And the million dollar question is, can he really see the double standard himself, or was the "if christianity is true" part of his statement just subconscious and he does not see the double standard?

@litigioussociety4249

Жыл бұрын

He's not referring to Christianity as a whole. He's referring to the Christian teachings of paradise, eternity, grave, forgiveness, etc. Those are the things he's saying were worth investigating. In contrast, most religions teach good works as a means of eternal rewards, so most religions are discouraging to people who are very convicted and burdened. A secular comparison would be a lottery or gambling. If there were evidence of people playing, but no one ever winning, then it would be foolish to investigate, but if there is some evidence of people profiting from it, then it's worth investigating. After which the sensible person concludes with most games that they can never win statistically. However, if one came to conclude they could profit by playing a game sensibly, then it would make sense to gamble. In the case of Christianity, it's taught that anyone can receive salvation without any requirement other than faith (and the profession of faith.) Craig was simply saying he would not make the requirements for something like an afterlife being true so high that one can only logically conclude it's false. I don't agree with many of the things he said in this interview, nor do a lot of other apologetics, but it's an interesting approach that followed correctly could lead someone to the established types of hermeneutics for studying the Bible and other religious doctrine.

@macmac1022

Жыл бұрын

@@litigioussociety4249 ""He's not referring to Christianity as a whole. He's referring to the Christian teachings of paradise, eternity, grave, forgiveness, etc. Those are the things he's saying were worth investigating. In contrast, most religions teach good works as a means of eternal rewards, so most religions are discouraging to people who are very convicted and burdened."" I am referring to the part at 8:50 in the video. Most religious use the carrot and the stick, christianity is no different. Follow the rules heaven, dont hell. And usually belief in it is on of the rules. >>A secular comparison would be a lottery or gambling. If there were evidence of people playing, but no one ever winning, then it would be foolish to investigate, but if there is some evidence of people profiting from it, then it's worth investigating. After which the sensible person concludes with most games that they can never win statistically. However, if one came to conclude they could profit by playing a game sensibly, then it would make sense to gamble. In the case of Christianity, it's taught that anyone can receive salvation without any requirement other than faith (and the profession of faith.)"" I could see evidence of a person winning or losing at gambling. How do I see evidence of heaven and hell? Would all christians agree with you about that all you need is faith? I wonder if you really think this. Mind if I ask you a few more questions about this? What if a person does have faith its true, but just had a real rough childhood and snaps in anger and sometimes kills people. He confesses to it even as he really does have faith and he does seem to be trying to fix this problem. He end up killing people in jail though still as he just cant seem to stop. He has faith still though. Is he saved? What about a boy who was raise in a christian family, later in life becomes gay but still has faith as he has some verses he interprets as gay is ok and promotes that idea around. He still has faith, is he saved? >>Craig was simply saying he would not make the requirements for something like an afterlife being true so high that one can only logically conclude it's false. I don't agree with many of the things he said in this interview, nor do a lot of other apologetics, but it's an interesting approach that followed correctly could lead someone to the established types of hermeneutics for studying the Bible and other religious doctrine."" He said he lowered his standards and said with low odds its worth believing. That is the problem.

@drrickmarshall1191

Жыл бұрын

@@litigioussociety4249 I never see why this is such a important point for Christian's. "My religion is a bit lazier than the others" really isn't all that great when you break it down.

I think the best clip is the one from 4:39 to 6:09. He basically admits that he starts from his conclusions. Then, if evidence or arguments happen to contradict his conclusions, it does not matter; he can always explain them away and hope evidence will turn in favor of Christianity some time in the future. That is the relationship between faith and reason, according to Craig. Thanks for sharing!

Could he be any more explicit about his emotional need for Xtianity to be true obviating any epistemic warrant? This is embarrassing.

I never quite understood Special Pleading until I heard this.

3:52 - "Read a book on Mormonism", wow, what a brilliant response. Read a book. Thanks Craig.

@azophi

Жыл бұрын

But is there even one chance in a million that it’s true ? I hate how Craig says we can just dismiss the false gods in his new podcast but at the same time have this “one in a million” standard lol

@jmjw00

Жыл бұрын

It's at least one step above "I watched a Broadway show about a book." Credit where it's due.

@ZephLodwick

Жыл бұрын

Admittidly, the Book of Mormon has tens of things in it that are so silly and couldn't ever be true. But the Bible, Torah, and Qu'ran have the same things. Craig claims many impossibilities of the Bible are just metaphors.

@ic.xc.

Жыл бұрын

@@ZephLodwick Bible and Quran are quite different and distinct.

6:09 - And this is how Craig makes his beliefs completely unfalsifiable. Intellectual honesty has left the building.

Don't forget: WLC is considered one of, if not _the_ greatest christian philosopher/apologist of our time. Them's some real interesting standards...

@Sekhubara

Жыл бұрын

For being one of, if not the greatest christian apologist in the world, he's still full of shite.

8:58 "a delusory emotional experience that is purely psychological", he's capable of understanding the shortcomings of religion when applied to Islam but is unwilling to apply them to Christianity or at least even consider the idea, at this point it's willful ignorance

So let's get this straight Bill. I think going to heaven with 72 virgins all to myself is the most amazing message I can imagine. In fact, even if there's a one in a million chance that it might be true, surely it's worth believing, right? So, Bill, could you kindly point me towards the nearest fatwah so I can grab my prize? The sad thing here is that the Mr. Craig's reasoning ability has not approved one jot or tittle since he was in high school. "Philosopher" my sphincter.

@khandakararraf2012

Жыл бұрын

This William Lane Craig thinking is just hilarious. 😁

@TheLivingDinosaur

Жыл бұрын

@@khandakararraf2012 I don't think of it as thinking. I think of it as excreting.

@bendecidospr

Жыл бұрын

This is not the implication of what he said. If you watch the whole video, you’ll see that he explained the difference between pragmatic and epistemic justification, the former of which is related to what you are mentioning. But, he also explained other factors, one of which is the presence of defeaters. So, its not as simple as “this is amazing, if true. So, I am justified in believing it.”

@drrickmarshall1191

Жыл бұрын

@@bendecidospr He's openly admitted to having his primary reasoning for accepting this as "faith", or rather more accurately, he basis his beliefs entirely on the warm fuzzy feeling he percieves as the Holy Spirit, everything else is a money making excercise. I think it's safe to say his foundation is entire wishful thinking based on "if it's true". Although I guess utility plays some part as well.

@bendecidospr

Жыл бұрын

@@drrickmarshall1191 Even in this video, he explicitly says that his faith is not based on this fuzzy feeling. His mention of the Holy Spirit is about assurance for the believer. Its not about epistemic justification.

Good one! Enjoyed watching this video!

Yes, I'm still baffled by this! And after seeing a talk (on Myth vision) with the questioner, it did amuse me, a bit, that he didn't find Craig's response all that helpful.

To be fair to WLC double standards are a necessity to prevent belief in the unbelievable becoming untenable. As is cognitive dissonance. And a refusal to actually read the lines in the bible and not between them.

Impressive mental gymnastics 🏅

When I came to know Leprechauns, my life changed forever. I am now always trying to steal their lucky charms.

5:50 "...whereas the holy spirit and his testimony..." Amazing that in Craig's world, even the holy spirit gets a male pronoun.

When you are not christian but believe in sin. Wtf.

@CrowManyClouds

Жыл бұрын

Kinda puts the lie to his "testimony" don't it?

8:52 WOW that “if” is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.

Waiting for part of Craig vs Dr. Price debate.

As a Mormon, I conferred with the Holy Spirit. He told me that the LDS Church is the true Church. Since conferring with the Holy Spirit is the ultimate defeater-defeater, that proves Bill is following a false gospel.

This was pure gold! Your doing the LORD'S work! Keep it up.

@unduloid

Жыл бұрын

Yes, Lord Cthulhu is proud!

@MyMomCallsMeCyb3rMan

Жыл бұрын

Nice name

Well said.

WLC is a victim of his own success, he is without a doubt the most popular christian apologist alive today so his work is always the first thing professional and amateur find on the topic. I'm sure there is no christian apologetic argument from WLC that hasn't been disproven by people from both academia to KZreadr. His magnum opus the *Kalam cosmological argument* has been completely destroyed by cosmologists, scientists, philosophers, and mathematicians. He admits that in order for one to believe in christianity one needs to lower the bar but the most ironic of all is that he does it because of 100% narcissistic reasons. So if the teen girl in his class was a muslin he would have become a muslin.

Any “argument” you have made for your religion can easily be applied to a different religion. How do you know you weren’t deluded in your beliefs the entire time?

Craig’s story of him being a nihilistic teenage kid who didn’t see any point to life, then suddenly being confronted by a fellow student who told him that the god of the universe loves him, that story resonates deeply with me. I’m an atheist, but I think it’s much easier to escape the abyss of nihilism if you can convince yourself that god is real and that there’s a purpose to life in some sense. Craig has spent his entire adult life doing just that, convincing himself that there’s a purpose to life and that it isn’t all meaningless. And while atheism may be the correct intellectual position to hold, I completely understand someone like Craig, and I think that atheists can be pretty ridiculous just incessantly complaining about people like him.

@UnofficialTranslator

Жыл бұрын

Well ofcourse he is telling other people what to think. I think you should tell anyone what to believe. That's why I don't like him. I get where he is comming from but I don't like him.

@lucofparis4819

Жыл бұрын

Living in France as an atheist pretty much since I've considered religious questions has given me a different perspective. I didn't grow up in a society encroached by religious institutions to the degree that most american atheists have experienced. That being said, religious beliefs are very far from being the only problematic belief systems that a society could experience, which is why I can relate yet understand that american atheists' focus on religion may sometimes obscure their views on what matters the most in those cases. The problem is actually _precisely_ the kind of shit WLC is doing: getting hooked on a psychological gateway drug and dumbing himself down in order to get his fix of reality denial. Worse, he is now the equivalent of a professional lawyer defending his metaphorical drug dealer of a client, with the full extent of his intellectual abilities. The guy got caught on snorting his spiritual cocaine on the lap of an epistemic prostitute? Well, too bad for him, but I won't shed a tear. The more exposed charlatans get, the better, even when they're first and foremost fooling themselves. Though, let's be honest, religious drug acceptance level is as good as alcohol's. It's not going anywhere any time soon, and it will intoxicate billions more before we grow tired of this bullshit... if it even happens. It's probably been tens of thousands of years since they started to believe and humans still do believe in such primitive superstitions as chance and curses... So, yeah, it sucks that people like WLC get intoxicated and then work their entire life in their respective drug industry to sell that shit to others, but it's not like there was anything new under the Sun. I'm afraid it's business as usual, and has been since the dawn of humanity.

@davethebrahman9870

Жыл бұрын

I’m with you, but eventually the truth comes out, and many former believers are angry at being deceived. If we are going to make life better on this rotten planet we had better start facing facts.

If WLC and Alvin Plantinga are the best Christianity has to offer, Christianity is in a sh*tload of trouble.

You know what feels good and is very common? Being drunk

@unduloid

Жыл бұрын

Also, petting fluffy kittens.

0:03 Bill starts his “reasoning” with an obvious lie. If he truly was ”a non-christian” anything at all, he had no reason whatsoever to worry about “sin” since it is an exclusively religious concept. Or is he claiming to have converted from another religion that has “sin” as a central doctrine? The colour of his skin and the accent in which he speaks English tells me that would be a lie too. 🙄🤔🤨🤷

Reading the Bible is a long, unpleasant way of rejecting Christianity. Listening to this garbage and that spewing from the mouths of other prominent apologists like Hovind is by far quicker.

Craig relies heavily on Plantinga'a flawed "reformed epistemology." If you have an experience, it is properly basic to trust that you had that experience until you are presented with a defeater. That does not imply that your *interpretation* of the experience is in any way justified. Even if you manage to construct a statistically reliable model of your experiences, that in no way infers that you have a statistically *valid* model. A lot of philosophers would have done well to take a few semesters in actual MATH, instead of more naval gazing classes.

@TheLivingDinosaur

Жыл бұрын

There may be a reason that they don't take those math classes. My eldest daughter recently graduated with a double major in math and philosophy. She worked her bottom off to average an A- in math and yet breezed through the philosophy classes with little effort while getting straight As. There's a reason Mr. Craig only produces a noxious cranial effluvium when he distorts physics math rather than actual peer-reviewed papers in those areas. It's that he's simply not smart enough.

What, according to naturalists, explains the experience of the Holy Spirit?

unfortunately for Craig, there is more like one in a trillion chance of his imaginary friend being real.

Mr William Lane Criag, I don't respect his doctorate, because it's just mythology. Would anyone respect him for putting in as much work defending Sasquatch? If Mr Criag had gotten a PhD in Sasquatchology it would have at least been worth listen to. Seriously, he's got a degree in spreading gibberish to gullible people.

@CrowManyClouds

Жыл бұрын

At least Sasquatchologists attempt to provide actual evidence for Sasquatches.

@13shadowwolf

Жыл бұрын

@@CrowManyClouds this is true, Craig has less evidence than the Sasquatchologist

@page8301

Жыл бұрын

Whenever I hear his whiny nasal apologetics I am reminded of that Simpson episode with the guy who says that he has a PhD in "Truthology". Still cracks me up!

Facts don't care about your feelings, Willy.

BTW - try find name of college where he get "Dr" title and then google earth it :D

@Nai61a

Жыл бұрын

Ma Ciek: It was the University of Birmingham in the UK, a highly-respected, internationally reputed university.

It's so circular I'm getting dizzy!

@page8301

Жыл бұрын

Round and round the tautology goes!

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence,. so where is the proof there ever was a jesus? The bible is the claim, not the evidence.

"Saved" from what? To believe you can be saved, you must first buy an unproven product. Kinda like a household cleaner that rids your house of Criminnees. Even tho there is no such thing as Criminnees.

Craig was a non-christian student? Unbelievable.

Wow! Hard to believe WLC could think anyone would fall for his BS! He must be a phony.

They are ALL delusional...

The Holy Spirit is indistinguishable from your feelings. Change my mind.

@unduloid

Жыл бұрын

I don't have any feelings.

This is not in any way new or amazing. WLC has always outright stated that he doesn't care about evidence if it contradicts his beliefs. He's a dogmatic fool, pure and simple, and is therefore best ignored.

You all know that there are no gods, right?

All apologists are deluded or liars or both. Low quality arguments are their norm.

Very clever man, but it does seem he’s a believer because of emotional neediness.

He's been pulling the same strokes for years. It's so boring at this point 😴 it only boils down to 'I believe because of a feeling in my heart' about the Holy spirit and that trumps all contrary arguments. Dull Craig, very dull

Borrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrring.

@Nai61a

Жыл бұрын

Glen Bak: No. Absolutely fascinating. Of course, you need to have a certain amount of intelligence to grasp what's going on here.