Noah is nailing it. He's able to articulate arguments with as much power as Matt. A fantastic proponent of Atheism I'd never been aware of before. He deserves a lot more screentime.
This is the first time I've seen Noah. I think if Matt ever decides to hang up his shoes, I think we have a successor ready and waiting. Noah and Tracey together? Fabulous!
I highly recommend the various podcasts that Noah participates in - Scathing Atheist, God Awful Movies, Citation Needed and Skepticrat. Noah, Heath Enright, and Eli Bosnick are all extremely talented and funny. (Not so much Tom and Cecil.)
well because yes or no would be devastating to their belief system. same as if you ask "will i go to hell for being an atheist" they will answer yes. then if you ask "do i deserve it" they will beat around the bush for hours. their thoughts say "no" though they have a hard time disagreeing with god out loud.
Because they know that answering honestly would force them to admit to the problems with their arguments and positions. Religious apologetics aren't about finding the truth of the matter or putting forward good supporting arguments. They're a smokescreen thrown up as a shield to defend what the theist already believes as a baseless presuppositions, and they KNOW that. And they don't want to be forced to admit that they don't have any good reason to believe what they believe and that all their arguments are just slight-of-hand and dishonest attempts to pretend they have a reason. What matters to them isn't the argument, it's the conclusion; they've already determined their conclusion is right, and are working their way backwards to try and invent an argument that seems to prop up that conclusion. Which is why they don't care about arguing honestly because the argument is just window dressing so that they can defend the argument and not have to defend a conclusion that they know they CAN'T defend. An apologist will never admit to a flaw in their argument, because their entire presentation is designed to cover up the flaws that they know are there and want to steer the conversation away from. Which is why the moment you start getting them off script and steering the conversation towards one of those flaws, they will shut down, start yammering, and attempt to obfuscate. Because obfuscating is literally all they're doing anyway.
Have you stopped beating your wife? Yes or No? PS - First of all you have to get them to agree it is a valid question, which of course Matt does pretty well, but Heffalumps are wary of Heffalump traps.
@@BaronVonQuiply Indeed. I was subject to twelve years of indoctrination and this point was never clarified. When I asked a priest directly about this (I was about 14 or 15) I got the big waffle. Lying sacks of shit is what the clergy is. Perverted, lying sacks of shit. Do they wonder why anyone with an IQ higher than 10 leaves the church?
@@zapkvr I think that depended on where you were crucified and when as at the time it was going out of style as a method of punishment. Some places would just tie one up and others would nail one up. Ofcourse they would put the nails in the wrists as opposed to in the middle of the hands, It'll hold better that way.
If god is all knowing then why create humans and then later destroy everything with a flood because it was all "corrupt"? Wouldn't you know that everything would turn out corrupt before you even created the first wave of humans? This is so silly its like if you were building a machine but knew that it wouldn't actually work so you talk shit about every machine based on the first machine failure that was already determined to happen before you created it. Its like getting angry at a poorly programmed calculator and punishing every future calculator based on your failed programming skills.
A religious worldview has much LESS explanatory power. Saying that God did something does not explain HOW he did it. It just replaces an explanation with an excuse. Once you understand how something works you no longer rely on supernatural excuses. If you always rely on supernatural excuses you will never understand how things work.
I'm still not convinced there even is a so called "atheist worldview". lacking belief in gods leads in no direct way to anything else. there are no tenets or commandments or dictates or creeds or rituals or holy books or contracts or constitutions or mission statements or philosophies... it's just lack of belief in gods
I think that's where Christers give a knowing smirk and say Our God Is A Awesome God, and that they "don't need to know how God does his wondrous work."
Dude asks question. Matt proposes an answer and asks a question back. Dude ignores Matt and asks a more nonsensical question. Assuming in some sense that the first question is not maximally nonsensical.
Red herring fallacy, easy tactic to deflect from actually just admitting they have no evidence by any rational standard, just anecdotal or God of the gaps or "special revelation" b.s. that reduces the worldview to fideism
John Austin Have you seen Matt’s debate with Sye ten Bruggencate? In the cross examination, just about any question Matt asked was met with “Here’s the problem. Do you believe that or do you know it?” or other attempts to deflect to word salad.
@Tom H Or who are just convinced they're right completely and have confirmation bias, etc. Supernatural claims are notorious in suffering from that, what with the unfalsifiability and such
@Tom H Cult does tend to have a particular meaning (if we're not talking cult classic films and such, obviously), I like to reserve use of it, as opposed to cult-like or similar notions of resembling it
We are in the 21st century still arguing if God exists. It’s clear at this point in time that he doesn’t. Time for people to give up this God concept and focus on the now and not what a book says.
It’s a conundrum for sure. Personally I’m fascinated by people that believe in the supernatural. From my perspective it’s the same as believing in literal magic. Every time I hear someone say “I’m not religious but I’m spiritual” I always want to say who cares, you still believe in magic.
Mabatch I too am fascinated by how people can hold views that violate logic and even the more non controversial aspects of what is colloquially called ‘common sense’. What’s more interesting is how vociferously they defend these beliefs, which have no rational basis in reality.
Citation Needed is great if you want gut busting humor without destroying religions. And "Beckerman" is probably the best God Awful Movie episode in my opinion. Christia John Wick with none of the talent, budget, and a divorced David AR White
JOHN L OPPERMAN maybe because I watch the clips rather than the full shows, I get the feeling that most theist that call in are pretty horrific when it comes to understanding simple arguments
@@plavyn I think many of them have a mental block when it comes to their favourite fairytale. It's not that they cannot understand, it's that they don't want to.
Love your show! I just spent a weekend with my very religious evangelical Christian extended family, and am now binge watching your show to feel sane again.
The possibility of the crucifixion is that he passed out from the pain and when he was stabbed no vital organs was hit. All was left was to nurse him back healthy enough to walk away. That is why when someone was crucified they left them hanging there for weeks not a few hours
I love how when Noah asks him for evidence that something that can't be explained naturally happened, something that wasn't a claim, and the callers first example is Jesus' resurrection. Umm hello, the resurrection of Jesus is a claim. Think Mcfly, think!
Exactly! and the more you look into their claim, the more you realize that he never even existed at all. Because no one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus, no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people. There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Jesus. Devastating to historians, there occurs not one single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus. All documents about Jesus came well after the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings.
It's rare to see a naked example of christians "antiprocessing" information but the discussion over blood and water at the end of this call is a textbook example of how antiprocessing works to defend the christian/theistic brain against any information that might question the faith. And this is being observed in a christian that just minutes earlier affirmed that pascal's wager is garbage.
The only useful thing I learned from this talk is that no matter what a coffee cup asks me to do - I shouldn’t do it if I don’t want to! Thanks AE! You truly are the source of wisdom in this world!
I think most Christians would consider Zeus to be a mythological figure and yet they can't see why some of us think that their Jesus guy is just mythology as well.
*_It's sad when a caller doesn't fully understand what is explained to them... then they try to twist the argument or certain statements to feel better about their credibility of calling..._* *_(Saving Face)_*
I watched this in 2022 and when Matt asked the caller who was the current president of the United States I immediately thought "oh no". Then the caller and co-host said "why did you have to go there?". All the white I was thinking that Matt's point was that someone might not accept reality based on verifiable facts.
The correct thing to say is christians assert an explanation, but they don't provide evidence, they just say it, doesn't mean it is the actual explanation, this argument that we have an explanation so we are right, regardless of having no evidence that explanation is accurate is ridiculously stupid
As soon as someone says "World view" you know there's going to be some nonsense going on. So many times they try and define *your* opinion by making some statement that confirms *their* bias it's just like a random speech generator. They seem to think (as far as I can tell) that words have power, and that saying words can somehow affect reality. I just don't grasp their gibberish most of the time....
Kinda reminds me of some claim I heard where supposedly some Muslims kept trying to insist that after several "scientific studies", reading the qu'ran to some water made it form "perfect crystals" when frozen. It sorta reinforces the notion that religious people believe simple words can change reality. I can't recall the name of the video, but if you're curious, I believe a youtuber called "Viced Rhino" talked about it at one point.
@@voiceoftruth2646 And the same could be said about all the several religions: there's no singular view or definition, despite how there's actually a dozen or so sects that call themselves christians in some form. Humanity just can't ever seem to all agree on one thing.
Right I don't buy the 'world view' stuff, no 2 people view the world in the exact same way. And there's certainly no Christian world view consensus, many different Christian sects disagree about all aspects of the Bible!
I feel like some people confuse "the first time *I* learned about a thing" with "the first time *anyone* knew about a thing". What a weird egocentric thing, to default to thinking that the first source that you personally encounter containing a fact is also the originator of the fact itself.
And now in 2020 a person with that mindset is the President of the United States to its grave detriment. A man who continues to deny basic scientific principles at the cost of thousands of lives. This is the danger of not challenging such backwards and insular thinking, it is able to flourish in a society where critical thinking skills and a lack of scientific literacy has been promoted by a vocal religious majority.
It's so sad that Christians believe in this false God. Especially since Roland, the Closet Goblin has made his presence known. I've seen more than one host on this show mention him, and after being told about Roland, I felt his presence. All praise Roland!
@@lesgoutsetlescouleurslglc1832 You have that exactly backwards… A quick Wikipedia search will show you that… Not that it’s a big deal … In fact, I’m not sure about this, but he might have even been the one that coined the term anti-theist… At least it was the first time I ever heard it used by anybody, referring to them self as something different than an atheist The reason, for that was because he believed that an atheist can still hope for the existence of God… And he did not include himself in that
Apparently, the caller must think no one ever hunted or no butchers exist before the very first Easter. He must not have grown up on a farm where animals die (either naturally or by human hands).
kellel, Not so, all you’d have to do is prove that you’re immortal. Then the position that you’re mortal would be falsified by default. Until immortality is proven I’ll continue to believe I’m mortal.
Mabatch Yes correct, all you would have to do to falisify mortality would be to prove immortality, but how would you going about doing that. And please justify why will you keep believing in your mortality if immortality is not proven. You just said you will, and not why.
kellel, I have no idea how I’d go about proving immortality, however, if I live to be 1000 years old instead of 80 or so then the likelihood that I might be immortal has increased somewhat. My justification for believing that I am mortal is simple, I’ve never seen a living organism survive past it’s death. Until that happens I have no reason to postulate that a living being can even be immortal.
Mabatch my point is that mortality is practically unfalsifiable as we dont know of a way to falsify it. What implications does this have in regards to philosophy of science.
@@charlesglidden557 No need to..... the default position is that nothing exists that isn't evidently in existence. Gawd botherers are making the affirmative claim, so have the burden of proof.
@@charlesglidden557 No, you could argue your own god out of existence. Granted, that god didn't exists in the first place, but you can make bad arguments that make the god impossible. ie the omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent god that wants me to know it exists.... does not exist or I'd know it existed.
@@kimweaver3323 well either It exists or It doesn't An argument can help you decide what you believe but It does but the argument doesn't affect the truth of It exists. So don't be afraid about picking up the
"I was talking from a theological standpoint, I wasn't talking from a practical standpoint." Lol Congratulations, you're one step closer to athiesm. 😂😂
If people really believed and understood the Bible , they would just tell the truth. God only exist in the mind , God is a personal belief , and that belief should never reflect on another person . I agree , this was a very dishonest argument. Great video .
There is no "Atheist world view" other than a lack of belief in gods. This caller tries to be so smart by pulling out all these fancy concepts and ideas. But his starting assumptions are wrong. He his thinking of materialism or maybe the methodological naturalism that Matt mentions early on.
Matt's direct, non-obfuscating, issue-clarifying questions make believers' heads hurt. Their overwhelming need to keep conflicting ideas in different cubbies forces them to evade-evade-evade and pretend not to understand Matt's point. And THAT'S why Matt hangs up on people.
Wayne's post IMHO, is the best comment I have seen in several dozen TAE videos I have watched recently, and I must give props: Wayne Catterton 3 days ago ~ If god exists yet he cannot protect children from being sexually abused in his own place of worship than what good is he?
Crucifixion was a popular method of execution during the Roman civilization. Julius Caesar (at age 25) had put to death an entire island of pirates - all by crucifixion. The failed slave uprising lead by Spartacus ended with all his captured followers crucified on the Appian Way, between Rome and Capua. By historical accounts it was 6,000 crucifixions - over 50 years before the purported time of Jesus. So yes, there was a huge amount of understanding of how people died when crucified.
Noah Lugeons is a pun on “No Illusions” I’m not sure if he’s legally changed his name to that, but it’s brilliant! Bonus: his cohost Heath Enwright’s name is similar, containing the word Heathen :)
This is exactly the cruz of the situation. They try to reconcile a dilemma with the most desperate illogical "fix" no matter how silly or insane their answer will sound.
I'd say that religions have greater explanatory power than science, but having more explanations and having _accurate_ explanations are two entirely different things. Science has less explanations for how and why the universe is the way it is because it takes the time to research and observe before coming to a conclusion that explains something. Religion has way more explanations because they aren't concerned with being accurate and can always employ the "Magic!" McGuffin to explain anything. Religion can give you unlimited answers; science can give you the right ones.
@Lady Skeptic I said they have more explanations, not that they were _accurate_ wxplanations. Like I said in my OP, religion has more explanations in the sense of how many things it claims to explain, (because explaining things is easy if you're just making shit up). Science has limited answers because it's honest about only answering that which it has evidence to back up. It's like comparing googling an answer (religion) vs asking a librarian for help (science); as Neil Gaiman put it, "Google can give you a million answers, but a librarian can give you the right one."
18 minutes in … Matt asks an easy question to prove an obvious point. Sadly, that obvious point and easy question now demonstrate the omnipotent power of disinformation.
23:33 They did not necessarily have that information? What the hell? Romans presumably crucified hundreds of people throughout the empire per year and they had no idea what happens to the body when they execute them that way? It is dumb to assume that they did not have that information.
If this is what people think is more important than than paying attention to the way we are destroying the Earth's ability to support life ....... "god" help us! Indeed.
For every account of an alleged miracle connected with the crucifixion and resurrection, you have to ask "Which is more likely: (1) that a genuine miracle occurred and was accurately recorded, or (2) that whoever wrote the account wanted people to believe a genuine miracle had occurred, and altered the account accordingly?" (hint: the second option is always more likely, given that we know people make shit up all the time, and no suspension of the laws of physics is required) The caller thinks that in the case of the blood and water, this can't have been just made up by the writer, since the writer could not possibly know about this phenomenon. Yet the caller is forced to admit that the same phenomenon must have been observed in other cases at the time of writing, since Jesus was far from the only person ever crucified. Having admitted this earlier, he then recants in desperation, reverting to the position that "they didn't know about it at that time". No wonder Matt was triggered a the end there.
and when the Pharaoh was again ready to let those people go God said "no, no, no, no I'm not done *showing off yet* , I'M going to harden your heart, and now I'm gonna kill every firstborn." OMG I was laughing for ten minutes! That's one of the funniest comebacks EVER!
To be fair, I don't think the caller was arguing dishonestly. I think he had already made up his mind that there was no way people in Jesus' time could know about bleeding water, and didn't understand the points the hosts were making.
if either of my children end up like this caller. i will have failed them.
No ...... you would have failed society.
Little Mexican girl: ¿Por qué no los dos?
*crowd erupts in joy*
@@BaronVonQuiply ¿Por qué*
@@Correctrix Oh, damn, you're right. Thanks.
THE PEOPLE SING what if they become arrogant Theists!
Noah is nailing it. He's able to articulate arguments with as much power as Matt. A fantastic proponent of Atheism I'd never been aware of before. He deserves a lot more screentime.
This is the first time I've seen Noah. I think if Matt ever decides to hang up his shoes, I think we have a successor ready and waiting. Noah and Tracey together? Fabulous!
@@Dragonblaster1 - Agreed, Noah is Matt's best "companion" on this show I've seen.
I highly recommend the various podcasts that Noah participates in - Scathing Atheist, God Awful Movies, Citation Needed and Skepticrat. Noah, Heath Enright, and Eli Bosnick are all extremely talented and funny. (Not so much Tom and Cecil.)
Try The Scathing Atheist. Noah’s diatribes in the beginning are the best.
Zander Noah looks like Eddie Money..
Why do these callers have SO much trouble answering a YES/NO question with a yes, or a no, and not a sermon?
well because yes or no would be devastating to their belief system. same as if you ask "will i go to hell for being an atheist" they will answer yes. then if you ask "do i deserve it" they will beat around the bush for hours. their thoughts say "no" though they have a hard time disagreeing with god out loud.
Full of their own ideas?
maskedathiest Great answer. Thank you.
Because they know that answering honestly would force them to admit to the problems with their arguments and positions.
Religious apologetics aren't about finding the truth of the matter or putting forward good supporting arguments. They're a smokescreen thrown up as a shield to defend what the theist already believes as a baseless presuppositions, and they KNOW that. And they don't want to be forced to admit that they don't have any good reason to believe what they believe and that all their arguments are just slight-of-hand and dishonest attempts to pretend they have a reason.
What matters to them isn't the argument, it's the conclusion; they've already determined their conclusion is right, and are working their way backwards to try and invent an argument that seems to prop up that conclusion. Which is why they don't care about arguing honestly because the argument is just window dressing so that they can defend the argument and not have to defend a conclusion that they know they CAN'T defend.
An apologist will never admit to a flaw in their argument, because their entire presentation is designed to cover up the flaws that they know are there and want to steer the conversation away from. Which is why the moment you start getting them off script and steering the conversation towards one of those flaws, they will shut down, start yammering, and attempt to obfuscate. Because obfuscating is literally all they're doing anyway.
Have you stopped beating your wife? Yes or No?
PS - First of all you have to get them to agree it is a valid question, which of course Matt does pretty well, but Heffalumps are wary of Heffalump traps.
“Christianity attempts to explain a mystery by appealing to a bigger mystery.”
Quote of the Year (2019)
Literally I'm gonna be using this one
Unfortunately, it's just a strawman.
Timothy must believe that the Romans invented Crucifixion specifically for Jesus.
I think a lot of people do, actually. You hear them talk about crucifixion as though it was a one-off event suffered by one guy.
@@BaronVonQuiply Indeed. I was subject to twelve years of indoctrination and this point was never clarified. When I asked a priest directly about this (I was about 14 or 15) I got the big waffle.
Lying sacks of shit is what the clergy is. Perverted, lying sacks of shit. Do they wonder why anyone with an IQ higher than 10 leaves the church?
@@69eddieD
No, they blame it on Satan ;-)
Introspection is for the faithless lol
Plus they were tied to the cross, they weren't nailed. For christs sake
@@zapkvr
I think that depended on where you were crucified and when as at the time it was going out of style as a method of punishment. Some places would just tie one up and others would nail one up. Ofcourse they would put the nails in the wrists as opposed to in the middle of the hands, It'll hold better that way.
I actually laughed out loud at "Let me give you a hint. He's omnipotent."
If god is all knowing then why create humans and then later destroy everything with a flood because it was all "corrupt"? Wouldn't you know that everything would turn out corrupt before you even created the first wave of humans? This is so silly its like if you were building a machine but knew that it wouldn't actually work so you talk shit about every machine based on the first machine failure that was already determined to happen before you created it. Its like getting angry at a poorly programmed calculator and punishing every future calculator based on your failed programming skills.
Yep, I also laughed when David Lee Roth said “...he’s omnipotent.”
@@devitomichael lol I thought he looked familiar
I fucking lost it XD
@@krumplethemal8831 I knew it, but I like TO KILL .............
A religious worldview has much LESS explanatory power. Saying that God did something does not explain HOW he did it. It just replaces an explanation with an excuse. Once you understand how something works you no longer rely on supernatural excuses. If you always rely on supernatural excuses you will never understand how things work.
Very True 👌 😎
Yes. A worldview based on fabrication and unsubstantiated assertion explains nothing at all.
@@blue5d09
Indeed 👌😎
I'm still not convinced there even is a so called "atheist worldview". lacking belief in gods leads in no direct way to anything else. there are no tenets or commandments or dictates or creeds or rituals or holy books or contracts or constitutions or mission statements or philosophies... it's just lack of belief in gods
I think that's where Christers give a knowing smirk and say Our God Is A Awesome God, and that they "don't need to know how God does his wondrous work."
17:30 phenomenal
Its not about choosing whether or not you believe, its choosing whether or not you follow and worship
Dude asks question. Matt proposes an answer and asks a question back. Dude ignores Matt and asks a more nonsensical question. Assuming in some sense that the first question is not maximally nonsensical.
Red herring fallacy, easy tactic to deflect from actually just admitting they have no evidence by any rational standard, just anecdotal or God of the gaps or "special revelation" b.s. that reduces the worldview to fideism
John Austin Have you seen Matt’s debate with Sye ten Bruggencate? In the cross examination, just about any question Matt asked was met with “Here’s the problem. Do you believe that or do you know it?” or other attempts to deflect to word salad.
@Tom H Or who are just convinced they're right completely and have confirmation bias, etc. Supernatural claims are notorious in suffering from that, what with the unfalsifiability and such
@Tom H Cult does tend to have a particular meaning (if we're not talking cult classic films and such, obviously), I like to reserve use of it, as opposed to cult-like or similar notions of resembling it
@@colinbaker3916 I find that guy particularly despicable. Mister Brain In A Vat.
We are in the 21st century still arguing if God exists. It’s clear at this point in time that he doesn’t. Time for people to give up this God concept and focus on the now and not what a book says.
Throughout history, every mystery ever solved. Has turned out to be....Not magic. - Tim Minchin
The coffee cup was like, "Don't bring me into this!"
Coffee cup: hold my stein.
(Holstein -> cream -> coffee -> cup)
If you could prove something supernatural wouldn't you have to stop calling it supernatural and consider it a part of nature?
Johannes Sjolte Yes.
Absolutely so their argument will always fail lol
It’s a conundrum for sure. Personally I’m fascinated by people that believe in the supernatural. From my perspective it’s the same as believing in literal magic. Every time I hear someone say “I’m not religious but I’m spiritual” I always want to say who cares, you still believe in magic.
Mabatch I too am fascinated by how people can hold views that violate logic and even the more non controversial aspects of what is colloquially called ‘common sense’. What’s more interesting is how vociferously they defend these beliefs, which have no rational basis in reality.
That's the point, supernatural doesn't works.
Noah’s actually real good damn, had never heard of that guy before
Check him out on the God Awful Movies podcast
@@Nickelini Yeah man I intend to soon, sounds good from what I have heard.
Scathing Atheist and God Awful Movies are good podcasts
Citation Needed is great if you want gut busting humor without destroying religions.
And "Beckerman" is probably the best God Awful Movie episode in my opinion. Christia John Wick with none of the talent, budget, and a divorced David AR White
I love Matt's methodological, rational and reasonable perspective.
Also, please get Noah back, he's awesome.
It is the first time I see Noah, but holy shoot, what a beast! Arguing with him would be like arguing with an artillery barrage ;)
2 hair extremes.
but below the belt matt sports an afro and noah is bald as can be! lol
It’s God’s will 😋
I know, what a difference a beard makes!
@@jimcarlson6157
How can you know that?
@@WhoThisMonkey how do they get the caramel in the Caramilk bar
Matt is so kind to have other hosts on the Matt Dillahunty show
Love Matt, but sometimes I wish he would let callers talk more. As well as co-hosts.
I thought that this caller was more sane than 95% of the people calling the show, still wrong though
plavyn
More articulate in regards to evasive word salad, yes.
More sane...?
I Think you Thought wrong.
What do you Think? :< )
JOHN L OPPERMAN maybe because I watch the clips rather than the full shows, I get the feeling that most theist that call in are pretty horrific when it comes to understanding simple arguments
@THE PEOPLE SING
Some are, some aren't ;-)
@THE PEOPLE SING
HAVE you ever asked them.
Or do you take it on "faith"?
@@plavyn I think many of them have a mental block when it comes to their favourite fairytale. It's not that they cannot understand, it's that they don't want to.
Love your show! I just spent a weekend with my very religious evangelical Christian extended family, and am now binge watching your show to feel sane again.
Poor you I would have had to walk out after a while I wouldn't be able to spend much time in their presence
Condolences Vanessa, I hope you have recovered by now :p
The possibility of the crucifixion is that he passed out from the pain and when he was stabbed no vital organs was hit. All was left was to nurse him back healthy enough to walk away. That is why when someone was crucified they left them hanging there for weeks not a few hours
I love how when Noah asks him for evidence that something that can't be explained naturally happened, something that wasn't a claim, and the callers first example is Jesus' resurrection.
Umm hello, the resurrection of Jesus is a claim.
Think Mcfly, think!
Exactly! and the more you look into their claim, the more you realize that he never even existed at all. Because no one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus, no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people. There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Jesus. Devastating to historians, there occurs not one single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus. All documents about Jesus came well after the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings.
Think? I've heard that word before. Is that in Romans, or Matthew?
It's rare to see a naked example of christians "antiprocessing" information but the discussion over blood and water at the end of this call is a textbook example of how antiprocessing works to defend the christian/theistic brain against any information that might question the faith.
And this is being observed in a christian that just minutes earlier affirmed that pascal's wager is garbage.
The only useful thing I learned from this talk is that no matter what a coffee cup asks me to do - I shouldn’t do it if I don’t want to!
Thanks AE! You truly are the source of wisdom in this world!
I find it curious that not one witness of Jesus's crucifixion mentioned him whistling "always look on the bright side of life".
cause Jesus is not a very good singer and they don't want to embarrass him. he's a tad touchy about it.
Kumbaya?
I absolutely love Noah and his podcasts. Such a good guest!
~ Thank you, Noah and Matt, today's two great voices of reason - really appreciative ~ Cheers, DAVEDJ ~
"hi all, timmothy here, I learnt some big words, listen to me use them to try to flummox matt and fail"
I think most Christians would consider Zeus to be a mythological figure and yet they can't see why some of us think that their Jesus guy is just mythology as well.
Instead of accepting his burden of proof, he assigns you a burden of belief by asking what would prove god to you
As the caller says "people do believe things contrary to what all common sense would say". Yeah we're listening to it right now.
*_It's sad when a caller doesn't fully understand what is explained to them... then they try to twist the argument or certain statements to feel better about their credibility of calling..._* *_(Saving Face)_*
I was too busy reading the script to listen to what you were saying.
I watched this in 2022 and when Matt asked the caller who was the current president of the United States I immediately thought "oh no". Then the caller and co-host said "why did you have to go there?". All the white I was thinking that Matt's point was that someone might not accept reality based on verifiable facts.
i would love to see noah back in the Axp. he's an excellent speaker and has a fresh voice for AXP.
The Christian world view can explain anything... but it won't be correct... so is it really an explanation?
Not for ANY thinking, non idiot .....................
The correct thing to say is christians assert an explanation, but they don't provide evidence, they just say it, doesn't mean it is the actual explanation, this argument that we have an explanation so we are right, regardless of having no evidence that explanation is accurate is ridiculously stupid
@@ARoll925 Of course it is !. But it gives them Power and MONEY ! .....................
Right? Even I child can make up explanations with some crazy stories.
As soon as someone says "World view" you know there's going to be some nonsense going on.
So many times they try and define *your* opinion by making some statement that confirms *their* bias it's just like a random speech generator.
They seem to think (as far as I can tell) that words have power, and that saying words can somehow affect reality. I just don't grasp their gibberish most of the time....
Kinda reminds me of some claim I heard where supposedly some Muslims kept trying to insist that after several "scientific studies", reading the qu'ran to some water made it form "perfect crystals" when frozen. It sorta reinforces the notion that religious people believe simple words can change reality. I can't recall the name of the video, but if you're curious, I believe a youtuber called "Viced Rhino" talked about it at one point.
Yep, cause the atheist worldview is ALLL nonsense. They cannot even HAVE ONE without God and they cannot see it.
@@voiceoftruth2646 And the same could be said about all the several religions: there's no singular view or definition, despite how there's actually a dozen or so sects that call themselves christians in some form. Humanity just can't ever seem to all agree on one thing.
@@voiceoftruth2646IF TRUTH=bullshit.
Theists just say it is and it's so because they assert bullshit into reality.
Right I don't buy the 'world view' stuff, no 2 people view the world in the exact same way. And there's certainly no Christian world view consensus, many different Christian sects disagree about all aspects of the Bible!
I feel like some people confuse "the first time *I* learned about a thing" with "the first time *anyone* knew about a thing". What a weird egocentric thing, to default to thinking that the first source that you personally encounter containing a fact is also the originator of the fact itself.
And now in 2020 a person with that mindset is the President of the United States to its grave detriment. A man who continues to deny basic scientific principles at the cost of thousands of lives. This is the danger of not challenging such backwards and insular thinking, it is able to flourish in a society where critical thinking skills and a lack of scientific literacy has been promoted by a vocal religious majority.
It's so sad that Christians believe in this false God. Especially since Roland, the Closet Goblin has made his presence known. I've seen more than one host on this show mention him, and after being told about Roland, I felt his presence. All praise Roland!
Imagine a hard-core antitheist like Christopher Hitchens on this show. Arouses me just thinking about it...
Christopher Hitchens was an atheist, not an antitheist.
He would never waste his time with ignorant idiots like these who are not willing to thibk critically or logically.
@@lesgoutsetlescouleurslglc1832
You have that exactly backwards… A quick Wikipedia search will show you that… Not that it’s a big deal … In fact, I’m not sure about this, but he might have even been the one that coined the term anti-theist… At least it was the first time I ever heard it used by anybody, referring to them self as something different than an atheist
The reason, for that was because he believed that an atheist can still hope for the existence of God… And he did not include himself in that
9:34 The question Timothy asks is a word salad of epic proportions! The multiple usage of "necessarily" was the crouton on top.
"Holy shit! I literally just asked you this fucking question!"
I'm going to make that my new ring tone.
At around 24 minutes I LOVE the long winded attempt Timmothy makes of trying to disguise the freewill assertion!
A world view founded solely on falsehood has scant explanatory power.
3:01 potential solution to the problem of hard solipsism
"They didn't have that knowledge at the time." Why do people think humans didn't know very simple trivial things 2000 years ago
Apparently, the caller must think no one ever hunted or no butchers exist before the very first Easter. He must not have grown up on a farm where animals die (either naturally or by human hands).
Matt's 'possible' answer to hard solipsism was brilliant. I'd never thought of that before.
Predictive power > explanatory power
Real > non-real
Falsifiable > unfalsifiable
To prove that you are mortal is unfalsifiable
kellel,
Not so, all you’d have to do is prove that you’re immortal. Then the position that you’re mortal would be falsified by default. Until immortality is proven I’ll continue to believe I’m mortal.
Mabatch Yes correct, all you would have to do to falisify mortality would be to prove immortality, but how would you going about doing that. And please justify why will you keep believing in your mortality if immortality is not proven. You just said you will, and not why.
kellel,
I have no idea how I’d go about proving immortality, however, if I live to be 1000 years old instead of 80 or so then the likelihood that I might be immortal has increased somewhat. My justification for believing that I am mortal is simple, I’ve never seen a living organism survive past it’s death. Until that happens I have no reason to postulate that a living being can even be immortal.
Mabatch my point is that mortality is practically unfalsifiable as we dont know of a way to falsify it. What implications does this have in regards to philosophy of science.
You can't argue gawd into existence.
Or out of existence either
@@charlesglidden557 No need to..... the default position is that nothing exists that isn't evidently in existence. Gawd botherers are making the affirmative claim, so have the burden of proof.
@@charlesglidden557 No, you could argue your own god out of existence. Granted, that god didn't exists in the first place, but you can make bad arguments that make the god impossible. ie the omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent god that wants me to know it exists.... does not exist or I'd know it existed.
@@charlesglidden557 Evidence bitch
@@kimweaver3323 well either It exists or It doesn't An argument can help you decide what you believe but It does but the argument doesn't affect the truth of It exists. So don't be afraid about picking up the
"I was talking from a theological standpoint, I wasn't talking from a practical standpoint."
Lol Congratulations, you're one step closer to athiesm. 😂😂
That bottle inside the Coffee mug appears to be Bawls energy drink. These are so hard to find near me. And I am thirsty now.
I can't look at Noah without wanting to sing Skid Row songs.
THATS what it is lol. Couldn’t put my finger on it.
Jump
@@pmtoner9852 How high?
@@CulturedWhiteBoy might ad well jump
@@pmtoner9852 That's Van Halen, not Skid Row.
23:20 - The laughter in the background is Awesome...!!!
If people really believed and understood the Bible , they would just tell the truth.
God only exist in the mind , God is a personal belief , and that belief should never reflect on another person .
I agree , this was a very dishonest argument.
Great video .
very well said👏👏👏
I understand the Bible but do not believe it.
Love the ending when the theist gets caught in his own word trap.
They always do.
The nonsense they believe soon trips them up.
There is no "Atheist world view" other than a lack of belief in gods. This caller tries to be so smart by pulling out all these fancy concepts and ideas. But his starting assumptions are wrong. He his thinking of materialism or maybe the methodological naturalism that Matt mentions early on.
Right it seems like indoctrinated people can't see Atheism as not a religion or "world view"
"The God excuse, the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument."
-George Carlin
Matt's direct, non-obfuscating, issue-clarifying questions make believers' heads hurt. Their overwhelming need to keep conflicting ideas in different cubbies forces them to evade-evade-evade and pretend not to understand Matt's point. And THAT'S why Matt hangs up on people.
Whenever I need a good laugh, I listen to a theist on the Atheist Experience show...
That ending was mega hilarious!!!
The pained look on Noah's face at 10:26, says more than words! Lol!
Some of the early Christians practiced colonic irrigation.
"The bowels of the saints are refreshed by thee, brother"
Philemon 1:7
I was watching a famous Televangelist this Sunday morning. His new series is titled........ready.............BELIEVE, GET YOUR MIND RIGHT.
Wayne's post IMHO, is the best comment I have seen in several dozen TAE videos I have watched recently, and I must give props: Wayne Catterton 3 days ago ~
If god exists yet he cannot protect children from being sexually abused in his own place of worship than what good is he?
Crucifixion was a popular method of execution during the Roman civilization. Julius Caesar (at age 25) had put to death an entire island of pirates - all by crucifixion. The failed slave uprising lead by Spartacus ended with all his captured followers crucified on the Appian Way, between Rome and Capua. By historical accounts it was 6,000 crucifixions - over 50 years before the purported time of Jesus. So yes, there was a huge amount of understanding of how people died when crucified.
The Christian worldview has no explanatory power until somebody proves any gods exist.
I nearly broke my jaw yawning when Timothy spoke..!
Wow. He was trying REALY hard to sound intelligent. I'm surprised Matt was so courteous .
I hope matt never stops that... he s soooo good...
The final line was absolute gold,..im just wondering if there is a theist that has ever argued honestly?
Gawd I love it when Matt swears (should happen more)
Matt refuses to believe in Jesus while sitting right next to him in studio, smh...
lol.
15:00 love that coffee cup analogy
The last minute and a half of this is priceless.
i like how his name is Noah, looks like Jesus, and full blown atheist haha
Noah Lugeons is a pun on “No Illusions” I’m not sure if he’s legally changed his name to that, but it’s brilliant!
Bonus: his cohost Heath Enwright’s name is similar, containing the word Heathen :)
@@katyungodly ohhhhh
Hi from Australia Noah I like your voice 👍🏽 keep up the good work.
it is so plain that religious thinking and teachings have trained people to usurp reason and logic, and to persist that we fall in and sink with them.
This is exactly the cruz of the situation. They try to reconcile a dilemma with the most desperate illogical "fix" no matter how silly or insane their answer will sound.
@@sutikare1512 yes, so true. sorry i took so long to respond.
This conversation finished at 2mins, Matt pretty much shut his whole argument down in 2 sentences.
If he keeps asking questions and listening to the show he will talk his way out of jesusism.
"God did it" has less explanatory power than "i don't know"
I'd say that religions have greater explanatory power than science, but having more explanations and having _accurate_ explanations are two entirely different things.
Science has less explanations for how and why the universe is the way it is because it takes the time to research and observe before coming to a conclusion that explains something.
Religion has way more explanations because they aren't concerned with being accurate and can always employ the "Magic!" McGuffin to explain anything.
Religion can give you unlimited answers; science can give you the right ones.
@Lady Skeptic I said they have more explanations, not that they were _accurate_ wxplanations. Like I said in my OP, religion has more explanations in the sense of how many things it claims to explain, (because explaining things is easy if you're just making shit up).
Science has limited answers because it's honest about only answering that which it has evidence to back up.
It's like comparing googling an answer (religion) vs asking a librarian for help (science); as Neil Gaiman put it, "Google can give you a million answers, but a librarian can give you the right one."
I love how Matt knew the caller would say, "The Resurrection."
Why is belief in God important ?
I believe there are rocks on the moon, but it wouldn't matter if I didn't.
Because beliefs in rocks on the moon dont influence government and education just to name a couple of things.
@@childboo2450 exactly,but they could if we start to make so.
@@ericscaillet2232 How?
18 minutes in … Matt asks an easy question to prove an obvious point. Sadly, that obvious point and easy question now demonstrate the omnipotent power of disinformation.
The guy on the left looks a bit like Ozzy when he was younger.
It's official, I love this channel 👍
your going to hell
Coffee Cup Denialism. There IS no goddamned coffee cup!
What did that coffee cup do to get damned?
23:33 They did not necessarily have that information? What the hell? Romans presumably crucified hundreds of people throughout the empire per year and they had no idea what happens to the body when they execute them that way? It is dumb to assume that they did not have that information.
Noah kind of looks like David Lee Roth.
He reminds me more of Randy Rhodes. Maybe it's the hair though.
He looks like Sebastian Bach.
I dont see it.
He just has long hair.
i was gonna say he looks like sebastian bach
Looks more like Linda Hamilton to me
If this is what people think is more important than than paying attention to the way we are destroying the Earth's ability to support life ....... "god" help us! Indeed.
For every account of an alleged miracle connected with the crucifixion and resurrection, you have to ask "Which is more likely: (1) that a genuine miracle occurred and was accurately recorded, or (2) that whoever wrote the account wanted people to believe a genuine miracle had occurred, and altered the account accordingly?" (hint: the second option is always more likely, given that we know people make shit up all the time, and no suspension of the laws of physics is required)
The caller thinks that in the case of the blood and water, this can't have been just made up by the writer, since the writer could not possibly know about this phenomenon. Yet the caller is forced to admit that the same phenomenon must have been observed in other cases at the time of writing, since Jesus was far from the only person ever crucified. Having admitted this earlier, he then recants in desperation, reverting to the position that "they didn't know about it at that time". No wonder Matt was triggered a the end there.
Matt LOV THE SHOW...GOOD WORK
and when the Pharaoh was again ready to let those people go God said "no, no, no, no I'm not done *showing off yet* , I'M going to harden your heart, and now I'm gonna kill every firstborn."
OMG I was laughing for ten minutes! That's one of the funniest comebacks EVER!
To be fair, I don't think the caller was arguing dishonestly. I think he had already made up his mind that there was no way people in Jesus' time could know about bleeding water, and didn't understand the points the hosts were making.
Seeing Sarah Connor settling down and getting over Johns death warms my heart
Matt's co-host looks like Rationality Rules (Stephen Woodford I think it is) 30 years later without the accent
Ok
Because both have hair...🙄
The moral of the story children is don't try to force Matt down a rabbit hole.
Noah Lugeons! 🤟 His show was one of the first atheist programs I got addicted to years ago.
I don't care what anyone says, that Coffee Cup isn't real.
HERETIC!
Sorry.... I'm a little touchy, I ran out of cream yesterday and have to settle for instant coffee.
Join us and become a Tea-ist instead. There's so many denominations to choose from.
13:55 excellent
What is is with this bizarre fondness for the word "evidences" among Christian apologists? It's such a giveaway for nonsense argument.