Quentin Smith - Fallacies in Arguing for God?

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 5 фев 2025
  • Believers in God should be appalled when poor arguments are offered to 'prove' the existence of God. These arguments can be so bad that one might think the proponents are really atheists in disguise.
    Donate to Closer To Truth and help us keep our content free and without paywalls: shorturl.at/OnyRq
    Click here to watch more interviews with Quentin Smith: bit.ly/1BRwSvf
    Click here to watch more interviews on fallacies in arguing for God's existence: bit.ly/1PVK090
    Click here to buy episodes or complete seasons of Closer To Truth: bit.ly/1LUPlQS
    For all of our video interviews please visit us at: www.closertotruth.com

Комментарии • 50

  • @frrascon
    @frrascon 4 года назад +20

    RIP Quentin Smith. Atheist philosophy has lost one of its most brilliant defenders.

    • @slapmeisterrecords8226
      @slapmeisterrecords8226 3 года назад

      Covid strikes again

    • @logans.butler285
      @logans.butler285 3 года назад

      I honestly don' think there has ever been, or whether there will ever be, a more brilliant defender of atheism in philosophy than Graham Oppy.

    • @bloodknight6142
      @bloodknight6142 3 года назад +1

      @@logans.butler285 Jordan Howard Sobel apparently was one. William Lane Craig called his book, Logic and Theism, an acid bath for Theism.

    • @setokaiba914
      @setokaiba914 2 года назад

      @@logans.butler285. Sobel is up there.

    • @VaughanMcCue
      @VaughanMcCue 5 месяцев назад

      @@slapmeisterrecords8226
      Did the Corvids really get him. He looks too young.

  • @AAA9549-w7w
    @AAA9549-w7w Год назад

    2- Why the recording of his voice is out of mixing board? There was no personal microphone!?

  • @BugRib
    @BugRib 4 года назад +2

    Dramatkic zoom-in at the end makes this video worth it.

  • @SeanMauer
    @SeanMauer 9 лет назад +2

    1) I think the disembodied mind concept of God is not justifiable from a biblical point of view, so I would not accept this as grounds for argument.
    2) Arguing that God can't bring about the universe, doesn't work.
    3) I agree, God can not be without physical existence.
    4) the argument of infinite regress does not work in our present-only time dimension, because you need an eternal present to resolve the regress.

  • @markcampbell8068
    @markcampbell8068 2 года назад +2

    I have viewed an enormous number of these videos, I have have been fascinated by them all. So much knowledge shared by very capable minds. I have to say, Professor Smith here , failed to deliver any thing coherent. I wonder if even he thought he made any sense.

  • @MrSouthstlouis
    @MrSouthstlouis 2 года назад +2

    Does anyone know how he died? I can't seem to find his cause of death anywhere.

  • @brudno1333
    @brudno1333 7 лет назад

    So, I guess he's saying that in order for the omnipotence of god to be realized, he must first have a universe in which to be omnipotent. Because the universe had to exist before god could claim omnipotence, god could not have created the universe, it had to precede him.

  • @AarvinMS
    @AarvinMS 3 года назад

    Ignosticism is the best philosophical justification that anyone can have for atheism.

  • @HardKore5250
    @HardKore5250 8 лет назад

    Trump should hire this guy to show there is no god and calm people fear of hell.

  • @theophilus749
    @theophilus749 7 лет назад +4

    If Quentin Smith was familiar with some of the arguments one finds in the great tradition of Christian teaching (such as is found in Aquinas) he would realise that God is not posited as a cause in the same sense as natural causes are causes. He would also realise that 'first cause' does not necessarily mean an initial cause _in_ time. Moreover, it is simply not true that "virtually every person who says they believe in God [is] using a word that means something different to each person". There are indeed different traditions but, within Christianity at any rate, they are not that numerous and tend to fall into overall groups. Atheists, too, when they say "there is no God" have some conception of what it is they are rejecting. If they didn't then their atheism would be meaningless. Smith also just boldly asserts that the concept of a disembodied mind (no that this is what God is according to the great tradition that I mention) is inconceivable. But why is it? He offers no arguments. And why should not a _whole_ have an explanation? Again Smith does not present a case. Altogether, Smith is long on assertion and short on argument.

    • @brudno1333
      @brudno1333 7 лет назад +1

      "Atheists, too, when they say "there is no God"" No! Atheists don't claim there is no god, they say that theists have not provided sufficient proof for them to accept the belief in the existence of a god. If there was proof, they'd no longer be atheists.

    • @rationalsceptic7634
      @rationalsceptic7634 4 года назад +2

      He is an Emeritus Professor of Philosophy Idiot..there is no evidence for Gods..just Faith,Apologetics and Fallacies

    • @theophilus749
      @theophilus749 4 года назад +3

      Sceptical Scientist I am more aware of Smith’s well deserved eminence but it doesn’t mean he cannot be mistaken. He is a modern philosopher who shows he has little grasp of older traditions of philosophical thought. The trouble is that it is just those traditions that one finds in the better areas of Christian theology.

    • @rationalsceptic7634
      @rationalsceptic7634 4 года назад

      Theo Philus
      Really? :
      rationalwiki.org/wiki/Thomas_Aquinas
      medium.com/@jakubferencik/arguments-for-gods-existence-debunked-cb656189653e
      The Bible Against Itself Why the Bible Seems to Contradict Itself www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0965504751/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_BIbLEbSAFM6G6
      Gospel Fictions www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B002I61F3A/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_kqeLEbS5CHP40
      Who Wrote the Gospels? www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0965504727/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_DqeLEbR5V1G4F
      www.richardcarrier.info/archives/13752

  • @AAA9549-w7w
    @AAA9549-w7w Год назад

    3-To express God or consciousness, free-will. Therefore, Zen would not be useful. Not Buddhism, not Judaism, not Christianity, nor Islam. Neither science, nor ordinary philosophy, nor math.
    Metaphysician

  • @mdbosley
    @mdbosley 8 лет назад +1

    infinite regress is also beyond conception.

  • @mdbosley
    @mdbosley 8 лет назад +2

    The tao that can be understood is not the great tao.
    The god that can be conceived is not the real god.

  • @jloren4647
    @jloren4647 5 лет назад

    Yes. The kalaam, if wholly accepted only arrives that the universe had a cause.

  • @BradHolkesvig
    @BradHolkesvig 9 лет назад +1

    Psalm 33
    8: Let all the earth fear the LORD, let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him!
    9: For he spoke, and it came to be; he commanded, and it stood forth.

    • @BradHolkesvig
      @BradHolkesvig 9 лет назад

      *****
      At this moment, you're sarcasm is blatant.

  • @klivebretznev2624
    @klivebretznev2624 4 года назад +1

    Concept of a disembodied mind is inconceivable. Like those words.

  • @HardKore5250
    @HardKore5250 8 лет назад

    This guy would. Ceam wlc

  • @uzairsaqib9298
    @uzairsaqib9298 9 лет назад +1

    He has no idea what he is talking about , this only happens when you try to explain spiritual things which are beyond physical study.
    We all should wait to die and then everything will be clear but by then it will be too late.

    • @jloren4647
      @jloren4647 5 лет назад

      Well, you are literally positing that god doesn't EXIST. Thats more than the average atheist would be comfy with.

  • @jaimel2037
    @jaimel2037 9 лет назад

    that was intense! ..ask him which came first!...The.....😜

  • @newweddingsong3027
    @newweddingsong3027 4 года назад +1

    Enroll this childish man in a Philosophy 101 course.

    • @rationalsceptic7634
      @rationalsceptic7634 4 года назад +5

      newwedding song
      He is an Emeritus Professor of Philosophy, idiot

  • @BradHolkesvig
    @BradHolkesvig 9 лет назад

    This fool doesn't know that I've been used by our Creator to testify to His knowledge and have learned exactly how we were created.

    • @claudiaquat
      @claudiaquat 9 лет назад +1

      +Brad Holkesvig You are the only one who know that.

    • @BradHolkesvig
      @BradHolkesvig 9 лет назад

      claudiaquat
      I have met thousands of our Creator's chosen believers here in Campbell, CA. They love to hear from their Creator and thank me for sharing His voice with them. Check out my website where all the messages are posted that I used to find His chosen believers.
      godsmessages.wordpress.com/
      I have also met several believers who use the internet forums and watch videos like this.

    • @claudiaquat
      @claudiaquat 9 лет назад +1

      Brad Holkesvig
      I'll pass.

    • @BradHolkesvig
      @BradHolkesvig 9 лет назад

      *****
      Our Creator used computing technology that is much more advanced than anything He taught us to use in his created simulation program called Eternal Life. He spoke his program into existence with his voice.
      He had me use Google to look for computer programmers who are using voice recognition software to speak code into to build computer programs. This is how our Creator created His program but his technology is much better than what we're using, particularly his computing language which can create more detail in his program than the simple binary code of 0's and 1's we use in building computer programs. This is how He's able to build a consciousness for each created being who makes that being self aware.
      Scientists are more confused then ever since they discovered quantum mechanics. Most of them have trouble fitting consciousness into their quantum theories. However, everything we experience came from God's simulation program called Eternal Life.

    • @BradHolkesvig
      @BradHolkesvig 9 лет назад

      *****
      I have all kinds of proof that our Creator had me testify to His knowledge but you still have to be chosen to believe the proof.
      Belief is a very powerful thing in our world because all our experiences are subjective. There is no proof that we're living in a computer simulation but that's exactly what is going on.