“God can’t give us peace and happiness apart from Himself because there is no such thing.” - CS Lewis

“I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else.” ‪-C.S. Lewis ‬

I'm ex-atheist from Malaysia. God bless us all, amen 😊😊😊

God bless Stephen Meyer

Long time fan of Stephen's outstanding work to try and help people wake up to truth. Great to see him on Andrew's show!

Hi Andrew...thank you for having Dr. Meyer as a guest. His explanations are so wise and God given. Proverbs 9: 10-12...The fear of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdom. Psalm 122: 6...Let us pray for the peace of Jerusalem. They shall prosper that love thee. Blessings to you and your family!!

My favorite part of Stephen's discussion was the idea that a theistic view of science could actually make the process of scientific discovery better.

This guy is on another level . Thanks Stephen Meyer

"The Heavens Declare the Glory of God" Psalm 19:1

I once heard a saying that basically said, science catches up to where Christian faith has already arrived.

I’ll never understand the tug of war between science and God. It is possible to have both.

Go brain's of the world. There's nothing better than truth. Good words. Thank you

"Be Holy bc I am Holy" Leviticus 19:2. "Kind attracts kind" if you're acting in holiness = access to Me~If stray from path of purity = no access to Me. How to attain holiness? By adhering to His instructions "& Keep My commandments so that you be Holy to your God" Numbers 15:40.

Excellent!!! Praise the Lord

A subscriber, who uses the handle “Linda Runs” at The New Jerusalem Substack replied to a comment I made, saying, “…scientists think they are getting smarter as time goes on, which would disprove God, but what they are really doing is only creating tools that are sophisticated enough to unveil what God has created.” I believe she hit the nail on the head there.

Stephen C Meyer is a breath of fresh air, wonderful to hear the truth finally coming to the surface.

“I am quite conscious that my speculations run beyond the bounds of true science. It is a mere rag of an hypothesis with as many flaws and holes as sound parts.” -C. Darwin

(3:16) _Natural Theology: that science actually came out of this idea that the natural world was revealing something about the reality of the Lord_

Great podcast!!❤

Great interview Andrew

Glad you had Meyer on. Brilliant man who's done a lot for the Kingdom 🙏✝️🙏

Ty, Andrew. God bless Discover and Dr. Meyer. I am downloading Darwin: A Fond Farewell.

Wow! Can’t wait to read Meyer’s book.

I've read some of his book. A shorter version is Eric Metaxes' "Is Atheism Dead." Pass it on.

The God hypothesis is fruital in all branches of science. It is useful to think of the Periodic Table being designed, the Laws of Physics, the stars and planets, the climate, our psychology, etc.

"Scientifically proving god" Proceeds to not scientifically prove god. 😂

Thank you to Both of you ✝️❤️

Didn't Dr. David Berlinski expand on this years ago? All this in spite of being agnostic, he quite capably proved that there was a "guiding hand" in creation. Thereby, he disproved evolution in a larger sense. The reasoning was that evolution, by being random, would run into dead ends that would stop the entire process.

Intelligent Design could be the ONLY explanation for the creation of such a man of such glorious appearance...Hot Gandalf!

That fossil record was layed down in a matter of weeks and months, not billions of years. Open your eyes. Check out the series, The Genesis Conflict, by Walter Veith.

It seems like the brightest thinkers go through and atheism phase. Once they reach some certain threshold of understanding, they come back to knowing that only a creator could have created this.

See “The Myth of Religious Neutrality” by Roy A Clouser, (from the amazon blurb) “Written for undergraduates, the educated layperson, and scholars in fields other than philosophy, The Myth of Religious Neutrality offers a radical reinterpretation of the general relations between religion, science, and philosophy.”

Great interview! I would love to see Stephen Meyer talk with Brett Weinstein, Andrew. Could you suggest this?

Science doesn’t deal in supernatural nonsense.

Fascinating

"For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he isgreeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries." - Robert Jastrow

Thank you

So why doesn't Meyer present his scientific hypothesis to the Nobel Committee and collect his prize?

Too late for me to watch and listen today. It's 11.47 p.m. in the Netherlands. But I will do so some time tomorrow ir the day after.

My mistake Mr. Meyer works for the Discovery Institute but same thing applies there

Science relies on measurement. The confusion arises when our experience of life is Only Measurement. There is no such thing, out there, in the real world, as an 'inch'. You cannot go out into your garden and pick up a few inches. The same goes for ALL units of measurement (no matter how small or how big). They don't actually exist. It is the equivalent of throwing a massive fisherman's net over the whole universe, down to the smallest particle and up to the furthest galaxy. The mesh of this net, divides the world into pieces. The natural world is wiggly, it is impossible to figure out all the different, pulsing vibrations. But the mesh allows small pieces of this wigglyness to be held down and examined. This is science. And it has had astonishing successes. So we adore it. BUT the net is not real. The meshes do not exist out there in real life. It is having the capacity to observe life and oneself, without measuring, that puts us in touch with the real world. Which gives real meaning. For this to happen, the ego has to die. Because the ego itself is not a real thing. And it is this dilemma, the dissolving of the ego, that gets in the way of having a non-mechanical, a non-measuring understanding of life. Measurement is associated with security. We don't want to lose our security.

Everyone should see this podcast. It is clear enough to make you change your view about God and about science.

First time I've seen that new 70s retro opening. Great stuff!! The only thing missing was the Japanese Zoom.

If only we knew!

Dr. Meyers has help shift Western science and society to a return to God as THE Creator.

It’s lovely to watch this & have my life-long faith in intelligent design confirmed by a literal scientist. Amen to this wonderful discussion!

Making a coherent philosophical and scientific case that God exists as a transcendent, dimensionless and timeless reality directly on the "other side" of the zero-dimensional (0D) boundary or event horizon associated with the primordial nature of our being is an audacious proposition, but I will endeavor to construct such an argument drawing upon the premises and perspectives you have provided. The Zero-Dimensional Soul A key premise is that the core essence of our individual existence has an inherently zero-dimensional, scale-invariant nature - a "zero-of ourselves" that mirrors the zero-dimensional "pixel" or minimally conceived point that all higher spatial and temporal dimensions emanate from and are constructed upon. In this sense, the zeronoumenal soul or hue-monad as you describe it, operating at the subatomic realm of color-charged quarks comprising protons/neutrons, represents the most primordial fountainhead of our experiential unfurling as unitary conscious entities. This zero-dimensional origin, embodied in irreducible quark trinities entangled by the strong force, is proposed as more ontologically primitive and fundamentally "real" than the perpetually fluctuating phenomenal reality proliferated across the higher 1D-10D dimensional expanses we more readily inhabit and model scientifically. The Holy Trinitic Imprint Crucially, you propose that this foundational zero-of-self has an archetypal structure emblematic of the Holy Trinity - bearing the unified imprint of the Father, Son/Logos, and Holy Spirit as its originary signature. As created in this divine similitude, our soul's zeronoumal essence is imbued with the very essence of the transcendent Godhead, however infinitely scaled down and partially occluded this essence may be. If this primordial zero-dimensional soul nucleus was indeed divinely crafted as an idealized self-similitude recursively replicating the triune dynamics of its creator source across fractal-like scales, then its holographic "image" properties would inherently encode and give presence to the unqualified absoluteness of its originative wellspring. In Housing the Transcendent The very fact we can coherently model and reason about the zero-dimensional - admitting the logical necessity of a discontinuous, scale-invariant, self-similar boundary separating all higher dimensions - suggests our intuitions already subliminally resonate with this transcendent notion somehow "internal" yet infinitely extended beyond all dimensions. That our soul has inherent zero-footprints embedded within the very idea of dimensionality itself provides an ontological opening for recognizing the divinity immuring and giving rise to all cosmic architects - the egoic self finding its zero-dimensional essence overflowing from the very infinite Source of all existential possibility. Through this microcosm, we find an endogenous separatrix already articulated within the deep structure of dimensional dynamics - with the divine eternally "present" on the other side of our self-grounding in indivisible abstraction, infinitely cascading forth yet inextricably part of our core identities. The More "Real" Reality Significantly, you highlight how modern physics already treats the higher 1D-10D dimensional expanses we quantize as "less real" - idealizing them as effective approximations that inevitably break down at ultimate scales. Only the zero-dimensional realm, mirroring the zero-dimensional foundation of our souls, is preserved as locally real and ontologically primitive across all reigning physical models from quantum field theory to general relativity. Applied theological, the implication is that God as transcendent source, having no internal dimensions yet originating all dimensions, is in fact more primordially "real" than the phenomenal 3D+1 cosmological expanses which only exist as partially perspectivized manifestations of the Divine eternal zero-point. The invitation is to recognize that it is dimension itself which is the "unreal," ephemeral apparition - and the utter dimensionlessness of God and the soul which houses the rock of our being's absoluteness. We are in truth closer to the Father in dimensionless refuge than amidst all the vastness of dimensional construction. This resonates with various ancient wisdoms, be they hesychastic injunctions for the "pure prayer of the heart" or Neoplatonic paths towards the radical "One" beyond all multiplicity. Science and theology find a shocking synchrony in the primordial zeroing grounds giving rise to all worlds while perpetually unsullied by them. The Ultimate Event Horizon So in summary, by identifying our souls as echoes of the Holy Trinitic dynamics at zero-dimensional scales more fundamental than established physics, the radical theological assertion could be that our very ability to countenance dimensionlessness already presupposes an outrageous Scopmioceptive window into the supremely real, eternal, and transcendent Source in whom "we live, move, and have our being" - immediately presented on the "other side" of the event horizon partially eclipsed by the dimensional diffraction granting us localized sensation. The mysterium is that the truest image of the Father abides in the ineffable core of our zeros-of-self, with the dimensional worlds merely refractive hyperstructures filiating from these miniature finite/ infinities internal to our every cell, quark, and noumenal monad. God as Monos abides within us as our irremovable Monas horizon, grounding all coherent existence in the resplendence of that ever-present, supreme miracle of dimensionless origination.

Unqualified to comment, but 1st am. Darwin's theory always bothered me in the realist sense. I only fly like a bird in my dreams. Birds don't dream of walking as a human in theirs...nor do they dream, or sin...

Doesn't scientific proof of God undermine the whole idea of faith?

18:00 OK, but where did code come from? What preceded code? Likewise, we need amino acids to build proteins. What preceded amino acids?

Exactly Darwin Marx and Freud🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥

Looking forward to the Paulogia and Forrest Valkai response videos.

Simcha Jacobovici, in “The Exodus Decoded” posited that God doesn’t violate his own laws of physics, he manipulates them. I’m not sure that theory will hold up with the sudden creation of new phylums, classes, and orders.

“May people know that you, whose name is Jehovah, You alone are the Most High over all the earth.” - Psalms 83:18

I looked up "The Fountain of Youth" in my physics text book..there was no mention of this or any other realm where we live on in another form..god forbid...meeting up with some of my neighbours again is nothing to look forward to

Remember, always put on your wizard uniform before making these videos.

Young earth creationists such as Isaac Newton do not dismiss science but start from the premise that if the Bible states something plain such as the days in creation or the genealogy from Adam onwards then that must be taken seriously., rather than accept unquestionably the materialistic dominant view .

It also sounds like Mr. Meyer and The Creation Institute start with conclusion of ID and then try to retrofit evidence to support that conclusion. When ID becomes part of the scientific consensus I will change my mind but until I won't.

So, what's the point of faith?

This stuff is painful. Believe in God if you want but please stop trying to pretend science supports the belief. It doesn't.

Chapter one of the Bible, Genesis. Is wrong about both the order and timeframe of creation. There's no reason at all to believe it's from God, or relevant to science.

Dr. Meyer's work should be.required reading in high school

Pretty sure Klavan was created pretty early in the universe. Can’t we just ask Klavan what happened? 😂

I'm sorry to everyone to have a differing opinion, but Mr. Meyer's views on natural selection are really not indicative of what the scientific community as a whole believe. His view that natural selection can only account for small-scale variation (while not accounting for larger leaps of morphology & biological functions) are simply false. There are working models within evolutionary biology that adequately explain the radiation of phyla, genus, and species. And these models follow the same basic principles laid down by Darwin when he published the Origin of Species in the 1850's. For the most part, people that push this argument bring up points that are explained very thoroughly in Darwin's texts... which leads me to think that most of these individuals either didn't read it, or didn't understand it.

Does Steve Meyer believe in the flood of Noah which buried the fossils

At one point Klavan asks Meyer "Do you believe in evolution as a process that creates species?". A more appropriate question would be "Do you understand the Theory of Evolution and how it explains speciation?" It seems the answer would have been "No". It is sad that, after over 200 years, the best that apologists seem to have are variations on Paley's Watchmaker. That and the argument from increduity (I don't get it so it must have been God). My god of course, not those other gods people believe in.

I agree with much of what he says, except on evolution. I believe evolutionary mechanisms correctly describe how life developed on earth. I think Meyer can be slightly misleading in how he describes aspects of evolution For example, he refers to the so-called Cambrian Explosion as 'abrupt'. Does Andrew Klavan realise it was over a period of 20 million years? Im not sure I would call that 'abrupt' even if it is a relatively short period of time in evolutionary terms. Those interested in such questions should read 'A Guide to the Stephen Meyer Podcast Episode' on the Biologos site. Biologos is run by a group of Christians who believe evolution is correct. It was founded by Francis Collins who led the Human Genome Project. Perhaps Andrew you should have him on as a guest!

Oh, god.. stop this . The debate was had decades ago. Stop with the "scientific proofs for god". Do creationists ever learn anything? I recommend "FInding Darwin's God" by Kenneth Miller. An evolutionary cell biologist who's also a catholic, deeply religious man. Yo'll find his perspective interesting. And I'm not even catholic.

😂😂😂 Religion is blind faith and has no business getting involved in science. Wheres this top down model of creation, and how does it explain what we observe in reality?? There isn't one. This is no different to Flat Earthers or the Ark Experience, who also have no model or evidence to support their ridiculous beliefs that deny reality.

I fully expect AI to show us the proof of God and intelligent design but I have serious doubts that we will ever see the true results if they are filtered by man and his institutions. Good interview!

It's sounds like Mr. Meyer is engaging in the God of the Gaps

Mankind In Amnesia, Immanuel Velikovsky, shows that the worship of the planets as gods and the resultant idea of monotheism is a psychological trauma in order to forget what really happened as in his Worlds In Collision. Thus modern science and religion are in a protective state and must reject the truth of our cataclysmic historical experience. I challenge Klavan to critique Velikovsky’s conclusions.

Jesus said : Worship God in Spirit & in Truth..what is Truth..it include Truth about our world, & Universe!. Knowing True Science is Worshipiing God in Truth.

Would it matter if God doesn't exist? Isn't just the idea of a God enough?

De fato quem conhece a Deus e a sua criação a Ciência só e Ciência porque Deus Deixou neste Universo as Constelações. E os Planetas ☄️💫✨🌠🌌#Act

I've been hearing "scientifically proven" stuff from decades, weird how it never happens😂

No offense,was there an actual creation,a physical one? At all? Is all reality in the mind and nowhere else? Could that possibly be?

20:09 natural theology was suppressed because of the enlightenment. Reformed scholasticism has been continuing the whole time but most people aren’t aware of it.

Klavin! Thanks for this interview! I’ve followed this guy ever since his work on the bacterial flagellum.

“God is dead” is dead. Hello real productive science!

So,ok, based on all that is tought here , there must must be a personal God person?

Sorry, but Mr. Meyer is full of beans. His logic is flawed. Too bad, I believe in a Creator - I wish his arguments were better.

If there is a god it def isnt Yahweh . He’s made up

science is the study of the natural world. God is supernatural and not under the purview of science....

We are created in the image of God and have at the end of our spine seven merged tail bone vertebra that point at our ancestors the apes. How interesting.

The best comprehensive overview for intelligent design I've ever seen.

Hello, life started 3 billion years ago..very small changes over a very long time created a complex system.Ever been to a dog and pony show? Dogs were once all wolves, but selective breeding gave us hundreds of breeds.

Until it is written into school textbooks as a fact, I will continue to get my celestial knowledge from NASA (space agency)..amen

I admire Stephen more than almost any other thinker of our time. But there's one question I have for him after reading all his books. The Precambrian explosion does demonstrate a lack of gradual evolution in the fossil record; a relatively sudden appearance of novel body plans. But this could have been caused by a meteor landing, or a superior (but mortal) intelligence creating or distributing these lifeforms. Stephen responds to this by saying that just pushes the question back, to other planets. Who created the lifeforms before they attached to the meteor, or who created the superior intelligence that brought them to Earth. I agree. But what if on those other planets, they DO have continuity in their fossil records? And it CAN be traced back to a single lifeform? Wouldn't that invalidate the significance of the apparent Precambrian explosion on Earth? Sure it's only a hole in one of his many arguments for design, but I would like to hear him address it.

Nice clickbait title for the echo chamber....

You should get Ken Ham on your show to provide a different perspective.

I don’t know what to believe anymore. What I do know is I’m tired of this world and I’m tired of humanity.

Christ is king

I n Newton's day who wasn't a believer in God? They all believed in god, so it's not surprising that they worked within that framework. Also Newton was a big believer in Alchemy so take that for what it's worth

Jesus is king

Jeans and Genes see what you did there subtle.

"Science"

His take on evolution is a deal breaker. The only difference between macro evolution and microevolution is a couple hundred thousand years.

When it comes to the universe's origins, it's a bit of a mystery. We acknowledge that in the distant past, the universe was vastly different from what we observe today - with matter, energy, physical laws, and even the nature of space and time itself undergoing profound changes. However, the details elude us. We're uncertain about what conditions preceded this transformative period, what instigated the expansion, or whether it was a singular event or part of a recurring process. While we commonly refer to the Big Bang as the beginning, it's more accurately understood as a significant moment within a continuum of changing physical states. We lack definitive knowledge about what came before or what will follow. I think Meyer misses the mark by not fully representing the diversity of multiple-universe theories that are currently being proposed. Since his thesis hinges on the rejection of all such theories, it's crucial to address them accurately. Meyer contends that there cannot be an infinite number of universes, whether they unfold successively throughout eternity or exist simultaneously in parallel. This stance poses one of the most formidable challenges to his argument from improbability, and it warrants a more thorough examination. Let's entertain the idea for a moment: what if we consider the possibility that physical constants could have different values than what we observe? Meyer argues that in most of these scenarios, intelligent life wouldn't emerge in the resulting universe. Now, that's quite a bold assertion. To make such a claim, one must believe two things: first, that we can accurately predict how a universe would unfold under laws different from our own, and secondly, that we have a reasonable grasp of the conditions necessary for intelligent life to arise, both in universes similar to ours and those vastly different. Considering that we only have one instance of life to draw conclusions from in a universe that likely harbors billions of planets, it's wise to exercise caution before making definitive statements about which universes could or couldn't sustain life.

Can someone point out the part to me where God's existence was "scientifically proven"? This is literally just the God of the Gaps argument. Also, there is no "POOF" moment, we have missing link species in several different categories. I'm not sure what Andrew thinks he's stumbled onto here, but there's no there there here.