Hitchens-Wilson Debate (Part 2)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 24 апр 2014
- In the heart of New York City, The King's College is an accredited, Christian liberal arts college. Using a biblical worldview and great works in politics, philosophy, and economics, we are educating the next generation of leaders for America and the world.
For more information, visit www.tkc.edu.
Absolutely enriching debate.
F for audio quality of this video. The person responsible for setting up the audio-video equipment hasn’t evolved past a chimpanzee.
Or evolved at all ;)
Because there is no such thing as evolution. It is an impossibility.
Do you think this debate happened yesterday? Maybe the day before you posted this comment? It's over a decade old, and sounds pretty good considering the tech they had, and the amount of times this video has been re-uploaded to different channels. You may be the one who's mental capacity is that of a chimpanzee.
Peter and Christopher Hitchens both have a similar habit of hogging the conversation by apparently stopping then adding a further thought over and over
lol totally
Actually in a proper debate you can interrupt to point out a correction especially when the opposition is clearly lying. Someone needs to do that every time Ben Shapiro or that other idiotic Canadian speaks.
I am religious for worshiping Hitchens?
This debate truly shows that intelligence and wisdom are often NOT found together. One may be super intelligent and at the same time utterly lacking in wisdom and true insight!
No it doesn’t and that you think it does his part of the problem. The non-Hitchens people were merely gainsaying as he said more than a dozen times you’ve done nothing to change my argument
Naw u gotta catch yourself in where you’re biases are, and don’t let what you want to be true influence whether or not you believe it
@@clydewmorgan Hitchens failed to defend his justifcation for any moral claim he made. Period. He just assumed it and gave an illogical miss direction point to "nature." Which is silly in the simple fact that many civilizations have different "naturally evolved" "moralities" that contradict. So Hitchens claim isn't objective. It's a subjective position on a word that literally describes an objective position on something in morality...... Without another "provable" source other than God that is tangible and over arching the human race. Morality is merly a human delusion. It's really just preference. But we know this isn't so. Because every single non-believer i've interacted with demonstrates their deaper "tesfiying knowledge" of right and wrong on a moral level including myself when I wasn't a Christian. Even the psycho path knows in his heart what he is doing is wrong. He just has destroyed his ability to respond to it. And without God he cannot and will not change.
This was published 7 years ago and hardly no one has had an oppinion! I find that sad, bieng a member of the human race?
Hi Paul, please see part 1. There are numerous comments and opinions.
Can barely hear this
Hitchens is just so good in this debate.
Wilson: “Killing other races off is another way to survive.”
Hitchens: “Sure, well that’s often enjoined in The Bible.”
Ouch. Pastor Wilson really stepped on a rake with that one.
hitch was the most secular puritan i've seen. his ability to dodge questions of morality while simultaneously shaming people for not displaying the values of a good protestant seperatist is deserving of a medal in mental gymnastics.
Protestant values? Protestants believe in predestinationism. Hitchens didn't. Protestants believe in the priesthood of believers. Hitchens didn't. Protestants believe in salvation through grace. Hitchens didn't. Protestants believe in the profession of faith alone. Hitchens didn't. Protestants believe in divine command theory. Hitchens didn't. Protestants affirm the 10 commandments. Hitchens didn't. Protestants believe that Jesus is the son of God and God exists. Hitchens didn't.
Yours is a moronic line of reasoning, an absolute dead-end, but I'm sure instead of defending it from these charges you'll cower away from this intellectual challenge and just repeat the same stale narrative in the future.
yep!
@@FightXScience-wh6kx Hitch dodged the scientific evidence of no free will by saying he has no choice but to believe in it.Therefore he did indeed believe in predestination.BTW predestinationism is not a word
I continue to be baffled by the stupidity of the questions. They never are to the point but go round and round
So what would you ask ?
@@edwinrivera5377 they always have a better question than others. Such hubris
@Mannie By what standard do you deem these profound questions are "stupid"?
@@justin10292000 by the fact that the questions are either irrelevant to the actual debate, or are framed in such a way that is ignorant of human history... a huge huge subject that gets little attention at school, along with geography. Hitchens did his best when faced with the lack of knowledge from the audience
I'm astonished that I'm the 42 persin tò like this debate, and correct me if I'm wrong, the 4th person to comment. I will check to see when this debate was published, but that is unbeielvable!
I'm the 87th. I was born in 1987. 42 years after Hitlers death. Lol
It really is crazy
Unbelievable *
Fat fingers 😆
The universe is expanding, yet Andromeda is headed toward us. That makes perfect sense.
Learn history kids
Things weren't all good and things weren't all bad
Love has always existed hate had always existed
Some hate some love none have to do with divine intervention
Trial and error for millions of years created this world you now know
End of the world is inevitable no matter what world view you hold
Sounds like a good reason to figure out where you're going after that happens
Well if God Doesn't exist it is to no avail
...but if he does the it's of Paramount importance
@@edwinrivera5377 that's exactly right. Now what if the gospel is true? And where does the risk come from in believing in it?
@@hookoffthejab1 I think we're on the same team 😅
@@edwinrivera5377 oh haha. From your first comment I figured you were a nihilist or something
Hitchens talks like he would be better than God if only he was God. That's what Lucifer said and felt in his heart too.
Well that how it works with children, they are "designed" to supplant parents, to help them end.
Except for the fact you're wrong, and clearly haven't listened to Hitchens.
Hitchens is dead
Get over it.@@Comrade2261
Lucifer never said anything because he is a fictional character.
16:00 So when going into church, at church & coming home from church, I felt a strong impression, heavy on my heart. Not knowing what the pressing feeling was about, I began to pray,
While praying I saw in a vision, what appeared to be pink Northern Lights coming from the sky and flowing down to the four corners of the earth (I am not a flat earther; I am simply telling what I saw). I also heard, but not with my ears, "I" do not have to be somewhwre in particular, for God to do a work through me, by answering a prayer (meaning, I did not have to leave my home, as I had wondered shortly if my neighbor across the street needed help, as I knelt to pray, looking in her home's direction). Was this a delusion? It continued: When I stood up from my prayer, the feeling impressed yet again, and I paced the room, and ended up taking a Max Lucado Book off of my book shelf. I sat on the loveseat I had knelt at, and my eyes landed on a portion of a paragraph, along with a scripture, which I began to text to friends and family, and adding only one other person I never had messaged such a thing to, Amy, my son's best friend's mom, as I felt again impressed. Is this delusional? This text msgs and the phone call are on record (2001-02). "Amy" (who ended up being a girl named Rachel) messaged back, asking me who I was, and why I sent that portion from the book explaining what love is? I recalled immediatly Amy had moved, and explained, I must have the wrong number. Rachel texts me, No, You do not understand! I need to know who you are. I text her my name, to which she frantically, responded by insisting on speaking to me. I accept her call, and Rachel explained she thought I was her husband, trying to expose her. You see, Rachel told me she was just praying that, If God is real, He would amswer her prayer & tell her what love is. She was about to have an affair on her husband. At that moment of her prayer, I sent a scripture about God's Love (I still have this book & I high-lighted that part; not a delusion). Rachel then told me that she prayed asking this because her husbamd was an abusive, cheating, alcoholic. She had fallen in "love" with her best friend's nephew. Furthermore, she had this "nephew's" name hidden in her phone, under her best friends name, which happened to MY name, which is why she freaked out when I told her who I was (and why she initially feared my text was her husband tricking her). Now after talking to me, she was rejoicing that God had answered her prayer, through a Scripture about the Love only God can give (The book os a book for Singles by Max Lucado). I could absolutely prove this all of this was true. I called her later after time had passed; she had given her phone to her Mom (was suffering from a tumor of the brain), and her daughter had told her who I was and what happened when she prayed. This has happened to me on more than one ocassion (five minimum). Something I have no way of knowing, comes to me as an impression to follow certain steps, and as I obey, something larger and immediately important is revealed to me or other people. I call that the Holy Spirit, working through me, as Christians are part of the Body of Christ. He will speak to whomever, as He does not respect people, as He recalls, we are made of dirt. Jesus looks at a man's heart, and understands us more deeply than we could ever understand ourself. I have been saved from my sin amd read the Bible since age 13. God is real. Sorry for those who won't even give Him half a chance - seeking for Him as they would a hidden treasure. This I know. If I miss out on heaven, it will not have been the fault of God. He is Righteous, Just and Truth. His ways are higher than ours, and it pleased Him, by the foolishness of preaching, to save the world. ♡
To you I am to be distrusted, but I have proof. Not on me, but if computer records are kept for texts messages, it is there (I still recall the phone number). And I still have the highlighted passage I sent her.
Yawn.
Minimize your screen and the sound is better
Atheism is taught in school not Christianity. So not sure what Hitchens is smoking.
He actually said to Christopher that Jesus doesn’t love him. Lmao
As him being a pastor and he said that… wow
Well Jesus doesn't love him because Jesus doesn't exist.
@@vtbn53 yes but in the pastors eyes….
He doesn’t say Jesus doesn’t love him, he says Jesus doesn’t believe in him.. silly
@@Herandezbrothers "The Lord tests the righteous, but the wicked and the one who loves violence His soul hates." Psalm 11:5
@@JG-qm3yh oh Doug would fully admit that unless Hitchens confessed Christ as Lord before he died, Jesus did not love him, and Doug would be fully in line with the bible if he said such a thing.
Did people get married, love their children and cared for their neighbor before the Bible?
Duuuuuhhhh
"Santa Claus makes me feel good to believe in"
So what!!??
A person, stranger or lifelong friend, says she/he just had a 12 hour long conversation with god. To some, if not many would conclude this stranger or friend is a raving lunatic. However, if 4 billion people say there's a god, then it's called a religion.
and your point is ..?
@@daviddeida_4 billion _*_delusional_*_ people!_
@@SooperFlye So what,they have no free will
_Yeah they do. 4 billion people freely believe in something that does not exist. It's their right to be delusional._
God didn't make us 'evil'. We did that. God permits it. He didn't make us robots.
The topic of the Israelites attacking, slaughtering and stealing the property and women from a neighboring tribe comes up and Wilson’s response is, “So what problem do you have with that?”
That tells you all your need to know.
Yeah, how is any thinking person okay with that ? Oh yeah, spare the virgins !
What do I need to know?
Absolutely
All I need to know is an atheist constantly defending mass murderers like Stalin and Mao and more - funny what happened everytime someone sets up a godless society 🤦🏻♂️
Doug wants to know by what standard does Christopher have any grounds to object to that. It's not that Doug doesn't even know that such a thing sounds detestable from a surface level understanding.
Christ is not coming back to destroy the world. But give it an upgrade. To make all things new. To remove evil and death.
Why didn't he just remove evil the first time? Why didn't God not create evil in the first place?
A miscarriage is not an abortion. Hitchens does this continuously: caricature his opponents and their arguments. I find him glib, vacuous and boring, at best.
Yes it is - spontaneous abortion.
@@true0204 No, a miscarriage. An abortion is where there is human inducement. Interference with the natural progress of life.
@@philcortens5214 you can call it whatever you like to make yourself feel better, but it is a fact that a miscarriage is a spontaneous abortion. There is no dispute, no argument - just plain facts.
@@true256 The same goes for you, the fact is it's not a crime it's just an attempt to confuse foolish people.
@@philcortens5214 I never said it was a crime. I simply defined the word correctly. Are you suggesting medical professionals are fools, or are trying to confuse people by using correct terminology?
BTW traditional Catholic teaching on Purgatory satisfies the need for the death-bed convert to make satisfaction for his sins. The good thief did his Purgatory on earth as we traditional Catholics say.
Jesus is the satisfaction for our sins. ♡
@@JLa7257 Jesus opened the gates of Heaven by his sacrifice on the Cross but we still have to do our part to get there and we do this by keeping the Commandments and by uniting our sufferings with His.
@@philcortens5214 Oh He said that?
@@jonkent928 Why, you got a problem with it?
@@philcortens5214 so yes?
If morality is only bestowed on humans by god, how then do Christoans explain morality expressed by great apes.
All things said ….. particularly bad ….. You have to love the English language that is so beautifully demonstrated by the brilliant Christopher Hitchens ….
Use of language may demonstrate intelligence, but certainly not necessarily wisdom with it!
No amount of evidence will make the slightest bit of difference to those committed to disbelief. Which is more arrogant to say? "I don't get to be my own God and I am subject to God's absolute moral law." Or, "There is no absolute morality and I will determine what is ultimately right and wrong." You be the judge, but based on your subjective judgment you will inevitably be objectively judged as either being arrogant or humble.
Magical-thinking sucks. Are you 9?
@@donthesitatebegin9283 An undignified and arrogant response. You illustrated my point beautifully. Thank you.
@@jasonhinkle4083 I did illustrate your point but you shouldn't thank me when you clearly don't understand what just happened.
@@donthesitatebegin9283 Is this not the reason you are mistaken; that you do not understand the Scriptures nor the power of God? Don't hesitate...begin! Best wishes. ✌🏼
@@jasonhinkle4083 The Scriptures are child's-play for the fearful, the gullible, the easily-pleased and the unsophisticated. I've read the Bible and there is nothing arcane in it that you know and I don't. It's just that you naively choose to accept an occult explanation for the Universe - probably because it salves your overwhelming fear-of-death - and I choose Spinoza's God, Einstein's God - the non-Supernatural Secular God of the Rationalist Philosophers. So don't try to pretend you know about "God" - your cartoon-like caricature is a childish parody of the Thing-in-itself.
I always enjoy hearing Christopher even quietly thats what amps are for.
That or electrical current.
F FOR AUDIO QUALITY
22:00 God is Worthy of All Praise, All Honor, All Glory. That is why we will forever praise Him; it's not totalitarian at all. We will see the lover of our soul for who He is, and comprehend His love, and it will be a natural response. Christopher cannot see this because, as He said, he is not seeking to see it. He is wose in his own eyes. If he were looking, God would reveal Himself to Christopher also.
White noise
"God is worthy of all praise, all honor, all glory....it's not totalitarian at all."
That is literally what every dictator demands.
Uhm where uhm do you uhm stand uhhhhhhm I guess my question uhm is howwwwwwww do you uhhhhm get your uhhhhhh weiws.
It was pretty heartbreaking when Christopher passed. He was around a lot of Christians before he went though. Either way, he's a believer now.
That sounds like someone who waits for their opponent to leave the room Before declaring “see there, I won. I won.”
@@JJS1953JJS that sounds like someone who doesn't understand what it means to beleive in Christ
I always say that as well 😂
@@JJS1953JJS it’s not so much as “I won”, but it’s more like Christopher cannot tell God to God’s face that God doesn’t exist. The debate is not just an intellectual exercise, it has real meaning. Those trying to convince people to put their faith in Christ are doing so so they don’t meet Him too late. But we’ll all meet Him regardless of belief system. We care about the atheists and want them to be in heaven with us. But men love darkness rather than light
In his name I shall say this to that statement.
*NEVER*
In all fairness that was before Hitchens was better acquainted with how to defend the claim that God isn’t necessary for morality. He nevertheless brings charm, wit and humor and his many of basic theistic critiques , I’m in alignment.
Without God, how do you know what morality is?
@@garymathis1042 Morality arises from the interplay of human empathy, social dynamics, and shared values, rather than being dictated solely by a divine authority.
For example, we know it is wrong to harm others because we can understand their suffering through empathy and recognize the value of promoting well-being in society.
Heres an analogy. Morality is like a tree growing naturally from the soil of human interactions and relationships, guided by cultural and societal influences, rather than being handed down from the heavens like a commandment.
Syllogism:
Premise 1: Morality is a product of human empathy, social interactions, and shared values.
Premise 2: Divine authority is not the sole source of morality.
Conclusion: Therefore, morality does not depend on God's existence.
@@garymathis1042 also, in addition to the above explanation, Shelly Kagan, a moral philosopher, argues that God is not necessary for morality (in a famous debate with William Lane Craig) because moral principles can be grounded in secular, rational, and humanistic considerations. According to Kagan, morality can be understood through ethical theories such as utilitarianism, deontology, or virtue ethics, which do not require the existence of a divine being to establish moral values and obligations. These theories rely on reason, human experience, and the well-being of conscious beings as the foundation for moral principles and judgments, making God's existence unnecessary in determining what is right or wrong.
They touched on the question of “the deeper story”, or “the cosmic significance of human worth”, which involves the philosophical debate between foundationalism and non-foundationalism.
Foundationalism is a philosophical approach that posits the existence of absolute and objective foundations for knowledge, morality, and cosmic significance. In the context of human worth, a foundationalist perspective would suggest that there is a fundamental and inherent value to human beings, and this value is grounded in some objective and unchanging cosmic principle, such as the existence of a divine being or a transcendent purpose. From this perspective, human worth is an inherent and unchanging aspect of the cosmos.
Non-foundationalism, on the other hand, challenges the idea of absolute and objective foundations for cosmic significance and human worth. It argues that there are no ultimate, unchanging, or universally agreed-upon principles that can serve as the absolute basis for moral or cosmic significance. Instead, non-foundationalists propose that cosmic significance and human worth are contingent and context-dependent, arising from human experiences, perspectives, and societal constructs.
From a non-foundationalist perspective, the value of human beings and the significance of their existence are products of human consciousness, social interactions, and cultural norms. There might not be an inherent cosmic purpose or objective value; instead, human worth is a dynamic and evolving concept that emerges from the complex interplay of human beliefs, emotions, and societal structures.
In summary, foundationalism posits an absolute and objective cosmic significance for human worth, often tied to a divine or transcendent foundation, while non-foundationalism rejects the idea of fixed and universal foundations, emphasizing the contextual and contingent nature of human worth in a complex and ever-changing world.
@@davidmireles9774 Well, that's an easy argument to make after 2000 years of Christian influence on Western Civilization. Wonder if you would still make that argument if you were a Canaanite dedicated to burning your children alive as a sacrifice to Baal in 1000 BC.
@@garymathis1042You mean like how the Jews sacrificed their children? How God commanded Abraham to do so?
Christopher died in 2011. He has now been in an extremely warm place for the last 11 years. I don’t know if his eloquent British accent is going to be any help for him where he is now.
wow,,,, you indoctrinated idiot !!! Very thankful that the religious fools are declining every year as our race evolves
@@woodytheduke
Religion isn’t declining. The fake and weak parts of religion are being filtered out and thrown into the sewage system where you dwell. But as I see you will join Hitchens sooner than you think and burn forever in loneliness.
@@user-ge1uz1jq4f ahhhh you ,must be a Muslim,part of the fake and weak! So you believe Mohammad road a flying winged horse around and also cut the moon in half? You get your 72 virgins and I get a nice sauna with Hitchens,,,looking forward to it!!
If Christopher Hitchens was finally broken of his unrepentant, hardened heart at the last extremity of pain and anguish and begged God for mercy and asked Jesus to forgive him of his wickedness, then he is in Heaven. However, if his hatred of God and unrepentance continued until his very last dying breath, we can't even begin to fathom the unutterable horror and misery he is now experiencing! All his God-hating blasphemous arrogance coming home to roost...and just beginning for his supercilious, unregenerated soul.
@@justin10292000 poor simple justin,,,you really believe that right?That is a very nice "just" god you workshop there,,,,almost as nice as satan!!!
He can't say there is no God. What he seems to be saying however is, I don't believe in God, therefore he does not exist. Also, the end of the world is the beginning of Heaven for the just.
No, that isnt what he seems to be saying. Open your ears dunce.
@@FightXScience-wh6kx OK, genius. What does he seem to be saying? Do tell.
@@philcortens5214 He isn't saying "I don't in God therefore he does not exist." That's moronic. Listen to his words. He is saying "I don't believe in God because I don't have any reason to believe he exists."
@@FightXScience-wh6kx Hey, I don't have any reason to believe in anthropogenic climate change, therefore.... Who made you? Or was your great, great a gazillion times grandfather a rock?
Atheists are moronic. (Hey, that's in the Bible.)
@@philcortens5214 Still struggling to read?
Let me help you there pastor. Progress is defined as a better quality of life (better food, cleaner and easier to get water, better shelters, better medicines, etc.) for more people and fewer people believing in myths without sufficient evidence. It's not just change, it's change for the better through actually measurable changes. We don't need gods for that, we need human solidarity and effort. See, wasn't difficult, was it?
Why do theists take Hirchens' positions to meaningless extremes in desperate attempts to discredit them? Just because we are the product of evolution by natural selection in no way means we think the extinction of the human species is something to look forward to. Why go desperately to such extremes? Do theists think atheists can't enjoy and appreciate art, music, philosophy, literature, humor, friendships, and love? What a completely bizarre reach of a question.
By what standard do you deem ANY of those things you listed as "good" or "desirable"? We are just meaningless accidents on YOUR worldview! Why do YOU care who "thrives" or not, if we are OBJECTIVELY worthless meat puppets on YOUR worldview?
“For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and forfeit his soul?” Mark 8:36.
@@gordonduffett5138
All you have to do is prove we have a soul and that it goes somewhere after we die. If you can't do that, I see no reason to believe any of the nonsense put forth by religious people. That means all religions, which are all based on made up myths.
@@Dr.TJ1 You dont have a choice what to believe,so stop with the show me evidence..You are a programed meat puppet with no free will.smh
Change comes only from within Dougie
Nope, we need an outside mover to change our, your my heart.
Survival of the fittest doesn’t promote love
contemporary science is suggesting random mutation is actually non-random and beneficial. for the organism.
@@revo1974 if it’s non random, that’s design
This is a misunderstanding of 'survival of the fittest'. It isn't a synonym for 'survival of the physically strongest in opposition to peers'. It means 'survival of those suitable for an environment'. Given the latter, it can encompass traits such as co-operation, mutual aid, trust and love in some circumstances.
@@lamalama9717 That’s correct.
@@richbozzi3148 What type of design are you suggesting. It’s possible life just like all other forms of systems of matter are a consequence of the governing rules/forces of nature. You could propose that these rules/forces or natural laws were designed by some intelligence. However, the design proposed by theists (god used magic to make things pop into existence) is certainly not an option.
What I always liked about Hitchens is his dialect/ oratorical skills but while sounding cool doesn’t make him right on his views
Doesn't make him wrong either 👍
@@moldybreaddd no , but it makes his “ wrong” assumptions sound right or at the very least… cool sounding
@@richbozzi3148 which "wrong" assumptions do you assume are wrong?
@@moldybreaddd in a nutshell.. the existence of God, he obviously doesn’t like God because of suffering.. ect but doesn’t lead to his belief of no God. He focuses on the god of Islam a lot but that’s not my God
@@moldybreaddd I hate a cold wind, can’t see it but I feel it as evidence it exists just as creation shows design and God
I think Wilson was the best Christian debater
Hitchens went up against. I like both fellows and I’m quite glad we have guys like both of them leading their respective movements/perspectives. Many of the guys Hitch went up against, from Christian theologians or religous studies professors or preachers/priests, Jewish rabbis or advocates, Muslim Imams, etc. were either slightly disingenuous or buffoonish, but Wilson did as well as and likely better (until the snarky comment about Jesus not believing in him at the end) than anyone else I’ve seen who’s gone up against Hitch and his the popular comrades on his side like Dawkins, Harris, Krauss, Shermer, Dennet, and so on.
J. mO
0 seconds ago
I think Wilson was the best Christian debater
Hitchens went up against. I like both fellows and I’m quite glad we have guys like both of them leading their respective movements/perspectives. Many of the guys Hitch went up against, from Christian theologians or religous studies professors or preachers/priests, Jewish rabbis or advocates, Muslim Imams, etc. were either slightly disingenuous or buffoonish, but Wilson did as well as and likely better (until the snarky comment about Jesus not believing in him at the end) than anyone else I’ve seen who’s gone up against Hitch and his the popular comrades on his side like Dawkins, Harris, Krauss, Shermer, Dennet, and so on. And actually his declaration against public schools was disconcerting too. But he did ok. I’m less impressed having watched more.
I thought so, too, for the first ten minutes of the first part of this debate. Then, Wilson rather quickly escalated into absurdity
His fellow satan worshippers to be precise 😂
Imagine arguing against the idea public school as part of your worldview.
I find it sketchy that they cut most of that part out. Maybe the OP is bias and doesn't want Wilson to look dumb lol? I was interested in what he was gonna say after that lol.
I can imagine it. “Public” (Government) School is one of the worst inventions ever.
The education system is solely from the Christian community including for instance Havard, Princeton, Yale were all Christian institutions, and you can clearly see that the secular community has corrupted all of those institutions including the public schools.
Christians are the ones to start the early childhood education
Once again Hitchens is debating religion not Jesus
Facts, he lumps them all together, but he never realized that 1) there is one true religion (that of Christ), 2) all other belief systems are false religions, and 3) atheism is also a religion (obviously false though)
@@tyc4587 No he doesn't, Hitchens often gunned the Catholic church. What Piffle is this *"...atheism is a religion..."* what utter nonsense.
well since jesus can't seem to come back from the dead,,,,then there is no one to argue with
plus jesus would defiantly lose as well
@@woodytheduke I take that bet now, on Jesus
How strange that Wilson is such an unpleasant man if this performance is anything to go by.
He is extremely calm and pleasant, for those NOT in spiritual warfare with the Truth he is presenting!
What an odd comment. Clearly not based on his conduct/performance in this debate.
Hitch disgreed with your opinion
Common atheism tenet is ,there is no supernatural occurrences… i strongly disagree
Prove one
@@olivia362436 the resurrection of Jesus Christ.., I’ll defer to Gary Habernas, again….. circumstantial evidence is used in court to convict/ free a person when no one was there to be an eyewitness…. then again we have the statement of at least 3 eyewitnesses in the New Testament
Our finite minds cannot comprehend the supernatural, so some throw it aside.. think 200 yrs ago of someone comprehending the intricacies of the cell phone
@@richbozzi3148 No we cannot comprehend the supernatural but putting your faith in it over a one time event that cannot be completely verified is something we should not be accountable for ... Hitchens is right about God intervening after 98,000 yrs. and says "enough of this, let's have a revelation in illiterate bronze age Palestine with a human sacrifice, that ought to fix everything" is a bizarre idea.
@@richbozzi3148 Many people have been sent to prison with bad eyewitness testimony, people were sure what the saw and they were mistaken. You are trusting people who thought Jesus was coming back for them and he didn't. You know this is true according to the gospels, they ALL thought that he was returning in their lifetime. Well, they got that wrong and how much else did they get wrong. Matthew 27:52-53 Do you really believe that people exited their graves and walked around Jerusalem ?
Wilson is just terrible throughout. Childish arguments.
"Childish", eh? By what standard? Your opinion?
Thats your childish opinion not a rebuttal of his arguments
I don’t believe in the Koran, Mormonism or any off shoot of dogmatic belief… I believe in Jesus, the Son of God, of the Bible. Let’s not complicate things… it’s really very simple
Like the wind , I feel God’s presence and actually feel it more on certain days.., just like the wind.. I have my own measurements for both.., the winds change but God doesn’t
Quran*
@@Herandezbrothers yeah, that one too
That's great but keep your belief to yourself.
'I believe in Jesus, the Son of God, of the Bible.' - And how do you decide between them?