@@scambammer6102 Craig portrays himself as an expert in a myriad of fields: Physics, Biology, Anthropology, Mathematics, Cosmology, Psychology - even Philosophy. Yet Craig’s existence revolves around biblical texts that he partially describes as mytho-history. His commentary on the Old Testament having “colourful” language is an interesting way to gloss over some of the immortality, bigotry, racism and barbarism contained therein. Craig has basically stated that a man and woman popped into existence 750,000 years ago and humanity proceeded from that point. I really dont know where to start with this general nonsense and biased rhetoric and religious based dogma. And I didnt even mention the dinosaurs
They are symbols of you and I, falling asleep in the Garden of Eden, which is the pre-separation condition in which nothing was needed. Eating of the tree of knowledge is symbolic expression of usurping the ability for self creating. Having made an illusory, false self (ego) to replace the Self God made, we fell asleep and have been sleeping ever since.
@@scambammer6102 Mr. T Rex is part of the illusory world of separation. Denying the wholeness, or holiness, of your mind will only block your awareness of it. The holiness of your mind IS the pre-separation condition.
In my view, the Genesis mention that after the Fall women would bear their children with pain, could be related to the evolution of the female pelvis. To me this "change" in the circumstances of childbirth could refer to the length as well as to the circumstances of the process of becoming the Neanderthal man / Homo sapiens, or some other such form which had this experience.
There weird they r exact duplicates of Hubble but just better. How did they get the exact shot if it’s equivalent to finding and looking at a grain of sand on your fingertip at arms length
Because the later sections lack the characteristics of mytho-history, obviously. That's like asking how can you tell that Revelation is Jewish apocalyptic literature, or that the letters of Paul are actual letters, or that the Pslams are poetry. You just read the text.
You would expect a god that knows our limitations to preface each chapter of his book with a legend saying what kind of writing the chapter contains. Since he didn't, some people feel perfectly confident the earth was created in 6 literal days and that god got tired from speaking a few words for 6 days.
I would have liked some mention of whether independently arisen, sapients in distant star systems (that we may discover later?) is relevant or not to this discussion. I mean Craig could just say there is a God-process wherever one arises in the universe. However, if he says this, then we could conceive of a species that did not "fall". Or is the fall somehow a necessity for a sapient species to arise (as in "the fall" being a metaphor for gaining consciousness through language and becoming aware of ones own transience and existence apart from animals, which is always how I've interpreted "the fall", just as a literary speculation). Anyway, what would an unfallen species be like, or is this simply an incoherent notion?
Human derived theology arose in a time well before anyone could even conceive of such a thing. Much later on, in the 1600s, it was believed that there were intelligent beings on the other planets. Even later, by the late 1800s, it was even thought that evidence of that was found on Mars. But beings on planets on other star systems is a very modern thought which religion doesn’t really deal with well.
@@melgross *Indeed. Because in that case, it would mean that we humans are not that “special” as the book of Genesis posited, among other issues, of course. 🙌*
@@fluffysheap Well, you may be right. However, the real beauty of UA-cam, and the Internet in general, is that aliens no longer need a "duckblind" to study and/or interact with the human race. Not that I'm worried about that.
@@fluffysheap Totally agree. It is one of the current "myths" that got propagated in the 1960s (I blame Star Trek for it!) There isn't a scintilla of evidence that their is life in any place but the Earth but yet supposed rational minds keep postulating extra terrestrial life as if its a given.
Does writing have something in addition to language, that writing start much more recently than language? Maybe writing of bible, including mytho-history at beginning of Genesis, is related to development of writing in recent human history? Is there something spiritual about writing?
Could there have been natural developments or changes in humanity that are different than the spiritual development of humanity described by writing in Bible?
What did Jesus and Paul say about historicity of Adam and Eve in New Testament? Are there any other statements about historicity of Adam and Eve, maybe with different names?
This mythoHistory is all you had in the Bronze Age. Luckily people were probably brighter then. Genesis told you more than you needed to know 3000 yrs ago.
@@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038 What’s the oxymoron ? Or what is in conflict? There’s a history of Santa Clause. There’s a history of Zeus. And all are mythology.
24:15 it amazes me that WLC can so easily contradict himself in the space of one sentence. After insisting that brain size is a necessary condition in order to be classed as a human - he then completely about faces and says, sure, brain size is not in fact a necessity. Brain size was the (presumably) most important characteristic Craig looked at in order to determine the first human being - and he just admitted that the criterion was void. I have no doubt that if Kuhn hadn't pointed out a deeply personal and emotive example, Craig wouldn't have made the concession. Craig is eager not to be seen as a moral monster - he avoided the issue of race by nesting the 'birth' of humanity long ago (but not too long ago) in Africa. One has to wonder, therefore about his views on homosexuality and why he won't make similar concessions to his worldview as he did with race and mental conditions. Again, this is another instance of Craig walking the tightrope in order to salve his intellectual reputation. Sure, he'll tweak a few things to avoid certain charges of holding incoherent and morally bankrupt ideas - but while he still has the safety net of a broad conservative following, he doesn't feel the need to adopt a genuinely progressive rational approach to morality.
"After insisting that brain size is a necessary condition in order to be classed as a human - he then completely about faces and says, sure, brain size is not in fact a necessity. " You are dumb.
If you understand the difference between sufficient conditions and necessary conditions, you will realize there is no contradiction here. Where does Dr Craig insist that brain size is a necessary condition in order to be classed as a human?
@@SC-gc5td at 14 min 20 Craig says, "in order to be human, an organism, first of all needs to be anatomically similar to ourselves". This seems to me that he he regards brain size - ie an anatomical feature - as necessary. The issue discussed ten minutes later, however implies that anatomy is not necessary - that is it possible to be a human without a particular anatomical feature because in fact it's all about having a human soul. So now he's gone from anatomy being necessary, to being merely sufficient. The problem for Craig is that he wants a nice comfortable cut off between modern humans and our ancestors, and the only way he can hope to achieve that in any coherent way (both to satisfy the limitations of the Biblical account, and the prudish chauvinism of his audience who won't be happy having Australopiths, let alone gorillas as siblings) is by asserting a particular set of anatomical features - ie the features of modern Homo sapiens. By making anatomy merely a sufficient cause, it opens the door to any other animal being considered human. And worse, it opens the door to the notion that there could be 'anatomically similar' organisms that are not considered human under Craig's model. In fact the main reason why Craig has decided to place the 'inception' of modern humans so far back in time (750,000 years ago) is so that his audience don't spend any time thinking about the entailments of his model - ie that the parents and siblings of the first human were not in fact human.
@@bengreen171 I understand min 14 to be a description of humans in broader terms, meaning behaviors and characteristics that are typical of humans. He does use the phrase "needs to be" a few times but not in the formal sense of necessary and sufficient conditions used in logic and math. At min 24, he uses the "sufficient condition" in the formal sense to address the case where reduced brain capacity in a specific individual does not match the typical human brain capacity. In my opinion, this describes our everyday experience, where exceptions to the rule are observed. A thing can still be categorized in a particular way even though some characteristics normally associated with the thing are missing for whatever reason.
Great content, as always. I do wish you could get Peter Hacker on a discussion like this about things like the mind-body problem, free will, consciousness, etc. It would make a huge difference.
This is exactly what The Word of God warned Humans: "Doubt and conformity with the sinful World". Dr. Craig is doing exactly what Satan is looking for: To conform the Bible to Evolution and to scientific theories. That is why Paul says in Romans 12:12 "And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God"
Adam would be the beginning of a race of humanity who had the wherewithal to think about God and enough capacity of intuition to carry on a two way conversation with God . So some threshold of conscious adequacy must be the point at which the early humans were wise to God and had the mind to carry on an intelligent conversation with God. The idea of a computer or machine being conscious would define that threshold, beneath that horizon it is just a machine , but above some plane of efficiency , the existence of a soul is well concluded.
@@scambammer6102 The sense of time is based on the apprehension of the moment . So if no one cared cared, and no one was keeping track of time, then these passages of time are irrelevant . It is like when you go to sleep and the night passes as if one moment you fell asleep, and you had some moments of a dream , but otherwise, time seems to have no substance of any duration , you wake up as if you just feel asleep, and so the sense of time is only meaningful for a careful awake and conscious observer. In a sense, all those eons of time , are just like a passing away of one night , to any observer who is not aware of eons of time. So the mystery is that God before just beginning to create the world, is confronted with the situation of no existence of any world in any eternal past, and so in comparison , any amount of time you suggest as passing , compared to any idea of an eternity of nothingness and voided empty sets of eternity , those periods of time, even billions or trillions of years in your philosophy, compared to eternity of some void without any sense of time, is like a wink of the eye , there is no difference between one moment in time with no observer of it, and infinite time of eternal moments , where yet there is no observer of those moments, then the two sets of ideas, one moment in one set notation and the other being infinite moments in one set notation , they are actually equal to each other in terms of having any significance of meaning. What can you call God before God began to create and invoke time and space ? Any idea is as good as any other, from saying a nothingness void of God is the same as Eternal God, since no observer is consuming time or grasping any meaning from any moment in time. Time seems to be only important to an intelligent observer, but God by God alone in a void of nothing, time yet has no real meaning at all. So , if you had ONE MOMENT to know God and you had Eternity to know God, both situations are really equal in meaning, if you know God for one moment, then you know God eternally , that the idea of knowledge can dispense with any need of time, once you know all you could know , whether you know everything for a split second or you know it all persistently forever. The moment of knowing God is always the same happening. So to know God is to escape time and space, and everything of any meaning happens all together at once, like a "BIG BANG" or like falling into a Black Hole, time is rejected , and there is no space , there is "infinite density" Everything is in the same place, and all time is just one moment .
In the case that the story of Adam and Eve in garden of Eden relates a spiritual fall or death; might the image of God have been a spiritual rise from God's creation of Adam and Eve? How could God's creation of Adam and Eve have brought about a spiritual rise from which Adam and Eve fell?
Because “god” sits back and writes directs and produces theatrical plays, and then he sits back and watches them in their entirety, despite the fact that he knows what’s going to happen in every scene.
One of the best discussion that Robert initiated with the most thoughtful and honest Christian philosopher of our days. It is wise and sensible for Christians ( I’m one of them) to consider that Adam and Eve are symbolic as referred to by Paul in Romans 5. Jesus never referred to Adam and Eve, because in chapter one of Genesis God created males and females ( in the pleural ) not one male and one female Which is consistent with human genetics.
I can't find any evidence in Romans 5 that Paul thought Adam was mythical. At most, he might not have considered the question of the literal existence of Adam to be important.
What a great discussion. I like Craig's understanding of, and discourse concerning, the first 11 chapters of Genesis. I would expand that mytho-historical account in the mythos genre by suggesting that Adam and Eve either represent all persons, in the sense of not being literal people, or which I prefer, as a hypothetical perspective shared by Origen and borrowed from Plato's view on the eternality of the individual, that the story of the fall refers to the incarnation of Mankind from a divine, eternal perspective. In other words, humans are divine beings that have fallen into a lower aspect of reality, the floor if you will (much like Isaiah 66:1 "Heaven is my throne and Earth the footstool of my feet"), and Christ came to lift us back up to where we belong. I would further suggest that the first actual individual historically mentioned would be probably Abraham. Though I haven't done enough research in this area, this is only my hunch.
Very interesting point of view. I may have to read his book. I've come to a similar conclusion about how to read the first part of Genesis, but the historicity of Adam and Eve is something that I have never felt confident in one way or another. I'm still not convinced based on this interview alone, but identifying Adam and Eve as non homo sapiens is an interesting idea. In some ways I don't think it matters so much, though. I think they could be an archetype for all "humans" or "image bearers" without necessarily being actual human individuals themselves.
Remember that there was many more humans back there: denisovans, floresiensis, heilderbergensis, and probably more. Just give up, really. The more the historical sciences advance, the more idiotic it becomes to think that Genesis could be scientifically validated. It is a lost battle, it has always been.
@@cosmodradek I forgot I made this comment. In the year since then, I've become convinced, there was never a historical Adam and Eve in any sense. To posit that Adam and Eve were Homo Heidelbergensis is to just make stuff up for theological reasons. It's certainly not what the authors of Genesis meant. If there's any truth in the beginning part of Genesis, it's moral truth only. IMO Christians would be most honest to just accept this and treat the text as such (i.e. mythology).
Is the image of God for humanity a natural or spiritual development? Does the image of God for a human being mean a capacity to relate to God? If so, what did humanity develop to bring about capacity to relate to God?
It's interesting "the world's leading theologian" speculating on "what Jesus of Nazareth believed". Wasn't He supposed to be God made flesh? Shouldn't He have "known" about the Creation?
Every human being on earth was a divine human creator from the divine human race. We called our home Paradise, now known as earth. Since the fall of man (humanity) we are devolving humans living on purgatory.
@@tomjackson7755 Obviously you didn't watch the video, otherwise you know this is clearly wrong. "Mytho-history" is a genre proposed by the Assyriologist Thorklid Jacobson. It is also a view common amongst Old Testament scholars, but is known as "Proto-history" because they know internet ignoramuses such as yourself lack the critical thinking skills required to move past the name.
WLC reminds me of Ben Cason, Both are intelligent as far as book learning goes. But their minds are so wide open most of their common sense slipped right through the cracks. I don't see how either one could cross a busy street.
I'm a Christian but I don't share his view regarding the historicity of Adam and Eve. They are best understood as a myth rather than a literal history, I hold to the standard model of scientific evolution. But I don't see what's so unreasonable with believing in the resurrection though.
@@DavidS_Tan You people got to believe in Adam and Eve no matter how ridiculous it is because your whole religion is built around Adam and Eve's Original Sin and Jesus eventually coming to wash away the Original Sin you dipstick. What is wrong with believing in the resurection is dead people are dead. Bodies can't be reanimated after death. It is patently absurd to believe such foolishness just like it is absurd to believe in Adam and Eve.
And do you get any closer to the truth? He asks the questions that everybody should be asking but so few do. There may be no ultimate answers but you've got think about these questions so you can question those scammers who claim to know all the answers.
I thought I appreciated Craig & his theories.. I'm not so sure now.. and after peeking around UA-cam a bit and hearing some of his "less heard" remarks.. I think I'm gonna jump ship.
Species are a group of living organisms consisting of similar individuals capable of exchanging genes or interbreeding. I have Neanderthal genes in my genome. Thus we could interbreed with Neanderthals. They part of the human species. We do not need a philosophical treatise to help us establish that. KISS!
The classic doctrine of original sin is actually the doctrine of St Augustine in the 5th century and it’s logically untenable. Guilt cannot be inherited.
Physical laws like conservation of energy and momentum determine that all the particles that make you today have existed for millions of year. Nothing new to this universe was required to make you. The same laws also determine that in million of years all the particles that make you today will be thoroughly mixed with the rest of the soup of particles. We are temporary condensations of particles with discernible boundaries and memories which gives us the ability to recognize "self" as different from "others." If we have 100 units of effort in this life, the personal choice is how much to devote to the aggrandizement of the self and how much to the communion with others? Many religious books dwell on this conundrum. With one God, many of them, or none, it remains the case that in this universe and for most of its 14 billion years existence, you and I have been and will be mixed with everything. I have the laws on my side.
Six Days of Creation was really the time taken by Moses standing on a Rock , to explain God to the Israelites, making time a parable of their Exodus, so that they trekked through the wilderness six days at a time and rested on every seventh day. So, like a Dewey Decimal System, Moses as the Teacher, moved by the Spirit, was up on a rock hovering over the men, and brooding over the people, standing in God's Place, and so Moses was God. In Exodus 7:1 God as Spirit communing with Moses , says to Moses "See now Moses, I have made you to be YHVH GOD to Pharaoh , and Aaron is your Prophet". So to apply that method of the Teacher standing in God's Place , using speech out of one mouth that Moses had, to speak as the Father and speak as the Son and Speak as Spirit is THEATRICAL, the Divine Playwright such as Alfred Hitchcock would use to show his Divine Place, as the Author doing CAMEOS to walk out onto the Stage during a play to prove to the people in the audience his divine nature as the God of this Performance. Then you see, Moses took SIX DAYS to teach Israel the Creation Story, every evening for six days, he got up on a rock and delivered a sermon teaching about his lesson plan , over six days, using a code like the Dewey Decimal System tells you by the number where to find a book or a subject , on the shelves of the Library. So every FIRST DAY Moses would stand in God's Place on a rock and teach about the BEGINNING , "Let there be Light". So , every SUNDAY the first day of teaching by a method of lesson plans, Mose would teach about LIGHT. On every Second Day, Moses would teach about WATER. On every third day , Moses would focus the subject content of his sermon on the DRY LAND. Every Fourth Day , Moses would teach about Astronomy, then on the Fifth Day of regulation , Moses turned to teaching about the emergence of LIFE. Then on the SIXTH DAY , Moses would teach Israel about their HUMAN HISTORY, and then on the Seventh Day , Moses would give the blessing and there would be no further instruction except to REST. SABBATH DAY. Then in taking license as the Law Giver, Moses would remind the people how God CREATED THE WORLD IN SIX DAYS and so Moses told the people to do diligence and complete their weeks of years doing works for each of the six days, and completing them , giving praise and blessings for the accomplishment and every Seventh Day they rested. That is how Moses regulated the Israelites during the Time of the Exodus, for all history before that Exodus, there was no story told by any earlier Patriarchs about creating the world in SIX DAYS. So in Job , there is a narrative given by God about Creation that does not invoke any regulation of six days and a day of rest to explain how God created the world. So it was the invention of Moses, where "Necessity is the Mother of Invention". Moses taught Israel, using a numerology of days, for a similar reason that the Dewey Decimal System regulated how to move through the Library to study everything.
@@scambammer6102 Job 38:4 "Where were you when I laid the earth's foundations ? Tell me if you understand . Who marked off it's dimensions : Surely you know ? Who stretched a measuring line across it ? On what were it's footings set or who laid it's cornerstone , while the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy ?" ( See, nothing here of six days creations, and in contrast the Genesis story has no stars appearing until the FOURTH DAY, so there were no angels or stars for the first three days of the Genesis account, thus the Genesis account is a TEACHING METHOD OF MOSES LIVING ONE DAY AT A TIME, while then Job's account of God creating has no semblance to the Moses' lesson plan. Job's account never mentions the SPIRIT OF GOD hovering over the waters. So , these two stories do not agree on setting things to a singular account, it was Moses who was standing on the Rock in God's Place, creating the Genesis Story as applied to the conditions of the Exodus , while Job had no idea of Moses ' account of six days creation. Thus you must read again EXODUS 7:1 "SEE NOW MOSES I HAVE MADE YOU TO BE YHVH GOD TO PHARAOH AND AARON IS YOUR PROPHET". God is as a Spirit communing with Moses, so that as Moses took to DIVINE his lesson plan, the CREDIT for the acts taken by Moses is applied to YHVH God, after the fact Moses on Earth was the TEACHER, and in Moses was GOD THE SPIRIT the actuation of giving the Law.
All Neanderthals and Denisovans were humans. Neanderthals are Eurasians and Denisovans are not Semitic, they are a mix of Eurasians and Hamites. You can see this in the heat mapping of Neanderthals and Denisovans as much as they are related to us modern day humans. Both are less related to the Semitic populations.
When Christians rename half of their holy stories to “mytho-history”, I call that progress. Hopefully someday these folk figure that it’s actually all a myth. :-)
After Craig’s “two years” of so-called research, there is NO WAY, that anything would have satisfied his conclusions that a historic Adam & Eve didn’t exist. Craig is not very honest, but he’s very bright…certainly bright enough to know, that once you concede one fact about the Old Testament, it won’t be long before you intelligently and honestly have to make a myriad of reversals and concessions about the mythical New Testament.
@@CJ-sw8lc it's existential crisis. Lose your faith, lose your livelihood or become a hypocrite. There are plenty of hypocrites like that in the clergy.
@@oscargr_ honestly, I think that's too simple/convenient an explanation. There are good reasons to be a theist - and good ones to be an atheist. And people arrive at different conclusions - it's normal...
Perhaps the origins of man lie buried deep in the "mytho-history" of the Mesopotamian/Sumerian cuneiform texts, the Babylonian Enuma Elish and the epic of Gilgamesh, the Annunaki, Enki n Enlil etc etc... Q: Why should the Judeo-Christian biblical narrative be considered factual, historical and accurate, while earlier Mesopotamian texts be considered myth ??.. who decides what is myth n what is history ?? what is the criteria ??.. I mean the Adam n Eve story in Genesis of them eating a piece of forbidden fruit offered by a talking serpent and then all of humanity be tarnished and dammed with guilt, sin and shame is just preposterous and the limit case for credulity. Imagine taking this case to court and telling the judge..." Your honour this talking snake 🐍made me do it"...😆 🤣 😂 c'mon Also, examine the Abram/Abraham story...he was from Ur of the Chaldees, then Mesopotamia, now, a region of modern day Iraq, wouldn't that make him an Iraqi ...🤔 hmmmm. A pagan Iraqi convert to Judaism, who is the "Father of Judaism, Christianity & Islam...And this dude Abram was promised Canaanite/Palestinian/Syrian land by this YHWH/Elohim/Annunaki/ancient advanced alien god to start a new generation...etc etc... This sounds to me like one of the first usurpation and land grabbing events in history, if it's true ??... No wonder the modern day Palestinians have beef with the Jews/Israelis, so called God's chosen people. It's also blatantly evident, that this YHWH god is biased, shows Abram favour, is partial to Abram (rather unGodlike) and also gets Abram's barren wife Sarai pregnant...And that is after Abram gets Hagar, Sara's servant woman pregnant...🙄 WTFudge ??..🤣😂🤪 Now Is this myth, fact, history or allegory ??.. Remember the apostle Paul's words to the Galations in 4:24 when referring to the Abraham narrative of the OT..."WHICH THINGS ARE AN ALLEGORY".. 2 Cor 3:6.."Who hath made us able ministers of the New Testament, NOT of the LETTER, but of the SPIRIT: for the letter killer, but the SPIRIT giveth LIFE". A clear indication that the Bible is not a history book, nor is it meant to be taken literally, rather, it is to be understood through a Spiritual lens with a Christ Mind and Christ consciousness. 👊 ✌ Even the whole tower of Babel n the Nimrod story in the OT is an allegory, if only more people knew what that story is meant to convey spirituality we'd be better off collectively as a species. Sadly, the vast majority don't get it and will never get it. Most walk that broad road that leads to destruction. Awake to the inner divinity.✌🏼☝🏼❤
Could it not be that Adam and Eve were not ancestral to the Neanderthals and Denisovans but far more recent as per mytho-history, or history and other biblical accounts? Would that leave the older humans out in the cold in terms of the original sin (as per Andrew Loke)? I don' think we know or can foresee how God handles these people (however we may define them), just as we do not know how he handles people of other current religions and cultures who may never have heard of the Bible in any tangible sense. I would not assume that they are all considered as fallen and end up condemned. If that were the case I could no longer be a practicing Christian.
all of the other heidelberg humans would have been fallen from a first pair of Adam and Eve; or the whole of heidelberg humans fell into spiritual death?
Interesting. But basically just substituting one narrative for another. Or at best adding one meta narrative on top of another. But kudos to anyone today who has some type of desire to write a systematic theology.
If you look around the world, every single ethnic group seems to have its own genealogical adam equivalent emphasizing that they are the chosen people of god or whoever they revere and fear. The Genesis story tells us nothing more than that.
Actually, you are quite mistaken. The emphasis on Adam and Eve as the progenitor of all people is quite exceptional in ancient literature and makes the chauvinism that comes out of ethnic identity more difficult. If ultimately, we all come from a common source, then their is no ultimate priority of one group or race over another. It is worth pointing out that when Darwin wrote On Origin of Species part of his ideological agenda was the posit a rational basis for discrimination between the races. Take a look at the full title of this work: "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life".
@@tomjackson7755 How am I mistaken again? What part of my assertion above is incorrect in your estimation? Surely you are not arguing my point based on one anecdotal claim.
@@markrutledge5855 Origin stories are quite ubiquitous among ancient cultures unlike you claimed. I wouldn't be surprised to find out the the Adam and eve story was stolen from some other culture like so much of the rest of the bible. I'm not even going to go into how you got all of the Darwin stuff wrong or why you even added that irrelevant nonsense.
to my 'weird thinking' it's matter of timeframe the 'belief' in current time is just like what ever happened.. we are not sure in different timeframe what kind was the belief available, for example in pyramids era, in gobekli tepe era, in machu pichu era, in aztec era or even in pithecanthropus era.. would be good just keep the understanding for 'believe algorithms' what ever available in our current timeframe no need going back too far whether it the same or not the 'meta conscious' of cosmic always changing.. 😊
Philosophy which is expressed only by language - can only be understood by those who master that specific language. So, the Hebrew bible talks about the preparation of an intelligent environment - in the realm of thought, that will suit any humanoid who wishes to understand this specific language - Hebrew. The only virtue of the Hebrew bible is the introduction of the Hebrew language to Humanity - do you think that the garden of Eden was a physical space for the beginning of humanity at large? An absurd. Adam was the first person-metaphor to understand Hebrew, he also gave names himself, the proper words… that was his ONLY tusk - to learn Hebrew - this is the only exercise god gave him- a linguistic one Hebrew … No philosopher can borrow Hebrew ideas since his language doesn’t allow it not verbally nor conceptually… it’s a diversion … 6 days is only a mathematical hint to the decimal system, (no 6 sheshet = 1000 in gimatiria). (days Yamim= 100 in gimatria) 10 is the mathematics of Hebrew and Hebrew geometry. The divine names are scientifically true and are seen in decimal geometry. So the story is not the beginning of Human beings - as scientists know. it’s the beginning of Hebrew speaking Adam. of Hebrew thought Not religions even - but this is what people do all over the world when they get lost in translation or even fail to understand their own language. Especially they have no clue of Hebrew which is coded 4 times … Jesus never spoke Hebrew, so the information you get is a 10th hand version, not even from Jesus himself, but gossip after gossip, Aramaic to Greek to Latin to French to English etc. a simple math will show you the probability that the end massage has any connection to the Hebrew source, YET good enough for billions
The story of adam and eve is a very primitive story most likely spread by word of mouth that ended up in the jewish torah and adopted by the roman empire when they added new manuscriptst to the Torah to have their official roman bible.
WLG: It would be morally reprehensible that there could be human or human like creatures that wouldn't fall under God's grace... The same God who would condemn people who don't believe in the Christian mythos to eternal damnation? No...of course not.
How do you think your second sentence is compatible with your first? People are offered grace, and it is only by rejecting that grace that they end up in eternal damnation.
@@oscargr_ that second statement is even false...no Christian think that is only going to be christian in heaven..to start with Job was a polytheist...Moses and OT prophet weren't christian..there is even argument if they were strictly monotheistic..
If the Judao-Christian God could rewrite parts of the Bible, which obviously He could, would He not remove "made in My image", "kill (nearly) all sinners", "the flood", "Lot's daughters", "You are My people", and so on and so on? So why hasn't He?
It's Funny How Science and Religion Use Both Differences and Commonality as Proofs or Unknowns in Choice Form. Further, I haven't Read this Book. However to Me, Attempting to Explain In Detail Religous Documents/Practice of 2000 Years ago or More is Neither here nor there. To Me to Draw Inspiration, Commonality, Knowledge and Faith from the Documents and Practice of Religion Long Ago is the Most Important Influence from that Past. Clearly the Past including the Bible Writers are Recording and Attempting to Explain the God Dilemma. They are Pushing the Boundaries of the God Conclusion. As an Example, I Suspect the Human God Conclusion Long Predates the Eve and Adam Theory. Interestingly The Bible Writers are Progressives in that they are Recording for the First Time. Back then Someone Created the Ability to Write with Agreed Definitions. Human Brilliance Drawn from the God Influence. Further Again, Attempting to Explain Ancient Religous Writings has the Same Problem as Explaining Darwin's Evolution Theory. The Same Problems of Very Very Little Evidence Remains, even from Only 5000 Years ago. Therefore to Me, was there Just One Adam and Eve or Many ?. I Don't believe the Bibles Excludes more than One Pair of Adam and Eve but More Importantly Connect AE's Creation to God. Therefore Homosapiens, Neanderthals etc can Fit with the Adam and Eve Conclusions of the God Bibles. Good Topic.
Scientific Adam and Mitochondria Eve likely lived thousands of years apart. The Biblical story is clearly a mythical telling, in the sense Joseph Campbell meant.
So they were part of the evolutionary process, but one day only two people were born of some parents in the same place and they were the first with human traits? Of if scientific timelines are being somewhat applied did God step in millions of years after initial creation and start the human branch separate from the evolution process? Sounds like another attempt to align the bible with science, just don't think about it too hard. My first thought was talking about this event happening 700K years ago would be the first thing to ruffle feathers with many Christians. Many subscribe to around 6K years for the Adam and Eve family tree.
Yes, in the beginning, the foundational character of man is revealed to be flawed and lacking in spirit. We see the history of this condition and the inspiration of God tapping on man's shoulder.
@Constructive Critique _"Yes, in the beginning, the foundational character of man is revealed to be flawed"_ That is only a Christian's concept, not that of Jwish or Islamic.
“The Bible Came from Arabia “, Kamal Salibi,1985. Gen. 1:2 has Thm as Tihamah- Hijaz, Asir and Yemen- in western Arabia, not the ‘deep.’ The ‘Jordan ‘ nowhere called a river in the OT. Junaynah at Dn- garden of Eden- at 20/20 by 42/55 in Asir region western Arabia with the 4 rivers and gold etc. Still Adam and Eve mythical and the trees. The bible contains myth, legend, history and science. The OT has yet to be translated. The little- but significant- parts Kamal Salibi has translated is interesting and important. Science says the sun’s shadow reversing itself occurs in the Tropical Zone- western Arabia- not Palestine,Pennsylvania or Pleiades as related in King Ahaz ‘s time and geographic area.
Craig requires a certain definition of Man, for his Anthropology. Then he looks to Paleontology. This is a prolegomenon to his forthcoming Philosophical Theology, likely.
Craig is very selective on what “evidence” and “rationale” he deploys to justify his faith and religious dogma. The dismantling of Craig’s stance on most things is rudimentary and frequent. Embarrassing to watch sometimes.
@@thetannernation Sure, it’s pretty easy… the entire story about Adam and Eve is made up… they are fictional characters that are supposed to symbolize that you should be obedient and never question God… or your leaders who claim to speak for God. Funny how most of the stories of the OT have the same message.😂
Well, one thing we know for sure is that Craig would be the last person on earth to ask about origins, because his 'theory' is that a "Magic Man in the Sky" done it. This might satisfy a kindergarten student, or folks with that level of ability to think critically, but not much of anyone else on the planet.
Two most appreciated and authoritative persons.. Love you both Robert and William!!!
I love how active you are and determined to find answers.
You may not agree with Craig, but he does his homework exceptionally well.
nah
Oh dear
Oh really, I think the dog ate it.
Much respect for Robert - still honestly seeking answers! And Dr Craig is brilliant as always.
You should say brilliant for a theist.
@@jerrylong6238 both are very dim bulbs
@@scambammer6102
Craig portrays himself as an expert in a myriad of fields: Physics, Biology, Anthropology, Mathematics, Cosmology, Psychology - even Philosophy.
Yet Craig’s existence revolves around biblical texts that he partially describes as mytho-history.
His commentary on the Old Testament having “colourful” language is an interesting way to gloss over some of the immortality, bigotry, racism and barbarism contained therein.
Craig has basically stated that a man and woman popped into existence 750,000 years ago and humanity proceeded from that point.
I really dont know where to start with this general nonsense and biased rhetoric and religious based dogma.
And I didnt even mention the dinosaurs
@@PetraKann Hang on - WLC accepts an old earth... he's not a creationist... why mention dinosaurs, as if he has a fringe view of them...?
@@CJ-sw8lc He IS a creationist, as far as I know, just not a young earth creationist.
Great discussion. Thanks for making this happen.
Sir can we get this book on social site In quest of Adam? 😊
Robert I really admire your work. This is one of my favourite channels
Glad Robert interviewed Dr. Craig so many years after their first stellar face-to-face interview.
What do the symbols in story of Adam and Eve mean, interpreted from mytho-historical view?
They are symbols of you and I, falling asleep in the Garden of Eden, which is the pre-separation condition in which nothing was needed. Eating of the tree of knowledge is symbolic expression of usurping the ability for self creating. Having made an illusory, false self (ego) to replace the Self God made, we fell asleep and have been sleeping ever since.
@@4give5ess "the pre-separation condition in which nothing was needed" and which never existed. meet mr. T rex.
@@scambammer6102 Mr. T Rex is part of the illusory world of separation. Denying the wholeness, or holiness, of your mind will only block your awareness of it. The holiness of your mind IS the pre-separation condition.
@@4give5ess don’t need no mumbo jumbo grow up
@@scambammer6102 May your life go well.
In my view, the Genesis mention that after the Fall women would bear their children with pain, could be related to the evolution of the female pelvis. To me this "change" in the circumstances of childbirth could refer to the length as well as to the circumstances of the process of becoming the Neanderthal man / Homo sapiens, or some other such form which had this experience.
Great interviews !
Compelling story good stuff! Now when do we see ALL the Webb pictures available or what they choose to show?
There weird they r exact duplicates of Hubble but just better. How did they get the exact shot if it’s equivalent to finding and looking at a grain of sand on your fingertip at arms length
Webb is theirs, yo have no say in what they show, they can even show you a photo shopped image if they want
@@ishikawa1338 seriously? it's the same fg stars jesus
What distinguishes homo sapiens, neanderthal man and heidelberg man from each other?
Although I'm not Christian, I really respect and adore William Craig ❤️ 💙
Are there differences in brain for writing compared to language and speaking?
Why was mytho-history genre put at beginning of Genesis, followed by more historical passages?
Because the later sections lack the characteristics of mytho-history, obviously.
That's like asking how can you tell that Revelation is Jewish apocalyptic literature, or that the letters of Paul are actual letters, or that the Pslams are poetry. You just read the text.
it's all myth no history. mythno-history. Get it?
You would expect a god that knows our limitations to preface each chapter of his book with a legend saying what kind of writing the chapter contains.
Since he didn't, some people feel perfectly confident the earth was created in 6 literal days and that god got tired from speaking a few words for 6 days.
Robert Kuhn is the best when it comes to exploring all topics.
I would have liked some mention of whether independently arisen, sapients in distant star systems (that we may discover later?) is relevant or not to this discussion. I mean Craig could just say there is a God-process wherever one arises in the universe. However, if he says this, then we could conceive of a species that did not "fall". Or is the fall somehow a necessity for a sapient species to arise (as in "the fall" being a metaphor for gaining consciousness through language and becoming aware of ones own transience and existence apart from animals, which is always how I've interpreted "the fall", just as a literary speculation). Anyway, what would an unfallen species be like, or is this simply an incoherent notion?
Human derived theology arose in a time well before anyone could even conceive of such a thing. Much later on, in the 1600s, it was believed that there were intelligent beings on the other planets. Even later, by the late 1800s, it was even thought that evidence of that was found on Mars.
But beings on planets on other star systems is a very modern thought which religion doesn’t really deal with well.
@@melgross *Indeed. Because in that case, it would mean that we humans are not that “special” as the book of Genesis posited, among other issues, of course. 🙌*
There are no aliens, at least not in this galaxy. Nothing to worry about.
@@fluffysheap Well, you may be right. However, the real beauty of UA-cam, and the Internet in general, is that aliens no longer need a "duckblind" to study and/or interact with the human race. Not that I'm worried about that.
@@fluffysheap Totally agree. It is one of the current "myths" that got propagated in the 1960s (I blame Star Trek for it!) There isn't a scintilla of evidence that their is life in any place but the Earth but yet supposed rational minds keep postulating extra terrestrial life as if its a given.
Does writing have something in addition to language, that writing start much more recently than language? Maybe writing of bible, including mytho-history at beginning of Genesis, is related to development of writing in recent human history? Is there something spiritual about writing?
No.
there are writings 3000 years older than jesus. mostly about gods you don't believe in.
What is meant by image bearer?
Gobbly gook. In other words, it's nothing but fabricated nonsense.
Could there have been natural developments or changes in humanity that are different than the spiritual development of humanity described by writing in Bible?
No!
the bible doesn't talk about spiritual development. It just says fear god or else.
What did Jesus and Paul say about historicity of Adam and Eve in New Testament? Are there any other statements about historicity of Adam and Eve, maybe with different names?
Fred and Wilma
@@scambammer6102 Clever! 😂
This was a great theological conversation. Mytho-history is a very interesting genre of literature.
This mythoHistory is all you had in the Bronze Age. Luckily people were probably brighter then.
Genesis told you more than you needed to know 3000 yrs ago.
God you people are such an embarrassment.
I suppose, if you're interested in oxymoron.
@@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038 What’s the oxymoron ? Or what is in conflict? There’s a history of Santa Clause. There’s a history of Zeus. And all are mythology.
myth-no-history. get it?
I need y’alls contact. I am deeply connected to an adjacent school of thought.
Who wrote first part of Genesis as mytho-history and why?
Charlie the Caveman
Is homo erectus considered to be human before heidelberg humans?
Homo Erectus was both before and after Heidelberg. HE lived for 2 million years. WLC's exclusion of HE from the conversation is clearly racist.
Were cave drawings and other art pieces an advance on language, a step between language and writing?
they were the first graphic novels
Why are the rivers Tigris and Euphrates identified for garden of Eden where Adam and Eve lived?
Because Ra was already using the Nile
24:15
it amazes me that WLC can so easily contradict himself in the space of one sentence. After insisting that brain size is a necessary condition in order to be classed as a human - he then completely about faces and says, sure, brain size is not in fact a necessity.
Brain size was the (presumably) most important characteristic Craig looked at in order to determine the first human being - and he just admitted that the criterion was void.
I have no doubt that if Kuhn hadn't pointed out a deeply personal and emotive example, Craig wouldn't have made the concession. Craig is eager not to be seen as a moral monster - he avoided the issue of race by nesting the 'birth' of humanity long ago (but not too long ago) in Africa. One has to wonder, therefore about his views on homosexuality and why he won't make similar concessions to his worldview as he did with race and mental conditions.
Again, this is another instance of Craig walking the tightrope in order to salve his intellectual reputation.
Sure, he'll tweak a few things to avoid certain charges of holding incoherent and morally bankrupt ideas - but while he still has the safety net of a broad conservative following, he doesn't feel the need to adopt a genuinely progressive rational approach to morality.
"After insisting that brain size is a necessary condition in order to be classed as a human - he then completely about faces and says, sure, brain size is not in fact a necessity. " You are dumb.
If you understand the difference between sufficient conditions and necessary conditions, you will realize there is no contradiction here. Where does Dr Craig insist that brain size is a necessary condition in order to be classed as a human?
@@SC-gc5td
at 14 min 20 Craig says, "in order to be human, an organism, first of all needs to be anatomically similar to ourselves".
This seems to me that he he regards brain size - ie an anatomical feature - as necessary.
The issue discussed ten minutes later, however implies that anatomy is not necessary - that is it possible to be a human without a particular anatomical feature because in fact it's all about having a human soul.
So now he's gone from anatomy being necessary, to being merely sufficient. The problem for Craig is that he wants a nice comfortable cut off between modern humans and our ancestors, and the only way he can hope to achieve that in any coherent way (both to satisfy the limitations of the Biblical account, and the prudish chauvinism of his audience who won't be happy having Australopiths, let alone gorillas as siblings) is by asserting a particular set of anatomical features - ie the features of modern Homo sapiens.
By making anatomy merely a sufficient cause, it opens the door to any other animal being considered human. And worse, it opens the door to the notion that there could be 'anatomically similar' organisms that are not considered human under Craig's model. In fact the main reason why Craig has decided to place the 'inception' of modern humans so far back in time (750,000 years ago) is so that his audience don't spend any time thinking about the entailments of his model - ie that the parents and siblings of the first human were not in fact human.
@@SC-gc5td
did you see my reply to you? If so, do you have any thoughts?
@@bengreen171 I understand min 14 to be a description of humans in broader terms, meaning behaviors and characteristics that are typical of humans. He does use the phrase "needs to be" a few times but not in the formal sense of necessary and sufficient conditions used in logic and math. At min 24, he uses the "sufficient condition" in the formal sense to address the case where reduced brain capacity in a specific individual does not match the typical human brain capacity. In my opinion, this describes our everyday experience, where exceptions to the rule are observed. A thing can still be categorized in a particular way even though some characteristics normally associated with the thing are missing for whatever reason.
Does language have anything to do with having image of God?
Great intervew
This channel cannibalises complexity and crystallises clarity
Great content, as always. I do wish you could get Peter Hacker on a discussion like this about things like the mind-body problem, free will, consciousness, etc. It would make a huge difference.
Yes, please bring Peter Hacker on.
This is exactly what The Word of God warned Humans: "Doubt and conformity with the sinful World". Dr. Craig is doing exactly what Satan is looking for: To conform the Bible to Evolution and to scientific theories. That is why Paul says in Romans 12:12 "And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God"
What did heidelberg humans have or develop that made into image bearers Adam and Eve?
opposable thumbs
Great interaction regarding philosophical approach in genesis though i am not agree theologically....
What is a “gendre”
What is a “gehnus”
Latin anyone?
What a story, try the interpretation of Thor, Zeus and Poseidon
Somethings Gotta give
Great to have Closer to Truth!
Adam would be the beginning of a race of humanity who had the wherewithal to think about God and enough capacity of intuition to carry on a two way conversation with God . So some threshold of conscious adequacy must be the point at which the early humans were wise to God and had the mind to carry on an intelligent conversation with God. The idea of a computer or machine being conscious would define that threshold, beneath that horizon it is just a machine , but above some plane of efficiency , the existence of a soul is well concluded.
so, why 6 million years of earlier hominids then? Not to mention 5 billion years of other organisms.
@@scambammer6102 The sense of time is based on the apprehension of the moment . So if no one cared cared, and no one was keeping track of time, then these passages of time are irrelevant . It is like when you go to sleep and the night passes as if one moment you fell asleep, and you had some moments of a dream , but otherwise, time seems to have no substance of any duration , you wake up as if you just feel asleep, and so the sense of time is only meaningful for a careful awake and conscious observer. In a sense, all those eons of time , are just like a passing away of one night , to any observer who is not aware of eons of time.
So the mystery is that God before just beginning to create the world, is confronted with the situation of no existence of any world in any eternal past, and so in comparison , any amount of time you suggest as passing , compared to any idea of an eternity of nothingness and voided empty sets of eternity , those periods of time, even billions or trillions of years in your philosophy, compared to eternity of some void without any sense of time, is like a wink of the eye , there is no difference between one moment in time with no observer of it, and infinite time of eternal moments , where yet there is no observer of those moments, then the two sets of ideas, one moment in one set notation and the other being infinite moments in one set notation , they are actually equal to each other in terms of having any significance of meaning.
What can you call God before God began to create and invoke time and space ? Any idea is as good as any other, from saying a nothingness void of God is the same as Eternal God, since no observer is consuming time or grasping any meaning from any moment in time. Time seems to be only important to an intelligent observer, but God by God alone in a void of nothing, time yet has no real meaning at all. So , if you had ONE MOMENT to know God and you had Eternity to know God, both situations are really equal in meaning, if you know God for one moment, then you know God eternally , that the idea of knowledge can dispense with any need of time, once you know all you could know , whether you know everything for a split second or you know it all persistently forever. The moment of knowing God is always the same happening. So to know God is to escape time and space, and everything of any meaning happens all together at once, like a "BIG BANG" or like falling into a Black Hole, time is rejected , and there is no space , there is "infinite density" Everything is in the same place, and all time is just one moment .
What is the reason for human cognitive development?
Survival. Plain and simple.
You see change, you assume reason.
In the case that the story of Adam and Eve in garden of Eden relates a spiritual fall or death; might the image of God have been a spiritual rise from God's creation of Adam and Eve? How could God's creation of Adam and Eve have brought about a spiritual rise from which Adam and Eve fell?
Because “god” sits back and writes directs and produces theatrical plays, and then he sits back and watches them in their entirety, despite the fact that he knows what’s going to happen in every scene.
One of the best discussion that Robert initiated with the most thoughtful and honest Christian philosopher of our days.
It is wise and sensible for Christians ( I’m one of them) to consider that Adam and Eve are symbolic as referred to by Paul in Romans 5. Jesus never referred to Adam and Eve, because in chapter one of Genesis God created males and females ( in the pleural ) not one male and one female Which is consistent with human genetics.
what about the rib thing?
I can't find any evidence in Romans 5 that Paul thought Adam was mythical. At most, he might not have considered the question of the literal existence of Adam to be important.
"The most thoughtful and honest"... could you set the bar any lower? 🤣🤣🤣
What a great discussion. I like Craig's understanding of, and discourse concerning, the first 11 chapters of Genesis. I would expand that mytho-historical account in the mythos genre by suggesting that Adam and Eve either represent all persons, in the sense of not being literal people, or which I prefer, as a hypothetical perspective shared by Origen and borrowed from Plato's view on the eternality of the individual, that the story of the fall refers to the incarnation of Mankind from a divine, eternal perspective. In other words, humans are divine beings that have fallen into a lower aspect of reality, the floor if you will (much like Isaiah 66:1 "Heaven is my throne and Earth the footstool of my feet"), and Christ came to lift us back up to where we belong. I would further suggest that the first actual individual historically mentioned would be probably Abraham. Though I haven't done enough research in this area, this is only my hunch.
Very interesting point of view. I may have to read his book. I've come to a similar conclusion about how to read the first part of Genesis, but the historicity of Adam and Eve is something that I have never felt confident in one way or another. I'm still not convinced based on this interview alone, but identifying Adam and Eve as non homo sapiens is an interesting idea. In some ways I don't think it matters so much, though. I think they could be an archetype for all "humans" or "image bearers" without necessarily being actual human individuals themselves.
Remember that there was many more humans back there: denisovans, floresiensis, heilderbergensis, and probably more.
Just give up, really. The more the historical sciences advance, the more idiotic it becomes to think that Genesis could be scientifically validated. It is a lost battle, it has always been.
@@cosmodradek I forgot I made this comment. In the year since then, I've become convinced, there was never a historical Adam and Eve in any sense. To posit that Adam and Eve were Homo Heidelbergensis is to just make stuff up for theological reasons. It's certainly not what the authors of Genesis meant. If there's any truth in the beginning part of Genesis, it's moral truth only. IMO Christians would be most honest to just accept this and treat the text as such (i.e. mythology).
Does spiritual death of Adam and Eve lead to some kind of physical separation of life in this world from God?
no
Why is this guy still interviewed?
Is the image of God for humanity a natural or spiritual development? Does the image of God for a human being mean a capacity to relate to God? If so, what did humanity develop to bring about capacity to relate to God?
What god to relate to? I see no evidence.
@@TraderTimmy 😂😂 you'll die without seeing it
It's interesting "the world's leading theologian" speculating on "what Jesus of Nazareth believed". Wasn't He supposed to be God made flesh? Shouldn't He have "known" about the Creation?
Of course Jesus knew about creation.
They can't see his contradictions, so delusional.
@@JohnnyHofmann Knew what?
Jesus knew the Bible, he didn't speak about creation because it is already in the Bible.
@@Jesusismykin The bible (new testament) was writen after Jesus died, stop inventing bullshit
Every human being on earth was a divine human creator from the divine human race. We called our home Paradise, now known as earth. Since the fall of man (humanity) we are devolving humans living on purgatory.
No.
What is mytho-history genre? What else is part of mytho-history genre?
The 'mytho-history genre' is something that WLC made up to try to make the obvious fictional story of Genesis sound less like fiction.
@@tomjackson7755 Obviously you didn't watch the video, otherwise you know this is clearly wrong.
"Mytho-history" is a genre proposed by the Assyriologist Thorklid Jacobson. It is also a view common amongst Old Testament scholars, but is known as "Proto-history" because they know internet ignoramuses such as yourself lack the critical thinking skills required to move past the name.
Lane Craig realizing late in life that his beliefs are batshit crazy so he makes up something else (also without evidence)
WLC reminds me of Ben Cason, Both are intelligent as far as book learning goes. But their minds are so wide open most of their common sense slipped right through the cracks. I don't see how either one could cross a busy street.
hey but he is still cool with virgin births, guiding stars and risen dead guys. that's what matters.
WLC is just as goofy as Dennis Prager when it comes to contriving religious nonsense. Please put a sock in it, Craig.
I'm a Christian but I don't share his view regarding the historicity of Adam and Eve. They are best understood as a myth rather than a literal history, I hold to the standard model of scientific evolution. But I don't see what's so unreasonable with believing in the resurrection though.
@@DavidS_Tan You people got to believe in Adam and Eve no matter how ridiculous it is because your whole religion is built around Adam and Eve's Original Sin and Jesus eventually coming to wash away the Original Sin you dipstick. What is wrong with believing in the resurection is dead people are dead. Bodies can't be reanimated after death. It is patently absurd to believe such foolishness just like it is absurd to believe in Adam and Eve.
Mr. Kuhn, "if there were a God" is a subjunctive phrase suggesting that there's no God. But you still reflect on whether God exists.
Non human parentage of Adam and Eve might have been spiritual, as well as having created a new natural life or physically altered an existing life?
No. It's just a made up story.
Theological anthropology -- a nonsensical term. I've watched many of Kuhn's videos and he never seems to get closer to any truth.
he never even gets closer to a clue
And do you get any closer to the truth?
He asks the questions that everybody should be asking but so few do. There may be no ultimate answers but you've got think about these questions so you can question those scammers who claim to know all the answers.
That is because you are thick.
Human image bearers in direct relationship with God without other human beings or anything else as leaders or rulers?
God really like dinosaurs. The human thing was kind of meh
Nooooooooooooooooo……
Not Bill Craig
I thought I appreciated Craig & his theories.. I'm not so sure now.. and after peeking around UA-cam a bit and hearing some of his "less heard" remarks.. I think I'm gonna jump ship.
What makes you think this?
Species are a group of living organisms consisting of similar individuals capable of exchanging genes or interbreeding. I have Neanderthal genes in my genome. Thus we could interbreed with Neanderthals. They part of the human species. We do not need a philosophical treatise to help us establish that. KISS!
Craigs voice is what I wants Gods to sound like welcoming everyone to heaven
The classic doctrine of original sin is actually the doctrine of St Augustine in the 5th century and it’s logically untenable. Guilt cannot be inherited.
Physical laws like conservation of energy and momentum determine that all the particles that make you today have existed for millions of year. Nothing new to this universe was required to make you. The same laws also determine that in million of years all the particles that make you today will be thoroughly mixed with the rest of the soup of particles.
We are temporary condensations of particles with discernible boundaries and memories which gives us the ability to recognize "self" as different from "others."
If we have 100 units of effort in this life, the personal choice is how much to devote to the aggrandizement of the self and how much to the communion with others? Many religious books dwell on this conundrum.
With one God, many of them, or none, it remains the case that in this universe and for most of its 14 billion years existence, you and I have been and will be mixed with everything. I have the laws on my side.
Is there a relationship of soul to writing, and the reading of writing?
It was only last night I watched William Lane Graig in conversation with Roger Penrose from 2019. It was very good!
Six Days of Creation was really the time taken by Moses standing on a Rock , to explain God to the Israelites, making time a parable of their Exodus, so that they trekked through the wilderness six days at a time and rested on every seventh day. So, like a Dewey Decimal System, Moses as the Teacher, moved by the Spirit, was up on a rock hovering over the men, and brooding over the people, standing in God's Place, and so Moses was God. In Exodus 7:1 God as Spirit communing with Moses , says to Moses "See now Moses, I have made you to be YHVH GOD to Pharaoh , and Aaron is your Prophet". So to apply that method of the Teacher standing in God's Place , using speech out of one mouth that Moses had, to speak as the Father and speak as the Son and Speak as Spirit is THEATRICAL, the Divine Playwright such as Alfred Hitchcock would use to show his Divine Place, as the Author doing CAMEOS to walk out onto the Stage during a play to prove to the people in the audience his divine nature as the God of this Performance. Then you see, Moses took SIX DAYS to teach Israel the Creation Story, every evening for six days, he got up on a rock and delivered a sermon teaching about his lesson plan , over six days, using a code like the Dewey Decimal System tells you by the number where to find a book or a subject , on the shelves of the Library. So every FIRST DAY Moses would stand in God's Place on a rock and teach about the BEGINNING , "Let there be Light". So , every SUNDAY the first day of teaching by a method of lesson plans, Mose would teach about LIGHT. On every Second Day, Moses would teach about WATER. On every third day , Moses would focus the subject content of his sermon on the DRY LAND. Every Fourth Day , Moses would teach about Astronomy, then on the Fifth Day of regulation , Moses turned to teaching about the emergence of LIFE. Then on the SIXTH DAY , Moses would teach Israel about their HUMAN HISTORY, and then on the Seventh Day , Moses would give the blessing and there would be no further instruction except to REST. SABBATH DAY.
Then in taking license as the Law Giver, Moses would remind the people how God CREATED THE WORLD IN SIX DAYS and so Moses told the people to do diligence and complete their weeks of years doing works for each of the six days, and completing them , giving praise and blessings for the accomplishment and every Seventh Day they rested. That is how Moses regulated the Israelites during the Time of the Exodus, for all history before that Exodus, there was no story told by any earlier Patriarchs about creating the world in SIX DAYS. So in Job , there is a narrative given by God about Creation that does not invoke any regulation of six days and a day of rest to explain how God created the world. So it was the invention of Moses, where "Necessity is the Mother of Invention". Moses taught Israel, using a numerology of days, for a similar reason that the Dewey Decimal System regulated how to move through the Library to study everything.
nope
@@scambammer6102 Job 38:4 "Where were you when I laid the earth's foundations ? Tell me if you understand . Who marked off it's dimensions : Surely you know ? Who stretched a measuring line across it ? On what were it's footings set or who laid it's cornerstone , while the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy ?" ( See, nothing here of six days creations, and in contrast the Genesis story has no stars appearing until the FOURTH DAY, so there were no angels or stars for the first three days of the Genesis account, thus the Genesis account is a TEACHING METHOD OF MOSES LIVING ONE DAY AT A TIME, while then Job's account of God creating has no semblance to the Moses' lesson plan. Job's account never mentions the SPIRIT OF GOD hovering over the waters. So , these two stories do not agree on setting things to a singular account, it was Moses who was standing on the Rock in God's Place, creating the Genesis Story as applied to the conditions of the Exodus , while Job had no idea of Moses ' account of six days creation. Thus you must read again EXODUS 7:1 "SEE NOW MOSES I HAVE MADE YOU TO BE YHVH GOD TO PHARAOH AND AARON IS YOUR PROPHET". God is as a Spirit communing with Moses, so that as Moses took to DIVINE his lesson plan, the CREDIT for the acts taken by Moses is applied to YHVH God, after the fact Moses on Earth was the TEACHER, and in Moses was GOD THE SPIRIT the actuation of giving the Law.
Therefore, magic.
All Neanderthals and Denisovans were humans. Neanderthals are Eurasians and Denisovans are not Semitic, they are a mix of Eurasians and Hamites. You can see this in the heat mapping of Neanderthals and Denisovans as much as they are related to us modern day humans. Both are less related to the Semitic populations.
😃 Are you saying Homo Erectus is not human ?
@@readynowforever3676 They are now refraining from labeling the humans since they are all either humans or they are not.
I hate the way he says, "genre." I wish he would stop that.
When Christians rename half of their holy stories to “mytho-history”, I call that progress. Hopefully someday these folk figure that it’s actually all a myth. :-)
@@ridetheferriswheel8935 I don't trust you, crazy person.
After Craig’s “two years” of so-called research, there is NO WAY, that anything would have satisfied his conclusions that a historic Adam & Eve didn’t exist.
Craig is not very honest, but he’s very bright…certainly bright enough to know, that once you concede one fact about the Old Testament, it won’t be long before you intelligently and honestly have to make a myriad of reversals and concessions about the mythical New Testament.
Kent Hovind minus the Hawaiin shirt
It's the slippery slope that they are so afraid will topple their entirly constructed religion.
Every damn stone is a cornerstone.
@@oscargr_ I honestly don't think fear comes into it... some people have just reached different conclusions to you, and that's okay...
@@CJ-sw8lc it's existential crisis. Lose your faith, lose your livelihood or become a hypocrite.
There are plenty of hypocrites like that in the clergy.
@@oscargr_ honestly, I think that's too simple/convenient an explanation. There are good reasons to be a theist - and good ones to be an atheist. And people arrive at different conclusions - it's normal...
Perhaps the origins of man lie buried deep in the "mytho-history" of the Mesopotamian/Sumerian cuneiform texts, the Babylonian Enuma Elish and the epic of Gilgamesh, the Annunaki, Enki n Enlil etc etc...
Q: Why should the Judeo-Christian biblical narrative be considered factual, historical and accurate, while earlier Mesopotamian texts be considered myth ??.. who decides what is myth n what is history ?? what is the criteria ??..
I mean the Adam n Eve story in Genesis of them eating a piece of forbidden fruit offered by a talking serpent and then all of humanity be tarnished and dammed with guilt, sin and shame is just preposterous and the limit case for credulity.
Imagine taking this case to court and telling the judge..." Your honour this talking snake 🐍made me do it"...😆 🤣 😂 c'mon
Also, examine the Abram/Abraham story...he was from Ur of the Chaldees, then Mesopotamia, now, a region of modern day Iraq, wouldn't that make him an Iraqi ...🤔 hmmmm.
A pagan Iraqi convert to Judaism, who is the "Father of Judaism, Christianity & Islam...And this dude Abram was promised Canaanite/Palestinian/Syrian land by this YHWH/Elohim/Annunaki/ancient advanced alien god to start a new generation...etc etc...
This sounds to me like one of the first usurpation and land grabbing events in history, if it's true ??...
No wonder the modern day Palestinians have beef with the Jews/Israelis, so called God's chosen people.
It's also blatantly evident, that this YHWH god is biased, shows Abram favour, is partial to Abram (rather unGodlike) and also gets Abram's barren wife Sarai pregnant...And that is after Abram gets Hagar, Sara's servant woman pregnant...🙄 WTFudge ??..🤣😂🤪
Now Is this myth, fact, history or allegory ??..
Remember the apostle Paul's words to the Galations in 4:24 when referring to the Abraham narrative of the OT..."WHICH THINGS ARE AN ALLEGORY"..
2 Cor 3:6.."Who hath made us able ministers of the New Testament, NOT of the LETTER, but of the SPIRIT: for the letter killer, but the SPIRIT giveth LIFE".
A clear indication that the Bible is not a history book, nor is it meant to be taken literally, rather, it is to be understood through a Spiritual lens with a Christ Mind and Christ consciousness. 👊 ✌
Even the whole tower of Babel n the Nimrod story in the OT is an allegory, if only more people knew what that story is meant to convey spirituality we'd be better off collectively as a species.
Sadly, the vast majority don't get it and will never get it.
Most walk that broad road that leads to destruction.
Awake to the inner divinity.✌🏼☝🏼❤
Could it not be that Adam and Eve were not ancestral to the Neanderthals and Denisovans but far more recent as per mytho-history, or history and other biblical accounts? Would that leave the older humans out in the cold in terms of the original sin (as per Andrew Loke)? I don' think we know or can foresee how God handles these people (however we may define them), just as we do not know how he handles people of other current religions and cultures who may never have heard of the Bible in any tangible sense. I would not assume that they are all considered as fallen and end up condemned. If that were the case I could no longer be a practicing Christian.
all of the other heidelberg humans would have been fallen from a first pair of Adam and Eve; or the whole of heidelberg humans fell into spiritual death?
what about Australopithecus?
Robert.. Please...
Please have more WLC? I’m with you!
Further from truth.
Interesting. But basically just substituting one narrative for another. Or at best adding one meta narrative on top of another. But kudos to anyone today who has some type of desire to write a systematic theology.
couldn't they do something more productive?
The Bible is trust worthy and reliable !!!
Only if you use it as a paperweight.
@@TurinTuramber You can't prove that 😉 . I have tested it and it is reliable you have just been brainwashed by atheist delusional scientists.
@@TurinTuramber And it burns just as well as the Quran.
*“Trustworthy*”, indeed. 🤦🏼♀️*
As kindling for fire, highly recommended.
Were Adam and Eve the progenitors of natural humanity, or could Adam and Eve be progenitors of a spiritual humanity?
and what about frodo?
If you look around the world, every single ethnic group seems to have its own genealogical adam equivalent emphasizing that they are the chosen people of god or whoever they revere and fear. The Genesis story tells us nothing more than that.
Actually, you are quite mistaken. The emphasis on Adam and Eve as the progenitor of all people is quite exceptional in ancient literature and makes the chauvinism that comes out of ethnic identity more difficult. If ultimately, we all come from a common source, then their is no ultimate priority of one group or race over another. It is worth pointing out that when Darwin wrote On Origin of Species part of his ideological agenda was the posit a rational basis for discrimination between the races. Take a look at the full title of this work: "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life".
@@markrutledge5855 Sorry it is you that is quite mistaken. I have even been to the place my local native tribe says all people came from.
@@tomjackson7755 How am I mistaken again? What part of my assertion above is incorrect in your estimation? Surely you are not arguing my point based on one anecdotal claim.
@@markrutledge5855 Origin stories are quite ubiquitous among ancient cultures unlike you claimed. I wouldn't be surprised to find out the the Adam and eve story was stolen from some other culture like so much of the rest of the bible.
I'm not even going to go into how you got all of the Darwin stuff wrong or why you even added that irrelevant nonsense.
to my 'weird thinking' it's matter of timeframe the 'belief' in current time is just like what ever happened..
we are not sure in different timeframe what kind was the belief available, for example in pyramids era, in gobekli tepe era, in machu pichu era, in aztec era or even in pithecanthropus era..
would be good just keep the understanding for 'believe algorithms' what ever available in our current timeframe no need going back too far whether it the same or not the 'meta conscious' of cosmic always changing.. 😊
Philosophy which is expressed only by language - can only be understood by those who master that specific language. So, the Hebrew bible talks about the preparation of an intelligent environment - in the realm of thought, that will suit any humanoid who wishes to understand this specific language - Hebrew. The only virtue of the Hebrew bible is the introduction of the Hebrew language to Humanity - do you think that the garden of Eden was a physical space for the beginning of humanity at large? An absurd. Adam was the first person-metaphor to understand Hebrew, he also gave names himself, the proper words… that was his ONLY tusk - to learn Hebrew - this is the only exercise god gave him- a linguistic one Hebrew … No philosopher can borrow Hebrew ideas since his language doesn’t allow it not verbally nor conceptually… it’s a diversion … 6 days is only a mathematical hint to the decimal system, (no 6 sheshet = 1000 in gimatiria). (days Yamim= 100 in gimatria) 10 is the mathematics of Hebrew and Hebrew geometry. The divine names are scientifically true and are seen in decimal geometry. So the story is not the beginning of Human beings - as scientists know. it’s the beginning of Hebrew speaking Adam. of Hebrew thought Not religions even - but this is what people do all over the world when they get lost in translation or even fail to understand their own language. Especially they have no clue of Hebrew which is coded 4 times … Jesus never spoke Hebrew, so the information you get is a 10th hand version, not even from Jesus himself, but gossip after gossip, Aramaic to Greek to Latin to French to English etc. a simple math will show you the probability that the end massage has any connection to the Hebrew source, YET good enough for billions
the Hebrew Bible is also BS.
Ok
Only the Sun was the inventor of electromagnetic waves. The eyes of higher animals are a gift of the Sun god. We can put the Adam label on the Sun.
"Theology" in all its monster forms will never replace Science. Craig is simply flailing. And...its very funny.
The story of adam and eve is a very primitive story most likely spread by word of mouth that ended up in the jewish torah and adopted by the roman empire when they added new manuscriptst to the Torah to have their official roman bible.
nO,.thats completely inaccurate
WLG: It would be morally reprehensible that there could be human or human like creatures that wouldn't fall under God's grace...
The same God who would condemn people who don't believe in the Christian mythos to eternal damnation? No...of course not.
How do you think your second sentence is compatible with your first?
People are offered grace, and it is only by rejecting that grace that they end up in eternal damnation.
@@sedmercado24 They are not compatible... And that's exactly the point.
@@oscargr_ that second statement is even false...no Christian think that is only going to be christian in heaven..to start with Job was a polytheist...Moses and OT prophet weren't christian..there is even argument if they were strictly monotheistic..
@@hushgaming9880 MANY Christian believe that.
@@oscargr_ never met any..but In this case the christian that matter is William Craig and William Craig doesn't believe that
If the Judao-Christian God could rewrite parts of the Bible, which obviously He could, would He not remove "made in My image", "kill (nearly) all sinners", "the flood", "Lot's daughters", "You are My people", and so on and so on? So why hasn't He?
he's lazy af
Theology creates its own paradoxes.
That's why they invented apologetics.
It's a way to invent and modify arguments to cover up the potholes that make religions incoherent.
It's Funny How Science and Religion Use Both Differences and Commonality as Proofs or Unknowns in Choice Form.
Further,
I haven't Read this Book.
However to Me, Attempting to Explain In Detail Religous Documents/Practice of 2000 Years ago or More is Neither here nor there.
To Me to Draw Inspiration, Commonality, Knowledge and Faith from the Documents and Practice of Religion Long Ago is the Most Important Influence from that Past.
Clearly the Past including the Bible Writers are Recording and Attempting to Explain the God Dilemma. They are Pushing the Boundaries of the God Conclusion.
As an Example, I Suspect the Human God Conclusion Long Predates the Eve and Adam Theory.
Interestingly The Bible Writers are Progressives in that they are Recording for the First Time. Back then Someone Created the Ability to Write with Agreed Definitions. Human Brilliance Drawn from the God Influence.
Further Again,
Attempting to Explain Ancient Religous Writings has the Same Problem as Explaining Darwin's Evolution Theory.
The Same Problems of Very Very Little Evidence Remains, even from Only 5000 Years ago.
Therefore to Me, was there Just One Adam and Eve or Many ?.
I Don't believe the Bibles Excludes more than One Pair of Adam and Eve but More Importantly Connect AE's Creation to God. Therefore Homosapiens, Neanderthals etc can Fit with the Adam and Eve Conclusions of the God Bibles.
Good Topic.
@We Don't Have Supreme Love for Negations Chicken.
Scientific Adam and Mitochondria Eve likely lived thousands of years apart. The Biblical story is clearly a mythical telling, in the sense Joseph Campbell meant.
You have not read his book. If you did you would be aware that you have just made a ccomplete fool of yourself.
@@TBOTSS wlc is not an anthropologist. His book is a joke. There is no evidence that there ever was an adam or eve except an old book of fairy tales.
This is not about mitochondrial Eve / y-chromosome Adam.
@@TBOTSS No no... You clearly misunderstood what he said in his book.
So they were part of the evolutionary process, but one day only two people were born of some parents in the same place and they were the first with human traits? Of if scientific timelines are being somewhat applied did God step in millions of years after initial creation and start the human branch separate from the evolution process?
Sounds like another attempt to align the bible with science, just don't think about it too hard.
My first thought was talking about this event happening 700K years ago would be the first thing to ruffle feathers with many Christians. Many subscribe to around 6K years for the Adam and Eve family tree.
well he has to believe in adam and eve (he says) so he just makes up stuff and sticks them in there. This is called "scholarship".
Yes, in the beginning, the foundational character of man is revealed to be flawed and lacking in spirit. We see the history of this condition and the inspiration of God tapping on man's shoulder.
@Constructive Critique _"Yes, in the beginning, the foundational character of man is revealed to be flawed"_
That is only a Christian's concept, not that of Jwish or Islamic.
All religions Evolve biblies once they reach critical mass of membership, these bibles are not the word of god but based on the local morality
“The Bible Came from Arabia “, Kamal Salibi,1985. Gen. 1:2 has Thm as Tihamah- Hijaz, Asir and Yemen- in western Arabia, not the ‘deep.’ The ‘Jordan ‘ nowhere called a river in the OT. Junaynah at Dn- garden of Eden- at 20/20 by 42/55 in Asir region western Arabia with the 4 rivers and gold etc. Still Adam and Eve mythical and the trees. The bible contains myth, legend, history and science. The OT has yet to be translated. The little- but significant- parts Kamal Salibi has translated is interesting and important. Science says the sun’s shadow reversing itself occurs in the Tropical Zone- western Arabia- not Palestine,Pennsylvania or Pleiades as related in King Ahaz ‘s time and geographic area.
Craig requires a certain definition of Man, for his Anthropology. Then he looks to Paleontology.
This is a prolegomenon to his forthcoming Philosophical Theology, likely.
Craig is very selective on what “evidence” and “rationale” he deploys to justify his faith and religious dogma.
The dismantling of Craig’s stance on most things is rudimentary and frequent.
Embarrassing to watch sometimes.
@@PetraKann yet he never seems embarrassed. That's his super power.
@@scambammer6102 The supreme Intellect and Supernatural presence of Super-Craig. Nobody can counter the arguments presented by Super Craig.
Nobody!
My head hurts.😂❤
Never seen you do such a long disclaimer at the start of your other videos? That’s an tacit bias
What the hell is mythoshistory? William should stop scamming people.
It’s history told through symbolism. It could not be more simple, sadly people don’t understand this, or the more likely, people don’t want to learn
@@thetannernation
Sure, it’s pretty easy… the entire story about Adam and Eve is made up… they are fictional characters that are supposed to symbolize that you should be obedient and never question God… or your leaders who claim to speak for God.
Funny how most of the stories of the OT have the same message.😂
Kudos
Well, one thing we know for sure is that Craig would be the last person on earth to ask about origins, because his 'theory' is that a "Magic Man in the Sky" done it. This might satisfy a kindergarten student, or folks with that level of ability to think critically, but not much of anyone else on the planet.