drcraigvideos
drcraigvideosFor more resources visit: http://www.reasonablefaith.org/finetuning
View the Kalam Cosmological Argument animation video: http://youtu.be/6CulBuMCLg0
View the Moral Argument animation video:
View Leibniz’ Contingency Argument animation video:
Reasonable Faith features the work of philosopher and theologian Dr. William Lane Craig and aims to provide in the public arena an intelligent, articulate, and uncompromising yet gracious Christian perspective on the most important issues concerning the truth of the Christian faith today, such as:
-the existence of God
-the meaning of life
-the objectivity of truth
-the foundation of moral values
-the creation of the universe
-intelligent design
-the reliability of the Gospels
-the uniqueness of Jesus
-the historicity of Jesus’ resurrection
-the challenge of religious pluralism
Read more: http://www.reasonablefaith.org
We welcome your comments in the Reasonable Faith forums:
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/forums/
Be sure to also visit Reasonable Faith’s other channel which contains full-length clips: http://www.youtube.com/reasonablefaithorg
Follow Reasonable Faith on Twitter: http://twitter.com/rfupdates
Add Reasonable Faith on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/reasonablefaithorg
source
48 Comments
@pogchamp2330
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMwas in a tf2 lobby where some guy playing demo was playing this video over voice chat
absolute chad (had a sign that said God is good)
@ben10diyar342
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMCan I publish it on my own YouTube channel? Turkis
@9wndibe
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMLove your video, where did you get these numbers, i want to read the books. Hope you answer. Keep up these videos
@svonlaven
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMPick one of your parameters and tell me what baseline distribution of values is reasonable. If you could know that distribution, then you might be able to say whether the observed value is 1) really lucky or 2) close to what you would expect.
@Research-Guy-kush
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMI'm here from Tiktak 2025
@JimmyYoung-p4e
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMThere are 2 kinds of so-called laws.
1 – Prescriptive laws tell us how we must and must not behave. They are made up by man such as the laws in Bible and Quran.
2 – Descriptive laws tell us how the Universe or nature works. Natural laws are the same as descriptive laws.
So where do so-called natural laws come from?
They come from our compilation of findings of how things behave or happen.
So why do they behave or happen the way they do?
They behave or happen so due to their intrinsic attributes, properties, nature, characteristics, etc. which come from antecedents which came from antecedents and so on to infinity.
There are 2 principles we all agree on.
1 – Nothing is beginningless or causeless.
2 – Nothing comes from nothing.
So if we use those 2 principles and logic without exceptions, fallacies, claims, etc. …..
1 – Nothing is causeless means every cause has its causes which have their causes and so on to infinity. So the logical sequence called infinite regress is unstoppable or undeniable. Hence there never was so-called 1st cause or uncaused cause aka the greatest BS.
There are 2 kinds of causes.
(1) EXTERNAL CAUSES ie. someone or something.
(2) INTERNAL CAUSES ie. intrinsic properties, nature, characteristics, attributes etc. which come from antecedents.
2 – Nothing comes from nothing means new things can't come into existence without antecedents ie. no product can come into existence without raw materials. Everything comes from antecedents which came from antecedents and so on to infinity. Hence there never was so-called nothingness or one thing only or one person only or some things only or some people only.
@johnmark2217
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMMy teacher once told me "Do you know why there are no blue cows?" Why don't fish walk ? Do you know the power of the sun and Gra ity ? Do you know what power it takes to hold all the planets in place ? 😮😮😮
@FabianFord-k5h
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMHulk🔸Hey booger … stop playing with Mickey Mouse and come here. Tell me your life story.
▫
God🔸I was designed and invented by senior conmen, my lord. And since then, I've been fine-tuned time and time again by junior conmen, my lord.
@MG-hi1ej
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PM“From its smallest particle to its largest galaxy, everything in the Universe follows rules that are described by the laws of physics,” explains The Encyclopedia of Stars & Atoms.
Physicist Stephen W. Hawking said: “The more we examine the universe, we find it is not arbitrary at all but obeys certain well-defined laws that operate in different areas. It seems very reasonable to suppose that there may be some unifying principles, so that all laws are part of some bigger law.”
Geologist Kirtley F. Mather wrote: “We live in a universe, not of chance or caprice, but of Law and Order. Its Administration is completely rational and worthy of the utmost respect. Consider the marvelous mathematical scheme of nature that permits us to give consecutive atomic numbers to every element of matter.”
A report in The Orange County Register stated: “The quantitative values of many basic physical constants defining the universe—for example, the charge of an electron, or the fixed velocity of light, or the ratio of the strengths of fundamental forces in nature—are ravishingly precise, some to 120 decimal places. The development of a life-breeding universe is exceedingly sensitive to these specifications. Any tiny variation—a nanosecond here, an angstrom there—and the universe might well have been dead and barren.” “It seems more reasonable to assume that some mysterious bias lurks within the process, perhaps in the action of an intelligent and intentional power who fine-tuned the universe in preparation for our arrival.”
British astronomer Fred Hoyle put it this way: “The list of apparent accidents of a non-biological nature without which carbon-based and hence human life could not exist, is large and impressive. Such properties seem to run through the fabric of the natural world like a thread of happy accidents. But there are so many of these odd coincidences essential to life that some explanation seems required to account for them.”
Physicist Sir John Polkinghorne concluded: “When you realize that the laws of nature must be incredibly finely tuned to produce the universe we see, that conspires to plant the idea that the universe did not just happen, but that there must be a purpose behind it.”
The charges of electron and proton must be equal and opposite; the neutron must outweigh the proton by a tiny percent; a matching must exist between temperature of the sun and the absorptive properties of chlorophyll before photosynthesis can occur; if the strong force were a little weaker, the sun could not generate energy by nuclear reactions, but if it were a little stronger, the fuel needed to generate energy would be violently unstable; without two separate remarkable resonances between nuclei in the cores of red giant stars, no element beyond helium could have been formed; had space been less than three dimensions, the interconnections for blood flow and the nervous system would be impossible; and if space had been more than three dimensions, planets could not orbit the sun stably.—The Symbiotic Universe, pages 256-7.
Physicist Paul Davies said: “If the universe is simply an accident, the odds against it containing any appreciable order are ludicrously small. As this was clearly not the case, it appears hard to escape the conclusion that the actual state of the universe has been ‘chosen’ or selected somehow from the huge number of available states, all but an infinitesimal fraction of which are totally disordered. And if such an exceedingly improbable initial state was selected, there surely had to be a selector or designer to ‘choose’ it.”
Philosopher Antony Flew wrote: “The important point is not merely that there are regularities in nature, but that these regularities are mathematically precise, universal, and ‘tied together.’ Einstein spoke of them as ‘reason incarnate.’ The question we should ask is how nature came packaged in this fashion. This is certainly the question that scientists from Newton to Einstein to Heisenberg have asked—and answered. Their answer was the Mind of God.”
Zoologist Pierre-Paul Grassé states: “Natural order was not invented by the human mind or set up by certain perceptive powers. No, it is a reality that was comprehended perfectly by such physicists and mathematicians as Planck and Einstein. The existence of order presupposes the existence of organizing intelligence. Such intelligence can be none other than God’s.”
@Sebastianx115
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMThis is why I do believe in theism, but why do we live in a solar system that’s in a universe filled with so many more solar systems and galaxies and why did 90% of all other species had to die for us to get here
@abdisaidali2525
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMAllahu Akbar
Allaha is the creator of the universe.
Every thing is Allah's hand
Yaa Allah make us the people of paradise
@criticalthinker8007
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PM1. Even if you the universe was fine-tune that does not get you to God Showing that X=0 does not show that Y=1.
2. If the universe was fine tune it would have been fine tune for what ever is most successful and abundant in the universe which is hydrogen and helium. If it was tune for life then it was badly tuned.
3. These universal constants only work for classical physics they do not work in the quantum realm so we know on a level they wrong. They just work for a particular model of the universe.
3. You are presupposing that life was a requirement of the universe.
4. Necessary: How did you determine the probability of these different types of universes. what was far more likely, how did you calculate the probability. You have failed to falsify this option.
5. Chance: Again how did you calculate the probability. Do determine the probability you first have to identify all the other possibilities and their probabilities so you can add up to 1. Besides the probability that a universe like this ie exist is 1 because we are in it.
6. The current best-fit scientific mode – the big bang theory is none of these options. That is the one that currently matches the data. How did you falsify that as an option.
if you going to put up an argument it is best not to misquote or take out of context quotes from eminent scientist but it weakens rather strengths your case.
@vollinaadkins8118
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PM@JimKrause1975
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMI love this! I have been saying multiverse is a crazy theory. I got some backlash for commenting on another video that it is more believable that a creator designed the universe than the multiverse theory. I didn't know so many people were in on the fine tune argument.
@arthurwieczorek4894
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PM'If God exists, does that mean my Holy Book is true? If my Holy Book is true, does that mean, to the degree that I read it, does that make me one of the people in the know? If I am a person in the know via my Holy Book, than there is little inventive for me to read other serious books. I have found the answer.'
@arthurwieczorek4894
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMThe fine tuning universe. The accidental universe. The completely arbitrary universe. The lawful universe. The natural universe. The supernatural universe.
@karlgudnason3565
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMhow arrogant and stubborn does one have to be to deny God ??
@martins.3923
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMI fear this number for Gravitation is not accurate
@JoBob-m5p
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMThe most rational conclusion, using occams razor, is that there is a mind behind the incredible precision we witness. All other explanations require multiplying entities which is scientific anathema!
@fixingcosmology
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMThis is a Link to the video BEST ARGUMENTS FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD DEBUNKED
https://youtu.be/qqgsg1cvvMg?si=FjFct3NdGSgTJ_6a
These two arguments are that:
(1) a god created the Big Bang and the origin of time.
(2) a god fixed the values of the fundamental constants to allow life to occur
@elonmuskbolado
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMThat’s also the argument to believe we live in a Simulation.
@nodical802
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PM3:40 except there is, LIFE
@polaraer
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMThe concept of fine tuning supposes that we already know all of the possibilities that are behind the laws of nature that we have observed and predicted. Therefore it seems to be that out or all these seemingly plausible outcomes from our perspective it appears tp be by a designer much in the same way we would design a watch. Afterall in christianity man is created in the inage of god. But the truth is we cannot even begin to understand the mysterious forces and answera to questiona beyond the horizon of human knowledge therefore we do not know what is necessary and what is not.
We then impose a human explanation suxh as a creqtor who mirrors us to an inherently inhuman and mysterious phenomenon such as the creation of our universe 9r the origins of our universe. If we truely where the centre of the universe how is it that our sun will expand and consume us? Or a number of other factors or scenarios that could be qpocalyptic for humanity?
Also the fine tuning argument begs the question. In this alledged god's infinite complexity who must have fine tuned god, his values, his ability to supposedly fine tune laws of natiure? It doesnt seem like god or design is actually a plausible explanation for anything it is infact a non explanation aince it gives us no knowleege and is based on faith in an ideology.
Your criticism of necessity assumes we know all the possible universe scenarios or physical laws that could exist in a hypothetical alternate universe. But thats exactly what it is a hypothesis that is untestable and beyone all human comprehension.
@georgerobertson9703
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMOMNI
@ryansmith1228
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMIs that INXS in the background haha??
@Frumious-Bandersnatch
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMIf it was designed then we have no way to detect, observe, measure or prove it just as the multiverse so by the reasoning of this video, design is also eliminated
@minaamjam1863
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMAllah is the The Designer, The Creator, The Sustainer…He not only Created but sustains all of it.
@hertogjandunneeertuh
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMshit is cool, therefore god.
@Hemming-Peter-Mortensen
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMI enjoy watching this video and have placed it in my library so others can enjoy it too. If it bothers you, I'll remove it again.
Best regards, Hemming
@JohnS-go3he
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PM@theamalgamut8871
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMThe ridiculousness of asserting something from a sample of…one.
@MalachiWhite-tw7hl
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMThe "fine-tuning" argument for God's existence is probably the silliest reverse logic apologetic commonly seen. The fine-tuning is an illusion. It's akin to a misunderstanding about how Evolution works, as if the giraffe grew its neck to reach the upper leaves. Backwards logic.
@sammbie
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMThis is an amazing and inspiring video.
@SajiSNairNair-tu9dk
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PM😮🕵️ guruvayoorappan 🌏😃🏃🕵️
@ChristinaWoll-p2f
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMSo many good things in this video. I'm currently preparing to present to a board of people (of varying beliefs and outlooks) on how science and religion go hand in hand, and this was the most simultaneously engaging and informative source I've come across. This has reinvigorated my passion for this speech! Also, I have to ask, was this narrated by John Cena or am I crazy?
@RehanAhmad-jo6ju
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMThe Qur'an beautifully captures the essence of creation in the verse, ‘الَّذِي خَلَقَ فَاسْتَوَى,’ which translates to 'He who created, then proportioned.' This idea invites us to reflect on the complexity and order in the universe. For those who may not believe in God, consider how the intricate balance and design we observe in nature and existence suggest a deeper purpose. Could it be that this complexity is a sign of something greater than mere chance?
@jlgamer3987
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMDo you not understand how stars form? How planets form? Gravity is a property of matter, so of course it would form stars. Gas clouds get closer together due to friction, and more clumped up gas will attract more and more gas slowly. I don’t understand how you are like “oh, it’s very improbable” when it really isn’t. The sun forming, the earth forming the way it did, and life forming are all very plausible. When you say there is no evidence for the existence of the multiverse, the same goes with the observer you believe in. It cannot be detected, observed, measured, or proved. You jump into assumptions that it must be designed when you do not have the evidence to back up such a claim.
@jadahub3370
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMPretty hypocritical to say the multiverse cant be Detected, Measured, Observed or Proved 😅😅😅
Just have faith that its true
@seanmckenna6122
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMThe multiverse is the best option. it is the result of eternal inflation 😊😊😊
@WilliamAlan316
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMGod bless you Dr Craig for producing this short and to the point video! Maybe it will help save some who walk away from their faith.
@dal7143
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMi was sent here by Apologetics Roadshow. Great video, thanks!
@2l84me8
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMThere is no fine tuning of our universe.
Life barely managed to adapt and survive on a tiny silver in a planet with 99% of all its inhabitants already gone extinct, all on a planet destined for heat death in a hostile and inhospitable universe.
Some “fine tuning” right there.
An all powerful good wouldn’t need to fine tune anything for us to begin with if life was the intended goal all along.
@AzibGhadi
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMWhen i link this argument and after self review on random creation and after reading my own root vedic philosophy from authentic sources than i finally leave Atheisam. Sorry for mocking and trolling Ishwar😢
Now my life is going good 😊
Be happy friends
@frankfowlkes7872
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMThe odds of a fine tuned universe are truly overwhelming beyond belief. Most physicists are aware of this but few are willing to admit it like Paul Davies. What we as believers have to be careful of in scientific circles is blindly attributing this to our" Christian God". This weakens the obvious conclusion of a designed universe into a matter of faith instead of science. At our current level of understanding we cannot explain why the Universe is designed only that it is. This, in itself, causes the curious to consider the options.
@blimpytheseal3383
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMHave you ever heard of survivorship bias? Basically when looking in a given group, you only focus on the successful individuals. Its the same concept here, you are arguing that god is real because everything is so perfectly fine-tuned. But if one thing was slightly off, then we wouldnt be here, and thus not be able to think about it. What im saying is that you arent looking at all the times where life DOESNT exist. iykwim
@faisalayache
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMGlory be to God, King of the universe.
@Brugar18
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMFor a fine tuning it sure seems to be a crappy tuning
@earthwarden8548
03/07/2025 - 4:24 PMأَوَلَمْ يَرَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا أَنَّ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضَ كَانَتَا رَتْقًا فَفَتَقْنَاهُمَا وَجَعَلْنَا مِنَ الْمَاءِ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ حَيٍّ أَفَلَا يُؤْمِنُون
ARE, THEN, they who are bent on denying the truth not aware that the heavens and the earth were [once] one single entity, which We then parted asunder? – and [that] We made out of water every living thing? Will they not, then, [begin to] believe
21:30