The new REBUTTED case for God's existence

OUTLINE

0:00 Intro
1:04 Trent’s preliminaries
3:49 Argument from change
27:14 Kalam
29:27 Scientific case
30:59 Hilbert’s Hotel
1:08:09 Benardete paradoxes
1:24:40 Modal contingency argument
1:49:42 Fine-tuning argument
2:00:29 Argument from miracles
2:18:45 Moral argument
2:33:18 Conclusion
2:34:16 A story
2:41:38 Bonus soccer

LINKS

(1) Want the script? Become a patron :)

THE USUAL...

[Nontradicath]

Regarding your segment about Fatima, in the Argument from Miracles chapter, I would love to add a few more quick points about Fatima: (1) Lucia, the main seer of the Fatima apparition, made a failed prophecy about the end of WW1. On that fateful day in October 1917, Lucia said that WW1 would end "that same day". We have accounts written by a certain Father Formigao, who was sent to investigate the Fatima Appairiton, only about a week after the apparition, in which Fr Formigao said to Lucia that she must have misheard Our Lady, because the newspaper was still reporting on the various battles going on on the other side of the continent, but Lucia doubled down, telling Fr Formigao that that is what Our Lady said and that was that. Odd! You wouldn't expect that from an authentic apparition of Our Lady! (2) You will often hear about other prophecies, with these supposedly being successful. Namely, I am talking about the deaths of Lucia's cousins, as well as the start of WW2. The only problem is that Lucia's cousins died in 1919 and 1920, and the prophecy about their deaths was first mentioned by Lucia in 1927. And the prophecy about the start of WW2? That was made in 1941. WW2 started in 1939. So, the only successful prophecies were the post-dated ones, and the pre-dated prophecy failed. (3) Lucia said that Our Lady told her that she would appear "with Our Lady of Sorrows and Our Lady of Carmel" ... the problem here should jump out at any faithful Catholic. There is no other "our Lady" than "our Lady", Mary, the Mother of God. Our Lady of Fatima simply IS Our Lady of Carmel who simply IS Our Lady of Sorrows. They're all the same person, there is no pantheon of Our Ladies. But, it was common for rural Portugeese villagers in the 1910s to not be entirely Orthodox in their understanding of Catholic theology. So, this really seems like something that Lucia would have made up, because this flies in the face of Catholic understandings of theology and who Mary is. Also, Our Lady of Carmel is widely understood by modern historians to be a complete legend, a myth. There are no contemporaneous sources that recount this apparition that supposedly occurred to St Simon Stock, and we have good reason to think that this tale was invented about 200 years after the life of St Simon Stock. So, yeah, there are a lot of reasons to be skeptical of the Fatima apparition. I find that the average Catholic is quite confident in Fatima, and I do not know if the average Catholic has read the primary sources, like "Fatima in Lucia's Own Words" or "Critical Documentation of Fatima", both of which add much to consider.

[VeNeRaGe]

You and Trent are literally Tom and Jerry haha

[KayleePrince-wepb]

What Trent said about lightning was ridiculous
The reason we don't imprison lightning isn't because it's "determined by molecular forces"
The reason we don't imprison lightning is because we can't.... I guarantee you that if there was a way to imprison lightning and preventing it from hurting anyone or causing damage ever again, we definitely would

[igbo]

Your videos covering mainstream apologetics are by far the most informative for those who are more casual about philosophy of religion. If you ever decide to cover different apologists/arguments which fall into your field of interest I would fully support that.

[extremelylargeslug]

I really do love Philosophy of Religion

[idnoble]

Voting 'YES' to Fodor v Horn!

[thesuitablecommand]

4:00 water absolutely can become a solid on its own via black-body radiation. Wait around long enough, and it will freeze.

Of course, you'll also have to wait for the earth to freeze via black-body radiation if that water is on Earth... but that just means the wait time increases :)

[EitherSpark]

im in support of your new channel idea

[thesuitablecommand]

If you make another channel, it absolutely must be called, "Majesty of Trent"

[andystewart]

Thanks for the strong responses and resources! Glad your recovering from your surgery!

[JezuesChavez]

High school teacher here in Texas. Just searched tiktok and you're not making content. I think you could reach a lot of young people and equip them with some tools to navigate life with. There are a lot of bad arguments out in the market place, and unfortunately they are way more popular than Trent's bad ideas. I know you're probably way busy doing real scholarship. But a couple of 2 minute videos a day could boost your popularity!?

[IvanPhil]

Just when I needed something to listen to on a 3 hour trip :)

[ChristopherMenzel]

Aaargh, Craig’s arguments against an actual infinite are the ultimate zombie arguments. Completely dead but they just won’t go away…

[RabidLeech]

As a Christian and Trent horn fan, I got a good laugh out of you using a Trent Horn style thumbnail against him.😂

[Casey_]

1:59:10 . . . "you've got a very large pickle and you're slobbering all over the pickle." 😮😮😮

[dohpamne]

Thank you for giving voice to my absolute #1 pet peeve that apologists commit: how they will casually and with complete confidence assert an ontology that is over 2000 years old and is resoundingly rejected by the great majority of academic philosophers and almost every practicing physicist.

The ontology of cause and effect is a PHYSICAL claim. Why should I believe there's such a thing as "a potential" that isn't just my conceptual formulation of likely future outcomes? What evidence is there of this? What does it explain that is not accounted for in much greater detail by the standard model? This should be the main focus of apologists, yet they always start their arguments with it already assumed.

[JohnnyHofmann]

Awesome video, and great to see the knee recovery progress!

[SHUBES]

Can you expand more on the definition of change being circular? To me it just seems aristotle is describing what he believes are intrinsic parts of nature and describing a process. Potency and act are not described in terms of change then, so I fail to see how it's circular

[j.victor]

I would love to see a debate between James and Trent!
Greetings from Brazil!
💚💛💙

[Igelme]

Thoughts about hitting him up for another debate? I could be laser focused on a specific argument or something. It's been a while since both of you actually talked and I love both of your contents