Sammy Harris and the New Atheists are Incorrect

[Goddoesexist]

Sam the scam Harris is a self-stultifying nut.

He hates truth as much as he hates himself.

--

He hates others as he himself wants to be hated.

[spiderzer0]

All you are describing is the human capability to name things. This requires no god, only sentience. As a matter of fact, the origin of consciousness is a far more interesting topic than whether or not there is a god. We are less certain about the answer. There are almost certainly no gods. There is certainly no Christian god. The origin of our "self," on the other hand, therein lies the mystery.

[Goddoesexist]

Incorrect.

The proof s necessary, sufficient, certain and articulated in most of my numerous vids and many of my hundreds of comments.

[Goddoesexist]

False.

See my vids on CT exclusivity; or do not comment further.

[spiderzer0]

Actually nearly every god of every religion fulfills the requirements you describe in this video. To say only the Christian god is endowed with the super natural abilities you seem to think are necessary to make a circle round is false.

However, no god is necessary to make a circle round, since a circle isn't actually a thing. It is a name we ascribe to things that are round. And if A were not A, if it were say, B, then it wouldn't be A. It would be B. Or A and B would be two equatable things.

[Goddoesexist]

Spider

Incorrect.

All false religions have primary sources which deny that their god has the ontic stature to account for universals and immutables.

i.e. Allah is revealed as one who can lie; additionally nothing of his nature can be known; and he has no true attributes.

[Goddoesexist]

hitchy

No. At least my kids and dog still like me.

Maybe lend me some of your meds - not the really strong pills you take every other hour.

[Goddoesexist]

hitchy

No. At least my kids and dog still like me.

Maybe lend me some of your meds - not the really strong pills you take every other hour.

[Goddoesexist]

Justine:

False.

And you fall into a logical fallacy: You cannot over turn a universal ground= God by using a particular action or particular actions.

[JustineK45]

God is genocidal and morally wrong. End of argument.

[Goddoesexist]

Do you affirm and if so how o your ground and account for:

1. Fixed geometry?

2. Unchanging mathematical truths?

3. Induction?

4. Deduction?

5. Changeless moral imperatives?

6. Love?

[supermurder67]

You did not need god for any of these.

[Goddoesexist]

SM67

Incorrect.

[Goddoesexist]

Knowledge = x1, x2,...xN in which differing and distinct categories and properties inhere and are unified by another thing that must have those essential categories and properties and more. Theism lays the ground for x1-xN and brings unity to the diversity of the categories/properties therein. Materialism cannot account for x1-xN and cannot account for knowledge.

[Goddoesexist]

If one's ethic is based on aiming for the strongest to survive over the weak: might makes right, if that is true, then men are just chance bags of amino acids, water & minerals. If there is no God you cannot disclaim Nazism, Fascism or Pol Pot. They were killing the weak -the least strong protein sacks & doing mankind a favor, if survival of the fittest rules as it does in Darwinism. In Christianity, truth makes right, the Law of God.

[boselegion]

A new God just appeared to me. He's going to eat yours in 5000 years; as his holy scripture dictates. Survival of the fittest.

[theshredator]

"Goldie Locks and the Three Bears" is the only true objective moral standard for the universe

[Goddoesexist]

What is taken for granted by atheists:

How are the particulars in our world unified by the universals?

Where do forms & concepts come from?

How do I epistemologically justify fixed Personal Identification?

Why should I not lie about rational truth or steal truth & replace it with falsehoods?

Where does a man obtain epistemic rights?

Theism alone provides the solution.

[analubalitious]

I don't see how questions are 'taken for granted' but I think I can tackle some of those, assuming semantic agreement of terms.

1) Doesn't make sense, please rephrase

2) If by forms you mean matter, we just don't exactly know everything about universal origins. Concepts (or cognition in general) is a special condition and process of matter (brain).

3) Not everyone's identity IS fixed, and what do you mean by 'justify'? It doesn't quite make sense.

[analubalitious]

4) When you say 'should', it seems to imply a moral basis. Humans generally wish to understand the world. Lying and intellectual dishonesty undermine that desire/goal.

5) Epistemic rights? Like what?

Just theism? Would that be ANY theism? Or only a vague nebulous concept of a deity sufficiently answers your questions? How would we know?

For the record, quoting the Bible to atheists is like quoting the Qu'ran to Jews,..

[prelevent]

Poe?

[braino2000]

Sam Harris is such a joke.

"Science MUST destroy ALL religion"- Sam Harris.

[Goddoesexist]

Your comment speaks for itself: u offer such a tremendous thoughtful & sagacious argument that bespeaks of your membership in monkeydom.

Like most atheistic cultists you lack a bright and keen of mind as you only offer combative atheistic alogical assertions. YouTube Atheists lack reasoning abilities & ruminating proclivities, just like Bonzo.

-you waste your life opposing God & boasting in an anti-logical worldview that is self-nullifying.

Repent - escape the wrath due your nefarious soul.

[Goddoesexist]

JW

Nope. The material is my own, although obviously standing on the shoulders of intellectual giants - it must be pretty good if you impute it to plagiarism -

No dice on the deism. Deistic god fails to account for love, personhood, communication, and moral law.

Take one only, moral law: without moral intelligibility is impossible. Only God provides the necessary pre-essentials for moral law. Thus God exists and you know it, but you hate God as much as you hate yourself.

[JW6639]

God

well, don't take it as a compliment--i suggested that because you're clearly reading and there's clearly a book as the image AND because it was incredibly boring and meant to be read, not spoken.

i see you dropped the roman civilization argument. point conceded i assume.

the christian god accounts for love? the old testament was filled with love!!

your last sentence is incredibly judgmental, self-righteous, and wrong. if you knew me, you would laugh at yourself for saying that!

[Goddoesexist]

JW

Yep, non-theists cling to their dopey self-stultifying world view as they willingly deceive themselves with kooky atheistic nonsense.

But let not your heart be troubled, atheism is stuck utilizing the universal and immutable laws of logic which only the universal and immutable God can account.

But yes, sure judgment hangs over their heads, so lets pray that they repent of their self-loathing loopy atheistic notions and find expiation and imputation.

[JW6639]

yeah, most atheists i know are not "self-loathing" at all. let's stop being accusatory and judgemental.

[gusb232]

Yes But your Moral Laws Arent written in Stone.

LOL, Ok

Atleast No Rational Person Believes the Bibles laws are Perfect an Infallible.

If you Do; Why dont you Stone to death those that Work on the Sabbath or for breaking any other silly law?

There Maybe A God will Some of those Attributes, But It Clearly not the God of the Bible. The Bible is Immoral.

[Goddoesexist]

gussie232

Nope. The moral law is universal and immutable and only and immutable and universal God can account for them.

And you as a loopy atheist have no fixed moral law to rate God's law.

If you as an atheist have a invariant moral law, name it and ground it___________

I won't hold you breath.

[JW6639]

good work reading. what's it called when people use other people's ideas without permission? plagiarism?

anyway, remember roman civilization? it adopted christianity as its national religion, and fell shortly thereafter. so god doesn't bless nations.

the deist god is much more rational and reasonable than the god of the three abrahamic religions unfortunately. that's why i choose to believe in it. :)

[al11199]

The so-called Brights aren't really so bright. It appears that they are just stuck in philosophical prejudice and wishful thinking.

[Goddoesexist]

It looks like he touched on nerve on the non-theist.

Here is a partial example of the certain argument for God's existence.

Take D (Laws of Logic: Changeless, transcendent, universal,necessary, non-tangible), it implies E (God: Changeless, transcendent, universal, necessary & sufficient, non-tangible).

The Denial of D implies E, as well.

The affirmation of E implies D

and the denial of D as well.

God must exist.

[memblor]

ummm....Fail.

[anthonymilessee]

definitions are not arguments - since anti-theism cannot posit the a priori necessities for the laws of logic and moral absolutes (both are required to discuss any subject or to assert anything) - included among these rational preconditions are universality, non-physical changelessness, and transcendence. if one rests his world view on a physicalist base, he's epistemologically baseless.

[AdvancedLoblolly]

A. there are no laws of logic, that is what epistemology is, to study logic and it's opacity on reality.

b. stringing large,scollarly sounding words together really doesn't mean that you are expressing something intelligent or true.

C. theism is as retarded as you are and as wrong as well. tell me what is true about it and why it is true and i will concede if it has any coherant,ontological meaning. don't give me rubbish either.

[Goddoesexist]

This atheist misses the point. The Laws of Logic are necessary and they are immutable and universal and a physical-only view has not the epistemic credentials to account for the laws of logic. God is immutable and has universal reach and knowledge, He alone supplies the pre-essentials for the Laws of Logic.

God exits.

[AdvancedLoblolly]

thankyou for that, it was the dumbest and most miscomunicated comment/video i've ever seen/read.

you are a complete and utter idiot.

god is true because god is true is not logic it is idiotic.

[anthonymilessee]

AdvancedFolley

hey knucklehead, i liked it - i guess he speaks in too lofty tones and epistemological ways for dimwitted anti-theists like u -

u r as irrational as u are hate-filled - for u loath yourself almost as much as u hate God and truth.

the good news is anti-theism presupposes theism and u can repent and find forgiveness from all your nefarious sins and wickedness

[AdvancedLoblolly]

I would love to debate you face to face, you seem like the type who likes to get away with being a complete piece of shit online and doesn't say a fuckin word to people irl.

prove god to me little man, please so i can laugh.

btw did you hear the news about einstein? turns out everytime one of you idiotic fanatics claimed he was religious it was a lie, isn't there something in your little life-manual about lying? oh, actually it's too concerned with graven images and false idols.

[Redfingers]

The fact that mankind lives in a spatially limited environment should coordinate you to the fact that you can't know that all physical laws are universally applicable and that you cannot actually have knowledge of God's existence. Presuming this, you can practically assume any being or non-being or nothing at all as the logical basis for universality which in fact was a presupposition to begin with.

Where the hell do you think you're going to get in this argument?

[Redfingers]

Scientific materialism does not posit a god and yet constructs a rational basis for the universe...

And by your logic so does every other theistic religion, philosophy, or worldview, and deism, as I would agree if I accept any proof of God's existence or his necessity for constructing a rational universe. What exactly grants Christianity an ounce of precedence over ANY of those worldviews/philosophies, or religions?

[Goddoesexist]

There is no revelation of any god that has aseity, they all lack the ontological and epistemic credentials to account for the Laws of Reason. Furthermore universality and immutability necessitate the attributes that Yahweh alone possesses.

[MrDorkLard]

You might want to capitalize your name... people might think you're some kind of sexist.

[truestefq]

Where is your evidence? All you offer are assertions, unproven claims!

Only (nasal) "There must be ...", "It is necessary that...".

A thinking person would know that these are not arguments for anything.

[anthonymilessee]

falsefq

i guess u r 1 more anti-theist who hates himself as much as he hates logic and the truth - clear and certain arguments aren't good enough for an atheist loon like u - but at least your kooky anti-theism presupposes God

[truestefq]

"falsefq" - lol, how original!

The rest of your sentence are again assertions without evidence. I now really wonder how the religious mindset operates: how do you tell one claim from the other (not only "god-yes/no" but the many different theologies f.e., different opinions about the world in general)? Certainly neither by logic nor evidence. I guess it's all about believing in authority and falling for smug name-calling.

But that's not very challenging, intellectually I mean.

[Goddoesexist]

• T (Laws of Thought) have the property U (Universality)

• For All rational thought requires T, if T has the property U. And L (Logos of God) has the property U

Conclusion:

• If L has the property U, it can account for T.

• T is necessary for I (Intelligibility).

• I, hence L.

If not L, place your suggestion here:

[Goddoesexist]

The truth of God is implied and necessary by every act of asserting or denying anything at all, thus by every act of asserting or denying God.

& the truth of God is exemplified by every possible act of asserting even your ridiculous propositions. Hence every non-theistic act of denying God implies and necessitates God who is exemplified by the exercise of the Laws of Thought in its application within all language, rhetoric, locution & expression.

Only theism isn't alogical, atheism is alogical.

[AdvancedLoblolly]

you have gone insane, this is what happens when you read the bible in your moms underwear too many times.

go drench yourself with gas and sit in a chair n light matches plz. go out like all of your crazy little counterparts.

[Goddoesexist]

The laws of Logic =q are necessary but

not sufficient for

true knowledge of our world =r.

r require fixed ethics, objective truth, fixed personality, other minds, relations between propositions & obj. world, certainty.

r presupposes God=g through G's aseity, omniscience, etc. thus

g supplies the necessary preconditions for r.

God's existence is absolutely certain.

[Goddoesexist]

retep

I know the crazy notions of atheists are mind boggling - yet atheism is anti-rational and atheism presupposes theism.

[Goddoesexist]

Just the way I speak - can't change that.

But at least theism is certain as it alone has epistemic environment to account for the laws of reason.

[CanterburyCat]

Oh, yes. One more thing. Shut up!

[CanterburyCat]

"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."

-Thomas Jefferson (Notes on Virginia, 1782)

[Goddoesexist]

CaCat

Yes, Atheists are ignorant and irrational as they live in an alogical worldview.

[Love2BeHated666]

truly pathetic

[Goddoesexist]

Love2

Yes, atheism is immensely pathetic.

good point.

[Goddoesexist]

The truth of God is implied and necessary by every act of asserting or denying anything at all, thus by every act of asserting or denying God.

And the truth of God is exemplified by every possible act of asserting even your ridiculous propositions. Hence every non-theistic act of denying God implies and necessitates God who is exemplified by the exercise of the Laws of Thought in its application within all language, rhetoric, locution and expression.

[Goddoesexist]

The laws of Logic = q are necessary but

not sufficient for

true knowledge of our world = r.

r require fixed ethics, objective truth, fixed personality, other minds, relations between propositions & obj. world, certainty.

r presupposes God=g through g's aseity, omniscience, etc. thus

g supplies the necessary preconditions for r.

God's existence is absolutely certain.