A god can be anything you like. When you need an imaginary friend, you can give them any attributes you want them to have. The scary part is how so many people want a Sado-Masochistic relationship with their imaginary sky god.

Many thanks to Dr. Craig and everyone involved in this project. We will all benefit greatly from your knowledge and efforts.

Wow!! I love this. God bless you immensely 🙏❤️✝️

great vid; deserves more views

Thank you for all you do, Dr. Craig! God bless 🙏

I had no idea Dr. Craig had his own video series until now. Been watching his debates with atheists for a couple years. Dr. Craig is a beautiful mind with a sugar cookie of a soul. I'd love to meet him some day.

Beautiful, in order to know God we must know about God. Lovely. His greatness is unsearchable!

God is in control of all things from beginning to end Amen 🙏

The cleverest funniest most loving & knowledgeable person you'll ever know. Relatable yet perplexing. Forgiving yet just. Loving yet firm in His righteousness. On high. Awesome. The greatest. Ever.

Excellent video Dr Craig

Love it. 👍

Beautiful

Thank you so much for this video! I just sent it to my junior high Biblical Worldview class to watch and discuss next week. Thank you for this ministry and for making truth accessible and reasonable for young people to understand.

Craig been coming out with some bangers... haha

I think the Christian Mystics were correct in thinking God has more incomprehensible characteristics than we can imagine. We only know a very small amount about God. The ancient mystic, Angelus Silesius, wrote "The Cherubic Wanderer" that reads like Christian Zen koans. Female Christian mystic, St.Hildegard Von Bingen wrote mystical chants she called "Hymns of Ecstasy".

God trained me for 6 months, I should be helped but God says he can't get anyone to help, he said he will begin nuking the earth if no one will help

An utopic concept is like the super heroes of antique mythology, and nowadays mythology. Isis Osiris Dionysus, and Flash Super man, Batman Harry porter respectively.

Who can do many things but simply does not do all they can do? Our unwillingness to do as others want us to do may mean we are dead to them, but certainly it does not mean we do not exist.

Is it possible for God to make a reality in which there is free will and yet no suffering?

Isn't this a reupload?

A perfect God must have - to the maximum- such qualities as omnipotence, omniscience, self-existent, sovereign, and so on BUT it is by no means logically necessary to include attributes such as goodness, love, mercy, kindness, etc. We could replace the second set of attributes with their antonyms and still call the entity perfect since they are not objectively decidable unlike the attributes in the first category.

Can someone please share some best resources to learn Christian philosophy. Thank you!

Surely, you understand that the problem of the rock too heavy for God to lift is in the term, "all-powerful." Like the terms eternal and all-knowing and supernatural, we have no experience of them whatever. We cannot define them, we cannot discover them, we cannot employ them in thought experiments without results that are contradictory and absurd and inconsistent and incoherent--all terms which are easily defined and employed.

The Rock analogy..God can create an infinitely heavy rock,and lift it

God is not a being with attributes....God IS those attributes.

Now if God’s nature is such that He is obligated in such a way that He MUST foreknow as absolutely certain how everything will come to pass whether He wants to foreknow it as certain or not then to what extent can God freely choose to make changes to the future? To what extent then can God freely make decisions at all and to what extent can God freely choose to make a truly brand spanking new decision? If He were to make a change to the future He would naturally experience a change in His knowledge for He would go from knowing that although things were going to happen one way they ended up happening a different way due to the changes He made. Problem is that closed theism theology denies that God can experience changes in His knowledge so therefore the future that He faces is a future that He is stuck with and cannot make changes to. Therefore He does not rule sovereign over a future that He can make changes to but rather a fixed and written in stone future that He cannot make changes to rules sovereign over Him. The price to be paid for making exhaustive definite foreknowledge of absolutely everything an obligation that God faces is that we end up with an all- knowing finite deity who is still finite even though He is all-knowing due to the fact that He cannot decide anything and is therefore no better off with the knowledge that He has than He is without it. A finite all-knowing cosmic fate machine who can only do only what He always knew He would do and cannot avoid doing any of the things He always knew that He would do. It is certainly not the belief that we have free will that drives me into the arms of open theism. Rather it is the belief that the all-powerful and sovereign and truly perfect God that we pray to that He has a free will of His own to freely make His own decisions that drives me into the arms of open theism.

It’s interesting how the Hebrew god has evolved over the last 3000 years. From the god of the Hebrews in a world filled with gods. Where he didn’t know everything and was just above us, peering down from the white peep holes in the night sky. To the god of everyone, who knows everything and exist outside space and time.

If God is perfect does that mean he doesnt make mistakes? When the bible says God regretted making humans before the flood, does that mean God made a mistake? Doesnt regret follow after a mistake? Maybe I have fundamental misunderstanding of the word regret.

I'd be interested to know how other people can reconcile perfection and creation. For me, a pre-existent perfect being would not want to create anything because perfection had already been achieved by its very nature. A perfect, pre-existent being would look at itself and immediately revel in its blissful state eternally. Surely, only a being with emotional frailties or some other weakness would choose to make a world that would lead to it having unpleasant feelings such as wrath, jealousy and regret.

I think God is even beyond what us conceivable and is in fact able to act beyond the laws of nature and logic that we know. Just think of how an optical illusion can sometimes even make you lose your footing, imagine if it was a reality bending revelation. We would likely break. We are not made to comprehend some things. I have seen arguments for God taking a rest day after creation as proof that He is limited. I say there is deeper meaning to the rest, and not a necessity of God. He made things that were good, and in resting He also added the goodness of rest to the world. Resting is good. It is balance and it is above all enjoyable. It is a gift from God that He himself enjoys. We can all relate to this. God set things up in a way that in irder to interact with it He too follows the rules most of the time. Hence why He doesnt just snap His fingers and eliminate sin. There is a purpose to the process. In fact, the purpose seems to BE purpose. Easily attainable things mean nothing. God however has set things up in a way where we grow organically. I believe this also explains why atonement means that Jesus had to die for us. There is weight to it but most importantly, without a process, there is no justice, no goodness, no mercy. To dismiss evil without concequence and call it mercy would be like printing money to pay a debt. It is meaningless, and God, being God, is responsable for giving purpose and meaning. It is in fact an important aspect of the creation process. God honors the gold standard that backs up His mercy through the blood of Christ. It would otherwise be a meaningless justice/mercy.

There are two issues on my mind to do with the character attributes of God which I am hoping will be well handled by William Lane Craig in this series and in the systematic theology he is working on. 1. When defining God's character attributes our definitions must not be oriented around us and our sin. God existed before there were human beings - before there was sin in the world. With that in mind what does it mean when for example we say that God is merciful? How was God's mercy expressed before there were human beings and before there was sin? Only when we can answer this can we know if we rightly understand God's mercy in the context of us and our sin. Let me hold myself to the standard I just sought to impose on others by attempting to define the mercy of God without the definition being oriented towards human beings and their sin. I believe that the mercy of God is God's ensuring that the way in which he affirms his own character doesn't ultimately defeat his own welfare - due to the maintenance of his own welfare also being an essential element of his character. 2. I am hoping that William Lane Craig will show that the following three principles which are provable from scripture and which are widely accepted in the church concerning God and his character leads to a fourth (listed below) which is certainly not widely accepted - which is certainly not well understood. (I wrote to William Lane Craig about this issue and unfortunately didn't receive a reply - and yet I cannot imagine a theological issue more important than the one I about to outline): - Each one of God's character attributes is unchanging (Heb 13:8) - God is unified of character - his attributes of character are never in conflict with each other - God acts only under the influence of his own unchanging character (he would otherwise be a less than optimumly great god). So for example he never responds to someone's suffering only on the basis that they suffer. And he does not answer prayer except in circumstances which are not inconsistent with his character/will. So then - to the point that I don't believe is well understood - if the above three principles are true it should lead us to the conclusion that there is only one possible MOTIVE for ALL of God's actions. It therefore cannot for example be right to talk about BOTH God's restorative justice - and his retributive justice - since that implies that the motives for God's justice vary. To see what the single unchanging motive for all of God's actions is we only need to look to the cross - where we find out that the ultimate aim of God's justice is ALWAYS to if possible create the circumstances in which it is possible to open a path to offering a person mercy (I say if possible because God respects free will - the cross doesn't seek to erase the fact that someone may choose to exercise their freedom to refuse to know God). Not only is God's justice only restorative - so is his holiness, his mercy, and his grace. What about God's vengeance (for example see Nahum 1)? Isn't this his retributive justice - isn't this God 'paying people back'? No - God's vengeance is his HOLINESS. Whenever we see examples of God expressing his holiness we must interpret such passages in a way that is consistent with God AT ALL TIMES acting restoratively - unless all possibility of restoration is extinguished. God never allows his holiness to extinguish the possibility of restoration if the possibility exists. If I am right then it is wrong to think of God as love only up to the point when he becomes fully and finally angry with someone. "God is love until he gets angry" is a pretty good definition for an abusive father. And if I am right hell must be a necessary doctrine to preserve instead of contradict the love of God. We already know in scripture that while God delights in his justice (Psalm 37:28) this does NOT mean that God delights in the punishment of the wicked - but rather that the wicked should turn to him and live (Ezekiel 33:11). In Lamentations 3:31-33 we read that when God punishes he does not afflict 'FROM THE HEART'. However this does not completely explain how the eternal nature of hell relates to God being love and ONLY love. To explain how it does let me point out that God's love is HOLY. This means that it isn't enough for God only that HE show love - he wants love to be everywhere - he wants it to reign - God believes in the absolute necessity of love - as part of his unlimited love for his own character. God has an unlimited love for love. The logical corollary of this is that God has unlimited hatred for all that is freely, knowingly, and wilfully opposed to love - evil. If hell was not an expression of God's UNLIMITED hatred for evil - it would be the same as saying that God's love for love was limited - which would imply that there might be a point in eternity where God's love for love would run out - a horrific thought. (This is true while at the same time hell is NOT eternal punishment for sin - but rather punishment for eternal sin - people go on sinning and therefore go on being punished - the sin is eternal - not the punishment - or otherwise hell would contradict God's restorative justice. Although I cannot prove this from scripture no-one can prove the other view - that hell is eternal punishment for sin - we can only prove that hell is punishment for sin - and that hell is eternal. However only hell being punishment for eternal sin is consistent with God's restorative justice - and so this is the option we must choose without any other factors present). In conclusion our doctrine of hell must be consistent not just with God's holiness - but also with his justice.

God is the only logical and reasonable way to explain the existence of the whole contingent reality, it means the existence of the entire Universe.

How if God can lift the rock, he can't be all powerful?

Since omnipresence is an attribute that indicates Divinity, that leads one to ask: what observable entity exhibits this attribute? The answer is clearly The Universe. Hence Pantheism.

God has many wonderful attributes but there are only 3 declarations of His being, His essence. He is love, He is light, and He is life. These are nouns that define God and not adjectives that speak about Him. If we really want to know what God is like, simply read 1 Corinthians chapter 13 and His essence, (agape), is plainly described.

W rizz 👽👍

U said in 1 of ur video, without god life has no value and meaning. I would like to point out if u have infinity amout of something it worthless. Why would the life o Earth matter if u live forever after that? That makes the life on Earth super meaningless. Living forever without changing and progress is the hell itself. Also a god wont use a book to communicate with ppl. He would be able o speak to every one, he wot use abook to limit himself by languange and borders.

So essentially "Perfect Being Theology" is what humans made up about God.

actor Fernando Colunga Isaiah 9:6 i sentenced you craig extinct megadeth - countdown to extinction revelation 20:12

To the atheists: What are you talking about, "Where is God"? God is everywhere. He is firstly present in the voice of your mother while you are still in the womb. He then is present in the care of your parents, then in the shelter of your home and protection of your loved ones. He then is present in the multiple layers of society that offer a sense of control and protection to calm down the anxieties of the ego. Then, he is present in multiple reasoning offered to explain unknown phenomena. He is present in the figure of a president, of a teacher, of a doctor. He is present at the gym, in a healthy diet. He is then present in the hospital, at your dying bed, in the form of medicine, and finally, he is present in the form of God, when ALL OTHER FORMS of sense of control have failed. He then is God. We need God, because we are too small to be without "God".

Mute, Invisible, Made-up, Pretend.... that about sums it up!

Dr Craig does seem a little preoccupied with ‘punishments’. I find this odd in the context of this videos theme as he is asserting that knowing God’s nature is key to understanding theology. That being the case, as the bible says ‘God prefers mercy to sacrifice’. Apart from being our creator, one of the core aspects of God’s nature is that he is a loving parent. Loving parents may punish as a form of correction, but they do not punish just for the sake of punishment itself. That would be revenge. And to suggest that God would ‘punish’ an innocent party in Jesus for the sins of others would imply that God feels some need to dish out punishment and doing so takes priority over who gets the punishment. What would you think of a person who feels wronged and wants to punish the wrong doer but is unable to instead asks an innocent person to put him or herself forward to be punished so the punisher can feel satisfied? That would not be justice, that would be injustice, petty and vindictive. Someone bearing suffering and making a sacrifice that is unavoidable in order to help or save someone is reasonable when there is no other way. But that is not a punishment, it is just a practical necessity. The word forgive is old English and it means to ‘give up’. The wronged party, in this case God, forgives us by giving up his resentment, anger or hurt. It does not mean a price has to be paid. That would not be ‘giving’. God offers his reconciliation with we fallen children freely. Just as the story of the prodigal son shows. In that parable, no one had to be punished. Jesus being murdered was a tragedy not a required human sacrifice that God demanded in order to forgive us. This is just an idea that was theologically ‘retconned’ after the fact and Old Testament phrases were repurposed to come in line with this. For example ‘he must be pierced for our transgressions’. Well, did Jesus not describe a process of salvation being that we are branches of an evil, sickly tree and we must detatch from it and engraft ourselves to the healthy, holy tree of life that is Jesus? How do you think ‘actual’ engrafting of shoots onto other plants or trees is done? The healthy, host tree is pierced to make a wound for the engrafting branch to connect and fuse to. But this phrase ‘pierced’ was re-taslked to mean the crucifixion. When Jesus was asked what the will of God is, he was unequivocal his answer. It was ‘that you believe in him who was sent’. Jesus did not answer ‘that you murder me’. God seeks to save us and sometimes that process is difficult or even painful. But ‘punishment’ is not a necessary component of the salvation. And in any case, those born with an inherited spiritual condition are not guilty of being so and so substitutive punishment doesn’t even make any sense. Check out my KZfaq channel where I will be giving more talks on these matters.

Imaginary

you lost me completely when you cited the bible. it's circular reasoning for the nonbeliever. not a good first axiom, just preaching to the choir. study nature to learn the attributes of the mind or minds behind it. everything else bears the mark of human contrivance.

I have read the OT and even if the Christian god does exist, I would not want to worship him. His attributes are dictatorial and petty. It's not justice for the use of a scapegoat to take the punishment for someone else. All powerful? ... what has the Christian god done recently that is an example of his almighty power? The title of this video is misleading as I didn't really find out much about god's personality, character or his preferences. Just a load of high-level adjectives relating to his supposed attributes.

Like nothing anyone has ever seen, simply because it has no evidence of ever being in existence

Low Bar Bill, at it again. Wishful thinking out the wazoo. Lower the epistemic bar, believe against 1 in a million odds, worth believing as long as any evidence exists at all -- because the narrative sounded nice to Lil Billy and he hasn't dared to risk cognitive dissonance or thinking about it ever since.

Hello - The One in the Centre, the Core of All, is the Universe of GOD Himself. Around are the circles of the other Universes, ours being the Twelfth and Last. In the Heart of the Twelve Universes dwells Father/Mother GOD Himself, being the SUN in His Universe. All the Universes are experiments from the first to the last. The Twelve Rays/Sons beginning with Jesias are the Adept Archangels in their own Solar Planes. GOD sleeps during the Nights of Brahma. Only the Spirit of the Universe still breathes as IT has always done from time immemorial. At the new Day of Brahma, being the so-called next Big Bang, all are again awakened for a new Round of existence. Blessings - RevDrD/Ministry

Allah is the only true god. God is not a man. God is one without partner.

The real God is Allah. He is unique and no one is like him. The supreme and absolutely one and eternal. There is nothing like him. He is one but not three. Understanding one is more comprehensive than understanding God as three which is complex and concluded it can never be understood.