Christian Apologetics: The Moral Argument for the Existence of God

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 10 сен 2024

Комментарии • 46

  • @tristanhaggard
    @tristanhaggard 4 года назад +16

    Fantastic work. God bless.

    • @ChurchoftheEternalLogos
      @ChurchoftheEternalLogos  4 года назад +9

      Thanks a lot brother! Big fan of your stuff. God bless you and your family. 🙏

  • @vihodanyet
    @vihodanyet 4 года назад +8

    Thankyou for what you are doing brother. Its great to find someone who i can relate to in terms of spiritual journey. Allowing god back into my life and through the teaching of orthodoxy is the best thing ive ever done. I have more energy, more conscious thought and a foundation for my life going forward. I’m praying 5 times a day now as i really believe my conversations with God to be so powerful and having such a positive impact on my life.

  • @ransetruman2984
    @ransetruman2984 4 года назад +7

    God bless, brother 🙏
    "Nothing is true everything is permitted"
    "You cant derive an OUGHT from an IS"
    "or who laid the corner stone thereof;
    When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?"

  • @NickOeffinger
    @NickOeffinger 4 года назад +6

    You’re doing the Lords work brother. We need you in a university waking these kids up stat!

    • @ChurchoftheEternalLogos
      @ChurchoftheEternalLogos  4 года назад +2

      Thank you brother. Really appreciate it. Hope all is well in your neck of the woods. God bless 🙏

    • @NickOeffinger
      @NickOeffinger 4 года назад +2

      Church of the Eternal Logos it’s nice and degenerate out here. House is on the market now I’m off to Boise! ✌️

  • @johnbuckner2828
    @johnbuckner2828 4 года назад +6

    agree. morality is fiction unless it is built in to the design; we have been designed with the faculties to reason, feel and Intuit. we can't reach an ought through pure reason, pure feeling or pure intuition. we have the set to realize the standard which is grounded in the Mind of God.
    Although I do believe biology does play a role by design, objective morality can't be reduced to instinct which happened to be practical; like you said, that's just a case for cultural & subjective relativism, and an absence of any real right or wrong.

    • @ChurchoftheEternalLogos
      @ChurchoftheEternalLogos  4 года назад +1

      I completely agree. Thanks for the comment. Hope all is well. God bless 🙏

  • @realsafetysquad
    @realsafetysquad 4 года назад +5

    I started cracking up during your hypothetical about pedophiles - hahahaha!
    also this was great - I've been thinking about pre-suppositions and intangible things that we perceive as real a lot lately - specifically numbers and logic. The fact that a promise is an intangible that we all have faith in is so cool! Thank you for your videos

  • @markschmitz5038
    @markschmitz5038 4 года назад +5

    "Non non, out dare is da nother universe wit da monkey oo has da system dat says 2+2= da 7" JF Gariepy.

  • @noecontreras7068
    @noecontreras7068 3 года назад +1

    How would you respond to the non aggression principle ,or psychopaths ?

  • @drewid3876
    @drewid3876 4 года назад

    3:15... deep magic... I Love this.

  • @PViolety
    @PViolety 2 года назад +1

    Nice.

  • @szp9925
    @szp9925 3 года назад +1

    Unfortunately the atheist will just appeal to the non-aggression principle no matter what you say. "It just works and thats how society evolved to work"

  • @RichardHunter-qr4hw
    @RichardHunter-qr4hw 3 месяца назад

    I have no problem with saying that morality is relative. I don't see how it can be otherwise. when we say that morality is relative, what we really mean is that we make our own minds up on moral questions; and can anyone really say that isn't the case? when we decide that murder is wrong, are we really referencing some other authority to reach that opinion? I find that exceptionally hard to believe. the OP might argue that moral relativity is undesirable, but there are two things to be said about that: 1. whether it's undesirable or not has no bearing on whether it's true; 2. moral relativity is mitigated by the fact that human beings tend to come to the same or similar views on moral questions anyway (this is affirmed by moral objectivists who use this fact to try and prove moral objectivism)

    • @timbro88
      @timbro88 2 месяца назад

      Shouldn't it occur to you that it's interesting how 'human beings tend to come to the same or similar views on moral questions'? Why is that the case? Especially considering that so many people all throughout the world today want to do their own thing and live their own life the way they want it. Why is it that most of them don't suppress too much of the truth as to have a world where everyone decides to believe their own thing completly, but instead decide to agree that murder for example is wrong. It's because it is objectively wrong.

  • @drewid3876
    @drewid3876 4 года назад

    I can see the argument for an absolute morality, but in the world morality is relative. I just don't know that we can can come to an objective perspective on the matter. I believe in Creation is behind all forms of intelligence in the cosmos. I'm searching for a multitude of points of reference for morality. For it's the only way to get a sense of the absolute morality that is difficult to grasp and to come to an agreement upon. This is why we have law courts, right? To work toward a collective sense of morality.

    • @sonofclay
      @sonofclay 4 года назад

      I'd like to invent a term. 'Topical morality' varies among cultures. These are the more superficial societal norms that are different from place to place. Fundamental morality, though, doesn't change from place to place. It's consistent across cultures and even species. It wasn't invented by any particular person or set of people, nor does it need such in order to be recognized and operational in our lives. This includes not stealing, killing, lying, screwing someone else's spouse, etc. In older cultures this morality would only firmly apply within one owns social group, but even if the violations of this kind of morality occur across groups, there will almost invariably be a negative response, generally a response in kind.

  • @DeconvertedMan
    @DeconvertedMan 4 года назад

    what ethical system do you think god has?

  • @dr.chrispark
    @dr.chrispark 4 года назад +1

    Great video brother! I did one several months ago called: Jeffrey Epstein Proves the Existence of God. Similar thoughts but your explanation is much better. I was kind of just winging it 😂

  • @IndyDefense
    @IndyDefense 4 года назад

    You should debate Stefan Molyneux on this subject.

    • @IndyDefense
      @IndyDefense 4 года назад

      I didn't see him outright deny it as an argument, but note that Dyer's argument is itself circular (as it requires one to presuppose the validity of logic in order to presuppose God in order to assume logic...). That issue aside, I should direct you to Molyneux's book on Universally Preferable Behavior. It essentially says the same thing you say in the video, but doesn't attribute it to a higher power.

    • @IndyDefense
      @IndyDefense 4 года назад

      Again, he wasn't denying metaphyics as a concept, merely that "7" is a concept humans use to describe and organize the natural world. The idea of numbers existing outside of our own systems is one I would like to see explained in its own video by someone knowlegable on the subject.

    • @natearmstrong8510
      @natearmstrong8510 4 года назад

      @@IndyDefense no one needs to presuppose if logic works. We see Logic working all the time.

    • @natearmstrong8510
      @natearmstrong8510 4 года назад

      @@IndyDefense If you took out all humans, by let's say some virus or something, the number 7 would still exists even if no society of humans is keeping the number sustained.
      We could remove all the material plane of existence and the idea of the number seven (and all of mathematics for that matter since they are all numbers) would still remain.

    • @IndyDefense
      @IndyDefense 4 года назад

      @@natearmstrong8510 How could it exist if there's no one around to perceive it? The double-slit experiment and quantum physics seem to suggest that at least some parts of the physical world are determined by observation. Keep in mind that I'm not trying to argue against God (I'm a Deist).

  • @davids11131113
    @davids11131113 4 года назад

    If Bible god was real, you wouldn’t need any of these arguments for it.

    • @NickOeffinger
      @NickOeffinger 4 года назад +4

      Huh...?

    • @ALLHEART_
      @ALLHEART_ 4 года назад +12

      That's not how logic works. The existence of God is obvious, but if you're trying to convince someone else of this, you're going end up having to express it through arguments like these.