William Lane Craig is teaching wicked heresy. He doesn't have enough faith to believe in the biblical creation account because he is blinded by his pride and doesn't want to be seen as unintellectual by his peers in "academia". In seeking to be wise in the eyes of the world, he has become a FOOL in the eyes of God: (1 Corinthians 3:18-20) ¶ Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.
@@susanthroop1279 So-called "science" must bow before the HOLY word of God. Scripture plainly reveals that the earth is roughly 6000 years old and that God supernaturally created Adam and Eve. William Lane Craig is an idolator who won't submit himself to the divine revelation of almighty God. And by teaching that Adam and Eve were some sort of primitive ape-like creatures makes him a HERETIC.
Another awesome and very important video! Definitely sharing this around. Dr. Sarfati nailed it at 26:25 when he says "the atheists love the science because they're not moving towards Christianity, they're rejoicing that the Christians are moving towards their position." Exactly right. WLC uses the exact same arguments these atheists use in support of naturalistic evolution--such as pseudogenes. Using pseudogenes as an argument for evolution tells me the person using that argument is not up to date on the scientific literature. Great discussion on Junk DNA.
Thank you, Jonathan and Keaton, for another comprehensive discussions. Craig is certainly a smart scholar. But when scholars deviate from the plain, straightforward reading of one part of the Bible, they have to "patch up" other parts of the Bible with more twisted interpretations.
In one of his recent videos, Were Neanderthals Made in the Image of God?, Dr Craig considered Neanderthals as a different "species" of humans and there may be a different "species" of Humans on Earth when Jesus returns. This is the kind of thinking that led to the Holocaust which is very disturbing.
Theistic evolution is such an affront to God, who is truth; to His nature; and to His Word. Thank you for equipping us with powerful, unimpeachable arguments we can use to help lead our Christian brothers and sisters back to full faith and confidence in the veracity of the Creation account.
Excellent discussion, lads. Thanks heaps. The more I see of the contortions that scholars like Craig perform to accommodate materialistic assumptions at the expense of Biblical authority, the more convinced I am in a clean Biblical Creationist worldview. Thanks so much to CMI for the solid foundations you provide. God bless you.
I understand the desire to give grace to a Brother who has slid into an area of unbelief but we also need to make sure he understands the potential consequences of promoting his unbelief as truth that he may cause others to fall away into unbelief. Jesus warns in Matthew 18:6 "“But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea." And this reminder from His brother James "My brethren, let not many of you become teachers, knowing that we shall receive a stricter judgment." James 3:1
@@susanthroop1279 He does not believe in the historical narrative of Genesis 1-11 (Creation through the flood) that there was a real Adam and a real fall, and a real judgement of God on the earth... and in a NY Times interview (21 Dec 2018) he stated "I don’t insist on the inerrancy of Scripture." There is more but this should be enough to make the point regarding his unbelief.
@@MichaelBethel Nope...his whole thesis is in search of the historical Adam. Yes he does believe in the historical narrative from Genesis 1-11. (Mytho-history). Did you not note "history" in his description. His view is called limited inerrancy vs classic. I really don't know the difference and will have to research it.
@@susanthroop1279 Please note your own wording... Mytho-history = not history but myth... This in contrast to Historical narrative = actual history. We either believe that the Scriptural text is true and as such is actual history or we don't believe it is true (unbelief) and classify it as myth, or poetic, or co-opted from other sources. The New Testament authors all treat it as true and the Gospel itself is totally rooted in it being true. If it is not true, if death and suffering were in the world for thousands of years prior to Adam (whoever you think he was) or the fall (whatever you think that was) then in the words of Richard Dawkins "‘Oh but of course the story of Adam and Eve was only ever symbolic, wasn’t it? Symbolic?! So Jesus had himself tortured and executed for a symbolic sin by a non-existent individual? Nobody not brought up in the faith could reach any verdict other than barking mad!’
I’m with you Jonathan, if WLC could humble himself to believe God’s Word he would be a wonderful apologist. He would probably also discover a new depth to his faith. When the Lord showed me the importance of actually believing He could ensure His Word was totally accurate in every detail, given the grammatical-historical approach, my walk took on a new dimension. Trusting in the authority of God’s Word strengthens our faith and equips us to face a hostile world in a way I could never have imagined before taking that step. Praise God for your ministry which also gives us reason, logic and scientific knowledge to equip us to walk with Him through this sceptical time in history.
Please stop calling him "Dr" Graig. His PhD is dung in the sight of God. God respects FAITH, not worldly intellectualism. (Job 32:21-22) Let me not, I pray you, accept any man's person, neither let me give flattering titles unto man. For I know not to give flattering titles; in so doing my maker would soon take me away.
WLG is like the early days of the Emergent guys. At first, they sounded orthodox, but the more they talked and wrote, the more we knew they were anything but orthodox. And now they aren't even considered Christian at all. Same with WLC. He may technically not deny a real Adam, but he is wavering on the truth of Genesis. He believes in evolution. He denies original sin. It's only a matter of time until before he denies the Virgin birth, the reality of hell, etc. He's too smart for his own good.
Craig's neologism of 'mythic history' fails on many levels, the main one being that he's missed the entire point of Genesis 1-11. . In contrast to actual myths, for the most part Genesis from 1 on features: historical locations; from the 'days' to the genealogies and events constantly tied back to named individuals in those genealogies. This shows concrete history. Myths de-historicise; they avoid time locations, they avoid geographical locations, they avoid links with history that can be verified; many of them take the cosmos and all reality as a given; they tend to merge with the 'given' in a monist manner and drive their tale with an irrational causality. . Genesis on the other hand features a rational causality, puts God before the cosmos and grounds reality in him, but separates him from the creation. Information drives outcomes: the material creation depends on information; God reveals this in rational propositions with objective reference over the 6 days. He shows that there is no 'transcendental' non-personal super reality behind our experience (unlike the pagan fantasies of Plato and his school, culminating in Neoplatonism etc.). He shows the exercise of wisdom and knowledge in the creation (Proverbs 3:19f). He makes man for relationship and in his imageness for relationship with God. Even the genre of the list of days. It's an ordered list! It is akin to a modern computing data structure, with a 'count' field, an 'end of record' field and specific content. The relationships between the events of the says are systematically coherent. . Finally, the creation is executed in 'our world' terms. There is no intermediate process or substance along the way, unlike the 'trash-talking' Enuma Elish. God clearly creates the world we are in and he is in it creating: thus the huge significance of the 'days'. They put God's action in our world. The language, concepts and outcomes are all concretely real and depicted as such both here and in the NT. . But, why? The creation is the setting for our real fellowship with the God who is and who speaks. The creation bases the fellowship in a real setting where God was really and directly active, through Christ, as the NT tells us. Thus God's contact with us in and through the creation is immediate, not at distance like deism, and specific, not diffuse as a monist or materialist (theistic evolutionist/long ager) would have. Thus God so close to his creatures-in-his-image indicates his love (and his evaluation of creation over the 6 days indicates his delight in it).
yes we will all pray that the cloud of deception leading Dr Craig astray will lift and he will hear sound wisdom from whoever can speak into his life so he can be rescued from his current path, situation, destination or what have you. Great review gentleman, keep up the saving and comforting work you do.
One thing I have asked Father for in Bliis life is, that he comes to the knowledge (experientialy also) that his eternal security is in, by, and through Lord Jesus ony, because Lord Jesus is the only eternally secure one. Sadly, like others truly saved by Yeshua, he lives in the old Adamic "spirit of fear to bondage," (Romans). And he has never yet taken hold of the "spirit of adoption where we cry Daddy Father." You see, all humans got a spirit of fear to bondage from the REAL LITERAL ADAM, AS HE HIMSELF SAID WHEN ASKED, WHERE ARE YOU, AND HE REPLIED, "I WAS AFRAID AND HID MYSELF." NOTHING COULD BE POSSIBLY CLEARER THAT THE LORD WAS NOT HAVING A CONVERSATION WITH A MYTH. WITH A NON EXISTENT PERSON. BUT WITH A REAL MAN, AND LITERALLY "COVERED THEM WITH TUNICS OF SKIN." A TYPE OF CHRIST TO COME. AND THE ANGEL WAS PROTECTING THE TREE OF LIFE FROM REAL LITERAL PEOPLE, ADAM AND EVE. LOVE TO ALL MY BRETHREN HERE BECAUSE OF OUR LORD JESUS.
The Lord saved Adam and Eve from eternal punishment by "COVERING THEM WITH TUNICS OF SKIN." HE SAVED REAL PEOPLE. AND THAT IS THE FIRST TYPE OF THE LORD JESUS. THIS INNOCENT, PURE, ANIMAL THE JUST DYING FOR THE UNJUST. THE INNOCENT FOR THE GUILTY. BLOOD SHED, ETC. GODS JUDGEMENT, AND THEN HIS GRACE TO SAVE. JUST GIVE OUR BROTHER BILL TIME, AND OUR SPEECH "ALWAYS WITH GRACE..."
When God created man IN HIS IMAGE AND LIKENESS, HE TESTED THEM. ADAM AND EVE WERE THE ONLY ONES CREATED IN HIS IMAGE AND LIKENESS. THE TEST WAS TO THEM. THEREFORE, NOTHING COULD BE POSSIBLY CLEARER THAN, GOD DID NOT CREATE ANY OTHERS IN HIS IMAGE AND LIKENESS BEFORE ADAM AND EVE, OR HE WOULD HAVE TESTED THEM, and failing (because Christ was the LAMB SLAIN BEFORE, BEFORE, BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD, AND KNEW THOSE CREATED IN HIS IMAGE AND LIKENESS WOULD FAIL) SO THESE PSUEDO HUMANS WOULD HAVE FAILED ALSO, THEN-------- CHRIST WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BEEN SACRIFICED TWICE! And LORD JESUS ASSURES US THAT HE IS THE LAST ADAM, AND NOT THE LAST PSUEDO HUMAM, AND THE LAST ADAM. THE IMPLACATIONA OF ALL THIS IS BLAPHAMAS. PLEASE RETRACT NOW.
And please remember, CRAIG IS NOT SAYING IT IS TRUE, ONLY IF THIS NEXT STEP IS CONFIRMED, IT COULD MAKE HIS THESIS MORE PLAUSABLE. GIVE HIM A CHANCE PLEASE.
The Lord God, Father, Son , and Spirit, NEVER JOKE, OR SPIRITUALIZE AWAY, OR SPEAK OF SIN IN A MYTHICAL WAY NON LITERAL WAY! IT IS AN AFFRONT TO THE LORD TO EVEN DARE INSINUATE THIS. HE LITERALLY SAVED ADAM AND EVE WITH LITERAL "TUNICS OF SKIN." HE NEVER TAKES SIN LIGHTLY IN ANY WAY.
There were never people before Adam and Eve ie ( humans, or non moral agents within the moral human family)) for "Christ Jesus came in the cosmos to save sinners. If sin brough death upon all men, then a whole race of others would have lived right to the time with Adam and Eve, until Adam sinned, then they would have died. And If they did not die because of Adams sin, then we have a whole other class of animals, Non moral (that look similiar like apes) created by God. The chief end of man is to worship God and enjoy Him forever. Now these psuedo non moral humans cannot worship God and enjoy Him forever.
All this is taking the saints time and mind from preaching the good news "that some might be saved," and building up one another in our holy faith" in Christ.
William Lane Craig is smart but at the same time anyone who believes in the Bible yet denies young earth creation is simply wrong. Either believe in God or believe in evolution, there is no in between.
nobody wants to say it so i will: this man Craig, is not a christian. you cant be a christian, filled with the Holy Spirit and deny important doctrines, such as original sin.
There's a saying in German which aptly describes Dr. Craig's character: "wenn es dem Esel wohl ist, geht er aufs Eis tanzen." In English: "When the donkey feels too good about himself, he goes dancing on ice.
Youre missing the thesis of his book. In most of the interviews I've watched with Brother Craig He specifically emphasized the meaning of the term "myth" Its not to be confused with our modern understanding of a myth. Here's a definition from Britannica: The nature, functions, and types of myth Myth has existed in every society. Indeed, it would seem to be a basic constituent of human culture. Because the variety is so great, it is difficult to generalize about the nature of myths. But it is clear that in their general characteristics and in their details a people’s myths reflect, express, and explore the people’s self-image. The study of myth is thus of central importance in the study both of individual societies and of human culture as a whole. So in this case myth doesn't mean its not true. As Craig says, "myth" is one of the genres of literary methods in the bible. Also, he's saying that the genre is a mix of myth and history. Effectually Genesis 1-11 is historical but not in a wooden interpretive sense. I'm seeking to relate this the best from the interview so as not to misrepresent his thesis. Your discussion is superficial as it just brushes by the main considerations Dr Craigs thesis in order to get your talking points out. This is unfair to the review of Dr Craigs book. Its going to take much more than this rapid rundown to unpack it. The traditional understandings of the gospel are still in tact ie sin, need of a Savior. Also....I believe he estimated them living 450,000 years ago. He did not speak of their creation in the wooden sense that they evolved from apes. I havent read the book but in his interviews he points out the similarities of the human genome to the ape genome. I think his discoveries are in their infancies and he's not declaring this is a dogmatic truth but the plausibility that perhaps their is a tie in of the scriptural narrative to the evolutionary one.
Jonathan Sarfati is great but he is too nice. LAME Craig is basically slandering him for being "paranoid" and yet Dr Sarfati is being so nice to him. Creationists are TOO NICE.
It seems that WLC needs to give more heed to James 3:1. “My brethren, let not many of you become teachers, knowing that we shall receive a stricter judgment.” James 3:1. (NKJV) I would be nice to see Dr. Sarfati debate WLC on the later’s twisted view of Genesis. If he would, that is, or if he would be like Hugh Ross and avoid a debate with Jonathan like he would the plague.
Our dear brother William Lane Craig has not claimed to have any kind of supernatural revelation for his positions, nor any especial exegesis or illuminating new idea emanating from the study of the scriptures to verify his claims which are simply his own opinions. These cast doubt about the veracity of the Bible in which he also claims to have believed. The question will always continue to be: What does Jesus say about Genesis. Meanwhile, 'Men Moved By The Holy Spirit Spoke From God' (2 Peter),,,, He has non been moved nor spoken from God.
Why is the CMI logo a circle and square, compass and square is free masonic? Same with the dark and the light, the circle is half and half, ying yang. Love your work, wonderful explanations here.
The logo of Creation Ministries International symbolizes the literal reality of a Genesis creation day: alternate periods of light and dark on a rotating earth. A real evening and morning, just as the text makes clear.
@@1969cmpPARTIAL CORRECTION PLEASE, I certainly agree about Craig. However Hugh Ross believes exactly the opposite of Craig on this ISSUE. HE BELIEVES ON A HISTORICAL ADAM AND EVE. THAT THEY FELL. THAT THE EARTH WAS CREATED IN 6 DAYS (NOT 24 HR DAYS), BUT HE DOES NOT HOLD WHAT CRAIG HOLDS HERE. THANK YOU, BLESSINGS IN CHRIST.
@@yeshuaneitheristheresalvat8018 Thanks for the correction. Does Hugh believe that Adam is the very first human being, biologically and that he and Eve lived about 6000 years ago.
