Two reasons why God exists. | Where's The Proof!?

I understand that neither of these two points I gave prove God's existence. No one can prove or disprove God's existence. However I feel that these are important points that are worth talking about! I'd love to know what you think!
______________
REFERENCED MATERIAL
The anthropic cosmological principle
(Book with the statistics of the human genome evolving that I talked about)
The video I showed that was talking about the statistics of the human genome evolving -- • Does God Exist? Willia...
iDubbbz video about the lottery -- • DO NOT CONTRIBUTE TO T...
TikTok by Therealbrianlouis "we need our world to change". -- www.tiktok.com...
________________
Thanks for watching everyone!! Sorry my art style is so inconsistent, I'll figure it out eventually! :P

[@JazmoTheKitty]

As an agnostic I've been watching your videos out of curiosity. They haven't changed my mind yet but I definitely love your enthusiasm and passion for your religion.

[@fiji.christianblue]

Awesome, thanks for the comment! I acn relate to agnostic so I understand why my videos haven't convinced you. But I really appreciate you being here! 💙

[@oy_oy_]

​@@fiji.christianblue I'm an atheist and I agree It's interesting

[@erastussimanjuntak9184]

I love how you're an animation channel AND a christian channel. Please keep making videos.

[@sw_nerd]

Agreed

[@PercydeRoloFangirl]

So 4 or 5 years ago my dad died because of Alcohol posioning and a year after that me and my mom and grandma (his mom) were cleaning up our old apartment and my mom's wedding ring that was lost for years just popped out of a box.

[@slso3642]

I appreciate your logical and biblical approach to your opinions

[@tjevarts9525]

I love William Lane Craig! Great video Blue! One way I like to think of it is in terms of time it would take to create the genome from randomly assembling nucleotides, just getting 18 "digits" of DNA in the correct order or amino acids in the correct order for a protein would take 12.2 billion years if one "mutation" occurred every minute somewhere on the earth... Scientists "agree" that the earth is only 4.5 billion years old... and most proteins are between 50 and 2000 amino acids long and a the smallest human chromosome contains 50 million nucleotides... Either the universe is way older than we think it is, or there is some other intelligence at work.

[@fiji.christianblue]

Good stuff! And it's surprisingly easy to find well thought out arguments like that. There's just no way evolution is true. People love saying that science erases the need for God but it most certainly doesn't. Thanks for the compliment! :)

[@sanmartinovallevictorjuven5187]

The problem seems that people like you who think like this don't understand evolutionary theory at all, it is obvious that our aminoacids and DNA didn't assemble instantly or in a short period of time, we weren't spawned out of existence, the first lifeform LUCA is most likely to be much simpler than a bacteria.

[@bruvance]

If the universe could exist for an infinite amount of time (cyclically: big bang, expanding, contracting, big bang, expanding... etc), it wouldn't matter how small the chance was, as it would eventually happen. I wonder how they calculated that chance anyway, I don't know how you'd even begin... So I feel until I saw how exactly they could calculate such a number accurately I have no idea how it could be true. Craig's explaination as to why the universe couldn't be infinite wasn't a real reason (it was in that same debate you clipped from), and just because infinity doesn't make sense to humans, doesn't necessarily mean its impossible. Heck, god has to exist without space and time in order to be the one who created everything, so thinking something always existed, like the universe, isn't so crazy compared to something that also had to always exist, but also has to exist without the very fabric of space and time, like god.

[@Frostedbro]

You're right but there is proof that universe DID NOT exist for infinite amount of time, there is scientific evidence that it had a cause, lets say it was bigbang, okay what caused the big bang? Everything that begins to be has a cause, God didn't came to be, he is eternal he always was always is and always will be, thats how it works mate

[@bruvance]

@@Frostedbro there is in fact no evidence it had a cause, nor that it begun at the big bang, we simply know around how long our big bang happened, we don't know and can't know if the big bang was the start of the universe nor of space and time.

[@Plague_Doctor_MD]

So do you believe in god?

[@bruvance]

@@Plague_Doctor_MD nope

[@Plague_Doctor_MD]

@@bruvance idk if I do or not

[@chiebukachibee-zoraedu]

I really enjoy this video as a fellow Christian myself. I personally believe in theistic evolution, that God created the whole evolution process billions of years ago. I guess I had that carried from Biology class in freshman year of high school, as well as me being a huge dinosaur fan as a kid (and still am to some degree). Also, I agree with the concept of object morality and God kind of helped us understand that during the evolution process. Of course there are still gray areas, I think some scenarios aren't always black and white, but I guess where we get our morality is inspired by what God placed in nature throughout the years. I wonder what you think about this, and I hope that what I said made sense at all. I tend to ramble on like this when I something is on my mind 😅

[@billycalifornia1112]

Morality is Subjective. What I think is right and wrong is different than what someone else thinks is right or wrong. Morality is in us naturally. We are a Social Species like Wolves and Elephants. We want to take care of one another and throw out or punish the troublemakers.

[@fiji.christianblue]

Sure everyone has a different idea of what specific action is good and what is bad. But no one believes nothing is good and nothing is bad. That makes it seem like to me that there is an actual good and evil and we as humans are aware of it. Why would we be aware of something like that in a naturalistic godless world?

[@billycalifornia1112]

You can observe similar behavior in other social species even down to the microscopic level. Our bodies consist of billions of individual cells and bacteria working together to keep us functioning.

[@insertname212]

​​@@fiji.christianblue We could explain our concepts of right and wrong with evolution alone. It seems that universal traits of humanity can be explained by the idea that those traits were selected for by nature. For example, thanks to my AP psychology class back in high school, I recall that humans universally, no matter the culture they're reared in, like sweet tastes. This makes sense from an evolutionary perspective since such tastes often imply edible, energy-rich food as opposed to rotting, poisonous food. By the same token, it makes sense to say that developing a sense of morality was evolutionarily advantageous for all humans, no matter the culture or society reared in. Human survival back then depended a lot on group coherence: if everyone was antisocial and didn't care about their tribe's well-being, then that tribe would die. And so, nature selected for humans who cared about others and wanted to help them survive. For that reason, it seems morality often involves acts of doing good to others: charity is moral; theft is immoral. The reason why we all agree that killing is wrong, though we may disagree whether that's always true or just sometimes true, seems simply to be that such a mentality was evolutionarily advantageous. We can look to apes as well to see this, since they also display what can be called a “code of ethics” in their behavior. They have concepts of right (e.g. helping the group survive) and wrong (e.g. hoarding food from everyone else). Because all intelligent, social animals benefit naturally from being moral, morality just seems to be a product of natural evolution

[@klavczarkalafan4191]

Morality is not objective nor subjective. It's conjunctive. It's conjunctive! Everyone ignores conjunctive reality as a category.

[@bruvance]

@@klavczarkalafan4191 objective to me literally would be conjunctive. If the observer is the only things that allows for reality to be realized, then by our experience and reason can objectively define things we create, but also objectively assess reality to an extent, and in the case of morality, an already existing evolutionary strategy of a social species that can not change significantly in a generation. We can apply morality to other things objectively, from the human perspective. A dog eating a kitten is not morally bad to the dog, but it is objectively bad when the human moral standard is applied, which thinks babies being eaten is bad.

[@bobleponge3363]

Why do you think that God is the only explanation on why we try to do good? Utilitarianism is a great explanation on why we do good and also explains why it is basically engrained into our brains.

[@planteruines5619]

utilitarianism can't justify it's own doctrine , since it falls on itself in some particular forms , and also they completely forgot the logical link to morality with the deontology, to resume , you need to make both in tension to see the true moral , which is something eternal

[@bobleponge3363]

@@planteruines5619 sorry could you please speak english, i am not smart enough to decript this reply…

[@planteruines5619]

@@bobleponge3363 basically the teachings of utilitarianism being " we must maximize the happiness" so being purely turned for the consequences has always sole exemple when the moral intuition is strongly opposed , secondly ,unlike kant's maxim (which is the other extreme) , Bentham can't explain explain a logical link with moral , but he does exist , so to conclude i say that a true moral can only be found if you hold both position, possible by the existence of a God , more specifically the triune one

[@czar6203]

I agree but utilitarianism's 👎👎. It has no other foundation but by the greatest "good" which is subjective btw. Voluntarism has a better foundation and expanded by many libertarian thinker like Rothbard, Mises, Rand, etc.

[@iguess2739]

"Utilitarianism is a great explanation on why we do good" You just made a fundamental error regarding the assumption of the premise of utility (utilitarianism). You assume there is "good" from the objective standpoint, as per your comment because you incorporate the word "we" when joining the verb "do", thus signaling that "good" is universal between all people. There is no such thing as objective (universal) good or bad in the secular sense, as utilitarianism cannot prove such. There only exists subjective good and bad, as there only exists subjective value. When applying subjective good and bad, where there exists 2 (or more) parties, who defines good and bad? No one, because each's own subjective interpretation of good and bad are equally valid. This is not a peaceful method for party interaction because so long as there are differences in what a person considers good and bad, valuable and not, there exists the potential for conflict which inevitably results in physical aggression when civil recourse is absolved. Those who advocate for utilitarianism as being the way for a life to be lived by everyone do not actually agree with its outcomes, as they usually disagree with any negative outcomes done unto themselves from an external party, since their own subjective value system contests such.

[@sirzacattack114]

Hi, I love the fact that your so passionate about your opinion and I was wondering if you wanted to hear a few of mine? I studied philosophy a for a little bit and part of the course I took part in was to cover religious philosophy. I’m not sure if you’ve looked much into it but I find to construct the most informed opinion, it’s best to look at both sides. Before I start I also want to say I don’t know enough about the first point to issue a counter argument or opinion so I’ll start with the second, morality. Personally, I believe that morality is objective, such as most people’s thoughts. The main premise is that not everyone thinks the same, so we cannot give a set list of morals that everyone will agree to. I’m sure that both you and I will have a similar opinion on morals such as be kind to one another or don’t kill or eat people or whatever, however we can observe this every day that not everyone follows these rule like you and I. People have been observed to criticise others to make themselves feel good, people kill out of anger and feel no remorse, and there are people who belong to cannibalistic religions that think eating the dead bring them closer to the souls of the departed. To put this in perspective of the idea of hitler, you and I will think that they did horrible things, however in their mind they could have thought that what they did was the morally correct action they had to take (or maybe they knew it was evil and did it because it sounded fun) but even still this would lead into the fact that they did not think the same as you and I (I hope). This again is evident in your next point “you probably knew someone who did something evil”. The person who did this evil would not have thought what they did was morally evil. Adding a new discussion point to morality, I want to address the theory of evil and what it means for the God in the bible. The theory states that God in the bible is three things, all knowing, all powerful, and all loving. So being all of these things, God would know where evil is, have to power to remove all evil, and love all people enough to do so. However a problem arises as evil still exists in our world. This means that either God is not all loving and doesn’t wish to remove evil, God is not all powerful and cannot remove the evil, or God is not all knowing and doesn’t know where all evil is or a combination of these. I know it’s a little pessimistic, however it plays into morality nicely as without a God, there is not objective truth to morality. Last I want to point out how you say that the world is bad and always has been. Personally I don’t think this is true (fully anyway). I’m an existentialist personally which basically means I believe that we are all as free as our own will and meaning comes from our own beliefs and actions rather than outside sources giving it to us. To be an existentialist I cannot say that the world is bad or good, it’s both. To say one point and ignore the other is ignorant as there may be people who do bad things by our standards but there are also people who do good by them too. And who are we to say what’s true for all Overall I just wanted to bring up some points and have a friendly discussion, so don’t feel pressured into thinking it’s your duty to combat these as hard as you can. Keep up the videos too 👍🏻

[@sirzacattack114]

Edit: saw you made a video on the problem of evil so my fault there (but still worth looking at)

[@fiji.christianblue]

First off thank you so much for the well thought out comment! I'm honored you put so much time into a response under my humble video! 1 You speak straight facts when you say not everyone agrees on what's evil. You use this to say evil doesn't exist, it's just subjective. I use it to say a lot of people ignore what is right for their own personal gain. Therefore supporting my Christian belief that we are all evil. The way I see it is that I KNOW beating and hurting a child is evil. In a world without God why would I even think that? I don't have any kids to protect. There's already too many of us if some of us died that would probably be more for me! Like with guinea pigs when there's too many kids they eat some of them. Why would I be any different than them? Only explanation I can think of is that there is a literal non-subjective evil and we as humans are aware of it. I mean if I can't trust what I know what can I trust!? One more thing. You said these people who do these terrible things by our standards believe they are in the right, and blameless. But call sus on that one! Someone can act like they're happy and believe that they're doing the right thing, but be completely lying! In fact it's common because when you do something wrong you want to justify it! Even I've pretended like I was right when I knew I wasn't. You lie to yourself so you can feel better and get what you want. Anyway we don't know what's going through their heads. We don't know what's going through their hearts. All we know is what's in ours! So that's what I go by! 2. Either God isn't all powerful. Isn't all knowing. Isn't all loving. OR We don't really understand what the truly loving thing to do is. we simply don't have enough information. 3. Existentialist!? Very interesting I've never heard of that before. I'd like to learn more about it! All I really can reply to is your last sentence there. "Who are we to say what's true for all" Honestly good point, I agree. I believe God's the one who says what's true for all, not us. And if he does exist and created us then he definitely has that authority. Thanks again for the comment. I'm enjoying this conversation!! :)

[@sirzacattack114]

@@fiji.christianblue thanks for the response! I love to hear other people’s perspectives on things and it sounds like you truly love what you believe in and I highly respect that. It requires a lot of resilience to do so! Can’t wait for the next video 👍🏻

[@oy_oy_]

7:30 Ok just got through the first point, and I think that if that number applies to evolution happening in a way we exist, why shouldn't it apply to the probability of any set of events in evolution, sets where we exist, others exist and none exist. We were just randomally selected out of the seemingly infinite options. 13:00 I can agree Hitler is bad and believe morality is subjective. We have developed morality because it was beneficial for us to help eachother so we survived and spread our genes. But since it was caused by evolution it isn't objective it's different in every mind.

[@evan7391]

But that random selection itself is not random, but intentional. Because that which limits probabilities is not itself a probability, but a certainty or intention. And also, beneficial or useful would presuppose a good. I would argue a lot of things considered moral do not benefit natural selection, but rather rational or spiritual ends.

[@kyleyeung1402]

Hello, I hope you're having a nice day. Let me quote from the video: "There's a God. Some sort of creator who has preferences who prefers kindness over cruelty, who prefers forgiveness over revenge, and he decided to, for some reason or another, install those same preferences into us." I only want to ask you 2 questions: 1) If one God with one set of morals installed said morals into every human who has ever lived, then why do humans have disagreements on morality? 2) If the absolute, objectively right set of morals is in the minds of every human being, then should we trust our own human judgement as God-given? Thank you for the time taken to make this video. I like your art style! --- From a fellow Christian.

[@KolBamekil]

1. He didt set it in us, all we have is the knowledge of good and evil, so, he let us know what is good and godly, but we are free to reject it, as we often do as it is either convenient or pleasurable. 2. We should know there is an optimal moral framework, which we know as "good". That is gods path for us. We just have our ideas of what that is, the bible is in a sense human lessons of what it means to be good and what is evil and sinful. We suck at being good, but there is good. Be honest, be kind, be forgiving, be loving, be generous, take responsibility, forgive easily, stand up for others, dont be materialistic, repent for wrong behaviour, and dont be afraid of suffering or death used to threaten you from being good. I think those are not subjective, i think tese are objectively good. So to your question, we have to live according to gods and jesus standard of good, but we are human and distort it to our own interepertstions, but we still have to live, thus trust our human judgement of what is good. But it is important to reflect if it is actually gods will, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

[@billycalifornia1112]

None of those prove the existence of a god. Those statements can be applied to pretty much any god/gods that have ever been brought up in many other religions. You still also have to prove wheather or not it’s your god in particular. And just because something is unlikely to happen doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen like winning the lottery after being struck by lightning for example.

[@fiji.christianblue]

Yes, I agree.

[@katiehelms8903]

Blue literally said ALL of that in the video?!?!

[@insertname212]

​​@@katiehelms8903 It seems then that the title of the video is misleading or clickbait. On account of it, I thought the video would give 2 reasons that demonstrate God's existence. Unfortunately, based on this comment and the replies to it, the video doesn't

[@katiehelms8903]

@@insertname212 this video demonstrates well-based proof that there is a God of some kind. Christian Blue explains why she believes HER God is the real god in another video.

[@insertname212]

​@@katiehelms8903Then the first sentence of billycalifornia's original comment must be wrong. But since blue replied to it saying that she agrees with billy, i assumed that she also agreed with that first sentence, which says of course that nothing in this video of blue's proves the existence of a god. I was a bit confused on that part

[@perfecthollywood]

If god is just another higher dimensional being, why is he worthy of worship?

[@fiji.christianblue]

Good question! I don't think he is just a higher dimensional being. I think he's much much more than that. Someone who we were built for, someone who we need. But I'll get to that in later videos! In this video I just argued "a god" not the God ya know?

[@atsrepairs]

Just as a question for you, why wouldnt you want to worship something that made you, and wants to have a relationship with you?

[@perfecthollywood]

@@atsrepairs If i'm working on the assumption that there is a god and he's actively trying to have a relationship with me, then i wouldn't want to worship it on those reasons. Because first, just because something makes you doesn't mean its worthy of worship. Abusive parents are an example of that. Secondly, just because someone wants to have a relationship with you doesn't mean they always have your best interest at heart.

[@thegreatandpowerfultrixie7]

If I can fit an infinite God inside of my three pound brain the runs chemicals, and comprehend him more than the person who sits to the left of me on a sunway~ he is not a God worthy of worship. Thankyou, this is the God I worship, and the one that touches the union synchronicities of cosmic reality.

[@wesleyrodgers886]

Can't remember the exact quote but.. If humanity died out and a new ape species arose..physics would be the same. But there'd be a different main religion.

[@fiji.christianblue]

Thank you for the comment. God is good and God is true. I'm certain of it. but I'm sure you have valid reasons for not being convinced! Will you let me know specifically what they are?

[@thegreatandpowerfultrixie7]

Ah. The seeinginthefuture fallacy. A common one!

[@bobleponge3363]

Well, religion will most likely always exist as long as the fear of death exists so i kindof agree

[@Sedent333]

hello, sorry for my bad english. first of all congratulation on being better than most christians i know when it comes to saying their opinions while respecting the others. also the videos have a lot of effort into it one can tell, so thats good. so anyways as far as i know it has been proved that what we call good and evil are actually just brain processes. a couple of examples when it comes to hurting or not hurting others wich are the examples of this video: * you dont hurt others because you know what pain is and have the mental capacity to related to another feeling that, without mysticism involved, you see someone getting punched in the face you can clearly imagine how much that hurts even if you never been there. * we dont hurt others so that we can all move forward otherwise we would die literally as a species. * if we hurt others we would be punished eventually and learn that there are consequences, like goin to jail, god crearly is not stopping people, sometimes it even insentivate them, but the stronger the law punishment and chances of getting caught commiting a crime does stop them. * sometimes they dont stop hurting others because they have some kind of brain damage, could be phisically or phycologically ( It is scientifically proven that certain parts of the brain are responsible for empathy, most killers have those parts damaged so they cant see the full picture. ) * people hurt others if their logic is: " there is no moving forward as a group, is a save yourself kind of world " * people hurt others if they are scared and wants to survive by hurting others if they have to by stealing for example, that could also be because they dont think they deserve less than other so they justified themself with that logic. * others stop hurting others when they realize that the brain is programmed to defend only yourself so it create what we call ego, once people realized it they sometimes stop being dominated by it because they see it has logical errors one of the errors beign that if you take care only of yourself and the others do the same we will kill each other. in this case you take hitler, well he has been a soldier when he was 25 years old so his head was already messed up, hitlers hate towards jews was based on a combination of ideological, racial, political and economic factors, as I mentioned above. Hitler viewed the Jews as a threat to Aryan racial purity and blamed them for many of Germany's social and economic problems. he also blames them for the defeat of germany in world war 1 and may has been moved also by the religious ideas about jews being the killer of jesus all of these ideas has been spread around europe before him so he was born in that enviroment with thoose influences so he hate them and kill them for those reasons as far as i know, of course is a crazy logic. the point is that to me and to what we can actually prove with science, is all just logic and/or brain related problems, not good and evil mysticism. and about the chances of god existing and beign the bible god all powerfull all mighty and that knows empathy and has intelligence, all of that out of nowhere and that he care about us... i would say is far less than: 1) the chances of the big bang or some other cientifical answer. 2) we just created this god out of logical fear of everything we dont undestand or dislike ( by now we still fear death and life without meaning, among so many other things ) needing something to protect us like we have been doing since we were cave man worshiping the sun. if god actually exist then is probably that he created that big bang and after that evolution came, maybe religion and scientists are both right or maybe he made that big bang and then just left.

[@intercakefederation]

Without even considering God I heavily doubt the big bang. I’ve heard the argument, but it seems like given the evidence there are better answers

[@jasonpark1556]

It doesn't just involve hurting people(even though even if you see someone getting hurt your first reaction won't be logical, it will be genuine concern from your soul) but also things like getting robbed, if you see someone robbing a woman you know you have to help no matter what because deep down we love each other even as strangers

[@Sedent333]

@@jasonpark1556 that´s your opinion, is not a fact and there is no way to prove it, but many can prove(not as just an opinion) that it CAN be only logical process, do you really think without a soul that we will look a robbery and look elsewhere and just be cool the first time we look at an event like that ? no, we will react as we always do, first we get scared because there is an agressive person that is attacking someone that is not agressive wich belong to our group of person (or could potencially belong ) therefore it could just as easily attack us instead, second we will like to protect the victim so that people that belong to our group survive, some persons cant deal with the fact that is not posible to save others in those cases and just jump in front of the gun justifiyng it with hope that everything will end well, in the animal world some animal protect his/her group if the animal think he/she can actually protect but if the treath is too big they back off, the weaker and small animals instantly know they cant protect anyone so they just run if they sense danger. in short as long as we identified with the victim or think the victim can become one of our group of being, we will try to protect, otherwise we will ignore it (in the first reactions at least)

[@insertname212]

Having read Plato's "Euthyphro" dialogue, I'm curious what the best answer would be to its main dilemma: Are good things good because God says they are good, or does God say that good things are good because they themselves are already good? It's essentially a chicken-egg question: what came first, God or morality? It's a fair question to ask if we're to say God gives us our moral values

[@jasonpark1556]

They have both existed since eternity. God wasnt created, he just was, and God is a being that is all good therefore he says what is moral

[@arielgon3173]

Much needed

[@LuckyOtter_WorldBuilding]

unlikely doesn't mean impossible, given the number of things that happen, some unlikely things are bound to happen, for instance the birth of intersex children is extremely unlikely, and yet it they exist, so if there's alot of evidence that something unlikely happened, then it probably happened, and the odds of it happening again are irrelevant

[@LuckyOtter_WorldBuilding]

it's also worth adding that the unlikelyness of human evolution is de-valued further, by the fact that any other out come that is so specific would've been equally unlikely, and yet one of them had to happen, thus demonstrating another example of how unlikely thing are POSSIBLE

[@czar6203]

say we have a box with 10^10^100,000 balls each have it's own individual color. I pick one up randomly, let's say red, what's the possibility of me picking the exact red? Almost zero. But I gotta pick a ball somehow. On morality, Rothbard and Rand did their extensive work on the philosophy of morality. You should try them out.

[@picklerick.n.666]

My conclusion is this: Jesus is King and I love hin with all my hearth althjoug im yet to get baptized im 31 btw xD. Ill be baptized as a Chatolic after a loooooootttttttttttttt of research I came to that conclusion,there is a reason whi the Chatolic church is the oldest church. God bless you all and may you found the truth if you seek 4 it.

[@ydraig95]

conclusion 5: if something can happen, then why can't it even if it's unlikely. sure it's unlikely to win the lottery, but someone always does, and if us existing is unlikely then it could of happend

[@r3wzarenespanoldx897]

cool video

[@fr33man80]

Regardless of why evolution is correct (intelligent design or not) I can't deny it exists. I have beef with the numbers for an impossible claim. Ive heard it explained like this: the odds are 1. We can say odds are 1 out of 1 if given exactly the factors because we exist if given the factors. What those factors are is for us to learn. And (and this is now my input) we do know a lot of what it takes to create some form of life. We are searching an infinite expanse of infinite time of infinite possibilities and we arent even a grain of sand size on a beach (probably. Idk how big space is). Most likely whatever is possible to exost can and/or will exist. But thats the funkiness of probability. How you word the question leaves to COMPLETELY different answers. Idk the math. But thats my input. Oh and to end on a poor note: what hitler did was evil through MY lense. Not his. Subjective morality is individualist. I cant prove morality, merely explain how mine is nicer, fairer, and honest. But i also blaspheme and in how we disagree on that moral is just an example of how subjectivity works.

[@jowi_]

the propability of anything evolving is insanely high, not just humans. the path to snails is just as complex and unlikey, humans arent special in that regard. also putting all proof of god in one book is a cyclic argument, without the bible you would never believe in the christian god, so putting all your evidence of his eternal existance in it when the bible itself is everything but eternal. basically there was no proof of god before the bible was written then, plus if all bibles were to vanish he would vanish as well, since anything in it coulndt be discovered the same way again. contrary, you dont need a math book to know math exists, if you destryoed all math books, the knowledge of math would come back the exact same way, since math IS eternal. Also even if evolution was by some god, how do you know it was Your god, and not one of the thousands of others also evolution didnt just have one chance to occur, it wasnt just one event, as in the probability on that one event happening only one time, instead it were billions of events happening over billions of times they could have occured. imagne if youd dropped a million dice hoping for a specific outcome, yes that specific outcome would have a low probability, but it would be the same probability as every other outcome also, no, morality is not objective actually, good and evil is dictated by human society, if a society deems murder of other good then it is good to them, but obviously not to the others, and if some people deem homosexuality as evil it obviously isnt evil to homosexuals themselves, plenty such examples and penty examples of morality shifting with time (especially since the bibles explicitly villifies homosexuality and promoted infanticied, but im sure you think otherwise, wheres the constant objective morality then?) alse we help the weak because we are a social species, plenty of other animals do the same and plenty other dont, it isnt evidence of a higher being, and even if, again, how would you know it is of your god the creator is us, we have these preferances, and you cant say we were given free will yet our morality is still dictated by god, we wouldnt have free will then you could do all these thought experiments with all sorts of gods or entities in mind, so none of these prove a god or even your god specifically

[@pocjmeioejcis9154]

Amazing.

[@michaelsminecraftknowledge]

0:27 🤓Salt

[@derrickjohnson4952]

Listen I don’t mean to be rude but 1 nothing you’ve given proves the judeo-Christian god’s existence, definitely not objective morality unless we say it is objective that god’s subjective morals ought be followed or objectively result in punishment. And the “proof” you have could just be used by others to justify their gods. Of course Amun-Ra exists there must be a moral law giver.

[@ProfessorPrel]

She did spesifically say she argued for the existence of A or MULTIPLE Gods, not spesifically the Abrahamic God

[@the_chaiwallah]

0:27 I laughed sm

[@fiji.christianblue]

Lol

[@intercakefederation]

For point one, assuming that the big bang happened, that means nothing turned into something. After this leap, it’s not ridiculous to say to nothing turned into something an infinite amount of times. My three choices are, something can come out of nothing, The universe always existed, or God always existed (or Gods, but to I don’t consider that convincing).

[@bobleponge3363]

The big bang has nothing to do with the creation of the universe, it only explains the constant expansion of the universe. So to say that there was anything (something or nothing) before the universe is a claim that has yet to be proven.

[@davebowman-i2o]

That is a god or that is a good?

[@bobleponge3363]

None of these arguments adress the existence of a god. They would only prove that evolution and subjective morality are wrong if this all made sense. I could make any other claim to explain this. (Spaghetti monster or whatever else). Either way, evolution being improbable doesn’t prove it is impossible. What is important is if it happened or not wich science has proven to be true. What you’re doing here is saying something is false and not explaining how it would happen any other way. You’re just making more claims that have yet to be proven by anyone.

[@jasonpark1556]

You can't have objective morality without a god because there is no higher authority telling you something is bad. Evolution as an origin isn't proven and there is no evidence life as a cell can just start in a barren rock

[@evan7391]

A spaghetti monster has parts and is material. But God is immaterial and has no parts.