Michael Murray - Did God Make Animals Suffer in Evolution?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ส.ค. 2024
- Follow us on X for news and articles, plus connect with other viewers: shorturl.at/imHY9
Sentient suffering is a hard problem for theists to solve. The ‘free will defense,’ that privileges and blames human choice, claims to cover moral evil. But what about natural evil, such as animals being killed or eaten alive continuously during the process of evolution before humans? Shouldn’t egregious and relentless animal suffering count against God?
Make a tax-deductible donation to Closer To Truth to help keep our content free and without paywalls: shorturl.at/OnyRq
Michael J. Murray oversees the program departments of the John Templeton Foundation. Before joining the Foundation, he was the Arthur and Katherine Shadek Humanities Professor of Philosophy at Franklin and Marshall College.
Sign up for a free CTT membership today to get exclusive benefits: closertotruth.com/
Closer To Truth, hosted by Robert Lawrence Kuhn and directed by Peter Getzels, presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.
A god doing all this on purpose would be the biggest a-hole in the universe. No contest.
That’s only because you believe macro evolution is true.
@@zimpoooooo Not on purpose but by absolute and total indifference.
"He" or "it" could not care less.
I never understood why a good god would allow “Human intestinal parasites” for poor farmers for thousands of years…
God sounds the most absurd thing to you because it's the truth
God came up with life and life is absurd, life is your kidnapper
you were kidnapped by life without your consent, only to get abandoned by life at the end without your consent again
at this point, do you seriously think God would require your consent to bring you back for the judgement day?
@@jimliu2560 it's actually an empty suffering
things are made of atoms and atoms are mostly hollow
sufferings, no matter how hard they are, they're empty. everything is hollow, including your happiness as well
so keep calm and just enjoy our empty/hollow lives
His wife is having an affair. And like animal suffering, he's just trying to justify it.
He does not explain, he escapes !
Totally unsatisfying !!!
This is some hard coping and denial speaking here. I can clearly see emotions in my dog. I know he feels pain. This guy is trying to use science to justify his religious beliefs.
emotions shown by unaware animals are programmed reactions to help humans understand life survival
@@evaadam3635 😊😊
Humans are not the center of the universe and you are no more likely than a dolphin, mouse or spider to get to heaven.
I agree except for your last statement of using science to justify religion. Science is how we try to understand the universe. Science can be a tool to understand “supernatural” phenomenon. At one time weather and electricity seemed supernatural.
@@evaadam3635 What do you get out of telling obvious lies like those?
What the actual F**k?!?
Brilliant response, professor 😂
That was awful … as simple as that …
I’m hardly ever impressed with the totally inadequate answers to your brilliant questions. But I must say this time even the question itself left a lot to be desired. It was full of half-baked assumptions and goofy premises - from the presumption of the existence of God to the idle association of Evolution with suffering!
It is not a brilliant question but, rather, an assault based on pure ignorance...
@@evaadam3635 You don’t know how to read, do you?!
It is always the same story. Theists trivializing the extreme pain/suffering that exists in the world and resorting to some kind of “skeptical theism” which is a failure as a response.
Theists don't play the skeptic card in any other scenario, exemplifying a double standard.
This route is a double-edged sword. If they were consistent, they would see this type of reasoning undermines everything else they believe as well.
claiming that animals can feel pain is nothing but just a belief that can not be proven... just because a doll can cry does not mean it can feel pain..
@@evaadam3635 Incorrect. We infer animals feel pain the same way we infer other people feel pain. Pain is needed to explain their behavior. It is part of the causal story.
What you are claiming here is silly and dangerous because it propagates even more mistreatment of animals. Likewise, it can be applied to other people to the point of treating them like dolls or mere automata!
@@evaadam3635
There are plenty of species of animals have pain receptors (along with complex brains) just like humans. Denying that fact is denying evidence to support theistic beliefs. If you say that doesn’t mean animals feel pain or suffer, who is to say that you, me or anyone else actually suffers? You can’t prove that anything truly suffers but you can infer it from behaviors and, more recently, from scientific research.
In reality, pain and suffering are likely evolutionary psychological adaptations to keep animals alive long enough to reproduce.
@@rileyrobertson7571 When someone brings “it cannot be proven/you can't know that” it shows nothing more but a misconception of epistemology. They conflate certainty with knowledge/provability.
Certainty is not the threshold for knowledge/provability. It has never been.
@@anteodedi8937Animals have no free conscious souls to be aware of suffering or comfort...
..the power of Awareness is the essence of the Almighty Holy Spirit. We are aware because our souls are free splits of the Holy Spirit...
All animals actions and reactions are driven by a program, designed by the Holy Spirit, that we call as Natural Instincts... it is similar to a doll programmed to walk, talk, cry, or laugh but unaware..
Michael is a bright guy, but he has a significant confirmation bais here.. In my opinion, there is NO rational argument against the fact that animals have awareness and suffer from pain like WE do..The cruelty that occurs in the animal kingdom fits well with what natural selection would predict, but NOT at all what a benevolent creator hypotheses would predict.. Peace..
If there i a God, he could easily make it seem like they sufer but really feel no pain.
Bill I caught that too. He said he looks at the atheist argument as having or not having reasons to believe it to be true and not knowing it is false. There are many reasons to believe that animals have awareness and suffer from pain like WE do. There is nothing to suggest that it is false. He needs it to be false because his god could not be all good if it is true.
@@mickistevens4886 We could assume this nonsense about people as well. I am the only one suffering and god makes it look like everyone is. This is justification, not evidence.
@tomjackson7755 Yes indeed, friend...
I wonder if he has a dog. I kind of hope he doesn't.
It is not uncommon to treat your dog as human like you, no different than a child who treat her doll as a human baby... both are not aware of pain and pleasure..
@@evaadam3635noice
@@evaadam3635 You have obviously never owned a dog. SMH
@evaadam3635 One of the most intellectually vacant ideas I hear with way too much regularity is: Animals don't experience pain.. ONLY a person blindly seeking confirmation bias at any cost to common sense and sensibilities could make such an agregiously false assumption..
So let me get this straight. So if I can come up with a reasonable / acceptable explanation for anything, that casts doubt on the simplest explanation, then that is sufficient to maintain a belief counter to said simplest explanation?!
Theres nothing any religious person can say to me that justifies the sheer cruel suffering in non humans. Humans at least an argument COULD be made because we choose to enact cruelty. But animals have no choice in that they survive because they've been born that way
Why create a situation to fuel suffering itself. Theres no good reason
“Burden of proof” is key here, one that believes a priori that God exists and is good, then there is nothing that can be proof enough to change those beliefs.
Of all the arguments refuting the tri-omni God idea, I really do find this the most compelling. And, the more I consider it the more compelling it gets. It truly does involve levels of suffering, in numbers of beings, over lengths of time which are so vast, they're difficult for our minds to even get a handle on. This is "imagine the size of the universe" territory. Our brain's haven't developed to comprehend these quantities, because there's little benefit.
The inconsistency between that particular god, specifically it's properties, and the 'design' of the system, right down to the basics of how, as animals, we get our energy, is pretty damning in my eyes. I don't see how they can be reconciled in a way that's coherent to me.
This is a tough question... The answer may speak to God's nature or existence or our understanding or lack thereof.
But for me as a Christian theist, its a tough one to address from the present cultural situation.
Nice job. My Sunday school teacher used to use the language of anesthetization... if God exists, he anesthetizes animals in certain conditions to decrease or eliminate their suffering. Actually, a lot of neurophysiology supports the idea that we have built-in pain reduction systems that do just that. Still, what we know of those systems doesn't come close to making animal pain a morally minor thing. Instead, the theist has to add that the anesthesia God provides animals is substantial. It's not hard at all to imagine God does this (if all of creation is conserved by Him, moment to moment, where's the difficulty?).
His dog is cheating on him with the neighbor.
😂 Many thanks for the much needed laugh.
I did not find this conversation persuasive at all, in assuaging our concern for the pervasiveness of suffering. One argument that is growing on me, however, which might better suggest proof of a god, is mother-love. I've long rejected neo-Darwinian because-genes physicalism, and so the pervasiveness of mother-love throughout nature is crying out for an explanation. Where does a mother get that impulse from, to love her own, assuming it's not in genes-as-first-cause (it's not)? I'm stumped.
Actually yes he does explain. But he goes the long way around. I didn't follow every step of his logic with one hearing only. I may go through it again to catch some of the nuance. But finally he says suffering is necessary in higher order animals. And thus is part of God's plan. That's my simplified take away.
Animals suffer constantly. Most die of starvation. God is cruel.
Then you’re arguing there is a god?
I’m saying for those that believe in god, drop the loving caring bit.
Will people in a hundred years time still believe in magical imaginary beings despite of all the scientific progress that's being made and the availability of information in our age? Probably.
The question is wrong. It assumes an obvious absurdity, that a loving God would permit or allow animal suffering...or human suffering. If anything is clear to a contemporary thinking theist, it is that God does not relate to creation as a puppeteer, pulling this string, not pulling that. The question then becomes why God would create a world which includes a kind of suffering which comes and goes on its own? See Jesus' reported comments on the tower that fell on people, not because they were evil, but for no apparent reason.
When you can not direct and observe Growth, Order, and development through discipline and forward movement, know vergence is everywhere. You either choose to remain on the spot or move. Either way, it is your rites and right.
1:00 ... I have the slightest idea why God permits animals to suffer and I don't really intend to provide an answer to that question even in the book that I wrote on the topic 1:34 ... 4:21 ... and I think there are three different kinds of explanantions you might offer so the First is questioning just how much suffering is going on when it comes to the animal realm and if it turns out that there's not as much as we thought well that at least decreases the problem of animal suffering so I'll say something about more about that in a minute Second 4:38 ... 5:25 the Third alternative is to say
Suffering is a part of life. You can minimize it but not eliminate it. When you see it as a necessary part of the scheme of things it becomes easier to accept. When suffering is so intense that you cannot accept it, at least you can accept the fact that you cannot accept it, and that makes it possible to endure without despair. Nature isn't controlled by God, it has no intentions or foresight, makes no plans and produces no final result, only continuous change. You are God and can only make yourself suffer.
I'm just grateful that the universe has provided us with hip boots.
The notion at an all-seeing, all-powerful, and completely good god had no choice but to create a universe riddled from top to bottom with pain and suffering.... is just completely absurd.
We simple humans can imagine a universe free from suffering - we call it heaven. If we can imagine, it why couldn't God?
No need to concern yourselves with suffering of people or animals now because after you die it all gets fixed. Unless, of course, you don’t believe the scant evidence god supposedly sprinkles around. Then the suffering god gave you today will be multiplied a thousand fold for eternity.
your soul left Heaven a long time ago by your own choice despite God's plea and warning that there is only suffering beyond Heaven.. blame your soul, not God...
@@evaadam3635 because you feel it in your heart.
but....why. I ..dont see the point of the question, at all
God is the best person to answer these questions. A God who is wise enough to have created intelligent and inquisitive humans must have long communicated with his intelligent creation to address inevitable concerns and questions. A failure to do that would create doubts about his possession of wisdom. That is one reason why the Bible's claim that it is inspired of God is worthy of our careful investigation.
For the moment, let us agree that the Bible is what it claims to be - the word of God. What does it say about these questions?
From the Bible's point of view, humans have failed in their primary God given commission to take care of the non-human animal creations. (Genesis 1:28) The result is that nearly all animal creations have gone untamed thus giving rise to hooliganism among them.
Evidently animals are not as sensitive to pain as humans are. There is evidence of this in labor pain and eking a living. (Genesis 3:16,17)
It was not part of God’s original purpose for animals to eat other animals. The Bible promises a reverse of the present situation in his coming new world. Even lions are going to feed on straws like bulls in the future. (Isaiah 65:25)
It is also worth noting that non-human animals are self fueling (feeding ) biological machines - higher level machines, unlike humans who are said to be made in the image of God. (Genesis 1:26) Humans therefore have a higher level of consciousness.
Perhaps it is more likely that the Logos is not "perfect and all knowing"... The evidence seems to be that trial and error is the mode of creative becoming... 🤔
No body speaks of the Karma philosophy here propounded by Hinduism... which says that bad deeds as humans can make u an animal in next birth... and hence the suffering... while good deeds as humans can give u a much better life in future..
Karma is bs
Well that was interesting! In less than one and a half minutes Murray tells us he hasn’t the slightest idea what the answer to Kuhn’s question is. And most of that time was taken up by Kuhn asking it.
Simplest explanation why God permits the suffering since such evil will produce a good outcome. Best example as its parallel... kids who got spank and those who only get a pep talk.
Most kids who got spanked by their parents always thankful for it because they became a proper human being when they grow up. Those who got only peptalk becomes more problematic for lacking self control.
This mechanism are true to all complex species in the world.
This is why it does not sound like it was created by an all-powerful god. Surely, someone with all the power would not need suffering. It sounds like if there is a god, he likes to watch us suffer.
@@J_Strong night and day, positive and negative etc etc etc... is how the world works. lol so walking daftness.
the end
the end
We all suffer. But to become a vegan is something that we can all do to reduce the suffering. I have been a vegan for 25 years. I think God should be happy with this!
the whole episode is stupid , asking someone who believes in God and makes money from religion about religion /God is like asking a possible criminal if they committed the crime
The question I thought ever, if God cares.
Why "interpret"? Why "guess"? Why doesn't god just tell you why? Oh, that's right... he doesn't talk or explain himself, or interject, or.... well, do anything.
That cheating wife hypothetical sure had a lot of weirdly specific details
It is impossible to prove that there is no god, but vice versa it is impossible to prove that there IS a god.
About consciousness: this is not a privilege of homo sapiens, e.g. homo neanderthaliensis had consiousness, just as homo naledi and other homonids.
Talk about the wrong question! Presuming "god" is faulty, and the question will get you nowhere.
Brilliant ideas
......god makes everything suffer........all gods do.......
OMG, I guess seminaries still teach behaviorism !!!
Whole discussion starts with a false assumption, that a god, whatever that means, exists in rhe first place.
...men with an inner compass, as in a genuine intellect and intuition, and alpha characteristics realize once at a particular degree, one can study scripture scientifically and rationally without being part of the modern religious BS - don't join them.
There are two nets: modern science and modern religion - most get caught up in one of them; atheism however, being most degenerate and irrational is precluded as such a belief and dogma has no system, explication, exposition, basis, foundation, nor goal or unity with such as truth or wisdom.
The practice of "science" that occludes theology is by one that has had no recollection - an unfoundedness entirely focused without. Religion without science is a sign of codependency and negligence - a sign that such a group or individual isn't serious about real theology or the Divine.
There aren't many serious seekers anymore.
We can talk about k2 all day every day...doesn't anybody want to actually climb it?
You need to show this post to your doctor so they can get your meds adjusted.
Here say isn’t evidence.
Really?
Noah
Job
The lesson on the garden is not that eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil is not that that there is good and evil but that without God( you got kicked out of where God walked ) So then the philosophy of Nietzsche to Sartre to Foucault is right there!
Is goodness only goodness if it is penultimately good? Is less than penultimate goodness evil?
Why didn’t God just start over instead of make a flood?
There are kinds of things
Things have images( patterns by which we distinguish things)
There is what it is like to be a bat: things have likenesses.
All the cumulative intelligence of humans ever are dumb compared to “ nothingness “.
0. Three things
1. Is a primary reference to, about and including the second of these three and is self referential.
2. Is reflective of the first thing and in so being between the primary and tertiary is of necessity self referentially reflective.
3. Being neither primary nor secondary of these three things is by definition non self, non referentially reflective and thus encompassing the primary and secondary is equivalent to the priori of 1., As in zero, and posteriori as in 3, itself non self, non referentially reflective in its existence as an exclusion of nothing but three.
PS
Is But a derivation of:
1x1=2
Salads are meant to be filling and fruitless.
Word
Word salad
A purposefully purposeless intention
( note there cannot be an unintended purposeless purposefulness: never seen in a laboratory nor ever experienced by anyone ever)
No true critical thinker or true scientist could believe in evolution. Strong delusion! Makes Forest Gumps intellect seem genius.
Animals don't suffer. They only suffer in the process of getting ready to be served on someone's dining table.
Way to contradict yourself in two sentences. SMH
Michael Murray is simply great. Today he beat Robert in greater understanding of this subject.
@@sujok-acupuncture9246 Do you realize he completely disagrees with your OP?
Making up a story that you don't know is false is in no way an understanding of anything.
Obviously there is no all-good, omnipotent God in the Abrahamic sense. But there is relentless, crushing Existence endlessly kindling and extinguishing in measures without compassion, care or concern. Someday, perhaps, the perfect painless being will emerge and become God, but not yet. Joe Rogan thinks it will be AI. Me, I'm still waiting for a competent AI spell checker. 😅
I disagree with this ratioalizer
Yeah yeah... but the insomniac atheist dyslexic stayed up all night wondering if there really is a dog.
There is no god.
Read what the Bible says about people who say that.
Read what the Spider-Man comics say about the green goblin. What does your fictional book have to do with anything?
@@Promatheos such an angry person, shocker
@@jollygreen9377 Such a lying christian, shocker.
@@tomjackson7755 prove I’m lying
Nonsense
Ridiculous question. Presumes the existence of an imaginary entity.
Maybe you are an imaginary entity. Maybe you are just an AI bot. 😂
yet you promote what you are thinking to others.
I just can't imagine spending an entire life trying to support absolute nonsense.
Like people who vote Democrat 😂
Gymnatics...
The easy answer is animals go to heaven
This is a world that satan is controling ..in heaven the lion lays down with the lamb.
So why doesn’t God just stop Satan then? According the Christian doctrine, He plans to in the end times, but what’s preventing him from doing so now?
@@seanpierce9386 good question...lets hope this ends soon...its a cruel world but it wasn't meant to be this way.
@@jabster58 If not, then why didn’t God create us all in heaven? Either evil is in God’s plan or it isn’t. In the former case, He has no use for Heaven (or ‘better afterlife’) and in the latter case, He has no use for Earth. It’s a catch-22. Either evil or heaven cannot exist. I would be interested to hear any arguments to the contrary (legitimately).
@@seanpierce9386Maybe we're here because we f'd up. Everyone else is chillin up in the clouds but we were "bad apples" that had to be sent to a world with evil and suffering to test us.
@@seanpierce9386God is good but we are not. This life is but a proving ground for us less than perfect entities. Evil is not "God's plan", it's a human construct. People will argue against the existence of God by saying why does he permit evil? Well that argument assumes an "active" God, or in other words, a God that intervenes in the affairs of this world. Not all who believe in God believe that he acts in this way. I actually think the concept of an "active" God is false because of evil. God is not active or intervening, we are on our own here and it is up to us how we behave if we want that next step after this world. It's a test. Not everyone is worthy and this is how the bad ones are weeded out of the system.
The law of nature determines what is going on, even God is under the laws (the laws don't accept God to do anything on his own).
Yep, and if God exists he's part of Existence and made out of the same stuff as the rest of us. 😂
@@browngreen933 you sound like a buddhist
yea? even gods are operating under the same operating system, they cannot break out of the system
God's primary purpose is Love.
Your god's primary purpose is to control the masses.
The rest of the animal kingdom doesn't suffer that much. And have been suffering greatly in civilization only.
Most animal death are caused by being eaten alive, getting stuck and dying of no food or having failing parts in their body that slowly kill them. All of these seem to be horrible forms of suffering.
This will be my last attempt to end the war in Ukraine and save lives with knowledge. You are witness and you can tell the story. Are you ukrainian or palestinian or russian or israeli or a person interested in the end of the war. Is it possible or impossible to not be interested in the end of the war? Imagine your country is at war and your life is in danger, would you publish the discovery that atheism is a logical fallacy? Why don't you publish the discovery that atheism is a logical fallacy and see how it goes?, you have nothing to lose. There is another way to end the war, you have to ask for proof that the Quran was memorized. Imagine your family is in danger, would you ask for proof that the Quran was memorized?, you have nothing to lose. My truth is atheism is a logical fallacy that assumes God is the religious idea of the creator of the creation to conclude wrongly no creator exists because a particular idea of God doesn’t exist. Did you understand the atheist logical fallacy? I will rephrase the atheist logical fallacy to facilitate the understanding. Atheism is a logical fallacy that assumes God is "sky daddy" to conclude wrongly no creator exists because a particular idea of God doesn’t exist. Would you memorize and understand the atheist logical fallacy to save your life? I am saying to you the truth, I am not lying to you, I don't want to hurt you. Are you a journalist?, is not your job to publish news?. Are you a psychologist?, shouldn't you be interested in psychology?. Emergency! It is urgent! Every moment counts! You can be the hero that stops the war!. Thank you.
When evil lust & greed is in the way, God's blessings go away, and satan gets his way...
...what is happening to Ukraine may soon happen to America and Europe as their people are abandoning the Creator in favor of Darwin's IGUANA that promotes ZERO ACCOUNTABILITY -- just evolving by accident...
Do you promise to quit posting these obvious lies?
What a bunch of BS
3:53 "given the things we accept". Why not admit it's all wishful thinking at that point? After all one might accept that the Undetectable Anti-Deity Donut exists, prevented all gods, and is the reason animals suffer. Accepting this explains not only animal suffering but our lack of evidence of gods.
The question was excellent. The response amounted to, 'well just I wanna believe it.'
THE SUFFERING WILL REDUCE IN TIME.
No, “god” did not because “god” doesn’t exist. The ignorance on display is alarming.
This must be true because you say so.
(1:10) *MM: **_"There's no morally sufficient reason for God to permit something like that and therefore there can't be a God (the atheistic view)."_* ... If you remove God from the equation, you have just "Existence" evolving from simplicity to complexity, and you can more easily explain why animals suffer based on that. Each new stage of existence that emerges pulls from the previous stage since there are no other templates to select from.
After all, "Existence" doesn't know. ... _It just keeps moving forward!_
The reason why there has been over 500 million years of suffering within the animal kingdom is because there was no suffering during all previous stages, and "Existence" has been unknowingly applying these previous "operating templates" to living creatures without comprehending the consequences.
Existence cannot recognize or comprehend "pain and suffering" because it's just the same template being recycled over and over. In the mind of "Existence," why should things be any different with living organisms?
Positive / negative, attraction / repulsion, weak force / strong force, and the 2nd law of thermodynamics are just some of these "prior templates" that have been unknowingly _misapplied_ to the animal kingdom.
"Attraction and Repulsion" gets applied to "Male and Female." "Positive and Negative" gets repurposed into "Predator and Prey." "Matter and Antimatter" gets repurposed as "Life and "Death," ... and so on. These previous templates obviously "work well" within the animal kingdom, ... but there are unexpected consequences that weren't present within the realm of inanimate matter.
*... This is where self-aware humans come into play!*
Humans are tasked with *judging nature* prima facia and the inherent brutality operating within it. Thus, we are now "rewriting the script" for the next stage of evolution by our _moving away_ from eating other animals and _moving toward_ rescuing and preserving them. This is all predicated on "Existence" having a *minimalistic core intelligence* that intentionally attempts to correct whatever imperfections are present within the system, and "Existence" is currently using self-aware humans to figure out what could potentially result in a better evolutionary template.
This "minimalistic core intelligence" is also where people unknowingly extrapolate an almighty God, Many Worlds, and a Multiverse, ... so ironically, we are just as guilty at recycling previous templates without comprehending the consequences.
the choice to extrapolate can not be a property of physical matter being enslaved by physical laws, unless you are trying to flash physics down into the toilet bowl...
@@evaadam3635 *"the choice to extrapolate can not be a property of physical matter being enslaved by physical laws, unless you are trying to flash physics down into the toilet bowl"*
... I am made of physical matter; I am enslaved by physical laws, I extrapolate all the time, ... and toilets have "evolved" over time to increase in overall functionality / reliability. ... "Existence" is no different.
@@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC.. Physics deals with physical causes and physical effects, NOT Spiritual Effect such as the choice to believe in Supernatural Holy Spirit...
... and physical matter, being enslaved by physical laws ALL THE TIME, can NOT take a break from the enslavement of physical laws to have free time to make a choice on its own to believe in SPIRITS that defies your material science...
..it is official, you are indeed throwing physics down into the commode, invalidating material view...
just terrible
What a BS channel this is. Don’t know why I waited til now to unsubscribe.
Don't leave. This channel teaches many things indirectly about systems of belief.
To make change in the world, even good things, may require terror and very ignoble actions. As nobody here seems to really want to find truth and all consider themselves important - nobody here is serious, however, it's all mere entertainment.
Stop with the god thing . Eternal consciousness created this world to be EXACTLY what it is . We are here to be born , to live , and most importantly is to die. We are here to travel on a journey of time , and a journey of evolution , in a place where everything that happens has to be completely RAMDOM . We are here because , this is where eternity spends eternity . WHERE ELSE COULD ETERNAL LIFE SPEND ETERNITY . It is really quite simple isn't it !!!!!!!!!!!!! They should have me on this show !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
you need to show this post to your psychiatric team so they can get your meds adjusted
Every time I think this channel couldn’t get more embarrassing, it gets worse. What started out to be programming for truly intellectual ideas had degraded to this crap.
But yes, let’s have more philosophy from those immersed with the teachings of 2,000 year old goat farmers.
2000 years passed but still clueless why physical matter can chose on its own to believe in the non-physical supernatural God...
@@evaadam3635 There is an explanation - a coherent and very elegant one - for how “physical matter can choose to believe” in a supernatural creator. Simple chemistry provided the starting point for the process and Darwinian natural selection provides the explanation for how and why it continued. The ability to look for and find solutions to problems to the real world was a powerful selective adaption in early hominids, so it is perhaps no surprise that in time looking for solutions to questions about life and death would be answered by inventing supernatural answers.
Nobody is holding a gun to your head forcing you to watch it.
Why are you still here watching these embarrassing videos?
@@jcpmac1 according to your basic science, evolution is an INVOLUNTARY Natural Process... so, you are saying that when physical matter starts to choose on its own to VOLUNTEER, this process of evolution ends - no longer involuntary .. Don't you feel funny for swallowing such nonsense ?
Animals have to suffer so we don't have to.