“If God exists, he wouldn’t be hidden” - Cold Case Response
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 พ.ย. 2024
- In a recent episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner offered a number of brief, rhetorically powerful responses to the objection: “If God exists, he wouldn’t be so hidden.” Why doesn’t God make his existence known in a more persuasive way?
And, of course, we respond to Wallace's responses so that we can keep the conversation going beyond these surface-level copy-and-paste thoughts.
Quick Shot Responses to “If God exists, he wouldn’t be so hidden”
• Quick Shot Responses t...
Support Paulogia at
/ paulogia
www.paypal.me/p...
www.buymeacoff...
teespring.com/...
Follow Paulogia at
/ paulogia0
/ paulogia0
/ discord
I like how he tells people to see everything through a religious lense, attributing everything to God, and then calls atheists "biased against supernatural explanations" for not doing this.
You really should stop being biased against something that has absolutely not good evidence to support it actually existing
This is what they all do. They cant understand why you cant believe in the "evidence" for god but refuse to look at evidence against gods existence without viewing it through "god goggles."
@Joseph Noonan I agree, I had a good laugh at that one.
Yes but how do you explain all the amputees who pray and get their limbs back.
@# I'd just like to point out the irony that this is coming from somebody who used the wrong version of the word "they're" so.....yeah. Play stupid games win stupid prizes.
God's so good at hide and seek that if you don't find him he'll burn ya forever. But he loves you. He might not show it but he's kinda got to burn you for not being good enough at hide and seek. Sowweeee, he says, Not my rules.
And he already knows, before he creates you, whether you will love him back, be gay or straight, go to church, be a good person, etc. The concept of a divine unchanging plan for everyone is in direct contradiction with free will and prayer.
@@joecoolioness6399 - The free will argument is a joke. Free will is necessary basically because the reward is everlasting paradise, but the consequence is eternal torture. But we were all created against our will. We had no choice whether we were created or not. It sucks to be forced to live less than a century only to be set on fire for eternity.
@@emptyhand777 God knows everything that has happened, is happening and will happen in the future therefore he cannot give us free will because he himself is incapable of understanding free will.
The fact that we didnt ask to be made and that god knows the future means there isnt free will
But he made the rules! Lol
Seriously though God would be like an invisible Popee the Performer.
“Then maybe complex conversations are not for you.” LOL. I love Paul’s subtlety.
Yeah! 7:55
This is why I never dated women. I just had my best friends write books about how great I am and have them try to get women to read them and fall in love with me! It wouldn't be REAL love if she got to know me personally before loving me! LMFAO!
Perfect!
Man... I did it all wrong. Here I've been happily married for 11 years due to making my love known through physical interaction. If I could go back or ever have a new opportunity, I'd do it the right way.
Thanks!
@@dwo356
Yeah, you just have to learn to think like a god - it's a real chick magnet :-) But to do it right, you have to be sure to beat her every time she makes the tiniest mistake in your eyes, and make sure she accepts responsibility for not knowing you were bringing the boss home for dinner. But make sure to give her a good beating - it is important!
@@kathryngeeslin9509
Given that notion - it is no surprise that celibacy was considered a virtue! :-)
@@pdoylemi Whoa now. You're mistaken. I shouldn't just beat her. I have to go randomly beat the innocent around her as well sometimes too.
In fact, if I really want to be like a god, sometimes I must ONLY beat the innocent people or her kids for her wrongdoing while sparing her from punishment. Well, that's what the biblical god would do anyways.
These apologists just reword the same shit from 100+ years ago that's been shotdown countless times.
And they do it over and over again.. So annoying.
It's bonkers.
You don't read bronze age books to find out about any gods that might exist.
You just get on with your life and if a god shows up you politely say "hello" ...
Then put down the liquor bottle and go to bed.
In order for a god to exist you need to take a course in how to create it.
Response #1: He remains hidden so we can respond from a position of love. Lets think about this: You see an amazing person that you would like to date. You don't reveal your self to that person so that they can respond from a position of love, not fear. Does this not sound ridiculous?
My parents never hid from me, they were always there where I could see them, talk to them, and hug them. Why can't god do the same if he was using the parent argument.
But you also send anonymous messages to them saying that if they _don't_ love you more than life itself, you will come one day, grab them, and brutally torture them in your basement. Because you wouldn't want to coerce them or anything.
yes
It is not a matter of love or fear, it is a matter of free will. The issue is, if God shows himself, he removes your free will, and God does not want to remove your free will. God gives you an adequate amount of evidence to believe in him. If He gave you a little bit more, your free will would be removed, if He gave you a little less, you could easily doubt His existence.
@@kevincrady2831 Lots of Atheist have that misconception, and that is why they don't think God exists. Hell is just the absence of God. People have the free will to be with God or not. God is not beating on you because you do not believe in him, you chose to be away from God, which is the torture itself. Hell is also not the same for everyone, God is fair in everyones punishment. On top of just being away from God, they may also be punished for any evil they have done. Your misconception of punishment is the reason you are an Atheist.
He has comments disabled. Of course, he does.
That means he lied when he said he's interested in engaging with people and having dialogs. He's not interested in a dialog. That would involve a conversation that goes both ways, and he obviously can't handle that.
I am an atheist but I disagree with that statement, he could easily have the comments enabled and choose not to respond like many you tubers do, and I am sure he knows this. There are channels that have comments disabled and they're aren't even discussion debate type of things like basketball game of H.O.R.S.E for example. So your logic doesn't make any since to say that because someone has comments disabled, therefor there lying.
@@zzzzzz...9902 however many of the channels that promote god disable comments. Maybe, just maybe he does not want athiest commenting on his "open for discussion " video. But your right alot of you tube channels disable comments.
@TheRealMrMcCoyI never said that ''someone has comments disabled, therefor there lying" was his direct quote. Secondly, my basketball example is not ignorant as you just don't understand that I was comparing the comment section being disabled no various site, that was the entire point. You're being ignorant here. Thirdly, I said that I am an atheist because some people may think that I am a Christian because I was defending the Christians in this case, I am not trying to imply that my 'I am an atheist' comment makes my argument more or less valid. Nice try kid.
@@zzzzzz...9902 Comment old, but I still have to reply.
"He has comments disabled." "That means he lied when he said he's interested in engaging with people and having dialogs." To be fair, this is hyperbole. He can still be interested in engaging with people and having dialogues, and he almost certainly _does,_ at least to some degree, without having comments enabled on his video. The point is, disabling the comments is an action _directly antithetical_ to engaging with people and having dialogues. It closes off the most obvious avenue for dialogue about the video; that's what the comment section is _for._ This means disabling the comments is indicative of a _lack_ on interest in engaging with people and having dialogues, which belies his stated interest in exactly that.
He _could_ have comments enabled and still choose not to actually engage with any of the people there; that would still be an example of dishonesty on his part, but it'd at least be harder to identify, as you'd have to look through most of the comments to discover that he wasn't responding to anyone (this implies he cares more about hindering dialogue, since he's willing to do it even at the cost of revealing his dishonesty). Disabling the comments means he _can't_ respond to anyone, because there's nothing to respond to (meaning he's not only preventing himself from engaging, he's taking a big step to prevent _anyone_ from engaging, which is a generally anti-dialogue act).
It boggles my mind how you could think anything you said counters what you're responding to.
The fact that other videos have their comments disabled is irrelevant. Any video with comments disabled is _also_ indicative that the uploader doesn't want to engage with people or have dialogue, but that's only an example of dishonesty on the part of the uploader if they specifically say they _do_ want to engage and have dialogue, especially if they say such _in the very video they've disabled comments for._
it is not disabled now. I suspect he disables them when he first posts them to avoid getting spammed, then opens them up later. I left a comment there just now.
Sooooooo! Yet another "believe it 'hard' enough and it will be true" "argument" for the existence of a supernatural sky wizard .
William Lane Craig must be so proud.
Yeah, been there, tried that, did not work one bit.
Probably pissed that this guy is horning in on his cash cow...
Apologists are just sophists. Socrates is rolling in his grave!
How dare you insult the best philosopher of our times! You hide the truth in unrighteousness and refuse to read his most complete presentation of his arguments: www.wiley.com/en-us/The+Blackwell+Companion+to+Natural+Theology-p-9781444350852. Silly atheist denying objective morality and beliving unreasonable causes of the universe. Allah has shown all current 'beginningless' universes actually have a beginning: www.newscientist.com/article/mg21328474-400-why-physicists-cant-avoid-a-creation-event/?ignored=irrelevant.
@@bilalhussein9730 if morality is objective, is it wrong for a man to force himself onto a woman who does not wish to sleep with him?
...how about if he gave her father 2 camels beforehand? Did it suddenly become a separate situation, where the woman is now in the wrong and is cursed by all the angels in heaven?
We don't really have a way to know whether or not morality is objective, but one of the prerequisites for that is having morality. Shame the Quran is as far from that as anything else the Saudis did 1300 years ago.
This issue was probably the biggest thing that pushed me out of religion. I used to believe that God existed whole heartedly. I patterned my life around that belief. I reached an important point in my life where some big decisions could affect the rest of my life and at that time I had things happen that led me to believe that I was not receiving the direction from God that I needed to make the right decisions. Mind you, I thought that this was MY fault. I thought I must be doing something that was hurting or hindering my connection to God. And I felt like I desperately needed to fix that problem. So I did everything I could think of including church attendance, religion classes, stupid amounts of prayer and scripture study, seeking advice from fellow Christians and more to "find God again".
Unfortunately, the more I searched and studied, the louder the silence became. I never came to the conclusion that a God doesn't exist, but I did come to the conclusion that I had no reliable way to communicate with a God if one existed. And to me that was functionally the same as God not existing.
I could speak, but I had no good reason to believe that any god heard. And even worse, I could listen but I would have no way of knowing whether a god responded. I could attribute any events, thoughts, or feelings I had to a god as I was listening (as many theists do) but I would have no way to be confident that I gave the god credit for the right events/thoughts/feelings. You can't trust a compass that only works half the time. Especially if the direction you're going matters a great deal.
I have no use for pursuing a divine being that is not evidentially evident. My involvement in religion was based around the cultivation of a relationship with God. But you cant have a relationship with a being that you cannot communicate with. Therefore I have no use for religion or belief in a god.
I feel ya
Sounds very similar to my own journey on this. I wasted many years up to age 30 trying to find God but eventually reached the same conclusion as you. It’s been liberating.
Dude, I have talked to many polytheists who claim to have had a revelation with their gods. If they speak the truth, I honestly think this would be a relationship. You should also look into Sikhism.
@@TheMilitantMazdakite if I looked and found no way to communicate with any God what would "pursuing polytheism" look like? Sounds like a backward approach. I cannot start on the assumption that many Gods exist and then try to figure out what they are and how to communicate with them. My only path to polytheism would be to start by becoming convinced that a god exists and then later becoming convinced that a different god exists. At that point I would defacto be a polytheist. But being a polytheist is not something I can "look into" like it would be something I'd just decide to be.
Also, I've looked into Sikhism. I appreciate a focus on selfless service and humanism but Sikhism goes beyond those things. Sikhism is based on a "one god" concept that a god exists and that no religion is fully correct about it but that everything has bits and pieces of the truth about it. Again, it encourages working backwards. Start with the assumption that God exists and then find ways to make sense of how every other religious belief fits into this concept of God. I can't do that.
Also, things like a practice of chanting the name of God to reach some sort of spiritual alignment are an immediate red flag to me. Anything involving repetitive recitation comes across to me as manipulative. We know through research that repetition and recitation can lead people to believe things that are false. It's called the illusory truth effect. So when any belief system employs repetitive action to "teach truth" it is a pretty good warning sign that there's some bullshit about. If something is true,it can be learned and understood through reliable methods and would not depend on practices that we know can trick human brains.
In the end, Sikhism makes a bunch of claims that I see as unsupported by evidence about the nature of reality and about a "one god". I see no evidence that anything exists beyond the natural world. I will wait until I see reasonable evidence of such things before I jump to conclusions.
Maybe you have unrealistic expectations of God? Past generations had simpler expectations of life. This life can be difficult without striving for what popular religious heretic Joel Osteel calls "Your best life now".
"But godliness with contentment is great gain, for we brought nothing into the world, and we cannot take anything out of the world. But if we have food and clothing, with these we will be content" - 1 Timothy 6:6-8
Is God hiding from us because of His fear of not living up to the hype?
He's such a humble and shy guy XD He does love disco though. With fire and brimstone at gay orgies. The works! :p
"Do you think God stays in Heaven because He too lives in fear of what He's created?" -Spy Kids
Best post!
@Mister Privacy "Gods wrath upon the Sons of disobedience"?
Sounds like a couple of heavy-metal bands. God's Wrath & the Sons of Disobedience.
@Mister Privacy So God is a judging father that you will for ever be in dependence of?
That's a sad thought... never being allowed to stand on your own. Never to be free. No wonder the angles felt obliged to show a little anger. Stunted, limited, opressed, are words that comes to mind.
Why do you make the concious decision to believe in and worship such an idea. Why would you want to. The answer, quite paradoxically, is your own desire to do as you please. Unburdening the responsibility for your actions onto the abstract idea of a non-corperal being, utimately responsible for everything, leaves your conscience manageable as you burn witches at the stakes, or tell a quireboy to have a taste, or spit in the face of a human being not willing to conform to your idea of sexuallity.
You're not better that anyone just because you proclaim a belief in an idea. Especially as this particular idea can not, by its own admission, never be proven to be truthful, as ignorance is required for the idea to 'make sense', ie by having faith.
(It did sort of help, but not in any way that I assume that you intended. Sorry ;-)
obviously god is hiding to give us a surprise party
"Surprise! I loved you all along, and wanted a personal relationship with you, but I also wanted for there to be a chance that you'd burn in hell for eternity. Ha Ha." -God
@@yadabub
Oldie but goodie:
Knock, knock!
Who's there?
Jesus! Let me in so I can SAVE you!
From what?
From what I will do if you don't let me in!
Yes for most that surprize will be judgemont
@@pdoylemi
You are the one who has to knock
@@pdoylemi So a Christian falls off a cliff.On the way down he grabs a branch that is jutting out and is hanging on for dear life.He starts shouting up to the top,"Help! Is there anybody up there?!"-He hears somebody shouting down to him,"I'm here! This is God,your savior! So the man shouts up,"What are you going to do God?! God shouts back,"Let go of the branch!" The man shouts back,"You want me to let go of this branch,God?" God says,Yes.Let go of the branch!" The man thinks for a minute and then says,"Is there anybody else up there?!"
At age 11 I became an Atheist, during my education for my Catholic Conformation, not a choice but commanded to do it, I'm glad it happened. I never heard such BS from adult men.
Ask a question and the answer was always take it on faith, you want me to believe in Fairy Tales from a book that purely made no sense and so violent it should be rated xxx.
They didn't expect me to read the book.
That's EXACTLY what did it for me, the confirmation process. My faith prior to that was simple, a basic belief that God was out there somewhere. Once detailed religious doctrine was set out at a near-adult level of education it just became more and more outlandish. I was told that I was a slave so many times that I quit going, much to my mom's chagrin. Catholic confirmation was a real deal-breaker to me.
Actually reading the bible is one of the best ways to cure someone of christianity.
Indeed, so let's through a question look at why they insist on using scripture.
"Is it rational to use the Bible as evidence?"
To use, yes(_if you're an theist_ (explaination below.)
To accept NO, just no.
Seeing that they have *no real evidence* to show for anything, the only source they have to _support_(and I mean that in the lightest sense.) test in their claim is the bible.
Seeing that scripture is the closest thing to _evidence_ they have, it would be irrational (for them)not to use it.
Thing is, seeing that *none* of the claimed supernatural actions described in the bible have been confirmed by outside sources, *it is Illogical to accept it* as evidence.
I am not saying that the bible does not have any factual information in it, as some people and places did/do exist.
The *Problem* is, is that it does *not* validate tales of supernatural events.
For instance, the Harry Potter books often make reference to King's Cross Station. The place actually exist in London. Does that validate claims that you can hop aboard a special train that takes you to a real wizard school? Of course not.
Note, this is not to justify their irrationality, it's just to help you(the reader) understand their way of thinking a bit better.
@@guytheincognito4186, writes _"Does that validate claims that you can hop aboard a special train that takes you to a real wizard school?"_
You can only access Platform 9 3/4 if you have wizards blood in you, the fact that you can't access it doesn't demonstrate that it doesn't exist, it demonstrates that you don't have wizards blood.
I don't remember clearly a time I believed in God, but I did actually read the Bible (I also read the backs of cereal boxes, every other book on my parent's bookshelves and anything the public library didn't put off limits based on my age).
Then my parents inexplicably sent me to an all-boy's Catholic HS. I was not only the only non-Catholic, I was the only Atheist - and the only one who had actually read a Bible.
I was popular with the students. Somewhat less so with Religion teachers.
His comment section is disabled. God indeed works in mysterious ways.
@john dowe He's a coward ! That's why his comment section is disabled...
somehow i always find people from my other communities somewhere where i don't expect them. like life wants to have an excuse to connect all the communities to create a more interconnected plot.
Nice
Got to be totally transparent....
🙄
not anymore
Hi Rag’ss’s
Let me guess.. His comment page was disabled?
Yes it is.(
Hallelujah, you have the gift of prophecy!
Are you god or the devil, since you knew that supernaturally.
@@Lufsixq 🤣
Believers so often put me in mind of a person desperately trying to hang onto an abusive relationship.
Sad when you see it
I have a theory that these people have a form of narcissism that tells them, "I have a brand of Love that is superior to whatever this abusive person experienced in the past--an all-powerful Love that will overcome any pain or malformed thinking that this person has. I Am Love. Love Is Me."
We train women to value this All-Powerful Love and to convince themselves that this is a Natural Attribute of all women--if only they would not resist the Knowledge that they are Love and therefore all-powerful when it comes to abusive people. They just have to "be there for him" and "always show love" and the whole Soft Answer thing. At some point they're just doing it to fabricate an imago of themselves as Love Personified. Narcissism, in other words.
Very good!
Score!
You know how when you don't want to force your kids to love you, you abandon them in the middle of the woods and never let them know their parents exist?
When you want to test the obediance of your children, so you lock them in a room with a loaded gun and absolve yourself of all responsibility for the outcome.
ha, the great detective does not allow comments on his videos. No so confident, is he.
Apologists never are.
@@newsystembad It is funny that someone who thinks his arguments are so incontrovertible, should not allow comments or discussion. I must larf in his general direction.
By definition, theists are dishonest. That't why they must take steps to avoid being exposed.
I will NOT watch a video that has comments disabled.
@@ronthered138 Neither will I.
*"Have you considered the notion that God might appear hidden for a reason?"*
Yes. And I, along with all other non-Christians, have the correct answer for what that reason is.
He wants you to believe and obey through faith instead of through your senses.
He is an eccentric on these matters.
Faith is being wrong on purpose.
The Spence clone argues like someone teleported from the Dark Ages. He believes in the primacy of superstition.
Well, it's got "super" right in its name. That sounds pretty primal to me.
Comments are disabled on JWW's video, so much for him being interested in a conversation...
Since I can't ask him on his video I'll ask J.Warner here:
What is the best explanation for the beginning of an all-powerful, non-spacial, non-temporl, non-material being?
What does something being non-spacial mean?
What does something being non-temporal mean?
What does something being non-material mean?
(If you're going to try to answer, please try to avoid using any tautologies. Thank you)
Invisible and unknowable = non existent
The Bible is the story of a non existent character with super powers.
non-spacial means it doesn't exist within space
non-temporal means it doesn't exist within our time
non-material means it isn't composed of matter
and all-powerful means someone's trying to scare you ;)
@@ferociousfeind8538 Thank you for the tautological answers.
Now, please explain what something being non-spacial, non-temporal, and non-material means
I left the church and adopted the Buddhist outlook. No gods, no souls. The universe is natural, and we learn how to live in it as best we can. There is no savior and indeed no need for a savior.
Great video, I think the 'divine hiddeness' argument is possibly the most powerful defeater for theism
Yes, that and the Bible. Lmao 👍😆
@@guytheincognito4186
True, and add to this any other religion!
@@HughJaxident67
Indeed so. The khoran for example has equally contradictory stories, when not just describing superstitious nonsense.
Like with the story about a couple angles that taught "black" magic to people to test them during Babylon or wherever.
It really was just the "omniscient"(supposedly) and all merciful(supposedly) God doing Pointless things simply because he can and simply throwing people into hell simply because he wanted to.
And since when can either God or his angels do evil(black magic) anyway.
Really!, Only a child could ever be so gullible as to believe that horse shit.
@@guytheincognito4186
Here's one to ponder - How can an omniscient deity have free will, when free will necessarily requires a period of indeterminacy? Logical absurdities abound when believers start throwing 'omni this and that' around
@@HughJaxident67
Indeed so.
I've never been able to comprehend how believers throughout my life have consistently charged that my failure to see their god was due to a bias against it, while appearing unable to see that their bias *in favor of belief* was the far greater likelihood. Instead of considering how religion saturates our culture, thereby making belief seem reasonable without the ordinarily required actual reasons, they turn it around to make the rational dissenter appear somehow resistant. It's the madness of crowds, taking comfort in their numbers. For the rest of us, the red flags are enormous.
Anatole France, visiting Lourdes and observing the racks of abandoned crutches, expressed some disappointment. " I had hoped for trays of glass eyes."
And where are all the prosthetic limbs?
Lourdes is part of God's Divine Plan.
Create them crippled,
then cure them
so they will worship him in gratitude.
An old trick practiced by narcissists that constantly need to be worshiped.
If I had accidentally created evil, death, pain & suffering I'd hide too.
LOL true. But god is perfect and knows all, past and present. How does a being like this make any mistakes?
Top Notch logic as always Pauiogia. I love it when you point something out that I have known bugged me, but I couldn't quite put words to the thought.
3:36 I didn't know that Adam and Eve wore Canadian flags in paradise. This is why I love this channel : I always learn something 😉
I noticed that too. As a Canadian, I was quite proud of that.
@@unturbe Yes, obviously, your flag has very deep historical roots going almost all the way back to creation week. I'm actually surprised that you didn't learn that in school. You must be very young still 😉
@@diedertspijkerboer our flag has very deep roots going back to. . . 1963. Even young earth creationists go back farther than that. LOL!
@@knarf_on_a_bike When you say 1963, do you mean AD or BC? 😉
Nice video. Thanks for sharing it with us and keep your your great work
I love this so called former cop, that dose not use EVIDENCE in his life.. Did he just wake up one morning and say "Damn retirement I need some cash, Who are the most gullible people out there"... A light bulb flickers....LOL With the lack of LOGIC he uses maybe we should ask his cases be reviewed!
I wonder if a third of his cases were solved by writing in "ACT OF GOD" and forging his superior's signature
@@tyrvaldfenrischain7967 LMFAO love it, your right...lol
Like you, I gave up. In college, I said I was “agnostic from despair”.
I had to choose between atheism and schizophrenia.
My mother, the nuns, the priests, the Pope, the Bible and God
all tried to destroy my brain.
During all my slavery experience as a Christian, people were telling me to either expect miracles to happen or to call things that happen naturally-supernatural.I tried my best to believe them for that whole 35 year cognitive-dissonance delusion that I was under,even blinding myself to reality.I was swallowed up in confirmation-bias and I didn't even know it and didn't even want to know it.They say that hindsight is always 20/20-so true,so true.
and supernatural are but unexplained naturals, planes would be unexplainable and hence appear "supernatural" to tribal humans, yet they are but not understood naturals, to lose faith in religion and gain faith in humanity, is when one decides to take a step back from their preinstalled narrative and look at other people's narratives, ones that are different from them, then they begin to empathise
How is Christianity slavery?
@@TheMilitantMazdakite One of the definitions of the word "trembling:" is to "shake involuntarily with fear." This is how Paul said we should serve Christ (Phil.2:12 ) Paul also said that slaves should serve their masters with "fear and trembling." In Heb.12:6 it says that the Lord "SCOURGES every son he receives(and loves).Scourging means in the original Greek, to flog or to whip.That's how slaves were treated sometimes in the old testament-and-were treated in the American south in the late 1,800s.That's damn harsh treatment to put on a son, and today we call that abuse. "Slaves, submit to your master with all fear not only to the good and gentle ones, but also to the cruel."( 1 Peter 2:18 ) So much for the verse saying,"Perfect love cast out ALL fear." (1 John 4:18)
@@shriggs55 First of all, I am not a Christian. Second, most of the awful shit in Christianity comes from either the old testament or Paul. Jesus never says anything explicitly homophobic or misoginistic
Hiddenness on an entity that rewards belief and punishes doubt eternally and excruciatingly is a giant imperfection.
Miracles are weird. If a plane crashes and the only survivor is a two-year-old child, that is called a miracle. If a plane has an uneventful flight, it is not called a miracle.
I was taking a break from watching YT vids for a while there...then my wife suggested we catch up on Paulogia & here I am, totally sucked in again
If god is undetectable how did ANYONE find out anything about him? All we have are fables that people just made up. Who saw god create the universe then record it? -- no one.
It is just missing in the King James version but actually on day 1 god made a reporter.
@@sobertillnoon
Lol. That reporter was named Lois Lane and it was her best/Worst date with Sups she's ever had. 👌😜
@Phillip Hickman
Actual no, he can't. The bibles explicitly says that God is incapable of seeing sin, we can take that's as not ables to hear it also. Making God both blind and deaf to his sinful creation.
Either way here's two videos from the atheist experience about whether or not God reveales himself:
[WHY GOD REVEALS HIMSELF TO SOME AND NOT TO OTHERS!]
th-cam.com/video/u1YpgFcW0pA/w-d-xo.html
[GOD CAN'T REVEAL HIMSELF! ]
th-cam.com/video/b5qTEBCRnwU/w-d-xo.html
@Phillip Hickman Whewww!
@Giant Scorpion of the Apocalypse
Once scientists have admitted that spacetime is not fundamental but emergent, now anything atheists have to say about the non-existence of God can be simply pissed off. As senior scientists once used to say to their juniors: 'shut up and calculate', so similarly, now we can also say to our atheist buddies: 'just shut up and wait'.
Yes, just shut up and wait.
“I even looked at the trees” 😂😂😂
Especially when in the old testament he showed himself all the time but for some.reason we are supposed to believe he got shy.
I think a better analogy is if no child on earth ever saw their parents or any adult, but some children believed they heard from their parents and others didn’t
"GOD" is just like any other business ! They all KNOW it is complete BS , but they don't want to lose their business / money !
Money and social control over the institutionalized.
YEEHAW!
One of the best videos in your catalogue Paul!
thank you. hope it was useful.
Great video thanx so much, it helps me from going back to the cult! I recently left to clean out my brain from 35 years of delusion.
Hey Paul, hope you are doing well. I found you through the ACA network and I just needed to say how much I enjoy your work. These videos are some of the best presentations of rational thought on the subject of Christian apologetics I have ever seen. You keep it respectful and are generous with your assumptions, but you hit hard while you're speaking so softly.
There is NOTHING my sons or anyone could do for which I would get pleasure from them being tortured for eternity, much less at my command, yet this God even derives pleasure from it so how could his 'love' be greater than mine, a mere human.
Another way to remove fear from decision-making is to *not threaten people with eternal torture if they don’t believe*
"Love me, or I'll burn you forever"
If he's not trying to force people to love him then perhaps he shouldn't have made 40% of The Commandments about him
Thanks! Was always wondering why I never saw Thor even though I saw lightning. He's just hiding. Thanks!
lol, J. Warner asks questions and talks about discussions in his video... then disables comments.
I wonder why...
Because his idea of discussion is that he tells you what you should (or secretly do) believe, and he thinks he's correct. Discussion over.
The man can't handle freedom of speech.
Suggestion:
Leave comments open
Don't look at them.
Million to one chances happen 9 times out of 10. On Terry Pratchett's Discworld.
Unfortunately this universe was accidentally created without the element narrativium :)
I love your videos, Paul. Thoughtful, thorough and usually with a least one fresh nugget of perspective, which is tough to do with such well trodden ground. This is no exception. One piece of feedback, _"methodological naturalism"_ is not a tentative rejection of the supernatural, it's a tentative rejection of all potential influences, natural and supernatural alike, that have no measurable impact.
Frankly, the whole idea of supernatural as the opposite of natural is poorly defined and generally amounts to no more than an argument from ignorance in word form. We would do well to avoid casual usage in these discussions because it unwittingly surrenders ground that apologists never actually earned.
Creationist channel comments are fun but these comments on these channels are fantastically witty. And that’s the ones I get.
Love it. 😂
The thing about looking at evidence for God in nature is that you have to look at it from the mindset of already believing in God, making that "evidence" not evidence, but rather an affirmation of what you already believe. If you were to enter that level of evidence in a court of law, it wouldn't convince many people.
The one that always gets under my skin is when a disaster, man-made or natural, strikes and the religious praise god for survivors but absolve god of responsibility for those who died.
ex muslim here, in islam (at least the version they taught me) it is highly encouraged to be sychopantic to god, it basically goes like "whatever good comes from god and whatever bad comes from our own shortcomings", maybe it's the same for christianity?
@@manusiabumi7673 Yes, that is pretty much the same in Christianity. Though it is even more puzzling in those sects that believe that everything is "God's will".
@@chrisose god's will as in "both good and bad things come from god"?
@@manusiabumi7673 Yes. A good example of this is an incident where one child dies and another lives. If God was there for one it makes no sense that the other died, especially when this God is supposedly omnipotent.
@@chrisose in islam they simply say god does whatever he wants. while at the same time they want you to think god is both omnipotent AND omnibenevolent, which makes zero sense in a case like that.
Tebow!! Haha, I’m from Colorado, funny to see those images on your channel. Keep up the good work!
"I don't even know how you could force love. You could deny them privileges, threaten them in some way."
Sure sounds like god is trying to force us to love him to me...
The cognitive dissonance of religious people really is astounding.
You can only force someone to say they love you
God is love.
But God needs love.
Give God the love he deserves or suffer eternal damnation.
Makes perfect sense to a 5 year old.
Another great video. I really appreciate that you don’t use ad hominem attacks but instead utilize cogent arguments. Keep it up.
Thank you, Jason.
This guy is such a charlatan, and thank you Paulogia for showing it.
My god just went for a pack of smokes...
8:45 _Not answering my prayers_ (even to say "no") was the first step towards my atheist agnosticism.
I really enjoy your videos. Your mind is excellent. I’ve learned so much, especially in your responses. The methods you use are analytical, logical, and nearly always polite. Live long and prosper 🖖.
You do such a great job with these apologists, thanks.
Very good take on this stuff. I've never really thought about it this way. I have been critical of family and their attribution of good things being God's intervention, but often they blame the bad on the devil's attempts to trick them into giving up on god or it is some kind of test where they relate to Job or something. Great video, keep it up!
One of the reasons I love "The god that failed" by Metallica.
Thank you for this. We need this in the world. We need to open the people's eyes. Soon all that will be left are the stubborn and the slow.
@18:40 "If you hold your breath for five minutes and don't breathe, you'll see things much more clearly!"
Reminds me of that line Roy gives to his wife when he goes nuts and she leaves him in "Close Encounters of the Third Kind"
I have a question. In the case of God v Adam and Eve, would Adam and Eve be considered “not guilty on the grounds of insanity/mental deficiency”?
Here me out. Insanity isn’t a psychological term, it’s a legal term. Simply put it’s the inability to distinguish right from wrong. I’ve heard the tree be called the tree of knowledge and of good and evil.
If it’s the tree of knowledge then they’d be considered “mentally incompetent/deficient” at the time of the incident and therefor unable to understand that their actions were wrong.
If it’s the tree of good and evil then we’d have the insanity plea of “my clients *literally* could not tell the difference between right and wrong at the time of the incident”.
Yup. "Learning about right and wrong is evil."
Zaprozhan my question is more “if this was a proper US court case, would Adam and Eve be able to use an insanity plea given the definition being the lack of ability to determine right from wrong”
I agree it’s screwed up but coming from a family deep in the legal system (both sides lol) I use it as a frame of reference for a lot of my thinking process
If you want someone to love you just for who you are.... you do not frame the question with the choice of the alternatives of eternal damnation vs eternal bliss
I've always thought that "apologetics" sound a lot like they're apologising for stupidity.
The only thing "omni" about any god is their omni-ABSENCE! That should tell the thinking human something.
Christian apologetics I believe is a term coined by non Christians.
Apologizing for the creator of your world is stupid.
@@JamesRichardWiley "Apologetics (from Greek ἀπολογία, "speaking in defense") is the religious discipline of defending religious doctrines through systematic argumentation and discourse."
The two different contexts for words that obviously derive from the same root make sense to me. How else can you describe a system that makes so many outrageous claims in the total absence of evidence?
@Paulogia
I've been watching all of your videos and appreciate the style of addressing each point in your video. I'm always looking for new videos to watch, and I was worried I wouldn't find good content addressing these issues. Many I used to watch have moved onto other issues, so I'm glad you're still producing content like this, keep it up! :)
Wallace: "Love cannot be coerced".
God: "I command you to love me with all your heart".
If you need the same skills to find God as you do finding someone who killed a girl in 1983, something is wrong
I concur.
God and bigfoot are hide and seek champions. Thing is, I can show you pictures of bigfoot.
Well, no you can't but I get what you are saying.
God is a big fan of those clearly moral "surprise mechanics"
they're not immoral acts of god, they're "surprise moralities"
yep, penrose also said this to lane craig in "debate" - "there may well be a superior intelligence, but i don't see where that gets you" followed by "there's nothing to say that intelligence isn't malicious".
Love your Adam-and-Eve with the Canadian Maple leaf as their coverings. I been watching your shows for about 2 months now and as the 70 year old I am agreeing with everything you say. Many years ago I was told that you shouldn't agree with everything someone says because you're not thinking for yourself. I'm thinking for myself and I agree with you
The christian cold-case guy SINKS his own main hidden point.
If god hides because he doesn't want to coerce love, BUT the entire premise of christian soteriology is that you have to love god OR ELSE... then the hidden excuse is not even plausible.
Demons and the devil have (ostensibly) perfect knowledge of god.. and then again.. not much love there, right?
Well, the handful of theists from three different denominations I asked about this all claimed that you choose what to believe and choose who to love, so we choose to go to hell or be destroyed. JW's say we will all be wiped out, save for a special number of JW's, and everyone who has ever died will be resurrected and will have no choice but to know god exists and we will all be given a last chance and annihilation is for those who still refuse to grovel for the almighty.
As batshit crazy as they are, I actually found that a comforting idea. Then I at least don't have to suffer in hell for refusing to worship a megalomaniac mass murderer who promotes slavery and rape. I can just be freed of it forever.
Matt Dillahunty makes the same point. Satan knows very well that god exists, he has seen him and had plenty of interactions with him, yet he has chosen not to love god. That proves that it’s perfectly possible to see god face to face and not being coerced into loving him.
And that’s perhaps the real reason why god is so shy. 😁 When people get to know him really well they realize what a piece of s*t he is and don’t want anything to do with him. 😂
@@stylis666 Can you CHOOSE to believe that the chair that you sit on does NOT exist? Can you choose that milk is not a thing?
Sorry, belief is not a choice. That was intellectually incredulous.
@Phillip Hickman Cannot this supernatural being tamp down his power enough to meet someone without them becoming a slavish devoutee? Sounds like this god can't control his own power. Why worship a being who can't control his own power? Why make men so weak-minded that his mere presence makes them flip on a dime? Why have hell, when you can save all humans (from the fate he decreed, and made them vulnerable to!) by mere visitation? So much fun with the Bible-thumpers have to tie themselves in logical knots to explain it.
@Phillip Hickman Justice... eternal punishment for finite crimes, including believing he doesn't exist. Justice. If he can't show himself without burning our brains out, he can't control his power. If we are too weak, then he made us this weak. That's incompetence. If he wanted us to be obedient, why make us able to disobey, and punish us for doing what he made us capable of? That's sadistic or incompetent. The Bible makes reference to other gods, and God doesn't claim to create any of them. See the logical knots you need to do?
Belief in God fails completely at the first hurdle;
It attempts to explain the complexity produced by evolution, stellar fusion and the big bang by something grander and even more elaborate. Yet there is no possible explanation for god that couldn't also apply to a natural background to the universe, such as, it's always been there!
It's really very simple!
Good video!
An eternal god has the same chance of being true as an eternal cosmos with no god.
God forms the Cosmos
The Cosmos forms man
Man forms god
God forms the Cosmos
@@JamesRichardWiley
Nonsense!!
The background to our universe could be any of a number of simple models, followed by a well understood and gradual increase in complexity.
Asserting a god at the beginning is made without any basis!
Ugh, I hate that magic word "information" they like so much nowadays. It's too common to not understand, but too vague to pin down to a clear definition. "Information" is the new "kind".
It doesn't help that "information" is also a concept in physics that is hard to understand. It's easy to do a Deepak Chopra style "information therefore god" argument.
Now I know what is meant by the term 'Godspeed', it makes you talk really fast and see things that aren't there.
Just found your channel via pinecreek, love it. Maybe do more joint productions with other channels like rationality rules, and genetically modified skeptic
Did you ever notice how fast flim-flam con artists/theists talk! Supernatural means it is fictional.
It's the Gish Gallop, and they learn it from other apologists.
I love how Warner can't look at the camera for longer than 2 seconds. Camera shy about your belief in "almighty god" Mr. Warner?
At 14:00 I thought God of the Gaps just before you said it, and realized...the bigger the Gap for any individual, the bigger the (belief in) God. Another argument for a better educational system. Yes, there are very smart, well-educated people who are still religious, but I'm convinced they're remarkable precisely because of their rarity.
18:00 It is Confirmation Bias, but the Availability Heuristic also plays into it. Surviving a bad accident or otherwise closely escaping injury or death is an emotional experience. Emotions are tied to memory, as both are processed in the same area of the brain - so let it happen once or twice (or even hear about it) and being attributed to God, and suddenly all "good" things are attributable to God.
I've read that Theism is a result of thanatophobia, which seems logical, but I think it's also the "need for security". If Invisible Sky Daddy is watching and doing what's best for you (and you accept that even the bad things that happen as God being smarter than you are so you just don't understand *how* they're good), you can "feel secure" and relax.
Frankly, I'd rather believe 'security' is an illusion, the word a symbol without referent other than the emotional state itself.
Once you accept the Universe as a big, complex, chaotic and dangerous place and realize that evolution has given you the tools to deal with it, you can *really* relax - knowing that when you do eventually die, that will be the absolute end. Take away the need to pray for this and that, or sit in a building listening to some ignorant bloke blather on, and you can use that wasted time to actually do something significant.
Wallace is the kind of witness a defense attorney can destroy in the courtroom.
An apologist using the word disingenuous... The irony.
Once you've accepted the supernatural as the cause for anything, then real evidence will hold as much sway as "Must be God'.
Great video. I have issues with Occam's razor being defined as "the simplest explanation is best" though because to a theist a god could be the simplest explanation. I'd rather say it's the idea that the option where the least amount of assumptions is made is usually correct.
'Simplest' here just means the explanation that makes the fewest assumptions. Theistic explanations must assume the existence of a god, so they are necessarily less simple than naturalistic explanations.
When I was editing, I KNEW some people would make this comment... but it was too late to go back and re-record.
John 5:37 says that people who think Yahweh talks to them are deluded.
And here it is - the question that led me out of religion.
Paulogia you are awesome. Thanks for sharing your wisdom.
He's hiding in the bushes....
....in a Bob Ross painting.
Happy trees 🌲😁
I even looked in the trees 🤣
If one believes in a god, it follows that they recognize that all the other thousands of gods claimed by others have been non-existent false gods - hence their invisibility. All gods share this common trait of invisibility because they ALL share the more fundamental trait of never having existed.
Excellent video!!
Fantastic ,insightful un-deniable truths that allows no one to hide just by his pure logic,fantastic work paul !
It is possible to love people you have never met.
You have grandparents who live on another continent, but you know they exist and that they love you because they send you birthday cards and sometimes a book. It is claimed that God wrote the 10 Commandments but those tablets have been lost, losing something written by God sounds very careless, and nobody claims He wrote anything since.
Your parents tell you that they had a son who died before you were born. You know they are telling the truth because you have seen photos of him, you have seen his birth certificate and his death certificate. You love him because your parents have told you how loveable he was. You have never seen any photos of Jesus. The stories of Him are contradictory.
People fall in love with celebrities all the time. And they never meet them. I don't think that is the same kind of love that you feel for someone you do know and love. And what is love anyway? Lots of people claim to love but treat those they love like garbage. Love is just a name given to a set of feelings towards someone. It can mean different things to different people.
Imagine an extraordinary collection of testimony, stories, prayers, songs, artwork, rituals, artifacts, and temples to a human need for a creator parent
who is not there.
How exquisitely poignant.
19:59
Please! Occam's razor isn't about simplest explanation, but about explanation with fewest assumptions. Often these are the same, but not always.
Interesting. Please give me an example even if it's hypothetical.
When I was editing, I KNEW some people would make this comment... but it was too late to go back and re-record.
@Ryan Swanson
A quick example is just "God Did It". Saying that "God Did It" is the simplest explanation for _any_ problem. Someone has a heart attack? God Did It", etc. Thing is, using that answer presupposes that a Godlike being exists, that it's aware of humans, that it knows how human biology functions, that it acted it a way that caused a heart attack, etc.
Another example is if you find someone unconscious in the bathtub with a bump on their head. One person suggests they fell, another person suggests that someone entered the room, hit them on the head, and left. The first suggestion is, at the core, the one that makes the least assumptions because it only assumes "someone could slip and fall in the tub" while the other assumes someone broke in, had a motive to hit them on the head, left no evidence behind, etc.
That which employs fewest assumptions may be considered simple. That which is simple doesn't contain many parts. The confusion lies in its colloquial usage where one would think that an explanation that's easier to understand is most likely correct. Of course, that isn't the case.
Plain and simple, god is as real as santa, oh hell, I've seen santa.
God wants a relationship with me but he wants to remain invisible.
The number one reason for divorce is lack of communication.
The coercion argument always gets a chuckle. As if the threat of Hellfire weren't the ultimate coercion.