Claims Aren't Evidence (feat. Matt Dillahunty)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 кві 2020
- Capturing Christianity implored, "If you've ever watched a Matt Dillahunty debate and thought he was wrong but couldn't pinpoint the error, WATCH THIS VIDEO!" So, I asked Matt Dillahunty to watch it with me. It seems that "Bertuzzian break-down" might not be a system of analysis, but rather a state of missing the point.
Gotcha, Matt! Mug
teespring.com/gotcha-matt-mug...
Before You Watch Another Matt Dillahunty Debate, WATCH THIS!
• Before You Watch Anoth...
Matt Dillahunty UA-cam Channel
/ sansdeity
Support Paulogia at
/ paulogia
www.paypal.me/paulogia
teespring.com/stores/paulogia
Follow Paulogia at
/ paulogia0
/ paulogia0
/ discord - Наука та технологія
The unfortunate irony here is that these religious apologists who disparage street epistemology (which is asking questions, clarifying words, active listening, steelmanning, striving for clarify, driving to the foundation, etc.) could probably benefit from it the most. Just imagine if this fellow took the time to honestly engage with Matt in this manner instead of what he ended up doing. I’m fairly confident history will not look too fondly on their antics.
Cameron seems to be in some competition to see who can become the most dishonest apologist. He, Whaddo You Meme, and a few others have been pathetically trying to boost their channel's viewership by making videos about Matt. They are hoping that piggybacking on his name will draw people to their channels.
I didn't even know that there is such a thing as "apologetics" until I came to UA-cam, despite being a Christian for twenty years. (I'm not one anymore due to many inconsistencies & contradictions within the re-legion)
@Cleo Fierro the obsession is more influenced by the ever-receding constitutional rights we face from the god believer than any pathology.
Cleo Fierro Is this is the first time you’ve publicly made this observation? I’m truly curious if you’ve never heard our typical responses to what you’re saying right now.
@Cleo Fierro Do you really believe that the beliefs of a person do not influence their actions?
Lawyer: Your honor the defense is guilty.
Judge: Okay provide your evidence.
Lawyer: .... uh... I just did.
Bwahahahah this sums it up perfectly
Actually, ten of us just did.
the best one is "he knew about the crime", how do you prove that if you have no other evidence haha
But we listen to witnesses no?
@@johncollins8097 how do you know witness is telling the truth?
"Dad, at school today I saw a kid fall down the stairs and die." Dad beliefs kid and hugs her.
"Dad, yesterday the boy came back to life." Dad still believes her ..... RIGHT?! -_-
Right, and the boy felt tired so he lay back down and all the kids were like, well, I guess he's dead again. :p
Episode 16 or 17 of season 1 of Dragonball Z. Gohan washes ashore and two children, a boy and a girl, around the age of 5 and 3 years old, found him and the boy declared him dead. The girl responded with: Aw, that's a pity. XD
Gohan wakes up and sits up. The children say something and Gohan lays back down and the girl said: "I guess he's dead again."
For me the funniest thing about that is that my nephews would actually say those things. They're great grandmother passed away, so they know what death is, but if the first time they heard about it was when they found someone laying on the ground they'd just be really confused as to why other people are so sad about that and figure it's because sleeping kids can't play, and that's a pity :p And yes, I'm rewatching the entire series, sue me :p The show definitely has its moments; that moment being one of them :)
Oh my God! They killed Kenny!
@@crowwn649 You bastards!
@@crowwn649YOU BASTARDS!!!
No...only if the kid had claimed to be god previously....and had claimed he would die and come back to life. Or, if his schoolmate wrote the same in a story.
Haha when Matt said "aliens dancing in buckets of icecream", my brain just accepted it and didn't even notice.
A fortuitous object lesson.
Damn you Mandela Effect/Confirmation of Crowds!
Scrolled down to comments reading about 'dancing in icecream' before getting to that part. Then I heard 'dancing in icecream' until Paulogia replayed that part.
Me too.
I was like: "What? I didn't hear dancing. I heard "living" or "eating", but maybe he's right because he does these things all the time right?"
I love how they always start out with mundane claims like "a boy fell down at school" and use that to eventually assert that the claim that someone defied all known laws of biology and *rose from the dead* is also true.
Yes, because if you start with 'out there' bullshit, no-one is going listen to a word of your shite!
I would “like” this comment.... but, if I did. It wouldn’t be 69 likes anymore. And I like that number. So you, my good sir, do NOT get a like.
It's worse than that. Upon being bashed with the rebuttal of "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence," theists would start warping the standards of extraordinary. In one episode of AE for example, the caller has the gall to say that "Well, Alexander building an empire across three continents seems pretty extraordinary to me. Thus, historians claiming that Alexander ever exists holds exactly the same water as the Bible claiming Jesus exists."
I would say that theists have zero grasp on reality if you ask me.
Or was BORN of a VIRGIN.
@@thesearemymurdermittens Who was apparently still a virgin *after* giving birth as I've been told which....how XD
Cameron is pandering to people who want to believe. He is desperately trying to win the argument at all costs, which doesn't mean finding truth, but making himself & his "Christian" audience feel better about what they are trying desperately to believe against any inconvenient opposition.
That's what "apologists" do.
Maybe. I think that, more fundamentally, Cameron is wanting to build an income from a UA-cam channel and understands that he needs to cater specifically to those people to do so.
Lol big words kid
From the day I learned what a Christian apologist is, I wondered, why do Christians need apologists, what do they need to apologize for...?
Do they ever actually apologize?
I've seen the series of videos by *Rationality Rules* that systematically debunk many of the claims & arguments put forward by *Cameron* (& other *_Christian Apologists_* on his show). *Cameron* frequently seems disappointingly smug *_(⊕)_* when making his arguments - occasionally at inopportune times during the discussion & in often ways that demonstrate his profound ignorance of his interlocutor's arguments.
He's hardly alone in this among *_Apologists_* , with many showing tremendous contempt & arrogance, as well as serious ignorance of the details their opponent's argument/s. (Especially given that they're arguing against that position.)
Apart from seeing him wipe the smug off of his face, I'd like to see his argue against an *_Atheist_* or *_Scientist_* & demonstrate some comprehension of his opponent's actual argument, instead of his more typical _Strawman._
*_(⊕)_* *_Backpfeifengesicht_*
Disgustingly dishonest misrepresentation and deliberate obfuscation? Capturing Christianity truly lives up to his name.
Jay Maverick
Really??
@@rationalsceptic7634 really really. Pretty much captures Christianity in a nutshell.
Jay Maverick
Who is lying..Theists or Atheists?
Equivocation, obfuscation, and persistent extraordinary efforts,
to justify misunderstanding Matt's words.. Total dishonesty..
An average person could, with half his brain 'tied behind his back', understand what Matt said.
Do Christian Apologists EVER Steel Man an opponents argument?
Jay Maverick
Captures what ...the Bullshit of Bertuzzi
Plot twist, his daughter lied about the boy falling because she attends an all girls’ school. And aliens do no eat buckets of ice cream on Mars because ice cream is only a Martian dance floor media, not a tasty dessert.
Andy Nonya excuse me but... What?
I thought of the all girls school too.
But not in a creepy way!
Wolfgang There’s probably some way to make those claims (or are they evidence?) in to an argument for one side or the other, but mainly just being silly. My brain turns a little mushier than usual with even small doses of christian apologetics. 😁
Lots of Rocky Canal ice cream, too. Looking forward to going back.
I did watch CC's "destruction" of Matt and found it to be surprisingly weak. I also found it quite dishonest of CC to focus on Matt's off the cuff, unprepared answer when he used a word to define a word (i.e "evidence"). If CC genuinely believed he had valid criticisms of Matt's views, he would not just pounce on some sloppy language for a "gotcha" moment, but he would ask Matt to clarify his language in a prepared answer, then critique that considered view. The fact that CC chose to not seek clarification from Matt before posting his video says quite a lot in his interest in the actual truth. I suspect that I will very much enjoy hearing Matt and Paul's discussion on this topic.
@Game in a Jar
You can intentionally use a word in an inaccurate way around him and he will never ask for any clarification... he will just start attacking.
Dishonesty is their lifeblood.
@Gabe Norman awesome argument you got there.....
@Charlie
Socialist
Any atheist, skeptic, secular person who is invited to debate on CC's channel should be forewarned that they will debating both their opponent and the moderator.
@Gabe Norman how much grinding and honing do you do to get that edge?
Thought experiment:
In his argument, Cameron accepts that his daughter's classmate fell and busted his lip on her assertion of eye-witness testimony. Shortly thereafter, his wife tells him that the preschool teacher called and said that some of the other children, including the child with a busted lip, said that the daughter pushed him into the ladder of the slide, because he was taking too long to climb up, and she was impatiently waiting behind him.
Now her claim is in question, even though ordinarly possible. Just because there is more evidence to consider. It has nothing to do with being miraculous, impossible or otherwise. I think that this helps illustrates Matt's point.
Cameron almost certainly uses these same processes at arriving at the truth in every other situation on a daily basis, excepting only his pet beliefs that, being imaginary, need lots of mental gymnastics to convince himself & others that the beliefs are true. This is because the people to whom he is pandering, like himself, are trying desperately to believe.
I can say this from the viewpoint of a former Christian who wrote for a (now defunct) Christian history website. It took lots of difficult & exhausting mental gymnastics to prop up my fantasies (uh, beliefs) and help prop up those of others.
One day my realization of the fact that the reason that there were so many conflicting religious beliefs were because the holders of most, if not all, of those beliefs were willing and able to sensibly judge others' beliefs, but not examine their own with the same scrutiny, came together with my thought that I was, in many ways, guilty of the same thing. Furthermore, I realized that if I was to be totally honest, I should start with examining my own beliefs, that if true, would withstand scrutiny, & if not true, should be disguarded for what is true.
Imagine how the world would change for the better if everyone decided to take the honest step of applying the same scrutiny to their own beliefs as they do to others'. Wouldn't everything begin to change for the better?
Religious persecution & wars would no longer be a thing, since we would all eventually agree, or at least be open to discussion, versus attacks, right?
Imagine if Christian Apologists were trained to put HONEST and persistent effort into listening and comprehension ,,, then Steel Man an opponents argument.
The entire Apologetic's enterprise, would soon disappear
Yeah, his argument, to use a modern example, would be if I wrote that I "knew of" 15 Starbucks customers that witnessed a purple elephant walking down the street. It would be, you know, kind of "helpful", if their was foot prints, video, pictures, etc. Declaring that "Starbucks" is real, that customers exist, and therefor its sensible to assume I am telling the truth about these 15 people even existing, never mind what they saw, is, at best, a massive stretch. At the bare minimum I would want names of people, I would want to see tweets from these people, or a written account from even just *one* of them.
Saying that 500 people saw something, but having not even one, single, individual, account from one of those 500, and instead just the assertion that, "Well, gosh! Trust me that they existed, and that I am reporting what they witnessed!", would get anyone and everyone laughed at. Unless they had some desperate reason to want there to be purple elephant, or even just one specific purple elephant, walking down some equally vague "street".
Even if you personally interviewed all 15 of those Starbucks customers and they all made the same claim of seeing a purple elephant, it would still be hard to believe. You would have to consider the possibility of the coffee being drugged, or some sort of optical illusion, or any of countless other explanations. It is more likely that 15 people were mistaken than a purple elephant exists.
Also imagine his daughter said she saw a talking donkey.
He wouldn't believe her.
She says she saw the miracle of the talking donkey.
Now he believes her.
Then she says Vishnu did it.
Not believe. Lol
@@jonkroll4583 alternatively someone could have painted an elephant.
Classic apologist tactic, straw man then ignore
" saw mommy kissing Santa Claus underneath the Chrismas tree last night" See, there is the Tree right there.
axer351 plot twist, Santa is your father! 😱
Poor Cameron, he wants Jesus to be the “in” thing sooooo bad.
@Marcus Freebody I bet he never does !
@Marcus Freebody I bet he never proves christianity
@S Gloobal Belief is NOT proof neither is faith !
@S Gloobal Then you thought wrong.
Wouldn't Islam be the most popular religion since Catholics aren't real Christians? There are 1,6 billion Muslims and only 800 million Protestants.
And what denomination is the correct one?
Cheers to Paulogia, All the Best.
you too, Peter
@@Paulogia you are awesome, I don’t know how you stay patient and dispassionate when Cameron “The Hairdo” Bertuzzi lies through his teeth.
If it involves Cameron, let it be known I’m already facepalming. Don’t worry, I’ll wash my hands afterwards.
It's better if you do it before watching the video, to face-palm with clean hands
wash your hands FIRST! :D
20 seconds at least
Yes, wash your hands first, but por que no los dos? ☺️
@@angeliparraguirre7329 With soap! Otherwise 48 hours will probably suffice. Corona is encapsulated in lipids, fat. It will dissolve in soap after about 20 seconds, fat doesn't dissolve in water and you'll have to wait for it to run out of time and die.
So if you're going with water, you can close the tap and wash your hands with air for 48 hours instead and save some water.
Cameron: "Hmm, since I am incapable of dazzling them with brilliance I shall have to baffle them with bullsh*t."
The principle of Agent Orange.
Walter Brooks The Deepak Chopra and InspiringPhilosophy tactic
Sadly, the person who most needs to understand what Matt is saying, namely Cameron, is most unlikely to understand it. Why? Because his "philosophy" is informed by faith, not reason.
I have more the feeling that he is in it for the views, fame, money. Just a hunch, though.
*Camerinus* Exactly right because if he took his god glasses off for one minute and thought honestly about "claims aren't evidence" he could understand it - but then he wouldn't have his "gotcha".
@@PWN4G3FTW Cameron seems to be very honest in his Christian faith. Like many UA-camrs, yes, he seems to be hoping to make a living out of this. I'm fine with that, though of course it's infuriating to see how he misrepresent others. He proves yet again that faith is a poor guide to truth.
I would say that his 'opinions' are informed by faith. There is no foundation to build anything but self serving opinions.
@@BigHeretic Unlike Matt, he is not actually interested in finding the truth since he assumes he knows the truth. Has he ever wondered why there is a need for apologists ─hundreds of them─ if the evidence is so good? With solid evidence, there would be no need for the Bertuzzer nor any other apologist.
Bertuzzian: (adjective) an observation or question made about a claim while assuming your own fallcious beliefs are correct.
o_O How? All I can find so far is that Bertuzsomething is a former ice hockey player. I'd love a word for that explanation to exist, but it doesn't seem to be added to any dictionary (yet).
Setekh I believe it was essentially a description of how the word was _actually used_ in this circumstance, irrespective of whatever it was _intended_ to mean, or what it ever may have meant.
@@MendTheWorld I see. Thanks. My wishful thinking really wanted it to be an actual existing and widely understood term :/ Ah well.
The guy in the video is named Cameron Bertuzzi. Bertuzzian being the adjectival form of "pulling a Bertuzzi".
Which since it means whatever was going on with the video, Cameron's use meant that the explanation/video was long-winded, Paulogia and Matt's use meant twistingly deceitful.
Have I watched the Matt debates? Yes. Have I thought that something said is wrong? Yes. But it is NOT with what Matt was saying.
Personally I thought that the Martians dancing in ice cream was funnier than simply eating ice cream.
right?!? that's why I didn't say anything at first.
lol
First days lecture in law school evidence class. Pretty good. Thanks for the refresher. What Cameron is doing is similar to a defense attorney with a guilty client trying to create reasonable doubt even though he doesn’t believe his own arguments himself.
I love listening to Matt. His reasoned responses and arguments are so instructive and helpful to those of us who like to engage others on such claims.
Love the aliens dancing in ice cream montage.
I've been running through comments for a while looking for anyone mentioning Thanos making some moves over there in vain
and here we are... still lacking any evidence to support their claim
AT87
The claim “I exist “ is an easy one to provide evidence for . We can all provide documents, photographs and eye witness accounts, to support a claim “I exist”.
What I guess I mean is I don’t understand your point.
AT87 idiot. That’s ridiculous. Like saying: I see all these nails and I have a hammer, however I may not use the hammer because I do not fully grasp how the hammer came about.
@AT87 You don't understand what a mind is. A mind is a state of being, produced by a physical brain. Now go ahead and try your bullshit again.
@AT87 I'm not following. Is there some reason why the memories, imaginings, impressions and emotions and preceptions of the mind that prevents it from producing a self or "I"?
@AT87""""""There’s actually no demonstration that a mind requires a brain at all.""""""" Because lobotomies don't effect your mind, right? Damaging your brain, alters the state of your mind, that isn't some huge secret.
Everything Cameron says is phrased in dishonest service to his god delusion.
He's the kind of two-faced character that would wear a pro-christianity T-shirt while hosting a debate... So much for even the _appearance_ of objectivity!
rstevewarmorycom
"Everything Cameron says is phrased in dishonest service to his god delusion."
Let me correct that for you :- "Everything Cameron says is phrased in dishonest service to his money obsession."
See, much better...............
@S Gloobal don't be so naive, the term is fairly simple to understand. If you're struggling Google it!
@S Gloobal Is a book you should read by Richard Dawkins. You won't though, I've seen you being purposefully obtuse and ignoring everything said to you in other comment threads.
Maybe if you didn't shift the goalposts with every comment you make, and maybe if you weren't a dishonest actor pushing an obviously false narrative you'd have better conversations. Ask your apologist links you post have been debunked 100 times, and when you're shown that, you ignore it and change the topic, post another already debunked link, then rinse and repeat.
You're a total fraud.
@S Gloobal Man, you did exactly what I said you would do. When I say the god delusion "Is a book by Richard Dawkins", and you respond to that with """"""""""" So your saying God is a delusion. What's your evidence?"""""""""" You demonstrate how dishonest you are. You are so far gone you can't even respond to what was said. You are pathetic and sad :(
"""""" So your saying God is a delusion. What's your evidence?"""""" I did? When did I say that? Can you go ahead and quote me saying that to you in my comment? Either you have to quote me saying that, or you have to explain why you are so overtly dishonest and a hack. Which one? Care to explain why you are making shit up that I didn't say, to argue against? Want to explain why you ONLY straw man, and NEVER address what was actually said? Care to try that? I'm guessing not.
You are a total fraud, you literally did what I called you out for doing! What a chump!
Now I'll break down your dishonest, fallacious response for others that read these comments.
"""""I read atheists books. I read Lawrence Krauss the universe from nothing."""""" Nice, you can read, but cannot comprehend. Well, you are probably capable of understanding but choose not to, which is a lot worse because that is legitimate dishonesty. Also, did I ask about books written by Atheists that you've read? Another red herring that avoids the topic you should respond to, but won't.
"""""On page 58 he says that because something is physical and nothing is physical the universe can come from nothing. Ridiculous"""""""
Incredulity is not a rebuttal, and I am not a physicist, so why are you asking me physicist shit? Ohhhhhhh, right. I know why, it's because people like you do not give a single shit what the actual truth is, you are totally cool pretending to search for answers, so long as your unproven, evidenceless sky daddy belief is not broken.
"""""So your saying God is a delusion. What's your evidence?""""" And once again, I didn't say this, you are making shit up whole cloth to argue against, that is called a straw man argument. Quote me saying that, or you have proven yourself to be full of shit. The only claims I have made have been about you being a fraud and dishonest, and I have demonstrated those. You. are. a. total, fraud. And it is really obvious,
I need a 10 hour loop of that aliens dancing in ice cream clip
Y'all apologists let me know when William Lane Craig stops running scared from Matt.
Dishonest apologist is dishonest
Is there any other kind of apologist?
What a shocker
@@John_Demarco I dont know of any
+Matt Tarrant, I'm pretty sure that first "Dishonest" is redundant.
Fred Derf that’s how that joke is structured, it’s like saying the first knock in a knock knock joke is redundant
Cameron fully looks like the guy who would come to school with his guitar and do Christian Rock to try and convert the kiddies.
His daughter: How do I know that aliens eating buckets of ice cream on Planet Mars? A book says that 500 people saw it.
Cameron baited-and-switched.
This is why I have so much respect for Matt Dillahunty. He's able to just let Cameron's pathetic strawmaning role off his back and just very eloquently annihilate Cameron here by pointing out his intellectual dishonesty. Props to you Matt keep up the good fight
36:00 "What's the best explanation for this empty tomb?
That there wasn't one"
I’ve been a fan of Matt for a while now. And I just cane across you through Genetically Modified Skeptic. So I’m really glad to find you both on a video.
A reasonable assertion, like this fellow came back from the dead?
gowd sake you might be mixing a couple passages up. There’s a claim of 500 people seeing the risen Christ and there’s a claim in Matthew that many dead saints rose from their graves, there is no number given.
@@dustinosborn4068 My bad apologises I blame brain fog
During a brief discussion with my Christian brother, I touched upon the gospels left out of the canon of scriptures. He literally thought I was talking about a weapon that shoots things. Lesson: Sometimes people don't care to learn or are blissfully ignorant.
One of the greatest benefits to now working from home is I see the Paulogia notifications much quicker 😉
that shows how dire things are
That image with the dancing aliens in ice cream in the top-left corner kills me every time. lol
I am 20 minutes into this video and really enjoying it. Clearly distinguishing between claims and evidence is crucial.
Paul, you are sitting too close to Matt.
Can cartoons get Cv-19? That would indeed be a terrifying universe!
Only cartoon Covid-19.
Don't stand. Don't stand. Don't stand so close to me
@@brawnerbandwidthmusic2529 please don't stand so close to me
@@earendilthemariner5546 this apologist is half Matt's age!
I was hoping to see a comment down here from Cameron acknowledging some of this and showing that he watched the video. Disappointed not to see it.
Whenever a Christian tries to defend or augue their case at some point sanctimonious smugness or smug sanctimoniousness will make an appearance. They can't help it, its hard wired into them
@peter evans
As a Christian I can attest to this, as that sanctimonious smugness was something I sought to rip from my heart.
I've come to find that seeking knowledge about my theology is better than assuming I know it.
True
@@DemonicRemptiondo you still consider yourself a Christian? It's been 3 years, I wonder how your beliefs have held up to more rational scrutiny and less smug sanctimony.
I know mine didn't last that long.
@@phillyphakename1255
Quite well, especially now that I'm homeless and alone and I've got no one to rely on but the good lord and the wisdom he gave me after I stopped assuming that I knew everything.
Though it's not all it's cracked up to be, as it's like a super power that's prepackaged with a weakness. I can't give give in to fear, sadness, or my own ego, otherwise I'll be an idiot all over again.
But that's why you're an atheist, because the only thing you knew was sanctimonious smugness, while like I said I cast that crap aside and studied the theology for myself. That said I currently don't have the time to into everything wrong with how Christianity is practiced. But I will say this, I think Fredrick Nietzche was onto something when he saw it as "creative resentment." Because the idea I'm meant to endure being homeless when what I felt and experienced contradicts that reeks of b.s.
I think Cameron's hair spray/ hair wax is seeping in through his scalp and affecting his brain
Are you sure that it isn't infecting/colonising his head and exterminating his indigenous brain cells? That would explain a lot ;-)
All 2 cells of it.
This team up fills me with so much joy.
This is an interesting channel! I appreciate the resistance focused on the UA-cam videos I find way too frequently, thanks for the video and Matt you’re awesome as always.
Why do apologists use “historical” evidence then say science can’t. Were you there?
Here's a prediction (or "prophecy" for the religious). It is certain that CC is, or will become aware of this video and will watch it. Matt has made it perfectly clear in this video that CC has misinterpreted and misrepresented Matt's position, just so he can get his gotchas.
An intellectually honest person who actually values truth would now promptly issue a correction and perhaps even an apology. A dishonest scammer who is worried that any form of retraction may cost him street cred with his viewership (and therefore less views and less money) will stay silent. I predict (prophesy) that it will be the latter, but I would be happy to be wrong.
i think you were right. he ignored it
I love the fact they brought up alien abduction stories. Christians will not hesitate to highlight people on their deathbed or in the middle of surgery and getting a first hand glimpse of heaven. They'll gobble that stuff up as facts and proof but when someone said they met a lizard man they ignore it or say they were hallucinating.
Every time I hear apologetics or apologist, My immediate reaction is that they are apologizing for believing in their religion. I know that isn't the origin of the word, but it's still my gut reaction.
"yeah, I know it's stupid and unbelievable, I'm sorry, but here's the reason I believe regardless"
I really can't imagine Cameron has done anything but harm his own cause here.
33:12 My working hypothesis is CC doesn't care about the evidence. He's making a living doing this, so he'll offer whatever he thinks will fly with people who want to believe it.
They never seem to get the “gotcha” is not evidence!😂
I'm so pleased I was recommended this video after watching the CC video. Matt explained better then I could say what CC did in his video & the dishonesty within it.
Great, insightful video. Thank you!
Love the musical tag on this channel. Oh yah and your analysis too of course Paul :-)
If someone can't understand the difference between claim and evidence, then there are a lot of other things they don't understand.
And maybe study a dictionary rather than the bible 👌👍
@@southernsal3113 Truth seems to be a tad beyond them
The christian worldview depends very much on not understanding the difference. It's not surprising they conflate them.
Maybe he would have understood if you’d said “evidences.”
bwahaha
I really like the glowing green books behind Cameron. It looks like an eldritch library
Hey Paul, just wanted to say that even without the content you talk about, your vids are extremely relaxing to just have on. Your voice is calm and easy to listen to, and the art, background and Reference screen, is very charming.
I find myself waiting for your uploads more than most of my Subs.
I wonder what ancient people thought sleep paralysis was. God or demons taking them away?
Guys I respect you both immensely but uh. . . You're way behind the curve if you're just realizing how dishonest Cameron is. He does the same dishonest shit constantly.
I think you misunderstand the truth of this poor man, he is not capable of understanding that he knows nothing. It's like saying Trump is a liar, not so, Trump always tells the truth, he just doesn't know that he knows nothing at all. Trump is classic Dunning-Kruger on steroids, truly the poor man should not be allowed out without his Mom.
@@tonycook7679 I agree with you that he is perhaps the most dangerous example of Dunning-Kruger the world has ever seen but he also lies as much as he breathes. Sometimes it may be hard to tell the difference between him making suit up on the fly and outright lying but there are innumerable documented cases of things he knows and yet has stated something other than the truth.
Cameron is just a grifter in the same mold as Hamm or Robertson. . . Or I should say he hopes to be. His lies are very specifically about shielding the willingness of believers to support his lifestyle with money and views.
I mean... they're both former christians. If anybody's going to know how dishonest a religious person must necessarily be in order to be religious, it's going to be Matt and Paulogia. And any other former theists. And some not-quite-former-yet theists. And theists-with-a-partially-functional-brain. And atheists. And...
I mean, fuck, the list of people who know religious people are full of shit is almost a perfectly overlapping Venn diagram of humanity as a whole, with the small exceptions being people who don't give a shit or who play favorites and don't consider hypocrisy to be a bad thing. But sometimes, in order to expose lying scumbags, you have to pretend they aren't lying scumbags, so that you can catch them really pulling their dishonest scumbag dicks out and waving them around, instead of just catching them hinting at it.
It's sort of like undercover work, yeah? It's not enough to just say Cameron has a figurative micropenis; it's way better to catch him bragging about his figurative jerking-tweezers.
The detailed analytics discussed here are fantastic and mind expanding, and well done Paul for allowing Matt to speak, it would have been tempting to jump in and engage on many occasions
Love the teamup!!!
Now I want a shirt with dancing on ice cream aliens.
"The illusion of a powerful argument by use of forceful prose and confident pronouncements."
So, Christian apologetics?
@phoenixfire8226
What I find sad is that there's a lot of information in studying Christian theology and philosophy that could make Apologetics arguments more logically sound than they are.
But I know this song and dance already as what you're seeing is good old fashion arrogance. But these folks will never admit to me out of fear of angering God...
But Hell for all I know maybe I'm the crazy one for looking to better himself by reigning in his pride.
Yeah, sorry for the back pedaling as this is a problem with believing in Yhawah, lack of confirmation leaves you with more questions than answers. :p
Great video. Look through the comments and almost everyone concurred with your points in this video before you made this video. I really enjoyed this video. It was like debate crash TV.
daughter: "someone was raised from the dead at school and 500 people saw it"
Father : "how do you know"
Daughter "..."
Father: I think I need to go on UA-cam and retract something stupid I said
EDIT:
Here is where I think Cameron is right though, or at least Matt could have been clearer :
In philosophical terminology a claim is a proposition about the world. It exists outside of the world in a sense and a claim is not evidence by definition. However the fact that a person made some claim is a fact about the world and as such may be used as evidence for something. In particular it might be considered evidence,however weak, for the claim.
If my wife claimed that Ozzy Ozborne was going to come to dinner I might not believe her without further evidence but I would be more inclined to believe that it might be the case than if she hadn't made the claim.
I am not as apologists might tell you bound to accept it if I cannot explain why else she would have made the claim.
If the daughter's answer isn't "I was one of the 500, and you can ask everyone at school because they all saw it too", then you have a problem. Maybe someone just told your poor impressionable daughter that this happened and she didn't know it was a joke. Innocent babe that she is, she took a story as true without corroborating for herself that 500 people really do claim that this happened, or asking herself whether the four friends who told her this story might have been pulling her leg.
Was there a medical examiner? How do you know the person was dead? That's the first issue. Do we know anything about the person identifying the body? Do we have statements from any of the 500 people? Photo's? No? Did it happen thousands of years ago in a time were people were illiterate and prone to superstition, and the written statements of a handful of very biased people looking to promote a new religion were translated into several different languages and redacted, edited and corrupted? Case doesn't look so conclusive to me.
My partner was raised from the dead on the operating table. I know because it's in his medical charts. It's called resuscitation. XD
I would argue against that with the fact that reality has one truth correct and evidence when properly understood will always lead to the truth. But two people can have contradictory claims. So therefore as the fact that both those people have those facts pointing to two different contradictory things they cannot be evidence.
Sorry but NO, even in Philosophy the Author of Acts writing "a Zombie ran around and 500 people met him" is ONLY a claim. Paper has a lot of patience and will carry basically anything you print on it. Without any further attempts to demonstrate it actually happend that claim does have no value of evidence at all. Or to slightly paraphrase Ken Ham ... the only thing it proves is that one of the Authors of the bible wrote there were 500 witnesses.
(ironically even the acceptance of the 500 Witnesses does not help the historical Jesus argument one Iota... there were 3 and 12 "witnesses" of Joseph Smith's "golden plates" of the Book of Mormon. Which signed elaborate statements what they saw and that they swear it was true. These people existed, we know of other material confirming it like newspaper articles, letters, them being mentioned in diaries of other early Mormons etc. Most have known graves and descendants who know their family tree at least back to the 1820s when it happened... BUT there are also statements by the 3 that they were tricked into signing and that part of the witness testimony they had once sworn to be true was misleadingly formulated... they were used for an elaborate deception by the Prophet of Mormonism... SO what good do now 500 witnesses without any further information do us? There were thousands at Fatima and most retell the events in a pretty wrong form, Photographs exist but do not support the oral testimony... People stating they have witnessed something, even if they exist and did it from their own free will, still can be mistaken or misinterpreted by the ones doing the later writing down.)
David Hume (who all apologists dislike) said: "A body of ten ounces raised in any scale may serve as a proof that the counterbalancing weight exceeds ten ounces, but can never afford a reason that it exceeds a hundred." (An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section XI)
@AT87 Yes they like him when they can use him against the greatest enemy of superstition: SCIENCE!
@AT87 So when you read the scriptures aren't you using your fallible senses, brain and induction?
@AT87 that is curious as we have gained alot of knowledge and learned a great many truths using science.
Did Capturing Christianity actually delete Matt's comment?
Lol, that's pathetic.
Edit:
Note: although Matt's comment doesn't appear for me, perhaps it wasn't deleted after all.
2nd Edit:
I fully retract my comment (see correspondence below).
Its most likely people like that dont want to discuss they just want to claim they are right
Did they say it was deleted? I thought it had only been ignored. As in went unanswered... Don't remember anything about it being deleted. I must have missed it.
@@robertcartier5088
To clarify, I went and searched for the comment in the seemingly relevant post on their page, not found (clarification clarification: post found, comment not).
Also, suspiciously all of their comments are supportive. Dictatorship-like comment section haha
Typical?
Some say yes.
I say yes 😅
@@AdamAlbilya1 Wow! Now they're acting like flat-earthers! Oh, wait... some of them actually are, damn! ;-)
No he didn’t delete it. It’s still there I just saw it.
Good video. Thanks for sharing it with us. Your efforts are appreciate.
thanks, Charles
@@Paulogia you are welcome, Paul.
This was actually super helpful for me, since it focused on the distinction between claims, evidence, testimony, statements, etc.
You said you had a huge announcement coming up, something you have been hoping for since you started your channel. Did that fall through?
Nope... still happening, I just can't control the timing. Most of the work is done, but waiting on someone.
@@Paulogia Oh, the suspense...
@@Paulogia you haven't prayed to god have you?
_"Cameron has the brains of a sheep!"_
Hmmm... too harsh? _"Cameron does not have the brains of a sheep!"_
*[Spot the reasonable assertion.]*
Saying Capt. Christ has the brain of a sheep is putting sheep down, and giving CC way too much credit for being smart.
I MAY have seen him in the pasture. With a skull saw and a ziplock. But theres a missing link. It'd be irresponsible to speculate.
I love the cartoon format. Brilliant video all together.
I like your intro music, very Celtic!
I was told that there is written, eye witness testimony of when a man flew into the sky on a winged horse.
I’m not convinced.
I keep asking myself.
How did these guys fly into deep space without rocket propelled instruments? How didthey manage to survive the temperatures, stress on (G-FORCES), the high pressures we know exist from our Troposhere to the Exosphere and beyond? Muhammad and that winged horse were not wearing pressurised space-suits i can guess.. You need at least a space-suit to be able to survive up there.
Jesus just flew into deep space like superman.
Wow, the technology they had back then we can only envy. Isn't that when the only mode of transport was a walking, donkeys, Horses and Camels?
This shit does not add up..
smh
Cameron is another victim of the Dunning Kruger effect.
The editing in this video is so good. I love the visuals like at 6:10 and 18:00
I'll have you know I Karate chopped 15 cinder blocks in half and uploaded it to UA-cam, a bunch of people saw maybe 2K....but I took it down. I definitely chopped those blocks though, a bunch of people saw it, after all.
Two of my favorite skeptics in one place. Great show!
The claim is “there is a god” and the evidence for that is... well actually there isn’t any evidence for that.
@Roq Steady
There is, it's just nature itself isn't sufficient enough. Mainly because since there a lot of supernatural claims. Since those can't be proven, to you there is no God.
How fortunate...
@@DemonicRemption
So god isn't powerful enough to even show he exists...how pathetic
@@jimmyh6601
He can prove he exist, he just chooses not to. And given how rotten humanity has become, it's not hard to see why... Not saying I'm a saint, given my 20 year long hatred for humanity, I'm part of the problem.
@@DemonicRemption
How very convenient 🤪
@@jimmyh6601 it is possible that the god's exist but are not interested in humans
I forgot what that is called though.
Not my view though, as I have UPG for otherwise XD
When Matt claimed that he saw Paul drink out of a coffee cup, I was absolutely baffled. What an assertion! How could that possibly be true? Out of all the things that Paul could drink out of, a coffee cup was the last container on my mind. Clearly, the container Paul should always use is a cup with "The Bible Tells Me So" on it (though it probably hadn't been created at the time of recording). Yet, once provided with the much-needed video evidence, I had no choice but to be convinced of its veracity.
Excellent: From Matthew and Paul - The two that really do exist. Great video! 😎
The lack of miracles was one of those questions that nagged me as I slowly moved towards atheism. I wondered why God produced these amazing, huge miracles in stories but never beyond the pages of scriptures. I got many excuses as to why this was. The most common being along the lines of, "We're in the Church (or Faith) Age now. God wants us to come to him in faith." Or, "The Jews saw miracles and didn't believe. You wouldn't believe, either." The latter one always irritated me because it essentially told me what my reaction would be before given the opportunity. It boxed me in when the opposite was wholly possible. And I wondered why God would randomly decide that flashy miracles were obsolete and the unsupported words of strangers -- which often contradicted the unsupported words of other strangers -- was a better option? Didn't make God look like much of a planner or well informed on how we humans worked.
The entire exercise (plus the fact that much of the Bible is contradicted by actual history and archaeology) led me to conclude no miracles really happened. They were all faith stories. And people had to make up excuses for why those amazing things don't happen in real life. It was simply the more reasonable thing to conclude pending new information coming to light.
Kevin Williamson Another thing that would bug me if someone said to me « the Jews didn’t believe after miracles so you wouldn’t believe » is :
Eh, isn’t your god all knowing ? So shouldn’t have he known that even before he made all these miracles that wouldn’t lead the Jews to believe in him ? Why does he no longer do these miracles now because he knows I won’t believe, yet he did these miracles before... despite knowing they wouldn’t believe ?
Another other thing is that it’s stupid because Jesus’ followers came to believe in him largely because of miracles. In fact, the whole religion (if we believe Christian apologists) wouldn’t exist if not for Jesus doing a miracle (ie : resurrecting).
@Jubei Yang Dumb af comment
Says miracles will cease so I don't get why it nagged you
@@nathanjora7627 Most of His followers haven't seen miracles
@@gustavmahler1466 -- what says that, exactly? There are some verses that deal with gifts, signs and miracles, to which the following site responds.
www.blueletterbible.org/faq/don_stewart/don_stewart_480.cfm
I've read the Bible, in addition to the early Church Fathers and Biblical commentaries going back to the 2nd century. They all indicate miracles continue. In fact many interesting and miraculous stories circulated about various saints, icons, and results of veneration. I think modern apologists are trying to read the Bible to say these things ceased simply to make an excuse for one of the things that nagged at me (Not to say they did this for me, personally. But what nagged at me IS also a common question for many others).
And my original question still remains: " And I wondered why God would randomly decide that flashy miracles were obsolete and the unsupported words of strangers -- which often contradicted the unsupported words of other strangers -- was a better option?"
I’ll tell you what people think is wrong with Matt. He goes right for the major issues and doesn’t indulge anyone and allow strawman to derail the argument. These people think their dances makes the arguments valid. Can’t get past the slavery of the Bible? Why the hell should we talk about anything else until you do?
That’s a terrible point. Slavery in the Bible is irrelevant to the proposition “ God exists” or the proposition “ God does not exist.” It’s a side issue. It’s perfectly legitimate to argue the Bible isn’t inerrant because it potentially endorses slavery, but it’s not even close to legitimate to argue that God does not a exist because the Bible endorses slavery.
Craig Reed TCR I’m sorry. Who said this had anything to do with the question of god existing? I gave an example of Matt’s debate style. However, the question of god existing, if god is alright with murder and slavery why the hell do we care about such a terrible being?
@@Shylade superb reply! Please have a double 'like'! I love Matt's approach, forget providing evidence for the existence of god, why would you follow some so despicable!
@@craigreedtcr9523 « Slavery in the Bible is irrelevant to the proposition ‘’ God exists’’ »
It’s irrelevant to the general proposition of the existence of a mind with great powers over reality, potentially demiurgic and immortal.
It’s not irrelevant to the proposition « the god of the Bible exists, influenced the creation of the Bible, and is defined as being morally perfect, omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent », because if a god allowed slavery, then he wouldn’t be morally perfect, or at the very least not omnibenevolent, if a god didn’t know about slavery in the holy book in which his existence is testified to the world, then he wouldn’t be omniscient, if a god didn’t care about rectifying this immorality in his book, then again he’d be either immoral or at least not omnibenevolent, and finally if he couldn’t have forbidden slavery or corrected the content of the Bible, then he wasn’t omnipotent.
It’s like saying « the modern physical explanation for lightning isn’t evidence against god ». Well... It actually is, more specifically it’s evidence against any god defined as a god that throws lightning, like Zeus, or Thor.
And just like Yahweh, it doesn’t make them impossible per se, it just makes their existence unlikely, or at least belief in their existence unjustified.
My ad before this video was from the Colson Centre. Interesting.
Best episode of Mystery Science Theater yet! Matt's prescience is very engaging
Cameron is doing a wonderful job representing Christian apologists.
full of wonder
Hilariously, when I first watched this, I also just went "the claim is the claim and the evidence is the evidence. Duh?" But after some consideration, I think it would help to picture the situation as a formally logical argument. In this demonstration, the claim would be the conclusion of the argument, and the evidence would be any or all of the premises that support the claim. If someone wants to state that claims count as evidence, it renders the argument circular. So if we wish to adhere to noncontradiction, claims are not evidence.
The Bible Jingle at the end absolutely killed me
Holy cow, I matt saying it was "dancing in buckets" genuinely distorted my memory into thinking he said dancing instead of eating. I went back and rewatched like 4 times
@Alfonso Islas
So it's not just me. Because Cameron said "eating buckets of ice-cream" and Matt saying "dancing in buckets of ice-cream" distorted my memory. And this is like the third time I've sat through this.
Just because a claim is reasonable does not mean it's true. Conversely, just because a claim is unreasonable (to you) does not mean it's false.
how unlike Cameron to strawman an atheist to concoct a poorly made argument, and by doing so expose his shortcomings for all to see.......
I loved the dancing aliens. A superb example about the fallibility of human testimony wrapped in a chunk of Mandela effect, dressed with a piquant sauce of the subtlety of how easily influenced we are to accept an assertion almost by osmosis.
Bravo. I wonder how many Christians actually realised how significant that was.
it was a happy accident
That's the Bob Rossin' beauty of it.
@@bengreen171 Well said. Even if our universe, planet, life and even people were all accidents... It doesn't mean they can't be beautiful happy accidents.
@@MichaelDeHaven
that's not exactly what I was driving at, but I agree with your sentiment.
@@bengreen171 Apologies if I came across as speaking for, or misrepresenting, you in any way. I speak only for myself. None of us truly knows the mind of another. I was replying to your comment about Bob Ross, more than your initial comment. Oh well, this whole thing is just becoming a meta level lesson on assuming others thoughts and the accidents that can ensue. I hope I haven't done it again. Cheers.
It's always a pleasure to listen to Matt.
I absolutely heard "Dancing in Ice Cream" and was just as surprised when Paul replayed the clip.
My mind is blown.
@R. Travis Brazelton
I thought Paul would've censored that since he tries to not have cursing in his vids.
That's hardly surprising since Matt referenced that version of events multiple times, and also showed the dancing aliens clip, prior to going back and validating what was actually said.
That was a masterful slap.
Matt in animated form is my favorite thing lolol
15 seconds in and Paul is already laying the smack down, less go boyz!
I know Matt has probably mentioned this elsewhere, but I would like to know what resources he would recommend to learn formal logic. I know there are hundreds, but I'd be curious what he'd personally recommend.
(1) If God does not exist, then no one can properly represent Matt Dillahunty.
(2) Paulogia can properly represent Matt Dillahunty.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
Hallelujah! I am converted!
@@walterbrooks2329 You almost should be. It's like an hour of straight up miracles that just occurred.
(4) ...and this god is Paulogia, because only he can properly represent Matt :-)
@@soriac2357 You would need to prove that claim.
@@shadowkiller8192 Let me start by talking about cosmology and philosophy and koine Greek XD
I can listen to Matt for hours. I agree with him 98% of the time; or he agrees with me. I'm a little older than he is. One thing for sure, he's able to articulate our positions better than I.
I effing love you guys! This was great. 😂
What if Cameron's daughter went up to him and said "there are aliens in ice cream on another planet. I saw it." What if she said "a boy at school fell down and busted his lip. Oh uhh I made it up."