Two popular atheist YouTubers recently did a response video to my “atheist encounter,” in which I role-played an atheist at a Christian school and then reveal my real identity. At the end of the critique, the Genetically Modified Skeptic (Drew) made a suggestion to me that I bring in a real atheist rather than role play. In this video, I respond to their critique, offer some lessons learned, and then make a suggestion for Drew. Enjoy!
Original Atheist Role Play: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0rZOzdqlO8
Critique from the Genetically Modified Skeptic and Paulogia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBL93fZXgQk
*Get a MASTERS IN APOLOGETICS or SCIENCE AND RELIGION at BIOLA (https://bit.ly/3LdNqKf)
*USE Discount Code [SMDCERTDISC] for $100 off the BIOLA APOLOGETICS CERTIFICATE program (https://bit.ly/3AzfPFM)
*See our fully online UNDERGRAD DEGREE in Bible, Theology, and Apologetics: (https://bit.ly/448STKK)
FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Sean_McDowell
TikTok: @sean_mcdowell
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/seanmcdowell/
Website: https://seanmcdowell.org
source
Sean I want to tell you that you are a magnificent human being. So respectful to everyone and it seems rare these days. I am a non religious Jew, which means I have doubts and questions about certain aspects of Judaism but I am still one. I join your channel today because I find you an interesting person, and admire the way you have a respect to all religions and non. So I guess you wouldn't mind having a Jew on board.
Really glad to see this video. You are always so thoughtful and respectful
Oh my gosh, Sean. You are kinder than I would be. In my experience, most atheists are rude and condescending. While that doesn't mean you don't treat them with kindness, I wouldn't go out of my way to address their concerns.
Sean,
being an atheist does not mean evolution convinced people to abandon their faith.
Evolution is science, atheism is a non belief in gods.
And Stephen Meyer is really no one who should be given attention…..you could have talked to Kenneth Miller, Brown university professor who is a Catholic amd a biology professor.
Sean, I watch a lot of debates. Out of all the apologetics I've heard, you are always so polite and respectful. Infact the first video I saw you in was when you pretended to be an atheist and debated believing students. The whole point you were making to them was how they treat atheist. This is proof in the pudding. God bless you and thanks for what you do.
Impersonating is a deception and a dishonest thing to do – period. you can claim all you want that you don't do it all the time or that you haven't done it before – it doesn't matter! why don't you just apologize to all the atheists and to those who attended you class? Don't you find it strange that you – a self appointed representative of religion and morality don't get that your action, documented in the original video is immoral? As a lecturer in front of young students – you were granted with exceptional degree of authority and responsibility – you cannot claim that what happened in that class was an objective or a neutral discussion of the subject! you actually betrayed those young people trust, took advantage of their naivety and now you want to debate atheists after what you have done? what makes you think that you deserve a reward for what you have done? why do you think that by performing an immoral act of deception you will be qualified to even represent religion? I think you are taking the notion of "turning the other cheek" a step too far…
Minimally, one should concede the lack of evidence for supernaturalism. But if you're prepared to accept the supernatural (whatever that might mean), sans evidence, then you have millions of supernatural claims to evaluate. For 'precision and clarity', you might want to give your audience an idea of why anyone should favour the many varied Christian claims over the next barker on the street. Also, for the sake of clarity, always make it known when you are opposing philosophical over methodological naturalism.
What is a "socialist club"?
You just earned an atheist subscriber
A an ateist myself I agree with you that all the answers given could a been given by atheists, even though I didn't agree with all of them. I think you unconsciously choose the kind of atheists answers that christians like to hear, but I think it would be very hard to do it better than you did. The think that the ateist roleplay started a good conversation. Thanks you for promoting respect for people with different views than you own.
Its really sad that you are the exception and not the rule when it comes to Christian apologetics. Your approach is excellent, and while it has its flaws, as Drew and Appologia pointed out, you don't just dismiss their critique out of hand, you address and accept their criticism, and look to build bridges further.
No. Your take away from this should be don't be representing another view point when you're swaying young and impressionable minds because as Drew said, it does give atheists the bad name when misrepresented. You are trying to say they misrepresented you but they simply said their understanding of what you said along with a rebuttal. You're welcome to do that as yourself but you were literally trying to represent a different set of people. Just because you are around atheists and can parrot all the arguments back doesn't mean you really understand what the arguments are or why we use them to combat certain arguments. One way you majorly misrepresented us atheists in my opinion is you can't say idk. When you're talking about the start of everything, you go into about how the multiverse probably kept going. Sure, that may be some people thoughts on what happened but most often we will end these things with I dont know or we don't know. Just because its not a good argument doesn't mean its not a valid response or opinion. Stop filling the gaps. You also are talking about the death of James is both political and ideological. You saying they can't be seperated sounds like you mean to say it must be both when no, it could also be one, the other or neither. Those are all possible factors and saying its more must be political and ideological is simply untrue. Lastly, you presented yourself as an atheist from the beginning and came at more abrasive than most atheists probably would've. Please don't represent atheists, let them represent themselves and you do the same. Learn that lesson moving forward
What happened to ur interview with him?
You do a huge credit to Christians by the way you have engaged with these two atheist content creators. I came from Drew's channel and have loved the whole story between you two keep up the fantastic work you're a great role model
As a PhD candidate in astronomy, the biggest point in where you misrepresent atheists is in the origin of the Universe question. We don't know what caused the Big Bang or if it even had a cause or even if the question makes sense. Sure some of us are more haughty than others, but those of us with any basic knowledge have the humility to say "we don't know." And it's okay to say that, because we don't need to be able to answer every question. As a scientist, our entire JOB description is to ask and answer question that some of us spend decades coming up with an answer. The fact that we don't know certain things is exciting. It's new ground to cover. Manifest destiny almost.
I watched this guy‘s presentation thinking he was an atheist. I liked his polished confidence and charisma.…and then thought some of his answers were terrible, like weird….so it made total sense when his true identity was revealed. Btw, I don’t think it’s clever to try to trick people.
Whilst I have a very biased view on most "christians" being two-faced, backstabbing pieces of sh- I mean crap.
That being said I am always amazed but also very thankful to see christians that atleast try to understand other views and learn from people that aren't christian.
Also take my sub
Sean who has a doctorate in something, you have convinced me as an atheist I will be dressing up as a priest on weekends and preaching the word of God .I'll be passing around a donation tray so we can all gain from this truly rewarding experience ..😏
I completely understand words of rule is coming from and I actually agree with many of his points. But at the same time a lot of his points work against atheists as well, and there isn’t any things in the atheist community like faith being blind or many other inaccuracies about the Bible in Christian history, and there’s no Christians around to fact check it’s so complete nonsense it’s just seen as factual. And again hateful comments and mockery are pretty much a staple in the new atheist movement and online atheists, but yes I agree with this point. But also Drew is completely wrong about the point that Sean Audience doesn’t engage with atheists and his audience doesn’t engage with atheists, and he’s simply just role-plays. I agree with many of his points but I feel like Drew is just jumping to conclusions.
You seem like a standup guy… but I have a question. If you have been bringing students to see atheists for years, why did you not do it in this instance? Just because you have done it, does not mean that it is now ok to impersonate one.
Sean, the fact that you have facilitated SOME interaction with atheists doesn't address your failure to do it in this case. If anything it makes you decision to NOT do it on this occasion even worse.
And let's not gloss over the fact that you release this video and that this is the one being viewed by thousands if not millions of people and there is no prominent footage of the other interactions.
If you were pulled over for speeding, do you think it would be a legitimate defense to say you usually drive at the correct speed? What if your speeding was televised internationally? Would "but ivve had loads of people in the car with me when I drove correctly" make up for the example you have set?
And it's not a defense to say that "many" came from real atheists. The point is how an atheist would DIFFER, not how they would align. By your own admission it was only "many" and not ALL. That's the space for the misrepresentation. And it is the removal of that space that Drew is advocating for. ALL the answers given by an atheist would be from an atheist, not "most".
Note too how you talk about what you "meant". Drew didn't say you MEANT to misrepresent. He suggested that you DID.
It seems that you are missing the point here at every step.
What I think is the biggest misrepresentation of the atheist is when you stop being one and reveal that it was all pretend.
Given that the bible claims we don't really believe it, surpressing it, and many Christians believe that to be true, you have helped facilitate that in them. It's a very different take away to see someone walk away from that exchange knowing they are still an atheist that walk away having revealed it was only pretend.
In this interaction you have both been so respectful! Makes me hopeful for the future and definitely earned a sub
Seems like atheism has turned into a religion!
PALPABLE RESTRAINT shown from both sides!!!
I remember some students would show up to lgbt clubs for a class. It was college, so I was ok with it mostly. Might want to warn your students, if you don't already, that people aren't always there to educate others and are there for a safe space, so don't be surprised if people turn cold when they find out you're a christian (or just a student) tourist in an lgbt or other club. At least where I am there's tons of religious trauma, and I remember this being a problem brought up by quite a few non christians in non christian groups. There's a time and place for education and discourse. Sometimes clubs aren't it. Anyway, good luck with everything.
Role playing as an atheist is inherently dishonest. Creating a discussion that you control both sides is cowardly and shows you to have little faith in your own beliefs
I do think you may have accidentally perpetuated a few stereotypes, but i don't in any way feel as though you were trying to disrespect us at all. And I appreciate you mentioning the harassment and at times plain bullying that some religious people can put atheists through.
If I'm honest people like drew make me angry in a way 😮 I look at drew and I ask how old are you, Sean's dad has written evidence that demands a verdict at least 25 plus years before you were born. And answering the hard questions about the bible and the resurrection of Christ. And lots more. Let me ask you how old were you in 1998, wen Lee strobel had his amazing book the case for Christ ❤. I bought a copy of it that same year 🎉😊. Then the case for faith and the case for a creator. You have no excuse for your unbelief coz all of your objections have been answered fully and in detail. I know coz iv been on this subject since 92 wen I got saved ❤😊. Over the 90s there were tons of books dvds and more answering the hard questions of belief. I know everyone is saying O this is how we should talk to one another and I get it. But sometimes it needs to be said straight up no messing around. You're late to the party drew we and I have herd it all before believe me. I was arguing this stuff in the mid 90s. Just saying. Peace.
And Ray comfort has been engaging with skeptical people for decades 🎉Todd fril the same. The John ankerburg show was having debates with atheists in the 80s. These self proclaimed seekers who start up a YouTube channel and say O I have so meny questions and for some bizarre reason can't see the huge evidence library standing right next to them 😢
"I sometimes bring atheists to speak with my students." That's great, but it doesn't address Drew's objections to what you say in this particular video.
"When I spoke in this video, I said things that actual atheists have said." Yes, but you are cherry picking the things that you believe that you can refute.
Props for trying to open a respectful dialogue, and props for giving Drew's response at length. But your response here doesn't really answer his concerns.
Very nice!
beta
by 6:00 it already feels like you've failed to address the singular point you've tried to, that the role play/impersonation is harmful in and of itself, in that Drew's solution wasn't 'you can also do this' it's that 'what you've done was not acceptable under the guidelines and goals you claim to stand by, and if you want to properly stand by those guidelines and goals this is a solution'. Doing the better method is a good thing, but spending your first two and a half minutes of proper discussion flouting the point of the suggestion to say 'yeah duh, I was already doing it'(albeit in a much more polite manner) isn't a good look.
by 7:30 you've in part helped addressed the initial concern, but again you concede a lower point, that your arguments may not have been the best rather than the bigger issue presented that the rational you gave for your arguments being problematic. You can train being polite to an opposed stance in a debate without needing to actually have the proper arguments presented, but that would regardless be undermined by the reveal and impression you gave that 'you don't have to believe in the argument to make it, and atheists might not while trying to confuse you with word salad'. This is the main underlying issue with impersonating an atheist, you absolutely cannot match the motivations behind the arguments even if you can repeat the arguments. You can repeat the motivations you've been given, but you failed to do that in practice which I hope heavily weighs on your mind when you remember your words that "I will be doubly sure to represent atheists even more carefully in the future"
I make these first two paragraphs to note immediately, that your first thought was not to apologize for the most serious harmful act. Your first point was actually to make yourself look better by saying 'well yeah I already do your suggestion'. I would've had a soft line stance here where I'd say 'it'd be better if you noted this first, but you got to it either way so I respect it.' But no, you outright ignore the biggest problem with your impersonation of an atheist starting around 1:04:40 in the original atheist roleplay video, "you might have noticed sometimes instead of answering a question, i was like string theory multiverse complex words, act as if you answer something but really didn't. i played that card a few times." There is no justification for representing a group and claiming to be able to do it and having the best intents and then portraying them as if they will purposefully confuse you with word salad instead of answering a question. In the right context you can display that people will employ that tactic, but this was far from that context, and the lack of a direct apology on that point, and moreover a complete avoidance of that point, is really damning for your apparent sincerity. It doesn't matter at this point if you mean what you said and are and were trying your best to fairly represent atheists, because you have displayed that being transparent and honest and admitting to your mistakes are less important to you than preaching. The entire video you are entirely unapologetic while trying to present yourself as humble and honest, and in the process instead of washing your hands of the issue and being more trustworthy for the transparency you spread the dirt from them to the rest of yourself.
I appreciate the message of kindness and understanding, but I cannot interpret your actions to truly fit that message.
What was the critique thinking in his response….
Every atheist's worldview is subjective to their own understanding and opinion of Atheism, so I do not agree with Drew's view of bringing an actual atheist is necessary.
Imagine atheists containing about Christians misrepresenting them.
All atheists do is misrepresent Christians!
Dawkins wrote an entire book called the god delusion, he says religion is worse than smallpox, created the flying spaghetti monster…
Many atheists use the incorrect definition of faith as "belief without evidence" they claim that Jesus was copied from pagans etc.
It's very easy to see that without LIES, atheism dies.
tbh the only thing that i feel that you misrepresented us nonreligious people after i watched this video is the fact that atheist you said you believe that you believed in something from nothing, the big bang was just an expansion, you seem pretty cool actually
This drives me crazy, it's like he didn't understand Shawn was invited there, he didn't hold a talk. He was attempting to create dialogue with students. Maybe he should get in his own comments and address the hate in his own comments directed towards Christians.