Free Will, Reason and Morality
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 23 апр 2018
- A common response of the atheist against objective morality is to affirm that morality is the product of evolution, but if we analyze this in depth, it represents more an objection against atheism than theism.
I’ve heard this argument made so many times and I don’t understand why he doesn’t drive this point home instead of throwing out questioning tactics that confuse the premise instead of clearly giving examples, like of morals are ingrained to help survival than why are animals not moral. They will almost always use cruelty to survive. Kill or be killed. Weakness or sickness displayed in an alpha causes next in line to challenge to the death for that position. Mothers with a litter of kittens or almost all kinds of baby animals will stop caring for one that is deformed or sickly, even abanding it and moving the healthy ones to a new den. The slowest or weakest will be picked off and singled out by predators and the rest of the heard leaves them without remorse. We were the only creature made in his image with morality ingrained into our heart. Although some choose to stifle those basic intuitions, like hitler, overall that is proof of something that has written that on our heart. It’s a great argument for God that goes over weakly for lack of clarity.
This is great! I'm stealing this idea!
1:06 I love it how you say moist robots.
There is a contradiction in that line of thinking that is not apparent so i'll try to point it out here.
1) IF moral comes from evolution.
2) *ALL* morals comes from evolution.
3) Therefore raping or helping are neither morally right or wrong because both the rapist and the helper got their morals from evolution.
4) When society comes along and decides that some behaviors are imoral and must be punished it creates a contradiction because now you can no longer claim that morals comes from evolution because it's coming from society., it's no longer your evolutionary process that dictates your moral behavior, it's society.
Where did we get society from? Evolution. So in an indirect way it is STILL morals from evolution.
If the Hebrew god Yahweh actually existed and was perfectly moral, loving and just
there would be no crime.
@@JamesRichardWiley free will. we aren't robots.
Preach bru
@@trustingtheprocess1946 you sound like Satan
4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
So we as society know what's good or bad then why do we still condone bad?
My new insult is calling someone a moist robot
Atheists seem to also confuse the point we're making about morality and what we actually mean by the moral law...they seem to think that the thing we call the moral law is... people wanting to be moral and kind etc so they begin to list the reasons from a naturalistic perspective why humans want to help others and why we call things wrong etc...survival or whatever.
But they are failing to identify what theists actually mean by morality or the moral law., what we mean by the moral law is...that it tells us humans what we should do regardless of whether we actually want to do it or not...the moral law doesn't care how difficult or how painful it is for us to do it...it tells us we should do it anyway and if we don't listen to it we feel uncomfortable.
When we observe the animals we see the facts about how they behave.. we don't expect them to act in a different way there is nothing above them to say how they should act but with humans it's very different, we have the facts about how we do behave but we also have something above and beyond these facts, we have something which tells us how we humans should act but that we do not act in that way at all this is what we mean by morality or the moral law.
King of Kings great point. How would evolution create a moral standard that no human can actual fulfill and that shows every human that they fall short of that moral standard?
And furthermore this perfect moral standard is written on our hearts IE inherently known by everyone - and yet we are unable to fulfill it. Now how does evolution explain the creation of our minds in the light of this reality !
King of Kings so a terrorst wants to blow people up. According to christianity it's immoral to kill that terrorist. What do you do?
King of Kings well atheists and theists alike have a moral code. Often people refrain from doing things because the "know" it is wrong. The only difference is theists attribute that knowledge to their god. Interestingly enough different kinds of religious people attribute their behaviour to different gods, while atheists believe their moral code is a combination of external influences, genetics and instinct.
Nakadu: But the question is, "How do atheists KNOW something is wrong?" They do not have an objective moral standard. What evolutionists posit for moral code (survival of the fittest) is just a warmed-over version of utilitarianism, which is still just a form of relativism, which allows for majority rule without minority rights (ie. might makes right). Christians readily admit that atheists can be moral, because the Bible says that all men are born with a conscience. But atheists can NOT account for their consciences, or for any objective higher standard (other than utilitarianism) to inform their conscience.
mydh122 ok.....so how do Muslims know right from wrong?
Well done Frank Turek
I think the last thought summed it up pretty well!
Llppo+jp l8b
N
So easily said and so easily understandable. At least if you’re not stubborn and closed minded that is.
That's the first time I've seen you facepalm Turek. This was pure comedy.
Can someone answer this? I’m debating with someone who believes morality came from evolution. We can do research overtime and know that things affect people badly so that makes it wrong in our eyes. Does that point to morality coming from us? Please answer this soon.
hello again im not sure i fully understand the question but i guess you are asking if morality did come from us or evolution, its simple. There is a thing called objective truth, atheists believe in evolution and so they believe in subjective truth like its not really true but its true in some areas, we all know its not good to kill people, if that thought came from evolution then we are all psychopaths because when you say "OH NO I KILLED SOMEONE IM EVIL" that makrs sense right but if the morality isn't objective you would say "OH NO I KILLED SOMEONE ILL GET ARRESTED" that kinda sounds bad therefore there is an objective moral truth and what we base on is the bible that's why people say do not kill not because of the law but because of the moral law. Hope i answered your questiom
Isn't evolutionary theory based on "survival of the fittest"? Is that moral? (His Stalin example)
Evolution has zero to do with morality.
"fittest" means differently to just killing off people for having disabilitys, homosexuals, opposing views
Morality isn't self preservation
@Tony Droid It's obligation.
atheism, materialism, and determinism often go together but they're not co-extensive. In other words, you can be any one or two without necessarily being all three. All three are false, though :-)
Oh. That is calvinism full package
@@maematuguina2103 I feel you're being slightly unfair to Calvinists. But it's true they don't understand free will. God's knowledge and our free will are compatible. Just because you know your friend is going to do something, does not itself make your friend do it, for instance.
Heheh sorry.sir. did i hit a nerve on my comment?
Are you a calvinist?
@@maematuguina2103 No problem Mae, I'm not a Calvinist. I think Calvinists do not understand free will well.
Job 3:20-26 King James Version (KJV)
20 Wherefore is light given to him that is in misery, and life unto the bitter in soul;
21 Which long for death, but it cometh not; and dig for it more than for hid treasures;
22 Which rejoice exceedingly, and are glad, when they can find the grave?
23 Why is light given to a man whose way is hid, and whom God hath hedged in?
24 For my sighing cometh before I eat, and my roarings are poured out like the waters.
25 For the thing which I greatly feared is come upon me, and that which I was afraid of is come unto me.
26 I was not in safety, neither had I rest, neither was I quiet; yet trouble came.
Eeeew! I never want to hear the term "moist robots" again! 😂
A million times this same question is asked.
How do we have free will if we get punished for exercising it the wrong way?
In this sense, "free" means you will not be prevented from acting, not that there isn't a price to pay for those actions. The good news is folks are not punished for exercising "free will" wrongly. It would be punishment to force someone into the presence of a God they want nothing to do with.
DJMcNutty As it would be a punishment to force someone into eternal hell simply because they couldn't reason your existence based on dubious and unsubstantial evidence. How is this not coercion?
so maybe I should have clarified both terms. Freedom - meaning unrestrained initiation; Will - meaning decision-making mechanism. We are not free to exercise our will in any way we wish because we're limited beings, and we're not free from consequences of how we exercise our will because we're subject to God's design. The confusion of the terms come when we want (or "will") that which God doesn't offer (neither Him nor hell). By choosing anything other than Him, we're still freely choosing. Of course, we're free to assign a moral implication to that "coercive" system, but it's still our choice even if it seems like a no-brainer or even "dubious". And the Bible says many make that choice.
+DJMcNutty The free-will in atheism is just about the same as in Christianity or any religion.
DJMcNutty The major problem I have with the notion of free will, limited or unlimited, it doesn't matter, is this:
According to Christians,
1.God knows the future.
2.God hates sin (and apparently skepticism).
3. God created man, assigning all the design variables in a specific manner.
4. God knows how the life of every person will play out before it even starts.
5. Seeing that most of his creation functions poorly, he punishes the ccreation, sending billions to hell, never bothering to modify the design or stop those beings from existing in the first place.
C. This behavior doesn't follow any logical design and development process, suggesting that this designer does not exist.
I often liken this situation to a carpenter who makes tables. He creates them according to his design which almost never results in a finished a product that he actually wanted. Rather than redesign, the carpenter smashes each failed creation in a fit of rage before burning it in a fire. All the while blaming the table for it's failure.
Your're right, we are limited beings. Limited by our biology and our capacity to untangle anything real within the mass of spiritual "truths" on this planet.
3:21 "why should we believe that survival is a good thing". STOP. Think about this for a moment. Does the vast majority believe survival is good? Given the choice to survive or not, do most people think, reason, consider, weigh the consequences, etc.? Of course not! He's arguing needlessly. I don't know if survival is objectively good. What I do know is that almost nobody chooses the alternative. Do we really need to show that survival had some objective value??
actually countless people have chosen the alternative.
there is also a growing belief these days based on what i have seen in person and heard in the news that humans are a cancer to the planet and it would be better if we all died off for the greater "good" whatever that is.
if your morality comes from what most people think then you will always be shifting your morality. Also, logically you would have no basis to condemn ceremonial raping, sacrificing babies, cannibalism, genocide, slavery, religious suicide bombings, etc....
after all, those were all popular opinions of societies at one time. and popular opinion is what matters. right? lol
Nobody chooses the alternative because they objectively know that it's bad! Your statement is self-defeating!
@@DS-si9hg the amount of people that commit suicide vs people who dont is probably a massive gap, its safe to say 99% of the population wants to not die
So what if atheists want to survive. Survival isn’t really a good thing, it just happens. If you just happen to survive, ok. If you just happen not to survive well that’s ok too. There’s no reason to survive. Any reason somebody gives is already assuming a moral standard outside themselves.
Do we REALLY need to have some objective justification for survival? Who chooses the alternative to survival? A tiny portion of the living. And if no one survives, who would be around to debate the issue, or make up creation myths?
Humans are ego-driven. That's why physical survival (as long as possible) is sought by us. Also for many millions of believers (of all religions), their faith is ego-driven. The vast majority of believers follow God because they do not want to be punished after death. They worship God, not for the sake of God, but for their own sake. A question to a believer should be: would you worship/love God with the same zeal if you knew that, no matter how good you behave in life, He will still punish you in hell?! It would be curious to see how many would choose to follow God if that was the truth… In the 8th century in the city of Basra, Iraq, a Sufi woman called Rab'ia lived. When she walked on the streets of the city, she used to carry in one hand a torch lit on fire, and in the other hand a bucket filled with water. When people asked her why she was doing that, she replied: "with this water I am going to extinguish the fires of Hell, and with this torch I am going to set on fire Paradise, so that people end worshipping God out of fear of Hell, or greed of Paradise."
Faith is fear driven. Mankind is the only living organism that knows that he will eventually die. Man will not accept this premise, so he manufactures, gods, angels and an afterlife in order to secure his life's future.
Good points from both of you there
Your comment is refreshing to see, and very rare and difficult to locate among the numerous comments containing religious rhetoric that's found on a website thread like this one that's full of the fearful and frightened delusional children of GOD. It was well scripted and well worth reading, I must say. Other than this, I would like to add one thing to your analogy. All lifeforms are based by nature on the fight, flight, fear mechanism for species survival and protectionism through domination. Those lifeforms that do not adhere to this scenario will be eviscerated and become extinct along with 98% of all other lifeforms that once walked this earth. Therefore, mankind's fear of death, suffering, and pain brings him to the alter of religiosity in search of a father figure protector. I believe that it was Nietzsche that once said that GOD is DEAD, and Freud had said that GOD is DAD.
Uliks there is no punishment after death. You either chose to be with him or you don't.
There is no choice! There is no free will. Punishment is separation, the reward is union, yet both have been already decided since the beginning.
genius
Did Dr. Turek learn how to debate and exposite such amazing rhetoric from seminary school? Or was this a natural gift he has? Because I feel like when I try to explain just reasons for Christianity to an athiest I sound pathetic and wimpy... ;0;)/ I wanna learn how to do appologetics better so I can be salt in the culture. Because just saying, 'i believe in Christianity bc that's what I was taught, so u should too.. isn't a very good argument..."
So yea... Where does one learn to appologetics?
Seminary..right?
Tori Ellise well, to be clear, Turek doesn’t provide very good arguments.
If you want to learn how to be convincing to an atheist, do you know what the first thing you need to do is? Learn what atheists think about the arguments Christians and theists offer.
Here’s some resources to help you get started on that:
Two playlists of general counter apologetics:
ruclips.net/p/PLkYjGll0E2OBmBZXQXRIi3HortnULCiZi
ruclips.net/p/PLkYjGll0E2OCu566kGj9eYaBQVzPdz2Bl
Rebuttals to fine-tuning:
ruclips.net/p/PLkYjGll0E2ODDcHMqXhqOuk94iddph25b
Rebuttals to kalam:
ruclips.net/p/PLkYjGll0E2OAsp01mbhHPxsgmCn5HE4Fb
Rebuttals to moral argument:
ruclips.net/p/PLkYjGll0E2OBc_p2cI6Q0OF5-zX-c86G2
Rebuttals to Ontological argument, TAG and other word games:
ruclips.net/p/PLkYjGll0E2OBKMvkqo5R4EjdU20Lzyo--
Rebuttals to Frank Turek:
ruclips.net/p/PLkYjGll0E2OCqXPfnCmuMKNXOZowW6amK
Rebuttals to William Lane Craig:
ruclips.net/p/PLkYjGll0E2OCJ53Jg9GQfA9HuhYv9aU5n
An Atheist Reads:
ruclips.net/p/PLkYjGll0E2OA4fR7mzRw3HktgmUcWmOJv
And finally, rebuttals to free will:
ruclips.net/p/PLkYjGll0E2OAN9pA7qAsZj-LTewqMDpro
If you want to convince an atheist, you have to understand their position. If you have the time to listen to Frank Turek’s rhetoric, then you have time to listen to his critics. I hope you take the time to do so.
Peace.
Tim Pieper thanks so much!! I agree everyone should be made aware of the claims that oppose their own beliefs.
I've been realizing that even if I do convince an atheist to become a Christian- there's an entire knew bridge that opens up to whether that new Christian should even be deminiational or nondenominational (like Turek). So I've been looking into armenienism and Calvinism and all the rest.
I appreciate the playlists, again, I agree with you. C:
Tori Ellise great! I’m glad we agree. :)
If you want more resources, like on psychology of beliefs or evolution or the Big Bang. I know some channels that can explain that stuff pretty well. Those playlists are all of my making, so if you want to check out any others of mine, feel free.
D'aww look at you two people with different opinions getting along, isnt this nice? We need more of this
Tim Pieper xD aww geez lemme get thru all the stuff u already gave me first. Lol I'll definitely ask u for more when i get thru! Thanks. C:
The mind of humanity is much too simplified to comprehend the vastness of the universe, life, death. suffering; and, man will never know if there's a God or not because certain things are beyond his mental acuity and psychological ability to discern. So, the foolishness of those that seek to ponder these questions will forever find that no answers will ever exist or suffice that could render a satisfactory conclusion.
THE EYE OF GOD amen. Who needs to ponder wether there’s a god? It’s hard to imagine a more boring or irresolvable question. Now if only people who vote based on their beliefs in these god weren’t often so damn regressive in their religious beliefs. Maybe we can ponder how to solve that problem?
From the beginning of time when mankind first entered this world, he was harnessed to this world of pain and suffering with fear which inevitably was much to difficult to comprehend. He then required assistance from all of this horrifying anguish, so he began to connect this ordeal with the environmental observations that he witnessed. He saw tornadoes, whirlwinds, earthquakes, disease, death, etc... So, then mankind began to look up into the sky thinking and believing that there must be multitudes of gods found in the wind, earth, sea, air, the mountains, etc... that were angered, so man began to perform human and animal sacrifices in prayer ritualism in order to appease the gods. When these horrible events had finally subsided he believed that the gods were finally satisfied. Then, RELIGION and GOD were BORN on this earth!
THE EYE OF GOD true.
All that should matter is that you are happy with yourself, as a believer or nonbeliever
It does matter what is taught to our children and the children of the world. It's immoral to teach lies and untruths to these children and uneducated less intelligent adults. Religion is separatistic and a force multiplier for divisiveness. Is it good for the world to be separated by the diversity of religion or would it be better to just look at the human race as one species for which it is conjoined by the DNA that unites us all or is it best to have religion separate the masses of this world by the inculcation of hatred, hostility, murder, killing, mayhem, intolerance, and anguish? The child born isn't Islamic, Hindu, Jewish, Buddhist, or a Christian. The child is a human being of this world separated by cultural diversity, customs language and RELIGION. Remove religion from this earth and harmony will take hold of humanity in due time.
My neighbor is a pastor and I live a small town, some how or another he found out I was an atheist. One day my girlfriend and I are out in the yard chillen having a beer and he comes over to try and "save my soul". So we begin BSing and he isn't answering any of my questions or objections to his religion and he's beginning to get irritated. We get on the topic of free will and evil. Basically he said if we didn't have the ability to do evil and sin we wouldn't have free will and we'd be robots. I said fair enough then I asked if we have free will in heaven, he said of course. So I said we can sin in heaven, he replied with you can't sin in gods presence. So I said we have no free will in heaven then? At this point he got pissed, walked way saying I'm not open to truth and my heart is hardened. I thought that was very telling, in his eyes the problem wasn't with his religion but with me. Pointing out obvious contradictions and inconsistencies in his religion wasn't a flaw with his religion but some a flaw in me. That honestly blows my mind.....
Hi, yes we have free will in heaven, but there's no point to sin. Heaven has all your needs met. You don't need food, nor drink nor material things (so no stealing). You don't need to fulfill sexual desires (so no sex/rape etc,). Everything is fulfilled in heaven for you. Your pastor friend may have not know these things or studied enough.
You have a really good point that even within Christianity is very controversial. Calvinism and Arminianism and everything in between go over the argument but we usually understand it as a lack of understanding rather than a contradiction. It’s like trying to understand how would a being make a choice outside of the confines of time. Or trying to just imagine the fourth dimension, you can’t because anything you ever think of doing in said dimension would involve time, to do something in itself takes time from what we can imagine. But simply yes, we don’t know.
The number of Earth revolutions around the sun is irrelevant. No one will spend time and money on scientific methods of testing the effects of each revolution.
'Over billions, millions, thousands of years' is useless convenience, not 'proof'.
Other animals do; why not humans.
THE UNFATHOMABLE LIES OF RELIGION exist to assist the fearful sufferers of this earth from the torment and suffering that exists. The believer must receive solace from this pain, so the religious had fabricated the delusions of GODLY entities, ghosts, angels, the torment of hell, and the afterlife as a resolution to this in hopes of garnishing donation, power, and control from them. No man knows GOD. No man ever will. Those who demand to say that they know his word, wishes and desires are just fabricating lies to benefit themselves alone.
If Stalin's last act on his death bed was to shake his fist at God, he wasn't an atheist.
Quite right. He knew the truth the whole time.......
+Tim Brandt He said "IF". And Stalin had numerous hallucinations on his deathbed and therefore many crazy thoughts.
Hereiam H
Indeed. Sounds like he was a dangerous, crazy, angry, bitter man to his death. Not the best role model.
Stalin was a Christian that studied to be a priest in seminary in the United States at one point in his life. But, he found that being a dictator was a much better choice. When he died his likeness on coined currency included godly halos around his head. Sounds very deistic to me. Not atheistic.
I wouldn't be too quick to call him a christian myself, but you said it man. Very deistic indeed.
Omg, this drivel about morality... There’s many things attributing to it- not just evolution- social pressure, upbringing and reason. Morality is entirely subjective. U can’t have something that is both opinion and fact. U can base right and wrong based on facts but that doesn’t make the right or wrong a fact. And don’t get it twisted- just because something is subjective does not mean it is arbitrary or meaningless. It means something to us. Well being is what we think is best for humanity and it’s based on our thoughts and feelings which are what? SUBJECTIVE.
And this crap about being just molecules bumping into each other. It’s a little more complicated than that but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t work. Plus u r claiming u have some sort of infallible sixth sense which is non existent. We r stuck with what we got and just because we aren’t perfect does not mean we can’t know anything.
Religion without its fallacious claim that it has a monopoly on morality is essentially useless. Thus, it’s basically destroyed by the fact that morality is subjective and so u have to try so hard to claim the opposite.
Something shouldn’t be right or wrong because ur imaginary friend says so. It should be based on reason. Who’s reason? Ours. Can we be wrong? Yes, but there’s no other way of doing shit. Ur god falls silent on morality. We r left with our own ideas on morality which r entirely subjective regardless of the amount of people that agree with u.
Morality is imported into our human thinking from birth through our DNA, just as all of our physical and emotional traits are. A child as young as 5 already begins to understand a good from a bad action. It knows right from wrong to some extent already. The child doesn't need GOD to fear in order to make the right choices in life. It's innate. So, basically, a bad person will always do bad things; a good person will do good. But if you want a good person to do bad things you'll need religion.
THE EYE OF GOD Agreed- nice Hitchens’ quote at he end xD
The quote in itself isn't one that was originated by Hitchens. It's a quotation that was and still is being utilized by intellectual scholars today as in the past which is found throughout books of philosophy and critical thinking.
THE EYE OF GOD Wherever it is from- I like
"There can be no truth withiut god" poisoning the well.
"I know god is true because god is truth" circular reasoning.
is your statement true?
FreethoughtGreg didn’t watch video
didn't even answer the question or acknowledge the point, being that evolution has caused in us a 'sense of moralitly' which seems to be the best system of survival, not really for individuals per se, but the human species as a whole. empathy, sympathy, altruism, all have come about through evolutionary means in which the goal is survival, all of which their is evidence of and for
By whose standard of empathy is morality determined? Yours? Why you, who are you to set universal moral laws? And evolution cannot account for morality, because rape, thievery and slavery are all conducive to the survival of the species.
I am downsouth04
If you don’t believe in God and instead believe that everything came about by some process of evolution, then what you are saying is that everything that exists has come into existence through the process of following the physical laws of our universe. Not only does this lead to the question of where those physical laws came from that everything in existence follows, but it also asks the question of why we should trust anything you or I say? if indeed everything is a result of physical laws being followed, then even your own thoughts and actions are just reactions to these physical laws. Therefore, we have no control because we are just clutters of molecules reacting and following these physical laws. And if we are just mindless molecules floating through this place we call space, then how can we trust anything that comes into our minds as thoughts which we have no control over because it is just the result of a long chain of physical laws that our molecules blindly followed to form a particular thing we call a thought. If that’s the case then our thoughts have no meaning or value, so why should we trust it? If we are all just molecules floating around blindly following the physical laws of the universe, why should I trust anything you say? Nothing you say has any value or worth if this is the case. Yet it is still amazing after realizing this many atheist still live their lives like it matters, almost as if deep down they know that their life does have meaning. Regardless, You will probably continue to live your life like it matters, even if it contradicts your entire ideology, why is that? Think about what your saying when you say that we developed things like empathy through evolution. By saying so you acknowledge that at one point it didn’t exist and through the process of evolution it came into existence. If we evolved to have it, then it must be in some way physical or measurable. So let me ask the question, how much does “sympathy” weigh? Where is it stored? These are the kind of questions materialist create within their own ideology without even knowing it.
I hope you read this and I hope you didn’t feel like I was attacking you. I was merely trying to uncover the blind spots I see in the materialist ideology. Have a great day!
I am downsouth04 morals epistemologically must stem from God even atheist ethics professor Joel Marks admits this, he wrote a book on it
When you say that rape, slavery and thievery are productive means for survival, we as a society came to the conclusion that those tools are highly ineffective and harmful for society's sustainability. societies which had been dependent on slavery, theft and rape and viewed those immoral actions as a moving force for living, failed miserably to preserve peace and harmony. and as a result, such societies fell apart.
Nothing but moist robots? *Lenny face*
Yeah. It's only one in Turek's considerable army of straw men.
drumrnva well, he has a point. If there were no god, then we are all robots that pro create and are 100% determined. If we were determined, we can’t be held accountable for our actions, so that is giving a pass to people like Charles Manson, Jim Jones, Hitler, Mao, Stalin, etc.
The better question is why doesn’t Yahweh come down and tell the 66% of people who believe in god that they are believing in a different god?
1981andybt he did "come down" he made things incredibly clear to all of humanity. He sent us a book in an ancient language full of riddles and unlikely stories, how else could the creator of the universe possibly let us know of his existence???
Nakadu
At the time of the bible, it wasn't ancient.
And even if he sent us a new one today in perfect English, I have a weird feeling people would write it off today just as much. Antiquity is not the issue, and you know it.
Tim Brandt you're right. Isn't it strange that a being can create the entire universe.....but is incapable of communicating properly with humans? Almost as if the Bible isn't actually word from god eh?
Well, here's another snippet from the same lecture, and Frank nails nonbelievers to a T, especially when he polls the audience.
ruclips.net/video/E_s2iQHGUv8/видео.html
I've heard Lawrence Krauss say: "I don't like the idea of god."
ruclips.net/video/L7vEB6FXtbs/видео.html
Don't watch the whole thing, just find it if you don't believe me. But if you know Lawrence well enough, it won't surprise you. Sorry, I don't know where in the video it is.
So this is not to say Lawrence is going completely by his preference of whether God exists, but one can't deny, it certainly has some bearing on how he approaches this whole god subject. I'd say he just doesn't want God to exist, to be Frank.
But you say He's incapable of communicating properly with humans..... For what it's worth, I disagree. He's revealed to me more than enough proof of Himself, but feel free to write me off as a delusional, schizophrenic nutcase (I'd recommend against it). So does God exist or not?
Tim Brandt whether or not Krauss "likes the idea of God" it utterly irrelevant as to whether God exists or not. Let's start with the basics...I wouldn't argue against the idea that there is something which created the universe...I don't believe there is a being which did that, but I can't prove it either way so I'd have to concede it's possible. But the numerous religions which all claim to know all about this being (even though they all disagree in the details) are just lying to you. I don't know how you can read the bible and come to the conclusion that the author of it CREATED THE UNIVERSE!! So answer this.....God sent us his son so that we can "know him and be saved" the bible is god's way of telling the whole world about him so that we know how to behave and how to get into heaven, so my question is why use such a terrible method? Surely god can make me believe so easily, why send a book full of trivial stories and innacuracies?
oversimplification of how the brain works Frank. How do you know this being exist? Dictators dont kill, like God they command others to do their dirty work.
This is simply nonsense. What we know as right and wrong is entirely dependant on our circumstances. That most humans can agree that some things are simply wrong and other right only shows that such views have been with us in evolutionary terms for some time. They have served us well for countless generations.
I find it disgusting that people actually think athiest dont have morals, its like come on guys we are human just like you, we gain our morals from what we learn just like you guys
what video did you watch? lol he never said atheists don't have morals in fact he said the exact opposite. 3:00
In conclusion to this debate, I find that it would be best to leave the religious alone to dwell within their beliefs because at least it makes them feel good about themselves. There's no harm in that as long as they keep it to themselves and out of the public eye. What will happen is after the theist dies, so will the belief in religious delusion die with them. This will open up the floodgates to newly born individuals that mostly will follow the pathway toward logic and reason instead. In due time, generation by generation, religion will be nullified to some extent.
Not trying to be rude but why do u say that
And yet still going strong after 2000 years.....? you would have thought after 2000 years your theory would have happened.....
Guess what Christians.. Regarding your "free-will" that you hold dear to. The outcome is all predetermined.
Yep, all their beliefs, thoughts and opinions are already written in a book 2000 years before they were born, sad really
+Jason Fewell ... Why is it not predetermined besides you do not want it to be labeled "predetermined". If god were real, he created the universe in such a way that predicts and dictates what choices humans will make. True or not?
And if god creates the exact same universe again, everyone choices will be the exactly the same, and the two universes will be 100% identical. Also, true or not?
Hereiam H Again, wrong, God can't know our decision before we actually make the decision. God can't do a lot of things. If God remade the universe the exact same way, the outcome would be different. You are going by the thought that if the atoms and forces were placed in the same way wouldn't things repeat? My answer is no.
Morality has nothing to do with cooperation. It is a product of biological intellect to know that cynical intent to harm others is evil, immoral and bad. Scripture says God is a law giver and morality is taught, not objective moral source from God. BOOM, Exodus 24:12. Scripture also state our knowledge of good and evil was from eating the forbidden fruit, not because god is objective, moral or good. BOOM, Genesis 3:7.
Man cooperates for the wellbeing of others because we have empathy.
Frank is just arguing from an appeal to consequences. If atheism is true, then the consequences look bad and undesirable (the belief that we can’t know anything and we are just chemicals hitting each other), therefor it mist be false. Fallacious.
not his argument at all lol maybe give it a quick re-watch.
If your Hebrew god Yahweh has absolute power over his creation at all times, where is your free will?