WEBVTT

1
00:00:00.200 --> 00:00:03.960
<v Speaker 1>Hello and welcome to my podcast. This is an audio

2
00:00:04.040 --> 00:00:06.759
<v Speaker 1>version of my videos available to make listening to my

3
00:00:06.799 --> 00:00:09.400
<v Speaker 1>stuff in the background easier than YouTube makes it.

4
00:00:09.960 --> 00:00:10.599
<v Speaker 2>But since my.

5
00:00:10.640 --> 00:00:14.359
<v Speaker 1>Videos are primarily made for YouTube, there may be occasional

6
00:00:14.400 --> 00:00:18.120
<v Speaker 1>references to visual materials. If you'd like this podcast ad free,

7
00:00:18.160 --> 00:00:20.519
<v Speaker 1>you can join us on Patreon app, Patreon dot com,

8
00:00:20.559 --> 00:00:22.879
<v Speaker 1>slash Vice Rhino. Please enjoy.

9
00:00:23.839 --> 00:00:26.559
<v Speaker 2>Today's video is brought to you by surf Shark. Hello

10
00:00:26.800 --> 00:00:30.760
<v Speaker 2>and welcome to my channel Vice Rhino. Here today, I'm

11
00:00:30.800 --> 00:00:33.479
<v Speaker 2>looking at a video on the Impact Video Ministries channel

12
00:00:33.520 --> 00:00:36.000
<v Speaker 2>that claims to give proof that God exists using three

13
00:00:36.159 --> 00:00:39.079
<v Speaker 2>simple arguments. I don't like the word proof in this sense,

14
00:00:39.159 --> 00:00:41.759
<v Speaker 2>I'd mentally replace it with the word evidence, and in

15
00:00:41.840 --> 00:00:44.560
<v Speaker 2>so doing we wind up back at the btruzzi esque

16
00:00:44.679 --> 00:00:47.560
<v Speaker 2>question of whether or not arguments even count as evidence,

17
00:00:48.000 --> 00:00:50.640
<v Speaker 2>which I would suggest that they do not. You can

18
00:00:50.679 --> 00:00:53.679
<v Speaker 2>construct a logically valid argument to arrive at just about

19
00:00:53.679 --> 00:00:56.600
<v Speaker 2>any conclusion you like, But the way we would determine

20
00:00:56.600 --> 00:00:59.679
<v Speaker 2>whether or not that valid argument is also sound is

21
00:00:59.719 --> 00:01:03.039
<v Speaker 2>by finding evidence that supports the premises of the argument.

22
00:01:03.520 --> 00:01:05.920
<v Speaker 2>So an argument can point us in the direction of

23
00:01:05.959 --> 00:01:08.719
<v Speaker 2>where we should be looking for evidence. But it is

24
00:01:08.799 --> 00:01:11.719
<v Speaker 2>not evidence in and of itself. With that out of

25
00:01:11.760 --> 00:01:14.599
<v Speaker 2>the way, let's take a look. But first a word

26
00:01:14.599 --> 00:01:17.439
<v Speaker 2>from our sponsor, serf Shark. Are you worried about privacy

27
00:01:17.439 --> 00:01:19.120
<v Speaker 2>on the Internet in this day and age? If not,

28
00:01:19.519 --> 00:01:21.840
<v Speaker 2>you probably should be, and one of the most important

29
00:01:21.879 --> 00:01:24.760
<v Speaker 2>tools in the privacy toolbox is serf Shark VPN. Serf

30
00:01:24.760 --> 00:01:27.079
<v Speaker 2>SHARKVPN is a virtual private network which allows you to

31
00:01:27.079 --> 00:01:29.200
<v Speaker 2>appear to be connected to the Internet from any location

32
00:01:29.239 --> 00:01:32.079
<v Speaker 2>where serf Shark has the server. By connecting through surf Shark,

33
00:01:32.239 --> 00:01:35.319
<v Speaker 2>you can access streaming services from different geographic locations. This

34
00:01:35.439 --> 00:01:37.719
<v Speaker 2>means you may have access to additional libraries of movies

35
00:01:37.760 --> 00:01:40.040
<v Speaker 2>and TV shows not available in your home area. But

36
00:01:40.120 --> 00:01:42.079
<v Speaker 2>that's not all they do. With their clean Web two

37
00:01:42.079 --> 00:01:45.000
<v Speaker 2>point zero features, you can automatically block ads, reject unwanted

38
00:01:45.000 --> 00:01:47.359
<v Speaker 2>cookies without fumbling through the pop up first get alerts

39
00:01:47.400 --> 00:01:49.120
<v Speaker 2>when the website was a target of a data breach,

40
00:01:49.159 --> 00:01:52.200
<v Speaker 2>and block malware. Serf Shark VPN adds an extra layer

41
00:01:52.200 --> 00:01:54.799
<v Speaker 2>of encryption to your device, keeping you secure on public networks.

42
00:01:54.959 --> 00:01:58.000
<v Speaker 2>I always connect to public networks through surf Shark. Serf

43
00:01:58.040 --> 00:02:00.159
<v Speaker 2>Shark VPN is easy to use and simple to install.

44
00:02:00.200 --> 00:02:02.159
<v Speaker 2>They do not monitor, track, or store your data, and

45
00:02:02.200 --> 00:02:04.719
<v Speaker 2>it works on phones, tablets, and laptops with no extra fees.

46
00:02:04.840 --> 00:02:06.959
<v Speaker 2>Serf Shark offers a thirty day money back guarantee so

47
00:02:07.040 --> 00:02:09.520
<v Speaker 2>you can try it out completely risk free. My viewers

48
00:02:09.520 --> 00:02:11.120
<v Speaker 2>get a special promo where you can get an extra

49
00:02:11.159 --> 00:02:13.400
<v Speaker 2>four months out of your subscription for free. Go to

50
00:02:13.400 --> 00:02:15.680
<v Speaker 2>serf shark dot com slash rhino or use code Rhino

51
00:02:15.719 --> 00:02:18.680
<v Speaker 2>at checkout to get four extra months of search SHARKVPN. Again,

52
00:02:18.719 --> 00:02:20.879
<v Speaker 2>that's serfshark dot com slash RICHI and O for an

53
00:02:20.879 --> 00:02:23.560
<v Speaker 2>extra four months for free. This is a limited time offer,

54
00:02:23.599 --> 00:02:26.039
<v Speaker 2>so sign up today and remember by signing up for

55
00:02:26.080 --> 00:02:28.479
<v Speaker 2>surf Shark VPN, you are helping to support my channel,

56
00:02:28.560 --> 00:02:29.080
<v Speaker 2>so thank you.

57
00:02:35.840 --> 00:02:38.039
<v Speaker 3>The question of whether or not God exists is a

58
00:02:38.039 --> 00:02:40.879
<v Speaker 3>common question that many people ask, and the existence of

59
00:02:40.919 --> 00:02:43.520
<v Speaker 3>God is one that is heavily debated between believers in

60
00:02:43.520 --> 00:02:46.000
<v Speaker 3>a higher power and skeptics and atheists.

61
00:02:46.520 --> 00:02:49.039
<v Speaker 2>You know, I always find the acknowledgment that skeptics and

62
00:02:49.080 --> 00:02:52.879
<v Speaker 2>believers are two mutually exclusive categories of people amusing. I

63
00:02:52.960 --> 00:02:55.680
<v Speaker 2>know that in common parlance, skeptic can often just mean

64
00:02:55.759 --> 00:02:58.080
<v Speaker 2>someone who rejects a claim, regardless of how they got

65
00:02:58.120 --> 00:03:01.520
<v Speaker 2>to that rejection. But skepticism is more of a methodology

66
00:03:01.599 --> 00:03:04.759
<v Speaker 2>than a position. A skeptic is someone who withholds belief

67
00:03:04.759 --> 00:03:07.599
<v Speaker 2>in a claim until sufficient evidence is presented to support

68
00:03:07.599 --> 00:03:10.960
<v Speaker 2>that claim. So if a God existed, a skeptic would

69
00:03:10.960 --> 00:03:14.000
<v Speaker 2>not be someone who refuses to believe in God. A

70
00:03:14.039 --> 00:03:16.479
<v Speaker 2>skeptic would be someone who waited until there was sufficient

71
00:03:16.479 --> 00:03:19.360
<v Speaker 2>evidence pointing to the existence of God before they believed

72
00:03:19.360 --> 00:03:22.599
<v Speaker 2>in God. So the way I see it, lumping skeptics

73
00:03:22.639 --> 00:03:25.680
<v Speaker 2>in with atheists is a tacit admission that there isn't

74
00:03:25.759 --> 00:03:27.639
<v Speaker 2>enough evidence to justify belief in God.

75
00:03:28.280 --> 00:03:30.919
<v Speaker 3>And many times people who don't believe in God will

76
00:03:30.919 --> 00:03:33.039
<v Speaker 3>ask for hard evidence for his existence.

77
00:03:33.520 --> 00:03:36.039
<v Speaker 2>Yes, if a God exists and this God wants us

78
00:03:36.080 --> 00:03:38.400
<v Speaker 2>to believe in him, then it would be reasonable to

79
00:03:38.439 --> 00:03:41.439
<v Speaker 2>expect that he has provided or is willing to provide,

80
00:03:41.639 --> 00:03:44.520
<v Speaker 2>enough evidence to convince anyone beyond a shadow of a

81
00:03:44.560 --> 00:03:46.560
<v Speaker 2>doubt that he is in fact real.

82
00:03:47.240 --> 00:03:49.879
<v Speaker 3>And they'll challenge Christians and tell them show me proof,

83
00:03:49.919 --> 00:03:50.599
<v Speaker 3>and I'll believe.

84
00:03:51.080 --> 00:03:51.479
<v Speaker 4>I know that.

85
00:03:51.599 --> 00:03:55.000
<v Speaker 2>Earlier I said I'd mentally replace the word proof with evidence.

86
00:03:55.439 --> 00:03:59.439
<v Speaker 2>But honestly, if a God actually existed, I feel like

87
00:03:59.520 --> 00:04:01.639
<v Speaker 2>expecting the proof of his existence on the same level

88
00:04:01.639 --> 00:04:05.240
<v Speaker 2>as mathematical proofs is not unreasonable. He is supposed to

89
00:04:05.280 --> 00:04:08.240
<v Speaker 2>be all powerful, after all. But I shall temper my

90
00:04:08.280 --> 00:04:12.479
<v Speaker 2>expectations and only require extremely high caliber evidence that should

91
00:04:12.479 --> 00:04:14.719
<v Speaker 2>be super easy for an omnipotent God to provide, even

92
00:04:14.800 --> 00:04:16.439
<v Speaker 2>if it doesn't rise to the level of proof.

93
00:04:17.079 --> 00:04:19.800
<v Speaker 3>And to be honest, Christians can't give hard evidence that

94
00:04:19.839 --> 00:04:20.600
<v Speaker 3>God does exist.

95
00:04:21.120 --> 00:04:25.000
<v Speaker 2>Oh okay, so why do you believe in the guy?

96
00:04:25.800 --> 00:04:30.160
<v Speaker 3>However, just because believers can't show God physically, it doesn't

97
00:04:30.199 --> 00:04:32.519
<v Speaker 3>mean there aren't any good reasons to believe in God.

98
00:04:33.680 --> 00:04:36.519
<v Speaker 2>Who said anything about it being physical? Dude would be

99
00:04:36.560 --> 00:04:39.720
<v Speaker 2>capable of providing a personal spiritual experience to every person

100
00:04:39.759 --> 00:04:42.639
<v Speaker 2>on the planet at any moment, would he not. That'd

101
00:04:42.680 --> 00:04:45.439
<v Speaker 2>be some pretty great evidence, wouldn't you say? And there's

102
00:04:45.519 --> 00:04:49.240
<v Speaker 2>precedent for that. That's how he converted Paul. He showed

103
00:04:49.319 --> 00:04:50.319
<v Speaker 2>up and said Hi.

104
00:04:51.240 --> 00:04:53.480
<v Speaker 3>So in this video, I want to cover three reasons

105
00:04:53.519 --> 00:04:56.680
<v Speaker 3>why people can believe in God. However, I should mention

106
00:04:56.920 --> 00:04:59.879
<v Speaker 3>that these arguments should not be abused.

107
00:04:59.759 --> 00:05:02.079
<v Speaker 2>On like children who the church has been abusing for

108
00:05:02.240 --> 00:05:03.720
<v Speaker 2>basically as long as they've existed.

109
00:05:04.279 --> 00:05:07.000
<v Speaker 3>For example, many people can enter into a debate of

110
00:05:07.040 --> 00:05:09.959
<v Speaker 3>sorts and have the mentality to win, and will refuse

111
00:05:10.000 --> 00:05:12.240
<v Speaker 3>to listen to the other person and will only look

112
00:05:12.279 --> 00:05:14.920
<v Speaker 3>for moments to make the other person look stupid for

113
00:05:15.000 --> 00:05:16.040
<v Speaker 3>their lack of knowledge.

114
00:05:16.279 --> 00:05:18.560
<v Speaker 2>Greg Kochl comes immediately to mind when you say that

115
00:05:18.959 --> 00:05:21.680
<v Speaker 2>dude wrote a book called Tactics, which is all about

116
00:05:21.720 --> 00:05:23.680
<v Speaker 2>doing pretty much what you just said not to do.

117
00:05:23.800 --> 00:05:24.000
<v Speaker 4>Here.

118
00:05:24.759 --> 00:05:26.920
<v Speaker 3>Even now as I write, I know many people will

119
00:05:27.000 --> 00:05:30.000
<v Speaker 3>watch this video with the mentality to prove all these

120
00:05:30.079 --> 00:05:32.439
<v Speaker 3>reasons for God's existence wrong.

121
00:05:33.000 --> 00:05:38.480
<v Speaker 4>Here I am, this is me. There's nowhere else on

122
00:05:38.639 --> 00:05:43.199
<v Speaker 4>the Drabo Bee. In all seriousness, I don't actually approach

123
00:05:43.240 --> 00:05:46.120
<v Speaker 4>these videos with the mindset of I must prove them wrong,

124
00:05:46.319 --> 00:05:48.560
<v Speaker 4>with the possible exception of the creation of videos where

125
00:05:48.600 --> 00:05:51.680
<v Speaker 4>their positions are so obviously and demonsterrably wrong that I

126
00:05:51.720 --> 00:05:54.720
<v Speaker 4>can't even pretend to take them seriously. For the more general,

127
00:05:54.879 --> 00:05:57.439
<v Speaker 4>God is just a thing that exists videos. I am

128
00:05:57.519 --> 00:05:59.319
<v Speaker 4>actually open to the idea of a God of some

129
00:05:59.439 --> 00:06:02.519
<v Speaker 4>kind exists, but I don't think it's likely, and I

130
00:06:02.600 --> 00:06:04.600
<v Speaker 4>have yet to see any of these videos present a

131
00:06:04.639 --> 00:06:08.319
<v Speaker 4>case that is in any way compelling. So over the years,

132
00:06:08.480 --> 00:06:10.680
<v Speaker 4>I admit that I have gotten a bit jaded. I

133
00:06:10.720 --> 00:06:12.759
<v Speaker 4>am still willing to change my mind if presented with

134
00:06:12.800 --> 00:06:15.560
<v Speaker 4>adequate evidence, but I don't expect that any God who

135
00:06:15.600 --> 00:06:17.720
<v Speaker 4>actually wants me to believe in him would make the

136
00:06:17.759 --> 00:06:21.240
<v Speaker 4>evidence for his existence so tenuous that I can't be

137
00:06:21.319 --> 00:06:23.759
<v Speaker 4>convinced after more than a decade of watching at least

138
00:06:23.759 --> 00:06:26.360
<v Speaker 4>one video a week arguing that I really do have

139
00:06:26.439 --> 00:06:29.600
<v Speaker 4>good evidence for God. This time, I swear, and I'll

140
00:06:29.600 --> 00:06:30.519
<v Speaker 4>show it in the comments.

141
00:06:31.120 --> 00:06:34.480
<v Speaker 2>HA proved you're wrong. I'm not in the comments. I

142
00:06:34.800 --> 00:06:36.480
<v Speaker 2>made a response video.

143
00:06:36.839 --> 00:06:39.839
<v Speaker 3>And that's honestly fine. But know that if you're a Christian,

144
00:06:40.240 --> 00:06:42.720
<v Speaker 3>know that these three arguments that I'm about to cover

145
00:06:43.120 --> 00:06:46.439
<v Speaker 3>are meant to promote discussion and to get people to

146
00:06:46.480 --> 00:06:48.439
<v Speaker 3>consider that God may actually exist.

147
00:06:48.759 --> 00:06:52.040
<v Speaker 2>It's really weird that these arguments, which are inevitably going

148
00:06:52.040 --> 00:06:54.040
<v Speaker 2>to be slight variations on arguments that have been around

149
00:06:54.079 --> 00:06:57.079
<v Speaker 2>for hundreds to thousands of years, seem to have gotten

150
00:06:57.120 --> 00:06:59.519
<v Speaker 2>worse at convincing people as we learn more about how

151
00:06:59.519 --> 00:07:01.759
<v Speaker 2>the world went works. As far as I can tell,

152
00:07:01.959 --> 00:07:04.839
<v Speaker 2>there has not been a truly new argument for the

153
00:07:04.879 --> 00:07:08.160
<v Speaker 2>existence of God since Aquinas, and even then he was

154
00:07:08.160 --> 00:07:11.639
<v Speaker 2>pilfering material from ancient Greek philosophy. Yeah, the arguments get

155
00:07:11.639 --> 00:07:15.279
<v Speaker 2>periodic updates. The cosmological argument is the most obvious example. Here.

156
00:07:15.439 --> 00:07:18.319
<v Speaker 2>A Quinas formulated it as the argument from causality, the

157
00:07:18.360 --> 00:07:20.720
<v Speaker 2>idea being that every effect has a cause and there

158
00:07:20.759 --> 00:07:24.439
<v Speaker 2>cannot be an infinite regress. Therefore, God is the uncaused causer.

159
00:07:24.800 --> 00:07:27.720
<v Speaker 2>Setting aside the problems this argument has, we discovered in

160
00:07:27.720 --> 00:07:30.600
<v Speaker 2>the twentieth century that our instantiation of the universe is

161
00:07:30.680 --> 00:07:34.480
<v Speaker 2>not eternal. It had a beginning, a scientifically explainable beginning,

162
00:07:34.680 --> 00:07:38.480
<v Speaker 2>so the argument had to be modified and long story short. Now,

163
00:07:38.480 --> 00:07:40.839
<v Speaker 2>the most common form of the cosmological argument goes something

164
00:07:40.879 --> 00:07:43.480
<v Speaker 2>like this. Anything that begins to exist has a cause.

165
00:07:43.680 --> 00:07:47.040
<v Speaker 2>The universe began to exist, Therefore, the universe has a cause.

166
00:07:47.360 --> 00:07:49.879
<v Speaker 2>If you're paying attention, you may have noticed a slight

167
00:07:49.920 --> 00:07:53.000
<v Speaker 2>issue here. This argument does not actually get us to

168
00:07:53.040 --> 00:07:55.199
<v Speaker 2>a God, even if it is both valid and sound.

169
00:07:55.600 --> 00:07:58.079
<v Speaker 2>It just gets us to a cause. But anyway, I

170
00:07:58.079 --> 00:07:59.360
<v Speaker 2>feel like that's probably going to be one of the

171
00:07:59.439 --> 00:08:01.480
<v Speaker 2>arguments they bring up, so let's hold off on addressing

172
00:08:01.519 --> 00:08:03.160
<v Speaker 2>it until they do bring it up.

173
00:08:04.079 --> 00:08:07.560
<v Speaker 3>Argument number one, the creation argument. This argument is also

174
00:08:07.600 --> 00:08:09.160
<v Speaker 3>known as the cosmological argument.

175
00:08:09.839 --> 00:08:11.920
<v Speaker 2>Yay, I called it.

176
00:08:15.079 --> 00:08:17.680
<v Speaker 3>And while I could go through the argument in detail

177
00:08:17.879 --> 00:08:20.720
<v Speaker 3>where I go through each premise, I think it's better

178
00:08:20.759 --> 00:08:22.360
<v Speaker 3>to explain it in a way that you can use

179
00:08:22.360 --> 00:08:23.240
<v Speaker 3>it in a conversation.

180
00:08:23.959 --> 00:08:27.120
<v Speaker 2>I mean, going through each premise only takes a few seconds.

181
00:08:27.399 --> 00:08:29.720
<v Speaker 2>I've already done it, though I didn't do the formal

182
00:08:29.759 --> 00:08:32.000
<v Speaker 2>thing of saying outright which statements were the premisses and

183
00:08:32.039 --> 00:08:35.279
<v Speaker 2>which was the conclusion. But okay, go ahead anyway.

184
00:08:36.039 --> 00:08:39.320
<v Speaker 3>So the creation argument essentially states that everything that begins

185
00:08:39.360 --> 00:08:43.639
<v Speaker 3>to exist must have a reason for its existence, a cause.

186
00:08:43.440 --> 00:08:45.720
<v Speaker 2>Not a reason. It may feel like splitting hairs to

187
00:08:45.759 --> 00:08:48.519
<v Speaker 2>make that distinction, but that is often necessary when dealing

188
00:08:48.519 --> 00:08:52.200
<v Speaker 2>with apologetics. Apologists like to hone in on imprecise language

189
00:08:52.200 --> 00:08:55.159
<v Speaker 2>in order to get a technical gotcha. There's a reason

190
00:08:55.279 --> 00:08:58.919
<v Speaker 2>for existence, but reason presupposes to mind or go. The

191
00:08:59.120 --> 00:09:01.960
<v Speaker 2>reason for the universe had to have a mind or go.

192
00:09:02.279 --> 00:09:06.240
<v Speaker 2>It was God causes. However, don't need a mind. What

193
00:09:06.399 --> 00:09:09.240
<v Speaker 2>caused my backyard to be muddy? A combination of poor soil,

194
00:09:09.320 --> 00:09:11.279
<v Speaker 2>drainage and a lot of rain this past week. No

195
00:09:11.360 --> 00:09:15.679
<v Speaker 2>mind required. Now, in common parlance, reason doesn't necessarily require

196
00:09:15.679 --> 00:09:18.120
<v Speaker 2>a mind. The reason my backyard is muddy is all

197
00:09:18.120 --> 00:09:20.679
<v Speaker 2>the rain we've had recently combined with poor soil drainage.

198
00:09:20.799 --> 00:09:22.799
<v Speaker 2>But if there's one thing I've learned about apologies over

199
00:09:22.840 --> 00:09:26.120
<v Speaker 2>the years is that they love equivocating on imprecise language.

200
00:09:26.200 --> 00:09:27.879
<v Speaker 2>So we got to be precise here.

201
00:09:28.519 --> 00:09:31.679
<v Speaker 3>So since that's the case, we as people should also

202
00:09:31.759 --> 00:09:33.240
<v Speaker 3>have a reason for our existence.

203
00:09:33.840 --> 00:09:37.399
<v Speaker 2>Oh so we're dumb in it, right of down. You

204
00:09:37.440 --> 00:09:40.440
<v Speaker 2>skipped over like seventeen different aspects of the argument to

205
00:09:40.480 --> 00:09:44.120
<v Speaker 2>get there. Okay, Well, the cause for our existence is evolution.

206
00:09:44.679 --> 00:09:46.960
<v Speaker 3>So this is the way it works. Everything that we

207
00:09:47.080 --> 00:09:49.639
<v Speaker 3>see has a cause for its existence.

208
00:09:49.679 --> 00:09:53.000
<v Speaker 2>And causes do not have to have minds or intentions.

209
00:09:53.200 --> 00:09:56.360
<v Speaker 2>What caused that earthquake, tectonic activity boom?

210
00:09:56.720 --> 00:09:59.519
<v Speaker 3>Literally, for example, we can look at a building and

211
00:09:59.559 --> 00:10:01.879
<v Speaker 3>we can see fyfely assumed that there were architects and

212
00:10:01.960 --> 00:10:04.600
<v Speaker 3>construction workers that were responsible for making it.

213
00:10:05.159 --> 00:10:07.399
<v Speaker 2>Kind of jumping the gun there, running straight to things

214
00:10:07.399 --> 00:10:09.519
<v Speaker 2>that are known to be caused by thinking beings with minds,

215
00:10:09.559 --> 00:10:12.080
<v Speaker 2>aren't you? Why would you start there and not with

216
00:10:12.120 --> 00:10:15.200
<v Speaker 2>something that is naturally occurring? Could it be because you

217
00:10:15.279 --> 00:10:17.799
<v Speaker 2>want us to presuppose a mind is the cause.

218
00:10:18.600 --> 00:10:21.240
<v Speaker 3>On top of that, paintings come from artists, dishes come

219
00:10:21.279 --> 00:10:24.399
<v Speaker 3>from chefs, and forests come from seeds, and mountains come

220
00:10:24.440 --> 00:10:26.159
<v Speaker 3>from the Earth's tectonic plates moving.

221
00:10:26.679 --> 00:10:30.000
<v Speaker 2>Okay, my bad, they did get there. Okay, yes, you

222
00:10:30.120 --> 00:10:33.320
<v Speaker 2>are correct. And did you notice that forests and mountains

223
00:10:33.440 --> 00:10:35.720
<v Speaker 2>don't need a mind to cause them.

224
00:10:35.919 --> 00:10:39.240
<v Speaker 3>So the idea is that all that we see needed

225
00:10:39.279 --> 00:10:42.759
<v Speaker 3>to have some kind of cause, and our universe isn't

226
00:10:42.759 --> 00:10:44.360
<v Speaker 3>any different, or so our.

227
00:10:44.279 --> 00:10:46.600
<v Speaker 2>Intuition would have us believe. But the origin of the

228
00:10:46.679 --> 00:10:49.679
<v Speaker 2>universe involves situations that we have never had any direct

229
00:10:49.679 --> 00:10:53.120
<v Speaker 2>experience with, so our intuitions cannot be trusted to be accurate.

230
00:10:53.279 --> 00:10:55.720
<v Speaker 2>Given that the origin of the universe happened on quantum scales,

231
00:10:55.879 --> 00:10:58.440
<v Speaker 2>it stands to reason that quantum mechanics would have been dominant,

232
00:10:58.519 --> 00:11:01.320
<v Speaker 2>and causality gets real wonky when it comes to quantum

233
00:11:01.679 --> 00:11:03.759
<v Speaker 2>So even if the universe did begin in the sense

234
00:11:03.759 --> 00:11:06.320
<v Speaker 2>that this argument requires, we don't know that it would

235
00:11:06.320 --> 00:11:08.519
<v Speaker 2>have required a cause in the same way that things

236
00:11:08.559 --> 00:11:10.399
<v Speaker 2>within the universe would require causes.

237
00:11:11.159 --> 00:11:14.440
<v Speaker 3>According to science, our universe is expanding, and if it's

238
00:11:14.519 --> 00:11:18.879
<v Speaker 3>continuously expanding, then if we were to rewind time, there

239
00:11:18.960 --> 00:11:21.480
<v Speaker 3>had to have been a point in which everything started.

240
00:11:21.960 --> 00:11:25.679
<v Speaker 2>Super sloppy language aside. Yes, it's not quite that simple,

241
00:11:25.759 --> 00:11:28.159
<v Speaker 2>but we know that our current instantiation of the universe

242
00:11:28.200 --> 00:11:30.759
<v Speaker 2>began about thirteen point eight billion years ago, and the

243
00:11:30.759 --> 00:11:33.240
<v Speaker 2>fact that the universe is expanding was an important piece

244
00:11:33.279 --> 00:11:36.039
<v Speaker 2>of that puzzle. But the problem for this argument lies

245
00:11:36.080 --> 00:11:38.600
<v Speaker 2>in the assumption that there was nothing before the Big Bang,

246
00:11:38.879 --> 00:11:40.840
<v Speaker 2>and so the universe had to be created by a

247
00:11:40.840 --> 00:11:44.480
<v Speaker 2>god of some kind. Apologists usually ignore the plethora of

248
00:11:44.600 --> 00:11:47.120
<v Speaker 2>cosmological models that don't start with the beginning in the

249
00:11:47.120 --> 00:11:49.480
<v Speaker 2>same way that they mean when they say the universe began,

250
00:11:49.759 --> 00:11:52.240
<v Speaker 2>but most people don't know enough about cosmology to point

251
00:11:52.240 --> 00:11:56.080
<v Speaker 2>this out. But even ignoring all of that, usually apologists

252
00:11:56.080 --> 00:11:58.480
<v Speaker 2>are advocating for the idea of a universe from nothing,

253
00:11:58.639 --> 00:12:02.240
<v Speaker 2>and when they say nothing, they mean it nothing no time,

254
00:12:02.399 --> 00:12:05.360
<v Speaker 2>no space, no quantum field, no laws of physics, just

255
00:12:05.399 --> 00:12:09.120
<v Speaker 2>a formless, featureless void, what is known as a philosophical nothing,

256
00:12:09.320 --> 00:12:11.639
<v Speaker 2>which seems like post hawk reasoning designed to make the

257
00:12:11.720 --> 00:12:13.879
<v Speaker 2>argument fit in with Genesis one two, where the Earth

258
00:12:13.919 --> 00:12:16.120
<v Speaker 2>is without form and void, but They also tend to

259
00:12:16.120 --> 00:12:19.000
<v Speaker 2>ignore that Genesis one two doesn't describe a nothing either.

260
00:12:19.240 --> 00:12:21.039
<v Speaker 2>Darkness was over the face of the deep, and the

261
00:12:21.039 --> 00:12:24.000
<v Speaker 2>spirit of God was hovering over the waters. Seems like

262
00:12:24.080 --> 00:12:27.000
<v Speaker 2>an actual nothing wouldn't have had water in it, But

263
00:12:27.120 --> 00:12:29.399
<v Speaker 2>what do I know? But if I grant them a

264
00:12:29.440 --> 00:12:32.440
<v Speaker 2>philosophical nothing, then we run up against another issue with

265
00:12:32.519 --> 00:12:35.399
<v Speaker 2>the argument. You see, the reason we all intuitively know

266
00:12:35.559 --> 00:12:38.159
<v Speaker 2>that you can't get something from nothing is because we

267
00:12:38.279 --> 00:12:41.159
<v Speaker 2>exist in a universe that has laws of physics. In

268
00:12:41.240 --> 00:12:44.320
<v Speaker 2>such a universe, it is true you can't get something

269
00:12:44.360 --> 00:12:48.240
<v Speaker 2>from nothing. If, however, there were actually a philosophical nothing,

270
00:12:48.600 --> 00:12:51.039
<v Speaker 2>this nothing need not play by the laws of physics,

271
00:12:51.159 --> 00:12:53.519
<v Speaker 2>because a nothing that includes the laws of physics wouldn't

272
00:12:53.559 --> 00:12:57.240
<v Speaker 2>actually be a proper philosophical nothing. So in an actual

273
00:12:57.320 --> 00:13:01.440
<v Speaker 2>philosophical nothing, there isn't actually anything stopping the universe from

274
00:13:01.480 --> 00:13:05.840
<v Speaker 2>spontaneously popping into existence. So, in a rather amusing plot twist,

275
00:13:06.000 --> 00:13:08.039
<v Speaker 2>if they are right about the origin of the universe,

276
00:13:08.279 --> 00:13:10.639
<v Speaker 2>then it has to be possible for a universe to

277
00:13:10.679 --> 00:13:13.879
<v Speaker 2>come from nothing. And if this is how the universe began, then,

278
00:13:14.000 --> 00:13:16.480
<v Speaker 2>as it happens, we don't actually know if the universe

279
00:13:16.600 --> 00:13:19.480
<v Speaker 2>absorbs the nothing, or if the nothing continues to exist

280
00:13:19.519 --> 00:13:22.600
<v Speaker 2>outside of the universe. If it continues to exist outside

281
00:13:22.639 --> 00:13:26.039
<v Speaker 2>the universe, then it need never stop generating universes, leaving

282
00:13:26.080 --> 00:13:29.080
<v Speaker 2>us with a potentially infinite multiverse. The way I see it,

283
00:13:29.159 --> 00:13:31.879
<v Speaker 2>we have two options here. If the universe came from nothing,

284
00:13:32.159 --> 00:13:34.559
<v Speaker 2>God is not needed to explain it, and if the

285
00:13:34.639 --> 00:13:36.720
<v Speaker 2>universe did not begin to exist in the sense that

286
00:13:36.759 --> 00:13:39.559
<v Speaker 2>this argument means, then God is still not needed to

287
00:13:39.600 --> 00:13:42.120
<v Speaker 2>explain it. Either way, God is superfluous.

288
00:13:42.519 --> 00:13:45.919
<v Speaker 3>So the question is how did everything begin? And the

289
00:13:46.000 --> 00:13:49.000
<v Speaker 3>answer to this question is still a mystery in science

290
00:13:49.279 --> 00:13:52.120
<v Speaker 3>because we obviously can't go back and observe how life

291
00:13:52.159 --> 00:13:52.879
<v Speaker 3>actually began.

292
00:13:53.440 --> 00:13:56.360
<v Speaker 2>Please stop jumping between arguments. The origin of life and

293
00:13:56.360 --> 00:13:59.159
<v Speaker 2>the origin of the universe are two very different questions.

294
00:13:59.519 --> 00:14:01.759
<v Speaker 2>But I mean, at least he's basically coming right out

295
00:14:01.759 --> 00:14:04.600
<v Speaker 2>and saying we don't know therefore God. Usually I have

296
00:14:04.639 --> 00:14:07.320
<v Speaker 2>to infer that from the argument itself. It's nice when

297
00:14:07.360 --> 00:14:09.120
<v Speaker 2>they put the fallacies on full display for me.

298
00:14:09.679 --> 00:14:13.919
<v Speaker 3>So the creation argument pretty much states that because things exist,

299
00:14:14.320 --> 00:14:17.320
<v Speaker 3>things like the universe and its galaxy, stars and planets,

300
00:14:17.399 --> 00:14:20.759
<v Speaker 3>and the Earth with its land seasoned people, then something

301
00:14:20.960 --> 00:14:24.120
<v Speaker 3>or someone had to be responsible for its existence.

302
00:14:24.799 --> 00:14:28.759
<v Speaker 2>Some thing. Sure, unless the philosophical nothing preciated the universe,

303
00:14:28.759 --> 00:14:31.840
<v Speaker 2>in which case no cause is needed. But someone you've

304
00:14:31.840 --> 00:14:34.519
<v Speaker 2>gone from there's a cause to the cause is a

305
00:14:34.559 --> 00:14:37.919
<v Speaker 2>person with a mind. Without explaining your reasoning here, things

306
00:14:37.960 --> 00:14:40.519
<v Speaker 2>need causes is not a statement that is sufficient to

307
00:14:40.519 --> 00:14:43.000
<v Speaker 2>get us to an in physical magical man who watches

308
00:14:43.039 --> 00:14:43.440
<v Speaker 2>you poop.

309
00:14:43.480 --> 00:14:47.159
<v Speaker 3>As a conclusion, and while people may argue and say, well,

310
00:14:47.200 --> 00:14:50.159
<v Speaker 3>maybe the universe was just always here. To that, I'd

311
00:14:50.159 --> 00:14:53.759
<v Speaker 3>say that the universe expanding is proof that our universe

312
00:14:53.840 --> 00:14:56.799
<v Speaker 3>isn't infinite because it all had to start at a

313
00:14:56.840 --> 00:14:58.240
<v Speaker 3>single point in history.

314
00:14:58.519 --> 00:15:01.039
<v Speaker 2>It's evidence that our local instances of space time is

315
00:15:01.080 --> 00:15:04.639
<v Speaker 2>not infinite. But once again, even if you are correct,

316
00:15:04.919 --> 00:15:09.559
<v Speaker 2>this does not get us to the invisible magical copprofile, because.

317
00:15:09.200 --> 00:15:11.919
<v Speaker 3>From what we know and observe from the universe, that's

318
00:15:11.960 --> 00:15:13.679
<v Speaker 3>the most logical conclusion we can come to.

319
00:15:14.120 --> 00:15:18.279
<v Speaker 2>Our observations about how things behave inside the universe cannot

320
00:15:18.320 --> 00:15:21.519
<v Speaker 2>necessarily be applied to how the universe as a whole behaves.

321
00:15:22.279 --> 00:15:24.919
<v Speaker 3>So if the universe and everything in it seems to

322
00:15:24.960 --> 00:15:28.200
<v Speaker 3>have needed a cause or reason, to exist, then God

323
00:15:28.480 --> 00:15:31.879
<v Speaker 3>or some higher power seems to be the only explanation

324
00:15:31.919 --> 00:15:32.600
<v Speaker 3>that makes sense.

325
00:15:33.240 --> 00:15:36.600
<v Speaker 2>I suppose if you ignore all the other explanations.

326
00:15:37.279 --> 00:15:39.720
<v Speaker 3>And I know some people will say, you Christians look

327
00:15:39.799 --> 00:15:42.240
<v Speaker 3>at the unknown and turn off your minds and credit

328
00:15:42.279 --> 00:15:45.080
<v Speaker 3>the unknown to God. At least scientists are out there

329
00:15:45.120 --> 00:15:47.000
<v Speaker 3>observing and trying to figure everything out.

330
00:15:47.840 --> 00:15:50.399
<v Speaker 2>It's not quite how i'd say it, but yeah, that

331
00:15:50.519 --> 00:15:53.000
<v Speaker 2>is literally what you're doing here. We don't know how

332
00:15:53.000 --> 00:15:56.120
<v Speaker 2>the universe began. Therefore God. You also ignore all of

333
00:15:56.159 --> 00:15:59.000
<v Speaker 2>the models put forth by theoretical physicists, which are potential

334
00:15:59.039 --> 00:16:01.480
<v Speaker 2>answers to that question, in order to prop God up

335
00:16:01.480 --> 00:16:02.759
<v Speaker 2>as your preferred answer.

336
00:16:03.360 --> 00:16:04.919
<v Speaker 3>You know, back when I was in college, I sat

337
00:16:04.960 --> 00:16:07.639
<v Speaker 3>in one of my friends classes and JP Morland was

338
00:16:07.639 --> 00:16:10.399
<v Speaker 3>the professor, and he taught his class something interesting, and

339
00:16:10.480 --> 00:16:13.639
<v Speaker 3>he stated that the origin of the universe is outside

340
00:16:13.720 --> 00:16:14.720
<v Speaker 3>the realm of science.

341
00:16:15.440 --> 00:16:18.200
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, okay, I'm gonna go right ahead and trust a

342
00:16:18.279 --> 00:16:21.879
<v Speaker 2>Christian philosopher and apologist about what counts of science and

343
00:16:21.960 --> 00:16:24.639
<v Speaker 2>not the hundreds two thousands of scientists who have been

344
00:16:24.639 --> 00:16:26.799
<v Speaker 2>studying the origin of the universe over the past century

345
00:16:26.840 --> 00:16:28.720
<v Speaker 2>and a half, the study of which has led to

346
00:16:28.759 --> 00:16:31.000
<v Speaker 2>breakthroughs that have real world applications.

347
00:16:31.840 --> 00:16:35.320
<v Speaker 3>Sure, and the reason why is because science is based

348
00:16:35.360 --> 00:16:39.080
<v Speaker 3>on the scientific method, or in other words, it relies

349
00:16:39.200 --> 00:16:42.919
<v Speaker 3>solely on us making observations of the world around us. So,

350
00:16:43.039 --> 00:16:45.480
<v Speaker 3>due to the fact that time, space, and matter all

351
00:16:45.519 --> 00:16:48.799
<v Speaker 3>began at a single point in time, a point in

352
00:16:48.879 --> 00:16:52.279
<v Speaker 3>time that no one can go back and observe, science

353
00:16:52.399 --> 00:16:55.519
<v Speaker 3>then cannot answer the question of how the universe began.

354
00:16:56.159 --> 00:16:58.519
<v Speaker 2>It is possible that we may never get a definitive

355
00:16:58.559 --> 00:17:00.960
<v Speaker 2>answer there, but we can use what we know about

356
00:17:00.960 --> 00:17:03.960
<v Speaker 2>how the universe operates to construct mathematical models that describe

357
00:17:04.000 --> 00:17:06.720
<v Speaker 2>potential ways that the universe could have begun, as well

358
00:17:06.759 --> 00:17:09.440
<v Speaker 2>as what came before the Big Bang. That is, using

359
00:17:09.519 --> 00:17:12.359
<v Speaker 2>observations in the present to infer things about the past.

360
00:17:12.759 --> 00:17:16.240
<v Speaker 2>Turns out, direct observation is not always necessary in order

361
00:17:16.279 --> 00:17:17.720
<v Speaker 2>for something to be scientific.

362
00:17:18.519 --> 00:17:21.799
<v Speaker 3>So mor Lens the professor then asserted that the question

363
00:17:21.880 --> 00:17:25.240
<v Speaker 3>of how the universe began should actually be answered in

364
00:17:25.279 --> 00:17:27.799
<v Speaker 3>the realm of philosophy, not science.

365
00:17:28.480 --> 00:17:32.000
<v Speaker 2>So the philosopher who specializes in making arguments for God

366
00:17:32.359 --> 00:17:35.240
<v Speaker 2>concluded that a scientific field that seems to pretty definitively

367
00:17:35.240 --> 00:17:39.240
<v Speaker 2>render God unnecessary is actually not a scientific field, but

368
00:17:39.279 --> 00:17:43.160
<v Speaker 2>a philosophical one. I'm shocked, shocked, I say.

369
00:17:43.440 --> 00:17:45.720
<v Speaker 3>Well, not that shocked, and I thought that was interesting

370
00:17:46.119 --> 00:17:48.359
<v Speaker 3>for me personally. If someone were to tell me, you're

371
00:17:48.400 --> 00:17:50.960
<v Speaker 3>just turning off your mind and crediting the unknown to God,

372
00:17:51.400 --> 00:17:54.480
<v Speaker 3>I'd respond, I'm not turning off my mind. I just

373
00:17:54.640 --> 00:17:58.000
<v Speaker 3>think that a higher power that is greater than time, space,

374
00:17:58.079 --> 00:18:01.359
<v Speaker 3>and matter can only be respet responsible for creating the

375
00:18:01.480 --> 00:18:02.839
<v Speaker 3>universe that we observe today.

376
00:18:03.160 --> 00:18:05.599
<v Speaker 2>I'd argue that it's actually worse than turning off your mind.

377
00:18:05.799 --> 00:18:08.720
<v Speaker 2>You are actually using the power of your mind to

378
00:18:08.839 --> 00:18:11.720
<v Speaker 2>rationalize a conclusion that you already held, instead of using

379
00:18:11.720 --> 00:18:13.400
<v Speaker 2>it to actually understand.

380
00:18:14.680 --> 00:18:17.240
<v Speaker 3>Do you have a better explanation on why everything exists today?

381
00:18:17.559 --> 00:18:20.839
<v Speaker 2>Okay, do you not see it? I use my mind

382
00:18:20.880 --> 00:18:23.279
<v Speaker 2>to think about how God makes sense. If you don't

383
00:18:23.319 --> 00:18:26.319
<v Speaker 2>have a better explanation ready to go, then I guess

384
00:18:26.480 --> 00:18:28.640
<v Speaker 2>God is the answer because it's the only one that

385
00:18:28.720 --> 00:18:31.519
<v Speaker 2>makes sense. No further thought required.

386
00:18:31.720 --> 00:18:33.799
<v Speaker 3>Because if you do, then I'd love to listen and

387
00:18:33.839 --> 00:18:34.680
<v Speaker 3>I'm willing to learn.

388
00:18:35.119 --> 00:18:37.720
<v Speaker 2>Well, then you could have done some light ask Jeevesing

389
00:18:37.880 --> 00:18:40.599
<v Speaker 2>before writing the script for this video, because there are

390
00:18:40.759 --> 00:18:43.480
<v Speaker 2>plenty of explanations out there that aren't hard to find.

391
00:18:43.640 --> 00:18:46.400
<v Speaker 2>The fact that you made this video without learning about

392
00:18:46.440 --> 00:18:49.599
<v Speaker 2>them serves to demonstrate that you are, in fact using

393
00:18:49.640 --> 00:18:51.519
<v Speaker 2>God to fill the gap in your knowledge.

394
00:18:52.000 --> 00:18:53.880
<v Speaker 3>So if you're watching this and you're someone who does

395
00:18:53.960 --> 00:18:56.960
<v Speaker 3>not believe in God, I'd challenge you and ask, how

396
00:18:57.000 --> 00:18:58.680
<v Speaker 3>do you think we all came to exist?

397
00:18:59.039 --> 00:19:01.519
<v Speaker 2>Gay unicorn Gary, whose Holy Merch can be purchased at

398
00:19:01.519 --> 00:19:04.359
<v Speaker 2>merch dot Vice rhino dot com, had a massive gay

399
00:19:04.480 --> 00:19:08.160
<v Speaker 2>orgy resulting in a cosmic scaled orgasm that became the universe.

400
00:19:08.440 --> 00:19:10.279
<v Speaker 2>Hence the Big Bang.

401
00:19:10.480 --> 00:19:13.680
<v Speaker 3>Argument number two, the design argument. This argument is also

402
00:19:13.720 --> 00:19:15.400
<v Speaker 3>known as the teleological argument.

403
00:19:15.759 --> 00:19:18.960
<v Speaker 2>In short, some things have the superficial appearance of design.

404
00:19:19.119 --> 00:19:21.240
<v Speaker 2>So if I ignore all the stuff that doesn't have

405
00:19:21.319 --> 00:19:24.240
<v Speaker 2>this appearance and pretend that the appearance is not superficial,

406
00:19:24.480 --> 00:19:26.839
<v Speaker 2>then it must have a designer, which must be God.

407
00:19:27.200 --> 00:19:30.440
<v Speaker 3>So this argument pretty much states that complex and intelligent

408
00:19:30.519 --> 00:19:34.240
<v Speaker 3>design must come from an intelligent mind or designer.

409
00:19:34.720 --> 00:19:37.000
<v Speaker 2>Amusingly, one of the diagrams he's got up to illustrate

410
00:19:37.039 --> 00:19:40.960
<v Speaker 2>intelligent design is the Earth's axial tilt. A spinning ball

411
00:19:41.000 --> 00:19:43.640
<v Speaker 2>is a bit off center that is way too complex

412
00:19:43.759 --> 00:19:45.440
<v Speaker 2>intelligent design is necessary.

413
00:19:45.599 --> 00:19:45.799
<v Speaker 4>Now.

414
00:19:45.839 --> 00:19:48.880
<v Speaker 2>I know he's going for the Earth was designed specifically

415
00:19:48.880 --> 00:19:51.440
<v Speaker 2>to give us seasons or whatever. But given the sheer

416
00:19:51.480 --> 00:19:54.599
<v Speaker 2>size of the universe, the existence of Earth is neither

417
00:19:54.640 --> 00:19:55.960
<v Speaker 2>surprising nor special.

418
00:19:56.400 --> 00:19:58.720
<v Speaker 3>So let's look at the complexity of people. And I

419
00:19:58.759 --> 00:20:00.839
<v Speaker 3>cover this in our is They're Really a God?

420
00:20:00.960 --> 00:20:01.279
<v Speaker 4>Video?

421
00:20:01.640 --> 00:20:04.319
<v Speaker 2>And I cover that in My Things are Long Therefore

422
00:20:04.359 --> 00:20:07.960
<v Speaker 2>God video link in that place where links go high rule,

423
00:20:08.000 --> 00:20:08.599
<v Speaker 2>I think.

424
00:20:09.039 --> 00:20:11.400
<v Speaker 3>And in it I talk about how within a single

425
00:20:11.480 --> 00:20:19.400
<v Speaker 3>person they have a cardiovascular system, an endocrine system, a digestive, respiratory, excratory, lymphatic, nervous, muscular,

426
00:20:19.400 --> 00:20:22.200
<v Speaker 3>and skeletal system. And on top of that, according to

427
00:20:22.240 --> 00:20:26.000
<v Speaker 3>the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, the DNA from

428
00:20:26.079 --> 00:20:28.759
<v Speaker 3>one of our cells is six feet long.

429
00:20:29.160 --> 00:20:29.359
<v Speaker 4>Yeah.

430
00:20:29.440 --> 00:20:31.759
<v Speaker 2>So I was briefly worried that I'd have to explain

431
00:20:31.759 --> 00:20:34.319
<v Speaker 2>why I called the video things are Long Therefore God

432
00:20:34.400 --> 00:20:37.160
<v Speaker 2>if they just skipped past this part, but they went

433
00:20:37.200 --> 00:20:40.440
<v Speaker 2>ahead and clarified that for me. Thanks anyway, they keep

434
00:20:40.480 --> 00:20:42.000
<v Speaker 2>going with this, but I'm going to skip it. You

435
00:20:42.039 --> 00:20:43.680
<v Speaker 2>can watch the other video if you want a more

436
00:20:43.680 --> 00:20:45.480
<v Speaker 2>detailed response to this specific claim.

437
00:20:45.920 --> 00:20:48.799
<v Speaker 3>So the design argument would suggest that a person is

438
00:20:48.880 --> 00:20:52.960
<v Speaker 3>too complex, and evolution could not have been the reason

439
00:20:53.000 --> 00:20:56.680
<v Speaker 3>why people exist, regardless of how many billions of years occur.

440
00:20:57.319 --> 00:21:01.319
<v Speaker 2>On the contrary, things are complex because they evolve. Evolution

441
00:21:01.480 --> 00:21:03.960
<v Speaker 2>is a lengthy process of trial and error that often

442
00:21:04.000 --> 00:21:06.279
<v Speaker 2>results in things being way more complex than they need

443
00:21:06.319 --> 00:21:08.599
<v Speaker 2>to be in order to do what they do. The

444
00:21:08.720 --> 00:21:11.319
<v Speaker 2>length of all of our uncoiled DNA is actually a

445
00:21:11.359 --> 00:21:14.400
<v Speaker 2>good example of that. There is no reason why every

446
00:21:14.440 --> 00:21:16.880
<v Speaker 2>single cell in your body, except for the red blood cells,

447
00:21:17.039 --> 00:21:20.279
<v Speaker 2>should have a copy of your entire genome. They just

448
00:21:20.319 --> 00:21:22.799
<v Speaker 2>need the genes required to do what they do, but

449
00:21:22.839 --> 00:21:26.000
<v Speaker 2>they get the whole shebang because from an evolutionary standpoint,

450
00:21:26.200 --> 00:21:28.799
<v Speaker 2>that is way easier to accomplish than cutting out only

451
00:21:28.839 --> 00:21:30.680
<v Speaker 2>the bits of the genome that will be required for

452
00:21:30.720 --> 00:21:34.079
<v Speaker 2>any particular cell. Thus, there is extra complexity in the system,

453
00:21:34.119 --> 00:21:36.640
<v Speaker 2>specifically because it was not designed.

454
00:21:37.400 --> 00:21:40.359
<v Speaker 3>For example, it would be nonsense to think that a

455
00:21:40.440 --> 00:21:44.359
<v Speaker 3>laptop in a forest got there by evolution, because even

456
00:21:44.400 --> 00:21:46.799
<v Speaker 3>if all the necessary parts of a laptop were in

457
00:21:46.839 --> 00:21:50.720
<v Speaker 3>an area, and that area was untouched and nature just

458
00:21:50.799 --> 00:21:54.319
<v Speaker 3>had its way for billions of years, a working laptop

459
00:21:54.599 --> 00:21:55.759
<v Speaker 3>would not be the result.

460
00:21:56.559 --> 00:22:00.319
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, because laptops don't reproduce, and that's kind of a

461
00:22:00.400 --> 00:22:01.440
<v Speaker 2>key aspect of evolution.

462
00:22:02.079 --> 00:22:05.079
<v Speaker 3>Yet many people who believe in evolution use this line

463
00:22:05.079 --> 00:22:06.200
<v Speaker 3>of reasoning for people.

464
00:22:06.640 --> 00:22:12.400
<v Speaker 2>So you remember how laptops don't reproduce, People do so.

465
00:22:14.160 --> 00:22:17.119
<v Speaker 3>And they'll suggest that the building blocks for people were

466
00:22:17.160 --> 00:22:21.920
<v Speaker 3>in an area and over time in organism formed and

467
00:22:22.039 --> 00:22:24.880
<v Speaker 3>from that it kept evolving until we got to people.

468
00:22:25.359 --> 00:22:28.559
<v Speaker 2>That's oversimplified, and the graphic he's using paints a ridiculous

469
00:22:28.559 --> 00:22:31.359
<v Speaker 2>picture of the building blocks for life, including things like

470
00:22:31.400 --> 00:22:35.200
<v Speaker 2>fully formed eyeballs and such. But yes, evolution likely began

471
00:22:35.279 --> 00:22:38.160
<v Speaker 2>with auto catalytic reactions of non living material, that is,

472
00:22:38.319 --> 00:22:40.640
<v Speaker 2>chemical reactions where one of the products is a catalyst

473
00:22:40.680 --> 00:22:41.839
<v Speaker 2>for the reaction itself.

474
00:22:42.279 --> 00:22:44.279
<v Speaker 3>And I do want to add that I do find

475
00:22:44.319 --> 00:22:47.359
<v Speaker 3>a lot of credibility in evolution within a species.

476
00:22:47.960 --> 00:22:51.640
<v Speaker 2>Then if you actually understand how evolution works, you would

477
00:22:51.680 --> 00:22:54.039
<v Speaker 2>also find a whole lot of credibility in the theory

478
00:22:54.079 --> 00:22:56.720
<v Speaker 2>as a whole, because there's not really a functional difference

479
00:22:56.720 --> 00:22:59.920
<v Speaker 2>between evolution within a species and evolution of a new speed.

480
00:23:00.640 --> 00:23:03.640
<v Speaker 2>It's the same mechanisms at play, the scale is just larger.

481
00:23:04.119 --> 00:23:07.799
<v Speaker 3>Like Darwin's finches for example, finches do evolve over time,

482
00:23:08.200 --> 00:23:10.799
<v Speaker 3>but they don't become anything other than birds.

483
00:23:11.200 --> 00:23:14.079
<v Speaker 2>Why would you expect them to become anything other than birds.

484
00:23:14.279 --> 00:23:17.079
<v Speaker 2>That's not what the theory of evolution predicts. But since

485
00:23:17.079 --> 00:23:19.119
<v Speaker 2>you brought up the finches, this would be a great

486
00:23:19.119 --> 00:23:21.920
<v Speaker 2>time to point out that researchers have observed in real

487
00:23:22.000 --> 00:23:24.960
<v Speaker 2>time the evolution of a new species of Galapago's finch

488
00:23:25.000 --> 00:23:27.279
<v Speaker 2>over the course of just a few decades. Not sure

489
00:23:27.319 --> 00:23:30.920
<v Speaker 2>how that helps your case that evolution stays within the species. Also,

490
00:23:31.039 --> 00:23:33.160
<v Speaker 2>the fact that flightless birds are a thing that exists

491
00:23:33.160 --> 00:23:36.279
<v Speaker 2>suggests that evolution can create things that are fundamentally different

492
00:23:36.279 --> 00:23:40.000
<v Speaker 2>from their ancestors. Penguins diverged from their flight capable ancestors

493
00:23:40.079 --> 00:23:42.319
<v Speaker 2>just after the asteroid that killed the Nannie. Even dinosaurs

494
00:23:42.400 --> 00:23:45.480
<v Speaker 2>hit the large ocean based predators were wiped out, thus

495
00:23:45.559 --> 00:23:48.960
<v Speaker 2>leaving a relatively untapped niche for anything that hunted seafood.

496
00:23:49.079 --> 00:23:50.880
<v Speaker 2>But as it turns out, having a body that is

497
00:23:50.880 --> 00:23:53.119
<v Speaker 2>good at diving for fish requires traits that make it

498
00:23:53.160 --> 00:23:56.559
<v Speaker 2>difficult to be able to fly, so in optimizing for diving,

499
00:23:56.680 --> 00:24:00.519
<v Speaker 2>penguins gave up flight. So yes, penguins are still birds,

500
00:24:00.799 --> 00:24:03.319
<v Speaker 2>but they are quite different from all the other categories

501
00:24:03.359 --> 00:24:04.000
<v Speaker 2>of bird.

502
00:24:04.279 --> 00:24:08.119
<v Speaker 3>And we do have wolves that mates with lesser violent canines,

503
00:24:08.400 --> 00:24:12.480
<v Speaker 3>and evolution can create a bunch of different types of dogs. However,

504
00:24:13.000 --> 00:24:17.640
<v Speaker 3>they stay dogs, except for the ones that turned into seals. Okay, yeah,

505
00:24:17.680 --> 00:24:20.079
<v Speaker 3>I know it was the last common ancestor of seals

506
00:24:20.079 --> 00:24:21.119
<v Speaker 3>and wolves that did that.

507
00:24:21.200 --> 00:24:25.960
<v Speaker 2>It wasn't a dog or a wolf or whatever. Why

508
00:24:25.960 --> 00:24:27.480
<v Speaker 2>can't I just be pithy for once.

509
00:24:28.200 --> 00:24:33.039
<v Speaker 3>It's evolution that turns species into other species, like fishes

510
00:24:33.039 --> 00:24:36.599
<v Speaker 3>turning into birds and birds turning into dogs that I

511
00:24:36.599 --> 00:24:37.480
<v Speaker 3>would disagree with.

512
00:24:38.200 --> 00:24:41.519
<v Speaker 2>You don't believe in flying fish then, because they are

513
00:24:41.559 --> 00:24:43.759
<v Speaker 2>a thing that exists. I have seen them with my

514
00:24:43.839 --> 00:24:46.640
<v Speaker 2>own two eyes. They're actually super cool to watch, and

515
00:24:46.640 --> 00:24:49.480
<v Speaker 2>they can fly for a surprisingly long time. Now, we

516
00:24:49.519 --> 00:24:52.759
<v Speaker 2>wouldn't actually expect evolution to turn a currently extant fish

517
00:24:52.799 --> 00:24:56.519
<v Speaker 2>into a currently extant bird, but evolution does frequently develop

518
00:24:56.559 --> 00:24:59.559
<v Speaker 2>similar traits in unique ways, because, as it turns out,

519
00:25:00.079 --> 00:25:03.720
<v Speaker 2>traits are almost universally helpful. Being able to see, for instance,

520
00:25:04.079 --> 00:25:08.000
<v Speaker 2>eyes have evolved independently at least forty times because being

521
00:25:08.000 --> 00:25:10.920
<v Speaker 2>able to see things can help you find food, find shelter,

522
00:25:11.039 --> 00:25:15.240
<v Speaker 2>and avoid predators, among many other uses. So a fish

523
00:25:15.359 --> 00:25:18.640
<v Speaker 2>might not evolve into a bird, but a flying fish

524
00:25:18.799 --> 00:25:21.079
<v Speaker 2>could plausibly evolve into a type of fish that is

525
00:25:21.119 --> 00:25:23.279
<v Speaker 2>able to sustain flight in much the same way as

526
00:25:23.279 --> 00:25:26.319
<v Speaker 2>a bird given the right evolutionary pressures. And hey, since

527
00:25:26.319 --> 00:25:28.799
<v Speaker 2>we've already spent a bunch of this video being needlessly pedantic,

528
00:25:29.079 --> 00:25:32.079
<v Speaker 2>fish did evolve into birds. The last common ancestor of

529
00:25:32.200 --> 00:25:34.240
<v Speaker 2>all terrestrial vertebrates was a.

530
00:25:34.160 --> 00:25:37.480
<v Speaker 3>Fish, and the reason why is because in our fossil record,

531
00:25:37.839 --> 00:25:41.240
<v Speaker 3>I don't recall seeing much of any transitional species that

532
00:25:41.279 --> 00:25:42.480
<v Speaker 3>were in the middle of evolving.

533
00:25:42.960 --> 00:25:46.119
<v Speaker 2>Well, then you haven't looked very hard. Aside from the

534
00:25:46.119 --> 00:25:49.839
<v Speaker 2>pedantic nitpicking about how every species is a transitional species,

535
00:25:50.119 --> 00:25:53.200
<v Speaker 2>Archaeoptriyx is a very obvious example of the transition from

536
00:25:53.240 --> 00:25:56.640
<v Speaker 2>therapod dinosaur to bird. It's got teeth clad fingers on

537
00:25:56.680 --> 00:25:59.119
<v Speaker 2>its wings and a bony tail like therapods, but it's

538
00:25:59.119 --> 00:26:01.599
<v Speaker 2>got asymmetrical light feathers and a wishbone that make it

539
00:26:01.680 --> 00:26:03.079
<v Speaker 2>rather obviously a bird.

540
00:26:03.720 --> 00:26:06.559
<v Speaker 3>So, going back to the argument of design, complex and

541
00:26:06.640 --> 00:26:10.559
<v Speaker 3>intelligent design requires a complex designer.

542
00:26:10.480 --> 00:26:14.400
<v Speaker 2>Which means that God has to be complex, and complexity

543
00:26:14.440 --> 00:26:18.480
<v Speaker 2>indicates design. So who designed God? If nobody needed to

544
00:26:18.519 --> 00:26:21.720
<v Speaker 2>design God, and God is if anything way more complex

545
00:26:21.759 --> 00:26:24.240
<v Speaker 2>than people, then why do people need a designer?

546
00:26:24.920 --> 00:26:27.559
<v Speaker 3>So when you look at the complexity of people and

547
00:26:27.680 --> 00:26:30.920
<v Speaker 3>all that makes up a single person, this kind of

548
00:26:31.000 --> 00:26:34.440
<v Speaker 3>complexity had to have come from some higher power.

549
00:26:34.599 --> 00:26:37.079
<v Speaker 2>Which by extension, had to be created by some power

550
00:26:37.119 --> 00:26:38.279
<v Speaker 2>that is even higher still.

551
00:26:39.000 --> 00:26:41.039
<v Speaker 3>So if you're someone that doesn't believe in God and

552
00:26:41.079 --> 00:26:43.839
<v Speaker 3>you think that evolution makes more sense and that people

553
00:26:43.960 --> 00:26:46.240
<v Speaker 3>did evolve, I would challenge you to think of a

554
00:26:46.319 --> 00:26:50.079
<v Speaker 3>time when life can come from non life.

555
00:26:50.279 --> 00:26:54.400
<v Speaker 2>The digestion process is quite literally life coming from non life.

556
00:26:54.559 --> 00:26:57.640
<v Speaker 2>When you eat something, it is either already dead or

557
00:26:57.680 --> 00:27:00.119
<v Speaker 2>will be shortly after being exposed to your stomach acid.

558
00:27:00.559 --> 00:27:03.559
<v Speaker 2>Your body then takes this non living material and builds

559
00:27:03.559 --> 00:27:06.960
<v Speaker 2>itself out of it. Thus life from non life help

560
00:27:07.119 --> 00:27:09.839
<v Speaker 2>Plants do this at an even more fundamental level. Most

561
00:27:09.839 --> 00:27:11.720
<v Speaker 2>of the body of a plant is made out of

562
00:27:11.720 --> 00:27:15.039
<v Speaker 2>carbon that they pulled directly out of the air. Life

563
00:27:15.119 --> 00:27:18.279
<v Speaker 2>is made entirely out of molecules and chemicals that are

564
00:27:18.319 --> 00:27:22.039
<v Speaker 2>not themselves alive, but the way they interact creates the

565
00:27:22.079 --> 00:27:25.039
<v Speaker 2>gestalt that we know is life. Life is at its

566
00:27:25.039 --> 00:27:28.039
<v Speaker 2>core a cascade of chemical reactions, none of which we

567
00:27:28.079 --> 00:27:30.559
<v Speaker 2>would call a live on its own. Given the fact

568
00:27:30.599 --> 00:27:33.880
<v Speaker 2>that life is itself a cascade of lifeless chemical reactions,

569
00:27:34.200 --> 00:27:36.240
<v Speaker 2>why would we expect the origin of life to be

570
00:27:36.319 --> 00:27:39.359
<v Speaker 2>anything other than a cascade of lifeless chemical reactions.

571
00:27:40.039 --> 00:27:43.240
<v Speaker 3>Or, in other words, if evolution did start everything and

572
00:27:43.279 --> 00:27:45.799
<v Speaker 3>the world started with a bunch of non living things

573
00:27:45.839 --> 00:27:49.039
<v Speaker 3>that people ultimately evolved from, can you think of another

574
00:27:49.119 --> 00:27:52.640
<v Speaker 3>time when life was able to emerge from something that

575
00:27:52.799 --> 00:27:53.519
<v Speaker 3>wasn't alive.

576
00:27:54.400 --> 00:27:57.680
<v Speaker 2>No, but we wouldn't really expect life to spontaneously develop

577
00:27:57.720 --> 00:28:00.000
<v Speaker 2>in that way after life that's already on the planet

578
00:28:00.039 --> 00:28:02.960
<v Speaker 2>has become so well established. Our planet is favorable for

579
00:28:03.000 --> 00:28:05.839
<v Speaker 2>the type of life that we are, so any life

580
00:28:05.839 --> 00:28:08.440
<v Speaker 2>that would evolve on this planet would be in competition

581
00:28:08.480 --> 00:28:11.559
<v Speaker 2>for the same resources that we use, So it would

582
00:28:11.559 --> 00:28:15.039
<v Speaker 2>be immediately outcompeted for those resources by the currently living

583
00:28:15.160 --> 00:28:18.839
<v Speaker 2>organisms that are already highly specialized for living in their environments.

584
00:28:19.119 --> 00:28:20.880
<v Speaker 2>It'd be like trying to open a mom and pop

585
00:28:20.880 --> 00:28:24.000
<v Speaker 2>shop right next to a Walmart. The Walmart is already

586
00:28:24.000 --> 00:28:27.400
<v Speaker 2>well established and will immediately outcompete the mom and pop shop.

587
00:28:27.960 --> 00:28:30.599
<v Speaker 3>Because if that's not the case, then where did life

588
00:28:30.599 --> 00:28:33.240
<v Speaker 3>begin there are a few hypotheses.

589
00:28:33.480 --> 00:28:34.960
<v Speaker 2>The one that makes the most sense to me is

590
00:28:35.000 --> 00:28:38.160
<v Speaker 2>a tidal pool environment where wet dry cycling would encourage

591
00:28:38.200 --> 00:28:40.640
<v Speaker 2>auto catalytic reactions in the mud that was rich with

592
00:28:40.759 --> 00:28:41.680
<v Speaker 2>organic materials.

593
00:28:42.240 --> 00:28:44.680
<v Speaker 3>You could say, you just don't know, but I think

594
00:28:44.720 --> 00:28:48.799
<v Speaker 3>that the most logical explanation is life coming from some

595
00:28:49.079 --> 00:28:52.519
<v Speaker 3>originator of life, and I would call this originator of

596
00:28:52.559 --> 00:28:53.480
<v Speaker 3>life God.

597
00:28:54.160 --> 00:28:57.359
<v Speaker 2>Once again, we don't know, therefore.

598
00:28:57.079 --> 00:29:02.119
<v Speaker 3>Good And if you're a Christian and you're wondering how

599
00:29:02.160 --> 00:29:04.640
<v Speaker 3>you can use this argument in a conversation, I would

600
00:29:04.680 --> 00:29:07.279
<v Speaker 3>encourage you to ask a lot of questions on what

601
00:29:07.440 --> 00:29:11.079
<v Speaker 3>someone believes regarding the complexity of life, and I'd say

602
00:29:11.079 --> 00:29:15.440
<v Speaker 3>something along the lines of people are incredibly complex. Where

603
00:29:15.440 --> 00:29:17.440
<v Speaker 3>do you think we came from? And how do you

604
00:29:17.440 --> 00:29:18.359
<v Speaker 3>think life started?

605
00:29:18.839 --> 00:29:20.640
<v Speaker 2>And thus we arrive at a problem that I've pointed

606
00:29:20.640 --> 00:29:24.519
<v Speaker 2>out with apologetics before. For apologists, if you believe in God,

607
00:29:25.000 --> 00:29:28.200
<v Speaker 2>you don't actually need to have any good justification. But

608
00:29:28.279 --> 00:29:30.960
<v Speaker 2>if you want to question God's existence, now you have

609
00:29:31.000 --> 00:29:34.319
<v Speaker 2>to be an expert in biology, biochemistry, geology, astronomy, and

610
00:29:34.359 --> 00:29:37.799
<v Speaker 2>theoretical physics, among others. In order to be taken even

611
00:29:37.880 --> 00:29:40.680
<v Speaker 2>the slightest bit. Seriously, I'm skipping the rest of this one.

612
00:29:40.720 --> 00:29:42.480
<v Speaker 2>It's just him talking about how he has a friend

613
00:29:42.519 --> 00:29:44.960
<v Speaker 2>who is a chemist who doesn't believe in evolution. Great,

614
00:29:45.319 --> 00:29:48.240
<v Speaker 2>you found one out of tens of thousands two millions

615
00:29:48.240 --> 00:29:50.599
<v Speaker 2>of scientists who denies a thing that all the rest

616
00:29:50.640 --> 00:29:52.880
<v Speaker 2>of them accept. Forgive me for not caring.

617
00:29:53.440 --> 00:29:56.960
<v Speaker 3>And argument number three the moral argument. This argument pretty

618
00:29:57.000 --> 00:30:00.400
<v Speaker 3>much states that because people have universal laws that they

619
00:30:00.440 --> 00:30:04.200
<v Speaker 3>all abide by its evidence of God, because he had

620
00:30:04.240 --> 00:30:05.519
<v Speaker 3>to give people these laws.

621
00:30:06.119 --> 00:30:09.640
<v Speaker 2>Except we don't and he didn't. Different cultures have different

622
00:30:09.640 --> 00:30:12.119
<v Speaker 2>opinions on ethics, and that's to say nothing of the

623
00:30:12.119 --> 00:30:16.000
<v Speaker 2>disagreements between individuals in the same culture. So this argument

624
00:30:16.119 --> 00:30:18.839
<v Speaker 2>fails upon the tiniest bit of scrutiny to.

625
00:30:18.799 --> 00:30:23.759
<v Speaker 3>Explain it more, Murdering babies, purposefully polluting water reservoirs, and

626
00:30:23.960 --> 00:30:26.119
<v Speaker 3>other crimes like rape are wrong.

627
00:30:26.680 --> 00:30:28.839
<v Speaker 2>Blessed shall he be who takes your little ones and

628
00:30:28.920 --> 00:30:31.720
<v Speaker 2>dashes them against the rock Psalm one thirty seventy nine.

629
00:30:32.279 --> 00:30:34.200
<v Speaker 2>Seems like the book that you think is the word

630
00:30:34.200 --> 00:30:36.720
<v Speaker 2>of God disagrees with you about the murdering of babies.

631
00:30:36.960 --> 00:30:39.279
<v Speaker 2>It also treats rape as a property crime, committed against

632
00:30:39.279 --> 00:30:42.319
<v Speaker 2>whoever owns the woman, and doesn't acknowledge that men can

633
00:30:42.359 --> 00:30:44.839
<v Speaker 2>also be victims of rape. It also says nothing about

634
00:30:44.839 --> 00:30:47.680
<v Speaker 2>polluting in water, So an application of the Polline principle,

635
00:30:47.799 --> 00:30:49.880
<v Speaker 2>the idea that when the Bible is silent on an issue,

636
00:30:49.920 --> 00:30:53.240
<v Speaker 2>it's not prohibited, but it's also not necessarily good, would

637
00:30:53.240 --> 00:30:56.160
<v Speaker 2>tell us that it's at least allowed. And I don't

638
00:30:56.240 --> 00:30:58.880
<v Speaker 2>know if it's properly called the Pauline principle. That's just

639
00:30:58.920 --> 00:31:00.519
<v Speaker 2>what I heard it called it the Christian high school

640
00:31:00.519 --> 00:31:03.680
<v Speaker 2>I attended, But apparently after some googling, the Pauline principle

641
00:31:03.720 --> 00:31:06.640
<v Speaker 2>is actually Paul's version of the ends don't justify the means,

642
00:31:06.680 --> 00:31:09.000
<v Speaker 2>which can be found in Romes three eight. The thing

643
00:31:09.039 --> 00:31:11.039
<v Speaker 2>that I know as the Pauline principle comes from First

644
00:31:11.079 --> 00:31:13.960
<v Speaker 2>Corinthians ten twenty three. All things are lawful, but not

645
00:31:14.039 --> 00:31:16.759
<v Speaker 2>all things are edifying. Whatever it may be called, it's

646
00:31:16.799 --> 00:31:19.200
<v Speaker 2>the idea that at least some Christians have that if

647
00:31:19.240 --> 00:31:21.920
<v Speaker 2>the Bible does not explicitly forbid a thing, then that

648
00:31:21.920 --> 00:31:24.480
<v Speaker 2>thing is not sinful. But just because it's not sinful

649
00:31:24.519 --> 00:31:25.400
<v Speaker 2>doesn't mean it's good.

650
00:31:26.039 --> 00:31:28.920
<v Speaker 3>And while that seems obvious that they're wrong. The question

651
00:31:29.079 --> 00:31:31.319
<v Speaker 3>is why do we think they're wrong.

652
00:31:31.759 --> 00:31:34.000
<v Speaker 2>Because as a species that evolved to be social, a

653
00:31:34.039 --> 00:31:37.440
<v Speaker 2>sense of morality that promoted social behavior also evolved. But

654
00:31:37.559 --> 00:31:40.599
<v Speaker 2>this also explains why not everyone agrees on morality. Evolution

655
00:31:40.720 --> 00:31:43.279
<v Speaker 2>works through variation, so any trait that is a result

656
00:31:43.279 --> 00:31:46.119
<v Speaker 2>of evolution can be expected to have some variation within

657
00:31:46.160 --> 00:31:48.799
<v Speaker 2>a population. Most of us agree on most of the

658
00:31:48.799 --> 00:31:51.559
<v Speaker 2>big ticket items like murder, because there are very few

659
00:31:51.599 --> 00:31:54.759
<v Speaker 2>scenarios where murdering someone will help with social cohesion. But

660
00:31:55.240 --> 00:31:57.880
<v Speaker 2>then you'll notice that plenty of people disagree about killing

661
00:31:57.960 --> 00:32:00.920
<v Speaker 2>in certain other circumstances. Some of us think that the

662
00:32:00.920 --> 00:32:04.200
<v Speaker 2>death penalty is state sponsored murder and it's clearly immoral,

663
00:32:04.480 --> 00:32:06.960
<v Speaker 2>while others think that the death penalty is a necessary

664
00:32:07.000 --> 00:32:10.119
<v Speaker 2>part of the justice system. From an evolutionary perspective, I

665
00:32:10.119 --> 00:32:12.599
<v Speaker 2>could definitely see why killing members of a society that

666
00:32:12.680 --> 00:32:16.319
<v Speaker 2>severely break our moral code can be beneficial, But that

667
00:32:16.359 --> 00:32:19.000
<v Speaker 2>creates a conflict with our general distastes for killing, and

668
00:32:19.039 --> 00:32:22.519
<v Speaker 2>so there is much disagreement about it. Sure, Christians can

669
00:32:22.599 --> 00:32:25.279
<v Speaker 2>point to the many instances of God commanding executions and

670
00:32:25.319 --> 00:32:28.200
<v Speaker 2>genocides in the Bible to support capital punishment. And if

671
00:32:28.240 --> 00:32:30.759
<v Speaker 2>morality comes from God, then that would certainly be an

672
00:32:30.759 --> 00:32:33.720
<v Speaker 2>excellent argument for it. But does the fact that so

673
00:32:33.759 --> 00:32:36.480
<v Speaker 2>many people are against the death penalty not make you

674
00:32:36.559 --> 00:32:39.319
<v Speaker 2>wonder about this moral code that God supposedly wrote on

675
00:32:39.400 --> 00:32:40.319
<v Speaker 2>everyone's hearts.

676
00:32:41.119 --> 00:32:45.000
<v Speaker 3>The moral argument suggests that these moral laws can't develop

677
00:32:45.079 --> 00:32:48.839
<v Speaker 3>from a purely biological world, and that these morals need

678
00:32:48.920 --> 00:32:51.039
<v Speaker 3>to come from a higher power or God.

679
00:32:51.880 --> 00:32:54.079
<v Speaker 2>Well, there's no real reason to think they couldn't develop

680
00:32:54.079 --> 00:32:56.920
<v Speaker 2>through evolution, So that's just an assertion with nothing backing

681
00:32:56.960 --> 00:32:57.240
<v Speaker 2>it up.

682
00:32:57.839 --> 00:32:59.920
<v Speaker 3>And the reason why is because if there was no

683
00:33:00.319 --> 00:33:04.039
<v Speaker 3>God and we were purely biological beings, then we'd be

684
00:33:04.079 --> 00:33:05.079
<v Speaker 3>no different than animals.

685
00:33:05.799 --> 00:33:09.519
<v Speaker 2>We are animals, and rudimentary morality exists within our closest

686
00:33:09.519 --> 00:33:12.799
<v Speaker 2>animal relatives, along with biological explanations for its existence.

687
00:33:13.880 --> 00:33:17.319
<v Speaker 3>Because lions can kill gazelles and dogs can go have

688
00:33:17.440 --> 00:33:20.960
<v Speaker 3>sex with other dogs without their consent, But lions don't

689
00:33:21.079 --> 00:33:25.079
<v Speaker 3>murder gazelles and dogs don't rape other dogs. They're just

690
00:33:25.200 --> 00:33:26.279
<v Speaker 3>acting like animals.

691
00:33:26.799 --> 00:33:29.759
<v Speaker 2>You consider killing an animal in order to eat it murder,

692
00:33:30.559 --> 00:33:33.480
<v Speaker 2>So are you a vegetarian or are you a murderer?

693
00:33:33.720 --> 00:33:37.359
<v Speaker 2>Or is killing for sustenance morally permissible as to rape,

694
00:33:37.400 --> 00:33:41.119
<v Speaker 2>It's about cognitive capacity. Dogs don't have the cognitive ability

695
00:33:41.119 --> 00:33:43.599
<v Speaker 2>to consent in a way that humans would consider necessary

696
00:33:43.640 --> 00:33:46.480
<v Speaker 2>for sex, so applying our morality to their behavior in

697
00:33:46.519 --> 00:33:49.519
<v Speaker 2>this regard is just nonsensical. Side note. This is also

698
00:33:49.559 --> 00:33:51.880
<v Speaker 2>one of the many reasons why the off proposed slippery

699
00:33:51.880 --> 00:33:55.480
<v Speaker 2>slope from gay marriage to bestiality doesn't work. As long

700
00:33:55.519 --> 00:33:58.680
<v Speaker 2>as we maintain consent as a fundamental aspect of sexual ethics,

701
00:33:58.799 --> 00:34:01.720
<v Speaker 2>bestiality will never be okay because we don't know of

702
00:34:01.759 --> 00:34:04.200
<v Speaker 2>any animal that is capable of consenting in a way

703
00:34:04.240 --> 00:34:05.319
<v Speaker 2>that would make it okay.

704
00:34:06.000 --> 00:34:08.159
<v Speaker 3>So to really think about this argument, we need to

705
00:34:08.199 --> 00:34:12.119
<v Speaker 3>consider why we as people think that things are wrong.

706
00:34:12.400 --> 00:34:14.960
<v Speaker 3>Because if we truly did believe that our world was

707
00:34:15.000 --> 00:34:18.719
<v Speaker 3>purely biological, then we couldn't say that what Hitler did

708
00:34:18.880 --> 00:34:19.320
<v Speaker 3>was wrong.

709
00:34:20.039 --> 00:34:22.920
<v Speaker 2>Why Why does having its basis in biology mean that

710
00:34:22.960 --> 00:34:25.800
<v Speaker 2>we can't think genocide is wrong? More to the point,

711
00:34:26.039 --> 00:34:28.519
<v Speaker 2>how can a Christian say that genocide is wrong when

712
00:34:28.519 --> 00:34:30.800
<v Speaker 2>they worship a god who has commanded his people to

713
00:34:30.800 --> 00:34:33.840
<v Speaker 2>carry out several genocides. Not to mention, if you take

714
00:34:33.880 --> 00:34:37.039
<v Speaker 2>the story of Nozark seriously, he directly committed the biggest

715
00:34:37.079 --> 00:34:40.480
<v Speaker 2>genocide in human history. Unless this all get dismissed as

716
00:34:40.559 --> 00:34:43.639
<v Speaker 2>old Testament stuff, the Christian apocalypse holds that He's going

717
00:34:43.679 --> 00:34:46.639
<v Speaker 2>to come back and commit genocide again during the end times.

718
00:34:47.199 --> 00:34:49.880
<v Speaker 2>As an atheist, I am free to say that genocide

719
00:34:49.960 --> 00:34:53.679
<v Speaker 2>is always an unequivocally wrong. As a Christian, you have

720
00:34:53.760 --> 00:34:55.840
<v Speaker 2>to contend with the fact that a moral code based

721
00:34:55.880 --> 00:34:59.239
<v Speaker 2>on the Bible allows for genocide in some cases. I,

722
00:34:59.559 --> 00:35:01.920
<v Speaker 2>as an a theist, don't have to do any mental

723
00:35:01.960 --> 00:35:04.760
<v Speaker 2>gymnastics to say that Hitler was wrong. But the Christian

724
00:35:04.800 --> 00:35:07.719
<v Speaker 2>apologists are up there competing with some own biles in

725
00:35:07.800 --> 00:35:11.039
<v Speaker 2>order to be able to both condemn Hitler and justify

726
00:35:11.079 --> 00:35:12.079
<v Speaker 2>God's genocides.

727
00:35:12.760 --> 00:35:16.599
<v Speaker 3>If morals were not given to us by God, then

728
00:35:16.599 --> 00:35:20.559
<v Speaker 3>the rules we have as a society would be subjective.

729
00:35:20.800 --> 00:35:24.079
<v Speaker 2>And if they were given to us by God, they'd

730
00:35:24.199 --> 00:35:28.199
<v Speaker 2>still be subjective, just instead of it being our subjective

731
00:35:28.199 --> 00:35:31.320
<v Speaker 2>opinions and feelings about them, it would be God's subjective

732
00:35:31.320 --> 00:35:34.679
<v Speaker 2>opinions and feelings about them. God being God, does not

733
00:35:34.800 --> 00:35:38.039
<v Speaker 2>make his opinion objective. He's still a subject in this

734
00:35:38.119 --> 00:35:39.000
<v Speaker 2>sense of the word.

735
00:35:39.559 --> 00:35:42.679
<v Speaker 3>Meaning what's wrong for me may not be wrong for

736
00:35:42.760 --> 00:35:46.519
<v Speaker 3>other people, and we could then respectfully disagree.

737
00:35:46.360 --> 00:35:48.440
<v Speaker 2>You know, kind of like we do about the morality

738
00:35:48.440 --> 00:35:51.440
<v Speaker 2>of the death penalty or of eating meat. Weird how

739
00:35:51.440 --> 00:35:53.000
<v Speaker 2>it seems to work the way you say it would

740
00:35:53.039 --> 00:35:55.960
<v Speaker 2>work if it wasn't from God. Almost like it's not

741
00:35:56.000 --> 00:35:56.519
<v Speaker 2>from God.

742
00:35:57.320 --> 00:36:00.519
<v Speaker 3>But this moral argument suggests that there are things that

743
00:36:00.559 --> 00:36:05.519
<v Speaker 3>we can't respectfully disagree with, like we can't respectfully disagree

744
00:36:05.519 --> 00:36:06.039
<v Speaker 3>with Hitler.

745
00:36:06.480 --> 00:36:08.280
<v Speaker 2>We'll tell that Chuck Schumer.

746
00:36:08.400 --> 00:36:10.119
<v Speaker 3>What he did was morally wrong.

747
00:36:10.760 --> 00:36:12.599
<v Speaker 2>Okay, I skipped a bit in the Hitler section, but

748
00:36:12.679 --> 00:36:15.039
<v Speaker 2>it's relevant now, so let's go back to it.

749
00:36:15.239 --> 00:36:19.159
<v Speaker 3>They also killed black people, gay men, people with disabilities,

750
00:36:19.400 --> 00:36:20.639
<v Speaker 3>and their political opponents.

751
00:36:21.079 --> 00:36:23.440
<v Speaker 2>Now that we've heard that, let's read from the Good Book?

752
00:36:23.480 --> 00:36:26.760
<v Speaker 2>Shall we levitik Is twenty thirteen. If a man lies

753
00:36:26.800 --> 00:36:28.800
<v Speaker 2>with a male, as with a woman, both of them

754
00:36:28.840 --> 00:36:31.800
<v Speaker 2>have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death.

755
00:36:31.880 --> 00:36:35.079
<v Speaker 2>Their blood is upon them. Now. To be fair, there

756
00:36:35.119 --> 00:36:36.840
<v Speaker 2>are plenty of Christians who point out that this is

757
00:36:36.960 --> 00:36:40.079
<v Speaker 2>likely about pederasty rather than about just being gay, which

758
00:36:40.519 --> 00:36:42.760
<v Speaker 2>actually gives it a new level of cupidness when you

759
00:36:42.760 --> 00:36:44.719
<v Speaker 2>see the victim of what would then be rape being

760
00:36:44.760 --> 00:36:48.000
<v Speaker 2>put to death, although that is pretty consistent for the Bible,

761
00:36:48.199 --> 00:36:52.119
<v Speaker 2>so maybe that's the case, but most American Evangelical Christians

762
00:36:52.199 --> 00:36:54.679
<v Speaker 2>interpret this to be the death penalty for being gay.

763
00:36:55.000 --> 00:36:56.880
<v Speaker 2>Seems to me like you said in your video that

764
00:36:56.960 --> 00:37:00.559
<v Speaker 2>killing gay men was a bad thing. Are you disagreeing

765
00:37:00.559 --> 00:37:02.719
<v Speaker 2>with the moral code that was given to us by God?

766
00:37:03.079 --> 00:37:05.760
<v Speaker 2>And what's more, you're saying it's achieved such a level

767
00:37:05.800 --> 00:37:09.679
<v Speaker 2>of immorality that it is not possible to respectfully disagree. Now,

768
00:37:10.079 --> 00:37:12.079
<v Speaker 2>I'm all for it if that's what's happening here, But

769
00:37:12.159 --> 00:37:14.480
<v Speaker 2>something tells me that they would suddenly have a bunch

770
00:37:14.519 --> 00:37:16.920
<v Speaker 2>of hedging and qualifying to do if this were actually

771
00:37:16.960 --> 00:37:17.840
<v Speaker 2>pointed out to them.

772
00:37:18.400 --> 00:37:21.639
<v Speaker 3>But if we lived in a purely biological world, I'd

773
00:37:21.760 --> 00:37:24.360
<v Speaker 3>argue that we couldn't say that he was wrong.

774
00:37:24.960 --> 00:37:27.159
<v Speaker 2>Okay, fine, I suppose I'll give my moral system a

775
00:37:27.199 --> 00:37:30.599
<v Speaker 2>basic explanation at this point, net harm versus net well being.

776
00:37:30.639 --> 00:37:33.039
<v Speaker 2>If the results of an action increase harm, they are bad.

777
00:37:33.079 --> 00:37:36.880
<v Speaker 2>If they increase well being, they are good. Genocide increases harm,

778
00:37:37.000 --> 00:37:42.039
<v Speaker 2>so it's bad. Therefore Hitler was bad. Not all that complicated,

779
00:37:42.360 --> 00:37:44.880
<v Speaker 2>though this is midly oversimplified.

780
00:37:44.719 --> 00:37:48.199
<v Speaker 3>Because he was just doing what was right for him, but.

781
00:37:48.320 --> 00:37:54.000
<v Speaker 2>His actions impacted other people, so it's not just about him.

782
00:37:53.920 --> 00:37:54.239
<v Speaker 4>Is it.

783
00:37:55.199 --> 00:37:58.440
<v Speaker 3>And people could argue that objective moral values could emerge

784
00:37:58.440 --> 00:38:01.559
<v Speaker 3>from a society. But if a objective moral values did

785
00:38:01.599 --> 00:38:04.519
<v Speaker 3>begin within a society, how would we know which moral

786
00:38:04.599 --> 00:38:06.039
<v Speaker 3>values to defend.

787
00:38:06.360 --> 00:38:09.039
<v Speaker 2>By seeing which ones do the best job at reducing

788
00:38:09.119 --> 00:38:11.039
<v Speaker 2>harm and increasing well being?

789
00:38:11.559 --> 00:38:16.519
<v Speaker 3>Because different moral values could technically arise that contradict other ones.

790
00:38:16.840 --> 00:38:20.519
<v Speaker 2>As happens with the death penalty example. Once again, morality

791
00:38:20.519 --> 00:38:22.880
<v Speaker 2>in the real world seems to work in exactly the

792
00:38:22.880 --> 00:38:24.960
<v Speaker 2>way you say it would if morality did not come

793
00:38:25.000 --> 00:38:25.519
<v Speaker 2>from God.

794
00:38:26.039 --> 00:38:28.440
<v Speaker 3>So if you don't believe in God, I would challenge

795
00:38:28.480 --> 00:38:31.679
<v Speaker 3>you to think of where your conscience came from. Like,

796
00:38:32.239 --> 00:38:34.920
<v Speaker 3>you have a sense of right and wrong, So where

797
00:38:34.960 --> 00:38:35.880
<v Speaker 3>did that come from?

798
00:38:36.440 --> 00:38:39.079
<v Speaker 2>Definitely didn't come from that God that supposedly inspired the Bible.

799
00:38:39.119 --> 00:38:41.920
<v Speaker 2>That's for sure. I have way too many disagreements with

800
00:38:41.920 --> 00:38:45.079
<v Speaker 2>biblical morality for that to be the source. That's it

801
00:38:45.119 --> 00:38:47.280
<v Speaker 2>for this one. Today's comento the Day comes to us

802
00:38:47.280 --> 00:38:49.599
<v Speaker 2>from the life of Trash, who says, if you just

803
00:38:49.639 --> 00:38:51.840
<v Speaker 2>watch his channel, you will learn that he states all

804
00:38:51.880 --> 00:38:54.480
<v Speaker 2>of this is not true. It's just plausible and it's

805
00:38:54.480 --> 00:38:57.559
<v Speaker 2>a giant critical thinking class. This was on my video

806
00:38:57.599 --> 00:39:00.440
<v Speaker 2>responding to Professor Jang, where he spends the majority of

807
00:39:00.480 --> 00:39:03.360
<v Speaker 2>his time explaining why he thinks European Christians believe that

808
00:39:03.440 --> 00:39:06.519
<v Speaker 2>everyone was created equal. Therefore there was no excuse to

809
00:39:06.639 --> 00:39:09.920
<v Speaker 2>killer and slave people until Darwin came around and gave

810
00:39:09.960 --> 00:39:12.599
<v Speaker 2>them the excuse to do slavery right in the middle

811
00:39:12.639 --> 00:39:16.440
<v Speaker 2>of that time, when Europe began outlawing slavery. And therein

812
00:39:16.559 --> 00:39:19.719
<v Speaker 2>lies the problem. Even if your framing is correct, he's

813
00:39:19.719 --> 00:39:21.719
<v Speaker 2>not saying that the things that he's teaching as though

814
00:39:21.719 --> 00:39:24.840
<v Speaker 2>they are actually true are actually true. He's just bringing

815
00:39:24.920 --> 00:39:27.320
<v Speaker 2>up plausible alternatives with the goal of getting you thinking.

816
00:39:27.559 --> 00:39:30.400
<v Speaker 2>The fact remains that the stuff he brought up is

817
00:39:30.440 --> 00:39:33.880
<v Speaker 2>not actually plausible. It's not even superficially plausible if you

818
00:39:33.920 --> 00:39:36.880
<v Speaker 2>spend any amount of time actually thinking about the implications

819
00:39:36.880 --> 00:39:38.840
<v Speaker 2>of what he's saying. But he's also not making it

820
00:39:38.880 --> 00:39:42.199
<v Speaker 2>clear that he's just presenting plausible scenarios to get people thinking.

821
00:39:42.519 --> 00:39:45.800
<v Speaker 2>He's teaching it as though it is established fact. Now,

822
00:39:46.039 --> 00:39:49.400
<v Speaker 2>maybe he does clarify somewhere that he's not actually teaching facts,

823
00:39:49.760 --> 00:39:51.440
<v Speaker 2>but then we run into the same issue that we

824
00:39:51.480 --> 00:39:53.360
<v Speaker 2>had with Armored Skeptic when I covered him a couple

825
00:39:53.360 --> 00:39:56.760
<v Speaker 2>of years ago. As a YouTuber, you cannot expect your

826
00:39:56.800 --> 00:40:00.599
<v Speaker 2>audience to be familiar with your entire back catalog. Always

827
00:40:00.599 --> 00:40:02.760
<v Speaker 2>have to make your videos with a new viewer in mind.

828
00:40:03.039 --> 00:40:05.599
<v Speaker 2>Putting a statement that everything you're teaching is false at

829
00:40:05.599 --> 00:40:10.159
<v Speaker 2>the very very beginning of an extremely long series is

830
00:40:10.239 --> 00:40:13.320
<v Speaker 2>not adequate cover for presenting untrue shit as though it

831
00:40:13.480 --> 00:40:16.920
<v Speaker 2>is true eleven hours into the series without reclarifying that

832
00:40:16.960 --> 00:40:20.239
<v Speaker 2>it's actually not true. Most people only see clips of Jang,

833
00:40:20.280 --> 00:40:23.599
<v Speaker 2>not entire videos, and the clips are very much of

834
00:40:23.599 --> 00:40:25.840
<v Speaker 2>a These are true things that this guy is saying

835
00:40:25.920 --> 00:40:30.079
<v Speaker 2>variety not. These are some interesting hypotheticals to promote critical thinking.

836
00:40:30.360 --> 00:40:32.599
<v Speaker 2>Thanks for watching. Don't forget to go to surf shark

837
00:40:32.599 --> 00:40:34.679
<v Speaker 2>dot com slash rhino for an extra four months for free.

838
00:40:34.800 --> 00:40:36.239
<v Speaker 2>I'll be back next Friday with more, but if you

839
00:40:36.239 --> 00:40:37.760
<v Speaker 2>need to get your rhinofix in before then, I live

840
00:40:37.840 --> 00:40:39.719
<v Speaker 2>stream of service every Wednesday eight thirty Eastern on my

841
00:40:39.719 --> 00:40:42.320
<v Speaker 2>other channel, The Watering Hole, and periodically published shorts to

842
00:40:42.320 --> 00:40:44.280
<v Speaker 2>the channel Vice Rhino Shorts. I should probably do that again.

843
00:40:44.360 --> 00:40:46.599
<v Speaker 2>Thanks to Piper for being my editor and special things.

844
00:40:46.639 --> 00:40:49.239
<v Speaker 2>As always to my patrons, who are the line that

845
00:40:49.280 --> 00:40:51.559
<v Speaker 2>I forgot to write here for the outro. That is

846
00:40:51.599 --> 00:40:54.639
<v Speaker 2>the outro to my channel. If you'd like to be

847
00:40:55.000 --> 00:40:57.519
<v Speaker 2>forgotten about, you can join us on patriot at patreon

848
00:40:57.559 --> 00:40:59.880
<v Speaker 2>dot com, slash vice Rhino, or by supporting the channel.

849
00:41:00.199 --> 00:41:01.400
<v Speaker 2>The other method that I can be on the links

850
00:41:01.400 --> 00:41:04.639
<v Speaker 2>ibis round dot com. Thanks for watching Something Something by

851
00:41:05.159 --> 00:41:36.800
<v Speaker 2>funk Off. Yeah you didn't tell me you're recording now,

852
00:41:38.599 --> 00:41:40.400
<v Speaker 2>Well I'm recording now.

853
00:41:41.679 --> 00:42:04.440
<v Speaker 4>Who do you want? Oh?

854
00:42:04.519 --> 00:42:06.360
<v Speaker 2>I should stop recording half