Why atheists become Christians and Christians become atheists - Jana Harmon and Joel Furches

[@TheCorrodedMetalhead]

This woman Jana interviewed me once for about an hour and a half near the Atlanta area. She was nice, but I think I scared her to death with my de-conversion story. I also distinctly remember that she didn’t even know what the “Chi Rho” symbol is! She had also never seen the film “Marjoe” and didn’t really know anything about charlatans like Peter Popoff. I think she has a southern Baptist, evangelical background. She also didn’t seem to have any direct, personal relationships with Jehovah’s Witnesses, Oneness Pentecostals, Mormons, Pagans, Satanists, etc. I also didn’t get the impression she had much knowledge of liturgical, sacramental traditions. I discussed my experience in full time ministry, Bible College and the emotional pain I felt after leaving the faith. She listened closely when I also told her about my interest in the occult and black metal music. But, the examples she gives in this video of former Atheists don’t really impress me at all. I doubt they impress ANY serious skeptic of religion. It’s very “G rated”, naive and safe. I’d like to see her interview someone like Nergal from Behemoth, or Erik Danielsson from Watain. Sit down with Morgan from Marduk and ask him why he’s not a believer! When I met her, she hadn’t read Charles Templeton’s book “Farewell to God” either. She had never heard of Tony Alamo or the Process Church of the Final Judgement. I find it scandalizing that she is considered an “expert” on former Atheists, but she really isn’t informed about believers that have apostatized. Although a very polite woman, I felt judged and dismissed by her after candidly sharing my story. I think she wasn’t expecting to interview someone with such a raw, dramatic and unorthodox de-conversion experience. In fact, I’m convinced most Christians are clueless when it comes to debating former Christians like me.

[@philosophyjunkies6693]

I have a page called philosophy Junkies on Facebook, I'd like to talk to you if you're open to it. Sounds like an amazing journey.

[@Mutantcy1992]

Thanks for the comment. I completely agree that the selected clips were just people who played into the cliches. First guy was "mad at God" and his atheism was based 100% on emotion. First woman has a literary background but says that the Bible is wells put together and that you can't make this stuff up? Yet she studied world religions? Atheists that never believed are often people who have done no examination of the big questions but have an unearned sense of intellectual superiority over religious people. Arguing against ex-Christians is a completely different task for Christians.

[@KevinN3]

Joel did a great job. I haven't seen someone look past their own bias to see the other side as clearly as he did.

[@whoisandrewblack5679]

Yeah it’s a shame Justin let Jana blab on for an hour

[@charlottehughes3927]

Such an interesting topic, but I was disappointed with the very noticeable lack of time given to Joel. The conversation was much too uneven. It would be great to do a similar episode with more time given to the opposing view point to make up for it.

[@aidankiely9672]

Really interesting but I would agree that there was not remotely even focus given to both sides. There is probably even more we need to learn from why people moved away from Christianity.

[@Mutantcy1992]

Eh, if you play to the audience, the feel-good stuff wins.

[@lestariabadi]

As a convert from atheistic family, this is very interesting.

[@pinkpig6518]

"Justin talks to Jana Harmon about her PhD research on adult atheist conversion to Christianity and presents stories from her new ‘Side B Podcast’. Joel Furches, who is researching de-conversion, also joins the conversation." Even the video description acknowledges that Joel doesn't get enough time to speak.

[@Mutantcy1992]

Yeah it seemed a bit too focused on "hey, Jana has a podcast"

[@ClementPoh]

It's great that you're making content unrelated to US election mania!

[@greglogan7706]

As a US citizen addicted to politics, I find your statement humorous

[@martinploughboy988]

Well it is a UK programme (note British spelling).

[@rustlingbushes7678]

Did you miss the angels and demons reference?

[@greglogan7706]

As a Christian theist, I would love to see a mature adult deconverted Christian on here to provide formal, thoughtful counterpoint to what is presented. I would highly recommend Doug from Pine Creek - he will do a great job and has a very good spirit about him in his engagement

[@martinploughboy988]

No one who is a Christian ever ceases to be one.

[@Jonas-gl9ke]

@@martinploughboy988 No true Scotsman fallacy.

[@martinploughboy988]

@@Jonas-gl9ke On the contrary, the definition of what a Christian is includes the fact that they never cease to be a Christian. If they claim to have once been Christians, the fact is that they never were Christians.

[@Jonas-gl9ke]

@@martinploughboy988 I’m not familiar with scripture supporting your claim. Please let me know how you’ve come to that conclusion. In your opinion, does this same condition hold in Islam or Hinduism?

[@martinploughboy988]

@@Jonas-gl9ke You've not heard of the parable of the lost sheep, or these verses: All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. (John 6:37 [ESV2011]) No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. (John 6:44 [ESV2011]) And as John says: They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us. (I John 2:19 [ESV2011]) Since Hinduism and Islam are false religions the same would not apply to them.

[@forplaylists5981]

Justin, have you heard of Bishop Barron? He's an American Catholic Bishop who started Word on Fire Ministries, an online evangelization ministry. Your discussion about recognizing the importance of deep desires and longings in conversion to Christianity reminded me of his emphasis on the importance of beauty in evangelization, known as the "via pulchritudinis," the "way of beauty." He's collaborated with William Lane Craig, Jordan Peterson, Cameron Bertuzzi. You should have him on your show, which I love by the way!

[@123mneil]

48:00 I grew up in Mormonism. A lot of people convert to Mormonism after reading the Book of Mormon. I think these are Holy Books for a reason. I think they survived for a reason. I no longer believe, but I have been trying understand why people are believing and I can't seem to honestly get to a place where I can say I believe. I really appreciate religious teachings. I appreciate the fact that they might be important for a reason that I don't understand. However, I feel much more honest saying "I don't know" when many religions claim they have the truth and they come to that conclusion using the same tools. I honestly can't see how one is more true than another. The best I can do right now is appreciate the nuggets of wisdom from all religions when I see them.

[@123mneil]

Sorry to comment so much, but this has been a great episode to me! 57:54 Wow! This guy has done some amazing work! There was a little bit of all 5 of those that lead to my faith crisis. I'm not sure if he is aware, but this is true across religions. I am coming from Mormonism. Wow. Wow. Wow. Its not very often I hear believers say what the problem is, they try to say its because I wanted to sin, or I didn't have a real testimony, or I was living by the letter of the law and not the spirit of the law, or I was biased in how I was looking at information. I wanted so much for it to be true and after I realized I didn't believe it any more. I still wanted so much for my Heavenly Father to still be real. Its a super traumatic experience. It flipped my world upside down.

[@123mneil]

@@christiankhoury9343 Lots of things. Being honest with myself. A big one is as I was getting older I was realizing how much I don't know. The truth claims of Mormonism gradually became hard to accept and teach my kids. In politics I started to see the echo chambers people put themselves in and for the first time I realized I may be in a religious echo chamber. I had always just believed and never really seriously considered that I might be wrong (even felt grateful that I was born into it). However, I took a step back I realized that I wouldn't believe the truth claims that The Church if Jesus Christ Of Latter-day Saints makes if I weren't brought up in it. I kept this to myself for about 3 years and kept trying to chase away the thoughts with my faithful side. During this time I really struggled teaching my kids or teaching at church. Instead of saying things like "we believe xyz" I would say things like "the church teaches xyz". I still had many spiritual experiences too during this time. The doubts were just stuffed away and I ignored them. One day it kind of came up and I was honest with my husband about not "knowing" anymore. That's how it started. Don't want to make anymore of a novel than I already have. But I found out some stuff that I never knew before and I am left not believing anymore. I'm left feeling unconvinced of any literal beliefs. The best I can do is believe metaphorically.

[@wayneburchell6346]

I grew up in a non-Christian family with no particular faith. Experiences as a teenager led me to conclude that there was no such thing as God... at the same time as close friends became Christians. A few years later as a young adult (21), I had an experience of God that led me to Christianity for certain and I've not looked back (well actually, I've looked back numerous times :))

[@Apanblod]

What was that experience of God that you had?

[@wayneburchell6346]

@@Apanblod The Holy Spirit came upon me and convinced me that there was something real going on.

[@Apanblod]

@@wayneburchell6346 I see. I don't really understand what that entails or what it would feel like, but it sounds like quite a powerful moment. Do you think I could have a similar experience, or does it only happen to some people?

[@wayneburchell6346]

@@Apanblod You couldn't recreate the specific moment, but I've heard enough similar stories to make me convinced that it is possible. The danger is in desiring the experience. It convinced me that God was real, but I was a skeptic, without any real faith in God up until that moment. Not everyone needs that kind of thing (and I wasn't expecting it)

[@Apanblod]

@@wayneburchell6346 So if it happens, it happens, basically?

[@johnno6183]

As an x xn now athiest whos got a bachelor of theology, i found this a very sympathetic interview to jana...the 5 modes need to be drawn out..there is much to learn..regulated, controlled behaviour is common..the bethel church case in point...the accetable culture in these churchs is cult like..here in nz we hv gloriavale, a closed xn community..there is a sameness when u speak to these guys..we r unfortunately very easy to program.

[@ericbrown7628]

Where can we find Jana’s research paper???

[@boardwalkbiblecommentary]

Much is being said about the kind gentle approach of people holding different views. That is important when establishing friendships and establishing civility. But talking to a kind Muslim doesn’t mean islamic claims are historically factual.

[@dianasanchez7]

He barely spoke, I would have liked to listen more about his research.

[@rustlingbushes7678]

I came a conversation between "Christians and skeptics", not that Christians aren't skeptics about other religions, but this was one-sided. In this case, there should have been four panelists; these two presenting their findings, and two Atheists presenting their findings. That would only be fair.

[@pcb8059]

How about obvious Occam Reason #1 "They apostate because they just dont think its True"

[@thomasclaughton]

I've modified my explanation from 'I don't think it's true' to 'It's not true.' a subtle but helpful difference for me.

[@kunakos9062]

@@thomasclaughton Why not "i dont think its true" I would say that is far more reasonable

[@thomasclaughton]

@@kunakos9062 Because not knowing one way or another was agony. Better for me to just say it isn't true.

[@kunakos9062]

@@thomasclaughton You still dont know thou... You just say different words

[@thomasclaughton]

@@kunakos9062 That's right, I don't know. But there are other things I would say are not true without knowing for sure. This is now one of them.

[@Greg-il8by]

Poor Joel had less than 10 min of speaking time out of 82 min. Great topic and guests, but not a balanced interview and Justin clearly was interested in only one side of this issue.

[@jude179]

Agreed , would have been good to hear a lot more of what he had to say ,and learned about deconversion experiences .Wish he'd been given more time .

[@RaeMSmith]

Definitely going to be looking up his work based on what he's said here.

[@simonskinner1450]

A believer is expected to love their neighbour as thyself, but thyself must be righteous, and so must their neighbour. It is false when accepting someone who remains a sinner and unrighteous.

[@theoskeptomai2535]

Would you consider me, an unbeliever, to be a sinner and unrighteous?

[@simonskinner1450]

@@theoskeptomai2535 you must judge yourself and be guided by your conscience. Love in this context is by judgement to treat other believers as you would be treated. To do no harm and have guilt. Righteousness sounds pompous but is just to always do the right thing even to overcome temptation. It is about who you can trust when no one is looking.

[@theoskeptomai2535]

@@simonskinner1450 I was asking a straightforward question, was I not? Is there anything preventing you from answering it? Here, I will ask it again: _Would you consider me, an unbeliever, to be a sinner and unrighteous?_ Yes or no.

[@simonskinner1450]

@@theoskeptomai2535 no.

[@theoskeptomai2535]

@@simonskinner1450 Thanks for your honesty and receptivity. I will gladly return the same sentiment toward you. I agree, one must judge themselves and be guided by their conscience. Each and every individual is the sole arbiter of his/her own morality for each individual is soley responsible, capable, and culpable for their own intentions, decisions, and actions. I wish you a wonderful night. Peace.

[@123mneil]

Is it just me or are they sounded a little like universalists toward the end? They talk about outgrowing the Christianity of their Childhood and believing in a different kind of Christianity as an adult. What about people that don't go through that process? Are they not believing correct? Or are they both correct? That seems very universalist to me. What about those that reconvert to a completely different religion. Are they wrong? They seem to validate many different ways to believe and that is problematic when many are changing their views of Christianity in a fundamental way in order to continue believing.

[@martinploughboy988]

Does not the Bible speak of milk and solid food? But I, brothers, could not address you as spiritual people, but as people of the flesh, as infants in Christ. I fed you with milk, not solid food, for you were not ready for it. And even now you are not yet ready, (I Corinthians 3:1-2 [ESV2011])

[@123mneil]

@@martinploughboy988 That's a favorite of Mormons. Especially when it comes to converts. You give them the milk first since they might choke on the meat.

[@martinploughboy988]

@@123mneil Paul used it before they did: I fed you with milk, not solid food, for you were not ready for it. And even now you are not yet ready, (I Corinthians 3:2 [ESV2011])

[@123mneil]

@@martinploughboy988 Yeah. I understand that. That's one way to look at peoples faith journeys. I guess the red flag for me is that I can't tell where people are in their journey. They are just as sure in stage 1 as they are in stage 2. Plus there are contradicting beliefs from stage 1 to stage 2 and they can't both be exclusively correct. So it makes me wonder if anyone should ever be claiming exclusivity when it doesn't seem to be that anyone every stops updating their beliefs. The more I learn. The more I realize I don't know. My biggest hangup with religion is the claim to know more than the next religion. Religions claim to have the most complete truth available. I would expect truth seekers to be flocking toward it. I'm not seeing that though. I no longer believe in Mormonism and I've been trying to learn how others come to the conclusion that they know the answers to the big questions like why and how we are here. They don't convince me anymore than mormons convince me. I see the same game being played. Your quoting scripture is no more convincing than when I am quoted scripture from another holy book. I can't seem to find the secret sauce that will lead me to the truth with a capital T. For now I'm okay saying, "I don't know". I feel the most honest when I say that.

[@martinploughboy988]

@@123mneil I don't know what a faith journey is. As far as I can see, the Bible says the either you are a Christian or you are not, it is an instantaneous change. The problem is that Christianity is the truth no one wants. It tells of a good, creator God who creates mankind and gives them all that they need, but they rebel. The only way out of that rebellion is God's mercy, which no one can do anything to deserve. No one like to be told they can do nothing, they cannot please God. They demand that they be given at least some credit for choosing to obey God. That's what all false religions are about, men trying to do something to satisfy God, and they all fail. You had to do something to be a good Mormon, you still want to do something, you want to find something, to do something. God says you can't.

[@rkroger9725]

Old theological problem-If god is perfect then why did he /she, felt an urge to create human beings? May be God is imperfect and is trying to reach perfection through human beings ?Christianity as a religion has triumphed over all religions, but we won't know if Christ did..... only on the Judgement Day, the day of resurrection will we know if he was delusioned Rabbi and not God. Christ and Paul believed the kingdom of heaven , the end times, was to be established in their life times.Jews are still waiting over 5000 years, Christians over 2000 years to fulfil the promised eschatology. In the mean time just follow Christ to be human!

[@martinploughboy988]

The answer is simple, that His glory might be seen.

[@betford2]

Justin, I really appreciate your approach to these discussions, your intelligence, your fairness, and your great questions and interjections. I wonder though how many Christians are willing to say they honestly believe in talking serpents, donkeys and bushes, and that their faith is dependent on these being actual occurrences. Would they be willing to make the same allowances for equivalent claims made by other religions? Christianity stands on these Biblical "historical" claims. It didn't come out of a vacuum 2000 years ago.

[@l-cornelius-dol]

I am.

[@clearascrystal4960]

Atheist to christian here. No not a "mind change"...it was a personal encounter...then pursuing the God who answered me to what Truth was.

[@simonskinner1450]

But surely you must undergo a mind change as well. To be like minded in the wisdom of God, accepting the law of righteousness is all part and parcel of believing.

[@clearascrystal4960]

@@simonskinner1450 Of course, once being born-again, the Lord put His law in my heart. That's what happens when you become a born-again christian. It's actually a heart change.

[@davidduran3802]

It's a heart change but the mind renewal is a thing of a lifetime, that is why is something about growth in faith

[@clearascrystal4960]

@@davidduran3802 Yes I agree with that. I read the scriptures, especially Paul's letters, the New Testament and the psalms most days. All within my spirit listening to what the Lord has for me.

[@Jonas-gl9ke]

Would you agree then, that if someone has a personal encounter with Allah, they are equally valid in the “truth” of Islam?

[@christiangadfly24]

Great video Justin. Keep up the good work!

[@halvardlundnorway]

The term atheist, is a bit artificial - since it is only a political one, and not a religious one.

[@theoskeptomai2535]

You have caught my curiosity. Would you mind elaborating upon that statement?

[@walterwhite7554]

So if this Brandon said he was going to use the same standards of evidence for religion as he Science, why did he instead throw that idea away and settle for no testable evidence, and using false circular reasoning of using Bible stories to prove Bible stories? I listened but Brandon did not explain why he gave up using the Scientific Method to just settle for belief that the stories were true if they said they were? That made no sense.

[@liveonce2102]

Im a recent deconverted christian. For me it was all the immoral stuff througout the bible. I couldnt love someone like that. Ive believed all my life and brought up in a christian family but have come to to conclusion its all a fairy tale written by men.

[@Mutantcy1992]

Bingo. God is love, and apparently love sometimes kills people, sometimes a lot of people, sometimes potentially innocent people.

[@l-cornelius-dol]

"There are no 'reconversions' [to the same faith]". Well, I know of at least 3 -- two of my brothers, and my sister. So Joel is wrong on that point. Now, that said, I can see why he might have ended up with a strong selection bias, since he obviously focused on deconverts in his research.

[@Mutantcy1992]

His research was on deconversion. Why wouldn't he focus on them? Reconversions probably have happened but what happens far more often is people are raised as Christians, stray away but never really examine their worldview, but do get to the point where they wouldn't consider themselves Christians, then eventually return.

[@l-cornelius-dol]

@@Mutantcy1992 I didn't say he shouldn't, I only observed that he did, and so has a selection bias against those who fall away for a time and then come back, which in my experience is somewhere in the neighborhood of 50% or more of older believers. In fact almost everyone I know above the age of 40 has a period of months to years where they would not have considered themselves practicing Christians, if Christians at all. So, he is simply wrong about there being "no reconversions", and his selection bias led to that false statement.

[@Mutantcy1992]

@@l-cornelius-dol right but falling away from devoted practice is not deconversion

[@l-cornelius-dol]

@@Mutantcy1992 : Now I think you are argument semantics. But perhaps not; if one argues that deconversion is becoming completely convinced Christianity is false, then the proper term would be apostate. From a biblical perspective such a one will never repent because they've turned their back on the grace that leads to repentance. I would argue that many (most?) who "deconvert" are not apostate at all. Some were never saved to begin with, and some have fallen away but not actively and willfully rejected God's grace.

[@l-cornelius-dol]

@@Mutantcy1992 Oh, and I should add that the one's I am thinking of did not merely "fall away from devoted practice", their lives were pretty sinful and they themselves would not have claimed to be Christian.

[@gonzalovelascoc.2953]

Atheist people measure "any" believer according to some "awkward" neighbors or school colleagues they have, that belong to some far from average christian church among the (sadly) more than 300 denominations there are out there (thanks to Luther and Calvin).

[@betford2]

"Atheist people" is a bit general. You talk as if you don't know very many. You might be surprised to know how many atheists came from those churches, "far from average" and otherwise.

[@mr.c2485]

A boyfriend/girlfriend relationship has lead to more conversions than the “Holy Spirit” ever has. Deconversions require little more than separation from childhood friends and/or family...I.e...going off to college.

[@EliteInterpunct]

Funny you say that. That is what caused me reconverting after 10 years. separation of my childhood things and places/people.

[@mr.c2485]

Did she actually say “the CLARITY of the gospel”? Lol!

[@forplaylists5981]

@unbelievable? Justin, have you heard of Bishop Barron? He's an American Catholic Bishop who started Word on Fire Ministries, an online evangelization ministry. Your discussion about recognizing the importance of deep desires and longings in conversion to Christianity reminded me of his emphasis on the importance of beauty in evangelization, known as the "via pulchritudinis," the "way of beauty." He's collaborated with William Lane Craig, Jordan Peterson, Cameron Bertuzzi. You should have him on your show, which I love by the way!

[@jimfoard5671]

When atheists say science you can boil it down to Darwinism. It seems that an adherence to the theory of evolution is a universal among every single ex-Christian and atheist. Darwin becomes the new prophet and evolution becomes the creed. I was raised in an atheist household. I was of course taught the evolutionary theory as fact growing up in public schools, as have all children for decades in public schools. It is the reigning Weltanschauung that has dominated the educational system for over one hundred years. I had not yet become a Christian when I began to doubt the theory of evolution. I saw that many of the props that were used to indoctrinate us into the belief in evolution involved very artful and entertaining cartoon visuals in the form of movies that documented the so-called transition of one celled creatures to Metazoa, and on through jelly fish and clams and then to chordates, and fish and salamanders, reptiles, birds and mammals. And yet, even as a teenager I could see that many of these scenarios that were being presented to us were simply stories; nothing more. We respected our science teachers because they had taught us certain truths concerning anatomy, we dissected frogs in science class and learned about chemistry and conducted experiments with different elements, and saw that the experiments worked, and trusted in our teachers that they were in a sense infallible. We believed that everything they said was true. And so it was with the theory of evolution. We were impressionable young adolescents, many of us respected and in some cases almost hero worshiped our teachers, and when they told us that evolution was true we simply accepted it and went along with the crowd. But not me. I always had a critical mind and questioned authority, including academic authority. And so when I was around sixteen I realized that the stories that they told us about evolution were simply that: stories. The actual evidence they presented was usually scanty and based on conjecture. I began to see that they had very little evidence to present such as actual, undisputed transitional forms. The ape to human fossil remains were to my mind unconvincing. This did not immediately result in my sudden conversion to Christianity. I went through a number of years studying and practicing yoga, Buddhism and joining some non-Christian cults. It was many years later that I came to the end of myself and realized my need for forgiveness for my sins and my need of a savior.

[@pcb8059]

All that searching youve done, but what happens when you reject highschool level physical anthropology at the ripe old age of 16 years old, then you spend the rest of your life not realizing you've missed image searching side by side comparative biometric morphological features and quantified measurements of the bones themselves, hominids (we have hundreds of them) and compare with modern mans/primate/hominid teeth, jaws, spines, feet, hands and skulls, and notice age correlates with slow transitional morphological physical features and shapes of teeth exspecialy and jaws. The shapes of teeth amoung different hominids, ages and primates are like fingerprints, very specific, predictable and quantified down to submillimeters. And guess what, prehuman hominds have a mix of both distinct ancient primate and modern human dental features....and it correlates with Time.

[@clearascrystal4960]

I believe that is the truth. I became atheist @15 being taught evolution, even though I had no problem believing in God all my life before it. As an atheist I also went into TM and yoga , etc. Thankfully the Lord God answered me in a life/death situation. He's so good and patient and wise to know when to answer. Then showing me Jesus His Son being The Truth.

[@markwilton4412]

@@pcb8059 Quick comment because I am up to my eyes in marking evolution exams atm. I got thru to the end of Uni studying evolution. Had been a convinced atheist due to my love of science from 3 or 4 years of age and science training to 23 years of age, but started to become skeptical of the theory because of my studies and am open-minded now and am an evolution skeptic. I still like the theory and think it would be awesome if organisms could change (i.e macro evolution - because obviously micro evolution occurs), but I am less convinced by the evidence of macro evolution nowadays even though I teach it.

[@machtnichtsseimann]

@@pcb8059 - Would be interested in a detailed dialog here between you and mark wilton. Confession: I'm still a Theist, having been born/raised in a Christian home, well-educated in the Liberal Arts and Theology, Master's degree, and don't go for simplistic sweeping statements on either "side". While finding the Bible still authoritative and communicating truth in various styles ( i.e. NOT a Science book through and through ), "T"ruth to me is found and displayed through many disciplines, thought, art, cultures, religions, and, of course, science. Critical thinkers of all stripes are personally interesting for me on my life's journey. Please don't shy away from an exchange with mark wilton...at least for my selfish interests! ;-)

[@pcb8059]

@@markwilton4412 Sure, first off the whole evolution = atheism is a False Dilemma and the atheist platform is a false cultural construct from the Scopes Trials (and yes Im an atheist). Evolution really has nothing to do with atheism, its only a natural phenomenon, like everything else is. The real question is Naturalism vs Super-Nature which in essence means Local Cause-and-Effect vs Nonlocality. Everything in the Universe is shown to have (natural) localized causality, the variation of species is no different. Many science minded theists have no conflict with Naturalism, and they can make it fit inside thier faith , like Steven Jay Goulds NOMA essays, Natural Theology, or the Founding Fathers Enlightenment era Deism, they all find a way to make thier (nonsuper)Naturalism and Faith compatible. From my pov, the whole Christian vs evolution-is-atheism argument is pointless, a cultural misunderstanding , a False Dilemma created by both "new atheist "popculture and biblical literalists . Its no different than Christians or atheism insisting that natural blood-clotting mechanisms =athiesm, it doesnt, the only thing blood clotting mechanisms show us is, that its a Natural localized cause and effect phenomenon, just like everything else in this universe. So with that point, I dont have much motivation in "proving" or defending atheism, or nonChristianity with an Evolution Platform. Again I think the real debate is (nonSuper)Naturalism vs SuperNaturalism and it all boils down to confidence in standards of Methods; testing measurment, predictive power, observation, repeatability etc. and so invisible Supernature must compete with ordinary Material in this Paradigm. Ordinary Material can be measured, quantified and picked apart with our tools and Common-senses , its future motions and behaviour can be predicted with precision, while Metaphysical Stuff cannot. So thats where my confidence is, in (boring ordinary) tested Normal Science Paradigms But I dont have any motivation to argue that evolution presents a dilemma to theism

[@teddycollier4909]

No one can prove or disprove that god , santa , or the tooth fairy exist. If you live in reality, you know. Don't you?

[@markfrank0924]

Two good guests in their own right. There is something very appealing about Jana, and I am not talking about anything other than appealing. Her message is positive and uplifting. She looks in the camera's direction even when she is not speaking as if to communicate, "I am listening to you." Unfortunately, Joel, who is a great guy, seemed disinterest as if a man who wanted to be somewhere else. I kept thinking as I watched that I am more like Joel in countenance and need to be more like Jana. Having said this, I do feel as if Justin, who I love, favored Jana as well, and perhaps Joel pocket up on that.

[@simonskinner1450]

Jesus came to divide the righteous from the unrighteous, not to promote love for the unrighteous. That is the certainty of the gospel message in the law of righteousness.

[@Belfor1971]

No one is just one or the other. That’s binary thinking. Life is more nuanced than that.

[@simonskinner1450]

@@Belfor1971 but in some respects like harm and blame, it is binary in concept. Else you enable wrong doing. Every political system or religion makes laws for that purpose. The complication should only be in choosing the laws that give most justice and liberty to others, so that harm is not lawful, not acceptance that harm is lawful. The law of the New Testament is perfectly reasonable and achievable in my view, as it worked on the housing estate I grew up on in the 1960's.

[@Belfor1971]

@@simonskinner1450 sorry, but I’m not sure I understand your comment. Are you agreeing that people are not binary ie all righteous or all unrighteous? I have never met a completely unrighteous or righteous person. Not entirely sure what harm and blame have to do with it. Harm isn’t clear cut either. You cause harm to a child when giving an injection, but that’s ultimately to a good end. If you mean we should do the least amount of harm to help the most amount of people flourish, this is the idea between humanism. The difficulty is defining what that is. And it doesn’t necessarily mean doing no harm. Eg covid : massive economic harm to save some lives. ‘The law of the New Testament is perfectly reasonable and achievable in my view’ what law was that? There aren’t any laws as such in the NT. Jesus came to abolish the law, that was the point. The only thing he said was to love thy neighbour as yourself. He specifically did come to love the unrighteous (not a thing) but ok those who aren’t perfect. He hung around with tax collectors and didn’t condemn the woman in adultery. That’s precisely the point. How can he love just the righteous (not a thing) since they won’t be righteous in the first place. The bible even we love god because god first loved us. People aren’t binary. I doubt God is.

[@simonskinner1450]

@@Belfor1971 Well Paul says in Philippians 2:15 that they should be blameless and harmless, and without rebuke. Tough love does demand short term pain at times for long term gain, but we must do the right thing not selfish thing at all times. Jesus certainly laid down the law, to love God and one another, and love works no ill to his neighbour, and that is the law as Romans 13:8-10. Jesus' mantra was to go and sin more, and as all sin is unrighteousness, the law is righteousness. Mistakes and misjudgement are not wilful sin, though we are allowed a second chance, once.

[@Belfor1971]

@@simonskinner1450 Well Paul is writing a specific letter at a specific time to the Philippians. He suggests that they should ‘work out their salvation’ in the verses before. which means grapple with in, try, work with our imperfect ways in order to become ‘blameless and harmless, and without rebuke’. It’s an ideal to work towards. Most people are working towards something and better versions of themselves. Once again they will not be perfect and righteous, nor thoroughly unrighteous and evil. No one is. Everyone is a mixed bag or work in progress. If you have a law that is to love, all other things are seen by it. Romans isn’t Jesus’ saying it’s Paul’s. Even if Jesus says go sin no more which is giving people helpful instruction in ways to live their life, that doesn’t mean it means it’s a steadfast law that won’t be broken. We are fallible and always will be. Aim for goodness and love, but you will fail. People are not all good or bad. ‘Mistakes and misjudgement are not wilful sin, though we are allowed a second chance, once.’ No where does it say you are only allowed one second chance. Jesus says to forgive someone 7x77 times to indicate do it a lot. He expects people to mess up. Parents don’t treat their kids as badly as the Jesus you portray, what makes you think an all loving being of grace and forgiveness would be such a nasty character. Doesn’t sounds much like good news. Hoping that you can’t least accept it’s not cut and dry: evil v righteous.

[@markfrank0924]

For one to believe long-term they have to believe the story is real. All the warn touchy/feely stuff (being made comfortable) in the absence of belief. In Mark, Jesus talks about the Sower; too many Christian seeds fall on stony ground and will not take, and these are the ones who leave the faith.

[@theoskeptomai2535]

I said the same exact nonsense when I was a devout Christian. Oh, the memories!

[@martinploughboy988]

@@theoskeptomai2535 You never were a Christian.

[@theoskeptomai2535]

@@martinploughboy988 Are you making a claim or asking me a question?

[@martinploughboy988]

@@theoskeptomai2535 Was there a ? at the end? The fact is, no one ever ceases to be a Christian. If they stop doing the things Christians do it is because they never were one in the first place.

[@theoskeptomai2535]

@@martinploughboy988 That is simply not true. I said the EXACT same when I was an evangelical Christian never imagining that one day I would begin to gain a greater understanding. The pursuit of truth ALWAYS throws one curves, but it NEVER leads on astray. And the more one seeks the truth, the more one quests to know more. The difference between us is you believe you somehow (relationship with Christ, surrender to a Holy Spirit) have possession of the truth. I simply realize how truely ignorant I am. Consider yourself fortunate. But I'd rather be ignorant and actually seeking truth than professing I have found it.

[@iainrae6159]

An athiest is simply someone not convinced, due to lack of evidence, by the 'truth' claims of religious priests of the existence of a personal supernatural God. This is a rational and reasoned position.

[@Alex-yr8iy]

Explain that if I was 5 pls

[@iainrae6159]

@@Alex-yr8iy When you have reached that age I shall explain. Just think tooth fairy.

[@Alex-yr8iy]

@@iainrae6159 I'm 16 and gnostic theist I have proof of the existence of God but apparently no atheist gets convinced so I just have a conclusion Atheist demands proof that must conform to their personal worldview which conveniently makes it impossible for God to exist so no argument can ever satisfy them While they believe in the works of Tacitus blindly

[@Alex-yr8iy]

@@iainrae6159 and tbh referring God to a tooth fairy I would call thatthe bronze age myth fallacy When you constantly refer to a religion in a plethora of derogatory ways ranging from Bronze Age Myths ( Santa Claus ) To sky daddy what this does is make religion so bad , so inherently indefensible that you can just dismiss it out of hand thus allowing you to win the arguement without ever actually addressing their beliefs of a religion Christopher Hitchens did this alot and it's no different to when a progressive Atheist says that an argument is sexist , racist , Islamophobic or whatever

[@iainrae6159]

@@Alex-yr8iy Thankyou for your interesting comment. Most athiests take the view that its up to those who claim a personal supernatural God to provide any evidence for their claim As a non believer in fairies or Gods I cannot prove their non existence We may change our minds however if some evidence was presented. If you have any I am willing to hear it. Quoting chunks of scripture and claims of ' divine revelation ' is not convincing I'm afraid. I am sure you are very sincere in your beliefs and I wish you well. Check out another Alex Alex O'Conner , 'cosmic skeptic ' you tube site who is very articulate on the athiest rational position.

[@Birddraws412]

It is quite interesting to me at least that all of the 5 "drivers" to deconversion are really about Scripture and an aversion to any kind of moral guideline for life that is objective. It all comes down to the fact that people don't like anyone or anything telling them what to do, it's just sad that the response is to turn to a system that has no objective way to define morality and that is, at its very core, absurd. Nothing can then be good or evil because there is no way to define anything in terms of morality. There has to come a point in time where people realize that without God life can have no meaning and is ultimately devoid of purpose. Even the argument against God because of perceived evil acts in Scripture or the presence of pain and death is not supportable in an atheistic system. "By raising the question of pain and death in a moral context, an atheist betrays a glaring contradiction in his understanding of reality if at the same time he denies God's existence. If this is not a moral universe, why position the question morally?... If the question is meaningful for him to raise, then it is also self-indicting-- the implication that this is a moral universe and therefore the critic must also deal with his or her own immorality. Conversely, if the question is meaningless, because evil is not an appropriate category in a purely materialistic and Godless world, then the critic lives in contradiction by positioning his criticism of God in moral terms." - Ravi Zacharias

[@Greg-il8by]

Thank you for this example of the arrogant ignorance that is so often characteristic of believers.

[@Birddraws412]

@@Greg-il8by Happy to hear any constructive thoughts you might have that would help me alter my thought process. otherwise, thanks for reading. Arrogance was not my goal, just was interpreting the video as I understood it, and that was what it seemed like the five causes were saying.

[@Birddraws412]

@@itisnow source? Evidence?

[@theoskeptomai2535]

Are you willing some questions regarding your postulations in your original comment?

[@Jonas-gl9ke]

I’ve always found claims such as yours unconvincing. Yes, a Christian can claim objective morality once you have subjectively chosen the Christian God. A Muslim can also claim objective morality once Allah is subjectively chosen just as a Hindu can claim Brahma, Vishnu or Shiva as their subjectively chosen god. An atheist can follow utilitarianism or deontology as an ethical framework. One of the appeals of religion is the answer to nihilism. Some Christians, as yourself it seems, just can’t wrap your head around existentialism - the central tenet being that the purpose we create for our lives gives us meaning. I am sincerely happy that you seem to get a sense of meaning from religion. However, to claim that this is the only way to obtain this sense, is myopic and trite.

[@chrismonksellye4608]

Gravity is the God of Scientism.

[@rhinoromp5164]

Unbelievable is becoming quite unbelievable. People become athists because they think Christians are all like Ned Flanders. lol. One of the dumbest statements I've heard being passed off as sincere.

[@solomonwaffles4208]

Don't dismiss the influence of popular culture.

[@martinploughboy988]

Most Atheist I come across haven't a clue about Christianity, including those who claim to have once been Christians.

[@greglogan7706]

As a Christian theist, I find so much self-serving hooly squat even by Justin who usually stays pretty objective. The whole "I don't worship the God that you don't like" is bollocks...😖 The fact is these self serving religionists have simply made up their own highly sanitized humanize God a God very distinct from the depiction of Yala so often presented in the protestant Canon these self serving religionist are idolaters in that sense and they're failing to come to grips and really being dishonest in this matter. They are simply making about their own internally justified rationalizations as opposed to anybody who's really met God who will truly be humbled and knows there is a LOT we don't understand. There simply is not some nifty All-powerful description of reality that Christianity presents as this woman describes - such a notio is also pure bollocks.

[@martinploughboy988]

An interesting discussion of actual facts, makes a nice change. Shame about the American accents tho'.

[@Mutantcy1992]

Imagine being this petty

[@martinploughboy988]

@@Mutantcy1992 Premier doesn't seem to be attracting any UK debates, that's all.