Christianity and the Tooth Fairy - John Lennox and Don Demetriades at Montana State University
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 окт 2024
- www.veritas.org... - The Veritas Forum at Montana State, 2015
Full library available AD FREE at www.veritas.org....
Over the past two decades, The Veritas Forum has been hosting vibrant discussions on life's hardest questions and engaging the world's leading colleges and universities with Christian perspectives and the relevance of Jesus. Learn more at www.veritas.org, with upcoming events and over 600 pieces of media on topics including science, philosophy, music, business, medicine, and more!
Dr Lennox is such and inspiration and such an encouragement.
I love the way John always puts these philosophers in their place while respecting them as human beings. Even though they are fools because they deny God
Wait till tragedy strikes or old age leaves you lonely , disabled and dying , perspectives change , for me there has to be a deeper meaning , God !
There is, trust me! My testimony is a witness. The evidence ive gathered is a witness. One day, God will wipe away death, pain, suffering. And we can enjoy life,.if we keep strong in the faith , that Jesus, God incarnate, second person of the Trinity, died for our sins, and was raised.
Lennox is awesome, everyone should listen carefully to him
Discussions are much more enjoyable than debates.
I adore John Lennox. With relative ease he addresses his arguments from scientific, linguistic, historic, mathematical and theological perspectives; in the blink of an eye he cites four or five pertinent quotes from notable scholars, and he does all of this in ways that almost everyone can comprehend. While other debaters seem to lose steam about halfway through, he only builds momentum and becomes even more restless with the ideas rotating around in his head. He does this with conversations, debates, and during question and answer portions. Phenomenal. I like Don, I really do. He is self-effacing and humble, which is not an easy thing to find in the secular debating world. He even put the moderator on the spot with the glasses quip, which I found to be a very humorous high point in the conversation. However, he does not appear to have much experience in a debating arena, at least in this case. At one instance he even makes Lennox's point regarding intelligent design by observing watches. I do hope that this venue helped cause Don and other audience members to seriously consider the very valid arguments in favor of Christianity, at least to the point of investigating the facts for themselves.
God sets these up for a reason ;) even hitch and kraus have defended christianity and made defence claims for us when they were attacked incorrectly by the other party. The real intellectual atheist are amazing as they are just lost with many questions, and there are too many complacent christians not seeking knowledge and asking questions.
metalShoesandjacket good point. Dr. Lennox made this same observation with Richard Dawkins specifically. Richard Dawkins makes no effort to explore the claims or beliefs of Christianity, which is ironic being that that is what a scientist would do...
@@vanguard4065 They are incurious in the extreme.
I concur!
For the moderator, Don, and audience members to search it out for themselves is the only way they will be able to grasp hold of, and finally see God for themselves.
Not that they can find God for themselves on their own - they cannot. However, if they are actually searching for the truth, God has a way of revealing himself to each individual right where they are.
@@damisa3392 He sure does.
Don tried to bring up the morality issue because he understood John was coming up with much more logical arguments, but then the morality response came and the audience gave their first applause, priceless. I hope Don will find his way to the truth, before it's too late, Jesus Christ is Lord and He suffered more than anyone ever has, in order that we won't need to suffer anymore, forever more, through Him. Much love and God bless.
John Lennox is truly a humble and faithful servant of the Lord Jesus Christ. The greatest shall be our servant, and is John Lennox ever a servant!
God, Satan, angles, Adam&Eve, sin, sacrifice, talking snake, virgin birth, resurrection, and walking water, well, religion has got you by the balls. LOL.
@@AtamMardes Religion has clouded your mind. Try faith instead.
"Fast food questions Gourmet University Professor"... Hubris of the ignorant? I applaud D. Lennox for his patience, humility and grace!
I appreciated this discourse. You could freely hear what was being said without gimmicks or loud rhetoric. Instead, I did not have to fight my initial reaction to hear the point of view given. That was simply marvelous.
It did not sway my opinion, but it did allow me to openly ask myself if I should be swayed. This was a great dialogue.
No disrespect to Lennox's opponent but I don't think he was up to Johns level philosophical training to enunciate a counter world view.
Maybe it's not the enunciator... maybe there isn't anything better to enunciate?
After listening to many such debates as this with the eminently erudite John Lennox, it seems to me that his humility alone would forbid him from admitting that he humbles himself every time he takes to the stage to give voice to his Faith in contending the case of Christ! To that, am I humbled every time I listen to him! What a treasure we have in him whose Testimony speaks to Love, that measure of Life by which all things they are deemed worthy! Thank you, Professor Lennox!
Lennox counter-part tried ... but nothing can overcome the logic and requirement of God as explanatory for the universe.
PablitaPicasita There is no suitable answer for that question; though a very interesting question I contemplate frequently.
My logical counter would be that God is a necessarily-existing meta-being, a personhood, existing akin to mathematics, present regardless of matter or the physical universe.
What does that really mean? I don't know.
It's a bit like asking 'did time exist before space-time'?
I don't think you can take an Aristotelian approach and reduce the complexity into a satisfying answer; the best I could say is that God is an eternal being outside of the universe who harnessed 'dynamic energy' (Isaiah 40:26) to generate the space we live in.
singlecellorganism13 Lennox is a nice man but severely delusional with no evidence for his delusional claims.
PablitaPicasita He is eternal and we are immortal (our spirits)
JoM80 If you believe/accept God exists, then you must know what it is that you believe/accept. So, please tell me,
1- What is God made of? (If you say God is spirit, then you are evading the question unless you explain what is spirit made of?)
2- Does God occupy space?
3- How much space does God occupy?
4- How did God create the universe? Magically?
5- What evidence do you have aside from the superstitions and fairy tales made up out of arguments from ignorance by the primitive delusional people who thought cutting the throats of their sons will establish a communication link with an invisible God?
If you hesitate to answer any of the above questions, then you have proven to yourself that you are making stuff up, and you don't know what it is that you believe in. If you promote superstitions and fairy tales as facts, then you are either a delusional naive, or a charlatan scamming the delusional naive. So, which one are you? Are you the delusional naive or the charlatan?
***** 1, 2, 3, 4 -How do you know those things?
5- You should not talk about logic and sound arguments if you have managed to form an opinion that an almighty rational invisible God magically created a pair of fully grown Adam/eve, who had no childhood, no education, no interaction with others, no life experience, no knowledge of good/bad, and no used-car salesman experience, yet the all-knowing rational God decided to mess up the fresh-out-of-oven Adam/eve by set them up to be outwitted by a smart-ass talking snake to disobey his mighty self, who then huffed and pouted like a child storming off, only to come back disguised as his son to torture and sacrifice his mighty self in order to forgive a petty fruit eating mishap, and educate us with a book that teaches good moralities like how to buy slaves, how to beat slaves, how to pass slaves on to children as inheritance, how to kill unruly children, how to kill non-virgin brides, how woman should keep quiet, and how to slaughter an entire nation including their infants and animals. You should be ashamed of yourself for praising a God who orders the slaughter of even one infant.
Leviticus 25:44
Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves.
Leviticus 25:44-46
However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your
relatives, must never be treated this way.
Exodus 21:7
If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as male servants do.
1 Timothy 2:12
I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.
Luke 12:47
The servant who knows the master's will and does not get ready or does not do what the master wants will be beaten with many blows.
Deuteronomy 22:20-21
If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the young woman’s virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done an outrageous thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father’s house. You must purge the evil from among you.
Deuteronomy 21:18-21
If any man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father or his mother, and when they chastise him, he will not even listen to them, then his father and mother shall seize him, and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gateway of his home town. And they shall say to the elders of his city, "This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey us, he is a glutton and a drunkard." Then all the men of his city shall stone him to death; so you shall remove the evil from your midst, and all Israel shall hear of it and fear.
Exodus 21 Numbers 31
we see your god approving of ethnic cleansing and killing babies.
1 Samuel 15:3
3 Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.
How incredibly rude this "moderator" was. Just appalling.
What do you expect it's Montana State---- not exactly the intellectual capital of the world. Even as the moderator carried himself like an amateur Lennox has done so many of these it clearly didn't faze him in the slightest.
It is true that he sometimes interjected possible views from time to time into the conversation, which does, technically, go beyond the scope of "moderator", but I thought he kept things relatively on track and did appear, on the whole, fair to both sides.
I didn't find him to be rude. Did I miss something?
Moritz A. the moderator is a rude jackass because its his only way of coping with his ignorance.
Dr. John Lennox, I praised God for opening our conciousness to understand HIS GLORY!
I could listen all day to the wisdom of John Lennox. I wish a lot of today's Christian preachers I see on TV had the same wisdom but no, instead many of them like to perform and shout to hype people up, which is ok if u are already converted but I think others are put off by it. Just sayin.
Good discussion. Worth the time.
it seems and looks to me that Don Demetriades argued under a very sad and narrow minded point of view and his arguments were not even logical...not to mention a "competitive" logical response. It was like Lenox debating a guy with the understanding of a child.
How so? What did Demetriades say that wasn't logical?
Demetriades and the moderator come off as almost childishly unaccomplished, relying are styling and posturing to compensate for an obvious lack of intellectual depth.
For so called knowledgeable geniuses to say that you cannot be a Christian and a scientist is to show all with utter self-importance and self-worth ignorance beyond belief.
Proving in just that one assertion the fact that they are the more bigoted when compared to a true Christian and not just one by self labeling. Guilty as charged. Just like the one who has through their proclamation logically proven to be undeserved of the self anointed mislabeling of a 'true scientist'.
Exactly. They thought that labelling scientists, who doesn't stand with their view, as "Pseudoscientist" would make them "true scientist".
The guy on the left hasn't the intellect to do atheism justice, perhaps its not possible. Finding a competent spokes person for atheism is harder than finding one for theism.
John Lennox knows the father. He's faith is not blind. This knowledge is then used to have faith in the father for those things we dont yet understand. Learning the differences is important.
Love Lennox. 🤩🤩🤩🤩
Atheist call people of faith close minded but they don't think you can be a science person and a Christian. Rather hypocritical.
Thank u john
I'm not voicing my opinion on the debate. But I can say that it was incredibly mismatched.
+Deego the Great Nice.. :) If it's not an opinion... i don't know what it is. :)
+Drew Oyson more like an observation
Don Demetriades, this moderator and fellow atheist/evolutionists such as Richard Dawkins alternatively, would never dare to pin the problem of diseases, pain and suffering or of the fading bad eyesight as therefore a process of evolution and '''''natural selection'''', but are content to conversely blame God for not doing a good enough job. The world was created in perfection, but judgement ensued when man disobeyed God while in that state of perfection, and that is why Rom.ch1 says that all men will stand before the Lord without excuse
Lennox is always more prepared than anyone he faces.
His lack of socks is hard to ignore.
The atheist is so typical of that genre - so self-satisfied with the small and temporal understandings they’ve created for themselves. There is nothing inquisitive about them. It was an understated masterstroke when Professor Lennox called him on his use the term “magical”, saying “I don’t believe in magic.”
Touché.
Look at how Don's eyes begin batting to recalculate at 38:50 😂
Some magic would've come in handy for him at that point. Lennox is 😎
Terrible moderator, who thinks he is super clever.
+Leguan216 I was really wondering if John was debating two instead of one. It really was a good exchange though
Romans 1:22 "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,"
God did appear to Saul of Tarsus who was an enemy of God. God knocked him off a donkey and revealed Himself to him. This same man later suffered immensely for his revelation later known as Paul.
Lennox debating two people.
He could've taken on 3
If as Don Demetriades says, that he believes what he does has great resonance; virtually every action he undertakes, is that not in itself a direct revelation that he could attribute to power beyond himself, since the "resonance" must resound from somewhere, or is his stance here seemingly just one of arrogance? To the question of suffering I would add, what is the point of living without suffering if it is through our compassion for those in need we should experience and express Love as would anyone wish to experience and express it their self? It is, after all, and as Life is, something more than one's self.
What Lennox does is to divide all arguments into a pair of loose probabilities. Sometimes giving weight to the question as "very interesting, "fundamentally well based," -whatever. Then gives full weight to the probability factor of his choice with lots of waffle, quotes from (usually ancient) authority and his opinion. By discarding the basic meat of the question he just practices wordy evasion.
Imagine if you grew up in an environment where there was no pain or suffering how you would come to be as a human. How would your character be different ? Would you have any respect for your other self that were raised in that environment and knew nothing else ? Think of the hedonist robot in Futurama but dial up the personality to the power of 1000 while removing the capacity for humor comes from the reflection of and on tragedy and the world I described is devoid of that essential element. I would immediately murder me out of shame and revulsion and feel no regret whatsoever.
Suffering is because of sin. Plain and simple.
With respect to genetics, natural selection only works at the phenotype level, not at the genotype level. At the genotype level we have only two choice, chance or design.
Flip two coins. In the air. They come down on one side or the other. Chance is nothing. 😷😷😷😷
Horriblie moderator. Since when does the moderator butt in and start giving his criticisms and personal opinions? I would be so embarrassed for that university. The moderator took up time voicing his own views, and who cares what his views are. People wanted to hear the two debaters. Plus when the moderator wasn't complaining, he looked bored to death.
Somebody needs to buy Don a long pair of socks, or get him some longer pants. :)
Singlecell, The Trinity, God, is Love; 1John 4:8. Before God spoke the universe into existence, God did as a husband and wife often do; they wanted to share this love, of course, their progeny could rejected them. And they did. But to those who chose to come home, God provided a way....As to your second question, if you are truly a seeker read Romans 11:33-36. God does not need Anything, that is why He is God! Have a good night.
Kids can reject their parents, but they are not punished for all eternity for doing so, neither are their kids and every other human alive or to be born in the future for all time punished for their rejection, only a psychopath would do that, a normal parent has unconditional love for their children.
That's old timer verse 6 chapter 3, there that makes it true.
+Jeroboam2010
All God had to do was to create wise and loving and moral Beings, just like Himself. Then there would be no need for hell or for massive suffering. If God couldn't figure out how to do this, then He's not really God, is He?
+Jeroboam2010
Yes, I didn't understand it because you haven't explained it.
"Hell is a necessary and logical consequence of Unconditional love."
Why is this is a matter of logic? It's not self-evident, so you need to explain it.
Thanks
+Jeroboam2010
Thank you for that explanation. It still it doesn't make much sense to me, though.
"If people automatically love God, as you claimed God could create us to do ( and I fully agree God could do that)...the problem is that it wouldn't be love as expressed in the bible. It would have nothing to do with love. If we want LOVE, it must be freely chosen by the one who loves."
That's not the scenario I had in mind. I mean that God had at least 2 other options to ensure we will all be loving.
1) Give humans the hardwiring that makes them loving. Instead He chose to give us hardwiring that enabled evil to occur. He chose to give serial killers a lack of empathy, for example. If you aren't born with empathic circuitry in the brain, it cannot be chosen. It's a matter of hardwiring. This is a deliberate choice on God's part to ensure evil will be part of this world. If God determines evil is therefore necessary, this illustrates His imperfections.
2) Since's He's all-knowing, He could have used his powers of omniscience to foresee which beings would choose to do evil, and then eliminate them from the creation.
I have yet to see anyone successfully reconcile God and the problem of Evil. If God is a Perfect Being, then BY DEFINITION so are his creations. If they are not, then by definition God is not the Perfect Being He is alleged to be.
If you can successfully come up with an answer to these contradictions , then I would reconsider a biblical God's legitimacy. Until then, it remains a paper-thin fantasy.
cheers
Not a very satisfactory moderator here lol.
I just do not have the faith to believe it was all by chance when nothing went bang and formed everything from that nothing and all just happened to get into the right order to form life in the most complex forms we see now. Talk about far fetched. I can see how God did it through His Word. A design that can not be copied very easily or quickly. Sorry The evidence I see around me shouts out loudly God did it. Not hocus pocus nothing making everything over endless time and by hap hazard chance.
+plume2035 Your personal incredulity is worth zilch
Martyn Cornell Not my problem. I believe the Word of God and the evidence of His creation over any so called scientist who only accepts evidence that agrees with his theory anytime. I used to just go along with what they said but now I read more and look at the other side of the story. I do not have the faith to go along with all their codswallop now as I did. Your problem, not mine.
+plume2035 There IS no evidence of "his creation"
As I said, that is your problem, not mine. I see it constantly. Open your eyes.
while i cannot provide evidence of the lack of A god, there is evidence of the lack of YOUR god. christian god is supposed to be infallible, as is the bible. Catholicism was forced to admit that the earth is not the center of the universe in 1991. the pope is also supposed to be the infallible voice of god on earth. the pope was forced to admit that the infallible word of god got it wrong. this does not disprove that your god exists but it does prove he is not infallible and therefore not god. so the most you can assert is that some powerful metaphysical being who is indeed fallible, and quite uninformed, exists. i can provide more if youd like me too, but if you have faith in your faith youll put it to the test and research things like this yourself.
The dude in the bow tie is a great referee! I do not accept the argument of the atheist as satisfying in ANY terms. 1:16:30
I ask from ignorance...do you, Christians, believe the Bible/Christianity to be the absolute truth of the whole existence with 100% certainty? Or is it more like "leaning" toward the Christian world view with a realization that it could be wrong after all?
Thank you.
Hyder Noori I like your question because it sounds to me like you are really thinking about some of these things humbly. A few years ago I had a professor say to me "I believe in absolutes, but I believe in nothing absolutely." This was his conviction. And it serves as a warning against fanaticism, believing things with what you call 100% certainty. He was a Christian and I share his convictions... How Christian theologians have historically explained faith and belief is also very important. How you define faith and belief are also important... Best.
+Harry Flashman All of the Apostles except for John died a martyr's death. These deaths were not quick deaths for the most part and none of them denounced Jesus! That is a bit of evidence in itself. Lets also not forget that many of these deaths are recorded other than in the bible. These accounts should build our faith that Jesus came and did what was for told centuries before fulfilling prophesy.
+Hyder Noori Interesting question. I think that Christianity is a worldview you must accept by faith. Now I do not mean blind faith--which is the atheist's definition of faith--but reasonable faith. Fides et Ratio. I believe that faith in God begins when God reveals himself to you (i.e. by revelation), but that event should only be your starting point. It is the believer's task to arm himself with wisdom and knowledge, not only so he can preserve his faith, but also so he can know God and how God moves through creation and history.
Reason, i believe, is a tool which supplements faith. It is a tool given us by God so we can interpret the world around us. I do not believe you can rightly call somebody who believes Christianity out of sheer evidence a true Christian, because Christians must come to God by faith, in principle. But that is not blind faith. Revelation is a perfectly valid source of knowledge, as Lennox himself pointed out. With certainty of the knowledge created by this revelation, we come to see the world in a new framework or worldview. With this framework, we come to see the world for what it is, under the framework that God gives us.
So you can say that our predisposition toward the natural evidence is not purely scientific, that is in the modern definition. But this does not mean it is irrational belief. You must acknowledge that science is not not the only source of truth. It is not the only framework under which reason is validly employed. Faith coupled with reason can be categorized as philosophy, and these definitely produce scientia, or knowledge. And with this knowledge, we can interpret reconcile the evidence with our faith. This is to say that while our worldview is not entirely scientific, as in the modern sense, it is not incompatible with science; while not empirical, it is philosophical down to its core.
With regard to biases created by worldview, all people have worldviews they hold, so all people have biases. Not even atheism is exempt, so we can take that to mean that there is no such thing as neutral territory when it comes to the interpretation of evidence. As Christians, our biases lie in accord with the notion that there is a Creator God who created the heavens and the earth. This is the most honest answer I could give you.
as lennox said it is faith that is evidence based, aside from biblical prophecy to name one example of evidence of many, but personally I've had experiences that strengthen my faith, but to answer your question I'm sitting at 99.9% sure, I've gotta leave room for the possibilty of being wrong but I have my reasons for believing what I do and not alot against it... I've looked at it with an open mind and listened to arguments against it and I've gotta say for me I've came to the logical conclusion, not that God exist but the probabilty of his existence is very high
You have two ways to see that. One, the Bible may have some errors in it. Can you be 100% about it? As much as anything else. Finally, the witness of the spirit is generally more convincing than anything else. That said, I know you can choose to play off anything you want. People do it all the time.
There is a very good set of reasons to believe. The historical case, the philosophical case, the moral case, & the theological. Being willing to look into it, & to be pleasantly surprised to be wrong (coming from nonbelief or another faith) is required. You have to show desire & stick with it. If you never have a solid, fact based answer, that is because you gave up before the pay off.
Many people expect it should be easy to tell which is right. If the question matters, it is rarely so. I have often received less than welcoming people of all faiths. They say they are happy to have you there, but then pull the rug from under you. I have had people who are morally weak, show great kindness, compassion, & morality at times. I have personally been that lack luster person of faith. Honest to God it is true. It proves we are human, but you knew that.
The point is, read the Bible as a history, because it is. It is just as much history as what the Romans recorded at the time (more so at times). Think about if Jesus said & did righteous things. Get the context of what is being said from people who know, not those that scorn it. Look at the arguments people give logically. Do they hold water, or is there a hole? Is there a hole in what you came up with to explain that hole (for or against it). Critically examining your point of view is highly valuable! You might just find you are right & it stands! You might also find out that it sounds good, but is empty. You will never find out, if you do not look for it.
Finally, take things to the logical ends the idea implies. You cannot say everything is subjective & then say but this is just true. If you say yes to the former, the latter is false. If you say yes to the latter, the former is false. If you cannot see a rational third option (& there often is one), then you must accept what you believe is true from what you Know. I stress, Know, not doubt. I doubt everything, but once I know it is true, I need evidence to doubt it again.
God Bless you to never quit on this journey. John 3:16 is quoted often, because it matters. The rest is great also.
The Christian faith is like a long rope pulled tight. In one direction the rope stretches out behind us, disappearing into the distance past. The rope is anchored in that direction at a point at which the God who created all things, including time, became a human being in our time, lived, suffered, died ans was raised again from the dead. The rope runs straight and true from that distant anchor planted long ago in our history, into the dim future, our future, which we are told is ultimately gathered into God’s eternal present, the “eternal now,” to borrow Paul Tillich’s phrase….
“ is there any meaning to it [our transient and insignificant existence] all?” we ask.
Many voices answer, “No”. There is no meaning except perhaps the meaning we wish to assign to life.”
But Brunner reminds us,” The Word of God, the Creator of all these suns and races” say, “Yes! You mean something ! You mean something to God!”
We have meaning, Brunner says, because we belong to God, who created us and because the God who created us loves what he made. Beyond this life of contingency and transience “ is another life that longs to break forth” on us. “It has broken forth once in Jesus Christ, The Risen Lord, and it will break forth” for us all in the Resurrection.
This other life is Eternal life. It is the quality of this eternal life, which has broken in upon our existence in Jesus Christ, that both judges our shattered existence and gives it meaning, that both reveals our human frailties and points beyond our frailties to God’s purpose to make us like Christ.
(p.251)
Invitation to Theology , Michael Jinkins
no matter what answer you give they will reject as they have with christ....as JESUS has said shake the dust off and move on....christianity DOES have a answer do suffering and evil they just dont like the answer.....NEVER wate your time with fools
Those two dudes were in way over their heads. Not one original though from them. Obvious R. Dawkin stans. 😂
Doc Lennox is very much a pumpkinesque character.
The more you look for God the more you can understand him if you read the Bible to the "NEW TESTAMENT" you will see how Jesus his son made everything new don't just read the old testament
It is not the same law of gravity. Newton used Newtonian gravity, Hawking referred to quantum gravity and the universal wavefunctiin.
+Darth Erebus Personally, when I look at quantum mechanics, I'm all the more amazed by how great God is. The point Lennox is making is that God isn't just an explanation for things we don't know yet, but the more science reveals about the world, the more we realize that God is so much more than we imagined him to be.
+Timothy Fish Sure. I'm neither an atheist or really a theist, but you have to wonder whether these physical theories and their ontologies are compatible at all with the nature of any specified God.
Darth Erebus It is a good question to ask, but when the God we are talking about is specified to be the one who made the Universe and everything in it, I don't see any incompatibility with anything that accurately describes the world.
+Timothy Fish Is God omniscient?
+Timothy Fish Is God omniscient?
Did the tooth fairy assist John lennox in all the millions he has made from this racket
Why god allows suffering is easy to answer. Satan said to Jesus " bow down to me and I will make you king of all you see " Jesus didn't say they were not hes to offer. Satan is the God of this world , its why the great cities are hes to offer.
When you choose to live in satans world dont expect God to run an ambulance service. Dont blame God for the condition the world is in when it was created by us and satan. The one he gave us was perfect. We asked God to leave us alone. Hence the saying " be careful what you pray for , you might just get it "
Jesus begged the father to have the cup of suffering removed from him. Such was he's fear of it that he sweated blood just prior to it being poured out on him. Everything has limits , even God. If the removal of suffering in this world was possible the cup that he feared wouldn't have been poured.
Again God has limits. He isn't a know all that satan says he is. Abraham and Isaak prove this. God said to Abraham " NOW !! i know that you will not withold your son from me ". The fear Jesus felt was insanely intense , it caused him to sweat blood. Dispute this horrific fear he stayed to endure the crucifixion.
This shows that even when pressed beyond hes limits hes love for us has no bounds.
Lennox 😎
Too much from philosophical angle, not anywhere near enough clear scripture from the God breathed words, which answers virtually all competent and relevant questions about God and his creations. We can appreciate philosophy from Christians, but God's breathed words are given to mankind by the Holy Spirit and God's breathed words are always inclined to being questioned. God's breathed words, though, direct Christians to "rightly divide" or " carefully handle" them. God's breathed words prove truth and expose what is false, consistently.
It's a debate with an atheist who doesn't believe the bible is true bringing that up wouldn't convince anyone.
@ 44:30 Punt!!!!
none of these men know God through Christ revealing him matt.11:27-30
Silent witness
this is the worst veritas debate.
the evidence? the earth is flat.
prove me wrong
😅p😊
he needs to know how to dress
ARRGHH I can't stand theists who say science is a faith and you believe in it, for the last time no one has faith in science, because we are all willing to be wrong, those who have faith have closed minds ,they believe they have the truth and will not follow the evidence, even when parts of their holy book are proven ridiculous , they will twist things untill it fits their beliefs,those that follow science,if you prove something that they hold the utmost belief in to be wrong they throw it straight out the window ,doesn't matter how hard it is for them ,they will follow the evidence.Theists like this fellow say , their beliefs are based on evidence, then never ever produce any, they also state God can't be understood by science as he is outside our u der standing, well how do they Understand what he wants , how do they know his meaning behind his words, the truth is they don't, they interpreted the bible as they see fit, and twist those words to their reality, it's a horrible horrible con trick.
+Old timer complete trust or confidence in someone or something. Faith is not the same as belief. Faith is complete belief. Faith is unreserved belief. Faith is the fullness of belief. That is the definition of faith. I have faith in my Religion a complete trust and fullness of belief. You have faith in the scientific method. There are some truths you can not use the scientific method to prove.
If you were in a criminal court and had no forensic evidence would that mean you have no case? No you still have a case but you will need to rely on other types of evidence such as personal testimony or circumstantial evidence. Once you have added it all up, it will be up to you to decide if the case was made or not. If you disregard any evidence that you have a presupposition about you will fail the defendant. You will either acquit a guilty person or convict an innocent person.
Theist will change their beliefs when new information is given, why wouldn't we? DO you think Atheists are the only people with open minds? I will say there are people that feel the Bible was written by God. I think it may have been inspired by God, but I belief the New Testament to be more like biography of Jesus. Therefor I must decide if the authors were trustworthy. History tells me they were.
Laurie, God is fighting in an ever smaller and smaller ring, as mans knowledge advances God retreats, it has been happening for a few hundred years but he has been truly backed up against the ropes in the past fifty to one hundred years,as our understand of things has accelerated , so that all apologists can do now is verbal gymnastics ,and something from nothing claims along with moral questions( although why they think they have a claim on this I have no idea) you must remember where he started from was the point of view he did everything, controlled everything and everyone, etc etc, now he is reduced to scrabbling around just for some type of recognition, it reminds me of a washed up boxer who's had one to many fights but likes to remind folk he used to be the champ, unfortunately time has moved on and what he did is no longer relevant, he cuts a rather sad and pathetic figure now.
I would also add I don't have faith in the scientific method, as I said if anything was proved wrong and I mean anything, I am willing to change my mind, science so far is the best method we have to understand the way things are, why science and not God ? Well the evidence science produces can be tested then tested again, really science can be as much about trying to disprove the current understanding as it is about proving it. Can you say this about God? Theists make some very big claims what God can do, but can not in any way prove it, just one tiny piece of evidence that isn't based on your own personal version of God ( as everyone's version is different, which I find strange) not on belief or faith, it's not a lot to ask really is it, let's face it if I told you I knew a man who could walk on water and rise from the dead, what would you say to me? It wouldn't be too complementary would it :)
Also if there are contradictions in experiments in science they are repeated and repeated untill the correct answer is found, now the bible that is the word of God and the truth is crammed full of contradictions yet it doesn't matter to you, you just pluck out the bits you want, there is no trying to find the truth about the contradiction , there is no reasoning going on as to how these juxta positions can be correct, you just have faith, unfortunately that's a closed mind you are not interested in the truth because you have faith you have it, the story is already written for you, you know the ending, where as me, I haven't even read the first line yet and I'm not one hundred percent sure I understand that.
For one thing God is not fighting in a smaller ring, We no longer have a God of the Gaps. We would attribute everything we did not understand to God. Science was in conflict with a Creator. God is science. The only reason we are learning more about the world is because we are governed by very strict laws of the Universe.
Physicist Eugene Wigner confesses that the mathematical underpinning of nature "is something bordering on the mysterious and there is no rational explanation for it."3 Richard Feynman, a Nobel Prize winner for quantum electrodynamics, said, "Why nature is mathematical is a mystery...The fact that there are rules at all is a kind of miracle
I think we are programmed to look for answers. There have been plenty of Atheist Scientists that have crossed to the other side to theism or at least Deism , as a result of science.
God is a personal God and will reveal himself to different people differently. Although there is a common thread through all.
we see the order and the design in the universe. We can see rules and laws that govern the way our world not just earth but the universe. 'works. We see a written language in DNA. All DNA. a 4 letter amazing program.
I have my faith for plenty of reasons, you know that there is more than one book on Christianity Right? You know that there are plenty of books written for both Christians and atheists. And what is the answer?? You think as a Christian I know the outcome...lmao.. I friggen wish. NO I do not have the answer I have no idea. I can tell you from all that I seen and read, the answer points directly to God for me.
Most Atheists will disregard personal experiences out of hand. They claim that is not proof of God. Well I beg to differ. MY personal experiences are proof of God to me and those who were there with me. I can not make you believe that they happened, nor do I wish to, but I do not think it is supposed to work that way. I think the more you seek God the more he will reveal himself to you.
He in no way has to prove himself to the world, why the hell would he?? You have all the choice in the world. You can truly seek him or not.
My take is simple, you can decide that you want to know him, and truly seek him, the more you do the more he reveals himself to you in ways you will understand. YOU do not have to do that, you can decide that it is not important to you. Or you can think that if God was real he would prove himself to the world. That is the whole point.
Laurie you prove my point, yes there are many versions of the bible, there are thousands of different Christian sects, and there isn't a common theme, Young earthers can in no way be classed the same as those who know the world is billions of years old , those that are creationists and take the genesis story literally are completely at odds with Christians that accept evoloution, the list is endless, Christianity is all over the shop and the reason is because it's your own interpretation, there is no truth in the book, but there is a truth YOU can find if you want to just blindly beleive, but this in no way makes it true in the wider sense of the world.
How can God be science, that is a very poor statement in my opinion, theists ask scientists to prove their science all the time and if they don't know all the answers they jump up and say ha! Therefore God , that is God of the gaps ,that is all you have, because we can only trace the origins of the universe back to a few trillionths of a second after the Big Bang , you say God , well that's a very very small gap for him to exist in. A deist standpoint ,while I still don't beleive in as there is no evidence for it, is at least plausible , there is an argument to say there was a force beyond our Ken ,that existed before our universe but to jump from that to your personal God ,well that connect is too extreme . to be fair I'm not against you, I do not wish religion to be banned etc, but I do wish it was kept as a personal thing and we didn't have our leaders praying to a God before they decide to send us to war( Blair and Bush) this I find evil in highest sense, in this day and age two grown men asked their pretend friend if it's ok to go and kill hundreds of thousands of other humans and they believed he said yeh go ahead I'm on your side ,utter utter nonsense.
How John Lennox as a intelligent person can believe the things he says ,is beyond me
Lennox is a destroyer of Atheism and her logics. However, he looses me when he posits Christianity as a logical substitute (i.e. GOD coming to earth as a man and dying on a cross, etc.) GOD is not a man, and GOD cannot die. Period.
+Kenneth White It is my understanding that God can do as he wishes. He has ultimate power and ultimate control over ultimate power.
VikingPony God is all powerful, however, God can NOT do something that is unbefitting of his majesty. For example: God can NOT lie, God can NOT die, or localize Himself, God can NOT to something that is illogical, etc. Capeesh!
Anyway, I hope this answers your question.
Kenneth White
You are right on a few things, but what is human logic to God?
Yehoshua is God in the flesh. His body died, not his spirit. God is, was and always will be alive, no matter what.
Again, God can do as he wishes, regardless of how logical or illogical we see things. God is God, and God does as he wishes. He is Holy, so we can trust that everything he does is good.
VikingPony
YOU:
...what is human logic to God?
ME:
Human logic is the means by which we humans can come to know and understand truth. If God is illogical or does something illogical to the human mind, how can HE justly punish us for not understanding HIM? If God does illogical things then, when we stand before God, we will have an excuse for not believing or following. I hope this answers your question.
------------------------
YOU:
Yehoshua is God in the flesh. His body died, not his spirit. God is, was and always will be alive, no matter what.
ME:
#1 Then Christians need to STOP saying God died! Period.
#2 If Jesus' body died, the according to John 1:14 Jesus' spirit died too. It reads:
*"And the word BECAME flesh and dwelt amongst us."*
So, if the flesh died and that's what the word became, then by deduction the word (spirit) died. Capeesh!
I hope this clarifies things for you a bit.
Kenneth White
If Jesus' Body died, then according to John 1:14 his spirit died too?
A. Evidently you don't understand John 1:14.
According to your logic, the spirit died. Which is false. You said it yourself that God cannot die and what is God?
John 4:24 has an answer.
and it is my and many other Christians understanding that Spirits cannot die, let alone God.
Again, to simply put Jesus' body died, not his spirit and according to your logic the spirit died, you are false to the rest of the bible.
You seem to undermine Gods power. That is not a good thing to do.
And DON'T capeesh me again.
Christianity is false. To consider that the creator of the universe, hundreds of billions of galaxies and the universal laws of nature, has given his definitive proof about his existence on Earth in some local, temporary supernatural events, in antiquity to an isolated, illiterate few is so incredibly naive. It's mind-boggling how anyone could believe it. It's so easy NOT to believe it because it does not stand up to even the most elementary critical examination.
sounds like an argument from incredulity
+richard richardson Maybe, if there was even a dimes worth of evidence for any of the central claims of christianity.
+sauniz1 You can't be serious, surely. There is not a dimes worth of evidence for the central claims of Christianity? Of course there is. See J. Warner Wallace, William Lane Craig, James White, and Mike Licona. They're authorities on what you claim is non-existent.
+M. Aaron Give me a break, citing to me names of christian apologists. Of course you're going to find "proof" if your conclusions are foregone. It does matter a bit (to most sane people, at least) whether the proof is at all convincing or not. THese are the most important questions there are.
NO, there is not a dime's worth of evidence for the so-called original sin, for example. The story about Adam and Eve is an obvious myth. How could a story involving primordial man, a rib-woman, a mythical time and place in the distant past, a talking snake and and god, a tree of knowledge and of good and evil, cherubs etc. be a description of a real historical event? You wouldn't take this kind of story as a historical event if you read it anywhere else. There are many different literary genres in the OT, of which some are non-historical. The OT includes MYTH, SAGA,LEGENDS, ethiologies, history, annals, reports, anecdotes and novella. (Watson E. Mills, Roger Aubrey Bullard - Mercer dictionary of the Bible - Genre in the old testament page 323). The earlier the story, the more likely it is to be fictional. The story about Adam and Eve is probably the most obvious mythical story in the whole old testament. That means that there never has been a historical couple called Adam and Eve who could have “fallen”. Thus the whole farce that is the christian plan of salvation falls flat on it's face. There was nothing to atone for on the cross.
Furthermore, there is absolutely no reason to believe the gospels are like modern historical writing, as many christians (WLC and those other delusional cunts you mentioned) would have us think. There are many events presented in the gospels which should be able to be corroborated and verified from other sources, if in fact they did happen. There is no historical,extra-biblical evidence for the Bethlehem star, Herod's slaughter of the innocents,the census, the temple incident, Earth shaking and the sky turning black or the dead rising from their graves when Jesus died. Why should anyone believe any of this happened? Pontius Pilate wasn’t a proto-christian either. The trial is distorted in probably about a dozen ways for the purpose of making the jews look like the enemy, not the romans. The gospels are exactly what they themselves claim to be : euangelion, from the greek word euangelizoo; to announce good news (“evangelize”) to deeclare, bring (declare, show) glad (good) tidings, preach (the gospel). Take the texts for what they are - religious proclamation, preaching, in other words religious PROPAGANDA. Yes there was a historical Jesus, but the gospels are full of embellished, dramatized, and some times even completely made up stories, the purpose of which is to win over converts for the movement. The contents trace back to early Christian missionaries, not modern-type historians.
sauniz1 I won't waste any more of either of our time, as I see your mind is made up.
But you sure have some anger issues, calling great men one of the most vulgar of words. Did you parents raise you that way or did you become this way all by yourself?
Atheism is not a faith or a belief, John Lennox - no matter how much you may wish it to be. It is a position held by those who require evidence before they will accept something as factual and true or at least likely to meet the requirements of fact and truth. The gospels have no way of being proven as fact. To keep repeating what St Paul or St Peter o St Mark etc etc wrote does not make it any more true than me saying Zeus really exists or existed - there are plenty of ancient texts referencing that god. Why oh why does an intelligent man keep referring to writings he knows have as much validity as many many other ancient texts that he would dismiss out of hand. Yes he believes because, as he states, he is the son of the son etc of Christian ancestors. That's the sum total of what he has to say.
Look up the definition of belief and tell me naturalism isn't one.
+Michael Sleight because by definition a belief is: an acceptance that something exists or is true, especially one without proof. So please tell me again why atheism is not a belief when atheists believe there is no God with no proof to back their claim.
+Snugglepuff
a) Look up the definition of Naturalism and tell me it's identical to atheism. Can't do it? Well, that's not strange, because Naturalism is just one of many possible atheistic worldviews.
b) Even if Naturalism is a belief, lacking belief in gods is not a belief. I'm a Metaphysical Naturalist and I do hold certain beliefs about Nature, but if I was to describe my worldview to you, I would not mention the word "God" even once - not even to reject it. It's simply not part of my understanding of reality or my ontology. That's why Lennox is pushing a strawman. Rejecting concepts from other worldviews that have no apparent relationship to reality at all is not something that needs any kind of justification in my worldview.
Gnomefro
It is a belief because you believe all can be described naturalistically, despite not having access to all the evidence needed to make this claim.
Also, for people who say atheism or naturalism isn't a belief, you do an awful lot of preaching. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck but calls itself a non-belief, then it's still a duck.
+kickinthegob atheism is not a belief. It is a position held by those who require proof. Do you believe in fairies ? I would guess not, but they may exist so really you are an atheist regarding fairies. If someone could prove to you that they exist then you would have to believe in them. I' m like that about your idea of an almighty being/nonbeing that knows everything watches everything created everything listens to your silly prayers makes earthquakes sends unbelievers to hell never rests (oh apart from once on the first Sunday) watches two men have sex watches everyone have sex just in case its not good in his eyes makes it rain when there is a drought listens to silly prayers all the time mon stop from silly people who are asking for silly little things. No wonder he misses the occasional child who is suffering from cancer or being abused by a catholic or a baptist priest - to name a few . Does it all sound silly? It is to me too!!!
This guy Don Demetriades is far out classed by John Lennox. It's painful to watch
+thebullybuffalo I agree...
+thebullybuffalo I think he would agree; hence, he didn't try to debate but rather raised some standard atheist arguments for John to respond to (some of which were great, others drifted a bit).
Unless you're an atheist and then you see it differently.