Christianity's Biggest Problem 

Nice beard

Cringe video.

Very symmetrical :)

Love the background.

The new background makes you look more professional

He destroyed me with facts and logic.

Hahaha!

Oops, I'd better get back to work.

I wasted more time in looking for this kind of comment thread than answering my modules

@@kevinclydeeguia2543 you even saying the term "modules" activated my fight or flight

if you scroll your For You recommendations long enough, you'll get it. as well as the commentors sharing approx. four common braincells as a single entity

@Objective Morality Yeah, I couldn't hear what he was saying due to laughing at that jab. xD

@Darshana Ambulkar Twitter is good too

@Darshana Ambulkar I love goodreads. Not entirely relevant, I know, but yeah

I really hate such young people, as Alex is, already giving off *ok boomer* deserving vibe. I'm 46, every newest younger people's social/fun interest is The root of (all) evil. It's tiresome. I'm not amused.

Violence is okay in terms of defense of self/home family and others safety of others

@@SmartAss4123 get a dictionary, violence and self defense are two different thing not the same.

@@mynamemyself5469 If I act in self defense I will do so violently. How about that

@@mynamemyself5469can you explain how one would defend oneself without violence? If someone attacks me, I will react with all the violence I possibly can.

First, violence is not only physical...

When I was in High School I did a senior project on Puppy mills, and probably the most disgusting comments were “dogs can’t feel pain” and this lady that cut the vocal cords on all the dogs because she was annoyed with their barking. And if you have any observational skills you should realize that dogs like all animals feel pain because they all have nerves.

It's a spectrum, some animals, like bugs, probably have very little to no awareness of the pain. A reptile probably very little. A deer, probably not a lot. A dog, a lot more, depending on the dog.

Why would a dog be a lot more aware of pain than a deer?@@SnakeWasRight

making students do it is just for show, they can easily show a video but they chose this method, it definitely is not coming full circle if thats what youre trying to use to cope

@@sananton2821 because thats what he wants to believe ig

"A dog or cat can remember the suffering inflicted upon them" Yep. Amazing how many people don't even understand that much.

William Lane Craig is a bit touched i believe

Yeah, my childhood pet kept peeing into my dad's wine cellar because my dad sometimes lightly smacked her with a slipper if she did something wrong. She never quite warmed up to him until her death 😕

William Lane Craig spews some of the purest, foulest BS I have ever heard from any source... ever. It's hard to imagine how anyone could ever say something stupider than, "Animals need to be tortured to death, so that they won't starve." I do not feel like trying to restrain my massive disgust.

Exactly, if animals didn’t feel suffering, then animals that have previously been abused wouldn’t have an innate fear not only of their abuser, but also other humans. There’s many stories of how slow going of a process it is to get an animal to trust their new owner after having suffered abuse by a previous owner. If they didn’t suffer, why would they have trauma?

Oh god, you made my day.

That's likely partially true. Most animals are probably aware of the pain they feel, but it's likely not as acute because they can't analyze it as well as more brainy animals. To the inverse more brainy animals are going to feel more because they have existential dread while they are in physical suffering. But Craig is always confused.

You say that as a joke, but incidentally that perfectly sums up the Kalam Cosmological Argument and other such nonsense.

(Anyone who uses meaningless phrases like "necessarily sufficient contingency" is confused but isn't aware they are confused. The rest of us are just confused.)

@@spacedoohicky While it's certainly possible that humans experience pain more acutely than other animals, I don't see why the opposite couldn't also be true. They experience other senses like smell, sight, hearing, etc, far more acutely than we do, so why couldn't this also be true for their experience of pain?

Bro same😂🎉🎉

me at work like 👀

I have my dissertation due on Friday... but imma be watching this

I've got a bunch of homework that's due next Monday.

Soooooooo? Does he want us to turn off the video o.0? Jk haha

@@DaPradaGap I mean probably we've all got shit to do so... Let's be responsible adults I guess.

Well, for a while, there was this "what if" discussion about anaesthetics - what if they didn't actually prevent us from feeling pain, but simply paralysed us and made us forget everything that happened under their influence (so that nobody would _remember_ going through hours of torture during operations)? Quite a scary thought experiment...

@@Wolf-ln1ml Wouldn't that leave physcological scars, even if the person doesn't remember anything? Scientists could observe that

@@blubaylon Yeah, I'm pretty sure that by now, we can be certain that the stuff actually works as intended. But for a while, it was considered a possibility, however unlikely...

Hey that's an interesting point. Babies and fetuses aren't aware of their condition - their consciousnesses have not developed enough yet. Does that mean that we can do to them whatever we want?

@@Wolf-ln1ml did you know despite the fact that anesthetic use is so widespread, we have NO idea how it actually works?

Or worse, a psycopath.

He didn't say that tough He said they suffer to a different degree. I think that's still a shit argument against the animal suffering dilemma, but i felt like alex was misrepresenting his point

How can you be certain that the carrot you are munching on does not experience pain? A leaf of sallat? A bean? While I completely and full agree that we should do better in our animal husbanding... veganism is not the answer. edit: ...not the complete answer...

@@bodan1196 Because a carrot doesn't have a nervous system.

@@Renegade1100011 So you are saying that carrots have system of steel? Cool and not fazed by things? :-) (attempted joke) My attempted point is; that it does not matter much what does and does not have a nervous system, your distinction for what is what is not food, remains arbitrary. We need to consume other living things to survive. For now. In the future perhaps not. But until then, food is needed and as long as we don't play with our food, or by choice ignore our responsibillity to not cause unnecessary harm, 'eating meat' will remain on the table.

Ofc this is absolutely obvious to anyone with any honest evaluation of reality would conclude. We can see and instantly intuit through our own experience, it's not and shouldn't even be in question but this is unfortunately what contorting and theistic obfuscation does to the mind. lying is a sin apparently yet they willingly lie for god at any moment albeit knowing they can pray for forgiveness for their sins and hey presto such a shambolic reasoning system. All theists that believe this tripe should be banned from being guardians of animals of any kind.

@@Streetrat23 Only the religious believe in sin remember that, those religions that posit a god, until you can demonstrate a gods existence then we are all at sea without a boat.

@Gabriel Peters “if you were to not sin you would be healthy and immune” Yeah… citation sorely needed, as this is nothing but a supposition you pulled out of your ass

@@Streetrat23 That explains infant mortality, babies should just stop sinning.

@@rafox66 Oh and what about all the people living in india or some remote island who believe in a different god or don’t know about Christianity? Guess they’re all fucked.

if a person is in fact truly innocent then they therefore actually dont go to hell because they are in fact innocent. Therefore innocent people dont suffer for other people sins.

@@cyansorcerer6491 They do suffer in this life and I`ve seen many of such people. Quite a few of them were devoted Christians but that didn`t help them a bit. They suffered terribly, never experiencing "divine intervention" in their miserable lives. Even if those people go to Heaven but their loved ones end up in Hell, how are they going to be happy "up there" knowing that their loved one are going to be tormented in Hell forever? Tell me.

in all the most important ways, non human animals are no different from human animals. The main difference is that human animals are capable of rationalizing anything including the most egregious EVIL.

Yep, this happened when my mom raised her hand on our dog, he cried like a baby even when he wasn't actually hit

Poor doggo, that’s a learned reaction :(

@@joshwarrey3728 So someone probably hurt him in the past, otherwise he wouldn't have learned a raised hand probably leads to being hit. :/

@@animalsarebeautifulpeople3094 like the nazis did

I'm not sure the whip was used physically against the animals buy rather, psychologically. Even the latter can be a form of pain, however. Either way, the whip is a negative reward.

@@souloftheage That's not how conditioning works. At first the animal is whipped several times until the correlation between pain and sound/gesture is established. Only then the psychological effect is set.

Do you have a point captain obvious?

Animals are not self-aware of pain even if they can experience it. If they are not self-aware at all they can’t be self-aware of their own pain. Animals do not have a concept of self. Alex jumped right over this point.

They are evil, they have satan in them

well said. I was looking for something like this

I have never felt so called out in my life man... holy shit 😂

Procrastination is our all master

hahah the guilt kicked in didnt it

@YoStefan , you were eating animals, weren’t you?

@@tellmelullabies5552 lol!

I do the same on Christian apologist videos. Good on you man. We all should be willing to listen to other peoples views in order to question our own. Its healthy

Cheers man!

So what is your response to this and all other arguments Alex is putting out in his videos? Since you haven't change your mind despite beeing exposed to seriously good argumentation and logic you either must have access to even better arguments for your theism or logic and reasoning is just not what you base your theism on and therefore wont be able to change your mind..

@@martenjustrell446 easy now. Its a process. Its not as simple as youre trying to make it. It takes time.

You must have strong faith, I can't imagine keeping my faith when exposed to such reasoning

hes not saying "why wont god change things?". hes saying "why would god make the world like this?". Sure changing things now would probably screw things up but if, from the start, god had put in the "cosmic contraception" as alex calls it then a lot of suffering would be saved. Also if hes all knowing then he should know a solution that doesnt screw things up and if hes omnipotent then he should be able to implement it.

Well if God is all knowing and all powerful he should easily be able to come up with a better system

​@@RichardsGaySonor maybe this is the best solution

@@willyroo8570 And every atheist play dumb when they hear "Christ", like God literally offered everyone the solution, for two thousand years we've been told the solution of all suffering of this fallen world, but at the end, I guess everyone is an hypocrite nowadays.

​@@omariwashington2570 Did lions kill lambs in the garden of eden? Did Adam and Eve spent their days running away from dinosaurs? If no. then surely that ecosystem is better than what we have when it comes to animals. Honest Christians will admit (and have admitted whenever this is brought up) that animals were corrupted because of the fall of man. Then when someone brings up the problematic implications of precisely that theology, then it's full on denial mode.​

bUt BuT bUt... iNsTiNcT!

So y'all don't know what awareness is

@@joesifa5235 are animals not aware?

@@curranbrownlee9671 they're not self aware. Not as human beings are

@@joesifa5235 Self-aware and aware can mean two different things. Also what makes you think that animals aren't aware? After all, many animals share extremely similar brain structure and chemistry to us humans. Behavior of animals like dolphins, monkeys and elephants pretty much speaks for itself.

Animals are emitional too! It's a shame that many people don't see this and don't take animal suffering seriously. They can suffer emotionally and psychologically. Trauma can happen in animals too.

Do your cats eat meat products by any chance..?

@@panchopuskas1 Oddly enough, they do.

@@roybarrows9733 Almost like they’re omnivores 0.o

Craig is FAR from being the best we've got. I would recommend you to read "The sound of life's unspeakable beauty" by Martin Schleske.

ooooh very nicely put.

Yet we have used pain as a method to train animals and the threat of pain to control them. If they have no third order of pain awareness how can the threats of repeated pain be used to motivate them? They would have to be able to recall the particular past event in their present consciousness or the threats of inflicting further pain to gain compliance would not work.

@@theelephantintheroom8016 Of course animals do remember past pain, BUT (1) only when the present threat of pain has a clear sensory association with the past event and (2) without the imaginative recollection and imaginative VIVIDNESS that humans have. And it goes without saying that only in humans can pain awaken a spiritual resolve - which is what C.S. Lewis was getting at. Not being an animal physiologist I am humbly open to instruction on these matters, but to me the difference between human and animal pain is quite stark.

Check mate Christian's

Because God allows people to choose what they do.

@@nic8671Well, that is under the assumption that we have free will

@@fnafboy0555 - Yes, I opporate in reality.

@@fnafboy0555 I chose to write this comment. Or was it predetermined

1. Perfect quote. 2. Niv Mizzet's a bitch, go Lazav!

Tell that to people who experience joy. And we can use it differently too: "Life is pleasure, joy. Anyone who says differently is selling something" And you could also say: Tell that to people who experience pain. It's not black and white. It's a mixture.

aha great memories 😂

@@mism847 Sounds like bullshit

@@jaredmartin7040 Be honest with yourself.

The simple definition of god as all powerful all knowing and all caring we often herr. This alone makes him/her/it impossible to exist.

@@TorianTammas that is a subjective opinion. That's like saying you can't make tamato sauce with tomatoes. My point is that God should not be put in a box. What most atheists do. An intelligent and all-powerful being has the potential to be loving or evil.

@@lisalatham4389 How do you attain this God like power you have? You must be smarter than all humans that ever lived (combined) to be able to determine if another being really knows everything. Timothy 2:12

@@mrsatire9475 I don't claim to be smart or intelligent. I am simply asserting or saying this based on research and common sense.

@@mrsatire9475 Yes, that is the definition of God. If we talk about God's attributes, we should not put God in a box because this contradicts the idea or nature of God.

A turtle doesn't approve the existence of Tik Tok

💀💀

Redit😎😎😎😎 🤣🤣🤣😂😂

😂😂😂

@@just_a_turtle_chad And a turtle doesn’t presumably know about TikTok. Smart turtle.

How do you know that the animal is not just acting from instinct. Avoiding a past painful experience doesn’t evidence that the animal is succumb to suffering (at least long term) just because it tries to avoid a painful situation that it once had. Animals can defiantly feel pain but how does pain answer the question that animals suffer, at least in the same way a human would. You can’t prove that an animal suffers emotionally that’s for sure. If you are someone that believes in theories such as survival of the fittest then you accept that animals act for majority of their lives acting purely on their instincts and not with great thought or understanding but purely that every action it takes is in order to survive. If an animal can’t think deeply or understand deep concepts then surely it cannot succumb to deep suffering. If it cannot succumb to deep suffering then you can’t argue that God allows animals to suffer deeply and therefore you can’t argue that God himself is evil for allowing animals to suffer deeply. Whether an animal is intelligent enough to suffer deeply or not is subjective and therefore is not a strong enough argument to say that the Christian God is evil for allowing animal suffering. We can only prove that animals experience pain and remember it but we cannot prove that they experience deep suffering. But it’s just peoples opinions on whether you think an animal experiencing pain suggests that God doesn’t exist or not.

@wh4ckyWh4le Never once said it was good to purposely put them in pain. Just that we can’t prove whether they suffer in the way that Alex points out.

@@tomforemanx1079 I never said that you claimed it was good. I simply demonstrated the stupidity of your argument. Let's take this for example: "If an animal can't think deeply or understand deep concepts then surely it cannot succumb to deep suffering. If it cannot succumb to deep suffering then you can't argue that God allows animals to suffer deeply and therefore you can't argue that God himself is evil for allowing animals to suffer deeply." Now replace "God" with "me drowning puppies." "If an animal can't think deeply or understand deep concepts then surely it cannot succumb to deep suffering. If it cannot succumb to deep suffering then you can't argue that me drowning puppies allows animals to suffer deeply and therefore you can't argue that me drowning puppies is evil for allowing animals to suffer deeply." See what I mean? I just demonstrated via your own argument that if I drowned puppies, I would not be evil. Is that the same logic you want to use to defend God Almighty? If so, let's give Him a new title then. "God, The One Who Is Not Evil If You Don't Really Think About It That Much."

@wh4ckyWh4le the point I was making was about God, assuming that God is the one that created animals, not yourself. So replacing yourself with God in my message doesn’t make any sense.

@@tomforemanx1079 so if I created the puppies I drowned, that would make me less/not evil?

then that doesn't really make a difference to your suffering then? if you didn't know the difference between a gunshot and a stab wound you would still be in pain and suffering because of one or the other.

There isn't even any point to talk about it, the first question should be what makes them think, that there is any god at all, we can guess the answer, then what makes them think that their god is the real one, where is the last time that jesus just re-make somenes hand, or make any miracle at all? He said he will, but as we can see, it's bullshit, they can't answer this question, they will say that you have to belive without any proof, they will ignore that in bible's story, jesus did give a lot of proof to them, that he can do miracles.

Tullochgorum, Good point

Right?? Like how do you think no animals are capable of being aware of their own pain when parrots can straight up have ptsd?

They feel pain because we let the devil into our lives. But youre ignorant

@@professionalgambling6783 One of the miracles being casting the nets on the Sea of Galilee to kill lots of fish.

It's like they know something that this nincompoop doesn't 😃

Your argument here doesn't really hold up. It is easily countered with, "they use anesthesia to keep their patients still." and then your opponent might follow up with some hard to refute comment like, "most vets will tell you animals experience pain differently." WLC may be fighting a futile cause as a Christian Apologist, but he is no nincompoop. Respect for people please.

@@andrewdeller9744 Just to say, as a nurse, I was often sickened by the number of medics that claim "children experience pain differently". Didn't make them right, but you wouldn't know it by the way we often (don't) administer analgesia to kids.

@@andrewdeller9744 That would be an interesting refutation if animals were only administered general anaesthesia. Many times animals are only given local anaesthesia. They are also prescribed painkillers to take after the surgery and many other circumstances.

@@andrewdeller9744 I am a vet and I can tell that it is impossible to counter. Just pull the ear a bit hard of a cat and see how fast you are scratched ! All mammals and birds have the same type of pain as we have. There is no "argument" to be made against.

Man is just talking nonsense, bunch of theories that have nothing to do with reality. You said it yourself, we all have seen (unfortunately) animals that have been abused and to claim they don't feel pain is absurd.

We aren’t talking about dogs, we some on the smartest animals in the world bread them. Dogs don’t have the same intelligent levels as let’s say, a wild boar, deer, or squirrel

What does intelligence have to do with this? Stepping on any any animal’s tail will illicit a scream of pain plus a physical reaction. Based on Dr. Craig’s claim, my cat is more intelligent than he is. This shows that animals are fully aware of pain. Luckily, they’re not aware of Dr. Craig.

@@Wrkumlin WLC doesn’t ever say they don’t feel pain. Rather that they aren’t aware of themselves in the way humans are. Animals don’t think “*I* am in pain. *I* am suffering”.

Are u south African

he handsome

The good old days of Christian debunking

@@darklightmotion5534 Don't be gay

@@georgewashingtom6516 bitch Im bi also you out here assuming my gender? How ya know Im male?

@@darklightmotion5534 lmao right? Wtf

Which video?

Particularly amusing, as in the Roman Catholic Church the pope and a number of archbishops also have among their titles "primate". In the RCC the pope is the highest primate ....

Humans are also animals, and he separated that too. He also forgot dolphins.

That would offend a lot of his listeners.

Are you uncomfortable with his freedom of expression?

Almost got me with that pfp lmao

Excellent 👍 Anyone who doesn't agree isn't thinking with a clear mind. Thank you for this most intelligent comment.

@@debhurd8898 so someone who disagrees doesn't have a clear mind ..wow

I understand your argument, but that example is flawed. Animals live lesser existences than us, and as such trying to find a moral compass in anything outside of what was created in God's image is meaningless. To be even more specific, fishes almost exist to be food for other species, with them having some of the lowest intelligences of any animals

@@jpraise6771 WoW 🙃

Nonsense to associate this with evil.

Brilliant! Thanks for the laugh, as I rarely see South Park.

Reminds me of the line from Over the Hedge. “See? This is why I called an exterminator. To kill them, before they get hurt like this.”

It's coming right for us!

@First Name Last Name So you disagree with Alex's animal suffering load of nonsense and prefer the genocidal load of nonsense. Sweet! You're better off embracing the truth that suffering presents no problem for God. He is God.

Yeah, let's report this channel.. 😅😅😅

I am avoiding my studies XD I laughed out loud

Same.

just found my new channel name thanks a lot

Haha

@Andre Ghio I hope you know this but people are much less likely to listen to you if your attitude is like that. Instead, be patient, pleasant and explain why you think abortion is bad rather than attacking people and insulting them. Hope you have a great day, and more power to you! (Also I'm pretty sure Alura made a joke, so don't be so mad about it)

@Andre Ghio not wanting children doesn't mean I support abortion

@Andre Ghio Say one non religious argument against abortion! Heck, say a religious one that isn't fallacious! Else you're just here to attack people and shame them for their lifestyle choices.

Watch Boston Dynamics’ robots getting kicked - why do they stop themselves from falling? I disagree with Dr Craig that this is “useful” to the Christian, but the idea is not so easily dismissed. See “the problem of other minds’

@@althenimble I don’t understand your robot falling example can you expand?

@@MrRyan-wu4jx Imagine you wanted to program a robotic dog. You're like Boston Dynamics, but N years in the future - you also have self-healing tech in your robots. However, the self-healing takes time. Your robotic dog damages his foot. Say in order for the self-healing tech to work efficiently, you shouldn't put additional stress on the damaged foot. A well-programmed robotic-dog would now limp. You could make the same argument about a real-world dog (I'm not saying they are the same, just that this argument could be coherently made). The *appearance* of pain makes perfect sense without the (internal, subjective) *experience* of pain. In philosophy, this is related to the concepts known as "philosophical zombies" and "the problem of other minds" and belongs to the discipline of philosophy of mind. Hope that's helpful!

Of course you may say the "yelp" is harder to explain than the limp, but as long as it has an evolutionary explanation, it makes sense with or without a subjective conscious experience. And if it doesn't have an evolutionary explanation, why do we (and other animals) do it?

@@althenimble I’d argue all that’s irrelevant based on other evidence we have like the Yelp you’ve mentioned and personal experience like watching a cat suffer from cancer or my dogs demeanor when arthritis took over it’s body. I can’t think of any reason my one cat would bite it’s tail to the point we had to put him in a collar other than he was experiencing pain. I really don’t think that idea can be used to definitively state animals don’t feel pain anyway, at best it explains a possibility why they might not, not that they absolutely don’t.

Just order a bacon sandwich and eat it near a mosque 😂😂😂

@@proculusjulius7035 that's more of a problem of Muslims then of islam .

@@costas1032 oh so it's Muslims who say that pork is haram and therefore there's nothing wrong if I take my pig for a walk in the mosque eh?

@@proculusjulius7035 Islam says that pork is prohibited but it says nothing about what will happen to you if you it a pork sandwich. why would you take a pig or to a mosque when you know that it's holy place and desecrating it will be very offensive and can be considered an act of bigotry . you get your cat in the mosque though.

Since Muslims tend to just ineptly mimic Christian apologetic arguments, this is kind of a two-for-one video.

Fønni!

There's an F word in it

@@SavageHenry777 lol

Eric Cartman already dropped that.

Lol true 😂

Say YWH or any Sky Fairy is real they have to be SUPER PSYCHO EVIL I hate when people get into arguments about this or that, this all I need for this debate.

This is true. However, it doesn't make the arrangement false. It is possible to be true for animals that lack prefrontal cortex

@@Superman111181 yes..and still animals suffer.its not that simple

@@anandsuralkar2947 I think the point of the argument was that suffering is ill-defined sans prefrontal cortex. So without a better definition we could be in danger of equivocation

@@anandsuralkar2947 He confuses sentience with sapience. Sentience is merely the capacity to have experiences (+ pleasant and unpleasant sensations). Sapience is the ability to reason. The latter is not necessary for harm to be experienced, the former is enough. Some higher order animals like dogs, pigs, cats, cows etc demonstrate not only sentience, but an ability to have emotions, like sadness and joy - these are complex enough psychological states that they are on the very border of sapience.

Yoh

Yeah... The implications of his line of reasoning are incredibly disturbing. We don't know for a fact if animals are self aware or not. We DO know for a fact that babies are not, since we all used to be them, and know we weren't self aware at that time. If there is some moral distinction between experiencing pain, and being self aware of your pain experience.... Then babies would be in the same camp he argues animals are in. I really hope ol' Billy C. doesn't need someone to explain to him that pain suffered by babies is still just as bad as pain suffered by adults...

@@TheSonicShoe Are we even certain that humans are self aware? From what I've come to understand self-awareness develops when we recognise our reflection to be our self. I suspect we're far from self aware. Truth is, you are not allowed to become aware of yourself, when you are born. Every need is provided for. It's anything but a natural birth, which raises the question "is there anything natural about human nature?" Somewhere, in the deepest recesses of your mind is your first ever experience. What do you think it looks like? Not the memory, the experience.

@@TheSonicShoe Actually, I'd argue it's less traumatic. a lot of the trauma is psychological and tougher to overcome for an adult. But let's be honest, who remembers the midwife smacking their arse?

Prove it

@darkerthanblue9 price that dogs with abusive owners flinch when people go to pet them? Are you saying that isn't true? Ok then... how about shock collars being effective means of training animals? What about animals crying out in pain when their hurt? It's just absolutely asinine to suggest animals aren't aware of pain. Even if it's experienced differently than humans (we're also animals btw) it's still pain. Animals have emotions too; this is easily demonstrable with dogs again when their happy to see their owners, sad when they're left at shelters etc.

Yea if Craig wasn't already almost the bottom of the barrel in my opinion, he would be now. I mean, I'm not a vegetarian and I know about the suffering of animals. Craig doesn't seem to be even be aware of that.

The first passage I would have expected in response to this subject would be from Romans 8:18-25: 18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us. 19 For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now. 23 And not only this, but also we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body. 24 For in hope we have been saved, but hope that is seen is not hope; for who hopes for what he already sees? 25 But if we hope for what we do not see, with perseverance we wait eagerly for it.

Saying animals are not smart enough to understand pain and therefore don't feel it is such a bad argument. Same argument was used to excuse doing unspeakable things to those with neurological or developmental disabilities or differences. Like a similar vein of logic led to a lot of nazi sht.. totally not okay. It's a bad idea that can too easily lead to bad things

@@EllenMJKrog Alex, here, does not address any of Craig's work on the issue of animal suffering outside of this debate. Nor does he address any of Michael Murray's work on the issue, whom Craig references extensively. Simply, none of the arguments being made by Craig or Murray go along the lines of "animals are not smart enough to understand pain and therefore don't feel it." If you are interested in Michael Murray's work, I would refer you to his book Nature Red in Tooth and Claw: Theism and the Problem of Animal Suffering.

@@troycalhoun8438 I am not interested in nonsense. The idea that animals don't feel pain is nonsense. Pain is one of the most adaptive responses imaginable. It is not some recent addition, like the ability to do "philosophy". It is rock bottom basic and ancient. When are we going to get it: people are animals!

he is RIGHT

The darkest blot of human creativity!

Didn’t know Alex was a redditor

TikTok doesn't exists.

Snyone else that looked down to chat to find this comment?

How?

I think you should read the title of the video, as this is an objection to Christianity, not Buddhism.

Exactly, after living with and studied animals for my entire life, the idea that they don't know they are suffering is patently ridiculous. The book Peterson is referring to is one by a philosopher, not a biologist, and it's understanding of animal experiences and intelligence is out of date.

@@dr.jones.3832 You do realize that we need to conduct some experiments on animals in order to save other animals and humans?

@@dr.jones.3832 I agree it is inhumane to torture, but I would contend that most of the work scientists do with animals is not cruel or inhumane at all. But I'm sure your mind is firmly made up.

Why are animals so easy to love when people are such pains in the ars. ??? Ask. God heknows.

@@michaelpond813 God never picks up when I call him. I guess he's just holy ghosting me.

He just want to avoid the problem of God allowing animals to suffer so he simply makes the absurd assumption of course

So basically if you agree with this video you are saying that dogs🐕 and cats🐈 and birds🦅🐤🐧 and fish🐟🐠🦈 shouldn't exist at all and everything should be grazers🐑🐐🐄🦌 that can have a max of 1 or 2 kids....

@@joesifa5235A god could’ve created a vastly better, more efficient and less gruesome system that didn’t involve excessive pain, death, and suffering. And yet he didn’t, what does that say about the gods character? God chose, CHOSE to have sheep be torn apart in violent excruciating pain.

@@AliceSpeltRight You're right. Here's what God says: “The wolf and the lamb shall graze together, and the lion shall eat straw like the ox; and dust shall be the serpent’s food. They shall do no evil or harm in all My holy mountain,” says the LORD. Isaiah 65:25 (NASB)

@@joesifa5235 I mean snakes don’t eat dust, but that’s not here nor there. I don’t see your point. It’s ok because god said he made the atrocious system? Just because he made it doesn’t make it ok.

As a passionate Atheist, I'd advise you during your cogitating, you might not want to defenestrate "Jesus". Because when our species created "god" and invented all the religions, it was often done for a specific purpose: Rules--Routine--primarily for community STRUCTURE. Thee other two VITALLY IMPERATIVE reasons we invented religion, is for: Meaning (&) Hope

@@Dream-Eternal87 I think a possible origin for morality is that humans created it as a tool to survive. We are a lot more likely to survive as a pack than as indivituals, so treating each other well is useful to the goals of staying alive and thriving. That is why arguably the most fundamental moral rule that seems to appear in every society is that killing a human being (or what is percieved as a human being, of course there have been socities to consider some inferior for reasons like race) for absolutly no reason, is wrong. Everything else, be it killing people in other scenarios, treatment and value of indivituals belonging to other species, slavery, theft, assault, colonization, discrimination, drugs, alcohol, gun control, sex, freedom, cheating or lying, is far more debated and views on them have shifted a lot more depending on place, time and culture. And of course they have; they aren't as instrumental to our survival as a species. You also said we can determine what is right and what is wrong, and to that I have to ask, can we? Really? Our species has had entire civilizations (so, not a few psychopaths or nut cases, no, entire socities - normal people) that supported slavery, genocides, and war among other things. There are still so, so many things that are extremely debated to this day, the same way things that are now widely accepted to be good or bad were once debated. And who knows? Maybe some of the things that are widely considered to be morally grey now will one day be put in strict black and white boxes too. Maybe morality will change in such a way that our society and the moral codes that are accepted in it will one day be seen as corrupt and twisted the same way we view some past socities. Would any of that extremely broad diversity of opinion be possible if we could so clearly determine an objective right and wrong? I personally don't think so. But because we haven't been given objective answers by some indisputable, flawless force (at least one that we all believe in), there is so much uncertainty, conflict and subjectivity over morality. That got longer than I expected, sorry lol. Kind of got carried away. Anyway, I respect your opinion and I do not want to seem agressive or like I'm coming at you, these are just my thoughts.

Craig is in denial & in delusion.Animals suffer actually as do we.

@@thebelen2359 You’re 100% right, it’s a useful tool. Hope can be good, but when mixed with the wrong people can turn quite sour (ya know… all the wars and innocents slaughtered…) but yeah, as you were also saying, morality is subjective. There is no “good and bad,” they are made up, actions are actions that have effects and consequences. Morals are really just an opinion on how you should live. Therefore, not objective, definitely subjective lol

@@readynowforever3676 Liam Armstrong is saying how they think the video is thought-provoking. You’re antagonizing does nothing helpful, let people believe and be interested in whatever they want. Your behaviour is partially what can make atheists look bad.

Comparable to children in some ways.

@@tangerinetangerine4400 That's what I was thinking.

And if you think about their senses being like 10 times better than humans in some cases, you start wondering whether or not they may sense more in other areas too (physically), not just eyesight or smell.

@@tangerinetangerine4400 yeah. What about children in the womb? Do they suffer if they are aborted?

@@Superman111181depending on how old the fetus is, no.

How did they find this out? Do you have a source for that?

Yeah, magpies can tell their own reflection from the faces of others

And all typically farmed animals too - chickens, cows, pigs, to name a few. Primer on chickens intelligence is "Thinking chickens: a review of cognition, emotion, and behavior in the domestic chicken." by Lori Marino. You can find similar research on cows and especially pigs. I've picked chickens as they are considered stupid by most people.

Isn't that literally the definition of sentience?

@@NateROCKS112 not necessarily.

When Thanos killed, living did not suffer pain, just fear.

Yeah if you take it litteraly it doesn’t make sense🤦🏻‍♂️

@@mmkw5621 You can deduce any meaning from any words if you go far enough "metaphorically".

@@mmkw5621 Like Dutta said, if you don't take it "literally" then you can make out of the stories whatever you want, thus making the entire thing even less consistent.

LOL true

@@rritobakdutta8730 you can learn much more about human psychology by reading the Bible than reading some random fairytale.

Simp

@@josiahwashington1882 If she were a boy it would be disgusting

@@georgewashingtom6516 not really but I was joking tho

That’s not perfect tbh

@@georgewashingtom6516 Simping is fine as long as it doesn't become a way of life.

My version of this argument is.... They are not human let them di

@@armando429046 Why is this guy not talking about hurting plants. Isn't that Vegan diet?

The word 'anima' literally means 'soul', hence to argue that "animals don't have souls" is just being foolish at best.

@@BlacksmithTWD You assert that humans and other animals have a "soul". Presence of a soul is not in evidence and is as poorly defined as the term "spiritual". The emergent property of a brain and CNS along the animal kingdom's evolutionary pathways has long since imbued all animal species with the ability to suffer in pain. Assuming that animals feel pain because human beings sinned has got to be the biggest stretch of logic in the annals of Christiandom.

@@wickedguppy3715 No I'm not asserting anything, I merely argue that the word animal is derrived from the latin word for soul. It still could be they don't have a soul but instead are souls. I'm not that familiar with the world vieuw of the first speakers of latin, so I don't know what they meant with it. I would merely argue that there must be some connection. I don't know why you are bringing in concepts like sin and pain experience among animals into the conversation, I certainly didn't mention it. Seems to me that you are the one assuming too much here.

I caught this, as well. Guess we're just throwing chimpanzees under the bus?

And they've been used for experiments for many decades, with no regard for their suffering. Of course, zoos are no different, they are imprisoned without any regard for the misery it might cause.

A squirrel has 4 legs and a tail. So does a rhino. Does that mean they are relatives? Or that they simply have a similar structure? I'll believe the evolution debate when flamingos design nuclear weapons and wage war against each other's nations.

@YouOnlyLiveTwice Exactly my point

Right. And of course he doesn’t say much about souls since those are the most debunked theological concept.

I have a suspicion that Craig misinterpreted the findings of that paper. I have not read it myself, but logically, the only thing I can assume is that, when he read "they don't have the SAME pain awareness", he thought that meant, "Well, then. they don't feel pain." More than likely - and again, I am assuming right now - what Murray meant was that an animal can experience pain, be aware of it, and try to avoid whatever caused said pain, but they probably cannot form any kind of intellectual relationship with it. In other words, they can react to it, but do not think about it beyond the feeling of it, and probably would not be able to decide whether or not enduring it on purpose would be worth it in the way we do when consenting to medical treatments or helping others in danger. That sounds like a much more believable difference to me.

@@TristandeRobillard Well not for medical treatments. That is a bit too abstract of a concept for a dog I imagine. But you could say that they decide to endure it on purpose to do something different like biting their way out of a cage causing their mouth to bleed or to force themselves through a prickly bush to escape something scary, they can choose to walk on rocks that hurt their paws if there's some treat they really want on the other end.

@@GoldenMechaTiger That makes perfect sense to me, yes. That whole claim that Craig makes honestly holds up less and less the more you think about it.

@mr.anonymous it's kind of the opposite though...? The father's sins are heaped upon the heads of his children-

@@n-no_w-wait4889 You'll find both in the bible.

@@onigbajamo can u give me the scriptures for that pls

@@hearthebellsring3990 - Bible verses as requested: *Deuteronomy 24 : 16* _Fathers shall not be put to death for their sons, nor shall sons be put to death for their fathers; everyone shall be put to death for his own sin._ Yet thar verse is flatly contradicted by the story of the same god killing an innocent baby boy explicitly to punish the baby's father: *2 Samuel 12 : 13 - 18* NIV _Then David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.” Nathan replied, “The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die._ _But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die.”_ _After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah’s wife had borne to David, and he became ill._ _… On the seventh day the child died._ *The road to atheism is paved with Bibles that have actually been **_read._*

He litterly just disproved your god lol

@First Name Last Name Cringe.

@@seraphim-kpopdreamcorpsear5255 Why? It's a true statement.

@First Name Last Name no doubt Christianity is curse to humanity and this entire planet.

Alex Jones ?

Yes, that beard really is something

This is one of the main concepts behind stoic philosophy

Yes but even the most basic neuron circuits can, after being exposed to constant pain, adapt into being more tolerant to pain by augmenting the threshold of response. Functionally animals experience pain almost equally to us, we may understand it better but the sensation will not change because of our understanding, just because of how neurons work. We only differentiate in being able to prepare for a painful experience beforehand maybe like when going to the doctor to get a vaccine or something.

One day advanced aliens arrive and decide to poke about inside our brains and bodies because, hey, we’re way down in on the hierarchy of pain…

Can mean we suffer less, too. If we need to be aware of the suffering to experience it, then that explains why people who get injured but don't notice it instantly have varying amounts of delay between the moment of the injury and the moment they feel its repercussions. More to do with a kind of reverse placebo effect imo, but it's at least a bit interesting to dig into that thought, so I'm sharing it.

Circus animals are on constant fear of further pain which is why they perform tricks so they don’t get hurt. They also suffer from mental struggles such as ptsd depression and anxiety.

Good point. And unborn babies, too.

Almost like....wait for it...heaven.