Condemned to Hell for Subconscious Activity 

With the advent of Super Thanks, I'm starting a pledge to read and answer each Super Thanks comment left as I'm newly full-time and appreciate the financial support so much. For many reasons, I greatly appreciate the time and thought put in to every comment, but schedule and mental health prevents me from replying to each individually.

I subconsciously knew for years that Christianity was a lie. I suppressed that knowledge and tried (desperately) to live as a Christian. But eventually I brought my conscious and subconscious knowledge into alignment. Now I am whole and happy.

If a fool can figure out that there is no God, what's Greg's excuse?

When I was a Christian, and I saw books and writings, say like Htichens and "God is Not Good", I would actively avoid it, to say in my head that it is wrong whole-sale. It did NOT pursue reading and hearing things that went against my faith. If I heard x that was in contradiction, I would find an apologetic that shored up my faith, against the argument's logic or rationale. Truly, this is what I did. I suppressed truth. I suppressed real, logical arguments that had incontrovertible evidence, like how the Synoptics do contradict each other. I wouldn't hear it and would not study it.

The “suppressing the truth in unrighteousness” thing is a circular argument. You know, the same principle in Romans 1:18-20 can be applied to ANY fictitious deity.

I have ran into many instances of people who feel angst from something they are not actually guilty of, because they had been trained to use guilt as a goto instead of rational evaluation of something that went wrong.

But we’re not responsible for what happens in our subconscious mind. If we are, that means we’re also responsible for everything we do in dreams, because dreams are created by the subconscious mind. Going to the analogy Greg likes to use, it’s like sending someone to jail for killing someone in a dream.

It's always so *intensely* frustrating when apologists pull the "well, you think some things are right or wrong, therefore you have objective morality, therefore gAwD. Otherwise right and wrong is just opinion, therefore there's no real reason not to be bad". x_x I recognize that morality is a construct that exists from a combo of empathy and the social contract in order to ensure cooperative survival and yet I feel strongly about that morality, even if that's all it comes from. Things don't need to come from an authority to be true or exist.

Koukl always sounds like a used car salesman. His voice quality, cadence and pronunciation (adding the "y" sound before vowels -- thyat, yin, thyere, hyave...) grate on me before he even starts his dodge and deflect. Paul, I clicked to hear your analysis because it is ALWAYS informative.

Greg's argument is directly reversible. It, more or less, describes my move, as a youth, from theism to atheism. I did not admit to myself, at first, that I found Christianity illogical, unhistorical, immoral and no more likely to be "right" than any other religion. Do this mean that if I find his line of reasoning unsound, I should find my reasoning unsound or am I confused?

About 25 minutes in the woman says that “They [Atheists] don’t like god.” Would she like a person that is murderous, cruel, causes people to be sick, and is willing to burn people alive that don’t like him? Simple questions like mine actually get some of them to think about what they are saying. Good work, Paulogia.

Dang, you are good at analogies, Paul.

"... a fool has said in his heart..." Well, yeah. My heart is a muscle. It pumps blood. It does not think nor reason. My brains however, has looked at the evidence, and found them wanting. Poor. So... I withhold belief.

So convenient for apologists that their scripture tells them that non-believers are actually believers.

Greg "I only care about appearances" Koukl is one of our greatest allies. Think about it. He is arrogant, obnoxious and is projecting constantly. He probably has turned more people Atheist than Paul has. PS. Congrats on hitting the 100k mark.

People like Greg are vile. There's no other way to describe what he's doing here.

Do they really not hear how repugnant they are being?

This is my favorite weekend cartoon.

If the existence of God is evident, then why did it take a Damascus Road experience for Paul to stop killing believers?

I was lying to myself when I was making mental gymnastics to conciliate what I knew to be real (the stuff I was seeing in my microscope) and what I wanted to be real (religion) because it would displease my family if I came out as an atheist. Apologists never seem to give atheists the benefit of the doubt, do they? We're all liars to this crowd. Might be they are suppressing the belief that we may have a point because their paychecks depend on the religion stuff being right.

My “cos the Bible tell me so” meter is now off the scale and had a melt down 😂

How is 'the Christian God doesn't align to my internal moral compass' a trivial problem? If God wrote morality into my heart, then that is a major problem. Unless he intentionally made me with a corrupted morality, in which the all loving God condemned me to hell during my creation.

Book says a thing.

Fantastic Video. Thank you again. Really great content.

I’m a simple man, I see a new Paulogia video, I drop what I’m doing, watch the video, and hit that like button.

This just means, that Psalm 14:1 is an ad-hom, Rom. 1:18 is an ad-hoc assertion, which leads right into the gaslighting of Rom. 1:20.

Paulogia I love your work.. You are awesome!

Every time they say the psalm they take it out of context, every, single, time.

I'm legitimately curious as to what this guy would say his job is. Does he really think his whole deal is to get someone to admit what they already know, like a police interrogation mixed with confession?

I was born into Christianity. I was puzzled by what I was being told, original sin, superiority of men over women, Adam and Eve, what does a rabbit that lays chocolate eggs gotb to do with it, etc. I found , for me the truth in the Second Coming, in the Baha'i Faith. By leaving Churchianity, I was not leaving Christ. Leaving Churchianity does not make one an atheist

There are very few apologists I’m willing to think are just not intelligent. Greg is one of them.

Your videos are So underrated

Greg is a man who is incapable of imagining people who are not himself.

Thanks for the video :)

Call me shallow all you like, but the louder apologists protest, the more guilty they feel for their deeply repressed atheism; duh...

Someone should develop a morality exam for theists who think they believe in the same god. They can’t see what each other are answering, then all the questions they disagree on can be revealed-then they get asked “if morality is objective, and in our hearts, and you believe in the same god-why are you answers different?” And when they give some BS about interpretation, tell them to come to a consensus because if there is objective morality ‘cause his’ and even they don’t know what it is, then it’s pointless for atheists to give a fuck about what you say.

Thanks!

I do not think I would be capable of loving the god described in the bible. It commits too much genocide.

I can't stop thinking about wasps!

I think Greg is lying to himself, and he doesn't even know it. I think he thinks, "I have good evidence and good reasons for believing in God," but deep down, he knows he doesn't, and he is suppressing the truth in unrighteousness. See, it's not nice, is it? So how about we all stop pretending to know each other's thoughts better than the person who is actually thinking those thoughts, and have a real conversation like grown-ups?

As I listen to that guy I keep wanting to say, "I know you are, but what am I?"

So I know that God exist, I just don't know that I know it?

I think romans 1 could be referring to the energies of God rather than his essence

people adding "darwinian" in front of evolution has always irked me. Its just evolution folks.

This apologist argument isn't intended to convince non-believers. Like most apoligist arguments it's intended to comfort believers. They see all these non-believers confidently engagine in non-belief and this argument serves to convince believers that "they actually DO believe". It's so disingenuous and offensive. But I have a feeling that it's somewhat effective. There are many different angles that apologists attack from to assuage the doubting believer. This angle effectively convinces them that not only do non-believers actually believe, but they too actually believe even if they lose faith. So the doubting believer who feels like they're losing their faith can have faith that even if they don't believe, deep down in their heart they actually DO believe. It's like faith insurance... "Even if I lose faith, I'm still a believer so Pascal's wager still applies to me, I'll be saved".

A fancy version of the “ No atheists in foxholes “ argument.

Nice.

The fool says in his heart that Eneru is not the one true God.

I never understood how satan's actions are still my fault

Right Amy, one can be an otherwise intelligent person.. and yet still be a Christian.

I've never understood why people believed in God. I tried and tried to make sense of the idea, but it just never made any sense to me as anything more than a culturally-approved rationalization for 'why we do things', with a clear conflation of rationalizations of beliefs about what it means to be human and what it means to be Christian.

What if it was a fool who wrote that verse?

Excellent video, as always. I would say however, my interpretation of "loving God" is doing what one is told to do. It is worshipping, praising, believing, etc. As such, it *isn't* the emotion that we feel (though I think most people would expect the emotion to be present too). As such, I think this is equivocation on their part and, at the end, you are answering a slightly different question than they are asking.

Stop Paulogia! You're making TOO MUCH SENSE! 🤣 😉

I have a reflexive belief that apologists are disgusting.

At 5:00 “not an unusual condition” Sounds like Greg may be a suppressed atheist, as that is exactly how most become ex-theists.

"The fool has said..." argument is not valid. It is of the form "If A then B, We see B, therefor A" This is trying to make the converse of a statement follow from the statement. Women are human. Greg is human, therefor Greg is a woman. So may a fool is an atheist. But there are atheists who are not fools.

13:19 Then I counter with Jeremiah 8:8 How can you say, ‘We are wise, And the law of the LORD is with us’? Look, the false pen of the scribe certainly works falsehood.

I think it shouts volumes how desperate these fundies are, seeing their believers melt away, that they stoop to make these arguments, not to convince atheists, but an attempt to hold back the floodgates of the people who are finally opening their eyes to all this nonsense. I can't recall a single apologetic's argument that seems directed at the skeptic instead of wavering believers. For instance, Koukl's diatribe depends heavily on raising a guilt trip, which won't work for those of us already far free of this baloney. It might even be interesting to see/listen to really good and valid arguments. However, if there is no god, there can not be truly valid arguments for his existence. (And certainly if such a supposed-loving all-knowing super-critter existed, HE could simply demonstrate his existence by all the powers at his command instead of sending out an army of second-rate hacks.)

When I get angry, even at something universally considered anger-worthy (mistreatment of animals, children, the defenseless), I also feel guilty. If guilt feelings are God's secret morality written in my heart, God is immoral because He spends a lot of time being angry at things less worthy of it than I do.

Fool Says *There are no Gods* (Elohim) No *Gods* Psalm 14:1 …The fool says in his heart “(There are) No _Elohim;_ *they are* corrupt. They have done abominable works. None is good.” “Elohim” may be ambiguous as to number, because Ancient Hebrew didn’t require a verb for existence, but “they are corrupt” is not ambiguous; it can be only plural, which clarifies that _Elohim_ is a plural here (it is a plural form, but sometimes used as a singular). *“The fool” is singular* based on its verb. So the fool is saying the gods don’t exist and they are corrupt. That doesn’t make sense to us, but as some theists say, illogically, “You’re an atheist because you hate god.” So people can utter two phrases in the same sentence that contradict each other. The standard translation of “No god,” singular, appears to cater to later, including current, monotheists.

13:05 Aren't those three verses he cited written by humans and not by God? So they're just what people thought and believed, which is about as relevant as what a pastor’s opinion is or a random hobo’s opinion.

Atheistic World View ????? Is That A Thing ??? ... I Gotta Find That Atheist Holy Book 😅

I'm sorry if I bring a little bad mojo to an otherwise friendly and polite channel but "they deny god because they hate him" goes both ways christians, I could say "you love this character god and want it to be real". I'm sorry but it annoys me this "it applies only one way" thinking (conscious or not).

Funny I believe but don’t know I believe. What’s the one prerequisite for heaven? Right belief. So no one goes to hell we are all subconsciously fixing it.

Holy cow. Koukl basically saying that he's better at getting people to accept the "truth" of Christ better than the "inspired word of God", wow. We have to have apologists because God is incompetent is one hell of a claim for an apologist to make.

Does "stupid", "slow", "dumb", or any other ajective for less-intellgent people even show up in the Bible? Historically, it seems that "fool" is the catch-all term.

The carbon tax is a rather controversial subject. Here in Canada, I see the carbon tax increases climate change denial in common people's minds. Moreover, I can't see how carbon taxes are going to decrease carbon emissions unless we change our choices. Carbon tax only makes us poorer and unhappier. In the West, particularly in North America, we have to change our lifestyles. We need to stop car-centered urbanism and soulless suburbs in favor of walkable cities and efficient public transit. We need to start producing locally instead of getting products cheaply manufactured in the 3rd World. More importantly, we need to learn to consume less.

The fun thing about listening to apologists use their dishonest trickery for long enough, is that they inevitably end up insisting they will have their cake-god and eat it too -- thereby providing direct proof against both the being _and_ the eating. No wonder they choose to keep this content in a place where it doesn't have to stand to the reason of critical comments...

As a former Christian, the best way to counter this threat is to point out that you did, in fact, believe. After that, mention the doctrine of eternal security, a.k.a. "once saved, always saved." This works best on Evangelical Protestants.

With these apologist I learn all the problems that mighty omnipotent and omniscient gods have in demonstrating their existence to people, so they can be believed. Problems that every inert and dumb rock does not have, somehow...

The christian ping-pong is surely interesting. They always use the good ol' "but that's the Old Testament" card when there is something they don't like. But apparently Koukl here prefers the "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God" of the Old Testament, instead of the "Whosoever shall say, ‘Thou fool,’ shall be in danger of hell fire" of the New Testament.

I find it interesting that Greg claims atheists bring shallow arguments while presenting the most shallow argument ever, "You know, you know the truth, you're only suppressing it."🤪

Thanks!

Koukl is the modern example of 'the artful dodger'. If he doesn't like the question he works hard to rewrite the question to fit answers he likes to give.

The sad thing is, it's entirely possible that Greg isn't being dishonest when he incorrectly summarizes previous interactions, because every time he has a conversation, a radically filtered version of that conversation gets filed into his long-term memory, and that becomes indisputable fact to him. When someone says "I didn't say that" he never doubts his own memory, he assumes the other person is either not remembering correctly, or is being deceptive. EVERYTHING that he hears and everything that he says gets filtered through a lens of confirmation bias.

Paul, one of my favorite things about your approach is that you don't put words in people's mouths. You show them speaking. Koukl is a repeat offender deceiver when it comes to "misremembering" (read: inventing) stories that help his cause, and I appreciate that you show this and move on. Growing up in the church, I can't count how many times I heard pastors and evangelists employ this Entirely Made Up Story tactic only to hear the faithful parrot those stories and insist they were true. Once enough time had passed, if you challenged these people, a lot of them would insist that they saw it happen... kind of like all the people who claim to have been at Woodstock.

That was worded very well. I've been with me 24/7 for 56 years and while I'm certainly not an expert on much, when it comes to *me* I'm pretty much the worlds leading expert. So, if you're trying to convince me that what you believe is true, demonstrating that you don't know what you're talking about, by attacking the one thing I am absolutely sure of, is not a great way to go about it.

The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” And a wise man shouts it from the rooftops.

congrats on the 100k dude, been here for half of it. love your stuff and your laid back approach. hope to be here for at least the next 900k. ps. loved seeing you on the creaky blinder's podcast

The bible quotes: "the fool says in his heart...", so what? Darth Vader finds everyone not believing in the Force "...disturbing" (while magically choking him). Doesn't make Jedi, Sith and the Force any more non-fictional...

I met Greg Koukl once in a bar. He told me he is just in it for the money. This definitely happened. And congrats to 100k subscribers!

I wonder if Greg is capable of a sincere conversation with a non-Christian, or if he views every conversation through "tactical" lenses. What a sad way to see other human beings.

Fool or not I have no reason to believe in the invisible sky wizard and plenty of reasons not too. If by chance that genocidal maniac in the sky exist. That is one monster I will not worship.

Awesome and congrats on 100 k Paul. You really do deserve it. You were critically undersubbed for years. I remember when you and Shannon, and others were doing vids on the GDC. You have come so far. Thank you for all the wonderful content over the years. It really is a pleasure watching your vids. I still look forward and get excited about your content everytime you drop a vid or now do a live. Keep up the great work bud

"Things we know to be true, but we don't like" perfectly sums up my journey away from faith. Eventually the logical and experienced lack of evidence for God grew so big that I couldn't keep slathering more faith on top of it. It was a patchy mess with larger and larger parts uncovered and exposed. I couldn't ignore it any longer and I had to confront it no matter how much I didn't like admitting that I didn't believe in God even though that was the truth.

Romans 1:20 "...God's invisible qualities...have been clearly seen...". How does THAT work? 😉

We didn’t evolve “morality” in the same way we didn’t evolve medicine. We evolved the ability to reason along with evolving to be a social species. We evolved to value survival and cooperation and used our reason to create tools to further those purposes. Tools like medicine, education, government, and morality. And just like any other technology, morality has been tweaked and refined, which is why we see so much variation in morality across cultures and across time. All moral systems, even Christianity’s, have the same aim: maximizing well-being, but as we learn more about the world and ourselves we find parts of morality that work better or worse for that purpose, and thus refine it. Humans used to think slavery was perfectly moral (especially Christians), but we don’t anymore since we realized that being of a different race doesn’t make someone less human (although some have yet to realize this unfortunately). So I would agree it is wrong to say that we evolved to be moral, but only because it is imprecise. We did evolve behaviors and instincts that led us to invent morality to better align ourselves toward humanity’s shared goals.

Doug is just suppressing that conversation with Greg. Or Greg is just making crap up.

I have issue with believers always telling me that I do believe but simply deny, as though they know what's going through my head. I spend way too much time trying to explain how belief is not the choice they make out to be. In my eyes, belief is the result of persuasion. Either I am convinced of something, thus believing, or I'm not. I don't get to choose. So, to me, the idea of going to hell for something that god has failed to do, or outright chosen not to do, i.e. convince me of its existence, is asinine.

Yayy! 100K subscribers! Congratulations Paul, it's well deserved

Intellectually, I understand cognitive dissonance, but the sheer levels it can get to always seem to surprise me. Like, how can you bring up the devil blinding people to God in the same conversation you are blaming those people for not processing their believe?

These two Christians on the video complain that atheists are shallow thinkers? I can't imagine a more shallow method of thinking than to go to an old book and believe everything written in it. I always thought that self reflection was part of deeper thinking but is seems memorizing quotes from an old book is far deeper.

11:50 Him saying that "a lot of these evolutionary stories are just that, stories" while believing in creationism because the bible says so is so hypocritical it's hilarious.

4.57 - 'We suppress, consciously, things that we know to be true but we don't like''. Yes, that would include things like the earth being billions of years old, humans being one of the great apes, common ancestry with all other living creatures, evolution, all that sort of stuff. Christians are brilliant at projecting their own shortcomings onto those who do not share their beliefs.

I love how this type of argument is probably held by the same people who would call "group hallucination" argument for the resurrection absurd😆. Like, every non-beleiver (billions) is falling under the same psychological phenomenon but a handful of people sharing one psychological event is *totally* out of the question😂 (not putting the hallucination argument forward, just an observation).

"I'm going to stick with God's assessment here in Romans..." That's it. That right there is one of my key objections to Christianity. God didn't say that. Paul did. Why are you condemning people on the word of a self-described guilt-ridden religious fanatic??? One of the first threads of me leaving my faith behind was asking this question of countless people and getting no answer. Not only no "good" answer, but no real answer at all. Generally, I got a glassy-eyed stare followed by "all scripture is inspired..." My follow up to that: "Didn't Paul write that one too?" (now, yes, w're not sure he did, but THEY think he did). From there, it was more glassy eyes and the occasional pop apologist book recommendation.

The real irony here is that Psalm 14:1 contradicts Romans 1:20 by outright saying that there are people who believe in their hearts that there is no god.

The whole thing is summed up in one phrase. She said, "... is there a reason why some people do not accept the existence of God." This question is asked under the presumption that God exists,, while it questions people who make no such assumption. The existence of "God" has never been shown to be possible, let alone proven.

I was suckered by a scam (an MLM) their promotional material was full of 'this is really true' statements and full of warnings that even my best friend would try and discourage me OUT OF JEALOUSY