Give Me an Answer -
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 ноя 2024
- Cliffe Knechtle has a good dialogue with students at The University of Arizona - Tucson. Recorded in October 2012.
The "Give Me An Answer" ministry began as an outgrowth of the dialogues Cliffe Knechtle has had with students on various university campuses throughout the United States. These universities include the University of Maine, Harvard, MIT, University of Florida, University of Texas, University of Wisconsin, University of Minnesota, University of California Los Angeles, University of California San Diego, Berkeley, Stanford, University of Hawaii and the University of Washington. Cliffe spoke on these campuses in front of the Student Union or Library at noon for five to ten minutes. At the close of his initial remarks, he'd open up the time for questions and answers, which usually turned into a two to four hour dialogue with students. His crowd size ranged from 25 - 500 students at a time, and between classes, new students would join the discussion. This is an extremely effective way to reach a large number of university students with the Gospel of Christ.
![Lil Uzi Vert - Chill Bae [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/D7F42F_JM3U/mqdefault.jpg)
your very patient cliffe that kid didn't hear a thing you said it was like he was having a different conversation
Amen, wall usually don't listen. Cliffe has the patience of Job.
Cliffe has that Magic Johnson hook you saw the intro to the video where he does that! Fresh, great video by the way.
This show is awesome. Cliffes sound logic and reasoning has made it so much easier for me to answer questions myself or to make sound arguments in discussion. Before this show I would've had trouble answering questions or making strong arguments, besides something doesn't come from nothing. Hopefully I can use the same logical arguments to convert my fiance from agnosticism to christianity
Unless she knows logic herself, and can tell you where Cliffe goes wrong. If something doesn't come from nothing then why does God exist. Cliff says matter and energy came from nothing, which is probably true in a sense, but not the same "nothing" that Cliffe uses. Matter and energy were created at the big bang, however, there probably have been something before the big bang that triggered it (physicist hypothesize a quantum fluctuation). That "something" (not necessarily "someone" as Cliffe would have you think) could be God or not, but does not necessitate a God. God is something, and if something doesn't come from nothing, he must have been created or always existed. The same applies to whatever existed before the big bang be it God or some phenomenon we do not fully understand yet.
@@oceanceaser44 As you said "he must have been created or always existed" Yes, correct answer is ALWAYS EXISTED. Eternal living spiritual being.
@@oceanceaser44 Are you a theist yet? almost a decade since such ignorance was written.
@@oceanceaser44 There is no physical means to due away with a metaphysical problem. This is as absurd as using a hammer and nail on a computer. Whatever there is. Whatever IT is. It came from either Nowhere, Itself, or God. If the Universe were all there is, then IT would be the universe ITSELF. But obviously we live in time. So don't even have to think about it, we can't be eternal so the Universe can't come from itself. If it came from Nowhere, then IT is Nothing and Nothing just looks like Everything which means there are no logical distinctions (logical implosion principle). So from Nothing, must Nothing come. So, then God. God is Eternal. So God can Create IT as the Universe with images of Himself to steer the creation from within (as US conscious minds and through the physical super-force field). And through logic.
Nine years too late, but it's sad to see so many atheists only stop half-way in seeking metaphysical rock-bottom in fear of being exclusive in their position. But this is intellectual self-désarment. We must decide what and why what we know to be to true to be true.
Emulate, Jesus and that will show Her the relationship that you have with him.
Love your work sir.
Ok i thought i was dumb in certain things after watching this video i guess i ain't that bad lol. The Cliffe message is crystal clear here
is it me or are students less intelligent and reasonable as years pass??
kids are most definitely dumber these days.
the movie 'jackass' probably best describes their mental conditions.
jjhot254 The student is 10x smarter than this poor idiotic adult.
The guy proposed Occam's razor and then began to violate it by saying that the question of who created God must be asked ad infinitum. The reason for the razor is to make the simplest explanation more reasonable to avoid the compounding of questions which would result in an infinite regression of explanations.
You clearly don't understand the razor at all. The point of it is to cull explanations that require more assumptions than others....not merely 'simpler' explanations. If it just lead to 'simple' explanations we would expect it to answer cull all explanations except for 'nothing', as 'nothing' is the simplest explanation for anything possible -- considering it has no elements, parts or properties. But obviously that leads us to absurdities.
However when the razor is properly applied, if god is the type of 'explanation' that leads to an infinite regress of unfounded assumptions, he would certainly be culled.
I realize it isn't simply the simplest explanation and don't like that description because of the common misunderstanding but that is why I elaborated on it. But then again you can't claim I don't understand it because that is the way it is commonly described though I agree it can be misleading. Also you will probably agree that the skinny guy violated it which was my point.
***** Just about an hour ago I was saddened to see that your channel was gone and here you are again. What timing! And your channel content looks great. God bless.
MayonR Good to see you too!
I am here to stay.
=)
that kid got one epic dressing down --- one thing I'll say for him though, at least he's thinking
Love it...this kid got the smack down he deserved!!!
You're an idiot.
“Is there an eternal being and if there is who created him?” are you serious? if he’s E-TER-NAL then he always existed therefore nobody created him…why is the less educated crowd always the ones debating God’s existence? my God.
Awesome Cliffe!
It's a bummer that Cliffe didn't make it out here this year.
Cliffe that kid will come to Christ I believe it, when he said non aggression principal it reminded me a lot of myself. I always thought there were objective morals, but like you always say I had no basis to claim morals were objective, I probably would have admitted they come from God, but then I would have said idk who God is though, then you would have brought me to Christ guaranteed, but I am finding Christ now and I’m working my way closer to him everyday I can
bro. good testimony! ill pray for ya. ✝️
Without God, there could be no objective distinctions between the logical and the illogical, and yet there are such distinctions.
man arguing with atheists has to be so mentally draining...hats off to you Cliff...God bless
Arguing with Christians is like arguing with a brainless zombie.
@I PIMP TROLLS You're thinking of a Christian. 😉
Love ❤️ the talks ❤🌹
Anyone else was getting hyped up from his preaching 🔥🔥😂😁
Morality IS subjective, its subjective to what we value. Most people value life inherently, and most people have empathy. This is the basis of morality.
@Cameron Barnes That's a subjective opinion, isn't it? 😉
@@ryanmiller6266 No. Morality is simple. It's subjective to the measure of an objective standard. For example, you can subjectively choose any unit of measurement to measure something. But the measurement of the chosen unit is objective. That's analogous to morality. You subjectively choose to base your morality on dogma and the bible. From the perspective of your biblical morality, killing gays is a good thing. But my measure of morality is based on humanism and reason. So I can objectively say, that by that measure, your morality is wrong and immoral. Understand?
@@kubush NO!! There's no objective standard for right and wrong, remember!? You said flat out that morality is subjective. You can't say that I'm absolutely wrong! If what you say is true that morality is subjective, where on earth do you, as a moral subjectivist, get off calling me dogmatic and immoral? Certainly you're not going to be so arrogant as to insist that you're right and everyone else is wrong, are you?
@@ryanmiller6266 Wrong. Just because you can't understand simple concepts doesn't mean I'm wrong. The standard which you choose to follow is subjective. The standards themselves can be objective. Based on my standard, I can absolutely say you are wrong. Being dogmatic is not a moral question. So regardless of my moral standard, you are following dogmatic views. Also, you're assuming that everyone else agrees with you. Isn't that arrogant?
@@kubush I'm not assuming that everyone agrees with me, neither is my standard subjective. But from YOUR standard, I'm wrong. That's YOUR standard. But what about my standard? Suppose my standard is subjective and it permits me to be dogmatic, you're not going to tell me that I'm still wrong, are you?
And another thing: Haven't you ever heard of the law of non-contradiction? Subjective and objective are opposite of each other, therefore, a standard can't be subjective and objective at the time.
This generation talks but they don’t listen and hear what they want to hear. Just shows college education isn’t everything
That's the same for every generation
I don’t understand how this kid doesn’t get it
Lmao
That student is so lost. Thinks he is all that, but he's wrong and has no clue.
markmcsw Nah, I think you're lost. You believe in magical beings because you were indoctrinated into believing it and never learned critical thinking. You have no clue.
One of Cliff’s best
Just like listening to Kent Hovind's debate with students at the universities.
Brave kid. I would never be able to speak to him in public like that
the hate of this kid doesnt give him to think crearly
I was wondering if the guy would give Cliffe his money back.
Without God, non-aggression could not be objectively right, and yet it is.
Without God, human beings could not have any objective purpose, and yet we do.
God transcends space and time.
If you are referring to an entity that does not transcend space and time,
then you are not actually referring to God, regardless of whether you mistakenly call that entity "God" or not.
The universe did not exist before the Big Bang, but it does exist after the Big bang.
This means that someone or something must have caused the universe to exist.
That cause must necessarily be both personal and extremely powerful:
_The revealed scriptures identify that extremely powerful person as God._
Rational comes from non-rational? what do you even mean by that and why is it a problem...
This kid is hilarious
We do indeed know that the universe did not exist before the Big Bang.
We also know that God transcends time and has always existed.
Rising from the dead has nothing to do with credibility... how did you even come up with that?
The eyewitnesses
look at these scoffers below
11:10 Most physicists do not agree. No matter and energy perhaps, but not nothing.
Without God, there could be no objective moral ideals, and yet there are.
In the first sentence he contradicted himself "if there is an ETERNAL Being then who created Him"?? lol 😂 😂 Does he not know what eternal means...... no beginning, not created come on guy's think!! you are the future of Mankind God help us.
Why can't the universe be eternal?
I enjoy watching Cliffe. This video frustrated me though. Cliffe spent a lot of time reiterating his points and very little time allowing the kid to explain his or to ask questions.
The video description is misleading this time. This was definitely not "a good dialogue".
I like Cliffe Knechtle. He seems like a very, very nice person. But his debating with this young person is full of straw men and much phony pandering to the crowd. Matt Dillahunty destroyed him in a past debate, btw. Watch it.
Matt obliterated him. No contest
You find Matt’s arguments more emotionally appealing but they are not more reasonable. Matt resorts to anger and the childish strawman arguments of magic and unicorns many of the times I’ve heard him and they are nonsensical comparisons.
Of the two students debating with Cliffs , the short one made a false statement about how Einstein was upset at what THEISTS said about him......actually the opposite is true....here is an exact quote of what Eintien actually said:
" In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views."
-Albert Einstein
SO in truth it was the "atheists" that Einstein was upset with, NOT the "theists".
ydnar0591
Einstein also said this: "I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it." He said it in 1954. So yeah, he WAS upset with theists for misusing his quotes to push for a 'personal God'. He was a pantheist. He did not believe in a personal God.
But it doesn't matter either way what he said. Its ill-relevant to the question is there a God? It is an fallacy -- an argument from authority and both Atheists and Theists have done it as it was shown here. Someone or many believing that something is true does not magically make it true.
I already said that..Einstein did not believe GOD was a QUOTE:"PERSONAL GOD"...Einstein said he Believed in a "CREATOR GOD"...so what is new about your post ?.....but in fairness ...I ..nor ..YOU "KNOW FR CERTAIN" what was in Einstein's mind or heart {soul} ..ON HIS DEATHBED..???...GOD LOOKS ON THE HEART NOT THE OUTSIDE OF A MAN ~1Samuel 16:7~ KJB...??? SO.....Live with it..!?
IF YOU wanrt PROOF OF GOD ...READ THE "BIBLE"...!
ydnar0591
I posted that quote because as I said:
"So yeah, he WAS upset with theists for misusing his quotes to push for a 'personal God'. He was a pantheist. He did not believe in a personal God."
But you are correct that we cannot know for sure. But as I said, it doesn't matter either way.
"But it doesn't matter either way what he said. Its ill-relevant to the question is there a God? It is an fallacy -- an argument from authority and both Atheists and Theists have done it as it was shown here. Someone or many believing that something is true does not magically make it true."
And you can't use the Bible as a basis for why God is true. It cannot be used as evidence for a great many reasons. I mean I could go down a huge list of reasons why the Bible cannot be used to show that the Christian God is real.
If something is here, that demands "SOMEONE" put it here. Please explain why it has to be someone not something. Why is it wrong that the rational came from the irrational. You say it as though it is impossible but don't provide a good reason
Here are some more options:
1) Universe created by mindless supernatural force.
2) Universe created by trickster God who is testing our ablity to learn
3) Universe created by mad God who wants to maximize our suffering over eternity.
4) Universe created by time traveling scientists from the far future.
5) Universe created by wizards.
You limiting your number of options.
Here's one more
6) Universe created by natural process from transcendental dimension
~ here's another option , the universe was not created , it is being created ,
not by any one agent , but by itself , and a process whereby matter space and time interplay . The energy which fuels all this is borrowed and repaid to a mirror energy which subtends its own self creation . The 2 universes do not exist simultaneously , but share in minute sequential manifestations , taking turns in expressing planck time instants . Total energy is zero . Both appear continuous , even if there were 'billion year pauses' . It doesn't matter how long the lamps are switched off as measured , down time is arbitrary , and they come on again . A bit like we can still see if we blink our eyes very very fast .
Relex Graal Yes ! Love it . That's what I am trying to say in my garbled way .
1) False: The mindless cannot choose a specific time to act: Choice requires a mind. The beginning of the universe taking place at a particular time, therefore, indicates that it was created by a mind.
2) True and false: God tricks the tricky, and he tricks better than anyone. I accept that. However, he already knows our ability to learn, and doesn't need to test that.
3) If you really believe that, then I fear for your safety: Suicide is in your near future.
4) So ridiculous that it doesn't even warrant a direct response.
5) See #4.
Relex Graal Who created the supposed "transcendental dimension?"
17:12 ... You are telling me he decided not to believe in something? that makes no sense how can you just decide despite the fact you know something to be true, that you don't know that it is true... saying you are a christian and being a christian are two different things, just the same with being an atheist...
When I hear people describe “God” I picture a scientist that is from another world and we are only an experiment to them. Now who made that scientist? Maybe another scientist or maybe one scientist has just always been around with out a creator.
Ah the freewill argument. Is there freewill in heaven? Yes? Is there evil or suffering in heaven? No? So you can have freewill and no evil or suffering without making everyone machines? Yes? Then why didn't he do so on Earth? BOOM preacher. PWNED.
+kubush Are you aware that angels sinned in heaven and got kicked out?? so it is clear that there is free will in heaven, the only difference is that evil will be destroyed in hell.
stonebrownalien So you're claiming there is sin in heaven? And if so, then won't everyone eventually sin, statistically speaking? I mean within the time frame of an eternity, everyone will end up in hell.
+kubush I am claiming that angels were in heaven and some of them chose to rebel against God, that dosent mean that all the people there will do that, or that they have to.
+VideoAudioDisco09 In the Bible it is very clear that Lucifer, who was one of the most beautiful angels created, decided that he wanted God's throne and a rebellion ensued, and they got kicked out. Remember because God knows what is going to happen, dosent mean that he planned it. God knew what they were going to do because they would choose to do it, not because he made them do it.
stonebrownalien Beauty is subjective. How stupid does an angel have to be to think it can overthrow an all powerful being that can blink him out of existence? If god knew that was going to happen, why did he create lucifer in the first place? Can you not see how this makes zero sense?
Look up spacetime, there is no "before" the universe.
All human beings know for certain that God's unique qualities and activities are factual,
and this includes you.
More made up bullshit. You're delusional. Try using logic for once in your miserable life.
@@kubush what’s logic?
@@alfonzofields5352 🤣🤣🤣
@@kubush it’s gone get hot in that kitchen… stay in the living room
@@alfonzofields5352 You just need to invest in good ventilation.
Cliffe talk = Assumption, Lies, Ignorance and Appeals to Emotion.
Prove it.
It's been more than two months now, and still no proof for your assertion.
Liar?
=)
*****
He didn't respond probably because of you obviously didn't watch the video. Because if you had, you would have seen assumption, lies, Ignorance and Appeals to Emotion.
A.) The first part when he talks about there is only 4 choices (assumption).
B.) When he talks about 'blind faith in atheism and he would be gullible to believe in that stuff (lie) and ignorance. Atheism is NOT about faith. Atheism is simply a dis-belief on the God Claim. It is not Anti-theism. Atheism does not seek to prove or disprove God, therefore does not have faith.
C.) He even did the old 'fallacy of appealing to Authority bit as well when he mentioned Charles Darwin. Oh Charles Darwin (intelligent guy) said something therefore I must believe it.
D.) He also talked about Jesus coming back from the dead -- He assumes its true without providing evidence for said claim. So there is another assumption.
E.) He also said that everything that exists MUST have a cause. Then makes the fallacy that it MUST be God without giving evidence for it. He asserts that God is the cause of the Universe and not just 'a' God but because he mentioned Jesus he believes that it is the 'Christian' God which he would need to also demonstrate on top of the original 'God' did it claim. We do not KNOW of the origins of the Universe enough to make any such claim. Did it really have a beginning? Did it spawn from a singularity? We do not know what happened BEFORE the Big-Bang. Just because we do not know, doesn't mean you can assert God is the reason. Because we don;'t know, 'God must have done it'. God of the gaps is not an argument. The only thing we can do is give theories on the beginning and go with the best one and there isn't any actual evidence that God did it. There IS evidence for the Big-Bang though.
F.) He also pretty much at the end suggests that Without God there is no meaning -- that could be considered argument from emotion. Lol, he argues with God you are special!!! Playing with someone Emotions does not make something true.
The Dragon is going to EAT YOU if you don't give me money! Emotion is not evidence. Saying I'll be sent to hell if i don't believe in your God is not Evidence. (Also immoral).
There happy? Everything he said was bs.
"Everything that begins to exist has a cause" is not necessarily true. Yes it is true that all examples we have of something beginning to exist had a cause, but we only have examples within our universe. So the line should be "Everything that begins to exist within our universe has a cause" since it might not apply to the universe itself. Maybe it does, but it is not something we know for sure, as Cliff makes it out to be. Plus of course no one can create something from nothing, because we do not have a nothing to experiment with, even if we remove everything from some spot we will still have the fabric of the universe itself there, so it wont be true nothing.
Without God, there could be no logic or reason, and yet there are.
We have logic and reason and zero evidence for any gods. Guess we don't need any god for logic and reason after all.
Literally just responding to things that wasn't even said
I have watched a great deal of Cliffe. Not because I agree with him, or like listening to him. He is arrogant and condescending; he gets more arrogant and condescending as people disagree with him. I watch him because I learn a great deal about deceptive debating and the way he can twist an argument. He is a continuous stream of fallacious statements. He has many practised "tricks" to take control of a conversation from rational reasoned argument. Saw him in the late 80s in Austin. He has not changed :).
This guy only preaches at college campuses because actual adults know how to shut him down. College kids trip over their words and end up giving him more attention than he deserves.
He debates professors
Adults are usually more hardened and forceful but they are not more rational, logical, or good at productive conversation.
I am late. But why are most people mad here? DX
Already at the first dialogue... he didn't even answer the kid's question. He didn't answer how the god formed. He just went his own way, and appealed to emotion. Not much of an argument.
how god formed? how he was created? if that was the question, god wasn't formed, he wasn't created, he is eternal. no beginning no end.
+Lourens L If the Universe had a beginning as they say (14 billion years ago), it means life on earth took 10 billion years to start life. If the Universe is eternal, it means life on earth took INFINITY years to start life. That's the mathematic answer to that on a eternal Universe.
BUT.. If the universe had a beginning, it means all space, matter, time and energy had a beginning. There was something else that cause the universe to exist, and that cause couldnt been any of those 4 things because this 4 things didnt exist before the universe itself. Time and Space are mutually necessary. Matter and energy are dependent of then. SO whatever was the cause of universe to begin, it was something beyond time (eternal), beyond space (omnipresent), beyond matter and energy (omnipotent), and of course beyond any knowledge within the universe (omniscient). That pure logic. No one can refute that. Its impossible.
+Lauro Neto TO BE (created) depends on time. God is not a thing (matter) that was born (TIME). You guys cant get as far as your noses.
< If the universe had a beginning, it means all space, matter, time and energy had a beginning. >
That is 100% demonstratively false. We observe matter/energy that experiences no time every day of our lives. It's called light.
Again demonstratively false. Matter/energy moves through space without experiencing time at all.
< If the universe had a beginning, it means all space, matter, time and energy had a beginning.>
We know that our universe had a beginning. We have absolutely no way of knowing if matter/energy had an ultimate beginning.
< No one can refute that. Its impossible.>
All you have made is a bunch of false statements and unfounded assertions. Far from impossible to refute your statements contradict common knowledge and are self-refuting.
Its only wrong to rape if you don't have silver to give to the persons father, this is the moral standard from the bible. so, you can't say it's wrong because you don't have God saying so which you claim to be your moral standard & the worlds. We know that the bible is pro slavery and pre rape, unless somewhere within the bible God says its actually wrong.
Let's say that I do rape a woman but after I ask her to marry me and I took care of her for the rest of her life, does that make what I did to her any better? because according to cliffe in a debate he said it was better because back than if a woman was rape it would be hard for her to find someone to take care of her, or maybe the better answer is God shouldn't have made that a rule to start with.
Special pleading. Nothing comes from nothing, except God. And he knows this how? If all complex thing have a creator, who created God? The most complex thing in the universe has no creator.
Jesus Christ talked about the creation of the male and female. The living mater is about 6000 yrs old He also talked about major old testament characters like Noah, Abraham, Jacob, Moses, David, Solomon and queen of Sheba. The world was made through Jesus Christ. Sin has deformed us but Jesus came to transform the body, soul, and the spirit and our twisted minds too. see www.gotquestions.org
Some of these kids 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
We all have a soul and a spirit. The world was made through Jesus Christ. Finally he became a man to bring salvation to all. The preacher and the Holy Spirit Bible are just the tools but Jesus in the Savior. see www.gotquestions.org
18:26 so you are saying that god doesn't know the future? I thought he was omnipresent? There cannot be free will if he created us knowing exactly what path we would go down.
I can't hear that statement at that point? Never-the-less, how does God knowing the future(which he does according to the bible) mean that he caused those things to happen?
If he created us, and knew the future, he would have known exactly what we would. Like when he made Adam and Eve he knew that Satan would tempt them and that they would eat from the tree. It doesn't make sense to create somebody that you know is going to do something wrong then to punish them for it.
These snotty and over grown children always getting cooked by cliffe 😂
Its far more reasonable to believe that your rational mind comes from a rational creator who is rational because uhhh why?
Based on the evidence that’s the most plausible and rational to believe that life comes from life and that the rational comes from rational
What some people say is that we have evolved over 65 million years where is the fossil record we have dinosaurs were are our fossil records that point to evolution it’s week no fossil record of evolution of kind
You therefore still have to ask where do we come from is it more plausible that there is a God who created us for a purpose or not? Your an atheist I can tell you haven’t listen to a thing he just said why you running
kazam onyoligical aegument is insuffficiaent and play linguistiq and philosocla meaning of cause. Its easyto refute and anyway, quantum physics shows tant nothing is unsrtable, Nothing is a irrelevant notion in modern physics
Look at this poor kid shake and scream at his entire perception of reality and God become clear and he can’t stand himself and throws his anger at God
Lol, go right ahead down your rational path.. This cliffe guy is the face of irrationality
The Big Bang Theory does not say there was nothing prior to the Big Bang. It says there was a singularity and we have almost zero information about that singularity. We have no idea existence has an origin or if it has simply always existed.
He's got a good first name because he reminds me of Cliff from Cheers. Arrogantly talking about something he is totally clueless about.
+MrPoster42 If the Universe had a beginning as they say (14 billion years ago), it means life on earth took 10 billion years to start life. If the Universe is eternal, it means life on earth took INFINITY years to start life. That's the mathematic answer to that on a eternal Universe.
BUT.. If the universe had a beginning, it means all space, matter, time and energy had a beginning. There was something else that cause the universe to exist, and that cause couldnt been any of those 4 things because this 4 things didnt exist before the universe itself. Time and Space are mutually necessary. Matter and energy are dependent of then. SO whatever was the cause of universe to begin, it was something beyond time (eternal), beyond space (omnipresent), beyond matter and energy (omnipotent), and of course beyond any knowledge within the universe (omniscient). That pure logic. No one can refute that. Its impossible.
Lauro Neto The teleological argument has been refuted countless times. It's not logical and it's totally baseless in it's framing.
To be logical you must build your premises on verifiable evidence. Since we have no information about what occurs in a singularity we have no way of knowing what did or didn't come before the Big Bang.
We also have a very limited understanding of spacetime. So you can't say an "eternal" past is impossible.
It's just another God of the Gaps argument. We don't yet know so must be god. It's a complete joke that no one other than theists desperate to justify their belief find even remotely valid.
It's also rather comical because you see theists using it to "prove" their god is real. So Muslims use it to prove their god, Christians use it to "prove" their god, etc, etc. The truth is that you turn to desperate tricks like that because you don't have any evidence for your god. If you did you would talk about that instead.
Its not an argument to prove MY god, dude. Who said that?
You said its not verifiable, sure lets assume its not. We assume certain things from logic (maybe is right, maybe is wrong). BUT, if its not verifiable and you know materialism will never verify that, it seems the gap is not on God. Materialists will always use that argument.
Again, with eternal past, it means time came to exist NEVER. Matter came to exist NEVER, and so on.
Earth took INFINITY years to form. Life on earth took INFINITY years to begin.
About the verifiable evidence again, what does the big bang suggest about the beginning of time/space?
Lauro Neto
Well it doesn't actually prove anything at all.
I disagree. Assuming isn't good and logic is just a thought experiment. Without verifiable evidence logic can lead to very wrong conclusions.
Materialism is just a made up word for people that assume there is something that isn't material. We have zero evidence of non-material existence.
Well this is just gibberish so idk what to say to that. If you are using "we don't know X" then you are using a gaps argument. You don't prove things by pointing to the unknown.
We don't have the information to know about any "eternal" past. If there is a point at which time began then there is not an eternal past at all because eternal implies time.
We can trace our universe back to right after the Big Bang. Prior to that we don't have any information so there is no basis on which to make any claims.
No Earth took ~4.5 billions years to form. Life formed ~3.8 billions years ago. It makes no sense to try to add years prior to the Big Bang because there may not have even been anything prior to that. Including time.
What does it suggest about time/space? I don't know what you are trying to get at. As far as we know it's the event that caused spacetime which is the fabric of our universe. It doesn't really suggest anything.
Dude you didnt get me. At all.
I was supposing the infinity universe. And showing that actually it doesnt make sense. Yes earth was formed at 5 billion years, thats because time 0 existed. The -Infinity +Infinity is not a real thing. We are agreeing here.
If time came to exist, there was something that cause time to exist. And if that something was within some temporality, it means it didnt creat time, so its not the case. Its just walking in circles.
So that something was a timeless thing, which is the definition of eternal.
I can't believe people are still using the "everything that has a beginning has a cause" argument. The premise fails for multiple reasons, but the existence of virtual particles alone shows that it is simply factually incorrect. But even if the premise was (somehow) valid, positing "god" is an argument from ignorance fallacy, and moving a step further to posit your particular god is a non-sequitur fallacy.
Some of the more seasoned apologists attempt semantic maneuvers to get around this ("all contingent things have contingent causes"), but it fails for the same reasons once you parse out the semantics.
We live in a speck of dust in an incomprehensibly vast, largely lifeless universe that clearly had no intelligent design behind it. Once you realize this, you can start living.
It's never too late to start learning.
It's not argument from ignorance because it isn't an explanatory inference. It is deductive reasoning and if the premises are sound the conclusion logically follows necessarily.
But the premises aren't sound. That's the problem.
***** Yes, I've taken Quantum Mechanics 101. I still have my transcripts. Setting aside what is meant by "everything" and "beginning" for a moment, the problem with asserting that uncaused causes are causes is that it both equivocates causality and it begs the question. In other words, could you please explicitly define your god and explain how it created transient fluctuations in quantum fields? If you can't, then we're back to square one, and you're left to fill in the gaps with an argument from ignorance fallacies, ad hoc rationalizations, or more commonly, both.
Taking this fallacious reasoning even further and concluding that Muhammad split the moon, or that Jesus drove demons into swine, or that Krishna lifted a mountain with his finger is the result of faith, which is pretending to know things you don’t know.
Even the supposed "virtual particles" were in the big bang. Before the Big Bang there was *nothing*, no matter, no energy.
***** I did answer your question, and that isn't a red herring--unless I'm mistaken and you don't claim that a god is responsible for the creation of the universe. If that's the case, I'll retract my earlier statement.
"is just another way of saying eternal thing that caused something. I dont get how it would be begging the question."
If this "eternal thing" exists, what is it and how does it operate? (That's why it begs the question.)
I'm tired of this guy already. How does Clifffe do it?
Education or indoctrination?
Morality IS relative. Its evolution. There is no "evil" or "good." Its what is best for the survival of he species. Its science. And how the fuck is life meaningless without God?? I don't think this guy thinks through his arguments very well.
+1203shane You live for the sake of homo sapiens? You dont cheat your wife for the sake of homo sapiens? You dont lie to get a job for the sake of homo sapiens? Really?
+Lauro Neto Really.
+1203shane You know you dont... lol
+Lauro Neto what does that even mean? the point Is that you dont need a god to know how to be a "moral" person. you wanna "lol" like youre soooo enlightened when you dont even understand what my point even is.
You said evolution made us moral. Or am I wrong? My point is: You dont need a God but the universe have one, it doesnt matter what you think. You know good from evil not because of evolution. You really dont do evil things because you believe evolution made you morally responsable for you specie?
The burden of critical thinking. Critical thinking is more reliable than faith level thinking. Faith has 3 main parts, 1) Belief, 2) Training and 3) emotional drivers. Jesus the Christ can be a character of fiction writers. Why would Jesus the Christ heal one person of Leprosy, not cure Leprosy? Why would Jesus die and 3 days later comes to life and then ascends into heaven and abandons the people of Judea to the torture of the Roman Empire military, is Jesus the Christ moral or ethical?
Everything Jesus did was what a character of a fiction writers could do. Everything that Jesus knew about the world was as much as a fiction writer would know 2000 years ago.
Jesus did all the things that you mentioned above so that you would hear about him… and it worked!
***** That is a stupid argument. The same argument could be used for every religion ever.
If the Christian God is real, it would be like saying, God let Satan live after rebelling against him so that you could be tested! So that your faith could be tested! Or Zeus did what he did so that you could hear about him! And just talking about Satan for a second . . .
Its ill-logical for A.) God to not have destroyed Satan right after he Rebelled. B.) For letting the fallen Angel into the Garden of Eden. C.) For not punishing him for corrupting Adam and Eve (much less not destroying him then as well), D.) For not Destroying him after he did the Flood and letting Satan do EVERYTHING all over again (What the freak was the point of the Flood if he was going to let Satan corrupt is now 'pure' and savable human Noah and all of his descendants?
I could go on and on and on. There are at-least 5 separate instances where God SHOULD have killed Satan if he were all-loving or cared at all for humanity. If Satan were to be destroyed right now -- we would be instantaneously better off. But no God apparently will only destroy him at the END of life. For some 'reason'.
The reason why Satan hasn't been destroyed, and God doesn't do miracles today/show himself, that Jesus didn't cure diseases (just individuals) is because its all a work of fiction.
There are so many ill-logical things that happen in the Bible. I could go Chapter by Chapter, verse by verse and list out the ill-logic in them and quite frequently the immorality of its teachings. Like commanding someone to love him, Threatening someone with 'hell' or damnation for not believing. Showing and endorsing how to own someone as Property. Even allowing some creature like 'Satan' to exist is immoral in itself. Genocide is also immoral in my book. It goes on and on and on.
14:20 .. so if evolution is true you don't think we should be moral? that is scary that you would see nothing wrong with stabbing me in the face if it weren't for your god telling you not to
That isn't what he said, dude.
Toasty McGrath Yeah I see that. I must have heard him wrong because I thought he said that if we were just made through evolution then there would be no value to human life.
this guy is confused
Without God, no specie could display consistency, and yet they do.
Cliffe, as usual, puts his own ignorance on parade in this video.
I love how he always asks why we should trust our brains, as if he's not in the same boat. What reason does he have to trust his own brain? Notice the vicious circularity of that question -- what REASON does he have? But what is reason? Reason is the exercise of cognitive faculties...which are the very things in question! Any answer he appeals to could only have been reached through the exercise of his own cognitive faculties. And that is true for everyone.
If he took a bit of time to reflect on his ridiculous views, he'd see they're just as vulnerable to critique as the ones he mocks.
You sound smart so it's perplexing that you don't understand Cliffe when he just posits in simple terms. Cliffe is asking for epistemological justification. But even then I think it was Hegel that said that all epistimologies are circular and that it was not a vice but essential.
You are mocking Cliffe's point & making it for him at the same time. If cognitive faculties and mental reasoning is from pond scum, why have a discussion on a college campus about these topics? Or why trust that the result of 12 weeks of class will be worth anything when the class was generated by "pond scum evolved to a higher order"?
MayonR What part of Cliffe's point don't I understand? Nothing you posted contradicts anything I said. All you did was repeat it, with an appeal to Hegal at the end. Not to mention the absurdity of saying all epistemologies are circular: they certainly are not.
ChuckieJ 2 Your rhetoric isn't the least bit interesting. Just assuming that humans who have evolved from 'bond scum' cannot trust their reasoning faculties simply due to their evolutionary past is ad hoc and unjustified. You have to explain why natural selection cannot account for reasoning faculties. Simply asserting so is not an argument. And, of course you will not be able to provide such an argument, because natural selection actually provides a good account of why our reasoning faculties are reliable (namely, a reliable understanding of one's environment leads to a better survival rate).
Not to mention the same questions could be asked about any origin hypothesis.
Why should we trust our reasoning faculties if humans were originally crafted from unthinking clay?
Why should we trust our reasoning faculties if humans were created by a god whose desire is for us to simply worship him?
Why should we trust our reasoning faculties when they're the result of immaterial souls operating in ways we cannot understand or examine?
etc etc. Try again.
MayonR That's because Cliffe isn't putting things in simple terms, but rather is framing them so that the discussion is always in his favor. Look at how he words things in every video. There is a very clear pattern, and he gets very upset if you deviate from his prepared responses.
0:49 sorry Cliffe but you really shouldn't dabble in physics. Stick with what you know.
3:00; _"so which option is the best: Science not yet knowing exactly how it all started, or a heavenly magician with a magic wand who spoke everything into existence and who loves you (and doesn't need anymore enquiry, cause a bronze-age book mentions him already): Take your pick"_! 7:00 : _"you don't get something from nothing, yet that is exactly what you gotta believe when you're religious, and i'm making a truck-load of cash, talking this shitty reasoning to the gullible"_. etc. etc.
It's ok to be skeptical. What is the specific question you are asking?
@@vincentpaula3184 Don't know why precisely I typed that comment, 7 years ago. I don't see a question in it, though.
Ahh...bullshit!
At 1:00 he asserts that something can't come from nothing..how the fuck does he know that? Have he ever examined nothing?
Fus Ro Dah His whole argument is based on ignorance. He doesnt know of any other way, so it must be magic man done it.
kubush That's exactly it. "i know of only four ways and if you know another way then you can tell me...". its not a multiple choice question. you can't list 4 things it can only be and pick the best one as your answer and claim it to be right. if you don't know all of the possible ways why your car isn't working, coming up with four possibilities you can think of and picking the more likely one doesn't make it true. there could be something else wrong with it that you didn't think of, so claiming that these are the only possibilities that i know and so out of these this is the better answer is an argument from ignorance. If there had to be something to make something is his argument, i can substitute his god with any other god i want and it will be just as logical and true in his reasoning.
From the bottom of my heart i wish people could come up with better arguments than this.
Fus Ro Dah Why? God came from god right?
Michael Dennis nice circular reasoning.
Fus Ro Dah you can't examine nothing..... because there is nothing to examine!! it's a scientifically impossible to get something from nothing it just doesn't happen.
This kid stinks at moral relativism
1:10 strawman! and then in the eksplenation where did the strawman go??? i call intelectuall dishonesty!
3:35 yes you have seen other brains then word play with design with no definition! Designed is what cannot occure naturally! and minds ALWYAYS ALWAYS have material subtraces!
5:40 Cliffe thinks "i am in a corner ! better twist and change the subject !! lets try something on the atheist rationality"
6:20 QUOTEMINING ALERT! charles darwin used this phrase to describe an iner conviction of his about the order in the universe and not for the human mund un general!! FAILED again cliff!
7:13 same strawan again! and might i add to your sentace!!... you cant create something WITH NO PREE}{isting matterials!
and again and agin the same old things! the universe started therefore someone had to start it ! well too bad NOTHING CAN BE CREATED WITH NO PREE}{ISTING MATERIALS so again the singualrity before the big bang is stil the best option!
"what is there before the big bang?????" all mass and all energy compressed to a single point called the singularity!
11:40 are you implying that with no god youd be a rapist?? that only your belief in god stops you from being a rapist??
or are you unable to evaluate the concequense of your actions and to comprehend that the wellfare of the generall population benefits the unit in a society?
again word games without giving any definition of morality! well heres one!
morality is a system with wich we evaluate the concequence of our actions good or bad with the cretiria of the well fare of units and the total of our society and our spicies!
SELFCONTRADICTION UP AHEAD! on the one hand you say that if there is no god and you make your own purpose and your purpose is to rape that wouldnt be wrong and then you say that if you do all that youd feel guilt! SORRY but when you do something that you cannot label as wrong you dont fel guilt!
YOU HAVE FRIENDS THAT WORK FOR GOLDMAN SHUCKS??? byebye!
I pray God will give me a woman, i completely understand how God must feel when rejected, every time I start developing feelings toward a woman and it doesn't workout for one reason or another, that heart sinking sadness in the core of my being is exactly how God feels when we reject him. I feel I deserve to feel this way for the past decade I have been a christ rejector, I never stopped to compare gods feelings to my own, to feel empathy for the pain I caused him. I repent as it is revealed to me what my sins have done to god.