Burden of Proof | John - Topeka, KS | Atheist Experience 21.18

all right let's see we can get to some more real quick before we get done today John in Topeka Kansas thanks for waiting glow hey guys doing great pretty good to hear from you what do you got today I wanted to talk about the burden of proof because I hear a TSO bring us up quite a bit mm-hmm so you guys would I'm sure you'd affirm that you have no burden of proof you have nothing demonstrate right it depends on on what the actual proposition is if you if you're soft a piece we Casey is non-theist in the sense that you are not accepting the claim that there's a God there's no burden of proof - not accepting the burden of proof is on the claim that there is a God usually the idea of a burden of proof is associated with a particular claim right and whoever is making that claim you know if they want to convince the other person they have a burden of proof if I was to say there is no God that would be an assertion which would carry a burden of proof right because Matt would he makes my point yeah the problem is that saying that you don't believe is denying the Christian position that teaches that you do believe it is rejecting it I rejected the Christian position the Muslim position on all of their supernatural claims I reject it because it hasn't been today if you reject an April rejecting something rejecting something is not the same as saying X is false well well it's not saying that X is true because I say that you do believe in God and you say no I haven't happens agrees I'd be saying my claim is wrong so you'd be saying no no no my absence of a belief does not say anything about whether or not your claim is in fact correct or incorrect it's about me not being convinced that it is correct but but I was saying um the Christian position is that you every single person believes in God but they suppress the truth okay that's not that you backtrack that oh my god that is not the Christian position there's no such thing as the Christian position there are versions of Christianity okay that okay can I finish my sentence I apologize good there are versions of Christianity that would make a name that everyone believes or in fact as psy and others have said everyone knows there is a God now there's no way for me to prove to you that that is false but I reject it too and I don't actually know that there's a God and I don't believe there's a god but until you can find a way to actually get into my mind as long as we're talking about what I believe or what I know you either have to take it at face value or flat-out call me a liar no I'm there well my position is about you of our self defeat but in regards to what you said about that's not the official Christian position ok I'm grant you that not every Christian believes that but you're still denying my position that teaches that you do believe in God so your your claim is that I believe in God yes ok I I do not believe that that claim is true and I am in fact convinced that that claim is false because I don't believe in God now I can't prove I believe I can't prove that you who is in a better position to talk about the beliefs of a particular person that person or some random color on a telephone well I'm not saying that I'm some kind of mind reader but the Christian position God reveals certain things and he has revealed that every person believes in him serve it Oh tear guards to prove how do you prove that God has revealed that everybody believes in him um because that's what he doesn't the Bible what we write first of all how do you know that that's what God is saying in the BA and why do we give a about the Bible well unless your worldview is biblical your world views you coherent well no it's not but thank you for making an assertion how many I said why is it fit when I asked you to back off your demonstration all you do is make another assertion well you said well your first your first claim is just an attack of my position of the Bible I understood so you are convinced that every person believes that there's a god and you are convinced of this because you are convinced that God has revealed this in the Bible and my question was how do you know that God has revealed anything okay okay so all right that's nice tricky question and I would say that unless you start with the if that gotta fill themself you cannot rationally believe in anything else yeah well first of all you're not answering the question you're going down this presupposition was garbling mindset it begs but that makes an assertion in the entire history of the presuppositionalist movement they've made two assertions that their worldview can explain things and no other world you can and they have not even made the remotest attempt to demonstrate either of those they are nothing but bald-ass assertions and so that which can be asserted without evidence can be rejected without evidence what's the evidence of that what's the evidence of that you're not going to waste your time about the evidence so the position is based fundamentally on where the burden of proof rests and what the null hypothesis is and so the null hypothesis is that we are reasonably we can reasonably claim that there's no connection between x and y until such time as it's been demonstrated that there is a connection between x and y right the excitin regards to yourself that um I didn't understand what that was related to well that's a big problem if you don't understand the null hypothesis how are you going to establish a burden of proof if you don't understand something like the null hypothesis all it says is that all it says is you that there is no connection between x and y until such time as it's been demonstrated that there is a connection between x and y what does that have to do with Maya with my claim that you believe in God and that year.i that you believe in God and therefore have a burden proof yeah so there's no connection between God and existence until such time as there's evidence that God exists there's no such time between God has regard and a revelation until somebody demonstrates that connections that's why the burden of proof rests on their because because the the if we don't have that then you get to claim that you're convinced that God revealed the Bible and I get to claim that God revealed the thing that I wrote down last night which says you're wrong okay so in that situation how do we figure out who's right um do you affirm that the Bible is true and teaching that you believe in God or do you not from that if the Bible says I believe in God the Bible is in fact wrong okay so then when you state that is wrong that is seating something positively yes demands evidence yes and and so now we have to ask the question are you asking all those people that have a pertinent report well I have a burden of proof for that claim which I already acknowledge the minute ago when I said if I were to say there is no God I would be adopting a burden of proof if your claim is the Bible says I believe in God I'm going to say the Bible is in fact false because I don't believe in God okay so then what is the evidence for the claim that the evidence for the claim is that I don't believe in God the fact that I can't show that to you and convince you doesn't change whether or not I am warranted in rejecting that well I can speak that I don't believe I exist what would that be no because that's what that is directly in conflict with evidence so we're talking about two different types of things one is it whether or not I am actually convinced of something and number two is whether or not that something is true those are two different things you have no way of evaluating whether or not I do actually believe in a God well the evidence that you do believe in a God or in the Christian government I'm not arguing for generic v ism is that you you affirm things that only makes sense if the Christian world is true no that's false well okay so for instance you affirm objective morality or morality that is independent of human beliefs I'm sure I'm happy that's I hold the position on morality that morality is tied to the facts about reality my view on morality is not in any way tied to the truth of Christianity well that's one of the statement that you what is your eat you around he's unpacked that a number of times on a number of different shows we can do that here but but let's pretend he's done that we can we can find the episode you can go watch it okay so let's go to logic then because no more le taco tell you what you have here's the thing let's change the subject like idea win that argument let's let's change it so now you're going to now you're going to go down a road now you're going to go down a road of something like tag which doesn't get you to Christianity anyway well that's another assertion I've even laid all right answer me this are you getting ready to present the transcendental argument for the existence of God in some form one of us has incredible predictive powers that's right what is the reason read your mind let's for the sake of just this moment to save space skip right to the conclusion of the argument you're going to present okay therefore what therefore the Christian God exists oh okay well then I'm going to have to let you go through that because no version of tag can get you to that you because it's like when people try to present mathematical arguments for God when there's no mathematical constant or variable for God so go ahead give me give me your best tag well the argument for the existence of God in relation to logic is that without God there would be you know there would be no project yeah so that's a false assertion that I reject well then you're going to get to this objection right Christianity's position if any of your conclusions wrong I don't care if something is sufficient and that's how I was going to ready already took that objection only one that's really used together yeah you said that's the thing something has to be both necessary and sufficient to demonstrate causality and if all you do is assert that it's necessary you've accomplished nothing so what you're doing is running running around saying that my worldview is incoherent because it can account for logic well you can't account for logic either with anything more than an assertion well well but accounting for logic in the Christian position is that the Bible feels that God is author all truth and God cannot contradict him so I don't give a rat's ass about that because that's not a demonstration of fact that is the assertion you need to actually back the assertion up also your my my left tennis shoe my left tennis shoe is a necessary and sufficient justification well is your low logical reasoning well is your left tennis shoe universal and does it ever change yes my wife Jenna to my left tennis shoe is University now you're disarming nonsense because a tennis shoe versus something that's exactly you're doing you're affirming nonsense as well because what you're affirming that that you have an account for this that you can't account for okay so now you're going to that so you're essentially saying I am I am explaining something by something that we don't understand no well I'm saying you're attempting to explain something you are in fact not explaining anything because as we pointed out the top of the show God has no explanatory power why's that because we explain things we explain the unknown in terms of the known you don't get to solve a mystery five you don't get it you don't get to solve a mystery by claiming but by appealing to a bigger mystery I'm not appealing to mystery and my position got to the real themself so I'm okay I'm how do you demonstrate that how do you demonstrate that God has revealed himself because if you deny that your world's these nonsense okay thanks for your circular bye so I will hardly recommend that everybody look up circular arguments because what's happening here is I'm convinced that God has revealed himself and this surgeon sufficient just necessary well perhaps necessary but at least a sufficient justification for why reason is reasonable therefore if you don't believe in God you can't have a justification for reason and then we can't have a conversation okay but this foundational belief that God has revealed himself how do you demonstrate that and what was the answer because if it didn't happen we wouldn't be able to reason well one of us clearly isn't able to reason so maybe you should go back to the drawing board I'd have this over and over again with sides in Bergen Kate who doesn't understand this stuff either he's just parroting Greg Bahnson and others this idea that I get to take the biggest issues in philosophy that the brightest minds basically acknowledge we cannot based on our current understanding come up with an explanation for why reason is reasonable we cannot demonstrate that hard solid sysm is in fact false and instead we move on from those as foundational assumptions that reason is reasonable and that we exist in a world and we liberalize on those premises and tell such as we're shown to be wrong this is where the null hypothesis comes back in I am NOT living in the matrix until such time as somebody demonstrates actual evidence that I am living in the matrix simply asserting that I must be living in the matrix because you believe that the people from outside the matrix have revealed himself to you and that my worldview makes no sense unless I also accept that you're the one talking nonsense here not us I don't believe that a God exists I can't prove this to you and it's incredibly convenient and I get this smug crap from Christians all the time I did a debate in Canada man Christa Carlo against two administers who asserted that God will reveal himself to anyone and everyone provided you have the right frame of mind and your heart is in the right place and and on someone who sincerely sought God I can't prove that to you I'm someone who God didn't reveal himself to I can't prove that to you but if you come back as that minister did during the debate and suggest that I just didn't try hard enough well screw you because when Joseph the Ragman down the street has God find his car keys and that's enough for him to justify his Christianity and I spent years in prayer trying to fulfill my obligation our first Peter 3:15 and got no response that if there is a God that God's a douche that God is not doing what you said he won't reveal oh not you have some secret sin on your heart all that does is tell people about you let them tell them anything about me because you can't demonstrate that I actually believe in God you can't demonstrate that I didn't try you can't demonstrate that I have some secrets in these are all protective measurements measures to make you feel comfortable about what you believe because you believe well of course God will reveal himself to anybody because if it turns out God won't or doesn't because he either doesn't exist or he's very much selective then maybe your personal revelation is all in your mind and that's absolutely terrifying so instead you project these weaknesses on who don't believe what you believe my answer remains the same I am unconvinced that a God exists because the claims have not met their burden of proof will you come back at me and tell me that it's a secret sin on my heart or that I just can't make sense or that I actually do know that there's a God but I am deceiving myself for deceiving others make yourself look like the douchey God that you're believing in

Channel: The Atheist Experience

Views: 474,423

Rating: 4.8717241 out of 5

Keywords: atheist experience, the atheist experience, theatheistexperience, atheist, atheism, atheist vs christian, atheist debate, religion debate, atheism debate, Matt Dillahunty (Broadcast Artist), belief, faith, reason, rational, proof, evidence, logic, fallacy, religion, religious, science, secular, Skepticism, skeptic, questioning god, doubt, is god real, agnostic, agnosticism, evidence for god, Christianity, Islam, morality, evidence for jesus, Jesus, Jesus Christ, debate, Bible, Bible contradictions

Id: yICsS8CX4wQ

Length: 15min 53sec (953 seconds)

Published: Sat Jun 17 2017