Extraordinary Evidence For Extraordinary Claims

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence? Well, we've done it! We finally found extraordinary evidence for extraordinary evidence.
Rationality Rules' Original Video: • Extraordinary claims r...
Don't forget to help us create more videos! We need your support:
/ inspiringphilosophy
/ @inspiringphilosophy
inspiringphilo...

[@scruffythejanitor1969]

The irony being, of course, is that Athiesm has not been the "Ordinary" claim throughout history.

[@Realivangarcia]

Exactly. Atheism itself ignores the complexity of the world and wants to assume it’s all random and by chance. Ironically if we look at science, there’s more evidence to prove the contrary. Our world is made up of complex hierarchies & natural laws which seem to be “fixed”, when we look at just atoms alone they follow rules too. I don’t see a world of randomness, even our mathematical findings in physics/Calculus gives us the measurements of our universe and helps us to understand it’s actually fine tuned. The more I learn about science I’m inclined to believe God really does exist, he’s left us a world for us to explore and understand. We’re finding out more everyday, the universe itself is truly a wonderfully designed creation.

[@hopeseekertrue4792]

lol, ok athiest, how about give us extraordinary evidence about evolution, big bang and nothing is the beginning, also no designer but all the complicated design of the universe please give us extraordinary evidence mr athiest on the video

[@malirk]

Polytheism was the ordinary claim through most of recorded history. Should we now believe polytheism or does it need evidence?

[@myrddingwynedd2751]

​@@malirkMaybe he means the supernatural. Monotheism versus polytheism is a different question.

[@myrddingwynedd2751]

@casualphilosopher4066 The only thing that's fallacious is the term extraordinary evidence. It's a non sequitur and a slight of hand. What is really meant is that to the sceptic, he won't believe in a claim that can't be demonstrated first hand. For instance, the sceptic refuses to believe in the resurrection simply because the sceptic holds a presuppositional view of materialism. Therefore, physical resurrections are not possible. It's highly disingenuous and convenient for the sceptic, since all he has to do is dismiss eyewitness accounts as insufficient whilst ignoring or misrepresenting all other forms of argumentation. There are of course personality/psychological traits behind this phenomena, but I won't get into that.

[@Rx_Sqx]

“Oh stop it” 😂😂 man this is my favorite philosopher ever 😂

[@hopeseekertrue4792]

lol, ok athiest on the video, how about give us extraordinary evidence about evolution, big bang and nothing is the beginning, also no designer but all the complicated design of the universe please give us extraordinary evidence mr athiest on the video

[@ntkmw8058]

Rationality ≠ actual reason Rationality = sounding and looking smart

[@DaChristianYute]

Rationality = Speaking with a British Accent.

[@TheRareOcelot]

Rationality = You know what it is

[@reeferfranklin]

Having a cat that weighs 17 stone is not at all an extraordinary claim, it just means you own a pet tiger, lion, jaguar or leopard.

[@tafazzi-on-discord]

it's not ordinary to own a tiger

[@hopeseekertrue4792]

lol, ok athiest on the video, how about give us extraordinary evidence about evolution, big bang and nothing is the beginning, also no designer but all the complicated design of the universe please give us extraordinary evidence mr athiest on the video

[@grubblewubbles]

As a stupid American, What does 17 stone mean?

[@mba321]

@@grubblewubbles 238 lbs. Extraordinarily lightweight for a tiger.

[@mba321]

@@tafazzi-on-discord Chicks did pedantry, bro.

[@ThecrosseyedTexan]

I think the reason he doesn't define extraordinary evidence is because there's probably never going to be enough evidence.

[@raphaelfeneje486]

So can you help him out then??😂

[@ThecrosseyedTexan]

@@raphaelfeneje486 not really and here's why. The Socratic debate method requires the asking and answering of questions. The gentleman proposed that there is no extraordinary evidence but never gave a definition for what qualifies as extraordinary evidence. The onus is on him to define what qualifies as extraordinary evidence and until that is qualified no evidence can be given no matter how ordinary or extraordinary the evidence may be. These are simple debate practices that I learned in high school many years ago. These rules apply no matter what the debate is regardless of subject matter. If you demand extraordinary evidence then you have to define what extraordinary evidence is and the gentleman in the video never did.

[@DSW-im8cj]

Or he wants some supernatural Mojo to happen to him that’ll give him a religious experience so he can then tell all his atheist friends who won’t believe him after words😂. Also he just an intellectual Snob

[@ThecrosseyedTexan]

@@DSW-im8cj well if you're going to engage in debate I don't care which side you're on then you need to be honest and show some integrity and follow the rules. And you may be right about him but that's beside the point lol

[@googIesux]

@@ThecrosseyedTexan I was about to say, it's not about volume, but some undefined quality of the evidence in question. So indeed, there can never be enough

[@DanielApologetics]

This was an Extraordinary video! How so? 7 Reasons as an example: multiple types of humor, clear definitions provided, concise responses to points made, upbeat music, KZbin-friendly length, fitting B-roll, and creative editing. *See how easy that was to define Extraordinary when using it?*

[@InspiringPhilosophy]

thank you!

[@justingary5322]

SILLY ATHEISTS TRIX ARE FOR KIDS 🤣. EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS REQUIRING EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE IS BS 🤔😕😑. Michael Jones out here owning Atheists like Steve and Matt Dillahunty AGAIN 😂. Their arguments from ignorance about Christianity is just fuel for TIK TOK MISINFORMATION ABOUT EVERYTHING 😂. Matt is just a bald Pillsbury Doughboy looking guy that's trying to have community with a group of iconoclasts, pagans, Atheists, antitheists and secular people who want to destroy religious beliefs and ideologies because they hate what they fear and don't understand. YES obviously Jesus The Christ of Nazareth was a real historical person. I like him but he was clearly was trying to misrepresent The Bible. I'm sorry that brother Michael Jones has to deal with this stuff 🤣. God bless Inspiring Philosophy's Apologetics ministry. I used to be an atheist and agnostic but they're positions are both assumptions about reality made without any evidence just emotional and strawman arguments against Christianity and theism. Creation and design requires a Creator we call God. This has nothing and everything to do with the video but please listen if you want to otherwise leave it alone and ignore it. Hello my name is Justin and I'm a fellow Christian and Apologist but I'm also a 23 year old teacher's assistant and college graduate. I'm not a closed minded Theist as I have nothing against Atheists or unbelievers as I speak to them often to understand their reasons for unbelief but we as Christians are convinced of God's Existence due to many real factors). I'm not trying to convert anyone or convince anyone to become Christians as that's The Holy Spirit's job to help people believe but only explain why I believe in Jesus Christ. There's actually evidence of God's Existence in Christianity. First of all there's proof that Jesus of Nazareth existed in history since the writings of Tacitus, Josephus Flavius, Pliny the younger and other historical documents prove that He was living two thousand years ago that even scholars both religious and Atheists agree with historically speaking but not that He's The Divine Son of God because obviously they don't. I'm going to give you historical and archeological evidence for God's Existence as The Scriptures have prophecies that predate the events recorded in them by several millennia including Matthew, Hosea and Zechariah which prophesy accurately of the people of Israel becoming a nation again after over 1900 years of being scattered around the nations since the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 A.D. spoken of by Christ in Matthew 23:29-24:3 and returning to their homeland after The Holocaust with Jerusalem as their capital in 1948 exactly as Jesus The Christ said. The prophets including Daniel spoke of the time where several world empires would arise and fall including the Babylonian kingdom, Medes and Persians, Roman Empire, and Saladin and the Muslims which went in consecutive order for the past few millennia. The people of Israel becoming a nation after The Holocaust in 1948 (ironically the melting point of gold as God compares Israel to gold that's tested in fire in Zechariah 13:8 and Jeremiah 16:15) exactly how Jesus The Christ said would happen since God us everything to come in The Scriptures and not just because people were working towards as Atheists claim which are impossible for any regular man to predict. Just before anyone says Christianity is a white man's religion made to oppress blacks during slavery you obviously aren't aware that the first Christians were Jews in The Middle East and that Christianity just like any religion can be used by evil and corrupt people to oppress others but you forget that the first Abolitionists/Civil Rights activists were Christians who sought to abolish slavery, racism, segregation, injustice and prejudice throughout American history. Jesus The Christ loves you enough not to give you what we all deserve which is God's Wrath by His Own Blood. Charles Darwin didn't originally come up with The Theory of Evolution over 200 years ago as it is mentioned in the writings of Ancient Greeks who believed in Demons that gave knowledge to philosophers. Evolution makes no sense when nothing has evolved after thousands of years of human history and supposedly the first creature came from primordial sludge several millions of years ago funny how they won't believe that God an Eternal Almighty Spirit Being created us from the Earth) which came from a supermassive expansion of matter at high temperature that inexplicably created everything in the known universe that supposedly came from nothing billions of years ago. How did the organs evolve before there were bones, skin, substance and how did any creatures see before eyes evolved? I've studied evolution and abiogenesis in the past and read Darwin's " On The Origin of Species" and I'm not convinced of macro Evolutionary biology whereas I accept micro Evolution like speciation and adaptation but not macro Evolution because there's no evidence of it nor clear observable examples of it where living creatures evolve into other kinds of species plus the fact that fossils don't show evidence of evolution and genetic entropy rules out evolution. The question begs how did two genders evolve from a common ancestor with a perfectly hospitable and sustainable environment with breathable oxygen and resources to survive on inexplicably? Atheists have the burden of proof to explain how everything came to be and why our existence is possible without the Existence of God from an godless perspective just as Christians have to provide evidence of God's Existence and the validity of His Word. Evolution requires life to already exist in order to take any effect in living organisms so it doesn't account for the existence of Life and reality. Also evolution is impossible because it goes against The Law of entropy and the second Law of thermodynamics because evolution makes things better whereas nothing continues to get better but decays and turns to absolute destruction in the end. Mark Ridley an Evolutionist said "No evolutionist whether gradualist or punctuationist uses the fossil record as evidence in favor of The Theory of Darwinian Evolution as opposed to special Creation". God's Existence is made perfectly known and observable in the universe as demonstrated in His Handiwork in the intelligently designed manner that Creation was made, human consciences and consciousness historical and archaeological evidence of God's Word being valid history, fulfillment of Bible Prophecies God in His Holiness and Righteousness could give us what we deserve in Hell for our since but He's merciful to give us free will to choose to accept or reject His gift of salvation by grace through faith in His Son Jesus. I don't mean this is any condescending manner but if you'd like to discuss The Scriptures with me or have me listen to your view on anything my instagram account is Savage Christian Kombatant.

[@justingary5322]

@@InspiringPhilosophy You're extraordinary Michael

[@bringemyoungpbuh4123]

@@justingary5322 Hugs all around.

[@Kiwifactor46]

Extraordinary comment Daniel, however you forgot to mention Michael's extraordinary hair!

[@rickintexas1584]

That was the most extraordinary takedown of the argument.

[@ThatisnotHair]

Not really. I have seen many take downs like this before

[@rarescevei8268]

​@@ThatisnotHairhe said extraordinary as a joke, based on the claims of the argument

[@quantenmoi]

I think you mean it’s a pathetic takedown of a strawman. "Extraordinary claims … " is a pithy phrase meant to convey a deeper point. It’s easiest to convey the point with the classic example of someone claiming they have a dog in their backyard versus someone claiming they have a dragon in their backyard. The dog claim is so mundane we tend to accept it without question based on testimony alone. And actually seeing the dog in the backyard is equally mundane. On the other hand, the dragon claim is extraordinary. And hardly anyone would accept it on testimony. Now, if your friend takes you to their backyard and shows you the dragon, that would indeed be extraordinary evidence. Even though seeing things in backyards is generally mundane. Seeing dragons is extraordinary. And one would be perfectly sensible to question what they’re seeing. Maybe it's a trick? Maybe your friend slipped a hallucinogenic drug into your drink? All sorts of scenarios come to mind. One would be wise to demand all sorts of extra evidence that is thoroughly backed up by scientific investigations before giving any creedence to even what they saw with their own eyes. And this is what’s meant by "extraordinary evidence." Of course, InspiringPhilosophy doesn’t want to engage the deeper point. So, he argues against the literal words in the phrase rather than the meaning of the phrase. It’s pretty lame.

[@heinricho]

3:11 "FRUITS!" love it!

[@InspiringPhilosophy]

I couldn’t resist

[@justingary5322]

@@InspiringPhilosophy FRUITS 🍓. I love you dude I've been watching your videos since last year. SILLY ATHEISTS TRIX ARE FOR KIDS 🤣. EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS REQUIRING EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE IS BS 🤔😕😑. Michael Jones out here owning Atheists like Steve and Matt Dillahunty AGAIN 😂. Their arguments from ignorance about Christianity is just fuel for TIK TOK MISINFORMATION ABOUT EVERYTHING 😂. Matt is just a bald Pillsbury Doughboy looking guy that's trying to have community with a group of iconoclasts, pagans, Atheists, antitheists and secular people who want to destroy religious beliefs and ideologies because they hate what they fear and don't understand. YES obviously Jesus The Christ of Nazareth was a real historical person. I like him but he was clearly was trying to misrepresent The Bible. I'm sorry that brother Michael Jones has to deal with this stuff 🤣. God bless Inspiring Philosophy's Apologetics ministry. I used to be an atheist and agnostic but they're positions are both assumptions about reality made without any evidence just emotional and strawman arguments against Christianity and theism. Creation and design requires a Creator we call God. This has nothing and everything to do with the video but please listen if you want to otherwise leave it alone and ignore it. Hello my name is Justin and I'm a fellow Christian and Apologist but I'm also a 23 year old teacher's assistant and college graduate. I'm not a closed minded Theist as I have nothing against Atheists or unbelievers as I speak to them often to understand their reasons for unbelief but we as Christians are convinced of God's Existence due to many real factors). I'm not trying to convert anyone or convince anyone to become Christians as that's The Holy Spirit's job to help people believe but only explain why I believe in Jesus Christ. There's actually evidence of God's Existence in Christianity. First of all there's proof that Jesus of Nazareth existed in history since the writings of Tacitus, Josephus Flavius, Pliny the younger and other historical documents prove that He was living two thousand years ago that even scholars both religious and Atheists agree with historically speaking but not that He's The Divine Son of God because obviously they don't. I'm going to give you historical and archeological evidence for God's Existence as The Scriptures have prophecies that predate the events recorded in them by several millennia including Matthew, Hosea and Zechariah which prophesy accurately of the people of Israel becoming a nation again after over 1900 years of being scattered around the nations since the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 A.D. spoken of by Christ in Matthew 23:29-24:3 and returning to their homeland after The Holocaust with Jerusalem as their capital in 1948 exactly as Jesus The Christ said. The prophets including Daniel spoke of the time where several world empires would arise and fall including the Babylonian kingdom, Medes and Persians, Roman Empire, and Saladin and the Muslims which went in consecutive order for the past few millennia. The people of Israel becoming a nation after The Holocaust in 1948 (ironically the melting point of gold as God compares Israel to gold that's tested in fire in Zechariah 13:8 and Jeremiah 16:15) exactly how Jesus The Christ said would happen since God us everything to come in The Scriptures and not just because people were working towards as Atheists claim which are impossible for any regular man to predict. Just before anyone says Christianity is a white man's religion made to oppress blacks during slavery you obviously aren't aware that the first Christians were Jews in The Middle East and that Christianity just like any religion can be used by evil and corrupt people to oppress others but you forget that the first Abolitionists/Civil Rights activists were Christians who sought to abolish slavery, racism, segregation, injustice and prejudice throughout American history. Jesus The Christ loves you enough not to give you what we all deserve which is God's Wrath by His Own Blood. Charles Darwin didn't originally come up with The Theory of Evolution over 200 years ago as it is mentioned in the writings of Ancient Greeks who believed in Demons that gave knowledge to philosophers. Evolution makes no sense when nothing has evolved after thousands of years of human history and supposedly the first creature came from primordial sludge several millions of years ago funny how they won't believe that God an Eternal Almighty Spirit Being created us from the Earth) which came from a supermassive expansion of matter at high temperature that inexplicably created everything in the known universe that supposedly came from nothing billions of years ago. How did the organs evolve before there were bones, skin, substance and how did any creatures see before eyes evolved? I've studied evolution and abiogenesis in the past and read Darwin's " On The Origin of Species" and I'm not convinced of macro Evolutionary biology whereas I accept micro Evolution like speciation and adaptation but not macro Evolution because there's no evidence of it nor clear observable examples of it where living creatures evolve into other kinds of species plus the fact that fossils don't show evidence of evolution and genetic entropy rules out evolution. The question begs how did two genders evolve from a common ancestor with a perfectly hospitable and sustainable environment with breathable oxygen and resources to survive on inexplicably? Atheists have the burden of proof to explain how everything came to be and why our existence is possible without the Existence of God from an godless perspective just as Christians have to provide evidence of God's Existence and the validity of His Word. Evolution requires life to already exist in order to take any effect in living organisms so it doesn't account for the existence of Life and reality. Also evolution is impossible because it goes against The Law of entropy and the second Law of thermodynamics because evolution makes things better whereas nothing continues to get better but decays and turns to absolute destruction in the end. Mark Ridley an Evolutionist said "No evolutionist whether gradualist or punctuationist uses the fossil record as evidence in favor of The Theory of Darwinian Evolution as opposed to special Creation". God's Existence is made perfectly known and observable in the universe as demonstrated in His Handiwork in the intelligently designed manner that Creation was made, human consciences and consciousness historical and archaeological evidence of God's Word being valid history, fulfillment of Bible Prophecies God in His Holiness and Righteousness could give us what we deserve in Hell for our since but He's merciful to give us free will to choose to accept or reject His gift of salvation by grace through faith in His Son Jesus. I don't mean this is any condescending manner but if you'd like to discuss The Scriptures with me or have me listen to your view on anything my instagram account is Savage Christian Kombatant.

[@JTBennings]

The only reason the claim "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" sounds convincing to the vast majority of people is because each individual subconsciously injects what they consider to be extraordinary into the claim. Any person attempting to use this argument MUST define what is meant by extraordinary, failure to do so means either they've either not thought it through, or they're intentionally being deceptive by relying on the subjectivity of the claim.

[@calebryhal293]

@@JustADudeGameror maybe because it’s just kind of stupid?

[@tafazzi-on-discord]

@@JustADudeGamer it's either underdefined or more commonly used to mean a false thing. Tell me, do you agree that if X can be true, but your chosen mean to know the world would never let you believe in X even if it is true, then you better choose a non moronic epistemology?

[@hopeseekertrue4792]

lol, ok athiest, how about give us extraordinary evidence about evolution, big bang and nothing is the beginning, also no designer but all the complicated design of the universe please give us extraordinary evidence mr athiest on the video

[@raphaelfeneje486]

@@JustADudeGamer You made a claim that he defined the what extraordinary evidence means, right?? Since only you was intelligent enough to know the definition from his video, can you now tell us what your fellow atheist defined "extraordinary evidence" to be???

[@KG-jx8zt]

Yep, which makes it completely subjective.

[@HopeOfChrist]

What an extraordinary explanation, using extraordinary examples. I am extraordinarily impressed.

[@hopeseekertrue4792]

lol, ok athiest on the video, how about give us extraordinary evidence about evolution, big bang and nothing is the beginning, also no designer but all the complicated design of the universe please give us extraordinary evidence mr athiest on the video

[@jcfreak73]

That final response was epic

[@MojoDudeX]

Evidence is evidence, no matter the claim!

[@kristiansmith7737]

I agree with Michael. If they keep refusing to give a proper definition (not an example) of what extraordinary means, then all evidence that is provided can be labeled as extraordinary evidence. Let's see how quickly they keep using that excuse when we flip it back on them

[@hopeseekertrue4792]

lol, ok athiest on the video, how about give us extraordinary evidence about evolution, big bang and nothing is the beginning, also no designer but all the complicated design of the universe please give us extraordinary evidence mr athiest on the video

[@malirk]

DEFINITION: Extraordinary evidence is an amount or degree of evidence that is relative to the weight of the claim. The grander the claim (I can run a 1 minute mile) the more grand the evidence needs to be for that claim. When a claim is mundane (I own a dog) sometimes we don't even require any evidence.

[@fernandoaguila6724]

@@malirk You've still failed to define anything here though. All you've said is "extraordinary evidence = evidence proportional to the weight of the claim" , but you've failed to define what constitutes a "heavy-weight" claim vs. a "light" claim. Going back to Michael's example, is claiming that Alexander the Great conquered all the land he conquered when he was 33 years old an extraordinary, "heavy-weight" claim? How so?

[@marvalice3455]

@@malirk evidence doesn't have "weight" that can be measured. your definition is purely subjective, I know, because this argument weighs exactly 70 tons, which I measured with my meme scale, while your claim only ways 3 ozs, so my meme scale prooves that your claim is massively outweighed by my response. :)

[@paulthompson9668]

@@fernandoaguila6724 Here's a starting point: extraordinary = outside ("extra") the norm ("ordinary") Context will dictate how extraordinary something is. We could say that reciting Pi to 6 digits (i.e., 3.14159) is extraordinary for the average person because most people would only memorize it to 3 digits (i.e., 3.14). However, if you went to a math seminar, most attendees (if not all) would be able to recite Pi to 6 digits. In that case, it would be extraordinary if the attendee of a math seminar were to recite Pi to 100 digits. Now, when it comes to events in the past, something is extraordinary if it it meets two criteria: (1) it is outside the norm for that time period and (2) it is outside the norm for what we know about what is capable of occurring in general. Suppose something was reported to have happened 100 years ago that met both criteria, such as a pandemic that caused 50 million deaths (e.g., the Spanish flu). This would be considered to be extraordinary, as the number of deaths would be outside the norm for that time period, and the manner of people dying would be outside the norm for what we know about what is capable of occurring in general because of what we know about viruses. Suppose something was reported to have happened 2000 years ago that met both criteria, such as the carrying out of capital punishment that resulted in the person dying and then coming back to life (e.g., the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth). This would be considered to be extraordinary, as medical science being what it was at that time was largely unable to resuscitate people from even the simplest of life-ending injuries, and the spontaneous reanimation of a dead person is outside the norm for what what we know about what is capable of occurring in general because it is a medical impossibility.

[@ApologeticsSquared]

The best definition of "extraordinary evidence" and "extraordinary claims" are "a proposition which is shown to be true that had a low prior probability" and "a proposition which has a low prior probability," respectively. The reason why this is the best definition is because then the maxim "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" is entailed by Bayesian probability theory. If P(claim) is low, and we want P(claim|evidence) to be high, then P(evidence) has to be low! There are two main problems I have with this usage though: 1) Cumulative cases are a thing. Maybe no individual piece of evidence is "extraordinary," but the cumulative total of all our evidence can still count as "extraordinary" because the weight of individual pieces of evidence will stack up. 2) "Extraordinary" has lots of connotations! So, the word ends up being used differently than "having a low prior." For example, illustrating the word's meaning with mythical beasts connotes the idea that supernatural claims are, by their very nature, extraordinary. However, this needs to be argued for, and not just assumed.

[@grubblewubbles]

YOOOO SQUARED IS HERE!

[@tafazzi-on-discord]

The prior probability of Jesus' resurrection is extremely high.

[@thedude882]

I think in the same lines about what "extraordinary claim" means, ie low prior, but I would say that "extraordinary evidence" here simply means really robust evidence. This would in line with Bayes theorem and cumulative cases, of course. I am in complete agreement with point 2), it's a bit of a shame that many atheists seems to believe that anything that goes against an empiricist view has a low prior.

[@tafazzi-on-discord]

@@thedude882 the prior is high though

[@JustCJson]

​@@thedude882Well it turns out that empiricism is an important part of gaining knowledge. I'm not saying that it's only possible to prove things through empiricism alone, but it still needs to be used as one of the necessary pieces to prove something, along with another piece called rationalism for example. Immanuel Kant created transcendental idealism as a way of bringing together empiricism and rationalism as two necessary steps to obtain knowledge, that is, it is not possible to obtain knowledge without both, so if something cannot be proven empirically and rationally at the same time then their credibility is questionable, which is the case with these extraordinary claims.

[@nblack2867]

Fun fact, that interview you did is actually the reason I found out about you and your channel. In a way, it's the reason I'm subscribed. So that interview has a special place in my heart.

[@wyrmwoodouroborosheartofth4751]

You might say it was extraordinary. 😁

[@manne8575]

This guy is simply amazing. Keep being you Michael!

[@mysteryman8122]

Don't you mean simply extraordinary

[@hopeseekertrue4792]

lol, ok athiest, how about give us extraordinary evidence about evolution, big bang and nothing is the beginning, also no designer but all the complicated design of the universe please give us extraordinary evidence mr athiest on the video

[@notaleuntold]

@@mysteryman8122 I came to say the same thing.

[@Arg0naut0]

Really? I question your definition of "amazing"

[@manne8575]

@@Arg0naut0 Sure buddy

[@GranMaese]

This is the first time I've seen that guy Stephen, but, dude, he has to be the snobiest snob to ever snob. For someone that claims "rationality rules", he clearly seems to be quiet irrational himself. His arguments lack proper reason and grounding, but they sure are made with lots of gaslighting and dishonest rhetoric... He also seems to be a major slave to [terrible] fashion. Fantastic job exposing his absurd pseudo-intellectualism, Michael!!

[@jennipherkafula9467]

With all due respect Michael… and as much as I love philosophical arguments, I just dropped by to have a good laugh.😂 God bless your ministry ❤️

[@hopeseekertrue4792]

lol, ok athiest on the video, how about give us extraordinary evidence about evolution, big bang and nothing is the beginning, also no designer but all the complicated design of the universe please give us extraordinary evidence mr athiest on the video

[@consentwastaken1]

Great video, Michael! Very rarely do I find a channel that provides answers and questions in such a short amount of time, but it feels like I've read an entire group of articles on the matter (scholarly articles to say the least). Keep doing what you're doing!

[@InspiringPhilosophy]

Thank you

[@bringemyoungpbuh4123]

@@InspiringPhilosophy Are you a hugger?

[@hopeseekertrue4792]

​ @tiffanybiscuit7587 lol, ok athiest on the video, how about give us extraordinary evidence about evolution, big bang and nothing is the beginning, also no designer but all the complicated design of the universe please give us extraordinary evidence mr athiest on the video

[@IsraelCountryCube]

​@@bringemyoungpbuh4123hmmm. Don't think so. Mabey don't hug another man that isn't your family? Even though we're more than an even family for all of humanity

[@bringemyoungpbuh4123]

@@IsraelCountryCube A hug doesn't mean it is sexual. But I just don't see IP as a man who is very physically expressive.

[@Atreus21]

Claims I don't want to believe require evidence I won't accept because it's offered in support of claims I don't want to believe.

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

Claiming to be the arbiter of what is and is not “extraordinary” is itself an extraordinary claim, and thus requires extraordinary evidence!

[@philamras3732]

Nice. Never thought of this self-defeating aspect.

[@Tooinsecuretousemyrealname]

Atheists making the goalpost go brrrrrrrrrrr

[@malirk]

What's the best evidence for believing Jesus rose from the dead?

[@rainbowhawk911]

The word of the Bible, which is the word of God.

[@Tooinsecuretousemyrealname]

@@malirk literally every good historian

[@malirk]

@@rainbowhawk911 Why should we believe the Bible is the word of God? There are 66 books and some of them are kinda... interesting to say the least. Look at Revelation. John wrote it while on the Isle of Patmos. His writings are very out there and almost seem more fantasy scifi than connected to the rest of the Bible. Why should I think any book of the Bible is the word of God?

[@malirk]

@@Tooinsecuretousemyrealname Name one historian who was convinced by the historical evidence in the Bible to become a Christian. I don't know of any historian who became a Christian because of the scholarly work in the history of the Bible. You're probably thinking of theologians who are often apologists for their faith.

[@jerrytaz6982]

I love how you break this down. You Michael are "extraordinary" in field of apologetics. And I just watched the "extraordinary evidence" to prove it.

[@Tooinsecuretousemyrealname]

This channel is severely underrated

[@RealCaptainAwesome]

Extraordinarily underrated?

[@hopeseekertrue4792]

lol, ok athiest on the video, how about give us extraordinary evidence about evolution, big bang and nothing is the beginning, also no designer but all the complicated design of the universe please give us extraordinary evidence mr athiest on the video

[@Tooinsecuretousemyrealname]

Extraordinary claim Noun When you disagree with internet atheists

[@malirk]

I'll show it works for you: *CLAIM 1:* I have a dog. *CLAIM 2:* I have a dragon. Which of these claims is extra-ordinary and would require extra-ordinary evidence for it? You'd probably believe I have a dog if I just told you that. I bet a random stranger could tell you about their dog and you'd believe them. Meanwhile if your best friend told you they had a dragon, you'd laugh. Now if the friend brought you over and showed you the dragon, you'd believe them. You'd need more evidence to believe the claim.

[@malirk]

Even the Bible works this way. When the women at the tomb told the apostles Jesus had risen from the graven, they didn't believe them. Even doubting Thomas needed more evidence than the rest. It seems even the Bible understood that the people would need extraordinary evidence for the extraordinary claim.

[@malirk]

I'm no different than the Apostles. They knew Jesus and witnessed his miracles firsthand (So the stories say). Meanwhile they didn't believe he rose from the dead. They only believed when they got more evidence than a story. It's going to take more than a story to convince me. if the risen Jesus appears before me, like he did for Paul), I will believe. Is this too much to ask for? No. Paul's life was changed when this happened. I'm open to this and will believe if I have a vision of Jesus. Lots of people claim visions of Jesus even today.

[@justingary5322]

@@malirk You didn't witness anything so you're not convinced. Ok cool

[@LawlessNate]

Wouldn't that then be a verb?

[@xsss9928]

gotta love IP. I had basically the same dilemma when trying to get my atheist friend to define "bad" I just kept getting the "are you serious you know what bad is".

[@hubertagamasu6283]

The philosophical Michael is great. The satirical Michael, even better!

[@hopeseekertrue4792]

lol, ok athiest on the video, how about give us extraordinary evidence about evolution, big bang and nothing is the beginning, also no designer but all the complicated design of the universe please give us extraordinary evidence mr athiest on the video

[@John14-6...]

While I like both, I think I prefer the philosophical Michael because the opponents of satirical Michael are such low hanging fruit even though it is humorous.

[@tudorstancut9332]

They need to give an extraordinary definition.

[@temsumongbajamir1582]

You and David Wood, both of your sarcasm is worth applauding. And thanks for the extraordinary response to the extraordinary glib.

[@legodavid9260]

The evidence for the resurection of Jesus that we do have, is nothing short of extraordinary. After claiming to have seen the ressurected Christ, the apostles went on a crazy preaching spree across the Mediterranean world, costing them their time, money, safety, and eventually, for some of them, their very lives. In my view, that is nothing short of extraordinary. Nobody would be crazy enough to do that, unless they had actually witnessesed something extraordinary.

[@wet-read]

Human psychology and motivation is an insane spectrum. People can be inspired to do or not do all manner of things. Those who chain themselves to, or camp on the branches of, old growth trees to prevent loggers from cutting them down are seen as legit crazy by a lot of folks today (I admire that sort of activism, actually). Then there's Buddhists who have practiced self immolation as an act of defiance, and also, quite possibly, to inspire others to resist whatever powers that be. On the other end of the spectrum is the phenomenon of "akrasia", which means a weakness of will, a lack of motivation to do or accomplish things, even if they would be beneficial to the individual(s) in question. So this take about the apostles is ridiculously naive, in my estimation.

[@EthanMuldoonMusic]

@@wet-readit’s proven that no one would die for what they know to be a lie. Peter asked to be executed in a more brutal way cause he didn’t want to be on the same level as Jesus. You would have to find a more logical reason for why they did this. The logical reasoning is that they saw him rise

[@Rafu-uf8eh]

And when Vasco da Gama went to India, they saw churches. The people said that St. Thomas went to evangelize to India. All this for a lie?

[@Tomorrowdaynight]

Something I appreciate about your videos is how I learn something from watching them. You don't just debunk / challenge the claim, but you'll also go into detail as to why you disagree and give examples. I learned what a meta-analysis is and what certain fallacious arguments are just by watching your videos.

[@alz1997]

I don't understand why proving a cat weighs 17 stones needs extraordinary evidence. I would think putting it on a scale would suffice. Seems like a pretty ordinary type of data to me.

[@wishyouthebest9222]

It is extraordinary how unwilling this (atheist) gentleman was to give a definition.

[@patrickthomas2119]

It is as extraordinary as their deflection of any and all burden of proof; so far as to deny that the claims they make are claims.

[@Judge_of_Anubis05]

it's interesting how the subjectivness of a word like extraordinary eludes him. In fact by him making the assumption ppl know what he's referring to proves its subjective in an ironic way.

[@ronpatton5721]

Michael you may not realize it but you are growing into a legend and God is blessing you. Stay humble and stay at the front.

[@Switchback21]

The claim: “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” is an extraordinary claim!

[@paradisecityX0]

Stephen is extraordinarily irrational

[@wild7goose]

Initiating the classic *slow clap* for what you've offered here Mr. Jones.

[@InspiringPhilosophy]

😂

[@retrictumrectus1010]

When we say extraordinary, it means mind-blowing. Whether an idea or a thing is mindblowing is up to the eyes of the beholder, which makes it subjective.

[@dylanandfriends443]

Please talk about the Shroud of Turin next.

[@Dhavroch]

I’d love to see a series refuting Rationality Rules’ videos. There’s something about his smugness that I’ve never been able to stand.

[@kazumakiryu157]

Not only that, brother, some of his information and refutations are wrong or debunked!

[@Atreus21]

Dude, smugness is the defining feature of being an atheist youtuber.

[@wmarkfish]

That friggin hair cut is extraordinary. It’s so hard to be hip in these days of hyper inflationary hipness with out ending up being tragically hip.

[@Sousabird]

0:28 Wow Michael, way to take cheap shots at us folliclely-challenged believers.

[@joshuachaffin1858]

Good stuff Michael. Very edifying and strengthening. God bless you and your family.

[@hopeseekertrue4792]

lol, ok athiest on the video, how about give us extraordinary evidence about evolution, big bang and nothing is the beginning, also no designer but all the complicated design of the universe please give us extraordinary evidence mr athiest on the video

[@highroller-jq3ix]

Very redundant, repetitious, and repetitive. Thor gently smite your testicles with Mjolnir.

[@theapexfighter8741]

@@highroller-jq3ixwho hurt you? lol

[@highroller-jq3ix]

@@theapexfighter8741 How many children have you tried to hurt? Do you think that vapid lol bombs will lure them in?

[@CynHicks]

Perfect timing. I'm gonna link this to a guy that want stop using this silly phrase. Thanks!

[@Mr_Fairdale]

People laugh at the idea of Jesus’ resurrection. I used to. I used to say “bro I was six years old and saw through the fairytales of the Bible. Burning bushes that speak? People walking on water? Okay sure.” But then as the years passed and I became more and more aware that I didn’t have all the answers and I had hardly anything in my life figured out, I started thinking more about religion and meaning of life etc. Years ago when the first image of a black hole came out I remember feeling underwhelmed by it. Astrophysics are hard concepts to truly grasp. I wanted to knowledge to be easier to digest. I wanted a clearer picture, literally and figuratively. But that’s kind of how things work in life right? Even considering the possibility that Jesus rose from the dead is kind of staggering. It’s overwhelming. I never once questioned the findings of modern physics. But all I did was question Christianity. I’ll stop typing because I’m struggling to put a finer point on this ramble haha.

[@wet-read]

I can recommend some excellent stuff if you're looking for things that address meaning and such.

[@Mr_Fairdale]

@@wet-read yeah definitely that’d be great

[@SauerkrautX]

Go on

[@brianbucher1313]

Do you have any actual evidence that Jesus rose from the dead?

[@Pdub217]

I disagree with the claim that the evidence had to be extraordinary. Regular evidence should be enough for any rational person.

[@philippbrogli779]

True. If I have a pet dragon in my garden then just seeing it would suffice. That is quite ordinary evidence. It might be possible to say the implications of this ordinary evidence is extraordinary, as it might shake the world view of the one seeing the dragon, but the evidence itself is regular.

[@honorablevessel]

Claiming the Bible as evidence of a worldview is indeed citing extraordinary evidence. The Bible is unique and thus extraordinary.

[@artemisiachristodoulaki6305]

That is totally subjective though

[@springy1975]

As an agnostic who enjoys the works of both you and Stephen, I quite enjoyed this video. I think I generally was always a bit skeptical when people said "extra-ordinary evidence requires extra-ordinary proof" but I just kinda moved a long with it.

[@a.i.l1074]

He's reflecting where the discourse is in Britain. The assumption "OBVIOUSLY theism is ridiculous" runs so deep. It took me years of thinking about this topic to even be fair-minded. Not long after I did, I ended up getting baptised

[@maureenporter2967]

Please go on Pints with Aquinas again! You guys had an awesome conversation and you crack me up. 😂

[@arthurwohlleben961]

I love this and you are absolutely right. Thank you for all your content and God bless

[@Silver_is_disappointed_in_you]

This is the defintion of : Chad Christian apologetic vs Virgin Atheist youtuber 😂

[@Tooinsecuretousemyrealname]

Michael Jones is Ben Shapiro Christian apologetics

[@malirk]

@@Tooinsecuretousemyrealname Ben Shapiro, hahahaa, that guy is a comedian.

[@awuriefnejqwjmnwn4960]

He may be a scrawny gremlin but he is a sharp defender of the faith. The atheist is just walking proof of the average IQ hybris theory

[@Tooinsecuretousemyrealname]

@@malirk yes, he is a very charismatic person

[@malirk]

@@awuriefnejqwjmnwn4960 Theists saying atheists are low IQ is as cringe as atheists saying theists are low IQ. I hang around enough atheist circles to hear them say this same nonsense often. Would you like to discuss reasons for believing or doubting the Bible? You know... put your IQ to the test?

[@collegepennsylvania837]

“He was despised and rejected- a man of sorrows, acquainted with deepest grief. We turned our backs on him and looked the other way. He was despised, and we did not care. Yet it was our weaknesses he carried; it was our sorrows that weighed him down. And we thought his troubles were a punishment from God, a punishment for his own sins! But he was pierced for our rebellion, crushed for our sins. He was beaten so we could be whole. He was whipped so we could be healed. All of us, like sheep, have strayed away. We have left God’s paths to follow our own. Yet the Lord laid on him the sins of us all. He was oppressed and treated harshly, yet he never said a word. He was led like a lamb to the slaughter. And as a sheep is silent before the shearers, he did not open his mouth. Unjustly condemned, he was led away. No one cared that he died without descendants, that his life was cut short in midstream. But he was struck down for the rebellion of my people. He had done no wrong and had never deceived anyone. But he was buried like a criminal; he was put in a rich man’s grave. But it was the Lord’s good plan to crush him and cause him grief. Yet when his life is made an offering for sin, he will have many descendants. He will enjoy a long life, and the Lord’s good plan will prosper in his hands. When he sees all that is accomplished by his anguish, he will be satisfied. And because of his experience, my righteous servant will make it possible for many to be counted righteous, for he will bear all their sins. I will give him the honors of a victorious soldier, because he exposed himself to death. He was counted among the rebels. He bore the sins of many and interceded for rebels.” ‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭53:3-12‬ ‭NLT‬‬ This was written around 700 years before Jesus came into the earth, yet it describes His life perfectly. "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life." John 3:16 God loves you so much and showed that by sending His Son to die for us so that we may inherit eternal life. We deserve judgement but He gave us heaven through faith in Jesus. He took the punishment we deserved, and by putting our faith in Him we can be saved. The Key To Eternal Life: kzbin.info/www/bejne/q4vHp2CKqc6Aock For evidence for Christianity and answered questions, check out kzbin.info and kzbin.info because if Jesus really rose from the dead it is the most important fact ever!

[@xenoxorus]

Agnostic here and i had massive respect for Michael showing some balls to prove something!

[@xxxod]

What did he prove? All he did was pretend to not understand a simple term.

[@TheSpacePlaceYT]

​@@xxxod Then define the term.

[@juliogomez9145]

IP's refutation to RR is like Goku sparring with Batman without a suit.

[@caffeinatedme6955]

That was extraordinary. I wish I had thought of that, lol! I usually go into historical, archeological, and philosophical evidence that supports what I am trying to say, but who knew it could be so easy?

[@philippbrogli779]

You try to answer an emotional problem with factual evidence. Either talk about a topic which they have no predefined way of doing the Dillahunty dodge or give them the emotional answer they were looking for.

[@fearlesswee5036]

Personally I like the admittedly snarky remark of "The claim that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" is inof itself an extraordinary claim, and is therefore in need of extraordinary evidence to support itself." lol

[@MathAdam]

An IP video where we see Michael’s face! Extraordinary!

[@ryanmccarthy458]

What a king. Keep being extraordinary ❤

[@angelferreira1746]

There is a certain irony in believing your earthly life is all you have and spending a significant portion of it fighting something you don’t believe exists. I guess we all end up fabricating a purpose, even if subconciously.

[@JanekWeeb]

You are my favorite superhero🔥🔥🔥!!

[@CAB-yu8uj]

I like the term 'verbal chess match' in the definition of Socratic irony! If the person is caught in their own ignorance, you just say "checkmate!"

[@WorkingClassGodSeeker]

Great video! It’s so frustrating to see how smug some of these atheist guys are even when they’re wrong…Alex O’Connor is another one

[@emmaus5975]

The Ghost of David Hume rises again! God bless you, IP!

[@truthmatters7573]

That was smoooooth XD I have to declare you the winner in this battle of wits.

[@prime_time_youtube]

IP, you really extraordinary!!!

[@Lukasandsomenumbers]

Love the thumbnail, so glad I found this channel

[@SuperBossGiovanni]

The funny thing is, we have the most well preserved ancient document in Human history. One might call that... extraordinary...

[@Didyouseeitreally]

Yeah not one original

[@SuperBossGiovanni]

@Didyouseeitreally Thats the thing. When we have 14,000 New Testament manuscripts, all saying very nearly the same thing, we can be nearly 100% sure about what the originals said. Extraordinary I'd say.

[@Didyouseeitreally]

@@SuperBossGiovanni not when it's false.

[@SuperBossGiovanni]

@Didyouseeitreally you seem to be missing the point. Since you athiests NEVER provide a definition of what you mean by extraordinary, I was using the dictionary definition. Quote "very unusual or remarkable." So yes, by dictionary definition, the fact that the Bible is the most well preserved ancient document in human history, is, by dictionary definition, extraordinary. So, when you uselessly parrot "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Without clarifying what you mean by "extraordinary" we can use the strict dictionary definition to point out that we do, in fact, have evidence that is defined as unusual or remarkable.

[@Wallmart5]

This is one of the few channels that helps to keep my humanly faith in God, *extraordinarily* underrated.

[@philo3407]

I like what WLC said when debating Bill Parsons, "what you really mean is 'no amount of evidence will convince you.'"

[@davidjanbaz7728]

This is what they really mean: Dillahunty said so when He demands God to show up and talk directly to him and then says he wouldn't believe because his senses aren't reliable : that would also include his evolved brain.

[@wet-read]

That is an uncharitable take. Just because our senses are not always reliable doesn't mean they never are. But I do prefer a global demonstration. That would make it crystal clear that either God or something extremely powerful (like the Q in Star Trek) exists.

[@martytu20]

@@wet-readSelf delusion is a thing. Gaslighting is a phenomenon that is often linked to abusive relationships. Confirmation bias is what leads to blind spots and presuppositions. Our cognition is nowhere near as reliable as we think.

[@hopeseekertrue4792]

lol, ok athiest on the video, how about give us extraordinary evidence about evolution, big bang and nothing is the beginning, also no designer but all the complicated design of the universe please give us extraordinary evidence mr athiest on the video

[@wet-read]

@@martytu20 Yeah, I know about all of that. You can factor that into what I said above. What exactly is your point?

[@youtubesucks3811]

Lol the “oh stop it” killed me 😂

[@Contra.Mundum.]

I've been wondering how high Michael's IQ is; the man is a walking encyclopedia of Christian theology!

[@philippbrogli779]

I think it is decently high, but the thing he is extraordinary at is being thorough in his research. IQ is not everything. Without wisdom and persistence IQ will just lead to shallow self-delusion.

[@imperatorundso4193]

​@@philippbrogli779100%

[@EndTimesHarvest]

The problem is that what is considered to be "extraordinary" is largely subjective; something that is extraordinary to one person can be ordinary to another. For instance, the claim that angels exist is quite extraordinary to most people due to the lack of hard evidence (besides what's written in the Bible). However, if angels actually _do_ exist, then the claim that angels exist would be so obvious and ordinary to the angels themselves as they are constantly interacting with other angels.

[@grubblewubbles]

Also, for almost 2,000 years most people in the western world (judeo Christians) wouldn't have considered that an extraordinary claim at all, so I definitely agree it's all subjective

[@highroller-jq3ix]

And how much more so is "good?" Thanks for confirming how empty and nebulous biblical scripture is.

[@animalcart4128]

@@highroller-jq3ix And thank you for saying nothing of actual substance.

[@highroller-jq3ix]

@@animalcart4128 Thank you for ironically and obliviously shitting your diaper in public.

[@SueAnnaTucker]

That reminds me of if my musing about people , miracles, and perspective. The crossing of the Red Sea would be no miracle to God but getting the people there would be. And I've often thought of the argument that God wouldn't violate natural law. And what came to mind would be God saying "Who's Laws? Mine as I know them or you, finite mortal, as you have decided according to your limited observation and "objective","rational"mind?

[@Monomore]

My brother in the Lord..Stay strong brother 💪you encourage me with all your videos i watch.✌️

[@TheNikolinho]

awesome, as always, brother!

[@mrmcduck4902]

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" is generally just an excuse to shift the goal posts and avoid engaging with the existing evidence in good faith.

[@mr.iankp.5734]

Ah Rationality Rules…the embodiment of the Dunning-Kruger effect with a side of USI disorder.

[@yeahxd712]

I think it's fair to point out that the assessment of something as extraordinary is parasitic on prior commitments, metaphysical, exegetical and the like etc. Michael Jones pointing that out isn't some kind of an attempt to feign ignorance as "rationality rules" would like to insinuate, but is simply pointing out that fact. I have seen even Young Earth Creationists conceive of evolution as extraordinary, so am I also to believe now that the current state of evidence has failed to establish it, as it has failed to convince them? If we're being consistent, I don't see why not. The assessment of something being extraordinary is a disposition fundamentally, and different people have different dispositions due to different biological, psychological and sociological differences. If the argument is essentially that natural theology is insufficient grounds to establish the truthfulness of theism, by means of the "extraordinary slogan", then shall we also conclude that the current scientific evidence for evolution has failed to establish evolutionary theory as true, by means of that very same slogan? I don't see why not, if we're being consistent. Because the former has failed to convince millions? The latter has failed to convince millions too, many of whom aren't even religious. This, I think can all be evidently seen in the fact that "rationality rules" has not provided a clear definition of extraordinary, with a clear list of criterias to meet that. Imagine going around asking people for something all the time, while never clearly articulating what is it that you want. To go back to the previous example, imagine a YEC proponent going around asking for extraordinary evidence for evolution, while rejecting all scientific evidence in principle, simply because it is not extraordinary, is it not fair to ask what it is that he wants, or simply to suspect at that point that his slogan merely masks the fact that he simply wants to reject everything about evolution and is not interested in a fair assessment of the evidence for it in the first place? Yet that is exactly what "rationality rules" is doing. Once we critically evaluate the slogan instead of sloppily being attracted to it's intuitive appeal, we see that it's nothing more than incredulity, and incredulity is heavily influenced by prior metaphysical commitments, yet "rationality rules" fails to recognise this, since he would rather say he has no worldview at all, as he is an atheist, and atheists simply lack belief. Yet it is clear that prior metaphysical commitments do influence his assessment positively, so it operates like an unexamined belief, in a whole host of metaphysical commitments that is elusive to him, all denied existence in his conscious mind by yet another slogan "that I merely lack belief, I have no worldview". This level of inconsistency and failure for introspection is I think, particularly ironic given his constant allusion that all those who disagrees with him, can only be chalked up to moral or intellectual deficiencies. I get it, he has a fanbase and they like the diatribe, but I truly wonder sometimes, is he truly that uncharitable as a person?

[@wet-read]

People don't have to think much about how insane the idea of coming back to life after being dead for three days is, much less have, consciously or unconsciously, metaphysical commitments that prevent them from doing so. It's just something that we never see or deal with, because everything we know about reality says that dead people (I mean good and dead for a large chunk of time: a few days, weeks, years) coming back to life is impossible. Do you think going around thinking literally anything is possible is a good way to think? Yeah, some dude just made a Destructo Disk and decapitated the CN Tower. Why not? Now, if, somehow, we discover something about reality that accommodates dead people coming back to life, or creating powerful disks of energy with their life force that can penetrate almost any solid material, that is another matter.

[@jerrytuxman4421]

​@@wet-readIf there is a God, a being who is personal and intelligent, which acts in time in the world, then the idea of a man coming back from the dead is a non issue, especially if that man is God. The people of the time had some idea of resurrection from the dead, but overall it was a point of contention for the early church as well. It is not normal for someone to be killed, stay dead for 3 days, and then come back to life. That doesn't happen normally. However, if there is a God, and he is like the God of the Bible, then resurrection can absolutely happen. If the God of the Bible is real, then the rules of nature that he wrote become unbound by their maker. So the big thing to discuss is if God does exist. This guy has many videos on it. I am nowhere near read up enough to be convincing to anyone, but this guy has a lot of knowledge.

[@ThatisnotHair]

​@@jerrytuxman4421Evidence would be demonstration of the supposed happened phenomenon. Ask your God do dead people now in present day in front of scientists. That would be the extraordinary evidence. Arguments are useless. Literally anyone can do it. We need demonstration.

[@KG-jx8zt]

"Extraordinary Claim" is completely subjective if you cannot define it.

[@grubblewubbles]

Even the definition RR gives is extremely subjective

[@ThatisnotHair]

​​@@grubblewubblesike violating laws of physics. How is that subjective? What are guys even smoking?

[@grubblewubbles]

​@@ThatisnotHairwhat RR said at 1:08 or so was along the lines of "the more the claim violates our models, evidence, and understandings, the greater the standard of proof required". However, such models, evidences, and understandings (espescially this 3rd point) vary greatly between places, times, people groups, and individuals, so the definition would make a claim being extraordinary entirely subjective depending upon the values for the above variables.

[@KG-jx8zt]

@@grubblewubbles I think the problem lies in one person defining an event or claim as extraordinary. As soon as they do so, they have already exposed their lack of objectivity. Evidence is either sufficient or it's not. You may think the idea of a holographic universe is extraordinary. Yet Juan Maldecena, in his 20s, has proved it was as viable as any other theory of reality. The expansion of the universe seemed extraordinary until it was proven by Hubble. To call one proposal "extraordinary" but another "perfectly logical" is just stating a personal biased opinion, and it doesn't belong in philosophical debate.

[@Eben_Haezer]

Extraordinary word needs extraordinary definition Patrick

[@Dominick7]

This was great, pretty hilarious too with the interaction with Braxton. i usually just ask them whats the difference between super duper extra ordinary evidence and regular boring old evidence, and ive never to this day ever seen an answer.

[@justdoinmything]

Lol I feel like he's the kind of guy who would be like "how do I know if Christ was resurrected if you cant show me the body that came back to life!"

[@wet-read]

Look: it is a lot more simple than what the apologists are making it seem like. The bottom line is that stuff like Christ's resurrection are indistinguishable from what people call mythology. That's it! Both feature things that, at best (a *big* at best), are extremely difficult to believe on account of how insanely they depart from what we know of reality.

[@Reaper08]

@@wet-read Still not giving a definition.

[@rogerhelou9164]

To steelman his argument I would define extraordinary claim to mean a hypothesis that has a lower prior probability either because of its complexity or it not fitting well with our background knowledge, and extraordinary evidence would be evidence that is probable enough to overcome the low prior probability. In the case of the resurrection of Christ, the hypothesis that Jesus rose from the dead seems to have a low prior probability due to resurrections not being part of our background knowledge about the physical world.

[@frankgamez9808]

As a Christian, I’m not entirely sure how I feel about this video. Id imagine extraordinary is simply that, extra ordinary, more or above ordinary. Something like a resurrection is something that is more than what we see ordinarily. We don’t see someone dead for 3 days and then that person coming back to life. I’m okay with simply saying, I just believe it happened, the apostles testimony is enough for me even if it’s not extraordinary evidence.

[@StellarGamingOnline]

I've found that a lot of apologist content isn't really aimed at Christians even if I do find a lot of the content a good mental exercise. Faith in the Lord is one of the foundations that all believers already have. This is for the people who dismiss things out of hand or have heard a bunch of things about the bible but have never actually read it themselves. This type of video pulls in the crowd who would otherwise dismiss following God out of hand.

[@lucienmauricesenghor8216]

Dude micheal is right it is very vague.for the mongol empire to spread so rapidly till in Europe and even making islamic World to not have any khalif and controlling a massive population at that Time is very very extraordinary

[@lucienmauricesenghor8216]

The thought experience of schroedinger is also very extraordinary and how it explains quantum mechanic IS mind blowing. Because before looking to cat WE perceive that the cat is either dead or alive but in quantum mechanic that's not the case

[@casfi9672]

No true Christian doesn't have a head of luscious hair! In all honesty, keep doing Gods work IP.

[@survivaloptions4999]

He did give a perfectly serviceable definition of extraordinary evidence, albeit accidentally. In both Imaginary examples, he said that the claims contradicted his personal knowledge and personal experience. Therefore, any claim that does not support his personal confirmation bias is extraordinary. In both cases the level of evidence would be identical: show me the animal. That's it. Nothing extraordinary about it. Even if it was a dragon. What is it with Englishmen and dragons, anyway?

[@JonathanVachon777]

yah the problem is that even if God show himself, he could say: i had an hallucination. SO nothing will satisfy if he doesnt want to see the truth

[@bretth3718]

That was an extraordinary video!! Thanks for the laughs!

[@houstoneuler]

Depending on his definition of what extraordinary is, he may have already accepted one, since the percentage of people owning a cat and also having a garden is somewhat small

[@hopeseekertrue4792]

lol, ok athiest on the video, how about give us extraordinary evidence about evolution, big bang and nothing is the beginning, also no designer but all the complicated design of the universe please give us extraordinary evidence mr athiest on the video

[@malirk]

Yet we know that owning a cat and having a garden happen often. We can just use probability to see that this is quite possible. Now if you're friend says they own a pet dragon and they won the lottery, you might doubt both claims because individually they're either impossible (by what we've seen) or extremely unlikely. You'd probably not trust that friend if they make extraordinary claims and refuse to give the extraordinary evidence.

[@houstoneuler]

@@malirk the whole point was that the guy brought up extraordinary without defining it, leaving him free to slide his meaning as he needs

[@silenthero2795]

@@malirk How do you define "extraordinary" evidence then? An evidence that is beyond the norm or just really strange? If you win the lottery, just showing you got the winning numbers is "extraordinary" now?

[@albertcollins2725]

You nailed it. The reason he and other atheists won't define extraordinary evidence is so they can just keep saying no matter what evidence is given they will always say it doesn't meet their definition of extraordinary evidence because they don't want or care what evidence is given. The examples given of accepted historic events by written records long after they happened is the perfect example of extra ordinary evidence this is so.

[@thewalruswasjason101]

IP absolutely demolished him. It was extraordinary

[@brian_s_musicfan]

I appreciate your videos a lot!

[@InspiringPhilosophy]

Thank you for the donation.

[@pleaseenteraname1103]

I think what he really means by extraordinary is something that doesn’t normally happen within nature. Which I still think it’s pretty arbitrary.

[@highroller-jq3ix]

Then you aren't doing a whole lot of thinking.

[@pleaseenteraname1103]

@@highroller-jq3ix Ha ha ha! Says the troll who intentionally tried to gaslight theists into his epistemology, just so he doesn’t have to provide any evidence for it whatsoever. Also coming from the guy who has nothing nothing but typical shallow entry-level atheist argumentation and memes and that pretty much no respectable academic uses. Don’t really think you’re the best person putting forth that objectification.

[@dadaolujare6940]

An extraordinary video requires an extraordinary subscriber... oh wait, I'm already subscribed! Keep up the good work IP!

[@deviantchristian9778]

My personal view on Sagan's claim, is that Sagan couldn't actually come up with a good anti-christian argument, so he resorted to the "Ye old faithful," of past thinkers and turned to sophistry as a means of arguing against religion. Undefinable wordplay is a common feature of sophistry. As are anachronism, like Sagan's definition of Faith.

[@tiffanybiscuit7587]

' For Those who have faith they do not need evidence, for those that do not have faith , any evidence wil never ever suffice ' ....Thomas Aqunis. ( probably spelt that surname wrong)

[@hopeseekertrue4792]

lol, ok athiest, how about give us extraordinary evidence about evolution, big bang and nothing is the beginning, also no designer but all the complicated design of the universe please give us extraordinary evidence mr athiest on the video

[@hopeseekertrue4792]

​@@tiffanybiscuit7587 lol, ok athiest on the video, how about give us extraordinary evidence about evolution, big bang and nothing is the beginning, also no designer but all the complicated design of the universe please give us extraordinary evidence mr athiest on the video

[@innocentsmith6091]

I think its pure pseudoscience, too. Sagan knew he couldn't apply null hypotheses and statistical significance to historical and philosophical questions, so he tried to import it in an abstract sense. The most shameful part is that since a scientist said it, it gives people a false impression about the scientific way to think.

[@tiffanybiscuit7587]

@@innocentsmith6091 I think the scientific way has been totally negated by the whole covid follow the science mantra, too the whole indoctrination of following that a man can become a woman by imagination doctrine. Either fact is fact or fact is fiction ...you cannot have both.

[@SupremeSkeptic]

What an extraordinary response!

[@Emporkommling]

Last year: what is a woman? This year: what is extraordinary?

[@acem82]

I'm going to go out on a limb and say Michael was somewhat annoyed by rationalityrules' video and decided to go right for the throat, metaphorically speaking.

[@MyWatchIsEnded]

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" says the antitheist and yet they teach the multiverse theory almost as a matter of fact despite the fact that the multiverse theory is an extraordinary claim. I would like to see the extraordinary evidence for the multiverse or for the majority of theoretical claims of the scientific community.

[@georgechristiansen6785]

It is a rather extraordinary claim to say that something can from nothing and that life came from non-life, but these people expect us to accept that miracle as if it was just par for the course.