# Questions for Atheists...Answered!

An episode of [Viced Rhino: The Podcast](https://invisiblenetwork.ai/podcast/1536972599), 26 Jun 2026, 21 min.

Audio: https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/72681708/audiofix_pod_uncensored_questions_for_atheists.mp3

Some TikTokkers asked some more questions for atheists. Hey, I'm an atheist! I Can answer those! Cards: I Took a Religious Journey…: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vXHsCLAYIY Original Videos: Real Lily Jay: https://tinyurl.com/2xkhnspq Its David Cipriano: https://tinyurl.com/2yyqwrlv The Dr Derek: https://tinyurl.com/26jpx3j3 DaTrumanShow: https://tinyurl.com/29luo8fw Jackson Lahmeyer: https://tinyurl.com/2236eqf9 Lily Fit Faith: https://tinyurl.com/2d3vqhls Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/viced-rhino-the-podcast--4623273/support. All my various links can be found here: http://links.vicedrhino.com This content is CAN credentialed, which means you can report instances of harassment, abuse, or other harm on their hotline at (617) 249-4255, or on their website at creatoraccountabilitynetwork.org

## Transcript

[0:00] Speaker 1: Hello, and welcome to my podcast. This is an audio
[0:04] Speaker 1: version of my videos available to make listening to my
[0:06] Speaker 1: stuff in the background easier than YouTube makes it. But
[0:10] Speaker 1: since my videos are primarily made for YouTube, there may
[0:13] Speaker 1: be occasional references to visual materials. If you'd like this
[0:17] Speaker 1: podcast ad free, you can join us on Patreon Apppatreon
[0:20] Speaker 1: dot com, slash Vice Rhino. Please enjoy.
[0:24] Speaker 2: Hello and welcome to my channel Vice Rhino. Here today,
[0:28] Speaker 2: I'm doing another one of those videos where I respond
[0:30] Speaker 2: to a bunch of questions for atheists posed by several TikTokers.
[0:34] Speaker 2: I know it's low hanging fruit, but it's such good fun,
[0:37] Speaker 2: so let's go.
[0:44] Speaker 3: I've got two questions for you if you're an atheist.
[0:49] Speaker 3: My first question is if there are no arguments for atheism,
[0:55] Speaker 3: no good arguments. I mean, they're all really kind of
[0:58] Speaker 3: parasitical on Christianity and theistic arguments.
[1:03] Speaker 2: I mean, I guess atheism is me saying I don't
[1:07] Speaker 2: believe you when you say that there's a God. The
[1:10] Speaker 2: atheist arguments come up when you ask why I don't
[1:12] Speaker 2: believe in your God. If you just stop trying and
[1:14] Speaker 2: convince people that you're right, then we won't need to
[1:17] Speaker 2: explain why we don't think you are anymore. So, while
[1:19] Speaker 2: I feel that your use of the word parasitical was
[1:22] Speaker 2: meant as a bit of a jab, it is true
[1:24] Speaker 2: that if nobody was arguing for the existence of God,
[1:27] Speaker 2: nobody would be responding to those arguments with explanations as
[1:30] Speaker 2: to why they are unconvincing.
[1:33] Speaker 4: And especially if you take the route that atheism, which
[1:36] Speaker 4: I disagree with, is there's a lack of belief, so
[1:38] Speaker 4: it's just kind of like a neutral position. I think
[1:40] Speaker 4: that's like gnocissism, but let's go with it.
[1:43] Speaker 2: Hey, fun fact, you don't get to define how other
[1:46] Speaker 2: people use their labels. I could say that I don't
[1:49] Speaker 2: think you can be a Christian while wearing a hat
[1:51] Speaker 2: like that, and my saying that does nothing to change
[1:54] Speaker 2: the fact that you still consider yourself a Christian despite
[1:56] Speaker 2: the hat.
[1:58] Speaker 4: If you think that there are no good arguments for atheism,
[2:02] Speaker 4: then why are you an atheists?
[2:03] Speaker 2: I'm an atheist because I found Christianity to be severely lacking,
[2:07] Speaker 2: and I haven't seen any good reason to believe in
[2:09] Speaker 2: any other gods, so I didn't convert to any of
[2:12] Speaker 2: those other religions when I left Christianity, you don't have.
[2:15] Speaker 4: Any arguments for atheism, then it would seem unreasonable to
[2:19] Speaker 4: be an atheist.
[2:20] Speaker 2: There are no good arguments for a lack of belief
[2:22] Speaker 2: in gay unicorn Gary, the all powerful creator of everything,
[2:25] Speaker 2: who's given everyone a desire to participate in a gay orgy,
[2:27] Speaker 2: which some people deny in their unrighteousness. So why are
[2:31] Speaker 2: you a Gary denier? Don't you find that unreasonable?
[2:34] Speaker 4: My second question is why would you be agnostic considering
[2:40] Speaker 4: that that would also be unreasonable If you think about
[2:43] Speaker 4: Pascal's wager, the idea that, well, you have to wager,
[2:47] Speaker 4: you can't just not wager, and if you choose not
[2:51] Speaker 4: to wager, that's a wager in and of itself. To
[2:53] Speaker 4: be neutral, to make no choice whatsoever is to make
[2:56] Speaker 4: a choice for eternity.
[2:58] Speaker 2: Well, he did a shit job of planning it, so
[3:00] Speaker 2: I'm gonna take a crack at it here. Pascal's wager,
[3:02] Speaker 2: for those who are unfamiliar, is essentially the idea that
[3:05] Speaker 2: when choosing between Christianity and atheism, you should choose Christianity
[3:09] Speaker 2: because if Christianity is true, the reward is great and
[3:12] Speaker 2: the downside is horrific. Well, if atheism is true, the
[3:15] Speaker 2: reward is negligible, and the downside is also negligible. There
[3:19] Speaker 2: are a few problems with it. First, and foremost, you
[3:22] Speaker 2: cannot choose your beliefs. If you think otherwise, then I
[3:25] Speaker 2: suggest you try to make yourself believe in gay unicorn.
[3:28] Speaker 2: Gary Pascal's solution for that was essentially to fake it
[3:31] Speaker 2: till you make it, But I feel like an omniscient
[3:33] Speaker 2: God would know if I was just faking, so it
[3:35] Speaker 2: wouldn't actually work. Second, Christianity has requirements for your life
[3:39] Speaker 2: which can be incredibly burdensome, so to live in accordance
[3:43] Speaker 2: with those requirements if atheism is true, could actually be
[3:46] Speaker 2: a rather large downside, especially if you are someone who
[3:49] Speaker 2: has been victimized by the church or are LGBTQ. Many
[3:52] Speaker 2: Christian denominations would say you can't go to heaven if
[3:55] Speaker 2: you're LGBTQ, So you have to suppress an important part
[3:58] Speaker 2: of who you are as a person for your entire
[4:01] Speaker 2: life in order to get the good Christian outcome. But
[4:04] Speaker 2: if atheism is true, you have now made your one
[4:06] Speaker 2: and only life a life of pain and misery for nothing. Third,
[4:11] Speaker 2: the wager assumes that the choice is a binary it's
[4:13] Speaker 2: either Christianity or atheism. But what if Islam is true,
[4:17] Speaker 2: for example, then you live your life as a Christian
[4:19] Speaker 2: only to wind up in Muslim hell for eternity. If
[4:22] Speaker 2: either of them are true, then at least the atheists
[4:24] Speaker 2: got to enjoy their one life. And honestly, there are
[4:27] Speaker 2: a number of religions, such as Hinduism and Buddhism, whose
[4:30] Speaker 2: afterlives reward you for being a good person in this life,
[4:33] Speaker 2: not for being a member of their religion. These types
[4:35] Speaker 2: of religions often come with an analog to hell that is,
[4:37] Speaker 2: a temporary punishment proportionate to whatever bad things you did
[4:40] Speaker 2: in your life, which honestly seems like a way better
[4:43] Speaker 2: system than the Christian one. If those ones are true,
[4:45] Speaker 2: then as an atheist, I get to live my life
[4:47] Speaker 2: in a way that I find fulfilling without worrying about
[4:50] Speaker 2: whether or not my cotton polyester blended T shirt is sinful,
[4:53] Speaker 2: And as long as I was good to my fellow
[4:54] Speaker 2: human beings, I don't wind up suffering for an eternity
[4:57] Speaker 2: simply because I wasn't a member of the correct religion.
[5:00] Speaker 2: And that's without even getting into these sometimes mutually exclusive
[5:03] Speaker 2: versions of Christianity. There are denominations that believe that every
[5:07] Speaker 2: member of every other denomination are doomed to hell. So
[5:11] Speaker 2: how do I choose a denomination? Then if I choose
[5:14] Speaker 2: the wrong one, I might still wind up in hell,
[5:16] Speaker 2: even if Christianity is true and God doesn't seem to
[5:19] Speaker 2: be open to clarification. So the way I see it,
[5:21] Speaker 2: I may as well live how I want and not
[5:23] Speaker 2: worry about the afterlife.
[5:25] Speaker 4: So this would show that agnosticism itself is unreasonable, right
[5:31] Speaker 4: I forgot?
[5:32] Speaker 2: Yeah, No, Pascal's wager does not render atheism or agnosticism
[5:37] Speaker 2: unreasonable unless you ignore the existence of non Christian religions
[5:40] Speaker 2: and mutually exclusive Christian denominations, as well as all the
[5:43] Speaker 2: other stuff I said earlier. Hey atheists, I have a question.
[5:47] Speaker 5: So you believe the universe is a coincidence and without
[5:50] Speaker 5: a creator.
[5:52] Speaker 2: Not a fan of the word coincidence, but yes, our
[5:54] Speaker 2: knowledge of the beginning of the universe does not indicate
[5:56] Speaker 2: a creator at this time.
[5:58] Speaker 6: But can this simple food be without a chef?
[6:04] Speaker 2: T does that?
[6:04] Speaker 6: What?
[6:05] Speaker 2: Yes, it can be without a chef because chef is
[6:07] Speaker 2: a term that is applied to the person at the
[6:09] Speaker 2: restaurant who is in charge of the menu, coming up
[6:11] Speaker 2: with the various recipes that they will serve along with
[6:13] Speaker 2: several mangerial duties. Those appear to be French fries, which
[6:17] Speaker 2: I can prepare at home, despite being only a moderately
[6:19] Speaker 2: decent cook. But I suppose that the point you're getting
[6:22] Speaker 2: at is that someone had to prepare them, whatever title
[6:25] Speaker 2: that someone may hold. But if we expand the scope
[6:27] Speaker 2: of this conversation, talk about food in general rather than
[6:30] Speaker 2: that specific food item, there is plenty that you can
[6:33] Speaker 2: forage in nature that can be eaten raw and without
[6:35] Speaker 2: any sort of prep So no, you do not need
[6:38] Speaker 2: a chef or a cook to prepare food if you
[6:40] Speaker 2: know where to look.
[6:42] Speaker 3: Your question for the atheist, oh, what event led you
[6:49] Speaker 3: to believing that there is noga?
[6:52] Speaker 2: In my case, it was more of a process than
[6:54] Speaker 2: a single event. It started with me noticing an error
[6:57] Speaker 2: in the Bible. In Matthew two too, when the magi
[6:59] Speaker 2: are looking for Jesus, they say that they were in
[7:01] Speaker 2: the east. They saw his star in the east and
[7:03] Speaker 2: followed it, leading them west. This is extremely minor as
[7:07] Speaker 2: far as Bible airs go. There are plenty of interpretations
[7:09] Speaker 2: that are quite reasonable and handle it quite nicely. It
[7:12] Speaker 2: could be that when it says they saw the star
[7:13] Speaker 2: in the east, that is referring to where they were,
[7:16] Speaker 2: not where the star was. I was over there and
[7:18] Speaker 2: I saw a star over there, and it led me
[7:20] Speaker 2: over here. It could be that they weren't following it
[7:22] Speaker 2: in a literal sense. They could have been astrologers. They
[7:25] Speaker 2: read the stars, and their reading sent them west. Though
[7:28] Speaker 2: admittedly this one does run into a problem when in
[7:30] Speaker 2: verse nine it says that the star went before them
[7:32] Speaker 2: and stopped over the place where Jesus was, making this
[7:35] Speaker 2: look like it is a literal follow that light in
[7:37] Speaker 2: the sky type of thing. Another possibility comes in the
[7:39] Speaker 2: form of an alternate translation. The words that were translated
[7:42] Speaker 2: as in the east could also mean when it rose, So,
[7:46] Speaker 2: since this is a magical traveling star, God could have
[7:48] Speaker 2: made it rise in the west, thus leading them westward.
[7:51] Speaker 2: So yeah, not really a big deal, but it shook
[7:54] Speaker 2: my conviction of the inerranci of scripture, leaving me open
[7:56] Speaker 2: to noticing other potential problems. And once those doors were open,
[8:00] Speaker 2: they couldn't be shut. If you're curious about the full
[8:03] Speaker 2: story of how I became an atheist, I'll leave a
[8:04] Speaker 2: link to that video.
[8:06] Speaker 7: If you're an atheist, then I have a question for you.
[8:09] Speaker 7: If Christianity were proven to be true, would you become
[8:13] Speaker 7: a Christian?
[8:14] Speaker 2: Maybe that's a hard one to answer. The God of
[8:17] Speaker 2: the Bible is an immoral monster who does not deserve worship.
[8:20] Speaker 2: So I would like to say that I'd stick to
[8:22] Speaker 2: my guns and refuse to worship him. But Hell is
[8:24] Speaker 2: scary and I don't want to go there, so I
[8:26] Speaker 2: might pretend to worship him in the hope that eventually
[8:28] Speaker 2: I'd be able to reach a point of sincerity that
[8:30] Speaker 2: would allow me into Heaven. But honestly, having to spend
[8:33] Speaker 2: an eternity worshiping the kind of abuse of monster who
[8:36] Speaker 2: would make you prostrate yourself for fear of eternal torture
[8:39] Speaker 2: sounds kind of like hell anyway, so maybe it wouldn't
[8:41] Speaker 2: be worth it. Ultimately, I don't actually know.
[8:44] Speaker 7: What i'd do.
[8:45] Speaker 6: Now.
[8:45] Speaker 7: If your answer is yes, then what evidence would you
[8:48] Speaker 7: like to see that would convince you?
[8:50] Speaker 2: Well, how about we start with the evidence that the
[8:52] Speaker 2: Bible says should be there. Christians should be able to
[8:55] Speaker 2: heal people, cast out demons, speak in new languages, be
[8:58] Speaker 2: immune to poison, and be able to pick up, sir.
[9:00] Speaker 2: Notice that in this verse, it does not require the
[9:03] Speaker 2: sick person to be a believer in order to be healed.
[9:05] Speaker 2: If this verse is correct, then any Christian should be
[9:08] Speaker 2: able to heal any sick person with the laying on
[9:11] Speaker 2: of hands. And yet even in the most Christian areas,
[9:15] Speaker 2: of the most Christian nations of the world, hospitals still exist.
[9:19] Speaker 2: The only people who seem to be able to do
[9:20] Speaker 2: any of those signs wind up being exposed as frauds
[9:24] Speaker 2: a La Peter popoff. Also, the pickup serpents bit is
[9:27] Speaker 2: kind of weird, like, that's a thing that I can
[9:29] Speaker 2: do now. I guess the presumption is that they'll be
[9:32] Speaker 2: immune to their venom, but that's not what it says.
[9:34] Speaker 2: So I guess my handling of a garter snake that
[9:36] Speaker 2: I found in my yard the other day makes me
[9:38] Speaker 2: a true Christian. But yeah, Christians can still be poisoned.
[9:42] Speaker 2: They can still die from snake bites. There isn't any
[9:44] Speaker 2: indication that the exorcisms they perform are real. They don't
[9:47] Speaker 2: miraculously know new languages, and hospitals still exist. So at best,
[9:52] Speaker 2: here we are one for five on signs that accompany
[9:54] Speaker 2: those who believe, and the one that you get is
[9:57] Speaker 2: one that I, a non believer, can also do. The
[10:00] Speaker 2: signs that the Bible says we'll accompany those who believe
[10:02] Speaker 2: never actually materialize. There are two options here. The first
[10:06] Speaker 2: is that nobody today is actually a true Christian. Y'all
[10:09] Speaker 2: are just a bunch of fakes. And second is that
[10:12] Speaker 2: the Bible is wrong. And if the Bible is wrong,
[10:14] Speaker 2: I see no reason to believe that it is the
[10:16] Speaker 2: word of God.
[10:17] Speaker 7: But if your answer is no, then that exposes something
[10:21] Speaker 7: because if you still wouldn't become a Christian even if
[10:24] Speaker 7: it were proven true, then you don't actually care about
[10:27] Speaker 7: truth or evidence.
[10:29] Speaker 2: That's not actually how this works. Is Satan a Christian
[10:33] Speaker 2: in your view? Because Satan definitely believes in God and Jesus,
[10:37] Speaker 2: but he doesn't worship them. It is possible to believe
[10:40] Speaker 2: that a thing exists without also worshiping that thing. In fact,
[10:44] Speaker 2: that is my relationship with pretty much everything that I
[10:47] Speaker 2: believe exists. It is a thing that exists, and I
[10:50] Speaker 2: do not worship it.
[10:51] Speaker 7: You see, often the reason why people reject Christianity is
[10:55] Speaker 7: not because of intellectual reasons, but emotional reasons.
[10:59] Speaker 2: Yeah, so I've been told by Christian apologists. But as
[11:03] Speaker 2: someone who actually experienced the loss of Christianity for myself,
[11:07] Speaker 2: I can tell you that I was holding on to
[11:09] Speaker 2: it for emotional reasons. It was years between my first
[11:13] Speaker 2: doubts and my actual admission to myself that I had
[11:15] Speaker 2: become an atheist, and I spent much of that time
[11:18] Speaker 2: tearfully praying that God would reveal himself to me. When
[11:21] Speaker 2: I left the church, I lost my entire social group,
[11:24] Speaker 2: and I had it relatively easy. I know plenty of
[11:26] Speaker 2: people who ended up divorced or losing family over their deconversion.
[11:30] Speaker 2: If you only ever talk to apologists, you'll hear that
[11:32] Speaker 2: most atheists are only atheists because of their emotions. They
[11:35] Speaker 2: just want to sin, they want to be their own God,
[11:38] Speaker 2: et cetera. But the story I have heard from atheists
[11:40] Speaker 2: who are former Christians is almost always the exact opposite
[11:45] Speaker 2: of that. They actually really wanted to stay Christian, but
[11:48] Speaker 2: because of that aforementioned thing about how we don't choose
[11:51] Speaker 2: our beliefs, they wound up as unwilling atheists. Why do
[11:54] Speaker 2: you think it is that apologists seem incapable of listening
[11:57] Speaker 2: to the atheists about why they are athis. I propose
[12:01] Speaker 2: that it's because if the atheists are actually being truthful,
[12:04] Speaker 2: then it proves Romans one eighteen through twenty wrong and
[12:07] Speaker 2: the Bible can't possibly be wrong, can it. So every
[12:10] Speaker 2: single atheist who claims to have wanted to remain a
[12:13] Speaker 2: Christian must just be lying. Seems like a rather emotional
[12:16] Speaker 2: reason to believe that.
[12:18] Speaker 7: Huh, they don't want Christian and it need to be true.
[12:22] Speaker 2: Not anymore I don't, but twenty five year old me
[12:24] Speaker 2: was desperate for it to be true.
[12:27] Speaker 7: And they refuse to submit to God because they choose
[12:30] Speaker 7: to be their own God instead.
[12:32] Speaker 2: There it is, we just want to be our own God.
[12:35] Speaker 2: Never mind that my journey into atheism had me doing
[12:37] Speaker 2: everything I could to submit to God in a desperate
[12:40] Speaker 2: attempt to rekindle my faith. I really just wanted to
[12:42] Speaker 2: be my own God, So I deny the true God
[12:45] Speaker 2: in my unrighteousness. As so often happens when dealing with apologists,
[12:49] Speaker 2: you are assuming that you know more about what's going
[12:51] Speaker 2: on in my inner life than I do.
[12:54] Speaker 5: The Bible actually never tries to prove God's existence incorrect.
[12:59] Speaker 2: We literally just read the bit at the end of
[13:01] Speaker 2: Mark that says that Christians will be able to do
[13:03] Speaker 2: a bunch of stuff as signs signs of what the
[13:06] Speaker 2: fact that they follow the one true God. It also
[13:08] Speaker 2: promises repeatedly that if you seek God, you will find Him.
[13:11] Speaker 2: Not to mention all the Old Testament stories of God
[13:13] Speaker 2: proving himself against the other gods of the time, The
[13:16] Speaker 2: Bible makes many attempts to prove it's God to you,
[13:18] Speaker 2: but y'all have to pretend it doesn't because, as it
[13:20] Speaker 2: turns out, the things that it says prove God don't
[13:23] Speaker 2: actually work.
[13:25] Speaker 5: In fact, the Bible actually says only a fool believes
[13:29] Speaker 5: there is no God.
[13:31] Speaker 2: Oh, that's how it is. The Bible doesn't try to
[13:33] Speaker 2: prove God. It just says that you're an idiot if
[13:35] Speaker 2: you don't believe in him. I'm not sure how that's
[13:38] Speaker 2: supposed to be a point in your favor, but eh.
[13:41] Speaker 5: That you can look out into creation and you can
[13:44] Speaker 5: easily see there is a God.
[13:47] Speaker 2: It doesn't try to prove God. It just says that
[13:50] Speaker 2: such and such a thing is proof of God. Do
[13:52] Speaker 2: you not see it?
[13:54] Speaker 5: The Bible doesn't try to prove the existence of God
[13:58] Speaker 5: because there's a very tough filhophical question that many atheists
[14:03] Speaker 5: have a hard time answering, and the tough philosophical question
[14:07] Speaker 5: is this, why is there something rather than nothing?
[14:13] Speaker 2: I don't know, and neither do you. You just pretend
[14:16] Speaker 2: to know because your book that says that anyone who
[14:18] Speaker 2: disagrees with you as an idiot says that God done
[14:21] Speaker 2: did it.
[14:22] Speaker 5: The reason there is something rather than nothing means there
[14:27] Speaker 5: must be a God.
[14:29] Speaker 2: Why and would whatever logic you use to get there
[14:32] Speaker 2: not hold regarding God as well? God exists instead of nothing,
[14:36] Speaker 2: So there is something rather than nothing, so there must
[14:38] Speaker 2: be a super God.
[14:39] Speaker 6: Right?
[14:40] Speaker 2: Oh, but I forgot y'all define God as existing eternally
[14:43] Speaker 2: without being created and refuse to justify that definition in
[14:46] Speaker 2: a way that would actually preclude it from applying to
[14:48] Speaker 2: whatever came before the Big Bang. So God's a special case.
[14:53] Speaker 2: If only there were a word for when you plead
[14:55] Speaker 2: specially like that.
[14:58] Speaker 5: So the Bible's not arguing to try to prove God's existence.
[15:02] Speaker 5: What the Bible does is tell us who the God is,
[15:07] Speaker 5: what he is like, and how we relate to him.
[15:11] Speaker 2: And if the God of the Bible is the God
[15:13] Speaker 2: that exists, then he is a genocidal monster who is
[15:16] Speaker 2: massively self absorbed and I wouldn't want to relate to him.
[15:20] Speaker 5: And no book better does that than the Book of Genesis.
[15:25] Speaker 2: Yeah, that's the book where, if it were true, he
[15:28] Speaker 2: does the biggest genocide in history. Thankfully it's not true.
[15:33] Speaker 6: Christian here asking a question to all my atheists, have
[15:38] Speaker 6: you ever considered that? Like, if your belief system is wrong,
[15:42] Speaker 6: then like there is an eternal punishment unfortunately, Like, if
[15:48] Speaker 6: you are wrong, I could.
[15:49] Speaker 2: Ask you that same question. If you are wrong, you
[15:52] Speaker 2: could wind up in Muslim hell. Have you ever considered that?
[15:56] Speaker 6: But if we're wrong, the Christians are wrong, and it's
[15:59] Speaker 6: just like black all of this when you die, then like,
[16:03] Speaker 6: what do Christians have to lose in what we believe?
[16:07] Speaker 2: Only the entirety of the one life that you know
[16:09] Speaker 2: for sure that you get.
[16:11] Speaker 6: And I know this type of question aggravates a lot
[16:14] Speaker 6: of people.
[16:15] Speaker 2: There are two reasons that I can see that would
[16:17] Speaker 2: make this question aggravating. First is the frustration with the
[16:20] Speaker 2: christians apparent blindness to the myriad of options that could
[16:23] Speaker 2: potentially be correct but do not fall into the dichotomy
[16:25] Speaker 2: of Christianity or atheism. Second is that the first thing
[16:29] Speaker 2: has been pointed out time and time again, but Christians
[16:32] Speaker 2: keep asking the same question as though it hasn't been
[16:35] Speaker 2: well and thoroughly answered to bazillion times already. This isn't
[16:38] Speaker 2: like the normal philosophical stuff where there will be forever
[16:41] Speaker 2: arguments about the validity and soundness of some formal argument
[16:44] Speaker 2: or other. It is a question that is completely answered
[16:47] Speaker 2: by the mere existence of non Christian religions. But Christians
[16:50] Speaker 2: continue to think that it's some big showstopper of a
[16:53] Speaker 2: question for some reason.
[16:55] Speaker 6: But I do want to bring it up because it's
[16:58] Speaker 6: a really good and valid question.
[17:00] Speaker 2: It's really not though. It'd be like going out to
[17:02] Speaker 2: a restaurant and telling the person you're with that they
[17:04] Speaker 2: really have to consider the consequences of ordering the salmon
[17:07] Speaker 2: or ordering nothing. If you order the salmon, you'll leave
[17:10] Speaker 2: here happy and fulfilled. But if you order nothing, then
[17:13] Speaker 2: in the end you'll just still be hungry. So you
[17:15] Speaker 2: may as well order the salmon. But wait a minute,
[17:18] Speaker 2: what if I order the mushroom rafaoli that is also
[17:20] Speaker 2: on the menu. I don't understand. If you order the salmon,
[17:23] Speaker 2: you'll be happy, but if you order nothing, you'll be hungry.
[17:26] Speaker 2: Why would you choose to order nothing. That's what y'all
[17:28] Speaker 2: sound like when you keep using Pascal's wager. That's ridiculous.
[17:33] Speaker 6: And it forces you to think and look at things
[17:36] Speaker 6: like a little bit more deeply, because I know that
[17:38] Speaker 6: we don't have to worry about death right now, but
[17:41] Speaker 6: someday we will.
[17:43] Speaker 2: Well, I would encourage you to think a little more
[17:45] Speaker 2: deeply about why you believe what you believe, because ultimately
[17:48] Speaker 2: you'll regret not agreeing with me after you die. Isn't
[17:52] Speaker 2: all that convincing of an argument. That's it for this one.
[17:55] Speaker 2: Today's comment to the Day It comes to us from
[17:57] Speaker 2: Josh Bunch of letters and Numbers, who says, if evolution
[17:59] Speaker 2: were true, we should see the genome growing every single generation.
[18:03] Speaker 2: We don't. Also, we've had bacteria under observation for over
[18:06] Speaker 2: seventy thousand generations, which equates to millions of years of
[18:10] Speaker 2: human generations, and they haven't changed at all. There's still bacteria.
[18:14] Speaker 2: Evolution disproved. Well, Josh, regarding the genome growing, why do
[18:20] Speaker 2: you think it should grow if evolution were true? There
[18:23] Speaker 2: really is no reason that I can see for that. Now.
[18:26] Speaker 2: Certainly there are evolutionary mechanisms that can cause there to
[18:29] Speaker 2: be more genetic material from one generation.
[18:31] Speaker 6: To the next.
[18:32] Speaker 2: Look up polyploidy. Sometime it gets wild in a hurry,
[18:35] Speaker 2: but there's no real reason to expect that to happen
[18:38] Speaker 2: for every generation. As to the bacteria, bacteria is in
[18:42] Speaker 2: classic taxonomy a domain of life. The three domains are bacteria, archaea,
[18:47] Speaker 2: and Eukaria. To say that they haven't changed because they
[18:50] Speaker 2: are still bacteria is to say that elephants and mushrooms
[18:53] Speaker 2: are essentially the same thing, because you know they're both eukaryotes.
[18:57] Speaker 2: But if you had actually read up on the long
[18:59] Speaker 2: term Ecoli evolution experiment, which is the experiment I think
[19:02] Speaker 2: you're referencing here, you'd see that they were documenting evolutionary
[19:06] Speaker 2: changes in the various strains of E. Coli starting at
[19:08] Speaker 2: generation two thousand. If you go to their website, there's
[19:11] Speaker 2: even a handy dandy history graph that you can scroll
[19:13] Speaker 2: through to read about all the significant changes that happened,
[19:16] Speaker 2: everything from the evolution of hypermutants that were able to
[19:18] Speaker 2: much more rapidly adapt to new environments, to the stable
[19:21] Speaker 2: coexistence of several lineages of Ecali in the same environment,
[19:24] Speaker 2: to their evolved ability to metabolize citrate in aerobic environments.
[19:27] Speaker 2: The E. Coli experiment is one of the most interesting
[19:30] Speaker 2: examples of evolution observed in a lab, so your dismissal
[19:34] Speaker 2: of it because they are all still bacteria just shows
[19:37] Speaker 2: that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what evolution even is,
[19:41] Speaker 2: which likely isn't even your fault. But I would encourage
[19:44] Speaker 2: you to look beyond creationist sources for your answers, as
[19:47] Speaker 2: I have found that creationists are shockingly comfortable with lying
[19:50] Speaker 2: to you. You don't even have to leave Christian sources.
[19:52] Speaker 2: Read some Biologos articles. They are a great resource for
[19:56] Speaker 2: scientifically accurate material, and it's an organization run by a
[19:59] Speaker 2: bunch of Christians dedicated to explaining how science can be
[20:01] Speaker 2: compatible with the Bible. Thanks for watching. I'll be back
[20:04] Speaker 2: next Friday with more, but if you need to get
[20:05] Speaker 2: your Rhyano fix in before then, I live stream with
[20:07] Speaker 2: service every Wednesday eight thirty Eastern around my other channel,
[20:09] Speaker 2: the Watering Hole. Thanks to Piper for being my editor,
[20:11] Speaker 2: and special thanks as always to my patrons who are
[20:13] Speaker 2: the mushroom ravioli available at the restaurant that is my channel.
[20:16] Speaker 2: If you'd like to be deliciously ignored by Pascal's Wager.
[20:20] Speaker 2: You can join us on Patreon for as little as
[20:21] Speaker 2: a dollar per week over at patreon dot com, slash vice, Tryna,
[20:23] Speaker 2: or by supporting the channel and one of the other
[20:25] Speaker 2: methods that can be found at links staviceround dot com,
[20:27] Speaker 2: which is also where you'll find links to my other projects.
[20:29] Speaker 2: If for whatever reason you want to send me stuff,
[20:31] Speaker 2: my pobox addresses in the description. See you next time.

Shows are listed from Apple Podcasts' charts and directory, and Podcast Index where it is used. Every show and episode belongs to its publisher and plays from the publisher's own feed; this site hosts none of them.