Why Believe In Christianity? 🔍 (feat Seth Andrews) 

As soon as he said “the difference between ‘believe’ and ‘believe in’“, I knew this caller was a PhD from the Jordan Peterson school of Pedantic Semantics. What does ‘in’ mean? What does ‘mean’ mean? Words are so hard. I think we should slowly turn language into unusable slop so my crappy ideas can’t be critically analyzed.

Being pedantic about word definitions is very much Apologetic ploy to avoid answering simple questions. Not a thing we should be doing.

"The word is not the thing. The description is not the described." J. Krishnamurti

when I say "I believe" I know I may be wrong. if I say "I know" I am 90-99% confident in that.

This caller was tap dancing from the get go! Shuffling from foot to foot.

It initially seems that this atheist is just calling to sound intellectually superior to the hosts. A waste of time.

Damn you Seth, and your wicked voice. 😂 I admire both of your perspectives, reason, and demeanors.

I sneezed at work once, and Charen's response was "GAWD Bless You!" She really hit it. It seemed intentional. I turned and said "Hail Satan." I feel I was justified.

My dad did that when I had my oldest. I said "JESUS CHRIST!!" during a contraction and he said "I didn't know you were religious" 😂 Destroyed my train of thought, completely halted my complaining for just a few seconds. Just killed the rage-momentum.

If someone asks me "Is water wet?" I would just say yes, because wetness is a quality of water. There is such a high degree of certainty that I don't even have to preface that it's a belief. If someone were to ask me if I believe in something, i'd view that as more of a probabilistic report on my degree certainty. But 'in' is just an adverb, I don't actually see it doing any heavy lifting here.

Nope. Seth is spot on. He is trying to simplify the use of the word. The pedantic pedaling of parsing the word "believe" is problematic when used in debating ideas, not in general conversations.

read eric berne "games people pay" cos people aren't always talking about what they think they are talking about. it's a 60's shrink book, but i think it's a great way to learn how to keep conversations positive and on track, and how to deal with people who don't want positive and on track.

Isn't this type of caller just a theist tying up the lines as long as possible? They see it as saving souls, and it's just the opposite.

Haha we went from being pedantic about pedantry to a momentum killing discussion about killing momentum.

I enjoyed this. It was interesting. Thanks.

What a pointless, banal call

We should all stand with peace!

LMAO 🤣 seriously is this guy the voice that used to be on voicemails!? " Please leave a message after the tone" Thats all i keep thinking of when this dude Dak talks 🤣 his voice is so robotic

To "believe in" is to practice _make believe_. To "believe" is to hold to be true based on evidence.

ty

You can communicate clearly and people still dont understand, many people that's reality, most people don't know what clear communication is.

I do think the caller had a good point, albeit not an excellent way of putting it. That is, there is a significant difference between “I believe this is true/real” and “I believe this is good.” The difference is important especially when it comes to a God that must be BOTH real/existent/true as well as good. Contrast this with “I believe the Christian God exists and also that this same God is evil and unworthy of my worship.” It shifts the focus away from atheism/theism distinctions and toward a conversation about the nature of good vs evil. I think there is a desire among many people (myself included) for a discussion of morality (which I characterize as an exploration of aesthetics) that can rise above the “that’s merely personal opinion” objections.

“It might be somewhat pedantic or it might seem somewhat pedantic and perhaps not be but if I can make a clarification for example if someone says they believe in something and they believe it as good but someone else takes it to believe it is true and they hear enough people saying they believe in that thing to think all these other people believe it’s true, they may take that as testimony that it’s true and what the people are really saying is they have wishful thinking.” Yea, whatever. Screw this guy.

11:05 im atheist and refer to god all the time in my language; theyre jus tohrases we use because theyre phrases in our spciety.

While this caller was being pedantic, and I think incorrectly so in this case, the definition of terms IS vital to any and all communication. Any legal and binding contract worth the paper it's written on, for example, has a section--typically at the beginning--for term definitions. All parties to said contract are bound by those definitions, should a dispute arise from any misinterpretation. In theological debates, Christians OFTEN claim to KNOW that God exists, Jesus saves, heaven is real, etc, when, of course, they do not, and cannot know such a thing. The correct term in that case is "believe," NOT "know." They act as if the two terms are synonymous, when they are far from it. "Belief" is the acceptance of an alleged fact--or body of facts--as true. However, beliefs may or may not BE true! "Knowledge" is defined as "an acquaintance with facts, truths, or principles, as from study or investigation; general erudition." Therefore, "knowledge" requires evidence, "beliefs" do not!

How do people not get it? We can know what we believe but can't believe in our beliefs of what is known without believing our beliefs are known by what is believed objectively and known subjectively. Therefore what is known is believed by those who believe in their knowledge of what is believed in about what can be known _and_ what is discovered through belief in what beliefs are known by those who can consistently illustrate what they believe and believe in. Simple.

Okay okay im convinced 😂😂

English is not my first language, so I may misunderstand the nuances. But I have sometimes wondered that "believe in" thing. Like "If you don't believe in God, what do you believe in?" "I believe in love". What does that mean? It is not the same as to say "I believe there is love", at least not in my opinion. I think it means "I think love is the most important thing in life". I have not listened the whole video, maybe you talk about this later.

This is typical Jordan Peterson word salad. He was asked if Kane and Abel were true, to which he replied "depends on what you mean by true." WTF

We have to keep asking what people mean by certain words because we allow those words to be twisted in fear of being pedantic. "Gay" is the perfect example. If someone proclaims themselves to be gay today it means something very different than it did in the 1890's The Gay Nineties. But do you ask every person that says they are Gay today what they mean by it first before talking to them? Yet because the ambiguity has been allowed to continue, we have to find out what a person means when they use a word with a good solid definition like "belief"? "Belief" is used, is needed when facts don't exist to support something. It's that simple. If something has factual support, you don't use "belief" to accept it. And allowing the world to be twisted beyond it's well established definition has the same effect in destroying simple open conversation as refusing to acknowledge what a person means when they tell you they are Gay. How pedantic to ask if they just mean like back in the 1890's! But then it would be as pedantic to not allow that Atheism includes baby eating so ask first?

While I do agree that pedantry wars are boring and annoying, I do think we can debate about definitions in a systematic way. Definitions have certain functions from which we can infer where their value lies. A good definition consolidates, simplifies, provides reference, adds clarity, has applicability, and avoids obfuscation. Bad definitions are overly expanded, makes complex, is difficult to reference, creates confusion, has little applicability, or conceals an agenda. So theists will sometimes argue something like "Atheism is a belief in no god" because they fear the lack-of-belief definition conceals an agenda of making atheism more palatable, while many atheists would argue the positive-belief definition conceals an agenda of making it less palatable. It's probably good to have one's own criteria for what constitutes a good definition, but these are mine.

i say "gesundheit" lol.

I believe something when I think that a proposition accords with evidence (I believe I’m standing here), reasoning (I believe some of the people in this chapel must believe this nonsense), or conviction (I believe what I’m supposed to be repeating is a pack of lies). When I believe, I take a position that is based on empirical evidence or logical reasoning, towards a proposition or a fact. There is quite likely to be a way for me to verify or falsify my belief through observation and experimentation, or through some trusted process (itself verifiable) that allows me to depend on someone else’s observation and experimentation. Which is why I believe that the principal export of Argentina is beef; the teacher told me so, and the book the teacher was reading from makes the same claim. It may not be true, but I believe the teacher says it’s true, so, for the limited purposes of the exam at the end of term, I’m willing to claim I believe it, even if I don’t actually believe Argentina exports beef at all. Maybe I don’t even believe Argentina exists. Some beliefs are subjective and based on personal experience and interpretation (I believe that guy is a thug), but my belief in an objective proposition has nothing to do with my perspective or feelings. Believing in something is very different. Believing in something is about having faith, trust, or confidence in a person, idea, or thing, and is about commitment or allegiance to values or principles. If I say I believe in justice or the scientific method I’m saying something about my guiding principles or values. I’m taking an affective or evaluative position based on trust, emotional commitment, or moral conviction towards some abstract, value-laden idea. The idea itself is not verifiable or falsifiable. If I claim that I believe in democracy I’m saying I’m committed to the principles and values of democratic governance. All that can be tested there is the extent of my commitment - the concept of democracy itself is not a testable. Ethics, morality, faith, values, principles, politics, philosophy and world view are all carried into the discussion by that little preposition “in”. Even as a young schoolboy, it seemed to me that when it comes to the supernatural, what matters is what people believe, not what they believe in. And when it comes to a personal avowal of adherence to a worldview, what I don’t believe in is the supernatural.

Now that Hawaii has been discovered, why would dude take over the world from a desert?

Wow the spreading of anti Israel propaganda at the end there was extreme. Calling it carpet bombing and mass murder is simply false, and deeply irresponsible. And right after a conversation about appropriate use of language as well. "Saying the quiet part out loud" is right.

The one I genuinely don't understand is "believe _on_," like "believe on Jesus." Is that like "trust in?" I've never heard it used in any other context. How would it be used in a non-religious context?

Another theistic caller with peculiar speech

It is fair, though, in casual parlance, to point out that there is a difference between believing a thing or believing-in a thing. One can believe-in the philosophy or moral lesson behind a fair tale, for instance, without believing the events of the fair tale were real. This may seem pedantic, and you all might want to crap on this guy for it (he was apologetic), but to use the old cliche, wars have begun over the smallest miscommunications. When you're speaking in a heated way with somebody who doesn't want to understand you, or with somebody who intentionally warps your words (something I've encountered many times, personally), this crap can quickly become a thing. Seth is right that pedantic thought can slow momentum in a conversation. He is assuming both interlocutors are honest. That is often not the case. Paul felt it was relevant enough to create this video out of however many calls. So...

idk, i totally agree with the importance of the word "belief" the caller was emphasizing, especially when i comes to religion, or even more specifically when it comes to believing in jesus. for instance someone might say they "believe in communism" or "believe in democracy" but thats very different from someone saying they "believe in evolution" or that they believe 2+2=4, etc. and i get that its easy to just shrug this off as pedantic or whatever, but its a HUGE FUCKING THING in what it means to be a christian i think. what does it mean to "believe in jesus"?? they say you have to believe that jesus rose from the dead and that he was born of a virgin etc etc but thats just believing certain shit about jesus. very different from how you would believe in karl marx or believe in donald trump, etc. and this is a problem because they question "what does it mean to believe in jesus?" NEVER EVER GETS FUCKING ANSWERED BY ETIHER FUCKING CHRISTIANS OR ATHEISTS ALIKE.... L.O.L.

Thank God I'm an atheist.

It’s not a confusing title, you either believe it’s true or not. It doesn’t need a lot of explanation.

the phrase "believe in" annoys me too, i can only "believe in" myself, what people mean is "i believe that" as in 'i believe that god exists' or 'i believe that aliens exist' or 'i believe that aliens have visited earth' - "i believe in aliens" is clearly silly, it implies that you know some aliens and they inspire you. "i believe in god" means you put trust in god to tell you accurate things, not that you _just_ believe god exists. that would be "i believe god exists" (by the way, god does not exist).

Paul iis drinking from his special cup "every' time someone says something that is " because the bible says so"...

🙂👍

7 minutes in and besides saying language is ambiguous. Nothing was sayed of value...

Is it illegal for someone to be God?

I think this guy is nice. And I agree with him. He sounds a bit like Johnny Cash. Or an I wrong?

Seth, stop screwing around with the English language. To believe a thing, or to believe in a thing, means to accept said thing as true, and that is all that "to believe" means. That definition says nothing whatsoever about why, or on what basis, you believe it. Stop trying to make believe mean something it doesn't mean.

The bloke was just trying to make a point, boring or not. There was no need to be rude. Not saying goodbye, or even granting him a grunt when he finished, wasn't the way I was brought up and I reckon neither were you, Seth.