I don't get how people can call into AXP saying "yeah, been a huge fan for years, but I'm still gonna throw a terrible argument you've heard a hundred times at you"
I'm a former level 42 Grand Atheist, Inner Circle. Kirk Cameron was in my battalion. We would have gotten away with it, too, if it weren't for those meddling kids and their dog. Plus Kirk lost his mind and I stopped larping in favor of the real thing.
@@pythondrink It's a joke mocking the people who literally say things like Kirk Cameron telling everyone he was a "devout atheist". I think the Inner Circle bit came from a caller on AXP, but I also link that to Cameron in my head so I could be wrong. You'll also see that appear about 100% of the time in the 80s Satanic Panic "interviews with a Satanist / Former Satanist".
"The amount of divorce has gone up!" Yeah, dude, because we're not shaming people doing it anymore. People aren't stuck in abusive relationships, loveless marriages, or whatever. It's called freedom of choice, man! Sheesh.
The first flaw in this argument is that science text books are summaries of what scientists have discovered, not the source from which they get their information. Textbooks are allowed to be rewritten when we learn new things, whereas religious texts by their nature aren’t allowed to be “updated.”
I like how that caller's thought experiment just sort of highlights what nonsense apologetics are. If we were left with just one outdated science textbook and our current knowledge of science nobody in their right mind would edit the old one to modernize it, they'd just write new textbooks using the current knowledge.
Today, those old science text books are of little or no value to the scientists that are utilizing today's knowledge of science to practice and research genetics, chemistry, medicine, agriculture, engineering, animal husbandry, biology, cosmology, astrophysics, or any other field of science.
This was my thought exactly. No need to rewrite the old one, simply write a new one. Old texts with incorrect information is only useful for reflecting on the fact that we as humans can be wrong and should always check ourselves and check where we get information and why we trust the information we’re getting. History is important to be able to understand what NOT to do in the future.
@@bloodyrose1995 Yes, old science textbooks with correct or incorrect info are basically history books. Science itself is always about having a strong filter. The filter blocks and kicks out bad info. The goal of science is always to watch what we observe in our environment. With religion, there is no goal at all. The claims are not verifiable and the claims are wild, all over the place and conflict with modern science. I'm sure that there are fact in the Bible. It isn't entirely useless. It is an authentic book. It is truly an old book. It gives us clues as to how life was like long ago and what their fears and problems and their beliefs were. There is no reason to believe that it (the Bible, all religions) comes from aliens or bird people.
This discussion leads to a broader point. What good is the bible, if you keep reinterpreting it over and over and over to fit whatever makes sense to you in the first place? It's not just about the world around us, but morals, ethics, how one should live, etc. That's why even if the bible were the inerrant word of an infallible god, it's not much use if it's being filtered through a fallible being who makes it say whatever is convenient for them.
The thing no christian ever thinks about, is the fact, that christanity and its teachings have changed, drastically over the last hundred years, not to mention the last 2000 years. How does this work, if there is only gods word? Who got it right? And why is it still changing after all this time?
It's good for killing spiders and emergency cigarette papers, but the latter should only be taken from copies before 1970. After that the ink is as toxic as the contents.
@@undrwatropium3724 Well, actually! I'm pretty sure there's a "love your neighbors" and "do unto others" line here and there, but it really is just picking out the grapes in a compost heap.
Forrest & JMike: How's it a good thing to force a person into something against their happiness and freedom? Andrew: No no, you guys, you don't understand. It's not a threat. It's a _threat_
God exist. It exists in ancient books. Just read them and you will see. It lives in the mind of indoctrinated people. It exists in religous organizations. It also exists in reality, as dr. Jordan peterson defined accurately: god is the ultimate fictional charecter. Thats the most honest and accurate definition. Its an idea. A fictional false one. It exist to explain to the ignorant the reality. It gives a solution to the lazy and an excuse not to learn science. Most of all, its the easy solution that help the ignorants remain in his ignorancy, while making them feel superior.
When the caller says he's "taking up the Christian mantle," and declares himself to be an "Atheist" [and he expresses no certainty in his], I think that he's lying because he believes that being an Atheist would lend more credibility to his words. I don't believe ANYONE just because they are or are not an Atheist. They must have a believable thing to say, with something to back it up if their claims are suspicious or otherwise lacking.
Sorry that this is so late, but it'd probably be fun to rewatch anyways, but I felt the same way you describe at first, but honestly I think he is an atheist, I think this whole thing was just him trying to reconcile his relatively new perceptions with his past, shaking off some of the slough from his religious beliefs.
The nail has been hit on the head, by you. At some point in the past, Andrew had thoughts that he thought seemed very significant, interesting, and sensible. At least by the time he called, they were clearly none of those.
He started out off, then went full "wtf" with this idea that fewer divorces- because people are afraid of going to hell- is a good thing, not a bad one!
@@DrumWild Trapping people in unhappy marriages through threat of eternal damnation...you know, the "societal benefit of confirmity." I'd love this guy to try to say that with a straight face to my grandmother who was financially and religiously trapped with a man who abused her, and beat and raped her children. Please, explain to her slowly how society benefited from her, and her children's misery and trauma.
Science and religion are completely different fields of endeavor. The science of archaeology enables us to throw out Moses and Exodus as mythology. He never existed and it never happened.
@@jayrose8638 bro basically just just spat in my face and called it ice cream, bro nothing you said even remotely proves anything definitely not to me or bro at least. Maybe it convinces you but I’d argue then your pretty gullible I have some Nigerian prince to introduce to you 😂
@Chris Cuomo I have found that the single most common answer to questions if the form, "Why is X true?" is, "X is not true". For anyone looking to explain what he asks about, first check if they are reasonable claims.
I write out a paragraph describing the contents of my neighbors refrigerator and nearly every sentence is false. Some are right because it's a reasonable guess that there are eggs and ketchup. Then I go back with a receipt from his last shopping list and a photo of the top shelf and try to edit the paragraph to make it more in line with reality I haven't really made the original paragraph true. There are likely to still be massive errors. And the correct statements in the original version didn't come from divine knowledge. They were best guesses and coincidences. I've gained nothing. And I could just go open the door and look inside. No one really needs to keep guessing and arguing over what was right or wrong in the original version.
Well you would have to throw in the names of geographical locations that are still around like Jerusalem and the Red Sea, but it would still be very thin.
However Josh there is a VERIFIED miracle in the Bible. It happened at Tel Jericho in the Biblical Book of Joshua. Archeological digs have validated this Biblical miracle actually happened. The two sets of brick walls at Jericho tumbled simultaneously OUTWARDS 360 degrees around the city. This has not been observed anywhere else in the world (not even described) except at Jericho. There is no natural phenomena that could cause the walls of Jericho to tumble outward simultaneously 360 degrees all around -- not any kind or strength of earthquake, or storm, or tornado, or flood or mudslide. Here is a Biblical miracle verified by decades of dig data. Oh I did read one small section of the outer wall didn't tumble -- this had to be the home of Rahab the prostitute who helped the Israeli spies and made them SWEAR to spare her and all her family.
Besides for literature, I think the Bible is also good to study the psychology of human. How people tend to fill in gaps on concepts they can’t grasp, etc. also, it’s important to study the atrocities both in the Bible and the ones caused by the Bible.
Even though the caller is apparently playing the devil's advocate this is still a good discussion. JMike has amazing reasoning skills and Forrest is just one switched on dude. Loved Mike's, "We've built a city and the theists are shouting from the roofs of our city" Brilliant :)
"Show me the works your methods produce. Nothing that doesn't crumble if I so much at look at it sideways? Then let's inspect the tools that provide such shoddy results."
@@TheTruthKiwi Lots of them, but to clarify, I put my post in quotation marks, not in reference to a quote of either host during the exchange, but in reference to the version of JMike's argument I frequently use. Sorry if I'm breaking down open doors 😅 I just wanted to make sure you don't think I'm putting words on the lips of the hosts.
@@bazingaburg8264 Haha no worries, all good man. That's a great quote. I've never been religious myself but I honestly don't know how people can watch these shows and still remain theists. I guess "faith" is stronger than rationality, reason and reality right.
@@TheTruthKiwi Thank you kindly 😁 I'm a former wishy-washy catholic, but deconstructing belief in an afterlife took me 15+ years and sometimes I still wake up in cold sweat from dreams split between the fundamental need for hope and dreading it, because hell Always takes it away. Imagine being a fractured turdy meatsack Satan pushes through his never-ending colon. No way out, only pain, every moment of relief is just another build-up to anguish that your mind seeks to flee. My equally wishy-washy catholic "God is love" Mom never sought to inflict this terror on me, she loved me, but she did. We build ourselves upon the cornerstones other people place For Us and the taller we rise above them, the more terrifying reevaluating and replacing them becomes. Furthermore, most religions leverage our fear of death and desire to be reunited with loved ones. The comforting lie gave false hope where lack of understanding failed to deliver good reason for hope, but - nowadays - the lie has outlived its utility. Understanding provides agency that coping with a lack thereof couldn't hope to compete with. Sadly, feelings aren't rational, so the next nightmare up the devil's ass is just a matter of time. My hope is this will instill a preponderance of pity for believers in you. Few of them deserve the anger in which I approach them as vessels of belief, which is the Actual problem. The standards by which we adopt beliefs are too important to lower for personal comfort.
As soon as this guy’s attempt to smuggle in his god under the guise of “spiritualism” and as atheism, he goes full bigot and authoritarian over people’s right to not be in a relationship they don’t want to be in.
The value of excluding spirituality from scientific discussions is that it is based on feelings and traditions instead of evidence. This doesn't mean that a person who is spiritual can't participate, it just means that the spiritual aspect of their personal life isn't relevant to the discussion and so doesn't belong in it.
23:30 my mother had an abusive relationship. My father was a monster, she stayed a long time just because she was a catholic and though she could "fix" him. She did not. Until the end he was a monster. No, if you want people who love each other to stay married, promote marriege consulting, not religion.
@@irrelevant_noob thanks, english is not my first language. And yes , it was his end, he decided to end his life with a gun... In a public plaza, in the middle of the day. Right in front of her. He clearly tried to scar her for the rest of her life. But thankfully, she recovered, that was 23 years ago and all of us moved on from that, a decade later she fell in love with a great guy that i see as my real father. This all could have ended differently if he accepted going to therapy with her but no. But anyway, there is no point on guessing what could have happened. I am just dissapointing on the possibility of him rectifying his life like his brother did (they were pretty similar in personality, but my uncle changed a lot).
Philosophy is like being in a dark room looking for a black cat. Metaphysics is like being in a dark room looking for a black cat that is not there. Religion is like being in a dark room looking for a black cat that it’s not there and yell “found it.” Science is turning on the light and see what’s really in the room.
Funny, I went from James Tour videos on chemistry and the origins of life to this. Tour's work is a great and shows why those old science books sit in the past. The algorithm doing its thing.
His starting argument is "don't throw the baby out with the bathwater" except the baby is hypothetical and the water has sit stagnant for "weeks." There isn't anything to salvage at this point and we should just dump the water
And back in the day, goblins were the reason people tripped over in the woods. We don't look back at the claim and try and fit goblins into the current understanding of motorskills and concentration.
@@royroy3 It’s definitely a line of thinking that could eventually get him there. I remember trying almost everything to justify continuing to believe on my way out.
The caller emphasized that he encountered a conundrum he sought help with. Playing devil's advocate enabled him to outline his issue, which enabled the hosts to address his worries sufficiently. I f'ing loved this call, kudos all around!
I remeber there's been a troll calling into the AXP years ago. He was using many different names, somerimes he was a theist, sometimes he was an atheist, and was throwing these absurd arguments. This Andrew sound exactly like him. Not to mention that he argues for the Bible while claiming to be an atheist.
The biggest issue I see with the callers argument is that there are plenty of people who consider the Bible to be the inspired word of God, so they don't question the book or think it's outdated. We have young Earth creationists who think the stories in Genesis are true.
I used to be spiritual. Good enough term for it anyway. I felt a connection to something bigger. Felt a sense of awe and wonder, first in church and later in the woods. I got benefit from it. It helped me. As I dropped my belief in gods and spirits and the like, I realized that all that awe, wonder, and benefit came from me. I can still feel it and receive it when I need it. Connection to something bigger? I've got a society. I've got a species. I've got an ecosystem. My grandchildren might have a solar system. Big enough for me.
I have a half dozen old science textbooks. I even have a modern copy of Newton's Principia. I read them out of curiosity, not for any knowledge about the world. (Although I have learned a lot of interesting facts such as what happens if you boil 5 pounds of brandy in a sealed room and then 'rush ion with a torch' Leonardo Da Vinci.) 🤣 I also have a bible somewhere but that's of little use for anything.
One famous atheist put it this way: If all books, science and religious books were to disappear and no knowledge of them exist. The new religious books would come out completely different from the old versions. The new science books would pretty much come out the exact same
Also, a large part of the increased divorce rate involves a small fraction of the population getting divorced multiple times, often from the same people.
Not really before this age women stayed at home with their parents or husbands then when they entered the workforce there was more temptation to cheat unfortunately men and women are like magnets when they get too close they come together.
Why do so many religious people insist on forcing me to believe in their god? Because as soon as I agree to believe in their god, either by lies and false promises or by threats. I am handing to them power over me and power over my life. They can now tell me what to believe, what to do, who I must hate and who I must not love and most important, they require me to give them some of my hard earned money. Power and money is all that religion is really about.
I agree with caller. Keep the truth in the Bible and get rid of the rest. The Bible would then be on two double-spaced pages, saving time to read a good science book.
"I'm an atheist, just arguing for spiritualism" Translation: I'm a theist, and I believe that if we update the Bible to conform to modern science, then the bible is 100% accurate, and thus proves my god delusion. Ergo, I win!" "Also, I'm still a virgin, because I can't find a woman to submit to my god given supremacy because I have a tallywacker!"
I find once you write science into the bible there is also no point in worshiping anything in it. Being a decent human being to people around you and using common sense are much more effective.
0:56 this dude was definitely me in college. Idk why but for some reason if I had to do any type of presentation/public speaking I would literally asphyxiate myself and not be able to breath half the time. It’s funny to me now how it sounds and to hear it happen to someone else.
Science is constantly proved all the time. You see, if we take something like any fiction, any holy book… and destroyed it, in a thousand years’ time, that wouldn’t come back just as it was. Whereas if we took every science book, and every fact, and destroyed them all, in a thousand years they’d all be back, because all the same tests would produce the same result.” Ricky Gervais
Not true. Science is based on assumptions. And even if the same experiments were conducted then the interpretations of the results may not be the same. Interpretations of scientific results depend on who is funding, politics and the narrative of the day. How we saw science in the late 19th century is totally different to post Einstein science.
@@rl7012 except we can demonstrate that science works and update it when we learn new things. You lot can't demonstrate God, and haven't had a new idea in 2000 years!
@@rl7012 also, terrific job the buddy... demonstrating that you are completely scientifically illiterate, but you lean in hard on your Dunning-Krugerism, and think that your opinion is worth a damn. 👏👏
@@BlarglemanTheSkeptic2 Can you demonstrate abiogenesis then? Can you demonstrate that the universe is expanding faster than the speed of light? Can you demonstrate 'Schrodingers Cat' science conclusion that something can be dead and alive at the same time?
When he starts talking about divorce rates he is basically DIRECTLY arguing for oppression. There is nothing stopping divorced people from marrying each other again. So if they were in a marriage, decided they wanted out, got out, and then later felt like divorcing was a mistake ... there is nothing stopping them from getting back together. The fact that they don't do this in large numbers suggests they do IN FACT prefer having gotten out. So stopping that with teachings about hell or whatever is clearly worse in the aggregate than allowing people to get out of marriages that they want out of. If you want lower divorce rates then don't make people feel like marriage is a necessary part of life (causing people to marry who otherwise might not, or might do so later in life) and structure society to be more helpful to people in marriages (parental leave, affordable child care, etc.)
It's weird he ignores all the new religions that have sprung up in the last 2000 years. Some reached a huge following. But to him they just don't exist... I don't think he wants a new religion, he wants Christianity to be less at odds with his experiences so his cognant dissonance disappears.
Well, Andrew is clearly not a Baptist so he's got that going for him. Not sure where gets the notion that spirituality has not been examined in two thousands years. That's a case of "it's new to me, therefore it's new." 19th and 20th century america was filled with people exploring spirituality
I mean, there have been tons of religions that post-date and/or explore spirituality in different ways from Christianity, but there's still no evidence that spirituality isn't imaginary, or at most a pretentious way of referring to materialistic processes/relationships.
It's not the book it's not the bad science, we don't throw out what works cause it works. It's the method and results based in our reality. So what works from a biblical perspective of reality? Very little if anything is what.
@Ronnie Alexander Yes, Ronnie! That is a good thing, because it means we learned and now understand things better than before. That is the concept of science, to have the best current explanation for what we observe. I hope this helps you.
How don't get u comprehend this process? Old information gets updated(unlike religious stories/beliefs/texts) as time progresses. New information is discovered that supports it or not and either is vindicated or replaced. Whereas nothing is ever found that supports religion in a meaningful and demonstrable way. It's the same thing, all the time that wasn't ever actually factually correct or 'true' to begin with. It's not like plants existed before the sun. (Bible account differs) No such thing as "first human"(bible account differs) Magic doesn't exist(bible accounts differ) And those things have all been found to be untrue yet, the bible gets no update ever atall.
Philosophy isn't "lagging" behind anything. It is a modern discipline that has been continuously studied for thousands of years and continues to be refined in universities today. Philosophy and science are not at odds with each other. That perspective stems from a profound misunderstanding. Science is a branch of philosophy. Philosophers refined epistemology to arrive at the scientific method. Scientists use both inductive and deductive reasoning in the formation and testing of hypotheses, respectively. Spirituality, too, has continued to be examined over millennia. There have been many profound theologians since Jesus. Moreover, most of what people are trying to point to with the word spirituality (ethics, morality, metaphysics) is often encompassed by philosophy, as well.
0:49 "If you get a text book from the 1800s it will have, like, accurate descriptions of the Solar System." How early in the 1800s? Neptune wasn't discovered until 1846.
Pi is approximately 3? I think that one's in Job. That fish exist, maybe? tbh you're hard-pressed to find that sort of thing outside of isolated facts that'd be known to people who didn't really do math or have access to post-Aristotelian logic
@@caffetiel funny thing about your comment. Define "fish" 🤔 Scientifically, it's much much more difficult than it is in colloquial terms. Colloquially, a fish has fins, gills, and it has an internal bone structure, and swims in the water. But🤔 what if any of those descriptors are missing, changed our added to? What about octopus, seahorse, crabs, salamanders, tadpoles, jellyfish, fish with legs, etc? But in scientific terms, fish is kind of a catch all (almost nonsense) term 🤷
Ask a theist this hypothetical question: If suddenly all of humanity had their memories wiped clean and same with all of history, and our species had to learn all over again. Science would be the same a thousand years later, but would religion? Would we be worshiping Jesus Christ? If a theist is honest the answer would have to be no. The odds of us coming up with the biblical god is incalculable. This is just another reason that god's are mythology.
21:00 It's to bad that Forrest didn't start by refuting the assumption that marriage is by default a good thing, which the caller snicked in the argument. I don't see any reason to let that assumption slide and go to justify the benefits of divorce (which is great in and of itself, but there's no reason to waste time justifying it when the interlocutor didn't prove their assumption to begin with). 😕 Still a good call. 🖖🏿🌈
"Thinking skills?" Says the lost and clueless atheist fool that thinks star dust, moist rocks and mud puddles have the INTELLIGENCE, POWER, PURPOSE AND MEANS to create/design LIFE, INTELLIGENCE, LOVE, CONSCIOUSNESS, MORALITY, the human being and ALL the co-existent bodily systems (circulatory, respiratory, reproductive, pulmonic, digestive, skeletal, muscular, nervous, body (skin), etc., etc.) intertwined in co-dependent order in the human body :) Atheism is pure idiocy. DO NOT judge knowledge by your lack of it. There is very firm & undeniable proofs of God and I've been proving God for over 50 yrs. AT THE SAME TIME when it comes to a RATIONAL/POSSIBLE, step-by-step explanation for reality, all atheists are totally bankrupt. Let that sink in; way in. Proof of God is easy. When we reason from effect to cause. We know the universe had a beginning. Thus, the universe had a beginner. So whoever created/designed this finite universe, had the INTELLIGENCE, POWER, PURPOSE AND MEANS TO DO SO. And since we can't manufacture life, intelligence, love, consciousness and morality, it had to be given to us by an entity that had these attributes to give us and the means to give them. Simple math. We also know that God is required to exist for what exists. You can’t get finite EVERYTHING from NOTHING or any other finite entity or any other atheist cause you want to use for the cause/source of EVERYTHING that exists. The finite requires the infinite to bring it into existence, due to the 2nd law. You simply have no atheist cause/source with the INTELLIGENCE, POWER, PURPOSE OR MEANS to create/design the human being, 10 million DIFFERENT species and ALL the co-existent bodily systems (circulatory, respiratory, reproductive, pulmonic, digestive, skeletal, muscular, nervous, body (skin), etc., etc.) intertwined in symmetry and order in the human body. Atheism is a non-starter; pure nonsense. That’s why atheist’s are embarrassing idiots in bragging that atheism has ZERO answers. Lies aren’t supposed to have any answers.
@@JamesJones-pm7tb Says the “lost and clueless” copy paste fake theologian, fake physician/surgeon, fake National Guard and CIA officer and the rest of the fake careers you pretend to have that I’ve forgotten.
the words 'science' and 'bible' are a contradiction in terms. if caller claims old science (rendered obsolete by newer science) is more 'compatible' with his ancient mythology then there is nothing to talk about, no merit in his argument. sounds like another desperate christian that tries to save his religious claims and find some 'spiritual' value in his immoral book. his hypocrisy was revealed later on during his unethical rant for the suppression of human rights - forcing people to stay married despite their will.
Back when we didn't know what lightning was, it was way more "compatible" with Zeus.😂 And they really think, they're making an argument for their cause...
It reminds me of the scene in Casablanca where Ugarti says to Rick, I know you despise me don't you. Rick replies, I don't know I suppose I might if I gave you any thought. That is how Science deals with religion.
To answer Andrew's question at 25:36, where to go to investigate the Bible's usefulness as a literary foundation or part of Western cultural background, there are college classes on the Bible as literature, or as mythology, or cultural tradition, that investigate these aspects without engaging in a sea of reactionary apologetics for an extremist religious position. Parts of these courses are even available on the internet.
But we should, we should definitely trash the issues where outdated or wrong information is contained! Otherwise we might end up with people claiming truth from obsolete sources. That sounds damn familiar, doesn´t it? 🙃😊
Eh, we do actually trash old science books. We only edit the ones with minor mistakes, not the ones where the entire theory gets discarded. No one today edits medical textbooks about the four humors, unless the analysis is purely historical.
the bible was edited so much over the centuries that a bible from the 8th century and today are two vey different books. a few additions of the medieval times: heaven, hell, angels, satan, the devil, purgatory. the conception of christ was also rewritten to sound less like the raping of a young girl. it also did not originate as a singular book. the first assembly of something like the bible happened in the hellenistic era, and is based predominantly on remnants from arameic texts found in the library of alexandria. a council then decided how to addemble it, what to include, what to add to make it more "coherent" - which is why there is so much mesopotamian myth in it. and just because people are barely paying attention, does not mean that philosophy is not up to date. there are plenty of contemporary philosophers who have a rather good grasp on the reality of today. and there have been thousands of ideas to advance spiritual pusruit, including the recognition that it is not a real thing. spirituality is not real (aside from the concept).
The caller also shows a problem with how so many folks misunderstand the place of philosophy especially when it comes to being compared with hard science like physics or biology. This also seems like where a lot of apologetics comes from. They think just a mere argument alone can debunk hard evidence without any evidence. If they philosophize a scientific fact with their understanding of science, they believe that can single handily disprove bodies of evidence and research.
And now you have people trying desperately to teach slavery never happened because it hurts their feelings that the US, unlike every other country, wasn’t perfect.
Hey Forest. Did you put the book back because it was bugging you not being in its place or because somebody else pointed it out? I'm just curious because it was bugging me before you put it back.
This guys got some really weird ideas about philosophy & science. Philosophy covers many branches. Natural philosophy became science. Theology is just a branch of philosophy that assumed there was a god thing and ran with it. It’s never validated itself. That’s why it’s not developed or discovered anything. It just made an assumption, ran with it, never stopped. It spends its time justifying itself - not discovering. It literally cannot confront itself and question its own truth.
"The last time people made a serious attempt at figuring out spirituality was 2000 years ago" (paraphrased) Hahahaha, no!? What about modern spiritual movements, what about cults, what about freakin' Islam!? This sort of thing is constantly evolving and it is strange of him to imply otherwise
It has in fact been used as a very bad science book. If there were a God, the properties of Nature were established by that Being, and it is Anathema to deny the actual fact of Evolution by Natural selection.
If all you have in the hypothetical is the outdated science book then you have no resource to sort the good parts from the bad, and you are hosed. The moment you allow ANY MECHANISM AT ALL in to the hypothetical that will allow you to sort the good from the bad in the old science book ... that makes the old book superfluous, and the right move is to jettison the old book and use the other mechanism directly and exclusively.
Better information would just turn the Bible into a combination science, legal, and philosophy text book. It couldn't be the inerrant word of God that theists say it is because it'd be clearly and visibly written by people. Instead of being secretly written by people.
Question: If the omniscient, omnipotent creator knows that The Bible is outdated, he is invited to come down and update it for us. Why would he let us read an outdated inaccurate book? The solution seems very simple here.
It takes a long time to find a virgin that is willing and able to have gods magic sperm impregnate her then for her to convince herself and her boyfriend/husband that she didn’t cheat then teach that kid he’s the son of god then have that kid have a bunch of disciples to rewrite it
According to the Bible, that god didn't understand, that two people who lack the ability to discern good from evil, can't discern between good and evil, especially if he lets a snake in the garden, who tries to trick them to take the evil decision... While he also made the snake... So sadly, that is actually in character. He may be omniscient and omnipotent, but also incompetend and not that bright. an all powerfull idiot god.
@Chris Cuomo You are wrong and breaking the commandment about bearing false witness. Atheists have not been given sufficient evidence. The only reason that you are a Theist is because you started as one or became one because you wanted to. Not because of preponderance of independent evidence.
@Chris Cuomo Why should I believe an ancient barbaric book that tells us to stone homosexuals to death, kill woman who were raped, kill teenagers who're going trough puberty, burn pregnant woman to death, and a perfect god that allows and even teaches slavery? Why should I believe in the thousands of unbacked claims that are made in the bible, like people that life to the age of 950 yo, talking snakes and donkeys, A wizard that magically parts the sea, and a perfect LOVING god that is so sensitive, that he wants you dead when you badmouth him. And a perfect god that is jealous?? (exodus 20:1-26) Just to name a few.. Or let me put it this way. Why should I believe in ancient fairy tales, when we have a modern understanding of life that is backed with a ton of actual evidence instead of empty claims?..
To me, spirituality is a specific type of applied philosophy that seeks to address the question of the meaning of life. It isn't a search for truth. It's a search for an outlook on life that lets you feel ok about having to have another day.
You note science technology is advancing what we know about something- and striving to learn more about it- spiritual knowledge would be trying to advance in Something we have yet to prove exists
@@angelmendez-rivera351 well i don't disagree that taken literally, Forrest was wrong at 4:00, it wasn't our "first"... But i was trying to make a case for how he might've gotten there, reinterpret the words if you will. 🙃
@@irrelevant_noob I obviously understand what Forrest was getting at, but it does not change the fact the phrasing he used is incorrect, and is a disservice (misleading) to anyone who is not knowledgeable enough to understand that he merely misspoke in the heat of the moment. It was an honest mistake. I am not accusing Forrest was being malicious. However, when a mistake is made, we have to acknowledge it, regardless of whether he's "on our side" or not. Otherwise, we are no better than Christians.
The marriage discussion has not so much to do with religion but with human rights. Marriages are no longer slavery contracts but an agreement to stay together because it makes people happy. If it doesn't: get out of it. Marriages are any worth defending and preserving if they add value to a relationship, not if they are a burden. Scaring people into staying together doesn't give them a fair way to assess the value of their marriage.
There are people who say they believe that sinners go to hell, and yet they do whatever they want and then get forgiven for it, effectively wiping the slate clean. Never trust anyone who believes an all-powerful god has forgiven everything bad that they will ever do. They believe because they want to sin :)
I’m so confused right now what the hell is he talking about? Just get a current book for each subject that you would like to learn about it is the best example we have the most updated today. Why do we need the Bible for anything?
Exactly. We wouldn't start with an old textbook if we were simply trying to learn a subject. So why would we start with an old textbook to try to make the bible seem to vibe with that subject?
I think this is a good subject to explore!! There may be more to it. If you take in account the new theories about the younger dryas, being a result of comet fragments hitting the ice sheet, and the result was the destruction of a much older civilization, which left all these old stone ruins, that have no written history, then one could come to the conclusion that everything we know came from trying to put the peaces of that civilization back together. Maybe there were parts of scientific literature left. Any none scientist would not be able to understand them, and may have attempted to fill in what wasn't there with what they thought should be there. Done in a non scientific way?
@@HEARTS-OF-SPACE Dumb B.S. you people never cite anything and even if you do it's usually an opinion article from some d-bag that means sht to real studies over various populations.
I don't get how people can call into AXP saying "yeah, been a huge fan for years, but I'm still gonna throw a terrible argument you've heard a hundred times at you"
The average callers dont display the utmost of good thinking skills
I've always assumed it's just a (dishonest) tactic some Christians use to curry favor. Just my opinion. I have no idea if that's really the case.
I'm a former level 42 Grand Atheist, Inner Circle. Kirk Cameron was in my battalion.
We would have gotten away with it, too, if it weren't for those meddling kids and their dog. Plus Kirk lost his mind and I stopped larping in favor of the real thing.
@@BaronVonQuiply wtf does "former level 42, Grand Atheist, inner circle" mean?
@@pythondrink It's a joke mocking the people who literally say things like Kirk Cameron telling everyone he was a "devout atheist". I think the Inner Circle bit came from a caller on AXP, but I also link that to Cameron in my head so I could be wrong.
You'll also see that appear about 100% of the time in the 80s Satanic Panic "interviews with a Satanist / Former Satanist".
"The amount of divorce has gone up!"
Yeah, dude, because we're not shaming people doing it anymore. People aren't stuck in abusive relationships, loveless marriages, or whatever. It's called freedom of choice, man! Sheesh.
The first flaw in this argument is that science text books are summaries of what scientists have discovered, not the source from which they get their information. Textbooks are allowed to be rewritten when we learn new things, whereas religious texts by their nature aren’t allowed to be “updated.”
I like how that caller's thought experiment just sort of highlights what nonsense apologetics are. If we were left with just one outdated science textbook and our current knowledge of science nobody in their right mind would edit the old one to modernize it, they'd just write new textbooks using the current knowledge.
Today, those old science text books are of little or no value to the scientists that are utilizing today's knowledge of science to practice and research genetics, chemistry, medicine, agriculture, engineering, animal husbandry, biology, cosmology, astrophysics, or any other field of science.
This was my thought exactly. No need to rewrite the old one, simply write a new one. Old texts with incorrect information is only useful for reflecting on the fact that we as humans can be wrong and should always check ourselves and check where we get information and why we trust the information we’re getting. History is important to be able to understand what NOT to do in the future.
@@bloodyrose1995 Yes, old science textbooks with correct or incorrect info are basically history books.
Science itself is always about having a strong filter. The filter blocks and kicks out bad info.
The goal of science is always to watch what we observe in our environment.
With religion, there is no goal at all. The claims are not verifiable and the claims are wild, all over the place and conflict with modern science.
I'm sure that there are fact in the Bible. It isn't entirely useless. It is an authentic book. It is truly an old book.
It gives us clues as to how life was like long ago and what their fears and problems and their beliefs were.
There is no reason to believe that it (the Bible, all religions) comes from aliens or bird people.
This discussion leads to a broader point. What good is the bible, if you keep reinterpreting it over and over and over to fit whatever makes sense to you in the first place? It's not just about the world around us, but morals, ethics, how one should live, etc. That's why even if the bible were the inerrant word of an infallible god, it's not much use if it's being filtered through a fallible being who makes it say whatever is convenient for them.
The thing no christian ever thinks about, is the fact, that christanity and its teachings have changed, drastically over the last hundred years, not to mention the last 2000 years.
How does this work, if there is only gods word? Who got it right? And why is it still changing after all this time?
My grandad used to say the bible is a lot like a person.
If you torture it enough it will say anything you want.
It's good for killing spiders and emergency cigarette papers, but the latter should only be taken from copies before 1970. After that the ink is as toxic as the contents.
There's nothing in the Bible that's ethical
@@undrwatropium3724 Well, actually! I'm pretty sure there's a "love your neighbors" and "do unto others" line here and there, but it really is just picking out the grapes in a compost heap.
Forrest & JMike: How's it a good thing to force a person into something against their happiness and freedom?
Andrew: No no, you guys, you don't understand. It's not a threat. It's a _threat_
It's the implication!
@@DefaOmegaso the women are in danger?
Jmike is proof of God, he's been given divine patience.
and Infinite Patience
He's also just, like...Blatantly out here bein' Jesus. Look at him, all Jesus n' shit over there.
And yet none of this proves God or gods.
that's what I was thinking throughout every single second of this...
So shocking!
It never does…
And that was never the point of this call.
God exist. It exists in ancient books. Just read them and you will see. It lives in the mind of indoctrinated people. It exists in religous organizations. It also exists in reality, as dr. Jordan peterson defined accurately: god is the ultimate fictional charecter. Thats the most honest and accurate definition. Its an idea. A fictional false one. It exist to explain to the ignorant the reality. It gives a solution to the lazy and an excuse not to learn science. Most of all, its the easy solution that help the ignorants remain in his ignorancy, while making them feel superior.
A single woman couldn't get a credit card until the 70s. That blows my mind.
"iT wAs LoNg AgO, sToP BrInGinG uP tHe pAsT, dO yOu HaTe AmErIcA?"
@@vertigo4236 I'm uncomfortable with how closely that came to my lifetime. I would have burning bras right beside them.
Until I think the 80’s women couldn’t sign themselves out of the hospital. More “Christian family values”.
And married women needed the permission of their husbands 😮😮😮
Couldn't get a divorce either
When the caller says he's "taking up the Christian mantle," and declares himself to be an "Atheist" [and he expresses no certainty in his], I think that he's lying because he believes that being an Atheist would lend more credibility to his words. I don't believe ANYONE just because they are or are not an Atheist. They must have a believable thing to say, with something to back it up if their claims are suspicious or otherwise lacking.
Hear, hear !
Sorry that this is so late, but it'd probably be fun to rewatch anyways, but I felt the same way you describe at first, but honestly I think he is an atheist, I think this whole thing was just him trying to reconcile his relatively new perceptions with his past, shaking off some of the slough from his religious beliefs.
Am I the only getting big "I gotta get this idea out before the shrooms wear off" vibes?
All that time and I still do not understand the point he is trying to make??
I understand, but he's weird, sants are weird.
The nail has been hit on the head, by you. At some point in the past, Andrew had thoughts that he thought seemed very significant, interesting, and sensible. At least by the time he called, they were clearly none of those.
He started out off, then went full "wtf" with this idea that fewer divorces- because people are afraid of going to hell- is a good thing, not a bad one!
That was very frustrating and HIGHLY dishonest.
@@DrumWild And he didn’t backtrack on it either.
@@DrumWild Trapping people in unhappy marriages through threat of eternal damnation...you know, the "societal benefit of confirmity."
I'd love this guy to try to say that with a straight face to my grandmother who was financially and religiously trapped with a man who abused her, and beat and raped her children. Please, explain to her slowly how society benefited from her, and her children's misery and trauma.
Science and religion are completely different fields of endeavor. The science of archaeology enables us to throw out Moses and Exodus as mythology. He never existed and it never happened.
The fields don't really have borders with each other. You can use *any* subject of note to learn about *any* other.
@Chris Cuomo no reason to believe in a god or gods was provided in your post
@@jayrose8638 bro basically just just spat in my face and called it ice cream, bro nothing you said even remotely proves anything definitely not to me or bro at least. Maybe it convinces you but I’d argue then your pretty gullible I have some Nigerian prince to introduce to you 😂
@Chris Cuomo
I have found that the single most common answer to questions if the form, "Why is X true?" is, "X is not true".
For anyone looking to explain what he asks about, first check if they are reasonable claims.
@Chris Cuomo and still no convincing reason to believe in a god or gods could be provided.
My favorite part was after juice convinced him, and jmike immediately jumps in with, "do not trust what we have to say about this!"
I like seeing you guys give people the chance to get lost in thought and find it again.
I write out a paragraph describing the contents of my neighbors refrigerator and nearly every sentence is false. Some are right because it's a reasonable guess that there are eggs and ketchup.
Then I go back with a receipt from his last shopping list and a photo of the top shelf and try to edit the paragraph to make it more in line with reality I haven't really made the original paragraph true. There are likely to still be massive errors. And the correct statements in the original version didn't come from divine knowledge. They were best guesses and coincidences. I've gained nothing. And I could just go open the door and look inside. No one really needs to keep guessing and arguing over what was right or wrong in the original version.
If you take out all the inaccuracies in the bible it would read "in the beginning, the end"
If there even was a beginning that makes any sense, that is. Otherwise it’s best not to open it at all and use it as a paperweight or doorstop.
Well you would have to throw in the names of geographical locations that are still around like Jerusalem and the Red Sea, but it would still be very thin.
I don't know. The acts of man are wicked from youth sounds pretty true from me.
At least from the point of view of an amoral God 💃🤖.
However Josh there is a VERIFIED miracle in the Bible. It happened at Tel Jericho in the Biblical Book of Joshua. Archeological digs have validated this Biblical miracle actually happened. The two sets of brick walls at Jericho tumbled simultaneously OUTWARDS 360 degrees around the city. This has not been observed anywhere else in the world (not even described) except at Jericho. There is no natural phenomena that could cause the walls of Jericho to tumble outward simultaneously 360 degrees all around -- not any kind or strength of earthquake, or storm, or tornado, or flood or mudslide. Here is a Biblical miracle verified by decades of dig data. Oh I did read one small section of the outer wall didn't tumble -- this had to be the home of Rahab the prostitute who helped the Israeli spies and made them SWEAR to spare her and all her family.
It would only have a title.
Besides for literature, I think the Bible is also good to study the psychology of human. How people tend to fill in gaps on concepts they can’t grasp, etc. also, it’s important to study the atrocities both in the Bible and the ones caused by the Bible.
Even though the caller is apparently playing the devil's advocate this is still a good discussion. JMike has amazing reasoning skills and Forrest is just one switched on dude. Loved Mike's, "We've built a city and the theists are shouting from the roofs of our city" Brilliant :)
"Show me the works your methods produce. Nothing that doesn't crumble if I so much at look at it sideways? Then let's inspect the tools that provide such shoddy results."
@@bazingaburg8264 Some great quotes in this one, I'll have to watch again.
@@TheTruthKiwi Lots of them, but to clarify, I put my post in quotation marks, not in reference to a quote of either host during the exchange, but in reference to the version of JMike's argument I frequently use.
Sorry if I'm breaking down open doors 😅 I just wanted to make sure you don't think I'm putting words on the lips of the hosts.
@@bazingaburg8264 Haha no worries, all good man. That's a great quote. I've never been religious myself but I honestly don't know how people can watch these shows and still remain theists. I guess "faith" is stronger than rationality, reason and reality right.
@@TheTruthKiwi Thank you kindly 😁
I'm a former wishy-washy catholic, but deconstructing belief in an afterlife took me 15+ years and sometimes I still wake up in cold sweat from dreams split between the fundamental need for hope and dreading it, because hell Always takes it away. Imagine being a fractured turdy meatsack Satan pushes through his never-ending colon. No way out, only pain, every moment of relief is just another build-up to anguish that your mind seeks to flee. My equally wishy-washy catholic "God is love" Mom never sought to inflict this terror on me, she loved me, but she did.
We build ourselves upon the cornerstones other people place For Us and the taller we rise above them, the more terrifying reevaluating and replacing them becomes. Furthermore, most religions leverage our fear of death and desire to be reunited with loved ones. The comforting lie gave false hope where lack of understanding failed to deliver good reason for hope, but - nowadays - the lie has outlived its utility. Understanding provides agency that coping with a lack thereof couldn't hope to compete with. Sadly, feelings aren't rational, so the next nightmare up the devil's ass is just a matter of time.
My hope is this will instill a preponderance of pity for believers in you. Few of them deserve the anger in which I approach them as vessels of belief, which is the Actual problem. The standards by which we adopt beliefs are too important to lower for personal comfort.
As soon as this guy’s attempt to smuggle in his god under the guise of “spiritualism” and as atheism, he goes full bigot and authoritarian over people’s right to not be in a relationship they don’t want to be in.
The value of excluding spirituality from scientific discussions is that it is based on feelings and traditions instead of evidence. This doesn't mean that a person who is spiritual can't participate, it just means that the spiritual aspect of their personal life isn't relevant to the discussion and so doesn't belong in it.
What does the word "spiritual" actually refer to?
@@jayjonah83 Religion,belief in ghosts, leprechauns, crystal healing, and all that other shit people believe in with out an evidence.
The kitty moment with JMike made my heart melt.
When the cat looked at him and he looked at the cat 😭😂 so cute
23:30 my mother had an abusive relationship. My father was a monster, she stayed a long time just because she was a catholic and though she could "fix" him. She did not. Until the end he was a monster.
No, if you want people who love each other to stay married, promote marriege consulting, not religion.
*counseling
PS i hope that "until the end" was his, so that she eventually escaped the shackles... even if it was probably way too late.
@@irrelevant_noob thanks, english is not my first language.
And yes , it was his end, he decided to end his life with a gun... In a public plaza, in the middle of the day. Right in front of her.
He clearly tried to scar her for the rest of her life.
But thankfully, she recovered, that was 23 years ago and all of us moved on from that, a decade later she fell in love with a great guy that i see as my real father.
This all could have ended differently if he accepted going to therapy with her but no.
But anyway, there is no point on guessing what could have happened. I am just dissapointing on the possibility of him rectifying his life like his brother did (they were pretty similar in personality, but my uncle changed a lot).
Philosophy is like being in a dark room looking for a black cat.
Metaphysics is like being in a dark room looking for a black cat that is not there.
Religion is like being in a dark room looking for a black cat that it’s not there and yell “found it.”
Science is turning on the light and see what’s really in the room.
The best part of this call was JMike’s cat. 🐱
Kitty looks so happy 🥰😻
Of course the cat is happy dad has blanket growing out of his face.
That brief parade at 8:20? Or was it some other that i've missed?
@@irrelevant_noob try 5:06
@@amyd6591 thank you. missed that interaction. 😻
Funny, I went from James Tour videos on chemistry and the origins of life to this. Tour's work is a great and shows why those old science books sit in the past. The algorithm doing its thing.
James Tour is a liar. Do not trust a single word he says
His starting argument is "don't throw the baby out with the bathwater" except the baby is hypothetical and the water has sit stagnant for "weeks." There isn't anything to salvage at this point and we should just dump the water
We need to throw the whole bath out and invest in a modern shower
And back in the day, goblins were the reason people tripped over in the woods. We don't look back at the claim and try and fit goblins into the current understanding of motorskills and concentration.
I love how he described looking at things from a Christian point of view as "playing Devil's advocate".
Hey, I'm sorry if this comes off as rude or unnecessary, but do you not know what devil's advocate means, or are you just humored by the irony?
I wish I had half the chill of JMike
18:12 "because it was our first, it is also our worst" I really need to remember this.
Love these two. Amazing dynamic.
Forrest and jMike are simply badasses
Forrest, you had me at sweet corn.
The show has been going on for decades yet some believers still wanna prove their books are divine 😊
At least he's sincere. I think he's trying to deprogram himself by asking these questions
@@royroy3 It’s definitely a line of thinking that could eventually get him there. I remember trying almost everything to justify continuing to believe on my way out.
The caller emphasized that he encountered a conundrum he sought help with. Playing devil's advocate enabled him to outline his issue, which enabled the hosts to address his worries sufficiently. I f'ing loved this call, kudos all around!
I remeber there's been a troll calling into the AXP years ago. He was using many different names, somerimes he was a theist, sometimes he was an atheist, and was throwing these absurd arguments. This Andrew sound exactly like him. Not to mention that he argues for the Bible while claiming to be an atheist.
The biggest issue I see with the callers argument is that there are plenty of people who consider the Bible to be the inspired word of God, so they don't question the book or think it's outdated. We have young Earth creationists who think the stories in Genesis are true.
I used to be spiritual. Good enough term for it anyway. I felt a connection to something bigger. Felt a sense of awe and wonder, first in church and later in the woods. I got benefit from it. It helped me. As I dropped my belief in gods and spirits and the like, I realized that all that awe, wonder, and benefit came from me. I can still feel it and receive it when I need it. Connection to something bigger? I've got a society. I've got a species. I've got an ecosystem. My grandchildren might have a solar system. Big enough for me.
I have a half dozen old science textbooks. I even have a modern copy of Newton's Principia. I read them out of curiosity, not for any knowledge about the world. (Although I have learned a lot of interesting facts such as what happens if you boil 5 pounds of brandy in a sealed room and then 'rush ion with a torch' Leonardo Da Vinci.) 🤣
I also have a bible somewhere but that's of little use for anything.
Well, sometimes you need to use a bible to correct a xtian about what’s in their own book, since so many of them don’t read it.
@@ookeekthelibrarian Spiders are welcome in my house. They help keep down the rats.
@@brynpookc1127 Fewer than 7% of Christians in America have read a bible, according to PEW research.
@@DrumWild Why am I not surprised? Curiosity is antithetic to faith.
I don't need to use a Bible to take out spiders anymore since my wife bought me a bug-a-salt gun, but it still makes a great doorstop.
One famous atheist put it this way:
If all books, science and religious books were to disappear and no knowledge of them exist.
The new religious books would come out completely different from the old versions.
The new science books would pretty much come out the exact same
Also, a large part of the increased divorce rate involves a small fraction of the population getting divorced multiple times, often from the same people.
Not really before this age women stayed at home with their parents or husbands then when they entered the workforce there was more temptation to cheat unfortunately men and women are like magnets when they get too close they come together.
Why do so many religious people insist on forcing me to believe in their god? Because as soon as I agree to believe in their god, either by lies and false promises or by threats. I am handing to them power over me and power over my life. They can now tell me what to believe, what to do, who I must hate and who I must not love and most important, they require me to give them some of my hard earned money. Power and money is all that religion is really about.
I agree with caller. Keep the truth in the Bible and get rid of the rest. The Bible would then be on two double-spaced pages, saving time to read a good science book.
Not sure you could fill two pages with mentioning some cities and people, because that's all there is true in it basically.
"I'm an atheist, just arguing for spiritualism"
Translation: I'm a theist, and I believe that if we update the Bible to conform to modern science, then the bible is 100% accurate, and thus proves my god delusion. Ergo, I win!"
"Also, I'm still a virgin, because I can't find a woman to submit to my god given supremacy because I have a tallywacker!"
I find once you write science into the bible there is also no point in worshiping anything in it. Being a decent human being to people around you and using common sense are much more effective.
I still can't figure out what he thinks adding spirituality will bring to the table.
I love JMike's analogy of building houses. "They have an empty lot." Awesome!
It's not empty, it's full of invisible and undetectable masterpieces! /s
0:56 this dude was definitely me in college. Idk why but for some reason if I had to do any type of presentation/public speaking I would literally asphyxiate myself and not be able to breath half the time. It’s funny to me now how it sounds and to hear it happen to someone else.
Once you learn to breathe through your nose, the problem goes away
@@chuckybang more of anxiety but I grew out of it
When something means different things to different people just means it doesn't conform to reality
Science is constantly proved all the time. You see, if we take something like any fiction, any holy book… and destroyed it, in a thousand years’ time, that wouldn’t come back just as it was. Whereas if we took every science book, and every fact, and destroyed them all, in a thousand years they’d all be back, because all the same tests would produce the same result.” Ricky Gervais
Not true. Science is based on assumptions. And even if the same experiments were conducted then the interpretations of the results may not be the same. Interpretations of scientific results depend on who is funding, politics and the narrative of the day. How we saw science in the late 19th century is totally different to post Einstein science.
@@rl7012 except we can demonstrate that science works and update it when we learn new things. You lot can't demonstrate God, and haven't had a new idea in 2000 years!
@@rl7012 also, terrific job the buddy... demonstrating that you are completely scientifically illiterate, but you lean in hard on your Dunning-Krugerism, and think that your opinion is worth a damn. 👏👏
@@BlarglemanTheSkeptic2 Can you demonstrate abiogenesis then? Can you demonstrate that the universe is expanding faster than the speed of light? Can you demonstrate 'Schrodingers Cat' science conclusion that something can be dead and alive at the same time?
@@rl7012 can you demonstrate the resurrection then? Can you demonstrate Jesus walking on water?
19:20 When you can work in the totally hilarious word, turd, into the conversation I’m all there😂
When he starts talking about divorce rates he is basically DIRECTLY arguing for oppression.
There is nothing stopping divorced people from marrying each other again. So if they were in a marriage, decided they wanted out, got out, and then later felt like divorcing was a mistake ... there is nothing stopping them from getting back together. The fact that they don't do this in large numbers suggests they do IN FACT prefer having gotten out. So stopping that with teachings about hell or whatever is clearly worse in the aggregate than allowing people to get out of marriages that they want out of.
If you want lower divorce rates then don't make people feel like marriage is a necessary part of life (causing people to marry who otherwise might not, or might do so later in life) and structure society to be more helpful to people in marriages (parental leave, affordable child care, etc.)
Dude wants to create a new religion.
Go for it.
It's weird he ignores all the new religions that have sprung up in the last 2000 years. Some reached a huge following. But to him they just don't exist... I don't think he wants a new religion, he wants Christianity to be less at odds with his experiences so his cognant dissonance disappears.
5:59 - Philosophers gonna philosophate :D
keep up the cool work, fellas!
Well, Andrew is clearly not a Baptist so he's got that going for him. Not sure where gets the notion that spirituality has not been examined in two thousands years. That's a case of "it's new to me, therefore it's new." 19th and 20th century america was filled with people exploring spirituality
Across Europe and the subcontinent too
Great job by Forrest and JMike!
I mean, there have been tons of religions that post-date and/or explore spirituality in different ways from Christianity, but there's still no evidence that spirituality isn't imaginary, or at most a pretentious way of referring to materialistic processes/relationships.
It's not the book it's not the bad science, we don't throw out what works cause it works. It's the method and results based in our reality. So what works from a biblical perspective of reality? Very little if anything is what.
He does know that the information in those textbooks is outdated right? 😕
@Ronnie Alexander "current textbooks will be outdated right?"
Only if it is wrong...
@Ronnie Alexander
Yes, Ronnie!
That is a good thing, because it means we learned and now understand things better than before.
That is the concept of science, to have the best current explanation for what we observe.
I hope this helps you.
How don't get u comprehend this process?
Old information gets updated(unlike religious stories/beliefs/texts) as time progresses. New information is discovered that supports it or not and either is vindicated or replaced.
Whereas nothing is ever found that supports religion in a meaningful and demonstrable way.
It's the same thing, all the time that wasn't ever actually factually correct or 'true' to begin with. It's not like plants existed before the sun. (Bible account differs)
No such thing as "first human"(bible account differs)
Magic doesn't exist(bible accounts differ)
And those things have all been found to be untrue yet, the bible gets no update ever atall.
@@ookeekthelibrarian
He even has new videos!
Which are as bad as the old ones.
But I dig the bearded look, not so much the what grows on his head...
@@ronaldalexander-bc5kx Not really. Want to give an example?
When he got flustered, he gave himself away as the old troll Mark, from the Austin Stone Church.
Ooof. 10 seconds in and it was obvious the caller was going to foot in his mouth...
Philosophy isn't "lagging" behind anything. It is a modern discipline that has been continuously studied for thousands of years and continues to be refined in universities today. Philosophy and science are not at odds with each other. That perspective stems from a profound misunderstanding. Science is a branch of philosophy. Philosophers refined epistemology to arrive at the scientific method. Scientists use both inductive and deductive reasoning in the formation and testing of hypotheses, respectively. Spirituality, too, has continued to be examined over millennia. There have been many profound theologians since Jesus. Moreover, most of what people are trying to point to with the word spirituality (ethics, morality, metaphysics) is often encompassed by philosophy, as well.
Guy's point is a red herring. Universities have theology departments.
0:49 "If you get a text book from the 1800s it will have, like, accurate descriptions of the Solar System."
How early in the 1800s? Neptune wasn't discovered until 1846.
Ok caller, Can you point out where in the bible (or ANY religious texts from 1000+ yrs ago) is there ANY accurate scientific information?
Pi is approximately 3? I think that one's in Job. That fish exist, maybe? tbh you're hard-pressed to find that sort of thing outside of isolated facts that'd be known to people who didn't really do math or have access to post-Aristotelian logic
@@caffetiel funny thing about your comment.
Define "fish" 🤔
Scientifically, it's much much more difficult than it is in colloquial terms.
Colloquially, a fish has fins, gills, and it has an internal bone structure, and swims in the water.
But🤔 what if any of those descriptors are missing, changed our added to?
What about octopus, seahorse, crabs, salamanders, tadpoles, jellyfish, fish with legs, etc?
But in scientific terms, fish is kind of a catch all (almost nonsense) term 🤷
@@tracewallace23 that's a lot of words to say nothing. These are not comparable categories.
@@caffetiel You are mistaken.
But ok.
Goodbye then
@@caffetiel *π is approximately 3?*
The Bible does not claim π is approximately 3. The Bible claims π is equal to 3. The Bible is mistaken.
This podcast is giving me multiple existential crises.
Wow, dude even knows he's got himself tied up in circles of nonsense.
Ask a theist this hypothetical question: If suddenly all of humanity had their memories wiped clean and same with all of history, and our species had to learn all over again. Science would be the same a thousand years later, but would religion? Would we be worshiping Jesus Christ? If a theist is honest the answer would have to be no. The odds of us coming up with the biblical god is incalculable. This is just another reason that god's are mythology.
The value of science is in the method, not so much in the books!
21:00 It's to bad that Forrest didn't start by refuting the assumption that marriage is by default a good thing, which the caller snicked in the argument. I don't see any reason to let that assumption slide and go to justify the benefits of divorce (which is great in and of itself, but there's no reason to waste time justifying it when the interlocutor didn't prove their assumption to begin with). 😕
Still a good call. 🖖🏿🌈
Apologetics really does cause otherwise intelligent people to abandon their objective thinking skills completely.
"Thinking skills?" Says the lost and clueless atheist fool that thinks star dust, moist rocks and mud puddles have the INTELLIGENCE, POWER, PURPOSE AND MEANS to create/design LIFE, INTELLIGENCE, LOVE, CONSCIOUSNESS, MORALITY, the human being and ALL the co-existent bodily systems (circulatory, respiratory, reproductive, pulmonic, digestive, skeletal, muscular, nervous, body (skin), etc., etc.) intertwined in co-dependent order in the human body :) Atheism is pure idiocy.
DO NOT judge knowledge by your lack of it. There is very firm & undeniable proofs of God and I've been proving God for over 50 yrs. AT THE SAME TIME when it comes to a RATIONAL/POSSIBLE, step-by-step explanation for reality, all atheists are totally bankrupt. Let that sink in; way in.
Proof of God is easy. When we reason from effect to cause. We know the universe had a beginning. Thus, the universe had a beginner. So whoever created/designed this finite universe, had the INTELLIGENCE, POWER, PURPOSE AND MEANS TO DO SO. And since we can't manufacture life, intelligence, love, consciousness and morality, it had to be given to us by an entity that had these attributes to give us and the means to give them. Simple math.
We also know that God is required to exist for what exists. You can’t get finite EVERYTHING from NOTHING or any other finite entity or any other atheist cause you want to use for the cause/source of EVERYTHING that exists. The finite requires the infinite to bring it into existence, due to the 2nd law.
You simply have no atheist cause/source with the INTELLIGENCE, POWER, PURPOSE OR MEANS to create/design the human being, 10 million DIFFERENT species and ALL the co-existent bodily systems (circulatory, respiratory, reproductive, pulmonic, digestive, skeletal, muscular, nervous, body (skin), etc., etc.) intertwined in symmetry and order in the human body. Atheism is a non-starter; pure nonsense. That’s why atheist’s are embarrassing idiots in bragging that atheism has ZERO answers. Lies aren’t supposed to have any answers.
@@JamesJones-pm7tb Says the “lost and clueless” copy paste fake theologian, fake physician/surgeon, fake National Guard and CIA officer and the rest of the fake careers you pretend to have that I’ve forgotten.
The empty lot analogy had me dead😂
Divorce rate has increased along with fossil fuel use, so we need to stop burning fossil fuels to save the family!!!!!!
the words 'science' and 'bible' are a contradiction in terms. if caller claims old science (rendered obsolete by newer science) is more 'compatible' with his ancient mythology then there is nothing to talk about, no merit in his argument. sounds like another desperate christian that tries to save his religious claims and find some 'spiritual' value in his immoral book. his hypocrisy was revealed later on during his unethical rant for the suppression of human rights - forcing people to stay married despite their will.
Back when we didn't know what lightning was, it was way more "compatible" with Zeus.😂
And they really think, they're making an argument for their cause...
It reminds me of the scene in Casablanca where Ugarti says to Rick, I know you despise me don't you.
Rick replies, I don't know I suppose I might if I gave you any thought.
That is how Science deals with religion.
To answer Andrew's question at 25:36, where to go to investigate the Bible's usefulness as a literary foundation or part of Western cultural background, there are college classes on the Bible as literature, or as mythology, or cultural tradition, that investigate these aspects without engaging in a sea of reactionary apologetics for an extremist religious position. Parts of these courses are even available on the internet.
We don't trash old science books, we edit them.
to the point where theyre a completely different book. in 2000 years think about how different science textbooks may be
But we should, we should definitely trash the issues where outdated or wrong information is contained! Otherwise we might end up with people claiming truth from obsolete sources. That sounds damn familiar, doesn´t it? 🙃😊
We make additions/deletions and adjustments based on empirical evidence.
Eh, we do actually trash old science books. We only edit the ones with minor mistakes, not the ones where the entire theory gets discarded. No one today edits medical textbooks about the four humors, unless the analysis is purely historical.
the bible was edited so much over the centuries that a bible from the 8th century and today are two vey different books. a few additions of the medieval times: heaven, hell, angels, satan, the devil, purgatory. the conception of christ was also rewritten to sound less like the raping of a young girl. it also did not originate as a singular book. the first assembly of something like the bible happened in the hellenistic era, and is based predominantly on remnants from arameic texts found in the library of alexandria. a council then decided how to addemble it, what to include, what to add to make it more "coherent" - which is why there is so much mesopotamian myth in it.
and just because people are barely paying attention, does not mean that philosophy is not up to date. there are plenty of contemporary philosophers who have a rather good grasp on the reality of today. and there have been thousands of ideas to advance spiritual pusruit, including the recognition that it is not a real thing. spirituality is not real (aside from the concept).
If Andrew is a non-theist, I'm a Martian!
The caller also shows a problem with how so many folks misunderstand the place of philosophy especially when it comes to being compared with hard science like physics or biology. This also seems like where a lot of apologetics comes from. They think just a mere argument alone can debunk hard evidence without any evidence. If they philosophize a scientific fact with their understanding of science, they believe that can single handily disprove bodies of evidence and research.
I remember my 5th grade Arkansas history book with slaves tied together and lynched. That's proof slavery is wrong and real.
And now you have people trying desperately to teach slavery never happened because it hurts their feelings that the US, unlike every other country, wasn’t perfect.
In second grade we learned about the canals on Mars. I'm sure they'll find them any day now. (Yes, I'm old.)
Why do Christians always ring in with these gormless what if scenarios ffs.
Like they have one premise where "if" isn't centrally pivotal.
I don't think he's a christian. He sounds like a spiritualist, i.e. there exists something else but not necessarily the christian god.
@@NuncNuncNuncNunc
You meant "if something exists...".
This guy I think is just bouncing ideas off the wall. That’s fine.
Hey Forest. Did you put the book back because it was bugging you not being in its place or because somebody else pointed it out? I'm just curious because it was bugging me before you put it back.
This guys got some really weird ideas about philosophy & science. Philosophy covers many branches. Natural philosophy became science. Theology is just a branch of philosophy that assumed there was a god thing and ran with it. It’s never validated itself. That’s why it’s not developed or discovered anything. It just made an assumption, ran with it, never stopped. It spends its time justifying itself - not discovering. It literally cannot confront itself and question its own truth.
"The last time people made a serious attempt at figuring out spirituality was 2000 years ago" (paraphrased) Hahahaha, no!? What about modern spiritual movements, what about cults, what about freakin' Islam!? This sort of thing is constantly evolving and it is strange of him to imply otherwise
the bible never was a science book.
Anyone else asserting the opposite has an issue with reality.
Wrong wrong wrong! The Bible is how we know that bats are birds. Checkmate! 😉
It has in fact been used as a very bad science book. If there were a God, the properties of Nature were established by that Being, and it is Anathema to deny the actual fact of Evolution by Natural selection.
Which is fine I think. It’s only an issue when you try to claim it is. It’s like me saying that HP Lovecraft was a scientist.
@@Multi_Purpose_Weirdo
Android #16, approves this!!
I just noticed Forrest has the Kanto badges on his shelf. 😁
If all you have in the hypothetical is the outdated science book then you have no resource to sort the good parts from the bad, and you are hosed.
The moment you allow ANY MECHANISM AT ALL in to the hypothetical that will allow you to sort the good from the bad in the old science book ... that makes the old book superfluous, and the right move is to jettison the old book and use the other mechanism directly and exclusively.
What this tells me is they need to write a new Bible with better information.
The existing Bible is just fine as a literary work....it just needs to be moved to the FICTION section of the library.
Better information would just turn the Bible into a combination science, legal, and philosophy text book. It couldn't be the inerrant word of God that theists say it is because it'd be clearly and visibly written by people. Instead of being secretly written by people.
I'll write my own bible. With blackjack... And hookers....
Why do people think divorce is so bad isn’t it good for people to be able to make their own decision on who they want to be with?
Question: If the omniscient, omnipotent creator knows that The Bible is outdated, he is invited to come down and update it for us. Why would he let us read an outdated inaccurate book? The solution seems very simple here.
It takes a long time to find a virgin that is willing and able to have gods magic sperm impregnate her then for her to convince herself and her boyfriend/husband that she didn’t cheat then teach that kid he’s the son of god then have that kid have a bunch of disciples to rewrite it
According to the Bible, that god didn't understand, that two people who lack the ability to discern good from evil, can't discern between good and evil, especially if he lets a snake in the garden, who tries to trick them to take the evil decision... While he also made the snake...
So sadly, that is actually in character.
He may be omniscient and omnipotent, but also incompetend and not that bright.
an all powerfull idiot god.
@Chris Cuomo
You are wrong and breaking the commandment about bearing false witness.
Atheists have not been given sufficient evidence.
The only reason that you are a Theist is because you started as one or became one because you wanted to.
Not because of preponderance of independent evidence.
@Chris Cuomo no convincing reason to believe in a god or gods could be found in your post
@Chris Cuomo Why should I believe an ancient barbaric book that tells us to stone homosexuals to death, kill woman who were raped, kill teenagers who're going trough puberty, burn pregnant woman to death, and a perfect god that allows and even teaches slavery? Why should I believe in the thousands of unbacked claims that are made in the bible, like people that life to the age of 950 yo, talking snakes and donkeys, A wizard that magically parts the sea, and a perfect LOVING god that is so sensitive, that he wants you dead when you badmouth him. And a perfect god that is jealous?? (exodus 20:1-26) Just to name a few..
Or let me put it this way. Why should I believe in ancient fairy tales, when we have a modern understanding of life that is backed with a ton of actual evidence instead of empty claims?..
To me, spirituality is a specific type of applied philosophy that seeks to address the question of the meaning of life.
It isn't a search for truth. It's a search for an outlook on life that lets you feel ok about having to have another day.
What is his meaning of "spirituality"? Everyone has a different meaning. Can't give a solid definition as there isn't one...
... a make-believe state of being
You note science technology is advancing what we know about something- and striving to learn more about it- spiritual knowledge would be trying to advance in Something we have yet to prove exists
Forrest, the bible isn't remotely the first collection of stories that try to make some sense - and fail hard - of reality...
Well it kinda is the oldest that we still have (effortless) access to.
@@irrelevant_noobThat's a whole new claim tho
@@angelmendez-rivera351 well i don't disagree that taken literally, Forrest was wrong at 4:00, it wasn't our "first"... But i was trying to make a case for how he might've gotten there, reinterpret the words if you will. 🙃
@@irrelevant_noob I obviously understand what Forrest was getting at, but it does not change the fact the phrasing he used is incorrect, and is a disservice (misleading) to anyone who is not knowledgeable enough to understand that he merely misspoke in the heat of the moment. It was an honest mistake. I am not accusing Forrest was being malicious. However, when a mistake is made, we have to acknowledge it, regardless of whether he's "on our side" or not. Otherwise, we are no better than Christians.
@@angelmendez-rivera351 well, or we can brush it aside as it's really not of any significant consequence to the topic being talked about.
The marriage discussion has not so much to do with religion but with human rights.
Marriages are no longer slavery contracts but an agreement to stay together because it makes people happy. If it doesn't: get out of it.
Marriages are any worth defending and preserving if they add value to a relationship, not if they are a burden.
Scaring people into staying together doesn't give them a fair way to assess the value of their marriage.
JMike took 10 minutes to the question what is spirituality. He was very confusing in this episode. He needs to learn to be more direct..
There are people who say they believe that sinners go to hell, and yet they do whatever they want and then get forgiven for it, effectively wiping the slate clean.
Never trust anyone who believes an all-powerful god has forgiven everything bad that they will ever do.
They believe because they want to sin :)
I’m so confused right now what the hell is he talking about? Just get a current book for each subject that you would like to learn about it is the best example we have the most updated today. Why do we need the Bible for anything?
Andrews trying to sneak his version of god in
Exactly. We wouldn't start with an old textbook if we were simply trying to learn a subject. So why would we start with an old textbook to try to make the bible seem to vibe with that subject?
I think this is a good subject to explore!! There may be more to it. If you take in account the new theories about the younger dryas, being a result of comet fragments hitting the ice sheet, and the result was the destruction of a much older civilization, which left all these old stone ruins, that have no written history, then one could come to the conclusion that everything we know came from trying to put the peaces of that civilization back together. Maybe there were parts of scientific literature left. Any none scientist would not be able to understand them, and may have attempted to fill in what wasn't there with what they thought should be there. Done in a non scientific way?
Isn't the divorce rate higher among Christians?
Why, because the population in certain areas is more Christians?
@@Atreyu-81 so Andrew was wrong, a fear of hell won't stop divorce, just another reason to not take it as any more than superstitious nonsense
Also spousal abuse.
@@Atreyu-81 You should probably learn what "rate" means.
@@HEARTS-OF-SPACE Dumb B.S. you people never cite anything and even if you do it's usually an opinion article from some d-bag that means sht to real studies over various populations.