I love Jmikes concept of a god that's gonna punish all the believers.

@heinshaaine8153

Жыл бұрын

I love this Terry Pratchett quote regarding it: "… the Quirmian philosopher Ventre, who said, ‘Possibly the gods exist, and possibly they do not. So why not believe in them in any case? If it’s all true you’ll go to a lovely place when you die, and if it isn’t then you’ve lost nothing, right?’ When he died he woke up in a circle of gods holding nasty-looking sticks and one of them said, ‘We’re going to show you what we think of Mr Clever Dick in these parts …"

@Rodrik18

Жыл бұрын

The idea that Jesus wants to hang around with people wearing the symbol of what was undoubtedly the worst experience of his life is always amusing. Can anyone prove the "mark of the beast" isn't a crucifix??? Conclusively??

@logan666

Жыл бұрын

Just like Yahweh in the Power Corrupts series by Darkmatter2525

@timothybrown5999

Жыл бұрын

@@Rodrik18 wow, good point

@skepticusmaximus184

Жыл бұрын

​@@Rodrik18If Jesus came during more modern times, Christians could all be wearing little electric chairs around their necks.

If I had a dollar for everytime a Christian tried to bring up Josephus without even knowing his name, I would have enough money to buy my own Supreme Court Justice.

@Kafaldsbylur

Жыл бұрын

It's funny, because unlike most people who bring up Josephus, he did accurately describe how he writes "There are people who believe Jesus came back from the dead". Problem is, you could write the exact same statement about Christians today, and it says nothing to the truth of their beliefs. Yet, Rodney doesn't notice the flaw in his argument

@1369Stiles

Жыл бұрын

@Guitarzen or capitalist............

@andrewharper1609

Жыл бұрын

Nice. What amuses me about Josephus was that he recounts that the ancient Hebrews kept nothing at all in the Holy of Holies. Quite literally nothing is sacred!

@guytheincognito4186

Жыл бұрын

Exactly 👌 it's willfull ignorance all the way. Theist claim: " _This is a no brainer. No historian worth his salt denies the existence of Jesus Christ. The historian Josephus knew about Jesus Christ and wrote about Him. So did Tacitus, just to name a few_ . " I like how christians try to trot out Josephus who wasn't even born until after the supposed death of the supposed Jesus. It's funny that the Testimonium Flavianum didn't show up in Josephus until Eusebius "found" this quote in the 4th century. Eusebius got his copy of Antiquities from Origen, and it's funny that Origen never made mention of this quote. Oops, caught Eusebius making shit up. The same Eusebius who when talking about pious fraud said "Let us do evil that good may result?" And did anyone else make mention of the Testimonium Flavianum prior to the 4th century? Not that I know of. Christians caught manufacturing textual support for their cause. And then they trot out Tacitus. What these guys really need is primary sources, and instead, in this case, they try to use Tacitus. Is Tacitus a primary source? No, he was a Roman born 25 years after the supposed death of the supposed Jesus. Is this the same Tacitus who wrote a history of Tiberius? And isn't it funny that missing from this history is the period from mid-29CE to mid-31CE? Hmm, makes you think doesn't it. Why was this period missing from this history of Tiberius. Hmm, what important events were supposed to have occurred in this short span of time? Historian Robert Drews has some views on this; they might want to look him up. Christians not only don't have primary sources, they don't even have any contemporary sources. A "man" that had a large following, and performed so many incredible miracles needed Christian forgery to make him real. Pitiful.

@johnscaramis2515

Жыл бұрын

@Guitarzen Can you give a definition what a communist is? Or you you like any Average Joe US-American who spouts out this word at any given chance without actually knowing what it means? And be honest, don't look it up, write your answer, then look it up what it means and write if you were correct. But that would require honesty. And I don't have faith the honesty of people spouting out "communist" randomly.

This is the best refutation to Pascal's wager I've ever heard! The god that doesn't like gullibility will not save any believer.

@davidleedougherty6478

Жыл бұрын

In the real world this happens all the time.. One applicant prepares, dresses well, behaves appropriately.. The other prays and believes the holy spirit will tell him what to say at the interview...I don't need to tell you who usually gets the job.

@rembrandt972ify

Жыл бұрын

@@davidleedougherty6478 Neither of the first two, the job goes to the nephew of the interviewer.

@RocksterOO1

Жыл бұрын

@@rembrandt972ify Plot Twist: There was no job vacancy!

"If you're an atheist and you decided to be an atheist..." Caller lost me right there. How does an atheist "choose" to be an atheist? That would be like choosing to be a human.

@drsatan9617

Жыл бұрын

People are born atheist by definition You cant hold a belief in the existence of something you cant understand. Especially if you cant grasp the concept of existence

@medidmi

Жыл бұрын

Same logic goes for choosing to be gay, transgender ..

@timothyhowson2775

Жыл бұрын

We are all born atheists. It`s only when parents,teachers and religious leaders impregnate the sponge like brains of children who will believe anything that those in authority tell them, that the trouble begins.

@rcblazer

Жыл бұрын

@@medidmi False. Having never been a believer of any religion and having friends and acquaintances who are LGBTQ+, I can safely say it is not contagious; if you are a straight cis male, you cannot "choose" to be gay or transgender.

@j.lahtinen7525

Жыл бұрын

Whenever a theist claims that I "chose" to be an atheist, I ask them to - just to prove that it IS a choice - switch to not believing in God, for, say, the next five minutes, and then switch back. Of course belief isn't a choice. You are either convinced or you are not, and whether you are convinced depends not only on the evidence, but also on your standards of evidence. Are you a critical thinker, who knows what counts as evidence and what doesn't? Most theists have no idea. And those that do, don't apply that critical thinking to their religious beliefs, because they learned them as a child, prior to developing those critical thinking skills, and have built their identity around the belief.

The caller’s evidence was that somebody heard somebody else say something that they heard someone else say during story hour thousands of years ago. He fundamentally couldn’t understand why this is not evidence at all, because obviously if he did, he’d immediately realize everything just fell down. “It Is Difficult to Get a Man to Understand Something When His Salary Depends Upon His Not Understanding It” rings true for religious beliefs and critical thinking as well.

@jquest99

Жыл бұрын

Heard it from a friend who... heard it from a friend who... heard it from a friend you've been messing around.

@Wilhelm-100TheTechnoAdmiral

Жыл бұрын

@@jquest99 The Prophecy!!!

@brandontankersley8107

Жыл бұрын

Yeah, it's so incredibly frustrating when someone keeps saying "a lot of Roman historians" without ever naming a single one of the so called historians.

@guytheincognito4186

Жыл бұрын

​@@brandontankersley8107 And the only ones they ever name have fraudulent works attested to them, Josephus, Tacitus etc. Theist claim: " _This is a no brainer. No historian worth his salt denies the existence of Jesus Christ. The historian Josephus knew about Jesus Christ and wrote about Him. So did Tacitus, just to name a few_ . " I like how christians try to trot out Josephus who wasn't even born until after the supposed death of the supposed Jesus. It's funny that the Testimonium Flavianum didn't show up in Josephus until Eusebius "found" this quote in the 4th century. Eusebius got his copy of Antiquities from Origen, and it's funny that Origen never made mention of this quote. Oops, caught Eusebius making shit up. The same Eusebius who when talking about pious fraud said "Let us do evil that good may result?" And did anyone else make mention of the Testimonium Flavianum prior to the 4th century? Not that I know of. Christians caught manufacturing textual support for their cause. And then they trot out Tacitus. What these guys really need is primary sources, and instead, in this case, they try to use Tacitus. Is Tacitus a primary source? No, he was a Roman born 25 years after the supposed death of the supposed Jesus. Is this the same Tacitus who wrote a history of Tiberius? And isn't it funny that missing from this history is the period from mid-29CE to mid-31CE? Hmm, makes you think doesn't it. Why was this period missing from this history of Tiberius. Hmm, what important events were supposed to have occurred in this short span of time? Historian Robert Drews has some views on this; they might want to look him up. Christians not only don't have primary sources, they don't even have any contemporary sources. A "man" that had a large following, and performed so many incredible miracles needed Christian forgery to make him real. Pitiful.

@tonicalhoun9049

Жыл бұрын

I played the game “Telephone” a lot as a child…NEVER did the last person repeat what the first person said

They always pull out Pascal’s wager like we’ve never heard it before, and they’re the first person to think of this massive revelation

It's funny how there are so many theists who think that atheists haven't already heard Pascal's Wager and that it's flaws haven't known since the 17th century.

@archapmangcmg

Жыл бұрын

Pascal invented (or presented) it as an IRRATIONAL justification for belief. Something to tell yourself while his (supposed) proofs worked through your mind. It's the worst maths I've ever seen from a mathematician!

@petermeichan3160

Жыл бұрын

maybe its the first time they've heard it, as they usually walk arounf with their fingers in their ears

@MyNameIsBucket

Жыл бұрын

Tell them to apply it to climate change and they'll suddenly find all sort of problems with it.

@ChrisF_1982

Жыл бұрын

I had an atheist philosophy professor in college, the Christians hated him. We covered Pascal's wager rather early in the course.

@FourDeuce01

Жыл бұрын

Pascal’s Wager- embarrassing religious apologists for more than 300 years.😈

I am a deconstructing Christian. My previous pastor told me he uses Pascal's wager. 😂 Must be easy being a pastor from what I have seen. You get to answer almost every question with, "I don't know. Why not ask God? You aren't getting anything back? It's not auditory. God is kind and his influence is gentle and loving. You aren't getting anything back still? It's hard to hear a whisper in a storm."😂 No critical thinking and you can hear yourself blab for an hour on Sundays. I am so glad to have gotten out of this cult.

@roarblast7332

Жыл бұрын

Lol. That's a good one. It's hard to hear a whisper in a storm. Basically, the one time you're desperately going to need to know you can hear God, you won't be able to. Very clever.

@MyNameIsBucket

Жыл бұрын

Interestingly, they have a very contradictory view about people who claim to have been instructed by their god to go on shooting sprees... especially since the Bible is full of examples of God carrying out mass murder.

@JoyInFreedom

Жыл бұрын

@@roarblast7332 yep. He always would say ambiguous things like that and have a look on his face like he was dropping pearls of wisdom. Lol!!!

@JoyInFreedom

Жыл бұрын

@@nandogarza8807 yes. Pascal's wager is a very selfish outlook. God wants you to love him eternally but the wager is about securing your place. And people follow this pastor. 😂 He's dumb af.

@mehallica666

Жыл бұрын

Kudos for getting out.

He really did just start with a verbatum Pascals wager.

@SaintD382

Жыл бұрын

Yeah, he probably heard Pascal's Wager recently and thought "Wow, this one will surely stump the atheists!" I remember when I was a Christian and I first heard Pascal's Wager, I thought it was profound. Now I just think it sounds like "heaven insurance". Sure, Christianity might not be true, but it can't hurt to have a little heaven insurance just in case, right?🙄

We have historians reporting that people believed Elvis didn't die. And this guy would have that presented to mean that Elvis is alive.

@TreeHairedGingerAle

Жыл бұрын

☝🏾 EXACTLY!

@brandontankersley8107

Жыл бұрын

But even that is way more likely to be possible that Jesus defying gravity by walking on water, actually changing the properties of water into wine, or coming back to life after being dead for 3 days lol.

@stevewebber707

Жыл бұрын

@@brandontankersley8107 True enough. I think it was MrDeity that called my attention to how bonkers the walking on water miracle is. If you think about all the physical dynamics involved, the logical conclusion, is who would go to that much trouble to perform a magic trick that isn't even that impressive. Simply levitating or flying would be vastly simpler, and also be more impressive. Which leads me to conclude that the passage was concocted by some ignorant person that wanted to invent a miracle that sounds impressive to other people too ignorant to understand what would be involved. Walking on smooth water would have several things required. Walking on stormy water, gets even more complex. Visualize the process of walking on a stormy and undulating surface that a stormy sea would create. It sounds like a demented amusement park ride. Flying needs only compensating for gravity and adding some propulsion. That, or a more reasonable story got corrupted or elaborated in weird ways. Either way, it's not a plausible story, regardless of miraculous powers.

@guytheincognito4186

Жыл бұрын

​@@stevewebber707 Plus walking on water is easy to fake both back then and now. Heck the time he was claimed to have walked on water is when the weather in that part of the world would have been cold enough to freeze the waters surface and there were at the place shallow landbridges that wouldn't be visible 5 meters away. 🤷‍♂️

@lidbass

Жыл бұрын

Elvis’ voice could be heard over great distances, and even after he died, and it is said that he caused the hymens of young girls to break spontaneously without touching them. Er, plus he looked good in leather? Does that one count? Anyway, sign up to the Church of the Swirling Pelvis, all donations welcome!

Christian: "What if you're wrong?!" Me: "You're betting that your single interpretation of your single religion is correct out of literally infinite possible interpretations of infinite possible religions and claiming that I have trouble with maths?! Your chances are as close to zero as you could possibly get! Go back to school and ask them to teach you how division, multiplication, zero and probability work."

@dieseljester3466

Жыл бұрын

Right!? It's like going to a casino and betting all of your money on Double Zero.

@archapmangcmg

Жыл бұрын

@@dieseljester3466 Yep, rolling a baseball and betting on a particular atom being on top would be BETTER ODDS.

@nealjroberts4050

Жыл бұрын

​@@dieseljester3466 Pascal's Roulette

"I have historical evidence!" "Can we see it?" "I have historical evidence!"

● "You'll be sorry when you die." ● "A book says a thing." Rodney should have gone for a trifecta and added ● "lookit thu treez" 😂

@skepticusmaximus184

Жыл бұрын

@@astraetluna Or to put it another way...The holly trifecta: ▪︎You'll be sorry when you die. ✝️ 😈 🔥 ▪︎A book says a thing. 📖 👄 💬 ▪︎Lookit thu treez 👀 ➡️ 🌳

“You’re not smart for believing everything I say automatically without thinking about it!” His standard of “smart” is obedience to corrupt authority.

That people still think Pascal's wager is a good argument for their god only demonstrates how indoctrinated they are.

@logicalmuslim1590

Жыл бұрын

Pascal's wager is not a false dichotomy as atheist contend because... either there is an afterlife or there isn't.

@Therian13

Жыл бұрын

@@logicalmuslim1590 But it is a false dichotomy: Pascals wager isn`t based simply on "there is an afterlife or there isn`t". Its based on "MY specific afterlife/deity is true or it isn`t". Because what if there IS an afterlife, but you chose the wrong one? You still lose, just like a non-believer would`ve. The Egyptian deity Ma'at would judge a Christian just as equally as an Atheist. The Buddhist king of Hell, Enma, would punish us just the same. Or what if it IS the correct deity/afterlife, but you got the criteria wrong? What if its based on how we took care of the poor? Or valued logic over blind-faith? That we didn`t eat fish on the sabbath? Not to mention the wager is based on the idea that you can FOOL a deity into making them think you actually believed in them, rather than believed in them just to hedge your bets. Pascal`s Wager isn`t a 50/50 chance to get it right, it`s more like 50/[0.1,0.1,0.1,0.1,0.1,0.1,0.1,0.1,etc].

@logicalmuslim1590

Жыл бұрын

@@Therian13 EZ PZ. If the Creator exists and if that Creator wants us to know that the Creator exists then that Creator would communicate His existence to us in some way. Only Islam has the exact words of God in the original language perfectly preserved. Alhamdulillah.

@Therian13

Жыл бұрын

@@logicalmuslim1590 What does that have ANYTHING to do with my rebuttal about Pascal`s Wager? You`re just re-asserting that "my deity is real, beause my religion says he is real". What you just said, I could replace with ANY deity/religion and hold the same weight: ---- If the Buddha exists and if that Buddha wants us to know that the Buddha exists then that Buddha would communicate His existence to us in some way. Only Buddhism has the exact words of God in the original language perfectly preserved. ---- If the Allfather exists and if the Allfather wants us to know that the Allfather exists then the Allfather would communicate His existence to us in some way. Only Asatro has the exact words of Odin in the original language perfectly preserved. ---- If Joe Pesci exists and if Joe Pesci wants us to know that Joe Pesci exists thenJoe Pesci would communicate His existence to us in some way. Only Goodfellows has the exact words of Joe Pesci in the original language perfectly preserved. ---- Did any of those statements convince you? If not, then why did you think yours would?

@IdiotDoomSpiral69

Жыл бұрын

@@shawnstephens1251 It's playing unknown odds for unknown outcomes. It's gullibility, and the way callers and others use it is indeed as an argument.

I cringe when callers try and speak about a topic that I know is full of crap and you guys know is full of crap but the caller doesn't.

@thschear

Жыл бұрын

Your patients with this caller qualifies both of to be declared saints.😁

@brandontankersley8107

Жыл бұрын

That's literally almost every call lol.

Why do people suggest they have legitimate evidence for something they have faith in? If evidence existed and was clear you would not require faith to believe it.

@knuckles543

Жыл бұрын

exactly or as damian wayne; son of bruce wayne A.K.A the goddamn batman, said: ''faith is belief based on an absence of data, it invites disaster''

@BushidoBrownSama

Жыл бұрын

They don't understand what "evidence" is, that caller was talking about historians who lived what hundreds of years after Jesus is supposed to have died? How could their records of religous claims and rumours believed by people contemporary to them ever amount to "evidence" of those original claims being true?

This is an example on how different the thinking of religion and science is

@BaronVonQuiply

Жыл бұрын

While it was playing, I thought of all the times a believer has gotten angry with me because they want me to come up with something that would make me believe in their untestable claim. Rather than look at the evidence and come to a conclusion, they start with a conclusion and try to go on a scavenger hunt where they look for anything that might work. The fact that they're asking me what evidence they need to go find means they don't actually care what it leads to.

@JimCastleberry

Жыл бұрын

How is that relevant? Science is irrelevant to most questions. Most truths are not accessible to science.

@Thistuffgetnucknfutz

Жыл бұрын

Scientocracy and Secular Humanism does qualify as a cult. Most of the atheist community isn't even aware of the latest discoveries in science. I bring up names and theories you people had no idea existed.

@skateboardingjesus4006

Жыл бұрын

Science is the epitome of self scrutiny. Religion is the opposite. Religious argumentation is the corpse in *A weekend at Bernie's* ; no matter how much they pretend, it's never going to stand up on it's own.

@schnoz2372

Жыл бұрын

Religious "Thinking" should be called unthinking

*Rodney, here is a list of creator Gods. How do you know which of the following is a real true God?* There is historical evidence of all of them as they have all been written down in history, that is how we have learned about them in the first place. *And from History* Abassi (spirit) Abira Abzu Achamán Adroa Agudar Ahone Ahura Mazda Aiomun-Kondi Akongo Alatangana Amma (deity) Amotken Amun Anansi Anguta Anulap Aramazd Atua I Raropuka Atum Awonawilona B Bagadjimbiri Baiame Batara Kala Bathala Bemba (mythology) Brahma Buga (deity) Bunjil C Cautantowwit Cghene Chaotroquin Chiminigagua Chirakan-Ixmucane Cocijo Coyote (mythology) D Daksha Damballa Degei Dohkwibuhch E Earth-maker myth El (deity) Elohim Enki Eskeri F Fuxi G Ganesha Gitche Manitou Glooscap God God the Father Gran Maître H Hahgwehdiyu Heryshaf Hœnir Holy Spirit in Christianity Huracan Huveane I I'itoi Imana Imra Inyan Io Matua Kore Itherther Itzamna Ixpiyacoc Iya Nla Izanagi J Jah Jesus K ǀKaggen Kalumba Kanda-koro-kamuy Kāne Kanglā Shā Karora Katonda (mythology) Kayra Kek (mythology) Kengue Khepri Khnum Khonvoum Khuman Pokpa Kokh Kox Kotan-kar-kamuy Koupalu Krishna Kukulkan Kuterastan Kutka Kutkh L Limu (Tongan mythology) Lóðurr M Mahakala Makemake (deity) Mangar-kunjer-kunja Marduk Mayari Mbombo Mebege Mukuru Mwari Mwuetsi N Na Atibu Nanabozho Nareau Ngai Ngenechen Ngewo Nhialic Nogamain Noncomala Nongpok Ningthou Nongshāba Num (god) Numakulla Nzambi a Mpungu Nzame O Obassi Ọbatala Odin Ryuho Okawa Olelbis Omai (deity) Ōmeteōtl Oro Religion P Pacha Kamaq Pakhangba Panam Ningthou Pangu Pariacaca (god) Phanes Phou Ningthou Pisatao Prajapati Ptah Puana Pūluga Pureiromba Q Qat (deity) Quetzalcoatl Qʼuqʼumatz R Ra Rama Rangi and Papa Ratovantany Raven Tales Rod (Slavic religion) Roog S Shiva Sibú Svarog T Ta'aroa Tabaldak Tagaloa Taoroinai Taryenyawagon Tatenen Tengri Tezcatlipoca Thangching Tloquenahuaque Tōnacātēcuhtli Tupã (mythology) Tzacol U Ugatame Ülgen Unkulunkulu Unumbotte V Vamana Vili and Vé Viracocha Vishvakarma Vrishakapi W Waheguru Wisakedjak X Xamaba Y Yahweh Yaldabaoth Yuanshi Tianzun Yúcahu Z Zamba (god) Zanahary *Let the Sunshine in, Dude...*

@JorgeCarlosPescadorCastillo

Жыл бұрын

I love your list, but you forgot the Spaghetti Monster

@middlegroundlogic

Жыл бұрын

@@JorgeCarlosPescadorCastillo And Lisa the Rainbow Giraffe, leaf be upon her!

@lorekeeper685

Жыл бұрын

rod tengri phanes azathoth etc too

@BushidoBrownSama

Жыл бұрын

Evidence they were believed in, not Evidence that they actually exist

He already lost me with "if you decide to be an atheist."

@MrCanis4

Жыл бұрын

Yep, he decided not to be a Muslim.

@jvondd

Жыл бұрын

@@1369Stiles Choosing to be honest with yourself is not the same as choosing what you believe.

@1369Stiles

Жыл бұрын

@@jvondd sigh......i decided to be an atheist that day BECAUSE of what and how i believed. i literally decided to be an atheist. people who actually do the conversion process come to a point where they DECIDE that they can no longer believe the bullshit, and so they DECIDE that they are now atheist. as i said, its semantics, but go ahead and make it more serious than i was intending it to be.

@kissit012

Жыл бұрын

@@jvondd choosing how you identify based on what you believe is possible. People do choose to be atheist. Not sure how that would cause a dismissal of his argument.

@frankeinstein7990

Жыл бұрын

@@kissit012 Because people win general don't choose their beliefs. They are either convinced of a proposition or they are not.

Pascal's Wager should be renamed as "the argument from cynical hypocrisy"

The amount of knowledge in JMike's head is just astounding.

@0okamino

Жыл бұрын

In contrast, the lack of critical thinking in Rodney’s head is also astounding.

"I'm dealing with what's most probably right."says the caller. Great if we're dealing with what's most probably right then I guess he should have agreed that there is no God because that is the most probable position to hold.

Every time I tune into this show, I learn something new such as Pascal's wager. I always knew the practice but I didn't know the term for it. I appreciate what JMike is saying to Rodney. At the end of the day, you can cite any historian, but to accept something someone said as evidence, there needs to be a methodology that can verify the claim. This is why attorneys object in court when a witness shares hearsay testimony. That witness is sharing something in Court that provides no method to verify the claim and thereby, is dismissed as meritless in a cross-examination. This is not hard to understand except if you're a theist who is too ignorant and/or arrogant to accept anything other than what you've been indoctrinated to believe. Thanks, JMike and Johnny for sharing your perspectives.

@macroman52

Жыл бұрын

"no method to verify the claim [a claim made by hearsay]" That's not quite the reason hearsay is not allowed. Hearsay such as "Jim told me that the robber wore a red hat" can't be accepted as evidence that the robber wore a red hat, because Jim is not available to be cross-examined. Jim's veracity and how Jim knows this, can't be evaluated unless Jim testifies and is available to answer questions. There may be nothing but Jim's word under oath but that is acceptable as evidence (and can be believed or not by a jury which has heard Jim testify and answer questions).

Very good response. When a caller starts with pascals wager you know that they are very very beginner level. But the hosts handled it very well.

@darlalathan6143

Жыл бұрын

So, the caller is a 1st-level Christian Apologist? Like a Dungeons & Dragons character?? LOL! 😄😆😅😂🤣🤓

Funny thing about pascal’s wager is that most religions are more harsh against people who worship “false gods” than against non believers. So even if it was true, it would put me in a much better position than a theist.

@Cornu341

Жыл бұрын

In polytheistic communities being an atheist was punished more harshly then believing in the wrong god. With monotheistic religions it depends if the false religions are deemed just slightly misinterpreted versions of the one true faith or being complete aberrations. That also depends on the necessity to distinguish your faith from a very similar one. Sometimes the most blood was shed, when the real difference in the believe systems was just miniscule.

“Rodney put the script away and let’s talk” Rodney “Okay” Busted

In the famous tragedy of Euripides Bacchae, Kadmos states an early version of Pascal's wager. It is noteworthy that at the end of the tragedy Dionysos, the god to whom Kadmos referred, appears and punishes him for thinking in this way. Euripides, quite clearly, considered and dismissed the wager in this tragedy.

@Montesama314

Жыл бұрын

The wager is incredibly cynical, not actually showing a genuine respect for the gods. I'd be pissed too if someone was trying to play a game with me and my bros to keep our favor.

Arguing Pascal's Roulette is always fun!

@0okamino

Жыл бұрын

Almost as fun as being on the receiving end of amateur dentistry.

Being atheist seems like a better bet because at least I'm not worshipping the wrong god.

@JimCastleberry

Жыл бұрын

Yeah. You worship nothing higher than yourself and your appetites.

@joshsheridan9511

Жыл бұрын

@@JimCastleberry I don't worship anything, least of all myself. The fact you seem to believe your own ramblings says a lot about you.

@amtlpaul

Жыл бұрын

Cant't resist your appetite for trolling, Blustery Barking ​@@JimCastleberry ?

@MrMarcusIndia

Жыл бұрын

​@@JimCastleberry Even if that were true (it's not, this is just more evidence of you spouting more nonsensical baseless assertions, Jimmy) that would stil make more sense than worshiping an imaginary, invisible, narcissistic, thin-skinned, homophobic, misogynistic, slavery-supporting homicidal mass-murdering monster like the xtian god.

First of all, there was NO JESUS. The name was Yeshua. There were some folks that claimed to be the messiah (multiple people), and there was ONE guy named Yeshua (a very common name) who was mentioned in Roman texts. We don't even know if they were all stories about the same person.

@paulrichards6894

Жыл бұрын

i doubt very much the jesus of the bible was a real person....i think he is just made up to place pauls "heavenly" jesus on earth

@t800fantasm2

Жыл бұрын

"We don't even know if they were all stories about the same person." Very similar to the tales of Robin Hood or King Arthur... A lot of stories that probably happened to some degree to different people all being used to create a legend of a specific invented name and person...

@numinous123

Жыл бұрын

@@t800fantasm2 There were a LOT of people who claimed to be the "messiah" during that time (we even have it happening today). Some even claim to have been ressurected from the dead. Here's an issue I have. The vast majority of Jewish people don't think Jesus... a supposed Jewish Messiah, is the messiah. So why should anyone believe he's "The messiah"?

@timothybrown5999

Жыл бұрын

The thing that I hear the most was that the one mention of this Yeshua actually calls him Yeshua Ben Yusuf, translated to Jesus son of Joseph. None of them ever like to mention that part.

@numinous123

Жыл бұрын

@@timothybrown5999 The name Yeshua almost directly translates to "Joseph". Which is interesting, since the "name" "Jesus" is actually a Greek mistranslation of Yeshua. So yeah, you're right. The whole Christian religion is a mess.

You guys knocked it out of the park on this call! The best I've seen on this channel regarding historical arguments for Jesus.

I am curious how much exceptionalism is tied to religion. A lot of Americans are convinced they chose the correct religion simply because it's what other Americans chose. I know that's how it generally works, members of other cultures often choose the popular religion for their area. But I wonder if Americans tie religion to their country more than most. Do American Christians think in their mind "America is the greatest and smartest nation so obviously we have the right religion, I don't have to think twice about it" ?

@stevewebber707

Жыл бұрын

I would say that a huge amount of religion is tied to, or derived from culture. And no doubt American exceptionalism is a big thing. I would add that the exceptionalism is not simply on the basis of America though. I have seen enough evangelicals circle their wagons against other American Christians as well. Whether there is a clear thought process, specifically asking whether they have to think twice about it, I have to doubt. If they are uninclined to think twice about important things, they are also unlikely to be prone to self examination, particularly of careful epistemology about their religion. Concerning comparing with other countries, I am no expert. But there is no shortage of other countries with nationalistic bents.

Dude, if Odin is the Allfather, this guy is so screwed.

"You can apply a critical analysis. I do it all the time. " I'll take things that are clearly untrue for $500, Alex!

I saw Criss Angel walk on water. I know it wasn’t a miracle, but if I didn’t know he was an illusionist I might think it was miraculous. If I tell someone what I saw and we play some Telephone and someone might actually believe the magic trick was miraculous.

@middlegroundlogic

Жыл бұрын

I got to see the show "The Supernaturalist" that he had those 9 illusionist touring around the US. I saw it in Richmond Virginia. It was amazing!!!!!!! Everything they did looked just as amazing as it does on TV. It was fuckin awesome!!

Pascal's wager. Works really well. You only need to show sufficient evidence that you believe in the right denomination out of 10,000 of the right god out of 10,000.

@archapmangcmg

Жыл бұрын

Show me your interpretation of your god is the right one out of infinite interpretations of infinite gods. One chance in infinity squared of being right! Yeah, I'll take my chances as an atheist over the statistical certainty of "choosing" the wrong god.

@uncleanunicorn4571

Жыл бұрын

As the wise Sage Homer Simpson once said, "what if we pick the wrong religion? Every time we go to church we're just making God madder and madder?"

@archapmangcmg

Жыл бұрын

@@uncleanunicorn4571 Mathematically certain that this is more probable than any Christian's beliefs are correct. Picking the wrong religion is frequently described as doing just as Homer said.

@roqsteady5290

Жыл бұрын

It is worse than that, because you also have to rule out all the logically possible gods that noone has yet invented or may never invent.

@rembrandt972ify

Жыл бұрын

@@uncleanunicorn4571 If Homer said it, it has to be true.

No one makes the decision to be Atheist. There are a lot if things I dont believe in. I haven't decided to not believe in them. I don't think its very smart to believe in something with no evidence.

Very often this feels like a losing battle. Believers always revert back to faith because they lack critical thinking abilities. Without faith they feel lost, the world becomes a scary place for them. For a bird born in a cage, flying is an illness.

@BigRalphSmith

Жыл бұрын

Worse, flying is a "sin".

@Conan_the_rastafarian

Жыл бұрын

That's a scary amount of generalizing you did to say what believers always do and think...but all atheists always talk like that :)

@logicalmuslim1590

Жыл бұрын

Did you know that a sweeping generalization is a logical fallacy?

@fredbohm4728

Жыл бұрын

@@logicalmuslim1590 Did you know that believing in a god is a logical fallacy?

@logicalmuslim1590

Жыл бұрын

@@fredbohm4728 which logical fallacy is belief in God, or did you just intend to sound snarky?

I read a book and I liked it, so I assumed it was a history book. - This call.

Claiming that the existence of an itinerant rabbi named Jesus proves the gospel is like claiming the existence of a lumberjack named Paul with an odd colored ox proves that the lakes in Minnesota are all footprints.

@exceptionallyaverage3075

Жыл бұрын

If you don't believe in Paul Bunyan, how do you explain the Mississippi River? The Grand Canyon? The Great Lakes? Well, you can't. And Babe isn't an "odd color," he' a lovely shade of blue.

@darlalathan6143

Жыл бұрын

LOL!

It sounds like he's saying that since we can't go back in time, all we can do is take the words of people who wrote about it. He doesn't even seem to recognize that there *are* ways to "go back in time" in a limited sense to better understand what is likely to have happened.

@archapmangcmg

Жыл бұрын

Worse, he thinks that our inability to find out would mean ACCEPTING these particular claims while rejecting ALL similar claims from all the religions he rejects. Could he be more obvious in his Special Pleading?

I roll my eyes every time I hear a Theist bring up Pascal’s Wager. 🤦‍♂️ Probably the weakest argument I’ve ever heard.

@archapmangcmg

Жыл бұрын

It was intentionally weak on Pascal's part. A "if you can't force yourself to believe based on my logic, just tell yourself you believe based on this wager until you really believe in my god." Tell yourself lies.

Thanks guys, I enjoyed this call.

There actually isnt ANYTHING written about Jesus in Roman history....Josephus was born in 37 AD, and therefore was not an eye-witness to a person named Jesus. ALL of the gospels were written between 60ad and 120ad....and written in GREEK, not Aramaic (Jesus and all his followers supposedly spoke aramaic). There are 6 different versions of the NT written in Aramaic that were copied from Greek. Tacitus wrote based on hearsay, and urban legend. Pliny .....same for him. There is not ONE SHRED of historical, archeological, paleontological, or scientific evidence for a person named Jesus.

@epicofatrahasis3775

Жыл бұрын

I'm an atheist. Josephus was a contemporary of Jesus’s brother James who he distinguishes as the brother of the one called Messiah. The gospels mention that Jesus had a flesh and blood brother named James. Check out *"History for Atheists"* by Tim O'Neill. He is an atheist.

@mikekelly702

Жыл бұрын

@@epicofatrahasis3775 Well, of course the gospels mention Jesus' bro. But the gospels are NOT REAL. Theyre FICTION. And we all know that alot of Josephus' writing is fraudulent. This has been proven time and time again by linguists.

I had a Christian tell me how much they hate hearing atheists say "which god?" when they bring up Pascal's Wager, as if it's not a valid question. They apparently didn't want to face the fact that their god isn't the only god ever worshiped throughout history. But that's the major flaw with Pascal's Wager, in that it presupposes that Christianity is the one true religion.

@stonemedia8901

Жыл бұрын

Regardless of Christianity being believed to be the one true religion, the majority of religions today instinctively share the same deity. They just go by a different name. God, Allah, Yahweh. It's the same deity.

Sorry lads this is way above Rodney's head.

@knuckles543

Жыл бұрын

like many things, even the top shelf

The existence of a historical Jesus, and it is broadly agreed by historians there was some character in history of that sort at that time and place, does not mean all the claims in the gospels MUST also be true. Nothing Josephus wrote, even if you accept it at face value, verifies the resurrection actually happened. That part is legend.

@PrometheanRising

Жыл бұрын

If he didn't exist it was another fellow with the same name.

Pascal's wager! 🤦🏻‍♂️🙇🏻‍♂️

@uncleanunicorn4571

Жыл бұрын

As the wise Sage Homer Simpson once said, "what if we pick the wrong religion? Every time we go to church we're just making God madder and madder?"

If you accept Pascal's Wager, the logical conclusion is to find as many different religions where the rules don't contradict each other and follow them all. I call this Pascal's Hedge.

@logicalmuslim1590

Жыл бұрын

Only Islam has the exact words of God in the original language perfectly preserved.

@wabbajack2

Жыл бұрын

You'd still lose your wager in the case of a God who left no evidence of its existence in the universe and only rewards those who hold to skepticism of all religions.

@fredbohm4728

Жыл бұрын

@@logicalmuslim1590 Bwahahaaa

@joshsheridan9511

Жыл бұрын

@@logicalmuslim1590 lol

@nealjroberts4050

Жыл бұрын

​@@logicalmuslim1590 Funny some Christians claim that of the NT too. How do we differentiate them?

Atheism is not a claim of intelligence - it’s a claim of logic and critical thinking

@adrenalproduct

Жыл бұрын

It’s the result of logic and critical thinking

@wwlib5390

Жыл бұрын

​@@adrenalproduct perhaps - but if the premise turns out to be false to begin with then the result of logic and critical thinking could be false as well.

@heinshaaine8153

Жыл бұрын

@@wwlib5390 What premise?

@rejinc

Жыл бұрын

@@wwlib5390 it is simple is there adequate proof of an or ANY god???? Nope

@Julian0101

Жыл бұрын

@@wwlib5390 The premise is simply "why would i believe in your magical fairy?" But you are right, as the premise "your magical fairy exists" is false to begin with, that would explain why all your arguments end up being so bad.

In 2023, do we still need to debunk Pascal’s wager ? That’s exhausting

Wow. JMike’s level of scholarship is astounding. Good listening to.

I was really hoping JMike was gonna say "I fought Allah and A-llah won"

@optillian4182

Жыл бұрын

lol

as a term, pascals roulette sounds more reasonable.

@nealjroberts4050

Жыл бұрын

I'm glad someone else had the same idea.

@empressoftheknownuniverse

Жыл бұрын

Ha! Pascal's Plinko...but the board is ridiculously huge and each peg represents a god. 🤔😄😄

@Montesama314

Жыл бұрын

Man that revolver has a LOT of bullet slots.

So often, these conversations boil down to the same thing: the caller is ignorant, lacking in knowledge, and not tremendously bright; while the atheists know their stuff, how to argue, have tons of reading under their belts, are highly educated, and can easily dismantle 90% of the flimsy "arguments" these Christians bring.

Caller: You can come up with your own interpretations, you don't have to have a method....

The more I listen to theists, the more convinced I am of atheism.

JMIKE really aced his argument with a critical thinking god, unfortunately he's talking to someone who has been brain-washed by religion and has no actual evidence for his beliefs.

Pascal's Wager is good at convincing the already convinced that "there's nothing to worry about" but not much more than that.

It is not written in Roman history. This is ridiculous. The most famous writer of that time in that region was named Philo of Alexandria and Philo never once wrote about anyone performing miracles or doing all the claims of Jesus. Don't you think the most famous writer of that time would have said something? Use your brain. Jesus is a myth. There is no evidence anywhere that he ever existed.

@heinshaaine8153

Жыл бұрын

So if in 2000 years nobody finds a letter from Dickens talking about WW1 you would assume that ww1 never happened? Your logic is really flawed.

@Diviance

Жыл бұрын

@@heinshaaine8153 If they couldn't find any evidence from anybody alive at the time of the event, but only writings from people decades to centuries later... it would be reasonable to assume the event probably didn't happen.

@heinshaaine8153

Жыл бұрын

@@Diviance What kind of evidence would you expect to find? Besides a cult? And we arent talking about the events, we are talking about the person.

@joshsheridan9511

Жыл бұрын

@@heinshaaine8153 stupid example since there is plenty of independent evidence that WW 1 happened.

@heinshaaine8153

Жыл бұрын

@@joshsheridan9511 Edit the Ops argument, not yours. This wasnt an argument for jesus this was against -your- Ops terrible argument: "if we have no writings of the most famous writer at that time about the event, then the event probably didnt happen." And you seem to agree with me.

If Rodney were to move from MI to Alabama the average IQ of both states would increase a tiny bit.

@jimcarlson6157

Жыл бұрын

don't try to tell me I'm not dragging down my state's average IQ. I think

Hystorians discover roman documents. Documents say: "Christian believe that their prophet rose from the dead because his tomb was empty 3 days later" Christians: "Hystorians say that romans attested the resurrection!" When leaps of faith make you bang your head on the door...

In my point of view, it is extremely ridiculous to live in a modern world in which not a single supernatural event or effect has ever been demonstrated, and have billions of people keep talking and talking about an ancient book that makes claims. How long should that go on?

@holgerlubotzki3469

Жыл бұрын

Two thousand years and running, as we type...

@markbeoluke6454

Жыл бұрын

I am shocked they all need money! You would think an all powerful God(gods) could will money into existence for his/her/its faithful followers. Oh, I get it! It would desrtoy blind faith and wreck free will!

I would definitelly worship that critical thinker god. I love critical thinking.

@uncleanunicorn4571

Жыл бұрын

As the wise Sage Homer Simpson once said, "what if we pick the wrong religion? Every time we go to church we're just making God madder and madder?"

@Seticzech

Жыл бұрын

@@uncleanunicorn4571 I love Simpsons too. 😀Homer is the best.

@jquest99

Жыл бұрын

@@uncleanunicorn4571 “Ah how shameless - the way these mortals blame the gods. From us alone they say come all their miseries yes but they themselves with their own reckless ways compound their pains beyond their proper share.” - A different Homer from The Odyssey

@ookekklibarianbornagain6708

Жыл бұрын

The following is what the "god" of Dwarfs of Discworld had to say. “Tak does not require we think of him, only that we think” “The first thyng Tak did, he wroten hymself; the second thyng Tak did, he wroten the Laws; the thyrd thyng Tak did, he wroten the World; the fourth thyng Tak did, he wroten ay cave; the fyfth thyng Tak did, he wroten a geode, ay egge of stone; and in the gloamyn of the mouth of the cave, the geode hatched and the Brothers were born; the first Brother walked toward the light, and stood under the open sky-” 🤔 I rather like Tak god of the Dwarfs.

@smittys3069

Жыл бұрын

If people who follow this show were interested in critical thinking they would question the propaganda being shoved down their throats by the media and not just question religion

I didn't make a choice to be an atheist, you can't make yourself believe something ridiculous that has no basis.

What a surprise. A theist that has no clue what he’s talking about

Rodney's issue is that he's appealing to "Roman Historians", but there are no _CONTEMPORARY_ Roman Historians that actually talked about Jebus. Josephus, for example, was born very close to (within a couple of years) when Jebus was supposedly crucified. By the time he could understand language, let alone research and write about current events, it was decades after Jebus was gone. How could he be considered a "contemporary" source for anything? One of the arguments _against_ a historical Jebus is that there are absolutely NO contemporary writings with him in them.

@nealjroberts4050

Жыл бұрын

Indeed. And contemporary Roman texts disagree on things like the census in Matthew (such censuses NEVER occurred) and who was governor beside what king etc etc

@wabbajack2

Жыл бұрын

Historians also seem to agree that Josephus's books include later forgeries.

@epicofatrahasis3775

Жыл бұрын

I'm an atheist. We don't have contemporary records of the vast majority of people in ancient history. Jesus was an itinerant Rabbi that went around preaching in backwater provinces. The gospels make him out to be more famous than he was, so you shouldn't expect there to be contemporary references to him. There are *two* references to Jesus by Josephus and the second one is universally deemed to be authentic by scholars and historians while the first is considered to be a *partial* interpolation. Josephus was a *contemporary* of Jesus’s brother James who he distinguishes as the brother of the one called Messiah. The gospels mention that Jesus had a flesh and blood brother called James. Mythicists try and overcomplicate things. Check out *"History for Atheists"* by Tim O'Neill. He is an atheist and he addresses all of the mythicist arguments.

@dienekes4364

Жыл бұрын

@@epicofatrahasis3775 _"I'm an atheist."_ -- Congrats! _"We don't have contemporary records of the vast majority of people in ancient history. "_ -- That's immaterial to this conversation. The point being made is that Xian keep _claiming_ that there are contemporary accounts of Jebus by Roman historians and that is just factually false. _"Jesus was an itinerant Rabbi that went around preaching in backwater provinces."_ -- Yeah, I don't buy it. I've never heard anything convincing, even from Dr Ehrman. It's not _just_ the lack of contemporary written records, it's the lack of any other compelling evidence. _"The gospels make him out to be more famous than he was, so you shouldn't expect there to be contemporary references to him."_ -- Which are consistent with a completely fictional character. _"There are two references to Jesus by Josephus and the second one is universally deemed to be authentic by scholars and historians while the first is considered to be a partial interpolation."_ -- Josephus recounted a _story_ that the xians at the time were telling. Not anywhere close to the same thing. _"Josephus was a contemporary of Jesus’s brother James who he distinguishes as the brother of the one called Messiah."_ -- Actually, no, this is false. Josephus was part of the generation AFTER Jebus supposedly existed. IF Jebus existed and IF he had any siblings, they would have been dead by the time Josephus became a historian. _"The gospels mention that Jesus had a flesh and blood brother called James."_ -- No, they actually don't. _"Mythicists try and overcomplicate things."_ -- And gullible people don't want to actually dig into the details that make all the difference. _"Check out "History for Atheists" by Tim O'Neill. He is an atheist and he addresses all of the mythicist arguments."_ -- To be honest, I'm not really interested. I don't particularly care if there were one, two, ten, a hundred, or no failed apocalyptic conmen that the fictional character out of the Bable was based on. The fact is, the whole thing is bullshit, the stories attributed to Jebus are bullshit, the superstition is bullshit, and I don't see why we should allow these batshit crazy lunatics to control our government.

@dienekes4364

Жыл бұрын

@@epicofatrahasis3775 _"The gospels mention that Jesus had a flesh and blood brother called James."_ -- I'm curious, why should I care what fanfic was written decades if not centuries after Jebus was supposed to have lived? The gospels also say that Jebus rose from the dead. Do you believe that, too? If there ANY OTHER contemporary accounts of Jebus' family? If there are none of Jebus himself, how could there be any references to his family? You need to under that "contemporary means that the writer _actually lived at the exact same time._ Not the next generation, not in a different country, not a generation before, but at the _EXACT_ same time and place. Even if the writings of Josephus that you are referring to aren't forgeries (which is more than likely) or re-telling of second-hand stories (which they appear to be), it doesn't lend any credence to Jebus' actual existence. I could claim to be the long-lost brother of Fenris. Does that make it true?

I won millions in Las Vegas employing Pascal's Wager!

They should have shut Rodney down on his claim that there were many Egyptian and Roman texts written about Jesus. There are exactly zero writings about Jesus that are contemporary to the time of his supposed existence.

20+ minutes with this caller? Time I will never get back!!

I still haven't heard why resurrection is important to anybody. Why would a story of someone coming back from the dead mean anything to anyone. Even if it was true, who gives a shit? If the soul is the important thing, why is resurrection the one thing that is important to Christians. Let alone the other sideshow magic tricks like water to wine or walking on water.

The other problem with Pascal's Wager is from the perspective of what if the omniscient being is real? It would know your thoughts, and know that your belief is not genuine and that you only took the safer bet, you'd go to hell anyway.

@Montesama314

Жыл бұрын

Exactly. The wager encourages cynical "belief" for safety's sake, which would only lead to more hell goers because the god can presumably detect the truth, making the wager's purpose (encouraging more people believing in God) to be utterly stymied. People in Pascal's time slapped this dude down.

Rodney... did you actually think we hadn't heard of Pascals wager? Was it too hard to look up responses to it? Because it's an absurdly bad argument, even if you ignore all the fallacies in it your god would obviously know when you're faking belief and honestly what would you judge more harshly? Genuinely not having been convinced, or faking it? Rodney... people talking about what christians believe is in no way evidence those beliefs are justified...

@ziploc2000

Жыл бұрын

Every theist caller seems more ignorant of both the source material and the apologist claims than your average atheist.

JMike's knowledge of the Bible and Josephus and that time period is very impressive

L. Ron Hubbard existed. He had followers. They really believed in his book, and some other people disagreed with him. Therefore Scientology is real.

@darlalathan6143

Жыл бұрын

Have you got proof of Xenu's existence? What about Thetans??

Pascals wager is wholly irrelevant because belief is not a choice. One could claim to believe in god a thousand times and it wouldn't make it true.

I feel like I should call in to the show for a practice dissertation defence! 😂

People believing that there's historical evidence for the resurrection boggles my mind.

Roman historians writing that Christians claim Jesus died and resurrected is NOT evidence of resurrection, it is evidence that Christians made the claim. That's it.

@MrMarcusIndia

Жыл бұрын

Our persistent mistake is assuming that any of the brainwashed cultists who call in to the show, or post in these comments, are either honest enough or intelligent enough to know the difference between "claim" and "evidence".

@MrMarcusIndia

Жыл бұрын

​@@jaflenbond7854 Lets see whats on jaflen's menu today: - Egg and Spam - Egg, bacon, and Spam - Egg, bacon, sausage, and Spam - Spam, bacon, sausage, and Spam - Spam, egg, Spam, Spam, bacon, and Spam - Spam, Spam, Spam, egg, and Spam - Spam, sausage, Spam, Spam, Spam, bacon, Spam, tomato, and Spam - Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam, baked beans, Spam, Spam, Spam, and Spam - Lobster Thermidor aux crevettes with a Mornay sauce, garnished with truffle pâté, brandy, and a fried egg on top, and Spam

@holgerlubotzki3469

Жыл бұрын

@@jaflenbond7854 Curator as teaceful Gordon and existence without submissive human believereignty of Gordon with Jaffles are oppose authout submissive believe human being, kinky, and worship the auths of Jesurrection a sausages, Agnostics of the Curator as teaching, kinky, and fanatics, without to theistence without liars, Jaffles, and hateful earth infering, kinky, and righteousness are oppose and Resurrection withority of Gordon of Gordongle, sausage, and Heavenly Fanatics of the dongle. lungings, Jaffles the BLasphlegmer

@ministryofarguments3525

Жыл бұрын

@@jaflenbond7854 You use the Bible as if it is evidence and that is your major blunder. It is only the claim of belief and is not proof.

@holgerlubotzki3469

Жыл бұрын

@@jaflenbond7854 Gordon a sausages, and honored against to the Curator as the dongle, and worship their lungingdom of the King, kinky, and honored by the dongle, and hateful aths are oppose auths of relieve his Crust's Truthorites, Agnostics, and peaching, kinky, and Heavenly Fanatics, and agnostics, hypocrimings and peaching, kinky, and submit the don of Gordon and hateful earth Jaffles, sausage, secure, and merciful earth infernals. Arrogant, criminal LIFE and fanatics on the blasphlegming Jaffles

Romans wrote that Julius Ceaser became a God. I guess it must also be true since Romans wrote about it /s

Christians: have you heard of Pascal's wager? Atheists: yeah and it's Christians: but have you heard of Wascal's wager?

Tell me you don't know how to critically examine an argument without telling me. Rodney- *repeats the first thing for the fifth time.

It's so laughable for the caller to say he has historical evidence and then say that you can look at history and make up anything xD

@Ex_christian

Жыл бұрын

This is typical religious and Republican way. They make claims with absolutely ZERO evidence. All they can do is lie!

Funnily enough, no ancient historian mentions a sudden zombie invasion three days after jesus crucifixion.

@norswil8763

Жыл бұрын

And the Romans kept thorough records too, maybe the record keeping department had that day off🤷‍♂️

Tacitis and Josephus just wrote down the stories they were told about Jesus and the ressurrection, many decades after the events supposedly occurred, from people who we can't verify were actually there and in fact, given the time gap probably relayed stories they themselves just heard.

My names rodney and i live in michigan. Hearing the opening freaked me out so much!

I believe in more than “the book said a thing. Like what? A lot of things in a book.

I always admire the pigheaded, purposeful ignorance of people who believe "sources exist" but have no idea what they are. All of this stuff is available for free online. Read Josephus, Tacitus, and anyone else, and see why we find the claims dubious and/or mundane.

That _which god_ combo at the start by both was hilarious. They caught him quick there.

We have evidence of people reporting that other people believed that Jesus performed miracles. Okay. The problem is that we have exactly the same for a whole lot of other people who were said to be the messiah or something similar from the same region and time period alone, and the only difference between Jesus and all the others is that for some reason Jesus stuck. And at this point, saying that „Jesus was the one who stuck because he was the real one“ is precisely the same as if six people were each betting on a different number on a die roll, saying that whoever happens to get it right „must have had special knowledge“.

I didn't "decide" to become an atheist; I was born one and the main reason why I'm still atheist is because my parents taught me to think for myself, question everything and didn't shove garbage down my throat. Rodney's parents did quite the opposite, which is evident in his desperate attempt to validate his own uncertainty, which is what Pascal's Wager really is about: better safe than sorry because I'm too scared to take initiative. Which just goes to show how insincere his belief is and to what level of dishonesty theists will go to to secure their happy happy afterlife, which is more important than their god (ie. I'll suck up to my god to secure my place in heaven). Sorry Rodney, try harder next time.

JMike and Johnny an eye and ear candy day! Poor Rodney guy! LOL Believers get misled, believe, and get upset if someone throws truth at them! You ruined his whole spiel!👍💖💙🥰✌

Jmike in his bag, elbow deep I luv it

I love Jmike's explanation of historical Jesus and so-called prophets. Excellent!

If your an atheist and god is real you had a GOOD life and a BAD afterlife. If ur a theist and god is not real u just got a BAD life. No matter how u put it pascals wager is always a W for atheism

@macmcleod1188

Жыл бұрын

It's not that quite that simple. If you were religious and lucky to be in a healthy religious community, you had a happy satisfying life and then you died. For example- Mr. Rogers and Jimmy Carter. Both religious. Both happy. Also, think of the bible as "random beliefs which resulted in the most prosperous tribal society." Imagine all the tribes all over the ancient middle east starting with various random beliefs. The ones who said "don't eat animals that carry parasites" did better. The ones that said, "Sleeping with your best friends wife is bad" did better. The ones that said, "Kill the *hell* out of anyone who doesn't believe like you, kill their kids, and take their women as your 2nd, 3rd, and 4th wives" prospered. The ones that said, "Lying is bad" did better. Religion gives people hope and helps them survive thru bad times. At some level, it's a survival trait during certain hard times. But, it also attracts a lot of con artists and criminals.

I've come to the conclusion that an omniscient God would know all my experiences and my thoughts that led me from blind acceptance through getting burned and humiliated so many times that I learned how to reason and have healthy skepticism. A fair and just and loving God would find that virtuous and respectable. God made a special effort for humanity. Such a God would be pleased that I used His gift of human logic to better myself and others by not allowing myself to become an intellectual pushover and demanding evidence that is fitting of the claims.

Why would God want someone in heaven that is basing their belief on the idea that they'll benefit more if right and lose nothing if wrong?

@chadwilson618

Жыл бұрын

I mean gambling is a sin right?

The Tacitus and Josephus thing cracks me up. Those historians wrote about Christians and what they believed. They didn't write a historical account of Christ's resurrection. They are reporting on fan fiction.

Pascal's wager again!!!