@izmfreak Its not gods existence that is mind boggleing....it is that people actually believe in a god that boggles ones mind. Its insane. The thought of no existence of a god is much more relieving. And heaven sounds like eternal torture to me.
Theists just don't understand the basis of science. There is no blind faith involved. You mock the very methods, research and scrutiny that has brought you technological advances. Don't use medicine. Don't use computers, GPS, cell phones, TV's, cars, air planes etc. Enjoy the fruits of progression but deny it's usefulness. Priceless!
@paramattic70 Actually they do understand it and use it everyday. But recently they have been claiming it was a gift from god. Trouble is evolution which is now credited to god goes against the creation story of adam being created in human form. go figure. Just deluded people
I don't debate Christians for the same reason I don't debate someone who thinks the Moon is made of cheese. The existence of God is unsuitable for debate. It is preposterous in this day and age of science, reason and technology. Believers lack the standing to debate among reasonable people. It is degrading to Atheists. I don't have to prove that something doesn't exist. I refuse to hold on to a Bronze age security blanket and deny myself the rewards of progression. I'm an Atheist. I'm saved.
Yeah that's him. Billy lame (not a doctor) craig. At least he has two contentions. Still trying to figure out what the hell he says. Lol. You can call him impregnable but I rather think he's incomprehensible. Lol.
Hey people...another deluded individual amongst us. Feels that science relies on faith rather than reality and observation of it. Lol I do not comment to make myself whole. Ha ha ha. I do it to keep religious nutjobs oit of my face. Enjoy this life to the max. Its the only one we have.
@Kostly The same William Lane Craig who repeats words continuously but never actually makes a point? lol impregnable...he's one of the worst debaters Ive seen on the theist side. Pick another one.
@Kostly If by "impregnable" you mean absolutely resistant to logic, deliberately lying and/or misrepresenting the facts and other side of the debate, pretending that arguments soundly defeated time and time again for being thoroughly idiotic and ignorant have never been refuted (Kalam, morality comes from god, etc), and just being an arrogant, hypocritical piece of shit, then yes you are correct-- that style is impregnable.
Dawkins has claimed, “As for religion … nobody wields a sharper bayonet than Sam Harris.” Harris debated Craig on 7th April. In his opening statement in that debate, Harris declared that Dr Craig is “the one Christian apologist who seems to have put the fear of God into many of my fellow atheists.” After that debate, the atheist website Debunking Christianity reported: “Bill (Craig) has once again showed himself as the best debater of this generation.” ROFL
“William Lane Craig is Christianity's #1 living apologist. Wake up, fellow Atheists … and see clearly what … is happening here. If we expect Christians to be honest about anything, we as a group need to be honest as well, and honestly face the fact that Craig is kicking our collective (butt) and we're apparently too dumb (as a group) to even know it!”
Why is it WLC has to work so hard? I've never seen apologists struggling to prove the existence of trees, or the spanish language, or pizza. Maybe that's because these things are demonstrably REAL.
An all-powerful God wouldn't need WLC's efforts.
Then again peruse your local bookstore and note how many Christian books are entitled "How to Keep Your Faith in the Face of...." fill in the blank. College, struggles, pokemon etc.
Seems like a pretty insecure bunch these Christians.
Also this designer, of which you speak, is described as a perfect god and a loving god. A perfect god would have made a much better product and a loving god would not allow his children to suffer. Insanity pure and simple.
@allanhill1 Just keep leeching that anti-judeo-christian-muslim argument for as long as you need to make yourself whole. People and their ideas of God are evolving with our understanding. Religion has one foot left inside the house of humanity and it's only a matter of time before they are pushed out completely. But, will the idea of God go with them? Heh, I don't think so. Not even close.
The "watch" anecdote is a poor analogy. The alleged designer according to deluded people commands us to worship him and obey his commandments yet prefers to remain concealed. Sorry that is just lunacy.
Haha, WLC invented himself a "personal causation vs. scientific causation" semantic trick? That's good, at least he's finally made a contribution of some sort.
@dpowens Oh yeah He is a tricky little devil. Not very convincing but he is tricky. He feels that if you repeat a lie enough times someone will eventually believe it. I can no longer listen to more than two or three minutes of his talks. Once you have heard his two "contentions" you have heard all his arguments and it is just more of the same semantics over and over.....
@allanhill1 Agreed. I can't quite put my finger on it, but something about his speech and the way he delivers it sends me into convulsions. I guess I just know when I'm being fed bullshit. It is yucky.
There is plenty of intelligent life on this planet....but there is also theists. Good to know religion is on the downturn. Slowly but in the right direction. Knowledge can go a long way !!!
@parraphrase I'm Mitt Romney and I am a mormon. I want to have many wives but darn it they changed the law. Now I want to be president to change it back. I approve this message
Theists don't have a big enough vocabulary to use a word so impressive as "endorse", nor do they have, on average, the brainpower to use it correctly.
@YetAnotherInfidel I understand and know for a fact that we're all guilty of doing that at times. At least I know I've been. I appreciate your honest sentiments. You are a credit to all infidels! I've had a similar experience as a theist. That is I find your prejudice often justified. Keep on thinking and searching. I'll do the same. Peace.
I hadn't originally intended to respond to this, but I also didn't expect such an accepting responce from you. I am extremely grateful for your sentiments; after talking to someone like SoG my mood turns sour.
To be kind even after I was a shit to you, that marks you as someone who truly adheres to whatever positive part of whichever religion you follow.
Truly, I never expect behavior like that from a random theist on YT, but you changed my mind.
@parraphrase HAHAHAHAH Great comment. Don't worry, they'll face the unknown just like every other being on this planet has in the moments before "death". Notice I put quotations around death. Why? If there is anything that is unreal that humanity has posited in it's history, it is death. What atheists want everyone to believe (besides just blindly following what science tells them it's ok to follow) is that consciousness ends at death. That beings arethe only thing not part of a full cycle
@JMatthewCharles Dawkins has claimed, “As for religion … nobody wields a sharper bayonet than Sam Harris.” Harris debated Craig on 7th April. In his opening statement in that debate, Harris declared that Dr Craig is “the one Christian apologist who seems to have put the fear of God into many of my fellow atheists.” After that debate, the atheist website Debunking Christianity reported: “Bill (Craig) has once again showed himself as the best debater of this generation.” ROFL
More poetry than logic, as far as I can tell, from Dennett. On the one hand, he acknowledges the "plausibility" of Craigs arguments and premises, yet he claims they lead to "implausible" conclusions. Who says? Dennett?
I look at at from both sides and every book, debate and lectures. read the bible and went to catholic school .1.the start of the universe well the bible says god made everything including me.Science says the universe started 13.5 billion yrs with our sun being 4.47bill year old and they have evidence cold hard facts.2.Us the bible said god made man then woman. Darwin says we are the smart ape once again evidence.Its this take it on faith bit sorry god no evidence science and reason wins
1. Scientific theories based on empirical evidence and logic
2. Fairytales written by some ignorant, Bronze Age scribe who knew fuck all about how the world worked.
If you picked choice No.2, take away 99999999999999999 points from your current IQ score. At least I can respect the stupid scribe for thinking of an explanation for things he didn't understand. Now, people would rather believe archaic theories despite lack of supporting evidence, or evidence to the contrary.
Careful with that "scribe who knew fuck all about how the world worked." Listen to Dennet again, or better yet, go study all that empirical evidence and logic yourself. Everything we discover only reveals multitudes of new things that we can't explain.
It's western enlightened arrogance to think that we have the capacity to understand the cosmos, or the discipline to be responsible with such knowledge.
I don't claim to know everything about the cosmos, and I don't know. Seriously, who does? If we, despite our scientific advancement, don't know near everything about the cosmos, then how could some ancient Babylonian dude possibly know EVERYTHING about it?
@foojuice101 Did you ever consider the Danielic prophecies which identify the Catholic church as an anti-christian farce foisted upon humanity as a way to make true Biblical faith repugnant to thinking people?
@foojuice101 Also what evidence best suggests to you that modification by descent got us to where we are? I understand if you just don't have the energy or time to answer. I'm just curious what makes you so radically confident in the theory of evolution. Not trying to pick a fight.
@parraphrase The overwhelming congruence of 150 years of evolutionary biology science and the mountains upon mountains of evidence that support it. If you're honestly interested in the truth, watch some evolution lectures here on youtube by ExtantDodo or AronRa. You'll find that nearly everything that religion has told you about evolution is a deliberate fallacy or an outright lie; I went to Christian schools from grades 5-12 and it took years to learn just how badly I had been mislead.
@VanDammesCokeDealer Thanks for the 411. I'll look it through. A comment though if I may. You are appealing to authority which is fine but that was not what I asked for. I was wondering what evidence you thought was most persuasive. My question wasn't worded the best. I appreciate you giving me something to look at. Some might say that your answer was akin to that of many religionists. A Catholic might site the authority of priests and a 1000 years of tradition as you did w/ AronRa etc. peace.
4. Overwhelming sound evidence and a backing from the members of the Royal Society
5. Overwhelming sound evidence and a backing from the members of the Royal Society plus the studies done by thousands of biologists over 150 years of evolutionary study
@foojuice101 Thanks bro. but I'm not looking for an appeal to authority but for your thoughts. To say overwhelmingly sound evidence is not overwhelmingly sound. At any given time in earths history a person may have appealed to an authority they'd accepted in order to validate themselves. That doesn't impress me. I'm not saying your wrong. You may be right. I just wish to know what sound evidence proves that you are. Respect and all the best to you.
The bible is NOT the words of God. It's the combinatorial work of tribal knowledge before the dawn of civilization that trickled to to modern day. It's the residue of past ignorance.
@Hector88. I'll listen again. My first thought is that he is swinging the door both ways. As C.S. Lewis wrote, "Reality is often not what one would have expected." QM might not be what one would expect, and God might not be what one would expect. Appreciate the comment.
Dennet is all over the place in his thought process. First he says Craig says, "Whatever the truth is, it's mind boggling." And, "Jaw dropping implausible and counterintuitive in one way or the other." He adds that one can't use mind bogglingness as a litmus test. Then a minute later he says, himself, "The truth is going to be very hard to believe." Mind boggling? And, again, "However counterintuitive this is (mind boggling, I assume) we are going to have to accept it." Mind boggling?
He's example of nailing up a diagonal brace to stiffen his house still requires conscious intent. This is the level of Atheist institutional philosophers
@foojuice101. I think this fodderunit guy may have grown up close to either a nuclear reactor or toxic waste dump. I find his comments to be some of the most ridiculous ever posted. Maybe never had the opportunity to go to school. Very evident there is a mental handicap or inability to grasp a concept
Funny how theists (believers) constantly reject science and evidence which explains the existence of the universe....and the computer on which they type their idiotic claims. Lol. It is futile to even try to debate with these brainwashed cult members
Intelligent design (I'd) is a new concept proposed by theists because religion is slowly losing ground. It is ludicrous as it negates genesis in the bible. Just another attemp by theists to hold on to bronze age beliefs to maintain power. Lol
Your an Atheist idiot who believes inanimate matter created life. Abiogenesis is a discredited Atheist fantasy which was never even a scientific theory. Rejection of Intelligence is Atheist Orthodoxy.
Snowflakes are evidence supporting your idiotic faith that life and human intelligence are a creation of inanimate matter. You're a common Atheist idiot.
you wrote: "We know that the basic parts for life . . . "
So what are the properties of this force? Does a virus have it? What about a self-replicating polymer? How come we can disrupt life by affecting the chemical processes it is comprised of?
You don't know the difference between living cells and viruses. What an Atheist. Keep trying to rationalize your Orthodox Rejection of Intelligence, Snowflake.
@onefodderunit I don't think you'll get much use out of debating Atheists, look at how they argue. They have the same attitude as the Soviets and would enslave us to their "sciences" if they had the chance, oh wait they already have! The future isn't looking good with the Atheist stranglehold on our educational institutions.
@stinnetbennet godforbid those scientific breakthroughs that brought us modern medicine and transportation, how dare we want our future generations to continue such advances and gain a better understanding of the natural world
Atheism is anti-science and is asinine faith that inanimate matter is creator of life. I'm not religious and If you believe life is unintended, you should kill yourself know. and give nature a break, pointless parasite.
How the fuck is atheism anti-science? If you don't believe in supernatural causes, then you will use science to explain things. And atheism is just as much a faith as not painting is a hobby. Atheism is not a faith at all; it is simply the rejection of a claim that has not met its burden of proof. It's the default position of a person before they are indoctrinated.
A billion sperm and YOU were the one who won? Please. I hope you're just trolling.
Existence popping itself into being would be unnatural. Inanimate matter creating life would be unnatural. Because an intelligence is incomprehensible, or "supernatural" to you, doesn't mean you should reject all scientific evidence that intelligence comes from intelligence, and only intelligence designs/creates. Atheism is not simply anti-science, it's the Orthodox Rejection of Intelligence.
Children read your comments. Can't you act like an adult, Atheist?
Why would it be unnatural? You do realize that the first life forms (eukaryotic and prokaryotic cells) formed from non-living things?
I am not rejecting things that have scientific evidence. I am rejecting things that DO NOT have scientific evidence of existing. Give me ONE piece of sound, scientific evidence that there is an intelligent creator out there.
Since children read your idiotic comments, I suggest you stop spreading your ignorance. You're a disgrace to theists.
You're a common lying Atheist. No soul, no integrity. If "non-living things" could turn into life, Abiogenesis wouldn't still be idiotic Atheist fantasy. It's never been a scientific theory, and you act like it happened. Why haven't you killed yourself, pointless parasite?
How am I lying? Check any biology book. It will tell you what I'm telling you. Just because you're ignorant, it doesn't mean that scientists are all lying.
You stick to your delusion if it makes you happy, and I'll stop wasting my time with ignoramuses like you.
And asking me to kill myself just because I'm not stupid and don't buy into your delusion? How hypocritical coming from someone who thinks they have more morals than others.
You're lying about your lie. Many anonymous Atheists end up doing this. It's pathological. Abiogenesis has never been a scientific theory. If it had happened, there would be no debate, which there shouldn't be anyway. You Atheists insist on forcing your filthy, dehumanizing anti-scientific idiocy into society, same as mass murderous Bolshevik Atheists.
@onefodderunit There is no dog, I mean god. If you need morals from a man-made book, then you ought to check yourself with a doctor. Thinking there are is a bearded transvestite in the sky is a sign of your stupidity.
@onefodderunit Typical deluded, bollocks, coming from a lying theist. Filthy creation loving cock-suckers who'd lie to sell their families. Vile, poisonous, snakes who believe in another cock-sucker in the sky making stuff.
The fact that Atheists claim life was never intended, but don't often volunteer to check out early to relieve nature of their burden and avoid waiting until they shrivel up and achieve dementia, is evidence that Atheists are selfish, fearful and greedy. Do you agree?
@onefodderunit Give me a single scientific paper showing that intelligence comes from intelligence. Just a single shred of scientific evidence for that...
That's the main problem with anti-science pricks. You just pick things that seem obvious and pose them as facts. But things that seem obvious aren't always true.
Like said in the video, you have no idea how counter intuitive things can be.
@MomoTheBellyDancer When he can't answer he resorts to ad hominem attacks,lol. Quite entertaining to watch him squirm and then stop replying altogether when asked a real question.
@onefodderunit You're of the asinine theist faith that believes in transvestites who magically created you, correct? You've clearly been smoking your creators "trout", LOL! Douchebag!
Religion is not my bag. Your Atheist Orthodox Rejection of Intelligence for the asinine faith that inanimate matter is your creator is the appropriate choice in your case.
@onefodderunit Yes it is, douchebag. It's the bag you unveil off of your creator's transvestite cock before you suck him off LOL! I rather be created by inanimate matter than by your transvestite who loves fucking little boys like you. LOL! Douchey! LOL!
@onefodderunit LOL! Talking about invisible transvestites again, are we? Yes, I'm glad we can show you that we are intellectually superior to you, and that those who believe in god are often the ones that can't come to terms with their intellectual shortcomings. LOL! Douchebag, keep slamming that bible! Yeeehaww...LOOL!
@hislord1 There you go He just showed his true intelligence level by claiminig atheism as a faith. Incredible how they cannot grasp the idea that it is someone who does not believe the fairy tale stories. Lack of faith as it were. Comes from reading the bible.
@hislord1 Its sad but these people need religion as a crutch. Seems they cannot face this present life alone so they buy into the tale of following a deity with the promise of eternal bliis or horrible eternal torture. LOL Funny but sad
@onefodderunit "Only intelligence designs/creates. If there is ever evidence that counters that fact, then there can be a debate."
Ever hear about 'natural selection'? It designs. It creates. It is a verifiable, predictive, process which produces measureable and empircal evidence (ex: molecular evidence).
"There is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind" by Anthony Flew
This book makes Richard Dawkins' book or Christopher Hirchens book look like comic books.
If Anthony Flew can see these things, why not Dawkins or why didn't Hitchens? The answer is Flew used his mind sufficiently in regards to arguments while Dawkins and Hitchens have not done so. They failed to put pieces together.
Atheists and evolutionists as a whole are just not capable or intelligent enough to be able to think properly. Judging the comments all over YouTube its appauling to see the mass idiocies that exist in this delusion that they claim exists amongst Christians! What THEY affirm is FAR MORE stupid that anything on earth! The mathematical probabilites are absurd against all they believe yet they hold onto it for dear life and call others stupid in the interim? Arrogant idiots believe this lie.
@PureAirSolutions I will try just once with you as I do with most believers. If you get it great if you do not then enjoy your delusional submission to a fake god... Atheists and nonbelievers do not affirm anything. Christians do !!!!!. As do muslims and most other believers. We are neutral in belief and ask that you back up your unbelieveable claims or go away and play by yourselves. It is jibberish to us. Thank you
@BlongBlarble Only in the minds of the sheep where black = white, good = bloodthirsty, merciful = cruel, love = slavery. For the rest of us who see the contradictions and don't fall for the sophistry trying to mask them Craig is a dishonest person who will say any nonsense to defend the faith. He's no scholar in search for the truth wherever it may lead.
@BlongBlarble More like 15%. Unfortunately rationality has not made it into most people's way of thinking. Look at the popularity of horoscopes and psychics. Also most religious people do not know all the nonsense in their religions. Some who find out are honest enough to stop believing. Most unfortunately take the lazy way out. They don't ask questions and just follow. To keep them in the fold Craig dresses up the contradictions with BS to confuse them.
@BlongBlarble The opinion or belief of a majority does not make it real...only popular. Nazi Germany is a good example of this. You are free to believe in any fairytale you find comforting. Keep it away from people who think for themselves and do not require a fake book or false god to govern their lives. Morality dioes not require a bible or god. Religion is evil and controlling. Leave me out of it please.
@BlongBlarble "I bet Dr Craig would destroy this fool in a debate too! "
I'm sure he would...seeing that Craig is really good at 'debates' that are scored on points like it's fucking high school. In the real world, where ideas and concepts are exchanged his idiotic presuppositions would be exposed...and he wouldn't be able to hide behind the gish gallop and circular reasoning.
You admire Craig, who justifies genocide because it's what his god did in his holy book. Awesome.
If this is impromptu, then... wow, what a well-spoken guy. Then again, WLC's arguments change so little that you don't actually have to do anything impromptu to refute him.
Check out Professor William Craig Lane and his Scholarly, Intellectual arguments for God's existence. Also check out Reasonable Faith Dot Org for more perspectives on Faith:)
All of the mainstream religions use scripture as the foundation. The bible (old and new testament) the quran etc etc. Intelligent design was simply offered on observation of the copmplexity of the universe and living organisms. The bible claims god used a handful of sand or dust and created adam the first human being. Evolution which is no longer considered theory argues humans evolved from a much more simple beginning. ID conflicts with the bible !!!
Religious people believe that God made the universe, but nothing or no-one made God. Why then is it so difficult to believe that nothing or no-one made the universe?
But let's say God DOES exist. Then God Himself is an Atheist.
Why?
Because if nothing or no-one created God, then there is no deity for God to believe in. Therefore it is only logical to assume that God is an Atheist.
@orlandofriend We are not hateful of the people just their idiotic ideas and their obsession with having us follow the doctrines. We neither want it or need it. It is jibberish to us. Pure nonsense. Leave us alone and continue in your fantasy and keep it personal and we will leave you alone.
Good to hear Dennett so politely (as usual) point out Craig's silliness. Craig has always seemed to me as a highschool evangelist wannabe frozen in time, but in a nicer suit. On and on with too many loose ends to bother tying, sloppy in the most well-scrubbed aort of way. Ad hominem? Maybe. But he honestly creeps me out in a subtly scary way. (Maybe fear and revulsion are always ad hominrm to some degree... sorry.)
In almost all Billy Lame (not a doctor) Craigs debates he uses the phrase (if something begins to exist it has a cause.) By using the word 'If" it is then implied that possibly it did not begin to exist. Therfore by his own implication if the universe did not begin to exist his whole argument is negated. Science does not claim to have the answer but rather offers possible explanations for both conditions and is ever prepared to accept other scientific theories that make sense.
@allanhill1 confused a bit. you say that he is not a doctor? Not sure what you mean. please explain. Secondly, are you suggesting that the universe has always existed? If so, it seems you are going against modern cosmology which points to a beginning. Also, why do you attack his person with name calling "Billy Lame"? If your arguments are solid why not let them make the case?
@atozatoz0 A doctorate in any subject means one has attained a certain level of education. Recognition of that certificate is required for credibility. Doctorates received from faith based teaching establishments are questionable. I did not claim the universe has always existed. the jury is still out on that conclusion in the scientific world and most probably always be unknown. The theists are the ones who claim that it had a beginning for sure.
@allanhill1 The universe, that is, the sum of everything that exists, is necessarily eternal in the sense of existing at every possible instance of time. That follows from the fact that something can't come from nothing. And, yes, that's true even though certain physicists talk about universes from nothing. Quantum fluctuations are not causally inert and therefore are not nothing.
@Gnomefro Tell this to theists who in a nutshell claim god waved his hand and in six days created all their is. And for some reason was not able to create the first human from nothing. the animals yes but Adam he required a handfull of dust or sand and Eve required a rib of Adam. I will always admit that science is forever looking for the answers but will never bow to claims from theist that the bible or quran have the answers It is fairytales told to children
@allanhill1 On the flip side, you'll note that to even talk about a beginning of "the sum of that which exists" is a logical contradiction because non-existent things can't cause anything. P1 in Kalam would also fail because of that. This means that naturalists and theists are simply talking about different things when they use the word universe. Although to be fair the terminology is confused by the multiverse people. Still, some eternal substrate of existence is a necessity.
@atozatoz01 Sorry you are mistaken. I did not suggest the universe is eternal. I said what every scientist would say is we are not sure. Theists claim they have the answer for sure. Science has several theories and some are better than others. I attack him because I feel he is not honest. My opinion of course but so be it. Scientists always welcome criticism and new thoughts whereas believers actually attempt to stifle anyone who questions the christianity or islam.
@alexicoff Game. Set. Match.? I must have missed something. Did you just win with one shot. Please explain how "A changeless god is a deist god at best" and how evidence for deism is now evidence for a-theism?
Theism "belief in the existence of a god or gods, specifically of a creator who intervenes in the universe" OED.
A changeless god cannot intervene in the universe, because intervention would require him to change, IE be in a state prior to the action and a different state after the action. Since our Universe is changing, in order for a god to intervene, he cannot be changeless.
Free thinkers (nonbelievers) and scientist are comfortable admitting that we do not know the origin of the universe. Theist claim they do without reason or evidence. Its that simple.
Hard to believe that so many theists, & even some atheists, take WLC's simple-minded sophomoric pasted-together houses of cards built out of worthless intuitions and creaky Aristotelean logic so seriously. I like the responses of Dennett & Sisyphus Redeemed much better than the responses of those who try to nit-pick the details in WLC's slick little sophistries. Hundreds of years of science have shown that our intuitions and 2-valued logic are worthless when it comes to understanding reality.
That's a self-refuting argument: you are arguing that we cannot trust our reasoning faculties. However, how did you arrive at your conclusion? With human reasoning.
Also, his arguments are based not off of intuition, but contemporary physics, philosophy, and historical study. If you believe that these are wrong, then your argument is still wacko: you say that science has showed that our reasoning is wrong, but then say science is wrong.
@THEEVANTHETOON Philosophy and history cannot show how what, if anything, "preceded" the big bang, or even if the question makes sense. Physics has not yet been able to achieve this, although it may some day. Anyone who claims to know or even to be able to attach a strong probability to some "pre-big-bang" state of affairs is a lunatic, liar, idiot, or, by large orders of magnitude, the greatest genius the world has ever known. My guess is that WLC is a lying hack who's found a good racket
@AegeanKing "Says the butt-hurt atheists making excuses. Hitchens himself admitted defeat to Craig."
Really? I wasn't aware Hitchens converted to Christianity before he died. Or perhaps by "admit defeat" you mean something entirely different than Hitchens acknowledging a shred of truth in Craig's arguments?
@Gnomefro By defeat, I mean Hitchens admitted that Craig beat him in the debate. Which means that Craig not only destroyed the arguments of Hitchens, but Hitchens failed to address even a single argument of Craigs. Thats what I mean. CommonsenseatheismDOTcom said that Hitchens "Got spanked like a child".
2000 plus years ago when we had little knowledge about our world it was natural to feel it was the work of a god. Human nature. As we observed and began to discover the true causes of natural phenomena the original divine explanations became obsolete. Unfortunately the religious community has closed their minds to reality. Very sad indeed.
@cablepanos come on thats bullshit. check this out. If the universe has always existed, it is eternal. Now think of God but a God that looks identical to our universe. it can make anything apear make art and do anything immaginable and has lasted forever. now strip away every attribute of God his conciousness and power, every thing but the quality of having lasted forever. A universe that doesnt need a cause has an attribute only attibutable to God. so either God created the it (1)
@cablepanos so either God created it or the universe is God but with no power. so that would make it not a God. logically.. So it makes since that since we know that the universe had a beginning that it needs a cause and that the only thing that COULD cause it was God, but if it didn't have a beginning it would be the same but the universe would have consciousness and the only created part would be us and our earth which in this hypothetical scenario would be the universe
@cablepanos listen brother im 17 in colledge i just learned what the Kalam argument was but i think i thought of it first. i was wrighting a paper and i said what i said earlier.
but under the deffinition of God the most powerfull intelegent magnificent being, you would probably need a being that would be more powerfull
And you caint because God is the MOST. But to me its either the univers has no cause making it a worthless unconsouse God, the U realy does have power or G created U
@woods8870 "A universe that doesnt need a cause has an attribute only att[r]ibutable to God" is just a bald assertion, and a meaningless one at that. It's self-contradictory. It boils down to "The Universe is un-caused and that cause is god." Alternately you claim that the Universe is God. The Universe is defined as "everything which exists", so that means God is everything, and that nature is supernatural, which is completely pointless and absurd.
@cablepanos what i was saying is that there are three options the third in mind is the absurd one
1 An uncaused God Caused the universe
2 all of the universe out side of earth is God and our planet is the (universe) and God is all around the planet (space but with inteligents and power)
3 the univers is natural and somehow doesnt need a cause which is absurd becaus that would make it a God (because of the attribute of not needing a beginning) but it would have no power or intelegence
Mindbogglingness lol
lunagalapogos 17 hours ago
God's existence and God's non-existence are both mind boggling thoughts...
izmfreak 18 hours ago
@izmfreak Its not gods existence that is mind boggleing....it is that people actually believe in a god that boggles ones mind. Its insane. The thought of no existence of a god is much more relieving. And heaven sounds like eternal torture to me.
allanhill1 16 hours ago
Theists just don't understand the basis of science. There is no blind faith involved. You mock the very methods, research and scrutiny that has brought you technological advances. Don't use medicine. Don't use computers, GPS, cell phones, TV's, cars, air planes etc. Enjoy the fruits of progression but deny it's usefulness. Priceless!
paramattic70 2 days ago
@paramattic70 Actually they do understand it and use it everyday. But recently they have been claiming it was a gift from god. Trouble is evolution which is now credited to god goes against the creation story of adam being created in human form. go figure. Just deluded people
allanhill1 2 days ago
I don't debate Christians for the same reason I don't debate someone who thinks the Moon is made of cheese. The existence of God is unsuitable for debate. It is preposterous in this day and age of science, reason and technology. Believers lack the standing to debate among reasonable people. It is degrading to Atheists. I don't have to prove that something doesn't exist. I refuse to hold on to a Bronze age security blanket and deny myself the rewards of progression. I'm an Atheist. I'm saved.
paramattic70 2 days ago
@paramattic70 Can you prove that the Moon is made of cheese? Nope. Therefore it must be made of cheese. Probably blue cheese.
werebee 2 days ago
Yeah that's him. Billy lame (not a doctor) craig. At least he has two contentions. Still trying to figure out what the hell he says. Lol. You can call him impregnable but I rather think he's incomprehensible. Lol.
allanhill1 2 days ago
Hey people...another deluded individual amongst us. Feels that science relies on faith rather than reality and observation of it. Lol I do not comment to make myself whole. Ha ha ha. I do it to keep religious nutjobs oit of my face. Enjoy this life to the max. Its the only one we have.
allanhill1 3 days ago
You know what's crazy? Debating WLC on God and anything spiritual. One word to describe his debate style? Impregnable.
Kostly 3 days ago
@Kostly The same William Lane Craig who repeats words continuously but never actually makes a point? lol impregnable...he's one of the worst debaters Ive seen on the theist side. Pick another one.
goulter1985 3 days ago
@Kostly If by "impregnable" you mean absolutely resistant to logic, deliberately lying and/or misrepresenting the facts and other side of the debate, pretending that arguments soundly defeated time and time again for being thoroughly idiotic and ignorant have never been refuted (Kalam, morality comes from god, etc), and just being an arrogant, hypocritical piece of shit, then yes you are correct-- that style is impregnable.
VanDammesCokeDealer 2 days ago
Dawkins has claimed, “As for religion … nobody wields a sharper bayonet than Sam Harris.” Harris debated Craig on 7th April. In his opening statement in that debate, Harris declared that Dr Craig is “the one Christian apologist who seems to have put the fear of God into many of my fellow atheists.” After that debate, the atheist website Debunking Christianity reported: “Bill (Craig) has once again showed himself as the best debater of this generation.” ROFL
RosesOfTimes 4 days ago
“William Lane Craig is Christianity's #1 living apologist. Wake up, fellow Atheists … and see clearly what … is happening here. If we expect Christians to be honest about anything, we as a group need to be honest as well, and honestly face the fact that Craig is kicking our collective (butt) and we're apparently too dumb (as a group) to even know it!”
Mark Smith, Contra Craig Website
ROFL
RosesOfTimes 4 days ago
No wonder Dawkins refused to debate Craig. Craig SPANKS ASS ROFL!!!!
RosesOfTimes 4 days ago
This video has an annoying lag in it's transmission
TheDano1947 1 week ago
Why is it WLC has to work so hard? I've never seen apologists struggling to prove the existence of trees, or the spanish language, or pizza. Maybe that's because these things are demonstrably REAL.
An all-powerful God wouldn't need WLC's efforts.
Then again peruse your local bookstore and note how many Christian books are entitled "How to Keep Your Faith in the Face of...." fill in the blank. College, struggles, pokemon etc.
Seems like a pretty insecure bunch these Christians.
HellRehab 1 week ago 2
Also this designer, of which you speak, is described as a perfect god and a loving god. A perfect god would have made a much better product and a loving god would not allow his children to suffer. Insanity pure and simple.
allanhill1 1 week ago
@allanhill1 Just keep leeching that anti-judeo-christian-muslim argument for as long as you need to make yourself whole. People and their ideas of God are evolving with our understanding. Religion has one foot left inside the house of humanity and it's only a matter of time before they are pushed out completely. But, will the idea of God go with them? Heh, I don't think so. Not even close.
Kostly 3 days ago
The "watch" anecdote is a poor analogy. The alleged designer according to deluded people commands us to worship him and obey his commandments yet prefers to remain concealed. Sorry that is just lunacy.
allanhill1 1 week ago
Haha, WLC invented himself a "personal causation vs. scientific causation" semantic trick? That's good, at least he's finally made a contribution of some sort.
dpowens 2 weeks ago 2
@dpowens Oh yeah He is a tricky little devil. Not very convincing but he is tricky. He feels that if you repeat a lie enough times someone will eventually believe it. I can no longer listen to more than two or three minutes of his talks. Once you have heard his two "contentions" you have heard all his arguments and it is just more of the same semantics over and over.....
allanhill1 2 weeks ago
@allanhill1 Agreed. I can't quite put my finger on it, but something about his speech and the way he delivers it sends me into convulsions. I guess I just know when I'm being fed bullshit. It is yucky.
dpowens 2 weeks ago
The human mind is a terrible thing to waste.....on religion !!!!!!
allanhill1 2 weeks ago 2
There is plenty of intelligent life on this planet....but there is also theists. Good to know religion is on the downturn. Slowly but in the right direction. Knowledge can go a long way !!!
allanhill1 2 weeks ago
@allanhill1 I know, right? Isaac Newton, Michael Faraday and Rene Descartes are fucking dumbasses!
Crobat87 1 week ago
@Crobat87 Sir Isaac Newton believed in God. He wrote more about religion than He did about science. Rene Descartes was catholic.
martyswn 3 days ago
@martyswn I was being sarcastic. Don't forget that Faraday was Anglican
Crobat87 2 days ago
@Crobat87 my apologies. i didn't know that about Faraday.
martyswn 2 days ago
Of course, life HAS been found elsewhere in our universe. It was a planet full of theists. Unfortunately the search for intelligent life continues.
JMatthewCharles 2 weeks ago 29
@JMatthewCharles Good one
emailpobox666 2 weeks ago
@JMatthewCharles Lol, the search will continue for a while yet if they're all like that!
DivineLucifer666 2 weeks ago
@JMatthewCharles I'm a theist and I endorse this message.
parraphrase 1 week ago
@parraphrase I'm Mitt Romney and I am a mormon. I want to have many wives but darn it they changed the law. Now I want to be president to change it back. I approve this message
allanhill1 1 week ago
@parraphrase
Bullshit.
Theists don't have a big enough vocabulary to use a word so impressive as "endorse", nor do they have, on average, the brainpower to use it correctly.
YetAnotherInfidel 1 week ago
@YetAnotherInfidel
Is labeling someone unintelligent due to their chosen belief system intelligent?
I know you're just cracking on those who disagree w/ you though. Don't work too hard using those highly intelligent atheistic brain cells of yours.
parraphrase 1 week ago
@parraphrase
Perhaps it is a bit... prejudice to judge without so much as an inquiry, however, I find my prejudice is often justified.
Racking on theists after a particularly heated argument is a flaw in my charactor. I am... I apologise for my childish display.
YetAnotherInfidel 1 week ago
@YetAnotherInfidel I understand and know for a fact that we're all guilty of doing that at times. At least I know I've been. I appreciate your honest sentiments. You are a credit to all infidels! I've had a similar experience as a theist. That is I find your prejudice often justified. Keep on thinking and searching. I'll do the same. Peace.
parraphrase 1 week ago
@parraphrase
I hadn't originally intended to respond to this, but I also didn't expect such an accepting responce from you. I am extremely grateful for your sentiments; after talking to someone like SoG my mood turns sour.
To be kind even after I was a shit to you, that marks you as someone who truly adheres to whatever positive part of whichever religion you follow.
Truly, I never expect behavior like that from a random theist on YT, but you changed my mind.
Thanks.
YetAnotherInfidel 1 week ago
@YetAnotherInfidel Bro. man. I wish that every discourse on these pages could end like ours. Peace!
parraphrase 2 days ago
@parraphrase HAHAHAHAH Great comment. Don't worry, they'll face the unknown just like every other being on this planet has in the moments before "death". Notice I put quotations around death. Why? If there is anything that is unreal that humanity has posited in it's history, it is death. What atheists want everyone to believe (besides just blindly following what science tells them it's ok to follow) is that consciousness ends at death. That beings arethe only thing not part of a full cycle
Kostly 3 days ago
@JMatthewCharles
cool statement, congrats
horstnele 6 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JMatthewCharles Dawkins has claimed, “As for religion … nobody wields a sharper bayonet than Sam Harris.” Harris debated Craig on 7th April. In his opening statement in that debate, Harris declared that Dr Craig is “the one Christian apologist who seems to have put the fear of God into many of my fellow atheists.” After that debate, the atheist website Debunking Christianity reported: “Bill (Craig) has once again showed himself as the best debater of this generation.” ROFL
RosesOfTimes 4 days ago
More poetry than logic, as far as I can tell, from Dennett. On the one hand, he acknowledges the "plausibility" of Craigs arguments and premises, yet he claims they lead to "implausible" conclusions. Who says? Dennett?
lourak 2 weeks ago
I look at at from both sides and every book, debate and lectures. read the bible and went to catholic school .1.the start of the universe well the bible says god made everything including me.Science says the universe started 13.5 billion yrs with our sun being 4.47bill year old and they have evidence cold hard facts.2.Us the bible said god made man then woman. Darwin says we are the smart ape once again evidence.Its this take it on faith bit sorry god no evidence science and reason wins
tony671 2 weeks ago in playlist Favorite videos
Kids, take your pick:
1. Scientific theories based on empirical evidence and logic
2. Fairytales written by some ignorant, Bronze Age scribe who knew fuck all about how the world worked.
If you picked choice No.2, take away 99999999999999999 points from your current IQ score. At least I can respect the stupid scribe for thinking of an explanation for things he didn't understand. Now, people would rather believe archaic theories despite lack of supporting evidence, or evidence to the contrary.
foojuice101 2 weeks ago
@foojuice101
Careful with that "scribe who knew fuck all about how the world worked." Listen to Dennet again, or better yet, go study all that empirical evidence and logic yourself. Everything we discover only reveals multitudes of new things that we can't explain.
It's western enlightened arrogance to think that we have the capacity to understand the cosmos, or the discipline to be responsible with such knowledge.
92spade 2 weeks ago
@92spade
I don't claim to know everything about the cosmos, and I don't know. Seriously, who does? If we, despite our scientific advancement, don't know near everything about the cosmos, then how could some ancient Babylonian dude possibly know EVERYTHING about it?
Worse yet, people actually think that he does.
foojuice101 2 weeks ago
@foojuice101 Where have you gotten your ideas concerning the Biblical texts? Modern Christians? Professors? Discovery channel? Just curious.
parraphrase 2 days ago
@parraphrase
Where did I get my idea of religion from? Well...
Bible + confirmation classes + Religion classes + years of being a (former) Roman Catholic + priests
foojuice101 2 days ago
@foojuice101 Did you ever consider the Danielic prophecies which identify the Catholic church as an anti-christian farce foisted upon humanity as a way to make true Biblical faith repugnant to thinking people?
parraphrase 2 days ago
@foojuice101 Also what evidence best suggests to you that modification by descent got us to where we are? I understand if you just don't have the energy or time to answer. I'm just curious what makes you so radically confident in the theory of evolution. Not trying to pick a fight.
parraphrase 2 days ago
@parraphrase The overwhelming congruence of 150 years of evolutionary biology science and the mountains upon mountains of evidence that support it. If you're honestly interested in the truth, watch some evolution lectures here on youtube by ExtantDodo or AronRa. You'll find that nearly everything that religion has told you about evolution is a deliberate fallacy or an outright lie; I went to Christian schools from grades 5-12 and it took years to learn just how badly I had been mislead.
VanDammesCokeDealer 2 days ago
@VanDammesCokeDealer Thanks for the 411. I'll look it through. A comment though if I may. You are appealing to authority which is fine but that was not what I asked for. I was wondering what evidence you thought was most persuasive. My question wasn't worded the best. I appreciate you giving me something to look at. Some might say that your answer was akin to that of many religionists. A Catholic might site the authority of priests and a 1000 years of tradition as you did w/ AronRa etc. peace.
parraphrase 2 days ago
@parraphrase
Things that make me believe in evolution:
1. Evidence
2. Sound evidence
3. Overwhelming sound evidence
4. Overwhelming sound evidence and a backing from the members of the Royal Society
5. Overwhelming sound evidence and a backing from the members of the Royal Society plus the studies done by thousands of biologists over 150 years of evolutionary study
foojuice101 2 days ago
@foojuice101 Thanks bro. but I'm not looking for an appeal to authority but for your thoughts. To say overwhelmingly sound evidence is not overwhelmingly sound. At any given time in earths history a person may have appealed to an authority they'd accepted in order to validate themselves. That doesn't impress me. I'm not saying your wrong. You may be right. I just wish to know what sound evidence proves that you are. Respect and all the best to you.
parraphrase 2 days ago
The bible is NOT the words of God. It's the combinatorial work of tribal knowledge before the dawn of civilization that trickled to to modern day. It's the residue of past ignorance.
MrVuHNguyen 3 weeks ago
@Hector88. I'll listen again. My first thought is that he is swinging the door both ways. As C.S. Lewis wrote, "Reality is often not what one would have expected." QM might not be what one would expect, and God might not be what one would expect. Appreciate the comment.
Redo12able 3 weeks ago
Dennet is all over the place in his thought process. First he says Craig says, "Whatever the truth is, it's mind boggling." And, "Jaw dropping implausible and counterintuitive in one way or the other." He adds that one can't use mind bogglingness as a litmus test. Then a minute later he says, himself, "The truth is going to be very hard to believe." Mind boggling? And, again, "However counterintuitive this is (mind boggling, I assume) we are going to have to accept it." Mind boggling?
Redo12able 3 weeks ago
@Redo12able All those statements are completely consistent. He is saying "Just because something is counter-intuitive doesn't mean it's false."
Hektor88 3 weeks ago
@Redo12able Watch it again.
NICH0LASM 2 weeks ago
He's example of nailing up a diagonal brace to stiffen his house still requires conscious intent. This is the level of Atheist institutional philosophers
onefodderunit 3 weeks ago
@foojuice101. I think this fodderunit guy may have grown up close to either a nuclear reactor or toxic waste dump. I find his comments to be some of the most ridiculous ever posted. Maybe never had the opportunity to go to school. Very evident there is a mental handicap or inability to grasp a concept
allanhill1 3 weeks ago 4
@allanhill1
With a brain that works (or doesn't work, as it seems) like his, I'm surprised he managed to survive this long XD
foojuice101 2 weeks ago
Funny how theists (believers) constantly reject science and evidence which explains the existence of the universe....and the computer on which they type their idiotic claims. Lol. It is futile to even try to debate with these brainwashed cult members
allanhill1 3 weeks ago
@onefodderunit
Nice strawman, "what an atheist". Here's an idea: provide a less fallacious argument and show respect to those you debate.
ManufacturedLegions 3 weeks ago
Intelligent design (I'd) is a new concept proposed by theists because religion is slowly losing ground. It is ludicrous as it negates genesis in the bible. Just another attemp by theists to hold on to bronze age beliefs to maintain power. Lol
allanhill1 3 weeks ago
What a pompous bore. Only intelligence designs/creates. If there is ever evidence that counters that fact, then there can be a debate.
onefodderunit 3 weeks ago
@onefodderunit
"Only intelligence designs/creates."
Natural processes "create" too, but it's always bottom-up, not top-down.
MomoTheBellyDancer 3 weeks ago
@MomoTheBellyDancer
Your an Atheist idiot who believes inanimate matter created life. Abiogenesis is a discredited Atheist fantasy which was never even a scientific theory. Rejection of Intelligence is Atheist Orthodoxy.
onefodderunit 3 weeks ago
@onefodderunit
"inanimate matter created life"
Water can form snow crystals under the right conditions. Or are you claiming some intelligence designs all those?
Life is basically a set of chemical reactions. There's no magic anywhere.
"Abiogenesis is a discredited"
Only in your feverish imagination. We know that the basic parts for life readily form under varying conditions, even in deep space.
MomoTheBellyDancer 3 weeks ago
@MomoTheBellyDancer
Snowflakes are evidence supporting your idiotic faith that life and human intelligence are a creation of inanimate matter. You're a common Atheist idiot.
you wrote: "We know that the basic parts for life . . . "
Life is a force, Atheist idiot. It's not a kit.
onefodderunit 3 weeks ago
@onefodderunit
"Life is a force"
Really? Can you provide a formula for that force? Can you point to any peer-reviewed articles where that force is being explained?
MomoTheBellyDancer 3 weeks ago
@MomoTheBellyDancer
It's Life Force, not 'Life Particulate'. You're a Fundamentalist Materialist.
Only intelligence designs/creates. Rejection of intelligence is Atheist Orthodoxy.
onefodderunit 3 weeks ago
@onefodderunit
"It's Life Force"
So what are the properties of this force? Does a virus have it? What about a self-replicating polymer? How come we can disrupt life by affecting the chemical processes it is comprised of?
MomoTheBellyDancer 3 weeks ago
@MomoTheBellyDancer
You don't know the difference between living cells and viruses. What an Atheist. Keep trying to rationalize your Orthodox Rejection of Intelligence, Snowflake.
onefodderunit 3 weeks ago
@onefodderunit
"You don't know the difference between living cells and viruses"
Do you?
Tell me, how can it be that the "life force" of a human being can be disrupted by administering cyanide?
MomoTheBellyDancer 3 weeks ago
@onefodderunit I don't think you'll get much use out of debating Atheists, look at how they argue. They have the same attitude as the Soviets and would enslave us to their "sciences" if they had the chance, oh wait they already have! The future isn't looking good with the Atheist stranglehold on our educational institutions.
stinnetbennet 3 weeks ago
@stinnetbennet godforbid those scientific breakthroughs that brought us modern medicine and transportation, how dare we want our future generations to continue such advances and gain a better understanding of the natural world
DizzyDisco93 3 weeks ago
@stinnetbennet
Thank you for your reply. You are right, reason and commonsense for Fundamentalist Materialists are like pearls and singing lessons for swine.
The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America (and the West) has been very successful.
onefodderunit 3 weeks ago
@onefodderunit
The only thing that is dumbing down the West is religion. Look at Mediaeval Europe.
Without science, you'd be dead. You have our "Soviet, slavery science" to thank for your existence.
foojuice101 3 weeks ago
@foojuice101
Atheism is anti-science and is asinine faith that inanimate matter is creator of life. I'm not religious and If you believe life is unintended, you should kill yourself know. and give nature a break, pointless parasite.
onefodderunit 3 weeks ago
@onefodderunit
How the fuck is atheism anti-science? If you don't believe in supernatural causes, then you will use science to explain things. And atheism is just as much a faith as not painting is a hobby. Atheism is not a faith at all; it is simply the rejection of a claim that has not met its burden of proof. It's the default position of a person before they are indoctrinated.
A billion sperm and YOU were the one who won? Please. I hope you're just trolling.
foojuice101 3 weeks ago
@foojuice101
Existence popping itself into being would be unnatural. Inanimate matter creating life would be unnatural. Because an intelligence is incomprehensible, or "supernatural" to you, doesn't mean you should reject all scientific evidence that intelligence comes from intelligence, and only intelligence designs/creates. Atheism is not simply anti-science, it's the Orthodox Rejection of Intelligence.
Children read your comments. Can't you act like an adult, Atheist?
onefodderunit 3 weeks ago
@onefodderunit
Why would it be unnatural? You do realize that the first life forms (eukaryotic and prokaryotic cells) formed from non-living things?
I am not rejecting things that have scientific evidence. I am rejecting things that DO NOT have scientific evidence of existing. Give me ONE piece of sound, scientific evidence that there is an intelligent creator out there.
Since children read your idiotic comments, I suggest you stop spreading your ignorance. You're a disgrace to theists.
foojuice101 3 weeks ago
@foojuice101
You're a common lying Atheist. No soul, no integrity. If "non-living things" could turn into life, Abiogenesis wouldn't still be idiotic Atheist fantasy. It's never been a scientific theory, and you act like it happened. Why haven't you killed yourself, pointless parasite?
onefodderunit 3 weeks ago
@onefodderunit
How am I lying? Check any biology book. It will tell you what I'm telling you. Just because you're ignorant, it doesn't mean that scientists are all lying.
You stick to your delusion if it makes you happy, and I'll stop wasting my time with ignoramuses like you.
And asking me to kill myself just because I'm not stupid and don't buy into your delusion? How hypocritical coming from someone who thinks they have more morals than others.
foojuice101 3 weeks ago
@foojuice101
You're lying about your lie. Many anonymous Atheists end up doing this. It's pathological. Abiogenesis has never been a scientific theory. If it had happened, there would be no debate, which there shouldn't be anyway. You Atheists insist on forcing your filthy, dehumanizing anti-scientific idiocy into society, same as mass murderous Bolshevik Atheists.
onefodderunit 3 weeks ago
@onefodderunit
Wow. I can make idiotic declarative statements too, but I don't because it's stupid. I won't waste my time with you anymore.
foojuice101 3 weeks ago
@foojuice101
Your representation of the common Atheist hasn't been a waste of time.
onefodderunit 3 weeks ago
@onefodderunit There is no dog, I mean god. If you need morals from a man-made book, then you ought to check yourself with a doctor. Thinking there are is a bearded transvestite in the sky is a sign of your stupidity.
hislord1 3 weeks ago
@onefodderunit Typical deluded, bollocks, coming from a lying theist. Filthy creation loving cock-suckers who'd lie to sell their families. Vile, poisonous, snakes who believe in another cock-sucker in the sky making stuff.
hislord1 3 weeks ago
@hislord1
You're clearly fixated on smoking someone's trout, Atheist.
onefodderunit 3 weeks ago
@foojuice101
The fact that Atheists claim life was never intended, but don't often volunteer to check out early to relieve nature of their burden and avoid waiting until they shrivel up and achieve dementia, is evidence that Atheists are selfish, fearful and greedy. Do you agree?
onefodderunit 3 weeks ago
@onefodderunit
No, because you're a fucking idiot.
foojuice101 3 weeks ago
@onefodderunit Give me a single scientific paper showing that intelligence comes from intelligence. Just a single shred of scientific evidence for that...
That's the main problem with anti-science pricks. You just pick things that seem obvious and pose them as facts. But things that seem obvious aren't always true.
Like said in the video, you have no idea how counter intuitive things can be.
ivanlagrossemoule 3 weeks ago
@ivanlagrossemoule
You need scientific evidence that intelligence comes from intelligence? You must be a descendant of a long line of idiots. What an Atheist.
onefodderunit 3 weeks ago
@onefodderunit You're so ignorant. Everything in science needs scientific evidence otherweise it can't be considered as true.
You yourself claimed to have scientific evidence that intelligence comes from intelligence.
ivanlagrossemoule 3 weeks ago
@MomoTheBellyDancer When he can't answer he resorts to ad hominem attacks,lol. Quite entertaining to watch him squirm and then stop replying altogether when asked a real question.
hislord1 3 weeks ago
@hislord1
You're of the asinine Atheist faith that inanimate matter is your creator, correct?
onefodderunit 3 weeks ago
@onefodderunit You're of the asinine theist faith that believes in transvestites who magically created you, correct? You've clearly been smoking your creators "trout", LOL! Douchebag!
hislord1 3 weeks ago
@hislord1
Religion is not my bag. Your Atheist Orthodox Rejection of Intelligence for the asinine faith that inanimate matter is your creator is the appropriate choice in your case.
onefodderunit 3 weeks ago
@onefodderunit Yes it is, douchebag. It's the bag you unveil off of your creator's transvestite cock before you suck him off LOL! I rather be created by inanimate matter than by your transvestite who loves fucking little boys like you. LOL! Douchey! LOL!
hislord1 3 weeks ago
@hislord1
You're an ideal representative of the Atheist faith. Thank you for your service, and God bless you.
onefodderunit 3 weeks ago
@onefodderunit LOL! Talking about invisible transvestites again, are we? Yes, I'm glad we can show you that we are intellectually superior to you, and that those who believe in god are often the ones that can't come to terms with their intellectual shortcomings. LOL! Douchebag, keep slamming that bible! Yeeehaww...LOOL!
hislord1 3 weeks ago
@hislord1 There you go He just showed his true intelligence level by claiminig atheism as a faith. Incredible how they cannot grasp the idea that it is someone who does not believe the fairy tale stories. Lack of faith as it were. Comes from reading the bible.
allanhill1 3 weeks ago
@hislord1 Its sad but these people need religion as a crutch. Seems they cannot face this present life alone so they buy into the tale of following a deity with the promise of eternal bliis or horrible eternal torture. LOL Funny but sad
allanhill1 3 weeks ago
@onefodderunit You must be a transvestite yourself! LOL! douchebag!
hislord1 3 weeks ago
@onefodderunit "Only intelligence designs/creates. If there is ever evidence that counters that fact, then there can be a debate."
Ever hear about 'natural selection'? It designs. It creates. It is a verifiable, predictive, process which produces measureable and empircal evidence (ex: molecular evidence).
AtheistPowerlifter 3 weeks ago
Mr. Craig loves to twist logic, his delusional assertions and colossal double-think… are enough to make an atheist exclaim "Jesus Christ!"
adlerbr12 3 weeks ago
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
SylG73 3 weeks ago
Dennett is absolutely spot on here.
Whoknowsuknow 4 weeks ago
"There is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind" by Anthony Flew
This book makes Richard Dawkins' book or Christopher Hirchens book look like comic books.
If Anthony Flew can see these things, why not Dawkins or why didn't Hitchens? The answer is Flew used his mind sufficiently in regards to arguments while Dawkins and Hitchens have not done so. They failed to put pieces together.
PureAirSolutions 4 weeks ago
Atheists and evolutionists as a whole are just not capable or intelligent enough to be able to think properly. Judging the comments all over YouTube its appauling to see the mass idiocies that exist in this delusion that they claim exists amongst Christians! What THEY affirm is FAR MORE stupid that anything on earth! The mathematical probabilites are absurd against all they believe yet they hold onto it for dear life and call others stupid in the interim? Arrogant idiots believe this lie.
PureAirSolutions 4 weeks ago
@PureAirSolutions I will try just once with you as I do with most believers. If you get it great if you do not then enjoy your delusional submission to a fake god... Atheists and nonbelievers do not affirm anything. Christians do !!!!!. As do muslims and most other believers. We are neutral in belief and ask that you back up your unbelieveable claims or go away and play by yourselves. It is jibberish to us. Thank you
allanhill1 4 weeks ago 2
I bet Dr Craig would destroy this fool in a debate too!
BlongBlarble 4 weeks ago
@BlongBlarble Implying he is any good at anything other than bullshitting his way through with appeals to emotion.
Alphacaliber 4 weeks ago
@BlongBlarble
The only thing Craig can destroy in a debate is his own credibility.
rkyeun 4 weeks ago
@BlongBlarble Only in the minds of the sheep where black = white, good = bloodthirsty, merciful = cruel, love = slavery. For the rest of us who see the contradictions and don't fall for the sophistry trying to mask them Craig is a dishonest person who will say any nonsense to defend the faith. He's no scholar in search for the truth wherever it may lead.
rm991 4 weeks ago
@rm991 The rest of you? What...4% of the world population? xD xD xD Run along teeniebopper. Run along. :-) And God bless you!
BlongBlarble 4 weeks ago
@BlongBlarble More like 15%. Unfortunately rationality has not made it into most people's way of thinking. Look at the popularity of horoscopes and psychics. Also most religious people do not know all the nonsense in their religions. Some who find out are honest enough to stop believing. Most unfortunately take the lazy way out. They don't ask questions and just follow. To keep them in the fold Craig dresses up the contradictions with BS to confuse them.
rm991 4 weeks ago
@BlongBlarble In the world, religious people aren't that dominating as in US. In my country, an overwhelmingly majority are atheists.
TheLittleDonkey 4 weeks ago
@BlongBlarble The opinion or belief of a majority does not make it real...only popular. Nazi Germany is a good example of this. You are free to believe in any fairytale you find comforting. Keep it away from people who think for themselves and do not require a fake book or false god to govern their lives. Morality dioes not require a bible or god. Religion is evil and controlling. Leave me out of it please.
allanhill1 4 weeks ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@BlongBlarble "I bet Dr Craig would destroy this fool in a debate too! "
I'm sure he would...seeing that Craig is really good at 'debates' that are scored on points like it's fucking high school. In the real world, where ideas and concepts are exchanged his idiotic presuppositions would be exposed...and he wouldn't be able to hide behind the gish gallop and circular reasoning.
You admire Craig, who justifies genocide because it's what his god did in his holy book. Awesome.
AtheistPowerlifter 3 weeks ago
If this is impromptu, then... wow, what a well-spoken guy. Then again, WLC's arguments change so little that you don't actually have to do anything impromptu to refute him.
SolMaster 4 weeks ago
Check out Professor William Craig Lane and his Scholarly, Intellectual arguments for God's existence. Also check out Reasonable Faith Dot Org for more perspectives on Faith:)
RosesOfTime 1 month ago
All of the mainstream religions use scripture as the foundation. The bible (old and new testament) the quran etc etc. Intelligent design was simply offered on observation of the copmplexity of the universe and living organisms. The bible claims god used a handful of sand or dust and created adam the first human being. Evolution which is no longer considered theory argues humans evolved from a much more simple beginning. ID conflicts with the bible !!!
allanhill1 1 month ago
Here's some simple logic-
Religious people believe that God made the universe, but nothing or no-one made God. Why then is it so difficult to believe that nothing or no-one made the universe?
But let's say God DOES exist. Then God Himself is an Atheist.
Why?
Because if nothing or no-one created God, then there is no deity for God to believe in. Therefore it is only logical to assume that God is an Atheist.
Just my own personal thoughts & opinions, folks.
billyrossjapan 1 month ago
I find anti-Christian folk to be vile and filled with hate. Look at the comments from the atheists and see for yourself.
orlandofriend 1 month ago
@orlandofriend We are not hateful of the people just their idiotic ideas and their obsession with having us follow the doctrines. We neither want it or need it. It is jibberish to us. Pure nonsense. Leave us alone and continue in your fantasy and keep it personal and we will leave you alone.
allanhill1 1 month ago
Good to hear Dennett so politely (as usual) point out Craig's silliness. Craig has always seemed to me as a highschool evangelist wannabe frozen in time, but in a nicer suit. On and on with too many loose ends to bother tying, sloppy in the most well-scrubbed aort of way. Ad hominem? Maybe. But he honestly creeps me out in a subtly scary way. (Maybe fear and revulsion are always ad hominrm to some degree... sorry.)
KnowKnot 1 month ago
Is there actually a video of the entire presentation?
Vorlos 1 month ago
With a beard like that you almost got to believe him straight on, Socrates would be proud
TheTvrulesthenation 1 month ago
In almost all Billy Lame (not a doctor) Craigs debates he uses the phrase (if something begins to exist it has a cause.) By using the word 'If" it is then implied that possibly it did not begin to exist. Therfore by his own implication if the universe did not begin to exist his whole argument is negated. Science does not claim to have the answer but rather offers possible explanations for both conditions and is ever prepared to accept other scientific theories that make sense.
allanhill1 1 month ago
@allanhill1 confused a bit. you say that he is not a doctor? Not sure what you mean. please explain. Secondly, are you suggesting that the universe has always existed? If so, it seems you are going against modern cosmology which points to a beginning. Also, why do you attack his person with name calling "Billy Lame"? If your arguments are solid why not let them make the case?
atozatoz01 1 month ago
@atozatoz0 A doctorate in any subject means one has attained a certain level of education. Recognition of that certificate is required for credibility. Doctorates received from faith based teaching establishments are questionable. I did not claim the universe has always existed. the jury is still out on that conclusion in the scientific world and most probably always be unknown. The theists are the ones who claim that it had a beginning for sure.
allanhill1 1 month ago
@allanhill1 The universe, that is, the sum of everything that exists, is necessarily eternal in the sense of existing at every possible instance of time. That follows from the fact that something can't come from nothing. And, yes, that's true even though certain physicists talk about universes from nothing. Quantum fluctuations are not causally inert and therefore are not nothing.
Gnomefro 1 month ago
@Gnomefro Tell this to theists who in a nutshell claim god waved his hand and in six days created all their is. And for some reason was not able to create the first human from nothing. the animals yes but Adam he required a handfull of dust or sand and Eve required a rib of Adam. I will always admit that science is forever looking for the answers but will never bow to claims from theist that the bible or quran have the answers It is fairytales told to children
allanhill1 1 month ago
@allanhill1 On the flip side, you'll note that to even talk about a beginning of "the sum of that which exists" is a logical contradiction because non-existent things can't cause anything. P1 in Kalam would also fail because of that. This means that naturalists and theists are simply talking about different things when they use the word universe. Although to be fair the terminology is confused by the multiverse people. Still, some eternal substrate of existence is a necessity.
Gnomefro 1 month ago
@atozatoz01 Sorry you are mistaken. I did not suggest the universe is eternal. I said what every scientist would say is we are not sure. Theists claim they have the answer for sure. Science has several theories and some are better than others. I attack him because I feel he is not honest. My opinion of course but so be it. Scientists always welcome criticism and new thoughts whereas believers actually attempt to stifle anyone who questions the christianity or islam.
allanhill1 1 month ago
" A changeless god is a deist god at best"
Game. Set. Match.
alexicoff 1 month ago
@alexicoff Not to mention that a changeless mind is, by definition, non-functioning.
cablepanos 1 month ago
@alexicoff Game. Set. Match.? I must have missed something. Did you just win with one shot. Please explain how "A changeless god is a deist god at best" and how evidence for deism is now evidence for a-theism?
atozatoz01 1 month ago
@atozatoz01
Theism "belief in the existence of a god or gods, specifically of a creator who intervenes in the universe" OED.
A changeless god cannot intervene in the universe, because intervention would require him to change, IE be in a state prior to the action and a different state after the action. Since our Universe is changing, in order for a god to intervene, he cannot be changeless.
alexicoff 1 month ago
Free thinkers (nonbelievers) and scientist are comfortable admitting that we do not know the origin of the universe. Theist claim they do without reason or evidence. Its that simple.
allanhill1 1 month ago
@jackfrombaltimore You do Understand that Aristotelean logic is the OG right?
XerxesTheory 1 month ago
See? Even Santa Claus says God doesn't exist!
hitjohnyup 1 month ago 21
@hitjohnyup LOL nice.
yashaouchan 1 month ago
A counter-intuitive mixture between Santa Clause and Charles Darwin.
TheLittleAssyrian 1 month ago
Craig is a hero!
ShaneyCunn84 1 month ago
@ 9:30
My response to his claim is "says who?".
objectivechristian 1 month ago
Santa is an atheist; Pic. 3:07
Vegasgodless 1 month ago
This guy looks like Noah. I like him.
saguhh00 1 month ago
"I don't know, it predicts, i can't, we have no idea, something like" zzzzzz.
fillini13 1 month ago
Hard to believe that so many theists, & even some atheists, take WLC's simple-minded sophomoric pasted-together houses of cards built out of worthless intuitions and creaky Aristotelean logic so seriously. I like the responses of Dennett & Sisyphus Redeemed much better than the responses of those who try to nit-pick the details in WLC's slick little sophistries. Hundreds of years of science have shown that our intuitions and 2-valued logic are worthless when it comes to understanding reality.
jackfrombaltimore 1 month ago 10
@jackfrombaltimore Sisyphus has a great channel btw, user SisyphusReedemed, check him out!
ja524309 1 month ago
@jackfrombaltimore
That's a self-refuting argument: you are arguing that we cannot trust our reasoning faculties. However, how did you arrive at your conclusion? With human reasoning.
Also, his arguments are based not off of intuition, but contemporary physics, philosophy, and historical study. If you believe that these are wrong, then your argument is still wacko: you say that science has showed that our reasoning is wrong, but then say science is wrong.
Either way, this argument=faulty,
THEEVANTHETOON 1 month ago
@THEEVANTHETOON Philosophy and history cannot show how what, if anything, "preceded" the big bang, or even if the question makes sense. Physics has not yet been able to achieve this, although it may some day. Anyone who claims to know or even to be able to attach a strong probability to some "pre-big-bang" state of affairs is a lunatic, liar, idiot, or, by large orders of magnitude, the greatest genius the world has ever known. My guess is that WLC is a lying hack who's found a good racket
jackfrombaltimore 3 weeks ago
@jackfrombaltimore Says the butt-hurt atheists making excuses. Hitchens himself admitted defeat to Craig.
AegeanKing 1 month ago
@AegeanKing i don't deny your claim, but if you can't substantiate it, there's no reason for anyone to believe it.
can you refer me to the video, audio, personal blog, etc. in which hitchens admits defeat??
shockoflogic 1 month ago
@AegeanKing "Says the butt-hurt atheists making excuses. Hitchens himself admitted defeat to Craig."
Really? I wasn't aware Hitchens converted to Christianity before he died. Or perhaps by "admit defeat" you mean something entirely different than Hitchens acknowledging a shred of truth in Craig's arguments?
Gnomefro 1 month ago
@Gnomefro By defeat, I mean Hitchens admitted that Craig beat him in the debate. Which means that Craig not only destroyed the arguments of Hitchens, but Hitchens failed to address even a single argument of Craigs. Thats what I mean. CommonsenseatheismDOTcom said that Hitchens "Got spanked like a child".
AegeanKing 1 month ago
2000 plus years ago when we had little knowledge about our world it was natural to feel it was the work of a god. Human nature. As we observed and began to discover the true causes of natural phenomena the original divine explanations became obsolete. Unfortunately the religious community has closed their minds to reality. Very sad indeed.
allanhill1 1 month ago
Comment removed
cablepanos 1 month ago 53
@cablepanos come on thats bullshit. check this out. If the universe has always existed, it is eternal. Now think of God but a God that looks identical to our universe. it can make anything apear make art and do anything immaginable and has lasted forever. now strip away every attribute of God his conciousness and power, every thing but the quality of having lasted forever. A universe that doesnt need a cause has an attribute only attibutable to God. so either God created the it (1)
woods8870 1 month ago
@cablepanos so either God created it or the universe is God but with no power. so that would make it not a God. logically.. So it makes since that since we know that the universe had a beginning that it needs a cause and that the only thing that COULD cause it was God, but if it didn't have a beginning it would be the same but the universe would have consciousness and the only created part would be us and our earth which in this hypothetical scenario would be the universe
woods8870 1 month ago
@woods8870 Then what caused god? Round and round and round and round and........
cablepanos 1 month ago
@cablepanos listen brother im 17 in colledge i just learned what the Kalam argument was but i think i thought of it first. i was wrighting a paper and i said what i said earlier.
but under the deffinition of God the most powerfull intelegent magnificent being, you would probably need a being that would be more powerfull
And you caint because God is the MOST. But to me its either the univers has no cause making it a worthless unconsouse God, the U realy does have power or G created U
woods8870 1 month ago
@woods8870 "A universe that doesnt need a cause has an attribute only att[r]ibutable to God" is just a bald assertion, and a meaningless one at that. It's self-contradictory. It boils down to "The Universe is un-caused and that cause is god." Alternately you claim that the Universe is God. The Universe is defined as "everything which exists", so that means God is everything, and that nature is supernatural, which is completely pointless and absurd.
cablepanos 1 month ago
@cablepanos what i was saying is that there are three options the third in mind is the absurd one
1 An uncaused God Caused the universe
2 all of the universe out side of earth is God and our planet is the (universe) and God is all around the planet (space but with inteligents and power)
3 the univers is natural and somehow doesnt need a cause which is absurd becaus that would make it a God (because of the attribute of not needing a beginning) but it would have no power or intelegence
woods8870 1 month ago