Atheists Strawman Religion?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 июл 2024
- Do atheists strawman the religious argument?
This clip is from The Atheist Experience, Episode 28.26 for June, 30 2024 with Armin Navabi and The Cross Examiner!
See the full episode: • The Atheist Experience...
Call the show on Sundays 4:30pm-6:00pm CT: 1-512-686-0279 or use your computer to save on long-distance charges: tiny.cc/calltheshow
► LinkTree: linktr.ee/atheistcommunityofa...
► Don't like commercials? Become a patron for ad-free content & more: / theatheistexperience
► Find all of our links here: linktr.ee/atheistcommunityofa...
► Podcast versions of the show may be found at:
www.spreaker.com/show/theathe...
► Atheist Experience merch can be found at: https:tiny.cc/merchaca
► Become a RUclips member: / @theatheistexperience
► Join our discord:
tiny.cc/acddiscord
Note: We request pronouns as part of the call screening process on our shows, and we display the pronouns our callers provide. If you see a caller with no pronouns indicated, this is because they chose not to provide us with any, and we respect that decision.
-------
WHAT IS THE ATHEIST EXPERIENCE?
The Atheist Experience is a weekly call-in television show in Austin, Texas geared at a non-atheist audience. The Atheist Experience is produced by the Atheist Community of Austin.
The Atheist Community of Austin is a 501(c)(3) educational non-profit organization based in Austin, Texas. The Atheist Community of Austin is dedicated to promoting atheism, critical thinking, secular humanism, and the separation of religion and government.
We define atheism as the lack of belief in gods. This definition also encompasses what most people call agnosticism.
VISIT THE ACA'S OFFICIAL WEB SITES
www.atheist-community.org (The Atheist Community of Austin)
NOTES
TheAtheistExperience is the official channel of The Atheist Experience. "The Atheist Experience" is a trademark of the ACA.
The views and opinions expressed by hosts, guests, or callers are their own and not necessarily representative of the Atheist Community of Austin.
Opening Theme:
Shelley Segal "Saved" www.shelleysegal.com/
Limited use license by Shelley Segal
Copyright © 2011 Shelley Segal
Copyright © 2024 Atheist Community of Austin. All rights reserved.
Dear all Christian preachers:
Nobody cares what you have to say.
And stop throwing those bible verses at us. They have no value at all for an Atheist.
By their own standards of sin counterproductive preaching is one
@@MrCanis4atheist humanist stop throwing your gender nonsense at us we don't care. And keep your hands out of our pockets and your men out of the females bathrooms and gyms.
In their system of beliefs, ignorant and blind loyalty to the in-group is a virtue. For the most part, they don't actually care if they convert anyone or not, they're here to rack up heaven points baby.
@@quotedotes The European churches are full of (then) very expensive marble tombstones. Only the very wealthy could be buried IN the church. You then bought your place in your heaven.
Atheists don't HAVE to strawman religion. Theists have done all the work already. We only have to point to it.
True, a lot of what a specific theist would call strawmaninning (unless it's used on their specific stance) is usually just an example of what another theist of the same religion has said or done.
I guess you're forgetting about transgenderism although I wouldn't call it a religion because it's not I would call it a satanic cult, coupled with satanic mutilation rituals practiced by atheist humanist
Atheist humanists are always straw Manning when it comes to their gender faith.
You point out the fact is not a shred of scientific is not a shred of physical evidence that somebody is born with a brain that doesn't match their body.. and instead of addressing the evidence The atheist humanist will accuse you of being a bigot.
The atheists humanist that believe in the supernatural aka the idea of the origins of Life came into existence without God also constantly straw man.
Matter of fact when I asked one atheist in specific on his multiple accounts to provide evidence to his faith-based belief in the supernatural that the origins of Life came into existence without God. Instead of him providing evidence for his belief in the supernatural he relies on straw man responses and says to me why are you calling abiogenesis supernatural, want to respond to him and I asked him to point out one time I called abiogenesis he can't do it because he made it up because he can't supply evidence for his beliefs in the supernatural AKA the idea the origins of Life came into existence without God .
Yeah they strawman themselves with their sometimes insane arguments
@@SgtWilko1979 the atheist humanist community has an extremely high rate of mental illness so it's not surprising atheist humanist usually give insane arguments.
Matter of fact I could probably tell whether or not you're an atheist by how you respond to the following request..
Please supply a rational definition for the word female .
Atheist also have a huge problem distinguishing between what they believe in faith and what's proven by the scientific method.
For example when they make a claim to the supernatural like the idea of the origins of Life came into existence without creation without God they don't understand they believe in the supernatural in faith.
So it's not only when it comes to gender they can't distinguish between their faith based beliefs and what's proven by the scientific method on many subjects.
Yes, and pointing that out to them, is like flicking an exposed nerve. Lots of angry screaming and flailing, for no reason.
"There are atheists that are great people, there are people who claim to be religious that are pieces of shit."
Anyone else notice how he uses "claim to be" when referencing "bad religious people"?
" An eye for an eye, would leave the whole world blind" Ghandi
The death penalty isn't about Justice, it's about vengeance.
Well the problem with justice systems is that they're not just themselves. Justice systems are a masquarade made to control people.
For example: a killer murders a victim. For this crime they get to spend multiple years in a facility that gives them food, water, place to sleep and heat. All paid from the taxes. Meanwhile a homeless person fights for those things.
And what does the family, of the killed man get for the justice? Nothing. They're screwed, they lost a loved one, so now they're devastated, while also they need to provide for themselves without a killed father or mother. Great job, justice system, you really helped the victims!
Forgive me for being pedantic, but G. did not actually say that. This is often times mistakenly attributed to him. The G. family and representatives concur. Remember the big expose that Hitch did on MT? There should have also been one about G. A google search results in fruit, but there are signs of impending censorship. My comment here might not be allowed, usually if I use the full names of G.or MT, my comment gets banned.
Religious people love to straw man evolution.
Don't be ridiculous, forget the fact that Darwin believed in God but the only one straw Manning is the atheist humanist.
Whenever you point out the fact that he has a faith-based belief that his ancestors were sea creatures he pretends that you're denying what's proven by the scientific method which is organisms evolve..
The atheist can't distinguish between what he believes in faith and what's proven by the scientific method.
And the scientific method
And cosmology
And nuclear physics
And geology
And meteorology
And archaeology
And palaeontology
And engineering
And several more fields of science I just forgot.
@@freddan6fly
Atheism is the complete opposite of the scientific approach, atheism is a disbelief which means it's an unwillingness or inability to accept God.
If you replace the brain of an agnostic with a rock and you do the same thing with somebody who believes in God, same thing with an atheist you end up with three atheists. Because a rock doesn't have the willingness or ability to accept God.
Atheism has nothing to do with science but atheists love to say the word science.
Modern science like almost everything else we see in the modern world today was created in Christian civilization AKA Modern Western Civilization.
Whereas atheistic human civilization has given the world North Korea.
B-b-but, if evo-wooooooshun is wrong, then therefore GAAAAWD! Checkmate, atheists
@@freddan6fly lol, they deny evidence in front of them but accept that which has not a shred of evidence. Bizarre…
I like how he tried to derail the argument with the pro choice thing knowing full well they have his goat.
The I N S A N I T Y of creationism
-- Being too ignorant to understand science, I can express personal incredulity with naturalistic explanations because some deity in a story making humans out of mud seems more plausible. And i have no understanding of sophisticated concepts such as emergent properties.
Creationists rarely try to show evidence FOR their position and instead try to discredit evidence AGAINST it.
It's because they know they don't have anything that can considered exclusive or conclusive evidence.
He ignored half of what they said, bruh
Caller Brad has some serious blind spots and confirmation bias that's off the charts.
If you can't see the blinding effects of your own religion, then the religion is working on you.
Sounds like you're describing atheist apologist.
Firstly they won't admit that atheism is a disbelief.
They also won't admit how garbage humanism is. No matter how much garbage human isn't produces they still won't admit it's complete garbage.
Religion and magical thinking, working exactly as intended.
More I N S A N I T Y from creationism
"I'm ignorant and incredulous about science therefore science is atheism and everything I declare as true MUST be true!"
And every "declaration" about science and evolution by the FloBloJokeBoi is simply a *LIE!*
The religious just can't stay out of my business. NOT a strawman. Demonstrably true.
There is no need to strawman religion or religious people. They can not meet their burden of proof and that is damming enough.
Suggesting the death penalty is moral is absolutely bonkers. He is confusing justice with morality. He has to learn the difference.
Define justice.
I would argue that justice is just morality made into a system that serves society and that thinking the death penalty is moral is simply a failure to apply good moral reasoning.
that's not even getting into the fact that the death penalty is effectively a factory for irreversible mistakes.
Yet sometimes there are individuals where the death penalty would be justified like Hitler or Stalin. So where do you draw that line, some people draw is in different places.
The idea of Justice comes from morality.
I think it's so interesting how the atheist humanist is so set against the death penalty unless the person being murdered is an innocent child.
The atheist humanist would scream in a rage if a state passed a law giving the death penalty to a rapist but at the same time they argue for the death for a child that was conceived in rape.
It's not surprised that atheists who support selective abortion including all the way up to birth will never argue it based on its own merits they always have to bring up rape and incest.
If you support the idea of a woman getting abortion even under the conditions that she does it because she thinks it's funny that her child is going to die in agony having a slim dripped off minutes before it's supposed to be born then you should argue based on those merits.. but that's not what you what you do because you know what you're supporting is completely immoral.
It'd be nice if people claiming something is a strawman actually knew what a strawman was.
Too many use it as a way to deflect criticism. Objections to an argument are not automatically strawmen.
They are reverting to their childhood, when they were called a poopyhead, they would reply with "You're a poopyhead" same difference. They go the next level, like the miscreant that gets called a trouble-maker by a judge that retorts with "No, you"
When they put the 10 commandments in schools I hope they include the one, "Thou shalt not cook a young goat in its mother's milk."
I mean that's an important one, no kidding!
But that's not one of the ten commandments.
Anyway are you for or against the death penalty for rapist.
If you're against it , are you for or against the death penalty of a child who was conceived in rape. Meaning would you support a woman having the right to murder her child in the womb if the child was conceived in rape.
From my experience talking to atheist humanist they would be dead set against the rapist receiving the death penalty and there would be totally for the child getting the death penalty
@@AtheistsLoveMetzitzah It is, unless you are cherry picking the commandments. But then again that is all you have.
If only your magical fairy were in your side about the critic you are making.
@@AtheistsLoveMetzitzah An unborn foetus don't have rights that are higher than a woman. You believe a woman is an object that you can own. That is a horrible moral standard. It is fitting for a horrible liar, like you. If you cared about foetuses or children you would already have adopted at least four unwanted toddlers. How many have you adopted?
@@AtheistsLoveMetzitzahtwo issues I can spot: 1. you are equivocating child and fetus; 2. Even if a pregnant person carried a fully grown child that’s already fully formed with a personality, friends, legal rights, etc., forcing someone to carry them and give birth is against their own autonomy. Just as you don’t have the right to someone else’s body, neither does a fetus. Pro-choice people generally are not “pro murder”, we are for consent and autonomy. We are against giving special rights to someone using our bodies.
@@neothepenguin1257
Hypothetical scenario.
If a conjoined twin said I want to kill my conjoined twin, do you believe that twin has a right to do so ? Or do you acknowledge that even though they're conjoined twins that they are individuals and both of them have the right to life.
The notion that moral values are more stable when they based on the God standard has some problems. First, it only actually works when people agree on what that means. People have to agree about what the God standard actually is. They don't. And there seems to be no rational way to resolve such disputes.
So we are left with the world as it is, where most people broadly agree on some moral principles, but often disagree on the finer details. For examples, people agree that killing people is bad in many cases, but what of the death penalty? What of warfare? Other moral questions are very much in dispute. The notion of the God standard doesn't seem to be a useful way of dealing with that reality.
The death penalty is about revenge, it's not moral justice, imo.
Is justice anything more than revenge? Being that I don't believe in objective morality, I find it hard to say that the death penalty is wrong.
@@vladtheemailer3223 Punishment and revenge are 2 different things. Killing in the name of justice...nah. Makes us just as bad.
@@einienj3281 how is punished after the fact not reveng?
How are the two different things? Couldn't I just define the death penalty as punishment?
@einienj3281 From either of our perspectives, what makes the death penalty wrong? From my perspective, the answer is nothing more than emotions.
176 days of counting and still not a single convincing reason to believe in the existence of any god, gods or other divine or supernatural beings.
About a week until these failures reach half a year
Approx 6000 yrs of counting and still not a single convincing reason to believe in the madness of atheism / humanism!!!
@@JESUS--NEVER--tAPPED--OUTyour response also fails to provide any convincing reason to believe in the existence of any god, gods or other divine or supernatural beings.
Thanks for providing the example for my thread.
Funny how the FloBloJokeBoi has never yet been able to provide one sliver of verifiable evidence that he is right about his g0d and that one billion Hindus are wrong about theirs.
@@JESUS--NEVER--tAPPED--OUT
humanism = I want to make the world better for everyone.
Makes sense you hate this, you are a evil person. Probably that Satan of yours, is guiding you to all this hate.
atheism = I do not believe something, I have not sufficend evidence for.
A perfectly logical thing to do, makes also sense for you tho hate it, your Satan loves decid, so it makes perfect sense that logic and reason is on your hate list.
@@vertigo4236 yeah, I'm a hateful person because I REPEATEDLY share the LOVE of Christ & the Gospel with this incredibly welcoming audience.
Not my problem you're a hateful, arrogant, & immature atheist who completely disrespects those whom you disagree with.
Are you capable of having a civil dialogue??? NOPE! ...What a shame!
I recommend you find a good mma school to learn some manners & respect!
-- osu
I'd say religions are an unnecessary time sink.
Is that a strawman?
And a good Wednesday Morning 🌞 AXP Fans and Theists ❤❤❤
Peace Love Empathy From Australia 💪🤠☝️
Hey Gricey! I'm giving you Firsties on this one! The others all cheated!
History does not record anywhere at any time a religion that has any rational basis. Religion is a crutch for people not strong enough to stand up to the unknown without help. But, like dandruff, most people do have a religion and spend time and money on it and seem to derive considerable pleasure from fiddling with it.
We don’t need to strawman that stuff. It’s so stupid and nonsensical that anybody can figure out it’s not true without us exaggerating or changing a single word of it.
Thong of David: My god is so good that he DROWNED every living thing on the face of the earth - men, women, babies, infants, pregnant women*
.
* except 8
LOLZ
Was it moral to drown all those kittens puppies and babies in the story of Noah’s flood?
@@jaflenbond7854 TL;DR God isn't real, waffler.
I think most atheists, especially those who care to defend their position are more moral than similar Christians because there is no dogma for atheists and they have had to ponder the question and develop their own moral code. Christians get most of their morals from their preacher which probably is only loosely based on the Bible and may include what is just the opinions of the preacher. The Bible repeatedly says to be kind to immigrants, something approaching 20 times, but modern right-wing churches preach the exact opposite with rabid conviction. This is hugely immoral in my opinion.
Christian too need to developp their own moral code as much as atheists. The bible says slavery is fine, so if you refute at least one idea from the bible you can no longer say your moral is objective. While atheists, our moral was teached by our parents too (as much as you)
Actually Christians don't get their morals from a preacher we get it from our moral conscience which we believe is given to us by God.
Atheism which is a rejection of God results in humanism and humanism is complete garbage..
I bet you don't support the death penalty for a rapist but you do support the death penalty for a child who is conceived in rape, unless I'm wrong and you don't support selective abortion and or you do support the death penalty for rapist.
Christians created the greatest civilization in the history of mankind. We've given women more rights than any other philosophy by far. Every atheistic humanist government without exception has been communist. You've murdered more of your own citizens in the last century then all of the civilizations combined since written word. And that doesn't even include the countless for abortions on women living under atheistic humanist China.
Atheist humanist even today support the racist eugenics plan the racist negro plan given to them by white supremacists atheist humanist anti-christian Margaret Sanger committing genocide against 50% of all black children every day in America.
Atheist humanist get their sense of morals from whatever their cult leaders tell them.
But basically they believe and do as thou Wilt and the ends justify the means. Not surprisingly the vast majority of Satanist identify as both atheist and humanist.
The biggest cause of rape in Christian civilization today AKA Western Civilization is the atheistic humanist voter.
The atheist humanist doesn't care that women are being raped they give priority to their gender faith and they allow men to share a prison cell with women.
We know how you feel about Christians but what about the Jewish people.
Do you feel the Jewish people and their talmud are moral or immoral? My guess is you don't want to answer that question.
Do Jewish people get their sense of morals from what a rabbi tells them to believe his moral or immoral?
What's your take about what they're doing to the indigenous black and brown people killing over 40,000 of them 75% women and children. Do you denounce this as completely immoral or do you support Zionism ?
Bbbbb
Which beliefs of which of the forty five thousand denominations of your religion are we straw manning?
It's certainly not strawmanning to point out that, in general, 'righteous' is not the first adjective that comes to mind to describe people who think God commanded them to take the lives of their offspring. There's a reason for that, and that is that today, the idea of child sacrifice is almost universally recognized as horrendous. Morals have changed since the origins of the Abraham and Isacc tale- I would say for the better. Which is a problem for claims that humam morals are based on an absolute divine standard.
I think the main change is that it's become anathema to consider another person, including children, can be property.
Most societies no longer consider children property of their families just as they consider that other adults can't be their property either.
No, we see through a glass brightly.
The comparison with dogs was good....similar to dogs, believers only react to words they know and ignore entire sentences.....🤗😄
"You can steel man their argument and say 'religious interpret it this way and I can see where they're coming from but I personally don't agree."
But that's the thing I DON'T see where they're coming from. I never have. Even as a child the Abraham and Isaac story specifically was one of the stories that twinged my internal antenna as being a problem. It got even worse when I would see things in media where they would talk about people killing other people and the killer saying God told them to. I would ask, "well, how do we know god didnt tell them to?" I always got the same answer: "God wouldn't do that."
God wouldn't do that? Isn't that the part of that story?
So I would ask pastors and preachers about this and they couldn't answer my questions and I always get the same blow offs. "You'll get it when you're older."
Well, I am older now. I'm 41. It has been at least 30 years. I could not see where they were coming from when I was a child but now I'm an adult with kids and I even more cannot see where they're coming from. 3/4 of my kids are not mine biologically and I still couldn't fathom doing that. There is no one and nothing I would trust to say "go kill your kid to show me your loyalty." No person worth worshipping would ask that, let alone a god worth worshipping. I'd rather the god get angry at my disloyalty and kill me than ever putting my kids in that position.
The CE's final point was very well made. Parents' interactions (about social behaviour) with youngsters change as they grow older. In religions, the message assumes followers remain as young children i.e. 'because I said so' - we should out-grow such infantile thinking.
The ending was so sad when the caller just didn’t engage at all with x-examiner’s restatement
Classic Christian strawman: “you don’t believe because you just want to sin”
Usually I hear it as "You know `God` exists. You just want to sin!" As if pretending I didn't believe would somehow work. It's the inverse of Pascals wager and just as silly.
Or the "You know its true because its written on your heart!" My uncle is a cardiac surgeon, and he assures me there's nothing written on the human heart!
'because you just want to sin'
And probably someone who thinks everyone sins so that's why they say it....
“you don’t believe because you just want to sin”
Saying that I don't believe in God because I just want to sin is a dumb argument. Like saying I don't believe in gravity because I want to be able to flap my arms and fly.
IF there was a God and a judgement and a hell as they claim, then not believing in God would not change that and nor would it absolve me of the consequences of my sin.
It is quite simply that I do not believe in God, or judgement day or hell. Sin doesn't enter into it.
I also don't believe in the cosmic hall-pass of praying for forgiveness - THAT would be the game plan of Christians who can sin and be absolved of the consequences of sin.
@@mirandahotspring4019 "My uncle is a cardiac surgeon, and he assures me there's nothing written on the human heart!"
They should have serial numbers - that way when you have a heart issue you can claim warranty from God the creator. 😄
Brad, just because you think blind obedience is a good thing,
it doesn't mean not agreeing with you is strawmaning your position.
Wait, what is immoral about opposing the death penalty?
Opposing the death penalty is immoral because someone should die for a crime, even if that person may not be guilty. Right?
Cause I'm sure NO ONE in the history of the death penalty was ever wrongly put to death. And there's surely no bias such that the society would consider certain people to be guilty with flimsy evidence.
@@quecee Yup. Like, I can see actual pro-death penalty arguments (I still don't agree with them, but I can have a conversation with them), but it just boggled my mind so much that "opposing the death penalty is immoral." Like... really?
Xtians straw manning Big Bang: Atheists believe "something can come from nothing"
.
WHILE their own book says: Our Invisible Sky Daddy clapped and made the Universe from NOTHING.
LOLZ
There is always a Brad in the bunch 😂
@13:00 Armin should have given what we do use...research studies. We get actual data to make the decision of good and bad outcomes. Its not a popularity contest, its looking at actual data.
The caller Brad showed up in the comments of the video of the Sunday night show and it didn't take very long for him to demonstrate the same dishonesty that they all do.
Dishonesty they all do? Who you talking about the followers of the talmud?
Can you be honest, why do you attack Christianity in the Bible but not the Talmud.
I asked you numerous times to denounce a certain practice called metzitzah jobs which not only results in children being molested but many of these children dying from complications due to herpes. You refuse to denounce this practice of Metzitzah yet you call yourself a moral person.
I can only come to a couple conclusions to why you won't denounce metzitzah jobs.. one is that you're not against child molestation. Two you're a follower of the Talmud. Is it both of these things, one of these things.
If it's something else please by all means explain to us why you refuse to denounce the practice of metzitzah.
Still obsessing over foreskins and ancient Jewish rituals I see.
I just want to add to something Amin said. Slaves don't necessarily have to be bought or sold at a market to be slaves. I noticed he used that as a way to differentiate a slave from a nonslave. There are many historical examples of slaves not being bought and sold.
Many of them were simply spoils of war. Some of them aren't bought and sold, but inherited. Others take an indirect route when it comes to ownership transfer like serfs being tied to the land and the land transferring from one individual to another.
(Some people might try to differentiate serfdom from slavery, I feel like it's pretty much the same. Saying they're different is almost like Europeans trying to whitewash their history saying they didn't practice barbaric forms of slavery)
The way to tell if they're actually a slave is whether they are distinguished from property or not.
Friendly reminder that Isaac was not the first son Abraham tried to kill and god was complicit. (Gen.21:8-16)
Religion is strawman. Once you've tried to logic theists through it, you just start getting irritated and start making fun of it.. only way to keep yourself sane when arguing with Stoopid..
I'm an agnostic pantheist.
I dislike Religion as it's used as a control mechanism for people and thought.
@@nealjroberts4050Exactly. Everyone is allowed to believe what they want, but not allowed to force it onto others.
Re. capital punishment, I've always been intrigued by Christians' readiness to spout off about the Old Testament "eye for an eye" crap yet conveniently ignore what their messiah says in Matthew 5:38-48: “You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well." Well... this is awkward.
Cafeteria Christians select from the Biblical buffet.
I do wonder if cherry picking is the natural state for Christianity.
Very interesting examples about utilitarian ethics. Useful!
So sorry i missed this episode. I wosh i could have called in. So rare the cast and paid moderators, give a caller a chance.
first abortion is not mentioned in the bible. he is pro life but likes killing a prisoner. And Christianity is not a religion of moral responsibility
Well, it technically _is_ mentioned insofar as there is a recipe for an abortion potion and instructions for a ritual involving it if a man suspects his wife of cheating (in Numbers chapter 5 iirc).
Unborn children weren't particularly valued in ancient Jewish culture. If I'm not mistaken they didn't even generally name children until they were a year of age.
@@ThorsDecree
There's even a passage that spells out the price/value of harming someone - and listed by age and gender. The unborn aren't included in that list, nor infants under a certain age.
@@nealjroberts4050 Yup. Until you're old enough to do "people" stuff you're not really considered a _person_ in that culture... basically just a minor piece of property that could potentially become a more valuable piece of property.
Don't forget the slave/free distinction, too. Killing your own slave is generally fine; killing someone else's slave results in a monetary fine paid to the owner; but if you put out a slave's eye or cut off a hand then you lose your eye or hand in return whether the slave is yours or another's. It's kind of peculiar that there's a penalty for putting out an eye but not for killing your own slave, eh?
There's a bit of semblance to the Code of Hammurabi in the ancient Jewish law... but only a bit. Most crimes just get you death penalty under ancient Jewish law lol.
Abortion is mentioned in the Bible because the Bible says thou shalt not kill. Actually it's the wrong interpretation it's supposed to be thou shalt not murder.
Which is interesting because atheists always claimed that Christians get their morals from the Bible which isn't true we get our moral conscience from God.. I always thought there was something wrong with thou shalt not kill it didn't make sense to me and I said something is wrong here because you have to kill to eat. It's justified to kill to protect your family from somebody who's trying to murder them
Decades later I found out that the interpretation was wrong and it's actually thou shalt not murder and that made perfect sense.
Selective abortion is murder but not all abortion is murder . For example if a woman chooses to preserve her own life of her life is in danger over her child that wouldn't be murder.
But if she gets an abortion because she wants to start a new career or she wants to spite her boyfriend this is murder.
@@nealjroberts4050
The ten commandments says thou shalt not kill which is a misinterpretation it's supposed to be thou shalt not murder.
Selective abortion is murder so it does cover selective abortion.
It's proven by the scientific methods that life begins at conception. A human fetus is a human being and a human being is a person.
Killing another person to spite your boyfriend or because you want to start a new career Would be murder.
Well, if atheists do sometimes strawman religion, then I feel it's entirely unintentional.
Like, it's not deliberately framing the theist argument incorrectly to "score points" but is just a genuine misunderstanding of a complex variable thing.
Most simply, if you, for example, talk about an old man with a beard sitting on the clouds then some theists will say "oh, come on, my understanding of god is far more sophisticated and nuanced than that". And, sure, I'll take your word for it. The slight problem is that, for some theists, it really genuinely isn't any more sophisticated than that, and some do literally believe in that way.
So, you know, it's kind of hard to accurately sum up something that has thousands of denominations and variant beliefs attached to it, even before we get to the diversity and variation between gods of different religions.
There's no intent to strawman your arguments. But it could sometimes happen accidentally, just because there's such variation - so, you know, you're challenging a popular belief that many theists really do have but, oh, okay, in your case, you don't believe in "divine command" (or whatever), so that particular point does not apply to you. But it does to plenty of others.
Like, for example, the Bible doesn't actually condemn abortion. It's just not in there. It's a later non-Biblical addition to the canon - as "the seven deadly sins" also is.
So, you know, we could be discussing the moral issues of abortion and the atheist presumes the theist is against abortion. But they might not be - you could totally be a Christian and pro-choice without any Biblical contradiction at all.
But, yeah, the atheist is not "strawmanning" there in the presumption of a theist being pro-life (as this really is the majority opinion, so it's, like, generally a good educated guess to make), it's just hard to hit a moving target, if you see what I mean.
In fairness, this show does its best to concentrate on the "tell us what you believe and why" thing, exactly so the theist speaks first and lays down what their exact beliefs are. Because there's a lot of them. Lots of different, sometimes very contradictory, beliefs are all happily label "Christian" by someone or another out there (and you know this to be the case too, as many Christians will refuse, for example, to see Mormonism as being "true Christianity" - not a true Scotsman).
Give us a break here. It's not deliberate "point scoring". It's just genuine confusion and misunderstanding, because you are presenting us with an often confusing "moving target" here.
I feel there needs to be a distinction where someone's argument is misrepresented deliberately - actual strawmanning - and where someone's argument is just genuinely misunderstood - because it's weird and confusing and not the popular mainstream opinion at all.
There are even people who'll take objections to their arguments as being strawmanning!
It always annoyed me when theists have the nerve to say people who support abortion are immoral because when you ask them about the thousands of children who are dying from malnutrition, "that's not relevant"
Brad's moral compass doesn't know where North is, hence he is lost in more ways than 1.
Right off the bat, even if I strongly disagree with it I can see death penalty being moral for some, but that *opposing* death penalty is immoral?!
God Bless America
While the storm clouds gather
Far across the sea,
Let us swear allegiance
To a land that’s free.
Let us all be grateful
For a land so fair,
As we raise our voices.
In a solemn prayer.
God bless America,
Land that I love,
Stand beside her and guide her
Through the night with a light from above;
From the mountains, to the prairies,
To the oceans white with foam,
God bless America,
My home, sweet home.
God bless America,
My home, sweet home.
Yes. Of course they do. Duh. They incessantly act as if the worst aspects of any religion are the core tenets of every religion.
Pointing out the bad parts isn't strawmaning.
The religious act like there are no bad parts
A strawman argument is when you argue a position that the opposing side did not take. It is as if you have made a man of straw, and beat on it as if it were your opponent, when it is merely a construct that you made.
What you describe here, is not an actual strawman, because the atheist is arguing against a position that the religion does take. That religion simply wishes for that position to remain out of the spotlight. It is what everyone does in an argument, they bring up their strongest points and use them almost exclusively.
Good or bad, it only matters if there's evidence that proves your deity exists. What evidence do you have?
"Yes. Of course they do. Duh. They incessantly act as if the worst aspects of any religion are the core tenets of every religion."
No we don't. That is a strawman argument in itself.
When I was a believer I was still adamant that religion had a lot to answer for, being a believer in God and Jesus did not stop me from thinking that churches were corrupt.
Atheism is a position on the belief in a god. Proving a god would change me to a theist, but I would still think the worst aspects of religion were horrid.
Worth noting that theism by itself isn't religion.
Did you hear what he said about democracy? Pay attention.
That caller going the Mai Mary Emanuel Gandalf character playing the christian persecution card when they're not wanting to answer the questions and claiming that questions being similar to attacking?
That's being quite lame-duck indeed.
what the ... was that end of this video.
if he doesn't have a religion,what is so hard for him to understand?
also .. TX .. with opinions like that, that was just nonsense from him.
I appreciate CE and Armin having a reapectful dialogue. I will be on QC stream this Saturday if anyone wants to have a respectful conversation. I will join at 8pm CST and be on for 1 hour max
I'll see if I can make it this week.
Is it a 1:1 or a more open discussion?
@@nealjroberts4050 More open discussion
@@nealjroberts4050 Open discussion
I think I may join in to discuss your remarks about democracy.
@@amtlpaul Sure
THE SUN MAKES IT POSSIBLE FOR LIFE TO EXIST ON EARTH.
THE SUN IS THE HIGHER POWER.
Yes.
Next question
Every chance they get
How and when?
Refuting or not agreeing with your position is not strawmaning
@@joshsheridan9511 dismissive hand-waving is not a refutation
very useful video. Well done. Armin made a small mistake: morality is indeed intended as the social rules of a specific society, at a specific time period and a specific place. That's morality, and it is obviously decided using democracy. What most people accept as good, is considered good. (because they could impose it to the minority by force, anyway). On the other hand, ethics are the sets of rules of every single individual, and those have nothing to do with democracy. There are so many ethics as humans. Every single citizen partly disagrees with the morality of his society. But everyone makes a compromise in order to live among others. So, Armin, morality is dictated by democracy, unfortunately.
"and it is obviously decided using democracy."
Oh boy, you should look up history and religion.
Morality isn't decided by democracy.
It should be decided by a cooperative process that has all of humanity and its well being in mind, but that isn't how it happend through the long human history.
@@vertigo4236 Oh boy, you should be careful when you read. As I said, morality is different at every place and every time. It is simply the set of rules of THAT society at THAT place and THAT time period. Nothing more. Those rules are not decided by having in mind anything about well being. They are decided by the majority of the people of that place, on the basis of their own ethics of that moment. The minority has to follow anyway, because the morality of the majority always dominates. That's why it is obviously a democratic process. Moreover, that is also the process which leads to the laws of a State. The laws follow the morality of the geografic area. Morality can't be for "all of humanity", because it applies only when people have direct interactions. It is for small areas and it also changes all the time.
Ethics and morals are often interchangeable terms.
I tend to use ethics for workplace standards and morals for more immediate personal standards however morality can used for societal standards.
Said societal standards are not implicitly democratic. Certainly not demarchic.
@@kosdas
Oh boy, I did...
And you are still wrong, because at specific points in time, it was NEVER decided by democracy.
Do you know what democracy is? Morality was not decided by the majority of people, but by the majority of POWER.
Ever heard about autocracy? Monarchy? Religion?
Do you think that chiristanicy, islam are a democraticly formed?
Please go and learn, this is embarrasing.
A democratic process, has to give everyone the same vote and has to be informend to be democratic.
That is NOT how morality has formed over the ages, if you claim that, give me a DIRECT proof of that.
@@kosdas
"becasue the morality of the majority always dominates."
You obviously have no clue about history, not. One. Bit.
Explain how the catholic church, who had the monopoly on morality for AGES, is democratic.
Please.
Please do that.
One reason given to become atheist or shun religion is "being told that people who believed in other religions would go to hell because they followed the “wrong” religion or for being born in the “wrong” country.” This seems to be a very common reason - but is it what the Bible really teaches? What if that particular reason for walking away as a Christian was based upon a completely false premise and if the lie is exposed, it might make a difference to you. John 3 16 invites you to know God's love and promise for you.
Should teenage rape victims have the right to abortion?
@@SundaeExpress All things that are permitted by the laws of one's society are lawful. From a Godly perspective, however, 1 Corinthians 10:23 reminds and instructs us thusly: “I have the right to do anything,” you say-but not everything is beneficial. “I have the right to do anything”-but not everything is constructive." If your state doesn't allow the 'rights' you demand by lawful means, seek to change the laws or move to a more obliging place - or seek first the Kingdom of God and His righteousness." which is God's path to life everlasting in His Kingdom.
@@wwlib5390 Should teenage rape victims have the right to an abortion? Yes or no
@@SundaeExpresswhat does the law say? Yes or no. What do today's moral opinions established by our very progressive and modern society say? Yes or no. Answer your own question. If you don't know what is moral or right and if you disagree with what the societal consensus is where you live, seek first the Kingdom of God and His righteousness - that is the path that leads to God's everlasting Kingdom and it begins and ends with Jesus Christ and Him crucified and resurrected (John 3 16).
@@wwlib5390 Should teenage rape victims have the right to an abortion? Yes or no
To the cross examiner on the left, if you are pastier than Nivea cream and can’t tan naturally just know that black clothes are not your friend but fake tans are. Also thanks for killing my appetite with the thumbnail. I didn’t know what you were holding up 🤯😫😖then I realized, it was just your hand.
The big issue stuff huh.
But thank you, you make great points about lighting and clothing choices and I assume you are a person of immense style and beauty.
@@sirbarryvee-eight6485 No doubt she has the visage of a busted tomato.
ChatGPT could’ve helped you here, tragic that this is an original paragraph from you
Never do jury duty. You will get distracted by so many irrelevant things, you could end up sending a shoplifter to the gallows.
When you don’t have any good arguments, just focus on optics, right? 🙃
God is good.
Evil is convinced that it's better than good.
God is…unproven.
Have a great day.
🥗🥗🥗
I would like to remind you that nobody cares what you say, and you're better off convincing people who believe in a different version of Christianity.
@@canbest7668 Unproven in what way specifically?
@@ThroneofDavid8 no evidence of a god.
No one has ever demonstrated it’s true.
“We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, . . . in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated commitment to materialism. . . . we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation & set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counterintuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.”
-- Richard Lewontin of Harvard
OP fails to provide any convincing reason to believe in the existence of any god, gods, souls, sin, any form of afterlife or other divine or supernatural beings.
According to my count you’re at 175 days of failures.
Because of the FloBloJokeBoi's LACK of ANY evidence for his tribal war g0d, I have concluded that his make believe g0d is *faketitious!!*
And ?
"Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.”
Bullshit. Prove a divine foot and I'll open the door to it.
I would just like to remind you that nobody cares.
Another reason to become atheist or shun religion is that some Christians portray a judgmental and rigid doctrine which serves to attack those such as LBGTQ or others who are not within their 'circle'. But does Jesus model and teach that rigidity and apply it in real life with real people on the street? How did Jesus treat the woman caught in adultery? What was the message in His teaching to both the 'judges' and her? What is more important to God than judging for our sins? John 3 16 invites you to KNOW God's love and promise for you.
The only reason to become an atheist is because there's no evidence to think a god exists.
Should teenage rape victims have the right to abortion?
@@SundaeExpress All things that are permitted by the laws of one's society are lawful. From a Godly perspective, however, 1 Corinthians 10:23 reminds and instructs us thusly: “I have the right to do anything,” you say-but not everything is beneficial. “I have the right to do anything”-but not everything is constructive." If your state doesn't allow the 'rights' you demand by lawful means, seek to change the laws or move to a more obliging place - or seek first the Kingdom of God and His righteousness." which is God's path to life everlasting in His Kingdom.
@@wwlib5390 Just answer the bloody question!
@@SundaeExpress "Should' is a question of morality. Society also makes its own rules according to the morality-of-the-day. So, you have laws that allow your desired 'shoulds' and laws that allow your desired 'rights'. Enjoy them, embrace them. Do as thou will. But if you ever decide you don't like society's decisions as far as 'shoulds' and 'rights' go, you can always seek first the Kingdom of God and His righteousness. That starts and ends with Jesus Christ and Him crucified and resurrected and the Gospel in John 3 16.
Yep, atheists always strawman the arguments for God. Anthropic reasoning and Fine Tuning, the transcendental argument (for knowledge), universal moral Nature/ Being (ontology), argument
from contingency. They can’t beat the arguments so they strawman what they WISHED the arguments said.
All of them are refuted, no need to strawman them
I would like to remind you that nobody cares what you say.
It's an ironic comment from an epic strawman fighter ! Deflectin Damon is simply incapable of substantively engaging actual objections to his claims, which is why he attacks strawmen instead!
@@amtlpaul Liar, you have no arguments for atheism, so you strawman what you can’t defeat.
@@quentind1924 You’d have to not strawman the arguments as being “refuted” before claiming no strawman.
The G O S P E L is your O N L Y hope:
Christ came, died, was buried, & rose again FOR YOU whether you like it or not, believe it not, it’s the Truth! 👈 👍
The Good News of the Gospel = 1 Corinthians 15:1-4
You've established the claim. You now need to provide proof.
The Bible is not proof of the Bible. If you wish to claim the Bible can be used to prove the Bible then please, go live inside a whale for 3 days and nights.
how do you know?
@corranhorn85
Brother, the Bible consists of more than 40 different authors, from different walks of life, in addition we have the writings of Tacitus, Josephus, & the Apocryphal writings which ALL testify to Christ! The likelihood that all of these men are lying is …ZERO %!
Furthermore, the “empty tomb” of Christ speaks for itself! Amen!
Because of the FloBloJokeBoi's LACK of ANY evidence for his tribal war g0d, I have concluded that his make believe g0d is *faketitious!!*
@@JESUS--NEVER--tAPPED--OUT "Brother, the Bible consists of more than 40 different authors, from different walks of life, in addition we have the writings of Tacitus, Josephus, & the Apocryphal writings which ALL testify to Christ! The likelihood that all of these men are lying is …ZERO %!"
The Bible consists of over 40 different authors, none of which knew Christ personally, all accounts were written at least 70 years after he passed. A whole bunch of authors writing fan fiction based off earlier fan fiction proves nothing.
"Furthermore, the “empty tomb” of Christ speaks for itself! Amen!"
I agree. The tomb represents the claims about the evidence for Jesus - empty, hollow, void thereof.
More I N S A N I T Y from atheism:
The overwhelming complexity & symmetry of the human body is not a product of intelligent design 🤔🤔🤔
More T R U T H & Scientific Fact:
- Paintings require a Painter
- Buildings require a Builder
- Design requires a Designer
- Life requires a Life-Giver
- Intelligence requires a Intelligent PERSON
- Consciousness requires a Conscious PERSON
- Morality requires a Moral PERSON
- Personality requires a PERSON
- Sociability requires a Social PERSON
- Emotion requires an Emotional PERSON
- Free will requires a PERSON to produce free will
Sadly, the friendly atheist will still continue to blatantly embrace the madness that a so-called natural process can produce the above!
What a shame!
More Stupidity from the FloBloJoKeBoi.
The FloBloJoKeBoi is so stupid that he thinks a functioning organism with one heart on the left side of the torso and one liver on the other side is 'symmetrical'... derp.
As I keep reminding you
1) Science and Atheism aren't the same thing
2) Your ignorance and incredulity about science don't make your claims true
@@nealjroberts4050 The FloBloJokeBoi's ignorance and incredulity about science are the not the reason he has to *LIE* about science. The reason he has to lie about science is because he is desperate to prevent his make believe alternative reality from imploding.
@@holgerlubotzki3469
Indeed they don't really preach to convince others but to convince themselves.
What God thinks of atheism:
“Only the fool says in his heart, ‘ There is no God!”
-- Psalm 14:1
“…claiming to be wise, they instead became utter fools!”
-- Romans 1:22
🛑 Stop being a fool & humble yourself!
Open your 👁️👁️ & acknowledge the clear observable evidence! All of creation is screaming at you with their silent words, pointing to the Creator (Psalm 19)! ✅
“What god thinks of atheism” is the dumbest sentence I’ve ever heard 😂😂
Your counterproductive preaching is still counterproductive.
And a Christian sin.
FloBloJokeBoi hasn't yet figured out what even the fools already know.
Claiming to know what the tribal war g0d of Abraham thinks is just another form of blasphemy.
*The simple believeth every word* : but the prudent man looketh well to his going. Proverbs 14:15
Philippians 2:12-13: “Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you.”
You should fear and tremble because God is working to keep you. And I think it means the sheer awesome presence of God in our lives working for us, not against us, should produce trembling. That is amazing. So, the New Testament treats the fear of God as a motive for not turning away from him. We should fear in the sense that we seek refuge from God away from God’s terrible wrath. God’s grace in Christ is the refuge from God’s wrath outside Christ. There is terror outside of Christ, and there is a different kind of trembling inside of Christ.
Bhagavad Gita, Chapter 9, Verse 23: "Even those who are devotees of other gods, and who worship them with faith, actually worship me alone, O son of Kunti, but in an improper way."
If the gh0d in question is working in you, _then it is not your own salvation, now is it?_ And you therefore have no freewill, because the gh0d took that away when it did the work. You cannot reason this passage in a way that makes sense. Not only does it contradict itself, it contradicts dozens of other passages.
Counterproductive preaching is still counterproductive. By Christian definition it would be a sin
Outside of Christ, god will visit the most unimaginable eternal torture. But in christ, he will give you protection from that awesome punishment.
You may not think it, but that is what you are saying.
Ridiculous sheep cowering in fear of “divine” judgement and punishment.
Brad is so defensive, he pretends to be an atheist just to avoid being labeled as stupid.