William Lane Craig (2/6) Cosmological Argument

William Lane Craig explains the cosmological argument at Watermark Community Church in Dallas, TX on October 4, 2009.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• William
• Lane
• Craig
• Atheism
• Reasonable
• Faith
• Christianity
• Apologetics
• Cosmological
• Argument
• Fine
• Tuning
• Contingency
• Resurrection
• Evil
• New
• Richard
• Dawkins
• Christopher
• Hitchens
• Science
• God

[YesWeCantaloupe]

@wseerldnoeoedfry Religion has a long list of misses, but that's not the point of the video. The video is about the evidence for a creator of the universe. BTW the word "day" in Hebrew means literally a 12 hour day, literally a 24 hour day, or literally a long period of time with a beginning and an end.

[wseerldnoeoedfry]

@YesWeCantaloupe - You start with "Hebrew has many literal interpretations", and then list some figurative uses of language. The evidence you've provided directly undercuts your position.

More to the point, if we're to take "the universe had a beginning" to be a 'hit' for religion, but not count the long list of 'misses' in the same story, you need to at least have some clear criteria for what's literally true and what's a metaphor. Otherwise you're just picking and choosing after the fact.

[YesWeCantaloupe]

@wseerldnoeoedfry 1st question: yes. Morning and evening are not actual days because Hebrew has many literal interpretations using the same words, for example:

"In the morning it [grass] flourishes, and sprouts anew; Toward evening it fades, and withers away." (Psalm 90:6)

2nd question: yes. The word for "earth" = "people." For example:

"Shall not the Judge of all the earth deal justly?" (Genesis 18:25)

[wseerldnoeoedfry]

@YesWeCantaloupe - So we're going to take the Bible literally, but "And the evening and the morning were the _ day." doesn't mean these were actual days, evenings or mornings.

Also, "and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered. ... the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days." doesn't really mean all hills were covered, or that the flood lasted that many days, but we're still taking it literally.

I don't think you know what 'literally' means.

[YesWeCantaloupe]

@wseerldnoeoedfry All of the interpretations I mentioned are in fact literal interpretations. They are also correct interpretations. So you're work is far from over; it's actually retrograded.

[wseerldnoeoedfry]

@YesWeCantaloupe "the literal interpretation of six 24-hour days is a fairly modern pseudo-science ... The erroneous "global" flood interpretation is fairly recent ... The "rapture" is BS as well."

Great! Now if I could just get you to admit that the whole Bible should be taken non-literally, I'll consider my work here done. :)

[YesWeCantaloupe]

@wseerldnoeoedfry Actually you're correct. The erroneous "global" flood interpretation is fairly recent, and is only the result of globalization and a global mind-set. The "rapture" is BS as well. You shouldn't take the likes of Pat Robertson so seriously when it comes to this stuff.

[wseerldnoeoedfry]

@YesWeCantaloupe - "the literal interpretation of six 24-hour days is a fairly modern pseudo-science. Early church leaders did not subscribe to it..."

Sure, and the "literal interpretation" that the Bible describes a global flood is just "modern pseudo-science", too. And in another century I'll be told that the idea that Jesus is the only path to salvation was just a briefly popular interpretation, that nobody believed way back when. LOL.

[YesWeCantaloupe]

@wseerldnoeoedfry the literal interpretation of six 24-hour days is a fairly modern pseudo-science. Early church leaders did not subscribe to it, and neither should we.

[wseerldnoeoedfry]

@YesWeCantaloupe - "It's hard to imagine a time when atheists thought the universe was eternal..."

And it's hard to imagine that there was a time when theists believed that the universe was created in six days a few thousand years ago, but at the time all we had was mythology. Now they just ignore that part.