Debate: Christianity vs Secular Humanism (2 of 14)

[Suzie141]

I find that dumb people who don't understand science, don't believe in the scientific evidence and so take the easy way out and believe in god and say he made everything. This is evident in this video. These idiots don't want to listern to the person who's telling them about the scientific evidence and so they attack what they don't understand. It's like children who don't want to listern to their parents when they tell them there is no santa claws.

[TheQjd]

Lets let the professionals like this argue, not the youtube commenters.

[6gunwalker]

dr geisler's correct with his cause n effect argument... for something to exist someone had to have caused it.. its the laws of physics.. however the refute from skeptics is if god created everything who created god? the answer is simple.. you dont need an explanation of the explanation.. eg who created cars?? humans designed and made cars fullstop. you dont need an explanation as to who created humans becoz the answer to who created cars is quite simply humans...

[JMorde999]

Though I'm more philosophically inclined, I think the arguments of the Christian proponent were sound and reasonable.

[menomonee56]

because believing we came from nothing is crazyy it is writtin in the beginning god created the heavens and the earth

[Jayjon81]

God is enternal.... huh? according to what? The book that couldn't even decribe the world around it's self.

[Jayjon81]

this is a bad debate, i've just watched the 1st vid and stoped. They talk over each other and don't bother to wait for a full reply before again restating the questions.

The Host is on side which makes it look like an ambush rather then a debate.

[ZarocLow1994]

3:35 reminds me of gollum

[felisleo101]

The scientists that Geisler keeps quote mining ad nauseam have not said that the Universe had a beginning PERIOD. They say that the Universe IN ITS CURRENT FORM had a beginning. The only problem is that before the Big Bang, the laws of the universe as we know them break down, and to postulate what came before the singularity is mere conjecture. Apologists like Geisler jump all over this in an effort to crowbar God into that gap in our knowledge.

[SIMKINETICS]

An infinite, eternal cosmos is possible. Neither a finite nor an infinite cosmos is provable, so we have no basis to assume that it was ever created. Perhaps most of us skirt the issue that God may be the Cosmos if it's infinite & eternal, with no first cause except itself. After all, the problem stems from the inability of many to conceive unlimited dimensions in a world where we measure everything. Evolution does not depend on either paradigm, finite or infinite.

[RomansGalatians]

Geisler's an Arminian, but he's kicking this atheist's butt.

[marlessangela]

WHOA I LOVE THIS!!! :D

[Nashhinton]

The humanist is a little bit unaware that God is eternal according to Christian theology.

[SMTsquidge]

Ffs let the guy speak! Creationism is hypocritical, contradictory towards physical evidence and is backward for humanity. Humanism is the way forward.

[TheGoogler77]

Science has proven that the universe is eternal. The universe is made out of matter and energy, both of which cannot be created nor destroyed.

[iluvideos]

@TheGoogler77

No it's not. Scientists have been able to break atoms and energy can die out

[Mysio]

christian is repeating the same argument all over.

[EVSjahms]

@Mysio Cuz "humanist" wasn't getting it or refused to accept the point. It would have done him well to understand this point before the debate so they could move past it. Calling yourself a skeptic and then saying "no" to everything that comes up doesn't work for me.

[Mysio]

@EVSjahms argument that universe begun with a cause, but the creator of the universe didnt need a cause is just plainly stupid. Only retard would use it.

[EVSjahms]

@Mysio The universe is a contingent thing. There would either have to be an infinite regress of causes; or there is a non-contingent source for all contingent things. I think Geisler already showed that the infinite regress is impossible. So there you go- you can take back your childish "retard" remark.

[MrDarkbloom]

@EVSjahms Sorry, but no-one knows what happened with the universe coming into being. There is no current scientific understanding to use to make a probable conclusion.

[EVSjahms]

@MrDarkbloom Jesus knows. It's not scientific, but I don't think science can find a satisfactory answer. Science doesn't explain other miracles either. It has to study universal (to our best knowledge) tendencies. But we can think about it hard enough to realize some things; and possibly put trust in our creator.

[MrDarkbloom]

@EVSjahms You have no way of knowing that. You're just guessing. Please be honest and say so.

[EVSjahms]

@MrDarkbloom . Proof is is impossible to anybody who just won't accept something. At the same time I realize that 100% certainty in our little minds is rare. E.G. You can't prove that other people aren't just robots. Throughout life we often have to go with the best/ most likely explanations

[MrDarkbloom]

@EVSjahms Yes, all you can do is be REASONABLE and take a skeptical view of evidence. I CAN prove that people are not robots. That's easy to prove.

[Mysio]

@EVSjahms How can you have infinite regress if there was no time when Universe was not around?

[EVSjahms]

@Mysio Right. You got it. Infinite regress theory is stupid. Nothing we see explains it's own existence. So do you think a non-contingent being gave things their beginning? It's like 3 ropes or chains hanging down: The first one- it's anchored to nothing. The 2nd one- it's never ending (which isn't actually possible). The third one- it's anchored to something indestructible.

[MrDarkbloom]

@Mysio The creator wouldn't need a cause if there was an uncaused creator. What reason do we have to be in an uncaused creator? No good reason at all.

[OregonAlleyCat]

The only way this theist can appear to be right here is to continually interrupt and put words in the secular humanist's mouth.

[SarahLee1]

I hate when people keep interrupting during debates!!

[kokofan50]

i hate it when people don't know something they say "lets make crap up"

[setmedic]

the wish for a god to worship is the wish for unfreedom. The wish to be a slave....

[Astrobrant2]

Science does NOT invoke or presume some supernatural being. Theists make this presumption with no evidence whatsoever for it's existence. At least we know that the Universe *does* exist, but at its limits, it becomes inconceivable. You want rational? When the Universe began (if it "began" in any sense that we can perceive), it was the beginning of time and space, too. So it is impossible to refer to the origin of the universe in terms of time. The Universe cannot be rationalized.

[arkee71]

@Astrobrant2 it was the beginning of OUR time and space...but the source material would have to be there theorhetecally right?

[Astrobrant2]

@arkee71 Not necessarily *and* I don't know.

As I said, I believe all our notions of logic, duality, and causality break down when we try to perceive or discuss the universe as a whole. I believe this can never be known. Not only that, it is fundamentally UN-knowable -- by anyone, at any time, ever.

The universe may be completely acausal. This flies in the face of all our experience and when you think about it, it is what we would expect the universe to be like.

[MrDarkbloom]

@Astrobrant2 Yes, absolutely. A rational person can expect to know nothing about the being of the universe. I don't agree that it is unknowable, though. You have just commited the fallacy you accuse theists of. Bald assertion. It's an open question whether we can ever understand the reality of the universe. It may be improbable in some respects, but why impossible???

[Astrobrant2]

@MrDarkbloom I have not given much in the way of details and examples for why I hold this view. It is not just a bald assertion. I have reasons for believing that the Universe cannot be known or understood in its totality. If you think about it, this is really the only logical viewpoint. Scientists generally refuse to admit defeat, believing that significant developments in technology and evidence will lead us to the truth. I do not believe this is the case.

And that is just my opinion.

[MrDarkbloom]

@Astrobrant2 You don't have good reasons to make that claim. It is certainly possible, but you have no right to probable.

[fairwhether1]

The last line is great!

[Dhyanipasa]

it depends on what one thinks of what is God. that is why the atheists or agnostics are what they are, for the simple reason that they, I as well do not buy the transcendent anthropomorphic God, that modern, traditional Theology propose. The gods of ancient antiquity, these tribal gods, exclusive to specific tribes and nations, still linger today in religious thought. The masses idea of God is diff. from a person whose intelligibly and TRULY trying to discover what is God, the Absolute, etc.

[VAJJification]

Krishna (India), Sakia (Hindu), Thamuz (Syria), Wittoba (Telingonese), Iao (Nepal),Hesus (Druidic Celts), Quexalcote (Mexico), Quirinus (Rome), Prometheus (Greek), Thulis (Egypt), Indra (Tibet), Alcestos (Greek), Atys (Phrygia), Crite (Chaldea), Mithra (Persia), Bali (Orissa).... all them died on the cross to take away the sins of the world, most of which born of a virgin, died and resurrected. not to mention Pontius Pilate never mentions jesus in his letters.

[diuryl]

@VAJJification

you sir are either ignorant of the facts, or you're just lying on purpose. i know for certain that some of the deites you've mentioned were not born of a virgin neither were they cricified on a cross, and i'll give you some reasons: 1- crucifixion on a cross was a roman creation. 2- prometheus was tied to a stone as punishement for giving man fire, and his liver was eaten every day by a bird.

[diuryl]

@VAJJification

3- krishna was never cricified on a cross either, and had 2 parents Devaki and Vasudeva, and he was the 18th child. so he wasn't born of a virgin. and he died of an arrow not on a roman cross. 4- Mithra was born/created from a rock.

etc. also, no one argued that Pilate mentioned CHIRST, so what are you talking about? before you regurgitate arguments from other lying/ignorant atheists, please check the facts first!

[VAJJification]

the anchor is biased. If this was a true debate he wouldn't be arguing, just acting questions.

[diuryl]

@VAJJification

it's a christian show, and the anchor is a christian, so it's okay that he also has some questions which he'd like the "atheist" or whatever he claims to be, to answer.

[PsychedelicZealot]

Dr Paul Kurtz Pwned!

[ArmanCortez1]

@PsychedelicZealot As an atheist i gotta say he indeed got owned.lol But then again im also agnostic, so instead of trying to come up with an answer like Kurtz i would just say "I dont know" which really nobody knows. The origin of time and reality is not fully known at this point, I just believe we should live life to the fullest and not infringe upon other's freedoms, we have much to learn as a species. So ill hold judgement at this point and say "Maybe god exists maybe not, who knows"

[jjason55740]

lol God is not proven Universe is proven The nature of the universe is infinite . If it weren't then at 1 time nothing existed and could never come into existence and nothing would exist.

The conventional bang theory explains the current state of the universe and not the creation of all matter and energy in existence .

[linknlog]

The Christian in this debate is getting annihilated. At no point has the Humanist said that the Universe is uncaused, but for some reason he keeps attributing this argument to him without responding to his claims.

[diuryl]

we know that GOD didn't begin to exist because inorder to be caused or to begin there needs to be TIME! but time never began until the moment of the big bang.

no time = no beginning. therefore GOD just is.

[jjason55740]

@diuryl Nothing can exist with out time. The word exist is a presence in time call present.

If I am living then I can only live with the succession of time.

prove god exist like the universe. If God exist he would be standing between the 2 of them and telling them to shutup.

[diuryl]

@jjason55740

nothing NATURAL can exst without time. if GOD was limited to time space and matter he wouldn't be GOD.

it always ends up being a game of semantics. lol!

there are things that exist that are uninfluenced by time, and completely defy the laws of physics. why should i prove GOD exists like the universe? the universe is natural, GOD is not. GOD is an entity that cannot be proven anyways, there is only evidence for GOD not proof. you've been asking the wrong question all along.

[VAJJification]

@diuryl Nothing can defy science, only our own limitations of intelligence, it would be ignorant to say that there is evidence that you cannot prove GOD when you have no idea where to start with GOD, what is GOD, you don't know, you don't even know where to start, so ever theory should be "We don't know" instead of believing in men that live in huge fish, and are born of virgins and hung on crosses, which has been found in other cultures before Christ, Christianity credible, i think not. zing.

[diuryl]

@VAJJification

"nothing can defy science"? it sounds like you're one of those who falsely believe that science is the measuring stick for everything. it's ironic that you say it's the limitationsof my intelligence, considering it's YOU! who seems to be ignorant of the fact that science is not the asbsolute measuring stick for all that exists. also, evidence and proof are two very different things. just because there's evidence doesn't mean it can therefore be proven....>

[VAJJification]

@diuryl We use to think the world was flat and you would be a hieratic to the church for thinking otherwise, science has always made the church change its views over time, and it will continue to do so as we grow in our knowledge, how can you believe in something that keeps changing its views to adapt to science?

[diuryl]

@VAJJification

the bible argees with science that the world was round, Isah 40:22. non-theistic scientists believed that the universe was eternal aswell, but they were proven wrong when the same science they worshiped opened their eyes. proving that theistic-scientists were correct all along by saying it had a beginning. the bible claimed that the universe expands way before science made that discovery. it also claimed that there were mountains beneath the oceans.

[diuryl]

@VAJJification

<.....so in actual fact, it's the other way round. i'd advise you to date when the bible made these claims, and date when these scientifc discoveries were made. the bible has been making factual scientific claims for thousands of years, in times when they lacked the necessary scientific equipment/knowledge to verify these claims. if you're honest enough, you'd take my advise. if you deny these facts, then problem lies not with the facts/evidence, but with YOU!

[Sweet92Sue]

@diuryl Great responses, diuryl. Atheists have all the evidence they need to believe in God; they only lack the will. They do not WANT to believe, so they must obfuscate at every turn. God bless you today!

[diuryl]

@Sweet92Sue

true, all the reasons they're looking for are in their faces everyday. for most of them, it's not that they want to learn more and eventually believe. they just want to excuses not to(as if we're forcing them), and make up stories as to why christianity/religion should be removed completely. thanks, and GOD bless you too.

[diuryl]

@VAJJification

there are many things that we believe to exist yet cannot be proven with science. GOD can be defined in many ways, there is no fixed definition. and before you accuse me of not knowing, you should atleast wait to hear what i have to say. and, saying we don't know, is a good answer, if there is no evidence. but the rality is that there is evidence, and it would be dishonest for us to claim ignorance despite all evidences.

[VAJJification]

@diuryl we are only limited by our own intelligence and time, most "evidence" that supports Christianity is fabricated and twisted to make people choose "a ridiculous answer of something which cannot be defined" rather then the rational answer of "we don't know, and neither do you." Would you like me to get into the new testement? maybe the dead sea scrolls? how about just basic logic?

[diuryl]

@VAJJification

prove that evidence for christainity is fabricated, seeing as you're so sure of yourself, provide your proof. a ridiculous answer such as? or something such as what that cannot be defined? you're being very vague. in order to prove that "we don't know" is the best answer, then prove that all evidences for christianity are false/lies. because only then will "i don't know" be a reasonable honest answer, before you get into those other topics.

[diuryl]

@VAJJification

which other cultures say the saviour of the world was born of a virgin and crucified on a cross?

[yvranx]

@diuryl ..or isn't.

[diuryl]

@yvranx

No idea what you're talking about.

[yvranx]

@diuryl Sorry, that was unclear, but it doesn't really matter. Have fun!

[diuryl]

@yvranx

It's okay, Merry CHRISTmas!!

[Nashhinton]

@diuryl, The bible says that God is eternal. The humanist doesnt understand that.

[Jayjon81]

@diuryl 2+2=God.....

[levi799]

Why does that guy keep quoting someone who is not there?

He is having a debate with the other guy and he pretty much says "I don't care what you said but another atheist said this and that"

[josephrl82]

If we were to discover what was before the big bang and the cause of the universe, the theists would just say that god caused that thing to exist. If we find out what was even before that they would say the same again. There is no end to the madness..

[wild112233]

We don't know what happened before the Big Bang. Therefore, a space daddy made it.

[jtbbrown3457]

thanks for putting this video on youtube

[raoskaos]

4:55 - facepalm.