@@someman7 ive seen this very common pattern amongst satanist and atheists alike, they seem to be almost incapable of being serious, and incapable of deeply thinking about uncomfortable truths and personal issues. They always resort to making a joke or trying to turn God into some comedy show. It stems from the inability to cope with death and reality of suffering and many other things the atheist cannot rationalize in their mind these very serious topics because mortality and meaning is all relative without God. So therefore the personal belief that their here for no reason and their lifes are worthless has a phycological defect that makes them wanna turn every topic about suffering, death, the after-life, and God into a joke everytime. Its an inverted way of expressing how they think about themselves, their mind reduces their being to a joke.
@@LlamaBearMan he literally just used computer as a word of no meaning and described the nature of God. It's have I I would say you are a pencil and not a human It's just stupid nothing else
@@Daniel-ld3zibecause he didn’t have a comeback to the fact that the universe couldn’t have always existed (because an infinite amount of time would have had to have passed for us to get here now). Goes against the rules of this universe. And that matter, space, time, maths, etc couldn’t have created themselves because that goes against the rules of this reality. What doesn’t.
@@Daniel-ld3ziSomething that is timeless and transcendent. And his only response was to attempt to mock him and look ridiculous doing it. He called God a computer instead of God and actually thought that it meant something.. 🤦♂️
@@spamgwin4166 "that goes against the rules of reality" Nobody knows the "rules" of quantum mechanics. The Universe doesn't cater to how you personally want it to be. Call it a computer if you will. I call it a "supernatural force". Basically, WLC and all theists fail to demonstrate that consciousness is necessary.
@@Lost_n_Found_1 yes, because of the truest of fools, both the fools and the wise suffered through the dark ages due to theocracy. Let's not make the same mistake again
@@jonathanpena5972 You speak of suffering as if you were unaware of it's benefit. Please, read the Bible. Even if you disagree, at least you'll know and have better understanding why we're here!
It's more of experimenting on the audience to highlight the contradictory behavior of being so sure that something has the qualities of God. But thinking the same concept is ridiculous when under a different name. The idea is to show that they believe in God not because of plausibility or proof but strictly because of faith. Faith that Was completely taught... Because the audience disregards a theory that is completely the same as their own but deviates from their hometown values... Showing that what they believe is just nonsensical but thrusted into their brains almost always from a young age
@@shaigoldsmith605His “computer theory” is not the same as their own. It’s not ridiculous just because of the name that was given but because of the properties of the two things that were compared. You can’t apply God’s qualities to a computer, its not like Christians are out here saying God is some inanimate object or animal here on Earth. God is separate. God is the creator, you can’t apply his qualities to creation or creation’s creation. It doesn’t make sense.
@@JesusSufferedForYou I sure can. This computer has always been. It doesn’t need a creator. And if you think that’s ridiculous you believe the same thing, but for your god.
@@JesusSufferedForYou I mean the other guy is literally calling it a God. He thought it was stupid the whole time, and laughed at it, and then at the end said "that's God", so he's the one contradicting yourself. It's also contradictory of you to not understand that.
I don't think you understand what happened in this exchange. WLC does not think that this dude actually believes it's a computer. He knows exactly what this guy is doing. You people are midwits.
I mean I'm a Christian myself....that used to be an Atheist. Is it lost on Christians that the computer thing was him being facetious to mock the type of thinking he feels Christians do? He wasn't actually being serious.....we can be honest about that, right?
His mocking demonstrated that he lacked understanding of the topic. All he did was call the creator a special computer instead of God. Where’s the joke here?
@@bethezebra The mockery itself isn’t an argument, but he’s certainly using it as an attempt to support his argument by making his opponent look silly. But what exactly should WLC feel silly about here? If one has the understanding that it doesn’t matter what you call the creator (God, special computer, etc.) it seems that the mocker’s joke falls flat. It only makes himself look silly instead.
But what the atheist doesn’t understand about his argument is that 12 apostles don’t give their lives for some whimsical feeling to just “say” something is AMAZING, or SPECIAL. Thousands of people don’t follow historical events and make the specific distinction between hallucinations and the reality that actually occurred and lives were given for just to say an object is greater than all it is a personal being with love. However, if the books of the Bible were based around a computer lol, then he would have a solid argument 😂 the atheist is just coming 2000 years later and acting like these real events didn’t occur because he can be illogical. Congratulations, you have free will.
@@ChristianWFL I could easily argue that Greek mythology is more credible and predates Christianity. There are ancient sites that correspond with the stories told in myths but for some reason Christian’s are so convinced their god is the right god
x+y=z or a+b=c Atheists and religious people are explaining the world with different words but the calculation done is the same. We are creative enough to describe the universe in any analogy, it doesnt change what it is.
He was trying to provide a reductio ad absurdum, by precisely saying that his ‘special computer’ is like the theist’s ‘God’. I’m a theist, but it’s important to correctly interpret your interlocutors.
This was such a great debate. WLC was kind, affable, patient and tolerant even though his interlocutor was being intentionally sophomoric. “That would be a contradiction in terms…a computer has to function. It takes time.” One of the swiftest WLC takedowns ever.
A computer who is a creator would need to have a mind, like artificial intelligence, or be programmed by a being with a mind. But God has revealed Himself to us, not a computer.
@@Daily_Dose_Of_WisdomFACTS 😂. Well then a special computer wouldn't be special if it was self existing and designed yet we knew about it so it's a finite and limited godly object I guess 🤔🤣. Many Atheists, agnostics and secular humanists out here using Naturalism of The Gaps arguments which means we understand therefore no God 😂. SILLY ATHEISTS TRIX ARE FOR KIDS 🤣. God can be Eternal if He exists because He's self existing yet nature isn't. I wouldn't think that nature could live, die then be reborn Eternally because we would see evidence of that basically a resurrection and rebirth cycle of Nature. Professor William Lane Craig was speaking FACTS 🔥. This has nothing and everything to do with the video but please listen if you want to otherwise leave it alone and ignore it. Hello my name is Justin and I'm a Christian and Apologist but I'm also a college graduate. I'm not a closed minded Theist as I have nothing against Atheists or unbelievers as I speak to them often to understand their reasons for unbelief but we as Christians are convinced of God's Existence due to many real factors). I'm not trying to convert anyone or convince anyone to become Christians as that's The Holy Spirit's job to help people believe but only explain why I believe in Jesus Christ. There's actually evidence of God's Existence in Christianity. First of all there's proof that Jesus of Nazareth existed in history since the writings of Tacitus, Josephus Flavius, Pliny the younger and other historical documents prove that He was living two thousand years ago that even scholars both religious and Atheists agree with historically speaking but not that He's The Divine Son of God because obviously they don't. I'm going to give you historical and archeological evidence for God's Existence as The Scriptures have prophecies that predate the events recorded in them by several millennia including Matthew, Hosea and Zechariah which prophesy accurately of the people of Israel becoming a nation again after over 1900 years of being scattered around the nations since the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 A.D. spoken of by Christ in Matthew 23:29-24:3 and returning to their homeland after The Holocaust with Jerusalem as their capital in 1948 exactly as Jesus The Christ said. The prophets including Daniel spoke of the time where several world empires would arise and fall including the Babylonian kingdom, Medes and Persians, Roman Empire, and Saladin and the Muslims which went in consecutive order for the past few millennia. The people of Israel becoming a nation after The Holocaust in 1948 (ironically the melting point of gold as God compares Israel to gold that's tested in fire in Zechariah 13:8 and Jeremiah 16:15) exactly how Jesus The Christ said would happen since God us everything to come in The Scriptures and not just because people were working towards as Atheists claim which are impossible for any regular man to predict. Just before anyone says Christianity is a white man's religion made to oppress blacks during slavery you obviously aren't aware that the first Christians were Jews in The Middle East and that Christianity just like any religion can be used by evil and corrupt people to oppress others but you forget that the first Abolitionists/Civil Rights activists were Christians who sought to abolish slavery, racism, segregation, injustice and prejudice throughout American history. Jesus The Christ loves you enough not to give you what we all deserve which is God's Wrath by His Own Blood. Charles Darwin didn't originally come up with The Theory of Evolution over 200 years ago as it is mentioned in the writings of Ancient Greeks who believed in Demons that gave knowledge to philosophers. Evolution makes no sense when nothing has evolved after thousands of years of human history and supposedly the first creature came from primordial sludge several millions of years ago funny how they won't believe that God an Eternal Almighty Spirit Being created us from the Earth) which came from a supermassive expansion of matter at high temperature that inexplicably created everything in the known universe that supposedly came from nothing billions of years ago. How did the organs evolve before there were bones, skin, substance and how did any creatures see before eyes evolved? I've studied evolution and abiogenesis in the past and read Darwin's " Origin of The Species" and I'm not convinced of macro Evolutionary biology whereas I accept micro Evolution like speciation and adaptation but not macro Evolution because there's no evidence of it nor clear observable examples of it where living creatures evolve into other kinds of species plus the fact that fossils don't show evidence of evolution and genetic entropy rules out evolution. The question begs how did two genders evolve from a common ancestor with a perfectly hospitable and sustainable environment with breathable oxygen and resources to survive on inexplicably? Atheists have the burden of proof to explain how everything came to be and why our existence is possible without the Existence of God from an godless perspective just as Christians have to provide evidence of God's Existence and the validity of His Word. Evolution requires life to already exist in order to take any effect in living organisms so it doesn't account for the existence of Life and reality. Also evolution is impossible because it goes against The Law of entropy and the second Law of thermodynamics because evolution makes things better whereas nothing continues to get better but decays and turns to absolute destruction in the end. Mark Ridley an Evolutionist said "No evolutionist whether gradualist or punctuationist uses the fossil record as evidence in favor of The Theory of Darwinian Evolution as opposed to special Creation". God's Existence is made perfectly known and observable in the universe as demonstrated in His Handiwork in the intelligently designed manner that Creation was made, human consciences and consciousness historical and archaeological evidence of God's Word being valid history, fulfillment of Bible Prophecies God in His Holiness and Righteousness could give us what we deserve in Hell for our since but He's merciful to give us free will to choose to accept or reject His gift of salvation by grace through faith in His Son Jesus. I don't mean this is any condescending manner but if you'd like to discuss The Scriptures with me or have me listen to your view on anything my instagram account is Savage Christian Kombatant
Heck of a mic drop... Way to show the ridiculousness of semantical jockeying! Not saying this proves anything, but just appreciating the art of debate here 🔥
@@marksnow7569 true... Though once in a while you do get a sound bite or nugget that sets you on the path of research leading to deeper understanding of Truth, the majority of it is the art of debate. You're good at debating, you can win an argument even if your stance is completely false, so I agree with your assessment.
@@jdubbizness I find it more entertaining how the other guy is laughing at the dude's argument, and disagreeing with it the whole time, just to say "you're talking about God" in the end. So yeah, I find it entertaining how the theist is basically saying that God existing is ridiculous.
The argument is that anything could exist under the circumstances that the other guy is claiming god exists, it doesn’t have to be a god and it’s even more absurd to think that thing is something thought up by humans
But what is that anything. His computer argument does not hold since a computer needs a programmer. The God argument holds because no matter what you name God, he is still God.
@@Slanderpencilyou can’t replace God with anything but you do have the free will to spend as your heart desires & that is the issue The heart has no reasoning to answer for what the mind thought was good only to find, disappointment. Disappointment that lead to shame & we learn to embrace shame bc pride is easy; humility is divine
He's missing the point that the metaphysical evidence suggests that the universe could only have been created by something that exists outside the laws of the universe. The theist says that creator is God, the atheist says it's nothing. Which makes more sense?
For Craig to argue that his opponent’s computer is god is silly. Craig is arguing for the god as described in the Christian bible, so it has no relationship to the computer that the man is talking about. The cosmological argument doesn’t support Craig God either. That is why Muslims use the same argument.
For real.😭 worst thing is there are a surprising amount of pple in the comments thinking the theist destroyed him in this argument. It’s funny but also infuriating.
Oh my, his sarcasm was really lost on the Christians in the audience. He was making light out of the entire conversation. The absurdity in even claiming to know what is around. Almost a pointless conversation in its entirety. But there are many people with their "heads in the clouds" wondering what started it all off. But none of us know, and that's why religion is a stifling force, as it claims to know that which we do not. If we wish to see an educated populous who are productive and capable, we shouldn't be making limitations on what is and what isn't, we should be pragmatic
@@mrstrong93 does the birth year of a person named yeshua, have any bearing on whether or not that person was a divine being? Also, certain countries are in different years based on the calendar they use. So it is not universal.
So in a professional scholarly debate its appropriate to mock the other side and use sarcasm and not take anything seriously? Got it. And yes we understand he was joking. But even the joke hes trying to make isnt a good argument against God. Thats the point of William Lane Craig. Don't mock God. Galatians 6:7 Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap. Proverbs 1:22 How long, O simple ones, will you love being simple? How long will scoffers delight in their scoffing and fools hate knowledge?
everyone missed the old man’s very good point!!! the point he is trying to make is that, making the claim that there’s this timeless being that has no creator is a unprovable and outrageous claim. Because the if i ask “what created/designed god?”, you would respond “he was the original cause!”. but that’s just a claim! you are just making that claim because you believe in god. so the point is, you can make that claim abt ANYTHING!! but you are not obligated to respect the statement made (especially considering there’s no physical evidence to prove the point, u just have to trust their word) SO… if I said that “the universe just existed with no cause”, you would say “no! it has to have a cause! or a creator. something had to create it”. would it be fair if I said, “no, that’s because the universe is timeless and always existed”. it wouldn’t be fair! because i am simply saying that with no evidence other than the fact that i believe it. so claiming that god is a timeless and non-causal being is an unfair claim to make to someone, because it only exists on the premise that the person you are speaking to believes in god. i am an atheist now after being religious for a while. i hope the theists (religious ppl) in this comment section can respect my stance and maybe understand why i and many other atheists think this isn’t a good argument for the existence of god. NOTE: i don’t know what started the universe or anything like that. but nobody knows! that’s why i think so many people become religious. it may never be solved. all we can do is slowly chip away at finding out how and why everything started
@@jeremyinvictus Failure to recognize the Biologist was being sarcastic. Using sarcasm to swap "God" with "supercomputer" attempts to highlight the problem of presupposing certain attributes onto any entity, whether God or a Supercomputer.
@@jeremyinvictus Instead of making an argument for why you shouldn't presuppose characteristics of entities, he says the computer would just be God as if it isn't problematic at all. As if anything that fits the description of God is God.
Right. Where's your phds and years of debate experience, bear boy? Also, thanks for the stupid arguing you left under my own comment which has like 3.5k likes
I saw this snippet on instagram from a random account and don’t actually know the name of the original video. Does anyone know the title, or name of this gentleman?
Well then a special computer wouldn't be special if it was self existing and designed yet we knew about it so it's a finite and limited godly object I guess 🤔🤣. Many Atheists, agnostics and secular humanists out here using Naturalism of The Gaps arguments which means we understand therefore no God 😂. SILLY ATHEISTS TRIX ARE FOR KIDS 🤣. God can be Eternal if He exists because He's self existing yet nature isn't. I wouldn't think that nature could live, die then be reborn Eternally because we would see evidence of that basically a resurrection and rebirth cycle of Nature. Professor William Lane Craig was speaking FACTS 🔥. This has nothing and everything to do with the video but please listen if you want to otherwise leave it alone and ignore it. Hello my name is Justin and I'm a Christian and Apologist but I'm also a college graduate. I'm not a closed minded Theist as I have nothing against Atheists or unbelievers as I speak to them often to understand their reasons for unbelief but we as Christians are convinced of God's Existence due to many real factors). I'm not trying to convert anyone or convince anyone to become Christians as that's The Holy Spirit's job to help people believe but only explain why I believe in Jesus Christ. There's actually evidence of God's Existence in Christianity. First of all there's proof that Jesus of Nazareth existed in history since the writings of Tacitus, Josephus Flavius, Pliny the younger and other historical documents prove that He was living two thousand years ago that even scholars both religious and Atheists agree with historically speaking but not that He's The Divine Son of God because obviously they don't. I'm going to give you historical and archeological evidence for God's Existence as The Scriptures have prophecies that predate the events recorded in them by several millennia including Matthew, Hosea and Zechariah which prophesy accurately of the people of Israel becoming a nation again after over 1900 years of being scattered around the nations since the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 A.D. spoken of by Christ in Matthew 23:29-24:3 and returning to their homeland after The Holocaust with Jerusalem as their capital in 1948 exactly as Jesus The Christ said. The prophets including Daniel spoke of the time where several world empires would arise and fall including the Babylonian kingdom, Medes and Persians, Roman Empire, and Saladin and the Muslims which went in consecutive order for the past few millennia. The people of Israel becoming a nation after The Holocaust in 1948 (ironically the melting point of gold as God compares Israel to gold that's tested in fire in Zechariah 13:8 and Jeremiah 16:15) exactly how Jesus The Christ said would happen since God us everything to come in The Scriptures and not just because people were working towards as Atheists claim which are impossible for any regular man to predict. Just before anyone says Christianity is a white man's religion made to oppress blacks during slavery you obviously aren't aware that the first Christians were Jews in The Middle East and that Christianity just like any religion can be used by evil and corrupt people to oppress others but you forget that the first Abolitionists/Civil Rights activists were Christians who sought to abolish slavery, racism, segregation, injustice and prejudice throughout American history. Jesus The Christ loves you enough not to give you what we all deserve which is God's Wrath by His Own Blood. Charles Darwin didn't originally come up with The Theory of Evolution over 200 years ago as it is mentioned in the writings of Ancient Greeks who believed in Demons that gave knowledge to philosophers. Evolution makes no sense when nothing has evolved after thousands of years of human history and supposedly the first creature came from primordial sludge several millions of years ago funny how they won't believe that God an Eternal Almighty Spirit Being created us from the Earth) which came from a supermassive expansion of matter at high temperature that inexplicably created everything in the known universe that supposedly came from nothing billions of years ago. How did the organs evolve before there were bones, skin, substance and how did any creatures see before eyes evolved? I've studied evolution and abiogenesis in the past and read Darwin's " Origin of The Species" and I'm not convinced of macro Evolutionary biology whereas I accept micro Evolution like speciation and adaptation but not macro Evolution because there's no evidence of it nor clear observable examples of it where living creatures evolve into other kinds of species plus the fact that fossils don't show evidence of evolution and genetic entropy rules out evolution. The question begs how did two genders evolve from a common ancestor with a perfectly hospitable and sustainable environment with breathable oxygen and resources to survive on inexplicably? Atheists have the burden of proof to explain how everything came to be and why our existence is possible without the Existence of God from an godless perspective just as Christians have to provide evidence of God's Existence and the validity of His Word. Evolution requires life to already exist in order to take any effect in living organisms so it doesn't account for the existence of Life and reality. Also evolution is impossible because it goes against The Law of entropy and the second Law of thermodynamics because evolution makes things better whereas nothing continues to get better but decays and turns to absolute destruction in the end. Mark Ridley an Evolutionist said "No evolutionist whether gradualist or punctuationist uses the fossil record as evidence in favor of The Theory of Darwinian Evolution as opposed to special Creation". God's Existence is made perfectly known and observable in the universe as demonstrated in His Handiwork in the intelligently designed manner that Creation was made, human consciences and consciousness historical and archaeological evidence of God's Word being valid history, fulfillment of Bible Prophecies God in His Holiness and Righteousness could give us what we deserve in Hell for our since but He's merciful to give us free will to choose to accept or reject His gift of salvation by grace through faith in His Son Jesus. I don't mean this is any condescending manner but if you'd like to discuss The Scriptures with me or have me listen to your view on anything my instagram account is Savage Christian Kombatant
@torstenjunker2332 Funny how 2 people can watch the same video & come to 2 completely opposite conclusions. Truly, atheism is the most myopic and theologically sophomoric religion in the world. IQ is a measurement of pattern recognition. Atheism has demonstrated that it is a low IQ religion.
@@torstenjunker2332 nothing stupid about it really. He's just basically calling God in another name, but the qualities are still the same. Unless, his main objective is to misrepresent God by just comparing it to a computer.
It’s not though. He’s arguing that the ‘cause’ isn’t God but a computer. What he doesn’t realise is the computer he describes has all the attributes of what others call God. Therefore he believes in ‘God’ but names it ‘Computer’.
@@furrygoose94Do you seriously not understand that he does that on purpose? There is only one difference, a computer is not a personal being. He wants his opponent to argue for why god must be personal.
I think it’s a lame way to debate on his part but it’s pretty obvious he doesn’t actually believe this. He’s simply trying to illustrate the absurdity of God as a hypothesis by providing an equivalent one that’s obviously wrong.
But the issue is that it shows that there is still no way out of the philosophical argument for God. You can redefine it as a computer, or a flying spaghetti monster, or a million other things, but when you sit and list the traits of this being, you have essentially the Christian God.
@@coreygossman6243 No, the Flying Spaghetti Monster loves spaghetti, beer, and sailing the seven seas. The first people were midgets and pirates, not Adam and Eve. Also he says that strict dogma sucks and never told me to believe in the Bible, but rather in His Gospel. His noodliness is a great being and is not the Christian God you describe, if anything you are mistaking the signs of the Flying Spaghetti Monster for the signs of some other god.
the immaterial, timeless, spaceless, all-knowing, all-powerful, inteligent, autonomous sentient characteristics of God aren't made up. It's the logical conclusion to the fact that mater, time and space were created, so the sentient couldn't be bond by none of these. The creator has knowledge of its creation, so all that is known is known for him, so he's all knowing. and he must be powerful to do everything that exists, so he's all-powerful. And he needs to be autonomous sentient, cause if there was nothing before him, there was nothing to make him change from the state of "not creating the universe" to "creating the universe" if not himself, he had to DECIDE to create. not programmed to do, so he's autonomous sentient being. and inteligent because our universe was created with inteligence, it's fine thunned by mathematical constants that couldn't not only not sustain the life, but not even form the galaxies if they were different.
@@matheuscaneta1194 All that though only proves that something did all that. Presuming the thing that did all that is the God of the Jews called Yahweh who then sent his sine Jesus to save the Christians is a leap of logic with zero evidence. Generally speaking, Christians should not be getting into arguments about these things. You believe it on faith... Not because it's true or provable. You could very well be all wrong and the 'God' is simply a sentient being from another dimension,.. Or it might not be one being. Perhaps one thing created the universe and something else ( more intelligent than us) but less than the thing that created the universe finds a part of the universe suitable and creates us humans S good way to understand this would be the creator of the Android phone vs people who create apps that can be used on the Android phone. Separate creators.. And that's just 1 of thousands of possibilities There are just too many skips in steps in the religious person's perspective on who or what God is. Just believe on fa
@@matheuscaneta1194 "Time and Space were created" smuggle smuggle smuggle. You dirty pirate, stop smuggling in your believe that the universe had a creator. Time and Space exist. You have all the work left to show they were created. Stop being lazy.
Many people despise the idea of a “personal” God because it means that what they do matters to someone else who is actually entitled to an opinion on the subject. There is a standard, which they should be living up to, which they don’t live up to and that just doesn’t sit well with them, so they go off in search of evidence to support the notion most convenient to them. That is their nature.
Many people despise hard work so they take the easy path: from a random Palestinian cult that wrote a nonsense book full of voodoo bs... because it (wait for it) promises eternal life... .... they'll use design & creationism... the very things that are not taught in schools... to support their death cult... .... & they'll deny blood transfusions to their very own children & mutilate the genitals of infant girls & 99% of religious teachers are male / deacons / bishops / cardinals / & millions of paedophile priests that will still get to heaven... coz they confessed... ... other people would feed these degenerates to the sharks.... See the difference?... never turn your back on a theist... You know their nature.
Many people despise knowledge: they desperately wish irrelevant Palestinian myths to be true / they don't understand natural systems but they'll give up all discernment for the illusory carrot of heaven & the fear of torment for all eternity... They will deny blood transfusions to their very own children & their priests that engage in paedophilia number in the millions... ... they wish to lay waste to this world on the promise of another... ... this is the death cult... It is their nature.
@Cowboy406 lies. The nature of your cult is fear & loathing: you don't understand natural systems & believe in talking snakes and zombie resurrections... you have zealots that deny blood transfusions to their very own children and other zealots that mutilate young girls... your cult has millions of paedophile priests & you wish for death... for that is your nature.
The world says his name, HEI SUS, but do you understand what the Greatest schemer of all tries to hide? The real jewish name of Jesus is "Yeshua". The name Jesus, was given to Yeshua to shame him as a hung on cross criminal, by the Romans. (Greek and Latin were spoken) * Bible was first translated in Greek, Latin and Hebrew, as well, as written from old sea scrolls. The Romans, would have pronounced Jesus with the sound of HEI. In Greek Ἰησοῦς /in Latin Iesus Iēsoûs) or Latin. Jesus is pronounced "HEI-soos". The HEI Hebrew/Aramaic symbol(17) means Truth, Sus שׂוּשׂ hebrew/Aramaic symbol = male. and pronounced same. Hei-sus/Je-sus/iou-sus SON of Truth in name.💯 Jesus Christ is pronounced "HEI sus.. kris to". Which obviously means Truth cruxificido/cruxified, by observation and truly listening. Each time Chrixtian, is said it verifies the krux/cross. Ask yourself why has this fact been hidden? The Christian God is named "Yod HEI Vav HEI" in the time of Moses written short "17" HEI. Now notrice the first letters, YHVH, which many now say, "Yewah". The name of our Father. Which means Truth. ((Look carefully, listen to the sound.. Yewshua-son/yewah-father...Even HEI-sus/Jesus, carries his father name. Crix-tian is crosss..facts are facts!!
Crap argument.... Wlcs actual arguments ( watch whole clip ) actually have weight and reason behind them... This intellectual snob offers no answers too his tuse simple and illogical reasons . He is logically incoherent ! A stupid answer is still stupid !
If that the Christian "theory" is illogical then the whole big bang theory is also illogical since its still a theory and not a fact. So in the end we are back to square 0.
Ummm... You missed the point. He used all of WLC's points and called them a computer so that you can distance yourself from the belief you already hold when evaluating the claims. It seems ridiculous when you think it's a computer, hence if you didn't already believe it was a being, you would be able to see how ridiculous the claim is.
@@adayah2933 That’s exactly my point: They’re personal in the sense they’re designed by a personal being (a human) for someone’s use, but they’re not a Being who is personal by nature. It’s only superficially like a computer.
Actually what the guy talking to William saying that you cannot assume a creator. If you can assume your god as an atheist I can assume an number of different things and I would still be just as wrong. Evidence and facts are needed not assumptions and arguments.
it's all religious nutjobs can do. cut off people mid sentence to make them look bad. every video they do it, then go "see, atheist are dumb" religious nutjobs don't have any real arguments or evidence. all they have is their holly bibble.
It's pointing out that what people do is define God into existence. He is speaking in jest and making fun of theists reasoning, and it has been clipped as a GOTCHA moment.
Yeah, he's describing God and the theist keeps mocking him and laughing at him... he disagrees with it the whole time and in the end says "You're describing God!" so it's incredibly dishonest from the theist, since he clearly disagrees with it.
@@patrickmurphy9091 No. The atheist was basically arguing that God is not real because we can put the same qualities of God with a different name/term that is not a god.
This was the clearest example of the manifestation of an ontological argument for God’s existence in a debate. It’s really not a common argument and most people don’t use it in debates, but here it came so well in this discussion. William Lane Craig is really a good debater, who understands well the arguments for and against the existence of God!
Im a christian but theres a slight misunderstanding here, a computer isnt simply laptops and PCs, computers are anything that computates, the first computers were people, literally called computers, theres a lot in the universe that can be described computationally, this scientist obviously subscribes closlely to a simulation universe theory, its just his scientific opinion (notice "i think") and i dont agree but it is logically coherent
@@murpzzthecat5559 “Don’t watch it” You just totally and utterly refuted yourself as you just watched it yourself - right? OUCH!! It’s beyond ironic and absurd listening to so called “liberal freethinkers” and so called “socialists” suggest that we police freedom of thought and censor other ideas using cancel culture and public “SHAMING” - yes? It stinks of left wing apartheid. It’s no surprise that the origins of the policy of apartheid itself was a combination of socialism and nationalism, somewhat similar to that of Hitler - right? Listening to triggered atheists virtue signalling and coping and proselytising about being “SHAMELESS” whilst in the same breath subscribing to the belief that we are all ULTIMATELY MEANINGLESS, HOLLOW AND SOULLESS APES who shares half their DNA with bananas is PRICELESS!! It gets even worse because according to the high priest of “new atheism” Richard Dawkins under this strictly reductive, causally closed, atheistic, nihilistic fan fiction…. “The universe we observe has … no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference. … DNA neither knows nor cares. DNA just is. And we dance to its music [emphasis added].” “At bottom no right, no wrong, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference” [Atheism] - yes? Yeah makes great “sense” and totally “sane”? Your world view, your absurdity, your ULTIMATELY MEANINGLESS, HOLLOW AND SOULLESS APE, your existential crisis and your epistemological crisis not the theists!! Further still, the irony and the absurdity is that under a strictly reductive materialism, atheism or philosophical naturalism “you” and your very lame “DONT WATCH IT” argument are nothing more substantive than the delusions of an overgrown amoeba with illusions of grandeur- right? That is nothing more substantive than the blind, mindless, ultimately meaningless accidental arrangement of POND SLIME evolved to an allegedly “HIGHER” order - yes? OUCH!! Your world view, your absurdity, your ULTIMATELY MEANINGLESS, HOLLOW AND SOULLESS APE, your existential crisis and your epistemological crisis not the theists - right? Moreover, given the atheists metaphysical presupposition, that is the fatalists and the epistemological nihilists belief that the blind, mindless, ultimately meaningless, accidental arrangement of random atoms and brain chemicals creating the illusion of stable patterns and regularities, accidentally just POOFED everything into existence for no reason whatsoever - - - - my search continues for an intellectually honest atheist who can actually give a cohesive, logically consistent, objective foundation for HOW THEY CAN KNOW ANYTHING AT ALL IS FACTUALLY TRUE OR FALSE OR “SHAMELESS” under relativism - right??? I’LL WAIT!!
@@murpzzthecat5559 ?? Priceless 3 “Don’t watch it” You just totally and utterly refuted yourself as you just watched it yourself - right? OUCH!! It’s beyond ironic and absurd listening to so called “liberal freethinkers” and so called “socialists” suggest that we police freedom of thought and censor other ideas using cancel culture and public “SHAMING” - yes? It stinks of left wing apartheid. It’s no surprise that the origins of the policy of apartheid itself was a combination of socialism and nationalism, somewhat similar to that of Hitler - right? Listening to triggered atheists virtue signalling and coping and proselytising about being “SHAMELESS” whilst in the same breath subscribing to the belief that we are all ULTIMATELY MEANINGLESS, HOLLOW AND SOULLESS APES who shares half their DNA with bananas is PRICELESS!! It gets even worse because according to the high priest of “new atheism” Richard Dawkins under this strictly reductive, causally closed, atheistic, nihilistic fan fiction…. “The universe we observe has … no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference. … DNA neither knows nor cares. DNA just is. And we dance to its music [emphasis added].” “At bottom no right, no wrong, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference” [Atheism] - yes? Yeah makes great “sense” and totally “sane”? Your world view, your absurdity, your ULTIMATELY MEANINGLESS, HOLLOW AND SOULLESS APE, your existential crisis and your epistemological crisis not the theists!! Further still, the irony and the absurdity is that under a strictly reductive materialism, atheism or philosophical naturalism “you” and your very lame “DONT WATCH IT” argument are nothing more substantive than the delusions of an overgrown amoeba with illusions of grandeur- right? That is nothing more substantive than the blind, mindless, ultimately meaningless accidental arrangement of POND SLIME evolved to an allegedly “HIGHER” order - yes? OUCH!! Your world view, your absurdity, your ULTIMATELY MEANINGLESS, HOLLOW AND SOULLESS APE, your existential crisis and your epistemological crisis not the theists - right? Moreover, given the atheists metaphysical presupposition, that is the fatalists and the epistemological nihilists belief that the blind, mindless, ultimately meaningless, accidental arrangement of random atoms and brain chemicals creating the illusion of stable patterns and regularities, accidentally just POOFED everything into existence for no reason whatsoever - - - - my search continues for an intellectually honest atheist who can actually give a cohesive, logically consistent, objective foundation for HOW THEY CAN KNOW ANYTHING AT ALL IS FACTUALLY TRUE OR FALSE OR “SHAMELESS” under relativism - right??? I’LL WAIT!!
It cut off the video at the end to give the illusion that the Christian made a winning point, when he was in fact falling into the Atheist's trap when he said, "What you're doing is describing God." Yes, exactly. He is. That's the point. If you think this was an "own" against the Atheist, then you, like the Christian speaker, have also missed the point. Strategically and dishonestly slicing up the video to make it feel otherwise doesn't help your case either.
Exactly and the religious argument is “god has to exist because you can’t get something from nothing.” Okay then what created god, isn’t god something? I thought the logic was you can’t get something from nothing😂
Exodus 20. It doesn't have to be invisible. People make all kinds of things gods of their life. Anything you put before God is your master. For an example money people "worship" idolize and desire wealth and using money as a standard of success. Another would be Fame/self idolatry and I would say this is the biggest worldly god of our generation today. Sadly even churches are promoting worship to this type of "god". Just know there's only one God and He is our Messiah Jesus. Many religions, scientists, and historians give some credit to Jesus, but Jesus says He is the Only Way. Please repent from your sins and turn to Jesus. For more info look up *The Roman's Road to Salvation*. Thank you for your time.
@@hartzellaerialproductions527 your purposely being mistaught and uneducated by the NWO about the difference between the linear timeline and the cyclical time loop
@@Slanderpencil Do you understand the point the Christian was making? If something is all of the things the man described, it’s no longer a computer… it’s just God.
@@Alex_Vlass the computer is not something the old man believes in, it’s rhetorical. He’s making a mockery of the Christian god; making the same arguments for the computer that a Christian would make for god. He’s doing it to give perspective on how the argument looks when it’s not on a god the Christian believes in.
@@Slanderpencil I understand he doesn’t actually believe the computer, it shows how he didn’t understand the fact that it doesn’t matter what he calls it (computer or divine being). If it has the characteristics of God, it’s God.
@@Alex_Vlass right, but he’s giving perspective on how the arguments many theists make are ridiculous. He’s not giving this computer as an actual counter argument. That fact that the computer is god is exactly the point. The computer is impossible to believe due to it’s crazy characteristics just as god is. At least from the atheist perspective, I understand it’s not crazy to believe as a theist.
he clearly wasn’t being serious about there being an all powerful computer, he was just trying to show how stupid the god concept is. it went over craig’s head and most of the comments…
I'm not going to make a claim for or against God at this time, but he didn't "destroy his own argument." He was trying to point out how ridiculous he thinks the idea of God is. He won because everyone in the room thought it was ridiculous, but really, he was simply describing God.
Exactly, this totally flew over the christian's heads. Somehow christians in the comments think they won this debate - how? He made silly arguments for a computer invoking the typical special pleading and special properties of this 'god' entity. WLC then goes on and admits his silly argument is the embodiment of god. They somehow think was a win for them? This is how blind they are to their own dissonance.
@teks-kj1nj I will explain why Christians call this a win, the guy who basically called God a computer did basically nothing but confuse the Christian dude and the entire audience, since all he did was describe God but with the name computer. I mean, that's cool if you wanna call God a computer, but that said computer is still a god. The only reason I believe that the example the atheist gave was dumb because there is a reason we have terms that describe things like computer / man / God / woman etc its same argument LGBT make when they describe a biological woman a man sure go ahead won't change the fact that said "man" is still a biological woman its still a fact, just like the Atheist tried to gocha the Christian by confusing him with the different term but in the end he is still described God, and yes it sounds ridiculous to describe God as a computer and the reason it is the ridiculous is because you are using wrong term to describe something that the term is never used on like computer / God, which in the end does nothing but bring confusion.
@@ILrukiamaxim55 You missed the point as well. Forget the computer, its the special pleading that theists do to justify god he was mocking. You can use that line of thinking to justify anything - hence the computer mockery. Theist: Everything needs a creator. Atheist: Who made god then? Theist: God is special Theist: Life can't come from non-life Athiest: How did god make Adam from dirt then? Theist: God is special How did god make the universe from nothing? God is special etc...
@@jonathancole5179 I would hate to worship the God of the Old Testament, endorsing slavery, rape, incest, genocide, baby killing, you Christians are part of a blood cult is pathetic. There is no way the creator of the universe with trillions of stars and planets inspired that book. Men who sleep with sheep and have iQ’s of 60 wrote that garbage
He does this QUITE OFTEN!! You'd THINK he'd catch on!! Gotta pray the Holy Spirit draws him to himself before it's too late 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏 Texas Nana Psalm 91
Actually the guy argued his point well. He’s building the computer god to check all the boxes no different than the other guy is building up the non computer god to check all the boxes. I could also join as a 3rd point of view and argue for a butterfly god that checks all the boxes. You have a plain canvas to paint your god to fit your agenda
I noticed that too. Having been an atheist for a decade and now a firm believer in Christ, I can safely say that i can understand the feeling of being in both of these guys shoes and understand them.
@@Viruz32It just seems like 2 people who know the same amount of nothing, disagreeing on which “nothing” Is good enough lol. Christians don’t KNOW that God exists they simply believe he does, while the Atheist also doesn’t KNOW that there isn’t a God he just has no concrete proof otherwise (Lack of proof is not proof of the contrary). Both of these people know nothing of actual substance to further their points so it’ll just end up with them decided what feels best to them. I just know that I don’t know and so religion seems like a pretty distant idea to me. Im pretty sure theres “something” out there that created us but I cant say to which Religion this “God” claims or claim to know anything about it or how it would think.
@@KaeporraGaeborra You claim that the Christians don't know if God exists, ignoring their arguments and the evidences and conclude that they believe God exists because they want to believe, not because God is the better explanation. The fact you even made a knowledge claim that either of them don't know, means you know that they don't know, meaning you know. So can you tell us??
i still remember a bishop in my church saying “remember, if you can fully comprehend God, what you have with you is not God, because God is beyond human understanding.” sometimes im just to arrogant to admit it.
Yes that’s the point. He’s making a point of how you can assign the properties of god to a computer and it works the same, how does that destroy his argument?
No one. God is the source of being. For there to be anything, you cannot rely on a temporal universe for the ultimate source as it is finite. God has no creator, no beginning and no end. He simply is. Hence, "I AM." This is something you cannot escape, there has to be an eternal source to all things.
@DM-dk7js My friend, you likely have a standard of proof that is unfeasible. You can hardly prove that you exist. But im glad you're perusing channels like this one. God willing you will stumble on some truth.
The point isn't that the atheist believes that a special computer created the universe. He's trying to belittle the Christian's argument by substituting "computer" for "God" to make it sound stupid. But he stuck his own foot in his mouth. There are far better videos of Christians and atheists debating where a Christian scholar lays out many strong arguments for the existence of God where the athiest's only response is to resort to insults and belitting.
@teks-kj1nj 1. Origin of the universe from nothing 2. Origin of life from non-life 3. Genetic decay and entropy from mutations 4. Complexity and interconnection of natural laws arising from random chance 5. Irreducibly complex biological systems These are all well-known, serious problems with evolution, that most of the evolutionary community conveniently gloss over. These are also arguments that atheistic evolutionists have no true argument against outside of: non-scientific claims and assertions; attacks on the arguer's credibility or intelligence; or just flat out ignoring it.
@@camerapasteurize72151-who said from nothing? 2-we don’t have the answer-doesn’t mean a god did it I’m sorry you’re saying #1 and 2 are problems for evolution?? NO they aren’t glossed over. Yes we have arguments against theists arguments and they don’t rely on what you’re saying Seems the only who’s ignoring things is you
@therick363 You're proving my point by trying to disregard the questions instead of answering them. You are literally doing exactly what I'm talking about: trying to disregard the question or gloss over it rather than provide a comprehensive answer. The reason is that there is no answer that isn't complete speculation and guessing, all of which is less rational than an intelligent creator. I noticed that you only even mentioned the first two questions.
@@camerapasteurize7215 I’m not disregarding them. I am actually talking about them. So definitely not proving your point. I’m literally NOT doing what you’re saying. I am actually engaging you in conversation about these things. Please don’t misrepresent things. Yes I only started with the first two to see how you reacted. Now one of three things can happen. 1-we discuss these things like two honest adults 2-misrepresenting/twisting 3-walk away. What would you like to do?
@@Shyguy71588 Yeah, he must have created an alt account and thumbs up his comment 6 times, right? Love how you went straight to a personal attack that was easily disproved by just waiting for a bit. Is really telling of how little thought you actually put into things. Also, how is it clear that he belittled the atheists comment the whole time, even laughing at it, even though he admits in the end "you're talking about god"? Clearly he thought god's existence was ridiculous and laughed at it. And guess what? So did you! Enjoy hell I guess
In quantum mechanics, the observer effect suggests that observation can influence the state of a quantum system, raising questions about the nature of reality. If reality depends on observers, this challenges the idea of objective reality and supports interpretations where the universe is shaped by observation. Understanding whether reality is observer-dependent is essential. Only then can we fully explore the question of a creator or god, as the nature of reality itself would influence the nature of such a being.
How are the atheists in the comments somehow not understanding this. Yes, the debator is being sarcastic to try to make a point. Yet, that point is moot because simply taking the attributes of something and assigning it a new name doesnt at all change what that thing actually is.
WLC cannot answer the core criticism that is leveled here. We could simply say the computer is God. Then we have to ask who created the computer. And who created the thing that created the computer. And so on. Something timeless doesn’t mean it doesn’t itself have a creator. If he wants to say God then he must answer what created God otherwise his argument falls apart and becomes meaningless. This is the same criticism that has been leveled against this “proof” for 1000s of years. Why can’t Christian’s come up with anything new?
It sounds like you’re missing the point a little bit. Here it is - given that anything exists, something must be eternal. We can say a computer is eternal, or that matter is eternal, sure, but then we’re really just sliding something else into that primary place where really God is.
@@Daily_Dose_Of_Wisdom weird you can summarize but not synthesize. If some thing created the thing that created us, it isn’t god at any point. That empties the argument he’s making of meaning and isn’t a proof
No actually you clearly don't understand the reasoning between the two debaters in the video. Well then a special computer wouldn't be special if it was self existing and designed yet we knew about it so it's a finite and limited godly object I guess 🤔🤣. Many Atheists, agnostics and secular humanists out here using Naturalism of The Gaps arguments which means we understand therefore no God 😂. SILLY ATHEISTS TRIX ARE FOR KIDS 🤣. God can be Eternal if He exists because He's self existing yet nature isn't. I wouldn't think that nature could live, die then be reborn Eternally because we would see evidence of that basically a resurrection and rebirth cycle of Nature. Professor William Lane Craig was speaking FACTS 🔥. This has nothing and everything to do with the video but please listen if you want to otherwise leave it alone and ignore it. Hello my name is Justin and I'm a Christian and Apologist but I'm also a college graduate. I'm not a closed minded Theist as I have nothing against Atheists or unbelievers as I speak to them often to understand their reasons for unbelief but we as Christians are convinced of God's Existence due to many real factors). I'm not trying to convert anyone or convince anyone to become Christians as that's The Holy Spirit's job to help people believe but only explain why I believe in Jesus Christ. There's actually evidence of God's Existence in Christianity. First of all there's proof that Jesus of Nazareth existed in history since the writings of Tacitus, Josephus Flavius, Pliny the younger and other historical documents prove that He was living two thousand years ago that even scholars both religious and Atheists agree with historically speaking but not that He's The Divine Son of God because obviously they don't. I'm going to give you historical and archeological evidence for God's Existence as The Scriptures have prophecies that predate the events recorded in them by several millennia including Matthew, Hosea and Zechariah which prophesy accurately of the people of Israel becoming a nation again after over 1900 years of being scattered around the nations since the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 A.D. spoken of by Christ in Matthew 23:29-24:3 and returning to their homeland after The Holocaust with Jerusalem as their capital in 1948 exactly as Jesus The Christ said. The prophets including Daniel spoke of the time where several world empires would arise and fall including the Babylonian kingdom, Medes and Persians, Roman Empire, and Saladin and the Muslims which went in consecutive order for the past few millennia. The people of Israel becoming a nation after The Holocaust in 1948 (ironically the melting point of gold as God compares Israel to gold that's tested in fire in Zechariah 13:8 and Jeremiah 16:15) exactly how Jesus The Christ said would happen since God us everything to come in The Scriptures and not just because people were working towards as Atheists claim which are impossible for any regular man to predict. Just before anyone says Christianity is a white man's religion made to oppress blacks during slavery you obviously aren't aware that the first Christians were Jews in The Middle East and that Christianity just like any religion can be used by evil and corrupt people to oppress others but you forget that the first Abolitionists/Civil Rights activists were Christians who sought to abolish slavery, racism, segregation, injustice and prejudice throughout American history. Jesus The Christ loves you enough not to give you what we all deserve which is God's Wrath by His Own Blood. Charles Darwin didn't originally come up with The Theory of Evolution over 200 years ago as it is mentioned in the writings of Ancient Greeks who believed in Demons that gave knowledge to philosophers. Evolution makes no sense when nothing has evolved after thousands of years of human history and supposedly the first creature came from primordial sludge several millions of years ago funny how they won't believe that God an Eternal Almighty Spirit Being created us from the Earth) which came from a supermassive expansion of matter at high temperature that inexplicably created everything in the known universe that supposedly came from nothing billions of years ago. How did the organs evolve before there were bones, skin, substance and how did any creatures see before eyes evolved? I've studied evolution and abiogenesis in the past and read Darwin's " Origin of The Species" and I'm not convinced of macro Evolutionary biology whereas I accept micro Evolution like speciation and adaptation but not macro Evolution because there's no evidence of it nor clear observable examples of it where living creatures evolve into other kinds of species plus the fact that fossils don't show evidence of evolution and genetic entropy rules out evolution. The question begs how did two genders evolve from a common ancestor with a perfectly hospitable and sustainable environment with breathable oxygen and resources to survive on inexplicably? Atheists have the burden of proof to explain how everything came to be and why our existence is possible without the Existence of God from an godless perspective just as Christians have to provide evidence of God's Existence and the validity of His Word. Evolution requires life to already exist in order to take any effect in living organisms so it doesn't account for the existence of Life and reality. Also evolution is impossible because it goes against The Law of entropy and the second Law of thermodynamics because evolution makes things better whereas nothing continues to get better but decays and turns to absolute destruction in the end. Mark Ridley an Evolutionist said "No evolutionist whether gradualist or punctuationist uses the fossil record as evidence in favor of The Theory of Darwinian Evolution as opposed to special Creation". God's Existence is made perfectly known and observable in the universe as demonstrated in His Handiwork in the intelligently designed manner that Creation was made, human consciences and consciousness historical and archaeological evidence of God's Word being valid history, fulfillment of Bible Prophecies God in His Holiness and Righteousness could give us what we deserve in Hell for our since but He's merciful to give us free will to choose to accept or reject His gift of salvation by grace through faith in His Son Jesus. I don't mean this is any condescending manner but if you'd like to discuss The Scriptures with me or have me listen to your view on anything my instagram account is Savage Christian Kombatant
@@ericwantsbbdYour literally arguing an infinite regress, you are definitely missing the point, the atheist in the video even said “it’s a self designing computer” so he’s arguing that this cosmic computer is the first cause, like WLC said he’s really just renaming what would essentially be God just to avoid saying the word God.
@@theonewhoknocks1976 sigh. This can be argued a number of ways and they all get to the central criticism I Illustrate above. In the video it is being argued that the evidence we have around us point to these ideas that it’s God. The atheist correctly makes fun by saying actually it’s a computer. Which *does* fit the criteria put forth by WLC as a proof for God. If we can easily sub a computer, or ask who created the creator, etc. then it empties the argument of meaning because it requires one to conclude anything could create and it isn’t it God. Don’t lose sight of the point made by WLC and bring more to the convo that was presented.
If he had an argument, he would be making the argument instead of toying. Atheists are so laughably arrogant. You have no argument for why Craig is wrong. All you have is ridicule and sarcastic quips.
@@reaganlecroy7773i had someone debate Jesus was a zombie. This was a friend group i was a part of. I made no mention of God or Jesus at all to them. At this question the person, who was an acquaintance, and this person looked at me for an answer. I replied along the lines of: zombies are a man made concept and God by extension, Jesus, isn’t man made (aside from virgin birth of Mary), as he needed to come into physical form. This person kept insisting about zombies and raising from the dead. I ultimately told em, you can believe in zombies and whatever and the like, it doesn’t change what I told you about Jesus and what he did on the cross.
@@zephyriasThe zombie hypothesis doesn't stick so well, since even his enemies report some type of appearance. Which means, that has lower exploratory power to try to explain the actual credible evidence. (Of his resurrection)
This guy completely exposed Craig's ridiculous philosophy and it's going completely over your head... Craig's argument for God is also logically inconsistent. Time is required for mental processes as well!!! But for some reason Craig has no problem with this. Also, if God is so poorly defined and vague that he's synonymous with a computer, then the entire Christian religion evaporates in a puff of smoke and you're left with at best a deistic God.
I think the white haired man's point is that the Kalam Cosmological argument doesn't lead to any particular creative cause. There's no reason for a victory lap here.
I think you're right. I'm not seeing what they're pitching here. I do see a few commenters who misunderstood the computer analogy completely, which means they're taking the TH-camrs statement on faith. I'm don't understand why it's such big deal. It almost appears that atheists are being judged by those who's savior tells them not to judge. Acceptance was what he preached. Acceptance is a foreign concept here.
@@Churd84538 If I'm going to take what science says from someone who doesn't believe it vs someone who does, I'm going to go with the person who believes it and then can I accurately question it. So, the fact that you think Christianity teaches acceptance and not to judge, tells me you have done no research upon it yourself and are just believing what you have been told without question.
The problem began when people started just throwing God's name around as the solution for anything they can't find an answer to. In reality the Bible that is printed today has been rewritten by people supposedly based on the word of God . The truth is that no human being knows what God actually is. Many are disappointed when they see innocent children suffer for example because Gd does not display the powers they described to him but it is humans that describe those powers to Gd. So the truth is is that if people can recognize that GD is whatever it is which could be the very first force that pushed things in the universe to start colliding together and chemicals mixing until it eventually over zillions of years turned into humans physically made which is a collective mashup of chemicals working together. The mistake science makes is discounting GD , they absolutely cannot disprove it exists but at the same time we should also not assume to know what GD is. Look for anything to start a force must act upon it to begin the process so maybe that force is Gd. Or maybe this is an entire organic simulation like Neil deGrasse Tyson says and there is an actual GD watching over all of us. Or if you choose to believe it's exactly as you see it written in the Bible that's okay too but I tend to think that's been manipulated far too much by humans at this point. The nice thing about humans who don't want to cause harm to anyone whether or not they believe is the most important thing to me, we should all treat each other peacefully and kindly and respectfully as we wish to be treated. So there are many good messages too that we can extract from the book that still survived from its original Inception 🤝🙏👍
Nope, he’s throwing the absurdity of the thiests argument back at him by saying the exact same argument but substituting god for computer than neither can prove. Thats the point. The evidence for either is the same. Prove there is no computer that created everything
I can’t believe I’m about to comment on this video. Yes, he was talking about “god” not a computer, he was showing how ridiculous it is when a believer brushes off counterarguments by saying “no no, god is much more special and powerful than that”.
This really go over everyones head? He was mocking theistic reasoning by using an example of a “computer” using the same arguments WLC was using for God….went right over william lane craigs head. So yes, the “computer” represented God in his example, that was his point. Personally ive never been impressed with craig….theres better apologists out there who think more critically🤷♂️ im a christian but this was an L and so are most of these comments
The guy went from cocky to looking stupid within a few exchanges
I think he was making fun of the Christian by blowing “his argument” way out of proportion. Ps I’m atheist
@@BraydenBrashear-fr2ux What is funny? That God is God?
Laugh at it it stops being true?
@@someman7 ive seen this very common pattern amongst satanist and atheists alike, they seem to be almost incapable of being serious, and incapable of deeply thinking about uncomfortable truths and personal issues. They always resort to making a joke or trying to turn God into some comedy show. It stems from the inability to cope with death and reality of suffering and many other things the atheist cannot rationalize in their mind these very serious topics because mortality and meaning is all relative without God. So therefore the personal belief that their here for no reason and their lifes are worthless has a phycological defect that makes them wanna turn every topic about suffering, death, the after-life, and God into a joke everytime. Its an inverted way of expressing how they think about themselves, their mind reduces their being to a joke.
@@someman7 It is funny that God can be switched with Computer and Christians think their religion remains the same. A computer is not a God.
@@LlamaBearMan he literally just used computer as a word of no meaning and described the nature of God.
It's have I I would say you are a pencil and not a human
It's just stupid nothing else
Romans 1:22
"....Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools...."
Amen and Amen💯❤️
Exactly. He'd rather sound stupid than admit the existence of God. 🤦♀️
@@AC-lg7vi🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣well that sounds stupid.
Best comment
Amen.
That wasn’t an actual argument he was making. He was mocking the thought process of the opposition
Why mock him?
@@hibidihibidihawasn't mocking him personally... Mocking the thought process of the theist argument
@@Daniel-ld3zibecause he didn’t have a comeback to the fact that the universe couldn’t have always existed (because an infinite amount of time would have had to have passed for us to get here now). Goes against the rules of this universe. And that matter, space, time, maths, etc couldn’t have created themselves because that goes against the rules of this reality. What doesn’t.
@@Daniel-ld3ziSomething that is timeless and transcendent. And his only response was to attempt to mock him and look ridiculous doing it. He called God a computer instead of God and actually thought that it meant something.. 🤦♂️
@@spamgwin4166 "that goes against the rules of reality"
Nobody knows the "rules" of quantum mechanics. The Universe doesn't cater to how you personally want it to be.
Call it a computer if you will. I call it a "supernatural force".
Basically, WLC and all theists fail to demonstrate that consciousness is necessary.
The atheist is using an analogy to explain the god of the gaps fallacy.
Romans 1:22
"....Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools...."
@@Lost_n_Found_1 yes, because of the truest of fools, both the fools and the wise suffered through the dark ages due to theocracy. Let's not make the same mistake again
@@jonathanpena5972 You speak of suffering as if you were unaware of it's benefit. Please, read the Bible. Even if you disagree, at least you'll know and have better understanding why we're here!
I don't think people know he is mocking their claims and unironically laugh at his argument.
@@Lost_n_Found_1
No one cares about whatever Mother Goose said.
Shut up
When you call God another name and think that's gonna make him disappear.
When you call something "God" and think that's gonna make him real.
@@conor.3875 Unlike the Atheists trying to switch terms, the Christians argument is coherent.
@@SahihChristiannot really.
@@djarmstrong23 So let's see then. Show me how what he said makes any sense. Go on
Exactly. It's the name , ' God's they have a problem with. Call it ' super computer, omnipotent, omniscient computer's thay are OK with it.
I’m a Christian but that guy is clearly being facetious, and doesn’t actually believe the words he’s saying. Just mockery
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,.
It's more of experimenting on the audience to highlight the contradictory behavior of being so sure that something has the qualities of God. But thinking the same concept is ridiculous when under a different name.
The idea is to show that they believe in God not because of plausibility or proof but strictly because of faith. Faith that Was completely taught... Because the audience disregards a theory that is completely the same as their own but deviates from their hometown values... Showing that what they believe is just nonsensical but thrusted into their brains almost always from a young age
@@shaigoldsmith605His “computer theory” is not the same as their own. It’s not ridiculous just because of the name that was given but because of the properties of the two things that were compared. You can’t apply God’s qualities to a computer, its not like Christians are out here saying God is some inanimate object or animal here on Earth.
God is separate. God is the creator, you can’t apply his qualities to creation or creation’s creation. It doesn’t make sense.
@@JesusSufferedForYou I sure can. This computer has always been. It doesn’t need a creator. And if you think that’s ridiculous you believe the same thing, but for your god.
@@JesusSufferedForYou I mean the other guy is literally calling it a God. He thought it was stupid the whole time, and laughed at it, and then at the end said "that's God", so he's the one contradicting yourself. It's also contradictory of you to not understand that.
This man didnt get destroyed he did EXACTLY what a massive amount of christians do
You get it 😊
Refreshing
I don't think you understand what happened in this exchange. WLC does not think that this dude actually believes it's a computer. He knows exactly what this guy is doing. You people are midwits.
@@jeremyinvictus thats quite literally what i said, go back to school jackass
@@jeremyinvictus exactly. Buncha 🤡's
Perfect example of athiest reasoning
Exactly, and they say they're the logical ones😂
Real
@@ndibunwapeter9013 shitan tries to copy God in many ways, it seems even concepts that "belong" to us Christians
Theists use double standards and special pleading and false choices. Thats the kind of reasoning they have
As if theists use logic at all
I mean I'm a Christian myself....that used to be an Atheist. Is it lost on Christians that the computer thing was him being facetious to mock the type of thinking he feels Christians do? He wasn't actually being serious.....we can be honest about that, right?
Yes…he is mocking and in doing so shows he hasn’t actually put much thought into it.
@@JoshDub78 He did, as WLC admits his silly reasoning = god
His mocking demonstrated that he lacked understanding of the topic. All he did was call the creator a special computer instead of God. Where’s the joke here?
It's just that the way it's being presented here is as if it's a real argument. It's mockery only, no argument whatsoever.
@@bethezebra The mockery itself isn’t an argument, but he’s certainly using it as an attempt to support his argument by making his opponent look silly. But what exactly should WLC feel silly about here?
If one has the understanding that it doesn’t matter what you call the creator (God, special computer, etc.) it seems that the mocker’s joke falls flat. It only makes himself look silly instead.
He is just pointing out how ridiculous it sounds. God in itself is such a crazy concept that it has to be argued for, not the other way around.
But what the atheist doesn’t understand about his argument is that 12 apostles don’t give their lives for some whimsical feeling to just “say” something is AMAZING, or SPECIAL. Thousands of people don’t follow historical events and make the specific distinction between hallucinations and the reality that actually occurred and lives were given for just to say an object is greater than all it is a personal being with love. However, if the books of the Bible were based around a computer lol, then he would have a solid argument 😂 the atheist is just coming 2000 years later and acting like these real events didn’t occur because he can be illogical. Congratulations, you have free will.
@@ChristianWFL I could easily argue that Greek mythology is more credible and predates Christianity. There are ancient sites that correspond with the stories told in myths but for some reason Christian’s are so convinced their god is the right god
x+y=z or a+b=c
Atheists and religious people are explaining the world with different words but the calculation done is the same. We are creative enough to describe the universe in any analogy, it doesnt change what it is.
He was trying to provide a reductio ad absurdum, by precisely saying that his ‘special computer’ is like the theist’s ‘God’. I’m a theist, but it’s important to correctly interpret your interlocutors.
Jesus loves you and forgives you. Talk to Him.
@@Lost_n_Found_1 I said I’m a Theist. Not an Atheist lol.
@@Charles3x7 I said what I said, lol. Love you!
@@Lost_n_Found_1 Love you too!
Wow, just wow
Funniest part is that he was clearly being sarcastic!
yeah, and no one gets it
Yeah unfortunate.
They’re internet Christians, they’re too dumb to understand context or sarcasm.
I’m literally scrolling through the comments with my jaw on the floor. Nobody gets that he’s making fun of the god people’s argument
@@max_mittler He's just mocking it. There's not an argument there that he's making, just choosing to be annoying.
This was such a great debate. WLC was kind, affable, patient and tolerant even though his interlocutor was being intentionally sophomoric.
“That would be a contradiction in terms…a computer has to function. It takes time.” One of the swiftest WLC takedowns ever.
Theists not picking up on sarcasm. Nothing new.
He's using the same logic as religion, he made the point.
A computer who is a creator would need to have a mind, like artificial intelligence, or be programmed by a being with a mind. But God has revealed Himself to us, not a computer.
Exactly
@@Daily_Dose_Of_WisdomFACTS 😂. Well then a special computer wouldn't be special if it was self existing and designed yet we knew about it so it's a finite and limited godly object I guess 🤔🤣. Many Atheists, agnostics and secular humanists out here using Naturalism of The Gaps arguments which means we understand therefore no God 😂. SILLY ATHEISTS TRIX ARE FOR KIDS 🤣. God can be Eternal if He exists because He's self existing yet nature isn't. I wouldn't think that nature could live, die then be reborn Eternally because we would see evidence of that basically a resurrection and rebirth cycle of Nature. Professor William Lane Craig was speaking FACTS 🔥. This has nothing and everything to do with the video but please listen if you want to otherwise leave it alone and ignore it. Hello my name is Justin and I'm a Christian and Apologist but I'm also a college graduate. I'm not a closed minded Theist as I have nothing against Atheists or unbelievers as I speak to them often to understand their reasons for unbelief but we as Christians are convinced of God's Existence due to many real factors). I'm not trying to convert anyone or convince anyone to become Christians as that's The Holy Spirit's job to help people believe but only explain why I believe in Jesus Christ. There's actually evidence of God's Existence in Christianity. First of all there's proof that Jesus of Nazareth existed in history since the writings of Tacitus, Josephus Flavius, Pliny the younger and other historical documents prove that He was living two thousand years ago that even scholars both religious and Atheists agree with historically speaking but not that He's The Divine Son of God because obviously they don't.
I'm going to give you historical and archeological evidence for God's Existence as The Scriptures have prophecies that predate the events recorded in them by several millennia including Matthew, Hosea and Zechariah which prophesy accurately of the people of Israel becoming a nation again after over 1900 years of being scattered around the nations since the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 A.D. spoken of by Christ in Matthew 23:29-24:3 and returning to their homeland after The Holocaust with Jerusalem as their capital in 1948 exactly as Jesus The Christ said. The prophets including Daniel spoke of the time where several world empires would arise and fall including the Babylonian kingdom, Medes and Persians, Roman Empire, and Saladin and the Muslims which went in consecutive order for the past few millennia. The people of Israel becoming a nation after The Holocaust in 1948 (ironically the melting point of gold as God compares Israel to gold that's tested in fire in Zechariah 13:8 and Jeremiah 16:15) exactly how Jesus The Christ said would happen since God us everything to come in The Scriptures and not just because people were working towards as Atheists claim which are impossible for any regular man to predict.
Just before anyone says Christianity is a white man's religion made to oppress blacks during slavery you obviously aren't aware that the first Christians were Jews in The Middle East and that Christianity just like any religion can be used by evil and corrupt people to oppress others but you forget that the first Abolitionists/Civil Rights activists were Christians who sought to abolish slavery, racism, segregation, injustice and prejudice throughout American history. Jesus The Christ loves you enough not to give you what we all deserve which is God's Wrath by His Own Blood. Charles Darwin didn't originally come up with The Theory of Evolution over 200 years ago as it is mentioned in the writings of Ancient Greeks who believed in Demons that gave knowledge to philosophers.
Evolution makes no sense when nothing has evolved after thousands of years of human history and supposedly the first creature came from primordial sludge several millions of years
ago funny how they won't believe that God an Eternal Almighty Spirit Being created us from the Earth) which came from a supermassive expansion of matter at high temperature that inexplicably created everything in the known universe that supposedly came from nothing billions of years ago. How did the organs evolve before there were bones, skin, substance and how did any creatures see before eyes evolved? I've studied evolution and abiogenesis in the past and read Darwin's " Origin of The Species" and I'm not convinced of macro Evolutionary biology whereas I accept micro Evolution like speciation and adaptation but not macro Evolution because there's no evidence of it nor clear observable examples of it where living creatures evolve into other kinds of species plus the fact that fossils don't show evidence of evolution and genetic entropy rules out evolution. The question begs how did two genders evolve from a common ancestor with a perfectly hospitable and sustainable environment with breathable oxygen and resources to survive on inexplicably? Atheists have the burden of proof to explain how everything came to be and why our existence is possible without the Existence of God from an godless perspective just as Christians have to provide evidence of God's Existence and the validity of His Word.
Evolution requires life to already exist in order to take any effect in living organisms so it doesn't account for the existence of Life and reality. Also evolution is impossible because it goes against The Law of entropy and the second Law of thermodynamics because evolution makes things better whereas nothing continues to get better but decays and turns to absolute destruction in the end. Mark Ridley an Evolutionist said "No evolutionist whether gradualist or punctuationist uses the fossil record as evidence in favor of The Theory of Darwinian Evolution as opposed to special Creation". God's Existence is made perfectly known and observable in the universe as demonstrated in His Handiwork in the intelligently designed manner that Creation was made, human consciences and consciousness historical and archaeological evidence of God's Word being valid history, fulfillment of Bible Prophecies God in His Holiness and Righteousness could give us what we deserve in Hell for our since but He's merciful to give us free will to choose to accept or reject His gift of salvation by grace through faith in His Son Jesus. I don't mean this is any condescending manner but if you'd like to discuss The Scriptures with me or have me listen to your view on anything my instagram account is Savage Christian Kombatant
revealed? how can you be sure of thatm
Proof? Oh yea that's right all of your proof is a fictional book
@@mantabsekali920Gospel. The Gospel.
Heck of a mic drop... Way to show the ridiculousness of semantical jockeying!
Not saying this proves anything, but just appreciating the art of debate here 🔥
Yes, this is an example of why live debate is a terribly inefficient way of finding truth
It’s mockery, not something he actually believes
@@Slanderpencil agreed... But even in his mockery, he came right back to his opponent's opinion, which I find entertaining.
@@marksnow7569 true... Though once in a while you do get a sound bite or nugget that sets you on the path of research leading to deeper understanding of Truth, the majority of it is the art of debate.
You're good at debating, you can win an argument even if your stance is completely false, so I agree with your assessment.
@@jdubbizness I find it more entertaining how the other guy is laughing at the dude's argument, and disagreeing with it the whole time, just to say "you're talking about God" in the end. So yeah, I find it entertaining how the theist is basically saying that God existing is ridiculous.
William Lane Craig has some amazing debate moments like this, I love rewatching this bahaha
When your argument is just changing the word "god" to a "computer" like renaming a "orange" into an "Apple"
The argument is that anything could exist under the circumstances that the other guy is claiming god exists, it doesn’t have to be a god and it’s even more absurd to think that thing is something thought up by humans
But what is that anything. His computer argument does not hold since a computer needs a programmer. The God argument holds because no matter what you name God, he is still God.
@@mystdragon8530 well this computer programmed itself.
You see, no matter what you can replace god with a computer.
@@Slanderpencilyou can’t replace God with anything but you do have the free will to spend as your heart desires & that is the issue
The heart has no reasoning to answer for what the mind thought was good only to find, disappointment. Disappointment that lead to shame & we learn to embrace shame bc pride is easy; humility is divine
@@CJ-dt5mh humility is not divine 😂 plus your point has nothing to do with the video, you’re just spouting things you’ve heard.
@@Slanderpencil you think you know better than Jesus, which is a big risk to take & then use a 🤣 emoji only proves my point
He’s comparing god to the computer. It’s not something he actually believes. He’s saying god is just as ridiculous as this computer.
U get it lol
But if he is comparing God to a very unique computer he still saying the computer is God and God is the computer either way there is a creator.
@@IAmKonah it was a rhetorical comparison to show its ridiculousness
Why is it ridiculous? Why can’t we be living inside the simulation of a supercomputer ?
He's missing the point that the metaphysical evidence suggests that the universe could only have been created by something that exists outside the laws of the universe. The theist says that creator is God, the atheist says it's nothing. Which makes more sense?
he literally got the christian to dismantle his own argument. brilliant
What argument was dismantled?
For Craig to argue that his opponent’s computer is god is silly. Craig is arguing for the god as described in the Christian bible, so it has no relationship to the computer that the man is talking about. The cosmological argument doesn’t support Craig God either. That is why Muslims use the same argument.
He didn't destroy his own argument. You just didn't understand it.
Fr this guy is dumb. The atheist was mocking the Christian’s arguments for god lmao
Fr this guy is dumb. The atheist was mocking the Christian’s arguments for god lmao
For real.😭 worst thing is there are a surprising amount of pple in the comments thinking the theist destroyed him in this argument. It’s funny but also infuriating.
its easy to understand lol , the atheist is just going in circles
@@frankerz8339 he wasn't going in circles. Again, you just didn't understand what he was saying.
Oh my, his sarcasm was really lost on the Christians in the audience. He was making light out of the entire conversation. The absurdity in even claiming to know what is around. Almost a pointless conversation in its entirety. But there are many people with their "heads in the clouds" wondering what started it all off. But none of us know, and that's why religion is a stifling force, as it claims to know that which we do not. If we wish to see an educated populous who are productive and capable, we shouldn't be making limitations on what is and what isn't, we should be pragmatic
Do you believe Jesus was a real person? And do you think it's strange we started our timeline around his birth? He might of been pretty special yeah?
@@mrstrong93 does the birth year of a person named yeshua, have any bearing on whether or not that person was a divine being? Also, certain countries are in different years based on the calendar they use. So it is not universal.
@pderpy1687 the birth year has nothing to do with His divinity. That's a totally different conversation.
@@Daniel-Goodfeather i agree. That's why i replied to the previous comment.
So in a professional scholarly debate its appropriate to mock the other side and use sarcasm and not take anything seriously? Got it. And yes we understand he was joking. But even the joke hes trying to make isnt a good argument against God. Thats the point of William Lane Craig.
Don't mock God.
Galatians 6:7
Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap.
Proverbs 1:22
How long, O simple ones, will you love being simple? How long will scoffers delight in their scoffing and fools hate knowledge?
Good thing we have you in the bottom of the screen pointing up.. that really adds so much to the content. Thank you!
everyone missed the old man’s very good point!!!
the point he is trying to make is that, making the claim that there’s this timeless being that has no creator is a unprovable and outrageous claim. Because the if i ask “what created/designed god?”, you would respond “he was the original cause!”. but that’s just a claim! you are just making that claim because you believe in god.
so the point is, you can make that claim abt ANYTHING!! but you are not obligated to respect the statement made (especially considering there’s no physical evidence to prove the point, u just have to trust their word)
SO… if I said that “the universe just existed with no cause”, you would say “no! it has to have a cause! or a creator. something had to create it”. would it be fair if I said, “no, that’s because the universe is timeless and always existed”. it wouldn’t be fair! because i am simply saying that with no evidence other than the fact that i believe it.
so claiming that god is a timeless and non-causal being is an unfair claim to make to someone, because it only exists on the premise that the person you are speaking to believes in god.
i am an atheist now after being religious for a while. i hope the theists (religious ppl) in this comment section can respect my stance and maybe understand why i and many other atheists think this isn’t a good argument for the existence of god.
NOTE: i don’t know what started the universe or anything like that. but nobody knows! that’s why i think so many people become religious. it may never be solved. all we can do is slowly chip away at finding out how and why everything started
William Lane Craig, the son of Dunning Krueger
what did he get wrong?
@@jeremyinvictus Failure to recognize the Biologist was being sarcastic. Using sarcasm to swap "God" with "supercomputer" attempts to highlight the problem of presupposing certain attributes onto any entity, whether God or a Supercomputer.
@@LlamaBearMan How do you know he didn't recognize he was being sarcastic?
@@jeremyinvictus Instead of making an argument for why you shouldn't presuppose characteristics of entities, he says the computer would just be God as if it isn't problematic at all. As if anything that fits the description of God is God.
Right. Where's your phds and years of debate experience, bear boy? Also, thanks for the stupid arguing you left under my own comment which has like 3.5k likes
Please always put the source link in any short you do, I want to watch it myself.
I saw this snippet on instagram from a random account and don’t actually know the name of the original video. Does anyone know the title, or name of this gentleman?
William Lane Craig vs Biologist Dr. Lewis Wolpert
Well then a special computer wouldn't be special if it was self existing and designed yet we knew about it so it's a finite and limited godly object I guess 🤔🤣. Many Atheists, agnostics and secular humanists out here using Naturalism of The Gaps arguments which means we understand therefore no God 😂. SILLY ATHEISTS TRIX ARE FOR KIDS 🤣. God can be Eternal if He exists because He's self existing yet nature isn't. I wouldn't think that nature could live, die then be reborn Eternally because we would see evidence of that basically a resurrection and rebirth cycle of Nature. Professor William Lane Craig was speaking FACTS 🔥. This has nothing and everything to do with the video but please listen if you want to otherwise leave it alone and ignore it. Hello my name is Justin and I'm a Christian and Apologist but I'm also a college graduate. I'm not a closed minded Theist as I have nothing against Atheists or unbelievers as I speak to them often to understand their reasons for unbelief but we as Christians are convinced of God's Existence due to many real factors). I'm not trying to convert anyone or convince anyone to become Christians as that's The Holy Spirit's job to help people believe but only explain why I believe in Jesus Christ. There's actually evidence of God's Existence in Christianity. First of all there's proof that Jesus of Nazareth existed in history since the writings of Tacitus, Josephus Flavius, Pliny the younger and other historical documents prove that He was living two thousand years ago that even scholars both religious and Atheists agree with historically speaking but not that He's The Divine Son of God because obviously they don't.
I'm going to give you historical and archeological evidence for God's Existence as The Scriptures have prophecies that predate the events recorded in them by several millennia including Matthew, Hosea and Zechariah which prophesy accurately of the people of Israel becoming a nation again after over 1900 years of being scattered around the nations since the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 A.D. spoken of by Christ in Matthew 23:29-24:3 and returning to their homeland after The Holocaust with Jerusalem as their capital in 1948 exactly as Jesus The Christ said. The prophets including Daniel spoke of the time where several world empires would arise and fall including the Babylonian kingdom, Medes and Persians, Roman Empire, and Saladin and the Muslims which went in consecutive order for the past few millennia. The people of Israel becoming a nation after The Holocaust in 1948 (ironically the melting point of gold as God compares Israel to gold that's tested in fire in Zechariah 13:8 and Jeremiah 16:15) exactly how Jesus The Christ said would happen since God us everything to come in The Scriptures and not just because people were working towards as Atheists claim which are impossible for any regular man to predict.
Just before anyone says Christianity is a white man's religion made to oppress blacks during slavery you obviously aren't aware that the first Christians were Jews in The Middle East and that Christianity just like any religion can be used by evil and corrupt people to oppress others but you forget that the first Abolitionists/Civil Rights activists were Christians who sought to abolish slavery, racism, segregation, injustice and prejudice throughout American history. Jesus The Christ loves you enough not to give you what we all deserve which is God's Wrath by His Own Blood. Charles Darwin didn't originally come up with The Theory of Evolution over 200 years ago as it is mentioned in the writings of Ancient Greeks who believed in Demons that gave knowledge to philosophers.
Evolution makes no sense when nothing has evolved after thousands of years of human history and supposedly the first creature came from primordial sludge several millions of years
ago funny how they won't believe that God an Eternal Almighty Spirit Being created us from the Earth) which came from a supermassive expansion of matter at high temperature that inexplicably created everything in the known universe that supposedly came from nothing billions of years ago. How did the organs evolve before there were bones, skin, substance and how did any creatures see before eyes evolved? I've studied evolution and abiogenesis in the past and read Darwin's " Origin of The Species" and I'm not convinced of macro Evolutionary biology whereas I accept micro Evolution like speciation and adaptation but not macro Evolution because there's no evidence of it nor clear observable examples of it where living creatures evolve into other kinds of species plus the fact that fossils don't show evidence of evolution and genetic entropy rules out evolution. The question begs how did two genders evolve from a common ancestor with a perfectly hospitable and sustainable environment with breathable oxygen and resources to survive on inexplicably? Atheists have the burden of proof to explain how everything came to be and why our existence is possible without the Existence of God from an godless perspective just as Christians have to provide evidence of God's Existence and the validity of His Word.
Evolution requires life to already exist in order to take any effect in living organisms so it doesn't account for the existence of Life and reality. Also evolution is impossible because it goes against The Law of entropy and the second Law of thermodynamics because evolution makes things better whereas nothing continues to get better but decays and turns to absolute destruction in the end. Mark Ridley an Evolutionist said "No evolutionist whether gradualist or punctuationist uses the fossil record as evidence in favor of The Theory of Darwinian Evolution as opposed to special Creation". God's Existence is made perfectly known and observable in the universe as demonstrated in His Handiwork in the intelligently designed manner that Creation was made, human consciences and consciousness historical and archaeological evidence of God's Word being valid history, fulfillment of Bible Prophecies God in His Holiness and Righteousness could give us what we deserve in Hell for our since but He's merciful to give us free will to choose to accept or reject His gift of salvation by grace through faith in His Son Jesus. I don't mean this is any condescending manner but if you'd like to discuss The Scriptures with me or have me listen to your view on anything my instagram account is Savage Christian Kombatant
@@Daily_Dose_Of_Wisdomhis name is Brandon. He runs a TH-cam channel called “Daily Dose of Wisdom”
th-cam.com/video/n2wh179kos0/w-d-xo.htmlsi=nQAwAWYgEaJzNQ25
I think people just don't want to be accountable to a personal God.
Woow that ending was so cool and obvious. Atheist called God a computer: ignorance, arrogance and ego. 😂
He's basically arguing that ultron created the universe, even if that were true that still means that ultron is God
That is the point. He showed how stupid reigious believes really are, and nailed it.
@torstenjunker2332
Funny how 2 people can watch the same video & come to 2 completely opposite conclusions.
Truly, atheism is the most myopic and theologically sophomoric religion in the world.
IQ is a measurement of pattern recognition.
Atheism has demonstrated that it is a low IQ religion.
@@torstenjunker2332 nothing stupid about it really. He's just basically calling God in another name, but the qualities are still the same. Unless, his main objective is to misrepresent God by just comparing it to a computer.
That’s literally the point he is making 😅no way this goes over everyone’s heads lol theists are waaack
@joelnugteren5206 thank you!
It’s not though. He’s arguing that the ‘cause’ isn’t God but a computer. What he doesn’t realise is the computer he describes has all the attributes of what others call God. Therefore he believes in ‘God’ but names it ‘Computer’.
bro i was just thinking that
@@furrygoose94hes making fun of thiestic reasoning, hes literally giving the same argument u guys give but changing things
@@furrygoose94Do you seriously not understand that he does that on purpose? There is only one difference, a computer is not a personal being. He wants his opponent to argue for why god must be personal.
The atheist was trolling and not only WLC fell for it but many of my fellow Christians too I see 😅
You don't get a free ticket to define your god into existence.
I think it’s a lame way to debate on his part but it’s pretty obvious he doesn’t actually believe this. He’s simply trying to illustrate the absurdity of God as a hypothesis by providing an equivalent one that’s obviously wrong.
He should have used Flying Spaghetti Monster to strawman God
@@24t44yn R’Amen. Praise to our noodly lord and savior the Flying Spagehtti Monster.
But the issue is that it shows that there is still no way out of the philosophical argument for God. You can redefine it as a computer, or a flying spaghetti monster, or a million other things, but when you sit and list the traits of this being, you have essentially the Christian God.
@@coreygossman6243 No, the Flying Spaghetti Monster loves spaghetti, beer, and sailing the seven seas. The first people were midgets and pirates, not Adam and Eve. Also he says that strict dogma sucks and never told me to believe in the Bible, but rather in His Gospel. His noodliness is a great being and is not the Christian God you describe, if anything you are mistaking the signs of the Flying Spaghetti Monster for the signs of some other god.
@@baconboyxy if we want to play pretend sure that's fine but if we enter into reality, then we have to deal with philosophical truths
The atheist is actually mocking the Christian view of God. Just keeping making up things that explain crazy ideas.
the immaterial, timeless, spaceless, all-knowing, all-powerful, inteligent, autonomous sentient characteristics of God aren't made up.
It's the logical conclusion to the fact that mater, time and space were created, so the sentient couldn't be bond by none of these.
The creator has knowledge of its creation, so all that is known is known for him, so he's all knowing. and he must be powerful to do everything that exists, so he's all-powerful.
And he needs to be autonomous sentient, cause if there was nothing before him, there was nothing to make him change from the state of "not creating the universe" to "creating the universe" if not himself, he had to DECIDE to create. not programmed to do, so he's autonomous sentient being.
and inteligent because our universe was created with inteligence, it's fine thunned by mathematical constants that couldn't not only not sustain the life, but not even form the galaxies if they were different.
@@matheuscaneta1194 All that though only proves that something did all that. Presuming the thing that did all that is the God of the Jews called Yahweh who then sent his sine Jesus to save the Christians is a leap of logic with zero evidence.
Generally speaking, Christians should not be getting into arguments about these things. You believe it on faith... Not because it's true or provable.
You could very well be all wrong and the 'God' is simply a sentient being from another dimension,..
Or it might not be one being. Perhaps one thing created the universe and something else ( more intelligent than us) but less than the thing that created the universe finds a part of the universe suitable and creates us humans
S good way to understand this would be the creator of the Android phone vs people who create apps that can be used on the Android phone. Separate creators..
And that's just 1 of thousands of possibilities
There are just too many skips in steps in the religious person's perspective on who or what God is.
Just believe on fa
@@matheuscaneta1194I think its time to your meds my friend.
@@matheuscaneta1194 "Time and Space were created" smuggle smuggle smuggle. You dirty pirate, stop smuggling in your believe that the universe had a creator.
Time and Space exist. You have all the work left to show they were created. Stop being lazy.
@@matheuscaneta1194God is a word people used for something they can't explain
Theists never have, and never will, do anything to establish a 'personal' anything.
To delve into mocking is kind of a weird debate tactic
Many people despise the idea of a “personal” God because it means that what they do matters to someone else who is actually entitled to an opinion on the subject. There is a standard, which they should be living up to, which they don’t live up to and that just doesn’t sit well with them, so they go off in search of evidence to support the notion most convenient to them. That is their nature.
Many people despise hard work so they take the easy path: from a random Palestinian cult that wrote a nonsense book full of voodoo bs... because it (wait for it) promises eternal life...
.... they'll use design & creationism... the very things that are not taught in schools... to support their death cult...
.... & they'll deny blood transfusions to their very own children & mutilate the genitals of infant girls & 99% of religious teachers are male / deacons / bishops / cardinals / & millions of paedophile priests that will still get to heaven... coz they confessed...
... other people would feed these degenerates to the sharks....
See the difference?... never turn your back on a theist...
You know their nature.
Many people despise knowledge: they desperately wish irrelevant Palestinian myths to be true / they don't understand natural systems but they'll give up all discernment for the illusory carrot of heaven & the fear of torment for all eternity...
They will deny blood transfusions to their very own children & their priests that engage in paedophilia number in the millions...
... they wish to lay waste to this world on the promise of another...
... this is the death cult...
It is their nature.
The nature of truth yes. Vs your death cult.
@Cowboy406 lies. The nature of your cult is fear & loathing: you don't understand natural systems & believe in talking snakes and zombie resurrections... you have zealots that deny blood transfusions to their very own children and other zealots that mutilate young girls... your cult has millions of paedophile priests & you wish for death... for that is your nature.
Satanic
YES, GOD IS KING OF KINGS 😃💯
So is the computer.
The world says his name, HEI SUS, but do you understand what the Greatest schemer of all tries to hide?
The real jewish name of Jesus is "Yeshua".
The name Jesus, was given to Yeshua to shame him as a hung on cross criminal, by the Romans. (Greek and Latin were spoken)
* Bible was first translated in Greek, Latin and Hebrew, as well, as written from old sea scrolls.
The Romans, would have
pronounced Jesus with the sound of HEI.
In Greek Ἰησοῦς /in Latin Iesus Iēsoûs) or Latin. Jesus is pronounced "HEI-soos".
The HEI Hebrew/Aramaic symbol(17) means Truth, Sus שׂוּשׂ hebrew/Aramaic symbol = male.
and pronounced same. Hei-sus/Je-sus/iou-sus
SON of Truth in name.💯
Jesus Christ is pronounced "HEI sus.. kris to".
Which obviously means Truth cruxificido/cruxified, by observation and truly listening.
Each time Chrixtian, is said it verifies the krux/cross.
Ask yourself why has this fact been hidden?
The Christian God is named "Yod HEI Vav HEI" in the time of Moses written short "17" HEI.
Now notrice the first letters, YHVH, which many now say, "Yewah".
The name of our Father. Which means Truth.
((Look carefully, listen to the sound..
Yewshua-son/yewah-father...Even HEI-sus/Jesus, carries his father name.
Crix-tian is crosss..facts are facts!!
@user-id5xf3qm3k He was just being sarcastic
I saw the atheist mocking the theologist and the theologist didn’t get it.
As a Christian its sad how its lost an all the goons in the comments he was literally mocking Christians having excuses for everything
He was being facetious to point out how illogical the theory of a god is, and why it should not be argued from a logical point of view
Crap argument.... Wlcs actual arguments ( watch whole clip ) actually have weight and reason behind them... This intellectual snob offers no answers too his tuse simple and illogical reasons . He is logically incoherent ! A stupid answer is still stupid !
If that the Christian "theory" is illogical then the whole big bang theory is also illogical since its still a theory and not a fact. So in the end we are back to square 0.
Ummm... You missed the point. He used all of WLC's points and called them a computer so that you can distance yourself from the belief you already hold when evaluating the claims. It seems ridiculous when you think it's a computer, hence if you didn't already believe it was a being, you would be able to see how ridiculous the claim is.
Not quite. When Doctor Craig got to the point about it being personal, he went “no!”
And that shows the flaw - computers are not personal.
@@Grandmaster_Dragonborn This one actually is. It's an amazing computer.
@@adayah2933 Then it’s not a computer, because computers aren’t personal.
They’re designed by personal beings, but aren’t personal themselves.
@@Grandmaster_Dragonborn You're just wrong, even Wikipedia has an article about personal computers. :]
@@adayah2933 That’s exactly my point: They’re personal in the sense they’re designed by a personal being (a human) for someone’s use, but they’re not a Being who is personal by nature.
It’s only superficially like a computer.
When people don't understand sarcasm
Actually what the guy talking to William saying that you cannot assume a creator. If you can assume your god as an atheist I can assume an number of different things and I would still be just as wrong. Evidence and facts are needed not assumptions and arguments.
Christopher Hitchens the end. You also just cut off the video and a very important part. WTH lol
it's all religious nutjobs can do. cut off people mid sentence to make them look bad. every video they do it, then go "see, atheist are dumb" religious nutjobs don't have any real arguments or evidence. all they have is their holly bibble.
special pleading fallacy
false equivalence fallacy
exactly why he says it
The old man sounded just like my six year old grandson! 😂
I dont think they understand the irony of what he is saying, he is beating them with there own beliefs.
He just replaces the word God with ‘computer’. Cool- what’s your point bro? That you can name God a computer and make people laugh?
It's pointing out that what people do is define God into existence. He is speaking in jest and making fun of theists reasoning, and it has been clipped as a GOTCHA moment.
Yeah, he's describing God and the theist keeps mocking him and laughing at him... he disagrees with it the whole time and in the end says "You're describing God!" so it's incredibly dishonest from the theist, since he clearly disagrees with it.
He is saying God exists but just don't want to use the word "God"
he is trying to show how dumb the god theory is, he does not belive that the computer created everything
He’s illustrating the absurdity of the god belief by replacing god with something else equally as absurd.
@@patrickmurphy9091 No. The atheist was basically arguing that God is not real because we can put the same qualities of God with a different name/term that is not a god.
This was the clearest example of the manifestation of an ontological argument for God’s existence in a debate. It’s really not a common argument and most people don’t use it in debates, but here it came so well in this discussion. William Lane Craig is really a good debater, who understands well the arguments for and against the existence of God!
Im a christian but theres a slight misunderstanding here, a computer isnt simply laptops and PCs, computers are anything that computates, the first computers were people, literally called computers, theres a lot in the universe that can be described computationally, this scientist obviously subscribes closlely to a simulation universe theory, its just his scientific opinion (notice "i think") and i dont agree but it is logically coherent
I keep saying; this channel is shameless.
Ikr.
And?
@@georgedoyle2487 Don't watch it.
@@murpzzthecat5559
“Don’t watch it”
You just totally and utterly refuted yourself as you just watched it yourself - right? OUCH!!
It’s beyond ironic and absurd listening to so called “liberal freethinkers” and so called “socialists” suggest that we police freedom of thought and censor other ideas using cancel culture and public “SHAMING” - yes? It stinks of left wing apartheid.
It’s no surprise that the origins of the policy of apartheid itself was a combination of socialism and nationalism, somewhat similar to that of Hitler - right?
Listening to triggered atheists virtue signalling and coping and proselytising about being “SHAMELESS” whilst in the same breath subscribing to the belief that we are all ULTIMATELY MEANINGLESS, HOLLOW AND SOULLESS APES who shares half their DNA with bananas is PRICELESS!!
It gets even worse because according to the high priest of “new atheism” Richard Dawkins under this strictly reductive, causally closed, atheistic, nihilistic fan fiction….
“The universe we observe has … no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference. … DNA neither knows nor cares. DNA just is. And we dance to its music [emphasis added].”
“At bottom no right, no wrong, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference” [Atheism] - yes?
Yeah makes great “sense” and totally “sane”?
Your world view, your absurdity, your ULTIMATELY MEANINGLESS, HOLLOW AND SOULLESS APE, your existential crisis and your epistemological crisis not the theists!!
Further still, the irony and the absurdity is that under a strictly reductive materialism, atheism or philosophical naturalism “you” and your very lame “DONT WATCH IT”
argument are nothing more substantive than the delusions of an overgrown amoeba with illusions of grandeur- right?
That is nothing more substantive than the blind, mindless, ultimately meaningless accidental arrangement of POND SLIME evolved to an allegedly “HIGHER” order - yes? OUCH!!
Your world view, your absurdity, your ULTIMATELY MEANINGLESS, HOLLOW AND SOULLESS APE, your existential crisis and your epistemological crisis not the theists - right?
Moreover, given the atheists metaphysical presupposition, that is the fatalists and the epistemological nihilists belief that the blind, mindless, ultimately meaningless, accidental arrangement of random atoms and brain chemicals creating the illusion of stable patterns and regularities, accidentally just POOFED everything into existence for no reason whatsoever - -
- - my search continues for an intellectually honest atheist who can actually give a cohesive, logically consistent, objective foundation for HOW THEY CAN KNOW ANYTHING AT ALL IS FACTUALLY TRUE OR FALSE OR “SHAMELESS” under relativism - right???
I’LL WAIT!!
@@murpzzthecat5559
??
Priceless 3
“Don’t watch it”
You just totally and utterly refuted yourself as you just watched it yourself - right? OUCH!!
It’s beyond ironic and absurd listening to so called “liberal freethinkers” and so called “socialists” suggest that we police freedom of thought and censor other ideas using cancel culture and public “SHAMING” - yes? It stinks of left wing apartheid.
It’s no surprise that the origins of the policy of apartheid itself was a combination of socialism and nationalism, somewhat similar to that of Hitler - right?
Listening to triggered atheists virtue signalling and coping and proselytising about being “SHAMELESS” whilst in the same breath subscribing to the belief that we are all ULTIMATELY MEANINGLESS, HOLLOW AND SOULLESS APES who shares half their DNA with bananas is PRICELESS!!
It gets even worse because according to the high priest of “new atheism” Richard Dawkins under this strictly reductive, causally closed, atheistic, nihilistic fan fiction….
“The universe we observe has … no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference. … DNA neither knows nor cares. DNA just is. And we dance to its music [emphasis added].”
“At bottom no right, no wrong, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference” [Atheism] - yes?
Yeah makes great “sense” and totally “sane”?
Your world view, your absurdity, your ULTIMATELY MEANINGLESS, HOLLOW AND SOULLESS APE, your existential crisis and your epistemological crisis not the theists!!
Further still, the irony and the absurdity is that under a strictly reductive materialism, atheism or philosophical naturalism “you” and your very lame “DONT WATCH IT”
argument are nothing more substantive than the delusions of an overgrown amoeba with illusions of grandeur- right?
That is nothing more substantive than the blind, mindless, ultimately meaningless accidental arrangement of POND SLIME evolved to an allegedly “HIGHER” order - yes? OUCH!!
Your world view, your absurdity, your ULTIMATELY MEANINGLESS, HOLLOW AND SOULLESS APE, your existential crisis and your epistemological crisis not the theists - right?
Moreover, given the atheists metaphysical presupposition, that is the fatalists and the epistemological nihilists belief that the blind, mindless, ultimately meaningless, accidental arrangement of random atoms and brain chemicals creating the illusion of stable patterns and regularities, accidentally just POOFED everything into existence for no reason whatsoever - -
- - my search continues for an intellectually honest atheist who can actually give a cohesive, logically consistent, objective foundation for HOW THEY CAN KNOW ANYTHING AT ALL IS FACTUALLY TRUE OR FALSE OR “SHAMELESS” under relativism - right???
I’LL WAIT!!
Brilliant ridiculing of the argument for God.
Like Craig, the poster of this video doesn’t get that the man is being sarcastic. The audience is laughing because they understand the sarcasm.
It cut off the video at the end to give the illusion that the Christian made a winning point, when he was in fact falling into the Atheist's trap when he said, "What you're doing is describing God."
Yes, exactly. He is. That's the point. If you think this was an "own" against the Atheist, then you, like the Christian speaker, have also missed the point. Strategically and dishonestly slicing up the video to make it feel otherwise doesn't help your case either.
Dumb on purpose.
He’s simply saying anything can plugged in for “God”. You can literally just make up anything if it’s invisible. The Christian didn’t burn anyone 🤦♂️
Exactly and the religious argument is “god has to exist because you can’t get something from nothing.” Okay then what created god, isn’t god something? I thought the logic was you can’t get something from nothing😂
Exodus 20. It doesn't have to be invisible. People make all kinds of things gods of their life. Anything you put before God is your master. For an example money people "worship" idolize and desire wealth and using money as a standard of success. Another would be Fame/self idolatry and I would say this is the biggest worldly god of our generation today. Sadly even churches are promoting worship to this type of "god". Just know there's only one God and He is our Messiah Jesus. Many religions, scientists, and historians give some credit to Jesus, but Jesus says He is the Only Way. Please repent from your sins and turn to Jesus. For more info look up *The Roman's Road to Salvation*. Thank you for your time.
Gods attributes are eternal, he was literally describing god, just using the name computer
@@hartzellaerialproductions527 In a timeless dimension, what is has always been. In a timeless dimension, there is no beginning nor end.
@@hartzellaerialproductions527 your purposely being mistaught and uneducated by the NWO about the difference between the linear timeline and the cyclical time loop
He fell right into the ontological argument haha. Great video, Christian scholarship is so underrated!
I don’t think you understand the point the old man was making…
@@Slanderpencil Do you understand the point the Christian was making? If something is all of the things the man described, it’s no longer a computer… it’s just God.
@@Alex_Vlass the computer is not something the old man believes in, it’s rhetorical. He’s making a mockery of the Christian god; making the same arguments for the computer that a Christian would make for god. He’s doing it to give perspective on how the argument looks when it’s not on a god the Christian believes in.
@@Slanderpencil I understand he doesn’t actually believe the computer, it shows how he didn’t understand the fact that it doesn’t matter what he calls it (computer or divine being). If it has the characteristics of God, it’s God.
@@Alex_Vlass right, but he’s giving perspective on how the arguments many theists make are ridiculous. He’s not giving this computer as an actual counter argument. That fact that the computer is god is exactly the point. The computer is impossible to believe due to it’s crazy characteristics just as god is. At least from the atheist perspective, I understand it’s not crazy to believe as a theist.
he clearly wasn’t being serious about there being an all powerful computer, he was just trying to show how stupid the god concept is. it went over craig’s head and most of the comments…
I'm not going to make a claim for or against God at this time, but he didn't "destroy his own argument." He was trying to point out how ridiculous he thinks the idea of God is. He won because everyone in the room thought it was ridiculous, but really, he was simply describing God.
Exactly, this totally flew over the christian's heads. Somehow christians in the comments think they won this debate - how? He made silly arguments for a computer invoking the typical special pleading and special properties of this 'god' entity. WLC then goes on and admits his silly argument is the embodiment of god.
They somehow think was a win for them?
This is how blind they are to their own dissonance.
😂
@teks-kj1nj I will explain why Christians call this a win, the guy who basically called God a computer did basically nothing but confuse the Christian dude and the entire audience, since all he did was describe God but with the name computer. I mean, that's cool if you wanna call God a computer, but that said computer is still a god. The only reason I believe that the example the atheist gave was dumb because there is a reason we have terms that describe things like computer / man / God / woman etc its same argument LGBT make when they describe a biological woman a man sure go ahead won't change the fact that said "man" is still a biological woman its still a fact, just like the Atheist tried to gocha the Christian by confusing him with the different term but in the end he is still described God, and yes it sounds ridiculous to describe God as a computer and the reason it is the ridiculous is because you are using wrong term to describe something that the term is never used on like computer / God, which in the end does nothing but bring confusion.
@@ILrukiamaxim55 You missed the point as well. Forget the computer, its the special pleading that theists do to justify god he was mocking. You can use that line of thinking to justify anything - hence the computer mockery.
Theist: Everything needs a creator.
Atheist: Who made god then?
Theist: God is special
Theist: Life can't come from non-life
Athiest: How did god make Adam from dirt then?
Theist: God is special
How did god make the universe from nothing?
God is special
etc...
@teks-kj1nj But if we assume that God is real which would make bible the word of God, would that not make God special?
Which god? There’s like a billion
The one I just made up.
@@user-kr1dh8hn3o Works as well as any other.
They are not talking about religion. They talk about how the universe came to be
🥱
There is no god until proven otherwise
"Not this computer"
Yessir also this discussion was funny af, I wish we were able to talk like this with eachother.
Christopher Hitchens never lost the debate with a Christian never once. He smoked every Christian theologian, especially that weirdo WLC.
You can't really tell who wins any debate. Some will be convinced by one side, some by the other.
@@adayah2933💯
To win a debate, the other person must back down their claim. If neither side convinces the other, then neither wins the debate.
@@jonathancole5179
I would hate to worship the God of the Old Testament, endorsing slavery, rape, incest, genocide, baby killing, you Christians are part of a blood cult is pathetic. There is no way the creator of the universe with trillions of stars and planets inspired that book. Men who sleep with sheep and have iQ’s of 60 wrote that garbage
Actually this dude wins. He uses all the garbage WLC uses against him. Well done.
He does this QUITE OFTEN!!
You'd THINK he'd catch on!!
Gotta pray the Holy Spirit draws him to himself before it's too late 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
Texas Nana
Psalm 91
Actually the guy argued his point well. He’s building the computer god to check all the boxes no different than the other guy is building up the non computer god to check all the boxes. I could also join as a 3rd point of view and argue for a butterfly god that checks all the boxes. You have a plain canvas to paint your god to fit your agenda
Christians and Atheists would both see this exchange as their own guy winning.
I noticed that too. Having been an atheist for a decade and now a firm believer in Christ, I can safely say that i can understand the feeling of being in both of these guys shoes and understand them.
@@Viruz32It just seems like 2 people who know the same amount of nothing, disagreeing on which “nothing” Is good enough lol. Christians don’t KNOW that God exists they simply believe he does, while the Atheist also doesn’t KNOW that there isn’t a God he just has no concrete proof otherwise (Lack of proof is not proof of the contrary). Both of these people know nothing of actual substance to further their points so it’ll just end up with them decided what feels best to them.
I just know that I don’t know and so religion seems like a pretty distant idea to me. Im pretty sure theres “something” out there that created us but I cant say to which Religion this “God” claims or claim to know anything about it or how it would think.
@@KaeporraGaeborraThat's a very sensible perspective on the matter.
@@KaeporraGaeborra You claim that the Christians don't know if God exists, ignoring their arguments and the evidences and conclude that they believe God exists because they want to believe, not because God is the better explanation. The fact you even made a knowledge claim that either of them don't know, means you know that they don't know, meaning you know. So can you tell us??
If any atheist see their guy winning without giving reasons as to why, then they're just clueless
You clearly don't understand his argument
Dude. The guy was obviously trying to make a point. This comment section is embarrassing.
i still remember a bishop in my church saying “remember, if you can fully comprehend God, what you have with you is not God, because God is beyond human understanding.” sometimes im just to arrogant to admit it.
The guy was being facetious it seemed and the theist took him literally. Context is key.
Children when don't understand something become like this, they start talking back.
Yes that’s the point. He’s making a point of how you can assign the properties of god to a computer and it works the same, how does that destroy his argument?
“You’re describing God, but you’re calling it a computer”
Just an old fool....
I feel sorry for him
He knows what sarcasm is and obviously you don’t.
But your comment is spoken like a bonafide religious cult member.
Congratulations.
I think people who don't get sarcasm are bigger fools
@@rogerbee697 I bet you felt powerful tuple this
@@CK2000_
Powerful against religious cult members?!
You betcha!
Anything else I can help you with?
@@rogerbee697 gayest shit I have ever read. “This will surely tell them” 🤓☝🏽. I bet you are grown man too 😂.
Hey, so how did God come to exist, who made God,
No one. God is the source of being. For there to be anything, you cannot rely on a temporal universe for the ultimate source as it is finite. God has no creator, no beginning and no end. He simply is. Hence, "I AM." This is something you cannot escape, there has to be an eternal source to all things.
I don't think that not knowing the answer to a question should be regarded as providing the answer to a question.
@@GundaniumSkeletonprove it.
@DM-dk7js My friend, you likely have a standard of proof that is unfeasible. You can hardly prove that you exist. But im glad you're perusing channels like this one. God willing you will stumble on some truth.
@@GundaniumSkeletonenergy can be the eternal source. No god needed
I love how he literally describes god, but instead of calling it god, he calls it a computer.
It's sarcasm
I love even more how the theist disagrees with him and laughs at it the whole time. So which one is it, is he right or wrong?
He is literally just pointing your own logic back at you. Seems like you cant take what you dish out.
Exactly!
The point isn't that the atheist believes that a special computer created the universe. He's trying to belittle the Christian's argument by substituting "computer" for "God" to make it sound stupid. But he stuck his own foot in his mouth.
There are far better videos of Christians and atheists debating where a Christian scholar lays out many strong arguments for the existence of God where the athiest's only response is to resort to insults and belitting.
Such as?
@teks-kj1nj
1. Origin of the universe from nothing
2. Origin of life from non-life
3. Genetic decay and entropy from mutations
4. Complexity and interconnection of natural laws arising from random chance
5. Irreducibly complex biological systems
These are all well-known, serious problems with evolution, that most of the evolutionary community conveniently gloss over.
These are also arguments that atheistic evolutionists have no true argument against outside of: non-scientific claims and assertions; attacks on the arguer's credibility or intelligence; or just flat out ignoring it.
@@camerapasteurize72151-who said from nothing?
2-we don’t have the answer-doesn’t mean a god did it
I’m sorry you’re saying #1 and 2 are problems for evolution?? NO they aren’t glossed over.
Yes we have arguments against theists arguments and they don’t rely on what you’re saying
Seems the only who’s ignoring things is you
@therick363
You're proving my point by trying to disregard the questions instead of answering them.
You are literally doing exactly what I'm talking about: trying to disregard the question or gloss over it rather than provide a comprehensive answer.
The reason is that there is no answer that isn't complete speculation and guessing, all of which is less rational than an intelligent creator.
I noticed that you only even mentioned the first two questions.
@@camerapasteurize7215 I’m not disregarding them. I am actually talking about them. So definitely not proving your point.
I’m literally NOT doing what you’re saying. I am actually engaging you in conversation about these things. Please don’t misrepresent things.
Yes I only started with the first two to see how you reacted.
Now one of three things can happen.
1-we discuss these things like two honest adults
2-misrepresenting/twisting
3-walk away.
What would you like to do?
No, Craig, he's not calling God a computer. He's trolling you and you didn't seem to catch it.
No. He knew what was being said and made his point very clearly. Thumbing up your own comment is telling
@@Shyguy71588 Nah, he missed the trolling. And I don't thumb up my comments. That's silly.
@ljss6805 whatever buddy 👍
@@Shyguy71588 You're cute
@@Shyguy71588 Yeah, he must have created an alt account and thumbs up his comment 6 times, right? Love how you went straight to a personal attack that was easily disproved by just waiting for a bit. Is really telling of how little thought you actually put into things.
Also, how is it clear that he belittled the atheists comment the whole time, even laughing at it, even though he admits in the end "you're talking about god"? Clearly he thought god's existence was ridiculous and laughed at it. And guess what? So did you! Enjoy hell I guess
In quantum mechanics, the observer effect suggests that observation can influence the state of a quantum system, raising questions about the nature of reality.
If reality depends on observers, this challenges the idea of objective reality and supports interpretations where the universe is shaped by observation. Understanding whether reality is observer-dependent is essential. Only then can we fully explore the question of a creator or god, as the nature of reality itself would influence the nature of such a being.
How are the atheists in the comments somehow not understanding this. Yes, the debator is being sarcastic to try to make a point. Yet, that point is moot because simply taking the attributes of something and assigning it a new name doesnt at all change what that thing actually is.
WLC cannot answer the core criticism that is leveled here. We could simply say the computer is God. Then we have to ask who created the computer. And who created the thing that created the computer. And so on.
Something timeless doesn’t mean it doesn’t itself have a creator. If he wants to say God then he must answer what created God otherwise his argument falls apart and becomes meaningless.
This is the same criticism that has been leveled against this “proof” for 1000s of years. Why can’t Christian’s come up with anything new?
It sounds like you’re missing the point a little bit. Here it is - given that anything exists, something must be eternal. We can say a computer is eternal, or that matter is eternal, sure, but then we’re really just sliding something else into that primary place where really God is.
@@Daily_Dose_Of_Wisdom weird you can summarize but not synthesize. If some thing created the thing that created us, it isn’t god at any point.
That empties the argument he’s making of meaning and isn’t a proof
No actually you clearly don't understand the reasoning between the two debaters in the video. Well then a special computer wouldn't be special if it was self existing and designed yet we knew about it so it's a finite and limited godly object I guess 🤔🤣. Many Atheists, agnostics and secular humanists out here using Naturalism of The Gaps arguments which means we understand therefore no God 😂. SILLY ATHEISTS TRIX ARE FOR KIDS 🤣. God can be Eternal if He exists because He's self existing yet nature isn't. I wouldn't think that nature could live, die then be reborn Eternally because we would see evidence of that basically a resurrection and rebirth cycle of Nature. Professor William Lane Craig was speaking FACTS 🔥. This has nothing and everything to do with the video but please listen if you want to otherwise leave it alone and ignore it. Hello my name is Justin and I'm a Christian and Apologist but I'm also a college graduate. I'm not a closed minded Theist as I have nothing against Atheists or unbelievers as I speak to them often to understand their reasons for unbelief but we as Christians are convinced of God's Existence due to many real factors). I'm not trying to convert anyone or convince anyone to become Christians as that's The Holy Spirit's job to help people believe but only explain why I believe in Jesus Christ. There's actually evidence of God's Existence in Christianity. First of all there's proof that Jesus of Nazareth existed in history since the writings of Tacitus, Josephus Flavius, Pliny the younger and other historical documents prove that He was living two thousand years ago that even scholars both religious and Atheists agree with historically speaking but not that He's The Divine Son of God because obviously they don't.
I'm going to give you historical and archeological evidence for God's Existence as The Scriptures have prophecies that predate the events recorded in them by several millennia including Matthew, Hosea and Zechariah which prophesy accurately of the people of Israel becoming a nation again after over 1900 years of being scattered around the nations since the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 A.D. spoken of by Christ in Matthew 23:29-24:3 and returning to their homeland after The Holocaust with Jerusalem as their capital in 1948 exactly as Jesus The Christ said. The prophets including Daniel spoke of the time where several world empires would arise and fall including the Babylonian kingdom, Medes and Persians, Roman Empire, and Saladin and the Muslims which went in consecutive order for the past few millennia. The people of Israel becoming a nation after The Holocaust in 1948 (ironically the melting point of gold as God compares Israel to gold that's tested in fire in Zechariah 13:8 and Jeremiah 16:15) exactly how Jesus The Christ said would happen since God us everything to come in The Scriptures and not just because people were working towards as Atheists claim which are impossible for any regular man to predict.
Just before anyone says Christianity is a white man's religion made to oppress blacks during slavery you obviously aren't aware that the first Christians were Jews in The Middle East and that Christianity just like any religion can be used by evil and corrupt people to oppress others but you forget that the first Abolitionists/Civil Rights activists were Christians who sought to abolish slavery, racism, segregation, injustice and prejudice throughout American history. Jesus The Christ loves you enough not to give you what we all deserve which is God's Wrath by His Own Blood. Charles Darwin didn't originally come up with The Theory of Evolution over 200 years ago as it is mentioned in the writings of Ancient Greeks who believed in Demons that gave knowledge to philosophers.
Evolution makes no sense when nothing has evolved after thousands of years of human history and supposedly the first creature came from primordial sludge several millions of years
ago funny how they won't believe that God an Eternal Almighty Spirit Being created us from the Earth) which came from a supermassive expansion of matter at high temperature that inexplicably created everything in the known universe that supposedly came from nothing billions of years ago. How did the organs evolve before there were bones, skin, substance and how did any creatures see before eyes evolved? I've studied evolution and abiogenesis in the past and read Darwin's " Origin of The Species" and I'm not convinced of macro Evolutionary biology whereas I accept micro Evolution like speciation and adaptation but not macro Evolution because there's no evidence of it nor clear observable examples of it where living creatures evolve into other kinds of species plus the fact that fossils don't show evidence of evolution and genetic entropy rules out evolution. The question begs how did two genders evolve from a common ancestor with a perfectly hospitable and sustainable environment with breathable oxygen and resources to survive on inexplicably? Atheists have the burden of proof to explain how everything came to be and why our existence is possible without the Existence of God from an godless perspective just as Christians have to provide evidence of God's Existence and the validity of His Word.
Evolution requires life to already exist in order to take any effect in living organisms so it doesn't account for the existence of Life and reality. Also evolution is impossible because it goes against The Law of entropy and the second Law of thermodynamics because evolution makes things better whereas nothing continues to get better but decays and turns to absolute destruction in the end. Mark Ridley an Evolutionist said "No evolutionist whether gradualist or punctuationist uses the fossil record as evidence in favor of The Theory of Darwinian Evolution as opposed to special Creation". God's Existence is made perfectly known and observable in the universe as demonstrated in His Handiwork in the intelligently designed manner that Creation was made, human consciences and consciousness historical and archaeological evidence of God's Word being valid history, fulfillment of Bible Prophecies God in His Holiness and Righteousness could give us what we deserve in Hell for our since but He's merciful to give us free will to choose to accept or reject His gift of salvation by grace through faith in His Son Jesus. I don't mean this is any condescending manner but if you'd like to discuss The Scriptures with me or have me listen to your view on anything my instagram account is Savage Christian Kombatant
@@ericwantsbbdYour literally arguing an infinite regress, you are definitely missing the point, the atheist in the video even said “it’s a self designing computer” so he’s arguing that this cosmic computer is the first cause, like WLC said he’s really just renaming what would essentially be God just to avoid saying the word God.
@@theonewhoknocks1976 sigh. This can be argued a number of ways and they all get to the central criticism I Illustrate above. In the video it is being argued that the evidence we have around us point to these ideas that it’s God. The atheist correctly makes fun by saying actually it’s a computer. Which *does* fit the criteria put forth by WLC as a proof for God. If we can easily sub a computer, or ask who created the creator, etc. then it empties the argument of meaning because it requires one to conclude anything could create and it isn’t it God. Don’t lose sight of the point made by WLC and bring more to the convo that was presented.
He's just toying with Craig. Theists are so gullible.
If he had an argument, he would be making the argument instead of toying. Atheists are so laughably arrogant. You have no argument for why Craig is wrong. All you have is ridicule and sarcastic quips.
He’s being intentionally obtuse, what’s the point in even talking to someone behaving like that
@@reaganlecroy7773i had someone debate Jesus was a zombie. This was a friend group i was a part of. I made no mention of God or Jesus at all to them. At this question the person, who was an acquaintance, and this person looked at me for an answer.
I replied along the lines of: zombies are a man made concept and God by extension, Jesus, isn’t man made (aside from virgin birth of Mary), as he needed to come into physical form.
This person kept insisting about zombies and raising from the dead.
I ultimately told em, you can believe in zombies and whatever and the like, it doesn’t change what I told you about Jesus and what he did on the cross.
@@zephyriasThe zombie hypothesis doesn't stick so well, since even his enemies report some type of appearance. Which means, that has lower exploratory power to try to explain the actual credible evidence. (Of his resurrection)
He did not destroy his argument , he was being sarcastic and condescending .
This guy completely exposed Craig's ridiculous philosophy and it's going completely over your head... Craig's argument for God is also logically inconsistent. Time is required for mental processes as well!!! But for some reason Craig has no problem with this. Also, if God is so poorly defined and vague that he's synonymous with a computer, then the entire Christian religion evaporates in a puff of smoke and you're left with at best a deistic God.
I think the white haired man's point is that the Kalam Cosmological argument doesn't lead to any particular creative cause. There's no reason for a victory lap here.
I think you're right. I'm not seeing what they're pitching here. I do see a few commenters who misunderstood the computer analogy completely, which means they're taking the TH-camrs statement on faith. I'm don't understand why it's such big deal. It almost appears that atheists are being judged by those who's savior tells them not to judge. Acceptance was what he preached. Acceptance is a foreign concept here.
You atheists can't fathom that a bunch of stupid, uninformed, uneducated Christians are right and you are wrong.
@@Churd84538 If I'm going to take what science says from someone who doesn't believe it vs someone who does, I'm going to go with the person who believes it and then can I accurately question it.
So, the fact that you think Christianity teaches acceptance and not to judge, tells me you have done no research upon it yourself and are just believing what you have been told without question.
Does he make that point in this short or in the original video?
@@Churd84538Judge not lest you also be judged by the same measure. Might want to go and read the actual full verse..
The problem began when people started just throwing God's name around as the solution for anything they can't find an answer to. In reality the Bible that is printed today has been rewritten by people supposedly based on the word of God .
The truth is that no human being knows what God actually is. Many are disappointed when they see innocent children suffer for example because Gd does not display the powers they described to him but it is humans that describe those powers to Gd.
So the truth is is that if people can recognize that GD is whatever it is which could be the very first force that pushed things in the universe to start colliding together and chemicals mixing until it eventually over zillions of years turned into humans physically made which is a collective mashup of chemicals working together.
The mistake science makes is discounting GD , they absolutely cannot disprove it exists but at the same time we should also not assume to know what GD is.
Look for anything to start a force must act upon it to begin the process so maybe that force is Gd.
Or maybe this is an entire organic simulation like Neil deGrasse Tyson says and there is an actual GD watching over all of us.
Or if you choose to believe it's exactly as you see it written in the Bible that's okay too but I tend to think that's been manipulated far too much by humans at this point.
The nice thing about humans who don't want to cause harm to anyone whether or not they believe is the most important thing to me, we should all treat each other peacefully and kindly and respectfully as we wish to be treated. So there are many good messages too that we can extract from the book that still survived from its original Inception 🤝🙏👍
"Those without evidence can be dismissed without evidence"
Nope, he’s throwing the absurdity of the thiests argument back at him by saying the exact same argument but substituting god for computer than neither can prove. Thats the point. The evidence for either is the same. Prove there is no computer that created everything
He was showing how ridiculous the god claims are, clips without the surround context can make anyone look silly.
So funny how two people can watch the same video and come to two completely different conclusions
I can’t believe I’m about to comment on this video. Yes, he was talking about “god” not a computer, he was showing how ridiculous it is when a believer brushes off counterarguments by saying “no no, god is much more special and powerful than that”.
This really go over everyones head? He was mocking theistic reasoning by using an example of a “computer” using the same arguments WLC was using for God….went right over william lane craigs head. So yes, the “computer” represented God in his example, that was his point. Personally ive never been impressed with craig….theres better apologists out there who think more critically🤷♂️ im a christian but this was an L and so are most of these comments