Happy Sunday, hope you all enjoyed yesterdays short video cause I really taken my time in this one! But these questions give a lot of good fuel for conversation so I hope you enjoy.
The evidence of evolution actually supports creation. when you view the evidence from the correct and proper perspective. God created every creature according to its kind according to the bible and the evidence of evolution has revealed that evolution is contained within an animal's kind. You don't see evolution from one kind of animal to another kind of animal. You see evolution of species within a kind of animal taking place to form new species of that kind of animal, but those species never evolve into another kind of animal outside of the animal that it descended from.
@@donaldyanson8144 says: *Doubt is an uncomfortable, position . certainty is a ridiculous one* Certainty is NOT ridiculous, but it can only be truly verified by God because God knows all things.
i love how every question from this guy admonishes to "be honest with yourself", "dig deep", "answer sincerely", etc. this is psychological projection; he is fully aware of the mental gymnastics and willful cognitive dissonance he himself holds in order to maintain his viewpoints, so he expects that of others and asks the listener to forgo them. congrats.
I actually think that's more to do with the particulars of the Christian worldview. Because he thinks that unbelievers are "of the darkness" he can't see atheists as honest interlocutors or thinkers
true, any religion lives in large part by focusing on othering vilainizing the outsider... fearing hating and fighting the outsider, and assuming they fear hate and fight you... they are the enemy you are good they are bad... its very ego stroking.@@JCW7100
I love how some apologists try their damnedest to sound respectful and kind, but they just can't help injecting venom into their interactions with atheists. The phrase "be honest with yourself" implies we ordinarily are not. There's a good reason for this. It's really the only tool they have to justify their belief. Preservation of the saints is a lie and God a liar if sincere believers can deconvert. There's not one single apologist who can accept this.
I would say the same about atheists that think that we evolved from dust without any kind of intelligent intervention. Sometimes atheists mock believers for believing God created Adam from dust. But many of you believe the same but without the intervention of an intelligent being. Do you understand the point?
Hmm... they say that no-one will know when their apocalypse will happen... maybe they just keep making so many doomsday predictions that they're forcing their god to push the date back? 🤔 😂
@@Isaac-hm6ih Paul warned people that marriage was a questionable idea because time was "short". Sorry, Paul, but you just dropped the ball on this one.
And they keep dancing around this passage. Ofc it means something else to them because it didn't happen, lol. Luke 21:32 - The New International Version (NIV) 32 “Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.
If all information about Christianity was wiped off the face of the earth, people would make up another religious belief system to take its place. If all information we have on science was wiped off the face of the earth, people would make observations and do experiments and we would eventually get all the same knowledge back.
I've wanted to try this as a thought experiment of sorts, exploiting the way Christianity (and Islam) say there will be no future revelation because it's all finished: Suppose the Earth is about to be destroyed by a big asteroid, and the only way humanity can possibly survive is by putting a bunch of frozen embryos in artificial wombs on a starship and slinging it on a hundred thousand year journey to a distant Earthlike planet. Because of the sensitivity of the ship's systems, the computers aboard have to be incredibly simple and cannot store large amounts of unnecessary data, so all human knowledge and culture outside of a handful of technical diagrams cannot be sent along. When the humans arrive on the new world and are birthed there, they will be starting from effectively zero. No preexisting human languages, no preexisting human cultures, minimal scientific knowledge, and of course, no preexisting human religions. These people will continue humanity, but all that humanity previously was must be lost in the process. Now... what exactly does God do in this case? He promised that Jesus/Mohammed/etc. were the fulfillment of his scriptures (which no longer exist and would be unreadable if they did), the culmination of his message (which none of the humans now existing have heard), after which there will be no other, and if God is truly perfectly honest and faithful, he'll have to keep that word even though the vestiges of the humanity he made that promise to don't exist anymore. Or he could send them new revelation, a new prophet or savior, someone to convey his message again. Which will it be? The problem here is that there's no good answer. If God knew humanity would die out except for the starship humans, he was clearly wrong when he said there would be no future revelation, or he is bound by his word to not send his message to them, dooming them by no fault of their own (or at least offering them none of the guidance on the right path that their predecessors got). But if the theist jumps at the chance to say God could just offer new revelation to these new humans, congratulations, you've now falsified all religions which say God can't or won't do that -- such as most Christian and Islamic sects (though not all). The only other alternative is to claim that God would NEVER allow this to happen, even though it is logically possible and entirely plausible, which is ridiculous.
"If all information... was wiped off" ---- Your argument is generally understood as a validation of universal experience and objective truth, not an argument against religious faith.
@@MindShift-Brandon "If all information... was wiped off" ---- That argument is generally understood as a validation of universal experience and objective truth, not an argument against religious faith.
It always baffles me that atheists are expected to answer & have knowledge about so many different subjects. Physics, biology, cosmology, chemistry, astronomy, zoology, natural science, anatomy, physiology, botany, etc. And theists? “The Bible says……” I started my journey questioning things that didn’t make sense in the Bible. I was kicked out of Sunday School because I asked “too many questions” and was viewed as a trouble maker. The problem of evil was a huge one for me as a kid. I didn’t understand how a god that loved us so much, allowed children to suffer through and eventually die from, cancer. You put so much work into your videos! Thank you so much!!
I’ve noticed this. Many apologists can imagine ways that Christianity can account for everything (often while arguing that the Christian God is NOT accountable for tons of things.) Atheists are apparently NOT allowed to imagine explanations. Atheists are commonly expected to demonstrate explanations for everything using only their own currently verifiable knowledge. Atheists are held to a standard where “I don’t know” is spun as an admission that any imagined explanation, no matter how likely false, is more likely true than no explanation. Technically, an atheist can explain everything with “I think it’s magic… I just don’t think it’s god magic” if the atheist doesn’t care about having an understanding of how reality works. Those types of apologists seem to think that a disregard for reality is something people should aspire to in order to be on equal footing as them.
Well, you know, they can "account for" SO many things 😇 I've always hated that phrase! Sure you can account for all kinds of things, IF you don't have to test to see if it is true! I used to read this preacher's books when I was a teen (and gullible). His name was Kenneth Hagin. Good lord, what he could "account for!" He had been to the third heaven, the second heaven and a lot more! He could describe IN DETAIL what Jesus was wearing and his various thoughts on all kinds of stuff (political for example). Oh yeah, Kenneth Hagin had an answer for ALL that, but can Braxton "account for" the same? Should I then listen to pastor Hagin since he could account for more? Following that logic, I should choose the most brazen liar to listen to .. It makes no sense!
Right? Especially when it comes to the creation of the universe, how does one go from "we don't know for sure how something happened billions of years ago when we weren't even a thing" to "god did it"?
This man is a Bible scholar. The way he fires off passages, stories, common interpretations, etc., indicates he's not stumbling around with this stuff as an amateur. I'm 68, and I had the "Word of God" "imprinted on my heart", starting as soon as I was able to memorize 3-word sentences. I attended church every time the doors were open, participated in competitive quiz contests for 6 years, went on to college, minored in in Religion, studied Greek (disaster), also attended a theological school in Manchester, UK. My studies were more focused on the Wesleyan traditions. Then, I encouraged my oldest son to pursue a "calling" of youth ministry. He went to Moody Bible College in Chicago for 5 years. They preach calvinism and I don't know what else. After that, he knew "everything " and we learned not to question anything about interpretation of scripture. He did youth ministry for one year and chose a different career. Our other son won a sports scholarship to a church-affiliated college. He didn't care for chapel and slept through it. He graduated as an atheist. He went off to teach English in Asia and stayed for 13 years. He came back and exhibits characteristics of Christ and buddhism, but definitely says he is atheist, doesn't see the problem of no afterlife. He denies being a buddhist, but he is very self- disciplined, careful with his words, and is very committed to his mom and pops. Not married, in early 40s. He doesn't judge people (except issues of guns and how Americans overeat) but he gives to the poor very discreetly. He doesn't care for a lot talking but we do crosswords and Soduku together. He lives a more careful life than his brother, who is a great guy but definitely on the wrong side of political issues and not seeing things clearly at times. I started stepping away about 10 tears ago, and in these last 10 years watched some in my family join the Qanon cult as well as the MAGA cult. I internalized that, reviewed my indoctrination and decided maybe I had been in a cult. I came out to family during the pandemic. I feel great, but my family is very disappointed. I found Kristie Burke first and now am also watching Brandon. I know every story he's talking about, the evangelizing words and responses, the questions he struggled with, so I feel a kindred spirit. We quit going to church about 10 yrs ago in this new community, so I didn't have church people questioning me. Thanks, Brandon!
I unindoctrinated(😂 not a word) myself 2 yrs ago. I am 61, so lived all of those decades believing lies. Glad to hear that you as well turned against the lies and indoctrination. Have a great life. ✌
Blindly filling a gap with mythology is not a better explanation for the unknown than just saying "I don't know." That's beautiful. I don't think many religionists comprehend that "I don't know" is, in fact, a valid answer.
At least admitting “I don’t know is an honest response that encourages thinking and investigating. Claiming “I dunno, god did it!” is neither an explanation nor an answer at all. They just appeal to a mystery by appealing to an even bigger mystery.
"I don't know" ---- We are not responsible for what cannot be known, but only for that that which is evident and undeniable. Willful ignorance is not a valid answer.
It's a logical fallacy that religious people constantly fall victim to...it's known as the "argument from ignorance". Basically "This is true because we/you/I haven't proven it false".
Having an answer isn't always superior to being honest and saying "I don't know." Accepting ignorance is a noble thing. No one's philosophy is complete, and it takes great intelligence and hardwork to go any distance philosophically. Great job stepping up to the plate Brandon.
We used to get a lot of street preachers on my college campus and I was approached a few times. Little did they suspect that they were about to deal with someone who had nearly two decades of church, Good News Club and Sunday school teaching behind her, and had been a Bible-verse memorizing BEAST during that time. Nothing flusters them so much as a new and dedicated unbeliever who has superior knowledge of their "holy" book and isn't afraid to use those powers against them. For me, it was pretty funny, for people without that background it's, as you say, incredibly manipulative.
It's very nice if a religious believer has training in STEM. It's actually frustrating to talk to a theist who doesn't understand basic science. But the onus is on the religious believer to tell me how he squares the scientific fact of evolution with the supernatural creation story in Genesis@@theboombody
"What does your worldview account for better than mine?" Whenever I hear those kinds of questions I just picture two Ancient Greeks (AG) having the same discussion. AG1: "You don't believe in the Olympian Pantheon? You're an atheist? How do you account for lightning? How it strikes only some people, how only some survive. How it causes fire and yet is light? My ideology of them being the weapons of the Gods accounts for this. Does yours?" AG2: "I mean, I have no idea what lightning is. But I'm pretty sure you don't have any idea either ..." AG1: "See! You don't even have an answer. You just don't want to accept 'the truth.'"
@@MindShift-Brandon Let's just all say it out loud: If he even exists, we don't understand the mind of god. We don't understand the mind of god. We don't understand the mind of god.
Not like it'd matter if we did understand his mind, cause we can at least understand what basic morals are, and that said entity obviously doesn't seem to be following them, assuming he actually has the power to do anything about suffering and such.@@sarahrobertson634
Well done for answering the ten questions. What I find fascinating is that most Christians are very quick to dismiss all the other religions without ever reading their holy books and apologetics. How hypocritical of them! They also often conflate theism with the Christian God when theism applies to all the gods of all the religions.
My answer for #9: Why should I need to read scholarly works from other people in order to help my belief in God? Is he incapable of showing himself to me on his own? This was actually one of the things that caused me to no longer believe: I realized that what I believed was just what had been told to me by other people.
No reason to read such literature unless you feel an emptiness in your life that you feel needs to be alleviated. Most people do not turn to religion until they feel defeated, humble, or empty. And that eventually happens to everyone at some point.
@dionberger1293 is that why there are so many different religions, and so many different denominations in THE SAME religion that claim to be revealed by God? Explain this. Judaism/Christianity were not the first religions in the world. Where was God before that?
@@exaucemayunga22 see God reveals himself to mankind and the first humans were Adam and Eve he created them he goes on to reveal himself to the population and humans would write their experiences like Moses and David and the prophets
As an Atheist, I can admit that we don't even know how much *we don't know.* But I can also assure people that it's *not going to be religion that gives us the answers.*
@bibletrivialistsandstatsthere’s nothing proving anything supernatural, all you have is an “idk how this happened” and claiming it to be “supernatural”.
@bibletrivialistsandstatsI agree but the lack of any physical proof of a god doesn’t exist. Personally I have experienced things of the supernatural that I can’t explain but know the experience was real. I never attributed it to god or the devil. I have my own theories but the truth is I don’t know. I don’t dismiss the possibility of there being a god(s). But I seriously doubt it would be the god in the Bible. You and I are better off admitting that we both don’t know the truth but we are free to think and explore our own ideas without any animosity towards each other
@bibletrivialistsandstats But in that situation, what would be the benefit of abandoning the scientific method of searching for more answers to try to understand the supernatural as we do natural and instead just rely on a particular mythos? Moreover, why that particular mythos instead of any of the thousands others to have existed and still exist?
Seems like an interesting paradox. You don’t even know what you don’t know but you are sure religion will not provide the answers. Seems like you know something after all. Strange that you can be so sure about one particular area. Irrational really.
Question 8 : those things didn't influence my atheism at all. I was raised in an atheistic household, which didn't care about the existence of God at all nor ever discussed it in any way. I didn't even know that I was an atheist until I reached Middle School and learned that other people believed in God. By that point I had already had a pretty good idea of what I thought was morally right and wrong, and my ensuing study of Religion only served to verify the correctness of my parents excluding that from my moral upbringing. In other words, at least in my opinion, if you are taught simply to treat others with kindness whenever it is possible and to care for yourself as you would care for others as my parents taught me, any study of the Old or new testament morality will stand in stark contrast to that basic moral principle.
Question 8 is a softer variation of the much used accusation that “You’re only an atheist because you like to sin”. I hold the position that if I do something wrong to another person, than that would be something that will stick to me forever. I can hope for a future where this person will forgive me, but if that person doesn’t I will have to live with that, and that can hurt. All the more reasons to be kind to other people. But then this Christian comes to me and says that Jesus can take away that pain; He can forgive me. That feels wrong to me. Unfair to this other person. But it might be a tempting proposition to some.
This is basically a copy/paste of my own experience. In addition I decided to try to determine why people believe in a god or the bible etc so I read their book. It in no way changed my mind and basically confirmed that the so-called god is basically a man-made construct in that everything god dictated was basically what the leaders of the time wanted.
There's the rub, and it's so fucking patronizing. Like it's a condition that formed in me. I don't think I ever believed in a god, let alone the Catholic one my family surrounded me with. I was just labeled as such by my family.
The Bible says that God created something like a law in our hearts so it is obvious that you are going to have morality but not in everything that God requires of us.
I appreciate you saying "once someone deconverts they suddenly become pro everything they were once against isn't true." That was 100% my experience. I formed liberal views about other religions, homosexuality, and other things long before my deconversion. I actively reformed my religious viewpoints to squeeze in my liberal views. That's ultimately what started my deconversion as I got older because I couldn't reconcile how easy it was to reshape religious interpretation to make it fit with my liberal viewpoints with other people who were doing the same thing in order to uphold their ideas of bigotry, misogyny, or racism.
Family friends at church learned I became an atheist. I was in a different city and working, so I didn't see them for at least a couple years. When I was with family and meeting with them at the church fellowship hall, they had a kind of hesitant body language that implied they were thinking, "Um ... we still good?" Like the fact I became an Atheist changed who I WAS as a person in their minds. I showed them that I'm still the SAME person, and the awkwardness went away, but the very fact they believed I had completely changed hit differently when experiencing it personally. I was raised in the church, so I used to believe that Atheists aren't good people cuz "cAn'T bE gOOd wiThOuT GOD!" So if I were in their shoes, I'd most likely react the same way. Indoctrination is one helluva drug!
Question 3 is what im dealing with right now. My family thinks my lack of belief is because i want to sin. So many things i used to consider immoral or wrong and even things i used to think were ok instantly changed when i lost my faith. The reason was that as a Christian i never believed those to be right or wrong in my own mind. I simply agreed it was so because i looked at the bible as the final authority. For example, i never thought homosexuality was ever immoral or wrong in my eyes. I saw no issues with it. But because i believed the bible i had to admit that it was somehow immortal and that i was just flawed in my own understanding. But with once the log was out of my eyes so many things instantly changed. I knew i needed to think for myself.
The answer to the arguments of your family members is simple: If I wanted to sin, I would have never left christianity. An atheist has to do good stuff to be a good person and even if he does, when he still dies assuming there is no heaven, no more joy, no afterlife. A christian can commit any sin he wants, than just ask for forgiveness, believe in Jesus and he will be granted eternal life in the best place imaginable.
If this helps, let me say that in fact, if a person wants to sin, being a Christian is the best way to do it. Christianity uses a "sacrificial crutch" (i.e. Jesus) to remove a person's responsibility for their own actions. How? By BELIEVING that through Jesus's "sacrifice" all your sins are "forgiven." It's a pretty convenient copout, eh? I have seen too many believers broken by a religion allegedly based on love and forgiveness. Don't let them break you, dear one. You have shown that your heart is good. We ALL make mistakes, but that doesn't make us "wanton sinners;" just seekers of good from outside the confines of religious dogma. Peace.
It is not true A Christian can sin then ask forgiveness then live happily forever in heaven.Genuine forgiveness implies genuine repentance. @@neverstopschweiking
I remember me and some others talking to my friend about religion and homosexuality. We asked him if he thought gay people were going to hell and he said yeah. So then we asked, “So you think being gay is wrong” and he said, “Well, I don’t really think it’s wrong, but the Bible says they’re going to hell so it’s not up to me to decide.” And I’m like dude how do you not see a problem with that
The silver lining of these Christian arguments is they really help me appreciate humanity’s craving to KNOW. For some they must have an answer, like a made up answer is better than not being sure. I like that we are so curious, but it can trap you as well
I think this is one of the most important problems the people of the world face. It infects (poisons) everything. The desperation to “KNOW” is the reason the world is so full of misinformation. It was the reason for superstition and now it’s the reason social media, politics, etc. is so toxic. People just can’t say “I don’t know”. It’s such a weakness.
Excellent point !! I think the other human behavior christianity "helps with" is empathy and death. If people feel bad for the struggles and pain of another, it is "god's will". If they fear death, they can just believe there is a heaven. Basically, religion is a crutch for the hard of thinking.
@@paulgemme6056 That wasn't even the guys real name. If folks can't get the name Yeshua ben Youssef right, how do they even dare to claim any truth whatsoever ??
100% agree. The hypocritical position of continual re-defining of god, as our science knowledge has increased, is just dismissed. The logical argument is that not everything theists accord to god are true. Therefore, it's probable that religion will become obsolete as we disprove more and more of those mysteries assigned to god. The answer is not to move the goalposts and double down.
@@FergusScotchman Religion is not the answer. Jesus Christ - the Living word is the answer. Jesus Christ did not teach us to follow (trust) religion, he teaches us to follow (trust) him.
@@paulgemme6056 How do you know what Jesus wanted? Because of the conflicting accounts written decades after he died? Or was the deification of christ a creation of Paul? Tell me what kind of accent does Jesus have, if he speaks to you? You can't explain Jesus' evidence by referring to the bible.Show me proof of his ongoing presence.
@@FergusScotchman When one is saved by Grace through faith and born again, born of the Spirit (Holy Spirit), born from above they trust God's Word because the Holy Spirit reveals truth to our spirit/souls. It's called divine intervention, when we repent and let the Holy Spirit renew our minds and cleanse us of all the lies that the enemy (Satan) gets man to believe. You know, like the lie that there is no Almighty God/Jesus Christ who is the creator of all things. It started with the light. "Let there be light" and there was light. No religion needed just pure supernatural power. The most wonderful power on earth and in heaven TO THOSE WHO KNOW HIM (Spirit to spirit). To those who don't know him, well let's just say that's why we tell others the truth (gospel) so they may believe and be saved, no religion need. Just faith, faith plus nothing.
Your answers were spot on even though I personally felt most of the questions were condescending in nature and exactly meant to be “gotcha” questions. I would love to see this guy agree to a one on one interaction with you. Another great video!
I find him condescending but I can see him being a nice guy outside his script but then again this is what he does for a paycheck. And Brandon and Mike convo would be awesome I wouldnt miss that one I get tired of the Hovinds,Hams and WLC of the world
@@thedude0000 I mean, you can toggle the like off and on a few times? XD But yeah, no. If there'd be only one, or maybe two such phrases or questions, I could go with "dude just lacks complete self-reflection and has no idea how what he says can be interpreted." But not with _that_ much of it.
I think one of the most amazing things is how apologists have changed or moved the goal post just from our better understanding of scriptures. As more scholars make it clear that the bible is not inerrant and there is now greater scrutiny of the scriptures themselves, Christians have been forced to go on the defensive and/or just ignore/deny what the scriptures themselves say. It is astonishing how little believers know about the scriptures and what it says and how, and what context.
Of course they shift the goal posts. Themselves. Dodge ball , ie, apologetics is virtually impossible otherwise. The best ones even have their own shoe contract- Adidas. The brand with the three stripes. The father the son and the Holy Joker.
"It is astonishing how little believers know about the scriptures" I actually had a conversation with a coworker earlier this year about faith and randomly found out that he's religious, goes to church etc. but doesn't even know that the Bible isn't a single book. The thought of the gospels being 4 different literary creations never even crossed his mind until then, at around 60yo. That is how an average believer evaluates their faith to keep believing forever. They just trust priests or whomever as the ppl with expertise like we do with advanced scientific concepts. Sounds reasonable, yet always boggles my mind. It's like not learning to add numbers because mathematicians got this
@@gilesbbb well, yeah that does seem necessary, but my point is that it's likely insufficient. I mean, why couldn't Loki also "cover a lot of topics" just the same?
@@irrelevant_noob I guess I just think a deceptive but entirely convincing loki is unlikely enough for me to accept the evidence of a coherent presentation.
Luke 24:27-48 CEV Jesus then explained everything written about himself in the Scriptures, beginning with the Law of Moses and the Books of the Prophets. He did...I guess it just didn't convince you
The thing most people are saying when they say they "hope their kids don't save themselves for marriage," isn't that they want their kids to be promiscuous. They're saying they want their kids to understand their sexuality and know they're compatible with their partner before they make what's supposed to be a lifelong commitment.
I fully expected to get struck by lightning the first time I had sex, or at the very least be drastically changed as a person. Instead I had a pleasurable time with someone I cared about deeply, I was no different afterwards than I'd been before, and it became a lot easier to see that I'd been fed epic amounts of BS for the first 20 years of my life.
"Doesn't this issue destabilize you?" No😂 I'm perfectly fine with not having an answer to that, I'll honestly be surprised if we ever come to know a sure answer, how are we even supposed to know?😂
@@MindShift-Brandon The great mystery of life is fine with me. And not in the way that religious types refer to mystery, selectively asserting that "God works in mysterious ways" when someone points out a contradiction in Christian doctrine.
For someone who didn't want glib answers, some of his questions were sorta glib. 😂 And I love how he removed "experimental reproducibility" from that one question. Blatantly stacking the deck. 😂 I think atheist/theist debate can kinda be a catch 22. The apologist cannot recognize any validity for the reasons why a nonbeliever is a nonbeliever. To do so would crack the edifice of the religion by admitting that there does exist some grounds for nonbelief. So I'm not sure whether the two parties can ever actually meet. 🤔
I think there is a place where both sides can meet: commitment to what is true first and foremost. We both don't want to believe in something false, so we come together to find out what is true. The biggest obstacle to this is that faith and religious belief, while it can put on the guise of truth, it often is about what feels good, or what gives you the most comfort in the face of existential dread of death and meaninglessness.
We don’t have to meet. Eventually enough people will stop following the superstitions of their ancestors and the ancients will simply disappear into history where they belong. That is, if they don’t get us all killed first.
@@ThatReadingGuy28 I don't think 'commitment to what is true' is common ground. I've seen videos ot theists recommending atheist fathers to teach religion to their kids, and people saying that they better believe, because they cannot stand (or think they cannot stand) a world without god and/or eternal life. To be fair, not committing to what is true can be also a problem with some atheists too. It's just less common.
If one is never born again, born of the Spirit (Holy Spirit), born from above they are spiritually blind. When they lead/teach others who are blind (no spiritual life) they will both fall off the cliff.
Question 9 : I've deconverted before internet (and atheists on youtube), before getting any better idea or even knowing the issues revolving around LGBTQ+, and so on... I've mainly deconverted because of few incoherences in the source material and religion in general, and by getting deeper scientific knowledge too, that pushed the god of the gaps I was clinging to for a while to a narrower and narrower spot.
I lost my dad a year and half ago, and one of the things I miss most about him is being able to have these kinds of discussions. Literally nobody I know IRL seems capable of having these kinds of discussions. I’m so glad I found this channel💖💖💖
An important note on your response to question 3. Wanting your children to 'not wait for marriage' before having sex is VERY different from saying you want your kids to be 'promiscuous'. It is about not waiting them to enter into a binding (difficult to dissolve) legal contract, before knowing if they are sexually compatible with that other person. While, knowing what it is you like in that way will likely require at least a small amount of experimentation, that could be done with same individual you marry or oneself. So, there is nothing about "not wanting your kids to wait until marriage before having sex" that requires ever having more a single partner through your entire life.
This is hands down the greatest atheist response video i have ever had the pleasure of listening to. You cover so many important bases i’ve believed but could never externally vocalize myself. Thank you so much mindshift!
As someone who has always LOVED books and was also SUPER religious as a kid, I always wondered why books that were written by people, not claiming Divine Inspiration, were easier to read and understand than the Bible that was written by men claiming Divine Inspiration.....
About no.5:- The notion that the universe came into existence unaided, and developed unguided is one I find incredibly exciting - and a bit hilarious. The idea that it's all about humans, that we're the pinnacle of 'creation' is patently absurd to me. But billions of years of natural processes turning a dust cloud into a life-bearing planet, supporting a species of self-aware primates who are doing their best to turn it back into a dust cloud; that make sense, and it also fits the evidence better than any creation myth I've heard. And why would any god create such a bunch of screw-ups?
Great point! It's pretty arrogant to believe that an extra-dimensional being, with human faults, created the universe and waited almost 4 BILLION years till the vast universe was just right for god to finally seed Earth with humans or near-humans in the last 200K years, which represents 0.006% of the lifespan of the universe. This was all done on only our planet, which is practically a negligible amount of the universe. Pardon me if I'm skeptical. :)
For "off the cuff," this was incredibly articulate and coherent. In other words, you spoke very well. You have obviously thought these issues through in detail prior to hearing the questions. I really wish Braxton Hunter and you could discuss these in a real time chat. I don't wish this because I view it as some type of competition where you would supposedly "destroy" him. I wish it because I would like to see some of his responses to your answers, of which I'm certain he'd have some pretty coherent replies, and your replies to his replies. I like it that Braxton tries to avoid "gotchas" and doesn't dwell on silly semantic games as much as many apologists do. Again, great job.
The argument that makes the most sense to me is one that C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien made, Lewis especially influenced by Owen Barfield, that mythology appeals to us in ways that history or science never can. It's the nature of a great story to make me wish that it were true. That's not proof; it's an acknowledgement that Apollo and Frith and Iluvatar ought to be real.
Great video, I very much appreciate your thoughtful responses. At the same time, I don’t consider Hunter to be an intellectually honest interlocutor. He has straight up admitted to not being amenable to changing his mind - that it would only happen if his brain became “diseased” to the point of (apparently) a catastrophic injury to his frontal lobe. This is not a person who can engage in critical analysis of his own worldview. And if he cannot, he certainly should not be asking the rest of us to do so.
Excellent, very concise, precise reasoning and analysys, way above what the questioner deserved. I struggle to find patience for religious people who demand from me what they won't provide themselves. They sit on a high horse to question without first asking themselves those same questions looking for honest answers, makes it very hard for me not to be arrogant condescending with them. I guess I need to be a better person
Hey thanks for that very much! Im sure as i see this more, the jadedness will creep in. But, for now, im excited just to help anyone who might be watching to not bother with Braxton on his glib questions.
The stabilization question is a self-own that is very common with the religious: religion, noun: 1. disbelief in "I don't know" as a claim, 2. disbelief in empathy as a source for morality. I'm a child atheist and mostly do to being comfortable with saying, "I don't know". Religious people are religious because they can't admit they don't know something and feel comfortable. Admitting "I don't know" destabilizes the religious. The question was pure projection.
hey i love you. it's been almost 15 years since I left my parents' Southern Baptist indoctrination/church but in the past 3 years I've finally begun doing work to heal instead of suppressing with addictions and substances. damn it's been rough but you and so many other creators' videos and content have helped me more than you'll ever know! 🥰
I'm amazed at how closely our thinking on these matters track with each other. You are more eloquent in explaining them though, so I enjoy how you present, and I love the content.
I told myself I was only gonna watch the first fifteen minutes, go game for a couple hours, and then come back and finish this when I was a bit more focused & not distracted by wanting to game. 45 minutes later, I have finished the video. Just great work, dude. I always love hearing your perspective. I’d love to interview you on my channel, if you’re interested. I just had Paulogia, Dr. Kipp Davis, & Dr. Josh Bowen on recently, as well as Dr. Greg Stevenson from the Christian theology side. I value your mind and your measured approach so much! Keep it up, dude.
@@MindShift-Brandon, of course, man. I’ll send it over now. I think just hearing your responses would improve my life in some way, so I think it could be beneficial content for others!
I am 74 years old and attended to a rural Southern Chruch when there was racial unrest in the South 1950's and 1960;s). When I was about 6 years old (about that age) I head a church leader pray that we'd never have to go to Church with "ni g er s" That laid in my mind for years among other things. SO morality does play a part. But honestly I think it was just the lack of evidence and the rejection of science that drove me away and allowed me to break the chains.
For many they realise that the morality of the bible and throughout christianity to the present day are unethical and downright depraved. And when you realise that, you cannot in all decency and civility, subscribe to such an immoral and unethical worldview.
i love how theists would say (including me a few years ago) "you think everything came from nothing? what caused the big bang" but when you ask them where god came from "oh no that is different, see he is beyond space and time" talk about special pleading
I'm really glad you pointed out that the Christian, Muslim and Jewish gods are not the same thing. A lot of people like to say this as they are all Abrahamic religions that are certainly related to each other closely on the religious evolutionary tree, but the gods they are worship are VERY different from one another. They have different powers, their moral guidelines are all different, they interact with humans in different ways. One of the only things they have in common is their complete lack of interest in demonstrating whether they are real or not.
33:31 In my personal journey, moral quandaries never served as the impetus for my disbelief in God. My initial doubts emerged during my teenage years when I had yet to fully comprehend the intricate nature of morality and its effects on the world. My transition away from faith was predominantly driven by logical reasoning. The omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient attributes associated with God were always a source of confusion for me as a Christian. The concept of a being possessing these traits coexisting with our observed reality seemed irreconcilable. Upon becoming an atheist, I embarked on a journey to deepen my understanding and articulate my atheism more effectively. This process led me to explore various philosophical issues surrounding the concept of God. However, it's crucial to clarify that these philosophical considerations were not the catalyst for my deconversion. They served more as a framework for elucidating my atheistic stance, rather than the underlying reason for my transition.
Growing up catholic I was taught that a lot of things were sins that I knew weren’t, starting with simple bodily functions and desires. That along with disconcert of what I was taught from the bible and doctrine and reality led me to leave religion. Doing into theology and science at university helped me understand how man made religions are and how false they are. Your answers were great, I’ve heard a few of these from other people and they are different with some common themes.
I wanted to tell you I think that you're a genius, Brandon. (And you may be, of course.) But really, your answers here do not require GENIUS thinking! Just really, really good reasoning! Thanks, man, for your content.
Well done! every question is answered with such clarity and understanding on the issues. By the end when you tell us you are an extensive reader on the subjects of Philosophy and Theology and go on about the number of books you`re red recently on both sides, all I can say to that is it shows Brandon it shows!
Off the top of my head, the christian explanation for the resurrection is that a man body rose from the dead. The atheist has several far more probable explanations (mistaken or lying disciples, wrong tomb, the whole story is mythosymbolic etc). Christianity needs magic to explain something, therefore literally every other explanation, however improbable, is going to be a better explanation.
its a great point. i wish I would have distinguished more between having an answer and having a good or right answer. Anything can have an answer for anything. it means nothing.
I’ve never been caught in an existential crisis because I’m not sure how the universe started, or even if it did start. How does this impact my life? It doesn’t.
20:56 The question, while intriguing, does not necessarily hold profound implications for our daily lives. The origins of the universe typically bear little significance on the day-to-day existence of most individuals. The discussion of cosmic genesis primarily arises within ontological debates, but in the broader context, it tends not to be a salient topic. When it comes to seemingly unanswerable questions from an atheistic perspective, they can often mirror uncertainties within the Christian worldview as well. For instance, Christianity, despite its rich narrative, does not definitively explain the mechanics of how the universe was created. It focuses more on attributing creation to an entity - God. Consequently, the process by which the universe came into existence remains an open question within both the Christian and atheistic worldviews.
Ayahuasca, Mushrooms and any Intensely Pleasurable Response to Music or Chanting is a “Neurological Response” triggered in the “Periaqueductal Gray” and what people will call a “Spiritual Experience”
These sorts of questions always prove to be less than tough to answer sincerely which actually proves the underlying work behind formulating them couldn't have been that hard either, thus revealing the intellectual capacity of the one posing them.
I tried to make some videos refuting apologists, but I cannot take their questions seriously because they are just plain liars. I may someday make a video series based on the assumption that apologists are aetheists arguing in bad faith for personal profit.
There is so much useful information in your videos that entire series of books. You have a gift and have worked on it. I really appreciate sharing what you have learned and applying them to these responses. Your answer to #10 is heartfelt and honest.
Question 9: I could turn this question right around on you sir. I'd ask what are the last 3 high level academic books you've read and, critically, understood on quantum physics, evolutionary biology, and cosmology? But that wouldn't be a really relevant question would it? Because you don't have to have read and understood high level academic books in order to understand the opinions of the people who are experts in the field. Rather, you could simply have engaged with the available material offered by those individuals who do have an understanding of the subjects, and engaged with material where those people debate other people who have differing opinions on the same subjects. Will that make you an expert? No, of course not. But not everybody can be an expert on everything. The best most of us can hope to do is to honestly and openly engage with the material that we can understand-for instance debate-and make our opinions based on that. Unless you're going to claim that you are the foremost expert on theology, biology, physics, mathematics, chemistry, and cosmology to name a few, you certainly have done the same.
Oh man. That is really kind! I just found out it was 2 years old. Im so late to this game, ha. I am excited to go see how others approached it. Again thanks for the nice encouragement.
I do not consider myself an atheist but I can't thank you enough for presenting your thoughts in such a logical and thorough manner. I have questioned many of the issues you have discussed before like prayer, why does God not reveal himself, satan, etc. I also appreciate how you thoughtfully analyze what Christian apologists say in defense of their position, without judgment, jumping to conclusions, badmouthing, etc. It gives me comfort to think though these issues with your style of logic and analysis. Unfortunately, my committed Christian friends would chastise me for even considering an atheist position at all. They would blame my doubt and inquiries on satan, of course. But there is one thing a good Christian friend told me one day. If the Bible is the "real" God's inerrant revelation of himself to humanity, then God would care less about doubt, inquiries, investigation, and reconsideration of what the Bible purports to reveal to us about the real God.
I would love to have a dialog with him that takes it from the opposite angle. Assume WE are right, AND the idea of religion is made up. Are these challenges equally valuable for a conman inventing a religion or a sincere follower duped by generations of "teaching"? If the answer is similarly helpful, we must set it aside if it's not true. Once you start doing this with Christianity, you realize their "evidence" all amount to overstating what they have and ignoring the simplest explanation. Someone got away with yet another religious fib and got enough people to like the idea it took off.
Very often, a religious person “believes” simply because they want to. It often comes down to just this. The rest is just apologizing. They “feel” the presence of god and don’t question that it could be their own mind producing the feeling and misattributing it to a deity.
People have tried to do this. You cannot get apologists to do this. William Lane Craig actually said that it was absurd to think any philosopher should ever argue for a position they don't hold. I don't know how he became a PhD.
@@jarodstrain8905 to me it is steel manning the atheist position and understanding what the religious claims actually are, instead of telling us what atheism does not do.
Right off the bat I had a problem with his poorly formed questions. For example, I can think of very little we would agree on to even begin to have a conversation. He claims a universe that always existed is impossible. How does he know that? What information and sources does he have that scientists (who do not universally claim the universe always existed) do not have? My deconversion probably actually began as a child when I simply could not see the Bible as anything more than allegory (though I didn’t know that word yet), it was reinforced by the science and history classes I took in my 21 year journey to complete my college degree, it was also reinforced by my total lack of any spiritual experience (even though I earnestly sought that until I was close to 60) and completed through reading the Bible (again) and books on comparative religions. I didn’t discover atheist RU-vid channels until afterwards. They have supplemented my knowledge and given me a sense of community I never experienced in almost 60 years of church involvement. My story may not be typical but, Christians are known for stereotyping. Sorry this is so long - just wanted to prove the point about stereotyping. I try not to stereotype but, don’t always succeed.
Reacting to this Braxton Hunter video is a RU-vid atheist rite of passage. Our little boy is all grown up! Next comes the invite to be on Piers Morgan’s show. Wait…no, that’s later. Interviewing Dr Bart Ehrman is next. I love Dr Ehrman and look forward to that segment.
I love the channel and this was a great video. I just wanted to point out around @12:25 mark it sounded like you said "Gnosticism" instead of "Agnosticism," but I rewound it and confirmed you used "Agnosticism." However, hearing it made me think you'd do a pretty good video about the Gnostic branch of early Christianity, and how it explains the actions of the Abrahamic God much better than the Christian God of the bible. Also, let us know when you've opened up a Patreon account (or provide the details to your current one). I'd be happy to chip in to help you produce more great videos.
Too kind! I have yet to dive into the patreon or channel memberships. I was thinking maybe when i get to 5k. And yes i plan to cover all the gnostic texts at the end of secular bible study, one by one. Thanks again!
Fantastic answers - especially shooting from the hip! Love your sincerity coupled with genuine empathy for the other side and humility that you could be wrong. I have been actively struggling with all this for over 40 years - since Bible College - studying some nearly every day. I may be totally wrong about everything - but I cannot yet be convinced that I should worship anything as evil & self contradictory as the character described as God in the Bible. Like you I may crumble on fear faced with this God if it’s all true - but I cannot imagine living in heaven knowing most everyone else is suffering forever in hell.
I didn't like his question about books. Out of all the questions that one definitely felt like a "gacha" question. I have two thoughts about it. 1. For me, it feels a bit abilist because I'm dyslexic and reading books is genuinely hard for me and I agree with you that on all your other points like "the right books" or the fact that sometimes RU-vid videos are better at getting the information out there then books. 2. Why does reading other books matter? Shouldn't the Bible be enough. The Bible claims to be enough, so that should be the only book I have to read to determine whether or not Christianity is true. If the Bible isn't enough, why should I believe it? Am I missing something?
Good money going after bad. Ed faster takes the cake. Were supposed to read Aquinas, Aristotle if not Augustine as well as the Bible. Both. The Catholic one, 72 books and the Protestant one 66 books. Does this mean proddys are in league with Saten then?
I could add a lot of thoughts but your POV matched mine pretty closely from the videos I've seen like this so far. Probably because I have a similar background of leaving religion after growing up into adulthood in it. Most of these questions I find kind of ridiculous, mostly because they have such a presupposition like mind set. Which I have noticed is a lot more common than I thought as I watch more and more RU-vid apologists. Even being a fundamentalist Christian for so long, the pressup arguments never made sense to me. Which leads me to my question, does anyone reading this know of any major apologists that were atheists and converted to Christianity? I would much rather listen to their arguments than these same narrow minded views. I kind of feel the same about atheist arguments from those with no religious background. Both mindsets usually just talk past each other too much, preaching to their own choirs without understanding how the opposing ones even think lol
Another fantastic show Brandon, both incontinent, and even more in the polite, honest and sincere way you present it. I would love for you to possibly take on some of the religious attributes of the daily wire with Ben Shapiro. His daily show has become very common place to be religious at some point every day. Thanks again for your show.
Thanks for this kind support! Yes id love to speak on the daily wire. So many others just killing it already though like GMC and RationalitnRules. But I’m sure ill get to it. Thanks again!
"atheist preaching is best" Well more logical and truthful but I bet it does not hold the excitement of a "snake handling" service. However I will never no personally == I hope..
More recently I’ve been thinking about the very concept of worship, and have concluded that it’s an unhealthy attachment. That no one “deserving” of worship would demand it, and any demands for it show it is undeserved. Basically, I think worship is bad, thanks for coming to my TEDtalk
I loved this video! Thank you for your work in articulating carefully what your experience has been and all the work it takes to share it. It helps me see that I'm not alone
I like this channel. Not because I’m mad at Christianity but because it confirms my wake up call. My BIGGEST take away from this study is Jesus wasn’t speaking to us, from the past, as a guide or down the road. He was speaking to the group in front of him about being better Jews in a Roman and corrupt Jewish(and others) world. I think if teens in the mediaeval times working on cathedrals their whole lives, dying without seeing things finished. What if they had labored for a cause that truly spoke to them, was current and had purpose for the moment. They didn’t and took comfort in the myth of the day. Not judging. As for me, I’m simply stoic now… more truth and honor for my path. Thanks for the content. Eye opening. Mind freeing. Truth.
28:32 "What they want from the christians is a demonstration that god exists" Personally, I'd much rather have god itself demonstrate that it exists, preferably to everybody at once. A god having to rely on humans to convince other humans it exists is a bad sign as far as I'm concerned, and I really find the idea of god talking to one prophet at a time throughout the bible and asking each one of them to go convert the rest of the world to be highly suspicious to say the least.
The usual videos critiquing religion definitely have their place, but I would like to see more of these civil engagements between secularist and religious--where the aim is not necessarily to be right, but to build understanding, build bridges. Regardless of ideological background, I think we can all agree the world is in desperate need of bridges.
You answered these questions exceptionally well friend. Seriously, it was like an adult explaining something to a child. No disrespect intended. I was a former believer.
You Sir, are just too kind. Braxton, as it has been said, is just not genuine or honest. The very fact that in just about each question, he uses loaded language to "smear" the atheists he says with his mouth(on his channel) that he loves, is quite telling of his character and motivations. Oddly enough, I believe... there's a verse or two about bearing false witness he should be concerned about, something that his Christian worldview should make absolutely clear to him. hehe Nonetheless, I enjoy your well thought out responses, thanks. Have a great day.
Ha, thank you very much. I appreciate that. Loaded is the perfect word to describe those questions, but I'd rather just answer them for those listening that can utilize them then point the finger back at Braxton. I may have made a quip or two to satiate myself though lol.
Question 3 The idea that people pretend to not believe in god in order to sin is so weird to me Like, you either believe or you don't If you don't then you will have no reason to not do something if the only reason you shouldn't is religion (the fact that he only mentions sex and not, let's say, robbing or hurting people us very telling) If you believe, well, can we stop pretending believers ever stopped themselves from sinning?
"I feel like we could take an entire other video to unpack this." ... Indeed. And recognize the manilulative technique being applied. No matter how a response is phrased, the massively varied and layered amount of information being thrown together coupled with the expectation of failure by whoever answers? Each deserves measured thoughtful responses and to give them less consideration is an insult? Basic debate tactics. Win by flooding subjects. Is this just a deck of cards for him? One shakey answer happens in any of those loaded question subject... and then what? He win? 2:45
Doing a marathon of your content, not any regret so far, you are pretty good with this topics, i would love that there was something like this in my native language, spanish
