As an atheist, I don't think we have an innate sense of morality, I believe we have an innate sense of empathy -- when we see suffering, we instinctively put ourselves in their shoes and imagine the pain they're in all too well. This behavior is observed in other species of ape too. And so we are primed to receive our first lesson in morality as a young child -- "You wouldn't like that if someone did it to you, would you?"
Matthew 12:36-37,1Corinthians 6:1-8.100 billion people standing befire God giving an account is absurd. Ancient minds didn'r think things through or have the infirmation to do so
@@rogersacco4624 What the heck are you talking about? You don't think ancient minds were smart enough to think things through? They built the pyramids without machinery. They calculated the movement of the stars and the constellations on the ecliptic. They figured out the earth was round, grew crops, and smelted iron.
Thanks for the great interview. I was always curious about him after seeing how he pegged Ravi so far in advance. Seems like a really cool guy. Very interesting how the ambiguity about salvation is a big challenge for him. I also liked his point about how we all end up "trusting our experts". That is something that bothers me as well.
Very interesting conversation. Thanks! "He Lives!" -- yes, I still remember that chorus almost by heart from my childhood, over 40 years ago now. One of my favorites, if I recall correctly. I haven't been a Christian for the last 30 years and I followed a similar path as Steve, only it took until my early 30s before I realized I was an atheist. The three things I remember that clinched it for me were: 1. No satisfactory answer to the old "What about people raised on a desert island with no contact with Christianity" question which has since been formalized as an aspect of Divine Hiddenness. The only answer I would get was "You should be more concerned about your own salvation." which was deeply dissatisfying. 2. Sitting in church in England watching everyone going through the motions thinking that if the Gospel is real, why aren't people far more excited and joyous about it. Then, after I started visiting the US for work, I attended churches where people were more excited and joyous and remember thinking, "These people are crazy!" Not because of their joy, but because of their far more superstitious beliefs -- that Satan was constantly attacking them, that witchcraft is real, that Dungeons & Dragons is a portal to the satanic, etc. This was far from my experience with other Christians growing up in the UK. 3. Coming to the same conclusion as Steve -- that the world would be a very different place if there was an all-loving perfectly just God "up there" taking a personal interest in us and desiring the best for us. Yes, those reasons and evolved and changed over the intervening years as I have continued to consider them, but I have never second guessed my decision to walk away, despite having missed the community and the people in it.
Well met. So, the generalizing is to your detriment I think. For years I've been defining religion as this: religion, noun: 1. disbelief in "I don't know" as a valid world view, 2. disbelief in empathy as the source of morality. I never believed primarily because skeptics are not just skeptics because of the lack evidence. Skeptics also have an agnostic bent where I'm not capable of knowing. I don't know covers both. Probably the generalization that drives a wedge between believers and non-believers is the generalization, "Everybody seeks answers to the big questions." No we don't. As a non-believer I know so many non-believers who have no interest in the so called "big questions" and don't care. Over generalizing is a huge character flaw of most apologists I've encountered. I don't know and I don't care how the word was created. That's what I said when I was a child and still say to day. Overgeneralizing comes from a place of arrogance, assuming everyone is like oneself. This is why AS A CHILD, I rejected the golden rule and classified it as the most evil concept ever invented. It wouldn't be until I was an adult that I came up with a better framing. The information rule: treat others as they are, not as you are. It is called the information rule because you can't do that wiithout information. The golden rule is childish and Jesus was child.
Yeah, I would too, especially consciousness, which I suspect will be confirmed to be an entirely natural phenomenon at some point in the future. As for the problem of why something and not nothing, I would argue that invoking a superintelligent even more complex being as the creator of the Universe merely creates a larger problem that needs to be solved. I like Sean Carroll's take on this. Perhaps our intuitions about "nothing" being the default state are incorrect. After all, there is very little about the fundamental physics of the Universe that confirms our intuitions -- e.g. relativity, quantum superposition, the double slit experiment, particle-wave duality, etc.
@EnglishMike exactly. Nothing as a default is an unfounded assumption. Even more than that it's literally the opposite of what we observe. I'm no astronomer or philosopher, but it seems to me "nothing" can't exist... impossible... like a square circle or married bachelor. Never understood what the problem of consciousness was either. Simply it's what the brain does. It's like asking about the problem of breathing, it's what the lungs do 🤷🏿♂️ if you damage your brain in a certain way you lose consciousness. Some stuff just isn't that deep. How brain cells do what they do, who knows. But magic ain't the answer cuz if it was we wouldn't need a brain we could just use magic.
Avlinizing might be a two week street but the consequences are anything but. None of the proposed secular solutions to existential questions imposes "oughts" on people as most religions and most traditions of Christianity do.
The world would be a very different place if there was an all-loving perfectly just God "up there" taking a personal interest in us and desiring the best for us. Another way of saying the exact same thing but from the reverse: There is nothing differentiating or distinguishing our world from one in which no god exists."
How would you know what a world without a God looks like if there is in fact a God? Have you considered that what you think God wants(from your first statement) isn't at all what God wants, or at least that this is a very simplistic understanding of an infinite God?
@@blusheep2 No, what I'm saying is that in THIS WORLD there are no events, interventions, miracles, etc. that support the concept of a loving, just, involved deity. There are only random occurrences, or those actions taken by other people.
Why can't we think that God made us with a moral compass such that we feel horrified at a puppy being tortured? Sure, it could be something else that I'm unaware of but a Creator seems quite plausible to me.
But drowning puppies hasn't always been deemed horrific even in Christian nations -- especially among farmers and other people who routinely slaughter animals --- and why would God instill such a feeling regarding puppies, and not calves or lambs (especially cute and cuddly), which we still routinely slaughter for their meat? It's as Steve says in the video, the moment you start diving into the details, you end up in a deeper mess of complications and conundrums.
![ARGENTINA vs. PERÚ [1-0] | RESUMEN | ELIMINATORIAS SUDAMERICANAS | FECHA 12](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/xtI25ENDDSY/mqdefault.jpg)
As an atheist, I don't think we have an innate sense of morality, I believe we have an innate sense of empathy -- when we see suffering, we instinctively put ourselves in their shoes and imagine the pain they're in all too well. This behavior is observed in other species of ape too.
And so we are primed to receive our first lesson in morality as a young child -- "You wouldn't like that if someone did it to you, would you?"
What do people do when they don't think there is someone or something that is going to judge them?
Matthew 12:36-37,1Corinthians 6:1-8.100 billion people standing befire God giving an account is absurd. Ancient minds didn'r think things through or have the infirmation to do so
@@rogersacco4624 What the heck are you talking about? You don't think ancient minds were smart enough to think things through? They built the pyramids without machinery. They calculated the movement of the stars and the constellations on the ecliptic. They figured out the earth was round, grew crops, and smelted iron.
Thanks for the great interview. I was always curious about him after seeing how he pegged Ravi so far in advance. Seems like a really cool guy. Very interesting how the ambiguity about salvation is a big challenge for him. I also liked his point about how we all end up "trusting our experts". That is something that bothers me as well.
Rauser, all I gotta say, is, Amen.
Keep it real man, true lovers of Christ got you.
Hallelujah...
Amen.
Very interesting conversation. Thanks!
"He Lives!" -- yes, I still remember that chorus almost by heart from my childhood, over 40 years ago now. One of my favorites, if I recall correctly. I haven't been a Christian for the last 30 years and I followed a similar path as Steve, only it took until my early 30s before I realized I was an atheist.
The three things I remember that clinched it for me were:
1. No satisfactory answer to the old "What about people raised on a desert island with no contact with Christianity" question which has since been formalized as an aspect of Divine Hiddenness. The only answer I would get was "You should be more concerned about your own salvation." which was deeply dissatisfying.
2. Sitting in church in England watching everyone going through the motions thinking that if the Gospel is real, why aren't people far more excited and joyous about it. Then, after I started visiting the US for work, I attended churches where people were more excited and joyous and remember thinking, "These people are crazy!" Not because of their joy, but because of their far more superstitious beliefs -- that Satan was constantly attacking them, that witchcraft is real, that Dungeons & Dragons is a portal to the satanic, etc. This was far from my experience with other Christians growing up in the UK.
3. Coming to the same conclusion as Steve -- that the world would be a very different place if there was an all-loving perfectly just God "up there" taking a personal interest in us and desiring the best for us.
Yes, those reasons and evolved and changed over the intervening years as I have continued to consider them, but I have never second guessed my decision to walk away, despite having missed the community and the people in it.
For #1, you might be interested in Randal's thoughts in inclusivism on his blog if you go there and search for that term.
Very good points by both speakers! Thank you for sharing this.
Love seeing Steve here, I enjoy following him on social media and like the way he thinks
2 of my favorite people, thanks to you both
Good dialogue. God bless
“The biggest question”…
…That’s a damned mouthful.
Steve is a great man
Steve is great. I miss him on Twitter
Great guest Randall
Well met. So, the generalizing is to your detriment I think. For years I've been defining religion as this:
religion, noun: 1. disbelief in "I don't know" as a valid world view, 2. disbelief in empathy as the source of morality.
I never believed primarily because skeptics are not just skeptics because of the lack evidence. Skeptics also have an agnostic bent where I'm not capable of knowing. I don't know covers both. Probably the generalization that drives a wedge between believers and non-believers is the generalization, "Everybody seeks answers to the big questions." No we don't. As a non-believer I know so many non-believers who have no interest in the so called "big questions" and don't care. Over generalizing is a huge character flaw of most apologists I've encountered. I don't know and I don't care how the word was created. That's what I said when I was a child and still say to day. Overgeneralizing comes from a place of arrogance, assuming everyone is like oneself. This is why AS A CHILD, I rejected the golden rule and classified it as the most evil concept ever invented. It wouldn't be until I was an adult that I came up with a better framing.
The information rule: treat others as they are, not as you are.
It is called the information rule because you can't do that wiithout information. The golden rule is childish and Jesus was child.
Fasting and praying is key.
Interesting discussion. I'd push back on him stating Christians have a better answer for something rather than nothing and consciousness.
Yeah, I would too, especially consciousness, which I suspect will be confirmed to be an entirely natural phenomenon at some point in the future. As for the problem of why something and not nothing, I would argue that invoking a superintelligent even more complex being as the creator of the Universe merely creates a larger problem that needs to be solved.
I like Sean Carroll's take on this. Perhaps our intuitions about "nothing" being the default state are incorrect. After all, there is very little about the fundamental physics of the Universe that confirms our intuitions -- e.g. relativity, quantum superposition, the double slit experiment, particle-wave duality, etc.
@EnglishMike exactly. Nothing as a default is an unfounded assumption. Even more than that it's literally the opposite of what we observe. I'm no astronomer or philosopher, but it seems to me "nothing" can't exist... impossible... like a square circle or married bachelor.
Never understood what the problem of consciousness was either. Simply it's what the brain does. It's like asking about the problem of breathing, it's what the lungs do 🤷🏿♂️ if you damage your brain in a certain way you lose consciousness. Some stuff just isn't that deep. How brain cells do what they do, who knows. But magic ain't the answer cuz if it was we wouldn't need a brain we could just use magic.
Avlinizing might be a two week street but the consequences are anything but. None of the proposed secular solutions to existential questions imposes "oughts" on people as most religions and most traditions of Christianity do.
I don't think there are so many aughts in Christianity. Check out Rauser's video on Mere Christian.
The world would be a very different place if there was an all-loving perfectly just God "up there" taking a personal interest in us and desiring the best for us.
Another way of saying the exact same thing but from the reverse: There is nothing differentiating or distinguishing our world from one in which no god exists."
How would you know what a world without a God looks like if there is in fact a God? Have you considered that what you think God wants(from your first statement) isn't at all what God wants, or at least that this is a very simplistic understanding of an infinite God?
@@blusheep2 No, what I'm saying is that in THIS WORLD there are no events, interventions, miracles, etc. that support the concept of a loving, just, involved deity. There are only random occurrences, or those actions taken by other people.
Lol, do angels like beer?
Does beer go with manna? If they drink too much, will they get drunk?
Lol.
please put up the transcript.
Why can't we think that God made us with a moral compass such that we feel horrified at a puppy being tortured? Sure, it could be something else that I'm unaware of but a Creator seems quite plausible to me.
But drowning puppies hasn't always been deemed horrific even in Christian nations -- especially among farmers and other people who routinely slaughter animals --- and why would God instill such a feeling regarding puppies, and not calves or lambs (especially cute and cuddly), which we still routinely slaughter for their meat?
It's as Steve says in the video, the moment you start diving into the details, you end up in a deeper mess of complications and conundrums.
Only some people can slaughter animals for food. I certainly can't.
Well I don't see how his living in your heart as something so untrue. Jesus did say the Kingdom of God is within us.
If, as a kid, he was taking the words of the song more literally, the idea of a man like Jesus living inside your heart could seem ridiculous.
Yes, as a kid, it makes sense but not as an adult imo.