7 Reasons to believe, opening statement in debate w/ shwanerd part 1

[EndDepravity]

I love it! A theist who can hold his own .Your argument for a "god" is better than most I've heard but, you have not explained why the judeo-christian god is the cause. I agree that we live in a causal universe but; what exactly makes your god the cause? How come it can't be zeus or krishna?

[DevoutAtheist42]

It is better than most, but it's not original to the poster; if I'm not mistaken, William Lane Craig popularised this one, the Kalam Cosmological Argument.

[Watchdawg]

@EndDepravity That's the exact thing I was wondering while watching this video.

[gusb232]

The First Premise is False!

See: (QCD)Quantum chromodynamics

or

watch?v=ECkG_JdodMA

[gusb232]

Kalam

[migkillertwo]

virtual particles, once again, are not uncaused.

one more thing, please learn about the first principle of metaphysics and why it is ridiculous to say that non-being can give rise to being. After all, nothing has no properties. How can it possibly give rise to being?

[gusb232]

Well I deleted my comment Not because I think Im wrong but I see that this issue Is ultimately peripheral for both of us Since I do think there could be a god.

and the Kalam is only a secondary reason of support for your christianity.

But

I Do think this argument is un-sound.

Actually i think all the premises may be false.

(Im lazy to make a vid)

[gusb232]

Comparing time to Physical thing object like Rooms Is a rediculous analogy,

Time is not an object, and Neither do i think it is a series of moments.

Its been show that Causality begins to break down even before the energies assoicated with plank time.

[gusb232]

I never denied This>

I may simply be that the Fundmental nature of existance may be slightly un-uniform in nature.... That the slight asymetry could give rise to all possible state.... Our universe could just be one of the state that is more self consistant than not, an therfore could exist longer by borrowing from this Well of possiblity.

[responder12345]

The Atheist's position is not that 'everything came from nothing.' An atheist can believe that there might have been 'something' that was always there. We see things come from 'something' all the time; rock formations, planets, stars, life, etc. This is not something from God, but something from something.

[bamboo4tameshigiri]

The nuclear reaction of a star, which creates heavier elements is a cause. Stars can be explained without a god, no need. Also no need to drag in quantum anything. I just shot down your "no cause" argument right there. Stars make star dust, star dust collects into planets. Abracadabra.

[bamboo4tameshigiri]

"Planets, dogs, people and cars" can be immediately sliced into 2 categories: Alive and not alive. Bad analogies.

[bamboo4tameshigiri]

"The building" is a poor analogy. It is neither alive nor a chemical reaction of any kind. This is a glorified watchmaker argument.

[TKMSeznam12]

All of your statements are based on faith. Using any argument - cosmological, teleological, whatever, is useless after that point. Using weak arguments such as Pascal's Wager and the such, are equally as useless. Using big words and circular reasoning is not considered 'evidence'.

[lilchrizz123]

What circular reasoning did he use as evidence in this video?

[Knowntje]

Im an atheist myself and this sounds like an ignorant and completely nonsensical statement to be honest

[bamboo4tameshigiri]

What, exactly?

[Knowntje]

"Using any argument - cosmological, teleological, whatever, is useless after that point"

this statement

[TKMSeznam12]

Not if you read the sentence before that (since you're obviously retarded and can't read, I'll re-write it for you)

"All of your statements are based on faith. Using any argument - cosmological, teleological, whatever, is useless after that point."

If someone does not believe, and will not believe (since believing in God requires ONLY faith and no evidence), then teleological arguments and the like are next to worthless. Are there only idiots on YouTube or what?

[Knowntje]

"If someone does not believe, and will not believe "

not even IF there is evidence? thats sounds crazy

"(since believing in God requires ONLY faith and no evidence)"

since when?

[TKMSeznam12]

What evidence is there for God's existence?

[Knowntje]

according to me, none, according to migkiller the arguments he used

[TKMSeznam12]

I don't think you wholly understand the difference between an argument and evidence. Using his logic (which is grounded in faith, and not evidence), accomplishes nothing. It is simply running a broken record that is meant as a tool for conversion but hardly accomplishes this. Since those who he is attempting to convert require EVIDENCE in order to be converted or swayed. Without evidence or *VERY* solid arguments (these aren't solid, they're hardly even good), he is speaking to silent ears.

[Knowntje]

his arguments arent rooted in faith but in philsophy

so in your opinion a philsophical proof doesnt count as evidence?

[TKMSeznam12]

Where is the philosophy that doesn't require faith? Philosophers have attempted this before, who were considerably more intelligent and well-spoken than he is (Aquinas, Augustine) and have accomplished nothing. Their statements require a certain amount of faith in the subject beforehand, which his target group (non-believers) does not possess. Once again, he is accomplishing nothing and wasting his camera batteries.

[Knowntje]

so what in your opinion WOULD be evidence for god's existence?

[TKMSeznam12]

Evidence? Exposing himself to my senses. Since this is unlikely (if he is immaterial), there would have to be provided something (data, equations, etc) that would 'prove' his existence. Since there are many things we cannot see but that have been 'proven' (orbit of distant stars, quasars, etc), it would be difficult. There is no specific 'proof' I require, but I know when sufficient and legitimate proof is shown to me, I will be able to recognize it as such. The Bible is a false attempt at it.

[responder12345]

That's a good question, I guess it depends on your definition of 'god.'

[bamboo4tameshigiri]

"so in your opinion a philsophical proof doesnt count as evidence?"

NO. Philosophy is mental masturbation.

[Knowntje]

No, philosophy is using inductive and deductive reasoning

[bamboo4tameshigiri]

"according to migkiller the arguments he used"

All he has is a treadmill of philosophical apologist nonsense.

[bamboo4tameshigiri]

"not even IF there is evidence? thats sounds crazy"

You don't have any evidence [proof of god]! All there is, is faith.

[bamboo4tameshigiri]

"Are there only idiots on YouTube or what?"

Apologists tend to be idiots and the ones who aren't are often delusional.

[bamboo4tameshigiri]

Show me where I said that.

[bamboo4tameshigiri]

Your magical hotel is one of the most ignorant arguments I've ever heard. It requires you take a half dozen things on faith to even follow it.

[lilchrizz123]

What?

[lilchrizz123]

What faith do you need for it, its showing the problems with infinity, and how its just a concept not something that can be in the real world.

[bamboo4tameshigiri]

The parameters of the philosophical thought experiment must be taken as gospel. You must take them all on faith for the "philosophy" to work. There is no magic hotel, there are no magically appearing room after room into infinity. It's childish and silly.

[lilchrizz123]

There is no magic hotel, there are no magically appearing room after room into infinity. It's childish and silly.

Exactly, he's showing how childish and silly it is to think an infinite actually exist in the universe.

[bamboo4tameshigiri]

In what universe does that prove there is a god?

[bamboo4tameshigiri]

Re: infinity. You do not know, I do not know, he does not know. There is no way of knowing what happened before the apparent big bang. Everything said about it is irrelevant- tossed out. Try again.

[bamboo4tameshigiri]

Two words: Red Herring.

[lilchrizz123]

I was on topic, what are you talking about lol.

[migkillertwo]

its not a red herring. it shows that actual infinites are inherently contradictory and, hence, cannot possibly exist.

[bamboo4tameshigiri]

Well, it is actually more of a straw man if we are talking about the hotel. You set it up to knock it down. I couldn't tell you were trying to knock it down so I considered it a red herring. It is actually a straw man.

[Knowntje]

so you think actual infinites can exist eventhough it can be shown to be logically selfcontradictory, or do you think it cannot be shown to be selfcontradictory?

[bamboo4tameshigiri]

Philosophical logic is an epic exercise in futility. It is mental masturbation. Nothing more and nothing less. Your baldly asserted philosophical ramblings have zero weight in science or fact. It proves nothing because it measures and documents nothing, but what you are daydreaming.

[Xenithan]

Cross apply your reasoning and the conclusion is god must have a causation. Just following the logic there.

[lilchrizz123]

You must not have watched the whole video.

[h8uall66]

Hmmm, I'm not sure that this guy is quite up to your level. You should string your videos together. It would make viewing them easier.

[Knowntje]

well it might be a good thing for shwanerd to have an actual challenge this time

[kirafan68]

Are you trying to prove that a god exists, or that the christian god exists?

[lilchrizz123]

That a God does exist, then he goes on to why he believes in the Christian God.

[kirafan68]

Thank you!

[lilchrizz123]

No problem.

[kintarocrab]

Cause doesn't equate to a GOD neither does existence. Minds are physical, your arguments don't make any sense and they do not support your particular view of a GOD.

[TheIrrationalAtheist]

"Minds are physical"

Really? Would you care to explain this?

[kintarocrab]

Mind refers to the aspects of intellect and consciousness manifested as combinations of thought, perception, memory, emotion, will and imagination, including all of the brain's conscious and unconscious cognitive processes. The CNS and PNS of organisms are composed of chemical elements, with all of their processes occurring according to the known laws of physics and chemistry, there is no ghost in the machine. Take the brain out and the mind ceases to exist. That good enough for you?

[bamboo4tameshigiri]

"Really? Would you care to explain this?"

I will. Your mind is a construct of your brain. It is an "emergence" (emergence theory) of the complexity of your brain. There is nothing divine about it, it's organic. If you remove any particular part of your brain, your mind will either change drastically and permanently or it will disappear in its entirely.

[Timmortal94]

I suppose you would say the same about information.

[lilchrizz123]

I would give migkiller five stars prior to watching his video because he delivers every time.

[bamboo4tameshigiri]

"I would give migkiller five stars prior to watching his video because he delivers every time."

BS. Absolute BS. You automatically down star others and up star him because you are a fundamentalist.

[lilchrizz123]

Thats not true, shwanerds video was pretty good actually.

[FranzDuckVideos]

5 parts? Good fuck. I think you need a life.

[Deliratio]

lol

[theman77777777232]

You are the one watching him.

haha

[migkillertwo]

I'm very sorry that you have a natural aversion to knowledge.

[lilchrizz123]

Hes going over the majority of arguments for the existence of God,so make some food, sit down and watch lol..if you feel like it.

[TempestMinor]

lmao, and this is just his opening statements.

[ShwaNerd]

I'll respond to this video tonight, at the moment I got a ton of school projects to finish.

By the way, I think SirTheist have you 5 stars without actually WATCHING your video. I applaud your LACK or ignorance in the fact that you accept the age of the universe. SirTheist is a YEC I think.

[Knowntje]

migkiller is a theistic evolutionist, sirtheist is as far as I know indeed a young earth creationist

[bamboo4tameshigiri]

I know migkiller is an intelligent kid. I wouldn't bother him so much if I knew he was an idiot, I would just pity him like I do some others of your group. I think mig is wasting his potential with these studies.

[Deliratio]

mig, could you elaborate on how we know that minds can exist without time?

The argument to support (1) looks interesting, I think it would deserve it's own video to discuss it (the discussion would have to include the origins of tiger who don't pop into existence out of nothing for example).

[migkillertwo]

deliratio, I'm not appealing to the physical possibiilty of a disembodied mind, but merely the metaphysical possibility of a disembodied mind. all objects are metaphysically possible until they can be shown to be self-contradictory.

[Knowntje]

"sorry knowntje and hawking"

LOL :p

Your outlining of the arguments is getting a lot better btw way

btw in the ball of on couchen (how the hel do you write that word) you didnt mention that the effect of the depression woul be simulteneous wth its cause if the ball laid there from eternity past

[migkillertwo]

its cushion BTW

but I didn't think that the part about it lying there eternally into the past was all that relavent, all it shows is that causes need not be temporally prior to their effects.

[Knowntje]

but I imagine shawnerd saying that this is not a good example since if you lay a ball on a cushion (thanks) than the cause (you putting the ball on the cushion) is prior to the ball making a depression in the cushion

[migkillertwo]

I guess it would be true for the cushion depressing, but not after its done depressing/compressing.

[Knowntje]

isnt in such an example the ball merely sustaining the depression rather than causing it. The ball causing the depression would be causally prior, but the sustaining of the depression would be simulteanous, but would sustaining a depression really count as causing a depression?

[migkillertwo]

I'd have to say so.

or its the gravitational force causing the depression, still temporally simultaneous.

[epaminodas]

Bravo!!! for trying to save electricity :)

[migkillertwo]

umm, thanks?

[migkillertwo]

well he did agree to be civil.

[lilchrizz123]

Go get em Mig!

[CooFrank]

Looking forward to it :D