What a gorgeous moment in recent history, this supremely significant conversation articulated with such insight, charm and urgency by these fascinating people.
Hectic 😬 Technically, he cannot find out if he's right because he wouldn't exist anymore. Also,,, he made no positive claim so even if God does exist he isn't wrong. For example: If there is not enough evidence that the butler killed the Lady, it doesn't mean he didn't do it. If it turns out he did it, it doesn't make the ones who accused him 'right'. They had no justification to believe that. So even if God exists, Mckaiser isn't 'wrong' because there was no good reason to believe God existed in the first place.
Said a philosopher to a road sweeper, I pity you, yours is a hard and dirty task, thank you kind sir said the road sweeper, may I ask what’s your task. The philosopher smile and said I study men’s mind and their desires. The road sweeper turn away and smile I pity you too.
It is easy to make an atheistic case. Much easier than a theistic case. But the atheistic argument cannot argue that the theist finds himself in a world consistent with one he would expect to be in according to biblical accounts. How did such an ancient account get it so right? The atheist can only say where is God, I don't see Him. That lacks philosophical intelligence.
Da Koos It is not the job of the atheist to prove God exists or not. If I claim that there is a boogie man. Am I right until the world proves me wrong or is the world right until I prove them wrong.
So Eusebius is an Agnostic alà Neil deGrasse Tyson ...Dawkins is an Atheist ..very evidentiary based convictions rather than philosophical arguments ..so please get Dawkins here ..pronto.
What a gorgeous moment in recent history, this supremely significant conversation articulated with such insight, charm and urgency by these fascinating people.
I am terribly sad that I missed this profound event but yet awe struck by the protagonists!
Thank you! This is wonderful 😊
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. And those who claim, have the burden of proof.
Audio is horrible, and coming out of one speaker.
Eusebius found out if he was right or wrong
Hectic 😬
Technically, he cannot find out if he's right because he wouldn't exist anymore.
Also,,, he made no positive claim so even if God does exist he isn't wrong.
For example: If there is not enough evidence that the butler killed the Lady, it doesn't mean he didn't do it. If it turns out he did it, it doesn't make the ones who accused him 'right'. They had no justification to believe that.
So even if God exists, Mckaiser isn't 'wrong' because there was no good reason to believe God existed in the first place.
Said a philosopher to a road sweeper, I pity you, yours is a hard and dirty task, thank you kind sir said the road sweeper, may I ask what’s your task. The philosopher smile and said I study men’s mind and their desires. The road sweeper turn away and smile I pity you too.
John Lennox is a very intelligent and patient man. Ironic that Eusebius now knows more about God than John....
Lol. I see what you did there.
Lol, you first have to demonstrate that a god exists for Eusebius to know him. You see the problem when you reason with blind faith?
I wish Gareth would have a session with Uncle John. Another smug South African atheist.
All these profesers and philosophers talk about no hard evidence but could mankind recognise it.
I can’t believe God and a bottle of water are being used in the same sentence and in comparison with eachother.
What would qualify as evidence for the existence of God to Eusibius?
Nearly nothing...I love Eusibius but he seems adamant that he will not question or change his stance on the existence of God.
Well he either found out if he was right or wrong
It is easy to make an atheistic case. Much easier than a theistic case. But the atheistic argument cannot argue that the theist finds himself in a world consistent with one he would expect to be in according to biblical accounts.
How did such an ancient account get it so right?
The atheist can only say where is God, I don't see Him. That lacks philosophical intelligence.
Da Koos It is not the job of the atheist to prove God exists or not. If I claim that there is a boogie man. Am I right until the world proves me wrong or is the world right until I prove them wrong.
Lochlanist
Is the boogeyman consistent with a worldview? Nope. Point of low philosophical intelligence well reiterated.
@@Lochlanist😊
So Eusebius is an Agnostic alà Neil deGrasse Tyson ...Dawkins is an Atheist ..very evidentiary based convictions rather than philosophical arguments ..so please get Dawkins here ..pronto.