Discussion with Atheists on YouTube – Part 2

Discussion with Atheists on YouTube – Part 2

When I produced my video about Atheism called Most Atheists Honestly Don’t Get It (You can view it for yourself at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtQ4gETT25w), I got a lot of response – too much, in fact, to put in just one article, so I created another one so you could read more. (You can read the first installment at: http://www.marketfaith.org/2021/03/discussion-with-atheists-on-youtube-part-1). Below are three more of the conversations that emerged from the video.

As I have shared in previous articles, Atheism is a religious belief that positively affirms that God does not exist. Interestingly, many Atheists don’t like that definition and will argue that their beliefs are not beliefs at all. Beyond that, many get upset that I even refer to it as a religious faith. That said, believers in Atheism, as with believers in every other religious tradition, come in a variety of forms. There are many who are very courteous and will dialog with a respectful attitude. On the other hand, there are many who are militant zealots who are anything but respectful. For the most part, those who choose to attack my videos tend to be of the more militant variety.

In interacting with people from other faiths, I have found that it is generally necessary to deal with them on the basis of their own personal paradigm. It is possible to hold a respectful dialog with those who are respectful, but often requires that one become a bit more confrontational with those who are themselves antagonistic. Please understand, though, that while it is sometimes necessary to be confrontational, that is not a license to act in a hateful way. It is always important to not allow own’s own attitude to become unchristlike.

As you read below, you should get more insights into the way many Atheists think about this topic. It is my hope and prayer that this will give you additional insights into how you, yourself, can penetrate the beliefs of Atheists that you know in order to share the gospel with them.

Here are three dialogs.

RVL
Atheism is disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods. Nothing more

Freddy Davis
Actually your definition is not true. Atheism is specifically a positive assertion that God does not exist. But regardless of whether you are an actual Atheist or hold some other form of naturalistic belief, you do believe something affirmatively — and whatever it is, you believe it by faith. Perhaps you should understand your own beliefs before you begin attacking mine.

RVL
You say i should understand my own beliefs before i begin attacking yours how did i do that i only said what atheism means how is that me attacking your beliefs

Freddy Davis
@RVL Your very first post is a repudiation of what I said. How is that not an attack?

BTW, your definition is still incorrect.

RVL
Yeah looking at the comments multiple people tried to explain atheism to you and you simply dont want to believe what they say and then you acuse me of attacking your beliefs only because i gave you the definition of atheism

Freddy Davis
@RVL Perhaps that is “a” definition of Atheism, but it is not “the” definition. Your definition only says what it isn’t – which is really no definition at all. My definition is what it is. While you make this big deal about your “lack of belief in God,” you do believe in something. Until you define what that is, you have not really said anything.

RVL
You clearly have no idea what it means to be an atheist or what atheism means

Freddy Davis
@RVL Either that or you don’t. I have clearly defined what I mean and you have not. You have only said what you don’t believe. Did you even read my last post?

(Note: At this point, RVL never responded again.)

Theo Skeptomai (This is not a real name but is a name derived from the Greek language meaning “God I Think.”)
“There are all manners of evidence when it comes to the Christisn faith”? Can you please at least provide ONE evidentiary fact that demonstrates the existence of this god you’ve mentioned. Not a bible verse. Not “look around you”. Not claiming evidence is everywhere and I just jchoose to ignore it. Not claim that my “heart is not open”. Not “well, explain the empty tomb”. Not “all the prophesies have come true”

Please present one evidentiary fact. Just ONE. Is that not a reasonable request?

Freddy Davis
Okay, then, tell me what kind of evidence you require. When you say “evidentiary fact,” you obviously have some specific meaning in mind. The problem we are running into is that different worldview beliefs accept different kinds of evidence, and you have already demonstrated that there are types of evidence you will not accept. Be ready though, to respond back when I question “why” certain kinds of evidence (for instance the ones you have mentioned) are out of bounds. If you are going to assert that my beliefs are wrong, I insist on knowing why your beliefs are right.

Theo Skeptomai
@Freddy Davis I am not requiring ANYTHING. I am requesting ANY evidentiary fact that demonstrates the existence of a god. Is that not a reasonable request? Yes or no.

You are LYING. I have NOT demonstrated that there is a type of evidentiary fact that I would not accept. I have not stated such. I have not implied such. I have stated I would accept any credible evidence.

I have simply requested that you present one evidentiary fact out of “all manners of evidence” you have claimed exists that demonstrates the truth of your claim. Is there anything preventing you from doing so?

Freddy Davis
@Theo Skeptomai I am not lying! You gave a whole list of things I could not use. Do you even know what you wrote? Tell me what you mean by “evidentiary fact” and I will respond appropriately.

Theo Skeptomai
@Freddy Davis None of those items I listed are evidentiary.

I consider ‘evidence’ as ANY PRESENTATION that substantiates the truth of a claim.

I consider ‘credible evidence’ as that which can be verified for validity, accuracy, and authenticity.

Are my considerations of credible evidence reasonable? Yes or no.

Freddy Davis
@Theo Skeptomai That is not true. All of the things you mentioned are evidentiary, just not by your standards apparently. But I don’t know what your standards are so I keep asking. What means of verification will you accept? I can’t know whether or not your considerations of credible evidence are reasonable until I know what they are.

Theo Skeptomai
@Freddy Davis I have simply requested that you present one evidentiary fact that substantiates the existence of a god. And four comments later you have only given excuses as to why you haven’t.

If you will not present any evidence, will you answer a series of straightforward questions DIRECTLY? Yes or no.

Freddy Davis
@Theo Skeptomai I have not given a single excuse to you. I have asked you for clarification – which for some reason you refuse to give. Are you having a hard time making a distinction between an excuse and asking for clarification? You may think that your question is straightforward, but there are implications surrounding it that make it not straightforward. That is why I keep asking you to define what you mean by evidentiary fact. Different people define it different ways. I need to know what YOU mean in order to answer you. So, are you going to clarify or keep on making false accusations about my replies? Do you even know what you mean by that term?

Theo Skeptomai
@Freddy Davis I not only clarified but gave definition as to what I meant by credible evidence.

And did my direct question worded “will you answer a series of straightforward questions DIRECTLY? ” need any clarification? Yes or no.

Freddy Davis
@Theo Skeptomai You may think you have, but you have not. Try again.

Theo Skeptomai
@Freddy Davis And you still have not presented even one evidentiary fact. Is that not true? Yes or no.

Freddy Davis
@Theo Skeptomai As I said, you think you have asked a straightforward question, but it is only straightforward based on your own worldview beliefs. It is not straightforward to me since I hold different worldview beliefs. If I were to guess, I would say that you will only accept naturalistic answers as credible. And since, for some reason, you don’t seem inclined to answer my question, you leave me in a position of having to guess. I am not willing to do that. I want to KNOW exactly what you mean. If you think you have answered the question, then answer it again so we can get on with this. Or, we can continue this dance. Tell me what you mean by “evidentiary fact.”

Theo Skeptomai
@Freddy Davis And you still have not presented even one evidentiary fact. Is that not true? Yes or no.

Freddy Davis
@Theo Skeptomai And you still have not answered my question as to what you consider to be an evidentiary fact. Is that true? Yes or no? (When you do, if you ever do, I will deal with you on a deeper level.)

Theo Skeptomai
@Freddy Davis And did my direct question worded “will you answer a series of straightforward questions DIRECTLY? ” need any clarification? Yes or no.

Freddy Davis
@Theo Skeptomai Yes, and I have repeatedly told you the clarification I need. Do you understand? Yes or no?

Theo Skeptomai
@Freddy Davis Is there anything preventing you from answering those two straightforward questions?

Freddy Davis
@Theo Skeptomai I have already answered that question about 10 times. Is there something preventing you from understanding what I am asking? Yes or no?

Theo Skeptomai
@Freddy Davis I consider an evidentiary fact any presntation that substantiates the truth of a claim. I have already defined this. And I have also stated several times that I have so defined it.

Theo Skeptomai
@Freddy Davis And you have not answer this question with a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’:

And did my direct question worded “will you answer a series of straightforward questions DIRECTLY? ” need any clarification? Yes or no.

Freddy Davis
@Theo Skeptomai You know, when I was in elementary school, some of the girls would pass notes to boys they liked that read, “Do you like me, yes or no? I need to know, are you in the third grade?

I have given very detailed answers to your comments. The fact that you don’t like my answers does not mean that I have not answered your questions. You have a particular frame of reference that seems not to allow you to see possibilities that don’t fit your already existing beliefs. As a result, you are attempting to frame your questions in ways that don’t leave room for the kinds of answers I am giving. If you are not able to deal with the complexity of the answers I am giving, well, that is simply too bad, I guess.

Beyond that, it seems that you have now moved from an honest discussion to trolling. I honestly believe now that you have no idea what an evidentiary fact is. If you want to continue, you will have to begin by clarifying what I asked you to clarify before. If you are not willing to do that, I will just consider you a troll and treat you as such.

Theo Skeptomai
@Freddy Davis What is the evidentiary fact that you have presented? Point it out to me.

Theo Skeptomai
@Freddy Davis Well? Are you going to point out where you presrnted evidence? Just point to the comment by quoting the first few words of the comment.

Freddy Davis
@Theo Skeptomai I don’t believe that you would understand even if I pointed it out to you, as you still don’t seem to be able to define evidentiary fact. And as I told you before, I will not be responding to you substantively until you do it. You are doing nothing at this point but trolling.

Theo Skeptomai
@Freddy Davis So you weren’t honest when you stated that you had presented evidence.

Freddy Davis
@Theo Skeptomai You are the one not being honest. You are asking for information that you will not clearly define. Answer the question: How do you define an evidentiary fact?

Theo Skeptomai
@Freddy Davis Again. An evidentiary fact is one that can substantiate the truth of a claim. An evidentiary fact goes to differentiate that which is real from that which is imaginary. And I have yet to encounter any evidentiary fact on this matter.

Is that not CLEAR?

Answer with only a simple ‘YES’ or ‘NO’ or I will not read your comment. I am tired of you dodging straight forward questions. So either a simple YES or NO, or I am terminating this discusion.

Freddy Davis
@Theo Skeptomai NO! Your answer is not clear. And here is, again, why it is not clear.

A worldview is a definition of what people consider to be real vs. what is considered imaginary (fantasy). However, EVERY worldview defines that in different ways. Are you demanding naturalistic proofs for my theistic beliefs (which I think is what you are doing – though it is hard to be certain since you won’t clarify)? You have never defined the KIND of evidence you will accept. SO, I keep asking. What do you consider to be evidentiary proof – specifically? It is not me dodging your questions, it is you not clearly stating what kind of answer you are willing to accept. Will you only accept answers that can be verified using experimental science? Or if you will accept other kinds, what kinds?

Theo Skeptomai
@Freddy Davis I wish you a wonderful weekend. Peace.

Freddy Davis
@Theo Skeptomai Okay, peace to you to. But it mystifies me why you are not willing to state what kind of evidence you are willing to accept. Until people agree on definitions, there can be no discussion.

Theo Skeptomai
@Freddy Davis I am willing to accept ANY evidence. STOP LYING!!!!!

Freddy Davis
@Theo Skeptomai No, you are not unless you have changed your mind. I am not lying, but you are unless you either forgot your restrictions or do not realize that you are limiting the kinds of evidence that can be put forth. And if you have changed your mind, then you haven’t let me know. In your VERY FIRST post you said several pieces of evidentiary fact were out of bounds:
1. Not a bible verse (no use of the historical record)
2. Not the empty tomb (no miraculous events – even if documented by eyewitnesses)
3. Not fulfilled prophesies (even if they actually happened)

So again I ask, “What are you willing to accept?”

(Note: At this point, Theo Skeptomai never responded again.)

IB
“Get them while they’re young”
That’s Child indoctrination, and all religions favorite tool to make these fragile minds become blind believers. So yes – you are indeed forcing your religion onto other people, and they are defenseless and innocent, it’s damn easy – so it’s “not impossible,” and it’s CHILD ABUSE, and there’s no other word for it.

About Evidence and Hallucinations
All you have as evidence are words. Literally. Be it scripture, be it alternative scripture, written testimonies, philosophical fallacies… it’s just words. So what is the best evidence you have? Written testimonies from near death experiences. What are they based on? … You guessed it right. – Hallucinations. …. (I had a heart attack while in hospital at the age of 22, and I remember the experience “being dead” very well. I’m also an epileptic). I’m not a clinical expert in any way, but on a personal level, I know a few things about how real this is and can be.

And a simple question is this; God knew they’d survive. Why would he EVER let them have a peek into the heavens, show himself, Jesus and all the glory to them? Why is it only when the brain is going high-wire on keeping the body alive, and are producing and pumping toxins like hell to keep the body stable and calm, that people experiences this? ……right.

Atheism
I can’t say there is no god, as I can’t prove a false negative. But I see no reason to believe in god until proven otherwise. If there is a god, this god does with a 100% certainty does_not_ represent any of the human made religions, as they are clearly flawed and a human made product. We believe in reason, facts and evidence, and honesty. It is just about having independent minds, being open minded, reflected and critical. In other words; NOT blind to extraordinary “truths!!!” told or presented.

Science
Is about learning and understanding what we do not know. And opposite to religion who tries to look for evidence and things that proves religion, science looks for everything that which disproves their scientific hypothesis. If they simply can’t disprove it, well then there’s a fair chance it’s true. The irony is that it is just too damn easy to prove something. Yet – religion struggles even with that.

Your level of ignorance is just baffling…

Freddy Davis
What are you even talking about? Child indoctrination? Nothing is even said in the video on that topic. (And I suppose you don’t try to indoctrinate other people with your beliefs – like you are not doing here?)

And where do you get off talking about near death experiences? I have not said anything at all about that. You are projecting your own personal thoughts about what you think I am talking about onto this conversation, and you are completely wrong. But beyond that, what evidence do you have for your beliefs? Whatever they are, all you have as evidence are words. If you have something more, I’m all ears.

Very interesting reflections on your thoughts about Atheism. You say you believe in reason, facts, and evidence, and honesty. Okay then let’s consider the basis for Atheism. First, based on the statements you have made, I am assuming that your Atheism is based on a naturalistic worldview – the belief that the natural universe operating by natural laws is all that exists. I never ask people to prove there is no God. I agree completely that you can’t prove a false negative. But naturalistic belief is based on a positive statement. What I insist is that you prove, using your definitions of reason, facts, evidence and honesty, that your naturalistic beliefs are true.

You don’t seem to know how to make a distinction between science and religion. Science is a methodology, not a religion. You are mixing the two. You are actually asserting that naturalistic philosophy is based on science. It is not. Naturalism is a set of beliefs (religious faith, if you will) – one which requires that all of reality be explainable using natural means (science). But you can’t prove Naturalism using science because it is a faith system. You may find this interesting, but Christians believe in the scientific method as much as you do. It is just that we also believe that there is a part of reality that exists outside of the natural universe.

Hopefully you are now beginning to see that perhaps I am not as ignorant as you thought, and that there are actually some things that you do not know. (Your insults are unbecoming, BTW, and do not contribute to making your point.)

(Note: At this point, IB never responded again.)

Atheism is a religious point of view. In my experience, Atheists who attempt to dispute this fact honestly don’t recognize the religious nature of their own beliefs. They truly think that their beliefs are based on science. To begin getting through to them, this is the first barrier that must be overcome. It is important to realize that their very understanding of the nature of reality is such that Christian theistic beliefs literally do not make sense to them. Before it is possible for them to be willing to even listen honestly to a gospel presentation, they must be brought face to face with the faith nature of their beliefs.

This is where an understanding of worldview concepts is so critical – and so practical. People simply have no way of processing thoughts that they consider to be fantasy. Having the ability to understand the different worldview possibilities, and to recognize their strengths and weaknesses, puts Christians in a position to force people to face the fallacies of their own beliefs. This does not mean that they will immediately accept the truth, but they will not even weigh the possibility it as long as they consider it to not be a credible option.

In our modern society, Christians MUST reimagine the way we do Christian discipleship. Making worldview study a part of that process is essential.

© 2021 Freddy Davis