I do have a few comments on the second video. In Point 12, FiveRedPears correctly notes that the size of the universe has nothing to tell us about the significance of human beings. (In fact, I find that observation refreshing, because I am amazed at how many times I hear otherwise intelligent people say that, because we "now know" the universe to be vast, we "now know" that human beings are "insignificant". If that were true, as CS Lewis said decades ago, that would mean large people are more significant than small ones.) But, because he doesn't believe in God, he says: "What gives your life significance and meaning is the relationships you have with other human beings and the things that you do." Naturally, I disagree with that, partly because the issue at hand is ultimate meaning, and partly because that ultimate meaning is only to be satisfied (in my view) in terms of the love which the transcendent Author of Life (God) has for us.

In Point 16, he correctly notes that science is not a religion, but I think he overlooks the fact that many people do misuse science by pressing it to the service of scientism, which is (arguably) a religion. I also note that he says religious beliefs are unfalsifiable, and I detect a hint of criticism in this. (I may be wrong, but that's the impression I get.) So, I'll just note that something's being unfalsifiable is not necessarily an indication of its falsity; it is, however (according to Karl Popper), an indication of it's not being scientific—which is fine by me; I never thought religious beliefs were scientific, just as I don't think many philosophical beliefs are either, including many of the foundational presuppositions that make science possible. (In Popper's view, even evolution theory is sufficently unfalsifiable as to qualify as a "metaphysical research programme" rather than science per se.) On the other hand, I'm not sure Christian belief is unfalsifiable in a broader sense. True, there's no scientific experiment that can be done to disprove God's existence, but I do think it's possible (in principle) to argue philosophically against God's existence (and other claimed attributes). Obviously, I don't think such attempts have been successful (to my knowledge), but maybe that's just because such arguments are false.

Beyond those remarks... enjoy.

{youtube}GeGbSwppXns{/youtube}