2 of 7: Using the Socratic Method with Christian Proselytizers (defining the Socratic Method)

This series is an overview of the approach I outline in my book, "Dialogue with a Christian Proselytizer" (a dialogue between a Christian proselytizer and a Socratic skeptic).

LINK TO CUSTOMER REVIEWS ON AMAZON: http://www.amazon.com/review/product/1601450893/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?_enc...

Link to eBook: http://booklocker.com/books/2739.html

Link to free PDF excerpt: http://assets.booklocker.com/pdfs/2739s.pdf

An overview of whole series:

1 of 7: a brief overview of videos 2 through 7.

2 of 7: a description of the Socratic Method.

3 of 7: the ground premises that the skeptic needs to establish with the Christian in order to focus on the issue at hand, which is "Are there convincing reasons for me to believe that the Judeo-Christian Bible is the Word of God?"

4 of 7: the skeptic and the Christian read through scriptures and stories from non-Christian religions. Both agree that the following three characteristics are strong clues that a religion was not created by an Infallible Wisdom, but just made up by quite fallible humans: (1) when a religion a cluelessness about the layout of the universe (its stories describe stars as tiny, the moon as a light, the earth as flat, the sun as orbiting our planet, etc.) (2) it contains laws that are barbaric and reflect senseless prejudices (3) history reveals that the religion was pieced together from ideas and stories from pre-existing religions

5 of 7: the skeptic and the Christian read through the Judeo-Christian Bible, and examine it by the same critical light just held up to non-Christian religions.

5.1 through 5.5: Further details on the origins of the Judeo-Christian bible--how many of its ideas & stories can be found in religions that pre-date the bible by centuries.

5.1 explains why many of the baffling details within the tale of Noah & the Ark make sense once the story is read as a monotheistic version (in which God is said to be Omniscient, Omnipotent, and Benevolent) of a story that was originally polytheistic (in which the gods were none of the above).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9fxvJy9swk&feature=channel_page

5.2 discusses the pre-Christian religious stories from the Greeks, Romans, and Zoroastrians about unions between gods & mortals, miraculous virgin births, and offspring that were both human and god. It also covers the "Satanic pre-plagiarization" explanations from early Church Fathers Justin Martyr and Tertullian on how the pagans knew about these phenomena centuries before the time of Jesus.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-ymGDRZfOQ&feature=channel_page

5.3: Richard Dawkins refers to the Christian premises behind the belief that Jesus/God sacrificed Himself to appease Himself as "barking mad." This video looks at each of those premises--Divine Anger, the need for sacrifice, the use of a scapegoat--from the perspective of comparative mythology. The subtitle for this video is "Richard Dawkins meets Joseph Campbell."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDJ-azGoBt8&feature=channel

5.4: the evolution of the afterlife. Stage One - the 37 out of 39 Old Testament books that either don't mention, or even deny, an afterlife. Stage Two - the 2 Old Testament books that say there IS an afterlife. Stage Three - The New Testament, in which the afterlife, complete with Judgment Day & Heaven & Hell, becomes one of Christianity's main selling points.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6_XJjJiVAY&feature=channel_page

5.5: A discussion of the evidence that Christianity's "Satan" comes more from pagan religions than Judaism.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYgNfKBg4H0&feature=channel_page

6 of 7: a review of some of the common counterarguments from Christian apologists

7 of 7: why I find the Christian apologist's answers unconvincing.

Related videos:
"An abbreviated version of using the Socratic Method with Christian Proselytizers": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaJwTvxAlBM

"Three advantages to questioning 'the Creator's Word' but not 'a Creator' (when speaking w/ theists)": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3lye16mJvQ

"When science contradicts Scripture: how theists cope": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=py48Lb495ew


* * * * * * * * * *


My three YouTube channels:

- http://youtube.com/user/ToddGates - my musician channel

- http://youtube.com/user/ToddAllenGates - where I discuss the ideas in "Dialogue with a Christian Proselytizer"

- http://youtube.com/user/ToddAllenGates2 - where I discuss the ideas in my book "Hunting, Gathering, & Videogames" (such as "Why do we have to work?" and "Why do we have to use money?" and "How should we define 'success'?")

Category:

Education

Tags:

• atheism
• skepticism
• Christian
• apologetics
• comparative
• mythology
• Socratic
• Method
• Christianity
• faith
• religion
• proselytizer
• Bible
• God
• Jesus
• Christ
• holy
• text
• savior
• Joseph
• Campbell
• ToddAllenGates
• ToddGates
• ToddAllenGates2
• Todd
• Allen
• Gates

[barifkin31]

You are SEVERELY mistaken as to what 'objectivity' actually means. Many objective moral theories posit different actions in the face of different circumstances. This does not make them 'subjective'. Their objectivity is derived from the objective *principles* that govern the various actions of the participants, not from a supposed set of objective *actions*. Kantianism (Neo-Kantianism, best outlined by Christine Korsgaard's book "Sources of Normativity") is a clear example of this.

[ToddAllenGates]

@barifkin31

> You are SEVERELY mistaken as to what 'objectivity' actually means.

The issue of what "objective morality" means (especially among non-theists) is certainly a worthy topic, but the only topic in this video is a brief description/example of the Socratic Method. Okay, I used the word "objective" during my example, but I used it in the casual everyday sense of the word: kind of like the way laypeople use the word "theory" as a synonym for "hunch."

[gigantibyte]

Beyond the scope of this video, but I always cringe when I hear the term 'absolute morality'. You give a very good example why the concept is flawed.

[ToddAllenGates]

@gigantibyte

> I always cringe when I hear the term 'absolute morality'. You give a very good example why the concept is flawed.

I talk about that a bit more in response to the Christian YouTuber Epydemic2020 and his videos on the notion that there *is* "objective morality" and how this proves the existence of god (my video is called "How the naturalistic explanation provides a fairly sturdy foundation for morality.")

[billygundum]

Couple that with the idea of the "lesser of two evils" concept.

[ToddAllenGates]

@billygundum

> Couple that with the idea of the "lesser of two evils" concept.

Agreed ... but using the Socratic Method, it would be best if that realization came from the other person--the idea that a certain behavior is "always right" falls apart when one is forced to make unpleasant choices. When this realization comes from the other person, there's less of a pride issue of being told that they're wrong.