Testimony For Resurrection | Frank-(CA) | Atheist Experience 25.18

The Atheist Experience 25.18 for May 2, 2021 with Dave Warnock and Matt Dillahunty.
Call the show on Sundays 4:30pm-6:00pm CT: 1-512-686-0279 or use your computer to save on long-distance charges: tiny.cc/callthe...
► Don't like commercials? Become a patron for ad-free content & more: / theatheistexperience
► Podcast versions of the show may be found at:
www.spreaker.c...
► Atheist Experience merch can be found at: bit.ly/aenmerch
► Become a KZbin member: / @theatheistexperience
► Join our discord:
tinyurl.com/Th...
► Chat room rules:
atheist-experie...
► The most up to date Atheist Experience videos can be found by visiting
atheist-experie...
-------
WHAT IS THE ATHEIST EXPERIENCE?
The Atheist Experience is a weekly call-in television show in Austin, Texas geared at a non-atheist audience. The Atheist Experience is produced by the Atheist Community of Austin.
The Atheist Community of Austin is organized as a nonprofit educational corporation to develop and support the atheist community, to provide opportunities for socializing and friendship, to promote secular viewpoints, to encourage positive atheist culture, to defend the first amendment principle of state-church separation, to oppose discrimination against atheists and to work with other organizations in pursuit of common goals.
We define atheism as the lack of belief in gods. This definition also encompasses what most people call agnosticism.
VISIT THE ACA'S OFFICIAL WEB SITES
www.atheist-com... (The Atheist Community of Austin)
www.atheist-exp... (The Atheist Experience TV Show)
► More shows and video clips can be found in the archive:
www.atheist-exp...
► DVDs of the Atheist Experience can be purchased via:
www.atheist-com...
NOTES
TheAtheistExperience is the official channel of The Atheist Experience. "The Atheist Experience" is a trademark of the ACA.
The views and opinions expressed by hosts, guests, or callers are their own and not necessarily representative of the Atheist Community of Austin.
Opening Theme:
Shelley Segal "Saved" www.shelleysega...
Limited use license by Shelley Segal
Copyright © 2011 Shelley Segal
Copyright © 1997 Atheist Community of Austin. All rights reserved.

[@Itsjojorose]

“Did Jesus resurrect?” “Yep!” “Is he still alive?” “Yep!” “Cool, then can I see him?” “We’ll, it’s complicated…” 🤣🤣

[@bjkarana]

Me: "Oh my gosh, hun, I see Jesus in my tortilla!" Wife: "That's wonderful dear, I'll put it with the others."

[@justanotherskeptic1113]

This guy is admitting there’s no evidence for the resurrection😂 and then stating it’s so unfair to be asking for evidence that doesn’t exist! I can’t stop laughing.

[@petyrkowalski9887]

I know…hilarious

[@jerrylong6238]

They believe in belief.

[@DCronk-qc6sn]

Well, isn't he also a priest? Yeesh....,

[@ZuoCruz]

He literally just spoke blasphemy to his church lmao

[@steveyuhas9278]

Shannon Q had made a similar point recently and it really stuck with me. I wanted to reword and expand it because this whole debate is bananas to me sometimes. Just take a step back for a second and really truly think about what's being put forth here: A grown adult in the 21st century...is seriously convinced that 2000 years ago, a magical man who is the son of a literal all powerful being, but is also that being but not that being, who created everything we know. ALL OF WHICH is based on what people claim happened and told each other about through word of mouth all those 2000 years ago, then wrote down in a book decades later which we have no originals of today.... And that's it. I mean, REALLY think about this. How this guy is talking, how serious and scholarly he is trying to sound, what he is actually arguing for. Let's not even factor in what they do on behalf of the beliefs. I think this is such a ubiquitous belief that we are desensitized to how preposterous it is. I think it's a defense mechanism our brain engages to keep us from going insane every time we see a church or a cross around someone's neck. But the truth is, it's one of the most ridiculous things a human being can believe and most of the U.S. just believes it without even needing the book for proof. Every once in a while I watch a video like this and it hits me like a truck that this obsurdity is a real thing that people believe based on basically nothing when you compare it to how we know anything else. It's just absurd, that's all.

[@Fantax92]

Yes as someone who never really believed, it is astonishing people would believe a crappy book about a ridiculous story wich would have happened over 2000 years ago

[@solly119119]

Someone should ask Frank if he were on trial for murder, would he want the prosecution to present physical evidence or should they just go off testimony? But not just testimony mind you, but of the sort that can't be independently verified. Or would he be okay with the prosecution saying, "Well, we don't have physical evidence so it would be impossible to provide any. So ... you shouldn't ask for any." Think that pretty well details the special pleading B.S. theists like Frank come up with.

[@SpaceLordof75]

There are no events in commonly accepted history that involve miracles. There’s a reason for that folks.

[@MJW238]

Miracle on Ice?

[@AlexanderNash]

This caller thinks he is vastly smarter than he actually is.

[@norswil8763]

I’d say that he shows he is smart, he accepts sound argument and logic and speaks well. The delusions and programming of religion are not so easily dissolved with intelligence - further speculation and being comfortable with considering it’s incorrect will get him there.

[@powbobs]

@@norswil8763 He’s reading from a script and pretending to agree yet moves right in to his nonsensical script. I see indication that he is of more than average intelligence.

[@pidayrocks2235]

@@norswil8763 I don’t think it counts as “accepting” sound arguments when your replies attempt to refute those arguments unsoundly, as Frank did. He could not seem to understand that testimony cannot be sufficient to warrant belief EVEN IF it’s the only kind of evidence that could be given (as is the case for historical events of that time). If a resurrection seemingly happened now, in the present, and nobody provided any physical evidence but a whole group of people testified to it, Frank might very well not be convinced and question if it was a magic trick or delusion or lie (or simply suspend belief due to lack of evidence) because he seems to expect reasonable evidence for claims of this time period... the fact that he seems willing to lower his standards and believe the SAME TYPE OF CLAIM simply because the supposed event was 2,000 years ago and beyond our ability to investigate is utterly egregious: Bad evidence is bad evidence regardless of the time period or tools at your disposal... it’s unfortunate that older civilizations didn’t have a means of providing good evidence but that is NO reason to lower the standards of what is reasonable to accept.

[@norswil8763]

@@pidayrocks2235 can I have an example of an argument that I've unsoundly refuted? The guy listened and accepted valid, reasonable points - smarter isn't really an accurate word, but it was to rebuttal the original comment. I'm not sure if you've ever been a believing theist, but this guy demonstrated that he is considering the counter arguments, as he didn't run to any apologetics.

[@louiscyfer6944]

@@norswil8763 he didn't say you have unsoundly refuted an argument. he said frank did. you is not always used in second person.

[@HappyHippieGaymer]

Caller: “yes” *ignores the point he just said yes to*

[@hayleycomet8029]

Would Frank believe another religion based solely on testimony?

[@scottc1857]

Judging by how qanon and other malignant scams sail right through the religionists "logical firewall" unimpeded most of the time... Yes he absolutely would given the "right circumstances"

[@Wardads1]

Evidence and religion are mutually exclusive.

[@guytheincognito4186]

True that, it's just so unfortunate how they often won't or can't acknowledge this and actively work to fix it rather than pretend like it's evidently true..

[@johniec5282]

"Sufficient" evidence, you mean. I know, I know I am being a bit pedantic. Good point though.

[@johniec5282]

@Heartland Fun Gear . The evidence is there is no evidence( or sufficient evidence), duh! If you aren't joking.

[@johniec5282]

@Heartland Fun Gear . Sufficient would mean convincing according to reason, not to mental gymnastics.

[@johniec5282]

In other words , we are going back again to the issue of burden of proof. Theists hold the burden of proof to demonstrate their god/ gods.

[@mistersippi2945]

“It’s unfair to ask for evidence of the resurrection because it’s impossible” This what he thinks is “evidence of god”. No questions, just believe.

[@SimonWoodburyForget]

I take issues with _"impossible"_ considering it is clearly physically possible for a god to leave evidance behind. You're about to tell me that Jesus himself was illiterate? You're about to tell me that Jesus didn't understand the scientific method? You're about to tell me that Jesus didn't understand that nobody would believe in the resurrection, because nobody has seen the resurrection? You're about to tell me that Jesus didn't bother writing about his resurrection and somehow getting this knowledge to people who could actually write as soon as it happened? It's literally insane, to think that Jesus himself did not understand how to do any of this... because he is supposed to be _"god"_ and him not understanding very _"basic"_ things about the universe is literally ridiculous, considering _"his only goal"_ was to get people to believe in him.

[@WTF3602]

Right lol 🤣 so wouldn't that mean it's highly unlikely this entire thing even actually exist? We don't have to "have faith" in dinosaurs... we've found their bones! So if one was to believe that they never existed, well that would make them pretty foolish considering.

[@robertvirnig638]

If Jesus was real and as an important figure as claimed by Christians why is there so little evidence that he lived, died, and done other things. Just because it was the ancient world is not enough of an excuse. The perhaps next most influential person from the same period of history is Julius Caesar and we have many 1000s of pieces of corroborating evidence that he not only existed but detailed accounts of many things he did throughout his life by people who loved him, hated him, killed him, and written by Caesar himself from the time that these events happened, not written 80 years later. We even have his likeness preserved in busts and minted on coins. One would have to be daft to doubt that Caesar lived and accomplished most of the things attributed to him. Why couldn't God arrange to have at least as much documentation of his time on Earth? But even if we had as much documentation for the existence of Jesus as for Caesar we would still be right to doubt any claims of resurrection since the claim is so preposterous. Even in the case of Caesar, one would be well-founded to doubt some of his more unlikely accomplishments such as the narrative of some of his most lopsided military victories or the exact details of his assassination. We can't even agree with what happened last January 6 when more people saw it on television than existed on the entire planet 2000 years ago.

[@AntitheistHuman]

It's so bad man, because they accept the resurrection and also therefore they have to accept the ignorant manipulation and indoctrination coming from the church and the bosses of religion, get implanted ideas that are inhuman and actually against society, additionally, christianity wishes and hopes for the end of the world and armageddon to let loose and provoke the death to every human, how can people follow that? But also how can we respect those who do?

[@ericmayle8510]

The single most important event in the new testament, and not.a.single.witness.

[@cnault3244]

Going by the bible they probably didn't think it was that big a deal at the time. There were numerous dead people restored to life before Jesus' resurrection and a couple dead people restored to life after Jesus' resurrection.

[@powbobs]

@@cnault3244 😂

[@cnault3244]

"Testimony For Resurrection |" is as convincing as testimony for alien abduction. But at least with alien abduction claims we can hear some testimonies directly from the abductees, and a claim of alien abduction is not as incredible a claim as the resurrection claim.

[@TheScotsalan]

Still waiting for evidence of an alien probe they left in an oriface by mistake 😂😂😳

[@AlDunbar]

I do not think we have ever heard testimonies from abductees, only from people claiming to be.

[@cnault3244]

@@AlDunbar The point is the two scenarios presented here were: 1) Talking to a living person who can give you a firsthand account of their claim they were abducted by aliens. And the alien abduction claim is not as incredible a claim as the dead person returned to life days after their death. 2) reading a written account from a couple thousand years ago by an unknown writer transcribing what they were told about a claimed resurrection I do not believe the stories of a resurrection that were transcribed by unknown writers are telling us about something that actually happened.

[@AlDunbar]

@@cnault3244 Oh, I understood what you were getting at perfectly. I was just having a little fun with your wording.

[@Brugar18]

To also add about existence of extraterestrial race, we also know that there are planets outside our solar system that possibly have similar conditions as earth for life to originate as well. I would say that. The conspiracy theories about UFO or alien abduction has stronger evidence than a resurrection, but it isn't a default to accept that aliens exist.

[@darthvirgin7157]

the exasperation in Dave’s voice is all of us in the face of gullible desperate theists.

[@The1980Philip]

This guy says "yeah", "I agree" and "absolutely" only to go back to his script.

[@jasondulin7376]

From watching this show for years, I now know that "right" means "I don't agree and I can't back up my claims but the next point on this script I printed out is...."

[@kellydalstok8900]

Don’t they all

[@nuffflavor]

Precursor to continue.

[@johniec5282]

I have heard callers say : " yes" , " yep", "right" or "ok" all the time. But what they really mean is: " just wait for my turn to speak ". The proverbial in one ear, and out the other.

[@adamcroft80]

Yeah I agree absolutely but let me show you my evidence for my 2000 year old book...

[@AlexPBenton]

“But Maaatt, how am I supposed to prove my claim if you don’t just beliiiiieve me?”

[@donaldsmith7824]

God is a meanie!!!

[@AbrahamMeat]

@Ohio State your acceptance of the resurrection doesn’t make it historical nor significant. You have to provide evidence mkay?

[@Brugar18]

@Ohio State Lack of evidence for resurrection does have the effect on historical significance though.

[@Brugar18]

@Ohio State nope, the resurrection is still not established as a fact

[@Brugar18]

@Ohio State nope, it's by no means logical, it shouldn't even be considered a hypothesis until resurrection was even proven to be possible in this world.

[@Haibing22]

“That’s fair” = “I didn’t hear what you said, I will repeat myself for the hundredth time”

[@MasterSpade]

2:07 -- "It's not the fault of the Standard that the Claim can't live up to it." -- Matt Dillahunty EXACTLY!!!!!!!

[@euripidiesupman9755]

School systems constantly reduce the standards when students can't meet them - which is totally wrong to do. It's not the standard's fault!

[@MrMichealHouse]

@@euripidiesupman9755 Are students making claims? That was a poor an attempt to equate the two.

[@achillies40]

What about the graves opening up when Jesus died, and the residents of the graves walked around town? Why does that not come upon any official town records etc? I would think that it was a little unusual. Maybe it happened so many times that it was run of the mill so it doesn’t merit recording any longer.

[@FakingANerve]

Shit... happens here every month or two. Some of the undead are actually pretty great drinking buddies! The stories they try to tell seem like they are _hilarious,_ but the listener really has to fill in the holes.

[@achillies40]

@@FakingANerve I guess they could tell some wild stories of their exploits. I would think they would be light drinkers though. A few drinks and they would have a skin full. I’m not figure how you would tell a normal zombie from a drunk one. The way they walk would be the same really, although the drunk one would be leaking more than the others.

[@pointbreak8646]

I asked my Christian friend how the people died a second time that jesus raised from the dead? Her response was.....it doesn't matter. Really?

[@achillies40]

@@pointbreak8646 You’re not allowed to use logic when it comes to their little S&M cult. And yes you read that correctly.

[@seraphinaaizen6278]

The fact that Matt's standards make it almost impossible to make a reasonable claim for the resurrection isn't anything to do with Matt's standards being too high. It's because the resurrection is not a reasonable claim. If Christians find that they're unable to argue for their mythology unless someone lowers their standards to the point where they're willing to essentially accept things on the bible's say-so, then go fish.

[@TimLondonGuitarist]

Validated testimonies & documents are the normal basis for historical knowledge + sometimes physical evidence. Resurrection claims satisfy none of these

[@seraphinaaizen6278]

@@TimLondonGuitarist Even if it did, and there actually WERE validates testimonies of people who claimed that they'd seen the resurrection happen, that would still not be sufficient evidence to validate the resurrection. Because magic doesn't exist. There are millions of people around the world today who will give first hand accounts and testimonies of seeing miraculous events that appear to be in defiance of the laws of nature. And we don't believe THEM, so why should such accounts become more reliable when they're thousands of years old, at a time when the population was generally uneducated, illiterate, and prone to supernatural thinking?

[@TimLondonGuitarist]

@@seraphinaaizen6278 no we should not be close-minded, if supernatural claims can be properly validated then that becomes hugely interesting. At that point such a phenomenon would no longer be magic, & would be open to proper investigation

[@seraphinaaizen6278]

@@TimLondonGuitarist There's a difference between "closed minded" and having reasonably standards of evidence. People saying they witnessed something supernatural, no matter HOW MANY PEOPLE say it, is not sufficient evidence to believe that the supernatural occurred. Not without some supporting evidence that would actually validate the claim. "But a lot of people thought this way" isn't sufficient. Lots of people think the earth is flat; that doesn't mean they're correct. " if supernatural claims can be properly validated then that becomes hugely interesting" If. And the way to validate it would not be "because someone said so".

[@TimLondonGuitarist]

@@seraphinaaizen6278 I don't understand your point: any claim needs to be validated according to normal historical &/ or scientific criteria. You don't know about vaIidating claims but other people do: scientists, historians, lawyers, police investigators

[@earlguild8748]

This guy is the reason why Law requires actual evidence because otherwise you could just believe that someone is guilty and send them to jail based upon testimony

[@Ozone280]

The church needs less regulation to take money off people than snake oil salesmen

[@inertiaforce7846]

The sun makes itself very clear without relying on human testimony and without needing a book. But God, the creator of the sun, needs a book and needs human testimony. Brilliant logic.

[@slimjim227]

Priest: “Thanks everyone for participating in this year’s Easter Pageant. All right kids we need to rehearse the part where it’s Easter morning and the first visitors arrive at Jesus’ tomb. Now who’s in this scene?” Child 1: “I am! Matthew 28:2-5 says an angel came down from heaven to greet them.” Child 2: “No, it wasn’t an angel! It was a ‘Young man’, Just look at Mark 16:5!” Child 3: “Hello! Luke 24:4 says very clearly it was ‘Two men’.” Child 4: “Well according to John 20:1-2 nobody was there.” Priest: “Children, the contradictions don’t matter! What matters is that we unquestioningly accept the magic of the resurrection even in the face of such glaring contradictions within the story.” Child 4: “Father, that was the most wonderfully concise summary of Christianity I have ever heard.” Priest: “Thank you child. It is blind submission to authority that got me where I am today.”

[@rimbusjift7575]

Wait, is the priest sodzing the child in this story? I can't tell.

[@guytheincognito4186]

@@rimbusjift7575 Appropriate, it's hard to tell how many does it in reality aswell, they after all protect their own despite the aggregious Sins committed.. Edit: I have no idea what I was typing there between _they_ and _ protect_ lol.

[@loodlebop]

Nice

[@slimjim227]

@@Ploskkky I wonder if the Catholic Church has a patron saint of paedophiles?

[@leosoftware2643]

@@slimjim227 the pope

[@PronatorTendon]

If the evidence doesn't exist, the conclusion to be drawn is that belief is unwarranted, not that the standards of evidence should be amended in order to allow being convinced it's true

[@slamfire6005]

That’s your world view and your own subjective standard.

[@PronatorTendon]

@@slamfire6005 Ok, but isn't everything aside from the primacy of consciousness subjective? Isn't that what the problem of _hard solipsism_ is about? Why would you even comment on the subjectivity of my statement? Isn't everything we state here subjective opinion? I mean I don't generally like going the route of _you might be a figment of my imagination and I might be a brain in a vat,_ but I also don't have people point out something so blatantly obvious as though it's a point of contention.

[@slamfire6005]

@@PronatorTendon well if I understand the basics of your initial statement, you are making a conclusion that there is no evidence to warrant belief… and I’m assuming you are speaking about belief in the supernatural or God. Which standards of evidence should never be amended, I doubt anyone really has the ability to believe something they don’t find substantial evidence for… its subjective. You also aren’t accounting for the possibility of properly basic beliefs that aren’t built upon evidence.

[@PronatorTendon]

@@slamfire6005 No, I'm not talking about a specific argument or case. The evidence required to warrant belief should scale with the ridiculousness of the claim, so: When you claim _I have a pet cat,_ I'm likely to just believe you because even if I'm incorrect, it wouldn't change my worldview significantly. However, if you claim _my invisible friend is the creator of the entire cosmos and he cares greatly what we do with our genitalia,_ I'm going to need some very convincing evidence But here's the really important part: No matter what the claim, our standards of evidence shouldn't change with the purpose of _maintaining belief._ It would be ridiculous for me to continue believing you own a cat if I go to your place and there are no signs of a pet cat and your roommates tell me you don't own one. I shouldn't amend my standards of evidence just so I can continuing believing you own a cat without evidence or in the face of disconfirming evidence The same thing goes for your hypothetical invisible friend. Anything that should be considered properly basic can have that case made potentially. It isn't something you can just assert Why are you telling me I'm not accounting for something? You haven't asked me what I'm accounting for, you're just asserting it Stop being dishonest or I'll block you. I have no desire to discuss anything with dishonest people.

[@PronatorTendon]

@@slamfire6005 Stop liking your own comments.

[@Fluffski2006]

Matt, I just don't know how you can keep putting yourself through this all the time. I would pull my hair out. Wait..

[@kyaxar3609]

😂

[@darthvirgin7157]

i wouldn’t want that guy in my jury trial. he’d rather listen to witness testimony (that’s contradictory most times) than look at the actual physical evidence.

[@inertiaforce7846]

Yeah no shit I agree. That's why I try to stay away from the court system as much as possible. There is no objective definition for what constitutes "preponderance of the evidence" or "beyond a reasonable doubt". It is a completely subjective assessment. If the judge or jury is an idiot, you're screwed, regardless of whether you're a plaintiff or a defendant.

[@nathanjora7627]

No, he’d listen to eye witness testimony if he didn’t have physical evidence. The reason he doesn’t rely on physical evidence here is that by his own admission there isn’t any.

[@funkknob]

"The plural of anecdote is not data."

[@gou0630]

Caller: I think is fair, I agree but... I'm going to contradict all of it right now because you have not heard it with my voice. And I love my voice.

[@thomascanfield8571]

An all powerful god should be able to reveal himself, place his memory engrams on a thumb drive, then hand it over to the 6 O'clock news.

[@jewsco]

Or heck take over every channel , radio, iPhone etc... all at once and proclaim his existence

[@thomascanfield8571]

@@jewsco exactly

[@KatKevaKelise]

Engrams? Is he a Scientologist????

[@guytheincognito4186]

@@KatKevaKelise XD

[@rich2209]

But you don't even believe! So how can you handle heavenly things.

[@mwkersch]

"The plural of anecdote is not data." I am going to remember this one from Matt! LOL and thanks so much. 🙂

[@sandpaper631]

Even if the resurrection happened how does that benefit humanity in any way?

[@cnault3244]

It was only one of numerous resurrections in the Bible. And some of the other resurrections happened after Jesus ascended into heaven.

[@NeverTalkToCops1]

Frank: "Intellectually consistent with your axioms." "We've come to the TERMINUS of the call." We've come to the terminus of human reasoning and critical thinking.

[@HappyHippieGaymer]

I just couldnt with how this person talked. He think way to high of themselves and admits at the end that he threw out everything he agreed with throughout the call to just reposition himself as someone who will believe anything as long as it confirms his emotionally held beliefs. Hearsay is enough for him because thats the only way he can hold the bullshit he does.

[@thevindictive6145]

The more uncommon the words are the more they have to hide, they do that to throw you off the trail.

[@kenbee1957]

He completely (and very rudely) ignored Dave's entire line of questioning And right back to his script about a debate that 10% of people on here even watched

[@bellezavudd]

I love how when Dave is "falling asleep" he expresses great throat clearing noises. 😆😃😄😃😜😂🤣😆 The kind people make when annoyed or in surprise of others ignorance. Im sure it's unrelated and just a habit/tic/health thing, but I tend to whole heartedly agree with each of his noises. 😁Yep.

[@gregorywalker4997]

caller--basically my whole approach is flawed, but believe me anyway.. let's just skip over every objection and let me keep on pontificating and eventually i will pummel you into submission. always the same,same,same!

[@jaymercha3859]

It's great to see Dave.....Love ya Dave!

[@JohnnysCafe_]

Frank is obviously a man who thinks deeply about what is evidence and what should be accepted, he agrees with Matt that there is no evidence yet he remains a Catholic and I do not understand that .

[@moragslothe6449]

He stated he agreed with Matt that there is no evidence while simultaneously saying he believes that ancient testimonials are the evidence. Caller is very confused and holding onto irrational beliefs for personal reasons greater than were discussed in the call.

[@Dhamma_Nomad]

God is an absentee landlord.

[@LM-jz9vh]

Worship that?! Never! - Al Pacino

[@ajclements4627]

He’s a deadbeat dad as well considering he’s supposedly “Our father”.

[@cnault3244]

Going by how the bible presents him, god is either an omnipotent Jerry Lewis or god is the ultimate abusive spouse... god: I LOVE you! Why are you making me hurt you?

[@tonythedwvyer]

If there is no REAL evidence for an ancient assertion, why should I believe that assertion? If someone I know well and trust told me that he or she had experienced or seen something very unlikely, I would have some confidence that they believed what that they were saying, but I would still want to see REAL evidence before committing myself to belief. Damn, that guy likes to hear himself talk!

[@andrewfranklin6217]

Is this Canadian Catholic’s more reasonable yet just as deluded friend?

[@hank_says_things]

Christians: **hang entire faith on implausible event that cannot possibly be demonstrated to have happened** Christians: hey why are your standards of evidence so high

[@Philip0209]

He could have done a reveal in china where they were already literate and keeping good records

[@TheAntiburglar]

I'm actually currently in the process of becoming an academic historian (and an archaeologist as well) I have to say that testimonial evidence is valued about exactly as much as Matt values it within the discipline of history itself. Asking a classicist if Plato really existed will get the EXACT SAME RESPONSE as asking if Jesus existed (I'm being slightly hyperbolic, of course) because we have so few records of Plato aside from the copies of his works. The ONLY difference between these kinds of discussions and general historical discourse is that we have fewer assumptions to make about most things than biblical claims require. It would not be terribly earth-shattering to learn that the person who originally wrote The Republic wasn't actually called Plato but instead was called Bob. Conversely, it would be rather more reality-altering to learn that someone really *did* RISE FROM THE DEAD. So that's my mini-rant on historical valuation of testimonial evidence.

[@janelreynolds770]

There is no need for evidence. Of the resurrection. Read the O T and read how Jesus is tied to the O T. I find enough to become an atheist.

[@qqx154]

The caller like to hear him self talking.

[@rickyd.989]

The silly part of this is to really think about the so-called supernatural powers of Jesus. If you can multiply bread you could feed all the starving people in those times. If you want to sell a religious story and stop people misbehaving, (committing sin) you make the executioners arms drop off in front of all the masses watching. “Hey we’re with you lord, we’ll be good.” There is a million ways to improve lifestyle and do many other things, including as a carpenter, making buildings appear with the wave of his hand. The fact that these above issues were not addressed, indicates the lack of forethought on the part of the J.K. Rowling wannabes who wrote the book.

[@PoeLemic]

I have a brother that is very religious. I only wish that he would be able to listen to this and understand what Matt & Caller are discussing. But, he's steadfast locked into his religion.

[@FourDeuce01]

"I want to discuss some of your critiques of the evidence that was provided." Which evidence would that be? :p

[@nathanjora7627]

Testimonial evidence. It’s all they have and it’s bad, but it exists.

[@FourDeuce01]

@@nathanjora7627 Like the kind of testimonial evidence which says Elvis is still alive?😉

[@nathanjora7627]

@@FourDeuce01 Pretty much on the same level yeah XD

[@mrdrone4253]

According to Frank's syllogism he must believe in little gray men because of all the personal testimony of little great aliens

[@SickLikeMe2532]

🌍 There’s a lot of “testimony” that the earth is Flat. How has that EVER effected the truth of the claim?

[@matszz]

I claim you murdered the butler, but it's unfair of you to demand I provide evidence because of unfortunate circumstances I can't possibly do that, you know that.

[@mrsatire9475]

"Is Jesus God?" "Yup" "Is God immortal?" "Yup" "Did Jesus die for your sins?" "Yup"

[@deanmoncaster]

My fave part is when we realise Dave is here too.

[@nuffflavor]

How can you agree to everything that debunks your view on the topic, but you still believe it ?

[@andrewlockett4569]

He didn't seem to agree with these points though, like most theist callers he's just largely batting away and glibly ignoring the responses so he can get to yet another subsequent failed proposal/argument/hypothesis et al. At the end of the day it's just yet another steaming pile of derivative PORKY PIG SHIT and WOO WOO WIZARDRY!!

[@bazpearce9993]

So according to this guy:- If we can't answer how the Universe formed, we shouldn't investigate it at all.

[@garybaltiejus7248]

Jesus is the answer, to a question NOBODY asked 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@artistjoh]

Ancient times is irrelevant. There was an Indian guru who died quite recently who his followers say was resurrected after three days. I bet that this catholic caller does not believe that Sai Baba was resurrected. He would probably expect proof and not believe the testimony. There are millions of his followers, but I bet that is not enough for him. Why not believe it since apparently testimony is enough?

[@40thCapeRifles]

"And I think we both agree..." Well right there you're kind of going out on a limb.

[@frankiecooper]

I think Frank is a fan of Jordan Peterson. He uses those $20 words like it’s going out of style🤣🤣🤣

[@SpaceLordof75]

“Surely I come quickly.” Revelation 22:20. I think Christianity got punked.

[@kenbee1957]

You don't know which vome he meant

[@DANISEVIL]

Please don't ask for proof of anything I say but believe it anyway. Man any of use could sell him some ocean front property in Arizona

[@jasondean88888]

Can't wrap my head around the frame of mind a caller has to be in to constantly say things like "I think that's fair." or "That's a good point." or "That's reasonable." and basically agree point by point that they don't have a case... And then walk away still believing.

[@topdamagewizard]

What really struck me is how smart frank was. But he dident have a better argument then the dumbest drooler to ever call in.

[@nagranoth_]

It is not our problem that claims of a resurrection cannot be supported if you actually care about decent evidence. Tough for you, but the conclusion is that if you aren't able to support your claim, you shouldn't believe it in the first place... And there is no testimony for a resurrection, there's a story about 50 anonymous hypothetical people who could've given a testimony if it actually happened, they actually existed, they actually saw it, and someone actually found them and asked them for their eye witness account. That's a ridiculous amount of hypotheticals to even get to the point where it's time to point out that eye witness reports are notoriously unreliable and not remotely enough to support your claim. But we never even get close to even that point. Because you never get beyond the hypothetical. It is not a problem with the standard of evidence, it's a problem with your baseless claim and your complete lack of anything remotely resembling evidence...

[@adamskythief8238]

“As a Catholic we wouldn’t believe that the lack of that knowledge would damn you.” …unless you’ve committed a mortal sin, like being born or committing one of various mortal sins, like uh, sex

[@palestinianhummus9251]

I like how their god created sex, but frowns upon it and throws people in hell for it, that he himself created lmao. Why the f create it then? What a st*pid god they have.

[@bas1sokkie604]

FFWD 200 years: We have proof of the resurrection of Elvis. Just look at all the eye witness accounts.

[@tonyhogg9839]

You know having a revelation and becoming skeptical of those ghost hunting show, has since made them so boring for me. 😒

[@happymaskedguy1943]

Wow, word salad.

[@jdsartre9520]

If he believes because he thinks those stories (pardon, testimonies) are enough to believe, then he MUST believe all the other 99.9% of all other claims which have equal or better standards of evidence (including other religions). But he doesn't. Why doesn't he? Pfft. He thinks he's so logical and reasonable and high thinking. Conveniently ignores what he's painted himself in a hole to believe.

[@geraldammons5520]

This is the same guy who will NEVER accept reality. He does get around: England...United States...Canada...

[@johnlopperman2161]

What evidence would prove the Bible, etc? Exactly the evidence that exists: NONE.

[@nathanjora7627]

I mean there are plenty of evidence that could prove a lot of the Old Testament, and even some part of the new one, like how the geologic column would look if seven days creations and the flood really happened, the evolution of languages if the Tower of Babel’s myth was true, significant Hebrew presence in Egypt as well as their artifacts in the desert of the exodus happened, etc, or in Jesus’s the testimonies of people who saw a bunch of saints, the sun being obscured in the absence of an eclipse, probably some sightings of a weird star, not to mention three kings abandoning their throne to go to the Middle East, etc. The fact that we find none is actually great evidence against the truth of the stories.

[@johnlopperman2161]

@@nathanjora7627 No, there isn't. IF there was, you like all others would present that evidence, rather than claiming it existed, but none do. EVER. In thousands of years. Claims are not evidence.

[@nathanjora7627]

@@johnlopperman2161 « No, there isn’t » ... But there is though. We have testimonial evidence from Peter that he saw the risen Christ. It’s garbage testimony because it’s easily explained by him being deluded, but it still technically counts as testimonial evidence. « Claims are not evidence » As Matt himself said, the utterance of a claim is not itself evidence, but you can have combinations of both a claim and an evidence, that’s literally what testimonial evidence is (I saw X = the utterance of having seen X, + me testifying that X was seen by me). Matt and Paulogia have a whole video on claims aren’t evidence, I’d suggest you go watch it/pay better attention to it.

[@johnlopperman2161]

@@nathanjora7627 Take all your ''evidence'' to the AXP ^^above^^

[@johnlopperman2161]

@@nathanjora7627 Stumping your feet and claiming EVIDENCE! is not evidence. Grow up.

[@user-xb1ht4py2v]

just love the tiny smirk of satisfaction that Matt has when Dave is spelling out the same argument he himself has said a thousand times. He is clearly proud of Dave in that moment.

[@ronduckett5017]

I wonder why God never told people the earth is round??!!

[@jewsco]

It is questionable is Jesus even existed. It is also questionable if any of the people who give testimony of the resurrection even existed . So why would I believe this testimony? The only person that can be reasonably proven to exist is Paul. A person who wasn’t there for any of Jesus’s miracles or resurrection. The evidence is laughable

[@Locust13]

It's telling that Christians are so hung up on "historical evidence" for Jesus when they think Jesus is looking over their shoulder RIGHT NOW. Present the evidence for THAT.

[@WTF3602]

Lmao if the standard is sooo impossible to meet... wouldn't that raise higher concerns about said topic?! 🤷🏾‍♂️🤦🏾‍♂️ If it actually happened, wouldn't the evidence be undeniable and more over become undoubtedly apparent? Maybe I'm not understanding what evidence and standards are.

[@reneolguin1081]

every day i thank my parents for sending me to parochial schools starting kindergarten..... it didn't take me long to see the truth ... religions are nothing more than businesses, in fact, the perfect business...no product stock needed, no taxes, just keep shovelling the chitt! there will always be "suckers" that will pay....to obtain.... nothing.

[@Truth-Be-Told-USA]

The definitive question. Why is Paul in the bible the only one that writes over 500 people saw jesus after the resurrection? It makes you go Hmmm.....

[@csnowutube]

"God", "Jesus" could show themselves to everyone at the same time, if it was important. No time machine needed

[@jack_rabbit]

"yeah" and "ok" are soft dismissals, and display that the caller is not really listening. this happens on almost every call i've seen them take.

[@henrikrolfsen584]

Real history: Pontius Pilate, (Pilate Ponti), retired to Rome where he was born. In his retirement, he wrote his memoirs; he never once mentioned any "Trial of Jesus". The more we dig into First Century Roman records, the less evidence we encounter for a "Wandering Holy Man name Jesus of Nazareth". In fact we have very good information about the settlement along the shore of the "Sea of Galilee", called "Lake Tiberius" during First Century Roman times. There no evidence for any settlement called "Nazareth". What we do know, is that "John the baptizer" was real, and was driven out of Jerusalem for causing disturbances. He and his followers, (Mostly female), went about proclaiming "The End is Near!", throwing rocks into the houses of the wealthy. After he, and his small following retreated to Bethel, was was once again thrown out, and retreated to the caves near Qumran, on the shores of the Jordan river. He and his sect were referred to as "Nazarines", and supposedly he appointed one guy named "Jesus" , (most common name in Judea), to be his successor.

[@tedgrant2]

When several women went to the empty tomb, they saw a young man sitting (Mark 16:5). Alternatively, they saw two men standing, wearing white garments (Luke 24:4). Or maybe one woman saw nobody (John 20:1). All reliable witnesses !

[@PapaWheelie380]

Forget killing him and resurrecting him at 30. You know what God could have done to make the whole Jesus thing a bit more believable? Since he had Noah and others live more than 900 years, I think it would have gone a long way in letting us know there was validity to the whole story - have Jesus live as a human for, say, 1-2,000 years. Shouldn't have been too hard for a God who apparently did it for others!

[@frederikbf6783]

If I was God and wanted to be worshiped I would make sure every single soul on earth would know of my existence. It would be written in the sky, “don’t fuck up My planet ( I need it for another experiment after I blow up the rest of this Universe) and You will be happy and healthy for the rest of your life. You will live in happiness with those you love. You will die in peace. Shouldn’t be to hard for a God to make things understandable acceptabel and reasonable for his creation.

[@jmg94j]

So he admits that even if the resurrection did happen, providing evidence for that resurrection is impossible. I'm glad to hear that. Baby steps are a good thing. However, to say that Matt is being unreasonable by asking for evidence that he knows is impossible to provide, is absurd. The burden of proof is on the person making an unreasonable claim. Saying that someone was resurrected after being dead for a day or two, is not just an extraordinary claim, it is an absolutely impossible claim, according to everything we know about human biochemistry. It is the equivalent of me claiming that I swallowed a Honda, crapped out a Rolls Royce, and you shouldn't be asking me for evidence to back up that claim because you know that providing evidence to back up an impossible claim, is impossible, silly!

[@fearalice]

If the first time the world saw a magician vanish a statue and asked the magician how he did it, then the magician replies "The power of Satan", Has he demonstrated Satan exists? No. If jesus actually resurrected then when asked how he did it he replied "The power of God", has he demonstrated God exists? No. All either of these people have demonstrated is that vanishing a statue or resurrecting are possible. Without a demonstration of the entity who caused it to happen, no one can reasonably conclude the existence of the claimed supernatural entity.

[@AntitheistHuman]

According to the mythology, Jesus is god, god is jesus, same thing, the universe didn't have its ruler for about 30 years because he wanted to be his human form getting a woman pregnant, what sacrifice is christianity talking about? He set up the rules, he set up human nature, he sets up destiny, he sets up how things end, come on guys, this is a story, mythology, but not even an original nor good one, Egyptian mythology is very interestinf in comparisson, there no way such a thing exists because magic is not real, when is humanity gonna grow up?

[@mikeash7193]

What they really found when the went to the supposed tomb of Jesus after the 'resurrection' was...chocolate eggs!

[@snaggledog0079]

But we do have proof Jesus was reanimated. Now a days we just call him tRumpty Dumpty.

[@defenestratefalsehoods]

Back then they never crucified a person and just left them therefore a few hours. Everything about his crufixtion goes against everything that we know about the culture at the time

[@dongorth9102]

The caller KNOWS there was and is Zombies....He watches THE WALKING DEAD...

[@ymusoke]

On resurrection, I wonder; having proved indestructible why didn't jesus return to his adversaries and prove to them that a son of god cannot be eliminated just like that. To me the testimony of the chief priest and or Roman establishment would have provided a better or rather akin to good evidence than testimonies of a few biased and almost unidentifiable disciples. Secondly, in the spirit of the so called 'saving humanity from damnation', it would have been better for jesus to stay a little bit longer and physically preach to a range of heathens around the world (after all a resurrected jesus was actually indestructible) something which in the overall scheme of things would have added alot more to the credibility of the claims.

[@alfredogarciamarquez4397]

This guy was boooooringgggg.

[@charlesatty]

I once had a belief but then realized that belief feeling was just a gas bubble, but it passed....and I feel and think better now.

[@seaandstorm]

11:44

[@MizzouRah78]

I can't believe this is even an argument. With a god around, why the hell is war even an option?

[@Karl-Benny]

Maybe Daddy wont let jesus come out and play Daddy did not tell his son that he was sacrificing him

[@davecrawley4634]

I agree with everything you say and here is why you are wrong. (Proceeds to talk shite)

[@the-trustees]

"You guys are great! Now let me tell you how stupid you are." - Many theist callers.

[@brucewilliams4152]

Frank has literally no evidence to support his claim

[@carolmckee8456]

Jesus can't show up bc that would screw up the rule that gullible folks have to believe WITHOUT evidence. Faith would be pointless. God is only happy if you turn your mind over to him.

[@lunar3009]

🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑

[@jjstuartonwriting8150]

Love Dave Warnock, he was a brilliant guest. Really enjoyed his point of view.

[@brynpookc1127]

So, Frank called in to say he had nothing worthwhile to say?