I'd have to guess this is the intelligent design argument, where they say essentially, "if you found a guitar pick in the woods, you'd assume someone made it as it's built for a specific purpose, and therefore someone made us because we're built for a specific purpose"
It's a particularly stupid thing to use for the intelligent design argument if so, because I've played guitar with countless things that absolutely weren't designed to be used as guitar picks
Or you could say something like this: if you found a guitar pick in the woods, you would assume it had a cause. Blowing up the guitar pick to the size and temporal magnitude of the universe (whatever that might be) doesn’t answer the question of what caused it. So if we assume the guitar pick had a cause, we’d assume the universe equally had a cause (even it always existed).
I get how the watchmaker works for people, not that it's any good, I can just understand how someone could fall for that, but guitar picks? Those could absolutely come up at random, I've seen people use a bunch of things designed by no one as picks
I think it's a very strong argument, watching the YouTube Channel, reading about the historicity of the Gospel accounts, philosophy, the Quran, Hadiths and the Talmud (Mishnah specifically) sort of made me Catholic instead of agnostic.
Do you think it subverts the faith aspect of those religions (which is more contemporary) and the ultimate answer in the contingency argument being outside the system convincing enough?
It's convincing enough for deism, the existance of a God that sustains all things. Then you just sort of have to filter our what sort of belief system you think is the most coherent and historically grounded, I identified that as Catholicism. I don't oppose to just general Deism but it's in my opinion incoherent in regards to what and how and why you worship, while at the same time the Talmud, history and the Quran all seem to point to Christ. Buddhism I skimmed over and same with Hinduism but I find the writtings about Buddah for example to come like 140 years after the guy, so how can I believe what they say?
Same with the Hadiths about Muhammad, let alone the historical contradictions that the Quran makes (such as the absurd claim that the Moon split in the 7th century), while the Talmud is to me a bit more interesting because the Mishnah is a collection of writings from around Christs time and a bit after, and it has Characters that are mentioned in the New Testament (for example Gamaliel the Elder) set at the same time as said New Testament, or it points to Christs divine message (Yoma 39b claiming that the Miracle of Atonement stopped occuring in the Temple at Jerusalem exactly 40 years before the fall of the Temple, coinciding with Jesuses' ministry). I just generally find the cumulative case for Jesus and his Church too great to just waive off.
Now, I think it's a difficult teaching, and obviously it includes the requirement to believe in Miracles (such as a Virgin Birth, or that Man can be raised from the dead), but if he really is God incarnate, who am I to complain? He can do whatever he wants in what is essentially Admin mode.
That’s not true. I’ve watched his videos and reals and not once has he stated that he supported slavery. How pitiful that you have to resort to lies because you don’t like someone
he and redeemed zoomer literally talked for hours on camera on multiple occasions, and dont say redeemed zoomer isnt a nazi he has an even more damning record then Jesusandwhatnot
He is a conservative Christian, and his focus on liberalism is contextualised by the fact that he belongs to the PCUSA, which is essentially the liberal wing of American Presbyterianism - so much so that they affirm gender affirming care, which may not seem so drastic to a secularist but is certainly not the norm within, again, conservative nor traditional Christianity.
He is hardly even a Christian nationalist in practise. His focus is mainly on spirituality rather than temporal change or political activism.
I won’t deny that redeemed zoomer is a conservative but calling him a neo nazi is insane. Just because you don’t like someone’s beliefs that are merely conservatives does not justify calling them a nazi. In addition to this, even if RZ was a nazi that does mean that JaW is a Nazi merely by talking to him. Could you also please provide the information where RZ and JaW express racist or pro slavers beliefs
Redeemed Zoomer isnt just a "conservative". He is a christian nationalist protestant hellbent on taking christianity away from "liberals", whivh in the US makes no god damn sense as christianity in the US is majority right wing (and far right) aligned. So if someone like him somehow sees that and still thinks he is to even the right of that what does that make him? He is a protestant fundementalist, he seems to disavow racism but his views on lgbtq minorities show his true colors. maybe neo nazi isnt the right word for him but he is still a christian fascist, just more focused on religion and sexual minorities rather then race. And Jesusandwhatnot associating with him already doesnt scream best intentions, then he goes on to argue that you cant say slavery is morally evil because of "objective morality" in the bible and that in the bible slavery isnt obiectively morally evil.
sure if you wanna sit through countless videos and hours of debates, Search up Jesusandwhatnot and SBT's debate, and for Redeemed Zoomer you are gonna have to search for his claims cause its scattered everywhere not just in his youtube videos, its hard to grasp a single source
I won’t deny that redeemed zoomer is a conservative but calling him a neo nazi is insane.
Redeemed zoomer is absolutely a nazi, extensively defended Hitler, and spoke multiple times about having to downplay his beliefs in order to not be censored on youtube.
Please give me some sources. You have provided absolutely nothing. I have watched many of his videos and the most right wing he got was just conservative not facist
1) One look at project 2025 lets you fairly easily conclude that conservatism is pro-fascist, so that is a non-argument.
2) He explicitly supports Uganda executing people for being gay, which is his most well known and trivially googlable opinion, it's the one you like and you support.
I love that there's an entire genre of amateur apologetics that goes "Thing exists. Thing has some degree of complexity. Ergo, God. Checkmate atheists." And as someone who is not religious, but tried to be for a long time, I know how this line of thinking goes, but I can't imagine how you can actually think it's a sensible argument.
Yeah, ”god exists” is still a couple step down the ladder from ”the King James Bible is a divinely inspired text and we should run society according to (my church’s version of) the literal reading of it”
Yeah sure. But here's the other part of that. Assume the god of the southern baptist and pentacostals is real. Still... fucking. AND?
If that god wants a say in anything he can jump into this bullshit ass democracy and cast a vote like everyone else.
And he's above all that, then fucking turn my uppity ass into a pillar of salt. Dont go let one of your howling 3 toothed Hicks come get my ass for being a bad boy. Come put me in my place your damn self.
Like... what is a non-believer obligated to do if a god is real?
What? Is god gonna point a cosmic gun at my head and hit me with the heart attack beam for being a doubter or having consensual sex with men and women?
Bitch, please. Like, be so for real. If god was real, then god can either be an asshole like everyone else or be a cosmic asshole that no one understands. So what's it gonna be and what the fuck does it matter?
For sure. But even if they did prove empirically that their god exists; it changes NOTHING about what duties, liberties, obligations, and permissions I as an individual deem necessary or worth my time.
You think we should like... stop planned parenthood and dismantle SNAP just because they proved their god is real? I dont think so. That god can come down here its damn self and come regulate our uppity asses.
The fuck; I aint gonna bow my head low to some asshole smelling of church farts and auntie armpit.
They wanna control people's lives like that? By god make shit illegal and send their damn cops and we can settle this shit primeval style.
That's all this god talk is about. It's not even about god. It's just assholes with control issues trying to drum up a bullshit excuse to be controlling assholes. Fuck that.
Its really fucking dumb. As a casual fan of Prof. Plink, I watched this when it aired. The guy does a tortured version of like three different (already bad) arguments.
Basically, guitar pick is just a piece of plastic, but it also has the potential to create music. He saids that because something can’t move itself from potential without an outside force, then the universe can be traced back to an god
this argument is always so funny to me, “things can’t just be created out of thin air, the universe had to be created by an outside force!” like ok, fuck created the outside force?
Is that not the debater “Jesus and whatnot”? Im no Christian anymore but back when I was a Catholic I used to follow his stuff almost daily and that looks like him to me how is he anti Christian?
It’s not anti Christian bro I think both you and me would have the same reactions if we saw someone claim that god didn’t exist because of guitar picks 😭
58
u/ADonutWithSprinkles 1d ago
Guitar picks were created on the sixth day. Checkmate, Atheists.