Lessons a Non-believer Can Learn From God (Exodus Clip) 

We should definitely care about what God wants from us, but we need to recognize that God doesn't need us... we need him.

Amen. Prager the only one close to representing God biblically here. The rest were just speaking like a bunch of new agers

@@JK-uo3pd If Prager wants to know what God wants him to do he's going to have to read, understand, and believe the New Testament. THEN he can act and speak accordingly.

@Gail Hill Sadly Jordan exposes himself at the 1:09 mark saying he leaves God out as much as possible. What a prideful statement to suggest that anyone can just “add in God when suited” God is sovereign and when I say God I mean the Trinity - Jesus Christ of whom is not mentioned once here…..also very telling. These new agers are just creating their own god. Jesus Christ name above all names. The only Living God. King of Kings and Lord of Lords

@@JK-uo3pd I think Jordan plays his cards close to his vest and I see nothing wrong with that. Was he saying that in his discussions he tries to leave God out of it? It's your job and mine to proclaim the name of the king of kings and lord of lords: Jesus Christ. Right? And I do proclaim it. However I believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God. Meaning: he is the "SON OF God," not "God." God is spirit John 4.24. God bless.

@David R Thank you, Sir.

@@BMFstudiosNYC That’s not true. If that was the case then I could’ve read two books and tried to justify believing. If that was indeed my goal. Especially if I read Pascal or someone pushing Christianity but it took me over a decade of studying even though I read Pascal a few years in. I disagreed wholly with The Wager and still do, fear of being wrong does not constitute faith. Other than Pascal (Christian), Nietzsche (Existentialist) and Schopenhauer (Pessimistic Atheist); I mainly read classical philosophy which would be considered Pagan. Not sure how you imagine any of them outside of Pascal could lead me to God, in fact philosophy led me further away from God before I made it back to God. Plato’s Republic and Nietzsche’s The AntiChrist were the first books I read, followed by Schopenhauer who was extremely irreligious. I wasn’t trying to become a Christian because I didn’t believe that I could, so I went down the path of Philosophy instead of Religion, not intending to justify being or become religious.

@@richardaaron4454 but you said you were unhappy because you couldn't force yourself to believe. That sounds like motive to me. You wanted to be happy, but why did you consider believing to be happiness?

@@BMFstudiosNYC Well I read The Bible at age fifteen after believing what my uncle who was a scientist taught me since I was a child, avid Atheism. “The people who wrote The Bible fasted and didn’t sleep so they hallucinated it all.” He said. When I was fifteen I decided that I wanted to read The Bible because I can’t dismiss something that I don’t understand. I asked my Mother to get me one for Christmas and my Uncle was disappointed that I’d asked for it. I went to his house after reading it thoroughly and asked if he’d even read it and he said that he’d never read it, not even once. The same Uncle told me that the old politicians who never smoked weed and didn’t know anything about it, made it illegal. So I saw him as a hypocrite after that night. I realized that he took something from me, which was a choice that I should’ve been able to make in my own when I was ready to that’s the reason I was truly unhappy. I knew that he was very intelligent l, the most intelligent person in the family but what I didn’t know as a young child was that there is a difference between intelligence and wisdom. Philosophy made me happy, I think there is no greater happiness than making new connections in your mind. Learning and understanding philosophy was the happiest I’ve ever been, the feeling of knowledge increasing by degrees is a happiness that I find impossible to articulate with words. I didn’t need religion once I learned to philosophize, it gives you the religious experience without religion. I think it was when I got heavy into the philosophy of quantum mechanics towards the end of the first decade that I started to believe there was something greater than myself. That belief wasn’t necessary to make me happy though. It’s been an extremely long process and I truly didn’t think it was possible for me to be religious. I felt as if it was simply impossible to circumvent my intellect and believe in something without proof. I never aimed to be religious because I never thought that it was even a remote possibility that I could so late in life. I thought that if you didn’t believe by six years old then you never will.

@@BMFstudiosNYC I hit ‘like’ on your question because it is a good question. I could’ve worded my first comment better to be sure. It’s important to ask good questions.

It isn't that we are not to ask of God, but in what we ask of God? Since God reveals Himself as Father, there is a proper request to be made of God which is attributed to His and our position. There are many things a father does of his own volition which is toward the goodness and betterment of the child, but the child is unawares of the direct (or at times, indirect) benefit. But the greatest thing a child can express in asking, is that it be trained to be just like their father (if indeed the relationship is a healthy one).

That's awesome. It was help to me too.

Too bad Prager rejects Jesus Christ and the New Testament: [Phl 4:6 KJV] 6 Be careful for nothing; but in every thing by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God.

@@gailhill8391 IKR. How IRONIC that Prager can SEE the necessity of God thru considering His absence, but cannot see the ABSOLUTE necessity for the substitutionary atonement of Christ. A covering was needed, not just right action, but a right being which Christ was and is for all who believe. May God show him the absurdity of right standing with God apart from faith in Jesus Christ -- may he see that before he ends up like the man in the parable of the wedding feast who showed up in the wrong attire, and was cast into outer darkness. Prager problem is being too behavioral/ethical in his approach. He only sees religion as important in terms of its practical benefit to this temporal world. I dont see a desire to glorify God in the deepest sense-- from the inside out. At this point he is a pragmatist, Jordan too. And this idea, of God's usefulness, or necessity as Prager put it, is what won him over. He found it irrefutable. That's enough for him, and it frames his thought and reading of Scripture. He likes the ethic. But Jordan is closer because at least he is able to see that Christ is the logos. However, I dont think he is yet to see Christ in His fullness.

Queue up the moral panic

I guess it's Chesterton's quote: Once abolish God and the government becomes God

Checkout the Migration of the Holy (sacred) by William Kavanaugh

@DCA just because a tyrannical king claims his actions are God’s will doesn’t mean that the church or holy people agreed with him. Throughout history as kings/tyrant’s made such claims there were always holy people disputing them. Unfortunately, organized violence, power, has been in control of those most willing and able to use it. The Catholic Church has long debated the idea of just war. It is their official position that there has never been one. The misconception that the Catholic Church was all powerful and therefore anything that happened during its religious reign was ideally how it wanted things to be is just naive and incorrect. The church from its very beginning with Jesus is well aware of what a tyrannical government can do to try and wipe a religion off the face of the earth and from human history.

How many 'Every OTHER Weekend' "Gods" do YOU know? Are their children the 'same' as jesus?

Only if you're a drone. And yes, most people are drones.

I agree. This "round table" of conversation very much reminds me of PBS programming in the early days - 1970s and some of the 80s - where such intellectual dialog (and respect) were the norm. I must confess that in both instances - then and now - the dialog pushes the limits of my intellect and understanding, yet the gentility of conversation and the social graces that were on full display in this clip have allowed the "hamster wheel in my head" to zoom forward at breakneck speed! I will be deciphering this bit for some time... and it was only a mere 14 minutes! I could never have learned as much in a heated debate, which is too often the norm today. Such displays prove to be nothing more than events of assassinating the character of your opponent. This forum, on the other hand, was built to edify all involved, especially us as the listener but I dare say that each of the participants walked away with new information and/or understandings of issues. What a great forum!

They did not debate, they are sharing.

More like a discussion than a debate.

I wholeheartedly agree. The need for a cultural Jesus to only allow for people to act out their divine will isn't enough. There needs to be an active relationship with the divine to ensure the proper placement of their heart's motive. Asking for guidance, forgiveness, strength, and a closer walk with him makes this possible. Without this open communication, individuals run the risk of making the divine will yet another prescription for a surface-level self-improvement guide.

He lacks understanding because he rejects Jesus Christ and the New Testament.

I don't know much about Dennis but I think that is exactly what he is praying for. He wants to know what he should do. He would then pray for guidance and ask what his gifts are so that he can do what God wants. Hopefully he would want to walk closer to God because that would be what God wants for him to do.

@@bobgriffin316 Which would mean confessing Jesus Christ as his Lord and believing that god raised him from the dead.

@@gailhill8391 Yes.

This is brilliant. I often get this feeling when lying down looking up at the night sky, as if I'm about to fall off the face of the earth into the vastness of space, "what is man that you are mindful of him?"

Pfft. The universe is much more extraordinary having come about naturally, from infinite possibilities bound by the laws of physics, no god necessary. God is Santa for adults.

@@s0ld4u The universe is impressive by itself, therefore no God necessary. Wild conclusion.

@@s0ld4u the Universe is already “extra-ordinary” thanks to God. It is even more amazing when you know that it exists for a purpose, and it is part of a greater picture which is perfect and more mysterious than what you could ever possibly understand in your finite years and limited human mind. Knowledge that can only be revealed by God. That to me is better than thinking the earth is a coincidence, its creatures go through a life of delusional meaning, and ultimately it doesn’t even matter because all will end in a couple million years for nothing. Also, I don’t think the universe is bound by laws. It would be more accurate to say that both laws and the universe are bounded to eachother. There are no laws if there is no nature to be bounded to. There are no laws if there is no order. Yet atheism suggests order is oddly achieved continuously by what is “disordered”. Which as believer in God we know it isn’t disordered

@@s0ld4u humble yourself and ask for god and he will show him to you. May god come to your life and open your eyes

I came to the same question but from a different path. It's surprisingly common for people (at least around me) to not even sit with that question of "Who is Jesus Christ?" It should be on everyone's mind though, since even if you only think He's "just a human being", He's still the most famous human being for over two thousand years. However, everyone thinks they got Him all figured out 🤣 even though He's (considering only His humanity) on a completely different level than them. Yet they dare to just put Him in a box and "get busy" with something "more important".

Amen

I have a question for you. Why not ask “who is Muhammed”? How do you choose between the two supposed prophets?

@@jessie6600 You could ask both questions and you'd find that if you are serious about trying find the answers the choice of who to follow becomes an easy one to make.

@@KevinMarshall757 I dunno, I looked just a bit at both and it’s kinda hard to judge. Mostly cuz I look at the millions of people who love either one, and the millions of Muslim families who SWEAR by their guy versus the Christians who do the same. Even the guy in my profile pic is a Muslim and seems to be one of the most honorable people I’ve seen. He’s SUPER Muslim! So I don’t know which to believe, it isn’t easy for me

Nevertheless, I tell you the truth; it is expedient for that i go away: for if i go not away, the comforter will not come unto you; but if i depart, I will send him unto you. #John16:7 So who is that comforter? "The Comforter is the HOLY GHOST!''' from John 14:26 "Holy Ghost." ''Pneuma," is the Greek root word for SPIRIT. There is no separate word for GHOST in Greek manuscripts of the new Testament. Comforter which is HOLY SPIRIT"! But the comforter, which is the Holy -Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, He shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your rememberance, whatsoever i have siad unto you. #John 14:26 Beloved, believe not every SPIRIT, but try the SPIRITS wheather they are of God; because many false Prophets are gone out into the world. #1John 4:1 You can observe that the word spirit is used synonymously with a prophet. A true SPIRIT is true prophet, and a false SPIRIT is a false Prophet. Hereby know ye the SPIRIT' of God: Every SPIRIT that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God #1John 4:2 I will raise them up a prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and i will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that i shall command him. #Deuteronomy 18:18 You see the most important word of this prophecy are 'SOO JY IS' (like unto thee), -LIKE YOU- like MOSES, and Jesus is not like Moses. According to Christianty- 1)'JESUS IS A GOD', but Moses is not 2) 'JESUS DIED FOR THE SINS OF THE WORLD', but Moses did not. 3) 'JESUS WENT TO HELL FOR THREE DAYS', but Moses did not. Who is the prophesied prophet like Moses? 1) Moses had a father and a mother, Muhammad also had the same. 2)"Moses and Muhammad were born in the normal, natural course, i.e. the physical association of man and woman. 3) "Moses and Muhammad married and begot children. 4)Moses and Muhammad (pbuh) were accepted by their people. 5) "Moses and Muhammad were prophets as kings. 6) "Moses and Muhammad brought new laws and new regulations for their people. 7) "Both Moses and Muhammad died in natural deaths". 8) "Moses and Muhammad lie buried in earth", but according christianity Jesus rests in heave.

I find interesting and joyful on the contemplation of him towards God, which hopefully he made a change to believe.

@@decimaldan4316 he was in his last days, maybe out of fear, but still was moving towards theism.

@@decimaldan4316 i was a devout listener to Willian lane Craig and he stated that by the end he had personal conversations with Will onto the fact he was repenting. The thing about salvation is that he need it to ask himselve for it, hope he did. Smart dude but God never loses, only allows our path to be reach.

The more my belief in God grows and matures, the more I love listening to Hitchens. Perhaps it's his sincerity or lucid ability to articulate questions, or even his utter disdain of the Clintons. Whatever it is, I sure hope we both make it to the realms of light because man, I really love the guy.

@Decimal Dan I think we've have learned many of the Christian myths are Jewish traditions. Well I'm not Jewish. I'm Celtic and Germanic. My people do not come from Moses(Egypt) or abraham(mesopotamia)

I like that quote too but I'm saying that as someone who is convinced of God's existence, where behaving like God exists is what it actually means to believe. I can understand why Peterson would say that as someone who may not be convinced of God's existence but is definitely convinced of God's necessity. I don't know if it makes much sense outside of those two perspectives.

Are you a theist if you are not certain god exists? Theist - a person who believes in the existence of a god or gods, specifically of a creator who intervenes in the universe. JP thinks god is fictional and the top of the pyramid of values. Hes not REALLY a theist, that is why he gets mad and avoid the question does god exist.

@@macmac1022 It seems that JP thinks of traditional stories about god as perhaps fictional in that he isn't convinced those events actually took place but that what is conveyed through those stories is actually more real than things that may have actually happened. I don't think that's quite the same as thinking god is fictional unless you mean fictional in a similar sense that might be more real than something that actually occurred. I suspect he gets mad about that question though because he doesn't like the idea of someone categorizing him one way or another and then dealing with him as though he is not an individual.

@@KevinMarshall757 "" It seems that JP thinks of traditional stories about god as perhaps fictional in that he isn't convinced those events actually took place but that what is conveyed through those stories is actually more real than things that may have actually happened."" Yep, its insanity. By that same logic I can use any story that has a meta meaning behind it that is still something happening today and say the events of the story were so real they are still happening today, like he said to answer his own questions of did the events of exodus really happen. >> I don't think that's quite the same as thinking god is fictional unless you mean fictional in a similar sense that might be more real than something that actually occurred. "" Fiction is the opposite of real. Fiction - literature in the form of prose, especially short stories and novels, that describes imaginary events and people. Real - actually existing as a thing or occurring in fact; not imagined or supposed. Saying a fiction is real is a contradiction. >> I suspect he gets mad about that question though because he doesn't like the idea of someone categorizing him one way or another and then dealing with him as though he is not an individual."" Every theist I have ever asked if god exists they just say yes, no hesitation, its the definition of theist. Most I dont not even have to ask, they just say it eventually. Cosmic skeptic did a really good video about it. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-5-yQVlHo4JA.html&lc=UgyidgseyThj5Mwub0V4AaABAg

@@macmac1022 I wouldn't call it insanity, you really could take a work of fiction and extract a meta meaning that applies today and say that meta meaning is still happening. I think though that when there is a concept that is real enough it will manifest clearly in reality and the need for referencing fiction should disappear. I do find it silly that Peterson would basically say he believes in the value of the story and that it is in some sense happening today, but somehow not believe that it happened then. In case there was confusion on my use of "real" and "fiction", what I meant was that there are real concepts that can be found in fictional works. If you want to determine whether or not JP is a theist I guess the question is: would you count what he believes in as a god?

Then you go to the world of physics, biology, chemistry... And then you can saw everything as a delightful symphony of energy, dancing and flowing around the universe.

God Kant is a different beast. Love him.

nah

In your sentence, what do you define the word "good" as?

The preacher man? I was falling asleep when he was talking. :p

Dennis is WRONG. [Rom 10:1-4 KJV] 1 Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved. 2 For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. 3 For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. 4 For Christ [is] the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

@@gailhill8391 You didn't get his point.

@@mackblack5153 I get his point. He's a natural man, not a spiritual man.

Yeah I didn’t like that statement at all. Cuz what if you act in all the ways a Christian does-the morality and habits-minus the praying and literal belief in God? I would assume that person would reap the benefits of those god-like habits even if he didn’t believe in God. So what consequences is the guy talking about? Maybe Hell, okay, but you’ll be a damn good person up until then

Religion and God go hand in hand unless that is you want to throw out all of humanities clues about God and create your own personal God... Never the less I don't think we have to suppress rational though, understanding the limits of rationality is not the same as "suppressing it"..

@@lifewasgiventous1614 You may not realize this, but you're proving my point for me.

@@VidkunQL Not sure how...everything I said is antithetical to what you wrote but If that's your takeaway so be it I suppose

@@lifewasgiventous1614 Of course I can create a new religion, but do you really think that I can create a deity? *You are not talking about God as if you were talking about something you thought were real.*

They are one in the same.

I like words from Mr Prager's more, because he only use common vocabulary, and lots of analogy, which make stories on the book so convincing.

I believe he’s going on another of his lecture tours after this

Ain't happening like that, accept this .

unfortunately, I think your right

That would be a bad thing believe it or not. Prophecy "understanding the word of God" is a gift of those in the faith. It is not only not wise but dangerous to listen to someone explain the bible who doesn't actually believe that it is the inspired work of the one true God.

Could you ask God why he gives babies Aids, I feel like he could have not done that.

@@billyalexander5645 worldly brokenness is caused and created by man, not God. He allows it to exist because it must stand to qualify man’s free will to choose between good and evil and accept the consequences of each.

@@JamesIsAway God created aids, humans can't create disease it's a natural thing not, man made. So God decided that.

@@billyalexander5645 humans literally created half the periodic table and you don’t think they can cause disease?

@@JamesIsAway well it's more like why did God create a universe in which that is even possible.

Isn't Dennis Orthodox? And isn't he a kind of 'lay' rabbi? He's at least a recognized teacher.

@@craigsmith1443 Prager is religious (based on his own words) but a lot of his views are very different from traditional Judaism. Most of the time he gives his opinion and not explain what Judaism really hold wich I think is the real need here.

@@MG-py9gb _Prager is religious (based on his own words) but a lot of his views are very different from traditional Judaism_ Perhaps, but if you would give examples it would be very helpful. I have had several Orthodox and Conservative friends, and they sound a lot like Dennis. I have read much of the Talmud, and found that 'traditional Judaism' says a lot of things, including much (at least) of what Dennis says. I can remember a spring-morning walk past a yeshiva on Chicago's near north side, and out of the door rolled a wave of voices arguing over the meaning of a Talmudic passage. Traditional Judaism spends a lot of time figuring out (through disagreement) what it really says. Mind you, I think that this is a strength, for life is like that. Orthodoxy (in both senses) is never a static set of beliefs, especially in a living, relational, active religion like Judaism. And then there's Reformed and Hasidic and Haredi and Dati and Masorti and Hiloni...

It took so much effort to put experts in different fields in this room. But I get you.

Daily wire is the platform to access this. No doubt a hacker will steal it later and post on youtube. BUT that is what we are talking about, morality , God. If it is worth it to you, pay the small amount.

Очень справедливое замечание. Прежде чем вести адекватную дискуссию, надо определить точно и однозначно используемые термины, хотя бы в рамках беседы. Остаётся надеяться, что эти люди выполнили этот шаг, или им повезло и они всё равно адекватно понимают друг друга. На счёт определения Бога, как Вам такое: "Бог есть источник всего сущего"? A very fair remark. Before conducting an adequate discussion, it is necessary to define precisely and unambiguously the terms used, at least within the framework of a conversation. It remains to be hoped that these people have completed this step, or they are lucky and they still adequately understand each other. As for the definition of God, how do you like this: "God is the source of all things"?

He is Allah, the One and Only; Allah, the Eternal, Absolute; He begetteth not, nor is He begotten; And there is none like unto Him.

In the culturally Christian West, when the average person says God they mean Jehovah, and by religion mean Christianity.

@@davidhawley1132 I'm on the west coast, the average person here isn't Christian and are more likely to mean a hallucinogenic experience probably from drugs when they say god.

Yes.

Oh no! You have caught Petersonism. Words and words and words but no meaning. Drivel.

@@kevinkelly2162 I've got wide shoulders,, but to direct anything towards Dr. Peterson, just proves your inept character, with empty thoughts,, so sad...

@@anchorfastanchor9192 So Peterson cannot be critcised? OK Will you praise him for me? Tell me one clever thing he has said here. I ask this all the time and........crickets.

@@kevinkelly2162 JP fans avoid hard questions about JP. Theists avoid hard questions about what they believe. People will even avoid questions about a statement they just made if you can point out something wrong with it. Been researching avoidance of questions by myself for over a year now. I think I understand it now. Would you like to know what I think it is?

@@macmac1022 Yeah, would be interested. I also ask christians what is good about God and they wont answer me either. Sometimes I get some drivel about God being goodness itself. Something else I notice is the weird way these people use language. They talk absolute gibberish but seem to understand each other.

I wish I was up there. I have some questions I would like to see them answer.

The question is, how much of a point is there to debate if the fundamental presumptions of the debate are by nature contradictory. You will only conclude disagreement.

@Sönke Schmidt well I would assume they would be talking about those assumptions, but yeah there are already a lot of conversations between Christians and atheists and it usually results in nothing. It just struck me as weird to have a video called lessons for non-believers and not include any non believers.

@@zacharytuttle5618 hehe, that's a good point indeed. It comes off a bit wierd =)

"The only thing I know for certain is that I know nothing" this was said by one of the greatest minds ever. Think about it.

@@JoviBootlegs90 He knew words and the meanings of those words

Believing is for the inexperienced.

@@JoviBootlegs90 Socrates. I love using the socratic method, just sucks when people avoid answering the questions though LOL. Also loved voltaire with his dont judge a man by his answers but by his questions.

@@kevinkelly2162 >>He knew words and the meanings of those words"" Its socrates. He said that because he just questioned everything and everyone and found that they knew nothing either LOL. Socrates is on our side :)

I don't think it's so black and white because it's not act as if something exists but you know for sure doesn't, it's act as if something exists that perhaps you have a deep intuition of and that maybe theoretically you're on the fence about it. Most people can't have devout faith but says that knowledge wise they don't believe whatsoever.

@@matthewr7593 I know for sure it doesn't. I'm not on the fence. I have absolutely no reason at all to believe in the existence of the god of the bible, and many reasons not to. Also, if I actually wanted to follow the actual word of the bible instead of some feel-good alternative that fits my own morality, it would be a pretty awful place. In other words, most people who have what most people would call good morals and blame it on god are doing just that, rather than acting in the way their god is documented as wanting them to act. Just look at the earlier "everyone who abolished slavery did it because they were religious, regardless of what they actually claimed was their motivation." Sure, except the god of the bible actively promotes slavery, which is conveniently ignored or rationalized away.

@@docwhat8370 And what the evangelical christians you're talking about were saying directly contradicts what's in the actual bible as laws from god. If you say homosexuality and slavery are both bad, it's because (A) the bible is self-contradictory or (B) you're not really reading the bible. The fact that the people advocating for something are christian doesn't make the thing they're advocating for a christian value. And yes, I can say for a fact god doesn't exist. That's how facts work. We have plenty of evidence that the god of the bible doesn't exist, as well as being logically impossible. Everyone who has the burden of proof has failed to meet the burden of proof. We've looked for evidence of god and not found any. I can equally say that I can say for a fact that there's no oak tree growing in my kitchen. The only way you can say "you have no evidence that god doesn't exist" is to make all god's existence so irrelevant that no possible evidence could be evidence of god's existence. And why only one god? Why not lots of gods? When you can demonstrate that there aren't two gods, I'll agree maybe there's one.

@@kevinkelly2162 Yeah. The only actual moral rule the Abrahamic god has is "obey me." There's no morality going on there beyond that. No "wash your hands before you eat" or "don't own humans" or "treat women like real people." Just "obey me" and "don't screw over your neighbors if they live close enough to get back at you."

@@docwhat8370 If man is made in the image of god, why did god command men to kill, rape, and enslave other men? I have exactly as much evidence for the nonexistence of god as I do for the nonexistence of the oak tree. It's trivial to empirically verify there is no god of the bible - it's called evolution, geology, and cosmology. Also the fact that engineers are hired to move mountains and not priests. The fact that praying for sick people tends to make them more sick instead of less, contrary to the descriptions of god in the bible. The god of the bible makes many, many claims which are false, yet is also generally believed to be omniscient and infallible. Nothing attributable to the god of the bible is actually verifiable fact, and a great deal of evidence exists that all the descriptions of the god of the bible don't conform with reality. Just as I'd expect acorns and fallen leaves in my kitchen if an oak tree was growing there yet I don't find them, I'd expect the world to conform to the designs of the all-powerful who created it but I don't find that. God did not create men in god's form, because men evolved. We know that as a fact that's basically as well-established as gravity and quantum mechanics. Yet here you are saying that god created men from dust, woman from rib, in a magical land where nobody died and carnivores didn't eat meat. I know that god doesn't exist in the same way I know the oak tree doesn't exist - there's absolutely no evidence for the existence of the god of the bible in spite of many people having looked for said evidence. Now, do I know there's no such thing as the supernatural at all? No, because that's too ill-defined to even describe. But once you start attributing behaviors and effects to a supernatural entity, and then you go look for those behaviors and effects, you can disprove the existence of *that* god.

Unfortunately the way a lot of modern churches present the fundamental machinations of prayer to children and new believers is by leading with Philippians 4:6 and failing to expand beyond that. Using the Bible out of context or without complete context makes both the believer and the atheist look stupid.