Try with logic :)

@@shadowbanned3044 Try

@@shadowbanned3044I’m waiting

@@JoviBootlegs90 On a censored platform? Make God remove the censorship on youtube and then I will do it. Deal?

@@shadowbanned3044My comment just got removed too

soooo good, i just want to reply 🤣🤣🤣

The silliness of Genesis would be a logical argument.

@@Stephanopoulosaugustus How's that logical? He asked for a good argument FOR ATHEISM, not AGAINST JUDAISM.

@@Stephanopoulosaugustus that is not an argument FOR atheism. That is an argument against one interpretation of one religious story (many that believe in even the Christian God view this story as allegorical and not to be taken at literal face value).

@@Stephanopoulosaugustus you're such a buzz kill😂😂😂 I thought athiesim was the cool kids club. I guess you got rid of god with your sense of humor🤣🤣🤣

I’ve got poor cell coverage here… I figured I was lagging again 😂

Only your brains froze. But they've been frozen for a long time, so you kinda aren't able to tell the difference.

If you want a smart atheist Graham Oppy is good ....most of the popular ones are a bit limited when it comes to understanding the non physical realm in my view ....to say if you saw something you did not want to believe in and then claim your own hallucination might to be slightly unhinged.

@@tomgreene1843 There's a difference between a "hallucination"--which certainly can occur--and the witness of multiple people, particularly those who were willing to stake their life on verifying what they saw and experienced.

Funny, the lack of atheist comments on this particular post. They're rampant in this thread otherwise. It's amazing how quickly a "valid" position can crumble when the champion of science and reason admits that he's a fraud. How lost do you need to be to follow a scientist who'd ignore evidence because it supports a contrary belief to what he currently holds.

What if it were a technological highly advanced alien civilization that could change water to wine, walk on water, bring back the dead and heal the crippled and sick. Should science accept that as "God"? Of course not! It would have to be studied with scientific scrutiny to verify that claim. Otherwise, people would be bowing to a false god.

How can you easily throw all atheists in a pot and act like they're all the same. Lol.

"Mabey ima more smarted than me thunk i is." I evolved the statement! Evolution is real!

Hilarious 😂😂😂

Haha. Liked that too 😂

😅

Hahahaha 😂… ….ahhhh, thunking is fun ☺️

Science answers lots of things. For example the phone you're typing on. Did you think God gave that to you? 😂

Great response. Thanks.

Philosopher here. You are totally misguided, the vast majority of philosophers are atheists, because there's no evidence whatsoever, logical or empirical that there's a god. You can't even define what god is

that's very interesting, because learning philosophy has made my atheistic stance even stronger than when I merely deconstructed from Christianity and was merely an agnostic atheist. Now I'm a gnostic atheist towards abrahamic Gods and just skeptical towards non-supreme deities.

The rise of materialism and "rationalism" (actually just empiricism in disguise) has made people dumber. So many people nowadays are just incapable of grasping abstract or philosophical concepts that people even just a hundred years ago would have had no problem understanding. What's worse, these new "philosophers" think they're smart for "seeing through the bull crap" when they're really just too stupid to understand something that doesn't have a scientific paper written on it. The only philosophies they seem to engage with are the "edgy" ones like nihilism and absurdism, which are also probably the least complex philosophies out there. All they really say is "life is too wacky and complicated, I'm not even going to try and make sense of it."

Considering how he calls Richard Dawkins fanboys like a cult, yeah (he could’ve just call then fanboys and I wouldn’t mind since well, Dawkins do have fanboys). Funny how some here straw man atheist arguments and then get mad when atheists (not saying they should) do the same or the whole group ish thinking not realising Christianity does the same thing (or any other major religion). The other thing I find hilarious is using Jordan Peterson to argue for Christianity because he’s just a dumb person idea of a smart person

How could a former atheist not know what an atheist is?

As an EX atheist, I am allowed to study anything you as an atheist are being forbidden by your religion to study, and there is simply nothing you can tell me about this cult, from the opression pyramid to the goal of genocide on christians. That's right - *surah 5:101-102* and *9:29* are as valid in atheist religion as it is in islame. Atheists have a belief system which is a blank piece of paper, and to fill that paper, they go to their imams (the atheist dawah channels) and their prophets (richard Dorkins, vladimir lenin, Commie harris, mao zedong, Mad Pedolahunty) - in order to find out what they by necessity must believe.

@@joshd3502 When Atheist knows his own thoughts and why he is rejecting God, his eyes opens up. Best examples are in question answer of Cross Examined program where an atheist were asked If I give you a book to read, would you read it?" He will say "NO" Why? Because he has decided not to believe in God! Even Richard Donk es says, Even if I hear God talking to me from heaven, I will think it is hallucinations"

Dr. Wood is a convert from Atheism. He was a hardcore atheist, willing to commit crimes at one time to prove his own evolutionary superiority and lack of conscience. He knows what he's talking about.

I’m too rich to buy atheism…

Lol.. Im not sure if im imitating D wood or Peterson when i say " i dont buy your atheism"

You can't afford it because you can't deal with insecurity and uncertainty. Love the believer but hate the belief...

@KasperKatje that doesn't even make any sense

Yes, I don't buy atheism either. I also don't buy the mythology of the ancient Hebrews. That's why I'm an agnostic.

Or, how about how there isn't good evidence of a god existing

You know that you're purely projecting.

@@hydraph4843 As Atheist Nobel Prize winning physiologist George Wald, wrote candidly in 1954: “When it comes to the origin of life, we have only two possibilities as to how life arose. One is spontaneous generation arising to evolution; the other is a supernatural creative act of God. There is no third possibility. … Spontaneous generation was scientifically disproved 100 years ago by Louis Pasteur, Spelazani, Reddy and others. That leads us scientifically to only one possible conclusion - that life arose as a supernatural creative act of God. … I will not accept that philosophically because I do not want to believe in God. Therefore, I choose to believe in that which I know is scientifically impossible, spontaneous generation arising to evolution.” As you can see, the reality is Atheism is also a belief system similar to any other religious systems. Fortunately for us, most Nobel Prize winners in science is not prideful enough to deny this reality. "A little knowledge makes men atheists; but a more thorough acquaintance with the sciences brings them back again to religion." (Francois Bacon a staunch Christian; father of empiricism, developed scientific method) Albert Einstein said, "In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views." In an estimate by Baruch Shalev, between 1901 and 2000, about 65.3% of Physics Nobel prize winners were either Christians or had a Christian background. (4.7% for atheist, agnostics, and freethinkers) In an estimate by Baruch Shalev, between 1901 and 2000, about 72.5% of Chemistry Nobel prize winners were either Christians or had a Christian background. (7.1% for atheist, agnostics, and freethinkers) In an estimate by Baruch Shalev, between 1901 and 2000, about 62% of Medicine Nobel prize winners were either Christians or had a Christian background. (8.9% for atheist, agnostics, and freethinkers) Ernest Walton 1903 - 1995. A devout Methodist, who said science was a way of knowing more about God. Winner of the Nobel Prize in Physics after he artificially split the atom and proved that E = mc2. J. J. Thomson 1856 - 1940. A practicing Anglican who prayed and read the Bible daily. Discovered the electron; invented one of the most powerful tools in analytical chemistry - the mass spectrometer; Charles Babbage 1791 - 1871. A Protestant devotee who devoted a chapter of his autobiography to a discussion of his faith. The father of the computer, invented the Analytical Engine, a Turing Complete computer in 1837 - the first general purpose computer. Werner Heisenberg 1901 - 1976. A Lutheran with deep Christian convictions. One of the primary creators of quantum mechanics. Formulated the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. Humphry Davy 1778 - 1829. Said that God’s design was revealed by chemical investigations. Discovered the electrical nature of chemical bonding. Used electricity to split several substances into their basic building blocks for the first time, discovering chlorine and iodine; produced the first ever samples of the elements barium, boron, calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium, and strontium. Other earlier scientists before 1900 who consider themselves committed Christians include: Leonhard Euler (1707 - 1783) Published more mathematics than any other single mathematician in history, much of it brilliant and groundbreaking. Michael Faraday (1791 - 1867) Discovered electromagnetic induction; discovered the first experimental link between light and magnetism James Clerk Maxwell (1831 - 1879) Transformed our understanding of nature: his famous equations unified the forces of electricity and magnetism, indicating that light is an electromagnetic wave. Gregor Mendel (1822 - 1884) Founded the science of genetics; identified many of the mathematical rules of heredity; identified recessive and dominant traits. Bernhard Riemann (1826 - 1866) Transformed geometry providing the foundation of Einstein’s theory of general relativity; the Riemann hypothesis has become the most famous unresolved problem in mathematics. Isaac Newton (1643 to 1727) spent more time on Bible study than math and physics. Profoundly changed our understanding of nature with his law of universal gravitation and his laws of motion; invented calculus; Willard Gibbs (1839 - 1903) Invented vector analysis and founded the sciences of modern statistical mechanics and chemical thermodynamics. John Dalton (1766 - 1844) Dalton’s Atomic Theory is the basis of chemistry; discovered Gay-Lussac’s Law relating temperature, volume, and pressure of gases; discovered the law of partial gas pressures. Carl Friedrich Gauss (1777 - 1855) believed science revealed the immortal human soul and that there is complete unity between science and God. His profound contributions to the physical sciences include Gauss’s Law & Gauss’s Law for Magnetism. Florence Nightingale (1820 - 1910) Transformed nursing into a respected profession; used statistics to analyze wider health outcomes; advocated sanitary reforms largely credited with adding 20 years to life expectancy between 1871 and 1935. Alessandro Volta (1745 - 1827) Invented the electric battery; wrote the first electromotive series; isolated methane for the first time. Blaise Pascal (1623 - 1662) Pascal’s wager justifies belief in God. Devised Pascal’s triangle for the binomial coefficients and co-founded probability theory. Invented the hydraulic press and the mechanical calculator. Samuel Morse (1791 - 1872) Took part in the invention of a single-wire telegraph and patented it. Developed the Morse code. William Thomson (also known as Lord Kelvin) (1824 - 1907) who Codified the first two laws of thermodynamics, deduced the absolute zero of temperature is -273.15 °C. and many more.. Einstein said in correspondence, "the fanatical atheists...are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures who-in their grudge against the traditional 'opium of the people'-cannot hear the music of the spheres." Dr Arno Penzias(Nobel Prize-winning astrophysicist): “I invite you to examine the snapshot provided by half a century’s worth of astrophysical data and see what the pieces of the universe actually look like…In order to achieve consistency with our observations we must…assume not only creation of matter and energy out of nothing, but creation of space and time as well. The best data we have are exactly what I would have predicted had I nothing to go on but the five books of Moses, the Psalms, the Bible as a whole.” Allan Rex Sandage (famous astronomer, dubbed the 'Grand Old Man of Cosmology' by the New York Times, and a former atheist): “It was my science that drove me to the conclusion that the world is much more complicated than can be explained by science. It was only through the supernatural that I could understand the mystery of existence.” To seek God with all our heart is fundamental to God’s revealing himself to us (Jer. 29:13). As the philosopher & famous pascal Blaise Pascal put it: Willing to appear openly to those who seek Him with all their heart, and to be hidden from those who flee from Him with all their heart, He so regulates the knowledge of Himself that He has given signs of Himself, visible to those who seek Him, and not to those who seek Him not. There is enough light for those who only desire to see, and enough obscurity for those who have a contrary disposition.

@cthulhucrews6602 hmmm...interesting argument...if we believe that God is as real as Santa Claus or Tooth Fairy....but since he's not...well...your argument is nullified...

@@hydraph4843 there is more evidence in this regard than the one that you exist, you know...

Weak and lazy response!

Moral argument for starters.

@@bamadrummer8920 The logical and rational thinking. Who makes the claim, must provide evidence. Atheism does not need to prove god doesn't exist, theism must prove god exists.

@@GuitarsRockForever is morality subjective or objective?

@@bamadrummer8920 Subjective. You do not have objective. The goal of humanity is simply survive as long as possible. We do what ever is needed. Right now we want be nice to each other as it is in our best interest. Who knows if in future, things may go mad max (or even worse).

First of all, where do scientific laws come from? Why are there laws in the natural universe that have remained the same for thousands of years? If the world is just some random popped out blizzard, then why are there all these natural laws? There should be no gravity, no physics, no dimensions, no entropy, no time, no aging. Why did mother nature condemn us with the idea that we only live for a set amount of time? Not only that, but towards the end, we experience entropy--we deteriorate. We should just be ageless particles randomly roaming the universe. Secondly, where does language come from--the idea of communicating? Did mother nature speak to the rest of the universe and say, "Come on, guys, we need to get together and explode! We need to create our first atom!" Language is a marvel. If we came from nothing, we should say nothing. We should have no purpose, and no expression. But that's not true. We express ourselves, we experience feelings, and we have creativity. None of these are necessary. So why do we have them? Thirdly, and most important, where does evil come from? Why is a person tempted? If there was no purpose but just some random explosion, then there should be no right and no wrong. Where does temptation fit in the world of reality? If a person does something bad, it's just as real as if he didn't do it. For instance, if a person is tempted to lie, he can decide. If he lies it's just as real as if he didn't lie. So why are human beings tempted?

@@leondepientopresents9623 Where do you get your expertise on how universes work? If I do not know the answer to a question, then obviously there is a god. Now all we have to do is decide which one. What about the one the Aztecs sacrificed all those people to, or Zues maybe. Yeah, I would like one or more of the European gods. I am bored of the Asian ones.

Expertise? You learn about scientific laws in elementary school. And if we have a problem with growing old, too bad. We age whether we like it or not. And what's so difficult about language? Every day we communicate. It's pretty obvious. You have a language inside you called your DNA. That's a language and it creates your very being. Everyone knows about DNA. These are basics. And everyone who ever walked the face of this earth has known temptation. It's something that goes along with being human. And now that you're asking about which god to serve....people asked that question thousands of years ago. It's nothing new. If you really want answers to that, read the book, "Against the heathen," by saint Athanasius. He can answer you much better than I can.

@@leondepientopresents9623 I don't know what you're going on about.

The Bible is the living word of God you can believe everything the Bible says. If you read and obey the gospel you will see you will become born again. Jesus said you have to be born again to enter heaven. Also you have to repent of all your sins.

Looking at how the online atheists elevate themselves is part of what drew me to Christianity. The smarter they tried to make themselves look, the dumber they looked to me.

Could you explain why? What's not so bright about them?

That's OK. We laugh at you too, with your talking donkeys and talking snakes and horrifying excuse for morality.

@@bjk8794 When someone tells you how 'bright' they are...

@@bjk8794 Don't bother. These are christians, so they don't debate honestly, they prefer to make up lies and claim they are the truth. They lie about everything, it's the only way to maintain their delusional faith. They'll just lie to you until you give up talking and then they'll think they've won.

As an atheist I appreciate the honestly.

He’s in heaven, biblically and metaphysically

@@eniolaelisery1503 how does that functionally differ from "he's in my imagination"?

@@eniolaelisery1503 to which an atheist would reply, where is heaven, why should I believe the bible, and metaphysically Krishna exists.

Jesus, Paul, Isiah, David and Moses all answer that in multiple ways. That is actually one of the worst arguments they have.

Definitely does not come easy to some of us. And no you aren't a bad person or stupid. What is it that makes it hard for you to believe?

"I just don't feel the need for it." Do you need creation to survive? Romans 1:18-20, "The wrath of God is REVEALED from heaven against all the godlessness & wickedness of people, who SUPPRESS the TRUTH by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is PLAIN to them, because God has made it PLAIN to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities-His eternal power & divine nature-have been CLEARLY seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are WITHOUT excuse." Do you need logic? Christianity is the most logically reasonable, cohesive, consistent explanation for actual, objective reality & real scientific findings, explaining origin (Genesis 1), meaning (ex.Isaiah 43:7), morality (ex.Exodus 20), destiny (ex.Hebrews 9:27), order, logic, reason, sense, beauty consistent from an orderly, logical, sensible, reasonable, beautiful God (1 Cor 14:33) Do you need morals? If anything is declared evil, it logically assumes good exists, necessitating moral law to differentiate good/evil, necessitating moral law giver (the triune God); there’s no meaningful morality from a godless worldview of an unguided/blind/pitiless/indifferent universe (R.Dawkins) born from chance/chaos/nothingness/unknown/stardust (C.Sagan/L.Krauss) where a rock in the road is as valuable as a person, made from the same theoretical primordial material.....

@@FindingGod365 I wouldn't say it's "hard", it's practically impossible. It's like asking me to stop having heartbeats. I don't have any control over It. Either I'm convinced of an information or I'm not. And if I'm not I don't even see the point in trying. For example I don't know why and how the universe came into existence. I Just trust the science about the origin of the observable universe, and I'm consciouss that It Is incomplete. But I'm happy to have incomplete trustworthy informations that do not answer everything and are the result of a process that I trust over having "something more" that comes in the form of a revelation. That's the part I Just can't bring myself to accept: the revelation. Everything I know and I trust I know because I or someone who I trust worked very hard to know. The Key thing about a scientist Is that he must explain his methodology, he must let you inquire what he did. That Is what makes It easy for me to trust scientific theories. If some scientists go rogue and invent for example gender studies I can go see what the methodology Is and Attack the root of their so called "knowledge". That Is the Key. Even thou scientists are humans and often they are politically motivated or morally corrupted I can go see their methodology and understand if it's okay for me to accept their work. I can use the work of literal nazis without being infected by their ideology, and I can reject the work of good people that are simply wrong, that Is how I want my knowledge to grow. But I don't see any of that in religious doctrines, nothing can be tested indipendently, many things are tribalistic in nature, concepts like dogmas and revelations are very frequent and some times irrational believes are protected by the criminalization of blasphemy. I don't want to offend anyone's believes but it's very clear to me that the idea of blasphemy itself often act as a protection against very fair criticism. It Is extremely evident in Islam: you can't practically say anything bad against muhammad without committing blasphemy. In Christianity the problem Is not as bad but Is still there as in any other religion. I also deeply dislike the pope, and I find the Idea that the holy spirit choose Bergoglio to guide christianity insulting to christians (I'm from a catholic country). My question Is "why Is all of this necessary?" I don't think It Is. We can get along together Just fine. If God does exist I know what I will say to him the day I die. I will just tell him "you didn't gave me the gift, and you know you didn't. I Just wanted to be honest with myself and if that's a good enough reason to be damned for eternity then ok, damn me for eternity, but that's clearly not Fair" I see that people with Faith often live good healthy and Happy Life. I just think I can do the same without believing in God. I don't want to corrupt anybody. By all means, please, keep believing, keep christianity alive, but don't force It on me. I won't do anything, except speaking my mind and explain my personal feelings, that could move someone to atheism. I also don't believe many people would be happy as atheists, but I know for a fact I wouldn't be happy as a believer, I wouldn't even be me, that person can't exist. I was not happy when I lied to myself and went to church desperately trying to ignore the many questions and perplexities I had.

@@robmc120 do you honestly believe that I value a rock as much as a human being? Do you really think It would be impossible for me to argue as an atheist that a human has more value than a rock? Moral value comes from the origin of the material you're made of? Why? Who said so? Why should I accept such a strange predicament?

@@alessandropallotta9838 " do you honestly believe that I value a rock as much as a human being?" If youre consistent with your atheism/agnosticism they have the same value from the same primordial origin, what gives man more value in your worldview?

Be careful what you wish for. He only believes in metaphores so he could convince some (but mostly Christians who believe he is a Christian) but... He could convince many that the biblical stories and claims are metaphores but contain an important message.

@@KasperKatje yes, I acknowledge he's not quite a Christian yet, but he's been bringing to the youth something that for years had been pretty out of their reach. That's a good thing

@@mgvilaca There is a risk he will be missing 2 boats when Christians realize what he is really saying and declaring him a blasphemer and atheists or doubters who stop listening when he attacks atheism and starts about god and Jesus. Time will tell, we will see where this leads to.

He might be turning them towards Islam. You're treating it as a false dichotomy: atheism or Christianity. Really it's between atheism Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Sikhism, Zoroastrianism, Celtic paganism, Hellenic paganism, or any other of the thousands of religions both extant and extinct.

I don't pretend to know where JP is, but a lot of the movement is political, not spiritual. It's a reaction to the excesses of wokism. It's eventually going to end in a different type of brokenness. Christianity is about changing society one reformed sinner at a time, not reforming sinners by changing society.

Amen ✝️ .

@@PaoloMilan keep spreading apologetics roadshow and acts 17 polemics on Facebook and twitter and Instagram and in your country and other countries but it is going to take years so take your time and be a messenger my friend

امين❤

امين 🙏🏻

exactly - it's just the rejection of the proposition that theism makes. And as there is no proof of a deity, it's the default position. What's the best argument for aunicornism or aleprechaunism? - it's the same principle. Everyone is an aunicornist because nobody has proved unicorns to exist.

how'd it go?

It's not an oxymoron for many Buddhists. Only the believers of the Abrahamic God find it hard to understand, though spirituality is actually an absent Idea in original Christianism.

@@a6hiji7 Believers in the Abrahamic God are the problem period

@@a6hiji7 Have you never heard of "Devas" my friend? Shame.

what ideology?

I agree!!

That what I thought, too.

Haha. David knows he is top tier smart.

He has a really amazing testimony

David is indeed quite smart that's the reason i subbed to him in the first place. But this time he was quite condescending towards atheists. grouping them all together with the completely deplorable indivudualls dwelling on twitter and reddit. I agree they are a total POS but i don't feel like i do the things he described and i think most of us think the same.

Based off his Why I Am a Christian testimony video, he’s really the last person anyone should be trying to deconvert back to atheism

@@meglukes exactamundo I'm a registered psychopath and paranoid schizophrenic as well. Last time I od on drugs I was shown hell!!!! No lie brother

@@F0r3v3rT0m0rr0w he chooses the best, the meanest, the vilest, the most putrid, the mass murderers, the foulest, the scummiest, the bentest, he chose me!!!!!

@@F0r3v3rT0m0rr0w he's the most clever by a country bloody mile!!!! The poorest of kids always look up to who has the most clever skills!!!! Because we have nothing else!!!!! He is sooooooo clever!!!!!! We serve the most original clever Lord!!!!! Think of a lush jungle setting, and think of a stealthy ambush predictor, green upon green upon green, our Lord decides let's make it bright orange with black stripes!!!! Who the F does that??? Our Lord!!!!! Mic drop moment there!!!!!!

If this guy is one of your best representatives, I'm sorry.

Isn't he the same guy that get owned by matt ?

@@AlwaysBeSkeptic matt the donkey brain with the bad temper, him?

@@AlwaysBeSkeptic Matt Dillahunty?

@@AlwaysBeSkeptic Dodging Dillahunty? Probably not.

I know it's tempting for theists to view Jordan Peterson as being on their side, but Jordan has the strangest idea of god that I've ever heard. You probably agree that there's no good arguments for atheism, but I suspect that Jordan means something very different when he says that than anyone else who would make that claim.

Link to the original clip is in the description!

@@apologeticsroadshow hello! Time to take the fight to the next level! *The Islam Paul paradox!* Paul refutes the islambookgod in one way or another! Is Paul telling the truth or not! Was Paul real or not! Because this islambookgod doesn't know what Paul taught = what Christians believe

@@apologeticsroadshow ​ An example! *The Islam Paul paradox!* (The battle slogan is important) Every Muslim grows up with the certainty that Christians believe God has a child! But Paul never taught that Son of God means God has a child!

​@@apologeticsroadshowCan you make a video on ,,Better Call George"? He is a self improvement KZfaqr, but recently started talking about God and his experience with God. At first I was happy he was doing that, but quickly realized nothing about his explanations was biblical. He was preaching that all religions are true and that religions are scam. I asked him about it one time and he dodged it,insulted me and made a video about me called ,,fatherless people are unsavable". So there are many young people right now who will get deceived by him, can you make a video about it?

Have you thought he may have been praying for the right answer to give?

You should have read more than Hitchens.

So what kind of cultist are you now, and why?

There is no such thing as a "Christopher Hitchens cult". No one prays to or worships Hitchens. Classic projection. You KNOW you are in a cult so you just HAVE to accuse others of it.

What got you out of it?

A lot of his arguments are still good. Almost unanswerable, in fact.

As an atheist good for you it's wrong to do something that if you're right almost nothing changes and if you're wrong...

​@beLogicalPlease Which is why I never understood atheism. You can give your devotion to God but live your life the same as you are now (unless you're a terrible person then you will have to change that up) and save yourself from a terrible fate. If you believe in God and you're wrong then nothingness is all that waits, while if you're an atheist and wrong, then you have a good chance of experience pain that no one has ever experienced on this earth.

@@Boss-ot1iy look up Pascal's wager. If you don't believe then you can't force that. Going through the motions doesn't make you a true believer and will still end up of experience pain that no one has ever experienced on this earth as you put it.

​@@Boss-ot1iyand if you're Christian and Allah is actually the real god, you are going to burn in hell lol

Zero's Iis all it has.

And is not very good at either.

@@jameslay1489 you are not from his audience and we don't care about your opinion.

@@greenbird679 yet you cared enough to make a comment about my opinion.

​@@jameslay1489You cared to watch David.

@@rosakutty2450 because I find it intellectually stimulating finding flaws in his arguments.

What if your religious and don't hear voices in your head?

I wonder where this school educated redditor idea that "everything needs proof" really came from, not everything needs tangible proof, God's existence can be explained philosophically and logically.

I have to agree, there is not nearly enough evidence for atheism to be true.

@@worldcorpenterprisesarchivewrong on both counts, you need a lack of logic to believe in something that doesn’t have proof and god lacks philosophical ideas

@@worldcorpenterprisesarchive No, everything has tangible evidence, so where is yours? I can say that I'm God, and philosophically, you can argue against me, but you can't say otherwise, so that gets us nowhere. And logic comes from tangible proofs, so you're contradicting yourself.

@@Cpnpd922 You don't need evidence for atheism-It's not a belief. We ask for evidence for God and then disprove that “evidence.” You can't prove or disprove God because he doesn't exist in our world, but we can determine that believing in him is irrational.

I have usually found Alex O'Connor of Cosmic Skeptic to be much of the same style and temperament.

I have really come to appreciate Alex O'connor actually. Since he did his degree he has risen way above pretty much every other popular atheist youtuber. But AP is still better.

Alex was my favorite atheist until he thought he should model himself after Christopher Hitchens. And frankly, he claims he studied theology but I don't see any of that in any of his takes on Christianity. He seems just as clueless as most other atheist channels when it comes to the Bible.

@@MrSeedi76 I haven't paid too much attention to his takes in Christianity it religion, but at least I appreciate his take on philosophy and the philosophical arguments for God etc. His philosophical takes at least elevate him next to guys such as Rationality Rules (NOT) and Dillahunty.

You cleary havent met enough people then

Are you a stoic? This sounds extremely similar to a piece one would take out of meditations.

@@ethancorsmeier1110 I am Human. It is time for us as a species to transcend the limited identifications of the mind. You see all the things you identify with in life your gender, your country, your culture, skin color, sexual status, political thoughts, your religion, your thoughts; all of these things have nothing to do with life. One goal of my life is to strive for an experience where these identifications are no longer apart of my living experience. There is a space beyond body, beyond mind, that is devoid of all identification. It is only when the mind is in charge of your experience that identifications arise and begin to mold the intellect. Over time these become stronger and stronger until you say "this is who I am". No all you are is a collection of things. Body is a collection of food. Mind is a collection of impressions. Its your identification with theses things that is causing the suffering. Existence is not suffering its just that in your current experience existence is suffering.

Atheists cannot explain consciousness. Their purely materialistic worldview does not have an explanation for consciousness. Neither does science for that matter. This is why we look to higher powers for answers to complex questions like the meaning of life or what is consciousness or what happens to us after we die

Why dumb? You can disagree with respect.

@@GeneralYen Because we do not have respect for people who believe that men can menstruate and give birth, neither do they earn that respect.

How about He guides them to Him….

Christianity is to “Him” if it’s not, it’s not Christianity.

May they come to the one true God and our one savior, the Lord Jesus Christ.

May the god of spaghetti monster guide all Christians into believing in the true God

@@larkiess And the God of the spaghetti Monster is Jesus Christ. For He is God above all gods. Lord above all Lords. King above all kings. Nice try though 🤭 oh and Jesus loves you so much!

Underneath all their objections and circular reasoning there is one outstanding and powerful reason why they are atheists: "I want to have lots of premarital sex"

Why are you lying? Doesn't Jesus have some rather strong opinions on bearing false witness. It is not possible to be on the Internet and not know the real reason we don't believe. Your need to strawman us makes you look weak.

Makes me sad when theists don't take the time to reflect on their shallow world view. Their ultimate reason for believing in a god is "I want to, but I don't know why".

Yea, I'm a Christian, but I have to concede you did strawman the atheist view there.

Nah that’s not fair. I am a Christian, yet I know a lot of atheists who have wrestled and questioned, and are still questioning. They’re on a journey, the genuine ones anyway. Then there are the ones who actually just hate God and think it’s okay to abuse ppl over it instead of having honest convos.

hi tati ❤

@@chloe-historyandgames 🤗

The Dwemer tried that. And they disappeared. Do you want to disappear?

@@nisonatic Not particularly disagreeing, but I consider Deism to be basically proto-atheism. Richard Dawkins said that "... although atheism might have been _logically_ tenable before Darwin, Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist.” The point is that prior to Darwin, it was hard to justify atheism intellectually, so you sort of _had_ to acknowledge some basic view of God. Which made you a Deist.

​@@PJRayment Deism isn't proto atheism at all, Darwin didn't make it possible to be atheist because the question of what started everything still exists. Evolution doesn't change that question You can use basic logic to come to a conclusion of a singular all powerful God, the question is, is it a personal God or an impersonal God? These days I lean more and more towards Deism because it does seem the creator of this universe doesn't particularly care

That’s funny because Asian countries are far from Christianity and have some of the most moral and upstanding cultures compared you European cultures

Exactly!

Thank you !!!!!!!!!!!

You forgot to mention, your truth. It's not a fact, therefore it is a belief. Which is why "your truth" would fit better.

it won't just be a tide. it will be a golden tsunami! 🌊

I like to see it shift too. But is it? Much as I respect Peterson, what he seems to be teaching is that the Bible has a lot of good teaching, not that it's actually true. So yes, he's shifting the tide, but perhaps toward another lie rather than the truth.

​@@PJRaymentI'm also very careful about all these "luminaries" floating around on the internet. I like both Wood and Peterson very much, but they are not my ultimate guide for truth ... that's only Yeshua and the Bible.

Years ago, pre Rona and all that jazz, Petersons lectures about Genesis made me realize there is actually some cool stuff and wisdom in the Bible. Which did heal some false ideas I had about the bible, and made it possible for quite a landslide conversion to take place. Did dear Jordan have the whole Truth back then? Of course not. Perhaps I would not have listened to that Truth anyway. But his interpretation opened Genesis for me in a way I could understand back then, and it is not wrong! Gods word is deep in many, many different directions. Fun fact, I tried reading his 12rules for life, and ironically had much trouble with his Genesis connections there, it put me off, even though i loved his Genesis vids... atheists are very inconsistent sometimes😆

@@MrsYasha1984 "Petersons lectures about Genesis made me realize there is actually some cool stuff and wisdom in the Bible." That's great, but did it help you realise that Genesis is actual history?

& they get REALLY ANGRY when you point it out to them.

not quite, but everything science has proven doesn't disprove the existence of god... just some beliefs about him.

So by "atheism" you mean "science".

More like leave nothing in a room for a long time and it will become a person

​@@michaelbuick6995not specifically... You can try to frame it that way.

To make fun of Harris 😂

The majority of the world is real is religious, why does presupposition favor your idea instead of what the majority is? Not saying religious people shouldn’t have reasons, but why favor yourself?

@@chadparker5517 a basic life will not display any sign of a god, religion is a belief attached onto life. and therefore should be proven. it's like if I walked up to you and said you had to prove to me you weren't dancing at the moment just because everyone thought were, and you're stupid if you think I have to prove you are dancing first

@@Millticker what does a display of God look like to you in a person? Do you think God would be naturally occurring or do you think He would have to reveal himself? Would you even know what to look for if life displayed a sign of God?

@@chadparker5517 something impossible, otherwise it is not a fit sign of anything other than life.

So, like a man rising from the dead 3 days after being killed?

The same could be said of theists.

no you use the same regurgitated arguments and we respond to them. It's on you to find a new non awful argument for gods existance.

@@criticalthinker8007 Thank you for proving my point! Your name is as original as your old cliched argument! 🤟🏻💀

@@simonnorgren2911 Another one! How exciting! Did you read my comment? You see any arguments about the existence of God? No! You're just reacting to a comment! Just like I knew some of you will! You can't help it! That's why you are here! 🤟🏻💀

​​@@simonnorgren2911 I could try to prove His existence all day long, but I won't. Instead I'll say this: If I'm wrong and we just stop existing, oh well. If you're wrong and there is a loving but fearful God at the end of this life who will determine where you go for all of eternity, you go to Hell. There is no saying "woops my bad" at this point. It's only through Jesus that we are saved.

Honestly as an atheist I was quite shocked by the level of disrespect. When will both sides at least try to see each other point without mocking them, and wrongfully, besides??

@@GeneralYen the atheists that Dr. Wood typically engages with do not offer the same respect, so I have no problem with parodying them. I personally don't really agree with Jordan Peterson here. You could see that Pints with Aquinas was having trouble following and he's a staunch Catholic. Atheism is a secular religion where evidence doesn't actually matter no matter how much they claim it does. That level of irrationality is hard to take seriously, though I realize most atheists come by their atheism honestly.

Too many ad hominems. On both sides.

given it's a satirical entity......I feel it's lost on you.

Classic reductionist moron

If presented with the question of whether to accept or reject the FSM as a (or the) god, we would either need to explain why we make the choice we do, or basically say, “I don’t know, or I don’t want to say”. I think we can do better than that though. We can simply say there is literally no evidence for its existence. The earliest testimony we have of it, in the form of an open letter, is much more plausibly explained by the hypothesis that the writer of the letter was writing a satirical fiction in order to try and make a case against teaching young-earth creationism in schools. In the absence of any evidence, it makes more sense to follow a more plausible worldview instead.

@cthulhucrews6602 FSM is satire...again, I don't think you know the actual backstory of the FSM

​@cthulhucrews6602The fact you even asked that shows how little you know about Gods. Jews believe in God because thousands of them heard his voice at once. Christians believe in God because of Jesus, who all athiest scholars admit existed, died, and thousands saw him alive again. I suggest reading up on things before you are against it. It's silly to hare something when you can't even tell the difference between a meme and a real historical person.

Except that the burden of proof is on whoever is making the claim. So if the atheist makes a claim that there is no God, he _does_ have the burden of proof.

@@PJRayment And: if the atheist doesn't make a claim that there is no God, he doesn't have the burden of proof. And: if the atheist doesn't buy a claim that there is a God, he doesn't have the burden of proof.

No. It goes like this: I believe in God. Do you believe in God? No. Simple as.

@@jamesnincrossthat’s not an argument

@@johnnybagofdoughnuts4193 I don't need to make an argument. You wouldn't expect me to make an argument against Krishna or Zeus. I just don't believe in them. Same as your God.

Was there KZfaq by the time the twin towers fell?

How is that possible? If you cannot explain it, I think you need to go to a psychiatric doctor.

@@user-po8ii4tl2j KZfaq came 1/2 decade after 9/11. But David Wood had a website with written content.

@@user-po8ii4tl2j Why do you think youtube only? He used to have shows on TV. I have seen some of his old clips from TV shows discussing is lam.

@@greenbird679 Oh, I didn't know that! Thanks for pointing that out. I 'met' him on KZfaq and didn't realise he already had a TV show.

@@TboneWTF Why am I atheist ? Look at religion, why would you even need to ask ?

@@alpharoo4251 Yes. I agree.

You will have to explain your stance here, because at the surface level, that seems like utter nonsense. I mean, it really feels the same as saying that the best argument for a spherical Earth is flat Earthers. Other people making bad arguments doesn't provide evidence for your stance.

@@ikeillue8385 It's not my stance

@@ikeillue8385 I accept the possibility of a creator. I don't accept the possibility of a creator as described by religion. I don't accept that religion is anything but a political manipulation and atheism is more often a reaction to that. I don't really mean political in the democratic sense.

I'm a Christian and I've been asking the same question for years following that fateful day...

Why are you blaming God for not drinking or milk on time? Are you going to blame God for failing your test too? The test for which you did not prepare nor study. God is not the cosmic vending machine that gives you all that you want with the right prayer tokens nor is God the genie from Aladdin that grants you your every wish. Take some personal responsibility, lunkhead!

because of the juice

Arguments could be made that we do not understand everything. I would think that's pretty obvious at this point. If, if something can be determined to exist it is no longer supernatural. I could really do without all the ad hominems in this video.

@@Deridus That may be so, but then you also cannot claim that it is supernatural. So far all attempts at this are just nonsense if you look at all thousands of diverse propositions. If you make such a claim, you must be able to back it up with compelling evidence before you force other people to accept it. It is time for this to end.

@@kohlhofers Exactly so. Mind you, I'm a Hard Atheist in that I deny the validity of any form of deism. In regards to what we might perceive as the supernatural, I do not rule out the possibility that there are some things that could potentially exist. Thing is, if a thing exists, it is thereby natural and with careful study, explicable. Gods and devils, souls, heavens and hells, reincarnation and karma, all fall in the supernatural and therefor I reject that they exist as they by definition cannot be proven. I may be wrong, but I'll believe it when I see it.

@@kohlhofersdon’t worry the end is near, then you will experience the evidence.

@@rvtalltales9327 Bullshit!

computers exist, bill gates exists. theres trully massive evidence for both mundane claims. none for an invisible mid without a brain thats not in reality. eg not real