In this comical clip Christian apologist William Lane Craig is debating the atheist Wolpert who ends up claiming that a computer caused the universe into being at the big bang. This seems like such a desperate attempt from the atheist that it practically screams what Saint Paul says in Romans the first chapter:
Romans 1:18-21 8 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
Here is the Video Clip:
You really have to ask yourself after watching this video: What will they say next Robot-Spirits?
Is this a case of the common British complaint that Americans don't understand irony? The atheist isn't saying he actually believes the universe was created by a computer. (He says he doesn't know how it came into being). Isn't he making fun of the Christian? It's obviously absurd to invent a computer with all the qualities necessary to create the universe. His point is that it's equally absurd to invent a deity with the necessary qualities.
ReplyDeleteHello Daniel,
ReplyDeletewell it is true that I do not understand the British Humor so what you have said might very well be the case. I could not tell if he was serious or joking to be honest. Interestingly, William Lane Craig to this day thinks that he was serious. But I must say either way it sure is hilarious.
God Bless,
NPT
Well, it's only hilarious if you're an atheist! As a Christian, I found it embarrassing. The atheist is making fun of Craig's argument, and Craig doesn't even notice. It seems to me Craig goes for it hook line and sinker!
ReplyDeleteReally? Well that is interesting. I found it funny either way. I am not sure if your assessment is right either way either.
ReplyDeleteGod Bless,
NPT
Nate,
ReplyDeleteThe atheist guy was definitely speaking in jest, attempting to show that Craig's argument is absurd because he can just invent anything that has all the necessary attributes to be the "creator" of the universe.
Daniel,
Craig definitely didn't buy it. In fact, he destroyed the atheist's attempt at mockery by pointing out that the atheist was simply describing God and substituting the word "computer."
oh well you would know best David because you like all that brit humor and Harry Potter.
ReplyDeleteThat was a good clip. Very funny. Dr. Craig is like the energizer bunny. He just keeps going, no matter what the opposition is doing.
ReplyDeleteWolpert was definitely making fun of Craig's argument using "computer" for "God." Craig seems to have fell for it at the beginning and realized the metaphor toward the end, employing a serious argument of definitions to counteract it.
ReplyDeleteThe gist of the jest, however, was that it is certainly possible to define a god in such a way as to bring it into existence. This doesn't mean, though, that such a god is the Christian God or any other god in modern religious thought. It's an abstraction, definitionally created to suit the apologist's purpose, and regardless of the argument, there still appears no evidence for the existence of the specific God advocated.
Hello Anonymous:
ReplyDeleteWhat Craig's argument would prove is that there was a timeless, spaceless, immaterial, personal, and powerful being caused the the initial singularity. This what we mean by God and hence God caused the universe. To prove it was the christian God one would need historical evidence of the resurrection which Craig provides in this debate but Wolpert fails to adequately address. It would not be a abstraction, but rather a concrete person creator that can be shown to be the christian God with additional empirical and rational evidence.
God Bless,
NPT