Trinity Radio
Danniel Dennett and Keith Ward Debated a wide variety of topics on Unbelievable Christian Radio. We break down the debate and provide what he hope to be helpful commentary.
Inspiring Philosophy: https://www.youtube.com/user/InspiringPhilosophy
Original Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mongL_2KMGg
Learn Casually: TrinityRadio.org
Learn Formally: TrinitySem.edu
Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/TrinityRadio
Music by Joakim Karud youtube.com/joakimkarud
Source
"Even James White loves me now"
Brax & J love your work! Awesome to see you team up with IP on this commentary!
Other than William Lane Craig, I would consider Michael Jones to be the best Christian apologist. He always backs up his claims with citations and sources, something that many Christian debaters don’t do.
Concerning pets in heaven, from a practical standpoint, if all animals go to heaven, there wouldn't be room for them all. So, for it to work, it would have to be that only elect animals go to heaven. From a Theological perspective, what pet has always pleased its master? It would seem to be that all pets have sinned. If they have sinned then they need a Saviour. We have no record of Jesus coming and dying as a dog or cat. I see no way for pets to be saved.
Awesome video. I'm dying to know if IP could point me in the direction for a definition of conscious behaviour. I'm at a big impasse in trying to understand his point of view. I'm a computer scientist and I know and it's possible to create programs that "decide" on what to do given sense information like a robot, but we still wouldn't say it's conscious because it's a completely causally closed process involving computation and sense data. If that's what bacteria essentially are, chemical programs, but just evolved instead of programmed would you say that they are not conscious? Or… are you saying that even in bacteria we can't prove that it's a casually closed process in the way the computer program is and are therefore concluding it's conscious. Or are we committed then to consciousness of computer programs and the consciousness of NPCs in video games. Love your content guys.
I'm not sure I follow his specific notion of consciousness. I agree that plants take in stimuli and respond, but I don't think that's the same as "being conscious".
I love JP's Superman shirts. I got some of those too.
"determinism isn't a person"… therefore you're both free and determined? I'm pretty sure that's not how most people define being free. Otherwise rocks are free because the nature that made it what it is isn't a person. It's just word salad.
I don't mean to be presumptuous, but since most videos on this channel deal with the topic of the Christian god, do you imply that the discussion in some way demonstrate the existence of that god? Some of these topics are indeed very interesting, and perhaps this was just a general philosophical discussion between friends.
Cats in heaven!!
So God did not create and make. He programmed and rendered? The problem with analogy is that when we program we copy the image of the physical. What was God modeling when He programmed and rendered?
I’ve watched hundreds of NDE’s and I’ve heard that your pets go to heaven and they can even talk there. Also, in heaven everything is alive and has consciousness even rocks… I believe it!!
Interesting stream, and great guest!
The problem with IP is that he usually starts with a preconceived conclusion and then presents evidence that supports that conclusion instead of following where the evidence leads him. He could use his approach to justify almost any view including a flat earth. Instead, whenever he defers to an expert opinion in any particular field, he should be deferring to the consensus opinion of experts in that field (unless he himself is an expert in that field). Frequently he does not do this
I may be misunderstanding Michael's idealism, but I feel like idealism contradicts the bible. For example, James talks about how the body without the spirit is dead. Using virtual worlds as a comparison also seems to present a problem because the only reason that analogy works is because we know that there's something distinct between a simulation and the real world. If the whole thing is a simulation, it just doesn't make much sense to me.
You need better admins. I was put in a ‘timeout’ during this live discussion for simply presenting a piece of evidence that suggested consciousness is a physical process of the brain.
Lotta great material, gentlemen. I would, however, contend that all cats are innate rebels and, thus, bound for perdition.
IP is known for holding a lot of fringe and crackpot views and positions. I would recommend to interview a scientist or scholars like Bart Ehrman.
28:41
Here's the problem with your argument: everyone knows you can't BUILD a book, you have to write it. Therefore, argument invalid. DEBUNKED.
😀
Also, while Jonathan is sometimes too extreme in what he says for my tastes, I will say this: as an AFOL, he has my respect.
Great stuff guys!
Wonderful video…
An interesting thought experiment for materialists in regards to consciousness: Suppose you have a person or machine that can manipulate atoms (think Dr. Manhattan). Now, this man or machine takes every atom in your body and separates them from one another carefully, then sends each out individually across the globe, to all meet again in China to be carefully put together again in exactly the same order and arrangement as they had prior to the desentigration. Is the you that was torn apart in the US, the same person that got put together in China? Did the person die and then be resurrected, or did they die and then have a clone take their place?
Materialist biology scientists try hard to stay afloat:
Evolution: A View from the 21st Century
Author: James A. Shapiro
James A. Shapiro proposes an important new paradigm for understanding biological evolution, the core organizing principle of biology. Shapiro introduces crucial new molecular evidence that tests the conventional scientific view of evolution based on the neo-Darwinian synthesis, shows why this view is inadequate to today’s evidence, and presents a compelling alternative view of the evolutionary process that reflects the shift in life sciences towards a more information- and systems-based approach in Evolution: A View from the 21st Century.
18 The wrath of God(AO) is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.(AP) 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made,(AQ) so that people are without excuse.(AR)
21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.(AS) 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools(AT) 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images(AU) made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.
24 Therefore God gave them over(AV) in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.(AW) 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie,(AX) and worshiped and served created things(AY) rather than the Creator—who is forever praised.(AZ) Amen.(BA)
26 Because of this, God gave them over(BB) to shameful lusts.(BC) Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones.(BD) 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.(BE)
28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over(BF) to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips,(BG) 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents;(BH) 31 they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love,(BI) no mercy. 32 Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death,(BJ) they not only continue to do these very things but also approve(BK) of those who practice them.
good show old boy
This just popped up in my mentions today!! I did not know he was on your channel discussing this! Fantastic stream!
The Hard Problem Of Consciousness is one of those slam-dunk arguments for theists. While it doesn't quite get you to proof that God exists, it does prove that a strict materialism/physicalist position is untenable. For the reasons Jones says in this stream: accounting for the " Aboutness" of our thoughts, and the irreducibility of consciousness.
Also, consciousness can, and often does act at times demonstrably and probably independent from the material world. This is literally almost impossible under a strict materialist/ physicalist worldview.
The way most of them get around the problem of consciousness is to say it’s an illusion and ignore it
The almighty God is normally supposed to BOTH A) being able to make decisions and B) to know the future.
Here you should make a distinction between "optional futures" – God could maybe interact and modify them – and "THE ONE FUTURE", because ONLY ONE DETERMINED future will eventually come true. (The one that will become our ONLY ONE PAST). Well, God is supposed to be able to get the best performance: to know that ONE future. But then God MUST JUST LET IT UNFOLD EXACTLY like it is, He is NOT ALLOWED to change anything in it, because God makes no errors in his knowledge of the future! God cannot decide ANYTHING more: ALL God's decisions are already included in that future.
What above means that EITHER God is free to decide, but this implies He does NOT know the ONE future, OR He knows the ONE future, but this prevents Him from making ANY further decision. Even worse than that, GOD WOULD BE OBLIGED to HIMSELF slavishly follow that one determined future. This all means the two abilities A) and B) are MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE ("either", "or", but never "BOTH" at the same time). Since obviously God was able to make his decisions and we are also confident that He knows the future, the path followed must be from A) to B). When that transition occurred ? Certainly not during the man's history, of course that must have happened BEFORE the birth of the universe.
However, God only arrived at step B) BUT WITHOUT ENTERING that step, we saw earlier that God is absolutely NOT INTERESTED IN TAKING PART to that future: He would be obliged to "SLAVISHLY" follow it. The God's actions in that one future (for example words) will AUTOMATICALLY come true instead. In other words that one future will come true WITHOUT GOD. Thus NOBODY will be there to take the God's actions. The God's words will thus be spoken by the SPIRIT OF GOD since God is not there to speak. Everything was done, God was thus FREE from any other duty. But where has the almighty God gone after that ? Of course He is now the Son of God. The almighty God dropped his then USELESS power to become like a normal man: Jesus. Thus, the almighty God is only IN THE PAST, "no one ever saw God" ""The world has not known you".