No video
Dawkins' Contradiction
Рет қаралды 21,644
Күн бұрынGreg Koukl of Stand to Reason discusses an argument offered in Richard Dawkins' "The God Delusion."
#StandtoReason #Apologetics #Christianity
----- CONNECT -----
Website: www.str.org/
Stand to Reason University: training.str.org/
Stand to Reason Apps: www.str.org/apps
Twitter: / strtweets
Facebook: / standtoreason93
Instagram: / standtoreason
LinkedIn: / stand-to-reason
Have a question or comment? Call Greg Koukl, live Tuesdays 4-6pm Pacific Time, at (855) 243-9975. If you'd like to submit your question ahead of time for the broadcast, or if you'd like to submit a question for the #STRask podcast, fill out our form at www.str.org/br....
----- GIVE -----
Support the work of Stand to Reason: str.org/donate
@STRvideos 6 ай бұрын
Dawkins-one of the most famous atheists of the world-does not really understand the biblical conception of God, which he spends much of his book writing against. Here are some resources to help you respond to the attacks of New Atheists like Dawkins. How Should a Christian Approach the Arguments in Richard Dawkins’s Book? rsn.pub/4bywUAP Answering the New Atheists-Part 1 rsn.pub/4byG14z Answering the New Atheists-Part 2 rsn.pub/3uzH6s5 Answering the New Atheists-Part 3 rsn.pub/3OFveeQ Always Ask What They Mean by “God” rsn.pub/3SBM0Nb
@HearGodsWord 2 жыл бұрын
Reading the God Delusion helped me to become a Christian!
@user-ly3or3ou8e5 10 ай бұрын
As an Arab Muslim, please contribute to spreading Christianity Soft atheistic thought is a materialistic thought that is destructive to humanity Then we discuss what we differ from, may God bless you
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
I never said he needed people. He is self-sufficient, and sufficient in his fellowship with the Son and the Spirit. But he created us out of his own pure pleasure. If he needed us he would not given us the choice to seek him. He would have forced us to worship him. And he created also us so that we can enjoy him!
@elvispresley3234 2 жыл бұрын
I'm a plumber. When I look at every created "thing" here on earth as well as beyond, I believe in God. To believe in God I am perfectly comfortable not being able to understand or explain everything God or the cosmos. Dawkins and persons like him seem to be uncomfortable not being able to understand and explain everything God or the cosmos. To me, it is the height of arrogance and ultimately very foolish.
@atlasshrugged2u 10 жыл бұрын
Exactly! Thank you. Dawkins makes alot of assumptions in his reasoning concerning God because he has God limited to that of a man or super human being. In spite of his intelligence, he lacks the ability to step outside his tiny mind and imagine a being (God) who is outside of time and space who is omipotent and omniscient. He just refuses to let his mind think on these things...
@Raphinater 10 жыл бұрын
If you believe god is outside of time and space, then we do not have the slightest clue of what that is.
@richwheeler 2 жыл бұрын
@@Raphinater So what? Cosmology also says the initial state of the universe had no time or space, and we have no clue what that is. If your reasoning is a valid argument against the existence of God, then it is also a valid argument against the existence of the universe.
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
Abraham did not change. He chose to bless the Jews out of a promise to Abraham. Was he displeased with a lot of them? Yes. Does that mean he changed his character? No, he kept his promise towards Abraham.
@Szeicheng 11 жыл бұрын
It's interesting to see your take on this and the line of reasoning you employ. I always just thought that ***in the event that an omniscient and omnipotent being exists***, it is only natural that we will not be able to fathom certain aspects of said being due to our inability to reason on an equal level. Just as the human mind simply cannot fathom the "beginning of everything", we likewise should not be so foolish as to assume that we are capable of fully understanding an almighty entity.
@taowaycamino4891 7 жыл бұрын
Hi STRvideos! Conveniently intelligent is what Dawkin is...But then again we all are to some degree, if not careful. Thank you for the video.
@JoshuaHults 11 жыл бұрын
Hold on a second, lets rewind. You think life came from non life. That non living chemicals arranged themselves without purpose, meaning into something as complex as a cell. Then, that cell became multi cellular, then that cell learned to read and write, pondered about itself, made laws art and flew itself to the moon. And it all started with a purposeless cell which has been shown mathematically impossible to have formed on its own. And thats pretending the atmosphere would allow it to.
@StopFear 14 жыл бұрын
Praise Lord Jesus forever!!
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
illusions and attachments to the things in front of us. And he destroys it to bring us to that depth where we can purely enjoy a relationship with him, which is the reason why he created us. I have suffered a lot in the recent years but I can tell you that it was for the good!
@emergingworshiper 12 жыл бұрын
And if He were to do those things, it would be because He chose to, and hence would be in obedience to Himself, and those deeds would become righteous by the very act of His doing them. God is not subject to any higher power, nor are His actions judged by any higher power. God is perfect, not because He meets an external definition of perfection, but because He IS the definition of perfection.
@Redington931 12 жыл бұрын
A square cannot be a circle and a square at the same time (that's what he said if you listen carefully). He did not say something like turning a circle into a square as you state; which is different altogether.
@suddenlyawakened 13 жыл бұрын
Part 1: Let me take a stab at this. What Greg is arguing is know as the "Law of Identity": Something is what it is, and isn't what it is not. Something that exists has a specific nature. So a circle is a circle and is not not a circle or in his example not a square. This applies to the nature of all Logical Absolutes. That which make things what they are.
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
Dude. Dawkins is suggesting that God can make contradictions come true. People have pointed out that there is no power that can make contradictions come true, and we are not suggesting at all that God can make contradictions come true! Dawkins is!
@JoshuaHults 11 жыл бұрын
the end was classic, " you get an F richard dawkins " ahahahahahahahahaha
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
What is "deep" faith? What is "strong" faith? I don't care if you were "Christian" for 40 years. There are so many people that have been Christians for a long time but are not really Christians at all.
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
Jeez so many questions dude. He is not useless at all. I am living a wild life of impossibility and enjoying every step of it. "He made up his mind, he wouldn't change it, the course is set and we are all just running out the clock with god's plan until it is somehow completed" Not that he wouldn't change it, it is not in his nature to change it. Just like it is not in his nature to not love human beings. And that's true that's what we're doing. The Lord's day is not here yet. Time allow
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
Prove to me that this is what happened in the beginning of time. Prove to me that the universe came about on its own in the beginning of time. Great post btw! Shows how powerful God is!
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
mutually exclusive if you stick to Dawkins characterizations of the Judeo-Christian God. As well, and Koukl did not mention this, but God does not see things the way we see things--he can see eternity in one point, past, present, and future conflated, and what he sees himself doing in the future, he is doing now, and has done it in the past. So God is not necessarily a helpless victim of the future--when God moves, it is all done in one great eternal movement: "A timeless God ...."
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
He is provable. But not in the conventional way you think. You must seek him sincerely with all your heart, and you will find. You are obviously closed off to God so you cannot find him. but if you open yourself up and seek him, he promises that you will find him.
@eltronrangamma 11 жыл бұрын
It is frustrating to see smart people as yourself completely miss the point. Greg here is not forcing god to exist, lol. In this video, if you were actually watching, he was simply arguing about a incoherence issue that Dawkins brought up in his book.
@ProLifeStrategist 12 жыл бұрын
Your immediate jump to attack those who disagree with you betray your lack of rationality and clear thinking. Rational, clear thinking people don't attack the person when arguments are presented. You might want to stand back and rethink your strategy
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
Not a square circle and taken out of context. That was a prophecy made against Israel who refused God's mercy and relented in their evil and spat upon God's mercy. God gives them what they want--calamity and destruction instead of mercy. "The Lord is very pitiful and of tender mercy" Yep no contradiction here. He wants to give mercy but if people relent and dont want to give mercy, he gives them what they want.
@scottsaville9512 11 жыл бұрын
The bible consists of many different historical/prophetic documents (that would all be separate if no one sat down and decided to put them all together), so no, it's not circular. It's multiple sources.
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
You are making assertions yourself here. I have addressed your points above. As far as we conceive God, there is no time gap between his willing and his acting (credit to Edward Feser for this one). Since we are in the temporal order, when God wills something, we anticipate it--but from God's eternal standpoint, every event in every point in time follows from his one act (credit to Edward Feser for this one as well). This is what we mean by God being immutable and timeless.
@Slashoom 11 жыл бұрын
He is probably thinking of Romans 1:20 "For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God." Basically everyone knows God by His creation, a fine-tuned universe.
@sunshade0 14 жыл бұрын
@riseofatheism we could say the same with the lack of non-bias definition of perfect from you. We have justification, we see it through the ability of creating, through the ability to love, to judge and to give oppritunity to humans and still give them freedom of choice.
@JoshuaHults 11 жыл бұрын
Wrong, wrong, and a little more wrong. There is no explanation of how single cells became multi cellular. Any claim of " we created life " is ridiculously false. When scientist claim to have created life, what they mean is, " we used pre existing cells and replaced some of their dna extracted from other pre existing cells. It has never, i repeat, never been shown how a single cell became multi cellular organisms by natural means. How could it, the odds are so against it happening.
@eltronrangamma 11 жыл бұрын
Bud, did you watch the whole video? First of all, Koukl does not say the Christian God is not coherent--Dawkins says it and Dawkins uses the omniscience and omnipotence thing to which Koukl dedicates his whole video to. Koukl is suggesting that he is both capable of omniscience and omnipotence without running into logical problems. "f course, as I suggested before the argument for God falls apart anyway." We all know what you believe in, friend.
@JoshuaHults 11 жыл бұрын
it is nothing like flakes of snow. Like trying to explain the construction of a functional 747 by saying, its like flakes of snow, gradually over time, the parts were chosen from and eventually you have yourself a 747. No, the 1st cell had to be extremely complex, capable of duplicating in order to get it going. You need ATP for energy, proteins and dna, rna cell wall, ..... all at 1 place at the same time, and 100% functional. This is impossible, if it happened, it would be a MIRACLE.
@JoshuaHults 11 жыл бұрын
what you do not get is if the engine is missing the crankshaft it does not work. Put the crank back in and remove the transmission and same problem. All the parts have to be there at same time to work. So how do you explain how all the parts that make up a cell formed by chance ? YOU CAN'T because its impossible. You do not have a self replicating cell until you have a self replicating cell. How did the cell form to replicate itself in the 1st place ? mathematically impossible.
@scottsaville9512 11 жыл бұрын
He was speaking to another facet of himself. God's only begotten son IS God. And is with God. See John 1. You aren't revealing anything. You are making logical mistakes / don't knowing what you're talking about. God doesn't have to think he is only a man in order to experience life as one. Jesus was both 100% man and 100% God. Why don't you study basic doctrine before pretending we believe things that we don't actually believe?
@pimplequeen2 11 жыл бұрын
The majority of atheists would describe themselves as "agnostic atheists" as logic informs us that there may indeed be a God and its just a matter of finding him. Not believing one way or the other doesn’t fully describe the issue. There might be a Bigfoot but I haven’t seen one and it is a surreal claim so I don’t believe but I remain “agnostic” as it is also possible. If you told me you had a dog I am likely to believe you do, but I would still be agnostic. Skepticism is very useful :)
@sunshade0 14 жыл бұрын
@riseofatheism thats like asking how do we know God created the universe, by looking at a blade of grass, by looking into our own self worth.
@tnmusicman1 11 жыл бұрын
@sweetshaman no one is claiming you need God to be moral, but you need God to ground your morals. The atheists always get this one wrong!
@JoshuaHults 11 жыл бұрын
Your correct, but man its so hard knowing he has ruined so many lives preaching his hate filled naturalist religion.
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
Right. I think we are done here. Peace.
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
I haven't proscribed anything. I dont study apologetics. It is just common sense. What is it about evolution that I am misunderstanding? Arent you suggesting that this impeccably complex universe came abou ton its own through a mindless process ?
@Slashoom 11 жыл бұрын
Fasting is a spiritual discipline that accompanies prayer. Its through both prayer and fasting that the believer draws closer to God. So I think fasting is more an issue of the believer being available to connect with God more through the discipline, rather than God responding to the discipline. That's my 2c.
@tnmusicman1 11 жыл бұрын
@Lo Mega No, shaman doesn't "get it" but doggone it he USE to be a Christian !! That means he KNOWS what he's talking about.(roll eyes) yessirrrrrreeeeeeeee.
@TheZookyDragon 12 жыл бұрын
You make it seem like the world's corruption wasn't planned. The corruption of the earth brought about something of a test that works to separate those who exist to follow the perfection of God and those who decide against him. Those who truly want to be with God for eternity are allowed to do so in the place he prepared for them, and those who'd rather not be with him (those who deny his existence, prefer another object of worship, etc) go to the one place in which he doesn't exist: hell.
@TheSmlth 13 жыл бұрын
@insanewarlock666 so 1.If the purpose of the world is pleasure, self satisfaction 2.Than anything that doesn’t bring pleasure, self satisfaction 3.Living you life for pleasure and self satisfaction creates suffering. 4. Thus living your life for yourself is pointless and can’t be the purpose of life because it is self contradictory.
@mrdarrell1963 11 жыл бұрын
just cos dawkins says its contradiction...don't make it so. dawkins is illogical as has been shown, thus his assertion has no merit..he's laughable.
@YodatheJedi12 13 жыл бұрын
Richard Dawkins is a "superior intellect?" You are too polite... describe it how it is! :) Otherwise I agree with the video.
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
I was not particularly satisfied of him dealing with omniscience. But I gave my rejoinders below. As far as God changing his mind, here is a quote: "Anthropopathism, therefore, is a figure of speech by which human feelings or emotions are ascribed to God, in order to accommodate man’s ignorance of the unfathomable intentions and operations of deity". Also, God might be angry and displeased with his people, but that does not suggest he "changed" his character--his promises for example towards
@oregonducksrpimpen 11 жыл бұрын
To an extent yes; modern day "faith" (to a large degree) definitely matches your description. A great article you should read is "what is faith" by J.P. Holding of Tektonics Apologetic Ministry. Many Christians today claim that they can talk to God directly, which unfortunately, their "revelations" contradict scripture and other Christian "revelations". Many of these accounts are highly subjective and vague. This only creates division, not unity.
@richwheeler 2 жыл бұрын
Talk to God... you mean, hear God.
@mollkatless 12 жыл бұрын
you seem honest, but have you have given this subject an honest days work? What type of evidence are you seeking? Do you want to haul God into a Lab & run the standard tests? As an atheist, you make the claim that God does not exist, what evidence supports that position? Don't give me a littany of complaints against the bible. There is a vid of a countryman of yours Dr. Peter Atkins debating William Lane Craig-this may provide you some of what you seek-curious to know your thoughts on it
@JoshuaHults 11 жыл бұрын
You are a sinner, you know you are a sinner, you know you have done things you are ashamed of that you would not want people to know about. Perhaps you beat off to your sisters friend, perhaps you stole from someone, perhaps your holding a grudge against someone and you refuse to forgive them, your a sinner. The simple fact is you know your a sinner, i do not even have to tell you this, you know it. You can deny it, but you know you are. Denial is not the answer, FORGIVENESS IS.
@scottsaville9512 11 жыл бұрын
So he can't remember anything as soon as he turns God mode back on? Oh and by the way, HE TOTALLY DID LIVE AS A MAN. SHOCKER I KNOW. That was Jesus. You're applying a lot of limitations to him that he doesn't have. When he was on the earth as Jesus, he was also God. Doing God-things and stuff. So he totally was one AND the other. At the same time. Time. There's another issue with what you're saying. He isn't limited by such a thing. He made it. He is outside of it, but may enter into it.
@sunshade0 14 жыл бұрын
@riseofatheism It is tied to Faith, and I think in one of gregs videos, he ties Faith with Trust, a very basic human thing in relationships. We are limited, so can't know perfectly, so we put trust into our beliefs, evidence and relationships. For those of meta-faith it is usally through philosophy,prayer,revelations or just pondering on things. For a christian it is trust in a Jew who got peirced in the heart, crushed lungs and put into a dark tomb, who somehow loved beyond we could ever do.
@richwheeler 2 жыл бұрын
You don't have to be a Christian to believe in Jesus's death. The distinction is not the dark tomb, but the empty tomb.
@JoshuaHults 11 жыл бұрын
Once again with your 40,000 Gods nonsense, i never said you go from know evolution is wrong straight to Christianity. At this point its a logical search. There are only 3 religions which are mono theistic. This is the only view that is logically plausible. At this point 1 has to choose which has the best evidence, obviously Christianity. Jesus left footprints, and fulfilled bible prophesy. He died the way they said he would, by who they said he would, and so on so forth.
@polaroidsky 14 жыл бұрын
@DanLeMerde : How did he sidestep the question?
@JoshuaHults 11 жыл бұрын
To make an argument against theism, you have to assume a purpose in doing so. Since you assume a purpose and your world view that evolution occurred does not support such a view, you obviously do not accept evolutions logical conclusion. Therefore you do not accept evolution. You say you do, but your actions speak louder than words. Every man knows God, they suppress the truth in unrighteousness. Your pride is the wall between God and you, tare it down.
@regelemihai 13 жыл бұрын
"than what are the miracles then?" You obviously don't even know what it means when something is logically coherent and when it's not. This statement says it all. A miracle iss not an impossible thing--creating square circles is. The Bible NEVER says that God can do that which is logically impossible. You have yet to demonstrate that. Is anything too hard for Him? No, but not in the sense of doing illogical things. That is not how omnipotence is defined. The video addressed that but you..
@scottsaville9512 11 жыл бұрын
Have you ever tried to wrap your mind around a hyper cube? A God that consists of more spatial dimensions than us easily explains his omnipotence, and the fact that he is one but also three persons is somewhat of a mystery now, but I have no doubt that science will eventually come up with something that will make sense of it.
@richwheeler 2 жыл бұрын
True. But... The spirit realm is, by definition, beyond the naturalistic boundaries of science. As for the Trinity, if God created space-time, then God could use that same creative power to enter, experience, and interact with His creation as three Persons. Since God existed outside of space-time, He observed it as a separate entity, giving Him a full view of all locations and times, which explains omniscience. Since God's essence is spirit, natural laws do not limit the three Persons from occupying the same space-time.
@richiejourney1840 10 ай бұрын
@@richwheelernot to mention His ability to do the same with other things: pillar of fire, burning bush, etc.
@JoshuaHults 11 жыл бұрын
My brother is in the ministry, he also believes in evolution and God. You can do it, but i will say this, you pretty much have to jump through hurtles to make it work lol. I will say this as well, though " he made man from the dust of the earth " does line up with evolution, it just as well could mean he used pre existing materials to make man. We make cars, and they are made from the dust of the earth as well, its a lot easier to say lol
@richiejourney1840 10 ай бұрын
Even “science” jumps through hurdles to make Evolution work.
@sunshade0 14 жыл бұрын
@riseofatheism so then one must allow crime to continue with rape and murder down by us humans? To neglect the problem would be morally wrong, to solve it without breaking the value of freedom is morally right. Also to assume death as evil is call nature evil, for death is part of nature, just like love, and life. The reason for the death defines it as a crime. Also their was no deceit in the garden, he said what would happen, and it did.
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
I am not gonna belabor this any longer. You can accept these arguments if you want. If not, then I don't think this discussion will go anywhere. Anyway here it goes and you can do the research on it: in some of these cases, the word "repent" could mean regret, console oneself, to be sorry when you study the original text. In the case of the Genesis account, if you look at the context..then it suggests that God was grieved because of the sins his creation were committing. Now this may be
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
does not literally remember, retain, or anticipate anything, but has all His knowledge timelessly"--Craig. "But Koukl barely explores the meaning of Omnipotence!" I reviewed it again, and may be you are right. I think Koukl is right in suggesting that it is ridiculous characterize God and define the terms in the way Dawkins is doing it because you will end up with meaningless suggests like "God is not all powerful because if he is all powerful enough to make a rock too heavy to lift that he "
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
There is evidence. You just refuse to accept it as evidence. Now, let me turn the tables on you. What are your beliefs about the universe? If you don't believe in God, then your default belief must be that the universe came about on his own or that the universe always, yes? Do you have any evidence for this? Or to use a better more accurate word, do you have proof for this? Can you prove through neuroscientific research that God just a figment of our imagination? Curious to know what
@TheSmlth 13 жыл бұрын
@insanewarlock666 haha firstly just a side note, Jesus did say any of that it was written by paul and peter in letters. but to get that they support slavery/ sexism is way out of context, slaves back then were people who could not support themselves financially so to survive they would go and work for a rich person and in return, would have a roof over there head and food, they where mostly well looked after it wasn't a racist or sexist thing, also the passage in timothy is paul's opinion
@JoshuaHults 11 жыл бұрын
You made a huge error in thinking. If evolution is true, there is no meaning, purpose or morality. So it is you who is wasting their time contradicting their theories logical conclusions. You see you think there is a purpose in commenting, and that believing in evolution has some type of mystical meaning to it, as if i will level up and my hair will turn orange from it. The fact is, if it is true, than your whole statement is a contradiction. Your arguing from theist ground which means i win.
@JoshuaHults 11 жыл бұрын
Besides the evidence, math, against evolution, there are other obvious reasons to not accept it. No other theory that i know of is riddled with as much fraud, lying, even preaching. You have to understand, this theory is to show how God does not exist, not how life began. You know there is no evidence for it when theres so many hoaxes. Another thing you will notice is, they never teach the negatives of evolution, this is bec its not about the science, its about disproving God.
@JoshuaHults 11 жыл бұрын
( SHAKES HEAD ) Please for the LOVE OF HUMANITY LISTEN ! Natural selection can only take place when you have crap to select from. ( You with me still ? ) So how did the 1st cell form ? The 1st cell had to be complicated enough to duplicate itself, perform cell functions, with no natural selection because its not living until its working and duplicating. So please please please explain to me your wisdom of how the 1st cell formed without using the word chance. THERE IS NO PROCESS
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
You are not saying anything here. Koukl is just suggesting that Dawkins is simply applying his own definition of omnipotence to God and using that as a straw man, hence his bringing up of the square circle (which he does not ascribe to God). Yahweh, the Judeo-Christian God that Dawkins is criticizing is not even characterized in the Bible the way Dawkins is characterizing him. There are no notions of God doing ridiculous things like making a square circle in the Bible. And they are only
@CettoTheCesco 13 жыл бұрын
@insanewarlock666 that makes him eternal and of infinite value. Basically God is the most valuable being that anyone can think of ..hence maximally greatest being conceivable. You are right infinity is impossible in the sense that an infinite number of things is impossible.
@sunshade0 14 жыл бұрын
@riseofatheism and the point is? you perpose that God works like a human does, but he isn't like the greek gods, he doesn't follow human rules to the 'T'. Also I say a leader who can follow his rules is pretty cool, and worthy of holy and perfect. It is us humans who need to follow these rules to be perfect and Holy, saddly we fall short of it with stains of our deeds.
@sunshade0 14 жыл бұрын
@riseofatheism well the commandments were made for humans, not for an eternal being, who exsited before the commandments, also the idea of death is not as evil as it seems. For us to take life is wrong, because we can't control that persons destiny, yet he who created the person and their destiny can, moving to the place he see's fit for the character. What your basically saying is something like J.K. Rowling is evil for killing off a character in Harry Potter. It doesn't really make sence there
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
It is not logical because Dawkins is not making it logical. Here, let us focus on Dawkins argument; "If God is omniscient, he must already know how he is going to intervene to change the course of history using his omnipotence. But that means he can’t change his mind about his intervention, which means he is not omnipotent." 1) If God infallibly knows that he will do in the future and doesn't bring it about, he may lack the power here, but that doesn't show any limitation on God because there
@TheSmlth 13 жыл бұрын
@insanewarlock666 if Jesus did not live. then how do you explain the thousands of followers, and the 12 apostles who where willing to die for him in the first century ad? the 12 apostles where supposed to have been with Jesus so they would no whether or not He lived and if he didn't why would they lie, to the point of death? People will die for what they believe to be true, but no one will die for what they know to be a lie.
@emergingworshiper 12 жыл бұрын
You are not addressing Dawkins' argument. The argument is that if God is all powerful, then that must include the power to sin. Therefore perfection and omnipotence cannot coexist. A better argument is that God is the definer of perfection. Sin is disobedience to God. Righteousness is obedience to God. So anything God does is always obedient to Himself and therefore righteous and not sin. God is capable of lying, stealing, murdering, or anything else that omnipotence empowers. And if He were to
@TheSmlth 13 жыл бұрын
@insanewarlock666 as i said before slavery back then isn't like slavery now or 200 years ago, its wasn't racist sexist or anything like that. the thing wrong with slavery is how people are treated (being force against there will to do work and to get nothing out of it) but the bible say's that if you are a slave ,aster you should TREAT your slaves well, it also says that slaves are freedmen in Christ.
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
Not nonsense. It is not what you think. "Mind" is not "mind" in the way Greeks thought it. It is translated as "heart" here. It is not an issue of ignorance--simply put, the sins that the Jews committed did not enter into his heart in his plans for Judah.
@regelemihai 13 жыл бұрын
@insanewarlock666 It appears you still don't understand the concept. The Bible has no relevance in this discussion--it wasn't even invoked by the presenter. You're drawing dubious conclusions. At best your claim would show that the Bible is false, not that omnipotence and omniescience are incompatible. Omnipotence is as was presented and omnipotence doesn't require doing that which logically incoherent. Face your mistakes, there's no shame in admitting you're wrong.
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
on God's omnipotence. And even if you were to insist he needs to have that power (i.e., the power to make contradictions true) that would mean that even if you were to prove that God did not exist, God, would still be able to exist because he had that power!
@drumrnva 11 жыл бұрын
God certainly can change his mind, if Genesis is anything to go by. In chapter 6 he is grieved that he made man and decides to scrap the whole project except for one family. In Exodus 32 he says he's going to destroy the Hebrews, but after talking with Moses he decides to make the stone tablets instead. These are clear, unambiguous examples of a character in a story changing their position.
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
What is that evolutionary evidence? I am curious to hear those reasons. And are they undisputable proofs? And if it is true, I would like to know about it and be part of the millions that are coming out of it! I would love to know how the thing I am experiencing right now is a figment of my imagination! "Yet, everything about god is a contradiction!" Yeah I know you think this bro. Whats new?
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
"cant lift, then then you cannot say God to be omnipotent". The problem here is not necessarily with the issue of omnipotence itself but definitions you assign to omnipotence. How you assign the definition will determine whether it will result in incoherence. Koukl succeeds in doing this, although he could have pointed out that Dawkins (and NOT the Bible's way of describing God's omnipotence..which is another topic) conception of omnipotence lends itself to meaninglessness.
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
Still not proof but fanciful ideas. I can accept a Big Bang and quarks flying here and there are cool but that does not prove that the universe came from nothing. God could be equally the causal factor in those quarks popping out of nowhere. After that, from the standpoint of a godless universe, you would have to accept that a mindless process resulted in something as incredibly fine-tuned as the universe. Mindlessness does not beget order--it is mindfulness and intelligence that does.
@milsimaustralia 13 жыл бұрын
pt/2 It thus follows that having faith or belief in a life after death that is offered but cannot be given by Greg's god would be just as logically incoherent, it is like believing in a circular square...absurd. So following Greg's advice we see that Christian notions of god are contradictory and thus false
@richwheeler 2 жыл бұрын
Whence in the world did you pull out that straw man assumption that God cannot give life after death?
@sunshade0 14 жыл бұрын
@riseofatheism you forgot free will in the equation. Also you use your own definition of these words, and to do that makes the data bias. You got to think abit more looser and higher when it comes to God. We have destiny and free will moving everything. We have freedom of choice, but no matter what choice we make, the direction we head to will still be the same.
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
Do what you want and believe what you want to believe, duke.
@JoshuaHults 11 жыл бұрын
life did not come from non life, its already been shown mathematically impossible. I explain this in previous comments, not going to explain again for you. If you bothered spending 1 minute a day looking at counter evidence against evolution you would know this, however you are ignorant on purpose. This debate is over, you lost a long time ago, i tried to give you time to redeem yourself but you failed. I am called to preach to the lost, not hold their hands and pamper them.
@arphaxadish 12 жыл бұрын
Thanks for helping me sort these things out. I used to be convinced by statements like those that Dawkins makes. I'm fairly new to philosophy. I didn't know it could be so fascinating. Keep up the great work, Greg.
@scottsaville9512 11 жыл бұрын
I didn't know there were agnostic atheists. I guess I never really thought about it before. So you don't "believe" one way or the other, but you lean toward atheism. Is that what that means?
@richwheeler 2 жыл бұрын
It's a rhetorical device. Usually, they say they aren't making a claim that there's no God, even though they impeach that claim with their ridicule and aggressive arguments. They do so in order to wriggle out of the burden of proof that comes with making the claim.
@polaroidsky 14 жыл бұрын
@singring76 : Could you please explain what you think the bible means by a personal being? Where do you find reference to this? If God transcends time (exists all points in time), is all knowing (knows the past and the future), and perfect (cannot make a wrong decision), then when would he ever have to change His mind?
@Mumtahin 13 жыл бұрын
science created atheists
@JoshuaHults 11 жыл бұрын
Its because of my mechanical background which enables me to think clearly about such things. This is not some small problem that science will figure out, origins of life research has turned into " origins of information " ..... Information is non material, if your looking for a material cause you already flunked. Like looking for crabs on top mount everest. You deny the obvious fact that INTELLIGENCE is the glove that fits. Your bias, has nothing to do with evidence for you. You hate God
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
you know! Don't take this as a facetiousness, I am really interested if you have any undisputable proof for the beliefs you have. I am willing to consider and embrace your beliefs if you can demonstrate that beyond a shadow of a doubt!
@TheSmlth 13 жыл бұрын
@insanewarlock666 wrong again my friend, here is a list of REAL people who DID DIE for Jesus Christ within 60 years of his death most of them saw and where with Jesus. all of the 12 disciples excluding Judas , Barnabas in Cyprus, John Mark in Alexandria both in 64 AD, Nero killed and persecuted heaps of Christians between 64-68 AD, Onesiphorus who was martyred either in 65 AD or 81 AD, Luke and Timothy both died around 80-100 AD.
@pimplequeen2 11 жыл бұрын
"So are you an atheist, theist, or agnostic?" I prefer skeptic as it says much more about the condition under which I labour than the the term "agnostic atheist" which is a very narrow descriptive of only one of the myriad of results of my skepticism. The problem with "agnostic atheist" as a term is it lends itself to crystallising theists into seeing an enemy and dialogue becomes either guarded or hostile..... we are all skeptics to some extent or other, there is no escape from that.
@richiejourney1840 10 ай бұрын
Gotcha…atheist it is then.
@pimplequeen2 9 ай бұрын
@@richiejourney1840 Strange response... Ok, ill play. Does your definition include the "gnostic/Agnostic" distinction and if so, which one?
@CettoTheCesco 13 жыл бұрын
@insanewarlock666 When we say God is infinite we are talking about His value ... and what you are talking about is that there cannot be an infinite number of things ...
@TheSmlth 13 жыл бұрын
@insanewarlock666 no my friend you are wrong again there is way more evidence for Jesus's existence then for any of the appostles why do you think they call it BC AD, BC being before christ?
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
The way I focussed on Koukl's argument is that he is pointing out a something flawed in the way Dawkins is defining omnipotence. As I mentioned above, and this will be the last time, the way Dawkins defines omnipotence will lead one to meaninglessness. Older theologians have nailed it--there is no such power that can make contradictions true. If God lacked a power, there would be a limit to his power--but since there is no ability to make contradictions true, lacking this power has no bearing
@LarsTheHonest 13 жыл бұрын
I thought u were an atheist..? Aren't you the one that read hatemails saying that you will 'burn in hell' etc? Anyway, to say something OT, you're making many good points here. Thanks for the video! :)
@TheSmlth 13 жыл бұрын
@insanewarlock666 If the purpose of the world is pleasure, self satisfaction(P, SS) than anything that doesn’t bring P or SS is pointless especially suffering. The problem with this is that people who live their lives to have P and SS end up creating suffering and poverty. For example buying an LCD TV for P and SS, you see it was most likely built by people living off les than a dollar a day in poverty stricken areas of the world. This fuels the compny to continue and thus keeps peopl in poverty
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
Great.
@sunshade0 14 жыл бұрын
@riseofatheism What if gives him the right is that he controls the after part of death, for all we know, those who died innocent could have a better out come then us. We can't control the persons out come after the time is passed, but the one who can does not commint murder because the outcome could be better then living. for the not innocent, well its just like why we have prisions.
@olzig361 11 жыл бұрын
No contradiction really. There are different aspects of God, one aspect of that is his Word which is incarnated through Jesus (who people saw) who himself is part of the Triune Godhead. One explanation suggests that whenever we see God "seen", it is usually through his Incarnational aspect. The Father himself is not seen. Jesus even explains this.
Kirk Cameron on TBN
Рет қаралды 183 М.
Fabiosa Best Lifehacks
Рет қаралды 18 МЛН
The Institute of Art and Ideas
Рет қаралды 109 М.
Kirk Cameron on TBN
Рет қаралды 13 М.
Dr Brian Keating
Рет қаралды 107 М.
The Poetry of Reality with Richard Dawkins
Рет қаралды 75 М.