Divine Hiddenness (InspiringPhilosophy Response)

[@russellcohen640]

calm, clear, critical, and without being cruel, unkind, or crass. Paul, time and again you demonstrate the ideal addressing theism. You are a hero and an inspiration.

[@thingschange6963]

Because ppl havent been trying that exact thing for thousands of years. Time for words is over. Common sense, logic and reason are not the impetus for the belief. They wont be the resson for the abatement of the belief. What's the sense? Waiting for the religious right to swing first is the act of an idiot.

[@thingschange6963]

@Trolltician Great! Just one thing- nobody gives a shit what you feel or think. Youre an internet troll. Fat, dumb, miserable and lonely is your path through life. You should do the world a favor.

[@jacksonrich1707]

@@thingschange6963 thank you for proving my point before I made it. Its part of the 'atheist group think' strategy to toss out 'calm, and intentionally dispassionate' talking points because they know they are tossing meat into a shark pool. The strategy on these atheist channels which absolutely conspire together is to maintain a cool exterior and let the sharks theyre feeding do all the dirty work. The very fact they KNOW they are tossing meat into a shark tank is PROOF their intentions are NOT docile.

[@thetruthchannel349]

"The very fact they KNOW they are tossing meat into a shark tank is PROOF their intentions are NOT docile." *Now thats just brilliant*

[@thingschange6963]

@@jacksonrich1707 Thank you for making my point on the believers ability to just make shit up. Nobody ever used the word, docile. Mind numbingly stggerring you didnt pick up ln that in previous coments. Reigious ppl in america should be labeled seditious and marched to internment/reeducation camps. Docile enough for you girl sharks? You are not sharks. You don't own the "tank". Pry more akin to that fish that sticks to the bottom of the shark. Shark does all the work, you pick up whatever scraps it lets you.

[@lordsrednuas]

17:00 ish I'd argue that a God that creates a soul, knowing full well that he'll torture it for eternity, is not a loving God.

[@alanw505]

God's omniscience is his downfall of being a loving being. He would have known all of our free will choices and knew we would violate his rules before he created us. It's simply redundant bullshit.

[@stevewebber707]

@@alanw505 I'd go further and say an omnipotent and omniscient God could convince unreasonable nonbelievers without impacting their free will. If I were to be convinced of a God I don't think it could be some omniscient omnipotent all loving one. Or at least if such a deity existed he would have to be one that considered it acceptable to remain hidden to me, making belief in it rather irrelevant. It is hard for me to see an effective difference in the results of a hidden God and a nonexistent one.

[@DCRey1872]

And this is why I could never back Calvinism.

[@archapmangcmg]

Even just creating a soul and knowing there's a significant chance that this particular one will be one he'll later torture! All he'd have to do is not create Hell or suffering. Ironically, justice would prevent ANY human from going to Hell but require its creator, God, to go there.

[@cloudsstar]

what is a soul where is it in the body whats its job how do we tell if a soul is real

[@bg6b7bft]

Did he imply that when a reasonable non-believer dies, God introduces himself and offers salvation directly? That might allow for an all-loving God. It also makes all religion on earth completely unnecessary.

[@joecoolioness6399]

Yup. But then maybe the complete lack of real evidence is not reasonable non-belief in gods eyes? Either way, if I die and am faced with any entity judging me, I'll throw up my arms and say "sorry, but you chose not to reveal yourself in a convincing manner, so if you think it just and fair, go ahead and torture me forever".

[@Paulogia]

It seems to be his position, yes.

[@incredulouspasta3304]

I still don't think it would be loving. Having an unreasonable belief/disbelief doesn't justify eternal punishment. Don't let the framing of the argument cause you to lose perspective. Can you think of any situation in which eternal punishment is justified for any human?

[@pondboy3682]

@@incredulouspasta3304 to my mind, the only human who might deserve eternal punishment would be one that somehow defeated death, and spends his eternal life authorizing torture of many beings in an eternal way. In other words, Jesus (as presented in the bible) is the only human worthy of eternal punishment!

[@frankwhelan1715]

@@pondboy3682 Kind of true but most people wouldn't condemn even him to that, so they're better than God

[@TheCheapPhilosophy]

All the gods suffer from the same hiddenness affliction, and they all have humans explaining better than themselves, why they are hidden. I find that quite telling on itself.

[@joecoolioness6399]

And all seem to use humans with human weapons to spread their word.

[@jhill4874]

@Brent Knoerl Seems that God is lazy. Look at all the people discriminating or killing in God's name. Hey God, do your own dirty work.

[@zemoxian]

Actually, something I found funny watching Lucifer that on a TV show with angels and demons running around, they’re just as lost and confused as us humans because they don’t hear from god either. And they’re family. Though Preacher is different. God is missing but he is actually in the show. And for some reason likes to dress like a dog and attend orgies. I really need to catch up with the current season...

[@zemoxian]

Something someone brought up with another video. I don’t recall which one. Why hasn’t there been a duplicate revelation? Every revelation is completely different and springs up once. They only spread person to person. Culture to culture. If the same (I mean identical not just similar) story appeared simultaneously on different continents without the possibility of communication, that might not be proof but it would be something.

[@jmaniak1]

The number of actual gods remains consistent.

[@stiimuli]

While your more irreverent videos like "Ham & AiGs" are entertaining, I really enjoy and value these detailed examinations of arguments and claims. Well done sir.

[@Paulogia]

Appreciated. Thanks.

[@greense65]

No disrespect intended to others, by Paulogia's argument videos are the best I have seen so far.

[@stiimuli]

@James Henry Smith That's just people doing people things. No actual god can be found anywhere in that process.

[@stiimuli]

@James Henry Smith Imagining something does not make it real. Maybe you missed that part.

[@BionicDance]

I believe in sea chickens. They're called 'tuna fish'.

[@vestafreyja]

And one of them is named Charlie.

[@kevinlitton1399]

BionicDance and somehow they slaughter dolphins. Wait...

[@michaelsommers2356]

You can tune a piano, but you can't tuna fish. Therefore, there are no sea chickens. QED.

[@BionicDance]

If tin whistles are made of tin, what are foghorns made of? Checkmate.

[@michaelsommers2356]

@@BionicDance But whistles are made of brass these days, so your attempt to bring chickens back into the discussion via Foghorn Leghorn fails.

[@jugglinglessons]

Consistently jaw-droppingly fantastic quality of presentation. thank you for this and your entirely excellent back catalogue.

[@Paulogia]

thank you for the kind words!

[@theosib]

Damn. I should have started work half an hour ago, but a Paulogia video popped up, and I had to stop everything and watch. Paul! Why do you do this to me! ;)

[@kevindavis5966]

If you had free will, you could have elected to watch his video at a more convenient time.

[@davidmoran4675]

@@kevindavis5966 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@Paulogia]

At least it wasn't a long one.

[@joseph-thewatcher]

Not all gods hide. I saw Iron Maiden in concert recently.

[@sinisterminister6478]

INFIDEL HERETIC!!! Lemmy is(was) God!!!😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@joseph-thewatcher]

@@sinisterminister6478 All the gods of rock live forever. That's why they gave us the "Rainbow" as a sign, Long Live Rock 'n' Roll.

[@sinisterminister6478]

@@joseph-thewatcher Agreed!

[@astrol4b]

But I didn't, hence they don't exists

[@sinisterminister6478]

@@astrol4b Party pooper lol

[@kylerichardson1242]

Paul, you're summary at the end is almost word-for-word my testimony. Thank you for expressing this situation so clearly, and giving me a way to express these feelings to my loved ones.

[@Paulogia]

You're very welcome, Kyle. So glad to have been some help.

[@ianfirth33]

I hear your pain Paul, I also followed, earnest sought God, yet evidence was wanting, this cost me everything as a minister, I walked away with only what was true. But truth is worth more than everything I lost.

[@maxonmendel5757]

sorry for your loss. you still write like a preacher in your comment. g*d bless you or whatever kind greeting there is. im still a doubting believer. but im okay if none of its real. im more worried about my marriage and relationships

[@stevenwizzle533]

Paul, I have seen each of your videos, and I love your approach, honesty, and poignancy throughout your catalog. But THIS is the most perfect video I’ve seen by you. So concise, so heartfelt, and so accurate. This is a win.

[@adamandracheloconnor2920]

God: I am all loving and wish that no one suffer hell. Me: Well... uh, why don't you tell everyone then? God: Well then who am I going to torture?

[@childboo2450]

God: What other cool and awesome way can i show off to those I've predestined to believe in me?

[@JamesRichardWiley]

I have an invisible, unknowable friend who wants a relationship with me. Nothing so far.

[@stylis666]

@@childboo2450 Hm... something wit hardening a guy's heart and sending plagues to the entire nation to punish them for the guy having a hardened heart. That should show everyone he is a bigger dick than everyone else. Oh, shit, it's supposed to show he HAS a bigger dick... Oh well... what's done is done I guess.

[@X22-p4t]

God makes facepalm on your comment because He doesn't torture anyone in hell.

[@pauligrossinoz]

@Setekh - the _really_ important question is: Does the god of the Bible have a circumcised dick? And if he does have a circumcised dick ... did he have to circumcise it himself? Or did he create his dick already circumcised? I have so many questions...

[@colinc892]

Paulogia, I just want to say from one reasonable non-believer to another, keep up the good work. Your story reminds me a lot of my own, and I think your channel is highly underrated. The amount of careful thought and research that goes into each video is astounding. I only regret that I can only subscribe to your channel but once.

[@Paulogia]

That means a lot today, Colin... thanks.

[@alflyle9955]

I wouldn't say Paul's channel is underrated, but it definitely is undersubscribed.

[@colinc892]

Alf Lyle agreed. much better word there

[@fnln3011]

Being informed violates free will? That explains the opposition to various areas of scientific research and forms of education from the religious rught.

[@SnakeMan448]

Whenever theists warn about how being informative or straightforward violates free will, it's an admission that they require your blind obedience and ignorance.

[@MrDanAng1]

I am of the opposite opinion, if free will even exist, being informed is the only way to exercise that free will.making decisions on insufficient information is not free will, it's a gamble.

[@Poopfingers345]

@@MrDanAng1 well said. Perfectly stated. Thank you.

[@nathanjora7627]

Daniel H but funnily enough, perfect information of everything renders the concept of free will meaningless, which makes a free god a contradiction.

[@Poopfingers345]

@@nathanjora7627 how? If I knew everything is doesnt mean I cant choose between two similar outcomes.

[@ernest3286]

It's frustrating to me that in order to preserve their world view, so many must pretend to know my own mind better than I myself do.

[@stevegeorge6880]

Along with the problem of evil, it's one where theists literally have nothing approaching a good answer regarding motive and other explanation.

[@notwhatiwasraised2b]

It's like apologists can't hear themselves arguing conspicuous absurdities to reassure 'the choir' that their 'faith' in god(s) is reasonable.

[@Paulogia]

Not enough to convince an outsider, but they have enough to placate themselves.

[@jhill4874]

@@Paulogia "placate" That's a great word for it.

[@roqsteady5290]

@@Paulogia They have enough to obfuscate the issue, so they can brush it under the carpet :).

[@honorb4glory606]

I feel bad for you guys. There is no such thing as an "atheist." They're just people who hate God, so they convince themselves that their own intellect is powerful enough to make Him not exist.

[@stevenwizzle533]

I have watched this video maybe once a quarter since it was posted. One day I will gain enough courage to share it with my dad. Thank you, Paul, for being calm and kind enough for me to be able to possibly share my views with my extremely religious loved ones.

[@SpareSimian]

You should also watch Genetically Modified Skeptic, who specifically addresses the issue of dealing with loved ones and coworkers who are extremist believers. He's more about the psychology than the philosophy.

[@SpareSimian]

Where Paulogia really helps is in doing the deep dive into Biblical lore and the Biblical claims of apologetics. I never studied the Bible as a kid so it's been quite interesting watching his review of that material in depth. (I became an atheist about 45 years ago, in my teens, when in a Pentecostal K-12 school that told me that belief is all-or-nothing. There were enough ludicrous claims that I chose nothing. Paulogia has revealed to me a more nuanced approach where false magical claims are set on a backdrop of historical places and events.)

[@filipe.sm31]

Just being curious, did you actually share this video with your father? If so, what was his reaction? I'd like to share some stuff with my family and I'm not sure

[@stevenwizzle533]

@@filipe.sm31 I haven’t. Our regular interactions feed my worries. I don’t think he’s open enough.

[@filipe.sm31]

@stevenwizzle533 oh man that sucks. I'm so sorry. Hopefully one day he'll be open enough for you to share this with him

[@CommieApe]

Why is it that a God who demands your love refuses to show themselves? People in the bible had their disposition changed by God appearing to them. What makes this any different?

[@Zethneralith]

I pretty much ended my faith with Thomas' reaction to hearing of Jesus' resurrection: "Unless I see with my own eyes and touch the holes in his hands with my own hands, I will not believe." At which point Jesus appeared to him. If Thomas was worth it, why aren't we? Well, the much more likely solution is that my assumption of god's existence was ill-founded.

[@joecoolioness6399]

@@Zethneralith exactly. Their god and jebus appeared all over the place 2000 years ago but in a day and age where a video can reach all corners of the globe in seconds, nothing. What better way to convert people than a sweet miracle video going viral? Nope, gots ta rely on some idiot trying to invade an island to spread your word.

[@goldenalt3166]

@@joecoolioness6399 more likely his followers just didn't preserve the skeptical writings. There are just as many supernatural claims made today.

[@Zaprozhan]

@@Zethneralith Heck, Thomas had seen the dude perform miracles, saw him die, and now he's running around again! Thomas saw all that, and STILL wasn't convinced. Jesus let Thomas finger some sweet stigmata to convince him. Are we supposed to fall on our knees in prayer having seen NOTHING of this dude's miracles, death, and resurrection, when Thomas gets a fucking parade of divine power?

[@imjessietr29]

@@Zaprozhan Who saw him die? Everyone ran off when Jesus was arrested. The apostles neither witnessed his death nor his resurrection.

[@jbthefirst960]

This is one I will have to watch a few more times. I consider myself a reasonable non believer who didn't choose to stop believing. As you said, the ball is in God's court.

[@JamesRichardWiley]

Is this existence we are living, god's plan? And If not god's plan, then whose plan is it?

[@Apollogetics]

In that case, If I provided scientific evidence that showed the Judeo-Christian God existed and was morally perfect, would you pursue a relationship with him to become a Christian?

[@deneb3525]

@@Apollogetics I would LOVE it. being a rational non-believer has made my life suck in several different avenues.

[@Apollogetics]

@@deneb3525 In that case, How did you become an atheist? Was it the accumulation of supposed evidence against Christianity. If you always identified as an atheist, what accumulation of evidence are you looking for that would prove Christianity to you? or you don't know the answer for either

[@deneb3525]

@@Apollogetics I was an incredibly devout Christian (like, the first time I kissed a girl was the night I got engaged. ) I ran into problems when someone asked me to prove God existed and I found I could not do it without resorting to logical fallacies. I spent 3 years looking for proof, talking to elders and preachers, and googling everything i could think of. Couldn't find anything. I expect a level of proof greater then that provided by psychics, faith healers, and the Loc Nes Monster. I use the round earth as a standard. With no more assumption then my senses are mostly accurate I can not only prove the earth is round, but Calculate it's diameter. I expect a Just God who will send people to hell for not believing him to provide at LEAST that level of proof.

[@misplacedfaith]

This video articulates so clearly the reasons I cannot bring myself to have faith and why I am not worried if I am wrong. I have been as honest with myself as I possibly can; it's now up to God to provide reason for me to believe. If God could only do that, I would be a faithful servant.

[@Paulogia]

amen, my friend. amen.

[@xDR1TeK]

I had these thought exercises and I'm glad someone articulated them in a well organised thought patterns. Thank you. I'm bookmarking this.

[@JamesRichardWiley]

YHWH (the Hebrew god in the Bible) wants to have a personal relationship with me. Well here I am. Been waiting 70 years. Nothing so far.

[@ctylsh1214]

Why would you wait for 70 years? Go find him!

[@Lapr3sed]

​@@ctylsh1214 yeah what this person said

[@warptens5652]

11:13 The argument is that God can't reveal himself to non believers because if they learn about God, they may seek divine rewards / fear divine punishment which is bad. Yes, learning about god is bad, that's the argument. So now instead of having to explain why god let billions disbelieve, you have to explain why he let billions learn about him.

[@danielsnyder2288]

And yet according to almost all religions God supposedly has revealed himself to some and, in the case of Christianity, supposedly actually walked the earth amongst unbelievers

[@Tenly2009]

“What difference would it make if all the non-believers became unsaved believers?” The church would collect a LOT more money!

[@joecoolioness6399]

Tax free money too!

[@Tenly2009]

Joe Coolioness Yup. That’s one of the things that makes me the angriest about organized religions. The money they collect is tax-free and they do not have to ever produce their “books” to show where all of the money went! They spend a tiny fraction “helping the needy” - but people assume that that “tiny fraction” was actually a “large percentage”. If they were required to provide their parishioners with a full accounting of their income and disbursements, many would start to see them for the scam they are.

[@michaelsommers2356]

How can an entity that asserts lordship be perfectly loving? Such an entity puts its own desires and well-being ahead of those of others.

[@stylis666]

Good question. I'm also wondering how anyone can believe that a being is all loving and depends on charlatans, child abusers and logical fallacies from other people to get the point across. If my mom would hand me notes that said my father loves me and if I don't do what she interprets from his words I get tortured in the basement for the rest of my life, I would have a hard time believing it's not my mom making shit up and threatening me. I would go to the police. But with religion, we're supposed to accept even worse threats as gifts. Religion reverses absolutely everything and turns reasonable people into idiots.

[@catelynh1020]

I don't know if this will get seen, but I believe it's the same as the whole "you can't know evil without good and vice versa" When people had no knowledge of democracy, of having a say, of their lives being their own, they can't imagine a slightly less evil version as anything other than good. If you starve for 3 weeks of a month, you might be content to starve only for 2 not knowing that you could eat 3 meals a day. My understanding of the bible is that the religion as a whole is a very unhealthy relationship. There's entrapment, abuse, gaslighting, and so on. But people who've only known abuse don't see it as wrong. So many people in abusive relationships don't leave without some outside help and support, but religion refuses that help because the alternative is scarier. Or the same could be said about family dynamics. A parent that beats their child and calls it love teaches the child that violence is a form of love. I grew up in a loving home and saw the red flags in the bible as horrifying. Worse yet, i saw those same red flags in the relationships that my friends would end up in and they would feel, if not content, that it was meant to be that way. Those people grew up thinking that they were just colorful flags no different from the others.

[@michaelsommers2356]

@James Henry Smith You're right. Something that doesn't exist can't hide.

[@michaelsommers2356]

@James Henry Smith I'm talking about the mythical gods theists believe aren't mythical.

[@davidmoran4675]

Divine hiddeness is my favorite topic because it's the surest way to know and have a relationship with a god, yet no god has sufficiently done so. I think it's the #1 cause of atheism and would be the easiest to correct if a LOVING god exists. In this way, a god that does not reveal itself to me is indistinguishable from a god that does not exist. Christians will jump on this and say God has already revealed itself to me and I reject it, but then they're only repeating what they hear in church, and what makes them believe a LOVING god exists instead of listening to and considering my arguement. Like I said, my favorite theological topic. You do an amazing job making these videos Paul, I hope your kids watch every one of them

[@Paulogia]

Thank you, David... I'm in full agreement.

[@Apollogetics]

Although a personal relationship is a two-step process where you have to know something exists first before you can decide to have a meaningful relationship with someone, this does not apply to God. This is because He does not need to appear physically or do something on a global scale in the first place to convince the ones he knows would have a relationship with him if he revealed to them that he is the true God. Remember, he is omniscient so just like he knows what evidence would convince unbelievers he exists, he also knows ways to convince somebody without resorting to appearing physically or on a global scale. More importantly, even if he did appear physically, The bible is full of stories and situations of Israel’s not only disobeying GOd but choosing to follow another God despite having God physically appear to them almost on demand in some form. We even have evidence that God only shows miracles when he knows it would potentially lead into a meaningful relationship with him. So we would expect him to skip the first step and go right into the second. Thus, If you are talking about the Christian God specifically, then you have to accept all this as a reality and showing such evidence does not mean someone will automatically choose to enter into a relationship with him.

[@dynamic9016]

Paulogia is very inspiring and intellectual.I'm deeply impressed by his reasoning skills.Great content as usual.

[@sbushido5547]

_"[God] does want a world of Stepford wives or Pleasantville humans following a script."_ What...like heaven? How can someone make a video so thoroughly refuting their own position...

[@goldenalt3166]

Check out his evil god challenge: kzbin.info/www/bejne/qoOqZYpsZq57fqs It does the same thing to the argument from evil.

[@HarryNicNicholas]

exactly. we're going to waste a perfectly good life worshipping god so we can waste a perfectly good eternity worshipping god. god makes life pointless.

[@robertplatt1693]

"Sinners are much more fun." -the Sage of Long Island

[@DJHastingsFeverPitch]

This is literally what indoctrination is tho so.....

[@bryanleonard8008]

The mental gymnastics theists go thru daily make me dizzy!

[@otakurocklee]

All theists go through mental gymnastics. But Christians are on another level.

[@chinookwind8535]

The mental gymnastics atheists go thru make me dizzy

[@bryanleonard8008]

@@chinookwind8535 like???

[@chinookwind8535]

@@bryanleonard8008 like????

[@bryanleonard8008]

@@chinookwind8535 thought so

[@yumeriagirl1231]

I LOVE that you did THIS! SOOOO Needed! Mr Jones is a kind person, who I began to like/follow a while back. At the same time that I was beginning to let go of my magical-thinking. He lost me, of course, when I realized that he advocated for ideas that I was letting go of. I still catch some of his content, now & then... So glad that I took the critical thinking route & kept learning more. Thank you for not shying away from this type of content. Just because a particular religious person is not a fundamentalist/bible literalist, does *not* mean that its safe or unharmful. #KnowledgeIsPowerful #SecularHumanism

[@HoldenHardman]

You laugh now Paul, but one day the sea chickens will rise.

[@pdoylemi]

They already have! I have seen cans of them at my store, labeled "Chicken of the Sea".

[@plasmaballin]

16:00 Every atheist who was once a sincere Christian is a counterexample to the idea that God only fails to give sufficient evidence to those who would reject his lordship. An ex-Christian has already accepted God's lordship but no longer believes that God exists. If God had shown the Christian evidence, that Christian would still believe and still accept God.

[@bdf2718]

It's amusing just how many KZbin atheists are former devout Christians.

[@mabrown666]

I was a strong Christian. I believed in God. God was the core of my existence. When I discovered a fact that didn’t fit with my belief in God, I went searching for a way to incorporate that fact in order to maintain my belief in God. I did not set out to disprove God, I set out to confirm him. But the more I looked for something to cover the crack, the more cracks I uncovered. Eventually I had to accept that the Christian God did not exist. I attempted to believe in other Gods, but having been a Christian, I was already prepared to see the flaws in those too. I finally accepted my atheism. At the time believing it was a flaw in me (atheists being the most hated group around). Since then I’ve come to be proud of what I am. But at any stage along this route, had God revealed himself to me, I would have remained a believer and faithful servant of the lord. However, if God revealed himself to me now, I would have questions. In short, if God exists, his game of hide and seek has condemned me to the fires of hell. So it's good news that he doesn't exist.

[@Apollogetics]

@@mabrown666 In that case, If I provided scientific evidence that showed the Judeo-Christian God existed and was morally perfect, would you pursue a relationship with him to become a Christian?

[@mabrown666]

@@Apollogetics If you mean believe in the existence of God as described in the Judeo-Christian bible, then yes. But, the case against the existence of God is very strong at this point and so the evidence proving his existence would have to be stronger than that. I’ll remind you that scientific evidence is testable and can only reasonably point to a single conclusion. For example, the existence of the pyramids of Giza is not scientific evidence for the existence of alien visitation. Some people think it is, but they can equally be explained with slaves and ancient Egyptian funerary practices. If, however you mean worship, that’s going to take more than scientific evidence. What I understand as moral and immoral has the majority of God’s actions under the heading of immoral. So, I would need to understand how the systemic murder of every man, woman and child who is not a virgin girl, then the systemic rape of those virgins, from multiple “morally good” towns, including the burning of those towns, is a moral thing to do. And that’s just one of hundreds of biblical examples. I would also need an explanation as to why he allows natural disasters to harm the innocent.

[@Apollogetics]

@@mabrown666 I will start off by saying that Christianity does not claim that morals are arbitrary but grounded in the nature of a all-just, all-loving morally perfect God. Objective moral values cannot exist without an objective moral law-giver to ground those necessary truths into existence and vice-versa. For example, Murder is wrong because God says it's wrong and God says it's wrong because it's inherently contrary to his own nature, which is objectively good. This is why God has a right to kill humans because he has moral authority to do so. We don't have moral authority to do so because we are not and cannot be objectively good people or posses the omnibenevolent attribute. However, when God kills in the bible, he does not murder anyone, which would violate his own moral standards. For example, For every command and action he enacts there is a morally sufficient reason that cannot be considered murder by definition. Of course, there are instances where God has allowed sin to take place but this would not be a promotion from God but a permission. You might say that it is wrong for God to permit sin. In that case, I don't see how you can object to the commands and actions he enacts to probihibit and eradicate that very sin. Now, you might argue that the moral standards that God has laid out in the bible and reflect his nature are themselves incoherent and flawed, such as some of the old testament laws. However, Let us not forget that the Bible wasn’t written by Americans. It’s a distinctly Jewish collection of writings, even (and especially) the New Testament. The point of the “Old Testament” laws was not supposed to be about morality. Now, there are some moral laws in there, such as don’t murder, but most of the regulations are ceremonial and cultural in nature. Why have these laws? it separated Israel from everyone else. The laws formed a dividing line, so everyone would know that the people of Israel were different from all other groups. This was a way to enact and live out the fact that God had chosen them specifically and specially. They even looked different, acted differently, ate different foods, etc. Thus, we are left with just a personal disagreement of God's actions towards humans. All I can say to this is that it is Ok to have negative opinions or disagreements of God's actions. It would not be a real relationship if there was not any resistance and free-will. I also, have anger and feelings of displeasure towards God and his actions but within my life rather than within the bible. This is natural since we are potentially dealing with an all-loving AND all-just morally perfect being. However, the difference between you and me is that I choose to trust him despite how I feel about him. PROBLEM OF NATURAL EVIL The bible suggests that God's designs in this universe are limited by the laws of physics. This doesn't mean that God Himself is limited, just that He chose limiting laws of physics to provide the optimal creation in which His purposes could be fulfilled. Contrary to what you want to believe about God, this universe was not designed to provide an eternal, perfect place for humans to live in. It is perfectly designed to give human beings the optimal conditions under which choice between good and evil can be made. In order to design thermodynamically-perfect biological machines, it would be necessary to create a universe in which the second law of thermodynamics did not operate at all. Of course, removing the second law means that the universe would have been completely different. There would be no stars, no electromagnetic radiation (including light), and no way to design machines (including biological ones) that depend on heat/energy flow. This means that creatures would not be powered by food or metabolic processes. Creatures designed for such a universe could never die a natural death, since death is dependent upon the operation of the second law. However, the description of this hypothetical universe corresponds almost exactly to the Bible's description of heaven. Therefore, your "perfect universe" model nearly exactly corresponds to the Bible's description of heaven. With that said, The problem about heaven is that there is no sustained ability to choose good vs. evil while we are in heaven. This lack of choice is the reason that God instituted a two creation design-the first in which free will beings could make choices, and the second to reward those beings who choose to be with God in His second creation. You seem to be stuck on the idea that a perfect God must design a physically-perfect universe. God Himself called individual aspects of the current creation as "good" and the overall design "very good," but never "perfect." And the universe is "very good." The biological machines are awesome, but by no means perfect. They can't be, in this universe. The second creation (heaven) is perfect, but it doesn't house beings with physical bodies-only beings with spiritual bodies. Physical bodies cannot operate in a universe that lacks the laws of thermodynamics. Yes, God could just wave His hand and prevent all individual examples of natural evil that might impact humans or animals. The solution seems simple, since, if God is omnipotent and omniscient, this task would not be too difficult. Every time something bad was about to happen, God would personally intervene and stop it. Although we would argue that God occasionally breaks the laws of physics (miracles), He does not do this on a routine basis. In general, miracles are done with the purpose of displaying God's power and authority as well as to lead people to Christ. If God were to break the laws of physics routinely, science would not exist, since it would be impossible to determine how the laws of physics operated. In essence, there would be no reliable laws of physics to measure, since God's interference would make measurement unreliable. As I said before, The animals within the Garden of Eden were made to relate and be Adam's friend, but this also applies to the universe as well. If it were different, it would be a haunted house. In addition, if God constantly interfered, people would get used to being rescued and would get lazy, expecting God to bail them out when they failed to act responsibly. This would circumvent any sort of meaningful relationship that he desires with his people. More importantly, the possibility of this happening anyways for us in this world was circumvented by Adam's sin and not without breaking the laws of nature. I am more than happy to clear up any other issue you may have regarding this subject if you feel it would change your mind. However, if you feel that no amount of evidence and reason can make you feel differently and potentially trust God, then I suspect this will probably be my last response and wish you good luck.

[@gregcampwriter]

His god reminds me of the stalker type who convinces himself that he has a relationship with some famous person and gets enraged when she doesn't act accordingly.

[@joecoolioness6399]

Haha god is the ultimate stalker, you can't hide from him!

[@Paulogia]

true dat

[@bdf2718]

God is a narcissist who demands worship. Remind you of any despotic leaders with bad hairstyles?

[@B.S._Lewis]

That's actually how I perceive the followers of Jesus.

[@andresvillarreal9271]

I have a different approach to this subject. Every time I have looked for guidance in my parenting or my teaching as a university teacher and in other scenarios, the guidance that comes from within the group is vastly superior to the guidance that comes from without. To teach or raise, I mostly listen carefully to my subjects, looking for the reasons why previous teachings have failed and for ideas that the rest of the group have and I did not find elsewhere. The very idea that any kind of external knowledge is the absolute truth goes against the fact that we are humans with a specific, instinctive approach to learning, so an external worldview, however "true", might not be applicable. If God had decided to teach Adam and Eve about apples or had decided to teach Noah's neighbors about whatever they did to deserve drowning, he would have spared himself of many blunders, where he applied maximum punishment for no result whatsoever. Divine hiddenness is the same. Assuming that our true guidance is hidden from us, instead of being within ourselves, robs us of the real knowledge about us and about the solutions for our problems.

[@andresvillarreal9271]

@daniel letterman In fact, I have never been a religious person. I try to think as a person who does not automatically disregard everything that sounds religious, because it is very easy to fall in the fallacy of assuming your own conclusion.

[@patrickelliott2169]

Actually, it sounds like a very convoluted version of the physicist Feynman's, "Don't ask me why things work." Basically, the difference between theology and knowledge comes down to, "If I had the time to bother I can at least try to see if things work the way I think they do, and either prove, to myself, that it does, or fail to do so.", vs., "Its just true, even if you can't test it." Asking "why" leads to a long list of other whys. The example Feynman himself used was, "My grandmother broke her leg, and was taken to the hospital." This contains a long list of hidden assumptions, from why did she fall, to why was what she fell on slippery, to how the heck did she even get to the hospital with a broken leg, to why did the ambulance actually come to get her, to why someone bothered to call the ambulance, to even just, "Why a hospital?" For any entity that have "no" knowledge of any part of this process its one giant house of cards. Yet, there is nothing in that pile of cards which, in context, doesn't have a clear reason, up until the point where you hit, "Why is any of this even how any of it works?" Theology inevitably ignores the billion cards we "can" see, for the one card they think is supporting the whole thing, which is, "Because god made it." Your average two year old can also, sadly, see the next step, "Why did he?", and probably, "Why him?" And, again, you run into a complete lack of any real answer. This is, fundamentally, why "knowledge" is contingent, and doesn't, ultimately, deal with ultimate "whys", because you literally never run out of them, if you go down that rabbit hole. As for "instinctive approaches", he also had something to say about that too, in a nutshell, as he himself describes is, "Having finished reading the book on the newest thing in physics, right at the end, the author said something profound, 'New approaches are needed to continue from here." Basically, if all you ever do is look at things the same way everyone else looked at things you can never "find" more knowledge. You run into a dead end. We have learned much of what we know today why *not* applying purely instinctive approaches, but by looking at the world in a way that fundamentally denied every prior way we looked at it before. Ironically, this very issue came up on another blog, and this video was linked in, in which he discussed this very problem: kzbin.info/www/bejne/j6KWhqioqNGcaqs

[@andresvillarreal9271]

@James Henry Smith Then you can show me a clear manifestation of God, one that cannot be better explained as part of the natural world. If an omnipotent God exists his manifestations should either be absolutely evident or non-existent. Otherwise, God is trying to show his presence and failing, so he is not omnipotent. In fact, I believe every apologist talks about the divine hiddenness, so I believe you have not heard of it because you have not researched it. The very first thing that appears when I google this is the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, telling us that there is a "long history" about this.

[@andresvillarreal9271]

@James Henry Smith Arthur Conan Doyle was a gifted writer, but nothing more. If anything, he was a spiritualist who fell prey of scam artists with basic knowledge of photographic tricks. He may or may not have had a confused version of naturalism that included spirits and other precenses. If you want a philosopher or scientist with a clear vision of naturalism, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle is not your man.

[@GameTimeWhy]

Growing up Christian I didn't realize that childrens (me) opinions mattered until i got older and realized that i treated children with more kindness than i was shown and that they learned way more about things because i actually listened and responded to their questions.

[@JankyPuzzles]

Your final statement in this video hit me incredibly hard. Thank you for your frankness and confidence.

[@robdumond2634]

I have watched many of your videos and consider this, now of your finest. Thanks!

[@Paulogia]

Thank you, Rob!

[@tkat6442]

I agree this video is just fantastic! I keep watching it again and again, and I keep getting fascinated by, and fixated on, one or another point and then missing the next one because I haven't moved on and kept pace. So I back up and listen again, and again, and again....

[@Lady8D]

Yay, Paulogia!!! Thanks for another fantastic video!!!

[@Paulogia]

Thank you, my Lady.

[@norelfarjun3554]

This is what happens when you try to defend an illogical belief

[@DutchJoan]

Could there be something like a logical belief? Wouldn't that just be ... consequence, fact?

[@norelfarjun3554]

​@@DutchJoan It depends on the way you perceive the world Do you know for sure facts or are you convinced of ideas based on the information you can get? Do you factually know that what you see in front of you is really in front of you or are you just convinced that it is based on the information you have received from your senses? Given the well known philosophical question that deals with not really knowing if your entire life is just a simulation, I tend to agree that you do not know unequivocally but are convinced based on the information you have. So there are things you believe in and you have good reasons to believe in (i.e. logical reasons) and there are things you believe in and you have no good reasons to

[@mabatch3769]

@Norel farjun If reality was a simulation how would you know? Why even postulate the possibility if it’s unfalsifiable? Even if reality was a simulation, and it’s impossible to escape from, how would that change the reality in which we exist? What are some things you think that I or another person believe without good reasons?

[@norelfarjun3554]

@@mabatch3769 There is something to be gained from this question even if it has no definitive answer And this is a fresh perspective on reality. And besides, we all really live in simulation Not a computer simulation, but a simulation that your brain has created Any idea that comes to your mind, anything you mean when you refer to something, even in the most broad sense, is all based on your brain's interpretation of information from the senses. This image that you have in mind and you mean when you say "existence" is just a fictional image that your brain has built from information that was available to it. This is exactly what your computer does when it builds a simulation.

[@mabatch3769]

@Norel farjun Ok, some of that I agree with, most I do not. My brain doesn’t create “fictional images”. It creates the best interruption from the available data. Just because the data might be incomplete or inaccurate doesn’t mean it’s fictional. My main question still stands, what are some things you think I believe without good reason?

[@lucifers.morningstar3805]

[Insert 3 random Bible verses] [Insert 3 random Bible verses that contradict the first three] Christian apologist "you're taking the Bible out of context!!!/ you need to interpret those versus differently!!!"

[@lucifers.morningstar3805]

@T J i take the bible as it is, a collection of stories that are fictional. When I do find contradictions within the bible I tend to be willing to remember them so that I can point them out to people who say that there are no contradictions in the bible. You cannot explain there being no contradictions in the Bible when it clearly states one thing and in another part of the bible clearly states the exact opposite of what it previously stated.

[@lucifers.morningstar3805]

@T J no that i where you are wrong. Genesis chapter 1 states that animals came before man, however Genesis chapter 2 states that Adam came before the animals; that is a contradiction, you can't say it is not unless you're lying.

[@lucifers.morningstar3805]

@T J once again you are wrong, I don't see myself as "the sole interpreter of the bible and everybody else is wrong." Bible apologist exist because there are contradictions in the bible. If Genesis 2 is the sequel to Genesis 1 then Genesis 2 is also a poem and not even literal. You refuse to read the bible for how it is written and acknowledge that there are contradictions. The bible also says that it is not up for interpretation. 2 Peter 1:20

[@lucifers.morningstar3805]

@T J again you are wrong, I knew that the bible is more than 60 books that were written by hundreds if not thousands of unknown authors, with the majority of them not even put into the conical collection. Instead of trying to argue with me how about you actually do research on the history of the bible.

[@lucifers.morningstar3805]

@T J again you are wrong. You refuse to accept that you are wrong. If you are going to quote me at least get what I said right don't cut out what was said to make it seem as if I'm repeating what you said. The bible is as factual as The Avengers, the Lord of the Rings, or Justice League.

[@FR_1677]

From one menno kid to another... You are a surgeon of reason. Thanks

[@Cori761]

@Paulogia bless you! I'm a Christian, but I really enjoyed this video, and I appreciated your humble and honest statement at the end. You made several good points throughout the video that I strongly agree with. As a 'reasonable' believer, I just want to say that one of the things that irritates me about some Christian apologists (not necessarily "IP" because I'm not that familiar with him) is that they always try to give an answer to every atheistic question, when sometimes the most honest answer is simply, "I don't know," and I think that applies here. If God exists (and I believe he does) then I'm not going to pretend to understand him, because he's not a creature capable of understanding in my current state. I don't know why he hides himself, but he clearly does. However, because of my lack of understanding, I also cannot conclude that he is unloving. So my answer stands - Why is God hidden? I don't know. 🙂

[@stephentaylor6726]

The problem with that is that there can't possibly be a reason if God is as described in the Bible. There can't be a reason for a compassionate and loving being with infinite power to set up a system in which some of the beings he loves will be tortured for all eternity. Not until they learn their lesson but forever. A parent punishes their child to teach them, it gives the child an experience from which they can take a lesson and then apply that lesson to their lives moving forward. A parent that beats their child mercilessly and locks them in the basement for the rest of their lives for stealing a cookie isn't giving that child an opportunity to apply the lesson of the punishment to their lives moving forward. That's exactly what God is doing if he did exist. He's punishing countless souls without ever giving them an opportunity to take that lesson and do anything with it. The God described in the Bible isn't a loving parent who wants the best for us...hes a serial killer who enjoys seeing his children tortured without reason. Tl;Dr: There can never be any justification for assigning infinite punishment for a finite crime. No matter how you slice it gods punishment in infinitely worse than the crimes he's punishing.

[@Cori761]

@@stephentaylor6726 You have a problem with a god that would punish someone infinitely without ever giving them the opportunity to apply the lesson they learned, correct?

[@stephentaylor6726]

@@Cori761 absolutely I do. Who wouldn't??? Would you have a problem with someone who tortured their child for the rest of their life because the kid told a lie once??? It's not a proportional response. (edit, ignore what I posted before, I thought I was replying to a different thread)

[@Cori761]

@@stephentaylor6726 Ok, so who says you cannot punish someone endlessly without giving them an opportunity to learn from it?

[@stephentaylor6726]

@@Cori761 Explain how then. How can I put the lesson of my 'failure' to believe if I have to spend the rest of eternity being tortured endlessly??? It makes no sense. If the God of the Bible does exist the only humans he made in his image are the ones who suffer from psychopathy. He's super clear in the Bible that there are no second chances. If you don't believe you don't get paddled and sent back to live another life with the knowledge you gathered during and directly after the previous one. You spend the rest of forever being tortured. Where in that do you have the opportunity to learn from that mistake and do better???

[@stevegee9087]

A year late seeing this, but this is an Outstanding video! Fantastic work! Thankyou!

[@ismailchennani4466]

@James Henry Smith what

[@cosmicvoid6202]

Wonderful video, especially your wrap-up because it is a perfect example of my life at this point. I was a devout Christian for a long time but now I see no compelling evidence of God's existence. And with the free will thing, God interfered directly with free will at least once that I can recall. He actually forced Pharaoh to refuse to let the Israelites go multiple times which caused suffering and death on all of the Egyptians just so he could prove his existence to the Israelites. So that shows that if we do have free will, then it's only sometimes or only some people have free will and God directly intervenes in earthly matters.

[@PDG1956]

Your journey out of faith echoes some of my own process. In a similar way, my change in understanding about personal experience and how psychological states can influence how we react to what we learn made me re-evaluate my so-called spiritual experiences as being quite normal human reactions rather than a god driven reality - such as guilt about 'sin', ecstatic feelings when expressing joy, believing in answered prayer, etc.

[@servantrider7044]

Choose to believe in the sea chickens CHOOOOOSE!

[@quantumrobin4627]

As usual, fantastic video Paul. It’s so much more meaningful living a life with no major assumptions like the theists must do

[@archapmangcmg]

LOL. First ad is for "FREE BOOK Introduction to the Catholic Faith." I'm happy to take their money and redirect it to Paul.

[@sandakureva]

I ended up with an advert for pureflix.

[@archapmangcmg]

@@sandakureva Ok, you "win", that's even worse so I'm glad you got their money. :)

[@astrol4b]

A Catholic would be on Paul side on this one though

[@Emiliapocalypse]

There’s been a petition to have John removed from the church! Purefucked... I mean pureflix

[@BrendaCreates]

I never see ads.

[@moshimeshowu747]

Oh. My. Gosh. This video has explained my feelings in a way that I don't think I've been able to before. Thank you for mentioning your personal experience at the end of the video, as it spoke to and resonated with me personally. I have lost multiple relationships that I have wanted to keep, because of my reasonable unbeliever-ship. Hearing your account has genuinely touched me and showed me that I'm not alone in my feelings. Thank you :)

[@pirsquar58]

My road to atheism ironically begins, after years of fervently praying and seeking answers, with an act of kindness on my part. I found a lost USB stick with vacation photos on it. Eventually I found the owner and returned them. He was the Sunday School teacher at the church down the street. At this point, I honestly was fully convinced that this was god/Jesus reaching out to me. I went to church, I listened to the sermons, I sang the hymns. A month later I was certain: I did not believe in God.

[@BabyShenanigans]

That ending made me super emotional for some reason.

[@DutchJoan]

You can't get it more personal and honest than that.

[@Cori761]

Aww, why do you think that is?

[@BabyShenanigans]

@@Cori761 Hmmm, probably because I had a similar experience. I wanted so badly to believe, but the more I studied the more I doubted, and the more holes appeared in the religion. And you do lose a lot when that happens.

[@Cori761]

@@BabyShenanigans I understand. May I ask - was there any specific area in which you studied that caused you to lose faith?

[@BabyShenanigans]

@@Cori761 Pretty much I just started at Genesis and started reading and taking notes, and it didn't take me long to realize there were a LOT of problems. I think I got as far as Numbers? And then I gave up. Somewhere I still have my high school bible that has gazillions of notes in it, but I haven't used it in close to 20 years, so it could be anywhere.

[@bengreen171]

"muh free will" had got to be the weakest counter to any criticism of God's crappy model of creation.

[@PitterPatter20]

Are you saying that you don't want the free will to choose to be burned in Hell for all of eternity? Pfft. How unreasonable of you.

[@bengreen171]

@@PitterPatter20 .... I know - I just can't help it

[@jymbo1969]

Is there any evidence for free will? I mean sure, I am compelled to believe I have free will, but is there any actual evidence it exists?

[@bengreen171]

@@jymbo1969 none at all. In fact there is evidence that it doesn't exist, as Paul made clear in the video.

[@pauligrossinoz]

@Trolltician - how do you spell _"Stupid Troll"?_

[@ALovelyBunchOfDragonballz]

[Insert random bible verse]

[@ArchitectGang]

[Inserted]

[@AynRKey]

[Insert contradictory bible verse]

[@Paulogia]

I knew it!

[@ArchitectGang]

Blasphemy!

[@phileas007]

@@ArchitectGang Y'all need more of that Pistis!

[@qcsorter4626]

Thanks

[@Paulogia]

Welcome. Thank you for the support!

[@mikemorris2867]

A bit late to this and only repeating what others have said, a good presentation and your points were well made. Thank you.

[@scottneufeld5131]

Great video Paul. I loved the sea chickens, and my faith is in them. But my favorite part was when you said "Juror" at 9:03. Fantastic. Keep them coming.

[@Paulogia]

Thanks, my friend.

[@brianharris7243]

"There He is - behind the sofa!"

[@carolinelabbott2451]

Wait a sec, I thought he was behind the window curtain.

[@zemoxian]

I’m confused. Do you mean like on the sofa, under the cushions, or he is the sofa?

[@brianharris7243]

@@zemoxian Heretic!

[@ryantoth676]

If god is all powerful and all knowing it knows exactly how to make everyone reasonably believe and has the power to do so. The fact it doesn't, is quite damning

[@erickent3557]

Blown away by your mental discipline and respect. Your hard work shows... incredible.

[@valid_sound_and_furious8413]

The proportions in your graphic were very generous. =) You once again show yourself to be a kind and magnanimous participant in this conversation.

[@Paulogia]

For a second I thought you meant cartoon Paul.

[@valid_sound_and_furious8413]

@@Paulogia His, too! /Eyebrow waggle

[@TurkPowers]

I use to defend the gospel in much of the same manner. SMH, there is an old saying, "Once you see something for what it is, there is no unseeing it." Once I saw it, I could no longer defend it or believe it. Good show Paul.

[@Paulogia]

thanks, Turk

[@johnfaber100]

This argument strikes me as really odd. God wants to prevent people from going to hell. But, it also doesn't want to reveal itself to them, because then they wouldn't love it out of their free will. So, in other words, god would rather millions of people burn in hell than have its feelings hurt.

[@joecoolioness6399]

Yup, god has a fragile ego, who knew?

[@bdf2718]

Yep. That's narcissists for you.

[@heteroclitus]

He's like an abuser who says to his victim: "you made me do it!"

[@bdf2718]

@dana stef Prophet of Zod's animated videos are also good. Especially the ones about the trinity. Casting Aron Ra as the voice of Kent Hovind and Robert Tilton as the voice of the Holy Spook was sheer genius.

[@bdf2718]

@dana stef kzbin.info/www/bejne/qp7HoWafatmXi80

[@MoldredTMalcontent]

If there was an omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, immutable, transcendental, idempotent and omnivoyant (omnivorus, oviparous?) God He would state clearly what he desired from all his creations in such a way that there would be no ambiguity because he would know what they would be able to understand completely throughout time. But if that god was man-made it would be biased toward the people creating it. It would only be applicable in their locale at the time they wrote it and only contain knowledge or assumptions they had access to. Which do you think it is?

[@tomtheplatypus5892]

Thank you, Paul! Keep up the amazing work! 🙂

[@paulpinos1676]

Wish I could like this more than once. Our stories have a lot of commonalities. Keep up the great work!

[@moodyrick8503]

The bible states over & over that God wants a relationship with us. (ad nausea) After almost two decades of praying, pleading and begging all I got was deafening silence. Basic & common facts like this is one of the main reasons the MAJORITY of humanity is not Christian and has never been.

[@kahlilbt]

If God wants a relationship with me, he'll know my phone number

[@moodyrick8503]

@@kahlilbt Agreed. If what the bible says is "true", then it should be that simple.

[@CharlesHuckelbery]

Good video. Thanks for sharing it with us and keep up your great work. Your efforts are appreciated.

[@CharlesHuckelbery]

@James Henry Smith how?

[@John.0z]

5:18, I would disagree about that "God wants Cognitively Robust Theism". Even in modern society the majority of Xtians find any dissension at least unpleasant - and I have provided them with such dissension when I was young. But if we accept that it's history shows a lot about what happens when a Xtian church holds political and legal power, then that claim is vastly less tenable.

[@JamesRichardWiley]

Who is replacing my worn out cells?

[@John.0z]

@Trolltician Your name says enough to me. Bye bye troll.

[@John.0z]

@Trolltician I am perfectly happy being called an atheist. I am happy to tell anybody that I have no religious belief at all. Are you as happy being a troll? A behaviour widely deemed antisocial and ignorant by all sensible people?

[@barrysoper9183]

Thanks Paul. Very well thought out, objective, and insightful - as usual.

[@philipmalaby8172]

This might be your best video. Well done, Paul.

[@idesel]

So this god already knows if you'd reject him or not, indeed he can send people straight to heaven or hell, no lesson to learn here, no tests and tribulations needed or else he is just playing a sick game. IP just proved determinism.

[@williambarnes5023]

4:55 *"The distinction between reasonable and unreasonable believer is for some reason inconsequential here."* Yep. That's because "reasonable believers" is the empty set.

[@bleirdo_dude]

HA!

[@greense65]

I'm willing to give God "lordship over my life" if: 1. He can provide me with convincing evidence of his existence. 2. He tells me he desires lordship over my life. (And explains to me what "lordship over my life" means.) 3. He gives me a good reason why his desire for lordship over my life should be fulfilled. (Maybe this would be obvious if I knew what lordship over my life meant, or maybe it would require further explanation.)

[@Julian0101]

I agree @Trolltician, there is no convincing evidence of its existence, so theism fails at 1.

[@Julian0101]

OHHH!!! little @Trolltician got triggered, well thanks for making my day.

[@Julian0101]

@Trolltician Yep, your words speak for yourself kiddo. Dont worry, is clear why you got triggered, even if you dont understand why.

[@Julian0101]

Poor@Trolltician , projecting your inability to deflect won't fix your lack of understanding.

[@allenquartermane6134]

Great video! After 35 years as a believer in the confines of the faith reading and excepting the bible as truth , I had to do so by non logic and common sense, and hearsay evidence without historical fact. Now however after rereading the bible outside of the box of faith alone and testing the hidden God , using tools of rational evidence and utilizing my brain instead of someone else's , I can only come to one complete answer that he she or it does not exist , and that unfortunately I have wasted 35 years of my life in guilt, fear, and shame. I now label myself as a born again human of free thinking and not one under the fear of eternal retribution for not giving my life over to a delusional fantasy any longer. I simply look at it if I were to say to a women love or else....then fat chance of a relationship or even a friendship. Ergo there is no deity unless it appears to me in person, and so far after 35 years of complete devotion that hasn't happened! I will continue being a good human being and if this God sends me to eternal punishment , then it is a sadistic, unloving liar of a god!

[@abderianagelast7868]

I haven’t seen anyone bring this passage up yet, but it’s shockingly accurate: Hezekaiah 38:212-219 “In those days before the Lord’s return, be wary of those who will claim to have once confessed God’s sovereignty but do so no longer. They will go by names foreign to your ears, like Paulogia or Viced Rhino, and will come from distant lands where the days of harvest are colder than the nights of winter, lands where trees produce honey and people ask for forgiveness before any wrongdoing has been committed. And when these men claim to no longer be convinced, do not be deceived, for the Lord knows the hearts of men and rewards those who seek Him through all ways. Let not your earthly condemnation fall upon them, as they will be asked to choose for themselves on the day of judgment. Instead, shower upon them gifts and appreciation through PayPal, as the Lord works in mysterious ways.” Not sure how I missed it when I read the Bible in the past, but I guess it has been a long time lol

[@DutchJoan]

🤣🤣

[@francissreckofabian01]

If there is a God and he is perfectly loving AND he knows how each of our futures will unfold then all are saved. A loving God does not knowingly create people he knows will go to hell. Of course, if he is a perfectly hateful God well, then, all bets are off and good luck everybody.

[@_a.z]

God is perfectly loving! . . I think Micheal needs to read the Bible!

[@sandakureva]

Or Lovecraft.

[@MrDanAng1]

It's interesting, atheists and preachers both say they want people to read the Bible. Atheist however don't try to explain why the Bible actually doesn't say what is written in it! 😀

[@TheFunGun5]

@@MrDanAng1 Well no, it doesn't. The bible is not factually or historically accurate in the slightest. So It stands to reason that when the bible says something its very likely not ture. Also, why does an all powerful all knowing god need human apologist to spread the word? Shouldn't god be smart/powerful enough to make people understand the supposed "perfect word of god"? If it's so perfect and understandable why does it need thousands of different interpretations? Its almso like... the bible is a load of shit.

[@EdwardHowton]

@Daniel H There's an old youtuber, Edward Tarte, who's probably died of old age by now, the poor guy. He went to seminary, where they specifically told him to tell his future congregants _not_ to read the bible, because some passages would be "too difficult" for them. Part of seminary lessons is how to deflect pointed questions about the BS in the bible, often with cheap dodges like "Oh don't read that bit, here re-read John 3:16 some more". Let's just say he didn't graduate seminary... So no, I don't think all that many preachers encourage people to read the bible. Preachers might encourage the reading of _selected_ passages, but never the whole thing. Gotta teach them quote-mining skills!

[@MrDanAng1]

@@EdwardHowton I agree, only encouraging specific parts of the Bible is what preachers and apologist DO, but it's not what they SAY. What they SAY is that if we follow the word in the Bible, everything would be hunky-dory. When I ask if they would stone their children to death if they are disobedient or if they think it's ok that rapists can buy their victims for something like $500 in todays value, or if someone beat a slave and just chip a tooth on them, should the slave go free or not, then there is suddenly a difference between new and old testamente, the Bible mean something else than it say, because god is love and certainly no author of confusion and... stuff. 🤨

[@mikehenry79]

IP's intellectual contortions are painful. At the end of the day, refuting the divine hiddenness argument requires one to justify the claim that an all loving, all knowing, and all powerful god will punish us with eternal hell fire for not believing in him, despite the fact that he has elected to make the purported evidence of his existence indistinguishable from his non-existence. That is, IP's video is literally an effort to explain why you should believe outlandish claims on terrible evidence under penalty of eternal torture, and that, incidentally, this is the chosen design of omniscience, omnipotence, and omnibenevolence. It’s ridiculous.

[@JamesRichardWiley]

Imagine an infinitely wise, ever present god that is TRYING to have a relationship with his own creation. I am not that stupid.

[@mikehenry79]

Trolltician I consider myself sufficiently credentialed on the topic. Divine hiddenness makes no sense, and requires an outrageous amount of mental gymnastics to explain away. They’re on full display in IP’s video. Surely at least some nonbelievers could be convinced by evidence? And surely an omniscient god would know who they are and what it would take to convince them? And an omnibenevolent god would wish to provide that evidence? And an omnipotent god could provide that evidence without obviating whatever free will we have? And yet . . . we still have divine hiddenness. This is all that’s required. Steelman IP all you like, but unless you’re willing to give up omniscience, omnibenevolence, or omnipotence, there’s no intellectually honest refutation. If you think you have one, I’m happy to hear it. Thanks.

[@mikehenry79]

Trolltician I consider the ball in your court to articulate an actual position. Good luck.

[@nothingmuch6666]

Found this channel through the Logicked collaboration. I love your style. Keep it up, man!

[@JCW7100]

Paul you have no idea how perfect this is. I was JUST looking up responses to this particular video.

[@Paulogia]

Glad I could help.

[@cunjoz]

My story is similar to Paul's. I used to be a Catholic and I have a masters degree in theology from a Catholic faculty of theology. I wanted to become a benedictine monk and I've spent 2 months in a monastery as one of the steps before being admitted to it. Now, there was one doctrinal question I ran into. Researching about it led me to be convinced of a position which didn't align with the current Church teaching. Actually, what I found is that the Church either intentionally, or unintentionally changed her position. It was a subtle change, but I noticed it. I couldn't reconcile nothing and I couldn't become unconvinced of my position no matter how much I read and how much I tried. Obviously, this implied that God let his Church to be led astray by some novel doctrine, or that he let me be led astray (by reading the old liturgical manuscripts, Church fathers and saints, mind you). But why would God do that? And If I had to choose, how would I know which Church I should trust? So, one thing led to another. From not knowing what to believe, I came to questioning why I believed anything in the first place. The last thing that held me in Christianity was my conviction of the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. Once I saw that the evidence previously considered good was in fact not good, and I saw that trying to strengthen my faith, I had to admit to myself that I was no longer convinced. The whole thing lasted for more than a year and a half. I've spent many hours in prayer, I've shed many tears. I've trembled and cried to Jesus that I didn't want to become a heretic and an apostate and end up in Hell separated from him. Yet here I am. A non believer. If faith is bestowed by grace, i.e. if it is an undeserved gift from God, i.e. if there is nothing that a man can do to merit that gift, then it is solely upon God that he has taken away that gift from me.

[@Paulogia]

Amen, Marko. Thank you for your story.

[@cunjoz]

@@Paulogia My pleasure, Paul. Thank you for responding :) As always, a great video. Keep it up.

[@X22-p4t]

Nema dobrog dokaza da je Hristos vaskrsao? Kako si došao do tog zaključka, molim te? ,,Promenilo se učenje Crkve." Pa kad si ti bio u Katoličkoj Crkvi, ne u Pravoslavnoj. ,,Bog je uzeo taj dar od mene." Druže, taj dar ti stoji na stolu i stojaće dok ne umreš. Niko ti taj dar nije uzeo.

[@cunjoz]

​@@X22-p4t Nije na meni da dokažem da nije uskrsnuo nego na tebi i na kraju na samom Bogu da dokaže da jest. Za takvo što još ne postoji dobar dokaz nego imamo samo nepotkrijepljene tvrdnje i tvrdnje o tvrdnjama. Bogu bi trebalo biti lako to dokazati, pa ako je (ako ćemo vjerovati Svetom Pismu) takvu milost ukazao Tomi i Pavlu, može i svima nama koji ne vjerujemo samo na rekla kazala. Ne bi ni ti meni vjerovao da ti kažem da mi se ukazala Bogorodica, predstavila se kao Kristorodica i rekla mi da su zapravo Crkve koje ne prihvaćaju Efeški sabor prave Crkve, a da je sve ostale zaveo đavao. Prvo treba utvrditi da je Krist ustao iz mrtvih, pa onda da je to djelo nadnaravnog uzroka (jer uznapredovala tehnologija se ne da razlučiti od nadnaravne intervencije), te da je to nadnaravno djelo imalo za cilj proslaviti Oca u Sinu, a ne to da je Jahve dopustio da mnoštvo bude zavedeno, a samo Ostatak da ostane pri pravome Savezu. Jer što ne bi? Što se tiče promjene učenja Crkve, ni ne znaš o kojem nauku govorim, a nauk koji sam spomenuo promijenio se i u Pravoslavnoj Crkvi.

[@BlockyBookworm]

@@cunjoz What was the doctrine?

[@daithiocinnsealach1982]

The starting premises of so many Christian arguments assume that God is anthropomorphic in nature. "cognitively robust theism" is a just philosophically fancy sounding terms for fideism. WLC fits this description perfeclty.

[@zemoxian]

“We are created in his image.” I’m like really? In what way? Is he really appropriate? I mean as a solitary god, why would he need to shuffle his genes? And with whom? Is god also a primate? Does he think? We think to solve problems and learn and develop. What problems would an omniscient entity need to think about if he already knows all the answers? What would he have to learn? _(The properties of certain gods create a whole lot of weird questions in my mind. )_ Or did humans create gods in our image as so many of the “false” gods were?

[@JamesRichardWiley]

WLC (Bill Craig) does not wish to live in a godless world. So he created his own which he offers to students, and the public, in books, lectures, and debates as "good news".

[@tastyloaf5487]

There's a scene from the movie _Kenny_ (2006) which I think about a lot: *Kenny:* _"Look, mate, if God appears in front of me, I promise I'll give him my full attention. But, right now, I've just got other things going on in my life."_

[@Robert44444444]

4 people so far went into hardcore denial, unable to face the devastation of the fatal cracks in their worldview this video would otherwise cause… so sad. Great work Paulogia!

[@NoSenatorson]

Thanks for the graphics of your argument. Sometimes, given the amount of abstraction, it sure helps to have a visual representation.

[@72kbobert]

So good. I was a Christian for 20-plus years, and am just now needing to make heads and tails of the claim of the Resurrection. You are videos have been very helpful. I consider myself to be a reasonable non-believer because if there exists evidence that can matter-of-factly prove the existence of God including the resurrection of Jesus then I would return to Christianity. Today I cannot do so.

[@Apollogetics]

I need more information from you. How did you become an atheist? Was it the accumulation of supposed evidence against Christianity.

[@72kbobert]

@@Apollogetics it wasn't like I had an aha moment, but it was more like thecontinual hypocrisy inside the church I attended combined with the small little differences in the gospels that finally made me say that I was no longer convinced that what I had believed for so long was truth.

[@Apollogetics]

@@72kbobert Beliefs that need to be resuscitate: God exists Jesus is God Standard of Proof being used: Beyond a reasonable doubt (A) Enough evidence that supports the actual claim being made (B) There can’t be other explanations that explain the evidence equally as well or better. (C) There can’t be unexplained conflicting evidence, unaddressed objections, or untested predictions that are designed to falsify it. Standards of Proof that will NOT be used: Consensus (scientific) Absolute certainty Persuasion (I.e. until I’m convinced) Type of evidence used: Scientific evidence Circumstantial evidence Type of evidence that will NOT be used: Direct evidence Deductive evidence Now that you know what standard of proof, I want to warn you as well since you are forcing me to use my Criterion instead of yours. If I don’t see you make objections that are consistent with this standard, I will give you a warning. The second time it happens I will probably end the discussion depending on the offense. These aren’t necessarily rules I am giving but I am just letting you know what to expect. If you are fine with everything here, I will get started as soon as you respond.

[@Apollogetics]

@@72kbobert Shall I move on with my case for my God?

[@Never-mind1960]

@@Apollogetics Dear believer kzbin.info/www/bejne/rp3ChaWsfq6WeLs

[@jobdoneperfect9176]

Alleged God: I gave you freewill to choose. Me: cool, I don't want to go to hell. Alleged God: No you cannot choose your eternal future. you can only choose the only thing you cannot choose, which is to believe I exist. Me: nice!

[@FGuilt]

The "god can't prove he exists to everyone, other wise we would have no free will (paraphrase)" thing always bothered me. After all, if that were actually a problem, it applies to everyone that he DID prove his existence to. The consequence of this argument is that everyone god did prove his existence to had no free will to choose to believe in god. Adam, the Israelites who witnessed the miracles, all the patriarchs, most of the judges, the disciples for whom Jesus "did miracles for so you would believe", everyone Jesus appeared to after being resurrected, etc. Basically, the consequence of the argument is, the story if Christianity and judeism was written by a bunch of robots. It's a lame argument.

[@JamesRichardWiley]

When god FORCED free will on his beloved children he knew exactly what we would do with it. So when will he REVOKE free will and restore our innocence? Hello, god? Excuse me but could I have a moment of your time? There is something I would like to discuss with you. Hello, hello. Is anybody there?

[@Ugly_German_Truths]

@@JamesRichardWiley Some love the dude showed there. No wonder Christians have such a effed up relationship to "love"... they suffer from Stockholm Syndrome to the celestial torturer

[@drlegendre]

This is possibly the most underrated and undersubscribed channel on YT. That aside - Congrats on breaking the 35K barrier, Paul!

[@Paulogia]

Thanks! Spread the word.

[@ericsbuds]

well said, as always.

[@joecoolioness6399]

There really are 4 things in the bible that you would think would be consistent, the creation, the resurrection, the ten commandments, and the criteria to get into heaven. Why are there more than one telling of these stories at all? Yet in all of them, there are variations in the retelling. Sound god or man made to you?

[@goldenalt3166]

Why would a reasonable person assemble a book with such contradictions? Couldn't they just pray for guidance like was done with the Koran?

[@DaGavinX]

Here's an idea for IP's next video: The Problem of Divine Nonexistence.

[@Paulogia]

ha!

[@WolfA4]

Turns out god was just socially distancing from us for our own good.

[@charger3479]

Hey Paul, love the channel, and I believe yours is the best way to convince christians that some of their beliefs are full of holes, buy burying them with kindness. As a former christian, I personally feel that your channel, and others like it (ie; former christians that want to have honest and sincere discussions about the inconsistencies in gods narrative) spoke to me in a way that some atheist channels don't. The way I argue against the god of the bible is simply this. God prioritized the free will of the devil over the safety and well being of every human being, even those who didn't even exist at the time that Adam and Eve sinned. Had god quarantined the devil from Adam and Eve, sin would not have spread from the devil to humanity. Therefore through gods inaction, humanity suffers. If god had quarantined Adam and Eve from the rest of humanity by making them sterile and then starting over from scratch with a new non-corrupted humanity, sin would not have spread from the past to the present. Therefore due to gods pride, humanity suffers. If god had sterilized the earth completely by not sparing Noah and his family allowing sin to spread across the world for the second time, then he could have started over with a completely non-corrupted humanity once again. Therefore due to gods incompetence in maintaining a quarantine, humanity suffers. Time and time again, god causes humanity suffers because god makes poor choices. At any point, if god had re-made humanity without sin, and maintained the quarantine between the devil and humanity, I am convince that there would be NO sin today. Another argument I use, is why does humanity need the capacity to choose to sin? What benefit does god give humanity in giving us the ability to spool out enough rope to hang ourselves? What benefit does god give us in not having absolute knowledge with perfect, unquestionable, reasonable, instantaneous, and unavoidable punishment for the horrible things that we do as soon as we do them? What benefit does god offer humanity when he allows murderers to escape justice the first time, so that they can commit murder a second time? Or a third? What about Rapists? Liars? Thieves? All throughout history is the record of unquestionably horrible things happening because god allows them to happen without punishment until after the perpetrator is dead. There is literally a bible verse where god states that if you spare punishment for children then their behavior tanks, therefore punish children for their bad behavior when the behave badly. However, god INSISTS on letting humanities poor behavior go unpunished until AFTER is too late for the lesson to be learned. GOD SPOILS HUMANITY BY NOT PUNISHING SIN WHEN IT HAPPENS. Why? What benefit does god give humanity by setting up a system where our poor behavior is not corrected until after we are dead and it is too late to correct it? And what benefit does god offer to the victims of our sins by allowing them to happen? The answer I'm repeatedly given is that this is because we are given free will, and that god wants us to use it in order for us to love him freely of our own accord. But as far as I'm concerned, if free will gives me the capacity to assault, rape, murder, lie, cheat, steal, hate, be unsympathetic toward others suffering, and deny forgiveness to anyone, then free will is a flawed by design. Furthermore, it is impossible for me to NOT sin. It is not within my capacity to live a life in which I do not sin. Therefore, to me, I do not have free will, because if living a life in which I CANNOT sin is the same as not having free will, then living a life in which it is impossible for me to NOT sin, then I also do not have free will. Whelp, sorry for the rant length response, and thank you for being awesome. (Fun fact, your channel is the first autocomplete in the youtube search-bar when typing the name Paul in, so congrats on being the most popular Paul on youtube... I think... At least you're a better role model than Logan Paul...)

[@Firestorm12345678910]

Kurt Langrehr:Had god quarantined the devil from Adam and Eve, sin would not have spread from the devil to humanity. It still would because the apple was "desirable" for Eve to eat from even without the snake present. So instead of the fall of grace happening quicker it would of eventually happened with the same results. The Genesis writers covered their tracks with that one. Kurt Langrehr:If god had quarantined Adam and Eve from the rest of humanity by making them sterile and then starting over from scratch with a new non-corrupted humanity, sin would not have spread from the past to the present. Therefore due to gods pride, humanity suffers. You would still need to explain death (because evolution and biology) and the "problem of evil" (also technology ie the ability to wage war) that is if non-corrupted sinless humans are to fill in the rest of Eden. Kurt Langrehr: What benefit does god give humanity by setting up a system where our poor behavior is not corrected until after we are dead and it is too late to correct it? Hmm. Well if I'd take an educated guess on this it is because souls are here to train their imagination capabilities. In the afterlife...uh..you are the dream/thoughts/information (or whatever else in an ethereal sense) and you start all over again (like a baby but with all previous earthly memories intact?) and have to re-create yourself and your surrounding environment using thoughts alone. It's sort of like how a physical cell is an all self contained package it builds/maintains itself and also functions as some sort of information processing unit at the same time. But even if this is somewhat nearer to the truth of it (assuming there is a 'transitory' life after death in a classical sense soul leaves the body and goes to the pearly gates) it still doesn't explain the training bit and the afterlife bit lasting forever.

[@charger3479]

@@Firestorm12345678910 I have to admit, I'm a little lost in the direction that you are taking your arguments. Are you arguing against Christianity, but for a form of spiritualism instead, or are you trying to play devils advocate by arguing what some might argue as holes in my logic? Not saying that you're wrong in your arguments, because in truth a lot of MY argument does depend on the idea that the devil was the snake, which either Paul or VicedRhino (I can never remember which channel addresses which arguments sometimes, especially when they do the same topics months/years apart) has argued in another recent video that there is nothing in genesis that gives definitive account that the devil was the snake. I was just making that argument due the fact that due to the evolution of christian lore over time there are numerous people that believe the devil and the snake were one and the same. I was one of those people myself until after I became and athiest, and sometimes it's STILL hard to separate my former belief that god exists from my current belief that he does not. I don't believe that he exists, but I'm still angry at him, or at least the IDEA of him, due to the harm that belief in him and other deities like him has caused humanity over our collective human history. As for the idea that god shouldn't have quarantined the devil form adam and eve, but instead quarantined adam and eve from the apple, that is a good argument. Still doesn't change the fact that god should have used ANY form of quarantine at all to prevent sin from ever existing. For that I offer the argument of "Imperfect Watch." It doesn't matter what the purpose of the apple was originally supposed to be, all that matters is what happened with it that caused us to end up suffering sin. If someone claims that they have created the perfect watch and that therefore they are the perfect watch maker, then the watch catches fire and kills dozens of people in the ensuing conflagration, it doesn't matter what the original intent of the watch maker was, they have proven that they ARE NOT a perfect watch maker due to the imperfection of their watch. Your argument against why adam and eve shouldn't have been sterile though, I feel misses the mark of the argument that I was trying to make. IF god actually does exist, my argument isn't that there should be a better reason for why death or war exists, my argument is that death and war should have NEVER existed, and that the fact that death and war DOES exist is a better argument AGAINST god than for him. God should have made adam and eve sterile and started over from scratch so that way sin wouldn't exist in us. I see no reason for a being that is supposed to "Love Justice" to punish billions of people for a crime that they weren't even alive for at the time to affect the outcome. Lastly, your idea of what the afterlife is... whelp I have no clue. I'm going to put this here now as a caveat, it is in no way my intent to insult you for what you put there, but I also don't get to control how you interpret how I say this, but the way you worded it makes you sound like you're just throwing out ideas to see what sticks? I have no better way to describe it. Like I said earlier, I'm confused as to your stance. Whelp, that was a fun conversation, hope you respond so I can have a better understanding as to your stance on your arguments.

[@feliciastaldotter5168]

"some people will never belive, therefore itd be a waste of time to convince the ones who would"

[@jaron.white21]

Tuna is chicken of the sea. I’m convinced!

[@rev68]

God is the reigning hide and seek grand champion.

[@MisterRorschach90]

8:10 Tuna

[@davidmoran4675]

I got that reference!!!

[@KingSplat1984]

This is a bit of tangent, but something I've wondered about regarding the Matthew 18:10-14 parable (at 14:46 in the video) about the shepherd who leaves the 99 sheep in the field to search for the one that wandered off - do real-life shepherds actually do that? Do shepherds really leave the the rest of their herd "on the hills," as Matthew put it, to go looking for one sheep? Or is a sheep wandering off every once in a while treated as an acceptable loss, or cost of doing business, or something like that?

[@tercerocastero]

One of my main reasons to not believe in God any longer is definitely divine hiddenness. Only one of so many at this point but it touches on a lot of other issues with the God of the Bible. This vid by InspiringPhilosophy is one of the better answers I've seen so far ... sad being that it answers very little and only reiterates to me how ridiculous the arguments for it are. (Many that I made myself when I was a Christian) But I AM looking for the best arguments to try to explain and justify it, so if anyone has seen better cases made for DH and has a quick link to share I would appreciate seeing them.