The deacon at my wife's church used to have a pig roast. Everyone was a church member except me. One year a tornado hit the area and destroyed a barn on one of his farms. He asked if people could show up on Saturday to help clean up. Over 200 Christians showed up to his pig roast. Only 21 showed up to help him. The deacon said one of the most disgusting things I'd ever heard. He asked my wife why I was there helping since charity was a Christian trait. I didn't find out until getting home but if I did know I would have told him 100% of atheists showed up to help and 10% of Christians did so apparently charity is an atheist trait.
Just shows how spineless and brainless they are, yet they claim to have the moral highground based on a book which most of them don't even know what it actually says :)
"Once they're adults I can't control what they believe." That sentence said it all. A christian and a racist. Funny how those 2 things go so nicely together.
@@Thexderify it was one of the first things he said. He thinks his children are his to mold. Fortunately it sounds like they’re pulling away from his indoctrination. Could you imagine having a father like that? Someone with so little respect for anyone. Poor kids.
I knew this was going to go bad as soon as he said that. Not too surprising he has a kid who left home and started to stray from the church. Kid was probably already on that path but hiding it from dad. Not “I have less influence” but “I can’t control”. Something tells me he probably is still trying to control them via less direct manipulation.
That was slightly less weird than the jacking off on corpses part. I thought “ Someone who supports abortion? That’s a faulty assumption for him as an individual, but if I had to bet based off of his association with other hosts who do, that’s where I’d put my money-WHAT?! Jacking offf on dead bodies?! Does he think that’s normal for any religious, philosophical, and/or political demographic?!”
@@josephine4s It's what happens when raw emotion takes over from reason: all the underlying prejudices come out. Logic goes out of the window too. "Jacking off on _dead_ corpses"? What other sort is there?
I Love You, I Love You...so Much.... Translation.. I Hate You, I Hate you...so Much...but I'm going to Heaven beCuZ I 'Septed Geebus Christ as My Lord and Savior...so Neener, neener, blllaaaa, waaah, wahhh.. Woow! That was amazing. I agree, mask totally slipped off. Haaahaaa! I replayed that last 1/2 a few times...and just lauuugghed.
They had agreed to be more charitable and I was thinking, “I can’t believe Eric actually salvaged some progress from this dumpster fire of a conversation.” Then the caller had to undo it all.
@@scruffylookingNerfherder5742 Inthink it was chad (a troll that got butthurt with this channel) attempting to gain self respect when his troll 'argument' got completely turned back to him.
Same here. IMHO It was Eric's fault. Eric assumed that the caller could differentiate between a hypothetical statement and an observation. Chris felt insulted by Eric's hypothetical situation and blew his lid. In doing so, the Christian revealed what he really thinks of atheists with a deranged, and very uncharitable rant. Which ironically is the polar opposite of what Jesus taught.
@@thembill8246 God loved us so much he had to kill a dude before he could forgive us for conditions he made that were ultimately out of our control. That's true love, brother; what you on about? :P
I'm an atheist , but I know from experience there are damaged and angry people on both sides. The same way there are kind and tolerable people on both sides. Don't blame this guy's nasty attitude on his religion, it makes you sound alot like him. The guy's just a jerk, and still would be if he turned atheist tomorrow.
@@stevedem76 I'm merely saying what the guy actually said about his position. He said it himself that if he were an atheist he doesn't believe he'd care. I'm not angry or anything, I just pity him for not being able to see the humanity in others. I know there are people like that on all sides, but he tied that to his religion, not me.
@@inquisitorbacon8170 apologies, my reply was more directed to those making blanket statements about religious people. I've met some that were great people, and they never preach to me.
Chris’s tone throughout is scary, e.g. at 6:22: “Let’s say you punch somebody in the face. You don’t like their face, you go up to them and you punch them in the face. You want to hurt them, you want to cause pain on them without facing any kind of consequence or action (unintelligible). If I can just do that, I can just walk outside and punch someone because they (unintelligible) looked at me funny…”. What? Where did that come from? *It’s both what he said and the way that he said it.*
Then there’s 8:46: “Well, I mean sometimes (my wife) does piss me off but I would never take that to a full extent of saying “Hey I’m going to ruin your life and break up my marriage”. I would never do that, I’m not that kind of man”. What? 😲
What sort of upbringing must someone have had that they think everyone who isn't a Christian must be a sociopath? How long before he narrows the distinction down from all Christians to just his church, and then just him? His concern that he is no longer able to control his kids' opinions suggests he may already be down that path. He let so many things slip there, added so much unnecessary detail -- unasked -- to his examples that shows his thinking.
@@RichWoods23 unless something changes, the Supreme Court will be successful in eliminating the separation between church and state and create their ultimate goal---A (THEOCRACY).
@@pearlgirl6840 Followed shortly afterwards by the traditional method of bringing a divided people together, a crusade. Internal or external, it doesn't matter. But the less-religious provinces of Canada should start organising their civilian resistance forces now.
@@RichWoods23I agree. The present day religious minions would enjoy a repeat of the crusades. It seems like globally authoritarians are gaining ground. 😖
The guy not realising that if the only reason you are not going around doing nasty things, its because you are afraid of God's punishment, actually makes you a psychopath 😂
The caller was clearly a very disturbed creature. Full of hate, insecurity, inadequacy, immaturity, jealousy to name but a few. IT is totally ill and the probability of IT being rehabilitated is a hard ask.
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him. If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb. If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves. The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament. We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven. We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection. The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing. There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too. Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture. This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text. It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
@@trentitybrehm5105 because a book say something, it doesn't make it true. The Bible is a mythological book. If that is your only source of evidence, well, those are not good evidence. It might be enough to say that someone called Jesus lived back then. Sure. But it doesn't prove in any way that he was the son of God and that God exists. Otherwise, can we say that Zeus exists because of the Odyssey?
@@ahah86 The Bible isn't the only source of evidence. We also have the writing of the disciples of the Apostels and the disciples of those disciples along with the writings of hostile contemporary writers, all of which contain all the core things of Christianty from the beggining. Jesus dying, rising from the dead, all of it. We also have archeology from Genesis through the New Testament.
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him. If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb. If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves. The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament. We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven. We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection. The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing. There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too. Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture. This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text. It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
1:45 Chris said about his kids, once they're out of the house, I can't control their beliefs. WTF? You actually CONTROL what your own flesh and blood THINK and BELIEVE???? How awful a dad are you!? Give them the tools to think for THEMSELVES!
He may think he’s controlling their thoughts and beliefs, but he can’t really do that. He can make them conform to his rules, but he cannot control what they think or believe.
My parents never tried to control what I believed. I was clearly brought up under their influences but I took everything they said and everything else I encountered and formed my own opinions. We agreed on many things but disagreed on others. I was lucky though my parents were very open-minded about a lot things. They treated everyone equitably. God and religion were things we disagreed on though there was never anything adversarial about those disagreements. For instance, they fully supported my choice to stop attending religious instruction at school though they might have disagreed with it, and signed the form. They supported me in every reasonable thing I wanted to do.
Wow wow wait there! We can't let them think for themselves, otherwise how are they going to believe in stories written thousands of years ago that go completely against the laws of nature and basic common sense? Don't you know that critical thinking is a tool of the devil? We need to train our kids to be good sheeps that cannot think for themselves.
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him. If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb. If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves. The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament. We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven. We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection. The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing. There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too. Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture. This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text. It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
"If you don't have anyone punishing you eternally, why would you ever be honest or good? There's no consequences." 😂 Religion in a nutshell, ladies and gents. This is why our country is being destroyed. Liked. Subscribed. Thank you.
@@benjaminnowack8433 YEah.. the only "leash" keeping him from turning into a rabid, adulterous, lying, stealing, hateful, spiteful, vindictive POS is his "god".. oh wait.. He IS a POS can do those things since "Jesus paid the bill, we can have our fill'..just confess, say "Imma Sorrweeee jeeezus" and go right back to life as normal. And to THINK (not just say, but think) the sh-t that he said to Eric, proves, that he's deluded and really a POS.. he can't claim some moral high ground from the swamp!!!
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him. If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb. If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves. The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament. We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven. We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection. The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing. There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too. Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture. This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text. It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
I never believed in it. Not one time in my childhood. I was raised with Catholicism, and thankfully never felt like my parents would hurt me if I didn't. I think I was a lucky one, to be honest.
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him. If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb. If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves. The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament. We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven. We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection. The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing. There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too. Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture. This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text. It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
It’s very telling how offended Chris got when Eric “accused” him of cheating on his wife and beating his kids. No one gets that angry unless there’s a bit of truth behind it. Makes you wonder, and makes you feel really sorry for his wife and kids.
Nah, this is not true at all Getting angry at a false accusation is perfectly reasonable, why wouldn't you The problem is how hypocritical this person is
@@randomusername3873 I mean yeah, but considering how horrible Chris is, I wouldn't be surprised if it WAS true, cuz fuck me, he's a poor excuse for a human being!
I'd say it's 50-50. Not an indicator that there's true to the accusations but certainly an indicator that you can't compose yourself as a proper adult. I mean...wtf...what's next? -I'm rubber you're glue, cowsh!t upon you😂😂😂
We tend to assume that others are like ourselves. Chris assumes that people are dishonest, deceitful, sleazy, and violent... because he is all of those things
I think it’s because of the myriad places in the Bible where non-believers are denigrated in much the same way. When I was a Christian that’s where I had gotten it, even to the point that I was afraid of communing with non-believers.
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him. If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb. If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves. The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament. We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven. We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection. The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing. There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too. Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture. This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text. It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him. If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb. If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves. The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament. We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven. We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection. The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing. There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too. Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture. This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text. It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
This troll has called in before. I can't remember his name but he was the one who got all pseudo butt hurt and started crying about how his dad fought in Vietnam and the hosts were disrespecting him with their argument. He also called in twice in a short span of time and gloated that he had gotten past the call screeners again. What a tool.
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him. If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb. If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves. The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament. We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven. We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection. The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing. There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too. Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture. This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text. It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
Eric was just trying to lay the ground rules for a civil conversation and he gets accused of being a Christian! And the vile rant at the end! I can only conclude that the self-righteous Christian caller got his 'morals' of racism and misogyny from his holy book.
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him. If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb. If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves. The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament. We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven. We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection. The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing. There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too. Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture. This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text. It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
I think the bit in the end proves that Chris was trolling this entire time. I think as much as I get annoyed with Matt just yelling at the person on the other end...I think you guys are too nice to noticeably dishonest people sometimes.
@@zacharyshort384 he was progressively losing his shit because Eric challenged him. The end sounds trolly, but I think he was just angry at a taste of his own medicine.
I feel, troll or not, his 3 brain cells shorted out from being challenged. Clearly this guy feels he should never be challenged at home, in public, or anywhere he feels the entitlement to start spewing BS. That they challenged him with good, fair rebuttals hurt his wittle feelings, so he did what lots of these people do where I live. Scream ridiculous accusations in hopes of putting them on the defense, so the power dynamic changes. It didn't, so his brain cells gave up.
Wow! The warped and depraved crap that they're feeding these mouth-breathers is staggering! _"Those who can make you believe absurdities can also make you commit atrocities"_ - Voltaire Unfortunately, some words of wisdom remain recyclable for centuries...
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him. If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb. If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves. The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament. We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven. We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection. The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing. There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too. Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture. This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text. It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
@@trentitybrehm5105 it's a story book. And you've decided that because it says so in a book, it must be true? Are you really THAT vapid? (Lord of the Rings is a million times the book the bible is, plus it makes sense, agrees with itself, and doesn't threaten you with punishment for not believing, by sending you to Sauron...)
@@angelstyro The meaning if what I wrote was that it is unfortunate that repetition is necessary. It is a lesson we should have learned long ago, yet gullibility persists.
I’m about the same age as the caller, maybe a few years younger, and I couldn’t imagine ever calling into a show and making noises like a 9 year-old in an argument. Some people truly never mature.
Agreed, humans as empathetic, social creatures have evolved to generally act in the interest of community, and towards things like guilt/shame when behaviours are interpreted by individuals as social transgressions. I also agree with the development of early religious systems and their evolution reflecting cultural and social contexts of the time, with later texts being bidirectional in influence. There's even a parable in Judaism, where a Rabbi discusses the importance of atheists in the world with one of his students: "They do not believe that God commanded them to perform this act. In fact, they do not believe in God at all, so their acts are based on an inner sense of morality. And look at the kindness they can bestow upon others simply because they feel it to be right."
Wow, I MUST remember this, it is the clearest description of how I CONDUCT MYSELF AND MY LIFE. Neither I nor my wife nor my children nor my grandchildren are believers in god, yet we’re are moral, caring, loving and respectful AND WE DO NOT NEED A STINKING GOD TO TELL US TO BE THAT WAY. WE LEARNED IT FROM OUR PARENTS WHO HAD SIMILAR STANDARDS.
Christians don't believe that people can be authentically good, moral or kind people on their own merits. Their belief system teaches them that all people are inherently evil and that because we are all born rotten to the core that only a bloody and violent human sacrifice can redeem us. What a pessimistic and horrible way to see other human beings this is. According to their god we are all scum and will always be scum. Seeing the world that way is the very core of their belief system. I have no room in my life for a god or for people who believe that I was born worthless trash and deserve eternal torture simply for existing or that I should be grateful that they condescended enough to me to spare me that fate even though I deserve it simply because I had the audacity to be born.That isn't love, not by any stretch of the imagination. That's hate and pity. You can't love somebody that you believe is innately unlovable but simply had enough pity on to spare them your wrath provided they dedicate their entire life to being your puscillanimous slave.
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him. If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb. If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves. The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament. We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven. We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection. The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing. There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too. Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture. This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text. It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
@trentitybrehm5105 hi I think you might have my comment confused with another? I wasn't discussing existence of Jesus at all and am not debating individuals' right to believe in him as a religious and historical figure although I don't personally believe in either If, instead, you're trying to proselytize in comment sections then you might find that garners more hostility than kinship 😉
"Why would you not tell a lie that will affect someone negatively?" "What's the consequence if God doesn't punish you?" - I think he answered his own question... - The consequence is the harm it caused...
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him. If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb. If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves. The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament. We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven. We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection. The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing. There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too. Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture. This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text. It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
@@neosapien247 You don't need a Nobel prizes. You can fight the facts if you want to, but all the way from Genesis through the New Testament, the archeology matches perfectly with the text.
@@trentitybrehm5105 only science illiterate bible thumpers talk like this. You don't know the first thing about the scientific method. You find fringe bible thumping 'scientists' and take their 'proof' as valid against the vast majority of evidence pointing to the contrary. It's called confirmation bias. Look it up. And let's assume your god is real. He's a morally bankrupt murderous psychopath if he's anything like your bible describes. If you worship that guy, you're just the same.
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him. If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb. If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves. The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament. We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven. We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection. The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing. There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too. Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture. This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text. It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
@@trentitybrehm5105 I could be, and you could stop posting irrelevant stuff on peoples posts to promote your particular brand of religion. If you tried.
@@zacharyshort384 actually she was only engaged to Joseph so god fornicated. OMG! LoL. I was told though, while a kid, that it wasn’t in fact sex, so it was ok what god did to Mary. She got pregnant when god or an angel (not exactly sure) whispered in her ear. Whispering ear sex. I just can’t believe I was raised by and with people who believe that and think it’s all true!
@@trishayamada807 I mean.. all that is actually said in scripture is that the 'Holy Spirit' would come unto her. Everything else is up to our dirty minds I guess :P Considering 'God' incarnates later in the story, I think it's fair to say he physically incarnated then as well to 'do the deed'. Good point about her not being officially married at the time. I misspoke. I still feel the 'homewreaker' bit applies in a sense tho!
@@zacharyshort384 sure, Mary would have been stoned to death being pregnant and not married. The whole story is so immoral. There’s rape or ear rape or whatever magical means of impregnating a girl there are, and then if Joseph said nope to marrying her, she’d be killed. It’s all so horrible and religious people think it’s this fabulous miracle. It’s gross.
Im a 48 year old atheist and only punched one person in the face my whole life and thats only cause he punched me in the face first😂😂😂 on a side note... there has been hundreds of people that i wanted to punch in the face but didnt, and thats not because a God was watching me, its because i can show restraint.
You ate a Christian in your heart, Chris! I love it when these callers prove our point themselves, we don’t even have to pull it out of them. We just have to wait and they do it. This is it to themselves.!!
Ya! Scriptures hates Hypocrites and Pride when its its time to do so seemingly contradicting. but, the Law knows a believer who doesn't Read it honestly or know any thing about it? why prisons are so full of believers and teach it today. because of hate on iether side as who really makes a jack ass of one self shows more clearly and very evidentiary how Christians become..
That was amazing how you lifted the lid on a crackpot mentality and I genuinely wonder how commonplace that kind of horrible ignorant, arrogance is amongst the deeply religious. Well done for exposing his true colours. I wonder how his perceived morality stood up to that stress test and I wonder how it was viewed by his peers. 🍻
Oh man, what a monster in disguise. I feel so sorry for this guy's kids. If Chris treats Eric, a stranger on a call in show "like a stern father" as Eric put it, imagine how badly and authoritatively he treats his young adult children! Not to mention the way he talked about his wife, and the cheating analogy he chose to use. Yikes. I can't picture anything but a massively abusive family dynamic there.
I hope that Eric is finally learning more and more to have stronger boundaries with callers, especially after this call and the ones he's had with Darth Dawkins. I can only imagine how Matt Dillahunty would have dealt with this guy and how much sooner Matt would have called him out. But Eric did fine.
"Lying is the most disgusting thing anyone can do." This from a Wisconsin Christiam who almost certainly votes for Donald Trump. In - fucking- credible.
This is an excellent vid. You're standing up and insisting on callers explaining their mindset is done in a very confronting way. It's so good, and strangely, very educational. 🍻✌️
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him. If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb. If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves. The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament. We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven. We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection. The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing. There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too. Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture. This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text. It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
To argue that a person would act in an otherwise unconscionable manner if they didn't believe in a god is to argue that people only do the right thing because they fear the consequences of not appeasing the standards of said god.
The word Christian directly translates to - Christ like. I remember a time when they were constantly asking, "What would Jesus do?" I'm thinking, "Not what you are doing." 🤦
A Christian will do the right thing because he's afraid of going to Hell. An Atheist will do the right thing because it's the right thing. If the only reason you're a good person is that you're afraid of Hell, you're not really a good person.
Amazing! This was one of the best examples of the arrogance of theism (and showing theists' reflections) that I have ever seen! The "cheating on your wife" analogy was brutal but certainly a mirror-image (darkly) of what theism does on a daily basis...... When theists are shown the shoe on the other foot, they go mental......
The caller's statement that lying would be the absolute most disgusting thing you could do to a person floored me. Never mind murder, enslavement, sexual assault... Also, how dare he tell you what you believe.
It’s similar to something that the notorious dumbass Darth Dawkins also said, and then doubled down on when challenged.it wouldn’t surprise me if this guy was one of Darth’s flying monkeys.
@@Scowdich it was just a snarky comment on why he may ignore those since they were at times commanded by "god." But yeah, those things tend to be way worse than lies in the reality that we exist in.
Why would a Christian feel guilty for doing anything dishonest or sinful when all they need to do is ask God for forgiveness and they would be forgiven? Their belief in God doesn’t give them a sense of morality. It gives them a scapegoat.
The caller could not understand that his remarks where insulting when you reversed the table. He really thought that you ment what you said. Like he ment what he said. I am sure he would put all atheists in jail if he had half a chance. Religion poisons!
Wow! 35 years old? We have three in our family who are 43……dumber than stumps. I was wondering how old kids gotta get before they start THINKING. Actually, we’d given up hope that they can. Eric is 35 and has been being productive for years. But these kids in our family believe that my wife and I are dumber than rocks and have no wisdom. We are retired and living comfortably. One of them is in jail for the second time, the other makes every bad decision she can find, and only lies…never tells a truth. You gave me hope Eric!
Wow. Talk about a double twist ending. First they came to an amicable agreement in their conversation. Didn’t see that coming. Then dude flew off the rails in no time flat after they came to an agreement. Wow. And he’s talking about moral superiority of his religion?! YIKES.
Here’s the thing: even granting that Chris is absolutely right and that the fear of divine retribution is the only thing that keeps people from behaving horribly, that wouldn’t be evidence that hid actually *does* exist.
Every time somebody wants to tell me that lying is disgusting and immoral, I just think, "No, Obersturmbannfuehrer, there are no Jews in my attic". incidentally, this is also the sentence I think of when Christians ask why would the apostles knowingly die for a lie.
"Do unto others as you'd do unto yourself". I mean, aside from self-destructive behavior, I do mostly agree with this Christian sentiment. If I were to lie, let's say, cheating on my wife, the question would arise "what if she did this to me? How would I feel?". Also, I love my significant other. I would hate to see her hurt, and if I can control that, I'd make sure she doesn't experience any pain whatsoever. Cheating on her is something in my control. Therefore, I will not cheat on her. It's not about "consequences", per se. It's about how I feel about her and the emotions I don't want to inflict on her. I don't need religion to make sure I don't lie to her. If this caller in insinuating that he needs religion not to lie to his wife, I think there are deeper problems involved.
It's a Christian sentiment, but it's not original to Christians ;) You are talking about consequences. Nothing 'per se' about that :P That aside, I could not agree more. Also, this caller was certainly insinuating that people of non-belief in religion (I assume his position would hold to Christianity) would lie, cheat, and steal without any remorse ever. It's a tragic indictment of religious indoctrination and its stranglehold on our conversation about morality.
The deacon at my wife's church used to have a pig roast. Everyone was a church member except me. One year a tornado hit the area and destroyed a barn on one of his farms. He asked if people could show up on Saturday to help clean up.
Over 200 Christians showed up to his pig roast. Only 21 showed up to help him. The deacon said one of the most disgusting things I'd ever heard. He asked my wife why I was there helping since charity was a Christian trait.
I didn't find out until getting home but if I did know I would have told him 100% of atheists showed up to help and 10% of Christians did so apparently charity is an atheist trait.
Too bad you didn't get to say that to him. There would have been another pig roast right there.
Maths is the devil (spoken like tge Waterboys mum)
@@quintonsm2616 Can't be...math is real.
Just shows how spineless and brainless they are, yet they claim to have the moral highground based on a book which most of them don't even know what it actually says :)
@@anthonymitchell9793 Well, technically mathematics is a set of abstract/arbitrary concepts that we apply to reality, but same difference.
"Once they're adults I can't control what they believe." That sentence said it all.
A christian and a racist. Funny how those 2 things go so nicely together.
Thought that was very telling when he said that
@@Thexderify it was one of the first things he said. He thinks his children are his to mold. Fortunately it sounds like they’re pulling away from his indoctrination. Could you imagine having a father like that? Someone with so little respect for anyone. Poor kids.
He’s a monster. He has abused his kids, likely. He beats his wife, or worse, likely.
I knew this was going to go bad as soon as he said that. Not too surprising he has a kid who left home and started to stray from the church. Kid was probably already on that path but hiding it from dad. Not “I have less influence” but “I can’t control”. Something tells me he probably is still trying to control them via less direct manipulation.
I definitely cringed when I heard him say that! But didn’t catch the racism in that sentence. Did I miss it?
There was a lot I was prepared for. The caller getting possessed by a turkey wasn’t one of them.
That was slightly less weird than the jacking off on corpses part. I thought “ Someone who supports abortion? That’s a faulty assumption for him as an individual, but if I had to bet based off of his association with other hosts who do, that’s where I’d put my money-WHAT?! Jacking offf on dead bodies?! Does he think that’s normal for any religious, philosophical, and/or political demographic?!”
😂
@@josephine4s only religion prevents people from jacking off to corpses, every christian knows this
@@josephine4s It's what happens when raw emotion takes over from reason: all the underlying prejudices come out. Logic goes out of the window too. "Jacking off on _dead_ corpses"? What other sort is there?
@@joshuakohlmann9731 Yeah :/
This caller demonstrates that being Christian doesn't necessarily make you a good person.
I would argue being religious doesn't make you a good person at all.
I would argue bad people use Christianity to masquerade as good people.
Anyone who starts a sentence"well, as a christian..." just wasted my air, because the next thing they say means nothing predicated by that.
For sure he has beaten both his wife and his kids in the past. But as a christian, he was then forgiven so it's all good, right...
Being an atheist does not mean you're a good person either.
Wow. That mask slipped right off that caller's face!
There is no hate like Christian love.
I mean he got called out on his irrational beliefs and his brain short-circuited from cognitive dissonance 🤭
Amen!
I agree, however I don't think every Christian is like that but many do get angry when you challenge they're beliefs.
I Love You, I Love You...so Much.... Translation.. I Hate You, I Hate you...so Much...but I'm going to Heaven beCuZ I 'Septed Geebus Christ as My Lord and Savior...so Neener, neener, blllaaaa, waaah, wahhh..
Woow! That was amazing. I agree, mask totally slipped off. Haaahaaa! I replayed that last 1/2 a few times...and just lauuugghed.
Oh that guy totally has cheated on his wife. And I see why his kid don't like him.
They had agreed to be more charitable and I was thinking, “I can’t believe Eric actually salvaged some progress from this dumpster fire of a conversation.” Then the caller had to undo it all.
What in the, and I can't stress this enough, actual fuck was that at the end there?!
@@scruffylookingNerfherder5742 Inthink it was chad (a troll that got butthurt with this channel) attempting to gain self respect when his troll 'argument' got completely turned back to him.
@@Julian0101 That was rather fun wasn't it
Same here.
IMHO It was Eric's fault.
Eric assumed that the caller could differentiate between a hypothetical statement and an observation.
Chris felt insulted by Eric's hypothetical situation and blew his lid.
In doing so, the Christian revealed what he really thinks of atheists with a deranged, and very uncharitable rant.
Which ironically is the polar opposite of what Jesus taught.
Obvious troll is obvious
So sad to hear a grown ass man with two kids nearly in adulthood act like an immature child because he can’t see the flaws in his reasoning
He's not the brightest bulb, and didn't really understand the analogy made at around 12 minutes. Then he went full racist nutty
dunning-kruger
Well, they are called Children of God for a reason. 🤷♂️
@@scottgrohs5940 you forgot sheep. =)
Having kids is the easiest thing in Earth next to breathing so it makes sense honestly, it's just tragic he's so confused.
So this is that Christian love I’ve heard so much about 😂
There’s no love like Christian love. 🤢🤮
Ironically, atheists are more Christian than the Christian’s are hahaha.
bog bless
There’s no love like Christian hate
U guys wanna have thex?
@@johndo8019 No fhanks, my penit neez a rest.
It's really sad that he needs a belief in god to feel guilty about hurting someone he loves.
That assumes this person even has any concept of what love actually is. Biblical love is nothing like love. It resembles hate more often than not.
@@thembill8246 God loved us so much he had to kill a dude before he could forgive us for conditions he made that were ultimately out of our control. That's true love, brother; what you on about? :P
I'm an atheist , but I know from experience there are damaged and angry people on both sides. The same way there are kind and tolerable people on both sides. Don't blame this guy's nasty attitude on his religion, it makes you sound alot like him. The guy's just a jerk, and still would be if he turned atheist tomorrow.
@@stevedem76 I'm merely saying what the guy actually said about his position. He said it himself that if he were an atheist he doesn't believe he'd care. I'm not angry or anything, I just pity him for not being able to see the humanity in others. I know there are people like that on all sides, but he tied that to his religion, not me.
@@inquisitorbacon8170 apologies, my reply was more directed to those making blanket statements about religious people. I've met some that were great people, and they never preach to me.
Chris is one of the worst kinds of human beings - the kind that only behaves because he thinks an invisible magic sky creature is watching him.
In his case it is a pity that an invisible magic sky daddy is *not* watching him!?
@@roqsteady5290 people like him are what should be considered criminals, and probably psychopaths too
Chris’s tone throughout is scary, e.g. at 6:22:
“Let’s say you punch somebody in the face. You don’t like their face, you go up to them and you punch them in the face. You want to hurt them, you want to cause pain on them without facing any kind of consequence or action (unintelligible). If I can just do that, I can just walk outside and punch someone because they (unintelligible) looked at me funny…”.
What? Where did that come from? *It’s both what he said and the way that he said it.*
Then there’s 8:46:
“Well, I mean sometimes (my wife) does piss me off but I would never take that to a full extent of saying “Hey I’m going to ruin your life and break up my marriage”. I would never do that, I’m not that kind of man”.
What?
😲
I wrote those two comments as I listened to the video. I hadn’t got to the end. The end is… wow! 😮
The caller exemplifies so many Christians pretty well. He said the quiet parts out loud.
Right.
What sort of upbringing must someone have had that they think everyone who isn't a Christian must be a sociopath? How long before he narrows the distinction down from all Christians to just his church, and then just him? His concern that he is no longer able to control his kids' opinions suggests he may already be down that path. He let so many things slip there, added so much unnecessary detail -- unasked -- to his examples that shows his thinking.
@@RichWoods23 unless something changes, the Supreme Court will be successful in eliminating the separation between church and state and create their ultimate goal---A (THEOCRACY).
@@pearlgirl6840 Followed shortly afterwards by the traditional method of bringing a divided people together, a crusade. Internal or external, it doesn't matter. But the less-religious provinces of Canada should start organising their civilian resistance forces now.
@@RichWoods23I agree. The present day religious minions would enjoy a repeat of the crusades. It seems like globally authoritarians are gaining ground. 😖
The guy not realising that if the only reason you are not going around doing nasty things, its because you are afraid of God's punishment, actually makes you a psychopath 😂
The caller was clearly a very disturbed creature. Full of hate, insecurity, inadequacy, immaturity, jealousy to name but a few. IT is totally ill and the probability of IT being rehabilitated is a hard ask.
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him.
If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb.
If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves.
The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament.
We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven.
We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection.
The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing.
There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too.
Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture.
This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text.
It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
@@trentitybrehm5105 because a book say something, it doesn't make it true.
The Bible is a mythological book.
If that is your only source of evidence, well, those are not good evidence. It might be enough to say that someone called Jesus lived back then. Sure. But it doesn't prove in any way that he was the son of God and that God exists.
Otherwise, can we say that Zeus exists because of the Odyssey?
@@ahah86 The Bible isn't the only source of evidence. We also have the writing of the disciples of the Apostels and the disciples of those disciples along with the writings of hostile contemporary writers, all of which contain all the core things of Christianty from the beggining. Jesus dying, rising from the dead, all of it.
We also have archeology from Genesis through the New Testament.
@@trentitybrehm5105 sure. If you think that is actual evidence to believe in the supernatural, good for you.
Starts off with "happy birthday", then descends into disrespect. What an ignorant caller.
Mask slipping :/
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him.
If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb.
If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves.
The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament.
We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven.
We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection.
The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing.
There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too.
Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture.
This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text.
It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
1:45 Chris said about his kids, once they're out of the house, I can't control their beliefs.
WTF? You actually CONTROL what your own flesh and blood THINK and BELIEVE???? How awful a dad are you!? Give them the tools to think for THEMSELVES!
He may think he’s controlling their thoughts and beliefs, but he can’t really do that. He can make them conform to his rules, but he cannot control what they think or believe.
My parents never tried to control what I believed. I was clearly brought up under their influences but I took everything they said and everything else I encountered and formed my own opinions. We agreed on many things but disagreed on others. I was lucky though my parents were very open-minded about a lot things. They treated everyone equitably. God and religion were things we disagreed on though there was never anything adversarial about those disagreements. For instance, they fully supported my choice to stop attending religious instruction at school though they might have disagreed with it, and signed the form. They supported me in every reasonable thing I wanted to do.
@@lisaspikes4291 Maybe if they get their own places, they can do the same to him when he's under their roof.
Wow wow wait there! We can't let them think for themselves, otherwise how are they going to believe in stories written thousands of years ago that go completely against the laws of nature and basic common sense?
Don't you know that critical thinking is a tool of the devil? We need to train our kids to be good sheeps that cannot think for themselves.
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him.
If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb.
If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves.
The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament.
We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven.
We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection.
The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing.
There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too.
Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture.
This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text.
It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
That's the reason why I'm not an anti-theist: because people like the caller really need religion to be moral...
"If you don't have anyone punishing you eternally, why would you ever be honest or good? There's no consequences." 😂
Religion in a nutshell, ladies and gents. This is why our country is being destroyed.
Liked. Subscribed. Thank you.
You didn’t say which country you’re in, and yet you’re probably right.
He even talked abut the consequences of losing his wife and destroying his family. Guy's a joke.
J.C. YOU'RE 👌🆒️AWESOME. I'VE HATED RELIGION for 28 years and
still going 💪strong!
@@benjaminnowack8433 YEah.. the only "leash" keeping him from turning into a rabid, adulterous, lying, stealing, hateful, spiteful, vindictive POS is his "god".. oh wait.. He IS a POS can do those things since "Jesus paid the bill, we can have our fill'..just confess, say "Imma Sorrweeee jeeezus" and go right back to life as normal. And to THINK (not just say, but think) the sh-t that he said to Eric, proves, that he's deluded and really a POS.. he can't claim some moral high ground from the swamp!!!
"If you don't have anyone punishing you eternally, why would you ever be honest or good? There's no consequences."
um... he forgot about jail.
A true Christian, for sure
This Scotsman finds nothing fallacious here.
@@zacharyshort384 OK, ok, it's actually Troo Kraystyin.
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him.
If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb.
If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves.
The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament.
We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven.
We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection.
The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing.
There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too.
Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture.
This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text.
It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
Chris you can't control what your kids believe. You can just make them lie to you so they won't get in trouble and be abused.
I never believed in it. Not one time in my childhood. I was raised with Catholicism, and thankfully never felt like my parents would hurt me if I didn't. I think I was a lucky one, to be honest.
@@genericwhitefemale6752you were indeed lucky
"As adults, I can't control what they believe". WHY would you want to control what your kids believe AT ANY AGE?
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him.
If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb.
If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves.
The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament.
We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven.
We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection.
The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing.
There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too.
Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture.
This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text.
It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
@@trentitybrehm5105 LOL
It’s very telling how offended Chris got when Eric “accused” him of cheating on his wife and beating his kids. No one gets that angry unless there’s a bit of truth behind it. Makes you wonder, and makes you feel really sorry for his wife and kids.
Nah, this is not true at all
Getting angry at a false accusation is perfectly reasonable, why wouldn't you
The problem is how hypocritical this person is
@@randomusername3873 I mean yeah, but considering how horrible Chris is, I wouldn't be surprised if it WAS true, cuz fuck me, he's a poor excuse for a human being!
I'd say it's 50-50.
Not an indicator that there's true to the accusations but certainly an indicator that you can't compose yourself as a proper adult.
I mean...wtf...what's next?
-I'm rubber you're glue,
cowsh!t upon you😂😂😂
We tend to assume that others are like ourselves.
Chris assumes that people are dishonest, deceitful, sleazy, and violent... because he is all of those things
I think it’s because of the myriad places in the Bible where non-believers are denigrated in much the same way. When I was a Christian that’s where I had gotten it, even to the point that I was afraid of communing with non-believers.
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him.
If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb.
If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves.
The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament.
We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven.
We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection.
The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing.
There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too.
Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture.
This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text.
It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
I love how Eric kept adding evil things to describe this guy freaking hilarious
The caller also randomly takes a bike from local elementary schools everyday.
He also knocks ice cream out of children's hands
@@ripbob1780 He also calls people Christians...*shudder*
It was the tax fraud allegations that set him off, methinks.
He also kicks puppies
And these people live, work, and breed amongst us.
Scary...
It blows my mind that these people think that they are the moral ones. 🤦♀️
Not to mention how quickly they snowflake... daaaaamn.
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him.
If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb.
If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves.
The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament.
We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven.
We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection.
The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing.
There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too.
Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture.
This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text.
It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
This troll has called in before. I can't remember his name but he was the one who got all pseudo butt hurt and started crying about how his dad fought in Vietnam and the hosts were disrespecting him with their argument. He also called in twice in a short span of time and gloated that he had gotten past the call screeners again. What a tool.
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him.
If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb.
If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves.
The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament.
We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven.
We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection.
The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing.
There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too.
Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture.
This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text.
It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
@@trentitybrehm5105 blow your fairytale out your @$$.
Eric was just trying to lay the ground rules for a civil conversation and he gets accused of being a Christian! And the vile rant at the end! I can only conclude that the self-righteous Christian caller got his 'morals' of racism and misogyny from his holy book.
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him.
If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb.
If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves.
The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament.
We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven.
We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection.
The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing.
There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too.
Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture.
This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text.
It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
@@trentitybrehm5105Aint nobody reading that copy paste ass message
I think the bit in the end proves that Chris was trolling this entire time.
I think as much as I get annoyed with Matt just yelling at the person on the other end...I think you guys are too nice to noticeably dishonest people sometimes.
I think, the minute a caller starts throwing out insults just hang up on them. No reaction, just a *click*🤣
It's hard to find a balance I suppose?
Honestly, I did not think he was trolling at all during the course of the call, but that finish was *very* trolly.
@@zacharyshort384 he was progressively losing his shit because Eric challenged him. The end sounds trolly, but I think he was just angry at a taste of his own medicine.
I feel, troll or not, his 3 brain cells shorted out from being challenged. Clearly this guy feels he should never be challenged at home, in public, or anywhere he feels the entitlement to start spewing BS.
That they challenged him with good, fair rebuttals hurt his wittle feelings, so he did what lots of these people do where I live. Scream ridiculous accusations in hopes of putting them on the defense, so the power dynamic changes. It didn't, so his brain cells gave up.
Wow! The warped and depraved crap that they're feeding these mouth-breathers is staggering!
_"Those who can make you believe absurdities can also make you commit atrocities"_ - Voltaire
Unfortunately, some words of wisdom remain recyclable for centuries...
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him.
If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb.
If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves.
The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament.
We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven.
We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection.
The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing.
There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too.
Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture.
This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text.
It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
Unfortunately? How is that unfortunate? Unfortunate for whom?
@@trentitybrehm5105 it's a story book. And you've decided that because it says so in a book, it must be true? Are you really THAT vapid? (Lord of the Rings is a million times the book the bible is, plus it makes sense, agrees with itself, and doesn't threaten you with punishment for not believing, by sending you to Sauron...)
@@angelstyro The meaning if what I wrote was that it is unfortunate that repetition is necessary. It is a lesson we should have learned long ago, yet gullibility persists.
WTF, indeed.... You've got way more patience and kindness in your heart than most do, Eric...
I think the kindness is in his mind vs his heart. As even Eric call that "flowery language". Which I agree.
Religion has NOTHING to do with honesty !
Basically "if I wasn't afraid of hell I would be a complete a$$hole therefore all atheist must be like that"
And I do think he’s as big of an A$$hole as his Bible allows, and that’s a lot!
Ironically, he is afraid of hell and is therefore an asshole.
That's the gist of it, yeah :)
Makes perfect sense.
That argument is the on the bottom of the hierarchy of moral reasoning. It's CHILD level reasoning.
Happy birthday, Eric. I'm 35 too... 20 years ago. One strong atheist here from the Philippines.
'Once they're adults, I can't control them....' Well, at least he's up front about who he is...
This caller is the whole of Christianity and America.
I’m about the same age as the caller, maybe a few years younger, and I couldn’t imagine ever calling into a show and making noises like a 9 year-old in an argument. Some people truly never mature.
Agreed, humans as empathetic, social creatures have evolved to generally act in the interest of community, and towards things like guilt/shame when behaviours are interpreted by individuals as social transgressions. I also agree with the development of early religious systems and their evolution reflecting cultural and social contexts of the time, with later texts being bidirectional in influence. There's even a parable in Judaism, where a Rabbi discusses the importance of atheists in the world with one of his students: "They do not believe that God commanded them to perform this act. In fact, they do not believe in God at all, so their acts are based on an inner sense of morality. And look at the kindness they can bestow upon others simply because they feel it to be right."
Wow, I MUST remember this, it is the clearest description of how I CONDUCT MYSELF AND MY LIFE.
Neither I nor my wife nor my children nor my grandchildren are believers in god, yet we’re are moral, caring, loving and respectful AND WE DO NOT NEED A STINKING GOD TO TELL US TO BE THAT WAY.
WE LEARNED IT FROM OUR PARENTS WHO HAD SIMILAR STANDARDS.
Christians don't believe that people can be authentically good, moral or kind people on their own merits. Their belief system teaches them that all people are inherently evil and that because we are all born rotten to the core that only a bloody and violent human sacrifice can redeem us. What a pessimistic and horrible way to see other human beings this is. According to their god we are all scum and will always be scum. Seeing the world that way is the very core of their belief system. I have no room in my life for a god or for people who believe that I was born worthless trash and deserve eternal torture simply for existing or that I should be grateful that they condescended enough to me to spare me that fate even though I deserve it simply because I had the audacity to be born.That isn't love, not by any stretch of the imagination. That's hate and pity. You can't love somebody that you believe is innately unlovable but simply had enough pity on to spare them your wrath provided they dedicate their entire life to being your puscillanimous slave.
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him.
If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb.
If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves.
The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament.
We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven.
We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection.
The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing.
There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too.
Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture.
This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text.
It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
@trentitybrehm5105 hi I think you might have my comment confused with another? I wasn't discussing existence of Jesus at all and am not debating individuals' right to believe in him as a religious and historical figure although I don't personally believe in either
If, instead, you're trying to proselytize in comment sections then you might find that garners more hostility than kinship 😉
@@dreadwolfrising I was trying to proselytize. Thank you for you kindness and not making fun of me.
Ladies and Gentleman! That's a REAL Christian, full of love, understanding, compassion and forgiveness! 🤣🤣🤣🤣
"Why would you not tell a lie that will affect someone negatively?"
"What's the consequence if God doesn't punish you?"
- I think he answered his own question...
- The consequence is the harm it caused...
What point was this caller even trying to make!? 😂
That he learned to be a monster through his Christian upbringing. Or at least that's what i got out of it
That if you're an atheist you will rape and murder people. Basically.
Without the threat of punishment he's a sociopathic asshole.
That was so christian of him.
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him.
If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb.
If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves.
The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament.
We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven.
We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection.
The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing.
There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too.
Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture.
This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text.
It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
@@trentitybrehm5105 did any of those 'archeologists' get Nobel prizes for their discoveries?
Then shut up and sit down.
@@neosapien247 You don't need a Nobel prizes. You can fight the facts if you want to, but all the way from Genesis through the New Testament, the archeology matches perfectly with the text.
@@trentitybrehm5105 only science illiterate bible thumpers talk like this. You don't know the first thing about the scientific method. You find fringe bible thumping 'scientists' and take their 'proof' as valid against the vast majority of evidence pointing to the contrary. It's called confirmation bias. Look it up. And let's assume your god is real. He's a morally bankrupt murderous psychopath if he's anything like your bible describes. If you worship that guy, you're just the same.
@@trentitybrehm5105 Only science-illiterate bible thumpers talk like this. You're 100% clueless about the scientific method.
Sometimes I wish some of the hosts had the temperament of Matt Dillahunty. These types of callers just need to get put in their place quickly.
Vi! that hair is absolutely bonkers. I love this look!
They accidentally exposed themselves on so many levels, I almost feel bad
they? the hosts?
@@cliftongaither6642 it’s been a while so I don’t remember, but I would assume I was referring to the caller
@@jarredjacob2244 cool. i thought maybe you meant the hosts, so obviously my next question would be why. lol take care Jarred.
I think the callers first statement of
“Once they are adults I can’t control their beliefs” pretty much says it all
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him.
If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb.
If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves.
The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament.
We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven.
We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection.
The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing.
There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too.
Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture.
This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text.
It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
@@trentitybrehm5105
Congratulations.
For posting drivel that has precisely nothing to do with the original post.
@@SamualRobotham-IWasOnlyKidding You don't have to be mean. You can be nice and respectful if you tried.
@@trentitybrehm5105
I could be, and you could stop posting irrelevant stuff on peoples posts to promote your particular brand of religion.
If you tried.
Good for you Eric not taking crap from that immoral caller.
Ironically, I’ve become a better person since I stopped believing that I ever was when I did believe
Nothing ironic about it.
Nothing ironic about it it makes more sense
That is the a display of fear. He was so afraid of reality, he was induced to panic and anger.
How many famous religious people have CHEATED? Hmmmmmm? They get the out by saying they have sinned but God has forgiven them. 🤢🤮
Hell, even 'God' cheated.... or at the least, was a homewreaker when he knocked up a married woman ^_^
@@zacharyshort384 actually she was only engaged to Joseph so god fornicated. OMG! LoL. I was told though, while a kid, that it wasn’t in fact sex, so it was ok what god did to Mary. She got pregnant when god or an angel (not exactly sure) whispered in her ear. Whispering ear sex. I just can’t believe I was raised by and with people who believe that and think it’s all true!
@@trishayamada807 I mean.. all that is actually said in scripture is that the 'Holy Spirit' would come unto her.
Everything else is up to our dirty minds I guess :P
Considering 'God' incarnates later in the story, I think it's fair to say he physically incarnated then as well to 'do the deed'.
Good point about her not being officially married at the time. I misspoke. I still feel the 'homewreaker' bit applies in a sense tho!
@@zacharyshort384 sure, Mary would have been stoned to death being pregnant and not married. The whole story is so immoral. There’s rape or ear rape or whatever magical means of impregnating a girl there are, and then if Joseph said nope to marrying her, she’d be killed. It’s all so horrible and religious people think it’s this fabulous miracle. It’s gross.
@@trishayamada807 Well no disagreement about this story. It's a moral atrocity.
Im a 48 year old atheist and only punched one person in the face my whole life and thats only cause he punched me in the face first😂😂😂 on a side note... there has been hundreds of people that i wanted to punch in the face but didnt, and thats not because a God was watching me, its because i can show restraint.
I so appreciate the both of you!!! Thankyou, your sanity blesses me.
You ate a Christian in your heart, Chris! I love it when these callers prove our point themselves, we don’t even have to pull it out of them. We just have to wait and they do it. This is it to themselves.!!
Ya! Scriptures hates Hypocrites and Pride when its its time to do so seemingly contradicting. but, the Law knows a believer who doesn't Read it honestly or know any thing about it? why prisons are so full of believers and teach it today. because of hate on iether side as who really makes a jack ass of one self shows more clearly and very evidentiary how Christians become..
Eric, this was your finest hour on the air with theist Chris.
Eric came off angry and nutty honestly
The last sentence Chris said was the most logical argument i have ever heard from a Christian.
Chris is a liar, and he beats his wife and kids. I'm convinced. 🤣😂😭☠️
That was amazing how you lifted the lid on a crackpot mentality and I genuinely wonder how commonplace that kind of horrible ignorant, arrogance is amongst the deeply religious. Well done for exposing his true colours.
I wonder how his perceived morality stood up to that stress test and I wonder how it was viewed by his peers.
🍻
Chris is the type of guy I hope remains a Christian
🙂
Containment zone.
Oh man, what a monster in disguise. I feel so sorry for this guy's kids. If Chris treats Eric, a stranger on a call in show "like a stern father" as Eric put it, imagine how badly and authoritatively he treats his young adult children! Not to mention the way he talked about his wife, and the cheating analogy he chose to use. Yikes. I can't picture anything but a massively abusive family dynamic there.
I hope that Eric is finally learning more and more to have stronger boundaries with callers, especially after this call and the ones he's had with Darth Dawkins. I can only imagine how Matt Dillahunty would have dealt with this guy and how much sooner Matt would have called him out. But Eric did fine.
"Lying is the most disgusting thing anyone can do." This from a Wisconsin Christiam who almost certainly votes for Donald Trump. In - fucking- credible.
This is an excellent vid. You're standing up and insisting on callers explaining their mindset is done in a very confronting way. It's so good, and strangely, very educational. 🍻✌️
Well freaking done! You've turned a Christian into a turkey 🤣👏
When you treat people badly like they treat you, they get upset.
With how pissed Chris got being accused of cheating on his wife and beating his kids, I think he has some skeletons in his closet 💀
It's funny. They were just using it as an example, but he felt caught.
The Apostles willingness to be killed not for saying they believed Jesus had risen, but they knew he had risen, because they saw him.
If the tomb wasn't empty, they would've paraded the body around to stomp out any idea of Jesus being ressurrected, but Christianty spread because there was no body in the tomb.
If someone stole the body, why were nearly all the Apostles willing to be killed for saying they'd seen Jesus risen? They were thousands of miles away from one another before phones and the internet and were being threaten, tortured, and murdered for their claim. Not one "broke" and said it was a lie to save themselves.
The archeology matches the Bible perfectly all the way from Genesis through the New Testament.
We have the writing of the disciples of the Apostles and the disciples of those disciples, and they not only quote much of the New Testament, but all the core idea of Christianty are present. Jesus being God, the Son of God, dying for sins, burial, resurrection, ascension to heaven.
We also have writing of Jewish and Pagan contemporary historians who were hostile towards Jesus, who say the same things : Jesus being worshipped as God, the Son of God, dying for on the cross, burial, resurrection.
The fact that there are contradictions between manuscripts is often sited as proof against trusting scripture, when it actually does the opposite. The fact that there are so many manuscripts makes it easy to tell when someone changed one, and modern Bibles are transparent about any differences in the footnotes. None of those differences found between manuscripts change anything about any core doctrines of Christianity, they are mainly a handwriting error on a letter or a different way to word something that means the same thing.
There is also all the undisigned coincidence between not only the four Gospels, but the rest of the New and Old Testaments too.
Matthew 2:22 talks about Joseph not wanting to return to Judea after fleeing to Egypt because Archelaus was ruling. That's all the info on that the Bible gives. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about the things Archelaus did and how evil he was. Put these two peices of evidence together, we get the full picture.
This sort of thing happens through the text with the seemingly useless details matching up perfectly with extra Biblical sources, lending to the credibility of the text.
It's because of the evidence that I believe in Jesus.
To argue that a person would act in an otherwise unconscionable manner if they didn't believe in a god is to argue that people only do the right thing because they fear the consequences of not appeasing the standards of said god.
This is what happens when you corner a theist.....they go ape-sh!t.....
The word Christian directly translates to - Christ like. I remember a time when they were constantly asking, "What would Jesus do?" I'm thinking, "Not what you are doing." 🤦
A Christian will do the right thing because he's afraid of going to Hell. An Atheist will do the right thing because it's the right thing.
If the only reason you're a good person is that you're afraid of Hell, you're not really a good person.
So glad I stumbled across your channel. I have missed listening to how well you deal with people like this guy.
Amazing! This was one of the best examples of the arrogance of theism (and showing theists' reflections) that I have ever seen!
The "cheating on your wife" analogy was brutal but certainly a mirror-image (darkly) of what theism does on a daily basis......
When theists are shown the shoe on the other foot, they go mental......
The hard turn at the end 😂, childish attitude follows childish logic
that's christianity in a nutshell 😂
If you need a reward to do good to escape a punishment for being bad ... congratulations you now have the morality of a Labrador Retriever
The caller's statement that lying would be the absolute most disgusting thing you could do to a person floored me. Never mind murder, enslavement, sexual assault...
Also, how dare he tell you what you believe.
I mean, those are all ok in the Bible under certain situations
It’s similar to something that the notorious dumbass Darth Dawkins also said, and then doubled down on when challenged.it wouldn’t surprise me if this guy was one of Darth’s flying monkeys.
@@shanewilson7994 I don't see why that matters.
@@Scowdich it was just a snarky comment on why he may ignore those since they were at times commanded by "god."
But yeah, those things tend to be way worse than lies in the reality that we exist in.
You Two are the GREATES. Thank You for your Love and Compassion.
Get 'em, Eric! 😎 He says you're a Christian, but he also says you're immoral because you're not a Christian.
lol! something something cake and eat it too ^_^
Why would a Christian feel guilty for doing anything dishonest or sinful when all they need to do is ask God for forgiveness and they would be forgiven? Their belief in God doesn’t give them a sense of morality. It gives them a scapegoat.
The caller could not understand that his remarks where insulting when you reversed the table. He really thought that you ment what you said. Like he ment what he said. I am sure he would put all atheists in jail if he had half a chance.
Religion poisons!
Talk about proving their character by their actions!
Vi, I love your hair!
Same, Vi's hair is amazing.
Wow! 35 years old? We have three in our family who are 43……dumber than stumps. I was wondering how old kids gotta get before they start THINKING. Actually, we’d given up hope that they can. Eric is 35 and has been being productive for years. But these kids in our family believe that my wife and I are dumber than rocks and have no wisdom. We are retired and living comfortably. One of them is in jail for the second time, the other makes every bad decision she can find, and only lies…never tells a truth. You gave me hope Eric!
I like Eric’s voice it’s so velvety smooth and like sliding down a freshly buttered banister
Wow. Talk about a double twist ending. First they came to an amicable agreement in their conversation. Didn’t see that coming. Then dude flew off the rails in no time flat after they came to an agreement. Wow. And he’s talking about moral superiority of his religion?! YIKES.
Are you capable of hosting even ONE episode in which you DON'T interrupt your co-host?
The YT ad coming in like a mic drop at “YOU wouldn’t feel guilty if YOU didn’t get in trouble for cheating on you wife.”
The thumbnail and the title on it made me think of the movie Phantasm. "BOYYYYYYYY!"
Chris is morally bankrupt
Pretty crazy how he starts out with "controlling" what his kids think rather than trying to teach critical thinking so they can think for themselves.
How do you lie to someone when there's nobody around? His example makes no sense.
Here’s the thing: even granting that Chris is absolutely right and that the fear of divine retribution is the only thing that keeps people from behaving horribly, that wouldn’t be evidence that hid actually *does* exist.
theist destroyed and RUNS
Oh my goodness! That escalated like a rocket!
I’ve so rarely seen Eric explode like that! Totally justified!
A great many people who are fundamentally immoral and lacking in Empathy.. find functional stability through belief in a Religion. (like Chris here).
Every time somebody wants to tell me that lying is disgusting and immoral, I just think, "No, Obersturmbannfuehrer, there are no Jews in my attic".
incidentally, this is also the sentence I think of when Christians ask why would the apostles knowingly die for a lie.
That ending was halrious. I'm bummed the conversation went unproductive though. 😭 His brain actually broke!
No wonder his kids are pulling away. Holy shit.
What an absolute dunce. The dude was projecting in IMAX. Incredible.
That echolalia at the end, it was like the Roadrunner running from the Coyote. All Chris needed was a "MEEP MEEP!"
"Do unto others as you'd do unto yourself". I mean, aside from self-destructive behavior, I do mostly agree with this Christian sentiment. If I were to lie, let's say, cheating on my wife, the question would arise "what if she did this to me? How would I feel?". Also, I love my significant other. I would hate to see her hurt, and if I can control that, I'd make sure she doesn't experience any pain whatsoever. Cheating on her is something in my control. Therefore, I will not cheat on her. It's not about "consequences", per se. It's about how I feel about her and the emotions I don't want to inflict on her. I don't need religion to make sure I don't lie to her. If this caller in insinuating that he needs religion not to lie to his wife, I think there are deeper problems involved.
It's a Christian sentiment, but it's not original to Christians ;)
You are talking about consequences. Nothing 'per se' about that :P
That aside, I could not agree more. Also, this caller was certainly insinuating that people of non-belief in religion (I assume his position would hold to Christianity) would lie, cheat, and steal without any remorse ever. It's a tragic indictment of religious indoctrination and its stranglehold on our conversation about morality.
The worst kind of lie is a "White Lie" -
13:30 'What the f.ck was that?'. A childish nobody or a troll.
It is difficult to be patient with the stupid.