How Do You Know There Aren’t Many Gods?

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 11 ธ.ค. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 693

  • @seekingtruth4045
    @seekingtruth4045 4 ปีที่แล้ว +61

    For those commenting that there was no explanation, Frank basically said that all things that are composed of different things (a composition) need an explanation for their existence outside of themselves (a composer). However, you can't have an infinite regression of causes (otherwise current physical events would never occur) so there must have been a first cause that was not itself composed of things. If the first cause was composed of things, then it would need a cause and would not be God. But eventually you would reach the end of the chain with the uncomposed first cause which is God. I think Frank's view would be why complicate the explanation and not just stop with the cause of all space, time, and matter being God, rather than some creation of God.

    • @indianmilitary
      @indianmilitary 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      The issue is in the definition of monotheistic understanding of god (by all the 3 Abrahamic religions). Monotheism simply says that there is just a transcendent god who is totally disconnected from the universe but still can create the universe and its "laws of nature" out of thin air and override them (whenever wanted) and control everything by just using a magic wand😊
      ERWIN SCHRODINGER (ONE OF THE FOUNDING FATHERS OF QUANTUM MECHANICS) Schrodinger's biographer Moore, wrote -- “His system - or that of the Hindu Upanishads/Vedas - is delightful and consistent: the self and the world are one and they are all. He rejected traditional western religious beliefs (Jewish, Christian, and Islamic) not on the basis of any reasoned argument, nor even with an expression of emotional antipathy, for he loved to use religious expressions and metaphors, but simply by saying that they are naïve--and will NOT understand Quantum theory and consciousness.

    • @multienergy3684
      @multienergy3684 2 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      This is way I love the cosmological arguments (especially the contingency one): they get to the heart of theism: we can bring to the table monotheism, the fact that the first explanation must be personal, powerful, spaceless, timeless, immaterial, ecc.

    • @bamboo1763
      @bamboo1763 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Or it could be, you fked up, you incarnate to suffer, and you fked up even more and cycle continues

    • @user-cs9tg9ze5o
      @user-cs9tg9ze5o 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Brilliant explanation. And your name is seeking truth. I suggest you look into islam. islam is monotheistic religion - we believe in one God who has power over all things. The proof for islam is: prophet muhammad saws said that bedouin arabs would compete in building tall buildings, siege of baghdad, interest based society, women walking clothed yet unclothed, cars... the best man in history is Prophet Muhammad saws and these are non muslims telling you this because he achieved excellence in every field that a human can achieve. If you seek the truth for sure you will become a muslim ❤

    • @wilsonnkwan
      @wilsonnkwan 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@user-cs9tg9ze5o Islam can't be true because the Qur'an says to the people of the book to follow their book, but their book says Qur'an is not true. So either way if the Qur'an is right that People of the Book follows their book, then Qur'an is wrong, if Qur'an is wrong, the Qur'an is wrong.
      If you truly seek the Truth, only God is Truth and Jesus claimed to be Truth. Dont find fake Jesus in the Qur'an, find the real Jesus whom Historically died and rose again, not raised to Allah directly.

  • @sethinneon
    @sethinneon 4 ปีที่แล้ว +34

    As soon as he tried to argue against "if you're timeless, do you have a beginning?" I knew the argument was lost.

  • @ltlsWhatltIs
    @ltlsWhatltIs 6 ปีที่แล้ว +317

    If you are timeless do you have a beginning?
    Shermer: Yes, of course.
    LMMMAOOOOO

    • @Bc232klm
      @Bc232klm 6 ปีที่แล้ว +13

      He didn't discount the possibility of many timeless entities... he never answers questions directly.

    • @pistol3333
      @pistol3333 6 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      cubs0110 Apply Occam's razor to get one timeless entity.

    • @rolanbentoso9777
      @rolanbentoso9777 6 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      Shermer is a pretty hillarious being...wahahahaha

    • @therion5458
      @therion5458 6 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      Space-less, timeless, and immaterial...in other words, non-existent.

    • @RobertGaron
      @RobertGaron 6 ปีที่แล้ว +32

      Indra Therion Nonexistent in the Physical Realm, but in the spiritual Realm very existent.

  • @JoeLackey
    @JoeLackey 6 ปีที่แล้ว +108

    "These are just words."
    Apply that logic to the IRS and see what happens.

    • @timbrandt11
      @timbrandt11 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      I don't often laugh audibly at youtube comments, but yours made me do so.

    • @seanbrevard7897
      @seanbrevard7897 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      lol

    • @TransGurlGamer
      @TransGurlGamer 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      So if Jesus was created by God how can he be God? And if he is God how can he be fully man?

  • @zxx5
    @zxx5 6 ปีที่แล้ว +78

    THERE IS ONLY 1 GOD
    omnipotent omniscient all mighty
    All praise to the utmost highest God Amen!

    • @AtamMardes
      @AtamMardes 6 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      +zxx5
      If there was an almighty omniscient omnipresent God, then God wouldn't need your petty efforts to prove its existence. God is just a figment of your imagination unless you can prove otherwise.

    • @zxx5
      @zxx5 6 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      atam mardes
      The only thing that keeps me into believing in God is the fact I exist.
      Fine tune universe, complex DNA, wasn't by coincidence ought to be designed by a space less timeless immaterial Being.

    • @AtamMardes
      @AtamMardes 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      zxx5 Current human DNA is far more complex than the single cell primitive DNA that initially emerged from chemistry & evolved. Your inability to comprehend the time involved in evolution is obvious.

    • @AtamMardes
      @AtamMardes 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      zxx5 The universe would kill you instantly if you fly away from earth. The universe is not fine tuned for life. The universe is the way it is, earth got lucky in its formation, life precariously emerged from chemistry & evolved.

    • @AtamMardes
      @AtamMardes 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      zxx5 "ought to be designed by a space less timeless immaterial Being."
      How does an space less timeless immaterial being think, plan & design without a material brain?

  • @stickmansam8436
    @stickmansam8436 6 ปีที่แล้ว +53

    Shermer digged his own hole in this debate. Positing multiple creator-gods does FURTHER damage to his position. If this is his 'strong rebuttal', he should've argued as a polytheist instead of an atheist, debating with Turek on "Is there one or more creator God?" instead of "does God exist" :-)

    • @stickmansam8436
      @stickmansam8436 6 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      +G Will I honestly don't think he looks into ANYTHING that challenges his atheism. I've heard him debate David Wood several yrs ago, and nothing has changed; just the same-old "god of the gaps accusation"-and-"we can be good without God" script :-)

    • @Kaymen1980
      @Kaymen1980 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      Stick man Sam
      Well you, theists, are still out there hiding your gods in basically every crack you can find. Who knew, to understand a god these days, you need to be an expert in quantum physics..

    • @NeoDemocedes
      @NeoDemocedes 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      Playing devil's advocate doesn't hurt your position. You are only giving your opponent more rope to hang themself with.

    • @Kaymen1980
      @Kaymen1980 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      G Will
      Yeah, I’m sure it does, or you can always retcon whatever text it is you need retconned.. But what are you doing, replying to me in this thread? I’m still waiting to hear what “active disbelief” entails.

    • @stickmansam8436
      @stickmansam8436 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      +G Will Haha yea; the typical militant-atheist has a hate-crush on Christianity while proclaiming Islam as a "religion of peace" under the same breath. They would get slayed along with polytheists PRETTY FAST under Islamic rule :-)

  • @ghostysama1155
    @ghostysama1155 5 ปีที่แล้ว +33

    Pray for Michael brothers and sisters.

  • @accentedreality
    @accentedreality 6 ปีที่แล้ว +25

    It has always seemed to me that Michael Shermer is more a fan of what about-ism than truth-seeking.

  • @ImpalerVlad
    @ImpalerVlad 6 ปีที่แล้ว +16

    “Many are called, but few are chosen”

    • @AtamMardes
      @AtamMardes 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      The sin-sacrifice-resurrection story implies a superstitious God who values blood sacrifice, which was a common practice 2000 yrs ago. Don’t you see how the early superstitious folks who valued blood sacrifice created the God of The Bible in their own image?

    • @Noname-qz5hg
      @Noname-qz5hg 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@AtamMardes
      The wage of sin is death and therefore if somebody sins then by law they deserve to die.
      The ultimate sacrifice was the Lord Jesus Christ.
      I'd highly advice you to read a bit about it from the Christian perspective rather than judging without evidence

    • @AtamMardes
      @AtamMardes 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Noname-qz5hg That's what you have been fooled and brainwashed to believe by religion. This is what religion does to the gullible folks who lack critical thinking.

    • @Noname-qz5hg
      @Noname-qz5hg 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@AtamMardes why do you think I'm being fooled?
      Do you have any evidence that Christianity is false or God doesn't exist?
      Critical thinking and logic leads to God not away from God!

    • @AtamMardes
      @AtamMardes 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Noname-qz5hg LOL. You are asking me for evidence to disprove something that was never proven to you by way of evidence to begin with, yet you think you have logic and critical thinking. LOL.

  • @adamalmir5214
    @adamalmir5214 4 ปีที่แล้ว +27

    Here’s a more simple answer. Ockum Razor’s law, “Do not multiply causes beyond necessity.”

    • @renancunha4799
      @renancunha4799 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @Mike Jones Of course is not. Think for a moment: you exclude "possible models" when you already have a sufficient cause with full explanatory power. So, if all other possible models are equivalent in explanatory power, then the ones (or the one) that use the minimal (or the optimal) number of causes are preferable because they're simpler. Any model using additional causes to explain the same circumstance is beyond necessity. It can be the true model but is certainly beyond necessity in this simplicity sense. Now, when one is talking about God as having explanatory power, that doesn't concern explanations for motion, Kepler's three laws, Newton's laws, Universal Gravitation Law, isentropic expansion, the laws of thermodynamics, Stark effect, Hall effect, Coulomb's law, Faraday's law of electromagnetic induction, Stern-Gerlach experiment, Hanbury Brown and Twiss effect for ultracold atoms, and so on. Physical effects are observations of the behavior of natural processes and physical laws are descriptive patterns derived from these observations. They do not have explanatory power for more fundamental levels of nature itself, such as its origin, and "why-questions", since its formulation occurs when nature is already guaranteed. All we know from observation and experimentation only is that they are derived from nature itself, not the other way around. From a pure, rigorous, and operational point of view, physical laws are statements of our accuracy in measuring reproducible phenomena. So you can't use such a "low-level" framework to deal with "high-level" inquiries, such as the nature of nature, moral and ethical basis, etc, which require more sophisticated tools. At deeper levels of explanation, there are many competing ideas, but God is certainly not excluded based on Occam's razor. The whole concept of Occam's razor for metaphysical explanations must be considered with parsimony, as Occam's razor itself is a metaphysical principle. As so are several of the "sufficient causes" that "exclude" God as a metaphysical explanation for various circumstances.

    • @BibleNutter
      @BibleNutter 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@renancunha4799 So do you believe in God?

    • @indianmilitary
      @indianmilitary 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Adam Almir Sure but the monotheistic core of all the 3 Abrahamic religions simply says that there is just a transcendent god who is totally disconnected from the universe but still can create the universe and its "laws of nature" out of thin air and override them (whenever wanted) and control everything by just using a magic wand😊

  • @Nick-s9f6h
    @Nick-s9f6h 4 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    "These are just words." God damn right.

  • @StallionFernando
    @StallionFernando 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    That platypus line was hilarious lol

  • @mikeramos91
    @mikeramos91 6 ปีที่แล้ว +156

    There is only 1 God. You cannot have 2 infinite’s

    • @AtamMardes
      @AtamMardes 6 ปีที่แล้ว +24

      +Michael Ramos
      How do you know you are not suffering from delusion? Schizophrenia is a mental condition well known to medical science & it can affect anyone even if they are highly educated. Schizophrenia symptoms are:
      1) DELUSION:
      - A false & mistaken or misleading opinion, idea, belief, strongly held in spite of invalidating evidence.
      - A belief held in the face of evidence to the contrary, that is against all reason.
      - To believe you are being watched or you are someone famous.
      2) HALLUCINATION:
      - Seeing, feeling, hearing imaginary voices that give commands/comments.
      3) ILLUSION:
      - A perception that is not true to reality, having been altered subjectively in some way in the mind of the perceiver.
      Add the following to the above & that explains why there are religions:
      4) GULLIBILITY:
      - To easily believe the nonsense made up by other delusional people.

    • @Kaymen1980
      @Kaymen1980 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      But you can have one?

    • @MikTukLui89
      @MikTukLui89 6 ปีที่แล้ว +17

      @@AtamMardes If he's suffering Delusion than you must be in serious Denial.

    • @AtamMardes
      @AtamMardes 6 ปีที่แล้ว +21

      MikTukLui89 I didn't make a statement. I asked a question based on the facts known to medical science. Can you prove that medical science is wrong and Michael Ramos is not suffering from delusion?

    • @MikTukLui89
      @MikTukLui89 6 ปีที่แล้ว +11

      @@AtamMardes To immediately jump to the conclusion that anybody who has the faith and the free will to worship a God is Delusional, is an insult and an unfair statement.
      Would you like it if somebody told you you were wrong for being an atheist? Of course not. There wouldn't be free will if the world believed the same thing and we would all be stuck in a box worshiping the same God, but we're not; and that's the beauty of it.
      Freedom of choice. God knew that some of his children would've strayed away and stop believing in his existence, he won't prevent them for wanting to stop believing and I can't judge you for being an atheist.
      To answer your comment :
      I believe in science as much as I believe in God. To learn and to study the world and its sciences is actually not a sin, we're still searching for knowledge and it's what God permitted us to do. We've all have a beginning and an end, nothing was born out of nothing. We've evolved mentally, not physically. The universe is limitless and we're just a small speck.
      I know how you feel. You can do anything even without God in your mind and it's actually weight off your chest. There hasn't been a Christian without doubts, and we've all took our minds off of God from time to time, but some of us regret not turning to faith and that's also why you see many Christians still worshipping the same God from over 2000 years ago.
      (Sorry for the wall of text.)

  • @jacobshank7336
    @jacobshank7336 6 ปีที่แล้ว +17

    Frank is cool.

  • @robertlombardo8437
    @robertlombardo8437 6 ปีที่แล้ว +25

    I have to admit, even as a devout Christian (in progress), the whole "board of directors" question has arisen for me many times. Just from observing other cultures and ways of life. For me personally, it hasn't gone away all at once, but rather in a series of arguments and personal discoveries. But at least nowadays I'm pretty sure of who God is and who He isn't.

    • @jignaio5762
      @jignaio5762 6 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      Here's the thing:
      Among explanations based on the same evidence, the one that relies on the least amount of assumptions is to be preferred (Occam's Razor). Given the evidence for theism we gotta choose between monotheism and polytheism, and unless new evidence is brought up (like something that refutes Christianity and therefore its teachings about the existence of one Supreme God), monotheism is to be preferred.
      However, it must be said that the line drawn between monotheism and polytheism can get blurry when you consider alternatives like monolatry.

    • @goor1322
      @goor1322 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      That's what I call death by a thousand paper cuts. It wasn't just one thing that convinced you. It was a cumulative case that all pointed to a singular source.

    • @Kaymen1980
      @Kaymen1980 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Jigna Io
      Ockhams razor is not a law... The correct answer does not necessitate simplicity... Like, try and define your god....

    • @jignaio5762
      @jignaio5762 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@Kaymen1980 I didn't say "Ockham's razor therefore monotheism"; I said that monotheism is the most likely option.

    • @Kaymen1980
      @Kaymen1980 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      G Will
      Yes, I am correct. Thanks.
      And that’s the problem isn’t it, the definition? Basically all theists define the god differently, if at all, or exactly as needed for whatever argument they are in.. We call that moving the goalposts

  • @intelligentdesign2295
    @intelligentdesign2295 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    "could it be a committee of gods" or "‘A great number of men join in building a house or a ship, in rearing a
    city, in framing a commonwealth: why may not several deities combine in contriving and framing a world?" (David Hume "Dialogues")
    Several counterarguments can be put forward to this objection:
    "And, further, the power
    of polytheism to explain this order in the world is perhaps not as
    great as that of theism. If there were more than one deity responsible
    for the order of the universe, we would expect to see characteristic
    marks of the handiwork of different deities in different parts of the
    universe, just as we see different kinds of workmanship in the
    different houses of a city. We would expect to find an inverse square
    of law of gravitation obeyed in one part of the universe, and in
    another part a law that was just short of being an inverse square
    law-without the difference being explicable in terms of a more
    general law."
    (Richard Swinburne "The Existence Of God")
    "If the
    physical universe is the product of intelligent design, rather than
    being a pure accident, it is more likely to be the handiwork of only
    one rather than more than one intelligence. This is so for two broad
    reasons. The first reason is the need for theoretical parsimony. In the
    absence of any evidence for supposing the universe to be the handiwork of more than one intelligence rather than only one, then, faced
    with a choice between supposing it the handiwork of one or of more
    than one intelligent designer, we should choose to suppose it to be the
    creation of only one. For it is not necessary to postulate more than
    one to account for the phenomena in question. The second reason for
    preferring the hypothesis of there being only one designer of the
    universe to supposing more than one is that the general harmony and
    uniformity of everything in the universe suggest that, should it be the
    product of design, it is more likely to be the handiwork of a single
    designer, rather than a plurality of designers who might have been
    expected to have left in their joint product some trace of their plural
    individualities. "
    (David Conway "The Rediscovery Of Wisdom")
    "Of the ‘unity of the Deity’ the proof is, the uniformity of plan
    observable in the universe. The universe itself is a system; each part
    either depending upon other parts, or being connected with other
    parts by some common law of motion, or by the presence of some
    common substance. One principle of gravitation causes a stone to
    drop towards the earth, and the moon to wheel round it. One law of
    attraction carries all the different planets about the sun. This philosophers demonstrate. There are also other points of agreement
    amongst them, which may be considered as marks of the identity of
    their origin, and of their intelligent author. In all are found the
    conveniency and stability derived from gravitation. They all experi￾ence vicissitudes of days and nights, and changes of season. They all,
    at least Jupiter, Mars, and Venus, have the same advantages from
    their atmospheres as we have. In all the planets the axes of rotation
    are permanent. Nothing is more probable, than that the same attracting influence, acting according to the same rule, reaches to the fixed
    stars: but, if this be only probable, another thing is certain, viz. that
    the same element of light does.* The light from a fixed star affects our
    eyes in the same manner, is refracted and reflected according to the
    same laws, as the light of a candle. The velocity of the light of the
    fixed stars, is also the same as the velocity of the light of the sun,
    reflected from the satellites of Jupiter. The heat of the sun, in kind,
    differs nothing from the heat of a coal fire.
    In our own globe the case is clearer. New countries are continually
    discovered, but the old laws of nature are always found in them: new
    plants perhaps or animals, but always in company with plants and
    animals, which we already know; and always possessing many of the
    same general properties. We never get amongst such original, or
    totally different, modes of existence, as to indicate, that we are come
    into the province of a different Creator, or under the direction of a
    different will. In truth, the same order of things attends us, wherever
    we go. The elements act upon one another, electricity operates, the
    tides rise and fall, the magnetic needle elects its position, in one
    region of the earth and sea, as well as in another. One atmosphere invests all parts of the globe, and connects all: one sun illuminates;
    one moon exerts its specific attraction upon all parts. If there be a
    variety in natural effects, as, e. g. in the tides of different seas, that
    very variety is the result of the same cause, acting under different
    circumstances. In many cases this is proved; in all is probable."
    (William Paley "Natural Theology")

  • @dwayneab1
    @dwayneab1 5 ปีที่แล้ว +12

    A question I ask atheists to answer-
    How did we comprehend a spiritual realm where a God could exist without any pre awareness of a spiritual realm or any pre awareness that we were created by a being unknown to man.

    • @LKBaird2016
      @LKBaird2016 4 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      Exactly, Yale University, and another one, can't remember the name, have both done studies on the minds of children. It was found that all children have an innate sense that there is a creator, to be an Atheist, you actually have to un-teach your brain that there is a God.

    • @brucedambrosio4270
      @brucedambrosio4270 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      We also comprehend Oz, the Star Wars Empire, Goldilocks, the Harry Potter universe, Middle Earth, and Snow White without any pre awareness of their existence. We can create fictional worlds which are internally consistent. All the stories in the Bible could be made up, or at best embellishments of the truth. (I think it requires an incredible "suspension of disbelief" to take the Adam and Eve story literally.) Mankind has shown it can create reasonable explanations involving the supernatural which later turn out to be unnecessary (and false). The Christian God could certainly fall in that category.

    • @LKBaird2016
      @LKBaird2016 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @Mike Jones Not true, all children are born with a conscience.

    • @LKBaird2016
      @LKBaird2016 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @Mike Jones To be *immoral*, you need a "moral system" in the first place. They don't need to be taught the basics, the need to be taught *why* to be moral.

    • @LKBaird2016
      @LKBaird2016 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @Mike Jones Of course you can, what are you talking about?
      Oh please, what are you an Empiricist?

  • @denissutherland3653
    @denissutherland3653 5 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    2 Timothy 5 "They will avert their ears from the Truth and they will turn to extravagant tales."

  • @gloryboundkev
    @gloryboundkev 6 ปีที่แล้ว +8

    The problem seems to be that the antagonist is just that. He does not want to logically think this through. Perhaps he is afraid of groupthink. He is afraid of what the crowd may think of him if he does not give their answer whether it is true or false. He is not concerned with truth but rather fear of what the mob might do to him.

    • @Bc232klm
      @Bc232klm 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      He's the only one thinking this through. Frank didn't even answer the question.

    • @gloryboundkev
      @gloryboundkev 6 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@Bc232klm Frank answered the question. The antagonist ignored the answer.

    • @darthbane2669
      @darthbane2669 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      cubs you need better comprehension skills, he clearly answered.

  • @maxlatour7912
    @maxlatour7912 6 ปีที่แล้ว +14

    A Scientist does not know the definition of timeless....sad.

  • @new-mississaugaevangelismc7364
    @new-mississaugaevangelismc7364 6 ปีที่แล้ว +38

    Atheism is ultimately a denial of what is clearly seen and understood. How sad. Let us continue to proclaim the Gospel in hopes they repent. This is what we do in our evangelism in Canada. Truth refutes falsehoods.

    • @Kaymen1980
      @Kaymen1980 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      What is seen and therefore understood?

    • @new-mississaugaevangelismc7364
      @new-mississaugaevangelismc7364 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      J Ovesen God has been made known by His creation and by the law which is written on the heart of man. All people have the innate sense of right and wrong. Man truly is without excuse.

    • @Kaymen1980
      @Kaymen1980 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      New - Mississauga Evangelism Channel
      And how do you know that?

    • @Kaymen1980
      @Kaymen1980 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      New - Mississauga Evangelism Channel
      Yeah, at some point you have to say you read it in the Bible.. Might as well rip off that bandaid now...

    • @Bc232klm
      @Bc232klm 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Atheists observe what's around us. Theists ignore that and give us a different idea.

  • @jesusisthegreatestever8593
    @jesusisthegreatestever8593 14 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    “If you’re timeless, do you have a beginning”
    “Yes, of course!” Oh boyyy 🤦🏽‍♂️

  • @seanfernandolopez9139
    @seanfernandolopez9139 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I like the Platypus joke😂
    caught me off guard

  • @a17a.17
    @a17a.17 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    -If you are timeless , do you have a begining ?
    -Yes...
    Brain - dead.

    • @indianmilitary
      @indianmilitary 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Conscious, immanent (soul), immortal, immutable, transcendent and omnipresent self is timeless and it has no beginning or end. Guess what? You are that conscious self.
      ERWIN SCHRODINGER (ONE OF THE FOUNDING FATHERS OF QUANTUM MECHANICS) Schrodinger's biographer Moore, wrote -- “His system - or that of the Hindu Upanishads/Vedas - is delightful and consistent: the self and the world are one and they are all. He rejected traditional western religious beliefs (Jewish, Christian, and Islamic) not on the basis of any reasoned argument, nor even with an expression of emotional antipathy, for he loved to use religious expressions and metaphors, but simply by saying that they are naïve--and will NOT understand Quantum theory and consciousness.

    • @FatalSensation
      @FatalSensation 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      You don't need time to have a beginning lol.

  • @YehoshuaMusic
    @YehoshuaMusic 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    There can only be one Truth.
    It's claimed, lived and proven by Jesus.

    • @indianmilitary
      @indianmilitary 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Sorry. Jesus did not exist.Jesus was a figment of imagination of the Jewish mother of Constantine, Helena. If you still like to believe he existed, at least try to validate the nicene creed claims of Christianity like ``Virgin birth ``'' son of god". if you don't validate, then you are just blindly believing that he existed based on fantasy stories propagated as history..
      Magdalene existed but so called Jesus did not. She was obviously the wife of a person called Damsa (a sidekick of APOLLONIUS OF TYANA). Apollonius of Tyana (an enlightened pagan sage) was suppressed but his sidekick Damsa was propagated as the enlightened one and he was re-named as so called 'Jesus". This is nothing but identity theft.

    • @YehoshuaMusic
      @YehoshuaMusic 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@indianmilitary We belong to opposite sides!
      You are talking about a jesus from the things you read, and what you know from those readings!
      I'm talking about the Jesus who appeared to me when I was left with no hope, while I was lying on the surgery table in the hospital 8 year ago!
      I'm talking about the Jesus who spoke to me when no one else could, who gave me endless hope when no one else had any hope! I'm talking about a Jesus who brought me back to life!
      I'm talking about the Jesus of the scriptures who said, “I'm the Way, the Truth and the Life!”
      I'm talking about the Jesus whom I've seen with my very own eyes!!
      And so, I no longer need any sort of validation or proof for Jesus' birth, life, ministry, death & resurrection.
      Well, this world has their multiple versions of that one Jesus that fits their needs and imagination, a jesus that's functions on their command.
      Anyway, I'll pray for you and your family.
      Stay happy, stay healthy,
      God bless, Peace :)

    • @FatalSensation
      @FatalSensation 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      lol no, stop being ignorant

  • @iconsworld9
    @iconsworld9 3 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    Frank Turek is correct.
    The logic why there could only be only God is:
    -An infinite being lacks nothing by definition. Because is everything.
    -In order 2 being to differ one must lack something the other has, they have to differ or else why would you call it different, then it would just be one thing and one thing is one being logically, so they have to differ if you want more than 1 God. And for that they the other must lack something the other has because to differ you can't have the same quality exactly.
    -But a being that lacks something isn't infinite from the first point.
    -Therefore there could only be one infinite being/God.

    • @indianmilitary
      @indianmilitary 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      "An infinite being lacks nothing by definition. Because is everything"
      It also means conscious soul = divine
      "In order 2 being to differ one must lack something the other has, they have to differ or else why would you call it different, then it would just be one thing and one thing is one being logically, so they have to differ if you want more than 1 God"
      But the issue is in the definition of so called "god" based on monotheism. The monotheistic core of all the 3 Abrahamic religions simply says that there is just a transcendent god who is totally disconnected from the universe but still can create the universe and its "laws of nature" out of thin air and override them (whenever wanted) and control everything by just using a magic wand😊
      "Therefore there could only be one infinite being/God"
      It also means there is nothing other the conscious, immortal, immutable, immanent (soul), transcendent and omnipresent divine and its intelligent energy. The conscious infinite and the material energy responsible for finite world cannot exist without each other. So, they always exist together for the perpetual duality cycles of nature to happen eg Birth/decay (including reincarnation cycle of human vehicles), manifestation and concealment of the universe (not creation or destruction since energy can be neither created nor destroyed but it can change from one form to another)
      ERWIN SCHRODINGER (ONE OF THE FOUNDING FATHERS OF QUANTUM MECHANICS) Schrodinger's biographer Moore, wrote -- “His system - or that of the Hindu Upanishads/Vedas - is delightful and consistent: the self and the world are one and they are all. He rejected traditional western religious beliefs (Jewish, Christian, and Islamic) not on the basis of any reasoned argument, nor even with an expression of emotional antipathy, for he loved to use religious expressions and metaphors, but simply by saying that they are naïve--and will NOT understand Quantum theory and consciousness.

    • @FatalSensation
      @FatalSensation 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      lol that was pure ignorance. Wrong. There could be a huge number of Gods, we simply do not, we will never. The fact people like yourself believe otherwise proves how dumb and ignorant our species is.

  • @STREEEEEET
    @STREEEEEET 6 ปีที่แล้ว +11

    You cannot have infinite regression thus *something or someone* IS eternal.
    Eternal matter or an Eternal God.
    Matter created mind.
    Mind created matter.
    These are the choices.

    • @Kaymen1980
      @Kaymen1980 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Streeeeeeeeeeeeeeet
      How do you know?

    • @NeoDemocedes
      @NeoDemocedes 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      "You cannot have infinite regression"
      Why not?

    • @Kaymen1980
      @Kaymen1980 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      G Will
      How does street knows there are only those two options?

    • @Kaymen1980
      @Kaymen1980 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      NeoDemocedes
      Good question, why not?

    • @STREEEEEET
      @STREEEEEET 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      That's not even controversial. The fact you both are trying to argue this point shows you're out of your element here.

  • @Manuel-kl8jc
    @Manuel-kl8jc 6 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    I can't believe this objection is still being brought up over 2000 years after Aristotle...

  • @hansfredriktrongaard7493
    @hansfredriktrongaard7493 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Reason im not religious is that all they say doesn't make sense.

  • @redpinggaming7980
    @redpinggaming7980 6 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Lol I wanna watch this full debate

    • @redpinggaming7980
      @redpinggaming7980 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @G Will lol yeah I found it and I'm watching it now

  • @cybirddude
    @cybirddude ปีที่แล้ว +1

    What makes you think that there cant be multiple uncomposed composers; as far as polytheistic religions are concerned the universe was composed by multiple gods, sometimes all at once, other times via editing and reshaping at different times.

    • @immanuel829
      @immanuel829 ปีที่แล้ว

      Pan- and polytheists often believe the universe has always existed, as far as I know. But science and philosophy show that the universe had a beginning.

    • @cybirddude
      @cybirddude ปีที่แล้ว

      @@immanuel829 Which polytheistic religions do you know that believe that the universe has always existed? Hinduism is not an example, as while some branches are polytheistic, others are monotheistic, pantheistic, animistic, and even atheistic. Many polytheistic religions that I know of such as Asatru, Hellenism, Shinto, Voodoo, Chinese indigenous religions, and many more also belive that the universe was created.

    • @immanuel829
      @immanuel829 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@cybirddude The beginning and the striking order and unity of the universe point to one immaterial, spaceless, timeless, all-powerful, personal cause of the universe. This cause is the first cause, the unmoved mover. Two or more competing deities couldn't explain the unity of creation. "a conscious and intelligent mind is the matrix of all matter." Max Planck
      Furthermore, good and evil are not relative. Objective moral values and duties point to one moral law giver.
      And about 2000 years ago, this personal Creator became a human and took the punishment for our wrongdoings upon Himself. And defeated death. God bless

    • @cybirddude
      @cybirddude ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@immanuel829 Two things: First, there is no reason why two or more deities coulnd't negotiate and compromise on how to create the universe, even if they do not agree on every specific detail. Second, different religions have different ideas of good and evil, and those different religions claim that their morals came from their respective deities. Therefore, on could conclude that the reason why different people have different ideas of good and evil is because different deities told different groups of people different things.

    • @immanuel829
      @immanuel829 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@cybirddude 1. Occam's razor. Plus, the mind-boggling fine-tuning and unity of the physical universe point to one maximal great Being. 2. Moral values are only relative as long as you are not the victim, I promise. 3. What's unique about Christianity? "That's easy. Grace." C.S. Lewis
      Since Jesus rose from the dead, Christianity is true.

  • @dwaipayan10
    @dwaipayan10 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    So why can't there be 2 or more timeless being?

    • @gochiuto4416
      @gochiuto4416 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      it's not just about being timeless that makes there be one God
      timeless is just one of the many things
      you can't have 2 because if God is infinite, he would be everything
      if there were 2 "infinite" beings, they wouldn't be infinite, they would each be half of infinite

    • @rekhakhanna5008
      @rekhakhanna5008 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      ​@@gochiuto4416 can this infinite creator create a stone so heavy that he himself can not lift 😂

    • @gochiuto4416
      @gochiuto4416 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@rekhakhanna5008 that goes against logic and his nature
      God cannot break his logic and nature
      can you draw a 3 sided square?
      it's a paradox that isn't logically possible

  • @Skyhigh275
    @Skyhigh275 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Awesome..

  • @terryrambarran5917
    @terryrambarran5917 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    I shudder to think when I hear a so called intelligent man say, I mean it could be?, Huh, your expecting people to learn truth from you based on, I mean, it could be? Michael, that's your best argument for the disbelief in God.

  • @colonelradec5956
    @colonelradec5956 ปีที่แล้ว

    The platypuss one got me 🤣 i love that guy lol. Get it multiple beings working on one creature 😂

  • @1godonlyone119
    @1godonlyone119 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    God means the Supreme Person.
    Supreme means having no equals and no superiors.
    Only one person can have no equals and no superiors.
    Therefore, there can only be one God.

    • @undyingbutterfly6087
      @undyingbutterfly6087 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      LOL 😂

    • @FatalSensation
      @FatalSensation 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      lol that made no sense. That still does not prove that there is only 1 God.

  • @bamboo1763
    @bamboo1763 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Hey, maybe the comment section is the real reason for the creation of humans
    I mean, look at the comedy in the comment section.

  • @170221dn
    @170221dn 6 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    The bible specifically mentions other real gods. Ever read the accouint of moses? He tried to persuade pharaoh to "set his people free". Moses had his brother perform some miracles but the pharaohs priests who followed another god were able to match those miracles. Even when his people were set free they immediately made an idol to worship another god, why would they do that unless there were otther gods around that were of comparable power to the one that had just freed them.
    And I am sorry but blaming the devil just doesn't cut it because if it was the devil then god should have been freeing the egyptians as well.

    • @170221dn
      @170221dn 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      G Will
      "@ H0M0 Danny: And the "serpents" that "pharaohs priests" brought to the fight got SWALLOWED UP. [hell; YOU oughta be able to relate-to THAT] :-)"
      I don't see why I should be able to relate to some imaginary place that was made up by bronze aged goat herders?
      "What makes you think that the "gods" that "were around" ACTUALLY had "COMPARABLE power to the one who had just freed them"?"
      Because they walked away from Yahweh. If Yahweh was clearly all powerful they wouldn't have done that. these people obviously didn't think he was the real deal.
      "Sounds like maybe YOU'RE making the SAME mistake the ancient Israelites might have. :-)"
      Well that is a stretch. How can I make a mistake about an imaginary god that imaginary people made LOL.
      "WHO would he have been freeing the Egyptians FROM? :-)"
      You tell me. Were the egyptians worshipping other gods? If so then Yahweh is clearly not the only god is he?
      I would imagine then that the excuse you will reach for is that they were fooled in to thinking they were worshipping a god but were actually worshipping satan. If that was the case surely god should have freed them from satan. Of course none of this was mentioned in the bible so the most likely story is that there were other gods making Yahweh a liar.

  • @dejectedpathogen4437
    @dejectedpathogen4437 ปีที่แล้ว

    michael shermer is like the cosmoc spirit of debate. the spirit only wants the debate and will make any point regardless of its logic or sense. the spirit desires the fight not the result

  • @michaelsowerby8198
    @michaelsowerby8198 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    How anyone can ask that most simple to answer question and still maintain that they are intelligent is embarrassing.

  • @johnalexir7634
    @johnalexir7634 18 ชั่วโมงที่ผ่านมา

    There are many gods featured in the bible, namely the gods of the neighboring nations (Molech, Baal, Dagon, Chemosh, etc.)

  • @thearmy8945
    @thearmy8945 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    I will answer it logically , first its impossible for god to get un-omnipotent.
    And if there is 2 god you will get both of them un-omnipotent , because first god can destroy second god claim , also second can do it too , so there is no gods only one God.

  • @stephenkaake7016
    @stephenkaake7016 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    looks like a confusion between 'the prime reality'-a logical outworking, there must be a prime uncreated reality from which all realities come from and 'deities' - personalities, intercessors, entities that we can interact with

    • @indianmilitary
      @indianmilitary 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Trying to repackage hindu/vedic metaphysics using your own word salad?

    • @stephenkaake7016
      @stephenkaake7016 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@indianmilitary thats what im about, word salad and mental gymnastics, unlike you, you only care about the truth and being clear on your points, no projection going on at all

  • @JoschuaSchmidt
    @JoschuaSchmidt 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    basically the unmoved mover

  • @byronhunley6821
    @byronhunley6821 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    Hey I don't get his rebuttal. If anyone is nice enough could they type it out in the comments ?

  • @XDRONIN
    @XDRONIN 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    *Any Action requires Time & Space in order to happen* How can something be "Created" (which is an Action) when there is No Time & Space to be created IN?

    • @XDRONIN
      @XDRONIN 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      Oh!.. Ok. But, before you put the horse ahead of the cart. Explain,.. What types of Actions are Non-Physical and do Not require Time & Space? Name a few, please.

    • @XDRONIN
      @XDRONIN 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      G Will :D You're right, it goes "Don't put the cart before the horse" My bad, I often forget how that goes. :D Any who.

    • @XDRONIN
      @XDRONIN 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      G Will
      What do you mean "Outside of this universe".. What outside? and as for the Quantum Realm, what part of the Quantum Realm is outside the universe/Space and Time?

    • @XDRONIN
      @XDRONIN 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      G Will
      Ok, the problem I see with your analogy is that it seems you think the Quantum Realm is not part of the physical Universe, so let me explain,.. Now, the following may sound a little Star Wars.. The Quantum Realm is everything, is in us, around us, in the stars & galaxies, etc, etc,.. There is no separation, No Inside and No Outside, No in-between the realm of the really small and the Realm of the really big. So at the really small level the Quantum Realm is the True form of what we refer to as the Physical, the Universe/Space & Time.

    • @XDRONIN
      @XDRONIN 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      G Will
      I didn't misinterpreted what you said. You seem to still not get it, let me say it in the simplest way,.. The Quantum Realm is The Universe. Whether that is String Theory and leads to a Multi-Universe.. Is still All part of the same, there are No Divisions at the Quantum level, there are No Barriers. *Think of all the Multiple Galaxies,* how they all are both separated and exist withing our Universe. String Theory simply predicts that there must be a much.. much *Greater Universe* or *Cosmos* where our Universe is just one of many, separated but, all withing the Greater Universe and that is the String Theory.. *And ALL is connected at the Quantum Level* which is part of the Physical and the reason as to *How & WHY* Scientist can make such predictions as the Multi-Universe in String Theory in the first place. Again, No Division, No Separations, the Quantum is ALL the Physical Universe and/or Multi-Universe.

  • @ADMusic1999
    @ADMusic1999 6 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    God is spaceless, timeless, uncaused, and exists outside of space and time...almost as if he isn't real.

    • @JeramyRG
      @JeramyRG 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      @G Will
      "Almost" was word play 😘

    • @ADMusic1999
      @ADMusic1999 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @G Will You know that Allah is also said to be spaceless, timeless, uncaused, etc. You cant prove me wrong so that means that Allah, Brahma, Thor, Zues, Apollo, Vishnu, Horus, Venus, and God of the Bible all must exist. They all share the same characteristics in that you must believe in them without any shred of evidence. You can say anything exists outside of space and time, but does that make it true?

    • @ADMusic1999
      @ADMusic1999 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @G Will So you never condemned belief in these other deities which means you believe that they all stand a chance of being true. Therefore, there is a 1/4,000 chance that you have picked the right religion. 4,000 being the approximate number of religions there are in the world today -- talk about random chance. You may feel comfortable in your faith and probably feel that it is true, but you really don't know. How do you have faith in a being you don't know exists?
      What are we? All holy books say that god(s) made us in his/her/their image(s) so what is it you don't believe? I think that we are an intelligent species of animals who should live our lives to the fullest because we won't get a second chance. I will also say that there is no supernatural explanation for those deities or yours. However, there may be a logical, scientific explanation that explains all religious phenomena. People used to think that comets, plagues, and eclipses were supernatural events...
      If you have non-biased, provable evidence that has no other natural explanation and proves God, please reveal that to me.
      So since making a claim doesn't make something true, then it is highly likely that no religion is true since they are built on claims. Unless, of course, you can show that these claims have supporting evidence that is testable, non-biased, reasonable, and cannot be used to prove the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

  • @daltondunn7856
    @daltondunn7856 6 ปีที่แล้ว +7

    How can an atheist make the argument of many gods?

    • @todbeard8118
      @todbeard8118 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Dalton Dunn, Believe it or not Judaism originated from a polytheistic religion.
      The ancient polytheistic Canaanite religion developed in the early Bronze Age about 2000 years prior to Judaism.
      El was the chief deity of that religion, Asherah, the Queen of Heaven, was his consort and mother of his 70 divine sons. Baal was also a deity in that religion.
      Canaan included what is now Israel, Syria, Jordan and Lebanon.
      Those who came to call themselves Israelites were or had been indigenous Canaanites. El was their original god. The word Israel is based on El.
      It's easy to see the early Israelites carried on worshiping El. El evolved into El Yahweh, then Yahweh through time.
      Here are a couple of sources.
      Google the Ugaritic Texts. They were discovered in 1929 at Ras Shamra(Syria) and gave historians great insight into the earlier Canaanite religion.
      You can watch the video Stolen Canaanite Gods of the Hebrews/Israelites; El, Baal ,Asherah.
      The Professor of Religious Studies at Yale University, Christine Hayes, gives a lecture on it.
      It's only 4 minutes long. Check it out.

    • @AtamMardes
      @AtamMardes 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      The same way that without evidence you make the argument that there is one God.

  • @BT3701
    @BT3701 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Shermer proved that his atheism is irrational and illogical

    • @BT3701
      @BT3701 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @Mike Jones Without any absolute evidence, you believe there is no God.

    • @BT3701
      @BT3701 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @Mike Jones If there is no God then everything came from nothing. In other words, nothing created everything. That fact that something exists rather than nothing is proof that an uncreated all powerful, eternally existing diety must by necessity exist. Lastly, it's rationally, logically, and scientifically impossible for something to come from nothing or that life could come from non-life.

    • @BT3701
      @BT3701 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @Mike Jones Wrong. God always existed. He wasn't created. He is the Creator of all that exists. The fact that man was created from dirt proves it wasn't from nothing. God created the dirt too. When you rule out the Creator (God), you're left with the impossible theory that all the complex life forms came from nothing, and that is scientifically impossible. When you begin with nothing, you get nothing. But when you begin with God you get Creation as Genesis 1:1, the very first verse of the Bible clearly tells us: "In the beginning God created."

    • @BT3701
      @BT3701 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @Mike Jones I'm sad that you dislike my answer, yet I noticed you were not able to disprove what I stated, or even provide an alternative workable theory that doesn't violate the science we currently have. All you were able to provide is to label me as a bigot. Is that the best you can do? Here's a challenge for you. In your view how did life originate from non-living matter, especially since there has never been any observable example of it ever happening, and all tests conducted have never shown it to be possible.

    • @guyjosephs5654
      @guyjosephs5654 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      At least you said his atheism and not all atheists

  • @seshuaiyar5047
    @seshuaiyar5047 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    What or where is God? How can one God solve so many problems,unless there are God's for every problem!

    • @indianmilitary
      @indianmilitary 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      The issue is in the definition of monotheistic definition of so called "god" itself. Monotheism simply says that there is just a transcendent god who is totally disconnected from the universe but still can create the universe and its "laws of nature" out of thin air and override them (whenever wanted) and control everything by just using a magic wand😊
      ERWIN SCHRODINGER (ONE OF THE FOUNDING FATHERS OF QUANTUM MECHANICS) Schrodinger's biographer Moore, wrote -- “His system - or that of the Hindu Upanishads/Vedas - is delightful and consistent: the self and the world are one and they are all. He rejected traditional western religious beliefs (Jewish, Christian, and Islamic) not on the basis of any reasoned argument, nor even with an expression of emotional antipathy, for he loved to use religious expressions and metaphors, but simply by saying that they are naïve--and will NOT understand Quantum theory and consciousness.

  • @Acts-1915
    @Acts-1915 ปีที่แล้ว

    Dawkins: "....those are just words."
    That's his argument. 🙄

  • @chrismott4248
    @chrismott4248 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Why cant you have multiple timeless Gods?

  • @vsc_07
    @vsc_07 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Still didn't convinced, why can't be many gods. Why can't there be many so called timeless, spaceless things(gods).

  • @ashley_brown6106
    @ashley_brown6106 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    What if there are other Gods for other universes, how could we possibly rule that out? Maybe our God created and rules this particular universe but what about others??

    • @indianmilitary
      @indianmilitary 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Monotheism which simply says that there is just a transcendent god who is totally disconnected from the universe but still can create the universe and its "laws of nature" out of thin air and override them (whenever wanted) and control everything by just using a magic wand, cannot be validated
      ERWIN SCHRODINGER (ONE OF THE FOUNDING FATHERS OF QUANTUM MECHANICS) Schrodinger's biographer Moore, wrote -- “His system - or that of the Hindu Upanishads/Vedas - is delightful and consistent: the self and the world are one and they are all. He rejected traditional western religious beliefs (Jewish, Christian, and Islamic) not on the basis of any reasoned argument, nor even with an expression of emotional antipathy, for he loved to use religious expressions and metaphors, but simply by saying that they are naïve--and will NOT understand Quantum theory and consciousness.

  • @DingDong-h1v
    @DingDong-h1v 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Poor Frank seems like a lovely bloke but his beliefs are ridiculous

  • @CSUnger
    @CSUnger 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I can understand the need for a Creator but what’s the need for there to be no Creator?

  • @tomosjackson4760
    @tomosjackson4760 ปีที่แล้ว

    Why can't there be many spaceless timeless beings? Each sharing in part of what makes God... well... God?

  • @1godonlyone119
    @1godonlyone119 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Shermer was a Polytheist, not an atheist.

  • @Liberty-LLama
    @Liberty-LLama 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Saying that something is timeless, spaceless, and immaterial says nothing at all. Why does that thing have to be one thing? Why couldn't there be multiple of that thing? Also it begs the question why? Why did this spaceless, timeless immaterial thing create everything? It doesn't need anything. So what is the motivation for creation? Existence is just as meaningful as nonexistence. It doesn't add or take away.
    So again what is the point?

    • @gochiuto4416
      @gochiuto4416 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      the point is that God is infinite/perfect
      the timeless, spaceless, immaterial thing is just some of the parts of God
      so after that, there can be only 1 infinite/perfect being because
      if something is infinite/perfect, it's everything and lacks nothing
      if there were 2 of them, it would be a paradox because they could only be half of everything, lacking the other half, making them not infinite/perfect
      as for why he created us, we can't know why

  • @stevenrod7
    @stevenrod7 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    You know I never hear of any atheist, ect say if there is a God I like too see or experience this as evidence. Never comes put of their mouth . What would their answer be? You could easily corner them because then they might use a ridiculous answer and compare that to what they are attempting to believe in.

    • @170221dn
      @170221dn 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Not exactly sure what you mean.
      If there was evidence that proved your god doesn't exist would you still believe?
      As for me if evidence came to light that your god existed, I would believe he existed. I just wouldn't worship him. In the same way I wouldn't worship Hitler if I had been born under his nasty regime.

    • @darthbane2669
      @darthbane2669 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      Plenty of solid evidence, you are just blind to see it.

    • @170221dn
      @170221dn 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Darth Bane
      "Plenty of solid evidence, you are just blind to see it. "
      Try me.
      Give me your one best bit of "solid" evidence that positively proves your god exists.

  • @duellingdescartes7950
    @duellingdescartes7950 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    He is a skeptic who is skeptical of some logic, apparently. His Modus operandi is the ad hoc!

  • @jamesdavidson7604
    @jamesdavidson7604 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Jesus was a Jew.
    Jesus said he was the Lord of the Sabbath.
    Jesus said if you love me keep my commandments.
    Jesus said I have not come to do away with the law but to fulfill it.
    The law says to keep the Sabbath and keep it Holy.
    So... why do Christian's observe Sunday and not Sabbath?
    Fact: Roman Catholic Church officially changed sabbath from Saturday to Sunday.
    So... why are Christian's worshiping on Sunday when Jesus said if you love me keep my commandment to keep the Sabbath and keep it Holy for Jesus is the Lord of the Sabbath...
    How do Christian's expect to do Gods will if they wont even obey and keep the simple "commandments" he gives?

    • @ivani.2621
      @ivani.2621 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Thanks for your question, I hope I can do some justice in answering it. I had this same question a while back. I didn't fully understand what Jesus meant when he said that He came to fulfill the law. What this means is that we are no longer bound to the condemnation of the law because Jesus fulfilled it when He died on the cross for us. It's important that we read the context around the verses, the verse you quoted in regards to the Sabbath is found in Matthew 12, but let's read the entire chapter instead of just one verse. Jesus was illustrating a point here and actually encouraged people to do good in serving, EVEN on the Sabbath. The Pharisees were stating what you posted here, "Isn't it unholy to work on the Sabbath?" and Jesus responds here saying, "if a sheep falls into the pit on the Sabbath, is it unholy to save it?". He also states in this same conversation that there is something GREATER than the temple, (meaning greater than the perception they had about the law). What good does it do for a Christian to observe the Sabbath and still treat others unkindly and be unforgiven? Jesus was simply making the point that the people had lost their way and forgotten why the law existed in the first place, and that's why Jesus was sent, to fulfill it and teach the people that there's a new and better way to live focusing on those things that TRULY matter.

    • @hewhositsuponfroggychair5722
      @hewhositsuponfroggychair5722 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      "For the sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath."

    • @indianmilitary
      @indianmilitary 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      James Davidson If you want to counter Abrahamic religions, attack their core which is monotheism. The monotheistic core of all the 3 Abrahamic religions simply says that there is just a transcendent god who is totally disconnected from the universe but still can create the universe and its "laws of nature" out of thin air and override them (whenever wanted) and control everything by just using a magic wand😊. Monotheism cannot be validated.

  • @mikesarno7973
    @mikesarno7973 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Shermer is so intellectually dishonest. I wouldn't waste my time talking with him about anything.

  • @jimi02468
    @jimi02468 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    If you define God as reality itself, then obviously there can be only one God because there is, by definition, only one reality. But in Christianity God is a person who is separate from some parts of reality (the creation). So there's no reason why there couldn't be many such Gods.

  • @tyranttitanium3296
    @tyranttitanium3296 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    What you have now though is special pleading. Only the a single thing specifically conscious and specifically "benevolent" (in quotes because morality is in the eye of the beholder) diety must be causeless. How can you assert that only that specific thing can be causless and say everything else must have a cause? We don't know

    • @indianmilitary
      @indianmilitary 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      There is nothing other than the conscious, immortal, immutable, immanent, transcendent and omnipresent self and its intelligent energy. Neither the conscious self and its intelligent energy can be caused by anything. So, they always exist together for the perpetual duality cycles of nature to happen. Hindus use cosmic allegories Shiva (non dual conscious self) and Shakthi (duality capable intelligent energy)
      In other words, neither the conscious self nor its duality capable intelligent self can produce anything on its own or can exist without each other.
      ERWIN SCHRODINGER (ONE OF THE FOUNDING FATHERS OF QUANTUM MECHANICS) Schrodinger's biographer Moore, wrote -- “His system - or that of the Hindu Upanishads/Vedas - is delightful and consistent: the self and the world are one and they are all. He rejected traditional western religious beliefs (Jewish, Christian, and Islamic) not on the basis of any reasoned argument, nor even with an expression of emotional antipathy, for he loved to use religious expressions and metaphors, but simply by saying that they are naïve--and will NOT understand Quantum theory and consciousness.

    • @tyranttitanium3296
      @tyranttitanium3296 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@indianmilitary There are a whole lot of extremes here being asserted without any good evidence. How did you arrive at the conclusion that intelligence is the only thing that exists (and what is all the stuff we are able to observe, does that not exist)? What do you think the conscious self is? Why do you think that either or both are requred in order for anything to exist? Can you provide a clear definition of 'intelligent energy'? Why do you think that any of it is immortal? What is a 'cycle of nature'?
      Please, **please** use more clear language. I'm really trying to understand what's being said but it seems like I'm going to have to ask quite a few questions in order to.

  • @sukruoosten
    @sukruoosten 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    well he does not love ore care about you shermer !!!!!!!!!
    ALL WHO REJECT HIM are bound to perish for ever without him SADLY !!!!!!

    • @matthewcooper4248
      @matthewcooper4248 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      sukruoosten Herecy. Congratulations.
      The Father wishes that all come to Him, but He will not force us to be with Him in the next life if we reject Him in this life. It is more than punishment, it is free will.

    • @darthbane2669
      @darthbane2669 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      Um sukr he indeed loves you even sinners, it's his wish that they choose to accept him, but he will never force it.
      For you to say something like that tells me you are not a born again Christian yourself.

    • @sukruoosten
      @sukruoosten 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      you dont know THE LORD !! yes he WANTS ALL TO BE SAVED
      but MANY MAJORITY deny him en so will perish FOR EVER
      herecy is a lord who loves everyone en everyone gets to heaven !!!!

    • @sukruoosten
      @sukruoosten 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      hahaha friend i telling the truth hurts en since the beloved son talked more on hell then anyone !!!!!!!!!!!!! you cant say THE LORD loves those who reject him
      go ask the Canaanites ore sodom gomorrah ore the filthiness en so on
      YHWH killed billions with THE FLOOD

  • @fraser_mr2009
    @fraser_mr2009 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    The reason I'm not religious is because no argument for a god makes any sense, and I've heard alot of them.

    • @gochiuto4416
      @gochiuto4416 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      how do you explain why the universe exists? if you follow all scientific evidence of the universe having a beginning

    • @fraser_mr2009
      @fraser_mr2009 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@gochiuto4416 All we know is that in the beginning there was energy and according to the law of conservation of energy, energy cannot be created or destroyed.

    • @spectrepar2458
      @spectrepar2458 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@gochiuto4416 our ability to understand what happened begins to break down at about 14 billion years ago. Our universe began at that time but it doesn't mean there isn't some "larger" universe or something cyclical. I dont have to know what happened to not believe in gods let alone your specific deity.

    • @gochiuto4416
      @gochiuto4416 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@spectrepar2458 einstein's theory of relativity says that time, matter, and space all need each other to exist
      if there was a beginning of time
      there was also a beginning of matter and space
      without time, matter, space, no laws of physics or any of the other laws could exist either
      name anything else that is timeless and immaterial that could create time, matter, space, and all the accompanying laws of reality

    • @spectrepar2458
      @spectrepar2458 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@gochiuto4416 mass time and space are linked. If you have no mass you havs timeless and spaceless energy. A good model to look at is conformal cyclic cosmology. There are also quantum field models that produce universes. There are models that revolve around multiple additional dimensions. Einsteins theory is something we understand now but it does not preclude wider and underlying theories that can operate under the circumstances such as a singularity. Even if none of those work it still doesn't mean God is real, just like our failure to produce a theory that explained solar eclipses for most of our history did not mean that a wolf was eating the sun and our inability to produce a theory that explained lighting was not indicative of the gods using lighting to express wrath. Even if i assert divine being made the universe it does not mean its yours. So now i ask you, if we had a good explanation of how the big bang could have occurred without a God would you still believe he made the universe?

  • @trekwars5400
    @trekwars5400 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    Damn you got school bad no wonder why I ended the video without the remodel. Then answer the question about multi gods just read the original Jewish writings anyone who studies history archaeology already knows that the originals stated Satan or Lucifer was God later translations change that to Angel

  • @walterdaems57
    @walterdaems57 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Let’s start with one, if he exist then why all the effort to prove his existence?

    • @Bidwellz9
      @Bidwellz9 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      did that seem like it took effort? lol it takes more effort to deny because theres no ground to stand on. just feelings lol

    • @walterdaems57
      @walterdaems57 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Bidwellz9 the ‘lol’ means you’re doubting that’s good enough for me

    • @Bidwellz9
      @Bidwellz9 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@walterdaems57 lol means laughing out loud, there is no doubt in me.

    • @walterdaems57
      @walterdaems57 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Bidwellz9 yes, there is and with good reason. Besides that, doubting is good, it’s the first step to think and learn something; trumps believing every day of the week

    • @Bidwellz9
      @Bidwellz9 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@walterdaems57 you say I have doubt. Show me my doubt. I know Jesus lived died and rose again. He was the son of god, God in the flesh. No one can change my heart not even someone who makes claims for other people like "you have doubt"

  • @JT-ht6fk
    @JT-ht6fk 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Only a fool says there is no God. Many are willfully ignorant. They simply will not accept anything/anyone who they have to be subjugated to.

  • @qfranklin2777
    @qfranklin2777 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    How do you know there aren't many gods?
    Answer is there can't be many gods because they would be limited gods and therefore would have to had an origin/beginning.

    • @qfranklin2777
      @qfranklin2777 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @Enrique Isaacs that they came into being/existence which means they didn't always existed and if they didn't always existed something personal would of had to created them.

    • @indianmilitary
      @indianmilitary 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@qfranklin2777 Sure but the monotheistic core of all the 3 Abrahamic religions simply says that there is just a transcendent god who is totally disconnected from the universe but still can create the universe and its "laws of nature" out of thin air and override them (whenever wanted) and control everything by just using a magic wand😊
      It also means monotheism cannot be validated. In other words, none of the Abrahamic religions were built around any well validated metaphysics. .It led to blind belief in a book, needless prophets/middlemen/son of god/messiah (especially in Christianity and Islam), angels, non existent heaven/hell, fantasy stories (propagated as history), proselytization, and half baked responsibilities towards nature and discrimination/violence against (non believer) due to lack of understanding of Karma or cause and effect (created by human ego based identities/ideologies/theologies), reincarnation (birth/death duality cycle) and Moksha (microcosm to macrocosm)
      ERWIN SCHRODINGER (ONE OF THE FOUNDING FATHERS OF QUANTUM MECHANICS) Schrodinger's biographer Moore, wrote -- “His system - or that of the Hindu Upanishads/Vedas - is delightful and consistent: the self and the world are one and they are all. He rejected traditional western religious beliefs (Jewish, Christian, and Islamic) not on the basis of any reasoned argument, nor even with an expression of emotional antipathy, for he loved to use religious expressions and metaphors, but simply by saying that they are naïve--and will NOT understand Quantum theory and consciousness.

    • @gilian2587
      @gilian2587 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      They could be unlimited Gods if they choose not to compete.

  • @brainblox5629
    @brainblox5629 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    Frank doesnt even understand the basic physics he tries to argue on. Time doesnt exist on its own, time has no meaning without space. Time is an illusion and a concept thats needed if we want to work with objects in a spacre that alter their location/state. If that object doesnt "move", if nothing moves, time is "non-existent", meaningless. You cant measure time, not "directly", not even indirectly. And for some object to exist, for ANYTHING to exist, that means to have some kind of form, it needs to be in a space.
    Something that isnt in a space is nonexistent, and if its timeless, it cant move. Its like an eternal rock.

    • @daniellim4649
      @daniellim4649 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      I kept an old photo of my family in my closet for years now, along with some books and accessories. I haven't touch that closet for years, I guess time is non-existant around the closet.

    • @matthewcooper4248
      @matthewcooper4248 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Brainblox Something tells me you haven’t watched many of his videos. He mentioned one aspect in this video. But his position is that space, matter, and time had to come into being at once. He even poses the questions of if you have time and space what would be in it, you have time and matter where would it be, and if you have space and matter when would you put it?
      I’m not arguing whether he’s right or wrong, simply pointing out that you should do more research if you’re going to make a claim of someone not knowing something.

    • @brainblox5629
      @brainblox5629 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@matthewcooper4248 the answer is since time doesnt really exist, space and matter were always there.
      Thats what Christians also get wrong about the big bang. It wasnt the starting point of the "time" of the universe. Its the local origin of "our" universe, the one we live in now, its a local argument, not a temporal. There could have been an universe before ours.
      Matter doesnt come from nowhere, thats right. The most logical argument would be that matter was always there, not that some in our space nonexistent creator put it suddenly in there.

    • @brainblox5629
      @brainblox5629 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@daniellim4649 you dont get the meaning of moving, do you? Atoms move, molecules move. The old picture would be withering, and change its state "relative" to its old one.
      Einsteins relativity is also based on movement

    • @daniellim4649
      @daniellim4649 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@brainblox5629 Put it this way. There's time not because things move. Things move because there's time. You got it all wrong. You argued that the photo of my family would decay and that accounts to "moving". No. You got the wrong terminology to begin with.

  • @dustyk103
    @dustyk103 ปีที่แล้ว

    Of course there are many gods because God says so in His 1st Commandment

  • @spreadingthelightofchristj9081
    @spreadingthelightofchristj9081 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Sure there are othere gods, they are satan and his cohorts, but JESUS CHRIST IS LORD OVER ALL, HALLELUJAH!!!

    • @AtamMardes
      @AtamMardes 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      How about spreading the truth instead of spreading made up religious fairy tales, superstitions, and imaginary invisible beings to the gullible fools?

    • @spreadingthelightofchristj9081
      @spreadingthelightofchristj9081 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@AtamMardes Jesus Christ saved me from a depraved life of sex, drugs, rock "n" roll, alcohol, I walked the whole nine yards of a sinful lifestyle and if not for Jesus I may be dead by now, some of the guys I grew up with are gone, but God saved my life by His grace, through Christ Jesus my Lord and Savior, that's why l'm still here, serving Jesus as a missionary in a foreign land, I'm a living testimony that God is real and Jesus Saves, stay safe, Jesus loves you atam mardes.

    • @AtamMardes
      @AtamMardes 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@spreadingthelightofchristj9081 I'm not denying that you are better because of Christ. I'm saying you are hallucinating. If you were born in a Muslim family, you would use Mohamed to make your life better. Religious brainwashing determines which religious figure you hallucinate about.

    • @indianmilitary
      @indianmilitary 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@spreadingthelightofchristj9081 Jesus did not exist.Jesus was a figment of imagination of the Jewish mother of Constantine, Helena. If you still like to believe he existed, at least try to validate the nicene creed claims of Christianity like ``Virgin birth ``'' son of god". if you don't validate, then you are just blindly believing that he existed based on fantasy stories propagated as history..
      Magdalene existed but so called Jesus did not. She was obviously the wife of a person called Damsa (a sidekick of APOLLONIUS OF TYANA). Apollonius of Tyana (an enlightened pagan sage) was suppressed but his sidekick Damsa was propagated as the enlightened one and he was re-named as so called 'Jesus". This is nothing but identity theft.

  • @MrBoywonder1985
    @MrBoywonder1985 ปีที่แล้ว

    Michael Shermer is a very nice guy and good soul. We should hope for more skeptics who are as congenial and kind as he is. Let's continue to pray for him, to have a "scales falling from his eyes" moment.

  • @thomasclark5413
    @thomasclark5413 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Frank, as a Christian, your answer is simple: because the Bible says so.

    • @darthbane2669
      @darthbane2669 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      There is a reason we use the bible for that. It's truth.

  • @bjsimon802
    @bjsimon802 ปีที่แล้ว

    Christ claimed to be the only God, he does not share his glory

  • @EndTimesHarvest
    @EndTimesHarvest 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    According to the Bible, there _are_ many gods. Only, these are lesser gods who are the fallen angels. The Bible makes it clear that these lesser gods rule over the nations and are the ones worshiped in pagan practices.

    • @AtamMardes
      @AtamMardes 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Smarten up please. The Bible is the claim, not the evidence for The God of The Bible.

    • @EndTimesHarvest
      @EndTimesHarvest 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@AtamMardes It is both the claim and the evidence. Jesus is the Word made flesh; Jesus is the fulfillment of the entire Bible. Jesus is essentially the Bible manifested as a living person, and within Jesus we see the truth which points toward the Father, just as the existence of a child points towards the existence of his father. And just as one sees the handiwork of God in His creation, the same handiwork can be seen within the spiritual truths in the Bible.

    • @AtamMardes
      @AtamMardes 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@EndTimesHarvest You obviously don't realize that you are not saying anything intelligent; You are just parroting the doctrine the religion scam has brainwashed you with without the benefit of your intellect. No offense.

    • @AtamMardes
      @AtamMardes 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@EndTimesHarvest If you were born in a Muslim family you would now care about Mohamed instead of Jesus. Religious brainwashing, not intellect, determines the religious figure you have been fooled to consider as holy and hallucinate about.

    • @AtamMardes
      @AtamMardes 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@EndTimesHarvest Hoaxer Christian writers, scholars, & historian have fabricated the resurrection hoax by making up a fake empty tomb story & fake eyewitnesses/testimonials. They didn’t realize that sin-sacrifice-resurrection implies a superstitious God who values blood-sacrifice, which was a common practice back then - e.g. sacrificing a goat for a new home. It's obvious that the superstitious early folks who valued blood sacrifice created the God of the Bible in their own image.

  • @greyspot00
    @greyspot00 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    "These are just words."
    Yeah, everything you say is just words. In other words, "shut up, I don't like what you're saying."

  • @stutteringdisciple1919
    @stutteringdisciple1919 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    I don’t see how atheist still cling to the already answered 8 million times assertion of “who created God”. It’s honestly such a dumb question to someone who clearly knows the answer (not those who are genuinely seeking truth). They just choose to suppress such truth because it back any existence of a God.
    The argument itself that God is timeless and wasn’t created new cause he is the infinite being is just a physiological reasoning. It would still make sense even if there was no God that there is a philosophical possibility t that doesn’t contradict that an infinite being can exist infinitely without a beginner. Atheists just choose to hack at it because they hate any notion of there being a God.

    • @undyingbutterfly6087
      @undyingbutterfly6087 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      You need to study logic

    • @spectrepar2458
      @spectrepar2458 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      No, i would like there to be a God and the attack that we just don't want there to be one is disingenuous. The issue is that many answers for "who created God" can also be given for the either our universe or some underlying reality it came from.

  • @JuandelaCruz001
    @JuandelaCruz001 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    Zing!

  • @umairz2178
    @umairz2178 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    All of you must get out of Christianity ASAP and enter the religion of God.
    Surely there is no doubt about the Day of Judgement.

  • @latanyaexe8606
    @latanyaexe8606 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    "Board of directors of gods"
    Hahahahahahahahaaaaaaaahhaaaa

  • @dazknight9326
    @dazknight9326 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Well if you can not see them spiritually/physically, people will use a visionary as to what they think you would look like. IE Athenae as I know her is big boned, red short hair, sometimes a short sword, around almost 6ft by our standards, has a strong voice, a pleasure to be around for me anyway, usually has an older style helmet and armor. Always ready to help out and she always does her thing. Aphrodite found near the Sea and Mountain area normally around her flowers, long Blonde hair, fancy pony tail, taller, slender, usually hangs out with Dionysis in the area. I know of around 200. Each God or Goddess has their own area in the spiritual. IE: The Faery Queen overlooks the land of Enchantment. Others have their Kingdoms it is a huge place. I am a higher up in the Angelic Realm which works closer to man, nature, and the world and therefore, is easiest to contact. I have in this lifetime worked with around 30 in some form or fashion in what I am doing to secure the USA and Allies against Russia and China for peace of Nations, so we can work on people to have more personal respect for others in their daily lives. The Spiritual is sought for one Realm or Kingdom, and for some to explore many and gain more friends and knowledge. It depends on the person. Most do not want confusion, and prefer the "easy" way, but life takes work to seek things and grow further. For most just keep it simple, once your knowledge grows forward, be warned, you can not go back and not know it to keep it simple any more. As Arcane knowledge grows so do responsibilities. The big word people fear out of wanting life easy.
    Archangel Michael

  • @Jonathan-mr8pz
    @Jonathan-mr8pz 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    Where is the full debate

    • @seb-stian
      @seb-stian 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      On this channel, just few videoa back

  • @ta3p-theannex3project84
    @ta3p-theannex3project84 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Timeless is also time, as in 0 (zero) is a number.

  • @vr_4691
    @vr_4691 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Bla bla bla. Just look at the number of atheist. Who's winning now?

    • @Kaymen1980
      @Kaymen1980 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      V R_46
      Are Catholics Christians?

    • @vr_4691
      @vr_4691 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @G Will yes i know that. Im just saying cause i know some of you will just continue saying that believing in god is the logical view. No matter how clear the arguments we gave you, you will easily find another answer cause religion is not well defined. You can make so many kinds of arguments for god. So maybe i should just ridicule your beliefs.

    • @vr_4691
      @vr_4691 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Kaymen1980 yup.

    • @darthbane2669
      @darthbane2669 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      Exactly G Will. Too me Athiest dont speak truth,they speak make belief and flat out willful lies only because they dont like the idea of God being in control. Too me it's absolute madness not to accept Jesus Christ as our Lord Savior.

  • @John14-6...
    @John14-6... 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    God is the uncreated creator. If someone created God then they would be God

    • @indianmilitary
      @indianmilitary 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      But the definition of so called god itself is a problem in monotheism which simply says that there is just a transcendent god who is totally disconnected from the universe but still can create the universe and its "laws of nature" out of thin air and override them (whenever wanted) and control everything by just using a magic wand😊
      ERWIN SCHRODINGER (ONE OF THE FOUNDING FATHERS OF QUANTUM MECHANICS) Schrodinger's biographer Moore, wrote -- “His system - or that of the Hindu Upanishads/Vedas - is delightful and consistent: the self and the world are one and they are all. He rejected traditional western religious beliefs (Jewish, Christian, and Islamic) not on the basis of any reasoned argument, nor even with an expression of emotional antipathy, for he loved to use religious expressions and metaphors, but simply by saying that they are naïve--and will NOT understand Quantum theory and consciousness.

  • @GaudioWind
    @GaudioWind 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    What a nonsense! There couldn't be other gods because they must be not composed. I don't agree with anything in this system, but let's start with the first. Let's suppose there is many not composed gods. What's the problem with that? Would they have to be the same? Why? Only someone needing desperately to believe in the Christian God can take Turek seriously.

    • @indianmilitary
      @indianmilitary 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Yes. it is because monotheism (followed by all the 3 Abrahamic religions) simply says that there is just a transcendent god who is totally disconnected from the universe but still can create the universe and its "laws of nature" out of thin air and override them (whenever wanted) and control everything by just using a magic wand😊

  • @khill4053
    @khill4053 ปีที่แล้ว

    Could there be a committee of gods? You tell us, hypocrite, couldn't there be?

  • @itsJPhere
    @itsJPhere 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    If you're timeless when do you exist?

    • @darthbane2669
      @darthbane2669 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      *sigh* God has always existed, it's why he is outside time and space.
      God could not exist if he was bound to the physics of nature purely. He would have to have a beginning if he was bound by time and space, he isn't, but he can exist in our time and space.
      I'm personally excited to ask him when I die and living in his presence to ask him many questions we simply cant learn by our way of doing things.
      Even the angels yearn to learn.

    • @itsJPhere
      @itsJPhere 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      Darth Bane
      But if I think about a timeless and spaceless entity, it has no time to exist and it takes no space to exist. It doesn't exist. So how can it exist without occupying some space and some time? If it's outside of spacetime, where is it? -Again it doesn't exist. So how could it exist? It exists purely in your mind, in your imagination?

  • @jancerny8109
    @jancerny8109 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Turek gave a non-answer; all he did was assert. Regarding "timelessness:" If you're timeless, are you changeless? And if you're changeless, can you do anything, or perform any action? And if you can't perform any action, how are you the creator of the universe?

    • @1godonlyone119
      @1godonlyone119 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Thank you for your assertions.

    • @indianmilitary
      @indianmilitary 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Jan Cerny
      1. " If you're timeless, are you changeless? - Yes "it" is immutable
      2. And if you're changeless, can you do anything, or perform any action? no but "your" intelligent energy can which is capable of duality.
      3. And if you can't perform any action, how are you the creator of the universe?
      Yes, it is the reason why there is no "creation" or 'destruction". There is just perpetual manifestation and concealment duality cycle of the universe. Time is cyclical not linear.
      But the monotheistic core of all the 3 Abrahamic religions simply says that there is just a transcendent god who is totally disconnected from the universe but still can create the universe and its "laws of nature" out of thin air and override them (whenever wanted) and control everything by just using a magic wand😊
      ERWIN SCHRODINGER (ONE OF THE FOUNDING FATHERS OF QUANTUM MECHANICS) Schrodinger's biographer Moore, wrote -- “His system - or that of the Hindu Upanishads/Vedas - is delightful and consistent: the self and the world are one and they are all. He rejected traditional western religious beliefs (Jewish, Christian, and Islamic) not on the basis of any reasoned argument, nor even with an expression of emotional antipathy, for he loved to use religious expressions and metaphors, but simply by saying that they are naïve--and will NOT understand Quantum theory and consciousness.
      Point is there is nothing other than the immortal, immutable, immanent (conscious self), transcendent and omnipresent self and its intelligent energy. They always exist together for the perpetual duality cycles of nature to happen.
      Consciousness is an attribute and essential nature of the conscious self and you (conscious and immanent self) are (already) that (conscious, transcendent and omnipresent self)
      This is Sankhya Vedic metaphysics (around which the whole hindu tradition was built including yoga and tantra) which can be validated by logic, double slit quantum experiment and embodied experience.

  • @kindnessfirst9670
    @kindnessfirst9670 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Until there is evidence of the existence of anything (gods included) rational, honest, unbiased people will assume those things aren't real.

    • @indianmilitary
      @indianmilitary 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Issue is in the definition of so called "god". The monotheistic core of all the 3 Abrahamic religions simply says that there is just a transcendent god who is totally disconnected from the universe but still can create the universe and its "laws of nature" out of thin air and override them (whenever wanted) and control everything by just using a magic wand😊
      ERWIN SCHRODINGER (ONE OF THE FOUNDING FATHERS OF QUANTUM MECHANICS) Schrodinger's biographer Moore, wrote -- “His system - or that of the Hindu Upanishads/Vedas - is delightful and consistent: the self and the world are one and they are all. He rejected traditional western religious beliefs (Jewish, Christian, and Islamic) not on the basis of any reasoned argument, nor even with an expression of emotional antipathy, for he loved to use religious expressions and metaphors, but simply by saying that they are naïve--and will NOT understand Quantum theory and consciousness.

    • @spectrepar2458
      @spectrepar2458 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      I think one can rationally and honestly believe in God(s)

  • @mastersplinter3901
    @mastersplinter3901 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    *punky lunkanorfa is not a god. Only God is God- bottom line.*

  • @xaindsleena8090
    @xaindsleena8090 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Turek is alluding to his belief in magic and wizards

  • @blacksheepwall79
    @blacksheepwall79 ปีที่แล้ว

    God, by definition is singular.
    Omnipotence, by definition cannot share power.
    The minute one God has to ask permission, of the other, he ceases to be Omnipotent.
    If one omniscient being deems the sky blue, and the other deems it red. Either a logically impossible result occurs.
    Or one or both of them is not omniscient.

    • @undyingbutterfly6087
      @undyingbutterfly6087 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      No The logical error occurs in assuming that the beings are not in peace with what they want, cause they could divide duties and keep doing them forever. When you say they would clash over preferences, you are ASSUMING That gods can clash like us humans do, they may be more understanding , as well as powerful. You are judging them based on human quality judgements, which is a logical error.

  • @stilliving
    @stilliving 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    If as a grown man you're still asking who created the creator you are very ignorant on a subject area you have deliberately made your life's work. Shame on you.

  • @Bc232klm
    @Bc232klm 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    He didn't discount the possibility of many timeless entities... he never answers questions directly.

  • @therion5458
    @therion5458 6 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    The universe and life itself came about by "God" who just snapped his fingers and created everything with magic? That's not a satisfactory explanation, much less a scientific one.

    • @thealterego4684
      @thealterego4684 6 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Indra Therion
      What do offer as an alternative? A spontaneously self-creating universe and ridiculously complex biological life arising from molecules "shake and baking" together? That certainly isn't intellectually satisfying. Sounds like magic, not science.

    • @therion5458
      @therion5458 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      the alter ego.
      That's the answer you consider "intellectually satisfying" ? Some magic man floating around in space poofing things into existence.
      Thinking about the mystery of how life originated certainly is intellectually stimulating. Simply saying "God done did it," isn't.

    • @Bc232klm
      @Bc232klm 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Appealing to ignorance is a logical fallacy.

    • @thealterego4684
      @thealterego4684 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Indra Therion
      Actually I consider the truth to be intellectually satisfying, even if I find it uncomfortable. Many atheists start with methodological naturalism, which rules out God as a possibility a priori, simply because they find the concept of God uncomfortable. For them, God can never be an answer, no matter what. They will always say, "we don't know yet" as an answer. But that is literally the opposite of an answer.
      And thinking about how God created the universe and all its other mysteries is intellectually stimulating. In fact, the Scientific Method was partly developed by theists who were trying to investigate a universe they believed God created.

    • @maxlatour7912
      @maxlatour7912 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Indra Therion And what do you believe, the universe was created out of chaos....random chance...you need more faith for that !

  • @umairz2178
    @umairz2178 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    If one God Wills to make orange sweet and the other God Wills to make orange salty then my question is this will the orange be sweet or salty?
    If the orange is sweet then the one who wanted it to be salty can never be God Almighty because his Will has been superseded and vice versa.
    God Exists. He is without a beginning and without an end. He is all knowing. All seeing. All hearing. All Powerful. He has got a Divine Will. NOTHING is like Him. He is unlike anything else. Everyone is dependent on him for everything and He is not dependent on anyone for anything.
    It's rationally impossible to have more than one God with the above attributes. Also it's impossible for Jesus to be God with the above definition.
    And the Day of Judgement is approaching where the sun will be like a quarter mile from your head and we will have to wait thousands of years dripping in our sweat even before the judgement begins.
    Would you then not want to accept Islam?