What About Those Who Never Hear The Gospel? | 5 Problems For Dr. Craig

I'm joined by Dr. James Beilby, a professor of biblical and theological studies at Bethel University.
Link to Dr. Craig's video:
• The Problem of Those W...
Link to Dr. Beilby's book on Postmortem Opportunity:
www.amazon.com...

[@TheAnalyticChristian]

If you're interested in hearing more critiques of Dr. Craig's animated videos, check out my playlist below. kzbin.info/aero/PLlVH-ThCazKlbDFfL0yH4bLe2bT2jzov-

[@modernmoralist]

Great work! I love this seies.

[@geraldbritton8118]

frankly , I find the critiques to be mostly useless. The animated videos are not designed to be comprehensive -- just introduce topics and major themes for newbies . Also, I recommend you do not publish the critiques at all until and unless you have a full response from WLC. Even better, wait until you can get him online for a real-time convo. I've no doubt things would be cleared up real fast.

[@roscaris6541]

I like this guest, please have him on again :)

[@linad9377]

All will come to knowledge of Christ and believe either in this life or the next.

[@danielcartwright8868]

I just watched your interview with Swenson, and it seems to me that the circularity argument is a kind of grounding objection: The question is, 'what grounds the fact: your choice or the circumstances?' If the answer is the circumstances, then you have determinism. If the answer is your choice, then it seems there's no good explanation, or 'grounding' for how God would know that choice, because the explanation is circular.

[@TrevorJamesMusic]

Good interview, and interesting discussion! I'm not sure where I land on this issue personally, but I do wish this video touched briefly on any scriptural support for the post-mordem view. I'm also curious how proponents of the view would address how post-mordem salvation opportunity seems to square with the hiddenness of God in this life.. In other words, if someone is presented with a salvation opportunity in the afterlife, their choice is apparently made easier in that they already know a purely naturalistic/materialistic reality is off the table.

[@andrewmoon1917]

The scriptural stuff is addressed in the other video they did together, which they mention in this video. It's not that hard to find on the channel, and you can probably just google both their names and 'youtube' in the search engine to find it.

[@andrewmoon1917]

Also, your divine hiddenness question is interesting.

[@nicktheflanders]

Another banger!

[@eugenehvorostyanov2409]

Matthew 7:14 small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it. Jesus many times pointed that path to salvation is really hard and we shouldn’t (unfortunately) expect many to follow this path and finish it. In addition there’s mystic layer to it - Holy Spirit draws you in, organizing circumstances for you to come to Christ.

[@reevertoun]

Any plans on bringing any Christian philosophers to critique atheist philosophers or do Christian philosophers not do that anymore?

[@TheAnalyticChristian]

This series I did is probably what you have in mind. kzbin.info/aero/PLlVH-ThCazKlzLxRmn39RqmLzTMnbr0zm&si=8uVP0Blm25OYXJVV

[@andrewmoon1917]

Any videos by professional atheist philosophers (like Craig, but atheist) that you have in mind for Jordan to find a Christian philosopher to respond to? I know he's very open to this sort of idea!

[@TheAnalyticChristian]

@@andrewmoon1917 yep! I’m very open to this!

[@reevertoun]

@@TheAnalyticChristian That's just more videos of Christian Philosophers name checking WLC. There is certainly no shortage of Christian philosophers willing to go on youtube to name check other Christians.. No one's doubting that. I'm asking for the opposite. Are there any Christian philosophers willing to come on and do the same sort of thing in response to current atheist philosophers? Let's have some fun!

[@ericpowell8563]

The five points that he raises all seem pretty weak.

[@kevinwells7080]

An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge. Ambrose Bierce

[@robertshaw6996]

So the idea is to make stuff up to feel better then discuss it as if it's reality or that there is any reason to believe these things?

[@TheAnalyticChristian]

How charitable of you to interpret the conversation this way.

[@velkyn1]

@@TheAnalyticChristian why do you require charity for your claims?

[@andrewmoon1917]

Principle of charity is super important for intellectual dialogues and even regular conversations throughout the day (including good marriages or romantic relationships!). This is a common thing you learn in critical thinking classes. But you're right that nobody has to give charity to anyone, but the world is a lot better if we do. I hope you will consider being charitable to people as well.

[@velkyn1]

@@andrewmoon1917 No evidence for your assertion, andrew. The principleof charity in an argument is to understand the opponent's claims. It doesn't mean to blindly accept them as christians often try to demand. I know christianity quite well, having been one. I already know what the various versions claim, and how they all have no evidence to support them. To insist that i accept things I already have considered and found wanting is not part of an intellectual argument. it is a delaying tactic by a christian who has nothing to support their claims. Notably, charity to people is not part of the charity one considers in a discussion, but nice attempt to poison the well with your claim that I am not charitable to people. I have considered it and I do it. "Principle of charity is super important for intellectual dialogues and even regular conversations throughout the day (including good marriages or romantic relationships!). This is a common thing you learn in critical thinking classes. But you're right that nobody has to give charity to anyone, but the world is a lot better if we do. I hope you will consider being charitable to people as well."

[@ysf-psfx]

@@TheAnalyticChristian Here you are with that same weak response instead of any real thought and response.