William Craig - How Could God Know the Future?

[@Bassotronics]

I always say that if God is “perfect” and “all knowing” then he will know our future. Then that means judgment should not be upon us since he already knows our actions.

[@ministryofarguments3525]

But according to these theists their "perfect" and "all knowing" God been the creator of everything was responsible for creating evil Satan and didn't know what Satan was up to or was party to Satan's mayhem being the origin of evil.

[@Bassotronics]

@@ministryofarguments3525 It’s all a confusing mess in my opinion.

[@ministryofarguments3525]

@@Bassotronics It's best to be honest and say you don't know how the universe came into existence rather than to dishonestly say you do know like a theist does. After all humanity has no evidence for how the universe came into existence and it remains as a blank in our knowledge. Anyone saying that they do know (religions) are being dishonest.

[@johnfranklin192]

Language could be safely said as the greatest of human invention. Its usefulness is immense and so is its potency to delude us.

[@ayamayamblackwhite3190]

🤣 Dr. Craig talking from his arse 🤣🤣🤣

[@cinikcynic3087]

Was that about Vishnu?

[@Ultras743]

Suppose God knows the future. 1. In particular, he knows I will perform action X at time t 2. God, being omnipotent has the power to tell me I will perform action X at time t. 3. I can choose to not perform action X and instead perform action Y Contradiction So God either does not know the future, is not capable of telling me the future, or I do not have free will to perform action Y. Any thoughts?

[@gordonquimby8907]

You are free to choose to do X or Y. God knows what will happen in each case. In like manner, a parent allows the child to experience the negative outcomes of poor choices. It is the only way a child will learn. Your choice is whether you will make the right one.

[@Ultras743]

@@abelincoln8885 Maybe you're right about my conclusion being incorrect. However my argument seeks to show that not all 3 premises can be correct and I was interested in people's opinions as to which one is false/where I have used incorrect logic.

[@panoramaofprophecy9107]

​@@Ultras743 I would argue that Conclusion 3 is incorrect (based on Premise 2), and by showing that it’s wrong, we can also demonstrate that Premise 1 and 2 are incorrect as well. This makes all three premises logically impossible because of the conclusion drawn in Conclusion 3. Let me explain: Conclusion 3 seems to assume that which it sets out to prove, by suggesting that God can be "surprised" or "caught off guard" (suggested when Premise 2 and Conclusion 3 are seen sequentially). Furthermore, it assumes a logical contradiction between human free will and God's knowledge of the future. This view assumes that God’s knowledge is fixed, so if a person changes their mind, it means God would still believe they’d make their original choice and end up being wrong (from Premise 2 and Conclusion 3). Instead, an alternative idea could be that God knows everything leading up to any given action. So, even if you tried to “trick” God by doing something unexpected (action Y), God would have already factored that in and would have seen it coming. Because of this, He would not have believed that “unexpected” action Y would be your final or "real" action-He would know your final or real action well in advance. It's "unexpected" as it is suggested in Premise 3 that God didn't know that you would choose action Y and is thus "caught off guard" so to speak. Therefore, Premise 1, 2 and Conclusion 3 taken together sequentially are false because God wouldn't have known (from Premise 1) or told you (from Premise 2) that you would perform action X, but action Y instead (from Conclusion 3, if it is true). Simply put, Premise 1, 2 and thus Conclusion 3 (since it is drawn from 1 and 2) can be disproved by simply affirming that if God knew that you would do otherwise than action X, He wouldn't have told you or believed that you would do action X, but action Y instead. Thus, what we do determines what God knows in relation to us. There are some excellent books that deals with this exact issue: Theodicy of Love: Cosmic Conflict and the Problem of Evil, mainly pages 46-47 (and its corresponding footnotes). I'd also highly recommend reading chapter 2 in its entirety. Divine Attributes: Knowing the Covenantal God of Scripture, pages 126-130. The Only Wise God: The Compatibility of Divine Foreknowledge and Human Freedom.

[@tedgrant2]

How could God manage without William Craig ? Every God needs a Willy.

[@toma3447]

Craig is genius. True intellectual. Those who are confused about God are in doubt about themselves.

[@tomnanD3]

I would suggest you reconsider your definition of who qualifies as a genius.

[@Metso-ateco]

"Religion=blind faith and wishful thinking"👍

[@tomnanD3]

A man asked Einstein what the difference was between genius and stupidity. A: genius has limits.

[@Captain2Pig]

i'm looking for 'him' or any evidence for 'him', the harder you look and listen to this stuff, the further i am away from the result and i aint no fool.

[@tomjackson7755]

Craig has made a good living off of the gullible like you.

[@francisb1]

listening to people talk about god this way is its own kind of weird. It's like listening to little kids discussing mickey mouse's physics or politics with advanced vocabulary

[@TheCruiseDog]

Craig is defending his metaphysical beliefs concerning God. For all of the critics of this post, don't expect him to play by your rules. He has a different game going. He is explaining the Infinite to the finite. He is trying to show how a Being of limitless dimension in both time and space interacts with those who are bound by time and space. Science is of no use at this point to this discussion. It will not work. So, for all you are driven by empirical data, this might sound foolish, but like I said before, it is a discussion at a different level using different tools. Think of it more like the schools of philosophy or logic which have the latitude to abandon the ruler, the scale, and the clock. This is all a discussion on ideas that can’t be verified. It is not science and one should not expect it to be.

[@stephenland9361]

Craig's only talent is his ability to spout bullshit in a intellectual sounding way that ALMOST makes me want to believe it. It's the old, "Baffle them with bullshit", done with a very straight face.

[@martinharrison7536]

You got a love the word games that William Ln., Craig uses to describe his so-called theories and claims. It’s astounding the absolute detail that he gives to something that he can’t possibly know it’s true, but it’s just a theory, but talks about it like he’s explaining simple physics. People usually believe in him because he tells them what they wanna hear or it’s so complicated and antiquated and religious term analogy just sounds so intelligent that people think it must be true

[@SimonBrisbane]

So…. like any other philosopher that champions a theory. Why the surprise?

[@CesarClouds]

@Simon of Oz Philosophy is in bad shape and Craig's theological preferences are in a worse state.

[@Bill..N]

I think his theories are firmly rooted in theoretical physics . Why would you think they are not?

[@mr.silence-kf3pu]

Yes Sir/ these are the business tactics of all kinds of theologians

[@CesarClouds]

@@Bill..N Craig's theological arguments are rooted against physics.

[@CarlosElio82]

CTT usually features insightful discussions. Hearing so called experts talking about properties of entities with unknowable properties is pretty ridiculous. God likes hot ice cream made with crystals infused in unknowable tastes. And it is so by the grace of the father.

[@CarlosElio82]

@fartpoobox ohyeah Kuhn may close or open his eyes, we don't know for sure. What we know for sure is that when you want to utter a response you invoke other people as if you did not trust your own convictions to voice your own opinions. What is your evidence to say there is ignorance in my comment? Can you articulate a cogent answer without hiding behind other's trousers?

[@CarlosElio82]

Mr Fart, I feel obliged to tell you that you play a depressing dummy game. You are the dummy and Khun is the ventriloquist that speaks through you. Are you capable of speaking your own voice? I know my tact is rough, distant from gentle. But when I face lame characters, politeness disappears from my horizon.

[@Bassotronics]

Time is broken up into 2 parts. The time that we perceive as the day going by even if you’re still and also the time of which when particles go from point a to point B.

[@DreGotHandz]

exactly, time is a measurement

[@alittax]

Why can't we say that God knowing everything means that God knows everything that can be known? And since humans have free will, it's impossible to predict with complete accuracy what decision they'll make when faced with a choice. This means that even if God knows every law of the Universe as well as everything that is going on in it, that's not sufficient to predict what a person might do. Of course, we can make accurate predictions of people's actions, and God can do the exact same thing, except much more accurately, but never with 100% complete certainty. This idea isn't so radical if you think about it: we wouldn't say God can know what it feels like to be a married bachelor, because it's impossible to be a married bachelor. Or: God can't know what number is smaller than 5 but bigger than 10, because that's also a contradiction. Free actions may or may not fall into this category. The only thing God can know is what the (maybe infinite number of) futures look like, but not which one is going to be experienced by finite beings like us humans. God is just sometimes as surprised by what we're doing as we are, and his creation is full of surprises even for him. Thoughts? Thanks for reading this.

[@bigben9379]

If you believe in the Bible then God knows the future or He couldn't use prophets to make accurate predictions. Jesus told Peter that he would deny Him 3 times before it happened .

[@tylerdavis8834]

​@@bigben9379 God knew His own plans..

[@ky7114]

I agree with this view. God knows much about the future because He knows all factors that will influence it. But imagine a human making a random choice. You come to my house and I say that I have a $100 bill under one bowl and nothing under the other bowl, and if you pick the correct bowl, you can keep the $100. This may seem like a trivial thing, but whether or not you get that $100 could have a profound effect on your life. Maybe you celebrate by going out to dinner and you meet someone who offers you a job doing something different, and the course of your life changes. There are many things like this that could happen. The answer to the question of why God can predict the future in the Bible is because God can also create the future. I can tell you that you will get a text message tomorrow morning at 10 AM and I can make that happen by sending you a text message at 10 AM tomorrow. But as a human being, my ability to do that is somewhat limited because the phone may not work, I may forget, I may die between now and then, etc. God has no such limitations.

[@alittax]

​@@ky7114 Thank you for the thorough response. Yes, if God exists, he can create the future, and since he's got more power than anyone else, he can shape it to his liking. The question though is: does God in the present know what he is going to do in the future? He can predict the effects of his actions, but he may not be able to predict which actions he's going to take in the future, some of which may cancel out the effects of his prior actions. I think Frank Turek said in one of his lectures that the Bible is written from a human perspective, which can explain why God would appear to be angry or to change his mind. This also adds another layer to the question.

[@ky7114]

​​@@alittax If you posit that the future is not completely knowable, even to God, then I think you must also say that God might not always know what He is going to do in the future because He may choose to react to something a human being using his or her free will chose to do. However, this would be God's choice and God certainly could choose always to know what He will do in the future because His own actions are under His sole control. Likewise, God could have created a universe where He did know what every person would do in any given situation, thus making the future completely knowable to God, but this would make humans into nothing more than robots acting according to our programming. Life would be pointless. Instead, God willingly gave up the ability to know with certainty what will happen in the future by giving people free will. In my view, this does not contradict God's omniscience because the future is not an existent thing to be known. In fact, the future will never exist; only the present and past exist. The future exists only in the mind as a collection of thoughts and suppositions about things that may happen, and never exists in reality. When Jesus says Peter will deny Him three times, I believe what is operating there is Jesus' knowledge of Peter's mind and everyone else's mind. Which actually makes the statement much more moving and important than it would be if Jesus were simply looking into the future and saying I know this will happen because I know the future. Peter did have the ability to make this not occur, but Jesus knew the state of Peter's mind at that time and accurately predicted that he would in fact deny Him three times.

[@markfischer3626]

Oh I love this one. If God knows the future that blows free will out the window and is identical to determinism. The future of the universe unfolds in the only way possible because it must. Then the only differences between us and God is that God knows and we don't know. Also we exist for a finite time in a finite space and God doesn't. So the only remaining question is the one that can't be answered, does God exist or not? I don't believe God exists because I must. If God exists and wants me to believe it then he will reveal himself to me in a way God knows I'll be convinced because God knows what it will take. He won't send a man around wearing a dress, a funny hat carrying a book written when the earth was flat. It also means God is not omnipotent, God is impotent because if God knows the future God can't change it so it's pointless to pray because it won't change anything. Checkmate.

[@pjaworek6793]

Although someone may pedantically assert that God knows all possible futures and we and him all have free will. In our case we call it predictions, and we do it all day as a part of making free decisions. I know it's outside the video, where I think Bill just flops on conceiving his own "omniscient" God. Why does he say god doesn't see at all. That's a monolith statue then. Some recording device we can access and nothing more.

[@markfischer3626]

@P Jaworek He didn't day all possible futures, he said THE FUTURE. If different futures are possible then there are an infinite number of them. It also means we do not live in a rational universe. Since the operative principle of a rational universe is cause and effect whether we understand it or not then notions of randomness and probability have no place and our theory of quantum mechanics is fatally flawed.

[@pjaworek6793]

​@@markfischer3626 now that kind of goes over my head. Cause and effect excludes randomness? A rational universe? You mean intelligible universe? Because it could be intelligible to have effect before apparent cause to me. Nothing wrong with a universe filled with true randomness happening from no cause at all, all the time, meanwhile a certain level of determinism is to be found and we tend to focus on these patterns as if that's all there is.

[@pjaworek6793]

It doesn't make sense to begin with that God is here and now and needs to "see the future". Why exist now and not 5 minutes ago or 400 trillion years from now with full view of the entire past. What is time to a god. That's what Bill should've said but he believes in absolute time which is another subject.

[@markfischer3626]

@P Jaworek Understandimg cause and effect is the way science tries to understand the universe. This distinguishes it from other methods such as theology and philosophy. They come up with ideas that can't be tested to find out if they are valid explanations or not. Before science we had natural philosophy. Everything was made out of earth, water, fire, and air. The earth was the center of the universe and everything revolved around it. Alchemists were trying to make gold out of lead. There was practically no knowledge. Was it all worthless? Not necessarily. One area that has some real value was the use of various plant substances to treat illnesses. They are being rediscovered using scientific methods to find out what's in them and how they work. We now have the tools to do that and it's only a recent development. Science offers no absolute truths. It offers only theories that have been proven wrong and theories that haven't been proven wrong yet.

[@collieclone]

I just love how people like William Craig profess knowledge of this god they worship and how he exists outside of time and space with absolutely no evidence to support their claims. They also seem to 'know' how he perceives things - again, based on nothing but what they would like to be true.

[@Mysterium_Magnum]

It is called metaphysics. Don't expect scientific investigation into something outside of the realm of science. Because something is unable to be falsified empirically, doesn't make it true or untrue. This is why it's called Faith. I'm not religious by the way, nor am I an atheist. I'm just curious how you come to the conclusion that God's existence can be denied by science which makes absolutely no claims about God's existence. You might say that there is no need to 'conjure' up a God, but how would you explain the telos of evolution? The telos of the universe? There still needs to be an explanation of why there is something rather than nothing, which is where people make a leap of faith. So let them make that leap.

[@mesplin3]

If God knows all true propositions, then God cannot alter the truth value of these propositions. This implies that God is powerless to alter reality.

[@darioinfini]

Well maybe he knows and can set them to his liking. The way you can inspect a 1 or a 0 in a spreadsheet but also change the number if you want.

[@mesplin3]

@@darioinfini You could do that, but this also implies that God could also make a thing that exists and doesn't exist. So the rules of logic wouldn't apply to God. Edit: For clarity, if we suppose the the claim "something is or is not, but not both" is true, then God could make this claim false. If so, then logic no longer applies.

[@briendoyle4680]

@@mesplin3 so ... gods are NOT needed...

[@waldwassermann]

Close but no cigar.

[@darioinfini]

@@mesplin3 "You could do that, but this also implies that God could also make a thing that exists and doesn't exist. So the rules of logic wouldn't apply to God." They don't seem to apply to Schroedinger's cat either.

[@snappycattimesten]

As Hitchens would say, “white noise”.

[@Northwind82]

I wish it gave you the year of the interview. They look a least 10 years younger.

[@waldwassermann]

These are the forever young ones who have drunk from the fountain of youth.

[@futures2247]

intelligence can be one way to delude yourself more creatively and thoroughly.

[@mattmatt245]

If god is a creator of everything including laws of physics then of course that he knows the future perfectly. He designed the mechanism by which our mind is functioning so he knows all our future decisions and choices. So, where do believers see room for free will, I don't know.

[@bobs4429]

So many of Dr. Craig's explainations begin with "If you accept/adopt the premise/theory then ...". This makes for interesting theoretical discussions, but little more than that.

[@X11bl]

“Truth value of all proposition.”

[@kayakutah]

One model is, "God knows the future" and we don't know why or how because we don't know everything there is to know about space or time. Another model is, "there is no God".

[@aaronjennings8385]

Now is a point that exists at every point in time, yet it's existence is so brief as to be unreal.

[@dominiclarose1785]

If god knows the future, hé already knows ahead of time if one will sin or not. It removes our free will of deciding to sin or not at some future time.

[@pjaworek6793]

I agree for the most part except the more you think about it, it does get muddy. Obviously the characters in a video no longer have free will but you could assume they did while filming it. But now, what if you could peer into the past anywhere at any time? It might seem like your very observing is affecting the past and maybe it does but it's kind of baked into both timeliness already. That's my best understanding at this point of quantum entanglement. The events are predetermined but without 'hidden variables'. There's a universe full of randomness (to me this gives rise to free will) but with events that are also connected across space and time. I don't see how a god fits, but I could see future humanity or aliens having this effect, hypothetically.

[@aaronjennings8385]

Correct, free will is an illusion.

[@pjaworek6793]

​@@aaronjennings8385 without a way out, mind you

[@michaeltape8282]

@@pjaworek6793 Yeah, the TV series of the future may end up being something like watching the past using lensing tech or something. I's love to see the real Flintstones...

[@pjaworek6793]

​@@michaeltape8282 exactly right and there's nothing stopping anyone from going into the future or observing the past. For sure what is going on here with these "gods". It's just us and beings like us in the future, affecting us now.

[@chrisgriffith1573]

I hear one man talking about what HE thinks of God... just like everything else about God, it's Man's idea for what something is like, philosophizing out the "truth" When reality is, you're just TALKING about God.

[@mockupguy3577]

WLC is such an interesting person, sometimes I wonder if he shouldn’t be in an institution and sometimes he appears perfect normal.

[@JaiSanatan-s5s]

If God is really present, which I doubt, can perhaps decide and design the future. So there is no question of him/her knowing it. If this is the case, then there must be certain strict rules to decide somebody's future. These rules must have been made by and strictly followed by god. If there is no such thing as god, then? There is no question of the god knowing the future. But one question remains... How is the future decided? Does it depend on "karma"? And as some scientists postulate, everything is an illusion. Then? Why is all this discussion about deciding the future?

[@GayorgVonTrapp]

Wishy washy woo woo.

[@jhunt5578]

I don't see how Yawehs foreknowledge and power of creation can coexist with free will.

[@ioioiotu]

God can know what we will freely choose to do if he's outside time. There is no logical inconsistency here.

[@DavidTraynier]

Nonsense on stilts.

[@abelincoln8885]

Prove Nature & natural processes ... can make & operate ... the simplest physical FUNCTION 13.7 & 4 billions years ago .... or ... made by Man(Intelligence) today like a wheel, lever, wedge, spring, nut, bolt, hammer, nail, rope, frame, panel, rivet .... cup, spoon, plate, knife. Anything that is a FUNCTION ... can only be made by an Intelligence. Everything in the Universe ... is a Function ... which is why Man will always believe in "the gods" or UNNATURAL INTELLIGENCE.

[@mikel4879]

I bet that next time Robert will talk with Kip Thorne about Superman and Dracula.

[@ministryofarguments3525]

Lol. He's not as bad as that. At least he is trying to discover whether his belief in a god is justified or not and asking lots of questions of the experts. Having an interview with WLC who is not an expert does him no favours though.

[@ayamayamblackwhite3190]

Dr Craig answers paraphrase: I have no evidence for what I'm talking about so I'll just talk a lot & convince myself that I'm knowledgeable. Maybe they won't notice I have not answered the question .

[@royalusala8527]

Hallelujah! He is God Jehova.. Omniscient, Omnipotent, omnipresent God. Praise be to the almighty!

[@Metso-ateco]

Can you prove anything you just waffled?

[@JamesFodor]

"The way that God can know the future is because he has the essential property of knowing the truth value of all propositions,." This is why people hate philosophy.

[@legron121]

Yeah. He's just re-describing the thing to be explained in a philosophical way.

[@stephenzhao5809]

1:03 so if God simply exists outside this space-time manifold he can see in a metaphorical way everything that transpires in the manifold so if you adopt this view of reality as a four-dimensional space-time block foreknowledge is very very easy to explain 1:18 Bob: suppose though God is not outside of time but exists in time with us then how does he see the future? 1:26 [BTS pp says] God reveals the things of the future through a spiritual mechanism of abdication of Sovereign to lift up Himself beyond the old space-time after setting the new unit, "1", i.e. 1/ΘΠ.

[@holgerjrgensen2166]

We are All Eternal Living Beings, Life-Unit's, time and space is something as We create, in Us. (the Perspective-Principle and Life-Unit-Principle, make it seems, as living 'in time',) Forget about four-dimensionel space-time, - there is No 'space-time'. If Life did'nt have the Ability to Renew it Self, there would Never have been any Life-Experience, Development, Movement, Performance, Re-newing, or Life at all. He told that, Life (God) have No senses, but all Senses is Life's (God's) senses, Feeling, is a Eternal Ability, if there were No Feeling, there would Never have been any one feeling anything at all. (how can We experience anything, if We cant Feel) All and any kind of Senses, is different ways of Feeling, through the Perspective-Principle and the Contrast-Principle. (Life-side-/Stuff-side-Feeling/Sensing) So, the Life-Desire is the Force or Motor, the Hunger- and Satisfaction-Principles, is the Compass. The Life- and Consciousness-structure, is a Eternal World-picture, it can be seen as a Eternity-calender, in it's own dynamic order, but all the local details is impossible to predict, and some have to be invented, in new ways and forms, even the Eternal Life 'only' have it Self and Consciousness to do with, and the same Eternal Creator-principles. So, in Basic, Life Knows it's Eternal Future, but the Never ending Life-Desire and Hunger will Instinctivly drive Life in direction of New Life-Experiences, new Life-Performance, new Life-Creations. So, what is Not Experienced, can't be Known, in Basic, there is two kinds of Experience, Experience of some Eternal, and Experience of some Temporary.

[@jeromehorwitz2460]

Since William Craig's god is purely a made up character, Craig is free to make up any rules for him that he wants. Logical consistency? That's just a football to be manipulated for the convenience of Craig's sophistry.

[@michaeltape8282]

Yeah, w/o faith, it wouldn't be religion.

[@aaronjennings8385]

This question needs more than words to answer it. Time is an unanswered question, with a few good models to describe it.

[@ghaderpashayee8334]

Great argument! 🙏👏

[@briangarrett2427]

Er, so HOW does God know the truth-values?

[@brothermine2292]

The truth of a proposition about the future cannot be determined merely by inspection of the proposition, unless it's a tautology. Assuming the proposition isn't a tautology, the three ways to determine whether it's true are (1) by comparing it to one's knowledge about the future, or (2) by deducing the future given the conditions of the present plus the laws of physics, or (3) by self-fulfilling prophecies... making the proposition true or false by using power to shape the course of future events. The third approach seems the least difficult... except in cases where the calculations for the second approach are relatively simple, for example the proposition "there will be a solar eclipse tomorrow" is a simple case that doesn't require omniscience to evaluate.

[@briangarrett2427]

@@brothermine2292 Well, the third approach seems to deny us free will, so I can't see Craig going for that. Anyway I think you're agreeing with my brief reply: just saying God's knowledge is innate is not enough. We need to be told how He knows.

[@brothermine2292]

@@briangarrett2427 : Yes, I'm in agreement with your comment. But my third way doesn't deny the possibility of free will unless the god chooses to control our will, which is unnecessary to make some propositions about the future true or false. For example, a prediction of a natural disaster doesn't compel human will. However, there are other arguments against free will, because it's incompatible with the laws of physics unless consciousness is "supernatural" and choice is caused by consciousness rather than by brain activity.

[@tedgrant2]

God is timeless. For him, there is no future. If he forgives my sins, then he's already done it. If I will go to Heaven, then I am already there.

[@100woodywu]

Ok . If God can see past, present, future simultaneously then the universe is deterministic . From that viewpoint then there is a place for the practice of divination, for example astrology which was practiced in the Hellenistic period and many other periods. Or is this against Christian rules ? just saying. Mainstream religion is a set of rules that contradicts its own belief system in regards to its belief that the universe is deterministic in relation to God that’s all knowing, this is my take on this video.

[@Jinxed007]

I feel like I just watched an interview with David Lee Roth.

[@allocke9446]

First thirty seconds, ok, and then...........I agree with you. bleh.

[@jamesconner8275]

I'm surprised that RLK has given William Craig a platform to spew his theology of double speak and gobbledygook.

[@markbrown2749]

Oh brother. How is it this guy has so much knowledge of god? Peter Ustinov wrote, "What is a more irrefutable proof of madness than the inability to have a doubt?" This guy doesn't posit a possibility. He declares a fact.

[@houmm08]

That was totally embarrassing, listening to WLC twist and turn and toss a preposterous word salad.

[@joelmichaelson2133]

When there is no room for God you will find reality.

[@USS-SNAKE-ISLAND]

No one should give Craig any air time at all. He's allergic to the truth.

[@WISE1]

uss snake island - Yes allergic to your truth.. or rather vice-versa. What is truth?

[@tomnanD3]

​@@WISE1 You certainly won't find any truth in religion.

[@uthman2281]

​@@tomnanD3 What is Truth?

[@kipponi]

​@@uthman2281Physics Rules? Religion is belief non physical thing.

[@rustyspottedcat8885]

Seeing the future ... about seeing the future in the future ... about everything else except itself.

[@yinooyang7757]

Must it not be endlessly boring for God to know the future for all eternity? Life strives to create and experience itself as diverse as possible. Don't matter if as matter. Don't mind if as mind.

[@michaeltape8282]

If the ability to see the past and future existed, the ability to see it all like a deck of cards would not necessarily be limited to use by a god, I would think.

[@regstoy]

In today's episode of "things we can make christians fall for" Mr craig dangles the shiny keys of gammatical tenses, to prove god tomorrow 🤪

[@KM-leons]

"gammatical tenses", "Mr craig dangles the shiny keys", "to prove god tommorrow",.. Learn to write some good English.

[@claudiozanella256]

I don't agree, if God can know what you will do independently of your actual actions, this means you don't have any free will. His knowledge must be dependent on your actions, on your actual choices.The only solution is that He gets his knowledge from a view into his future: you give God - who is in the past relative to you - that information by means of your actual actions.

[@AtheistCook]

I am very surprised that Craig seems to know his god very well without ever seeing him

[@waldwassermann]

There is only God and it is "seeing" not "seening".

[@AtheistCook]

​@@waldwassermannwho is that god? Jesus?

[@chyfields]

If you believe in cause and effect and you believe that every action (cause) has an equal and opposite reaction (effect), then predicting the future becomes clearer. Chess Grandmasters think several moves ahead of the board.

[@koala83r72]

So basically God can answer both yes and no, true or false at the same time about the future therefore he knows the future. Insert any physical theory and pervert it to fit that foregone conclusion and that's what I am getting from this gentleman. A appreciate Rob exploring and being receptive to a variety of truths in any case. That said this one was a bit difficult to listen to.

[@TheUltimateSeeds]

Craig stated that God has no way of sensing anything, at least not in the same way that we humans sense things (as in God has no "sense organs"). However, how does that square with the Biblical assertion that God created us *"in his image"* - an image that comes with a full array of senses? Craig needs to be more mindful of how his speculative suggestions about God's ontology contradict the doctrines of the religion he tries to defend.

[@ministryofarguments3525]

And then he needs to be honest about the fact that no-one has any evidence for how the universe came into existence or from what, it's a blank as far as humanity is concerned. WLC is a dishonest broker without a shred of evidence.

[@ministryofarguments3525]

@SamoaVsEverybody814 Now all you have to do is show evidence for a creator and you cannot do that because all you have is a blank to work from. Perhaps it came from a dimension of virtual particles and naturally formed?

[@ministryofarguments3525]

@@abelincoln8885 But it's not a book of facts about the universe. It's a book of theological nonsense because no-one has any evidence, it's only a belief and not fact or reality.

[@CesurYapayDünya]

Time is relative even in this universe that we live in. God knows how God time works. Maybe our past 13 billion years, our present and our 100 trillion years in future are his present at any given God time.

[@Radioposting]

Welcome to William Craig's world of word salad.

[@CesarClouds]

I'm still waiting for Craig to demonstrate the supernatural.

[@ThatisnotHair]

He is too lazy for that

[@georgeangles6542]

It's simple. People tell you your brain makes your next move before you realize it. God wouldn't need to know the future to know the future. The question doesn't really matter tbh

[@vinp6093]

My two cents: HOW DO YOU KNOW "GOD" IS A "HE"? WHAT IF "YOU ARE THE UNIVERSE?" "WHAT IF YOU ARE THE GOD? THE FOLLOWING IS PARAPHRASED, NIELS BOHR TO ALBERT EINSTEIN," ALBERT, STOP TELLING GOD WHAT TO DO?" WHEN EINSTEIN SAID, "GOD DOES NOT PLAY DICE WITH THE UNIVERSE? CREATION HYMNS OF RIG VEDA: "BUT GODS CAME AFTER THE CREATION, THEN WHO CREATED THE CREATION? PERHAPS GOD CREATED THE CREATION AND ENTERED IN TO IT, OR PERHAPS NOT! WHAT IMPULSE STIRRED, WHAT MOVED WE KNOW NOT But here is the clincher, two mortals talking about an OmnIscient entity and naming it eastern or western or oriental or occidental and so on, is limiting the ability and capacity of the very omniscient entity by narrowing its scope! IN SHORT, The ability of individual or collective thiking or thouhgt to DECEIVE ITS OWNSELF is astounding! IT JUST CLOSES INDIVIDUAL/GROUP MIND TO FURTHER OBSERVATION ,DISCOVERY or DIRECT PERCEPTION. NOT KNOWING IS GOOD! IT KEEPS THE BRAIN/MIND OPEN TO DISCOVERY OR INNOVATION OR" DIRECT PERCEPTION". THIS SEEMS TO BE A PREREQUISITE FOR NEUROPLASTICITY. OTHER WISE DOOR OF PERCEPTION OR OBSERVATION ARE CLOSED. DE NOVO, STARTING FROM SCRATCH, ZILCH, ZERO, NADA REQUIRES "EMPTYING OF THE MIND'" OF ALL KNOWN PREDICATES, PRESUMPTIONS, ASSUMPTIONS OF ACCUMULATED THOUGHT. BUT DE NOVO DIRECT PERCEPTION PUTS THE BURDEN OF PROOF ON THE Individual and some how finding the language that most peers will understand. Chances of a genius being labeled "psychotic" "megalomaniac" or "lunatic" are much higher in the world where humans start assigning properties to supposedly omniscient entity , rather than acknowledging their own pre- conditining or insecurity. Mind and/ or process of thinking of brain are dependent on laws and rate of interactions interactions matter but matter that is always in motion.

[@joelmichaelson2133]

The ultimate truth must be the future is not man made.

[@pjaworek6793]

Robert nailed it at 3:40. IMO god can either see all times or not. Whatever Bill is saying up to here sounds like word salad.

[@michaeltape8282]

I do believe I got what WLC was saying, but I see no reason if such an ability existed for it's use to be limited to one single, specific, devine entity. No justification that I can see.

[@SmithsMobile]

So basically when discussing God you can just make any old crap up.

[@richmonddoku]

God knows the future by weighing the value of a contradictory proposition and determine the truth value (or that which will happen). Do I capture it well

[@brucethegoose691]

God is a goose.

[@RickinHKG]

I guess it is fair and balanced to interview WLG, ... but ................... really? What nonsense! And he had the gall to accuse RLK of presupposition.

[@markgarrett4541]

Time is a dimension that we "perceive " In order to facilitate the process of using a human mind. I don't know if it's "real" because the mind is constrained by this particular framework.

[@MrSarajevofresh]

The first model is the only correct one. The basic property of God is the fact that he is the creator of time and space (otherwise he cannot be God). => If he is the creator of time and space, logic dictates that he must be outside of that time and space.=> By being outside that time and space, God has a "bird's eye" view of space and time, thus seeing OUR (I emphasize: OUR), past, present and future.

[@ministryofarguments3525]

The fact that humanity has no evidence for how the universe came to be proves that theism is a dishonest assertion. The god is an unfalsifiable claim and yet they say they have attributes for said god, which means that they've created the god to fit the big lie.

[@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC]

@@ministryofarguments3525 *"The fact that humanity has no evidence for how the universe came to be proves that theism is a dishonest assertion. "* ... How does science "not knowing" the origin of the universe prove theism is a dishonest assertion? Wouldn't science "knowing" the origin of the universe prove theism is a dishonest assertion?

[@ministryofarguments3525]

@@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC No-one has any evidence for how the universe came to be or what it was formed from, it's a total blank as far as humanity is concerned. So anyone that says they know how and what are being totally dishonest and that's what religions are all about. Edit: How did the universe come into existence? "I don't know" is the honest position. "I do know" is the dishonest position. Guess which one theism takes as the position.

[@joegibbskins]

It feels like given what we know about our subjective experience of time being wrong and the universe more like being completely determined at the macro and time neutral, being able to see the “future” is one of the most easily believable claims about any being outside spacetime including god

[@kos-mos1127]

There is no such thing as outside of spacetime. SpaceTime is not even a real entity.

[@supamatta9207]

The bible is about a dispute, and a alternative reality. What happens when we differ from gods view all the unuvers

[@wberckmann]

William Craig is incredibly perceptive and is way ahead of most of the respondents here. So many weak minds, propagandized minds, simple minds are responding from ignorance.

[@malatwork3890]

Yeah sure that's the reason, hopefully you can convince yourself because the rest of us live in the 21st century and we're over this sophistry.

[@syedaleemuddin6804]

Hey Bobby we are constantly reminded in Islam to avoid thinking about how God is, because this can mislead you. But if you say I am PhD in science so I have the right to think whatever I like then it's upto you.

[@MyJam]

God could foresee many worlds where people would choose to obey him and live in paradise and many worlds where people would choose to disobey him and be tormented forever… and he went with this world apparently. Seems legit

[@Bill..N]

As Robert pointed out such discussions are certainly philosophical meanderings COMPLETELY outside the perspective of science.. There is no way to bridge the two categories of science and superstitious thinking.. Any attempts to do so are disingenuous.. One opinion.

[@dombutland]

Further From Truth

[@mikmop]

The idea that there are multiple realities where any outcome is possible, is kind of Hugh Everett's idea of the many world's interpretation of quantum mechanics. So if God can see all future realities and is hoping you will avoid the sinful version and take only the righteous path, then it's still only one of the many worlds in existence and it leaves all the other universes intact. Maybe we could go with the Copenhagen interpretation where after smoking a joint, you exist in a superposition of both sinful and righteous states. Though if it's crappy weed, it may introduce decoherence into the system. And then Maxwell's demon will violate your second law of thermodynamics.

[@deepashtray5605]

That's what acid is for.

[@TKBreaksTheRules]

craig is challenging both theologians and non theologians and thats why the comments section is losing their minds. i personally think he has some really smart ideas, might not be accurate but at least he's using his brain. who is to say hes wrong? who is to say he is right? no one really knows anything its all just speculation to try and understand an infinite mind.

[@joelmichaelson2133]

There are many dimensions beyond our perceived four. Maybe God is an influence amongst the myriad of dimensions.

[@michaeltape8282]

Yeah, but I think that's a big maybe just given the concept of "God". I has been theorized that perhaps the gravitational force crosses over dimensions.

[@casuallearning5020]

WLC got it right the first time in discussing the block universe.

[@HakWilliams]

God invented quantum randomness so that he wouldn't know the end of the story.

[@judahbateman9849]

How long ago was this clip recorded? WLC looks so much younger here 😂

[@michaeltape8282]

Maybe he got blessed or something...

[@David.C.Velasquez]

I postulate, that the conceptual being we are referring to as god, is the eternally infinite omniverse itself... everything and nothing, in superposition.

[@ministryofarguments3525]

What about all the virtual particles popping in and out of existence, the vacuum of spacetime? Do you think they might be responsible instead of your being thingy?

[@David.C.Velasquez]

@@ministryofarguments3525 Firstly, thanks for the reply. My question to you is responsible for what? This "being thingy" is literally infinity, the block multiverse, including any particles, virtual or real. Real, meaning they can be interacted with, in the dimensional confines of our universe. Virtual particles, only appear that way from our limited perspective.

[@ministryofarguments3525]

@@David.C.Velasquez I know the idea or notion of a multiverse, but I don't have any evidence as proof. I'm not going to believe in, I require proof for firm foundation.

[@David.C.Velasquez]

@@ministryofarguments3525 The single photon double slit experiment is proof. Any contrived interpretation of quantum mechanics, including Copenhagen, Bohmian pilot wave, etc. only serve to ignore what Hugh Everett hypothesized. I believe David Deutsch can explain it better than I can in a comment section. If you require concrete proof, then how can you believe in anything? In my short lifetime, the fundamentals of accepted reality have been redefined several times. What proof of anything are you operating with right now? There are known knowns, which are dwarfed by known unknowns, but unknown unknowns may well be infinite.

[@David.C.Velasquez]

@@ministryofarguments3525 Has the ministry run out of arguments?

[@emmanuelmalonjao595]

Kindly ask some Islam scholars, as one pillar of the Islamic Faith is Destiny. You will be amazed how little we know about the topic...

[@petrhavlin3135]

I don't know if there is any sort of god but I certainly know this dude has no idea about it.

[@malatwork3890]

You'd first have to show that a god exist. It's yet to be done. Therefore it's futile to ask questions about it.

[@KienNguyen-sz5bx]

There's a possibility that a supreme being, not necessary the Christian God, created everything. These God interviews are all about figuring out what that God is like and what he could do if he does exist. To me, it's interesting to think about.

[@malatwork3890]

@@KienNguyen-sz5bx There's also a possibility that pixies farted the universe into existence five minutes ago but we don't entertain such ideas as like the god hypothesis there is insufficient evidence to conclude it to be the case.

[@Mysterium_Magnum]

@@malatwork3890 Scientism is the belief that the scientific method is the only reliable way to acquire knowledge about the world. However, this belief is self-defeating because it cannot be proven by the scientific method itself. Therefore, scientism is an irrational and limited view of the world that fails to account for other forms of knowledge and human experiences. We use the scientific method because it is successful at predicting the behaviours of things in the universe. It says nothing about the cause of those behaviours. I agree that we don't need to entertain those ideas if we are trying to predict things inside the universe, but religion in this regard is speculating something outside of the universe being the cause, which doesn't take away from anything in science. The two can mutually exist.

[@lakevacm]

So, God has no new experiences? That’s sad. How can he receive stimulation if He already knows what people are going to do? Also, does this theological theory place Him at the scene of every crime? Consider this: God knows what He wants, but being endowed with limited freewill, human beings decide when they will always go with the positive flow, and find out how good is goodness. In other words, God made the human conscience as a closer agency to us than even is His own conscience which stands in relationship to our conscience as the subject partner to the object partner. This way He can receive stimulation from a true object. God doesn’t need to be pumped up by human theologians saying He is omniscient. First of all, God is not a mind, He is a spirit. Limited freewill has the connotation that you will ultimately have to turn around from the repository in the spirit world which sadly came into being through man not trusting God during man’s growing period prior to marriage, if in the event that that is where you end up because of living to one degree of selfishness or another. God will simply wait until you are tired of being stubborn. Our freewill doesn’t have the ability to override God’s eternal desire for relationship. Also, God uses the conjunction “If” by the way, which is overlooked by people who think, goodness is adjudicated by the presence of evil.

[@RobertShaw-z7b]

So God knew when he created Lucifer he would become the devil. God knew when he put the tree of knowledge of good and evil Adam and Eve would eat from the tree and bring sin into the world.

[@ecyranot]

This guy has quite an imagination. He should write fiction. Oh, wait, he already is.

[@abelincoln8885]

C'mon. Provide your evidence that nature & natural processes ... can make & operate the simplest physical Function 13.7 or 4 billion years ago ... or ... the simplest Function made by Man (Intelligence) today like a lever,, wedge, rope, nut, bolt, nail, hammer, frame, panel ... plate, cup, spoon, knife, fork, spoon. Anything that is a FUNCTION ... can only be made by an Intelligence ... because all Functions possess INFORMATION to exist & to function. All Systems ... are functions ... with purpose, form, properties, processes & design .. which are INFORMATION. Everything in the Universe is clearly ... a FUNCTION ... which is why Man ( an Intelligence) will always believe in an UNNATURAL Intelligence (the gods) made the Universe & Life. All Facts about Functions, information & an Intelligence. And the Universe is an Isolated Thermodynamic System(function) ... with space, TIME, Laws of Nature, matter & energy ... and increasing entropy. All Thermodynamic Systems(Functions) .... originate from the SURROUNDING System .. which must provide the space, TIME, Laws of Nature, matter, energy ... & .. Intelligence to exist & to function. The SURROUND System ... of the Universe that has TIME & Natural Laws ... must be UNNATURAL, infinite & TIMELESS ... otherwise it would be a Natural System which must originate from the surrounding System. The Laws of Nature( eg Thermodynamic Systems) ... proves .. there is an UNNATURAL timeless & infinite System ... with an UNNATURAL intelligence ... with a Mind. The Mind of an Intelligence ... must be Unnatural (soul/spirti). And Man is a Natural Intelligence with a Mind ... made by ... an Unnatural Intelligence with a Mind. So the Mind of Man ... is natural (body) & unnatural (soul). Science proves God created Man in His likeness ... with a body & soul.

[@Mykola9]

What is deceiver! In various debates Craig has made it clear that he believes in the A-theory of time. According to this theory, the present exists, but the past and future do not. Here is explains God's ability to know the future by using the B-theory of time (that the flow of time is only a subjective illusion of human consciousness, that the past, present, and future are equally real) which he does not believe in. Isn't it funny that he uses what ever explanation supports his arguments, whether he believes in the explanations or not.

[@MagnusGoGo]

lmao, did you watch the video? He says IF you're committed to B-theory, it's easy to explain how God could know the future. But otherwise, he gave the conceptualist knowledge model for God's foreknowledge, which Craig's view given A-theory.

[@pjaworek6793]

Exactly. An absolute 'now' time for every place in the universe. The one that says that some explanations are too intellectually costly, Bill adds an unnecessary absolute time based on no reference point on top of our everyday relative space and time, the only kind we can see and measure.

[@diosrelish6924]

Although i speak little english but i feel comfortable to say that the man ( Griage ) is talking bullshit .

[@Kenneth-ts7bp]

God knew all of the comments in this thread from the foundation of the world.

[@SurajAdhikari]

Now we understand space time, that give openings to these fiction writers on what God is, based on those established understanding of space time. Main question is how do you validate that God is beyond space time. It could as well be a devil if he knows innately all these things, creating all this to punish all the sick people and the animals in husbandry. Realistically speaking, this is just a fiction, everyone will have their own fiction to convince some of these 'god fearing' people.

[@eksffa]

It’s not true that it seems impossible to most humans. It seems impracticable for most of us. If we could know the absolute sum of all stories (Feynman) we were able to know all possible outcomes - foreknowledge. If we wanted to interfere it could be done by directly interfering into one or the other collapse of the function. Providence. Middle knowledge answers it all in such a way it is completely consistent to what we already know of physics. What we don’t know and maybe could not know in a thousand lifetimes is how to instrumentally make it practicable.

[@AtheistCook]

This is what happens when one mixes theory of time with any given mythical being

[@UncleKennysPlace]

No proof of God... Indeed, no evidence at all

[@waldwassermann]

Future denotes time and time is relative. Theologically speaking I am as such not opposed to the idea that God is relative, or, that the purpose of God i.e. Relativity is Love.

[@arawiri]

It will be something like try to guess what will happen in the past.

[@arawiri]

We are already past that and 2 light years away

[@rickwyant]

The Further from Truth channel.