Russell Stannard - Does God Exist?

[@lancep.1251]

Another master class in the power of indoctrination, cognitive bias and fallacious reasoning.

[@tomlee2651]

Build up a case? You can't argue God/gods into existence.

[@kabtvro]

I'm glad you made this video it reminds me of my transformation from a nobody to good home, $34k monthly and a good daughter full of love

[@George-mic]

$75k biweekly changed my mindset and behavior, my goals, my family and I've to say this video has inspired me a lot!!!!

[@TravisScott-sy6fd]

wow this awesome I'm 41 and have been looking for ways to be successful, please how??

[@George-mic]

No one likes market risk, but without longer retirement, taking on risk is often a necessary evil to compensate for inflation

[@TravisScott-sy6fd]

My wife is willing to work for another 5 years if needed. Are we in good shape? Will we be okay if I begin withdrawing from Social Security when I'm 41 and my wife is 40? Should we hire a financial planner to help us navigate this?

[@George-mic]

These are crucial questions for a financial planner. I met mine at a NYSE summit, and with her help, my wife and I reallocated our $1.7M portfolio between a traditional IRA and a brokerage account. She's been making investments with our approval and has helped us recover twice our losses. We're holding steady and carefully navigating more markets

[@hvglaser]

If you arr looking for an interesting logical argument for the existence of god, save yourself the time and skip this video. There is nothing in terms of evidence or compelling arguments. It’s just a declaration of blind faith.

[@danielp2937]

Until you define what you mean by "God" in a precise way, what is it, what properties does it have, the conversation is essentially meaningless. What does it mean to assert that some undefined entity "exists"?

[@browngreen933]

They also need to define what they mean by "exists." Existence suggests elements, compounds, particles, stuff, etc.

[@logosao88]

@@browngreen933 Existence might not just mean physical stuff. It could also include other things that manifest in nature like time, entropy, purpose, order as well as desires, morality, and aesthetical qualities (beauty, goodness, love, etc.) Even material "stuff" has immaterial qualities like spin, momentum, charge, particleness (for lack of a better word).

[@thomasridley8675]

There is one thing about this reality that is absolutely true. None of the gods we have imagined are part of it.

[@branimirsalevic5092]

"Exist" is one extreme. "Doesn't exist" is the other. "Arising, enduring, and ceasing with the arising, enduring, and ceasing of causes" is the right view

[@aaabbb-py5xd]

Insanity is one extreme. Sanity is another extreme. So one eschews sanity. OK buddy.

[@charlieleedham5265]

6:32 "i never feel alone"....well there u have it, god exist cause the professor said he doesnt feel alone🤣🤣....schizophrenics literally say the same thing. He literally started off this dialogue bashing the big bang theory to ending it with "i dont feel alone", he spent most of his life work on the thesis on not feeling alone and the evidence backs up his theory cause he said so.

[@QuintEssential-sz2wn]

Despite the fact, I’ve encountered religious arguments for many decades, I’m still astonished at how bad the reasoning offered often is. This gentleman’s arguments are just mind-boggling awful . For instance, that hoary old apologetic trope “ we can’t prove that we love somebody; therefore it’s OK to believe in God, even though we can’t prove God” is ridiculous. They are completely different situations . If Russel was going to convince me, he loves his wife … of course he could convince me of that! First of all, he could easily demonstrate that he actually has a wife, by presenting her to me. Secondly, she could list all the way in which Russel indicates he loves her, and Russel himself could list many of the ways as well. I would have no reason to doubt them and every reason to believe them . Because people love each other all the time. It’s hardly some extraordinary claim. And they would be giving me the type of evidence of how people act when they love one another. Can they “prove” this to me such that I can have absolute certainty? Of course not. But that’s a complete red herring. we don’t have that in any of our inferences. We simply look at the evidence we have suggests, and make conclusions on that unless some counter evidence or better explanation is presented. So yes, of course Russ could demonstrate he loves his wife. And it can be demonstrated that what is eliciting, or is the object of his love, actually exists: his wife. On the other hand , he’s making a claim to “ know” God exists, without any demonstration of this or any good reason to think it is true. The analogy to loving his wife, certainly doesn’t give any strength to this claim as we’ve seen, and all he’s got is that “ I just know,” which is about the most naïve possible stance. Has Russel suddenly forgotten human fallibility? Has he taken into account just how often people are wrong when they think they “ know” something? There are people who fall in love with fictional characters in literature . They “ know” they feel love for this character… what does that mean? The character is therefore real? Of course not. How exactly does Russel ‘s confidence in his “ knowledge of God” square with the gazillion people who have different and contrasting claims of “ knowledge.” Plenty of people feel they absolutely no their particular God exists, which would be in contradiction to Russel’s claimed God. There have been countless people who have “ just known as a fact” that their cult leader was divine. It’s something they “ knew” whether they could convince you or not. Does that equate to their belief being justified? Or take the atheist who feels or believes in his bones that there is “ no one there” in terms of a God. How does Russel’s experiential “ knowledge” trump any of these? Of course, it doesn’t at all. Russel is just another example of how belief in God and religion basically exists in the mushiness of human thinking .

[@CosmoPhiloPharmaco]

And to add to your point, Russell is equivocating between knowing feelings and knowing truths about the external world. The only way to know your own feelings or sensations is by introspecting. However, when it comes to truths about the external world, there are other ways to know them. The methodology is different. So, he is engaging in a category error here by applying a methodology of knowing feelings (i.e., introspection) to a context where we should use empiricism (i.e., where sensory perception and reason have to be employed).

[@QuintEssential-sz2wn]

@ Exactly . It’s just a mind-boggling obvious mistake in reasoning. That’s why I say that God exists in the mushiness of peoples reasoning.

[@Maths_athlete]

​​@@QuintEssential-sz2wnSuppose there is a group of people sleeping (maybe small or any large number), so now, one person woke up, so my question is, Can he explain what is wakefulness to those who are sleeping? Certainly not. Next after sometime, another one woke up...now will he raise any question about wakefulness? Certainly not. The same thing is about God. You may counter argue, one may stir up sleeping guys & make them realise, hey buddy, the state you are in now is called wakefulness. In physical realms, yes this is true but in divine realms, preceding logic holds, that God realisation is too personal thing.

[@beemersboomersandbrews8206]

Just another smart man who wants to believe in god and therefore comes up with really poor evidence to justify his believe. I mean, if the evidence is how it makes him feel and that it just makes sense is a lot like how the Vikings felt about Thor.

[@BJtheMountaineerguy]

Evidence for God: • Design • Morality • Meaning • Information • Rationality • Knowledge • Intelligibility • Laws of logic • Consciousness • Identity over time • Uniformity of nature • Existence of anything • Beginning of the universe • Impossibility of the contrary • Near death experiences

[@roamingwildcampers2745]

I don't blame people for reacting badly to religious Dogma, but it's wise to leave God out of human folly....Science is not out to disprove God, but is a path to define God, coherently in whatever way that eventuates based on facts, not belief....

[@GooberGoo-mz8jv]

It's personal and, only thru faith , can you manifest his existence. It is not thru religion. That idea, belongs to the puppet masters in Rome.

[@vecumex9466]

Let me guess did you make up your faith on your own or was it inherited from hundreds of years of tradition? Before you respond let me remind you that it was the church that gave you the Bible not the other way around.

[@EvilXtianity]

_"...only thru faith..."_ So a person must first believe that a god (or gods) exist to have evidence that they exist.

[@MS-od7je]

First there was a beginning. Now there is an image. That image is the morphology of your brain. It is a mathematical formula derived pattern. It has a beginning and an ending. It is simultaneously infinite and finite. As structure it is ( as a transformation) the Bose-Einstein condensate to the largest structures in the universe. There are an infinite number of mathematical formulas and patterns from which to choose ( select). By being in everything it is everywhere. Given its ubiquitousness it can know everything known. Being the structure it makes/creates everything. If I describe a sphere you would not mistake it for the description of a cube. If I described a flower you would not claim that I described a house. Sufficient to the description is the reality.

[@TheAtheist_NextDoor]

Probably not. Stop making assumptions about unprovable things and go and live your life. The answer that claims to explain everything doesn’t explain anything.

[@bernardpalir]

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

[@RhettB-j3x]

So?

[@michaelmckinney7240]

It is not extraordinary to assert the existence of a transcendent agent responsible for the creation of the universe. The universe is in and of itself "extraordinary" and so by your logic and that of Carl Sagan an extraordinary result (our universe) requires an extraordinary cause. This old canard by Carl Sagan is no more convincing than it ever was.

[@goodwillthinking9931]

Really? You guys are still playing with the god-character filling every gap there is. This is just a logical fallacy. The honest answer is still:“I don’t know.“ Until there is proof and there is no proof so far, the god-character hypotheses is still a bad one, because the arguments for this god-character are the oldest and did not evolve a bit. If new science comes along, you guys claim, the pros and cons are on equal footing and therefore I keep believing. But this is just cherry picking all along. Aren’t you guys not getting tired of talking and every time ending on:“I know.“ Sorry, but you just believe, just believe.

[@barry.anderberg]

Except Sagan was wrong. There are many extraordinary claims that require quite trivial evidence.

[@James-v1o]

@@bernardpalir Does that apply to matter being self-existing and self-creating?

[@random-ks8et]

His inability to prove he loves his wife stems from his failure to define what he means by “love.” If he defined it as “valuing her above himself,” we could objectively judge whether his actions meet that subjective standard. In contrast, even if he defined “not feeling alone,” it would still offer no insight into the existence of God; it would only show that he does not, in fact, feel alone.

[@ttown918]

That's stupid. The distinction you draw depends entirely and your convenient definition of love. If he defined love as something he "feels" in his heart and mind, then it's no different that "not feeling alone." Thus, it's can very well be the same. You cannot know how he feels in either case.

[@random-ks8et]

​@@ttown918If your point is that ill-defined claims cannot be objectively proven, then his argument offers no insight into whether God exists.

[@jamesconner8275]

What? Is this guy saying his religious experiences are as affirmable as scientific experiences? I thought the same way when I was on LSD.

[@mindwrite2030]

Without a deep, honest, serious desire to know, I doubt it's possible for the individual to know for himself/herself who God is. The quest for truth is each individual's personal responsibility. The fact that your time here is temporary should be sufficient motivation for you to put everything else down and deeply seek the truth.

[@chrisconklin2981]

"The God Hypothisis"nocks down all other arguments and believe in god is a gestalt experience. I question that a Professor of Physics has any more credibility regarding Gods than I do.

[@SuperMrAndersen]

He's more trained and experienced in trying to prove something. But this time he failed

[@barry.anderberg]

The fact that you say "Gods" shows that you simply don't understand what's being discussed

[@TheUltimateSeeds]

"...Does God Exist?..." If it were conscious enough and could ponder such things, a human embryo - suspended in the amniotic water of its mother's womb - might ask: "...Does my 'mother' exist?..." Well, I suggest that we are all in that exact same situation right now relative to God.

[@jimliu2560]

The difference is: there is a physical and material connection between the baby and the mother…and when grown up…that offspring can see the connection… There is no scientific connection between God and the world…

[@TheUltimateSeeds]

@@jimliu2560 Do you mean the human "science" that doesn't know what 96% of the universe is made of? Besides, the "familial" connection between our souls and that of the greater SOUL of this universe will be made clear to us after we cross the threshold of death.

[@yadabub]

Based on what is seen in the world, it is more likely that Pod, a god that did none of the things claimed by the Bible, exists- rather than God.

[@fearitselfpinball8912]

I can understand that people may not find this man’s conclusion compelling or justified. But what does he demonstrate compellingly? To me: 1. That not everything we accept as true is (or can be) established by a singular knock-down argument (as it sometimes is in the hard sciences). (This ought to effect whether we expect all matters, including God’s existence to be established ‘scientifically’) 2. Even in these sciences, accepted conclusions are often established on the basis of a compelling ‘bouquet of evidence’ rather than by a singular irrefutable proof. (If we are demanding a proof on par with agreed science this ought to make us rethink whether singular irrefutable evidence is even what agreed science demands or provides). 3. Some claims that are true (subjective claims) cannot be empirically established but are nonetheless true. (This ought to make us rethink the role of subjectivity in relation to truth claims that are privately but not empirically accessible. It’s also a straightforward refutation that everything true is scientifically accessible and can be scientifically established). On this final point, it is interesting to me that in terms of consciousness, we cannot even establish that we exist (in the sense Descartes meant-self awareness-I think therefore I am) scientifically or from an exterior vantage; this knowledge is only accessible to us privately and from the inside. Again, it’s totally valid to say, point 1, if true, doesn’t prove God. Point 2, if true, doesn’t prove God. Point 3., if true doesn’t prove God. But if we don’t pause to think through what we mean by ‘demanding proof’ and what such proof might appropriately be after 1,2 and 3 we’re not engaging with the argument. If 3 doesn’t prove God what does it prove? How does that relate to a demand for scientific proof of God? These are not irrelevant questions to the conversation, (even if they don’t establish God’s existence).

[@mayankacharya]

For one to ask whether god exists or ...not... first the bigger question must be answered. What is god. If god is inside the boundaries of the universe then definitely such a possibility 'can' exist. Why not. If it is beyond then, why are we even bothered with the mental question.

[@michellaboureur7651]

So I now know that God exists…for Russell Stannard.

[@evaadam3635]

"Is Having Faith Too Much to Ask of You?" Many have gladly opened their hearts to give room to satan all their lives, influencing them to do all evils, vices, immoralities to their hearts' content, destroying their lives.... while closing its doors to their loving Creator who have been patiently knocking on their doors all this time for their own good but never given HIM a chance to at least have a little room to stay... ..is this too much to ask to give your Loving Creator a chance to have a room inside your hearts for your own benefit, while you allow satan to occupy all the rooms inside your heart all your lives doing nothing but trashing your life ? Merry Christmas to you all and I hope this New Year you will have full of blessings with faith in a lovinng God...❤

[@pcmasterwraith7676]

god itself is beyond essence and existence, to argue it does exist is to deny him

[@jarrichvdv]

Cop out

[@yadabub]

To be "beyond existence" is to not exist.

[@TheMadNorseman]

Before we ask the question wether God exist or not, we need to know what or who God is. I don't think we know. We're trying to get an answer to a question raised on ignorance, religions and belief. No wonder we are confused.

[@EvilXtianity]

_"...we need to know what or who God is."_ Well... first of all, she's Black.

[@jonnanderson6489]

As this universe appears infinite, any creator god would need to be infinite plus.

[@chayanbosu3293]

G- Generator O- Organiser D- Destroyer Generator is Lord Brambhya 4 headed Organiser is Lord Vishnu Destroyer is Lord Shiva This is the basic Hindu cosmology. Legendary Astrophysicist Carl Sagan explained it briefly in a TV Series.

[@sujok-acupuncture9246]

Shiva was a tantric sex master. The phallic sex symbol is his representation. In what way you call him a destroyer.

[@ShowMeYoBoob]

wait till you find out english is not the only language in the world

[@ClarenceThompkins]

The thing about science its able to make predictions, that's WHY we are able to accept the evidence.

[@gibau1000]

Did god come into existence at some point ? Is God a phenomenon without logicall explanation? Does God need to exist for everything else to exist? Could the universe exist without God?

[@jonnanderson6489]

No, yes, no, yes.

[@sanjeevjain5519]

Thoughts about God are one of the earliest thoughts of humans, at least. Because thoughts about God are hardwired in our brains. Because God is our Creator and imprinted thoughts about Him in our minds.

[@MJ1]

There’s no evidence whatsoever to support your conclusion. The only evidence we have of gods show up 40,000 years ago, about 260,000 years after our species.

[@jonnanderson6489]

What part of our brains?

[@dominicvijayanand1971]

The big bang happens forever. One happens and then it does its thing and it ends in its mission completed. And then what after that ? Does this way go on and on for eternity. Or does it. But all this proves a physical plane. Ever changing continually. On God's wish and will. But definitely there is something more to what we know and experienced.

[@panmichael5271]

Yes. Zeus exists!

[@James-v1o]

If I start with epistemology, as did Descartes (in contrast to beginning with metaphysics as in premodern philosophy), my own consciousness is what i am most sure of. That being the case, it seems to me that a subjective experience in my own consciousness of God would be the most compelling way to be convinced of God's existence.

[@jonnanderson6489]

Or at least convinced of your capacity to imagine a god.

[@James-v1o]

@@jonnanderson6489 Since you have no access to my consciousness you'll never know either way.

[@James-v1o]

@@jonnanderson6489 And since you have no access to my consciousness you will never be able to evaluate my experience either way.

[@evaadam3635]

"Does God Exists" Our lost souls were not sent here to know GOD exists... We are here to have a chance TO BELIEVE that a loving GOD exists... Now, applying your good common sense, it is way a lot saner to believe that your "Awareness with Freedom to Choose" could only possibly originate from Aware SOURCE or GOD.. ..but you are always free to choose to believe that you are a conscious produuct of Unconscious Bigbang out of NOTHING... The free will to choose covers everything, including the freedom to choose to be stoopid...

[@mikel5582]

Believe whatever you want. But if you want to use that belief to dictate how others should live, you ought to have evidence or reasoned support for that belief. It's really that simple.

[@joseleon8235]

The existence of teleology, or purposeful direction, in the universe is a profound question. At its core lies the most fundamental: why something exists instead of nothing. This question is compounded by the remarkable fact that mathematical concepts, residing in a Platonic realm, possess predictive power over physical phenomena, as evidenced by the universe's evolution. Furthermore, even randomness is underpinned by mathematical models, suggesting an inherent order. The emergence of conscious experience adds another layer of complexity, as it remains unclear how subjective awareness arises from objective reality. Furthermore, the universe lacks fundamental self explanatory-causation, with all phenomena relying on external even metaphysical factors. The limitations of our understanding are perhaps best showrd by Gödel's mathematical paradox, which reveals that mathematical systems require conscious insight or need of " understanding " to overcome their inherent limitations. These considerations collectively contribute to a case of teleology in the universe instead of a brut force that exists for no reason that has no purpose based on an ontological randomness based on not even mathematical fundamental because they are invented not discovered.

[@jimliu2560]

@7:20 You can prove that you love your wife by giving your life for her…Simple!

[@Kritiker313]

I'm guessing you mean sacrificing your own life to save your wife's life. By the way, how did you insert that 2:20 time index?

[@jimliu2560]

@ Typo fixed.

[@markbrown2749]

He's right about one thing. I don't have a clue what he's talking about.

[@stephenzhao5809]

0:46 RS: I think when you ask that sort of question you might be looking for some kind of evidence which is absolutely knockdown proof you know that's happens therefore you must believ in God it's certainly true that in science there are occasions when things are absolutely clearcut you know so and so exists therefore it follows but even in science there are situations particularly if you're dealing with the big questions like how did universe begin how did humans evolve um it's not like that you can't pin everything on a piece of knock down evidence and it's a bit like that with God whawt you have to do is to build up a case for example in sciecne if you all of the scientists now believe that the world began with a big bang now why where's the knockdown truth well all the galaxies are moving apart from each other and the further away the galaxies the faster they're receding into the distance so if you run the tape backwards everything was squashed to gether to a point therefore a big bang took place no because when that was the only pieces of evidence there were many people who subscribed to a different cosmology what was called the steady state 2:15 theory where all right things expanded but new matter formed and new galaxies where formed and so the general picture always remained the same there was there was no beginning point so then not everyone was convinced what then happened was that if there had been a big bang one could argue well it would be very violent there would be a blinding flash of light and that light must be around in the unviverse somewhere cooled down now and when you look sure enough you see it it's the cosmic micowave background radiation so 2:52 multiple pieces of evidence RS: so that's the second piece of evidence and then you say well okay um that then is the

[@ElyessBenarfa]

He is a very respectful honorable scientist man .. but a feel his religious childhood .. He believes that BigBang as a fact is answer to this crazy universe .. theory of god is absolutely obsolete as we conceive the Universe right now .. we are far away from anthropomorphism biases.. religion at first years of conscience is a devastating recurring old focus ..

[@Ekam-Sat]

Yes. God exists. Hence why truth is Self evident.

[@tamayaytam]

Please feel your god alone. Don't advertise, don't try to make people believe your god. Your god is your love experience. Let it sit there.

[@pandoraeeris7860]

It's not a scientific question, it isn't falsifiable. You can choose to believe, or you can choose not to believe, just don't pretend it's a question that could ever be answered with evidence, because it can't. I choose evidence first.

[@claudiozanella256]

Contrary to the video, the universe isn't fine tuned for life. The universe is fine tuned for....universe as we know it. Without the existing fine tuning no formation of atoms, no formation of stars !

[@mohdnorzaihar2632]

Could a baby's@new born developed "speaking@language" by itself without mimicking their ancestor/parents ? It's started from Adam&Eave, and we are mimicking both of them. Peace be upon ya'll and assalamualaiqum wmt

[@terrabusinessLLC]

Would be wonderful if GOD would exist so he can be kept accountable for his actions or inactions

[@Rittley]

WOW! This is actually the first time someone explains this so well. Thank you!!

[@aporist]

Just an idea: This celestial object that attracted me in quantum state is a data store, and I suspect they're many in the Universe. Our quantum replica could be transferred anywhere in the Universe where there are conditions - in our case, where there are phosphates, our earthly bio cannot do without phosphates. Nitrogen is everywhere but phosphates are only in the vicinity where a super nova had exploded.

[@LucifersSlave]

When God punished the snake and humanity, it wasn’t just a simple act-it introduced death and set humanity on a path of evolution. This punishment meant starting from scratch, becoming like animals that return to the dirt from which we came. Just as the snake was condemned to crawl and eat dust, humanity was also brought low, destined to struggle, fight, and live in a world defined by conflict and deception. This fall reshaped our nature. Death became a reality, and survival drove us to form societies-not out of love for others, but out of selfishness and self-interest. These societies reflect our inner conflicts, where selfish desires often outweigh the collective good.

[@barry.anderberg]

It's simple. Consciousness exists. Is it more likely that reality is at bottom fundamentally conscious or just matter? Obviously the former.

[@sierrabianca]

@barry.anderberg Funny how every uninformed answer begins with "It's simple"...

[@barry.anderberg]

@@sierrabianca Do they? Why is mine uninformed, pray tell?

[@ShowMeYoBoob]

@@barry.anderberg How do you know that consciousness exists outside the brain?

[@S3RAVA3LM]

It's a delight, a great joy, to seek God. Learning about science, theology, field theory, mysticism, metaphysics, philosophia, scripture(Greek, Indian, and Egyptian), is a lot of fun, figuring out enigmas, recollecting deeper meaning - the very fact of deeper meaning is an inner impetus. Everybody, as they were growing up and go through life, there's a change in perception and perspective, and why should this ever come to an end, rather why not continue on. Because we come in to being, i.e., life, therefore who wouldn't seek their Source.... you know, people there are who state that others believe in God and an afterlife, so to console their minds....if you were to ask me, really, truely seeking God is, to me, terrifying; even daunting, for any such beliefs I once had are now gone - up is no longer up, down is no longer down, what something seems is no longer what it seemed. This is what others are afraid of. Nobody likes change or lost and we all cleave to what's familiar to us, thus we find our identify in it such things but really they're delusion.

[@SandipChitale]

Which? Vishnu? Mithras? Zeus? Poseidon?

[@Roshan-q6n]

The WORTHWHILE comments that are HIDDEN from your view because you're not supposed to see them are under the "NEWEST" tab at the top.

[@truesay786]

The cumulative arguments, Intelligent design, first mover, consciousness etc etc

[@gzrrkk]

I've heard many bad argument for God. This is definitively among the worst

[@LuuLuong-bn8iy]

Rob go take your find no exam 😅 oh it's Big Bank or Bang ? watta beateafool of U2.... 😅😂😂😂

[@dennisbailey6067]

Psychosis.Belief that the imaginary is real.

[@ansleyrubarb8672]

...Man's learning is so short of a in Time, I think everyone needs to relax and see how knowledge will increase. GOD & all sciences will co-exist in marvelous harmony resulting in Perfect Eternity living with & encapsulated with GOD'S Love, respectfully ordinarychuck hotmail... captivus brevis... you tube... Blessings...

[@Brody.W]

Yes

[@BIGGIEsmalls13]

Don't forget to take your medication now will you.....

[@olivierdelyon8196]

The Universe IS God,God is the Universe,the Holy Spirit of the Bible being the energy of the Universe,there......😮

[@EvilXtianity]

_"...the Holy Spirit of the Bible..."_ Who's that?

[@EvilXtianity]

@@olivierdelyon8196 Source?

[@EvilXtianity]

​ @olivierdelyon8196 Oh, am I supposed to call you "dude" too?

[@olivierdelyon8196]

@@EvilXtianity as ya wish dude.....🫡

[@jonnanderson6489]

Which bible?

[@williamwillaims]

Personally, I don't care so long as we keep church and state separate. And keep God out of science. It's not does God exist - but do you believe that God exists?

[@khaleelorwhatever]

To the non-believers in the comments. Does it make you feel better to express something you can't prove wrong under a KZbin video? And don't try the whole burden of proof thing. Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence, and wielding that as your only shield doesn't make your argument any stronger. It’s not about winning or losing-it’s about engaging meaningfully, not just dropping contrarian comments to feel superior.

[@EvilXtianity]

_"Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence..."_ But it is.

[@khaleelorwhatever]

@EvilXtianity Please do yourself a favor and do research before commenting

[@khaleelorwhatever]

@@EvilXtianity Please do your research...

[@EvilXtianity]

@@khaleelorwhatever Wait. Are you really arguing that absence of evidence is _not_ evidence of absence? LOL

[@EvilXtianity]

@@khaleelorwhatever Or are you arguing that the Bible character known as Jesus existed?

[@bcflyer99]

Stannard demonstrates the difficulty of trying to prove something he already believes in, trying to fit the evidence into his beliefs. It should be about following the evidence where it takes you.

[@SuperMrAndersen]

He's trying to prove that believe in god doesn't require proof.

[@barry.anderberg]

Atheists suffer from the exact same problem. It's called confirmation bias.

[@sohu86x]

And believe that the world is flat. I don't need proof. I just believe.​@@SuperMrAndersen

[@SuperMrAndersen]

@@sohu86x Right. And this scientist knows very well there's no any proof or evidence. Otherwise he would provide it first

[@Atheist-o3n911]

Yes supernatural exist which means God too exist.

[@BIGGIEsmalls13]

Wow, your command of grammar is intoxicating.

[@Atheist-o3n911]

@BIGGIEsmalls13 who are you?

[@Atheist-o3n911]

@BIGGIEsmalls13 what grammar? You not agree with my statement. I'm the most atheist person in the world and i used to laugh at my mom and other people who pray to God and nobody can hallucinate me i even challenge to God. But I was shocked one day what i saw i couldn't believe my eyes and I research more than fifty times at last I agreed and here to claim that supernatural is definitely real. I know it's hard to believe but let's tell you that I'm a complete man by birth i have enough energy I can connect with universe and later even islam and hindu priest says that to see demons or angel you should have enough soul energy, i don't even know that, i saw later on KZbin. What they say is true because it match with me.

[@Atheist-o3n911]

@@BIGGIEsmalls13 why did you delete my comment? I don't know but it's not appearing

[@Atheist-o3n911]

@@BIGGIEsmalls13 what grammar? You not agree with my statement? Iam the most Atheist person in the world and i used to laugh at my mom and other people who pray to God and nobody can hallucinate me i even challenge to God. But I was shocked one day what i saw i couldn't believe my eyes and I research more than fifty times and at last I agreed and here to claim that supernatural is definitely real. I know it's hard to believe but let's tell you that I'm a complete man by birth i have enough energy to connect with universe and later even islam and hindu priest says that to see demons and spirits you should have enough soul energy. I don't even know that, I saw later on KZbin. What they say is true because it match with me.

[@williamburts3114]

Does God exist? That question might get a reply of, what is existence?

[@VeljaPopov]

Soo god of the gaps. Yeah, great scientific approach.

[@vecumex9466]

The slogans and one liners are boring. Try something else!

[@VeljaPopov]

@vecumex9466 what's actually boring is claiming your god and again not providing any evidence, except your personal feelings. So no need for anything else, until you or anybody else provides actual proof for your god. ✌🏻

[@VeljaPopov]

​@@vecumex9466 what's actually boring is claiming god and again providing no evidence, except your feelings. So yes I do agree on that, you really need to try something else and give some actual proof for your claims.

[@VeljaPopov]

​@@vecumex9466what's actually boring is claiming god and again not providing any evidence, just personal feelings. So yes I would also say try something else and provide real proof for your claims.

[@VeljaPopov]

​@@vecumex9466​​ what's actually boring is claiming god and again not providing any evidence, just personal feelings. So yes I would also say try something else and provide real proof for your claims.

[@BJtheMountaineerguy]

Only fools say there is no God

[@goodwillthinking9931]

I‘m getting tired of ppl like this guy, no doubt a nice person, talking about this god character as if this entity is some existing real thing and ending with: „I know, I love… and I know, I‘m not alone…“ as if this is in any way the straight forward proof for a sky daddy using magic to do stuff. The arguments for this sky daddy are as old as the birth of the oldest logical fallacy: the god of the gaps fallacy.

[@frontsidegrinder6858]

I wish you could have asked Alan Watts. Everthing would be clear. I give you one alternative: Even just sitting there without speaking any word would be another answer. It's way way more simple than you think.

[@prestonmack320]

You exist that means he exists

[@Bboar_969]

He?

[@EvilXtianity]

@@Bboar_969 She's Black.

[@jonnanderson6489]

Must "he" exist? Or does "he" have the ability to not exist?

[@BIGGIEsmalls13]

Don't embarrass yourself.

[@LuuLuong-bn8iy]

You tube 😅😂😂😂😂😂

[@joelharris4399]

What a splendid time to ask that question on Christmas Day

[@rdan123]

So what? You don't have to ask this question on Christmas?

[@sujok-acupuncture9246]

Or a better question for today would have been... Do gods are born as humans..?

[@joelharris4399]

I thought the holidays were a time for resting (the brain in particular) not philosophizing; spending time with loved one? That's why it is a bit odd to bring up such a question today

[@johnrichardson7629]

@@joelharris4399 The answer is still no.

[@S3RAVA3LM]

​@@sujok-acupuncture9246I don't know if the gods ever are born into mortal men, but man is related to the gods, for in the upanishads declare: indra as the sun is linked to the eye of man, and atman the very seer or witness of the eye. Through the pranas, there is Vayu....many organs of man are related to a gods. But I imagine your comment refers to Christ as God incarnate, so the Christians believe. The knowledge depths of christ are deep, as he's an avatara like many in hinduism, but God couldn't ever become a mere mortal, but his spirit, sure, and it's through this spirit that we come to....

[@johnmaisonneuve9057]

This guy being a true believer, is embarrassing. It’s all Christian mumbo jumbo silly nonsense. Pretty silly.

[@_a.z]

Who made God? The idea of a god answers nothing!

[@winstonoboogie2424]

Belief in god doesn't originate in the person, it comes from god. When it happens, all options of not believing are taken away, and it becomes knowledge. Unprovable knowledge, and you're stuck with it. If I was atheist I'd hope there is a god and a better life-after, this life isn't worth the trouble.

[@iemy2949]

Sorry you think this life isn’t worth the trouble.

[@tarekabdelrahman2194]

Universe can’t exist from nothing according to thermodynamics laws. A creator not created must be existing. That represents a self referential paradox. Logic suggests a resolution to this paradox by stating that the uncreated creator must be outside on the whole universe boundaries. An uncreated creator exists out of universe and created the universe is proven by logic/science.

[@VeljaPopov]

Lol so uncreated god can exist, but uncreated universe can't. Yeah, makes perfect sense.

[@JohnQPublic11]

The preponderance of *ALL* the evidences gathered from within the factual reality of *ALL* the sciences, i.e. geology, biology, philosophy, mathematics, physics, genetics, chemistry and anthropology, etc., proves beyond *ALL* doubt that the universe was “Intelligently Designed” and Created in and by the mind of the Judeo-Christian GOD.

[@bitterbold]

Oh come on, this is very embarrassing. A believer trying to bend everything to his liking and concluding there must be a god then. It's a shame but not unexpected because believers have NO evidence of a god or many gods whatsoever.

[@catkeys6911]

The belief in God is, I believe, a kind of anthropomorphization of reality. There has to be some kind of Being, who thinks in the same fashion as we human beings do, (except on an infinitely grander scale, of course). We can only conceive of reality in terms and concepts that are familiar and accessible to us.

[@WayneLynch69]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/nKjVi2Oifa2fjLM

[@browngreen933]

100% 😮

[@michaelmckinney7240]

Not true, though anthropomorphic tendencies are real, not all belief in God is so motivated. We see a "Fine Tuned" universe not because we want to see one, we see a cosmos filled with evolved emergent complexity, not because we wish it were so, we see empirically demonstrable constants in our universe that are real, and measurable, not contrived.

[@barry.anderberg]

Your post shows that you're totally out of your depth and lack even the basic conceptual tools to participate in the conversation.

[@barry.anderberg]

What you're saying is that YOUR conception of God is anthropomorphic, and you assume everyone else's is too, while simultaneously showing that you're totally unfamiliar with classical theism or historic theology of any kind.

[@rchas1023]

Define 'God'.

[@LogicStandsBeforeGod]

God Himself defined who HE is, you have a problem with it? Quran 112-1-4. 1)Say: He is Allah, the One and Only; 2) Allah, the Eternal, Absolute; 3) He begetteth not, nor is He begotten; 4) And there is none like unto Him.

[@thesoundsmith]

Does God exist? No. Stop asking, you bore Him.

[@NataliaCh93]

I don't believe in God, I believe in science, in looking for an answers, in what the science can prove and discover that we can see, touch, hear, and not in some stories for naughty kids to scare them and behave themselfs about some old guy that will come and punish them. And God like love doesn't exist.

[@Archimedes_1]

What, exactly, do you mean by saying "love doesn't exist"?

[@NataliaCh93]

@Archimedes_1 it's just a myth, ilusion, fantasy, not a real thing, just a fascination that doesn't last, it's just a bs, chemicals in our bodies and thing to fullfil emptiness in ourselfs for a moment, to have a bond with someone as a thing to help forget for a while about traumas or to avoid them and when you got what you wanted or got bored you move on and you even don't need engaging or you are focusing on yourself and your needs, and you're forgetting about this fellings bs, and in this world there's no place for a love or fellings bs and we all know that doesn't exists, love is only in the movies or books cause they are selling great cause they're about love

[@Blaze936]

Very... banal. You're greatly limiting what you can learn through such a rigid set of arbitrary parameters. I don't see the evidence in shutting the door on the question of God altogether because your senses, that are restricted to how they developed through evolution for survival, don't offer proof for you. Read some philosophy... or don't... it would be too abstract based on your model for finding truth.

[@uthman2281]

​@@NataliaCh93 yu are wrong with that

[@Archimedes_1]

​@NataliaCh93 Perhaps particular notions of love-such as what one sees in certain movies-don't really exist. However, many people _do_ claim to feel love for X, Y, or Z. Additionally, there are countless descriptions and depictions of love in one form or another in art, poetry, music, and literature throughout the centuries. So, I think we have ample evidence for a human experience called "love," although that's not to say we are anywhere near fully understanding this experience. Now, I think it is conceivable that one could, at least to some extent, "reduce" this experience to biology, chemistry and physics, in the same way I think one could conceivably do for the experience of music; one could even provide psychological and evolutionary explanations for these experiences, but would that _really_ make the felt experience of love, or of music for that matter, _any less_ real or _any less_ significant? Could we _really_ say that these experiences are non-existent?

[@browngreen933]

God cannot "exist." If God exists, then he's part of Existence like the rest of us and therefore made from the same stuff that we're made of. What theologian is willing to accept that? 😢

[@vecumex9466]

From your statement seems that you have been missing a lot of theologians as well as philosophers materials.

[@Roshan-q6n]

Consciousness continues on, while this physical existence does not.

[@browngreen933]

@@vecumex9466 Which theologians say that God is made from the same stuff as us?

[@browngreen933]

@@Roshan-q6n I assume you mean that consciousness continues on after death. There's no evidence for that. Quite the opposite.

[@Roshan-q6n]

@browngreen933 I have memories of that, I don't need evidence. You need evidence, I don't.

[@winstonsmith2235]

For believers It becomes increasingly more difficult to prove, or even give a semi-coherent explanation of the invisible sky-god. After all the talk the professor came up with a good old "I don't feel alone" and "subjective does not mean its wrong". Weak tea.

[@jonnanderson6489]

Agreed. His claim to being in constant communion strikes me as a form of amenable schizophrenia.

[@catherinemira75]

One hundred and ten percent correct. The comparison with trying to prove real and deeply felt love is an apt one because a love profoundly felt cannot be seen to outsiders. What is subjective to others is often what is the most deeply felt reality to us Russell is 💯% right 👏👌

[@noelwass4738]

This is excellent what you say.

[@VeljaPopov]

So I love my wife and my wife exists. Therefore if I love god he must exist as well. Yeah, makes perfect sense.

[@catherinemira75]

@@VeljaPopov that is not what is being said. Logic doesn't help when talking about God. What is being said is that subjectivity should not be considered as lack of credibility or validity when dealing with the nature of love or that of God.

[@VeljaPopov]

@@catherinemira75 it absolutely should, because your thoughts will give you the experience of what you believe in. So if you for some reason, that is because of your psychological conditioning, believe in god you can have that experience. But that is just because you believe in that, or it is implemented into your subconscious, again by programming in your life, thorough parents, education, culture, society etc.

[@michaelmckinney7240]

@@VeljaPopov Your inaccurate reference to what Stannard said is apparent. His point was that he loves his wife and if prodded to explain why, he might list a number of reasons that to an observer may sound trite. Mr. Stannard accepts this as valid from the observers point of view and yet just as valid is his subjective certainty that he in fact does love his wife, and he is making a perfectly logical statement in saying as much. Stannard never said anything about making something a reality by "loving" that person or thing. You, and no one else is making this false analogy. Yes you're right no matter how much I love Santa Clause, I don't expect to see him coming down the chimney. All Stannard is saying is there's a subjective element to this question that shouldn't be so easily dismissed and it's shared and experienced by hundreds and hundreds of millions of people daily.

[@ryngrd1]

Exactly right! Mathematical truth exists. Moral truth exists. Jesus is that light. Amen 🙏😇

[@EvilXtianity]

_"Moral truth exists. Jesus is that light."_ “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters - yes, even his own life - he cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:26-27) “No one can become my disciple unless you give up all of your possessions." (Luke 14:33) "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law - a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household." (Matthew 10:34-37)

[@ryngrd1]

@EvilXtianity Yes! Jesus is exactly right! You must place God first, before everything. It is the correct order of things. Thank you! Moral truth exists! Jesus is indeed Lord! 🙏😇⛄✨🎄🔥💪✝️👑🕯️♾️🌲

[@EvilXtianity]

@@ryngrd1 _"You must place God first..."_ But that wasn't what he said. The word used in the original Old Greek is "miseō" which means "to hate, pursue with hatred, detest". That is the only definition of that word in that instance according to Strong's Concordance and Bill Mounce. Jesus is stating that a prerequisite to following him is to hate your mother. It is an if-then conditional statement. IF you choose to follow Jesus, THEN you must tell your mother that you hate her. Hating your mother it a literal prerequisite to following Jesus.

[@ryngrd1]

@@EvilXtianity wow. None of that is true. Jesus gave us the two great commandments. Nuff said. Praise Jesus 🎄😇🙏🌲♾️🕯️👑✝️

[@ryngrd1]

@@EvilXtianity not true. Jesus gave us the two great commandments. Jesus is that light ✨🔥🎄😇🙏🌲♾️🕯️👑✝️💪

[@noelwass4738]

This is very enjoyable to listen to. We all try to make sense of the world. We all eventually come to our own conclusions about how we arrive at truth and what we accept as truth. Even then it is not static but changing. There are many facets to what we are prepared to believe, and it appears to be very much an individual experience. Talking about 'love' was amusing to me. It is of course more complex than spoken of. 'Love' is a strong human connection whenever it exists. How does one make it real? For some romantic love happens and for others it does not. It is all part of human experience.

[@LuuLuong-bn8iy]

😅😂😂😂😂

[@tadmorrison]

This fellow has little understanding of cosmology

[@jennymiko]

Thank You! 😊🙏

[@rickdavies4801]

No one noesfor sure

[@sujok-acupuncture9246]

Its very difficult to believe in God until we meet some godly people like Osho or Jesus or Buddha or Kabir. It is in their presence that the mankind experienced the energy of grace. Or experience that same energy in ourselves.. Until then just play with their words...

[@EvilXtianity]

_"...some godly people like Osho or Jesus..."_ “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters - yes, even his own life - he cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:26-27) “No one can become my disciple unless you give up all of your possessions." (Luke 14:33) "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law - a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household." (Matthew 10:34-37)

[@sujok-acupuncture9246]

​@@EvilXtianity who wrote the new testament...

[@EvilXtianity]

@@sujok-acupuncture9246 _"...who wrote the new testament."_ Anonymous authors. And, the Gospels were all copied from each other. Who do you think wrote them?

[@sujok-acupuncture9246]

​@@EvilXtianity I consider the gospel of Thomas as absolute authentic words of jesus. Others... It's just fifty fifty because the bible has been edited many times...

[@EvilXtianity]

@@sujok-acupuncture9246 The earliest Gospel fragment (it's known as P52) we have dates from the second century (John 18). More than 80% of New Testament manuscripts date to the 5th century or later. There are more than 5,500 surviving Greek manuscripts and no two are alike. We do not have any originals. There more than 500,000 differences. There are more differences than there are words in the New Testament. Matthew and Luke plagiarized a total of 97% of Mark, often word-for-word. Matthew contains 94% of Mark's material; Luke contains 88% of Mark's material. Mark contains a total of 11,025 words, and only 132 are unique to him. Additionally, Matthew (44%) and Luke (58%) have material in common that is not found in Mark. John was written later and 92% of the material was unique.

[@qake2021]

🤣🤣🤣🤣 god only exist in one's mind. 😁😁😁😁

[@johnpeers6540]

Gibberish... pure silly and embarrassing. All he feels is indisputable but it still don't prove that a God exists.

[@ttown918]

You have poor comprehension skills. He didn't solely base his belief in God simply by how he feels....

[@zeroonetime]

Does God exist?? Yes and n0, do your thoughts exist, yes and n0. Because they come and go as they ma, in the realms of the infinite potentials. On and Off, switching, one way or the other, and yet all the same. 010

[@voyager-tc9dz]

No.

[@bobcabot]

...No.

[@waynedarronwalls6468]

if God exists only as an item of faith, how can He be said to have a tangible "existence"?

[@johnrichardson7629]

Good grief. This channel is becoming ridiculous.

[@piruz3243]

I guess Robert is getting older and preparing for the Final Exam.

[@johnrichardson7629]

@piruz3243 My thought exactly.

[@PEM-zt5rd]

Not at all. First of all, Mr RL Kuhn's channel is about getting all perspectives on every subject. Second, his question to get the speaker to compare the evidences destroyed his analogy completely. There is no coming back from that. Robert showed that his analogy was based on subjective "evidence" compared to objective observations and physical proof we have accumulating for our leading theories. There is no comparing those. Theist just want to hitch a ride for free comparing themselves to Science which destroyed Religion a long long time ago. So no. Never disrespect Mr Kuhn again. Both of you. Fools.

[@jimliu2560]

Robert does not believe in God…but needs to be “friendly-to-all” in order to sustain this channel….

[@richardsylvanus2717]

Worship Satan