I grew up as an atheist. As a teenager, I fell in love with the books of Friedrich Nietzsche. In a very short time I understood, that if there is no God, there also is no true morality. Just human-made empty ideals. This debate was very hard to listen too. The atheists were so naive, inconsequent and childish in their worldview and their argumentation... but they felt so smart at the same time. We call it Fremdschämen in the german language... thats what it was like for me to listen to these guys. 4 yeas ago, I became born again and a believer in our great God, Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. And now I know, there is a real good and evil in this world.
Is your Omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient God morally good? Then why does he let bad things happen to people you consider good and good to people who are considered bad? Your government follows the same principals as God. They let innocent people go to jail and allow the rich and powerful to go free of punishment. Do you think it is morally good to stop a man from raping a child if you passed in an alley? If you see a blind man about to cross the street, and a car approaching, is it morally good to stop him from crossing? If you say yes to these questions, then you and your god do not share the same set of morals because God lets these things happen all the time even though he is all powerful all-knowing and all present.
Debate outline with timestamps: 00:01:01 Debate intro by Pastor Jason Wallace 00:02:50 Speaker intros for the negative: Dr Dean Chatterjee & Chaplain Jared Anderson: 00:04:00 Speaker intros for the positive: Dr James White & Pastor Jeff Durbin 00:05:14 Debate question & structure: 00:07:42 Opening Statement for the affirmative by Dr James White: 00:14:38 Opening Statement for the affirmative (continued) by Pastor Jeff Durbin 00:27:10 Opening Statement for the negative side by Dr Dean Chatterjee 00:39:47 Opening Statement for the negative side (continued) by Chaplain Jared Anderson 00:49:34 Ten Minute Rebuttal from the affirmative: Dr James White 00:54:10 Ten Minute Rebuttal from the affirmative (continued): Pastor Jeff Durbin 01:00:08 Ten Minute Rebuttal from the negative: Dr Dean Chatterjee 01:09:06 Ten Minute Rebuttal from the negative (continued): Chaplain Jared Anderson 01:12:12 Twenty minute cross-examination from the affirmative side to the negative side: 01:32:40 Twenty minute cross-examination from the negative side to the affirmative side: 01:54:28 Closing statements of five minutes for the affirmative side: Pastor Jeff Durbin 01:59:39 Closing statements of five minutes for the negative side: Dr Dean Chatterjee 02:00:53 Closing statements of five minutes for the negative side (continued): Chaplain Jared Anderson 02:02:04 Questions from the audience - how they will be answered: 02:02:50 Question from the audience for the negative side: How do you explain the empty tomb? 02:04:31 Response from the positive side to the answer given by the negative side to the question, 'How do you explain the empty tomb?' 02:05:05 Question from the audience for the affirmative side: 'How do you respond to the charge that what you're offering is simply circular reasoning? You're assuming your conclusion.' 02:06:28 Response from the negative side to the answer given by the positive side, 'How do you respond to the charge that what you're offering is simply circular reasoning?' 02:06:58 Question from the audience for the negative side: We have a question from someone with cerebral palsy. He is in a wheelchair. His question is essentially, 'If society determines that he is a burden on society, and he should be removed from that society, does he have a right to say that society is wrong to kill him?' 2:07:53 Response from the positive side to the negative side's answer to the question, 'If society determines that he is a burden on society, and he should be removed from that society, does he have a right to say that society is wrong to kill him?' 02:08:57 Question for the affirmative from the audience: 'Why are most wars done in the name of God? (and they included the wars by Stalin, Hitler and other leaders of genocide as well) Why would God require man to do this when the scriptures say to not be violent? Jesus preached 'Peace, peace.'' 02:10:15 Response by the negative side to the answer given by the positive side's question, 'Why are most wars done in the name of God?' etc 02:13:20 Response by Dr Dean Chatterjee:
Though neither of them really seemed to understand why their worldview was completely bankrupt and devoid of any absolute truth, I'd say that Dr. Chattergee *_by far_* was not even qualified to be on the panel.
What you're missing is that is true, but you see, we're all sinners now. I won't speak for Johnny Cash. Or forgot because I can't both because I'm not God. Second I don't know Johnny Cash's heart before he died. I have no idea if he repented of his adultery. I have no idea if he repented of anything he did. I was surely dead, but assuming it's not the same as knowing. We are not God. We can judge the actions but not the heart, so you don't know that he won't be in the Kingdom. When Christ raises people on the last day, you don't know.@@jasonbourne5142
@@jasonbourne5142 King David was an adulterer. Moses was a murderer. Matthew was a tax collector (which, back then, meant he was most likely very corrupt). The Apostle Paul persecuted the first century Christians and approved the murder of these people. Every one of these was used by God to further His plan and message of Love and Redemption. That is the bedrock of Christianity. It doesn't matter what you're past was, as long as you have repented of your sins, turned to Christ, confess He is the Son of God, and believe in your heart, soul, and mind. There's none perfect. The Bible says, "There is none righteous" (Romans 3:10). There is hope, though. "Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me" (Revelation 3:20).
All Humans need to repent & Believe in Jesus as their God. Why? Because all Humans have sinned (lied, lusted sexually, stolen, dishonoured parents etc). Avoid the fires of Hell (justice of God) and choose Heaven today. Jesus defeated death by rising from the dead. GOD IS HOLY
Poor Dr. Chattergee. His frustration with having his position challenged is very obvious. When you have no standard, it is clearly annoying to have your assumptions challenged. Well done, Jeff and James on upholding the standard.
Except that's not the debate question. The debate question is "do ethics depend on God." For this to be answered, the pro-God side have to show that there is a God, not presuppose it like they always do, *AND* show that ethics emanate from God. It could be the case that even if God exists, ethics are their own animal and He is not responsible for them.
@@RustyWalker Presupposing God because the opposite (God doesn’t exist) is absurd, is a proof. It’s called a transcendental argument and when talking about something that can’t be empirically proven, proving the opposite of its existence to be absurd is a proof. In fact, it’s one of the strongest proofs, even stronger than empirical proof.
@Rusty Walker this is false, and a common misconception of modern atheism that shows at best, that they are ignorant of the classical rules of debate, and at worst, that they are likewise ignorant of basic logic. I recommend the channel "Wise Disciple" to sharpen your understanding of public discourse.
@@oxtailsoup6493 Why can't it be empirically proven? Or are you merely making an excuse for it not being able to be proven? Also, "A god exists" is a declaration. The burden of proof is on the one that declares not denies. We practice this logic in court daily.
If we blame good things to God we must also thank him for the bad stuff. So thank God for the Russians raping and kidnapping and murdering in Ukraine.. thank God for global warming and for covid. Gett on your knees to worship his cancer creation because he is such a caring God!!!
Jeff hit them hard with presuppositional apologetics and this completely through them when challenged about how their worldview could account for ethics. Great job Jeff and Dr White!
@@AndresMartinez-tx6hc so what is it lol? It’s nonsense is what it is. It means I’m a theist so I get to make certain premises and pretend they’re fact to build their arguments on. It’s called a shaky foundation.
@@maksimchirkoff2444 No one outside of a very small niche of fundamentalists uses presuppositional tactics. It's basically: "Our 'worldview' is true because our holy book (in this case the Bible) says it is. If you don't believe as we do, then you have no basis for logic and no objective morality." Many world religions could put forward something similar, though most don't because it's immediately alienating and seems counter-productive to any actual evangelical efforts. It's also supremely arrogant to question the basis of your opponent's argument without establishing the validity of your own. On an intellectual level, it is problematic because it makes a virtue out of absolute certainty. Listen to any debate with a presupper - one of their favorite tactics is to attack the agnostic for "not knowing." Then claim that everyone "knows it's true, but is DENYING it." Disagreeing =/= denial. To call unbelief 'denying' is to poison the well. Finally, it's cheating because it assumes it's own victory without justification; it demands everything of it's opponent while offering nothing in return. At the end of the day, all they have is their certainty, which has no bearing on whether the claims are valid. Also, again, any other religion can use the exact same presupp script and two hours later you wouldn't be any closer to the truth. On youtube you'll find no shortage of presupp debates/encounters.
This debate was amazing! Pastor Jeff and Dr. White are so faithful to the scriptures and to spreading the gospel! You can really see the opposing side’s sand castles being demolished by the waves of scripture. They have absolutely no solid ground to stand on! Thanks Apologia for this!
They have no solid ground to stand on other then sanity 😅 if you need a higher power to keep you from murdering people then you need to see a sociologist.
@@LuciferAlmighty the opposing side kind of (not only kind of, but actually fully admitted lol) that he has no absolute basis by which to call anything right or wrong lol. Asking "how so?" doesn't make you look high and mighty. It only makes it look like you have poor comprehension and quite possibly a short attention span 😛
Well, in principle, going by the way it's phrased and what is conveyed, it is not dogma. Dogma implies something layed out by an authority figure that cannot be called into question, ever, because it is true. I'd say that this statement can be questioned in most ways without that constituting a transgression.
He obviously has no merit, no experience, and no MORALS. This man’s face is stuck in a book and has no credible relations with humanity; where he also claims to get his ethical basis. He’s miserable is all he is.
@@torreyintahoe *_Within the context of OP's point,_* yes. With OP loving how much Gospel there was, I'd imagine he couldn't care less that "he's not a real PhD." *_Aside from what the original context was,_* I imagine that I completely see your point. Unless there's a legitimate reason he does this? 🤷 I have no idea...
about 10 years ago archaelogists dug up 75 ancient jews from the time of jesus....these jews had 89% DNA of modern day egyptians...............this fits in with the origin of yahweh....the earliest mention of yahweh on tablets was in egypt by a sect called the shasha who almost certainly introduced yahweh to the caananites ....jews were caananites and when they moved into the levant they carried on worshipping all the pantheon of caananite gods and it took 700 years to get to just yahweh
Ex atheist here as well, after a supernatural encounter with the Risen Lord in 2016 I threw my life in the garbage/ Did a complete 180 to follow Him 🙏🏼
@@trumpbellend6717 “And Jesus said, “For judgment I came into this world, so that those who do not see may see, and those who see may become blind.” Those who were with Him from the Pharisees heard these things and said to Him, “We are not blind too, are we?” Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin; but now that you maintain, ‘We see,’ your sin remains.” John 9:39-41 NASB2020
@@trumpbellend6717 “You are doing the deeds of your father.” They said to Him, “We were not born as a result of sexual immorality; we have one Father: God.” Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I came forth from God and am here; for I have not even come on My own, but He sent Me. Why do you not understand what I am saying? It is because you cannot listen to My word. You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he tells a lie, he speaks from his own nature, because he is a liar and the father of lies. But because I say the truth, you do not believe Me. Which one of you convicts Me of sin? If I speak truth, why do you not believe Me? The one who is of God hears the words of God; for this reason you do not hear them, because you are not of God.”” John 8:41-47 NASB2020
@@trumpbellend6717 “At that time Jesus said, “I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent, and have revealed them to infants. Yes, Father, for this way was well pleasing in Your sight. All things have been handed over to Me by My Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son determines to reveal Him.” Matthew 11:25-27 NASB2020
@@trumpbellend6717 “Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; the one who comes to Me will not be hungry, and the one who believes in Me will never be thirsty. Everything that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I certainly will not cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that of everything that He has given Me I will lose nothing, but will raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.”” John 6:35, 37-40 NASB2020
@@LetsTalkChristMinistries Then why does Durbin keep mentioning "Fish that became philosophers" "You think we evolved from the scum" "If we are just descendants of bacteria" etc? He's playing purely on emotion to add weight to the bald assertions that he and James were making.
@@LetsTalkChristMinistries What emotional tactics does Dillahunty use? I've literally seen him do the opposite. And even when I was a Christian I knew that the emotional tactics like "In your worldview there is no ultimate justice in the end" or "You think we're just moral meatbags" were terrible arguments. Also, please cite a single valid point Durbin made.
@@LyingForJesusOrg You’re looking to argue. I’ve seen countless debates of Dillahunty. He does nothing but caricature, straw man, and dodge. Hitchens was worse. Dillahunty has a way with words, but no substance. The fact that you say Dillanhunty doesn’t emote let’s me know all I need to know about you. You don’t have one objective bone in your body. No matter how much Dawkins, Hitchens, or Dillahunty you want to regurgitate, no matter how much darkmatter2525 you watch, the atheist position is illogical. No. I’m not proving or presenting anything to you. Your agenda is obvious. You are looking to argue. Dillahunty is one of the worse emoters I’ve heard when it comes to debate. If you can’t see that, then you’re definitely biased. I have nothing further to discuss with you. No amount of evidence will do for you. You’re blinded by hate. Your name says it all. Your agenda is obvious. No thank you.
@@parkervitous2782 They aren't even questions. They are emotional tactics & statements. Telling someone that "their worldview doesn't offer ultimate justice in the end" isn't asking a question. It's an attempt to make someone sad & long for ultimate justice. And my rejection of the Christian deity isn't due to an emotion like anger. It's a result of having a consistent standard for evidence in my life. If you had the same consistency, you would also reject said deity.
@@JuhoPurola Absolutely! The problem? The secular worldview did much worse in a much shorter time The entirety of the Spanish inquisition, 2 centuries of the highest form of religious persecution? Killed less than 100,000 Stalin did that in a month, multiple times
@@scottyyoch3537 Lol, it wasn't secular worldview that did any of that, Stalin was a mad dictator who made a cult of personality around himself and his huge ego. His actions were not because of his "secular worldview", but instead his paranoia and incompetence. Meanwhile the Spanish Inquisition and its kin in other religious organizations in power have been terrorising the world for millennia. We don't even have the numbers for all of them, and not just killing but brutal torture and other atrocities not counted in the kill count. And the kicker is, they explicitly did it for their religions. The biggest difference between the two is that the human population grew exponentially after the industrial revolution, so Stalin had much more people to hurt, while the Spanish Inquisition existed at a time with a relatively low and stable population number. Maybe look into a bit history before embarrassing yourself again.
@@scottyyoch3537 I wanted to back you up on your point about the Spanish inquisition, by stating that it lasted 2 years, not 2 centuries, and the death toll was definitely less than 100,000. It was 2,000 max.
It’s amazing how you don’t have to be a professor to find such knowledge lol. Some atheist professors sound like knowledge just stems from them and them alone.
@@KlaustheViking I asked the question out of curiosity and its relevance is based on what i want to find out from it, but fine dont tell me i can google it anyways.
Doctor Deen Chattergee's opening statement was hilarious he just said "everyone should just agree with 'x' moral concept" when the entire point is justifying that claim. He just points out that everyone agrees on something without giving his philosophical justification under his worldview. He did exactly what Durbin's opening statement said he would, it was comical
The claim that theistic morality is somehow superior because its "objective" is ridiculous. Theists are merely substituting their own subjective moral standards with the morals standards of the god they subjectively determine represents the "correct objective" morality. 🙄🤔
@trump bellend it is actually superior and objective. So much so that when the so-called atheists attempt to come up with their own morality, they have to borrow from the Christian worldview to make sense because the ultimate conclusion of atheism is that nothing ultimately matters.
I'm sorry why would anyone need more "justification" as to why morality is actually about human wellbeing values, other than the fact that those values WORK as the basis for moral and ethical systems worldwide irrespective of religion or lack of. For the most part it is only with the concept of "SIN" ( transgression against the perceived whims of subjective invisible beings ) that the disagreement occurs.
The negative side didn't give one good argument whatsoever. Even their closing statements weren't good. The guy was right when he got up and said, "We failed...". Yes, you did. Jeff and James did awesome.
This shows that you did not understand anything that Anderson said and you don´t care to. Here is a simple example: If you would ask most Christians today if Slavery, any form of it, is bad then most Christians would say it is bad even though the Bible never once condemns Slavery, it even has verses regulating it. We know that most Christians were okay with it at some point. This means that Christians figured out that Slavery is bad without their God or their Bible directly telling them. There are many exmaples such as this and the asnwer is that Christians are part of the cultural conversation. Of course, the burden of proof that a God exists at all hasn´t been met yet, so Durbin and White just used circular reasoning.
@@HeLivesForever25 That is a statement which assumes that good and bad are not human concepts. You don´t seem understand how societies work then. If there is no God we will still continue the cultural conversation about good and bad as we have done for thousands of years.
What a great debate Pastor Jeff and Pastor James!! Unfortunately, the opposition was totally unprepared to answer, with any depth, a single philosophical question about how to account for ethics.
They can't be. I have yet to see an atheist answer this properly. Even Christopher Hitchens in his debate against Doug Wilson when asked about why killing the Amalekites was objectively wrong in the Bible he had no good answer.
true and true. These two are particularly unprepared however. Someone like Jordan Peterson might be able to at least provide a more entertaining debate.
That’s because there is no philosophical arguments against Christ They’re arguing against divine power, they’ll lose every time “For the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh but have divine power to destroy strongholds. We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ,” 2 Corinthians 10:4-5 ESV
That older atheist was rambling all over the place and couldn't understand basic questions. I felt sorry for him. The atheist brought a knife to a tank fight. lol
Is your Omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient God morally good? Then why does he let bad things happen to people you consider good and good to people who are considered bad? Your government follows the same principals as God. They let innocent people go to jail and allow the rich and powerful to go free of punishment. Do you think it is morally good to stop a man from raping a child if you passed in an alley? If you see a blind man about to cross the street, and a car approaching, is it morally good to stop him from crossing? If you say yes to these questions, then you and your god do not share the same set of morals because God lets these things happen all the time even though he is all powerful all-knowing and all present.
More of this please! It's valuable to learn how to debate the Christian/biblical worldview and also valuable to hear the opposing views. Thank you Pastor Jeff and Dr. White for your tireless efforts in many arenas and for demonstrating the focus of the Gospel.
There is plenty Christian debate on RUclips, checkout Dr. Frank turek RUclips channel, cross examined or Dr. Braxton Hunter RUclips channel, Trinity Radio
Wait, does that mean scientists can’t use scientific paper to backup their theories? What about medical students in med school, should they not use medical textbooks to prove that the medical procedures that we currently have access to is correct? Moreover, you compared the Bible to a Harry Potter book, how are they even comparable are you assuming that the Bible is a bunch of made up stories or that it’s not historical?
@@Vdoggfromtha818 Yes, I can use the Bible to give evidence for the Bible. You're implying 'circular reasoning.' unfortunately for you, that defense won't work. At that rate, you'd be accusing scientists of circular reasoning! How? Tell me, has gravity *ever* been proven? Nope. What about abiogenesis? Any proof? Nope!
I'm glad he brought it up, but I also wish it was ever pointed out that Jefferson's letter is merely saying, "Sorry that I can't help you with the religious disfavor you're facing as a minority in your state. As I am now a member of the federal government, I do not have the right to tell your state that they can't favor a particular Christian teaching. There has to be a wall of separation between me, here in the federal government -- "the State" -- and your individual state's denominational preferences when it comes to church."
Separation of state and religion did not come from god/ christian faith. You god rules on a theocracy according to your bible. Do any of you actually read your bible?
@@kalestanforde @Lucifer Almighty So where did it come from? Key words: church and state. So Christianity definitely played some role in the development of the idea. Albeit a negative one a, as I assume is an historical claim you'd be willing substantiate;however, I would be a proponent for its positive impact in American politics. First, the founding father's refer back to patristic church fathers in terms of their defense of religious pluralism for a republic; most notably Thomas Jefferson and James Madisin both draw from the seminal insights of Tertullian of Carthage (197 CE.) who in fact inctrouced the term "freedom of religion"(libertas religionis) into western thought. He's directly quoted by those two aforementioned founders at great length [see Tertullian, Apollogeticum(c.197) in Corpus Christianorum:Series Latina-- Tertullian, ed.E Dekkers(Turnhout: Brepols,1954),pg.234, with translation and discussion in Wilken,Liberty in the Things of God,10-13,189-92)]. Furthermore, that tradition was carried on by Lactanius, who expressed opposition to imposed force used by any one religion [De Mortibus Persecutorum,trans. and ed. J.L. Creed(Oxford: Clarendon Press,1984),71-73]. Secondly, all this culminated into what would become arguably St. Augustine's greatest work in "City of God"(ca. 413-427), where he quite literally draws on biblical verses linking this separatism as sound in Christian political theology. He claimed that there is a "city of God that coexist with this city of man," but emphasized that these two cities,although they may overlap, both exist necessarily. He contrasted their roles, seeing that religion does impact politics and vice versa, but within certain bounds[Religion and the American Constitutional Experiment/John Witte. Jr.,Joel A. Nichols and Richard W. Garnett[Fifth Edition](New York: Oxford University Press,2022),pg.16]. He draws primarily upon Christ teaching of "Rendering into Caesar What belongs to Caesar"(Matthew 22:21;Mark 12:17;Luke 20:25). And the Pauline tradition of "Liberty in Christ"(Romans 12:2;Ephesians 2:14,etc).
I thank the Lord your lives, Dr. James White and Ptr. Jeff Durbin. All glory and honor to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Watching this debate all the way from the Philippines.
It’s not the gospel that is annoying it’s the “I have a book and it is evidence for the claims in the book and I can tell everyone how to live their lives by the way I interpret it” that what’s annoying not the claims in that book
@ I highly doubt you'll receive a response to your question from Alien1375, but truth be told, Alien1375 would be the one to define morality for themselves. Alien1375 does worship God. The God Alien1375 worships is the one that stares back at him from the bathroom mirror everyday, which is exactly the same God all Atheists worships.
@ It's a combination of upbringing, education and evolutionary social impulses that make human beings social beings. And yes that means you have to think a bit for yourself. Not let everything decide what a bunch of guys from the bronze age made up for you.
@@jelly7310 I will check it out. If they agree to a debate I will use my moniker "Theo Skeptomai." However, it sounds like you are mentionng a Q&A session rather than a formal debate.
All Humans need to repent & Believe in Jesus as their God. Why? Because all Humans have sinned (lied, lusted sexually, stolen, dishonoured parents etc). Avoid the fires of Hell (justice of God) and choose Heaven today. Jesus defeated death by rising from the dead. GOD IS HOLY
I know someone with a PHD, and when I asked her if she believes in objective truth and morality, she said definitely NO. Moments later, she told me I was wrong for having certain opinions that contradicted hers.... Well, I don't know how she thinks she can objectively tell me I'm wrong, when she doesn't believe anything is objectively wrong.....???
@@truthnotlies *"Morality is subjective, we set the rules HOWEVER that does NOT mean we cannot set objective rules about morality* *Let me draw an analogy, in the game of chess there are no OBJECTIVE RULES laid down by a god* *They are arbitrary man made, however once we all come to an agreement about which rules we want to implement and adhere to it then becomes posible to objectively declare a move as illegal within the framework of agreed upon rules ( a Bishop can only move diagonally ect )* *That does not mean therefore that outside of the framework ( rules ) that its objectively impossible to move a Bishop straight forward* 😁
@JO But I’ll bet a million dollars that you act as though objective morality exists. The only way to be an intellectually consistent atheist is to be a complete and utter nihilist to the point that you don’t bother calling anything right or wrong, or behave like a psychopath because you realize that all morality is as arbitrary as your favorite flavor of ice cream.
God has made Brother James and Jeff,two of the greatest Christian debaters of our day.Everthing they say cannot be refuted because their arguments are derived from the very word of God and their arguments show the spiritual insanity of the world.
Jeff Durbin is a grifter. He doesn’t even have an argument. He just makes claims and dismisses his opponents arguments with “ I don’t like that so it’s not true”. There’s a reason he only debates complete dolts. Any atheist debater worth his weight can destroy Durbin but he will never agree to meet one because he can’t handle looking bad.
"Good" and "Evil" are words used to describe movement or points on a reference standard or scale conceptualised by man that is based upon our shared values like human wellbeing, empathy and equality. Whilst "God" is also a man made concept, the percieved whims of this "God" do not reflect these shared values and thus are irrelevant in any discussion of morality.
The fact that he said with a straight face that Christianity ranks first in historical violence makes me question his qualifications to even be on that panel.
Catholicism might actually be first if you think about the inquisition and the crusdades. More often than not, Christianity is confused with Catholicism.
@@MrPopemobile it really is mistaken quite often. I have to always point out that when that was happening many Christians were killed for not conforming to catholicism.
if you didn't already accept their side as truth, you would think it's a weak opening of first presupposing morality from god thus no morality without god, and then a guy who sais nothing of value for the debate and only throws shade on the other sides view by purposely presenting it in a ridiculing way. Only the last opening statement was good imo, although I am (just like you are) biased.
So good! Thank you Jeff Durbin and James White for eloquently presenting the case for grounding our views in God while exposing that humanistic world views are baseless. Soli Deo Gloria! 🙌🏼🙏🏼
It’s astounding to see people in the name of “being consistent” will not think nor contemplate but merely react to their own fleeting emotion and yet live in such a way and hold others to a standard contradictory to that emotion and reaction… what a mess!
“The other side didn’t offer a debate but a sermon” This is why pressup rules. It was a debate and yet Pastor Jeff and White argued their position while sharing the gospel.
The older atheist was hard to watch. He couldn’t form a cogent argument or rebuttal, it was very much “look at how good humanism is”. He cannot explain why pedophilia is wrong but wonders why Jeff keeps bringing up pedophilia as an example.
All Humans need to repent & Believe in Jesus as their God. Why? Because all Humans have sinned (lied, lusted sexually, stolen, dishonoured parents etc). Avoid the fires of Hell (justice of God) and choose Heaven today. Jesus defeated death by rising from the dead. GOD IS HOLY
oh, christians have always been willing to fight. slaughtering tens of thousands during multiple crusades. executing 'witches'. and yet they never showed ANY evidence.
wow. what an excellent debate. you can see how bankrupt the opposing side’s argument is for God being unnecessary in ethics. dr. white and pastor durbin, you two are cherished teachers and are wise because you fear God and are bold for His sake. thank you for strengthening my faith and for preaching the gospel to a world that needs it!!!
I mean, its pretty telling that multiple different Civilisations had ethics before Christianity. The fact that this was never answered showed me that one side came for cheap gotchas, while the other came to explore the others Worldview.
All Humans need to repent & Believe in Jesus as their God. Why? Because all Humans have sinned (lied, lusted sexually, stolen, dishonoured parents etc). Avoid the fires of Hell (justice of God) and choose Heaven today. Jesus defeated death by rising from the dead. GOD IS HOLY
@Anon Ymous I wasn't making any claims, but a simple observation of how it's often frustrating to watch presuppositional apologists debate relativists. The debate always hits a wall, and people start talking past each other. However, society based morality is indefensible, in my opinion, as it falls apart when societies all agree to engage in horrendous, evil acts such as society approved cannablism, genocide, etc.
@@hrebientony More to the point .... the idea that morality is formed by society simply begs the question in that society is made up of individuals. As Margaret Thatcher said: "there's no such thing as society: there's just you and me".
As a believer, I've grown to LOVE these Debates because I realize how much I LOVE the atheists. They aren't MONSTERS, just utterly lost in self self self.
@Lara Bonczek some people are judgemental. Atheists are people just like christains and deserve the same respect. Obviously not all of you are monsters. Seemed like a judgmental thing fir that person to say. Like it was supposed to be a compliment.
Just listen to the man. He's very religious. He thinks men become gods. He never stopped believing in his own divinity. The other man is a true atheist....which is to say, a foolish grumbler. I would venture to guess that the chaplain is technically a Pantheist. He definitely has spiritual views about reality and the universe. Easy to spot.
@Lara Bonczek why are you assuming they are bothering people? You could've just ignored the comment but chose to be hateful instead... I'd say that says more about you. I pray God rids you of your demons.
@@kingyoung5228 "why are you assuming they are bothering people" bro, I think they are saying that THEY are being bothered by that statement. No assumptions necessary. "You could've just ignored the comment but chose to be hateful instead" I don't see how you interpreted what they said as hateful. Unless you are one of those people that sees all criticism as hate. But if that is the case why are you watching a debate? Comment sections for debates are always filled with criticism and that comment barely even qualifies as criticism. In fact, your comment is the only one that comes off as hateful. "I pray God rids you of your demons" comes off as very rude to say the least.
@@sledteamcapt Undeniable? There’s no evidence that gods exist therefore they don’t. There’s no evidence that magic is a thing either, which is the means by which gods would theoretically function.
@@torreyintahoe that would be a reasonable objection if you only believed in things you had empirical evidence for, but you believe in many things you have no evidence for; Morality, emotions, mathematics logic, reason etc.
@@sledteamcapt There's no reason to. believe in things we don't have evidence for. Your examples are poor analogies. Morality is the label we give to a code of behavior. You can argue about what it consists of or where it comes from but not that it's hidden. Math is not hidden either. It's a tool we all use everyday. There is nothing in this world that even suggests that god belief is legitimate and when you look at how humans started using it to explain their world in the first place it becomes obvious that god belief is fiction and it would have died out a long time ago if it wasn't for childhood indoctrination.
How was it "[not] event close"? Nobody knows that God exists, yet we still have morality. Thus the premise "morality implies God" is not provable, so the entire Christian argument is an "Argument from ignorance". The negative side is only saying "we can't say God exists, but morality clearly exists."
@@AscentofTrollbane If god doesn't exist then morality doesn't exist. It's just chemicals. You can't put morality under a microscope. Also you saying that nobody knows if god exists is a logical fallacy, I'm not agnostic like you, im a theist I know God exists. I know you guys are obsessed with evidence, but Just because you can't put god under a microscope doesn't mean he doesn't exist. The surefire evidence that God exists is the impossibility of the contrary
@@irishscience580 no, that is a complete and utter logical fallacy "your lack of evidence for your claim is automatically evidence for mine" that's not how it works. you will STILL not have evidence even if you prove another side doesn't either. evidence is not two sided. i have evidence for morals, logic, matter, etc. just because i do not have ALL the evidence, doesn't mean the evidence i have no longer counts. the lack of evidence for god is just that, the lack of evidence for god... he doesnt exist as far as we know of. when we get some evidence, then we'll talk
@@AscentofTrollbane Depends on how you define terms. Morality as a concept exists, obviously, but the debate isn't about whether people can conceive of morality without God but whether morality has meaningful authority without God.
Special pleading alert: (1:01:16) Atheist: Some Christians have been responsible for terrible evils throughout history, therefor we can lump all Christians into this category and conclude that Christianity is not a good moral foundation. Also atheist: They are trying to lump all atheists into the same category when they appeal to the atrocities committed by Hitler, Mao, and Pol Pot, and that isn’t fair. Doesn’t need to be that way. 🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
Technically not special pleading since Christianity can be considered a coalition whereas atheism is not. For example, if I said people who like the color red all prefer red paint, it would not be an equivalent statement to say all people who do not like the color red prefer blue paint.
@@Samtastictogo This overlooks the fact that atheism is indeed a coalition united by their denial of God’s existence. The very fact that they don’t believe there is an ultimate standard of morality or that they’ll be held accountable after death is what enables the millions of deaths. You may not all subscribe to uniform set of rules or standards, but there the very thing that unites you and the very thing that fuels the death. Sorry you actually just proved my point further. If an ideology or religious views are responsible for producing violence then atheism is one of them and it applies all the same.
@@Samtastictogo seems a bit silly that you would watch a debate by a guy who is arguing that atheism/humanism provides a foundation for ethics, but then try to pretend like atheists aren’t united on the thing that caused the violence (the belief that God doesn’t determine how people should behave.)
I’m glad there are Christians in this debate who understand that it’s not about neutrality and must fight in defense of the faith. Unlike the atheist older gentleman who obviously has to ask the opposition to his point of view to not argue in their point of few. It’s a disingenuous way to argue.
The atheist doesn’t have standards to go by they flip flop in different directions. Is there a right, is there a wrong . If it feels good, it must be right. Christian’s are given standards to follow that lead to physical, spiritual and emotional good health.
Yeah and the first two opening statements are just code for " waah waah the world isn't stuck in the bronze age like I want it to and atheists are dumb poo poo heads for critiquing my fairytales". Damn, it's so nice to be able to interpret code this easily.
@Juho Purola well the critiques you guys make are never valid and have typically been answered hundreds of times over. Unlike the boundless logical inconsistencies that exist within your own belief in evolution, which cannot willnot ever be answered.
I think a problem with a naturalistic foundation for ethics is not whether or not the ethics are objective, but that it doesn't have to matter to anybody if they decide that it doesn't matter. Given God, you do not have the luxury of deciding that your choices don't matter. You will care eventually.
You're absolutely right, it doesn't have to matter to anybody if they decide it doesn't matter. That is true. However, if you act against the agreed upon societal standard of ethics, you will be reprimanded and/or punished. It doesn't matter what the individual believes, but rather society as a whole.
I was trying to figure out the glowing green liquid in the cups they had on their table. Then I remembered watching the previous debate where they guy said props shouldn't be allowed, but then he brought out a bottle of anti freeze and asked them to drink it if they knew God could create a miracle and save them. LOL Well done boys!
This little display of tempting GOD is nothing new. Just like the Satan attempted to get Jesus to tempt GOD by throwing himself off the mountain but Jesus responsed you shall not tempt the LORD your GOD. Matthew 4:7.
Why do we need a debate on this issue? If there is no objective/transcendent standard for good and evil, then every moral question is a matter of one person/group's opinion over another. EVERYTHING. Why don't people get this simple fact? It's so self evident that a child can understand it.
It is exactly that simple lol The problem is willful suppression of the truth by those who want to pick and choose what is moral according to their desires. Textbook example of Romans 1.
The debate is needed because there are myriads of people in society who believe that God is not necessary for ethics. Yes, it's obvious that a Creator who put ethics in the hearts of men is necessary for ethics to exist, but there are people who disagree and the debate is for the audience really.
@sylvilagus cunicularius unironically the Bible is the most well verified document that has ever existed in human history. But an atheist couldn't care less as the entire worldview is arbitrary and based on convenience. Seeking virtue in a careless universe is a fairytale that only captures the most gullible fools.
@@joshsimpson10 What do you mean by the most verified document? Like… even if you were to separate the mythological and the fictional stories from the Bible, there are plenty of more recent historical books that include the authors’ names and the original copies, lol. If you don’t separate the fairy tales from the Bible, how do you verify the angels wielding swords and armor while fighting heavenly wars? You mean the Christian’s worldview is arbitrary and based on convenience? It was definitely convenient for politicians, kings and emperors. Anyway, there is no atheistic worldview. Atheists can adopt any philosophy, and there is no consensus what which to follow. So, don’t be stupid. People who don’t believe in the tooth fairy do not hold worldview and act on based on that fact. The same goes for people that don’t believe in all gods. Hah. You know… I respect people that are law abiding and do good works out of compassion, love and empathy over someone who does good out of fear of going to hell or angering a mythological, jealous god.
@JO "no official canon until the 4th century" that's where you are wrong wholesale. And the point stands. There is more material evidence in terms of original manuscripts that for any other ancient text that has ever existed.
@JO original manuscripts are hand written documentation. I didn't say original text. But it wouldn't matter that all of the manuscripts we have are consistent with the God Breathed Scripture over all time. So the more time that passes the more we find that is closer to times when Christ walked this earth. It will simply verify what has already been consistent over time since the word was written. They recovered 25000 fragments and manuscripts that dated before Christ up to 100 years AD that verified Old Testament manuscripts veracity and accuracy which itself prophesied Christ. All in the mid 20th century alone. But again there is no other ancient text with more original manuscript evidence for its authenticity than any other text ever in all of human history.
Chatterjee woefully unprepared. And the theater kid thought he would just be able to be charming and raise questions Jeff and James hadn't thought of before to confuse and befuddle them. Must've been a rude awakening for him.
@@Followerdow the same guy who set up this debate is the same one from the last debate. (This one was supposed to be a year later, but COVID) he hunted down a pop similar to Mt. Dew with the coloring of antifreeze as a joke.
What I'm picking up from the agnostic with his own Pantheon is that he fears himself, so the only way to prove that he is right to himself is to not prove anything and be neutral. That's a doctrine of fear. He learned it by believing once and then feeling so unsteady so unsure that he longed to never feel that way again, so he became a leaf blowing in the wind of indecision. Abba father deliver him and show him his purpose.
When you zoom out and hear the atheist side of the debate, all you can notice is the image of God that they bear. Them even being there proves the existence of our Lord. The debate was won as soon as they agreed to it. Or should I say, before the debate? Great debate over all!
How do you have a debate about God and Ethics and NOT talk about God and "sermon topics?" Why would they think God and Jesus wouldn't show up? The Atheist perspective is always so dense in these debate and you have the patience beyond normal human standards.
I would gladly share this with any atheist. The defence of God and his word is incredibly powerful. On the other hand, I think any atheist would be embarrassed to share this with a Christian. His worldview would be on display for the failure it is. God bless James and Jeff and the fruit of this work.
Is your Omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient God morally good? Then why does he let bad things happen to people you consider good and good to people who are considered bad? Your government follows the same principals as God. They let innocent people go to jail and allow the rich and powerful to go free of punishment. Do you think it is morally good to stop a man from raping a child if you passed in an alley? If you see a blind man about to cross the street, and a car approaching, is it morally good to stop him from crossing? If you say yes to these questions, then you and your god do not share the same set of morals because God lets these things happen all the time even though he is all powerful all-knowing and all present.
@@andyayala5639 Andy, I don't know where you got the idea that I was making some kind of 'argument'. I was simply expressing my admiration of the powerful nature of the arguments made by Brothers Jeff and James. They argue from the presuppositionalist position and I am convinced that it is the only internally consistent and cohesive position that Christians should use and argue from. It's an appeal to the ultimate authority of God and his word rather than an appeal to fallen human reason. Are you s Christian or an atheist? I couldn't tell from your response.
All Humans need to repent & Believe in Jesus as their God. Why? Because all Humans have sinned (lied, lusted sexually, stolen, dishonoured parents etc). Avoid the fires of Hell (justice of God) and choose Heaven today. Jesus defeated death by rising from the dead. GOD IS HOLY
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 so... i should follow god or otherwise i burn in hell for all eternity? thats just. eternal damnation for a finite "crime". doesnt seem like such a good guy with all that power laying around he does nothing with.
@@Abzero-mx2pb GO TO HELL FOR ONE SMALL SIN? People argue that stealing a piece of candy doesn’t deserve hell. Firstly stealing $1 makes you as much a thief as stealing $1000, if someone just sins 3 times a day that’s a 1000 sins per year which is 10’s of thousands of sins in a lifetime that all have to be answered for, also in Heaven EVERTONE is perfect. Were they perfect on earth? No, They lived repentant lives and put their faith in Jesus so, the righteousness of Jesus is placed on them, and God sees them with a sin count of 0 so He lavishes His goodness on them forever.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 why didn't he just forgive us to begin with? Instead of sending himself as a loophole to forgive himself. And what about children in Africa - hell, ADULTS in Africa that don't know about Christianity? What happens to them? Does God not forgive them? Also, no, stealing a dollar is not equal to stealing 1000 dollars. That's preposterous.
@@Abzero-mx2pb All young children who die go to Heaven forever all adults who didn't hear the good news of Jesus will be judged fairly but only being washed by the blood gets you into Heaven. Of course stealing 1k is worse than 1 dollarbut you are a thief regardless of how much you steal therefore absolutely everyone needs to repent and believe the Gospel to be forgiven of their crimes against God, so be humble and love God
Anderson was very respectful - I hope he and Durbin had that dinner together! Chatterson seemed to throw his hands up in disgust pretty easily, which is surprising given Christians will and should hold to an ultimate authority. That’s what he should have expected to engage with. Great job by White and Durbin in holding to Scripture and reason!
Deen Chattergee was not strong and got flustered rather quickly. It appears he is not used to having his presuppositions challenged. Instead of increasingly lobbing insults and accusations of mischaracterization at Jeff Durbin as the debate progressed, he ought to attempt to clearly articulate his position if it is being so mischaracterized. Jared Anderson was rather competent. I would have sincerely liked to have seen a deeper 1-on-1 with him and Jeff Durbin or James White. I think it would have made for a lovely discussion as most of the substance of interest and value was made up between interactions with him.
Dr. Chattergee sounded like a rambling fool and Anderson an arrogant fool. When Chattertgee(sp) mentioned that some of the Bible he agreed with, like stoning Homosexuals, the look on Jared Andersons face was priceless.
"You sound like a broken album..."...two thoughts: 1. I'm going to use this on on my wife, and 2. This isn't an effective retort against anyone under 45
@@samuelcollier3350 I didn't like how people were badmouthing the guy in the live chat...even insulting the way he talked and calling him "old" or whatever. If it's a mudslinging fest, it's not a debate. I'm not saying Dr. White or Jeff were slinging mud, but their fans (myself included) should not be making ad hominem immature attacks like that. It is not becoming of God's people, and is not bringing one's best as supporters of Apologia.
Chattergee is literally Joe Biden when he doesn’t get his choco choco chip ice cream. How did his partner ever agree to him being his partner? Good grief.
I grew up as an atheist. As a teenager, I fell in love with the books of Friedrich Nietzsche. In a very short time I understood, that if there is no God, there also is no true morality. Just human-made empty ideals.
This debate was very hard to listen too. The atheists were so naive, inconsequent and childish in their worldview and their argumentation... but they felt so smart at the same time. We call it Fremdschämen in the german language... thats what it was like for me to listen to these guys.
4 yeas ago, I became born again and a believer in our great God, Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. And now I know, there is a real good and evil in this world.
Amen 🙏
There is no true or objective morality. That’s just a fact.
Is your Omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient God morally good? Then why does he let bad things happen to people you consider good and good to people who are considered bad?
Your government follows the same principals as God. They let innocent people go to jail and allow the rich and powerful to go free of punishment.
Do you think it is morally good to stop a man from raping a child if you passed in an alley?
If you see a blind man about to cross the street, and a car approaching, is it morally good to stop him from crossing?
If you say yes to these questions, then you and your god do not share the same set of morals because God lets these things happen all the time even though he is all powerful all-knowing and all present.
Amen
Wow, what an awesome testimony! 🥰
Debate outline with timestamps:
00:01:01 Debate intro by Pastor Jason Wallace
00:02:50 Speaker intros for the negative: Dr Dean Chatterjee & Chaplain Jared Anderson:
00:04:00 Speaker intros for the positive: Dr James White & Pastor Jeff Durbin
00:05:14 Debate question & structure:
00:07:42 Opening Statement for the affirmative by Dr James White:
00:14:38 Opening Statement for the affirmative (continued) by Pastor Jeff Durbin
00:27:10 Opening Statement for the negative side by Dr Dean Chatterjee
00:39:47 Opening Statement for the negative side (continued) by Chaplain Jared Anderson
00:49:34 Ten Minute Rebuttal from the affirmative: Dr James White
00:54:10 Ten Minute Rebuttal from the affirmative (continued): Pastor Jeff Durbin
01:00:08 Ten Minute Rebuttal from the negative: Dr Dean Chatterjee
01:09:06 Ten Minute Rebuttal from the negative (continued): Chaplain Jared Anderson
01:12:12 Twenty minute cross-examination from the affirmative side to the negative side:
01:32:40 Twenty minute cross-examination from the negative side to the affirmative side:
01:54:28 Closing statements of five minutes for the affirmative side: Pastor Jeff Durbin
01:59:39 Closing statements of five minutes for the negative side: Dr Dean Chatterjee
02:00:53 Closing statements of five minutes for the negative side (continued): Chaplain Jared Anderson
02:02:04 Questions from the audience - how they will be answered:
02:02:50 Question from the audience for the negative side: How do you explain the empty tomb?
02:04:31 Response from the positive side to the answer given by the negative side to the question, 'How do you explain the empty tomb?'
02:05:05 Question from the audience for the affirmative side: 'How do you respond to the charge that what you're offering is simply circular reasoning? You're assuming your conclusion.'
02:06:28 Response from the negative side to the answer given by the positive side, 'How do you respond to the charge that what you're offering is simply circular reasoning?'
02:06:58 Question from the audience for the negative side: We have a question from someone with cerebral palsy. He is in a wheelchair. His question is essentially, 'If society determines that he is a burden on society, and he should be removed from that society, does he have a right to say that society is wrong to kill him?'
2:07:53 Response from the positive side to the negative side's answer to the question, 'If society determines that he is a burden on society, and he should be removed from that society, does he have a right to say that society is wrong to kill him?'
02:08:57 Question for the affirmative from the audience: 'Why are most wars done in the name of God? (and they included the wars by Stalin, Hitler and other leaders of genocide as well) Why would God require man to do this when the scriptures say to not be violent? Jesus preached 'Peace, peace.''
02:10:15 Response by the negative side to the answer given by the positive side's question, 'Why are most wars done in the name of God?' etc
02:13:20 Response by Dr Dean Chatterjee:
Thank you for taking the time to make this, David!
Thank you so much!!!
Legend. Thank you!
Wow… good job. If only all debate comments could be graced with your skills. Its a marketable idea I’m sure of it.
🐐
"Pastor Durbin, you sound like a broken album." Praise God! Never stop preaching the truth.
He can know for sure he won't forget the gospel. May God have mercy.
“We’re not here to fight." Yet he was the only aggressive person on the panel.
Though neither of them really seemed to understand why their worldview was completely bankrupt and devoid of any absolute truth, I'd say that Dr. Chattergee *_by far_* was not even qualified to be on the panel.
@@ZekeMagnar I really feel compassion for him. Let's hope God grants him repentance.
Those were “fighting”words!
To quote Johnny Cash:
'They say they want God's Kingdom, but they don't want God in it.'
That would include him being he was an adulterer
What you're missing is that is true, but you see, we're all sinners now. I won't speak for Johnny Cash. Or forgot because I can't both because I'm not God. Second I don't know Johnny Cash's heart before he died. I have no idea if he repented of his adultery. I have no idea if he repented of anything he did. I was surely dead, but assuming it's not the same as knowing. We are not God. We can judge the actions but not the heart, so you don't know that he won't be in the Kingdom. When Christ raises people on the last day, you don't know.@@jasonbourne5142
@@jasonbourne5142 King David was an adulterer. Moses was a murderer. Matthew was a tax collector (which, back then, meant he was most likely very corrupt). The Apostle Paul persecuted the first century Christians and approved the murder of these people. Every one of these was used by God to further His plan and message of Love and Redemption. That is the bedrock of Christianity. It doesn't matter what you're past was, as long as you have repented of your sins, turned to Christ, confess He is the Son of God, and believe in your heart, soul, and mind. There's none perfect. The Bible says, "There is none righteous" (Romans 3:10). There is hope, though. "Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me" (Revelation 3:20).
@@bradholland7395 you're saying johnny repented ?
That’s something we can’t know. But from the stories I’ve heard it sounds as though he did
I feel like a little kid waiting for a new episode of his favorite cartoon to release😂🔥
I've been refreshing RUclips all day until now I see it is set for 5pm lol!
@@kalh.1292 Same. I thought it would be out a lot sooner.
ruclips.net/p/PLHjaRUn9mlISBG16889i5D-68QGtpm_3D
And you will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. - Jeremiah 29:13
“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life. -John 3:16
I always learn so so much humility from Jeff. Gentle but firm and strong.
He is anything but humble or full of humility. When I was a Christian I would have been sad at his cocky approach.
@@LyingForJesusOrg "when i was a Christian" is the new -- When I was a Woman.
I know right! I hope one day I can get there.#Christiangoals
@@markxivlxii1390 So do ignoramuses.
@@acordu Dumb.
"Mr. Durbin, you sound like a broken album!" Yeah it's almost like he has a consistent worldview! 😂
I think he would agree that he’s broken, we all are.
@@BibleLovingLutheran not me
@@jamichealruiz yes you
No he doesn't
@@vivi-rf2lkHow is his worldview inconsistent?
Jeff Durbin and James White compliment each other very well in these 2 on 2 debates.... I love it!
All Humans need to repent & Believe in Jesus as their God. Why? Because all Humans have sinned (lied, lusted sexually, stolen, dishonoured parents etc). Avoid the fires of Hell (justice of God) and choose Heaven today. Jesus defeated death by rising from the dead. GOD IS HOLY
Poor Dr. Chattergee. His frustration with having his position challenged is very obvious. When you have no standard, it is clearly annoying to have your assumptions challenged. Well done, Jeff and James on upholding the standard.
Except that's not the debate question. The debate question is "do ethics depend on God." For this to be answered, the pro-God side have to show that there is a God, not presuppose it like they always do, *AND* show that ethics emanate from God. It could be the case that even if God exists, ethics are their own animal and He is not responsible for them.
@@RustyWalker
For someone who probably does not believe in absolutes of any kind, you sure do make a lot of absolute truth claims in your comment.
@@RustyWalker Presupposing God because the opposite (God doesn’t exist) is absurd, is a proof. It’s called a transcendental argument and when talking about something that can’t be empirically proven, proving the opposite of its existence to be absurd is a proof. In fact, it’s one of the strongest proofs, even stronger than empirical proof.
@Rusty Walker this is false, and a common misconception of modern atheism that shows at best, that they are ignorant of the classical rules of debate, and at worst, that they are likewise ignorant of basic logic. I recommend the channel "Wise Disciple" to sharpen your understanding of public discourse.
@@oxtailsoup6493 Why can't it be empirically proven? Or are you merely making an excuse for it not being able to be proven?
Also, "A god exists" is a declaration. The burden of proof is on the one that declares not denies. We practice this logic in court daily.
Thanks for joining us in Utah, brothers! And glory to God on the debate.😊
“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life. -John 3:16
And you will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. - Jeremiah 29:13
ruclips.net/p/PLHjaRUn9mlISBG16889i5D-68QGtpm_3D
If we blame good things to God we must also thank him for the bad stuff. So thank God for the Russians raping and kidnapping and murdering in Ukraine.. thank God for global warming and for covid.
Gett on your knees to worship his cancer creation because he is such a caring God!!!
@@GirolamoZanchi_is_cool it would be nice if god showed up to one of these debates
Jeff hit them hard with presuppositional apologetics and this completely through them when challenged about how their worldview could account for ethics. Great job Jeff and Dr White!
Sorry probably a dumb question but what is presuppositional apologetics?
Amen to that. It was just fire from Jeff and James. 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
@@AndresMartinez-tx6hc so what is it lol? It’s nonsense is what it is. It means I’m a theist so I get to make certain premises and pretend they’re fact to build their arguments on. It’s called a shaky foundation.
@@maksimchirkoff2444 No one outside of a very small niche of fundamentalists uses presuppositional tactics. It's basically: "Our 'worldview' is true because our holy book (in this case the Bible) says it is. If you don't believe as we do, then you have no basis for logic and no objective morality."
Many world religions could put forward something similar, though most don't because it's immediately alienating and seems counter-productive to any actual evangelical efforts. It's also supremely arrogant to question the basis of your opponent's argument without establishing the validity of your own. On an intellectual level, it is problematic because it makes a virtue out of absolute certainty. Listen to any debate with a presupper - one of their favorite tactics is to attack the agnostic for "not knowing." Then claim that everyone "knows it's true, but is DENYING it." Disagreeing =/= denial. To call unbelief 'denying' is to poison the well.
Finally, it's cheating because it assumes it's own victory without justification; it demands everything of it's opponent while offering nothing in return. At the end of the day, all they have is their certainty, which has no bearing on whether the claims are valid. Also, again, any other religion can use the exact same presupp script and two hours later you wouldn't be any closer to the truth. On youtube you'll find no shortage of presupp debates/encounters.
@@BScott7220 you just gave the most bias perspective possible, your comment shouldn't be trusted. Maksim, do not listen to this definition.
This debate was amazing! Pastor Jeff and Dr. White are so faithful to the scriptures and to spreading the gospel! You can really see the opposing side’s sand castles being demolished by the waves of scripture. They have absolutely no solid ground to stand on! Thanks Apologia for this!
How so?
I mean did you watch the debate first off Mr guy who named his account lucifer for some reason
They have no solid ground to stand on other then sanity 😅 if you need a higher power to keep you from murdering people then you need to see a sociologist.
@@LuciferAlmighty the opposing side kind of (not only kind of, but actually fully admitted lol) that he has no absolute basis by which to call anything right or wrong lol. Asking "how so?" doesn't make you look high and mighty. It only makes it look like you have poor comprehension and quite possibly a short attention span 😛
@@juilianbautista4067 how so??
“We should not live by a dogma”
Is that a dogma? 🤔🤣
Dude said “Jesus was slipped in, I think he’ll forgive us” with a smirk. I’m weakkk 😂😂😂 bruh talking to nobody but God
@@samuelcollier3350 and earlier said Jesus was dead. ('rolling in his grave') The AUDACITY!
Hehe 🤭
To a fool yes, that’s dogma.
Well, in principle, going by the way it's phrased and what is conveyed, it is not dogma. Dogma implies something layed out by an authority figure that cannot be called into question, ever, because it is true. I'd say that this statement can be questioned in most ways without that constituting a transgression.
I don't think Dr. Chatergee has ever questioned or even looked at his own presuppositions.
That’s exactly what I got out of it. Seems like he’s spent a career having his hollow musings nodded-at by easily-impressed dinner party guests.
His arguments were Reddit midwit tier
He obviously has no merit, no experience, and no MORALS. This man’s face is stuck in a book and has no credible relations with humanity; where he also claims to get his ethical basis. He’s miserable is all he is.
@The Bannered Mare That's rather unkind. Are these two not fellow men?
@@thebanneredmare9190 He's a man to pray for and not just an opponent to crush.
I love how the Gospel was given throughout by Pastor Durbin and Dr. White
He's not a real pHD but whatever, blah blah blah.
@@torreyintahoeWhy does that matter?
@@bullheadedgideon1673 Why does it matter if you call yourself Dr. when you’re not a legitimate PhD? That’s your question?
@@torreyintahoe *_Within the context of OP's point,_* yes.
With OP loving how much Gospel there was, I'd imagine he couldn't care less that "he's not a real PhD."
*_Aside from what the original context was,_* I imagine that I completely see your point. Unless there's a legitimate reason he does this? 🤷 I have no idea...
about 10 years ago archaelogists dug up 75 ancient jews from the time of jesus....these jews had 89% DNA of modern day egyptians...............this fits in with the origin of yahweh....the earliest mention of yahweh on tablets was in egypt by a sect called the shasha who almost certainly introduced yahweh to the caananites ....jews were caananites and when they moved into the levant they carried on worshipping all the pantheon of caananite gods and it took 700 years to get to just yahweh
Ex atheist here as well, after a supernatural encounter with the Risen Lord in 2016 I threw my life in the garbage/ Did a complete 180 to follow Him 🙏🏼
Why did you not believe before this "supernatural encounter" ?
@@trumpbellend6717 “And Jesus said, “For judgment I came into this world, so that those who do not see may see, and those who see may become blind.” Those who were with Him from the Pharisees heard these things and said to Him, “We are not blind too, are we?” Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin; but now that you maintain, ‘We see,’ your sin remains.”
John 9:39-41 NASB2020
@@trumpbellend6717 “You are doing the deeds of your father.”
They said to Him, “We were not born as a result of sexual immorality; we have one Father: God.”
Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I came forth from God and am here; for I have not even come on My own, but He sent Me. Why do you not understand what I am saying? It is because you cannot listen to My word. You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he tells a lie, he speaks from his own nature, because he is a liar and the father of lies. But because I say the truth, you do not believe Me. Which one of you convicts Me of sin? If I speak truth, why do you not believe Me? The one who is of God hears the words of God; for this reason you do not hear them, because you are not of God.””
John 8:41-47 NASB2020
@@trumpbellend6717 “At that time Jesus said, “I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent, and have revealed them to infants. Yes, Father, for this way was well pleasing in Your sight. All things have been handed over to Me by My Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son determines to reveal Him.”
Matthew 11:25-27 NASB2020
@@trumpbellend6717 “Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; the one who comes to Me will not be hungry, and the one who believes in Me will never be thirsty.
Everything that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I certainly will not cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that of everything that He has given Me I will lose nothing, but will raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.””
John 6:35, 37-40 NASB2020
Durbin and Dr White are excellent debaters. Durbin is also a really good orator.
More accurately, they are excellent at making bald assertions and leveraging emotion.
@@LetsTalkChristMinistries Then why does Durbin keep mentioning "Fish that became philosophers" "You think we evolved from the scum" "If we are just descendants of bacteria" etc? He's playing purely on emotion to add weight to the bald assertions that he and James were making.
@@LetsTalkChristMinistries What emotional tactics does Dillahunty use? I've literally seen him do the opposite. And even when I was a Christian I knew that the emotional tactics like "In your worldview there is no ultimate justice in the end" or "You think we're just moral meatbags" were terrible arguments. Also, please cite a single valid point Durbin made.
@@LyingForJesusOrg You’re looking to argue. I’ve seen countless debates of Dillahunty. He does nothing but caricature, straw man, and dodge. Hitchens was worse. Dillahunty has a way with words, but no substance. The fact that you say Dillanhunty doesn’t emote let’s me know all I need to know about you. You don’t have one objective bone in your body. No matter how much Dawkins, Hitchens, or Dillahunty you want to regurgitate, no matter how much darkmatter2525 you watch, the atheist position is illogical. No. I’m not proving or presenting anything to you. Your agenda is obvious. You are looking to argue. Dillahunty is one of the worse emoters I’ve heard when it comes to debate. If you can’t see that, then you’re definitely biased. I have nothing further to discuss with you. No amount of evidence will do for you. You’re blinded by hate. Your name says it all. Your agenda is obvious. No thank you.
@@parkervitous2782 They aren't even questions. They are emotional tactics & statements. Telling someone that "their worldview doesn't offer ultimate justice in the end" isn't asking a question. It's an attempt to make someone sad & long for ultimate justice. And my rejection of the Christian deity isn't due to an emotion like anger. It's a result of having a consistent standard for evidence in my life. If you had the same consistency, you would also reject said deity.
Loved this debate. The answer on why suicide is wrong from Pastor Durbin at the very end was spot on! All of it was spot on.
"Thank you Pastor Durbin for using your time arguing a version of our side."
Well, somebody had to.
"Why always point to the worst of what atheists did?"
Because that is usually where it gets to. Always.
@@countbless3360 Ok, so pointing out the endless religious atrocities is a fair point in any debate against religious believers. Gotcha.
@@JuhoPurola Absolutely!
The problem? The secular worldview did much worse in a much shorter time
The entirety of the Spanish inquisition, 2 centuries of the highest form of religious persecution?
Killed less than 100,000
Stalin did that in a month, multiple times
@@scottyyoch3537 Lol, it wasn't secular worldview that did any of that, Stalin was a mad dictator who made a cult of personality around himself and his huge ego. His actions were not because of his "secular worldview", but instead his paranoia and incompetence.
Meanwhile the Spanish Inquisition and its kin in other religious organizations in power have been terrorising the world for millennia. We don't even have the numbers for all of them, and not just killing but brutal torture and other atrocities not counted in the kill count. And the kicker is, they explicitly did it for their religions.
The biggest difference between the two is that the human population grew exponentially after the industrial revolution, so Stalin had much more people to hurt, while the Spanish Inquisition existed at a time with a relatively low and stable population number.
Maybe look into a bit history before embarrassing yourself again.
@@scottyyoch3537 I wanted to back you up on your point about the Spanish inquisition, by stating that it lasted 2 years, not 2 centuries, and the death toll was definitely less than 100,000. It was 2,000 max.
They said Noah was an extremist, then the rain came and all the fact checkers died.
The older male clearly hasn’t heard of the Isaiah Scroll, Dead Sea Scrolls, or Masoretic Texts.
According to the Encyclopedia of Wars, out of all 1,763 known/recorded historical conflicts, 121, or 6.87%, had religion as their primary cause.
It’s amazing how you don’t have to be a professor to find such knowledge lol. Some atheist professors sound like knowledge just stems from them and them alone.
@@KlaustheViking Trust the experts.
And how many of those were based around a Christian God
@@Anchyy1171 Irrelevant to the point being made.
@@KlaustheViking I asked the question out of curiosity and its relevance is based on what i want to find out from it, but fine dont tell me i can google it anyways.
Doctor Deen Chattergee's opening statement was hilarious he just said "everyone should just agree with 'x' moral concept" when the entire point is justifying that claim. He just points out that everyone agrees on something without giving his philosophical justification under his worldview. He did exactly what Durbin's opening statement said he would, it was comical
As a byproduct of exposing the fool's worldview, Jeff and James' debates always have a comedic undertone, and it's so entertaining 😆
The claim that theistic morality is somehow superior because its "objective" is ridiculous. Theists are merely substituting their own subjective moral standards with the morals standards of the god they subjectively determine represents the "correct objective" morality. 🙄🤔
@trump bellend it is actually superior and objective. So much so that when the so-called atheists attempt to come up with their own morality, they have to borrow from the Christian worldview to make sense because the ultimate conclusion of atheism is that nothing ultimately matters.
I'm sorry why would anyone need more "justification" as to why morality is actually about human wellbeing values, other than the fact that those values WORK as the basis for moral and ethical systems worldwide irrespective of religion or lack of. For the most part it is only with the concept of "SIN" ( transgression against the perceived whims of subjective invisible beings ) that the disagreement occurs.
@@trumpbellend6717 The question is WHY they work. That should have been obvious.
The negative side didn't give one good argument whatsoever. Even their closing statements weren't good. The guy was right when he got up and said, "We failed...". Yes, you did.
Jeff and James did awesome.
This shows that you did not understand anything that Anderson said and you don´t care to. Here is a simple example: If you would ask most Christians today if Slavery, any form of it, is bad then most Christians would say it is bad even though the Bible never once condemns Slavery, it even has verses regulating it. We know that most Christians were okay with it at some point. This means that Christians figured out that Slavery is bad without their God or their Bible directly telling them. There are many exmaples such as this and the asnwer is that Christians are part of the cultural conversation.
Of course, the burden of proof that a God exists at all hasn´t been met yet, so Durbin and White just used circular reasoning.
@@BeruntoBsy You present an interesting fantasy concerning Christians and slavery. However, If there is no God, slavery isn't bad. End of discussion.
@@HeLivesForever25 That is a statement which assumes that good and bad are not human concepts. You don´t seem understand how societies work then.
If there is no God we will still continue the cultural conversation about good and bad as we have done for thousands of years.
I think this is what you call a BEATDOWN. Praise God!
What a great debate Pastor Jeff and Pastor James!! Unfortunately, the opposition was totally unprepared to answer, with any depth, a single philosophical question about how to account for ethics.
They can't be. I have yet to see an atheist answer this properly. Even Christopher Hitchens in his debate against Doug Wilson when asked about why killing the Amalekites was objectively wrong in the Bible he had no good answer.
true and true. These two are particularly unprepared however. Someone like Jordan Peterson might be able to at least provide a more entertaining debate.
@@firingallcylinders2949 why was it bad to kill them? Was it bad?
They simply can't answer 😂
That’s because there is no philosophical arguments against Christ
They’re arguing against divine power, they’ll lose every time
“For the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh but have divine power to destroy strongholds. We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ,”
2 Corinthians 10:4-5 ESV
That older atheist was rambling all over the place and couldn't understand basic questions. I felt sorry for him. The atheist brought a knife to a tank fight. lol
Is your Omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient God morally good? Then why does he let bad things happen to people you consider good and good to people who are considered bad?
Your government follows the same principals as God. They let innocent people go to jail and allow the rich and powerful to go free of punishment.
Do you think it is morally good to stop a man from raping a child if you passed in an alley?
If you see a blind man about to cross the street, and a car approaching, is it morally good to stop him from crossing?
If you say yes to these questions, then you and your god do not share the same set of morals because God lets these things happen all the time even though he is all powerful all-knowing and all present.
All his education brought him was a lot of stupidity.
He really showed how much ofna fool he was.
He just had to answer completely irrational arguments . .
More of this please! It's valuable to learn how to debate the Christian/biblical worldview and also valuable to hear the opposing views. Thank you Pastor Jeff and Dr. White for your tireless efforts in many arenas and for demonstrating the focus of the Gospel.
There is plenty Christian debate on RUclips, checkout Dr. Frank turek RUclips channel, cross examined or Dr. Braxton Hunter RUclips channel, Trinity Radio
Lol can’t use the Bible to prove the Bible. That’s like me using a Harry Potter book to prove Hogwarts exists 😂😂🤦🏾♂️
Wait, does that mean scientists can’t use scientific paper to backup their theories? What about medical students in med school, should they not use medical textbooks to prove that the medical procedures that we currently have access to is correct? Moreover, you compared the Bible to a Harry Potter book, how are they even comparable are you assuming that the Bible is a bunch of made up stories or that it’s not historical?
@@Vdoggfromtha818 Yes, I can use the Bible to give evidence for the Bible. You're implying 'circular reasoning.' unfortunately for you, that defense won't work.
At that rate, you'd be accusing scientists of circular reasoning! How? Tell me, has gravity *ever* been proven? Nope. What about abiogenesis? Any proof? Nope!
@@Peter-wl3tm Watch me destroy this kid in a debate.
Love it that Jeff brought up separation between state and religion came from God/Christian faith. Great job guys!!!
I'm glad he brought it up, but I also wish it was ever pointed out that Jefferson's letter is merely saying, "Sorry that I can't help you with the religious disfavor you're facing as a minority in your state. As I am now a member of the federal government, I do not have the right to tell your state that they can't favor a particular Christian teaching. There has to be a wall of separation between me, here in the federal government -- "the State" -- and your individual state's denominational preferences when it comes to church."
Separation of state and religion did not come from god/ christian faith. You god rules on a theocracy according to your bible. Do any of you actually read your bible?
Except it didn't
@@kalestanforde @Lucifer Almighty So where did it come from? Key words: church and state. So Christianity definitely played some role in the development of the idea. Albeit a negative one a, as I assume is an historical claim you'd be willing substantiate;however, I would be a proponent for its positive impact in American politics. First, the founding father's refer back to patristic church fathers in terms of their defense of religious pluralism for a republic; most notably Thomas Jefferson and James Madisin both draw from the seminal insights of Tertullian of Carthage (197 CE.) who in fact inctrouced the term "freedom of religion"(libertas religionis) into western thought. He's directly quoted by those two aforementioned founders at great length [see Tertullian, Apollogeticum(c.197) in Corpus Christianorum:Series Latina-- Tertullian, ed.E Dekkers(Turnhout: Brepols,1954),pg.234, with translation and discussion in Wilken,Liberty in the Things of God,10-13,189-92)]. Furthermore, that tradition was carried on by Lactanius, who expressed opposition to imposed force used by any one religion [De Mortibus Persecutorum,trans. and ed. J.L. Creed(Oxford: Clarendon Press,1984),71-73]. Secondly, all this culminated into what would become arguably St. Augustine's greatest work in "City of God"(ca. 413-427), where he quite literally draws on biblical verses linking this separatism as sound in Christian political theology. He claimed that there is a "city of God that coexist with this city of man," but emphasized that these two cities,although they may overlap, both exist necessarily. He contrasted their roles, seeing that religion does impact politics and vice versa, but within certain bounds[Religion and the American Constitutional Experiment/John Witte. Jr.,Joel A. Nichols and Richard W. Garnett[Fifth Edition](New York: Oxford University Press,2022),pg.16]. He draws primarily upon Christ teaching of "Rendering into Caesar What belongs to Caesar"(Matthew 22:21;Mark 12:17;Luke 20:25). And the Pauline tradition of "Liberty in Christ"(Romans 12:2;Ephesians 2:14,etc).
@@LuciferAlmighty Argument?
Jeff and James. My favorite duo. I just wish Jeff’s mic was clearer
Right! I was thinking the same thing.
Agreed, we listen while driving a semi truck long haul. Hard to hear him.
Agreed! As someone that does sound for my church, i was dying inside listening to it 😢
I thank the Lord your lives, Dr. James White and Ptr. Jeff Durbin. All glory and honor to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Watching this debate all the way from the Philippines.
People get annoyed when you bring in the light of the Gospel. Good job Apologia!
It’s not the gospel that is annoying it’s the “I have a book and it is evidence for the claims in the book and I can tell everyone how to live their lives by the way I interpret it” that what’s annoying not the claims in that book
And you will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. - Jeremiah 29:13
ruclips.net/p/PLHjaRUn9mlISBG16889i5D-68QGtpm_3D
“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life. -John 3:16
Amen!
Acts 17:22-28
I spent the whole debate yelling, “SAYS WHO!?” They never answered that question.
Said the people who wrote the Bible of course.
@@Alien1375 so who defines morality for you?
@
I highly doubt you'll receive a response to your question from Alien1375, but truth be told, Alien1375 would be the one to define morality for themselves. Alien1375 does worship God. The God Alien1375 worships is the one that stares back at him from the bathroom mirror everyday, which is exactly the same God all Atheists worships.
Jeff is fond of, “By what standard!”
Or my personal favorite, “So what.”
@ It's a combination of upbringing, education and evolutionary social impulses that make human beings social beings. And yes that means you have to think a bit for yourself. Not let everything decide what a bunch of guys from the bronze age made up for you.
Imagine the anxiety that comes from knowing you made the mistake of agreeing to debate Durbin and White. 😆
Hahaha so true
it also “helps” when you have the truth on your side!
I would welcome a debate with them.
@@Theo_Skeptomai call em up. They have a podcast that you get on through a phone call. I'll look forward to hearing the debate.
@@jelly7310 I will check it out. If they agree to a debate I will use my moniker "Theo Skeptomai." However, it sounds like you are mentionng a Q&A session rather than a formal debate.
What a powerful debate. God bless you Pastor Jeff and Pastor James. God bless you both
All Humans need to repent & Believe in Jesus as their God. Why? Because all Humans have sinned (lied, lusted sexually, stolen, dishonoured parents etc). Avoid the fires of Hell (justice of God) and choose Heaven today. Jesus defeated death by rising from the dead. GOD IS HOLY
The whole whole debate went over the PHD's head.
I know someone with a PHD, and when I asked her if she believes in objective truth and morality, she said definitely NO. Moments later, she told me I was wrong for having certain opinions that contradicted hers.... Well, I don't know how she thinks she can objectively tell me I'm wrong, when she doesn't believe anything is objectively wrong.....???
@JO That's just moral relativism.
@JO In your opinion, there is not even one black and white, objective moral law?
@@truthnotlies *"Morality is subjective, we set the rules HOWEVER that does NOT mean we cannot set objective rules about morality* *Let me draw an analogy, in the game of chess there are no OBJECTIVE RULES laid down by a god* *They are arbitrary man made, however once we all come to an agreement about which rules we want to implement and adhere to it then becomes posible to objectively declare a move as illegal within the framework of agreed upon rules ( a Bishop can only move diagonally ect )*
*That does not mean therefore that outside of the framework ( rules ) that its objectively impossible to move a Bishop straight forward* 😁
@JO But I’ll bet a million dollars that you act as though objective morality exists. The only way to be an intellectually consistent atheist is to be a complete and utter nihilist to the point that you don’t bother calling anything right or wrong, or behave like a psychopath because you realize that all morality is as arbitrary as your favorite flavor of ice cream.
one of my favorite debate topics to point to God. Great job fellas
God has made Brother James and Jeff,two of the greatest Christian debaters of our day.Everthing they say cannot be refuted because their arguments are derived from the very word of God and their arguments show the spiritual insanity of the world.
Their arguments are invalid.
By what standard? Your own finite, fallible, arbitrary one?
@@jordantheriverman6143 By God's word.
“Pastor Durbin, you sound like a broken album”. Exactly, the truth is a constant.
This is how you fight for Christ 😂
Jeff Durbin is a grifter. He doesn’t even have an argument. He just makes claims and dismisses his opponents arguments with “ I don’t like that so it’s not true”. There’s a reason he only debates complete dolts. Any atheist debater worth his weight can destroy Durbin but he will never agree to meet one because he can’t handle looking bad.
I recently got to be on a podcast with an atheist and a lucifierian.. It was awesome to defend the truth of God..
How did you keep your cool, lol?
Was there any difference between the two in their core belief?
Which podcast and episode please? I’d like to vet it myself 👀💪🏾💯🤙🏾🙏🏾
Link please.
@@josiahpulemau6214 yeah me too.
Having no absolute standard for morals means you have no such sure knowledge of good and evil.
Sounds like Christianity.
"Good" and "Evil" are words used to describe movement or points on a reference standard or scale conceptualised by man that is based upon our shared values like human wellbeing, empathy and equality. Whilst "God" is also a man made concept, the percieved whims of this "God" do not reflect these shared values and thus are irrelevant in any discussion of morality.
@@mattr.1887 God set the standard of morality so yes of course it sounds like Christianity because it is.
"Making a caricature" is just taking your own points and thinking them through to their logical extremes, and it is necessary for all of us to do.
The fact that he said with a straight face that Christianity ranks first in historical violence makes me question his qualifications to even be on that panel.
Hes not qualified in the slightest
Would you agree that the intolerance of the Inquisition was motivated by a Christian movement?
Catholicism might actually be first if you think about the inquisition and the crusdades. More often than not, Christianity is confused with Catholicism.
@@MrPopemobile it really is mistaken quite often. I have to always point out that when that was happening many Christians were killed for not conforming to catholicism.
@@MrPopemobile according to the KFF health and science center, the most casualties from war is due to hunger.
TRUTH is worth “fighting” for! Doubt is what “conversations” or for.
Jeffs intro is 🔥 🔥 🔥
Not gonna lie, if I was the opposition, I would have conceded defeat after James and Jeff’s opening.
I wonder if they were going through their notes thinking oh no they are dismantling our points before we even made them!
I laughed how weak it was.
if you didn't already accept their side as truth, you would think it's a weak opening of first presupposing morality from god thus no morality without god, and then a guy who sais nothing of value for the debate and only throws shade on the other sides view by purposely presenting it in a ridiculing way. Only the last opening statement was good imo, although I am (just like you are) biased.
Sheesh! Durbin delivered the gospel very clearly and beautifully to these men. What a blast!
So good! Thank you Jeff Durbin and James White for eloquently presenting the case for grounding our views in God while exposing that humanistic world views are baseless. Soli Deo Gloria! 🙌🏼🙏🏼
Claiming god as the grounding is just as baseless.
By what standard? According to “lucifer the slave of the Almighty?”
It’s astounding to see people in the name of “being consistent” will not think nor contemplate but merely react to their own fleeting emotion and yet live in such a way and hold others to a standard contradictory to that emotion and reaction… what a mess!
This was such a one sided debate. Jeff and white took this by a land slide
1:03:30 "Jesus must be turning in his grave right now listening to this"
Me: ... WHAT GRAVE?
I've been looking forward to this all week but now I won't get to watch it live. :( Ah well, it'll be my late evening treat when I sit down to knit.
Bottom line,an atheist can be made to believe anything but the Biblical truth.
Fortunately that is not always true. I am hearing many "Atheist" who have come to accept Biblical truth.
Anything?
@@bglynch3176 Then they aren't atheists anymore,right ?
That is FALSE. I cannot be made to believe anything of which I am not convinced.
With God all things are possible.
“The other side didn’t offer a debate but a sermon”
This is why pressup rules. It was a debate and yet Pastor Jeff and White argued their position while sharing the gospel.
@JO you cannot even have a debate without first justifying how everyone uses logic from an athiest POV
The older atheist was hard to watch. He couldn’t form a cogent argument or rebuttal, it was very much “look at how good humanism is”. He cannot explain why pedophilia is wrong but wonders why Jeff keeps bringing up pedophilia as an example.
Really enjoyed this engagement. Its so good to see faithful Christians willing to fight for the faith
All Humans need to repent & Believe in Jesus as their God. Why? Because all Humans have sinned (lied, lusted sexually, stolen, dishonoured parents etc). Avoid the fires of Hell (justice of God) and choose Heaven today. Jesus defeated death by rising from the dead. GOD IS HOLY
oh, christians have always been willing to fight.
slaughtering tens of thousands during multiple crusades.
executing 'witches'. and yet they never showed ANY evidence.
wow. what an excellent debate. you can see how bankrupt the opposing side’s argument is for God being unnecessary in ethics. dr. white and pastor durbin, you two are cherished teachers and are wise because you fear God and are bold for His sake. thank you for strengthening my faith and for preaching the gospel to a world that needs it!!!
I mean, its pretty telling that multiple different Civilisations had ethics before Christianity. The fact that this was never answered showed me that one side came for cheap gotchas, while the other came to explore the others Worldview.
I'm eagerly awaiting watching this
This is probably the very best thing I've heard this year so far!! JEFF DURBIN, YOU ABSOLUTELY NAILED IT MY BROTHER!! 🔨
All Humans need to repent & Believe in Jesus as their God. Why? Because all Humans have sinned (lied, lusted sexually, stolen, dishonoured parents etc). Avoid the fires of Hell (justice of God) and choose Heaven today. Jesus defeated death by rising from the dead. GOD IS HOLY
This debate was over from the beginning.
Much love, God bless
Really appreciated Anderson and his wrestling with the tension he feels. I pray he sees the truth of Jesus’s resurrection and turns from his sin.
This debate in a nutshell:
Christians: You don't have a true morality without God
Atheist: Yes, we do
Christian: Prove it
Atheist: Yes
Christian’s and theists don’t have true morality either. True meaning objective.
@Anon Ymous I wasn't making any claims, but a simple observation of how it's often frustrating to watch presuppositional apologists debate relativists. The debate always hits a wall, and people start talking past each other. However, society based morality is indefensible, in my opinion, as it falls apart when societies all agree to engage in horrendous, evil acts such as society approved cannablism, genocide, etc.
Cant believe people think atheists cant have morals.
@@hrebientony More to the point .... the idea that morality is formed by society simply begs the question in that society is made up of individuals. As Margaret Thatcher said: "there's no such thing as society: there's just you and me".
As a believer, I've grown to LOVE these Debates because I realize how much I LOVE the atheists. They aren't MONSTERS, just utterly lost in self self self.
Former Atheist/Agnostic. Was saved July 28th 2021, a few months later I fell into the world of Apologetics. It's been an amazing experience.
Feels like they deep down are horrified by the things humans have done and are doing and just make up a fantastical excuse why its all ok.
Truth
@Lara Bonczek good point.
@Lara Bonczek some people are judgemental. Atheists are people just like christains and deserve the same respect. Obviously not all of you are monsters. Seemed like a judgmental thing fir that person to say. Like it was supposed to be a compliment.
Durbin and White, wiped the floor with their interlocutores. This was obvious.
This guy being a chaplain is insane.
Wonder what comfort he can offer to someone staring death in the eye? What is his answer to someone pondering if there is an afterlife?
He gave me don't let him around my children vibes.
@@lorenepalmer9965 what does your social group say about the after life? The majority rules, and that's just ethical.
hes no chaplain...hes playing one for money
Just listen to the man. He's very religious. He thinks men become gods. He never stopped believing in his own divinity.
The other man is a true atheist....which is to say, a foolish grumbler.
I would venture to guess that the chaplain is technically a Pantheist. He definitely has spiritual views about reality and the universe. Easy to spot.
James White and Jeff Durbin did a great job in this debate. Glory to God
Imagen your only argument why ‘Christianity’ is the religion is saying that they found a tomb
No, they engaged in terrible strawmanning.
I love these debates, I pray God gives sight and salvation to these men..to God be the Glory
Amen I am praying too ❤
Amen!!
@larabonczek9437 Yet here you are, not following your own advice. :)
@Lara Bonczek why are you assuming they are bothering people? You could've just ignored the comment but chose to be hateful instead... I'd say that says more about you. I pray God rids you of your demons.
@@kingyoung5228 "why are you assuming they are bothering people" bro, I think they are saying that THEY are being bothered by that statement. No assumptions necessary.
"You could've just ignored the comment but chose to be hateful instead" I don't see how you interpreted what they said as hateful. Unless you are one of those people that sees all criticism as hate. But if that is the case why are you watching a debate? Comment sections for debates are always filled with criticism and that comment barely even qualifies as criticism. In fact, your comment is the only one that comes off as hateful. "I pray God rids you of your demons" comes off as very rude to say the least.
White and Durbin are on their A game here. Truly heroes of the truth, I am so thankful for their ministry.
Heroes of dogma. They're a long way from the truth.
@@torreyintahoe atheism is a foolish dogma. God is undeniable, you think therefore there is a God.
@@sledteamcapt Undeniable? There’s no evidence that gods exist therefore they don’t. There’s no evidence that magic is a thing either, which is the means by which gods would theoretically function.
@@torreyintahoe that would be a reasonable objection if you only believed in things you had empirical evidence for, but you believe in many things you have no evidence for; Morality, emotions, mathematics logic, reason etc.
@@sledteamcapt There's no reason to. believe in things we don't have evidence for. Your examples are poor analogies. Morality is the label we give to a code of behavior. You can argue about what it consists of or where it comes from but not that it's hidden. Math is not hidden either. It's a tool we all use everyday. There is nothing in this world that even suggests that god belief is legitimate and when you look at how humans started using it to explain their world in the first place it becomes obvious that god belief is fiction and it would have died out a long time ago if it wasn't for childhood indoctrination.
Wow, Durbin and White have given the testimony and debate of ages
I would argue God has.
This was awesome. Jeff and Dr. White you guys did an awesome job defending the Christian worldview and honestly it wasn’t even a close debate.
How was it "[not] event close"? Nobody knows that God exists, yet we still have morality. Thus the premise "morality implies God" is not provable, so the entire Christian argument is an "Argument from ignorance". The negative side is only saying "we can't say God exists, but morality clearly exists."
@@AscentofTrollbane If god doesn't exist then morality doesn't exist. It's just chemicals. You can't put morality under a microscope. Also you saying that nobody knows if god exists is a logical fallacy, I'm not agnostic like you, im a theist I know God exists. I know you guys are obsessed with evidence, but Just because you can't put god under a microscope doesn't mean he doesn't exist. The surefire evidence that God exists is the impossibility of the contrary
@@irishscience580 no, that is a complete and utter logical fallacy "your lack of evidence for your claim is automatically evidence for mine" that's not how it works. you will STILL not have evidence even if you prove another side doesn't either. evidence is not two sided. i have evidence for morals, logic, matter, etc. just because i do not have ALL the evidence, doesn't mean the evidence i have no longer counts. the lack of evidence for god is just that, the lack of evidence for god... he doesnt exist as far as we know of. when we get some evidence, then we'll talk
@@AscentofTrollbane Depends on how you define terms. Morality as a concept exists, obviously, but the debate isn't about whether people can conceive of morality without God but whether morality has meaningful authority without God.
Special pleading alert: (1:01:16)
Atheist: Some Christians have been responsible for terrible evils throughout history, therefor we can lump all Christians into this category and conclude that Christianity is not a good moral foundation.
Also atheist: They are trying to lump all atheists into the same category when they appeal to the atrocities committed by Hitler, Mao, and Pol Pot, and that isn’t fair. Doesn’t need to be that way.
🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
You're just a Christian supremacist, lol.
Technically not special pleading since Christianity can be considered a coalition whereas atheism is not.
For example, if I said people who like the color red all prefer red paint, it would not be an equivalent statement to say all people who do not like the color red prefer blue paint.
@@Samtastictogo This overlooks the fact that atheism is indeed a coalition united by their denial of God’s existence. The very fact that they don’t believe there is an ultimate standard of morality or that they’ll be held accountable after death is what enables the millions of deaths. You may not all subscribe to uniform set of rules or standards, but there the very thing that unites you and the very thing that fuels the death. Sorry you actually just proved my point further. If an ideology or religious views are responsible for producing violence then atheism is one of them and it applies all the same.
@@Samtastictogo seems a bit silly that you would watch a debate by a guy who is arguing that atheism/humanism provides a foundation for ethics, but then try to pretend like atheists aren’t united on the thing that caused the violence (the belief that God doesn’t determine how people should behave.)
I’m glad there are Christians in this debate who understand that it’s not about neutrality and must fight in defense of the faith. Unlike the atheist older gentleman who obviously has to ask the opposition to his point of view to not argue in their point of few. It’s a disingenuous way to argue.
The atheist doesn’t have standards to go by they flip flop in different directions. Is there a right, is there a wrong . If it feels good, it must be right.
Christian’s are given standards to follow that lead to physical, spiritual and emotional good health.
Praise Jesus! Amazing opening, brothers! 🙌
“Inter-subjectively wrong” is just code for “I’m doing my damnedest to suppress the truth in my unrighteousness.”
As arbitrary as “not my favorite flavor of ice cream”. These people don’t seem to think about their worldview with any seriousness.
Yeah and the first two opening statements are just code for " waah waah the world isn't stuck in the bronze age like I want it to and atheists are dumb poo poo heads for critiquing my fairytales". Damn, it's so nice to be able to interpret code this easily.
I'm not sure you know what that means
@Juho Purola well the critiques you guys make are never valid and have typically been answered hundreds of times over. Unlike the boundless logical inconsistencies that exist within your own belief in evolution, which cannot willnot ever be answered.
@@kingyoung5228 🤣
I think a problem with a naturalistic foundation for ethics is not whether or not the ethics are objective, but that it doesn't have to matter to anybody if they decide that it doesn't matter. Given God, you do not have the luxury of deciding that your choices don't matter. You will care eventually.
You're absolutely right, it doesn't have to matter to anybody if they decide it doesn't matter. That is true. However, if you act against the agreed upon societal standard of ethics, you will be reprimanded and/or punished. It doesn't matter what the individual believes, but rather society as a whole.
@@DynamiteGazelle Historically, society is awesome, so that's very reassuring.
Why do we not have the luxury of deciding that our choices don't matter given God?
I was trying to figure out the glowing green liquid in the cups they had on their table. Then I remembered watching the previous debate where they guy said props shouldn't be allowed, but then he brought out a bottle of anti freeze and asked them to drink it if they knew God could create a miracle and save them. LOL Well done boys!
This little display of tempting GOD is nothing new. Just like the Satan attempted to get Jesus to tempt GOD by throwing himself off the mountain but Jesus responsed you shall not tempt the LORD your GOD. Matthew 4:7.
Meanwhile, they ignore the miracle of gravity working, the breath in their lungs, and consciousness
How many signs do you need?
Why do we need a debate on this issue? If there is no objective/transcendent standard for good and evil, then every moral question is a matter of one person/group's opinion over another. EVERYTHING. Why don't people get this simple fact? It's so self evident that a child can understand it.
It is exactly that simple lol
The problem is willful suppression of the truth by those who want to pick and choose what is moral according to their desires. Textbook example of Romans 1.
@@dauntusgaming Yep!
Totally agree!
The debate is needed because there are myriads of people in society who believe that God is not necessary for ethics. Yes, it's obvious that a Creator who put ethics in the hearts of men is necessary for ethics to exist, but there are people who disagree and the debate is for the audience really.
You Christian Supremacist! ;)
Be an atheist, think yourself smart, have 0 self awareness even at 40+ years old.
Truly amazing stuff 😂😂
I think that believing in fairy tales or not believing in them isn’t about intelligence but about gullibility.
@sylvilagus cunicularius unironically the Bible is the most well verified document that has ever existed in human history.
But an atheist couldn't care less as the entire worldview is arbitrary and based on convenience.
Seeking virtue in a careless universe is a fairytale that only captures the most gullible fools.
@@joshsimpson10
What do you mean by the most verified document? Like… even if you were to separate the mythological and the fictional stories from the Bible, there are plenty of more recent historical books that include the authors’ names and the original copies, lol. If you don’t separate the fairy tales from the Bible, how do you verify the angels wielding swords and armor while fighting heavenly wars?
You mean the Christian’s worldview is arbitrary and based on convenience? It was definitely convenient for politicians, kings and emperors. Anyway, there is no atheistic worldview. Atheists can adopt any philosophy, and there is no consensus what which to follow. So, don’t be stupid. People who don’t believe in the tooth fairy do not hold worldview and act on based on that fact. The same goes for people that don’t believe in all gods.
Hah. You know… I respect people that are law abiding and do good works out of compassion, love and empathy over someone who does good out of fear of going to hell or angering a mythological, jealous god.
@JO "no official canon until the 4th century" that's where you are wrong wholesale.
And the point stands. There is more material evidence in terms of original manuscripts that for any other ancient text that has ever existed.
@JO original manuscripts are hand written documentation. I didn't say original text. But it wouldn't matter that all of the manuscripts we have are consistent with the God Breathed Scripture over all time. So the more time that passes the more we find that is closer to times when Christ walked this earth. It will simply verify what has already been consistent over time since the word was written.
They recovered 25000 fragments and manuscripts that dated before Christ up to 100 years AD that verified Old Testament manuscripts veracity and accuracy which itself prophesied Christ. All in the mid 20th century alone.
But again there is no other ancient text with more original manuscript evidence for its authenticity than any other text ever in all of human history.
Chatterjee woefully unprepared. And the theater kid thought he would just be able to be charming and raise questions Jeff and James hadn't thought of before to confuse and befuddle them. Must've been a rude awakening for him.
I hope we stay away from antifreeze this time😂
That guy was awful.
"You've seen miracles" 😂
I was wondering if that was why their drinks are bright green!! A little throw back to the antifreeze debate
@@Followerdow good catch lol
@@Followerdow the same guy who set up this debate is the same one from the last debate. (This one was supposed to be a year later, but COVID) he hunted down a pop similar to Mt. Dew with the coloring of antifreeze as a joke.
What I'm picking up from the agnostic with his own Pantheon is that he fears himself, so the only way to prove that he is right to himself is to not prove anything and be neutral. That's a doctrine of fear. He learned it by believing once and then feeling so unsteady so unsure that he longed to never feel that way again, so he became a leaf blowing in the wind of indecision. Abba father deliver him and show him his purpose.
When you zoom out and hear the atheist side of the debate, all you can notice is the image of God that they bear. Them even being there proves the existence of our Lord. The debate was won as soon as they agreed to it. Or should I say, before the debate? Great debate over all!
How do you have a debate about God and Ethics and NOT talk about God and "sermon topics?" Why would they think God and Jesus wouldn't show up? The Atheist perspective is always so dense in these debate and you have the patience beyond normal human standards.
“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life. -John 3:16
And you will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. - Jeremiah 29:13
ruclips.net/p/PLHjaRUn9mlISBG16889i5D-68QGtpm_3D
I can picture Sproul yelling, “what’s wrong with you people?!”
😂
I would gladly share this with any atheist. The defence of God and his word is incredibly powerful. On the other hand, I think any atheist would be embarrassed to share this with a Christian. His worldview would be on display for the failure it is. God bless James and Jeff and the fruit of this work.
Is your Omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient God morally good? Then why does he let bad things happen to people you consider good and good to people who are considered bad?
Your government follows the same principals as God. They let innocent people go to jail and allow the rich and powerful to go free of punishment.
Do you think it is morally good to stop a man from raping a child if you passed in an alley?
If you see a blind man about to cross the street, and a car approaching, is it morally good to stop him from crossing?
If you say yes to these questions, then you and your god do not share the same set of morals because God lets these things happen all the time even though he is all powerful all-knowing and all present.
God gave us choice. He created people, not robots alone. Weak argument
@@andyayala5639 Andy, I don't know where you got the idea that I was making some kind of 'argument'. I was simply expressing my admiration of the powerful nature of the arguments made by Brothers Jeff and James. They argue from the presuppositionalist position and I am convinced that it is the only internally consistent and cohesive position that Christians should use and argue from. It's an appeal to the ultimate authority of God and his word rather than an appeal to fallen human reason. Are you s Christian or an atheist? I couldn't tell from your response.
@@mattl3023 I fat fingered a response. Wrong guy, I agree and apologize for the mishap lol
@@andyayala5639 Apology accepted, brother. 🙂
Wait… are those cups a nod at the “show me” antifreeze debate?! 😂😂😂
Excellent. A sheer joy watching and learning.
Debate starts at 7:30
EXCELLENT debate. I don't see how anyone could argue the Affirmative side did not win this. Thank you for this and for sharing!!
All Humans need to repent & Believe in Jesus as their God. Why? Because all Humans have sinned (lied, lusted sexually, stolen, dishonoured parents etc). Avoid the fires of Hell (justice of God) and choose Heaven today. Jesus defeated death by rising from the dead. GOD IS HOLY
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 so... i should follow god or otherwise i burn in hell for all eternity? thats just. eternal damnation for a finite "crime". doesnt seem like such a good guy with all that power laying around he does nothing with.
@@Abzero-mx2pb GO TO HELL FOR ONE SMALL SIN?
People argue that stealing a piece of candy doesn’t deserve hell. Firstly stealing $1 makes you as much a thief as stealing $1000, if someone just sins 3 times a day that’s a 1000 sins per year which is 10’s of thousands of sins in a lifetime that all have to be answered for, also in Heaven EVERTONE is perfect. Were they perfect on earth? No, They lived repentant lives and put their faith in Jesus so, the righteousness of Jesus is placed on them, and God sees them with a sin count of 0 so He lavishes His goodness on them forever.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 why didn't he just forgive us to begin with? Instead of sending himself as a loophole to forgive himself. And what about children in Africa - hell, ADULTS in Africa that don't know about Christianity? What happens to them? Does God not forgive them? Also, no, stealing a dollar is not equal to stealing 1000 dollars. That's preposterous.
@@Abzero-mx2pb All young children who die go to Heaven forever all adults who didn't hear the good news of Jesus will be judged fairly but only being washed by the blood gets you into Heaven. Of course stealing 1k is worse than 1 dollarbut you are a thief regardless of how much you steal therefore absolutely everyone needs to repent and believe the Gospel to be forgiven of their crimes against God, so be humble and love God
Anderson was very respectful - I hope he and Durbin had that dinner together! Chatterson seemed to throw his hands up in disgust pretty easily, which is surprising given Christians will and should hold to an ultimate authority. That’s what he should have expected to engage with.
Great job by White and Durbin in holding to Scripture and reason!
Deen Chattergee was not strong and got flustered rather quickly. It appears he is not used to having his presuppositions challenged. Instead of increasingly lobbing insults and accusations of mischaracterization at Jeff Durbin as the debate progressed, he ought to attempt to clearly articulate his position if it is being so mischaracterized.
Jared Anderson was rather competent. I would have sincerely liked to have seen a deeper 1-on-1 with him and Jeff Durbin or James White. I think it would have made for a lovely discussion as most of the substance of interest and value was made up between interactions with him.
The best that can be said of chattertons performance is he gave Jeff and James the frowning of a lifetime.
😂😂🤣🤣
Dr. Chattergee sounded like a rambling fool and Anderson an arrogant fool. When Chattertgee(sp) mentioned that some of the Bible he agreed with, like stoning Homosexuals, the look on Jared Andersons face was priceless.
Audrey Hale knows better now.
Love seeing Van Til and Dr. Greg Bahnsen’s legacy being carried on through Durbin.
Bahnsen was the man
"You sound like a broken album..."...two thoughts:
1. I'm going to use this on on my wife, and
2. This isn't an effective retort against anyone under 45
😂😂😂😂 .. dudes heart was on fire but still had to shake Jeffs hand after lmfao
@@samuelcollier3350 I didn't like how people were badmouthing the guy in the live chat...even insulting the way he talked and calling him "old" or whatever. If it's a mudslinging fest, it's not a debate. I'm not saying Dr. White or Jeff were slinging mud, but their fans (myself included) should not be making ad hominem immature attacks like that. It is not becoming of God's people, and is not bringing one's best as supporters of Apologia.
Are the cups on the apologia desk a callback to when that atheist tried to convince them to drink poison in a previous debate? 😂😂
Engine coolant! I was thinking the same thing.
Chattergee is literally Joe Biden when he doesn’t get his choco choco chip ice cream. How did his partner ever agree to him being his partner? Good grief.
Is Chattergee the old guy?
I love how Jeff and James white are drinking the "battery acid" from the last debate 😂🤣 that's such a flex !!!