J P Moreland Skepticism & Apologetics part 1 of 8

[lastdaysguitar]

I think it's notable that Atheists keep coming back to listen to apologetics... you'd think if they were really SURE of their beliefs that they would have better things to do.

BUT: The truth is WAY DEEP DOWN they want to believe in God, and to know Him, because that's what they were created for - though they vehemently deny it.

[AbelianGroup]

If all knowledge is scientific knowledge and the only claims that can be known to be true are those that are empirically verifiable by means of the methods of science, then how do we test the claim "All knowledge is scientific knowledge?" And what about mathematics? (Those who're familiar with algebra won't be surprised I brought this up given my account name.) Mathematics is not scientific in the sense that it is not proven by experiment. Yet no one doubts even the most obtuse theorems.

[ClumsyRoot]

A general observation.

[ClumsyRoot]

A generic apologist.

[amyrollin]

Make life easier; do not deny anything.

Keep and open mind.

There is no truth and nothing is 100%

[GnomesAmok]

Thats the spirit: take the easy way out. *eye roll*

[amyrollin]

Well why not, we are never going to know the truth anyway... So why deny anything. Nothing is of more truth than the other.

[GnomesAmok]

Thats called relativism and its self-refuting. But its cute that you try :]

[amyrollin]

Look, mate. I'm well aware that it's relativist and what it means. I did do A level Philosophy and Ethics or else I wouldn't have really bothered watching this. But thanks anyway.

[kylemorne100]

Is it absolutely true there is no truth?

[amyrollin]

lol suppose nott no. but pretty most unlikely

[kylemorne100]

I'm sorry. I'm having a hard time deciphering your answer. Not no means yes (double negative make a positive) and "pretty most unlikely" *sound to me at least* probably not. This is a contradiction!

[amyrollin]

Yeah no shit Sherlock, to be honest I can't be bothered to argue about petty things.

I was busy when I typed my answer but just for your gratification I meant to say 'No, it is not absolutely true that there is no truth, but it's most likely that we will never find out the truth'. Does it really matter? I only made a comment I don't take this shit seriously. Quite happy?

[kylemorne100]

The fault is on me (the sherlock homes) I should have taken your comment as a sacarms or a mere avoidance of the question, but I take your comment pretty seriously because I really take truth seriously. Once I came to a state where I doubt so much, you would think I was a madman, if it wasn't for the fact that I believe there is a truth outside of myself and independent of me, objectively...I returned to my sanity angain.

I meant to cause no harm so sorry if I did.

Kyle.

[amyrollin]

No no, by all means. We all have different opinions and views and you didn't offend me, it just sounded as though you were being slightly arrogant t'was all. Be careful with that. But no, I'm not bothered It's all good.

[kylemorne100]

Good.

[drjones444]

No, if tath were true it would be a self-refuting statement.

[conman2317]

faith, is belief without evidence, doesn't that go completely against skepticism? religion was invented as a magic trick to control people,  study history before arguing against that.

[grandconjunct]

Faith is a step in the direction that the evidence leads in. Only Atheism has blind faith, Blind faith that there minds are reliable without evidence, Blind faith that design requires no designer without evidence, Universe requires no Universe creator without evidence, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence that is why atheism requires more evidence than theism but the fact Materialist Missionaries have provided none shows how gullible and easy led they are.

[Dhorpatan]

@grandconjunct

Everything about Christianity and God belief is built on illogic and fairy tales. And the God concept has no viable evidence at all.

[sunergos7]

faith means reliance or trust, it can prior to evidence or faith seaking evidence, or vica versa evidence giving rise to faith, it is not therefore necessarily as you say belief without evidence. There are deductive reasons for God's existence based on which you can logically take the step of trust. An example of the first type is the scientism of atheist Quentin Smith saying the universe came into existence from nothing by nothing for nothing. that is as you put it belief without evidence

[grandconjunct]

Dhorpaten the god concept has no viable evidence at all.

>> Ah the "No evidence for God" mantra that youtube atheists repeat like its a magic incantation that makes God go away, I thought I was going to go an entire day without some youtube kid parroting that, not today, constantly repeating that cliche is not going to keep anyone from noticing atheism has no evidence at all for it. Your un-designed brain surely lacks god but that does not mean the Universe lacks God.

[TheIrrationalAtheist]

"Your un-designed brain surely lacks god but that does not mean the Universe lacks God. "

Maybe the best quote I've heard about Dhorpatan in a while. haha

[PraetorDrew]

Perhaps faith in the existence of other minds is belief without evidence. Should we fall into solipsism, then?

[grandconjunct]

Of coarse no Metaphysics is proven by evidence, its a category error to try and get your Metaphysics from empirical evidence a typical atheist blunder.

When you have no God to make your Brain a reliable truth detector solipsism and even worse follow quite naturally ,Godless skepticism never ends till it eats the mind and truth itself.

Atheism is irrational.

[BillyMumfrey]

Hardly....solipsism is flawed and cheap. Skepticism is valid for things that can not be verified with reasonable certainty. God being one of those things.

[Bartlolomew]

Have you any idea when this lecture might have taken place?

[grandconjunct]

I don't know ? my guess is early 90's

[biologos101]

It says he is a philosopher, but he is a theologian. there is a difference. A philosopher starts with the bare minimum, a theologian presupposes the existence of God.

[elroy2112]

Moreland is a philosopher not a theologian, Philosophers start with Logic and avoid illogical positions like matter is all that exists, at the end of this video Moreland shows that Atheism/naturalism undermines Rationality unless you start with a well designed mind aimed at truth as the goal and not just survival. So assuming no God assumes no reliable mind this is realized by Logic not holy books, theologians are not even necessary

to realize this obvious truth you have made a mistake.

[biologos101]

Don't get me wrong, I believe in God, but the existence of God is one debated in philosophy. You can't say someone is illogical just because of a belief in God or lack there of. You have made a mistake.

[Atheistjeremy]

"Atheism/naturalism undermines Rationality" No one can defend that utterly stupid position.

"unless you start with a well designed mind" Sigh...who designed the mind of your god? The "designer" argument answers absolutely nothing.

[elroy2112]

atheistjeremy >>who designed the mind of your god? The "designer" argument answers absolutely nothing.

elroy>> Who designed the mind of God ? the first creator did of coarse, what a stupid question jermy! !

Now answer me a question, who made your universe ? No one did, is not an answer, Nothing explains nothing. a first designer and first creator explains everything, nothing doesn't explain anything, and who designed the atheists brain ? when you say no one did, I'm Inclined to agree!

[Dhorpatan]

@elroy2112

Hahahahah! Your God designed it's own mind??

[elroy2112]

dhorpaten > haha you god designed its own mind.

elroy>> No the necessary FIRST CREATOR and first designer designed all creators and designers, do you get it now Dhorpatan ? You only came up with the "God designing his own mind" straw man because you can't find anything incoherent about a first designer and you know atheists are stuck with their spontaneously generating pseudo science Universe. Brights are Dim and will never see evidence for God untill they open their eyes.

[elroy2112]

bilog you need watch the videos, professional Philosophers all over the country are convinced they have proven Gods existence and other philosophers who convinced they have disproven God, everyday they call the other side illogical, so biolog is wildly ignorant at what happens in university Philosophy departments to think we cant say anyones view on God is Illogical, the very idea that no ones view of God is illogical is itself illogical. so biolog doesn't even reach the level of being mistaken

[Entropy56]

Yes, that is how it works. A game of philosophical chicken to see who will make the first assertion of truth and then thereafter be forever on the defensive. This is the game Presuppositional Apologists use. So in the end both parties will just stare at one another with arms akimbo daring the other to go first.

[grandconjunct]

No The Christian will gladly Go first and say God makes sense of truth,Science,keeps skepticism healthy, keeps the mental reliable,etc. Atheism undermines reason, Makes skepticism rationally suicidal and unhealthy this is why the atheist if he goes first winds up eternally skeptical of everything (except of skepticism of course )and he never goes second either for fear of exposing this bottomless skepticism.

* Note Moreland is an Evidential apologist/Philosopher not a presuppositionalist

[Entropy56]

Well religion often leads to an unhealthy pathology because these ideas are more than mere philosophical exercises. In his mind, the Atheist doesn't have eternal Hell to answer for if he is wrong, but the Christian is bound morally to be right as if he is defending the honor of God. Life gets much more complicated when you layer on top of it the eternal demands from the Bible. You've jumped out of the frying pan into the fire.

[Entropy56]

A Christian doesn't have the luxury to take lightly the words of the Bible. He is morally required to know what the definitions of the commands of God are in order to keep them. Plus, if he goes around claiming to know ultimate truth then he better know what it is he is talking about. When has he prayed enough, given enough, studied enough, loved enough, died to self enough, sacrificed enough?

[Entropy56]

For example, an Atheist can have a loose definition of gluttony and casually talk about it. A Christian, on the other hand, must know exactly what God had in mind when gluttony was declared a sin. It becomes an infinite regress of definitions to get at it. This can become unhealthy pathology to some Christians who take too seriously every word of the Bible.

[Entropy56]

Belief in God doesn't magically solve all of life's mysteries. It just merely shifts the goal posts. Now he has to resort to phrases like, "God's ways are above our ways," in order to gloss over contradictions or unfulfilled promises in the Bible. And, of course, the granddaddy of them all is how anyone can be morally responsible and have free will if God is sovereign, all powerful, and planned all things in advance.

[elroy2112]

Gluttony is a relative word for different people and everyone knows when they are deep in gluttony, God did not need to spell out in mechanical detail what the exact line of gluttony is anymore than he needed to have a verse that says thou shalt not abort or thou shalt not commit computer piracy, thou shalt not murder or steal is clear enough a guideline, Hitchens can drink himself to death and he will never have Violated any universal atheist moral principle, atheism offers nothing of value

[veritaslogos]

wow..good stuff man

[elroy2112]

Ento>> if he goes around claiming to know ultimate truth then he better know what it is he is talking about

>>Yes this is why a fixed point above the crashing waves of human opinion is necessary to see above it all , Aristotle saw the necessity of this, hence Revelation (the bible) ,the God point of view, so God is the one who must know what he's talking about and communicate the important things , we only need to admit reason and language something many atheists want to destroy

[elroy2112]

Ento>>

When has he prayed enough, given enough, studied enough, loved enough, died to self enough, sacrificed enough?

>> We are saved by Grace, No one loves, prays, gives enough to be saved If there is a limit on how much of all this God wants then

, God will meet this standard himself, All we need to do is TRUST God and love him (the greatest commandment), and love our neighbor as ourselves ( the 2nd greatest commandment)

[elroy2112]

Unhealthy skepticism =questioning everything, Never knowing anything (except the unquestioned absolute of skepticism) is being contrasted with Healthy skepticism ( test everything, hold on to what is good 1 Thess 5:21) ."Pathology" or psychology is missing my point. But since you brought it up I believe Religious people in general have been shown to be the mentally and healthiest people alive today, based on sociological and psychological and medical research.

[elroy2112]

Entro>> In his mind the atheist doesn't have eternal Hell to answer for if he is wrong.

Some Christians don't believe in Eternal hell but only temporally finite versions of Hell,

Also many Christians reject the torture chamber model of Hell and opt for a Shame model of Hell or a Balancing of good & Evil Model of Hell where we simply undo the evil we did on earth which entails suffering in some sense. so this is irrelevant to Gods existence or anything in this video.

[elroy2112]

Entro>>. Life gets much more complicated when you layer on top of it the eternal demands from the Bible. You've jumped out of the frying pan into the fire.

>>No Gods yoke is easy and light, The effects of sin are what are very demanding and feel like jumping into the fire, Hence the incredible danger of denying the existence of Sin, while shifting blame to God for the effects of sin when they are self inflicted james 2:13-14

The disordering of life through sin are what make life hard

[elroy2112]

J.P. Moreland has to be the clearest thinking

Christian I have ever heard, no wonder atheists feel the need to try and slander him.

[neotropic9]

He said people are united that there is no religious or moral knowledge. He is exactly half right and half wrong on that point.

[grandconjunct]

No neotropic you are exactly 100% wrong, Moreland said the state run univesrities, acadameia, the "gate keepers of knowledge" hold this irrational position, and he is absolutely correct and you are naive, I challenge you to to try and get a Phd at berkley while saying knowledge of god is real

and while holding a realist view of world and truth You will not graduate.

scientism and postmodernism rule the universities only someone with the head in the sand would deny this.

[neotropic9]

I agree with the the part about religion -it is difficult to progress in academia if you believe in fairy tales. On the other hand, realism about morality is a perfectly respectable philosophical position. I have never heard of someone being crucified (so to speak) for believing in a difference between right and wrong.

[grandconjunct]

Do I understand correctly Neotropic ? that you have converted from atheism to Christianity recentley ? If so why are you calling religion Fairytales ? Im very confused about what your trying to say please help me to understand ?

[grandconjunct]

Well it looks like neotropic took his

"converstion story" video down about converting to christianity since he was lieing about that ,but I guess we should still take him seriously about state run colleges being open minded ? athiests are forver trying to spread the lie that you can

believe anything you want as long as you just dump the god thing, Well God changes everything whether you believe in him or not.

thinking you can graduate with christ like ethics even with out the god is a lie.

[grandconjunct]

The only fairy tale is when atheists believe they have well designed minds to find truth through science and logic, yet no one designed there brains, yet it goes beyond survival to find truth and even theoretical truth beyond that, atheism is the fairy tale to end all fairy tales, that's why atheists constantly call names because they are heavy on rhetoric light on argument.

[mayartay]

"they are heavy on rhetoric light on argument."

So true! That explains why their leader is the intellectual lightweight, Dawkins. They see no problem with his reasoning. lol!

[DrStevenz]

What I have noticed is that anti-Christians are selectively skeptical and lack objectivity.

[grandconjunct]

Amen Dr stevenz

[AmazingGrey]

Skepticism running rampant? Skepticism can't run rampant enough. Is a necessity for living a life based in reality. Prove a god exists, if you can't do that then it remains that people of faith are clinging to their belief because of personal needs and weaknesses, and are reluctant (or afraid) to change their minds. We need to change our minds people! It's not a bad thing, just an acceptance of reality. And for crying out loud get religion out of policy making and education!

[GustavusAdolphus1]

If I'm to follow your argument I am to reject it, as well. That is, if we're called to be skeptics we cannot accept your claim that "people of faith are clinging to their belief because of personal neds and weaknesses... minds." After all, yours is a statement of unfounded/unsupported belief, not opinion.

No offense, but you made a spectacle of yourself.

[grandconjunct]

amazinggrey>>Skepticism running rampant? Skepticism can't run rampant enough.

grandconjunct>> Christians make a distinction between healthy skepticism, and unhealthy runaway self eating skepticism. christianity is the only religion that Honors skepticism (1 thes 5:21 test all things. etc) being skeptical is neccessary, but not being skeptical of skepticism is gullibility, You should be skeptical of design without a designer, a reliable mind and creation without a creator etc, but your not

[AmazingGrey]

I'm skeptical, period. I question things, don't you? Don't you see the complete lack of evidence for things that you believe in? How about this: atheism isn't running rampant enough!

[grandconjunct]

Amazinggrey>>I'm skeptical, period. arent you?

grandconjunct >> Of coarse but before you can beggin to question anything, you have to assume you have a mind you can trust to find truth in the universe, But who designed the atheists brain to distinguish between truth and falsehood ? Answer No one did! atheists just want to assume they have well designed brains when they have no designer, atheist skepticism is a very naive simple minded selective skepticism and I dont have that kind of faith.

[AmazingGrey]

How do you know you have a mind you can trust and atheists aren't right? Atheism isn't really about faith, it's about accepting facts. Science finds real evidence. So I guess I have faith in science, but I don't put faith in an unknown. Just because we can't conceive how we came to be doesn't mean we should make something up and proclaim it as fact. That's the kind of mind I can't trust.

[zakiechan]

Grandconjunt-

1 Thes 5:21 is in reference to moral claims, not empirical. Read the verse in context.

As for Christianity being the "only religion that honors skepticism", you might want to check out Zen Buddhist. One of their most popular sayings is "Great doubt, Great awakening. Little doubt, little awakening. No doubt, no awakening."

[grandconjunct]

The context is "Everything" test everything, not test Morality. you pulled that "context" out of your butt , but then when you run from Christianity that honors skepticism and reason, and run to a religion that openly Mocks rationality and have no criticisms of that you show your real unskeptical biase, If you read real Zen buddhist they will tell you only College Kids who don't really understand Z.B. think it is a rationalistic skeptical religion, Zakie you must learn this wise Koan.

[grandconjunct]

Your amazingly dense, Neither one of us has to prove the mind is realiable, If there is a God who designed brains to find truth and distiguish error then the mind is trustworthy by defintion, So simply assuming God will explain a realiable mind. If you assume Atheism then you need to explain How you can trust your brain ? To date no atheist has ever given a coherent answer how this is possible. So to pretend like you dont need to give an answer shows you are gullible not truly skeptical

[Newton1692]

Skepticism (in the Academy) actually lasted until AD 529. For some time the term Academic meant skeptic. Another symptom of philosophic bankruptcy is Eclecticism.

Great vid.

Clear and Precise.

[braino2000]

Good video.....J.P. Moreland=Genius!

[robocopnz]

How 'bout a better quality video?

[grandconjunct]

sorry i forgot to clean the camera lens on my $40 dollar cell phone ! LOL

[CAndiron]

Mooreland must have taken this from Monty Python. There was a sketch where Michael Palin went to an argument clinic. John Cleese was the 'iterative skeptic.'

[grandconjunct]

Yes that was the funniest episode of monty python i ever saw , although the funny thing there are lots of street level skeptics who think like that and a few runaway skeptics in academia that keep asking the question in drone like fashion , as Dallas Willard notes even a head of cabbage can keep asking "why" ? yet they think they are super sophisticates for some reason !