1
00:00:16,519 --> 00:00:39,119
Speaker 1: It's so insane. It's so insane.

2
00:00:51,560 --> 00:00:55,640
Speaker 2: Boo boo boo boo boo boo boo boo boo. All right,

3
00:00:55,679 --> 00:01:00,320
welcome everybody to another installment. We will be inter viewing

4
00:01:00,439 --> 00:01:06,560
and reviewing the debate to get today with between William

5
00:01:06,640 --> 00:01:09,560
Lane Craig and Muhammed had Job and my good friend

6
00:01:09,599 --> 00:01:12,680
doctor Bo Branson joins me today. Of course, doctor bo

7
00:01:13,680 --> 00:01:18,480
is very pertinent, very adjacent to this conversation because he's

8
00:01:18,680 --> 00:01:23,840
published in the thing, the book that William lane Craig

9
00:01:24,000 --> 00:01:27,680
mentioned in the debate about four views on trinity. Is

10
00:01:27,760 --> 00:01:28,239
that correct?

11
00:01:29,640 --> 00:01:30,239
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's right.

12
00:01:30,400 --> 00:01:34,680
Speaker 4: So William lane Craig, me, Bill Hasker, who he mentioned

13
00:01:35,159 --> 00:01:39,079
during the debate, and Dale Tuggy, and.

14
00:01:39,159 --> 00:01:42,680
Speaker 2: That's four views on the trinity and particularly issues that

15
00:01:43,079 --> 00:01:47,040
are relevant to this debate, such as inseparable operations. And

16
00:01:47,120 --> 00:01:50,719
we'll kind of get into that later on. But what's

17
00:01:50,760 --> 00:01:52,560
your before we get into the doctor bow, what's your

18
00:01:52,599 --> 00:01:55,400
overall feeling and assessment of the debate before we get

19
00:01:55,439 --> 00:01:56,359
into the particulars.

20
00:01:58,079 --> 00:02:00,319
Speaker 3: I was pretty disappointed, but.

21
00:02:02,640 --> 00:02:05,799
Speaker 4: I was actually really looking forward to it because, on

22
00:02:05,879 --> 00:02:10,400
the one hand, William Lane Craig is just like legendary debater,

23
00:02:10,800 --> 00:02:14,479
you know, super smart and everything, but I think that

24
00:02:14,599 --> 00:02:16,840
the doctrum of the Trinity is literally his like the

25
00:02:16,960 --> 00:02:21,400
weakest thing, you know that maybe his Christology, but anyway,

26
00:02:21,439 --> 00:02:23,560
it's you know, something he's like really weak on. So

27
00:02:23,639 --> 00:02:24,960
it's kind of like, wow, I mean this would be

28
00:02:25,000 --> 00:02:28,719
really interesting to see, you know, his MOHAMEDI job, I'm

29
00:02:28,719 --> 00:02:30,199
going to beat him? Is this going to be really

30
00:02:30,280 --> 00:02:31,240
you know interesting?

31
00:02:33,120 --> 00:02:34,159
Speaker 3: But yeah, the.

32
00:02:36,240 --> 00:02:37,840
Speaker 4: So I guess for me, I mean, I just spent

33
00:02:38,560 --> 00:02:40,280
a bunch of time on this book that we're in,

34
00:02:42,240 --> 00:02:44,719
So I've kind of, you know, recently been thinking through

35
00:02:44,879 --> 00:02:47,840
his whole model, and there's like a million things that

36
00:02:47,960 --> 00:02:50,719
I want to say about it. And it was really

37
00:02:50,800 --> 00:02:53,039
frustrating in the book too. It's like you just kind

38
00:02:53,039 --> 00:02:55,479
of have a limited word count, you know, for every chapter.

39
00:02:55,639 --> 00:02:58,199
So I think I had written like two or three

40
00:02:58,280 --> 00:03:01,639
times the word out and still had stuff that was

41
00:03:01,759 --> 00:03:03,560
just an outline form, and I was like, well, I

42
00:03:03,639 --> 00:03:06,520
gotta cut down everything. So I was thinking, like, there's

43
00:03:06,759 --> 00:03:08,680
so much stuff that you could you could go through,

44
00:03:08,759 --> 00:03:11,520
and Muhammed a job stuck the landing on any of

45
00:03:11,599 --> 00:03:17,120
the arguments, Like he kind of mentioned different topics that

46
00:03:17,360 --> 00:03:21,240
could go into like a larger debate, you know, or

47
00:03:21,360 --> 00:03:25,080
larger argument for the incoherence of his view or something

48
00:03:25,120 --> 00:03:28,759
like that. But he never really connected a lot of

49
00:03:28,840 --> 00:03:31,439
those things. Like the first I don't know how much.

50
00:03:31,479 --> 00:03:34,080
It was like quarter of the debate or something, where

51
00:03:34,120 --> 00:03:36,840
he was just talking about how we only in Craig's view,

52
00:03:36,879 --> 00:03:38,960
is heretical or whatever, and it's like, well, cool, but

53
00:03:40,000 --> 00:03:41,919
how does that show that the doctor of the Trinity

54
00:03:41,960 --> 00:03:42,479
in general?

55
00:03:43,599 --> 00:03:43,800
Speaker 2: Yeah?

56
00:03:43,919 --> 00:03:44,400
Speaker 5: Coherent?

57
00:03:44,719 --> 00:03:47,840
Speaker 2: Right? Which was the title of the debate was the

58
00:03:47,919 --> 00:03:52,479
coherence of the Trinity? Before we get into that, And

59
00:03:52,560 --> 00:03:54,840
this is an area that you you focus on you're

60
00:03:54,879 --> 00:03:57,360
really good in. Could you tell us a little bit

61
00:03:57,479 --> 00:03:59,319
I know, the lot of the audience does not know

62
00:03:59,680 --> 00:04:03,560
the act academic literature and the sort of schools and theories.

63
00:04:03,639 --> 00:04:06,000
Could you tell us a little bit on about what's

64
00:04:06,000 --> 00:04:08,879
the difference between this what they're calling the debate, the

65
00:04:09,000 --> 00:04:13,919
Latin model the Trinity and then social trinitarianism, which Wilane

66
00:04:13,960 --> 00:04:17,680
Craig espouses. And then we'll kind of counter that with

67
00:04:17,800 --> 00:04:21,839
the orthodox of you that you defend, which is monarchical trinitarianism.

68
00:04:23,519 --> 00:04:28,680
Speaker 4: So we'll start with social trinitarianism maybe, So what they

69
00:04:28,759 --> 00:04:36,600
call social trinitarianism. Basically, all social trinitarians seem to be

70
00:04:36,920 --> 00:04:40,040
really focused on this idea that the Father, Son, and

71
00:04:40,120 --> 00:04:45,879
Holy Spirit are three distinct centers of consciousness and will

72
00:04:46,120 --> 00:04:52,040
and whatever, so kind of three minds. That seems to

73
00:04:52,120 --> 00:04:56,959
be sort of definitive of social trinitarianism. And then originally,

74
00:04:57,000 --> 00:04:59,839
like you know, you read old older stuff on social trinitarianism,

75
00:05:00,079 --> 00:05:02,800
was kind of like, well, then they formed this like society,

76
00:05:03,519 --> 00:05:08,199
and God is really like the society. It's like you know,

77
00:05:08,399 --> 00:05:10,199
God incorporated or something.

78
00:05:10,279 --> 00:05:10,879
Speaker 3: It's like the whole.

79
00:05:10,920 --> 00:05:13,720
Speaker 4: You know, they form this bigger thing. And there's been

80
00:05:13,759 --> 00:05:16,160
all sorts of different kind of variations on it since then.

81
00:05:16,240 --> 00:05:19,360
Those that's kind of just maybe that view is a

82
00:05:19,399 --> 00:05:21,199
little unsatisfying in various ways.

83
00:05:21,639 --> 00:05:23,920
Speaker 2: That's what's the origin of that view. By the way,

84
00:05:24,079 --> 00:05:26,560
who's kind of the first to propose that? Somebody pretty modern?

85
00:05:26,600 --> 00:05:31,279
Speaker 4: Right, Yeah, Actually, this is a book I'm supposed to

86
00:05:31,319 --> 00:05:33,319
write over you for and I'm way ling on, but

87
00:05:34,000 --> 00:05:37,360
this is a Protestant guy, Matthew Barrett. It's it's a

88
00:05:37,480 --> 00:05:40,560
decent it's a decent introduction i'd say to like Western

89
00:05:41,360 --> 00:05:44,720
sort of trinitarian thought, like he does a pretty good

90
00:05:44,800 --> 00:05:47,240
job of that, and he goes in the first part

91
00:05:47,319 --> 00:05:49,240
and really goes through a lot of kind of the

92
00:05:49,399 --> 00:05:55,399
history of social trinitarianism and basically came up with kind

93
00:05:55,439 --> 00:05:58,959
of to make the doctrine of the Trinity relevant because

94
00:05:59,000 --> 00:06:04,040
it just wasn't like in Western theology anymore. So you know,

95
00:06:04,079 --> 00:06:06,560
I thought, well, maybe if we make God into a society,

96
00:06:06,680 --> 00:06:09,279
then we can just sort of map stuff from the

97
00:06:09,319 --> 00:06:12,839
Trinity onto social things. And so he goes through all

98
00:06:12,839 --> 00:06:15,199
these things about you know, how the Trinity has been

99
00:06:15,279 --> 00:06:19,959
used to just you know, support like like environmentalism and

100
00:06:20,399 --> 00:06:24,439
gay rights and feminism and you know, socialism, like just

101
00:06:24,519 --> 00:06:27,560
all kinds of different things. But it definitely is in

102
00:06:27,639 --> 00:06:29,800
the in the I think the fifties maybe is when

103
00:06:29,879 --> 00:06:34,560
it when it first started. Really yeah, really kind of

104
00:06:34,600 --> 00:06:39,519
coming out, so so not yeah, not super old. And

105
00:06:39,680 --> 00:06:41,560
to say that the you know, the persons of the

106
00:06:41,600 --> 00:06:46,680
Trinity kind of form a larger hole is partialism, I mean,

107
00:06:46,920 --> 00:06:49,439
at least on a straightforward reading of it. And that's

108
00:06:49,720 --> 00:06:56,000
you know, that's been rejected as a heresy for centuries, right,

109
00:06:56,720 --> 00:07:02,160
So what they call the Latin model, I mean basically

110
00:07:02,439 --> 00:07:09,519
it's really that's kind of a term for really more

111
00:07:09,639 --> 00:07:15,160
like what people maybe a few decades ago sort of

112
00:07:15,279 --> 00:07:20,319
thought that was going on in most Latin like scholastic

113
00:07:20,480 --> 00:07:21,800
theology or something like that.

114
00:07:22,160 --> 00:07:23,519
Speaker 3: People used to have this view.

115
00:07:23,439 --> 00:07:26,920
Speaker 4: That there was a huge divide between like Greek and

116
00:07:27,040 --> 00:07:32,360
Latin thought on the Trinity. I think Michelle Renee Barnes

117
00:07:32,439 --> 00:07:36,360
and people like that have pretty much destroyed that kind

118
00:07:36,399 --> 00:07:41,199
of caricature. But anyway, that was the idea was like, well,

119
00:07:41,240 --> 00:07:43,959
the Latins kind of start with the one and then

120
00:07:44,040 --> 00:07:47,079
move to the three, and the Greeks kind of start

121
00:07:47,160 --> 00:07:49,759
with the three, so they're more clear about the distinction

122
00:07:49,879 --> 00:07:50,480
of the persons.

123
00:07:51,199 --> 00:07:54,000
Speaker 3: But any case, I.

124
00:07:54,000 --> 00:07:56,240
Speaker 4: Guess the basic way to put what people usually mean

125
00:07:56,319 --> 00:07:58,439
by the Latin view is just that God is this

126
00:07:58,639 --> 00:08:04,720
one substance, so one simple thing and somehow I mean,

127
00:08:04,800 --> 00:08:07,079
you know, if you're talking about like aquinas, the persons

128
00:08:07,120 --> 00:08:12,759
are subsistent relations whatever exactly that means, and the you know,

129
00:08:12,839 --> 00:08:15,199
the worry of course that everyone has as well. Latin

130
00:08:15,279 --> 00:08:20,079
trinitarianism sounds like it's really just modalism and social trinitarianism,

131
00:08:20,279 --> 00:08:25,199
or Greek as they used to understand it sounds like tritheism,

132
00:08:25,399 --> 00:08:28,240
and so what's the you know, how do you avoid

133
00:08:28,319 --> 00:08:30,399
both of those? Is kind of but I think that's

134
00:08:30,480 --> 00:08:32,919
not a very accurate.

135
00:08:33,080 --> 00:08:35,200
Speaker 2: Well, but you would agree though that by the time

136
00:08:35,240 --> 00:08:37,240
of the Middle Ages, as this is sort of a

137
00:08:37,320 --> 00:08:39,320
side issue. But I know, how what people, for example,

138
00:08:39,399 --> 00:08:42,720
people that are proponents of the Western right will hear

139
00:08:42,840 --> 00:08:44,799
you say that there's not a big difference and think, oh,

140
00:08:44,840 --> 00:08:47,279
we'll see he's saying that there's no difference between Polla,

141
00:08:47,360 --> 00:08:50,960
Moss and Aquinas and everybody's teaching the same thing. You

142
00:08:51,000 --> 00:08:53,240
don't believe that, do you, or that's not what you

143
00:08:53,360 --> 00:08:53,799
mean by.

144
00:08:54,840 --> 00:08:56,720
Speaker 3: Well now, I guess.

145
00:08:59,679 --> 00:09:02,720
Speaker 4: I guess I would just say I think the more

146
00:09:02,799 --> 00:09:05,639
I I mean, the further I go along, the more

147
00:09:05,679 --> 00:09:09,879
I think maybe a lot of people just being misunderstood.

148
00:09:10,000 --> 00:09:13,960
So like Augustine in particular, I find a lot of

149
00:09:14,039 --> 00:09:18,159
times maybe we're just misinterpreting him. Like if you kind

150
00:09:18,200 --> 00:09:21,080
of read him through a scholastic lens, then he looks

151
00:09:21,159 --> 00:09:23,720
one way. But if you read him in the context

152
00:09:23,840 --> 00:09:26,080
of you know, the other church Fathers at the time,

153
00:09:26,879 --> 00:09:29,440
he might be closer really to the cappit oceans.

154
00:09:29,519 --> 00:09:31,360
Speaker 2: But well, I'm speaking more of the Middle Ages though,

155
00:09:31,440 --> 00:09:33,480
Like with how am I synods in the way that

156
00:09:33,559 --> 00:09:34,320
they treat.

157
00:09:35,360 --> 00:09:36,639
Speaker 3: About like a Quinas.

158
00:09:36,679 --> 00:09:40,600
Speaker 4: I mean, I do think like Aquinas's fascination with divine

159
00:09:40,600 --> 00:09:45,200
simplicity is a problem, and I think that's that's kind

160
00:09:45,200 --> 00:09:48,919
of a criticism A lot of modern philosophers would raise two,

161
00:09:49,720 --> 00:09:51,519
which I don't think is well.

162
00:09:51,840 --> 00:09:53,159
Speaker 2: Part of the reason I bring that up is that

163
00:09:53,240 --> 00:09:55,879
I remember years back I was listening to William Lane

164
00:09:55,919 --> 00:09:58,360
Craig and he was he had a brief debate that

165
00:09:58,519 --> 00:10:01,960
was only on audio with Bishop and Baron was defending

166
00:10:02,000 --> 00:10:05,879
the Tomistic position, and I noticed that somehow or somewhere

167
00:10:05,919 --> 00:10:08,679
along the way Wimline Craig apparently had got wind of

168
00:10:08,840 --> 00:10:11,919
modal collapse arguments, and he sort of brought in this

169
00:10:12,039 --> 00:10:15,120
critique of Tomism on the basis of modal collapse. But

170
00:10:15,360 --> 00:10:17,240
he doesn't seem to have the toolkit of the Essen

171
00:10:17,279 --> 00:10:20,039
Centergy distinction to really sort of make sense of it.

172
00:10:20,159 --> 00:10:22,559
So a lot of what he talks about in these

173
00:10:22,600 --> 00:10:26,080
discussions to me seems to be that he's lacking precisely

174
00:10:26,159 --> 00:10:29,559
that toolkit, which is in my view also connected to

175
00:10:29,720 --> 00:10:32,120
the a Pollinarian position that he has, because for him,

176
00:10:32,639 --> 00:10:37,440
person is really equated to like a like a human

177
00:10:37,679 --> 00:10:39,840
like an individual over there, a person is just an

178
00:10:39,879 --> 00:10:42,679
individual with a body and of soul. And so that's

179
00:10:42,720 --> 00:10:45,960
why it's the a pollinarian error, because if he visays

180
00:10:46,080 --> 00:10:51,320
Christ is, you know, the logos is replacing the human

181
00:10:51,440 --> 00:10:54,240
soul or the human mind in the humanity of Christ.

182
00:10:54,600 --> 00:10:56,960
That's a confusion of nature and person on the level

183
00:10:57,000 --> 00:11:00,480
of humans. And so I think that there's this nature

184
00:11:00,519 --> 00:11:02,879
person mistake, and then there's Assassin's interim. It's the thing

185
00:11:02,919 --> 00:11:05,799
that's missing in the in the WAE online Craig scheme.

186
00:11:07,240 --> 00:11:08,399
Speaker 3: Yeah, no, I agree.

187
00:11:08,559 --> 00:11:12,720
Speaker 4: I actually in this book, I find I find Craig

188
00:11:14,039 --> 00:11:16,639
very unclear at times. It's very strange because I mean,

189
00:11:16,720 --> 00:11:19,759
other you know, he's an analytic philosopher, and he's generally

190
00:11:19,840 --> 00:11:22,519
speaking very clear, very precise, and I find it hard

191
00:11:22,559 --> 00:11:26,519
to kind of parse. And also I guess he's changed

192
00:11:26,559 --> 00:11:30,480
his views, so I criticize a bunch of stuff and

193
00:11:30,559 --> 00:11:32,200
then he's like, oh, I don't believe that anymore.

194
00:11:33,440 --> 00:11:34,960
Speaker 3: But uh, but yeah.

195
00:11:35,000 --> 00:11:36,519
Speaker 4: One of the things that I, by the end of

196
00:11:36,559 --> 00:11:38,200
it I pointed out is like, yeah, the way that

197
00:11:38,320 --> 00:11:45,799
he understands being in person or person and nature is

198
00:11:46,600 --> 00:11:50,840
sort of reversed. So what he calls try I put

199
00:11:50,840 --> 00:11:55,240
it this way, what he calls tri personal monotheism, I say,

200
00:11:55,360 --> 00:12:00,279
is what Gregory of Nissa would probably call try theistic modalism. Yeah,

201
00:12:00,960 --> 00:12:03,360
it's really he really when he talks about so his

202
00:12:03,519 --> 00:12:06,559
view is kind of there's God is like this one soul,

203
00:12:07,240 --> 00:12:10,759
this one immaterial soul that has three sets of top

204
00:12:12,919 --> 00:12:17,759
So he really has one hyposthesis that has three different powers,

205
00:12:18,720 --> 00:12:22,559
which we would kind of one to one associate a

206
00:12:22,679 --> 00:12:27,759
particular power with a particular instance of a nature. So

207
00:12:27,919 --> 00:12:31,840
it's I mean, he really does ultimately have one person

208
00:12:32,000 --> 00:12:34,799
with three natures. I mean that's kind of how our

209
00:12:35,320 --> 00:12:40,559
or three energies. Explicitly he'd say that. So it's just

210
00:12:40,679 --> 00:12:43,240
kind of the opposite of what it, you know, is

211
00:12:43,320 --> 00:12:47,159
supposed to be. But anyway, that's yeah, that's kind of

212
00:12:47,200 --> 00:12:49,879
his his view for better or worse, which I think

213
00:12:49,879 --> 00:12:51,919
there's a million things you can criticize about that, And

214
00:12:51,960 --> 00:12:55,559
I was hoping that Muhammed a Jab would, you know,

215
00:12:55,879 --> 00:12:58,440
find something that it's just like he kind of focused

216
00:12:58,480 --> 00:13:02,960
on a handful of things, could have gone a lot

217
00:13:03,679 --> 00:13:05,960
deeper in a lot of issues. But anyway, I guess

218
00:13:06,039 --> 00:13:07,200
we'll we'll talk about that.

219
00:13:07,919 --> 00:13:09,840
Speaker 2: So getting into the debate, he opens up what we

220
00:13:09,960 --> 00:13:13,919
online Craig does by he didn't really plan the five

221
00:13:13,960 --> 00:13:16,279
minutes or however long they had, because maybe it's four

222
00:13:16,320 --> 00:13:18,159
minutes or something like that, because he kind of like

223
00:13:18,360 --> 00:13:20,399
was saying stuff and then the time right now. But

224
00:13:21,000 --> 00:13:22,759
he did the sort of pitch on the basis of

225
00:13:22,840 --> 00:13:26,120
the kalamb argument, which was intended to appeal to I think,

226
00:13:26,159 --> 00:13:29,480
to the Islamic audience, which most Muslims don't really care

227
00:13:29,559 --> 00:13:33,279
about kalam and medieval philosophical disputes. And that's really why

228
00:13:33,360 --> 00:13:36,080
I think in this debate, Muhammed a Jab, who doesn't

229
00:13:36,120 --> 00:13:39,120
know these topics, was relying totally on Jake by his

230
00:13:39,200 --> 00:13:42,360
own admission, for a lot of this that the.

231
00:13:42,360 --> 00:13:45,039
Speaker 4: Whole time he put out a Muhammed a job put

232
00:13:45,039 --> 00:13:49,960
out some video just afterwards that was he just explicitly

233
00:13:50,000 --> 00:13:50,279
said that.

234
00:13:50,399 --> 00:13:53,799
Speaker 2: I was like, yeah, what it sounds. Yeah. There was

235
00:13:53,840 --> 00:13:55,799
a funny mistake he made where he seemed to think

236
00:13:55,919 --> 00:13:58,399
that the law of identity is the same thing as

237
00:13:58,480 --> 00:14:00,600
the is of credication and that's why it's the is

238
00:14:00,639 --> 00:14:04,240
of identification law, which those are not the same things.

239
00:14:04,279 --> 00:14:08,240
But that was an attempt to sort of trick Williamlin

240
00:14:08,320 --> 00:14:10,200
Craig with some version of the logical problem of the

241
00:14:10,240 --> 00:14:12,799
trinity and the predicating of if the Father's God, the

242
00:14:12,840 --> 00:14:15,799
Son's God, the Spirit's God, then the Father is the

243
00:14:15,919 --> 00:14:20,480
Son based on identical predication. But you know, we've dealt

244
00:14:20,519 --> 00:14:23,480
with that, You've covered that in terms of the debate

245
00:14:23,519 --> 00:14:25,600
that I did with Jake as well. But before we

246
00:14:25,639 --> 00:14:28,559
get to that, so he appeals to the colomn cosmologic argument.

247
00:14:28,600 --> 00:14:30,799
I don't think it's a very good apologetic argument. William

248
00:14:30,840 --> 00:14:33,240
ly and Craig believes that he's revived this and sort

249
00:14:33,279 --> 00:14:37,919
of made it relevant again. But the first mistake that

250
00:14:38,039 --> 00:14:41,159
I saw, and feel free to agree disagree with my

251
00:14:41,879 --> 00:14:44,039
take on it, was he began his argument for the

252
00:14:44,080 --> 00:14:47,600
trinity by saying first that it's a New Testament doctrine doctrine.

253
00:14:47,600 --> 00:14:49,600
I think it's very important that we understand that it's

254
00:14:49,639 --> 00:14:51,200
not only a New Testament doctrine.

255
00:14:52,799 --> 00:14:53,960
Speaker 3: Yeah, that kind of came up.

256
00:14:54,159 --> 00:14:56,799
Speaker 4: I mean, we didn't unfortunately, really get into that in

257
00:14:56,840 --> 00:14:59,200
any detail in the book, but it definitely it will

258
00:14:59,240 --> 00:15:03,519
be obvious to you or any Orthodox person like that

259
00:15:03,879 --> 00:15:06,960
we're just coming at this from completely different angles. One

260
00:15:07,000 --> 00:15:09,679
thing that really like irked me, and I just didn't

261
00:15:09,720 --> 00:15:11,799
have time. I didn't have word count, you know, to

262
00:15:11,919 --> 00:15:15,399
actually address it. Was he he mentions a few times,

263
00:15:15,519 --> 00:15:18,600
like in the Gospel of John, you know, when John

264
00:15:18,679 --> 00:15:23,440
says Isaiah saw his glory. But the way that Craig

265
00:15:23,600 --> 00:15:28,080
always like describes it, He's like, oh, look, John is

266
00:15:29,080 --> 00:15:33,720
like he says like retroactively doing some or like retrojecting

267
00:15:34,320 --> 00:15:37,720
Christ like back into the Old Testament, you know, in

268
00:15:37,840 --> 00:15:39,720
this appearance of yahweh or whatever.

269
00:15:40,240 --> 00:15:44,320
Speaker 3: And I'm like, no, that's that's not what John's saying

270
00:15:44,360 --> 00:15:48,159
at all. Like that He's saying Isaiah saw yeah, exactly,

271
00:15:48,720 --> 00:15:49,559
sitting on the throne.

272
00:15:49,679 --> 00:15:52,320
Speaker 4: Like that's that's the idea, because I go into that

273
00:15:52,440 --> 00:15:56,559
in my in my chapters I talk about the Theophanes.

274
00:15:57,159 --> 00:15:58,600
You know, it is like one of the things that

275
00:15:58,720 --> 00:16:02,600
you you about the Trinity needs to address because historically

276
00:16:03,480 --> 00:16:07,320
that was this like major one of the major you know,

277
00:16:07,559 --> 00:16:11,519
things that was kind of driving the doctrine was how

278
00:16:11,559 --> 00:16:13,519
do we make sense? And it's very clear just if

279
00:16:13,559 --> 00:16:14,120
you read.

280
00:16:14,840 --> 00:16:18,519
Speaker 2: Justin versus Tripho for example, Yeah, yeah, like yeah.

281
00:16:18,399 --> 00:16:22,840
Speaker 4: Early Christian stuff and also late Temple, late second Temple, right,

282
00:16:23,639 --> 00:16:24,159
and then look.

283
00:16:24,080 --> 00:16:24,879
Speaker 3: At the New Testament.

284
00:16:25,919 --> 00:16:27,559
Speaker 4: I mean I go in and kind of mention some

285
00:16:27,679 --> 00:16:30,600
of that and compare anyway, I go through sort of

286
00:16:30,679 --> 00:16:33,120
the probability of it all. But point being like, it's

287
00:16:33,240 --> 00:16:37,519
very clear that the New Testament authors themselves were looking

288
00:16:37,600 --> 00:16:39,440
at the Old Testament and saying how do you make

289
00:16:39,519 --> 00:16:41,799
sense out of the Theophanes and sort of saying, well,

290
00:16:42,039 --> 00:16:47,960
Christ is the god that that appeared to Moses, Jacob

291
00:16:48,080 --> 00:16:51,000
and so on. And Craig is just kind of like, oh, well,

292
00:16:51,039 --> 00:16:53,399
they're you know, sort of reading him back into it.

293
00:16:53,519 --> 00:16:56,039
Speaker 2: Or well, but I mean Jesus himself, John five through nine,

294
00:16:56,360 --> 00:16:59,440
in the debates with the Pharisees, identifies himself as the

295
00:16:59,519 --> 00:17:02,320
one talk to Moses, as the one eating with Abraham.

296
00:17:02,519 --> 00:17:07,079
Speaker 4: So yeah, yeah, yeah, and he just doesn't I mean,

297
00:17:07,119 --> 00:17:09,160
he just you know, he thinks that the Old Testament

298
00:17:09,440 --> 00:17:12,519
Theophanies I guess were God the Father, and that it's

299
00:17:12,640 --> 00:17:15,920
just sort of reading Jesus back into But for Craig

300
00:17:16,079 --> 00:17:18,680
that's kind of all I mean, yeah, I mean that's

301
00:17:18,720 --> 00:17:20,480
his view, right. It's just like, oh, we look at

302
00:17:20,480 --> 00:17:24,559
the New Testament. The New Testament authors are indicating that

303
00:17:24,680 --> 00:17:28,240
Jesus is divine and that's kind of you know, that's

304
00:17:28,279 --> 00:17:30,000
all he cares well.

305
00:17:30,039 --> 00:17:32,599
Speaker 2: But I mean again, maybe you don't agree with this,

306
00:17:32,720 --> 00:17:34,720
but this is a key point I think against kind

307
00:17:34,720 --> 00:17:38,119
of the natural theology presuppositions that William glene Craig appealed

308
00:17:38,119 --> 00:17:40,839
to multiple times to say, hey, we believe in monotheism

309
00:17:41,279 --> 00:17:43,359
just like you Muslims. He said this multiple times in

310
00:17:43,440 --> 00:17:45,480
the debate. And you know, when you look at the

311
00:17:45,680 --> 00:17:48,519
Vatican two documents when they talk about the purpose of

312
00:17:48,599 --> 00:17:52,720
natural theology, it's explicitly in Lemgentium sixteen and Nostrotate three,

313
00:17:52,759 --> 00:17:55,519
it's explicitly to find this common ground that we're all

314
00:17:55,559 --> 00:17:58,440
worshiping the God of Abraham. The Muslims have the faith

315
00:17:58,440 --> 00:18:00,640
of Abraham like we do. Vatican two is that twice.

316
00:18:01,119 --> 00:18:03,200
But of course, to according to Paul, the faith of

317
00:18:03,240 --> 00:18:06,839
Abraham is the faith in the Angel of Yahweh. It's

318
00:18:06,880 --> 00:18:09,319
not a faith in a Unitarian deity. And this is

319
00:18:09,480 --> 00:18:11,880
very important for this this discussion. So I think that

320
00:18:12,200 --> 00:18:17,119
from an apologetic standpoint, that's a weak position to take

321
00:18:17,240 --> 00:18:19,759
if you're taking the Christian position against the Muslim to say, oh, well,

322
00:18:19,759 --> 00:18:23,039
we all believe in monotheism, but it's not the same monotheism.

323
00:18:23,559 --> 00:18:26,680
Speaker 3: So anyway, Yeah, and I think that's right.

324
00:18:26,720 --> 00:18:29,799
Speaker 4: I think it's I mean, it's it's an important point

325
00:18:29,920 --> 00:18:33,799
because it's like, yeah, I mean, you can you can

326
00:18:33,920 --> 00:18:37,839
say something like we all agree that the total count

327
00:18:37,920 --> 00:18:41,880
of God's equals one or something like that, right, But

328
00:18:42,000 --> 00:18:44,559
it's like, I mean, if you're worshiping a different god, like,

329
00:18:44,680 --> 00:18:47,440
no one would be okay if someone was just like, well,

330
00:18:47,480 --> 00:18:50,640
I worship Bail and Bail alone, you know, so I've

331
00:18:50,680 --> 00:18:54,519
got one guy, I'm a monotheistic just you know, like,

332
00:18:54,960 --> 00:18:58,400
no one would be happy with that, right, And and

333
00:18:58,519 --> 00:18:58,799
it is.

334
00:18:59,079 --> 00:18:59,400
Speaker 2: It does.

335
00:19:00,279 --> 00:19:02,200
Speaker 4: It does put things in a very different light when

336
00:19:02,240 --> 00:19:05,680
you when you point out, like, no, the god that

337
00:19:06,839 --> 00:19:11,359
gave the Torah to Moses was Jesus. Yes, well, that

338
00:19:11,519 --> 00:19:14,559
puts things in a very different light when you're claiming

339
00:19:14,799 --> 00:19:19,000
to worship this god. But also, you know, it's sort

340
00:19:19,000 --> 00:19:23,039
of like the scene where someone's like talking about how

341
00:19:23,160 --> 00:19:25,880
cool Spider Man is and then Peter Parker's there and

342
00:19:25,880 --> 00:19:26,799
they're like making.

343
00:19:26,640 --> 00:19:31,119
Speaker 3: Fun of him. You know, it's like, well, you're maybe you.

344
00:19:31,319 --> 00:19:34,599
Speaker 4: Realize the inconsistency and the irony of it, but you're

345
00:19:35,000 --> 00:19:38,119
you're doing something that's kind of out of place there, right,

346
00:19:38,680 --> 00:19:40,960
And yeah, that gets lost when you just sort of say, well,

347
00:19:41,039 --> 00:19:42,160
we're all Manothius.

348
00:19:42,920 --> 00:19:43,119
Speaker 3: Yeah.

349
00:19:43,640 --> 00:19:46,519
Speaker 2: Next to issue that I think is tied into the

350
00:19:46,599 --> 00:19:49,119
one about the New Testament only being or being the

351
00:19:49,160 --> 00:19:51,279
basis for where he supposedly wants to prove the Trinity.

352
00:19:51,279 --> 00:19:52,720
It says, I don't know where he would get this,

353
00:19:52,880 --> 00:19:55,319
my guess would be the Protestant idea of the persepecuty

354
00:19:55,319 --> 00:19:58,200
of scripture, and this idea that well, the text just

355
00:19:58,240 --> 00:19:59,839
says what it means, and it means what it says.

356
00:20:00,160 --> 00:20:03,160
This is a common refrain from Protestants and soul scripturists.

357
00:20:04,039 --> 00:20:06,759
He says that there is no metaphysics, there's no baggage,

358
00:20:06,920 --> 00:20:09,599
there's no hair splitting. The New Testament, doctor, the Trinity

359
00:20:09,720 --> 00:20:13,279
is really only two basic tenets, that there's one God

360
00:20:13,400 --> 00:20:16,599
and three persons. But I don't know, I mean, where

361
00:20:16,920 --> 00:20:20,599
in the New Testament alone is that the two basic tenants.

362
00:20:20,640 --> 00:20:24,480
I think he's assuming the Protestant presuppositions here that there

363
00:20:24,559 --> 00:20:26,960
is this lowest common denominator that we can scale it

364
00:20:27,039 --> 00:20:29,039
down in the New Testament. And then he said there

365
00:20:29,119 --> 00:20:32,559
is nothing in the New Testament about intertrinitarian relationships in life,

366
00:20:32,880 --> 00:20:34,279
which I thought was an odd statement.

367
00:20:36,960 --> 00:20:39,200
Speaker 4: Yeah, we get into that in the book a little

368
00:20:39,240 --> 00:20:45,680
bit too. He's he wrote a paper about the the

369
00:20:45,799 --> 00:20:46,680
eternal generation.

370
00:20:47,000 --> 00:20:51,319
Speaker 3: It's something like, what is you know, is Christ.

371
00:20:52,640 --> 00:20:56,880
Speaker 4: Generated or be gotten in his divine nature? So he

372
00:20:57,000 --> 00:20:59,920
has this view just well call him the sun because

373
00:21:00,039 --> 00:21:04,240
he was incarnate and something like that. And he goes

374
00:21:04,279 --> 00:21:06,680
through and just kind of you know, he he just

375
00:21:06,759 --> 00:21:09,880
sort of tries to argue that the Bible doesn't sort

376
00:21:09,880 --> 00:21:14,039
of explicitly make that clear whatever. But he doesn't really,

377
00:21:15,680 --> 00:21:17,440
at least as far as I can tell, in anything

378
00:21:17,480 --> 00:21:22,000
he's written, he doesn't really have any like positive reason

379
00:21:22,160 --> 00:21:26,720
to reject eternal generation except for this thing about aseity.

380
00:21:26,799 --> 00:21:29,519
He just thinks like, well, if you have the divine nature,

381
00:21:29,519 --> 00:21:31,720
you have to be asse, which I think, I mean.

382
00:21:31,799 --> 00:21:34,640
Speaker 2: I've called that a Yeah, that was the Jake argument

383
00:21:34,720 --> 00:21:35,559
that you guys had.

384
00:21:37,960 --> 00:21:40,240
Speaker 4: And I kind of gave a I gave a little

385
00:21:40,279 --> 00:21:43,119
argument against that in the book. And also I just

386
00:21:43,599 --> 00:21:46,319
pointed out, you know, this also comes down to a

387
00:21:46,480 --> 00:21:53,079
question what is the Bible? Because the Septuagint says from

388
00:21:53,160 --> 00:21:56,640
the womb before the morning Star, I have begotten the right,

389
00:21:56,799 --> 00:22:00,759
and that's I don't know something else. I think it's

390
00:22:00,799 --> 00:22:03,640
some jumbled mess in the masoretic text that does like

391
00:22:03,720 --> 00:22:07,079
no one knows what it looks like, text corrupted or something.

392
00:22:07,160 --> 00:22:09,920
But but anyway, I mean, I'm like, well, what's you know?

393
00:22:10,599 --> 00:22:14,240
Is the Septuagint not the Bible. It's my Bible.

394
00:22:14,559 --> 00:22:18,400
Speaker 3: It's so kind of and there's i mean, there's also

395
00:22:18,640 --> 00:22:19,079
I think.

396
00:22:19,000 --> 00:22:20,920
Speaker 4: Warrant for it in the New Testament. You just kind

397
00:22:20,960 --> 00:22:25,319
of have to dig a little bit deeper. But but yeah,

398
00:22:25,400 --> 00:22:29,839
he one thing that's frustrating too to me is he

399
00:22:30,880 --> 00:22:33,160
he talks about what he calls the Biblical doctrine of

400
00:22:33,200 --> 00:22:35,559
the Trinity, and that's what he calls it in this book.

401
00:22:35,720 --> 00:22:40,200
But you would think that a phrase like the Biblical

402
00:22:40,279 --> 00:22:44,000
doctrine of the Trinity would just mean like whatever the

403
00:22:44,119 --> 00:22:47,720
Bible says about the Trinity, right, whatever.

404
00:22:47,519 --> 00:22:48,400
Speaker 3: That ends up being.

405
00:22:50,119 --> 00:22:52,160
Speaker 4: But of course if that's what it meant, then like

406
00:22:52,920 --> 00:22:56,240
Dale Tuggy, who's a Unitarian, would claim that he believes

407
00:22:56,279 --> 00:22:58,119
in the Biblical like what the Bible says.

408
00:22:58,240 --> 00:23:00,319
Speaker 2: I think everybody every or something.

409
00:23:01,920 --> 00:23:04,880
Speaker 4: Yeah, what's the content of that, right, Like everyone will

410
00:23:04,920 --> 00:23:09,519
claim to believe it. But he like just stipulatively defines like, okay,

411
00:23:09,799 --> 00:23:12,319
by biblical doctrum of the Trinity. I mean, you know,

412
00:23:12,400 --> 00:23:15,039
boom boom boom, and it's like okay, but I mean

413
00:23:15,079 --> 00:23:18,720
that's not necessarily like I don't know that that's all

414
00:23:18,880 --> 00:23:22,200
and only what the Bible says about the like there's

415
00:23:22,279 --> 00:23:27,039
more So it's kind of a textbook example of persuasive definition,

416
00:23:27,279 --> 00:23:29,319
like he's just trying to kind of pack a premise

417
00:23:29,440 --> 00:23:33,000
into yeah, pretend like that's the definition of it.

418
00:23:33,359 --> 00:23:37,640
Speaker 3: But as I was gonna say, it's.

419
00:23:38,440 --> 00:23:42,400
Speaker 4: Sort of defining trinitarianism in sort of a broad sense

420
00:23:42,480 --> 00:23:45,640
of the term, as like one God in three persons.

421
00:23:47,079 --> 00:23:49,720
But it might not be orthodox trinitarianism.

422
00:23:49,839 --> 00:23:50,599
Speaker 3: It might be you know.

423
00:23:50,759 --> 00:23:53,279
Speaker 4: I mean I argue like, I mean, when we really

424
00:23:53,319 --> 00:23:56,599
talk about the doctrine of the Trinity, we really mean

425
00:23:56,839 --> 00:24:01,039
what the Church settled on in the fourth century. And

426
00:24:01,160 --> 00:24:03,440
so that's just I mean, in my view, that's just

427
00:24:03,559 --> 00:24:08,400
what the term refers to. So I mean I just

428
00:24:08,519 --> 00:24:09,960
kind of say, by the end of the book, like

429
00:24:10,039 --> 00:24:15,319
if you're gonna just knowing like deliberately reject the Nicene

430
00:24:15,400 --> 00:24:17,720
doctrine of the Trinity, like what's in the Creeds and

431
00:24:17,759 --> 00:24:21,960
the Church fathers like just say, I reject the doctrine

432
00:24:22,000 --> 00:24:25,240
of the Trinity, like I reject what English speakers are

433
00:24:25,319 --> 00:24:26,680
referring to when they talk.

434
00:24:26,559 --> 00:24:29,200
Speaker 3: About the doctrine of the Trinity, because you know, I

435
00:24:29,640 --> 00:24:30,720
don't think it's in the Bible.

436
00:24:30,920 --> 00:24:33,279
Speaker 2: Well, I mean, even even the Church fathers would complain

437
00:24:33,440 --> 00:24:36,480
that every heretic, whether it's you know, me, yes, or

438
00:24:36,519 --> 00:24:39,200
whether it's Nestorius, would say, well, I believe in the

439
00:24:39,279 --> 00:24:41,240
doctrine of the Father, the Son of the Spirit, and

440
00:24:41,480 --> 00:24:44,319
my my doctrine as biblical. Yeah, but what does it

441
00:24:44,480 --> 00:24:46,279
mean is of course the key question here. So a

442
00:24:46,319 --> 00:24:49,720
lot of word gains, a lot of ambiguity, of textual

443
00:24:49,799 --> 00:24:55,359
and referential ambiguity. Now, the next thing I noticed was

444
00:24:55,440 --> 00:24:59,359
that and this this might be a little more controversial,

445
00:24:59,440 --> 00:25:01,759
but he said there's no metaphysics involved in the Doctor

446
00:25:01,759 --> 00:25:03,599
in the Trinity. I'm not sure that that's the case

447
00:25:03,640 --> 00:25:04,920
even in the New Testament. I mean, you have in

448
00:25:05,000 --> 00:25:07,640
Hebrews won the statement that the Son is the direct

449
00:25:07,680 --> 00:25:11,480
image of the Father's hypostasis. There's some kind of you know,

450
00:25:12,039 --> 00:25:16,039
meaning to that that's more than just what the text says.

451
00:25:16,200 --> 00:25:19,440
I mean, this is again a very common Protestant argument

452
00:25:19,559 --> 00:25:21,640
that texts just mean when they say, they say what

453
00:25:21,720 --> 00:25:24,400
they mean. And when he was asked about this, why

454
00:25:24,440 --> 00:25:26,759
do you you know, why do you have this position?

455
00:25:26,880 --> 00:25:30,559
And he says, well, I believe in solar scriptura. So

456
00:25:30,799 --> 00:25:31,960
you know, I thought there was going to be more

457
00:25:31,960 --> 00:25:35,960
of a high falutin fancy reason why maybe we get

458
00:25:35,960 --> 00:25:38,720
into asaity like you're saying, But it just ended up

459
00:25:38,720 --> 00:25:40,519
being well, I just followed the New Testament, and this

460
00:25:40,680 --> 00:25:43,200
is what the New Testament says. But again, what about

461
00:25:43,200 --> 00:25:46,720
these other verses where philosophical quote unquote terminology is used,

462
00:25:47,000 --> 00:25:48,119
like hypostasis.

463
00:25:49,960 --> 00:25:54,079
Speaker 4: Yeah, and I mean scholars have tracked down so many

464
00:25:55,119 --> 00:26:00,519
passages for Paul and other people like use terminology from Platanism,

465
00:26:00,759 --> 00:26:03,200
from Stoicism and so forth. So it's like even in

466
00:26:03,240 --> 00:26:07,400
the New Testament, people are drawing on the resources of

467
00:26:07,559 --> 00:26:11,319
Greek philosophical thought, you know, to make their points.

468
00:26:11,480 --> 00:26:13,640
Speaker 3: So yeah, I agree.

469
00:26:13,640 --> 00:26:18,079
Speaker 4: I mean I think it's I think people want theology

470
00:26:18,200 --> 00:26:23,240
to be sort of metaphysics free somehow sort of feel

471
00:26:23,359 --> 00:26:26,640
like it should be or something. But yeah, I don't

472
00:26:26,680 --> 00:26:31,319
know that that really works. What was it you were

473
00:26:31,400 --> 00:26:34,519
I was just thinking of too? Well, anyway, I'll think

474
00:26:34,559 --> 00:26:35,119
of it later.

475
00:26:35,160 --> 00:26:39,319
Speaker 2: But like Greek terminology and New Testament, what were.

476
00:26:39,240 --> 00:26:41,119
Speaker 3: You saying just before that that you're.

477
00:26:43,759 --> 00:26:46,119
Speaker 2: The text means what it says. There's no that text

478
00:26:46,160 --> 00:26:48,920
aren't theory laid and they're just kind of you know surface.

479
00:26:49,319 --> 00:26:51,279
Speaker 4: Yeah, well, one thing, I think, here's what I was

480
00:26:51,319 --> 00:26:54,519
thinking of. He he does this in the book like

481
00:26:54,599 --> 00:26:58,319
he spent it's really the book was disappointing. I thought,

482
00:26:58,720 --> 00:27:03,799
in some sense his first chapter a litle disappointing. He

483
00:27:04,079 --> 00:27:08,039
is like ninety percent of his first chapter just going

484
00:27:08,119 --> 00:27:11,160
through like New Testament evidence for the divinity of Jesus,

485
00:27:11,400 --> 00:27:15,279
like so or evidence of I guess the divinity of

486
00:27:15,359 --> 00:27:17,319
Jesus in the New Testament, right, So he tries to

487
00:27:17,359 --> 00:27:20,039
make the case that the New Testament authors think Jesus

488
00:27:20,119 --> 00:27:23,440
divine and that's like literally ninety percent of the of

489
00:27:23,559 --> 00:27:26,920
the chapter. And then he just has like a page

490
00:27:26,920 --> 00:27:29,519
and a half or something at the end where he's like, okay,

491
00:27:29,559 --> 00:27:31,400
and here's my model of the trinity years how I

492
00:27:31,440 --> 00:27:34,240
think this works, you know, And he's just like, yeah,

493
00:27:34,279 --> 00:27:36,279
God is an immaterial try personal being.

494
00:27:36,359 --> 00:27:38,480
Speaker 3: Boom, no metaphysics, no, nothing.

495
00:27:38,279 --> 00:27:41,440
Speaker 4: Banned out, And I, you know, I just laid out

496
00:27:41,559 --> 00:27:44,160
like here are kind of the arguments against the Doctor

497
00:27:44,200 --> 00:27:46,920
of the Trinity, like the biggest ones in the literature,

498
00:27:48,279 --> 00:27:49,880
and you know, you want a model to kind of

499
00:27:49,880 --> 00:27:52,519
be able to answer those. And you also here's you know,

500
00:27:52,599 --> 00:27:55,519
the theophany issue that's kind of an argument for the Trinity,

501
00:27:55,599 --> 00:27:58,480
and you want your model to be consistent with what

502
00:27:58,759 --> 00:28:02,799
originally was one of the major you know, impetuses if

503
00:28:02,880 --> 00:28:03,119
that's a.

504
00:28:03,160 --> 00:28:04,079
Speaker 3: Word for the Trinity.

505
00:28:04,559 --> 00:28:08,319
Speaker 4: So uh, and I just get like, look, you're like

506
00:28:08,559 --> 00:28:10,160
you haven't answered either.

507
00:28:10,000 --> 00:28:10,759
Speaker 5: Of these big questions.

508
00:28:10,799 --> 00:28:13,400
Speaker 4: I mean, the the obvious question is is the Doctor

509
00:28:13,400 --> 00:28:16,519
of the Trinity tritheistic? Like is the Father Son and

510
00:28:16,559 --> 00:28:20,240
Holy Spirit? Is that three gods? And just telling me

511
00:28:20,440 --> 00:28:23,720
like there is one God, but there are three persons,

512
00:28:23,799 --> 00:28:27,599
father Son, and Holy Spirit, each of whom can properly

513
00:28:27,759 --> 00:28:31,920
be called God and properly means like literally, not just

514
00:28:32,079 --> 00:28:37,680
metaphorically or whatever like that that just creates the quote.

515
00:28:37,680 --> 00:28:40,079
I mean, that's what the big question is, is like,

516
00:28:40,200 --> 00:28:43,039
how do you if you can call each one of

517
00:28:43,119 --> 00:28:47,559
these God, then how is that not three gods? Like

518
00:28:47,640 --> 00:28:50,240
you have to like that's the question, and he he

519
00:28:50,279 --> 00:28:52,200
doesn't do anything to answer the question. I mean he

520
00:28:52,279 --> 00:28:54,799
just kind of acts like it's just there's no problem,

521
00:28:54,839 --> 00:28:57,400
and it's like, now you haven't you haven't addressed the

522
00:28:57,480 --> 00:28:58,160
question at all.

523
00:28:58,519 --> 00:29:01,119
Speaker 2: Well, one question I have because I've only read I

524
00:29:01,200 --> 00:29:04,880
read Reasonable Faith, and I read his book Defending Genesis.

525
00:29:05,400 --> 00:29:07,920
So that's really the only William Lane Krebb books I've

526
00:29:07,960 --> 00:29:10,200
read over the years. I thought the Genesis book was

527
00:29:10,200 --> 00:29:14,400
actually pretty good. But does he ever interact with the

528
00:29:14,519 --> 00:29:19,200
Cappadocian models and approaches that you specialize and talk about

529
00:29:19,680 --> 00:29:21,039
in Yeah, a.

530
00:29:21,079 --> 00:29:26,559
Speaker 4: Few times, but very lightly, I would say, and in

531
00:29:26,640 --> 00:29:30,720
a way that's like frustratingly selective. Also, so like he

532
00:29:30,839 --> 00:29:35,519
has a paper where he was he was criticizing Mike

533
00:29:35,680 --> 00:29:40,440
Ray's model of the Trinity, and he kind of draws

534
00:29:40,519 --> 00:29:45,319
on like one of Basil's epistles and kind of says it.

535
00:29:45,319 --> 00:29:47,319
You know, it looks like maybe Basil is talking about

536
00:29:47,359 --> 00:29:50,400
this kind of view and rejecting it. But then, of course,

537
00:29:50,440 --> 00:29:52,519
you know, if you point out that their church fathers

538
00:29:52,599 --> 00:29:55,240
that are rejecting his views, just like oh, well, you know,

539
00:29:55,319 --> 00:30:01,440
I'm a Protestant, I bring everything before the bar of scripture. Why, Yeah,

540
00:30:01,480 --> 00:30:05,400
it's just kind of odd. So yeah, I mean he

541
00:30:05,519 --> 00:30:07,480
kind of just vaguely, you know, he talks about how

542
00:30:07,519 --> 00:30:10,079
the Capit oceans were clear, that there's a distinction between

543
00:30:10,119 --> 00:30:15,400
the persons. Yeah, sometimes he kind of mentions them, but

544
00:30:16,720 --> 00:30:19,759
it doesn't really doesn't really make munchy.

545
00:30:21,400 --> 00:30:24,319
Speaker 2: Now that book is you had sent me, I think

546
00:30:24,319 --> 00:30:26,640
an advanced version of that. I've got to read some

547
00:30:26,759 --> 00:30:28,680
of that, did you Is that out yet or is

548
00:30:28,720 --> 00:30:29,480
it still that out yet?

549
00:30:30,079 --> 00:30:31,799
Speaker 4: No, it's I don't really know what's going on with it.

550
00:30:31,839 --> 00:30:33,920
It's still the publishers. We all we all spend it

551
00:30:34,079 --> 00:30:40,400
our final drafts like January first, like everything was was in.

552
00:30:40,599 --> 00:30:43,880
So it's been there since then. I got and every

553
00:30:43,920 --> 00:30:45,640
now and then I get an email from the editor

554
00:30:45,640 --> 00:30:47,480
and it's like, oh, they're trying to figure out you know,

555
00:30:47,599 --> 00:30:50,759
this is a typo or whatever. And so I'm not

556
00:30:50,799 --> 00:30:52,039
really sure what's delayed it.

557
00:30:52,160 --> 00:30:54,319
Speaker 2: But and one more time. The title is four of

558
00:30:54,400 --> 00:30:56,440
yous on the Trinity, and that's what published.

559
00:30:58,200 --> 00:31:03,960
Speaker 4: One god, three persons, four views. I think it's whipping stock.

560
00:31:04,839 --> 00:31:09,759
Chad McIntosh will be the editor, So we'll see when.

561
00:31:09,680 --> 00:31:11,599
Speaker 3: It comes out. I'll sart, yeah, come.

562
00:31:11,519 --> 00:31:13,880
Speaker 2: Back and we'll we'll get a deeper interview on that.

563
00:31:14,039 --> 00:31:17,920
Now moving on the next section. Is Mohammed a Job

564
00:31:17,960 --> 00:31:22,119
giving his opening statement. William Craig did end his opening

565
00:31:22,160 --> 00:31:24,640
statement with it which a good question, which is, you know,

566
00:31:24,839 --> 00:31:28,240
tal heat is not a unified position in Islam. Of

567
00:31:28,319 --> 00:31:30,799
course we brought this up a lot in the Muslim debates.

568
00:31:30,799 --> 00:31:33,000
I brought it up to the Muslim Muslim lantern not

569
00:31:33,119 --> 00:31:36,400
too long ago, and which is a fair question. And

570
00:31:36,440 --> 00:31:38,720
then of course they will say, well that and my

571
00:31:39,000 --> 00:31:42,000
edge up. So this is too quoquay. I don't. I mean,

572
00:31:42,000 --> 00:31:44,519
I'm not sure it is too quoqua, because doing an

573
00:31:44,559 --> 00:31:47,200
internal critique isn't too quoquay. And I think in a

574
00:31:47,279 --> 00:31:49,880
debate it's a fair question to ask, Okay, I have

575
00:31:50,000 --> 00:31:51,799
a burden of proof if we're going to debate the trinity.

576
00:31:52,200 --> 00:31:53,960
But I don't think it's unfair to ask. You know,

577
00:31:54,039 --> 00:31:56,319
you have the same kind of issue of reconciling the

578
00:31:56,400 --> 00:31:59,400
one in the mini in God as well. It's not persons,

579
00:31:59,440 --> 00:32:01,960
but for you, the attributes of all law, the dependence

580
00:32:02,039 --> 00:32:04,839
relationship of the attributes. So I think that's a fair question.

581
00:32:04,960 --> 00:32:07,880
But Mohammed a Job tried to side step but by

582
00:32:07,920 --> 00:32:10,359
saying well, you don't disagree that there's one a law,

583
00:32:11,240 --> 00:32:13,160
but we just disagree on what that means. Well, that's

584
00:32:13,279 --> 00:32:16,079
the point. So just saying that you all believe in

585
00:32:16,200 --> 00:32:17,640
one a law is another word game.

586
00:32:17,680 --> 00:32:21,400
Speaker 4: Really we say, yeah, we agree that there's one God,

587
00:32:21,519 --> 00:32:23,920
we disagree about you know what all that requires?

588
00:32:24,039 --> 00:32:26,240
Speaker 2: And that led to deaths. Actually, this wasn't just a

589
00:32:26,319 --> 00:32:29,160
minor dispute. There were just in the early Islamic stages

590
00:32:29,200 --> 00:32:30,759
that were killing each other over this, so it's not

591
00:32:30,880 --> 00:32:31,799
some minor dispute.

592
00:32:32,720 --> 00:32:32,960
Speaker 5: Yeah.

593
00:32:33,559 --> 00:32:34,720
Speaker 3: Yeah, I thought about that too.

594
00:32:34,880 --> 00:32:36,920
Speaker 4: When he said, like, that's a two quotque, I was

595
00:32:37,000 --> 00:32:40,599
kind of like, well, like yeah, I mean, on the

596
00:32:40,640 --> 00:32:43,160
one hand, it doesn't show that the doctorate of the

597
00:32:43,200 --> 00:32:47,079
Trinity is right coherent, but it I think it There

598
00:32:47,240 --> 00:32:53,119
is a point to saying, like, you know, you're offering

599
00:32:53,759 --> 00:32:59,400
this argument against the Trinity, but you yourself don't believe

600
00:32:59,599 --> 00:33:03,240
one of the premises exactly, yeah you did, It would

601
00:33:03,319 --> 00:33:07,200
cause this other problem for your own view, So it

602
00:33:07,279 --> 00:33:11,039
seems a little disingenuous, right, So I think it was legitimate.

603
00:33:11,079 --> 00:33:15,920
I mean, maybe it wasn't right immediately obvious to muhammedan

604
00:33:16,160 --> 00:33:19,599
job like how it was relevant or something, but but

605
00:33:19,759 --> 00:33:23,839
I thought, yeah, it's relevant if like your own worldview

606
00:33:23,960 --> 00:33:26,240
can't sustain.

607
00:33:25,960 --> 00:33:26,519
Speaker 3: That or whatever.

608
00:33:26,799 --> 00:33:29,319
Speaker 2: And I think that the next question that Hajab asked

609
00:33:29,400 --> 00:33:31,200
what you brought up, which I think this was a

610
00:33:31,279 --> 00:33:33,519
fair question and I think we would agree with this,

611
00:33:34,240 --> 00:33:37,880
which is that William Lane Craig does not represent historic

612
00:33:38,039 --> 00:33:39,200
or mainstream Christianity.

613
00:33:39,920 --> 00:33:40,039
Speaker 6: Uh.

614
00:33:40,279 --> 00:33:43,680
Speaker 4: And so yeah, but one that's where I was like,

615
00:33:44,119 --> 00:33:48,599
I wish that Muhammed hi Jab would have just explained, like, what,

616
00:33:49,119 --> 00:33:52,119
what exactly is the conclusion that you were aiming at

617
00:33:52,240 --> 00:33:55,000
with that, because it's like, I mean, I'm listening to it,

618
00:33:55,039 --> 00:33:57,240
and I'm like, yeah, I wish that William Lane Craig

619
00:33:57,319 --> 00:34:01,359
would not be a trinitarian heretic. That'd be awesome, and

620
00:34:01,880 --> 00:34:04,400
I agree you shouldn't be. But uh, and it's sort

621
00:34:04,440 --> 00:34:07,640
of like vaguely embarrassing, like ahaha, you've got, you know,

622
00:34:07,799 --> 00:34:13,360
this kind of minority and basically heretical view. But it's like, okay,

623
00:34:13,559 --> 00:34:14,920
so but then where are you going with that?

624
00:34:15,000 --> 00:34:17,119
Speaker 2: Well, the conclusion he tried to draws in non sequitor.

625
00:34:17,199 --> 00:34:21,719
The conclusion was because Weenland Craig's trinitarian doctrine is outside

626
00:34:21,719 --> 00:34:25,039
of the norm, outside the mainstream, that the trinity is

627
00:34:25,119 --> 00:34:29,679
not a clear, conspicuous uh doctrine doctrine and Christians disagree well,

628
00:34:29,719 --> 00:34:31,360
of course, but that wouldn't disprove the trinity.

629
00:34:31,920 --> 00:34:35,559
Speaker 4: So I mean, that's that's I think that's part of

630
00:34:35,639 --> 00:34:38,000
what Craig is trying to do with this really broad

631
00:34:38,119 --> 00:34:43,800
definition of just like one God, three persons, that's the trinity.

632
00:34:43,920 --> 00:34:46,280
Is kind of like, well then anything that falls under

633
00:34:46,360 --> 00:34:48,400
that umbrella like count says.

634
00:34:49,039 --> 00:34:51,599
Speaker 2: Which is interesting because Muhammed a Jab wanted a very

635
00:34:51,639 --> 00:34:57,400
broad umbrella for Muslims all believe God has won. So yeah,

636
00:34:57,480 --> 00:35:00,679
so if there was a fair standards here, yeah, he

637
00:35:00,760 --> 00:35:03,360
should have granted. I think this broad definition, even though

638
00:35:03,360 --> 00:35:06,480
I don't agree with that broad definition, but still from

639
00:35:06,519 --> 00:35:09,599
a debate perspective, it shows I think a double standard. Yeah.

640
00:35:09,880 --> 00:35:12,159
Speaker 4: Weird thing too about that is, I mean, if you're saying,

641
00:35:12,199 --> 00:35:14,880
if you're gonna say, okay, William Lane, Craig's view doesn't

642
00:35:14,920 --> 00:35:21,199
really represent like historically the mainstream Orthodox view about the Trinity,

643
00:35:21,920 --> 00:35:25,239
then what that really does? That means you could demolish

644
00:35:25,440 --> 00:35:28,559
Craig's view and you haven't really addressed like, you know,

645
00:35:28,760 --> 00:35:33,000
the yeah, Orthodox view. So it was sort of like

646
00:35:33,119 --> 00:35:35,760
he just thought well, if William Lane Craig like grants

647
00:35:36,159 --> 00:35:42,599
that the standard view is incoherent or something, then at

648
00:35:42,639 --> 00:35:44,519
the very end of the debate too, I mean he

649
00:35:44,599 --> 00:35:47,519
even sort of he said this. He was just like, well,

650
00:35:47,559 --> 00:35:50,320
William Lane Craig and I have demolished the you know,

651
00:35:50,559 --> 00:35:54,199
traditional Orthodox view or whatever. His own view also has problems.

652
00:35:54,280 --> 00:35:56,800
It's like, you didn't demolish it. He just both agreed

653
00:35:57,639 --> 00:36:01,559
to not talk about it and sort of agreed to say.

654
00:36:02,639 --> 00:36:05,599
Speaker 2: Well, this has to do. I think also with Muhammed

655
00:36:05,639 --> 00:36:09,280
a Jab intentionally choosing William Lane Craig as his opponent

656
00:36:09,360 --> 00:36:12,079
because it allows him to say, I'm debating the most

657
00:36:12,199 --> 00:36:14,960
quote eminent of the Christian apologists that are out there.

658
00:36:15,679 --> 00:36:17,360
Once I've done this, I don't really have to deal

659
00:36:17,400 --> 00:36:19,840
with anyone else because he's sort of the figurehead of it.

660
00:36:20,000 --> 00:36:22,519
But he's not really the figurehead if by all of

661
00:36:22,559 --> 00:36:27,280
the argumentation my job is making, he's the fringe outlier,

662
00:36:27,920 --> 00:36:30,199
so he's not so. But I think it was an

663
00:36:30,199 --> 00:36:33,880
intentional choice to debate when like Craig and to explicitly

664
00:36:34,039 --> 00:36:38,519
not choose to debate me and Sam or me or

665
00:36:38,679 --> 00:36:41,199
Sam or me and Sam and him and Jake, which

666
00:36:41,239 --> 00:36:43,519
he doesn't seem to want to do. Yeah.

667
00:36:44,719 --> 00:36:44,920
Speaker 3: Yeah.

668
00:36:45,440 --> 00:36:50,320
Speaker 4: Right after that debate, Capturing Christianity did a review like

669
00:36:50,440 --> 00:36:54,760
a few hours later or whatever, and David Wood made

670
00:36:55,039 --> 00:36:59,639
some interesting observations about it. So one was that that

671
00:36:59,760 --> 00:37:02,519
he like maybe he was going to just try to

672
00:37:02,960 --> 00:37:05,280
from now on be like, well, I've already debated wien

673
00:37:05,320 --> 00:37:06,800
Link Craig, I don't need to you know, I don't

674
00:37:06,840 --> 00:37:11,320
have to debate anybody anymore, which is probably and that

675
00:37:11,440 --> 00:37:16,639
sounds plausible. But also he made an interesting point about

676
00:37:17,920 --> 00:37:21,679
who he thought the intended audience was, and he thought that,

677
00:37:21,960 --> 00:37:26,800
you know, this maybe wasn't really directed towards like trying

678
00:37:26,920 --> 00:37:29,639
to convince Christians that the doctrine of the Trinity is

679
00:37:29,679 --> 00:37:33,639
incoherent and they should become Muslims, or trying to convince

680
00:37:33,679 --> 00:37:35,760
people who are kind of on the fence or agnostic

681
00:37:35,880 --> 00:37:38,719
or whatever, but just trying to but that he's really

682
00:37:38,800 --> 00:37:42,039
is just kind of trying to keep Muslims from.

683
00:37:42,000 --> 00:37:43,920
Speaker 2: No, it's their audience. In fact, I think the last

684
00:37:44,039 --> 00:37:48,440
several Multimum debates were really just done for Muscile audiences. Yeah,

685
00:37:48,599 --> 00:37:51,480
to find a kind of like well clip that clip

686
00:37:51,559 --> 00:37:53,320
that little thirty second there and make it look like

687
00:37:53,440 --> 00:37:55,639
Jay didn't know what he was saying or Sam didn't. No,

688
00:37:55,800 --> 00:37:58,079
that's exactly it. And to that to that first point, actually,

689
00:37:58,119 --> 00:38:00,280
Muhammed had Job today said that very thing. He said,

690
00:38:00,280 --> 00:38:02,639
I've debated William Lane Craig, I don't have to debate

691
00:38:02,639 --> 00:38:05,400
anybody else. Yes, he said that on Twitter today. So yeah,

692
00:38:05,400 --> 00:38:08,559
I think that David was correct there. But again I

693
00:38:08,639 --> 00:38:11,800
want to issue the challenge again to Mohamed d Job.

694
00:38:11,840 --> 00:38:14,039
I did talk to Myron today and Myron said that

695
00:38:14,159 --> 00:38:20,039
freshen Fit would host me and Sam shimun versus Mohammed

696
00:38:20,079 --> 00:38:22,320
a Job and Jake, because Mohammed a Jab was saying

697
00:38:22,400 --> 00:38:25,320
that Sam has to debate Jake first, then he would

698
00:38:25,360 --> 00:38:28,199
debate Mohammed a Job and then Sam's idea was, well,

699
00:38:28,199 --> 00:38:29,719
why don't we just do it two verses two? So

700
00:38:29,880 --> 00:38:34,000
that should solve everybody's complaints if we want to do that.

701
00:38:34,119 --> 00:38:38,239
But anyway, get it back to the debate. So it

702
00:38:38,320 --> 00:38:41,000
seemed like he was trying to sneak in a little

703
00:38:41,000 --> 00:38:43,199
bit of that logical problem of the trinity there, because

704
00:38:43,239 --> 00:38:46,880
he said, if Father is God, Son is God Spirit God,

705
00:38:47,000 --> 00:38:50,119
therefore Father is Spirit because all our God, this all

706
00:38:50,199 --> 00:38:52,760
relies on just sort of one usage or reference to

707
00:38:52,800 --> 00:38:55,199
the word God, as if God couldn't pick out different things,

708
00:38:56,400 --> 00:38:59,719
which again I think comes from Jake. Thank you, and

709
00:38:59,880 --> 00:39:03,199
we've covered that. I think you helped pointing to a

710
00:39:03,239 --> 00:39:05,559
lot of the literature and various papers that deal with

711
00:39:05,639 --> 00:39:09,000
different ways of counting anything you wanted to say, because

712
00:39:09,000 --> 00:39:10,960
they didn't really go into logical problem. The tourney just

713
00:39:11,039 --> 00:39:13,280
kind of just kind of mentioned in passing.

714
00:39:14,039 --> 00:39:16,159
Speaker 3: Hey, I mean I took a bunch of notes.

715
00:39:17,400 --> 00:39:19,400
Speaker 4: And then I was just thinking about that today. I

716
00:39:19,480 --> 00:39:22,039
was like, did I miss something or did he just

717
00:39:22,199 --> 00:39:25,239
never really it never came back. They claim that this

718
00:39:25,440 --> 00:39:27,880
is three gods, which is kind of surprising, like seems

719
00:39:27,920 --> 00:39:31,320
like that's the first thing a Muslim would want to do,

720
00:39:32,199 --> 00:39:32,559
would be.

721
00:39:32,639 --> 00:39:33,199
Speaker 2: Say this is.

722
00:39:34,840 --> 00:39:37,039
Speaker 4: I kind of thought about that. I'm like, if they

723
00:39:37,159 --> 00:39:40,360
just decided that that's kind of played out or well.

724
00:39:40,440 --> 00:39:43,880
Speaker 2: And but to your point where this debate goes when

725
00:39:43,920 --> 00:39:48,320
it gets to inseparable operations, I mean, unless I misunderstood,

726
00:39:48,360 --> 00:39:52,639
you're saying that the model that this inverted Nissa model

727
00:39:52,760 --> 00:39:56,119
that Wimland Craig has it actually kind of does lead

728
00:39:56,159 --> 00:39:57,159
to tritheism, right.

729
00:39:59,400 --> 00:40:02,719
Speaker 4: Yeah, I think I think so and it's one thing

730
00:40:02,800 --> 00:40:05,119
that that comes up. So see this is one of

731
00:40:05,159 --> 00:40:07,239
the So this is one of the things that was

732
00:40:07,360 --> 00:40:11,679
kind of disappointing. I guess maybe Muhammed Hi jab A

733
00:40:12,320 --> 00:40:15,639
k A. Jake would not have any way to to

734
00:40:15,840 --> 00:40:19,880
know all this maybe, But anyway, this that kind of

735
00:40:19,920 --> 00:40:23,199
comes out in the book that Craig has. This just

736
00:40:23,360 --> 00:40:28,880
is completely inconsistent about what he thinks about counting and such.

737
00:40:29,000 --> 00:40:32,559
So he'll when I talk a little bit about you

738
00:40:32,639 --> 00:40:36,599
know how in antiquity people would think of that counting

739
00:40:36,679 --> 00:40:41,440
works by your counting discrete, separate things, not overlapping your

740
00:40:41,519 --> 00:40:45,280
things or anything. So, uh, when I talk about that,

741
00:40:45,400 --> 00:40:48,360
he's like, that's crazy, that's that's nuts. The only the

742
00:40:48,440 --> 00:40:50,320
only way you can count is by identity.

743
00:40:51,039 --> 00:40:51,159
Speaker 1: Uh.

744
00:40:51,400 --> 00:40:53,800
Speaker 4: And he you know, cites this paper I think I

745
00:40:53,840 --> 00:40:56,599
think it was by Hughes or something. But anyway, he

746
00:40:57,679 --> 00:40:58,880
was just like, oh, this is crazy.

747
00:40:58,920 --> 00:40:59,719
Speaker 2: It was just a nuts.

748
00:41:01,039 --> 00:41:06,320
Speaker 4: But then he says, because I talk about inseparable operations, uh,

749
00:41:06,679 --> 00:41:08,760
and that the persons of the trinity have the same

750
00:41:08,880 --> 00:41:12,639
will and they're you know all this, so he says, well,

751
00:41:12,679 --> 00:41:17,000
that's really just one person. Then that's really hunitarianism. But

752
00:41:17,239 --> 00:41:19,079
notice that if you want to say that the Father

753
00:41:19,199 --> 00:41:23,280
Son and Holy Spirit are not identical, uh, but they

754
00:41:23,480 --> 00:41:27,360
are just one person, then you're saying that we don't

755
00:41:27,519 --> 00:41:30,239
count by identity. We don't we don't count persons by

756
00:41:31,119 --> 00:41:33,920
see I mean part in fact, the paper that he cites,

757
00:41:34,000 --> 00:41:37,760
like one of the main arguments in there about you know,

758
00:41:38,159 --> 00:41:40,960
let's forget about this weird you know, relative identity and

759
00:41:41,079 --> 00:41:41,920
counting all this stuff.

760
00:41:42,400 --> 00:41:42,559
Speaker 3: Uh.

761
00:41:43,400 --> 00:41:47,960
Speaker 4: One of the premises in that paper is like, if

762
00:41:48,039 --> 00:41:50,920
there are in number of f's, and all the f's

763
00:41:50,920 --> 00:41:53,039
are g's, then there have to be at least as

764
00:41:53,079 --> 00:41:55,760
many g's as there are f's. So it's like, well,

765
00:41:55,800 --> 00:41:57,960
if the Father Son and Holy Spirit are three anything,

766
00:41:58,719 --> 00:42:01,239
then by that reasoning, they if they're all persons, they

767
00:42:01,320 --> 00:42:05,039
had there at least three persons. Funny is he he

768
00:42:05,159 --> 00:42:12,159
adopts like Gregorednis's view basically for counting persons. Yeah, but uh,

769
00:42:12,760 --> 00:42:15,079
but not like beings or whatever. And I just point

770
00:42:15,119 --> 00:42:18,880
out that, well, but what Craig calls a person is

771
00:42:19,159 --> 00:42:22,880
what Gregor Nissa calls a god like a divine person

772
00:42:23,000 --> 00:42:26,719
is what he's and what Craig calls a being is

773
00:42:27,159 --> 00:42:32,000
a hyposthesis. So really, so I was like, really, there's

774
00:42:32,079 --> 00:42:35,679
not actually any philosophical disagreement here. It's just a terminological thing.

775
00:42:35,800 --> 00:42:40,159
Like what what Craig calls divine persons is what Gregory

776
00:42:40,239 --> 00:42:44,719
calls gods. And Craig admits that Gregory has just one

777
00:42:44,800 --> 00:42:48,920
of those. He just calls them persons instead of gods. Right,

778
00:42:49,079 --> 00:42:51,960
So he's basically admitting that gregor Danissa has just one

779
00:42:52,079 --> 00:42:55,519
god if they have in separable operations, which is the

780
00:42:55,559 --> 00:42:57,760
whole argument that I was making, is like in separable

781
00:42:57,840 --> 00:43:02,280
operations are key to, you know, defending the view that

782
00:43:02,320 --> 00:43:07,519
there's one God. So he's just kind of incoherent about that.

783
00:43:07,760 --> 00:43:10,480
And that was something that Muhammed a Job never really

784
00:43:10,599 --> 00:43:14,199
got into. Another thing he does that's really weird is

785
00:43:14,519 --> 00:43:17,199
he says that to me, like you have to count

786
00:43:17,239 --> 00:43:21,280
by identity, anything else is incoherent and crazy. But then

787
00:43:21,400 --> 00:43:25,599
when Craig is responding to Dale Tuggy, he says that

788
00:43:25,719 --> 00:43:28,679
people in antiquity didn't even have a concept of numerical

789
00:43:28,719 --> 00:43:31,639
identity like we understand it today, where you know, so

790
00:43:31,760 --> 00:43:35,239
you can't make these arguments about identity that Tuggy was making.

791
00:43:35,519 --> 00:43:37,039
And I actually asked if we were in a like

792
00:43:37,119 --> 00:43:40,320
a round table discussion sort of thing in November at

793
00:43:40,320 --> 00:43:46,280
this Evangelical Philosophical Society and Theological Society. We got a

794
00:43:46,360 --> 00:43:47,880
chance to kind of ask each other questions. And I

795
00:43:47,960 --> 00:43:50,559
asked him. I was like, so, you know, you say

796
00:43:50,679 --> 00:43:55,840
that this is how counting has to work, but people

797
00:43:56,480 --> 00:43:59,840
in antiquity didn't even have the concept of identity that

798
00:44:00,119 --> 00:44:02,840
would need in order to be able to count. So

799
00:44:03,000 --> 00:44:05,840
it was like, so, how were people in the ancient

800
00:44:05,960 --> 00:44:08,719
world able to count? And he was just kind of like, oh,

801
00:44:08,960 --> 00:44:09,679
that's a good question.

802
00:44:09,800 --> 00:44:14,880
Speaker 3: The typically living that was his response, Just like and

803
00:44:14,960 --> 00:44:15,960
they're like, okay.

804
00:44:16,480 --> 00:44:18,239
Speaker 2: Well maybe he could buy the bullet and say that

805
00:44:18,320 --> 00:44:19,400
they just didn't even count.

806
00:44:19,519 --> 00:44:23,480
Speaker 4: There was no counting there, like how many dogs?

807
00:44:24,079 --> 00:44:25,880
Speaker 3: So what his job?

808
00:44:26,280 --> 00:44:27,920
Speaker 2: And that's that's good because a lot of people don't

809
00:44:28,000 --> 00:44:31,280
know this area of critique when it comes to the

810
00:44:31,440 --> 00:44:35,360
terminology confusion there. What do you think is the source

811
00:44:35,519 --> 00:44:38,679
of William Lane Craig's terminological confusion. Is it just lack

812
00:44:38,719 --> 00:44:42,559
of familiarity with the patristic ideas of nature, person and

813
00:44:42,559 --> 00:44:45,639
all this kind of stuff, or is he just sort

814
00:44:45,679 --> 00:44:49,000
of maybe obtuse about it because he's committed to his

815
00:44:49,159 --> 00:44:51,920
definitions or is it because he doesn't really care what

816
00:44:52,039 --> 00:44:55,159
the church fathers said because it's a biblical perspective. I

817
00:44:55,239 --> 00:44:57,079
mean it seems like, I mean, it's just it's just

818
00:44:57,199 --> 00:45:00,639
odd to not want to use the terminology that the

819
00:45:00,760 --> 00:45:02,119
church father is sort of adopted.

820
00:45:02,199 --> 00:45:09,760
Speaker 4: Yeah, to be fair, I mean, I think that a

821
00:45:10,000 --> 00:45:15,519
lot of confusion has been generated by social trinitarians, Okay,

822
00:45:16,039 --> 00:45:17,840
and I don't you know, I mean, maybe some of

823
00:45:17,880 --> 00:45:20,840
that deliberately, maybe some of it not. So you know,

824
00:45:20,960 --> 00:45:24,199
he may just if you don't really dig into it,

825
00:45:24,360 --> 00:45:26,960
you know, maybe you would just sort of think, well,

826
00:45:27,039 --> 00:45:29,079
this is kind of and in fact, I mean Hasker

827
00:45:29,239 --> 00:45:32,559
even sort of made this point that it was just like,

828
00:45:32,639 --> 00:45:35,159
surely you know about all of this, you know, debate

829
00:45:35,239 --> 00:45:37,239
about what a person is and whatever. And I was

830
00:45:37,280 --> 00:45:39,360
kind of like, I know, the debate is just a

831
00:45:39,440 --> 00:45:42,679
dumb debate that like there's not that's really not that art.

832
00:45:43,440 --> 00:45:46,039
But but yeah, I mean, social trinitarians are so like

833
00:45:47,480 --> 00:45:52,239
it that social trinitarianism doesn't work if you have i mean,

834
00:45:52,320 --> 00:45:57,039
unless you have distinct minds and wills and whatever, it's

835
00:45:57,119 --> 00:46:02,239
not social trinitarianism anymore. Also, though, I think Craig i

836
00:46:02,360 --> 00:46:05,760
forgot when he did. Is his doctorate in theology?

837
00:46:06,760 --> 00:46:07,400
Speaker 3: I forget who.

838
00:46:07,480 --> 00:46:11,000
Speaker 4: But he might have studied under I know he had

839
00:46:11,000 --> 00:46:13,400
studied under Pannenberg, but he might have studied under someone

840
00:46:13,559 --> 00:46:16,360
else there too. That was like a big one of

841
00:46:16,400 --> 00:46:19,039
the big like early proponents of social trinity.

842
00:46:19,360 --> 00:46:21,960
Speaker 2: H okay, his education.

843
00:46:24,079 --> 00:46:26,599
Speaker 3: But so I don't know, but that's yeah, yeah.

844
00:46:26,480 --> 00:46:28,920
Speaker 2: That's that's an interesting point. I didn't know that. Now

845
00:46:28,960 --> 00:46:33,199
the next section, williamline Craig responds by saying, well, you

846
00:46:33,320 --> 00:46:35,639
have Koran or no? This is excuse me, this is

847
00:46:35,719 --> 00:46:38,679
a Job responding to I thought this was a really

848
00:46:38,760 --> 00:46:42,159
weak response. Williamline Craig said, you know, in Koran five

849
00:46:42,320 --> 00:46:46,760
sixteen you have this reference to a misunderstanding of the trinity,

850
00:46:47,320 --> 00:46:50,360
and Mohammed Job's response was pretty preposterous. It was like,

851
00:46:50,480 --> 00:46:53,320
the Trinity is not mentioned in that verse. Well, but

852
00:46:53,719 --> 00:46:57,039
the verse is about the relationship of Christ to the

853
00:46:57,440 --> 00:47:00,280
triad and whether he's divine or not, whether all has

854
00:47:00,320 --> 00:47:03,159
sons or not. So fact, the bay was not not

855
00:47:03,320 --> 00:47:05,679
about whether the word trinity do is Is this a

856
00:47:05,840 --> 00:47:09,239
reference to Trinitarian doctrines, namely the deity of the Sun,

857
00:47:09,320 --> 00:47:13,239
which is a Trinitarian doctrine so by extension. So I

858
00:47:13,280 --> 00:47:15,199
thought that was a really weak response and sort of

859
00:47:15,280 --> 00:47:19,000
trying to sidestep the fact that clearly, and this is

860
00:47:19,000 --> 00:47:21,360
a very powerful argument if you think about it, because remember,

861
00:47:21,480 --> 00:47:24,719
if the Quran is true, if Islam is true, we

862
00:47:24,760 --> 00:47:27,920
would at least expect them to get the basic doctrines

863
00:47:27,960 --> 00:47:31,679
of Christianity correct, even if they think it's false, it

864
00:47:31,679 --> 00:47:35,559
should at least have some basic presentation of well, these

865
00:47:36,079 --> 00:47:38,440
errant you know people of the book believe that you know,

866
00:47:39,239 --> 00:47:42,360
there's three persons and once you know one essence or something.

867
00:47:42,400 --> 00:47:44,519
But it never even states that correctly. In fact, I

868
00:47:44,599 --> 00:47:47,519
have iman to MEA's book over there. Even even to me,

869
00:47:47,599 --> 00:47:50,079
it doesn't state what the doctrine of the trinity is correctly.

870
00:47:50,239 --> 00:47:54,119
So that shows that the early generations of Muslims, namely

871
00:47:54,280 --> 00:47:57,639
even to me for example, very important to Jake and

872
00:47:58,199 --> 00:48:02,440
momented job and the authority Muslim school there, like even

873
00:48:02,519 --> 00:48:05,599
even to me, it repeats this misunderstanding, showing that the

874
00:48:05,719 --> 00:48:08,800
Quran actually does misunderstand the Trinity.

875
00:48:11,000 --> 00:48:11,599
Speaker 3: Yeah I didn't.

876
00:48:11,719 --> 00:48:14,440
Speaker 4: I mean, I'm not qualified to say a whole ton

877
00:48:14,480 --> 00:48:18,719
about the Quran, but yeah, I was kind of Yeah,

878
00:48:18,760 --> 00:48:20,760
it'd be nice to have more detail, Like it was

879
00:48:20,800 --> 00:48:22,480
just kind of like, well, yeah, that's not really what

880
00:48:22,559 --> 00:48:25,760
it means. It's like, well, I mean I thought that

881
00:48:25,880 --> 00:48:28,719
that passage was sort of about the Trinity like that.

882
00:48:29,760 --> 00:48:32,199
So I mean, if we're talking about the Trinity in general.

883
00:48:32,039 --> 00:48:35,960
Speaker 3: Then anyway, another thing with.

884
00:48:36,039 --> 00:48:38,079
Speaker 4: That, I mean it's I don't know that I don't

885
00:48:38,119 --> 00:48:41,519
know that Islam is committed to something like the clarity

886
00:48:41,559 --> 00:48:43,800
of scripture the way you know Protestants are, but.

887
00:48:44,440 --> 00:48:45,840
Speaker 2: Get at least the traditional ones are.

888
00:48:46,599 --> 00:48:48,920
Speaker 4: Okay, yeah, so I mean then it's kind of like, well,

889
00:48:50,159 --> 00:48:51,639
then you'd expect the Quran to.

890
00:48:51,719 --> 00:48:53,519
Speaker 3: Be more the like.

891
00:48:53,760 --> 00:48:55,880
Speaker 2: Well, in fact, the Koran says in multiple places that

892
00:48:56,039 --> 00:48:59,480
the Quran makes all things perfectly clear, and then nothing

893
00:48:59,880 --> 00:49:02,920
is unclear, although there is another verse which says some

894
00:49:03,199 --> 00:49:06,880
verses only all I knows the meaning, So I'm not

895
00:49:06,920 --> 00:49:09,039
sure how everything is clear. But then there's other verses

896
00:49:09,079 --> 00:49:10,719
that say that only all I knows the meaning of them.

897
00:49:10,760 --> 00:49:12,519
But anyway, that's a good one to bring up. Now

898
00:49:12,800 --> 00:49:15,400
we only Craig responds by saying, well, look, there's two

899
00:49:15,440 --> 00:49:20,159
broad schools of trinity. They're social and there's Latin. That's

900
00:49:20,199 --> 00:49:23,039
not true. But if you're in a modern I guess

901
00:49:23,039 --> 00:49:25,760
analytic product Protestant setting, you would only think that I'm

902
00:49:26,000 --> 00:49:29,119
surprised he didn't mention any other models. He didn't mention

903
00:49:29,280 --> 00:49:33,159
the monarchical trinitarian model. Yeah, yeah, it was kind of.

904
00:49:34,719 --> 00:49:36,760
Speaker 4: I get maybe he just feels like he doesn't understand

905
00:49:36,800 --> 00:49:39,840
it or something like that. Yeah, and he mentioned Hasker

906
00:49:39,960 --> 00:49:42,559
because and this does I don't know, I kind of

907
00:49:42,599 --> 00:49:45,679
go back and forth on this. So in this book,

908
00:49:46,199 --> 00:49:49,480
Bill Hasker and William Lane Craig, I mean, they're both

909
00:49:49,559 --> 00:49:54,719
social trinitarians, and they I mean, according to them, they

910
00:49:54,840 --> 00:50:00,079
basically agree about everything except the eternal begetting right. So

911
00:50:00,199 --> 00:50:06,280
Hasker thinks that the eternal processions are really important to

912
00:50:06,480 --> 00:50:11,199
kind of secure monotheism, although when I talk about the

913
00:50:11,239 --> 00:50:13,360
monarchy of the Father, which is basically the same thing,

914
00:50:14,639 --> 00:50:18,719
and how that's important for monotheism, he seems to like

915
00:50:18,840 --> 00:50:21,000
want to resist it in weird ways that I don't

916
00:50:21,039 --> 00:50:24,239
really think he needs to. But and then yeah, and

917
00:50:24,320 --> 00:50:26,639
then Craig just thinks, now they have to all be

918
00:50:26,880 --> 00:50:30,880
absolutely I'll say whatever. So and I'm not really sure

919
00:50:30,920 --> 00:50:35,960
if they don't actually disagree more really under the surface.

920
00:50:35,679 --> 00:50:40,079
Speaker 3: But they kind of present it that way. So, I

921
00:50:40,199 --> 00:50:41,480
mean that was kind of his his.

922
00:50:43,119 --> 00:50:45,679
Speaker 4: I guess response to his job there was kind of like, well,

923
00:50:45,760 --> 00:50:48,519
if you want to talk about how the you know,

924
00:50:48,559 --> 00:50:52,880
the fact that he rejects eternal begetting, then just look

925
00:50:52,920 --> 00:50:55,800
at Bill Hasker's model and it's basically the same thing.

926
00:50:55,880 --> 00:50:58,880
But just and Craig, I mean, he is clear that

927
00:50:59,159 --> 00:51:03,400
his model of the trinity is supposed to be like

928
00:51:03,639 --> 00:51:06,840
neutral with respect to that question. So he's kind of like,

929
00:51:06,960 --> 00:51:12,000
he personally rejects eternal begetting and procession of the spirit.

930
00:51:12,360 --> 00:51:14,840
So but he's like, but if you want to believe

931
00:51:14,880 --> 00:51:17,480
in the eternal beginning of the sun and eternal procession

932
00:51:17,519 --> 00:51:18,199
of the spirit, you.

933
00:51:18,239 --> 00:51:19,119
Speaker 3: Know, have ad it.

934
00:51:19,719 --> 00:51:21,960
Speaker 2: Well that to that point, this was something that I

935
00:51:22,039 --> 00:51:25,000
thought Mohammed a Job could have hammered harder, which he

936
00:51:25,000 --> 00:51:28,199
didn't really he kind of touched sort of in passing

937
00:51:28,320 --> 00:51:33,559
mentioned it. But if social trinitarianism is what Leland Craig affirms,

938
00:51:34,320 --> 00:51:37,159
and his affirmation of that, as he says by his

939
00:51:37,239 --> 00:51:39,880
own admission, was because of sol Scriptura and the New

940
00:51:39,960 --> 00:51:42,760
Testament attacks, why was it that no one was a

941
00:51:42,800 --> 00:51:45,679
social trinitarian until the nineteen fifties. This was the clear

942
00:51:46,199 --> 00:51:47,199
New Testament teaching.

943
00:51:49,440 --> 00:51:50,159
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean.

944
00:51:52,119 --> 00:51:56,119
Speaker 4: Yeah, I guess it was Martin Luther and pastor Bob

945
00:51:56,559 --> 00:51:58,880
from the one hundred Luther.

946
00:51:59,079 --> 00:51:59,840
Speaker 2: I mean, does he.

947
00:52:02,639 --> 00:52:04,400
Speaker 4: People who like hit you know, the guy who like

948
00:52:04,480 --> 00:52:05,800
hid the King James Bible.

949
00:52:06,079 --> 00:52:10,000
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, yeah, Joseph Smith found it. That Joseph Smith

950
00:52:10,079 --> 00:52:12,199
found it and prayed over it, like you know.

951
00:52:12,920 --> 00:52:16,159
Speaker 4: I don't know Moltman or someone who you know, I

952
00:52:16,199 --> 00:52:20,320
don't know, yeah, who knows? I mean maybe it's not

953
00:52:21,119 --> 00:52:22,840
And Craig that we really out the.

954
00:52:23,760 --> 00:52:27,719
Speaker 2: Doctrine of the truth exactly. Now, hit Job said something

955
00:52:27,760 --> 00:52:31,880
I thought was odd, where he says and William and

956
00:52:31,960 --> 00:52:34,480
Craig returns to that point of there being many schools

957
00:52:34,559 --> 00:52:38,480
fighting over talheed, and the Job again says, yeah, but

958
00:52:38,559 --> 00:52:40,840
we all believe God's wont which is again a deflection

959
00:52:41,079 --> 00:52:44,480
from the actual criticism. And then a Job counters by saying,

960
00:52:45,400 --> 00:52:47,119
and I guess he got this from Jake because I've

961
00:52:47,159 --> 00:52:49,760
never heard anybody say this, which is I've never heard this.

962
00:52:49,880 --> 00:52:51,719
You could please correct us if this is false. I

963
00:52:51,800 --> 00:52:55,039
would assume it's false. He thinks that the Kappadocians teach

964
00:52:55,079 --> 00:52:58,480
a social trinitarianism. That's just simply not true. And is

965
00:52:58,519 --> 00:53:00,480
there somebody who argues this where with it come from?

966
00:53:01,440 --> 00:53:04,880
You said that Craig or the Job in passing said

967
00:53:05,599 --> 00:53:08,400
do you think that the Cappadocians teach social trinitarian He

968
00:53:08,400 --> 00:53:11,960
says something like that, affirming that the Cappadocians teach a

969
00:53:12,039 --> 00:53:13,159
social trinitarianism.

970
00:53:15,119 --> 00:53:20,320
Speaker 4: Yeah, well so a lot of social trinitarians.

971
00:53:20,559 --> 00:53:24,920
Speaker 2: Oh, I think a Job isn't familiar with these terms

972
00:53:24,920 --> 00:53:27,519
because he's sort of just repeating what Jake's told him,

973
00:53:28,199 --> 00:53:30,599
and so he would he was probably just assuming that

974
00:53:30,760 --> 00:53:33,800
this is some sort of ancient model, and that's why

975
00:53:33,880 --> 00:53:36,039
we Craig has it because he wanted to then say

976
00:53:36,119 --> 00:53:39,800
that if you believe the Cappadocian social trinitarianism, why do

977
00:53:39,880 --> 00:53:43,679
you reject eternal generation? Right?

978
00:53:43,760 --> 00:53:47,000
Speaker 4: Okay, yeah, yeah, well so a lot of social trinitarians

979
00:53:47,519 --> 00:53:51,840
have appealed to the Capitocian Okay, I see support for

980
00:53:51,880 --> 00:53:54,599
their model. So, especially early like in the eighties and stuff,

981
00:53:55,280 --> 00:53:58,599
you'll have people pointing to Gregorbanissa in particularly.

982
00:53:58,840 --> 00:53:59,840
Speaker 2: That's where they're getting that then.

983
00:54:00,199 --> 00:54:03,599
Speaker 4: And the reason is because I think it's just that

984
00:54:05,519 --> 00:54:10,039
the way at least people understood like Latin trinitarianism or

985
00:54:10,119 --> 00:54:15,880
kind of traditional Western view was kind of tantamount to modalism,

986
00:54:16,079 --> 00:54:19,760
if it wasn't just kind of a you know, kind

987
00:54:19,800 --> 00:54:22,960
of repackage modalism or something. But and it's just that

988
00:54:23,079 --> 00:54:26,920
the the capit Oceans are very clear about the distinction

989
00:54:27,360 --> 00:54:28,840
of the of the persons, and.

990
00:54:28,920 --> 00:54:29,679
Speaker 3: They accept that.

991
00:54:29,840 --> 00:54:33,840
Speaker 4: They'll they'll sort of run with the three man analogy,

992
00:54:35,280 --> 00:54:38,519
you know, like they're kind of you know that they're

993
00:54:38,559 --> 00:54:40,159
not going to say they're three gods. I mean, it's

994
00:54:40,159 --> 00:54:42,679
not totally analogous, but they'll they'll kind of run with

995
00:54:42,760 --> 00:54:45,000
that for a while. And so it's kind of clear that, okay,

996
00:54:45,039 --> 00:54:45,800
there's a distinction.

997
00:54:45,960 --> 00:54:47,079
Speaker 3: And so social.

998
00:54:46,880 --> 00:54:49,559
Speaker 4: Trinitarians would say like, look, that's you know, this Greek

999
00:54:49,679 --> 00:54:52,360
tradition and we need to kind of recover that. And

1000
00:54:52,440 --> 00:54:55,159
it's there, you know, these kind of early social trinitarians

1001
00:54:55,239 --> 00:54:57,400
or something, and I think, you know, once you get

1002
00:54:57,440 --> 00:54:59,159
into the details of it.

1003
00:54:59,239 --> 00:54:59,960
Speaker 2: It's there.

1004
00:55:00,079 --> 00:55:02,960
Speaker 4: Not social critarians, but but a lot of social printarians,

1005
00:55:03,039 --> 00:55:06,119
especially early on, kind of appealed to them.

1006
00:55:09,800 --> 00:55:12,400
Speaker 2: Next Wymlane Craig moves on. That was where he makes

1007
00:55:12,440 --> 00:55:15,000
his statement that there is no New Testament teaching about

1008
00:55:15,000 --> 00:55:17,159
the inner life of the Trinity. I thought that was odd.

1009
00:55:18,880 --> 00:55:21,119
And then there's an argument from silence, which I thought

1010
00:55:21,320 --> 00:55:23,519
was also not a very good argument, which wym lane

1011
00:55:23,559 --> 00:55:26,639
Craig says, well, I don't believe in I assume you

1012
00:55:26,679 --> 00:55:29,280
saw eternal generation there. I don't believe in eternal generation

1013
00:55:29,400 --> 00:55:33,599
because it's not taught by the post Apostolic fathers. Well,

1014
00:55:33,679 --> 00:55:36,039
that's an argument from silence. I mean, yeah, it might

1015
00:55:36,119 --> 00:55:37,719
be the case that they don't mention it, but there's

1016
00:55:37,719 --> 00:55:41,039
all kinds of things that the New Testament first century

1017
00:55:41,079 --> 00:55:43,880
post Apastolic fathers don't talk about or teach that William

1018
00:55:43,920 --> 00:55:47,320
lane Craig also holds to, for example, the New Testament

1019
00:55:47,400 --> 00:55:50,000
post as the post Avastolic Church fathers don't list the

1020
00:55:50,039 --> 00:55:52,880
canon of scripture that William lane Craig has. And so

1021
00:55:53,119 --> 00:55:55,119
why would we think then that that it has to

1022
00:55:55,199 --> 00:55:59,440
be an explicitly written affirmation to believe that this was

1023
00:55:59,519 --> 00:56:03,039
something in the post Apostolic period. So a lot of

1024
00:56:03,079 --> 00:56:04,880
Protestants do this, They'll say they'll have this sort of

1025
00:56:05,039 --> 00:56:07,960
arbitrary standard of well, I don't have to accept something

1026
00:56:08,159 --> 00:56:10,760
like eternal generation of the sun because it's not mentioned

1027
00:56:10,840 --> 00:56:14,960
until whatever late person. I think it's mentioned by but

1028
00:56:15,079 --> 00:56:16,760
that's really again, I don't think that's a very good

1029
00:56:16,960 --> 00:56:19,440
reason too too. And there's all kinds of things to

1030
00:56:19,480 --> 00:56:21,880
post as I've start. Fathers will talk about.

1031
00:56:21,639 --> 00:56:27,199
Speaker 4: That Protestants believe, yeah, and I mean the you know,

1032
00:56:27,480 --> 00:56:30,639
the Canada Scripture is kind of the big like gotcha

1033
00:56:30,719 --> 00:56:36,280
because it seems you know, obviously circular and self referentially

1034
00:56:36,360 --> 00:56:39,440
and coherent if you But but yeah, there's a million

1035
00:56:39,480 --> 00:56:41,760
other things. And this is another thing that's really frustrating

1036
00:56:41,840 --> 00:56:47,400
is William Lane Craig also has this book where he's, uh,

1037
00:56:49,800 --> 00:56:56,039
basically he's he's defending like nominalism because he doesn't want

1038
00:56:56,079 --> 00:56:57,960
to say that there's like yeah, he wasn't doesn't want

1039
00:56:57,960 --> 00:56:59,559
to be a platonist and say like there's all of

1040
00:56:59,599 --> 00:57:03,119
these platonic forms or divine ideas or whatever that are

1041
00:57:03,159 --> 00:57:08,239
also eternally existent and you know that God's like dependent

1042
00:57:08,400 --> 00:57:13,320
on them for his properties or something like that. In

1043
00:57:13,519 --> 00:57:16,440
that book he has a list of like early church

1044
00:57:16,559 --> 00:57:20,519
fathers talking about how you know, God is the only

1045
00:57:20,679 --> 00:57:25,960
thing that is ungenerated and say basically, so it's kind

1046
00:57:26,000 --> 00:57:27,880
of like well, in that book he's going to appeal

1047
00:57:27,960 --> 00:57:32,400
to these church fathers. Oh that you know, God is

1048
00:57:32,440 --> 00:57:34,559
the only thing that's say or whatever. So you know,

1049
00:57:34,719 --> 00:57:37,199
that's it's really it's authoritative.

1050
00:57:36,679 --> 00:57:36,840
Speaker 5: You know.

1051
00:57:37,000 --> 00:57:39,800
Speaker 3: There, it's like, you know, and anyway, it's really you

1052
00:57:39,880 --> 00:57:40,719
really should follow that.

1053
00:57:40,760 --> 00:57:42,400
Speaker 4: You know, it's at least at least has some kind

1054
00:57:42,440 --> 00:57:45,239
of to it, right, But it's like, yeah, as soon

1055
00:57:45,280 --> 00:57:47,159
as as soon as the church fathers go against you,

1056
00:57:47,400 --> 00:57:51,559
it's you know, well, yeah, I'm a Protestant, right.

1057
00:57:51,679 --> 00:57:53,840
Speaker 2: And on that same point too, that's odd that he

1058
00:57:53,880 --> 00:57:56,440
would defend a kind of nominalist position. Maybe he's just

1059
00:57:56,559 --> 00:58:00,159
changed his position because I remember a talk maybe six

1060
00:58:00,199 --> 00:58:02,079
seven years ago that I listened to where he was

1061
00:58:02,159 --> 00:58:05,840
defending divine conceptualism and it was appealing to platonism and

1062
00:58:05,880 --> 00:58:10,000
platonic arguments, which if you're a nominalist, that wouldn't work anymore.

1063
00:58:10,360 --> 00:58:13,960
Speaker 4: So in that book, I mean, he says that when

1064
00:58:14,000 --> 00:58:17,880
he sort of started that research project out, he anticipated

1065
00:58:17,960 --> 00:58:21,760
that he would end up being a conceptualist, but kind

1066
00:58:21,800 --> 00:58:25,760
of as he went through everything more he eventually decided

1067
00:58:25,800 --> 00:58:30,280
he's so he might have been a concept divine conceptualist

1068
00:58:30,440 --> 00:58:32,280
or something earlier.

1069
00:58:32,199 --> 00:58:38,880
Speaker 2: On Okay, now, okay, next it begins to shift into

1070
00:58:39,159 --> 00:58:43,639
Now this is the part where let's see somewhere. Yeah,

1071
00:58:43,679 --> 00:58:48,800
William L. Craig thinks that there's not a specific reference

1072
00:58:48,880 --> 00:58:54,239
for eternal generation the New Testament, and that the New

1073
00:58:54,320 --> 00:58:59,079
Testament just simply teaches a very scaled down three persons,

1074
00:58:59,159 --> 00:59:04,440
one God and that eternal generation. Will Lane cred didn't

1075
00:59:04,480 --> 00:59:10,239
explicitly reply to this, but the accusation of his job

1076
00:59:10,440 --> 00:59:16,239
is that Williamin Craig thinks the eternal generation necessitates subordinationism.

1077
00:59:16,800 --> 00:59:19,320
Is that what Craig argues somewhere?

1078
00:59:23,440 --> 00:59:26,079
Speaker 4: Yeah, now they out of my head. I'm not sure

1079
00:59:26,079 --> 00:59:27,679
if he does.

1080
00:59:27,559 --> 00:59:29,679
Speaker 2: He just think it's not a New Testament doctrine, or

1081
00:59:29,719 --> 00:59:33,039
does he think that it mightn't well necessarily, I think.

1082
00:59:32,960 --> 00:59:36,599
Speaker 4: His main his main worry is with ausaity. He thinks

1083
00:59:36,679 --> 00:59:41,599
that that to be fully divine you have to be

1084
00:59:41,719 --> 00:59:42,920
absolutely aw same.

1085
00:59:42,960 --> 00:59:45,159
Speaker 2: Okay, So is that why Jake got that argument? He

1086
00:59:45,280 --> 00:59:48,360
just cribbed it from probably from Willelan Craig.

1087
00:59:49,400 --> 00:59:53,199
Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah, Craig and Ryan Mullins also makes the same argument,

1088
00:59:54,800 --> 00:59:58,159
and Bill Hasker and Ryan Mullins have gone back and forth,

1089
00:59:58,320 --> 01:00:01,960
like y various papers, sort of back and forth about

1090
01:00:02,000 --> 01:00:06,280
whether you know a saity is required for divinity or whatever.

1091
01:00:07,440 --> 01:00:11,960
But but Craig definitely that's that's I think his probably

1092
01:00:12,079 --> 01:00:14,840
main motivation. I can't recall off the top of my

1093
01:00:14,880 --> 01:00:19,280
head if he talks about subordinationism in some other respect,

1094
01:00:19,360 --> 01:00:22,559
but a saiity certainly is the big issue for him.

1095
01:00:23,920 --> 01:00:26,119
Speaker 2: Yeah, And this was the point where Muhammad a Jab

1096
01:00:26,199 --> 01:00:29,719
says that if there's clear and ordinary language that teaches

1097
01:00:29,880 --> 01:00:34,360
the Trinity, then why do you reject the traditional Christian

1098
01:00:34,440 --> 01:00:37,639
teaching which wasn't word Well, but I think that's that's

1099
01:00:37,679 --> 01:00:39,719
a fair question to ask William Lane craig.

1100
01:00:41,800 --> 01:00:46,840
Speaker 4: So what's the how would that argument go? Like, uh,

1101
01:00:49,719 --> 01:00:51,679
just that it should be clear in the.

1102
01:00:51,880 --> 01:00:55,199
Speaker 2: New Well, William Lane Craig as a Protestants arguing, well, look,

1103
01:00:55,280 --> 01:00:58,400
I'm just arguing the clear, scaled down New Testament doctrine

1104
01:00:58,440 --> 01:01:01,920
of the Trinity. And then Muhammed Adjab is saying, but

1105
01:01:02,039 --> 01:01:06,360
your social trinitarianism is against the you know, two thousand

1106
01:01:06,480 --> 01:01:10,000
year clear tradition of what most Christians accept as orthodoxy.

1107
01:01:10,119 --> 01:01:13,920
So more of an I guess a hermeneutical objection about

1108
01:01:13,960 --> 01:01:17,400
clear and ordinary language. But I think the job is

1109
01:01:17,440 --> 01:01:20,559
trying to score points with the just demonstrating that, look,

1110
01:01:20,639 --> 01:01:24,719
the Trinity is not coherence because supposedly it's not clear.

1111
01:01:25,440 --> 01:01:27,880
But that's actually a false equivalence, Right, something can be

1112
01:01:28,000 --> 01:01:31,440
true and not necessarily simple, and so a lot of

1113
01:01:31,519 --> 01:01:36,760
Muslims confuse simplicity with clarity or perspecuity, and those are

1114
01:01:36,800 --> 01:01:39,599
not necessarily the same things. In fact, when I debated

1115
01:01:39,639 --> 01:01:42,239
with Daniel in The Jaws, the first thing Daniel said was, look,

1116
01:01:42,920 --> 01:01:46,719
Islam's true because it's simple, God's won. I was like, well,

1117
01:01:46,840 --> 01:01:48,559
but that doesn't mean that it's true, because it does

1118
01:01:48,599 --> 01:01:50,519
like a version of Rockham's razor fallacy.

1119
01:01:51,599 --> 01:01:53,519
Speaker 3: Yeah. Now that's one of the things that really.

1120
01:01:55,079 --> 01:01:56,960
Speaker 4: It's like a huge pet peeve of mind because I

1121
01:01:57,159 --> 01:01:59,599
you know, I teach a class on like kind of

1122
01:01:59,679 --> 01:02:02,400
critical thinking sort of, a little bit of logic, a

1123
01:02:02,440 --> 01:02:04,679
little bit of just various sort of and that's like

1124
01:02:04,800 --> 01:02:07,239
one of the big things that we talk about is

1125
01:02:07,400 --> 01:02:10,599
like when so you know, for people who don't know, like,

1126
01:02:11,199 --> 01:02:13,039
this is something that's gotten a lot of attention, just

1127
01:02:13,440 --> 01:02:18,519
like from from psychologists doing like empirical research about how

1128
01:02:18,639 --> 01:02:21,599
people reason and the accuracy of their reasoning and whatever.

1129
01:02:22,599 --> 01:02:24,960
I mean, basically the consensus is like there's kind of

1130
01:02:25,000 --> 01:02:27,719
two different systems going on in your brain at the

1131
01:02:27,760 --> 01:02:30,840
same time. So there's what they'll sometimes just call system one.

1132
01:02:31,000 --> 01:02:35,000
It's this like kind of intuitive, like fast, kind of

1133
01:02:35,079 --> 01:02:38,519
gut reaction, knee jerk sort of reaction. And then system

1134
01:02:38,559 --> 01:02:42,239
two is this like methodical, you know, conscious, deliberate going

1135
01:02:42,320 --> 01:02:46,480
through following rules and whatever. And you know the big

1136
01:02:46,599 --> 01:02:50,239
issue is just like the system one, like what intuitively

1137
01:02:50,440 --> 01:02:55,440
seems simple and obvious to us, Like that system is

1138
01:02:55,880 --> 01:03:00,239
it's it's very quick and accurate in certain contexts, and

1139
01:03:00,280 --> 01:03:02,320
then it just gives you the completely wrong answer.

1140
01:03:02,360 --> 01:03:03,320
Speaker 2: Yes, certain others.

1141
01:03:03,400 --> 01:03:06,079
Speaker 4: Yeah, and there's no way to know ahead of time,

1142
01:03:06,960 --> 01:03:11,039
like whether it's gonna be the accurate one or not.

1143
01:03:11,280 --> 01:03:13,880
Like it's just sort of like it gives you the

1144
01:03:13,960 --> 01:03:17,960
right results ninety nine percent of the time in cases

1145
01:03:18,039 --> 01:03:22,400
where it kind of is important to make snap judgments forever.

1146
01:03:22,840 --> 01:03:25,239
But so it's like it's one of the like this

1147
01:03:25,400 --> 01:03:27,679
is something I would I try to spend a whole

1148
01:03:27,679 --> 01:03:30,719
semester like telling students to not do this, Like just

1149
01:03:30,840 --> 01:03:36,039
because something seems intuitively obvious to you has not necessarily

1150
01:03:36,199 --> 01:03:40,440
like any relation to whether it is true or even coherent.

1151
01:03:40,679 --> 01:03:43,159
Speaker 2: Yes. This is a key point too, because I've had

1152
01:03:43,159 --> 01:03:46,719
a lot of discussions with Thomas lately and with Muslims,

1153
01:03:46,719 --> 01:03:49,960
and I've noticed a parallel between the discussion with certain

1154
01:03:50,039 --> 01:03:54,119
Thomas and with Muslims, and the pattern is that both

1155
01:03:54,199 --> 01:03:58,840
seem to assume that, well, look, everybody knows what monotheism

1156
01:03:59,039 --> 01:04:02,320
is and what divine simplicity is, and that a self

1157
01:04:02,400 --> 01:04:04,920
evident simple being has to be this, this, this, and this,

1158
01:04:05,559 --> 01:04:07,400
and then that being would also be perfect and we

1159
01:04:07,440 --> 01:04:09,440
all know that perfection includes this, this, this, and this,

1160
01:04:09,639 --> 01:04:11,880
So it's like all this metaphysical baggage that well, wait

1161
01:04:11,920 --> 01:04:14,760
a minute, how do I know that's the right content

1162
01:04:14,960 --> 01:04:18,519
for what you mean by one God? It's just all assumed.

1163
01:04:19,239 --> 01:04:21,920
We don't know that that's the case, And then if

1164
01:04:21,920 --> 01:04:24,559
you start asking them epistemic questions, it's like, well but yeah,

1165
01:04:24,599 --> 01:04:26,480
but we all know that. So it's like basically just

1166
01:04:26,519 --> 01:04:29,960
built on appeals to like peel to masses, fallacy, or

1167
01:04:30,000 --> 01:04:32,519
appeal to simplicity or something like that, none of which

1168
01:04:32,559 --> 01:04:34,519
necessarily tells us that that's the case or how we're

1169
01:04:34,519 --> 01:04:38,599
supposed to interpret what it means to be one God.

1170
01:04:38,960 --> 01:04:44,760
It's just assumed, but that brings us to the next point,

1171
01:04:44,760 --> 01:04:50,360
where William Craig says, well this the whole debate then

1172
01:04:50,440 --> 01:04:54,440
shifts about halfway through to Muhammed Jabs saying, well, you

1173
01:04:54,440 --> 01:05:01,159
believe in three wills in God? This necessitates conflict. Now

1174
01:05:01,239 --> 01:05:03,239
this was a I think this is a silly way

1175
01:05:03,239 --> 01:05:06,880
to go about the debate, because there's not necessarily anything

1176
01:05:06,920 --> 01:05:12,239
about multiple wills that necessitates opposition. He should have he

1177
01:05:12,239 --> 01:05:13,840
should have gone the route of what you say, of

1178
01:05:13,920 --> 01:05:16,880
saying that, well, look, will has to be some kind

1179
01:05:16,920 --> 01:05:20,719
of property of an existing nature or being, and that

1180
01:05:20,760 --> 01:05:23,320
would necessitate three gods. But he doesn't go in that direction.

1181
01:05:23,440 --> 01:05:27,880
He tries to argue that somehow having three wills necessitates

1182
01:05:28,119 --> 01:05:32,400
partition in what the beings do, and it necessitates some

1183
01:05:32,599 --> 01:05:35,920
form of opposition as a potentiality, which not necessarily I

1184
01:05:35,920 --> 01:05:36,400
don't think.

1185
01:05:36,280 --> 01:05:40,840
Speaker 4: Any referenced Scott Williams paper. So Scott's a good friend

1186
01:05:40,880 --> 01:05:42,920
of mine and he so I don't know. Maybe maybe

1187
01:05:43,000 --> 01:05:45,320
Muhammed a job didn't do a good job like articulating

1188
01:05:46,480 --> 01:05:51,639
the argument. But what Scott's argument is is if you

1189
01:05:51,840 --> 01:05:59,559
have three wills, you know, like social trinitarians want. I mean,

1190
01:05:59,800 --> 01:06:03,119
it seems like if you don't say anything else, then

1191
01:06:03,159 --> 01:06:06,280
it seems like at least there are possible worlds where

1192
01:06:07,159 --> 01:06:12,760
these three wills disagree, and you need to say something

1193
01:06:12,800 --> 01:06:16,480
about like why there wouldn't be right because you don't,

1194
01:06:16,519 --> 01:06:18,519
I mean, you know you can. It's fine to say

1195
01:06:18,599 --> 01:06:20,719
like the persons of the Trinity don't disagree and they

1196
01:06:20,760 --> 01:06:24,039
always cooperate, but but it seems weird to say they

1197
01:06:24,280 --> 01:06:27,559
could and they you know, they would get into a war.

1198
01:06:28,440 --> 01:06:32,320
Speaker 2: Right. But this is where William Lane Craig appeals to

1199
01:06:32,440 --> 01:06:35,800
this metaphysics of perfection, which I thought was odd because

1200
01:06:35,920 --> 01:06:39,519
it's very similar to them to the Muslim appeal to perfection,

1201
01:06:40,119 --> 01:06:44,639
which shows the presubpositions of metaphysical baggage that people have, because,

1202
01:06:44,679 --> 01:06:48,039
for example, Muslim thinks that well, to be the more

1203
01:06:48,159 --> 01:06:51,440
perfect being means in some cases that Allah is only

1204
01:06:51,599 --> 01:06:55,639
strictly just one, because to have real multiplicity would mean

1205
01:06:55,719 --> 01:06:58,559
some kind of diminution or some kind of imperfection, because

1206
01:06:58,599 --> 01:07:02,000
we all know that multiplelicity means a perfect unity, or

1207
01:07:02,000 --> 01:07:06,360
excuse me, perfection truly means a perfect unity without distinction.

1208
01:07:06,519 --> 01:07:09,840
So that's a metaphysical assumption about perfection. But in other cases,

1209
01:07:10,480 --> 01:07:13,000
right even to me. It says, well, we'd all wouldn't

1210
01:07:13,039 --> 01:07:15,199
We all know that to be a more perfect being,

1211
01:07:15,320 --> 01:07:18,960
Allah has to laugh versus not laughing, because laughing is

1212
01:07:19,000 --> 01:07:21,360
more perfect than not laughing. So there's this weird metaphysical

1213
01:07:21,360 --> 01:07:24,119
assumption about perfection. Wim Lane Craig then says, well, look,

1214
01:07:24,280 --> 01:07:26,159
there are three perfect beings, so I can appeal to

1215
01:07:26,280 --> 01:07:28,760
perfection of the beings, and therefore they would never be

1216
01:07:28,800 --> 01:07:30,559
out of a court in terms of three different wills.

1217
01:07:31,159 --> 01:07:33,679
I just thought the whole course of the debate at

1218
01:07:33,719 --> 01:07:35,920
this point gets into two bad arguments here.

1219
01:07:37,679 --> 01:07:38,440
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's.

1220
01:07:40,119 --> 01:07:44,239
Speaker 4: So Richard Swinburne has this kind of view that although

1221
01:07:44,280 --> 01:07:47,119
he swinburn believes in the processions too, so he kind

1222
01:07:47,159 --> 01:07:50,079
of has a natural way for the father to kind

1223
01:07:50,119 --> 01:07:53,920
of have some I don't know priority in some sense,

1224
01:07:54,000 --> 01:07:57,599
but anyway. One, yeah, one way social trinitarians will respond

1225
01:07:57,679 --> 01:07:59,159
to this argument is to say, well, the.

1226
01:08:00,760 --> 01:08:01,599
Speaker 3: Yeah, they're perfect.

1227
01:08:01,639 --> 01:08:04,679
Speaker 4: So if they're all omniscient and they all are omni benevolent,

1228
01:08:04,800 --> 01:08:06,880
like they all know what's good and they all want

1229
01:08:06,960 --> 01:08:10,039
what's good, so they'll all kind of so number one,

1230
01:08:10,119 --> 01:08:13,960
they'll all just naturally want the good anyway, and then

1231
01:08:14,000 --> 01:08:16,840
they know, it's not good to fight and whatever, so

1232
01:08:16,920 --> 01:08:20,800
they would all want to agree and whatever. I hi

1233
01:08:20,880 --> 01:08:25,279
Jab brought up a kind of good point, but there's

1234
01:08:25,359 --> 01:08:27,239
you can go a little further with it. So he

1235
01:08:27,399 --> 01:08:30,920
just pointed out that God there are some things that

1236
01:08:31,720 --> 01:08:35,920
God wills that are He didn't really put it in

1237
01:08:36,039 --> 01:08:38,199
terms of like morally neutral, but that I think that's

1238
01:08:38,279 --> 01:08:40,560
the idea, Like they're morally neutral and they're contingent. So

1239
01:08:40,760 --> 01:08:44,680
just something like, you know, suppose there's a possible world

1240
01:08:44,720 --> 01:08:47,239
where the Father wants the sky to be blue, but

1241
01:08:47,399 --> 01:08:49,560
the sun thinks it'd be better if it was green,

1242
01:08:50,199 --> 01:08:52,359
and the Holy Spirit sort of likes red, and you

1243
01:08:52,399 --> 01:08:54,439
know they want they you know, they can't agree on

1244
01:08:54,520 --> 01:08:57,479
the colors, and they and they all have three different things,

1245
01:08:57,479 --> 01:08:59,520
so they're all kind of voting on different things. They

1246
01:08:59,560 --> 01:09:04,960
can't do you know, by democratically or something. And uh,

1247
01:09:05,760 --> 01:09:09,439
Swinburne's argument is kind of like, well, they would all

1248
01:09:10,640 --> 01:09:12,960
as perfect and good beings, you know, they would all

1249
01:09:13,079 --> 01:09:17,600
like want to resolve that disagreement peacefully, and you know

1250
01:09:17,680 --> 01:09:21,600
they'd be willing to kind of you know, defer to

1251
01:09:22,159 --> 01:09:29,479
the Father or something like that. But one one thing

1252
01:09:29,600 --> 01:09:33,359
that they didn't get into in this debate. And I've

1253
01:09:33,359 --> 01:09:35,079
heard people get talks about this and they kind of

1254
01:09:35,079 --> 01:09:39,239
it's kind of overlooked sometimes. I like this phrase something

1255
01:09:39,319 --> 01:09:44,239
people call it a Canadian standoff, as opposed to like

1256
01:09:44,279 --> 01:09:47,319
the Mexican standoff or who's gonna shoot first? But the

1257
01:09:47,560 --> 01:09:50,399
Canadian standoff quote unquote is like, you know, suppose you're

1258
01:09:50,399 --> 01:09:52,760
at the door and one person is like, oh you

1259
01:09:52,960 --> 01:09:53,600
you go first?

1260
01:09:53,800 --> 01:09:55,720
Speaker 2: Oh no, no, no, it would right, it would be

1261
01:09:55,720 --> 01:09:56,720
an internal stem up.

1262
01:09:57,560 --> 01:09:57,760
Speaker 3: Yeah.

1263
01:09:57,800 --> 01:10:00,359
Speaker 4: So it's like you can be perfectly like a good

1264
01:10:00,479 --> 01:10:02,560
will and you don't want to get in a fight,

1265
01:10:02,640 --> 01:10:05,880
you know, and you're and that's not necessarily enough to

1266
01:10:06,479 --> 01:10:11,239
resolve the decision problem, like just having good will, because

1267
01:10:11,279 --> 01:10:14,600
you can be. In some cases good will can lead

1268
01:10:14,680 --> 01:10:18,319
to the standoff, right, that can't be resolved. Like if

1269
01:10:18,359 --> 01:10:20,600
one person would just be like, yeah, okay, man, I'll

1270
01:10:20,640 --> 01:10:25,640
go through, then that would resolve the issue. But but yeah,

1271
01:10:25,680 --> 01:10:29,399
it could be just precisely, maybe the father wants red,

1272
01:10:29,439 --> 01:10:31,600
the son wants green, the Holy Spirit wants blue. But

1273
01:10:31,680 --> 01:10:33,640
then everyone's like, oh, well then we need to do

1274
01:10:33,720 --> 01:10:35,000
what you want. Oh no, no, we can do we

1275
01:10:35,039 --> 01:10:36,119
can do what you want to do. Oh no, well,

1276
01:10:36,199 --> 01:10:37,600
let's do what he wants to do. Well, I want

1277
01:10:37,640 --> 01:10:39,000
to do just whatever you guys want to you know,

1278
01:10:40,439 --> 01:10:42,840
So I think I think it is a problem that, like,

1279
01:10:43,079 --> 01:10:46,279
if you're gonna say there's three distinct wills, it's just

1280
01:10:46,439 --> 01:10:52,199
not clear how how it could be not possible for

1281
01:10:52,399 --> 01:10:56,000
them to like disagree and not be able to resolve

1282
01:10:56,039 --> 01:10:58,640
that disagreement. And maybe I mean, you know, I guess

1283
01:10:58,680 --> 01:11:01,760
you could just say, like, well, luckily it turned out

1284
01:11:01,800 --> 01:11:04,560
that they didn't disagree or something, But that's kind of

1285
01:11:04,640 --> 01:11:09,720
a disappointing, unsatisfying, you know response.

1286
01:11:10,479 --> 01:11:14,640
Speaker 2: Well, the next part waynmline Craig says that modal collapse

1287
01:11:14,680 --> 01:11:18,319
sort of makes an appearance, and williamline Craig says, yeah, well,

1288
01:11:18,399 --> 01:11:23,319
God does have I believe, contingent properties, which is odd,

1289
01:11:23,479 --> 01:11:25,640
odd language and terminology. Of course, I think he means

1290
01:11:25,680 --> 01:11:27,960
the essence entergy distinction and how we believe that, you know,

1291
01:11:28,039 --> 01:11:33,760
God has, you know, different possibilities of what he can

1292
01:11:33,840 --> 01:11:36,399
will to create or not to create, or that God

1293
01:11:36,479 --> 01:11:42,079
does different actions. But but that's odd, Yeah, odd terminology

1294
01:11:42,159 --> 01:11:45,520
is that maybe an I've never heard contingent properties.

1295
01:11:49,600 --> 01:11:52,119
Speaker 4: Anyway, Yeah, I would just take that as he probably

1296
01:11:52,159 --> 01:11:53,439
is just thinking of proper but.

1297
01:11:55,079 --> 01:11:57,199
Speaker 2: He says the power of creating, like to create is

1298
01:11:57,239 --> 01:11:59,279
not something that he had to do.

1299
01:12:00,560 --> 01:12:04,960
Speaker 4: Yeah, the property of creating being a thing that has created.

1300
01:12:05,199 --> 01:12:06,439
Speaker 3: I mean, usually, like you know.

1301
01:12:06,800 --> 01:12:08,920
Speaker 4: Philosophers today, we'll just use the word property in a

1302
01:12:09,039 --> 01:12:11,199
very broad you know, just.

1303
01:12:11,319 --> 01:12:15,159
Speaker 3: Cover true about something. So I think that's how he's

1304
01:12:15,239 --> 01:12:15,560
using that.

1305
01:12:17,319 --> 01:12:19,159
Speaker 2: And then it gets into an issue. But what I'm

1306
01:12:19,159 --> 01:12:21,560
saying is that again, you know, because there's not an

1307
01:12:21,680 --> 01:12:26,720
essenceentrity distinction there. Even though will Lane Craig seems to

1308
01:12:26,760 --> 01:12:29,920
be aware of the motial collapse issue. Rather than using

1309
01:12:30,039 --> 01:12:33,680
and going to orthodox theology which resolves this question, it's

1310
01:12:33,760 --> 01:12:36,600
just another situation where well, I've got to invent sort

1311
01:12:36,640 --> 01:12:39,000
of my own you know, system or baggage or whatever.

1312
01:12:39,439 --> 01:12:41,239
I mean, it's the New Testament and the Old Testament.

1313
01:12:41,279 --> 01:12:44,520
I think, as doctor Bradshaw has shown in multiple papers,

1314
01:12:44,680 --> 01:12:46,479
that teaches the Essen Sentarti stinction. I mean, it's a

1315
01:12:46,520 --> 01:12:49,399
biblical doctrine, which so if you want to be biblicaal

1316
01:12:49,520 --> 01:12:52,000
Paul's teaching the you know, Essen Sceentnerti distinction of multiple

1317
01:12:52,000 --> 01:12:53,600
passages in the New Testament, where he talks about the

1318
01:12:53,600 --> 01:12:56,840
inner Geia working in him, uh to work with grot

1319
01:12:56,960 --> 01:12:58,640
with Christ and so forth, the power of God in

1320
01:12:58,760 --> 01:13:01,920
him doing a miss et cetera. That's all New Testament.

1321
01:13:02,159 --> 01:13:04,039
But why wouldn't we use that if we want to

1322
01:13:04,079 --> 01:13:08,039
resolve this issue of this specific point. I mean, and

1323
01:13:08,239 --> 01:13:10,359
Palomas does this, He says, you know, if you want

1324
01:13:10,399 --> 01:13:13,119
to notice the difference between essence and energy, says, look

1325
01:13:13,199 --> 01:13:16,840
to God creating and then ceasing from creating. That is

1326
01:13:16,880 --> 01:13:17,600
an example of this.

1327
01:13:19,279 --> 01:13:22,520
Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah, I mean I think he have that apparatus, right,

1328
01:13:22,640 --> 01:13:24,720
So it's just kind of like, well, I don't know,

1329
01:13:25,000 --> 01:13:28,359
God has some necessary properties and some contingent properties.

1330
01:13:28,479 --> 01:13:28,640
Speaker 1: Yeah.

1331
01:13:29,000 --> 01:13:31,680
Speaker 4: But one thing that's this is another thing where I

1332
01:13:31,960 --> 01:13:35,800
get kind of confused. I mean, it's hard for you

1333
01:13:35,880 --> 01:13:41,880
to understand what his view actually is because if I mean,

1334
01:13:44,159 --> 01:13:45,880
if you're going to be anomalist, I mean, I guess

1335
01:13:45,960 --> 01:13:49,119
maybe he would just say, maybe we just have to

1336
01:13:49,159 --> 01:13:51,800
translate all of this talk about properties into talk about

1337
01:13:51,880 --> 01:13:56,479
predicates that are true about God or something, because I mean, there's.

1338
01:13:56,319 --> 01:13:59,399
Speaker 3: Not really any properties if you're a nominalist.

1339
01:14:00,920 --> 01:14:02,279
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, that's a great point. Yeah.

1340
01:14:03,520 --> 01:14:06,840
Speaker 4: Which also, this is another thing that that muhammeda job

1341
01:14:06,920 --> 01:14:13,520
never brought up, which I wish that he had. So

1342
01:14:13,680 --> 01:14:16,119
Number one, I mean, even if you are a realist,

1343
01:14:16,359 --> 01:14:19,800
it's kind of a I always have this question, like

1344
01:14:19,840 --> 01:14:23,199
you've got this one soul that has three sets of

1345
01:14:23,319 --> 01:14:28,760
cognitive faculties, Like what exactly individuates the cognitive faculties?

1346
01:14:28,840 --> 01:14:31,079
Speaker 3: Like how do you get three of them? It's not the.

1347
01:14:31,199 --> 01:14:36,720
Speaker 4: Subject because there's only one subject, only one soul, So

1348
01:14:36,880 --> 01:14:39,760
that's not making them three. They're not like in three

1349
01:14:39,840 --> 01:14:46,560
different places spatially or something, because it's God and you

1350
01:14:46,760 --> 01:14:51,279
reject eternal relate the you know, relations of generation and processions,

1351
01:14:51,279 --> 01:14:57,279
so there's no like asymmetric relations to individuations, Like how

1352
01:14:57,399 --> 01:14:58,039
exactly do you get?

1353
01:14:58,199 --> 01:14:59,840
Speaker 2: Yeah, what individuates? What would he say?

1354
01:15:00,119 --> 01:15:02,920
Speaker 3: Graduays yeah, and there's no and and all.

1355
01:15:03,039 --> 01:15:04,760
Speaker 4: I mean if you just said something like they're just

1356
01:15:04,880 --> 01:15:09,079
primitively like they just they just come from the factory

1357
01:15:09,119 --> 01:15:11,960
that way, or you know, like it's like why couldn't

1358
01:15:11,960 --> 01:15:14,720
there be more? And if there and if it's possible

1359
01:15:14,800 --> 01:15:17,159
for there to have been a fourth person of the

1360
01:15:17,239 --> 01:15:23,159
trinity and divine persons are necessary beings, then it's necessary

1361
01:15:23,960 --> 01:15:26,039
that there's four. You know what I mean, so it's

1362
01:15:26,079 --> 01:15:28,279
like if you just sort of say they're primitively individuated,

1363
01:15:28,319 --> 01:15:30,720
it's like, well, why aren't there infinitely many persons?

1364
01:15:30,800 --> 01:15:30,960
Speaker 5: Then?

1365
01:15:31,800 --> 01:15:33,640
Speaker 4: And I don't, I don't have any idea, And he

1366
01:15:33,760 --> 01:15:36,279
never as far as I know, he's never addressed that.

1367
01:15:36,920 --> 01:15:39,119
And then and then if you add on top of that,

1368
01:15:39,439 --> 01:15:43,279
like he wants to be as hardcore nominalists, So like

1369
01:15:44,840 --> 01:15:47,880
I would think that that what nominalists would say. You know,

1370
01:15:47,920 --> 01:15:50,840
if you're talking about a cognitive faculty or a power

1371
01:15:51,680 --> 01:15:56,239
of thinking and willing, you just translate that, Well, it's

1372
01:15:56,319 --> 01:15:59,880
just a way of saying that this soul can make

1373
01:16:00,079 --> 01:16:03,560
decisions and have thoughts. So what does it mean to

1374
01:16:03,640 --> 01:16:05,159
have three that? I mean, if you if there's no

1375
01:16:05,439 --> 01:16:08,800
there's no such thing as powers. It's just kind of

1376
01:16:08,840 --> 01:16:11,199
a metaphorical way of talking about, you know, this this

1377
01:16:11,359 --> 01:16:15,159
thing can talk or think and will, Like, what does

1378
01:16:15,199 --> 01:16:18,359
it mean you can think and you can think three

1379
01:16:19,399 --> 01:16:24,000
things or will three things? I mean, I can will

1380
01:16:24,119 --> 01:16:26,399
three different things or two different things. I can have

1381
01:16:26,520 --> 01:16:28,680
a conflicted will or something. But I'm not I don't

1382
01:16:28,720 --> 01:16:31,600
have two different faculties of willing.

1383
01:16:31,800 --> 01:16:32,199
Speaker 3: So I don't.

1384
01:16:32,199 --> 01:16:33,920
Speaker 4: I don't know, you know, It's like, I don't even

1385
01:16:33,960 --> 01:16:37,800
really know what the model actually is. So I wish

1386
01:16:37,840 --> 01:16:41,319
that Muhammed a Job had brought that up at some point,

1387
01:16:41,520 --> 01:16:43,000
but oh well.

1388
01:16:43,239 --> 01:16:48,479
Speaker 2: The argument then seems to shift into parts whole situations

1389
01:16:48,520 --> 01:16:54,359
in regard to the product of three will three beings,

1390
01:16:54,399 --> 01:16:58,079
with three wills creating the world, what does one of

1391
01:16:58,159 --> 01:17:02,720
them do that the other two do not? And William

1392
01:17:02,760 --> 01:17:07,479
and Craig responds with saying, you are misunderstanding causal overdetermination.

1393
01:17:07,640 --> 01:17:10,640
I could have three matches that light at the same

1394
01:17:10,760 --> 01:17:13,640
time and there's not you know, one match that's doing

1395
01:17:13,720 --> 01:17:15,319
all the work and the other ones are doing half

1396
01:17:15,359 --> 01:17:17,720
the work or the third of the work or whatever.

1397
01:17:18,000 --> 01:17:19,840
That seemed to be a good response. Although I don't

1398
01:17:19,920 --> 01:17:23,800
believe in three wills or three independent beings, but that

1399
01:17:23,840 --> 01:17:27,840
would still seem to be a response that our trinitarian

1400
01:17:27,880 --> 01:17:29,840
model would use as well. What do you think about that?

1401
01:17:30,399 --> 01:17:33,399
Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean, William and Craig even at that point said,

1402
01:17:33,439 --> 01:17:37,960
I mean he actually used the phrase inseparable operations or

1403
01:17:38,000 --> 01:17:41,760
the operations you know, odd extra are inseparable, and basically

1404
01:17:41,840 --> 01:17:46,159
he just said, you know, he rejects like inseparable operations

1405
01:17:46,199 --> 01:17:49,159
as a general claim. But he's like, I do believe

1406
01:17:49,199 --> 01:17:52,039
in some inseparable operations, so like, I think creation is

1407
01:17:52,079 --> 01:17:56,039
an inseparable operation. So I mean I thought, I mean,

1408
01:17:56,079 --> 01:17:59,920
it's you know, I think it's a weird view to take,

1409
01:18:00,119 --> 01:18:03,800
but yeah, I mean I think it pretty much responded

1410
01:18:03,880 --> 01:18:05,560
to his to his jobs.

1411
01:18:07,920 --> 01:18:08,560
Speaker 2: Argument there.

1412
01:18:09,880 --> 01:18:11,800
Speaker 4: I mean, I I get I get into that in

1413
01:18:11,920 --> 01:18:15,920
separable operations more in my in the book in response

1414
01:18:16,000 --> 01:18:20,079
to Bill Hasker, because Hasker believes in the divine processions

1415
01:18:20,119 --> 01:18:26,760
but doesn't like inseparable operations. So I don't really I'm

1416
01:18:26,840 --> 01:18:29,479
not sure what kind of metaphysics you have to have

1417
01:18:29,840 --> 01:18:35,119
to get sometimes in separable operations like you're muted, I think,

1418
01:18:35,239 --> 01:18:36,079
or at least for me.

1419
01:18:36,640 --> 01:18:38,680
Speaker 2: Yeah, I was gonna say, like, well, what what what

1420
01:18:38,800 --> 01:18:40,439
are the one of the times that we haven't when

1421
01:18:40,479 --> 01:18:42,479
one of the times that we don't like what determines

1422
01:18:42,560 --> 01:18:47,039
the right, Well, it determines when it's uh inseparable versus separable.

1423
01:18:47,079 --> 01:18:47,840
I mean it's odd.

1424
01:18:48,079 --> 01:18:50,439
Speaker 4: But yeah, and that and that actually comes up in

1425
01:18:50,520 --> 01:18:52,880
the thing with with Hascar and I is that's it's

1426
01:18:53,000 --> 01:18:56,600
like yeah, when, yeah, when when would you have them?

1427
01:18:56,640 --> 01:18:57,159
Speaker 2: When would you not?

1428
01:18:57,840 --> 01:19:00,439
Speaker 3: My I mean, anyway, I.

1429
01:19:00,600 --> 01:19:06,359
Speaker 4: Just argue that that causal powers are rooted in an individual,

1430
01:19:06,560 --> 01:19:12,960
you know, instance of a nature, not the hypostas, And

1431
01:19:14,159 --> 01:19:16,239
that may be kind of hard to see for people

1432
01:19:16,600 --> 01:19:17,880
at first, but I think it.

1433
01:19:18,720 --> 01:19:23,039
Speaker 2: I think, well, and that's that's that's ironically the traditional

1434
01:19:23,359 --> 01:19:26,399
Orthodox and even the Western position in the first thousand years,

1435
01:19:26,520 --> 01:19:29,640
we agree that this is why there's two wills in Christ.

1436
01:19:29,720 --> 01:19:33,039
There's two natures in Christ, there's two two operations, because

1437
01:19:33,279 --> 01:19:36,880
operations or energies signify the nature from which they proceed,

1438
01:19:37,600 --> 01:19:40,199
and so that's why there's one will in the trinity,

1439
01:19:40,479 --> 01:19:41,520
not three wills in the trinity.

1440
01:19:42,159 --> 01:19:45,960
Speaker 4: Yeah, exactly, which is that's I mean, that's the thing.

1441
01:19:46,079 --> 01:19:47,399
So that, yeah, if you if you just think that

1442
01:19:47,560 --> 01:19:52,439
causal powers inhere in the nature primarily, then yeah, you

1443
01:19:52,600 --> 01:19:55,840
have to have inseparable operations in the trinity, and you

1444
01:19:55,960 --> 01:19:58,680
have to have two nature's and two wills and two

1445
01:19:58,840 --> 01:20:03,000
energies in the incarnation. So yeah, I think it's a

1446
01:20:03,039 --> 01:20:05,600
weird I mean, and the other I mean, your other alternative.

1447
01:20:05,680 --> 01:20:07,760
It seems like the most straightforward. If you're going to

1448
01:20:07,800 --> 01:20:12,079
reject that, you would think that you would say, okay,

1449
01:20:12,479 --> 01:20:17,039
powers just kind of directly attached to a hyposthesis then,

1450
01:20:18,680 --> 01:20:22,119
But in that case you would always have three actions.

1451
01:20:22,399 --> 01:20:27,239
Speaker 2: I mean, there would there would always be the same.

1452
01:20:29,359 --> 01:20:31,640
Speaker 4: Physics you have where you kind of sometimes have in

1453
01:20:31,760 --> 01:20:35,199
separable operations sometimes don't. But I think he might also

1454
01:20:35,399 --> 01:20:39,640
just kind of misunderstand how inseparable operations are supposed to work.

1455
01:20:41,640 --> 01:20:43,760
I mean, the cause a little a determination thing I

1456
01:20:43,880 --> 01:20:48,680
think works as a move in the debate for for

1457
01:20:48,880 --> 01:20:54,079
Craig to kind of defend himself, But I don't think

1458
01:20:54,159 --> 01:20:57,199
that's exactly probably the best way to think about.

1459
01:20:58,159 --> 01:21:00,600
Speaker 2: Does this I mean you may not feel this way,

1460
01:21:00,640 --> 01:21:02,119
but I mean, does this go back to the a

1461
01:21:02,199 --> 01:21:07,760
pollinarian mistake? Because pollinarianism is basically taking a feature of

1462
01:21:08,319 --> 01:21:11,840
a property of nature, in human nature, and saying that

1463
01:21:11,960 --> 01:21:15,319
that's what the subject of the person is. It's identifying

1464
01:21:15,720 --> 01:21:19,279
the human subject with the rational soul. And so for

1465
01:21:19,359 --> 01:21:21,439
Willen Lane Craig to think in his model of what

1466
01:21:21,560 --> 01:21:24,000
a person is, at least what I've undertoo him in

1467
01:21:24,000 --> 01:21:25,880
the past, I think a person is for him that's

1468
01:21:26,039 --> 01:21:28,640
just an individual with the body and a soul. There's

1469
01:21:28,680 --> 01:21:32,680
no notion of a subject that's more than just the

1470
01:21:32,920 --> 01:21:35,960
properties of the nature. But that would be consistent with

1471
01:21:36,039 --> 01:21:39,960
the nominalism to have that reductionist model. So maybe the

1472
01:21:40,039 --> 01:21:42,720
nominalism and the reductionist model and the pollinarianism are all

1473
01:21:42,760 --> 01:21:43,159
linked here.

1474
01:21:44,680 --> 01:21:49,880
Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah, that's actually I think that's probably right. I mean,

1475
01:21:50,039 --> 01:21:56,600
certainly it's pretty clear that there's this widespread kind of

1476
01:21:56,800 --> 01:22:01,760
assumption among a lot of philosophers and maybe evangelical theologians

1477
01:22:01,840 --> 01:22:02,199
or something.

1478
01:22:02,279 --> 01:22:04,119
Speaker 3: But uh that that, yeah, the.

1479
01:22:06,399 --> 01:22:10,560
Speaker 4: Cognitive faculties and wills and powers and whatever kind of

1480
01:22:10,640 --> 01:22:15,439
our hypostatic instead of natural. Right, And if that's the

1481
01:22:15,560 --> 01:22:19,000
view that you take, then yeah, you get three wills

1482
01:22:19,039 --> 01:22:23,920
in the Trinity and one will in Christ. And they

1483
01:22:24,039 --> 01:22:28,319
seem to not understand or they just don't like the

1484
01:22:28,399 --> 01:22:33,199
idea that the will is natural instead of hypostatic. So

1485
01:22:33,439 --> 01:22:35,359
and I think that's definitely what's going on with with

1486
01:22:35,520 --> 01:22:37,600
Craig and they, you know, they'll sort of associate the

1487
01:22:37,760 --> 01:22:41,439
number of wills and cognitive faculties with like that's what

1488
01:22:41,560 --> 01:22:45,079
a person is, because they they think of persons like

1489
01:22:45,760 --> 01:22:49,359
you know what we mean by a person, like a human, like.

1490
01:22:49,399 --> 01:22:53,199
Speaker 2: A modern human individual person modern modern.

1491
01:22:53,079 --> 01:22:57,239
Speaker 4: And they just don't yet or they or just don't care,

1492
01:22:57,960 --> 01:23:02,880
you know that that you know, hypostas is just anything concrete.

1493
01:23:04,079 --> 01:23:05,800
I mean I brought this up at one point, like,

1494
01:23:05,920 --> 01:23:08,439
you know, the Church Fathers will use it. We'll give

1495
01:23:08,520 --> 01:23:10,960
examples of hypostases besides.

1496
01:23:11,399 --> 01:23:12,319
Speaker 3: The persons of the Trinity.

1497
01:23:12,399 --> 01:23:15,199
Speaker 2: Yeah, don Damascus does that in Fount of Knowledge.

1498
01:23:16,079 --> 01:23:18,319
Speaker 3: Yeah, he'll I mean they'll give like a horse or.

1499
01:23:20,720 --> 01:23:26,560
Speaker 4: Or you know, a knife, pieces of charcoal, like like

1500
01:23:26,720 --> 01:23:30,039
you know, all of those things are hypostases. They're just individual,

1501
01:23:30,239 --> 01:23:34,680
concrete things. And I so that's one reason why. Yeah,

1502
01:23:34,680 --> 01:23:38,119
I mean, like I realized there's this big debate, you know,

1503
01:23:38,319 --> 01:23:40,960
in theological what are persons? Is it person in the

1504
01:23:41,039 --> 01:23:45,239
modern sense? But it's like, I have no idea how

1505
01:23:45,479 --> 01:23:50,000
anyone familiar at all with the primary sources could ever

1506
01:23:50,159 --> 01:23:53,039
think that the Church Fathers are talking about person in

1507
01:23:53,159 --> 01:23:56,359
like a Cartesian sense or something like, I don't think

1508
01:23:56,439 --> 01:23:59,399
the gold coin is a person in the modern sense

1509
01:23:59,479 --> 01:23:59,920
of the term.

1510
01:24:00,239 --> 01:24:03,319
Speaker 2: Like that's just nuts, now, doctor Calil. I know he

1511
01:24:03,399 --> 01:24:05,920
wanted to call in and he had some comments on

1512
01:24:06,560 --> 01:24:10,560
the hit Job and Craig debate. Doctor Calile, do you

1513
01:24:10,600 --> 01:24:11,920
want to did you want to say anything?

1514
01:24:13,520 --> 01:24:17,359
Speaker 5: Yeah, Hi, yeah, thanks for having me on. I just

1515
01:24:17,800 --> 01:24:18,920
I was teaching, so I just.

1516
01:24:19,000 --> 01:24:19,479
Speaker 2: Log in now.

1517
01:24:19,560 --> 01:24:21,880
Speaker 5: So I don't know what you guys already covered, but

1518
01:24:22,199 --> 01:24:25,880
just to what you are saying now, maybe.

1519
01:24:25,760 --> 01:24:28,039
Speaker 7: Something that's a question for both but also yourself. So

1520
01:24:28,159 --> 01:24:32,199
I made some comments in a preview video about Craig

1521
01:24:33,319 --> 01:24:36,760
and hit Job. So one thing is, in my view,

1522
01:24:36,800 --> 01:24:39,319
if Craig is a nominalist, which.

1523
01:24:39,199 --> 01:24:41,920
Speaker 2: He is, right, yeah, we just we just yeah, that's

1524
01:24:42,000 --> 01:24:43,239
exactly what we were covering up.

1525
01:24:44,000 --> 01:24:48,000
Speaker 7: So then how can he affirm that Christ like has

1526
01:24:48,039 --> 01:24:50,239
a human nature of any kind? Like there's no such

1527
01:24:50,319 --> 01:24:53,600
thing as human nature under that view, Like, I don't

1528
01:24:53,640 --> 01:24:56,399
know how he can he can ascribe human nature to

1529
01:24:56,520 --> 01:25:00,479
anything right, Like for him, I don't see how his

1530
01:25:00,640 --> 01:25:04,159
incarnate Christ is genuinely human like in any meaningful sense.

1531
01:25:04,239 --> 01:25:06,399
And then I don't how can he even talk about

1532
01:25:06,920 --> 01:25:11,279
homousio homosios? Like how can you say the Father and

1533
01:25:11,359 --> 01:25:15,520
the Son are homosios if you don't like, like the

1534
01:25:15,640 --> 01:25:20,000
three divine persons, they're all bear particulars in Craig's view, right,

1535
01:25:21,239 --> 01:25:23,520
they can't as far as I'm concerned, And I haven't

1536
01:25:23,520 --> 01:25:26,279
seen anyone make this argument against him, but to me,

1537
01:25:26,399 --> 01:25:29,800
that the three divine persons are bear particulars, they can't

1538
01:25:29,840 --> 01:25:35,000
share anything. They're like, they're basically three gods. So I

1539
01:25:35,039 --> 01:25:35,880
don't know what you guys.

1540
01:25:36,600 --> 01:25:39,279
Speaker 2: That's that's exactly where the critique was going. I'll let

1541
01:25:39,359 --> 01:25:41,520
doctor will respond, but I mean that's exactly where the

1542
01:25:41,560 --> 01:25:44,079
critique was going, was that this would lead to trotheism

1543
01:25:44,199 --> 01:25:47,640
and that the nominalism would seem to be another big stickler,

1544
01:25:47,920 --> 01:25:49,840
a big roadblock here.

1545
01:25:51,199 --> 01:25:51,399
Speaker 3: Yeah.

1546
01:25:51,479 --> 01:25:54,399
Speaker 4: So I think what Craig I think would do is

1547
01:25:54,520 --> 01:25:56,720
he would just say, Okay, well, when we talk about

1548
01:25:56,840 --> 01:26:01,319
you know, so and so has this nature or that nature,

1549
01:26:02,359 --> 01:26:04,439
like we just have to He's just going to kind

1550
01:26:04,479 --> 01:26:09,880
of translate that into this, X, Y and Z are

1551
01:26:10,039 --> 01:26:15,720
true about this subject. So like if this subject has

1552
01:26:15,880 --> 01:26:18,439
such and such DNA and he's like this tall and

1553
01:26:18,520 --> 01:26:20,520
this wide and ways that, you know, like all of

1554
01:26:20,560 --> 01:26:24,800
that stuff is true. However that works, but anyway, it's true.

1555
01:26:24,880 --> 01:26:28,039
So if it's just true, if all these predicates are

1556
01:26:28,119 --> 01:26:32,960
true about you, then then the predicate is human is

1557
01:26:33,000 --> 01:26:35,640
also true about you. Right, So it's just going to

1558
01:26:35,720 --> 01:26:37,319
kind of say, like for him and nature I think

1559
01:26:37,439 --> 01:26:40,720
is just kind of a definition. Right, So if X, Y,

1560
01:26:40,880 --> 01:26:43,800
Z predicates are true, then like when he.

1561
01:26:43,920 --> 01:26:46,840
Speaker 7: Says the father is God or the Son is God.

1562
01:26:47,079 --> 01:26:49,680
It just means the Father is a part of an

1563
01:26:49,920 --> 01:26:54,479
entity called God. Like that's it, that's his, that's total.

1564
01:26:55,640 --> 01:26:57,840
Speaker 4: I think he would want to say, like X is

1565
01:26:58,000 --> 01:27:03,239
God means like something like X is all powerful, and

1566
01:27:03,800 --> 01:27:05,760
X is omni benevolent.

1567
01:27:05,560 --> 01:27:08,840
Speaker 2: And and and and. But but didn't you just say

1568
01:27:09,000 --> 01:27:11,680
you had said a minute ago that when he talks

1569
01:27:11,720 --> 01:27:15,720
about God possessing attributes or contingent properties, if he's anomalist,

1570
01:27:15,760 --> 01:27:16,680
that would be a problem.

1571
01:27:16,840 --> 01:27:24,720
Speaker 8: So well, if if you have Craig's view is ex

1572
01:27:24,760 --> 01:27:30,199
as God means exit ex as omnipotent and whatever, that

1573
01:27:30,319 --> 01:27:34,479
would still imply under normalism that the Father's omnipotence is

1574
01:27:34,520 --> 01:27:37,439
still different from the sons, because like there can't be

1575
01:27:37,640 --> 01:27:39,760
like truly shared properties, right.

1576
01:27:41,520 --> 01:27:43,920
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean he might just they.

1577
01:27:45,800 --> 01:27:49,439
Speaker 4: That's kind of a pseudo question, assuming that there's such

1578
01:27:49,479 --> 01:27:55,920
a thing as that bothered omnisis or whatever and there

1579
01:27:56,039 --> 01:27:59,760
and there really is no such thing. That's a good question.

1580
01:28:00,279 --> 01:28:01,479
Speaker 3: But I think it's a problem.

1581
01:28:04,239 --> 01:28:04,840
Speaker 2: There's an echo.

1582
01:28:05,279 --> 01:28:08,239
Speaker 4: But but anyway, I do think it's a problem because

1583
01:28:08,319 --> 01:28:11,079
you do want to say things like there's one nature

1584
01:28:11,199 --> 01:28:14,680
between the person of the Trinity or Christ has two natures.

1585
01:28:17,159 --> 01:28:19,600
I guess I guess what he would say to get

1586
01:28:20,399 --> 01:28:23,920
to get two natures. He would just say, Jesus satisfies

1587
01:28:24,000 --> 01:28:27,760
all of the predicates that are required to call him human,

1588
01:28:27,960 --> 01:28:29,560
and then he satisfies all the predicates.

1589
01:28:29,600 --> 01:28:31,760
Speaker 2: Well, I might have I might have not had the

1590
01:28:32,800 --> 01:28:34,680
unmute because I'm trying to I have to unmute if

1591
01:28:34,720 --> 01:28:36,760
he's talking, and then I have to mute when you're talking.

1592
01:28:36,840 --> 01:28:40,800
But what doctor Calil said was, wouldn't if you're a nominalist,

1593
01:28:40,880 --> 01:28:43,720
how could you have a shared after between father and

1594
01:28:43,880 --> 01:28:45,880
son as a nominalist?

1595
01:28:46,239 --> 01:28:46,279
Speaker 7: Like?

1596
01:28:46,359 --> 01:28:48,439
Speaker 2: How could it? Because it seems like there's obviously gotta

1597
01:28:48,439 --> 01:28:50,920
be some kind of metaphysical shared reality there.

1598
01:28:54,159 --> 01:28:59,039
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think, well, so two things. One is.

1599
01:29:00,720 --> 01:29:02,560
Speaker 4: And it's kind of confusing because he'll go if he's

1600
01:29:02,600 --> 01:29:04,840
talking about a nature, he's gonna be talking about generic

1601
01:29:06,680 --> 01:29:10,319
nature in a generic sense, like just you generically, you satisfy.

1602
01:29:09,920 --> 01:29:10,960
Speaker 3: These predicates or whatever.

1603
01:29:12,439 --> 01:29:14,479
Speaker 4: But he goes back forth because when he talks about

1604
01:29:14,560 --> 01:29:17,600
three persons in one being, like we were saying earlier,

1605
01:29:18,760 --> 01:29:21,479
what really his view amounts to is that there's one

1606
01:29:21,640 --> 01:29:24,359
hypostasis that has three minds.

1607
01:29:26,000 --> 01:29:26,680
Speaker 3: But he kind of.

1608
01:29:28,680 --> 01:29:31,000
Speaker 4: He just uses terminology in a weird way, so he

1609
01:29:31,439 --> 01:29:34,359
calls that one being. So it's sort of like sometimes

1610
01:29:34,439 --> 01:29:37,720
that usia is really the hyposthesis for him, and kind

1611
01:29:37,760 --> 01:29:41,159
of everything kind of gets backwards. So really, if you're

1612
01:29:41,560 --> 01:29:43,920
if you were going to accuse him of tritheism, I

1613
01:29:43,960 --> 01:29:46,920
think what he would really do is I mean, he'd

1614
01:29:47,000 --> 01:29:49,520
he'd be like, hey, my model says there's one soul,

1615
01:29:51,520 --> 01:29:55,359
so that's the one and the one concrete. I mean really,

1616
01:29:55,399 --> 01:29:58,039
I think it really boils down to like there's one

1617
01:29:58,199 --> 01:30:02,800
concrete particular, one bear particular. The real mystery of what

1618
01:30:03,039 --> 01:30:05,119
Jay and I were talking about just a few minutes

1619
01:30:05,159 --> 01:30:08,720
before you got on Khalil was the big mystery is

1620
01:30:08,800 --> 01:30:14,399
like what individuates these cognitive faculties if you're a nominalist, right,

1621
01:30:14,399 --> 01:30:18,279
because they're not real things. They're just like the fact

1622
01:30:18,399 --> 01:30:21,039
that you can think, right, or the fact that you

1623
01:30:21,159 --> 01:30:24,159
can will. So if there's just this one soul, and

1624
01:30:24,279 --> 01:30:27,319
if having a will just means it's like true that

1625
01:30:27,479 --> 01:30:31,319
you can will things, it's not really clear what it

1626
01:30:31,359 --> 01:30:35,039
could mean to say that there's three wills or three

1627
01:30:35,199 --> 01:30:35,880
cognitive facts.

1628
01:30:35,920 --> 01:30:39,319
Speaker 2: In other words, just ambiguity about what individuates but is

1629
01:30:39,359 --> 01:30:42,720
there any route because I thought earlier when you and

1630
01:30:42,800 --> 01:30:44,479
I were to me and you doctor, but you were

1631
01:30:44,520 --> 01:30:50,079
talking about problems in nominalism for viewing God, is there

1632
01:30:50,199 --> 01:30:54,640
is there no element of critique for Wayne Lane Craig's

1633
01:30:54,720 --> 01:30:57,319
because to me, it seems like it would undercut Christology.

1634
01:30:57,399 --> 01:30:59,920
It would undercut the trinity too, if you're a hardcore

1635
01:31:00,079 --> 01:31:01,600
I didn't realize it was a hardcore nonmalist.

1636
01:31:03,000 --> 01:31:06,239
Speaker 4: Yeah, that's that's the I don't think. I mean, so

1637
01:31:06,560 --> 01:31:10,880
certainly you the the traditional view about the doctrine of

1638
01:31:10,920 --> 01:31:18,079
the Trinity. Absolutely, you know, presupposes some metaphysical machine nature

1639
01:31:18,239 --> 01:31:21,800
and there's some you know, you have to be some

1640
01:31:21,920 --> 01:31:25,119
kind of realists about you know, property or if not

1641
01:31:25,319 --> 01:31:27,640
universals and tropes or something. But you have to have

1642
01:31:27,720 --> 01:31:31,439
that distinction there. So it's certainly not going to be

1643
01:31:31,479 --> 01:31:36,199
the orthodox view. And I really don't see how you

1644
01:31:36,479 --> 01:31:41,640
could actually have a coherent view about the Trinity if

1645
01:31:41,640 --> 01:31:42,359
you're a nominalist.

1646
01:31:42,399 --> 01:31:43,079
Speaker 3: I mean, I don't.

1647
01:31:44,199 --> 01:31:46,720
Speaker 4: I mean, maybe someone will come up with something, but

1648
01:31:46,800 --> 01:31:50,159
it's it's hard for me to see to see how.

1649
01:31:52,039 --> 01:31:56,159
Speaker 2: Now Doctor coils or any other Uh, we we have

1650
01:31:56,239 --> 01:31:59,119
progressed in the debate to the point where really they

1651
01:31:59,159 --> 01:32:03,159
were just getting into almost what's that.

1652
01:32:03,960 --> 01:32:07,520
Speaker 4: I was just saying, we're almost to their closing statements

1653
01:32:07,560 --> 01:32:08,119
from what we were doing.

1654
01:32:08,199 --> 01:32:09,399
Speaker 2: Yeah, we had got up to the point of the

1655
01:32:09,439 --> 01:32:12,279
closing statements where I just want.

1656
01:32:13,880 --> 01:32:18,279
Speaker 7: So in my opinion, you know, I've studied a lot

1657
01:32:18,319 --> 01:32:21,880
of the anti Trinitarian arguments that are on offer in

1658
01:32:22,039 --> 01:32:29,399
literature from major authors. I thought his job's attack was

1659
01:32:29,840 --> 01:32:33,279
very underwhelming, Like, of all the arguments he could have

1660
01:32:33,359 --> 01:32:35,319
brought against Craig or the Trinity in.

1661
01:32:35,399 --> 01:32:38,560
Speaker 5: General, I have found he just picked the weakest ones.

1662
01:32:39,840 --> 01:32:41,560
Speaker 7: And then I actually and you know a lot of

1663
01:32:41,640 --> 01:32:46,000
people online like Muslim sort of cheerleaders, and I understand

1664
01:32:46,039 --> 01:32:46,880
why they cheerlead.

1665
01:32:46,920 --> 01:32:48,720
Speaker 5: They're like, oh, no, like this was so good and

1666
01:32:48,800 --> 01:32:49,479
blah blah blah.

1667
01:32:49,479 --> 01:32:51,840
Speaker 7: But then I actually talked to three Muslim philosophers and

1668
01:32:51,880 --> 01:32:54,439
religion I'm not going to say who, and I was like, guys,

1669
01:32:54,520 --> 01:32:56,479
am I the only one who thought this was underwhelming,

1670
01:32:56,520 --> 01:32:58,399
And they're like, no, it was underwhelming.

1671
01:32:59,159 --> 01:33:03,279
Speaker 5: So what did you think of the hit jobs like

1672
01:33:04,520 --> 01:33:05,600
attack arguments?

1673
01:33:05,880 --> 01:33:08,600
Speaker 2: Well, before you got here, we had basically agreed that

1674
01:33:09,000 --> 01:33:11,239
there were several places where he could have brought really

1675
01:33:11,279 --> 01:33:14,079
stronger points. He hit on a couple strong points and

1676
01:33:14,119 --> 01:33:17,279
then kind of blew past them, so he really didn't

1677
01:33:18,199 --> 01:33:21,640
Both sides were kind of underwhelming, was my assessment.

1678
01:33:22,840 --> 01:33:27,680
Speaker 4: Yeah, that's exactly what I's what I had thought.

1679
01:33:28,039 --> 01:33:29,199
Speaker 3: And yeah, agreed like I thought.

1680
01:33:29,239 --> 01:33:30,920
Speaker 4: I mean, I was really excited for it because I

1681
01:33:31,039 --> 01:33:34,720
was like, I mean, there's a million criticisms that I

1682
01:33:34,760 --> 01:33:38,119
would like to make about William and Craig's views on

1683
01:33:38,199 --> 01:33:39,880
the Trinity. And I was just like, oh, this will

1684
01:33:39,920 --> 01:33:42,760
be pretty exciting because he's this fantastic debater and he's

1685
01:33:42,760 --> 01:33:45,079
a really smart guy, but this is like, I think,

1686
01:33:45,199 --> 01:33:49,319
his weakest subject. And I was really, I mean interested

1687
01:33:49,399 --> 01:33:51,199
to just see, like, well, how's this going to go?

1688
01:33:52,039 --> 01:33:53,960
And yeah, there were so many things I thought, you

1689
01:33:54,560 --> 01:33:58,039
so many places Muhammedi job could have taken it that

1690
01:33:58,159 --> 01:34:01,520
he just didn't. And one of them was this issue

1691
01:34:01,600 --> 01:34:04,039
like how do you individuate these cognitive faculties?

1692
01:34:04,159 --> 01:34:06,359
Speaker 3: Like what how do you even get those? And he

1693
01:34:06,520 --> 01:34:07,720
never raised that.

1694
01:34:08,159 --> 01:34:10,520
Speaker 4: He didn't he didn't even really, I mean, Jaye and

1695
01:34:10,520 --> 01:34:13,159
I were talking about like, I don't think he really

1696
01:34:13,319 --> 01:34:16,680
even I guess a couple of times he mentioned tri theism,

1697
01:34:16,760 --> 01:34:18,760
but like I would have thought that would have been

1698
01:34:19,000 --> 01:34:19,560
that would.

1699
01:34:19,359 --> 01:34:22,720
Speaker 2: Have been really if he had hammered whining Craig on

1700
01:34:22,800 --> 01:34:29,439
tri theism, that would have been really yeah, hardcore, But.

1701
01:34:29,479 --> 01:34:30,680
Speaker 4: Yeah, I thought there was a lot of stuff he

1702
01:34:30,720 --> 01:34:32,760
could have said that he didn't. And also one thing

1703
01:34:32,840 --> 01:34:35,359
I Khalil before you got on here, that I was

1704
01:34:35,680 --> 01:34:38,880
saying to Jay was like I just felt like in

1705
01:34:38,960 --> 01:34:42,279
a lot of the arguments that Muhammed a Jab did give,

1706
01:34:42,560 --> 01:34:47,159
like he never really fully articulated like where he's trying

1707
01:34:47,239 --> 01:34:49,640
to go with that argument, Like he spent a whole

1708
01:34:49,680 --> 01:34:51,840
bunch of time talking about how Craig is a heretic

1709
01:34:51,920 --> 01:34:55,199
and his views not really mainstream. But it's like, okay,

1710
01:34:55,279 --> 01:34:58,920
but tell me where that's how that's pertinent, Like I

1711
01:34:59,119 --> 01:35:01,680
just make it explicit, like what do you you know?

1712
01:35:01,760 --> 01:35:04,960
Why is that showing that the doctor the Trinity is incoherent?

1713
01:35:05,039 --> 01:35:08,039
And he didn't really kind of connect the dots on

1714
01:35:08,399 --> 01:35:10,279
a lot of the a lot of his arguments.

1715
01:35:12,840 --> 01:35:15,960
Speaker 2: Any thoughts on thoughts on the closing statement or anything

1716
01:35:16,000 --> 01:35:16,840
else that comes to mind.

1717
01:35:20,039 --> 01:35:21,319
Speaker 3: Did Khilie already get offer?

1718
01:35:21,680 --> 01:35:23,000
Speaker 2: Are you still there? Did you want to talk to

1719
01:35:23,039 --> 01:35:23,560
doctor Blow?

1720
01:35:28,600 --> 01:35:28,920
Speaker 3: Maybe not?

1721
01:35:29,159 --> 01:35:33,239
Speaker 7: Maybe he's gone the sort of autopositions that Craig have

1722
01:35:35,920 --> 01:35:41,399
that doesn't contribute towards the thesis that the Trinity is incoherent.

1723
01:35:41,560 --> 01:35:42,000
Speaker 5: It doesn't.

1724
01:35:42,119 --> 01:35:46,439
Speaker 7: However, I'll tell you why he did it. So he

1725
01:35:46,640 --> 01:35:48,840
did it as a showman.

1726
01:35:49,000 --> 01:35:51,720
Speaker 5: He he did that. He started with that. Again.

1727
01:35:51,760 --> 01:35:53,680
Speaker 7: I don't think it's a smart thing, but like he

1728
01:35:53,800 --> 01:35:56,800
did it for showmanship, because he wanted to get the

1729
01:35:56,920 --> 01:35:58,840
audience on his side, right.

1730
01:35:58,960 --> 01:36:01,159
Speaker 5: He wanted all of you guys watching.

1731
01:36:00,920 --> 01:36:03,600
Speaker 7: To be like wow, like why we shouldn't support this guy?

1732
01:36:03,680 --> 01:36:06,960
And then what he wanted is he wanted some clippable

1733
01:36:07,079 --> 01:36:07,840
moment moments.

1734
01:36:10,560 --> 01:36:12,560
Speaker 5: Jake clipped it up. He clipped it up.

1735
01:36:12,680 --> 01:36:14,199
Speaker 1: So this is just this.

1736
01:36:14,600 --> 01:36:16,159
Speaker 5: I mean, you know, they do this to everybody.

1737
01:36:17,119 --> 01:36:18,239
Speaker 7: They tried to do it to you.

1738
01:36:18,520 --> 01:36:20,640
Speaker 5: They try to do it to everyone. They don't usually

1739
01:36:20,720 --> 01:36:23,760
succeed when they do it. But that's all it was.

1740
01:36:25,880 --> 01:36:30,520
Speaker 7: But I do think I would be interested personally. I

1741
01:36:30,720 --> 01:36:35,560
have not actually seen a good debate between a Muslim

1742
01:36:35,640 --> 01:36:39,159
and a Christian where they act where there's like a

1743
01:36:39,279 --> 01:36:43,800
proper sort of more traditional Trinity on offer and they

1744
01:36:43,880 --> 01:36:46,479
actually get into the metaphysics of this stuff. I have

1745
01:36:46,640 --> 01:36:49,279
not seen a debate usually they're just arguing about scriptures

1746
01:36:49,560 --> 01:36:50,399
or this, that and the other.

1747
01:36:52,520 --> 01:36:56,680
Speaker 4: Yeah, which that's like I was hoping that this would

1748
01:36:57,239 --> 01:37:00,960
get into that because you know, you would expect that

1749
01:37:01,039 --> 01:37:02,000
it it could have.

1750
01:37:03,159 --> 01:37:06,880
Speaker 2: Now anything on the closing statements. Uh, we've come up

1751
01:37:06,880 --> 01:37:10,279
to that point there. Overall, everybody seems to be on

1752
01:37:10,319 --> 01:37:13,000
the same page. It was a pretty underwhelming discussion. It's

1753
01:37:13,079 --> 01:37:15,479
kind of short. Yeah, it was a little too short too.

1754
01:37:15,520 --> 01:37:18,880
It was only one hour. But yeah, final thoughts on

1755
01:37:19,039 --> 01:37:19,640
the debate.

1756
01:37:23,239 --> 01:37:27,760
Speaker 4: So yeah, at the very end, Craig, I guess, you know,

1757
01:37:27,960 --> 01:37:30,119
I guess he did go full preacher.

1758
01:37:29,880 --> 01:37:32,399
Speaker 2: Mode at the I was, I was like an alter

1759
01:37:32,560 --> 01:37:33,279
call at the end there.

1760
01:37:33,680 --> 01:37:37,039
Speaker 4: Yeah, Muhammed a job kind of you know, criticize him for.

1761
01:37:37,199 --> 01:37:39,800
But and at first, I mean I was kind of like, ah, dude,

1762
01:37:39,920 --> 01:37:40,319
you know this.

1763
01:37:40,560 --> 01:37:40,880
Speaker 3: I don't know.

1764
01:37:40,960 --> 01:37:43,119
Speaker 4: I mean, I was a little bit like, come on,

1765
01:37:43,279 --> 01:37:45,920
I give a real closing statement. I was kind of like, well, okay, whatever,

1766
01:37:45,960 --> 01:37:47,640
that's what he's gonna do. But then I had thought

1767
01:37:47,640 --> 01:37:49,600
about it, and I was like, you know, actually I

1768
01:37:49,720 --> 01:37:51,720
kind of respect William Lane Craig for.

1769
01:37:52,560 --> 01:37:54,000
Speaker 3: For doing that, Like you know what I mean, Like,

1770
01:37:54,119 --> 01:37:57,840
it's that's that he you know, he's.

1771
01:37:57,680 --> 01:37:59,640
Speaker 4: A philosopher, but I mean everything he's done, he kind

1772
01:37:59,640 --> 01:38:01,760
of sees is like a ministry and whatever. I was like,

1773
01:38:01,840 --> 01:38:04,800
that's that's actually kind of cool. And I was actually

1774
01:38:05,479 --> 01:38:06,760
and then I thought about it, and I was like,

1775
01:38:06,880 --> 01:38:09,479
you know, I sort of felt like Muhammed hi Job

1776
01:38:09,680 --> 01:38:13,760
actually was sort of in preacher mode through the entire thing,

1777
01:38:14,720 --> 01:38:16,600
you know what I mean, like like because a lot

1778
01:38:16,640 --> 01:38:19,720
of it was him just like being really boisterous and like,

1779
01:38:19,800 --> 01:38:21,680
oh this is I will show you this is this

1780
01:38:21,760 --> 01:38:25,760
is incoherence. Yeah, right, irrefutable evidence, and like I mean,

1781
01:38:25,840 --> 01:38:30,600
he was sort of being like Southern Baptist preacher slash

1782
01:38:30,960 --> 01:38:31,520
Islamic and.

1783
01:38:31,560 --> 01:38:34,399
Speaker 3: Mom like the whole way through.

1784
01:38:34,479 --> 01:38:37,399
Speaker 4: And I was like, ah, why are you criticizing him

1785
01:38:37,479 --> 01:38:40,720
for I don't know, I was just a little I

1786
01:38:41,079 --> 01:38:44,920
found it a little off putting. But and yeah, his

1787
01:38:45,119 --> 01:38:50,520
jobs like last yeah, his his final statement was just

1788
01:38:52,600 --> 01:38:55,039
I mean just not he just said a bunch of

1789
01:38:55,079 --> 01:38:57,840
stuff was just not the case. Like you know, Craig

1790
01:38:57,960 --> 01:39:02,840
is retreated from the debate. Uh, you know, we're talking

1791
01:39:02,840 --> 01:39:05,199
about the resurrection and blah blah blah, it's not relevant.

1792
01:39:05,760 --> 01:39:06,840
Speaker 3: They we've both you.

1793
01:39:06,840 --> 01:39:12,439
Speaker 4: Know, dismantled a quinas together and you know, blah blah blah,

1794
01:39:12,680 --> 01:39:15,039
and it I mean, all that stuff is like, I mean,

1795
01:39:15,119 --> 01:39:17,760
they didn't dismantle anything, they just agreed not to talk

1796
01:39:17,800 --> 01:39:19,439
about it because they just kind of agreed that that

1797
01:39:19,640 --> 01:39:20,279
they didn't.

1798
01:39:20,079 --> 01:39:20,840
Speaker 3: Think that was true.

1799
01:39:20,920 --> 01:39:22,600
Speaker 4: I mean, it would sort of be like if you know,

1800
01:39:24,399 --> 01:39:28,760
if I debated a Protestant or something and we were like, well,

1801
01:39:28,800 --> 01:39:31,640
let's just let's just agree at the outset that Islam

1802
01:39:31,760 --> 01:39:33,319
is false and then we'll go on and have our

1803
01:39:33,359 --> 01:39:35,680
little Christian debate or so, and it's like, well, we

1804
01:39:35,880 --> 01:39:38,279
just demolished is like, no, you didn't you just agree

1805
01:39:38,640 --> 01:39:41,800
talk about that because we both I mean, that's you know,

1806
01:39:41,840 --> 01:39:46,520
it's just so ridiculous. But and yeah, I mean, and

1807
01:39:46,800 --> 01:39:48,920
I mean they didn't really establish anything. And then he

1808
01:39:49,079 --> 01:39:51,319
ended with another one of these like the Trinity is

1809
01:39:51,399 --> 01:39:53,800
complicated things and that's.

1810
01:39:55,399 --> 01:39:56,600
Speaker 3: Yeah, that just drives me nuts.

1811
01:39:56,640 --> 01:39:59,319
Speaker 4: So like earlier I was saying, I don't know if

1812
01:39:59,359 --> 01:40:02,199
Khalil's still but anyway to you J I was saying, like,

1813
01:40:02,279 --> 01:40:04,960
you know, that's this thing I teach people in critical

1814
01:40:05,000 --> 01:40:08,880
thinking classes, like just because something seems simple and intuitive

1815
01:40:08,920 --> 01:40:11,760
and obvious, that doesn't necessarily mean that it's going.

1816
01:40:11,760 --> 01:40:12,199
Speaker 3: To be true.

1817
01:40:12,479 --> 01:40:12,600
Speaker 1: Right.

1818
01:40:13,399 --> 01:40:16,640
Speaker 4: The other thing that I really dislike about that, actually,

1819
01:40:16,640 --> 01:40:20,960
if Khalil is on, maybe maybe he can respond to this,

1820
01:40:21,119 --> 01:40:27,680
because I think that is a horrible long term strategy

1821
01:40:28,119 --> 01:40:32,439
for Muslim apologists because what it what it comes across

1822
01:40:32,600 --> 01:40:37,319
as it comes across as these guys saying you should

1823
01:40:37,359 --> 01:40:41,840
be Muslim because it's easier to be dumb if you're Muslim,

1824
01:40:43,720 --> 01:40:46,000
which is not a good look for Islam number one

1825
01:40:46,159 --> 01:40:50,199
and number two, Like in the long run, because I've

1826
01:40:50,239 --> 01:40:53,039
said this about you, I shouldn't say, but I've said

1827
01:40:53,039 --> 01:40:56,079
this about Protestanism for a long but like evangelical kind

1828
01:40:56,119 --> 01:40:59,880
of fundamentalist Protestantism for a long time, is like it

1829
01:41:00,239 --> 01:41:03,199
leads this it's a problem if you have some approach

1830
01:41:03,279 --> 01:41:06,920
that leads to brain drain. And what happens is like

1831
01:41:07,039 --> 01:41:09,279
if you've got this approach like here, I'm gonna attack

1832
01:41:09,359 --> 01:41:14,279
the Trinity with arguments that are not that great, and

1833
01:41:14,439 --> 01:41:16,560
so smart people are gonna look at it and be

1834
01:41:16,720 --> 01:41:20,399
like nah, right, and dumb people are gonna look at

1835
01:41:20,399 --> 01:41:22,359
it and be like, oh man, this guy seems really

1836
01:41:22,399 --> 01:41:26,600
confident and whatever. Right, So like it's the approach they're

1837
01:41:26,680 --> 01:41:34,399
taking does nothing to attract or retain intelligent people, and

1838
01:41:34,640 --> 01:41:40,640
it only functions to retain and maybe attract dumb people basically.

1839
01:41:41,239 --> 01:41:43,680
And what's and what that means is like over time,

1840
01:41:44,039 --> 01:41:46,600
you're going to have brain drain, like all the smart

1841
01:41:46,640 --> 01:41:48,760
people are going to go somewhere else, all the dumb

1842
01:41:48,800 --> 01:41:51,920
people come into your camp. And then that's just like

1843
01:41:52,079 --> 01:41:54,880
this that just feeds into so then you then your

1844
01:41:54,960 --> 01:42:00,439
next generation of apologists are all morons. You're gonna being

1845
01:42:00,640 --> 01:42:04,680
unwittingly right like, and it's it's, yeah, just a really

1846
01:42:04,720 --> 01:42:06,039
bad approach.

1847
01:42:06,960 --> 01:42:08,800
Speaker 2: Doctor Cali, anything you want to sound out.

1848
01:42:10,159 --> 01:42:12,159
Speaker 7: Yeah, but come on, bow, Islam is so simple.

1849
01:42:12,239 --> 01:42:14,359
Speaker 5: There's only one God. And you know, you guys have

1850
01:42:14,439 --> 01:42:18,079
a hyposthesis and Usia all this stuff.

1851
01:42:18,600 --> 01:42:21,199
Speaker 7: I was a common man on the supposed.

1852
01:42:20,840 --> 01:42:22,039
Speaker 5: To worship Usia.

1853
01:42:22,199 --> 01:42:22,359
Speaker 2: You know.

1854
01:42:23,920 --> 01:42:29,199
Speaker 7: You're right, Yeah, just sign to sign up here, give

1855
01:42:29,239 --> 01:42:32,399
me your email address. Please make a donation at Sapiens Institute.

1856
01:42:32,439 --> 01:42:32,600
You know.

1857
01:42:32,960 --> 01:42:35,680
Speaker 2: Yeah, Well, the the Mormons say that if I pray,

1858
01:42:35,720 --> 01:42:38,600
I'll feel a burning bosom and burning my bosom, so

1859
01:42:38,720 --> 01:42:41,399
that that seems pretty simple to me. So I guess

1860
01:42:41,439 --> 01:42:46,199
Mormonism is true. But thank you for that. Uh uh,

1861
01:42:46,560 --> 01:42:48,560
we got some super chat. Somebody wants to ask that

1862
01:42:48,600 --> 01:42:50,720
Doctor Bow will have to go soon. Uh, thank you

1863
01:42:50,760 --> 01:42:52,560
for joining us, Doctor Coalili. You're welcome to stay if

1864
01:42:52,560 --> 01:42:54,960
you want. If anybody wants to call in and ask

1865
01:42:55,039 --> 01:42:57,199
a couple of questions, you can. We have a few minutes.

1866
01:42:57,680 --> 01:42:59,960
I don't want to stop doctor Bow from any other comments.

1867
01:43:00,039 --> 01:43:02,439
Some of the debate if the only thing.

1868
01:43:03,920 --> 01:43:07,439
Speaker 4: Is another thing that I found kind of just obnoxious.

1869
01:43:07,760 --> 01:43:13,600
Was after that, after the closing statements, Cameron Bertuzzi was like,

1870
01:43:13,760 --> 01:43:16,279
you know, let's end with you know, I want to

1871
01:43:16,399 --> 01:43:18,920
end by you know, why don't you say one thing

1872
01:43:19,039 --> 01:43:21,560
that you like about the other person's view, you know,

1873
01:43:22,159 --> 01:43:24,039
And like Craig was genuine about it. He's like, you know,

1874
01:43:24,079 --> 01:43:27,279
I like monotheism and the denial of divine simplicity that

1875
01:43:27,399 --> 01:43:29,119
you had. You know, like there's lots of stuff about

1876
01:43:29,199 --> 01:43:33,000
Islam that you know, Christians agree with and like, and

1877
01:43:33,239 --> 01:43:35,159
so he was kind of a genuine, you know response,

1878
01:43:35,239 --> 01:43:38,000
and then Muhammed a job just like took it as

1879
01:43:38,000 --> 01:43:40,279
an opportunity to take another dig.

1880
01:43:40,840 --> 01:43:41,000
Speaker 7: You know.

1881
01:43:41,039 --> 01:43:43,039
Speaker 4: It was just kind of like, well, you know, he's like,

1882
01:43:43,119 --> 01:43:45,640
I like Craig William Lane Craig personally, and he's just like,

1883
01:43:45,680 --> 01:43:49,520
I like his bravery in denying the eternal generation, and

1884
01:43:49,720 --> 01:43:53,239
you know, like it's kind of like, dude, come on,

1885
01:43:53,479 --> 01:43:57,039
like just just you know, say something nice.

1886
01:43:57,119 --> 01:44:02,079
Speaker 3: That was the one that anyway, I'm.

1887
01:44:02,000 --> 01:44:07,319
Speaker 7: Just curious who's the first Christian to deny the generation.

1888
01:44:07,039 --> 01:44:07,520
Speaker 5: Of the sun?

1889
01:44:09,800 --> 01:44:12,960
Speaker 4: As well, as far as I know, it is from

1890
01:44:13,000 --> 01:44:17,359
an Alexander role in sixteen eighty nine, which actually.

1891
01:44:18,800 --> 01:44:21,920
Speaker 2: You're cutting out, doctor bo. Could you say that again? Oh?

1892
01:44:22,159 --> 01:44:27,960
Speaker 4: Sorry, So Muhammada job actually mentioned in the debate Hermann

1893
01:44:28,000 --> 01:44:32,439
Alexander role in sixteen eighty nine. As far as I know,

1894
01:44:32,600 --> 01:44:36,319
that is the first person to like explicitly reject it.

1895
01:44:36,399 --> 01:44:38,680
And I'm pretty sure that he got that from Jake,

1896
01:44:38,760 --> 01:44:41,840
and Jake got that from me, because.

1897
01:44:42,000 --> 01:44:44,039
Speaker 3: I don't know anyone else who you know, is made

1898
01:44:44,079 --> 01:44:44,920
much out of that.

1899
01:44:47,039 --> 01:44:55,720
Speaker 2: So are you saying, second, he said, are you saying

1900
01:44:55,720 --> 01:45:00,159
that you prepared Muhammed a job for this debate? Yeah? Yeah, I.

1901
01:45:01,760 --> 01:45:04,800
Speaker 4: Mean I guess it indirectly by just saying stuff and

1902
01:45:05,439 --> 01:45:09,439
Jake sort of copies and tape indirectly, I did.

1903
01:45:11,399 --> 01:45:13,880
Speaker 2: Lily Secure says for three dollars, how would you respond?

1904
01:45:13,920 --> 01:45:16,640
To the powerful chronic argument against the Trinity that Jesus

1905
01:45:16,680 --> 01:45:20,640
and Mary eight food. Don't you see the signs are clear? Well, yeah,

1906
01:45:20,720 --> 01:45:23,960
that's a joke, super Chad, I think that's a bad argument. Anonymous,

1907
01:45:24,000 --> 01:45:27,000
ten dollars, God plus the One Holy Catholic Orthodox Church,

1908
01:45:27,039 --> 01:45:29,800
thank you for your content and thank you for no

1909
01:45:29,920 --> 01:45:34,039
compromise on orthodoxy. A milion assentic ten dollars. Thank you

1910
01:45:34,159 --> 01:45:36,760
Jay and doctor Bo for this theological discussion of guidance.

1911
01:45:37,199 --> 01:45:40,279
Emilion again for ten dollars. Can you politely ask doctor

1912
01:45:40,359 --> 01:45:43,279
bolt Bo, when are you going to create a YouTube

1913
01:45:43,359 --> 01:45:47,159
channel and allow us to follow your work?

1914
01:45:49,920 --> 01:45:53,439
Speaker 4: Well, you can follow my work. I have most I

1915
01:45:53,479 --> 01:45:56,000
think I have everything that I've published except for this

1916
01:45:56,119 --> 01:46:01,640
book on my website and most or all of my

1917
01:46:02,560 --> 01:46:04,319
YouTube appearances and stuff on it.

1918
01:46:04,920 --> 01:46:06,199
Speaker 3: I mean, I've thought about doing.

1919
01:46:06,079 --> 01:46:10,319
Speaker 4: Some kind of YouTube like interview kind of series or something,

1920
01:46:10,399 --> 01:46:14,520
but I would almost have to have someone else who

1921
01:46:14,760 --> 01:46:17,159
would manage all the technical stuff, because.

1922
01:46:16,880 --> 01:46:19,960
Speaker 2: It's yeah, it's it's its own it's a hassle, it's

1923
01:46:20,000 --> 01:46:22,760
its own job, for sure. Anonymous, five dollars. Holly Orthodoxy

1924
01:46:22,840 --> 01:46:25,039
is true? You think, Anonymous, anybody else want to call

1925
01:46:25,119 --> 01:46:27,279
in or any other comments, doctor Kalil, anything else. I

1926
01:46:27,319 --> 01:46:30,239
don't see anybody who wants to If you want to

1927
01:46:30,800 --> 01:46:32,680
request to speak, just hit the request to speak button

1928
01:46:32,680 --> 01:46:41,359
and I'll bring you up. Nobody else. All right, Well,

1929
01:46:41,399 --> 01:46:44,119
we will look for that book when it's out, doctor Bou.

1930
01:46:44,159 --> 01:46:46,479
Appreciate you coming back on and thank you for doing

1931
01:46:46,520 --> 01:46:50,119
the debate review. Yeah, let's when the book comes out.

1932
01:46:50,439 --> 01:46:52,640
Come back and we'll hear somebody wants to ask a question,

1933
01:46:52,760 --> 01:46:55,479
So let's see what MKG has a question.

1934
01:46:55,560 --> 01:47:00,520
Speaker 5: Go ahead, man, yes, hi, thanks ring me out.

1935
01:47:00,600 --> 01:47:04,520
Speaker 6: Last second, I had a question regarding the last thing

1936
01:47:04,600 --> 01:47:09,239
he gets touched on. Regarding the fact that Islam's claim

1937
01:47:09,319 --> 01:47:13,399
of simplicity and trinity being complex and you guys saying

1938
01:47:13,479 --> 01:47:17,600
that it attracts dumb people and all that, I think

1939
01:47:17,680 --> 01:47:22,159
that's a still important issue of the average person. I

1940
01:47:22,279 --> 01:47:26,000
know Khalio kind of threw it as like a throwaway comment,

1941
01:47:26,159 --> 01:47:31,560
but the fact that Islam attracts common people with that phrase,

1942
01:47:31,640 --> 01:47:35,079
people like Sneako and stuff like that. I'm wondering what

1943
01:47:35,800 --> 01:47:38,800
you think the best, because I do agree from like

1944
01:47:40,399 --> 01:47:44,239
the smart people perspective, that's where it kind of falls short.

1945
01:47:44,439 --> 01:47:47,399
But from the average side of like if we were

1946
01:47:47,520 --> 01:47:52,159
to see chiosks of religion basically Christianity and Islam, and

1947
01:47:52,199 --> 01:47:55,479
then the common man would go and ask each person

1948
01:47:56,640 --> 01:47:58,479
why this is a good thing or why this is

1949
01:47:58,520 --> 01:48:03,439
the religion of truth? Basically the one phrase that each

1950
01:48:03,479 --> 01:48:06,439
one would use like a their thesis statement. I think

1951
01:48:06,640 --> 01:48:11,119
Islam's case to the common person might be more appealing.

1952
01:48:12,640 --> 01:48:16,840
I'm just wondering, even though I agree with the monarchical trinity,

1953
01:48:17,359 --> 01:48:20,720
I'm wondering, what do you think the counter would be

1954
01:48:21,119 --> 01:48:22,279
from an orthodox Christian?

1955
01:48:22,640 --> 01:48:24,319
Speaker 2: What would Yeah, what would you say to somebody who says, well,

1956
01:48:24,359 --> 01:48:26,880
why wouldn't we think that you know it's true because

1957
01:48:26,960 --> 01:48:28,600
you know it's simple. How do you convey that to

1958
01:48:28,680 --> 01:48:30,560
somebody who's sort of the common man or whatever?

1959
01:48:31,439 --> 01:48:36,479
Speaker 6: Yeah, I think the conclusion point of like why would

1960
01:48:37,359 --> 01:48:40,720
God make the religion for all people complicated?

1961
01:48:40,760 --> 01:48:43,000
Speaker 5: I think that's something that a Muslim would.

1962
01:48:42,840 --> 01:48:48,960
Speaker 4: Say, Yeah, well, I mean to that, I would just say,

1963
01:48:49,039 --> 01:48:52,039
it's not like God is making I mean, it's not

1964
01:48:52,199 --> 01:48:55,720
like a religion is God just like makes up right,

1965
01:48:55,800 --> 01:48:59,199
It's it's whatever's actually true, So it's not a God

1966
01:48:59,239 --> 01:49:03,039
could just sort of well, I'm going to make reality

1967
01:49:03,359 --> 01:49:05,520
you know, different or something like that. But I do

1968
01:49:05,680 --> 01:49:09,840
think that you raise it an interesting point because this

1969
01:49:10,039 --> 01:49:12,399
is something that I realized when I was doing my

1970
01:49:12,479 --> 01:49:15,199
dissertation and going through Gregory of Nissa's Letter to a

1971
01:49:15,239 --> 01:49:19,640
Blabyous and realizing like the way people have had it

1972
01:49:19,760 --> 01:49:23,279
such a hard time kind of reading and interpreting that

1973
01:49:23,479 --> 01:49:28,359
text because they didn't realize that the way Gregory of

1974
01:49:28,479 --> 01:49:32,319
Nissa himself is thinking about it is he's thinking, who

1975
01:49:32,359 --> 01:49:35,840
are the different audiences that we are talking to, and

1976
01:49:36,359 --> 01:49:39,479
how do we give a response to each of these

1977
01:49:39,560 --> 01:49:43,279
audiences that will satisfy each one. And he gives this

1978
01:49:43,439 --> 01:49:46,319
first argument or this response where he says, well, if

1979
01:49:46,359 --> 01:49:49,600
you're talking to simple minded people who are just kind

1980
01:49:49,600 --> 01:49:55,119
of straightforward and you're just speaking offhand or whatever he says,

1981
01:49:55,159 --> 01:49:57,560
you know, I would just say, well, you know, our

1982
01:49:57,640 --> 01:50:03,159
religion is it's not like polytheistic like the pagan Greeks,

1983
01:50:03,279 --> 01:50:06,800
but it's not this like unitarian view like the Jews,

1984
01:50:07,399 --> 01:50:10,000
and we have this like middle way between, you know,

1985
01:50:10,159 --> 01:50:14,960
between the two. And then he just immediately is like,

1986
01:50:15,039 --> 01:50:17,000
of course that doesn't really answer the question, Like that

1987
01:50:17,000 --> 01:50:19,760
doesn't solve anything. And so people have looked at that

1988
01:50:19,800 --> 01:50:21,239
and like, well, why does he even say that, you know,

1989
01:50:21,319 --> 01:50:23,079
what's he what's doing? And what I realized is he

1990
01:50:23,199 --> 01:50:26,760
what he really is thinking is he's he's actually got

1991
01:50:26,840 --> 01:50:29,319
three audiences in mind, and he's he's really giving a

1992
01:50:29,359 --> 01:50:31,600
response to a bishop, and he's thinking, like, well, in

1993
01:50:31,680 --> 01:50:34,760
a pastoral sort of way, what do we say? And

1994
01:50:34,880 --> 01:50:38,520
so he does acknowledge, like, yeah, you've got to You've

1995
01:50:38,560 --> 01:50:42,319
got to have a response for the common man. It's

1996
01:50:42,439 --> 01:50:44,640
just that the response to the common man needs to

1997
01:50:44,800 --> 01:50:50,199
be something simple, and it might not really solve, you know,

1998
01:50:50,319 --> 01:50:52,079
fully really solve the issue.

1999
01:50:52,159 --> 01:51:04,880
Speaker 2: But we lost him for a second. He'll be back

2000
01:51:04,960 --> 01:51:08,760
just one second. We lost you for a second. But

2001
01:51:10,159 --> 01:51:11,840
we lost you for a second. There you were saying,

2002
01:51:11,880 --> 01:51:14,560
the last thing you said was about the common man,

2003
01:51:14,720 --> 01:51:16,520
and then you do need to give this response.

2004
01:51:16,560 --> 01:51:20,239
Speaker 4: Go ahead, okay, well yeah, just that that, you know,

2005
01:51:20,319 --> 01:51:23,039
Gregory is thinking, you do need to kind of think

2006
01:51:23,159 --> 01:51:26,039
pastorally and and so have a response for the common

2007
01:51:26,119 --> 01:51:31,159
man and have responses for educated people. So I do

2008
01:51:31,239 --> 01:51:34,399
think it's important, and yeah, I mean I don't know.

2009
01:51:34,439 --> 01:51:36,159
I think I think it's a good point. Like you know,

2010
01:51:36,199 --> 01:51:41,840
I guess rhetorically, you do want to have you know, good.

2011
01:51:42,319 --> 01:51:44,680
Speaker 2: Well, but I think every every religious position kind of

2012
01:51:44,760 --> 01:51:47,600
has this issue. Any any major world religion, it's gonna

2013
01:51:47,640 --> 01:51:50,000
it's gonna you're gonna have people saying, well, look it's

2014
01:51:50,000 --> 01:51:52,439
really simple, our position is true, and then any of

2015
01:51:52,479 --> 01:51:54,880
the ones that you get into, even Islam, you're gonna

2016
01:51:54,880 --> 01:51:56,920
find out, well, there's a lot more complexity here than

2017
01:51:57,039 --> 01:51:59,880
was maybe on the surface. So you know, there's not

2018
01:52:00,159 --> 01:52:05,000
any like silver bullet way to avoid the possibility of

2019
01:52:05,319 --> 01:52:08,680
you know, thinking that the system is on the surface

2020
01:52:09,000 --> 01:52:11,800
just really simple and scale down. Then you get into it,

2021
01:52:11,880 --> 01:52:13,760
you find out there's a lot more complexity involved. And

2022
01:52:13,800 --> 01:52:15,119
that's going to be true for any position.

2023
01:52:16,479 --> 01:52:22,319
Speaker 7: And as a Muslim, I will say, Islam is complex.

2024
01:52:23,760 --> 01:52:31,319
Islam is not simplistic. In all throughout Islamic civilization, both

2025
01:52:32,159 --> 01:52:36,399
Sunnis and Shia have always distinguished between the common people

2026
01:52:36,680 --> 01:52:42,640
known as the Alam and the intellectual elite known as

2027
01:52:42,880 --> 01:52:47,640
the kas. So this is a very common distinction. So

2028
01:52:48,600 --> 01:52:52,600
there's always been an internally complex Islamic discourse that is

2029
01:52:52,680 --> 01:52:55,920
for the elite that they don't actually share with the

2030
01:52:56,079 --> 01:52:58,319
common people, like they purposely.

2031
01:52:57,920 --> 01:52:58,359
Speaker 4: Don't do it.

2032
01:52:58,399 --> 01:53:01,960
Speaker 7: They're like very specific protocol than every religious science of Islam.

2033
01:53:02,520 --> 01:53:05,560
And if you read their writings, they're always distinguishing between

2034
01:53:05,600 --> 01:53:07,640
the commoners and the elite, and they're like, oh, we're

2035
01:53:07,680 --> 01:53:12,000
writing for the elite, So this is it's really false advertising.

2036
01:53:12,479 --> 01:53:14,880
When people come and say, oh, Islam is so simple,

2037
01:53:15,000 --> 01:53:18,960
I mean it's really not. Historically, it's not Islam like Christianity,

2038
01:53:19,640 --> 01:53:26,920
is a combination of scripture, tradition, and interpretation. Like those

2039
01:53:27,039 --> 01:53:32,119
three things. There's not one Islamic you know, sect or

2040
01:53:32,279 --> 01:53:37,880
denomination that is free of scripture, tradition, and interpretation. Islamic

2041
01:53:38,039 --> 01:53:41,000
law is one of the most complicated things. Like ever,

2042
01:53:41,439 --> 01:53:46,920
it's very complicated, right, Islamic theology is like even need

2043
01:53:46,960 --> 01:53:51,319
to say, it's more esoteric than Islamic law. And the

2044
01:53:51,439 --> 01:53:54,800
thing is to be a Muslim, whether Shia or Sundi,

2045
01:53:55,359 --> 01:53:58,800
you are required before you understand the way to live,

2046
01:53:59,119 --> 01:54:03,399
you are required to affirm an Islamic creed, a set

2047
01:54:03,479 --> 01:54:06,880
of beliefs, and you're required to understand what you affirm,

2048
01:54:07,920 --> 01:54:09,800
just like you guys have a nice in creed and

2049
01:54:10,000 --> 01:54:12,720
these creeds, I assume a Christian has to know the

2050
01:54:12,800 --> 01:54:15,560
creed that they affirm, right, they can't affirm it blindly,

2051
01:54:15,720 --> 01:54:19,880
so a Muslim has to affirm a creed out of conviction.

2052
01:54:20,079 --> 01:54:21,239
Speaker 5: And you cannot affirm a.

2053
01:54:21,279 --> 01:54:24,840
Speaker 7: Creed if you haven't studied some degree of Islamic theology.

2054
01:54:24,960 --> 01:54:27,479
And guess what that's full of terms like substance and

2055
01:54:27,600 --> 01:54:31,000
accidents and necessary and contingent. So this is just a

2056
01:54:31,119 --> 01:54:34,359
mirage that, oh, Islam is simple, and you know, all

2057
01:54:34,399 --> 01:54:37,319
the other religions are complicated. Actually, as a religion professor,

2058
01:54:37,359 --> 01:54:41,640
I'll say all religions have varying degrees of complexity. There

2059
01:54:41,720 --> 01:54:44,840
is a simplistic version of Christianity. God became man, so

2060
01:54:45,039 --> 01:54:49,000
man might become God. There very simple like that will

2061
01:54:49,039 --> 01:54:52,960
appeal some level of Christians that will satisfy them, and some.

2062
01:54:53,159 --> 01:54:54,119
Speaker 4: Level of Muslims.

2063
01:54:54,359 --> 01:54:56,199
Speaker 7: The Shahada alone will satisfy them.

2064
01:54:56,399 --> 01:54:58,000
Speaker 5: They won't go deeper, and that's fine.

2065
01:54:58,680 --> 01:55:01,800
Speaker 7: That's the beauty of religion that all religions contain layers

2066
01:55:01,920 --> 01:55:06,239
of complexity and simplicity, and every human can sort of

2067
01:55:06,800 --> 01:55:10,800
engage with the level of depth in their religion that

2068
01:55:11,000 --> 01:55:12,680
they have the capacity to bear.

2069
01:55:13,399 --> 01:55:14,479
Speaker 5: That That's how I feel.

2070
01:55:16,199 --> 01:55:20,560
Speaker 3: I agree, And also i'll this too.

2071
01:55:20,680 --> 01:55:22,920
Speaker 4: I mean, I ever since I was a kid, I mean,

2072
01:55:22,960 --> 01:55:26,560
I've always been interested in just religion in general. I

2073
01:55:26,720 --> 01:55:29,239
like to study ancient mythologies and like I like to

2074
01:55:29,399 --> 01:55:32,520
learn about Buddhism and Hinduism and this stuff. And and

2075
01:55:32,680 --> 01:55:36,279
the way that Islam was always presented to me, I

2076
01:55:36,760 --> 01:55:40,520
always felt like, this is the most boring religion that

2077
01:55:40,640 --> 01:55:43,520
I don't really like, I'm not really that interested in

2078
01:55:43,560 --> 01:55:45,840
it is it just seems so like because it always

2079
01:55:46,000 --> 01:55:48,680
was presented when I was a kid or just you know,

2080
01:55:48,800 --> 01:55:51,560
reading about stuff on my own, like it's just like, well,

2081
01:55:51,600 --> 01:55:53,840
it's just this book and you have there's a few

2082
01:55:53,920 --> 01:55:55,760
rules and whatever, and there you go.

2083
01:55:56,039 --> 01:55:56,319
Speaker 2: That's it.

2084
01:55:56,600 --> 01:55:59,520
Speaker 4: And I was just like that's it, Like that's this

2085
01:55:59,680 --> 01:56:02,239
is you know. And and it's only in the last

2086
01:56:02,399 --> 01:56:04,680
several years that i've kind of you know, really well.

2087
01:56:04,720 --> 01:56:06,119
I mean, I guess when I went to grad school,

2088
01:56:06,119 --> 01:56:09,319
I kind of started learning something about Islamic philosophy and

2089
01:56:09,359 --> 01:56:11,840
I was like, oh, that's interesting. They actually have this

2090
01:56:12,000 --> 01:56:16,359
whole you know, history of philosophical debate and whatever. It's like, oh,

2091
01:56:16,399 --> 01:56:18,880
there's actually a whole yeah, Like I mean to me,

2092
01:56:19,079 --> 01:56:22,079
that makes it more much more interesting. Like now I

2093
01:56:22,199 --> 01:56:24,680
kind of am like, oh, I'd like to know more

2094
01:56:24,760 --> 01:56:28,640
about all of this. So I think Yeah, it's it's

2095
01:56:28,720 --> 01:56:31,079
not a it's not a good way to present.

2096
01:56:31,279 --> 01:56:34,239
Speaker 2: Yeah, the attempt at selling point of oh this is

2097
01:56:34,319 --> 01:56:36,680
like the super easy thing. It might cut both cut

2098
01:56:36,840 --> 01:56:37,680
both ways.

2099
01:56:37,920 --> 01:56:41,800
Speaker 3: Like yeah, uh Joe, but it's going to turn off

2100
01:56:41,960 --> 01:56:42,319
some people.

2101
01:56:42,399 --> 01:56:47,039
Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly exactly, Jordain. You have a question, Well, it's it's.

2102
01:56:47,119 --> 01:56:48,720
Speaker 9: Pretty much on the topic that you've had this whole

2103
01:56:48,760 --> 01:56:52,079
week about paid these factories and what doctor cooleg just said.

2104
01:56:52,960 --> 01:56:55,079
Why even though like over the last like fifty years,

2105
01:56:55,760 --> 01:56:59,840
everyone is every church, Protestant church in mainstream like dummed

2106
01:56:59,840 --> 01:57:02,399
out Islam, why is it continued?

2107
01:57:02,479 --> 01:57:03,800
Speaker 5: Like why is this process.

2108
01:57:03,479 --> 01:57:08,800
Speaker 9: Continued of abandoning like any higher intellect within within religion.

2109
01:57:09,560 --> 01:57:11,640
Why is it persistent even though the long term it

2110
01:57:11,800 --> 01:57:14,079
always ends in liberalism, in atheism?

2111
01:57:14,119 --> 01:57:15,560
Speaker 5: Why is it persisted? Do you guys think?

2112
01:57:16,079 --> 01:57:18,399
Speaker 2: I think there's multiple reasons. I think there's a there's

2113
01:57:18,439 --> 01:57:22,479
a cultural trend. It's can you it's it's really loud

2114
01:57:22,479 --> 01:57:25,359
in the background, so let me so. I think there's

2115
01:57:25,399 --> 01:57:30,399
a cultural trend in general of people leaving theism, leaving

2116
01:57:30,439 --> 01:57:35,880
the church, leaving Christianity because the culture is so toxic.

2117
01:57:35,960 --> 01:57:39,039
So it's constantly pumped at them to engage in degeneracy,

2118
01:57:39,119 --> 01:57:42,920
to accept degeneracy. The education system, the government from a

2119
01:57:43,000 --> 01:57:46,359
top down is pushing it. There are wealthy people who

2120
01:57:46,520 --> 01:57:50,520
influence religions and they donate to religious institutions, to seminaries

2121
01:57:50,600 --> 01:57:54,159
to make them into atheism factories. So all of those

2122
01:57:54,199 --> 01:57:58,399
things play a role. That's that's my take on that.

2123
01:57:58,520 --> 01:58:02,800
Why do you think there's a can constant push, doctor Branson?

2124
01:58:03,520 --> 01:58:06,039
Speaker 4: I mean, I'd agree with all that, but I'd also

2125
01:58:06,319 --> 01:58:09,960
say to me, I think there's this kind of like

2126
01:58:10,239 --> 01:58:14,239
business model for churches that I mean, especially in America,

2127
01:58:14,359 --> 01:58:17,159
Like it's it's become a thing at some point to

2128
01:58:17,279 --> 01:58:20,199
kind of like treat it like a business. Like you're

2129
01:58:20,239 --> 01:58:23,279
thinking about marketing and getting you know, your people are

2130
01:58:23,359 --> 01:58:25,680
like customers that are going to come in and and

2131
01:58:25,800 --> 01:58:28,520
I mean like if you want to be marketable to

2132
01:58:28,600 --> 01:58:30,640
the widest audience, like you want.

2133
01:58:30,479 --> 01:58:32,000
Speaker 2: To be the lowest common nominator.

2134
01:58:33,640 --> 01:58:35,880
Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean really Like I mean, how could you

2135
01:58:36,039 --> 01:58:42,439
get like a huge megachurch, you know, if you're taking

2136
01:58:42,560 --> 01:58:47,840
really really specific views on a lot of issues and whatever.

2137
01:58:48,520 --> 01:58:53,239
Speaker 2: Yeah exactly. Yeah, I mean if you, yeah, your anti schedules,

2138
01:58:53,279 --> 01:58:55,199
anti this and that, like that's going to cut down

2139
01:58:55,279 --> 01:58:59,239
on the you know, offering plate so exactly that there

2140
01:58:59,319 --> 01:59:01,479
might be a you know, it might might hurt the

2141
01:59:02,000 --> 01:59:04,520
bottom line. So business church, which I did. I did

2142
01:59:04,560 --> 01:59:06,720
a livestream make it coat like if on a business

2143
01:59:06,800 --> 01:59:08,159
church a few years ago. So a lot of you

2144
01:59:08,279 --> 01:59:11,680
have probably seen that. I don't see any more. Super chats,

2145
01:59:12,159 --> 01:59:14,079
Doctor both, thank you for joining me, Doctor Calill, thank

2146
01:59:14,119 --> 01:59:17,439
you for joining me as well. Any any final thoughts,

2147
01:59:17,439 --> 01:59:21,079
anything else to debate? What have you thought of the

2148
01:59:21,319 --> 01:59:23,159
recent Muslim debate. I don't know if you've seen the

2149
01:59:23,199 --> 01:59:26,279
other ones, the ones that we did with Daniel and

2150
01:59:26,960 --> 01:59:27,760
Muslim Lantern.

2151
01:59:29,119 --> 01:59:30,000
Speaker 3: No I heard about that.

2152
01:59:30,520 --> 01:59:33,239
Speaker 4: I just now watched the first I don't know, maybe

2153
01:59:33,279 --> 01:59:34,960
half hour something, but it was a pretty long one,

2154
01:59:35,000 --> 01:59:36,840
so I've gotta gotta go through more.

2155
01:59:36,960 --> 01:59:37,640
Speaker 3: But I did.

2156
01:59:37,880 --> 01:59:41,520
Speaker 4: Yeah, I notice the opening like this is simple and you.

2157
01:59:41,560 --> 01:59:44,760
Speaker 2: Know, and again I want to remind people. Muhammed a

2158
01:59:44,880 --> 01:59:48,960
job as well. Like Sam and I Fresh and Fits agreed,

2159
01:59:49,000 --> 01:59:52,000
we're happy to do two on two. So Mohammed a job,

2160
01:59:52,119 --> 01:59:55,239
doesn't want to debate Sam. Shemoon directly wants Sam to

2161
01:59:55,319 --> 01:59:59,479
debate Jake. Easy solution, Jake, Muhammed a job debate me

2162
01:59:59,560 --> 02:00:02,119
and Sam on Fresh and Fit. Myron said he's happy

2163
02:00:02,159 --> 02:00:05,279
to do that, so I'll issue that challenge and thank

2164
02:00:05,319 --> 02:00:07,720
you for joining me. Doctor Bow and everybody can check

2165
02:00:07,760 --> 02:00:09,840
out his website. He's linked if you want to go

2166
02:00:09,920 --> 02:00:12,399
see his lectures and his media appearances. I highly recommend

2167
02:00:12,439 --> 02:00:15,359
this series on monarchical trinitarianism that's over at his website.

2168
02:00:15,600 --> 02:00:19,159
You can also find his uploaded videos at Orthodox Rahta.

2169
02:00:19,680 --> 02:00:22,640
Doctor Klill is also on YouTube as well under his name.

2170
02:00:22,760 --> 02:00:25,560
So thank you guys and appreciate you coming on