Lennox makes a personal attack on Dawkins and completely fails to answer the question other than to quote the Bible. It is the old circular and stupid argument. It's true because the Bible says so. Genesis is a flat earth theory.
@@myroncoetzee5228 You are right. But maybe there is another function for the net. People express their opinions and get feed back that may trigger them to look into why they are feeling upset. It's free therapy. What do you think? Do ever feel upset by comments?
@@medicalinterest9091 Perhaps. But I would then say it's those who are tiggered by opinions that criticize others with such hostility. One can mock anothers belief all they want, it never works out.
@@myroncoetzee5228 You are right mostly. The working out is within each of the parties. Example: I have a deep frustration with how the western world is being put on the brink of destruction by the Christian Right. I accept they are locked into a brainwashed condition as much or more than me about what is real and what is imagined. (if there indeed is a difference in the end.) So I do what Christopher Hitchens advised. I throw their beliefs under the spot light of reason. (maybe a B double of logic) It is quite cruel to attack a cognitively impaired person in real life. On the net I can have my say and not stick around for the personal attacks that such people resort to. Thanks for your response. Now back to music practice. (Jazz piano and singing). Feel free not to respond. I am presently being stared at by a pretty girl lying on a lounge suite in a beautifully decorated room. It's and advertisement. Now, seriously, back to music. Covid-19 has been a gift. We are in lock down in Victoria, Australia.
@@urebeatsgaming7285 how about with Jesus he says serve ur slave owners well and Christianity requires that u put all ur sins and all ur faults on someone through human sacrifice on someone being tortured and killed. If we’re only talking about Christianity and not judiaism
@The Endless Riff doesn’t mean that they are consistent with there doctrine. Actually Thomas Paine was an atheist and the person who inspired the American revolution, he helped released 4,000 slaves in America and the. And many members of the anti slave society in America were atheist.
@@brycewinn6867 Thomas Paine wasn't an atheist. Get your facts right before saying them publicly. Thomas Paine was a deist. He believed in a God who created the universe. But, not in religions. Even though he was against religion generally, and Chrsitianity in particular, however, like other founder Fathers of the US, they were influenced by the judeo-christian values which forms the basics of the western civilization. The founder Fathers were either Chrsitians or Deists, and they still good the Bible to some extent, even though maybe not exactly religiously... Thomas Jefferson is a good example. So, please don't just come here making false claims. Thank you.
@@emmanuel8310 throughout history we see a progression from polytheism, theism, deism, and atheism. People believed in deism during the enlightenment because that was the only logical view during that time but they were all against religion. We don’t know who was atheist because they will receive violence and threats especially among the founding fathers. So we aren’t entirely sure who was actually an atheist or not
My theory is that if an entity created time and space, he must be out of time and space, and unlimited by it. Time doesn't apply to God because it was created by him.
If you can explain what does it mean to be outside of time and space I believe you But you can’t because you introduce to your explanation something that has no meaning to us
A holy book is not a book of facts . facts must be proven. Some are proven and some are disproven but you don't accept the ones which are disproven. Funny and ironical people.
_"For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse."_ - Romans 1:20 Sadly, for all the hard-hearted sceptics, they will have their proof one day. But it will be too late to act, and they will have eternity to rue their folly.
@@TheRealTorG The digital age, the internet and instantaneous communication around the world was a ludicrous concept to people who lived in antiquity (and even 100 or so years ago). Because you cannot understand something doesn't mean it isn't real or that it doesn't exist. Like the two-dimensional people in _Flatland_ being unable to comprehend a 3rd dimension because it was outside their understanding and frame of reference. Because we are temporal beings living in a universe that is governed by time, how can we grasp at infinity when science *guesses* that even the universe will end one day? You are playing Russian roulette with a gun that has a bullet in every chamber. You just don't realise it yet.
@@Locutus.Borg. you are an atheist and a blasphemer to the thousands of other Gods we humans have worshipped through the ages, I just subscribe to one less far-fetched tale. The only reason you lend any credence to the Abrahamic concept of hell is because it is culturally relevant at this ephemeral point in time. If you lived in Saudi Arabia, you'd be lecturing me about Allah right now...
@@belablasco6681 well first of all the boarde guth vilenkin theorem tells us that any expanding universe would need a absolute beginning, another thing is that the universe will end in heat death however if the universe has always existed it would already be in heat death as we are running out of usable energy. Saying the universe has always existed but isn't in heat death is the same as saying your phone has been turned on forever but it still has charge in it. People try and get around this by saying that the universe will instead end in a big bounce that the universe will stop expanding and will start contracting then reexpand making a infinite cycle. However there's a problem with this a contracting universe is highly unstable and wouldn't be able to reexpand as small perturbations would cause it to devolp all sorts of messy singularities and even if it could reexpand there would still have to be a first time it expanded so you've just pushed the question back. Another thing is that if the universe always existed then the amount of events that occurred in the universe is infinite there was no first event which would result in a infinite regrees which is impossible.
@@HagelBiscut You are just repeating the Creationist standard, "if there was a beginning-- then God." But that is false on several levels. Neither Borde, Guth or Vilenkin refer to a beginning in the sense of a religious creation myth, they are only talking about a spacetime boundary in the past of an expanding universe, something we can't describe in terms of time. Not all events have causes at the quantum scale, such as the decay of sub-atomic particles, and our universe doesn't need one other than quantum uncertainty. Guth has shown that inflation could be eternal and our universe just one bubble among an infinity of others. There are many current theories attacking the problem of the origin of the universe-- such as Penrose's conformal cycling or Krause's universe from nothing-- but Creationists like to latch onto arguments by authority as if cosmologists are prophets. Nothing in the bible shows a knowledge of modern science. What the Big Bang emerged from is beyond our horizon but may not always be. Just chalking it up to your favorite deity explains nothing and is only self-serving.
nickj14711 we know the universe had a beginning. A basic scientific principle you learn early on in your life is that something cannot come out of nothing. There must be something eternal for the universe as we know it to exist because the very laws of the universe demand it. However the laws of the universe also prevent anything eternal from existing. That is why a creator who does not obey the laws of the material world(because he made them) must exist.
Because everything we have observed and studied within the universe requires a cause and an origin. There is no scientific explanation as to how it could otherwise exist. Hence, a divine eternal creator would have to exist outside of that which has been created and which we can scientifically observe and study.
@@danielskelton1145 sadly though the question still remains. And sadly you still can't notice major flaw in this statement. You say nothing can exist without a cause but then go on saying that god exists without cause. Answer this why did god create black holes?
@@eileensongs the theory of evolution pertains to biological life on earth, and has absolutely nothing to do with the creation or formation of the earth.
An atheist once asked me who created God and I said, can you count back in time, by units of a millions years at a time and he said yes. I said how far can you count back and he said forever. I said yes, but when does time start, when does it begin? He said time has no beginning. I said well, if you can believe that of time, why can't you believe that of God? His mouth opened and stayed open, like a goldfish and then looked amazed and then said, that is the question have always wanted someone to answer and no one has and you answered it and shook my hand and thanked me. He looked so happy, like lifted up. There were other atheists standing there and they all remained quiet. Fact is, I had been praying that week and for some reason that idea popped into my head, I guess God knew that man was going to ask me that question and he wanted to answer him through me. It's amazing how God can do these amazing things and I have seen this many times, like a witness, just standing there and witnessing God at work. People really don't realise what they are missing by not knowing God, the Lord God is truly amazing. I fancy if Dawkins had been asked this question it may not have worked, but would have been nice to see him stumped and speechless.
current thinking is that the Universe has always Existed just in way we cannot truly understand if it has always existed it would not need a cause and I ask why is God exempt from a Cause why is he so special that he doesn't need a cause well Because you say he Doesn't need a cause
If we are to assume that anything that is complex needs an intelligent creator, why should we not be forced to make the same assumption of your God? You have no evidence, you are making assumptions, if science can't answer a question, more research is done and we don't invent explanations for it. We don't have all the answers, but frankly assuming that it had to be a god or any other supernatural force kinda takes some of the mystery and wonder out of the universe.
@@5688gamble You are thinking of a limited god. God is not limited, if God was limited then he wouldn't be worth worshipping and he will be a fake god. Then what created your stupid so loved impossible big bang. The day you realise your so loved space (universe) is fake is when you realise that big bang is just a way of getting you further away from God. I really feel sad for you, you are brainwashed to the max and you have a big ego so you can't accept the truth. I really feel sad for you.
@@leebennett1821 does your universe have a cause? And if the universe always existed then who created it? Where it got created? When? From what? How? It's sad that you are so brainwashed and that your ego is so big to accept the truth because you don't want to be wrong so you have to lie and convince yourself that there is no hell because you know you are on the way to hell and if you don't accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Saviour and if you don't repent you will go to hell. Those in hell wish they could hear the word repent just once more.
This question; _"Who Created God?"_ is answered well in another video (link below). Asking _"Who made God"_ is a classic category fallacy. Like saying how much does the musical note C weigh? Sound is created by vibrations that travel through the air or another medium it is NOT measured by weight. These are two different categories being conflated into one. Like saying what does the colour pink taste like? This conflates two different senses, sight and taste. Asking _"Who made God"_ makes the same category fallacy. God by definition is the kind of thing that CANNOT be made. If God was made then He would NOT be God.
This is all cute however, you need to provide evidence for this claim. Saying that Gods are uncreated has 0 evidence to back it up, it makes you look like a charlatan. In addition, how do you know its 1 god? perhaps a team of uncreated gods did the job, just as teams of engineers design projects. How can you prove that a God has this property? Where do you get all this information about all these claims, and where is your evidence? You are making an unproven statement and then building your case on it. You need to first prove why plants sprout without human involvement from the ground before explaining why a swing is attached to the tree.
@@PeterMasalski93 Let me show you a fallacy used by Dawkins that makes you look like a charlatan when you mindlessly repeat it. Atheists claim God isn't real because there isn't any objectively verifiable evidence for his existence (which is Dawkins' central argument), why would I believe such a claim? There isn't any objectively verifiable proof that science is the overarching source of truth. 1- The objectively verifiable is the overarching source of truth. 2- God isn't objectively verifiable. 3- Therefore, God isn't real. If that is in fact the case, then this is also true: 1- The objectively verifiable is the overarching source of truth. 2- There is no objectively verifiable proof that science is the overarching source of truth. 3- Therefore, science isn't the overarching source of truth. So please enlighten me. Why is science the overarching source of truth? Can you scientifically prove such a claim?
@@vvv70v lol Then show me a better way of evaluating whether something is true other than science. How can you compare how much C weighs is a nonsensical concept, because we have established musical notes have frequencies not weight (unless you count the mass of the string), when we can actually measure the frequency of the note C, we have actual evidence that there is a "sound/tone/note" of C. YOu are comparing "Missing Data" (aka GOD) to " actual things we can connect together" Its like comparing rainbow unicorns to how many apples can fit in the ocean. ridiculous Go get an education rolf
He deceived you Satan and his aides from human demons the hypocrites who were showing faith and they lean in disbelief and cunning and repel from the right For they have slandered the Prophet Muhammad Peace be Upon Him Hadiths he did not say to distort Islam mercy religion in the eyes of both worlds and people repel him until they die while they are infidels until they are with them either in hellfire on Judgment Day. Unfortunately the Muslims today they differed in their religion and they dispersed and followed these fabricated hadiths and they left the Holy Quran which God promised to protect him from distortion to the Day of Judgment celestial Book Ring Who was sent down with Gabriel, peace be upon him, the Messenger of God from the angels which he delivered to Muhammad, the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him. But Muslims they cling to the devil’s talk that contradicts what is stated in the text of the great Qur’an from the verses, the rulers, the clear evidence. And also the Christians they followed a corrupted Bible from human demons call to polytheism by God and God forgives all sins but that is not forgiven to polythe with it And Jesus Son of Mary, peace be upon him he is the Messenger and servant of God like the Messenger of God Muhammad, peace be upon him and God created it like his creation to Adam with the words of his ability with be so will be so his mother Mary, peace be upon her, conceived him Choose your language and read wwwmahdialummacom
Not really. The Universe could have come into existence as a random quantum fluctuation. In fact, I believe we're all here by dumb luck and there's no reason for existence nor is their any sort of supernatural creator.
If I were to tell you that there are 2 purple dragons living in the hills near my house.Nobody has ever seen them or heard or shown that they exist,but they can harmonise like Don and Phil.You might respond by saying that sounds ridiculous to claim to know anything at all about those dragons that have never been demonstrated to be real.And you would be correct.Just as I am correct in saying to Mister Lennox.'It sounds ridiculous to claim to know anything about a celestial overseer that nobody has ever seen or heard or been demonstrated to exist.In fact my claim is more likely than his because at least we have evidence of kamodo dragons.We have zero evidence of and gods
@@dfs-comedy the concept of a random quantum fluctuation as the origin of the universe is a topic already explored by many, it's essential to acknowledge that this idea doesn't necessarily negate the possibility of a purpose or a supernatural creator. From a theological standpoint, we maintain that the presence of order, complexity, and design in the universe can coexist with the idea of a Creator. It's not necessarily a matter of 'luck' but rather a philosophical and theological exploration of the profound questions surrounding existence and purpose.
I agree, like Einstein often thought, we will reach a human limit of knowledge and such questions will still be outside of that realm left only to the individuals faith.
His answer was meaningless. Why do you have to believe that god is uncreated? Why can’t you just believe the universe is uncreated? It’s saying the exact same thing.
The universe has a beginning therefore whatever caused the universe into existence has to be timeless spaceless and immaterial so if God created the universe he has no beginning .
@@leebennett1821 because all the evidence point to the universe having a cause. For example the boarde guth vilenkin theorem tells us that any expanding universe would need a absolute beginning and of course our universe is expanding. Also the most widely believe theory for how the universe will end is heat death and if the universe was eternal we would already be in heat death as we are running out of usable energy. To say the universe has existed for eternity but isn't in heat death is like saying that your phone has been on for eternity but still has charge in it. Some people try and get around this by saying that the universe will not end in a heat death but will end in a big bounce. The big bounce theory suggests that the universe one day will stop expanding and contract in on it's self and then reexpand making a infinite cycle. However a contracting universe is highly unstable and it would never make it to the expansion phase as small perturbations would cause it to devolp all sorts of messy singularities. Also even if the universe could contract and reexpand there would still need to be a first time it expanded as a infinite regrees is implausible. Another more philosophical thing is that if the universe has always existed that means the number of events that happen in the universe is infinite there was no first event but this of course is illogical. All things we know of are contingent ( meaning they could have not existed and depend on something for it's existence for example i am contingent because i could have not existed if my parents didn't meet and I depend on them for my existence) but there can't be a infinite regrees of contingent things so at some point there must be a necessary thing (something that has always existed, will always exist and doesn't depend on anything for it's existence.) The question is why does it have to be a necessary being why can't it just be a necessary thing? The reason is it would be agent causation not event causation. For example the necessary thing would of course be uncaused so it wouldn't be caused by another event to do anything it would act on it's own accord making it conscious and therefore a being.
@@leebennett1821 true and i agree to some extent as I'm a deist ( the philosophy that believes in a god not revealed in religion and thinks one should arrive at that conclusion through reason and logic as opposed to faith.) However deism is on a spectrum with one side that thinks god set up the universe and then went away so there's most likely no afterlife and there's no use praying to it nor even thanking or thinking about it as it didn't create humans but just the laws of physics. Then you've got the view that god is somewhat of a guiding hand in the universe. I'm somewhere in the middle and I like to take David Attenboroughs analogy to describe how I feel about god " the amount of times I've sat watching ants on a termite hill and there going around their business without the slightest clue I'm there watching them." And that's how I feel about god a observer i don't feel it makes any sense to think god created the universe and then just left for multiple reasons. For one the universe is clearly fine tuned for life if you were to change any of the core aspects of the universe by the slightest amount the universe either wouldn't exist or wouldn't be able to support any life let alone intelligent life. So if a god created this universe it created it with intelligent life in mind so it wouldn't make sense for it to design a universe specifically for life to evolve and then just leave. BTW I'm not saying that the universe was perfectly suitable for life we obviously evolved to fit our environment however that isn't what the fine tuning argument says if you changed the core aspects of the universe life wouldn't have had the resources to evolve in the first place. Then you've got design in evolution people like dawkins seem to think because humans evolved that means it rules out a god's role in life but to the contrary. If we look at evolution it seems clear that it was in fact inevitable and if you turned back the clock you would get the same result time and time again. This is what convinced atheist anothny flew who was at one point the world's most famous atheist but he changed his mind and became a deist. I also believe in an afterlife as it seems obvious to me that as wilder penfield said the brain is not the creator of consciousness but a filter. We've also got accounts of people still conscious while clinically dead as evidenced by the AWARE studys by Dr sam parina that showed people could accurately hear conversations that occurred minutes after their heart had stopped and studys done by Michael sabom show they can also see events that occurr during resuscitation. So if a soul or mind exists then that means we aren't just the products of brains. This means that creator purposely gave us souls as if it let everything down to the laws of physics and nature we wouldn't have soul's as we can't evolve souls naturally. So the evidence that the universe was fine tuned for life, that evolution of life was inevitable, and that thd evidence points to our consciousness being more than brains points to the fact that the creator does care for us but doesn't interact in the universe as it would disrupt our free will and the laws of physics and nature which it created. I'd be happy to go into more detail about any of these subjects if you'd like.
I will never understand why religious people won't accept that the universe could be eternal and MUST have been created, but have no problem accepting the concept of eternal when it applies to God. The only rational answer to the question "did a god (or anything) create the universe?" is no one knows. Could have been the case, but there's no good reason to think it had to be the case.
there's a good reason, from a Christian perspective, the belief in a Creator God stems from the idea that an eternal, uncaused universe is highly improbable. We argue that the complexity, order, and design in the universe suggest a purposeful Creator rather than an eternal, self-existent universe.
@@Netomp51 I'm sorry, but I don't see how an eternal, uncaused, complex, orderly universe is any less probable than an eternal, uncaused, complex, orderly being. To my understanding, the complexity and order (using the word DESIGN is begging the question) of the universe is a natural end product of many stacked layers of basic chemical, energetic and physical properties and interactions, similar to the way computer programs that we experience as writing or drawing are ultimately nothing more than the culmination of many layers of simpler sets of instructions, which at their most basic level manipulate just two values - 0 and 1. Another example could be the coordinated movement of large flocks of birds - that was mysterious until someone figured out it was based on a few very simple rules.
@@moosick7066 I think the main flaw on your argument its oversimplification of the concept of a creator and the complexity of the universe. It equates the two without addressing the fundamental differences in their nature and origin. The comparison doesn't fully encompass the profound nature of these hypotheses. The philosophical debate on causality and the existence of uncaused entities persists. From a theological perspective, the intricate order, fine-tuning, and the existence of moral and ethical values in our world leads to consider the presence of a purposeful and intelligent creator who designed the universe with human beings in mind.
@@deansantos3017 Lennox is a wiggly thinker. Basically he knows the Bible is junk and useless to science so he skirts around subjects and makes idiotic personal attacks on Dawkins thinking he is being funny. Lennox is just another arrogant self righteous and cognitively impaired imbecile who pretends to be a scientist. He is climate change denier and very dangerous.
He deceived you Satan and his aides from human demons the hypocrites who were showing faith and they lean in disbelief and cunning and repel from the right For they have slandered the Prophet Muhammad Peace be Upon Him Hadiths he did not say to distort Islam mercy religion in the eyes of both worlds and people repel him until they die while they are infidels until they are with them either in hellfire on Judgment Day. Unfortunately the Muslims today they differed in their religion and they dispersed and followed these fabricated hadiths and they left the Holy Quran which God promised to protect him from distortion to the Day of Judgment celestial Book Ring Who was sent down with Gabriel, peace be upon him, the Messenger of God from the angels which he delivered to Muhammad, the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him. But Muslims they cling to the devil’s talk that contradicts what is stated in the text of the great Qur’an from the verses, the rulers, the clear evidence. And also the Christians they followed a corrupted Bible from human demons call to polytheism by God and God forgives all sins but that is not forgiven to polythe with it And Jesus Son of Mary, peace be upon him he is the Messenger and servant of God like the Messenger of God Muhammad, peace be upon him and God created it like his creation to Adam with the words of his ability with be so will be so his mother Mary, peace be upon her, conceived him Choose your language and read wwwmahdialummacom
Well who did Create God?So why Does Everything other than God need to be Created?Why Does God not need a Cause? Because he says so!!!No Actually it's you that says God Doesn't need a Cause or Maybe the Kid is smart enough to realise God is silly idea Until someone comes along and smashes God into the Poor kids Brain with threats of eternal torture
@@leebennett1821 just stop please… before you embarrass yourself. Watch and listen to the video as many times as you want in order to understand what is being said. This is the problem with a lot of atheists… they don’t understand science or religion. Most are just followers of mainstream science. Let me do you a favour and make it as easy as possible for you to understand… everything is existence from people, animals, the earth, planets, stars, universe etc are dependant entities. You follow the chain and it continues to have dependencies. Now something can’t come from nothing but something can’t always come from something because this is all finite and not infinite… otherwise it’s a fantasy and magical and illogical. There has to be a independent entity which is necessary and even science flirts with that idea. This independent entity has to be different and outside of understanding where it is unique and nothing like it in order for it to make sense. Dawkins deep down must know this (being a man of science). What atheists cannot comprehend and accept is that religious people call this independent entity God. That is what frustrates you. Now stop asking “who created God?” It’s becoming cringe.
@@leebennett1821 No the kid is young enough to not have enough knowledge about life because he's a young kid who is barely starting life and made a mistake God is the ancient of days and we are all young in this world we haven't stepped into eternity. There are beings God created that have existed since the beginning of time.
This is frustrating because Lennox is answering the ‘question’ not the argument. Dawkins isn’t literally asking ‘who designed the designer’. He’s pointing out special pleading. How comes something as finely tuned and perfect as god just gets to exist but then not the universe? Why can’t the matter and the laws that govern that matter just exist in a bottom-top universe in terms of minds evolving from matter (us) in comparison to a perfect mind just existing and creating matter in a top to bottom approach? Not only do I think the metaphysical approach favours something more complex like a mind (humans) evolving from matter that just exists in a less complex form, in comparison to a perfect mind just existing and creating less complex universal laws and matter. But the empirical evidence seems to support that complex minds like ours is something that comes from the slow evolution of less complex systems like the universal laws and matter.
Exactly. It's a little embarrassing that educated fellow humans...theists who've been to college...can't grasp the nuance. That challenge doesn't mean there isn't or can't be a god or a creator. It just means it's not as good a solution as many theists try to pretend it is in explaining why there's something rather than nothing.
@@rizdekd3912 the issue with the question is that a created God is not, and cannot be, God. Hence why Lennox said he was surprised to find this as a central argument in Dawkins' book. If the question were "Is an eternal divine God just a creation of human minds?", then that is a fair question. However, once you wish to entertain the possibility that an eternal divine God could exist, it is a fallacy to then ask who or what created God, because such a question does not apply to God as he is defined in any religious texts or philosophies.
@@danielskelton1145 "However, once you wish to entertain the possibility that an eternal divine God could exist, it is a fallacy to then ask who or what created God, because such a question does not apply to God as he is defined in any religious texts or philosophies." That's answering the question without engaging with the issue. Of course IF something exists eternally that would mean it wasn't created. But what the thing is that exists eternally would be an assertion (just someone's definition) just like if I asserted the natural world exists eternally. Does it then become a fallacy to ask how the natural world came to be the way it is if it is defined as existing eternally and having the capability of producing finely tuned universes?
@@rizdekd3912 if an external natural world gave rise to our own universe and us, then we firstly have to consider the extent to which we would be capable of identifying it. If it is essentially an external arrangement of substance and mechanisms which gave rise to our own universe distinctly from itself, then we may have no means of exploring the mechanics and agent of its origins. However, if we are here hypothetically referring to a natural world modelled on the principles of our own, but merely external, then we can reliably determine that it too would have required a preceding origin. This is because all matter, forces, energy and substance within the natural world is incapable of self-creating from nothing. It contains mechanisms (including evolutionary ones) which can act upon and between the ingredients of it, but it is not capable of creating its own ingredients from nothing. Thus, an external agent is required whose properties are not natural and hence, what we refer to as "supernatural". This is why a supernatural God is in one sense a "God of the gaps" insofar as whilst we may not understand the creative mechanisms involved with every part of the development of the universe, we can say "God did it". However, this is not a "God of the gaps" in the sense that God becomes a way of shutting down curiosity and learning. This God is not a lazy mental construct, but rather a logical inevitability which leads us to ask and explore further, not less.
@@danielskelton1145 "if an external natural world gave rise to our own universe and us, then we firstly have to consider the extent to which we would be capable of identifying it. If it is essentially an external arrangement of substance and mechanisms which gave rise to our own universe distinctly from itself, then we may have no means of exploring the mechanics and agent of its origins." Yes. it may well be true that we, embedded as we are in space/time that itself exists within the natural world, would be unable to explore this eternal and external natural world I posited. It would be like a 2 dimensional creature ever accessing a third dimension. The best they can do is assert it to explain some things that seem impossible. I don't see that as a problem so much as an interesting scientific issue. As an explanation for the universe we see around us I don't see why we absolutely have to consider the extent to which we would be capable of 'identify' it and studying it or even understanding it. We can assert its existence and try to indirectly determine what its properties might be based on the outcome(s) we CAN observe. Isn't that what happens in the development of (the concept of) God? IE over the millennia people reasoned out the features God MUST have to 'be' the explanation structuring the definition to cover ALL aspects of the problem and to address each enigma. For each observation or feature of the natural world we are aware of or think we are aware of and can't explain, there just happens to be a feature of God that addresses it. This is not saying God doesn't/can't exist...in fact I sometimes think God exists, but I find that thought to be as meaningless as when I think eternal nature exists. Furthermore, AFAIK, BOTH an eternal God and an eternal natural world may exist. I wouldn't see any contraction EXCEPT based on someone's choices in how they define God and/or the natural world. It might be true we can never observe/measure/test this eternal eternal natural existence directly, but we already have other examples of aspects of the natural world that we have to do that with such as gravity and dark matter and dark energy. Gravity is defined as mass warping time/space such that it seems like massive objects (people and rocks) are attracted to other massive objects (eg the earth). We can't actually STUDY that feature directly...ie 'see' what ever it is that is warping time and space or even 'see' time/space as it is being warped. It is invisible to us. But we see the effects and guess at the cause. The cause COULD be God willing massive objects to be attracted to each other and we'd be none the wiser. The same goes with the conjectured dark matter and dark energy. We, so far as I know, haven't been able to actually identify exactly what 'they' are and we only assert their existence...ie we assert the existence of dark matter by indirect evidence...ie gravitational lensing and the speed of stars orbiting in galaxies and we posit the existence of dark energy to explain why the rate of expansion in the universe is increasing. In like fashion we would 'see' the results of an eternal natural world that produced/produces universes because we see an expanding universe that would be conjectured to have have emerged FROM this timeless/spaceless natural existence. That coupled with the assumption that something can't come from nothing so that leads to an inevitable conclusion that something has to exist eternally and that something has to be able to produce universes. One option is a God who 'top down' created a lessor world with his omniscience and omnipotence. The other option is that the universe with it's mass/energy and time/space emerged from an eternal natural existence that just so happens to have certain properties. This would be just like many assert God just happens to have certain properties In both cases we must assert some things we can't determine directly to explain things we do observe directly. "However, if we are here hypothetically referring to a natural world modeled on the principles of our own, but merely external, then we can reliably determine that it too would have required a preceding origin." Not if it is eternal. By definition an 'eternal' existence would NEVER require a preceding origin. in fact the notion of anything preceding an existence that is timeless/eternal would be a category error. "This is because all matter, forces, energy and substance within the natural world is incapable of self-creating from nothing. It contains mechanisms (including evolutionary ones) which can act upon and between the ingredients of it, but it is not capable of creating its own ingredients from nothing." As I said, if the natural world is eternal, the universe and its mechanisms and ingredients would not be coming from 'nothing.' "Thus, an external agent is required whose properties are not natural and hence, what we refer to as "supernatural". Sure we could choose to call this eternal natural existence 'super' natural...but why would we? Just because it is different than what we can observe/sense/measure/experience with our limited perspectives as beings embedded in space/time? That seems an arbitrary delineation and going beyond what is necessary...ie arbitrarily and artificially limiting what the natural world can be. "This is why a supernatural God is in one sense a "God of the gaps" insofar as whilst we may not understand the creative mechanisms involved with every part of the development of the universe, we can say "God did it". However, this is not a "God of the gaps" in the sense that God becomes a way of shutting down curiosity and learning. This God is not a lazy mental construct, but rather a logical inevitability which leads us to ask and explore further, not less." I would consider neither a supernatural explanation nor a natural explanation for the expanding universe in which we live would be a 'lazy' construct. But both would be constructs. It is obvious that cultures throughout history spent a great deal of time trying to explain fundamental aspects of reality. So no, it's not 'lazy.' Most saw the need to posit a 'top down' arrangement where a super mind/being created and orchestrated and managed and oversees everything. That could be because that's what humans see themselves as doing...so that could be them seeing themselves having been created in God's image, but it have been them creating God in their own image. IOW the top down view of creation may be a misconception based on a limited perspective. What if the natural world just is...and all this marvelous complexity arose from simpler foundational processes and substances and fields?
Theres a huge difference between the concept of eternal and supernatural Mr. Lennox. Just because you ask a "whats the difference?" question doesn't automatically mean you've won if anything you have just extended the debate into more filler.
@@zaxbitterzen2178 What do you mean by "supernatural"? Because if it just means "outside what we define as the laws of nature," then by definition the origin or existence is a supernatural event.
Who created god? Ok, the assumption is God is uncreated and it(he?) created the Universe. But the watch maker argument is: something relatively complex needs a creator. This doesn’t apply to God. If the argument doesn’t work for God which is assumed to be complex then why would it work for clocks? So the argument doesn’t work for all complex things/beings therefore the watchmaker is not a reliable argument
All complex created beings require a more complex creator. God is more complex than all of creation, but he is not created. If he were, then he would not be God - he would simply be a part of creation more complex than ourselves. If we do not have an eternal original creator, then the only alternative is an infinite regress of increasingly complex creators. If that were so, then we would not exist because an infinite number of creators and prior creative events would have been required to create us.
The nature of god is that he was always there and he didn't begin to exist. yet whenever scientist state that the singularity mightve been eternal theist scoff
@@jessehenrique4343 The problem of a limited, or an unlimited, regression is a philosophical problem for everyone. Anyone who claims to know the solution is either lying or misunderstands the problem.
@@JustN0tMe No, you got the premise wrong. It is all things that *begin* to exist has a cause. The Universe had a beginning/began to exist, therefore the universe has a cause.
@@RehzaVFX even still, theres no indication that the universe began to exist and even if there was thats no indication that God exists or it created it. Look at the internet, thats a world in of itself, created by humans...if it was possible to create sentient being in it and they had this philosophical debate, they would be wrong if they reached this same conclusion, even if its sound The fallacy still remains present even after my mistake
@@JustN0tMe So by your statement you ought to explain the cause of the universe because it exists. //there's no indication that the universe began to exist and even if there was there's no indication that God exists or it created it// Even if there was, there is no indication that it popped into existence of its own either. If the universe did not begin to exist, there was an infinite no. of events to the past, which is impossible as we would never have reached into the present moment. So we know that the universe most likely had a beginning, and the most likely explanation is the transcendent designer who created, designed and fine-tuned it.
@@princeleslin1607 From a Reddit post "I just wrote a comment about this on a different thread, which I'll paste below. There are two distinct ways the infinite regress is used in cosmological arguments. One version is in the Kalam argument, which argues that an infinite accidentally-ordered series (see below) is impossible because, among other things, it would take infinite amount of time to traverse it. But a completely different version is used in other cosmological arguments (primarily related to arguments from Plato and Aristotle) that do not argue for a first cause in time (e.g. a first event), but rather for a first hierarchical cause (like a motor) behind the scenes. Here is my comment: There is an important distinction to be made, here. There are two different types of causal chains that are spoken of in cosmological arguments, and the impossibility or possibility of their being infinitely long is completely different: Accidentally-ordered series: a chain in which each element is the cause of the next element in the chain. A good example would be a chicken laying an egg which hatches and grows up to lay its own egg. In the unmoved mover argument from Aristotle, this type of chain is allowed to be infinitely long: there is no problem with there being an infinite number of chickens stretching into the past, infinitely laying eggs. No need for a First Chicken. In fact, Aristotle explicitly argues that the universe must be infinitely old because he argues that change cannot begin or end. Essentially-ordered series: a chain in which each element can only pass along an effect but cannot generate it themselves. This type of chain requires at least one element that generates the effect, otherwise the other elements in the chain won't have anything to pass along. An example is a laser bouncing off a chain of mirrors and finally onto a wall. For convenience, call the mirrors "secondary causes," as they are able to pass the effect along but cannot generate it, and the laser a "primary cause," as it can in fact generate the effect in question. The argument here is not so much that the chain cannot be infinitely long as it is that it cannot consist only of secondary causes. If we see the laser light on the wall, we know that there must be a primary cause somewhere in the chain, otherwise there wouldn't be a laser light in the first place. The unmoved mover argument makes use of this second concept. It would be similar to seeing the hands of a clock being turned by gears (secondary causes) and inferring that there must be a motor (a primary cause) somewhere inside the clock even if you can't see it. That's what Aristotle is getting at. So strictly speaking it really doesn't have anything to do with whether an "infinity" is possible or if we are uncomfortable with it." Again even if the universe was created it wouldnt mean it was done by a "transcendent designer who created, designed and fine-tuned it"...a being that great would still be considered imperfect, just by looking how fucked up the world is
Time, space, and matter can't be eternal. Get real. Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing." Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God. God is the reason for us and all we have. ua-cam.com/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/v-deo.html “However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins. We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God. The odds are NOT there. ua-cam.com/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/yW9gawzZLsk/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/ddaqSutt5aw/v-deo.html No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd. ua-cam.com/video/X7h2HWcTwa4/v-deo.html Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection... The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.” Oh, but Dawkins knows what's true about life...killing those who don't meet his expectations for living. dailycaller.com/2021/05/19/richard-dawkins-down-syndrome-roe-v-wade/
What a horrible rebuttal. A textbook case of special pleading and red herrings on behalf of Lennox. "My god is not created." Well, my matter is not created... nor destroyed. The only difference is I have a law of physics to support that theory.
He deceived you Satan and his aides from human demons the hypocrites who were showing faith and they lean in disbelief and cunning and repel from the right For they have slandered the Prophet Muhammad Peace be Upon Him Hadiths he did not say to distort Islam mercy religion in the eyes of both worlds and people repel him until they die while they are infidels until they are with them either in hellfire on Judgment Day. Unfortunately the Muslims today they differed in their religion and they dispersed and followed these fabricated hadiths and they left the Holy Quran which God promised to protect him from distortion to the Day of Judgment celestial Book Ring Who was sent down with Gabriel, peace be upon him, the Messenger of God from the angels which he delivered to Muhammad, the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him. But Muslims they cling to the devil’s talk that contradicts what is stated in the text of the great Qur’an from the verses, the rulers, the clear evidence. And also the Christians they followed a corrupted Bible from human demons call to polytheism by God and God forgives all sins but that is not forgiven to polythe with it And Jesus Son of Mary, peace be upon him he is the Messenger and servant of God like the Messenger of God Muhammad, peace be upon him and God created it like his creation to Adam with the words of his ability with be so will be so his mother Mary, peace be upon her, conceived him Choose your language and read wwwmahdialummacom
@@hidingodthe Quran did not come from God 😂 you can’t use a claim within the book itself and use it as evidence. All the Quran did was plagiarize half of the old and new testaments but then add a new plot twist where the Jews and Christian’s are the actual enemy of God and the heroic pedo is gonna rise up and stop them!
A God is eternal ... explains nothing about this God. Eternal or omnipotent and many hyper features humans assigned to God reveals that humans don't know their personal God. Be humble and honest at least on that point. I don't discard the possibility of a creator, but if we don't know who is the creator, just say we don't know: Gods and Godesses from all ancient books aren't necessarily the right one; they utterly contradict each others.
That is the critical point. If there is a god...a god with a mind or that IS a mind that creates and can manipulate the natural world including human thought, then we are precluded from actually knowing anything at all. Not just about the nature of god, but whether anything else we perceive/think/aspire to is real or valuable. It's all made up. There is no objective reality only a reality that God manufactures. And since we can't know the mind of god, we can't know what his motives are...what kind of being it is.
Problem is not whether god exists or not, the real problem here is which god is true? Christian, muslim, jew, hindu or something else? No one believes in god except their own. So everyone is an atheist except for their own god.
“Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” was a phrase made popular by Carl Sagan. It applies so perfectly to anyone that puts forth the argument that there is a Supernatural Being, where's your evidence?? There is no evidence, period.
Except he asserts the god is eternal and then uses the gospel as his evidence. Thats quite the assertion, and extraordinary, it needs extraordinary evidence to backup the claim.
That was such a good point right at the end, if atheists don’t believe God created matter and that it always existed, then they do believe that something can always exist without have been created so why do they have a problem with God not being created and have always existed? And of course that means that if material hasn’t always existed, then it had to have been created and therefore another problem because it begs the question....who created, or what created the matter?
That "something" you are referring to in your first sentence does not necessarily have to be supernatural. This is the problem that science has with God. Scientists speak by the evidence. And there is no evidence indicating the presence of something supernatural as God. It is just something people believe in, in order to explain what they cannot explain. Atheists do not say that the probability of God being existed is zero. They just believe that it is more probable that there isn't one.
@@mohammadtajabadi Actually the universe coming into existence does have to be supernatural. Why? Because things don’t just naturally appear out of nowhere by nothing. If it doesn’t happen naturally and it is super natural by definition. And objects don’t make decisions so something had to choose to create. And with the complexity of even an amoeba, let alone a human being, whatever made it had to be incredibly intelligent. We can’t make anything out of nothing. And many scientists do believe in God. You would have to ignore all of this logic and evidence to deny it. And by definition an atheist is someone who does not believe in Gods existence. (which is something you could not know.) If you’re leaving any room for the possibility of God then you’re no longer an atheist and you’re an agnostic. That’s one step in the right direction.
@@sandina2cents779 Again, the fact that you insist that a supernatural power should exist comes from the fact that we do not know what happened. You're saying if no one knows what happened, why don't we just accept that there is a God? However, the problem for scientists and those who believe in science is that the existence of God (as is represented by religion) contradicts what science has achieved, the most important one being evolution. Yes, there may be a god, but it's not like what most people think. About the terms atheist and agnostic, you are right. There's a thin line, and even Dawkins has said that he can be counted as an agnostic, but of course not a 50-50 one.
@@mohammadtajabadi “ you insist that supernatural power should exist” Really? Of course supernatural power exist unless you’re seriously trying to tell me that nothing can create some thing.... Sciences the demonstration of some thing that can be done over and over and seen. So scientifically show me nothing creating some thing. You having an intelligent mind, can you create something from nothing? And yet you’re trying to tell me that is possible without supernatural? Think about that.
@@sandina2cents779 Why are we even talking about creation? Why should the universe be created? Why can't energy just exist, just BE? As I said, we still don't know what happened at the big bang and before it. But, if you are talking about creation, it does raise the question about god itself and its nature. For example, what was God doing before he "created" the universe? And you also didn't talk about the contradictions that religion has with science, more specifically with evolution. Again, my point is: there may be a God (my own opinion: There is a God), but it is definitely not what religion has represented. And why should it be our concern anyway?
Because by our own standard of logic, you can't have something out of nothing. So you have to define a category outside that system (think about it like a math constant needed to explain a phenomena) to make sense of the universe and existence itself. That category would exist in a different way that everything else.
@@issaavedra There are no "standards of logic". The laws of identity, non-contradiction and excluded middle are objective, unchanging and not subject to gradation. Logic just is. But this isn't really relevant to my point. I'm saying, if the theist can simply say god is eternal and doesn't need a creator then why can't we say the universe has always existed in some form? We're making up an explanation for which we have no evidence and where we don't even fully know if one is needed...
@@issaavedra Logic IS my a priori framework just like god is yours. The only difference is mine is actually useful to me and I can show it to you. I don't have any other choice but to rely on logic even if it can only be proven using itself. But notice god doesn't solve this problem. Saying "logic can only be proven using logic" is no more ridiculous than saying "things only make sense, because an all-powerful dictator says so"...I don't make any more presuppositions than necessary...
@@amac9044 Logic is just one of your a priori presupposition. Logic need the self to formulate the proposition, time, space, causality, teleology, etc. It is embedded in a coherent reality. In my worldview there is an ontological grounding for this phenomena, and is not an induction->deduction conclusion, but the acceptance of the reality of God have coherence as a given.
@@issaavedra All of those things stem from logic (except maybe teleology, I'm not convinced existence has a "purpose"). They are not a priori. You don't get to just invent a solution where you identify a problem. "I can't justify logic, therefore, god....Problem solved!" This is a non-sequitur. You haven't proven or solved anything. If the laws of logic are "grounded in" god does that mean he can change them? Because if that's the case then they are useless. But if they transcend god then you're right back at the same problem and we don't know where they "come from" (if that terminology is even sensible)....🤷♂
John is a very good orator but his argument here doesn't make sense at all. John: "The Universe couldn't create itself. So it must have been created by God." Man: "But then who created God?" John: "God doesn't need a creator. God is eternal." WTF?
So we created the world? You are plain stooo-pid. How did you get around the first verses of the bible with God creating and giving life? Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space, and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We KNOW these laws. We have NO doubts about them. We also KNOW that the laws of nature can't come about without a Lawgiver, God. So if you want to pretend to be smart, please give me the laugh by giving your science how creation really happened by natural means. Also, throw in how we got the laws of nature, naturally. Life only comes from life. Law of biogenesis. God is the reason for us and all we have. ua-cam.com/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/v-deo.html The odds are NOT there. ua-cam.com/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/yW9gawzZLsk/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/ddaqSutt5aw/v-deo.html
So John's claim is that God was in existence for an infinite period of time before creating the universe in six days? I for one am glad he finally got around to it!
Jimmi K Because the Ark was a warning for all who saw. God was patient and merciful with His people that He gave them a sign for the coming judgment. Also, this comment demonstrates a misunderstanding of Eternity. God exists outside of time, space & matter. However, because of the limits of our human mind, we can only define “eternity” with the concept of time. God is beyond our conceptions.
@@RannonSi you say that the story of Noah is kind a dumb, but yet yoskees needed to write it out to explain it to am atheist who didn't even seem.to know the most basic concepts put forth in the story. I do wonder what does that has to say about the level of intelligence of Jimmy.
Can we stop pretending like Lennox had any kind of salient point? Or that the “Who created the creator” question is any kind of fallacy? God is eternal? Maybe the universe is eternal.
How can you as a scientist ask "who created God" knowing full well that energy can neither be created nor destroyed. God is the source of all energy and so it wouldn't make sense if he was created.
Did you understand what I was saying? I didn't say anything about creating energy. If energy is transformed from one form to another then it remains energy. The point is that the source must not have been created if that is true, it just always is. That's why theologians refer to God as the "uncaused first cause"
@@derrekdevon2366 You're assuming energy needs a source. The word "source" has no physical meaning in this context. If you have time, you also have energy conservation. Postulating god as a cause for something simply means we don't understand the cause.
@@martinkunev9911 Nobody is saying we understand the cause. God is outside of time, that means he is Infinite. Never created, never changing, never ending. We humans are wired to think in this box, in time, hence why we can't understand something that is outside of time. The point is that God created the laws, time, matter e.t.c. It wouldn't make any sense if he were bound by those laws.
God could not be created , if he could then it wouldn't be God. If he was created then that means their is a God above him. You can't create God, he has always been , always is and always will be.
If anyone missed the point: By using the argument of (1) everything that exists has a cause and (2) the universe exists therefore (3) the universe has a cause. The first premise is not obvious. You could argue that the universe is eternal therefore ending a regression. No need for a eternal creator. Adding a Christian god is a very big leap which needs evidence. Some people use the Bible, but unfortunately you need to presuppose miracles and god's to use the Bible as a source, so it's unfortunately not helpful. The big bang does not prove the universe had a cause since we don't yet understand what caused the big bang. gods, aliens, parallel dimensions are all equally possible etc.
If change it to everything which begin to exist has a cause then it make who created God question invalid rather than everything that exist has a cause. Instead of examining Bible I would like you to examine Quran, read it with open mind and reflect on it, I am sure it will help you find the evidence which could convince you. Think about how could the author of this book could have known about the things he spoke about in the book? Check if there are any contradictions? Examine the claims it makes. Examine the scientific fact mentioned in the Quran? How could the author have known about them? Are there any mistakes, are all of the fact which we can check are indeed true or not. Remember the Quran came to be 1440 year's ago. There are few question to help you with your research. I sincerely hope you find the evidence which would convince you that the creator of all creation is God/Allah.
He deceived you Satan and his aides from human demons the hypocrites who were showing faith and they lean in disbelief and cunning and repel from the right For they have slandered the Prophet Muhammad Peace be Upon Him Hadiths he did not say to distort Islam mercy religion in the eyes of both worlds and people repel him until they die while they are infidels until they are with them either in hellfire on Judgment Day Unfortunately the Muslims today they differed in their religion and they dispersed and followed these fabricated hadiths and they left the Holy Quran which God promised to protect him from distortion to the Day of Judgment celestial Book Ring Who was sent down with Gabriel, peace be upon him, the Messenger of God from the angels which he delivered to Muhammad, the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him. But Muslims they cling to the devil’s talk that contradicts what is stated in the text of the great Qur’an from the verses, the rulers, the clear evidence And also the Christians they followed a corrupted Bible from human demons call to polytheism by God and God forgives all sins but that is not forgiven to polythe with it And Jesus Son of Mary, peace be upon him he is the Messenger and servant of God like the Messenger of God Muhammad, peace be upon him and God created it like his creation to Adam with the words of his ability with be so will be so his mother Mary, peace be upon her, conceived him Choose your language and read wwwmahdialummacom
@@hamzamuhammed3 I guess we'd have to define "begin" vs "changing significantly". Consider the thought experiment "The Ship of Theseus", which asks, “Does an object that has had all of its original components replaced remains the same object?”. The answer depends on who you're asking - To some, it's a new ship every few nanoseconds, and to others, it'll be the same ship in 100 years - even if its wood is replaced with metal. If we want to say the universe "began", we'd have to show that. Lacking the ability to do so is not an excuse to make a conclusion one way or the other.
lennox is exactly right when he says, if the laws of physics are in existence , an they are, then where did they come from? surely they started to exist at some point in time and space an then it follows who made them,Not what made them. so they would also be eternal but athiests don't believe anything is eternal. there in a dilemma!!
I have Seen things I don’t attack science. I say God created it, and he created it in a way that points to his existence. Something cannot come out of nothing, therefore the universe cannot exist. Unless there is something that is eternal. That thing is God.
Bertrand Russell summed it up succinctly: "If everything must have a cause, then God must have a cause. If there can be anything without a cause, it may just as well be the world as God, so that there cannot be any validity in that argument."
@@clarkelaidlaw1678exactly bro, the fact people are bolstering someone because they say “No one made god, god eternal” just proves how long the human species has to exist
@@crazyalarmstudios2012 i admit that my first response to the original statement was quite shallow. The concept of infinity is something that we can argue about whether we can or cannot understand. What actually amazes me is how easily we accept that our mind is finite and there is no possible way to understand the infinity of God, so we lay back and take it for a fact. Isn't that too convenient? Doesn't that raise any suspicion? If i wanted to create a supernatural being, that's exactly how I would present it. As something beyond any understanding and reasonable explanation.
ThaGodWeCreate ah clear example of someone who supposedly “wants” to see God with his own eyes for him to be real, yet he doesn’t even look to find him
ThaGodWeCreate btw Richard Dawkins admits Jesus is a real historical figure. There are more manuscripts talking about Jesus than Julius Cesar and 12 of those are from non-christian sources. You would also need to explain how all his followers were cowering when Jesus was crucified and then after the 3 days the tomb was empty. Which btw the guards didn’t die or get hurt. Which also brings me to my next point: Mary was the first to see him. Why would a gospel in such time where women were considered unreliable, and their testimony would be at the level of a slave, be the first ones to see him and then tell the apostoles he resurrected? If I were to make my own religion I would’ve definitely used male witnesses so it would sound more reliable to the people then. Wouldn’t it make sense that this would be dismissed if it were false? But it is true. After all two women were the ones who came to the apostoles and told them he was alive before seeing him with their own eyes. 500 witnesses saw him. If it were false, there would need to be an explanation for the amount of followers, loyal followers willing to die for the truth to be spread, that around 5000 in greek and 2500 in latin copies were made when the most popular books in those time would get around 12 copies. Why would they die for a lie, and even worse, a book that talks about their faults? Because it’s true. And If Jesus is real, and he resurrected, then all his teachings are true too. Which would make the Old testament is true as well.
@@marcocortes9968 You're right, it's called the criterion of embarrassment. The fact alone that the people who witnessed Jesus alive after he was buried were determined to affirm it even if it meant risking their own lives should raise some questions to anti-christians. It would have made no sense to embarrass yourself and risk being killed if it was all just a lie.
He deceived you Satan and his aides from human demons the hypocrites who were showing faith and they lean in disbelief and cunning and repel from the right For they have slandered the Prophet Muhammad Peace be Upon Him Hadiths he did not say to distort Islam mercy religion in the eyes of both worlds and people repel him until they die while they are infidels until they are with them either in hellfire on Judgment Day. Unfortunately the Muslims today they differed in their religion and they dispersed and followed these fabricated hadiths and they left the Holy Quran which God promised to protect him from distortion to the Day of Judgment celestial Book Ring Who was sent down with Gabriel, peace be upon him, the Messenger of God from the angels which he delivered to Muhammad, the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him. But Muslims they cling to the devil’s talk that contradicts what is stated in the text of the great Qur’an from the verses, the rulers, the clear evidence. And also the Christians they followed a corrupted Bible from human demons call to polytheism by God and God forgives all sins but that is not forgiven to polythe with it And Jesus Son of Mary, peace be upon him he is the Messenger and servant of God like the Messenger of God Muhammad, peace be upon him and God created it like his creation to Adam with the words of his ability with be so will be so his mother Mary, peace be upon her, conceived him Choose your language and read wwwmahdialummacom
He had to exist first in a timeless realm. That is the realm we call the spirit realm, or the supernatural realm. That realm does not have time. We just can't wrap our minds around that because time dictates to everything we've ever known in this realm.
I'm not an expert but don't really need a "supernatural realm", just access to the theorical higher dimensions. This is theorically possible based on our current understanding of the universe. There is currently absolutly no scientific evidence that could prevent God existing in our natural universe, let alone outside the universe since we have no clue if the known natural laws apply outside of it in the same way they do here.
Similarly there's "no scientific evidence that could prevent unicorns existing". But hey, religion gets a free pass on making stuff up without evidence because "faith".
To know if God or the gods were created or not, we first need to know the knowledge and history of the pantheons, the christians, the hindu gods, the titans, etc. We first need to know what happened when these guys acted, how these guys acted, where these guys acted and where, when and how they came to be. And also, if they ever interacted with the humans, how did they do it, and if they did, when did it stop. But this is impossible because no one knows if the gods were real or not. And also, time has eroded the knowledge we have now to be changed from their origins. To answer the question, we need to know everything that happened, the moment when the humans came to be. Spoiler alert i came up with this one the spot. But i didn't see anyone in the comments saying it like this so i just wanted to write it for someone to think about. And don't go insane over it, haha.
In Christianity, the belief in God is rooted in faith, revelation, and theology. We don't claim to possess a comprehensive historical record of God's actions and interactions throughout human history. Our faith is based on the teachings of the Bible, personal experiences, and theological reflection. We believe in a God who has revealed Himself through sacred texts, particularly the Old and New Testaments, and through the life and teachings of Jesus Christ. While there may be similarities in the questions about divine actions and interactions in different belief systems, it is essential to recognize that faith often transcends empirical evidence and historical records. From a Christian standpoint, belief in God is a matter of faith and relationship, rather than solely relying on historical documentation or the actions of deities from other belief systems.
I never understood how it is the "easy way out" to explain the fine-tuning of the universe with God. They say they don't but they clearly conflate God with the god of the gaps.
lol you're tripping dawg. Athiesm doesn't have proof. Theism, particularly Christianity does. We can argue how strong the proof is, but unlike athiesm it has proof. No disrespect but you need to give an educated response, even people like Christopher Hitchens didn't say that, they simply argued against the proof, but they never said there was none. At least not that I can recall, they simply don't say stuff like that.
@@missioncodez - smh, the universe and it’s regularities show that thiesm is possible, not true. And the evidence for Christianity shows specifically that the God of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob is real. What you said not only seemingly misunderstood a good portion of what I said, but it was extremely ignorant. I mean think it through for a second, two thirds of things youtube comment athiests say are never said in debates by their athiest idols and heroes, seriosuly they are not. Like do you think you came up with a new argument or something? What you said would be laughed at if you said it toward any scholar in a any public debate. I’m not trying to be mean, I’m just saying you don’t know what you’re talking about, and you conpletely misunderstood what I had said earlier. No I was NOT talking about thiesm in the sense of inclusion to all beliefs and religions. And no; no other beliefs or religions have what Christianity has, prophetic, historical, and philisophical evidence, as well as evidence of the resurrection of Jesus. At best other religious documents show their historical figures existed, not that they were gods, or knew god. But Christianity, as many both religious and skeptical historical scholars have said, “has strong evidence for the resurrection of Jesus, evidence with which the early church exploded in growth.”
@@missioncodez I honestly don't remember making many typos, but who knows, however you truly have no reply for what I said. If you did, you would say something in response, but you didn't. Think I'm am idiot? Then reply to the original reply and stop being scared of a random guy on the internet with a fortnite pfp
@@missioncodez 😂 I hope people see your replies, you’re really proving yourself right man! Keep the work up. I literally invite anyone to message me on discord: HD Entique #7264 I’m not scared your dog crap bro😂, anyone add me and let’s talk. Please don’t be scared of these people who call you names and stuff if you ever disagree with them, they need to call you names because they can’t defend their point. Seriously people like these have no debating, arguing, or fact checking skills.
Where did the universe come from? Basically, the same question. It is a matter of cause-and-effect. You can say, God always was and always will be, and on the other hand, you can say the the same about the universe. Sidestepping cause-and-effect about the universe always existing.
Better believe in Jesus or you will go to hell! Still, no evidence exists as to if Jesus was even on the planet besides The Bible, which was was only hearsays from people. People also say they have seen Bigfoot and if I don't believe in him, he is going to make me live in **ETERNAL PUNISHMENT**
No Dairy Carrie No not really, the original bible never mentioned hell or eternal Torture that was later added by the Catholics. It does say that you die and return to the ground unless You give your heart to Jesus. And there is so much evidence for Jesus that it’s possible He did rise from the dead.
No Dairy Carrie no evidence that Jesus was on the planet? This is just an ignorant statement. You simply won't accept the evidence because you want that to be true.
i don't understand how he can use the watchmaker argument for the universes existence but then say that same argument doesn't apply to god. to say he doesn't believe in a created god is just saying his magical being is even more magical.
God is all there is, was or will ever be. He created everything including you in his image. Science only explains how some of the things he has created work. He’s just trying to teach us and prepare us for the hereafter with him. I trust that he knows what’s best for us. We will never understand the mind of God. Faith is a necessity. Our pride and ego tells us we know better than God. Don’t listen to it.
Where’s the evidence? You see, in the realm of science you need to demonstrate your hypothesis with experiments. It has to be repeatable. You can’t just make claims and then hand-wave away any criticism
Lebron Fitzgerald We can’t “prove” anything. There is only evidence to infer with. For me, creation itself is enough evidence. Even if we started from nothing 13 billion years ago, still not enough time for evilution. Irreducible complexity is another great argument for the evidence we see. Keep seeking and you will find. 😉
I believe in a created God. He is in this place. I am a creator, I am a father, I make art, I create ideas. We are in a created place. God was created in a place, a realm, through that realm, which he did not create, he created this universe and the many heavens. He is a construct of a very special place. He has a creator. 🤔
He deceived you Satan and his aides from human demons the hypocrites who were showing faith and they lean in disbelief and cunning and repel from the right For they have slandered the Prophet Muhammad Peace be Upon Him Hadiths he did not say to distort Islam mercy religion in the eyes of both worlds and people repel him until they die while they are infidels until they are with them either in hellfire on Judgment Day. Unfortunately the Muslims today they differed in their religion and they dispersed and followed these fabricated hadiths and they left the Holy Quran which God promised to protect him from distortion to the Day of Judgment celestial Book Ring Who was sent down with Gabriel, peace be upon him, the Messenger of God from the angels which he delivered to Muhammad, the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him. But Muslims they cling to the devil’s talk that contradicts what is stated in the text of the great Qur’an from the verses, the rulers, the clear evidence. And also the Christians they followed a corrupted Bible from human demons call to polytheism by God and God forgives all sins but that is not forgiven to polythe with it And Jesus Son of Mary, peace be upon him he is the Messenger and servant of God like the Messenger of God Muhammad, peace be upon him and God created it like his creation to Adam with the words of his ability with be so will be so his mother Mary, peace be upon her, conceived him Choose your language and read wwwmahdialummacom
Not trying to be weird but, can someone link me some videos or something so I can watch to help me believe in god or tips on what I should do? I question this daily. On how earth was created. Who created the universe and god. I go back and forth between Science and God.
" I can watch to help me believe in god " Which god? You can watch videos of lightening, that may help you believe Zeus or Thor exists. Or you can watch videos of fire, which the god Prometheus gave to humans. That may help you believe the god Prometheus exists.
No one creates God, we are human and our understanding has limitations, if you are going to think of that and will try to answer it eventually you will loose your sanity. Just like asking why it is hard to find another planet in the universe just like earth. And why man cannot rejuvinate a dead man?
We have found several exoplanets around nearby stars, many in the habitable zone. So technically we probably have found a few earth like planets, and it will be confirmed as telescope technology increases. Several mega telescopes are in plan to be constructed before 2030. It almost sounds like your saying, we don’t know, so god? God of the gaps? Man created god.
He deceived you Satan and his aides from human demons the hypocrites who were showing faith and they lean in disbelief and cunning and repel from the right For they have slandered the Prophet Muhammad Peace be Upon Him Hadiths he did not say to distort Islam mercy religion in the eyes of both worlds and people repel him until they die while they are infidels until they are with them either in hellfire on Judgment Day Unfortunately the Muslims today they differed in their religion and they dispersed and followed these fabricated hadiths and they left the Holy Quran which God promised to protect him from distortion to the Day of Judgment celestial Book Ring Who was sent down with Gabriel, peace be upon him, the Messenger of God from the angels which he delivered to Muhammad, the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him. But Muslims they cling to the devil’s talk that contradicts what is stated in the text of the great Qur’an from the verses, the rulers, the clear evidence And also the Christians they followed a corrupted Bible from human demons call to polytheism by God and God forgives all sins but that is not forgiven to polythe with it And Jesus Son of Mary, peace be upon him he is the Messenger and servant of God like the Messenger of God Muhammad, peace be upon him and God created it like his creation to Adam with the words of his ability with be so will be so his mother Mary, peace be upon her, conceived him Choose your language and read wwwmahdialummacom
nickj14711 how is lennox embarrassing? Dawkins is embarrassing because he believes in magical things such as created gods when the typical atheist does not believe in magic
nickj14711 if u watched the full debate, our faith in God is not blind. Evidence comes from science (with rational reasoning) and history Science say that the Big Bang occurred. It would not make sense to say something came out of nothing, so the only answer that makes sense is that an eternal and all-powerful being must have made it happen. There is historical evidence outside the Bible; there are so many accounts of Jesus Christ being seen after his death. Jesus Christ was not the only one to be miracles revived as there have been cases of people coming back to life in hospitals and funerals. Miracles are occurring all the time in this world. A baby boy named Jaxon: today he is living at age 5 with only HALF OF HIS BRAIN. Science itself supports theories that seem magical. What are the chances that a single celled organism will eventually evolve into an intelligent life form? What are the chances of a flower having all its pedals the same size? It takes faith to say that science is correct just as it takes faith to declare religion to be true. I believe that science is in religion in disguise with math sprinkled on top of it. I’d just like to tell you the Bible explicitly tells us to validate its legitimacy rather than just blindly believing it. So I am not some dogmatic and religious zealot declaring anything true without evidence and reasoning. And if you want to make your argument sound convincing, then attacking other people’s personality is not the way.
nickj14711 I never called anyone evil in this comment section and how do we get from being evident to being emotional? The Bible never said whether Adam and Eve were homo sapiens, so it is possible that God had the human race evolve from homo habilis which would make sense because evolution itself is a miracle. Here is the deal, I will provide credible evidence if you first explain if your claims on evolution are based on faith or not
nickj14711 Lol. The same hackneyed insults, objections that were answered 2400 years ago and complete misunderstandings of the sociology, history and methods of science, over and over again. - it’s so easy, we just inductively examine concrete facts according to uniform, invariant laws of nature by using the scientific method, and then deductively evaluate evidence based on universal abstract laws of rationality. Who needs God? Lol. - I’m breathing just fine, who needs oxygen?
According Dawkins theory for the existence of universe, we are encountered with an" intelligent design" with no particular identity In this infinite universe which we can't reach the end or maybe we can, if we try to make some better objects to reach. It is my conception from his Sayings though! According what he says, we are the pinnacle of the intelligence and a unique phenomenon which has been made by this intellectual world through no particular reason,and no particular creator! meanwhile nothing can compete with us, and this universe (intelligent design) has made no " intellect" better than us!! (If made, so Where is it? ) Apparently we, as humans are riding forward with no opponent. My question is, that how and why, no particular thing(if you say that intelligent design has no certain and unique identity as creator) has made a particular thing which is called human??? Why this intelligent design has made an intellect(man) who has some spectacular criterion, so fragile though, that can't even protect itself from death and nought , and why the end of its destiny is to becom fertilizers and food for some cheaper phenomenons called "worm", and then nothing and the story of this intellect comes to an end! My question is to Mr, Dawkins that, why should we be that much hopeful to life and this doomed universe? And what would be our achievement if we disbelieve God?!
"When inventing a god, the most important thing is to claim it is invisible, inaudible, and imperceptible in every way. Otherwise people will become skeptical when it appears to no one, is silent, and does nothing." - Lindsey Brown No matter how many times their gods are debunked, theists will say, "my god is not a debunkable one, therefore, the one you have just debunked is not my god."
@zilla5749 rubbish. You can debunk the theory that a "flat earth" exists. You can debunk the theory that living Tyrannosaurus Rex's exist. You can debunk the theory that married bachelors exist. You can debunk many things that don't exist, indeed, that would be the entire purpose of the debunking. UsE yOuR bRaInN
@zilla5749 the laws of logic haven't physically appeared and revealed themselves to you either, and yet you believe in those. They are timeless, spaceless, immaterial and universal just as God is. "iF God ExIsT wHy bAd tHiNgS hAPpEn" nice argument 😂 The very existence of bad things happening proves Gods existence. Richard Dawkins states that "The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference." So you citing evil as something that disproves God actually proves my point which is that God exists. If he didn't exist, good and evil wouldn't exist either. Just as there would be no shadow without the light, the only reason you can point at something and say it is bad, is because you have an objective standard of the good; which is God. Next time you want to be a fedora-wearing keyboard warrior, you should bring your A-game.
Theists like Lennox offer justifiably valid reasonings for the concept or existence of God but never say why their religion and lore is correct or morally superior to others. Arguments for the existence of God consist of just as much validity and basis - as well as contradictions and holes - as arguments against God's existence. The real debate is one about culture/history moreso than science/creation: where is the evidence for the respective narratives described in the Bible, Qur'an, Torah, etcetera? After all, they all describe histories that supposedly took place in the material world.
for something to be created, it has to be a creation. God isn't creation and therefore he wasn't created, it is easy as that. If a paint was painted and the paint asked the painter who painted him, it would be incorrect because he wasn't painted. The painter was born. To simply apply the same logic and premise to something entirely different is inane and illogical and therefore this argument is fallacious
So he just exists out of nowhere? Hm, now doesn’t that sound familiar? Oh right, the FUCKING universe. Your logic is literally so contradictory. The universe cannot be created out of thin air, but god can 😜
Also by definition, god is a creation. A creation is simply the action or process of bringing something into existence. If god exists, and if anything exist, it has been created. The fact that god is conscious just proves that he’s a creation. He was created, he exists. God needs a creator. If something complex as the universe cannot be created by magic, and has to have an entity behind it, then god would be more complex than the universe no? God would therefore HAVE to also have a creator due to its complexity. If god doesn’t need a creator, neither does the universe 😊
@@steelpump100 um no because God didn't begin to exist so he can't be considered a creation. And nope God isn't complex he's spirit immaterial. God is simple now what I mean by this is that God doesn't have any parts so he doesn't need to be created he always existed
@@pacma7383 god is simple? Then how the fuck did he create life, which is scientifically proven to be VERY fucking complex. And how did he create the universe which is also infinitely more complex than life? If he created everything, including the things we can’t fathom, even after supposedly learning everything through the apple of knowledge, how is he “simple” by definition he is complex. He created complexity, therefore he is complex. You can’t be the originator of everything and just be fucking simple. That makes no sense, which is basically just religion anyway 🤷♂️. And what do you mean begin to exist? Doesn’t make a lick of sense
Let me ask you a question following the logic of the mathematician..... If we are going to accept the postulate of uncreation that something can not be created and exist forever, then why do we automatically assign that property to a God who existed forever and if he created the universe and simply do not accept that the universe itself existed forever without being created and therefore without the need for God? Why apply the concept of non-creation and therefore of durability to God and not to the universe itself, leaving God aside?,
Our intelligence is a programmed product of our creator. In this product, time, space, and matter are three essential dimensions to drive our logic into cause-effect chains of happenings. That is why we can't escape doing the question: who created the creator. As a byproduct of the universe, our intelligence can not explain what the existence out of time, space, and matter and not linked to the cause-effect chains would be. Therefore, let the scientists try to explain things of our created universe based on our human intelligence and let our spirit believe and have faith in our creator who knows things beyond time, space and matter and moreover outside of cause and effect links.
Gavril Lasku I feel like you are somehow implying that you are, in fact, intelligent with your statement. Using "our" instead of a more specific term like human implies you are assuming you are intelligent. I highly doubt that claim can have any factual basis. Your invocation of "spirit" and the rationalization of God because we have yet to figure some specific question out about the origin of the universe is intellectually lazy and makes you LOOK foolish to anyone capable of thinking critically without their divine king telling them which opinion is correct before even assessing what is presented to them.
I will not qualify you or any other like you what you look like. Your critical thinking advocacy, in fact, is so far from the content of the comment I wrote in my statement. We both have faith in our minds The only thing which makes us different is that I accept my faith and you, on the contrary, try to oppose that bipolarism resting inside of yoursef. Remember, once again, three things which are mentioned in my comment: Time, space, and matter If you find the spirit of human being as part of these 3 things, then you may go on...
Gavril Lasku You speak of your faith as something spiritual, when in reality our minds are material, there is no supporting evidence that there is any metaphyshical portion of our selves that can exist outside of our body. You directly used the term spirit yourself in trying seperate out our world from our perception of it, and therefore, your justification of the inability to provide evidence for your god. Time, matter, and energy exist without the need to invoke God.
Gavril Lasku And also, don't presume to tell me what I do and don't have, your false equivalency is irrelevent and makes your argument even more flimsy. I have no faith, faith is the belief in something in spite of or in contrary to evidence.
If you ask who created God , you can ask who created the God that created that God and you get an infinite regression a philosophyc fallacy , Dawkins should study more about that before saying these things.
If recall, the question, "Who created God?" is based on the creationist saying that "complex things must be created", which leads people to say, "Well then, what created God?" By replying, "No one created God; you commit a special pleading fallacy. This can be avoided by not saying "everything complex is designed". Assuming the question follows this logic, then Dawkins is doing fine, but I'd need to hear his points made in the debate to really tell.
@Papito Rey yes I forget the saying, but it goes like this, “Great are the works of the Lord, and great are those who delight in them.” It’s a quote in the Oxford university somewhere, but it basically means, that God made this, and we study it.
Im proud to be a Christian and all evidences from philosophy, science, history, archeology, NDE's, místical experiences, miracles, marian apparitions, Jesus'apostles testimonies, etc point to the existence of God, to the reliability of the Bible and to the divinity of the Lord Jesus. The existence of God is obvious. Looking at the very fact that the Universe exists and the properties it has: it is very big, beautiful, order, it has laws of nature(it requires a law giver), it is extremelly fine tuned, it reveals a mathematical structure, it works in a marvelous way, it contains a great variaty of beings, it has billions of Galaxys, Solar Systems, Planets, Black Holes, SuperNovas, particles, attoms, cells, etc. It has life, biodiversity, information, rational and counscious beings, moral beings, loving beings, where all that stuff comes from? Who created all things? Who gives being to all things? Who sustains all things in existence at every moment? Why there is a Universe at all? Why the Universe is the way it is? Why nature work the way it works? The existence of God is quite obvious. John Lenox is a great christian appologist.
Nothing indicates the divinity of Christ, because Christ is just a human being, and I find it funny when I remember that Christ came to ask you to worship God, so you worship Christ instead, and here I remember this saying “I am pointing at the moon and the fool is looking at my finger.”
God is not Christ, Christ is not God, God is not the father of Christ, Christ is not the Son of God, God has no sons, God does not need sons, God cannot be crucified, God cannot come out of a woman’s womb
Pahaha the existence of god is obvious? If it was obvious then there wouldn’t be any argument. If it was obvious then I’d believe it as would nearly everybody else. ‘Obvious’ would be clear evidence of his existence but let me tell you, Jesus’ apostles testimonies, mystical experiences and the bible are NOT repeat NOT evidence of him existing at all. I’m afraid you’ve been conned. There is absolutely no evidence of any god existing. Wake up!
@@eileensongs You can feel the wind on your face. You can see clouds and debris blowing around. You can measure wind speed with an anemometer. Wind direction with a weathervane. You can't do anything like that with God.
Anyone who understands biology/zoology knows exactly how such complexity and precision came to be through evolution by natural selection, which forms the bedrock of modern biology.
Yeah, too bad he faced off against a Mathematician... the intellectual elite. But don't worry, the concept of a god can't stand up to the proof test of mathematics - it fails miserably.
Tal Fisherman of course you don’t believe in created gods, but it doesn’t mean the stories about their existence aren’t created by men lol I don’t believe in imaginary unicorns I believe in real ones 😂
He deceived you Satan and his aides from human demons the hypocrites who were showing faith and they lean in disbelief and cunning and repel from the right For they have slandered the Prophet Muhammad Peace be Upon Him Hadiths he did not say to distort Islam mercy religion in the eyes of both worlds and people repel him until they die while they are infidels until they are with them either in hellfire on Judgment Day Unfortunately the Muslims today they differed in their religion and they dispersed and followed these fabricated hadiths and they left the Holy Quran which God promised to protect him from distortion to the Day of Judgment celestial Book Ring Who was sent down with Gabriel, peace be upon him, the Messenger of God from the angels which he delivered to Muhammad, the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him. But Muslims they cling to the devil’s talk that contradicts what is stated in the text of the great Qur’an from the verses, the rulers, the clear evidence And also the Christians they followed a corrupted Bible from human demons call to polytheism by God and God forgives all sins but that is not forgiven to polythe with it And Jesus Son of Mary, peace be upon him he is the Messenger and servant of God like the Messenger of God Muhammad, peace be upon him and God created it like his creation to Adam with the words of his ability with be so will be so his mother Mary, peace be upon her, conceived him Choose your language and read wwwmahdialummacom
They don’t know if something that knows everything just like that has a meaning or not they only believe it has. Based on the miracles they think he did and they think they have many testimonies they believe those miracles to be true and then what he says it’s true but it could be some aliens that sent those men messages to make fun of them 😂 this is more plausible than believing in something like a god. But there is no proof for that either
If god was just 'there' and didn't need creating then why can't the Universe have just been just 'there'...why the need for a creator? John Lennox on yet another confused and bumbling rant.
Because the laws of nature clearly tell us that the Universe is limited and has a beginning and an end. Even our ancestors knew that things come to be and die. We now know that the Universe had a definite beginning. The eternal and unchanging universe... that's, my friend, an idea 300 years old and a long overcome one.
By the way tell me how can anything just "be there"? I'm sorry, but this view doesn't sort anything out. Things need to have their source of being. By saying that the source is just the matter that those things are made out of, it's honestly quite misguided, since by this assertion you completely ignore the question of the ultimate source, whatever that is.
Al M because we aren’t God. It’s as simple as that 😂 why do we have to bake cakes, why can’t the cake just always be there...? I know it’s a bit different but it’s the same thing. God is God, almighty and eternal.
Controversy Owl this is true what you’re saying, but that doesn’t sort anything either. You see even if the universe is undergoing a forever loop of Big bangs and Big crunches, there is still the mystery of the ‘being’ of this eternal universe. It must have its source of just simply being.
They, Christians and others, argue that the world must be finite in the past in the sense that it has a beginning in existance. The world, according to them, necessarily begins in existance. There was nothing and then there was something, and that happened because of God. So, that's what they would probably argue for in response to your response. I think William Lane Craig is an advocate of that. If you want, you can check that out. And if you want an atheist's response to that, then check out the youtube channel called TMM where he responds to Craig's arguement multiple times.
He deceived you Satan and his aides from human demons the hypocrites who were showing faith and they lean in disbelief and cunning and repel from the right For they have slandered the Prophet Muhammad Peace be Upon Him Hadiths he did not say to distort Islam mercy religion in the eyes of both worlds and people repel him until they die while they are infidels until they are with them either in hellfire on Judgment Day Unfortunately the Muslims today they differed in their religion and they dispersed and followed these fabricated hadiths and they left the Holy Quran which God promised to protect him from distortion to the Day of Judgment celestial Book Ring Who was sent down with Gabriel, peace be upon him, the Messenger of God from the angels which he delivered to Muhammad, the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him. But Muslims they cling to the devil’s talk that contradicts what is stated in the text of the great Qur’an from the verses, the rulers, the clear evidence And also the Christians they followed a corrupted Bible from human demons call to polytheism by God and God forgives all sins but that is not forgiven to polythe with it And Jesus Son of Mary, peace be upon him he is the Messenger and servant of God like the Messenger of God Muhammad, peace be upon him and God created it like his creation to Adam with the words of his ability with be so will be so his mother Mary, peace be upon her, conceived him Choose your language and read wwwmahdialummacom
Notice how Dawkins attacks Lennox's argument - good debating technique. Lennox quietly attacks Dawkins, - desperate debating technique. Tells me all I need to know.
You can postulate a God that is uncreated then why you can’t postulate the Universe that is uncreated? It’s simply more likely to have an uncreated chaotic universe with laws of physics pretty complex than an uncreated agent of extreme complexity. Complexity needs a designer? Then if this is true the extremely complex designer needs as designer as well and so on. But the laws of physics from which everything happened are extremely simple
I love it when two people who have respect for each other debate.
Lennox makes a personal attack on Dawkins and completely fails to answer the question other than to quote the Bible.
It is the old circular and stupid argument. It's true because the Bible says so. Genesis is a flat earth theory.
Unfortunately that almost never happens in the comment sections
@@myroncoetzee5228 You are right. But maybe
there is another function for the net. People express their opinions and get feed back that may trigger them to look into why they are feeling upset. It's free therapy. What do you think? Do ever feel upset by comments?
@@medicalinterest9091 Perhaps. But I would then say it's those who are tiggered by opinions that criticize others with such hostility. One can mock anothers belief all they want, it never works out.
@@myroncoetzee5228 You are right mostly. The working out is within each of the parties. Example: I have a deep frustration with how the western world is being put on the brink of destruction by the Christian Right. I accept they are locked into a brainwashed condition as much or more than me about what is real and what is imagined. (if there indeed is a difference in the end.) So I do what Christopher Hitchens advised. I throw their beliefs under the spot light of reason.
(maybe a B double of logic) It is quite cruel to attack a cognitively impaired person in real life. On the net I can have my say and not stick around for the personal attacks that such people resort to.
Thanks for your response. Now back to music practice. (Jazz piano and singing).
Feel free not to respond. I am presently being stared at by a pretty girl lying on a
lounge suite in a beautifully decorated room. It's and advertisement. Now, seriously, back to music. Covid-19 has been a gift. We are in lock down in Victoria, Australia.
I never had problem with the existence of God rather the specifications given by each religion.
@@urebeatsgaming7285 how about with Jesus he says serve ur slave owners well and Christianity requires that u put all ur sins and all ur faults on someone through human sacrifice on someone being tortured and killed. If we’re only talking about Christianity and not judiaism
@The Endless Riff doesn’t mean that they are consistent with there doctrine. Actually Thomas Paine was an atheist and the person who inspired the American revolution, he helped released 4,000 slaves in America and the. And many members of the anti slave society in America were atheist.
Jesus had the same problem. "In vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’”
@@brycewinn6867
Thomas Paine wasn't an atheist.
Get your facts right before saying them publicly.
Thomas Paine was a deist.
He believed in a God who created the universe.
But, not in religions.
Even though he was against religion generally, and Chrsitianity in particular, however, like other founder Fathers of the US, they were influenced by the judeo-christian values which forms the basics of the western civilization.
The founder Fathers were either Chrsitians or Deists, and they still good the Bible to some extent, even though maybe not exactly religiously... Thomas Jefferson is a good example.
So, please don't just come here making false claims.
Thank you.
@@emmanuel8310 throughout history we see a progression from polytheism, theism, deism, and atheism. People believed in deism during the enlightenment because that was the only logical view during that time but they were all against religion. We don’t know who was atheist because they will receive violence and threats especially among the founding fathers. So we aren’t entirely sure who was actually an atheist or not
My theory is that if an entity created time and space, he must be out of time and space, and unlimited by it. Time doesn't apply to God because it was created by him.
Well thats nice if its ur own theory
If you can explain what does it mean to be outside of time and space I believe you
But you can’t because you introduce to your explanation something that has no meaning to us
Show your proof, if not I can theorize leprechauns cooked my breakfast this morning...😂😂😂
@@hidingod the question who created God is theoretical
@@rotorblade9508 it means living in an undifferentiated amount of time
"For all the gods of the nations are Idols, but the LORD made the heavens." Psalm 96.5 & Isaiah 45.20..25 etc.
A holy book is not a book of facts . facts must be proven. Some are proven and some are disproven but you don't accept the ones which are disproven. Funny and ironical people.
_"For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse."_ - Romans 1:20
Sadly, for all the hard-hearted sceptics, they will have their proof one day. But it will be too late to act, and they will have eternity to rue their folly.
@@Locutus.Borg. I'll take my chances, an eternity/infinity of anything is a ludicrous and childlike concept.
@@TheRealTorG The digital age, the internet and instantaneous communication around the world was a ludicrous concept to people who lived in antiquity (and even 100 or so years ago). Because you cannot understand something doesn't mean it isn't real or that it doesn't exist. Like the two-dimensional people in _Flatland_ being unable to comprehend a 3rd dimension because it was outside their understanding and frame of reference. Because we are temporal beings living in a universe that is governed by time, how can we grasp at infinity when science *guesses* that even the universe will end one day? You are playing Russian roulette with a gun that has a bullet in every chamber. You just don't realise it yet.
@@Locutus.Borg. you are an atheist and a blasphemer to the thousands of other Gods we humans have worshipped through the ages, I just subscribe to one less far-fetched tale. The only reason you lend any credence to the Abrahamic concept of hell is because it is culturally relevant at this ephemeral point in time. If you lived in Saudi Arabia, you'd be lecturing me about Allah right now...
If God made the universe, then who made God? If God was a created being, then that being would not be God. Mic drop.
God is a created being-- created by men. The universe however is not created, it has no ultimate beginning.
@@belablasco6681 all Cosmological evidence disagrees with you
@@HagelBiscut Cite some of that "cosmological evidence" for your claims.
@@belablasco6681 well first of all the boarde guth vilenkin theorem tells us that any expanding universe would need a absolute beginning, another thing is that the universe will end in heat death however if the universe has always existed it would already be in heat death as we are running out of usable energy. Saying the universe has always existed but isn't in heat death is the same as saying your phone has been turned on forever but it still has charge in it. People try and get around this by saying that the universe will instead end in a big bounce that the universe will stop expanding and will start contracting then reexpand making a infinite cycle. However there's a problem with this a contracting universe is highly unstable and wouldn't be able to reexpand as small perturbations would cause it to devolp all sorts of messy singularities and even if it could reexpand there would still have to be a first time it expanded so you've just pushed the question back. Another thing is that if the universe always existed then the amount of events that occurred in the universe is infinite there was no first event which would result in a infinite regrees which is impossible.
@@HagelBiscut You are just repeating the Creationist standard, "if there was a beginning-- then God." But that is false on several levels. Neither Borde, Guth or Vilenkin refer to a beginning in the sense of a religious creation myth, they are only talking about a spacetime boundary in the past of an expanding universe, something we can't describe in terms of time. Not all events have causes at the quantum scale, such as the decay of sub-atomic particles, and our universe doesn't need one other than quantum uncertainty. Guth has shown that inflation could be eternal and our universe just one bubble among an infinity of others. There are many current theories attacking the problem of the origin of the universe-- such as Penrose's conformal cycling or Krause's universe from nothing-- but Creationists like to latch onto arguments by authority as if cosmologists are prophets. Nothing in the bible shows a knowledge of modern science. What the Big Bang emerged from is beyond our horizon but may not always be. Just chalking it up to your favorite deity explains nothing and is only self-serving.
athiests cant help but defend their beloved Dawkins in the comment section
nickj14711 how is it laughable?
@@andypants3521 Jimmi K has no response after 7 months.....
@@jedmaegraith8542 he's just a hypocrite
@nickj14711 If you asked this question, then can you explain the origin of life, briefly.. starting from the where everything begins
nickj14711 we know the universe had a beginning. A basic scientific principle you learn early on in your life is that something cannot come out of nothing. There must be something eternal for the universe as we know it to exist because the very laws of the universe demand it. However the laws of the universe also prevent anything eternal from existing. That is why a creator who does not obey the laws of the material world(because he made them) must exist.
I’m just happy I can find the debate with no memes in it...
If God is uncreated, why couldn't the universe be uncreated?
Because everything we have observed and studied within the universe requires a cause and an origin. There is no scientific explanation as to how it could otherwise exist. Hence, a divine eternal creator would have to exist outside of that which has been created and which we can scientifically observe and study.
@@danielskelton1145 sadly though the question still remains. And sadly you still can't notice major flaw in this statement. You say nothing can exist without a cause but then go on saying that god exists without cause. Answer this why did god create black holes?
@@eileensongs the theory of evolution pertains to biological life on earth, and has absolutely nothing to do with the creation or formation of the earth.
An atheist once asked me who created God and I said, can you count back in time, by units of a millions years at a time and he said yes. I said how far can you count back and he said forever. I said yes, but when does time start, when does it begin? He said time has no beginning. I said well, if you can believe that of time, why can't you believe that of God?
His mouth opened and stayed open, like a goldfish and then looked amazed and then said, that is the question have always wanted someone to answer and no one has and you answered it and shook my hand and thanked me. He looked so happy, like lifted up. There were other atheists standing there and they all remained quiet.
Fact is, I had been praying that week and for some reason that idea popped into my head, I guess God knew that man was going to ask me that question and he wanted to answer him through me.
It's amazing how God can do these amazing things and I have seen this many times, like a witness, just standing there and witnessing God at work. People really don't realise what they are missing by not knowing God, the Lord God is truly amazing. I fancy if Dawkins had been asked this question it may not have worked, but would have been nice to see him stumped and speechless.
God works through people, dreams, He works in a lot of ways. God is real and He loves you! There had to be a beginning.
current thinking is that the Universe has always Existed just in way we cannot truly understand if it has always existed it would not need a cause and I ask why is God exempt from a Cause why is he so special that he doesn't need a cause well Because you say he Doesn't need a cause
If we are to assume that anything that is complex needs an intelligent creator, why should we not be forced to make the same assumption of your God? You have no evidence, you are making assumptions, if science can't answer a question, more research is done and we don't invent explanations for it. We don't have all the answers, but frankly assuming that it had to be a god or any other supernatural force kinda takes some of the mystery and wonder out of the universe.
@@5688gamble You are thinking of a limited god. God is not limited, if God was limited then he wouldn't be worth worshipping and he will be a fake god. Then what created your stupid so loved impossible big bang. The day you realise your so loved space (universe) is fake is when you realise that big bang is just a way of getting you further away from God. I really feel sad for you, you are brainwashed to the max and you have a big ego so you can't accept the truth. I really feel sad for you.
@@leebennett1821 does your universe have a cause? And if the universe always existed then who created it? Where it got created? When? From what? How? It's sad that you are so brainwashed and that your ego is so big to accept the truth because you don't want to be wrong so you have to lie and convince yourself that there is no hell because you know you are on the way to hell and if you don't accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Saviour and if you don't repent you will go to hell. Those in hell wish they could hear the word repent just once more.
I never tire of watching a Scotsman bludgeon an Englishman
He's Irish 🤦♂️
@@philipeafroboy1 He is!...and , I think, an Anglican?
I never tire of people mistaking Irish for Scottish.
@@DeanH92
😂😂😂
jnixa 1010...
How d'ya feel? 👄⬅️🦶
This question; _"Who Created God?"_ is answered well in another video (link below). Asking _"Who made God"_ is a classic category fallacy. Like saying how much does the musical note C weigh? Sound is created by vibrations that travel through the air or another medium it is NOT measured by weight. These are two different categories being conflated into one. Like saying what does the colour pink taste like? This conflates two different senses, sight and taste. Asking _"Who made God"_ makes the same category fallacy. God by definition is the kind of thing that CANNOT be made. If God was made then He would NOT be God.
correct but they won't listen. insistence is futile
@@blackfalkon4189 Clever pun BlackFalkon. 😂👍
This is all cute however, you need to provide evidence for this claim. Saying that Gods are uncreated has 0 evidence to back it up, it makes you look like a charlatan. In addition, how do you know its 1 god? perhaps a team of uncreated gods did the job, just as teams of engineers design projects. How can you prove that a God has this property? Where do you get all this information about all these claims, and where is your evidence?
You are making an unproven statement and then building your case on it.
You need to first prove why plants sprout without human involvement from the ground before explaining why a swing is attached to the tree.
@@PeterMasalski93 Let me show you a fallacy used by Dawkins that makes you look like a charlatan when you mindlessly repeat it. Atheists claim God isn't real because there isn't any objectively verifiable evidence for his existence (which is Dawkins' central argument), why would I believe such a claim? There isn't any objectively verifiable proof that science is the overarching source of truth.
1- The objectively verifiable is the overarching source of truth.
2- God isn't objectively verifiable.
3- Therefore, God isn't real.
If that is in fact the case, then this is also true:
1- The objectively verifiable is the overarching source of truth.
2- There is no objectively verifiable proof that science is the overarching source of truth.
3- Therefore, science isn't the overarching source of truth.
So please enlighten me. Why is science the overarching source of truth? Can you scientifically prove such a claim?
@@vvv70v lol
Then show me a better way of evaluating whether something is true other than science. How can you compare how much C weighs is a nonsensical concept, because we have established musical notes have frequencies not weight (unless you count the mass of the string), when we can actually measure the frequency of the note C, we have actual evidence that there is a "sound/tone/note" of C. YOu are comparing "Missing Data" (aka GOD) to " actual things we can connect together" Its like comparing rainbow unicorns to how many apples can fit in the ocean. ridiculous
Go get an education rolf
Always believed Lennox had the more optimal arguments cause he was looking out the square hitch Dawkins seems never ab to.
He deceived you Satan and his aides from human demons the hypocrites who were showing faith and they lean in disbelief and cunning and repel from the right
For they have slandered the Prophet Muhammad Peace be Upon Him Hadiths he did not say to distort Islam mercy religion in the eyes of both worlds and people repel him until they die while they are infidels until they are with them either in hellfire on Judgment Day.
Unfortunately the Muslims today they differed in their religion and they dispersed and followed these fabricated hadiths and they left the Holy Quran which God promised to protect him from distortion to the Day of Judgment celestial Book Ring Who was sent down with Gabriel, peace be upon him, the Messenger of God from the angels which he delivered to Muhammad, the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him. But Muslims they cling to the devil’s talk that contradicts what is stated in the text of the great Qur’an from the verses, the rulers, the clear evidence.
And also the Christians
they followed a corrupted Bible from human demons call to polytheism by God and God forgives all sins but that is not forgiven to polythe with it
And Jesus Son of Mary, peace be upon him he is the Messenger and servant of God like the Messenger of God Muhammad, peace be upon him and God created it
like his creation to Adam with the words of his ability with be so will be so his mother Mary, peace be upon her, conceived him
Choose your language and read wwwmahdialummacom
@@nassimmajd9976 kindly get In the bin with that drivel
The end was a punch to the jaw. Wow.
Not really.
Not really. The Universe could have come into existence as a random quantum fluctuation. In fact, I believe we're all here by dumb luck and there's no reason for existence nor is their any sort of supernatural creator.
It was actually just a big argument from ignorance....
If I were to tell you that there are 2 purple dragons living in the hills near my house.Nobody has ever seen them or heard or shown that they exist,but they can harmonise like Don and Phil.You might respond by saying that sounds ridiculous to claim to know anything at all about those dragons that have never been demonstrated to be real.And you would be correct.Just as I am correct in saying to Mister Lennox.'It sounds ridiculous to claim to know anything about a celestial overseer that nobody has ever seen or heard or been demonstrated to exist.In fact my claim is more likely than his because at least we have evidence of kamodo dragons.We have zero evidence of and gods
@@dfs-comedy the concept of a random quantum fluctuation as the origin of the universe is a topic already explored by many, it's essential to acknowledge that this idea doesn't necessarily negate the possibility of a purpose or a supernatural creator. From a theological standpoint, we maintain that the presence of order, complexity, and design in the universe can coexist with the idea of a Creator. It's not necessarily a matter of 'luck' but rather a philosophical and theological exploration of the profound questions surrounding existence and purpose.
Richard Dawkins believes in eternal things but not God. He believes in a creator but not God.
What name does he give to the eternal thing in which he believes in?
Some things in the universe.
Both are wrong and right at the same time. Atleast that's what I feel like.
I will tell you exactly what Created you!!!! Are you ready!!!! The Universe itself created you
@@leebennett1821 last time I check it was my parents. If they didn't wanted me I wouldn't exist.
This discussion will never end ... Believe me .
Juan Hernandez
believe me, it will
Juan Hernandez THAT is the understatement of all time!
I agree, like Einstein often thought, we will reach a human limit of knowledge and such questions will still be outside of that realm left only to the individuals faith.
It will end at precisely the moment God wants it to end.
cause everything that comes from God happens at precisely the time God wants it to happen. and to answer your second question, no, I am not God.
His answer was meaningless. Why do you have to believe that god is uncreated? Why can’t you just believe the universe is uncreated? It’s saying the exact same thing.
For being a mathematician he surely does leaps around logical rigorosity...
The universe has a beginning therefore whatever caused the universe into existence has to be timeless spaceless and immaterial so if God created the universe he has no beginning .
@@Someguy12333 explain timeless, spaceless to yourself first..
@@stinkyoldmonk8982 Something that is outside of space-time
Does God have to have a beginning? Our tiny minds need to open up much more to such a concept.
Why is God Exempt from a Cause?If God is Exempt from a Cause then Why not the Universe?
@@leebennett1821 because all the evidence point to the universe having a cause. For example the boarde guth vilenkin theorem tells us that any expanding universe would need a absolute beginning and of course our universe is expanding. Also the most widely believe theory for how the universe will end is heat death and if the universe was eternal we would already be in heat death as we are running out of usable energy. To say the universe has existed for eternity but isn't in heat death is like saying that your phone has been on for eternity but still has charge in it. Some people try and get around this by saying that the universe will not end in a heat death but will end in a big bounce. The big bounce theory suggests that the universe one day will stop expanding and contract in on it's self and then reexpand making a infinite cycle. However a contracting universe is highly unstable and it would never make it to the expansion phase as small perturbations would cause it to devolp all sorts of messy singularities. Also even if the universe could contract and reexpand there would still need to be a first time it expanded as a infinite regrees is implausible. Another more philosophical thing is that if the universe has always existed that means the number of events that happen in the universe is infinite there was no first event but this of course is illogical. All things we know of are contingent ( meaning they could have not existed and depend on something for it's existence for example i am contingent because i could have not existed if my parents didn't meet and I depend on them for my existence) but there can't be a infinite regrees of contingent things so at some point there must be a necessary thing (something that has always existed, will always exist and doesn't depend on anything for it's existence.) The question is why does it have to be a necessary being why can't it just be a necessary thing? The reason is it would be agent causation not event causation. For example the necessary thing would of course be uncaused so it wouldn't be caused by another event to do anything it would act on it's own accord making it conscious and therefore a being.
@@HagelBiscut Maybe so but it Doesn't mean it's any God Humans Recognise nore does it mean Humans are it's Chosen ones
@@leebennett1821 true and i agree to some extent as I'm a deist ( the philosophy that believes in a god not revealed in religion and thinks one should arrive at that conclusion through reason and logic as opposed to faith.) However deism is on a spectrum with one side that thinks god set up the universe and then went away so there's most likely no afterlife and there's no use praying to it nor even thanking or thinking about it as it didn't create humans but just the laws of physics. Then you've got the view that god is somewhat of a guiding hand in the universe. I'm somewhere in the middle and I like to take David Attenboroughs analogy to describe how I feel about god " the amount of times I've sat watching ants on a termite hill and there going around their business without the slightest clue I'm there watching them." And that's how I feel about god a observer i don't feel it makes any sense to think god created the universe and then just left for multiple reasons. For one the universe is clearly fine tuned for life if you were to change any of the core aspects of the universe by the slightest amount the universe either wouldn't exist or wouldn't be able to support any life let alone intelligent life. So if a god created this universe it created it with intelligent life in mind so it wouldn't make sense for it to design a universe specifically for life to evolve and then just leave. BTW I'm not saying that the universe was perfectly suitable for life we obviously evolved to fit our environment however that isn't what the fine tuning argument says if you changed the core aspects of the universe life wouldn't have had the resources to evolve in the first place. Then you've got design in evolution people like dawkins seem to think because humans evolved that means it rules out a god's role in life but to the contrary. If we look at evolution it seems clear that it was in fact inevitable and if you turned back the clock you would get the same result time and time again. This is what convinced atheist anothny flew who was at one point the world's most famous atheist but he changed his mind and became a deist. I also believe in an afterlife as it seems obvious to me that as wilder penfield said the brain is not the creator of consciousness but a filter. We've also got accounts of people still conscious while clinically dead as evidenced by the AWARE studys by Dr sam parina that showed people could accurately hear conversations that occurred minutes after their heart had stopped and studys done by Michael sabom show they can also see events that occurr during resuscitation. So if a soul or mind exists then that means we aren't just the products of brains. This means that creator purposely gave us souls as if it let everything down to the laws of physics and nature we wouldn't have soul's as we can't evolve souls naturally. So the evidence that the universe was fine tuned for life, that evolution of life was inevitable, and that thd evidence points to our consciousness being more than brains points to the fact that the creator does care for us but doesn't interact in the universe as it would disrupt our free will and the laws of physics and nature which it created. I'd be happy to go into more detail about any of these subjects if you'd like.
I will never understand why religious people won't accept that the universe could be eternal and MUST have been created, but have no problem accepting the concept of eternal when it applies to God. The only rational answer to the question "did a god (or anything) create the universe?" is no one knows. Could have been the case, but there's no good reason to think it had to be the case.
there's a good reason, from a Christian perspective, the belief in a Creator God stems from the idea that an eternal, uncaused universe is highly improbable. We argue that the complexity, order, and design in the universe suggest a purposeful Creator rather than an eternal, self-existent universe.
@@Netomp51 I'm sorry, but I don't see how an eternal, uncaused, complex, orderly universe is any less probable than an eternal, uncaused, complex, orderly being. To my understanding, the complexity and order (using the word DESIGN is begging the question) of the universe is a natural end product of many stacked layers of basic chemical, energetic and physical properties and interactions, similar to the way computer programs that we experience as writing or drawing are ultimately nothing more than the culmination of many layers of simpler sets of instructions, which at their most basic level manipulate just two values - 0 and 1. Another example could be the coordinated movement of large flocks of birds - that was mysterious until someone figured out it was based on a few very simple rules.
@@moosick7066 I think the main flaw on your argument its oversimplification of the concept of a creator and the complexity of the universe. It equates the two without addressing the fundamental differences in their nature and origin. The comparison doesn't fully encompass the profound nature of these hypotheses. The philosophical debate on causality and the existence of uncaused entities persists. From a theological perspective, the intricate order, fine-tuning, and the existence of moral and ethical values in our world leads to consider the presence of a purposeful and intelligent creator who designed the universe with human beings in mind.
"Awareness is known by awareness alone," is the sole irreducible axiom of reality. To put forth a syllable to refute it is to concede...
Mr.Lennox is a legend
No, a legend is something that a culture adopts. He is marginalized and has no respect in the field of science now.
Medical Interest you know science is part of the reason why he believes in God
@@deansantos3017 Lennox is a wiggly thinker.
Basically he knows the Bible is junk and useless to science so he skirts around
subjects and makes idiotic personal attacks on Dawkins thinking he is being funny. Lennox is just another arrogant self righteous and cognitively impaired imbecile who pretends to be a scientist. He is climate change denier and very dangerous.
He deceived you Satan and his aides from human demons the hypocrites who were showing faith and they lean in disbelief and cunning and repel from the right
For they have slandered the Prophet Muhammad Peace be Upon Him Hadiths he did not say to distort Islam mercy religion in the eyes of both worlds and people repel him until they die while they are infidels until they are with them either in hellfire on Judgment Day.
Unfortunately the Muslims today they differed in their religion and they dispersed and followed these fabricated hadiths and they left the Holy Quran which God promised to protect him from distortion to the Day of Judgment celestial Book Ring Who was sent down with Gabriel, peace be upon him, the Messenger of God from the angels which he delivered to Muhammad, the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him. But Muslims they cling to the devil’s talk that contradicts what is stated in the text of the great Qur’an from the verses, the rulers, the clear evidence.
And also the Christians
they followed a corrupted Bible from human demons call to polytheism by God and God forgives all sins but that is not forgiven to polythe with it
And Jesus Son of Mary, peace be upon him he is the Messenger and servant of God like the Messenger of God Muhammad, peace be upon him and God created it
like his creation to Adam with the words of his ability with be so will be so his mother Mary, peace be upon her, conceived him
Choose your language and read wwwmahdialummacom
@@nassimmajd9976 your Mohamed is a true prophet yes. but the prophet of the devil himself. have a great day
Wow that was a super good point right at the very end
The well who created God question really is a question I would expect from a small child....
Well who did Create God?So why Does Everything other than God need to be Created?Why Does God not need a Cause? Because he says so!!!No Actually it's you that says God Doesn't need a Cause or Maybe the Kid is smart enough to realise God is silly idea Until someone comes along and smashes God into the Poor kids Brain with threats of eternal torture
@@leebennett1821 just stop please… before you embarrass yourself. Watch and listen to the video as many times as you want in order to understand what is being said. This is the problem with a lot of atheists… they don’t understand science or religion. Most are just followers of mainstream science.
Let me do you a favour and make it as easy as possible for you to understand… everything is existence from people, animals, the earth, planets, stars, universe etc are dependant entities. You follow the chain and it continues to have dependencies. Now something can’t come from nothing but something can’t always come from something because this is all finite and not infinite… otherwise it’s a fantasy and magical and illogical. There has to be a independent entity which is necessary and even science flirts with that idea. This independent entity has to be different and outside of understanding where it is unique and nothing like it in order for it to make sense. Dawkins deep down must know this (being a man of science). What atheists cannot comprehend and accept is that religious people call this independent entity God. That is what frustrates you.
Now stop asking “who created God?” It’s becoming cringe.
@@leebennett1821 No the kid is young enough to not have enough knowledge about life because he's a young kid who is barely starting life and made a mistake God is the ancient of days and we are all young in this world we haven't stepped into eternity. There are beings God created that have existed since the beginning of time.
@@leebennett1821 So you call a little kid smart and trust his understanding of life when he's just learning as well as you?
@@leebennett1821 great point
This is frustrating because Lennox is answering the ‘question’ not the argument.
Dawkins isn’t literally asking ‘who designed the designer’. He’s pointing out special pleading. How comes something as finely tuned and perfect as god just gets to exist but then not the universe? Why can’t the matter and the laws that govern that matter just exist in a bottom-top universe in terms of minds evolving from matter (us) in comparison to a perfect mind just existing and creating matter in a top to bottom approach?
Not only do I think the metaphysical approach favours something more complex like a mind (humans) evolving from matter that just exists in a less complex form, in comparison to a perfect mind just existing and creating less complex universal laws and matter. But the empirical evidence seems to support that complex minds like ours is something that comes from the slow evolution of less complex systems like the universal laws and matter.
Exactly. It's a little embarrassing that educated fellow humans...theists who've been to college...can't grasp the nuance. That challenge doesn't mean there isn't or can't be a god or a creator. It just means it's not as good a solution as many theists try to pretend it is in explaining why there's something rather than nothing.
@@rizdekd3912 the issue with the question is that a created God is not, and cannot be, God. Hence why Lennox said he was surprised to find this as a central argument in Dawkins' book. If the question were "Is an eternal divine God just a creation of human minds?", then that is a fair question. However, once you wish to entertain the possibility that an eternal divine God could exist, it is a fallacy to then ask who or what created God, because such a question does not apply to God as he is defined in any religious texts or philosophies.
@@danielskelton1145 "However, once you wish to entertain the possibility that an eternal divine God could exist, it is a fallacy to then ask who or what created God, because such a question does not apply to God as he is defined in any religious texts or philosophies."
That's answering the question without engaging with the issue. Of course IF something exists eternally that would mean it wasn't created. But what the thing is that exists eternally would be an assertion (just someone's definition) just like if I asserted the natural world exists eternally. Does it then become a fallacy to ask how the natural world came to be the way it is if it is defined as existing eternally and having the capability of producing finely tuned universes?
@@rizdekd3912 if an external natural world gave rise to our own universe and us, then we firstly have to consider the extent to which we would be capable of identifying it. If it is essentially an external arrangement of substance and mechanisms which gave rise to our own universe distinctly from itself, then we may have no means of exploring the mechanics and agent of its origins.
However, if we are here hypothetically referring to a natural world modelled on the principles of our own, but merely external, then we can reliably determine that it too would have required a preceding origin. This is because all matter, forces, energy and substance within the natural world is incapable of self-creating from nothing. It contains mechanisms (including evolutionary ones) which can act upon and between the ingredients of it, but it is not capable of creating its own ingredients from nothing.
Thus, an external agent is required whose properties are not natural and hence, what we refer to as "supernatural". This is why a supernatural God is in one sense a "God of the gaps" insofar as whilst we may not understand the creative mechanisms involved with every part of the development of the universe, we can say "God did it". However, this is not a "God of the gaps" in the sense that God becomes a way of shutting down curiosity and learning. This God is not a lazy mental construct, but rather a logical inevitability which leads us to ask and explore further, not less.
@@danielskelton1145 "if an external natural world gave rise to our own universe and us, then we firstly have to consider the extent to which we would be capable of identifying it. If it is essentially an external arrangement of substance and mechanisms which gave rise to our own universe distinctly from itself, then we may have no means of exploring the mechanics and agent of its origins."
Yes. it may well be true that we, embedded as we are in space/time that itself exists within the natural world, would be unable to explore this eternal and external natural world I posited. It would be like a 2 dimensional creature ever accessing a third dimension. The best they can do is assert it to explain some things that seem impossible. I don't see that as a problem so much as an interesting scientific issue. As an explanation for the universe we see around us I don't see why we absolutely have to consider the extent to which we would be capable of 'identify' it and studying it or even understanding it. We can assert its existence and try to indirectly determine what its properties might be based on the outcome(s) we CAN observe. Isn't that what happens in the development of (the concept of) God? IE over the millennia people reasoned out the features God MUST have to 'be' the explanation structuring the definition to cover ALL aspects of the problem and to address each enigma. For each observation or feature of the natural world we are aware of or think we are aware of and can't explain, there just happens to be a feature of God that addresses it. This is not saying God doesn't/can't exist...in fact I sometimes think God exists, but I find that thought to be as meaningless as when I think eternal nature exists. Furthermore, AFAIK, BOTH an eternal God and an eternal natural world may exist. I wouldn't see any contraction EXCEPT based on someone's choices in how they define God and/or the natural world.
It might be true we can never observe/measure/test this eternal eternal natural existence directly, but we already have other examples of aspects of the natural world that we have to do that with such as gravity and dark matter and dark energy.
Gravity is defined as mass warping time/space such that it seems like massive objects (people and rocks) are attracted to other massive objects (eg the earth). We can't actually STUDY that feature directly...ie 'see' what ever it is that is warping time and space or even 'see' time/space as it is being warped. It is invisible to us. But we see the effects and guess at the cause. The cause COULD be God willing massive objects to be attracted to each other and we'd be none the wiser.
The same goes with the conjectured dark matter and dark energy. We, so far as I know, haven't been able to actually identify exactly what 'they' are and we only assert their existence...ie we assert the existence of dark matter by indirect evidence...ie gravitational lensing and the speed of stars orbiting in galaxies and we posit the existence of dark energy to explain why the rate of expansion in the universe is increasing.
In like fashion we would 'see' the results of an eternal natural world that produced/produces universes because we see an expanding universe that would be conjectured to have have emerged FROM this timeless/spaceless natural existence. That coupled with the assumption that something can't come from nothing so that leads to an inevitable conclusion that something has to exist eternally and that something has to be able to produce universes. One option is a God who 'top down' created a lessor world with his omniscience and omnipotence. The other option is that the universe with it's mass/energy and time/space emerged from an eternal natural existence that just so happens to have certain properties. This would be just like many assert God just happens to have certain properties In both cases we must assert some things we can't determine directly to explain things we do observe directly.
"However, if we are here hypothetically referring to a natural world modeled on the principles of our own, but merely external, then we can reliably determine that it too would have required a preceding origin."
Not if it is eternal. By definition an 'eternal' existence would NEVER require a preceding origin. in fact the notion of anything preceding an existence that is timeless/eternal would be a category error.
"This is because all matter, forces, energy and substance within the natural world is incapable of self-creating from nothing. It contains mechanisms (including evolutionary ones) which can act upon and between the ingredients of it, but it is not capable of creating its own ingredients from nothing."
As I said, if the natural world is eternal, the universe and its mechanisms and ingredients would not be coming from 'nothing.'
"Thus, an external agent is required whose properties are not natural and hence, what we refer to as "supernatural".
Sure we could choose to call this eternal natural existence 'super' natural...but why would we? Just because it is different than what we can observe/sense/measure/experience with our limited perspectives as beings embedded in space/time? That seems an arbitrary delineation and going beyond what is necessary...ie arbitrarily and artificially limiting what the natural world can be.
"This is why a supernatural God is in one sense a "God of the gaps" insofar as whilst we may not understand the creative mechanisms involved with every part of the development of the universe, we can say "God did it". However, this is not a "God of the gaps" in the sense that God becomes a way of shutting down curiosity and learning. This God is not a lazy mental construct, but rather a logical inevitability which leads us to ask and explore further, not less."
I would consider neither a supernatural explanation nor a natural explanation for the expanding universe in which we live would be a 'lazy' construct. But both would be constructs. It is obvious that cultures throughout history spent a great deal of time trying to explain fundamental aspects of reality. So no, it's not 'lazy.' Most saw the need to posit a 'top down' arrangement where a super mind/being created and orchestrated and managed and oversees everything. That could be because that's what humans see themselves as doing...so that could be them seeing themselves having been created in God's image, but it have been them creating God in their own image. IOW the top down view of creation may be a misconception based on a limited perspective. What if the natural world just is...and all this marvelous complexity arose from simpler foundational processes and substances and fields?
Theres a huge difference between the concept of eternal and supernatural Mr. Lennox. Just because you ask a "whats the difference?" question doesn't automatically mean you've won if anything you have just extended the debate into more filler.
Well, whats the difference? The "supernatural" category just mean: "thing outside the system I defined as natural", nothing else.
@@issaavedra Supernatural is extremely unlikely
@@zaxbitterzen2178 What do you mean by "supernatural"? Because if it just means "outside what we define as the laws of nature," then by definition the origin or existence is a supernatural event.
@@issaavedra It was until we became capable of observing and understanding it.
@@zaxbitterzen2178 We became capable of observing and understanding the origin of existence?
Who created god? Ok, the assumption is God is uncreated and it(he?) created the Universe.
But the watch maker argument is: something relatively complex needs a creator. This doesn’t apply to God. If the argument doesn’t work for God which is assumed to be complex then why would it work for clocks?
So the argument doesn’t work for all complex things/beings therefore the watchmaker is not a reliable argument
All complex created beings require a more complex creator. God is more complex than all of creation, but he is not created. If he were, then he would not be God - he would simply be a part of creation more complex than ourselves. If we do not have an eternal original creator, then the only alternative is an infinite regress of increasingly complex creators. If that were so, then we would not exist because an infinite number of creators and prior creative events would have been required to create us.
@@danielskelton1145 so complex things require a creator but more complex things dont need a creator... Right?
"Who Created God" Really shows Dawkins lack of knowledge in theism, scientific philosophy and Christian & Islamic philosophy.
bruh
The nature of god is that he was always there and he didn't begin to exist. yet whenever scientist state that the singularity mightve been eternal theist scoff
i don't think he stated it as a key argument, those kinds of old school questions always appear in debate.
Yeah, he is using the infinite regression problem... militant atheism is ridiculous
@@jessehenrique4343
The problem of a limited, or an unlimited, regression is a philosophical problem for everyone. Anyone who claims to know the solution is either lying or misunderstands the problem.
GOD HAS NO BEGINNING.
Yes the Bible 📖 Says that GOD is ALPHA and OMEGA!
Exactly if you’re timeless do you have a beginning?
@@ferniegutierrez5605 humans cant be timeless, we are CREATED, god isnt, what were you watching lol?
@@niklaus9678 I agree humans cannot be timeless but God is timeless because he had no beginning.
@@ferniegutierrez5605 exactly
Thank you Richard for proving me how irrational atheism is .
How?
All things that exist have a cause
Doesnt that also apply to God
If the answer is no, youre committing the Special Pleading Fallacy...
@@JustN0tMe No, you got the premise wrong. It is all things that *begin* to exist has a cause. The Universe had a beginning/began to exist, therefore the universe has a cause.
@@RehzaVFX even still, theres no indication that the universe began to exist and even if there was thats no indication that God exists or it created it.
Look at the internet, thats a world in of itself, created by humans...if it was possible to create sentient being in it and they had this philosophical debate, they would be wrong if they reached this same conclusion, even if its sound
The fallacy still remains present even after my mistake
@@JustN0tMe
So by your statement you ought to explain the cause of the universe because it exists.
//there's no indication that the universe began to exist and even if there was there's no indication that God exists or it created it//
Even if there was, there is no indication that it popped into existence of its own either.
If the universe did not begin to exist, there was an infinite no. of events to the past, which is impossible as we would never have reached into the present moment.
So we know that the universe most likely had a beginning, and the most likely explanation is the transcendent designer who created, designed and fine-tuned it.
@@princeleslin1607 From a Reddit post
"I just wrote a comment about this on a different thread, which I'll paste below. There are two distinct ways the infinite regress is used in cosmological arguments. One version is in the Kalam argument, which argues that an infinite accidentally-ordered series (see below) is impossible because, among other things, it would take infinite amount of time to traverse it. But a completely different version is used in other cosmological arguments (primarily related to arguments from Plato and Aristotle) that do not argue for a first cause in time (e.g. a first event), but rather for a first hierarchical cause (like a motor) behind the scenes. Here is my comment:
There is an important distinction to be made, here. There are two different types of causal chains that are spoken of in cosmological arguments, and the impossibility or possibility of their being infinitely long is completely different:
Accidentally-ordered series: a chain in which each element is the cause of the next element in the chain. A good example would be a chicken laying an egg which hatches and grows up to lay its own egg. In the unmoved mover argument from Aristotle, this type of chain is allowed to be infinitely long: there is no problem with there being an infinite number of chickens stretching into the past, infinitely laying eggs. No need for a First Chicken. In fact, Aristotle explicitly argues that the universe must be infinitely old because he argues that change cannot begin or end.
Essentially-ordered series: a chain in which each element can only pass along an effect but cannot generate it themselves. This type of chain requires at least one element that generates the effect, otherwise the other elements in the chain won't have anything to pass along. An example is a laser bouncing off a chain of mirrors and finally onto a wall. For convenience, call the mirrors "secondary causes," as they are able to pass the effect along but cannot generate it, and the laser a "primary cause," as it can in fact generate the effect in question. The argument here is not so much that the chain cannot be infinitely long as it is that it cannot consist only of secondary causes. If we see the laser light on the wall, we know that there must be a primary cause somewhere in the chain, otherwise there wouldn't be a laser light in the first place.
The unmoved mover argument makes use of this second concept. It would be similar to seeing the hands of a clock being turned by gears (secondary causes) and inferring that there must be a motor (a primary cause) somewhere inside the clock even if you can't see it. That's what Aristotle is getting at. So strictly speaking it really doesn't have anything to do with whether an "infinity" is possible or if we are uncomfortable with it."
Again even if the universe was created it wouldnt mean it was done by a "transcendent designer who created, designed and fine-tuned it"...a being that great would still be considered imperfect, just by looking how fucked up the world is
Good point. Dawkins does believe in something eternal - something that was always there - matter and energy.
Time, space, and matter can't be eternal. Get real.
Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing."
Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it.
We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God.
God is the reason for us and all we have.
ua-cam.com/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/v-deo.html
“However improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here.” -Richard Dawkins.
We only get life from life...the law of biogenesis. We can't get anything without God.
The odds are NOT there.
ua-cam.com/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/yW9gawzZLsk/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/ddaqSutt5aw/v-deo.html
No, the eye did not evolve into various eyes. Your mere chance mutations are absurd.
ua-cam.com/video/X7h2HWcTwa4/v-deo.html
Even Dawkins admits we can't know what is true because of natural selection...
The God Delusion, “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.”
Oh, but Dawkins knows what's true about life...killing those who don't meet his expectations for living.
dailycaller.com/2021/05/19/richard-dawkins-down-syndrome-roe-v-wade/
Matter and energy are finite, though. How could something finite have always been there?
What a horrible rebuttal. A textbook case of special pleading and red herrings on behalf of Lennox. "My god is not created." Well, my matter is not created... nor destroyed. The only difference is I have a law of physics to support that theory.
Nc one.
great, and where is the rest of the speech?
The whole debate is in the same channel
He deceived you Satan and his aides from human demons the hypocrites who were showing faith and they lean in disbelief and cunning and repel from the right
For they have slandered the Prophet Muhammad Peace be Upon Him Hadiths he did not say to distort Islam mercy religion in the eyes of both worlds and people repel him until they die while they are infidels until they are with them either in hellfire on Judgment Day.
Unfortunately the Muslims today they differed in their religion and they dispersed and followed these fabricated hadiths and they left the Holy Quran which God promised to protect him from distortion to the Day of Judgment celestial Book Ring Who was sent down with Gabriel, peace be upon him, the Messenger of God from the angels which he delivered to Muhammad, the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him. But Muslims they cling to the devil’s talk that contradicts what is stated in the text of the great Qur’an from the verses, the rulers, the clear evidence.
And also the Christians
they followed a corrupted Bible from human demons call to polytheism by God and God forgives all sins but that is not forgiven to polythe with it
And Jesus Son of Mary, peace be upon him he is the Messenger and servant of God like the Messenger of God Muhammad, peace be upon him and God created it
like his creation to Adam with the words of his ability with be so will be so his mother Mary, peace be upon her, conceived him
Choose your language and read wwwmahdialummacom
@@nassimmajd9976 perhaps you should god exists and the Quran actually came from god...it would help a lot
@@hidingodthe Quran did not come from God 😂 you can’t use a claim within the book itself and use it as evidence. All the Quran did was plagiarize half of the old and new testaments but then add a new plot twist where the Jews and Christian’s are the actual enemy of God and the heroic pedo is gonna rise up and stop them!
Why can't the universe come from nothing? Why can't the impossibility of nothing be the cause?
A God is eternal ... explains nothing about this God. Eternal or omnipotent and many hyper features humans assigned to God reveals that humans don't know their personal God. Be humble and honest at least on that point. I don't discard the possibility of a creator, but if we don't know who is the creator, just say we don't know: Gods and Godesses from all ancient books aren't necessarily the right one; they utterly contradict each others.
That is the critical point. If there is a god...a god with a mind or that IS a mind that creates and can manipulate the natural world including human thought, then we are precluded from actually knowing anything at all. Not just about the nature of god, but whether anything else we perceive/think/aspire to is real or valuable. It's all made up. There is no objective reality only a reality that God manufactures. And since we can't know the mind of god, we can't know what his motives are...what kind of being it is.
Problem is not whether god exists or not, the real problem here is which god is true? Christian, muslim, jew, hindu or something else? No one believes in god except their own. So everyone is an atheist except for their own god.
“Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” was a phrase made popular by Carl Sagan. It applies so perfectly to anyone that puts forth the argument that there is a Supernatural Being, where's your evidence?? There is no evidence, period.
You are the evidence, except you created yourself.
@@jesseadebayo4746
About as lazy as "look at the trees."
I would suggest that, logically, the claim that there is no God is the more extraordinary claim.
What a wisdom and Intelligent answer by John Lennox , wonderful answer .
Except he asserts the god is eternal and then uses the gospel as his evidence.
Thats quite the assertion, and extraordinary, it needs extraordinary evidence to backup the claim.
@@keenynman34 do you believe we came from apes ?
It may have been intelligent, but I'm not sure it qualifies as an answer.
@@luisdasilva3879 I don't believe i know
@@lazypotato6743 The evolucion is it a fact or a theory ?
Why didn't Richard Dawkins take the advice of Prof. Anthony Flew when he told him " Give up you've got nothing to offer".
atheism is based on NOTHING. Nothing created everything for no reason and with no space for it to be and no time for it be be in
@@rep3e4 Very good point. But Dawkins unfortunately is not interested in looking for truth for he is a militant atheist.
That was such a good point right at the end, if atheists don’t believe God created matter and that it always existed, then they do believe that something can always exist without have been created so why do they have a problem with God not being created and have always existed?
And of course that means that if material hasn’t always existed, then it had to have been created and therefore another problem because it begs the question....who created, or what created the matter?
That "something" you are referring to in your first sentence does not necessarily have to be supernatural. This is the problem that science has with God. Scientists speak by the evidence. And there is no evidence indicating the presence of something supernatural as God. It is just something people believe in, in order to explain what they cannot explain. Atheists do not say that the probability of God being existed is zero. They just believe that it is more probable that there isn't one.
@@mohammadtajabadi Actually the universe coming into existence does have to be supernatural. Why? Because things don’t just naturally appear out of nowhere by nothing. If it doesn’t happen naturally and it is super natural by definition. And objects don’t make decisions so something had to choose to create. And with the complexity of even an amoeba, let alone a human being, whatever made it had to be incredibly intelligent. We can’t make anything out of nothing. And many scientists do believe in God. You would have to ignore all of this logic and evidence to deny it. And by definition an atheist is someone who does not believe in Gods existence. (which is something you could not know.) If you’re leaving any room for the possibility of God then you’re no longer an atheist and you’re an agnostic. That’s one step in the right direction.
@@sandina2cents779 Again, the fact that you insist that a supernatural power should exist comes from the fact that we do not know what happened. You're saying if no one knows what happened, why don't we just accept that there is a God?
However, the problem for scientists and those who believe in science is that the existence of God (as is represented by religion) contradicts what science has achieved, the most important one being evolution.
Yes, there may be a god, but it's not like what most people think.
About the terms atheist and agnostic, you are right. There's a thin line, and even Dawkins has said that he can be counted as an agnostic, but of course not a 50-50 one.
@@mohammadtajabadi “ you insist that supernatural power should exist”
Really? Of course supernatural power exist unless you’re seriously trying to tell me that nothing can create some thing.... Sciences the demonstration of some thing that can be done over and over and seen. So scientifically show me nothing creating some thing. You having an intelligent mind, can you create something from nothing? And yet you’re trying to tell me that is possible without supernatural? Think about that.
@@sandina2cents779 Why are we even talking about creation? Why should the universe be created? Why can't energy just exist, just BE? As I said, we still don't know what happened at the big bang and before it. But, if you are talking about creation, it does raise the question about god itself and its nature. For example, what was God doing before he "created" the universe?
And you also didn't talk about the contradictions that religion has with science, more specifically with evolution.
Again, my point is: there may be a God (my own opinion: There is a God), but it is definitely not what religion has represented.
And why should it be our concern anyway?
"Existence is one not wanting to be alone." - Wald Wassermann
, Physicist Theoretical Physics & Cosmology, Institute of Theoretical Physics (1972)
If Lennox can assume god wasn't created, why can't we assume the universe wasn't created?
Because by our own standard of logic, you can't have something out of nothing. So you have to define a category outside that system (think about it like a math constant needed to explain a phenomena) to make sense of the universe and existence itself. That category would exist in a different way that everything else.
@@issaavedra There are no "standards of logic". The laws of identity, non-contradiction and excluded middle are objective, unchanging and not subject to gradation. Logic just is. But this isn't really relevant to my point. I'm saying, if the theist can simply say god is eternal and doesn't need a creator then why can't we say the universe has always existed in some form? We're making up an explanation for which we have no evidence and where we don't even fully know if one is needed...
@@issaavedra Logic IS my a priori framework just like god is yours. The only difference is mine is actually useful to me and I can show it to you. I don't have any other choice but to rely on logic even if it can only be proven using itself. But notice god doesn't solve this problem. Saying "logic can only be proven using logic" is no more ridiculous than saying "things only make sense, because an all-powerful dictator says so"...I don't make any more presuppositions than necessary...
@@amac9044 Logic is just one of your a priori presupposition. Logic need the self to formulate the proposition, time, space, causality, teleology, etc. It is embedded in a coherent reality. In my worldview there is an ontological grounding for this phenomena, and is not an induction->deduction conclusion, but the acceptance of the reality of God have coherence as a given.
@@issaavedra All of those things stem from logic (except maybe teleology, I'm not convinced existence has a "purpose"). They are not a priori. You don't get to just invent a solution where you identify a problem. "I can't justify logic, therefore, god....Problem solved!" This is a non-sequitur. You haven't proven or solved anything. If the laws of logic are "grounded in" god does that mean he can change them? Because if that's the case then they are useless. But if they transcend god then you're right back at the same problem and we don't know where they "come from" (if that terminology is even sensible)....🤷♂
I really do think that Dr. Lennox dodged the question.
John is a very good orator but his argument here doesn't make sense at all.
John: "The Universe couldn't create itself. So it must have been created by God."
Man: "But then who created God?"
John: "God doesn't need a creator. God is eternal."
WTF?
Because universe came to being it’s does not exist by his own
It’s contagious
We are all God,we have created this World ourselves as our own plaything & we get our memory back when we die & realise we are God ourselves
So we created the world? You are plain stooo-pid.
How did you get around the first verses of the bible with God creating and giving life?
Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space, and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We KNOW these laws. We have NO doubts about them. We also KNOW that the laws of nature can't come about without a Lawgiver, God.
So if you want to pretend to be smart, please give me the laugh by giving your science how creation really happened by natural means. Also, throw in how we got the laws of nature, naturally.
Life only comes from life. Law of biogenesis.
God is the reason for us and all we have.
ua-cam.com/video/JiMqzN_YSXU/v-deo.html
The odds are NOT there.
ua-cam.com/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/yW9gawzZLsk/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/ddaqSutt5aw/v-deo.html
So John's claim is that God was in existence for an infinite period of time before creating the universe in six days? I for one am glad he finally got around to it!
Jimmi K Because the Ark was a warning for all who saw. God was patient and merciful with His people that He gave them a sign for the coming judgment. Also, this comment demonstrates a misunderstanding of Eternity. God exists outside of time, space & matter. However, because of the limits of our human mind, we can only define “eternity” with the concept of time. God is beyond our conceptions.
@@Amencore You do know that the story's rather dumb, yeah?
@@RannonSi you say that the story of Noah is kind a dumb, but yet yoskees needed to write it out to explain it to am atheist who didn't even seem.to know the most basic concepts put forth in the story.
I do wonder what does that has to say about the level of intelligence of Jimmy.
Where was this god when nothing existed?
@@SNORKYMEDIA I tell you, will you believe me?
Can we stop pretending like Lennox had any kind of salient point? Or that the “Who created the creator” question is any kind of fallacy? God is eternal? Maybe the universe is eternal.
Lol. He annihilated Dawkins.
@@IdeasHaveConsequences In another clip, perhaps? Certainly not here.
How can you as a scientist ask "who created God" knowing full well that energy can neither be created nor destroyed. God is the source of all energy and so it wouldn't make sense if he was created.
You don't need to create energy in order to create things - you can transform energy from one form to another.
Did you understand what I was saying? I didn't say anything about creating energy. If energy is transformed from one form to another then it remains energy. The point is that the source must not have been created if that is true, it just always is. That's why theologians refer to God as the "uncaused first cause"
@@derrekdevon2366 You're assuming energy needs a source. The word "source" has no physical meaning in this context. If you have time, you also have energy conservation.
Postulating god as a cause for something simply means we don't understand the cause.
@@martinkunev9911 Nobody is saying we understand the cause. God is outside of time, that means he is Infinite. Never created, never changing, never ending. We humans are wired to think in this box, in time, hence why we can't understand something that is outside of time. The point is that God created the laws, time, matter e.t.c. It wouldn't make any sense if he were bound by those laws.
@@derrekdevon2366 I cannot argue against that (by definition). However I don't see any way in which talking about god can be useful.
People of faith say "God " atheists say Nature . Just respect each other's ideas or else it's a cold war.
But nature is not independent
@@MamaMama-sv3b Yes it is, Nature is everything. Mama ma we're all crazy now, Slade 1970's
God could not be created , if he could then it wouldn't be God.
If he was created then that means their is a God above him.
You can't create God, he has always been , always is and always will be.
So What’s the point god created us?to be worship? To admire him every week?
Nice assertion please provide proof it is true
Brian Patrick so that He can love us
Assumptions alone won't prove anything.
Okay
If anyone missed the point: By using the argument of (1) everything that exists has a cause and (2) the universe exists therefore (3) the universe has a cause. The first premise is not obvious. You could argue that the universe is eternal therefore ending a regression. No need for a eternal creator. Adding a Christian god is a very big leap which needs evidence. Some people use the Bible, but unfortunately you need to presuppose miracles and god's to use the Bible as a source, so it's unfortunately not helpful. The big bang does not prove the universe had a cause since we don't yet understand what caused the big bang. gods, aliens, parallel dimensions are all equally possible etc.
If change it to everything which begin to exist has a cause then it make who created God question invalid rather than everything that exist has a cause.
Instead of examining Bible I would like you to examine Quran, read it with open mind and reflect on it, I am sure it will help you find the evidence which could convince you.
Think about how could the author of this book could have known about the things he spoke about in the book?
Check if there are any contradictions?
Examine the claims it makes.
Examine the scientific fact mentioned in the Quran? How could the author have known about them? Are there any mistakes, are all of the fact which we can check are indeed true or not.
Remember the Quran came to be 1440 year's ago.
There are few question to help you with your research.
I sincerely hope you find the evidence which would convince you that the creator of all creation is God/Allah.
He deceived you Satan and his aides from human demons the hypocrites who were showing faith and they lean in disbelief and cunning and repel from the right
For they have slandered the Prophet Muhammad Peace be Upon Him Hadiths he did not say to distort Islam mercy religion in the eyes of both worlds and people repel him until they die while they are infidels until they are with them either in hellfire on Judgment Day
Unfortunately the Muslims today they differed in their religion and they dispersed and followed these fabricated hadiths and they left the Holy Quran which God promised to protect him from distortion to the Day of Judgment celestial Book Ring Who was sent down with Gabriel, peace be upon him, the Messenger of God from the angels which he delivered to Muhammad, the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him. But Muslims they cling to the devil’s talk that contradicts what is stated in the text of the great Qur’an from the verses, the rulers, the clear evidence
And also the Christians
they followed a corrupted Bible from human demons call to polytheism by God and God forgives all sins but that is not forgiven to polythe with it
And Jesus Son of Mary, peace be upon him he is the Messenger and servant of God like the Messenger of God Muhammad, peace be upon him and God created it
like his creation to Adam with the words of his ability with be so will be so his mother Mary, peace be upon her, conceived him
Choose your language and read wwwmahdialummacom
@@hamzamuhammed3
I guess we'd have to define "begin" vs "changing significantly".
Consider the thought experiment "The Ship of Theseus", which asks, “Does an object that has had all of its original components replaced remains the same object?”.
The answer depends on who you're asking - To some, it's a new ship every few nanoseconds, and to others, it'll be the same ship in 100 years - even if its wood is replaced with metal.
If we want to say the universe "began", we'd have to show that.
Lacking the ability to do so is not an excuse to make a conclusion one way or the other.
lennox is exactly right when he says, if the laws of physics are in existence , an they are, then where did they come from? surely they started to exist at some point in time and space an then it follows who made them,Not what made them. so they would also be eternal but athiests don't believe anything is eternal. there in a dilemma!!
Bob Free WELL EXPLAIN TO ME HOW GOD CAME YOU PEOPLE ATTACK SCIENCE AND SAY THAT WE WERE NOT THERE YOU WERNT THERE EITHER
That's not what Lennox said in this video, and the statement that a 'who' made them does not follow, at all.
I have Seen things I don’t attack science.
I say God created it, and he created it in a way that points to his existence. Something cannot come out of nothing, therefore the universe cannot exist. Unless there is something that is eternal. That thing is God.
Aedan Kennedy science doesn’t say the universe came from nothing 😒
Rotor Blade I agree
Bertrand Russell summed it up succinctly: "If everything must have a cause, then God must have a cause. If there can be anything without a cause, it may just as well be the world as God, so that there cannot be any validity in that argument."
Everything must have a cause except God. Hope that helps.
@@garymathis1042 that proposition explains nothing and is mere sophistry at best.
@@garymathis1042 So you have an alternate meaning for 'everything' which doesn't include everything? You might want to re-think that.
@@GreenDistantStar BR's statement that everything needs a cause simply does not apply to God.
@@garymathis1042 so if it's not everything, don't say that, it's an implicit contradiction. Think about it...
Jhon lennox is something else 😎😎😎
yes he is completely irrational
@@clarkelaidlaw1678exactly bro, the fact people are bolstering someone because they say “No one made god, god eternal” just proves how long the human species has to exist
@@cameronzimermann9883 sorry.i don't see what point you are trying to make.
The only thing that is sophisticated about Richard Dawkins argument, is his accent.
The mind of man is finite and cannot fully comprehend the Infinite.
Are you sure you understood what you wrote?
@@chrisrea6841 ArE yOU surE yoU UnderStoOd what he wrote?
@@crazyalarmstudios2012 it amazes me that all of you seem to be satisfied with it.
@@crazyalarmstudios2012 i admit that my first response to the original statement was quite shallow. The concept of infinity is something that we can argue about whether we can or cannot understand.
What actually amazes me is how easily we accept that our mind is finite and there is no possible way to understand the infinity of God, so we lay back and take it for a fact.
Isn't that too convenient? Doesn't that raise any suspicion? If i wanted to create a supernatural being, that's exactly how I would present it. As something beyond any understanding and reasonable explanation.
So it was the word. Gibberish.
Created Gods are by definition a delusion.
This is the most ironic line ever!
Yea my jaw hit tha floor w/ that one. Irony at its finest.
ThaGodWeCreate ah clear example of someone who supposedly “wants” to see God with his own eyes for him to be real, yet he doesn’t even look to find him
ThaGodWeCreate btw Richard Dawkins admits Jesus is a real historical figure. There are more manuscripts talking about Jesus than Julius Cesar and 12 of those are from non-christian sources.
You would also need to explain how all his followers were cowering when Jesus was crucified and then after the 3 days the tomb was empty. Which btw the guards didn’t die or get hurt.
Which also brings me to my next point: Mary was the first to see him. Why would a gospel in such time where women were considered unreliable, and their testimony would be at the level of a slave, be the first ones to see him and then tell the apostoles he resurrected? If I were to make my own religion I would’ve definitely used male witnesses so it would sound more reliable to the people then. Wouldn’t it make sense that this would be dismissed if it were false? But it is true. After all two women were the ones who came to the apostoles and told them he was alive before seeing him with their own eyes. 500 witnesses saw him. If it were false, there would need to be an explanation for the amount of followers, loyal followers willing to die for the truth to be spread, that around 5000 in greek and 2500 in latin copies were made when the most popular books in those time would get around 12 copies.
Why would they die for a lie, and even worse, a book that talks about their faults?
Because it’s true.
And If Jesus is real, and he resurrected, then all his teachings are true too. Which would make the Old testament is true as well.
@@marcocortes9968 You're right, it's called the criterion of embarrassment. The fact alone that the people who witnessed Jesus alive after he was buried were determined to affirm it even if it meant risking their own lives should raise some questions to anti-christians. It would have made no sense to embarrass yourself and risk being killed if it was all just a lie.
He deceived you Satan and his aides from human demons the hypocrites who were showing faith and they lean in disbelief and cunning and repel from the right
For they have slandered the Prophet Muhammad Peace be Upon Him Hadiths he did not say to distort Islam mercy religion in the eyes of both worlds and people repel him until they die while they are infidels until they are with them either in hellfire on Judgment Day.
Unfortunately the Muslims today they differed in their religion and they dispersed and followed these fabricated hadiths and they left the Holy Quran which God promised to protect him from distortion to the Day of Judgment celestial Book Ring Who was sent down with Gabriel, peace be upon him, the Messenger of God from the angels which he delivered to Muhammad, the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him. But Muslims they cling to the devil’s talk that contradicts what is stated in the text of the great Qur’an from the verses, the rulers, the clear evidence.
And also the Christians
they followed a corrupted Bible from human demons call to polytheism by God and God forgives all sins but that is not forgiven to polythe with it
And Jesus Son of Mary, peace be upon him he is the Messenger and servant of God like the Messenger of God Muhammad, peace be upon him and God created it
like his creation to Adam with the words of his ability with be so will be so his mother Mary, peace be upon her, conceived him
Choose your language and read wwwmahdialummacom
“I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world.” -Professor Richard Dawkins
He had to exist first in a timeless realm. That is the realm we call the spirit realm, or the supernatural realm. That realm does not have time. We just can't wrap our minds around that because time dictates to everything we've ever known in this realm.
Boxing Forum
And your evidence for a spirit realm is ?
I'm not an expert but don't really need a "supernatural realm", just access to the theorical higher dimensions. This is theorically possible based on our current understanding of the universe. There is currently absolutly no scientific evidence that could prevent God existing in our natural universe, let alone outside the universe since we have no clue if the known natural laws apply outside of it in the same way they do here.
Myles Lawless, what part of "He had to exist first in a timeless realm." you didn't understand?
Similarly there's "no scientific evidence that could prevent unicorns existing". But hey, religion gets a free pass on making stuff up without evidence because "faith".
Jimmi K Where did you read that?
U dont know
To know if God or the gods were created or not, we first need to know the knowledge and history of the pantheons, the christians, the hindu gods, the titans, etc. We first need to know what happened when these guys acted, how these guys acted, where these guys acted and where, when and how they came to be. And also, if they ever interacted with the humans, how did they do it, and if they did, when did it stop. But this is impossible because no one knows if the gods were real or not. And also, time has eroded the knowledge we have now to be changed from their origins. To answer the question, we need to know everything that happened, the moment when the humans came to be.
Spoiler alert i came up with this one the spot. But i didn't see anyone in the comments saying it like this so i just wanted to write it for someone to think about. And don't go insane over it, haha.
In Christianity, the belief in God is rooted in faith, revelation, and theology. We don't claim to possess a comprehensive historical record of God's actions and interactions throughout human history.
Our faith is based on the teachings of the Bible, personal experiences, and theological reflection. We believe in a God who has revealed Himself through sacred texts, particularly the Old and New Testaments, and through the life and teachings of Jesus Christ.
While there may be similarities in the questions about divine actions and interactions in different belief systems, it is essential to recognize that faith often transcends empirical evidence and historical records. From a Christian standpoint, belief in God is a matter of faith and relationship, rather than solely relying on historical documentation or the actions of deities from other belief systems.
The fact the people argue about the existence of god, it's a clear evidence that it does not exist. 😂😂😂
Damn John is a genius
IBlewUponYourFace then you're as thick as two planks...
Isoroku1983 you’re thicker than Kim Kardashian’s Fake Ass
kk's Fake Ass? known only if you've been there.
I never understood how it is the "easy way out" to explain the fine-tuning of the universe with God. They say they don't but they clearly conflate God with the god of the gaps.
Rational thinking vs fantacy
The bottom line is we really don't know therefore all possibilities exist that's it.
We do know who wrote Yahweh and why and when.
The believers as well as the non-believers are ALL in the same boat, neither have proof.
lol you're tripping dawg. Athiesm doesn't have proof. Theism, particularly Christianity does. We can argue how strong the proof is, but unlike athiesm it has proof. No disrespect but you need to give an educated response, even people like Christopher Hitchens didn't say that, they simply argued against the proof, but they never said there was none. At least not that I can recall, they simply don't say stuff like that.
@@missioncodez - smh, the universe and it’s regularities show that thiesm is possible, not true. And the evidence for Christianity shows specifically that the God of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob is real. What you said not only seemingly misunderstood a good portion of what I said, but it was extremely ignorant. I mean think it through for a second, two thirds of things youtube comment athiests say are never said in debates by their athiest idols and heroes, seriosuly they are not. Like do you think you came up with a new argument or something? What you said would be laughed at if you said it toward any scholar in a any public debate. I’m not trying to be mean, I’m just saying you don’t know what you’re talking about, and you conpletely misunderstood what I had said earlier. No I was NOT talking about thiesm in the sense of inclusion to all beliefs and religions. And no; no other beliefs or religions have what Christianity has, prophetic, historical, and philisophical evidence, as well as evidence of the resurrection of Jesus. At best other religious documents show their historical figures existed, not that they were gods, or knew god. But Christianity, as many both religious and skeptical historical scholars have said, “has strong evidence for the resurrection of Jesus, evidence with which the early church exploded in growth.”
@@missioncodez I honestly don't remember making many typos, but who knows, however you truly have no reply for what I said. If you did, you would say something in response, but you didn't. Think I'm am idiot? Then reply to the original reply and stop being scared of a random guy on the internet with a fortnite pfp
@@missioncodez 😂 I hope people see your replies, you’re really proving yourself right man! Keep the work up. I literally invite anyone to message me on discord: HD Entique #7264
I’m not scared your dog crap bro😂, anyone add me and let’s talk. Please don’t be scared of these people who call you names and stuff if you ever disagree with them, they need to call you names because they can’t defend their point. Seriously people like these have no debating, arguing, or fact checking skills.
Where did the universe come from? Basically, the same question. It is a matter of cause-and-effect. You can say, God always was and always will be, and on the other hand, you can say the the same about the universe. Sidestepping cause-and-effect about the universe always existing.
Eternal, all mighty, super intelligent, benevolent GOD.... still a mortal man has to advocate about himself.
Better believe in Jesus or you will go to hell!
Still, no evidence exists as to if Jesus was even on the planet besides The Bible, which was was only hearsays from people.
People also say they have seen Bigfoot and if I don't believe in him, he is going to make me live in **ETERNAL PUNISHMENT**
No Dairy Carrie
No not really, the original bible never mentioned hell or eternal
Torture that was later added by the Catholics.
It does say that you die and return to the ground unless
You give your heart to Jesus.
And there is so much evidence for Jesus that it’s possible
He did rise from the dead.
Jesus is Lord, every knee will bow, better bow that knee before you die!
He will add a Knight those who bow the knees are already dead .
No Dairy Carrie no evidence that Jesus was on the planet? This is just an ignorant statement. You simply won't accept the evidence because you want that to be true.
i don't understand how he can use the watchmaker argument for the universes existence but then say that same argument doesn't apply to god. to say he doesn't believe in a created god is just saying his magical being is even more magical.
God is all there is, was or will ever be. He created everything including you in his image. Science only explains how some of the things he has created work. He’s just trying to teach us and prepare us for the hereafter with him. I trust that he knows what’s best for us. We will never understand the mind of God. Faith is a necessity. Our pride and ego tells us we know better than God. Don’t listen to it.
Then who designed the god?
Why he looks like some kind of primate?
Why is he a he and not a it.
Where’s the evidence? You see, in the realm of science you need to demonstrate your hypothesis with experiments. It has to be repeatable. You can’t just make claims and then hand-wave away any criticism
Lebron Fitzgerald
We can’t “prove” anything. There is only evidence to infer with. For me, creation itself is enough evidence. Even if we started from nothing 13 billion years ago, still not enough time for evilution. Irreducible complexity is another great argument for the evidence we see. Keep seeking and you will find. 😉
I believe in a created God.
He is in this place.
I am a creator, I am a father, I make art, I create ideas.
We are in a created place.
God was created in a place, a realm, through that realm, which he did not create, he created this universe and the many heavens.
He is a construct of a very special place.
He has a creator.
🤔
if we don't care for one another, the belief in god is just for show.
He deceived you Satan and his aides from human demons the hypocrites who were showing faith and they lean in disbelief and cunning and repel from the right
For they have slandered the Prophet Muhammad Peace be Upon Him Hadiths he did not say to distort Islam mercy religion in the eyes of both worlds and people repel him until they die while they are infidels until they are with them either in hellfire on Judgment Day.
Unfortunately the Muslims today they differed in their religion and they dispersed and followed these fabricated hadiths and they left the Holy Quran which God promised to protect him from distortion to the Day of Judgment celestial Book Ring Who was sent down with Gabriel, peace be upon him, the Messenger of God from the angels which he delivered to Muhammad, the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him. But Muslims they cling to the devil’s talk that contradicts what is stated in the text of the great Qur’an from the verses, the rulers, the clear evidence.
And also the Christians
they followed a corrupted Bible from human demons call to polytheism by God and God forgives all sins but that is not forgiven to polythe with it
And Jesus Son of Mary, peace be upon him he is the Messenger and servant of God like the Messenger of God Muhammad, peace be upon him and God created it
like his creation to Adam with the words of his ability with be so will be so his mother Mary, peace be upon her, conceived him
Choose your language and read wwwmahdialummacom
@@nassimmajd9976 Saved through faith by grace through the blood of Jesus. No man cometh unto God but by the grace of Jesus.
He can save you too.
The existence of God is a more philosophical issue than to be Biological or cosmological.
I think it can be both. The two become intermingled when you talk about things like the laws of physics and where they come from.
I agree with Dawkins.
Not trying to be weird but, can someone link me some videos or something so I can watch to help me believe in god or tips on what I should do? I question this daily. On how earth was created. Who created the universe and god. I go back and forth between Science and God.
" I can watch to help me believe in god "
Which god? You can watch videos of lightening, that may help you believe Zeus or Thor exists.
Or you can watch videos of fire, which the god Prometheus gave to humans. That may help you believe the god Prometheus exists.
Dawkins even agreeing to this debate topic is hilarious. It shows that he doesn't know a single thing about the God claim.
No one creates God, we are human and our understanding has limitations, if you are going to think of that and will try to answer it eventually you will loose your sanity. Just like asking why it is hard to find another planet in the universe just like earth. And why man cannot rejuvinate a dead man?
We have found several exoplanets around nearby stars, many in the habitable zone. So technically we probably have found a few earth like planets, and it will be confirmed as telescope technology increases. Several mega telescopes are in plan to be constructed before 2030.
It almost sounds like your saying, we don’t know, so god? God of the gaps? Man created god.
He deceived you Satan and his aides from human demons the hypocrites who were showing faith and they lean in disbelief and cunning and repel from the right
For they have slandered the Prophet Muhammad Peace be Upon Him Hadiths he did not say to distort Islam mercy religion in the eyes of both worlds and people repel him until they die while they are infidels until they are with them either in hellfire on Judgment Day
Unfortunately the Muslims today they differed in their religion and they dispersed and followed these fabricated hadiths and they left the Holy Quran which God promised to protect him from distortion to the Day of Judgment celestial Book Ring Who was sent down with Gabriel, peace be upon him, the Messenger of God from the angels which he delivered to Muhammad, the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him. But Muslims they cling to the devil’s talk that contradicts what is stated in the text of the great Qur’an from the verses, the rulers, the clear evidence
And also the Christians
they followed a corrupted Bible from human demons call to polytheism by God and God forgives all sins but that is not forgiven to polythe with it
And Jesus Son of Mary, peace be upon him he is the Messenger and servant of God like the Messenger of God Muhammad, peace be upon him and God created it
like his creation to Adam with the words of his ability with be so will be so his mother Mary, peace be upon her, conceived him
Choose your language and read wwwmahdialummacom
Dawkins is embarrassing to atheism.
nickj14711 how is lennox embarrassing? Dawkins is embarrassing because he believes in magical things such as created gods when the typical atheist does not believe in magic
nickj14711 if u watched the full debate, our faith in God is not blind. Evidence comes from science (with rational reasoning) and history
Science say that the Big Bang occurred. It would not make sense to say something came out of nothing, so the only answer that makes sense is that an eternal and all-powerful being must have made it happen.
There is historical evidence outside the Bible; there are so many accounts of Jesus Christ being seen after his death. Jesus Christ was not the only one to be miracles revived as there have been cases of people coming back to life in hospitals and funerals. Miracles are occurring all the time in this world. A baby boy named Jaxon: today he is living at age 5 with only HALF OF HIS BRAIN.
Science itself supports theories that seem magical. What are the chances that a single celled organism will eventually evolve into an intelligent life form? What are the chances of a flower having all its pedals the same size? It takes faith to say that science is correct just as it takes faith to declare religion to be true. I believe that science is in religion in disguise with math sprinkled on top of it.
I’d just like to tell you the Bible explicitly tells us to validate its legitimacy rather than just blindly believing it. So I am not some dogmatic and religious zealot declaring anything true without evidence and reasoning.
And if you want to make your argument sound convincing, then attacking other people’s personality is not the way.
nickj14711 I never called anyone evil in this comment section and how do we get from being evident to being emotional? The Bible never said whether Adam and Eve were homo sapiens, so it is possible that God had the human race evolve from homo habilis which would make sense because evolution itself is a miracle. Here is the deal, I will provide credible evidence if you first explain if your claims on evolution are based on faith or not
nickj14711 Lol. The same hackneyed insults, objections that were answered 2400 years ago and complete misunderstandings of the sociology, history and methods of science, over and over again. - it’s so easy, we just inductively examine concrete facts according to uniform, invariant laws of nature by using the scientific method, and then deductively evaluate evidence based on universal abstract laws of rationality. Who needs God? Lol. - I’m breathing just fine, who needs oxygen?
Endless Nameless Are your claims based on faith? Yes or no?
Which god?
According Dawkins theory for the existence of universe, we are encountered with an" intelligent design" with no particular identity
In this infinite universe which we can't reach the end or maybe we can, if we try to make some better objects to reach. It is my conception from his Sayings though!
According what he says, we are the pinnacle of the intelligence and a unique phenomenon which has been made by this intellectual world through no particular reason,and no particular creator!
meanwhile nothing can compete with us, and this universe (intelligent design) has made no " intellect" better than us!!
(If made, so Where is it? )
Apparently we, as humans are riding forward with no opponent.
My question is, that how and why, no particular thing(if you say that intelligent design has no certain and unique identity as creator) has made a particular thing which is called human???
Why this intelligent design has made an intellect(man) who has some spectacular criterion, so fragile though, that can't even protect itself from death and nought , and why the end of its destiny is to becom fertilizers and food for some cheaper phenomenons called "worm", and then nothing and the story of this intellect comes to an end!
My question is to Mr, Dawkins that, why should we be that much hopeful to life and this doomed universe? And what would be our achievement if we disbelieve God?!
As we can see, UA-cam is a completely unbiased community. The comment section seems to gravitate the brightest minds and scholars of the species.
"When inventing a god, the most important thing is to claim it is invisible, inaudible, and imperceptible in every way. Otherwise people will become skeptical when it appears to no one, is silent, and does nothing." - Lindsey Brown
No matter how many times their gods are debunked, theists will say, "my god is not a debunkable one, therefore, the one you have just debunked is not my god."
Nobody has ever debunked God.
Oh, that's right.! Just like Lindsey Brown says, we have to remeber that every god in the world is carefully defined so that nobody can debunk it.
@@akasatana202 😂😂
@zilla5749 rubbish. You can debunk the theory that a "flat earth" exists. You can debunk the theory that living Tyrannosaurus Rex's exist. You can debunk the theory that married bachelors exist. You can debunk many things that don't exist, indeed, that would be the entire purpose of the debunking. UsE yOuR bRaInN
@zilla5749 the laws of logic haven't physically appeared and revealed themselves to you either, and yet you believe in those. They are timeless, spaceless, immaterial and universal just as God is.
"iF God ExIsT wHy bAd tHiNgS hAPpEn" nice argument 😂
The very existence of bad things happening proves Gods existence.
Richard Dawkins states that "The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference."
So you citing evil as something that disproves God actually proves my point which is that God exists. If he didn't exist, good and evil wouldn't exist either.
Just as there would be no shadow without the light, the only reason you can point at something and say it is bad, is because you have an objective standard of the good; which is God.
Next time you want to be a fedora-wearing keyboard warrior, you should bring your A-game.
Theists like Lennox offer justifiably valid reasonings for the concept or existence of God but never say why their religion and lore is correct or morally superior to others. Arguments for the existence of God consist of just as much validity and basis - as well as contradictions and holes - as arguments against God's existence. The real debate is one about culture/history moreso than science/creation: where is the evidence for the respective narratives described in the Bible, Qur'an, Torah, etcetera? After all, they all describe histories that supposedly took place in the material world.
for something to be created, it has to be a creation. God isn't creation and therefore he wasn't created, it is easy as that.
If a paint was painted and the paint asked the painter who painted him, it would be incorrect because he wasn't painted. The painter was born.
To simply apply the same logic and premise to something entirely different is inane and illogical and therefore this argument is fallacious
So he just exists out of nowhere? Hm, now doesn’t that sound familiar? Oh right, the FUCKING universe. Your logic is literally so contradictory. The universe cannot be created out of thin air, but god can 😜
Also by definition, god is a creation. A creation is simply the action or process of bringing something into existence. If god exists, and if anything exist, it has been created. The fact that god is conscious just proves that he’s a creation. He was created, he exists. God needs a creator. If something complex as the universe cannot be created by magic, and has to have an entity behind it, then god would be more complex than the universe no? God would therefore HAVE to also have a creator due to its complexity. If god doesn’t need a creator, neither does the universe 😊
@@steelpump100 um no because God didn't begin to exist so he can't be considered a creation.
And nope God isn't complex he's spirit immaterial.
God is simple now what I mean by this is that God doesn't have any parts so he doesn't need to be created he always existed
@@pacma7383 god is simple? Then how the fuck did he create life, which is scientifically proven to be VERY fucking complex. And how did he create the universe which is also infinitely more complex than life? If he created everything, including the things we can’t fathom, even after supposedly learning everything through the apple of knowledge, how is he “simple” by definition he is complex. He created complexity, therefore he is complex. You can’t be the originator of everything and just be fucking simple. That makes no sense, which is basically just religion anyway 🤷♂️. And what do you mean begin to exist? Doesn’t make a lick of sense
@@pacma7383 Do you know what they say about an assertion made without evidence?
Let me ask you a question following the logic of the mathematician..... If we are going to accept the postulate of uncreation that something can not be created and exist forever, then why do we automatically assign that property to a God who existed forever and if he created the universe and simply do not accept that the universe itself existed forever without being created and therefore without the need for God? Why apply the concept of non-creation and therefore of durability to God and not to the universe itself, leaving God aside?,
Our intelligence is a programmed product of our creator. In this product, time, space, and matter are three essential dimensions to drive our logic into cause-effect chains of happenings. That is why we can't escape doing the question: who created the creator. As a byproduct of the universe, our intelligence can not explain what the existence out of time, space, and matter and not linked to the cause-effect chains would be. Therefore, let the scientists try to explain things of our created universe
based on our human intelligence and let our spirit believe and have faith in our creator who knows things beyond time, space and matter and moreover outside of cause and effect links.
Gavril Lasku I feel like you are somehow implying that you are, in fact, intelligent with your statement. Using "our" instead of a more specific term like human implies you are assuming you are intelligent. I highly doubt that claim can have any factual basis. Your invocation of "spirit" and the rationalization of God because we have yet to figure some specific question out about the origin of the universe is intellectually lazy and makes you LOOK foolish to anyone capable of thinking critically without their divine king telling them which opinion is correct before even assessing what is presented to them.
I will not qualify you or any other like you what you look like.
Your critical thinking advocacy, in fact, is so far from the content of the comment I wrote in my statement. We both have faith in our minds
The only thing which makes us different is that I accept my faith and you, on the contrary, try to oppose that bipolarism resting inside of yoursef.
Remember, once again, three things which are mentioned in my comment: Time, space, and matter
If you find the spirit of human being as part of these 3 things, then you may go on...
Gavril Lasku You speak of your faith as something spiritual, when in reality our minds are material, there is no supporting evidence that there is any metaphyshical portion of our selves that can exist outside of our body. You directly used the term spirit yourself in trying seperate out our world from our perception of it, and therefore, your justification of the inability to provide evidence for your god. Time, matter, and energy exist without the need to invoke God.
Gavril Lasku And also, don't presume to tell me what I do and don't have, your false equivalency is irrelevent and makes your argument even more flimsy. I have no faith, faith is the belief in something in spite of or in contrary to evidence.
@@PsionicMonk You either do not have evidence to prove what you say. Even David Berlinsky does not support your thoughts
If you ask who created God , you can ask who created the God that created that God and you get an infinite regression a philosophyc fallacy , Dawkins should study more about that before saying these things.
If recall, the question, "Who created God?" is based on the creationist saying that "complex things must be created", which leads people to say, "Well then, what created God?" By replying, "No one created God; you commit a special pleading fallacy.
This can be avoided by not saying "everything complex is designed".
Assuming the question follows this logic, then Dawkins is doing fine, but I'd need to hear his points made in the debate to really tell.
Good Job John Lennox!!! Sorry to Richard Dawkins and your science and scientists
@Papito Rey yes I forget the saying, but it goes like this, “Great are the works of the Lord, and great are those who delight in them.” It’s a quote in the Oxford university somewhere, but it basically means, that God made this, and we study it.
Wheres is Lennox evidence God was not created? It's a complete assertion contained in Holy Books without any proof.
Im proud to be a Christian and all evidences from philosophy, science, history, archeology, NDE's, místical experiences, miracles, marian apparitions, Jesus'apostles testimonies, etc point to the existence of God, to the reliability of the Bible and to the divinity of the Lord Jesus.
The existence of God is obvious. Looking at the very fact that the Universe exists and the properties it has: it is very big, beautiful, order, it has laws of nature(it requires a law giver), it is extremelly fine tuned, it reveals a mathematical structure, it works in a marvelous way, it contains a great variaty of beings, it has billions of Galaxys, Solar Systems, Planets, Black Holes, SuperNovas, particles, attoms, cells, etc. It has life, biodiversity, information, rational and counscious beings, moral beings, loving beings, where all that stuff comes from?
Who created all things? Who gives being to all things? Who sustains all things in existence at every moment? Why there is a Universe at all? Why the Universe is the way it is? Why nature work the way it works?
The existence of God is quite obvious.
John Lenox is a great christian appologist.
Nothing indicates the divinity of Christ, because Christ is just a human being, and I find it funny when I remember that Christ came to ask you to worship God, so you worship Christ instead, and here I remember this saying “I am pointing at the moon and the fool is looking at my finger.”
God is not Christ, Christ is not God, God is not the father of Christ, Christ is not the Son of God, God has no sons, God does not need sons, God cannot be crucified, God cannot come out of a woman’s womb
You base your religious views on a book which was written by man not God that's why there's contradictions in it.
Pahaha the existence of god is obvious? If it was obvious then there wouldn’t be any argument. If it was obvious then I’d believe it as would nearly everybody else. ‘Obvious’ would be clear evidence of his existence but let me tell you, Jesus’ apostles testimonies, mystical experiences and the bible are NOT repeat NOT evidence of him existing at all. I’m afraid you’ve been conned. There is absolutely no evidence of any god existing. Wake up!
Remember the bible was written by man
Lennox certainly has one thing wrong. The difference between God and the universe is that the universe can be shown to exist.
@@eileensongs You can feel the wind on your face. You can see clouds and debris blowing around. You can measure wind speed with an anemometer. Wind direction with a weathervane. You can't do anything like that with God.
anyone who understands biology/ zoology can tell you there has to be a creator.
it is way to complex and precise to not have been planned.
No
Anyone who understands biology/zoology knows exactly how such complexity and precision came to be through evolution by natural selection, which forms the bedrock of modern biology.
Richard Dawkins is a first-rate scientist but a fifth-rate theologian and philosopher.
Yeah, too bad he faced off against a Mathematician... the intellectual elite.
But don't worry, the concept of a god can't stand up to the proof test of mathematics - it fails miserably.
man created gods
We don't believe in created gods
wow player? lol
Tal Fisherman of course you don’t believe in created gods, but it doesn’t mean the stories about their existence aren’t created by men lol
I don’t believe in imaginary unicorns I believe in real ones 😂
He deceived you Satan and his aides from human demons the hypocrites who were showing faith and they lean in disbelief and cunning and repel from the right
For they have slandered the Prophet Muhammad Peace be Upon Him Hadiths he did not say to distort Islam mercy religion in the eyes of both worlds and people repel him until they die while they are infidels until they are with them either in hellfire on Judgment Day
Unfortunately the Muslims today they differed in their religion and they dispersed and followed these fabricated hadiths and they left the Holy Quran which God promised to protect him from distortion to the Day of Judgment celestial Book Ring Who was sent down with Gabriel, peace be upon him, the Messenger of God from the angels which he delivered to Muhammad, the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him. But Muslims they cling to the devil’s talk that contradicts what is stated in the text of the great Qur’an from the verses, the rulers, the clear evidence
And also the Christians
they followed a corrupted Bible from human demons call to polytheism by God and God forgives all sins but that is not forgiven to polythe with it
And Jesus Son of Mary, peace be upon him he is the Messenger and servant of God like the Messenger of God Muhammad, peace be upon him and God created it
like his creation to Adam with the words of his ability with be so will be so his mother Mary, peace be upon her, conceived him
Choose your language and read wwwmahdialummacom
@@nassimmajd9976 We live on planet earth...what planet are you from?
Where did god learn how to create universes?
They don’t know if something that knows everything just like that has a meaning or not they only believe it has.
Based on the miracles they think he did and they think they have many testimonies they believe those miracles to be true and then what he says it’s true but it could be some aliens that sent those men messages to make fun of them 😂 this is more plausible than believing in something like a god. But there is no proof for that either
If god was just 'there' and didn't need creating then why can't the Universe have just been just 'there'...why the need for a creator? John Lennox on yet another confused and bumbling rant.
Because the laws of nature clearly tell us that the Universe is limited and has a beginning and an end. Even our ancestors knew that things come to be and die. We now know that the Universe had a definite beginning. The eternal and unchanging universe... that's, my friend, an idea 300 years old and a long overcome one.
By the way tell me how can anything just "be there"? I'm sorry, but this view doesn't sort anything out. Things need to have their source of being. By saying that the source is just the matter that those things are made out of, it's honestly quite misguided, since by this assertion you completely ignore the question of the ultimate source, whatever that is.
Al M because we aren’t God. It’s as simple as that 😂 why do we have to bake cakes, why can’t the cake just always be there...? I know it’s a bit different but it’s the same thing. God is God, almighty and eternal.
Matěj Jureček
Well, it is being claimed that God is just there, and cosmologists actually don't know for certain if the universe had a beginning.
Controversy Owl this is true what you’re saying, but that doesn’t sort anything either. You see even if the universe is undergoing a forever loop of Big bangs and Big crunches, there is still the mystery of the ‘being’ of this eternal universe. It must have its source of just simply being.
If you say that god is uncreated and eternal, why can't you say that to the universe.
Happy to see that there are still people using their mind
They, Christians and others, argue that the world must be finite in the past in the sense that it has a beginning in existance. The world, according to them, necessarily begins in existance. There was nothing and then there was something, and that happened because of God. So, that's what they would probably argue for in response to your response. I think William Lane Craig is an advocate of that. If you want, you can check that out. And if you want an atheist's response to that, then check out the youtube channel called TMM where he responds to Craig's arguement multiple times.
@@crazyalarmstudios2012 About that god who doesn't necessarily exist? Okay
@@crazyalarmstudios2012 Is there any scientific evidence for the claim that the universe came from nothing?
@@crazyalarmstudios2012 Yes you have? Give me that
Dawkins admire you so much, I'd fall to my knees and bow ........ not really! But truly admire you and learn from you.
He deceived you Satan and his aides from human demons the hypocrites who were showing faith and they lean in disbelief and cunning and repel from the right
For they have slandered the Prophet Muhammad Peace be Upon Him Hadiths he did not say to distort Islam mercy religion in the eyes of both worlds and people repel him until they die while they are infidels until they are with them either in hellfire on Judgment Day
Unfortunately the Muslims today they differed in their religion and they dispersed and followed these fabricated hadiths and they left the Holy Quran which God promised to protect him from distortion to the Day of Judgment celestial Book Ring Who was sent down with Gabriel, peace be upon him, the Messenger of God from the angels which he delivered to Muhammad, the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him. But Muslims they cling to the devil’s talk that contradicts what is stated in the text of the great Qur’an from the verses, the rulers, the clear evidence
And also the Christians
they followed a corrupted Bible from human demons call to polytheism by God and God forgives all sins but that is not forgiven to polythe with it
And Jesus Son of Mary, peace be upon him he is the Messenger and servant of God like the Messenger of God Muhammad, peace be upon him and God created it
like his creation to Adam with the words of his ability with be so will be so his mother Mary, peace be upon her, conceived him
Choose your language and read wwwmahdialummacom
If God was created, then he wouldn't be worth calling God.
Jimmi K nice joke there, Jimmy Kimmel
Notice how Dawkins attacks Lennox's argument - good debating technique.
Lennox quietly attacks Dawkins, - desperate debating technique.
Tells me all I need to know.
its much more about the truth not just technique
@@rep3e4 Should be, agree with you there.
You can postulate a God that is uncreated then why you can’t postulate the Universe that is uncreated? It’s simply more likely to have an uncreated chaotic universe with laws of physics pretty complex than an uncreated agent of extreme complexity.
Complexity needs a designer? Then if this is true the extremely complex designer needs as designer as well and so on. But the laws of physics from which everything happened are extremely simple