¶1I've decided to come up with seven arguments against God's existence. And this is going to be a lightning round, the problem of evil, the problem of divine hiddenness, the success of naturalism, the argument from religious diversity, the incoherence of divine attributes, the argument from parimony or Okam's razor, the argument from the scale and indifference of the universe. Here's a bonus. All right, Joe Schmid, great to have you on the channel on the last cool episode. You were an atheist/aggnostic YouTuber.
¶2You had a very successful YouTube channel for about 6 years, but you decided to blow that all up and become a Catholic. >> God decided to blow it up. And whenever God blows up, you know, I'm just like, "Yeah, I submit my intellect and will to that." >> Well, you're a smart guy, dude. And so I've decided to come up with seven arguments against God's existence. And this is going to be a lightning round.
¶3I'm going to throw the argument at you. I really hope I don't deconvert you in the process of this show. I got a feeling that won't happen. And you can answer as sufficiently and quickly as possible. You ready for this?
¶4>> Yeah. Absolutely. [snorts] >> Well, let's start with the primary uh argument against God's existence, namely the problem of evil. If God is all good, all powerful and all knowing, why is there so much seemingly pointless suffering like childhood cancer, natural disasters, genocide, and animal suffering and so on. Yeah.
¶5So, this is one of the biggest objections to Christianity, to God's existence. Very difficult objection, but I think there are a number of ways that theists can respond. First, we can say that listen, God is an infinite mind. He knows way more than we do. And it wouldn't be surprising at all if there are reasons that God has for doing what he does that we're not aware of.
¶6And so just because we're not aware of some goods that are enabled by certain instances of evil, just because there are like just because we're un we don't know which reasons that God has, just because we can't see a point for some suffering doesn't mean that there is no such point, right? So I just think it wouldn't be terribly surprising under theism that maybe there are reasons that God has of which we're unaware. And I think that can at least dent the force of the problem of evil. But yeah, go on. I want to step in and just say, well, what if you take Macky's argument and say that God and evil are logically incompatible?
¶7>> Oh, I mean that seems Yeah. So, I mean, there are different versions of the problem of evil. So, one is like the logical version of the problem of evil, which says, oh, yeah, there's literally like a strict contradiction between God's attributes and the existence of evil. Another one just says there's an evidential tension. I was kind of responding to the evidential tension one because the logical one is not taken as seriously because the reason is just because I don't know, it seems like maybe God has some reason for allowing evil.
¶8like parents can be perfectly good parents and still allow their children to undergo evil if it enables greater goods down the line. So for instance, you know, a parent might um inoculate their child and know that that's going to cause some suffering, but the parent is justified in allowing that sort of suffering because they have good enough or sufficient reason to allow it. So I don't think that there's any logical inconsistency because maybe God has and that's not like a logically contradictory proposition that maybe God has some reason for allowing evils. Uh >> so I think that suffices to put the logical problem of evil to bed. But what about the evidential problem?
¶9Well, the first thing that we could say is that well, you know, God's an infinite intellect. We have puny intellects. And so, it wouldn't be too surprising if there are some reasons that God has of which we're unaware. The second thing that I would say is that listen, there just are lots of goods that suffering enables. Goods of character development and character growth, right?
¶10What is forgiveness if not a response to a wrongdoing? Right? So, manifesting forgiveness requires there to be wrongdoing. What is courage if not a response to some kind of perceived danger or threat? And that requires there to be danger or threat.
¶11And so in order to develop virtue, in order to manifest virtue, which seems incredibly valuable, there need to be some kind of suffering or wrongdoing and whatnot. So there are lots of goods like that. And you know, just like in general, it's really good for us to be able to make a difference to each other's lives. Um, and that can reap infinite benefits, in fact, for all of eternity if it improves our relationships for all eternity. So, >> but um that's really good.
¶12Obviously, we could talk about the prop of animal suffering, but that's a big issue because I mean, no soul development is being is taking place there presumably. >> Maybe not. God's a resourceful guy. So maybe, you know, the lion will lay down with the lamb in the escaton, and maybe animals do indeed have some kind of afterlife whereby their cognitive capacities are enhanced a little bit, and they're able to recognize their role in God's providential plan and maybe develop their character as a result of their suffering. Or maybe certain other creatures, non-human creatures and non-animal creatures, were given the task of providentially ordering and governing and the the evolutionary process to direct it in ways that were kind of more kumbaya and less suffused with suffering.
¶13And that could be justified by the potential for them to make a significant difference in the lives of creatures which again could reap infinite benefits in the afterlife. If people are interested in that, they can check out a paper on the omissions the Odyssey by um Brian Cutter and Philip Swenson. >> You're right. I'm wrong. I told you this was a lightning round.
¶14We should only expect a lightning round answer. That was a really good lightning round answer. Well done. Second lightning round question. The problem of divine hiddenness.
¶15If God wants a relationship with everyone, why are so many sincere, open-minded people unable to believe in him? Unable to even believe in his existence [music] to therefore give their life to him. Also a very tricky challenge. But I do think there are a number of goods that divine hiddenenness enables. So for instance, if there are really people who aren't believers in God or believers in Christianity, what does that enable?
¶16It enables you and me and other people who are believers in Christianity and are believers in God's existence to evangelize and to try to save them and to try to spread the truth about God, his existence, his nature and his love for them. And like think about how valuable that kind of thing is. Basically God cooperating with creatures in bringing people into salvation, right? So basically in order for there to be the good of differencemaking responsibility over other other people's like knowledge of God and salvation there need to be there needs to be some kind of distribution of obscurity and there needs to be some distribution where people don't believe and other people do believe. So that's one kind of response that we could make like there are just goods enabled by um a little bit more obscure modus operandi.
¶17Uh a second thing you could say is that for these people who aren't um who don't currently believe in God's existence God might be permitting them to be in a state of non-belief for the sake of greater relationship goods down the line. Look at my own case. I was an atheist. I was an agnostic. But now look where I've come.
¶18Right? And now my relationship with God has deepened because I've sort of I've sought after him. I've sought him in like the depths of despair and in in good times and in bad. I've sought him. I've sought after him and I finally reached him.
¶19Right? And that kind of made my relationship with God better in a very unique kind of way. And so maybe God is just holding off on a relationship with some people for the sake of greater relationship goods down the line. And then a third thing that I would say is that actually these people who really are sincere seekers maybe unbeknownst to them they're in a kind of primitive or implicit relationship with God which is itself deeply valuable. So I think um the argument relies on a kind of premise that people who don't yet believe in God's existence or Christianity can't be in a relationship with God.
¶20But I think that may very well be mistaken. I'm not saying that it's necessarily a salvific relationship but it could be the the kind of necessary precondition for a salvific relationship down the line. And that could be even more valuable because of the implicit relationship that they were in with God where they were swimming in the depths of God's love without even knowing it and then later come to recognize that it was God that they loved all along. >> Okay, very good. So here's the third one.
¶21Now you remember in the sum theologier Thomas Aquinus sometimes comes up with as many as 12 arguments against the position he wants to refute when it comes to atheism. He can only think of two arguments. One being the problem of evil, the second being that God is a superfluous hypothesis. And that seems to lead seems to be similar to this argument, namely the success of naturalism. Science has increasingly explained phenomena once attributed to God, lightning, disease, evolution, cosmology, reducing the need to posit a divine explanation.
¶22What say you? >> What say I? I say firstly there are lots of extraordinary phenomena, miraculous phenomena that naturalism just can't explain. So Fatima, Lords, Guadalupe, Zetun, canonization miracles, Padre Peio, St. Charbble, I mean you could just go through like Eucharistic miracles, all these healing miracles, Barbara Schneider, like just go through the list and naturalism offers no explanation and in fact it's been empirically refuted.
¶23So that's the first thing that I would say is naturalism certainly has been successful in like certain domains where we can find a naturalistic explanation for uh ordinary natural going on in the world but that doesn't touch lots of these other things that naturalism can't possibly account for. So that's one thing that I would say a second thing that I would say is that actually um God's existence is the best explanation of lots of the very striking features of the universe itself that we look around. It's like there are certain things where um we don't have a very plausible naturalistic explanation of like why do for instance the constants and laws of nature fall within an exceedingly narrow life permitting range which allows for interesting and you know >> interesting development uh of the universe and conscious creatures like us. um there currently isn't a good naturalistic explanation for that and there are lots of other things that the naturalism at least even if they can offer naturalist that is they can offer an explanation of. It just seems like theism offers a a better more unifying explanation where um we can explain all these crazy striking fortuitous coincidences that occur and that are built into the very fabric of natural reality.
¶24Um so like it just turns out that lots of the fundamental features of the physical universe themselves kind of cry out for explanation. Um and that you have to appeal to something outside of the universe to explain them. In other words, we don't believe in God because of what we don't yet understand, but we believe in God because of what we do. >> Precisely because we do understand things and we see that theism is the best explanation of the data. >> Excellent.
¶25Fourth argument, the argument from religious diversity. Thousands of religions contradict one another. This widespread disagreement suggests that religious belief may be more a product of culture than divine revelation. Yeah. So I think one of the main problems with this argument is just one of the main problems for the problem of divine hiddenness, right?
¶26Which is that it seems like there may very well be plausible goods that religious diversity enables such that God is justified in permitting there to be religious diversity. So what are such goods? Well, again, the good of making a difference to the lives of other people by evangelizing, by helping them come to discover truths about God and the fundamental nature of reality with cautioning, care and love and and philosophical rigor and and scientific rigor in fact as well. So >> I think basically being able to spread knowledge of the truth is itself a deeply profound good that is enabled by some people not yet knowing the truth and in fact having various false beliefs. So that's that's one response that I'd give to this.
¶27And of course another thing to say is that just because you know various people have beliefs that are resulting from culture or influenced by culture doesn't mean that those beliefs are in fact false. And in fact maybe there's significant evidence for them. And in fact that's what I would say about Catholicism where we just have significant evidence for the truth of Catholicism from various vindicatory miracles where God is going out of his way to put his divine stamp of approval on distinctively Catholic doctrines. So that's another thing that I'd say. Do you ever think about the fact that every purchase that you're making that I'm making is actually a small vote?
¶28One thing I've become more intentional about over the years is supporting businesses that actually support the truth. If I'm going to spend money anyway, I'd rather spend it with people who are trying to make the world a little better. That's one reason I want to tell you about 7 weeks coffee. They're America's pro-life coffee company and they donate 10% of every sale to pregnancy centers and pro-life organizations around the country. I also love the story behind the name.
¶29At 7 weeks, that is when a baby is the size of a coffee bean, which is pretty awesome. Since launching, 7 weeks coffee has donated more than $1.5 million and helped save thousands of lives. And thankfully, none of this comes at the expense of quality. The coffee is organically farmed, uh, shade grown, mold-free, pesticidefree, and low acid. It's actually just excellent coffee.
¶30So, you should go to 7weekscoff.com/pints right now, subscribe, and save 15% forever. receive a free gift and use promo code pints for an additional 10% off your first order. That's 25% off your first purchase plus your free gift. A lot of us have a misconception about freedom. What is freedom?
¶31Well, when we talk about freedom, we can talk about being free from something such as constraints. And this is usually what people mean today when they talk about freedom. But we also need to be talking about freedom for something. Right? So the truest freedom is to be free to be who we are and not enslaved to our passions and our sins.
¶32This is why I really appreciate Exodus 90. It's an invitation to step away from the distractions and habits that keep us spiritually numb and create space for prayer, fraternity, and a deeper encounter with the Father's love. The goal isn't hardship for its own sake. The goal is freedom in Christ. Join Father Columb, CFR, and the Exodus 90 Brotherhood for the St.
¶33Michael's Lent Challenge happening now through September 29th. Invite a few men in your life to begin the journey together. St. Michael's Lent with Father Columbus is happening now. Download the Exodus90 app to start your 14-day free trial or visit Exodus90.com/matt to learn more.
¶34That's exodus90.com/matt. Become the man you were created to be. All right, fifth argument. And I haven't got you yet, but buckle up cuz here we go. The incoherence of divine attributes, right?
¶35Some philosophers argue that traditional attributes like omnipotence, omniscience, timelessness, and human freedom cannot be true simultaneously. It reminds me of the old question, can God create a rock so heavy that he can't lift? So, what do you have to say about that? This argument from the incoherence of the concept of God? >> Yes, there are lots of different arguments along these lines.
¶36One of them is, as you said, like the stone paradox. Can God gr a stone that's so heavy that he can't lift it? But I mean philosophers have long understood that the way that we should understand omnipotence is not the ability to do like literally anything like for instance make 1 plus 1 equ= 17 or like make square circles. No, omnipotence is something like the ability to do anything possible. And it's just not possible for there to be a rock that's too heavy for an unlimitedly powerful being to lift.
¶37So it's no challenge to God's omnipotence. Now there are other potential problems here that you mentioned. One of them is um divine timelessness. And how does that exactly relate to human freedom? And is divine timelessness even coherent?
¶38After all, if God knows things about the changing world, wouldn't he have to change? But no, not necessarily. For starters, maybe we can develop we can adopt a view of time on which time is like a static four-dimensional block. This is popular among various philosophers and physicists. It's not the consensus or anything, but you know, Catholic philosophers also take this seriously and adopt it.
¶39Like Alexander Puce, one of the best Catholic philosophers alive. So maybe if the universe is like a static block and God just exists outside of time, he doesn't need to change because it's not like there really is a kind of objective temporal dynamism going on. But even if you think there is objective temporal dynamism or change going on in the world, then maybe uh all times are just present to God but not present to us. So maybe actually which times exist, this is kind of kooky but interesting and but you know fundamental reality is kind of weird. Maybe which times exist is relative to your reference frame.
¶40Maybe relative to God he kind of sees all of time laid to be bare but relative to us um the present and future don't exist. So that's interesting. That's one that's a second response. A third response to this and maybe this is my favorite response which is just that like God doesn't have to undergo any intrinsic changes as a result of changing knowledge because God is cognitively perfect. He doesn't need to rely on intermediary beliefs that are like in his brain or something to represent the world and which kind of like change inside of him.
¶41No, instead God has direct unmediated access and awareness of the facts themselves. So intrinsically he can remain unchanged and it's just the objects of his awareness which themselves change which are entirely outside of God. So that doesn't compromise his uh immutability or his timelessness if the changes are wholly outside of him. So uh that I think is uh those are three ways to respond to that. And then in terms of human freedom uh and divine fornowledge.
¶42Yeah. So like the way that this argument typically goes is that like a thousand years ago God believed that we would be having this conversation right now. Um, and it seems like we don't have any control over the past, right? There's nothing you can do over spilled milk. There's no no use crying over spilled milk, right?
¶43Because it's out of our control. Um, and so if the past is fixed in that way, if we can't change the past, if we have no control over the past, if it's not up to us, well, then it seems like it's not up to me what God believed a thousand years ago, >> but God believed a thousand years ago everything that I do right now because he's comprehensive for knowledge, right? And so, uh, if I don't have control over what God believed a thousand years ago and that entails what I do, well then it seems like I also just don't have control over what I do because it's just entailed by things that I don't have control over. And there are a few ways that uh, some there are a few ways that we could respond to this. I think my favorite response is what's called the dependence response in the philosophical literature.
¶44And the dependence response combined with divine timelessness. So firstly, God is not inside time. Uh, he doesn't like kind of like stare into like a time orb or crystal and see what happens in a thousand years. though he's sort of outside of time. [snorts] And if we model God's kind of cognition on the model that I just mentioned where he just has a kind of direct access to the facts themselves, well then actually it's our making the decisions that we do which explain why God knows what he does.
¶45And so if if if what God knows is sort of explanatory dependent on the facts themselves, then we shouldn't be holding it fixed in evaluating our abilities because it's explanatory downstream of our abilities. Mh. And so, no, the fact that God knew from all of eternity timelessly what exactly we're going to do does not remove our freedom or anything like that. I mean, it's almost like God is kind of out there just watching us do what we're doing. And me like watching you doing what you're doing is not removing your freedom or anything like that.
¶46It's certainly not making you do what you do. So, I just think none of these objections that you raised are successful. >> How dare you? I have two more. The argument from parimony or Okam's razor.
¶47If the universe can be explained without appealing to God, then adding God may be an unnecessary explanatory entity. The thing is God is not an unnecessary explanatory entity because he provides the best explanation of the very striking and fortuitous coincidences that we see built into the very fabric of physical reality and the connection between conscious reality and physical reality. So we talked earlier about the the fine-tuning of the constants and laws of nature. There are various constants and laws of nature that uh govern various features of the universe which need to be strikingly fine-tuned. They need to take on very narrow they need to take on values in a very narrow range in order to allow for life to exist or anything interesting to occur.
¶48And then even once that happens, there's no guarantee that the creatures which develop will have these like strikingly harmonious and fortuitous and orderly mental lives that actually make sense and which enable lots of profound goods. It's no guarantee that you'd even get conscious creatures at all. And then like these creatures are finding themselves with very significant moral knowledge about the world even though like the moral facts don't play any role in the evolutionary process. So like I really do think that like there are so many facts that theism offers the best explanation of the fact that there is any physical universe at all. The fact that the general form of the laws of nature allow for anything interesting to occur including life and valuable relationships and conversations like this.
¶49The fact that the constants in the laws of nature take on those very narrow life breeding values. The fact that the fundamental laws of nature actually match or apply to the conditions of the universe when conceivably they might not have to allow for the universe to evolve over time. And then the fact that the creatures which develop actually do in fact have consciousness. And not just consciousness but consciousness which is strikingly and fortuitously connected up with the physical world that results in intelligible, coherent, orderly mental lives that enable those profound goods. And not just that, but beings which have significant moral knowledge about the world, significant aurory knowledge, so knowledge from the armchair about metaphysics and and whatnot.
¶50And this is just like it's just coincidence upon coincidence upon coincidence upon coincidence upon coincidence cosmically if you don't believe in God. So I think that God is the best explanation for by far the best explanation for the data that we have. And then sprinkled on top of that are just like all these overwhelmingly evidenced miracles. If people are interested check out Padre Pio and go to Ethan Muse's Substack article on Padre Pio our lady Guadalupe and yeah our lady Guadalupe our blessed beautiful mother our glorious Theotocos. All right, final argument.
¶51Maybe we'll throw in a a bonus one, but this is the seventh argument. Uh, namely, and this was Lewis's argument really, something like this. This sort of intuition from the problem of pain. Um, it's the argument from the scale and indifference of the universe. The universe is unimaginably vast, mostly empty, and apparently indifferent to human life.
¶52Some argue this fits better with atheism, it seems to, than with the idea of a universe intentionally created for humanity. Ah well one thing that we should say in there is uh there's an implicit assumption here that theism is committed to the entire universe being created just for humanity. >> Why should we accept that? Maybe humanity was one of God's goals. You know bringing about rational creatures with whom he can engage in a relationship.
¶53But that doesn't mean that the entire cosmos was created just for us. That's not a commitment of theism. So that's one thing we should say. The argument just rests on a demonstrabably false assumption. So that's the first thing to say.
¶54The second thing to say is that again maybe there are just like lots of goods that having just this vast and maybe mostly lifeless universe um enables. So for instance, I don't know about you, but if you look at pictures in the Hubble telescope, it's just staggering. It's beautiful. And that you know these are just like lifeless gas clouds and whatnot. Like it's just awe inspiring.
¶55It creates what uh Rudolph Otto calls like numinous experiences where there's like you just have this kind of awe and like fear and kind of mystery and kind of trembling but also a kind of like reverence and like creaturely dependence kind of feeling that all this stuff enables and that that's like enabled by like this this vast and diverse cosmos with all these beautiful cosmic structures. So I don't know that's another thing. It can like increase our humility when we just look at how tiny we are in comparison to this gigantic universe which displays the magnificence and glory of God uh and just our finitude in relation to it. Like who I've watched those videos where it's like Carl Sean and he's like the pale blue dots and it sort of zooms out from like just our local vantage point and then it zooms out and out and out and you just get this overwhelming sense of like ah at least for me this ah and this mystery and this like almost creature feeling like dependence like we are radically dependent on things around us and this dependence chain ultimately traces back to God and maybe part of the reason why God created things like this is just to give us that kind of sense of humility and to allow for those sorts of experience. experiences to allow our kind of natural cognizance of God to kind of kick in, you know.
¶56Um, and there are lots of other reasons, you know, maybe like a vast and mostly mostly lifeless universe is actually like sort of needed given the law structures that we have. And maybe it's not very surprising that the law structures that we have would obtain given theism. And then given those law structures, maybe a vast and mostly lifeless universe is needed for the universe itself to cooperate in bringing about creatures, biological organisms and us, right? Cuz like uh the standard scientific story which we have a lot of evidence for is that you know there were like supernova and then they basically kind of imploded and then exploded and spewed their guts everywhere where you what the stars do is they forge the heavy elements that are needed um for you to get like planets and for you eventually get life on those planets. Right?
¶57So like basically the universe itself is like forging the very elements that go to on to make us up and then you know there's like an accretion disc around a main star and then and then it and then certain localized pockets start develop into planets and then the planets like themselves bring forth life through God guiding it. Right? So notice that this involves various goods of creaturely co-creatorship with God. God's involving creatures in the creative process. And I think there's significant value in that as well.
¶58M this reminds me again speaking of CS Lewis. He said something like God can't win. If he creates a vast universe then that will be evidence used against him. But if he creates a small universe then we'd be likely to say well wouldn't a God as grand as the one you say exists create something far bigger than this. >> Yeah.
¶59[laughter] Exactly. It's like it's like a you can't win with these with these objections. >> If you are raising Catholic children as I am, eventually they're going to ask hard questions. I did this to my parents growing up. And if I'm honest, maybe it was just my arrogance.
¶60That's fully likely actually. But a lot of the time I felt like the answers weren't really there. But we as parents, we we want to answer these questions for our children so we can raise them in the faith. We we want to respond to our friends and co-workers. And that's why I recommend the St.
¶61Paul Center. The more deeply you understand scripture yourself, the more naturally you'll be able to answer questions and pass the faith on to the next generation. Know Christ, share Christ. Start your 30-day free trial today at spaulcenter.com/pint or become an annual member and they will even send you a free copy of the complete Ignatius Catholic Study Bible. You know all about the St.
¶62Paul Center because I've been talking about it forever, but also because you've seen their amazing teachers right here on Pines with Aquinus like Dr. Scott Han and John Bergsma. You're going to love it. Check it out. I would say that many of us, especially because of the advances in technology, have been set back when it comes to living a peaceful life.
¶63You know, I've I go on about this all the time, but it's obviously true. But did you know that prayer is scientifically proven to reduce stress, improve mental health, and reduce cortisol? If you've been wanting to build a more consistent prayer life, obviously one thing you should do is remove the unnecessary distractions in your life that are taking you away from the Lord, that are causing you unnecessary stress, that are causing in you the sin of curiosity. But you could actually download an app that will help you pray and that's how. So again, if you've been wanting to build a more consistent prayer life, go check out hallow.com/mattfrad right now and get three months for free.
¶64That's hallow.com/mattfrad. All right, here here's a here's Thank you. That was really good. Here's a bonus argument [music] for atheism. It's not really an argument from atheism, but it's one people have talked about maybe during the height of the new atheism.
¶65Maybe people say it today. I don't know. Well, if Christianity is true, how come atheists are the smart people and Christians are the sweet and well-meaning but ultimately not terribly sophisticated people? [music] Maybe like my grandma and so on. Not my grandma.
¶66My grandma's brilliant, but your grandma, other people. >> Yeah. Few things to say. [snorts] So, in our gospel reading just this past Sunday, uh Christ our Lord was talking about how he has hidden some things from the wise. And he's basically saying like, "Blessed are you because you have eyes to see and ears to hear and you've become childlike and you've become humble and you've trusted me." And he's saying, you know, he's hid some these things from the wise for various reasons.
¶67But I think that uh what this indicates is that like I don't know there is a kind of simplicity that we're called to a kind of childish dependence on God which is I think in fact very very beautiful. Uh and so maybe there's something >> I don't know um there's something to being intellectually humble and recognizing intellectual humility and just God revealing himself to the the simple and those who I don't know are a little bit more trusting. So that's one thing I don't know one thing that I would say is >> yeah I definitely think that's true. I also think that and I'm sure you agree that like uber intelligent and trusting with childlike faith isn't contradict. >> Oh no no no not exactly.
¶68No no sorry exactly that's exactly the case. So um which brings me to my second point which is just that there are a lot of people who do indeed have that kind of childlike trust and who have systematically combed through the evidence who have PhDs who are on faculty of these high and prestigious universities and whatnot. Um and so I mean I don't know about like the data here. I don't have any data to site but like it's just like manifestly false of course that um you know the the atheists systematically are the brights and the intellectuals and then the you know the Christians are just like the poor benited folk who haven't you know gotten the gist of the enlightenment ideals or anything like that. I just think that's that's just like empirically manifestly mistaken.
¶69Um but also you know like maybe it's precisely that attitude which is you know oh we're the brights we're the intellectually uh autonomous people we are the ones who are you know intellectually superior to others. Maybe that's precisely what's operating as a stumbling block to receiving God's grace and cooperating with it so that you can discover God. >> Well that was eight arguments I give up. Well done Joe. Where can people find you and the good work that you are now doing since coming into the church and announcing it fullthroatedly?
¶70Yes. Well, people can check out my YouTube channel, Majesty of Reason. Objectively the best YouTube channel that has ever existed, of course. >> Ever existed. >> Ever existed.
¶71It's quite frankly the best. Believe me, folks. Um, so yeah, the Majesty of Reason and then um I should probably upload those in podcast format, but I'm a little bit uh little bit behind on that. But yeah, mainly Majesty of Reason. And yeah, thank you for having me.
¶72>> Thanks, Joe.