Top Ten Questions to Ask Skeptical Friends (Frank Turek response)

[@alflyle9955]

As an atheist, I take great comfort that Turek is considered one of the best Christian apologists, preachers, and authors. If he's the best they've got, they don't have much.

[@Jrpyify]

IS HE? That's amazing, because that was awful.

[@user-hp6pj4sy3k]

If Christianity were true, apologetics wouldn't need to exist. There would be no need to have tons of made-up "arguments" for something if it was obvious that said thing was real. And the fact that apologetics all teach different things, only makes it more contradictory. The one good thing I will say about Frank Turek is that he's polite when he engages atheists.

[@brianpeterson8908]

When the core of your beliefs are based on fantasy and fear, you are already starting behind an 8 ball. It's all down hill from there.

[@pwoods100]

That's what I've always said - if he's one of Christianity's best spokesman then Christianity is in trouble.

[@reubenmanzo2054]

"Was that your last card? It wasn't good enough." Or alternatively... "Is that fear? You do know you never stood a chance, right?"

[@leothenomad5675]

Frank to some guy he just met: So are you a religious person? Guy: I don't talk religion to some guy I just met Frank:😟 But I had a whole thing prepared

[@Paulogia]

😆

[@AzureDragon158]

The proper answer: Yes, extremely religious. I one day hope to die gloriously in battle and be accepted into the hallowed halls of Valhalla.

[@danhoff4401]

@@AzureDragon158 out crazying the crazies is sometimes the best play

[@ladyselenafelicitywhite1596]

There used to be a commonly held belief here in the UK that it wasn't polite to discuss politics or religion. I wish that was still the case. Obviously, this wasn't a universal principle.

[@JayMaverick]

@@ladyselenafelicitywhite1596 the reason it's considered impolite is because people don't like to question their beliefs and because the church has scared people into not asking questions. These topics should never be taboo.

[@kennethd.9436]

My favorite Turek line: “Where does evil come from?” Hitchens: Religion. 🤣

[@gabrieledwards1066]

I miss that guy.

[@santicruz4012]

According to the bible, from god lol

[@Nameless-pt6oj]

Isaiah 45:7 in the King James Version reads, “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.” How does Isaiah 45:7 agree with the view that God did not create evil? There are two key facts that need to be considered. (1) The word translated “evil” is from a Hebrew word that means “adversity, affliction, calamity, distress, misery.” Notice how the other major English Bible translations render the word: “disaster” (NIV, HCSB), “calamity” (NKJV, NAS, ESV), and “woe” (NRSV). The Hebrew word can refer to moral evil, and often does have this meaning in the Hebrew Scriptures. However, due to the diversity of possible definitions, it is unwise to assume that “I create evil” in Isaiah 45:7 refers to God bringing moral evil into existence. (2) The context of Isaiah 45:7 makes it clear that something other than “bringing moral evil into existence” is in mind. The context of Isaiah 45:7 is God rewarding Israel for obedience and punishing Israel for disobedience. God pours out salvation and blessings on those whom He favors. God brings judgment on those who continue to rebel against Him. “Woe to him who quarrels with his Master” (Isaiah 45:9). That is the person to whom God brings “evil” and “disaster.” So, rather than saying that God created “moral evil,” Isaiah 45:7 is presenting a common theme of Scripture - that God brings disaster on those who continue in hard-hearted rebellion against Him.

[@vtblda]

@@Nameless-pt6oj what do you mean by that?

[@Nameless-pt6oj]

I was addressing Santi’s comment about God being the source for evil and I think he meant the verse from Isaiah.

[@grapeshot]

And when those 10 questions are answered they'll immediately try and move the goalposts.

[@ladyselenafelicitywhite1596]

Or they will: Twist their interlocutors words. Twist the words of the Scriptures. Flat out lie.

[@scienceexplains302]

Mostly they’ll ignore the answers and keep telling people, including us, that they’re unanswered

[@ladyselenafelicitywhite1596]

@@scienceexplains302 absolutely. I find the dishonesty and disingenuousness of such interlocutors infuriating.

[@DarthRock]

Also sharpshooting to death

[@scienceexplains302]

@@ladyselenafelicitywhite1596 Please don’t give them so much control over your emotions. There are more productive reactions

[@42percenthealth]

Man, I remember when I first expressed my doubts about God to my wife, she immediately wanted me to talk with a Christian friend of ours who was big into apologetics. I tried expressing my doubts and questions to him... very few conversations in my life have been more frustrating and pointless. It was very clear that he had a script he wanted me to follow; and if I answered him in some way that wasn't what he had been told by the likes of WLC or Frank Turek that an atheist would respond, he would repeat the question in different words trying to tease the desired answer out of me.

[@Joemamahahahaha821]

The arrogance in these people. They know what’s best for everyone.

[@martinmckee5333]

I knew someone like that as well, though he had a unique take and felt that all my answers could be found in the Book of Psalms. Still had his script though, and still made no effort to listen to or understand my position. It is very frustrating - even more so knowing that he actually did care. He just couldn't escape his own beliefs enough to be a good friend.

[@wfemp_4730]

Not trying to get too personal here, but has your revelation to her affected your relationship? Is she still a believer?

[@42percenthealth]

@@wfemp_4730 Yes, she is still a believer, and no, it hasn't really affected our relationship much. There was some initial fear on her part that we would have to separate, or that I would become abusive because... atheist, I guess. We've also stopped attending church, but that's about it. For a long time, she didn't want to talk about our differences of opinion on religion, just hoping that I would "come back around". Lately, she's been a little more open about asking questions, especially regarding our plans to have kids in the future and how to handle raising them.

[@Amoth_oth_ras_shash]

@@42percenthealth sounds like something that be good to 'hash out' before having kids... after all , most kids are way more swayed by emotional arguments..even bad ones.. maby if you two still want to be partners and have family do something like ''not before age of reason' or such stuff... sounds like one frustrating way to leave religion though ,having to get a first hand taste of how dishonest or emotional arguments deependent apologetics can be ... either way , live long and prosper in waht ever way you feel for mate! ^^ hoppe things stays nice and warm between your mate and yourself as you hash that hole to humunculie or not humunculie out ;)

[@Slum0vsky]

Turek never fails to disappoint.

[@deathwatch1980]

not sure if this is dubble negative or not?

[@hifijohn]

He never disappoints me because my expectations of him are very very low.

[@reformCopyright]

Would you be disappointed if he some day did fail to disappoint?

[@genXstream]

Yeah, when I heard Turek say, "If Jesus rose from the dead, Christianity is true," I thought, hold up. That's still a pretty large epistemic step.

[@hitesh8383]

@@genXstream If UFOs exist (which have eye witnesses) and aliens have "free will" to visit earth, then bible is false because man is not a unique creation...

[@Groffili]

"Say... did you perhaps have a bad emotional experience with a Christian?" "Yes, I once listened to the mad ramblings of an apologist called Frank Turek. That was traumatizing! Say... what was your name again?" ...

[@johnstewart4943]

A man goes to a pastor. “Father, I’m wavering,” the man says; God is capricious at best, absent at worst. The pastor lights up. The treatment, after all, is simple. “The great apologist Frank Turek is in town tonight,” the doctor says, “Go and see him! That should sort you out.” The man bursts into tears. “But father,” he says, “I am Turek.”

[@mashah1085]

Frank Turek is one of the most potent forces for atheism around today.

[@Locust13]

Frank's audience is going to be highly disappointed when skeptics don't stick to Frank's script.

[@marccolten9801]

“Hm, the script doesn’t even _mention_ them telling me to go eff myself.”

[@streetsdisciple0014]

Correct. It’s very easy to turn these questions right back on them.

[@scienceexplains302]

Disappointed and sometimes angry… trying to force the conversation into a script of false dichotomies.

[@heinshaaine8153]

I am really happy that nobody ever even tried to convert me... i really would fall for the skript out of ineptness...

[@Commanderziff]

I don't think they're going to be disappointed, they may well feel vindicated. "They're not giving me the right answers. What more proof do I need of their dishonesty?"

[@mistahbreeze4412]

Remember, my Christian flock, that it's not about having a conversation with a fellow human being, it's about identifying and exposing the infidel and either converting them or at least making sure to out-group them to our fellow believers to keep them from poisoning our beliefs with their 'thoughts' and 'logic'. Thus we ask the question; "Were you raised in a religious home?"

[@erikblaas5826]

Wel, if those questions were asked to me, it could go on a bit like this from my side; No, sorry to say so. My home was not religious, it was just made of bricks and mortar.... But why do you ask such a question, are you in house building business? No, you want to talk about religions? Aha, Christianity, where the teachings of Jesus Christ state that you should love your fellow humans whatever there religious background is.... Hold on, why you say that, that is not very Christian to say so, you are shunning me for not being from the same type of Christian believe as yours? Are you shure you are a Christian? Now you sound more like one of those brain-washed people from a cult group. No, I am Christian, but not as short-sighted and prejudiced as you seems to be. Are you shure you are a Christian? See how easy I turned the table and put the guild pressure on the side where it belongs?

[@DemonicRemption]

@Mistah Breeze As a Christian I can attest to seeing this more times than I care to count. Sad thing, there are exceptions, but you don't hear about them. And I'm jaded enough to think people like Turek don't want those voices to be heard.

[@myrawest]

I was raised evangelical Christian and I became involved with a different denomination of Christians this past year, and they almost immediately told me my parents were not real Christian's (and going to hell) and neither was I. Then throughout the year they treated me as their little pet project, treating me as an outsider and sinner, looking down on me with self righteousness, simply because I was raised with a slightly different form of Christianity. It was being so involved with them that caused me to completely deconstruct my faith over the course of the year.

[@akiblue]

I get really mentally tired arguing with evangelical Christians. I am an atheist raised Greek Orthodox. I've always been able to get them to stop arguing with me by telling them that unless they understand the nuances of Greek, the language the new testament was written in, they have no understanding of true Christianity and can argue this well. It's easier for me to argue Greek Orthodox Christianity against evangelism than it is to argue atheism with Christianity. My Hope Is that doubt starts small and they start questioning faith at a small level. For instance I'll tell them John 1:1 says (in English) in the beginning was the word. (In Greek) εν αρχή ην ο λόγος. Λόγος (Logos) in this sense is "The word" but in Greek also means "reason". That is why the word Logic comes from Logos. Logos also means speach. When you misunderstand even that one sentence because of nuance how can you say that every sentence can't be misunderstood by translation. When the Orthodox Church can trace their origins to the Nicene synod without having changed a thing then yes they believe every other Christian sect misunderstands Christianity. My problem as an atheist is arguing with Greek Orthodox Christians because they have an answer for everything because for a couple thousand years Christian scholars have been dissecting those nuances that Greek language has and is built into the religion. It's intertwined with history, tradition, art, music, ancient mythology, Byzantine theocracy and can't be untied from Greek culture. By being an atheist in Greece you are disavowing greekness. It's as strong as Judaism is. Back to your point, yes Greek Orthodox Christians will believe that you are a heretic that doesn't understand the Bible in any way by being Evangelical. They even believe other Greek Orthodox sects that don't adhere to the same calendar as them are heretics so evangelicals have no chance.

[@chriswest8389]

Thats exactly what theyd say about about me Mum- M. West.

[@e.n.6079]

That is a sad story. I don't know these people and why they behaved the way they did. However, it doesn't change the fact that the gospel of Christ is the truth.

[@razorbeard6970]

​@@e.n.6079It certainly is NOT the truth. As in, a man died for no other reason except that he was threatening the worldly authority of spiritual leaders in his own community so much that the controlling community at the time took him out. No sacrifice for sins will ever be enough to stop or cover them. The man either died or, did not. He most certainly didn't resurrect if he died. So, the whole thing is surrounded by untruths in service of spiritual propaganda.

[@e.n.6079]

Do you have an evidence that He didn't rise from the dead?

[@hegyak]

The problem with a script, is. It breaks. Often and FREQUENTLY against Atheists. Atheist Experience callers prove this, over and over.

[@Ugly_German_Truths]

But ironically they cannot go WITHOUT a script as that is the only standard they can lean on. There is no observable truth anywhere to be found that anybody looking seriously into history or miracles or whatever else would HAVE to agree on. Just look on how wide the views of believers on these "truths" do diverge and then there is all the non believers on top that do accept even less as irrefutably correct. So anybody not a leader (= the ones writing the script for their specific deviation from all the other groups and ideas) has to follow the script or they arte lost in what there IS to stand up for. That would lead to chaos, like agreeing with the WRONG church, suddenly making all that factionalism look silly *gasp*

[@tbotalpha8133]

"No plan survives contact with the enemy."

[@hegyak]

@@tbotalpha8133 I thought it was "No Plan survives contact, intact."

[@tbotalpha8133]

@@hegyak I've never heard that version before. It also doesn't really make sense - contact with what?

[@tbotalpha8133]

@larrydesmond1787 I wasn't saying that Christians and non-believers being enemies is inevitable. But Christian apologists approach non-believers like a general besieging a castle. They think in terms of strategies and tactics, to breach the non-believer's defences. But they are not very good at it, because they struggle to adapt when any part of their plan goes wrong.

[@marccolten9801]

#5 is like asking “If you lived in North Korea would you publicly revere Kim Jong Un? Damn right, no matter what I thought of him. It’s called a survival instinct.

[@Szadek23]

Well, in the North Korea scenario I would pretent to, but I don't think how that would help me against God, so...

[@grumpylibrarian]

If Christianity as described in the bible were demonstrated to be true, then I would worship Jebus if and only if he was cool with lip service. Because unless I develop some serious Stockholm Syndrome (which I cannot rule out!), I don't expect to like the dude's dad at least. Sonny boy and I *might* be able to come to an understanding. If it's not going to count because he read my mind, then why get my lips dirty?

[@tetsujin_144]

@@Szadek23 Ya never know, maybe Yahweh just really likes boot-lickers. Maybe he even likes it MORE if they secretly HATE him but worship anyway!

[@grumpylibrarian]

@@tetsujin_144 Despite theist's repeated insistence, we cannot ever rule out the possibility of an "evil" god. So I agree. :

[@pauligrossinoz]

The one unshakable condition required for me to believe that Christianity is true, is that *Christianity first has to make sense.* And every time somebody explains their version of Christianity to me, it's just nonsense. And it's perfectly understandable that I cannot make my self believe that nonsense is true. So Frank - explain your Christianity to me in a way that makes sense, then I'll let you know.

[@thejudgmentalcat]

"It's not a head problem, it's a heart problem" so much to unravel there, proving it's not a convo, it's an attack

[@danielsnyder2288]

He is avoiding saying "We have no empirical evidence so try to wow them with arguments instead

[@byebry]

I love how he also accused atheists of seeking comfort, not truth... I mean... really?

[@Nerazmus]

When the "heart problem" is not feeling like supporting a guy who sentences people to infinite punishment for not licking his boots.

[@bleirdo_dude]

It's a Holy Dopamine Ghost via Placebo Faith problem.

[@memitim171]

@@byebry Have you ever seen an apologist who doesn't love projection? It is rather insulting though, it wasn't easy to accept the universe is cold and uncaring and I certainly didn't do it because it gave me comfort...I accepted it because I had to, not because I wanted to.

[@BryonStice]

Paul, thanks for always being a great role model in how to have a calm, rational dialogue on these topics!

[@Paulogia]

I appreciate that!

[@wickedcabinboy]

@@Paulogia - I absolutely envy your ability to remain calm and rational in the face of such absurd provocation.

[@gmgurp6666]

@@wickedcabinboy I sometimes wish I could find a playlist of Paul and Sir Sic addressing the same videos just to see the two extremes of the emotional spectrum juxtaposed.

[@wickedcabinboy]

@@gmgurp6666 - That's like comparing NPR to SNL, Paul's educated, knowledgeable, calm and methodical. Sir Sic just roasts theists with flame broiled sarcasm. Both have their place.

[@foppishdilletaunt9911]

Oh, my, my favourite, calm, rational, deliberative and honest interlocutor, The Esteemed Dr Frank Turek, always interested in a fruitful and mutually enlightening dialogue… “Evangelical foreplay” 😂

[@timeshark8727]

Its subtle... but I'm sensing some sarcasm here

[@DAYBROK3]

ever been to those fellowship things after church?

[@1970Phoenix]

I'm just happy to finally hear Turek speaking without yelling like an angry drunk. He does yell a lot … and he always seems angry.

[@adamthaxton3157]

Oddly enough, I didn't have any "negative" interactions with Christianity until I left the faith.

[@autonomouscollective2599]

Same here. My Christian upbringing was mostly pleasant. And I even went to a Catholic school. I'd happily be Catholic still if it wasn't for, you know, not believing it anymore.

[@mikewrites1577]

same for me

[@e.n.6079]

@@autonomouscollective2599 Well, Catholicism is a nonsense anyways (so not bad to go away from the Catholic church) , but not the true gospel.

[@autonomouscollective2599]

@@e.n.6079 There’s really no such thing as the “true” gospel. There’s all sorts of different translations and interpretations, and no one has yet nailed down which are correct. And there probably never will be because there will always be differences in opinion.

[@Florkl]

If you believe in Justice, you don’t believe in pardoning the guilty. Lining those two up beside each other is a huge contradiction.

[@Paulogia]

right?!?

[@quebeccityoliver4742]

I prefer Terry Pratchett's view. “Take the universe and grind it down to the finest powder and sieve it through the finest sieve and then show me one atom of justice, one molecule of mercy. Hogfather Quotes by Terry Pratchett - Goodreads Or if you prefer his darker, older take - From Snuff "Willikins laughed. “Truth is, Mr. Stratford, from where I sits he’s a choirboy, he really is, but there has to be some justice in the world, you see, not necessarily law justice, but justice justice, and that’s why I am going to kill you. Although, because I’m a fair man I’m going to give you a chance to kill me first. That means one or other of us will die, so whatever happens the world is going to be a better place, eh? Call it…cleaning up. " Wilkins then kills him.

[@joecoolioness6399]

And who honestly believes that punishing your kids and your grandkids for your actions is justice?

[@PrometheanRising]

​@@quebeccityoliver4742 You aren't going to find justice by grinding the universe down. Justice isn't the kind of thing you find by looking under a rock. So I suppose he is technically correct.

[@dane947]

"It's not a _head_ problem it's a *heart* problem." - Frank Turek The heart in a human being is a muscle that pumps blood(oxygenated and deoxygenated). And that's about it. Frank's whole spiel, like most, always comes down to an appeal to emotion, and where do emotions come from, the brain... and where does the brain reside, in our HEADS! How can you do this for most of your adult life, BE a professional at this and yet... get it so wrong every time. Unless of course you *know* you are speaking to an indoctrinated group and care little for actual experiential truth.

[@davidjanbaz7728]

Obviously you have no clue: we are more than just anatomy: the Hebrew word is actually kidneys (not heart )so you don't actually know what you're talking about. When you try to make it hyper- literal.

[@JimJamTheAdmin]

@@davidjanbaz7728 no, you don't have a clue. Reread the comment and try again. He is specifically calling out this obfuscation as an emotional appeal asking you to ignore what your brain says. Even though your brain is where your emotions come from and logically thinking about it can often illuminate issues with your emotional beliefs.

[@david2869]

For heart problems, I consult a cardiologist.

[@venusrose9890]

This doesn't feel all that exclusive to just Frank, or even to just religious people. Appeals to follow your heart even though the heart is not literally where emotions come from are super common in the secular world.

[@dane947]

@@venusrose9890 Yes, we know what it means when someone says to another "I love you with all my *heart* " and similar phrases. But Frank's usage here is a manipulative tactic that's permeated thru the ages in Christianity.

[@inquisitorbacon8170]

I feel like he'd be aggravated by a lot of my answers about "the beginning" being "I don't know and I don't care?" Lol

[@Paulogia]

sounds right

[@autonomouscollective2599]

Oh, I seriously pissed off someone on YT by saying I don't care. He went so far to say I was lying - I _have_ to care!

[@pauligrossinoz]

_Just follow the script I wrote for you!_ 🤪🤣

[@myxini]

Yeah people don't respond very well to answers like "It makes no difference to me whether God(s) exist or not, and won't change anything about my life, so I don't care"

[@JayMaverick]

My favourite is when the Turek-drones try this script on atheist call-in shows and get stuck because the answer didn't conform to the script.

[@pansepot1490]

I am sure that happens even in real life. I have the feeling that Frank’s tactics backfire most of the time.

[@NarcissisticAbuseHealing]

I feel that a big attraction of Christianity for Frank is that a higher power will absolve him of all his sins and responsibility of his actions without him needing to make anything right with the people he hurt. He was very enthusiastic about that getting a free pass section.

[@Cathmoytura]

Frank didn't get past the first question with me, because it raised red flags he was up to something and I responded, "Why are you asking me about my childhood?"

[@xwing2417]

Frank's presentation was a sermon through and through, and the psychological power of it started getting to me. That made me feel angry that this formula is everywhere, manipulating people's emotions. I appreciate that Paul was calm and reasonable while refuting the list. Thanks Paul.

[@funkdragon7659]

I’ve been a Christian for 40 years and still don’t understand it! The world “of order”has forced me to challenge my doctrine and come to a realization that there might not be a creator. Good arguments being made by Paul

[@martifingers]

Hi Paul. I hope you are not too traumatised by this - at first glance it would seem to be a great threat to your world view. FWIW I think the subjects being considered (the nature of the cosmos, morality, the nature of truth, the relationship between our perceptions and reality, the reliability of scripture and the nature of myth, the precise nature of God etc. etc.) are each complex and difficult to even formulate in words without the possibility of us making errors of logic or of fact. To claim a monopoly of truth is probably then (to coin a phrase ) the major sin. To say "I don't know" probably the wisest option in many areas. I have my own ideas why genuine dialogue appears so difficult but it seems to be the only way.

[@Nameless-pt6oj]

If you want evidence for Christianity, look at the resurrection, that’s all you need. Read CS Lewis and George Lyttelton, watch Michael Jones and Erik Manning.

[@Tore_Lund]

No sane Christian claim they don't doubt, including any pastor I've ever asked. Only crackpots claim the bible is the word of God. God is not required for Christianity to be true in an utilitarian sense. In other words, a religious organization, personal belief and Theism as an idea are 3 completely different concepts. Further the bible dismisses any attempt of self-righteousness, especially the religious kind but still recognizes acts of humanism dethatched from any kind of religion as equally valid! I seriously believe that not a single self-proclaimed preacher in the US even would qualify as Christian had they cared to attend any Theology university in Europe. Atheism is not about what religion gets wrong and why it is bad. It is about what the absence of Theism, the absence of an objective purpose in life leave us. As an Atheist, don't fall in the trap of making debunk videos. It is not relevant how they are wrong in the same way that proving Flat Earthers wrong is pointless as time is better spent on learning what can be done on a round Earth. In science, Big Bang is not a creation hypothesis for the universe. It is a tool to describe the conditions in the very early universe. General Relativity can not give an answer to what is outside spacetime, so it does not even hint at anything.

[@nicolab2075]

@@Nameless-pt6oj Hi! I thought I'd give one of your recommendations a go, so I searched Erik Manning on KZbin, and it took me to a Testify channel - I assume that's his channel? The first vid was called something like 'new argument for the resurrection ', which sounded relevant to what you were recommending. I was planning to listen to the whole thing, but honestly the first minute was such a dense, fast-spoken review of bits of the Bible that I couldn't follow it at all. Do you think reading bits of the Bible will convince non believers that the resurrection happened? To me, the Bible just seems made up by people.

[@bleirdo_dude]

2 Pet. 1:16 "16 For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we had been eyewitnesses of his majesty." 2 Pet. 3:15-16 "15 and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation. So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16 speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures." Phili. 2:6-8 "6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited, 7 but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness. And being found in human form, 8 he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death - even death on a cross." 1 Cor. 2:6-8 "6 Yet among the mature we do speak wisdom, though it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to perish. 7 But we speak God's wisdom, secret and hidden, which God decreed before the ages for our glory. 8 None of the rulers of this age understood this; for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory." (Note: "rulers of this age" is reciprocal with Earthly & spiritual powers to the ancient reader) 1 Cor. 15:50bc "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable." Zec. 3:1-9 "1 Then he showed me the high priest Joshua (Savior) standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan (Adversary) standing at his right hand to accuse him. 2 And the LORD said to Satan, "The LORD rebuke you, O Satan! The LORD who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you! Is not this man a brand plucked from the fire?" 3 Now Joshua was dressed with filthy clothes as he stood before the angel. 4 The angel said to those who were standing before him, "Take off his filthy clothes." And to him he said, "See, I have taken your guilt away from you, and I will clothe you with festal apparel." 5 And I said, "Let them put a clean turban on his head." So they put a clean turban on his head and clothed him with the apparel; and the angel of the LORD was standing by. 6 Then the angel of the LORD assured Joshua, saying 7 "Thus says the LORD of hosts: If you will walk in my ways and keep my requirements, then you shall rule my house and have charge of my courts, and I will give you the right of access among those who are standing here. 8 Now listen, Joshua, high priest, you and your colleagues who sit before you! For they are an omen of things to come: I am going to bring my servant the Branch. 9 For on the stone that I have set before Joshua, on a single stone with seven facets, I will engrave its inscription, says the LORD of hosts, and I will remove the guilt of this land in a single day." Zec. 6:11-13 "11 Take the silver and gold and make a crown, and set it on the head of the high priest Joshua son of Jehozadak (Savior Son of the Righteous God); 12 say to him: Thus says the LORD of hosts: Here is a man whose name is Branch: for he shall branch out in his place, and he shall build the temple of the LORD. 13 It is he that shall build the temple of the LORD; he shall bear royal honor, and shall sit upon his throne and rule. There shall be a priest by his throne, with peaceful understanding between the two of them." Jos. 10:22-27 "22 Then Joshua (Savior) said, "Open the mouth of the cave, and bring those five kings out to me from the cave." 23 They did so, and brought the five kings out to him from the cave, the king of Jerusalem, the king of Hebron, the king of Jarmuth, the king of Lachish, and the king of Eglon. 24 When they brought the kings out to Joshua, Joshua summoned all the Israelites, and said to the chiefs of the warriors who had gone with him, "Come near, put your feet on the necks of these kings." Then they came near and put their feet on their necks. (see Psa. 110:1/Heb. 10:13) 25 And Joshua said to them, "Do not be afraid or dismayed; be strong and courageous; for thus the LORD will do to all the enemies against whom you fight." 26 Afterward Joshua struck them down and put them to death, and he hung them on five trees. And they hung on the trees until evening. 27 At sunset Joshua commanded, and they took them down from the trees and threw them into the cave where they had hidden themselves; they set large stones against the mouth of the cave, which remain to this very day. (see also Deut. 21:22-23/Gal. 3:13)" Image of God (2 Cor. 4:4, Phili. 2:6), Agent of creation (Rom. 11:36, 1 Cor. 8:6) Philo: THE SPECIAL LAWS, I "XVI ...Now the image of God is the Word, by which all the world was made..." Celestial high priest (Heb. 2:17, 4:14), God's Word (Heb. 1:3, 11:3), Firstborn son (Rom. 8:29) Philo: ON DREAMS, THAT THEY ARE GOD-SENT "XXXVII ...the high priest is the Divine Word, his own firstborn son." Philo: ON ABRAHAM "XLI These things, then, are what are contained in the plain words of the scriptures. But as many as are able to contemplate the facts related in them in their incorporeal and naked state, living rather in the soul than in the body, will say that of the nine kings (Gen.14:1-2) the four are the powers of the four passions which exist within us, the passion of pleasure, of desire, of fear, and of grief; and that the other five kings are the outward senses, being equal in number, the sense of sight, of hearing, of smell, of taste, and of touch. For these in some degree are sovereigns and rulers, having acquired a certain power over us, but not all to an equal extent; for the five are subordinate to the four, and are compelled to pay them taxes and tribute, such as are appointed by nature. For it is from the things which we see, or hear, or smell, or taste, or touch, that pleasures, and pains, and fears, and desires arise; as there is no one of the passions which has any power to exist of itself, if it were not supplied by the materials furnished by the outward senses." Philo: WHO IS THE HEIR OF DIVINE THINGS "XXXVIII ...Now, the craters of the sense of seeing are the eyes, those of hearing are the ears, those of smelling are the nostrils, and so on with the appropriate receptacles for each of the senses. On these craters the sacred word pours a portion of blood, thinking it right that the irrational part of us should become endowed with soul and vitality, ...purifying itself from the deceitful alluring powers of the objects of the outward sense which aim to overcome it." Philo: QUESTIONS & ANSWERS ON GENESIS, III "(51) What is the meaning of, “And it shall be my covenant (or agreement) in your flesh?” (Gen. 17:13). God is willing to do good, not only to the man who is endued with virtue, but he wishes that the Divine Word should regulate not only his soul but his body also, as if it had become its physician. And it must be its care to prune away all excesses of seeing, and hearing, and taste, and smell, and touch, and also those of the instrument of voice and articulation, and also all the redundant and pernicious impulses of the genitals, (morning cross? Rom. 7:23) as also of the whole body, the effect of which is, that at times we are delighted by our passions and at times pained by them."

[@Fernando-ek8jp]

From what I've seen, Sean McDowell is one of the most honest apologists. He holds firm to his beliefs of course, but when it comes to claims that rely on testable reality, he does seem to question and admit personal and group mistakes.

[@roeliethegoat]

He's the only Internet apologist I actually respect. I loved his conversation with Drew from Genetically Modified Skeptic. He seems to want to listen and admits when he doesn't know something. I admire that.

[@Nameless-pt6oj]

Glad you two respect him, God bless :)

[@1970Phoenix]

I agree. It wouldn't shock me if one day I hear that Sean McDowell has drifted into some version of mystical deism, or even stopped believing altogether. It's really, REALLY hard for an intellectually honest, educated person to continue to hold religious beliefs when the evidence supporting those beliefs are so incredibly flimsy.

[@pansepot1490]

Honest like when he impersonated an atheist in front of a classroom of students instead of inviting a real one? No, he’s in the business of brainwashing and keeping young people especially brainwashed. The fact that he doesn’t make claims that can be dismantled with a two minute internet search only shows that he’s smarter than the old schools apologists.

[@roeliethegoat]

@@pansepot1490 well, to be fair, he did have a conversation with Drew (GMS) about that. He didn't cower away when he was called out on it. I don't agree with his line of work, but I respect him as a person.

[@DarcOne13]

Oooh, I'm gonna play along: 1: Yep. My mom is a theist and my dad's borderline fundamentalist, but not literalist. He does the harmonizing science and bible thing. 2. I mean he isn't brainwashed into thinking his bipolar is demonic possession. 3. Medicine helps him. 4. Yeah, but science has proven time and again that it knows more than your book. 5. If there was evidence for a god, sure. I'd believe. I might not follow them, but I'd believe. 6. As far as I know, nothing isn't a viable state. 6 ½: That's a different question, but we have no reason to believe a being started anything. 7: A hippy, by today's standards. 8: According to which book? Mark, Matthew, Luke, or John? Are you rehearsing a play? 9: My atoms rejoin the rest of the universe. 10: Justice is a concept. I love it, but it's idealistic. Punishment isn't the best reason for justice; reformation is.

[@cy-one]

Just from your replies (I haven't listened to the video yet), I feel inclined to partake as well. I will edit my own replies to those questions for entertainment/comparison's sake :D 0) Germany, and "what do you do" could either be asking about my profession (Tech support) or my current activity (typing a comment while listening to a YT video). My story, _in very short words,_ would be: Born in Germany, spent childhood in the Caribbean Sea and Venezuela, joined early school (age 7) in Germany, been in Germany since then, had a bit of a "spiritual mumbo-jumbo" phase as a young teenager, but that didn't survive into adulthood. Been an atheist for all my life as far as I'm aware. Was unemployed for a couple of years (not a good experience), but life's looking better since the last 4'ish years. 1) No, I wasn't brought up in a religious home. My mother believed in all sorts of spiritual/shamanistic things, including supernatural powers. Never talked much about it with her, but considering the knowledge I have today, I'd probably classify her as either an agnostic deist or an agnostic atheist. My father (and generally speaking male figures) was mostly absent. Not seen or talked to him in roughly two decades now. Had religious classes in school until the age of 14 when I could switch to a more neutral "ethics" class, which I did. Nothing negative to say about Christianity at that point. No memorable events that have anything to do with religion at all. No creepy Christian uncles, no bothersome Christian teachers, no annoying visits to church on Sundays. Nothing, sorry. 2) What do I mean with what? Sorry, I don't see how that question applies to what I've said prior. 3) Think _what_ is true, came to _which_ conclusion? 4) Considered what? If you're referring to the arguments brought forth in support of Christianity, then yes. I've considered them. And found them lacking, mostly because they seem to consist of logical fallacies. Bonus) Bit too big of a question to fit here. But generally speaking secular humanism as well as the Veil of Ignorance and "Don't do onto others what you don't want to be done to you" play big roles here. Super-simplified: Cause as little harm and as much happiness to other people as possible. 5) That depends _wholly_ on how you define "Christianity" and "Christian." To give two extreme examples: If by "Christianity being true" you *only mean God exists, Jesus existed and got zombiefied, etc...* then this would _not_ solve the issue of God being a mass-murderer that causes unnecessary harm left and right, as well as punishing people for following his plan. If, however, you mean *God exists, Jesus got zombiefied, God is just and perfect and holy, as is Jesus, no harm that is being done is actually bad and everything the two of them do is good", then that's a different story. Similarly, "Christian" could either mean someone who believes that God exists and Jesus got zombiefied, but still thinks God is a mass-murdering maniac. Or it could mean someone who believes God is just and perfect, etc.pp. If I would be convinced that God is a mass-murderer, I would obviously believe he existed, but I wouldn't worship him. This probably counts as "No." If I would be convinced that God is just, holy, perfect and whatever, then yes, I would follow his word and act accordingly. Considering most the overwhelming majority of Christians do wholeheartedly believe their god to be just and perfect, I will use that conclusion going forward. So yes*. If I'd become convinced that God and his actions as well as Jesus and his actions are truly just, good and perfect, then I would act in accordance with his word. Which would probably make me a Christian. 6a) Don't know. 6b) That's a different question. I agree with Paul's points in that regard, as they reflect my own opinions. I do not know if "everything" ever had a beginning. Our local presentation had "some form of change" currently called The Bing Bang. I've no idea what was "before." The start of our local presentation could very well be an inevitable result of the end of a previous universe with a chain of collapsing and expanding universes stretching out into infinity. Additionally, I don't accept the idea of fine-tuning. The mindbogglingly overwhelming part of everything we know to exist doesn't support life or is unnecessary for life to exist. Additionally², if we'd live in a universe that _doesn't_ support life, yet we live, that'd be more convincing to me than we living in a universe that supports life. Something that is spaceless and timeless exists nowhere and never - I do not find that convincing. Bonus) Does God exist? Did Jesus rise from the dead? I have not heard any valid and sound arguments to accept either proposition. And, just for completion's sake, I've also not been presented any credible scientific evidence for either proposition as well. 7a) Don't know. Could be an amalgamation of a dozen of Jewish doomsday rabbis called Yeshua. (lol, wrote this before Paul gave his answer :D) Maybe some of which pissed of the Roman's enough to get put to death by their favorite death penalty at the time. I've no reason to believe "the" (single) Jesus existed or experienced a resurrection. 7b) By "just" a man I'd mean someone like you or me. Earthly father, mother, no healing powers, no resurrection capabilities. 7c) Came to that conclusion because I haven't seen healing powers, resurrections or other mentioned supernatural phenomenon be demonstrated to even be possible. Until that happens, I think leprechauns are more believable (Irish midgets with gold? Sure.) than a biblical Jesus. 7d) That was convoluted. But considering (as just one of many examples) Luke 19:27, I do not believe Jesus to be a "good man." 8a) Don't know. Why did John Smith die for his religion if it's not true? Why did the 9/11 attackers die for their religion if it's not true? This is a false dichotomy of "either true, or a lie." 8b) Considering "people making stuff up/people being wrong about something/people misremembering stuff" is something that happens all the time and "people raising from the dead" isn't, I do have a different understanding of what "takes more faith" than Frank does. 9) My body will probably either be burnt or decompose somewhere. Without a functioning brain, my consciousness ceases to exist. 10) Dunno, do you believe in warm? The word is way, way, _way_ to vague. But in general I agree with what Paul said. I do not believe God's actions (including heaven and hell) to be "justice."

[@killershrew1]

I'm response to your #2, my younger brother is severely bipolar and my idiot parents DID think it was demonic possession. So, instead of taking him to a doctor, they had their pastor perform multiple, intense exorcisms on him. When that didn't work (surprise surprise) they FINALLY took him to proper, scientific treatment. But the exorcism sessions further exacerbated the problem and he is pretty much beyond hope now. He's under so much heavy medication that he's a complete zombie...

[@Nixeu42]

​@@killershrew1 Then he's over medicated and should probably be on less medication. This is something that actually really pisses me off with how some people view mental disorders: the goal of medication should not be to make the person "normal" or tractable, it's supposed to help to moderate the self-destructive tendencies to a point the person taking the medication is more or less happy with. Trying to make the person over into someone else's preferred version of themselves is usually what makes them reject medication and treatment entirely, and what makes them feel like they become someone else when medicated. If I had to guess, and I'm very sorry if this comes across as harsh, the reason he's "beyond hope" is because his emotional connection to his family has been heavily damaged, possibly to the point where any love he might have felt for you all is nearly gone. I can't speak for everyone, but concern for those around me is a huge part of why I take my medication, possibly more so than my own well-being. I've seen people say hateful, awful shit in the heat of the moment and utterly wreck interpersonal relationships when unmedicated for bipolar multiple times. You know those dark, uncharitable thoughts you have about people sometimes? The sort that would really hurt the other person because there's a kernel of truth to them? Mania can put you in a state where you're willing to say them, even if you really care about the other person. And that's even worse when the person has genuine reason to be angry. It's also the state where you're most likely to get violent or hurt yourself. Depression is way less dangerous of the two extremes. Honestly, what your brother needs isn't just medication, it's therapy. Medication won't help fix the trauma he experienced. But he needs to want to get said therapy on some level in order for it to work. He needs a reason to want to get better. One of the strongest and most effective reasons is usually other people. He also needs to find a therapist he feels he can trust. That can also be a challenge, especially with that sort of trauma. That said, he's only "beyond hope" if he accepts that he is, and he's more likely to do that if you give up too. It's definitely a rough road, trying to find a medication balance that keeps a person on a fairly even keel, but it really is worth it, and it's definitely possible.

[@NickersonGeneral]

This reminds me of a video I saw about pickup artists telling you "id say _______ to a girl I just met, and she'd say _______ in response". Evidently its not just all women who have pre-programmed responses to certain statements, but all atheists as well. Learning so much

[@DoctorZisIN]

"Ten questions to ask skeptics again even though we continue to ignore their answers."

[@billcook4768]

The other problem with the CS Lewis thing is that someone can be a great teacher AND a lunatic. Issac Newton wrote tons of stuff that was flat out nuts… doesn’t stop us from studying calculus and gravity.

[@JimmyTuxTv]

It’s always a pleasure to see a new video from Paulogia

[@Locust13]

Something Matt dillahunty likes to say whenever someone just starts rattling off a bunch of leading questions is "I'm not here to be interviewed" Asking questions is fine but doing nothing but asking questions as a methodology for dominating a conversation is dishonest and unusual.

[@Paulogia]

I like that line.

[@Florkl]

The Socratic Method is a fine thing in certain contexts, but using it exclusively shows you can’t defend your belief, only attack theirs.

[@cygnustsp]

thats what flat earthers do too, during a "debate" when asked to provide evidence all they do is ask questions and try to get a "gotcha" moment

[@DJHastingsFeverPitch]

I think this is a version of JAQ'ing off a.k.a. "jusk asking questions" had a pastor do this to me once. Was a really shit experience

[@apetoast3671]

Wow, this is super well done. Pure cold rationality against sneaky and smug bullshit

[@Paulogia]

thanks, A-T

[@jeremyrodriguez324]

If I was still a Christian, I would have thought this is the most brilliant thing ever. But now as a skeptic, all these little sessions for Christians just sound like jibberish and scrambling to convince not only others, but also themselves, that Christianity is true.

[@fred_derf]

That's what they're designed to do.

[@byebry]

Yes. I got into apologetics as a struggling christian. But I took the salvation of other people seriously, so I tried to apply my knowledge of apologetics to win souls. It took a while, but I finally had to admit that apologetics bounced off of other people and stuck to me. It was so ineffective and unconvincing. That's when I had to look at apologetics again, with a little more objectivity and honesty. And that was what finally broke my belief.

[@ericpierce3660]

It took some time after I deconverted, but eventually the "Christianese" I was so used to hearing began to sound like a foreign language.

[@cobalius]

Yeah and the confidence from just hyping stuff like this would be enough to feel to be appreciated by god himself..

[@DemonicRemption]

@Jeremy Rodriguez Well I hate to be a wet blanket, but I think Turek's suggestions are akin to wet smelly garbage. No one in their right mind Christian or otherwise would trust this because it's too fallacious to work. Mainly because it's meant to manipulate the weak minded, not those with strong convictions.

[@pauligrossinoz]

My first question to the Christian would be: *Do you accept that because you are merely human, that you might just **_possibly_** be wrong in believing that your god is real?* And if they answer that they would never accept that _possibility,_ then the conversation ends right there. I'm not wasting my time arguing with an unreasonable person. But if they _do_ accept that possibility, then we can have an interesting conversation about exactly why they are confident that their god is real. In this conversation, we will be endeavoring to understand each other's point of view, and we will hopefully learn something about each other. No script required.

[@memitim171]

Honestly though how many times does it actually go down like that? Ironically, the only times I've managed to have a conversation (as opposed to an argument..) with someone about the possibility there is a god of some kind they were also atheist...now that isn't really an issue to me but if you're religious that's a big fucking problem!

[@pauligrossinoz]

@@memitim171 - you need to make that first question a deal-breaker, meaning that you make it clear that you won't discuss anything unless you both agree that it's _possible_ that either of you could be wrong. Anyone who enters a conversation with the idea that they could never, ever, even _possibly_ be wrong, is by definition unreasonable. And there is no point continuing with somebody who is unreasonable. I have had about a 50% rate of elimination at the start of conversations by holding fast to this condition. The moment that they refuse to concede that it's even possible that they're wrong, I just call them a *Troll* and refuse to proceed. And for those who do concede that they could be wrong, I ask polite questions about why they are currently confident about their beliefs. That way we _both_ learn something from the discussion. A reasonable Christian is confident that their Jesus was resurrected, and I ask polite questions of them to determine where their confidence comes from. There is no harm in having that conversation.

[@Cathowl]

Once again I find myself hung up on one of the earliest set up questions. Were you raised in a religious home? Me, with my at-the-time neopagan mother and wiccan grandmother raising me: "Yes." Of course what is MEANT is "were you raised in a Christian family" but I stand here as a confounding factor being someone who was raised by people with supernatural beliefs that were not Christian. I have PARTICIPATED in religious ceremonies -- my family weren't just vaguely spiritual neopagans, they were out there doing magical rituals at festivals and such. I've sat in a circle and hummed and felt like a dullard because I wasn't getting something out of this that everyone else seemed to. I've lost track of where I'm going with this but I started as "these leading questions are resting on a lot of unspoken presuppositions about what even counts as religion, and I don't fit the assumptions".

[@robertplatt643]

"Everything is just a matter of opinion." That's a matter of opinion.

[@ummmno3871]

No. It’s simply a false statement.

[@cmack17]

If someone asks me how do I determine right from wrong, the next words out of my mouth are always: with respect to what, specifically?

[@fudgesauce]

When I was in my dorm room in college decades ago, one day two students that I didn't know knocked on my door and asked if I had a few minutes to talk about something important. I let them in, and instantly I knew they were going to try to sell me Christianity. The only part of it I recall was what, in their mind, was going to be the clinching argument. They asked if I could give them a sheet of paper and a pen, so I did. One guy drew on it while the other watched expectantly, waiting to gauge my reaction. On the paper he drew two cliffs, with a stick figure (that I was told was me), and cliff my stick figure proxy was standing on was labeled something like "PROBLEMS". The other cliff had under it something like "SOLUTION". They asked: "There you are on a hill of problems, and there is no way to get to the safety of where the solution lies. The chasm between the two is too great and too dangerous for you attempt to cross that bottomless chasm. But what if I told you there is a way to get to that other side?" They let the question hang for a bit, I shrugged, and then the moment came: he drew a large crucifix, where the "arms" spanned perfectly from the PROBLEMS hill to the SOLUTIONS hill. I'm afraid I disappointed them because my reaction was: that is proof of nothing. I let them on their way as they asked me to think about it some more and call them when I came around. I was non-confrontation back then, but had I been, I would have flipped over the page, drawn two hills again labeled PROBLEMS and SOLUTION and drawn a large dollar bill that spanned the chasm to illustrate how vapid their proof was.

[@Ugly_German_Truths]

You could also point out that a "t" shaped crucifix puts a big unsurmountable bar in the way of anybody trying to cross. _|_ .... what does that make their "reveal" then other than clumsy and unworkable? ;)

[@tbotalpha8133]

That's an amazing anecdote.

[@nigelbrownwellington6514]

Last time I tried smuggling in a Who, I didn’t even make it out of Whoville.

[@Paulogia]

😆

[@tetsujin_144]

I find that Whos usually just show up and involve themselves in whatever's going on. For some reason most people just don't seem to question it.

[@LPNurja]

Me, at 13:45 : "He's not gonna come with the fine tuning argument, is he?" Me, five seconds later: "*screaming*"

[@DAYBROK3]

we are tuned for where w developed

[@DeludedOne]

Fine tuning is like the go to for all apologists today, Cameron Bertuzzi also likes propping it up as "the truth" sometimes sneakily so.

[@larryatkins6849]

Paulogia videos are always welcome in my feed. Thank you, sir!

[@ryanrountree2363]

I'm first cause of Jesus!

[@thewick-j1837]

That is cheating.

[@Locust13]

Ah but Jesus said the first shall be last.

[@Paulogia]

K is right

[@DeludedOne]

@@Locust13 He also said, according to one of the Gospels, "Happy are those who do not see and yet believe."

[@Venaloid]

10:18 - Frank Turek accuses atheists of being on a happiness quest rather than a truth quest... as if Christian apologists like William Craig, Mike Winger, and Justin Brierley, have not openly admitted that they themselves came to, and remain in Christianity for exactly this reason: because it makes them happy, because it gives them feelings of hope and purpose. Frank Turek is the pot calling the kettle black.

[@Paulogia]

well said

[@markshort9098]

Pot calling the silverware black

[@LadyDoomsinger]

11:15 Full disclosure, I am one of those "there is no truth" people - the exact philosophy is a bit too complex to get into in a KZbin comment, but basically it boils down to: Reality is chaos. Order is a construct of the human mind. "Truth" is an aspect of order. Thus, the concept of "truth" is likewise a construct of the mind (like time, beauty, currency, etc.) To use an analogy: Truth is the ship humans have built to cross the void of existence. The only thing that makes it real, is the fact that we agree that it is real (like how we agree money is real.)

[@jana731]

I love that Paulogia is like a very patient dad.

[@flowingafterglow629]

#1 and #2: So when you ask me, "Did you grow up in a religious household?" I should respond with "What do you mean by that?" Actually, that's a really great response to most any question about god.

[@noemiperez8447]

I have taken to using "Minimizing harming and maximizing flourishing for human beings" as my foundation for deciding right or wrong. Thank you.

[@XDRONIN]

As someone who has listened to Frank Turek for a long time, I can affirmably say that Frank over the years has done a number of variations of these so-called "questions to ask an Atheist or Skeptic" for his audience only, and I do mean for his audience only because Franks knows perfectly well that many atheists have already given him plenty of answers. I do feel sorry for his audience though because they don't know that what Frank is essentially doing is throwing them to the wolves, they don't know any better, many of them are very enthusiastic about their faith, and some do probably think that they are doing some good, I think it's just sad Frank is using people this way.

[@reasonablespeculation3893]

Turek is tell his audience what they want to hear. This makes them happy... compliant, and generous (he's got to make a living like everybody else).

[@donaldnumbskull9745]

Whenever believers have tried to reconvert me, I've always asked, sooner or later, that they stop. I don't think I would stay friends with anyone who failed to respect that.

[@X1Y0Z0]

Always enjoy your vids

[@Paulogia]

thank you

[@ladyselenafelicitywhite1596]

Me too 🙋🏼‍♀️

[@myrawest]

10:40 Yes! I came to this same conclusion on my own and I'm so relieved to hear others have too.

[@toddramsey6893]

I really appreciate you, @Paulogia. Thanks for this thoughtful response.

[@Paulogia]

My pleasure!

[@mbrum3230]

Religion comes down to this...the guy upstairs said give me your money.

[@khrowv]

I've been wanting to see more reactions to Frank Turek. My dad follows him closely and uses his words as sources, and even though I know so much is wrong with what he claims, I've been wanting to hear what people like Paulogia said on his 'work'.

[@Paulogia]

Here's the Paulogia / Turek playlist... kzbin.info/aero/PLpdBEstCHhmXQisbhd5b4BKeOgZrXvets

[@khrowv]

@@Paulogia Yes! Thank you

[@Triumph_Of_Insinuation]

Your patience is astounding Paul.

[@guiagaston7273]

I am a simple man. I see Turek and I click and I laugh and I laugh and I laugh.

[@tetsujin_144]

I'm still waiting for him to hunt some dinosaurs.

[@thepubliusproject]

I've never seen your channel before. I am impressed. Very, very impressed. Well done, Paulogia.

[@Paulogia]

Welcome!

[@thepubliusproject]

@@Paulogia thank you!

[@DanTheMeek]

25:30 / Question 10 - This is one of those things that even back when I was a believer I didn't understand why other christians would say. Christianity is, at its heart, about celebrating injustice, if you want justice to be done, you'd be unhappy if christianity is true because the core concept of it is that there is a corrupt judge who has decided not to be just and follow the law, but rather, at least in some cases, to ignore it and let the guilty go free. That "in some cases" is what really makes this a bad question to ask as well because even if you don't believe in justice, then the fact some people will still be punished will also put this god judge in a poor light. For this to sound like a positive thing you'd need to talk to some one who specifically believes in only occasional justice, they can't want justice to always be served, or never served, and whats more, they need to want what determines when people aren't served justice to be completely unrelated to their crimes, their good deeds, or their character, but on their credulity to specific claims. I'm not saying its impossible such a person exist, but I'm confident that rarity of such people would make this question only likely to push away 99.9999999% of all people you talk to.

[@franciswalsh8416]

"For the Bible tells me so!!"I can't tell you how funny and accurate that little jingle is. Brilliant!!

[@Huntingslife1]

Sometimes I wonder how such great channels don’t get the traction others do, Paul do you have one of the best atheist/theist Point counterpoint channel on KZbin say hi to Shannon for me lol

[@Paulogia]

thank you, Michael. I will.

[@CharlesHuckelbery]

Well done and thanks

[@tetsujin_144]

22:26 - "What motive would they have to invent a resurrected Jesus?" It makes a good story. The hero dies at the end, but it turns out he meant to do that. Believers faced with harsh realities of the world (things like a Roman army holding power over their nation) could look to the story as an example of their hero facing those harsh realities, meeting the end that logic would dictate (and an end that may have been public knowledge to some extent) but still emerging victorious in the end. People like to believe in things like that. People will believe things they like whether they are true or not.

[@martifingers]

Another answer might be that a small group of Jewish Christians were traumatised by the death of their leader who they genuinely believed to be the Messiah of prophecy. However as Jesus was murdered he did not fulfil the prophecies that concerned him providing imminent leadership in defeating the Romans and establish the Messianic Age. So in their grief and existential fear they re-interpret the texts to produce a myth (that had parallels in other parts of the Graeco-Roman world) with much more symbolic and supernatural elements. It's not lying or deception , just a very human way of coping with loss, fear and cognitive dissonance.

[@vaiyt]

Also because a lot of the cool people clubs were doing it at the time.

[@memitim171]

Honestly just asking that question means you're a snake, there's no need to answer it at that point.

[@sinjinbritt3371]

Another Master level deconstruction of typical apologetics. BRAVO

[@AlexOvTheAbyss]

I've had many bad experiences with many different christians. It makes me think that the majority of them don't practice what the preach, and question if they even believe it. It hasn't, however, made me think christianity isn't true - that was completely due to thinking about christianity logically, rationally, and comparing it to what I can actually see.

[@Critical_Capybara]

thanks Paul

[@grumpylibrarian]

Presuppositionalist arguments are already freaking annoying in general. Saying "haha you want evidence therefore you believe in God!" would be a legal justification in court to kick your ass. Has Turek ever talked to another human being, let alone an atheist?

[@robertadsett5273]

The right issues? That’s rather illuminating

[@NDHFilms]

Technical question for Paul: when you have the mini-Frank bouncing up and down, what is controlling that? Is is just a loop of movements, or is it tied to volume? Like, if Frank was speaking louder (a scary thought, I know), would the mini-Frank move more?

[@Paulieinspiration]

It's amazing how the ending is the beginning. The beauty of circular reasoning.

[@ghostreyn]

its funny to listen to this because the way he has them training for answers from a non-christian who never was christian.

[@Abstract_zx]

i love the unambiguous "yes." at 9:41, because theyre clearly looking for a no

[@freddan6fly]

Frank's script is great if you want the atheist to go away because he/she heard the already defeated arguments 10,000 times.

[@BackupChannel329]

I actually recently talked with someone who did not believe in objective truth/reality. If I understood his position correctly, (and trust me I and many others had lots of questions for him) he is one of those people that believes truth is determined by agreement among collective consciousness. And that there wasn't necessarily a physical reality that we were all in or at least not the same physical reality necessarily. So to people who think the Earth is flat, that is the reality for them and for those who think it's round that is their reality. He rejected the idea that we can know one way or the other or that there was even a physical object called Earth that we are standing on at all. I don't understand the appeal or see any usefulness in this concept but it sure was a fascinating conversation.

[@galacticbob1]

That sounds like he's not far from hard solipsism. I'm not sure that anyone *can* prove that there exists a reality outside your own personal experience. It's just that there certainly *appears* to be, and that reality appears to be deterministic and predictable (e.g. if I release this object, it will drop to the ground). You can do a lot just from the assumption that objective reality exists, whereas the alternative is, "I'm not sure that anything exists, including me." One ends up being way more useful. 😅

[@Fuzzthefurr]

I'd like to ask Turek "If Christianity weren't true, would you be an athiest?"

[@david2869]

But hopefully you would spell it correctly 😉

[@Fuzzthefurr]

@@david2869 Only if God wills it, I suppose.

[@fnfn9199]

He has answered this before in a video. Yes, he would stop being a Christian " why would I beleive in something that isn't true?" His words. And I agree with him

[@Fuzzthefurr]

@@fnfn9199 A good response, and a good question.

[@petertrnka9127]

Frank Turek - the boss of circular reasoning!

[@MrCrimsonbolt]

They could also ask 'Can we all agree that you're extremely unlikely to learn anything of merit about religion from Frank Turek?'

[@TaeyxBlack]

29:18 here we can see frank conflate “i believe in justice” with “i believe there is a cosmic entity that will ensure justice is meted out”. when i say “i believe in justice”, i mean “i believe we as humans should endeavor to treat each other fairly, seek to restore those who have been harmed, and incentivize perpetrators of harm to not commit harm in the future.” the fact that i don’t like that some people get away with harmful behaviors in no way implies the existence of some inter-dimensional justice-giver.

[@reneejones6330]

If no one ever dies for some belief that they know is untrue, then Frank must be a Mormon, right?

[@Nameless-pt6oj]

Torture, death, persecution, no money, sex, food, drink, shelter, clothes, family, friends, misery and sickness. Lovely life for a liar.

[@vaiyt]

He should convert to Sikhism, now that's a faith with a history of heroic deaths for their beliefs.

[@annina134]

Found this channel today and this is the first video I watch and this is exellent! The questions are hilarious. And Paulogia's answers are really great!

[@darrynreid4500]

I laughed my arse off at Frank letting it slip in an unguarded moment that a religious upbringing might just have resulted in hostility to religion. He then pretty gets to the part about exerting control in order to force compliance from people for bad reasons by emotional manipulation.

[@AarmOZ84]

I like conversations where I realize that I don't have definitive proof for my beliefs, the other person knows they don't have definitive proof for their beliefs, and we are willing to listen to why the other person believes what they believe so we can learn something from each other. So simple. 😊

[@pauligrossinoz]

*Exactly!* _This_ ☝

[@joecoolioness6399]

When it comes to religion, I lack belief in the claims of the religious, no proof needed or possible. I don't believe the claim that there is a god, any god, because I do not find the reasons others have for their belief convincing. So simple.

[@stlchucko]

“You need god to have science because you need an orderly universe.” How could a universe be “orderly” when the “miracles” Frank says his god does directly contradict the order he admits is required for science to work?

[@vaiyt]

If the intervention of a conscious mind is necessary for things to have consistent properties, then which mind allowed god to exist?

[@memitim171]

@@vaiyt "None, he's just eternal. He didn't need to be allowed to exist coz he was just always there." Is the default answer, honestly I can see why people would have bought this in the past. But then we began to understand time...and the whole thing just collapses. What do words like "eternal", "consistent" "created" and "always" even mean when there is no time? But really the argument only gets that far if I'm generous and grant a *lot* of unprovables. We can easily defeat this argument with something we can prove: The universe is not orderly, in fact it spends all it's time purging itself of any semblance of order and it's doing a pretty good job...so if god is supposed to be keeping it all orderly, then he's doing a pretty bad job.

[@nathanlloyd774]

Frank Turek....never ceases to disappoint

[@Paulogia]

True. Though he keeps finding new ways.

[@probablynotmyname8521]

Im just imagining how this would go down in reality… nearly everyone would walk off from some loon that starts asking you about your upbringing. We arent npcs frank. Also, if christianty were true it doesnt mean that people should start worshipping a god or following a book that has more issues and holes than a dan brown novel. It does not follow that if christianity is true then the only reasonable choice is to follow christianity.

[@Valfara770]

Yes, to both points. If he asked the 5th question I would say "No, why would I want to worship such in insane and fickle god that thinks genocide is a logical answer when people don't worship him?"

[@stevewebber707]

I would ask him to provide a Christianity that could be true, before I would ponder whether I could believe it to be true. I would need him to demonstrate Christianity as a logically coherent concept to start with. I find it incredibly frustrating, and a bit dishonest for him to phrase things this way. Because considerations of the truth value of Christianity is what defines my atheism. And perhaps we should pause his onslaught of incessant questions there, and ask him if Christianity is false, would he become an atheist?

[@memitim171]

Surely the only reasonable choice would be to take the chance he doesn't smite us all while we frantically research the possibility of deicide?

[@thesuitablecommand]

I can't help but notice that you're close to 100k subs... Looking forward to that milestone 😃

[@valeerasanguinar850]

Why would people suffer and die for what they know to be false? Hmm… why would an “atheist” suffer eternally for rejecting what they know to be true?

[@MarkSheeres]

That’s a great insight! Never thought of that.

[@jessetrapani8445]

I've just recently discovered this Genre of close debunking on KZbin. Seems like a lot of work. It's a real public service. Thanks!

[@Paulogia]

welcome!

[@BorisNoiseChannel]

If Frank were in any way honest, he'd tell his fellow god-believers that the opposite of skepticism is gullibility.

[@JerryPenna]

Frank is such a good salesman! Always be prepared to answer any objects and be super duper confident in yourself. Buyer be ware!

[@RiiDii]

I'm a little guarded when people start talking to me in the first place. Ok. Yes. I am an introvert. That aside, if the first question you ask me is delving into my personal life about my upbringing, the alarm bells go off and I wonder what your angle is: Are you just socially outgoing, or trying to get me to open up and provide a ton of personal information for identity theft? Just be careful if you aren't a guarded introvert like some of us.

[@XarXXon]

No one can project (psychologically) like Frank Turek.

[@T2revell]

This guy is truly the used car salesman of apologists. I can’t believe he didn’t just stop talking about this shit after the late great hitch put him in his place back in 2009-10

[@citris1]

High level dialog. Thanks.

[@86645ut]

Seriously, how many times has this guy been set straight about every apologetic point he makes? He and his gullible followers need to understand one meaning of insanity: doing the same thing repetitively and expect a different result.

[@JayMaverick]

Remember, this guy makes millions spouting this bollocks. He has no reason to change his views. His followers are looking for excuses to believe things they know are utterly ridiculous, because it's more comfortable and convenient.

[@FuzzyJeffTheory]

I hate that “definition”. There are plenty of reasons to repeat a process and expect different results.

[@86645ut]

@@FuzzyJeffTheory , you are assuming that his refusal to change his opinion is NOT indicative of abnormal mental function. Of course, that definition is hyperbole, but it makes a point.

[@FuzzyJeffTheory]

I am not assuming anything. The statement is a gross generalization, and does not even work as hyperbole in my opinion.

[@86645ut]

@@FuzzyJeffTheory , that you are entitled to. We disagree.

[@seans5289]

I’d like to offer you a sincere, “Thank you, Paul” 0:19

[@jsnel9185]

"When I was a Christian I went for decades not exploring the evidence against my claim ". This. Sadly I also did this, consuming ONLY information from the side that I was on, thinking I was building up a body of knowledge. I was, sadly, incorrect. 21 years began unraveling the moment I seriously considered even the simplest of arguments, once I stopped framing it from my own strawmanned point of view. Having spent those 21 years independently reading the Bible, free from any specific pastoral influence, it was a fairly quick process to realize my personal morality was more refined that what I found inside the book. Rather, I find the idea of regressing backwards to that particular moral system repugnant now, and I wager 90% of all Christians would surely regret hoisting such a brutal system upon their loved ones should the fundamentalists succeed. This guy is terrible. He says so many things that I used to say, and I see how arrogant it is. To assume that I KNOW why someone thinks what they do with only the smallest amount of inquiry, and that with the ulterior motive of selling them to a viewpoint, was a terrible way to live. I am SURE I have lost many good friends before I ever had a chance to have them.

[@axer3515]

I remember when it was considered rude to ask people who you don't know what religion they follow. Politics too. Today you can't get through an introduction without both subjects being brought up. I went through high school without ever knowing a teammate was Jewish. I think going back to this standard would lead to better dialogue.

[@rickelmonoggin]

"If Christianity were true would you become a Christian?" - I think you should answer this with: If Christianity could be demonstrated to be true, then I would become a Christian.

[@oscargordon]

Well to be precise, if Christianity was demonstrated to be true, then I would agree that Christianity was true. Now would I worship the creature Yahweh? Absolutely not. I would try to find what ever magical flaming sword or whatever was necessary to destroy it as the creature as described in the Bible is positively evil, in my admittedly subjective opinion.

[@rickelmonoggin]

@@oscargordon Yes, obviously one would still have the choice not to worship the Christian God, but I think if what he's described as being like in the Bible were actually true, most people would go along with it.

[@oscargordon]

@@rickelmonoggin I would agree, but that is only because fear generally outweighs moral principles for most people. But imagine the challenge. Would you rather be subservient to Yahweh for eternity or battle Him/It? I know how I would rather spend eternity. I'm with Satan on this one.

[@pauligrossinoz]

Christianity can't even reach the level of _making sense,_ let alone being demonstrated to be true!

[@istvansipos9940]

"god almighty" And "god wants a personal relationship with you" 2 things many christians say. Which means that IF christianity were true, I'd be ALREADY a christian. We all would be. Other religiouns would have never ever popped up in history.

[@kennylex]

I'm a Swede and I know that my grandfather's grandfather was an 'atheist' and did not attend church, we know this due to a note from a priest in the small village where he lived, so when I grew up religion was something that was not a part of our life and I can't even remember that we talked about religion, there was traditions based on that old religion, but for us it was just traditions. So if that man had asked me "If christianity were true, would you become a christian" I had not understood the question, for me that would be the same as "If Owoism where true, would you become a furry", they had asked "What is Owoism", if I had told them that a man called 'The Click' once went to hell for e621 but was saved by doing OWO, they had just been confused, and that often happen to me when folk would ask "If Christianity were true, would you be a furry".