John Lennox: God is not dead and science shows why
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 окт 2024
- John Lennox explains to Dave Rubin why he believes science has increasingly brought the God question back into public view.
Watch in full Pt 1 • Dave Rubin & John Lenn... Pt 2 • PART 2 Dave Rubin & Jo...
For more debates, updates and bonus content sign up at www.thebigconve...
This is an extract from Dave Rubin and Prof John Lennox in dialogue. Episode 5 | Season 2 of The Big Conversation.
The Big Conversation is a unique video series from Unbelievable? featuring world-class thinkers across the Christian and atheist community. Exploring science, faith, philosophy and what it means to be human.
Listen to more sparkling conversations every week via the Unbelievable? podcast www.premierchri...
The Big Conversation Season 2:
1. Alister McGrath & Bret Weinstein: Pt 1 • Alister McGrath & Bret... Pt 2 • Alister McGrath & Bret...
2. Roger Penrose & William Lane Craig • Sir Roger Penrose & Wi...
3. Bart Ehrman & Peter J Williams • Peter J Williams vs Ba...
4. Dave Rubin & John Lennox Pt 1 • Dave Rubin & John Lenn... Pt 2 • PART 2 Dave Rubin & Jo...
5. Tom Holland & AC Grayling • Tom Holland vs AC Gray...
The Big Conversation Season 1:
Jordan Peterson & Susan Blackmore • Jordan Peterson vs Sus...
Steven Pinker & Nick Spencer • Steven Pinker vs Nick ...
Derren Brown & Rev Richard Coles • Derren Brown & Rev Ric...
John Lennox & Michael Ruse • Michael Ruse vs John L...
Daniel Dennett & Keith Ward • Daniel Dennett vs Keit...
Peter Singer & Andy Bannister - • Andy Bannister vs Pete...
The Big Conversation is produced by Premier in partnership with the Templeton Religion Trust
Videos, updates, exclusive content www.thebigconv...
For weekly debates between Christians and sceptics subscribe to the Unbelievable? podcast www.premierchri...
The insulting that comes from the internet is comical, I myself believe in God and I have good friends that are atheists and we simply do not insult eachother even if we get caught up in a little debate lol just simply respect eachother and agree to disagree.
indeed, it's shocking how many can't seem to have a civilized conversation anymore.
Its sort of hard when I keep getting lied to.
Yes, but it is much easier to debate when you are an anonymous entity. One can hide behind that computer screen like the wizard of oz. Real life one on one debate a different story altogether.
@@youtubespag it’s hard not to insult others? Sounds like you’re the source of the problem you’re creating. If you don’t agree that’s doesn’t mean it’s ok to insult others. I’m sure if we examined your life we would all find things we would disagree with, would it be appropriate for everyone to insult and ridicule you over the things we find in your life?
You’re not as smart or special you think you are inside your head. Learn to be more humble and not think you’re better than anyone to the degree you feel that you have to insult others. That just makes you a shitty person then.
The bible says (read "God says in His Word") the one who says there is no God is a fool.
If i insult my atheist 'friend' and he turns to Christ, that's far preferable to being afraid to hurt their feelings and they shoot off to hell.
God bless you, Prof. Lennox
Lenox, you're brilliant. And props to you, sir, for citing Lewis, another genius.
Lennox is a superstitious fool in the twenty-first century when science sends spaceships to the planet Pluto and further! He should be sent back to the Middle Ages!
"The universe came from a single powerful source" is far more consistent with science and the laws of nature than "The universe came from nothing".
Or that chaos brings about logic and order in the universe. But that's literally what you have to accept if you want to go with naturalism.
@@WaterspoutsOfTheDeep “order” happening makes sense because things like particles and atoms and planets are bound by the rules and laws of the universe. It makes sense and we can understand why they do what they do. It’s not the chaos brings about order without some reason-the resins are the rules of the universe. Logic is our way of understanding and comprehending the things we see. I do not intend to be rude but that’s not how to view naturalism.
@@guyjosephs5654 No shit that's why there is no naturalism. That's exactly what I'm pointing out. The coherent inherentness of the universe does not lend itself to naturalism.
@@WaterspoutsOfTheDeepthen you don’t understand what naturalism is.
@@guyjosephs5654 You don't understand my argument.
Thank ya Jesus
Jesus just trimmed my hedges, great yard worker indeed, looks beautiful
@@badideass Next he'll trim your ego a little.
@@whitedragon9731 what ego? Jesus was good at his job and did beautiful work on my trees and plants...etc
Do you mean Muhammad? Zeus? Thor? Jupiter? Poseiden? Why is your God correct?
Lennox is a real man of God. "The naive notion that God's out and we now do science".
He's just another bible banging fanatic and it's given him a good living.
Prof Lennox is a real man of God, an old school gullible fool who believes in the supernatural, demons and probably leprechauns.
@@WildPhotoShooter That's literally just racist, leprechauns only being mentioned because of his nationality. Just because someone believes in God they must be insulted and a complete idiot. Never call yourself a man of "science" if that's how you do things.
@@SStupendous Don't be offended on his behalf, you have no right to be offended for him.
@@WildPhotoShooter Don't ever call yourself rational if you're making unbacked claims attacking people's backgrounds. Nice replying to this response and not the one I made a larger point on.
If god is dead then youre implying he was alive at one point lol. He is alive
Why do so many debates need to happen about what should be the clearest situation given what’s been claimed?
This is a famous passage in Nietzsche's "Die fröhliche Wissenschaft" and "Also sprach Zarathustra". It is a metaphor and not meant to be understood literally. It means that once God seemed real to the people but he does not any longer.
Oak FN it normally means that the idea is dead, sort of like saying “the earth isn’t flat anymore”. Of course that doesn’t mean it used to be literally flat, but that it was once assumed and obvious that it was so.
@@pannonia77 thank you for the clarification. I wasn't necessarily disagreeing with the gesture, although I did assume it was trying to favor the idea of God, but I was merely adding the idea that since the debates have gone on so long there must not be a heap of evidence for the claim, such as the evidence for the earth being round. i'm not being sarcastic in saying thank you (previously i have been mocked for saying thanks online).
@@diego67hd94 there's a show i saw the title/picture of on Netflix that says "the universe's creation..." Pertaining to the same idea of "slippery" language that you guys in this thread seem to be hip to; Using the word "Creation" slips in the idea that there is a creator, which I don't like since there is no evidence for it. That's all I got, have a great day :)
BRILLIANTLY DONE SIR!
Not really he just said I exist because there's no evidence saying I don't
@@GodinSpace false but ok
@@GodinSpace bad case of phycological deffaince youve got I can see... You prolly think 12 or more constants to the 200th and in some cases more decimals just snaped into existence.... Lol sure buddy try explain that pls... You probably = Uhhhh uhhh chance.... Go and educate yourself my good fellow.... God loves you all you have to do is open your heart to him
How?
@@johanvandermerwe7687 that's a fallacy sir.
"Come let us reason together."
Brilliant Prof. Lennox. God bless
As the Bible says..God is the beginning of wisdom and knowledge..Bible will always defeat other books
@Mr T.T Sikhosana why do you have to read?go fly plane
@Mr Sikhosana is that supposed to be a quran reference?
"As the bible says".
A book doesnt prove itself
That’d be like a Science article saying that the reason it’s right is because it says it’s right.
@@isaiahdean424 in other words, bible will always defeat itself because tries to prove itself by using the book itself, which is something that always fails because it is a circular reasoning that doesnt make any sense
This is wonderful 😊 John Lennox is one of the greatest thinkers and speakers, especially because of the way he explains things in simple terms that anyone can understand. I think it's great to listen to him 🙂
He’s so articulate and captivating which makes me feel God is talking thru him, he has so much wisdom that makes me cry once in a while ❤
"Science actually brings God back in!" -Well said!
Science actually debunks god and religion as a whole.
Karl Stanc.
Science, discovery, experiment observation and knowledge trashes religion ......that is why religion hates knowledge.
@@WildPhotoShooter Christains often have contradictory views on science. Either they claim “god created science”, or science is inaccurate due to its willingness to change its mind when better evidence is presented, or science is the “devils work” to fool humanity.
@@2l84me8 Yes, Christians have always contradicted themselves, they are not going to change the habits of many centuries now. I find it strange they try to claim science for themselves now but they never talked about science until science started discovering things. its a shame their God hadn't shown them first.
@@WildPhotoShooter Science in the time the Bible was written? Said the ocean floor was flat, said the Earth could quite possibly be on a giant stand or on the back of a tortoise. The Bible said the Earth was suspended in space, "hung on nothing". Said there were "hills and mountains" on the ocean floor, it wasn't just flat. Bite that.
God cant die. psalms 90:2;1 Timothy 1:17. he live forever and ever
If he is alive, then show me the cunt he came out of.
roberteb You think that God, the ETERNAL BEING, is affected by TIME, SPACE, MATTER? My goodness..
of course he isn't. He came out of a supernatural cunt that is also not affected by TIME, MATTER and SPACE. It's the HOLY HOLE that can take infinte loads! Every straight man gets to fuck it after death. You can't prove that I'm wrong.
@@Bowl01986
God is call the Creator and Is eternal, there was is no one noting that made him. God Existed b4 time and the physical universe came about. We are limited be he not,that makes it hard 4 us to understand. Just like there some things we cant answer. So who made God if he the creator? No one can say?
@@sirhborn "God existed b4 time" Nothing can exist before time, because the word "before" requires time. To say that something exists out of time is to say that that something never existed.
C S LEWIS MAKES THE AUDIENCE BURST INTO LAUGHTER ANG LENNOX HELPLESSLY GIVES US A DIVINE SMILE.... CHARMINGLY BLISSFUL
God cant die he is life itself!
What a nonsense! Which life is god? I killed a fly by accident today, maybe that one was god? God is not life, it is just a god and yes it can die likewise many other gods which already died long ago.
Then show him.
STOKED to listen to this, thank you for all your uploads!
"Therefer" I love the way he says that.
this need To go VIRAL!🔥🔥
Why? So we know what a bad argument looks like?
@@jackdaniels9179 Exactly!! lol Nothing but bad arguments here.
GOD Bless Amen Thank you
I’m publishing a weekly RUclips video on episodes from the life of Don Bosco, entitled ST JOHN BOSCO by JOE ZAMMIT. In this series I’m narrating events and miracles from the splendid life of Don Bosco. St John Bosco used to perform a miracle almost every day, through the intercession of Mary Help of Christians. From the lives of saints we can learn how to love God more and draw closer to him Thank you.
@@josephzammit8483 God Bless you Joe I will look out for it ..
stand in God's true word Amen
True
God is above science and science is given by God
Human body is an example that God exists
The various species of animals
The intricately designed body mechanisms both micro and macro
Clearly points out that an intelligent creator has created all of them
Yes!!!!
Why didn't God explain the science in Genesis ?
@@WildPhotoShooter
Because it was incidental.
@@steenystuff1075 Surely not incidental, it was creation, very important I would have thought, If you believe it wasn't mentioned in more detail in Genesis because it was "incidental" you are very naive .I think it was because the didn't know a jot and they were guessing.
Why do christians spend so much time now talking about science and trying to claim it for themselves? Just stick to the vague words in genesis and be happy, leave the complexities of modern science to the educated people and those wanting to learn more.
Yes, yes, yes!!
Attaboy John. I would back you against Dawkins and his chums any day!!
Peter Hack. Peter Hack the Ball Sack.
Love the tribalism ;)
you would back the wrong horse mate XD
I would really love to see that...on Dawkins worst day he would have Lennox babbling like a fool...worse than he did here today.
I mean reasoning that Christians KNEW there was a beginning because the Bible says so but ignoring the fact that other mythologies which came prior to christianity also assumed a beginning and ignoring the false claims of the Bible such as God creating the sun on the 4th day is just laughably fallacious.
@@jackdaniels9179 I never refer to the Bible.
What is your explanation of our universe without a Creator God?
If you have one, you'll convince me to abandon cosmogonic apologetics.
Sir Isaac Newton was a Christian!
Sir Isaac Newton didn't have access to all the information we have today. There is no excuse these days.
Some Random he access to the Bible, that’s he needed. He spent two years of his life to write a scientific paper that involved the Bible and science. Sadly and unfortunately they were destroyed.
@@lawrencesmith1985 and now we have more information about the nature of reality, and the gaps that your god used to fill are explained by natural phenomenon.
@@somerandom3247 what do you mean by you god? There's no such thing. Our God*. U have free will if u don't want to believe in him fine. But Don't be a prick saying ur god.
@@lawrencesmith1985 access to the Bible which didn't help him at all scientifically speaking of course..
"If everything reduces to chemistry and physics and so is your mind. Then why should you trust your mind?" Very interesting question. Sounds plain but gets deeper when you think about it.
The Truth What a scathing rebuttal...
Zhou Andy Yes. It’s one of the questions that led me back to theism. If the intellect has no final goal/end/purpose to aim towards to obtain truth, why should anyone trust their cognitive faculties which have evolved only to produce neurological behaviour that would just increase survival? If there is no teleology or final causes inherent in nature, then we are literally animated chunks of matter formed by a mindless, unguided process...
The Truth No. It’s because I carefully evaluated atheism and its implications and found it to be an untenable and absurd position...
The Truth I’m criticising atheism/naturalism as a position/worldview. It’s got nothing to do with people who are atheists...I know many atheists and they are all good people, but their position is just false...
@The Truth i havent seen you responding properly or producing any clear arguments/premises to cool muso but rather just respond with arrogance with continuous denial and committing fallacies. and then you tell others they being arrogant. Rich coming from you to be honest. atheism just drives you to nihilism and has no purpose. if we believe our selves according to it we just become pure matter regulated by several universal laws. why would we need to feel compassionate and eager to be a better human within ourselves for the inefficiencies we have. why would we even dream or have mystical experiences? would you care to provide a decent response rather than just express your energy/forces which are emitted by your body due to the unexplained behaviors on your brain particles which only evolved needing to survive.
im confused. why would the fact we are only matter and molecules in motion undermine our ability to think critically? or conclude correctly and all that?
@ Ivo Andricic Because matter is mindless. Matter just exists, it doesn't have spiritual attributes. It cannot 'think', it cannot plan, it cannot decide paths or between right and wrong. Our mind is not the product of our brain. Rather the brain is the tool our mind uses to express itself.
A computer that is programed to err, doesnt know it is erroring. Its just the input that gives the output. You cannot know if you are truthful
Of course it would not. But when believers do not have good arguments they have to make do with bad ones. 😁
Alex Mala it’s a debate actually. I’m more into mind is the brain. No brain, no mind.
@Alex Mala I think you need to do a little actually research into modern neuroscience. If you did you would know that the mind is directly contingent upon the brain. If we alter the brain surgically, we can literally change how people think, feel, perceive, etc.
I was waiting for that science that "shows why" and I'm still waiting.
John Lennox is a turd. I've never seen him give evidence. He simply declares things.
Listen too what he say you donky Boy but you too small brain too get what he say
@@gg3198
"Listen too what he say you donky Boy but you too small brain too get what he say"
I'll let this writing speak for itself.
Lunga Phakathi YHVH is going to keep you waiting because without Faith it’s impossible to please Him. And when you come to your end buzzard, He will snuff you out in your unbelief because it pleases Him to do so. Fear the Almighty and allow Wisdom to enter into that dead carc- ass of yours. I’m done my rant. Thank ya.
@@johnbennett3714
"because without Faith"
So you should believe that I am god. Since you don't seem to care about things like evidence. And if you don't believe in me, I'm going to be very angry.
Rather than silence science, the religious now try to take ownership of it. It would be comedic if it wasn't so insane.
Depends what you mean! Many people believe in God but are not 'religious'. Many others are 'religious' without believing in God at all. Also an atheist 'religiously' follows his own principles to the best of his ability. A vegan religiously sticks to her vegan diet!
@@lostandfound1642 And bald is a hair color.
@@Paine137 That says a lot about you.
@@lostandfound1642 Atheists do not follow anything "religiously". The term when used in your context is called a "figure of speech". Atheism is nothing more, and nothing less than the disbelief in a creator. It is not a religion, belief system, way of life, or ideology.
@@anthonymorris5084 You believe that the whole universe came from nothing, right? You believe that all life-forms somehow just "evolved" - out of nothing. Right? You believe that when we die, that is the end of everything,, and there is no eternal life, right? You believe that truth is relative, right? You believe that there is no eternal consequences for our actions here on earth, right? You reject the sanctity of life and therefire feel freer to terminate a life should it prove 'inconvenient'. You believe that man descended from apes, right? And you may even think that all those who believe in God are inferior, if not lunatics, right?
So, *those are beliefs shared pretty much by all atheists*. They form a certain ideology. True, they are not the same as Christian beliefs. Also Christian's beliefs are not the same as a Hindu's beliefs - but the Hindu's beliefs are not less just because they are different.
And indeed, atheists uphold their "disbeliefs" far more than many Christians uphold their beliefs!
Errr... Sorry to point to the elephant in the room, but the Bible said that there was in the beginning WATER, EARTH, AIR and then LIGHT (Fire). The ancient four elements that were really compound substances and not "made" at the beginning, so science found out.
The Bible got it wrong, at least as wrong as the rest of the mythologies from that time, that also had such understanding of cosmology.
No reason to believe anything from the paper weight called the Bible.
It's literature...
@@badideass Yep, and there are many reasons not to believe it, right from the beginning.
That was not meant literally 😂. I recommend for you to watch inspiring philosophy to understand the bible more
@@riru363 I understand the Bible quite well, one of the reasons I'm an atheist towards your religion
@@riru363 it was meant literally, and was literally how the Creation was done...until science found out it was not! 😂
I recommend you to read the exegesis of the Genesis through time reflecting such change from literal to metaphoric, from christian scholars like Saint Augustine to Martin Luther or even RUclips opinionists, like Inspiring Philosophy.
The Ever-Existing Logos
John 1.1-5:
1. In the beginning of the ages the Logos had always existed!
And the Logos had always existed in equality with the Ever-Living.
And the Logos had always represented the Ever-Living.
And the Logos had always been the very Essence of Deity.
2. In the beginning of the ages the Logos had always existed in equality with the Ever-Living.
3. All things came into existence through Him! And apart from Him not one single thing ever came into existence that did indeed come into existence.
4. In Him Life has always existed! And the Life has always been the Light that shines for all!
5. And the Light keeps on shining in the darkness!
And the darkness neither extinguishes nor comprehends the Light!
Amen
Prove any of it 🤷♂️
DM: The only thing I can say to you is that the unique patterns of existence on earth and throughout what we know of the galaxies in the universe point to a footprint and design-style of a highly organized and complex thinking Being. The only place where someone makes claim of such super-natural brilliance is the Scriptures. Then you go there and, if you will take the effort to study them (which I have no doubt you will not), you will find the same deep diversity, the same design-style, in each and every line and paragraph throughout.
Next and last, you have a handful of men who accepted the Message from Khrist, and they went out into a world where it was against the law to broadcast this Message-the penalty being death-that Message being trust in Him and you will be raised after the physical death for an ever-existing life in a new body that does not decay or die. From that point millions accepted that Message and were put to death for their belief. Before that point, the First Couriers were simple men who had no world philosophy and were steeped in another religion. From one tiny point, somewhat like the Big Bang, Khristianity exploded into a worldwide belief.
I could add more, but for people who are genuinely curious and serious, that is enough to put them on the trail of the truth.
I am, Lilly Bloom
lilly bloom the same scriptures that say slavery is fine , you can beat that slave as viscously as you like as long as he doesn’t die ? , the same scriptures that talk of gods dislike for certain people’s and promotes genocide ? The trouble with religious people is you pick and choose what you want from the bible and ignore everything else 🤷♂️ I would say you need to turn around and walk your ass back to the start because the path you’ve chosen is the wrong one
DM:
You asked me to prove something. Just like every atheistic evolutionist, however, all you can do is avoid the subject, change it, and obfuscate. I gave you some points to get started, if you truly have the gumption and fortitude to search.
But like all atheistic evolutionists, you don't want evidence. You don't want to put an effort into properly reasoning out a proposition.
Thus, I shall not waste another instant on you.
God bless you.
Wish I had that accent lol
I like how he spells Christianity.
Chri-stia-inytyy
Something that doesn't exist, can't die.
Amazing! I have solved the mystery!
Then why are you still arguing about sth that doesn't exist
So what are you implying?
If you bother the world with your imagination.
You can't expect intellectuals to be held hostage on behalf of your argument that mentioning your imaginary friends, automatically allows them to become real by default.
That's an obvious example of how a conversation about reality functions.
Elanya well the fact is that atheists try to argue their point but it goes nowhere. However, the bible accounts of the Old Testament have been proven true. And the New Testament. Its not a matter of whether you believe or not; but if they want proof they need to look and stop arguing what’s already been proven and disproven.
@@jackwooten2374 The accounts of the Old Testament have NOT been proven true. Science (and also common sense) has disproved Noah's flood. (And many other things.)
I always enjoy listening to John. Makes so much sense
Lennox make sense??? Lol... You on drugs?
@J w yet he says the most unscientific things when trying to support his idea of a god.
Fantasy is Fantasy... Bible wont be true no matter how you read it.
That says more about you than it does of him.
@@newmove4378 who are you talking about?
@@badideass OP
To the microbiota we dont exist, the level of the being is of importance
To the microbiota, the concept of "existence" is not of concern, or even comprehendible. This is a false equivalence
It’s wrong to say that god exists or doesn’t exist. It’s correct to say we do not know. We do not know anything about what is or why it is.
Having said that, there clearly is a place in life for faith, religion and the study of holy texts.
I agree wholeheartedly God Lives and science knows this! 🙏🙏🙏
Science debunks god, not proves it.
God as a creator of everything is not an explanation, but a subtle and nuanced circumvention. Lennox is deploying circular logic which is counter-intuitive when he blames Atheists for embodying an inelastic and fixed bent of mind; infact it is inverse and disingenuous logic as it is God and Religion which prohibits inquisitive questioning and dictates unwavering obedience without even rudimentary application of mind. Universal God, by itself as a proposition is a big logical problem, more so complex it becomes when people like Lennox contend that it is their own personal God, faith and belief systems which are true, unquestionable and supreme taking their dogmatism and bigotry to new heights. Lennox as a Scientist must be ashamed to repose faith in miracles like man turning water to wine, curing diseases with the touch of his hand, a virgin conceiving and resurrection after death. Atheists never rule out anything; all that we profess is that there is no anecdotal evidence to prove the existence a personal God.
You’re ignoring the problem that he came up with entirely. You’re trusting your brain right now to discover truth, but that’s foolish of you since it was only acquired by evolution governed by the laws of nature. Your brain would be the result of random mutation.
@@irishali896 And what is Lennox trusting to reach his conclusion? Ow right his brain, which is what you are doing. You also don't seem to understand evolution Ours brains are the result of random mutation *AND* natural selection processes.And no evolution is not governed by the laws of nature as those laws are descriptive and not prescriptive. Meaning those laws describe how the universe works, they don't dictate how the universe works.
Darryl Elam Yes he is using his brain? Waw I’m convinced lol okay, please elaborate on how natural selection works then please :)
@@irishali896 you can say whatever shit you say. The fact remains. Go to east asia. South east. And youll find your logic dont matter. Go. Not just sit and argue. People eating sharp glass, bamboo which cant be pushed even by 10s of men, some, quite many, have bullet proof. There is no fucking way you can apply your science there.
Darryl Elam .....with me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of mans mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. - Charles Darwin
Albert Einstein: "In the view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what makes me really angry is that they quote me for support of such views.” - so here's another top scientist that believed in God, the Creator of the universe.
He didnt believe in god you idiot. Like many others who didnt like being called an atheist, he was an agnostic, which in modern terms is the same as atheist.
Tamás Faragó Nikola Tesla believed in the biblical god
@@tamasfarago1843 no agnostic doesn't know if any god exist or not, atheist don't believe in any god.
@@tamasfarago1843 relax. Mankind is a People Who have tried to kill each other right from the start of our exsistens. And destroying religion is not going to chance that. Thats how biologi works. Life kills life for life to excist
Einstein knew his limitation. His ignorance was outsourced to God
Atheism requires more faith than any religion.
Wow how original.... you obviously possess a towering intellect 🤣😅🤣😅🤣😅
@@trumpbellend6717 It's true. Atheism is rooted in Dogmatic Scientism which relies on blind faith in "authority," academia, and the current consensus... as opposed to what the scientific method actually shows in real life with a focus on independently verifiable evidence.
Atheists are the type to ask for "citations" or "peer-reviewed papers" (both of which are academia, not science) in a scientific debate instead of "independently verifiable evidence" (which is what real science is about)
They're the type of people who will trust a peer-reviewed paper over their own observations in real life if the two conflict.
It requires an *enormous* amount of faith. Especially in a very broken, biased, and corrupt peer-review process.
Why you guys have so much faith in "authority" is beyond me. I certainly don't have that much faith in them... especially with their abysmal history with honesty throughout history.
You guys think you're against faith and religion but you're the most religious people I've met. The way you guys emotionally defend the almighty academic consensus when it's questioned is unparalleled. You ruthlessly mock & silence anyone daring to question it with evidence in any way. Your religious text is the current consensus and you blindly believe it on faith alone, without the need/ability to independently verify.
@@lightbeforethetunnel Yawn 😴😴😴 "atheism requires faith" you engage in the "tu quoque fallacy " ( or hypocrisy fallacy ) which typically deflects criticism away from yourself or your position by accusing others of the same problem or something comparable. It's often used to distract from the issue.
It's almost as if you comprehend just how irrational faith is and think if only we can ascribe it to atheism they will be just as irrational as those that believe in magicmanintheskyism.
Nope sorry kid, I personally as an atheist have faith in NOTHING .
I have TRUST which is completely different . My trust is given tentatively and is not unconditional. It is based on EVIDENCE and my levels of trust in something are
directly related and proportional to the amount of evidence that supports it. The more evidence the more trust , it can also be withdraw if the evidence changes.
My level of trust is also proportional to the importance of that which I am placing my trust in . So for example if a stranger asked to borrow 20 cents that he would pay me back, I wouldn't require much trust in him to say yes. However if that stranger were to say "let me pack your parachute for you" , that's a different matter.
FAITH on the other hand is something given unconditionally and does not require EVIDENCE. I regard faith as the most irrational dishonest position possible to hold. As many have said before me there is no belief or proposition that could not justified using faith. No god , no matter how bizarre unlikely or evil could be discounted. Could I not believe in thor , zeus or even the kraken based solely on faith. I could believe it was a good thing to eat babies or that one particular race were superior to another based solely on faith.
Faith is what ALL religions require because they have no evidence. If you have the evidence you don't need the faith simple as. Faith is about the ability to believe what YOU WANT to be true rather than actual truth itself , like an afterlife for example. Hebrews 11 talks of this replacing evidence with faith in "things hoped for that are unseen," its literally the enabling of belief in the things you want to be true but dont have evidence for.
The attempt to conflate TRUST with faith is a well worn tactic of thiests, its basically saying " athiest are just as irational as we are " this tactic has long been debunked by people much smarter than me. I'm not saying you are necessarily being disingenuous, maybe you just haven't thought it through properly.
@@lightbeforethetunnel lol what does " peer reviewed " mean ??
It means it's been repeadly independently "verified" using experiments that are observable falsefiable, predictable, testable. 👇👇 *read on*
If you feel that the scientific conclusions are wrong then please present YOUR observable ,falsefiable , predictable evidence for the biblical claims .
You remember them dont you ? Talking snakes& donkeys , tribes of giants , witches , magic , Angel's, zombies, 🤣😅
Your bible claims that mans origins lie in a mud figurine becoming a living breathing man and a rib becoming a woman 🤣😅
Infact let's have a laugh that's my next question to you, just hold on a sec while I put a creatard dunce hat on 😂😂
Ok let's go
How does a Rib become a woman?
Do you have examples of any transitional fossils from said rib to woman.?
If ribs can turn into women then why are there still ribs around ?
Why do we not have examples of the RIB KIND turning into cat or dog kinds?
How do you explain the second law of thermodynamics in regard to ribs, if we find less entropy In women ?
Are ribs not irreducibly complex?
Isn't it true that ribvolution is just a THEORY not a fact?
If women are really ribs then why aren't they covered in barbecue sauce?
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
The bottom has fallen out of Darwinism/ evolution and atheism. No one has ever observed the transition of one kind of creature to another kind of creature (ape to man, etc.). However, many people throughout history have interacted with God. Choose recorded history, not hypothetical atheistic conjecture; choose Christ!
There is no transition there is continual evolution that is why we have a comon ancestor whit some monkeys and that is a proven facts.
Other simple proof of évolution is the small legs on snakes or whales that are usless for them actually but a lot of years ago they where used to walk.
How do we know?
Because there scientific method to know from wich era an animal is and whit all the squelettons from the past you can see the transition.
@ElPablo
You are correct, there is no transition. Unfortunately, your statement that we have a common ancestor with monkeys is completely unobservable and is therefore not a proven fact, but an assumption made by atheists. The small “legs” on snakes serve a purpose in reproduction. They are not useless. The pelvic bones in whales atheists point to as vestigial also have been shown to serve a reproductive role. And no one has EVER seen a whale (or whale ancestor) walk. The Bible does indicate that snakes walked at one time, so we can agree that a change occurred in snakes at some point, but the cause of this change is where our views diverge. Theists have a historical record of how it happened, while Anti-theists have a patently unobservable hypothetical assumption.
You have been told there is a scientific method used to ascertain the age of fossils, but it is a well-known fact that the method (carbon dating) is very unreliable. The term “transitional fossil” is actually a misnomer. A fossil can only tell us what creature it was itself, not what it was on the way to becoming. Similarities in different animals only indicate the fact that they were designed by the same Creator. Evolution is pseudoscience unless and until we can track and observe the generational connection between two different kinds of creature (i.e. rat to bat, fish to snake, etc.). This should be very easy to observe in creatures with a short life span like bacteria and flies. But rather than see bacteria evolve into new creatures, all we see is bacteria produce more bacteria; same for flies. This confirms EXACTLY what the Bible says, that God created them to produce after their own kind. I encourage you to stick with recorded history (the Bible) and reject patently unobservable hypothetical anti theistic history.
2:56 What Thomas Nagel said
...and l completely missed the part where science demonstrates God isn't dead. Hmmmm...
It’s almost like that was a click bait title or something?
Awesome!
Only mind or minds build complexity not unguided random chance out of chaos.
Andy says who
Andy you are right but you worded it wrong lol. Only a mind or intelligence can produce functionally coherent structures. That is any structure composed of multiple parts working together to produce a top level function not present in the individual parts themselves = always the product of design when we know the origins of that structure. There is no reason for a materialist to speculate this was any different when nobody was looking.
Which mind is building snowflakes?
Artur Ferrão do you want to explain your point of view. Can anything other than mind build The universe into something complex if so show your evidence.
Artur Ferrão and in a naturalistic point of view what brought those atoms into existence?
Misleading statement. Before saying a "god" is not dead prove first if that god did exist in the first place.
Oh come on. That's not the subject of the video. If you want proof of God then go for the sound arguments and all of that data but here, here the thing is a beautifully-built statement on admiration towards God and how the belief in him inspired science.
When someone says There is God, he found , only one thing is sure that is he is lying..when scientist says they didn’t find any God, it’s true , you can believe him because they didn’t find any god till now..
You don't believe in God?
Vinoop, you obviously have a very limited view in God and the universe. The scientists have many thing to discover yet, because they haven't found them, you just come to the conclusion that they dont exist?
@Dugie Doogs So you're convinced that something wholly undectable, something that we cannot verify exists, in fact does exists...
@@TheMarsCydonia Well yes, at least you do - Macro Evolution.
@@thisisme2115 With that, I have serious doubt you have any basic understanding of what "macro evolution" is...
Because the average creationists don't.
A scientist cannot account for the uniformity of nature he merely assumes it to be true.
Correct. But is an atheists being consistent when they assume uniformity in nature ? There is no grounding for uniformity of nature in atheism.
Joshua Hults
No, atheists are engaging in hypocrisy when they assume uniformity in nature. Same is true for the laws of logic.
@@breambo3835 Correct. Atheists can't account for objective laws of logic. In atheism logic would merely be a personal opinion or perception of the world, making it impossible to demand others perceive the world in the same way.
Joshua Hults
No it wouldn’t .
My justification for logic is that logic works , and I know that is circular reasoning .
You claim you have a justification for your use of logic ( other than it works ) which is a particular version of a particular god.
Ok
Demonstrate that, that particular god exists... and il be on my way
Furthermore , I don’t assume uniformity in nature .
I have a very high confidence level that tomorrow will be like today, there is zero evidence that would make me think otherwise .
It’s just religion, try not to confuse it with reality👍
Mick Q
Do you know what begging the question means and that it's fallacious.
Seeing that your degrees are in math and philosophy, you cannot say that you are a scientist in physics, chemistry or biology, the hard sciences.
Most religions have some sort of creation story, They all can't be right but they all, including christianity, can be wrong. There is nothing that can be proven to show that any creation story is true.
When in science or in the operating theatre have you heard, I’m at the limit of my knowledge, get me a bible? Never! In the biblical times they didn’t know how floods, lightening, volcanoes, cyclones, tsunamis , hail, and a heap of other natural phenomena worked and now we do. And how is that? Oh Science.
Do you know about the shape of earth? The earth is spherical....and scientist identified it in 15s...but it is mentioned in the bible that the shape of earth is spherical....what do you think who wrote it in the bible ?
@@piyushdive79 no it says a circle, which can mean flat as well...
The Aztecs knew the Earth was a glove llong before Christianity was invented by man
@@badideass circular shape & spherical shape is same bro & u think that earth is flat ???
& Christianity is not came into existence 2000 years ago...but i was in existence since 1st man on earth i.e.adam
we know that the shape of earth is circular...it is said by a scientist in 15th century....but it is written in bible that the shape of earth is circular...so what do you think who wrote it in the bible 2000 years ago ???
@@piyushdive79 Idiot it doesn't say earth is like a sphere and yes earth is not like a perfect sphere.
The Bible IS the Word of God HE isn't the slightest bit confused on how He creates the earth and universe, although many is.
1:43 the word "intelligent" comes from the word "inter" = between, "legere" = choose.
The Intuition, hunch, tendency of pattern that precede observation process of the unknown, the search of reason of things, why there is something rather than nothing. The thing that driven every sages from the past up to the present to seek the answer of the quest-ion "what happened?".
Gin,
Nothing beats ‘it’s complex, so god must’ve done it. The expression ‘in the beginning’ is as vague as it gets. Attributing that amazing insight to a god is seriously clutching at straws
It doesn't seem vague if you understand that at one point our universe did not exist.
Agree, God is not dead - he was never alive.
Of course, you do realize it takes faith to believe what you just said, especially since you cannot prove that with science. But from where does your faith come?
Brilliant!
A case to debunk for rationality rules
If God is dead everything living don’t exist. God was never dead and never BORN. Don’t ever forget that brothers & sisters. We live because He IS. Thanks be unto The Lord Jesus Christ!
My friend, Jesus (peace be upon him) never claimed godhood.
Deuteronomy 6:4:
Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one.
@@mosman3691 My friend, Allah is never exist. Allah just Muhammad's alter ego since Muhammad is mentally ill to begin with. There are not one verse in the Quran showing Allah speaking to Muhammad instead of a cave ghost name Jibril ..
@@mosman3691 Btw, Deuteronomy 6 just prove the monotheism of Christianity.
I am the I am
He went where he went
It is what it is
I were where we were
We did what we did.
All it means is it is not the important detail. He IS makes absolutely no sense.
Mosman I am the door, I am the bread, I am the way the truth and the Light. I AM. You need to read John and you’ll see who exactly Jesus is!
". . .if everything is reduceable to physics and chemistry, then so is your mind. But then why would you trust your mind?"
Perhaps because the physics and chemistry of the human brain is complex enough to be capable of reason, logic, and the rational thought that results from it.
Lennox seems to ignore the fact that the mind is often deceived by its own sensory input, and is generally very capable of making mistakes. So, sometimes the mind is trustworthy, and sometimes it isn't. Science is simply the best system of checks and balances that we've come up with to aid in filtering out some of the mistakes the mind makes.
@@jeffreychow1478 -- "Truth" and "reality" are such loaded terms that they make these kinds of conversations very difficult. Lennox and other similarly-minded apologists seem to argue that science leads us to "truth", because of course he sees God in all things that are "true". But science's theories and conclusions are all provisional and open to new evidence, so I think there's always some percentage of uncertainty baked into scientific "truths", no matter how well supported they are by evidence and how unlikely they are to be disproved. You can be reasonably assured that the earth will continue its path around the sun tomorrow, by you can't be absolutely certain that it will, for example. So, to what extent can we say that heliocentrism is "true"? Probably to as great a degree as we can hope to reasonably obtain, but not to such a degree that it could never be proved wrong, so not to certainty. I'm trying to illustrate why I think that the search for "truth", as people like Lennox use the term, is a bit of a fool's errand.
@@jeffreychow1478 ---
Because of the reasons stated, and the fact that I'm not a silly solipsist!
Yeah , why would you trust your mind ? Some minds are susceptible to believing things without seeing it. The gullible human mind never fails to amaze me when it comes to the nonsense of religion.
Something that doesn't exist is neither dead nor alive.
I love how every time science proves god, nobody wins a Nobel Prize, and it just disappears within the pile of pseudo-science and fallacy talk.
Science has never proven God, you are imagining things but religion has always had a brilliant imagination.
@@WildPhotoShooter I am imagining things? please show me the evidence for the existence of God backed by science and agreed upon by the scientific community.. I am waiting, actually, the whole world is waiting..
I can't wait to see your rehashed morality/kalam cosmological argument...
It is amazing how apologists can shamelessly suit every achievement made by man to bible.
@@OJPrime verificationism ? You mean you believe and do things without checking ? No wonder you are gullible. Again provide proof or stfu. Dancing around with quack philosophy won't save you.
As a matter of fact, we don't trust our minds because they are somewhat limited. That is the anthropic principle: the Universe we see is the Universe from our point of view, not the Universe as it really is. We will never overcome that obstacle, it is genuinely impossible.
Therefore, I really don't see the role of a god in all of this.
Maybe, in the end, is all a matter of personal beliefs.
Because we are unable and limited to understand there is a need of God in all of this because the universe and life is a miracle. Where is your logic?
If you would have understood 100% everything, then, yes, but when you are limited and there is more but can not comprehend, there must be a God, greater than our imagination can produce. Think about it in-depth, why something rather than nothing? Why life works so perfectly? Why do we have everything we need to live? Why there are beauty and order in nature and not chaos? Why male and female? Why their bodies are a perfect fit for each other? Why do we have consciousness, reason, free-will? Why water freeze at the top only, protecting the marine life underneath? Have you given a thought just one second in all of these?
Of course not, you think that blind forces did all the creation, all the order, all the purpose, even gave you consciousness and free-will, and your life is from non-life. How absurd is this?
Do you really believe this?
@@alexanderstephen1567 First of all, I've clarified in the end that this matter was open to interpretation. I can understand from your stance that you do not tolerate my point of view, and that's unfortunate. But let's consider the discussion.
As you said, our existance is an amazing fact: if only one parameter of the universe was different, we wouldn't be here having this conversation. We both understand this.
The explanation I give to this I take it from evolution: life on our planet has some billion years of evolution behind, which are enough to form a very complex environment. It took some billion years for mankind to appear as the first sentient species. You're right to be amazed when you see the fruit of such a long time in front of your eyes. Still, rationality doesn't give me purpouse as a man, because only "blind forces of creation" are behind my existance, according to what I've just said.
Some find this purpouse in the figure of a God. In my life, I've preferred something different: I don't pretend to give explanations to things I cannot understand yet, but I'll try in my limitations to push humanity a little closer to the answer, if there's one.
That's the only difference between you and me, and I respect your will to find an answer to this problem in your own way.
@@alessandroturci6750 The problem with evolution is very serious because there are some logical questions. First of all, what was the first living cell? From where it came? The evolutionists say that life came from non-life, this is very hard to swallow because from the scientific point of view this is genuinely impossible. Secondly, if the evolution occurred over billions of years, how did man lived without a brain? How did life survive without eyes to see and other basic needs? And how did male and female appear, who was the first so that they have sexual relationship to make a baby so that the humankind multiply? It happens that both males and females "evolved" at the same time? This is extremely miraculous. And how it came that we have the reproductive function? If there is evolution and not an intentional Creator, who had thought that in order to reproduce ourselves, we need a reproductive function in our bodies between a male and a female nature? You see, the male's penis is perfectly designed for the female's vagina and vice versa. These are all simple questions, but extremely important. You see, when a male and a female have sexual relations a baby will be as a result, and for this, the female body has a perfect place for the development of life, it's called the womb. When the baby is born, the breasts of the female are precisely designed to serve just one purpose, the primary and important source of food to feed the baby. Again, this is very simple and we can see and check with our own eyes. Did the evolution plan that in order life to multiply it requires a male and a female? Did the evolution know that the female body needs a womb in order life to form and a place from where the baby will come out and breasts to feed the baby?
When you see the Great Pyramid of Gisa, although you don`t know the brilliant mind of its architect and sculptors or the workers what built it, your reason tells you that this designed pyramid is constructed by humans, because everything designed has a designer, this is basic logic, it is reasonable.
In the same manner, especially the Universe and Life, it MUST have a Designer because everything is designed. Even the wings of a bird are living proof of a designer as the wings of an airplane are existing proof of a designer.
Modern science had come to the conclusion that the universe was designed.
The structure of the Universe is determined by some extremely fixed and precise numbers named The Fundamental Constants and Quantities of the Universe.
These are the numbers.
Higgs Vacuum Expectation Value: 246.2 Ge
Mass of Up, Down, Strange Quark: 2.4 MeV, 4.8 MeV, 104 MeV
Mass of the electron, neutrinos (sum): 0.511 MeV, 0.32 eV
Electromagnetism coupling constant 0.00729
Strong nuclear force coupling constant: 0.1187
Cosmological Constant: (2.3 x 10-3 eV)4
Scalar fluctuation amplitude Q: 2x10-5
Baryon, dark matter mass per photon: 0.57 eV, 3 eV
The entropy of the Universe: 4x10 (81) J/K
Number of spacetime dimensions: 3 (space) + 1 (time)
Scientists have come to the impressive realization that each of these numbers has been set to an astonishingly precise value life-permitting range. If any of these numbers were altered by even a hair's thread, then no physical, interactive life of any kind could exist anywhere. There would be no stars, no planets, no life, no chemistry.
To better understand how astonishingly the universe is tuned, take for example Gravity. The force of Gravity is determined by the gravitational constant ( F=G m1|m2|r2). If this constant varied by just 1 in 10 (at power 60) parts, then none of us could exist.
To understand how narrow this life-permitted range is, imagine a dial divided into 10 (to 60) increments (1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000...) to get an idea of how many tiny points on the dial this is, compare it to the number of cells in your body (10 to 14) 100,000,000,000,000, or the number of seconds that passed since the time began (1to20) 100,000,000,000,000,000,000. If the gravitational constant had been out of tune by just 1 of these infinitely small increments, the universe would either expand so rapidly that no stars could have formed and life could not exist or it ould collapse back on itself with the same result: no stars, no planets, no life.
Or, another example is the Expansion Rate of the universe. This is driven by the Cosmological constant. A change in its value by nearly 1 part in 10 to 120, would cause the universe to expand rapidly, or too slowly, in both cases, the universe would be life-prohibiting, the life would have been impossible.
The same result is with the Mass and Energy of the early universe (neutrinos, photons, atoms, dark matter) were not evenly distributed to a precision of an incomprehensible precision of 1 part in 10to10to123, the universe would be hostile to life of any kind.
Our universe permits physical, interactive life only because of these and many other numbers have been independently exquisitely balanced on a razor's edge.
Look what top scientists have to say regarding this to show that this is not my own opinion, but pure science.
Fred Hoyle, Astrophysicist and cosmologist Plumian Professor of Astronomy and Experimental Philosophy at Cambridge, said: "A common-sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics... and there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question."
Even scientist like Stephen Hawking, Theoretical physicist, and cosmologist, Director of Research at the Center of Theoretical Cosmology within the University of Cambridge, had to admit that, he said: "The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life."
Now, a logical question: "...very finely adjusted..." by whom? Because we all know that when something is fine-tuned, there is an intellect involved.
David Deutsch, Physicist at the University of Oxford, professor in the Department of Atomic and Laser Physics at the Center of Quantum Computation (CQC) in the Clarendon Laboratory of the University of Oxford, said: "If anyone claims not to be surprised by the special features the universe has, he is hiding his head in the sand. These special features are surprising and unlikely."
Sir Martin Rees, Astronomer Royal of Great Britain, Fellow of Trinity College and Emeritus Professor of Cosmology and Astrophysics at the University of Cambridge, said regarding this: "Where physicists look, they see examples of fine-tuning."
Allan Sandage, Cosmetologist, said: "We can't understand the universe in any clear way without the supernatural"
Vera Kistiakowsky (MIT physicist), said: "The exquisite order displayed by our scientific understanding of the physical world calls for the divine."
@@alexanderstephen1567 The first part of personal incredulity in front of evolution can be clarified better by some academic book regarding the topic (I don't know if I am able to explain evolution in a youtube comment section LOL).
On the second part regarding universal constants, this is one of the most amazing thing science has to offer. In fact, I share the marvel of all the great scientists you quoted (even if I don't know the source you used to quote them). But scientists study the world around us proving their hypotesis whit experiments according to the scientific method. Stephen Hawking is famous for his Black Hole Theory, which he proved with complex calculations and ISS orbit experiments. Those quote you cited are only words of marvel.
I can quote another great scientist such as Peter Atkins, a chemist in the field of quantum mechanics (who works with those universal constants you expressed above). He said that "by asserting the existance of a god, you are casting a spell which covers reality and prevent you to go deeper because of personal incredulity" (you can check this quote simply by looking for "Peter Atkins about God" on youtube).
Scientists have different beliefs on the matter of God, you can check it by statistics.
Oh and about the logic of the statement "everything complex must have a designer", may I suggest the video from "rationality rules" about the watchmaker argument? He is much better than me in explaining this XD
20. O Timothy! Guard what was committed to your trust, avoiding the profane and idle babblings and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge--
21. by professing it some have strayed concerning the faith. Grace be with you. Amen.
1 Timothy 6:20-21
God created heavens and earth in 6 days.
Before creating sun n moon, there was 'evening and morning a day', that is it was called Universal Day (not earthly day 24 hours).
We've to dig deep the science to get clarity on bible verses.
God created the entire universe
Yom is the hebrew word for day. Yow can mean an indefinate period of time.
Day is a term we use to describe the earths relative rotation to the sun when we are facing it. How could God create the sun on the 4th day?
@@jackdaniels9179 that's the english definition for day. The Hebrew definition can mean any of 10 things. Reading it from an english context will make no sense to you
God created light first, then on day 4 he created the sun . Where did the light come from before the sun arrived ?
Amen.
Dr. Lennox seems to be surprised at the idea the a universe governed by impersonal forces should be consistent, but I don't understand why that should be surprising. If there's no cosmic personal will, then there's nothing to interfere with or suspend the natural order of things.
Brilliant
"If there is a law of nature then there should be a law giver" Is it what science says? Nope.
What does science say?
@@JamesSmith-ie8js
God doesnt exit ?
James Smith
Science would say that natural laws are descriptive and not prescriptive, so comparing them to laws made by humans is an equivocation fallacy.
@@ramigilneas9274 I'm sure everyone knows that. It doesn't solve the problem because you have now invoked brute facts to avoid explaining. Even worse, these laws supposedly explain everything else but on the brute fact view they are by definition unexplainable. So now you have a view that says things/laws do not need a reason to be the way they are, yet we still expect consistency, we still look for explanations, this is all irrational if at the base level we have to admit there is no explanation. This is why when you look at all the rationalist philosophers they were all theists, these were the ones who believed in rationality and our ability to understand and ultimately intelligible world. What did the atheist thinkers of the time have to say? Well we get largely skeptical thinkers like Hume and downright nihilistic ones like Nietzsche. When you look at atheism today it's a totally robbery of the rationalism that defined theism so well in an effort to avoid the logical conclusion of naturalism. Indeed the conclusion is not only a terrifying thought but it lead to some truly horrific things as Nietzsche predicted.
Joshua Philip
Inventing gods as an explanation also doesn’t solve any problems and of course doesn’t really explain anything. Believing that there are natural laws that always existed makes a lot more sense than that some kind of magical superbeing always existed for some reason.😂
Also, most of the arguments of Lennox suspiciously sound like arguments from emotion or arguments from consequence. Lennox believes in god because it would terrify him if there was no ultimate meaning, no ultimate purpose and no afterlife.
Well, it seems like many people need those comforting lies but the inconvenient truth seems to be that we have to think for ourselves and have to figure out our own meaning and purpose in life.
Also also... today most philosophers are Atheists.😉
Dr. John Lennoxʼs articulation of the Religion and Science connection is just too clear to be ignored by any serious thinker. The integrity of his inquiry and the intellectual rigor he has put his study into fortifies his stance all the more for the claim of theism.
I hope Dave Rubin gets led closer to the Lord by people around him. Having known this whole interview, the Lordʼs grace is not far from him as he has already been questioning the liberal worldview that is doing far worse things for the West.
God bless these intellectuals. May the Lord move mightily in their midst as they tread upon the road towards the Truth, the Lord Jesus Christ.
Soli Deo gloria!
Yeah sure! MC2 + bulshit = yahweh
I've heard that scientists already have proven god's existence by an experiment in Cern collider.
Allhamdullillah for Islam
Tarik Ramadaan JESUS IS THE WAY THE TRUTH AND THE LIFE !!!!!
Islam destroy Islamic nations. trust Jesus
@@pennyharkness5524
He is the way not destination. All the prophets are the way to God.
If you live during the time of Moses, without following Moses you'll not attain salvation. At that time, Prophet Moses is the way, the truth, and the life.
DracAllah hu akbar. Inshallah
Are you taking about the guy who reaped 9 year old girl and said killl Evey one who didn't follow me etc ( Mohammad)
Lol, Lennox claiming he's a scientist while he never applied the scientific method to his own reasoning.
What a fraud...
Liza, you're arrogance is impressive. Where did that comes from?
@@wwrussell180 Not arrogance, just a logical assessment of Lennox' statements.
He misrepresents scientific facts and findings, and is no stranger to logical fallacies, but moreover never has provided any argument in favour of his "christian god proposal".
Science doesn't have an answer to all natural phenomena (yet), why even should we?
While the scientific trackrecord is already quite impressive, their record is completely blank.
They just never get to the point of demonstrating their "theory". They imply that pointing to scientific "gaps" somehow can be filled with ... "god" ... as if that explains anything.
This comment section is strongly divided between people who view things solely trough the faith and people who view them trough their ego.
That's why I respect Dave Rubin.
Why can't the universe be wonderful and comprehensible without an intelligent God? It seems like such a leap to me, and it also doesn't seem like theism adds anything to the beauty of mind and universe. Anyone want to explain why Lennox says so?
why should it? why should a haphazard event produce something wonderful, comprehensible and complex in all its varieties? Don't you sincerely think that this requires a bigger leap of faith. Like someone rightly said, you need a BIG faith to be an atheist
Because it takes crazy precision and consistency and accuracy for science to work and thus we can comprehend it in its complexity. Like how on earth is there such thing as gravity and it doesn't change for yearsssss?
@@samadesh5678 "why should a haphazard event produce something wonderful, comprehensible and complex in all its varieties?" Why do you think it was a haphazard event? Also 99.99999% of the universe is deadly to life as we know it. If I build a skyscraper and the only place that it could support life was smaller then a gran of sand, would you cal it wonderful?
@@wylieryanjonlean3661 "Like how on earth is there such thing as gravity and it doesn't change for yearsssss?" So you think that gravity should change at random for no reason at all? Why? Unless there is a force acting upon gravity there is nothing to make gravity behave differently. Why do you think it should magical change?
@@darrylelam256 see? The foundational principal and law are very magically consistent. You even think about it as default. I don't blame you for it.
I'll tell u the secret. It's because God is unchangeable. He is orderly and consistent in his character and nature. The creation simply shows who the creator is.
John Lennox is not a scientist. John Lennox is a mathematician who is promoting his personal belief in the Judeo/Christian Bible. The Judeo/Christian Bible is not based on testable evidence. It is based on words that require an agreement from the reader using the imaging process to create the reality inside the readers brain. The process of agreement that John is promoting is called faith.
I accept John's credentials as a mathematician but not as an authority establishing reality.
look up Nikola Tesla and the number 3. He found out something about the number 3 that seems like a code in our universe. He had an obsession with that number too. Math was not made by man. It was discovered.
Maybe he likes no. 3?
Might have been obsessive compulsive. I heard OCD people do things more so in three than other numbers.
God is 3 in 1
So good!
“Let us not follow vulgar leaders
Who exploit the fear of death,
And promise the bliss of salvation.
If we are truly happy,
They will have nothing to offer us.
If we do not fear death and are happy, what will such leaders have to offer? Spirituality is an organic part of daily life, not something dispensed by a professional. True spirituality is liberation, not just from the delusions of reality but from the delusions of religion as well. If we attain freedom from the fear of death, a sound way of health, and a path of understanding through life, there is happiness and no need for false leaders.”
-Deng Ming-Dao,
365 Tao: Daily Meditations, ch. 20
Break the internet with this!
His quote should have been "Gods alive in my mind".
How do you explain our universe, Dave?
@@20july1944 No one can yet, but why add God? It just muddy's the equation until there proof.
@@DaveJuddWhat is the basis of your working atheist hypothesis?
Dave why add God lol.... the real question is why leave out a designer? If you look at computer programs, the Rosetta Stone, or hieroglyphics, people dont say oh it must have been all made by random unguided process, through rain, storms, and wind erosion. At the contrary people naturally ask what type of designer or creator made these markings? Why would the human DNA (or any DNA) code be any different? Or the complex digestive, reproductive, endocrine or other systems be any different in asking the same questions? We know something comes from something. But somehow atheist awkwardly believe that something came out of nothing.
20july1944 And you think god explains it? How?
3:00 "But then, why would you trust your mind?" We DON'T trust our own minds. That's the entire POINT of submitting one's work to peer review. BECAUSE we don't trust our minds. That's the reason we also constantly test our ideas against the rigor of experimentation in the real world (by which I mean the common shared context within which we interact with things outside our own minds) -- because thought experiments are NOT ENOUGH.
с помощью чего учёные занимаются наукой?
Wonderful to see a Christian scientist ,and yes he's right the early scientists did have a deep faith in God.
Science has absolutely nothing to do with the idea of a god.
Lots of scientists believe in a god, however that doesn't support one existing .
The laughing stock of science would be the oxymoron "creation scientists"
How many of those same early scientists would have a deep faith in a god today?
ThadoS secular science that’s prejudice against the Bible and God would denounce his existence! But REAL MORAL science proves Christ existence.
Mario a lot of them! Believing in God is not based on popular opinion, but it’s a faith... just like evolution is a faith. No man has ever witnessed any part of evolution take place but plenty of men of old witnesses Christ and his many miracles. Such as Pontius Pilate , Nicodemus, Joseph , pharaoh , and many others.
@@lawrencesmith1985 Science doesnt support a god, dont be an idiot. Science is for the natural.
If you have an undeniable need to believe in something, go out into nature for an extended period of time ALONE, Every answer you seek is within yourself!!!
Which god?
Only the flying spaghetti monster is real
The Lord is the only true God. The others are just idols, created by men because they rebelled against the Lord. May Jesus Christ bless you.
@@pedrohenriquediniz6125 amen 🙏 🙌
@@pedrohenriquediniz6125 No matter how much evidence you have about God, atheists will always be hypocritical,god bless you
I like this Lenox guy. Im not a theist (I was raised agnostic) but I actually agree with a lot he says. Atheism at its core just a lack of belief in a god or gods but it doesn't equal rationality or science. The concept of God should always be considered in science even if you don't like it. Science is merely a general term and its not a way of life. Science is a tool to understand the world but not to interpret it. When atheist dismiss anything a theist says by labeling a "God of the gaps" I just cringe. Most great theist who are scientist use the very methods a secular person uses himself. So I just don't trust an atheist on most things about science. I rather study on my own or look at both sides equally.
@Sammy McKay Sorry if I wasn't clear enough but I wasn't bundling all atheist in one bottle (my apologies if I sounded like that). Of course I wasn't. I was talking about when some atheist label things as God of the gaps without good reasoning as many do. I have a very different take in terms of what is evidence. I worked in the area of Law and most people don't know what evidence is even if they see it or know it. Evidence is not about my personal feelings or how I interpret the data. Its just about what things are objectively. Im agnostic because I was raised that way so I have no idea on how to define a god but I do like the concept of general deism due to the fact that it can be argued with hard science in most cases. However im not a deist just a guy who likes these topics. I just don't think the mainstream atheist have given much thought or even good reasons to be one or take the attitude they take. Evidence is a very fragile thing which is why I dislike rash dismissal used by people like Dawkins and Harris. Though Hitchens was cool. I just don't (in my subjective idealism) that either side has managed to connect the central issues of the topics. Hence I keep watching both sides.
In some regards this is why I like this channel and Dave Rubin. You get to see both sides of the spectrum rather than a narrow bland slate. I think many people have given good reasons to believe in a god but I also acknowledge that some things can be respected but not accepted. Pleasure speaking to you Sam. Lightspeed to you.
People came up with math. math is just a language we use to describe reality. Us being able to have language that describes this universe is not evidence a God exist.
Humans didn’t create the laws of mathematics, or the laws of logic.
The merely discovered them.
These laws are immaterial, objective, transcendent constants,
Unlike what humans create.
For any ideology to be tru it’s must be mathematically consistent then scientifically consistent and then philosophically consistent
Therfore accurate
@@ąყŋ-o8q These "laws" are just our understanding of reality to the best of our abilities. Nothing makes them immaterial because the immaterial doth not exist.
Only mind or minds build complexity not unguided random chance out of chaos.
Mathematics and logic do not exist outside of our minds ,
They are both systems of thought ,
They exist in our minds , you cannot separate the thoughts from the thinker .
For example
Are 2 rocks , 2 rocks , if there are no humans .
No ,
there is an undetermined number of unidentified objects , that are not defined in any way shape or form.
Scientist's were around before Christianity. FACT
God can’t be dead because he was never proven to exist in the first place ........ gotcha 😉
To true
Jesus is god in flesh, boom roasted
What else athiest?
Apollo Rap prove it 🤷♂️ , words are cheap
@@danmchugh7106 3000 ancient manuscripts and 300 fulfilled prophecies what else
1. Almighty god: omnipotent, omniscient, onmipresent
2. omnipotence and omniscience are mutually exclusive
3. If god is omnipresent, by definition our reality is false
4. Almighty god logically impossible
5. The Abrahamic god disproven
6. THE END
Omnipotent = having unlimited power
Omniscient = knowing everything
Omnipresent = widely or constantly encountered
(Google dictionary)
I want to understand your POV. Can you qualify your statement 2 and 3 in the light of God being spirit and possibly occupying more dimensions than we know about. Thank you.
We got science in spite of judeo-christian religions, not thanks to it.
Nothing to back up your conjecture. Just listen to Lennox.
Great post, but you're trying to use rationality on people who embrace irrationality.
@@toomanyhobbies2011 "Nothing to back up your conjecture. Just listen to Lennox." - Why would I listen to an uneducated apologetic? We would have travelled to the stars unless religion have held us back for 1800 years.
Atheist kill me man! They hate a man they never seen before 😂😂... the truth puts fear in them!
You are going to have to prove, you know, show evidence, that atheists hate some man, assuming that you mean jesus, that they have never "seen". I'm an atheist and I don't hate jesus any more than I hate Zeus...
rkernell you just proved it lol🤦🏾♂️
@@lawrencesmith1985 You can't even prove that the god you grovel to exists.
Michael Dodds you just proved my point idiot 😂🤦🏾♂️
@@lawrencesmith1985 Lawrence, Lawrence, Lawrence.. Buddy, you have no idea what "proof" is.Your assertion is specious and without any substance. Re read my posting and highlight the hate that you find there. Micheal Dodds is correct. christians often use an ad hominem attack when they can't develop a reasoned one.
There are no gods to be able to die.
What is incomprehensible though is that an intelligent god can come from nothing and have no beginning, but the universe apparently cannot.
But if he has no beginning then how can he come from nowhere.
It's far more likely that an unconscious, unintelligent universe is eternal than a conscious, intelligent entity.
@@Funaru I would like to examine that. Want to?
He didn't "come from nothing ". God has no beginning and no end☺, from everlasting to everlasting He is God ( Psalm 103:17, psalm 41:13, 1Chronicles 16:36).
@@Funaru I respectfully disagree. Are you suggesting that before there was life, there was matter?
Atheism leads to millions of deaths, I'm a scientist! LOL Correlation doesn't equal causation.
Except there is causation. Atheism means there's no transcendent moral good or evil. Moral good and evil are whatever individuals or society deem they are. Anything goes. We're just advanced animals. Survival of the fittest. Death is the end. There's no God, no judgment, nothing after death. Therefore, why shouldn't the strong destroy the weak, if it's of benefit to them? Or just because they can?
Address this fact. You won't. Anti-theists never do. EVER.
dollarsignfrodofan77 you are talking to a wall my friend. These people ignore what is it that motivates people to do violence, they think that fear of god's wrath is the only possible way for people to act decent. Of course this view is very naive when taken into account that most of the wars in the past were between religous people, this doesn't necessarily mean that they were because of religious reasons but it is evidence enough to show that whether one man is theist or not has little to do with the probability of that man commiting violence.
@@jokerxxx354 no, you are flat out wrong.
Yesica1993 atheism doesn't mean that there is no moral good or bad, atheism is about the existence of god. The existence of god has nothing to do with the existence of moral facts, there are two problems with this view and both are caused by ignorance.
First problem is that morality cant come from god. The main argument against morality coming from god is the euthyphro dilemma. Second problem is the god's nature itself which is supposed to be merciful, good and unchanging, yet god still makes questionable things, for exp. the immoral acts in the old testament and the very well documented problem of evil and the problem of hell.
So no atheism doesnt mean moral facts do not exist, because atheism in the narrowest sense is disbelief in gods.
@@jokerxxx354 if objective morality does not come from God then where does it come from?
God created formless primal matter in the beginning in silence . Christ is the beginning and end. Alpha and Omega. In him everything exists.
For in him we live and move and have our being.
Acts 17:28
He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.
Colosian 1:17
Matter exsists because it is sustained by Christ. He is the eternal observer. If matter is not sustained it will perish and dissapear.
The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact expression of his nature, sustaining all things by his powerful word.
Hebrew 1:3
As he is the beginning and end He is interlinking link between Eternity and time. That is why we say through christ only one can approach God the Father who dwells in eternity.
This visible universe came from the invisible primal matter which was created by God in the beginning. Visible universe came from primal matter and not from nothingness. Primal matter was created from nothing.
By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was made from things that are not visible."
Hebrew 11:3
Have you considered the possibility that gods are conceptual in nature?
Prove it.
The last words to the world. John Lennox
Good riddance.
This is extremely circular. His assertions are not proofs nor are they definitive, simply statements of wishful thinking.
Wow you’re really smart. Why aren’t you on that stage?
How come the creation killed it's creator???????????!!!!!!!!
How can you debate a belief
well...you have to believe to do so.
By investigating its claims and the results it produces when people adhere to its teachings faithfully.
For instance, faithful adherence to Hinduism produced the cast system which leaves millions in a state of hopeless poverty while elevating others to a place of unsympathetic superiority. Faithful adherence to 1sl44m has left females in a permanent state of second class citizenship throughout much of the Middle East, not to mention the violence and political instability we see. Christianity teaches us to do unto others as we would have them do unto us; to love our neighbors as ourselves; to lead lives characterized by righteousness, peace, joy, etc. There is a reason why people flock to America, a historically Christian nation. There is also a reason why America is statistically the most generous, charitable, and humanitarian nation in the world.
That's the point of a believe...
Still waiting ...
81
This is another typical Lennox "argument", which really doesn't argue about anything, but just keeps repeating his definition of god, and thus explains nothing. It's ironic. He probably thinks he is spreading the word of god as the bible demamnds, but really he is narrowing his god's "jurisdiction" by saying what he says.
That's not irony. Irony would be arguing for the existence of God whilst proving himself wrong. Alanis Morissett tried to explain irony in the song Isn't It Ironic when she said: "Ten thousand spoons, when all you needed was a knife". That's not irony, it's just inconvenient. The irony would have prevailed when it was understood that a spoon would've been sufficient. In this case, the irony is that science actually explains and expounds the existence of God because it is through science that we understand more about who God is. What I've just done here is spread the word of God as the bible demands. See? Easy.
@@michaeljamesdesign
Exactly! You just completely agreed with me. If you don't see that, that IS ironic.
@@tosuchino6465 If I had of agreed with you then that would have been agreement. Not irony. Irony is a gift which everyone from Liverpool is born with. You can't earn it, you can't learn it. You either have irony or you don't.
@@michaeljamesdesign
Ok, sure.
Now i understand why they produce bible....i see a sign of money🙄.
Oh yes! Whats that old saying, jesus saves and saves and saves
Now you realize..actually they know the truth....
Many christians are persecuted just to get a free bible in China.
Bible are freely distributed in many other poor region. And you said it is for money? Don't think with your ego.
@@Yahya8.19 The bible was denied to the public for how long? Even when it was translated to english, congregants were tortured and executed for owning one.
Look at hem now, the most powerful racketeering pedophilia ring on the planet.
Who shouldn't think with his/her ego?
And why our pastor woman everytime she preach you must buy a bible if you want to be save... Did God say produce a bible and sell it to the people?
So the Bible got it right that the universe had a beginning?
The authors of Genesis didn’t even know what the universe is.😂
Their "universe“ consisted of our earth, a tiny sun and a tiny moon that orbit around earth and a few thousand tiny stars that are nothing more than signs in the solid firmament.
So for every part that the Bible got right it got hundreds of the details wrong... very compelling evidence against Christianity.😂
Well oh well, bible actually says that earth hangs in the above of nothing (meaning space). And have you ever asked how is it possible that all the randomness that "made life in multiple ways happened on the one planet? That also came to its existence randomly.. Sounds like believing in random.
@@MinnaAnniina Traditional Hebrew cosmology suggested a 3-plane universe. With Earth as a flat disc in the middle, separated from Heaven by the round Firmament, and below was Hell (Sheol). Later, this was replaced by the Greek model of cosmology, with a round Earth surrounded by the spheres of the heavens (planets, sun, other stars). That latter one is what we typically see in old Christian depictions of cosmology (see the Divine Comedy for an example).
The Bible makes it very clear that the sky is stood on pillars/foundations/supports (Psalm 75:3, 1 Samuel 2:8, Job 9:6, Psalms 18:7 and 82:5, Psalm 104:5). Just because one verse could be interpreted as meaning "space", that doesn't dismiss the plethora of other verses that make abundantly clear what the traditional Hebrew thinking was on cosmology, and that the model is fundamentally wrong. And what verse specifically are you referring to anyway when you say "earth hangs in the above of nothing"? Not trying to be a jerk, genuinely curious since I don't remember where that is.
When you say "all the randomness", you are presenting a strawman misunderstanding of biological evolution, stellar formation, planetary formation, and so on.
God not being dead doesn’t mean he’s alive or ever existed. We just don’t know and trying to prove one or the other is absolutely meaningless