Atheists LOVE to Use This Argument, but It’s COMPLETE Nonsense

Atheists LOVE to use this argument against Christianity, but it’s COMPLETE nonsense. In this presentation, Ken Ham discusses why it’s inconsistent for unbelievers to claim God is unjust or unfair for allowing certain things to happen.
This video is part of Ken Ham’s Foundations series. You can watch the other episodes in this series here: www.answers.tv/ken-ham-s-foun....
Visit Answers.tv: All Answers in Genesis videos, live streaming, and much more-all in one place.
Please help us continue to share the gospel around the world: AnswersinGenesis.org/give

[@sseltrek1a2b]

one of the best things i ever heard was, "to let God be God...even when we don't like it..."...

[@njhoepner]

"If god wants to be evil, just get out of his way so he doesn't beat you up." Sounds like a gang leader.

[@jelly7310]

​@@njhoepnerwho said that?

[@gisellewofford8821]

Thank you, for your teaching and insight ❤

[@theotheoth]

insight...hahahahahaaaa

[@gi169]

Thank you Ken Ham.

[@Moist._Robot]

You’re welcome.

[@gi169]

@@Moist._Robot You just can't resist can you FrankyC. I read your comment, but there was nothing there to respond to. What was so important about thanking Ken Ham that you felt compelled to comment? Also, how are you?

[@Moist._Robot]

@@gi169 I’m great. Stuck in traffic. Cycling in the sun tomorrow. Have you listened to “Answers in Genesis Canada”? It’s hilarious.

[@gi169]

@@Moist._Robot I have watched some of AIGC's videos, they are awesome. Have fun I'm traffic.

[@Moist._Robot]

@@gi169 Awesome??? It’s like he’s reshowing old episodes of the three stooges that his followers have never seen before and think he directed them. None of the material is original. He’s simply copying what’s already on AIG’s website. Lol.

[@user-jt3ex9pl8s]

💜💜💜💜💜💜💜💜💜💜💜Please 🙏🏻pray for salvation for Chris, Pete and Nick.

[@AnthonyTolhurst-dw1nc]

❤

[@PastorwithoutaPulpit]

God doesn't just offer us the gift of salvation, He has already given it to all, it is up to each individual what they will do with that gift. Pray for those that don't know and love Him to come to Him and find the reason for the hope that lives in us, God's love. God Bless...

[@richardgregory3684]

A gift with conditions is not a gift.

[@user-ex4wx1rj7s]

@@richardgregory3684 And a gift with dire threats attached, even less so.

[@PastorwithoutaPulpit]

@@richardgregory3684 Do you accept the gift of love others offer you, does it not come with conditions? Stop arguing semantics... But more to your point we know Jesus the Christ died for even those who do not believe or did not when He offered Himself as a substitute , (propitiation),for all. He paid our sin debt in full at the Cross to a Holy God and that payment is imputed to believers the instant they believe in Him and accept Him as Lord, (justification). I'd say that's a pretty good gift...

[@gabrielfrohlichhernandez3175]

Amen 🙏

[@richardgregory3684]

@@PastorwithoutaPulpit _does it not come with conditions_ No _But more to your point we know Jesus the Christ died for even those who do not believe or did not when He offered Himself as a substitute , (propitiation),for all_ Sorry, didn;t Jesus go on to live forever in heaven? And what sort of loving god finds it acceptable to have his own son totured to death just to appease his wrath? _He paid our sin debt in full at the Cross to a Holy God and that payment is imputed to believers the instant they believe in Him and accept Him as Lord, (justification). I'd say that's a pretty good gift_ I wouldn;t, I;d call it a reward for submitting to a dictator

[@theotheoth]

I've just sat here and watched this with a Christian friend, and even she says this guy is just waffling weak nonsense.

[@Chris-hf2sl]

Well, he's right about one thing - it's complete nonsense. However, it's not the atheist argument that's complete nonsense - it's his argument.

[@bbog-jo7pk]

Thanks for your excellent reasoning session Mr Ham. Very Edifying

[@theotheoth]

Have you ever read a book about reasoning outside of the topic of God? Ham's reasoning is about as weak as I've heard. (Admittedly, I am not Christian, but I watched this with a Christian friend who just found the his arguments embarrassing.)

[@robertfriend2205]

I Love Mr. Ham but Jesus Loves him more and he's blessed him with much wisdom. Praise God ❤

[@statutesofthelord]

I just pray he starts remembering the only commandment God specifically said to "Remember".

[@theotheoth]

I spoke with God just now and He said he's kinda embarrassed to have Ham as His spokesperson.

[@Chris-hf2sl]

I'm glad that Jesus loves him more. Jesus is welcome to him.

[@lyngruen8607]

The MORE I LEARN about God....the MORE I realize I KNOW NOTHING! Always an adventure to learn and many nuggets of wisdom dropped thru out the Word of God.... something NEW every day☝️💖 it's very exciting. Appreciate your clear explanations, Mr Hamm. I stand alone on the WORD OF GOD... the B I B L E 📖 DO LIFE GOD'S WAY ☝️🙏 Texas Nana Psalm 91

[@DontOpenThisChannel]

Learn about Quran

[@thedragonreborn9856]

You are very wise

[@DontOpenThisChannel]

@@thedragonreborn9856 I can say the same about any scripture or someone's believes so the real question is it the truth?

[@JohnSpencer90]

02:16 "Before sin everything was perfect"....... Well if that is true, then why did God introduce sin into the world through Lucifer ?

[@byronwright1612]

Adam transgressed the law

[@JohnSpencer90]

@@byronwright1612 That is not the point. The big idea is that someone introduced sin into the world and made the world imperfect, and that person was NOT Adam, nor was it lucifer. So, who do you think did it?

[@ElizabethW70]

So what can we do to be forgiven and get eternal life? What does Repent mean? 🤔

[@brentryan2047]

You need only to acknowledge to Jesus that you are a sinner and can not live up to God's holiness on your own. You need His help and no longer wish to live apart from Him. Put your faith in Jesus to save you. To repent is to acknowledge you've done wrong, you regret it, and you'd like to turn from it. When you do that, God, over the course of your life will help you get there.

[@janicejette4374]

God is the One Who causes you to repent, which means to turn away from your sins. Then He gives you the desire to follow Jesus and all of His ways. You now have a relationship with God, which also means you no longer have any desire with worldly things.

[@theinsectmanofwv]

How would you answer this question from an atheist? If God created everything, why couln't He preserve his Word, in English, without error?

[@brentryan2047]

His word doesn't need to be without error. The message is without error and that's all that is needed. God isn't looking for us to follow an instruction manual, he is looking to build a personal relationship with us, see us put our trust in him to sanctify us and bring us into his kingdom.

[@njhoepner]

@@brentryan2047 OK, why couldn't the all-knowing, all-powerful, absolutely perfect, transcendent superbeing at least manage to communicate clearly - like any English teacher demands of their ordinary students? And before you say "he does," let me just remind you...1100+ denominations and counting.

[@njhoepner]

Never passed freshman comp, apparently.

[@brentryan2047]

@@njhoepner No I don't think He communicates all that clearly at all. But I am utterly convinced he DOES communicate. So why might that be? Let's take your teacher. If they clearly give students answers how will the students use those answers? Probably robotically, using memory recall, and with very little understanding of the function or application. The teacher that wants the student to GROW and transform into something more will in fact pose challenges, unclear answers, and problem solving to engage them. I don't think we're here for some simple litmus test to get into a static afterlife. God is preparing us for something and He's given you a lifetime to figure it out.

[@njhoepner]

@@brentryan2047 I guess you've never been a teacher. I have. When I give a writing assignment, I give a clear prompt - if the question they are to write on is not clear, that's a fault on me. When they write their response, one of the things I grade on is clarity. No matter the answer they give, did they communicate it clearly? Can the reader tell what their answer is? Can the reader see and understand the argument they make and the logic they use? That is clarity. Take any professional writing - if an engineer communicated like "god" does, nothing they designed could ever be built. If an officer wrote like your "god" does, no operation they planned could possibly be carried out. The incoherence and unclarity of this supposed god's supposed word is monumental...as proven by the millions of doctorate-level people who've made a handsome living for the past few thousand years explaining to the masses what god surely meant...and disagreeing with each other so severely that the masses have argued with, fought with, and killed each other with abandon over the differences...and always will. 1100+ denominations and counting.

[@bubbajames2157]

The American pronunciation of Isaiah is correct

[@sseltrek1a2b]

it's clear the longer you live and more you hear from God's Word that the good and bad in our lives are woven into a tapestry that we're mostly not aware of...

[@jakestrother9032]

I learned so much from Ken Ham is an excellent teacher with a simple way of giving us to understand with common sense and using the word we can believe in what God says

[@statutesofthelord]

Yes, but let's also pray he remembers that one commandment that God says to "Remember".

[@MatthewJLight]

A wonderful video!

[@georg7120]

Nonsense.

[@JacoBecker]

Thank you JESUS, for He is our Lord and Saviour!

[@justincapable]

Appealing to God doesn't solve the Euthyphro dilemma. Either an action is good because the command coms from the mind of God, ie subjective morality, or the action is objectively good. If the action is objectively good, appealing to a supreme being isn't necessary to follow objective facts. Furthermore, divine command theory doesn't resolve the is-ought problem.

[@pvpeet9374]

Yes it does. And you got it backwards. Subjective morality is based on an individual human interpretation. Objective morality can only come from God, as he made everything - including the inherent definition of an action is good. The point is, that you can only say that an action is good or bad if there is objective morality underlying everything - which is Gods perspective. You treat God like you would some rando on the street in your argument and that’s the fallacy.

[@jonasmlgaard-asmussen9844]

@@pvpeet9374 But where does God's authority to define good and evil come from? If it simply stems from God's nature, then you'd have to show that his nature is good. I know Christians will often argue that God is goodness, but how do you prove that?

[@njhoepner]

@@pvpeet9374 You reveal that you don't know what the words "subjective" and "objective" mean. If something is good merely because "God" says so, then it is subjective...you've just made the subject "God" instead of "me" or "us." It remains subjective, by definition. Objective would have to be binding on "God," which of course christian theology can't allow. So christian "morality" comes down merely to might makes right. "God" gets to say what's right or wrong because he's bigger.

[@Ariella-mx3xq4cw6n]

If a child is left to his own devices with no teaching or discipline you end up with a monster.

[@mchooksis]

That's why you teach your child to act in the right way to live in the society they are living in. It has nothing to do with a god or religion. To say only theists can be moral is quite ridiculous. Look at Humanists, Buddhists. And many many others. Look around the world and know that good people do not need god to be good. They just need to be part of a society of good people. Sadly, many theists, like this man Ham, preach division.

[@statutesofthelord]

@@mchooksis sis, your definition of "good" is mistaken.

[@Ariella-mx3xq4cw6n]

@@mchooksis Who gave you the instructions or your parents and so on and so on. The instruction did not come from man originally.

[@Ariella-mx3xq4cw6n]

@@statutesofthelord ??

[@AnthonyTolhurst-dw1nc]

@@mchooksismore thinking needed

[@NMSUNSETGOURMET]

The beginning argument is that GOD doesnt exist, yet we see the word GOD two times in truth.

[@DamodricWilliams]

How

[@Theo_Skeptomai]

I am an atheist. I define atheism as suspending any acknowledgment as to the reality of any particular god until sufficient credible evidence is introduced. My position is that *_I have no good reason to acknowledge the reality of any god._* And here is why I currently hold to such a position. Below are 10 facts I must consider when evaluating the claim made by certain theists that some god exists in reality. To be clear, these are not premises for any argument concluding there to be no gods. These are simply facts I must take into account when evaluating such a claim. 1. I personally have never observed a god. 2. I have never encountered any person who has claimed to have observed a god. 3. I know of no accounts of persons claiming to have observed a god that were willing or able to demonstrate or verify their observation for authenticity, accuracy, or validity. 4. I have never been presented a valid logical argument that also employed sound premises that lead deductively to a conclusion that a god(s) exists in reality. 5. Of the many logical syllogisms I have encountered arguing for the reality of a god(s), I have found all to contain either logical fallacies or false or unsubstantiated premises. 6. I have never observed a phenomenon in which the existence of a god was a necessary antecedent for the known or probable explanation for the causation of that phenomenon. 7. Several proposed (and generally accepted) explanations for observable phenomena that were previously based on the agency of a god(s), have subsequently been replaced with rational, natural explanations, each substantiated with evidence that excluded the agency of a god(s). I have never encountered _vice versa._ 8. I have never experienced the presence of a god through intercession of angels, divine revelation, the miraculous act of divinity, or any occurrence of a supernatural event. 9. Every phenomenon that I have ever observed has *_emerged_* from necessary and sufficient antecedents over time without exception. In other words, I have never observed a phenomenon (entity, process, object, event, process, substance, system, or being) that was created _ex nihilo_ - that is instantaneously came into existence by the solitary volition of a deity. 10. All claims of a supernatural or divine nature that I have encountered have either been refuted to my satisfaction or do not present as falsifiable. ALL of these facts lead me to the only rational conclusion that concurs with the realities I have been presented - and that is the fact that there is *_no good reason_* for me to acknowledge the reality of any god. I have heard often that atheism is the denial of the Abrahamic god. But denial is the active rejection of a substantiated fact once credible evidence has been presented. Atheism is simply withholding such acknowledgment until sufficient credible evidence is introduced. *_It is natural, rational, and prudent to be skeptical of unsubstantiated claims, especially extraordinary ones._* I welcome any cordial response. Peace.

[@billh4285]

I don't see these as facts, but your own experience/opinion. I'm glad you're here. I hope you watched the whole video. I hope you are seeking truth with an open mind. I was a nonbeliever until I was 21 so I understand where you're coming from. 42 years later, my knowledge and experiences leave me with no doubt that God is real, that Jesus is the Creator, and that the Bible is true. If you are honestly seeking the truth, I hope you will continue to watch Ken Ham. You should also read some books on apologetics from people like C.S. Lewis and Lee Strobel. AIG has some too. These books might answer some of the questions you have. Reading parts of the Bible will help too. The Gospel of John and the book of Romans are good ones to start with. Ask God to show you if He is real or not. If you are TRULY seeking, you will find the truth.

[@Theo_Skeptomai]

@billh4285 Thanks for your cordial and thoughtful reply. My experience can be _factual._ For instance, it is a _fact_ that I ate turkey last night for dinner. Do you agree?

[@billh4285]

@@Theo_Skeptomai Your experience is factual for you but not for others. You experienced eating turkey but I didn't see you do it. Does that mean you didn't? You personally may not have experienced the hand of God but that doesn't mean others haven't or that God does not exist. Neither one of us can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that God exists. That is what faith is. The Bible verse Hebrews 11:1 states, “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” We will both find out the reality of our decision the moment we die. I hope that you find the truth before then. Have a great day. 🙂

[@Theo_Skeptomai]

@billh4285 In THIS case, it has only to be factual for me. And it is. Do you agree?

[@Theo_Skeptomai]

@billh4285 Have I stated, suggested, or otherwise inferred that _others_ have not experienced the hand of this 'God' or that it doesn't exist? Yes or no.

[@JamesRichardWiley]

It's only nonsense to a creationist who replaces reality with fictional people and events from the past.

[@alantasman8273]

What fictional people are you talking about? Name names

[@DamodricWilliams]

​@@alantasman8273 people in the Bible.

[@alantasman8273]

@@DamodricWilliams So you can't name names ..hummm

[@DamodricWilliams]

@@alantasman8273 I literally said people in the Bible which literally means pretty much everyone in the Bible, did you not get it.

[@alantasman8273]

@@DamodricWilliams So when the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, the Roman Senator Tacitus, Pliny the Younger and others All spoke about Jesus the Christ...they were referring to fictional people. Your knowledge is woefully lacking.

[@RobertA-oi6hw]

God bless, brother Ken 🙏 praying for you

[@mashah1085]

Does Ken Ham ever LOSE an argument...or is he perfect?

[@Minifliek]

I have yet to see him WIN an argument.

[@mashah1085]

@@Minifliek But he CLAIMS he wins and never loses. I wonder if his fans recognize him as "infallible"?

[@Minifliek]

@@mashah1085 A lot of them do unfortunately

[@mashah1085]

@@Minifliek Protestant or Catholic, it always comes back to one Church leader claiming infallibility and permanent certainty that what they say or do is "the way God wants it."

[@spencergee6948]

Something that doesn't exist cannot be unjust (or anything else).

[@njhoepner]

True. What is unjust is the "morality" christianity's particular mythology proposes...which would not be a problem except they are sooo, sooo eager to impose it by law on everyone else.

[@JamesRichardWiley]

Global suffering is real and it is exactly what Almighty God has chosen for humanity in His Divine Perfect Plan. He said Himself that He was sorry he made us after He said that his creation was good. By his own words Yahweh is a failed god.

[@VirginaLawton]

Thank YOU. Perfect presentation as usual. God bless from Australia

[@crumudgeon4102]

Ken, outstanding application of presuppositionalism. All comes down to by which standard. In one's thinking, where one begins one ends.

[@shannaconda3434]

Where does the consciousness that brings this about come from? Even with consciousness, morality isn't instinctive. God is the absolute authority and everything flows out from him.

[@jockyoung4491]

@@shannaconda3434 Empathy is instinctive. And all ethical systems are based on empathy.

[@Dah_J]

@@jockyoung4491and why do we need to develop ethical systems? Because we don’t instinctively behave in an ethical way. There would be no need for ethics or laws or morality if we all instinctively behaved in accordance with them. Not to mention, everyone has different instincts so that theory goes right out the door.

[@Minifliek]

@@shannaconda3434 Even if it wouldn't be instinctive it is beneficial. To live in a society there need to be agreements on certain ethical questions.

[@johnnytangent2849]

22:35 Born again? Was Jesus born again before his death and resurrection? Are Christians born again before their death and resurrection? Was Jesus's death and resurrection a metaphor or a real event? Jesus was born twice, correct? Regarding the first time he was born, was he concieved first? How about the second birth - did that occur when He was baptized and the Holy Spirit descended on Him or was he born again AFTER being dead for 3 days and 3 nights? The point is why can't preachers like yourself tell the difference between begettal and birth? Jesus is called the firstborn from the dead. Can one be born again before death and resurrection? Metaphorically maybe - but is that what Jesus was teaching Nicodemus? New believers who are baptized and receive the Holy Spirit are begotten again but will not be born again till the resurrection.

[@alanpmasters]

Thank you Mr Ham. You make things so clear and give me, a life-long believer, answers to those common objections.

[@jstube36]

So if we Humans are to blame for all the evil that occurs, can it also be that we Humans can be credited for all the good? And if that be the case. Which makes most reasonable sense. Then what actual control does God, or Satan, or Emperor Palpatine really have over anything?

[@troypullen7469]

Do you really want an answer? or do you just want to express your opinion?

[@jstube36]

@@troypullen7469 If you understand the point of my question, then perhaps both. As we are often told to stop blaming others( including God or Satan) for the evils that we do. I say that's fine. But at the same time we humans should also be noted for the wonders of this life. Questioning the need for any god or spirit, if any exist at all.

[@troypullen7469]

@@jstube36 Well, from a Biblical Theological perspective: The fall of mankind began when Adam & Eve decided to go their own way, in which they were warned that if they did they would surly die, and other scriptures point to this as the point that sin and death entered the world that had not experienced death and destruction yet. The idea is not that there can be no good ideas, or works from mankind but eventually it will all come to not. Outside of God, every human has an innate selfish tendency to one degree or another which eventually leads to destruction (albeit maybe generations later). I would like to submit a video of Dr. Clay Jones who, after coming to Christian faith and wanting to express his belief on how good God was felt the need to truly understand evil in human civilization, as he felt talking about how Good God is and not truly understanding evil would not be credible. Here is Dr. Clay being interviewed on a KZbin channel called Capturing Christianity, that interviews, mostly Christians from different points of view: kzbin.info/www/bejne/ooLPo3airdx_Ztk

[@SunbeanCat]

Do you want to provide an example of what exactly good people do? I will never agree to be alone with another human without God's supervision. I don't trust myself or anyone else. The issue is that all evil arises from God, allowing us to act according to our own will, revealing what lies within our hearts. We obviously had very different experiences in life if you still think that people are capable of doing anything good. They can be nice but not good!

[@jstube36]

@@SunbeanCat Ham's issue is one thing I actually agree with him on. That we should stop pointing to outside agents for the wrongs that we do. That we should point those fingers at ourselves. But as Louis Armstrong reminds us in his most famous song: What A Wonderful World: not all we do is so dark and cruel. Good can certainly be as subjective a term as evil is. Meaning we all have different understandings of what that is. For me, I'll give an example of my Great Grandfather. During the Depression, he opened up a soup kitchen to feed people. There is light in even the darkest of darkness. That even in those harshest times, there are those that open their hearts to do for others. I take from a philosophy that each of us have both a Dark and Light nature. Yet as we live in a World full of so many problems. There are still wonders to delight in.

[@patrickshepherd1341]

It would be much more useful if, instead of claiming that morality and religion are mutually necessary, religious leaders actually presented the ways in which non-religious morality is derived and then pointed out why they think it's insufficient. This approach is deceptive. Christians, ask yourselves: if you really believe he is right about morality, then why does he refuse to tell you how other people actually understand morality, and instead just insists that it all must just be opinion? Why won't he show you what they actually think? Is he afraid it might make sense to some of his congregants, even if they continue to be his congregants?

[@fakeaccount7913]

Because it is common sense for probably all christians. I dont need a side by side comparison of Islam to see the conflicting morality.

[@Dah_J]

As Christians we believe God engrained a sense of morality in every human (a moral compass/ conscience). We believe that’s why you as an atheist have the ability to know right from wrong. You’ve clearly misunderstood our position on morality. We never said morality is “just your opinion” we said if the atheistic worldview is true, then morality is just your opinion and therefore it’s self defeating. We as Christians actually believe you have the ability to know morality and act according to the same morality we do. The whole point we’re trying to make is that Atheism logically forces you to be a moral relativist and therefore you claim that God is wrong for his actions because ultimately there is no right or wrong, it’s just your opinion (if atheism is true)

[@patrickshepherd1341]

@Dah_J well, I wrote a longer reply but it disappeared into the aether somewhere. I'm gonna do a cliff notes version. For non-theistic morality, the only assumption you have to make is that creatures should have the right to try to make it in the world and survive. Anything that arbitrarily goes against that is wrong. Anything that enhances that is good. Generally speaking. That's why it's wrong to kill for no reason: it hampers the survivability of the group. If someone is killing a lot of people for no reason and I kill that person, I am not wrong because it enhances the survivability of the group. And the survivability of the group is NOT a matter of opinion - that's what makes it even better as a standard. And what makes your assertion that it IS an opinion so absurd. Anyway, I had a lot more details, but I'll get to them further on if you want to continue. My point is that it's incredibly foggy-headed to think that there can be no moral standards that both aren't given by a deity AND aren't just a matter of opinion. In fact, it takes LESS creativity to come up with a moral law BETTER THAN that of the Bible than it would to actually come up with the moral law of the Bible. And just to cap off, I understand the moral compass thing. But a) you understand where that argument is poor, right? Like, I could just as easily say you have an instinctual drive to promote the survivability of the group and are just attributing it to your favorite fictional character. That's exactly what you said, but in reverse, wrt the moral compass point. And b) isn't it funny how often your moral compass tells you that things in the Bible are immoral? Which is why you then have to justify it in your head by saying that it IS moral and you just don't understand why - his ways higher than our ways and all that (which is a VERY convenient thing to have in the theology if you don't want people thinking about it too hard, don't you agree?). But I thought God's moral compass was... well... given to you directly by God! Why would THAT compass tell you the Bible is wrong? I thought it was a package deal. But this seems intentionally confusing. But the Bible says God isn't the author of confusion. Bah, I'm sure it all makes logical sense to some other logic, I just won't think about it for myself. My ways aren't high enough. Better go get someone to tell me what to think so I don't come to a conclusion about morals on my own 😉

[@Dah_J]

@@patrickshepherd1341 you hit the nail on the head in the very first paragraph. “You have to make the assumption that creatures have the right to make it in this world and survive” You got it exactly right! YOU HAVE TO MAKE THE ASSUMPTION. Because you have no right to anything if atheism is true. We’re all just molecules in motion if atheism is true. Molecules in motion don’t have “rights” You hit the nail on the head perfectly. “You have to make the assumption” because without it, you have no basis for morality. You have to impose a standard that doesn’t exist to make sense of morality from an atheistic perspective. So then ultimately it is your opinion, because there have been plenty of atheists throughout history who didn’t believe every creature had the right to survive and make it in this world. Some atheists believed that removing less fit creatures would help the species as a whole, and you can’t prove them wrong, because ultimately it’s just two opinions clashing.

[@patrickshepherd1341]

@Dah_J so you really didn't read anything past the first paragraph then, huh? Like, literally none? 1) guess what: you are making an assumption too. You are assuming nothing makes sense without God. But if we in fact live in a universe with no God, then you're wrong. Until we have good reason to believe you're right, we have to put some weight on what we KNOW objectively: that we are here, and that every single human is willing to fight for their right to try to survive (with maybe some mentally unwell exceptions), so that's our objective basis. We can measure, objectively, how much any given action supports or hinders that. Objectively. We didn't "invent" a standard anymore than we "invented" the concept of survival. I want you to read my comment again and give it another try, because I do NOT believe you read it all given the way you responded. It feels like you saw a phrase you liked in the first paragraph and then latched onto it like a baby to a teet.

[@troypullen7469]

I love Ken Ham! I remember the first time I saw a video of him in the early 80's. I thought then... everyone needs to hear and consider this, especially if you are a Christian. I've since quoted Ken Ham on many occasions. This was long before the Creation Museum or the Ark Encounter in Northern Kentucky.

[@jaythefit8817]

The question about God's existence is not contingent on whether God is just or not just. God either exists or He doesn't exist. There is no third option, or as it were, a false dilemma fallacy. God exists a part from me and a part from you. God cannot be taken out of existence because His character is flawed for the opinion of a human, nor can the existence of God be true because of the opinion of a human. A moral argument cannot create God, nor can a moral take God out of existence.

[@TickedOffPriest]

It all comes down to ABSOLUTES.

[@jockyoung4491]

Exactly. And wise people who understand that there are none.

[@HS-zk5nn]

@@jockyoung4491 "And wise people who understand that there are none." except that now you have made an absolute statement

[@jockyoung4491]

@@HS-zk5nn But a meaningful one. Wisdom comes from meaning, not word ganes.

[@shannaconda3434]

​@@jockyoung4491That's your opinion but it's not fact and you don't have any evidence that it is. There are absolutes. One absolute is that if you are concieved, you will die. Nobody escapes that and never will. That is an absolute and it's not the only one.

[@shannaconda3434]

​@@jockyoung4491So, you're a hypocrite then.

[@martinhoy1]

Forgive 70x 7. Just 490 times?? Even fundamentalists don’t take that literally. Don’t you think there could be other verses, That were also not meant literal. Eg. “ To the Lord a Day is like a 1000 years “. It doesn’t say it IS. He said, LIKE. He was trying to prove a point

[@daveaz9962]

You must be new to this ministry brother, but if you take some time you’ll find that your point has been addressed in previous posts/videos.

[@martinhoy1]

@@daveaz9962 Hi. Been a Christian since I was born. Or 3 years old. On the contrary, I think you may find it’s the ones who have been around for a long time, who have seen all the problems, & issues, who have become more liberal. My mum used to come home from Meetings, being physically sick, thru talk of the devil, & watching demons being cast out of people. This is why I like Andy Stanley, he knows all the problems with people leaving churches. The focus should be on the event of the resurrection, not wether a story about evil spirits being cast out of Pigs falling of a cliff, is true or not.

[@daveaz9962]

@@martinhoy1 Yes, we can trust our Savior’s words to us, It is finished! We can put our trust in the authority of God’s Word. The resurrection is His promise that our debt has been fully paid. See you in heaven brother.

[@jonnyxquest]

I think the issue is that atheists don't believe in god. What I mean by that is that a moral argument against god is only logical from the perspective that he doesn't actually exist. If there is a god, then he is always right and correct because he is the one that determines what is right. but if there is no god, then he is just a human creation, a fictional character made with man's morals and can be judged by man's morals.

[@njhoepner]

1) He IS a fictional character, just as christians believe about every god but their own (with no evidence to back it up); 2) if such a being existed, and such a being determined right and wrong simply because "he is always right because he is the one that determines what is right," then christian "morals" are subjective and amount to nothing more than might makes right. We can do so much better than that without reference to any imaginary beings.

[@jonnyxquest]

@njhoepner no, the morals would literally be objective as they would be based on the being that determins objectivity. You described it as "might makes right," but even if that were true, it would literally be the morally correct position. It would be impossible for a being like that to ever be wrong or incorrect. My argument is not that God exists, merely that if he did any moral argument against him would be literally wrong by virtue of him simply being god.

[@njhoepner]

@@jonnyxquest Is only true if might makes right. This kind of morality is not objective by definition, because objective morality is right or wrong regardless of the desires or whims of any individual, including any god, if such a being existed. What you're claiming is that subjective morality becomes objective if the subject is big enough or magical enough. Which is literal nonsense.

[@jonnyxquest]

@njhoepner you clearly lack imagination to even attempt to picture this. You don't seem to grasp a concept like "all powerful". A being like God could change what atoms are made of, create new elements. It's quite literally a situation of "because dad says so" with the unlimited power to back it up, to bend reality itself to his will. You claim God is a fictional character yet you're really lacking in imagination when describing him.

[@njhoepner]

@@jonnyxquest You act like its some kind of rocket science. This "all-powerful" stuff was literally invented by a gang of bronze-age priests who thought the world was flat. It's not exactly hard to understand. And you're right, it is exactly "because I said so" with the power to back it up (if such a being existed)...in other words, might makes right. Now I've been a parent...I don't know anyone, expert or otherwise, who considers "'cuz I said so" to be good parenting...but again, you're right, it is the best religion can possibly do. It is completely subjective, completely arbitrary, and founded solely on who's bigger, with no moral content at all. You're absolutely right.

[@KuntHovind]

God is certainly unjust according to the Bible, in my opinion. You are fully aware of the verses I'm referring to. How do those things sit with your morality?

[@user-ex4wx1rj7s]

In your opinion and also in the opinion of any right-minded human being. As I state elsewhere, we "sinners" have an incomparably better definition of "right" and "wrong" than those on display in the barbaric Old Testament.

[@KuntHovind]

@@user-ex4wx1rj7s Speak for yourself. I'm no sinner, and I answer to no God. And your Bible states that God is never changing. And your Jesus stated from the mound that he was not there to change any law. So the old and the new testament represent the same God. An hateful, vengeful, spiteful god. How can anyone align themselves with that atrocities in the Bible?

[@user-ex4wx1rj7s]

@@KuntHovind Hi ! I think you misunderstood me (my apologies if I did not make myself clear). I agree with you entirely. I put "sinners" in inverted commas, because this is the term which Ken Ham and Kent Hovind (I take note of your pseudo) take such delight in using. I intended it as irony (the Bible depicts a God who is far more sinful than any human that I have encountered). I refer specifically to the Old Testament because that is what Ken Ham is trying to sell to us as the truth. The New Testament makes a feeble attempt to improve matters. It fails dismally. Sorry for the misunderstanding (if you have a moment to spare, you could root out one or two of my other comments to see where I stand).

[@njhoepner]

It is obvious that there is no connection between the Christian concept of "sin" and morality. Christians, in fact, are forbidden from having morals or ethics of any kind...that is the message of Gen 3 and Gen 22.

[@jonathanw1106]

Lol at people acting like they have any basis to judge right and wrong, bro if you don't believe in objective morality then none of this stuff you call "unjust" should even register. Where do you come off to call anything unjust? You're just a collection of chemical reactions, even your emotions are chemical reactions you have absolutely no reason to care about or even make a statement on what other people do or don't do unless it directly affects you in some way, and even then the only reason to say anything is that it may impact what you want. But then again, no one should care

[@eugenedenbrook322]

Amen!

[@Diviance]

Imagine being _Ken Ham_ and claiming _someone else_ is wrong. Isn't being wrong about everything like... your whole thing? Or is it just an accident that you are?

[@robertfriend2205]

It's no accident that I seen your comment and you should know that when I was a young man I was standing in my living room in the middle of the day and all of a sudden It was like I was transported back in time and I saw Noah standing at the entrance of the ark and he had long white hair and a long white beard and he looked so proud then I looked down and seen two giraffes and two elephants and two rhinos two of every living animal God created stretched out in a line as far as my eyes could see going to Noah. I don't know who you are but I love you but Jesus loves you more. Please keep an open mind because I swear on my soul that I'm telling you the truth. Jesus is the ark and he's the only one that can save you from the destruction that's coming upon the world. And I pray that God forgives me for not telling people sooner. Please ask Jesus into your life you won't regret it. You will make me the happiest man alive. You can just look at signs of the times. ACTS 2:17 and it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions and your old men shall dream dreams. Acts 2:21 and it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved 🙏 Please ask God into your heart ❤️ please

[@Diviance]

@@robertfriend2205 I already know God isn't real, mate. You won't be able to convince me he is because his very existence is impossible. It contradicts itself.

[@Diviance]

@@robertfriend2205 But if you still want to try, I have a simple requirement. It is the absolute most fundamental requirement for any religion. Demonstrate that a deity existing is possible.

[@pvpeet9374]

@@Diviance the evidence that he is real is far more convincing then that he is not. But your problem is that you close your eyes willingly; if he were to appear direct in front of you, you would think you have a hallucination. We can’t convince someone who is willfully ignorant and doesn’t even consider the points of the other side. You said it yourself: „you can’t convince me“. No point to argue with that.

[@Diviance]

@@pvpeet9374 Demonstrate that a deity existing is possible. Go on. I will wait. If you can't, then your claims and position are completely unjustifiable.

[@HS-zk5nn]

I am so glad I am not an atheist anymore. it doesnt answer any of the questions that I want the answers to. its just empty and meaningless

[@rhett_rydinhood]

_"it doesnt answer any of the questions that I want the answers to"_ Why do you blame your inability to live with open questions on atheism? It's not the "answers" as such that matter, but their truth. _"its just empty and meaningless"_ That may be, because it's not his job - but it is true.

[@HS-zk5nn]

@@rhett_rydinhood thats your subjective interpretation of my statement. "That may be, because it's not his job - but it is true." also subjective.

[@davidpiot8098]

@@HS-zk5nn i find your answer weird. atheism does not suppose to answer any questions. it is just a position that a persons holds: not accepting the claims the bible makes. Also when you said you where an "atheist" does that mean that before you didn't believe in a god and now suddenly you do? that's like someone who no longer believes in santa and then overnight decides to believe in santa again anyway. Very weird indeed. if my interpretation of your answer is incorrect, then please explain yourself further.

[@Moist._Robot]

@@HS-zk5nn If you returned home one day and found your most prized possession missing, would you be satisfied with the answer that a thief took it?

[@HS-zk5nn]

@@Moist._Robot no

[@refuse2bdcvd324]

The fact that darwinism has been debunked should be a source of encouragement for atheists. It means you are not a random monkey mistake. It means your great, great, great... grandkids won't grow scales and swim off into the ocean never to be seen again. It means you were designed by the most intelligent mind in the universe with a loving purpose. Please accept the love; declare Jesus as your Lord, believe in your heart that God raised him from death and you will be saved (Romans 10:9).

[@SuperSglenn]

evolution has not been "debunked" by anyone. evolution is true regardless whether one is a theist or atheist.

[@seantaylor4095]

Evolution is real whether you like it or not. God is a human creation invented to control the masses and you are evidence of it's success.

[@richardgregory3684]

_The fact that darwinism has been debunked should be a source of encouragement for atheists_ I'm sure you desperately want to believe that. "Darwinism" isn;t even a thing, evolutionary theory left that behind long ago. Darwin got the basic idea right, but much else he got wrong, or could not explain, or did not know. _It means you were designed by the most intelligent mind in the universe with a loving purpose_ How can anyone look at the human body with it's often comically bad structures and features and conclude it is designed at all? Even we mere humans can recognises the numerous laughably bad flaws in our bodies; thesealone are rpoof positive we evolved, rather than being the product of a divine, perfect intelligence.

[@user-ex4wx1rj7s]

It is not far off 200 years since Darwin produced his remarkable study “On the Origin of Species” (1859). It was far from complete. It inevitably contained inaccuracies. Since then, scientists have delved deeper into the theory that he puts forward. They have added to Darwin’s work, they have corrected mistakes, they have filled in gaps. Above all, they have consistently shown that in his fundamental principles, he was entirely correct. Whatever criticism could be made of Darwin’s work has been systematically quashed. Mindlessly stating that Darwinism has been “debunked” does not mean that it has been. The only serious shortcoming in Darwin’s work is that he never discovered at what point in history snakes lost their ability to talk.

[@refuse2bdcvd324]

@@SuperSglenn you made an assertion, not a factual statement. Who in your family lineage was not human?

[@ClaudioIbarra]

"Unless you have an absolute authority, how can you determine what's right and what's wrong? How can you determine what's just and what's unjust?" What about the well-being of conscious creatures? In general, morality is that which contributes to the well-being of conscious creatures. That's why you don't feel bad for a rock when you kick a rock, but you might feel anger towards the concept of owning other human beings.

[@user-nd7dy2kv6x]

you: "What about the well-being of conscious creatures? In general, morality is that which contributes to the well-being of conscious creatures." So you are vegan ? Tell the cheetah it's wrong to kill the gazelle. Yet men intuitively know it's wrong to murder other men, steal, cheat, etc...because God has written the works of the Law on their heart. But for some, this God given conscience has been seared. They know God exists but they suppress that knowledge...because they don't want to be held accountable for their thoughts/actions. Rom 1:19,20 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. John 3:19,20 19And this is the verdict: The Light has come into the world, but men loved the darkness rather than the Light because their deeds were evil. 20Everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come into the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed...

[@jackj807]

Sorry, no one needs an absolute authority to know right from wrong.

[@ClaudioIbarra]

@@user-nd7dy2kv6x The concept that everyone believes in Yahweh but chooses to suppress that so they can sin is just dumb. Come up with better arguments.

[@truthbetold8787]

​@@jackj807That makes no sense

[@shannaconda3434]

Where does that come from? Morality is taught, not learned through natural process. Give a group of 4 year olds a room with no adult supervision, provide them with food and water and no guidance and watch.

[@charlesbadrock]

Campbell's soup death is all part of the natural world sin has nothing to do with it there was No Adam and Eve ñature is cruel and unjust

[@guitarrens4912]

It sounds creepy to me that someone takes his moral from an ancient story book😬

[@markscholz1219]

Glad you are at least sampling different ideas. Keep searching with all your heart and you will find answers

[@kennethleeds8503]

The answer Mr. Ham gives to this objection will never be accepted by a normal person. Everyone has a sense of right and wrong, and telling a person that he has no basis for his sense of right and wrong will be dismissed as silly. This answer does not move the discussion forward. Giving this answer only convinces a normal person that you are incapable of providing a rational defense of the bible.

[@michaelburns317]

No, he’s just pointing out the irrationality of that position. It’s not his fault that many are deceived and many willfully reject (Rom 1) the only truly rational position. There is no way to know Truth without the God of the Bible.

[@thegoodtest]

You who base everything on your opinion, please explain what is a "normal person". Your absolute of normal makes you the authority over everyone else. Like you are judging everyone by your standard.

[@kennethleeds8503]

@@thegoodtest The arguments made by Mr. Ham are objectively silly. People have an innate grasp of morality. It comes partly from evolved instincts, and partly from other sources. When I say a normal person, I am quite certain that most people would consider Mr. Ham's position wrong. I am not saying I'm the arbiter of these things. I am quite sure that most people think Mr. Ham is wrong. He represents a small minority position. The bible advocates slavery and mass murder. A normal person doesn't accept that as reasonable.

[@robertfriend2205]

I've got to tell you that I don't know Mr.Ham but I know God showed me a vision in the middle of the day, i I was standing in my living room and I had been reading the Bible not much but I read it once in awhile but all of a sudden it was like God transported me back in time and I saw Noah standing at the entrance to the ark he had long white hair and a long white beard and he was holding a Shepherds staff that curved at the top and there was two giraffes, two elephant's two , rhinos and two of every living animal God created going to Noah they stretched out in a line that was as far as my eyes could see. I swear on my soul that I'm telling you the truth. I don't know who you are but I love you and want you to know Jesus is the ark and only he can save you from the He ll fire that's about to destroy the earth. I'm praying that you keep and open mind about what I'm telling you. And I pray that God forgives me for not telling people sooner. Please I'm saying a prayer for you right this moment and you should know that Acts 2:17 and it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God I will pour out of my spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions and your old men shall dream dreams. Jesus is coming soon !!! Ask him to come into your life and I promise you won't regret it and you will make me the happiest man in the world. Acts 2:21 and it shall come to pass that whosoever shall call on the name of the lord shall be saved.

[@kennethleeds8503]

@@robertfriend2205 One of the main problems I have is that the objective evidence demonstrates that Genesis isn't literally true. Consider: when you look up at the sky, you can see objects that are a lot more than 6000 light years away, in some cases millions or billions of light years away. You can see with your own two eyes that the universe was up and running long before Genesis alleges that God created the universe. The universe itself proves that Genesis isn't true. Reality itself proves that Genesis isn't true. Does that affect your beliefs?

[@Chris-hf2sl]

Ken Ham always starts these videos by quoting or referring to what it says in the Bible and then uses that to assert that God must therefore exist. Does he not understand the problem with this? If you want to use what it says in the Bible as proof that God exists then first you have to demonstrate that what the Bible says is true. Conveniently, he always misses that vital bit out. The fact is that the Bible was cobbled together over many centuries by superstitious folk with little or no understand of how the world works (ie. science). Once you recognise this, it becomes clear why the Bible is as it is, namely a load of incoherent rubbish. Yes, I'm an atheist - not because I choose to be one, but because I see ABsOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE that the universe was created by an old man in the sky using some form of magic. Whilst there are many things that science can explain, there are many things that science can't (yet) explain. But that doesn't mean they must have been caused by magic; it just means that we don't know.

[@daveaz9962]

Ray Comfort also has a wonderful ministry, Living Waters. Here is what he would say to anyone who is truly searching. A building is proof of a builder. A painting is proof of a painter. Creation is proof of a Creator.

[@njhoepner]

And everyone would agree that a painting is a painting...because we've all seen painters make paintings. Everyone would agree that a building is a building...because we've all seen builders make buildings. We DON'T all agree that we are in a "Creation," and no one...not you, not Ray Comfort, not Ken Hamm, NO ONE...has ever seen any being create a universe...or any supernatural being create anything...or any supernatural being, period...not once, EVER. So the argument is (at best) a non sequitur...or to be more honest, an attempt at deception via word tricks.

[@daveaz9962]

@@njhoepner And matter plus energy creates information even though observational science cannot come up with one such example. All information is traced back to a mind, an author. Just as a painter is traced back to a painter, a building to a builder, or creation to a Creator. DNA or the program of life didn’t write itself, just as the information in a book can be traced back to an author.

[@njhoepner]

@@daveaz9962 False statement. All energy that radiates carries information. We can determine the composition of a distant star by the light it emits...thus the light carries information...unless you want to contend that the star is a sentient being trying to communicate?

[@daveaz9962]

@@njhoepner Information You entirely missed my point. Information originates as a language. This type of information is always traced back to a mind. The one prerequisite for information is that first, information must be in coded form comprising individual symbols. This stored information/code is then used to compose meaningful words or symbols. These meaningful words are then arranged in sentences according to very specific rules or grammar (syntax), to convey an intended meaning (semantics). Information must also include the idea of a sender and a recipient that must be in tune with each other or you cannot have any meaningful transmission and reception. The two examples I gave were of the DNA molecule or an author of a book. If one can find a code underlying a given system, then one can conclude that the system had a mental origin. Information of this type is always traced back to a mind. A painting is proof of a painter, a building is proof of a builder, and creation is proof of a Creator. I do hope that you give this some thought. God is Holy and in order to be just, he must punish sin. But, God is Love. Jesus chose to come into this world because He loves us. He suffered dearly in our place and paid our debt out of love. Jesus suffered God’s wrath in our stead but love is not something He will force upon us. But, I do hope you eventually come to understand how much He suffered for you out of His great love for you.

[@daveaz9962]

@@njhoepner Information You entirely missed my point. Information originates as a language. This type of information is always traced back to a mind. The one prerequisite for information is that first, information must be in coded form comprising individual symbols. This stored information/code is then used to compose meaningful words or symbols. These meaningful words are then arranged in sentences according to very specific rules or grammar (syntax), to convey an intended meaning (semantics). Information must also include the idea of a sender and a recipient that must be in tune with each other or you cannot have any meaningful transmission and reception. The two examples I gave were of the DNA molecule or an author of a book. If one can find a code underlying a given system, then one can conclude that the system had a mental origin. Information of this type is always traced back to a mind. A painting is proof of a painter, a building is proof of a builder, and creation is proof of a Creator. I do hope that you give this some thought. God is Holy and in order to be just, he must punish sin. But, God is Love. Jesus chose to come into this world because He loves us. He suffered dearly in our place and paid our debt out of love. Jesus suffered God’s wrath in our stead but love is not something He will force upon us. But, I do hope you eventually come to understand how much He suffered for you out of His great love for you.

[@adelinomorte7421]

***IT IS NOT SAYING THAT ATHEISTS ARE NOT GOOD THAT MAKES YOU BETTER***

[@billybobwombat2231]

Well he did break quite a few of his own commandments, commandments that if we break we get eternal punishment, hes a do as i say not as i do kinda god.

[@danieldowdell9831]

Good Today ! __ " Jesus the Christ of GOD ", a simple trueth easily found in the early Writings of the Jewish Be-Livers of the " Way, Trueth, Life ". __ humbly, neighbour daniel __ p.s. thanks for increasing knowledge in this our troubled time .

[@jbunch3331]

It is literally the only Authorized Bible

[@danielpaulson8838]

I read what I want. Your authority does not exist outside of your mind. Get over it , Pharisee.

[@HS-zk5nn]

how do atheist determine what is good and what is evil? it is just arbitrary.

[@rhett_rydinhood]

Oh, no: Our feelings tell us. Don't you have feelings?

[@ClaudioIbarra]

Generally we call that a "conscience". It's the same thing that leads some Christians to try really hard to ignore the more obvious atrocious lessons in Bible passages.

[@HS-zk5nn]

@@rhett_rydinhood some people feel good take advantage of people, mocking them, insulting them, hurting them.

[@HS-zk5nn]

@@ClaudioIbarra some peoples conscience tells them that it is okay to take advantage of people, mocking them, insulting them or their religion, hurting them.

[@rhett_rydinhood]

@@ClaudioIbarra' I think "conscience" is not the concept I meant. "Conscience" already looks too much at external demands on behaviour.

[@irishdave4322]

Many of the comments are from people claiming to be atheist because they have not seen evidence for God. If atheists do see proof of God and decide to change their beliefs, that means they were not Atheist at all. That would make them agnostic and not atheist.❤

[@Zucr_]

Given you are speaking past tense that would mean Atheist who changed their mind not agnostic. Generally speaking most Atheist are Agnostic(to some degree). They usually say Atheist because they generally side on that much like many theist believe in god; however, often don't discredit the idea they might be wrong. If any one says you know for 100% with no chance of being wrong in just about any why when there is so many unknown factors then id simple call them ignorant.

[@partyrock4144]

Wow. This guy’s argument has more circles than a merry go round.

[@zellerized]

How so?

[@partyrock4144]

@@zellerized where to start? Bible says there wasn’t death until sin so nothing died until sin God is good because the Bible says god is good Atheists can’t deicide god is good or evil because the bible says that god decides good and evil. It’s all just “the bible says blank”, borderline gibberish

[@Gruuvin1]

No serious theist claims you need religion to tell you what's right and wrong, and to go there is an ignorant red herring fallacy. The claim is about right and wrong being OBJECTIVE: you need a moral standard SOURCE for right or wrong to actually exist. If objectivity doesn't exist, then neither can actual right and wrong exist; only personal preferences in disguise. If fact, without actual right and wrong, there can be no truth claims about what is and should be, and the atheist cannot even make an argument against theism without importing objectivity to stand on when they claim the theism 'wrong'!

[@jockyoung4491]

Ethics IS subjective, and absolutes are extremely rare. But we can all agree it is wrong to hurt others. Ethics are based on empathy, and society is where the nuances are discussed and played out. Some people may use a rule book to give them guidance, but in the end we have to choose in our own heart and mind what we are going to limit ourselves to. Life is complicated.

[@seantaylor4095]

Morality is subjective and this is demonstrated in no small part by the fact that religions can't agree on what these so called objective morals look like. One mans terrorist is another mans religious freedom fighter. One day slavery is ok, the next it isn't. One day homophobia is 'right' the next it's 'wrong'. One day (2000 years ago) human sacrifice is ok, the next it isn't. The theist position is always shifting and making new statements about what is right or wrong, trying to keep up with what societies already know. For an institution supposedly so adamant in their self-righteousness about knowing what is good and bad, they seem to have a pretty difficult time agreeing with themselves let alone others and they are always on the backfoot trying to play catch up. There's a very good reason for this. Religions are outdated human creations that lost their usefulness as soon as we figured out the earth orbited the sun. Morality is a product of human civilisation and agreed by majority consensus and policed in line with this. Religions tell people what they want to believe, not what is true.

[@CarlSidor]

I don’t think that you understand what the Straw Man logical fallacy consists of. A person who advances the Straw Man logical fallacy is hardly ignorant. You are simply name calling.

[@Gruuvin1]

@@CarlSidor a strawman is when you raise an objection to an argument that doesn't really pertain correctly to the argument, but then wastes your opponent's time debating that objection rather than staying on point. Or maybe that's a red-herring... there are similarities. But yeah, I think you're right, I should be more accurately labeling that a red-herring. "A red herring fallacy refers to an attempt to change the subject and divert attention from the original issue. In other words, a seemingly solid but ultimately irrelevant argument is introduced into the discussion, either on purpose or by mistake. A straw man fallacy involves the deliberate distortion of another person’s argument. By oversimplifying or exaggerating it, the other party creates an easy-to-refute argument and then attacks it."

[@CarlSidor]

@@Gruuvin1 , no, a Straw Man logical fallacy is when you introduce an irrelevant argument and proceed to attack that instead of the actual argument. It is a way to avoid dealing with the actual argument. Your opponent has nothing to do with it. People who use it are not ignorant. They are reasoning incorrectly. Our conception of morality descends from religion. Remember that religion is very old in humans. Religion gives us our moral framework that we all use. So, atheists are using a religion based morality that they then try to claim isn’t religous.

[@stephanhirons3454]

This video by Ham can only be described as an insane rant.The ravings of a fundamentalist madman

[@statutesofthelord]

The words of God are foolish to the worldly person following Satan.

[@throckmortensnivel2850]

The little story about killing someone because you don't like their opinion is not a good argument for a Christian to make. Mr. Ham may not know it, but Christians did exactly that in the past. They killed plenty of people for the sin of not believing in the one true religion. But let's leave that aside for the moment. From a Christian's point of view it may be true that death entered the world because of sin. Fair enough. But what about animals that aren't human, and are incapable of sinning? Why do they die? Why did God wipe them from the face of the earth in the flood? What is the reasoning behind that? I can understand God becoming angry with humans. I feel that way myself sometimes. But what about all the other animals? What did they do to anger God? As far as where morality comes from, it comes from the fact that humans live in groups. A "lone wolf" doesn't need rules. Animals that live in groups do. All human socieities, Christian or otherwise, have sets of rules. Those rules don't always protect those who are not part of the group, witness the Christians who killed off huge numbers of pre-Columbian peoples in the Americas, and Christians who enslaved people from Africa in the Americas, but they are enforced within the society itself. Given that non-Christian societies have many of the same rules as Christian socieities, it appears the rules are not from God.

[@jockyoung4491]

The story was deliberately fallacious. If everyone' has a right to their own opinion, then someone has the right to THINK that somebody else should be shot for their opinion. It is the actual shooting that is unacceptable. Trying to equate murder with "just another opinion" is obviosuly fallacious.

[@shannaconda3434]

Because you profess to be Christian doesn't make it so.

[@shannaconda3434]

Morality didn't come about through Christianity. The old testament is at least 1400 years older than Christianity so no, it didn't come from christians.

[@troypullen7469]

I believe you're missing the point. The whole point is what determines what right and wrong are. Is it subjective based on individuals opinions?... or is there, has there, been something much deeper imparted to humanity that gives all of us a vary similar definition and belief of what right and wrong are? That being a creator.

[@throckmortensnivel2850]

@@troypullen7469 I was just today reading about Joan of Arc. She was burned to death for blasphemy. For a Christian to be shaking his finger at the rest of us for our moral failings is just ridiculous. The reason we all have similar definitions of what's right and wrong is a society is because we are all humans. The morality rules cross religious boundaries, as there are many different religions, but most have core beliefs that are very similar. As I said, it is humans that impose morality on the religions, not religions that impose morality of societies. Religion is just the means for society to remove the morality from debate. We know that some other mammals have societies, and rules by which they operate, but they have no religion at all. So why would we believe that morality was imposed from outside?

[@martinhoy1]

Yes, but your only calling it a tree of death, because according to you it doesn’t fit with the Bible. If the Bible talked about evolution, you wouldn’t have a problem with it.

[@kennethswenson6214]

I sense a rather profound irony here. You speak about God's Authority, which is true, He is the final arbiter. But when YOU speak, where is the Authority? Can you point out in Genesis or any other book, by citation, by the exact words, everything that you say Genesis and the Bible says?

[@shannaconda3434]

Where is he claiming that he, not God, is speaking from authority?

[@shannaconda3434]

When you pray, before reading from scripture, do you pray to get a message or do you pray to get the message YOU want? That could be why you don't understand that Ken Ham is not speaking from his own authority.

[@kennethswenson6214]

@@shannaconda3434 I pray to get the message that God is actually saying. To show me how to read the text. I'm not really that interested in "filling in the blanks" of what is not explicitly there.

[@kennethswenson6214]

@@shannaconda3434 Okay, I'm going to answer your question slightly backward. If he is not saying that he is speaking with authority...then he is not speaking with authority and as such cannot represent what God says, because he does not have the Authority to speak it. If he is speaking with Authority, then by what means was he given Authority?

[@jockyoung4491]

@@kennethswenson6214 I think Varys gave the best answer: "Power (authority) lies where men believe it lies."

[@MisterCapra]

May these "Atheist" deeply reflect upon the fundamental implications of their religion, and stop determining the morality of Christianity using their corrupt worldview. As the Word says in Psalm 53:1, “The fool says in his heart, 'There is no God.' They are corrupt, doing abominable iniquity; there is none who does good.” May God have mercy on their hardened hearts. To unbelievers: Science means knowledge, and there is no know fact to humankind that nothing was the creative force behind everything or molecules to man evolution was how we came about. A house is evidence for a builder, a painting for a painter, and a car for a car manufacturer, the same is true of creation! Creation is evidence of a Creator. This Creator is called God, and He is to Whom we owe our existence and sense of morality to. But we went astray, we lied, stole, blasphemed His Holy Name, commit adultery (Matthew 5:28), denied God and created for ourselves false gods that suited our desires, and God's just judgement is to punish all such evil. His Holy wrath abides upon all people, as none does good, no, not one, we all deserve Hell, “For the wages of sin is death..." Romans‬ ‭6‬:‭23‬. Yet, that isn't the end of this reality; God loved us so much and seeking to show His mercy, He became a man, lived the perfect life we couldn't, and took the punishment we deserved so that all who repent (that is to turn from your sin, and genuinely follow Christ) and believe may have eternal life, “...but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” Romans‬ ‭6‬:‭23‬.

[@jockyoung4491]

Except that there is enough clear scientific evidence for biological evolution for virtually all biologists to accept it as obvious. Whetehr God exists or not is irrelevant to the science.

[@MisterCapra]

@@jockyoung4491 You say that, yet provide no such evidence, are you going off of faith in scientists or genuine evidence, sir?

[@jockyoung4491]

@@MisterCapra I have been studying the evidence for evolution for 40 years. Try to tell me it doesn't exist and I can only laugh.

[@shannaconda3434]

​@@jockyoung4491Has it been tested? Is it falsifiable? Is it repeatable. The only things Sen in a lab have been rapid adaptation of fruit fly colonies and the like that have very short life spans. They've never changed to another species and they've never witnessed any evidence for increase in genetic information in speciation. It's always the opposite. 100% of the time. The idea of junk genes has been disproven as well. Also, even given 3.4 billion years for life to develop, if you do the math on cellular adaptation, there is not even close to enough time for that to have happened. Evolution requires far more e faith than creation because there are far more assumptions in that theory. Even modern geneticists have reluctantly agreed for the most part that Dawrwins theory of evolution, which was built on his theory of the simple cell is improbable at best.

[@MisterCapra]

@@jockyoung4491 If you wouldn't mind, could you share it?

[@DavidPeriard]

Might be the dumbest thing I’ve heard in a while, well besides listening to Kent Hovind

[@michaelsears6702]

What makes it dumb?

[@shannaconda3434]

That's because your mind is closed and your heart is hardened. You've heard the truth and you're not curious. A Christians job is to give people the news of the gospel. The holy spirits job is to work in their heart to inspire that curiosity. Yiur heart has been hardened and you're not interested in the truth that doesn't support your agenda of man as God.

[@DavidPeriard]

@@shannaconda3434 nah

[@jockyoung4491]

@@shannaconda3434 Why do you assume that what YOU believe has to be the truth so that anyone who comes to a differeent conclusion must have a "hardened heart". That is rather presumptive and a little insulting. If I try to respect your right to your faith will you respect mine?

[@MatchDayFortnite]

@@jockyoung4491 this video is for believers , but you found yourself watching the whole 26 minutes just to end up complaining in the comment section. if you don't believe in any of the teachings here , because like you said , it's against your faith. i suggest you stop watching these and watch atheist channels instead because 90% of the comments here are going to be against your faith. i wish you all the best.

[@dansaber5853]

You can be LGBT and Christian 👨‍❤️‍👨

[@HS-zk5nn]

😂

[@dansaber5853]

@@HS-zk5nn the religious people laughed at Jesus christ. You have the same spirit inside you right now

[@HS-zk5nn]

@@dansaber5853 the religious people laughed at Jesus. You have the same spirit inside you right now

[@dansaber5853]

@@HS-zk5nn James 4:9

[@HS-zk5nn]

@@dansaber5853 John 14:6

[@jockyoung4491]

Life and death over millions of years DID lead to evolution, so just saying you don't like the idea doesn't make it go away. Science is based on evidence and logic, not what sounds good.

[@HS-zk5nn]

lol

[@shannaconda3434]

That's not fact, no matter how much you jump up and down, stomp your feet, and have a temper tantrum about it. It's still just your opinion about a theory. It's a theory because it's not testable, falsifiable, repeatable!

[@jockyoung4491]

@@shannaconda3434 It is testable, falsifiable, and repeatable, and has been demonstrated so may times. I don't think I'm the one having the temper tantrum. Why is it so upsetting to you that I accept the scientific evidence for evolution?

[@Dah_J]

Give us one verifiable testable proof of macro evolution

[@seabass124]

I am curious about your scientific evidence that you claim to have for macro-evolution, and I will gladly read your proofs. Don't use emotional or biased "evidence".

[@AlgyPug]

"God's word" is just the opinions of the biblical authors.

[@Kiyomoto657]

“All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;” ‭‭2 Timothy‬ ‭3‬:‭16‬ ‭

[@AlgyPug]

@@Kiyomoto657 Does that include the seven books of the Bible that the Protestants decided to remove? Was this editing decision inspired by the Holy Spirit?

[@CarlSidor]

Care to prove that with evidence?

[@AlgyPug]

@@CarlSidor What am I meant to be proving?

[@CarlSidor]

@@AlgyPugthat God’s word is just the opinions of the authors of the Bible. I would think that should be obvious. Can you prove that God’s word is actually just the words of the Biblical authors? Good luck with that, because they are all dead.

[@jbunch3331]

King James Bible is the Authority.

[@thegoodtest]

Which revision?

[@jockyoung4491]

For you.

[@93Current]

Ha ha ha! Good one! Oh, hold on, you're not actually being serious are you? I love the flowery Tudor language, but it's not a great translation. American evangelicals really seem to love it, although it's not clear why, and that's hardly a recommendation.

[@troypullen7469]

There really are no bad translations, and I do mean translations not paraphrases. If you really want the most accurate, then I suggest you learn to read and understand Greek, Aramaic, Hebrew and Chaldean. Not that there will be much variation in meaning for the majority of the text compared to any of the major translations. Honestly, the best translation for anyone, is the one you will read.

[@martyski691]

Mr. Ham might have more credibility if he didn't lie about the beliefs of atheists.

[@statutesofthelord]

Self-professed Atheists are all hypocrites, because, as you note, Atheists have belief.

[@Gardentrellis]

How does one “lie” about the beliefs of atheists? As far as I can tell it seems like atheists have different beliefs than each other. Ken Ham is probably bringing to mind a memory of an interaction he had with an atheist before so he isn’t lying….

[@robertsimpson5801]

What lie did he tell?

[@WisdomThumbs]

As a former atheist (ex-trans, too), everything Ham described here is what I once believed. So what lie did he tell?

[@oldcountryboy]

​@@robertsimpson5801 One lie he says is when he says Darwinian evolutionThere is no such thing it is just evolutionAnd when he says atheist believe in this he actually should say scientist He is being deceitful on purpose

[@thomasowens5824]

Nope, You don't need an old immoral book for guidance.....its all just about control.

[@topgunaudio7983]

The god you claim exists is by his own book unjust. Moral laws are set by men wanting to live in peace and cooperation. You can not name a single 'moral law' that can only come from a god. Your claim to moral law is the biggest fallacy out there, moral laws existed long before the bible and exists in cultures that never had your myth presented to them.

[@user-ex4wx1rj7s]

Absolutely. I was writing my own comment to that very same effect (if you care to give it a glance) when you posted yours.

[@MatchDayFortnite]

you are right , that's why it's said ''Morality is written on everyone's heart'' . so everyone is born with an ability to know good from evil, empathy and so on are a result of that moral imprint on everyone's heart. so yes we don't need the Bible to teach us about morality as you want it to sound. i wish you all the best in whatever you believe in , when the time comes hope one of us will be right.

[@avi8r66]

Evolution is not a 'tree of death'. Evolution happens at birth, it's all about which variants of a species manage to reproduce and pass on their traits. So from the start Ken is, as always, misrepresnting (strawmanning) the opposition. Anything to keep the grift going to I guess.

[@maxdoubt5219]

Let's paraphrase this BS: "morality boils down to blind, unquestioning _obedience."_ That's disgusting!

[@jockyoung4491]

No, you don't need religion to tell you what is right and what is wrong. You can base it on empathy and the practical needs of society. You can consider rules from 2000 years ago, but in the end you have to determine in your own heart and mind if it is a good rule that you wish to follow. Sorry, there are no absolutes in life.

[@shannaconda3434]

Ever read the book Lord of the Flies? Where does morality come from? It's obviously not instinctive. If it were lions wouldn't kill the young of other lions and certain bird species wouldn't allow siblings to kill each other to be the only one left in the nest. Wolves wouldn't hunt baby caribou because they are easier to kill than adults. Male bears wouldn't eat bear cubs, etc... You're entitled to your opinion but you have no authority to stand on and no evidence that your opinion is fact.

[@shannaconda3434]

You're lying to yourself intentionally if you don't believe in absolutes. An absolute right to life doesn't mean that someone won't try to take it from you but it is an absolute right. You believe in the absolute right to life or you wouldn't defend the life of your child up to the point of giving your own for it.

[@jockyoung4491]

@@shannaconda3434 No, you defend your child because it is your child. You don't stop to consider the philosophical foundations. While I admit there may be some kinds of absolutes, it is very rare in ethics. But the point is we know what is right and wrong without somebody else having to make us do it.

[@thegoodtest]

​​It's still just your opinion. A killer will justify his killing of you or your child then he or she will be right in their own mind using the same reasoning. Their opinions. They think killing us is okay. Who are you to force your views on the killer? ​@@jockyoung4491

[@fakeaccount7913]

Are you absolutely sure there are no absolutes? Society is usually wrong. My morals do not come from society. Why do some societies accept murder and others do not?