God & Time with the Majesty of Reason Podcast
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 фев 2023
- Joseph C. Schmid of the Majesty of Reason Podcast interviews Dr. Craig and Ryan T. Mullins on the topic of God and time.
Special thanks to Joseph Schmid for this interview. Visit his RUclips channel here: / @majestyofreason
For more resources visit: www.reasonable...
We welcome your comments in the Reasonable Faith forums:
www.reasonable...
Be sure to also visit Reasonable Faith's other channel which contains short clips: / drcraigvideos
Follow Reasonable Faith On Twitter: / rfupdates
Like the Reasonable Faith Facebook Fan Page: / reasonablefaithorg
GET DR. WILLIAM LANE CRAIG ON THE JOE ROGAN PODCAST PLEASE!!! It would be amazing for Joe, Dr. Craig, and the world!!
That would both be the weirdest and coolest conversation ever. I would love to see it take place, but I doubt it will happen.
Joe who?
Honestly, don't think Joe has ever interacted with a Christian powerhouse on the level as Craig. Would be fun.
@@bubbillionaire2423 Yeah.. I don't think Rogan is ready for that kind of powerhouse hehe
@@bubbillionaire2423 I don’t know. Craig’s style is polite and scholarly. Would he even get a chance to make his points?
I will never be able to comprehend any of that. Oh my gosh, my head hurts so much.
Don't worry. In time, your headache will go away.
It's like to see Dr Strange debates with Kang about time and Peter Parker is mediating the debate
Timelessness is hard to conceive as temporal, finite creatures.
I agree. Timelessness and time itself are a mystery to me.
I've been looking forward to this conversation for a long time. I've been confused by Dr. Mullins' theory for a long time. However, I'm not sure if I understand it yet.
Personal struggle: Having a hard time looking past the black fingernails. 😆 Love the discussion though.
Dr. Mullins is my favorite 2000's Emo-Theologian Philosopher. And if you think the nails are bad, look at his hair.
Should you read my comment Dr. M, I love them both.
@timmy
Facts on your part.
If God is omniscient, and knows all true counterfactuals of creaturely freedom, he surely knows counterfactuals of himself, right?
So wouldn't God have always known which world out of all the possible worlds he would choose to create?
If so, wouldn't that mean there was no state in which God was ignorant of what will happen, since he always knew which world he would create, and thus always knew what will happen?
You finally are getting to not believe in the occult Jackson Plummy? Good for you. You sure had to engage in dishonesty to believe it.
@@Dhorpatan lol are you delusional or something?
Don't be like that Plummy. Please leave belief in the occult and magic and embrace logic, reality and mighty Science. Thanks Jackson Plummy!
Sounds like Molinism, combined with God’s omniscience.
Good!😁🤔
Molinism has traditionally held that God’s creative act is an arbitrary choice of a best possible kind of world, so, suppose God has a trillion best feasible worlds, God elects without regard to the choice of the elect within that world so that none may boast
Most Holy Family Monastery ☦️ ⛪️ ✝️, also, strongly proves that God exists and that God is the creator of time. Christianity is true ✝️ ⛪️ ☦️ ✝️ ⛪️ ☦️ MHFM✝️
A definition of ‘event’ that references time is not circular. A circular definition would require defining ‘event’ relative to ‘event(s)’.
I think “God is either in time or timeless” is a false dichotomy. If the dichotomy is true, God in time cannot exist as three Persons without dividing. But the three Persons are one God and consubstantial. Since God created the universe, God has creative power over time, which is external to Him. Being external to time, He can view all time, which explains prophecy. His creative power enables Him to enter and experience time as three Persons, which explains the Trinity.
If time is an attribute of God, and moments are contingent and separate from time, then moments are locations in an attribute. That seems to be a category error.
If moments are locations in time, all time exists, and time is (an attribute of) God, then God can be divided. We knew a bit of God yesterday that we no longer know today, there exists a bit of God today that we will no longer know tomorrow, and there exists a bit of God tomorrow that we cannot know today.
If time is such that only now exists, and time is (an attribute of) God, then God is divided between part of God that no longer exists, that zero-duration portion that exists in this instant, and that infinite portion that exists between now and eternity.
Since time began with the universe, if time is an attribute of God, God gained that attribute along with creation of the universe, God is not the Creator, and… either the universe had a separate Creator (a prior God), so our God is a second god; or God was either incomplete before creation or diminished by creation.
I hope Dr Craig does discussion/debate on kalam argument with Majesty of Reason.
You have the wrong middle initial for Mullins - it is T, not C. Interesting discussion.
Fixed! Thank you! - RF Admin
"Accidents" happen, events are planned!
As an Arsenal supporter you will be fully aware of what a 'long time' feels like.
XD
Will you be responding to Joe Schmidts most recent argument against the Kalam? He makes some claims that seem to need a clear refutation.
Looked it up; found nothing. You have links?
Oh, I see what might have happened. You misspelled his name.
Nevermind, I found it on my own. Which is good, since based on historical precedent for me on this platform, you likely weren't going to respond period, let alone with helpful information🤣
@@Dhorpatan Oh! his YT channel is Majesty of Reason
I've always noticed that the one who does the most talking, has the weakest case.
That principle makes zero sense and has absolutely no warrant or justification.
Having a hard time looking past the black fingernails
Maybe he was born like that :) The poor guy is no match for someone like Dr. Craig.
And the hair, and the apparent lipstick??? It is hard to take it seriously.
Yeah, this is not the right crowd for that type of stuff. To put it mildly.