The Two Mistakes We Make When Thinking About God & Science | John Lennox
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 лют 2024
- John Lennox (Oxford) explores why God and science don't need to be mutually exclusive. | Arizona State University, 2016 | View full forum at • Has Science Buried God... | Explore more at www.veritas.org.
Want Veritas updates in your inbox? Subscribe to our twice-monthly newsletter here:
www.veritas.org/newsletter-yt
INSTAGRAM: / veritasforum
FACEBOOK: / veritasforum
PODCAST: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
SUBSCRIBE: ua-cam.com/users/subscription_...
Over the past two decades, The Veritas Forum has been hosting vibrant discussions on life's hardest questions and engaging the world's leading colleges and universities with Christian perspectives and the relevance of Jesus. Learn more at www.veritas.org, with upcoming events and over 600 pieces of media on topics including science, philosophy, music, business, medicine, and more!
Wow! Lennox explains things so clearly that even I can understand.
Love John Lennox
This man is so intelligent and God has given him a great gift to help us to rationalise the huge amount of evidence for God. It blows my mind how very wonderful, amazing an d mighty our God is.❤
And the Evidence for God or any God is ?
The first time I got it, it was kind of a revelation. This is necessary stuff for the first years in school! I had to learn it as an adult. What a shame to the german school system. As usual: THANKS John Lennox!
I have heard many stories from John Lennox and this one is again a very strong story.
Truly a master at explaining the most important things to people.
Story is right
also a master of mixing up facts with his religious beliefs and trying to shoehorn the two together..he is a scientific menace
@@johnpro2847
Would you like to explain that with 1 example?
@@johnpro2847Precisely. He's just trying to affirm his magical thinking and superstitious beliefs by conflating it with science. Just another fancy argument from ignorance and incredulity.
@@johnpro2847 Yet you make no rebuttal ,but only state
logical fallacies. Your magical thinking denies the laws of thermodynamic. Entropy not exist in your world. Only an Atheist could have the enough faith to believe that the most complex language, DNA, the ability to interpret it, and cellular replication all appeared at a momentary instance. Darwin himself stated that if the cell was not the lowest common denominator in an organism, throw out everything he said. Boy was he wrong !
John Polkinghorne takes this point further and from the perspective of a particle physicist who led a team working on the mathematics of quarks before becoming an Anglican priest.
First time hearing Pr John Lennox speaking french is absolutely wonderful😍. Love this man and bless God for such a gift.
Wouldn't everyone want this wise man to be his father. What a great expositor of the entanglement of the dialectic and faith . Thank God for such a faithful man.
Prof John Lennox for Education Minister, to get rid of filth they put into schools.
God bless Prof Lennox 🙏
You sound very intelligent. Just cling to bronze and iron age Hebrew fiction.
He would be a very good minister of fiction and bronze age myths!
Public education has a responsibility to remain secular.
Only oif you want education dragged back to the dark ages
@@colinmatts As opposed to today’s godless, “progressive” education, where children are taught that there are more than two genders, and that a men can get pregnant. Yep. We certainly need more of that kind of atheist enlightenment.
Brilliant.
you nailed it!
indeed
If Aristotle's understanding of the four types of causes was brought back into formal education, then many of the current popular misconceptions about the relationship between metaphysics and science would dissipate.
Aristotle postulated, quite apart from any belief in organized religion, that there must be a "Prime Mover" who was the "efficient cause" of the cosmos.
Very true, but one must remember that Aristotle's theoretical PM, is not the God who is. He is philisophically 'unmoved', he, or rather, it is impassive, disengaged, impersonal. None of which describes the creator who is. Aristotle's cosmos is finally impersonal and ultimately purposeless. The real cosmos is from the love of the creator (for us to enjoy) and its purpose is for us to know him.
@@dagwould The PM according to Aristotle would not be "impassive, disengaged, and impersonal" so much as the Mover is self-referential to a degree that we mortals can never really have the capacity to experience. It is true that Aristotle's PM does not engage in relationships with smaller beings, but that is not the result of personal apathy on the Mover's part, so much as what the philosopher considered a necessary attribute of the Deity's transcendence or "divine simplicity."
I'm also not sure that Aristotle would agree with his understanding of the cosmos being characterized as "purposeless." Aristotle's whole system of ethics is based on his belief that everything has an inherent "telos," and that people should strive to live up their ideal selves, not in the sense of self-defining subjectivism that modernity has embraced, but in conforming to a virtue paradigm that we ourselves did not invent.
@@galaxyn3214 I thought the ideal was more of Plato's belief. But I haven't read much on that topic.
Well done, Sir!
Thank you John Lennox
A lot of religious people with a persecution complex must be taught that science is in the business of debunking their supernatural beliefs, which is not the case at all. Science is simply a method for trying to determine the best explanations about the naturally occurring world.
Exactly 😊
Wow - great wisdom!
Lennox is profoundly correct on this score.
Yeah! John Lennox has a great mind and a great grasp of these topics, and explains them in such a way that simpletons such as I can understand. And as it turns out his explanations are so much better than those of the so called “geniuses” of science who try to eliminate God from the scene.
I've said it before of John Lennox, and I will say it again: BRILLIANT. Thank you Veritas.
Recommended study:
The Philosophy of John Locke
Hmmm, brilliant at waffle, again
@@bobwilkinson2008 I think you misspelled baffle.
@@questor5189 Sadly not
The Jordan, Euphrates, Bow and EL-bow are all rivers 🙌 ALLELUIA 🙌 A-men' 🌾
Philosophy is an explanation, not evidence, philosophies can explain science. They are not the science itself, they are an abstract.
to prove anything beyond reasonable, doubt , you need to provide a mechanism, as John Lennox and all social media Christians fail to do , is provide a mechanism for anything god has created.
This is just about the best thing I've ever seen on UA-cam.
Of course it is , you don’t need evidence on social media
You must have only watched one video on youtube. How sad.
@@colinmatts you think anything will be proven on UA-cam 🤔, you don’t need evidence for UA-cam, which is why it’s the Christian go to
@@colinmatts
You think anything on UA-cam is a fact , how sad
@@Unconskep NO! I don't think "anything on UA-cam is a fact". I watch thousands of youtube videos. Many of them are nonsense. The trick is to be discerning
Love this man.
Best explanation of science was that its based on probability not certainty.
Science is not based on probability at all.
@@johnbrown6189Quantum mechanics ?
@@jrwjr45 Quantum mechanics is just the next thing that theists say is by a God.
SUPER! THANKS to God and this brilliant scientist!❤🙏🙏🙏
God Created Science and it is All for Us! God Loves us! 😊❤
"God Created Science" and omitted to tell us anything about it.
@@administratorlynch6223
Science is There for us to Discover! He Knew we would like that!
Actualy Henry Ford did not invent the motor car.It was Benz in Getmany. He named it after his daughter Mercedes
To me it's quite an achievement. Not only do you have to invent the machine, but the fuel that runs it too.
As we all know, something must come from something.
It follows immediately that there must be an infinite series.
Mathematicians love infinite series !
The God of the Bible Spoke everything into Existence, time and all laws of science were CREATED
@@fredweber6585
When I speak to the trees they grow.
Well, actually that was supposed to be “How” rather than “Why” in the first question. How would be a question about the process. Why would be a question about the purpose. Anyway, I love the logic. Even if science explains the how, I still want to know the why; the purpose.
For god to be an explanation of anything, you first have to show god exists.
Liquidity damages ?
JMJ, O HOLY SPIRIT PLEASE HELP US, THANK YOU AMEN.
Yes sir, every professor, studies, about something which they like it, and becoming popularly in their field, then they think they are genius, but one thing they have forgotten, that is, what they have studied and learned is a temporary and theirs knowledge is this darkest world knowledge, and everyone have the same capacity of knowledge to become popular, some people gain greatest popularly then other persons, those have studied the same subject or whatever we called it.
However very few people, have the GODLY KNOWLEDGE ( WISDOM) along with this worldly knowledge, but they don't bother about, theirs greatness and popularity. They are very simple and humble personality. Please don't think I am flattering you really and truly I love to say that you are one of the greatest gentleman YOU have the GODLY KNOWLEDGE ( WISDOM) and this worldly knowledge.
MAY THE ALMIGHTY AND MERCIFUL GOD AND SAVIOR LORD JESUS CHRIST BLESSED AND OUR BLESSED HOLY MOTHER GUIDE AND GUARD AND PRAY FOR YOU TO RECEIVE MORE AND MORE WISDOM. FOREVER AMEN.
How exactly do you know that the Islamic religion isn't true?
Moreover, those who claim God of the gaps do so as an excuse to deny God no matter what. If God split the universe in two from end to end like an egg to reveal a heavenly realm too glorious and expansive to comprehend and manifested himself atop the earth as a brilliant expanse of lightning and energy emitting the phrase I am God such that everyone understood in all languages all at once; even then some would shield their face and say in their heart and mind: there must be a scientific explanation that rules out God.
If that happened then it would be counted as evidence and could possibly warrant belief. So far there is zero evidence of any supernatural claims made in the bible being true so withholding belief is rational and reasonable.
I don’t know if God created everything, as a physical entity, or weather everything is an accident because of God, but God definitely exists, we simply can’t understand what God is..
A great video, thanks for sharing ! Prof Lennox is so brilliant, well-spoken, interesting and thought-provoking !
Understand that God who is described in the Bible lies at the heart of modern science. I refer to Harrison's book "Bible, Protestantism and the rise of modern science".
In the creation account we have the cosmos established on the basis of word spoken to produce a consequential result that corresponds to the content of the word: we therefore have confidence in two things.
1 -- rational causality, and
2 -- propositional knowledge at the heart of the material world (Proverbs 3:19-20 relates). It is thus rationally intelligible.
Knowledge, which we are confident we can develop as we study and explicate the material world on the basis of 2, above, of course, is immaterial. Yet it is recorded and transmitted materially, because we are blessed with a material existence. Similarly immaterial is the language that runs through the living world (the genetic code and its related systems), our minds and in our communication.
These two aspects of the creation account are rarely explored theologically. Perhaps because they have to be understood as integral to a concrete series of timed events in history that are relegated to mythopoeic art by most theologians.
Are you kidding? "God...lies at the heart of modern science". LOL
How exactly do you know that matter and energy hasn't always existed in some natural form?
@@TheTruthKiwi I don't and neither do you. Either way that has nothing to do with inventing supernatural gods
@@bobwilkinson2008 Sorry Bob, my comment was for OP. I love how they are desperately trying to legitimize their superstitious fantasies in this comment section. 😁😁😁
@@TheTruthKiwi Indeed. Nothing new!
I thought all this was settled with Newton math mapping the classical observer fallen hierarchy of the knowledge of Good and evil equations .
Qauntom physics confirmed it ,he created on the smallest scales with an example of infinite degrees of freedom yet uniformity, timelessness without linear direction perfect building blocks.
We even measured the fingerprints left over in code of life .
How could we become so separated in less than 80 years ?
@QuietlyContemplating That's how additional information works Especially when it's covering 500 years of movements & discovery to and fro on
apologetics, predictions ,confirmation .
What many thought would be dealt or wrote off by statistical anylics launched the entire naturalistic movement until it came full circle and measurements spoke loudly
@QuietlyContemplating I did point out how uneducated & separated so called experts like Dawkins & students have become in such a short 40- 80 years.
To make scientific measurements and not even know where standardized weights and measure comes from our how you came to know your tools and how they got here is sad.
Especially in institutions that bare the faithful names as so many do ,not to mention knowledge is the product sold there .
@QuietlyContemplating it helps to learn theoretical claims & the disputes against them so that your aware when they are overturned by the advocates predictions.
Which explains why we discovered & mapped conprencous code of life yet we still call it the ptolemaic evolutionary model.
Gallaleo would recognize our eclesatical academics over the past half a century
Science explains processes, the how.
Great talk, thanks!!!
Just in case one is looking for an answer, you will not find it in the intellect, but do question the looker. INTELLIGENCE IS NOT INTELLECT, intellect is a culture that manipulates within chronological time and space, what science does is bring one close to perceiving, but it is NOT the thing.
When the church tells us that all humans derived from just two specimens, who's the science stopper there? When priests tell women not to have necessary hysterectomy operations, who's the science stopper there? When the Vatican authorities placed Galileo under house arrest and forced him to recant the truth he had observed, who was the science stopper there? When those nutty fundamentalists wanted creationism taught alongside evolution in science classes, who was the science stopper there? When Copernicus had to wait till he was on his deathbed to publish his heliocentric theory, who was the science stopper then? When has theology actually achieved one fraction of what science has?
Those are all legitimate points. However, in the 21st century the shoe seems to be on the other foot. Those proponents of naturalistic theologies are now finding all sorts of ways to dodge what science has proven about the images of a crucified corpse that cannot be either explained or accurately reproduced.
Thank you for honoring my freedom of speech.
Who … other than those that are certain they speak on behalf of a god … could have terrified you with the “flamboyant story” of there being a place your “soul” will go in the afterlife … to suffer for eternity?
________
From the book “Twisted Scriptures,” by Mary Alice Chrnalogar, published in 1997.
Tricks to Keep You Controlled
A Guilt-Edged Sword
The key for gaining maximum control over someone’s conscience is to influence the person to study and accept certain beliefs. Then, if the person fails to follow those beliefs, a powerful feeling of guilt will be the result.
Leaders get you to believe that they don’t interpret the Bible but just “teach what is in the Bible”-making the Bible synonymous with their interpretations.
i request to dr. lenox please one time the first semon of nehjulbalagh from Ali ibne abi deleverd 14 centuries before about creation of univers your veiw will more advance
This reminds me of the study of music theory. Great composers can write a piece of music, and they use music theory as a guiding principle, so that it makes sense and so that they can figure out difficult problems with the harmonies and the structure of the piece. But if you start from the perspective of music theory and try to compose a piece of music, just based on that science, you’re gonna wind up with a very boring piece of music and that’s been shown time and time again, and every single time.
so you are a composer then?
As science has progressed, the number of gods has reduced.
In most counties, only the god of Israel is worshipped.
I wonder why that god is so popular ?
**Please Also Watch**
'Where Did God Come From?' Dr.Kent Hovind
BRILLIANT !
What happens if it is discovered that the first cause was in fact an astronaut.
it sounds like you should have validated your premise, by asking these said people....who or what do you think when I say....God....
If Jesus had cured blindness or cancer then I might worship him.
Well, he did. And many other ailments as well. You can see it in the gospels how many suffering people He healed. You can also see it in the history of medicine. So many of medicines cures came as people who followed Jesus asked Him for cures for the suffering they saw...and He showed then the cures.
@@jenniferpinaire2605
I was referring to the eradication of blindness and cancer completely !
Not just curing people he happened to bump into
Brilliant man
REALLLY??? Did I hear you correctly Dr Lennox - are you suggesting that the three monotheistic religions… Judaism, Christianity and Islam all worship the same God (@3:20)??? Or, that YAWEH and Allah is the one and same God?
Please please please tell me I heard you incorrectly (and I listened very carefully, not once but 6 times!)…
I believe I have heard him say that before
@@jemarpaloso6272 No, I don’t think so…
Also… for Truth to be Truth (with a capital ‘T’), it necessarily needs to transcend human experience… what you’re suggesting, reduces truth (with a small ‘t’) to the subjective, which is by definition, a philosophically self-refuting view-of-things
For example, the common maxim, “Everyone is free to believe whatever they choose to believe” can easily be shown to be an absurdity… a nonsense idea…
They each share the goal of following the God of Abraham. The problem lies in the identity and character of the God of Abraham, which is where the problem of worshipping different gods comes from.
Science is us thinking after God.
That is palpable non sense!
@@twosheds1749 Science is simply discovery. Not inventing anything new. Science is Knowledge - the discovery of the things which already are. I also believe that we may trace out God's character in the things that are already made even though sin has marred God's perfect work
@@okellojeremy2700 Explain? What has he made? Did he make malaria and rabies? Oh how about the parasitic wasp, he come up with that too?
@@twosheds1749 Naaah . . . Those are the consequences of sin . . . Allow me quote from Volume 3 of Spiritual Gifts by Ellen White to give further insight , "Every species of animal which God had created were preserved in the ark. The confused species which God did not create, which were the result of amaglamation, were destroyed by the flood". There are particular animals which are a result of amaglamation and it is these animals which God did not create.
I believe that originally, God created every thing good and perfect as in Genesis 1 and 2. After sin entered, the pale of death rested upon creation. Like Jesus, I simply answer, "an Enemy has done this". Some of the ferocious characteristics of animals are a result of nature being thrown out of equilibrium by the entrance of moral evil. In fact, An Im-moral Agency. Nature exhibits certain diabolical features which are not the result of human wills, and are most probably the action of certain diabolical supernatural forces. In nature, you will recognize that there is cause for perplexity. We see both the placid and the ferocious, but we cannot but recognize the working of antagonistic forces. Looking upon the evil manifest in the natural world, all have the same sorrowful lesson to learn, -- "An Enemy hath done this". Matthew 13:28. I subscribe to the Cosmic Conflict Motif reading of the Bible - A Conflict between Christ and Satan, concerning God's Character.
John is a Don, Top G. A humble student remaining at the Lord's feet. I look forward to meeting John one day! 😊
Proof of rapture and resurrection?
When truth dawns the light comes down from above, like when you learn something new or catch on to a joke, destroying everything that came before, I'm very visuall and slow to catch on, I've seen it and it looks like revelation
THREE great monotheistic religions? Are they all great?
And all the same God apparently 😔
Neither Newton nor Einstein knew squat about gravity. Kepler’s 3 ‘laws’ are all energy free, mass free, and force free. “The Final Theory: Rethinking Our Scientific Legacy “, Mark McCutcheon for proper physics.
theories of newton and einstein works. They are used to get machines on mars. they are used to fly to saturn, jupiter and pluto. McCutcheons quack theories doesn get anyone anywhere...
On the day that proof of God, any God, is discovered, scientists will be the FIRST to stand in line to worship that God. Until then, NOT so much.
I find it difficult to believe everything that Jesus said.
(Matthew 19:28)
Absolutely rolling on the floor in tears of laughter.
because you have the maturity of a child
@@grantbartley483 Yea, I should grow up and get myself an imaginary friend 🤣
Bruh really manifesting on the floor 💀
You would think that after thousands of years and thousands of gods that these god botherers would give it up. But, alas...they are just too thick it would seem.
Religion and Science were both from God. Everything we have is from God, Including our knowledge and Technology.
Thus, they won't be Contradicting each other, because both are from God.
So, if your Religion cannot co-exist with Science, means your Religion is not from God.
It's that simple.
How do you know ANYTHING is "from God"?
@@colinmatts Bro, God is The Creator of our Existence and Reality. 🤦
Science is a study, to learn about the law of Nature, the Basic of our Existence. And who do you think Created the law of Nature? God. 😮💨
So, if your religion cannot Co-Exist with science, means your religion is not from God. 👉☕️👌👍
@@GiganticMythicalSpaceFishWhale How do you know God created our "existence and reality"?
Nobody knows how the "law of nature" came about. You don't get to just plug your God into unexplained phenomena. That's the god of the gaps fallacy.
But every religion claims to co-exist with science (which they clearly don't) and they all claim to "be from God". How do we find out which one is telling the truth?
Interesting claim. Do you have any evidence to back it up?
@@TheTruthKiwi God in religion has the same Concept of the Sentient Singularity which caused the Universe to Exist in Scienctific Theories.
God = The Uncaused Original Cause of the First Effect in our own Reality and Existence.
Logically, there are only 2 Possibilities of what's there before time even Flows. Either a Sentient Singularity, or an Absolute Void.
But if it's an Absolute Void, then nothing would ever Exist. So by the law of Deduction, the answer is the other Option.
That's what religion call as God, The Creator.
So, if a religion cannot Co-Exist with science, which is a study to learn the Law of Nature caused by The Sentient Singularity, then the religion is False.
Jesus tells me that Genesis isn't allegory...
It's literal
Mark 10:6 KJV
[6] But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
I agree. And if Genesis chapter 1 was somehow an allegory, that allegory would still be from God. And God is not god of confusion. Since God said He made the plants before the sun, no one can explain the meaning behind that. Thus, if were an allegory, it would be very confusing. I have found that born again people actually believe the bible.
Most christians who believe in an old earth, don't believe the sun was made after the plants. To me, that is heretical. They are calling God a liar. God's Word is true. I had read the bible before I was born again. And on my new birth date, God opened the Word to me. Jesus is the Word. He is the Truth.
@@puppyupper4565
👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻💯💯💯
realizing biblical cosmology brought me so much closer to Jesus.
I’ve always said science and religion answer two different questions. Science answers “how.” Religion answers “why.”
What if there ISN'T a why?
Religion assumes and asserts the "Why", there is no evidence of it being true.
Chúa sáng tạo ra loài người , để loài người biết ai là đấng tạo ra
And therefore original sin, triune God, Jesus????
Big John should stay out of the scientific lab (he is a menace ) and continue teaching arithmatic.and other math issues
(^o^)／~~ if someone makes the Bible your disability you become the most interesting person in the world.
science and god, both human inventions.
One is the best tool we have for determining truth from fiction!
Religions rely on a classic a posteriori fallacy: the world exists so it must have been created. Accepting that the universe is temporally and spatially infinite makes the postulation of a creator unnecessary.
You can explain God without the Universe, but you cannot explain the Universe without God.
If I remove the Mind from the brain. I stick it in a box. I point at the box. I will be pointing at “God.” All gods of all religions.
The Mind rules an invisible realm and it is total in power over this realm
. Like a God.
John 1:1 explains it. Its logic. Logic is god.
You need to prove there is such a thing as a mind.
My brother, John 1:1 is about Jesus becoming incarnate as man. If you read the gospel of John, it's very clearly not talking about logical abstractions, but about Jesus Christ being God incarnate as Man to show us what God is like and to die for our sins. Making John 1 about 'logic' is a huge misunderstanding and an example of trying to apply a Greek philosophical framework onto a text that is clearly religious in nature, as would be shown if the rest of the chapter is read. God is described in the book of John as revealing Himself through Jesus to the human minds, not as being a part of the human mind. Please be respectful of the context of texts like this, as these kinds of reinterprations hugely disrespect the intent of the authors and the message they are communicating in their works. The apostle John does not preach what you are talking about anywhere in his gospel.
@@stefanwalicord2512 proverbs 1:6
You will never understand
@SplashyCannonBall if the words of the wise are a riddle, riddle me this: how does ignoring 99% of the book of John for a single verse out of context make you wise? Sounds more like folly to me. Try the very next verse, Proverbs 1:7:
"The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, But fools despise wisdom and instruction."
@@stefanwalicord2512 interpreting the Bible based off the English translation isn’t interpreting. You are just reading it.
It’s raining cats and dogs has nothing to do with cats and dogs.
Proverbs 1:6.
Greek God (Almighty)
Egyptian God (creator)
Jealous and Angel God (Jahweh)
Sun of God (Jesus)
Moon God (Allah)
＼(^^)／ With a television you don't have to be supernatural. God prefer that because it's more social but we have to use it correctly. Right now we have anarchy blindness. Despite the anarchy blindness I figured it out. That proves we can be God like. Only a person getting crucified would suspect something greater. They crucified me with exact same disease that in pink Floyd the wall. Victor said it's all good. It should be possible to make everything all good m.
He's presuming the truth of what he's trying to prove. Petitio Principi
Unlike scientific induction which is circular with no external justification. I.e the sun has risen every day - therefore it will rise tomorrow.
Or even better still:-
Premise 1 …..Deduction 2 ………Dawkins. ( but you might not know that Dawkins joke where he appears to be trying to form a syllogism in the style of William Lane Craig)
After Prince Charles warned us he got in his private helicopter
According to one of the gospels. At the point when Jesus died on the cross, large numbers of dead people (basically ... "zombies") climbed out of their graves and wandered about the streets of Jerusalem. Does Dr. Lennox ,,, REALLY BELIEVE THIS ????😮
In the same way that Moses, and Elijah stood beside Jesus during the Transfiguration, witnessed by some of the Apostles ?
Or that Christ himself appeared to several after his resurrection?
And that he had a kind of resurrected body, unlike the one he had risen from the dead with the daughter of Jairus, or the son of the widow of Nain, or even Lazarus, who was days in his tomb, so they feared " he smelled ".
(-.-)Zzz・・・・ natural selection is the character flaw in evil that is integrity is more important than life otherwise evolution is tragic circumstances with nothing intelligent happening. Almost everyone survive until they reproduce. Nothing is getting selected except for the character flaw in evil. I found a replacement for the character flaw in evil that I liked but God makes me forget things that will cause me trouble.
Oh, the problem is OUR definition of God, oh I see 👀 🙄. Being good at maths doesn't mean you're to be trusted on this issue. He's as disingenuous as a Ray Comfort or a Ken Ham, just cleverer
Same old God of the Gaps argument! Just because we have not yet proved the theory of Quantum Gravity than a god must have done it......somehow! Non sense filled with assumptions!!
I'm a big fan of John, but Yahweh started out as a god of the gaps, being a volcano. When Moses is getting the 10 commandments, the ground shakes, there's fire, kind of sounds like a volcano grumbling... The only God in the Bible that isn't a God of the gaps is Jesus' depiction of God as a spiritual leader.
"Yahweh started off as a volcano...."
Faith is belief without evidence too, right?
I wish you well but this is pretty bad.
This is typical atheist 'just so story' that has no evidence. It's just a declaration & believed by atheist bloggers.
The god of the gaps is atheism of the logic dodges. It's just asserted & dodges arguments: it's like politics just say 'racism' or _______phoic. tThe god of the gaps claim is a massive failure. 21st century atheism has an infinite multiverse to explain fine tuning & 'nothing' made the universe & the MV.
Then 21st century atheism just affirms those capricious gods. They just burst into existence & cause things & then quantum tunnel elsewhere.
I would like to engage you more on your claim of Jesus but....maybe some other time.
I just wanna say i appreciate your comment & I wish you well. Keep engaging
I'd like to point out Mt. Sinai (at least where we currently think it is) is not a volcano
the Yahweh you speak about walked in the garden with Adam. He conversed with Noah. The father of Judaism is Abraham. Yahweh had lunch with Abraham. Jesus is Yahweh. You might want to learn the bible before coming up with absurd statements about it.
Dissonance 101
He says himself, 'all other gods are god of the gaps - oh but not my one, my one is different.'
Even though his god exhibits all the same attributes as the other ones he dismisses. (providing a poor answer to any question where there is a gap)
I can't even... So much cognitive dissonance, it's almost heart-breaking to see such a supposed intelligent man fall for this nonsense.
You can apply his logic to all the other gods too:- The more I understand about lightning, the more I admire Zeus for making it that way...... Wohoo, Zeus must exist then.
Precisely 👍
The world is very complicated, so there must be a God.
God is very complicated, so there must be a Supergod.
That's right, it's gods all the way up !
The Creator, Jesus, is a Supergod. His handiwork in creation is beyond all that we can ask or think. Great minds still don't understand what's out there in the cosmos.
@@puppyupper4565
And as long as there are mysteries, there is room for the god of Israel
@@puppyupper4565
It's interesting that Jesus knew the future.
He knew how to make an electric motor.
Yet he never told anybody.
@@tedgrant2 It really doesn't matter whether or not humanity or Israel sees God as a mystery. Jesus is wonderful but also unfathomable in who He is. He says that we who love Him will know Him as He is. That day is in the future. And the day we know Him as He is, He won't disappear. All mystery will be gone but He will not be
@@tedgrant2 He made the electrons. Of course He knew how to make an electric motor. But they didn't have the ability to make one if He told them how. But His trip to earth was far more valuable than the industrial revolution. He came to set people free from the consequences of sin. Praise His holy name.
I guess the glasses he uses to read and the electronic devices used to make this video all came from a god.
Well that depends I think.
@@tomgreene1843 Depends on what? God did not give him those things, people who used their brains developed those things, people who used procedures learned from doing research, that is science.
@@MrGoogelaar The glasses, electronic devices and so forth are all remodelled from pre-existing matter, as you infer, and developed with science. That is correct. But science neither created the pre-existing matter, nor developed the brains that did the remodelling. Mr Lennox is not setting these things up as competing hypotheses, but demonstrating that while God is the one and only creator, we humans can be co-opted to participate as secondary causes in creation (of glasses, electronic devices etc) through our reason, intelligence and free will. Hope that makes sense!
There is only one huge mistake here, not two.
And that is that God and science are somehow twins.
They are not.
They are neither identical nor fraternal.
They are completely unrelated as one can be through one being supernatural and the other being natural.
(Addendum). Nor is faith and science twins.
There is no intent between what you want to happen(faith) and what actually happens(science) however much you believe it does.
The potential mistake is assuming nature cannot possess any kind of intent. Now it's HANDY to assume nature operates like a thoughtless machine, because it makes certain phenomena easier to predict, and perhaps that's a necessity in the scientific world. But to assume that reality itself is thoughtless and without intent even though it's a superset of ourselves is underestimating the universe I believe. A lot of people are very intent on proving human beings are mere machines without will, just like the universe appears to be. But not many go in the opposite direction saying it's possible that not only human beings possess intent, but the universe itself might. Now that's a faith-based claim. But it is ALSO just as much of a faith-based claim to say that scientific processes are able to explain ALL of reality. We have no scientific proof of that whatsoever. It's okay to have science as a replacement for religion, since it has a good track record. Just realize that it IS your religion when you believe it can explain all of reality. You are putting a lot of faith in science that it can do things it never claimed it could do.
@@theboombody read (Addendum).
The mistake is people believe in a man made god like all of them , yet dispute science whilst enjoying all the benefits from it.
Unfortunately, science has run amok and we have all become enslaved by it
The Standard Theory/Model was replaced by Expansion Theory in 2002. Facts have replaced that religious fantasy. “The Final Theory: Rethinking Our Scientific Legacy “, Mark McCutcheon for proper physics- including/starting with the CAUSE of gravity.
@QuietlyContemplating Do tell: what will your prescience say about; “The Unique and Its Property “, Max Stirner,1844/2017 Landstreicher translation? Arguing from ignorance - brilliant indeed. Laugh. Grow up.
@@davidrandell2224you should watch the video, science does not disprove God, never has and never will, grow up and don‘t be ignorant!
This is an atheist statement that wants to sound profound.
So, we shouldn't believe in man made gods??? ...cool! I guess we have vast agreement. That's hard to achieve.
Lennox straw maning atheists again. If you are going to critise someone, do it honestly! Hawkins had a Doctorate in Science, you sir a doctorate in make believe. If you can't supply one single verifiable fact about god's existance, how can you make any claim about that god's nature?? In the total absents of any evidence, Hawkin's "god" is a valid as yours.
the problem is the God in the books....
ALL SCIENCE WAS CREATED BY GOD THE GOD OF ABRAHAM, MOSES. AND THE PROPHETS WHO TOOK ON A HUMAN BODY AS JESUS OF NAZARETH THE HOLY ONE.
Theology is akin to astrology, tarot cards,seiance (communications of spirits) sharmans , tribal witch doctors and other praying class members...
The other discipline is fact based professionals ...who would you believe. ..amen
Religious indoctrination in childhood leaves the human brain vulnerable to becoming a mathematician, explaining all sorts of incompetent nonsense. 😢😂
Clever move by Lennox, moving science into the category of discovering how God made things, thereby defining God as all-powerful. It still doesn’t mean that God exists. Anyway, problems lie not in the existence of God but in the obviously man-made consequences known as religions with all their contradictions and dubious values, attitudes and behaviour. Or as I saw on a student’s tee-shirt: “God is OK. Religion is the problem”
At 02:13 this Preacher committed another fallacy: Special Pleading. His god is DIFFERENT from the other concepts of god, in other words, the Preacher is DISHONEST.
Special pleading is a logical fallacy where someone applies a double standard or makes an exception for their own argument or position.
It involves selectively presenting evidence or arguments that support one's own position, while ignoring or dismissing evidence that contradicts it.
It is a form of bias that undermines the principle of fairness and objectivity in reasoning and argumentation.
Special pleading is often used as a tactic to defend a weak or untenable position by attempting to shift the burden of proof or by making unfounded claims.
It is considered a fallacy because it violates the principle of consistency and undermines the credibility of the person making the argument.
The Jordan, Euphrates, Bow and EL-bow are all rivers. Made of the simplest of fabrics (H²O, waters) 🙌 ALLELUIA 🙌 A-men' 🌿
@@QuietlyContemplating Tractor trailers and sports cars are both vehicles. What category is God in?
@@QuietlyContemplating Where am I being "intellectually dishonest"?
@@QuietlyContemplating "Members of a larger class"....A larger class of what? Shouldn't you demonstrate that Gods exist before you start classifying them?
@@QuietlyContemplating So, every time I expose your logical inconsistencies, you're going to interpret that as "intellectual dishonesty". I think any honest reader of these comments would easily see which of us is being intellectually dishonest.
Richard Dawkins definitely does not believe in the "god of the bible" or any other imaginary
sky daddy!
Is John implying Richard does believe in some kind of god? John is a silly old man sometimes!
Mr Lennox is lying about Mr Dawkins for his imaginary god and Jesus! How dishonest can someone be! I thought that under the christian doctrine lying is a "sin"!
@@rudysimoens570 John may be able to add up numbers, but if you can accept
Faith is a way of finding the truth, you are either gullible or delusional!
The cornerstone of "faith" is basically lying to yourself, and it does not stop there.
I also fear John is very smug and full of himself, he loves the attention.
@@gknight4719 Faith is what every person starting a new business must have at least a little of. And there are times it does become reality.
@@theboombody I think you will find the comment you should have made is
"CONTROL IS AN ILLUSION" So you must do due diligence when taking on any new
endeavor.
like using logic/critical thinking, (that's something believers in god rarely do )
trust in what others have "done" when taking on the same endeavor.
the faith system is very reliable, you might as well flip a coin!
finally, if you use the "faith system", you are basically lying to yourself.
Dawkins has claimed aliens seeded life on the back of crystals.....
Buddha created the universe. The god of the Bible is false. Isn’t it amazing how Buddha set up gravity to work like it does? That explains that
They are all gods of the gaps except mine the epitomy of a batty professor
UA-cammyGreatThanksForFeatiringthisDivineThinkerandtoVeritas.YesSuh!!!
Lennox's theory of God only works if this god is supra natural and everlasting which unfortunately does not gel with everything we see and experience in the universe. He would have a stronger augument if he could provide some evidence for the existance of this amazing "for ever" god. The bible is not candidate for evidence as this collection of nonsense has only existed for a tiny micro miniscule moment of the apparent existance of this everlasting God.
What makes you the expert on “god”. There is no conversation required, there is simply your gargantuan alpha ego seeking applause. Grow up and be a good person. Cheers Mike
Don't talk about science. It doesn't matter. There simply is no god.
If there is no God, why did the original witnesses to the resurrection (eg Peter, who was the main source for Mark) keep saying they saw Jesus raised from the dead when they were being persecuted for saying it?
Plus, the cosmological and moral arguments are good arguments for God, too. So you're wrong.
Hey, its just a book some guys wrote a long time ago. And they were stories passed by mouth before that. The real question is that with your kind of intelligence, how can you feed yourself. Man, its just a science fiction book.@@grantbartley483
@@grantbartley483 Eyewitness evidence is the least accurate, especially when recorded generations after the event. There are no cosmological and moral arguments. Or is this the moral "god" that promotes genecide (e.g. crusades, flood), slavery, genital mutilation, misogyny, homophobia? LOL
@@grantbartley483 All we really have are a few scraps of text, written by anonymous writers decades later, that say they did.
@@mirandahotspring4019I'm sorry if you don't like the actual evidence, without any counter-evidence. Ignore it like a proper new atheist. In any case, you're wrong. Papius said he met John personally, and so would also have directly known about Peter sourcing Mark.
At 00:28 John Charlatan, Begs the Question.
Evolution disproves Genesis no
It really does