Point by point:
1. What reason would the devil have to oppose God?
A. None. Who said the devil was omniscient? We know so little about him it could very well be he was very optimistic about his whole situation upon seeing his own glory.
2. God can't be omnibenevolent and omnipotent if evil appears in the world.
A. You know, most people would consider creating us with free will to be a good thing. Or perhaps they would rather be automatons? But God wants those who will worship him in spirit and in truth. In order to have this free will has to be thrown into the mix. But can't God create beings with free will, who earnestly seek after God all of the time and who only make the right decisions? That isn't free will. And it's forced worship by automatons. Again, can God create beings with free will and who only make decisions that conform to God's will? Why don't they just cut to the chase and ask, "So... can God create beings with free will who don't have free will?" It's a paradox, because their questions are set up to read that way. The flaw is in the logic of their questions. It's like asking the question, "Can God create a rock so heavy even he can't lift it?" And that's akin to asking, "Can God be so omnipotent that he can't be omnipotent?" And if the Christian answers, "No," then the atheist claims, "Well, then God isn't omnipotent!" See something wrong with that logic? The question is rigged.
3. God wants to remain hidden.
A. The position the Bible takes on this issue seems to be that God desires those who will seek him out. And when he has the power of life and death and seeing how every human being knows they will die one day unless they do something other than live for this life, it becomes a no-brainer to use this life to seek out a higher being who has made us, given us life and can therefore give us life again after we die. Otherwise we live for a little while and then we die. Not a very bright plan, is it?
4. God is not bound to causality.
A. Any way you slice it, there is going to be a point in time where we have to acknowledge a first cause that does not interact within traditional notions of cause and effect.
It's hard to keep track of the number of straw men this video builds. It sets up questions with paradoxes in logic whose paths all lead to the same conclusion that they want you to arrive at. Then it takes English terms such as omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence and causality and attempts to tack them onto the Bible and claim that Judeo-Christianity is ridiculous because we cannot explain God within these English terms. Have you ever found one of these English terms in the Bible? Then it makes up the new word, "omnibenevolence," whose meaning isn't entirely clear.
In the very end it claims that the supernatural is both un-falsifiable and unacceptable. How can it be unacceptable if it's un-falsifiable? Have they already falsified it?
1. What reason would the devil have to oppose God?
A. None. Who said the devil was omniscient? We know so little about him it could very well be he was very optimistic about his whole situation upon seeing his own glory.
2. God can't be omnibenevolent and omnipotent if evil appears in the world.
A. You know, most people would consider creating us with free will to be a good thing. Or perhaps they would rather be automatons? But God wants those who will worship him in spirit and in truth. In order to have this free will has to be thrown into the mix. But can't God create beings with free will, who earnestly seek after God all of the time and who only make the right decisions? That isn't free will. And it's forced worship by automatons. Again, can God create beings with free will and who only make decisions that conform to God's will? Why don't they just cut to the chase and ask, "So... can God create beings with free will who don't have free will?" It's a paradox, because their questions are set up to read that way. The flaw is in the logic of their questions. It's like asking the question, "Can God create a rock so heavy even he can't lift it?" And that's akin to asking, "Can God be so omnipotent that he can't be omnipotent?" And if the Christian answers, "No," then the atheist claims, "Well, then God isn't omnipotent!" See something wrong with that logic? The question is rigged.
3. God wants to remain hidden.
A. The position the Bible takes on this issue seems to be that God desires those who will seek him out. And when he has the power of life and death and seeing how every human being knows they will die one day unless they do something other than live for this life, it becomes a no-brainer to use this life to seek out a higher being who has made us, given us life and can therefore give us life again after we die. Otherwise we live for a little while and then we die. Not a very bright plan, is it?
4. God is not bound to causality.
A. Any way you slice it, there is going to be a point in time where we have to acknowledge a first cause that does not interact within traditional notions of cause and effect.
It's hard to keep track of the number of straw men this video builds. It sets up questions with paradoxes in logic whose paths all lead to the same conclusion that they want you to arrive at. Then it takes English terms such as omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence and causality and attempts to tack them onto the Bible and claim that Judeo-Christianity is ridiculous because we cannot explain God within these English terms. Have you ever found one of these English terms in the Bible? Then it makes up the new word, "omnibenevolence," whose meaning isn't entirely clear.
In the very end it claims that the supernatural is both un-falsifiable and unacceptable. How can it be unacceptable if it's un-falsifiable? Have they already falsified it?
He gives a pretty honest look I think,more so than most apologetic books.