Part Two - Dialogue Between Ayaan Hirsi Ali & Richard Dawkins

Рет қаралды 1,440

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 14

@brando3342 Ай бұрын

The irony of Dawkins saying "If it were true, it would change everything.".... bruh, Jesus Christ literally SPLIT HISTORY between "before Him" and "after Him".... LITERALLY changed EVERYTHING 🤣🤦‍♂

@MeganDelacroix Ай бұрын

7:02 Funny, I couldn't choose _to_ believe that one.

@brando3342 Ай бұрын

I don't think Intelligent Design proponents consider theism a "scientific hypothesis". Pretty sure I've heard Stephen Meyer talk about how the intelligent design hypothesis is a scientific hypothesis, but it's not one that involves "God" necessarily. The argument is purely scientific. The benefit of the argument is that, once it goes through, THEN you can propose a new specific theistic hypothesis to explain it. They are two separate things.

@JoelTenny-jq4bx Ай бұрын

Dr Craig, I have a question about Christ I have been struggling with lately. When Jesus came to earth, were there still 3 persons in the God?(This is not a big problem but the next one is) And when Jesus died for our sins and said on the cross "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" I heard some explanations like Jesus was seperated from God when he took our sins that's why he said that. Does Jesus saying this mean that "One person from trinity" was seperated? I don't understand this but I feel there seems to be a problem. I can't show an explicit contradiction too. How do you reconcile Jesus's incarnation and Jesus's death on cross with God being three persons?(It seems that one person is being seperated(I just used this vaguely I don't have a good definition of seperation) atleast during Jesus's death)

@ReasonableFaithOrg Ай бұрын

In the incarnation, the 2nd person of the Trinity - the Logos - was conjoined with a hominin body. So, the person of Christ just is the 2nd person of the Trinity. He doesn't cease to possess his divine attributes or divine personhood in virtue of taking on flesh (contrary to the views of the kenoticists). Christ often refers to the Father as "God." However, he also takes on himself divine prerogatives, such as forgiving sin and fulfilling prophecy predicted of Yahweh in the Old Testament. He also accepts worship and even reference to himself as "God" (John 20:28). This radical divine self-understanding is vindicated through the resurrection. Jesus affirmed the Old Testament teaching that there is one God, while indicating that he himself was also God. This is why the early church felt compelled to formulate a multi-personal understanding of their Jewish monotheism, and why we have the doctrine of the Trinity today. Christ's references to God, as in his cry "My God, My God, why have you forsaken me (which quotes Psalm 22)" are a way of differentiating his own personhood from the Father's. But, given the above, we shouldn't therefore conclude that Christ himself was not a divine person. "God" is also used in Scripture as a title of supreme authority, and Christ submitted to the Father as his supreme authority. But just as a human soldier can submit to another human soldier (say, a general) as his authority without therefore becoming less human, so too could Christ submit to the Father without being less than divine. - RF Admin

@JoelTenny-jq4bx Ай бұрын

@@ReasonableFaithOrg Thanks for the reply dr Craig it clears my doubt

@carladraffen9145 Ай бұрын

This was full of contradictions and didn’t make much sense. I usually like Craig when he’s teaching but feel like this host is baiting him into a different agenda but hey 🤷🏾‍♀️

@rhandley1000 Ай бұрын

Craig is right about belief. For the past 4 years, I've been trying very hard to not believe that Joe Biden is president, but I have to accept that he is Hehehe

@simonskinner1450 Ай бұрын

Christianity asks unbelievers to believe a counter-intuitive story of atonement at the Cross, to accept salvation due to belief, not the obedience of faith as the NT.