How Should I Respond to Someone Who Just "Lacks a Belief in God"?

[@SusanHarris-q9w]

I was homeless, did drugs, went into prison, where I got to know God. He changed my life. Now I have a home, a husband and a lovely year old daughter (Zoe), and a stream of income that gets me $32,000 Weekly. Plus a new identity- a child of God. Hallelujah!!!

[@Victor-n6m-z9w]

Excuse me for real?, how is that possible I have struggling financially, how was that possible?

[@SusanHarris-q9w]

Mrs Mary Margaret Schimweg is lord sent!!!

[@SusanHarris-q9w]

I always appreciate God for his kindness upon my life

[@Pinky-v2m]

YES!!! That's exactly her name (Mary Margaret Schimweg) so many people have recommended highly about her😊 and am just starting with her Brisbane Australia🇭🇲

[@Mark-u4z-b2p]

Same here, with my current portfolio made from my investments with my personal financial advisor (Mary Margaret Schimweg) I totally agree with you

[@Username78537]

The correct response to someone who honestly tells you why they hold a position is not pretend it is some sort of "pivot" but to reciprocate their honesty and engage with their actual position rather that the one you have invented for them that is more convenient for you.

[@leojmullins]

I just feel so sorry for people who do not see the pure love of Christ that they are rejecting. Arguing with them does not help but loving them might...

[@tonyaprim3047]

Two questions: Do you feel that this video was advocating "arguing" with an atheist? What do you mean by "loving them"?

[@tonyaprim3047]

Oops! I actually have a third question: Do you think I am arguing with you by asking these questions? (I sincerely want clarification - not trying to badger you.)

[@johnsmit5999]

I agree that in whatever we do, love is paramount but the gospel is the power of God unto salvation to everyone who believes. If they don't know the gospel, they won't know the power of God for salvation.

[@yllatusmuna]

​@@tonyaprim3047 hehe 😂

[@mattr.1887]

Is it possible that someone can believe in the pure love of Christ, but not be convinced of the supernatural claims in the Bible?

[@mashah1085]

Go for it, Alisa. Let's see you actually debate an atheist. Not an ambush of some college kids that you can walk away from or edit the video if it gets too uncomfortable. Actually debate somebody like Sam Harris or fellow KZbinr Genetically Modified Skeptic. Let's see your "tactical game plan" in action.

[@DeconvertedMan]

I'll do it!

[@DeconvertedMan]

Atheist here, happy to talk to you. But you will not do that will you? Nah just talk about us, never to us. *ARGUMENTS ARE NOT EVIDNECE.*

[@atirblum]

"Of course there is evidens, they just don't believe in it! Multiple people have written.." -Is an evidens actually an evidens if you don't believe in it?🤔

[@sabhishek9289]

Hey, flat Earthers choose to deny and don't believe all the scientific evidence for a spherical Earth. That doesn't mean that there isn't any evidence.

[@ob2249]

whatever is written is insufficient evidence, kapeesh ?

[@JamesRichardWiley]

I was brought up a Catholic, attended Church, attended Catholic school, prayed the rosary every day with morning and evening prayers, read the Bible and dated a Catholic girl. Sadly the Hebrew god Yahweh and his son Yeshua/Jesus never appeared or spoke to me, making it difficult to have an actual relationship with them. Instead I was forced to use my own imagination to create Yahweh and his son based on reading stories in the Bible. Today I am a 76 year old that watches and listens to people on you tube tell me what they believe and why they believe it. It is my favorite activity when I am not busy repairing appliance, electrical and plumbing problems for my clients.

[@robertmueller2023]

The only thing that makes me happy is fulfilling God's will. Everything else is vain and ephemeral.

[@ob2249]

the fact y0u think y0u kn0w g0ds wiII is where the m0numentaI arr0gance resides

[@dragonhold4]

Even if there are a plethora of counterfeits this in itself doesn't mean there wasn't an original.

[@billbrock8547]

There is no empirical evidence for the supernatural. And an argument, regardless of how thoughtfully it's expressed, is not evidence. It's just an argument.

[@yllatusmuna]

Good point. Why are you talking about supernatural though? The podcast was about atheism and the origin of the universe. The supernatural is merely a part of this universe we live in. An unseen segment of the Universe. Care to elaborate?

[@CountCulture27]

Well. If everything has a cause, which is a scientific principle, there will have to be a cause of the universe that is uncaused for lack of a better word. This will go against scientific explanation and natural law. So, by definition it is supernatural. Unless you can give me a scientific theory on how something is created by and out of nothing, you're probably going to have to concede at least one miracle happened....or I guess you can go with the good ol' I don't know. But, that would have to place creationism as at least an equal if not superior theory in your mind if you are intellectually honest.

[@paulc7190]

1 Corinthians 2:14 - But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned

[@terrypaul7706]

@@yllatusmunathe origin of the uni-verse comes from the imagination! That is what the bible speaks of! It’s not a history book! It comes from I AM! Awareness of being.. assumptive! An image! A holographic nature! Mental

[@kylemacdougall8355]

Would you say YOUR argument is evidence that your opinion is correct? 😉 If you didn't believe your argument was legitimate evidence, I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be making it in the first place.

[@garyjelich4709]

The Big Bang theory disagrees with the Bible. The Big Bang theory says that the earth, sun, moon, and stars all came into being at once. The Bible says that "the heavens and the earth" were created on Day 1, but the sun, moon, and stars were created on Day 4.

[@yllatusmuna]

I love The Big Bang Theory. Great TV show. Jim Parsons and Kaley Cuoco are soo coool 😂

[@mattr.1887]

Maybe both are wrong.

[@clarkcoleman8143]

The Big Bang theory does not say that earth, sun, moon, and stars all came into being at once.

[@bigmacsauce1953]

That's so wrong 💀 the moon is MUCH MUCH younger than the Earth, and the Earth is MUCH MUCH younger than the sun

[@AZRefugeeMinistry]

Alisa, I really appreciate these short segments as reminders that help us be a brighter light for Jesus.

[@mve6182]

1:30 The significance of not-believing in one more God than you do, is that there really is not that much difference between all these other religions and Christianity. They are all based on blind faith and they all lack evidence. Why is it so easy for Christians to confirm this claim when it comes to other religions, but so hard to confirm when it concerns Christianity?

[@yllatusmuna]

Why would you think that Theism has anything to do with religions? Theism and Religion are two different things. The conversation gets very muddied when we don't discern those two. Do you have a problem with Theism, or do you have a problem with religions, or do you have a problem with a certain Religion?

[@Andreamom001]

Your statement is untrue. I don’t know anyone who believes anything blindly. Whatever one believes, there is faith involved. Thinking people look at what evidence we have and make a judgement about what seems most likely to be true. One can choose to have faith that natural processes can create something out of nothing or that one day more evidence will come to light to explain how the universe began or one can choose to have faith that the universe beginning makes more sense if something outside the universe caused it to happen…a thinking, powerful, creative, intelligent, likely eternal/outside-time-and-space Being. Either one has faith that only the physical is real or one is faith that things beyond the physical are possible. Either way, it starts with faith because neither is provable. Maybe some people do choose blindly, but I think most people have reasons for their choice.

[@mve6182]

@@Andreamom001 Atheism does not require any faith, since it just means a lack of belief in a God. Atheism does not provide an answer to the question of the origin of the universe or the possibility of the supernatural. You may believe in a God who created the universe, but this is not a logical conclusion, since this God would in turn require a beginning/creator. If you claim your God is eternal and has no beginning, this is a claim that is strictly based on faith.

[@mve6182]

@@yllatusmuna I'm not sure if I understand your question. You say theism has nothing to do with religions. But if you believe a God exists, wouldn't that imply you choose a certain religion that teaches you about this God? Maybe you could believe a God exists, without knowing anything about this God and without any religious worshipping of this God. However, then what do you believe in?

[@kylemacdougall8355]

"They are all based on blind faith and they all lack evidence." This statement itself is based on blind faith and lacks evidence.

[@donaldfincher3417]

So, Koukl's big idea is to employ false dichotomy fallacies? That tracks

[@kylemacdougall8355]

What part of his argument was fallacious, and why?

[@donaldfincher3417]

@@kylemacdougall8355 False choice fallacy. He says one can affirm theism, withhold adjudication on theism, or deny theism...as if those are the only options. They are not the only options. It's akin to CS Lewis false trichotomy of lord, lunatic, or liar. Just staying with "L" words, there is another option that is more likely than any of the three he allows for and that is "legend." Specifically, with Koukl's false trilemma, he did not give the option of I deny all the forms of theism on offer but am open to the concept of a god different than the god concepts that have been proposed thus far. This would fit a far larger number of atheists/agnostics than Koukl's trilemma. And the reason why is that Koukl conflates the existence of a god with the existence of the Christian god as if those are the same and one option rather than two. Neither is the case.

[@kylemacdougall8355]

@@donaldfincher3417 You just proved Koukl's point and proved that his trilemma is indeed legitimate. You said that you deny certain specific brands of theism but are open to the concept of theism in theory. That position falls under the category of "withholding adjudication on theism," because rejecting SOME forms of theism is not the same as rejecting theism as a whole. If you have not accepted or rejected it as a whole, then you are, by definition, withholding adjudication on it. Therefore, Koukl's argument commits no fallacy. Also, he did not conflate the existence of a god with the existence of a particular god. You're the one conflating the two, by putting words in his mouth that he never said.

[@donaldfincher3417]

Someone can be certain they don't believe in any of the current slate of gods on offer while still not being certain that no gods exist. As they say, two things can be true at the same time

[@clarkcoleman8143]

So, there could be a God who has remained unrevealed all this time, and I could be the first to find him some day? He/she/it never wanted to offer any love or guidance to anyone?

[@kylemacdougall8355]

A person who doesn't believe in a specific god but is theoretically open to the existence of one or more gods is an agnostic, not an atheist.

[@donaldfincher3417]

@@clarkcoleman8143 Exactly! I guess you've never heard of deism - which is what most of our founding fathers were (if you live in the U.S. that is). That's the entire deist position. We're the god's ant farm essentially. Just like you are so far above ants that an ant farm would only be something that entertains/amuses you rather than something you have a "relationship" with, the same is true of god to us in deism. It's the "he/she/it wound it up and made it self sustaining and simply enjoys his creation from afar approach. It actually has a lot less baggage to tote around than a theistic position.

[@donaldfincher3417]

@@kylemacdougall8355 Wrong! I don't believe in alien life on other planets. However, I admit that I don't know for sure and it cannot be known (at present) if any alien life exists on other planets. The first is a belief statement which is akin the theism vs. atheism. The second is a knowledge claim which is parallel to gnostic vs agnostic.

[@kylemacdougall8355]

@@donaldfincher3417 The definition of agnostic is: "a person who holds that the answers to the basic questions of existence, such as the nature of the ultimate cause and whether or not there is a supreme being, are unknown or unknowable." That's a direct quote from the dictionary. You can't redefine agreed-upon words and concepts to mean whatever you want them to mean.

[@sgtlynxUSMC8983]

If I had to guess what car she drives I would venture to guess a 2024 Range Rover and or Audi SUV white , leather interior with a vanity plate that says “blessed “ lol 😂

[@kylemacdougall8355]

What does that have to do with whether God exists or whether the "lack of belief" argument is coherent?

[@joelblack2591]

I just throw it back at them and say “well, theism is just a lack of non-belief in God. Now what?”

[@yllatusmuna]

Interesting. Are you saying that NON-BELIEF in God is not a lack of belief in God but rather a belief in a proposition that states there is no God? Are you trying to say that belief in God is a lack of non-belief in God? Lets play out your proposition. Theism is a lack of lack of lack of Atheism or Theism is a lack of lack of Theism. And Atheism is a lack of lack of lack of Theism or Atheism is a lack of lack of Atheism. What do we do now ??

[@joelblack2591]

@@yllatusmuna I’m saying that I no longer carry the burden of proof because theism is a “lack of non-belief”. It’s my get out of jail free card.

[@kylemacdougall8355]

​@@yllatusmunaYour argument cuts both ways. That's the point the OP was making. The reason why playing out the proposition sounds silly is because the original argument made by atheists is equally silly. Throwing it back in the atheist's face demonstrates how silly the original argument was.

[@ManoverSuperman]

@@joelblack2591So you admit that you are too lazy to intensely interrogate your own philosophical positions? Good to see this is what the average theist gets kicks out of.

[@joelblack2591]

@@ManoverSuperman I don’t understand what you mean. Why would you think that? Is that something Atheists are guilty of? All I admit is that theism is a lack of non-belief and therefore I don’t carry the burden of proof. It’s the atheist’s job to prove there is no God while I sit back and tell you whether I’m convinced by your evidence.

[@terrypaul7706]

⁠the origin of the uni-verse comes from the imagination! That is what the bible speaks of! It’s not a history book! It comes from I AM! Awareness of being.. assumptive! An image! A holographic nature! Mental

[@mve6182]

5:30 Christians always seem to think it is very important to point out that the universe must have a beginning and a cause, which they see as evidence for God, but they just as easily claim God himself did not have a beginning or a cause. So which is it, everything must have a beginning or not?

[@yllatusmuna]

Universe does not equal everything. 'Universe' has a beginning, 'Everything' does not. Universe has a beginning is a well established scientific fact. 'Everything' consists of more than the Universe. The beginning only applies to the Universe, not the other things.

[@kylemacdougall8355]

No Christian has ever claimed that everything has a beginning. That's a strawman. The cosmological argument says that everything that BEGINS to exist must have a cause.

[@mve6182]

@@kylemacdougall8355 The Kalam cosmological argument claims the universe has a beginning, and since the word universe literally means "everything", it claims everything has a beginning.

[@mve6182]

@@yllatusmuna The word universe literally means everything! If you do not agree, could you tell what is not part of the universe?

[@kylemacdougall8355]

@@mve6182 "Universe" does not mean "everything," at least not in the common usage of the term. No Christian has ever claimed that it does. Even atheists don't believe that "universe" means "everything," because they were the ones who posited the existence of the multiverse in order to make their theories seem more plausible. Obviously, if the universe began to exist and therefore has a cause, then the cause must exist outside of the universe.

[@stephenbailey9969]

Theists, atheists, agnostics, and the indifferent. (It is the last category that committed atheists wish to encapsulate into their numbers.) But the indifferent don't just 'lack' belief in God. You can't live in this world without the concept of God being in the social atmosphere. The indifferent make a choice to say, "I don't want to think about that stuff one way or the other. I'm going to live my life." Their lives (thoughts, words, actions) then are in part molded by that choice, and outcomes will be so affected.

[@somerandom3247]

A/theism is a true dichotomy for those who have the capacity to ponder the question. You either believe that a god exists, or you don't. Everyone who calls themselves an agnostic is either an atheist, or a theist.

[@stephenbailey9969]

@@somerandom3247 Your statement makes a kind of sense. But I accept the probability that there are some people uncertain and unwilling to make a firm choice between theism or not. Yet, these would not be indifferent. Seekers that are open to the possible, constantly sifting the arguments, but not coming to a conclusion yet.

[@somerandom3247]

@@stephenbailey9969 I don't think you can be uncertain about whether you believe something or not. Surely you know what you do and don't believe. And those who are unwilling to tell you, are still an atheist or theist, they just don't want to tell you which one. The seekers you describe are also still going to be either an atheist or theist. I'm an atheist, I'm open to the possibility of a god existing, and keep my eye out for any new arguments/ evidence.

[@stephenbailey9969]

​@@somerandom3247 Some people call themselves agnostics, but you could be right regarding them. Peace be with you.

[@somerandom3247]

@@stephenbailey9969 Sure, lots of people call themselves agnostic. I'm an agnostic. A/gnostic is a claim to knowledge, A/theism is a claim to belief.

[@bauman7962]

Have you noticed how some atheists are sometimes the most obsessed with talking about God? That’s because God planted eternity in all of us. There’s a void, a real state in your heart, souls, and spirit that can only be taken by God. Now there’s a point where an atheist heart begins to cauterize and the soul becomes so corrupted that it’s almost impossible to convince them. In that case only a near death experience can snap them out of it, but even then some people have crossed too many lines. But if you have a relative, or friend who claims to be an atheist, and somehow they’re the ones that want to debate Gods existence don’t give up on them. They’re inquiring, because there’s a void, they just don’t know that what they need is The Holy Spirit

[@Hemocracy]

God Almighty says : *Allah - there is no deity except Him, the Ever-Living, the Sustainer of [all] existence. Neither drowsiness overtakes Him nor sleep. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. Who is it that can intercede with Him except by His permission?, He knows what is [presently] before them and what will be after them, and they encompass not a thing of His knowledge except for what He wills. His Kursi ( chair ) extends over the heavens and the earth, and their preservation tires Him not. And He is the Most High, the Most Great * (Quran)

[@LawlessNate]

The Quran also says that the sun sets in a pool of muddy water. The Quran also says that shooting stars are demons being shot out of the sky.

[@johnsmit5999]

Like the Bible, the Quran describes characteristics of God that atheists can entertain but what do you offer as evidence outside of holy books for the existence of God?

[@Hemocracy]

@@johnsmit5999 Creation can only be explained by the Creator. Your existence means that God exists. ---------------- God Almighty says : * Have not those who disbelieve seen that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity, and We separated them and made from water every living thing? Will they not then believe? And We placed on the earth firm mountains, lest it should shift with them, and We placed therein paths, so that they may be guided. And We made the heaven a protected ceiling, while they are turning away from its signs. They turn away. And it is He who created the night and the day and the sun and the moon; each in an orbit is swimming * (Quran) ----------------- God Almighty says : * Were they created out of nothing, or were they the creators? Or did they create the heavens and the earth? Nay, they have no certainty * . (Quran)

[@LawlessNate]

The Quran says that the sun sets in a pool of muddy water and that shooting stars are demons being shot out of the sky.

[@robertmueller2023]

Jesus Wins! Calvinism is a win-win irrefutable philosophy.

[@LawlessNate]

Calvinism? What does this video have to do about Calvinism? Why hone in on that?

[@cinnamonbiscuit727]

First comment great video 💪