 Save 10% with my code Bobby10 on raw, organic, grass-fed and grass-finished, freeze-dried organ meats from grassland nutrition. Link in the description box. All right guys, welcome back to the channel. If you're new, my name is Bobby. Guys, finally we're gonna continue with the Genius of Islam series today with the Dark Truths about the atheist mind by Daniel Hakikachu, the Muslim skeptic. This part looks just as dark as part one, therefore I'm sure we're gonna get depressed again watching this. Anyways, the video is almost half an hour long, so we probably will have to split it in two parts. With no further ado, let's have a look. That baseline man. Yo, the other thing is Hollywood bro. Can you take a pill that will kill your soul? In the novel, the giver told you Daniel will make us depressed again. He's thinking of a mandated pill to kill their emotions and desires. The pill also makes them colorblind and interferes with their memory. In the classic sci-fi novel Brave New World, authorities keep the population enslaved through a happiness-inducing pill called Soma. Published in 1886, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde tells the tale of a chemical serum that transforms the mild manner Dr. Jekyll into a murderous villain with no conscience and a thirst for blood. In the post-modernist novel Thus Spoke Zarathustra, the main character transcends the limited nature of man to become the ubermensch, the overman. He says, you must be ready to burn yourself in your own flame. How could you rise anew if you have not first become ashes? According to Nietzsche, the author, the overman makes himself into his own god by willing himself to become the standard of all value and meaning. The uberman declares. Coming from an Orthodox Christian background, this actually reminds me of the writings of Saint Justin Popovich in the Orthodox Church and Ecumenism. He writes, European culture is based on men. Men is its program and its goal, its means and its content. Humanism is its chief architect. It is totally constructed on the sophist principle and criterion that men, European men, is the measure of all things, visible and invisible. He is the supreme creator and giver of values. The truth is whatever he proclaims is true. The purpose of life is whatever he proclaims it to be. Good and evil are what he pronounces good and evil. To put it briefly and bluntly, he makes himself god. Have you not noticed how immensely he loves to play god in science and technology, philosophy and culture, religion and politics, art and fashion? To play god at any price, even by inquisition and papism, by sword and fire, by savagery and cannibalism. In the language of his humanistic, positivistic science, he has pronounced that there is no god. Guided by that logic, he confidently concludes that as there is no god, he is god. European culture has been systematically suppressing in men all that is immortal and eternal, deftly paralyzing his sense of immortality and diminishing his soul until it is reduced to nothing. And this is really what it boils down to, worshipping oneself. And if you look into what we are doing at the moment, it is creating technology. Therefore, this self-worship transmutes into the worship of technology and merges into transhumanism, worshipping oneself through the abilities to create technology, but at the same time detesting oneself because we are in this animalistic flesh. We have to poop, we have to pee, we have to make children. What a chore. Therefore, the best solution would be to burn ourselves and rebuild ourselves from the ashes as cyborgs. In all of these works, there's a fine line between cultivating human nature and destroying human nature. Human nature is an obstacle to be either buried or transformed or transcended, often with horrific consequences. But what is human nature? Humans are born with a heart, a brain, two eyes, two hands, but we're also born with certain inbuilt emotions, instincts, behaviors, desires and intuitions. Why do you salivate when looking at a delicious meal? Evolution? Why do you feel cleansed with water? Why are you repulsed by rotting flesh? Why do you want to hug and embrace loved ones? Are these things you learn from your culture? Not at all. These are natural reactions that all humans have. Maybe not all. But beyond reactions and feelings, we also have natural intuitions. An intuition is a belief that you don't necessarily know you have, but how is that possible? How can you have beliefs that you are not consciously aware of? Imagine a little girl playing on a swing and a boy roughly pushes her off. What do you think about such an action? We all have a strong, intuitive belief that the boy did something wrong. But where did that intuition come from? Did you have wrong beliefs in your mind specifically about little boys pushing little girls off of swings? Probably not. Imagine... Because now me as a father, sometimes I see it on the playground, some children really don't see that they did anything wrong. I just saw a boy, roughly six years old, punching a three-year-old girl in the back of her head, and he didn't think anything of it. He needed to be disciplined by the father of that little girl to start to comprehend that there might have been something wrong with what he did. Probably he was just scared of the consequence and not really of that evil act itself. Therefore, I'm really not convinced that every human being has the same preconceived notion of things being good or bad. Taking at a table. On top of the table are many loose objects. Someone comes and violently moves the table. What do you expect to happen to all the loose objects? We all have a strong intuitive belief that they'll fly off. But where did that intuition come from? Did you have strong beliefs in your mind about how objects on a table behave when the table is moved? You might think that your expectation about the table is based on a lifetime of experiences with gravity. But psychologists have done this experiment with infants. They show infants a table with objects, and then the table is suddenly removed. But the researchers have rigged the objects, so they remain stationary, suspended in the air. The infants watching this react non-verbally with surprise and shock. Why? In another experiment. Again, the atheists will say this is evolution because over millennia of years we've been programmed to understand what goes up must come down. They show young children a boy stealing an apple. Then the boy walks on a bridge that collapses. They ask the children, why did the bridge collapse? And the children overwhelmingly agree that it was because the boy stole the apple. These children come from a variety of religious and non-religious backgrounds, and none of them would even be able to articulate the belief that somehow morality can affect- I have to be sceptical here. Those kids can already speak, so therefore they already been told that stealing is bad. I think if it would be completely intuitive that stealing is bad, we wouldn't even need religious texts that tell us that you shall not steal. Physical events like the collapse of a bridge. Nonetheless, they all share this intuition. It is said that there are no atheists in a foxhole. This is because in the heat of war, the atheist relies on his intuitions that God exists and can help him. So he calls out reflexively. Similarly for the atheist at sea, when the dark storm blows, tall waves batter his ship and the watery grave beckons, the sailor cries out, oh God save me. This is not because the atheist sailor consciously believed in God all along but kept it a secret, rather the belief in God is a deep human intuition that's not always conscious but can nonetheless manifest itself in extreme situations. People have hundreds and thousands of unconscious intuitions about everything, but is it true that all people are born with this intuition about the existence of God? Despite the oppressive power of secularism, a surprising 80-90% of all human beings on the planet today still believe in God, even if many don't believe in organized religion. Not only that, but people across all developed cultures historically have a virtually identical concept of God. Yes, most religions are polytheistic, but except for a minority of small hunter and gatherer tribes, all civilizations, even the polytheistic ones, believed in a singular all-powerful God. Beyond the so-called Abrahamic faiths, even religions like Hinduism, Daoism, Confucianism, ancient Greco-Roman religion, despite all their differences, nonetheless share this universal notion of one supreme being who's created and maintained the universe. Justin Barrett, American psychologist, lists the primary characteristics of this universal notion of God. He's the all-knowing, all-powerful supreme being responsible for the creation of the universe. He has a mind, has a will, is immortal. He controls the past, present and future. He created the universe for a purpose and has set a moral order. He communicates with people and rewards or punishes them. The moral order is something very fascinating to me personally. When you talk to atheists, they will all agree that there are physical laws in place. If you jump off a bridge, you're probably gonna die. If you jump into an ice lake and you're not prepared for it, you're probably gonna suffer from cardiac arrest and you're gonna die yet again. So those are physical laws, but when it comes down to moral laws, atheists do not want to believe in those, even though they see them manifested in this world. For example, on the bus you're getting up, so a grandma can sit down. Evolutionary, there is no advantage to that act whatsoever. So this would be a genuine act out of love, but not evolutionary love, where we are thinking about our own survival. Because you're not gonna procreate with that grandma. This love is transcendent. Atheists want to deny that reality. Different parts of the globe, and at different times in history, not only independently came to the same conclusion about the existence of God, but also agree on the primary attributes of God. It would be impossible for such alignment to arise purely by chance. The answer is human nature. Humans naturally are born with an intuitive God concept. Belief in God is ingrained in us as a species. It's a part of what makes us human, and this is the consensus in psychology and cognitive science. Paul Bloom, professor at Yale, writes that the concept of a supreme being is natural. Deborah Kellerman, professor of psychology, even goes so far as to say that children are born intuitive atheists. What makes the God concept so naturally compelling to the human mind is that it is interconnected with other deep humans. Ultimately, you cannot deny that it's natural because even if you adhere to strict Darwinistic evolution, why would we then come up with religions? Even from that worldview out on, you would have to admit that it is natural for the human being to produce religions about the world. Causation is one example. From early childhood, we intuitively believe that nothing occurs without reason. Everything has a cause, and causes have their own causes and so on in a causal chain. Anyone who's talked to children has experienced this firsthand. Your child asks you, why does it rain? You reply, because the clouds release stored water. But why does that happen? Because the sun heats up water that turns it into steam that forms clouds. But why? Unless it stopped, this questioning from children would continue indefinitely. We're born with this natural intuition to seek out ultimate causal ends. This intuition about causation supports the notion of a supreme being, which is why many religions independently produced cosmological arguments as proof for the existence of God. One ultimate cause is necessary to explain the existence of the universe. Humans also have innate intuitions about order and design. From childhood, we innately believe objects around us are purposefully created. When children in studies are asked about the origins of natural things like plants, animals, mountains, they recognize that these things are not man-made, but were made for a purpose. For example, flowers were made to make the world beautiful. Puppies were made to play with children and so on. How can something both be made for a purpose, but not be man-made? For children, the answer is obvious. God made it. Olivera Petrovich, Oxford researcher, tested Japanese and British children from ages 4 to 7 by showing them photos of natural objects and man-made objects. Again, I have to be critical here because certain child psychologists have claimed that children at the age of 4 have completed the first development of their character. And man-made objects. When the children were then asked questions about the origins of natural objects like mountains and animals, regardless of cultural or religious background, the children predominantly chose God as the answer. They did not give an agnostic answer like nobody knows their origins or an incorrect answer like those things were made by people. Well, they said that God was the creator. Petrovich called this result absolutely extraordinary because the Japanese Shinto religion doesn't include this idea of God creating anything. How do Japanese children get the idea that creation is in God's hands when their religion and culture has no such teaching? The researchers also asked the children to describe God. More interesting to me personally is if intuitively all the children have that belief, why would you even create the Shinto religion in the first place? We might expect that the children give different descriptions of God based on their religious upbringing. But surprisingly, that wasn't the case. Children predominantly conceive of God as a person without a body similar to notions of gas and air. Petrovich claims that children get the idea of God as man through their religious education. But no child naturally thinks of the creator of the world as a person with a body. It would be an astonishing vindication of Hinduism if children in Mexico raised by non-Hindu parents thought of God as a blue-skinned deity with an elephant head. It would be an astonishing vindication of Christianity if children in China raised by non-Christian parents thought of God as a Trinitarian deity. What children do think, regardless of cultural and religious background, is that the universe was created purposefully by one God without partners, one God who is ever-living, all-powerful, all-knowing, but does not have a bodily form. Where does this intuition come from? Atheists claim that belief in God is ridiculous. Famous atheists like Richard Dawkins claim that believing in God is like believing in a flying spaghetti monster. Dawkins explains that if religious people want to know why atheists don't- It's hilarious, right? But they don't believe it themselves. They know just by voicing it that it is ridiculous to believe in a flying spaghetti monster. This is why they use this example. Oh, I don't believe in God because I don't believe in the spaghetti monster. But by saying this, you already admit that the idea of God has value and you have to ridicule it by comparing it to a spaghetti monster.