_William Lane Craig is at his best when talking about those sorts of abstract things._ Philosophers are always at their best when speculating unfettered by facts. But give them reality, and they're lost.
@@grasonicus you argue from the end as though you know what reality is. Reality is to be discovered, including by argumentation, and here Craig convinced more than the other one. In Part II, I agreed with Craig's arguments even more, as I sort of held the same mental model intuitively for a while.
@@danielfromca _you argue from the end as though you know what reality is_ Reality (fact) is something which is or was. That's it. Words and arguments don't determine or influence reality. People who are by nature BS artists love speculation and philosophy. The longer and more convoluted an argument is, the more they love it.
@ I didn’t understand what you meant by reality. But facts that you know carry you only some way, and beyond that to construct a reasoned argument is a very good way to grow in knowledge. Mathematics does exactly that. More fundamentally, the very facts themselves, when examined, may be based on a great deal of reasoning too - indeed except for the most basic axioms of logic, things perceived as merely factual are pillared on layers of reasoning. For example, the move from an experiment to a generalization is based on reasoning related to constancy in nature as opposed to chaos. You may reason about the constancy of nature or accept it as an unreasoned properly basic belief, but in this case, like with all else, there is no manufacturer stamp on it that says: “guaranteed fact”. You can say Craig’s arguments are wrong or implausible, but if you attack the system itself, to be consistent, you may have to shed many of the things you accept as “facts”.
@@danielfromca _I didn’t understand what you meant by reality._ Reality and fact are the same. Look at dictionaries. Someone can say x happened, and you can say, in reality/fact, y happened. Both reality and fact existed or exists. They're not amenable to words used in any way. From the word count of your response, it seems you drank of the Kool-Aid of the arts and humanities.
The son is begotten of the Father in the Bible. What other way then eternally begotten. This distinction is biblical. Craig should update his basic trinity to include the idea that the son is eternally begotten of the Father.
Great, show me the bible verses that say the 2nd person of the Trinity has always been the Son? I fully accept the Trinity. I just don't see scripture to say the Son has always existed as the Son. In the Old Testament he was the Angel of YHWH. He only becomes the Son once he is born and they say he will be called the Son of God.
Begotten doesn't mean created. All the verse is saying and perhaps trying to convey is how the son is brought to bear to offer himself for the redemption and atonement to whosoever will.
@@faithfulservantofchrist9876 hebrews 1:2. Eternal sonship is hard to deny given this verse. All things were made through the Son. This means he was the Son before creation.
@greg3412 I would love to agree but it doesn't make him the Son eternally. What we need is a verse saying he was the Son before the incarnation. Luke 1:35 English Standard Version 35 And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born[a] will be called holy-the Son of God. He will be called the Son of God, not he's always been the Son of God.
A often overlooked scripture is Hebrews chapter 1 verses 8 and 9! This is just as good as the opening of John chapter 1. I mean read Hebrews 1: 8-9 and see how the Father is telling the Son "...thy throne O God is forever..." Then the Father says "...therefore God(Son) even thy God(Father)..." The Father is speaking as God and referring to the Son as God. It's truly amazing. Also note: What makes God worthy as opposed to other fake gods like Zeus and Thor is how our Lord and Savior is Righteous on top on being Holy and possessing Omni-traits. These other false gods are extremely unrighteous. And have other bad qualities.
W.L.Craig descriptions are so confusing and convoluted because he ‘adds’ the ideas of man in his Gospel. I want those I’m talking to understand what the word of God says and not what I say. Instead of using the words, Free Will, Responsiveness, Intentional as if I have some credit or had some responsibility in my be Born of God. I would use the Words, Convicted, Believe and Transformed to demonstrate that Transformation, when it comes about, is the Act of God and not us in any way. I would add. We can use the terms in the first group to describe us intervening intentionally and stopping God from Transforming us. That’s because rejecting God or denying the Truth that Transforms us is our responsibility and we will receive the Credit for it. The set of words Craig uses ‘implies’ that our salvation is dependent upon God yes but us as well. The words Convict, Believe, and Transformed reveal just how dependent we are upon God to give to us New Life. The Word ‘Conviction’ demonstrates at its core that we depend on the Word outside of us to do the Work within us. We must be convinced or persuaded by another to the point where Belief is birthed within us. And this New Belief ‘given’ to us Begins to Transform us. The Word we receive does the Work in those that don’t Reject God or Deny Him. The seed itself, which is planted in us by another and watered by another WILL grow because God WILL make it grow. Not us. The Bible does describe we can make it stop growing but we can take No credit or have any responsibility in its growth. Yes we are Lead but we are Lead because God brings Jesus into our lives. God’s Gospel given to us by another brings to Life Faith and Love for God and captures our hearts and minds so that we have ‘no other choice’ but to Follow Him. His Love captures us, makes us slaves of Christ. To whom would I go for Salvation grips our soul. We had nothing to do with our first birth. The man planted the seed, the woman watered it and God made you grow. Why do we use words that imply we have some responsibility in our New Birth? We don’t have a choice. Our Salvation is in Christ Jesus alone. There is no choice. It’s The Truth I’m proclaiming. I’m not laying before you a choice. The devil deceives us and wants us to believe we have a choice. This softens the Situation men are in. We don’t have a choice, we Will die be judged if we reject the Grace of God in Christ Jesus. I’m not giving you a choice, I’m telling you the Truth! My point is Craig’s explanation of Salvation is not biblical and his explanation of the Trinity is off because he adds the words of men and doesn’t stick with the Bible. One last example is he believes the earth was created in more than 6 days. He again brings in the ideas of the world. And doesn’t stick with the Word of God.
You added quite a few non-biblical words to this comment, such as "Trinity." Also, you didn't write it in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek. Does that mean your words are false and that you don't "stick with the Word of God?" - RF Admin
@ your criticism is silly and nonsensical. You’re not addressing the fact that he uses ‘ideas’ of man, such as ‘free will’ and ‘the age of the earth’ instead of we are saved by Grace, Through Faith, not of the will of man but of the Will of God. I didn’t use the Word Trinity to explain the Bible either. God is Spirit. We are called to worship Him in Spirit and Truth. How can we worship that which we do not know? The Father sent the Son to die for our sin and to (Reveal the Father) to us. The Father is poured out to us through the Gospel. As we hear the Gospel our Spiritual Eyes are open to SEE God. Our Eyes are open to See the Grace, Mercy, Forgiveness, Faithfulness, Justice and Love of God. Those who do not reject or deny the Gospel Will SEE The Spirit of God. When we are ushered into the Prescience of God through the Cross, The Spirit of God begins to Transform us. New things begin to come alive in us. We find Belief in God, Faith in God, Trust in God and Love for God beginning to come to Life within us. And as this New Spirit begins to come alive in us, we find our desires being made new. We find a new desire to be obedient to this New Love we have for God. This is the best example I’ve heard of God is One. The Father’s Name is God. At the same time God is what The Father is. The Son’s name is Jesus. At the same time God is what The Son is. There is One Spirit. The Spirit of The Father is Poured out for us to See through the Gospel and When we enter the Presence of God and Get to SEE and KNOW His Goodness, God Spirit gives birth to the Spirit of the Son within us. Giving to us the Spirit of Christ and opening our mouths to cry out Abba Father. The picture and image is present in Adam. If Adam means Mankind then it would be shown in the following. Adam’s name is Mankind. At the same time Mankind is what Adam is. Adam’s Son’s name is Cain. At the same time Mankind is what Cain is. There is One God. There is One Mankind. There is One Spirit in The Father and Son. There is One Spirit in Mankind. The Spirit of the world. These are biblical concepts and ideas that come from the Word and explained by the same words in the Bible. Craig uses man made and scientific ideas and concepts and brings them into his conversations and writings. The Bible says the earth was created in 6 days and genealogy purposely reveals the age of the earth. Craig adds to that. The Bible says God saves us through the Work of Christ and gives to us Faith. Craig adds that we have Free Will, and we respond to the Gospel. The Bible says we must believe and that Faith is given by God. I’m just saying. I’m a nobody and not a theologian. I have listened to him for many years and was convinced he was right until I studied the word of God for myself. And have found those issues.
@mebsteve47 how do know those R 24 hour Days when you don't know Hebrew and what YOM can mean. Get a Theological education before making criticisms you have a limited knowledge of from hyper literal fundamentalists.
@ you’re right. There should be no Sunday School teachers, life group leaders or even general speaking about the Bible unless we all know Hebrew and Greek. We idiots should stay in our lane and let you educated people decide what’s right and wrong in the Church and Society. Can Yom mean 24hours? My Pastor who knows some Hebrew and Greek has stooped down to his congregations level and explained in can mean that as well. He could be wrong so thank goodness we have such kind professors like yourself that will enlighten us.
What's amazing by God's design of explaining His nature, is He communicates there is only 1 God, but within that 1 God there are 3 co-equal(in nature) co-eternal persons. So if He emphasizes too much on the singularity of God, you get Unitarianism, too far the other way, tri-theism. In the Bible, we see this beautiful balancing act He performs to confirm both premises Dr. Craig mentions. I don't think humans(this side of heaven with a fallen nature) are expected to understand the trinity in its fullest extent, which is perfectly fine. I don't understand how all space time and matter can be created out of non space time and matter...doesn't mean it's not true lol
I think that Dr. Andanis' excellent, albeit failed attempt at interpretation and understanding of Christian trinitarian arguments is probably the absolute pinnacle of contemporary Muslim theological thought.
If God the Father, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are omniscient, they all share the same awareness and therefore fully know one another and may even know what they are each going to do in advance with foreknowledge. Therefore there is no disagreement between them or conflict between the three conscious persons of the Trinity. At least that is my understanding of it. When Jesus assumes human form and is no longer omniscient or omnipresent there may seem to be more of a separation between the three persons of the trinity, but this is only temporary. Also I think while Jesus is in human form God the Father is greater than Jesus. God the Father has access to omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence whereas Jesus is limited by his temporary human form.
Why does Allah in the quaran speak of himself as we and us! The Muslims are so.blind they can't see it in his own book which it says is perfect and complete therefore Allah is a plurality and not a singularity
I'm a Christian, but I have to note that this is a misunderstanding. The god of the Qur'an refers to himself using the "royal we," a grammatical flourish that monarchs and bishops use from time to time. In this style, singular persons refer to themselves using plural pronouns to convey majesty or authority, so the use of "We" in the Qur'an does not imply multiplicity of being. If your statement were correct, you would also face a contradiction: the Qur'an would in that case semantically affirm the Trinity yet explicitly deny it in its content, meaning its understanding of God is both correct and false at the same time and in the same sense. This would be incoherent.
He's a professional shuffler who claims to be an academic but is either 1. so indoctrinated and brainwashed he couldn't accept the truth from Sam, or 2, he knows full well what the truth is but is too proud or probably too afraid to admit it. Islam is built on sand, their false prophet a career criminal who most Muslims don't even know was a white man. I could go on, but we all know the truth and can only pray for the likes of Andani.
In WLC's model, God is a not a person - God is distinct from the Persons who instantiate God. This is not the God of the Bible who is a person. This is just idolatry!
@@oeshkoer Yeah, I kind of understand his objection, but whenever God speaks in the Bible, it's always one of the 3 persons of the Trinity. It's never all 3 at once(like a choir almost). I think the full nature of God is beyond sinful human understanding, so to try and cram it into a neat little box will always leave us in error. There are allusions that we will know God more fully in heaven.
Craig, you are violating actual scripture which clearly states that the Father is greater than the son Jesus clearly stated that , only the Father knows the time of the end in the last days and Jesus definitely depended on his Father to ressurect him,,, you must include these very clear scriptures otherwise you are simply making stuff up!
You comment confuses ontological and economical greatness. Jesus proved that he is ontologically divine via his resurrection, which vindicated his divine self-understanding. But by freely submitting himself to the Father, he was economically subordinate to the Father and hence "lesser." Take the military as a mundane example. The general is greater in an economic sense than the private, the former able to give orders to the latter but not vice versa. But the general is not greater ontologically: both the general and the private are human beings with the same intrinsic moral value. - RF Admin
@@ReasonableFaithOrg Agreed. The fancy term is functional subordination. The 3 members of the trinity are co equal in nature, but have different roles they undertake, yet are in perfect loving agreement with one another(unlike humans lol)
Dr. Craig. As much as I respect you and your ministry, your presentation of your model of the Trinity leaves much to be desired. You've gone too far. I think you need to show more respect for Christian tradition. Do you honestly presume you're the first or greatest Christian philosopher who has ever graced the church? It's a misnomer and very arrogant of you to label your model, which contradicts centuries of Christian tradition, the biblical one. Do you mean to imply that theologians like Tertullian, Gregory of Nissa, Athanasius, Augustine, Jonathan Edwards, and many others were not reading the bible or were reading a different bible when they developed their models? Be more humble and acknowledge this is your model not necessarily the biblical one and leave it at that. Let your individual viewers be the judge of that. But don't exalt your intellect while sweeping the greatest minds the church has ever seen under the rug. I say this as someone who considers you to be the greatest philosopher of our day: Regardless of how convinced you are that your model is correct, keep in mind you could be wrong since many biblically literate Christians today have dismissed your model. "So," I advise you, "Whatever you believe about your model, keep between yourself and God." Romans 14:22.
you sound very frustrated and accusing Professor Craig of lacking humility. Church history isn't as big to a protestant and also what exactly comes as church history depends on who is talking about it. To properly study what our brothers and sisters came up with requires a year or so of commitment to this and he doesn't say they were wrong. He is just wanting to defend the very basic idea as he says 2:00-2:22"...my doctrine doesn't include...but it also doesn't exclude them". For someone who isn't a Christian (which are the people to which he defends this view to) church history is irrelevant. Why would they care?
@@Masowe. It is incredibly frustrating when people present their model as "the Biblical model"... as if others believe their own model is "unbiblical." It's an unintentional painting of alternative positions as "unbiblical."
Sam Shamoun's recent video discusses various Christians who are good at some things and to avoid on other subjects. He says as great as Craig is discussing the crucifixion and resurrection, you should avoid him on the trinity. Then if you go to JP Uncut channel, he had a video last night discussing Sam Shamoun's making peace video, which goes into more detail about the topic of heresy and what different people believe.
![William Lane Craig vs. Christopher Hitchens | "Does God Exist?" | Biola University | [HD]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/P0XRQd9YOUM/mqdefault.jpg)
William Lane Craig is at his best when talking about those sorts of abstract things. Great response and discussion!
_William Lane Craig is at his best when talking about those sorts of abstract things._
Philosophers are always at their best when speculating unfettered by facts. But give them reality, and they're lost.
@@grasonicus you argue from the end as though you know what reality is. Reality is to be discovered, including by argumentation, and here Craig convinced more than the other one. In Part II, I agreed with Craig's arguments even more, as I sort of held the same mental model intuitively for a while.
@@danielfromca _you argue from the end as though you know what reality is_
Reality (fact) is something which is or was. That's it. Words and arguments don't determine or influence reality.
People who are by nature BS artists love speculation and philosophy. The longer and more convoluted an argument is, the more they love it.
@ I didn’t understand what you meant by reality. But facts that you know carry you only some way, and beyond that to construct a reasoned argument is a very good way to grow in knowledge. Mathematics does exactly that. More fundamentally, the very facts themselves, when examined, may be based on a great deal of reasoning too - indeed except for the most basic axioms of logic, things perceived as merely factual are pillared on layers of reasoning. For example, the move from an experiment to a generalization is based on reasoning related to constancy in nature as opposed to chaos. You may reason about the constancy of nature or accept it as an unreasoned properly basic belief, but in this case, like with all else, there is no manufacturer stamp on it that says: “guaranteed fact”. You can say Craig’s arguments are wrong or implausible, but if you attack the system itself, to be consistent, you may have to shed many of the things you accept as “facts”.
@@danielfromca _I didn’t understand what you meant by reality._
Reality and fact are the same. Look at dictionaries. Someone can say x happened, and you can say, in reality/fact, y happened. Both reality and fact existed or exists. They're not amenable to words used in any way.
From the word count of your response, it seems you drank of the Kool-Aid of the arts and humanities.
Dr. Craig uses a circle analogy to explain why his view isn't "visciously circular." Lol
misrepresentation is not truth! great video response Dr William Lane Craig
The son is begotten of the Father in the Bible. What other way then eternally begotten. This distinction is biblical. Craig should update his basic trinity to include the idea that the son is eternally begotten of the Father.
Great, show me the bible verses that say the 2nd person of the Trinity has always been the Son? I fully accept the Trinity. I just don't see scripture to say the Son has always existed as the Son. In the Old Testament he was the Angel of YHWH. He only becomes the Son once he is born and they say he will be called the Son of God.
Begotten doesn't mean created. All the verse is saying and perhaps trying to convey is how the son is brought to bear to offer himself for the redemption and atonement to whosoever will.
@@faithfulservantofchrist9876
Psalm 2, proverbs 30:4
@@faithfulservantofchrist9876 hebrews 1:2. Eternal sonship is hard to deny given this verse. All things were made through the Son. This means he was the Son before creation.
@greg3412 I would love to agree but it doesn't make him the Son eternally. What we need is a verse saying he was the Son before the incarnation.
Luke 1:35
English Standard Version
35 And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born[a] will be called holy-the Son of God.
He will be called the Son of God, not he's always been the Son of God.
A often overlooked scripture is Hebrews chapter 1 verses 8 and 9! This is just as good as the opening of John chapter 1.
I mean read Hebrews 1: 8-9 and see how the Father is telling the Son "...thy throne O God is forever..." Then the Father says "...therefore God(Son) even thy God(Father)..."
The Father is speaking as God and referring to the Son as God. It's truly amazing.
Also note: What makes God worthy as opposed to other fake gods like Zeus and Thor is how our Lord and Savior is Righteous on top on being Holy and possessing Omni-traits.
These other false gods are extremely unrighteous. And have other bad qualities.
W.L.Craig descriptions are so confusing and convoluted because he ‘adds’ the ideas of man in his Gospel.
I want those I’m talking to understand what the word of God says and not what I say.
Instead of using the words, Free Will, Responsiveness, Intentional as if I have some credit or had some responsibility in my be Born of God.
I would use the Words, Convicted, Believe and Transformed to demonstrate that Transformation, when it comes about, is the Act of God and not us in any way.
I would add. We can use the terms in the first group to describe us intervening intentionally and stopping God from Transforming us. That’s because rejecting God or denying the Truth that Transforms us is our responsibility and we will receive the Credit for it.
The set of words Craig uses ‘implies’ that our salvation is dependent upon God yes but us as well.
The words Convict, Believe, and Transformed reveal just how dependent we are upon God to give to us New Life. The Word ‘Conviction’ demonstrates at its core that we depend on the Word outside of us to do the Work within us. We must be convinced or persuaded by another to the point where Belief is birthed within us. And this New Belief ‘given’ to us Begins to Transform us.
The Word we receive does the Work in those that don’t Reject God or Deny Him. The seed itself, which is planted in us by another and watered by another WILL grow because God WILL make it grow. Not us.
The Bible does describe we can make it stop growing but we can take No credit or have any responsibility in its growth.
Yes we are Lead but we are Lead because God brings Jesus into our lives. God’s Gospel given to us by another brings to Life Faith and Love for God and captures our hearts and minds so that we have ‘no other choice’ but to Follow Him.
His Love captures us, makes us slaves of Christ. To whom would I go for Salvation grips our soul.
We had nothing to do with our first birth. The man planted the seed, the woman watered it and God made you grow. Why do we use words that imply we have some responsibility in our New Birth?
We don’t have a choice. Our Salvation is in Christ Jesus alone. There is no choice. It’s The Truth I’m proclaiming. I’m not laying before you a choice. The devil deceives us and wants us to believe we have a choice. This softens the Situation men are in. We don’t have a choice, we Will die be judged if we reject the Grace of God in Christ Jesus. I’m not giving you a choice, I’m telling you the Truth!
My point is Craig’s explanation of Salvation is not biblical and his explanation of the Trinity is off because he adds the words of men and doesn’t stick with the Bible.
One last example is he believes the earth was created in more than 6 days. He again brings in the ideas of the world. And doesn’t stick with the Word of God.
You added quite a few non-biblical words to this comment, such as "Trinity." Also, you didn't write it in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek. Does that mean your words are false and that you don't "stick with the Word of God?" - RF Admin
@ your criticism is silly and nonsensical. You’re not addressing the fact that he uses ‘ideas’ of man, such as ‘free will’ and ‘the age of the earth’ instead of we are saved by Grace, Through Faith, not of the will of man but of the Will of God.
I didn’t use the Word Trinity to explain the Bible either.
God is Spirit. We are called to worship Him in Spirit and Truth.
How can we worship that which we do not know?
The Father sent the Son to die for our sin and to (Reveal the Father) to us.
The Father is poured out to us through the Gospel. As we hear the Gospel our Spiritual Eyes are open to SEE God. Our Eyes are open to See the Grace, Mercy, Forgiveness, Faithfulness, Justice and Love of God. Those who do not reject or deny the Gospel Will SEE The Spirit of God. When we are ushered into the Prescience of God through the Cross, The Spirit of God begins to Transform us. New things begin to come alive in us. We find Belief in God, Faith in God, Trust in God and Love for God beginning to come to Life within us. And as this New Spirit begins to come alive in us, we find our desires being made new. We find a new desire to be obedient to this New Love we have for God.
This is the best example I’ve heard of God is One.
The Father’s Name is God.
At the same time God is what The Father is.
The Son’s name is Jesus.
At the same time God is what The Son is.
There is One Spirit. The Spirit of The Father is Poured out for us to See through the Gospel and When we enter the Presence of God and Get to SEE and KNOW His Goodness, God Spirit gives birth to the Spirit of the Son within us. Giving to us the Spirit of Christ and opening our mouths to cry out Abba Father.
The picture and image is present in Adam. If Adam means Mankind then it would be shown in the following.
Adam’s name is Mankind.
At the same time Mankind is what Adam is.
Adam’s Son’s name is Cain.
At the same time Mankind is what Cain is.
There is One God.
There is One Mankind.
There is One Spirit in The Father and Son.
There is One Spirit in Mankind. The Spirit of the world.
These are biblical concepts and ideas that come from the Word and explained by the same words in the Bible.
Craig uses man made and scientific ideas and concepts and brings them into his conversations and writings.
The Bible says the earth was created in 6 days and genealogy purposely reveals the age of the earth. Craig adds to that.
The Bible says God saves us through the Work of Christ and gives to us Faith. Craig adds that we have Free Will, and we respond to the Gospel. The Bible says we must believe and that Faith is given by God.
I’m just saying. I’m a nobody and not a theologian. I have listened to him for many years and was convinced he was right until I studied the word of God for myself. And have found those issues.
@mebsteve47 how do know those R 24 hour Days when you don't know Hebrew and what YOM can mean.
Get a Theological education before making criticisms you have a limited knowledge of from hyper literal fundamentalists.
@ you’re right. There should be no Sunday School teachers, life group leaders or even general speaking about the Bible unless we all know Hebrew and Greek. We idiots should stay in our lane and let you educated people decide what’s right and wrong in the Church and Society.
Can Yom mean 24hours? My Pastor who knows some Hebrew and Greek has stooped down to his congregations level and explained in can mean that as well.
He could be wrong so thank goodness we have such kind professors like yourself that will enlighten us.
What's amazing by God's design of explaining His nature, is He communicates there is only 1 God, but within that 1 God there are 3 co-equal(in nature) co-eternal persons. So if He emphasizes too much on the singularity of God, you get Unitarianism, too far the other way, tri-theism. In the Bible, we see this beautiful balancing act He performs to confirm both premises Dr. Craig mentions.
I don't think humans(this side of heaven with a fallen nature) are expected to understand the trinity in its fullest extent, which is perfectly fine. I don't understand how all space time and matter can be created out of non space time and matter...doesn't mean it's not true lol
I think that Dr. Andanis' excellent, albeit failed attempt at interpretation and understanding of Christian trinitarian arguments is probably the absolute pinnacle of contemporary Muslim theological thought.
If God the Father, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are omniscient, they all share the same awareness and therefore fully know one another and may even know what they are each going to do in advance with foreknowledge. Therefore there is no disagreement between them or conflict between the three conscious persons of the Trinity. At least that is my understanding of it. When Jesus assumes human form and is no longer omniscient or omnipresent there may seem to be more of a separation between the three persons of the trinity, but this is only temporary. Also I think while Jesus is in human form God the Father is greater than Jesus. God the Father has access to omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence whereas Jesus is limited by his temporary human form.
Why does Allah in the quaran speak of himself as we and us! The Muslims are so.blind they can't see it in his own book which it says is perfect and complete therefore Allah is a plurality and not a singularity
I'm a Christian, but I have to note that this is a misunderstanding. The god of the Qur'an refers to himself using the "royal we," a grammatical flourish that monarchs and bishops use from time to time. In this style, singular persons refer to themselves using plural pronouns to convey majesty or authority, so the use of "We" in the Qur'an does not imply multiplicity of being. If your statement were correct, you would also face a contradiction: the Qur'an would in that case semantically affirm the Trinity yet explicitly deny it in its content, meaning its understanding of God is both correct and false at the same time and in the same sense. This would be incoherent.
Who's the Muslim dr again?
Dr. Khalil Andani
He's a professional shuffler who claims to be an academic but is either 1. so indoctrinated and brainwashed he couldn't accept the truth from Sam, or 2, he knows full well what the truth is but is too proud or probably too afraid to admit it.
Islam is built on sand, their false prophet a career criminal who most Muslims don't even know was a white man. I could go on, but we all know the truth and can only pray for the likes of Andani.
I really dont get the trinity, sorry
What don't you get about it? - RF Admin
In WLC's model, God is a not a person - God is distinct from the Persons who instantiate God. This is not the God of the Bible who is a person. This is just idolatry!
Where is God in person according to the Bible?
@@oeshkoer Yeah, I kind of understand his objection, but whenever God speaks in the Bible, it's always one of the 3 persons of the Trinity. It's never all 3 at once(like a choir almost).
I think the full nature of God is beyond sinful human understanding, so to try and cram it into a neat little box will always leave us in error. There are allusions that we will know God more fully in heaven.
Craig, you are violating actual scripture which clearly states that the Father is greater than the son Jesus clearly stated that , only the Father knows the time of the end in the last days and Jesus definitely depended on his Father to ressurect him,,, you must include these very clear scriptures otherwise you are simply making stuff up!
You comment confuses ontological and economical greatness. Jesus proved that he is ontologically divine via his resurrection, which vindicated his divine self-understanding. But by freely submitting himself to the Father, he was economically subordinate to the Father and hence "lesser." Take the military as a mundane example. The general is greater in an economic sense than the private, the former able to give orders to the latter but not vice versa. But the general is not greater ontologically: both the general and the private are human beings with the same intrinsic moral value. - RF Admin
@@ReasonableFaithOrg Agreed. The fancy term is functional subordination. The 3 members of the trinity are co equal in nature, but have different roles they undertake, yet are in perfect loving agreement with one another(unlike humans lol)
Andani's career came to an abrupt halt after his failed attempt to debate Sam Shamoun.
Dr. Craig. As much as I respect you and your ministry, your presentation of your model of the Trinity leaves much to be desired. You've gone too far. I think you need to show more respect for Christian tradition. Do you honestly presume you're the first or greatest Christian philosopher who has ever graced the church? It's a misnomer and very arrogant of you to label your model, which contradicts centuries of Christian tradition, the biblical one. Do you mean to imply that theologians like Tertullian, Gregory of Nissa, Athanasius, Augustine, Jonathan Edwards, and many others were not reading the bible or were reading a different bible when they developed their models? Be more humble and acknowledge this is your model not necessarily the biblical one and leave it at that. Let your individual viewers be the judge of that. But don't exalt your intellect while sweeping the greatest minds the church has ever seen under the rug. I say this as someone who considers you to be the greatest philosopher of our day: Regardless of how convinced you are that your model is correct, keep in mind you could be wrong since many biblically literate Christians today have dismissed your model. "So," I advise you, "Whatever you believe about your model, keep between yourself and God." Romans 14:22.
you sound very frustrated and accusing Professor Craig of lacking humility. Church history isn't as big to a protestant and also what exactly comes as church history depends on who is talking about it. To properly study what our brothers and sisters came up with requires a year or so of commitment to this and he doesn't say they were wrong. He is just wanting to defend the very basic idea as he says 2:00-2:22"...my doctrine doesn't include...but it also doesn't exclude them". For someone who isn't a Christian (which are the people to which he defends this view to) church history is irrelevant. Why would they care?
@@Masowe. It is incredibly frustrating when people present their model as "the Biblical model"... as if others believe their own model is "unbiblical." It's an unintentional painting of alternative positions as "unbiblical."
@@heremtica I didn't consider this implication of his statement. I can see why you would come to that conclusion. May the LORD bless you 🙏
Sam Shamoun's recent video discusses various Christians who are good at some things and to avoid on other subjects. He says as great as Craig is discussing the crucifixion and resurrection, you should avoid him on the trinity.
Then if you go to JP Uncut channel, he had a video last night discussing Sam Shamoun's making peace video, which goes into more detail about the topic of heresy and what different people believe.
@marko9912 link please?