You can put oil and water in one place. But no matter how hard you try to make their bonds go together chemically, these will never come out into one homogeneous mixture. We can see two faiths here clashing rationally and independently. Unless one of them is humble enough to not "go with the solution", nothing such peace and understanding will ever prevail. But I really do appreciate Trent Horn and his hosting partner for being so patient enough to listen and consider "misconceptions" being told by the caller. My salutation be unto you!
dear folks I became a Catholic in 1995 many of church writers I don't know about. I have my own conversion story why I entered the universal church. I decided to obey what Jesus said in the sacraments shown by a Catholic read Catholic Catechism the Catholic faith for me is very Biblical and follows Jesus no other faith does they take things out of context twist to thee liking or rewrite scripture.
Overall fairly well done, though you guys have a bad habit of premature interruption of the guests. I notice typically he got about one sentence to your three or four (give or take for both parties). Perhaps especially for a topic such as this one, he should have been afforded a little more time to be able to describe his side, and THEN you come in and refute his argument.
D Imek it's a radio show so time is a big problem for them so as patrick coffin said in one of the videos, iinterrupting is one of the dreadful parts of his job lol
+George Kranovich It basically means what it says quite literally. Let's say that God exist (which He does). He didn't have to go through all those trouble to create any of this (the universe). Let's say that God doesn't exist...well, then how do you explain existence from nothing even if we agree that everything come into existence by chance?
... and how does God explain the existence of the universe? Where's the justification, where's the reasoning? What is God? Is God supposed to be a person, like a human, who has motivations and emotions? Is god a force that just follows laws? I doubt that the theists even know what they are saying these days.
We have a church document written by St Thomas Aquinas that address those very question. I doubt you'll listen to me anyway so feel free to find and read the book yourself. I just can't believe you can still say that we don't know what we are talking about after watching a theist defending his religion on video. I believe Trent has had e few debates with atheists in other video on UA-cam. Why don't you check those out and prove that he doesn't know what he's talking about.
I will absolutely listen to you if you have good reasons for what you believe. Let's hear it, not Arguments from Ignorance, what the church is notorious for. "Well science hasn't figured this out" is not support for "the god that I believe in explains this phenomena". The way the church "identifies" saints is a classic argument from ignorance. "Scientists don't know how this baby survived an hour without oxygen." Well it doesn't help the side of miracles because that's not evidence that Fulton Sheen intervened from heaven and kept the baby alive.
It doesn't seem to me that not being absolutely certain that you can't be absolutely certain about anything means that you can be absolutely certain about some things. Sorry if this is confusing, but I don't think the double negative creates a positive in this particular case. On the other hand, it seems to me that this argument not to believe in God merely because you can't be absolutely certain about anything puts an unfair burden of proof on theists. No one actually bases any of their practical beliefs in a need for absolute certainty. For example, we eat even though we can't be absolutely certain that food exists. Anyway, I don't think belief in God should require absolute proof for people who don't require absolute proof when going about their daily interactions with the world. Theists should only have to prove that belief in God is practical in the same way that our belief in food is practical.
Look at the beautiful world with green grass beautiful trees and flowers and ask your self we can see the wind but we know it exist. God created read Gen. The Bible is th holy inspired word of God.
What is sufficient evidence for God - what is a God, what is it made out of, how does it work, where is it located, why should we think it is a thing in the first place?
+Deconverted Man Pretty much nothing anyone could tell you will change your mind. Your heart has been hardened and until you're ready and open to recieve you will never understand. If you are asking questions merely for the sake of conflict without a sincere search for the truth, then we are all wasting our time. +Iohannes Cassianus very well said, I hope to have your level of understanding and inteligence some day.
***** "You are essentially asking, 'Who created the uncreated creator.' What we mean by God is a metaphysically necessary being whose existence is impossible" -Catholic Apologist Matt Fradd
Let's be as honest as we are ignorant. On the god issue, we know nothing. Drop all the jesus-allah type stuff and maybe we can make some headway toward figuring something out.
***** Again, it's not a singular person observing. It's observations made world wide by trained professionals under controlled conditions, repeated and confirmed through scientific instrumentation. You can call that philosophy if you like, but deities always fail to perform in such conditions.
You can put oil and water in one place. But no matter how hard you try to make their bonds go together chemically, these will never come out into one homogeneous mixture. We can see two faiths here clashing rationally and independently. Unless one of them is humble enough to not "go with the solution", nothing such peace and understanding will ever prevail. But I really do appreciate Trent Horn and his hosting partner for being so patient enough to listen and consider "misconceptions" being told by the caller. My salutation be unto you!
Oil and water can be mixed by adding in a surfactant, which in the case of this analogy, would be Jesus.
dear folks I became a Catholic in 1995 many of church writers I don't know about. I have my own conversion story why I entered the universal church. I decided to obey what Jesus said in the sacraments shown by a Catholic read Catholic Catechism the Catholic faith for me is very Biblical and follows Jesus no other faith does they take things out of context twist to thee liking or rewrite scripture.
+ella hope Congrats!
Mr. Anonymous had obviously never had any philosophical debate before...
First, this atheist stumbled around so much... Second, I want to say ha! Even the atheist said mormons aren't really Christians. xD
Overall fairly well done, though you guys have a bad habit of premature interruption of the guests. I notice typically he got about one sentence to your three or four (give or take for both parties). Perhaps especially for a topic such as this one, he should have been afforded a little more time to be able to describe his side, and THEN you come in and refute his argument.
D Imek it's a radio show so time is a big problem for them so as patrick coffin said in one of the videos, iinterrupting is one of the dreadful parts of his job lol
Trent you never explain how the universe "doesn't have to exist". What do you mean by that?
+George Kranovich It basically means what it says quite literally. Let's say that God exist (which He does). He didn't have to go through all those trouble to create any of this (the universe).
Let's say that God doesn't exist...well, then how do you explain existence from nothing even if we agree that everything come into existence by chance?
... and how does God explain the existence of the universe? Where's the justification, where's the reasoning?
What is God? Is God supposed to be a person, like a human, who has motivations and emotions? Is god a force that just follows laws?
I doubt that the theists even know what they are saying these days.
We have a church document written by St Thomas Aquinas that address those very question. I doubt you'll listen to me anyway so feel free to find and read the book yourself. I just can't believe you can still say that we don't know what we are talking about after watching a theist defending his religion on video. I believe Trent has had e few debates with atheists in other video on UA-cam. Why don't you check those out and prove that he doesn't know what he's talking about.
I will absolutely listen to you if you have good reasons for what you believe. Let's hear it, not Arguments from Ignorance, what the church is notorious for. "Well science hasn't figured this out" is not support for "the god that I believe in explains this phenomena".
The way the church "identifies" saints is a classic argument from ignorance. "Scientists don't know how this baby survived an hour without oxygen." Well it doesn't help the side of miracles because that's not evidence that Fulton Sheen intervened from heaven and kept the baby alive.
It doesn't seem to me that not being absolutely certain that you can't be absolutely certain about anything means that you can be absolutely certain about some things. Sorry if this is confusing, but I don't think the double negative creates a positive in this particular case.
On the other hand, it seems to me that this argument not to believe in God merely because you can't be absolutely certain about anything puts an unfair burden of proof on theists. No one actually bases any of their practical beliefs in a need for absolute certainty. For example, we eat even though we can't be absolutely certain that food exists. Anyway, I don't think belief in God should require absolute proof for people who don't require absolute proof when going about their daily interactions with the world. Theists should only have to prove that belief in God is practical in the same way that our belief in food is practical.
Look at the beautiful world with green grass beautiful trees and flowers and ask your self we can see the wind but we know it exist. God created read Gen. The Bible is th holy inspired word of God.
What is sufficient evidence for God - what is a God, what is it made out of, how does it work, where is it located, why should we think it is a thing in the first place?
***** prove it
+Deconverted Man Pretty much nothing anyone could tell you will change your mind. Your heart has been hardened and until you're ready and open to recieve you will never understand. If you are asking questions merely for the sake of conflict without a sincere search for the truth, then we are all wasting our time.
+Iohannes Cassianus very well said, I hope to have your level of understanding and inteligence some day.
Trap-lord - nope, just give me empirical evidence and/or a repeatable test and or a logically coherent argument and I will agree with you.
Deconverted Man Like i said, i just get the feeling that you dont sincerely want to find the truth.
***** "You are essentially asking, 'Who created the uncreated creator.' What we mean by God is a metaphysically necessary being whose existence is impossible"
-Catholic Apologist Matt Fradd
Maybe the universe doesn't exist at all...
#solipsism
Let's be as honest as we are ignorant. On the god issue, we know nothing. Drop all the jesus-allah type stuff and maybe we can make some headway toward figuring something out.
Eve Ihlone if we drop that then what's there to discuss at all about theism.
You can't evidence a deity, that's just silly. You just look for justifications for your beLIEf. Real things don't require beLIEf.
frosted1030 All things you "know" are dependent on the things you believe. See also philosophy of science.
***** False. We have objective observation (the foundation of science). Not a philosophy, but a method of confirmation that excludes bias.
Calling what you observe objective is a philosophy.
***** Again, it's not a singular person observing. It's observations made world wide by trained professionals under controlled conditions, repeated and confirmed through scientific instrumentation. You can call that philosophy if you like, but deities always fail to perform in such conditions.
If you say so. That doesn't matter for my point, however.