Evidence Proves That God Existing Is More Probable Than Not!? | The Atheist Experience: Throwback

[@durrutti]

”I’m a critical person” “I start with the assumption that god is real and work myself backwards” That’s NOT how you do critical thinking!

[@EdGein542]

@@durrutti No no no. You start with the know laws of physics….energy cannot be created from non energy then you realize the universe could not have started on its own. Even the Big Bang describes the process of creation….everything from nothing

[@PhillipJermakian]

True but usually critical thinking begins with some small finite problem and not needing to first understand the sum totally of existance.

[@durrutti]

@@PhillipJermakian It’s never good thinking to start with the answer and work your way backwards, no matter what

[@PhillipJermakian]

@durrutti Yea good point.

[@PeerAdder]

@@durrutti you can do that - it's called testing an hypothesis - but you have to be prepared to go where the evidence leads and not, like this caller (and tbh every other theist), keep trying to make the evidence fit the answer. So it is perfectly ok to start with "let's assume an all knowing, all powerful, all loving god exists" so long as you follow that with "if it does, what should I *_not_* be able to observe happening?", i.e. look for something that falsifies that hypothesis. And immediately that hypothesis is falsified by the existence of suffering in the world: at least one of those omni properties has to go (could eliminate suffering and wants to but doesn't know how to, wants to and knows how to but isn't able to, knows how and could but doesn't want to...)

[@VogtTD]

“I’m a skeptical person, so I start with special pleading”.

[@Gundamman]

When a skeptic says, "atheists think/say," you already know, they were never a skeptic.

[@vandal280]

Did he actually just claim to be a skeptical person and then like two sentences later state that he starts with the conclusion that there is a god and works backwards from there? With absolutely zero sense of irony?

[@jakes658]

He also claimed to be an atheist.

[@petyrkowalski9887]

He did… i have heard this crap loads of times. Its utter Bs

[@reefhog]

He also said he decided to become a theist because the probability of god existing is high enough. Where did you get the statistics to decide the probability is higher?

[@Tardis1217]

Unfortunately, to the layman, a skeptic is just somebody who doubts. If they are anything short of the most naive gullible person who will believe anything you tell them, these people will refer to themselves as a skeptic. They don't understand epistemology. They don't understand reasoning. They don't understand logic. They just know that they doubt certain propositions and they think that makes them a skeptic.

[@richardmooney383]

All the "how?", "why?", "what?" questions have the same answer for Christians: "Magic!".

[@powbobs]

They hate that word. That’s for witches apparently. It’s hilarious.

[@nuclearsimian3281]

Religious people aren't skeptics. Its not about probability. Its about blind faith.

[@MicheleGardini]

They are, as long as it is used by them regarding the opinions of others.

[@ijaygee1]

They are sceptical of science, reality, history, even logic and rationality. That's blind faith for you...

[@courtneybrown5958]

If I say I'm a skeptic enough times, maybe someone will eventually believe me!

[@joeyangtree1862]

What does it even mean that Jesus "spoke with such authority?" Even if we accept that Jesus said what the Bible claims, how does it have "authority", unless you have already accepted that he was divine? Did Confucius speak with authority? Did Socrates?

[@Salamander_falls]

Hitler spoke with authority. Doesn't mean I take his words as gospel.

[@bodricpriest8816]

They mistake confidence with authority, it's why they listen to preachers.

[@Mosz]

obviously he had so much authority that people were scared to even mention his name for 40 [years] from the time of the resurrection, that is proof he existed.

[@joeyangtree1862]

@@Mosz So, like Voldemort 😀

[@Insertia_Nameia]

​Yup. My dad and brother are both good at taking advantage of this. My dad used to charm a lot of people just because he said and did thihs with confidence. He got away with a lot of things as well for it. My brother has broken into a lot of places for various reasons without ever actually breaking in, in fact was let in, because he knows how to speak with unwavering confidence and how to act like he's supposed to be there. @@bodricpriest8816

[@TrumansDad]

The caller is completely disingenuous. "My Beliefs are right because they are mine - I gave you proof" is just garbage.

[@thedeebo410]

Looks like _my_ immediate skepticism that the caller is, or ever was, a skeptic was not misplaced.

[@normkeller2405]

Everyone considers themselves to be skeptical. I definitely am a skeptic. ;-) I agree with those who automatically reject that anyone who claims to be a skeptic, is a skeptic. It appears that many of is try to be skeptical, but the question is always open, IMO.

[@stuartsmith8155]

Is all a daddy issue. Its very comforting to believe that an all powerful entity will love you like your parents did. Its crazy, but comfortable.

[@floristfindspeace]

precisely one of the reasons why we have to remain patient, steadfast, and empathetic when helping believers deconstruct their beliefs

[@shanewilson7994]

Mark claims he believes in god due to the evidence. Doesn't present anything remotely reliable as evidence.

[@fcbaker]

"I'm a skeptical person"... I doubt that.

[@logicalmuslim1590]

Everyone is skeptical about something. Even theists. You reject the idea that anyone has been a messenger of the Creator. We don't. What makes your opinion right?

[@christasimon9716]

@@logicalmuslim1590 Being unconvinced of someone else's claim isn't exactly an opinion. It's simply being unconvinced. So, show us some evidence that Odin really is the Allfather.

[@logicalmuslim1590]

@@christasimon9716 in my opinion being unconvinced is an opinion. I don't worship Odin. I worship the Creator of the universe and everything that is in it. Allahu akbar.

[@christasimon9716]

@@logicalmuslim1590 So, you can't tell the difference between a state of being and having an opinion. Ok.

[@Seticzech]

@@logicalmuslim1590 "What makes your opinion right?" Evidence. Or more accurately lack of evidence.

[@marct9942]

As per every single delusional apologist, their only evidence for god is; "I believe therefore you must believe"

[@bobby9192]

Or god is real because atheist can’t prove him as false

[@marct9942]

@@bobby9192 Just like people cannot prove I cannot fly

[@Sean-oy8xm]

“I start with the idea that there is a God…” That was his first mistake.

[@alexissmith5589]

Humans ARE animals. Life can only be one of 4 things; Animal, Plant, Fungus or Unicellular.

[@tonyfendex2558]

THANK YOU!!!!!!

[@DrinkWater713]

False. It can be Protista as well (stuff like algae)

[@littlefurrow2437]

​@@DrinkWater713 not plant?

[@fettbub92]

Yes and no. I could reduce this to life is only unicellular and multicellular. I agree that we are animals, but careful with throwing out these categories as set in stone. Science doesn't quite work that way.

[@GumSkyloard]

@@fettbub92 Yep! Reality is always fuzzy and in various shades of grey.

[@isaacpiper510]

This is my first vid that I’ve watched with jmike and he has immediately become a favorite for me

[@jjpopnfresh6822]

I'm skeptical of Mark's claimed skepticism

[@bortiz11]

I loved the cognitive dissonance when confronted with Sati Saibaba's story and the belief parameters... that stutter at about 21 minutes was a physical manifestation of a short circuit in this caller's base belief system...

[@michaelrittel1441]

Anybody who claims to be a skeptic and has a religion is NOT a skeptic

[@frankanderson5012]

They let him off way too much. ‘I’m a sceptic, I was an atheist, I want to know the truth’. Clearly none of these was true. They then gave him more by saying Jesus existed, which I would question. At best it’s on the same level of Robin Hood or King Arthur - stories of stories told by unknown individuals about a character, long after they supposedly existed and may not have even been called that. The whole crucifixion story doesn’t follow what we know about what the Romans did typically. I felt Forrest did try pick him up on these by questioning that he happened to believe in Christianity. Instead of letting him think he was a rational, reasonable person in believing what he believed that Jesus existed and therefore the bible, they questioned how he became an atheist and if a sceptic, he therefore thoroughly looked at all the other belief systems, new where the Abraham religion came from and the history of the bible.

[@Insertia_Nameia]

This is so common. They'll pretend to be the other side. Like you see racists, phones of all kinds, amd mysogonists all the time. Like it's super popular for incels to pretend to be girls (there is a lady, I forget her name off hand, that studies incels and the like that have admitted to this and they've been found out pretty often for it.) They feel it gives their bs more authority or they use it to try and discredit tbe other side and to brainwash others I to agreeing with their side.

[@neomyte22]

In this call, Mark admits bias and presupposition

[@MrCanis4]

Always ‘Atheism’. Why not ‘Those who do not believe in MY god’. But then it becomes a completely different ball game, isn't it?

[@Gwaithmir]

Jesus' resurrection? Interestingly, no writer or historian contemporary to Jesus had anything to say about this alleged event.

[@PeerAdder]

Not to mention the zombies ...

[@berrywin]

Mark, you are not a sceptic. If you think that then you are delusional.And this video shows you are.

[@imetr8r]

Early Christians wanted to worship Jesus but were unable to do so in a "Single God" religion. This desperation led to the "Theory Of The Holy Trinity". Tertullian (155-200 CE) was the first to explicitly define the Holy Trinity as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. So until the third century, Jesus was just a prophet and not divine. It was this knowledge that tipped me over the edge from Christian to Atheist. BTW, Mormons are desperate to worship Joseph Smith. I predict that one of their "apostles" will eventually have a "revelation" that will devise a theory allowing them to worship a divine Joseph Smith much as Jesus is worshiped as divine.

[@BilliamJoyBoy]

When you call yourself a skeptic person in a discussion it’s kinda a red flag

[@Devious_Dave]

Believers don't / won't / mustn't apply the same level of scrutiny to their own beliefs as they do to others. There's better evidence for Sathya Sai Baba performing miracles than for Jesus but Christians don't / won't / mustn't allow that thought.

[@The_Buff_Guy]

You can’t call yourself a skeptic AND a religious person. That’s nonsense for the same reason that it’s nonsense to claim you’re simultaneously a fish and a human.

[@EBDavis111]

No, the second claim is technically correct. Unlike skeptic and faithful, human and fish are not exclusive.

[@stephenolan5539]

@@The_Buff_Guy Are a mammal?

[@joshsheridan9511]

​@@stephenolan5539fish aren't mammals, but humans are. Don't know if that helps any?

[@stephenolan5539]

@@joshsheridan9511 Why are humans, mammals? Are you a vertebrate?

[@EBDavis111]

@@joshsheridan9511 Not all fish are mammals, all mammals are fish, having descended from other fish. It's polyphylletic.

[@qwadratix]

Every theist: 'I used to be an atheist (After my birth and until my parents took me to church for the first time three days later.)'

[@Childfree334]

Right. I was once a believer because I was indoctrinated as a child. We believe what our parents tell us to believe. But once I actually read the Bible and started asking some serious questions that NO Christian wanted to answer, the light bulb 💡 finally came on. Somehow, I always KNEW it was all fake, but the anger I encountered for asking questions confirmed it.

[@borthwrenblanston6632]

​@@Childfree334 "FAKE!" Screams the lost and clueless atheist that thinks star dust, moist rocks and mud puddles have the INTELLIGENCE, POWER, PURPOSE, RESOURCES AND MEANS to create/design LIFE, INTELLIGENCE, LOVE, CONSCIOUSNESS, MORALITY, the human being and ALL the co-existent bodily systems (circulatory, respiratory, reproductive, pulmonic, digestive, skeletal, muscular, nervous, body (skin), etc., etc.) intertwined in co-dependent order in the human body :) Atheism is pure idiocy. The religious cult of atheism is INFAMOUS the world over for having ZERO ANSWERS. That's because atheism RUNS from "reality." I would add that as an atheist, you're bankrupt of RATIONAL/POSSIBLE causes for life, intelligence, consciousness, morality and ALL the co-existent bodily systems (circulatory, respiratory, reproductive, pulmonic, digestive, skeletal, muscular, nervous, body (skin), etc., etc.) intertwined in co-dependent order in the human body. Atheism has no RATIONAL/POSSIBLE, step by step atheist explanation for reality. That’s because there isn’t one. THINK ABOUT what you’re getting into w/ the cult of atheism. GET OUT NOW. I’ll help you find truth. Atheism has none. These 2 hosts are fools (atheists) and their less-than-worthless, asinine, lost & clueless religious cult of atheism is INFAMOUS the world over for having ZERO ANSWERS. No atheist has a RATIONAL/POSSIBLE, step-by-step atheist explanation for reality. That's because there isn't one. THESE GUYS ADMIT THAT THEY HAVE NO ANSWERS!!! The fact remains that along w/ DYING/FINITE space/matter/energy, TIME had a cause. The logical conclusion (when we follow the evidence) is that such a cause is TIMELESS. And if you're TIMELESS, do you have a beginning or end? No. We call that cause "OUR INFINITE, SUPERNATURAL GOD," who by definition is TIMELESS, CHANGELESS, BEGINNINGLESS, SPACELESS, IMMATERIAL and ENORMOUSLY POWERFUL. These topics are the most important topics known; thus, EVERYONE should have a vast understanding of the facts that frame the truth of these topics and not be so content to gulp down the false propaganda of channels such as this one. THESE GUYS ADMIT THAT THEY HAVE NO ANSWERS!!! It's far more plausible that God exists than not; otherwise a mud puddle DID IT. Without God, one would have to believe something like this: A rock came from a bang, got wet and produced LIFE from SOUP. There is no POSSIBLE BRIDGE to get from a ROCK to YOU. The cult of Atheism is just that easy to kill. There's no possibility that a MINDLESS, UNGUIDED wet rock produced the human being, 9 million DIFFERENT animals & 300,000 DIFFERENT plants over time from basically NOTHING. Try to learn what I'm teaching you before it's too late (when your temporary free will expires at your last gasp on earth and you go to an eternal hell - wishing you had never been born). YOU CAN’T AFFORD TO GET THIS WRONG. Because 100+ trillion yrs from the moment you enter hell, it won’t even be the start of eternity! For now, you and every facet of your asinine, lost & clueless cult of atheism are hereby debunked (e.g. multiverse, big bang, abiogenesis, mistakes (mutations) gaining in complexity/new information, evolution, gain of complexity/gain of new information/new anatomy). Yeah, now you see why I've totally dominated this entire channel for 12 yrs.

[@conors4430]

It’s not faith that somebody loves me, because firstly I know that they exist, I can prove that they exist, their actions actually have a tangible thing that I can see and measure, and so can others. And I have repeated evidential consistency to base my opinion, on that what I feel is love. God can’t even meet the very first Point, let alone the rest.

[@aidenisduranarzuaga4030]

Everytime they say they’re skeptical they come up with the most biased and circular argument ever.

[@lilcaps]

This is a helpful little guide Belief: To perceive something to be true faith: Belief without strong evidence Knowledge: Belief with strong evidence Theist: a person who believes in god(s) Atheist: a person who does not believe in god(s) Nostic: a person who claims to have knowledge Agnostic: a person who does not claim knowledge Evidence: data points that can be used to determine truth Truth: That which comports with reality If you have any objections to these definitions then please, reply

[@blacksilus7419]

I don’t know why theists always bring up lack of evidence for love. Love is not a tangible thing. Love is a description people give for a set of feelings. You can’t really show evidence for happiness or sadness, they are just descriptive terms. If god is just a feeling then sure you can have faith in that, but if you believe a god actually exists then you should require evidence.

[@JakeFowler-q9s]

While I do agree with you, I feel it's relevant to point out that love and subsequently all emotions are tangible things in the sense of neurochemistry, and as such evidence for them can be provided. Example: serotonin, at least I believe that is the one, is commonly known as the love chemical and can be artificially induced with the ingestion of chocolate.

[@matissimoj1190]

I imagine all the love potions being just a molten chocolate

[@nevitt2236]

2:56 I would call that confidence.

[@KGP221]

Forget what every version of every bible claims Jesus said. Since we have zero evidence in the way of documents, document fragments, or words on any page written from the biblical character Jesus' own hand, we don't know what he believed or what knowledge he had if he was a real person.

[@haydenwalton2766]

the jesus is myth. christianity was a j*wish mystery c*lt

[@slimjim227]

Trusting that someone loves you without evidence to support that belief has led to some people being prosecuted for stalking and worse!

[@Boneworm852]

I'm at 4:36 and if this guy says "the Kalam" I'm going to eat my phone. Edit: my phone survives...for now

[@JJ-qo7th]

And they can never answer the damned question, "Why does the universe need to be created out of nothing? Why can't the matter and energy of our universe have always been here?"

[@mattjindrak]

​@JJ-qo7th cause you need a BEING and that being is OBVIOUSLY MYYYYYY god

[@JJ-qo7th]

​@@mattjindrak "Creation needs a creator!" Reality doesn't need a realtor.

[@AvaEFF]

I wouldn’t recommend eating a phone. It would affect your body on the *cellular* level. I’m so sorry ☠️

[@Boneworm852]

@@JJ-qo7th that almost made coffee come out of my nose lmao

[@dawnbreaker2912]

Mark was never a skeptic, and probably never an atheist.

[@dogwalker666]

He doesn't know what Athiest means.

[@diogeneslamp8004]

@@dogwalker666 Or skeptic, of course.

[@dogwalker666]

@@diogeneslamp8004 indeed.

[@ARoll925]

Totally agree, he very clearly demonstrates he was lying when he said that, it's nonsense

[@Leith_Crowther]

Why is it that hard to believe? Sometimes psychological maladies only manifest later in life.

[@dannywebb2987]

Blood it's fucking blood that's in your heart no spirits no soul no fucking God your heart is a blood pump that's it

[@KitPhuket-ix1en]

Some people have cholesterol

[@tonyclements1147]

Cholesterol is God’s way of saying “behave” or I’ll hurt you, don’t make me hurt you.” 😁

[@ajharris2690]

@@tonyclements1147 ahh yes but which one

[@matissimoj1190]

The god of heart attacks

[@TheSkyGuy77]

​@@tonyclements1147 god's a masochist then..

[@ANCIENTWARRI0R]

Caller: I’m a skeptic. I start with the idea that there is a God. My evidence = I feel there has to be a god.

[@Tonberry2k]

For me, Judas’s betrayal doesn’t seem like something that should get the benefit of the doubt. It’s required for him to betray Jesus for the story arc to be completed. It’s more of a plot point that needs to be fulfilled than evidence that the story is true. It’s a storytelling technique.

[@Insertia_Nameia]

Exactly. He was an antagonist used to drive the story forward.

[@sparki9085]

"I'm a skeptical person, I start with the idea there is a god" *What*

[@borthwrenblanston6632]

It's far more plausible that God exists than not; otherwise a mud puddle DID IT. Without God, one would have to believe something like this: A rock came from a bang, got wet and produced LIFE from SOUP. There is no POSSIBLE BRIDGE to get from a ROCK to YOU. The cult of Atheism is just that easy to kill. There's no possibility that a MINDLESS, UNGUIDED wet rock produced the human being, 9 million DIFFERENT animals & 300,000 DIFFERENT plants over time from basically NOTHING. Try to learn what I'm teaching you before it's too late (when your temporary free will expires at your last gasp on earth and you go to an eternal hell - wishing you had never been born). YOU CAN’T AFFORD TO GET THIS WRONG. Because 100+ trillion yrs from the moment you enter hell, it won’t even be the start of eternity! For now, you and every facet of your asinine, lost & clueless cult of atheism are hereby debunked (e.g. multiverse, big bang, abiogenesis, mistakes (mutations) gaining in complexity/new information, evolution, gain of complexity/gain of new information/new anatomy).

[@honestlywhatever]

me and Forrest had the same facial expression then lol

[@AXKfUN9m]

I think he means he's skeptical of mainstream science, like heliocentrism, evolution, vaccines, round Earth, etc.

[@honestlywhatever]

@@AXKfUN9m Even with that being the case, a skeptical person wouldn't believe something without evidence. The reason why it's funny he says that is because his skepticism is selective. So he's not a skeptical person, he's skeptical sometimes.

[@frankflegg8968]

You blokes are so intelligent. I really appreciate your videos. Thank you.

[@borthwrenblanston6632]

Then you're just as much a fool as they are. These 2 hosts are fools (atheists) and their less-than-worthless, asinine, lost & clueless religious cult of atheism is INFAMOUS the world over for having ZERO ANSWERS. No atheist has a RATIONAL/POSSIBLE, step-by-step atheist explanation for reality. That's because there isn't one. THESE GUYS ADMIT THAT THEY HAVE NO ANSWERS!!! The fact remains that along w/ DYING/FINITE space/matter/energy, TIME had a cause. The logical conclusion (when we follow the evidence) is that such a cause is TIMELESS. And if you're TIMELESS, do you have a beginning or end? No. We call that cause "OUR INFINITE, SUPERNATURAL GOD," who by definition is TIMELESS, CHANGELESS, BEGINNINGLESS, SPACELESS, IMMATERIAL and ENORMOUSLY POWERFUL. These topics are the most important topics known; thus, EVERYONE should have a vast understanding of the facts that frame the truth of these topics and not be so content to gulp down the false propaganda of channels such as this one. THESE GUYS ADMIT THAT THEY HAVE NO ANSWERS!!!

[@AvaEFF]

I hate arguments like this because they are trying to sneak in the assertion that believing your spouse loves you is even remotely close to believing god is real. These two things are in no way, shape, or form analogous. I can SEE my souse. I can TOUCH my souse. I can HEAR my spouse. And I can. Weigh the actions that I can directly observe him taking to determine whether or not he is showing me love. Try to do the same with God. You can’t.

[@wtfjesus8251]

Yep...and still U can be wrong!.... like myself about my "lovely" ex-wife for 20y! 😐

[@madddog7]

Mark-NY is great at dancing the Sidestep

[@blumoon131]

Really telling how the biggest comments here praising Jesus and claiming god did miracles are fucking bots.

[@billhinsperger8120]

Starting with a belief first then working backwards to try and make everything fit is a great way to always be wrong

[@normkeller2405]

Not wrong, but unjustified?

[@EdithBromfeld]

Lying and strawmanning is lazy. The evidence is not on the atheists side.

[@billhinsperger8120]

@@normkeller2405 irrational to start with a belief

[@SurgiusMaximus]

@@billhinsperger8120 that's literally the Presup position. Let's assume god and philosophize the justification

[@billhinsperger8120]

@@SurgiusMaximus exactly wat I said in my original statement

[@dalecs47]

Why religious people insist on us believing in their god? When we agree to believe, we are handing to them power over us, power over our lives. They can now tell us what to believe, what to do, who we must hate, who we must not love and most important, they require us to give them some of our hard earned money. Power and money is all that religion is really about.

[@quotedotes]

Complements the host ✅ Talks about the previous caller ✅ Calls themselves a skeptic unprompted ✅ Yup, this is a certified dishonest caller

[@haydenwalton2766]

not necessarily at all. but that is the MO of some of these dishonest callers. but, I think that mark is prob one of these

[@alamunez]

*compliments

[@robertschriek1353]

Marks reasoning is what in the corporate world we would call retrofitting.

[@MicheleGardini]

And here we are with another self-claimed "ex-atheist" defining atheism in apologetic terms. So predictable.

[@Soylent1981]

JMike is savage in his refutation.

[@soulcrewblue8629]

He's a class act.

[@ARoll925]

He demonstrates in this call that he was never a skeptic or an atheist, he likes to think he is skeptical but is obviously not

[@Hoboclimber]

Skeptic my arse. He says he is a skeptical person but starts with the idea that there is a God. Ooops, back to the drawing board.

[@Aleiza_49]

They're never actually skeptics, just fishing for BS contrary to reality. None of these 'skeptics' who fall for the lie of religion have the thought processes of actual skepticism. If they did, any religion would be exempt from being possibly true with available evidence.

[@Iceheartedbastard7]

@@HoboclimberI think they lie about this stuff on purpose to make themselves seem more credible

[@mikewil004]

He went into William Lane Craig mode very fast.

[@christasimon9716]

I _believe_ [I expect] that the sun will rise in the east tomorrow morning. That is NOT a religious conviction. 3:47 "Uh-oh, they defeated my attempted wordplay. Now I have to quickly change tack and take the conversation somewhere else. Oh! I know - I used to be an atheist like you..."

[@NocnaDusza]

My answer to theist saying "I used to be atheist like you" is "I don't care if you was atheist. I care if you where actually a skeptic". I met plenty of atheists that were atheists for "wrong" reasons...

[@user-yb8yl6kg9x]

The one thing that boils my blood more than anything is someone claiming to be something they are 100% not. Are you delusional or a liar? Either way I’m not interested

[@justinfowler2857]

Mark was an athiest to every religion that wasn't the one he was taught from birth.

[@PaulBolton-jl2qm]

Romulus was a real historic person, he founded Rome and his face is even on coins....but I don't believe he and his brother were raised by a she wolf....how hard is myth to separate from history, really?

[@kevinvanlaeken5912]

I knew it was all downhill from, "I'm a skeptic. "

[@normkeller2405]

I agree. Shouldn't one be highly skeptical of one's own belief that one is skeptical? I regard being a skeptical or being skeptical as a goal that I have to try to remain skeptical about achieving. Does that make sense?

[@kevinvanlaeken5912]

@normkeller2405 Sort of. Evaluating evidence, as free from bias as possible, is in contrast to an a priori assumption that one's god is real

[@Paul-p1p6m]

The best solution and the most logical is to say/write and think, there are or is no god(s) and never were any.

[@falsenarrativecults6235]

Who is the laziest “I used to be an atheist” in the world? Mark from NY!

[@dashingkevs3295]

I'm a skeptical person.. I have faith

[@tonydarcy1606]

The guy obviously didn't know about Sai Baba but pretended that he had heard of him. Well Sai Baba's "miracles" are far better attested to by now living people than anything in the Bible. These Christians really must think that we're all suckers ?

[@EGOS42]

Legend has it if you say, "I'm a skeptic" enough times it becomes true!

[@Childfree334]

Everybody add on to this list of "Theist evidence in a nutshell 🥜: 1. I feel it 2. Because I have faith 3. I just know it 4. MY prayers were answered 5. I am so special that God chose ME to communicate with in private 6. Because the Bible says so

[@borthwrenblanston6632]

It's far more plausible that God exists than not; otherwise a mud puddle DID IT. Without God, one would have to believe something like this: A rock came from a bang, got wet and produced LIFE from SOUP. There is no POSSIBLE BRIDGE to get from a ROCK to YOU. The cult of Atheism is just that easy to kill. There's no possibility that a MINDLESS, UNGUIDED wet rock produced the human being, 9 million DIFFERENT animals & 300,000 DIFFERENT plants over time from basically NOTHING. Faith? Wrong. Let me educate you: All faith is not blind faith. Faith itself carries with it the ideas of belief, trust, commitment and is therefore only as robust as the evidence for it. Faith in Jesus is based on Biblical truths, science and God-given common sense. “Blind faith” is faith w/ no evidence. But Christianity is “faith” in FACT, REASON & LOGIC that are based on a preponderance of the evidence, whether it be scientific, theological, historical, archaeological, sound rational logic on given facts - coupled w/ personal intimate and profound experience w/ G0D and spiritual research. You need to learn the difference. Are you this stupid? You think this is a game of rules where sides score points? There's no such thing as a "burden of proof." You either have a good argument or you don't. That said, there's absolutely no part of nature that can produce the human being (e.g. star dust, moist rocks, mud puddles, hot rocks, moon dirt, warm ponds, gravity, oceans, primordial soup, nothing), so don't insinuate otherwise. Try to learn what I'm teaching you before it's too late (when your temporary free will expires at your last gasp on earth and you go to an eternal hell - wishing you had never been born). YOU CAN’T AFFORD TO GET THIS WRONG. Because 100+ trillion yrs from the moment you enter hell, it won’t even be the start of eternity! For now, you and every facet of your asinine, lost & clueless cult of atheism are hereby debunked (e.g. multiverse, big bang, abiogenesis, mistakes (mutations) gaining in complexity/new information, evolution, gain of complexity/gain of new information/new anatomy).

[@robertcarsten4050]

I mean add "it's more likely god did exists" And then never provide a methodology for determining that likelihood

[@elitezafficobra2288]

NO. It’s because the universe cannot exist without a creator. NOTHING cannot create SOMETHING. It’s scientifically, logically, theoretically, philosophically, mathematically impossible.

[@AXKfUN9m]

@@elitezafficobra2288 From what did your god create everything?

[@robertcarsten4050]

@@elitezafficobra2288 yes we see that you can just assert your idea must be true because you said it...... It would be nice if you were able to support the claim at all.

[@roguebotanist]

At the end Mark was back peddling with a barrage of claims with no evidence then tried to blame atheist for not providing evidence for his claims.

[@LOwens-xf8yo]

Fortunately science is never based on what seems “more probable than not.” Every scientific claim has to stand on its own, verified by physical evidence, & subject to constant ongoing skepticism. That is humanity’s most effective pathway to knowledge that results in useful predictions.

[@stephenolan5539]

I kinda disagree. Every Scientific claim has to have consilience with other claims. None are in isolation.

[@LOwens-xf8yo]

@@stephenolan5539 sure, there is never too much evidence. New claims must both stand on their own and fit with other related facts. Except occasionally, when there is a new break through that challenges previously held assumption.

[@seannelson3613]

I'm starting to think that Mark isn't actually interested in the truth.

[@patriceriksson7924]

He was nice. But dishonest. You two are great!

[@Mr_Porter]

Absolutely.

[@qwadratix]

@@patriceriksson7924 Dishonest is not nice. It's just a deception.

[@69suger69]

Haha.. ​@qwadratix talk with your doctor about your problem/ letter combination you suffer from..

[@raouldemer2300]

I used to be an atheist, then I found evidence for a god. This is the definition of BS.

[@69eddieD]

I'm an atheist, and all the evidence for God I've been presented with is philosophical horse manure.

[@callac]

'I use to be an atheist ''... why christians think that this quote make their arguments better? Is like a grown man saying ''I started to believe in fairies again''.

[@haydenwalton2766]

yeah, you'd think that if someone said 'i used to be an a-theist' it'd help to know what one is. particularly before calling in to speak to jmike

[@geofftoscano6804]

The best you can say with regard to Jesus and associated issues is what are the probabilities. Did Jesus exist? Probably. Was he crucified? Probably, but less likely than that of his existence. Did he resurrect? Almost certainly not. Did he perform miracles? Almost certainly not. In short, to accept these matters of high improbability and describe yourself as sceptical is just plain delusional.

[@dom11949]

holistic? does that mean it is full of holes?

[@Krikenemp18]

"I don't like any of the other explanations" will never be evidence an explanation.

[@VonPatzy]

By this logic they could dig up our society in 2k years and “prove” Luke Skywalker was real - lots of retellings match up of people talking about him around campfires for hundreds of years. You just have to believe in the force.

[@stephenolan5539]

A young lad named George was out tooling around in his car. He had his seatbelt on. He lost control of the car and wrapped it around a tree totally destroying it. BUT his seatbelt had given way and he was ejected from the car and survived. He said it felt like there was a force involved. Take a wild guess what his last name is.

[@Seticzech]

@@stephenolan5539 So? There were thousands of others who died in similar accidents.

[@c.guydubois8270]

Farce?..

[@briannelson27]

Fun fact: Jedi is a real religion right now in the real world. and it is every bit as real a religion as christianity, taoism, or scientology.

[@stephenolan5539]

@Seticzech He didn't die. And you have heard of him. And if anyone believed that Luke Skywalker was real they would use this story.

[@Ben-no4lz]

Something has to be Demonstrated to be POSSIBLE before you can even begin to attempt to determine how PROBABLE it is.

[@petyrkowalski9887]

Theists always do this - they conflate justified confidence with blind faith. They do it on purpose and its dishonest of them.

[@danielkeizer4174]

No way. A dishonest theist. That never happens....

[@wardraven8755]

Well god is dishonest so the forbidden fruit doesn’t fall far from the forbidden tree

[@borthwrenblanston6632]

Faith? Wrong. Let me educate you: All faith is not blind faith. Faith itself carries with it the ideas of belief, trust, commitment and is therefore only as robust as the evidence for it. Faith in Jesus is based on Biblical truths, science and God-given common sense. “Blind faith” is faith w/ no evidence. But Christianity is “faith” in FACT, REASON & LOGIC that are based on a preponderance of the evidence, whether it be scientific, theological, historical, archaeological, sound rational logic on given facts - coupled w/ personal intimate and profound experience w/ G0D and spiritual research. You need to learn the difference. Are you this stupid? You think this is a game of rules where sides score points? There's no such thing as a "burden of proof." You either have a good argument or you don't. That said, there's absolutely no part of nature that can produce the human being (e.g. star dust, moist rocks, mud puddles, hot rocks, moon dirt, warm ponds, gravity, oceans, primordial soup, nothing), so don't insinuate otherwise. It's far more plausible that God exists than not; otherwise a mud puddle DID IT. Without God, one would have to believe something like this: A rock came from a bang, got wet and produced LIFE from SOUP. There is no POSSIBLE BRIDGE to get from a ROCK to YOU. The cult of Atheism is just that easy to kill. There's no possibility that a MINDLESS, UNGUIDED wet rock produced the human being, 9 million DIFFERENT animals & 300,000 DIFFERENT plants over time from basically NOTHING. Try to learn what I'm teaching you before it's too late (when your temporary free will expires at your last gasp on earth and you go to an eternal hell - wishing you had never been born). YOU CAN’T AFFORD TO GET THIS WRONG. Because 100+ trillion yrs from the moment you enter hell, it won’t even be the start of eternity! For now, you and every facet of your asinine, lost & clueless cult of atheism are hereby debunked (e.g. multiverse, big bang, abiogenesis, mistakes (mutations) gaining in complexity/new information, evolution, gain of complexity/gain of new information/new anatomy).

[@Sean-oy8xm]

Love is a concept, not a thing.

[@duncanbryson1167]

NO NO NO!!!!! 🙄 NOT faith but trust. There is a different mindset between secular and religious usage of words. What's inside someone's heart is blood.

[@ziploc2000]

I blame Turek for trying to conflate faith and trust. They realize that faith is a bad decision-making process, so now they have to pretend we're all guilty of it. Trust based on experience is nothing like religious faith based on "I wanna believe because I'm scared of death".

[@stephenolan5539]

I prefer the word confidence. I distinguish it from faith by asking if you are willing to give the belief in question. I have confidence that a chair will hold me. I am willing to give up that belief based on evidence.

[@anthonythompson1680]

If I knew Jesus reserected I would be convinced of his divinity. I'm an atheist so I don't believe it happened but I was surprised that Forest said it wouldn't convince him.

[@BrokeTheSeal]

This guy sounds exactly like Baked Alaska, a repeat caller with crap takes. He’s also on Discord a lot. Might not be him but his tone and style sound identical.

[@haydenwalton2766]

there are a lot out there like mark. generally christian orthodox. often presupers

[@cdogthehedgehog6923]

Oh hi mark

[@Nocturnalux]

YOU’RE TEARING ME APART!

[@martinpappaterra1738]

JMike is brilliant

[@joshsheridan9511]

My SO has put up with me for 47 years, bloody good evidence she loves me.

[@normkeller2405]

Or, afraid of the legal consequences? 😉

[@joshsheridan9511]

@@normkeller2405 there are no legal consequences

[@Childfree334]

Someone "putting up" with you sounds like you add nothing positive to their lives. You might want to rephrase that.

[@joshsheridan9511]

​@@Childfree334nope. She put up with someone who spent more time over seas than by her side. And I don't particularly care about your opinion.

[@Childfree334]

@joshsheridan9511 Dude, all I said was the way you phrased your post makes it sound like you make your partner miserable, so she is "putting up" with you. That phrase has negative connotations. Did I hit a nerve?

[@LGpi314]

What is this "has to be"? WHY?!?!? WHY!?!?! There is nothing "has to be" This caller starts with the wrong assumption and then claims his started with science. I highly doubt he understands what science is and how it works. PERIOD.

[@joshsheridan9511]

Mark "i was an atheist " yet he doesn't know what atheism is. 😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@Arkloyd]

mark was never a *true atheist.*

[@canderson5098]

He's been shunned and disfellowshipped.

[@David34981]

​@@Arkloyd Perhaps not, but let's not engage in that (potentially fallacious) line of reasoning too quickly. Perhaps he actually was an atheist, but just for bad reasons. Being an atheist means ALMOST nothing, after all. It's just the description of not accepting a claim; the reasons for that can vary wildly and some are better than others. If you're properly skeptical, you're probably an atheist because there is no good evidence for the existence of a god, and that's the best way of looking at all this.

[@Wilhelm-100TheTechnoAdmiral]

Mark was an inner circle atheist

[@Finckelstein]

@@Arkloyd "mark was never a true atheist." Strike the "true" there. There are no "true" atheists. You either believe in a god or you don't. This is a true dichotomy. No qualifiers needed.

[@Sean-oy8xm]

30:35. YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@Mr_Porter]

Dishonesty at it's finest.

[@Wilhelm-100TheTechnoAdmiral]

Typical religious gooblygook

[@Ben-no4lz]

Pretty sure you have to demonstrate Possibility before Probability can even be calculated.

[@anthonycraig274]

There is no way you can be a rational person who was not convinced there is a god then flip into believing in Christ, resurrection and all that nonsense. It just doesn’t work that way unless you had a severe psychotic break.

[@Leith_Crowther]

This might blow your mind, but not every atheist is an atheist for rational reasons.

[@Facetiously.Esoteric]

I was coming to post the same. You don't suddenly become irrational. Not without a mental break or physical damage to the brain.

[@vitast2000]

Religion is based on hope and fear, not rationality.

[@Facetiously.Esoteric]

@@Leith_Crowther 🤣 Your posts are always delusional.

[@jackwhitbread4583]

​@@Leith_Crowtheragreed, I live in a very secular country and atheists come in all shapes and sizes, some are even flat earthers and anti vaxxers. Not all atheists are rational and not all atheists are ex Christians or have any real experience dealing with Christian faiths. Religion isn't talked about at all publicly in my country.

[@cartossin]

Love you guys. One nitpick: the plural of criterion is criteria, not criterions.

[@haydenwalton2766]

12:45 "when i look at all those historical facts... (stories about the figure jesus)" no, these aren't even close to historical facts. why does someone like jmike say these things !!??

[@Seticzech]

It doesn't matter how much probable something is. What matters is there is no evidence for existence of any god. God is just man made idea.

[@borthwrenblanston6632]

Not even close. It's far more plausible that God exists than not; otherwise a mud puddle DID IT. Without God, one would have to believe something like this: A rock came from a bang, got wet and produced LIFE from SOUP. There is no POSSIBLE BRIDGE to get from a ROCK to YOU. The cult of Atheism is just that easy to kill. There's no possibility that a MINDLESS, UNGUIDED wet rock produced the human being, 9 million DIFFERENT animals & 300,000 DIFFERENT plants over time from basically NOTHING. Faith? Wrong. Let me educate you: All faith is not blind faith. Faith itself carries with it the ideas of belief, trust, commitment and is therefore only as robust as the evidence for it. Faith in Jesus is based on Biblical truths, science and God-given common sense. “Blind faith” is faith w/ no evidence. But Christianity is “faith” in FACT, REASON & LOGIC that are based on a preponderance of the evidence, whether it be scientific, theological, historical, archaeological, sound rational logic on given facts - coupled w/ personal intimate and profound experience w/ G0D and spiritual research. You need to learn the difference. Are you this stupid? You think this is a game of rules where sides score points? There's no such thing as a "burden of proof." You either have a good argument or you don't. That said, there's absolutely no part of nature that can produce the human being (e.g. star dust, moist rocks, mud puddles, hot rocks, moon dirt, warm ponds, gravity, oceans, primordial soup, nothing), so don't insinuate otherwise. Try to learn what I'm teaching you before it's too late (when your temporary free will expires at your last gasp on earth and you go to an eternal hell - wishing you had never been born). YOU CAN’T AFFORD TO GET THIS WRONG. Because 100+ trillion yrs from the moment you enter hell, it won’t even be the start of eternity! For now, you and every facet of your asinine, lost & clueless cult of atheism are hereby debunked (e.g. multiverse, big bang, abiogenesis, mistakes (mutations) gaining in complexity/new information, evolution, gain of complexity/gain of new information/new anatomy).

[@videos_iwonderwhy]

@@Seticzech Do you understand the difference between proof and evidence? Because there is evidence of God's existence and the argument is only about how good or bad it is.

[@qwadratix]

@@videos_iwonderwhy Some "evidence" is just so bad that it can be simply discarded.

[@Seticzech]

@@videos_iwonderwhy I do and no, there is no evidence about existence of any god. Delusions and ignorance are not evidence.

[@videos_iwonderwhy]

@@Seticzech people assess evidence differently. And I respect the way you do. But I happen to be a design engineer and have met so many more (including bioengineers) who feel the same way as I do. We recognize design when we see it. To us, intent in design is amply evident in nature. For us it is very compelling evidence for a Designer. Proof is another standard, but evidence is strong.

[@77gravity]

I believe my wife loves me. A small amount of faith may be involved in that, but the main reason is the evidence (personal experience) that I have. I may not be able to demonstrate that to another person, but I could make a fair case - and for those people who know us both, it would probably be obvious that we DO love each other (Note: I am 100% certain I love her).

[@porkyboy4226]

You do not become a theist using skepticism!

[@ziploc2000]

The caller immediately conflates faith with trust based on previous experience. I thought religiots were proud of their faith, but now they seem to want to water down the "value" of faith by saying we all have it.

[@borthwrenblanston6632]

We all do have a faith. Atheism is simply the dumbest one. These 2 hosts are fools (atheists) and their less-than-worthless, asinine, lost & clueless religious cult of atheism is INFAMOUS the world over for having ZERO ANSWERS. No atheist has a RATIONAL/POSSIBLE, step-by-step atheist explanation for reality. That's because there isn't one. THESE GUYS ADMIT THAT THEY HAVE NO ANSWERS!!! The fact remains that along w/ DYING/FINITE space/matter/energy, TIME had a cause. The logical conclusion (when we follow the evidence) is that such a cause is TIMELESS. And if you're TIMELESS, do you have a beginning or end? No. We call that cause "OUR INFINITE, SUPERNATURAL GOD," who by definition is TIMELESS, CHANGELESS, BEGINNINGLESS, SPACELESS, IMMATERIAL and ENORMOUSLY POWERFUL. These topics are the most important topics known; thus, EVERYONE should have a vast understanding of the facts that frame the truth of these topics and not be so content to gulp down the false propaganda of channels such as this one. THESE GUYS ADMIT THAT THEY HAVE NO ANSWERS!!!

[@AXKfUN9m]

"It requires more faith to be an atheist than a theist" "Atheism/Evolution is just another religion"

[@jgarehart89]

They love to claim to be skeptics. I never hear a whole lot of skepticism.

[@soulcrewblue8629]

The two best hosts in debating theists, anywhere. This caller is another victim.

[@jackwhitbread4583]

Agreed, Forrest and JMike are easily my 2 favourite hosts. Very articulate and intelligent in their respective fields and I throughly enjoy watching them converse.

[@borthwrenblanston6632]

Then clearly you're just as much of a fool as they are. These 2 hosts are fools (atheists) and their less-than-worthless, asinine, lost & clueless religious cult of atheism is INFAMOUS the world over for having ZERO ANSWERS. No atheist has a RATIONAL/POSSIBLE, step-by-step atheist explanation for reality. That's because there isn't one. THESE GUYS ADMIT THAT THEY HAVE NO ANSWERS!!! The fact remains that along w/ DYING/FINITE space/matter/energy, TIME had a cause. The logical conclusion (when we follow the evidence) is that such a cause is TIMELESS. And if you're TIMELESS, do you have a beginning or end? No. We call that cause "OUR INFINITE, SUPERNATURAL GOD," who by definition is TIMELESS, CHANGELESS, BEGINNINGLESS, SPACELESS, IMMATERIAL and ENORMOUSLY POWERFUL. These topics are the most important topics known; thus, EVERYONE should have a vast understanding of the facts that frame the truth of these topics and not be so content to gulp down the false propaganda of channels such as this one. THESE GUYS ADMIT THAT THEY HAVE NO ANSWERS!!! It's far more plausible that God exists than not; otherwise a mud puddle DID IT. Without God, one would have to believe something like this: A rock came from a bang, got wet and produced LIFE from SOUP. There is no POSSIBLE BRIDGE to get from a ROCK to YOU. The cult of Atheism is just that easy to kill. There's no possibility that a MINDLESS, UNGUIDED wet rock produced the human being, 9 million DIFFERENT animals & 300,000 DIFFERENT plants over time from basically NOTHING. Try to learn what I'm teaching you before it's too late (when your temporary free will expires at your last gasp on earth and you go to an eternal hell - wishing you had never been born). YOU CAN’T AFFORD TO GET THIS WRONG. Because 100+ trillion yrs from the moment you enter hell, it won’t even be the start of eternity! For now, you and every facet of your asinine, lost & clueless cult of atheism are hereby debunked (e.g. multiverse, big bang, abiogenesis, mistakes (mutations) gaining in complexity/new information, evolution, gain of complexity/gain of new information/new anatomy).

[@mmoreno7137]

So at 20 minutes in Mark says atheists have a misunderstanding that theist are putting the cart before the horse. They believe theist start with the assumption and he gets cut off. But at 18 minutes or so in Mark stated that he starts with the assumption of God existing. So even though he was cut off I have trouble imagining what unfounded assumption he could have been planning to point out.

[@craigbradford4850]

“I looked at the evidence” and presents NO evidence. Whenever a theist say they have evidence is always the weakest evidence OR it’s what atheism doesn’t do.

[@Salamander_falls]

THIS! I found this sooo frustrating about the caller! Claims to judge each person based on the evidence; but "bible am true because Jesus resurrected" ISN'T EVIDENCE!!!! But the caller WANTS to be a Christian and wouldn't admit it.

[@logicalmuslim1590]

So evidence is any information or things offered in support of a proposition. But one cannot judge evidence without applying criteria. What is your criteria? What would evidence of a Creator look like?

[@craigbradford4850]

@@logicalmuslim1590 Do you think the evidence that guy presented was convincing for believing in Jesus?

[@logicalmuslim1590]

@@craigbradford4850 For believing what about Jesus? That he existed? That he is God? That he did miracles? Muslims believe that Jesus peace be upon him was God's messenger, but not God.

[@craigbradford4850]

@@logicalmuslim1590 What’s your criteria for believing he didn’t perform miracles?