An Answer to God of the Gaps...
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 окт 2024
- Make sure to subscribe and check out some of my other videos for more on Christianity, Theology and other aspects of culture!
READ: A Rebel's Manifesto, by Sean McDowell (amzn.to/3CHaY5U)
*Get a MASTERS IN APOLOGETICS or SCIENCE AND RELIGION at BIOLA (bit.ly/3LdNqKf)
*USE Discount Code [SMDCERTDISC] for $100 off the BIOLA APOLOGETICS CERTIFICATE program (bit.ly/3AzfPFM)
*See our fully online UNDERGRAD DEGREE in Bible, Theology, and Apologetics: (bit.ly/448STKK)
FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA:
Twitter: / sean_mcdowell
TikTok: @sean_mcdowell
Instagram: / seanmcdowell
Website: seanmcdowell.org
Religion: We have answers you can't question
Science: We have questions that we can't answer, but want to.
See the difference?🤔
The scientists aren't afraid to say I don't know instead of making bold claims and assumptions
@@joey.99 Agreed 👍. Science is always looking, if something that they have been using has been found to be flawed or false they try to correct it or toss it out and find something that does fit the facts. I hope I explained it correctly. I haven't seen Religion do that.
This would be a great comparison if you represented our stance truthfully. Instead you've decided to make a strawman of our stance as you guys usually do. Our actual stance is thus:
Religion: We have questions. We asked those questions and have come to the most likely conclusion with the evidence we currently have. However, we are willing to hear any new evidence and consider it.
We welcome questions with open arms. We ask them all the time. However, the questions have to lead somewhere, not just questioning for questioning sake. If the questions don't advance us towards an answer, then the questions are pointless.
If you can attack our actual argument instead of strawmaning our argument then we can advance this discussion. Yet, the only thing you guys have is questions that don't advance us towards answers and strawmen.
@@joey.99 This inference and implication is wrong. We are not afraid to say I don't know. There's many things that we can't come to a most likely conclusion to within our doctrines and theology. We are quite at ease to set them down and say "I don't know." until more evidence presents itself.
However, if we see duck tracks, duck feathers and hear quacking in the distance we aren't going to say "I don't know what made these tracks." We are going to come to the most likely conclusion that ducks probably made these tracks.
@@nathanloan3334 you're indoctrinated. Break your indoctrination before you spend your life worshipping things that aren't real
He is just silly. Well done Sean.
Hm, can you explain why it must be prrsonal creator, not "spaceless,timeless, immaterial" cause? 🤔
They'd rather fill their gaps in knowledge with more theories that leave them with more questions, no answers, and no "best explanation", in order to give them an excuse not to consider God as a possibility. They will only consider empirical evidence for answers...even for the philosophical questions. Empirical evidence doesn't answer philosophical questions.
That is a really good effort you made there, but if you go back and finish high school I think you will be able to grasp it a little better.
@@DigitalSteel 😆
@DigitalSteel based on Atheist logic, there would be nothing to grasp to begin with.
@@timothywalters23 I grasp not acting like a 12 year old who keeps telling people they have superpowers
@DigitalSteel that has nothing to do with the discussion. Try and engage like an adult without sarcasm and self-rightous indignation.
Hi Sean! Atheist here. I’ve been watching your videos for a while, and I’m a big fan of your work! I like to see you interact with individuals from other belief systems, and it’s always really interesting to see your reaction to another atheist’s line of thinking. It seems like you’re pretty tired of the God of the gaps argument, which is fair! It’s been around for a while, and it’s clear that you’ve encountered it your fair share of times. That said, I think your response closed some, but not all, of the gaps eluded to by atheists. When discussing the origin of the universe, it seems reasonable to point to something occurring outside of space, time, and matter as the cause, but for me, it doesn’t follow that the cause must be a personal being. Things happen in our universe all the time without any evidence of a personal cause; wind blows, seedlings sprout, and oceans rise. Furthermore, whatever occurred happened in a time where reality was much different. Does it seem clear beyond a reasonable doubt that a personal being is the cause rather than some process that we have yet to understand? I’m not so sure yet. Please keep sharing your thoughts! If the atheists who view you want one thing, I think it’s for you to provide a detailed, step-by-step guide to how you arrive at your beliefs. (If you have evidence, that’s a bonus!) I’d encourage you to make it clear enough that even someone like me (a guy who doesn’t arrive naturally at the same conclusions as you) couldn’t criticize your explanation! Thanks again, Sean, and keep the dialogue going!
I’m also an atheist/agnostic but my personal issue with his statement response was mostly his “it’s the BEST explanation for the universe” it might but be me but that seems like a personal opinion more than a fact…. U could also say it was multiple gods, or u could say we’re all basically the same beings connected and we created ourselves we just have no knowledge of it, or another conclusion one could make is the universe is like AI, ai can create things it’s not conscious of it or knowing or aware of itself but it can still create, couldn’t the universe have been the same? It created all this but it just simply isn’t conscious of it.
nice comments from you and rosssussel7864. Sean does have a great demeanor and really want to portray truth as best he sees it.
as to your hypothesis about the "possibilities " of how we got here- the imagination is endless! That's why the Bible is so amazing!. We just happen to have a written account of how it all went down "in the beginning". Wouldn't that be what you'd expect from a personal, rational creator? To let his creation know who he was, and what he did, and his rules. The problem is not that these things are hidden, it's just that people would rather it not be true because as the creator, he did make some radical claims/ expectations/ rewards/ and punishments. It's all there. All of history pointed to when Jesus would come. And then he came, and did many convincing proofs to show he was who he said he is.
@@dwightwhitman2781 Well, rather the problem is that when we read the bible it is filled with so many illogical and unreasonable things that it is hard to believe that the creator of the universe wrote it.
For example in the bible, there are numerous prophecies made which never came true. If it is the infallible word of God, then this is simply a contradiction and suggests that your bible is not actually the word of God.
Similarly there are numerous truly horrific and absurd incidents that occur in the bible which make it hard to believe. For example, that an entire town was raised from the dead, that two cities were burned to the ground because they participated in sin (Sodom and Gomorrah), that a lady who hesitated when turning away from the burning people in the cities was turned into a pillar of salt by God, that women and children were murdered on the order of God in Caanan. Or the absurd account of how the whole world was flooded by water, and a single man built a zoo-boat that housed two of every animal on board.
In some cases, religious apologists have some horrific defenses for what occurs in the bible. For example, William Lane Craig says its not actually that bad to kill children, because they'll be going to heaven anyway!
So what we see is a collection of either flatly incorrect statements in the bible, or else truly absurd or horrifying stories that contradict the idea of an all-loving God. In both cases, it makes the bible extremely hard to take seriously.
When you add to the fact that, these stories only seem to occur during the bronze ages, at a time where no one could read or write and superstitions where extremely common. Making it even more likely that the bible was just a collection of old wives tales with no actual validity.
But for some strange reason, in the intervening 2000 years since the bible came out, we have had no evidence of any similar interactions from God with humanity. Why did it suddenly stop? And is it a coincidence that it stopped just as humans are becoming scientifically literate and have the ability to record photographic or video evidence of incredible feats? Is it a coincidence that prayer studies regularly find no correlation between prayer and healing?
Some food for thought. But in a nutshell that is why atheism is so much more compelling than theism. The bible is basically extremely hard to take seriously as it is filled with inaccuracies, errors, or stories that obviously contradict the supposed loving nature of God (including the whole notion of eternal torment in hell).
Well put 👍
Keep it up Sean, God bless your ministry
If it's timeless and spaceless, it, by definition, doesn't exist. What makes you think it's a personal being?
How are you getting personal in there?!
Because the creator made the choice to create the universe. That makes it a personal act.
@@jurgenvandenhouwe3670 you’re putting the cart before the horse there. You are assuming creator so the the choice becomes necessary.
Maybe I'm just nitpicking but I think you could have done a better job at explaining how the Kalam is a deductive argument (as formulated e.g. by Craig) and only after doing a conceptual analysis of the cause of the universe (conclusion of the first two premises of the argument) you get a "timeless, immaterial, even personal entity" (i.e. God).
Now it sounds like the cosmological argument is an inference to the best explanation, which might sound as "God of the Gaps"?. 🤔 In my opinion the deductive version of the cosmological argument is way more powerful than "an inference to the best explanation".
Thanks a lot for your edifying material on RUclips; really appreciate it as a fellow Christian. 🔥
We don't know what Sean claims we know.
We don’t know what happened before the Big Bang. Before the Big Bang may not even be plausible. That is a gap in our knowledge as humans. To postulate any explanation in regards to something we don’t know is by definition a god of the gaps argument.
Amen
I love the sad trombone.
I'm happy to everything here except for the word "personal." Citation needed for personal.
How did you determine it is the BEST explanation?? Just saying it's the best does nothing to demonstrate the god, it just fills the gap with an assumption.
“Timeless, space less, personal creator”
I understand this isn’t submitted as proof, rather as a potential explanation for the origin of our universe. But, it seems to me that this line of argument doesn’t advance the conversation at all. Rather, it only creates three separate lines of evidence and argumentation that now requires an explanation and substantiation with evidence.
I get that it’s an attractive slogan for theist, but, certainly you have to see the regress it creates for you. Especially the “personal” portion. I think to much value is placed in this explanation.
Technically the best explanation would be timeless spaceless unknown cause for the beginning of the universe. You don't have to make some something personal to do it
Are you familiar with Dr. Lennox? He makes the case that a mind is behind the universe, and I think he makes a good case for it.
I would rather ask how to explain something's existence than how to explain its "origin". The question assumes less.
I actually find the "universe had a beginning" assumption to be a dangerous pullar hang god on. Physics and astronomy are well know for radical paradigm shifts in understandings, and It would get embarrassing quickly for apologists if a new discovery suggests an
Eternal universe.
Bhai kimme bhi bol gya tu to ❤❤
"Well , its not that we put God on what we dont know , its that we see what we dont know , make up an scenario that isnt confirmed , say that hod is the only posible answer and put it in there"
Its literally the same with more steps LoL
How is that the best explanation ? Where did you see that we know that the univers is finit in space or time ?
@SeanMcDowell
1) How is that the "Best Explanation"? Show your evidence
2) How many other Universe do you know of that were "created" by a Spaceless/Timeless anything?
3) What Actual (Verifiable, Falsifiable) evidence do you have that the Universe did not come into existence through natural means?
4) What Evidence(Verifiable and falsifiable) do you have that there is such thing as Outside "Spaceless/Timeless" anything?
You don't understand philosophy do you?
@@benisbrave5290
Kid, don't use big words from books you obviously never read
@@benisbrave5290Philosophy or Fantasy?
First off, there are testable predictions that the Bible makes that have been confirmed to be true. Second, the claim that the universe came into existence via natural means contradicts the fundamental principle of science: cause and effect. All scientific discoveries and inventions follow the scientific principle of cause and effect and that includes future scientific discoveries and inventions. So is it possible that purely naturalistic processes are responsible for the formation of the universe? No, not at all. Because only something eternal can create a finite universe that follows the scientific principle of cause and effect.
This is why you should know some basic level of philosophy. Philosophy is the daddy of all natural sciences. Philosophy is a kryptonite against all materialist and atheist worldviews.
@@XDRONINso is that a no?
Hi Sean, so once again as the resident atheist in your videos, the position you're raising is basically just a variation on God of the gaps.
There are many different forms it can take. One is you have no idea what created the universe, and so you assume it is God. The second might be, you know the universe had a beginning, but you can only think of one thing that could cause matter/space/time, and so you similarly assert that it is God.
Either way, that is a god of the gaps argument. You are asserting God not because you know its the answer, but because you can't think of anything else, you assume it either completely or as a best explanation.
But there is no such thing as a "best explanation" without evidence or some sort of logical proof that your argument is true. Since you have neither, all you have is a hypothetical possibility. And the standard for using a mere hypothesis as an answer until you get something else, is far too low and as we have seen throughout history, it has been wrong over and over again, when it comes to Zeus, Ra, or other ancient Gods to explain natural phenomena we similarly had "no other answer" for like lightning or the sun. That was also God of the gaps. I hope you can see how your argument is basically the same, but applied now to the universe - another phenomenon we can't explain.
Maybe you want to call it by some other name, that's fine. But any way you describe it, I hope you will agree it is a form of illogical reasoning and seems to pop up regularly from religious apologists
You just did god of the gaps with extra steps.
I think it’s a mistake to *not* at least mention that there are specific reasons for inferring personal nature of the Cause.
(I know he does elsewhere)
It has to do with the idea that, if everything is random and has been for eternity, then everything that could have happened would have already happened. So why did the universe begin ~13 billion years ago as opposed to any other random time? Answer: because it wasn't random; a _personal_ being made the choice to begin creation at that time.
Or something like that, I'm no expert. 😅
@@frogpaste As Craig frames it, if the cause is both permanent *and* sufficient then the effect should also be permanent.
So how does a timeless, permanent cause produce a temporal effect with a finite history?
Craig gives the example of a man sitting from eternity freely willing to stand up.
So personal agency is the way out of the dilemma
Or so the argument goes.
(I’m a bigger fan of non-kalam cosmological arguments, personally)
@@frogpaste an additional argument comes from Swinburne’s distinction between scientific mechanistic explanations and personal explanations.
So if someone asks, “why is the water in the kettle boiling?”
You *could* answer with, “well, the kinetic energy from the heated coils is causing the molecules to speed up and enter a gaseous state.”
That’s true.
OR you can say, “because I wanted to make tea.”
If ALL matter, energy, space, and time have an absolute beginning, then we cannot explain that in terms of mechanistic causation (since such causation itself had a beginning). So, per some version of PSR, we might want to insist on Swinburne’s distinction and infer personal agency.
(Ironically, Swinburne has defended a brute version of God, which I think is false and hurts his own case)
@@TheProdigalMeowMeowMeowReturns and still no evidence of sean's god or that any personal desire is involved at all.
@@velkyn1 I didn’t offer any. But I can tell it wouldn’t get anywhere anyway. The point is that the arguments are far richer than people like you realize
if god, defined as "timeless, immaterial, persona and immensely powerful" created the universe.
what did his power consist of?
"what did his power consist of?"
You can't really know what that is especially when you are restricted by space, time and matter.
Then it must be a timeless spaceless kratos 🤷🏻♂️ why god of bible ? God in bible is NOT the best explanation nor any other
Why not a timeless, spaceless, personal pink unicorn? No? Who said the universe is finite? Prove your creator exists - then maybe I'll believe.
You'll maybe believe if a creator is proven? So you admit you might continue to disbelieve things that are proven?
What I always pose is-fine, then please offer a more reasonable explanation. It’s interesting too, many atheists assert that they don’t have to show evidence nor proof for their position because they’re not making any claims.
It is at this point that I like to refer back to the questions that started the whole God debate in the first place; where did we/it all come from? Why are we here? How do we best explain that existence of moral compass? And where is it all going from here?
Good stuff, brother McDowell
"I don't know" is always a valid answer. We should always continue searching, but we shouldn't pretend that we know if we don't.
Eeeh
The problem stars when you asume that the universe is finite , thats also something(as far as i know ) that science is wtill to explain , so its not a god of the gaps argument but a
Let me asume my answer is correct
Argument
The best explanation is a magic wizard who lives outside of space time? Really? Because cosmologists have natural explanations that sufficiently explain it all without magic. And we already know that the category of natural things exists, so that makes it a better explanation by definition.
What is the scientific explanation for the origin of the universe? Show how it explains it better than God did it.
@@Justas399 I just cant see how scientific knowledge based on our understanding of reality can explain a source where reality hasnt existed yet. Let's just wait for the natural explanation that explains itself how nature came to be. lol
These young guys think they're so intellectual, so wise, clever. But won't feel so clever when on your knees face down before the Almighty.
Ah yes. The old embedded threat response. “You’ll be sorry some day”. Do you really think an infinite loving creator wants some of His creatures to feel regret with no hope of relief for an infinite future stretch? It seems absurd to me the more I think of it.
@@mikelsikel73 well, you keep thinking about it and intellectualizing it, bc you're definitely smarter than an all-knowing all-loving creator of the universe.
@@geralhammonds9272 I suppose if that infinite Being chooses to punish, there is not much I can do. While being punished though - can one ask forgiveness at that point? How about after a billion years of Hell - a short recess ?
@@mikelsikel73 You can mock and ridicule it and just blow it all off as nothing, you do you, again it's your choice. You can choose now to repent and be born again, turn from the darkness into the light.
When you're doing something you KNOW you're NOT supposed to be doing, do you do it in the dark or the light? Of course you do it in the dark, bc you DON'T want to be found out. BTW God already knows.
Jesus IS the light. Choose the light NOT the darkness. God bless you and good luck.
@@geralhammonds9272 God bless you too. I apologize if I seem argumentative. Arguing on the internet is rarely productive. It is often a temptation to jump in and respond.
You can demonstrate and prove that, riiight?
No the best answer isn’t a personal creator
The best answer is something happened and now we are as we are
You can’t just say well because no other answer it’s god
You are just taking a question we don’t know the answer to and saying god
It is pretty well certain though because anything else besides God would itself be material and therefore can't have created everything material. This is just someone offended at the truth grasping at straws.
There could be a physical existence that preceded the current universe. Multiverse or greater cosmos. Just because our current laws of physics can’t “see” before the hot dense beginning doesn’t mean that all physical causes started ~14 B years ago. Sean M glosses over this possibility far too rapidly.
When atheists say "God of the gaps" what they mean is they don't have a rebuttal.
Its rather the opposite, its that the Christian doesn't properly understand what god of the gaps means and how they keep making the same fallacious arguments over and over again. We are here to remind you how to think correctly
This is not accurate at all. What it means is that the theist is pointing to any available gaps in human knowledge, shrugging and shoving their god concept in there. For centuries the gaps in our knowledge have gotten smaller and smaller and not a single time has the answer been a god.
@@jackprather81 I understand the argument. In theory the God of the Gaps is where theists feebly point to the unknown and say, "God must've done it!" before they are proven wrong. But that does not comport with history. And as for Christians pointing to things as evidence for God, how do you know they are ignorant? This is the faulty premise of the God of the Gaps argument. The user of the argument admits they are ignorant. They are assuming the Christian is also ignorant when, in fact, they are not. Hence why I say the God of the Gaps argument is an admission that an atheist does not have a rebuttal.
@ather81 I understand the argument, but it does not comport with history. The flaw in the argument is that you are assuming there is a gap in the Christians' knowledge when there is not.
@@hermanwooster8944 are you claiming to know EVERYTHING about the universe??
How is that the best explanation when it isn’t remotely close to demonstrable?
Sorry to say, but your explanation begs the question: Is the universe truly finite? I would believe in god if you can prove that, and I still wouldn't believe in the christian god.
Time, matter, and space are finite? This seems false to me. Matter probably finite . Space seems infinite to me imagine going to “edge of space” now imagine sticking your arm past that point . Regardless of what happens to your arm it makes sense to think there is something beyond that point.
If time is infinite (no origin) then how are you here now ?
@@biblelorax Time can have a beginning and still be infinite. Also the how are you here puzzle i think is parallel to Zeno’s paradox. In Zeno’s paradox it is concluded that motion is not real because an infinite number of points exists between two points and therefore in order for something to move an infinite number of points must be crossed. I bring this up because it has a crazy implication because of infinity. Because of this I think it reasonable to be hesitant about using infinity to conclude time had to have a beginning. Also if you can ask how are we here now I believe it is valid to ask what happened before the beginning of time?
@@benbockelman6125 I did not mean time must be infinite, I should have clarified eternal time is inconceivable. Positing that Time must be eternal is a big difference. God is eternal (and infinite as a result). However, human beings can have everlasting or infinite life through Christ, but they are not eternal because they had an origin. Apologize if I did not clarify that.
basically, you can recursively go back and determine that the Universe itself must be the uncaused first thing, or someone outside of it. Since we exist, the Universe itself did have an origin.
Time is an extension of God's being. He determines the bounds of the beginning and the end of time as we know it. Without God, there would be no time, but time as we experience it is a construct, a necessary truth, but one contingent on God's upholding. There was no time before God created the first thing.
My point is not whether the Universe and time itself are infinite, but whether they had an origin. Basically, are they eternal? Time could be infinite and not logically contradict our existence as long as it had an origin point. However, we know through the principle of causality that everything with an origin had a preceeding cause. Thus, if you concede the Universe had an origin, it must be due to an ancaused being outside of it.
There are also tons of other Quasi-empirical proofs why God must exist, but I can prove he does with the same certainty that I can prove you exist. No, I'm not exaggerating. It is actually foolish and illogical not to believe in God. Even the most famous thinkers and intellectuals in history, including Darwin himself, acknowledged that "brute force" couldn't have been the answer for everything.
The "elites" or modern day gnostics who think they are smarter than everyone think atheists are fools and stupid people. I am not kidding. They don't outwardly express that, but that is their mindset. Ironically enough, they come to the wrong conclusion about who God is, so while it is good to realize God must exist that is obvious. You then have to reason why Jesus Christ is logically the only option.
Zf set theory's axiom of extensionality helps weed out every world religion besides Christianity on the basis of it being the only religion that gets you to God without any good deeds at all.
It is like if I told you to pick one out of 50 hats a magician shuffles. Since even he cannot remember which hat hides the rabbit, it must be a trick. Say you found a unique feature like a slightly curved top on one of the 50 hats. Probablistically, you would select the unique one to give the best change of finding the rabit under the pretense that the game is inherently a trick. Effectively all world religions are the same religion (including catholiscism, orthodoxy, mormonism, etc.) except biblical Christianity.
Amen 🙏
"They" scientists, like the Taurus theory, The twisting donut, or an Orange with a tunnel going thru it's poles. Beginning and end are entering and exiting the poles. The universe is expanding and contracting at the same time. Today, the world is ending, and Today the world is beguining... somewhere.
I lost brain cells well, watching this🤣
From McDowell or the other guy?
aint' that the truth. I do love poor Sean's baseless assertions.
@@TheProdigalMeowMeowMeowReturns from poor Sean. It's great to see him try to make lies a family business.
@@velkyn1 I think Sean failed here, but not as hard as the “skeptic” he was reacting to. See my other comments for some idea of how the argument can go.
@@velkyn1im not a McDowell guy but you gotta be a miserable pos lol
God of the gaps…… He is literally just making an assertion and proclaiming it must be correct or more likely to be correct….
What’s his basis for saying the universe is finite? Or if there was a cause to the universe it must be “personal”
Granted, this is but a short clip, but he is simply making assertions. How could you demonstrate your claims?
So your 'answer' to the god of the gaps claim is to literally explain the gap in your understanding of the universe and claim a god did it? Makes sense. But riddle me this... why wasn't it just aliens? The concept is exactly the same. It is an unfalsifiable hypotheses that does nothing but stop the actual learning process.
If God did create the universe from nothing, then what did? What's your explanation?
@@hydepark1382 You realize that is asinine though, right? You are essentially banking your answer on personal incredulity.
@@Justas399"if God did create the universe from nothing, then what did?"
is there a "not" missing in that question?
if god did it then what did is incoherent.
@@lukecrawford6482 I mean sure, you can use personal incredulity all you want... but nobody is ever going to take you seriously
@@lukecrawford6482 hahahahaha, you must be joking
Creation
Under the direction of Heavenly Father(ELOHIM), Jesus Christ(JEHOVAH) and Adam (ARCHANGEL MICHAEL) created the heavens and the earth (see Mosiah 3:8; Moses 2:1). From scripture revealed through the Prophet Joseph Smith, we know that in the work of the Creation, the Lord organized elements that had already existed (see Abraham 3:24). He did not create the world “out of nothing,” as some people believe. The scriptures also teach that Adam was “the first man of all men” (Moses 1:34). God created Adam and Eve in His own image and in the image of His Only Begotten (see Moses 2:26-27). The Creation is an integral part of Heavenly Father’s plan of salvation. It gives each of us the opportunity to come to the earth, where we receive a physical body and exercise our agency. In the premortal Council of the Gods, the following declaration was made: “We will go down, for there is space there, and we will take of these materials, and we will make an earth whereon these may dwell; and we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them” (Abraham 3:24-25).
Thinking some random guy is over seeing us 24/7 for whatever reason is truly the best explanation for why the universe exists
Life is a vapor. Eternity is a long time to be wrong, so, gamble away. Repent, Jesus Christ loves you. Good luck.
And what if I pick the wrong religion??? Where's Jesus then because there are thousands of gods all saying their the one and only. I'll spend eternity figuring out which one is real
@@YF-21Dream I've already spoke the truth to you in all sincerity. It's your choice to deny or accept.
Christianity is distinct and stands alone, because it is the truth.
If you prefer NOT to study the Bible, not just read but study the Bible, you could start off with a 3-second Google search, or even easier just put your faith in Jesus Christ and repent be born again, he died for our sins, it's a free gift, all you have to do is accept or deny.
I deny bc I didn't ask for anyone to die for me
@@YF-21Dream did you ask American soldiers from WW2 died for you freedom? Did you ask them to fight for your freedom?
You just worded things differently and then used the god of the gaps argument
Instead of saying "everything" for the god of the gap argument. You used "time, space, and matter"
Well, the atheist guy is wrong. This isn't a God of the gaps issue at all.
The problem is that claiming God created the universe doesn't actually explain anything. Where did God come from? This just results in an infinite regression of "how did *that* happen".
But also your premises are also suspect. Why assume that the universe is finite? Why not assume that time, matter, and space are all infinite?
It's not an assumption, our best conclusions from science are that the universe is finite.
And no, it's not infinite regression, because the claim is that God always existed. Something that the universe doesn't appear to have done.
@@midimusicforever Thank you for your response. Well, I disagree with you on both accounts. Science is inconclusive about whether the universe is finite or infinite; to take a position on this one way or another is to make an assumption. And the claim that god always existed begs for an explanation; this is after all, yet another assumption.
@@zapatafa That's not true. We have a model for the expansion of the universe called the big bang theory, which is well established, and which leads to a finite universe. One cannot say that we are 100% certain that this is how it happened of course, but if that would be the requirement, then drawing conclusions from science is impossible.
What needs an explanation, do you mean?
@@midimusicforeverSo to avoid infinite regress, you use special pleading.?
@@oscargr_I'm not sure what you mean. What special pleading are you talking about?
and sean fails yet again. How typical.
Yep, that is the argument christians make, that since they don't know how the universe happened, and their myths claim it was god, then they claim is was god, a literal god of the gaps argument.
Nothing about the universe being finite, etc needs their god or any "personal" creator. Poor Sean, he just makes a baseless assertion. Alas for him, his bible doesn't describe a timeless, spaceless being. Sean makes that part up.
how is that the best explanation? how is that more probable than literally any other explanation?
The reason IT IS a god of the gaps argument is because you are taking something we dont know and using your god as the explanation for it. this has happened all throughout history. You religious lot used god as an "explanation" for all sorts of things until we actually discovered the real reason. Judging by history this will more than likely be the same, as every discovery we have ever made has ALWAYS been NATURAL and NEVER been god.
Wait.... the best explanation is a supernatural being??? Really??? 😂
So an assumption 😂😂😂😂
The run-of-the-mill Christian is scientifically illiterate, but apologists like Sean are the worst because they have seen the evidence against their case and still double down on their ridiculous religion.
Please explain further
@@benisbrave5290 Most Christians won't ever educate themselves on evolution theory, Big Bang Cosmology, genetics, or any number of scientific disciplines that disprove many of the Bible's claims. Sean, I'm presuming, is aware of most, if not all, of the scientific evidence against Christianity...yet he still continues to ignore it.
@@benisbrave5290 Yeah there is nothing else to explain here, the whole statement was all there needed to be to explain the point... If you need an explanation on scientific literacy, I would suggest starting the 8th grade over again.
Yuck
Sorry, Mr. McDowell. I saw that you support Willam Lane Craig and don't believe in original sin so I have to unsubscribe. You obviously hold to evolution and without original sin, why did Jesus die? You are definitely not like your father and that is sad to see.
Whoa there pardner! Do you have proof that he believes all this stuff? Because he's flat out denied evolution as being a possibility, and he hasn't said anything on original sin. Guilt by association isn't always Accurate or fair
@@micahm7123I watched an interview with him and Mr. Craig. I'll try to find the link.
Dirt man, magic rib woman, and talking snakes. If you don’t believe in those, how can you have hope, meaning and purpose? Maybe if I also believe in a flying hippopotamus, my life will feel extra special!
@@micahm7123watch "quest for historical Adam"
An interview done by Sean McDowell with William Lane Craig
@@micahm7123perhaps you can send me a link where Sean McDowell says evolution is impossible. That would help.