Alister McGrath - Atheism's Best Arguments?

Atheism fields two kinds of arguments denying the existence of God: arguments that refute so-called 'proofs' of God's existence and arguments that affirmatively support the truth claims of atheism. This first seeks weaknesses or fallacies in pro-God arguments; the second seeks to show why atheism alone makes sense. Different atheists offer different arguments.

[ABiggles]

Does this video hold the record for the most strawmen arguments in 6 and a half minutes?

[myopenmind]

I can’t believe he played the “I used to be an atheist” card.

Nonbelievers now for the first time now account for >50% of the UK population.


I don’t think he was a well considered atheist and also wonder did his move to Christianity coincide with meeting his wife who is an Anglican minister.

[bebeezra]

What prominent Atheist has ever claimed, *_"if we get rid of religion, we get rid of violence!"_*

He's beating the hell out a pathetic strawman.

[Funnysterste]

Atheism has no arguments. I am an atheis, because there are no good argument for theism. I am not claiming that there is no god, i just refuse the claim that there is a god.

[plasticvision]

His comment on scientists believing in god does not show the god claim to be any the more valid. All this really means is that smart people can both entertain and believe stupid ideas. It’s nothing more than that really.

[jimtuv]

Atheism's Best Arguments? Why should atheists even need an argument? The person making the extraordinary claim (the theist) is the one who needs extraordinary amounts of evidence and a reasoned argument why the unbeliever should believe. Why don't they understand this? There is no atheist community, doctrine, dogma or belief system. Just unbelief. The only thing atheist have in common is that they don't believe. They will, however, come together to fight unfair laws that give preference to the theist.

[ronjohnson]

let me say this for the ump-teenth time. Why cant god himself show up and answer Kuhn's questions. You claim he can, but as my father said, "don't give me excuses, give me performance".

[SentimentalHogwash]

This man’s misrepresentation of atheism and atheists is nothing but straw men. Atheism is non-belief in gods, there are no religious analog to not being convinced of a thing. Religion as a permission structure for violence is not an atheist argument at all, it’s a condemnation of a given religion’s moral authority that has nothing to do with the whether or not gods exist. Predictions of the demise of religiosity are also irrelevant to the atheist perspective.

[Bvic]

Most pro-god speakers on this channel defend an abstract version of God that isn't what everyday religion is about.

Atheists are not much in opposition of Voltaire's type of deism.

[douglasparise]

First and foremost, self preservation, survival, primal instincts manifest psychologically, intellectually, physically

[christophercousins]

This is embarrassing. He didn't answer one question.

[MBBurchette]

Trying to parse out ALL of the logical fallacies McGrath uses in these 6 minutes would be a mighty challenge, but I don’t think he ever addressed the question.
The best he can say is that ALL violence isn’t caused by religion, and that ALL scientists aren’t atheists ergo...god exists?

[LuukVanEgeraat]

At 5:48 he states "The fact we can make sense of this world at all is astonishing". That idea leads him to his religious convictions. But I do not see how religion makes this make sense. Since when does something become more explained by adding elements to its inner workings that are themselves undetectable and unexplained?

[Webnotized]

There's no kind of argument proving the existence of a god.

[sarahcrouse]

Anyone else notice that this guy didn't actually address "atheism's best arguments, " but the weakest ones? Lol

[jaygallagher]

I’m an atheist and I don’t want religion to go away and I don’t care what you believe in

[andrebrown]

This guy says Stalin...I stopped listening.

[simianbarcode]

Amazing. Every single word of what McGrath said was incorrect...



(and based on exhaustingly over-emphasized logical fallacies.)

[plasticvision]

Science can adjudicate on the god question: when the god hypothesis makes testable claims.

For example, an all powerful god, a god that must necessarily have the physical property of power, and who exists necessarily and before the universe, is by definition a testable hypothesis. A hypothesis Christians claim he has failed at because somehow his power is not physical, even though he supposedly created the physical and is supposed to possess the attribute of being immensely powerful. Oh, and he's supposed to be changeless right up to the point of creating a universe so this perfect being can be woreshipped. WTF? Wouldn't a perfect being not only be incapable of creating imperfection, but what possible need would a perfect being have for being worshipped? Surely, a perfect being has no deficiencies by definition, and so has no need for anything?

How does this incoherent question begging nonsense even make sense???!!!

[BibleContradictionsErrors]

This is reverse organized business religion is on the way out. Spiritualism is maybe on the way up.