Well, when you don't have any arguments left intact from the video you're responding to your only option is to attack the person who made the video in the hope that your fans will be distracted from the ruins of your argument.
@daniel letterman Being generation w (preceding generation x), I self-observe strong motherly feelings for the Gen-X-Avatar and somehow grandmotherly inclination towards millennial little Paulie. My feelings for the un-avatared WLC, however, are mixed: part of me wants to turn away in disgust, the rest of me stares in fascination, how self-assured bias can stroll along...
Yeah, because nothing proves an argument like an irrelevant attack on the irrelevant artistic merit of an irrelevant avatar. And they really tore you apart there! Burn! 😏
Dear Paul Ens, as someone with a PhD, my humble opinion is that you are most definitely NOT nobody. Thank you again for your content and the depths of work and analysis you put into them.
Hear! Hear! Paul's work consistently shows very well thought out and reasoned ideas. The fact that he has no formal degree in philosophy, theology, or any related matter just shows that its is possible for anyone to apply reason and logic to ideas and come to reasonable logical answers. You dont need a PhD to understand logic. You don't need a PhD to be someone. And most of all, having a PhD says says one thing and one thing only - You have a PhD. It does not guarantee the depth, or accuracy of your knowledge.
Russell Cohen What you said about Paul is definitely true, but getting a PhD is no walk in the park (unless you’re Kent Hovind). I’d say that Paul is super smart and definitely PhD material.
Yes. He is the Bernie Madoff of apologetics. I was aghast when WLC pretended incomprehension of how any educated Christian could be unaware that dinosaurs lived millions of years ago.
Heh, slowpoke.jpg... Guy has always been considered a clown in scholarly/philosophical circles. He's one of those people who are frequently cited by amateurs and lay-people, but may as well not exist as far as academic discussions are concerned. Craig has not made a significant contribution to the philosophy of religion, despite being at it for quite some time now.
He has to be. If i remember correctly he is under contract to lie for Jebus. Just like the people under AIG. Though they call it their "doctrinal statement".
@@merkkila5033 This was something I just assumed that his PhD is just window dressing of his lies, damned lies and more damned lies. His, and other Christian Apologists, entire goal is to obfuscate the facts to confuse but definitely not to illuminate the actual truth.
I like how the more of these apologist videos I see the more I realize they all fall into the same sorts of tricks be it there word choice or cadence the pauses and sounds they make, change the accent and he could be Ken Ham or Kent Hovind
I’m so proud of you Paul. Not only did you knock Mr. Lane’s ego out of his head, you clearly exposed his bias. His belittling you is a cheap trick to set the stage for his listeners. “Don’t even think of looking into this guy’s claims, he’s just some ‘gen-x’ TH-camr”. The fact he felt the need respond to your response of his video shows the world that your arguments are compelling. You truly shined in this video and I can’t wait to see the next one.
It's amazing how specious Craig's rhetorical gymnastics seem to be when they're countered by rational, researched and considered arguments. If anyone is intimidated by slick, empty apologetics then they might still find this showman to be impressive, but most of us can see him for the charlatan he actually is.
I expected WLC, and what I got was a train wreck that wasn't even interesting. So hey, I win again. Apologists are so much easier to predict than flat Earthers are. I always underestimate the stupidity of that bunch of lunatics, but with apologists I know what they're going to say before I even know they exist. It's amazing how WLC can still have any sort of audience. No bang, no flame, not even sparks. A child could find more amusement out of a wet brick. It's no wonder he had to get voice-overs from foreigners, he probably can't afford a) local b) talent.
If Yahweh is impeccable he does not need a son to correct his mistakes. The story of Jesus is a red herring. Bill missed the boat and is misleading himself and his audience down a path that leads nowhere.
@@EdwardHowton WLC's target audience is people who desperately *want* to be told that God is real. They'll never hear any of Paulogia's words except what Bill carefully selects for them. With them, he has no reason to be embarrassed.
@jursamaj Well, I don't know about that. Craig's hype man made the mistake of actually saying Paulogia, which gives them a chance of googling correctly. Most apologists I've seen completely refuse to name the people they're ineptly attempting to ridicule, or at least spell the name wrong to make it impossible to find them. Like when Kent Hovind's knob-polisher called him up when he was in prison and mentioned a guy called "Logiced" and meant Logicked. WLC is inept and breeds ineptitude, so his failure to hide reality might work against him for one or two of the less unclever sheep in his flock of gullible idiots. I mean, sometimes you win the lottery.
@Bob Smith I've never understood why people like you a) can't comprehend what a religion is, and b) think that painting atheism as a religion does your cause any good.
WOW! A complete, and point by point evisceration of Craig's 'claims' by Paulogia. Kudos to Paulogia for A.) Not letting Craig get away with his ad hominem distraction-fest and B.) Defeating each point Craig makes when he FINALLY moves onto Paulogia's substantive arguments. This is an impressive example of a so-called "Student" schooling a so called "Master" when uncovering truth and calling out bullshit is the ultimate goal. 👈👏🤙
Craig's entire argument, his lectures, debates and books all begin with an unproven assumption (the existence of an eternal creator god) and ending with his own faith, (I believe). The only part that's missing is the presence of his star witness.
@@CJ-sw8lc no, but I listened to the entire video before commenting on it. And I've listened to numerous WLC presentations and debates and they were more than enough to understand his arguments. Why on earth would I read ALL of his books? 📚🤔
@@davidlenett8808 I was replying to a comment underneath :) I'm not exactly sure that listening to a debate IS enough to understand someone's arguments. I'm not sure there's enough time for that, but I'm glad you feel you heard enough to draw a conclusion that satisfies you (no sarcasm - I mean it)!
The very fact that Craig feels it necessary to mock Paulogia ( and he does this badly ) clearly shows his nervousness at the veracity of what Paul has to say. Paul's destruction of Craig's comments is pure brilliance.
When I was an apologist-in-training, I read widely - but WLC was revered as the peak of Christian philosophy. I spent years working my way up until I felt like I was ready for the "best." I never got to the point that I felt I was good enough for his books. That is the level of legend that I had for him. Now I see that this was a cloak of prestige he built around his reputation - his actual intellectual honesty is embarrassing.
I’m a former Christian as well and I’ve never understood why WLC has always been held in such high regard. I think the guy is intellectually dishonest and I think he’s incredibly arrogant.
@@jacoblee5796 My honest opinion is that his prestige in the apologetics circle was based on his books being the biggest. As an everyday Christian- you don't see a lot of long books on theology outside of a seminary setting. And other pastors/apologists are happy to swing another big book around to make their point (whether they have read or understood it is a different matter).
ches haII never been a beIiever, ever, s0 the wh0Ie christians having difficuIty "c0ming 0ut" as it were was a new c0ncept t0 me when I started I00king at what christians were saying I was appaIIed, they are s0 unc0nvincing craig is meant t0 be 0ne 0f their best ???!!! I find his arr0gant "seIf attested feeIing" pr0ves his imaginary friend is reaI is Iike Iistening t0 an 0ver excited infant he has the0I0gicaI "quaIificati0ns" apparentIy, phd`s etc???!! phd`s in h0w t0 argue f0r y0ur imaginary friend he is inteIIectuaIIy dish0nest and by his 0wn admissi0n has n0 need 0f the0I0gicaI dipI0mas he has singIe handedIy d0ne m0re f0r atheism than m0st atheists 0Id "I0w bar " biII w0rst ap0I0gist ever
Oh, man. I could not wait for you to come out with this video! As a former creationist myself, I was so triggered by the way WLC criticized Paul. It's amazing how calm Paul is in his response, but he did take an appropriate amount of time to think about what to say.
I think affirmation of faith is exactly how a lot of people become an atheist. I spent years apologizing for my beliefs, and found quickly that I was trying to lie to myself more than convince my friends that I was in the one true faith. It was shortly after I realized that I was trying to convince myself more than my friends, that I quickly started losing my own faith. But that really came after I immersed myself in Christian literature and apologetics to affirm my faith, and it backfired. Best backfire in my life.
Obviously the Harry Potter books, movies, and games are independent sources, because they have different authors. And the seven books are independent, because, uh, they tell different stories. Yeah, that's it.
@@theconservativechristian7308 It's called _reductio ad absurdum._ I'm taking the form of Craig's argument, applying it to another situation, and reaching an absurd result. Thus the form of Craig's argument is invalid.
So I’m 2 years late to this video; I recently found your channel. As a former Christian myself I really appreciate the journey you’ve taken us on sharing your personal experiences. Also, Craig comes across like such a down punching douche bag. I appreciate the gracious way you purport yourself on your channel, challenge ideas-not unrelated personal details. Also your animation is great- I love animated Paul cheers from the PNW, US
I have been watching more videos on this channel lately. I am starting to realize now more than earlier how well they are put together. I have a HUGE amount of respect and appreciation for Paul.
Hehe! Is it a badge of honor to be on William's radar? Sure. Is it a complete and utter victory, that he feel he has to attack you personally as a prelude? Oh yes!
Even if we took this literally all you are saying is that somebody stole a dead corpse from a hole in the ground that does nothing to validate your religion nor prove that Jesus had any supernatural powers
@@bobreil7464 knowing the Romans, that poor itinerant rabbi, Yeshua, wound up rotting in a mass grave with all the other unfortunates who rubbed the Roman's the wrong way, so all the cultists had to do was make up a story and leave it to the telephone game effect to make it special
@@bobreil7464 knowing the Romans, that poor itinerant rabbi, Yeshua, wound up rotting in a mass grave with all the other unfortunates who rubbed the Roman's the wrong way, so all the cultists had to do was make up a story and leave it to the telephone game effect to make it special
Paul, as a fellow atheist, it pains me that they did not challenge your ideas first, and tried to frame you. Please continue doing what you are doing, it is really helpful!
This sort of combination condescension and ad-hominem attacks is what I have learned to expect from Christians. Despite having read the Bible more closely than most in my family and studying the history of the texts, my questions were always dismissed by them as being dishonest or naive, depending on their mood, and I was constantly advised to study the Bible harder to arrive at the “correct” conclusions. These days I don’t bother to engage with Christians unless they refuse to let me be.
Damn Paul. Your comment about being nobody brought me to tears man. While that’s not true at all, because you are most definitely someone displaying pure humbleness, I can relate to that feeling 100%. I discovered your page through Drew at GMS and I’m so thankful for both of you. Regardless of whatever anyone believes, both of you do a better job of showing fairness, kindness, and compassion than any of these Christian leaders. I’ve turned away from my faith as well, and while science and historic evidence are where I ground that belief, I also have to give credit where credit is due. I credit theists like these gentlemen (and Christians I grew up around, including my own close-minded parents) for confirming to me through their words and actions that I made the right choice. Thank you so much for your incredibly thorough work. You had my subscription before I even clicked the “skip ads” button. I’m looking forward to ripping through your entire catalogue. Keep up the fascinating work!
A well done, level-headed, stay-on-point response to WLC's ad hominem-laced and weak arguments to Paul's video. Looking forward to WLC's Part 2 and Paul's response.
Indeed it is and very entertaining too. I would compare it in this respect to Sean Carrols's debate with WLC. However I am not convinced that "rational" evidence based argument will have any effect on WLC or his followers. Don't stop doing what you do however!
It's quite a compliment that WLC and his lap dog came at you in the manner that they did. Tag teaming and leading with insults is not what I'd have expected from someone so supposedly esteemed as WLC.
I guess when you don’t have an actual argument, you waste the first 5 minutes of your video poisoning the well with ad hominems. WLC is such a dishonest huckster; the best Christian apologetics has to offer
When it is most of what you have in form of "argument", it is not really wasted ;-) From the point of view of Craig at least... From our view basically every Craig Argument is wasted time anyway.
As I explained several times before: Craig is fully aware of his doing, but his "feelings of the holy spirit" makes his mind dense here explains by TMM in a very short video: th-cam.com/video/Q78ahkiMtFk/w-d-xo.html That comes along why Craigs personal feelings and emotional attachment shall defeat reality _itself_ : th-cam.com/video/5S823FczC0k/w-d-xo.html Because when your mind shall be so dense that not 1 drop of reality shall sip into your mind and you just stay "closed minded" as possible to what you wish it shall be true - you shall be successful. ;-)
Typical apologist argument. "This piece of shit is name calling and making ad hominem attacks. You know he worships satan or else he wouldnt be an atheist!"
Who didn’t have ignorant beliefs in high school? I was the guy handing out AiG material 🤦♂️. Good to know I’ll be forever judged solely on the beliefs I had and level of education I had 16years ago.
I am a Christian of 15 years of age and I love to examine both sides. I am happy to be here and though this was a longer video than I bargained for, it really got into the niddy-giddy details which was unique compared to most non-Christian videos I examine. Though I hold strongly to the Bible being the Word of God, I come from a Greek Christian family that could never really answer my questions, so I sought to find answers and eventually concluded with Christianity after seriously questioning my faith. I was drawn into Young Earth Creationism because I focused more on Genesis and thought that the Young Earth Creation model best explained Christianity, but after 4 years of vigorous searching I began to see that Old Earth Creationism made sense, though my position has changed as time went on, my passion to study just about anything pertaining to the Bible has led me all over the place and even to this channel. Most might scoff at me which is fine, everyone has their own opinion, but either way I am happy to learn from the other side especially besides William Lane Craig as I have not always been particularly fond of his arguments (Even before coming to this channel) and enjoy learning.
@@Paulogia I'd say reputations necessarily require a consensus which is relatively widely/commonly accepted. It should depend on what most of a particular population thinks the reputation is. After seeing Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens both lead their respective debates with suggestions about how great a debater WLC is, and then seeing your, many other YTers debunks, as well as his own crap debate performance (which tends to require his opponent to counter VERY specific questions within VERY specific parameters which don't necessarily ACTUALLY apply to the debate agreed; basically he expects his opponent to follow the rules he writes in real time, then claims victory when they don't follow his rules), WLC has an unearned reputation of being a great debater IMO.
@@FGuilt The problem with debate format with Christians is they can fire off a load of crap that takes longer to debunk than the few minutes allowed for a response. That leaves the uneducated viewer seeing many claims left unanswered which the Christian then points to in claiming victory.
To attack another's credibility based on past ignorance has to be the most hypocritical response Craig could ever give. These types of Ad Hominem attacks are unacceptable in the scholarly world.
Well WLC has still not acknowledged the blatant mistakes he makes in "logically" thinking through his precious Kalam... especially the sleight of hand involved in the Non Sequitur to pretend that "we can be reasonably sure" leads in ANY way to a christian god as "proven". And that is only the killing blow to the argument, by far not the only illogical step made. As he presents it the argument is "if we presume the universe needs a creator we will to our astonishment find out it has got a creator (and I, William, can tell you his name)", which simply is ridiculous.
My mother believed in Jesus. Nothing could shake her faith. When I tried to introduce reason, she almost had a nervous breakdown. I left her alone after that.
Unless I'm mistaken, Craig sure seems to be equating the perfectly ordinary claims about the activities of Caesar and Alexander with the extraordinary claim that Jesus rose from the dead. Does he think that the standard of evidence for both kinds of claims is the same?
You are a great person, and the world is greater for having you in it. You make a lot of great arguments, and your work is so high quality I am astounded you don’t have hundreds of thousands of subs.
Not much of a show... Craig could somehow lose a fight against nobody. Actually, he often does, since he's constantly going after straw opponents and still makes a complete ass of himself. He even famously said his own argument for the existence of God was worthless. The "self-authenticating nature of the holy spirit" thing, remember that? You could strap Billy to a table and he'd still manage to kick his own ass. He's one of the least interesting, most incredibly overhyped apologists in the -business- scam.
I thoroughly enjoyed this video. Your humor and Frank honesty is what makes your channel so great. Honesty. I love, how you keep everything about the quality and honesty of the information you discuss. It is a pleasure to listen to.
Great job, Paul. Like some others, I had not encountered Craig's ad hominem side, and this was nothing but ad hominem. I had noticed his tendency to talk about what he wants to talk about, thus he talks about time frames rather than line content. On the whole, if I were him, this is not a fight I'd have picked. Oh, and for what it's worth, I'd say you come off as older than you are not younger, as Craig contended, and was pleased to see you are a quite young man who has done an awful lot of work. Lastly, Frank Jones is right. Where do we get the graphic novels?
@ScepticalCynic I am more familiar with Craig in a professional setting haven't used a few of his articles to teach philosophy of religion. Admittedly I usually use the articles to be up to the position he espouses, and those he at least maintains some appearance of intellectual honesty, but appearance is all.
So... their only response to your video was to attack you personally, and to talk about completely different things then the issues you brought up... guess that means you were correct on all points
Oh my goodness! I just discovered your channel and this the first video of yours that I've seen. Not even halfway through, I've subscribed to your channel and gave the video a thumbs up! I appreciate your dry humor and your witty and intelligent rebuttal of Craig's critique of your channel and content. I'm an elder GenX, cusp Baby Boomer, and was raised in an Evangelical household, and can relate closely to your position on young-earth/elder-earth philosophy, and had much the same experience you described as a teenager and young adult in my church and spiritual life. I would describe myself as a "Recovering Nazarene" and agnostic, when it comes to Christian faith. Thank you for your content.. Soon as I finish this video, I will be viewing many more.
(desire to know intensifies) Seriously, I love dinosaurs. Even if it's a dumb, holy-roller story he wrote when he was young, I really want to read Paul's Dino Comic.
bu-but the bibble was made by multiple autho-rs!! anonymous authors... with conflicting data... 100 years after the fact... all cherry picked by the catholic church... with no other secular source...
I'm an atheist tho. The comment is expanding on the joke in the title. You'll notice I said that WLC *wasn't* using facts or logic in a reversal of the "destroys x with facts and logic" Ben Shapiro titles
Hey! A picture of the The Long Room Of The Old Library At Trinity College in Dublin Ireland at 10:59! That Library was built in 1592! :) (I visited there. I am a library science student.)
It's like: Paul: "A and B are related in this way." WLC: _Point out some completely irrelevant aspect in which A and B are NOT related, and act as if this disproves Paul's point._ Paul: "X and Y are NOT related in this way." WLC: _Point out some completely irrelevant aspect in which X and Y ARE related, and act as if this disproves Paul's point._ Over and over and over. The focus on the tomb. The focus on authorship. The whole point of the Harry Potter analogy. I have a hard time believing this isn't an accident. It's so consistently done. It's surreal.
Your interaction with Craig's "preface" analysis of you is priceless. It reveals so much more than is actually being said. He is being destroyed before even presenting the issue at hand. Well done.
I've known about William Lane Craig for quite a few years and seen how he argues for things/debates, and I've only discovered your channel 2 days ago. Already I trust you as an honest minded-open-to-the-evidence debater and rational individual more than Craig.
"The way in which I know Christianity is true is first and foremost on the basis of the witness of the Holy Spirit in my heart and that this gives me a self authenticating means of knowing that Christianity is true wholly apart from the evidence and therefore if in some historically contingent circumstances the evidence that I have available to me should turn against Christianity I don't think that that controverts the witness of the Holy Spirit." - William Lane Craig "If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it?" - Sam Harris
Glad you guys shaked that illusions off. He appears to be smart, like any good conman does, but if you listen closely he only spews the same as any other christian does. WLC doesn't even know what independent source means. Etc.
I don’t know if it’s fair to equate intelligence directly with the reasoning output someone produces: maybe he’s not smart enough to consider hypothetically that he might be wrong, OR maybe he’s too bound up in his emotional need for his faith to be true to escape from motivated reasoning.
Paul’s talent for precise use of language is amazing. I bet he could be a brilliant lawyer and politician. Since I’m rather new to this channel I appreciated learning about his educational background and philosophical evolution.
Ah! When the second Paul started talking freaked me out a little, holy crap. Love the stuff buddy, I know this one is old but YT decided to show me now, and I'm much happier it did.
Paul, even if we never meet, if I ever met you face to face I would break down in tears over the strength you gave me to leave my religion and be rational. You are strong, incredible, and amazing. Don't let me sob on you it will be very messy.
A masterful exposition so clearly demonstrating the indisputable superiority of belief predicated on the process of rational analysis over belief predicated on acceptance of a collection of ancient stories.
WLCs voice alone immediately awakens my most base instincts that I am in the presence of a whole lotta BS that someone is trying to pretend is some shiny artifact by using overly flowery insincere faux intellectual language.
I appreciate everything you say, Paul. You're doing an incredible job. My father is a Baptist pastor and a trained geologist, yet he is a young earth creationist. So, I understand being indoctrinated to believe nonscientific claims. Thanks for being honest and vulnerable with your audience.
It still bothers me that these passages of Jesus’s resurrection come from the same book that says the earth is flat. Also a tyrannical Deity commands you kill a child if he disobeys his parents. I would be dead if I lived back then.
Not to mention the ritual killing of children. Which we tend to minimize because in the case of Abraham, the angel stopped him, but nothing is said of numerous other events where such intervention never happened, such as Judges 11, the conquered children of Jericho or the legend of the flood.
@@DoctorZisIN It sense to me that child sacrifice was a thing among the Israelites back then, reading between the lines. Other canaanite people get lambasted for sacrificing children to "Molech", but at he same time there are plenty of times where God has to specifically tell the Israelites *not* to sacrifice their children. The ritual oblation of first born seems to be an attempt to end a more murderous practice. Abraham never says "Wait, what? That's not what we do Lord" when commanded to kill Isaac. I'd be interested to know from proper OT scholars if there's more evidence for this.
@@simongiles9749 That is an interesting topic and one that disqualifies the Bible as a moral standard more so than any other. After all Canaanites and Israelites were basically the same people, family feuding over grievances, each inventing a mythology which made them the chosen people of God, but many barbaric practices were entrenched in their culture. So you see that contradiction in the bible where some authors seem to agree with the practice and others seem to find objection with it, both projecting their points on view onto God's will.
@@DoctorZisIN pressing on from your remarks, since archaeologists no longer take an Israelite Exodus from Egypt to be real, it only stands to reason that the Canaanites and Israelites are just a middle eastern version are the Hatfields and McCoys
I suspect he was going for a quick, easy, and decisive win against an uneducated (in his terms) and therefore defenseless and unknown atheist. Not uncommon in overconfident conmen. So happy to see this guy calmly and easily dismantled yet again. Thanks Paul
I’d love to introduce Craig to my dad. He’s been a preacher in a very conservative sect of Christianity for 30 years. He taught us that dinosaurs weren’t real, and those were whale bones that scientists said were dinosaurs, because they hate god and the Bible. I know almost a thousand Christians that believe this and preach this on a daily basis.
William Lane Craig doesn't know what many Christian church schools teach? It comes as a shock to his cohost that a Christian wasn't taught the religion's theology in detail?
Craig just exposes his own immature shallowness. He just shoots himself in the face over and over. Sadly, this same tactic of simply attacking the person who is challenging them is all too common. I get it constantly in debate groups. It's all they have when confronted with facts and sound reasoning. You do an awesome job, Paul.
I can understand why believers would do so, but who among atheists has mocked you for your former beliefs? I believe that we should have much more respect for former devout believers who had the mental acuity and strength to see through the lies, and overcome the programming that they underwent, than we have for people who have never believed. It's easy to be an atheist if you weren't taught to be a sheep.
My parents never talked about religion, so naturally, I became an atheist. I have great respect for believers who reason themselves out of their faith. Unfortunately, not all ex-believers are able to rid themselves of emotional stuff, like guilt, the idea to be a sinner, being not worthy, or keep longing for the comfort of someone caring and watching over them...
@@joined201010261347 The greatest thing I lost was the promise of eternal life in heaven which was an incredibly hard thing to give up. At the same time, Christians have been ingrained that hell is real and the fate of all those who reject God. So it's the carrot and the stick that keeps most believing. After I left Christianity, it was actually a relief not to have to live in a superstitious world where God and the Devil were watching me and to be truly free to let my reason guide me, not a need to defend my religion.
*Person A* "It is my opinion that the gods are a man made concept, that our ancestors used to explain events and the existence of the world for which they no understanding, and no possible way of understanding." "Looking at what they believed compared to what we currently understand, highlights just how incompatible there ideas are to what we have found in reality. And seeing as the being they claim created everything (who should know how it all works) supposedly revealed to them incorrect information that is demonstrably false and no closer to being correct then any other claims of other gods made by people of time, leads me to the conclusion that yes the gods are a man made fiction" Person B "See how badly dressed person a is, he is dressed like some kind of millennial weed smoking hipster, this should give you pause for thought, add to this the fact that the school person a attended is questionable, in ways that make my argument stronger, not to mention person a doesn't have a full understanding of what is being talked about, and I think you will agree that the only possible out come is that person a is misguided simpleton. The fact of the matter is no matter what evidence no matter what the argument *god did it* is the only possible answer that I will accept as an answer, because it's the answer I want"
I love you videos and ability to clearly express your arguments. Can you reorder your jesus resurrection playlist so we can more easily watch them in order?
@@MirandolinaAmaldin agreed. Aronra looked more scary than usual! Lol! No wonder no one wants to debate him, he looks like he could strangle someone! XD
"The Alexander the Great who crossed the Rubicon?" Surely you misspoke and meant Caesar. Fix this: don't give them ammo to claim you're ignorant. Also, WLC is insufferably smug. What a jerk!
My hypothesis for why Craig gets so emotional and testy with laypeople: he's acutely self-conscious of the fact that, despite having a Ph.D and being a published theologian, his arguments/reasoning are so slipshod and shallow that anyone with even the slightest capacity for critical reasoning is well-suited to absolutely destroy them, Ph.D or no. And he's got a point- if you have a Ph.D and are considered an expert, your arguments SHOULD be beyond laypeople to easily refute. And yet, his aren't, and thus his overly emotional/indignant reactions.
In science, we keep track of the uncertainties in our measurements. These uncertainties are rigorously tracked and combined in our final calculations. These "independent sources" seem rather speculative, to be _extremely_ generous. I wonder if anyone has bothered to keep track of all the "uncertainties" in the argument for the resurrection, and how large they become in the final conclusion.
Imagine that the guy who calls your former beliefs "braindead Christian faith“ now desperately tries to convince himself that God created Adam and Eve 750k years ago who then outbred the already existing human population which evolved naturally but probably didn’t have a soul yet.😂
Are you crazy? In fact, in the podcasts, I did not find any personal attack to this new atheist, another thing that Craig make a small reference to their past Christs of Paul, to say he had a faith hollow and it was incredible that never heard what a land of thousands of years. They well say that internet atheists as followers of these clowns dressed as scholars, are very stagnant academically (And this paragraph is a personal attack, but it's still true or distancing themselves from the low scholarship that many atheists have)
@@TheServantSlayer7 "Low Scholarship"?!, Hahaha Hi you must be new to these parts of the Internet. 👋😄 Most atheist here(not all of them naturaly, but a whole lot, both with and without channels of their own.) are quite learned actually. Nice attempt at strawmanning though, and yes Craigs comments at the start there were an underhanded attempt at poisoning the Well, and was indeed an attack on his character. It seems like it might have worked somewhat on you even, going by your comment were you assume falsely that's his faith was hollow. Paul explained clearly and calmly whatever Craig purposefully got wrong in Theirs strawman caricature of Paul, his beliefs and past. You can even go backwards through Pauls playlist and search up the video were he originally talks about his past and his thoughts on creationism dinosaurs etc. And see for yourself how wrongly Craig gets it(purposefully). Also if you find you have trouble finding the particular video, Justin contact Paul and hell point it out for you. Good day. 👌😁
@@Nilsy1975 Well, it's a little rushing to date typical straw men to Christians or religious in general. Otherwise, you didn't show because I didn't pay attention...
Not first!!!
WLC: "Let's respond to this video by ripping on the guy who made it. Including how his avatar was drawn. That'll be a killer argument."
That's why he went to school.
Well, when you don't have any arguments left intact from the video you're responding to your only option is to attack the person who made the video in the hope that your fans will be distracted from the ruins of your argument.
@daniel letterman Being generation w (preceding generation x), I self-observe strong motherly feelings for the Gen-X-Avatar and somehow grandmotherly inclination towards millennial little Paulie. My feelings for the un-avatared WLC, however, are mixed: part of me wants to turn away in disgust, the rest of me stares in fascination, how self-assured bias can stroll along...
Well, as you know, Billy Craig is a first-class philosopher. If you don't believe him, just ask him, and he'll tell you.
Over.
And over.
And over.
Yeah, because nothing proves an argument like an irrelevant attack on the irrelevant artistic merit of an irrelevant avatar. And they really tore you apart there! Burn! 😏
Dear Paul Ens, as someone with a PhD, my humble opinion is that you are most definitely NOT nobody. Thank you again for your content and the depths of work and analysis you put into them.
Hear! Hear! Paul's work consistently shows very well thought out and reasoned ideas. The fact that he has no formal degree in philosophy, theology, or any related matter just shows that its is possible for anyone to apply reason and logic to ideas and come to reasonable logical answers. You dont need a PhD to understand logic. You don't need a PhD to be someone. And most of all, having a PhD says says one thing and one thing only - You have a PhD. It does not guarantee the depth, or accuracy of your knowledge.
Russell Cohen What you said about Paul is definitely true, but getting a PhD is no walk in the park (unless you’re Kent Hovind). I’d say that Paul is super smart and definitely PhD material.
I'm sorry. I can't imagine going through college long enough to get a PhD.
i am sure you appreciate his denial of scripture, and that isall that you apeciat about him
What PhD do you have?
I used to think that Craig was merely deluded, but with each passing encounter he proves himself to profoundly dishonest.
Yes. He is the Bernie Madoff of apologetics. I was aghast when WLC pretended incomprehension of how any educated Christian could be unaware that dinosaurs lived millions of years ago.
Heh, slowpoke.jpg... Guy has always been considered a clown in scholarly/philosophical circles. He's one of those people who are frequently cited by amateurs and lay-people, but may as well not exist as far as academic discussions are concerned. Craig has not made a significant contribution to the philosophy of religion, despite being at it for quite some time now.
He has to be. If i remember correctly he is under contract to lie for Jebus.
Just like the people under AIG.
Though they call it their "doctrinal statement".
@@merkkila5033
This was something I just assumed that his PhD is just window dressing of his lies, damned lies and more damned lies. His, and other Christian Apologists, entire goal is to obfuscate the facts to confuse but definitely not to illuminate the actual truth.
I like how the more of these apologist videos I see the more I realize they all fall into the same sorts of tricks be it there word choice or cadence the pauses and sounds they make, change the accent and he could be Ken Ham or Kent Hovind
I’m so proud of you Paul. Not only did you knock Mr. Lane’s ego out of his head, you clearly exposed his bias. His belittling you is a cheap trick to set the stage for his listeners. “Don’t even think of looking into this guy’s claims, he’s just some ‘gen-x’ TH-camr”. The fact he felt the need respond to your response of his video shows the world that your arguments are compelling. You truly shined in this video and I can’t wait to see the next one.
Comments like these make me smile :D
I wish everybody was kind online like this
It's amazing how specious Craig's rhetorical gymnastics seem to be when they're countered by rational, researched and considered arguments. If anyone is intimidated by slick, empty apologetics then they might still find this showman to be impressive, but most of us can see him for the charlatan he actually is.
Not that I had high expectations for WLC, but I didn't think he'd outright embarrass himself this badly
I expected WLC, and what I got was a train wreck that wasn't even interesting. So hey, I win again. Apologists are so much easier to predict than flat Earthers are. I always underestimate the stupidity of that bunch of lunatics, but with apologists I know what they're going to say before I even know they exist.
It's amazing how WLC can still have any sort of audience. No bang, no flame, not even sparks. A child could find more amusement out of a wet brick.
It's no wonder he had to get voice-overs from foreigners, he probably can't afford a) local b) talent.
If Yahweh is impeccable he does not need a son to correct his mistakes.
The story of Jesus is a red herring.
Bill missed the boat and is misleading himself and his audience down a path that leads nowhere.
@@EdwardHowton WLC's target audience is people who desperately *want* to be told that God is real. They'll never hear any of Paulogia's words except what Bill carefully selects for them. With them, he has no reason to be embarrassed.
@jursamaj Well, I don't know about that. Craig's hype man made the mistake of actually saying Paulogia, which gives them a chance of googling correctly. Most apologists I've seen completely refuse to name the people they're ineptly attempting to ridicule, or at least spell the name wrong to make it impossible to find them. Like when Kent Hovind's knob-polisher called him up when he was in prison and mentioned a guy called "Logiced" and meant Logicked.
WLC is inept and breeds ineptitude, so his failure to hide reality might work against him for one or two of the less unclever sheep in his flock of gullible idiots. I mean, sometimes you win the lottery.
@Bob Smith I've never understood why people like you a) can't comprehend what a religion is, and b) think that painting atheism as a religion does your cause any good.
WOW! A complete, and point by point evisceration of Craig's 'claims' by Paulogia. Kudos to Paulogia for A.) Not letting Craig get away with his ad hominem distraction-fest and B.) Defeating each point Craig makes when he FINALLY moves onto Paulogia's substantive arguments.
This is an impressive example of a so-called "Student" schooling a so called "Master" when uncovering truth and calling out bullshit is the ultimate goal. 👈👏🤙
Craig's entire argument, his lectures, debates and books all begin with an unproven assumption (the existence of an eternal creator god) and ending with his own faith, (I believe).
The only part that's missing is the presence of his star witness.
Have you read all of Craig's books?
@@CJ-sw8lc no, but I listened to the entire video before commenting on it. And I've listened to numerous WLC presentations and debates and they were more than enough to understand his arguments. Why on earth would I read ALL of his books? 📚🤔
@@davidlenett8808 I was replying to a comment underneath :) I'm not exactly sure that listening to a debate IS enough to understand someone's arguments. I'm not sure there's enough time for that, but I'm glad you feel you heard enough to draw a conclusion that satisfies you (no sarcasm - I mean it)!
@SaintCynical Hahaha, no no - it's two of my initials :) Are you feeling okay...??
The very fact that Craig feels it necessary to mock Paulogia ( and he does this badly ) clearly shows his nervousness at the veracity of what Paul has to say. Paul's destruction of Craig's comments is pure brilliance.
When I was an apologist-in-training, I read widely - but WLC was revered as the peak of Christian philosophy. I spent years working my way up until I felt like I was ready for the "best." I never got to the point that I felt I was good enough for his books. That is the level of legend that I had for him.
Now I see that this was a cloak of prestige he built around his reputation - his actual intellectual honesty is embarrassing.
I’m a former Christian as well and I’ve never understood why WLC has always been held in such high regard. I think the guy is intellectually dishonest and I think he’s incredibly arrogant.
@@jacoblee5796 My honest opinion is that his prestige in the apologetics circle was based on his books being the biggest.
As an everyday Christian- you don't see a lot of long books on theology outside of a seminary setting.
And other pastors/apologists are happy to swing another big book around to make their point (whether they have read or understood it is a different matter).
ches haII
never been a beIiever, ever,
s0 the wh0Ie christians having difficuIty "c0ming 0ut" as it were was a new c0ncept t0 me
when I started I00king at what christians were saying
I was appaIIed, they are s0 unc0nvincing
craig is meant t0 be 0ne 0f their best ???!!!
I find his arr0gant "seIf attested feeIing" pr0ves his imaginary friend is reaI
is Iike Iistening t0 an 0ver excited infant
he has the0I0gicaI "quaIificati0ns" apparentIy, phd`s etc???!!
phd`s in h0w t0 argue f0r y0ur imaginary friend
he is inteIIectuaIIy dish0nest and by his 0wn admissi0n
has n0 need 0f the0I0gicaI dipI0mas
he has singIe handedIy d0ne m0re f0r atheism than m0st atheists
0Id "I0w bar " biII
w0rst ap0I0gist ever
Oh man, this is so funny. The complete dismantling you do of his arguments line-by-line is so thorough.
Great job, man.
Oh, man. I could not wait for you to come out with this video! As a former creationist myself, I was so triggered by the way WLC criticized Paul. It's amazing how calm Paul is in his response, but he did take an appropriate amount of time to think about what to say.
Craig is terrified of the unknown.
Discovering and promoting the ancient Jesus story consoles him and allows him to carry on.
I think affirmation of faith is exactly how a lot of people become an atheist. I spent years apologizing for my beliefs, and found quickly that I was trying to lie to myself more than convince my friends that I was in the one true faith. It was shortly after I realized that I was trying to convince myself more than my friends, that I quickly started losing my own faith. But that really came after I immersed myself in Christian literature and apologetics to affirm my faith, and it backfired. Best backfire in my life.
Exactly my story as well! Best backfire of my life!
Obviously the Harry Potter books, movies, and games are independent sources, because they have different authors. And the seven books are independent, because, uh, they tell different stories. Yeah, that's it.
That's the ticket!
Michael Sommers false equivalency fallacy 🤷♂️. We aren’t talking about Harry Potter are we?
@@theconservativechristian7308 It's called _reductio ad absurdum._ I'm taking the form of Craig's argument, applying it to another situation, and reaching an absurd result. Thus the form of Craig's argument is invalid.
@@theconservativechristian7308 We are now!
These are the most desperate of times for Christianity...
we must show empathy as we are witnessing their death thralls.
So I’m 2 years late to this video; I recently found your channel. As a former Christian myself I really appreciate the journey you’ve taken us on sharing your personal experiences.
Also, Craig comes across like such a down punching douche bag. I appreciate the gracious way you purport yourself on your channel, challenge ideas-not unrelated personal details. Also your animation is great- I love animated Paul cheers from the PNW, US
Well, I'm 2 yrs later than you, so that means u weren't too late in the grand scheme of things 😊
I have been watching more videos on this channel lately. I am starting to realize now more than earlier how well they are put together. I have a HUGE amount of respect and appreciation for Paul.
Wait there are ranks among atheists? So how do i rank up?
It’s like a pyramid scheme. You get points for everyone you de-convert then even more points when they de-convert other people and so on
Consuming the souls of innocent Christian children probably.
@@ewanmontgomery6815 No it's not a religion.
@ObscureReality how many babies have you eaten yet?? :-)
You have to grind it out, or pay for crystals to level up faster. It's kind of a "pay to win" format.
Hehe!
Is it a badge of honor to be on William's radar? Sure.
Is it a complete and utter victory, that he feel he has to attack you personally as a prelude? Oh yes!
Bill knows that his imaginary god is real.
I'm open to a demonstration.
Ad hominem... when your opponent can't attack your ideas so they attack yoir person instead. If you make it personal, you've lost.
Awe. William Craig has a crush on you! So sweet.
Even if we took this literally all you are saying is that somebody stole a dead corpse from a hole in the ground that does nothing to validate your religion nor prove that Jesus had any supernatural powers
@@bobreil7464 What? Wrong person?
@@bobreil7464 knowing the Romans, that poor itinerant rabbi, Yeshua, wound up rotting in a mass grave with all the other unfortunates who rubbed the Roman's the wrong way, so all the cultists had to do was make up a story and leave it to the telephone game effect to make it special
@@bobreil7464 knowing the Romans, that poor itinerant rabbi, Yeshua, wound up rotting in a mass grave with all the other unfortunates who rubbed the Roman's the wrong way, so all the cultists had to do was make up a story and leave it to the telephone game effect to make it special
Paul, as a fellow atheist, it pains me that they did not challenge your ideas first, and tried to frame you. Please continue doing what you are doing, it is really helpful!
This sort of combination condescension and ad-hominem attacks is what I have learned to expect from Christians. Despite having read the Bible more closely than most in my family and studying the history of the texts, my questions were always dismissed by them as being dishonest or naive, depending on their mood, and I was constantly advised to study the Bible harder to arrive at the “correct” conclusions. These days I don’t bother to engage with Christians unless they refuse to let me be.
Ahhhh...William Lane Craig, the quintessential smug git.
Paul, keep up the great work. Your videos (specifically your takedown of "Is Genesis History") were instrumental in leading me out of my faith.
Wow. Thank you so much. I'm so honored to have had a part.
@@Paulogia please make more videos. I miss them.
Craig is just another example of lying for Jesus or lying for financial gain you make the choice.
You can do both!
Why does Yahweh and his other self, Yeshua, need Bill to defend their existence?
I knew there are things wrong with W.L. Craig, but I never realized it was just intellectual dishonesty. Thanks Paulogia.
Damn Paul. Your comment about being nobody brought me to tears man. While that’s not true at all, because you are most definitely someone displaying pure humbleness, I can relate to that feeling 100%. I discovered your page through Drew at GMS and I’m so thankful for both of you. Regardless of whatever anyone believes, both of you do a better job of showing fairness, kindness, and compassion than any of these Christian leaders. I’ve turned away from my faith as well, and while science and historic evidence are where I ground that belief, I also have to give credit where credit is due. I credit theists like these gentlemen (and Christians I grew up around, including my own close-minded parents) for confirming to me through their words and actions that I made the right choice.
Thank you so much for your incredibly thorough work. You had my subscription before I even clicked the “skip ads” button. I’m looking forward to ripping through your entire catalogue. Keep up the fascinating work!
A well done, level-headed, stay-on-point response to WLC's ad hominem-laced and weak arguments to Paul's video. Looking forward to WLC's Part 2 and Paul's response.
Thanks!
Yes! I agree!
Indeed it is and very entertaining too. I would compare it in this respect to Sean Carrols's debate with WLC. However I am not convinced that "rational" evidence based argument will have any effect on WLC or his followers. Don't stop doing what you do however!
It's quite a compliment that WLC and his lap dog came at you in the manner that they did.
Tag teaming and leading with insults is not what I'd have expected from someone so supposedly esteemed as WLC.
It shows that they're on the ropes and going down.
Uneducated idiots.
I guess when you don’t have an actual argument, you waste the first 5 minutes of your video poisoning the well with ad hominems.
WLC is such a dishonest huckster; the best Christian apologetics has to offer
When it is most of what you have in form of "argument", it is not really wasted ;-) From the point of view of Craig at least... From our view basically every Craig Argument is wasted time anyway.
Yeah, basically.
"I'm right and am confident in my reasoning...but you're ugly so I'm more right."
As I explained several times before: Craig is fully aware of his doing, but his "feelings of the holy spirit" makes his mind dense here explains by TMM in a very short video:
th-cam.com/video/Q78ahkiMtFk/w-d-xo.html
That comes along why Craigs personal feelings and emotional attachment shall defeat reality _itself_ :
th-cam.com/video/5S823FczC0k/w-d-xo.html
Because when your mind shall be so dense that not 1 drop of reality shall sip into your mind and you just stay "closed minded" as possible to what you wish it shall be true - you shall be successful. ;-)
Typical apologist argument. "This piece of shit is name calling and making ad hominem attacks. You know he worships satan or else he wouldnt be an atheist!"
Who didn’t have ignorant beliefs in high school? I was the guy handing out AiG material 🤦♂️. Good to know I’ll be forever judged solely on the beliefs I had and level of education I had 16years ago.
Christian skeptic here: 4 years later and I thank you for this video. You are highlighting so many key issues that go ignored with "debate" tatics
I am a Christian of 15 years of age and I love to examine both sides. I am happy to be here and though this was a longer video than I bargained for, it really got into the niddy-giddy details which was unique compared to most non-Christian videos I examine. Though I hold strongly to the Bible being the Word of God, I come from a Greek Christian family that could never really answer my questions, so I sought to find answers and eventually concluded with Christianity after seriously questioning my faith. I was drawn into Young Earth Creationism because I focused more on Genesis and thought that the Young Earth Creation model best explained Christianity, but after 4 years of vigorous searching I began to see that Old Earth Creationism made sense, though my position has changed as time went on, my passion to study just about anything pertaining to the Bible has led me all over the place and even to this channel. Most might scoff at me which is fine, everyone has their own opinion, but either way I am happy to learn from the other side especially besides William Lane Craig as I have not always been particularly fond of his arguments (Even before coming to this channel) and enjoy learning.
Why are you still Christian if the more you look at evidence the more you find the bible isn't correct?
Keep learning
💚 *quality content* 💚
I am very much looking forward to part 2!
"Internet Infidel" is great. Wish I'd thought of it when I started my Twitter account.
I think WLC doesn't deserve his reputation.
Depends on what you think his reputation is.
@@Paulogia I'd say reputations necessarily require a consensus which is relatively widely/commonly accepted. It should depend on what most of a particular population thinks the reputation is. After seeing Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens both lead their respective debates with suggestions about how great a debater WLC is, and then seeing your, many other YTers debunks, as well as his own crap debate performance (which tends to require his opponent to counter VERY specific questions within VERY specific parameters which don't necessarily ACTUALLY apply to the debate agreed; basically he expects his opponent to follow the rules he writes in real time, then claims victory when they don't follow his rules), WLC has an unearned reputation of being a great debater IMO.
@@Paulogia Thanks for keeping up the videos man. Whatever its worth, your stuff was part of my own deconversion.
@@FGuilt Oh wow... I'm so honored to have been a part. Welcome.
@@FGuilt The problem with debate format with Christians is they can fire off a load of crap that takes longer to debunk than the few minutes allowed for a response. That leaves the uneducated viewer seeing many claims left unanswered which the Christian then points to in claiming victory.
Ugh how pretentious 🙄 WLC talks like the high IQ Rick and Morty guy
Don't insult Rick man. ;-)
@@justaguy6100 Could not agree more.
Idk if there's a more archetypal example of Dunning-Kruger syndrome than poor Mr. Craig.
To attack another's credibility based on past ignorance has to be the most hypocritical response Craig could ever give. These types of Ad Hominem attacks are unacceptable in the scholarly world.
This was another great video, Paul. You are fast becoming my favourite producer of on-line video atheist content.
totally laughable to watch this guy talk about Paul's lack of understanding concerning things that are make believe 🤣
Well WLC has still not acknowledged the blatant mistakes he makes in "logically" thinking through his precious Kalam... especially the sleight of hand involved in the Non Sequitur to pretend that "we can be reasonably sure" leads in ANY way to a christian god as "proven". And that is only the killing blow to the argument, by far not the only illogical step made. As he presents it the argument is "if we presume the universe needs a creator we will to our astonishment find out it has got a creator (and I, William, can tell you his name)", which simply is ridiculous.
My mother believed in Jesus.
Nothing could shake her faith.
When I tried to introduce reason, she almost had a nervous breakdown.
I left her alone after that.
@@JamesRichardWiley good call. what time you had left with her was more important.
Consider this: You now can say that like Christopher Hitchens, you've drawn the dismissiveness of William Lane Craig.
Unless I'm mistaken, Craig sure seems to be equating the perfectly ordinary claims about the activities of Caesar and Alexander with the extraordinary claim that Jesus rose from the dead. Does he think that the standard of evidence for both kinds of claims is the same?
You are a great person, and the world is greater for having you in it.
You make a lot of great arguments, and your work is so high quality I am astounded you don’t have hundreds of thousands of subs.
One of my new favorite youtube channels. Love watching you school WLC :)
#same
Not much of a show... Craig could somehow lose a fight against nobody. Actually, he often does, since he's constantly going after straw opponents and still makes a complete ass of himself. He even famously said his own argument for the existence of God was worthless. The "self-authenticating nature of the holy spirit" thing, remember that?
You could strap Billy to a table and he'd still manage to kick his own ass. He's one of the least interesting, most incredibly overhyped apologists in the -business- scam.
Good job getting a response from Craig! Well done on your response.
Does this mean Dr Craig believes Slenderman is real? I mean, look how fast the story spread...
For him to break his no PhD, no dialog rule probably means he saw you as worthy of damage control. And for good reason.
Bingo! WLC recognized a threat to his apologetics.
Craig is intimidated by Paulogia intellect etc..
I thoroughly enjoyed this video. Your humor and Frank honesty is what makes your channel so great. Honesty. I love, how you keep everything about the quality and honesty of the information you discuss. It is a pleasure to listen to.
Great job, Paul. Like some others, I had not encountered Craig's ad hominem side, and this was nothing but ad hominem. I had noticed his tendency to talk about what he wants to talk about, thus he talks about time frames rather than line content. On the whole, if I were him, this is not a fight I'd have picked. Oh, and for what it's worth, I'd say you come off as older than you are not younger, as Craig contended, and was pleased to see you are a quite young man who has done an awful lot of work. Lastly, Frank Jones is right. Where do we get the graphic novels?
@ScepticalCynic I am more familiar with Craig in a professional setting haven't used a few of his articles to teach philosophy of religion. Admittedly I usually use the articles to be up to the position he espouses, and those he at least maintains some appearance of intellectual honesty, but appearance is all.
so half of Craig's video is basically discredit his "opponent". Poisoning the well 101.
a useful tactic, when you have no actual arguments or evidence to present.. poor WLC
So... their only response to your video was to attack you personally, and to talk about completely different things then the issues you brought up... guess that means you were correct on all points
@daniel letterman
I hope they are watching, it just might help them think..maybe.
Bill is getting sloppy in his defense of an all powerful god that is present everywhere and knows everything.
@12:15 How can three "independent" accounts come from the same New Testament of the Bible? Are they not all designed to give the same message?
I saw that too, all the independent sources were from the Bible 🤣🤣 can’t make it up
Oh my goodness! I just discovered your channel and this the first video of yours that I've seen. Not even halfway through, I've subscribed to your channel and gave the video a thumbs up! I appreciate your dry humor and your witty and intelligent rebuttal of Craig's critique of your channel and content. I'm an elder GenX, cusp Baby Boomer, and was raised in an Evangelical household, and can relate closely to your position on young-earth/elder-earth philosophy, and had much the same experience you described as a teenager and young adult in my church and spiritual life. I would describe myself as a "Recovering Nazarene" and agnostic, when it comes to Christian faith. Thank you for your content.. Soon as I finish this video, I will be viewing many more.
Sorry for deviating from the topic, but are those graphic novels that you did available anywhere online? They look amazing!
(desire to know intensifies) Seriously, I love dinosaurs. Even if it's a dumb, holy-roller story he wrote when he was young, I really want to read Paul's Dino Comic.
You can get Neozoic and some of my other work on Comixology.
@@Paulogia autographed copies???
@@Paulogia Was the woman on the cover drawing a sword intended to have two right hands?
I've actually read some of them, although I forget where. Nice to know who wrote them.
Please keep up the good work Paul, from a UK admirer, you are entertaining and honest at the same time, in marked contrast your critics.
He denigrates you, then uses the old "my book says my book is true" argument. Jeez what a dork.
Don't point out the flaws in Bill's argument or he will collapse into a depression.
The older Craig gets, the more he starts resembling an ageing David Lee Roth. Roth, as strange as it may sound, makes a lot more sense.
Mr Low-Bar-Bill has fallen in recent times, with his admission that his epistemology is garbage.
😂 is WLC saying the resurrection story is true because they said it's true in the bible?
No other independent proof!?
*jingle*
That is exactly what he has always claimed.
The circularity of William Lane Craig's reasoning is starting to make my head spin.
And then they don’t understand why we still gave doubts 😂
bu-but the bibble was made by multiple autho-rs!!
anonymous authors...
with conflicting data...
100 years after the fact...
all cherry picked by the catholic church...
with no other secular source...
William Lane Craig DESTROYS Paulogia Without FACTS or LOGIC
Your deity is guilty of not existing...deal with that.
I'm an atheist tho. The comment is expanding on the joke in the title. You'll notice I said that WLC *wasn't* using facts or logic in a reversal of the "destroys x with facts and logic" Ben Shapiro titles
An empty tomb is evidence that the tomb is empty. Period.
Keep up the good work paulogia
Your videos are great
Your responses are clear , and well researched and thought out👍
Hey! A picture of the The Long Room Of The Old Library At Trinity College in Dublin Ireland at 10:59! That Library was built in 1592! :) (I visited there. I am a library science student.)
For what it's worth, WLC debated Christopher Hitchens who did not have a PhD. It's probably why he refuses now.
I'm loving this Dr. Craig vs. Paulogia story arc. A bit of Gman cameos would make this arc epic.
I like how he says that Paul said a ton of Ad Hom stuff in the video, but proceeds to Ad Hom Paul for 1/3 of the rebuttal
And then says there's too little time to do a proper rebuttal.
It's like:
Paul: "A and B are related in this way."
WLC: _Point out some completely irrelevant aspect in which A and B are NOT related, and act as if this disproves Paul's point._
Paul: "X and Y are NOT related in this way."
WLC: _Point out some completely irrelevant aspect in which X and Y ARE related, and act as if this disproves Paul's point._
Over and over and over. The focus on the tomb. The focus on authorship. The whole point of the Harry Potter analogy. I have a hard time believing this isn't an accident. It's so consistently done. It's surreal.
Your interaction with Craig's "preface" analysis of you is priceless. It reveals so much more than is actually being said. He is being destroyed before even presenting the issue at hand. Well done.
Billy Lane turned off comments on the original video. Smooth move X-Lax.
I've known about William Lane Craig for quite a few years and seen how he argues for things/debates, and I've only discovered your channel 2 days ago.
Already I trust you as an honest minded-open-to-the-evidence debater and rational individual more than Craig.
"The way in which I know Christianity is true is first and foremost on the basis of the witness of the Holy Spirit in my heart and that this gives me a self authenticating means of knowing that Christianity is true wholly apart from the evidence and therefore if in some historically contingent circumstances the evidence that I have available to me should turn against Christianity I don't think that that controverts the witness of the Holy Spirit." - William Lane Craig
"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it?" - Sam Harris
I used to think WLC was actually a very smart guy.
Not anymore
Me too. Me too.
Glad you guys shaked that illusions off. He appears to be smart, like any good conman does, but if you listen closely he only spews the same as any other christian does.
WLC doesn't even know what independent source means. Etc.
I detest WLC because of his dangerous immorality, he justifies genocide without embarrassment.
I don’t know if it’s fair to equate intelligence directly with the reasoning output someone produces:
maybe he’s not smart enough to consider hypothetically that he might be wrong,
OR
maybe he’s too bound up in his emotional need for his faith to be true to escape from motivated reasoning.
That happens when you compare him against people like Ken Ham.
Paul’s talent for precise use of language is amazing. I bet he could be a brilliant lawyer and politician. Since I’m rather new to this channel I appreciated learning about his educational background and philosophical evolution.
Ah! When the second Paul started talking freaked me out a little, holy crap. Love the stuff buddy, I know this one is old but YT decided to show me now, and I'm much happier it did.
“Most Scholars” for WLC includes mostly evangelical, Protestant commentators that hold WLC’s own views....
Bill is a word warrior.
He has nothing real to offer.
Lots of scholars he referenced are actually critical scholars, not only believers.
You only pretend to be Canadian. You don't say "oot" or "sorry" enough to really be Canadian. ;-)
Especially "sorry." He doesn't say "sorry" nearly enough.
@@jaradams He has his undercover Viced Rhino channel to make up for that :D
That sounds like the _No true Canadian Eh_ Fallacy.
You spelled soory wrong.
You mean /'sɔɹi/?
Ahhh, yes, six independent sources: the bible, the bible, the bible, the bible, the bible, and... Oh yeah, the bible.
Don’t be ridiculous, we have the Holy Spirit, the son, the father, the bible, my experiences, your experiences . . . That’s like millions of sources
…..You missed out the bible.
Don’t forget the independent sources, which is guys who talked about the Bible long ago
Paul, even if we never meet, if I ever met you face to face I would break down in tears over the strength you gave me to leave my religion and be rational. You are strong, incredible, and amazing. Don't let me sob on you it will be very messy.
Aw, Dave. I'm so glad you found your way out.
A masterful exposition so clearly demonstrating the indisputable superiority of belief predicated on the process of rational analysis over belief predicated on acceptance of a collection of ancient stories.
I was never a fan of WLC, even as a Christian. Today I find the man obscene.
How do you find the cheese in the fridge without WLC divine love
WLCs voice alone immediately awakens my most base instincts that I am in the presence of a whole lotta BS that someone is trying to pretend is some shiny artifact by using overly flowery insincere faux intellectual language.
I appreciate everything you say, Paul. You're doing an incredible job. My father is a Baptist pastor and a trained geologist, yet he is a young earth creationist. So, I understand being indoctrinated to believe nonscientific claims. Thanks for being honest and vulnerable with your audience.
Wow.... that's a lot to overcome.
It still bothers me that these passages of Jesus’s resurrection come from the same book that says the earth is flat. Also a tyrannical Deity commands you kill a child if he disobeys his parents. I would be dead if I lived back then.
Not to mention the ritual killing of children. Which we tend to minimize because in the case of Abraham, the angel stopped him, but nothing is said of numerous other events where such intervention never happened, such as Judges 11, the conquered children of Jericho or the legend of the flood.
@@DoctorZisIN It sense to me that child sacrifice was a thing among the Israelites back then, reading between the lines.
Other canaanite people get lambasted for sacrificing children to "Molech", but at he same time there are plenty of times where God has to specifically tell the Israelites *not* to sacrifice their children. The ritual oblation of first born seems to be an attempt to end a more murderous practice. Abraham never says "Wait, what? That's not what we do Lord" when commanded to kill Isaac.
I'd be interested to know from proper OT scholars if there's more evidence for this.
@@simongiles9749 That is an interesting topic and one that disqualifies the Bible as a moral standard more so than any other. After all Canaanites and Israelites were basically the same people, family feuding over grievances, each inventing a mythology which made them the chosen people of God, but many barbaric practices were entrenched in their culture. So you see that contradiction in the bible where some authors seem to agree with the practice and others seem to find objection with it, both projecting their points on view onto God's will.
@@DoctorZisIN pressing on from your remarks, since archaeologists no longer take an Israelite Exodus from Egypt to be real, it only stands to reason that the Canaanites and Israelites are just a middle eastern version are the Hatfields and McCoys
@@jaradams My thoughts exactly.
I suspect he was going for a quick, easy, and decisive win against an uneducated (in his terms) and therefore defenseless and unknown atheist. Not uncommon in overconfident conmen. So happy to see this guy calmly and easily dismantled yet again. Thanks Paul
I’d love to introduce Craig to my dad. He’s been a preacher in a very conservative sect of Christianity for 30 years. He taught us that dinosaurs weren’t real, and those were whale bones that scientists said were dinosaurs, because they hate god and the Bible. I know almost a thousand Christians that believe this and preach this on a daily basis.
William Lane Craig doesn't know what many Christian church schools teach? It comes as a shock to his cohost that a Christian wasn't taught the religion's theology in detail?
Craig just exposes his own immature shallowness. He just shoots himself in the face over and over. Sadly, this same tactic of simply attacking the person who is challenging them is all too common. I get it constantly in debate groups. It's all they have when confronted with facts and sound reasoning. You do an awesome job, Paul.
I can understand why believers would do so, but who among atheists has mocked you for your former beliefs? I believe that we should have much more respect for former devout believers who had the mental acuity and strength to see through the lies, and overcome the programming that they underwent, than we have for people who have never believed. It's easy to be an atheist if you weren't taught to be a sheep.
My parents never talked about religion, so naturally, I became an atheist. I have great respect for believers who reason themselves out of their faith. Unfortunately, not all ex-believers are able to rid themselves of emotional stuff, like guilt, the idea to be a sinner, being not worthy, or keep longing for the comfort of someone caring and watching over them...
@@joined201010261347 The greatest thing I lost was the promise of eternal life in heaven which was an incredibly hard thing to give up. At the same time, Christians have been ingrained that hell is real and the fate of all those who reject God. So it's the carrot and the stick that keeps most believing. After I left Christianity, it was actually a relief not to have to live in a superstitious world where God and the Devil were watching me and to be truly free to let my reason guide me, not a need to defend my religion.
*Person A*
"It is my opinion that the gods are a man made concept, that our ancestors used to explain events and the existence of the world for which they no understanding, and no possible way of understanding."
"Looking at what they believed compared to what we currently understand, highlights just how incompatible there ideas are to what we have found in reality.
And seeing as the being they claim created everything (who should know how it all works) supposedly revealed to them incorrect information that is demonstrably false and no closer to being correct then any other claims of other gods made by people of time, leads me to the conclusion that yes the gods are a man made fiction"
Person B
"See how badly dressed person a is, he is dressed like some kind of millennial weed smoking hipster, this should give you pause for thought, add to this the fact that the school person a attended is questionable, in ways that make my argument stronger, not to mention person a doesn't have a full understanding of what is being talked about, and I think you will agree that the only possible out come is that person a is misguided simpleton.
The fact of the matter is no matter what evidence no matter what the argument *god did it* is the only possible answer that I will accept as an answer, because it's the answer I want"
I love you videos and ability to clearly express your arguments.
Can you reorder your jesus resurrection playlist so we can more easily watch them in order?
Huh... I've heard Paul doesnt look like his avatar, but I'd say it's pretty close. Perhaps a bit of liberty with muscle, but that's cool with me :)
He definitely draw himself in a flattering style.
@@sandakureva oh totally, but as an animator I think he has every right to :) as long as the topics are solid
It's also a style that extends to his visitors. Everyone seems to be a bit more buff on Paulogia's channel. 😉
@@MirandolinaAmaldin agreed. Aronra looked more scary than usual! Lol! No wonder no one wants to debate him, he looks like he could strangle someone! XD
Apaulogio 13, Jerusalem we have a problem! Coming this Summer..
Clever!
"The Alexander the Great who crossed the Rubicon?" Surely you misspoke and meant Caesar. Fix this: don't give them ammo to claim you're ignorant. Also, WLC is insufferably smug. What a jerk!
I researched Paul's statement and could find no corroboration. ;)
Next level awesome bro.
Killing it.
28:31 You misspoke here, saying Alexander crossed the Rubicon, when it was Caesar that did that.
You know you are famous when William Lane Craig responds to you. Nice work!
Wlc should be proud of getting any attention.
My hypothesis for why Craig gets so emotional and testy with laypeople: he's acutely self-conscious of the fact that, despite having a Ph.D and being a published theologian, his arguments/reasoning are so slipshod and shallow that anyone with even the slightest capacity for critical reasoning is well-suited to absolutely destroy them, Ph.D or no.
And he's got a point- if you have a Ph.D and are considered an expert, your arguments SHOULD be beyond laypeople to easily refute. And yet, his aren't, and thus his overly emotional/indignant reactions.
In science, we keep track of the uncertainties in our measurements. These uncertainties are rigorously tracked and combined in our final calculations.
These "independent sources" seem rather speculative, to be _extremely_ generous. I wonder if anyone has bothered to keep track of all the "uncertainties" in the argument for the resurrection, and how large they become in the final conclusion.
There Isn't a "resurrection hypothesis." There isn't an anomaly raising a question for Science for a hypothesis to explain.
Mr. Paulogia- you seem to have hit a nerve- bravo! Your response here is cogent, fair, and complete- looking forward to part 2.
Anytime I mentioned dinosaurs nobody in church wanted to talk to me. I must have been asking scary questions
Imagine that the guy who calls your former beliefs "braindead Christian faith“ now desperately tries to convince himself that God created Adam and Eve 750k years ago who then outbred the already existing human population which evolved naturally but probably didn’t have a soul yet.😂
So, WLC starts with poisoning the well, followed up with an ad hominem.
The Signs of an true intellectual... 😆😆😆😆
Are you crazy? In fact, in the podcasts, I did not find any personal attack to this new atheist, another thing that Craig make a small reference to their past Christs of Paul, to say he had a faith hollow and it was incredible that never heard what a land of thousands of years.
They well say that internet atheists as followers of these clowns dressed as scholars, are very stagnant academically (And this paragraph is a personal attack, but it's still true or distancing themselves from the low scholarship that many atheists have)
@@TheServantSlayer7 Well you weren't paying attention then. No doubt due to your brain being full of superstitious gibberish.
@@TheServantSlayer7
"Low Scholarship"?!, Hahaha Hi you must be new to these parts of the Internet. 👋😄
Most atheist here(not all of them naturaly, but a whole lot, both with and without channels of their own.) are quite learned actually.
Nice attempt at strawmanning though, and yes Craigs comments at the start there were an underhanded attempt at poisoning the Well, and was indeed an attack on his character. It seems like it might have worked somewhat on you even, going by your comment were you assume falsely that's his faith was hollow.
Paul explained clearly and calmly whatever Craig purposefully got wrong in Theirs strawman caricature of Paul, his beliefs and past.
You can even go backwards through Pauls playlist and search up the video were he originally talks about his past and his thoughts on creationism dinosaurs etc.
And see for yourself how wrongly Craig gets it(purposefully). Also if you find you have trouble finding the particular video, Justin contact Paul and hell point it out for you.
Good day. 👌😁
@@Nilsy1975 Well, it's a little rushing to date typical straw men to Christians or religious in general. Otherwise, you didn't show because I didn't pay attention...
❤️ thank you for standing toe to toe with these guys
20:27 Which historical sources say that Alexander the Great crossed the Ruibicon?