Special thanks to KAN in Christ, Dominik Sieciński, Greyz174, AL, blue99i, Mangopeaches, Elie Chamoun, Oflameo, Zahra Berserk, Stephanie Casey, Rusko, David, Reincarnation Entertainment, Antony John Puthur, Scrooge Jones, Frank Prophecy, Apostate Prophet, Adam M, Paul Schlachter, Leonardo Doel, JohnSketchShow, Cheryl R, Trevor Green, Beatriz N., Revan Star, Polycarp Salavarrieta, watrewoks, and Luth Lexor for contributing via Super Chat and Super Stickers!
@@haydenwalton2766 No UA-cam tax it by 33% so DW only gets say 60ç to 65ç by the time it gets to him etc but not for long as these platforms have really really really done enough when it's us the people who build them literally from the ground up we us me you NOT NO Google and the multi billion dollar platforms it owns THAT WE THE PEOPLE BUILT FOR THEM 🤔
@@wet-read no its just the measure of Good and what defines it. Are you being good because you want to but still want personal gain is it truly a good deed? is it selfless? no it isn’t its called an ulterior motive because they did it contingent upon receiving divine protection. when you have faith in christ you do Good because you want to. Because once your saved your saved but once you realize how much he went through for you and you didn’t deserve it you would do anything for him because he does in fact deserve it.
@@Scotty_cooks "its just the measure of Good and what defines it. " God is subjective opinion. "when you have faith in christ you do Good because you want to. " That's the same reason an atheist does good. No faith in Jesus required and the atheist doesn't expect any sort of reward in the afterlife for their good deeds.
@@cnault3244 A reward is something earned a gift is given i didn’t deserve eternal life it was given to me by Jesus he died for you too btw. You cant earn what is eternal.
I follow both of you & when I saw you 2 together, I knew this would be great, but had no idea how great. Just over a year ago, my husband went to be with Jesus unexpectedly 5 days before my only daughter turned 13. Long story short, and I understood...generally apologetics doesn't completely help right away with healing...but I was caught off guard about how much this video...& things both of you said gave me things I needed to know to help me in my journey of grieving & healing. Thanks so much & may the Lord continue to bless both of you and your amazing ministries.
God bless you sister. God took my late wife from me 5 years ago in a sudden accident. It left me and my entire family blown away by grief. God comforted me in various ways, from little signs to the random loving acts of friends and strangers. God works in mysterious ways. Hang in there. Prayers going out to you. 🙏🏼✝️🙏🏼
I have education in Neuropsychology and am happy to inform you that this means you have learned so much that your neural network has been restructuring, and by sleep and then revisit by meditation on these subjects you'll be able to grasp something from a better vantage point, and it also is a great way of saying that you really was listening in a humble way! 🤓❤🧠❤️🔥😎
At the 1 hour 29 minute mark David makes a point about the moral argument that I had never heard before, and one that is absolutely brilliant! If the Problem of Evil and Suffering is actually a problem, then it can only be one if a moral standard is first taken as axiomatic. This is brilliant, David!
@Troy Hailey And they can't live consistently or without being a hypocrite by denying evil. ex. ask an atheist about the actions of Hitler, Stalin Mao Bush Trump lol...
Re: Suffering Deer; Even the fact that a deer may suffer needlessly AND humans know it can/does happen, it can create compassion within humans for the created world, thus, increasing the virtue of humans.
Exactly. By know their may be an evil that may go unaddressed, it forces us to be more ardent in our pursuit of virtue and justice within our societies, so that said needless suffering doesn't need to happen. We know for example in Africa, so many people die and as a result, I feel like a lot of us are conditioned to want to help them one way or another. We don't really see any of it lest it's by photos and even then, people still feel sympathy beforehand just from heresay. It doesn't really affect any of the first world countryman at all, yet it elicits empathy that motivates people, atheists and theists alike, to go and help them, in whatever way they can, fostering more virtue and bringing humanity a little closer together. I know it's not smooth sailing, whatever is going on out there, but the attempts are being made.
Re: 15:00 ff.: Many years ago I wrote a poem called "ycidoehT A." The point was that God's mercy and grace in the face of my stupidity is so overwhelming that the question becomes not how a good God allow evil, but how a sane God could be so merciful and gracious to me.
Excellent!! That’s what so many Can’t Grasp! He gave up Himself so we could Be in heaven w/ Him when he did not have to do so! God is Love God is Grace We at the very least MUST show Gratitude each and every day w/ Singing and dancing and be joyful even when we don’t feel like it cause that shows the devil - “Nice Try”
Yeah but there isn't a shred of evidence for the multiverse. Apparently, atheists have the nerve to use the multiverse theory as their argument even though the multiverse theory is non scientific nonsense. It is pseudoscience that has no evidence backing it up. Ironically it's the same atheists who subscribe to such pseudoscience claim to be Pro science.
@High Priest of the Flying Spaghetti Monster Wouldn't be much of a God if He need a beginning. He is not part of the physicality of nature, but the cause of it. The necessary uncaused cause. Beats fluctuations in nothing.
@High Priest of the Flying Spaghetti Monster Well you can say that but you're just not gonna get many people to agree with you. Athiests or theists for that matter.
@High Priest of the Flying Spaghetti Monster That would go against the current scientific knowledge on it. I thought Atheist's were the ones that believed science over faith. You just proved that wrong. Atheism is an emotional response to things they cannot for some reason accept.
What I find most interesting about the skeptical theism approach is that it is practically the same argument presented by God at the end of the book of Job. The fact that a book written about 3000 years ago still has relevance to these discussions just makes me appreciate it all the more. Thank you for this stream, I'm trying to do an apologetics course at my church and your guy's channels and this video in particular have been massive inspirations for that. Thank you for your work!
I have always wondered why it is so difficult to explain logical fallacies to internet atheist. I swear everytime i point out a fallacy the conversation descends into senseless mockery
@@ramigilneas9274 except most of them can’t properly identify logical fallacies, and just throw them out as a scapegoat when they run out of objections, 🤣🤣🤣🤣.
@@sw3783 Well, 20% of all Americans think that all of the stories in the Bible are literally true… so we only have to find out who those remaining 5% are.😂
@@Galmala94 - If you’ve ever gone through a tough time and came out the other side, you can see the benefit of tough times. The more I study, the less I believe in eternal punishment, but more like purification. In Buddhism, the suffering that we encounter in life can be overcome by enlightenment… a state called nirvana (which literally means “to blow out”). - like blowing out a flame. I think the hell we go through could mean a number of things, and it’s meant to purify (like gold in a furnace) not to punish.
this reminds me of a class i took in college 'Quests for the explanation of Evil' which was my first formal introduction to epistemology.. all the things i learned in the class were extremely valuable, but the BIGGEST takeaway is that almost no one even bothers to think about the nature of their beliefs or the arguments that support them.. it's why flat earthers and atheists just keep proposing the same lame disproven crap and why most Christians don't have good answers.
@saved by the wordMy position on cosmology is not germane to the discussion as it has nothing to do with whether or not the majority of folks consider the basis of their beliefs, ergo my suggestion that your comments are irrelevant, or non-topical if you prefer. Edit: it IS consistent that a self professed flat earther would attempt to drive the conversation off the rails in an attempt to seem superior, there's that.....
Uh.. ok.. whatever you think.. have a ball with that -- I said nothing about faith or the actual position, i said that most atheists and flat earthers propose the same tired crap and that most Christians don't have good answers to those tired postulations. I'm not willing to engage with you in a discussion about flat earth or science, it's a waste of my time. You're having a completely different conversation that I'm really not interested in and which, I'll say again, is non topical/irrelevant. That said, by all means go feel all superior if you need to.
@saved by the word Yeah, but I’ve flown planes before and the earth sure don’t seem flat? Why can I fly straight around the world and not find an edge? When I go long range hiking, why is there magnetic declination if the world is flat? Why if I do long range shooting, there is the Coriolis Effect? This isn’t exactly a scientific method of inquiry. I encounter things in the world, and I must understand those effects. Those effects existed prior to my awareness of them. I have spoken to many people, good folks, who believe the earth is flat. But from those conversations, the difference is that I have encountered these effects and they haven’t yet. How would you factor this in? (Asking in good faith)
I found IP a while ago, and am so grateful that I did. So much common sense and insight. As for you, Mr. Wood, I thought I had lost you completely when you gave up your old channel. I was so happy to stumble upon this in my feed. Subscribed, and can't wait to see more of your brilliant commentary. You were missed! I see that you reposted your video on Norm MacDonald. That one should stay up on the internet forever.
At one point I stopped calling myself a Baptist and was even close to avoiding the term Christian. I've changed my mind on both of those. I understand avoiding labels feels improtantt, because the labels carry bagage, but eventually i realized, people will label you and misrepresent you whether you choose the label or not. Now i just prefer to have discussions with people who want to talk, dispite my beliefs
That’s how I’ve felt about the word “religious”. I hate how Christian’s have made demonized that word because the culture has. Now that I see that Christianity is a religion, and it is indeed the one TRUE religion, I now am proud to say that I am religious. I can be religious and not a Pharisee. And my religion is Christ ❤
I've also thought of calling myself things other than Christian, but decided I don't have to change, they do. I don't call "progressives", "progressive christians" anymore. They lost the right to the lable "Christian" - they are not taking the goodness of the word away. I heard a video by Redeemed Zoomer where he talked about conservative Christians always giving ground to progressives, which makes them even more progressive. We should lovingly stand our ground and not let some bad apples ruin everything.
I'm definitely a premillennialist, but at the same time I think that we need to look at what scripture holds up as heroes to see how we should act. The only people called to just sit back and wait, are people who rationally cannot do anything anyway. Elderly widows, and the desperately poor. Ordinary people are always called to act. It depends on our station in life, I'm not in a position were I can call out false prophets to a duel, but I can pray, and focus on living a holy life. And way too many Christians are complacent I think.
Ministry is time consuming, metally draining and sometimes doesn't produce the fruit we'd like to see. I completely understand why most Christians end up just attending a church, i've been one, however its important to be involved and help others to get involved
To quote Obi-wan Kenobi, "You've taken your first step into a larger world." A very good resource is "Illogical Atheism" by Bo Jinn. He discusses atheism and religion from a philosophical and logical standpoint.
The “problem” of evil assumes that good people exist (Romans 3:23) and is therefore a loaded question fallacy. If “there is none righteous, no, not one” that means there are no good people.
I always thought that arguments from evil/suffering in all its variants were silly. I noticed a few issues with it over the years when thinking about it. Some I list below. 1) The argument ignores the creation itself, and that said creation has agency. 2) I noticed that the argument relies on a strawman of God, reducing God to "all-loving" and "all-powerful" while ignoring God as a person with many traits, motivations and desires. 3) The people making the argument are contradicting themselves: they demand God turn us all into slaves who cannot do evil, then say slavery is evil. 4) The argument is mere scapegoating: "it's God's fault that I use my agency to do evil". There are other problems with the "problem of evil/suffering" so-called "argument" (it's not really an argument, it's just a complaint that God is not doing what I want him to do, which is another problem with this pseudo-argument).
"reducing God to "all-loving" and "all-powerful" - Do you disagree that He is those things? They seem commonly held beliefs but certainly not universal. "they demand God turn us all into slaves who cannot do evil, then say slavery is evil" - That is not usually how the problem is put forward. Either you can say punish wrong doers or make certain things impossible with the end goal of reducing evil (make rapists impotent, make serial killers have a heart attack, make child molesters go blind etc), or simply reduce the suffering which is natural to this world (cure cancer, ebola, aids etc, remove horrific parasites, calm the continental plates to stop earthquakes and volcanoes etc). You don't need a perfect world, but you could have a much better one, and doing any of these things reduces suffering while not affecting freewill. "The argument is mere scapegoating: "it's God's fault that I use my agency to do evil" - No one is saying humans don't make decisions to carry out evil acts, but if we had the power to stop such horrors occurring, we would certainly do so. If we could stop a child rapist before they destroy someone's life, then we would. If we could stop millions dying from malaria, we would. If we could make it rain in drought-stricken countries, then we would.
@@Wertbag99 You appear to have ignored the "reducing" part of the comment, despite quoting it yourself. "That is not usually how the problem is put forward." So? That's exactly what the argument is. Just because it's made in a dishonest fashion designed to hide its internal contradiction does not mean it is not incoherent. Your attempt to to avoid this incoherency was useless. " if we had the power to stop such horrors occurring, we would certainly do so." Here you are making the same argument: that we should enslave people as a good. You can try to word this any way you want, but that is the necessary conclusion. Depriving a person of agency necessarily enslaves them, meaning you are doing an evil...so the evil of enslavement must be prohibited via...enslavement. What you leave out of this whole argument is that agency is a good. Without agency, we cannot have meaningful relationships with anyone since we would effectively be automatons. The other things you leave out is where we draw the line. "Horrible" acts can mean anything to different people in different times. To God, every sin is horrible, even something you might consider minor. Sometimes even things we consider small can cause tremendous harm. Sometimes we try to do something we think is good and cause tremendous harm. It's a nonsense argument no matter how you try to frame it. And here's the worst part of the argument: it's irrelevant because it has no value in the question of God's existence.
@@droe2570 "Depriving a person of agency necessarily enslaves them, meaning you are doing an evil...so the evil of enslavement must be prohibited via...enslavement." - Not at all. If a man tells you he is going to rape a child and you have the power to stop him, would you say, "No I can't do that, I'd be robbing him of his free will?". If someone wants to punch you in the face, would you let them, because stopping them would be taking away their agency? If Jeffrey Dahmer says he's going to murder and eat someone and you could stop him and save that life, would you say "Oh no, I wouldn't want to enslave him?" It should be obvious that stopping evil can be a good thing, or if we cannot stop it then punishing the individual to avoid such evil being committed in future is also a good thing. And of course, none of that even applies to the question of suffering, where disease, parasites and natural disasters aren't caused by freewill anyway. ""Horrible" acts can mean anything to different people in different times." - I would really hope there are things we could all agree on. Do you have doubts that child rape is evil? Maybe on the fence about cannibalism? Not sure if seeing children die bleeding from their eyes as ebola ruptures their internals, is something you would rather not happen? It's this strange contradiction that some Christians do, where in one breath they will say we have objective moral standards, and those standards are "written on our hearts" and yet in the next breath try to tell us we have no way to judge good and evil, and maybe the evil we see is actually fine. " It's a nonsense argument no matter how you try to frame it." - It's a question that Christians have struggled with for thousands of years. It has been the cause of thousands losing their faith. One of the major reasons is it hits people on an emotional level, where you can see the suffering for yourself and ask "why does God not help these people?". When a Christian with doubts seeks answers and gets a hand wave response like "freewill" they often feel like there is no good answer and hence are driven further away. "it's irrelevant because it has no value in the question of God's existence." - It does if you are trying to apply the characteristics of all-powerful and all-loving to the God claims. An uncaring deistic God has no problem with evil or suffering, but the common image of the Christian God being good and therefore should want to care, and with the power to stop vast amounts of suffering, but not doing so, is in direct conflict with the claims being made.
I shared this with an intelligent atheist after searching hours for a better argument. You guys nailed it concisely in an engaging way. Sweet and sour. Could we have some more, please?
How come Jesus was fully God and Jesus also was fully man? Does it sound ridiculous? 😆🤣😂 In John 5:31, Jesus said - "if I (Jesus) bear witness of myself, then I would be a liar!" - this verse proves that Jesus is not God because actual God's testimony alone is always sufficient! .
@@اروانشاه Thank you for your question. Jesus is referring to the Mosaic Law where two witnesses are required. Your example shows that Jesus and the Father are two Persons. It does not say anything about the divinity of Jesus. Then while it is true that Jesus is both man and God, he set aside the use of his divine attributes while on earth and put on humanity so that he could become a perfect sacrifice for humans. I hope this helps. Blessings on your journey.
@@AirChurch Why Christians have many sects with different theology and different core beliefs? Each Christian sect labeling other Christian sects as heretical and deviated. Below are their major sects: a. Catholics (Idolators, believe that Jesus is God incarnate). b. Protestants (Removed 7 books from bible ) c. Unitarians (Jesus is son of god and a prophet but NOT GOD himself) d. Jehovah witness (Trinity deniers) .
@@AirChurch Why many expert Christian Scholars refuting the status of the bible New Testament as an inspired scripture? The early Church Fathers also never considered NT as inspired scripture! Bible New Testament (NT) was written few hundred years after Jesus time by unknown (anonymous) author. Bible author is still unknown until today. Hence the believers in the NT are all following utter conjecture and anonymous words whose source we cannot know and neither can we trace back the words or verify them.
@@AirChurch Islamic Quran writing has isnad (chain of narration) since the time of Prophet Muhammad. The Christians have the matn (text) of their scripture but no isnad (chain of narration). Hence it is impossible to trace back the alleged words attributed to Jesus all the way back to his mouth. So, how can it be known that the Christian material is not mixed with falsehood when there is an absence of isnads and no verification checks in place at all.
From my experience with missionaries and doing missions on 3 continents, and along side various groups/denominations... from what I could tell, premill missionaries weren't stymied by their eschatology at all. Indeed they were motivated by it enormously. Note: most Southern Baptists, pentacostals and charismatics are premill. These are some of the most prolific missionary senders.
@highpriestoftheflyingspagh8071 to focus on the preciousness of the next life. I would say that the children are better off to be in the presence of the Almighty Lord, with zero suffering anymore, total joy eternally. And as a parent you will have to look forward to meeting your child without suffer.
@High Priest of the Flying Spaghetti Monster I'm pretty sure everyone dies. There are some better ways to go than others but it's going to happen. Immense suffering does not prove God isn't real and hasn't made a kingdom for you after you die.
I know I can’t state this enough. I love IPs Library of Videos unpacking INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT TOPICS AND DOES SO HARMONIOUSLY LOL….I hope his depiction of the 2nd coming is correct. How those who will end up in hell will do so because they will choose that. I’m still looking for Gods Will in my Life but I love this new Mindframe I’ve been given / New change of heart towsrds it all, New Mindset and New heart for things and ppl. I’m not perfect and learning so much everyday by guarding myself from the evil junk / vomit that’s on my feed sometimes but it’s so effortless to avoid it now w/ the help of the HS! Sorry lol just wanted to agree w/ ur statement - didn’t mean to write a novel Be blessed
One point I think is missed is that pain and suffering are not intrinsically evil. The rare few people who cannot feel pain, do not know when they are being injured and can easily die because of it. Pain is a warning system that something is wrong. When we feel emotional pain, this is because something is wrong. So when anyone is suffering, it is an indicator that something is wrong, nothing intrinsically moral about pain and suffering in and of itself. The moral question comes into play when you are speaking about causing pain. You may cause pain by accident, or on purpose. However, even causing pain on purpose may be out of a desire for a good result. For example rebreaking a bone that was set improperly hurts a person, in the moment for a long term gain. Or telling a person the truth about someone who is manipulating them may cause them emotional pain, but if they see the truth, that will be worth the pain.
I kind of appreciate Mike's approach in his videos more than David's (tho I love David's vids). My impression is David responds TO atheists, agnostics, infidels, etc. while Mike addresses their potential audiences encouraging them to not put up w/their deceit. Reasoning w/Anti-christianity voices is very much a losing battle at this point; they're determined to destroy faith and reason is not an option. I'd rather invest my time in containing and burning the rubbish they spread by responding making noise with truth. Keep your eye on God's method: freewill. Evil/destruction will be here until judgement day; provide enough of the alternative for the uncertain to have opportunity to choose. 🕊️ Each of us must make up our minds ❤️
I love listening to these while editing videos, it makes time go by faster while also giving me insightful information, keep up the good work brothers in Christ And God bless you in Jesus name
You know, I watched your video where you revealed your quite substantial life experiences and whilst I respect the final outcome resulting in your acceptance of the Christian religion, I can only say that, in general, your life was a rabbit hole of experiences and thoughts interacting with your environment. Although not as "eventful" as yours, my own life's journey produced an outcome which one could say is the opposite to yours - I transitioned from a devout Catholic to being an atheist. To me, what this highlights is that there are a myriad of personalities, environments, circumstances which mould (or you guys would probably say mold) who we are. Although I could not hope to experience exactly what you experienced during your life's journey, there were many stages in that journey where I would have arrived at very much different conclusions to the ones you came to accept. But then we speak in generalities. Your beliefs are the product of your consciousness coming to terms with your experiences and environment and as such, you don't have a high need for verifiable substantiation to satisfy your belief. My own personal journey, having being exposed to scientific training, has resulted in me transitioning from being religious to accepting atheism. The words of an ancient script satisfy your needs for substantiation and if it makes you content, then so be it. To me, they have transitioned from "The word of God" to the attempts of the ancients to explain what to them was inexplicable, and to us now is totally subject to interpretation of what they wrote or meant. Having said that, I acknowledge that there are scientists who still hold on to their religion, but as stated before, everyone's life journey is quite unique. You might regard me as an amoral, soul-less atheist, but that doesn't stop me from wishing you well on your life's journey, nor does it prevent me formulating my own morals to live by.
11:20 THANK YOU! A worldview must be consistent. Once you choose a fundamental root premise, all other points and premises must follow from there or must be consistent with it. 12:51 To me, understanding defense of the Problem of Evil comes from understanding that three kinds of Good and Evil exist: Experiential Good, Moral Good, and Spiritual Good.
@@renem.5852 If we begin with the assumption that there is no God, then we become like Sartre or Camus (The universe is meaningless and our lives are empty; we are fussing about over nonsense) or else like Kafka (our lives are meaningless and our illusions of morality come from our base evil desires -- "the pig sty") or like Nietzsche (As long as we're evil and life is meaningless, we have no reason to do good, so take what you want). On the other hand, if we begin with the assumption that there is no God _ad Argumentum,_ like Tolstoi, then we find that life is a meaningless equation, and we can only make the equations sensible by having both God and Physical elements in our equations -- "A bridge between the finite and the infinite." ... Which is why Tolstoi abandoned Nihilism in favor of a simple spiritual form of Christianity. If you just read that carefully, you now know more about philosophy than most college sophomores. You're welcome.
@@WhereWhatHuh The universe is then meaningless in an overall perspective, yes. That doesn't conclude that our lives are empty, that is a non sequitur. I also don't get how you conclude that Nietzsche thought we have no reason to do good. How did you get there? Nevertheless it's still a non sequitur. Because the assumption of no God existing doesn't lead to "we don't have any reason to do good". Because no God existing doesn't make our lives *for ourselves* meaningless, hence you can't argue based on the meaningless of one's life. Nihilism and atheism are different things, you are mixing up terms. Probably most nihilists are also atheists, yes. But nihilism is nothing that follows directly from atheism. And if you read carefully, you just learned that an atheism does not need to be a nihilist and therefore argue based on non sequiturs. You're welcome.
@@renem.5852 Alright... Let's take it slower, then... So you acknowledge the fundamental idea underlying existentialism, and it's cousin/conjoined-twin, nihilism. Life is meaningless if we begin with the assumption that there is no God. But then you argue that atheism does not mean nihilism. You want to be an "atheist" and not believe that there is nothing outside of the observable physical universe. Okay, so what inhabits your atheistic metaphysical space? "The Force?" Ghosts? "Nature" or "The universe," meaning something just like God, but definitely not God? If you say "Nothing," (Nihi) then, congratulations, you are now a Nihilist. Or you were one all along, but never finished thinking it through to its conclusion. Again, notice what I congratulated Wood and Jones for saying, namely, that one's initial assumptions produce one's world-view. Now, you also ask how Nietzsche leads to doing one's own thing, and taking what one wants, without regard for morality. Nietzsche tried to do what you are trying to do: To create meaning within a meaningless construct. I would invite you to read _Thus Spake Zarathustra_ and _Ecco Homo._ In it, Zarathustra constructs a concept of an Ubermensch (Meta-man) who "creates life and gives purpose" in the context of abandoning traditional concepts of God and morality. Zarathustra himself was a sort of -- for lack of a more precise term, an "Ascended Master" or pseudo-spiritual being, who revealed to mere mortals the keys to creating the "Artist tyrant" who is the Ubermensch. Note the inconsistent terms; Abandoning all hope of traditional morality, a new pseudo-morality is created based upon producing the ubermensch. Thus, if one feels that taking from the weak will facilitate building the society which would produce the Ubermensch, one is free to do so. For the SuperHomme (Ubermensch) "All is permitted." Belief that one will face judgement for doing so is absurd, since "God is Dead," in Nietzsche's mind. Thus my summary: That per Nietzsche, we have no reason to do "Good." (We should, he opines, instead be working to make the Society of the Ubermensch). Please realize, Friend: In Philosophy, all roads lead to Rome, or else to Carthage. Any other points, including Sils-Maria, merely take us to these places by a longer course. If we abandon Rome, we are destined for Carthage.
@@WhereWhatHuh "Life is meaningless if we begin with the assumption that there is no God." This is wrong. "You want to be an "atheist" and not believe that there is nothing outside of the observable physical universe." This is not what an atheist is. Atheists don't hold the view that there is nothing outside of the observable physical universe. Atheists hold the worldview that they don't believe in the existence - whether withing or outside of the universe - of a deity. Atheists for example still can be spritualists. That's no contradiction. "Okay, so what inhabits your atheistic metaphysical space?" How about: "I don't know". If you don't want to accept that answer: Please define what you mean with "your atheistic metaphysical space". "Metaphysical Space" is not an actual term, yet alone not a scientific one. "If you say "Nothing," (Nihi) then, congratulations, you are now a Nihilist." I wanna be bold and say I doubt that you define "Metaphysical Space" in a way that *this* is the definition of a nihilist.
The concept of the Multiverse has always reminded me of a "hail Mary pass" in that there's not much anyone can do to deny the clockwork universe. Rather than believe that there is something beyond this life it's imperative to find a reason for not believing, no matter how unlikely.
"Rather than believe that there is something beyond this life it's imperative to find a reason for not believing, no matter how unlikely. " Well, the epistemic justification for belief would be after it has demonstrable evidence. No one needs to find a reason for not believing. The honest position is to remain unconvinced until there is evidence.
@@nonprogrediestregredi1711 Sorry, but that argument makes no sense. The concept for believing by faith alone does make sense. If you want absolute proof of another life beyond this one & it's proven than the most evil people in the world including Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao, & every other evil would be believers. Not because they are good, deserving people but because they are afraid not to believe. Pick a side, evil or good. There is no other honest position.
The concept of the multiverse is mostly just a thought experiment and nothing much more. I don't use it against the fine tuning argument because if don't necessarily accept that there is a multiverse. The Puddle Analogy is the one I hear more often or that if this universe was fine tuned, it was fine tuned for black holes and neutron stars rather than for life.
@Sheikh Boyardee That argument makes no sense? What? Yeah, it really does make sense. The people you mentioned are irrelevant, and evil is a subjective label. But if you think that believing by faith alone is sensible, then Hindus who have faith that people will go through their afterlife to be reincarnated as insects is also sensible. Would you agree with that belief?
Would one answer for the preponderance of evil in this world is that to choose a life with God we also must be able to have an idea of what life would be like without him?
It’s a legitimate mental exercise but the average atheist will retort with “well why can’t he just make us love him?” They will naturally follow by claiming we have no free will in a theistic or an atheistic system
As to the Probabalistic Problem of Evil, I don’t even consider it an argument. How can a human being decide whether the amount of suffering in the world is necessary or not for the greatest possible good? Even if you could somehow know, how would you convince anyone else? How would you even know what it would look like? Furthermore it really seems to involve trying to calculate how many souls can be saved and if purgatory exists and how the mortal world in general interacts with the spiritual world. It’s just an incalculable mess. It is impossible to see whether this renders theism more or less likely. I think the so-called argument derives it’s power principally by making the atheist look sympathetic because they don’t have to tell people thier suffering is necessary. They can say, “Its not your fault! You deserve better!” Whereas the theist has to tell them that most of them probably aren’t worth God’s time and are best used as fuel for the machine that will save the elect. I have a dim view of humanity and though I love the little rascals I am quite convinced Hell is better than any of us deserve, so suffering doesn’t faze Me a bit. Nor am I concerned with putting on a rhetorical show to impress anyone. The suffering in the world is probably much lower than it ought to be, and it seems to me that rather suspicious that the people who suffer least are the ones most likely to judge the suffering too great. The Beysian argument is downright silly. You cannot possibly try to imagine the universe unbiasedly. Nor again can you know how much suffering or what kind would be implied by God’s purpose. Nor can you even know if humanity is possible given naturalism. But, if you ask Me to consider what I see around Me and what I know of history, obviously the sort and amount of suffering I see indicates an extraordinarily merciful God who is rather transparent in His purposes and goes out of His way to craft complex narratives of suffering and cathartsis into peoples lives and history itself. And you have a humanity so degenerate and hard headed that they sit around mooing and crying “WHY ME!?” When the answers constantly stares them in the face and because the answer isn’t “Because you’re awesome” they refuse to see it. The proper answer to that nonsense about gods foreknowledge contradicting gods free will is simply to restate it correctly. God does not inherently experience time. His mind being founded in eternity, He has no foreknowledge of Himself because there is no future for Him to know about nor past in which He could have known it. God exists in an endless present and He never in which he eternally makes all of His decisions simultaneously. Think of it like a database containing all logical possibilities connected to a function representing God’s will. Run the database through the divine will function and you have Gods decisions. Got knows what He decides as He decides it, but He never begins to decide nor does He stop deciding it. His being entails the decision. This does imply god cannot change His mind, but that also is implied by perfection, ie If God’s every decision is perfect then He would not ever choose differently since any other decision would be less desirable to Him and why would He choose that which He does not desire?
Exquisitely said. I'm utterly disappointed to see you have a strictly "gaming channel" when your theological commentary & theodicy are so articulate & interesting. Sorry, I'm not into those games or anime or I would sub. Take care.
I think the free will defense still holds solid in the case of animal suffering. If there are spiritual beings which also are capable of falling to sin, then it is possible that "natural evils" are the result of free will choices by such beings to inflict suffering...which, just like human suffering, God can purpose to his will for a higher good EVEN IF no human is aware of it. It's impossible to claim with certainty that such a thing as "pointless suffering" exists at all, simply on the basis that it's outside of our knowledge or perspective.
The atheist theory that God and Christianity is a destructive force in human society is far older than internet edgelords of today. I know this from reading the works of G K Chesterton, where he references this idea.
After Nietzsche's linguistic cannonballs against Christianity everything else is mere commentary. I don't know anyone more acute in their atheistic logic and psychological insights, maybe Dostoevsky. The 19th century ushered in the giants of contempt and dissection.
@@zoelong6021 Good. You agree with me. So to say that this speculation is the atheists only counter to the fine tuning argument is poor gaslighting. Or worse, ignorance.
@@Unconskep None are so blind as those that DO NOT WANT to see....there's more evidence today than ever has been pointing to GOD...e.g DNA, James Webb telescope discoveries. In actual fact - *every theory atheists cling to had to be walked back.* You make falsified claims and silly conjectures about the lack of written works on Jesus the Messiah - his existence was verified by other non Chrsitians like Josephus. Also, Alexander the Great didn't write anything about himself...so why do you believe he existed? Or do you think you need a "selfie" to prove you exist?
The Debate will be completely useless I think as Richard Dawkins would reject all evidence for God regardless of how strong the evidence for God is. He said it in an interview himself.
I don't see much reason to "debate" when each side talk to his own audience, then walks away declaring himself the winner. This is pretty much what happens each time there's an apologist vs. atheist spokesman debate.
58:32 I think that sceptical theism can be easily answered by "If God has reason to allow evil and he is a good and loving God, he would tell or reveal to his conscious creation about them." Answering this is the interesting part of the discussion.
Thank God for using you both. I've learned a lot from y'all and others here on the tube. And much more to learn. Wanted to share that the LORD help me with a Muslim, Lyft driver; the wheels in his head were turning. There wasn't much time, but he heard how we're made in the image and likeness of the Triune God, as Revealed In Christ; as The Word of The Father, He Proceeded from The Father. The Word is No less The Wisdom He was (IS) in The Father , and we know the Father's Wisdom is Eternal. And I asked, as man, where does your word come from? Your (lesser)wisdom; and a spirit goes with it as in a breath, coming from your heart(spirit). These parts* of us are in the likeness of the *Persons* of God. Yet, we're very much Not like God. And Not of His Spirit. But the Holy Word of The Father was sent In the very Power of the Holy Spirit. This means Jesus Christ Is One with The Father and He Is our God. ... Then the Lyft ride was over
I think we should consider AP being in more livestreams like this as if he's also a Christian since responding to certain things like this can possibly be helpful for him too.
If any of you lack wisdom let him ask of GOD that giveth liberally to all men but let him ask in faith nothing wavering. There is no debate. Remember THE NAME OF JESUS. What does it mean? "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God."- John 3 verses 16 to 21.
@MichaelAChristian1 Oh my what shallow nonsense. When you die and realize you chose the wrong religion (tortured for an eternity), are you still gonna accept God as good? Or will you see that for what it is?
While I was still confused by my religious childhood indoctrination, an Atheist once shared his personal feelings with me. He said, "If I pretended to believe in a god, and the god was real, it would know that I was pretending, because the fact is, I just don't believe that a god exists." That point of view resonated with me as being heartfelt and as honest "as could be." I later chose to become a born-again Atheist, and wanted to be as honest with my self, as that man had been honest with me. Once I was doubtful about the existence of a god, there wasn’t any way to entrap my thoughts where they once had been, as freedom from religion was my only alternative. Now I believe as did Stephen Hawking before he died ... that the universe in one form or another always existed ... no creator or plan involved ... and that suffering of all forms of life always was ... and is ... natural.
The Christian view holds that if you draw near to God, He will draw near to you. Even if you feel like you’re faking, God will honor you for humbling yourself and soften your heart over time. Not saying this to be a jerk. If the evidence makes you want to believe in God, but you just don’t feel like you’re being 100% honest, your emotions will eventually follow.
@@SammyCatFace What "evidence" do you believe exists that indicates that a god created this mess? Be honest with your self ... or not ... but if you had the power to create a universe ... would suffering exist ... and if so ... WHY ... other than if you were a monster?
@@junevandermark952 hey I wasn’t trying to start a debate. I was just letting you know from the Christian perspective, God is totally ok with loving him imperfectly. Your atheist mentor seemed to think God wouldn’t excuse his doubts. I was just trying to point out that God likely would. Romans 3 is great evidence of this theological understanding. I’m sorry if I came across as condescending. That wasn’t my intention. As for your question, I believe that since God is omnipotent, omniscient, and good this must mean that suffering serves some greater purpose. I don’t claim to know what that purpose is, but I’m confident there must be one because of his character. I think David and IP point out that this refutes the logical argument from evil. If I had to create a universe, and I could choose to bring about suffering for the gain of something worth immeasurably more than the price of suffering I would do so every single time. If I was omniscient, I think I’d have a fairly simple time weighing the pros and cons.
@@junevandermark952 as for evidence of a creator, I think fine-tuning is pretty convincing. I also think the Kalam argument is pretty good. I understand that you don’t think the universe had a cause though, so I’m not gonna try and change your mind. Personally though, I find the gospel message very compelling. It has profoundly changed my life. The Bible amazes me with it’s harmony throughout the Old and New Testament. Jesus’s understanding of human nature blows me away. I’ve learned more about mankind from his teachings than anyone else. You may be convinced that his resurrection was a lie that was propagated by his disciples, but Jesus’s death wasn’t an accident. His disciples didn’t scramble to make up some story that fit, rather it seems that was the plan from all along. I just think it all really happened!
@@SammyCatFace I understand that by the belief that your soul is saved, and other souls are not ... thrills you to the core of your being. That idea repulsed me, and that (in part) is why I left religion behind. You can stay in that rut if it continues to thrill you. That is your choice. It is not my choice. Thanks for the conversation. Now you go your way ... and I'll go mine.
I think by and large, a lot of people on both sides are stuck 30-40 years ago in their arguements. Being up to date and able to converse with people is the realm of the few.
I do not understand why anyone would propose the idea of multiverses. A universe is defined as all existing matter and space as a whole. If we say there exists space and time outside of a universe, that's a contradiction. If multiverses exist, the sum of them would be the universe. There only is one universe. Words have meaning.
No there is another world...its the same old movie from atheists...they borrow from the bible, twist the message to mean something else and deceive many. John 18:36 Jesus said, _“My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place.”_
There is no multiverse because there is no evidence for it. It's a nonsensical pseudoscientific fantasy. Unfortunately, mainstream science entertains this and other dumb pseudoscientific fantasies.
@@sabhishek9289 _There is no multiverse because there is no evidence for it_ and in the next breath theist will claim a god created everything. You truly cannot make this stuff up...
_If we say there exists space and time outside of a universe, that's a contradiction_ So, can we agree that the concept of "before the big bang" is kinda nonsensical? Yet, theist (not specifically pointing at you) make claims about "before" all the time.
IP pls read up on books of jurisprudence of the madhabs regarding child marriage, if that debate with Haqiqatou is still happening. They (clerics) are aware of the harm and permanent damage to these very young girls because they noted it and have compensation in Sharia. They also cover issues of accusing minor child bride of adultery. Books - Reliance of the Traveller (Shafi), The Hedaya and Heavenly Ornaments (Hanafi)
They don't understand because they don't want to think on it too much as they have written it all off. They seem to prefer a being like Thor from marvel.
Christianity isn't a blind faith. We're in a better position than the atheists. We are certain of our faith because there's evidence for it. Just recently Richard Dawkins admitted that he could be wrong. That's the position of the Atheists.
@@Jaydays818 might well be, but given their proclivity for copy-paste arguments (because "I think with my own head, I don't blindly follow authority") you can never be sure.
@Ron Berg This is true, most new atheists haven't studied, they stand on the shoulders of others with little to no understanding of the topics they are discussing.
@@Jaydays818 let's remember that when Dawkins was criticised for his poor understanding of philosophy and theology he replied along the lines of "well of course I've never bothered reading into it, it's all rubbish".
Love IS suffering in a lot of cases. So the love of God could be that you lose your child, hypothetically, the child may have not a long to live. But swept into the arms of Our Loving God. And the parent who lost the child, well, they have 2 choices. Use this extraordinary experience to help others, including yourself, maybe form a community. Or you can choose that God hates you. Neither is the best answer, but blaming God for the death of a child, to me, is an extremely specific and individual situations.
The reason we are all here is because of Adam and Eve. Not because of their sin but because we all made the same choice: we convinced ourselves that we can decide between good and evil without God’s assistance. So God called our Bull-Poop and said: “here you go, you’re on your own now. Let’s see where this goes…”
the problem that sinners like us are forgetting God's grace while complaining about the problem of other evil is good starting point of the discussion of the general problem of evil. we have to start somewhere don't we, i say "self" is a pretty nice spot to start. and i confess, i am the worst sinner amoung sinners. Thank God somebody paid my debt.
18:00 A square circle IS possible in the context of Taxicab geometry (look it up). However, you can counterargue that in this case what you really have is a "circle" that looks like a square from the point of view of Euclidean geometry, but is really a circle in Taxicab geometry. So it's not a proper square circle because it isn't both a square and a circle in the same way (it's a square from one point of view, and a circle from a different point of view). If you don't mind the fact that it's a square from one point of view, and a circle from a different point of view, then you can have a "square circle".
I looked it up. The pictures don’t look like square circles to me. When they say square circles, they’re talking about four equal straight sides with four corners simultaneously being a no sided shape.
You ever met a person who had everything handed to them and never had adversity in thier life. They are the most terrible narsasistic people ever......
Most likely (I believe) we are spiritual beings having a human experience, and we choose the challenges before we come here. The myth of Sisyphus involves a man condemned to move the same heavy rock up the same hill every day as a punishment. - But we have millions of people who choose to go to the same gym every day and push heavy weights around for exercise. Likely, suffering is exercise for the soul.
There’s an interesting argument that’s fairly new in philosophy of religion that skeptical theism works for “tokens” of evil, while theodicies work for “types” of evil. You can come up with reasonable explanations for why God allows categories of evil to occur while not knowing God’s transcendent nature well enough to explain the grand reason specific instances of evil occur. This allows one to keep natural theology while being consistent with a type of skeptical theism.
_while not knowing God’s transcendent nature well enough to explain the grand reason specific instances of evil occur_ This isn't new.....growing up in the 80's I heard this ALL THE TIME... *God works in mysterious ways*
@@thedude0000 Meh this is more technical than that and is basically a response to the position that you can either have natural theology and theodicies, or some form of presuppositionalism/reformed epistemology and skeptical theism. It’s an argument for applying skeptical theism on one level, theodicies on another, and keeping natural theology. If you’ve heard it all the time growing up you must’ve been around a lot of philosophy of religion professors.
@@martyfromnebraska1045 _Meh this is more technical_ It's not really. The "fancy" claim: _You can come up with reasonable explanations for why God allows categories of evil to occur while not knowing God’s transcendent nature well enough to explain the grand reason specific instances of evil occur_ and the layman's claim: _God works in mysterious ways_ Are both making the exact same claim. God is sooo complex and beyond our mere human minds that we cannot always understand his motives. I spent twenty-three years as a christian and three years in seminary. When I finally deconverted because nobody could answer the question of suffering... The _god is so complex_ argument was always the fail safe.....which is a bad argument IMO.
I would like to propose that DW and IP write a book, "A Christian's Manual of Arms," containing problems like these and a clear Christian refutation to such problems. As Free Will defeats the Logical Problem of Evil, for example.
Free will doesn't defeat the logical problem of evil. As God is all knowing he could've just only created the humans he knows won't behave evil for example. Free Will isn't that Joker you might thing it is.
@@renem.5852 Did you listen to David's explanation? There remains the probabilistic problem of evil, but the classic Epicurean problem of evil -- the logical problem of evil -- is defeated by the mere fact that, so far as we know, there *_*could be*_* a reason for suffering. If it is possible that there might be a cause sufficient to justify evil, then we cannot say, "Evil exists, therefore God does not." If you hope to comment on a video, it is very helpful to first watch the video.
@@renem.5852 I'm sorry, but this appears to be a non sequitur. Are you saying that God could, for example, produce free will without ever giving people a chance to choose evil? Would that not be but the illusion of Free Will? So merely the fact that "Free Will " *_could be_* an answer to the logical PoE defeats the Logical PoE, which requires absolute exclusion in order to follow logically. So there remains only the Probabilistic PoE.
@@WhereWhatHuh you said "there might be a cause sufficient to justify evil" I say "as an all mighty God he should be able to skip this cause." This by itself doesn't effect the free will.
@@David-kz2im Oh, I thought he was just an evidentialist... I watched the whole stream and it still confuses me why he uses 'evidence' instead of TAG which is much stronger.
@@toastme I agree but all one really has to do is claim Platonism or be an anti-realist to reject the argument. It forces them to concede a lot but they don’t mind biting those bullets just to try and win an argument in the moment.
@@LtDeadeye , hm, the point of TAG is to show that all paradigms and worldviews are incoherent except for Christianity including the Platonic and anti-realists'.
@@toastme They don’t seem to mind saying things like 2+2 can equal 5 if we want it to. According to them, we just have to invent new axioms…and they’ll demonstrate it. They’ll appeal to other systems of logic, and deny moral facts. It’s unlivable but they don’t seem to mind lol.
Under what conditions do atheists exist? Is a question I posed to an atheist on line. He just tapped danced and went blah blah blah. He did say something interesting. He said an atheist might ignore any evidence. That’s just not being honest to themselves or anyone else.
Oooh. I got one i heard 'God is punishing women for having sex by making them pregnant because he's a misogynist' 😂. It would be hilarious if those people weren't so demonic 😢
I heard Moses walked down the mountain with the 10 commandments sees people worshipping a golden calf and has 3000 killed. But it's was lawful beforehand to worship a golden calf.
@@wondering_stars_in_oz8462 I hear you. Imagine a perfectly written book so easy to understand we only have 20,000 Christian schisms. Some believe a Trinity others reject a Trinity, some believe the pope others think the pope is evil. Make believe allows for all sorts of magical thinking.
@@ronbernardi yeah imagine adding and subtracting verses from the book to pretend you have some sort of point. One has to ask what motivates such behaviour. I mean it's one thing to require help to understand what is actually written, but when you making it up to confuse yourself and others along with you? THAT requires some explanation. Christians aren't responsible for Athiests making stuff up that isn't even written in the book. It's not OUR obligation to explain that, it's the Athiests who believe it.... on the subject of Trinity. Most Christians who do or don't call the Godhead a Trinity will still say Jesus is the saviour, so your using an internal theological discussion to pretend it has confused you as to who Jesus is and who HE said he was dosnt fly. Jehovahs witness and Mormon are generally not considered Christians because they don't think Jesus was God in flesh and they also refer to books other than the Bible to inform their faith. 'My children die for lack of knowledge', we are instructed to read and study.....
@@wondering_stars_in_oz8462 atheist don't make up Christians schisms. That's why we have over 20,000 Christian schisms each with its very thin, weak theological studies and defence. Moses numbers 31:17-19 kill all keep alive only women who haven't known a man. This means pregnant women, infant boys, breastfeeding baby boys. Elderly toddlers butchered and Virgin girls taken as "brides". Morality at its best.
1:37 mark - Divine Foreknowledge We seem to be in a 4-dimensional universe (both spacial and temporal). - We think we comprehend the spacial aspect of God, because we can imagine hiding from someone…we wrestle more with the temporal because we can’t envision timelessness. I would suggest that we don’t understand the omnipresence of God, because He’s not “hiding somewhere”…He’s everywhere. - Likewise, we don’t understand divine foreknowledge, because we don’t understand eternity. We think eternity is an infinite amount of time, and rather, it is timelessness. God doesn’t see the future, thus losing free will…God is in all time all at once, and we have no point of reference to gage that with.
Suffering and pain is caused by evil actions and behaviour from other people towards others - and also we can cause individual pain and suffering due to wrong or negative personal choices which cause it.
@@GodIsLove1015 Suffering and pain can also be caused by natural reasons. Losing a parent - or god forbid losing a child to a disease or less extrene causes like the struggles of daily life. Not all pain and suffering are caused by evil actions. I don't want to be mean brother/sister but was there a point you wanted to make?
@@VindensSaga I already agreed with you on that. And basically, it's saying what I already said in my first comment. Also, pain and suffering can be self-inflicted.
It’s so silly that people question the creators motives about anything. God created everything. Including us. We belong to him. When an author writes a book or a painter makes paints a picture, we don’t understand why they do certain things, they just are. It’s not our place to question why there is evil. But it’s self evident. And the Bible answers this 100 times over. We can’t have free will and also be all good. Because people make bad decisions.
lovely example of a cultist who must defend their tyrant. It's always good when a cult says don't question what our god says (aka what we humans make up). "It’s so silly that people question the creators motives about anything. God created everything. Including us. We belong to him. When an author writes a book or a painter makes paints a picture, we don’t understand why they do certain things, they just are. It’s not our place to question why there is evil. But it’s self evident. And the Bible answers this 100 times over. We can’t have free will and also be all good. Because people make bad decisions."
@@adjustedbrass7551 "are you a bot?" nope. Just a atheist who finds it important to show how poorly Christians lie. This cult does far too much harm to allow it to stand unchallenged.
Atheist: If God is good why doesn’t he put a stop to evil….. Theist: He did that once. It’s called a global flood…. Atheist: So why not just destroy the worst of the worst so others can learn by example…. Theist: He did that too. It’s called Sodom and Gamorrah….
Special thanks to KAN in Christ, Dominik Sieciński, Greyz174, AL, blue99i, Mangopeaches, Elie Chamoun, Oflameo, Zahra Berserk, Stephanie Casey, Rusko, David, Reincarnation Entertainment, Antony John Puthur, Scrooge Jones, Frank Prophecy, Apostate Prophet, Adam M, Paul Schlachter, Leonardo Doel, JohnSketchShow, Cheryl R, Trevor Green, Beatriz N., Revan Star, Polycarp Salavarrieta, watrewoks, and Luth Lexor for contributing via Super Chat and Super Stickers!
Please turn on closed captioning.
eastern orthodoxy
please ^_^
@@haydenwalton2766
No UA-cam tax it by 33% so DW only gets say 60ç to 65ç by the time it gets to him etc but not for long as these platforms have really really really done enough when it's us the people who build them literally from the ground up we us me you NOT NO Google and the multi billion dollar platforms it owns THAT WE THE PEOPLE BUILT FOR THEM 🤔
great show
my muslim husband abducted my son and christian princess posted my video and you said you would help. i have been trying to reach you
Love both of them, David who loves to talk and Michael who always looks unimpressed 😂
Lol!!😂
@@jodi3784 I didn't say there was no evidence of God. I believe there is.
😂 but true.
Ha ha
LOL!!
“The question is not why do some good people suffer, but why some do _not.”_
CS Lewis
So being good is irrelevant, then?
@@wet-read no its just the measure of Good and what defines it. Are you being good because you want to but still want personal gain is it truly a good deed? is it selfless? no it isn’t its called an ulterior motive because they did it contingent upon receiving divine protection. when you have faith in christ you do Good because you want to. Because once your saved your saved but once you realize how much he went through for you and you didn’t deserve it you would do anything for him because he does in fact deserve it.
@@Scotty_cooks "its just the measure of Good and what defines it. "
God is subjective opinion.
"when you have faith in christ you do Good because you want to. "
That's the same reason an atheist does good. No faith in Jesus required and the atheist doesn't expect any sort of reward in the afterlife for their good deeds.
@@cnault3244 A reward is something earned a gift is given i didn’t deserve eternal life it was given to me by Jesus he died for you too btw. You cant earn what is eternal.
@@Scotty_cooks If you finish the book you find out that Jesus gets better. According to the book, he gave up his weekend for our sins.
I follow both of you & when I saw you 2 together, I knew this would be great, but had no idea how great. Just over a year ago, my husband went to be with Jesus unexpectedly 5 days before my only daughter turned 13. Long story short, and I understood...generally apologetics doesn't completely help right away with healing...but I was caught off guard about how much this video...& things both of you said gave me things I needed to know to help me in my journey of grieving & healing. Thanks so much & may the Lord continue to bless both of you and your amazing ministries.
God Speed to you and your family.
Prayers are with you and your daughter. Jesus be with you both!
God bless you sister.
God took my late wife from me 5 years ago in a sudden accident. It left me and my entire family blown away by grief. God comforted me in various ways, from little signs to the random loving acts of friends and strangers.
God works in mysterious ways. Hang in there. Prayers going out to you. 🙏🏼✝️🙏🏼
Without *lies* Islam *dies*
It's already dead
Fastest growing religion in the world.
@@InigoMontoya- it is also the fastest hated religion in the world
Without lies christian faith also dies.
@@InigoMontoya- Only through birth-rate. More people are leaving Islam than Christianity.
Thank you David and Mike, my mind is hurting now from all the thinking.
Yep.. all that foccusing and concentration was giving me a headache. Gave the brain cells some exercise.
That's what happens when we simply must have the fruit of knowledge lmaorotf
I have education in Neuropsychology and am happy to inform you that this means you have learned so much that your neural network has been restructuring, and by sleep and then revisit by meditation on these subjects you'll be able to grasp something from a better vantage point, and it also is a great way of saying that you really was listening in a humble way! 🤓❤🧠❤️🔥😎
At the 1 hour 29 minute mark David makes a point about the moral argument that I had never heard before, and one that is absolutely brilliant! If the Problem of Evil and Suffering is actually a problem, then it can only be one if a moral standard is first taken as axiomatic. This is brilliant, David!
@Troy Hailey And they can't live consistently or without being a hypocrite by denying evil. ex. ask an atheist about the actions of Hitler, Stalin Mao Bush Trump lol...
1:29
@@dionsanchez4478atheists don't need to deny evil, they just need to deny an objective standard of evil.
No inconsistency required.
A human definition for “good” is different than God’s as well.
@Troy Hailey yup. just try keying an atheists car.....they will take offense
Re: Suffering Deer; Even the fact that a deer may suffer needlessly AND humans know it can/does happen, it can create compassion within humans for the created world, thus, increasing the virtue of humans.
Exactly. By know their may be an evil that may go unaddressed, it forces us to be more ardent in our pursuit of virtue and justice within our societies, so that said needless suffering doesn't need to happen. We know for example in Africa, so many people die and as a result, I feel like a lot of us are conditioned to want to help them one way or another. We don't really see any of it lest it's by photos and even then, people still feel sympathy beforehand just from heresay. It doesn't really affect any of the first world countryman at all, yet it elicits empathy that motivates people, atheists and theists alike, to go and help them, in whatever way they can, fostering more virtue and bringing humanity a little closer together. I know it's not smooth sailing, whatever is going on out there, but the attempts are being made.
Thank you David. Im really happy you brought Mike so we can all enjoy your monologue.
Love this collab.
Thank you David! The Lord is using you. It's very encouraging to me every time I see your videos!
david coper feild naguc god
@@sharonbraselton4302 David Copperfield? What are you talking about?
Re: 15:00 ff.: Many years ago I wrote a poem called "ycidoehT A." The point was that God's mercy and grace in the face of my stupidity is so overwhelming that the question becomes not how a good God allow evil, but how a sane God could be so merciful and gracious to me.
Excellent!! That’s what so many Can’t Grasp!
He gave up Himself so we could Be in heaven w/ Him when he did not have to do so!
God is Love
God is Grace
We at the very least MUST show Gratitude each and every day w/ Singing and dancing and be joyful even when we don’t feel like it cause that shows the devil - “Nice Try”
@@donjohnson1290based
If there is a multiverse, there is a multiverse creator. Even it has to have a beginning.
Yeah but there isn't a shred of evidence for the multiverse. Apparently, atheists have the nerve to use the multiverse theory as their argument even though the multiverse theory is non scientific nonsense. It is pseudoscience that has no evidence backing it up. Ironically it's the same atheists who subscribe to such pseudoscience claim to be Pro science.
@High Priest of the Flying Spaghetti Monster Wouldn't be much of a God if He need a beginning. He is not part of the physicality of nature, but the cause of it. The necessary uncaused cause. Beats fluctuations in nothing.
@High Priest of the Flying Spaghetti Monster You literally didn't even get the argument correct lol...
@High Priest of the Flying Spaghetti Monster Well you can say that but you're just not gonna get many people to agree with you. Athiests or theists for that matter.
@High Priest of the Flying Spaghetti Monster That would go against the current scientific knowledge on it. I thought Atheist's were the ones that believed science over faith. You just proved that wrong. Atheism is an emotional response to things they cannot for some reason accept.
Love seeing you two together - great discussion. God bless you brothers
What I find most interesting about the skeptical theism approach is that it is practically the same argument presented by God at the end of the book of Job. The fact that a book written about 3000 years ago still has relevance to these discussions just makes me appreciate it all the more. Thank you for this stream, I'm trying to do an apologetics course at my church and your guy's channels and this video in particular have been massive inspirations for that. Thank you for your work!
I have always wondered why it is so difficult to explain logical fallacies to internet atheist. I swear everytime i point out a fallacy the conversation descends into senseless mockery
Maybe the problem is that the average internet Atheist knows more about logical fallacies than you do.😂
every time i see an internet Christian cultist trying to explain logical fallacies, it almost always defending the ones they just committed.
@@ramigilneas9274 except most of them can’t properly identify logical fallacies, and just throw them out as a scapegoat when they run out of objections, 🤣🤣🤣🤣.
@@sw3783
Well, 20% of all Americans think that all of the stories in the Bible are literally true… so we only have to find out who those remaining 5% are.😂
You death blood magic cultists are fucking weird.
Amazing discussion. Love it when you two team up. Praise God!!
Suffering is like an alarm clock for the soul - The whole point is to wake us up to the true reality of the “Kingdom”.
@@Galmala94 - If you’ve ever gone through a tough time and came out the other side, you can see the benefit of tough times.
The more I study, the less I believe in eternal punishment, but more like purification.
In Buddhism, the suffering that we encounter in life can be overcome by enlightenment… a state called nirvana (which literally means “to blow out”). - like blowing out a flame. I think the hell we go through could mean a number of things, and it’s meant to purify (like gold in a furnace) not to punish.
Thank you for your clarity! One of the best discussions yet!
this reminds me of a class i took in college 'Quests for the explanation of Evil' which was my first formal introduction to epistemology.. all the things i learned in the class were extremely valuable, but the BIGGEST takeaway is that almost no one even bothers to think about the nature of their beliefs or the arguments that support them.. it's why flat earthers and atheists just keep proposing the same lame disproven crap and why most Christians don't have good answers.
@saved by the word what's that got to do with anything?
@saved by the word I made no such claims, where's your relevance?
@saved by the wordMy position on cosmology is not germane to the discussion as it has nothing to do with whether or not the majority of folks consider the basis of their beliefs, ergo my suggestion that your comments are irrelevant, or non-topical if you prefer. Edit: it IS consistent that a self professed flat earther would attempt to drive the conversation off the rails in an attempt to seem superior, there's that.....
Uh.. ok.. whatever you think.. have a ball with that -- I said nothing about faith or the actual position, i said that most atheists and flat earthers propose the same tired crap and that most Christians don't have good answers to those tired postulations. I'm not willing to engage with you in a discussion about flat earth or science, it's a waste of my time. You're having a completely different conversation that I'm really not interested in and which, I'll say again, is non topical/irrelevant. That said, by all means go feel all superior if you need to.
@saved by the word Yeah, but I’ve flown planes before and the earth sure don’t seem flat? Why can I fly straight around the world and not find an edge? When I go long range hiking, why is there magnetic declination if the world is flat? Why if I do long range shooting, there is the Coriolis Effect?
This isn’t exactly a scientific method of inquiry. I encounter things in the world, and I must understand those effects. Those effects existed prior to my awareness of them. I have spoken to many people, good folks, who believe the earth is flat. But from those conversations, the difference is that I have encountered these effects and they haven’t yet. How would you factor this in? (Asking in good faith)
I found IP a while ago, and am so grateful that I did. So much common sense and insight. As for you, Mr. Wood, I thought I had lost you completely when you gave up your old channel. I was so happy to stumble upon this in my feed. Subscribed, and can't wait to see more of your brilliant commentary. You were missed! I see that you reposted your video on Norm MacDonald. That one should stay up on the internet forever.
Because UA-cam is retartid, they would shut him up, they banned me multiple times too for not keeping my mouth shut
At one point I stopped calling myself a Baptist and was even close to avoiding the term Christian. I've changed my mind on both of those. I understand avoiding labels feels improtantt, because the labels carry bagage, but eventually i realized, people will label you and misrepresent you whether you choose the label or not. Now i just prefer to have discussions with people who want to talk, dispite my beliefs
Now all you need to do is come to an Orthodox church and your journey will be complete! 😄
@@jodi3784 Well why not visit him at His house? He left the door open for us to come and sit with Him. Seems a bit rude not to, tbh.
That’s how I’ve felt about the word “religious”. I hate how Christian’s have made demonized that word because the culture has. Now that I see that Christianity is a religion, and it is indeed the one TRUE religion, I now am proud to say that I am religious. I can be religious and not a Pharisee. And my religion is Christ ❤
I've also thought of calling myself things other than Christian, but decided I don't have to change, they do. I don't call "progressives", "progressive christians" anymore. They lost the right to the lable "Christian" - they are not taking the goodness of the word away.
I heard a video by Redeemed Zoomer where he talked about conservative Christians always giving ground to progressives, which makes them even more progressive. We should lovingly stand our ground and not let some bad apples ruin everything.
Thanks for such great apologetics videos! God bless!
I find it hilarious that you guys act so mean but care so much I like it
New York Christians 😂
The tatoo on the gentleman's arm is Hosea 4:6 in Hebrew, if anyone was curious. It translates to: "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge".
What time was it shown, for those who want a quick check?...
Leviticus 19:28-"Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh (for the dead, )nor print any marks upon you"- this prohibits tattoos.
@@ronbernardi well he had a lack of knowledge there i guess
@@paulfast1893 hahaha hahaha hahaha true, a Christian who lacked knowledge of Christianity.
@@ronbernardi the reinterpretation squad is coming in 3,2,1...
Wow this is one of the most beautiful things i have ever seen. Godbless you my friend! Im crying right now
I'm definitely a premillennialist, but at the same time I think that we need to look at what scripture holds up as heroes to see how we should act. The only people called to just sit back and wait, are people who rationally cannot do anything anyway. Elderly widows, and the desperately poor. Ordinary people are always called to act. It depends on our station in life, I'm not in a position were I can call out false prophets to a duel, but I can pray, and focus on living a holy life. And way too many Christians are complacent I think.
Ministry is time consuming, metally draining and sometimes doesn't produce the fruit we'd like to see. I completely understand why most Christians end up just attending a church, i've been one, however its important to be involved and help others to get involved
The lives of the saints is really illustrative in this regard, and I'll be the first to admit I don't do that nearly enough
Thanks for this video it's made me realize how little I actually know about philosophy
To quote Obi-wan Kenobi, "You've taken your first step into a larger world." A very good resource is "Illogical Atheism" by Bo Jinn. He discusses atheism and religion from a philosophical and logical standpoint.
The “problem” of evil assumes that good people exist (Romans 3:23) and is therefore a loaded question fallacy. If “there is none righteous, no, not one” that means there are no good people.
I always thought that arguments from evil/suffering in all its variants were silly. I noticed a few issues with it over the years when thinking about it. Some I list below.
1) The argument ignores the creation itself, and that said creation has agency.
2) I noticed that the argument relies on a strawman of God, reducing God to "all-loving" and "all-powerful" while ignoring God as a person with many traits, motivations and desires.
3) The people making the argument are contradicting themselves: they demand God turn us all into slaves who cannot do evil, then say slavery is evil.
4) The argument is mere scapegoating: "it's God's fault that I use my agency to do evil".
There are other problems with the "problem of evil/suffering" so-called "argument" (it's not really an argument, it's just a complaint that God is not doing what I want him to do, which is another problem with this pseudo-argument).
Your argument is amazing. Atheism has the problem of evil since they do not have a standard beyond what they feel
It also ignores the Bible which explains evil and predicts it’s defeat.
"reducing God to "all-loving" and "all-powerful" - Do you disagree that He is those things? They seem commonly held beliefs but certainly not universal.
"they demand God turn us all into slaves who cannot do evil, then say slavery is evil" - That is not usually how the problem is put forward. Either you can say punish wrong doers or make certain things impossible with the end goal of reducing evil (make rapists impotent, make serial killers have a heart attack, make child molesters go blind etc), or simply reduce the suffering which is natural to this world (cure cancer, ebola, aids etc, remove horrific parasites, calm the continental plates to stop earthquakes and volcanoes etc). You don't need a perfect world, but you could have a much better one, and doing any of these things reduces suffering while not affecting freewill.
"The argument is mere scapegoating: "it's God's fault that I use my agency to do evil" - No one is saying humans don't make decisions to carry out evil acts, but if we had the power to stop such horrors occurring, we would certainly do so. If we could stop a child rapist before they destroy someone's life, then we would. If we could stop millions dying from malaria, we would. If we could make it rain in drought-stricken countries, then we would.
@@Wertbag99 You appear to have ignored the "reducing" part of the comment, despite quoting it yourself.
"That is not usually how the problem is put forward."
So? That's exactly what the argument is. Just because it's made in a dishonest fashion designed to hide its internal contradiction does not mean it is not incoherent. Your attempt to to avoid this incoherency was useless.
" if we had the power to stop such horrors occurring, we would certainly do so."
Here you are making the same argument: that we should enslave people as a good.
You can try to word this any way you want, but that is the necessary conclusion. Depriving a person of agency necessarily enslaves them, meaning you are doing an evil...so the evil of enslavement must be prohibited via...enslavement. What you leave out of this whole argument is that agency is a good. Without agency, we cannot have meaningful relationships with anyone since we would effectively be automatons.
The other things you leave out is where we draw the line. "Horrible" acts can mean anything to different people in different times. To God, every sin is horrible, even something you might consider minor. Sometimes even things we consider small can cause tremendous harm. Sometimes we try to do something we think is good and cause tremendous harm. It's a nonsense argument no matter how you try to frame it. And here's the worst part of the argument: it's irrelevant because it has no value in the question of God's existence.
@@droe2570 "Depriving a person of agency necessarily enslaves them, meaning you are doing an evil...so the evil of enslavement must be prohibited via...enslavement."
- Not at all. If a man tells you he is going to rape a child and you have the power to stop him, would you say, "No I can't do that, I'd be robbing him of his free will?". If someone wants to punch you in the face, would you let them, because stopping them would be taking away their agency? If Jeffrey Dahmer says he's going to murder and eat someone and you could stop him and save that life, would you say "Oh no, I wouldn't want to enslave him?"
It should be obvious that stopping evil can be a good thing, or if we cannot stop it then punishing the individual to avoid such evil being committed in future is also a good thing.
And of course, none of that even applies to the question of suffering, where disease, parasites and natural disasters aren't caused by freewill anyway.
""Horrible" acts can mean anything to different people in different times."
- I would really hope there are things we could all agree on. Do you have doubts that child rape is evil? Maybe on the fence about cannibalism? Not sure if seeing children die bleeding from their eyes as ebola ruptures their internals, is something you would rather not happen?
It's this strange contradiction that some Christians do, where in one breath they will say we have objective moral standards, and those standards are "written on our hearts" and yet in the next breath try to tell us we have no way to judge good and evil, and maybe the evil we see is actually fine.
" It's a nonsense argument no matter how you try to frame it."
- It's a question that Christians have struggled with for thousands of years. It has been the cause of thousands losing their faith. One of the major reasons is it hits people on an emotional level, where you can see the suffering for yourself and ask "why does God not help these people?". When a Christian with doubts seeks answers and gets a hand wave response like "freewill" they often feel like there is no good answer and hence are driven further away.
"it's irrelevant because it has no value in the question of God's existence."
- It does if you are trying to apply the characteristics of all-powerful and all-loving to the God claims. An uncaring deistic God has no problem with evil or suffering, but the common image of the Christian God being good and therefore should want to care, and with the power to stop vast amounts of suffering, but not doing so, is in direct conflict with the claims being made.
I shared this with an intelligent atheist after searching hours for a better argument. You guys nailed it concisely in an engaging way.
Sweet and sour. Could we have some more, please?
Did you show the atheist evidence for a god?
@@cnault3244Yes, now can you show us that evidence that you've touched grass within the last year?
@@alanrickman4586 Why would I need to show evidence for a claim I have not made?
Now, you have claimed you have evidence for god, present it.
@@cnault3244 Bro i'm not gonna argue with some guy who hasn't touched grass within the last year.
@@alanrickman4586 Who hasn't touched grass within the last year?
So much wisdom in this stream. God bless you both ❤
Both of you guys really help me.
This made my day. Thank you both.
How come Jesus was fully God and Jesus also was fully man? Does it sound ridiculous? 😆🤣😂
In John 5:31, Jesus said - "if I (Jesus) bear witness of myself, then I would be a liar!" - this verse proves that Jesus is not God because actual God's testimony alone is always sufficient!
.
@@اروانشاه Thank you for your question. Jesus is referring to the Mosaic Law where two witnesses are required. Your example shows that Jesus and the Father are two Persons. It does not say anything about the divinity of Jesus. Then while it is true that Jesus is both man and God, he set aside the use of his divine attributes while on earth and put on humanity so that he could become a perfect sacrifice for humans. I hope this helps. Blessings on your journey.
@@AirChurch Why Christians have many sects with different theology and different core beliefs? Each Christian sect labeling other Christian sects as heretical and deviated. Below are their major sects:
a. Catholics (Idolators, believe that Jesus is God incarnate).
b. Protestants (Removed 7 books from bible )
c. Unitarians (Jesus is son of god and a prophet but NOT GOD himself)
d. Jehovah witness (Trinity deniers)
.
@@AirChurch Why many expert Christian Scholars refuting the status of the bible New Testament as an inspired scripture? The early Church Fathers also never considered NT as inspired scripture!
Bible New Testament (NT) was written few hundred years after Jesus time by unknown (anonymous) author. Bible author is still unknown until today. Hence the believers in the NT are all following utter conjecture and anonymous words whose source we cannot know and neither can we trace back the words or verify them.
@@AirChurch Islamic Quran writing has isnad (chain of narration) since the time of Prophet Muhammad. The Christians have the matn (text) of their scripture but no isnad (chain of narration). Hence it is impossible to trace back the alleged words attributed to Jesus all the way back to his mouth. So, how can it be known that the Christian material is not mixed with falsehood when there is an absence of isnads and no verification checks in place at all.
From my experience with missionaries and doing missions on 3 continents, and along side various groups/denominations... from what I could tell, premill missionaries weren't stymied by their eschatology at all. Indeed they were motivated by it enormously.
Note: most Southern Baptists, pentacostals and charismatics are premill. These are some of the most prolific missionary senders.
Thank you guys 👍✝️❤
Thanks for these and what you two do!
1:04:40 Excellent point by IP! Had not thought of that angle. Good points by both throughout. Thanks for the vid', Dizzle!
I have been so angry wity God, and I hope He still forgives everything I've done..... Thank you for your very helpful perspectives.
Only through suffering one can value the preciousness of life.
@highpriestoftheflyingspagh8071 to focus on the preciousness of the next life. I would say that the children are better off to be in the presence of the Almighty Lord, with zero suffering anymore, total joy eternally. And as a parent you will have to look forward to meeting your child without suffer.
@High Priest of the Flying Spaghetti Monster I'm pretty sure everyone dies. There are some better ways to go than others but it's going to happen. Immense suffering does not prove God isn't real and hasn't made a kingdom for you after you die.
@highpriestoftheflyingspagh8071 well maybe it doesn't explain it because that is not the question you asked?!
@High Priest of the Flying Spaghetti Monster Why do you assume that suffering is a bad thing?
@High Priest of the Flying Spaghetti Monster theists have never claimed that God is a pleasure maximizer so what exactly are you arguing
Appreciate these 2 very much, what a blessing : 👑🛡💎🔥🗡✝️✡️🕊
I know I can’t state this enough.
I love IPs Library of Videos unpacking INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT TOPICS AND DOES SO HARMONIOUSLY LOL….I hope his depiction of the 2nd coming is correct. How those who will end up in hell will do so because they will choose that. I’m still looking for Gods Will in my Life but I love this new Mindframe I’ve been given / New change of heart towsrds it all, New Mindset and New heart for things and ppl. I’m not perfect and learning so much everyday by guarding myself from the evil junk / vomit that’s on my feed sometimes but it’s so effortless to avoid it now w/ the help of the HS!
Sorry lol just wanted to agree w/ ur statement - didn’t mean to write a novel
Be blessed
Thank you, David, for giving me some arguments for my apologetic arsenal. Thank you, Mike, for teaching me to listen. 😝
youd still lose since they are crap
@@Donald-loves-the-uneducated In what way?
@@yesenia3816 for every argument you think you've learned from any cult apologists on UA-cam, there are hundreds of videos addressing them.
@@Donald-loves-the-uneducated Hmm. You still haven't provided any evidence.
@@yesenia3816 evidence for what?
Love you both from India
Way to crush the multiverse, David! Will steal!
One point I think is missed is that pain and suffering are not intrinsically evil. The rare few people who cannot feel pain, do not know when they are being injured and can easily die because of it. Pain is a warning system that something is wrong. When we feel emotional pain, this is because something is wrong. So when anyone is suffering, it is an indicator that something is wrong, nothing intrinsically moral about pain and suffering in and of itself. The moral question comes into play when you are speaking about causing pain. You may cause pain by accident, or on purpose. However, even causing pain on purpose may be out of a desire for a good result. For example rebreaking a bone that was set improperly hurts a person, in the moment for a long term gain. Or telling a person the truth about someone who is manipulating them may cause them emotional pain, but if they see the truth, that will be worth the pain.
As for you, what you intended against me for evil, God intended for good, in order to accomplish a day like this-to preserve the lives of many people.
THANK YOU for introducing me to this man (Michael Jones) ..David! l had never heard of him before. Have an AMAZING Easter! :D
I kind of appreciate Mike's approach in his videos more than David's (tho I love David's vids). My impression is David responds TO atheists, agnostics, infidels, etc. while Mike addresses their potential audiences encouraging them to not put up w/their deceit. Reasoning w/Anti-christianity voices is very much a losing battle at this point; they're determined to destroy faith and reason is not an option. I'd rather invest my time in containing and burning the rubbish they spread by responding making noise with truth. Keep your eye on God's method: freewill. Evil/destruction will be here until judgement day; provide enough of the alternative for the uncertain to have opportunity to choose. 🕊️
Each of us must make up our minds ❤️
I love listening to these while editing videos, it makes time go by faster while also giving me insightful information, keep up the good work brothers in Christ
And God bless you in Jesus name
“When you argue against Him, you are arguing against the very Power that makes you able to argue at all.”
CS Lewis
You know, I watched your video where you revealed your quite substantial life experiences and whilst I respect the final outcome resulting in your acceptance of the Christian religion, I can only say that, in general, your life was a rabbit hole of experiences and thoughts interacting with your environment. Although not as "eventful" as yours, my own life's journey produced an outcome which one could say is the opposite to yours - I transitioned from a devout Catholic to being an atheist. To me, what this highlights is that there are a myriad of personalities, environments, circumstances which mould (or you guys would probably say mold) who we are. Although I could not hope to experience exactly what you experienced during your life's journey, there were many stages in that journey where I would have arrived at very much different conclusions to the ones you came to accept.
But then we speak in generalities. Your beliefs are the product of your consciousness coming to terms with your experiences and environment and as such, you don't have a high need for verifiable substantiation to satisfy your belief. My own personal journey, having being exposed to scientific training, has resulted in me transitioning from being religious to accepting atheism. The words of an ancient script satisfy your needs for substantiation and if it makes you content, then so be it. To me, they have transitioned from "The word of God" to the attempts of the ancients to explain what to them was inexplicable, and to us now is totally subject to interpretation of what they wrote or meant. Having said that, I acknowledge that there are scientists who still hold on to their religion, but as stated before, everyone's life journey is quite unique.
You might regard me as an amoral, soul-less atheist, but that doesn't stop me from wishing you well on your life's journey, nor does it prevent me formulating my own morals to live by.
11:20 THANK YOU! A worldview must be consistent. Once you choose a fundamental root premise, all other points and premises must follow from there or must be consistent with it.
12:51 To me, understanding defense of the Problem of Evil comes from understanding that three kinds of Good and Evil exist: Experiential Good, Moral Good, and Spiritual Good.
And what follows from the "atheistic worldview" aka not believing in a God?
@@renem.5852 If we begin with the assumption that there is no God, then we become like Sartre or Camus (The universe is meaningless and our lives are empty; we are fussing about over nonsense) or else like Kafka (our lives are meaningless and our illusions of morality come from our base evil desires -- "the pig sty") or like Nietzsche (As long as we're evil and life is meaningless, we have no reason to do good, so take what you want).
On the other hand, if we begin with the assumption that there is no God _ad Argumentum,_ like Tolstoi, then we find that life is a meaningless equation, and we can only make the equations sensible by having both God and Physical elements in our equations -- "A bridge between the finite and the infinite." ... Which is why Tolstoi abandoned Nihilism in favor of a simple spiritual form of Christianity.
If you just read that carefully, you now know more about philosophy than most college sophomores. You're welcome.
@@WhereWhatHuh The universe is then meaningless in an overall perspective, yes.
That doesn't conclude that our lives are empty, that is a non sequitur.
I also don't get how you conclude that Nietzsche thought we have no reason to do good. How did you get there?
Nevertheless it's still a non sequitur. Because the assumption of no God existing doesn't lead to "we don't have any reason to do good".
Because no God existing doesn't make our lives *for ourselves* meaningless, hence you can't argue based on the meaningless of one's life.
Nihilism and atheism are different things, you are mixing up terms.
Probably most nihilists are also atheists, yes. But nihilism is nothing that follows directly from atheism.
And if you read carefully, you just learned that an atheism does not need to be a nihilist and therefore argue based on non sequiturs. You're welcome.
@@renem.5852 Alright... Let's take it slower, then... So you acknowledge the fundamental idea underlying existentialism, and it's cousin/conjoined-twin, nihilism. Life is meaningless if we begin with the assumption that there is no God.
But then you argue that atheism does not mean nihilism. You want to be an "atheist" and not believe that there is nothing outside of the observable physical universe. Okay, so what inhabits your atheistic metaphysical space? "The Force?" Ghosts? "Nature" or "The universe," meaning something just like God, but definitely not God?
If you say "Nothing," (Nihi) then, congratulations, you are now a Nihilist. Or you were one all along, but never finished thinking it through to its conclusion. Again, notice what I congratulated Wood and Jones for saying, namely, that one's initial assumptions produce one's world-view.
Now, you also ask how Nietzsche leads to doing one's own thing, and taking what one wants, without regard for morality. Nietzsche tried to do what you are trying to do: To create meaning within a meaningless construct. I would invite you to read _Thus Spake Zarathustra_ and _Ecco Homo._
In it, Zarathustra constructs a concept of an Ubermensch (Meta-man) who "creates life and gives purpose" in the context of abandoning traditional concepts of God and morality. Zarathustra himself was a sort of -- for lack of a more precise term, an "Ascended Master" or pseudo-spiritual being, who revealed to mere mortals the keys to creating the "Artist tyrant" who is the Ubermensch.
Note the inconsistent terms; Abandoning all hope of traditional morality, a new pseudo-morality is created based upon producing the ubermensch. Thus, if one feels that taking from the weak will facilitate building the society which would produce the Ubermensch, one is free to do so. For the SuperHomme (Ubermensch) "All is permitted."
Belief that one will face judgement for doing so is absurd, since "God is Dead," in Nietzsche's mind.
Thus my summary: That per Nietzsche, we have no reason to do "Good." (We should, he opines, instead be working to make the Society of the Ubermensch).
Please realize, Friend: In Philosophy, all roads lead to Rome, or else to Carthage. Any other points, including Sils-Maria, merely take us to these places by a longer course. If we abandon Rome, we are destined for Carthage.
@@WhereWhatHuh
"Life is meaningless if we begin with the assumption that there is no God."
This is wrong.
"You want to be an "atheist" and not believe that there is nothing outside of the observable physical universe."
This is not what an atheist is. Atheists don't hold the view that there is nothing outside of the observable physical universe. Atheists hold the worldview that they don't believe in the existence - whether withing or outside of the universe - of a deity.
Atheists for example still can be spritualists. That's no contradiction.
"Okay, so what inhabits your atheistic metaphysical space?"
How about: "I don't know".
If you don't want to accept that answer: Please define what you mean with "your atheistic metaphysical space". "Metaphysical Space" is not an actual term, yet alone not a scientific one.
"If you say "Nothing," (Nihi) then, congratulations, you are now a Nihilist."
I wanna be bold and say I doubt that you define "Metaphysical Space" in a way that *this* is the definition of a nihilist.
37:18 IP unironically said spoilers from C.S Lewis Perelandra.
The concept of the Multiverse has always reminded me of a "hail Mary pass" in that there's not much anyone can do to deny the clockwork universe. Rather than believe that there is something beyond this life it's imperative to find a reason for not believing, no matter how unlikely.
"Rather than believe that there is something beyond this life it's imperative to find a reason for not believing, no matter how unlikely. "
Well, the epistemic justification for belief would be after it has demonstrable evidence. No one needs to find a reason for not believing. The honest position is to remain unconvinced until there is evidence.
@@nonprogrediestregredi1711 Sorry, but that argument makes no sense. The concept for believing by faith alone does make sense. If you want absolute proof of another life beyond this one & it's proven than the most evil people in the world including Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao, & every other evil would be believers. Not because they are good, deserving people but because they are afraid not to believe. Pick a side, evil or good. There is no other honest position.
The concept of the multiverse is mostly just a thought experiment and nothing much more. I don't use it against the fine tuning argument because if don't necessarily accept that there is a multiverse. The Puddle Analogy is the one I hear more often or that if this universe was fine tuned, it was fine tuned for black holes and neutron stars rather than for life.
@Sheikh Boyardee That argument makes no sense? What? Yeah, it really does make sense. The people you mentioned are irrelevant, and evil is a subjective label. But if you think that believing by faith alone is sensible, then Hindus who have faith that people will go through their afterlife to be reincarnated as insects is also sensible. Would you agree with that belief?
@@sheikhboyardee556 You do realize that Hitler was a Christian?
Would one answer for the preponderance of evil in this world is that to choose a life with God we also must be able to have an idea of what life would be like without him?
It’s a legitimate mental exercise but the average atheist will retort with “well why can’t he just make us love him?” They will naturally follow by claiming we have no free will in a theistic or an atheistic system
A collab with Rob from Sentinel Apologetics would be great too.
As to the Probabalistic Problem of Evil, I don’t even consider it an argument. How can a human being decide whether the amount of suffering in the world is necessary or not for the greatest possible good? Even if you could somehow know, how would you convince anyone else? How would you even know what it would look like? Furthermore it really seems to involve trying to calculate how many souls can be saved and if purgatory exists and how the mortal world in general interacts with the spiritual world. It’s just an incalculable mess. It is impossible to see whether this renders theism more or less likely.
I think the so-called argument derives it’s power principally by making the atheist look sympathetic because they don’t have to tell people thier suffering is necessary. They can say, “Its not your fault! You deserve better!” Whereas the theist has to tell them that most of them probably aren’t worth God’s time and are best used as fuel for the machine that will save the elect. I have a dim view of humanity and though I love the little rascals I am quite convinced Hell is better than any of us deserve, so suffering doesn’t faze Me a bit. Nor am I concerned with putting on a rhetorical show to impress anyone. The suffering in the world is probably much lower than it ought to be, and it seems to me that rather suspicious that the people who suffer least are the ones most likely to judge the suffering too great.
The Beysian argument is downright silly. You cannot possibly try to imagine the universe unbiasedly. Nor again can you know how much suffering or what kind would be implied by God’s purpose. Nor can you even know if humanity is possible given naturalism. But, if you ask Me to consider what I see around Me and what I know of history, obviously the sort and amount of suffering I see indicates an extraordinarily merciful God who is rather transparent in His purposes and goes out of His way to craft complex narratives of suffering and cathartsis into peoples lives and history itself. And you have a humanity so degenerate and hard headed that they sit around mooing and crying “WHY ME!?” When the answers constantly stares them in the face and because the answer isn’t “Because you’re awesome” they refuse to see it.
The proper answer to that nonsense about gods foreknowledge contradicting gods free will is simply to restate it correctly. God does not inherently experience time. His mind being founded in eternity, He has no foreknowledge of Himself because there is no future for Him to know about nor past in which He could have known it. God exists in an endless present and He never in which he eternally makes all of His decisions simultaneously. Think of it like a database containing all logical possibilities connected to a function representing God’s will. Run the database through the divine will function and you have Gods decisions. Got knows what He decides as He decides it, but He never begins to decide nor does He stop deciding it. His being entails the decision. This does imply god cannot change His mind, but that also is implied by perfection, ie If God’s every decision is perfect then He would not ever choose differently since any other decision would be less desirable to Him and why would He choose that which He does not desire?
Exquisitely said.
I'm utterly disappointed to see you have a strictly "gaming channel" when your theological commentary & theodicy are so articulate & interesting.
Sorry, I'm not into those games or anime or I would sub. Take care.
I think the free will defense still holds solid in the case of animal suffering. If there are spiritual beings which also are capable of falling to sin, then it is possible that "natural evils" are the result of free will choices by such beings to inflict suffering...which, just like human suffering, God can purpose to his will for a higher good EVEN IF no human is aware of it. It's impossible to claim with certainty that such a thing as "pointless suffering" exists at all, simply on the basis that it's outside of our knowledge or perspective.
The atheist theory that God and Christianity is a destructive force in human society is far older than internet edgelords of today. I know this from reading the works of G K Chesterton, where he references this idea.
Apparently ancient atheists said the same.
ah yes...theories are a dime a dozen...like the existence of unicorns and mermaids in another multiverse where also 1+1=3
After Nietzsche's linguistic cannonballs against Christianity everything else is mere commentary.
I don't know anyone more acute in their atheistic logic and psychological insights, maybe Dostoevsky. The 19th century ushered in the giants of contempt and dissection.
@@zoelong6021 Good. You agree with me. So to say that this speculation is the atheists only counter to the fine tuning argument is poor gaslighting. Or worse, ignorance.
@@zoelong6021 I don't even know what you're trying to say, but your PFP gives me doubts as to whether it's anything of value.
I’d love to see a debate with David and Richard Dawkins.
@@Unconskep None are so blind as those that DO NOT WANT to see....there's more evidence today than ever has been pointing to GOD...e.g DNA, James Webb telescope discoveries.
In actual fact - *every theory atheists cling to had to be walked back.*
You make falsified claims and silly conjectures about the lack of written works on Jesus the Messiah - his existence was verified by other non Chrsitians like Josephus. Also, Alexander the Great didn't write anything about himself...so why do you believe he existed? Or do you think you need a "selfie" to prove you exist?
That would be sooooo boring
The Debate will be completely useless I think as Richard Dawkins would reject all evidence for God regardless of how strong the evidence for God is. He said it in an interview himself.
Dawkins doesn't debate, he just makes grade school strawman attacks and then scoffs a lot.
I don't see much reason to "debate" when each side talk to his own audience, then walks away declaring himself the winner.
This is pretty much what happens each time there's an apologist vs. atheist spokesman debate.
58:32
I think that sceptical theism can be easily answered by "If God has reason to allow evil and he is a good and loving God, he would tell or reveal to his conscious creation about them." Answering this is the interesting part of the discussion.
The Book of Job already answered that question, might want to read it...
Thank God for using you both. I've learned a lot from y'all and others here on the tube. And much more to learn.
Wanted to share that the LORD help me with a Muslim, Lyft driver; the wheels in his head were turning. There wasn't much time, but he heard how we're made in the image and likeness of the Triune God, as Revealed In Christ; as The Word of The Father, He Proceeded from The Father. The Word is No less The Wisdom He was (IS) in The Father , and we know the Father's Wisdom is Eternal. And I asked, as man, where does your word come from? Your (lesser)wisdom; and a spirit goes with it as in a breath, coming from your heart(spirit). These parts* of us are in the likeness of the *Persons* of God. Yet, we're very much Not like God. And Not of His Spirit. But the Holy Word of The Father was sent In the very Power of the Holy Spirit. This means Jesus Christ Is One with The Father and He Is our God.
...
Then the Lyft ride was over
I think we should consider AP being in more livestreams like this as if he's also a Christian since responding to certain things like this can possibly be helpful for him too.
I can struggle with doubt when thinking about that after having access to the same gospel for 2000 yrs, we still can't agree on even salvation issues.
If any of you lack wisdom let him ask of GOD that giveth liberally to all men but let him ask in faith nothing wavering. There is no debate. Remember THE NAME OF JESUS. What does it mean?
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God."- John 3 verses 16 to 21.
@MichaelAChristian1 Oh my what shallow nonsense. When you die and realize you chose the wrong religion (tortured for an eternity), are you still gonna accept God as good? Or will you see that for what it is?
@@adamgates1142 Read John 10. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.
While I was still confused by my religious childhood indoctrination, an Atheist once shared his personal feelings with me.
He said, "If I pretended to believe in a god, and the god was real, it would know that I was pretending, because the fact is, I just don't believe that a god exists."
That point of view resonated with me as being heartfelt and as honest "as could be."
I later chose to become a born-again Atheist, and wanted to be as honest with my self, as that man had been honest with me.
Once I was doubtful about the existence of a god, there wasn’t any way to entrap my thoughts where they once had been, as freedom from religion was my only alternative.
Now I believe as did Stephen Hawking before he died ... that the universe in one form or another always existed ... no creator or plan involved ... and that suffering of all forms of life always was ... and is ... natural.
The Christian view holds that if you draw near to God, He will draw near to you. Even if you feel like you’re faking, God will honor you for humbling yourself and soften your heart over time.
Not saying this to be a jerk. If the evidence makes you want to believe in God, but you just don’t feel like you’re being 100% honest, your emotions will eventually follow.
@@SammyCatFace What "evidence" do you believe exists that indicates that a god created this mess?
Be honest with your self ... or not ... but if you had the power to create a universe ... would suffering exist ... and if so ... WHY ... other than if you were a monster?
@@junevandermark952 hey I wasn’t trying to start a debate. I was just letting you know from the Christian perspective, God is totally ok with loving him imperfectly. Your atheist mentor seemed to think God wouldn’t excuse his doubts. I was just trying to point out that God likely would. Romans 3 is great evidence of this theological understanding. I’m sorry if I came across as condescending. That wasn’t my intention.
As for your question, I believe that since God is omnipotent, omniscient, and good this must mean that suffering serves some greater purpose. I don’t claim to know what that purpose is, but I’m confident there must be one because of his character. I think David and IP point out that this refutes the logical argument from evil.
If I had to create a universe, and I could choose to bring about suffering for the gain of something worth immeasurably more than the price of suffering I would do so every single time. If I was omniscient, I think I’d have a fairly simple time weighing the pros and cons.
@@junevandermark952 as for evidence of a creator, I think fine-tuning is pretty convincing. I also think the Kalam argument is pretty good. I understand that you don’t think the universe had a cause though, so I’m not gonna try and change your mind.
Personally though, I find the gospel message very compelling. It has profoundly changed my life. The Bible amazes me with it’s harmony throughout the Old and New Testament. Jesus’s understanding of human nature blows me away. I’ve learned more about mankind from his teachings than anyone else. You may be convinced that his resurrection was a lie that was propagated by his disciples, but Jesus’s death wasn’t an accident. His disciples didn’t scramble to make up some story that fit, rather it seems that was the plan from all along.
I just think it all really happened!
@@SammyCatFace I understand that by the belief that your soul is saved, and other souls are not ... thrills you to the core of your being.
That idea repulsed me, and that (in part) is why I left religion behind.
You can stay in that rut if it continues to thrill you. That is your choice. It is not my choice.
Thanks for the conversation. Now you go your way ... and I'll go mine.
☦️
God bless
I think by and large, a lot of people on both sides are stuck 30-40 years ago in their arguements. Being up to date and able to converse with people is the realm of the few.
I do not understand why anyone would propose the idea of multiverses.
A universe is defined as all existing matter and space as a whole. If we say there exists space and time outside of a universe, that's a contradiction. If multiverses exist, the sum of them would be the universe. There only is one universe.
Words have meaning.
No there is another world...its the same old movie from atheists...they borrow from the bible, twist the message to mean something else and deceive many.
John 18:36 Jesus said, _“My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place.”_
There is no multiverse because there is no evidence for it. It's a nonsensical pseudoscientific fantasy. Unfortunately, mainstream science entertains this and other dumb pseudoscientific fantasies.
I'm glad you said you "don't understand" go and make research so as to understand
@@sabhishek9289 _There is no multiverse because there is no evidence for it_
and in the next breath theist will claim a god created everything. You truly cannot make this stuff up...
_If we say there exists space and time outside of a universe, that's a contradiction_
So, can we agree that the concept of "before the big bang" is kinda nonsensical? Yet, theist (not specifically pointing at you) make claims about "before" all the time.
IP pls read up on books of jurisprudence of the madhabs regarding child marriage, if that debate with Haqiqatou is still happening.
They (clerics) are aware of the harm and permanent damage to these very young girls because they noted it and have compensation in Sharia.
They also cover issues of accusing minor child bride of adultery.
Books - Reliance of the Traveller (Shafi), The Hedaya and Heavenly Ornaments (Hanafi)
Always check the batteries in your sarcasm detector!
1:30 12:20 18:00 24:00 31:50 39:55 42:30
They don't understand because they don't want to think on it too much as they have written it all off. They seem to prefer a being like Thor from marvel.
Yesterday I had an atheist state that to believe in God is like to believe in "fairies" because "my blind faith says so". I wish this were a joke.
Christianity isn't a blind faith. We're in a better position than the atheists. We are certain of our faith because there's evidence for it. Just recently Richard Dawkins admitted that he could be wrong. That's the position of the Atheists.
I must be dealing with the same atheist because I just encountered this argument yesterday.
@@Jaydays818 might well be, but given their proclivity for copy-paste arguments (because "I think with my own head, I don't blindly follow authority") you can never be sure.
@Ron Berg This is true, most new atheists haven't studied, they stand on the shoulders of others with little to no understanding of the topics they are discussing.
@@Jaydays818 let's remember that when Dawkins was criticised for his poor understanding of philosophy and theology he replied along the lines of "well of course I've never bothered reading into it, it's all rubbish".
Oh yeah? Well, if you guys are right, then why am I aggressively misunderstanding you?!
Love IS suffering in a lot of cases. So the love of God could be that you lose your child, hypothetically, the child may have not a long to live. But swept into the arms of Our Loving God.
And the parent who lost the child, well, they have 2 choices.
Use this extraordinary experience to help others, including yourself, maybe form a community.
Or you can choose that God hates you.
Neither is the best answer, but blaming God for the death of a child, to me, is an extremely specific and individual situations.
Okay guys you are very good at 1.5 speed. Either you need to speed it up or I need to decrease my caffeine flow.
Nothing in existence escapes process. Processes implicitly requires law.
Massive Kingdom W ✝️
The best duo right now
The reason we are all here is because of Adam and Eve. Not because of their sin but because we all made the same choice: we convinced ourselves that we can decide between good and evil without God’s assistance.
So God called our Bull-Poop and said: “here you go, you’re on your own now. Let’s see where this goes…”
the problem that sinners like us are forgetting God's grace while complaining about the problem of other evil is good starting point of the discussion of the general problem of evil. we have to start somewhere don't we, i say "self" is a pretty nice spot to start. and i confess, i am the worst sinner amoung sinners. Thank God somebody paid my debt.
Is this Wood's official channel?
It's ONE of my channels.
@@apologeticsroadshow Awesome strategy 🤝
18:00 A square circle IS possible in the context of Taxicab geometry (look it up). However, you can counterargue that in this case what you really have is a "circle" that looks like a square from the point of view of Euclidean geometry, but is really a circle in Taxicab geometry. So it's not a proper square circle because it isn't both a square and a circle in the same way (it's a square from one point of view, and a circle from a different point of view). If you don't mind the fact that it's a square from one point of view, and a circle from a different point of view, then you can have a "square circle".
I looked it up. The pictures don’t look like square circles to me. When they say square circles, they’re talking about four equal straight sides with four corners simultaneously being a no sided shape.
David, are you able to make your dissertation public? Fordham will only let me rest the first 21 pages
Smacking my head had me dying. Has David wrote a book, if so please drop a link.
You ever met a person who had everything handed to them and never had adversity in thier life. They are the most terrible narsasistic people ever......
Most likely (I believe) we are spiritual beings having a human experience, and we choose the challenges before we come here.
The myth of Sisyphus involves a man condemned to move the same heavy rock up the same hill every day as a punishment. - But we have millions of people who choose to go to the same gym every day and push heavy weights around for exercise.
Likely, suffering is exercise for the soul.
There’s an interesting argument that’s fairly new in philosophy of religion that skeptical theism works for “tokens” of evil, while theodicies work for “types” of evil. You can come up with reasonable explanations for why God allows categories of evil to occur while not knowing God’s transcendent nature well enough to explain the grand reason specific instances of evil occur. This allows one to keep natural theology while being consistent with a type of skeptical theism.
_while not knowing God’s transcendent nature well enough to explain the grand reason specific instances of evil occur_
This isn't new.....growing up in the 80's I heard this ALL THE TIME...
*God works in mysterious ways*
@@thedude0000
Meh this is more technical than that and is basically a response to the position that you can either have natural theology and theodicies, or some form of presuppositionalism/reformed epistemology and skeptical theism. It’s an argument for applying skeptical theism on one level, theodicies on another, and keeping natural theology.
If you’ve heard it all the time growing up you must’ve been around a lot of philosophy of religion professors.
Are you implying that skeptical theism only works for tokens of evil, and that it doesn’t work for types as well?
@@martyfromnebraska1045 _Meh this is more technical_
It's not really. The "fancy" claim:
_You can come up with reasonable explanations for why God allows categories of evil to occur while not knowing God’s transcendent nature well enough to explain the grand reason specific instances of evil occur_
and the layman's claim:
_God works in mysterious ways_
Are both making the exact same claim. God is sooo complex and beyond our mere human minds that we cannot always understand his motives.
I spent twenty-three years as a christian and three years in seminary. When I finally deconverted because nobody could answer the question of suffering...
The _god is so complex_ argument was always the fail safe.....which is a bad argument IMO.
@@thedude0000 the question is responded in this very exact video
I would like to propose that DW and IP write a book, "A Christian's Manual of Arms," containing problems like these and a clear Christian refutation to such problems. As Free Will defeats the Logical Problem of Evil, for example.
Free will doesn't defeat the logical problem of evil.
As God is all knowing he could've just only created the humans he knows won't behave evil for example. Free Will isn't that Joker you might thing it is.
@@renem.5852 Did you listen to David's explanation? There remains the probabilistic problem of evil, but the classic Epicurean problem of evil -- the logical problem of evil -- is defeated by the mere fact that, so far as we know, there *_*could be*_* a reason for suffering.
If it is possible that there might be a cause sufficient to justify evil, then we cannot say, "Evil exists, therefore God does not."
If you hope to comment on a video, it is very helpful to first watch the video.
@@WhereWhatHuh and as he is supposed to be all-mighty God should be able to skip that justification of evil.
@@renem.5852 I'm sorry, but this appears to be a non sequitur. Are you saying that God could, for example, produce free will without ever giving people a chance to choose evil?
Would that not be but the illusion of Free Will? So merely the fact that "Free Will " *_could be_* an answer to the logical PoE defeats the Logical PoE, which requires absolute exclusion in order to follow logically.
So there remains only the Probabilistic PoE.
@@WhereWhatHuh you said "there might be a cause sufficient to justify evil"
I say "as an all mighty God he should be able to skip this cause."
This by itself doesn't effect the free will.
David, have you heard of the transcendental argument? If so, what are your thoughts on it?
He was using it in the stream.
@@David-kz2im Oh, I thought he was just an evidentialist... I watched the whole stream and it still confuses me why he uses 'evidence' instead of TAG which is much stronger.
@@toastme I agree but all one really has to do is claim Platonism or be an anti-realist to reject the argument. It forces them to concede a lot but they don’t mind biting those bullets just to try and win an argument in the moment.
@@LtDeadeye , hm, the point of TAG is to show that all paradigms and worldviews are incoherent except for Christianity including the Platonic and anti-realists'.
@@toastme They don’t seem to mind saying things like 2+2 can equal 5 if we want it to. According to them, we just have to invent new axioms…and they’ll demonstrate it. They’ll appeal to other systems of logic, and deny moral facts. It’s unlivable but they don’t seem to mind lol.
Under what conditions do atheists exist? Is a question I posed to an atheist on line. He just tapped danced and went blah blah blah. He did say something interesting. He said an atheist might ignore any evidence. That’s just not being honest to themselves or anyone else.
That was a great stream ruined by that stripper at the end. I'm unsubbing. 😂
20:15 I liked Christopher Hitchens protesting that God’s existence required Him being a tyrant as He forced free-will on unwilling creatures!
Oooh. I got one i heard 'God is punishing women for having sex by making them pregnant because he's a misogynist' 😂. It would be hilarious if those people weren't so demonic 😢
I heard Moses walked down the mountain with the 10 commandments sees people worshipping a golden calf and has 3000 killed. But it's was lawful beforehand to worship a golden calf.
@@ronbernardi gotta love when they add and subtract from the bible and think you won't notice.
@@wondering_stars_in_oz8462 I hear you. Imagine a perfectly written book so easy to understand we only have 20,000 Christian schisms. Some believe a Trinity others reject a Trinity, some believe the pope others think the pope is evil. Make believe allows for all sorts of magical thinking.
@@ronbernardi yeah imagine adding and subtracting verses from the book to pretend you have some sort of point. One has to ask what motivates such behaviour. I mean it's one thing to require help to understand what is actually written, but when you making it up to confuse yourself and others along with you? THAT requires some explanation. Christians aren't responsible for Athiests making stuff up that isn't even written in the book. It's not OUR obligation to explain that, it's the Athiests who believe it.... on the subject of Trinity. Most Christians who do or don't call the Godhead a Trinity will still say Jesus is the saviour, so your using an internal theological discussion to pretend it has confused you as to who Jesus is and who HE said he was dosnt fly. Jehovahs witness and Mormon are generally not considered Christians because they don't think Jesus was God in flesh and they also refer to books other than the Bible to inform their faith. 'My children die for lack of knowledge', we are instructed to read and study.....
@@wondering_stars_in_oz8462 atheist don't make up Christians schisms. That's why we have over 20,000 Christian schisms each with its very thin, weak theological studies and defence. Moses numbers 31:17-19 kill all keep alive only women who haven't known a man. This means pregnant women, infant boys, breastfeeding baby boys. Elderly toddlers butchered and Virgin girls taken as "brides". Morality at its best.
1:37 mark - Divine Foreknowledge
We seem to be in a 4-dimensional universe (both spacial and temporal). - We think we comprehend the spacial aspect of God, because we can imagine hiding from someone…we wrestle more with the temporal because we can’t envision timelessness.
I would suggest that we don’t understand the omnipresence of God, because He’s not “hiding somewhere”…He’s everywhere. - Likewise, we don’t understand divine foreknowledge, because we don’t understand eternity. We think eternity is an infinite amount of time, and rather, it is timelessness.
God doesn’t see the future, thus losing free will…God is in all time all at once, and we have no point of reference to gage that with.
Evil is a choice which another human flesh thing has decided to act upon - suffering and pain though is just part of life.
Suffering and pain is caused by evil actions and behaviour from other people towards others - and also we can cause individual pain and suffering due to wrong or negative personal choices which cause it.
@@GodIsLove1015 Suffering and pain can also be caused by natural reasons. Losing a parent - or god forbid losing a child to a disease or less extrene causes like the struggles of daily life. Not all pain and suffering are caused by evil actions.
I don't want to be mean brother/sister but was there a point you wanted to make?
@@VindensSaga
Of course, I agree with you.
Why do you think you were mean?
I already made my points in my previous comment.
@@GodIsLove1015 Okay because I don't really know what you mean though. Evil choices results in pain and suffering, we can agree on that. Yes
@@VindensSaga I already agreed with you on that. And basically, it's saying what I already said in my first comment. Also, pain and suffering can be self-inflicted.
Loved all of it. Thanks for your work guys
It’s so silly that people question the creators motives about anything. God created everything. Including us. We belong to him. When an author writes a book or a painter makes paints a picture, we don’t understand why they do certain things, they just are. It’s not our place to question why there is evil. But it’s self evident. And the Bible answers this 100 times over. We can’t have free will and also be all good. Because people make bad decisions.
lovely example of a cultist who must defend their tyrant. It's always good when a cult says don't question what our god says (aka what we humans make up).
"It’s so silly that people question the creators motives about anything. God created everything. Including us. We belong to him. When an author writes a book or a painter makes paints a picture, we don’t understand why they do certain things, they just are. It’s not our place to question why there is evil. But it’s self evident. And the Bible answers this 100 times over. We can’t have free will and also be all good. Because people make bad decisions."
@@velkyn1 are you a bot?
@@adjustedbrass7551 "are you a bot?"
nope. Just a atheist who finds it important to show how poorly Christians lie. This cult does far too much harm to allow it to stand unchallenged.
@@velkyn1 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
@@adjustedbrass7551 Unsurprisingly, rather than show how I'm wrong, all AB has are emojis. What a nice way to admit that he has nothing.
"😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂"
IP! That beard is lookin' GOOD
Atheist: If God is good why doesn’t he put a stop to evil…..
Theist: He did that once. It’s called a global flood….
Atheist: So why not just destroy the worst of the worst so others can learn by example….
Theist: He did that too. It’s called Sodom and Gamorrah….