The Craig/Carroll debate, and the relationship between the Cosmological and Teleological Arguments

About | Information | History | Online | Facts | Discovery

1. Really good job, Ed. I'm a fan. Don't like the hat.
2. Thank you for this intelligent presentation! Briefly - the cosmological argument requires that this cause be a personal agent possessing freedom of the will and who is able to bring into being a temporal effect from within a timeless regime. Otherwise the effect (the finite universe) would have to exist eternally with it's cause. But a personal agent can initiate a new effect at its discretion.
3. Very good thinking, Ed. I usually get so passionate when I'm in a conversation with fundamentalists that I have real trouble maintaining clarity. You really hit the nail on the head many times.. I am going to watch all of your videos. AND lol.. I'd like to have my thinking checked out by the likes of you.
4. It seems that a theist qualifies God as something because God is an agent/mind regardless if it is timeless, immaterial, and spaceless, Then again, when is the last time you have seen an agent/mind that is not "anchored" to something physical let alone an agent/mind that is timeless, spaceless, or immaterial?
5. Ozy's recommendation of you is very high.
   What a great piece of luck to discover you both in the same week.  Great, lucid work -- very grateful for it, since it's not my background, and I often get bogged down in the terms and conventions of this argumentation tradition.
   Looking forward to seeing more of these videos.
6. Another great video, Ed. In my series, I mentioned that intelligence is a fundamental property of a personal god, but I think you did a much better job of explaining the significance of the relationship between intelligence and the personal god concept (versus the impersonal god concept) as it relates to the possibility of justifying the existence of a higher power (i.e. why the teleological argument is the most important one to address). In fact, I reached out to someone recently who viewed my series and somehow came away with the thought that I was focusing on a trivial aspect of the discussion, which rather blew me away (how could the teleological argument be trivial?)
   I've had a renewed interest in this subject since you started posting videos, so if I get around to summarizing my series for mass consumption, I'll definitely start with your explanation here. Thanks for the outstanding uploads, and thanks for the numerous shoutouts. I hope to contribute as much to your subscriber base as you have to mine :)
7. A very nice job, sir! More please.
8. This is an incisive video discussing the Craig/Carroll debate by EdJacobson77.  It is worth your time to watch it.
   - Ozy
9. Great work Ed.  I am especially interested to hear your thoughts on teleological arguments. I have long maintained that teleological arguments and pre-theoretical intuitions about teleology or purpose and function are the most important reasons why people think a god exists.
   Cheers,
   - Ozy
10. I endorse your shoutouts. :)
11. What do you think of this... Even if the laws of quantum physics did begin at the same time as the "beginning" of the universe, the universe would still be eternal. If time (along with quantum physics), AND the universe began together, the universe has existed for all time. It would be incoherent to talk about anything prior. Does that make sense?