Christians Have More Evidence than Atheists: Refuted

The whole video:
• Why Christians Have Mo...
Yes, I do have a Patreon account, thank you for asking:
/ themessianicmanic
My Twitter:
/ idiolekt
My facebook:
/ themessianicmanic
Here’s my society6 store if you’re interested in my pretentious minimalist poster designs:
society6.com/t...

[@NickyTannock]

Just because I'm not buying what they're selling doesn't mean I'm selling something else.

[@NickyTannock]

​@DastardlyDawkins Atheism doesn't demand any shared belief system, so I'm not sure what you're talking about when you mention indoctrination. I'm assuming then that you've lumped together everything that goes against your personal beliefs and attributed it to Atheism. If that's the case, then have fun with that.

[@NickyTannock]

@ajs1031 Good advice.

[@NickyTannock]

@DastardlyDawkins More on the strength of your inflammatory comments, username and Hitler icon. And I'm aware that any reply counts as feeding, but I don't mind at the moment. Anyway, there are lots of different belief systems that don't include a God, so no, there are no specific consequences in regard to that idea.

[@ixamraxi]

@DastardlyDawkins Yes, that's correct. There are no consequences or strings attached to the idea that God does not exist. Given identical circumstances, the life of a person who never even heard of the concept of God would be pretty much indistinguishable from a person who believed and lived with the belief that no Gods exist. The idea may have consequences and strings for a person who believes, but none for the non-believer. In fact, the only time strings and consequences exist for the non-believer is when they are sourced from believers, such as religious friends and family, a religious society, the general expectation of religion from others, religious solicitors, religious authorities, etc etc. Why that is confusing to you, I can't help you with that.

[@NickyTannock]

@DastardlyDawkins Nope.

[@BrianTylerComposer]

Just replace the word "god" with "leprechaun" the entire way through his video and his arguments work exactly the same. Which is not at all.

[@massey904]

Leprechaun's are unrelated to the subject.

[@seans5289]

Rabbi Chris t: Isn’t the subject the ability to disprove supernatural beings?

[@massey904]

@@seans5289 No

[@seans5289]

Rabbi Chris t: Cool. Cool. Okay. What is the subject of the video?

[@massey904]

@@seans5289 The subject of the video is how "atheists" are purposely being dishonest.

[@mabatch3769]

He wasn't trying to refute atheism. He was preaching to the choir.

[@robertmiller9735]

He was trying to quiet his congregation's doubts.

[@khymaaren]

More like grasping for straws in fear of loosing the bliss his ignorance provides.

[@Nai61a]

Mabatch: I think you have just about summed it up. I went to look at the original vid and its comments. I cannot find a single negative or challenging comment. I find it hard to believe that NONE of TMM's subscribers (and nobody else, for that matter) has bothered to comment, so I draw the provisional conclusion that somebody is filtering what appears on the page. I may do a little test, just to see what happens.

[@Nai61a]

And, as I suspected, comments which challenge his nonsense are being removed. Dishonesty in action.

[@mabatch3769]

Nai61a, Can’t say that I’m surprised. Religion, especially this preachers brand, is inherently anti-intellectual and authoritarian. He simply cannot let people think for themselves or risk losing followers. Now he may be completely sincere, actually believing he’s saving people, but that doesn’t change the fact that he’s caught up in a system of control.

[@tfive24]

He has excellent hand writing. There ! I said something positive about his argument.

[@josiahferrell5022]

@Robert Jones Well then, prove it!

[@Pluggit1953]

Handwriting is a compound word.

[@TerrorBlades]

Very true.

[@IAmAlgolei]

I found his printing legible, but not excellent. "Legible" could also be considered a positive statement.

[@historicalbiblicalresearch8440]

In his word salad does he sometimes accidentally prove atheism?

[@yumeN0dengon]

8:28 : - There's no God. - Okay, give me strong proof for that. - Well, I can't do that. - So, that means that there is a God. 5 minutes later : "Christians use logic." Yeah.. Do they really, though?

[@mcarp555]

So: Most atheists do not claim no god exists. He ignores that for his strawman instead. "History and society are based on the idea god exists" - History and society were once based on the ideas that men were the superior gender and slavery was necessary. How did those ideas turn out? "I have plenty of evidence for god because it's written in the bible". Sigh. Here's someone who's nowhere nearly as smart as he thinks he is.

[@jeffc5974]

@DastardlyDawkins Actually it's more along the lines of Atheism = I don't believe. Agnosticism = I don't know. They are different, though related claims. I personally fit both of those definitions, but I also claim another label: Igtheism = I don't know what the hell you mean by the word "god".

[@jeffc5974]

@DastardlyDawkins You were closer the first time around. Can't be sure = I don't know. Anti-theists are the ones who claim there is no god. I don't claim that, since I don't know what you mean by god, but I do know that the christian god is incoherent.

[@elnegromatapacos162]

@DastardlyDawkins The exact colloquial meaning is rather blurred- the original meaning of atheism is "Without God" and that is vague enough to justify most definitions given earlier.

[@MrOttopants]

@DastardlyDawkins If someone says, "Do you believe in a god," and I say, "I don't know, I'm an agnostic", that's not a response to the question of belief. Agnostic applies to either theist or atheist. Your argument sucks.

[@jeffc5974]

​@DastardlyDawkins "Pure" is another word which is ill defined and highly subject to interpretation and biases. I am being as honest as I can in this discussion, if that's what you mean. I understand that many people prefer to avoid answering whether they believe or not, which is why they say they are an agnostic instead, pretending that answers the question, when they are actually answering a completely different question. Historically this is very reasonable, as being a nonbeliever could mean torture and/or death. Gnosticism is about knowledge, theism is about belief. You can be without knowledge of god, but still believe in him, which would make you an agnostic theist. In fact, your Bible often talks about this, but it simply refers to it as "faith". Gnostic theism is a very specific position which you might be surprised doesn't really describe you. I'd encourage you to read about it from someone who claims to be one; they will be better prepared to explain it than I would. I understand that many groups oppose specific issues that some christians (not all) have where they want to persecute and exclude them from equality. Whether they have a god belief or not is not the source of those conflicts. This has not been part of this discussion until you brought it up. Can we please stay on topic? I also find it interesting that you think anti-theists oppose persons. No, they simply think there is no god. That is not about you or other believers. Yes, some of them do try to get others to not believe, but if your belief can't stand a challenge, is it really that strong? Most vocal nonbelievers welcome being challenged. In fact, I don't think I've seen a nonbeliever on KZbin close their comments, but believers do it constantly, often preemptively.

[@NickyTannock]

Do Apologists assume that Atheism is the opposite of Christianity?

[@smashexentertainment676]

@Jubei Yang believing in the same god, but worshiping it in a different way is the opposite of christianity. that's one of the reasons I left this circus, there's no way to know which god and which way is correct. Although atheism looks like the only correct way.

[@ApocryphalDude]

Bigoted supremacy?

[@dan9521]

@@smashexentertainment676 but there is only one Jesus

[@chaschoune]

@@dan9521 How do you know that?

[@dan9521]

@@chaschoune what is knowing?

[@rootytuners]

It always amuses me that Christians mock the example of Santa Claus when used as a comparison, since Santa Claus (St. Nicolas in plain English) is a Christian saint, with similar origin fables to the rest of the Christian fantasy. Yet they dismiss him so easily - as easily as the rest of us. There’s probably more evidence that Saint Nicolas existed than the rest of the entire Jesus myth. Comical don’t you think?

[@frodobaggins2328]

I’d hate to point out that Santa clause is another Christianized stolen character from an older society. Santa clause is almost a direct ripoff of the Norse Yule tomte

[@frodobaggins2328]

At the very least, the elves are based on this too

[@tardigrade8019]

@@frodobaggins2328 several different stories actually, some Nordic ice lady/spirit and Sinter Klaus are the ones I know off the top of my head. It's not even like this is a uniquely Christian thing, pretty much all mythology borrows and copies stories from its neighbouring cultures and preceding mythologies.

[@frodobaggins2328]

@@tardigrade8019 well, I happen to know that Yule tomte also happens to be a hypothesized alter ego to Odin. Still, I am aware that this isn’t strictly related to Christianity, however, Christians like to call other religions outside their own as pagan. So a thing they cry out is evil is something they have adapted to their own ideologies Also, I would bet a tin nickel that that “Nordic ice lady/spirit” is the goddess skadi.

[@zkapsh]

@@frodobaggins2328 they also the stole the idea from German holiday/myth of saint nicholas as well. It's been a while since my German class, and if I remember correctly, he was a real saint, he gave presents to children. And over time the myth of saint nicholas became a thing. Different Germanic cultures had different myths about him. Then when Germans moved to America slowly their myth along side things like nordic myths became commercialized by American culture and thus came Santa claus.

[@Beery1962]

I have the same level of certainty for the statement "There's no God" as I have for the statement "There are no leprechauns". If we need absolute certainty for the lack of existence of something before we disbelieve, then we must believe in every mythological being ever thought up: leprechauns, fairies, unicorns, Cthulhu, Zeus, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, etc. When someone claims something doesn't exist, that is not making a claim to absolute knowledge - it is merely the default position of disbelief in the face of a lack of evidence.

[@RustyWalker]

Or, we can express it as, belief in proposition X is unjustified due to a lack of supporting (empirical) evidence. We have not been presented with persuasive evidence that a God *does* exist.

[@rexbettencourt3800]

Loser that is wrong. You have to have a holy book and not read it before you can have real proof.... got you! Silly rabbi, kicks are for trids.

[@WilliamGrayIV]

The scary part is that some people have started to believe that other mythological creatures literally existed. For example, some Christians believe that dragons and giants existed while some "pagans" seem to think that Thor was literally born from 9 maidens. Neither of those are true. Rather, I see myths such as these being more like riddles or exaggerated stories about nature that contain some truth. The fact that they're outrageously wrong is meant to guide people towards the truth within them. In the case of Thor, he is an infant who is born after 9 months (280 days for Europeans, 275 days for Africans and Asians) with the months being the maidens.

[@UnofficialTranslator]

Now you're going too far. You can't just say that The Flying Spaghetti Monster isn't real

[@truebeliever786]

Not even close to the same thing, because the idea of God is an overseer or creator of everything around us, which is perfectly logical given the intricacy of everything in existence. Leprechauns or unicorns etc. are very specific descriptions, which is ridiculous. That's why I find Deism to be make much more sense than Atheism, though I'm not Deist myself. A lot of the more militant Atheists are like cult members following guys like Dawkins et al. without thinking for themselves, which is ironic considering that Atheism in spirit is meant to be quite the opposite.

[@Fraterchaoraterchaos]

funny how he makes the claim to have "more evidence" for god, and doesn't present a single bit of evidence...

[@NetAndyCz]

The theist usually just know that there is god and it is my God, it is such a common knowledge it does not need any evidence, it is like knowing that sky is blue and night is when sun is below horizon... or that we feel good about good things and bad about bad things and since they feel good about god it means it is good god and real one as well, because it just has to be. There is just no need for critical thinking because it is so obvious.

[@xxMrBaldyxx]

@@NetAndyCz They believe in God despite having no evidence or reason for their belief. This is why the belief in God requires faith. "Faith" is their excuse for having no evidence or reason. Belief in the absence of evidence and reason is _delusional_ .

[@126644]

@@NetAndyCz you can look at the time, see the sun setting, see it's dark outside. You cant see a god, you cant hear a god, its literally impossible to prove the existence of god.

[@whiterabbit75]

@@xxMrBaldyxx Oh, they have reasons. They're not _good_ reasons, but they have them.

[@isidoreaerys8745]

We have “logic, science, and historical” reasons. But I will talk about those some other time there’s no time today. Just, trust me.

[@sandorski56]

When he argued against Santa/Tooth Fairy, he made a decent case for Atheism.

[@AnkhInfinitus]

The way that he thinks he could prove there is no Darth Vader is the same exact method that we could use to prove to him that there is no Yahweh.

[@Yoseqlo1]

Exactly. There is historical evidence, space-fantasy have a long record, science, interestellar travel may not be feasible for our civilization, but theoretically it is possible, and using his same logic, yeah, *There is a Darth Vader!*

[@Yoseqlo1]

+Josh Opell "Just because something produces good things doesn’t mean it’s true." While that is true, the models we have seem to be the less wrong when describing reality. True, the so-called ultimate truth can't really be obtained to that extent, but it is good enough so that we can have our own assumptions in which we can go through life with enough certainty (mind you, not any ultimately objective truth) by making predictions that are less wrong than other models previously tried. So, while we can't say a hundred percent sure the sun will rise tomorrow, our models say that we shouldn't worry about the sun disappearing for the next five billion years or so. *TLDR:* Induction may not be the best possible solution, but is the best that we got at explaining reality's behavior.

[@wunnell]

@Josh Opell , I find your argument rather silly. It sounds rather like standing in the middle of a road while a car speeds towards you and not getting out of the way because you don't know for sure that the car even exists. The fact is that we can't know anything for sure other than that we exist in some form (or else we wouldn't be able to contemplate whether we exist) and we perceive our environment in a particular way and we can make certain predictions about that environment that seem to be consistent. Without any better option, I choose to exist based on that perception and those predictions. You do too, so any argument that you make that we shouldn't is rather hollow. Science may not be perfect but, until someone comes up with something better, it is the best tool we have for navigating our perceived reality.

[@timpieper5293]

Josh Opell the goal is not certainly. The goal is rationality.

[@timpieper5293]

DastardlyDawkins if your goal is certainty, you’ve got an unattainable goal. It’s pointless. But rationality is attainable. Not permanently because we’re human, but a goal worth striving for. Empiricism is a part of rationality, dumbass. And politics never came up. You’re definitely not striving for rationality.

[@awakeningtovacuity8372]

I would accept absolutely any evidence of the existence of a god. So far, nothing.

[@crimsonblade25]

“Can you prove that Asura Poseidon Horus Vishnu or Ganesha don’t exist” “Yeah” “And that proof is?” “My holy book says so” Facepalm So this is what passes as “logic” for the Christians eh. I’m glad I figured it was all bullshite by the time I was 8 years old. It saved me from a lifetime of being dumber then a bag of bricks.

[@BillGarrett]

This video's Suicide By Drinking Game keyword is: "strong".

[@kmbassett7222]

Or "whine".

[@ryavix]

I would've said disprove, but i've been accused of sadistic schadenfreude.

[@theapistevist8128]

Using science to prove the existence of God is interesting. Why hasn't science proved God's existence? What a Christian theist actually means is to look at the Earth and the galaxy. A Christian theist then makes baseless guesses about God's character. Using their method, God loves astronomical balls.

[@nanoblast5748]

"A Christian theist then makes baseless guesses about God's character." well if you're using the bible as a template for your own moral compass, then not so much, but you'd still technically be a christian.

[@theapistevist8128]

+Josh Opell I've only heard of both, but never read their works. Maybe "prove" was the improper word, since that applies to mathematics. Evidence and facts might be more suitable.

[@theapistevist8128]

+Nanoblast Inc This comes off as incoherent. Please rephrase what you mean.

[@theapistevist8128]

+Josh Opell Hm. I should read up on the philosophy of science, then. Are you a philosophical skeptic?

[@nanoblast5748]

@@theapistevist8128 my point is that not all christians make the 'beautiful therefore god' line of thought.

[@bat2293]

He believes in God but not in Santa or the Tooth Fairy? Oh Ye of little faith. Packages miraculously appearing under the tree Christmas morning. A quarter magically appearing under my pillow after losing a tooth. Hey, that's enough evidence for me.

[@johnholland9371]

There's a rumor going around that the parents do it...

[@turkeyherder9456]

I knew it, he was just making an argument from popularity. Followed up with a reversal of the burden of proof. Prove that Allah is not the correct god, that should be interesting.

[@johnholland9371]

Because the Bible, checkmate evolutionist!

[@GuitarDog_atx]

Even IF an atheist makes the positive claim that "there is no god", if this shy space dictator would actually show himself, they would change their mind and admit that they were wrong. Doesn't mean they'd bow to him. I wouldn't - the god of the bible does not meet my standards of morality. There's just as much "proof" of many gods (an infinite number of them), as there is for 1 god.

[@Yoseqlo1]

Yeah, for what we know, you could be Christian and will be making the real god angry, thus, your access to an afterlife will be denied.

[@CristianMartinez-hg6xu]

I don't think Christians will be as happy in heaven as they think because they make the assumption that God can be God only when their views, interpretation and politics are exclusively, objectively right. How could God disprove homophobia, a specific denomination or interpretation of a biblical passage if a person bases both God's existence and their self worth on it. If a creationist had to share a bunk bed in Heaven with Stephen Hawking or Richard Dawkins, he would throw a tantrum without waiting for God to explain himself. Religion teaches that life means nothing if your teacher/congregation was wrong.

[@naos8116]

@@Yoseqlo1 What if Shinto is right? We all go to the same place, bitch! Haha!

[@dylanwight5764]

In times like these, I think back to the wise words of Steve Buschemi in Spy Kids 2: "Does God remain in Heaven because he too fears what he created?" Seriously, have you seen us humans??? We suck!!! I'd stay in Heaven too!

[@terryriley8963]

If I went to court to prove that someone was crucified and arose from the dead and I told the judge I have written evidence containing eye witness accounts of people who saw this but I didn’t actually have the original documents and I don’t know who actually wrote these testimonies and what I am showing him were actually translations of copies of the supposedly original documents that were originally written in a dead language but on the plus side I have four versions of this translated story although unfortunately all of these versions all tell the story differently with a few contradictions thrown in as well. I do not have any experience of being in court but I am pretty sure the judge would lock me up for wasting his time.

[@XeniteBlackthread]

Word salad and I'm all out of croutons! Shucks! 😉

[@AntiCitizenX]

I love how this guy says "there is no proof" when there are millions of atheists who will prove it to him in a heartbeat if only he asks.

[@ixamraxi]

@Josh Opell It depends on the god. Specific god's (gods with specific attributes, behaviors, intentions or desires) are easy to disprove with relative certainty, its the deistic type god, the vague nebulous concepts of a higher power or designer that don't interact with their creation, that are unfalsifiable and impossible to disprove with certainty (though skepticism in their existence is reasonable enough).

[@jacksonheathen2092]

If he's so sure he's right, then he should immediately slit his own throat to prove his faith & be with jesus.

[@ixamraxi]

​@Josh Opell Falsification is a foundational pillar of science. You make an observation, create a hypothesis that accounts for the observation, then try to falsify the hypothesis using experimentation; then we use the hypothesis that survive to create theories and models that we use to make predictions about the world around us. Falsification is an important part of gaining knowledge. As for the infinite regress, Ill side with Aristotle, that not all knowledge requires demonstration.

[@KalibreSteelblast]

@Josh Opell ... ... ... Go on? Why is it whenever people make a claim, they never follow up with examples?

[@badatheist9948]

@Josh Opell The god proposition is a unfalsifiable position. And science can not look into the supernatural. So in any form show that any god exists.

[@HTYM]

The "strong" is strong in this one. The only thing that isn't strong is his argument. Which is weak.

[@MRayner59]

The smell of bullshit coming from his argument is also pretty strong.

[@PigRipperLAW]

I just don’t get their line of “reasoning.” It’s so scattered and arbitrary. Full of contradictions and hypocrisy.

[@spocksvulcanbrain]

That's religion for you!

[@smoofoperator]

I love how this guy points at the words he's written with extreme confidence, like they're true statements just because he wrote them on a whiteboard. The degeneracy of the human race is staggering

[@chriswilson3126]

I'm getting tired of the burden of proof shifting

[@ptolemyauletesxii8642]

God also can't lose his car keys, stub his toe, or feel any genuine pain at the loss of anyone, not even his son Jesus. Not that he lost Jesus.

[@itsjustameme]

No TMM - his worst example is not the one about Darth Vader. The worst one by far is his assertion that he can prove that no dinosaurs are roaming the streets of his city. If his city is anything like mine he can on any given day go out and count hundreds of pigeons and other dinosaurs. For him to prove his claim would require him to uproot the theory of evolution itself - I doubt he can do that.

[@theMosen]

Listening to that guy was like having a tooth pulled.

[@Altorin]

I love when it falls apart right from the start "atheists who claim there is no God are making a strong claim" Yes. Yes they are. Most atheists don't actually make that positive claim. Most are happy enough to just be left alone to their disbelief. Silly little "smart" man

[@XDRONIN]

LOL!!.. We were all laughing at the HUGE irony of this video, weren't we? :D

[@mikean7074]

2:50 "The only thing that keeps me from asserting that a god does not exist is the fact that I'm open to the possibility that..." You can assert that gods don't exist while still being open to the possibility that you could be wrong about that. Only a theist deals in absolutes.

[@DL-rl9bd]

Mike AN in one of his videos, I’ve heard Aron Ra state, “I don’t think there is no god. I KNOW there is no god.” Aron Ra is an atheist that asserts as fact that there is no god. A person who does that meets, in my opinion, the true definition of an atheist. Anything less is an agnostic. Further, I think being agnostic is the truly honest position. Whereas, being an atheist, in that sense, is being as fundamental as a fundamental Christian - dealing in absolutes, in the face of a lack of knowledge. I just can’t understand why there is controversy over the definition of these two terms.

[@spocksvulcanbrain]

@@DL-rl9bd I understand what you mean, but you're wrong. Atheism is about belief, Gnosticism is about knowledge. They are NOT the same topic. To be an agnostic tells us nothing about your belief of whether a god exists or not.

[@DL-rl9bd]

@@spocksvulcanbrain not really. If someone says they’re agnostic, it’s saying they’re uncertain or undecided about their belief. That they belive they don’t know or cannot know.

[@pythondrink]

@@DL-rl9bd doesn't prevent them from still believing tho. I don't see how you counteracted their reply. They're absolutely correct.

[@bryanburton6087]

1. "There IS a god" - Strong Proof- Strong Claim 2. Does exist - Prove I'll wait.................................

[@wbdill]

This guy is weak sauce.

[@Apollorion]

And who is your "This guy"? *TMM* , the *narrator/presentator of the video TMM responded to* or *someone else* ?

[@CaseAgainstFaith1]

Apollorion I am pretty sure that Brian is saying the apologist is “weak sauce”

[@wbdill]

The apologist.

[@Apollorion]

@@wbdill Thank you for being more clear & transforming our (i.e. from me & CaseAgainstFaith) surmise into knowledge.

[@gepisar]

Thats pretty funny! Good call, DanielSon.... ;-)

[@Ugly_German_Truths]

His problem is that it is the opposite of his argument... because there are so many strong claims put out for god existing none of them coming true if you test it (like Prayer, miracles) is a good argument for the claim "that god does not exist in the way you describe him".

[@Ugly_German_Truths]

Urgh how often can he say the word strong in five minutes? Is this yet another form of magical incantation "praying" something into becoming truth despite no supporting evidence for it existing?

[@Ugly_German_Truths]

Birds *are* phylogenetically dinosaurs so chances are hight hat somebody has a pet chicken or something else walking around at that moment "in his city"...

[@maingun07]

@@Ugly_German_Truths Pidgins.

[@Ugly_German_Truths]

@@maingun07 Do you mean the doves or the garbled English? Pidgin-holing is probably against the geneva convention or something... Pigeonholing on the other side is far too frequent...

[@maingun07]

@@Ugly_German_Truths Pigeon. Eye spel knott sow gud.

[@MasamiPhoenix]

I like how he mocks us for insisting they have the burden of proof but then just takes the burden of proof back, and never realizes what he's done

[@cmgvideo]

"I'm not going to go through the proof in this training" Aw shucks! I was waiting for the prove! Maybe the next lesson.

[@larrydicus7822]

I’ve never heard an atheist say there is no god. They just say they haven’t seen any evidence for a gods existence . Big difference

[@maingun07]

There is no god. This is a justified belief based on an utter lack of evidence _especially where we should find evidence_ in addition to being incoherent. Now I can't say that there cannot be out there somewhere some entity with god like powers, that could for all intents and purposes be classified as a god, but the Abrahamic god is most certainly false.

[@NetAndyCz]

There is evidence, but only when you define god in a way that anything you find supports you claim... which is pretty useless definition imho.

[@diobrando6716]

NetAndyCz true

[@naos8116]

An Asian Christian apologist? Weird. Not to be offensive, but I rarely see Asians make these kind of arguments. Am I the only one who sees this?

[@azazel166]

Well, South Korea is quite Christian from what I know.

[@naos8116]

A Ghost Without a Past Maybe. But you don't see them online making thesr kind of arguments from all the Christian videos. They're usually white or black as far as I can tell.

[@Ugly_German_Truths]

Naos... thatis a Black Swan Fallacy. Just because you do not remmber ever having seen an asian Apologist does not mean they do not exist. Indeed Flat Earth and Creationism as fringe forms of Apologetics are pretty popular in India that technically counts as Asia ;-)

[@adrianrhoden8310]

Stereotypically, they're of the intelligent set.

[@CaseAgainstFaith1]

China has a sizable Christian minority. Philippines are majority Christian.

[@redblaze8700]

To anyone who claims Darth Vader doesn’t exists, I have three words: “Watch Star Wars!”

[@Krikenemp18]

He exists every bit as much as god does - in books, movies, and imaginations.

[@frank_calvert]

that is such a good analogy for "read the bible!" peoplr

[@ByronAgain]

"Our god is a strong being." So, why does he need you to defend him & make arguments for the existence of a god. Seems weak.

[@GigglingStoners]

... they just hadnt gotten around to showing any...

[@crazyprayingmantis5596]

This guy actually thinks he's clever, he thinks he's saying things that have never been said before.

[@oscargr_]

To be honest, that can be said about both sides of the debate. As many times as the exact same pro god arguments have been made, exactly that many times these arguments have been shown to be false. I m lying... Sometimes a single claim of god's existence is based on multiple fallacies. (But it's still a stalemate)

[@josephedwardsarena9487]

I feel like a cat playing with my prey watching apologists, I've heard all the arguments.

[@keiraferrari7764]

”God exists” That is a very strong statement. It requires very strong evidence.

[@m1g4s]

I am now incredibly interested to see how he thinks he can prove darth vader doesn't exist

[@Blackmark52]

This "god is necessary" kind of apologetics lacks the self-awareness to realize that, if true, it should also prove the existence of any and all gods. It can't just work for the god one wants to exist.

[@isaacpriestley]

He seems to think that if his God is "strong", then an atheist would need strong evidence to, like, "defeat" his God, like in a fight.

[@yoreljm]

It's like saying "I'm going to keep talking to on my invisible friend until you disprove that he exists". This is truly delusional.

[@puppyash9656]

"There are no dinosaurs walking around!" * The council of Pigeons have requested your presence at their next session. *

[@elainejohnson6955]

He can prove Harry Potter existed since there are books written about him.

[@stevenbyers8747]

Wouldn't this guy's time be better spent giving proof of his God? His entire video is a sidestep.

[@TerrorBlades]

"People believed it in the past, so its true" We have believed in allot of fucked up shit in that past...

[@TheBT]

I can prove that there are dinosaurs walking around San Jose. There are Chickens in San Jose, All chickens are birds, all birds are dinosaurs, therefore Dinosaurs walking around San Jose

[@DesGardius-me7gf]

“Intelligent design,” my ass! Just look at how many problems there are with the human body. And creationists, don’t give me the whole, “Oh! That’s because of the fall!” bullshit.

[@normalhumanperson4149]

I hate it when apologists try to say that all atheists are claiming that there definitively is no god. Atheism is the lack of a belief in a god, atheists feel that the proof against the existence of a god is too great and hence they don't believe in a god. Atheism isn't a claim that there is no god. Don't talk to me unless you can actually understand this.

[@NielMalan]

7:01 If there are no dinosaurs walking around in the city, then San Jose is one of the rare cities in the world not infested by pigeons.

[@polixter421]

I would not mind more responses to this guy. Was wondering if he was a progressive apologist out of San Jose who viewed the Bible in a different way than most radical Christians, but actually he managed to basically remain religiously conservative despite his background. And he has gotten very few responses despite an okay amount of viewers.

[@aarifmg8959]

The first sign of a stupid person is that they think they are smart. Mr. Chi here is the perfect example.

[@dec5847]

The argument for the Tooth Fairy or Santa is far more substantiated than the argument for God. At least I have gotten a quarter under my pillow or presents under the Christmas tree. Whenever I've tried to pray, God just happened to be on lunch break.

[@seanelsenbroek7530]

Christian: God exists Atheist: I don’t believe you Christian: Prove it Atheist: …

[@wassilykandinsky4616]

There is no tooth fairy is a very strong statement for every believer in the tooth fairy.

[@jusfugly]

I can't give you evidence there are no leprechauns. Does that mean there are leprechauns.

[@ak2wa2or]

man, i gotta reiterate that i felt like you were really punching down there for a while with these videos. obscure youtube evangelicals, soapbox corner-yellers - low hanging fruit all! but this gets back to the salty, juicy meat that's thickest on the bone. pre-supposed assumptions, logical implications, and underlying epistemology riddled with inconsistency. welcome back

[@dylanwight5764]

I love that this fellow tries to assert that the burden of proof lies on the one whose position does not require a burden of proof or indeed disproof. He doesn't understand what the burden of proof does and does not entail, and that is very disappointing

[@user-hm4zx4tj5s]

of course because he has no real education he obviously been homeschooled or went nothing but Christian schools who sole purpose is the nonsense of Christianity.

[@brandwijkgg]

It all becomes more convincing when written down, even on a whiteboard. Imagine what effect an age-old book by anonymous authors has.

[@AusTxMale]

No dinosaurs in San Jose? I guess this guy has never seen a bird before.

[@jacksonheathen2092]

Ultimately, I don't have to prove anything, or make excuses for not believing in his god. The question is, if he's so sure that he's right, then why does he desperately need to convince everyone else ?

[@sergiop888]

The proof or evidence of a religious minded person is like a child minded justification.

[@ericmishima]

There are live dinosaurs in wherever he said.

[@maxnullifidian]

I don't claim that there is no God, only that the word "God" doesn't have any coherent meaning to me.

[@smitty215able]

There's no Santa clause because as described in tales Santa defies the laws of physics

[@michaelanderson7715]

6:58 birds are dinosaurs, bad example!

[@dom11949]

you ended that video just in time as i was ready to put a blunt object thru my moniter

[@tinstrings6312]

I feel bad for people like this. So much time and energy spent twisting themselves into knots to convince themselves that God exists. NOBODY who doesn't harbor either major doubts or doesn't really believe in god, but is so scared that if they're wrong they'll go to hell or are existentially terrified of ceasing to exist, puts this much effort into their own so-called beliefs.

[@pmaggs]

"It takes a lot to say god doesn't exist because he's so fucking cool!!!" ...strong opening.

[@potentpotables5468]

Athiesm - I don't believe there is a god Antithiesm - I believe there is no god This guy dismantles his own arguement in seconds.

[@owenmcateer721]

Is he saying god used to leave money under my childhood pillow to make me think the tooth fairy was real? Or was it Darth Vader? I'm sure the heavy breathing would have woken me up

[@GMYSTERYICTNF]

I'm guessing this dude doesn't know that birds are dinosaur's

[@hereticairsoft4918]

His argument falls at the first hurdle ... not all atheists assert there is no god , however all disbelieve the theists claims

[@HiEv001]

Christians overwhelmingly prefer to argue with straw man atheists, as the straw man version is much easier to defeat.

[@biekgiek]

6:29 He lists those people as not being present and someone in the audience says "Amen". I guess the guy who said "amen" was thankful those other people weren't there. I wonder what's going on with all those folks who weren't there. He also says there are no dinosaurs walking around San Jose. So none of the birds in San Jose walk?

[@JoshuaWillis89]

Dude has rocks in his brain. “I can disprove the existence of the Tooth Fairy with this Bible verse.” Brilliant. Which Bible verse disproves Darth Vader’s existence?

[@AzimuthTao]

Guy just bought a new dry erase board and needed to test it out.

[@letstrytouserealscienceoka3564]

Whoops! There are dinosaurs walking around in San Jose every day. All birds ARE dinosaurs.

[@giacomoburtone9706]

Love your channel man, keep up the good work

[@ChrisMaxfieldActs]

You have to love the way these people repeat their useless statements over and over, as though the repetition itself makes them ( and their pseudo-facts) more credible.

[@Sunaki1000]

7:23 yeah or some Kid called Vader? And Dinosaurs? We got Pidgen dude, they totaly exist.

[@Randerson2409]

"The worst example he gives is Darth Vader." I'm not so sure about that. I would say that his claim that there "No dinosaurs walking here alive in the city of San Jose." I can't say for absolute certain, but I think it fairly unlikely that there are no birds walking around in San Jose

[@jacksonheathen2092]

What the fuck does a "strong" claim even mean ? I don't think refuting an invisible god (or a book of debunked fables) is making a particularly "strong" claim. I think it clearly falls under common sense.

[@nadtz]

I've been asking for years for any Christian to prove anything related to Christianity without referring to the bible. The funny thing is none of them understand why I say this and usually come back with "but the bible" and then I pretty much start trolling.

[@lifesajourneyclub]

Here is the best answer I have received on that question to date: "Those who believe my account, will seek Jesus for themselves and they WILL find him. When they find him, that'll be the objective verifiable evidence that will enable a person to discard all other religions with 100% accuracy."

[@nadtz]

@@lifesajourneyclub And how does one find Jesus? I can do this all day, at some point the bible is going to come into the conversation, I assure you.

[@lifesajourneyclub]

LOL good question. When I reworded my question to a simple "I want to know _how you know_ " the response was to ask me why I make a simple thing so difficult. Everything went downhill pretty fast from there. Just watching a debate of Michael Suderman. Interesting point Micheal made was to say christians need to learn the meaning and usage of words. They are using words in ways that suit their agenda and apply usage other than the _normal_ usage to a word. This more often than not leads to an argument instead of debating a point. In my example above "objective verifiable evidence" clearly means something totally different to this person and therefore it was a conversation stopper.

[@CletoFrost]

english is not my first language so i dont know about yall but in Portuguese, the word for "reason" also means "motive", so its not directly stricted to logic

[@KalibreSteelblast]

I was waiting for this guy to just get past saying "that's a strong statement." Okay, you don't need to repeat it 6-7 times, we get it- you think the claim is powerful. And of course the moment he does move on, his tactic is to shift the burden of proof under the guise that everyone throughout history has believed in some sort of god. And while it's not impossible to prove a negative, a skeptic is _not_ obligated to go out of their way to do so; less so if the claim is being offered by someone with an agenda that could affect millions of non-believers. Of course, that ignores the fact that Christians routinely dismiss these other beliefs as being wrong; without acknowledging that they could be wrong about their beliefs and instead asserting that their god exists. Ironically, _that_ is also a powerful claim- but he does nothing to offer powerful evidence.

[@obscureinception8302]

7:16 - Actually the worst example he gives is the claim that he can prove that there are no dinosaurs walking around in the city of San Jose. Even if the talk he was given took place between sunset and sunrise, when most birds would be sleeping, there is no way that he could prove that there wasn't a single bird walking around somewhere in the city - and birds _are_ dinosaurs. It is actually very likely that this claim could be proven to be false.

[@losttribe3001]

3:13 it’s like he walked right up to the realization that beliefs don’t equal truth...but then quickly backs away.

[@chileaus]

The burden of proof lays on the positive not on the negative

[@Gwestytears]

Saying there is no god is a less strong statement than saying there is one

[@nupetball31]

Guys like this make it difficult for me to not reply, “You’re a moron!” I really don’t want to be that guy, but some dishonest people bring it out.

[@SnakeMan448]

They always point out that saying that there are no gods is folly, pretending that most atheists haven't haven't already recognised that. It's their one and only intelligent point, and just hammer away with it.

[@elliejohnson2786]

But if santa clause doesn't exist, who brings us presents every year? Check mate, christians.