This is by far the best response to the question, “Where did God come from?”
I am a Christian and I believe in an eternal God. Generally, I like what Kent Hovind believes and what he says. But I do not like this particular argument that Kent makes in response to the atheist’s first question during this debate. Kent creates a secondary peripheral argument that not only does not prove his secondary point, but even if it did prove his secondary point, it would not have proved his primary point and therefore would have been a Fallacy of the Irrelevant Thesis (i.e. supposing an argument proving an irrelevant [secondary] point has also proved the [primary] point at issue).
The atheist asked, “Where did God come from?”
“You are thinking of the wrong God, because the God of the universe is not affected by time, space or matter.”
(At this point, Kent is supposed to prove that the God of the universe is not affected by time, space or matter. However, Kent deliberately bypasses the impossible proof of his primary point and instead attempts to prove a secondary point: that matter, space and time cannot exist independently of each other, as if proving this secondary point will somehow also prove his primary that God is not affected by time, space or matter as if God is “outside” of matter, space and time.)
So Kent says, “Because if there were matter but no space, WHERE would you put it?”
Here Kent makes the self-evident argument that MATTER cannot exist without requiring the existence of SPACE. Then he says, “If there were matter and space but no time, WHEN would you put it?” and makes the self-evident argument that MATTER cannot exist without the existence of TIME either.
Now that Kent has proven the twin self-evident points that MATTER cannot exist without both SPACE and TIME, he must also prove that SPACE cannot exist independently of matter and time and that TIME cannot exist independently of SPACE and MATTER. But Kent does not attempt either of these proofs, nor does he logically connect how his secondary argument proves his primary argument, that God is not affected by time, space or matter and therefore God is “outside” of time, space and matter.
Instead, Kent simply repeats his A Priori belief that, “You cannot have time, space or matter independently; they have to come into existence simultaneously”, claiming he has proven a point that he has not proven at all. At the end, all Kent did was commit an A Prior Fallacy (i.e. trying to base knowledge of fundamental truths on anything other than empirical evidence), plus a Fallacy of the Irrelevant Thesis (i.e. supposing and argument proving an irrelevant [secondary] point has also proved the [primary] point at issue). Kent has merely fooled his audience into thinking he has finished the argument and won the point. This type of argument is unworthy of a Christian like Kent, and I was very disappointed in Kent to hear hi answer in this way.
Then Kent was cheered by the audience and so he sat down, having felt he proved his argument (which he did not) while ignoring the atheist’s second question, “How does a spiritual force have an impact on a material universe to create it?”
So I was very disappointed in the above Kent Hovind video.
That being said, here is an entirely different video that attempts to explain, “how an eternal God with no beginning might have come into existence in the first place and still be eternal with no beginning”. The you-tube video is located at https://youtu.be/ApYOxD3EIkg and is from a website called uniquebibleanswers.com .
Personally, I believe that God is LIVING TIME–specifically, LIVING SPACETIME–the literal fabric of the universe. Jesus confirms this when he says, “I am the Beginning and the End”, which I interpret to mean “I am [literally] the Beginning–the LIVING PAST–and the End–the LIVING FUTURE. That is who and what I actually AM ” Jesus also said, “Before Abraham was, I AM”, where Jesus was not only claiming to be the great I AM, but was also claiming that THE PAST STILL EXISTS and that GOD is STILL ALIVE IN THE PAST, and (by implication) ALREADY ALIVE IN THE FUTURE.
Only something inanimate that is already naturally eternal with no beginning (like eternal time) that somehow becomes alive can explain the origin of a living God who is likewise naturally eternal with no beginning.
Likewise, only something inanimate that consists of three inseparable parts that is already naturally eternal with no beginning (like eternal time–the inanimate past, present and future) that somehow becomes alive can explain the origin of a living Trinity–the LIVING PAST (the Father), the LIVING PRESENT (Jehovah/Jesus) and the LIVING FUTURE (the Holy Spirit) who are likewise naturally eternal with no beginning. If Siamese triplets were ever to survive, this would be three inseparable living beings existing within one human body. Likewise, the Trinity are three living beings existing within one body of LIVING SPACETIME.
See https://youtu.be/ApYOxD3EIkg and visit uniquebibleanswers.com
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Google+ account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Twitter account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Facebook account.
( Log Out /
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Notify me of new posts via email.
Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.
Join 1,556 other followers
Create a website or blog at WordPress.com