We're all atheists, I just deny one more God than you do!

[Peidanful]

Oh brother. Another creationist who can't get his definitions right. Atheists don't assert anything. What this guy is talking about is Antitheism which is making a judgement that there is no god. Atheism simply means to lack a belief in a god. They don't claim that the existence of one is impossible but that there is no evidence for its existence so, therefore, they cannot justify believing it. I don't believe in a god any more or any less than I believe in Big Foot.

[drcraigvideos]

@Peidanful Oh brother. Another typical atheist who calls Craig a creationist even though he isn't: watch?v=_IQoLg7w-_4. Also, get your definition of atheism right: watch?v=XcuSMQVq5dM

[daswenzel]

@drcraigvideos I am not an atheist. I am a religous person who waits for a single evidence for the existence of god. The moment someone can give me this, I will start praying. But everything I got till now from religous people is, that I have to BELIEVE! But I can´t, and now? It the same thing someone wants me to believe in Aliens, ghosts, fairies and unicorns. The moment I see one I start believing in their existence.

[Xquu15]

Where does Craig know all this????????????

[PikkuMiku]

@Xquu15 Not sitting in small church in Hill-billy village, but constantly reading the bible, talking to with people with different viewpoints, and most importantly having faith in God not himself.

[Rheinlander95]

Atheism , of course is a very finite philosophy for the cerebral. Yes, for people who need to live in their heads. If only life,even the very life in front of our very eyes was so simple.

[flameboy1236]

I may not believe in your god, but I still believe in a God. Therefore, I am a Theist.

[drcraigvideos]

@flameboy1236 Good for you.

[flameboy1236]

@drcraigvideos This comment wasn't for you, it was an argument. I do believe in the Christian God.

[SuperMegaFl0yd]

@flameboy1236 Do you believe that this supposed god intervenes?

[BER2ERKER]

@drcraigvideos Yeah, nice try. The definition of atheism comes *from atheists*. Do you think I give s$&@ what *you* or a "scholar" thinks about what "atheist" means? Atheism, especially the modern movement (many of whom don't like the word) is not a belief, that's wholly incorrect. The simple nomenclature of the word makes it clear: A-Theism. By definition, all atheism means is a rejection of theism, period; simply by nomenclature it's pretty clear. Get it?

[drcraigvideos]

@BER2ERKER Don't get all soft on me, Ber2erker. I'm going to have to start taking you seriously, you know. Anyway, get your facts straight: watch?v=XcuSMQVq5dM. And I'm not Dr. Craig. Thanks though.

[Themegalogical]

@drcraigvideos i havent read much from craig, are you able to tell me what his reasoning is for believing the cause of the universe has the attribute of 'personal'? Maybe a vid in your channel if you have one. (im an atheist by the way)

[IluvDonnieandJordan]

I believe in God. I pray to God. Wait until Judgment Day. When all the Atheists people facing God. God will say to them. God: Do you believe me now? God loves you. Turn your wicked ways.

[trekgeek1]

@IluvDonnieandJordan

What if on judgement day, the god you face isn't yours? What if that god had a different set of rules and morality than the faith you followed? Many theists don't believe that simply believing in a god is enough to be saved. You must follow a specific doctrine. What if you face a panel of Hindu gods that judge you and they are offended by the beliefs you hold? Please honestly think about this.

[radbot1]

@trekgeek1 Point well made, but I liken different religions to children going to the zoo. When they are asked to wrire about and draw what they saw, they all write and draw different things. Add to that scenario a bit of human error and a lot of predudice (against other races and gay people for example) and it's a hodgepodge of trues, half truths and lies. So when holy books conflict with each other, it's probably lies, but where they agree, it's probably true, and they all agree a God exists.

[StygianDysnomia]

@shadesofgray100 Ehh, using that definition would suggest that rocks, computers, amoebas, etc are all atheists as well.

but in fact, not believing something exists = believing it doesn't exist. So yes, atheism is indeed a belief. That's also the dictionary definition.

[Stefanvdl93]

Hi, I just wanted to ask politely whether you were in fact Dr. William Lane Craig himself or a devote fan who uploads excerpts from most of his conferences and debates? Thanks :)

[drcraigvideos]

@Stefanvdl93 I'm not Dr. Craig.

[vinivinus]

I don't think he knows the definition of Atheism. Somebody tell him about the free online encyclopedia called Wikipedia.

[drcraigvideos]

@vinivinus LOL! Uh, yeah, Wiki has reliable sources. How about checking scholarly articles and dictionaries on the definition of atheism?

[vinivinus]

@drcraigvideos Your right, Wiki isn't always reliable. I'll rephrase.

Somebody tell him about the scholarly articles and dictionaries on the definition of atheism.

[drcraigvideos]

@vinivinus Indeed. You'll find out that the real definition of atheism is the belief in no God.

[vinivinus]

@drcraigvideos It's actually, lack of belief in God. Nevertheless, i get his point. But, i've never understood one thing. Even if there is a probability of there being a designer for the Universe, i see no reason to believe that the designer (or God) still controls it and is constantly working to maintain it and is answering the prayers of his creation. Maybe he abandoned it after creating. Or he just doesn't care.

[drcraigvideos]

@vinivinus The definition of atheism is the belief in no God. Better thinking people realize this: watch?v=XcuSMQVq5dM

[vinivinus]

@drcraigvideos ..contd.. if this is the best God can do, then i'm not impressed, considering he's all powerful. This world is fucked up. Kids with AIDS! Why would you worship such a God?

[drcraigvideos]

@vinivinus Why would you care? You're the atheist who believes life has no objective meaning and that morals are purely subjective and relative.

[Tomasito261]

I've been looking through various dictionary definitions, and some say atheism is a lack of belief in god and others say atheism is the belief that there is no god. The oxford dictionary even contains both, depending on which volume you use. I think that all this distracts from the fact that some people don't believe in gods. As for the 'we're all atheists' argument, it should 'atheists regarding god x, god y etc'

[empreme]

It's amazing how many of these agnostics actually think they're atheists.

I love watching them fail.

[Tomasito261]

@empreme different dictionaries contain different definitions of atheism, then you have new terms such as positive atheism, strong and weak atheism etc, so it's not actually clear cut. Also, it's possible to be an agnostic atheist. The confusion starts when the boundary is not drawn between deism and specific theism, as most non-believers would be agnostic regarding deism, but positively atheist regarding a specific God-claim, which may be self-contradictory and therefore deniable.

[empreme]

@Tomasito261 I'm basing this more on the grounds that unless you provide a positive argument against God's existence then all you have is a question mark. However, both philosophical dictionaries on my bookshelf claim that Atheism is the belief that there are no gods/is no God. They both also say that lack of belief is agnosticism. There are positive arguments against God's existence; I just wish more people would man up and use them.

[Tomasito261]

@empreme Well, again, it depends what you mean by 'God'. For some people God is just energy, or love, or the universe, or an unknowable creator. For others its a being capable of emotion who created the world in 6 days and made man from dirt. Obviously some of these claims can be disputed whereas others cannot. Personally I'd like to see a debate between a deist, a theist, an agnostic and an atheist. It might clarify and refine the debate a bit.

[clizzaster]

All these arguments about the semantics surrounding the word "atheist" are just silly. It doesn't matter if someone is labeled an "atheist" or not, it doesn't affect what they believe.

[wazpoppin9]

It's such a shame that these shorter 1-2min clips have more dislikes (and views) than the other longer debate videos. I surmise that the YT atheists much prefer these tiny soundbites rather than using their brain and thoroughly examining the argument for themselves.

[Tomasito261]

@wazpoppin9 Debates get more 'likes' because people click 'like' if they liked the debate and found the exchange stimulating. Here there is one viewpoint with one specific argument, so what you're liking or disliking is this point in particular. Also some of the debates are very long, which makes it less likely that people (theists and non-theists) will decide to watch them.

[thedaystripper]

Both the Webster's dictionary and the Oxford English dictionary define atheism as 'the doctrine or belief that there is no God (meaning the Judeo-Christian God) or gods (the part Dr. Craig doesn't mention).' So yes, Dawkins is right. We are all atheists to a degree. You only believe in your God not someone else's god therefore, by definition, to some extent you are an atheist.

[Falcondick69]

@thedaystripper "the doctrine or belief that there is no God or gods" so if you believe there is a God or gods then you are not an atheist, so actually dawkins is wrong, or do you think richard dawkins could be a hindu and still be an atheist?

[Syncopator]

It's always easier to win a debate when you get to invent what you're opponent believes.

I simply, DO NOT BELIEVE, that any god exists. Do I claim to KNOW such? No, I just do not believe it. Call it what you like.

[drcraigvideos]

@Syncopator Uh, okay, you DON'T KNOW your non-belief. You're very smart.

[TarriCJx19]

@drcraigvideos excellent response to that Syncopator commentor

[RetSquid]

@Syncopator

Then you are really more of an agnostic, not an athiest? The philosophical definition of an atheist is one who believes that the statement 'there is a god' is a falsehood.

[blondetrumpetboy]

@Syncopator Withholding belief and saying that God does not exist are two different things. Weak atheism is a lack of belief. Strong atheism is a denial of the existence of any god.

[planb66314]

@Syncopator

You're is short for you are...stopped reading you comment after that

[AgApE010]

@Syncopator

"I simply, DO NOT BELIEVE, that any god exists. Do I claim to KNOW such? No, I just do not believe it. Call it what you like."

Faith, with an agnostic leaning.

[Christlovesanimals]

@AgApE010 Well said and spot on.

[PolishedLake]

@Syncopator

lol but if you don't believe that a god exists then you believe there is no god. just like how i don't believe a santa exists, then i believe that santa doesn't exist. let's not play games. just admit you believe there is no god lol

[peteface24]

Wait?! What's that? WLC *isn't* an atheist?!!! Wow, my world just got blown apart : p

[mason72518]

Atheists do not assert that god definetly does not exist. We simply reject the arguments that suggest that a god exists. It is not the same.

[RetSquid]

@mason72518

So what you are saying is that Atheists have redefined 'atheism' to from meaning 'a belief (opinion/assertion) that there is no God or gods' to one that means you don't accept any arguments for God's existence?

[mason72518]

@RetSquid I do not claim to know for 100% certain that there is not god. Only children deal in terms of "absolute certainty" with respect to matters such as this. In terms of reality, and dealing in terms that are useful I would say that there is not god. But none of us can say for sure, without any doubt, that god does not exist.

[lravenhill]

@bump11of11 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

[Gericho49]

Alister McGrath makes the point that atheists cant believe in a God they apparently cant live without. If there really is no God then even the very idea of God shouldnt exist. The fact is God's existence has been the most dominant issue in all humsan history. I can live totally obvious to any & all claims about UFO's, aliens, astrology occultism. The same should apply if atheism is true

[WanagiAkicita]

If someone is raised by wolves from infancy, they would still look up at the sky and wonder about that, whoever or whatever it is, up there, watching them.

-Born Deist, raised Christian, discovered Deism, became Deist

[Gericho49]

@WanagiAkicita If a deist God can create an absurdly fine-tuned, law-abiding, rationally intelligible, life-permitting universe of immense power, precision & predictability why wouldnt He be capable of intervening it? Why wouldnt that God create a sentient being capable of sharing in the joy & beauty of that creation, thus becoming personal?

My goodness, perhaps he has?

[Funkyflorist]

@shadesofgray100

Actually you are bastardizing the Greek in your use.

'a' is used for a negative connotation but its united in a pair; IE, atheos.

"Atheism" is "without a God belief" is actually incorrect too. You are basically defining it backwards!

Atheos=no god

ism=belief

Atheism=No God Belief (a belief that there is no god)...

"without a god belief" would actually be; "A-Ism-Mesa-Theism".

So you're saying you're an 'Aismmesatheist'?

[drcraigvideos]

@bump11of11 Tell them to get a dictionary and see what atheism means. Atheism is the belief in no God: watch?v=XcuSMQVq5dM

[butchbutch66]

@drcraigvideos It's the old "soft" atheism trick. Atheism is not an absence of a belief in God, like some psychological or internal mental state - "I am missing a belief in God in me that you, Mr. Theist, evidently have". An atheist is someone who categorically believe a Creator does not exist, regardless of what our inner beliefs are!

[CtheWolfe]

@drcraigvideos You do realise the term agnostic or gnostic can apply to atheism right? Both those terms deal with knowledge, one is a reservation of not knowing for sure, the other is a definitive statement of absolute knowledge. Most atheists would fall into the category of agnostic atheism because they do not claim to know for sure, yet you can still believe there is none. Theists are generally gnostic theists because they claim to know for sure their god exists.... to bad they don't agree.

[drcraigvideos]

@CtheWolfe You're giving me junk philosophy. Reputable philosophers know that atheism really means a belief in no God.

[CtheWolfe]

@drcraigvideos This is not junk philosophy it is the way words are actually used. Agnostic and gnostic have nothing to do with religion. They are claims about knowledge. One being absolutely know and the other holds reservation. Hence you can be agnostic towards any claim of any sort, or gnostic towards it. To claim atheism or theism must be absolute gnostic positions is silly. Not believing in a god is not a gnostic assertion that there is absolutely no god. Understand?

[drcraigvideos]

@CtheWolfe *SIGH* watch?v=XcuSMQVq5dM. Get it, now?

[drcraigvideos]

@bump11of11 If someone asserts that atheism is the non-belief in God due to the "fact" that you can't disprove a negative (even though you can) then that would fall under agnosticism. Dr. Craig has addressed agnosticism.

[zelda0521]

I don't understand why atheists like to say they "lack a belief" in God...

Agnostics are the ones that lack a belief in God since they don't think there's enough information to make a decision on what to believe.

[FHomeBrew]

@zelda0521 (a)Gnosticism is about knowledge. I can believe something without knowing if it's true or not. When doing groceries you can believe you still have pickles in the fridge, even if you're uncertain if that belief is true. You act on your beliefs (buy pickles y/n?). I don't believe the christian god exists, yet I do not KNOW if this belief is true or not. That makes me an agnostic atheist with respect to the christian god, but not to all other gods (position depends on definition of god)

[libertatus]

Dr. William Lane Craig is my hero. Watching him in his debates is like watching your favorite sports team win over and over again. Terrific! Craig vs. Dawkins is a debate I would purchase on pay-per-view. That is, of couse, if Dawkins ever quits sitting on that egg.

[aidan1668]

@libertatus Have you watched the debate between them yet ?. The conference was held in Mexico. If you haven't, you should.

[stephjh2006]

@aidan1668 It wasn't really a debate between them 2, it was a joke. A waste of everyone’s time, both the theists and atheist side, I was embarrassed for them all I can only assume they were not told how ridiculous it was going to be. It butchered the concept of intellectual debate.

Feel better now I got that off m chest :)

[aidan1668]

@stephjh2006 I'm glad you felt better. You must be theist. May I ask why you believe God exists ?, just out of curiousity.

[Reasonwillwin]

Without a God, meaning that I don't believe in any God, do we need to have a big argument about this?

[Xenphobe777]

@shadesofgray100 That was a clever comment, but I'm pretty sure the order in which parts are put together in a word do not make up the meaning in the way you put it there. The "-ism" means that the word describes a belief of some sort. I personally don't see why some atheists dislike that (I'm sure most of us believe in something) but oh well.

[Sashajw12345]

""Atheism" is "without a God belief""

Words are not defined by etymology.

If they were then a submarine sandwhich would be interesting to say the least.

[drcraigvideos]

@Sashajw12345 Oh, I see. So since words have nothing to do with their etymology I guess the color "blue" can small like chicken. That's very very very intelligent.

[AndyW244]

@drcraigvideos "Oh, I see. So since words have nothing to do with their etymology"

That's not what she said, she said etymology does not define words and shes right. Etymology is the study of the origin of words.

"I guess the color "blue" can small like chicken."

Clearly, your a complete moron and have no business posting up videos that invite philosophical discussion. the word 'blue' doesn't smell like anything as it is not a physical object.

[drcraigvideos]

@AndyW244 Oh, I see. So since words does not define, well, words then, "blue" can STILL be about smelling like chicken. Boy, are you smart!

[Kiithknight]

@Sashajw12345

Submarine comes from the style of ship of the same name, and in relation to a sandwich, it's a colloquialism which relates to the shape of old submarines (boats). Sandwich is supposedly a reference to Fourth Earl Sandwich who was said to eat cold meat between slices of bread rather than proper meals, so he could stay seated during a gambling marathon. Both of these refer to names of objects rather than ideas. There is no comparison between them and "atheos" - "no/without god".

[MrKGatl]

@burnyourcrutch why not break it down. micro atheism vs macro atheism

[20kevron]

you'd think that since atheism is such a rational position more persons would rush to support their claims..but only hide behind semantics

[Birdieupon]

@burnyourcrutch

"we can see the origin of the word "atheos," which clearly indicates an absence of belief."

LOL! What utter stupidity! You said yourself that the "a-" negates "theos" meaning "without God". You then simply ATTACH the word "belief" to it yourself! That's got to be the most pathetic, ad hoc argument ever!

Atheism is "athe-ism", not "a-theism". To use it in the latter sense is merely to talk about yourself and your personal psychological lack of belief... telling us NOTHING!

[mypolicy9]

@luker4459 "if you are going to debate with someone who claims there is no god, then you're both wasting your time because you are both holding untenable positions."

--You can't seriously believe that. So Michael Tooley's probabilistic proof "The Problem of Evil" for the non-existence of God in Stanford Enc of Philosophy online is "untenable"? I doubt it. Look up and see how logically rigorous it is. He brings it to debate often. Can you please tell me why you think it is "untenable"?

[mypolicy9]

Craig is right wrt this ridiculous defnition because it entails a logical contradiction:

(1) Theist df: A person who believes in at least one god

(2) Atheist df: A person who lacks belief in all gods

This is fine. No contradiciton.

But if the definition of atheist is

(3) A person who lacks a belief in at least one god,

then it follows that Craig both is, and is not, a theist.--Contradiction. So (3) is false. The distinciton is one of kind, not the # of gods you don't believe.

[mypolicy9]

@luker4459 "Most atheist would never claim that god definately does not exist."

--"Definitely"? That's extreme. All you have to do is offer good reasons for not believing in God, and you have thereby shown the proposition "God does not exist" is well-supported. That's how that works. "Certianty" is not required for an argument to be a good argument. The argument just has to be valid, and its premises more plausibly true than false.

[mypolicy9]

@luker4459 "Most atheists would never claim that god definitely does not exist. "

--Maybe in the general public. But in academia this is false. Famous atheists like Michael Tooley, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, and Quentin Smith actually do the intellectual work in constructing valid arguments against the existence of God. See Tooley's "The Problem of Evil" in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Online for such an argument. I know and work with Michael Tooley personally.

[luker4459]

a·the·ist

[ey-thee-ist] Show IPA

–noun

a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.

So basically, both apply - but i think you'l find that most people who call themselves atheists do NOT claim there is no god. I disbelieve the existence of a supreme being or beings. This does not mean i claim there is not one. If sufficient evidence were presented, i'd change my mind - but that has not happened nor does it seem like it will any time soon.

[mypolicy9]

@luker4459 It really doesn't matter to most philosophers how you choose to define "Atheism." As an academic myself in a philosophy department surrounded by atheists, just know the majority of REAL practicing atheists think your definition is uninteresting and inconsequential because it is not a claim about anything except your personal psychology, not any definite position you are taking about the status of God's existence. "I lack a belief in God"--So? Why should I care?

[mypolicy9]

@luker4459 We don't care about your psychological states. For purposes of debate/discussion, we want to know whether God exists, & what reasons we have for & against that belief. In this context, we take the"-ism" found in the terms "Atheism" & "theism" as suffixes designating a definite position wrt the question at hand: "Does God exist?" Atheism--no.Theism--yes. Now we have 2 people ready to defend opposing positions. If u come to a debate w/o taking a stance, you are wasting everyone's time

[luker4459]

@mypolicy9 The definition of atheism does matter. Because most atheists would never claim that god definitely does not exist. Atheism is simply not buying what religion is selling. It does not mean it is selling something else.

If you are going to debate with someone who claims there is no god, then you're both wasting your time because you are both holding untenable positions. The purpose of debating with a believer should be to expose the fallacies in their arguments.

[mypolicy9]

@luker4459 "Because most atheists would never claim that god definitely does not exist. "

--Maybe in the general public. But in academia this is false. Famous atheists like Michael Tooley and Quentin Smith actually do the intellectual work in constructing valid arguments against the existence of God. See Tooley's "The Problem of Evil" in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Online for such an argument against the existence of God. I know and work with Michael Tooley personally.

[mypolicy9]

@luker4459 "If you are going to debate with someone who claims there is no god, then you're both wasting your time because you are both holding untenable positions"

--You can't seriously believe that. So Michael Tooley's probabilistic proof for the non-existence of God in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy online is "untenable"? I seriously doubt it. Look up and see how logically rigorous it is. His article is titled "The Problem of Evil." Can you tell me why you think it is untenable?

[mypolicy9]

@luker4459 It is not always rational to suspend belief, especially when someone offers good reasons for that belief in debate. If a theist offers good reasons (sound arguments) for God, then the terms of the debate require you to show those reasons are faulty (unsound arguments).This requires giving what's called "rebutting defeaters" that falsify the premises of your opponent's arguments. If you can't do this, & his premises remain more plausibly true than false, then his arguments stand.

[luker4459]

@mypolicy9 The problem i have with debates is that they often come down to who is the better debater and not who is right or wrong. Alot of theists/preachers particularly people like craig and zacharias are highly skilled at making faulty arguments sound very convincing.

[mypolicy9]

@luker4459 "The problem i have with debates is that come down to who is the better debater and not who is right or wrong."

--Sure, I agree. That's because debates unfortunately have a time-limit. If we had more time, we could assess the arguments better on their own terms without the personalities of the debaters getting in the way. That's why people should go about futher researching the same topic as it is found published in peer-reviewed journals so they can really assess the arguments.

[mypolicy9]

@luker4459 I don't have a high opinion of Zacharias. Just know, that man is NOT part of mainstream philosophy. And I will admit Craig is a bit snarky. But Craig is also a highly respected PhD in his field whose actual articles are published in peer-reviewed journals. So remember, if you accuse someone of a faulty argument, you need to explain why that is the case. I wouldn't let the limitations of the debate-format get in the way of your researching the merits of the argument on its own terms.

[badpanda84]

problems is we don't a word for that -- and its too hard to say william lane craig is a aTHORist , aZEUSist aODINist etc.. so to save time its easier to say he is a atheist with respect to all Gods aside from the chirstain God

[TheVoid]

So if he isn't an atheist to thor...zeus..etc etc..then what is he in relation to those gods?

[drcraigvideos]

@burnyourcrutch It says "without God" not "without belief". So, atheism means belief without God.

[iliveon]

@drcraigvideos I can grant you the definition of atheism meaning no beliefs towards any gods. What does it have to do with the validity of the argument when every other God is just as likely?Even the confusion God who writes all other religious texts and makes it seem like they are correct and grants eternal life to atheists who don't believe them? I happen to worship that God. He goes by Psyduck, the prophet, whom he is incarnated as a pokemon sent by God to confuse us all into religion.

[thundercrane]

DR.CRAIG IS A GREAT SPEAKER NO DOUBT,BUT TO THINK THAT ONLY YOUR GOD IS THE ONLY TRUE GOD.PLEASE!! HOW CAN ANY OF YOU LOOK PAST ALL OF THE VILE SHIT IN THE BIBLE.PRO SLAVERY,OPPRESSION OF WOMEN,MURDER.HOW CAN ANY OF YOU BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS TWO OF EVERY ANIMAL ON THE PLANET ON ONE BOAT?OR THAT PARTING OF AN OCEAN IS POSSIBLE.WHY NOT BELIEVE IN HUMAN POTENTIAL RATHER THAN A FABLE.

[keatris]

@thundercrane

Will you at least respond to the video?

Stick to the topic, please. Stop spamming.

[ruraldean12]

@OneEyedJack Yup. You're right. i was a Christian, then a militant atheist for 11 years, then finally a Christian. Best 11 years of my debating life, as I learned all the atheist arguments and every weak point in them. This one doesn't even deserve addressing.

[AceofDlamonds]

@ruraldean12

are you serious??

I've never heard of something like that...

christian - 11 years militant atheist, ur talking rough, aggressive atheism aren't you? - and then christian?

That's pretty sweet, never heard of that ever. =D

[ruraldean12]

If an atheist is someone who "lacks a belief in God" and WLC DOES believe in God, then how could any rational mind try to twist this? The fact that he doesn't believe in every single potential god is irrelevant. It's only if he believes in no gods at all that he can be called an atheist. One of the dumbest pieces of atheist word-play ever, yet still trotted out as if something clever has been discovered.

[OneEyedJack1970]

@ruraldean12 I think it has more to do with ego than rationality -- some people are just cocky enough to think they can smooth-talk their way through anything, even an argument as ridiculous as this one.

[Soprano2321]

I suggest Dr Craig familiarize himself with the term atheist...an atheist is simply someone who lacks a belief in God...for example, babies obviously lack a belief in God...you will seldom here an atheist claim "there is no God"...majority of them say "there's no reason to believe that there is one"....and there's a major distinction there.

Dr Craig IS an atheist with regards to the many hundreds of other gods he could have chosen to believe in.

[hayakain]

@Soprano2321 Babies ONLY lack belief in an idea that has not been presented to them, once the idea has been presented a judgment is made in one way or another. This is unavoidable. The only way a grown person may LACK a belief in something is if the idea has never been presented, no evidence for or against it has been given them.

Atheism is the belief that there IS NO GOD. This statement rejects a proposition and makes a claim, no matter what you may say in opposition.

[Soprano2321]

@hayakain And atheism CAN be defined as simply the absence of a belief in God, so babies would be included as atheists.

If there is no evidence for a proposition, you should have the courage to say you don't believe in it. That doesn't mean you're saying 'there are no gods'; it means you simply don't hold the belief. Same thing can be applied to other supernatural entities such as ghosts, pink unicorns, fairies etc.

[hayakain]

@Soprano2321 Babies cannot be defined as atheist, an atheist makes a conscious decision the moment the idea is presented.

If you do NOT hold the belief that "there is no such thing as God" then don't call yourself an Atheist.

The term states more than you yourself claim you can prove.

[Griexxt]

@hayakain The word atheism means "without belief in god(s)", it makes no claim of whether gods exist or not, just that we as atheists don't believe so, for whatever reason. I would agree though that babies cannot be defined as atheists since I think one has to be able to grasp the concept of a god before one can disbelieve it. I also agree with WLC in this video, if you believe in a god you can't be called an atheist. I disagree with his definition of atheism though.

[Soprano2321]

@hayakain I'm presenting alternative definitions to the term 'atheism'. Under some definitions, babies would fit into the category because they do not hold a belief in God. It doesn't say they have to consciously be aware of the term (you added that in yourself); it simply says if the belief in deities is absent, you're considered an atheist. So under that definition, babies would be included. What's so hard to understand?

[Soprano2321]

@hayakain and most atheists nowadays will say "we can't say there is no God. We can say there's no reason to believe there is one". THAT is the general atheist position (from what I've seen) and the view I hold. You'll obviously get some hardcore atheists who say there is no God but that's a more extreme view. Point is, simple absence of belief is considered atheism too (absence of belief is not the same as saying 'there is no God'. there is a distinction).

[Steve7508]

Dr. Craig is an atheist in regard to other Gods. He presumably doesn't believe in Zeus, Thor, Vishnu etc...That's what Dawkins meant. In that sense believer is an atheist in regard to other Gods. It doesn't make you an atheist in the same sense as people who describe themselves that way, obviously, because you do believe in a God.

[knowsall101]

hey how about we all right a paragraph...

[Sunneyskys]

Misuse of terms is exactly right..... is there anyone who actually buys that stuff when it's put out?

[dashan091]

Claiming there are many gods is a category mistake. Our ongoing human struggle for a consensus regarding the name & nature of that transcendent reality that nearly all people, in all culture in all ages seek, is not surprising. The mistake is seeing God as a being among many rather than the creative source of all that exists, "I am who am." Aquinas said we cannot know the essence of God with our unilluminated finite reason. The latter is confounded by God as our reason tries to categorize Him

[dashan091]

cont'd. Aquinas says our reason is confounded by WHAT God is but we can know from revelation THAT God is. He is eternal (ie not in time) & therefore immutable but our experience doesnt include things that dont change. What we do know is God is not so much a name or definition but an experience, the source of all truth. How God judges other faiths is not for me to say but the God I know and love, is big enough and wise enough to deal with my limited intellect and imperfect attempts to define Him.

[dashan091]

A dog cannot know what it’s like to be human. Likewise, I can only describe my human experience of God but my understanding of God’s nature may be different even from those even in my own faith. As messages get refined and reinterpreted over centuries by different communities, religions have gone thru and are still in the process of a spiritual evolution. A lived faith is not just a matter of propositions, it’s a lived life in the consciousness and presence of God we don’t fully understand.

[PheonixRise173]

People like to confuse theism (belief in a god) with omnitheism (belief in all the gods of every religion). To me, that just goes to show how intellectually bankrupt our society has become.

[dashan091]

@PheonixRise173 You forgot toadd 'spiritual bankrupcy" Deep down we all (including hardened criminals) know moral values. It's just that with "God out of the way, all things are permitted." So we live in an indifferent society where greed & corruption are rife, Governments and individuals living beyond their means, where liars, cheats, racists drug pushers and violence abound.

[PheonixRise173]

@dashan091 I think the Savior put it best: "Out of the hearts of men come all manner of wicked things."

[seinfan9]

so the only way you can be a theist is to believe there are an actual infinite number of gods? lol I must be an aeverythingist because there are many things that do not exist, I'm sure.

[NLPNVC]

Some of the arguments people toss out are a lot of fun to play with, the one presented here amuses me to no end. Thanks for the post. Cheers.

[funningincircles]

uh, duh... its called 'tongue in cheek', look it up

but then he goes on to say 'in no sense of the term' to which i can only say "Never speak in absolutes. You will always be wrong." haha (that is also tongue in cheek)

[Purushadasa]

Dr. Craig rules! Very nice video -- thanks for uploading!

Big thumbs up!

[iToyRobot]

Amen Craig