Great video. The existence of transcendent natural laws (like laws of physics and logic) is another important thing everyone has to consider. Even if the beginning of the universe could be accounted for purely through natural law, the origin of those unchanging laws still needs to be accounted for. I've heard atheists try to get around this by claiming that natural laws are merely a tool used to describe reality. However, this still begs the question of why the universe behaves in such a way that allows us to prescribe unchanging laws to it in the first place. I've also heard people say that the laws of nature exist because they have to, but this is just circular reasoning.
There has never been a human who existed who had, within their head, EVERY single bit of knowledge that humanity has known. Everybody can be asked a question on any given subject that they do not, personally, know the answer to. It would be disingenuous, or require a heck of a lot of hubris to be of the view that: "Well, if I don't know the answer then the only plausible solution must be a supernatural cause!" That argument couldn't even work for extremely knowledgeable people, let alone the average person on the street. If God is the ultimate creator then religion can only be proved by scientific query, not disproved if it isn't all made up to control the masses.
God bless you, J! Thank you for your ministry, i love the points in this video. People love to pass the burden of proof without sharing but i agree it's both sides, but most are not willing to discuss or consider other explanations, just argue; that's why I'm reading Greg Koukl about needing relationships with the person first, even if very basic. Really enjoyed the "we'll eventually explain it" explanation, I've never really thought about it like that. You're doing God's work sir! Keep at it and be blessed!
no we don't actually have a burden to have answer and explanation for everything. sometimes "I don't know" is the most rational and wisest response science of the gaps is just a false term because there are no objective scientific or natural gaps there's just lack of our scientific understanding which is referred to as scientific gaps. we didn't know what causes rain in the past, but that didn't mean there wasn't actually a scientific explanation until it was discovered! what has filled the previous gaps in our knowledge?! scientific explanations not God. so how come relying on scientific and natural explanations seems dumb despite all the credibility it has gained throughout history with filling between the previous numerous scientific gaps, but believing God has certainly had a part is rational despite zero occurrence of filling any scientific gaps in history?!! how are these two even comparable?!! and you attribute features and characteristics to God that also need evidence. with introducing God you didn't reduce the burden you just added to it!! now you need to prove God and all characteristics you claim he has plus the scientific gaps(how God fills them)! you didn't actually give any real answer! just as "God causes rain" didn't explain anything as to what causes rain to the people living in the past.
I think if you binge a little more you’ll see the evidential argumentation you seem to imply hasn’t been presented. There is legitimate scholarship for this area of inquiry. Perhaps a more objective approach to the questions and answers is warranted.
Your arguments itself in an example of Science of the Gaps. You are using "begging the question" and "special pleading" fallacy. You are assuming just science has gave explanation for natural phenomena it will able to give answers of other unexplained mysteries such as, The origin of the universe, The origin of consciousness etc. you are using circular reasoning, begging the question fallacy and special pleading fallacy and ultimately your whole argument is itself a great example of "Science of the gaps", or " Future of the Gaps" argument..
Would you say that atheists look at science (w/o the Christian God) as their god? Christians look at science as "how did God create this [part of the universe]?"
Atheists by definition don't have a god. They look at science as the ability to describe and predict the universe around us. Divinity has nothing to do with it.
These will help: coldcasechristianity.com/writings/science-agrees-with-the-bible-the-universe-began-to-exist/ coldcasechristianity.com/writings/is-there-a-way-to-avoid-a-universe-with-a-beginning/
Correct, he was the fulfilment of the promises his creator father gave to Adam, Abraham, Isacc, Jacob, David etc. And anything that prevents him from having the curse of Adam on him is anti Christ and the trinitarian view destroys Christs humanity and link to humanity.
John 8:58. Before Abraham was, I am. John 10:30. I and My Father are one. The Jews state in verse 33 that they were stoning Him explicitly because He made himself equal with God. So many heresies could easily be avoided if people would just bother to read.
This is brilliant argumentation. A lot of Darwinist/atheist/materialists absolutely do the exact same things they accuse us of, but somehow they're above it cuz "SCIENCE." It's so smug and elitist. I don't know how as a human being you wouldn't feel ashamed over it after a while.
Great video. The existence of transcendent natural laws (like laws of physics and logic) is another important thing everyone has to consider. Even if the beginning of the universe could be accounted for purely through natural law, the origin of those unchanging laws still needs to be accounted for. I've heard atheists try to get around this by claiming that natural laws are merely a tool used to describe reality. However, this still begs the question of why the universe behaves in such a way that allows us to prescribe unchanging laws to it in the first place. I've also heard people say that the laws of nature exist because they have to, but this is just circular reasoning.
This channel is binge worthy✝️
Thanks Allen!
Wow that was good. So simple. Why didnt I think of this?
Awesome!!!
Thanks!!
Keep up the awesome work!
Thank you so much this really helps!
There has never been a human who existed who had, within their head, EVERY single bit of knowledge that humanity has known.
Everybody can be asked a question on any given subject that they do not, personally, know the answer to.
It would be disingenuous, or require a heck of a lot of hubris to be of the view that:
"Well, if I don't know the answer then the only plausible solution must be a supernatural cause!"
That argument couldn't even work for extremely knowledgeable people, let alone the average person on the street.
If God is the ultimate creator then religion can only be proved by scientific query, not disproved if it isn't all made up to control the masses.
God bless you, J! Thank you for your ministry, i love the points in this video. People love to pass the burden of proof without sharing but i agree it's both sides, but most are not willing to discuss or consider other explanations, just argue; that's why I'm reading Greg Koukl about needing relationships with the person first, even if very basic. Really enjoyed the "we'll eventually explain it" explanation, I've never really thought about it like that. You're doing God's work sir! Keep at it and be blessed!
no we don't actually have a burden to have answer and explanation for everything. sometimes "I don't know" is the most rational and wisest response
science of the gaps is just a false term because there are no objective scientific or natural gaps there's just lack of our scientific understanding which is referred to as scientific gaps. we didn't know what causes rain in the past, but that didn't mean there wasn't actually a scientific explanation until it was discovered!
what has filled the previous gaps in our knowledge?! scientific explanations not God. so how come relying on scientific and natural explanations seems dumb despite all the credibility it has gained throughout history with filling between the previous numerous scientific gaps, but believing God has certainly had a part is rational despite zero occurrence of filling any scientific gaps in history?!!
how are these two even comparable?!!
and you attribute features and characteristics to God that also need evidence. with introducing God you didn't reduce the burden you just added to it!! now you need to prove God and all characteristics you claim he has plus the scientific gaps(how God fills them)! you didn't actually give any real answer! just as "God causes rain" didn't explain anything as to what causes rain to the people living in the past.
I think if you binge a little more you’ll see the evidential argumentation you seem to imply hasn’t been presented. There is legitimate scholarship for this area of inquiry. Perhaps a more objective approach to the questions and answers is warranted.
Your arguments itself in an example of Science of the Gaps. You are using "begging the question" and "special pleading" fallacy. You are assuming just science has gave explanation for natural phenomena it will able to give answers of other unexplained mysteries such as, The origin of the universe, The origin of consciousness etc. you are using circular reasoning, begging the question fallacy and special pleading fallacy and ultimately your whole argument is itself a great example of "Science of the gaps", or " Future of the Gaps" argument..
Would you say that atheists look at science (w/o the Christian God) as their god? Christians look at science as "how did God create this [part of the universe]?"
Atheists by definition don't have a god. They look at science as the ability to describe and predict the universe around us. Divinity has nothing to do with it.
@@ericherman8829 Unfortunately, not everything can be explained by science. God bless!
what if the universe has always existed?
These will help:
coldcasechristianity.com/writings/science-agrees-with-the-bible-the-universe-began-to-exist/
coldcasechristianity.com/writings/is-there-a-way-to-avoid-a-universe-with-a-beginning/
You are right about Gods existance but you cannot prove that Jesus was God incarnate ,as he was just a perfect human the second Adam.
Correct, he was the fulfilment of the promises his creator father gave to Adam, Abraham, Isacc, Jacob, David etc. And anything that prevents him from having the curse of Adam on him is anti Christ and the trinitarian view destroys Christs humanity and link to humanity.
John 8:58. Before Abraham was, I am.
John 10:30. I and My Father are one. The Jews state in verse 33 that they were stoning Him explicitly because He made himself equal with God.
So many heresies could easily be avoided if people would just bother to read.
@@brettmciver432 Tell me you don't read the Bible without telling me you don't read the Bible
This is brilliant argumentation. A lot of Darwinist/atheist/materialists absolutely do the exact same things they accuse us of, but somehow they're above it cuz "SCIENCE." It's so smug and elitist. I don't know how as a human being you wouldn't feel ashamed over it after a while.