The destruction of Carthage is immoral today because the morality evolves with the changes occurred in the society but it was OK at the times it happens. Hypothetical extermination of Jews could be moral deed in some other society. The objective morals dose no mean absolute morals - for everybody everywhere.
Pay attention! W.L.C. proves existence of of objective morality through a hypothetical event. The Nazis win the WWII and exterminate the Jews and all people think it was a moral think to do, i.e there is a social consensus - objectivity. However it would be still immoral because god exist. I want to hear one occasion in which a big number of people have agreement on one topic only - they think the same way. There is no such thing.
The Nazis could say that evil must have existed during that time in order for their world peace. Same thing Craig is willing to do for Yahweh. The Israelites must have wiped out all the male Midianites and raped their virgins girls in order for the maximum number of people to come to know Yahweh.
He just admit defeat right there, and he knows it, not by Dr. Craig, but by a simple question from the audience. If you are going to debate and defend 'atheism', you got to be prepare for these questions since it is about 'nature', especially if you believe nature is all there is.
@gilams09 Not really. You can't expect the atheist to know EVERYTHING. It's also not a simple question. This is a scientific question and you can't expect someone to be an expert on every single topic or have all of the answers.
Godwin's "law" does not apply in the context of Craig's argument. For the law to hold the debater wielding the Hitler reference would be using it in as an ad hominem. Craig was simply invoking Hitler to demonstate a historical case that is easily and readily accessible to most people. BTW, Hitler is an actual historical figure and did leave an significant mark in history - like it or not.
The destruction of Carthage is immoral today because the morality evolves with the changes occurred in the society but it was OK at the times it happens. Hypothetical extermination of Jews could be moral deed in some other society. The objective morals dose no mean absolute morals - for everybody everywhere.
cosmopolite66 5 months ago in playlist More videos from UQueTV
Pay attention! W.L.C. proves existence of of objective morality through a hypothetical event. The Nazis win the WWII and exterminate the Jews and all people think it was a moral think to do, i.e there is a social consensus - objectivity. However it would be still immoral because god exist. I want to hear one occasion in which a big number of people have agreement on one topic only - they think the same way. There is no such thing.
cosmopolite66 5 months ago in playlist More videos from UQueTV
The Nazis could say that evil must have existed during that time in order for their world peace. Same thing Craig is willing to do for Yahweh. The Israelites must have wiped out all the male Midianites and raped their virgins girls in order for the maximum number of people to come to know Yahweh.
Scientialist 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If you want to know if god exist or not I give you the answer
You will not believe what I discovered, I advice all to read about this religion Called
( ISLAM) it will surprise you and you will be passion of it
You can search for the Islam thru internet or reading some books
You will lose nothing
If you want to know meaning of love and soul peace read about this religion
I Love you all
Multisclerosis 2 years ago
"7:45 ...defer to science to do the explaining.."
He just admit defeat right there, and he knows it, not by Dr. Craig, but by a simple question from the audience. If you are going to debate and defend 'atheism', you got to be prepare for these questions since it is about 'nature', especially if you believe nature is all there is.
gilams09 2 years ago
Not really, he is an atheist, not necessarily a scientist.
These audience questions have been answered time and time again in this context.
sk8ram 2 years ago
Being an atheist doesn't mean you "absolutely" think nature is all there is, just at this moment in time nature is all we know (all there is).
shallbeagain 2 years ago
You idiot(like that guy in the audience), what the fuck are you talking about?!?!?!
What does a scientific question(unrelated to the existance of god) have to do with this debate???
This is ANOTHER god of the gaps.
Theist : "Hey atheist, explain this..."
Atheist : "I don't know, neither does science."
Theist : "GOD EXISTS. Proven conclusivly."
raoskaos 2 years ago
@gilams09 Not really. You can't expect the atheist to know EVERYTHING. It's also not a simple question. This is a scientific question and you can't expect someone to be an expert on every single topic or have all of the answers.
MauricXe 1 year ago
Dr Craig is the best debater!
xtrashed 2 years ago 11
@xtrashed In the Q and A Crag was the clear victor.
abrimestome 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
BooYAh
And Godwin wins again.
I was getting worried that a debate didn't mention Hitler. You know its only a good debate when hitler gets involved.
BayerLexan 2 years ago
What do you mean?
ncs901 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Godwins law, its when in a debate (or any situation really) someone casts their opponent as siding with Hitler, thus loosing all credibility.
For example:
"My point is more valid because Hitler also liked to eat pastrami sandwiches, and you have opening admitted to liking such Nazi sandwiches."
BayerLexan 2 years ago
Godwin's "law" does not apply in the context of Craig's argument. For the law to hold the debater wielding the Hitler reference would be using it in as an ad hominem. Craig was simply invoking Hitler to demonstate a historical case that is easily and readily accessible to most people. BTW, Hitler is an actual historical figure and did leave an significant mark in history - like it or not.
Echobuns 2 years ago