pitiful claims of God? that another opinion lol. he provides plenty of evidence. its not his fault if you cant understand what he is saying. frank wasnt discrediting atheists, he was showing how atheism leads to damaging consequences. i have plenty of evidence for my beliefs, too bad the same thing cant be said about you. and you call me pitiful, resorting to insults already? how childish of you! whilst at the same time trying to insult frank by calling him a boy, which also makes you a hypocrite!
Patience and humility are, indeed, fine virtues. But they can be invalidated by irrational claims, such as Turek routinely makes without wincing. His imaginary footballer -- in a godlike denial of natural laws, in Turek's view -- is simply using physics to play a game. He is not subverting or "interrupting" natural law in any way; he's exploiting it. And thanks to science -- not religion or faith -- we understand how it works. Turek, meanwhile, gives no credible, substantiated reasons for (A) why there must be a "cause" to the universe (he needs to read Hume on that subject), (B) why it must take an inexplicable "supernatural entity" to be that cause, and (C) why that entity must be Turek's god, among the thousands of gods both extinct and extant, and the countless others yet unimagined by the antic human mind. Turek's demeanor is laudable; his arguments are frivolous when not outright preposterous.
@@geokaplan59 "And thanks to science " listen to yourself! You are actually thanking "SCIENCE" Don't tell me you have no gods and you worship nothing because you do.
@@OneBoundMusicWhile my inital comment was a joke, I will seriously say that the only thing I can do is keep weighing the arguments, short of a personal revelations 😊
You just proved his point, or you don't know how to have a civil conversation behind a keyboard? If you can't speak with compassion no one's gonna listen to you.
please provide one fault in the christian teachings. im sure you must know that any actions that contradict christian teachings, even if they are claimed to be christian, cannot be held against the ideology itself. so for example, when the catholic church went on crusades they contradicted the teachings of christ, hence the actions were not christian and cannot be held against christianity. so as a RELIGION christianity has a perfect track record. if you disagree then please prove it. oh and btw, atheism has caused the deaths of more people than all religions combined. or have you not done your homework?
Jack Plumbridge Then maybe I'm misunderstanding something, of we know that energy and matter are not the same, then why can't energy have existed before the universe.
of we know that energy and matter are not the same, then why can't energy have existed before the universe. At the point of the singularity energy and matter were the same thing. (what that 'thing' could be the scientists are still researching for it ie. (UFT Unified field theory, ToE theory of everything) The reason why the universe looks the way it does is because as it expanded it itself began to gradually cool down (but not enough to stop the rate of expansion because there is good evidence for it's continual expansion). So it's due to the cooling that gravity (some intrinsic property of the universe) had the chance to take over to form galaxies,stars and little ol' us. You could even do an experiment of sorts. Take a magnet and stick it to something magnetic. If you heat up the magnet just enough it will loose it's magnetism (you could say that it looses it's artificial gravity) and fall to the ground (get's back to it's natural state and further heating would be required to get it back close to the energy levels of the singularity however there isn't enough energy in this universe to recreate the singularity event so scientists are still researching this ask Stephen Hawking etc.) so this type of a phenomena is responsible for ultimately creating brains and minds at the universe at large.
Dude do you know how insane that sounds. "Demonstrate that God transcends time and space." You can't demonstrate that which is not tangible...kind of like evolution. You follow the evidence and Frank has made enough arguments to prove that the evidence leads more to a creator and not evolution. You get upset because you don't like the answer. The problem with your assertion is that you are using it as a means to justify what you "want" to believe and not what is. I've seen to many atheists getting frustrated with things that cannot be explained. That is what happens when you are looking for a solution to the unknown. God wasn't man made therefore cannot be explained in a vacuum of human thought or logic of man's capacity of understanding. You can't use the indefinite or better yet unfathomable to keep you from believing in God. Rather step into the mystery and be in awe of how great God really is. He has placed eternity in the hearts of man, yet man has not understood beginning to end. Ecclesiastes 3:11
No, Frank did not win. Saying basically a nonphysical supernatural being caused the universe is not evidence of such just because we don't know what occurred before the big bang. IN fact there is no evidence of such.
Lawn Tex "Keep up the good work Dr. Turek. " I have no doubt the millionaire Frank Turek will keep up the "good work" for as long as people continute to buy in to it.
nickj14711 its a category fallacy. By definition, God is uncaused. God could not be caused and still be God. Frank explains it, don't ask the question then reject the answer. Its simple.
When will he START it? His flimsy ramblings illuminate nothing, and merely point out the paucity of his insights. But you fall for it. Watch the video again and really listen. His analogy of the footballer is as pointless as it is irrational. Are we really this credulous? Are we really swayed by so anemic a thinker as Turek? "Truth Seeker" is a noble appellation. But apparently you want not truth but apologetic comfort.
@@johnelliott5859 you can't PROVE God just like you can't PROVE the Big Bang. And science doesn't PROVE anything. Through observation and experimentation it reveals evidence. The evidence then has to be evaluated and interpreted. God is the best answer to the evidence that has been revealed.
@@mikeslater6246 the theory of the big bang resulted in predictions such as the CMBR. When it was discovered through observation, it provided evidence for the big bang theory. In that sense it can be proved. If other observations refute the theory then the theory is altered or discarded. The theory of evolution has been demonstrated time and again. This leads one to alter the theory that a god created all living things. Some apologists will say god created the kinds and evolution worked from there - still an alteration of original theory. One can't prove that a theory is correct fpor all time, but they can definitely prove or disprove the current theory. That's science. Science can prove or falsify an hypothesis. your god is not testable or falsifiable.
@@johnelliott5859 unfortunately your answer is not in the conversation string on my tablet. So others may not see our discussion. But I repeat you cannot prove or disprove God. Observations reveal evidence but all evidence has to be interpreted to come to a conclusion. If you're starting presumptions are wrong then your conclusions are going to be wrong. Evolution definitely has not been proven correct time and time again. DNA alone clearly shows that evolution is not possible. Time is not the magic ingredient to make Evolution work. And I don't believe God used evolution. Again you have to believe in a miracle without a miracle maker. The Miracle of Life coming from non life which Louis Pasteur and his experiments clearly show cannot occur.
@@mikeslater6246 I have conceded you can't disprove or prove god. And you are correct that if your starting presumptions are wrong than your conclusions are likely wrong. My issue is you assuming god did it, when we don't know how it happened. In that sense I am not making a presumption, you are. Counting on scientific evidence from 19th century when their are more recent studies which contradict your position is of no value. It has been shown that the building blocks of life can be generated from nonliving chemicals. The theory of evolution is as solid as the theory of gravity. Consider COVID and its many mutations which continue because those mutations make then more likely to survive the human immune system and reproduce. These viruses have a very short generation rate. Imagine if the same process happened in large organisms over millions or billions of years. There is no one who claims that no evolution occurs, they will just call it microevolution and use a young earth as a reason it couldn't happen. But science also refutes a young earth through very many different types of study. Only if you presume a young earth and a creator being can you willingly ignore the evidence of an old earth and evolution.
Unfortunately, he missed the point. The atheist was saying that the principle of causation is a natural law and this is false. It is a principle of reason. Without cause, there is no reason. So if there is a reason for the coming into existence of the universe, then it has a cause. This is not a natural law like gravity. Natural laws assume the principle of causation. It assumes there is a rational explanation when something happens.
i find a lot of atheists are never able to disprove god and are only able to critique him, theres this emotional barrier because heir thinking is a certain way that makes them unable to comprehend a god in their mind.
The barrier is a lack of any evidence for the existence of some omni god. A physical explanation for the beginning of the universe is far more valuable then an unfalsifiable, invisible, non physical reason.
@@stutteringdisciple1919 Not at all what I said. I said I don't know what made everything or if the matter/energy always existed. By the way, it us you who believes that the universe was created by nothing by a being whose existence has no proof. Current physical laws would suggest that all the matter/energy that exists always did and always will. What if the energy/matter in our universe is actually zero. In other words what if energy and "dark energy" cancel each other out. Then there is a chance that "nothing" is what the universe is made of. Hmmm? Is the Y pronounced as a J?
@@johnelliott5859 there is plenty of evidence. The heavens declare the glory of God. Your inability to recognize it is willful on your part. You don't want there to be a God so you don't accept that there is a God. I'll pray your eyes can be opened. And I'm speaking from experience. I didn't believe there was a God until I started looking at the world around me and the things happening around me and realize that I am not an accident. You aren't an accident either. Look into it with more of an open mind seeking Him honestly and you will find Him.
@@mikeslater6246 Actually I was born again believer for decades. When I investigated my problems about the bible and the religion, they did not withstand scrutiny. As difficult as the decision was with my eternal soul in the balance (or so I thought) I had too be honest with myself. I did want there to be a god, but the evidence just didn't add up to the existence of the god of the bible.
Well I hate to tell you but, your child don't know Jack... unless that's the teacher's name at school. The FACT of the matter is NO ONE knows the exact age of the universe, and it is ARROGANT for anyone to claim that they do. What we have is mere theories, conjecture and speculation. For example; Our estimate of the age and size of the Universe has changed several times during the past century. 1919 Age: Infinite Size: 300,000 Light Years 1929 Age: 2 Billion Years Size: 280 Million Light Years 1955 Age: 6 Billion Years Size: 4 Billion Light Years 1965 Age: 10-25 Billion Years Size: 25 Billion Light Years 1993 Age: 12-20 Billion Years Size: 30 Billion Light Years 2006 Age: 13.7 Billion Years Size: 94 Billion Light Years You say that; "Prior to that it was merely a singularity and a whole load of nothing. It merely started expanding at that point." Where can I get some of this "nothing"? Can I order it online? Is this "nothing" natural? How do you know it isn't supernatural, and you simply don't yet understand???
@@rustyshadow7 ... I agree with you, we don't know how old the universe is... we DO know that it HAS an age (i.e it's existence can be measured by time.. i.e. IT BEGAN. LOL). I don't see any comments from the person that you directed your comment to, but that person clearly doesn't understand that the singularity is described as a point of INFINITE density. Functionally speaking, the singularly is a point of "out of no thing PHYSICAL". It just surprises me that so many atheists appeal to science and logic, without actually understanding science nor logic.
Everything in Turek's football example happens in perfect accord with the laws of gravity. The only way those laws would be "defied" would be if a resting football floated away from earth. Anybody ever seen that happen?
@@dimasrahadian360 Airplanes don't defy natural law, rather they use what science we know to fly. Although Dr. Turek's premise is wrong, his conclusion is still valid. God can of course defy natural law in the same way Superman can fly. Fictional entities aren't bound by natural law.
@@dimasrahadian360 Magnets follow natural laws as well. You, like Dr. Turek, don't seem to understand the concept of forces.. Magnets have electro-magnetic force which can be stronger than the force of gravity. It's still natural law. If you ever observe an action that defies natural law, you will have observed by definition, a miracle.
@@brucedambrosio4270 if atheis have questions " how do we know the cause of the universe is god?" Then Christianity only have answer it miracle, it's like Zakir Naik answer😂
@@johnelliott5859 people laugh when they don't know what else to do. You tremble at the thought of His existence and chuckle because you don't know what to do if He does exist, which He does.
@@JarrydTiltmanphotographer Lets say my conscience is proof there's a God. Is it Odin, Apollo, Zeus, Loki, Artemis? So many to choose if only our creator would reveal himself.
@@ferniegutierrez5605 I do and thats why I like the great majority of the top scientists dont believe in a creator of the universe. If God wants to make his presence known he needs to provide real evidence.
@@sick_ibg712 God has left ample evidence to know he is real. I have long since rejected the childish notion that people will always accept evidence. We do not even need to look to the supernatural to see this idea to be false. There are certain people who believe the earth is a certain shape and no manner of historical and visual documentation will convince them otherwise. If you show them something historical they will simply say it's made up or some other such excuse. As a baby Christian, I used to be like "God u simply haven't shown them enough." As I've lived longer and observed human nature I realised for some it will never be enough. Ironically the Bible warns people of the very thing it took me years to accept. And now I see it all around me , in politics, relationships, etc. As the Bible says "whoever has ears to hear, let them hear."
The atheist meant if God doesn't need to follow natural laws, then why are we saying that space, matter, and time have to have their origin with God (basically, why does nature need to have a supernatural origin if origination itself is natural)? Also, Frank's response about defying gravity is pretty dumb. I'm a fan of Frank, just pointing out he messed up this time.
*Psalm 24:1 _"Of David. A psalm. The earth is the LORD's, and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it."_ *Deuteronomy **8:18* _"But remember the LORD your God, for it is he who gives you the ability to produce wealth, and so confirms his covenant, which he swore to your ancestors, as it is today."_ *Isaiah 42:5* _"This is what God the LORD says-- the Creator of the heavens, who stretches them out, who spreads out the earth with all that springs from it, who gives breath to its people, and life to those who walk on it:"_ I support God :) the One True God. I give Him 10 percent of the gross amount on my paychecks. I've been diligent to do this for several months now even when my bank account funds were running low. I was involved in a car accident about one year ago (minor injuries). I just got word that the settlement amount that will be given to me will be in the several thousands (more than a dozen). I just started college and my girlfriend left me. The funds will be very needed for my college needs and when my girlfriend comes back to me she will see a large amount in my bank account. It's very important to me to show her that God prospers His children.
Oh and i also see what you were getting at neighbor. I don't "give" God funds to *sustain* Him. No. I give _Him_ (that is His establishment, the Church, i.e. handing over to Him) I give funds to my church to support the Kingdom of God, of which He rules over. God allows me to participate in His Will to help lost and hurt souls in my community and the rest of the world.
God has already written a check that entitles me to bursaries that can not be measured in human standards. I am the benefactor of eternal riches in Jesus Christ my Lord and Savior. Glories that can not be fathomed. Why do you say I am "lucky?" Luck does not exist neighbor. Furthermore, why do you say, "[God] didn't kill [me] in the car accident" ? Do you think God causes all things? This is unBiblical. And it hurts me to think you have that misconception about the One True God. I will walk on streets of gold one day neighbor. The commodities of this world are fleeting and temporary. True riches abide and abound in the inheritance of the saints, of which I am. Do you know Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior neighbor? He loves you so much that He died for you. God bless. th-cam.com/video/N_lrrq_opng/w-d-xo.html
Someone please explain it to Turek here that a footballer isn't breaking any natural laws. Breaking a natural law would mean flying like Superman. And this is a valid question: how do we know the first cause is god ? It could be just a theoretical term or factor or maybe it's just potentiality. Physicists are trying to figure out what comes before the big bang. People putting in a lot of hard work and here comes Mr. Turek declaring he knows it all . Why don't we stop giving funds for cosmologists and present an award to Mr. Turek . Now, imagine some physicists do discover something before the big bang , perhaps an infinite potential. The next thing you'll hear Christian apologetics say is God is that potential or God created that potential . It's an endless stream of Ad hoc's cuz Christians don't want to give up their beliefs .
There was a time when I tried with everything I had to find any way I could that God did not exist.Anyone who is honest will have to come to the conclusion that God exists and that he created everything.Sometimes you just have to put your whole being into discovering his existence.God is unfathomable but he will reveal in your conciseness and spirit that he is everywhere.
The only conclusion you can come to presently is we don't know how the universe was originally created. That's it. Testable, falsifiable hypotheses are useful. A magic being from outside the universe did it are not. Especially if you claim that being is the christian omni god.
@@johnelliott5859 and your belief says that nothing exploded and became something and that life came into existence from a wet rock. Louis Pasteur did experiments that can be repeated and clearly show life only comes from life. And nothing is what rocks dream of.
@@mikeslater6246 no the big bang does not say something exploded out of nothing. Common misrepresentation put forward by creationists especially. The big bang was an expansion of the energy/matter that was present. What happened before that? Science doesn't know at the current time, but will put forward hypotheses, test them and prove or falsify them. Your argument is simply a god of the gaps argument. We don't know how life or the universe began so magical immaterial being did it. History is littered with gods of knowledge gaps. No one believes Thor creates thunder or Ra drives the sun in a chariot. When knowledge gaps are reduced so are the gods used to explain them. History would show that your god will achieve the same fate.
@@johnelliott5859 you really shouldn't be arguing that something is wrong when you admit you don't know what is right. You admit you don't know how the universe got here. But you say that it can't be God? And the straw man argument about Thor and RA don't help your argument at all! Just because others claimed those gods existed but don't doesn't mean the one true God of the Bible doesn't exist. You can call mine a theory of the God of the gaps but in truth they're your gaps, not mine. Time is your god of the gaps, just give us enough time and we'll find out the truth. Well you are going to find out the truth in a lot less time than you think. I challenge you to listen more intently and look more closely at the arguments for God. I did 50 years ago and haven't regretted it one minute.
@@mikeslater6246 I have never said it can't be god. I have said, as have you, that it can't be proven or disproven. Until I have good evidence I will withhold my belief. I find there is good evidence for evolution and an old earth, so I do " believe" in them. Those two things make the god of the bible less likely. I didn't make the gap. The limits of our knowledge did. We don't know how life or the universe began. At present if you provide an explanation, it is only an hypothesis. Hypotheses need to be tested to see if they accurately reflect reality. The hypothesis god did it is not testable. You have said so yourself - god can't be proven or disproven. I spent several years evaluating the claims/arguments on both sides of the theism/nontheism debate. Probably didn't want to lose my faith, but I had to be honest with myself, the christian faith and the god of the bible do not withstand honest scrutiny. The christian god is supposed to be an omni god - all loving, powerful, knowing, present. Is it moral for this omni god to create billions of people that he knows will suffer eternal torment? A god like that cannot be all those omnis. It is impossible. But that is the god the christian religion believes in.
This may seem off topic, but in communist countries one of the first things to always be banned is the reading or teaching of the Bible. Why is that 🤔🤔
I would encourage people to read the entire bible. Many will begin to wonder about the teachings they have accepted. The god of the bible condones slavery, commands genocide and promotes misogyny. It is not a moral being.
@@johnelliott5859 I would encourage you to do a better job at trying to understand what the Bible says. It does not condone slavery. Paraphrasing: Exodus 21:16 clearly states that anyone who steals a man, puts him in slavery, or any person who is found in possession of a man who has been stolen is to be put to death. Doesn't sound like condoning to me. And the creator of the universe cannot be guilty of genocide for destroying part of his creation when it disobeys Him. And the Bible says that there is no male or female, that they are equal in His sight. But the Bible does define different, but equally important, roles for women and men in life. Lastly, the Bible is God's Word to his creation and it is telling us about Him. Much of what He says in His Word is truth about what is happening or has happened in this world but it is not all condoned by God. I encourage you to seek Him out honestly. He will reveal Himself!
@@mikeslater6246 if you read the entire bible instead of just the parts that support your position, you will see Jews were permitted to buy slaves from the nations around them and to leave them as an inheritance. They could also beat them as long as they didn't die too quickly. Parts of the bible also are misogynistic. Womens testimony wasn't as valuable, they weren't allowed into the synagogue during their period since they were "unclean". A raped woman had to marry her rapist, but he couldn't divorce her. Paul wouldn't allow women to teach but they had to be silent. Read Joshua, the most recurrent phrase is kill every living thing. This included women and children. How anyone can excuse genocide is beyond me. Except to maintain your notion of god.
Turek is a joke. The footballer doesn't overpower gravity by heading the ball away. Gravity still exists. It is still working on the ball, the football player, the goalposts, etc. The atheist has a point in that he doesn't know how things work, but that doesn't mean the answer is..... GOD! That's what he was saying when talking about cars and baking powder. Also, notice the edits - particularly at the end. Why does Turek end the video before the atheist makes his point?
The Atheist admitted that he didn't know a lot of things. Could God be part of what he should be admitting that he knows nothing about? It's obvious he doesn't know anything about God, about his existence or anything else. Why is he sitting there arguing about what he doesn't know?
@@mikeslater6246 But Turek does know about god. It possible for anyone to explore the knowledge that someone has - up to the point of our own knowledge on the subject. I am an atheist. Like Turek, I use my mind to explore what a god is. I am also able to use my mind to explore what Turek means by god.
@@GariSullivan I'm sorry but your first two sentences seem to be missing a couple of words and make no sense to me. But referring to your last sentence, all you have to do is listen to Frank to know what he means by God. I don't agree with everything that he believes about the Bible but I do know that he believes there is a God and neither you, Frank, or I are Him. A final thought, you seem to be saying you use your mind to determine there is no God, but in doing so aren't you claiming you use your mind to come to the conclusion that nothing exploded and became everything and then you actually evolved from a wet rock? Those are the only two choices. It was by using my mind that I went from an unbeliever to a believer.
when he say "before there was any time or space", or he say "God created time and space", it is totally contradict. With out time, how he can describe the order of creation? The cause-effect means an event happened before another event. God happens before time, then what the "before" means? He is using human mind trying to describe what is beyond.
Claims a god transcends natural law, is timeless, spaceless, etc. etc. is an unfounded assertion. The correct and only honest answer is 'we don't yet know the cause, the how or the why of the origin of the universe.....and we may never know.' Better to have an unanswered question than an answer that cannot be questioned.
@Nick Jones well at least that ASINE claim was always there not like the Big Bang Theory that nothing makes nothing which is way MORE WORSE and to top it off a Roman catholic cardinal started the Big Bang Theory.....yup atheists putting their trust in a religious man ;) and I'm not even religious >;)
@Nick Jones well why are you even trying to argue with me? Isn't your life an accident? 🤣 You're gonna die one day and be forgotten forever. I forgot about you and you just popped up so here we go again and no creation claims go way than 2000 years. So yeah what's the point of proving a proving a point if I have nothing to lose and you have so much to lose? Aren't you just a jumbled up pile of particles saying random words?! Lmao 🤦♂️👎
@Nick Jones So thats your definition of lost? You show so much anger and hatred and you're telling me that I lost? You lost and you seem lost at the same time. You're the one with the young mind being brainwashed by the science of this world and claiming to be the owner of science and whatever you say goes because all atheists feel entitled owning science. Just because a scientist said it does not make it science.....its only a theory.....a game theory >;)
@Nick Jones a theory is not a fact and it cannot be proven. You just got triggered because i said atheists believe that something comes from nothing and i said that something came from something and you're here arguing with me blah blah blah that it was not a cardinal and that my intellect is low while trying to disprove a High Power with no evidence. I'm just gonna put a white coat and come up with an equation and thats proof that we came from nothing.....that hurt so much saying it. Lets just say that christians need faith to believe in God but atheists need a HUGE AMOUNT of faith to believe in the origin of the universe according to the atheist model. You were not there and the scientists either. You just have to take their word from them and believe what is actually in the books. Ooooops almost sounds like a religion too lol
No, the reason that the universe has a transcendent cause is because of the laws of logic, not because of natural laws. The law of causality (which is itself an observable constant) indicates that everything that BEGINS has an exterior cause. There are no exceptions that we have EVER observed. ZERO. Time/space began... it was CAUSED. This isn't debatable.
Come on Turek! You should know better. Overcoming the force of gravity is not overpowering a natural law God follows the laws of logic because they are a part of His nature. The hard of logic are distinct from the laws of nature. God created the laws of nature which could be different. The first principles of logic could not be otherwise
To me, what you said is a Confusion. The Hard LOGIC of Gravity is in fact a LAW. It is something else when the GRAVITY is a HARD FORCE, yet Humans, animals, and THINGS continually go against that FORCE, Overcome the FORCE to a certain DEGREE for a BIT of Time, yet don't BREAK THE LAW, and Gravity continues in effect. Other times, Miracles Happen and People, animals, THINGS DEFY the LAW without Scientific Cause, and yet the Person BELIEVES that GOD HIMSELF reached down and touched them and took their hand and for a Time, lifts them UNSCIENTIFICALLY above the Force, be it Gravity or another Natural Law. Whether this was Jesus and Peter walking on the water, or whether you see a man whose vocal cords were cut completely through in some terrible accident, yet you sit and hear him talk and sing before your very eyes for another 46 years NEVER having his Vocal Cords repaired or replaced - singing WITHOUT VOCAL CORDS. Or whether an unbelieving doctor operates on a tiny baby, and the moment they cut the baby's chest open and behold the damaged heart, he SEES that baby's heart heal before his very eyes! In a MANNER of SPEAKING, ALL SORTS of NATURAL LAWS have been broken - yet are functioning perfectly in every other instance in the world, the LAWS not broken, REALLY, at all, but that FORCE of the Law was briefly interrupted, for One Divine Moment, and we saw a PEEK at His Majesty and Glory, here on Earth.
The 'god hypothesis' is illogical, you first have to have evidence for a claim to have a logical reasoning to believe that claim is true. Last I checked, your particular brand of deity is completely unsubstantiated like all the rest.
@@tedbishop Well some astronomers say all that would happen if two black holes collided is make a bigger black hole but you still need an uncaused first cause.
his response was that god has to obey natural laws but any "scientific" explanation for creating everything out of nothing doesnt. no matter the cause, creating something out of nothing is "magic" as he put it. believe in god or believe in science. we can understand neither so theyre both the same level of faith
That science says that time space and matter had a beginning, therefore if God didn't do it, everything came out of nothing. which is more likely that nothing created everything or that God created everything?
@@amerokii god created everything. its the only option that makes any logical sense. to say "nothing created everything" is nonsense because its essentially saying out of a void of complete desolation suddenly a thing magically poofed into existence without any cause or action to precede it.
@@amerokii science does not say anything. Scientists do. Every bit of evidence that exists is evaluated and interpreted by people. And if you start with the wrong assumptions, you come up with the wrong conclusions as to what that evidence reveals. I believe you are saying that God created everything and I'm agreeing but we need to stop making the statement that science says anything, because it doesn't.
This was horrible to watch. Very bad from both sides. As an atheist I didn't really understand what the atheists (I'm assuming he was an atheist) point was and at the same time Turek's rebuttal analogy was nonsensical.
Yeah same I think Turek was trying to say if you have a system then someone can intervene in that system. So if the player is an outside force and the ball and gravity are the system then a player can step in and "defy laws" by adding energy to the system. But either way I felt like he could've done better on that analogy.
he is calling magic, creator creating, while being a creator/doer himself. what he believes is beyond magic: nothing to cell, thats not all he believes life slowly formed, when life cant even survive 5mns w/o being complete, it cant even exist w/o being complete
This atheist reminded of that great William Somerset Maugham quote, "Like all weak men, he laid exaggerated stress on never changing one's mind." The purpose of science and scientific method lies not in finding the truth rather to systematically search for ERROR. Those who think they have found the truth and are certain of it are not scientists, rather they are religious or political. Science is ever changing, ever questioning and presenting new theories to question the status quo. Christians-faith and the object of that faith, Jesus.
Isn't it Frank who holds to a belief that is not testable, so one cannot systematically search for error in a god belief? Isn't it fundamentalist in particular who believe in the creation myth and Noahs flood literally despite the evidence proving them wrong?
@@johnelliott5859 I don’t think so…God’s plan included “faith” as his policy for mankind’s salvation. Non-meritorious as the object of the person faith….carries all the merit. God planned this in eternity past….it’s been functioning since Adam in the garden. Each individual has a choice. It certainly is “testable” by God. His ways our higher than ours. Isaiah 55:9-9
@@g.alistar7798 I think you have made my point. This kind of faith leads to belief in unfalsifiable, untestable tenets. For example how do you test to see if god created the universe and life on earth? Those are certainly two issues that have not been proven in science, but there are hypotheses presented that can be tested.
@@johnelliott5859 Hi John, do you think perhaps there is a difference between the things of earth and the spiritual? Applying science to faith to justify unbelief is your choice. The science of “Systematic Theology” is the application of the scientific methods and principles to the supernatural, i.e., the Word of God found in the Bible. “By faith the Christian understands…” Hebrews 11:3. The Bible is foolishness to the unregenerate, yet to those with faith, it is the power of God, The Bible is not understood, nor received by unregenerate men (1 Cor 2:14). Regardless of one’s native mental ability and powers and regardless of how hard the unregenerate may try, they will never understand the supernatural aspects of the Christian way of life. It’s foolishness, God meant it to be that way. Importantly, only men and women of faith may understand the spiritual. The laws and theories of science such as mathematics, statistics, quantum theory, physics, biology, medicine, etc….. have no equivalent in the spiritual or supernatural.
@@g.alistar7798 Thank you for your respectful, reasonable tone. So far there is no evidence for the supernatural. And claims that a nonbeliever can't understand the bible are questionable. Since I was a believer for decades, can I no longer understand? There's a reason there are no equivalent of the laws of our physical world in the supernatural. It can't be studied. I don't consider the bible proof, basically of itself. It has enough errors in it for me to discount it's validity as an inerrant, inspired word of an omni being.
Let's remember to win the heart not the argument. Logic is not on the side of Atheism. That's why they get so angry. Some of them will eventually convert. Some will deny in hell.
Logic is indeed on the side of atheism, the time to believe something to be true is when it has been substantiated to be true, not before as you delusional wind whisperers disingenuously do.
Really. "Logic is not on the side of atheism." Instead, we should deliver, with all due gullibility, our trust to the apologistic blathering of Mr. Turek -- who seems to believe a soccer player defies or "interrupts" the laws of physics when he heads a ball. I see no anger in the atheist on the panel, but there is a level of exasperation as his valid points go unheeded. Turek offers no evidence for his preposterous claims. He is the one who uses emotion as a kind of sleight of hand, or sleight of mouth. His footballer is as much a deception and illusion as his god. And you, Artty. You really believe in hell. You accept a god who loves us so much that if we don't kowtow to his whims (from slavery to killing non-virginal single women to slaying homosexuals and disobedient children), he'll prove his love by casting us into an eternal lake of searing shrieking fire. Riiiiiight. What is in fact happening, and demographics show this, is that greater and greater numbers of Christians are renouncing their faith or, more often, the tenets of their religious doctrines. The so-called "Nones" are the fastest-growing segment of American society. Hallelujah! Maybe that's why you get so angry. Don't worry; you will eventually convert. Then you won't deny in hell; you'll simply deny hell. You'll recognize hell for what it is: a threat to coerce false belief. The "heart of the argument" has already been won, and atheists stand tall, while apologists of Turek's stripe (why would any omnipotent, omniscient god need apologetics?) stumble and fail and fall. Believe as you will; that is your right. But give no snide promises of hells for refusing indoctrination into such silly, fallacious faith systems as yours and Turek's.
Artty 1975 logic is totally on the side of atheists disbelieving in things to which There is no evidence for Is logical not illogical You believe in god on faith Not evidence that’s illogical We believe in only what can Be proven and factual not in Lies created by ignorant goat Herders
NIKOS very nice false equivalence of creationism We have tons of evidence it’s Not logically possible for your God to exist period claims of the bible are not a part of reality
NIKOS yeh well guess what you can wait thousands of years or longer for proofs Like skeptics have been waiting for proof of god The evidence against gods Existence is all around it’s Called reality .
Your assumption is wrong. A person throwing the football is overpowering gravity, but only temporarily. Once he has let go of the ball he no longer can overpower it because the ball is no longer in his control and is now back in the total control of gravity. There are residual effects of the throwers control but the ball will eventually hit the ground. But he did absolutely overpower gravity for a short period!
The problem is atheists think with their brain's capacity and theists believe that human brain is limited, thus this kind of debate would never end. But there is another issue in this video, Frank said God also create the law of physic, is it his assumption or where did he get that? And Frank's last argument wasn't right either, he said that we can overpower the natural law by example of a football player, but when the player hit the ball he does not overpower the gravity, the gravity still works on him otherwise he can throw the ball very far like out of space. But this example shows how human is limited, while the issue is about unlimited God that can overpower natural laws.
He doesnt just think "i dont know" is an explination but THE best explination. Go science! I LOVE THE FUTURE! Tomorow i shall start being a gnome wizard. I miss D&D.
Of course, "I don't know" is the best explanation. If you don't know something, what would be a better explanation and statement and claim? Do you think the best explanation is "God!"
his answer about overpowering natural law makes me cringe, there are no natural laws being broken when you catch a football and throw it. it had no place in this argument. but regardless keep it up.
@youtube swallows throwing a football isnt defying the laws of nature. You're not saying anything that's why I asked what your point was. Its seems you dont understand
1- All the natural laws are are the observable constants in our reality. They don't ACTUALLY "govern". 2- A natural law, even of it DID "govern", only applies to NATURE. Our reality had a beginning, therefore the observable constants of how the universe functions had a beginning. They were CAUSED.
How can someone make a comment on a debate that he obviously never heard. Frank did not say he stopped gravity, the example shows that the EFFECTS of gravity can be stopped and overpowered.
And how does one overpower gravity? Again by the natural laws.. Isn't it?.. A football player changing the direction of the football by an external force... Newton's 1st law.. See everything here happens with the impact of natural laws.. And on what premesis he said there is someone called 'God' who doesn't have to obey natural laws?? If he say so he must prove so.. He is just saying some random stuff that doesn't make sense... Isn't it??.. How much of a poor argument it is???
@@dinukabimsarabodaragama716 it isn't a poor argument at all. If there is an omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient God; and there is; that created and upholds natural laws; and he did; then that God is not bound by the natural laws that he created and upholds. It's as simple as that! So, what would you require as proof? I'll bet you can't even Define it. But we use reason in interpreting the evidence that we have to make a decision that is reasonable based on that evidence. And the conclusion that an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent God doesn't have to abide by his natural laws should be an easy conclusion to come to. It doesn't make sense to you because you don't want there to be a God so you are willfully blind to the evidence for him. With accepting that triple "o" God, you would have to accept that there is someone or something greater than we are that we all must answer to and you just refuse to do that. But please understand, decisions have consequences and refusing the God of the universe has dire consequences. I pray you will give that thought the attention it deserves and reconsider your position. Have a blessed day!
No offence at your belives whatsoever. But see how religion has brainwashed people into thinking that there is soemone above you and you must obey or else u would have consequences after your life... Very sad to see how naive people are to believe such.. And on what premise man you could state that 'God' created the universe??... Again the burden of proof man.. The one who clamins that 'God' is not abide by natural laws must prove so... The one who clamins that 'God' created the universe must prove so... Not just 'stating' that.. . . You'ce said that "if there is an omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient God; and there is; that created and uphold natural laws; and he did ...." How do you know man? How do you know??? Please prove that 'God' created the universe... How can u be so sure??? Personal experience?? Have been taught so?? Prove it man? Prove God created the universe... Give me a proof...
@@dinukabimsarabodaragama716 yes I agree. I see how your atheistic religion has brainwashed you into believing something that cannot be true. You haven't said how you believe the universe came into existence but I'm pretty sure I know how you think it did. And just like I can only strongly suggest by deduction that God created the universe, that is the only way you could introduce the possibility of a different way. Nobody was there so nobody really can prove either way. You have to select the most logical reason from the two possibilities. We were either created by God or we popped into being something from nothing. Which seems to be the more correct direction. I asked you what proof you would require. I've told you how I have deduced from the information I have seen about evolution and what I know about God that He is real. But you won't accept that. And believe me, naive is not what anyone that knows me would use as a word to describe me. You don't have to believe that, but it is a true statement. Thanks for the conversation and have a blessed day!
God Almighty(Yahweh, Elohim)is the only natural law, and Creator of the law of relativity, without Him, there is no Time,Matter or Space, so take that and ponder why you have a free will to decide He(Jesus) does not exist through all History!!!
@@johnelliott5859J E Basis? Every thing on earth that has the Breath of Life and all Vegetation(meat) that feeds That Breath and the miracles that The Biology of those two things prove there had to be a Creator, That is unless you have a better theory that can be Proven.?? AMEN.
@@geraldjohnson8871 how do you prove god did it? How can one even test that hypothesis? There are hypotheses for abiogenesis and the events before the big bang and some are testable. I will take that over a magic man outside of time and space.
@@johnelliott5859j e I do Not have to test what is already seen by mans own eyes, God is Not to be tested by his Creation. Big bang how could that create any Thing but Chaos in a World that was Not. Do Not waste your time testing the Ways of God, you might Die before you get Saved from your Sinful Life. Christ Jesus rose from death for all man to see there is life after we Die in this body. Learn about life Not a fantasy about Human existence. Amen.
@@geraldjohnson8871 You can't test what doesn't exist. The big bang was not a creative event, it was a rapid expansion. Predictions based on this model have been accurate, ie the expansion of space and the CMBR. We don't know about events before the bang. I guess that gap is where you are placing god. That has been a common place for gods of the past. Thor explained thunder, Ra the path of the sun, etc.. Where are those knowledge gaps now? Where are those gods? The resuurection is questionable. No one has ever come back to life after being dead for so long. And there are no contemporary historical records from the Romans despite a wealth of writings from that time and region. Hmmmm? Learning about life is what brought me here.
Dr. Turek I still don't understand why you beat around the bush and never actually answer the question. Normack: Why a cause? Why does your God need a cause; isn't he above that? Dr. Turek: ...He doesn't need a cause; that's right. Because if he's timeless, he didn't have a beginning. Normack: So why do you need him? Turek: He created everything and sustains everything. Normack: Why does he have to create it? That means he needs to follow the natural laws. So that means the natural laws would be for God. You're having a logical problem there my friend. Turek (following the rabbit trail further): Why does he have to follow the natural laws if he created the natural laws? Normack: Because you said there has to be somebody who starts it...why does someone have to start it? Because of natural laws. Turek continues from there, but still only talking about the leaves and the branches, but never ever reveals the root, or the foundation that would clear it all up. Ultimately, the discussion is about cause and effect. The reason why Dr. Turek is appealing to the fact that the universe had a beginning is because of the law of cause and effect. The universe needs a cause because it had a beginning, which is a change. And a change is an effect. So something that changes is an effect that, by definition, needs a cause! Normack's arguing, though he doesn't realize it (or perhpas he does and doesn't care) that since everything needs a cause, then why doesn't God? He is assuming that, "because someone has to start it" means that the one who starts it must adhere to natural laws as well as the thing started. But both his premise for his assumption and the assumption are incorrect! Firstly, he thinks that because Turek is appealing to natural laws to prove that God must have started the universe, then God must be subject to the natural laws that Turek has appealed to. But that just doesn't follow. Secondly, and the reason it doesn't follow, is because it is not the law of cause and everything, but the law of cause and effect. Only effects need causes. So the thing started needs a cause because it is by definition an effect, but the one who starts it only needs a cause if he is himself an effect. But if he is not, then there is nothing that says a cause, itself, needs a cause. Only effects need causes. And God, by definition, is eternal, immutable, and personal; thus needs no cause. But Dr. Turek never gets to this, and I cannot for the life of me figure out why! He's appealing to it in the things that he says, but I cannot remember ever hearing him actually explain it to anyone. He discusses all the ramifications, but never comes to terms with the issue, except only implicity.
@@RAJ-zo8cu Thank you for asking. Sure is, we do not know. My own assertion as regards the so called Big Bang is, that two very different "x" and "y" collided. Those two had existed eternally before they collided with another. *Iow these were not created.* Now, there is a seemingly serious objection put by some Apologists such as WLCraig: "IF the universe per se (ie before the BB) had existed eternally, the entropy should have attained its maximum by now" which assertion does not withstand mathematic scrutiny though: While we go back in events (time) infinitesimally, the entropy is going towards a minimum value *but asymptotically.* Likewise, the entropy of the universe is right now going towards a maximum value ("heat death") BUT asymptotically. Feel free to ask if you do not understand. Sure IS: nobody has all the answers, and I consider it fair to readily admit when one does not know - rather than fill the gap with one's god. kind regards from GERMANY!
Then I guess you have to go back and tell Einstein he was wrong. Because his theory of relativity clearly indicates that time space and matter definitely had a beginning and secularists call it the Big Bang. Where Have You been?
@@mikeslater6246 Your response proclaims your scientific illiteracy. The BB is the event, when the material (world) in the ways we can know it, came about. We MEASURE space, time, mass, energy, forces, velocities, and accelerations such as gravity, !!!FROM/ABOUT!!! the material (world) as we can know it. Pls abstain from embarassing yourself towards real scientists such as I.
Atheism is falling .. if it cannot be seen then I won't be surprised because how do u make sense to a glorified baboon just leave him BE ... let him contain his anger disgust confusion and stupidity because it will only damage his mind and his body with stress .. my advice don't even waist your valuable time debating such a one .rather find hospitals and struggling schools and beggars and give them the truth the life and the way. . Much satisfaction from that. But still well done to Frank keep up the Lords calling on your life.
I used to be a big Kent Hovind fan. This guy blows Hovind WAY out the water. Hovind isn't even that good, now that I've gotten older and a bit wiser to the workings of the world around us.
And that’s your belief on the matter. It’s okay it is and most people don’t care that’s what you believe. It’s when apologists and theists go beyond belief and say it’s a fact of reality.
@@therick363 and that is your belief and you are entitled to have that belief. But I'm not going to say I don't care about your belief. If your belief is correct and there is no God then I'm okay with my belief that there is one. It's not going to change the ending situation at all, for any of us. But if there is a God, which I strongly assure you there is, then your belief is going to affect your in situation. You need to give the existence of God serious honest consideration and investigation. Seek him out, you will find him.
Usual arrogant atheist, they don't want to know the Truth, they run away from it. He doesn't want to hear an explanation he just wants to win a debate which is why he'll talk over you....
Footballers don't change the laws of physics when they head a ball. Typical of Tureks inability to comprehend science. Don't believe him till he's learned something useful.
You have totally misinterpreted what Frank said just like you obviously are totally misinterpreting the evidence of God. Science is your god and my God can beat up your god. LOL😁😁😁
@@mikeslater6246 We all know what he's saying, I'm just pointing out that his reasoning is flawed. A frequent feature of Mr. Turek. I've yet to find any evidence of a god. What makes you think there is one? Do you actually know?
@@ploppysonofploppy6066 I don't agree with everything that Frank says but I find no flaws in his reasoning in this video. And I also refuse to accept your premise that there is no evidence of God. Yes, I actually know there's a God because the best answer for all the evidence that does exist, and there is a plethora of evidence, is the God of the Bible. I was an agnostic evolutionist, I didn't believe in God and even argued with my best friend about it, that the Bible was totally contradictory. But I evolved! I started listening to God who kept wooing me to seek him out and I did. I stopped listening to man and the lies about evolution. And there are plenty of things that I could give you as reason for believing this but I think there is one that is irrefutable. DNA, it is information and information must come from a mind. Even Bill Gates says that DNA is like a program but far more complex than any of today's programmers could come up with. It had to be from a mind far superior than our finite minds. If nothing to this point had convinced me, DNA would have. When the basis of our beliefs are the ever-changing ideas and beliefs of man then we don't have a good starting point. You really can't hit a moving Target very easily. But the truth of God is Everlasting and never changing and we can trust it. I challenge you to seek it out.
@@mikeslater6246 Thank you. You see, even a numty like me can understand the clear chain of events, from the big bang to here. We will probably never understand every link in the chain, but we can observe how they fit, and they line up so well we don’t need a god to explain anything. Doesn’t mean there isn’t a god, but I’ve been on your challenge for years and no one can explain why they believe one exists when pressed. You can personally refute science all you like, but no one has published anything that refutes the current suite of scientific theories, not in the relevant places anyway. Your answer is extensive, but you haven’t said why you believe all this. DNA? - Frankly I don’t care what Bill gates thinks about it. Did he say that 80% of it does nothing? Not very “intelligent design”. It is very complex, but complexity doesn’t necessarily require a mind. No two snowflakes are alike - that’s complexity and no one designs each one. (Unless you can demonstrate that). However, if the nature of DNA is your answer - (irreducible complexity/personal incredulity), and it works for you - I wish you the all the best with it.
@@mikeslater6246 Thanks Mike. But please be clear with yourself, you are refuting science, "the lies about evolution" the facts about DNA. And no one has dared to publish in a scientific journal. "Answers in Genesis" et al doesn't count I'm afraid. Moreover, beware in debunking science, because if a God exists it is science. And beyond the fact that you cannot see anything else that explains what we are, you don't know why you believe in it. Take care.
So the Christian's argument for why the universe needs a god is, "we don't know, therefore god". This argument does not follow logically, you first must demonstrate that there is an all powerful god before you claim that one created the universe.
CBA what is the evidence we are living in a creation? And even if we did live in a creation, what is the evidence that a god is responsible? Why couldn't something else, that can not be considered a god, be responsible for the, supposed, creation?
CBA saying the question is dumb and not elaborating on why, gives me no information. If you can show me the evidence that we are living in a creation than, by all means, do so. But, if just say the question is dumb, I can imply that you don't have an answer. I am not saying you don't have an answer, I am just saying that you still haven't provided one. So please, give me an answer to the question.
'' we can overpower naturale laws'', frank should have been more careful, and not saying that. and the example of footbal is just... i don t know.. ridiculous
God Jehovah said the Foolishness of God (Himself) Confounds the Wisdom of Man. Now if He BE God Indeed, HOW EASY would that be for Him to do? Apparently, the first time He did that - Confound Man - was when He made Woman from Man's side, his rib! And Adam had already named all the Animals, earlier that day.
Naturale? :) We can overpower natural laws. Just like God Himself, His Bible teaches Christians to carefully consider their words. Frank didn't do anything wrong. He didn't say we can overpower "all" natural laws. And the football analogy was great. Very great.
Is it natural for thousands of pounds of metal to fly through the sky carrying hundreds of people? No but we do it. Defying natural laws everyday it looks like.
exactly.. I may not know how the car came together or the laws of combustion in its entirety, but it would make way way more sense that "SOMEONE" put the car together using the laws of combustion, than the car just happen to come together on its own without a cause.
@@iwatchfamilyguy interesting. Thank you for clarifying. I would say it’s inaccurate but that’s me(with Frank being the prof and other guy being pre schooler, but that’s my opinion)
Jack Plumbridge Ok. What is the evidence of Adam? Eve story? Devil? Talking snakes, bushes, skies, donkeys, a man in a fish, dead saints arising from tombs, etc?
@1981, The evidence starts with the creation. You don't have to know the Bible to know God exists. That is why no man has an excuse to deny God. Whether you are a Jew, Christian, or Muslim is a separate question.
What angers me about Frank Turek is that he constantly repeats all the nonsense that he has been repeatedly explained to him as being incorrect and often utterly nonsensical....He has repeated his "interrupting gravity" nonsense dozens of times, and dozens of times he has been told that "interrupting gravity" is not "breaking the laws of nature".....He has been told dozens of times that the football thing is an example of the laws of gravity....but he ignores it and continues to repeat it and purposefully confuse people.... He makes a completely unsubstantiated claim, and tries to "prove" it by assuming its true, and then making another completely unsubstantiated "connection"...and he compounds it from there by asking questions he doesnt have answers to, because he never substantiated the entire foundation of his thesis statement... "the universe had a beginning, therefore it couldnt have been nature, it had to be beyond nature"...whatever the hell that means...not like he bothered to explain it or support it.... "he doesnt need a cause because if he is timeless he didnt have a beginning"....... he never proved that god exists, let alone that he is timeless... He has never once been able to explain how he knows that god is timeless.... He is simply not able to understand what timelessness is...None of us are.... Much of his dishonest charlatanry is based on him trying his very hardest to ignore the fact that he cant prove that god is timeless....His entire act is based on that presupposition....Hes even written books skewing basic precepts in order to support his presuppositions.... He likes to use The Kalam Argument alot....he already knows that the Kalam Argument isnt about creation and thats its actually about causation, and it has nothing to do with the supernatural in any way....he twists it anyway, and he does it even though he has been told that he never proved that god is timeless... everything that exists, had a cause.....he believes that god exists....but he refuses to say that god had a cause...... everything that begins to exist, had a cause....the universe exists....the universe had a cause.... everything that begins to exist, had a cause...god began to exist....god had a cause.... Turek will say that is not true, because god didnt begin to exist, because god is timeless and didnt have a beginning.... He will be asked to prove that....He will not do so....He never does...He is never able to use his own "logical" progressions in order to prove the foundation of his argument....He resorts to asking questions based on presuppositions, and then hoping his opponent falls for it and tries to answer him, so that he can then turn around and try to say that his opponent agreed with his presupposition...and then he will go on basing every argument on his utterly unsubstantiated basic foundational claim... It usually ends with him saying things like "it has to, because if..."
Some of us, like Frank, have experienced MIRACLES of those things such as "interrupting gravity", for ourselves - often in the company or at least in the witness of others, as well. We are not lying, and your failure to grasp or believe it, for whatever reason you do so, has no bearing on the FACTS we speak of, when we talk of these things. If you were to tell someone of some experience you had when you were NOT PRESENT with THEM at the time of the event you speak of, and they don't believe you really had that experience (did you REALLY meet that celebrity? talk and visit with them? become great friends with them? Even though THIS PERSON never saw you with that celebrity, or heard that celebrity mention your NAME???) DO YOU THEN QUIT SPEAKING OF IT AND ACT AS IF THAT EVENT IN YOUR LIFE NEVER HAPPENED - EVEN IF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE DON'T BELIEVE YOU? . Would you believe Frank if you DID SEE IT YOURSELF? . A MAN has no obligation or ABILITY to prove these things TO THE SATISFACTION of any other person. Many peoples' own brothers and sisters do not believe the things that are told them. And that is something Jesus Himself said would BE SO. It was, even for HIM, His own brothers thought he was crazy until after the Resurrection, then His human brothers preached the Gospel and died testifying to Jesus' Divinity and Miracles, as they were martyred for refusing to deny Him. All through your life, people around you that you know tell you things you don't believe. Others tell you they do not believe certain things YOU have told them. Sorry excuse for one who KNOWS what he is talking about to SHUT UP because they are challenged by someone who was not even there.
not everything that exists has a cause. how on earth did you come to that conclusion? God didnt begin to exist. how one earth did you come to that conclusion?
Two things, dear boy. First, ALL-CAPS does not in any way REINFORCE the validity or SPECIOUSNESS of WHAT IS BEING SAID. It just is ANNOYING and POSTURING. Second, you certainly are welcome to your impassioned beliefs, but the very fact that you reject a responsibility to reveal evidence for those beliefs tells us everything we need to know about you. People in every belief system claim miracles and personal mystical experience with their deities. Are they all correct? Are all gods out there, slyly performing miracles for some while leaving huge swaths of humanity out in the cold? It is not my province to believe you SIMPLY BECAUSE YOU'RE EMOTIONAL and INSISTENT. So are any number of people in insane asylums. Which is not to suggest you're nuts, just that you are in particularly debatable company. I'm an atheist and I've experienced some strange and astonishing things. I take them as they come, and do not attribute them to invisible sky phantoms. Life is miraculous enough, and appears to have a wicked sense of irony and humor. (And cruelty.) Enjoy your GOD and your MIRACLES, just don't ask the rest of us to join you in the turbulent waters of your delusions.
@@jamesmagwenzi6058 The entire religion is a scam that promises you a life after death if you donate and tithe your money to them. We have hundreds of satellites all over outer space. There is not any old man up there, playing a harp and making people. The scammers had no idea that we would ever have space travelers, going and coming. Man has achieved immortality.When that is formerly announced, all religions will become obsolete and disappear. Google "human like robots" and see a copy of a human mind, installed into a mechanical body. That will allow human intelligence to survive living on planets that have no water nor atmosphere. We are making great progress.
I've watched a few of Franks videos, and I think Frank is having a hard time trying not to be a non believer. must be more money in acting as a spokesman for God.
@@PositivelyBrainwashed I completely reject your premise that there is no evidence for God. It's all around you. You just choose not to see it. The heavens declare the glory of God. DNA alone is irrefutable evidence of God in that DNA is information about how we develop and is the building plan for our bodies and everything else that exists and live on earth. Information must come from a mind and even Bill Gates says that DNA is a program that no programmer he knows of could design. You can choose to reject that as evidence. But choices have consequences and rejecting God has dire consequences. I pray you will reexamine it and that you change your mind like I did when I evolved from an agnostic evolutionist to a bible-believing creatioist 50 years ago.
@@mikeslater6246 There's naturalistic explanations for DNA. None of your claims that a mind or God created DNA is testable. Just because you don't understand the naturalistic explanations or you're not comfortable not having an answer, doesn't mean you can make up a mind. DNA and programming code is just a metaphor. Computer science is my background and code and DNA are not the same. And the afterlife and any punishment you're talking about is also not testable. There's no one who has died, and returned with evidence.
@@PositivelyBrainwashed your so-called naturalistic explanations are also not testable. And I agree that DNA being made by God is also untestable. But of the two untestable explanations for DNA I think the one about God is more reasonable. The fact that you willfully ignore the simple correlation between DNA and computer code does not make the comparison wrong. The bottom line is you don't want there to be a God because it interferes with what you want to do in this world. You will have to answer to something greater than we are, you reject that which is your privilege, but that privilege comes with consequences. You will learn those consequences soon enough if you don't already realize them now. My prayer is that God will open your eyes.
My skpeticism started when I realized that not one single word of the bible was written by god himself...I was supposed to simply just accept that the men who wrote the bible were being truthful when they claimed that god was speaking through them....I have absolutely zero evidence that god had anything to do with any part of any page of the bible...I cant just blindly believe what some other human writes about something so fundamentally unknown as the origins and causation of our universe....I think its incredibly arrogant and utterly ironic that the only living organisms on this planet that willfully destabilize nature and wantonly destroy the planet, somehow believe that we are the superior creatures who the creator of the universe chose as his chosen ones....Seems pretty hypocritical to destroy gods creations and then claim that god loves all of us....maybe gods not around saving us anymore because he is too busy helping all of his other creations and trying to protect them all from the monstrous ingodly human mutants who immediately started to self destruct the moment we started answering questions that we falsely believe we know the answers to... Besides, Im also sick and tired of christian apologists with a net worth above zero, who go around preaching about Jesus in order to make more money....
FishBayVI420H20 Hey! I have a question for you. You mentioned that you were skeptical of the Bible because men wrote it. Why does that bother you so much?
Isaiah writing the biography of Jesus Christ 700 years before Jesus Christ is not enough? You were not asked to "simply" accept but rather the Bible tells us to work out your salvation in fear and trembling-- as in careful thought and respect for the significance of the issue. Complete opposite of what you stated. Someone may have told you wrong, but they misstated the Bible.
Frank is such an amazing person at making false assumptions. Well done Frank! I'm praying for you that magic can be real and we can one day have access to that magic in the place where God lives outside of space and time. I really hope that place is true even though we have no proof other than we don't know so it must exist because things don't come from nothing. Now as for the Bible and Jesus! That stuff is only true to people who really really want to believe it. Normal people can take an unbiased look and be like, "Hmm, nope." This is honesty.
Wait, kicking a football up is breaking natural law? It's just one force cancelling out another one. If you had enough data, you could perfectly calculate what's going to happen using the laws of forces.
Nah, he's pointing out that even have the power to overcome some laws. That is stated because some will say that it is illogical for something natural to go against the laws of nature, but we do it all the time. On a smaller scale, of course.
It doesn't matter if a ball bounces of someone's head or just off the floor. There is no overcoming of any natural law in the example. Humans do not have the power to overcome natural laws. Frank gets flustered and says dumb things.
The footballer is not "overcoming" a natural law. He is exploiting and confirming it, just as science has proved. Turek is ghastly in his misunderstanding of such remedial physics, and please tell me you're not so credulous as to think he has made a good point. He's merely reinforced his desperation as a feeble apologist. Soccer does not, I assure you, "go against the laws of nature." It embodies them. Sheesh.
A football player is overpowering natural laws by heading the ball?? Holy shit, he said that with a straight face! Heading a ball only demonstrates additional laws of physics!! That Christian dude showed hang it up. What happened to not bearing false witness?
but look how the atheist talks, always nervous and seems upset with Frank Turek's questions he doesn't want there to be God himself tends to the proofs in sight, why does he feel uncomfortable?
I have huge respect for Frank's patience and humility in response...something to adopt...
gonna back that up with any evidence? or are you just going to be an angry pitiful atheist on the internet that nobody cares about?
pitiful claims of God? that another opinion lol. he provides plenty of evidence. its not his fault if you cant understand what he is saying.
frank wasnt discrediting atheists, he was showing how atheism leads to damaging consequences.
i have plenty of evidence for my beliefs, too bad the same thing cant be said about you. and you call me pitiful, resorting to insults already? how childish of you! whilst at the same time trying to insult frank by calling him a boy, which also makes you a hypocrite!
Patience and humility are, indeed, fine virtues. But they can be invalidated by irrational claims, such as Turek routinely makes without wincing. His imaginary footballer -- in a godlike denial of natural laws, in Turek's view -- is simply using physics to play a game. He is not subverting or "interrupting" natural law in any way; he's exploiting it. And thanks to science -- not religion or faith -- we understand how it works. Turek, meanwhile, gives no credible, substantiated reasons for (A) why there must be a "cause" to the universe (he needs to read Hume on that subject), (B) why it must take an inexplicable "supernatural entity" to be that cause, and (C) why that entity must be Turek's god, among the thousands of gods both extinct and extant, and the countless others yet unimagined by the antic human mind. Turek's demeanor is laudable; his arguments are frivolous when not outright preposterous.
@@geokaplan59 "And thanks to science " listen to yourself! You are actually thanking "SCIENCE" Don't tell me you have no gods and you worship nothing because you do.
Nick Jones you dont have proof against a theistic god so
man that atheist had no clue what was going on
Just a lot of twitching and stuttering. Looks like a puppet for the devil
No clue at all!
@@brucecall1595 "puppet for the devil" this was hilarious
Welp. An atheist lost a debate. I guess it's time to accept the true risen savior Jesus Christ.
Debates help people see both sides of an argument. From that, you make your own choice.
Don't accept Jesus just because he (and most atheists) lose the debate. Accept Him because His gift is free and it costs you nothing :)
@@OneBoundMusicWhile my inital comment was a joke, I will seriously say that the only thing I can do is keep weighing the arguments, short of a personal revelations 😊
@@parker6936Agreed.
@@dogsandyoga1743 Lol, a personal revelation would be great. Follow the evidence! What would you say is your biggest contention right now with Jesus?
An other emotional atheists being emotional as usual without making any goddamn sense
nickj14711 Everything
Abu Muhamed Alee Al Ansari don't say goddam fam lol
GeorgetheGreat I agree! How did I not catch that?!
Using the term goddamn is really not helpful is it?
Why you swear if your not atheist
This atheist seems so full of hate. Gonna pray for him tonight.
Thurold better to be full of hate than full of Shit. Like Frank.I'll reason for you tonight.
You just proved his point, or you don't know how to have a civil conversation behind a keyboard? If you can't speak with compassion no one's gonna listen to you.
please provide one fault in the christian teachings.
im sure you must know that any actions that contradict christian teachings, even if they are claimed to be christian, cannot be held against the ideology itself.
so for example, when the catholic church went on crusades they contradicted the teachings of christ, hence the actions were not christian and cannot be held against christianity.
so as a RELIGION christianity has a perfect track record. if you disagree then please prove it.
oh and btw, atheism has caused the deaths of more people than all religions combined. or have you not done your homework?
Jack Plumbridge Then maybe I'm misunderstanding something, of we know that energy and matter are not the same, then why can't energy have existed before the universe.
of we know that energy and matter are not the same, then why can't energy have existed before the universe.
At the point of the singularity energy and matter were the same thing. (what that 'thing' could be the scientists are still researching for it ie. (UFT Unified field theory, ToE theory of everything) The reason why the universe looks the way it does is because as it expanded it itself began to gradually cool down (but not enough to stop the rate of expansion because there is good evidence for it's continual expansion). So it's due to the cooling that gravity (some intrinsic property of the universe) had the chance to take over to form galaxies,stars and little ol' us. You could even do an experiment of sorts. Take a magnet and stick it to something magnetic. If you heat up the magnet just enough it will loose it's magnetism (you could say that it looses it's artificial gravity) and fall to the ground (get's back to it's natural state and further heating would be required to get it back close to the energy levels of the singularity however there isn't enough energy in this universe to recreate the singularity event so scientists are still researching this ask Stephen Hawking etc.) so this type of a phenomena is responsible for ultimately creating brains and minds at the universe at large.
Dude was starting to get mad...you can tell by his demeanor. Didn't like the answer so get angry like a little kid I guess.
Talk about getting triggered
Dude do you know how insane that sounds. "Demonstrate that God transcends time and space." You can't demonstrate that which is not tangible...kind of like evolution. You follow the evidence and Frank has made enough arguments to prove that the evidence leads more to a creator and not evolution. You get upset because you don't like the answer. The problem with your assertion is that you are using it as a means to justify what you "want" to believe and not what is. I've seen to many atheists getting frustrated with things that cannot be explained. That is what happens when you are looking for a solution to the unknown. God wasn't man made therefore cannot be explained in a vacuum of human thought or logic of man's capacity of understanding. You can't use the indefinite or better yet unfathomable to keep you from believing in God. Rather step into the mystery and be in awe of how great God really is. He has placed eternity in the hearts of man, yet man has not understood beginning to end. Ecclesiastes 3:11
It's offensive when you don't have the Lord. Before I was saved I couldn't understand why I would get angry. Now I see.✝️
So many people are blind I feel sorry for them
the end will be alot of arrogant people the bible says..ther u go
if this were a boxing match the Ref would have stopped it early! good job Frank
Brilliant way to put it...
Reminds me of that simpsons episode - "Stop stop...he's already dead"
Frank was the dead one here. He had no answer other than. God did it cos God says so.
No, Frank did not win. Saying basically a nonphysical supernatural being caused the universe is not evidence of such just because we don't know what occurred before the big bang. IN fact there is no evidence of such.
@@ploppysonofploppy6066
You didn't watch it did you?
Keep up the good work Dr. Turek.
Right, the ridiculous shit Franky boy spout is doing more good for atheism than what a thousand atheists could ever hope to achieve.
Lawn Tex
"Keep up the good work Dr. Turek. "
I have no doubt the millionaire Frank Turek will keep up the "good work" for as long as people continute to buy in to it.
nickj14711 its a category fallacy. By definition, God is uncaused. God could not be caused and still be God. Frank explains it, don't ask the question then reject the answer. Its simple.
When will he START it? His flimsy ramblings illuminate nothing, and merely point out the paucity of his insights. But you fall for it. Watch the video again and really listen. His analogy of the footballer is as pointless as it is irrational. Are we really this credulous? Are we really swayed by so anemic a thinker as Turek? "Truth Seeker" is a noble appellation. But apparently you want not truth but apologetic comfort.
@@schneider4280
Scientists all get more money than Frank?
Hitchens did the same "im not an expert" dodge in debates
And Frank acts like an expert when he’s not
@@therick363 frank evidence is backup by experts..
Even Atheist & agnostic scientists.
@@daddada2984 what evidence specifically are you referring to?
He sounds like an angry child, no scientific evidence to back his toughts. The athiest is whom im talking about
what scientific evidence does Frank have to back up his claim that god caused the universe?
@@johnelliott5859 you can't PROVE God just like you can't PROVE the Big Bang. And science doesn't PROVE anything. Through observation and experimentation it reveals evidence. The evidence then has to be evaluated and interpreted. God is the best answer to the evidence that has been revealed.
@@mikeslater6246 the theory of the big bang resulted in predictions such as the CMBR. When it was discovered through observation, it provided evidence for the big bang theory. In that sense it can be proved. If other observations refute the theory then the theory is altered or discarded. The theory of evolution has been demonstrated time and again. This leads one to alter the theory that a god created all living things. Some apologists will say god created the kinds and evolution worked from there - still an alteration of original theory.
One can't prove that a theory is correct fpor all time, but they can definitely prove or disprove the current theory. That's science. Science can prove or falsify an hypothesis. your god is not testable or falsifiable.
@@johnelliott5859 unfortunately your answer is not in the conversation string on my tablet. So others may not see our discussion. But I repeat you cannot prove or disprove God. Observations reveal evidence but all evidence has to be interpreted to come to a conclusion. If you're starting presumptions are wrong then your conclusions are going to be wrong. Evolution definitely has not been proven correct time and time again. DNA alone clearly shows that evolution is not possible. Time is not the magic ingredient to make Evolution work. And I don't believe God used evolution. Again you have to believe in a miracle without a miracle maker. The Miracle of Life coming from non life which Louis Pasteur and his experiments clearly show cannot occur.
@@mikeslater6246 I have conceded you can't disprove or prove god. And you are correct that if your starting presumptions are wrong than your conclusions are likely wrong. My issue is you assuming god did it, when we don't know how it happened. In that sense I am not making a presumption, you are.
Counting on scientific evidence from 19th century when their are more recent studies which contradict your position is of no value.
It has been shown that the building blocks of life can be generated from nonliving chemicals.
The theory of evolution is as solid as the theory of gravity.
Consider COVID and its many mutations which continue because those mutations make then more likely to survive the human immune system and reproduce. These viruses have a very short generation rate. Imagine if the same process happened in large organisms over millions or billions of years. There is no one who claims that no evolution occurs, they will just call it microevolution and use a young earth as a reason it couldn't happen. But science also refutes a young earth through very many different types of study.
Only if you presume a young earth and a creator being can you willingly ignore the evidence of an old earth and evolution.
Why did he assume they were natural laws before everything existed??
Unfortunately, he missed the point. The atheist was saying that the principle of causation is a natural law and this is false. It is a principle of reason. Without cause, there is no reason. So if there is a reason for the coming into existence of the universe, then it has a cause. This is not a natural law like gravity. Natural laws assume the principle of causation. It assumes there is a rational explanation when something happens.
That was the loudest mic drop ever.
Check baby check
Baby one two three four
Check baby check
Baby one two three.
i find a lot of atheists are never able to disprove god and are only able to critique him, theres this emotional barrier because heir thinking is a certain way that makes them unable to comprehend a god in their mind.
The barrier is a lack of any evidence for the existence of some omni god. A physical explanation for the beginning of the universe is far more valuable then an unfalsifiable, invisible, non physical reason.
@@johnelliott5859 you legit believe in nothing creating everything
@@stutteringdisciple1919 Not at all what I said. I said I don't know what made everything or if the matter/energy always existed.
By the way, it us you who believes that the universe was created by nothing by a being whose existence has no proof.
Current physical laws would suggest that all the matter/energy that exists always did and always will. What if the energy/matter in our universe is actually zero. In other words what if energy and "dark energy" cancel each other out. Then there is a chance that "nothing" is what the universe is made of. Hmmm?
Is the Y pronounced as a J?
@@johnelliott5859 there is plenty of evidence. The heavens declare the glory of God. Your inability to recognize it is willful on your part. You don't want there to be a God so you don't accept that there is a God. I'll pray your eyes can be opened. And I'm speaking from experience. I didn't believe there was a God until I started looking at the world around me and the things happening around me and realize that I am not an accident. You aren't an accident either. Look into it with more of an open mind seeking Him honestly and you will find Him.
@@mikeslater6246 Actually I was born again believer for decades. When I investigated my problems about the bible and the religion, they did not withstand scrutiny. As difficult as the decision was with my eternal soul in the balance (or so I thought) I had too be honest with myself. I did want there to be a god, but the evidence just didn't add up to the existence of the god of the bible.
will someone please tell me what that music is?
Are all of the these recent video clips from a longer debate?
Ryan Bali th-cam.com/video/t-p2eSkmyIQ/w-d-xo.html
Thanks
It all comes down to this; either the universe i.e the natural world is eternal, OR something supernatural i.e. beyond nature caused it to be.
Nick Jones
So do you disagree with the science that says that the universe i.e. the natural world, had a beginning about 17 billion years ago?
Well I hate to tell you but, your child don't know Jack... unless that's the teacher's name at school. The FACT of the matter is NO ONE knows the exact age of the universe, and it is ARROGANT for anyone to claim that they do. What we have is mere theories, conjecture and speculation. For example;
Our estimate of the age and size of the Universe has changed several times during the past century.
1919
Age: Infinite
Size: 300,000 Light Years
1929
Age: 2 Billion Years
Size: 280 Million Light Years
1955
Age: 6 Billion Years
Size: 4 Billion Light Years
1965
Age: 10-25 Billion Years
Size: 25 Billion Light Years
1993
Age: 12-20 Billion Years
Size: 30 Billion Light Years
2006
Age: 13.7 Billion Years
Size: 94 Billion Light Years
You say that; "Prior to that it was merely a singularity and a whole load of nothing. It merely started expanding at that point."
Where can I get some of this "nothing"? Can I order it online? Is this "nothing" natural? How do you know it isn't supernatural, and you simply don't yet understand???
@@rustyshadow7 ... I agree with you, we don't know how old the universe is... we DO know that it HAS an age (i.e it's existence can be measured by time.. i.e. IT BEGAN. LOL).
I don't see any comments from the person that you directed your comment to, but that person clearly doesn't understand that the singularity is described as a point of INFINITE density. Functionally speaking, the singularly is a point of "out of no thing PHYSICAL". It just surprises me that so many atheists appeal to science and logic, without actually understanding science nor logic.
Dude seemed quite flustered
Why are the atheist always so tense and angry when debating Christians 🤷🏾♂️🤷🏾♂️🤷🏾♂️
Because Christians often have double standards, misrepresent atheists and science, and think they can’t be wrong and everyone else is. It gets old.
So this guy would rather believe that nothing suddenly exploded and created something. Mmm !!!
I can't find this whole debate. Who is the guy Frank is debating?
Everything in Turek's football example happens in perfect accord with the laws of gravity. The only way those laws would be "defied" would be if a resting football floated away from earth. Anybody ever seen that happen?
Have you see air plane
@@dimasrahadian360 Airplanes don't defy natural law, rather they use what science we know to fly. Although Dr. Turek's premise is wrong, his conclusion is still valid. God can of course defy natural law in the same way Superman can fly. Fictional entities aren't bound by natural law.
@@brucedambrosio4270 Maybe magnet can defy gravity.
@@dimasrahadian360 Magnets follow natural laws as well. You, like Dr. Turek, don't seem to understand the concept of forces.. Magnets have electro-magnetic force which can be stronger than the force of gravity. It's still natural law. If you ever observe an action that defies natural law, you will have observed by definition, a miracle.
@@brucedambrosio4270 if atheis have questions " how do we know the cause of the universe is god?" Then Christianity only have answer it miracle, it's like Zakir Naik answer😂
I need full debate
wow I am a horrible debater but I think I could of beat this atheist .
Whenever there is talk of the existence of a Creator, the atheists tremble, they feel uncomfortable.
No we don’t
They do because of their concience. They know that Gods law is against their doing and they fear the judge yet they dont want the saviour.
I think you are mistaking trembling for chuckling.
@@johnelliott5859 people laugh when they don't know what else to do. You tremble at the thought of His existence and chuckle because you don't know what to do if He does exist, which He does.
Even if there's a creator of the universe, where's evidence that he wants us to live a certain way.
Your conscience bears witness
@@JarrydTiltmanphotographer Lets say my conscience is proof there's a God. Is it Odin, Apollo, Zeus, Loki, Artemis? So many to choose if only our creator would reveal himself.
@@sick_ibg712 You must look to where the evidence points.
@@ferniegutierrez5605 I do and thats why I like the great majority of the top scientists dont believe in a creator of the universe. If God wants to make his presence known he needs to provide real evidence.
@@sick_ibg712 God has left ample evidence to know he is real. I have long since rejected the childish notion that people will always accept evidence. We do not even need to look to the supernatural to see this idea to be false. There are certain people who believe the earth is a certain shape and no manner of historical and visual documentation will convince them otherwise. If you show them something historical they will simply say it's made up or some other such excuse.
As a baby Christian, I used to be like "God u simply haven't shown them enough." As I've lived longer and observed human nature I realised for some it will never be enough. Ironically the Bible warns people of the very thing it took me years to accept. And now I see it all around me , in politics, relationships, etc. As the Bible says "whoever has ears to hear, let them hear."
God who made the laws is limited by them? i am confused.........
The atheist meant if God doesn't need to follow natural laws, then why are we saying that space, matter, and time have to have their origin with God (basically, why does nature need to have a supernatural origin if origination itself is natural)? Also, Frank's response about defying gravity is pretty dumb. I'm a fan of Frank, just pointing out he messed up this time.
God created natural laws to support us not to support Himself. Last time I checked, we were the natural beings, not God.
Christians support Gawd, don't you give him 10 percent of your paycheck?
*Psalm 24:1
_"Of David. A psalm. The earth is the LORD's, and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it."_
*Deuteronomy **8:18*
_"But remember the LORD your God, for it is he who gives you the ability to produce wealth, and so confirms his covenant, which he swore to your ancestors, as it is today."_
*Isaiah 42:5*
_"This is what God the LORD says-- the Creator of the heavens, who stretches them out, who spreads out the earth with all that springs from it, who gives breath to its people, and life to those who walk on it:"_
I support God :) the One True God. I give Him 10 percent of the gross amount on my paychecks. I've been diligent to do this for several months now even when my bank account funds were running low. I was involved in a car accident about one year ago (minor injuries). I just got word that the settlement amount that will be given to me will be in the several thousands (more than a dozen). I just started college and my girlfriend left me. The funds will be very needed for my college needs and when my girlfriend comes back to me she will see a large amount in my bank account. It's very important to me to show her that God prospers His children.
Oh and i also see what you were getting at neighbor. I don't "give" God funds to *sustain* Him. No. I give _Him_ (that is His establishment, the Church, i.e. handing over to Him) I give funds to my church to support the Kingdom of God, of which He rules over. God allows me to participate in His Will to help lost and hurt souls in my community and the rest of the world.
I guess you're lucky Gawd didn't kill you in the car accident, next time ask him to just write you a check instead of wrecking you car.
God has already written a check that entitles me to bursaries that can not be measured in human standards. I am the benefactor of eternal riches in Jesus Christ my Lord and Savior. Glories that can not be fathomed. Why do you say I am "lucky?" Luck does not exist neighbor. Furthermore, why do you say, "[God] didn't kill [me] in the car accident" ? Do you think God causes all things? This is unBiblical. And it hurts me to think you have that misconception about the One True God. I will walk on streets of gold one day neighbor. The commodities of this world are fleeting and temporary. True riches abide and abound in the inheritance of the saints, of which I am. Do you know Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior neighbor? He loves you so much that He died for you. God bless.
th-cam.com/video/N_lrrq_opng/w-d-xo.html
Someone please explain it to Turek here that a footballer isn't breaking any natural laws. Breaking a natural law would mean flying like Superman.
And this is a valid question: how do we know the first cause is god ? It could be just a theoretical term or factor or maybe it's just potentiality. Physicists are trying to figure out what comes before the big bang. People putting in a lot of hard work and here comes Mr. Turek declaring he knows it all . Why don't we stop giving funds for cosmologists and present an award to Mr. Turek . Now, imagine some physicists do discover something before the big bang , perhaps an infinite potential. The next thing you'll hear Christian apologetics say is God is that potential or God created that potential . It's an endless stream of Ad hoc's cuz Christians don't want to give up their beliefs .
How about try circular reasoning?
It's dr turek. You came here seeking truth. It's all around you brother. Creation
There was a time when I tried with everything I had to find any way I could that God did not exist.Anyone who is honest will have to come to the conclusion that God exists and that he created everything.Sometimes you just have to put your whole being into discovering his existence.God is unfathomable but he will reveal in your conciseness and spirit that he is everywhere.
The only conclusion you can come to presently is we don't know how the universe was originally created. That's it. Testable, falsifiable hypotheses are useful. A magic being from outside the universe did it are not. Especially if you claim that being is the christian omni god.
@@johnelliott5859 and your belief says that nothing exploded and became something and that life came into existence from a wet rock. Louis Pasteur did experiments that can be repeated and clearly show life only comes from life. And nothing is what rocks dream of.
@@mikeslater6246 no the big bang does not say something exploded out of nothing. Common misrepresentation put forward by creationists especially. The big bang was an expansion of the energy/matter that was present. What happened before that? Science doesn't know at the current time, but will put forward hypotheses, test them and prove or falsify them.
Your argument is simply a god of the gaps argument. We don't know how life or the universe began so magical immaterial being did it. History is littered with gods of knowledge gaps. No one believes Thor creates thunder or Ra drives the sun in a chariot. When knowledge gaps are reduced so are the gods used to explain them. History would show that your god will achieve the same fate.
@@johnelliott5859 you really shouldn't be arguing that something is wrong when you admit you don't know what is right. You admit you don't know how the universe got here. But you say that it can't be God? And the straw man argument about Thor and RA don't help your argument at all! Just because others claimed those gods existed but don't doesn't mean the one true God of the Bible doesn't exist. You can call mine a theory of the God of the gaps but in truth they're your gaps, not mine. Time is your god of the gaps, just give us enough time and we'll find out the truth. Well you are going to find out the truth in a lot less time than you think. I challenge you to listen more intently and look more closely at the arguments for God. I did 50 years ago and haven't regretted it one minute.
@@mikeslater6246 I have never said it can't be god. I have said, as have you, that it can't be proven or disproven. Until I have good evidence I will withhold my belief. I find there is good evidence for evolution and an old earth, so I do " believe" in them. Those two things make the god of the bible less likely.
I didn't make the gap. The limits of our knowledge did. We don't know how life or the universe began. At present if you provide an explanation, it is only an hypothesis. Hypotheses need to be tested to see if they accurately reflect reality. The hypothesis god did it is not testable. You have said so yourself - god can't be proven or disproven.
I spent several years evaluating the claims/arguments on both sides of the theism/nontheism debate. Probably didn't want to lose my faith, but I had to be honest with myself, the christian faith and the god of the bible do not withstand honest scrutiny.
The christian god is supposed to be an omni god - all loving, powerful, knowing, present.
Is it moral for this omni god to create billions of people that he knows will suffer eternal torment? A god like that cannot be all those omnis. It is impossible. But that is the god the christian religion believes in.
I'm not a believer, but that's another KO to Frank Turek. I'm sure there are good atheist debaters, but where are they hiding...
This may seem off topic, but in communist countries one of the first things to always be banned is the reading or teaching of the Bible. Why is that 🤔🤔
Because comunism is literaly satanic. Karl Marx hated God and loved Satan. Stalyn died shaking his fist at the heavens.
I would encourage people to read the entire bible. Many will begin to wonder about the teachings they have accepted. The god of the bible condones slavery, commands genocide and promotes misogyny. It is not a moral being.
@@johnelliott5859 I would encourage you to do a better job at trying to understand what the Bible says. It does not condone slavery. Paraphrasing: Exodus 21:16 clearly states that anyone who steals a man, puts him in slavery, or any person who is found in possession of a man who has been stolen is to be put to death. Doesn't sound like condoning to me. And the creator of the universe cannot be guilty of genocide for destroying part of his creation when it disobeys Him. And the Bible says that there is no male or female, that they are equal in His sight. But the Bible does define different, but equally important, roles for women and men in life. Lastly, the Bible is God's Word to his creation and it is telling us about Him. Much of what He says in His Word is truth about what is happening or has happened in this world but it is not all condoned by God. I encourage you to seek Him out honestly. He will reveal Himself!
@@mikeslater6246 if you read the entire bible instead of just the parts that support your position, you will see Jews were permitted to buy slaves from the nations around them and to leave them as an inheritance. They could also beat them as long as they didn't die too quickly. Parts of the bible also are misogynistic. Womens testimony wasn't as valuable, they weren't allowed into the synagogue during their period since they were "unclean". A raped woman had to marry her rapist, but he couldn't divorce her. Paul wouldn't allow women to teach but they had to be silent. Read Joshua, the most recurrent phrase is kill every living thing. This included women and children. How anyone can excuse genocide is beyond me. Except to maintain your notion of god.
@@johnelliott5859 From what standard do you say slavery, genocide and misogyny is objectively immoral?
Turek is a joke. The footballer doesn't overpower gravity by heading the ball away. Gravity still exists. It is still working on the ball, the football player, the goalposts, etc.
The atheist has a point in that he doesn't know how things work, but that doesn't mean the answer is..... GOD! That's what he was saying when talking about cars and baking powder.
Also, notice the edits - particularly at the end. Why does Turek end the video before the atheist makes his point?
The Atheist admitted that he didn't know a lot of things. Could God be part of what he should be admitting that he knows nothing about? It's obvious he doesn't know anything about God, about his existence or anything else. Why is he sitting there arguing about what he doesn't know?
@@mikeslater6246 But Turek does know about god. It possible for anyone to explore the knowledge that someone has - up to the point of our own knowledge on the subject. I am an atheist. Like Turek, I use my mind to explore what a god is. I am also able to use my mind to explore what Turek means by god.
@@GariSullivan I'm sorry but your first two sentences seem to be missing a couple of words and make no sense to me. But referring to your last sentence, all you have to do is listen to Frank to know what he means by God. I don't agree with everything that he believes about the Bible but I do know that he believes there is a God and neither you, Frank, or I are Him.
A final thought, you seem to be saying you use your mind to determine there is no God, but in doing so aren't you claiming you use your mind to come to the conclusion that nothing exploded and became everything and then you actually evolved from a wet rock? Those are the only two choices. It was by using my mind that I went from an unbeliever to a believer.
Atheist was coming apart...
when he say "before there was any time or space", or he say "God created time and space", it is totally contradict. With out time, how he can describe the order of creation? The cause-effect means an event happened before another event. God happens before time, then what the "before" means?
He is using human mind trying to describe what is beyond.
Claims a god transcends natural law, is timeless, spaceless, etc. etc. is an unfounded assertion. The correct and only honest answer is 'we don't yet know the cause, the how or the why of the origin of the universe.....and we may never know.' Better to have an unanswered question than an answer that cannot be questioned.
Nothing exploding into something is magic
@Nick Jones christians claim that something made something
@Nick Jones well at least that ASINE claim was always there not like the Big Bang Theory that nothing makes nothing which is way MORE WORSE and to top it off a Roman catholic cardinal started the Big Bang Theory.....yup atheists putting their trust in a religious man ;) and I'm not even religious >;)
@Nick Jones well why are you even trying to argue with me? Isn't your life an accident? 🤣 You're gonna die one day and be forgotten forever. I forgot about you and you just popped up so here we go again and no creation claims go way than 2000 years. So yeah what's the point of proving a proving a point if I have nothing to lose and you have so much to lose? Aren't you just a jumbled up pile of particles saying random words?! Lmao 🤦♂️👎
@Nick Jones So thats your definition of lost? You show so much anger and hatred and you're telling me that I lost? You lost and you seem lost at the same time. You're the one with the young mind being brainwashed by the science of this world and claiming to be the owner of science and whatever you say goes because all atheists feel entitled owning science. Just because a scientist said it does not make it science.....its only a theory.....a game theory >;)
@Nick Jones a theory is not a fact and it cannot be proven. You just got triggered because i said atheists believe that something comes from nothing and i said that something came from something and you're here arguing with me blah blah blah that it was not a cardinal and that my intellect is low while trying to disprove a High Power with no evidence. I'm just gonna put a white coat and come up with an equation and thats proof that we came from nothing.....that hurt so much saying it. Lets just say that christians need faith to believe in God but atheists need a HUGE AMOUNT of faith to believe in the origin of the universe according to the atheist model. You were not there and the scientists either. You just have to take their word from them and believe what is actually in the books. Ooooops almost sounds like a religion too lol
No, the reason that the universe has a transcendent cause is because of the laws of logic, not because of natural laws. The law of causality (which is itself an observable constant) indicates that everything that BEGINS has an exterior cause. There are no exceptions that we have EVER observed. ZERO.
Time/space began... it was CAUSED. This isn't debatable.
Come on Turek! You should know better. Overcoming the force of gravity is not overpowering a natural law
God follows the laws of logic because they are a part of His nature. The hard of logic are distinct from the laws of nature. God created the laws of nature which could be different. The first principles of logic could not be otherwise
To me, what you said is a Confusion.
The Hard LOGIC of Gravity is in fact a LAW.
It is something else when the GRAVITY is a HARD FORCE, yet Humans, animals, and THINGS continually go against that FORCE, Overcome the FORCE to a certain DEGREE for a BIT of Time, yet don't BREAK THE LAW, and Gravity continues in effect.
Other times, Miracles Happen and People, animals, THINGS DEFY the LAW without Scientific Cause, and yet the Person BELIEVES that GOD HIMSELF reached down and touched them and took their hand and for a Time, lifts them UNSCIENTIFICALLY above the Force, be it Gravity or another Natural Law.
Whether this was Jesus and Peter walking on the water, or whether you see a man whose vocal cords were cut completely through in some terrible accident, yet you sit and hear him talk and sing before your very eyes for another 46 years NEVER having his Vocal Cords repaired or replaced - singing WITHOUT VOCAL CORDS. Or whether an unbelieving doctor operates on a tiny baby, and the moment they cut the baby's chest open and behold the damaged heart, he SEES that baby's heart heal before his very eyes!
In a MANNER of SPEAKING, ALL SORTS of NATURAL LAWS have been broken - yet are functioning perfectly in every other instance in the world, the LAWS not broken, REALLY, at all, but that FORCE of the Law was briefly interrupted, for One Divine Moment, and we saw a PEEK at His Majesty and Glory, here on Earth.
Logic is a man made system. God is imaginary, like Han Solo or the Tooth Fairy. Grow up kid.
The 'god hypothesis' is illogical, you first have to have evidence for a claim to have a logical reasoning to believe that claim is true. Last I checked, your particular brand of deity is completely unsubstantiated like all the rest.
@@CaffeinatedDebate what do you mean by that ? and how did you come to that conclusion?
@Nick Jones you dont have one credible scrap of evidence supporting your claim
The big bang was when two black holes collided. The resulting debris field became our universe.
Wrong your lost
@@waynelewis4466 It is correctly written, "Wrong, you are lost". Learn to write. You appear to be uneducated.
@@tedbishop Well some astronomers say all that would happen if two black holes collided is make a bigger black hole but you still need an uncaused first cause.
How can two black holes exist if there was no Universe for them to exist in?
his response was that god has to obey natural laws but any "scientific" explanation for creating everything out of nothing doesnt. no matter the cause, creating something out of nothing is "magic" as he put it. believe in god or believe in science. we can understand neither so theyre both the same level of faith
That science says that time space and matter had a beginning, therefore if God didn't do it, everything came out of nothing. which is more likely that nothing created everything or that God created everything?
@@amerokii god created everything. its the only option that makes any logical sense. to say "nothing created everything" is nonsense because its essentially saying out of a void of complete desolation suddenly a thing magically poofed into existence without any cause or action to precede it.
science is testable and falsifiable. It does not require faith.
@@amerokii science does not say anything. Scientists do. Every bit of evidence that exists is evaluated and interpreted by people. And if you start with the wrong assumptions, you come up with the wrong conclusions as to what that evidence reveals. I believe you are saying that God created everything and I'm agreeing but we need to stop making the statement that science says anything, because it doesn't.
Frank just ruined this guys argument
This was horrible to watch. Very bad from both sides. As an atheist I didn't really understand what the atheists (I'm assuming he was an atheist) point was and at the same time Turek's rebuttal analogy was nonsensical.
Yeah same I think Turek was trying to say if you have a system then someone can intervene in that system. So if the player is an outside force and the ball and gravity are the system then a player can step in and "defy laws" by adding energy to the system. But either way I felt like he could've done better on that analogy.
Excellent answer. I would have a lot of trouble remaining patient with the man in the blue coat, who is obviously mentally ill.
It's like arguing with a petulant child
he is calling magic, creator creating, while being a creator/doer himself. what he believes is beyond magic: nothing to cell, thats not all he believes life slowly formed, when life cant even survive 5mns w/o being complete, it cant even exist w/o being complete
This atheist reminded of that great William Somerset Maugham quote, "Like all weak men, he laid exaggerated stress on never changing one's mind." The purpose of science and scientific method lies not in finding the truth rather to systematically search for ERROR. Those who think they have found the truth and are certain of it are not scientists, rather they are religious or political. Science is ever changing, ever questioning and presenting new theories to question the status quo. Christians-faith and the object of that faith, Jesus.
Isn't it Frank who holds to a belief that is not testable, so one cannot systematically search for error in a god belief? Isn't it fundamentalist in particular who believe in the creation myth and Noahs flood literally despite the evidence proving them wrong?
@@johnelliott5859 I don’t think so…God’s plan included “faith” as his policy for mankind’s salvation. Non-meritorious as the object of the person faith….carries all the merit. God planned this in eternity past….it’s been functioning since Adam in the garden. Each individual has a choice. It certainly is “testable” by God. His ways our higher than ours. Isaiah 55:9-9
@@g.alistar7798 I think you have made my point. This kind of faith leads to belief in unfalsifiable, untestable tenets. For example how do you test to see if god created the universe and life on earth? Those are certainly two issues that have not been proven in science, but there are hypotheses presented that can be tested.
@@johnelliott5859 Hi John, do you think perhaps there is a difference between the things of earth and the spiritual? Applying science to faith to justify unbelief is your choice. The science of “Systematic Theology” is the application of the scientific methods and principles to the supernatural, i.e., the Word of God found in the Bible. “By faith the Christian understands…” Hebrews 11:3. The Bible is foolishness to the unregenerate, yet to those with faith, it is the power of God, The Bible is not understood, nor received by unregenerate men (1 Cor 2:14). Regardless of one’s native mental ability and powers and regardless of how hard the unregenerate may try, they will never understand the supernatural aspects of the Christian way of life. It’s foolishness, God meant it to be that way. Importantly, only men and women of faith may understand the spiritual. The laws and theories of science such as mathematics, statistics, quantum theory, physics, biology, medicine, etc….. have no equivalent in the spiritual or supernatural.
@@g.alistar7798 Thank you for your respectful, reasonable tone. So far there is no evidence for the supernatural. And claims that a nonbeliever can't understand the bible are questionable. Since I was a believer for decades, can I no longer understand?
There's a reason there are no equivalent of the laws of our physical world in the supernatural. It can't be studied.
I don't consider the bible proof, basically of itself. It has enough errors in it for me to discount it's validity as an inerrant, inspired word of an omni being.
..what a fool.. In baking powder he trusts...
Let's remember to win the heart not the argument. Logic is not on the side of Atheism. That's why they get so angry. Some of them will eventually convert. Some will deny in hell.
Logic is indeed on the side of atheism, the time to believe something to be true is when it has been substantiated to be true, not before as you delusional wind whisperers disingenuously do.
Really. "Logic is not on the side of atheism." Instead, we should deliver, with all due gullibility, our trust to the apologistic blathering of Mr. Turek -- who seems to believe a soccer player defies or "interrupts" the laws of physics when he heads a ball. I see no anger in the atheist on the panel, but there is a level of exasperation as his valid points go unheeded. Turek offers no evidence for his preposterous claims. He is the one who uses emotion as a kind of sleight of hand, or sleight of mouth. His footballer is as much a deception and illusion as his god. And you, Artty. You really believe in hell. You accept a god who loves us so much that if we don't kowtow to his whims (from slavery to killing non-virginal single women to slaying homosexuals and disobedient children), he'll prove his love by casting us into an eternal lake of searing shrieking fire. Riiiiiight. What is in fact happening, and demographics show this, is that greater and greater numbers of Christians are renouncing their faith or, more often, the tenets of their religious doctrines. The so-called "Nones" are the fastest-growing segment of American society. Hallelujah! Maybe that's why you get so angry. Don't worry; you will eventually convert. Then you won't deny in hell; you'll simply deny hell. You'll recognize hell for what it is: a threat to coerce false belief. The "heart of the argument" has already been won, and atheists stand tall, while apologists of Turek's stripe (why would any omnipotent, omniscient god need apologetics?) stumble and fail and fall. Believe as you will; that is your right. But give no snide promises of hells for refusing indoctrination into such silly, fallacious faith systems as yours and Turek's.
Artty 1975 logic is totally on the side of atheists disbelieving in things to which
There is no evidence for
Is logical not illogical
You believe in god on faith
Not evidence that’s illogical
We believe in only what can
Be proven and factual not in
Lies created by ignorant goat
Herders
NIKOS very nice false equivalence of creationism
We have tons of evidence it’s
Not logically possible for your
God to exist period claims of the bible are not a part of reality
NIKOS yeh well guess what you can wait thousands of years or longer for proofs
Like skeptics have been waiting for proof of god
The evidence against gods
Existence is all around it’s
Called reality .
I really wanna see a frank turek vs matt dillahunty
Throwing a football isn't overpowering the law is gravity... If he threw the ball and it didn't come down that would be overpowering it
Your assumption is wrong. A person throwing the football is overpowering gravity, but only temporarily. Once he has let go of the ball he no longer can overpower it because the ball is no longer in his control and is now back in the total control of gravity. There are residual effects of the throwers control but the ball will eventually hit the ground. But he did absolutely overpower gravity for a short period!
The problem is atheists think with their brain's capacity and theists believe that human brain is limited, thus this kind of debate would never end. But there is another issue in this video, Frank said God also create the law of physic, is it his assumption or where did he get that?
And Frank's last argument wasn't right either, he said that we can overpower the natural law by example of a football player, but when the player hit the ball he does not overpower the gravity, the gravity still works on him otherwise he can throw the ball very far like out of space. But this example shows how human is limited, while the issue is about unlimited God that can overpower natural laws.
He doesnt just think "i dont know" is an explination but THE best explination. Go science! I LOVE THE FUTURE! Tomorow i shall start being a gnome wizard. I miss D&D.
Of course, "I don't know" is the best explanation. If you don't know something, what would be a better explanation and statement and claim? Do you think the best explanation is "God!"
his answer about overpowering natural law makes me cringe, there are no natural laws being broken when you catch a football and throw it. it had no place in this argument. but regardless keep it up.
Reading these kinds of comments feels the same as swimming in salt water
So according to frank if i jump or run down a football field I'm defying natural laws
@youtube swallows I'm not a Frank fan
@youtube swallows What was the purpose of writing all that?
@youtube swallows and I'm asking what was the point of replying to my comment with all you wrote?
@youtube swallows cool so you know you're a troll
@youtube swallows throwing a football isnt defying the laws of nature.
You're not saying anything that's why I asked what your point was. Its seems you dont understand
1- All the natural laws are are the observable constants in our reality. They don't ACTUALLY "govern".
2- A natural law, even of it DID "govern", only applies to NATURE. Our reality had a beginning, therefore the observable constants of how the universe functions had a beginning. They were CAUSED.
Stoping the gravity is an impact of natural laws?? Jesus Chirst how can one come to such a debate without knowing the basis of science??
How can someone make a comment on a debate that he obviously never heard. Frank did not say he stopped gravity, the example shows that the EFFECTS of gravity can be stopped and overpowered.
And how does one overpower gravity? Again by the natural laws.. Isn't it?.. A football player changing the direction of the football by an external force... Newton's 1st law.. See everything here happens with the impact of natural laws.. And on what premesis he said there is someone called 'God' who doesn't have to obey natural laws?? If he say so he must prove so.. He is just saying some random stuff that doesn't make sense... Isn't it??.. How much of a poor argument it is???
@@dinukabimsarabodaragama716 it isn't a poor argument at all. If there is an omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient God; and there is; that created and upholds natural laws; and he did; then that God is not bound by the natural laws that he created and upholds. It's as simple as that! So, what would you require as proof? I'll bet you can't even Define it. But we use reason in interpreting the evidence that we have to make a decision that is reasonable based on that evidence. And the conclusion that an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent God doesn't have to abide by his natural laws should be an easy conclusion to come to. It doesn't make sense to you because you don't want there to be a God so you are willfully blind to the evidence for him. With accepting that triple "o" God, you would have to accept that there is someone or something greater than we are that we all must answer to and you just refuse to do that. But please understand, decisions have consequences and refusing the God of the universe has dire consequences. I pray you will give that thought the attention it deserves and reconsider your position. Have a blessed day!
No offence at your belives whatsoever. But see how religion has brainwashed people into thinking that there is soemone above you and you must obey or else u would have consequences after your life... Very sad to see how naive people are to believe such.. And on what premise man you could state that 'God' created the universe??... Again the burden of proof man.. The one who clamins that 'God' is not abide by natural laws must prove so... The one who clamins that 'God' created the universe must prove so... Not just 'stating' that..
.
.
You'ce said that "if there is an omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient God; and there is; that created and uphold natural laws; and he did ...." How do you know man? How do you know??? Please prove that 'God' created the universe... How can u be so sure??? Personal experience?? Have been taught so?? Prove it man? Prove God created the universe... Give me a proof...
@@dinukabimsarabodaragama716 yes I agree. I see how your atheistic religion has brainwashed you into believing something that cannot be true. You haven't said how you believe the universe came into existence but I'm pretty sure I know how you think it did. And just like I can only strongly suggest by deduction that God created the universe, that is the only way you could introduce the possibility of a different way. Nobody was there so nobody really can prove either way. You have to select the most logical reason from the two possibilities. We were either created by God or we popped into being something from nothing. Which seems to be the more correct direction.
I asked you what proof you would require.
I've told you how I have deduced from the information I have seen about evolution and what I know about God that He is real. But you won't accept that. And believe me, naive is not what anyone that knows me would use as a word to describe me. You don't have to believe that, but it is a true statement.
Thanks for the conversation and have a blessed day!
God Almighty(Yahweh,
Elohim)is the only natural law, and Creator of the law of relativity, without Him, there is no Time,Matter or Space, so take that and ponder why you have a free will to decide He(Jesus) does not exist through all History!!!
what basis/evidence do you have for god being the creator?
@@johnelliott5859J E
Basis? Every thing on earth that has the Breath of Life and all
Vegetation(meat) that feeds That Breath and the miracles that The Biology of those two things prove there had to be a Creator, That is unless you have a better theory that can be Proven.?? AMEN.
@@geraldjohnson8871 how do you prove god did it? How can one even test that hypothesis? There are hypotheses for abiogenesis and the events before the big bang and some are testable. I will take that over a magic man outside of time and space.
@@johnelliott5859j e
I do Not have to test what is already seen by mans own eyes, God is
Not to be tested by his Creation. Big bang how could that create any
Thing but Chaos in a World that was Not.
Do Not waste your time testing the Ways of God, you might Die before you get Saved from your Sinful Life.
Christ Jesus rose from death for all man to see there is life after we Die in this body.
Learn about life Not a fantasy about Human existence. Amen.
@@geraldjohnson8871 You can't test what doesn't exist.
The big bang was not a creative event, it was a rapid expansion. Predictions based on this model have been accurate, ie the expansion of space and the CMBR. We don't know about events before the bang. I guess that gap is where you are placing god. That has been a common place for gods of the past. Thor explained thunder, Ra the path of the sun, etc.. Where are those knowledge gaps now? Where are those gods?
The resuurection is questionable. No one has ever come back to life after being dead for so long. And there are no contemporary historical records from the Romans despite a wealth of writings from that time and region. Hmmmm?
Learning about life is what brought me here.
Dr. Turek I still don't understand why you beat around the bush and never actually answer the question.
Normack: Why a cause? Why does your God need a cause; isn't he above that?
Dr. Turek: ...He doesn't need a cause; that's right. Because if he's timeless, he didn't have a beginning.
Normack: So why do you need him?
Turek: He created everything and sustains everything.
Normack: Why does he have to create it? That means he needs to follow the natural laws. So that means the natural laws would be for God. You're having a logical problem there my friend.
Turek (following the rabbit trail further): Why does he have to follow the natural laws if he created the natural laws?
Normack: Because you said there has to be somebody who starts it...why does someone have to start it? Because of natural laws.
Turek continues from there, but still only talking about the leaves and the branches, but never ever reveals the root, or the foundation that would clear it all up.
Ultimately, the discussion is about cause and effect. The reason why Dr. Turek is appealing to the fact that the universe had a beginning is because of the law of cause and effect. The universe needs a cause because it had a beginning, which is a change. And a change is an effect. So something that changes is an effect that, by definition, needs a cause!
Normack's arguing, though he doesn't realize it (or perhpas he does and doesn't care) that since everything needs a cause, then why doesn't God? He is assuming that, "because someone has to start it" means that the one who starts it must adhere to natural laws as well as the thing started. But both his premise for his assumption and the assumption are incorrect! Firstly, he thinks that because Turek is appealing to natural laws to prove that God must have started the universe, then God must be subject to the natural laws that Turek has appealed to. But that just doesn't follow. Secondly, and the reason it doesn't follow, is because it is not the law of cause and everything, but the law of cause and effect. Only effects need causes. So the thing started needs a cause because it is by definition an effect, but the one who starts it only needs a cause if he is himself an effect. But if he is not, then there is nothing that says a cause, itself, needs a cause. Only effects need causes. And God, by definition, is eternal, immutable, and personal; thus needs no cause.
But Dr. Turek never gets to this, and I cannot for the life of me figure out why! He's appealing to it in the things that he says, but I cannot remember ever hearing him actually explain it to anyone. He discusses all the ramifications, but never comes to terms with the issue, except only implicity.
>>>Time, matter and space had a beginning
What created matter?
@@RAJ-zo8cu Thank you for asking. Sure is, we do not know. My own assertion as regards the so called Big Bang is, that two very different "x" and "y" collided. Those two had existed eternally before they collided with another. *Iow these were not created.* Now, there is a seemingly serious objection put by some Apologists such as WLCraig: "IF the universe per se (ie before the BB) had existed eternally, the entropy should have attained its maximum by now" which assertion does not withstand mathematic scrutiny though: While we go back in events (time) infinitesimally, the entropy is going towards a minimum value *but asymptotically.* Likewise, the entropy of the universe is right now going towards a maximum value ("heat death") BUT asymptotically.
Feel free to ask if you do not understand. Sure IS: nobody has all the answers, and I consider it fair to readily admit when one does not know - rather than fill the gap with one's god. kind regards from GERMANY!
Then I guess you have to go back and tell Einstein he was wrong. Because his theory of relativity clearly indicates that time space and matter definitely had a beginning and secularists call it the Big Bang. Where Have You been?
@@RAJ-zo8cu the what is actually a Who. And that who is God!
@@mikeslater6246 Your response proclaims your scientific illiteracy. The BB is the event, when the material (world) in the ways we can know it, came about. We MEASURE space, time, mass, energy, forces, velocities, and accelerations such as gravity, !!!FROM/ABOUT!!! the material (world) as we can know it. Pls abstain from embarassing yourself towards real scientists such as I.
The natural laws are God's properties -- he controls them, they do not control him.
We’ve never seen him control them once
@@guyjosephs5654 Yes we have.
Demons are cringes when God is winning, look at them.
Anyone that doesn’t agree with you is a demon?
Why did this atheist agree to this debate ?
Always interesting how an ignorant creation tries its best to explain the Creators Works
Atheism is falling .. if it cannot be seen then I won't be surprised because how do u make sense to a glorified baboon just leave him BE ... let him contain his anger disgust confusion and stupidity because it will only damage his mind and his body with stress .. my advice don't even waist your valuable time debating such a one .rather find hospitals and struggling schools and beggars and give them the truth the life and the way. . Much satisfaction from that. But still well done to Frank keep up the Lords calling on your life.
Dr. Turek is legit
I was cringing watching the Atheist...
Frank decimating the unbelievers
I used to be a big Kent Hovind fan. This guy blows Hovind WAY out the water. Hovind isn't even that good, now that I've gotten older and a bit wiser to the workings of the world around us.
hello no answer normark....hahahahahahahaha
Gee! You can be an atheist but do use reason and not "non-reason"!
the Lord created Everything period he obeys Nothing it obeys him
And that’s your belief on the matter. It’s okay it is and most people don’t care that’s what you believe. It’s when apologists and theists go beyond belief and say it’s a fact of reality.
@@therick363 and that is your belief and you are entitled to have that belief. But I'm not going to say I don't care about your belief. If your belief is correct and there is no God then I'm okay with my belief that there is one. It's not going to change the ending situation at all, for any of us. But if there is a God, which I strongly assure you there is, then your belief is going to affect your in situation. You need to give the existence of God serious honest consideration and investigation. Seek him out, you will find him.
@@mikeslater6246 you kinda didn’t bother addressing the main point of what I was saying.
Usual arrogant atheist, they don't want to know the Truth, they run away from it. He doesn't want to hear an explanation he just wants to win a debate which is why he'll talk over you....
Footballers don't change the laws of physics when they head a ball.
Typical of Tureks inability to comprehend science.
Don't believe him till he's learned something useful.
You have totally misinterpreted what Frank said just like you obviously are totally misinterpreting the evidence of God. Science is your god and my God can beat up your god. LOL😁😁😁
@@mikeslater6246 We all know what he's saying, I'm just pointing out that his reasoning is flawed. A frequent feature of Mr. Turek.
I've yet to find any evidence of a god. What makes you think there is one? Do you actually know?
@@ploppysonofploppy6066 I don't agree with everything that Frank says but I find no flaws in his reasoning in this video. And I also refuse to accept your premise that there is no evidence of God. Yes, I actually know there's a God because the best answer for all the evidence that does exist, and there is a plethora of evidence, is the God of the Bible. I was an agnostic evolutionist, I didn't believe in God and even argued with my best friend about it, that the Bible was totally contradictory. But I evolved! I started listening to God who kept wooing me to seek him out and I did. I stopped listening to man and the lies about evolution. And there are plenty of things that I could give you as reason for believing this but I think there is one that is irrefutable. DNA, it is information and information must come from a mind. Even Bill Gates says that DNA is like a program but far more complex than any of today's programmers could come up with. It had to be from a mind far superior than our finite minds. If nothing to this point had convinced me, DNA would have. When the basis of our beliefs are the ever-changing ideas and beliefs of man then we don't have a good starting point. You really can't hit a moving Target very easily. But the truth of God is Everlasting and never changing and we can trust it. I challenge you to seek it out.
@@mikeslater6246 Thank you. You see, even a numty like me can understand the clear chain of events, from the big bang to here. We will probably never understand every link in the chain, but we can observe how they fit, and they line up so well we don’t need a god to explain anything. Doesn’t mean there isn’t a god, but I’ve been on your challenge for years and no one can explain why they believe one exists when pressed. You can personally refute science all you like, but no one has published anything that refutes the current suite of scientific theories, not in the relevant places anyway.
Your answer is extensive, but you haven’t said why you believe all this.
DNA? - Frankly I don’t care what Bill gates thinks about it. Did he say that 80% of it does nothing? Not very “intelligent design”. It is very complex, but complexity doesn’t necessarily require a mind. No two snowflakes are alike - that’s complexity and no one designs each one. (Unless you can demonstrate that).
However, if the nature of DNA is your answer - (irreducible complexity/personal incredulity), and it works for you - I wish you the all the best with it.
@@mikeslater6246 Thanks Mike. But please be clear with yourself, you are refuting science, "the lies about evolution" the facts about DNA.
And no one has dared to publish in a scientific journal. "Answers in Genesis" et al doesn't count I'm afraid.
Moreover, beware in debunking science, because if a God exists it is science. And beyond the fact that you cannot see anything else that explains what we are, you don't know why you believe in it.
Take care.
So the Christian's argument for why the universe needs a god is, "we don't know, therefore god". This argument does not follow logically, you first must demonstrate that there is an all powerful god before you claim that one created the universe.
The argument is the creation is the proof of God. We do know, and that is why the atheist got upset. "We don't know" is not an accurate statement.
CBA what is the evidence we are living in a creation? And even if we did live in a creation, what is the evidence that a god is responsible? Why couldn't something else, that can not be considered a god, be responsible for the, supposed, creation?
Dumb question. .
CBA saying the question is dumb and not elaborating on why, gives me no information. If you can show me the evidence that we are living in a creation than, by all means, do so. But, if just say the question is dumb, I can imply that you don't have an answer. I am not saying you don't have an answer, I am just saying that you still haven't provided one. So please, give me an answer to the question.
If you are not sure if you exist, I am not going to disagree.
God is not magic.
'' we can overpower naturale laws'', frank should have been more careful, and not saying that. and the example of footbal is just... i don t know.. ridiculous
God Jehovah said the Foolishness of God (Himself) Confounds the Wisdom of Man. Now if He BE God Indeed, HOW EASY would that be for Him to do? Apparently, the first time He did that - Confound Man - was when He made Woman from Man's side, his rib! And Adam had already named all the Animals, earlier that day.
mohamed benmohamed You are a first class stupid.
Naturale? :)
We can overpower natural laws. Just like God Himself, His Bible teaches Christians to carefully consider their words. Frank didn't do anything wrong. He didn't say we can overpower "all" natural laws. And the football analogy was great. Very great.
Is it natural for thousands of pounds of metal to fly through the sky carrying hundreds of people? No but we do it. Defying natural laws everyday it looks like.
Who is this guy?? I think he needs to cut back on the caffeine.
exactly.. I may not know how the car came together or the laws of combustion in its entirety, but it would make way way more sense that "SOMEONE" put the car together using the laws of combustion, than the car just happen to come together on its own without a cause.
A car is an artificial construction and comparing it to natural things never works.
its like a pre school student arguing with a professor.
Who’s who?
@@therick363the guy who didn’t give an answer
@@iwatchfamilyguy interesting. Thank you for clarifying. I would say it’s inaccurate but that’s me(with Frank being the prof and other guy being pre schooler, but that’s my opinion)
Is the Bible god true because it says so in the Bible?
no. the God in the bible is true because the evidence proves it.
Jack Plumbridge
Ok.
What is the evidence of Adam? Eve story? Devil? Talking snakes, bushes, skies, donkeys, a man in a fish, dead saints arising from tombs, etc?
@1981, The evidence starts with the creation. You don't have to know the Bible to know God exists. That is why no man has an excuse to deny God. Whether you are a Jew, Christian, or Muslim is a separate question.
CBA
Which god? The Christian god? The Hindu god? Or which of the thousands is the real one and how do you know?
Are you saying you believe in God? If so, then who is Jesus Christ?
What angers me about Frank Turek is that he constantly repeats all the nonsense that he has been repeatedly explained to him as being incorrect and often utterly nonsensical....He has repeated his "interrupting gravity" nonsense dozens of times, and dozens of times he has been told that "interrupting gravity" is not "breaking the laws of nature".....He has been told dozens of times that the football thing is an example of the laws of gravity....but he ignores it and continues to repeat it and purposefully confuse people....
He makes a completely unsubstantiated claim, and tries to "prove" it by assuming its true, and then making another completely unsubstantiated "connection"...and he compounds it from there by asking questions he doesnt have answers to, because he never substantiated the entire foundation of his thesis statement...
"the universe had a beginning, therefore it couldnt have been nature, it had to be beyond nature"...whatever the hell that means...not like he bothered to explain it or support it....
"he doesnt need a cause because if he is timeless he didnt have a beginning"....... he never proved that god exists, let alone that he is timeless... He has never once been able to explain how he knows that god is timeless.... He is simply not able to understand what timelessness is...None of us are....
Much of his dishonest charlatanry is based on him trying his very hardest to ignore the fact that he cant prove that god is timeless....His entire act is based on that presupposition....Hes even written books skewing basic precepts in order to support his presuppositions....
He likes to use The Kalam Argument alot....he already knows that the Kalam Argument isnt about creation and thats its actually about causation, and it has nothing to do with the supernatural in any way....he twists it anyway, and he does it even though he has been told that he never proved that god is timeless...
everything that exists, had a cause.....he believes that god exists....but he refuses to say that god had a cause......
everything that begins to exist, had a cause....the universe exists....the universe had a cause....
everything that begins to exist, had a cause...god began to exist....god had a cause....
Turek will say that is not true, because god didnt begin to exist, because god is timeless and didnt have a beginning....
He will be asked to prove that....He will not do so....He never does...He is never able to use his own "logical" progressions in order to prove the foundation of his argument....He resorts to asking questions based on presuppositions, and then hoping his opponent falls for it and tries to answer him, so that he can then turn around and try to say that his opponent agreed with his presupposition...and then he will go on basing every argument on his utterly unsubstantiated basic foundational claim...
It usually ends with him saying things like "it has to, because if..."
Some of us, like Frank, have experienced MIRACLES of those things such as "interrupting gravity", for ourselves - often in the company or at least in the witness of others, as well.
We are not lying, and your failure to grasp or believe it, for whatever reason you do so, has no bearing on the FACTS we speak of, when we talk of these things.
If you were to tell someone of some experience you had when you were NOT PRESENT with THEM at the time of the event you speak of, and they don't believe you really had that experience (did you REALLY meet that celebrity? talk and visit with them? become great friends with them? Even though THIS PERSON never saw you with that celebrity, or heard that celebrity mention your NAME???)
DO YOU THEN QUIT SPEAKING OF IT AND ACT AS IF THAT EVENT IN YOUR LIFE NEVER HAPPENED - EVEN IF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE DON'T BELIEVE YOU?
.
Would you believe Frank if you DID SEE IT YOURSELF?
.
A MAN has no obligation or ABILITY to prove these things TO THE SATISFACTION of any other person. Many peoples' own brothers and sisters do not believe the things that are told them. And that is something Jesus Himself said would BE SO. It was, even for HIM, His own brothers thought he was crazy until after the Resurrection, then His human brothers preached the Gospel and died testifying to Jesus' Divinity and Miracles, as they were martyred for refusing to deny Him.
All through your life, people around you that you know tell you things you don't believe. Others tell you they do not believe certain things YOU have told them.
Sorry excuse for one who KNOWS what he is talking about to SHUT UP because they are challenged by someone who was not even there.
You could have shortened it down that comment down to "I believe what I believe because I beleive it, and I dont have to prove anything to anybody"
not everything that exists has a cause. how on earth did you come to that conclusion?
God didnt begin to exist. how one earth did you come to that conclusion?
Absolutely right. Thank you for daring to be rational. Not easy on threads such as these.
Two things, dear boy. First, ALL-CAPS does not in any way REINFORCE the validity or SPECIOUSNESS of WHAT IS BEING SAID. It just is ANNOYING and POSTURING. Second, you certainly are welcome to your impassioned beliefs, but the very fact that you reject a responsibility to reveal evidence for those beliefs tells us everything we need to know about you. People in every belief system claim miracles and personal mystical experience with their deities. Are they all correct? Are all gods out there, slyly performing miracles for some while leaving huge swaths of humanity out in the cold? It is not my province to believe you SIMPLY BECAUSE YOU'RE EMOTIONAL and INSISTENT. So are any number of people in insane asylums. Which is not to suggest you're nuts, just that you are in particularly debatable company. I'm an atheist and I've experienced some strange and astonishing things. I take them as they come, and do not attribute them to invisible sky phantoms. Life is miraculous enough, and appears to have a wicked sense of irony and humor. (And cruelty.) Enjoy your GOD and your MIRACLES, just don't ask the rest of us to join you in the turbulent waters of your delusions.
Poor Atheist.
How so?
Is god real
Yup
No evidence of a god exists.
Creation testifies of his majesty so that we are without excuse, especially on the day of judgement.
@@jamesmagwenzi6058 The entire religion is a scam that promises you a life after death if you donate and tithe your money to them. We have hundreds of satellites all over outer space. There is not any old man up there, playing a harp and making people. The scammers had no idea that we would ever have space travelers, going and coming. Man has achieved immortality.When that is formerly announced, all religions will become obsolete and disappear. Google "human like robots" and see a copy of a human mind, installed into a mechanical body. That will allow human intelligence to survive living on planets that have no water nor atmosphere. We are making great progress.
I've watched a few of Franks videos, and I think Frank is having a hard time trying not to be a non believer. must be more money in acting as a spokesman for God.
ngl this is the funniest thing I've seen all day
@1:24 got eeemmm! He knows it too. Atheism is asinine.
The atheist won that. Frank is very humble posting a video where he gets owned
You are calling that atheist's emotional and totally irrational rant as owning Dr Turek? Your chosen alias says it all.
@@mikeslater6246 It's not rational to believe in an invisible deity without good testable evidence.
@@PositivelyBrainwashed I completely reject your premise that there is no evidence for God. It's all around you. You just choose not to see it. The heavens declare the glory of God. DNA alone is irrefutable evidence of God in that DNA is information about how we develop and is the building plan for our bodies and everything else that exists and live on earth. Information must come from a mind and even Bill Gates says that DNA is a program that no programmer he knows of could design. You can choose to reject that as evidence. But choices have consequences and rejecting God has dire consequences. I pray you will reexamine it and that you change your mind like I did when I evolved from an agnostic evolutionist to a bible-believing creatioist 50 years ago.
@@mikeslater6246 There's naturalistic explanations for DNA. None of your claims that a mind or God created DNA is testable. Just because you don't understand the naturalistic explanations or you're not comfortable not having an answer, doesn't mean you can make up a mind. DNA and programming code is just a metaphor. Computer science is my background and code and DNA are not the same. And the afterlife and any punishment you're talking about is also not testable. There's no one who has died, and returned with evidence.
@@PositivelyBrainwashed your so-called naturalistic explanations are also not testable. And I agree that DNA being made by God is also untestable. But of the two untestable explanations for DNA I think the one about God is more reasonable. The fact that you willfully ignore the simple correlation between DNA and computer code does not make the comparison wrong. The bottom line is you don't want there to be a God because it interferes with what you want to do in this world. You will have to answer to something greater than we are, you reject that which is your privilege, but that privilege comes with consequences. You will learn those consequences soon enough if you don't already realize them now. My prayer is that God will open your eyes.
My skpeticism started when I realized that not one single word of the bible was written by god himself...I was supposed to simply just accept that the men who wrote the bible were being truthful when they claimed that god was speaking through them....I have absolutely zero evidence that god had anything to do with any part of any page of the bible...I cant just blindly believe what some other human writes about something so fundamentally unknown as the origins and causation of our universe....I think its incredibly arrogant and utterly ironic that the only living organisms on this planet that willfully destabilize nature and wantonly destroy the planet, somehow believe that we are the superior creatures who the creator of the universe chose as his chosen ones....Seems pretty hypocritical to destroy gods creations and then claim that god loves all of us....maybe gods not around saving us anymore because he is too busy helping all of his other creations and trying to protect them all from the monstrous ingodly human mutants who immediately started to self destruct the moment we started answering questions that we falsely believe we know the answers to...
Besides, Im also sick and tired of christian apologists with a net worth above zero, who go around preaching about Jesus in order to make more money....
FishBayVI420H20 Hey! I have a question for you. You mentioned that you were skeptical of the Bible because men wrote it. Why does that bother you so much?
Isaiah writing the biography of Jesus Christ 700 years before Jesus Christ is not enough? You were not asked to "simply" accept but rather the Bible tells us to work out your salvation in fear and trembling-- as in careful thought and respect for the significance of the issue. Complete opposite of what you stated. Someone may have told you wrong, but they misstated the Bible.
Frank is such an amazing person at making false assumptions. Well done Frank! I'm praying for you that magic can be real and we can one day have access to that magic in the place where God lives outside of space and time. I really hope that place is true even though we have no proof other than we don't know so it must exist because things don't come from nothing. Now as for the Bible and Jesus! That stuff is only true to people who really really want to believe it. Normal people can take an unbiased look and be like, "Hmm, nope." This is honesty.
the football analogy was just about the dumbest thing ive ever heard frank say
Wait, kicking a football up is breaking natural law? It's just one force cancelling out another one. If you had enough data, you could perfectly calculate what's going to happen using the laws of forces.
Nah, he's pointing out that even have the power to overcome some laws. That is stated because some will say that it is illogical for something natural to go against the laws of nature, but we do it all the time. On a smaller scale, of course.
It doesn't matter if a ball bounces of someone's head or just off the floor. There is no overcoming of any natural law in the example. Humans do not have the power to overcome natural laws. Frank gets flustered and says dumb things.
Maybe frank can kick a ball in to space?
The footballer is not "overcoming" a natural law. He is exploiting and confirming it, just as science has proved. Turek is ghastly in his misunderstanding of such remedial physics, and please tell me you're not so credulous as to think he has made a good point. He's merely reinforced his desperation as a feeble apologist. Soccer does not, I assure you, "go against the laws of nature." It embodies them. Sheesh.
claudiaquat Homosexuality
How we know it's not a unicorn 🦄??🤔
You're right, we should change the myth we choose to the Hydra or something.
The atheist in this video is defensive, angry, and upset because he knows that his worldview is nonsense.
A football player is overpowering natural laws by heading the ball?? Holy shit, he said that with a straight face! Heading a ball only demonstrates additional laws of physics!! That Christian dude showed hang it up. What happened to not bearing false witness?
but look how the atheist talks, always nervous and seems upset with Frank Turek's questions he doesn't want there to be God himself tends to the proofs in sight, why does he feel uncomfortable?
Turek’s god sounds awfully similar to Carl Sagan’s dragon.
You had a good going there, but kicking a football does not suspend gravity.