Sir Roger Penrose & William Lane Craig • The Universe: How did it get here & why are we part of it?

[@kurtglathar5162]

Roger Penrose is impossible to dislike. He's so kind, respectful, and honest.

[@JohnHansen-ej8nh]

Absolutely likable but completely out of his depth. Frankly, his responses to Craig sounds like a first year uni student in philosophy. It's a bit hard to watch if you know a bit about metaphysics.

[@WickedIndigo]

@@JohnHansen-ej8nhI think that’s a somewhat fair criticism, but Penrose’s position was never really grounded in any philosophy as far as I could tell. It seems that he’s going solely based on the math and the science. I always find it a little weird when there’s debates between a philosopher and a scientist because it seems like they often end up talking past each other whether that be intentional or not. There’s gonna be philosophical concepts that Penrose doesn’t grasp in the same way there’s gonna be mathematical and scientific concepts that Craig doesn’t grasp. So while I agree that it’s a little rough to watch Penrose fumble the philosophical, I’d say it is, in the same way, a little rough to watch Craig fumble on his scientific knowledge. That being said I have great respect and admiration for both of these gents. And the conversation was, if nothing else, entertaining at least.

[@JohnHansen-ej8nh]

@@WickedIndigo I studied both math and philosophy in uni. Whenever doing 'science' there is always a philosophical framework being assume within a larger worldview, whether or not one can articulate that philosophy and worldview. Penrose unfortunately has spent all his time in math and science, and not reflecting on the philosophical ground he's depending on. And that's fine for more most regular people. But he's taking a bit of authority on here. He could at least have learned how Platonic forms (as first years are taught) are wanting for a metaphysical basis. You can tell he's never thought about how they could be more easily explainable by being found in God's mind. For him to say "well why do we need to consider God?" to Craig just shows he hasn't read or considered Craig's arguments for God and that explainability of math/science with a God. My point is, Craig did not say "we need to consider God!!" all Craig is doing is showing that there are better explanations to why math works so well in the physical world, and they're logically coherent arguments. You can tell Penrose has just never considered them.

[@klausziegler60]

WLC tries to argue like Bergson’s. As Einstein said, go and study riemannian geometry and only then we could talk

[@JohnHansen-ej8nh]

@@klausziegler60 bro math doesn't make you a good reasoner. Philosophical logic makes you a good reasoner. There's no need to know riemannian geometry to know something doesn't come from nothing. If your answer is "go study hard things then come talk to me" you're just elitist.

[@thekaz5225]

One of the greatest minds of our time: "I haven't the foggiest idea." It's good to be human.

[@TurinTuramber]

He was 88 years old here, he has Likely forgotten more than most people will ever come to know.

[@fatmaramadan6928]

It is good to be humble too. "I haven't the foggiest idea" And neither has anyone else....

[@Albeit_Jordan]

I love how he even makes errors when explaining concepts, it's just a nice small thing that dispels the idea that somehow great intelligence = infallibility.. as you say, it's good to be human.

[@JohnHansen-ej8nh]

He's completely out of his depth. Frankly, his responses to Craig sound like a first year uni student in philosophy. It's a bit hard to watch if you know only intro metaphysics.

[@ck58npj72]

@@JohnHansen-ej8nh Everything Craig claims depends entirely on ideas that people like Penrose say!

[@katiemiaana]

Roger Penrose is the perfect ambassador for science, he is humble, acknowledges when he doesn't know and is skeptical of claims that cannot be easily investigated.

[@Theactivepsychos]

Every scientist I’ve read says “I don’t know”. Name one who says they know.

[@mortensimonsen1645]

Well, his skepticism is rather uneven in distribution. He allows himself to believe consciousness can take any form to avoid fine-tuning. He allows himself to believe the CCC-model which seems to come out of his equations, but on the intuitive level is quite absurd. I think he's willing to believe the abstract realm is primary, although clearly, such a realm cannot cause anything. And so on. But I guess it's easy to lean back and be skeptical and not commit to anything. I could also do that.

[@Theactivepsychos]

Sometimes the answer is “I don’t know”. People who are educated in this stuff are the only ones who can really theorise as to the possibilities. You can replace WLC’s idea of a mind with any number of things. We could be in a simulation and the rules outside that simulation are completely different. You could say were in an infinite universe that has always existed, you can even say we’re just particles of a bigger dimension. The problem is when you pick one possibility over the other and say “this is the truth”. Roger Penrose doesn’t do this. He does his work based on a theory that he can try and falsify. But in falsifying it he’ll understand a little more and then the next generation will stand on his shoulders and either progress the theory or discover its failures. This can’t be done if your claim is an unknowable force is behind it all.

[@celeritasc9207]

@@mortensimonsen1645 My interpretation of Penrose’s position is that the distribution of his skepticism is based on the evidence for the subject at hand and his understanding of it. When he understands, is able to make the logical connections and there is some underlying ability to verify to at least some extent that something is plausible his skepticism on the matter is decreased. That is admirable. Fine tuning - he stated he was agnostic, there was not yet enough understand to take a firm stand. He simply provided evidence there was on the opposing side and indicated those arguments were not sufficient for him. CCC model that comes out of his equations - I am not if you are saying the CCC model itself is intuitively absurd or that his belief in the model that comes out of abstract mathematical equations is absurd. Our understanding of our universe, how we live in the comforts of our modern society is all based on those mathematical principles. There is nothing absurd about basing one’s willingness to believe something on mathematical principles. Penrose provided concrete examples that backed his position (Einstein’s relativity proved with atomic clocks). GPS devices would not work without taking the mathematics of both special and general relativity into account. Penrose indicated that fact our universe has such a mathematical basis is first of the three mysteries. There is nothing absurd about his position. Penrose also provided information about supporting mathematical evidence and potential observations that could support his theory. He cited other independent papers that supported his position (but remains aware that the papers are new and that criticisms could be forthcoming). Very open to challenges. Your comment - “I guess it easy to lean back and be skeptical and not commit to anything”. I believe the opposite is true. WLC’s position really boils down to the very weak “God of the Gaps” argument. We don’t understand our universe and it is uncomfortable not to know. Therefore, I will create an entity that explains everything even though there is absolutely no basis for it other than my proclamation. That is easy, anyone can do that. Penrose has spent very productive lifetime of pushing the boundaries of our scientific understanding of our universe. That is not easy. Being skeptical and non-committal has what has drove Penrose to search for answers. Penrose’s value system has enabled his abundant contributions to mathematics, science and our understanding of our universe. WLC’s contribution is simply, God did it. There is no comparison. Being skeptical is definitely the more challenging position, because it means one is not done and the investigation continues.

[@mortensimonsen1645]

@@celeritasc9207 I admit I don't understand the CCC-model, but it seems absurd to believe that in a totally empty void of free photons floating around, a sudden Big Bang could appear - just because time/space does not count for these photons? Why should this happen all the time around in our universe? Anyway - I am sure the equations can handle this, but although I agree that mathematics can be a source of truth about the physical world, it is not a 1:1 relationship. Penrose even said that only a small number of mathematical truths had anything to do with the physical world. But the strangest idea Penrose put forward was the consciousness could take many strange forms, citing sci-fi stories. That's not very empirical one could say and does not demonstrate the necessary skepticism. About the mathematical realm being the primary, WLC responded that the number 7 could not cause anything. I agree - an abstract realm cannot cause a physical change. One should demonstrate such a thing if one would wish to make such a bold claim. Furthermore, Penrose didn't like the God hypothesis because it couldn't be put to a scientific test (my interpretation of a comment he made). He had just admitted an abstract realm and a mental realm, none of which can be scientifically proven. I believe only God can explain objective morality. I believe God best explains fine-tuning. If the universe did have a beginning, I believe God is the best explanation for that. This is really not "God-of-the-gaps" as many like to throw around. If you're open to that we're in a simulator, then you will recognize the same arguments as for God - really much of the same thing.

[@edilsonguirengane6448]

People underestimated how well-educated you have to be to moderate this kind of debate!

[@dominicseanmccann6300]

Yeah, William Shatner just wouldn't cut it.....

[@blackcatlullaby]

Come to thanksgiving sometime.

[@benthomas9830]

He did a really good job aswell

[@TrustMe55]

@@dominicseanmccann6300 but you gotta love William Shatner, He loved to hear this talk hopefully he has.

[@monty3854]

Even so, I thought Justin did great!

[@jacderida]

I'm an atheist and I'm usually not particularly fond of William Lane Craig, but he's much more likeable in this conversational setting rather than a formal debate setting. It was a good conversation. I generally favour Roger's positition, but I thought Craig did raise some reasonable objections to CCC. Great moderation too. I must say, kudos to a Christian organisation willing to arrange these conversations and hear opposing viewpoints. A lot of other areas in our society just now could use this kind of civil engagement over disagreements.

[@rjonesx]

Justin (the moderator) runs Unbelievable which regularly hosts atheists, agnostics, and theists to discuss these issues and it is almost always very polite. You should check out his channel. You might also want to see the discussions on Capturing Christianity's channels.

[@PaDutchRunner]

I agree about this organization - they are knocking it out the park with “season 2.”

[@rgenericson5361]

I'm assuming you are not familiar with his brand of apologetics. He tries to walk and talk like a scientist but he simply cherry picks quotes and topics that will prop up his reengineered old and tired version of the Kalam cosmological conundrum. Check out his debate with Sean Carroll. Sean destroyed him. He's got a PhD in divinity, not particle physics, math, cosmology or astronomy. Science is dynamic and changes in tandem with new information. Obviously if you're not updated on the topics they're discussing it might seem like he actually has an argument. Penrose is being extremely patient and tolerant.

[@PaDutchRunner]

R Genericson I’m not a WLC fan - his theology is just as bad as his science-- but I think the poster was commenting more about the format, which I, too, think is very good.

[@jacderida]

@@rgenericson5361 I've been familiar with WLC for a long time. To be clear, I don't really find much of anything he says very convincing. I've seen all the big debates he's done, including the one with Carroll. I agree that Carroll was the person who most comprehensively picked apart his positions, but to be honest I just don't find it that helpful any more to say that one person "destroyed" another. I find this conversational setting more civil and therefore more fruitful in terms of learning opportunities. Even with that said though, I still think Craig made some reasonable challenges to Penrose, and that's to be welcomed. For example, I would say his point about the Platonic world being causally inert is a perfectly reasonable point. It doesn't completely refute Roger's idea, but it's a sensible thing to say and I enjoy hearing other points of view. He was also correct to point out that CCC isn't exactly a well accepted theory. I would agree though that when Craig tries to get into the science it's kind of embarrassing to watch - it's clear he doesn't really know what he's talking about. He should stick to the philosophical objections.

[@joshboston2323]

this moderator is absolutely fantastic. extremely likeable, has basic knowledge to ask the right questions, rarely interrupts etc.

[@PietCarlos]

No no no he is not. He is the reason I stopped watching anytime on this channel. First of he consumes s lot if time with his interruptions and attempts to clarify what is already clear. But moreover whenever it gets interesting he changes the subject. Wlc is constantly pushing Lorentz time. He even tries to explain it to Penrose. Hello! Than instead of letting Penrose school him the moderator wants to change the subject. That is a tremendous stupidity on his part that is unforgivable

[@crabb9966]

​@@PietCarlos ... you seem a bit spiteful

[@PietCarlos]

@@crabb9966 there is a saying. When you see people dancing and you cannot hear the music you may think they are crazy. Seems that you're not able to hear the music. Don't worry. You wil get there.

[@crabb9966]

@@PietCarlos we will see

[@PietCarlos]

@@crabb9966 we have seen

[@Drp_br_]

Man. I love scientists/mathematicians like Roger. Open minded, respectful and humble to all. He dose not hate religion but skeptical. Everyone has a right to be so. Roger is a good man.

[@sabin97]

not just the right, but the moral obligation.

[@Drp_br_]

sabin97 yep!

[@sabin97]

@@queenisrael8158 professor CLAIMED to have deied and seen hell and demons.... there i fixed it for you. so where's his evidence for his claims? if we can present claims without evidence i can tell you i have an invisible, perfectly silent, intangible dragon living under my bed. it communicates with me telepathically and doesnt know anything i dont already know. it also has no need for sustencance and leaves absolutely no trail of its existence anywhere. do you accept my claim?

[@queenisrael8158]

@@sabin97 That man are telling the truth he know what happened ,who is you to say what happened you want there only him and God. And it lots more videos out there . One more video call Bill Wiese 23 min in hell. He said the same thing happened.when you die you will prove to yourself hell is real by falling in hell burning forever with fire 🔥 up to your head , demons and beasts, dragon and everything else, down there with you cause you didn't believe in God,the Bible said what will happen to people like you. God will punish you in hell. You will have all the proof you always wanted burning in hell for ever!!! Where is your proof there is no God show me one proof cause you can't show me anything. You don't know for sure yourself!! Injoy the little time you have on Earth.

[@sabin97]

@@queenisrael8158 "That man are telling the truth" he may not be lying, but what he says is not necessarily true. yeah. in order to lie you need to be aware that what you're saying is false. unless he provides actual evidence of his story, nobody can reasonably accept it as true. "One more video call Bill Wiese 23 min in hell. He said the same thing happened." yeah. and LOTS of people claim to have been abducted by aliens, and their stories are very consistent with one another.... and yet not a single one of them has provided any evidence for it. do you accept the alien abduction stories? hopefully not.... "when you die " it's too late to provide evidence. so either provide it now, or kindly admit you dont have it. " falling in hell burning forever with fire 🔥 up to your head" ohhhh nice...so now the threats begin? "believe this without evidence or be tortured forever!!!!" "Where is your proof there is no God" in the exact same place of your proof that my dragon doesnt exist. my dragon is invisible, intangible, perfectly silent, doesnt eat, communicates with me telepathically and doesnt know anything i dont already know. prove my dragon doesnt exist. other than merely asserting it doesnt exist. you cant. the nonexistence of something like that cannot be demonstrated. but you dont need to demonstrate my dragon doesnt exist, because that's now how anything works. when someone makes a claim something exists, the burden is on the person making the claim that the thing exists. nobody else has a burden to demonstrate the claim is false.

[@donthomas4793]

You can tell that Bill is enjoying just being able to speak to someone he holds in such high regard very enjoyable

[@AOPrinciple]

Idk, I perceived that what Craig enjoyed was the opportunity to evangelize a figure like Penrose.

[@jamesppesch]

If only humility had followed his glee.

[@donthomas4793]

@@jamesppesch I don’t see any arrogance in the man, but I might be mistaken.

[@scottgodlewski306]

It must be disheartening to hear that the man whose work had so much influence on your theological views doesn’t share those views at all.

[@donthomas4793]

@@scottgodlewski306 as much as I Enjoy William Lane Craig, he really hasn’t molded my theological views. I enjoy both men, and having gone through what I have in life I don’t get disheartened.

[@hollyfanatic8686]

First class moderator. He should have a world wide radio/tv show!

[@roberthutchins4297]

He has.

[@mitchellc4]

The gospel is the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM! Repent and believe the gospel! Follow Jesus’ teachings! Jesus is going to return and set up the kingdom of God ON THE EARTH! God’s government ON THE EARTH! The Messiah will resurrect his people! The destiny of the Messiah and his people is to be ON THE EARTH! The renewed restored earth! God also dwelling with them! Rev 21 Jesus said the Father is the only true God! John 17 3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent. RSV Only-monos God-theos Monos theos Monotheism The Father Jesus is the one sent by the true God (the Father)! Jesus never claimed to be God, Jesus said he has a God! Jesus has a God! Jesus died! God can’t die! God raised Jesus from the dead!

[@jinglejangle100]

Yes! Didn't alienate anyone or make assumptions, and was able to keep them respectfully engaged.

[@jinglejangle100]

@@mitchellc4 Or Islam is right or Judaism or atheism. I don't think that is for humans to dictate to others. But hold on to your Christian beliefs because they seem to mean a lot to you.

[@ElSmusso]

Internet

[@markcusblakc8615]

We must keep Sir Roger alive for another 100 years please

[@SStupendous]

@SvendBosanvovski Would require severe rocketry for keeping him another decade

[@maxwellsequation4887]

We MUST make technology for that. There are just too many greats. Penrose, Witten, Tao, Perelman, so many greats.

[@ismailnyeyusof3520]

Perhaps if no other technology is available to preserve his physical body, perhaps it’s possible to download his consciousness to a computer.

[@sv8156]

@SvendBosanvovski "THE DAYS OF OUR YEARS ARE THREESORE YEARS AND TEN; AND IF BY REASON OF STRENGTH THEY BE FOUR SCORE YEARS, YET IS THEIR STRENGTH LABOUR AND SORROW; FOR IT IS SOON CUT OFF AND WE FLY AWAY. (PSALM 90:19)

[@matthewstokes1608]

Only God can do that

[@tevochristmann5372]

I can only wish that at 88 years old I can engage in high level debates like this without skipping a beat

[@jamesbra4410]

We'll gauge your conversation by the frequency of grunts and farts. If you poo in your diaper, then we'll say you need a break.

[@BillyBike416]

@@jamesbra4410 What an appropriate and thoughtful comment. We can learn such a great deal about each other from what we say.

[@jamesbra4410]

@@BillyBike416 yeah now I know you're a tightwad.

[@BoRisMc]

I hope I could at my 35 lol

[@HarryNicNicholas]

well i have a close friend who is schizophrenic, and the only way to deal with people who suffer delusions is to be respectful, try to understand their point of view, stick strictly to the facts and avoid being trapped into getting upset, or distracted (my friend can change the subject, over and over, without blinking). RP knows his stuff, there is no need for him to get flustered.

[@marvinhesler6002]

This is how two human beings are to conduct themselves in a serious debate ... good job fellows !!! I am in awe of Dr Craig and his ittelect as a theological Man !!

[@bungalobill7941]

Penrose is the gentleman scientist Everyone could take a lesson from him

[@SEK.7]

thoroughly agree with you. It was interesting to see Bill looking so "on-edge". It seems he was in battle mode but still resorted to proper etiquette.

[@maplenook]

That’s the entire generation. Sadly mostly gone.

[@bungalobill7941]

@Kakashi Hatake Oh yeah that guy. What a flash in the pan. I think he went and got himself cancelled. Not a big surprise.

[@bungalobill7941]

@Kakashi Hatake Yeah I remember someone else stating that the particles popping in and out of existence event that he based his whole premise on, happens after the universe already begins to expand. Which would render the whole thing moot because it happens in an already existing universe. Someone else also pointed out that the title of his book 'A Universe From Nothing" was totally deceptive and just used to sell books. Because the claim that the universe came from nothing isn't even made in the book. Krauss was a deceptive dude and knew exactly what he was doing with that. Which was getting semi rich off of suckers that are supposed to be skeptics. Irony.

[@eb60lp]

Kakashi Hatake why don’t you debate Kraus in the future? Of all the people he’s debated they’ve never thought to point out what you’ve claimed he has lied about?

[@TEOVOX]

This is what a civil discussion looks like, folks.

[@sammysam2615]

As an atheist, this is so much better than debates at least in regards to the topics. This video and IMO Matt Dillahunty and Jordan Peterson are the examples of what discussions should be.

[@20july1944]

@@sammysam2615 Can you explain Penrose's cycle? I don't follow it. He describes the heat death of a previous universe, a vast, diffuse group of photons with no mass at 0 deg K -- and I agree that's what physics indicates. Then what? How do (or what causes) massless things at 0 deg K to do whatever the next step is?

[@sammysam2615]

@@20july1944 That's honestly beyond by understanding let alone explaining it. I do know there are a few YT videos that explain it fairly well, I can't really grasp it. Sorry

[@sammysam2615]

@@20july1944 Search Professor Brain Cox or Lawrence Krauss, both explain it in a way most can understand.

[@imgayasheck595]

@@sammysam2615 please don't compare dr penrose to grifters like peterson. He doesn't follow his own rules. He did a video about how to recover from addiction and didn't mention rehab. But now it turns out he has been an addict and just lying by omission. And he didn't follow his own advice because he went to rehab (which he didn't say in his video). He's a scam artist

[@paulfoor7388]

The big questions remaining for me after watching this are (1) Who are the people who disliked this video and (2) How could they have possibly come into existence?

[@ThermaL-ty7bw]

flying spagetti monster ?

[@mortensimonsen1645]

@Clayton Tobin I think so too. Would be interesting if YT moved the buttons more apart, I think the numbers of dislike would go down significantly.

[@paulfoor7388]

@Natmanprime You stop it. It was funny. Party pooper.

[@HeadGodoftheGodCouncil]

"(2) How could they have possibly come into existence" By parents having the decency to actually fuck.. And Evolution ofc..

[@chikkipop]

@@HeadGodoftheGodCouncil For once I can say "Thank you, God!"

[@necessaryevil6636]

As a theist myself, Roger Penrose has given me a lot to think about and consider. These are two men, speaking in their own fields of expertise, brilliant!

[@iamBlackGambit]

Makes you consider what?

[@retsnomeikcooc]

@@iamBlackGambitThats like jordan peterson breaking down individual words of questions as a scapegoating effort.

[@retsnomeikcooc]

Jesus loves you.

[@FactStorm]

@@retsnomeikcooc Krishna loves you

[@elysium619]

Justin is an outstanding moderator. Grasps the issues and adroitly guides the discussion forward.

[@MultiWalrus1]

@Edward Verda Exactly. That is the elephant in the room.

[@HarryNicNicholas]

is bias stills shows though, his program may seem "balanced" but these guys are still rooting for god.

[@alexp8924]

gregory s I am not sure if he asked a single non-leading question

[@hollygoodson6025]

I thought so too! Sir Roger Penrose kept saying "exactly" to his contributions which just shows how well he did. He must have been thrilled 😊

[@davidt0504]

I don't think Justin is trying to hard to hide his bias. I think that the format was never intended to be a formal debate but more of a discussion/conversation.

[@richardfeynman5560]

Incredible fact that Sir Roger Penrose is 88 years old in this video! Having a bright and active mind seems to keep him younger than he actually is!

[@annapaula3352]

He is 88 years old, which means that he is so close to discover that Jesus really exist, I pray that he repent for his sins cause not matter if you believe in hell and heaven, your mind will not make them disappear.

[@roberthutchins4297]

@@annapaula3352 Why do you believe nonsense_

[@mitchellc4]

The gospel is the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM! Repent and believe the gospel! Follow Jesus’ teachings! Jesus is going to return and set up the kingdom of God ON THE EARTH! God’s government ON THE EARTH! The Messiah will resurrect his people! The destiny of the Messiah and his people is to be ON THE EARTH! The renewed restored earth! God also dwelling with them! Rev 21 Jesus said the Father is the only true God! John 17 3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent. RSV Only-monos God-theos Monos theos Monotheism The Father Jesus is the one sent by the true God (the Father)! Jesus never claimed to be God, Jesus said he has a God! Jesus has a God! Jesus died! God can’t die! God raised Jesus from the dead!

[@kaylangoliath]

@@mitchellc4 Hello, I read what you typed and it has taken my interest as to why you say I should follow Jesus and yet you say He is not God? Would it not be sensible to say that I should rather follow God or His word than a mere man? I am Christian, and I find it rather confusing as to how people can believe one thing and denounce something closely related at the same time. For example Jesus never said “I have a God” but according to the gospel of John in Chapter 10:30 He said “I and My Father are one.” How do you explain what that means other than Him claiming to be of the same essence as the Father? In the next verse, verse 31-33 it says “Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, ‘Many good works I have shown you from my Father. For which of those do you stone Me?’ The Jews answered Him, saying, ‘For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a man, make Yourself God.” Jesus clearly claimed to be God my friend and to deny that is to deny the Father Himself (1 John 5:10)

[@cassondramcgowan2284]

@@kaylangoliath So Kaylan, since YOU opined, thought I, to myself, why not I! Not that I believe at all the "stories" found in the new testament concerning the character "Jesus", BUT! Your statement, "For example Jesus NEVER said ' I have a God' "??? Pray tell, can YOU explain to ME what did the author of John mean when he had the character, "Jesus", say in chapter 20:17 ...." I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and to MY God, and your God"? Here Jesus is saying indeed, MY God!?!? He here is saying just THAT!!! "I have a God"! AND he demonstrated as much when he is shown in "prayer" to HIS God on many occasions!?!? What of the incident at the baptismal scene in Matthew 3:17, where a voice from heaven said "This is my SON"!!! Who was speaking from heaven Kaylan? Was this not the very voice of "God, The Father Himself??? What I wish for YOU to understand is that the voice did NOT say "This is ME" but rather, "my SON"! THINK Kaylan, THINK!!! Is Jesus His OWN father? Makes NO sense!? The ONE and ONLY, TRUE "God", can NOT die Kaylan!!! "Jesus" DIED and was DEAD "3 days and 3 nights"??? He did NOT say, "I am God" anywhere in the "bible", he simply demonstrated that he was NOT "God" by DYING!!!

[@paulmichaelfreedman8334]

Incredible...88 years old and still as active as he is...incredible.

[@KONAMAN100]

You can see at times he fatigues, but that might be as he glazes over with some of the nonsense flowing by.

[@mystery6411]

@@KONAMAN100 yup his nonsense maybe.

[@RP-ch8yn]

@@mystery6411 Shame how William Lane Craig has been parroting the fallacious kalam cosmological argument for decades eventhough it contains a false premise and a hasty conclusion... Despite Craig’s immense charisma and friendliness, I would be fatigued too at such ignorance of physics and oversimplified appliance of common intuitions about the metaphysics of causality into something as unintuitive as the big bang, whose first 10^-43 seconds were governed by physics not yet understood and whose features may not even be amenable to such common metaphysical ideas of causality.

[@rdjinaz]

Absolutely outstanding discussion. I love Roger Penrose's humility and brilliance. Of course, William Craig always is interesting too. Getting them together? Fantastic! (And refreshing, because it was a civil discussion)

[@jesusislord2123]

Kudos to the moderator, he is smart and well informed, and did a good job of fleshing out the arguments. Actually, I think he understood Craig's argument better than Penrose, and understood Penrose's argument better than Craig. Good job mate.

[@bonnie43uk]

How does Craig explain a loving God in respect to the question of why do bad things happen to good people?

[@DANGJOS]

@@bonnie43uk I suppose he may use the free will defense, which while explains certain things, I think has a number of problems. I don't know. He may have some other explanations.

[@thekinginthenorth8011]

@@DANGJOS Yeah, I suspect that the problems are intractable. It's quite revolting to hear Craig try reconciling his omni-benevolent & omniscient God with a world in which blameless young children die in agonising pain from cancers and such. Any dry bit of abstract reasoning is going to come off as a crass platitude at best, a demonstration of psychopathy at worst.

[@ajsirch]

@@thekinginthenorth8011 Revolting? And to you what is the reason why young children die in agonizing pain from cancers or bombs? Bad luck?

[@bonnie43uk]

@@ajsirch We live on a planet that has evolved naturally without the need for a God, we humans have evolved alongside many other living creatures many of which are harmful or even in many cases deadly to mankind. Why, for example would God create a mosquito that infects hundreds of thousands of young children and in particular, babies, which suffer from the mosquito's bite infecting it with malaria and die agonizing deaths?, From the atheist perspective we know that it's one of life's downfalls of living on a planet with, as i say lots of other creatures that we happen to share it with.

[@matthewhazelwood6520]

One of the most enjoyable debates I’ve seen. Very respectful and brilliant men.

[@cosmopolitan4598]

Google would have said Did you mean "discussion" But, this video is very, very interesting to me, too.

[@Cecilia-ky3uw]

its a discussion not a debate

[@sandygrungerson1177]

i agree, i had no idea david lee roth had become an analytic philospher, he was always such a pragmatist when i knew him

[@panpsychism_]

Well, one of them is brilliant…

[@coltoncatalli8148]

@@panpsychism_ hey man give the devil it’s due. He sits there and discusses his ideas in front on people who dont agree. I learn so much about the universe and how to discuss through people like these who bring together and participate in these conversations. There is something brilliant about that, and credit it due to both sides for that.

[@minetime6881]

Absolutely love these conversations. I still like them more when they are like this; discussions and not debates. They are both looking for a truth rather than defending their position.

[@humptyslick]

The theological mind was not quite so open, yet surprisingly well educated about physics. Wonderful! And facinating to see Roger completely un-intimidated by Bill's almost permanent frown of disbelief - probably used so successfully during his lifetime its now unconsciously tattooed on ;) Nevertheless their example of respect for each other's differences was exemplary and made for a fabulous informing conversation. Thanks immensely Christian Radio.

[@RandallChase1]

@@humptyslick I had Dr. Craig as a professor 3 times. He is not a frowning or angry person. He was always very kind. He is incredibly intelligent and sometimes those individuals have difficulty socially, but I don’t think he is frowning here more intensely listening.

[@IanM-id8or]

ROFL

[@pythondrink]

William Lain Craig has shown multiple times that he doesn't rly care about truth. He's willing to lower his epistemic bar for Christianity.

[@PhilosophyUnraveled]

​@@pythondrinkHow so? And who says where ones epistemic bar is supposed to be? You?

[@iqgustavo]

🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:00 🎙️ Introduction to the big conversation on the universe, featuring Roger Penrose and William Lane Craig. 01:06 🌌 Roger Penrose's contributions to confirming Big Bang cosmology and his thoughts on purpose in the universe. 02:15 🙏 William Lane Craig's background, engagement with Big Bang cosmology, and Christian philosophical arguments. 07:13 🔮 The three mysteries of existence according to Roger Penrose: precision in physics, emergence of consciousness, and comprehension of mathematics. 09:25 🧠 William Lane Craig's response to the metaphysical questions, proposing an omniscient consciousness as the underlying unity for the mental, abstract, and physical realms. 17:01 🤔 Roger Penrose's reservations about a super mental being as the source of unity, discussing necessity, causation, and vagueness. 25:44 🧩 The mystery of the abstract realm and its existence, with unresolved questions about its purpose and nature. 25:57 🌌 Mystery: Connections between realms. Three worlds interconnected by mysteries: physical laws, organization of physical world, and emergence of consciousness. 26:38 🌍 Mystery: Rare occurrence of life. Tiny fraction of physical world hosts conscious life, posing questions about existence. 27:36 🤔 Hypothesis: Omniscient mind as ultimate explanation. Suggests divine mind orchestrating physical and mental realms. 28:42 🧮 Applicability of mathematics: Platonism vs. Divine Blueprint. Discussion about whether mathematical principles are coincidental or divinely designed. 29:39 🕶️ Mystery: Vagueness of divine explanation. Challenge in making a specific and coherent case for the role of a divine mind. 31:12 ✨ Divine attributes: Ethical and mathematical grounding. Attributes of omniscience, goodness, and power associated with the proposed divine mind. 33:15 🌌 Unified metaphysical vision. Tripartite division of realms (physical, mental, abstract) forming a complex, interconnected reality. 34:07 💭 Free will debate. Discussion about whether the divine mind's existence affects free will and control over events. 36:56 ❓ Openness to hypothesis. Skepticism about attributing divine consciousness to the mental world, preferring exploratory questions. 40:51 🌌 Evolving cosmological understanding. Exploration of black holes, their radiation, and the eventual "heat death" of the universe. 48:23 🔆 Photon experience and timelessness. Discussion on photons, timelessness, and the absence of time and space at the end of the universe. 51:10 🌌 Roger Penrose proposes the concept of infinity and sequential Aeons in cosmology. 52:16 🔄 Penrose's conformal cyclic cosmology involves continual expansion without collapse between Aeons. 53:43 🧐 William Lane Craig discusses the Kalam cosmological argument's second premise and its support from modern cosmology. 55:30 🌌 Penrose presents observational evidence for his cyclical model, emphasizing collision signals and Hawking points. 01:00:09 🤔 Penrose acknowledges his shift in considering the conformal space-time prior to the Big Bang as physically real. 01:02:10 💡 Penrose discusses how observations have led him to take his outrageous proposal seriously. 01:06:11 🔍 The debate delves into the fine-tuning argument, discussing physical necessity, chance, and design as explanatory options. 01:12:53 🌌 Penrose is agnostic about fine-tuning's implications for consciousness in the universe, considering alternate forms of life. 01:16:58 🌌 Roger Penrose doesn't advocate for physical necessity, chance, or design in fine-tuning, but suggests the universe might not be finely tuned. 01:17:28 🌌 Fine-tuning examples in contemporary physics are numerous, making denial of fine-tuning implausible; matter and chemistry depend on fine-tuned constants. 01:18:38 🌌 The conformal cyclical model proposes varying constants over successive eons, potentially allowing different constants for different forms of life. 01:19:30 🌌 The conformal cyclical model faces objections similar to the anthropic principle for explaining fine-tuning, raising questions about observing a finely tuned universe. 01:20:55 🌌 Possible solutions like sequential eons or observable universes not finely tuned still pose challenges to explaining the finely tuned universe we observe. 01:21:38 🌌 Agnostic stance: Roger Penrose acknowledges the finely tuned universe but lacks an adequate explanation, emphasizing our limited understanding of the constraints on fundamental constants. 01:23:42 🌌 The CCC model doesn't address all aspects of fine-tuning, and certain constants' values remain a puzzle even within its framework. 01:24:50 🌌 Roger Penrose remains uncertain about a divine mind behind the universe and is skeptical about personal continuity after death. 01:25:26 🌌 Penrose expresses uncertainty about a divine mind explaining the universe and the continuation of personal experiences after death.

[@diceblue6817]

Penrose is one of the people that are so incredibly great in their own time that we don't quite know what to do about it, 50 years from now he'll be 100x more celebrated

[@goranmancevski5550]

Why Penrose is so great? Please explain the achivements for all good?

[@josvanderspek1403]

Exactly. It is really about as amazing as having one of the other Greats still with us (Russell, Bohr, Dirac, Feynman, etc.)

[@markhiggins8315]

@@goranmancevski5550 You obviously have no scientific education. Penrose is one of the greatest thinkers of our time and will indeed be even more celebrated in time.

[@dlbattle100]

@@goranmancevski5550 If his cyclical universe model continues to make testable predictions that remain supported and uncontradicted by evidence gathered in the future, he will be more famous than he is now. That is the greatest achievement you can have as a scientist.

[@depthsofpentecost2973]

This was an unbelievably fascinating discussion, and I greatly admire the respectful back and forth between Craig and Penrose. I could watch this stuff for hours!

[@tabasco7915]

Me too.

[@ExistentialRoamer]

I'm having a lot of fun watching this :) Two people disagreeing deeply, but being totally sincere and enjoying their time together. It's as rare as it is beautiful.

[@oldschoolman1444]

That's how adults behave. =)

[@mitchellc4]

The gospel is the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM! Repent and believe the gospel! Follow Jesus’ teachings! Jesus is going to return and set up the kingdom of God ON THE EARTH! God’s government ON THE EARTH! The Messiah will resurrect his people! The destiny of the Messiah and his people is to be ON THE EARTH! The renewed restored earth! God also dwelling with them! Rev 21 Jesus said the Father is the only true God! John 17 3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent. RSV Only-monos God-theos Monos theos Monotheism The Father Jesus is the one sent by the true God (the Father)! Jesus never claimed to be God, Jesus said he has a God! Jesus has a God! Jesus died! God can’t die! God raised Jesus from the dead!

[@KingstonHawke]

I don’t find Craig to be sincere at all. He just says whatever he can to try to justify his view of god. At one point he limits the entire world to three possible categories, as if there couldn’t be a fourth. That’s a con-artist move. Basically a false dichotomy. He does that all the time because to admit he doesn’t know doesn’t justify his religion.

[@gretchen121000]

​@@mitchellc4 Oh Lordy

[@jestanuthername]

@@KingstonHawke your bias is blatantly obvious in your stated opinion on Craig from the first two sentences on and as such is without merit

[@deepblue2250]

Moderatör did an excellent job… Thank you very much for this amazing conversation

[@Blackopsmechanic338]

Great respect for a man with Roger’s Knowledge to say “I don’t know’. The more we learn the more questions we have.

[@sandygrungerson1177]

he didnt say "i dont know", he said "i dont know what to do with it"

[@beaniegamer9163]

And Roger should never know...or it will be the end of creation.

[@jvbest5k301]

@@beaniegamer9163 what? of He knows it might be the end of atheism as when He knows that the universe had indeed begun at some point, the atheist physicists panicked!

[@markhiggins8315]

@@jvbest5k301 Really.

[@Wuppie62]

@@jvbest5k301 What a nonsense. Science is knowledge seeking. If science could explain the beginning of the universe too, it's more likely a feast for atheism and the end of religion. But many religious zealots will still be in denial, call it fake news and dogmatically try to hold on to their bronze age texts. Many people don't like facts and inconvenient truths, but go for their preferred narrative and delusional beliefs.

[@jansauza6483]

Sir Penrose's humility and truthfulness should be emulated by every one who claims to be a Christian...

[@arno7303]

Do you claim to be a Christian? Do you engage with many atheists?

[@webslinger527]

@Fatram Fatram are u crazy what childish beliefs which childish were having purpose saying that their is agod what so childish about that but you’re more child is just try to denying that

[@arvaneret_329]

Well, of course if you're referring to hypocrites, but true Christians already practice those qualities, no need to “emulate” them. These qualities are already Christian in nature.

[@misterfuck7261]

Sir Penroses's humility and truthfulness should be emulated by everyone who claims to be an atheist...

[@dovbarleib3256]

Yes, this attribute of Humility of which you speak is more likely found in people who believe in G-d and are in awe of Him than in people who are atheists. Thank G-d there are men like Dr. Penrose, who while being atheists of sorts, still display an attribute of humility. But such a person is rare indeed.

[@yacovmitchenko1490]

Penrose is a good example of someone who can be brilliant, disagree with you, and not be an asshole - a lesson Lawrence Krauss can learn. Love Penrose - a phenomenal mind, approachable, a gentleman, without the slightest dogmatism.

[@pescatoralpursuit1726]

I disagree. I found his tantamount dismissal of Craig's philosophical perspective, off-putting.

[@tomschmaltz5467]

@@pescatoralpursuit1726 I mean it is largely because Craig genuinely has no background in physics and doesn't really understand it that well. He understands metaphysics exceptionally, but he is very poor when dealing with actual physics due to imprecise understanding and definitions. Penrose was not rude at all about it though.

[@pescatoralpursuit1726]

@@tomschmaltz5467 His contempt for Craig is due to him not being a peer. Craig's argument is over Penrose's head which is obvious given his dismissal when asked to rectify the physical conundrum. He's appears another atheist hiding behind his credentials, or he really has no interest in seeking answers to the big questions.

[@tomschmaltz5467]

@@pescatoralpursuit1726 I would hardly say he has any contempt for Craig. They both were incredibly respectful for one another. The issue is Craig makes a lot of waffly statements without much evidence. It's not that those went "above Penrose's head", it's just there is no good reason to believe in something on bad evidence. Penrose has dedicated his life to using EVIDENCE to answer the bigger questions, that is ultimately why he's considered one of the greatest minds of the last 100 years and won a Nobel Prize.

[@TryingtoTellYou]

Imagine knowing your brain creates your consciousness yet still telling a Nobel Prize winning scientist that the universe is God's consciousness and not even bothering to explain how it exists without a brain.

[@bartkl]

"It's very hard to bore a photon". Love the British wit!

[@garanceadrosehn9691]

Let me start by saying my own belief is very much Christian, but I'll add that I do love listening to Roger Penrose. For one thing here, while I don't know how much Roger believes in what William Craig is saying, but it seems he's always listening and actually thinking about what the other person is saying.

[@mdt471]

Your qualification that you are very much Christian...but love listening to Penrose, is tacit confirmation that in your view, Christianity and theoretical physics cannot coexist.

[@garanceadrosehn9691]

@@mdt471 No, it just means that I wanted to make it clear that I'm keenly interested in both sides of this debate. And by "this debate", I mean the specific debate as shown in this video.

[@garanceadrosehn9691]

Let me also add that the attitude of Roger's that I'm praising here is something that I've seen from Roger in any kind of debate that I've seen him in. That goes for debates like this, but also in debates on the merits of different (contrasting and incompatible) theories of theoretical physics. He's always listening, and always tries to be very precise in what he is describing. It's baked into Roger's character, and I wish more people would do the same when they're listening to someone they disagree with (no matter what topic is being debated).

[@TheSecurityAgency]

Don't worry, this is not your fault being religious, but mother nature's failure.

[@hxhdfjifzirstc894]

@@mdt471 Perhaps you made a typo, but as written, that's a non sequitur.

[@jamesyarnall6728]

Two thoroughly-pleasant, gentle-men, in the classical sense, with diverse ideas, and both men with great skill in the art of mapping complex ideas into meaningful spoken words ... at table with a third congenial gentle-man with a most-pleasant way of “steering” the conversation: Wow! What a treat to this person, here and now struggling to describe what he has just seen and heard. My thanks to the three “stars”, at the table, and also to those unseen ... who in some way contributed to the making of this recording. Thank you ALL!

[@robertthomas4234]

This is a beautiful conversation; I love when people can respectfully discuss their ideas with open minds. Kudos to ye, lads!

[@JeffEyges]

It isn't mutually respectful. Craig thinks Penrose, along with the vast majority of humanity, will be made to suffer eternally. He is a psychopath, as is everyone who holds that belief. Craig agrees to do these "conversations" and "debates" because he's primarily concerned with self-promotion.

[@qaz-fi1id]

Shut up

[@uranamac]

I didn't liked "Therfore God" argument though.

[@Netomp51]

@@uranamacfacts don’t care about your feelings, Craig postulated strong arguments which Roger couldn’t refute.

[@SunsetHoney615]

@@Netomp51in which universe did that happen ?? 😂

[@ALavin-en1kr]

Sr. Roger is a class act and always a pleasure to listen to.

[@rememberme3852]

How lovely are these three gents and how lovely is this video. A pleasure to listen to. ❤

[@CaptCoolTime]

I love hearing a debate where I am unable to understand every part of it. It means I have more to learn and listen to this discussion again. So good!

[@MKTElM]

We are able to comprehend as much on a given subject only as much as our minds have knowledge that can be built on by the new ( to one ) knowledge being put forward. Not everyone comes out of a lecture with exactly the same information as everyone else. Each reaps from it only as much as his previous knowledge has prepared him/her for. Of course there is also 'information bias' which may block any new 'hostile' but useful information coming in .

[@Patrick77487]

Love Penrose. His 'we don't know' honesty. What a mind, though.

[@Patrick77487]

@@StellaLovesMusic25 Are you god? If not, please provide communique from god to Penrose.

[@Law9652]

You see this sort of humility in academics generally.

[@HarryNicNicholas]

@@StellaLovesMusic25 i'm with penrose, there may be a god, but that doesn't help. god takes no part in human affairs, even if you are christian, gods divine plan means god made himself redundant at the moment of creation, a perfect plan doesn't need updates or supervision, praying for change is actually blasphamy "oh god i don't like what you're doing kindly see my suggestions"

[@Patrick77487]

@@StellaLovesMusic25 Meaningless drivel from a Bronze Age culture that knew almost nothing of Time, Space, and human capacity to reason.

[@Patrick77487]

@@StellaLovesMusic25 Not my vision of god, merely examining the "visions" of world religions, minus the cherry picking. I'd hope you'd agree---belief does not equate reality or what is true.

[@ThetaMinistries]

As a Monotheistic Christian, I always appreciate when a genuinely humble Agnostic like Penrose is always willing to be open unlike most “skeptics” who just attack and attack and aren’t open at all. Roger is a breath of fresh air.

[@Blackbeltborris]

Penrose regards himself as an atheist, but like most atheists he is probably an agnostic atheist.

[@muzwell]

It would have been a different conversation - and possibly one you would not have found so respectful - if WLC had made specific claims about Christianity. Most agnostic/atheist scientist don't have a problem with deism - but WLC was smart enough to steer clear of using revelation as an argument in favor of there being a divine creator.

[@jasonbensonmusic]

I agree☀️

[@maniac79410]

Are you opened to the possibility that your monotheistic beliefs might not be the truth amongst the thousands of different beliefs out there

[@ahah86]

I think Penrose just find the whole thing unnecessary. A scientist is perfectly fine in saying "I don't know". Craig, instead, seems to be perfectly fine in assuming a lot without any evidence for it.

[@fujiapple9675]

21:58 was used at the intro. I'm loving the discussion thus far. I appreciate Roger's appreciation of Bach and Philosophy as well as Science. Since Craig uses Penrose's findings in his forums and lectures, to say I've been looking forward to this discussion is a gross understatement.

[@SpeakLifeMedia]

[Lane-Craig] “Do we have free will?” [Penrose] “...I’d like to keep an open mind on that one...” 😂😂😂

[@gingrai00]

LOL! Great catch!

[@danieljohnston3708]

Classic 🤦‍♂️😂

[@johnnybgoodeish]

When I see Roger's 'comb-over', I think perhaps not :)

[@alankoslowski9473]

Why is that laughable? There's a convincing neurological argument that freewill is illusory or at less of a factor in our behavior they most like to think it is.

[@SpeakLifeMedia]

Alan Koslowski you’re right that it’s a respectable debate to be had. And I don’t find Roger’s position “laughable” at all. But it is funny (in a good natured “isn’t that ironic” way) that he doesn’t feel determined either way on the question. That’s all

[@samier44]

Really interesting discussion, and brilliant moderation thank you, Justin 🙂

[@PremierUnbelievable]

Samantha Richardson Thankyou!

[@vampyricon7026]

@@PremierUnbelievable I agree. Wonderful moderation. Your willingness to step in and stop them (I say them but it's mostly Craig) from going off-topic is commendable.

[@sarapitter2339]

@@vampyricon7026 yyyyyyyyyyyyýyyyyyy6ýyyb

[@PsBennywood]

The moderator is knowledgeable as well. I salute him.

[@mohammadhosseinmehrabi7516]

Roger is one of the most important mathematicians in the world of physics, who at the same time speaks with the wise humility that comes from his high knowledge.

[@mitchellc4]

The gospel is the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM! Repent and believe the gospel! Follow Jesus’ teachings! Jesus is going to return and set up the kingdom of God ON THE EARTH! God’s government ON THE EARTH! The Messiah will resurrect his people! The destiny of the Messiah and his people is to be ON THE EARTH! The renewed restored earth! God also dwelling with them! Rev 21 Jesus said the Father is the only true God! John 17 3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent. RSV Only-monos God-theos Monos theos Monotheism The Father Jesus is the one sent by the true God (the Father)! Jesus never claimed to be God, Jesus said he has a God! Jesus has a God! Jesus died! God can’t die! God raised Jesus from the dead!

[@dayweed85]

@@mitchellc4 nobody likes you

[@NoahsUniverse]

@@mitchellc4 psychopath

[@BenjaminGoose]

@@mitchellc4 Jesus sucks dicks. His teachings are evil.

[@DieElect]

@@BenjaminGoose "Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one's life for one's friends." You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor[a](A) and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies " Wow sounds really evil to me.

[@sisyphus645]

To have Roger Penrose on your program must be the most exciting thing you've ever done in your life

[@SurgeonSuhailAnwar]

The expressions on Bill,s face are priceless when Penrose is talking about hard core physics - amazing discussion.

[@NudlemanJones]

Like him or not, Craig actually has a pretty strong grasp of physics.

[@calebjohnson7510]

I also noticed that haha. In all fairness, RP is a scientist. WLC is a philosopher. WLC does have a decent understanding of physics though. It was a great discussion between two goats.

[@Wuppie62]

@@NudlemanJones Oh really?

[@ablazedguy]

@@Wuppie62 Yes, really. Probably wouldn't solve many physics problems, but he understands how the math and observations connect and focuses on the philosophical implications of the physics' discoveries.

[@Wuppie62]

@@ablazedguy How would you know? Isn't it a possibility that you're one of the blind people who worship Craig for being their King One Eye, whilst real scientists - in this case physists - are shaking their heads at Craig's 'philosophical' (read: religion driven) brainfarts?

[@02buddha02]

Roger Penrose, for someone who is so brilliant, speaks so plainly and simply. I admire that, and makes me find his points more engaging.

[@Shaewaros]

Perhaps of the best conversation about the topic I've seen so far.

[@mitchellc4]

The gospel is the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM! Repent and believe the gospel! Follow Jesus’ teachings! Jesus is going to return and set up the kingdom of God ON THE EARTH! God’s government ON THE EARTH! The Messiah will resurrect his people! The destiny of the Messiah and his people is to be ON THE EARTH! The renewed restored earth! God also dwelling with them! Rev 21 Jesus said the Father is the only true God! John 17 3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent. RSV Only-monos God-theos Monos theos Monotheism The Father Jesus is the one sent by the true God (the Father)! Jesus never claimed to be God, Jesus said he has a God! Jesus has a God! Jesus died! God can’t die! God raised Jesus from the dead!

[@beyamoth]

Except WLC kept talking....

[@sebas793]

@@mitchellc4 sorry. But f.. off.

[@brandongoss9748]

@@mitchellc4 stop trying to spread these lies. Thomas bowed to Jesus and said my Lord and my God. Jesus didn't correct him on calling him God. He said before Abraham was I AM. These are only two of many proofs against your unfounded claims.

[@mitchellc4]

@@brandongoss9748 Hi Brandon Jesus has a God Are you claiming Jesus is God who has a God?? Who is Jesus’s God? Who is Paul referring to as “the God of our Lord Jesus Christ”? Who is Peter referring to as “the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ”? Who is Jesus referring to when he says “my God”? Rom 15 6 that together you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. 2 Cor 1 3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and God of all comfort, 2 Cor 11 31 The God and Father of the Lord Jesus, he who is blessed for ever, knows that I do not lie. Eph 1 3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, Eph 1 17 that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of him, Col 1 3 We always thank God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, when we pray for you, 1 Pet 1 3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! According to his great mercy, he has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, Rev 1 6 and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father, to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen. Rev 3 12 He who conquers, I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God; never shall he go out of it, and I will write on him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem which comes down from my God out of heaven, and my own new name. - As for John 8 No Jesus didn’t use Exodus 3 in John 8 Jesus said before Abraham was born “ego eimi” which means I am he Multiple people say ego eimi in the New Testament, but you’re not saying they are God? The blind man who was healed said it John 9 9 Some said, “It is he”; others said, “No, but he is like him.” He said, “I am the man.” I am the man= ego eimi The healed blind man just said ego eimi, did he just refer to Exodus and claim to be God?? Of course not I believe in the Greek translation of Exodus it says “Ego eimi HO ON”-I AM THAT I AM “Tell them I AM has sent you”-tell them HO ON has sent you Had Jesus said HO ON you may have a point, but he didn’t Again Jesus has a God God doesn’t have a God

[@gdr38515]

I collaborated with Roger over 35 years ago. He was a great and humble guy then and I have huge respect for him.

[@vorador4365]

Gareth Rees my favourite of interviewee of all time

[@spaceisalie5451]

Gareth Rees What did you do with him?

[@KipIngram]

Wow - what a great thing. He's one of the most impressive men I've ever listened to. What a great experience that must have been for you.

[@mlgfrog2470]

@@spaceisalie5451 sex

[@HaltonOutdoors]

This is simply amazing...what a great delight to see these two amazing intellectuals engage in such a positive and fruitful discussion while respecting one another. May we all continue to spur one another for the common greater good. God Bless.

[@naxd]

I am crazy impressed that Scientist and a religious person discuss very politely without shouting, increasing their voice. Wonderful wonderful wonderful, thanks for sharing \o/ Greatest person I ever seen Roger Penrose (I am sure he doesn't care about being called Sir ...)

Everytime I watch a conversation about the big questions, my mind runs into an infinite loop of questions and answers.

[@dimingohale1952]

I don't think that you can have an infinite number of questions being that you are a finite being.

@@dimingohale1952 A loop is infinite per definition.

[@HDitzzDH]

@ Not necessarily, is just means that something repeats itself, and this can happen one time, two times, a thousand times etc, or infinite.

@@HDitzzDH COVID seems infinite to me XD.

[@mycroftholmes7379]

One of the most civil discourses in this program...i love it!!

[@Serenity5460]

“The Problem with us mathematicians is that we are very poor philosophers.” -Einstein

[@reecem367]

"When we set out to unravel and behold the ever present interconnectedness, awe inspiring, complex, and infinite beauty that by its own virtue binds the cosmos- we inevitably overlook the extent to which abstract manifestation can't self actualize it's own justification without necessitating an appeal to metaphysical constructs, by which any attempts to define it are hence rendered self defeating." - Newton

[@rgenericson5361]

Just curious, when’s the last time a philosopher developed a cure for disease or published papers on particle physics, chemistry and cosmology?

[@tomdjm1000]

R Genericson Just curious, when have you?

[@joshjeggs]

@@rgenericson5361 Philosophy created science. science is a branch of philosophy. a philosopher tells you how to do science and limits the stupidity of theories so that science can create a cure.

[@reecem367]

@@joshjeggs By that logic, philosophy created pretty much everything.

[@RandallChase1]

Thank you Justin for doing all of these videos and for all of your hard work! It is such a blessing and you have really helped many in their faith.

[@josephthomas2226]

Roger Penrose is amazing. I love hearing him talk. if I live that long, I hope my mind is 1/10th as sharp as his! he is brilliant and humble, and understandable. Thanks Justin for making this happen.

[@holliswilliams8426]

I went to a talk of his recently and he spoke like he was 30 years younger.

[@Intuitioncalling]

Mr Penrose is such a nice, courteous and fatherly figure🥰

[@Cmdrrnvr1]

What a joy this debate was. A genuine, courteous and well-reasoned debate between two polite, erudite intellectuals. As commented elsewhere, Justin is superb as chairman of this debate. Whatever side of the argument one is on, there is much food for thought here.

[@Monkeytype6]

You can actually feel William Lane Craig's joy to be able to discuss philosophy and metaphysics and, you know, philosophical stuff, because he's so used to discussing with those scientistic people who don't anything about philosophy.

[@st3ppenwolf]

scientistic isn't a word and most scientists hold PhDs which stand for philosophy doctors and are versed in aspects of philosophy relevant to their disciplines. WLC is so used to argue for things he doesn't really know, I think his joy in this case comes from the fact that Sir Roger Penrose doesn't really care about confronting him on that

[@gabepearson6104]

@@st3ppenwolf yeah no the two times I really saw him lose was the Shelly kagan debate, and the oppy debate. That’s it

[@davidgagnon3781]

@@st3ppenwolf PhD stands for Doctor of Philosophy for historical reasons. For example, Science used to be called Natural Philosophy. Newton's Magnum Opus was titled "Philosophae Naturalis Principia Mathematica " It has nothing to do with scientists being trained in Philosophy.

[@st3ppenwolf]

@@davidgagnon3781 Most people holding PhDs from good schools need to understand the principles of philosophy to actually write their thesis. It's not just for historical reasons. It's in the title

[@ericgraham8150]

So admittedly, I'm just going off the cuff here and have *not* done my proper googling, but I have a loose understanding I can share I think... The distinction I was always aware of was that you had Ph. D's and you had M.D.'s ... Medical doctors and philosophical doctors as mentioned. So in order to get your Ph. D you need to pick a problem in science that has not been properly addressed in a certain way, and that becomes your thesis - you then will write one of the most intense papers of your life (more like a book) which you then will have to confront a panel of professors or tenor'd staff in which you have almost a "trial" where you need to defend your thesis statement as your mentors try to find ways to poke holes in your argument. That's my understanding :)

[@wesboundmusic]

Wow, I think you've created an entirely new form of art with this amalgam of interviews and reflecting commentary. I truly enjoy these episodes.

[@hymnsake]

This lived up to the hype. _Unbelievably_ great conversation!

[@johnhardin6969]

The more you learn, the more you realize you don’t have the answers.

[@kevr8482]

Exactly!!!...Science keeps plugging away....Theism has a huge problem with I DONT KNOW?...Its ridiculous to claim you have answers with a foundation of knowledge that came from people who thought volcanoes and earthquakes were a punishment from God....not to mention sacrificing children in an attempt to stop natural disaters....Sorry Im not jumping on board with people who argue from ignorance...

[@boogiman14]

Kev W saying that Christianity is the Stone Age is ignorant

[@nicholaswheeler507]

@@kevr8482 Actually Christianity emerged during the early first century so pretty far off from the stone age.

[@kevr8482]

@@nicholaswheeler507 It still doesn't detract from the point that the ignorance level of humans at that time was 1000 fold....Do you remeber David Koresh from Waco? That dude convinced over 100 people that he was the 2nd coming of Jesus...OVER 100 PEOPLE believed in that man and followed him to the grave!!!...Those people had far less ignorance about the world then the people from the time of the bible....Bottom line..the gullability of humans..when Jesus was supposedly around...was off the charts...

[@gingerbill128]

​@@kevr8482 i hate when people think we are some how smarter and wiser or less gullible than our ancestors . " you are standing on the shoulder of giants and you think you are flying"

[@treasurecave431]

This is some next level discussion. 5 hours and i would not get enough

[@tedbates1236]

I like Roger Penrose. I see a ray of hope.

[@carissamcmahon3645]

God is the ray of hope 💕

[@TheKantele]

It seems a productive discussion between two different mind-sets [Penrose & Craig] evolves when their is common ground on some fundamental basis: tripartite structures of reality which was a source of awe for both. Penrose articulated 1] how the physical world and its behaviour subscribes to the rules of mathematics 2] how our mind is able engage reality 3] and how the physical world and mathematics can be directed in our mind to yield discoveries. Craig, parallel to this, identified 1] the realm of the abstract [ideas and numbers, etc. 2] the realm of the physical [which is governed by numbers] 3] the mind [ the agent of intentionality, which directs, decides and discovers]. AMAZING! It's these kinds of discussions that give dignity to the discussion and clarify elements of agreement and disagreement.

[@terrywbreedlove]

I always enjoy Mr Penrose talks.

[@mr-wx3lv]

Very enjoyable. Much prefer these conversations than the big atheist/Christian debates from say Christopher hitchens and alike..

[@HerALC99]

This was the best conversation I've ever listened. Thank to you program.

[@MrMatt-qs2ck]

This is a brilliant, honest, human conversation deriving from two brilliant minds. It's something of a miracle to see a conversation between geniuses that is so relatable.

[@bkhan19]

I am a Muslim and this was a fascinating discussion. Great kudos to the moderator!

[@jayrocky9067]

Praying for you brother.. Jesus Christ died and rose again for you.. 🙏🏽❤️😇

[@quinnculver]

Do you lead all your KZbin comments with a declaration of your religion? ;)

[@bkhan19]

@@quinnculver yes, in this context, I felt wise to mention it.

[@solomonseru9514]

I love the way they debate, one doesn't have to show aggressiveness to disagree.

[@PremierUnbelievable]

Hope you all enjoy this one! For an EXCLUSIVE additional video of Sir Roger Penrose talking to me and William Lane Craig about his work with Stephen Hawking on Big Bang cosmology sign up at www.thebigconversation.show

[@benbrown561]

The foam windscreens on the mics are SPOTLESS. Impressive.

[@Feynman235]

Great discussion. Definitely prefer this format! Would love to see more like this involving WLC!

[@HarryVerey]

This is the internet at it's best .First rate moderator and a privilege to be able to witness this conversation. We are made of stardust at the quantum level and yet are conscious therefore intuition is worth respecting.

[@ktall6749]

Yes, 40 years ago, finding this level of discussion on this subject would have been next to impossible to access or find.

[@paulfoor7388]

Justin added to some of the things Sir Penrose said that clarified the points he was trying to make and even contributed to them in a way that he appreciated and seemed pleasantly surprised at. It seemed like it made Sir Penrose realize that some Christians really know what they are talking about. Justin was beyond prepared for this conversation and showed a strong understanding of the interaction between the science and philosophy, albeit from a layman's perspective. Bravo Justin. You are an amazing fit for the position you find yourself in in life and in your career, as if there was a God who ordained it for you. Thank you. I look forward to seeing you in California next weekend.

[@PremierUnbelievable]

Paul Foor very kind words. Thanks!

[@ZbjetisGod]

Justin did an amazing job and was on the ball for the entire debate but let's not jump to Penrose realizing Christians know what they're talking about since he basically sat there the entire time saying Craig wasn't offering sensible solutions to any of the problems posed

[@timediverx]

Watching Penrose rest his head in his palm as WLC rattled on was pretty telling. He definitely wasn't impressed with WLC.

[@connormcflurry6708]

Roger is a really open minded man and when he isnt sure about something he never denies or accepts it. He will say I dont know and he is open minded. I wish every debate had this style. I will start doing it myself

[@connormcflurry6708]

@@StellaLovesMusic25 bruh. I'm not scared of your threat. And you are claiming that god exists. 1. Prove it. 2. Which one.

[@gregsmith5134]

@Connor McFlurry God as in Jesus . Reason being atheists scientists have proven the biggest miracle in the Christian Bible. Which makes the rest at least probable. I can also prove God exists but first can you prove to me that you exist ? Thank you

[@connormcflurry6708]

@@gregsmith5134 I need to exist in order to answer you. If my imaginary friend doesn't exist, he can't talk to me or do something physical. I exist. I can answer you(yes I do exist), people can touch me, smell me, look at me. BIGGEST MIRACLES IN THE BIBLE PROVEN BY ATHEIST SCIENTISTS? Do you mean adam and eve, the exodus, Noah's ark? Oh wait, science has disproved those tales. I'll keep being an atheist.

[@Noblility]

I think you might be confusing humility with being open minded. Penrose was more ready to simply throw in the towel before considering the arguments placed before him.

[@dayweed85]

@@aaronclarke7732 basically we can pick and choose and interpret things as we want. No wonder there are so many christian denominations.

[@jayfrei]

What an incredible discussion. I love WLC and agree with him for the most part, but was also very blessed with the humble attitude of Penrose. What a brilliant and humble man. Hats off to the host as well! All in all, well worth the time to listen - thank you for these.

[@queenisrael8158]

Go on KZbin and pull up video call Atheist college professor die and see hell and demons it change his life!!! True story.

[@Christina92029]

Yes! A welcome change from some of the hard core atheists who just attack and deride any religious faith!

[@mr.johncharlescharlie3502]

I am always moved by the weighty intellectual gravitas and humble personal presence of Roger Penrose. And today, I gained a new appreciation for William Craig's ability to probe with deference, dignity, and humility the mind and heart of Roger Penrose.

[@jgeorge2465]

This debate will go down as one of the best.

[@Ambassador826]

I'm an Evangelist, first time to listen to Roger. He is a fantastic human being. He is honest, and so well founded in his career and education. Awesome WLC AND RP

[@trevlac2000]

Read your comments and was intrigued to find out if Sir Roger provoked any thoughts?

[@algfayomega]

Forget about the guys in the video. The true wisdom and knowledge are to be found in the comment section. The guys with the PhDs, who have debated all over the world, with published books, articles in journals and dissertations know nothing about the topic at hand. Don’t mind the video, go straight up to the comment section and bask in the knowledge that springs from the minds of some random scholar sitting in a basement, or sipping from some soy late at a Starbucks, or the unemployed one that stumbled upon this video after watching porn. Again. Forget about the guys in the video, they know nothing! The comment section is where the true knowledge is to be found. Enjoy!

[@jojojojo5353]

@J w feeeling a bit butthurt your idiot cult is dyin are ya ? ahaahah

[@daniel1fullerton]

@J w jealous of my high school degree are you?

[@nobs4898]

Craig's degree isn't in cosmology or physics though....

[@nobs4898]

@J w Then why was Craig trying to pin philosophical questions on Penrose? The discussion was about cosmology and physics. Craig's shtick is to attack the opposite of what the person is an expert in to make them look like they lost the debate. If he debates a philosopher he diverts to science or history. If he debates a historian he diverts to philosophy and science. If he debates a scientist he uses philosophy as in this case. It's the same old shit.

[@nobs4898]

@J w Being "well read" doesn't mean you're qualified to comment. Source: The Sean Carroll debate where Craig got his ass handed to him.

[@infinitelyexhausted]

Thanks for this. Penrose seems like a real gentleman.

[@AxmedBahjad]

The first sign of a well-educated person is (that) one knows that he doesn't know much.

[@animatedsermons4448]

Craig has actually described how he literally knows nothing in past interviews. And clearly penrose admits it. Plus I think they both have PhD’s These guys are educated out the wazoo Well spoken.

[@MultiWalrus1]

@@animatedsermons4448 Yeah but only one of them pretends to have som inkling of the mind of God. Can't believe Penrose even agreed to debate tis guy.

[@animatedsermons4448]

Matthew Hynds Well either one of them is going to heaven and one to hell. Or their both dead and forgotten. Earthed way their life’s don’t matter cause the universe will eventually die as well. This is really all just a dream. So no biggy. Don’t take life too seriously we’re all dead men and meaningless.

[@CJ-sw8lc]

@matthewhynds - maybe it's a sign he should be taken more seriously! :)

[@MultiWalrus1]

C J ha ha. Yeah! 😂

[@dukeofdenver]

This was a lovely conversation, thank you all

[@misticulandrei2234]

Who else is here after Sir Roger Penrose won the Nobel prize ?

[@billjones8503]

From article dated 2020: Appears nobody yet after Penrose. He was awarded half the prize money, whilst the other 2 split the other half, so Penrose obviously was the major player: "German Reinhard Genzel, of the Max Planck Institute and University of California, Berkeley, and Andrea Ghez, at the University of California, Los Angeles, shared the other half for discovering that an invisible and extremely heavy object governs the orbits of stars at the centre of our galaxy."

[@sunknownhuman3883]

Why do you ask?

[@GamesBond.007]

Well I just debunked the famous Double Slit experiment, so I think I deserve the Nobel prize more than him. No offense grandpa.

[@alisinakarimi5608]

Me😍

[@spiralsun1]

Lol, I am but it’s a coincidence because I have been thinking about him a lot lately and speaking with Kip Thorne too about black holes etc. Because I have figured out how the universe and light works and why light has a speed limit and why we find it difficult to unify the theories. Stuff like that. It’s hard to get people to listen to me though because I left graduate school to pursue this. And everyone wants to pontificate on this topic because of the pressure created in them by the coming of this new enlightenment. It’s a threshold. It’s complicated to explain because it’s alien. But yeah. So all I am trying to say is that’s not why I am here. Roger gets a Nobel because I am thinking here. People are far too mind-separation oriented due to our evolutionary past. 🤔😂 Anyway... humor aside... ❤️❤️❤️ This video is awesome regardless and it’s irrelevant to point the interpersonal logistics of all this when you fully understand the meaning and connectedness. 🤷‍♀️

[@sethwilley9858]

what a fantastic and respectful debate. You can learn so much - regardless of the side you stand on...

[@medusaskull9625]

Great scientist is humble and honest. He is the most respected figure in the modern world but undoubtedly not just for his work alone.

[@attemm1]

Yes. Undoubtly. I'm very inspired by his great qualities.. so many beside jus intellectllual as well. He is my role model.

[@m.mulyani8611]

A great moderator; very smart and absolutely appropriate!

[@jayalfred790]

One of the best moderators in a discussion I've seen at YT...Justin

[@HarryNicNicholas]

he appears to be, but you can't always rely on appearance. he still loves his god.

[@Nibster213]

A pair of absolute gentleman and a pleasure to watch..

[@chadlawrence2240]

The brilliant conversation was only outshined by their civility. I hope the rest of us can follow suit. We live in scary times where disagreement is leading to hate crimes.

[@queenisrael8158]

Go on KZbin and pull up video call Atheist college professor die and see hell and demons it change his life!! True story.

[@jpgduff]

@@queenisrael8158 Diane, that makes no sense?

[@queenisrael8158]

@@jpgduff what you talking about?

[@hxhdfjifzirstc894]

Hate crimes are just crimes. Why should we make a special category for thought crimes? Orwellian!

[@CharlieTooHuman]

@@hxhdfjifzirstc894 Wait, what? I’m pretty sure hate crimes refer to actual physical acts against someone based on animosity towards their race, religious beliefs, etc.

[@markmooroolbark252]

Justin's facial expression throughout this discussion seems to suggest he has died and gone to heaven.

[@Shulamitefire]

Justin is a citizen of heaven and he knows it. He has tasted of the heavenly gift, the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age. Selah

[@Shulamitefire]

@C E I don't see any text in your reply. What appears are several empty boxes - unrendered graphics.

[@thehitchsman7435]

'the human mind is extremely susceptible to hallucination'.

[@bigboi1803]

Williams face suggests he's constipated

[@Shulamitefire]

@C E Mysterious to you... you attempted a reply but the graphics didn't render. Here's hoping you articulate. Kind regards

[@young_dan_kee]

Justin, you are an absolutely brilliant moderator. I love how you instantly label the arguments of your speakers. You understand what their points are and which models they are referring to and you bring them to light in the most charismatic way. Your ability to reference a seemingly infinite source of information amazes me. Also, “That sounds suspiciously like God” lol this cracked me up

[@kieronbrowne7881]

I think Justin should be an atheist.

[@young_dan_kee]

Kieron Browne Interesting. Why is that?

[@kieronbrowne7881]

Young Dan Kee He appears to think in a logical way which is uncommon for the religious. For instance Bill Craig talks in absolute riddles and I honestly have know idea what he is going on about.

[@young_dan_kee]

Kieron Browne WLC definitely isn’t the easiest man to understand but he does speak using reason and logic. And I’m not sure I agree that religious people don’t use logic and reason. I feel like this is a misconception about religious people.

[@kieronbrowne7881]

Young Dan Kee I can only speak from my experience. To me Bill Craig doesn’t seem logical to me I do not understand his explanation of why there has to be a god. I do accept that I could be wrong and that not all religious people are like him. I personally just don’t get religion and it’s explanation of the way the world and universe work. I have made a real effort to get my head round it but seems bizarre to me. Anyway if there is a god and it wants to get in touch with me I’m sure it will know where to find me. I shall await a call. Thanks

[@sophos.sophos]

I love how Sir Roger Penrose manages all the concepts in order to not get confused, but with no imposing a negationism to things he do not know, a clear open and wise being

[@jazzman1904]

It's clear, though that he has no belief in a god.

[@InShadowsLinger]

I wish believers were able to do just that instead of defending the indefensible.

[@Truthmatters-]

Sir Penrose deserves to win the Nobel Prize not only because of academic excellence but also humility in mind.

[@margaretklassen172]

Absolutely!! SO pleased he won the Nobel Prize.

[@Cecilia-ky3uw]

Humility is not a factor in nobel prizes adding it is idiotic and moves from scientific achievements to morality

[@LS-qu7yc]

This was a great conversation. I like them both for different reasons.

[@marcoantonioalcazarperedo8846]

The best video I had seen in this quarantine. Two enormous personalities, and my poor mind was blowing again and again. Thanks a lot!!

[@edge4192]

Amazing job Justin. I walked away from this conversation with questions and answers. I'll be praying for Mr. Penrose, I would love to speak with him on the other side ✝

[@SamIAm-kz4hg]

Edge419 "I'll be praying for Mr. Penrose" Meanwhile, he'll be thinking for you, since you seem to have abandoned that road. "I would love to speak with him on the other side" I'm always amazed by people who are certain of things they could never know. It's the epitome of stupid.

[@edge4192]

@@SamIAm-kz4hg I show nothing but love for the guy and your response is to attack my character and intelligence? Feel better?

[@SamIAm-kz4hg]

@@edge4192 "I show nothing but love for the guy and your response is to attack my character and intelligence?" Really? That's what you think? Come on. At least be honest about your religious bullshit. Yes, I do feel better telling the righteously stupid how arrogant they are. And I bet you don't even get it.

[@benscott1596]

Arrogant claim. You're basically saying you're correct and he is incorrect. Even though you admit he's infinitely smarter than you. Tsssk

[@edge4192]

@@benscott1596 I never claimed he was infinitely smarter than I am. Someone can be more intelligent in a field of study than someone else, it doesn't make them infinitely more smarter. I leave that level of intelligence to the one who created and designed it all. Just because I believe I'm right and he's wrong doesn't make me arrogant, what a hyperbolic claim.