I do appreciate that he would admit the existence of observable evidence, but it still doesn't help make his belief in a God, especially the Abrahamic God, any more rational.
Sorry, Craig, but the best estimate we have for the WORLD is 4.5 billion years. You have shown your fundamental ignorance of the science you so readily use to defend your ridiculous assertions.
@correctionguy - Pointing out that he answered the wrong question is not a "vehement" attack, unless you define the word differently than the rest of us, which you may, for all I know. If you're a theist, you probably do. They tend to redefine things to suit their needs.
@farrell2k You said he has a 'fundamental ignorance of the science', though I would agree with that claim, it is a pretty vehement attack when you base that on him confusing a question of the earth with that of the universe.
@farrell2k I think that he confused the age of the Earth, which is supposedly around 4.5B yo, with the age of the universe, which is supposedly about 13+ B yo. I'll give him credit for not saying 6,000 years.
Thanks so much for clearing that up Craig. Nowhere in the bible does it state the age of the earth. The whole 6,000 year thing is a matter of opinion. And how long it took God to create the earth is also a matter of opinion. 6-24 hour days or 6 billion years.... the bible doesnt say. I wish people would stop trying to turn the bible into a freaking science book. That is not what it was made to be. B-asic I-nstructions B-efore L-eaving E-arth...... no science in that.
The one comment I like in this mentions breaking the laws of science. True science dictates that everything we know is based on best possible guess.
Neutrinos as an example do travel faster than light in a vaccume thus breaking E=mc^2. A consequence of studying nuclear physics I guess. Also the ability of black holes in destroying both quantum and classical physics which are known to exist at the centre of galaxies.
@Solitarious2011 Do you read the fuc#ing news man? Nobody expected the neutrino data from the collider to be valid in the first place based off of our detection of neutrinos during the 1987 supernova. Now it's been confirmed that the hadron collider had wiring problems therefore the results were a false positive. The fact that you've already jumped to the conclusion that E=MC^2 is false, without evidence is no surprise to me given that you're a theist. Fail
@MrSamySara First off I did not mention the Hadron Collider so your response to neutrinos traveling speed based on that principal is floored. I speak from the perspective of Nuclear reactors that have continually witnessed in excess of light speed by neutrinos.
Please consider the difference between what you see on the media against someone who studys nuclear physics as part of their occupation. I think I should also state that E=mc^2 was a perfectly reasonable assertion at the time
0:22 "I'm not bucking up against main-stream science."
Cough, cough. Ahem. I need a drink after that comment.
The virgin birth, exorcisms, demons possessing pigs, Jesus ascending without the aid of technology, dead people strolling about Jerusalem, a staff turning into a reptile. Keep kidding yourself Craig.
Out of interest, do you not believe in such miracles because you find no evidence for them or do you just find them to be impossible point blank? Basically, do you think it is impossible that there could be a God that has powers that can break the laws of science? Thanks
"do you think it is impossible that there could be a God that has powers that can break the laws of science?"
If I were to grant that it's "possible" then I would also have to grant the equally likely "possibility" that there could be multiple gods, or that there could be a deistic god that can't intervene in human affairs. It would also open the "possibility" that Baal was the one true god and that's why the Hebrews blew it.
Isn't he wrong though? The bible doesn't *explicitly* state the age of the universe/earth, but you can *infer* it from all the ages of the characters in the book.
Isn't he wrong though? The bible doesn't *explicitly* state the age of the universe/earth, but you can *infer* it from all the ages of the characters in the book.
Isn't he wrong though? The bible doesn't *explicitly* state the age of the universe/earth, but you can *infer* it from all the ages of the characters in the book.
@farrell2k Yes he did. I can't believe I'm defending Craig here, as he's almost always wrong, but you can't fault him in this particular clip, mainly because it's so short.
i think that lane is a idiot, but the question was how old the world is, and i beleive he took it as the universe, lane is intelligent idiot, he knows the earth is 4 billions years
See the problem with me and evolution is this; u find 1 fossil. It is for all you can tell complete. Then you find another fossil of the same level of completness. If it looks the same guess what... Ita because IT IS THE SAME. If it looks different, maybe IT IS A DIFFERENT ANIMAL. Why should i accept that they are related or not related based solelu off what some atheist scientist dictates?
@MagnusCattus You should take a class on evolutionary biology or biological anthropology to clear up your misguided ideas. Also you have to consider the different biological connections between animals, geologic time differences, and the structure of the animals in question and their relation. Just thought i'd give you a direction to find those answers.
@MagnusCattus Why not educate yourself on the subject from sites dedicated to evolution or take a college level class. For information on bones/evolution look up paleoanthropology which studies human evolution and for skeletal structures anthropometry.
@Requiemxtoxinnocence That would mean I would be graded on how well an atheist can dictate me his interpretations of the evidence means... OR at best have him dictate to me what some other atheist said. no thanks, if its a mater of spending money, then that should tip you off imediatly its a scam. Anyone who isn't educated, simply cannot be correct. That's called a racket.
@MagnusCattus Not all professors at college who teach biology are atheist, in fact many Christians understand evolution and accept it. Not to mention being graded is dependent on your performance and if you learned anything at all on the subject at hand. Ah yes College is a scam and science is the devil, well I can't say I didn't try to reason with you.
@MagnusCattus Science isn't that hard to understand once you've studied it. If learning things is too large a leap for you well...then I don't see how you could've gotten this far in life. Please check your biases at the door and if you want to actually learn, provide some of that humility that all humans are capable of one not understanding a subject.
@MagnusCattus Hmm, please educate yourself on the actual theory of evolution and I would be utterly surprised if you didn't accept it. I wouldn't believe your current understanding of evolution either.
@MagnusCattus You misunderstood what I said, "educate yourself on the actual theory of evolution" I never said you were uneducated in general, but I would like to make a point on what you said to someone else, "if its a mater of spending money, then that should tip you off imediatly its a scam" because God doesn't ask for money... "Honor the Lord with your wealth and with the firstfruits of all your produce; then your barns will be filled with plenty, and your vats will be bursting with wine"
@dominatein08 You misunderstood the meaning, it was saying give the best to God, not to the ecclesiarchs, and this verse was likely from the Hebrew scriptures, which had a different covenant, before Christ paid a ransom back, the Isrealites were to preform pennance in the form of material sacrafice, a small portion going to the preists who worked as the spiritual leaders and chieftans. Thats of course if this verse was not figurative. Besides that, you assumed I didnt understand-
@dominatein08 -how the Hypothesis of macro evolution works, or for short let's say the theory of evolution. Micro evolution does happen and its simply a misnomer, since its likely just a cyclical series of minor changes, as Darwin's finches appeared to be. And If I don't understand how evolution works, please indulge me. As far as I knew it was small changes accumulting over time by means of mutation and natural selection of those beneficial mutations. This is somehow suppose to-
@dominatein08 -account for every single biological structure no matter how complicated. That my friend is totally absurd and unreasonable, and off the record I would say its a pathetic attempt to demean the worship of God. Now go on, start your barrage of ad hominem or what have you, and convince me I'm somehow wrong in being unconvinced of such an absurd teaching. And yes, regardless of what the Bible says, these scientists are just looking for money, and when thats involved-
@MagnusCattus you cannot say that something is unreasonable and then not back that up with reason. 'its a pathetic attempt to demean the worship of God.' < paranoia much? You say it's absurd twice and yet do not give a reason why it is absurd, meaning all you just said is irrelevant waffle.
The world? No the universe is 14 billion years old. The earth is possibly 4.6 billion years old. And complex animal life could be around 530 million years old. Im skeptical on the last number and it might not be the right number that evolutionists use, but i can say all this and that God created the universe and animal life within undefined peramiters called "kinds". I see no contradiction of faith or science here.
It is disappointing a man as smart as Craig buys into mainstream science, I mean come one Cosmology? Evolution? Universe 13.7 Billion years old? You can see how he is hesitant to even say these, probably because he only allows these premises in his arguments for the Atheists sake, so he can start with common ground from the get go. I hope this is true and Craig doesn't by into the Atheist hijacked "science" that is presented today as "fact".
@stinnetbennet You are an idiot... the computer you are sitting at is built on science your car tv games all science fact. Athieists never hijacked science there are plenty of religious scientists you moron....
Facts are facts demonstrably proven just because you dont like them does not mean they are not true.
You need to get somthing for your paranoia the world is not against you trying change facts.Scientist dont want to pretend something is true(like theists)they want to prove it is.
the question that should have been asked is was man created 6 days after the the creation 13.7 billion years ago because the bible does say that and that would be a contradiction I would love to see how WLC would squirm out of that.
It says in the the bible you cant serve two masters but WLC tries to and thats how he fails the universe 13.7 bil then 4.54bil earth, but then another 4 billion years for man so he is over 13 billion years out if thats what he thinks.
As far as Bible goes it seems like some prophecy on spot some just far away off. Anyway even if those turn out to be true it doesn't mean Bible is original book. There were other prophecies preceding Bible as if Bible took page off another book without copyright. In ancient times Book of Enoch was serious book that were destroyed and persecuted those who have it. Bible is no way unaltered edition. Probably it came thru or with bunch of nutcases added.
@eddybrox If you dont know what the difference between the world and the universe then EPIC FAIL.
WORLD is a common name for the whole of human civilization, specifically human experience, history, or the human condition in general, worldwide, i.e. anywhere on Earth.
The UNIVERSE is commonly defined as the totality of everything that exists, including all matter and energy, the planets, stars, galaxies, and the contents of intergalactic space.
@ahhninjadragon I think that we should not deal with splitting hairs on that topic. I'm sure that Dr. Craig knows the difference between the age of earth and the age of the universe. Your comments on this topic shows that you are definitely prejudiced.
@eddybrox I do think that we should deal with splitting hairs he is purposely evading the direct question "how old is the world"and answering "how old is the universe"he has been asked that before and avoided it.the reason is that the two views are different(bible and science)and he avoids the inconsistencies if he was honest he would not have to.
@ahhninjadragon0:10 He says he goes inline with science and do not think, that it is plausible, that the earth is 6.500 years old. So he avoids nothing
@eddybrox0:10 he does not think, that it is plausible the earth is 6.500 years old but imply it is 13.7billion.he avoids saying what age he thinks the earth is which is what the question was, he would need to be stupid not to know that and he not stupid so he is avoiding the question.
@eddybrox thanks for pointing out a occation where he avoids the question again he was asked directly is there a inconsistency or contradiction of the age of the "earth" and the biblical account(earth not world) and he said no there is no inconsistency.then in the bible on the 6 day god made man so man has live for 13.7 billion in his "world view that is inconsistent with science.he is inconsistent because he cherry picks parts and does not see the whole.
@ahhninjadragon Oh man, really u'r baised. Say what u want. Say he is a creationist or whatsoever. I only judge, by what i says. And he is not telling something contradictional. He says, that nowhere in the bible is a reference on when the earth/universe was made or came into existance. I think the one who picks parts and does not see the whole is u in our bias.
@eddybrox im not biased he is and fits everything around his biased(thats what it means to be biased)
Fact1bible said on the 6th day god created man.
Fact2 science said the universe is 13.7 billion years old.
if these fact are not inconsistent then man has been here for 13.7billion years.
not to mention all the other science like evoliton,inflation,cosmology,physics etc that all are inconsistent with the bible if you ignore all this and more then you are biased not me.
@eddybrox he said that the bible is true and the universe is 13.7 billion years old and there are no inconsistencies so I pointed out one. if he does not belive the bible then he is a theist not a christian and if he doent belive in science why does he use for an argument.if he belive in both then man has been here for 13 billion years and he cant say any differnt unless on or the other is wrong.
Which one do you think is wrong or do you believe both?
@ahhninjadragon So go to reasonable faith. org an ask him in the Q&A section. But i never heard him saying that both is right! And i think, that with his statements he agrees with mainstream science.
@eddybrox Its not about proving someone wrong (for me anyway) its about building a better understanding I love being wrong because that means Ive lernt something It also works when I see someone else wrong I understand things better showing the failing of the argument Like I did here.
If you are only trying to prove someone wrong and are not willing to change your mind on the evidence thats not respect its irreverence.
@ahhninjadragon :-) So what evidence did you provide? Close u'r eyes and you'll see your evidence. Instead of stating hidden provocation and self-congratulation you should think about your vacuousness u'r letting soak through with every word you type here.
Fact2 science said the universe is 13.7 billion years old.
Then man has been here for 13.7billion years.but archaeology says modern man has been around for 100,000 years and recorded history has only been 6000 or 7000 years.
the earth is 4.54 billion years were did man stand.tell me there is no inconsistencies.
@ahhninjadragon BTW wikipedia says: "...In philosophy, the term world has several possible meanings. In some contexts, it refers to everything that makes up reality or the physical universe..." I personally think, that this is, what Dr.Craig had in his mind. Nuff said.
@eddybrox It says in context, so if I say "how much water in the world" you would count all the universe no,in philosophy "in context" the ancient world was earth and the sky was the heavens but "today"we and WLC know its not the heavens its the extended universe and we made a separation.if he thinks that the world is the universe his idea is out of date just like all his science...
@ahhninjadragon This (how much whater in the world) is not the question here. So neither me and you have seen the whole conversation. In fact you can not tell, what was the context bevore.
@ahhninjadragon The age of the earth and universe are being changed almost every year so don't expect someone to keep up with your time frames. Also no, he doesn't believe the earth was created at the same time as the universe. Why don't you just listen to the video? Some people....
@bumper212 Why don't you just listen to the video he said there is no inconsistencies in science and the bible 00:38 and the bible said the earth was created in days of the creation so the earth is as old as the universe and that is an inconsistency with science refute that.
The age of the earth does not change every year, as our measurement tools get better we get more accurate, we refine the date we dont change it.
@ahhninjadragon You're not even reading what the Bible says.Before days are even created in Genesis 1:3-5 verses 1 and 2 say,"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep,and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters."
It says "in the beginning" not "on the first day".The first day doesn't come until God creates light.How long the earth was "shapeless and void" we don't know
@bumper212 so when the bible said" And God called the expanse Heaven.And there was evening and there was morning, the second day". it meant on the 10 billionth day and you know this because god told you or are making it up youself.
If the earth was void then how did the Spirit of God hovering over the face of the waters if the earth had no shape and when did he he create water.
but the fact remains the earth was created10 billion years after at the start of the universe not first.
@ahhninjadragon The earth was created outside the 6 FIGURATIVE days. Meaning the age of the earth could be whatever the current speculation is. Adding those decimals didnt make you seem less childish when you used the word "fail".
@MagnusCattus Im glad you dont believe the bible but it the earth was created first in the bible, are you saying a incompant god took 10 billion years to finish it I thought he was all powerful.
it is inconsistent with science because in science after the big bang gravity clustered atoms together in galaxies and stars and one galaxy a star exloded and a smaller yellow star formed(our sun)and the expelled matter became planets(one earth)show me that in the bible!
@ahhninjadragon I do believe in the bible and the earth was no creted frist. why does time factor into it? Why would you restrict god with a time frame? He is all powerful and thats exactly why time is totally irrelevant to our tiny 80 year life span. How God created the earth is again irrelevant, do you think that he would have explained that to the first writer? No human would have understood it at the time its irrelevant, and thats even if thats correct at all.
@MagnusCattus How can you believe the bible, then say its wrong in what it said,and its what you think is correct, then why have a bible at all.moses was either told by god how the earth started or it is a made up story its not irrelevant science is consistent or inconsistent with the word of the bible.god does not say how the earth was created just tells moses the timeline, that we know to be wrong.you cant pick and choose what you want, the bible is correct or not cant be both.
@ahhninjadragon Either that or you have no clue what the Bible says. I have no clue what you're talking about, I take it english isn't your native tongue? you have to rephrase your qeustion. How is the timeline wrong? and What timeline? All that is said as far as any timeline goes is how old the human race is, and given the deplorable accuracy of any form of dating im really not that conflicted with the science behind it and my religious beleifs. The human race-
@ahhninjadragon -By anthropolohists the human race is around 100k years old, easily within the realm of a dating error considering every single date we have could be out be a few million years. Not to mention if there was a global flood it would severe cripple all dating processes within the last 6k years anyways. Besides this, there is no confrontation of science with the Bible. If you think there is I would love to hear it, chances are you have been listening to fundamentalists
@MagnusCattus How would a flood change any dating process (and there was no flood anyway as there is no "evidence")you made that up.
no dating method we use under 50,000 years has a margin of error of a few million years you made that up too.Radiocarbon dating has at most a 400 year margin of error.
Stop making thing up
If you want a contradiction from the bible and science get a bible start at the first page work your way to the end and if you knew anything about science youllsee
@MagnusCattus How do you know they are figurative, that is a characteristic that you have placed on the story? It wasn't figurative before we discovered it was bullshit.
I am a hardcore atheist, this man is the first theist i have come across that has dug deeper in the intellectual arguments for the theists views, not just giving the wornout "faith" answer and "god works in mysterious ways" routine. But still i think he tries to give intelectual answers to "non questions"
@Hedningen1 I had similar thoughts about him, but as I watch more and more debates/lectures with him, I'm more and more convinced he's a fraud. He begins talking, sounds reasonable, then he says something like: "I can't think of a better explanation than God" almost every time :/ He's of course much better than banana man, but still...
@willpower242 It seems you don't know anything about Evolution. Of course you would demand a "frame or a snird" as proof for Macroevolution, because you know that isn't Macroevolution and you know evolution wouldn't permit that. Your comments are very telling, you care less about what is true than what you would prefer. Evolution has strict laws that life must and does abide by, your love for scripture has no hold on reality.
@pat5168 Ummmmmm sorry that IS macroevolution......and it doesnt exist AND it never existed.....EVER...............I bet you have imaginary friends too to go along with your imaginary laws. Have fun in your imaginary mind in your imaginary reality.
@willpower242 No, it is a strawman brand used by Creationists. Your playground level of taunting is quite telling, indeed, if the incompetence of Creationists wasn't such a stiff competition, yours would be deserving of an award.
@willpower242 You're the one quoting scripture written by ignorant goatherders in attempts to explain the unknown. Don't project your own faults onto me, it is among the most predictable tactics of your ilk.
@pat5168 Ahhhhh but goatherders inspired by the Holy Spirit.......the very word of God. His word to you His creature.........you best heed it for your own sake. He wants the best for you.........what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his soul???? Leave your false religion and come on over to the true.
@pat5168 Ummmmm..... no how about fulfilled prophecy written hundreds of years before it happened..........it's a supernatural book. It's alive. Heb 4:12,13 Check it out .........read the Gospel of John........youll see.
@willpower242 Anyone can make a vague prediction that would be inevitable. For example, one could predict that a city will fall, since no city lasts forever, it's bound to happen, and if it hasn't, believers will insist it will but hasn't happened yet. Sorry to disappoint you, but they are not divinely inspired nor do they surpass the knowledge prevalent of their time. It is not unique in its predictive power or moral teachings. I have read it all, the Silmarillion is a more interesting read.
@pat5168 you are grossly ignorant of the prophecy in the Bible........let's just start w that.
Over 300 very specific prophecies JUST on Christ's first coming including the city and the time. Whatever ..........you dont have to believe........it's your soul at stake tho........but you should do some more study b4 you dismiss the Bible.........ignorance is not a good reason to go to Hell.......nor is laziness or being distracted by the world.
@pat5168 Guess you dont know much about evolution........Like I said show me a frake or a snird, THAT is macro evolution. Great variation within a kind, that is not evolution even tho you want to redefine it .....I have no problem w new species.
@pat5168 I would think you would know more than you do about your false religion.....study up on your fantasies there will b a test.....Acts 17:30,31.
'It's a young world after all' is a book by Paul Ackerman lays out pretty simply the evidence for a young earth. Pretty overwhelming stuff. WL Craig doesnt know his Bible very well .........Bible teaches a young earth. #Luke:3:23-38
@willpower242 You're kidding? Right? Just counting begats? Seriously? OK....how do we know any of these people were real and actually existed? How old were all of them at said begatting? Is there a chance, even if they were real, that a few begats got forgot here and there? Or some not talked about near some family members? Hmmm....
Is that the best you have? Be serious. We aren't supposed to believe that short list, are we? Compiled by people who JUST learned to read sorta'?
@willpower242 Phooey, the Bible also says it's right because it says so. :LMAO!! The Bible does NOT list the age of the Earth, it does NOT support a "young Earth" at all. Neither does reality and emperical evidence by the heaps. Show some evidence for a young planet and I would lend it some credence, but 'til then......
How 'bout the decay of the magnetic fields of the earth? If you estimate what they should have been not so long ago ....life could not have existed they would have been so strong.
How 'bout the salinity of the oceans......if the earth is as old as some say they should be many times more salty than they are.
Go ahead .......live in your fantasy world............it's your soul at stake, not mine.
The truth is there if you want it (Jer 29:13)........but so is the foolish speculation (Rom 1:21) to trip people up and keep them out of the Kingdom. 1 Cor 1:18-29
Start searching for the truth with all your heart.
No sir, it is a serious question. I grew up thinking the apostle John wrote the Gospel of John, but when I studied about it, the apostle John was a fisherman who could not write.
Whoever wrote the Gospel of John wrote as an educated Greek. The apostle spoke Aramaic, as did Jesus. Peace.
If you want to trust scientists who are sinful fallen finite and live about 80,90 years max....go ahead. I'll trust God who has existed from all eternity who knows all and can never lie who wants the best for us if we would but listen to Him. Who has written down what we need to know for life and godliness. You can stick with the foolish speculation not me. Rom 1:21
@willpower242 You are right. God has "spirits" to lie for him
1 Kings 22:22 And the LORD said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persuade him, and prevail also: go forth, and do so. 23 Now therefore, behold, the LORD hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the LORD hath spoken evil concerning thee.
continued........Real science supports a young earth............most scientists are foolish speculators however and dont really deal in science but in philosophy and a false religion that they call science.......but it's not.
@Andromedonian Craig is well aware of this. But sometimes when people say "world," depending on the context, they sometimes are referring to the universe. I'm sure if he asked "How old is the earth," Craig would have said 4.5 billion.
I think Dr. Craig is a disingenuous in saying Young Earth Creationists are reading their views into the Bible without its support. What he can’t say, since he’s an apologist, is the Bible is so muddled that equally sincere Biblicists can see either Young Earth or Gap Creationism in Genesis. In short, the Bible doesn’t give straight answers to some big questions, so Biblicists sort of pretend they don’t exist most of the time. But., in the end, they don’t even agree on who can be saved.
I am a Clinical Psychologist and Dr. Craig is either lying or ignorant. Children that are taught this principle of hell have lifelong difficulties with fear and anxiety. Even as a rational adult they can’t escape the trauma that was caused by such verbal abuse which caused them as children to believe what they were told. There is preponderance of evidence that clearly statistically shows that children carry these fears forward.
@raywingfield I'm sorry but your comment is so faulty. There will always be children who grow up and were taught about something and then say they were damaged because of that said thing. It's more about how they were taught (abused into believing) than the subject of the teaching. Just because some dunce misused the teachings of hell does not make the idea of it any less true. Insecurity breeds the fear you speak of, not hell. You being a "Clinical Psychologist" should know this.
@raywingfield If a parent were teaching their child that hell is a "principle" then yes, there would be a problem. One reason why we have so many problems with youth today is because of parents not teaching responisbility and consequenses for actions, and discipline.
@raywingfield haha clinical psychologist? i'm a christian and i believe in hell. I believe it is a place where sinners go who deny God. I always have believed this and i've never believed otherwise. I am a man now and i can quite honestly say i've never had trauma or anxieties about hell. why? because i'm not afraid that i will go to hell. I dont mean to be rude but psychologists are not as bad as psychiatrists but they all are therapists. and therapist is another word for (the rapist).
@HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke there is convincing evidence out there. for example the rock that moses split in half still stands today. it really depends on your openess towards accepting a creator, or intelligent designer. If you remain closed off towards the idea, nothing will look like evidence to you. however if you are open to the idea, you will see God in everything.
@epopeegenetics If I show you an ancient book claiming that faeries make flowers bloom, can I point to flowers as evidence for faeries? I'm not closed off to the idea of finding evidence for god, but I don't find a split rock the slightest bit convincing, especially since there are millions of rocks worldwide split by natural forces, and we understand in detail that no designer is needed for life. I actually have half a spherical rock on my desk right now (and some of it's full marbly brothers).
@HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke hey dude, i'm not telling you what to think. i wonder how many rocks got split in half on Mount sinai with a water aquifer underneath it??
I'm sure you wouldn't find anything convincing for the existence of God
matter fact you just told me that i needed to provide you evidence
so dont act like your "open" because you're just lying to yourself
I can't deny god in that sense until I know he's real.
I'm lying to myself and not fooling anyone? are you seriously implying that I find theists' arguments convincing, and am just in some sort of denial?
Do youself the justice of admitting your that religious beliefs are faith based, and that your evidences aren't good enough to convince any scientist, or rational person who doesn't already believe.
@epopeegenetics If there were any valid evidences or arguments for the existance of god, Christianity wouldn't be a religion, it would be the currently accepted scientific model (btw it's not)
@epopeegenetics yes, you do need to provide me with evidence if you want to assert that I'm denying god. Much, much better evidence than what you have so far.
there's better evidence for other religions, ufo abductions, the loch ness monster, ghosts, flower-blooming faeries etc.
@HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke@HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke I don't have to do anything for you, but out of the goodness of my heart and just because i have nothing to do i just found this so I will give you the link
watch?v=HWGmUvkE1fc&feature=channel_video_title
just click on 17:00 minutes if you dont want to hear the whole thing
@epopeegenetics did you notice they only identified that mountain as the Mt. Sinai of legend because it had a cave? and that they showed photos of other split rocks nearby, they just clung onto the biggest one?
So you have a holy book that says someone split a rock near a mountain with a cave, and there's a mountain with a cave somewhere near a rock that - as they mentioned, is worn smooth by water (which actually would have taken too long to be compatible with the story)
@HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke well now that you've been shown proof of a bible story, you can do your own research and find other archeological evidence of bible stories on your own.
@epopeegenetics ya I've been researching for years, it's all just as unrealistic and flawed as this rock, or my example of the aboriginal three sisters mountain peaks
@epopeegenetics if you really think that was proof of a bible story, do you think the three sisters prove the magical legends of the aboriginal dream time?
@epopeegenetics What's a more likely explanation for this, someone claimed to have split a rock and folklore carried on his story, someone DID split a rock and millions of gallons of water gushed out and the whole bible is true, or the whole bible is made up?
options 1 and 3 are plausible, and option 2 just isn't
@epopeegenetics It's not a realistic explanation for how a rock gets in such a state.
The Australian aboriginals have similarly unrealistic explanations for many things, like the Three Sisters mountains, are supposedly three human sisters who were turned into mountains.
Are these 3 mountain peaks evidence for the primitive, magical explanation of how they formed?
@epopeegenetics I gathered all of that, that's the bible's unrealistic explanation for the rock (or at least, a story in the bible that people looked for a rock to point to and found that one)
1st. THE THREE SISTERS ARE MOUNTAIN PEAKS
2nd. THREE ABORIGINAL GIRLS WERE PUNISHED MAGICALLY
@epopeegenetics it doesn't matter if evolution 'does it for me and is everything i've dreamed of' because unlike you, I don't base my beliefs on what's pleasing, but on what's been demonstrated to be true.
evolution HAS been demonstrated as true in millions of ways.
read a biology article that isn't from your church-approved library.
I'm subscribed to a peer reviewed magazine and every day I read about things that beautifully and exclusively demonstrate evolution.
Craig is a theistic evolutionist.
MrAluminous 2 days ago
I do appreciate that he would admit the existence of observable evidence, but it still doesn't help make his belief in a God, especially the Abrahamic God, any more rational.
correctionguy 5 days ago
Sorry, Craig, but the best estimate we have for the WORLD is 4.5 billion years. You have shown your fundamental ignorance of the science you so readily use to defend your ridiculous assertions.
farrell2k 1 week ago
@farrell2k I'm not defending his ideas, but there's no reason to vehemently attack simple accidents such as mishearing the question.
correctionguy 5 days ago
@correctionguy - Pointing out that he answered the wrong question is not a "vehement" attack, unless you define the word differently than the rest of us, which you may, for all I know. If you're a theist, you probably do. They tend to redefine things to suit their needs.
farrell2k 5 days ago
@farrell2k You said he has a 'fundamental ignorance of the science', though I would agree with that claim, it is a pretty vehement attack when you base that on him confusing a question of the earth with that of the universe.
No, I'm not a theist, definitely not a theist.
correctionguy 5 days ago
@correctionguy - Not a theist? Then I agree with everything you wrote, and will no longer argue with you. Reasonable people have no need to argue. :)
farrell2k 5 days ago
@farrell2k You are a sir, sir. I tip my non-hat.
correctionguy 5 days ago
@farrell2k I think that he confused the age of the Earth, which is supposedly around 4.5B yo, with the age of the universe, which is supposedly about 13+ B yo. I'll give him credit for not saying 6,000 years.
crucisnh 3 days ago
Thanks so much for clearing that up Craig. Nowhere in the bible does it state the age of the earth. The whole 6,000 year thing is a matter of opinion. And how long it took God to create the earth is also a matter of opinion. 6-24 hour days or 6 billion years.... the bible doesnt say. I wish people would stop trying to turn the bible into a freaking science book. That is not what it was made to be. B-asic I-nstructions B-efore L-eaving E-arth...... no science in that.
stormsophia1994 1 week ago
The one comment I like in this mentions breaking the laws of science. True science dictates that everything we know is based on best possible guess.
Neutrinos as an example do travel faster than light in a vaccume thus breaking E=mc^2. A consequence of studying nuclear physics I guess. Also the ability of black holes in destroying both quantum and classical physics which are known to exist at the centre of galaxies.
Solitarious2011 1 week ago
Comment removed
MrSamySara 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Solitarious2011 Do you read the fuc#ing news man? Nobody expected the neutrino data from the collider to be valid in the first place based off of our detection of neutrinos during the 1987 supernova. Now it's been confirmed that the hadron collider had wiring problems therefore the results were a false positive. The fact that you've already jumped to the conclusion that E=MC^2 is false, without evidence is no surprise to me given that you're a theist. Fail
MrSamySara 1 day ago
@MrSamySara First off I did not mention the Hadron Collider so your response to neutrinos traveling speed based on that principal is floored. I speak from the perspective of Nuclear reactors that have continually witnessed in excess of light speed by neutrinos.
Please consider the difference between what you see on the media against someone who studys nuclear physics as part of their occupation. I think I should also state that E=mc^2 was a perfectly reasonable assertion at the time
Solitarious2011 1 day ago
0:22 "I'm not bucking up against main-stream science."
Cough, cough. Ahem. I need a drink after that comment.
The virgin birth, exorcisms, demons possessing pigs, Jesus ascending without the aid of technology, dead people strolling about Jerusalem, a staff turning into a reptile. Keep kidding yourself Craig.
HellRehab 1 week ago
@HellRehab
Out of interest, do you not believe in such miracles because you find no evidence for them or do you just find them to be impossible point blank? Basically, do you think it is impossible that there could be a God that has powers that can break the laws of science? Thanks
tigereyes5 1 week ago
@tigereyes5
"do you think it is impossible that there could be a God that has powers that can break the laws of science?"
If I were to grant that it's "possible" then I would also have to grant the equally likely "possibility" that there could be multiple gods, or that there could be a deistic god that can't intervene in human affairs. It would also open the "possibility" that Baal was the one true god and that's why the Hebrews blew it.
I find no evidence for a personal god.
Peace! :)
HellRehab 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Isn't he wrong though? The bible doesn't *explicitly* state the age of the universe/earth, but you can *infer* it from all the ages of the characters in the book.
antizac 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Isn't he wrong though? The bible doesn't *explicitly* state the age of the universe/earth, but you can *infer* it from all the ages of the characters in the book.
antizac 2 weeks ago
Isn't he wrong though? The bible doesn't *explicitly* state the age of the universe/earth, but you can *infer* it from all the ages of the characters in the book.
antizac 2 weeks ago
@antizac
Yes this is what confuses me as well..
tigereyes5 1 week ago
@antizac It was not meant to be read as a historical catalog.
TheNightwing01 1 week ago
Wow finally I agree with Craig
ctsfinestjon 3 weeks ago
Wow, Craig got everything right there. Good for him!
Ozzyman200 3 weeks ago
@Ozzyman200 Yeah, no he didn't. He was asked age of the world, no the universe.
farrell2k 1 week ago
@farrell2k Yes he did. I can't believe I'm defending Craig here, as he's almost always wrong, but you can't fault him in this particular clip, mainly because it's so short.
Ozzyman200 5 days ago
i think that lane is a idiot, but the question was how old the world is, and i beleive he took it as the universe, lane is intelligent idiot, he knows the earth is 4 billions years
lapmarty 1 month ago
Average Christians eat this shit up like cotton candy.
2eelShmeal 1 month ago
The bible said you cant have two masters, so why does WLC?
You need to pick, bronze age myth or scientific method.
You need to pick, make stuff up or testable facts.
You need to pick, magic or reality.
You need to pick because the are completely different and incompatible.
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
.
He is very good at knowing nothing.
.
tellnet 1 month ago
If we followed the path of religion we would still believe that the world was flat.
MrBeautifulba1 1 month ago
Isn't that cute? He passed!
agentssith 1 month ago
see "3.3.3 A History of God" youtube
bryanttillman 1 month ago
See the problem with me and evolution is this; u find 1 fossil. It is for all you can tell complete. Then you find another fossil of the same level of completness. If it looks the same guess what... Ita because IT IS THE SAME. If it looks different, maybe IT IS A DIFFERENT ANIMAL. Why should i accept that they are related or not related based solelu off what some atheist scientist dictates?
MagnusCattus 1 month ago
@MagnusCattus You should take a class on evolutionary biology or biological anthropology to clear up your misguided ideas. Also you have to consider the different biological connections between animals, geologic time differences, and the structure of the animals in question and their relation. Just thought i'd give you a direction to find those answers.
Requiemxtoxinnocence 1 month ago
@Requiemxtoxinnocence Oh by all means educate me.
MagnusCattus 1 month ago
@MagnusCattus Why not educate yourself on the subject from sites dedicated to evolution or take a college level class. For information on bones/evolution look up paleoanthropology which studies human evolution and for skeletal structures anthropometry.
Requiemxtoxinnocence 1 month ago
@Requiemxtoxinnocence That would mean I would be graded on how well an atheist can dictate me his interpretations of the evidence means... OR at best have him dictate to me what some other atheist said. no thanks, if its a mater of spending money, then that should tip you off imediatly its a scam. Anyone who isn't educated, simply cannot be correct. That's called a racket.
MagnusCattus 1 month ago
@MagnusCattus Not all professors at college who teach biology are atheist, in fact many Christians understand evolution and accept it. Not to mention being graded is dependent on your performance and if you learned anything at all on the subject at hand. Ah yes College is a scam and science is the devil, well I can't say I didn't try to reason with you.
Requiemxtoxinnocence 1 month ago
@Requiemxtoxinnocence arlight im done with you, you said "understand it". How crass can you be?
MagnusCattus 1 month ago
@MagnusCattus Science isn't that hard to understand once you've studied it. If learning things is too large a leap for you well...then I don't see how you could've gotten this far in life. Please check your biases at the door and if you want to actually learn, provide some of that humility that all humans are capable of one not understanding a subject.
Requiemxtoxinnocence 1 month ago
@MagnusCattus Hmm, please educate yourself on the actual theory of evolution and I would be utterly surprised if you didn't accept it. I wouldn't believe your current understanding of evolution either.
dominatein08 1 month ago
@dominatein08 lol the ol' "anyone who disagrees with me is undeducated"... you might like the fable "the emperor's new clothes".
MagnusCattus 1 month ago
@MagnusCattus You misunderstood what I said, "educate yourself on the actual theory of evolution" I never said you were uneducated in general, but I would like to make a point on what you said to someone else, "if its a mater of spending money, then that should tip you off imediatly its a scam" because God doesn't ask for money... "Honor the Lord with your wealth and with the firstfruits of all your produce; then your barns will be filled with plenty, and your vats will be bursting with wine"
dominatein08 1 month ago
@dominatein08 You misunderstood the meaning, it was saying give the best to God, not to the ecclesiarchs, and this verse was likely from the Hebrew scriptures, which had a different covenant, before Christ paid a ransom back, the Isrealites were to preform pennance in the form of material sacrafice, a small portion going to the preists who worked as the spiritual leaders and chieftans. Thats of course if this verse was not figurative. Besides that, you assumed I didnt understand-
MagnusCattus 1 month ago
@dominatein08 -how the Hypothesis of macro evolution works, or for short let's say the theory of evolution. Micro evolution does happen and its simply a misnomer, since its likely just a cyclical series of minor changes, as Darwin's finches appeared to be. And If I don't understand how evolution works, please indulge me. As far as I knew it was small changes accumulting over time by means of mutation and natural selection of those beneficial mutations. This is somehow suppose to-
MagnusCattus 1 month ago
@dominatein08 -account for every single biological structure no matter how complicated. That my friend is totally absurd and unreasonable, and off the record I would say its a pathetic attempt to demean the worship of God. Now go on, start your barrage of ad hominem or what have you, and convince me I'm somehow wrong in being unconvinced of such an absurd teaching. And yes, regardless of what the Bible says, these scientists are just looking for money, and when thats involved-
MagnusCattus 1 month ago
@MagnusCattus you cannot say that something is unreasonable and then not back that up with reason. 'its a pathetic attempt to demean the worship of God.' < paranoia much? You say it's absurd twice and yet do not give a reason why it is absurd, meaning all you just said is irrelevant waffle.
peteymandem 1 week ago
@dominatein08 -I wouldn't bet 2cents on them being honest in the way they carry out their work.
MagnusCattus 1 month ago
The world? No the universe is 14 billion years old. The earth is possibly 4.6 billion years old. And complex animal life could be around 530 million years old. Im skeptical on the last number and it might not be the right number that evolutionists use, but i can say all this and that God created the universe and animal life within undefined peramiters called "kinds". I see no contradiction of faith or science here.
MagnusCattus 1 month ago
Theists they know everything about everything ask the a question they are silent.
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
It is disappointing a man as smart as Craig buys into mainstream science, I mean come one Cosmology? Evolution? Universe 13.7 Billion years old? You can see how he is hesitant to even say these, probably because he only allows these premises in his arguments for the Atheists sake, so he can start with common ground from the get go. I hope this is true and Craig doesn't by into the Atheist hijacked "science" that is presented today as "fact".
stinnetbennet 1 month ago
@stinnetbennet You are an idiot... the computer you are sitting at is built on science your car tv games all science fact. Athieists never hijacked science there are plenty of religious scientists you moron....
Facts are facts demonstrably proven just because you dont like them does not mean they are not true.
You need to get somthing for your paranoia the world is not against you trying change facts.Scientist dont want to pretend something is true(like theists)they want to prove it is.
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Fact1bible said on the 6th day god created man.
Fact2 science said the universe is 13.7 billion years old
Thats my evidence
my conclusion If both facts are true(like WLC said)man has lived for 13.7 billion years old.
Is the bible wrong or is the age of the universe wrong.
dont go "argumentum ad hominem" it only avoids the subject.
Which one is wrong or are the both right what do you think I would like to hear you view?
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
the question that should have been asked is was man created 6 days after the the creation 13.7 billion years ago because the bible does say that and that would be a contradiction I would love to see how WLC would squirm out of that.
It says in the the bible you cant serve two masters but WLC tries to and thats how he fails the universe 13.7 bil then 4.54bil earth, but then another 4 billion years for man so he is over 13 billion years out if thats what he thinks.
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
As far as Bible goes it seems like some prophecy on spot some just far away off. Anyway even if those turn out to be true it doesn't mean Bible is original book. There were other prophecies preceding Bible as if Bible took page off another book without copyright. In ancient times Book of Enoch was serious book that were destroyed and persecuted those who have it. Bible is no way unaltered edition. Probably it came thru or with bunch of nutcases added.
symmetry08 1 month ago
At last I've seen him give an honest answer!
lewisner 1 month ago
Get it right the earth is 4.54 billion years The universe is about 13.7 billion years.
Is he saying that the earth was created at the start of the universe on does he not know what he is talking about?what a Fail............
ahhninjadragon 2 months ago 15
@ahhninjadragon The question was: "How old is the world!" If your world only consists out of the earth, then you do FAIL!
eddybrox 1 month ago
@eddybrox If you dont know what the difference between the world and the universe then EPIC FAIL.
WORLD is a common name for the whole of human civilization, specifically human experience, history, or the human condition in general, worldwide, i.e. anywhere on Earth.
The UNIVERSE is commonly defined as the totality of everything that exists, including all matter and energy, the planets, stars, galaxies, and the contents of intergalactic space.
look it up
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
@ahhninjadragon I think that we should not deal with splitting hairs on that topic. I'm sure that Dr. Craig knows the difference between the age of earth and the age of the universe. Your comments on this topic shows that you are definitely prejudiced.
eddybrox 1 month ago
@eddybrox I do think that we should deal with splitting hairs he is purposely evading the direct question "how old is the world"and answering "how old is the universe"he has been asked that before and avoided it.the reason is that the two views are different(bible and science)and he avoids the inconsistencies if he was honest he would not have to.
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
@ahhninjadragon 0:10 He says he goes inline with science and do not think, that it is plausible, that the earth is 6.500 years old. So he avoids nothing
eddybrox 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@eddybrox 0:10 he does not think, that it is plausible the earth is 6.500 years old but imply it is 13.7billion.he avoids saying what age he thinks the earth is which is what the question was, he would need to be stupid not to know that and he not stupid so he is avoiding the question.
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
@ahhninjadragon 0:43 here you see, that he saw the question in context of the universe
eddybrox 1 month ago
@eddybrox thanks for pointing out a occation where he avoids the question again he was asked directly is there a inconsistency or contradiction of the age of the "earth" and the biblical account(earth not world) and he said no there is no inconsistency.then in the bible on the 6 day god made man so man has live for 13.7 billion in his "world view that is inconsistent with science.he is inconsistent because he cherry picks parts and does not see the whole.
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
@ahhninjadragon Oh man, really u'r baised. Say what u want. Say he is a creationist or whatsoever. I only judge, by what i says. And he is not telling something contradictional. He says, that nowhere in the bible is a reference on when the earth/universe was made or came into existance. I think the one who picks parts and does not see the whole is u in our bias.
eddybrox 1 month ago
@eddybrox im not biased he is and fits everything around his biased(thats what it means to be biased)
Fact1bible said on the 6th day god created man.
Fact2 science said the universe is 13.7 billion years old.
if these fact are not inconsistent then man has been here for 13.7billion years.
not to mention all the other science like evoliton,inflation,cosmology,physics etc that all are inconsistent with the bible if you ignore all this and more then you are biased not me.
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
@ahhninjadragon And where does he says, that he believes this is true?
eddybrox 1 month ago
@eddybrox he said that the bible is true and the universe is 13.7 billion years old and there are no inconsistencies so I pointed out one. if he does not belive the bible then he is a theist not a christian and if he doent belive in science why does he use for an argument.if he belive in both then man has been here for 13 billion years and he cant say any differnt unless on or the other is wrong.
Which one do you think is wrong or do you believe both?
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
@ahhninjadragon So go to reasonable faith. org an ask him in the Q&A section. But i never heard him saying that both is right! And i think, that with his statements he agrees with mainstream science.
eddybrox 1 month ago
@eddybrox Thanks I posed the question on reasonable faith I will post the answer if I get one (usually I don't, just get blocked)
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
@ahhninjadragon Good luck. I think, as long as one side can prove the other wrong, we should treat oneanother with respect.
eddybrox 1 month ago
@eddybrox Its not about proving someone wrong (for me anyway) its about building a better understanding I love being wrong because that means Ive lernt something It also works when I see someone else wrong I understand things better showing the failing of the argument Like I did here.
If you are only trying to prove someone wrong and are not willing to change your mind on the evidence thats not respect its irreverence.
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
@ahhninjadragon :-) So what evidence did you provide? Close u'r eyes and you'll see your evidence. Instead of stating hidden provocation and self-congratulation you should think about your vacuousness u'r letting soak through with every word you type here.
eddybrox 1 month ago
@eddybrox
Fact1bible said on the 6th day god created man.
Fact2 science said the universe is 13.7 billion years old.
Then man has been here for 13.7billion years.but archaeology says modern man has been around for 100,000 years and recorded history has only been 6000 or 7000 years.
the earth is 4.54 billion years were did man stand.tell me there is no inconsistencies.
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
@ahhninjadragon BTW wikipedia says: "...In philosophy, the term world has several possible meanings. In some contexts, it refers to everything that makes up reality or the physical universe..." I personally think, that this is, what Dr.Craig had in his mind. Nuff said.
eddybrox 1 month ago
@eddybrox It says in context, so if I say "how much water in the world" you would count all the universe no,in philosophy "in context" the ancient world was earth and the sky was the heavens but "today"we and WLC know its not the heavens its the extended universe and we made a separation.if he thinks that the world is the universe his idea is out of date just like all his science...
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
@ahhninjadragon This (how much whater in the world) is not the question here. So neither me and you have seen the whole conversation. In fact you can not tell, what was the context bevore.
eddybrox 1 month ago
@ahhninjadragon wow u really nailed him there. NOT
ghae1 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ghae1 I say again
Fact1bible said on the 6th day god created man.
Fact2 science said the universe is 13.7 billion years old
this is one of many inconsistencies so are they both right or is one wrong tell me what you think. are you saying they are consistent?
no one has the guts to answer (must be part of being theists).
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
@ahhninjadragon The age of the earth and universe are being changed almost every year so don't expect someone to keep up with your time frames. Also no, he doesn't believe the earth was created at the same time as the universe. Why don't you just listen to the video? Some people....
bumper212 1 month ago
@bumper212 Why don't you just listen to the video he said there is no inconsistencies in science and the bible 00:38 and the bible said the earth was created in days of the creation so the earth is as old as the universe and that is an inconsistency with science refute that.
The age of the earth does not change every year, as our measurement tools get better we get more accurate, we refine the date we dont change it.
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
@ahhninjadragon You're not even reading what the Bible says.Before days are even created in Genesis 1:3-5 verses 1 and 2 say,"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep,and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters."
It says "in the beginning" not "on the first day".The first day doesn't come until God creates light.How long the earth was "shapeless and void" we don't know
bumper212 1 month ago
@bumper212 so when the bible said" And God called the expanse Heaven.And there was evening and there was morning, the second day". it meant on the 10 billionth day and you know this because god told you or are making it up youself.
If the earth was void then how did the Spirit of God hovering over the face of the waters if the earth had no shape and when did he he create water.
but the fact remains the earth was created10 billion years after at the start of the universe not first.
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
@ahhninjadragon The earth was created outside the 6 FIGURATIVE days. Meaning the age of the earth could be whatever the current speculation is. Adding those decimals didnt make you seem less childish when you used the word "fail".
MagnusCattus 1 month ago
@MagnusCattus Im glad you dont believe the bible but it the earth was created first in the bible, are you saying a incompant god took 10 billion years to finish it I thought he was all powerful.
it is inconsistent with science because in science after the big bang gravity clustered atoms together in galaxies and stars and one galaxy a star exloded and a smaller yellow star formed(our sun)and the expelled matter became planets(one earth)show me that in the bible!
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
@ahhninjadragon I do believe in the bible and the earth was no creted frist. why does time factor into it? Why would you restrict god with a time frame? He is all powerful and thats exactly why time is totally irrelevant to our tiny 80 year life span. How God created the earth is again irrelevant, do you think that he would have explained that to the first writer? No human would have understood it at the time its irrelevant, and thats even if thats correct at all.
MagnusCattus 1 month ago
@MagnusCattus How can you believe the bible, then say its wrong in what it said,and its what you think is correct, then why have a bible at all.moses was either told by god how the earth started or it is a made up story its not irrelevant science is consistent or inconsistent with the word of the bible.god does not say how the earth was created just tells moses the timeline, that we know to be wrong.you cant pick and choose what you want, the bible is correct or not cant be both.
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
@ahhninjadragon Either that or you have no clue what the Bible says. I have no clue what you're talking about, I take it english isn't your native tongue? you have to rephrase your qeustion. How is the timeline wrong? and What timeline? All that is said as far as any timeline goes is how old the human race is, and given the deplorable accuracy of any form of dating im really not that conflicted with the science behind it and my religious beleifs. The human race-
MagnusCattus 1 month ago
@ahhninjadragon -By anthropolohists the human race is around 100k years old, easily within the realm of a dating error considering every single date we have could be out be a few million years. Not to mention if there was a global flood it would severe cripple all dating processes within the last 6k years anyways. Besides this, there is no confrontation of science with the Bible. If you think there is I would love to hear it, chances are you have been listening to fundamentalists
MagnusCattus 1 month ago
@MagnusCattus How would a flood change any dating process (and there was no flood anyway as there is no "evidence")you made that up.
no dating method we use under 50,000 years has a margin of error of a few million years you made that up too.Radiocarbon dating has at most a 400 year margin of error.
Stop making thing up
If you want a contradiction from the bible and science get a bible start at the first page work your way to the end and if you knew anything about science youllsee
ahhninjadragon 1 month ago
@ahhninjadragon lol ok if you say so.
MagnusCattus 1 month ago
@MagnusCattus How do you know they are figurative, that is a characteristic that you have placed on the story? It wasn't figurative before we discovered it was bullshit.
peteymandem 1 week ago
I am a hardcore atheist, this man is the first theist i have come across that has dug deeper in the intellectual arguments for the theists views, not just giving the wornout "faith" answer and "god works in mysterious ways" routine. But still i think he tries to give intelectual answers to "non questions"
Hedningen1 2 months ago
@Hedningen1 I had similar thoughts about him, but as I watch more and more debates/lectures with him, I'm more and more convinced he's a fraud. He begins talking, sounds reasonable, then he says something like: "I can't think of a better explanation than God" almost every time :/ He's of course much better than banana man, but still...
pambuk 1 month ago
@willpower242 It seems you don't know anything about Evolution. Of course you would demand a "frame or a snird" as proof for Macroevolution, because you know that isn't Macroevolution and you know evolution wouldn't permit that. Your comments are very telling, you care less about what is true than what you would prefer. Evolution has strict laws that life must and does abide by, your love for scripture has no hold on reality.
pat5168 2 months ago
@pat5168 Ummmmmm sorry that IS macroevolution......and it doesnt exist AND it never existed.....EVER...............I bet you have imaginary friends too to go along with your imaginary laws. Have fun in your imaginary mind in your imaginary reality.
willpower242 2 months ago
@willpower242 No, it is a strawman brand used by Creationists. Your playground level of taunting is quite telling, indeed, if the incompetence of Creationists wasn't such a stiff competition, yours would be deserving of an award.
pat5168 2 months ago
@pat5168 No really macroevolution=fairy tale..........Have fun with your foolish speculation and darkened heart.....I'll stay real. #Rom1:21
willpower242 2 months ago
@willpower242 May you live long with your cowardice.
pat5168 2 months ago
@pat5168 Ummmm youre the one afraid of reality.............
willpower242 2 months ago
@willpower242 You're the one quoting scripture written by ignorant goatherders in attempts to explain the unknown. Don't project your own faults onto me, it is among the most predictable tactics of your ilk.
pat5168 2 months ago
@pat5168 Ahhhhh but goatherders inspired by the Holy Spirit.......the very word of God. His word to you His creature.........you best heed it for your own sake. He wants the best for you.........what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his soul???? Leave your false religion and come on over to the true.
Matt 16:26
willpower242 2 months ago
@willpower242 And you verify the bible's claims with nothing but the bible. Spare your circular reasoning.
pat5168 2 months ago
@pat5168 Ummmmm..... no how about fulfilled prophecy written hundreds of years before it happened..........it's a supernatural book. It's alive. Heb 4:12,13 Check it out .........read the Gospel of John........youll see.
willpower242 2 months ago
@willpower242 Anyone can make a vague prediction that would be inevitable. For example, one could predict that a city will fall, since no city lasts forever, it's bound to happen, and if it hasn't, believers will insist it will but hasn't happened yet. Sorry to disappoint you, but they are not divinely inspired nor do they surpass the knowledge prevalent of their time. It is not unique in its predictive power or moral teachings. I have read it all, the Silmarillion is a more interesting read.
pat5168 2 months ago
@pat5168 you are grossly ignorant of the prophecy in the Bible........let's just start w that.
Over 300 very specific prophecies JUST on Christ's first coming including the city and the time. Whatever ..........you dont have to believe........it's your soul at stake tho........but you should do some more study b4 you dismiss the Bible.........ignorance is not a good reason to go to Hell.......nor is laziness or being distracted by the world.
willpower242 2 months ago
@pat5168 macroevolution wouldnt permit a frog turning into a snake or a snake into a bird........are you serious????
willpower242 2 months ago
@willpower242 Sorry, speciation is the emergence of new species, new species = Macroevolution by even the strictest definition. You are an ape.
pat5168 2 months ago
@pat5168 Guess you dont know much about evolution........Like I said show me a frake or a snird, THAT is macro evolution. Great variation within a kind, that is not evolution even tho you want to redefine it .....I have no problem w new species.
willpower242 2 months ago
@pat5168 I would think you would know more than you do about your false religion.....study up on your fantasies there will b a test.....Acts 17:30,31.
willpower242 2 months ago
@pat5168 You are made in the image of God ......and you will be held accountable for what you do in this life
willpower242 2 months ago
@pat5168 Things reproduce after their own kind.......just like the Word of God says................Gen 1:24,25....hmmmmmmmm, makes you think.
willpower242 2 months ago
@willpower242 There have been numerous events of speciation documented in the lab and in nature. You are an ape.
pat5168 2 months ago
@pat5168 Maybe you are an ape.....but not me .. lol......Im made in the image of God ....Gen 1:26,27
I have no problem w speciation.....that is NOT evolution.
willpower242 2 months ago
"Evolution.........really stupid ideas that sound less stupid if you say they happened a long time ago!!!"
willpower242 2 months ago
@willpower242 Yeah, like a talking snake, talking donkey, talking burning bush, virgin giving birth, dead people walking around. You are so right!
csnowutube 2 months ago
Modern day science is a false religion. Not science.
willpower242 2 months ago
#Fail
'It's a young world after all' is a book by Paul Ackerman lays out pretty simply the evidence for a young earth. Pretty overwhelming stuff. WL Craig doesnt know his Bible very well .........Bible teaches a young earth. #Luke:3:23-38
Ciao!
willpower242 2 months ago
@willpower242 You're kidding? Right? Just counting begats? Seriously? OK....how do we know any of these people were real and actually existed? How old were all of them at said begatting? Is there a chance, even if they were real, that a few begats got forgot here and there? Or some not talked about near some family members? Hmmm....
Is that the best you have? Be serious. We aren't supposed to believe that short list, are we? Compiled by people who JUST learned to read sorta'?
gvman3670 2 months ago
@gvman3670
Not kidding .......Scripture cant be broken........The Lord said it. John 10:35
willpower242 2 months ago
@willpower242 Phooey, the Bible also says it's right because it says so. :LMAO!! The Bible does NOT list the age of the Earth, it does NOT support a "young Earth" at all. Neither does reality and emperical evidence by the heaps. Show some evidence for a young planet and I would lend it some credence, but 'til then......
gvman3670 2 months ago
@gvman3670
How 'bout the decay of the magnetic fields of the earth? If you estimate what they should have been not so long ago ....life could not have existed they would have been so strong.
How 'bout the salinity of the oceans......if the earth is as old as some say they should be many times more salty than they are.
Two off the top of my head........
Merry CHRISTmas!!
. John 3:3-5
willpower242 2 months ago
@willpower242 Sources to peer reviewed papers and results?
Happy Winter Soltice to you, too!
gvman3670 2 months ago
@gvman3670
Go ahead .......live in your fantasy world............it's your soul at stake, not mine.
The truth is there if you want it (Jer 29:13)........but so is the foolish speculation (Rom 1:21) to trip people up and keep them out of the Kingdom. 1 Cor 1:18-29
Start searching for the truth with all your heart.
willpower242 2 months ago
@willpower242 Who wrote "John?"
csnowutube 2 months ago
@csnowutube is this a trick question??? John under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit...is that what you mean???
willpower242 2 months ago
@willpower242
No sir, it is a serious question. I grew up thinking the apostle John wrote the Gospel of John, but when I studied about it, the apostle John was a fisherman who could not write.
Whoever wrote the Gospel of John wrote as an educated Greek. The apostle spoke Aramaic, as did Jesus. Peace.
csnowutube 2 months ago
@gvman3670
If you want to trust scientists who are sinful fallen finite and live about 80,90 years max....go ahead. I'll trust God who has existed from all eternity who knows all and can never lie who wants the best for us if we would but listen to Him. Who has written down what we need to know for life and godliness. You can stick with the foolish speculation not me. Rom 1:21
willpower242 2 months ago
@willpower242 You are right. God has "spirits" to lie for him
1 Kings 22:22 And the LORD said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persuade him, and prevail also: go forth, and do so. 23 Now therefore, behold, the LORD hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the LORD hath spoken evil concerning thee.
csnowutube 2 months ago
@gvman3670
continued........Real science supports a young earth............most scientists are foolish speculators however and dont really deal in science but in philosophy and a false religion that they call science.......but it's not.
willpower242 2 months ago
Craig is full of shit.
ray4ix 2 months ago
god created man and the animals on the sixth day which obviously includes dinosaurs so they lived together...im afraid you got that one wrong william
yonexseven 2 months ago
World: 4.5 billion
Universe: 14 billion
Not the same thing.
Andromedonian 2 months ago 14
@Andromedonian I'm glad someone else noticed
OpethNation 2 months ago
@Andromedonian Craig is well aware of this. But sometimes when people say "world," depending on the context, they sometimes are referring to the universe. I'm sure if he asked "How old is the earth," Craig would have said 4.5 billion.
ebeatworld 2 months ago
I think Dr. Craig is a disingenuous in saying Young Earth Creationists are reading their views into the Bible without its support. What he can’t say, since he’s an apologist, is the Bible is so muddled that equally sincere Biblicists can see either Young Earth or Gap Creationism in Genesis. In short, the Bible doesn’t give straight answers to some big questions, so Biblicists sort of pretend they don’t exist most of the time. But., in the end, they don’t even agree on who can be saved.
Cathmoytura 2 months ago
I am a Clinical Psychologist and Dr. Craig is either lying or ignorant. Children that are taught this principle of hell have lifelong difficulties with fear and anxiety. Even as a rational adult they can’t escape the trauma that was caused by such verbal abuse which caused them as children to believe what they were told. There is preponderance of evidence that clearly statistically shows that children carry these fears forward.
raywingfield 2 months ago
@raywingfield I'm sorry but your comment is so faulty. There will always be children who grow up and were taught about something and then say they were damaged because of that said thing. It's more about how they were taught (abused into believing) than the subject of the teaching. Just because some dunce misused the teachings of hell does not make the idea of it any less true. Insecurity breeds the fear you speak of, not hell. You being a "Clinical Psychologist" should know this.
bumper212 2 months ago
@raywingfield If a parent were teaching their child that hell is a "principle" then yes, there would be a problem. One reason why we have so many problems with youth today is because of parents not teaching responisbility and consequenses for actions, and discipline.
CiscoWes 2 months ago
@raywingfield haha clinical psychologist? i'm a christian and i believe in hell. I believe it is a place where sinners go who deny God. I always have believed this and i've never believed otherwise. I am a man now and i can quite honestly say i've never had trauma or anxieties about hell. why? because i'm not afraid that i will go to hell. I dont mean to be rude but psychologists are not as bad as psychiatrists but they all are therapists. and therapist is another word for (the rapist).
epopeegenetics 2 months ago
@epopeegenetics Is to not be convinced that god is real, the same as to deny god?
If I was actually presented with convincing evidence, I wouldn't be an atheist.
HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke 2 months ago
@HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke there is convincing evidence out there. for example the rock that moses split in half still stands today. it really depends on your openess towards accepting a creator, or intelligent designer. If you remain closed off towards the idea, nothing will look like evidence to you. however if you are open to the idea, you will see God in everything.
epopeegenetics 2 months ago
@epopeegenetics If I show you an ancient book claiming that faeries make flowers bloom, can I point to flowers as evidence for faeries? I'm not closed off to the idea of finding evidence for god, but I don't find a split rock the slightest bit convincing, especially since there are millions of rocks worldwide split by natural forces, and we understand in detail that no designer is needed for life. I actually have half a spherical rock on my desk right now (and some of it's full marbly brothers).
HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke 2 months ago
@HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke hey dude, i'm not telling you what to think. i wonder how many rocks got split in half on Mount sinai with a water aquifer underneath it??
I'm sure you wouldn't find anything convincing for the existence of God
matter fact you just told me that i needed to provide you evidence
so dont act like your "open" because you're just lying to yourself
and you're certainly not fooling anyone.
epopeegenetics 2 months ago
@epopeegenetics"I'm not telling you what to think" is just avoiding my request for proof of your truth claim.
you're sure I wouldn't find anything convincing, just because I reject your split rock?
OF COURSE I'm demanding evidence before believing, how could you possibly even claim to believe anything that you haven't been convinced is true.
you're being ridiculus and you must see it! Is it because you feel backed into a corner because the best evidence you have is a cracked rock?
HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke 2 months ago
@epopeegenetics I'm not 'denying god', I'm rejecting theists' pathetic, unconvincing evidences.
I can't deny god in that sense until I know he's real.
I'm lying to myself and not fooling anyone? are you seriously implying that I find theists' arguments convincing, and am just in some sort of denial?
Do youself the justice of admitting your that religious beliefs are faith based, and that your evidences aren't good enough to convince any scientist, or rational person who doesn't already believe.
HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke 2 months ago
@epopeegenetics If there were any valid evidences or arguments for the existance of god, Christianity wouldn't be a religion, it would be the currently accepted scientific model (btw it's not)
HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke 2 months ago
@epopeegenetics yes, you do need to provide me with evidence if you want to assert that I'm denying god. Much, much better evidence than what you have so far.
there's better evidence for other religions, ufo abductions, the loch ness monster, ghosts, flower-blooming faeries etc.
HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke 2 months ago
@HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke @HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke I don't have to do anything for you, but out of the goodness of my heart and just because i have nothing to do i just found this so I will give you the link
watch?v=HWGmUvkE1fc&feature=channel_video_title
just click on 17:00 minutes if you dont want to hear the whole thing
epopeegenetics 2 months ago
@epopeegenetics did you notice they only identified that mountain as the Mt. Sinai of legend because it had a cave? and that they showed photos of other split rocks nearby, they just clung onto the biggest one?
So you have a holy book that says someone split a rock near a mountain with a cave, and there's a mountain with a cave somewhere near a rock that - as they mentioned, is worn smooth by water (which actually would have taken too long to be compatible with the story)
evidence for god? NO!
HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke 2 months ago
@HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke well now that you've been shown proof of a bible story, you can do your own research and find other archeological evidence of bible stories on your own.
epopeegenetics 2 months ago
@epopeegenetics ya I've been researching for years, it's all just as unrealistic and flawed as this rock, or my example of the aboriginal three sisters mountain peaks
HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke 2 months ago
@epopeegenetics if you really think that was proof of a bible story, do you think the three sisters prove the magical legends of the aboriginal dream time?
HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke 2 months ago
you can't answer yes or no without debunking your own 'proof'
HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke 2 months ago
@epopeegenetics What's a more likely explanation for this, someone claimed to have split a rock and folklore carried on his story, someone DID split a rock and millions of gallons of water gushed out and the whole bible is true, or the whole bible is made up?
options 1 and 3 are plausible, and option 2 just isn't
HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke 2 months ago
@epopeegenetics It's not a realistic explanation for how a rock gets in such a state.
The Australian aboriginals have similarly unrealistic explanations for many things, like the Three Sisters mountains, are supposedly three human sisters who were turned into mountains.
Are these 3 mountain peaks evidence for the primitive, magical explanation of how they formed?
HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke 2 months ago
@HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke dud you obviously didnt watch the video very long
1st. THE BOULDER IS over 40 FEET HIGH
2nd. MOSES TAPPED IT TWICE WITH A STICK
3rd. MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF GALLONS OF WATER POURED OUT
thus quenching the people's dehydration because of there journey to the promised land
epopeegenetics 2 months ago
@epopeegenetics I gathered all of that, that's the bible's unrealistic explanation for the rock (or at least, a story in the bible that people looked for a rock to point to and found that one)
1st. THE THREE SISTERS ARE MOUNTAIN PEAKS
2nd. THREE ABORIGINAL GIRLS WERE PUNISHED MAGICALLY
3rd. THEY WERE TURNED INTO THE MOUNTAINS
ya, greeeeat evidence
HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke 2 months ago
@HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke alright dude i'm not gonna argue with you
you are obviously pathologically screwed up.
evolution is your pride and your safe haven so be it, you hide behind a shadow.
You didn't watch the whole video, I get that!
but later tonight you will watch a 30 minute video on the theory of evolution
and soak it all in, you'll believe with ur full imagination every drop of it.
all I have to say is go ahead!
i hope the theory of evolution does it for you & is everything u've dreamed of
epopeegenetics 2 months ago
@epopeegenetics it doesn't matter if evolution 'does it for me and is everything i've dreamed of' because unlike you, I don't base my beliefs on what's pleasing, but on what's been demonstrated to be true.
evolution HAS been demonstrated as true in millions of ways.
read a biology article that isn't from your church-approved library.
I'm subscribed to a peer reviewed magazine and every day I read about things that beautifully and exclusively demonstrate evolution.
btw your god is immoral ;)
HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke 2 months ago