Why I Am/Am Not a Christian,
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 21 авг 2022
- In the second session recorded at CC Exchange 22, Alex O'Connor (Cosmic Skeptic) and Trent Horn (The Counsel of Trent) engaged each other in conversation over the topic of why they are/are not a Christian.
--------------------------- FREE STUFF ---------------------------
"The Rationality of Christian Theism" & "The Ultimate List of Apologetics Terms for Beginners" E-Books (completely free): tinyurl.com/CCFREESTUFF
------------------------------- GIVING -------------------------------
Patreon (monthly giving): / capturingchristianity
Become a CC Member on RUclips: / @capturingchristianity
One-time Donations: donorbox.org/capturing-christ...
Special thanks to all our supporters for your continued support! You don't have to give anything, yet you do. THANK YOU!
--------------------------------- SOCIAL ---------------------------------
Facebook: / capturingchristianity
Twitter: / capturingchrist
Instagram: / capturingchristianity
SoundCloud: / capturingchristianity
Website: capturingchristianity.com
-------------------------------- MY GEAR ---------------------------------
I get a lot of questions about what gear I use, so here's a list of everything I have for streaming and recording. The links below are affiliate (thank you for clicking on them!).
Camera (Nikon Z6): amzn.to/364M1QE
Lens (Nikon 35mm f/1.4G): amzn.to/35WdyDQ
HDMI Adapter (Cam Link 4K): amzn.to/340mUwu
Microphone (Shure SM7B): amzn.to/2VC4rpg
Audio Interface (midiplus Studio 2): amzn.to/33U5u4G
Lights (Neewer 660's with softboxes): amzn.to/2W87tjk
Color Back Lighting (Hue Smart Lights): amzn.to/2MH2L8W
Recording/Interview Software: bit.ly/3E3CGsI
-------------------------------- CONTACT --------------------------------
Email: capturingchristianity.com/cont...
#Apologetics #CapturingChristianity #ExistenceofGod
I appreciate the way the chairs match their shoes. Whoever made that happen, I see you.
Hey nice eye!
Best comment ever
Civilized comment.
Or...it's coincidence.
Good observation. 😁
Filming this in heaven was a nice touch
I know its been a year, but this is funny.
😂😂
@@3magikarpinamansuit281 after a year and two weeks, it's still funny. Let's come back periodically and see when it stops being funny, if ever.
That’s almost believable 😂 then you see cosmic sceptic is there
@@Pretty_Fly_White_GuyStrongest evidence against Christianity.
I’ve been watching cosmic skeptic for a long time and this conversation has really changed my perspective:
I too now see Alex as a tall person.
You're not talking intellectually speaking I take it.
@@zootsoot2006 it was a joke i think, but why not exactly?
Right?? Damn
I thought it was funny.
Is 6.1ft (what the hell is wrong with you people still using this atrocious system) considered tall? It's... it seems kind of average to me.
Edit: 6.1ft = 186cm... I am 184 and I'm not considered tall nor am I considered short...
My wife's water broke while listening to this. Just thought you all should know.
You fornicator you..
Congratulations!
Damn hopefully you'll be able to fix her water again...
I broke while listening to this
If you drink it you get superpowers
So refreshing that there needn’t be a moderator in this debate. No strawmanning, dodging questions, rabbit trailing, or ad hominems. Just two serious thinkers really listening to each other and talking through what they believe. I’m a Protestant Christian but I greatly respect both of these guys.
Even as a Catholic, Alex O'Conner is very respectful. Lots of atheists can learn from him in how to have a discussion. And yes, Trent is great. He's always super nice in debates/dialogues.
Yes, this is the climate we need instead of the inflammatory fundamendalist vs. Hitchens age
jaredlowry, what convinced you to select your particular religion out of the many which are available?
@@thedubwhisperer2157are you a seeker?
@@gorb_oron A what?
Alex has become my favorite and respectful atheist. He’s sincere and genuine and respectful. He’s definitely an example of someone who disagrees and yet he’s not mocking or insulting the other! Definitely an example for Christian’s as well to follow.
He carries himself well. But I can't take him that seriously as a thinker. He is too young for one. Articulate yes, but still young.
@@gideondavid30 It's not age that makes one wise.
@@mattheartfollower4123 It often does aided with life experience and self-reflection. How many 18-22 yr olds have you met that are wise? Very small percent.
@@gideondavid30 This. I think people give him too much credit where there shouldn't be any credit.
@@gideondavid30 one of the most silly comments I have seen in a while
It’s lovely that we’re starting to see Alex so much in all places. I’ve been here for a while and absolutely delighted by the recognition he has received.
The smartest atheists don't remain atheists, but for Alex it's a career.
@@joannware6228 by that logic Dawkins, Hitchens, Sam Harris and so on arent smart atheists? Lol ok
@@Gill1923 You forgot Hawking. He was one of the smartest. The other three are smart but maybe not the smartest like C. S. Lewis and Edith Stein.
@@joannware6228 What about Hawking? He was an atheist. Also a scientist. And not even close to being as smart on the subject of religion and atheism as the people I had mentioned.
@@Gill1923 Okay I'll cross him off. Thanks.
00:00 Discussion on philosophy of religion and why Trent Horn is a Christian
05:52 The existence of intrinsic human dignity and morality points towards a divine direction.
16:12 The problem of divine hiddenness and non-resistant non-belief raises questions about the existence of a loving God.
20:43 Religion and politics cannot be simply labeled as good or bad.
35:27 A world that journeys to perfection has more goods in it
44:48 Critiquing the problem of evil in Christianity
49:25 The morality of inflicting suffering for a greater good
58:44 Promoting welfare of mentally handicapped humans over non-human animals
1:03:37 Moral debates involve emotive states and differing moral claims.
1:12:53 The Bible's account of God's revelation is progressive in nature.
1:17:57 People will be judged based on their culpability, not just intellectual inquiry.
1:28:26 The problem of evil and falsifiability of Christianity
1:33:01 The problem of suffering is important and should be taken seriously.
1:42:32 Compensation for suffering may justify allowing evil.
1:47:14 Arguments can increase probability of Christianity being true
1:56:02 The existence of suffering and evil is not a reason to be an atheist.
Thank you so much for these time stamps!
Can we get this comment pinned please?
I feel like there needs to be a time stamp to 10:22 but I'm not good at writing a quick little title for it. That's when Alex begins to explain why he is an atheist, starting with the problem of needless suffering.
@ContriteCatholic MVP of the comment section 😎
@@wolfegaming36yes i think you're right, maybe something like "Religion is a response to human suffering"
This is definitely one the best Christian and Atheist discussions I've ever watched after 30 years of listening/watching/reading hundreds of discussions and debates.
Have you seen his debate with William L Craig...if yes what did you make of it?
@@streetwisepioneers4470 You mean where Alex interviewed WLC? It wasn't a debate. It was cordial discussion and interview. Alex even admitted that a number of his criticisms a few years back when he was younger were bad objections. That he now recognizes it being older, wiser and more informed when it comes to philosophy and argumentation.
It’s because Trent is Catholic. Protestants have no idea what they’re talking about
I think the calm and respectful tone is quite nice; but on substance I don’t really see this as being anything other than par for the course, bad arguments for Christianity.
@KZSoze Truth is only "bad arguments" to the Spiritually blind.
Another atheist here. I am also a nonresistant nonbeliever. In fact I used to believe and realized my prior evidences and personal experiences for my beliefs had more natural reasons.
I wish you all the best, Internet comrades. Lots of love.
Well said! That matches me perfectly man.
Samesies.
Yup. Never thought I’d be in those shoes but here we are. Would have liked to hear Alex’s reply about evil in the Bible. That to me is probably my biggest hurdle to belief that Christianity is true. The follow up question was telling of what possibly could be in the Bible that would convince you a loving God didn’t write it.
Hey mate.
Just want to challenge you on nonresistant nonbeliever. I'm not saying your not. In my experience though, lots of people say this and then on reflection realise they were resistant. They had just fooled themselves.
Again, not saying you are. Just saying sometimes understanding our own motivations are hard
@@joshs2986 Hey mate, I'm replying though you didn't comment to me. Leaving Christianity was a struggle that took me around a decade. I was trying to share the good news and prove the truth of Christianity but I kept coming up against evidence against my claims and reasons to doubt. As someone who desperately wished for Christianity to be true, even after no longer believing it, I can tell you that there's many of us out here who truly desired to believe or continue believing, but became convinced otherwise. Sometimes the truth hurts because it's not what you truly desired with all your heart.
Walked for 2 hours while listening to this, and I was thoroughly engaged the whole time. Thanks for this.
I am cooking and have done the same. ⚘
@@rosiegirl2485 You walk while you cook? :p
same, but i got hit by car while crossing the street
Doing relatively mundane tasks while listening to a video/podcast is always a nice experience!
@@Solbashio F
Been watching Alex for years, he always been a smart well spoken lad.
big ups
Wow! My respect for Cosmic Sceptic has skyrocketed (pardon the pun!). I am really impressed by his integrity and honest enquiry. I wish him well. Thank you CC for hosting and posting this event.
Mine went down, he keeps using the same excuse as to why he rejects God and it’s gotten so played out it’s not even worth responding anymore
@C L I think we may yet still be surprised by his journey! I certainly can related to his way of thinking before coming to Christ.
@@japexican007 it’s god’s turn to respond.
My respect for him has skyrocketed as well.
The atheist both thinks too highly of himself but also too lowly. He thinks too highly because his pride won't let him admit that he has faults and that he is wrong. He thinks too lowly because this causes him to accept a dismal existence.
Such an awesome conversation! Could listen to these two talk all day
I expected a good conversation, but this exceeded expecations. There was certainly some repeats from earlier conersations but they injected some new content into this conversation and I was engaged throughout. Keep up the great work.
Love this! Nothing better than respectful, reasoned discussions.
Wow... I genuinely didn't think that either guest could bring me anymore "new" arguments to the table that I haven't come across before...boy was I wrong!
you must be new to this.
Hi @Aadam, what new gems did you discover :) ?
@@archangelarielle262 this comment is gold
Alex is so suave, calm and collected, a very impressive showing good sir. Keep up demonstrating what atheists can really be 👍🏽
"What atheists can really be" - well, anything that theists can be. We are all just people from obnoxious a**holes to champions of humanity. Whether person believes in God, gods or none doesn't affect it.
@@Staremperor in my experience, believing you're one of God's chosen people definitely lends itself towards obnoxious assholes.
There are indeed a handful of very outspoken atheists... But the other side of the coin is Christian missionaries, of which there are exponentially more. And their main job is to travel the world and tell people they're filthy sinners who deserve hell except that some guy sacrificed himself so that if only you worship him, you can avoid eternal he'll fire.
@@williamdowling7718
Are you objecting to the message or the messengers? If I had to deliver you disturbing news, and you wouldn't like it, should I just not tell you anything? Maybe a hurricane is about to hit the beach, and I tell you go inland, would that make me an obnoxious person?
@@gideondavid30 From "The good news bible" then yes!
^Im an atheist, but I certainly think loud obnoxious atheists are far more common (hence the original comment and it's number of likes, since people agree that he's setting a better example than we have seen countless times).
Sure, missionaries are spreading that message, but genuine ones are doing it out of the goodness of their hearts (well not exactly, but the point is that they aren't doing it due to ego).
Atheists are constantly are just doing an ego battle of who's smarter/who was so dumb that they got brainwashed, and while theists arent immune from the ego battle of "you're so dumb god is right in front of you idiot you think we all came from nothing??? Hahaha idiot", they are still, at least seemingly, far less likely to engage in the battle of egos, assuming they're genuinely trying to live up to what their book has taught them.
Since to them, it's very serious, literally about heaven and hell, and to us its just an argument to get into for the sake of arguing.
Cameron, PLEASE keep making videos! I hope your channel continues forever
Alex seems to be a sincere truth seeker, and I love that!
He does, but pride will always block the truth even if you are sincere. Truth seekers don’t always find God because there are other things required like repentance and dying to self
@@OrangeRaft Which God do you believe in?
@@GlossRabban well that’s not a good question unless you are involved in these debates comparing Americanized atheism to Americanized Christianity. But I’m not interested in such comparisons because there are other options like a Heiser type view on the ancient world. The question is of allegiances not “belief”
@@OrangeRaft Fine.
Which God do you swear allegiance to?
@@OrangeRaft Yeah, allegiances. So this little game of yours does devolve into tribalism. How dull, and predictably human. Let's not have an informed view of the world, no, let's pick a team, and build a worldview of excuses that always comes back to that team, even though we live in a world that allows us to be more than that.
what a deep and meaningful discussion between two opposing teams.... props to both.
This was a very good discussion. They work together to create a shared improved understanding, as opposed to fight against each other.
So much respect for Alex. Well done Trent, always impressed with your answers.
Cosmic skeptic has been a huge influence in my life. Love him :-)
He is brilliant ✨
Same
me too... mf made me go vegan xD
@@Macluny
Now he is no longer vegan. So sad and disappointing, isn’t it? 😭
@@marishasveganworld2240 yes. I'd love to hear the detailed reason.
I am an atheist but find this explanation and defense of theology quite well developed and honest (even though I disagree)
do you think that with this defense and explanation presented to you, it might be a better idea to adopt a theological worldview for the sake of happiness and personal fulfillment?
@@AquinasBased no I’m quite happy and it would be a futile effort as you can’t choose to believe. Sure I can act like I believe but that won’t have the same effect and would result in me knowing I’m living in a way that I disagree with which probably wouldn’t make me happy
Fantastic dialog. Super respectful and in depth.
I was obsessed with apologetics and taught it to high schoolers in church for years. I now fall into the non-resistent non-believer category.
I eventually couldn't help but realize that my determination was to support Christianity, instead of starting with 0 assumptions and aiming for the truth. I've had no spiritual experiences, even despite praying for an hour long drive every day for years. I was one of the "overcommitted" Christians, and now I just look back and cringe.
I'm not going for sucking on each other's members, but I guess you have nothing to cringe about - it is common case that people have neither time nor strength of will to start from 0 and look at the claims impartially, especially when they have been indoctrinated as kids and live in tight communities that are bound by religion, church etc.
I wasn't in that position, but I guess I would go through the same process. At some point I would need to know what the hell are facts about Jesus, resurrection, Genesis etc. I don't see how someone with average intellectual ability can swallow all the half baked answers, once they start asking the questions.
In any case, good luck!
Well that sucks lol
What evidence made you leave a relationship with Jesus?
@@JG-pw1wp I think it’s more of the lack of evidence of the god in the Bible.
@@tristanrenteria515 The question of honest seekers looking for proof of Christianity is bogus. God’s raising His Son from the dead is the only proof, and that proof is infinitely capable of settling the mind of anyone who is concerned and who is sincere. So the question is not what proof is there of Christianity, because we are not dealing with Christianity. We are dealing with Christ. We are dealing with a man who became flesh, walked among men, gave His life for man and, to complete it, rose on the third day from the dead. The question is not what you think of Christianity but what you think of Christ and what you are going to do about Him.
Good points on both sides. Thanks for stirring some thoughts. 🙂
Why's it so bright, was this shot in heaven?! That's one way to win an argument, well played...
Man, thank you CC Team for hosting cool stuff like these.
The smartest atheists don't remain atheists, but for Alex it's a career.
@@joannware6228 Very wrong there, Jo Ann. Atheist see the truth. We can do without an imaginary skydaddy.
This was fantastic. Love Alex’s heart so much.
This is one of my most favorite Christian/Atheist dialogues of all time. Keep up the awesome work Cameron!
I agree! I was so moved by the level of respect, engagement, knowledge that each of these men displayed. Their sincere interest in capturing the other person’s meaning and line of thought, just admirable. As a christian, I have to say I admire Alex’ approach, he is incredibly humble to always leave the door open ((however slim)) to the possibility of him abandoning atheism, I hold on to the hope God will reveal himself to him in a way he finds irrefutable. I say that out of love and respect for the beautiful soul he is.
@@johannaquinones7473 What would you say was irrefutable? John 14:12, would be one way.
2 Samuel 24 would be another - but boy, it would be messy.
Or Numbers 13:13? It all depends what is being revealed, I guess, if God is so mutable, or changes His ways, or at least - changes what faces and traits, are shown.
And Satan never got hidden from - even post high treason, his dubious suggestions about Job got given extraordinary weight and audience.
@@chrissonofpear1384 "Because the Bible says so" ought never be enough evidence, reason or argument to convince anyone of the truth of the bible. Of course its going to have "trust me bro this book is true and people who say it isn't are idiots" ("only the fool says in his heart...") sort of verses. All religions and cults have these self preservation/protection devices built in.
@@johannaquinones7473 If you're a Christian, how do you deal with the fact that your God has either favoured you in giving you the sort of brain that accepts the evidence for theism and not the evidence for atheism, or the sort of personal evidence that would convince anyone first hand, thus resigning you to an endless fate of pleasure and happiness.
But he has given non-resistant non-belivers the sort of brains that are not convinced by the evidence for theism and are convinced by the evidence for atheism, or he denies them the undeniable first hand evidence that he gives to theists, thus resigning atheists to an endless fate of suffering and torment?
How do you deal with that on a "all loving god" world view?
@@Joseph-zi2pe Where is a person’s free will in all of this? I don’t see it like you do. Yes, everybody faces different circumstances, have different mental abilities, etc. and it is true God has very different ways of in which He makes Himself known to people, but I think it is up to each individual to ultimately make the choice for his/herself what to believe. For me it has been a journey, the more I learn about Christianity, the more I am convinced, and if I find myself doubting I put my questions to Him. I trust that He can help me either find answers or dissipate the feeling I need the answer to believe. I am not by any means saying to have faith without reason, but there is a point when you just decide that the evidence you have is good enough.
Alex is a very charming atheist in my eyes. He has real empathy for deep depression and suffering.
Empathy for deep depression and suffering is completely independent of religious belief. There are wonderful atheists and terrible atheists. They're wonderful Christians and terrible Christians. There's wonderful Jews and terrible Jews. Etc. Religious belief has nothing to do with it
The difference between atheists and Christians is being an atheist tells you nothing about that person other than they don't believe in a god. They don't have doctrines. Christianity on the other hand has a book full of terrible things that even the "good" ones subscribe to.
@@amizan8653 if religion doesn't make you a better person what is the utility for it
@@HarrDarr I think the utility existed in the past. If humans work together as a group, it makes them more powerful altogether compared to individuals. I think religion in the early days was used to get people to form groups where members of the group were even willing to die for the objective of the religious group leader(s). Such a group would have more power and out-compete other groups of humans.
Also, humans are extremely afraid of death in terms of what death truly is: the unescapable, permanent end of one's existence, where they return to the state they were in before they were born. Religions all promise some form of afterlife, which is a coping mechanism to not accept with death really is.
Anyways, these are simply guesses of mine as to the utility of religion. I can't prove that these are true or not. They're simply what I think.
As everyone should
As an atheist, I very much enjoyed this discussion, including Trent’s points. Well-spoken and intelligent, though I do disagree and think his response to the racism and MLK question was a total dodge.
Subbed for more chats like this.
The atheist both thinks too highly of himself but also too lowly. He thinks too highly because his pride won't let him admit that he has faults and that he is wrong. He thinks too lowly because this causes him to accept a dismal existence.
@@joannware6228 oh dear god…
@@joannware6228 rofl what a terrible take, this is exactly why most Theists are laughed out of the room. Trent approaches this with empathy and you spew ridiculousness.
@@joannware6228 haha hot take there, Jo Ann Ware. Good thing nobody agrees.
@@joannware6228 You've only pasted this comment a handful of times. MOAR.
I’m looking forward to Trent’s journey towards veganism.
I think he is more likely to give up Jesus
@@theunrepentantatheist24 I doubt it.
I wish
Lol
@@theunrepentantatheist24 He would have to give up scriptural orthodoxy to be vegan. In Romans we read that "He who is weak in faith eats vegetables only". God instructs Peter to "Raise, kill, and eat". Jesus informes us personally that "all foods are clean for you to eat" so it's obvious to me that moral veganism is just a subjective individual elevating beasts up to the level of humanity. I don't have enough faith to look at farm animals as enslaved.😂
I subscribed to Trent because of the way he argued for his belief. Although I am an agnostic atheist, I like to challenge my existing beliefs.
I only recently discovered Alex and his channel. In this discussion Alex was clear with his explanations and Trent did not seem to answer directly.
In short, I will be consuming a lot of Alex's content this week.
Great stuff!
Christians never answer directly, because they can't, there's no argument for them to make. Expecially his orrible answer about slavery really tells you everything you have to know about the intrinsic evilness of religion.
Yeah I noticed that too. Trent when his ideas are backed into a corner seems to divert from the subject. Alex brought that up several times in this discussion and Trent never adequately engaged with Alex's point. Trent did this in his debate with Destiny on abortion too. He is very civil and his points are very well crafted and informed though, they both did pretty well I think
This is very good. Thanks for sharing 👏🏽
Wow, I oftentimes find myself disagreeing with whichever Christian Alex debates with, but I'm finding that Trent is doing a great job with taking him on.
I'm thankful for thoughtful and charitable interlocutors like Alex who can help us understand our beliefs and God better through these types of discussions. Perhaps that's one moral good that could come from some non-resistive unbelief 😉
As Alex would say, lucky you to benefit from Alex's non-consensually being withheld sufficient evidence/experience/whatever to believe.
What is Alex’s “threshold” and how is it objectively wrong?
That was a great discussion.
I'm very excited for this one, probably gonna watch it this weekend. Greetings from the Netherlands! We're a dutch apologetics squad. Groetjes uit Nederland :)
I love the Netherlands! (I'll hou Nederland...?)
@@CJ-sw8lc Amazing! You're getting there, it's: Ik hou van Nederland.
Groetjes van een nederlandse atheist. Nog nooit een vervelend gesprek gehad met een gelovige hier.
(greetings from a dutch atheist. Never had an annoying/bad conversation with a believer here)
@@ChristenDOM010 Ahh! I need to practice more 🧐
@@aidanya1336 Groetjes terug :)Hoelang ben je al overtuigd van het atheïsme?
Seeing Trent bend over backwards for how God treated Job was hard to watch. Alex certainly gave the right interpretation and asked the right question
@CosmicSkeptic thank you for your work in these debates
That ”its funny that” with a subtle little smirk, on 56:37 was a check mate that went over the opponents head
I am highly sympathetic towards Alex O'Connor concern over why there is suffering and pain with us.
.
The immense pointless suffering of trillions of trillions of trillions of innocent animals on this planet alone should be enough to shake any believer's faith to its core.
@@NoInjusticeLastsForever
what i begin to believe is that the pain, suffering and death in any form is part of our life on earth no matter how painful it is.. what matters the most is quality of our soul that matters the afterlife that i believe in. Jesus set a precedent for this process.
@@lesmen4 In English, please.
@@lesmen4 do you have any actual reason to hold that belief, or is it just what you’d like to be true?
@@NoInjusticeLastsForever indeed I agree pointless suffering created by man who rejected God and now God has to clean up our mess except atheists still reject God while making him the excuse as to why pain and suffering exists lol trololol
Trent has such an amazing way of fully fleshing out what someone is asking or trying to say, that is definitely what makes him special at this debate stuff.
Interesting take. I find him quite different.
Often, when he is fleshing something out, he he just changes what is being said.
Example when the talk about the Problem of Evil. Trent changes it into "Why God let's bad stuff happen". If that were the problem of Evil, it wouldn't be considered a problem.
The switch from discussing "How can Perfectly Good create an absence of itself and it still be Perfectly Good" into "Why does Perfectly Good allow bad things to happen" are fundamentally different questions.
Trent's changed question assumes there is no Problem of Evil (creation of evil) and asks why God allows (already created) Evil to continue existing.
@FPT Bot They are fundamentally different in that one asks about actualization and the other asks about sustainment.
Trent knows this but does it anyway.
Trent has a great way of confidently not understanding the question
@@cheftr1 both questions are part of the problem of evil, though.
@@King-uj1lh If asked one question and you decide to answer the other, it doesn't really matter that they both are found as chapters in the problem of evil book.
They are entirely different arguements dealing with the Problem of Evil, with different premises and different conclusions.
both sides made brilliant points i think its these discussions that will eventually lead us to the truth that is if we ever have enough time to develop the concepts before extinction
I sincerely enjoyed this conversation
After I suffered from some traumas in life , I thought about how our ancestors, the hunter-gatherers , who encountered the Neanderthals, might have dealt with suffering loss of loved ones.
I truly believe what arose was a belief in an afterlife and god(s)... to help provide hope and reduce the chance of suicidal ideations.
Bingo
I think it's the opposite and much bigger than we realize
@@paulhayes5684care to elaborate ?
I’m an atheist but I do enjoy Trent Horn. I think he’s a very intelligent individual, speaks very eloquently, and can bring up points and responses that make you think. I will say, and I may be a weird case as an atheist, but I generally don’t like the problem of evil. As intuitively it may be for me to think that there’s no way a loving god could allow for all this seemingly gratuitous evil, it very well may be the case that if he were to exist then it would be justified in some sense.
I agree entirely, but the example of someone beating a kid on the side road made Trent fidget a bit - if you accept god has his reasons, you cant back away because "you understand parent - child dynamic". Either you can act on your own and counter god's decision to have a child ripped apart, or you have to accept any murder, rape, robbery and whatnot as part of gods plan - after all "if he were to exist then it would be justified in some sense". As with other arguments, Christians want to have it both ways, and that's just 🤮
@@tomyossarian7681 I agree for sure.
Merely positing that an explanation may exist is not to provide an argument; it is merely to assert that one thinks such an explanation is possible. Until that fact is established the ‘argument from evil’ stands.
I was also interested in what arguments he would bring forth. Sadly the first argument was the argument citing Anthony flee ... Hm.
Agreed. Because I can't help but intuitively feel that these second order goods like compassion, forgiveness or bravery enrich the human experience in a way that even a loving, perhaps especially a loving God, would allow them. The idea that a loving God necessarily needs to provide us some luxurious paradise just doesn't sit right with me
Wow great convo between these two.
I enjoyed this. Personally I felt it was an intellectually honest debate, where each one tried to understand and answer each others point (same for the Q&A). To often we see debates where the other side is ignored or misrepresented .
Love the patience of both speakers. That's probably why I was able to watch it until the end. They sounded like friends. Personally, I think a pragmatic justification for being a Christian is the hope for a renewed physical life without suffering and evil. If there is no everlasting and relatable hope after death, then one day everything will die and nothing will matter about my life. It may have mattered to me or others when we were alive, but in the end it will be the same. On the other hand, a new kind of relational and physical life in a world that has continuity from this life, yet suffering, evil, and death are not present....that's a uniquely hopeful possibility. This isn't to say there isn't any need for a epistemic justification of Christianity, but only that there is a pragmatic encroachment on the epistemic, as mentioned in the latest Reasonable Faith podcast. I find this to be a missing component of most explanations of why many of us become Christians. Another component can be found in what is often called reformed epistemology. I've already wrote enough though, but these would be three reasons why I am a Christian.
Unfortunately the cost of living as a Christian isnt nothing! So we have to use some reason to determine if it's a good bet :)
If one day everything will be gone, and nothing matters inherently, then you get to decide for yourself what matters to you. I don't believe I have an afterlife waiting for me, so I have to make sure I live and love to the fullest while I can! I appreciate your well thought out comment, my friend. All the best.
Let him believe this who can! I’d like to believe that every woman is attracted to me, but the evidence is against it.
@@iSkulk Thanks for reading my long comment(s) and replying! I agree that if atheism is true, everything will one day be gone and nothing matters inherently so you might as well live your life in whatever way seems best to you. I'm glad to hear your way includes loving to the fullest! Sometimes love is hard and even costly, and I'm guessing we'd both agree that the most loving thing a person can do for another would be to unexpectedly voluntarily choose to take the painful death that someone should've had so that they could live. For example, when Yondu unexpectedly dies for Quill. In Christianity, it's Jesus who unexpectedly dies for even the ones who rejected and killed him, in order that they would live. Even if you think it's a fictional story, I hope you get a chance, if you already haven't, to read a couple of the four gospel accounts of Jesus. Or if you don't want to read them, try watching "The Chosen", which is a top notch TV series on the story (with some creative license). Obviously as a Christian, I believe the gospel accounts are more than fiction, but even if we never agree on that, I hope you'll be inspired by the amazing love modeled in Jesus. Also, thanks for calling me friend. I hope for you all the best as well!
@@Prophet_Isaiah For sure. There is definitely a cost. Epistemic justification is critical as well!
Great conversation.
Im an Athiest and I liked Trents approach and deminer.
Demeaner
Damn it!!!
Its demeanour
Man! I have so many questions for and ideas to put to Cosmic Skeptic! Just as a regular believer.
I’ve listened to this a few times since it came out, and I genuinely appreciate the conversation. I think Alex does a fantastic job presenting his own positions as well as strong counters to Trent’s. I also appreciate how honest Trent seems when trying to understand Alex properly before offering rebuttals.
I think these two are some of the best representatives of healthy conversation in this space.
Now that it’s been a year I’d love to know Trent’s thoughts on a few things. (If anyone else knows feel free to weigh in!)
1. Did you ever get off the fence? Did you land on ethical veganism or an advocate of factory farming (I imagine neither, because nuance).
2. Around 1:22:00 when using Michael Shermer as an example he says: I think really smart people can come to unintuitive conclusions.
This strikes me as the opposite point he wants to make. The world is full of unintuitive truths. Quantum mechanics isn’t intuitive. A globe earth isn’t intuitive. There are countless logic puzzles that demonstrate just how readily our intuitions can fail us. It seems to me that a smart the smarter a person is, the more willing they should be to accept unintuitive answers when related to life’s most complex questions.
3. I forget the rest. But just want to reiterate, I like Trent a lot. I think he’s be a very fun person to get a beer with and chat philosophy. Much love.
Number 2 I want to give my two cents about, since it's something I've had my own issues with.
Intellect is mostly pattern recognition, the universe is very complex and apparently chaotic. It happens that smart people may notice new hidden patterns and expose them to the world, and (maybe irrationally to a degree) they must fight so that they are not relegated back to the chaotic background at least for as long as it takes to properly assess their worth. A very smart person could theoretically create a defense so good for their theory that others who undertake the duty of trying to prove it false, fail.
Eventually someone, or the smart man himself, may prove it wrong, but the time between him finding a theory and someone proving it wrong (we are assuming it's wrong) is a lapse of time in which great intelligence made up and sustained a lie.
Sorry English is not my first language and I may have messed up somewhere.
Thanks Trent and Alex.
I’m writing this only 45 minutes in, so my apologies if I’m writing prematurely - regarding the objective good God and an existence of evil. Alex wanted a Christian answer. Well Trent could have said we live in a broken world. From his Catholic belief… we did live in a perfect world. That’s was before the original sin.
"Infinity is just a really bad thing to bring into the world."
In the next breath claims god is infinite...
This is why I can't.
Where in the video did this happen
God it's not a created being, thus is the only thing, by a definition of a supreme creator and God, that can be infinite. Among the created things (this whole reality), his postulate about infinity is still compelling.
May God give Alex the grace of faith as he sojourn throughout his human existence. Maybe not the way we expect it. That's the beauty of the Theodrama of life. May the Great St. Augustine intercede for him as well 🙏
Good debate. You can tell these 2 guys have respect for each other
how articulate alex is never fails to blow my mind
It's scary.
He has watched all of Hitchens videos and read his books
He's made himself sound smarter by changing the way he speaks
Or he's actually that smart and has only gotten smarter...@@bryn3652
@viancavarma3455 But Alex is still wrong. Charm, sophistication and intelligence don't equate to wisdom and spiritual insight.
The juxtaposition of "who am I to know god's reasoning when it pertains to any unresolved idea or mystery followed by the religious person "knowing god exists and his commands and how he wants humans to act etc" always seems so glaring to me. In one hand they are so sure as to even try to change legislation to follow what they think is god's command but then immediately fall back on "who are we to question or assume we know xyz regarding god". Cant have it both. ways folks
I notice no theist has attempted to respond to your point. There’s a reason for that.
Because they’re different scenarios. When it comes to the moral law of the universe, God has revealed what it is to us. But when God acts in a way that seems to contradict His law, we are saying we have no right to question His actions since we are not all knowing like He is. We are not questioning the objective morality of the universe that He’s implemented.
Come to Vancouver, Canada, next with Alex!
Beautiful discussion!
1:43:33 No, it depends on *if* something is evil. I wouldn't accept payment from someone for them to do something I considered evil as it would make me complicit in the commission of that evil. In the case of arson there's a question of whether it's any different from demolition in this context especially when the payment is promised beforehand and the person's already thinking about the house they can build in its place.
People praise Trent for his intellectual honesty but he dodged (politely I'll give you that) almost all of Alex hard questions. What's his answer to the deer under a tree problem ? I have no idea.
Without suffering faith is void, and without faith it is impossible to please God. So there's your answer.
@@lawrence1318those are non séquitors.
@@lawrence1318
ruclips.net/video/6xqCkx6WQBE/видео.htmlsi=mAF52CNHkNgnz0yU&t=18m24s
@@MB-nx9tqAtheist here (or, nonresistant nonbeliever)-I wouldn't call that a non-sequitur.
To have faith, you need that faith tested. Suffering is presented by the individual you're replying to as the test for faith, meaning without a reference point (the spectrum of suffering-happiness), you have no touchstone for faith.
It's the same way having no power and being peaceful does not make you good, just harmless. One way to visualise a good man is to visualise a powerful man who exercises reason of his own volition to inhibit his use of his power.
Complete dodger
My physical suffering comes and goes. There is no remedy. It shrinks my world. Maybe your compassion does something for you but it does nothing for my suffering.
In regard to the people that "don't care", I wonder if they'd care if they were in the path of bad ethics, or would they suddenly ask/beg for "morals" and "humanity", or if someone they care for/wanted to protect were in the path of bad ethics, etc.
00:57:00 | Not sure if Trent was comparing the parent of a child to God and us, but I sure hope not, because Trent has basically said God can do what he wants to his creation...
I reckon that is what Trent was saying and that it was just because god would have good reason to punish us in hell even though we can figure out what that good reason would be - that is just more assertion to justify god sending people to hell - it doesn’t demonstrate god or reasonably justify that his can do whatever he wants.
Trent also seemed to suggest that while spanking Alex’s arse wouldn’t be good that is permissible for a parent to do to their child - he’s implying ownership of the child to justify doing what you want within some reason in the way the god is justified in doing anything.
It not convincing at all.
Cameron if you see this, a bit of constructive criticism, the video was a bit over exposed. Idk if this can be fixed in editing but just a heads up.
To give clarity on the question asked from the audience member about emotivism and utilitarianism, these two things are not mutually exclusive. I may have inferred the person's position incorrectly, but it sounded like he was under the impression that someone could not be an emotivist if they are a utilitarian and vice versa. Cognitivism and non-cognitivism are metaethical views whereas utilitarianism is a normative ethical view. Someone can be an emotivist, which merely describes what they think it means when someone makes moral statements about what is "good", and they can still be a utilitarian giving the "good" (or "hurrah") to the greatest utility.
This is the most honest debate I’ve heard
Hey Cameron. Someone mentioned having more Eastern Orthodox people on. Would you consider reaching out to Jonathan Pageau to come on? We could all learn some fascinating stuff from him!
THE TRUE CHURCH IS THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
@@VictoriaCatolica The true church is the universal church. That's catholic, with a little "c".
@@brando3342 or "orthodox" with a little "o"
@@Thedisciplemike Touche 🤣🤣
@@brando3342 Universal as in Church of the First-born Hebrews 12:23 so it's not limited to c or o traditions.
I'm always confused by the "What do you expect a universe with/without god to look like?" line of questioning.
Idk, I only have the one universe to look at, and even then in an absurdly limited capacity
I can't compare this universe to a universe with a known creator, or to another with a known lack of creator. I have absolutely no idea how either of those should play out.
Only thing that matters is do you treat your fellow human with kindness. I don't care what you believe as long as you at least believe you should be kind to all and gentle to children.
Is it just me, or did Trent *not* mention most of the arguments that Koons and other classical theists make to conclude that the Most Fundamental member of the per se chain / pure actuality is personal? He cites Koons, but Koons has argued at length for the personal nature of this ipsum esse subsistens/ground of being.
It feels a bit like Alex is getting tired of this debate, atheism vs. christianity. And I understand him. I really appreciate him moving on and discovering other discussions like he have done with veganism!
Lol, he's the one accepting the invitations. He can easily say no to them if he's tired of it.
@@chrisvalenzuela7911 he's probably tired because he had to spend half the video explaining the christian position to the christian
I mean you can only prove their arguments wrong so many times. Theism never changes, so you just prove the same things wrong over and over.
I’m Catholic and love these debates. Alex is incredibly respectful and knowledge. God bless💪🙏
Science Bless ❤
21:05 Alex said that when joining the atheist or theist online culture, you feel compelled to say the other side isn't just wrong but bad as well... but now he see's 'these are mutually exclusive' (21:18). I think he meant to say these aren't necessarily correlated, something like that?
I might have misheard him and he quickly said "but these _aren't_ mutually exclusive", but I can't make sense of that when he started the sentence saying he used to hold both positions.
The setting is beautiful… but is there a finger down right?
Christ is Lord! I love when debates like this can happen and people can talk about this. Horn is a good apologist for the Faith.
If that were true you wouldn't need an explanation point. Everyone would just know. And you don't think it's telling that it's called being an apologist lol.
@@talyahr3302 Apologist ultimately comes from Late Latin, meaning “a speech in defense of”, in this case Christianity. Also, you saying that Christ isn’t Lord doesn’t make him any less the Lord.
@@micahcollins6412You Christ is Lord doesn’t change the fact that it’s actually the eternal Oompa Loompa that is Lord.
Prove to me it isn’t.
Fantastic discussion. Top class. There's an obvious reason why Alex O'Conner is sitting there rather than Stephen Woodford.
What don't you like about Stephen Woodford?
@@Enaccul arrogant dbag who purposefully misrepresents his opposition to make them look stupid
@flock of doves Oh dang really? When does he do that? That's shitty if he does
Stephen could just as easily sit in that seat and do just as well.
@@Enaccul There's zero modesty in his claims. He produces a lot of "debunking" videos, and presents his arguments as irrefutable. Alex O'Connor truly engagés with all the arguments, and leaves the door open for modification or correction. Stephen doesn't, and comes across extremely arrogant.
Dear alex, do you have a video where you descriptively and exhaustively express your type of morality (where it comes from, how you justify using it for daily life and veganism...). I cant find one whixh isnt just critiquing someone elses view. If not please make one
When it comes to why we permit animals to suffer, I think the term should be "excuses" rather than "explanations"
Alex ran circles around Trent
Let me tell you, that plant enjoyed the debate - especially the part where they brought forth the concerns of the creature's sufferings alongside human suffering. Praise God.
The number of things that exist that I and everyone never expected. Why not this world?
What a great comment by Alex in regard to suffering and in my opinion the common denominator of everything certainly about the human experience disclosed in the Christian faith as the path chosen by God to redeem its creation. This is not an argument to justify a religious conviction rather pointing out the biblical passage of the crucifixion of Jesus. Death and suffering.
Is the bible just the oldest record of victim blaming?
56:28 What Trent said here is utterly abhorrent. It is not in fact moral to beat your children, countless studies were done on it you do nothing but cause trauma if you do it. And what is even more disgusting is that he admits that without "moral authority of having caused them" limiting others autonomy would be slavery. So by his logic the act of parenting is slavery but it's a just kind of slavery.
Just why? Why do people see their children as objects? Can't you teach children by love? And if you can't why do you think it's OK for you to have them? This pathetic remnant of pre-enlightenment garbage ethics must die. As moral people we all must condemn the religion that promotes child abuse.
nobody:
Christians: I wanna hit my kids so badly
Studies on this topic by their nature tend to look at the larger picture, they cannot be used to condemn each individual case of parents disciplining their children via physical force. Although I agree in most cases where violence is used for parenting it does more harm than good, there are certain circumstances where some sort of a physical responce or at least the threat of the possibility of a physical responce is absolutely needed. You seem to have a naively positive view of how children behave, coupled with a seeming underestimation of the possible consequences of their actions, especially on other children.
As someone who has over 20 cousins, many of them younger than me that i had to look after from time to time, some kids just won't stop doing harmful acts like excessive bullying unless you threaten them with force, no matter what you do or tell to get them to stop, believe me i did try all the healthy communication methods that i could think of. This isn't that surprising, considering studies show empathy itself isn't something we are born with, rather it is something we are taught over the years. So some children who havent yet had empathy instilled in them are literally sociopath like in their behaviour, even if they have good and caring "ideal" parents. A kid who practically behaves like a sociopath won't listen to arguments from "empathy" based on "healthy communication" or any other stupid advice typically given by many so called "experts". In cases like that, for the sake of the other children these kids might target you do need to step in with a strong deterrent if they won't stop despite repeated warnings. Obviously not beating them into a pulp but a slap or some other limited method of violence can really be needed and effective to discipline them.
@@zgramzhnisk3036 This doesn't really address what dreamwolflettersnumbers is saying, I think. Killing is morally wrong, but sometimes it can (with the same cool utilitarian logic that you use here) be justified in situations where worse wrongs might otherwise be committed. Similarly, using violence against sociopathic children is still wrong, even if it can sometimes be used to avoid even worse outcomes.
To summarize: you're saying "violence against children can [sometimes] be effective in reducing harm," dreamwolf is saying "violence against children is morally wrong." Obviously, both can be true.
Also worth mentioning that *your* particular talking point can (and has been) easily used to excuse *un-* justified violence towards children (whereas I can think of very few situations in which a bias towards restraint would have a terrible outcome, short of rare "exception that proves the rule" situations where physical harm is already involved, as you say).
Alex is so precise on his arguments that the dude was like: Yeah thats god's work here.
Great talk. Thanks
As a child in the 1950s, watching Oral Roberts "lay hands" on the "afflicted" every Sunday on our black & white TV terrified me
In 70 years, I've never set foot in a "church". Swaggart, Hinn, Jim and Tammy Fae, etc, reinforced my resolve. Hallelujah
Trent "I don't think the analogy works because it would undermine my world view" Horn.
I JUST STARTED HAVING AN EXISTENTIAL CRISIS 14 MINUTES INTO THE VIDEO AND IM TYPING THIS TO BREAK THE TRANCE THANK YOU
Hey bro Hope ur doing well
Almost all former Christians eventually enjoy the freedom from religious delusions and appreciate reality.
@@peterp-a-n4743 Listen to Sunset Limited
I KEEP HAVING EXISTENTIAL CRISES WHEN WATCHING DEEP DEBATE VIDEOS AND ALWAYS TELL MYSELF I NEED TO STOP BUT I AM SO DRAWN TO THEM THAT I CAN'T STOP WATCHING THEM. IT'S A CURSE.
@@hummingbird1375 no it's your brain trying to resolve an important issue. Existential crises only thrive in a backdrop of delusion. A disappointment with reality is just the mourning of a falsehood (disappointment in German is "Enttäuschung" which is literally "disabusement")
I really wished Alex would have nailed him down on a few things.
I know that he wants to be respectful and all that, but damn, I would have loved for him to switch in his debate mode and just pin him to a few positions instead of letting him dodge left and right.
That argument at 56:00 just floored me.
As a polytheist, I find it fascinating to watch these types of discussions between atheists and monotheists, as I can often find myself agreeing with either side or neither side on some issues. I find the intellectually honest, civil discussions happening between atheists and monotheists recently to be a very big step of from the type of discourse we typically found on RUclips a decade ago. I hope that things continue in this more civil direction in the future.
❤
Out of curiosity, whats your Religion?
And what points do you disagree with on both sides? :)
@@glebkamnev7006
Hellenismos, Greek Polytheism. I tend towards reconstructionism, but typically use the term "Revivalist".
As for things I agree with on each side,
Things I agree with Alex on:
1) I agree with Alex on the Problem of Divine Hiddenness, at least when it comes to religions like Christianity and Islam within which God demands worship. Within many religions, including my own, the Gods do not demand worship, nor do they necessarily desire it. Worship isn't for the sake of the Gods, it doesn't get us a better place in an afterlife, etc. Religions like this have no issue with Divine Hiddenness. I also would take things a step further than Alex and say that Divine Hiddenness is even WORSE for Christians, Muslims, etc. because of the fact that non-resistant non-believers can end up believers of many different religions (take me, for instance, that went from non-resistant non-belief to Polytheism). According to most standard theological ideas on the afterlife within Christianity and Islam, I am hell-bound merely because my non-resistant non-belief led me to the wrong religion, and that is problematic.
2) I do tend to side with Alex on the Problem of Evil in THIS discussion, but that is because they are both coming at it with the conception that a world without evil is a possible world and thus the existence of evil needs an explanation. I think that a world without evil would be a perfect world, but perfection only exists for the Gods and the Forms. Anything beyond that will have imperfections (take a sphere, for example, we can mathematically understand what a perfect sphere is but we also understand, due to our knowledge of physics, that such a thing cannot actually exist in the world). If you start with the idea that the world inevitably will have SOME evils, that is where I think various theodicies, like some used by Trent, work, but as it seems Trent maintains that a world without evil is possible, I tend to agree moreso with Alex's criticisms here.
Things I agree with Trent on:
1) While it is moreso an agreement with Pruss and Koons, that infinite causal chains as an explanation cause more problems than they solve. I do think that the Grim Reaper Paradox, and variations of it, helps to suggest that our causal history must be finite.
2) I do agree with him that, in regards to historical miracles, that Jesus resurrection has better evidence going for it than many non-Christian ones. I think that is, however, in large part due to Christian dominance in the world almost dictating what texts got preserved, and I also do not think that that actually means that Christianity is true rather than Polytheism (Jesus' Resurrection is consistent with Polytheism, so non-Christian miracles not having as good of evidence as the Resurrection isn't an issue if the evidence is still substantial enough).
I could go on, but that would require rewatching the video to see what they covered here.
Polytheism is a much more coherent idea.
Trent said he would need to be a vegan or defend factory farming. But that's a false dichotomy because a non-vegan can buy food and other products from local farms and farmers' markets. If I need to buy some products from a supermarket, I can buy only products that factory farms don't produce. When you have to buy groceries from a store selling factory-farmed foods, you have to see whether you cooperate directly or remotely with the factory farmers. Say I'll die if I don't buy a factory farm makes. Should I die because I'm against factory farming?
I went from truly not understanding Christians but respecting their connection to faith to truly considering some of them brilliant people because of Trent. Now I still have a lot of issues with Christianity, pro life one of them, but Trent is really smart and I appreciate how he has changed my perspective. Still an atheist sorry to whoever
I had a chat with God this morning.
He told me he's having trouble sleeping.
I gave him some advice and he thanked me.
“I had a chat with God this morning.
He told me he's having trouble sleeping.
I gave him some advice and he thanked me.”
By sheer coincidence I’ve actually got two new brands of pen right here on my desk which i use for writing down ultimately meaningless and ultimately purposeless comments. A [Richard Dawkins pen] and a [@tedgrant2 pen] they’ve got no point!!