Theists vs Logical POE by Jack Angstreich (ft. monkeyboy) [Trey Host]
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 16 พ.ย. 2024
- Patreon: www.patreon.co...
#debate #debates #debater #debaters #debating #discussion #discourse #argue #argument #arguments #argumentation #argumentative #dialect #dialectics #dialogue #philosophy #philosophical #philosophicalthinking #logic #theology #god #godless #godexists #nogod #apologetics #gnosticism #agnosticism #atheism #theism #deism #pantheism #intellectuals #intellectual #intelligent #intellectualfun #dispute #criticalthinking #criticalthinkingskills #critique #criticism #criticisms #critique_of_religion #religion #religious #religiousbeliefs #religiouschannel #religionsoftheworld #religionvideo #religionvideo #religioussignificance #logos #discord #discordserver #discordchallenge #atheist #atheistdebate #atheistvschristian #christiandebate #christian #christianity #christianfaith #christ #apologetics #apologetic #apology #theologydiscussion #facts #theory #godthoughts #spirit #spiritual #spirituality #salvation #praise #praiseandworship #pray #prayer #philosopher #philosophypodcast #philosophyofreligion #archive #modality #ontology #debatecompetition #clubhousegroup #clubhouse #clubhousediscussion #darthdawkins #presupuestopersonal #jackangstreich #jack
#patreon #patreoncreator #subscribe #subscribetomychannel #problemofevil #evil #poe #sin
#archive #monkeyboy
![[Live สด] การออกรางวัลสลากกินแบ่งรัฐบาล งวดวันที่ 16 พฤศจิกายน 2567](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wPd7VFfWHIA/mqdefault.jpg)
"A purpose that we do not fully grasp or understand" = "I can't reconcile the problem."
I've become more and more convinced over time that the reason more people don't run with the logical PoE isn’t because of any flaw in the argument but because it's such a massive ballache to get anyone to engage with it.
That's a fair comment, but it also shows how effective being consciously ignorant can be in these conversations - if theists can deflect a reasonable argument in that way they'll "win".
His whole point about accidental goods and bad making properties is irrelevant when considering that God is supposed to be all powerful and all knowing. He could literally just cause those goods to exist without any sort of evil that causes them.
40 minutes in and I cannot believe Jack hasn’t lost his cool with this dishonest ass
His type are also annoying af because they simply don’t care to understand the concept in the argument and they do anything to avoid the argument
I am baffled by how much protective he got when it came to problem of evil literally a hour and half he doesn't even know what argument is and he just jump to speculations about argument and strawman Jack's arguments.
Omg, please tell me i.neved spoke like this! I know I did. I was so broken by indoctrination. 😢
Logically possible but not feasibly possible. What makes a world feasible or infeasible
@@ragnarokfps yeah I'm not sure how he's using feasible language either
Typically they cache out feasibility as either 1. metaphysical modality which is dubious & dialectally circular because they explain metaphysical modality in terms of feasibility or 2. intuition which isn’t a modality unless they’re talking about epistemic modality which is again dubious & also irrelevant in light of logical modality.
They typically are referring to man’s free will. If man has free will then God cannot instantiate a world where free creatures do not sin given that they are free to sin.
Adam and Eve were not created with a fallen and corrupted nature, so they would never desire to sin even though they were free to sin. We sin because we were born with a fallen and corrupted nature that desires the lusts of the flesh (Romans 7:15-20). In heaven we are given a glorified body that is free from the lusts of the flesh. That’s how we can have free will in heaven without sin.
This explains why God put the serpent in the garden to tempt Eve. If not for the serpent, why would Adam and Eve ever desire sin? They wouldn’t.
So the claim that free will prevents God from actualizing a world where free creatures always choose the good is false according to the Bible.
The real question is why did God desire for man to sin and evil to abound if the goal was to have free creatures always choose to love and obey him when the fall was not necessary to achieve that end? It just seems like God needed sin and death and evil to exist for whatever reason.
The rationale for a 'metaphysical' between nomological and logical realities is MAGIC. And at 01:42:30 the claim is God can't create certain worlds without evil. But certainly that still leaves trillions upon trillions of possible worlds, which funnily happens to include THIS one where the theist is the lotto winner and the atheist drew the short straw. Funny how things work out in your favor when your metaphisics is 'whatever I say my magic is, smiply is'. And why should a baby, who presumably hasn't had any time to gain some advantage from having this 'free will' goes to heaven while some long-suffering Jew during the Holocaust DOESN'T because he refused to say he believes Jesus is the same person as his god.
56:17 Under this notion, Sin wouldn't be evil, as sin is undesirable by God, and these evils are desirable by God, so therefore these evils can't be sin.
46:36 I don't know why this Christian is having such a hard time understanding this. God has access to all knowledge. God, having access to all knowledge, knows what is the best world for his ideal outcome.
Given that God knows what the ideal world that He desires, God only desires the good, and He has the ability to actualize the world that he desires, he desires this actual world, and We know this actual world exists because we exist in it, then it follows that this must be the best possible world.
He understands it.
It doesn't follow that this would be the best possible world. Given your premises the logical conclusion would be "this is the world he desires the most"
@@Farce13 Why would God desire a world that is not the best possible world? If he’s omnipotent, what would stop him from obtaining his desired outcome?
@@frederickfairlieesq5316 none of your premises entail that he desires the best possible world, and you didn't define good in your premises either.
@@Farce13 read the very last line of my OP.
That Logibear dude was gibberating against Jack and Jack started getting heated bc he was being a condescending idiot. Then finally tracks what Jack says and looks goofy. Same thing with monkeyboy, accuses him of not knowing philosophy while gibberating, then pinned on "Metaphysical modality" just keeps repeating the scope of necessity without actually informing mb and Jack what metaphysical modality is then gets clowned then they get they payback with Jack saying theyd have to walk him threw it. Golden!
please upload more debate content with jack angstriche there is not much jacks content available on TH-cam. Or tell jack to also make a channel on TH-cam because ticktok is banned in many countries.
@@noexception9598 Jack won't make a channel lol, and there's a huge amount of Jack vids, like hundreds, but I'll see if I find any other content with Jack I feel is worth posting.
@@darth_mb yeah but those hundreds of videos are already finished watching they are not enough for us debatemaniac. and it's ok if he doesn't want to make a youtube channel but the demand still exist.
@@noexception9598 i mean I have several Jack videos on my patreon, but yeah I'll see what the next thing i can upload that likely involves Jack
56:43 most confident kamikaze attack of all time. "I dont have to give you the reason"
These whitebelt thiests are a headache of buzzwords and rehearsed scripts. It's emberassing
That poor Christian and his brutal cognitive dissonance. It's hard to hear.
Theists are the most intellectually dishonest people. God can literally actualize a world where he aims at those goods without allowing some accompanying evil to occur.
I would say apologists (rather than theists generally) are the most intellectually dishonest people because they’ve put in the time to try to understand the arguments against their positions.
I was talking to a Christian a long time ago who had made Christianity the center of his life. He spends his time reading the Bible, going to church, praying, etc, but he had never heard the term “apologist.” He had never heard of POE, the Euthyphro dilemma, or any of the popular arguments (cosmological, transcendental, design).
I’ve subsequently found this to be true for 99% of the Christians I know. This revelation made me realize just how shallow Christianity really is. If these arguments against theism were taught in church, I’m convinced they would decimate the population of practicing Christians. I don’t think all Christians are as intellectually dishonest as the average Christian apologist.
What's wrong with believing in a creator and following Jesus? His teachings give great value to individuals and society.
Fun debate channel MB
@@jwonderfulsuccess Well there's no problem in believing in a creator if you have good epistemic reasons to, which I'm not convinced much if anyone are. Maybe Jesus' teaching principally guide your moral values, then I don't see issue in using a model type theological normative framework. But I definitely have issue in me and many people believing in a creator for various epistemologically tentative reasons.
@@darth_mbIsn't it so very obvious the universe is designed. Everything works so perfect, yes there are problems but the text gives us reason for that and redemption.
We are humans with limited knowledge and abilities although we often think we are so smart. Think of how powerful a creator has to be to create this universe and the unfathomable complexity of it. We ought to be more humble in our approach.
@@masterkeymotivation no, it's almost like it's very obviously not designed.
You must be blind or in deep denial if you believe nature does not look designed.
54:47 No, In Christianity, God's sacrifice was only in forgiveness of sins. The sacrifice was not an abolishment of evil, and it had nothing to do with the prevention or nullification of evil. The sacrifice was only a method for people to be forgiven so that they may have access to heaven. And even that isn't guaranteed as it is also said that once you are saved and you knowingly commit a sin again, you are no longer saved and you can never be saved again as there is no sacrifice left for the sin (Hebrews 10:26)
or god could just let them access heaven without having a human nailed to a cross since he can do whatever he wants, if that was the only way he could forgive his creation, then I'm not sure that this being is actually worthy of worship, secondly he already knows that every single human will continue to sin after jesus' crucifixion and still declares that all people will no longer be saved for doing this.
what a batsh!t crazy story. if any other sentient being acted this way we would call them monstrous, but if it happens in the bible its beautiful and perfect.
The cringe of this Christian who clearly understands he believes in nonsense. I suppose he believes that if he argues for anything other than evangelical fundamentalism, he will got to hell.
1:14:28 "if and only if" lmao dude was trying to sound logical and make it seem like he was making sense
Do you have the stream with Davy in it as well?
@@deetheoriginal3117 some of it but that's private. It's on my Patreon.
@@darth_mbstarting energy wash
@@raya.p.l5919 ?
1:42:47 under this view God cant do miracles in this world.
53:03 How is Christ the answer to a bolder falling and killing a baby? That's a complete non-sequitur.
1. Boulder
2. "It's all part of a bigger plan"
See how you did not use Christ.
@@displacegamer1379 I'm just saying that that's the answer they would probably give
@@Farce13 perfect steelman
50:47 If he doesn't believe in desires in this way, then the argument's not for him. He should dismiss himself from the conversation because this argument doesn't apply to his God. This argument only applies to a god that acts in this way. If he has a different god that doesn't act in this way, then this argument doesn't apply to him. His god doesn't have this particular problem of evil. It doesn't apply to his god.
5:10 , 5:24, 5:32 Jack saying "Oh my God!" at 5.10 unwittingly, and then repeating it again to hide the fact that he unconsciously tried to call God to make these theists reasonable.
@@KlPop-x1o wtf are u saying 💀
@@darth_mb Jack is a closeted theist
This is the 'By using a standard phrase that originated in your culture's religion, you affirm the actual existence of that culture's deity' argument. It has to overlook the fact that 'Oh my God' is used as an expression of disbelief.
mEtApHysIcKKS
Jack is so cringe. All the halfway decent theists who could have been engaged and their arguments shown to be wrong if they weren’t disincentivized bc of the screaming and interrupting. Too bad. Lost opportunities.
They had an opportunity to “actually “ address Jacks argument. Instead they pulled out every obfuscation in the book to avoid having to do so.
@@rainrick66 how's is Jack cringe? Bc he's debating morons who can't track or stay dialectically linear and shows emotion towards those blatantly dishonest responses and behaviors?
Well yeah he is sometimes but here he was just right and the other guy was being obtuse.
(That said the screaming was uncool).
Jack's the goat
“bY gOd LiKes” what the actual fuck !?!??!?
lights
saying 'by jm3606's lights' is another way to say 'in jm3606's view' or 'from jm3606's perspective'
@@bentdune8143 you really expect me to believe this bullshit. No one talks like this except you…stop making shit up.
@@bentdune8143 By my lights bentdune is making shit up….. no one talks like this.
@@jm3606You’re just unfamiliar with the term.
When you say, “No one talks like this,” what you really mean is that YOU don’t talk like this. Your first comment is just broadcasting your ignorance of a philosophical term.