Download FREE Cheat Sheet “The 4-Point Case For Christianity” 👉📱https://cutt.ly/ZYMC4nl
@paulhudson4254 Says:
Being an expert is easy, when nobody really knows! 🌺✝️🌺
@TheBocceCrew Says:
Gravity has always been just theory.
@JamesRichardWiley Says:
Frank and Bill are not Cosmologists. They are god believers. And not just any god.
@mickqQ Says:
There are no real Gods
Only people that believe that Gods are real
Religions are the things people believe about non existent Gods
@princybella5386 Says:
Gravity explains the motion of the planets,but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion Sir Issac Newton.
@ganymedkallisto5561 Says:
„It doesn‘t provide any sort of explenation as to why“ => therefore GOD must have done it?
Strange logic!
@The-F.R.E.E.-J. Says:
It's interesting how the same people whose best argument is, "where did God come from?", will accept things like: _gravity created the universe,_ or the singularity itself (which presumes something existed before everything existed.) Those who believe that time, space & matter came from a timeless, spaceless, immaterial being are the only ones with a reasonable argument for how everything came to be.
@mball5 Says:
Classic example of apologists misrepresenting some one else’s argument and talking about shot they don’t understand. Also the title of this video is so funny. I can’t wait for the follow up where Craig weighs in on the flawed logic of brain surgery
@binhanh296 Says:
Guess Hawking was so angry with God for his disabilities so he desperately tried to remove God out of the picture, to the point he could say nonsensical thing. Anyone who want to oppose this, please show proof that his claim "Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can create itself from nothing". This is science we're talking about, and science is based on solid proofs, so, please show proof, any of proof.
@bjrn1mdsn2 Says:
Frank Turek, maybe i´m not right but as far as I can see is that this is one of your newest video´s, so I hope You read this. :)
My point is that ... I have been told by my Father that::: "There need to be energy, to create energy". I don´t if it´s the same but there´s a quote that says "Pressure breeds counterpressure". A thought along the way :)
@Mikkall Says:
This has been bugging me for weeks. William Lane Craig looks a lot like David Lee Roth.
@daniellevy2272 Says:
EXACTLY. It's not just that G-D is the best explenation for the beginning pf the universe, it's that He provides the *only logical explenation under the physicial and mathematical world*
It's not just that He provides the best explenation, it's that it is simply *impossible*, both logically and physically, to have any other explenation.
@luish1498 Says:
Are they nominated for the next Nobel Prize? I don't think so
LOL
@Matthew_Holton Says:
An interesting video. Two people (Turek and Craig) who between them no scientific qualifications, credibility or understanding (which is obvious from the first things they say), take on someone - Hawking, whose understanding of reality is totally beyond them. Its like watching two children who have just learned to read criticising Shakespeare.
@logicalatheist1065 Says:
Amazing scientist or preacher without an entry level scientific education, hmmmm difficult choice
@charlesbadrock Says:
Hi Frank how's the rackets going? hope your pulling in good dough as you take your act on the road as always Frank Mythology is very powerful in the human psyche
@FeetMusical Says:
When I first heard Hawking describe gravity as the source for the big bang, I about fell out of my chair. Total and complete nonsense. It is clear that he saw his end coming and was desperate to disprove the existence of God. The fundamentals of the pre-bang universe is presumed to be pure energy - which has a very weak force of gravity present, if any at all. How then was that weak, ineffectual, force able to drive the presumed big bang and the establishment of all laws of physics as we know them? And accomplish that across the entire universe? Unfortunately for Hwaking, at this point, he knows the entire truth that he resisted all his life and can look forward to the gnashing of his teeth - forever.
@SemajTawrodi Says:
You mean absurdcion. 😅
@BeTruthful123 Says:
Muslims Love Jesus
Jesus is a figure who is loved and revered by billions of people the world over, yet there is much confusion surrounding the status of this colossal personality. Muslims and Christians both hold Jesus in high regard but view him in very different ways. This pamphlet aims to clarify the issues surrounding Jesus: Was Jesus God, or was he sent by God? Who was the real historical Jesus?
"Jesus as God"
Some Christians claim that "Jesus is God" or part of a trinity - that he is the incarnation of God on earth, and that God took on a human form. However, according to the Bible, Jesus was born, ate, slept, prayed and had limited knowledge – all attributes not befitting God. God has attributes of perfection whereas Man is the opposite. How can anything be two complete opposites simultaneously?
Islam teaches that God is always perfect. To believe that God became a man is to claim that God is or was (at some point in time), imperfect. A Christian must ask him/herself, does the idea of a god who was once a weak helpless child, one who could not survive without food, drink or sleep, be the same Almighty God described in the Old Testament? Surely not.
One may ask, "If God can do anything, why can't he become a man?" By definition, God does not do ungodly acts. God does not do anything that would make Him, something other than God. If God became man and took on human attributes, he would, necessarily, no longer be God.
Some ambiguous verses of the Bible can be applied erroneously to show that Jesus is in some way divine. But if we look at the clear direct verses of the Bible, we see again and again that Jesus is being referred to as an extraordinary human being and nothing more. The Bible contains many verses in which Jesus speaks and behaves as if God is a separate being to himself. For example:
Jesus "fell on his face and prayed." (Matthew 26:39) If Jesus was God, then would a God fall on his face and pray? And who would he be praying to?
The Bible calls Jesus a Prophet (Matthew 21:10-11), so how could Jesus be God and be God's Prophet at the same time?
Jesus said, "I am going to the Father, because the Father is greater than me." (John 14:28)
Jesus said "I ascend unto my Father, and your Father, and to my God, and your God." (John 20:17) If Jesus was God, then why would he say, "to my God, and your God," and who was he ascending to?
If Jesus was God, he would have clearly told people to worship him, and there would be clear verses in the Bible stating this; yet he did the opposite and disapproved anyone worshipping him: "And in vain they worship me." Matt 15:9
"Son of God"
Some Christians claim that Jesus is the Son of God. What does this actually mean? Surely God is far removed from having a physical and literal son. Humans have human children. Cats have kittens. What does it mean for God to have a child?
Rather than being taken literally, we find the term "Son of God" is symbolically used in the earliest biblical languages for a "righteous person", and has been used for David, Solomon and Israel - not exclusively for Jesus: "...Israel is my firstborn son," (Exodus 4:22). In fact, anyone who is righteous is referred to as God's 'son' : "All who are led by God's Spirit are God's sons and daughters." (Romans 8:14)"It is not befitting to (the majesty of) Allah that He should beget a son. He is Perfect and Flawless! When He determines a matter, He only says to it, 'Be' and it is."Quran 19:35
"Father and Lord"
In the same way, when the word 'Father' is used to refer to God it shouldn't be taken literally. Instead, it's a way of saying God is the creator, sustainer and supreme master of all. There are many verses for us to understand this symbolic meaning of the word 'Father', for example: "One God and Father of all." (Ephesians 4:6)
Also, Jesus was sometimes called 'Lord' by the disciples. This term is used in the original languages of the Bible, for God as well as for people who are held in high esteem. For example, in the Greek New Testament, the term kyrios is used for both 'Lord' as well as to name the owner of the vineyard (Matthew 20:8), and the master who beat the disobedient servant (Luke 20.42-47).
In other parts of the Bible, Jesus is even called a 'servant' of God by the disciples: "The God of our fathers, has glorified his servant Jesus." (Acts 3:13) This clearly shows that when 'Lord' is used to refer to Jesus, it is a title of respect, not of divinity.
Attempts are made to explain the complexity of the above issues of the nature of God and the nature of Jesus, which can be quite confusing or unsatisfying. However, the key point to ponder is: Why would God make it so hard to understand? How do these complicated teachings compare with the simple, clear and pure teachings of the concept of God in Islam?
Jesus: The Prophet
In Judaism, Jesus (peace be upon him) is denied as the Messiah. This is in stark contrast to Christianity where he is worshipped as a deity, or the son of God. Islam takes the middle ground and acknowledges Jesus as an honourable Prophet and Messenger of God, as well as the Messiah, but Muslims do not worship him - as worship is for God alone who created Jesus and everything that exists.
"(Jesus) said, 'Indeed, I am the slave of Allah (God). He has given me the Scripture and made me a Prophet.'"Quran 19:30
Miraculous Birth
According to the Quran, the Angel Gabriel was sent to Mary, the noble virgin, in the form of a man, informing her of a child who was to be born miraculously without a father.
"He (Angel Gabriel) said, 'I am only a messenger of your Lord to announce to you the gift of a righteous son.' She said, 'How shall I have a son, seeing that no man has touched me, and I am not unchaste?' He said, 'Thus (it will be). Your Lord says, "It is easy for Me, and We will make him a sign to the people and a mercy from Us. And it is a matter already decreed." "Quran 19:19-21Some claim that his miraculous birth is evidence of Jesus' divinity. However, Jesus was not the first to come into existence without a father, as Prophet Adam before him had neither a father nor mother. God says:
"The likeness of Jesus before God is as that of Adam; He created him (Adam) from clay, then said to him: 'Be', and he was. This is the truth from your Lord, so be not of the disputers."Quran 3:59-60 If Jesus is worshipped due to having no father, then surely Adam is more deserving of worship since he was created without either parent.
Miracles of Jesus
Jesus was miraculously conceived with no father and also performed great miracles by the will and permission of God. He spoke as a baby in the cradle to defend his mother against the people who accused her of fornication. The Quran also states that Jesus gave life to the dead, cured the leper and the blind - all by the will of God.
The fact that Jesus performed miracles does not mean that he was anything more than a humble servant of God. In fact, many Messengers performed miracles, including Noah, Moses and Muhammad (may peace be upon them all) and these miracles only took place by the permission of God, so as to demonstrate the authenticity of the Messenger.
Message of Jesus
The Prophets of the Old Testament such as Abraham, Noah and Jonah never preached that God is part of a Trinity, and did not believe in Jesus as their saviour. Their message was simple: there is one God and He alone deserves your worship. It is not logical for God to send Prophets for thousands of years with the same essential message, only to suddenly change it, claim that He is now a part of a trinity, and to stipulate the belief in the divinity of Jesus to be saved.
The truth is, Jesus preached the same message as all the Prophets in the Old Testament. There is a passage in the Bible that really emphasises this core message. A man came to Jesus and asked, "Which is the first commandment of all?" Jesus answered, "The first of all the commandments is, 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one.' "(Mark 12:28-29) So, the greatest commandment, the most important belief according to Jesus, is that God is one. If Jesus was God he would have said, 'I am God, worship me.' Instead, he merely repeated a verse from the Old Testament confirming that God is One.
This aligns with the mission of Jesus, as taught in Islam, where Jesus was sent to the Children of Israel to confirm the message of the past Prophets – to believe in the One True God.
"And when Jesus brought clear proofs, he said, '… Indeed, God - He is my Lord and your Lord. So worship Him alone. This is the only Straight Path.' "Quran 43:63-64 As an honourable obedient Messenger of God, Jesus submitted willingly to God's commands. As such, he was a "Muslim" – which refers to anyone that submits to the will and commandments of God.
Jesus in Islam
Jesus was as an honourable Prophet sent by God to call to the worship of God alone. This is evident in the Bible and confirmed by the Quran. The Islamic belief about Jesus explains who the real Jesus was, whilst maintaining the pure belief about God and His complete Greatness, Uniqueness and Perfection.
Islam is not just another religion. It is the same message preached by Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad.
Islam means 'submission to God' and is a natural and complete way of life. Islam teaches that God is the All-Just and All-Merciful and does not need to sacrifice himself to forgive sins nor is anyone "born into sin". God judges everyone based on their own deeds and everyone is accountable for their own actions.
Islam teaches us to love and respect all the Prophets of God, but loving and respecting them does not mean worshipping them because worship is due only to God. Acknowledging Jesus as a Prophet of God and becoming a Muslim does not mean changing or losing your Christian identity. It is about going back to the original and pure teachings of Jesus.
@The_Somewhere_Monarch Says:
Commenting to improve the YouTube algorithm.
@blank557 Says:
Hawking's personal life explains his antagonistic attitude with God. He dumped his long-suffering and faithful wife who stood by him thick and thin in his years prior to becoming famous, and kids, for a nurse he met in a hospital during a stay. He joke about a colleague who he didn't bring him a Playboy magazine. Later, he went to a strip club and had several women lap dance on his body, and bragged about it. While one can predicate his struggles with his disability, but Hawkings used it as a "get out of moral judgement" card to excuse his bad behavior, as well as as his scientific credentials. Helen Keller did the same, promoting with a published article for the euthanasia of children born with birth defects run by a board of doctors. The irony is unbelievable, but there it is. Don't let people play on your sympathy just becasue they have physical handicaps, to get off the hook for bad actions and ideas.
@maylingng4107 Says:
*Destroying the First Cause Argument*
The most prominent form of the argument, as defended by William Lane Craig, states the Kalam cosmological argument as the following syllogism: Everything that begins to exist has a cause. The universe began to exist. Therefore, the universe has a cause for its existence.
“Craig, having decided that the universe does have a cause, then says ‘The cause of the universe has to be a logically necessary being, by which he means a being that had to exist, such that it involves a contradiction if it did not exist. But this means that to say ‘God does not exist’ involves a logical contradiction. But how can there be such a ‘necessary’ being? Who ordered that? (A question asked by a nuclear physicist upon the discovery of an unexpected new particle). This argument was invented by archbishop Anselm in 1077, called the ‘ontological argument’.” (From “William Lane Craig’s Eight Reasons for God” by Conway Hall, 30th March 2015)
It is child’s play to destroy this fallacious argument. Anyone with a basic education is physics knows that there are subatomic particles pop into existence all the time without any cause. In quantum field theory, particle-antiparticle pairs continuously pop in and out of existence from vacuum. These particles have a very short lifetime, at the scale of 10^-22 seconds. In Schwinger's theory, if you apply a massive enough electrical field to a region of space that is completely empty, that space's quantum field will seize some of this electrical energy and create particle-antiparticle pairs from nothingness. Also, photons—packets of light—can pop in and out of a vacuum.
Aspects of quantum theory can and have been tested in the laboratory, although much mystery remains to be discovered, still. Yet we can compare our knowledge thus far on the topic and contrast it with Craig’s abstract “hocus-pocus” for which he (and no one else) can provide any evidence, and just shake our collective heads at the ridiculous attempts by Craig to substitute the irrational, fictitious claims of the bible for science.
@nicholasemond1388 Says:
And what evidence is there that the universe was created by a being? Who/what created that being? What about the space it occupied before creation?
@CaptainFantastic222 Says:
Hawkings scientific theories are not “Philosophical” enough for Craig….
Science doesn’t concern itself with the question “why?” Why is irrelevant. Science asks and answers the question “how?”
Craig displays his lack of scientific knowledge when he takes issue with the fundamental assumption of which all science is based on, the physical laws of the universe that we can observe and measure are assumed to remain constant throughout the entire universe.
@XDRONIN Says:
*_WHY?_*_ That came into being?_
Answer - Is there any known reason as to *Why...* the Universe shouldn't have come into being? The problem with the question the so-called Dr. Graig is asking is that presumes that the normal state of reality should be None-Existence, Absolute Nothingness Itself,... _But Hey!... Clearly, There is Something; _*_therefore;.._*_ SOMETHING Must Have Happened to the NORMAL State of affairs that is Absolute Nothingness_ *_So, Why is there something RATHER Than Nothing?_*_ Answer that Atheists_ What a joke
@SuperEdge67 Says:
Who should I listen to, a genius……or a religious fanatic? My money’s on Hawking!!
@william3347 Says:
Thought gravity is a side effect of matter, one needs matter first in order to get gravity.. yes?
@JustaGuy2.0 Says:
The problem was never about the existence of God, the problem always has been the existence of YOUR God.
The problem is not the concept of God, the problem is God of religion, the sadistic dictator from the Bible.
That's what makes atheism be a thing, which is ironic and hilarious, you are the reason people don't believe.
@carlosibarra4041 Says:
PROFESSING THEMSELVES TO BE WISE, THEY BECAME FOOLS; ROMANS 1:22
@Druid75 Says:
I couldn’t imagine the amount of hubris it takes for two superstitious middle aged men to fool themselves thinking they know better than the late Stephen Hawking, who isn’t even alive to defend and explain his work which they’ve clearly misunderstood
@germanwulf40 Says:
So according to Hawking, even though absolutely nothing existed at one point in time, gravity was there regardless. I think he missed the concept of what AB-SO-LUTE-LY NO-THING means. Geez, sometimes even geniuses can say the stupidest things.
@tonyputman3398 Says:
Gravity isn't nothing. It's a "thing", therefore, nothing can create nothing. God bless y'all!!
@LunchboxDrop-0uts765 Says:
Why haven't the church Stood up to Islam are you afraid of telling them the truth.That they aren't following God at all ?
@seanmilliken4866 Says:
Frank, I got one for you. It should prove a smidge exciting.
Ok ok ok. The many universe theory states, the universe splits into every possible outcome, so that all outcomes are represented by one of the split universes.
Example, i goto the store and have only enough money to buy either bread or hotdogs. Not both. So the universe splits into one where i buy hotdogs. Another universe is where I buy bread.
Ok my question. How do we know this universe isnt just one where the explanation for evolution is actually what happened?
As an aside, im just playing devil's advocate, asking a question for Frank to mull over. My argument to defeat this position would be prophecy. As it always comes true, yes? Gods word will not return void. Also, the lot is in the lap of the Lord (Pro 16:33 KJV).
All of these, however, dont point to the real gist of the issue, and that is that flesh cannot see the things of the Spirit, except they be revealed to them by The Holy Spirit.
@toomanyhobbies2011 Says:
How odd that a scientist would think there are inviolate, absolute, laws of physics. Richard Feynman spells out how scientists should think of their ideas, they should be heavily criticized and changed when needed. No theory has been accepted as truth, because there are always situations where theories fail. Newton's Laws have been shown to only work in special situations, same with quantum mechanics. Not that physics is wrong, it's applications are the basis of all technology, so long as it's limitations are understood.
We can't even come up with a solution to the Three Body Problem.
@joestfrancois Says:
Oh, so he had no observations about this "why" that WLC posits, so he made up no explanation for it.
Fair play Hawking.
@maxhagenauer24 Says:
We found out gravity is just the curvature of the fabric of space-time. So its not really a law, the next question is what causes mass and energy to curve that space-time fabric which I think scientists are still trying to figure out. But why can't the universe and its laws come out of nothing? How is an eternal god, who also has no cause and has always existed, which is just as illogical as something coming from nothing, more likely than the universe coming from nothing with no cause?
@lancastrian413 Says:
Which version of Hawking? There have been at least three. He is/was an actual puppet. People would rather believe this person, who couldn't wipe his own backside, wrote best selling books and gave tv interviews one twitch of the cheek at a time, than accept they have been deceived.
@thierry860 Says:
Two know nothing theologian, meaning only knows about myth talk about one of the greatest scientific of all time after his death. there is no low for them.
@EdwardRomanOficial Says:
Honest and respectful question:
In your current position, what is your best wish for people in the opposite position?
@MarioRodriguez-qm6jv Says:
Gravity would be their god.
@boarderdude1193 Says:
“Christians believe in the virgin birth of Jesus Christ. Materialists believe in the virgin birth of the cosmos. Choose your miracle.” -Glen Scrivener
@anguschiggins2161 Says:
They start the video saying that Hawkins doesn't explain the "Why". Then go onto explain that well Stephen Hawkings is just dealing with the physical world and that would be expected. Nothing gets past Holmes and Watson here.
They think that pointing out potential problems with Hawkins adds any credibiltiy to this pairs claims of ghost stories. Hawkins was one of the leading scientist of our generation. Making actual contributions to figuring out how the Universe works. Then this pair come along with a sprinkle of magic and superstition, and their theology degrees, thinking they have all of the Universes answers. The God that we defined, that we don't know how it works, did it all. Case closed. Except it's not.
@cptrikester2671 Says:
Science and any form of evolution does not begin until the Creator says 'Let there be stuff, working in accordance to the laws that He put in place'.
@user-gv8xf9ul5j Says:
Low-Bar Bill showing dead people who’s boss!
@Soli_Deo_Gloria_. Says:
Steven Hawking articulated with great profundity exactly what the transcendental argument for God says if one presupposes there is no personal mind that all logic and reason flows from……..
“Now, *IF YOU BELIEVE* that *THE UNIVERSE IS* not arbitrary, but is *GOVERNED BY DEFINITE LAWS,YOU ULTIMATELY HAVE TO COMBINE THE PARTIAL THEORIES INTO A COMPLETE UNIFIED THEORY* that will describe everything in the universe. *BUT THERE IS A FUNDAMENTAL PARADOX* in the search for such a complete unified theory. *THE IDEAS* about scientific theories outlined above *ASSUME WE* are rational beings who *ARE FREE* to observe the universe as we want and *TO DRAW LOGICAL DEDUCTIONS* from what we see.”
“In such a scheme it is reasonable to suppose that we might progress ever closer toward the laws that govern
our universe. *YET* if there really is *A COMPLETE UNIFIED THEORY;* it would also presumably determine our actions. And so the theory itself *WOULD DETERMINE THE OUTCOME OF OUR SEARCH FOR IT!* And *WHY SHOULD IT DETERMINE THAT WE COME TO THE RIGHT CONCLUSIONS* from the evidence? *MIGHT IT NOT EQUALLY WELL DETERMINE THAT WE DRAW THE WRONG CONCLUSION ? OR NO CONCLUSION AT ALL?”*
Hawkings is smart enough to see the paradox of the materialist view of science which debases the very thing of science into unintelligible and utterly impossible nonsense. He proceeds to buttress his well thought out rational and reasonable conclusion of the materialist view by undermining the materialist presupposition.
Prepare for an atheist to commit intellectual suicide. 😭
*“THE ONLY ANSWER THAT I CAN GIVE* to this problem is based on Darwin’s principle of natural selection. The idea is that in any population of self reproducing organisms, there will be variations in the genetic material and upbringing that different individuals have. These differences will mean that some individuals are better able than others to draw the right conclusions about the world around them and to act accordingly. These individuals will be more likely to survive and reproduce and so their pattern of behavior and thought will come to dominate. It has certainly been true in the past that what we call intelligence and scientific discovery have conveyed a
survival advantage. It is not so clear that this is still the case: our scientific discoveries may well destroy us all, and even if they don’t, a complete unified theory may not make much difference to our chances of survival. However, provided the universe has evolved in a regular way, we might expect that the reasoning abilities that natural selection has given us would be valid also in our search for a complete unified theory, and so would not lead us to the wrong conclusions.”
(Stephen Hawking
A Brief History of Time Pg.12-13)
Truly laughable; the dilemma Hawking rightly understood would not only apply to the intellectually challenged but the intellectually championed as well. Universal natural law would not be a respecter of persons.
Why ?
*BECAUSE THE LAWS OF PHYSICS WILL DETERMINE THINKING.*
_Ergo,_ author's faulty logic.
The very logic and reason of these brilliant folks demonstrates the profuse leaking and hemorrhaging of their _Imago Dei._
But yet, they turn around and argue against The Very One Who gave them the ability to argue logically and with reason in the first place.
So sad…….
What is the chief end of man ?
Man's chief end is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever.
Seek Christ Jesus the Redeemer
@Gek1177 Says:
Craig, you shouldn't even pretend to be on a level even part ways to equivalent with Stephen Hawking.
Hawking literally produced mathematical models for the origin of the universe that don't require any God. You couldn't produce a mathmstical model to describe the Earth's orbit.
@Eye_Witness Says:
Is he saying that basically you can't get something from nothing? Makes sense.
LATEST COMMENTS