This was an amazing and outstanding performance, Dr. Craig! Keep it up! I’m glad God's is using you to impact my life and faith. Thank you 🙏🏼 All glory to God! God deserves our everything from us. In our bad days, He’s still good and deserving of glory 👍🏼 And I’m sure God is pleased with your service, Dr. Craig! As I said, keep giving your all for Him! 🙌🏼
I don’t think dr. Craig will ever “finish” his work. He recently wrote about how it’s inconceivable for a Christian in ministry to retire. He plans on working as long as possible.
I would like to know why, when addressing the theory of evolution, we just assume certain parts as bedrock fact? Why is it that when a theory is proposed, and we find out it doesn't work, we don't scrap the theory? Isn't it just as likely that you will ALWAYS run into dead ends with the viability of certain models, if the foundation you are building on is fundamentally flawed? Why, even when the theory is shown to be flawed, do we simply go back to building on the same theory that already lead to flaws? Why isn't the whole thing scraped, as all it generates are dead end models? I've never understood that. How many times does the foundation have to fail as a support structure, before we actually focus on the foundation as the problem? 🤔
It seems like it might need to be said that it is possible that one day we could discover how it's likely that the origin of biological life can be grounded in chemistry/physics and this would not in anyway take away from the compatibility between science and faith since Genesis can be (and many would say should be) read non-literalistically when describing God creating all living things - as pointed out in the section on biological complexity. Therefore, it's possible God created life via the fundamental particles and did not bridge the "gap" by what we might call a "miraculous" intervention. It seems to me that at this point both views are compatible with science, but it may be that the "miraculous" intervention view may not be compatible with modern science in the future - although it does seem like it may be a hopeless endeavor at this point considering the technological ability, time, and money already spent toward this cause with little ROI. I believe Craig has said elsewhere that he would essentially agree with my comments, but investigate for yourself!
That seems to be the tactic amongst Christians these days. Everything in the bible is literally, untill we can prove that it's wrong, then it's just an allegory or poem.
Foe. Science shows that your faith in Christianity is unfounded, And your faith goes against reality, as we can scientifically evaluate. Science is the best process we have for evaluating the world around us. Faith is just believing what you want regardless of what the evidence shows.
you have a horrible mindset my friend. Man looked for laws in nature because man believed in a Law giver. Ever heard that little quote? Science was formed from men like this, creationist scientists was the most common until the 1900's. Math, reason, science, and many inventions all came from Creationist scientists... so if your process came from someone believing in a God, why not understand that we don't know everything, and God very possibly could be the reason for constant unnatural laws such as math 2+2 always equals 4 even with no people. Why does it equal 4 if no one can know it? Because God created it and without humans, God and all other creation is still viable. so how is faith in a historical event, the death and resurrection of Jesus unfounded? what about the numerous other authors who wrote about Jesus and His resurrection? do you not believe because you don't think the supernatural exists? or you just don't like what the Bible teaches and therefore you don't like God? please explain a little...
All laws of physics, laws of nature and all quantum states are natural not supernatural. To prove anything beyond reason, you need a mechanism, Craig and all other apologists have no mechanism for anything god has created.
@@protestssopeacefulweneedad2017 Are you saying that because you agree we shouldn't believe in gods? Ideas start unknown. Well if our goal is truth, then we must be honest: when an idea is unknown, we shouldn't believe it's true (because we're sure we don't know it). So that lack of evidence of a god is what justifies the non-belief position. And that non-belief is atheism.
@@protestssopeacefulweneedad2017 No it can't. The reason I am an atheist is because there is insufficient evidence to justify believing that any gods exist. I don't have faith in anything. Not even close.
Science seeks truth through proof. Faith is what you have when you have no proof. Religion is faith. Craig is a debunked and discredited laughingstock.
It's very refreshing to see a father and his son working together
Neat to get to hear from Dr. Craig’s son. Must make him proud to see his son helping in ministry as well.
Thank you, Dr. Craig, for your work in Christian apologetics. You have bolstered the faith of many, including myself!
This was an amazing and outstanding performance, Dr. Craig! Keep it up! I’m glad God's is using you to impact my life and faith. Thank you 🙏🏼 All glory to God! God deserves our everything from us. In our bad days, He’s still good and deserving of glory 👍🏼 And I’m sure God is pleased with your service, Dr. Craig! As I said, keep giving your all for Him! 🙌🏼
Great to see Dr. Craig’s son! How fortunate to have Dr. Craig as a father!
of course Craig's son is a chad
Dr. Craig's list of responses for why the YE model is not iron-clad was potent. Good issues worth serious consideration.
Dr. Craig's texan accent was fire! 🤣🔥
Amazing. This must be the first time we got to see Dr. Craig's son.
Even Dr. Craig's son has similar voice. I feel younger again.
I wouldn't confuse their voices for a second. He even looks completely different.
@@protestssopeacefulweneedad2017You’re right
I love the drama! Keep it up Dr Craig!!!!
This is heartwarming 😊
you can tell that's his son by the way he moves his hands when he talks lololol
Hopefully WLC isn't "finishing" -- well or otherwise -- anytime soon!
He looks quite good compared to some recent appearances -- I hope this is very recent.
I don’t think dr. Craig will ever “finish” his work. He recently wrote about how it’s inconceivable for a Christian in ministry to retire. He plans on working as long as possible.
The only true God and science are NOT in conflict.
The only true God and pseudoscience ARE in conflict.
I would like to know why, when addressing the theory of evolution, we just assume certain parts as bedrock fact? Why is it that when a theory is proposed, and we find out it doesn't work, we don't scrap the theory? Isn't it just as likely that you will ALWAYS run into dead ends with the viability of certain models, if the foundation you are building on is fundamentally flawed? Why, even when the theory is shown to be flawed, do we simply go back to building on the same theory that already lead to flaws? Why isn't the whole thing scraped, as all it generates are dead end models?
I've never understood that. How many times does the foundation have to fail as a support structure, before we actually focus on the foundation as the problem? 🤔
why would a perfect, all-powerful God need to intervene in his own creation to create and develop life?
lol why jon is so tall
It seems like it might need to be said that it is possible that one day we could discover how it's likely that the origin of biological life can be grounded in chemistry/physics and this would not in anyway take away from the compatibility between science and faith since Genesis can be (and many would say should be) read non-literalistically when describing God creating all living things - as pointed out in the section on biological complexity. Therefore, it's possible God created life via the fundamental particles and did not bridge the "gap" by what we might call a "miraculous" intervention. It seems to me that at this point both views are compatible with science, but it may be that the "miraculous" intervention view may not be compatible with modern science in the future - although it does seem like it may be a hopeless endeavor at this point considering the technological ability, time, and money already spent toward this cause with little ROI. I believe Craig has said elsewhere that he would essentially agree with my comments, but investigate for yourself!
That seems to be the tactic amongst Christians these days.
Everything in the bible is literally, untill we can prove that it's wrong, then it's just an allegory or poem.
Chat GPT ranked him in 5th place? Shows you how much AI knows 😂
Foe.
Science shows that your faith in Christianity is unfounded,
And your faith goes against reality, as we can scientifically evaluate.
Science is the best process we have for evaluating the world around us. Faith is just believing what you want regardless of what the evidence shows.
you have a horrible mindset my friend. Man looked for laws in nature because man believed in a Law giver. Ever heard that little quote? Science was formed from men like this, creationist scientists was the most common until the 1900's. Math, reason, science, and many inventions all came from Creationist scientists... so if your process came from someone believing in a God, why not understand that we don't know everything, and God very possibly could be the reason for constant unnatural laws such as math 2+2 always equals 4 even with no people. Why does it equal 4 if no one can know it? Because God created it and without humans, God and all other creation is still viable. so how is faith in a historical event, the death and resurrection of Jesus unfounded? what about the numerous other authors who wrote about Jesus and His resurrection? do you not believe because you don't think the supernatural exists? or you just don't like what the Bible teaches and therefore you don't like God? please explain a little...
God of the gaps in action. This is what separates theists from atheists: For atheists, gaps are not Gods.
All laws of physics, laws of nature and all quantum states are natural not supernatural.
To prove anything beyond reason, you need a mechanism, Craig and all other apologists have no mechanism for anything god has created.
Nobody arrives at belief in a god by evidence. So foes. (Nobody brings up their "faith" in gravity, because they have evidence.)
Even if true, the same can be said of atheism.
@@protestssopeacefulweneedad2017 Are you saying that because you agree we shouldn't believe in gods?
Ideas start unknown. Well if our goal is truth, then we must be honest: when an idea is unknown, we shouldn't believe it's true (because we're sure we don't know it).
So that lack of evidence of a god is what justifies the non-belief position.
And that non-belief is atheism.
@@protestssopeacefulweneedad2017
No it can't.
The reason I am an atheist is because there is insufficient evidence to justify believing that any gods exist.
I don't have faith in anything.
Not even close.
I would the very ashamed to be the son of the worst philosopher I have ever listened to.
Science and faith are not in conflict (as long as you reinterpret the bible to no longer mean what it says)
Science seeks truth through proof.
Faith is what you have when you have no proof.
Religion is faith.
Craig is a debunked and discredited laughingstock.
Please cite legitimate evidence for the "debunking" you refer to.
The terms Reasonable and Faith cannot logically exist together.
You speaking with evidence and you are the laughing stock😂😂