Current Arguments for God | Episode 1006 | Closer To Truth

[@deepakfialok]

Can not sleep without listening to at least one episode daily, questions that puzzeled me for last so many years. Thank you for your time

[@WayneLynch69]

Carl Sagan carved out a wholly undeserved reputation as the science whisperer, when in fact he was an ego-maniac kook. Irresepctive there's been a Super Bowl caliber competition to be 'the new Sagan': Brian Greene, Brian Cox, Michio Kaku, Neil LOL Degrasse Tyson.... Robert Lawrence Kuhn is very much the legitimate science whisperer.

[@rationalsceptic7634]

Spinoza's God was just the fabric of reality that Science is exploring!

[@Raptorel]

The most coherent formulation if you ask me.

[@abdullahtahir9622]

Poet of East,Allama Iqbal counter Spinoza 's view

[@JamesRichardWiley]

Instead of a god we have arguments for a god.

[@JScholastic]

Instead of professing God, we have fools denying God

[@JesuzPrice222]

Instead of a multiverse, we have arguments for a multiverse.

[@Ballwithrich]

We need a court style version because we have people willing to question it all

[@cwpIII]

Wondering if maybe we're just looking for the "wrong" answer, to the question "Is there God?" - We're asking that, but we're discarding all answers that aren't the ONE answer that's something like "God is some intelligent being, sitting somewhere watching us, waiting for our worthiness" - But the answer might just be right in front of us, but very different to comprehend, and we're CHOOSING to look past it as THE answer, because our less-intelligent brains can't wrap around it.. which is EXACTLY what God says! He already said humans cannot look upon His form, thus be rendered insane..

[@kh34ly5]

The guy talking at 13:50 says that he believes in a creator because if it was true that a creator existed and there is purpose to his life instead of it being just chance then it would ground him to reality and motivate him to seek the truth, and low and behold the conclusion of truth he has come to is that a creator exists. Now there's a circular argument if ever I've seen one. Surely the truth matters despite how it makes you feel.

[@Niatnuom_Esiotrot]

It is quite common for theists to indulge in circular arguments. I think more interestingly, when we compare this guy(Robin Collins) with the person(AC Grayling) who speaks after him we can see rather distinct differences. AC Grayling who is a non-theist speaks in a calm manner. Robin Collins speaks with what looks like a scowl, and clenched fist(look at his left hand at 14:04). And he's not the only one, I have come across way too many professional theists who speaks in an angry aggressive manner, metaphorically speaking it often reminds me of somewhat like a creature with fangs and claws swinging in all directions. I very often have very little doubt if the law allowed them to do violent conversions, they would have very little hesitation. I think it's perfectly fine for them to believe what they wish to, however the manner they choose to interact with non-likeminded persons is highly disturbing.

[@Questioning_God]

@@Niatnuom_Esiotrot what a ridiculous comment, just take a look at any and all debates involving William Lane Craig, Frank Turek or John Lennox to name a few. They are all incredibly calm, humble and respectful. By your logic the same could be said about Richard Dawkins at the Reason Rally in which he insults believers the entire time and encourages atheists to ridicule theists in public. In conclusion your comment is inaccurate as it is obvious that individuals on both sides are susceptible to this type of behavior.

[@Niatnuom_Esiotrot]

@@Questioning_God There is very little meaning in having a contest of personal experiences. I am neither atheist or a theist, I have experienced the best and worst of them all. I have been around long enough to have a reasonable estimation of where this is going. You are just trying to use me as a punching bag to put on a show for the eye in the sky so that you can earn your loyalty points. Let's end this conversation here. Wishing you good health, and have a great day.

[@Questioning_God]

@@Niatnuom_Esiotrot I had no such intentions, but you were making extremely biased remarks based on your personal experiences which I felt needed rectifying. A violent conversion goes against the teachings of the Bible. I don't think the scientist in question was Islamic hence your assumptions are completely incorrect. Once again I have no need as I believe we are saved not by works but by grace. God knows more then anyone where my loyalties are. You claim to be on the fence but it seems to me that you have quite clearly chosen a worldview hence the negative assumptions of Christians. I wish you all the best now and in the future. God bless you mate!

[@VidkunQL]

I heard a different fallacy there. He says that if "atheism were true" (a strange way of saying "there were no gods") then he wouldn't care about truth because [reasons]; but he does care about truth, therefore atheism is not true. He assumes that if atheism were true, he would know it. And Dr. Kuhn doesn't call him on it, because pointing out logical fallacies is just _not done_ in theological circles.

[@mozerm]

These video's are very helpful from the standpoint that they let me see how I'm not the only one searching. My intellectual honesty won't let me believe in god but my desire for answers to the unanswerable keeps me looking. If I could take a pill that would make me truly believe in god I think it would be extremely freeing (which is why there are so many believers in my opinion). Unfortunately no such pill exists.

[@tunahelpa5433]

Should be called searching for truth, not closer to truth

[@danewheeler384]

I found what I was looking for in studying Spinozas Ethics and the work of the various Mystic traditions, and that of NeoPlatonism. I wish the best for you on your search for the Divine.

[@mickhealy572]

Which god? christians and muslims and jews think there middle eastern god is the only god worshipped because they know so little..Throughout recorded history, we can count anywhere from 8,000-12,000 gods who have been worshiped. But we can only count around 9 different types of gods (based on theological characteristics) that have been worshiped. Every modern god also fits into one of these types, and 5 of them are Hindu types. It is quite likely that you rejected these other gods without ever looking into their religions or reading their books. You simply absorbed the dominant faith in your home or in the society you grew up in. In the same way, the followers of all these other religions have chosen to reject God. You think their gods are imaginary, and they think your God is imaginary. In other words, each religious person on earth today arbitrarily rejects thousands of gods as imaginary, many of which he/she has never even heard of, and arbitrarily chooses to "believe" in one of them. The following quote from Stephen F. Roberts sums up the situation very nicely: "I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

[@playpaltalk]

I believe in God but I don't have a religion it is a lot easier to believe in God after fully understanding how Satan was created consciousness is a gift from God.

[@soubhikmukherjee6871]

I wish I had opportunity to talk to all these great people

[@RadicOmega]

What a very intellectually honest inquiry and display 👍🏽 God bless you dude, I wish you luck on your journey

[@thomasridley8675]

@@TheWorldTeacher You could just say that there is no god that needs you too, or cares if you do or don't, worship what ever figure you can imagine. Does that sum it up ?

[@apigf]

I am from kurdistan in iraq and love❤️❤️❤️😍❤️ that man(alvin plantinga) at the end so much and i am a big fan of his speeches a great philosopher😍😍❤️

[@diaryabsh9474]

l___ ___l choni shera kurr

[@akamahmad3129]

Ahlan kurds!! Chonn gullakan ewa ratan chya what is the best argument for god’s existence?

[@apigf]

@@diaryabsh9474 ag slawt lebe awa chonret lera kawtwa😅?

[@apigf]

@@akamahmad3129 ustaz awa banda lasar away mabastt la xwa chya agar mabastt law shtaya ka buwata hoi emaw mabastt la kaseki dyarikraw nia awa argumenti motioni thomas aquinas wakw cause and effectekek mantiqiya, Balam masalai problem of evilish keshaya larey masalai xwa

[@apigf]

@@akamahmad3129 harchana hanek ayanawe ba fizya awa bslmenn ka cause and effect nia probabilitya masalaka chunka predict nakre balam harchibe causek haya wa aka aw shta drusbew akre randomizerek causaka be ka nahele predict bkre

[@Outspoken.Humanist]

Personal experience and revelation are not ways to know if there is a God. If you are suffering from a delusion, you believe what you experience is real. That does not mean all religious people are deluded but it does remove inner experience as a form of proof. In over thirty years of study I am yet to be convinced by any argument for God. But I am still open to learning.

[@albertjackson9236]

Arguments about gods are just arguments, nothing else. FACTS only should be used.

[@nelsonlaw23]

Since I was a child, I have questioned so many things about god.. it always appear strange and contradictory how a all powerful and all present god would not stop so many atrocities, such as the abuse of children, bewteen others. Other thing is most of us don't have a choice. We are require to beleive un god since childhood. At this stage of My life (34) i'm inclined to think that we created god... We'll see.. or maybe not

[@teeniequeenie8369]

Cuz sometimes those abused children grow up to do incredible things for abused children instead of becoming fashion models. A lot of “good”things come from “bad” ones…once you reach a certain level of enlightenment you realize that good and bad are just judgements Wes put on things.

[@johnhauk2885]

One of my philosophy professors sumed up the argument for God with respect to evil: A) God is not omnipresent/omnipotent B) God is not all powerful to stop evil C) God doesn't care D) God doesn't exist

[@ardasargin9431]

I totally agree Nelson!

[@MeowjesticMeowgician]

I pity you all, and wish you all could look for answers in Islam rather then keep all religion under same banner, check for yourselves what islam says about sufferings, the creation of universe, good and evil, God's attributes etc etc

[@playpaltalk]

I was never required or forced to believe in God and that's a huge difference because God created us with the freewill of doing what we want we are free to believe what we want including worshipping Satan.

[@allenrussell1947]

"Wishful thinking" me too. The need of mystery is what confounds me. That to discover God you must first believe is such a frustrating example of circular logic. "As much as I want God to exist, far more I want what's true"

[@thetoddlanders1992]

One does not need to believe in God to experience or discover God. If people say "you must first believe" they are mistaken.

[@duaneholcomb8408]

I want to know if tomorrow exists. But I have no proof it will happen. I only hope and with faith I,plan things I will do tomorrow., ,,

[@neiprekhutso2546]

60 years............ Here for more than 30 years am on the same journey and found this one for a step closer to truth. It's a new convincing experience watching your series.

[@jeffmacaskill7656]

Read the bible. "You will seek me and find me, when you seek me with all your heart." Jeremiah 29:13 (ESV)

[@Jesusismykin]

How do I worship God ? By loving his acts and following it. What are his acts loving him and loving others.

[@evansclan4eva49]

We will evolve enough to create life and control time. We ARE God.

[@oldtimeycabins]

Thank you Robert!

[@dennistucker1153]

Yujin Nagasawa...I like this guy. Thank you CTT. Another great video.

[@dennistucker1153]

@@jamesrey3221 I'm not a believer. On your comment "...He does not force us to love or worship Him...", I would think that if God did exist that this would be true. I am so against indoctrination of children into any political or religious beliefs. After age 12(or there about), I think it fine to discuss all these things without a single side of the stories. I, like the rest of my family members, were indoctrinated into the beliefs of our parents and their parents. It felt very forced on me.

[@jamesrey3221]

@@dennistucker1153 All parents wants the best for their children, the same for all cultures, and that's how it goes, in all probability you become a Muslim in the Middle East, a Buddhist in Asia, a Hindu in India, or a Christian in the West. When you come your age you get to know your choice, stay or leave your parents choices, no one will force you the believe. 7% of the world population choose to not believe in God. The majority of the world still believe in a God

[@secullenable]

I find it intriguing to imagine the huge number of intelligent species throughout the incomprehensibly vast and distant universe that have in the past and will in the future debate these very questions. I wonder have or will any of them ever reach a definite conclusion?

[@Two_But_Not_Two]

I'm not interested in arguments, only the evidence. See: The University of Virginia School of Medicine, Division of Perceptual Studies.

[@mohammedakhmed6213]

Hi Sean. As a Muslim for me all the conclusions have been reached. I belive without doubt. This gives me immense peace, meaning, purpose and answers.

[@garybala000]

Thank you for another valuable video contribution in the series. My view on this topic is to argue for “God” based on re-defining God and simply pointing to the sheer existence of all things. If we downsize the definition of “God”, and simply apply the indisputable premise of sheer existence, we may be able to make progress. Consider this definition. “God” = a primordial force outside of space-time which is an Ultimate Source and Creator Force to the observable universe (and any multiverse landscape) . . . However, something LESS than all-powerful, LESS than all-knowing and NEITHER all-good nor all-bad but rather neutral, and essentially naturalistic and impersonal. Then we apply what seems to be the irrefutable and universal premise of our perceived Reality, namely this: there appears to be EXISTENCE or at least the APPEARANCE of existence. This argues for an explanation - and thus existence of our downsized “God”. I daresay that it makes it more likely than not, and offers the simple benefit of explanatory power. Furthermore, I suggest that this view disposes of the problem of evil and the other God-doubter arguments. Thank you again for your video.

[@garychartrand7378]

Why do some people over-think a very simple concept like the Creator?

[@ramaraksha01]

@@garychartrand7378 esp a creator that will reward us with the easy lazy life sponging off him for eternity if we just believe! Like Putin rewarding his supporters if they just support him Who knew God was a Putin, a Saddam?

[@garychartrand7378]

@@ramaraksha01 you really should get some medication. You are not in touch with Reality. So sorry.

[@VidkunQL]

If you redefine "God" to mean something that definitely exists, like the moon, then you can claim that you have proved the existence of God. You are engaging in sophistry. And in that you are no worse than most theologians.

[@SongWhisperer]

Maybe we don’t need to re-define God but instead re-define ourselves, our existence/experience, and the words we use to explain who God is to us. Take the word perfect, the argument is made that God cannot be real because God is supposed to be perfect, but God can’t be perfect because of all the imperfections in the world (if I understand that argument correctly?). But what if it’s the imperfections in the world that makes it the perfect reality, a perfect life/existence full of imperfections leads to a perfect God. It’s not that God isn’t perfect it’s just our meaning of the word perfect doesn’t apply to God because perfection is actually found in imperfections but humans define perfection as something without imperfections. God is perfect in every way even if people don’t recognize that it’s their imperfections that lead to a perfect God, people don’t understand that without the imperfections this perfect reality just wouldn’t exist.

[@jake8200]

I believe a lot of people are approaching the "fine tuning" arguement from the wrong perspective. Religious people are often quick to assume the universe was calibrated by a "creator" to facilitate life. I believe the correct approach is to appreciate the fact that if the universe was calibrated even slightly differently then we wouls not exist to even ask the question. The universe just happens to exist in the state that it does and science is still in its infancy so there is a lot of mystery surrounding our existence, conciousness and reality. But to surrender these ideas to a "creator" ties your hands intellectually and stunts further investigation into the true nature of how reality actually functions if our human minds are even capable of understanding it.

[@glitchedpixelscriticaldamage]

I don't understand one thing... why did the third guy say that all those ideas ... they all POINT to Theism, why? why do they point to Theism? please can anyone explain? (he made some statements without too many explanations)

[@matthewrodriguez2499]

I love this series. I wish I found it sooner. It's been on PBS all these years??

[@luuluong3670]

PBS faith & reason forum b4 u2k 😎

[@anonxnor]

Yesssssss I agree. Such a good channel. Free access to this content is peak internet.

[@mhauser9457]

You’re here now so cheer up creamy jeans!

[@jedi4049]

great channel

[@sharonhearne5014]

My opinion is that this life we experience seems materialistic but it actually is holographic and has the aspect of an experimental practice of living and what it is like to be a being who goes through this appearance of experience(s) of the self in contrast and alliance with fellow (or not) other beings. We could also be only aspects of a single “being” experiencing itself through multiple aspects simultaneously which appears to be individualistic but is, in fact, is a learning/integrating aim akin to something like evolution. In this non-physical regard the being is eternal acting out various choices of experimentation. (Think of a seeming human lifetime series of “acting” in various dramatic plays as if onstage whereas beings learn from these “plays”.)

[@olafsigursons]

blah blah blah

[@proudlycreated7027]

Could you not have squeezed a few more adverts into this video? One every 30 seconds isn't enough!

[@garylewis4455]

Maybe pay for KZbin. Then no ads. Nothing is free.

[@luuluong3670]

PBS faith & reason brand out 👽👽👽

[@garys1967]

@@garylewis4455 yeah not even faith is free.

[@cinemusicberlin]

Install KZbin Vanced -> no more ads.

[@thatonegamergirl1182]

Adblocker is free

[@dcterr1]

Very well done and thought provoking video. I agree that the argument from design is the most convincing argument for the existence of God - in particular, the fact that our known physical laws pertaining to the working of the universe are comprehensible and that they work. I also agree that most traditional arguments for the existence of God don't hold much water. Nevertheless, I do believe in God, though not at all in the traditional sense, but rather more in the Spinozian sense, i.e., that God is the Universe, or more specifically the Multiverse. It's pretty clear to me that God exists, though His true nature is still very much a mystery to me!

[@realnumber_9]

This show help me get through the pandemic 😊

[@BillEFabian]

The artist is not part of the painting.

[@gladishilton1943]

But artists are known to exist.

[@johnlawrence2757]

Graewulfe are you sure?

[@johnlawrence2757]

Graewulfe I would have to respectfully withhold my agreement. Today’s astrophysicists and quantum mechanics have come up with some novel theories as to what the universe might comprise, so it’s sensible of you not to rule it out entirely !

[@johnlawrence2757]

Graewulfe did you understand it ? Please summarise what you believe I meant and then I’ll let you use it with equanimity

[@Garybutonline]

Is this the fabled youtube comments section?

[@jairomartins7427]

I have been watching Dr. Kuhn in the series "Closer the Truth" several times since last year. I do appreciate his wisdom on how he approaches scientists from both sides (atheists and theologists) and manages the conversation on a very productive way. Congratulations Dr. Kuhn ! In my whole ignorance I would like to add my inputs based on my life experience. In my mind, a scientific method is based on hypothesis and tangible evidences that lead to conclusions. In this sense, a common definition of an evidence is not determined by our scientific community yet, even as being an important and compulsory step for any research. Alternatively, our common logic can be used and it can come up with intelligent questions. For instance, we can question: how is a machine might be created by accident and without a designer? At the first glance the answer is: No it is not possible. However, another question might be, if there is a creator how was that created ? Ultimately, we have got trapped in a big puzzle again. On the other hand, a possible answer to this puzzle might be to go down to our humbleness and assume that we do not have a proper method, aside scientific one, to answer this question nor a proper tool that can help us to reach a conclusive answer.

I disagree with the "machine example". I was also thinking that every living thing is created by divine intervention, therefore we can not find any structure like Eiffel Tower on Mars, which is naturally evolved there without human intervention. But I was wrong. If we have enough environmental circumstances and all material on Mars, that could be possible. To clarify this strange argument, take another example: Think about it, we have thousands of magnetic bricks on an Asteroid in a different universe with different laws. They have different kinds of magnetic strength, physical shapes and so on. Let's assume that this asteroid has a thin atmosphere (although it is not possible with physical laws in our universe, just imagination). It spins around itself, therefore there is a pressure difference between its night and day sides. Because of this pressure difference, strong winds are created in the atmosphere. These winds move bricks from one place to another, even sometimes they are flying in the atmosphere and they collide with each other. Let's assume that the possibility, that two magnetic bricks stick together, is rare. If we give enough time to bricks to form themselves, after hundreds of millions of years, an interesting structure could evolve on that asteroid. We can maybe call this structure a "house". That means, in that universe, the laws are so "arranged" that some unconscious magnetic bricks can move around and stick together and establish a house with windows, roof and so on. That is what we observe in our universe now. Some billion years ago, the earth was harsh and life-unfriendly. Given enough time, some atoms stick together (because of the natural laws in our universe like strong nuclear force, electromagnetic force, gravity and so on) and build some molecules. Those molecules then establish molecular structures like amino acids, proteins and then RNA, DNA.... Billion years later, here we are as atomic structures with consciousness. The next question is: Is Consciousness made from atoms in our brain, or there are other things yet to be discovered?

[@jeniosk1097]

God is eternal therefore can't be created. There had to have been an uncaused cause.

[@gregorymercurio7402]

@@jeniosk1097 The universe is eternal and therefore can't be created. There had to have been an uncaused cause.

[@jeniosk1097]

@@gregorymercurio7402 But the universe isn't eternal because of the big bang. And if you're referring to the cyclical model that one is basically a conspiracy theory in the physics community. So yeah, unlike God, universe had a beginning.

[@gregorymercurio7402]

@@jeniosk1097 The notion of an eternal god is basically a conspiracy theory in the theist community. See how easy that was? Look, we can continue this ad infinitum, but why not do everyone a favor and look up "Special Pleading fallacy," because your entire argument relies on it.

[@waerlogauk]

A cumulative case argument was used by the Bankers when they added together a lot of subprime mortgages in the hope that it would turn into to a good loan. A cumulative case argument can be valid when you have a collection of sound but inconclusive evidence. When you string together a lot of bad evidence or arguments your technique can be described as the "Gish gallop" or "baffle them with bullshit".

[@xaviervelascosuarez]

The question is who is to judge what is good evidence and arguments and what is bad... That's why, in the end, faith always remains a free choice of the individual. But if one must be honest there's a recognition to be made of a yearning for transcendence in the human heart. To that inclination, add the witness of the overwhelming majority of humankind of all times, and the fact that no modern atheist dares to explicitly deny the existence of the divine, then you have a pretty compelling case for, at least, being very tentative at the time of attacking religions or religious believers.

[@3rdrock]

@@xaviervelascosuarez When you don't know the difference between good and bad evidence, it's not surprising that you are likely to dribble all sorts of nonsense and believe it too.

[@Samsara_is_dukkha]

@@3rdrock In the case of "God" -- whatever that may be -- we don't have any epistemological method to obtain any evidence at all. For example, if you take Penrose's idea of Conformal Cyclic Cosmology, all there is left at the end of the cycle are immaterial photons that presumably carry information. Information is meaningless without some sort of consciousness. If what we term "God" is that form of consciousness, then it is out of reach of the current scientific epistemological method that only knows how to deal with material phenomena.

[@subject8332]

@@xaviervelascosuarez "Evidence: Factual circumstances which are accounted for, or supported by, only one available explanation over any other." Your deepest delusions can be explained with way less assumptions in the light of evolution than with anyone's magical anthropomorphic immortal friend. Faith is supporting a position without any reason and against all reason and therefore it is the most intellectually dishonest position possible to have. Next one.

[@3rdrock]

@@Samsara_is_dukkha I will stand by my first comment.

[@MartinJutras]

It's very rare that scientists and philosophers think about God in a fresh matter, without Christian or religious assumptions. In order to get closer to the Truth, we must rethink God.

[@brandijaysays2245]

Worship of God is living in such a way that is of the highest moral behavior = holy, other than

[@mikesomerset6338]

While I was watching this I half expected William Craig Lane to appear.

[@mhauser9457]

Should have waited til end credits bruh... he makes an appearance

[@randomperson2078]

@@mhauser9457 I don’t see his face anywhere in the credits.

[@youngman44]

I love Robert Lawrence Kuhn. And I am like him in that, I like arguments about God.

[@GeoCoppens]

You are a nutcase!

[@jamesrey3221]

The problem of evil - The world would be unnatural, > if there are no evil people (the murderers, robbers, the Hitler's and Stalin's of the world, etc.), no disease, no sickness, no accidents (car crash, aircraft crash, etc.), no divorce, no earthquakes, no hurricanes, etc. Just think, everyone will live to be a hundred years old and never get sick, and never get into accidents even when driving a 100 mph, etc. Without all this we would be living in a movie like "The Truman Show" where Truman and his world is scripted and controlled. Anything can happen in our life. . The end of the world is nigh. It ends on the last day of each of our individual lives. In this sense, the world could end tomorrow - We have freewill and are able to do anything we want.

[@playpaltalk]

I learned on my own to blame everything that is bad on Satan and his angels because I understand how Satan take advantage of our weakness.

[@christyjia8449]

16:26 Maybe it was bad editing, but Kuhn doesn't state the Cosmological Argument correctly here. He should have stated that everything that *begins* to exist has a cause.

[@theoskeptomai2535]

And it would _still_ not be a sound argument for such a premise is not self-evident or demonstrated to be true from a prior premise.

[@christyjia8449]

@@theoskeptomai2535 Can you name anything that has begun to exist without a cause?

[@theoskeptomai2535]

@@christyjia8449 No. I can not name _anything_ that began to exist, period. Phenomenon don't begin to exist - instantaneously pop into existence. Each and every phemomenon (object, event, substance, entity, process, system, or being) rather, _emerges_ from necessary and sufficient antecedents over time without exception, no matter how brief or epoch the interval.

[@christyjia8449]

@@theoskeptomai2535 Was there ever a time when the KZbin phenomena _named_ "Theo Skeptomai" had not yet begun to exist?

[@theoskeptomai2535]

@@christyjia8449 No. But there was a time that it didn't exist. Again, phenomena have no beginning, they _emerge_ into existence over time. My identity as 'Theo Skeptomai' did not pop into existence. There was a process by which this occurred from becoming a member of KZbin, to the process of thinking of a moniker, to initiating that moniker into a sign up form, to the acceptance of YT to verify it as a unique moniker to my agreement to conditions,to logging into the system, to searching a video, to forming an opinion, to sending a comment,to the point where someone process my comment and notice my moniker, etc. Those are all necessary antecedents for 'Theo Skeptomai' to emerge.

[@PhillLOL]

I believe in God because in dreams I was warned of harmful future events like accidents & the failing of classes. That points to the existence of a loving intelligence.

[@stephencowie3358]

No, it just means you ate too much cheese before bedtime.

[@FactStorm]

I hope you're being sardonic or else you'd be suffering from a severe case of gullibility.

[@edmondcohen2300]

Your Thought ~ your Aura, your feelings

[@robertwhite1810]

The universe is not fine tuned for life. It's lethal nearly everywhere.

[@johnbrzykcy3076]

I think the tongue is often the most lethal weapon.

[@robertwhite1810]

@Tracchofyre It's not fine tuned for anything..it is what it is and what pops up in it is because of its properties.

[@sadscientisthououinkyouma1867]

Someone has clearly never studied physics. The cosmological constant if off by 1:10^120 would prevent the universe from forming any life whatsoever. That is miraculous, even if you don't believe in God life and it's conditions being met are miraculous. I could go into more detail regarding the mathematics if you want but I highly suspect you don't care or will rely on multiverse theory to escape that conclusion. Many atheist physicist acknowledge that the Universe appears to be designed, I can quote them if you wish.

[@robertwhite1810]

@@sadscientisthououinkyouma1867 "Appears" that's the key word. If any universe of any kind were to form or exist eternally or otherwise it would have constants...so what? It in no way implies they were "designed" nor carried on the backs of giant space turtles

[@robertwhite1810]

@@sadscientisthououinkyouma1867 I don't do "arguments from authority" there are plenty of delusional scientists too.

[@Jesusismykin]

I need more than faith, I need a personal relationship that convince me that God is real.

[@jasvindersingh1757]

Same here bro

[@jeffmacaskill7656]

Read the bible. "You will seek me and find me, when you seek me with all your heart." Jeremiah 29:13 (ESV)

[@jeffmacaskill7656]

​@@jasvindersingh1757 Read the bible. "You will seek me and find me, when you seek me with all your heart." Jeremiah 29:13 (ESV)

[@frankiemcbean.]

But without faith you can't get that personal relationship with God.

[@Jesusismykin]

@@frankiemcbean. which came first, the chicken or the egg ? You need the chicken to lay the egg but you need the egg for the chicken to be born. The answer is God created the chicken first. My faith came from God now I am working on my personal relationship, so I guess you are right.

[@tr9809]

I love this series, such a good exploration of philosophy, and philosophy of religion. It's good to contemplate the reasons for belief, the nature of God and to explore truth. The premise is based on Kuhn as the enquirer and that makes for a great way to shape these programmes. Spiritually though, we can't hang around in a limbo trying to decide whether to believe or not, to hang around in the hallway as it were. It can only take you so far, you have to choose a tradition and allow that tradition as the mediation of the divine to shape you as a human being in a deeper way in order to progress in these questions of faith. Faith here is presented as the assent to the notion of God. That merely makes faith as the possession of one extra proposition compared to holding other propositions. Faith is a participation and a trust in truth in such a way that forms you as a human being and thus is more than holding onto knowledge.

[@HezbAlreef]

There is a difference between the knowledge of the existence of a God and the knowledge of God..... The first can be inferred by reason, but knowledge of God is impossible with reason.... Rather, it is possible through his messages.

[@drsatan9617]

Go ahead and infer the first by reason. This should be good

[@einareinarsson8662]

One of many good things about God is that you dont have to argue with yourself about things. You observe it and you let go. You dont need to drown yourself in arguing and dwelling and have every answer leads to a new question and as you doubt the thoughts will collide at last and its painful. You should questioning things and argue but you dont need to be empty with meaninglessness and solve anything by yourself. Because you are a human. You can leave it to God and just observe and you by yourself has not to figure out everything yourself. And its a relief. To observe things and observe it only. In other religions its also like that. To live the life of the senses free from the schackles of thougjt. To live life with your senses and thoughts, reasoning and intellect is a helper and not you and you dont identified with it. Actually its just a beeing as such that actually living. The life if the senses. That beeing has no need to ask for the meaning of life. You dont even ask the question as you live the life of the senses and what comes with intellect can have a stop and dont be relentless without an end as its given to Gods hands.

[@ashley_brown6106]

There is no direct link between "there is intelligent design in the universe" and "therefore, God exists". The universe itself could be intelligent and have consciousness. There could be a designer, but not the traditional God we think of. And even if there is a God, there's nothing that proves that it's the Abrahamic God. There are just too many assumptions included to end up with this conclusion.

[@AnonymousC-lm6tc]

What proof is there that that universe is intelligent and consciousness?

[@cloudhme]

The connection is first to figure out what properties this intelligent designer should have. Aristotle first pointed it out the cause of the universe should be immaterial, immutable, conscious, all powerful etc.. And these properties match the Judaic God. William L Craig has many videos talking about that connection.

[@otbricki]

Perhaps there is a God. Who or what created Him? If there is such a being why should He be interested in Us? A recently evolved monkey well on its way to destroying the environment it is living in. The universe is immense billions of galaxies with billions of stars each, There may be billions of universes in the multiverse. There is no reason to believe that there is anything special about us.

[@sadiaasad6843]

@@cloudhme study the God concept of Islam....surah ikhlas in Quran is the true definition of Almighty

[@tomarmstrong3297]

@@AnonymousC-lm6tc There’s no proof the universe exists, only evidence of anything is our having perceptions which exist in consciousness

[@Rohit-oz1or]

Has Robert explored the realms of Ayahuasca, DMT? Would like to see some episodes on those. It is said that under the influence of these substances and also meditation, the body becomes a receptor for information that is apparently not of this world. The mysterious pineal gland is also supposed to be repository of DMT

[@olafsigursons]

Yeah, religion has been funded by people on drug, then we wonder why religions are so whack.

[@RickMacDonald19]

I really like the Cumulative Argument. I have had numinous experiences but still can't say I believe them 100%, my only 100% belief is Cogito ergo sum, and so considering all things god is more likely than no god. I also no longer find it difficult to deal with the problem of evil which helps.

[@cinemusicberlin]

A bunch of bad arguments does not equal a good argument.

[@JPoleet]

To me the whole cumulative argument it’s just throwing a bunch of crap at the wall and hoping something sticks, no individual argument on its own is very compelling, it is really up to the perception of the world you have going into it as to whether you think things like finely tuned elements of the universe exist.

[@duroxkilo]

cumulative leads... the list is comprehensive enough, much like a presented list in a court of law, sufficient to reach a conclusion beyond reasonable doubt. checked the list, it's unconvincing to me. so the list is either not comprehensive enough or i don't understand it. but i've studied (not the 'did my own research type' but academically) the list and 'the manual'... so it seems i'm incapable of reaching the right conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt. either way, this is out of my control, so now what? turn to the personal experience methodology? i've tried that too in the first place (full immersion, years) with unconvincing results. for believers, pls try to accept that for *some* ppl, god is kind of evading contact :}

[@carlupdyke1406]

The universe, our planet in it and our life on it is because otherwise we would not be here. Roll of the dice.

[@art-of-techno]

Believing in a God is not a problem, it's when you think you understand God and what it wants from us that can be harmful to yourself and others, (religions).

[@houmm08]

Robin Collins from 11.40 made so many biased misrepresentations it's almost unbelievable he was able to make them with a straight face. Especially describing himself as a truth seeker and what he then goes on to say about atheism. It's preposterous.

[@descartergosum]

God would have made suffering optional... god can still appear and we will have our free will to reject him or accept him.. no problem for him to appear

[@_-AB-_]

@S Gloobal so, god doesn't care enough.

[@_-AB-_]

@S Gloobal not what but who. Humans, or any Human in general. I don't think that there is any picture or video of god either. Are god/satan/angles/demons camera shy?

[@_-AB-_]

@S Gloobal it was list of extremely bad arguments. He can not show any of it to be true. This man is conning people and relying on their gullibility. If there is a god and it has slightest sense of justice then the man from video can not escape it.

[@_-AB-_]

@S Gloobal also, there was no pictures. Books have people meeting angles/demons all the time, not much after invention of camera.

[@_-AB-_]

@S Gloobal google it yourself, I am not a teacher. Also claiming that a video is list of bad arguments is NOT ad hominem. Share a single good quality video/picture of a spirit. There are many of aliens as well, and not a single one is good.

[@discerningacumen]

I struggle in my youth to convince myself that there exits God and that God should be the Jesus in the Bible. And I finally found it, seeing nature, calculating in mathematics, reading the Bible, and then those experiences with God long time ago (when I was a University student.). And then it convinced so much so that I have never doubted it again. If I should be faltering in my faith, it'd better that I should first doubt my existence and the extent of all the human history: it is clear as if I am seeing God.

[@PaulRossOnline]

Probably, the only channel I find interesting.

[@jstube36]

First we must establish who or what we call God. And it must be proven beyond all doubt that the chosen is truly worthy of being called God.

[@connorjones4893]

no... just no. that is so wrong

[@jstube36]

@@connorjones4893 Why do you think is wrong with my statement

[@iam007richie]

I find it interesting that the so called "truth" is only found in certain faith (Christianity). I would have thought that as a scientist you would explore all possible avenues in pursuit of "truth"

[@manisthemeasure2205]

What does it matter if it’s Christianity? God is supposedly omnipresent. It can be in Christianity as in everywhere else. A God would not take sides, don’t you think?

[@michaelmiller2478]

@@manisthemeasure2205 the point is other faiths aren't explored equally or at all in this series... its mainly a western lens... well despite the west's ego... much more exit beyond the western views...

[@thelionsam]

@@michaelmiller2478 he rarely talks about Christianity with the Christian philosophers. He talks about 'theism' He deliberately avoids differentiating between religions on the grounds that this is a completely different question, one which I'm guessing leaves him cold. The theism vs atheism question is more fundamental. Buddhism has no creation myth, doesn't concern itself with origins...Hinduism and other polytheistic religions likewise have esoteric ideas that cant be compared well with science. Islam and judaism have many of the same strengths and weaknesses as Christianity. By the way, talks to lots of Rabbis... I think your criticism is groundless.

[@christyjia8449]

Another thought-provoking video, Mr. Kuhn. I think it would be fantastic if you did a segment exploring the metaphysics of "negative theology" and how it differs from the more commonly understood conceptions of Deity.

[@thesoundsmith]

Happy 14,000,000,001th birthday, Universe...🎆🎇🥂🎂

[@0NOTHINGNESS0]

May (HE) guide u and me(us) to the truth

[@rabidL3M0NS]

God is not a being, God IS being.

[@anthonycraig274]

Every time someone think that god did that, there has been an natural explanation.

[@InfinityBlue4321]

No, thats not true. Big Bang Cosmology, Origin of Life, Physics laws are just a few examples. The existing natural explanations for those, are just ridiculous make believe ( for ignorants) pseudoscientific and ficcional, mumbo jumbo phalacies like Multiverse, which do not explain anything. They just fool the layperson, as they have no connection with any observation, experiment, and objective reality...

[@anthonycraig274]

Big Bang is a scientific discovery not religious. Evolution of life to a single cell origins is a scientific explanation not a religious one. The religious has an explanation of life that has been smashed by science or a natural explanation, the religious explanation for the cosmos always been there has been smashed by a scientific explanation and discovery. Science is only finding deeper explanations for its own discovery, nothing to do with religion. There is nothing that religion explains, as everything has been found to be false, if anything is nearly right, well lets put it this way, I would have more faith in a broken clock as it right at least once a day, religion would love those odds.

[@InfinityBlue4321]

@@anthonycraig274 Worst than a religious fanatic, there is only the materialist scientific (religious) fanatic. Nothing of what I wrote was about religion or faiths, but about TRUTH... but what I usually write , is not for every mind to understand... specially minds formatted in any cult... the cult of matter, the cult of Science ( which is just an enquiring tool servicing the rational mind), and the cult of the unknown...

[@anthonycraig274]

@@InfinityBlue4321 How can materialist be a religion when the evidence is the physical world. Its the world you make up in your head that has no evidence of its existence is fanatical. If you want to pretend that you are enlightened because you adapted the thoughts (thing made up in their heads) of others as your own, stick with that. Jeez, its not even your original thought, just a copy, paste, follow, just like any communal old garden cult.

[@anthonycraig274]

@@InfinityBlue4321 bring on your evidence, then we can talk, I have no time for someone else’s dreams that you have adopted for your own religious convictions. When you have no evidence of what you speak of, is either a fairytale or/and religion.

[@waerlogauk]

13:10 Believing in an illusionary "Truth" gives you an illusionary connection to reality, there is no proof here.

[@johnbacsa1616]

Maybe the Universe is an illusion. It seems to exist though.

[@tomjackson7755]

@ReligionlessFAITH Take all of your accounts and troll elsewhere.

[@cbernar699]

We don't exist to beings in another galaxy, there's no proof.

[@tomjackson7755]

@ReligionlessFAITH You don't have any TRUTH. Take all of your accounts and troll elsewhere.

[@thomasridley8675]

@ReligionlessFAITH That word salad was not impressive. Stop trying to dazzle and just make your damn point. I can't sleep. So i get to play for a while longer. Lucky you.

[@art-of-techno]

I couldn't worship a God that saves me without saving my neighbor.

[@prometheusrex1]

What if your neighbor said, fully informed, "Don't save me"?

[@art-of-techno]

@@prometheusrex1 Oh yeah, didn't think about that! I'm sure there must be plenty of humans out there either starving to death, dying of cancer or living in poverty that don't want to be saved...

[@prometheusrex1]

@@art-of-techno Answer the hypothetical. Should people be forced to do things against their will?

[@prometheusrex1]

What if your neighbor had raped and murdered your child?

[@art-of-techno]

@@prometheusrex1 That should depend on the community that the human is part of. If the person's will is to do something harmful to nature and/or the community, of course others should try to influence or educate him or her to not behave in such a manner. Like not putting on your seat belt while driving for example. In an accident his could hurt yourself but also someone else. I don't believe in forcing someone to behave in a certain way if this behavior only hurts themselves, like taking drugs for example. Only if it hurts the environment and the community.

[@farhanpavel7016]

# I WANT to believe>Signs> I CHOSE to believe # I DON'T WANT to believe>Signs> I CHOSE to deny

[@dialectic76]

At 5:42, RLK is sitting next to some kind of fountain/statue. Does anyone know what this is, or where he is?

[@BrainConduit123]

Robert states that one way to know the existence of god is through personal experience yet he has yet (to my knowledge) to interview those that claim they have, either by way of an NDE, psychedelics, or some other experience. It’s like wanting to know if Disneyland exists but never interviewing anyone that’s been there, only people that have studied it.

[@countryrah]

Facts because what gets me is people from all different backgrounds and beliefs see the same exact goods when they take dme why no one ever sees trolls or fairies they all see the snake head god and the wine god for sure I always wondered why all those different people see the same things when they all got different beliefs

[@ricklanders]

Can you imagine being a parent, hiding from your kids, and watching them fight with and kill each other over what they thought you were - and then refusing to show yourself to them to stop them from killing each other? The arguments for god are so absurd and easily refuted, it's like some of these people never got out of kindergarten.

[@andreea5927]

period

[@thegoodlistenerslistenwell2646]

Well the personal Christian god is easily refutable. Certain definitions use supernatural causes ( outside our universe, not necessarily anything to do With ghosts or magic) that don't have fallibility. Which to me can never then be a thing anyone says they know, and beliefs are nothing should be deemed to have high priority in decision making.

[@RadicOmega]

rick landers “so absurd and easily refuted” which is why professional atheist philosophers to this stay are still in constant dialogue with theists over these arguments

[@SukumarBaishya]

Well, we humans claim ourselves to be most intelligent creature, but self destroying, or" killing each other" as you have said, and still hope the parent, you mean God, to come and moderate amongst you? "Natural selection" has made you intelligent enough to deal with these "petti"( compared to the ontological quest of existence or otherwise of God) issues.. :-)

[@RadicOmega]

Tracchofyre yourself clearly are severely divorced from the dialectical situation If you think that the atheists philosophers look at their theist colleagues as clowns. They would love to believe that their problem of evil was a solid knock down defeated for theist or that these arguments are “easily debunked.”

[@Infidel_hero]

Teach children how to think, rather than what to think. Also explain why this show is called closer to truth instead of closer to what what makes you feel comfortable. Also Robin Collins got his philosophy education from a private Christian college.

[@andresgonzalez-gm5ry]

FACTS

[@pedrogonzalez9934]

Question my dude, it matters where the guy obtained his title of philosopher? I said this because philosophers of religion that are atheist work in christian universities, like JL Schellenberg, so i don't understand the argument and i think is fallacious but because i am being in a good mod can you please explain to me how is that matters to what he has to said?

[@mallikonduri]

Robert, what about philosophies like Advaita Vedanta, which are predicated more on finding the truth about ourselves than presupposing the existence of and faith in God? Have you explored that?

[@supremepartydude]

Please address the issue of 9-11-2001 where religious fanatics were praying to God that they would succeed while those in the buildings were praying to God that they would get out alive or live through the building' fall aftermath.

[@AnonAnon1]

I have two thoughts on this: firstly, in a court the suspect/defendant is usually present during proceedings and is compelled to testify under cross-examination. Somehow, I have a feeling that god isn't going to turn up to court. Secondly, if you try to use an evidence-based approach to validate the existence of god you have to provide evidence. It's like the art of providing evidence without providing evidence.

[@LoraxChannel]

1 most litigation involves entities, not people, and even when people are involved, there is the 5th amendment stating you can't be compelled to testify. Basically, your first point is just incorrect. 2 I don't think you know what evidence is in the illegal sense.. The bible, for example is evidence, maybe unconvincing, but evidence nonetheless. Expert opinion, personal experience . . all evidence. The way you use the term evidence seems like you are just circularly defining evidence as those things you personally accept.

[@dkenmiller9829]

Your first point is not correct. In the U.S. criminal defendants cannot be compelled to testify and are usually advised not to do so.

[@colingeorgejenkins2885]

I've heard that story before but the main character wasn't god

[@garryjones1847]

Pascal's wager! That's all it is at the end!

[@thsc9119]

How do you know which God to place your wager on?

[@G_Demolished]

@@thsc9119 Even better, have you ever taken something you honestly don’t believe and suddenly decided to believe it? I’m not sure it is possible.

[@anikettripathi7991]

Like when we play, dance or consume water we get all benificial properties/effects similarly when we talk, discuss, or criticize God we actually toch infinite properties and we are benifitted. Benifits not necessary we presumed /expecting.

[@dt6653]

Suppose there is a creator. Since different religions worship different gods, which one is the true God?

[@tomorrowmaynevercome3171]

You figure it out.

[@wingsuiter2392]

Theology is pretending you comprehend the incomprehensible.

[@studleydewrite2942]

"Metaphysics is the art of beffudling one's self methodically." - Michelet

[@RockyHoarderPictureShows]

True. Just because you don't understand something now doesn't mean it's not understandable. Just means there's more to learn than we believe. But if you know everything why would you be interested in what you are looking for?

[@dacerobertson2968]

All theology is prayer. God is incomprehensible. Therefore the only way to comprehend any thing about God, you would need to commune with Him and He with you. Only through His power can His truth be revealed. This is what we call revelation. All of humanity's attempts to describe truth are done from within this world and are therefore relative. Relativism is humanities lot. Without God's divine revelation, there is no human objective truth claim. We have observations, scientific theory, conclusive results from repeated experiments, and personal experience, but with God there is wisdom and understanding. If we don't learn to pray, theology remains a mystery. Looking for arguments to prove the existence of God is chasing after wind and vanity. I cannot prove or disprove God's existence; I cannot force Him to stay hidden or force Him to be revealed. I am a simple creature with limited power. I am wisest only when I admit that I know nothing. You will not find God in quantum physics, black holes, consciousness, or AI, but you will find him in prayer. Seek and you will find. Knock and it will be opened to you. Ask and it will be given to you. God made this universe. He knows everything about it. He has the power to give you all the truth you seek if He wishes. We chose to eat of the knowledge of good and evil, and our conscience burns in us. What we still do not yet hold is the key to eternal life. If we knew the truth about the universe (about physics and consciousness) we would have this key. We would not die. Think of what we have learned from true science in just a couple hundred years. Now think of what humanity will know about science in 5,000 years, or 1,000,000 years. What powerful technology will we destroy ourselves with (like the atom bomb or AI) if we do not seek God's grace and goodness and beauty to keep us from destroying ourselves? Pray first, then ask for truth, then study the universe in that order. Doing this in any other way will lead to the end of humanity and life on earth.

[@yourlogicalnightmare1014]

@@dacerobertson2968 It's clear you know nothing about the nature if god.

[@vatofat]

Not true. Theology is knowing you don't know, but believing a greater something does know.

[@toni4729]

Do YOU want a god? I've found that if someone wants a god they'll find one.

[@zerototalenergy150]

..a strong belief in god,promotes sertonin secretion.. hence a feeling of "good"... (not too different from ingestion of narcotics.)

[@toni4729]

@John Patriot eagle freedom boner I think there are far more fun and energy, a lot more cheerfulness and song from a football game than a sermon. Personally I absolutly hate sprt but I cannot help seeing this is so obvious. Just type " You'll never walk alone" It has more emotion in it than any hymn. It's all about the Liverpool football team.

[@toni4729]

@John Patriot eagle freedom boner Don't be such a tit. I suppose you're an American.

[@kbeetles]

Toni - emotions? You are after emotions? Watch a cheesy film! - those kind of feelings are NOT what God generates in humans. Those feelings are here today, gone tomorrow - no, they are even more flimsy and perishable than that! God is playing a different ballgame!! ( Soccer or football or basketball etc take your choice....) And God seems to persue those who rant and rave agaist him - but this God is patient and his methods are beyond human logic. (After all God is not an oversized, invisible human being in spite of our efforts to reduce Him to that fantasy!) Do you really think humans are the only active agent in this relationship? That would be a disaster and let's be honest, we would mess it up - like we tend to mess up everything else. Just look around you....... .....and beware, God might surprise you in a moment of your life when you least expect it - He is committed, I warn you!

[@toni4729]

@@kbeetles Watch " The Plank" and have a glggle on my account. When you were born, you knew nothing a god, it had to be shoved into you by your elders and teachers or you would never have even thought of one. Think of that for an hour or two. You've had it shoved down your throat all your life until you can't live without it. Will I'm sorry but I don't have to lean on some imaginary ghost in the sky. I'm sixty eight years old and have NEVER had to put up with that sort of dependency. Have a nice day.

[@kevinwells7080]

none of her list of ‘arguments’ are used by anyone I know of in my post graduate research on the subject. She is straw manning so hard she is going to be picking straw out of her hair after this interview.

[@NotScotus]

Totally agree, WLC destroyed her in a debate a few years back. Sad to say that she doesn’t know much about what she’s talking about and that’s why seasoned philosophers don’t take her seriously.

[@shariqueahmad1050]

I agree clear strawman. We have contingency argument , kalam cosmological argument , intelligent designer argument . She didn't talked about any of these ????

[@Ziltoid_Knows]

@@shariqueahmad1050 all three of the arguments you just purposed require you to presuppose a god to begin with. These three arguments are some of the most tired apologetics out there. Random side not, in the scope of cosmological arguments, the Kalam is one of the weakest. Even the prime mover argument is a better one. Again, as with all theological arguments, you must assume the existence of a god in the first place because there is no argument that leads the sole conclusion that any God exist at all. Even IF one of these heavily flawed presup arguments were valid and true, it still does not point to any specific God ( of which there are many thousands of claimed gods ). It's funny how no one tries to prove the existence of the good they actually believe in. Wonder why that might be...

[@shariqueahmad1050]

@@Ziltoid_Knows you said these arguments presupposes god ...... This statement shows how little u know about these arguments . As for Kalam 😂😂 why don't your guys prove it's premises to be wrong ...... As u claimed it most weak and flawed . Another thing u said these doesn't prove any particular religion .. well no one claimed that these arguments are for Allah , Jesus or Yahweh . These deductive arguments are just to show the logical contradictions of atheists . In every debate Hitchens , Krauss like atheist are unable to disprove these arguments and starts making moral judgement like religion says this and that etc etc .😂😂😂 Atheist of today making moral judgement is the joke of millenium ....... The enlightenment era atheist were atleast honest unlike today's new atheists who can't complete a sentence without contradicting their atheistic views ......👍👍

[@dougg1075]

“ do not give what is holy to the dogs lest they turn and tear you to pieces “

[@sethanon6778]

I once had a enlighten moment. Lets say there is only two outcomes, god is real or fake. And you will only know about it after death . But no one can know what happen either death . So either you make the best of the time you have and create as much good and joy as possible in this lifetime . If everything end without god. You will be judging yourself. If there is god, nothing matter as he is almighty including unimaginable love. Thus nothing matter anyway . Just be the best of yourself.❤

[@ecollazo67]

It amazes me how people can overthink an otherwise simple prospect. The number of logical fallacies present in this video is breathtaking.

[@JesusRamirez-hu1eh]

So what is it? Does God exist?

[@ecollazo67]

@@JesusRamirez-hu1eh There is no credible evidence than any gods exist. People like to dance around the issue, but it really comes down to a lack of sufficient evidence.

[@JesusRamirez-hu1eh]

@Eric Collazo: Soren Kierkegaard would call it “objective uncertainty.” Which means that we will never be 100% sure that God exists. Even if we are full-fledged believers. So for Kierkegaard, faith was something amazing! He would say that faith was the greatest miracle. But anyway, I just wanted to know your stance. I knew you were sure about it. I just wasn’t sure if you believed in God, or not. Also, I know you are not interested in what I believe. But Parmenides, one of the pre-Socratics, really helped me to figure it out, I think: “Nothing can come out of nothing.” And since there is something, there must be an eternal un-caused cause. Something like that 🙃 Blessings!

[@ecollazo67]

@@JesusRamirez-hu1eh The statement "nothing can come out of nothing" is not provable nor is it a physical law or principle. That's an assumption. As far as my personal feelings on faith go, I am always open to having my mind changed about any subject upon being presented with a sufficiently cogent and evidence-based argument. However, I have yet to encounter that in regards to god(s). There is simply no evidence to show. As far as Kierkegaard's perspective on that, I find it to be severely flawed. Try substituting the word "God" with "Unicorn" and tell me if the logic holds? This is what I referred to in my initial post. People often get lost in flowery rhetoric and counting the number of angels that can fit on the head of a pin without addressing the more basic and pertinent questions at hand. Additionally, the more specifically defined a god(s) is, the easier it is to prove or disprove. So I find the god(s) of established religions particularly easy to disregard considering the numerous claims about the physical world they make (e.g. creation, weather, physics, biology, etc).

[@deepashtray5605]

Apologetics101: Mastering the Straw Man. Prereq for 102: God of the Gaps.

[@willeykev]

Hello Robert - I've been watching your channel for many years now and absolutely love ALL the content because you give a great deal of material which has ALWAYS served as food for many many thoughts. However, in all that you have presented and the plethora of famous and brilliant people you've invited to talk on your show, you have never visited with any representatives of the Jewish faith, to my knowledge. Why is this the case? Please understand, I'm NOT at all being critical here, just very curious as they have an INCREDIBLE rich history and perspective on God! If you should ever like to undertake such a venture, I would highly suggest you seek out Rabbi Manis Friedman, in St. Paul and give him a chance to interview as well. Please lookup up Rabbi YY Jacobson as well. Both are VERY well spoken and extremely knowledgeable on all subjects God. Thank you in advance for your possible consideration! :-) Kevin

[@ramaraksha01]

He doesn't want anything to do with Hindus, Buddhists either

[@CloserToTruthTV]

Hi Kevin. Please see - kzbin.info/www/bejne/bZOzlZethN1-p9k closertotruth.com/contributor/david-shatz/profile closertotruth.com/contributor/arthur-hyman/profile

[@thetoddlanders1992]

I wonder if this guy realises how silly he sounds sometimes. He says he's "struggled to know about God for sixty years" - but mostly what he seems to have done is think about things, talk to people, play intellectual games. There can be some use in this and it's of course interesting, for a time - but it shouldn't take that long to answer the question if the search is true. He says "believers tell me the best way is by experience - but I'll just talk and argue and discuss". That, to be perfectly brutal, is pretty dumb. It's like: A man says he'd like to know about football. People tell him he should go to a game, watch a match on TV, or play - but instead he says, "no, I'll read a book and talk with some other people who have never seen it or played." It would be like thinking about a meal but refusing to go to the restaurant to try it. "No," he says, "I'll just read the list of ingredients over and over again - for sixty years! - and try to _imagine_ what it tastes like." Like I say, pretty dumb, if you think about it.

[@vgmilo]

So what do you suggest he does instead?

[@zerenx8272]

Your anology is false, sports and food exists objectively, football ball and rules and tomatoes, but experiencing religion there is a human bias involved

[@mantoniol24]

Where is the door to experience god so we can open it. Seems you make it seem so simple

[@con.troller4183]

@@zerenx8272 "Your anology is false, sports and food exists objectively, ..." By your standard, ALL analogies are false. I think you don't know what an analogy actually is. A false analogy already has a well established definition: "A false analogy is a type of informal fallacy. It states that since Item A and Item B both have Quality X in common, they must also have Quality Y in common. "

[@robertwhite1810]

There are NO arguments for any of the 10k "gods" people have invented.

[@ck58npj72]

Interesting though that we may be pre-conditioned for worship of the future AI, the calculations which will be far more advanced and impossible for us to verify.

[@jordancox8294]

This is a pretty stupid comment.

[@christyjia8449]

There are. And there are also arguments against them. As well, there are arguments for and against an un-invented Deity.

[@subject8332]

10 000? Christianity only has more than 33 000 denominations! They are all lucky though, since they were all born into the only correct one.

[@deepashtray5605]

Sure there are, doesn't mean they're any good.

[@TheGuiltsOfUs]

Where is the evidence?

[@ramaraksha01]

lol you notice that they never squabble about whether Superman or Spiderman exists? Because such men are not Sugar Daddies They are not going to let them sit around in some magic land and sponge off them for eternity while they nicely tend to their creature comforts

[@dreduduwa]

okay I have to say this "GOD IS A CONCEPT, JUST LIKE MATHS!"

[@jayv9779]

Fine tuning has to be one of the strangest arguments. It really leans into counting the hits and ignoring the misses.

[@roqsteady5290]

Also by pushing it back onto something else, you are just inventing something that is even more fine tuned than the fine tuning you were trying to explain in the first place. We could look at such a god, if it would come out of hiding, and ask why it had exactly the qualities necessary for creating us. Out of an infinite number of conceivable gods, why that one? Must have been made by an even more powerful god and so on.

[@jayv9779]

@@roqsteady5290 I go with show me creation in the sense they are talking about with a god. That to me is something from nothing. Everything we have observed is just a state change from the previous state. The farthest state we can guess at is the singularity by backing up Newton's constant. They will ask about an infinite regress, but time would be very different, if even a concept, in a singularity. I could be wrong, but it is a reasonable conclusion to me from the evidence presented.

[@responsestability8376]

Yea that's true. I can see how it's a compelling argument to some people though. Just a little bit of thought will get you to realize.. wait a second. I have NO idea where this universe comes from. I have NO reason to assume that it even COULD be any other way.. maybe ill wait for some answers with i don't know.. PROOF behind it before i start telling other people their children have to believe whatever thing i come up with to explain it is lol

[@nestorlovesguitar]

I mean no disrespect, but it really is the most ridiculous argument for God. I cannot believe people take that "argument" seriously. You're better off saying that you believe in God just because you "feel it". At least that thing is unfalsifiable. The argument of fine tuning on the other hand... that's just plain stupid.

[@pedrorodriguez7604]

Too many ads :(

[@afsaljamal9226]

From Swinburnes' most popular book 'Is There A God', 2010: "Argument and counter-argument, qualification and amplification, can go on forever. But religion is not exceptional in this respect. With respect to any subject whatever, the discussion can go on forever. New experiments can always be done to test Quantum Theory, new interpretations can be proposed for old experiments, forever. And the same goes for interpretations ofhistory or theories of politics. BUT LIFE IS SHORT AND WE HAVE TO ACT on the basis of what such evidence as we have had time to investigate shows on balance to be probably true. We have to vote in elections without having had time to consider the merits of the political programmes of even the main candidates with respect to one or two planks of their programmes. And we have to build bridges and send rockets into space before we can look at all the arguments for and against whether our construction is safe-let alone be absolutely certain that it is. And in religion too we have to act (while allowing that, later in life, we may look again at the arguments). The conclusion of this book was that, on significant balance of probability, there is a God. If you accept it, it follows that you have certain duties. God has given us life and all the good things it contains, including above all the opportunities to mould our characters and help others. Great gratitude to God is abundantly appropriate. We should express it in worship and in helping to forward his purposes-which involves, as a preliminary step, making some effort to find out what they are. But duties are of limited extent (as we saw in Chapter 1); a moderate amount of worship and obedience might satisfy them. We could leave it at that. Yet, if we have any sense and any idealism, we cannot leave it at that. God in his perfect goodness will want to make the best of us: make saints of us and use us to make saints of others (not, of course, for his sake, but for ours and for theirs), give us deep understanding of himself (the all-good source of all being), and help us to interact with him. All that involves an unlimited commitment. But God respects us; he will not force these things on us-we can choose whether to seek them or not. If we do seek them, there are obvious obstacles in this world to achieving them (some of which I discussed in Chapter 6). The obstacles are necessary, partly in order to ensure that our commitment is genuine. But God has every reason in due course to remove those obstacles-to allow us to become the good people we seek to be, to give us the vision of himself-forever."

[@deepashtray5605]

Life is short, too short to submit to untestable claims of divine authority granted by the god or gods in question. Is the existence of any god testable and independently verifiable? What about divine judgement? Afterlife? If not then it can be dismissed.

[@FortheLoveofGamingYT]

The expert who had mentioned that seeking truth and value of life loses meaning without God is confusing. I’ve heard this a few times that value of morality or importance of life is lesser without god, and I certainly understand the difference in profoundness with the two idea of origin. But I feel like it has to be that if God was not real, all the profoundness of life and morality associated with theism is still essentially as valid.

[@stujeal]

fear of death and not being drives our fascination with the none argument. the Devine creator will save you

[@este4955]

It's funny how atheists claim to not care about God's existance and yet, they comment on every single video about God XD It proves they care more about God then belivers. How ironic lol.

[@NedzadSabanovic]

We whant to know, if there is something to know.

[@youtubeuser8393]

Maybe that's because they are actually open minded to God existing

[@ronnysingh4509]

Nailed it. They are bigger believers than actual believers themselves. Don't worry atheists - God is in Control!

[@reembagadi7875]

Spot on!!

[@chrism6315]

No, atheists care because belivers care, the belivers also tend to legislate based on the wishes of their imaginary friend, this has - to put it mildly - caused some problems. When religious people stop trying to make laws about how people need to act based on stone age morality, atheists will stop complaining about religion.

[@peterdeutsch6378]

Sounds like rather than talking to talking heads, he needs a psychedelic experience. lol

[@MrMawnster]

So...personal experience...coool.....still not sufficient....if you were paying any attention at all ya burnout

[@peterdeutsch6378]

@@MrMawnster Why watch closer to truth when you seem to know everything already? The answer must be subjective and therefore not worthy of consideration.

[@IbnHunter]

The art of a creator is resembled in his creation. To create creatures/beings that question reality and search for a creator is in it self pure art! We are asked to believe in God, but we keep trying to understand him even though we didn't see/acknowledge him at first 😂. How can someone understand what air is if he only hears about it? This is not a playground for science, it is belief and faith playground. As a Muslim I think the idea is really simple we just insist on asking the wrong questions that originate purely from our narrow view of existence and identity.

[@Eikenhorst]

I find the arguments from natural theology strange: because you can wonder how improbable it is that everything is just right for carbon based live to be able to originate like it did. But this sounds like shuffling a deck of cards and wonder how extremely improbable it was that exactly that outcome happened. If the conditions weren't just right for live, you wouldn't be here to wonder about it. Just because something is very unlikely to have happened at random, that is not proof it wasn't random.

[@alexojideagu]

That's why it's far more likely some kind of multiverse, either parallel, or 1 cyclical, or 1 infinite universe with different laws of physics in different areas, is the only real explanation. God is wrong, and a one off unique universe is wrong.

[@Eikenhorst]

@@alexojideagu I think the only proper position is to be agnostic about all of these possibilities. For now, we have no way of knowing anything about other universes and we cannot have insight in what was before the big bang. Making any claim about any of these things and claiming that must be true, including god claims, but also multiverses, by definition is rooted in nothing more than the belief it is true (which doesn't make it true)

[@cabonlux5344]

I'll explain it in a way my grandma will understand, God is the air you breath.

[@jeffamos9854]

Did all the crazy theists trolls decide to comment on this video ?

[@SumNutOnU2b]

Not yet, but there's still time, the rest will get here eventually.

[@500lbkaren5]

GOD IS SEXI

[@joshheter1517]

... oh, the irony.

[@lourak613]

Dr. Kuhn's opening salvo to Rebecca: "I've never had a religious experience and don't particularly want one" - (chuckle from Rebecca). Well - there's objectivity and an open mind for you...What does he say? Closer to truth? G-d himself doesn't have a fighting chance under these conditions.

[@RoYaL3796]

My thought exactly, he doesn't really care about the truth.

[@sahelanthropusbrensis]

@@RoYaL3796 He cares about truth. He just can't accept silly fairy tales as arguments. He wants to belive due to fear od death, like majority of you. But he is a smart man, so he can see how stupid religions really are.

[@Elaphe472]

@@sahelanthropusbrensis Well put. Religious people scare me. I wonder if the people that question Kuhn´s "objectivity and open mind" are objective and open minded themselves.

[@RoYaL3796]

@@sahelanthropusbrensis how does he know that religious experiences aren't the truth?

[@RoYaL3796]

@@Elaphe472 what is objectivity? You don't seem to truly understand that there is no such thing. In order for something to be experienced, it has to be experienced by someone. What you call "objectivity" is a collection of scientist's subjective experience of reality. But it's subjectivity none the less.

[@Lillianachimp]

Unreal how she says the universe causes itself. That's like sayin I can cause my own birth. WTF?! N these people have actual jobs? Wow

[@jasvindersingh1757]

🤣🤣 correct

[@TupacMakaveli1996]

You need to be consistent with what you say is the key to getting a job. What you say don’t really matter these days.

[@j-r-m7775]

What she is trying to say is the universe has no cause. How could there be no universe. No space and no time is not even a coherent concept. How could there be no space or no time?

[@chrismathis4162]

Okay, who or what caused god? The same people who say that the universe can't cause itself, have no problem believing god caused himself. We are evolved apes and part of nature. It could be that the answer is just beyond our ability to comprehend.

[@King.Lov3.Soular]

I am God we are all reflections of God and are experiencing our creation of my minds perspective in the present moment

[@migueljorge786]

You are a creation of God

[@cinemusicberlin]

You're both just claiming things without evidence.

[@ramaraksha01]

Basically the idea is that we can all be Rama(Good) or Ravana(Evil) - the choice is up to us

[@followyourbliss973]

If only C Hitchens and Carl Sagen were still here to interview for this series!