Myths About Atheism - Let There Be Light | Renegade Cut

let there be light is a movie directed by and starring Kevin Sorbo co-starring Kevin Sorbo wife Kevin Sorbo children and featuring Kevin psorbos far-right Christian conservative worldview made manifest in a series of hollow arguments and logical fallacies sermo plays dr. Saul Harkins an author who the film calls the world's most famous atheist a vague reference to dr. Richard Dawkins but also a straw man for atheism in general in the beginning of the film he debates a creationist and has the University student audience in the palm of his hand he takes almost sexual pleasure in humiliating the creationist with his brand of acerbic wit and loud bombastic arguments Harkins wins the debate not so much because he disproved to God but because his argument was more appealing to the audience he tells his audience what they want to hear for the socially conservative Christian demographic of this film this scene is confirmation of what they suspect about atheism it is appealing to young people because it lacks responsibility the real truth is under attack by liberal authors and professors let there be light is a didactic film but it is proselytizing rather than genuinely informing the film does not shy away from this it explicitly says so there is a lot to cover with how much let there be liked gets wrong but maybe the best place to start is how it propagates popular myths about atheism when spiritual matters come up on my show it is never my intention to convince viewers of something so grandiose like that there is or is not a god that's not my job I try to approach a spiritual matter in a film with the same reverence that the author gives it or its intended audience would give it I make exceptions to this like with indefensible beliefs like prosperity gospel or premillennial dispensationalism so bear in mind when I deconstruct this film's fallacious arguments about atheism I am NOT trying to promote atheism or attack theism so much as I am trying to explain why many common theistic arguments against atheists are not logically defensible it's a distinction I trust my audio is reasonable enough to see let's begin [Music] the first thing we learn about dr. Saul Harkins is that he's a jackass he is condescending to his debate adversary he advocates a life creed that is essentially party on oh you want to know my religious credo is party on Wayne he drinks while he drives he is not a very present father he surrounds himself with ne'er-do-wells he is prideful and obsessed with himself and so on many theists believe that there is no such thing as a good atheist after all how could anyone have morality without God this question is asked by theists who believe that our sense of morality comes from God or is dictated by God for theists this is perfectly fine to live life in that belief but upon trying to convince atheists that they are inherently immoral due to their lack of belief in God we come across a circular argument a logical fallacy a circular argument restates the argument rather than attempting to prove it for example in the statement doctor Harkins is a good communicator because he speaks so well we get a circular argument the conclusion that hearkens is a good communicator and the evidence used to prove it he speaks so well are essentially the same idea specific evidence such as his ability to use comedy to reaches audience his use of uncomplicated language to neatly break down complex problems or illustrating his points with personal meaningful stories would all be evidence to prove the hypothesis that hearkens is a good communicator in the case of theists proving that atheism is inherently immoral we run into a similar circular argument some variant of atheism is immoral because belief in God is moral but the second part of that statement only restates the first part it does not provide evidence for why atheism is immoral or why belief in God is moral theists could attempt to argue that atheists are amoral by providing anecdotal evidence a bad encounter with an atheist like hearkens for example if someone bumped into hearkens had a party in headed moment with the world's most famous atheist one could make the leap that atheists in general behave this way he's a jerk he's insensitive irresponsible and a sloppy drunk however a personal experience an isolated incident or a collection of a small sample size of data does not constitute compelling evidence a singular witness to say a singular crime could be credible enough evidence that the crime was committed but broad declarative statements about an entire worldview or group of people requires more than one's personal experiences another logical fallacy related to proving atheism is immoral is begging the question this is similar to a circular argument the person trying to prove something assumes the truth of what they are trying to prove the conclusion is stated by the premise if one needs to initially believe the premise in order to believe the conclusion then one has not established anything one cannot establish something by assuming it theists use their holy texts as evidence that belief in God is moral and non belief is immoral but this relies on the belief that said texts are true in the first place and that's where begging the question comes in everything in the Bible is true it says so in the Bible you will only find this argument convincing if you already believe the Bible is true which is both the premise and the conclusion again I am NOT interested in proving or disproving the divinity of the Bible or someone's personal faith but this argument is not enough there is no real data that proves not believing is immoral because suggesting otherwise is predicated on something that has not been proven dr. Harkins is a jackass but that is because let there be light once to portray him that way it reinforces what the target audience of the film already believes about atheists okay back to the narrative of the film we learned that dr. Harkins books are given sensationalist titles like aborting God which is just one example of the film's sense of subtlety dr. Harkins exclaims that he knows that there is no God because Harkins son tragically died since then Parkins has devoted his life to proving God does not exist through a series of popular books the son's death must be fairly recent in the past few years or so making one wonder what Harkins was doing with his life prior to this he is some sort of overnight atheist sensation he parties and gets drunk with his two business partners one of whom is coated gay the character mentions an interest in women but that is not what code it means here he is given effeminate qualities and over-the-top affect ation and becomes the straw man for what socially conservatives believe is the limp-wristed liberal movement although not explicitly called gay so that the film can avoid direct accusations of homophobia the film delivers a coded homophobic message to the film's demographic so let's not be naive about media literacy and what the film is trying to convey dr. Harkins is miserable and still grieving the loss of his son which brings us to the next myth about atheism [Music] dr. Harkins became an atheist because of the tragic loss of his son this is a trope that surpasses the borders of this film the ones faithful man often someone of the clergy who has lost his faith and must regain it is a common perhaps overused character in a film someone befalls a tragedy or has seen too much horror in the world but then receives supernatural evidence to the contrary and his faith is restored in reality faith has not been restored evidence has been presented what these films that let there be light get wrong about faith is that it is not lost due to a tragedy it can perhaps but the implication of virtually every film including this one is that a lack of faith is a failing that must be overcome and that a loss of faith must have had something negative that preceded it this is not actually true the other thing movies like this get wrong about faith is how it is recovered the word faith in the spiritual context should not be mistaken for certainty faith in the spiritual context of the word means strong belief based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof certainty means unassailable proof exists in other words if you are certain then one would not require faith dr. Harkins lost his faith in God but he does not receive a moment of enlightenment he receives proof he has a near-death experience in which he sees his dead son certainty and faith under the spiritual definition are mutually exclusive the nature of faith requires less than certainty anyway the real answer to why some people are atheists is far less sensational on some occasions they are simply raised without a religion and atheism comes about naturally for others it's different but just as simple people have the opportunity to adopt a new outlook when confronted with alternative viewpoints experiences and education different from that with which they were raised based on Pew Research on the matter showing rising secularism and atheism specifically upon someone reaching higher levels of university education the implication is that the introduction of alternatives allows for differing viewpoints including theological I want to be clear that does not necessarily mean college equals atheism of course it only means that leaving home and no longer following the guidelines of one's parents provides opportunities for new ways of viewing the world the increase in secularism in the 21st century may have something to do with information being more readily available due to the internet again this does not mean that knowledge equals atheism neither or that ignorant equals theism obviously it only means knowledge equals confronting previously held beliefs some people keep their childhood religion and some people change their religion from one theistic faith to another theistic faith and some people adopt agnosticism or atheism I've made dozens of videos explaining what Christians and other theists believe I may as well briefly explain what atheists believed atheists think there probably is no God because extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence atheists would say that the counter-argument of you can't prove God does not exist is another logical fallacy called appealing to ignorance because complete proof that something is false is usually impossible a lack of proof against something is not a good reason to conclude that it's true if you've ever heard someone say you can't prove a negative that's basically what this means a claim puts the burden of proof on those making the claim not on the person disbelieving it due to lack of evidence in a nutshell that is what atheists believe and frankly it's not as fascinating or sensational as movies like let there be light make it out to be in the film dr. Harkins not only became an atheist due to tragedy he also exhibits a related trait that is also a myth related to atheism that he hates God he seems vindictive he says even while strolling atheism that God took his son here's the thing atheists cannot hate God because atheists do not believe God exists being an atheist by definition is not believing in God if someone believes in God they cannot call themselves an atheist if someone hates God it is predicated on first believing God exists so an atheist cannot hate God this is not some no true Scotsman situation I know that's a logical fallacy too I'm not saying Oh a real atheist wouldn't do the bad thing or anything like that I'm saying if someone hates God then the term atheist is not applicable or appropriate or correct it's another word and another definition altogether claiming an atheist hates God is a contradiction in terms some people hate God but by definition they cannot be atheists they are usually called mouthiest or anti-theists and there are some faiths that do portray God as inherently malevolent so yes some people in the world do hate God but atheists can't by very definition of who they are in the film dr. Harkins follows this trope he suffered a tragedy he experiences the supernatural and he becomes religious once again a near-death experience allows him to see his departed son Harkins apologizes to his family for his previous atheism kind of the way someone apologizes for being in a bad mood one day because they were hangry or something it's embarrassing the whole movie is embarrassing though let there be light strays from its central claim atheists are just bad to dip its toes into other socially conservative talking points yeah this is gonna get more uncomf sorry every reference to Islam in the film is to al Qaeda Isis or a singular formerly Muslim woman who converted to Christianity after escaping Islam let's be clear here and not be naive the reduction of Islam purely into Isis is entirely intentional to a movie like let there be light the only good Muslim is one who converts to Christianity by the end of the film and all others cannot be trusted the opening credits even invokes 9/11 and al-qaeda dr. Harkins wants to set up a Christian phone app to give selfies to God yes really and convert everyone to Christianity so he goes on fox news with sean hannity and this exchange happens what right do you have to impose your religious values onto somebody else well what light does Isis have to cut people's heads off that's a powerful point is it is it Hannity because that's actually two logical fallacies at one the first is the either-or fallacy in which a conclusion oversimplifies an argument by reducing it to two sides or choices sometimes irrelevant choices like in this case the second is that this argument well what about Isis is a diversionary tactic or red herring or what about ISM a method of avoiding an issue by focusing the audience's attention on something else entirely or something allegedly worse dr. Harkins and Sean Hannity are using their fair and balanced news program to convert people to Christianity the loyal adherents of Fox News have virtually no chance of joining Isis they are inventing a potential consequence to do something that has nothing to do with the actions of Isis there are so many Isis references in this movie and nearly all of them are non sequiturs I'm asking something is the God you believe in then different than the God of Isis because baiser and they don't think so they're no less than seer in their beliefs than you are in yours this whole Isis is no the church thing has gone viral baby look what those guys Isis look what they're wearing that clothes of black their flags are black they're a cult of death and unlike Isis this is not a convert or die proposition listen to this what if we do a t-shirt that says Isis equals Church we should be proselytizing life with as much vigor as Isis proselytizers death but millions of points of light have lit up the darkness around the world in Iran and Isis occupied territories well what light does Isis have to cut people's heads off Isis does not actually show up and let there be light this is not an action movie or a war movie it just keeps mentioning Isis as if the only alternative to Christianity is to become an Islamic militant I could go on there is this enthusiastic plug for chick-fil-a the anti-gay fast food chain but it's not product placement chick-fil-a is not seen in the film Harkins wife just casually mentions that her children only want to eat a chick-fil-a no money to that godless in-and-out burger Kevin Sorbo just really really wanted to sprinkle in as much anti-gay and socially conservative references into his film hannity says the word diversity like he is spitting out poison and there's more I could talk about but this has gone on far too long as it is I hope this has been educational and I hope more than anything that people don't assume the worst about people based on what they check on the religion question on the census people believe the things they believe for a variety of reasons most of them innocuous the vast majority of atheists are just regular guys and the vast majority of Christians would probably hate this awful cynical ignorant movie hi everyone if you like what I do please click on the orange patreon link below that's how this show happens it's also the only way to request an episode also please like share subscribe and click on the notification bell so that you never miss an episode I'll see you next week

Channel: Renegade Cut

Views: 249,793

Rating: 4.9140162 out of 5

Keywords: atheism, atheism is unstoppable, atheist arguments, best atheist arguments, religion vs atheism, atheists debunked, new atheism, atheism and islamaphobia, islamaphobia, let there be light, let there be light movie, let there be light review, let there be light atheism, kevin sorbo, atheism debate, atheist delusion, atheist vs christian debate, atheism vs christianity, is there a god, does god exist, logical fallacies, richard dawkins, christianity debate, atheism myths

Id: jm-iKLqCI3c

Length: 18min 48sec (1128 seconds)

Published: Fri Mar 09 2018