Does God Exist? - Debate - Matt Dillahunty vs. Cliffe Knechtle

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 6 дек 2024

Комментарии • 8 тыс.

  • @zakariyarazi8247
    @zakariyarazi8247 5 лет назад +113

    I am an ex-Muslim. It was very hard to leave Islam. Many years of struggle to leave the faith I was born into. However, now I know it is Jesus the Christ who chose me. I am happy for those days of pain. I like to watch debates on God's existence but never debate with anyone. It is useless according to me. Someone who is looking for God will only find Him. And also, if Jesus does not select someone he can't have faith. Many people who only debate about God's existence are not seeking truth. But I like honesty of some Atheists. Matt is one of them. At least he is far far better than a hypocrite who calls himself Christian for convenience but has not denied himself yet and not carrying his cross and following Christ. Cliffe has patience like a tortoise. I love him. May "Abba" bless him and his family. Jesus is God. Jesus is the Christ and He is the King.

    • @yomansprince8486
      @yomansprince8486 Год назад +2

      May Jesus Bless you!❤

    • @powerant1914
      @powerant1914 11 месяцев назад +1

      True Jesus is not God but rather Lord Jesus has a God Who is the only true God and this leads to eternal life

    • @powerant1914
      @powerant1914 11 месяцев назад

      @BreazyAU
      One what? Plz respond

    • @powerant1914
      @powerant1914 11 месяцев назад

      @BreazyAU
      Ok so not one God right? Ok i thought you meant one God... Definitely not one God cause thats not what the verse says

    • @JrSmoov
      @JrSmoov 7 месяцев назад

      amen brother, welcome to the truth

  • @clearascrystal4960
    @clearascrystal4960 2 года назад +395

    As an ex-atheist, what I did was read the gospels and left out whether it all happened or not, and simply came to the conclusion that if Jesus were real, I would want to know Him. Well that is exactly what God did.

    • @onionbelly_
      @onionbelly_ 2 года назад +38

      Personal testimonies of having transcendent and personal experiences with god(s) aren't unique to Christianity. If you want to make the case that *_your_* particular experience is true, then you should provide the actual evidence for the existence of your deity. That would then make your comment unique from every other religious convictions, and it'll no longer be based on a non sequitur and actually have some explanatory value.

    • @clearascrystal4960
      @clearascrystal4960 2 года назад +25

      @@onionbelly_ The problem is, science is limited to material, so what you are asking is not possible at this time anyway. I do remember at age 10 or 11 I considered how one could see and process things material without contact, and wondered what Genius put this all together? There had to be a Creator Genius unexplainable and unseen. However, evolution taught as fact in honors history class took that away from me at age 15. You choose to believe me or anyone else or not, but, I do understand. You have to have your own encounter experience. I'm here to simply say you or anyone else who wanted to can.

    • @joshallenforpresident
      @joshallenforpresident 2 года назад +1

      @@onionbelly_ there’s evidence of the flood. There’s evidence of the parting of the Red Sea. There’s evidence of the crucifixion. Evidence of Mt Sinai. Evidence of the plagues. Evidence of Babylon. Etc etc

    • @nathang2465
      @nathang2465 2 года назад +18

      Had the same experience except I wanted to know the historical evidence as well. For me it was reading through Gospels again and asking God for clarity on Jesus. Isn't God great?

    • @clearascrystal4960
      @clearascrystal4960 2 года назад +8

      @@nathang2465 So Great! It may not seem so many times, but He hears every desire of our hearts. Many blessings.

  • @regigarza
    @regigarza 3 года назад +320

    I used to be agnostic, until one day I started to think what’s the meaning of it all? Work, make money, having a family, kids, death, for what? A limited time. Then I became so scared of life after death and for the first time ever I prayed to God that if he was real he would send someone to guide me towards him because doing it alone was too hard. Months later, I met someone in college from Chi Alpha, and they introduced me to the Bible. I Did my research, read and investigated the chronological timeline, authors, time, and the word of God. As I read through the book of John, my heart was being transformed in a way that I can’t explain.... I was filled with the Holy Spirit and repented of my sins and even though I don’t understand everything; I accept it because Christ died for me.
    He set me free of my sins, and transformed my heart. Thank you God for changing my stubborn, and prideful self.
    I pray for you, that you will seek the truth and find out that Jesus is the way, the truth and the life✨💖
    Take your time, God is so patient and loving.

    • @aram8067
      @aram8067 3 года назад +15

      My goodness this is amazing

    • @TimothyGPTSanders
      @TimothyGPTSanders 3 года назад +12

      Praise the Lord, God bless you sister, stay on His path, He's always with you 🙌🏾

    • @rogerweigel7925
      @rogerweigel7925 3 года назад +6

      What did you discover about the authors of the Gospels?

    • @jesus-is-rad9684
      @jesus-is-rad9684 3 года назад +6

      Keep seeking Him!(:

    • @jackalsgate1146
      @jackalsgate1146 3 года назад +44

      So . . . you became so scared of death, and if there is life after death, that you decided it is better to play it safe and save yourself instead of finding truth itself: wherever, that might lead you.?

  • @dogelife7901
    @dogelife7901 2 года назад +46

    My favorite part is when they have the giving standoff. Love that these guys were able to speak freely and have a moment of jest, despite being completely opposed ideologically and spiritually.

    • @noahcole6856
      @noahcole6856 11 месяцев назад

      @dogelife7901 I really like when debaters who are normally angry at each other start experiencing technical difficulties and complaints about there connection

  • @-NoneOfYourBusiness
    @-NoneOfYourBusiness 10 лет назад +20

    Very good debate format : Short first statement and then straight to q&a from the public and both answers can be compared right on the spot.
    All these debates should adopt a similar format.

  • @UpTheHarbour
    @UpTheHarbour 9 лет назад +26

    the emotional appeals are strong with this one.....not one ounce of evidence towards his wold view...just faith

    • @DiscoverJesus
      @DiscoverJesus Год назад

      You're on a wing and a prayer as an atheist it's a blind cold delusion and it's running out of time

    • @bac0nlifeforever956
      @bac0nlifeforever956 Месяц назад +1

      it’s theology, there barely any need for evidence. however, cliffe did give evidence, he cited a lot of sources, while Matt did not, infact a lot of his claims were “I don’t know”, so please don’t say “there wasn’t an ounce of evidence”
      by the way im not implying that Matt needs to cite his evidence or else it’s not a valid argument, I’m just rebuking your statement

  • @02jail
    @02jail 8 лет назад +15

    all these people critical of Cliff, wouldn't talk like this in public or in any serious forum. typical keyboard warriors that get no respect here or in open, honest discussions.

    • @techsysengineer5135
      @techsysengineer5135 8 лет назад

      I would pay money to speak in front of him. What in the world makes you think ANYONE would be afraid to speak in public. He is on the losing side of this argument. Just because your parents brainwashed you into having false heroes and believing in sky daddies doesnt give any of these morons any credibility.
      Keyboard warriors ? LOL uhh that is a title for people who talk tough. Nobody in here (on the skeptics' side) is talking tough. They are talking from doubt, skepticism, education, research, and the reluctance to not jump to conclusions, and only believe in things with evidence.
      Try reading some harder books, not just 1 easy one that promises you cake at the end.

    • @diybunny8171
      @diybunny8171 8 лет назад +1

      @TechSys If your own parents had given you no moral training, would you be looking for someone to love, or would you have fallen into taking advantage of others? I saw an NDE where the man stood before God asking Him questions. He asked about all the people who have never heard of Jesus. He asked about a man in an isolated African village, for instance. God actually said to Him: "He would know not to steal his neighbour's goat, "for instance", meaning that we all have our consciences, right? Many people who meet the Creator come away with the feeling that we give Him a few laughs, as do our own small children, when we actually will speak to Him. Selfish little fallen brats, we usually treat Him like poochie and ignore or make fun of Him! No wonder when we choose Justice over Love, we get sent to outer darkness or are mocked by demons. But the REAL question is, even if what you said is true, why do you care. By caring, you sort of prove yourself incorrect...

    • @02jail
      @02jail 7 лет назад +1

      Your response was biased, judgmental, presumptive and condescending. Good argument dude!

    • @dontcensormebro3217
      @dontcensormebro3217 6 месяцев назад +1

      Criticism =/= Nastiness. I would be incredibly critical of Cliffe's supernatural nonsense, but I would still be respectful.

    • @apothe6
      @apothe6 5 месяцев назад +2

      An statement, opinion or whatever does not become true or untrue if it can be said to a person's face or in public. It simply is true or not.

  • @RaveFM7
    @RaveFM7 9 лет назад

    Matt has so much patients, because everytime Cliffe gives his religious sermons about how god=logic and the ONLY way to have a mind is if there was a God. My whole family is very religious and nearly all of his voice raging rants are very poor examples of logic. Cliffe seems to get more irate with every passing second. It's almost as if he can't stand someone not thinking like him. I wonder why he agreed to this debate? He is way out of his league with Matt, who was always calm and never yelling at the audience. Why do preachers do that?

  • @morphicsm
    @morphicsm 11 лет назад +50

    I found Cliffe to be disingenuous, consistently misrepresenting both the bible and Matt's position. I was hoping for some deep arguments from the Christian perspective, but instead Cliffe flowed anecdotes and built straw men enough to fill all the fields of England.

    • @phg3646
      @phg3646 3 года назад +10

      "deep arguments from the Christian perspective" Those do not exist.
      Religious people don't have a good proof of their god, that's pricesely why they rely on faith. Those religious public talkers are always dishonest like this one or for the few that are not they have a major flaw in their logic that they can't see because of their indoctrination into religion.

    • @phg3646
      @phg3646 3 года назад +2

      @@joshlete Wow are you really going to keep insulting me like this, it's really not nice and not deserved. What the fuck is wrong with you?
      Let's start with the first thing that CK said after his introduction with a useless example: "Love shows us that there is more to reality than matter and energy. And the only way there could be more to reality is if there is some kind of god... blablabla"
      Do you realise the amount of bullshit in this opening he chose? You get two sentences from this apologist, but they are simply two dumb assertions without any proof.
      As to why he gives us no proof for what he says here? Looks to me like he doesn't have any proof and try to find justifications. If he had a proof of that, he would have given it. He starts from the conclusion and then looks for unrelated things like "love" that could be vaguely interpreted to justify his conclusion. He doesn't build up arguments to reach a conclusion, he already has it.
      So yes, I do say those words he said here are dumb bullshit, I suppose you won't agree, so please give me your enlightened opinion on how this is a rational way of thinking what he said there.
      Do I really need to go further in this debate?
      Also, are you really calling me "stuck in a rut" because I have a higher quality level of requirements than you? I won't accept the existence of any god until there is a rational proof that a god exist. Faith is just wishful thinking, I need some valid evidence before reaching a conclusion and anyone who doesn't follow this method of thinking either doesn't care about the truth of what they believe in, or they are too dumb to understand why they are believing in things that they don't have a good reason to believe in.

    • @phg3646
      @phg3646 3 года назад +1

      ​@@joshlete Yes I admit that was not a true logical or, so I'll rephrase what I meant to avoid the fallacy. But I disagree on the rest of your paragraph. If you care about the truth of what you believe in, you cannot believe in something without an satisfying evidence.
      I am calling dumb the people who don't care about the truth of what they believe in. Don't you agree that it is justified?
      I am also calling out those who have a very low standard of evidence. Because indeed it is true that people have different standards for what a satisfying evidence is.
      However for something as important as an all powerful invisible magical deity existing, I am convinced that people should require evidence of the highest quality before being convinced. Nothing supernatural has ever been observed. So to make an extraordinary claim like your christian god, I need pretty much extraordinary proof to know.
      And yet, the proofs we get are barely passable at best. I have heard so many times christians/muslims/jews say that they believe their god is real because it is written in their holy book... Most religious people have a bad understanding of why they believe in god. Don't say that I do not understand them. I simply do not agree at all with their reasoning, or rather sometimes lack of it...
      What's wrong with calling people dumb because of what they believe in? Beliefs can be dangerous, we should not be scared of challenging people on their beliefs, whether religious or not. If you told me you believe the Earth is flat or that you believe in a young 6000 years old Earth I'd call you stupid.... Wouldn't I be justified?
      Yes, as much as possible I use evidence to guide myself to truth or to take an action. I'll always look left and right before crossing a road, etc. That's enough evidence to know if it is safe. I'm saying that for a claim as crazy as religion, you need even better evidence that normal. I'm not seing any evidence. And miracles... come on please you should know they are not real. The ones documented are severely lacking in evidence and swimming in a sea of fabricated false miracles. And even if they were real, why would they point to the christian god? Muslims for exemple also believe in miracles...
      Also... why would your god bother to heal a single person? Was it because he was bored after killing 15 thousands innocent babies that day? If your god is real he'd be the worst mass killer in the world. And maybe even in fiction... pick whatever dark lord from a book you want and I'm pretty sure your god supposedly killed more people than him according to the bible...
      "do you think they are dumb to assume that there was a God involved? Or perhaps it's much wiser to believe that we all came into existence from... nothing"
      Facepalm... The classic we come from nothing bullshit. I'll remind you that the bible say even more stupid things about your creation idea: the universe was created in 7 days, and he created plants before creating light ahah Ah also the first man was created from clay... lol
      By the way here that's the same fallacy you accused me of. A nice false logical dichotomy. There are other possibilities that a god creating the universe or nothing. Adding god to the mystery of the universe would only raise more questions. You don't have any proof that a deity was there to create the universe, adding it just adds a supernatural complexity needlessly. I don't know if there was a god, but what you said is clearly not a good argument for it.
      "concluding that God doesn't exist sounds far more foolish than the alternative"
      When did I say that your god doesn't exist? You just proved that you didn't understand my main point. We don't have any satisfying evidence for the christian god, we don't have it either for any other god. That's why I am an atheist, I do not believe in any god. That does not mean I think there is no god. That means I don't know if there is a god, but I do not believe in any god because the evidence I have found is severely lacking so I simply refuse to accept the theistic claim.
      You can't prove that there is no god at all. Can you prove that ghosts don't exist ? That's the problem with the supernatural, particularly when it's invisible and does not interact with us... You can't disprove those things, and yet we are no closer to being justified in believing they exist.
      The burden of proof is on theists. That's why I am waiting for evidence, and that's why I am pissed of at apologists who appeal to emotions and only do preaching instead of debating and giving arguments and evidences. Same reason I do not respect much religious people who can't justify why they believe in their god.
      By the way.... Do you believe that Allah is real and that the Koran was of divine inspiration too? How about Krishna, are The Vedas the word of god too? There has been so many religions, the arguments people make to justify are the same that the arguments people of another religion make to justify their god. Those people generally can point out the flaws in that other person reasoning, but they can't find it on themself even though the arguments are often pretty much the same.

    • @PRPWR
      @PRPWR Год назад +2

      ​@@phg3646What arguments were strawmen? And why would you think that?

    • @EricBrowning-k7q
      @EricBrowning-k7q Год назад

      ​@@PRPWR zero is mentally ill, pay no attention to that

  • @judithsanders9801
    @judithsanders9801 9 лет назад +56

    Children can't understand the concept of a god until they're at least 3 or 4. And yet, they are born with the capacity to love. Animals never know anything about god, and yet they love.

    • @JamesRichardWiley
      @JamesRichardWiley 3 года назад

      I never believed in gods. God's are fictional characters that appear in human literature.

    • @captainrex2298
      @captainrex2298 2 года назад +14

      You can brainwash anyone to do anything. A baby born in a loving family will understand love. A child growing up in a violent family will be a violent child. Abuse happens behind closed doors. Same with dogs and cats. Freedom of will makes us do good or evil acts. God is with you. I hope you can pray and find God.

    • @bartonb8982
      @bartonb8982 9 месяцев назад

      Its cause it takes atleast a few years of brainwashing.

    • @MaximilianRisteski
      @MaximilianRisteski 9 месяцев назад +4

      It is not the fact that love proves god. But Love proves that you do have a free will, and since Free Will is something immaterial, it must’ve been created by something immaterial. Hope this helped 😊 (btw we are talking about the Love that Cliffe is talking about not the Bio-Chemical reaction)

    • @bartonb8982
      @bartonb8982 9 месяцев назад +3

      @@MaximilianRisteski cliff loves his own voice

  • @WhyteRook2323
    @WhyteRook2323 Год назад +6

    Cliffe is quite the preacher but not very good at providing evidence for his beliefs other than “I believe it so it must be true”.

  • @amberjarratt6072
    @amberjarratt6072 9 лет назад +38

    Actual debate content begins at 4:43.

  • @mygiftmatters
    @mygiftmatters 2 года назад +131

    Ex-atheist here, hardcore, hated God and Christians and then Jesus found me through His Holy Spirit. Amen

    • @danielkanu8554
      @danielkanu8554 Год назад +49

      Claiming to have “hated God” is acknowledging and accepting that god exist. By that statement, you were not actually an atheist.

    • @playzfahdayz
      @playzfahdayz Год назад +8

      @@danielkanu8554 Wrong. He started out by claiming God _does not_ exist, and then believing he _does exist_ and hating him. *Valid claim.*

    • @Grandmaster_Dragonborn
      @Grandmaster_Dragonborn Год назад +1

      @@danielkanu8554 And yet, when I say to a former Christian that they were not actually a Christian, I'm trounced upon with claims of bigotry..?
      Of course, the comment itself is nonsense.

    • @JaniceinOR
      @JaniceinOR Год назад +7

      @@playzfahdayz
      What mygiftmatters wrote is easily interpreted as they hated God while they were an atheist, which I agree with danieldanu8554 seems nonsensical, since one would not hate something if they did not think it existed.
      Perhaps mygiftmatters meant that they hated God when they were not an atheist, but they did not clearly communicate that.

    • @JaniceinOR
      @JaniceinOR Год назад +6

      @@Grandmaster_Dragonborn
      If someone said to me that they used to be a Christian, and that their beliefs in that time were that Jesus Christ never existed, I would point out that that belief is counter to any sensible definition of Christian I can imagine.
      Similarly, if someone says they were an atheist and hated God at the same time, that makes me wonder whether they believed the whole time that God existed, which is counter to any sensible definition of atheist.
      Further, many Christian apologists claim they used to be atheist, and use that as part of their strategy of trying to convince others to become Christian. Some of them similarly claim to have hated God when they were atheist (which, again, makes no sense).
      Because of this history, if someone else similarly claims to have been a God-hating atheist, I am wary that they are just claiming to have been an atheist in an effort to make their argument more persuasive.

  • @TomLeedsTheAtheist
    @TomLeedsTheAtheist 10 лет назад +34

    15:20 Is Cliffe not aware that most animals can also love? It is hardly a uniquely human trait. Is he so blinded by his creation myth fantasy reality that he is unaware that HE to is an animal? Religion may not make you stupid but it certainly helps make you clueless, or at least to appear so.

    • @64imma
      @64imma 10 лет назад +4

      Quote from him is "you are not an animal. You are a human being".

    • @64imma
      @64imma 10 лет назад +1

      Jos van Weesel I agree with you. When he said that, I facepalmed myself.

    • @noahm44
      @noahm44 3 года назад +2

      @Phelan If love and all these things are mechanical, then love can mean anything. Not only that, it means things like murder can show to just be a byproduct of our evolution. Love in its totality cannot be described by science, unless you can show me sources.

    • @noahm44
      @noahm44 3 года назад +2

      Animals can have love? Biblical love? Source please!

    • @TomLeedsTheAtheist
      @TomLeedsTheAtheist 3 года назад

      @@noahm44 Biblical love? What the F is that

  • @johnnymanhands
    @johnnymanhands 9 лет назад +119

    Respect to Cliffe for keeping comments open.

    • @mmazz414
      @mmazz414 3 года назад +7

      Seriously

    • @mygiftmatters
      @mygiftmatters 2 года назад +1

      @@darkeen42 Name one.

    • @mygiftmatters
      @mygiftmatters 2 года назад +2

      @@darkeen42 According to you. Bravo. Now tell me who Jesus was, and where we can learn about the historical Jesus, because I would Love to ascertain your claims about Jesus without manuscripts to back them up. Please, go on and explain who Jesus was, and where we can find this well preserved historical account of the Jesus of Nazareth that you are submitting, without sourcing the Gospel records that you reject. Please enlighten us all with your historical evidence of Jesus; without sourcing the first and second century manuscripts like Rylands Library Papyrus P52 which is John dated ~95 AD.

    • @mygiftmatters
      @mygiftmatters 2 года назад +1

      @@darkeen42 But the Rylands Library Papyrus P52 which is John dated ~95 AD is rejected by you as accurate history, so please do not source this manuscript according to your world-view that rejects it as True. Instead I am asking you to provide evidence for your bold submission regarding who Jesus was, and provide your historical evidence of who Jesus was without sourcing the first and second century manuscripts like Rylands P52. I'm ascertaining your historical claim that you made on Jesus, and I am requesting your historical evidence for Jesus without sourcing the first and second century NT manuscripts.

    • @mygiftmatters
      @mygiftmatters 2 года назад +1

      @@darkeen42 Muhammad was indeed a historical space-time person who really lived and really died and we have historical evidence to verify Muhammad and who Muhammad was. But now we are talking about Jesus and who Jesus was, and I promise I am not throwing you curve-ball here; in that I am merely requesting your historical evidence of the Jesus you have submitted without sourcing any of the NT manuscripts as your historical evidence, like Rylands Library Papyrus P52.

  • @Wezlb8
    @Wezlb8 8 лет назад +20

    I find it humorous how so many atheist make the statement that "I'm not saying God doesn't exist" JUST so they can try to avoid any kind of questioning about what they believe. Then spend their time attacking others who make the claim that they believe in God.
    You might have fun attacking people who believe in God but keep in mind those people have the courage to stand for what they believe in while you hide behind semantics.
    (Just a heads up don't bother trying to engage me in a debate. I wont reply to any messages)

    • @WhatsTheTakeaway
      @WhatsTheTakeaway 6 лет назад +1

      Wezlb8 Yeah its circular reasoning and also why some theists wont debate this Matt guy. His wordplay is good, but he has a habit of declaring that "people are putting words in his mouth" when they catch him circling around in his arguments. Then he hangs up on them. Sad!

    • @tomcooper6108
      @tomcooper6108 5 лет назад +1

      So do you accept everything's existence on someone's word or do you want evidence?
      Why would I not want evidence?
      Bigfoot, aliens.....I guess you take those on FAITH.

    • @amandamcgovern5744
      @amandamcgovern5744 4 года назад

      Are you really so daft that you missed the irony of refusing to stand by your position?
      I really try not to believe that theists are dumb but boy do they make it hard...

    • @westloves
      @westloves 3 года назад +1

      Even Matt’s analogies say nothing at all. Why would someone even debate that is like this?

    • @jasonleslie4349
      @jasonleslie4349 11 месяцев назад +1

      Sorry I'm abit late to the party but I had to comment
      What's wrong with people? Even being a Christian I can see how illogical cliff is! The strength he has is his orating abilities which deserves an A+ no doubt about it. But it looks like he appeals to peoples emotions whereas Matt seems to make sense with facts I duno rethinking my faith

  • @WTFDUDEEEEE
    @WTFDUDEEEEE 10 лет назад +12

    Hey Cliffe, if you raise your voice every time you try to assert and assume stuff, it doesn't make it truth.
    Matt Dillahunty won by a mile. No chance.

  • @dallassmith8854
    @dallassmith8854 6 лет назад +7

    views aside, a debate on religion where people don't talk over each other... respect

  • @atheistrex4218
    @atheistrex4218 9 лет назад +23

    This isn't really a debate. Cliff is just preaching.

  • @NOWABOmusic
    @NOWABOmusic 2 года назад

    This is hard to listen to, because Cliffe tends to talk too long and switch subjects too often, and the other guy just keeps saying things that are incorrect. Lol

  • @kossmikham
    @kossmikham 10 лет назад +45

    Knechtle is a stereotypical caricature of every apologist out there. His arguments hold not one iota of value in logical reasoning. If I were a theist while still possessing the ability to reason, I would be cringing at every word this guy spewed out in this debate.

    • @nick8945
      @nick8945 5 лет назад +13

      Ironically, laws of logic aren't even possible under atheism, so your appeal to a logic and reason couldn't be made if atheism were true.

    • @rrock2025
      @rrock2025 4 года назад +3

      Logic doesn't need a god.

    • @nick8945
      @nick8945 4 года назад +10

      @@rrock2025 ironically you used reason to come to that (false) conclusion, and since laws of logic are eternal, abstracted and metaphysical entities, yes they require the mind of God to exist.

    • @KC-py5vq
      @KC-py5vq 4 года назад

      Nick wow! So many claims yet no evidence, what an arrogant idiot you are

    • @KC-py5vq
      @KC-py5vq 4 года назад +1

      Nick the irony in saying logic isn’t possible if you’re an atheist yet atheist are literally the only ones that use logic.

  • @bronzetv8534
    @bronzetv8534 8 месяцев назад +5

    God bless you all and I pray that anyone that doesn't believe, finds their way to Jesus!

    • @crasssh00
      @crasssh00 7 месяцев назад +4

      Odin bless you and I pray you repent to him before it's too late for you.

    • @duncanbryson1167
      @duncanbryson1167 7 месяцев назад +1

      ​@@crasssh00
      I'll stick with The Flying Spaghetti Monster, parmesan be upon Him 🙏 Ramen 😂

    • @xnoreq
      @xnoreq Месяц назад

      If you pray for me then I will think for you!

  • @shanebakke8172
    @shanebakke8172 10 лет назад +30

    45 minutes in... is Cliffe actually going to make real points... or just preach? EVERYTHING he is saying is just a sermon with fluffy thoughts and wishful thinking. This guy doesn't actually know how to debate.... kind of sad really. At least Matt is addressing the points very clearly and not with tales of yore, and excepts from the bible that are subject to interpretation.
    Cliffe pretty much proves my point in his response to life after death... wishful thinking. He is clearly being intellectually dishonest. Appeals to claims with no proof and asserting that it is true. Matt already rebutted that with the alien analogy. You have thousands of people alive today that "claim" aliens, why shouldn't I believe them, but believe a 2000 year old account in a book that has been translated and rewritten many times.

    • @失恋した男
      @失恋した男 4 года назад

      everything is based upon Belief

    • @walterdaems57
      @walterdaems57 3 года назад +1

      Don’t be so harsh on him, he’s used to bully students on universities and even they give him some hard times

    • @angru_arches
      @angru_arches 2 года назад +1

      Matt, an atheist, kept making appeals to objective morality?!?!! His worldview is not privy to make such appeals....you have none.
      Cliffe kept emphasizing that the existence of an intricately designed universe and its intelligibility point to an intelligent origin,, as all of humanity has inferred in our history. They used their reason to conclude that...even your great prophet Dawkins said it seems designed, but the lack of reason to see that it logically follows that something that seems designed might have a designer, but nope! The evidence that has sufficed for all other humans, atheists are too dense or disingenuous to admit.
      Science and reason, ok. Science: never has anyone observed one species turn into another, Evolutionists make that inference(faith by what they consider fossil evidence)...reason: never have we observed something coming from nothing, life from non-life...so the universe is something, it did not come from nothing...life did not come from a rock and primordial soup...that's reason, which the lot of you seem to lack. MORALITY: You have no right if you claim no God. And if you think you do go ahead and try to make the case for it.

    • @angru_arches
      @angru_arches 2 года назад

      @@walterdaems57 you call the dialogues he has with students bullying?
      Why don't you rebut his points instead of this soft soap you try to comfort yourself with....you like Matt, all you do is refuse all evidence that confront you and when pressed on an issue you fall on that cheap cop out of, like Hitchens said, "our beliefs are not beliefs" type of rationale,, as if you don't have a worldview.....you do, just no good arguments, zero evidence, and insults,,
      Atheists comments are the most ad hominem in nature. Can't argue reason so you go after the person. Please. Grow some balls and be honest with yourself, you want atheism to be true coz the existence of God and the chance that you'll be morally accountable is highly inconvenient, and you wanna live your life how you want. You wanna be God.

  • @ladillalegos
    @ladillalegos 3 года назад +12

    That was definitely not a debate, that was a Q&A

  • @legionmantis
    @legionmantis 11 лет назад +60

    The look on Matt's face while Cliffe is talking is priceless!

    • @nimaside
      @nimaside Год назад

      I know. Matt is like "Why am I even debating this brainwashed numbskull?".

  • @PracticalFaith
    @PracticalFaith 5 лет назад +12

    Just featured Cliffe in my latest video listing my top 7 RUclips street preachers. Thanks for your ministry!

    • @bradzimmerman3171
      @bradzimmerman3171 5 лет назад +1

      Practical ? Faith are you collecting a group of delusionists cause Cliffe falls into that catagory ,no thinking there

    • @dattebayosigma90744
      @dattebayosigma90744 8 месяцев назад

      ​@@bradzimmerman3171you're delusional if you think the universe came from nothing and that life also came from nonlife

    • @Slammerworm1
      @Slammerworm1 7 месяцев назад

      @@dattebayosigma90744 I agree. I'm an atheist and neither myself nor any atheist I have ever met or corresponded with thinks this. However, many Christians have no problem with the concept, since according to them, God 'spoke everything into existence' from absolutely nothing.

    • @zy353
      @zy353 Месяц назад

      @@dattebayosigma90744 is your god life, or is alive? If so, based on your delusional argument, where did it came from?

    • @kingis_dingis8103
      @kingis_dingis8103 27 дней назад

      @@Slammerworm1where did everything come from, according to your worldview?

  • @GeneralZod99
    @GeneralZod99 11 лет назад +15

    Something that Cliffe said that bothered me very much, something that was highly suspect. He said he grew up in New England (as did I). As a matter of fact, he lives 4 towns over from me. He said that at his school that he and 1 other were the only believers in Christ. Now, I will go out on a limb and say that is a lie because just 4 towns over I experienced the exact opposite.

    • @OLDSKOOLNYC1
      @OLDSKOOLNYC1 11 лет назад +9

      Exactly, i live in NYC, work in CT, and travel alot in New England, where some of the largest Dioceses exist. Not to mention huge populations of Irish Catholics, Roman Catholics, and other religious denominations. It was a flat out lie!

    • @tangerinetangerine4400
      @tangerinetangerine4400 3 года назад

      It fits better with his plot of misunderstood, self-sacrificing and brave christians. It's hard to prove in a society where christianity is the religion of the majority.

  • @BreadBaker33
    @BreadBaker33 2 года назад +7

    All of you that just praised Matt have too much blind faith in him lol
    Cliffe totally killed this debate solely on Matt claiming that there were no evidence coming from Cliffe while he just blabbered on with no evidence either!

    • @littlesoul8282
      @littlesoul8282 2 года назад +1

      What does he need evidence for? He didn't make a claim!

  • @scottmutley2627
    @scottmutley2627 11 лет назад +61

    I have been a long time subscriber of this channel. The comments are usually quite civil except for when cliffe debates matt, then some of the people who follow matt get very bitter in the comments. I find it strange how some of the atheists in the comments claim to be morally superior, yet mock at the same time.

    • @carncats07
      @carncats07 3 года назад +3

      We’re not morally superior, just intellectually superior.

    • @hvrlxm_3348
      @hvrlxm_3348 3 года назад +15

      @@carncats07 your atheistic position makes you look like foolish. As soon as the atheistic position gets pushed it fails.

    • @zacharyberridge7239
      @zacharyberridge7239 2 года назад +1

      @@hvrlxm_3348 no, it really doesn't.

    • @lifethroughromans8295
      @lifethroughromans8295 2 года назад +6

      @@zacharyberridge7239 - Yes, it does. The moment you get bitter just from arguments, you fail.

    • @zacharyberridge7239
      @zacharyberridge7239 2 года назад

      @@lifethroughromans8295 who said I'm bitter because of arguments? Way to assume, bud

  • @DutchLiam84
    @DutchLiam84 11 лет назад +7

    Cliffe, your atheist friends live for money? Really? You sure you're not just making that up? It might be different for other places on earth but I don't know a single atheist, and I know dozens, that would ever say they live for money. Practically all of them say that they live to make the world a better place compared to when they were born and they hope this brings joy and happiness to themselves, their offspring and their fellow human beings. I think you are making this up to make us look bad.

  • @narco73
    @narco73 11 лет назад +5

    Why do christians always say things like "it is objectively wrong to hurt children for fun"
    I don't get it. Haven't they read Psalm 137:9?
    "Happy is the one who seizes your infants
    and dashes them against the rocks."

    • @narco73
      @narco73 11 лет назад +3

      Well it says "Happy is the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks"
      And I interpret that as meaning "Happy is the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks"
      The implication being that according to the bible, enjoying killing children is at least sometimes right, which means that it can't be objectively wrong.

    • @narco73
      @narco73 11 лет назад +3

      Jesus said " But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart."
      So fantasizing about sinning is the same as doing it.
      The "psalmist' as you call it is traditionally thought of as being Jeremiah. The words Jeremiah used were god's own, as said in Jeremiah 1 “The lord… …said to me: I have put my words in your mouth. See, today I appoint you over nations and kingdoms to uproot and tear down, to destroy and overthrow, to build and to plant.”
      So this verse about being happy when killing children is condoned by god.
      It is not the only place in the bible where god condones the killing of children, often as a part of a genocide he orders. I only chose the verse I did, because it used the word "happy", I could have chosen from many more.
      You need to read your bible more.

    • @narco73
      @narco73 11 лет назад +2

      You say that these culture's were vile, were the children vile too? The bible says nothing about sending them to heaven. What about the first born of Egypt, are Egyptians vile too, or was it just the oldest children of that generation that happened to be vile?
      2nd Timothy 3 16:
      "All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful to teach us what is true and to make us realize what is wrong in our lives. It corrects us when we are wrong and teaches us to do what is right."
      So the verse saying "Happy is the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks" was "inspired by god" and "make us realize what is wrong in our lives. It corrects us when we are wrong and teaches us to do what is right.". I can't remember the verse were it is recanted, nor the verse that explains that god didn't agree with it. In fact, when reading it in context with the rest of the books of the old testament, it doesn't seem out of line with gods personality at all.
      I'm sure you are a good person, your comments here show that you are more moral than your god. You would be an even better person if you didn't let your morality be corrupted by ancient superstitions. I hope you do read the bible objectively.

    • @narco73
      @narco73 11 лет назад

      You do seem relatively friendly (abuse comes from both sides). I also realize you don't have all the answers (neither do I), and I don't expect to change your mind on an internet forum.
      I honestly hope you consider the bible objectively. It is a rare christian that does, and they often walk away non believers.
      I maintain that you would be at least as good, and probably a better person if you didn't believe. There is nothing moral that you couldn't do as a non believer that you do do now. On the other hand, as a non believer you wouldn't feel the need to justify genocide and child killing.
      Don't be scared to doubt. There is no bogey man on the other side of the door.

    • @narco73
      @narco73 11 лет назад

      ***** Surely if god sent these kids to heaven, that would make him worse? Think about it:
      If god has the ability to make a pre-emptive strike and kill children, therefore ushering them straight into heaven, when they would have otherwise (as you put it) grown up to become heathens and condemned, then why does he only do it for THOSE children?
      That would mean that billions upon billions of people that are going to go to hell could had been saved by god via this method, but he chose not to.

  • @humbertojimmy
    @humbertojimmy 9 лет назад

    What really puzzles me is how can Matt say he's a humanist and right after that say he's also a feminist. A humanist is someone already concerned with the rights of ALL human beings, no matter the gender or any other characteristic about them. So, is he saying "i care about all humans, but especially about women"? Because, in case he has been living under a rock, on this present day and age women no longer have to fight for equal rights (at least in the Western world. Perhaps in Arabian countries it still makes sense to be a feminist) so, what happens when someone is fighting for a cause that requires no fight? A lot of crying for no reason and insults to people who have done no wrong! And that's exactly what modern day feminists are doing (besides embarrass themselves). I'm amazed at the fact that Matt is one also.
    Now, as for mister Cliffe's rant (at 39:35), he managed to put a bullet on his own foot by saying "we were all created in the image of God, and i hate racism because it's wrong". Isn't his mistake here quite obvious? If he belives we humans were ALL created to match God's own features, but he also aknowledges that we are all different looking (hence racism exists)... then WICH RACE better represents God's image??? We have to pick one! Is God white, yellow, black, asian looking, or what? For a long time, white europeans used exactly that idea to practice slavery, based on the "fact" that God had to look like them (since they were their chosen people and the others were inferior). Can't Cliffe realize the problem with that bullshit? That line of reasoning is exactly what further separates human races apart and leads to racism (that he claims to hate), by focusing on "image", on the features of a people who wishes to look like God Himself and uses those very differences to claim superiority over the others that don't look the same. It's not just bullshit, it's DANGEROUS bullshit!
    Besides, all you have to do to see what mister Cliffe really knows about anything he's talking about, is just to check the video at 1:17:28 and you'll get "Science claims that the best model for the beginning of Universe is Evolution"... Do i even have to comment?

    • @MrMamfbr
      @MrMamfbr 9 лет назад +1

      +Jimmy David it is just labels, they may not be defined in the same way for everyone. he may have definitions of feminism and humanism that do not contradict each other. you should focus more on his ideas instead of his labels.

    • @javiersmith8618
      @javiersmith8618 8 лет назад

      +Jimmy David So gender wage inequality, attacks on women's healthcare, etc. those are all over? :)

  • @ChipFox
    @ChipFox 10 лет назад +16

    Cliff uses so many tired old arguments from Christian apologetics that have already been shelved while ignoring everything Matt says... so much #Facepalm

  • @Exceltrainingvideos
    @Exceltrainingvideos 11 лет назад +12

    A fascinating debate! I think that God is a concept to help us humans live within certain boundaries and avoid becoming monsters. Krishna, Buddha, Christ and Mohammad were all great human beings and wanted to give our lives a certain direction according to their ideas and concepts prevalent in their times. Unfortunately in the name of God humanity has done a lot of wrong things - just to prove my God is better than yours. The situation has become alarming today. Muslims and Christians are out o destroy the world - each religious community assuming that they have been wrongly hurt by the other. Based on just this fact and that science has provided many solutions for the benefit of human-kind, I tend to agree with Matt. Let's keep our God love or Christ love private. Let's be secular. Let our laws be secular. Let's love each other not because we are Muslims or Christians or Hindus but because love makes a lot of sense - economically or otherwise.

    • @Tezwah
      @Tezwah 11 лет назад +5

      ***** the only people that believe we came from nothing are people like you. There are not 2500 prophecies that is simply a lie, and it is also a lie that anything like that has come true, a prophecy is something that can be interpreted at the time, not something you need to look back on later to confirm. Furthermore you argument that people were not there to observe something clearly applies to your belief in the bible.
      Homosexuals were created by your so called god, it is a natural thing, it is evident in animals, if you disagree please let me know the moment you chose to be a heterosexual.
      Abortion has no relevance to evolution, before I thought you were stupid but that statement proves you are either a troll or under the age of 12.
      There are many good people in the world that do not need god for anything, your blanket, wild and false assertions are not backed by evidence at all.
      The bible is easily proven to be false because of the huge falsehoods in it.
      We know evolution is true so that shows the bible got the origin of man wrong, we know the earth is close to 4.5 billion years old so that shows the timeline is wrong in the bible, we know there has been no global flood for at least 40 000 years which proves the flood story wrong, we know the ark story is ludicrous anyway and we know how the earth was formed.
      All these things the bible got wrong and quite frankly if it was inspired by god you'd think he would get them right.
      Educate yourself from unbiased non creationist sources or stay our of adult conversations

    • @Exceltrainingvideos
      @Exceltrainingvideos 11 лет назад +1

      I think you didn't even read my comment accurately! You sound so frustrated.

    • @Exceltrainingvideos
      @Exceltrainingvideos 11 лет назад

      Of course, you know what you're talking about!

    • @rain3743
      @rain3743 3 года назад +1

      What do you mean? the worst monsters on the planet, do stuff In the name of their God all the time.

    • @dogelife7901
      @dogelife7901 2 года назад

      What do you mean the worst monsters on earth do things for no reason at all simply because they want to.

  • @gregorypdearth
    @gregorypdearth 11 лет назад +6

    2:06 Yeah, they are "unique perspectives" but the most important event of that religion, the resurrection, is not even remotely consistent across the 4 gospels. The details of who was there, who saw what, how many angels (or if any angels were present), zombie jews or no zombie jews... the BIG news stories aroind this cemtral belief vary widely to the point of absurdity. And NOBODY saw the resurrection event itself! They just discovered an empty tomb. Of course WHO discovered the empty tomb is ALSO not in agreement between the 4 books, and those who "saw" zombie jesus didnt even recognize him. Consistency? Hardly. But of course few Christians have read and compared all four accounts. And it is all beside the point. Written stories (especially ones written decades after the event as in all of the gospels) are not evidence of the true nature of actual events.

    • @RePlaylist1
      @RePlaylist1 11 лет назад +1

      I'm with you on the logistics. Who could hear mumbles from a broken battered face hoisted high on a cross?..the garden where jesus prays alone - how is there a transcript? or of his temptation by satan? Thomas is like who are you and the voice, nothing clicks? So this guy has stigmata or something and Thomas is playing about in a man's wounds, yet believers think that makes the crap more credible?

    • @fshs9028
      @fshs9028 3 года назад

      and how superior and blessed a man could have been if he was allowed to see the resurrecting body of Christ! When Jesus himself rose, Peter saw his bare hands with the marks of crucifiction.

  • @MrDorbel
    @MrDorbel 9 лет назад +4

    "My atheist friends". Hard to imagine an atheist putting up with Cliff foe more than four minutes. High on my list of men not to be stuck in a lift with.

    • @derekardito2032
      @derekardito2032 8 месяцев назад

      Lying is a core Christian tenet, Cliffe is in all probability lying when he says he has atheist friends, he may have acquaintances that are atheist , but atheist never, no atheist could befriends with a biased bigot like Knectle that can't stand any one having a different view to his, he demonstrated theirs in another debate with Matt Dillahunty were he lost himself big time and constantly shouted and ranted at Dillahunty to shut up.

  • @mathunt1130
    @mathunt1130 11 лет назад +50

    Has this guy got anything else apart from an argument from emotion?

    • @havard94
      @havard94 3 года назад +1

      How is he using emotion?

    • @carlosbecerril3317
      @carlosbecerril3317 3 года назад +2

      @@havard94 cliffe is basically going "if god doesnt exist then good and evil is subjective, and we dont want that. If there is no god then life is meaningless and we dont want meaningless lives."

    • @havard94
      @havard94 3 года назад

      @@carlosbecerril3317 call it God or intelligent design it shows there has to be a superior being than us. Otherwise your the person that defines good and evil, which if you believe that then how can you say who’s right and who’s wrong and yes your life would be meaningless in the big picture if there is no superior being or intelligent design. These are evidence that there has to be some superior being than us. He’s trying to emphasise nobody would can live them out truly!

    • @havard94
      @havard94 3 года назад

      @@carlosbecerril3317 Plus you can say that without being emotional

    • @carlosbecerril3317
      @carlosbecerril3317 3 года назад +1

      @@havard94 no, you are literally making a leap in logic. The ONLY way you can say any of this is with an appeal to emotion: "if god foes not exist then life is ultimately meaningless." Is fine, but reason cliffe is giving for why its wrong is because we dont want a meaningless life, that's an appeal to emotion. What we want is irrelevant to whether or not its true.

  • @drstrangelove09
    @drstrangelove09 11 лет назад +20

    Does Cliffe not know the counterarguments? I know that he does because I've seen him in other debates where the flaws in his arguments were pointed out. So, he chooses to ignore those valid counterarguments, which is disingenuous.

  • @user-zp9br7jk9k
    @user-zp9br7jk9k 10 лет назад +37

    knechtle is preaching. not debating.

    • @friedit7862
      @friedit7862 4 года назад +7

      you need to activate multi tasking mode there man. just because he sounds like he is preaching doesn't mean he isn't answering the question.

    • @XiagraBalls
      @XiagraBalls 4 года назад +2

      @@friedit7862 I listened carefully. I don't think he answered any questions adequately. It just assertions all the way down.

    • @jamseshess92
      @jamseshess92 4 года назад +1

      Hes preaching truth 👏

  • @saristaa1
    @saristaa1 9 лет назад +7

    My argument against Cliffe Knechtle point at 1:01:45 King James Bible, "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create EVIL: I the LORD do all these things."

    • @noahm44
      @noahm44 3 года назад

      God is good.

    • @bernierasmusson9257
      @bernierasmusson9257 3 года назад +2

      @@noahm44 If you had actually read the bible, you wouldn't think god is good.

    • @noahm44
      @noahm44 3 года назад

      @@bernierasmusson9257 Oh yeah? What part is that?

    • @bernierasmusson9257
      @bernierasmusson9257 3 года назад +2

      @@noahm44 Well, for starters, the part where he murders everyone on earth but eight people.

    • @noahm44
      @noahm44 3 года назад

      @@bernierasmusson9257 Alright. Well God does take the life that He gave us. But murder is unjustified killing. You'll have to appeal to a standard higher than God to make that claim.
      Death is a change in location of the soul. There's nothing wrong with death. God takes everyone's life. The human mortality rate is 100% so I don't know why you call it murder when God floods the earth but you won't call it murder when we die by "natural" causes/old age. You need to be consistent.

  • @jjones9452
    @jjones9452 10 лет назад +20

    As a Christian, I will not throw Matt under the buss like some atheists might do to Cliffe - just to show support for my position. I do think this debate was way long...but I give credit to both sides doing a good job presenting what they believe in.

    • @jjones9452
      @jjones9452 9 лет назад +2

      P Foster I do see what you are saying as Cliffe seemed to give more of a reason(s) why he believes in God, rather than providing any kind of evidence that people can take away and do some research on for themselves. However, in fairness, although he seemed pretty mellow in this debate, Matt can get a little demeaning with people as well. I was impressed with Matt because I have seen some debates where he really didn't do very well. But in this situation, I don't feel like he did well because Cliffe did bad - instead I think he did well on the merits of his own arguments and rebuttals.
      To me the real test is to see how they answer questions - like if they try to slither out of it or not. I think in this debate, neither attempted to do so, which is why I think they both did a pretty good job.

  • @scatton61
    @scatton61 11 лет назад +11

    Is Cliffe in the same debate? I haven't heard him answer a single question.

  • @steveb0503
    @steveb0503 11 лет назад +5

    @ askcliffe - So, I'm gonna ask: Do you not see that EVERY reason you've given for why it makes sense to believe in God boils down to nothing more than a justification for everything else you'd like to believe is true? You go on and on about how this, that, or the other doesn't make sense to believe UNLESS you believe there's a god - but you've not managed to give even one shred of evidence that any of those things are reasonable to believe in the first place. You've only expressed things you wish were true, not any reasons to think they ARE true (except for your presupposition that God DOES exist).
    If you do reply to this comment, I'd hope you have enough respect for the question to not just (once again) turn on the tape recording in your head of every previous rationalization you've ever given yourself for believing (or continuing to believe) what you ALREADY believe. In other words: I'd like an actual answer to the question I asked.

    • @Haimgard
      @Haimgard 11 лет назад

      ***** you're right we should eat our babies like cats instead of abortion that would be far less evil... fucking nuts

    • @steveb0503
      @steveb0503 11 лет назад

      ***** Somehow I missed your response to my comment and only realized that you had made one when I was alerted that Haimgard had responded to it (I hate the new comment structure and notification protocol). I am only responding now lest you get the impression that somehow you'd managed to scare me off with your oh-so-insightful response (you didn't).
      First of all I notice how you're trying to tell me what I believe. Have I ever told you what I believe? Are you claiming to be psychic? Are you so clueless as to believe that ALL atheists believe the same things? Where do you "get off" making such a claim? What I DO believe about the origin of the Universe (if that is in fact what you are referring to) is that I do not know how it began - although I ACCEPT that the "Big Bang Theory" is the best, most well-supported by the evidence explanation we currently have for what occurred after T + Planck Time (if you do not understand what I mean by this, I suggest further research on your part - as I cannot be relied on to fill you in on all the details). I also believe that you do not know how it happened either - you merely ASSERT that you do.
      Secondly, if you want to have any hope of being considered as anything more than an uneducated buffoon - I would also suggest that you take a refresher course in the English language and learn to use "let's" instead of "lets", "...even though there is not a shred of evidence that proves this..." instead of "...and there is a shred of evidence that proves this...", "etc." instead of "ect", "their" instead of "there", "goes" instead of "go's", as well as the proper use of capitalization. Just saying...
      Thirdly, the assertion that: "The fact that there is abortion in the world proves that evolution is false." is quite possibly the dumbest, most ill-informed bit of nonsense it has ever been my misfortune to witness. I, and everyone else that has been unfortunate enough to read it, is now dumber for having been exposed to it. We have the capacity to overrule our innate dispositions (the urge to procreate being the particular disposition in question), unlike (most) other animals (and yes, we ARE animals - go learn some basic biology if you believe otherwise) who are slaves to their instincts (nest-building, "schooling" and herding behavior, etc,).
      And lastly, I remember going 'round with you a couple of years ago about "Biblical prophesy" - didn't you get enough then? Let's take your ONE cited example of a Biblical "prophesy" that you claim was not only fulfilled but which supposedly demonstrates "revealed knowledge" so far in advance of its occurrence that it cannot possibly be accounted for in any other way. I will assume (for the purpose of forwarding the discussion) that you are referring to Isaiah 45 (if I am incorrect, then I am indeed sorry for doing your thinking for you - a courtesy I will once again point out that you failed to show for me). This passage NEVER mentions Babylon (one would think this would be a trivial piece of information for God to have included in his revelation) and even if it did, it hardly seems anywhere near as prophetic as one might be led to believe it is if the fact that it was actually written within two years before or even slightly AFTER the conquering of Babylon by Cyrus (this date of authorship is agreed upon by most un-biased scholars). This honest appraisal of the date which this passage was penned also takes a bit of the mystery out of how this king's name was known. Although Isaiah does indeed refer to gates, the actual means Cyrus used to gain entry to the city of Babylon, was meant figuratively. This is evidenced by noting the continued use of obviously figurative language in the next verse: "I will go before you and will level the mountains; I will break down gates of bronze and cut through bars of iron..." (NIV). It should also be noted that "anointed" as used in Isaiah 45:1 is translated into Hebrew as "messiah" and into Greek as "Christ." Although never admitted by Christians, this passage seems to assert that Cyrus is the messiah (another minor detail obviously missed by your supposedly omniscient god). I would also like to point out (as I did in our previous discussion) that just because an event is predicted accurately, does it mean that it couldn't have turned out any other way? Does it mean that events proceeded in the way that they did BECAUSE they were foretold? The answer is, of course, NO. If I predict heads on the next coin-toss and I am correct - does that mean I am psychic? Again, sadly for you (with regards to the demonstration of how illogical this bit of reasoning actually is) - the answer is: NO.
      The simple truth is that if your god is, was, or ever will be capable of providing a revelation of prophesy that is as irrefutable and unexplainable as you seem to think these 2500 "prophesies" are, he will have to be a little (read: a lot) more specific than anything you Biblical inerrantists have EVER offered up.
      FYI - do you know how long it took me to look up and discover just how explainable this "prophesy" you claimed I couldn't explain was? About two minutes (the Internet is a wonderful place - it is "where religions come to die"). Next time I suggest you do a little research of your own before simply parroting what your pastor or some apologist said was true.

    • @steveb0503
      @steveb0503 11 лет назад +1

      *****"I don't care what you say..." Well, that pretty much sums it up - doesn't it? You obviously intend to continue believing whatever it is that you ALREADY believe no matter how much contradictory evidence you are presented with.
      Allow me to make just one more point for your further consideration: Claiming that God has done "unexplained things" things in your life just shows that you are using God as an explanation for that which is otherwise unexplained - and nothing more. It is what is known as an "argumentum ad ignorantiam" (or: argument from ignorance), whereby you assume that: lacking a better or more convincing alternative explanation, you believe that ANY answer is as likely to be the correct one as any other. The problem is that you are lacking any real reason to think it is true BESIDES your inability to come up with a better explanation.
      However, I realize that not a single bit of this will make even the slightest difference to someone who already "knows" (scare-quotes deliberately used) what the answer is - as this is something you've already clearly stated).

    • @steveb0503
      @steveb0503 11 лет назад

      ***** I never suggested that evidence IS proof of anything - that's just a red-herring you absolutist-minded types like to toss around to try and convince yourselves and others that you've made some kind of point. Proof really only exists in mathematics and logic when it can be demonstrated that your conclusion has not violated any of your assumed operational principles - other than that, one can only show that an explanatory model fits the observations, makes testable predictions, and is not proven untrue. That being said, to take "personal experience" as absolute confirmation of anything is to fail to take into account all that we have learned about reasoning biases, logical fallacies, perceptual failures, and any of the myriad other ways human thinking can go horribly awry. Consider just two quick, readily-familiar examples of how you can see something with your very own eyes, and yet be grossly mistaken as to what actually occurred; optical illusions and stage magic. Now, before you get your knickers in a twist, think about what your perceptions of either of those things would be if you HADN'T - at some point - been made aware of what was really "going on" regarding either of these phenomena. Critical inquiry as to the nature of reality and existence is only achievable through the scientific method, as it is the only consistently reliable way we have for getting at real truth while limiting the degree to which we can mislead ourselves due to our motivated reasoning. As physicist Richard Feynman once put it: "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool."
      I'd like it known that I am not trying to tell anyone that they are indeed wrong (as I am probably not capable of determining that one way or another to any reliable degree), but that I'm only trying to point out that you (and your fellow believing brethren) just might not have as good of reasons to believe what you believe as you might otherwise think you do.

    • @steveb0503
      @steveb0503 11 лет назад

      *****"... you're not going to find God using science." I would suggest to you that if God does indeed exist and causes things to happen (when he answers prayers, metes out punishments, or in any other way causes events to turn out differently than they otherwise would have) then there definitely would be some sort of evidence discoverable through scientific methodology. Unless his effect on the world was demonstrable (in a statistically significant, repeatable, and verifiable way), how could you hope to separate such an effect from purely random results merely INTERPRETED as the unpredictable intentional acts of an omnipotent deity?
      "...if you want to find out for yourself then I already told you how to go about doing so." Yes you did, and what you said was: "You want to know if God exists? Search for him truthfully with a humble and open heart." First of all I'd like to know just why it is that you assume I have not done this. Is it because I have come to a different conclusion than you have? Would it surprise you to know that I was once also a believer such as yourself? The difference however - between you and I - is that I stopped to think long enough to realize I actually had no better reason to believe any of it than my use of God as an explanation for that which I could not otherwise explain. Using God as a "one size fits all" explanation for everything, turns it into an unfalsifiable proposition. How would you know the difference between a Universe in which a god does not exist and one in which it is impossible to disprove this "God" because he could do anything? Bottom line: it's just not enough of a reason to believe anything in my book, and it really ought not to be in yours either - unless you enjoy counting yourself amongst the gullible of this world.

  • @gnagyusa
    @gnagyusa 9 лет назад

    12:00 Cliffe's argument is: disabled kid believes in Jesus, therefore god is real.
    Our brains experience emotions, like love, therefore there must be a big, invisible guy out there.
    "There's more to reality than matter and energy" because human brains produce emotions?
    This nonsensical crap is supposed to impress anyone?
    Sorry, Cliffe. That's not how grown-ups present and support claims.
    We use *evidence*, *logic* and *reason*.
    You don't get to jump to conclusions, like there's a big, invisible wizard in the sky from the fact that humans experience emotions.
    That's a ridiculous an completely unsupported claim and there are *much better* and *much simpler* explanations for emotions.
    You need to *independently* support your claims about your imaginary sky wizard, with *evidence*.

  • @stellaconcepts
    @stellaconcepts 10 лет назад +48

    There must be a god, because when Matt was religious he felt God calling him to do the Good Work. Well, God must exist cause Matt is doing the good work so eloquently

    • @КаналДляСебя-ь7у
      @КаналДляСебя-ь7у 7 лет назад +5

      About seventy Matt's fans (who believes that life comes from nonlife) trying to prove by comments, that he won:)
      The fruits of rejection of Christ's way/commandments: Stalin (and USSR), Chernobyl, Mao, Pol Pot, French revolution, Hitler, North Korea, Islamists and other terrorists etc. Experiments on people. All crimes, AIDS, satanism, racism, all kinds of porn, drugs, GMOs, perverted churches (of the hypocrites, who pretend to be disciples of Christ), the most terrible weapons of mass destruction etc. = destroyed planet!
      That is why rejection of Christ's way is wrong and foolish. End of the debate!
      You know what Jesus Christ taught, and you know that this is right, but you're doing the opposite. And all that I have listed - It is the opposite to Christ's teaching.

    • @cba4389
      @cba4389 7 лет назад +3

      Why would a Christian like someone who leads people to hell? Are you sure you are a Christian? I wouldn't want my worse enemy spend eternity in hell. For you that is ok?

    • @Gericho49
      @Gericho49 7 лет назад

      "Since God is dead all things are permitted" must be an ironic tombstone epitaph for many of the deniers over the past 3000yrs when the Psalmist proclaimed "a fool in his heart says there is no God' Ps 19

    • @Gericho49
      @Gericho49 7 лет назад +1

      Since the Bible is the only scripture that concerns you, allow me assure deniers of one fact. It might shock u but no one goes to hell in a Biblical sense unless they want to. The idea that people are in hell crying to be let out is false. Just read Dante or CS Lewis who put it this way, “the gates of hell are locked from the inside.” People will go to hell because they want to avoid an ultimate authority who tells them what they should and shouldn’t do. People in hell are saying it’s miserable, but they wouldn’t want to be in heaven if God is just pushing us around all the time.
      On the other hand people want to go to heaven and submit to God in a loving relationship, a fact that give their life meaning, hope and destiny. The most fair understanding of the afterlife is the Christian view that God only gives you what you want. If you want to be your own savior and lord, you will get it. Your choice! As atheist philosopher Jean Paul Sartre said, “If God exists I am not free. Since I am free therefore God does not exist.” Such perfect circular logic will appeal to many who demand moral autonomy at the price of "unyielding despair." (B. Russell)

    • @bernierasmusson9257
      @bernierasmusson9257 3 года назад +1

      @@Gericho49 All you have done is make assertions. You have no evidence for any of them.

  • @WingedWyrm
    @WingedWyrm 10 лет назад +7

    Mr. Knechtle, the more I hear you talk, the more I doubt that you've ever had an honest conversation with an atheist.

    • @youweechube
      @youweechube 10 лет назад +1

      or maybe just with himself

  • @lostfan5054
    @lostfan5054 3 года назад +4

    It's really hard to listen to Cliffe spouting platitudes.

    • @angru_arches
      @angru_arches 2 года назад

      Platitudes and evasiveness is a tool of the Atheist. It's way more difficult to hear an atheist make unsupported moral claims....what's 'good' 'right' 'ought' 'should', atheists have no case for such things.

    • @lostfan5054
      @lostfan5054 2 года назад

      @@angru_arches How do you figure?

    • @angru_arches
      @angru_arches 2 года назад

      @@lostfan5054 you have no ontic reference to claim anything is good, or anybody ought/should do anything....what informs your sense of morality?

    • @lostfan5054
      @lostfan5054 2 года назад

      @@angru_arches Pretty simple.
      I don't want to be murdered. I wouldn't like it if someone stole from me. I wouldn't want someone to harm my children.
      I don't want these things for me, so I agree that I won't do them to you if you agree you won't do them to me. Then we're both happy. No god needed.

    • @angru_arches
      @angru_arches 2 года назад

      @@lostfan5054 oh, feelings...right, you wouldn't like for those things to be done to you...but what's the argument that therefore I shouldn't do it to you? What if robbing you makes me richer, happier, and if I'm smart enough to get away with it I do the same till the end of my days? And when I die that's it, everything is over. What damn should I give about another 'accident' we call persons? Can you really tell me I shouldn't steal and kill even if it benefits me? And if you can, with what authority?

  • @brandwijkgg
    @brandwijkgg 9 лет назад +1

    Knechtle sounds like a broken records

  • @alwaysthinkforyourself7028
    @alwaysthinkforyourself7028 11 лет назад +7

    I'm sorry Cliffe, but your attitude pushes myself and others I know away from being able to listen to a word you are saying. Very difficult trying to understand that you actually believe what you are saying, due to the edge in your voice.

    • @vegeta3739
      @vegeta3739 11 лет назад

      ironic how your username is "alwaysthinkforyourself" but you are affected by how others react to things. Im guessing you have never heard of something called rhetoric we cant all be as boring as dillahunty sad to say.

    • @bradchervel5202
      @bradchervel5202 11 лет назад +2

      vegeta3739 Yes we are all affected by how others react to things,,,its a part of how we evolve. Look that up

    • @alwaysthinkforyourself7028
      @alwaysthinkforyourself7028 11 лет назад +3

      Vegeta3739, Having the inability to follow along with the individual due to the edge in his voice is a normal human reaction. Not an inability for me to not be able to think for myself. Having reason and logic, has nothing to do with a human reaction to his attitude. If he lowered his attitude, it might be easier to listen. Simple.

    • @YY4Me133
      @YY4Me133 11 лет назад +1

      vegeta3739
      alwaysthinkforyourself didn't say s/he's "affected by how others react to things." Rather that Knechtle's tone is off-putting. He sounds insincere, as though he's giving a sermon, not speaking extemporaneously.
      Disagreeing with Matt is one thing, but I have the impression you didn't even listen to anything he said, if you think he's boring.

  • @josephpizarro1146
    @josephpizarro1146 10 месяцев назад +5

    Cliffe Knechtle was adequately prepared for the circumstance, articulating his thoughts with eloquence. I find the likelihood of God's existence to be quite compelling, supported by substantial evidence concerning Jesus.

    • @nickshaw6085
      @nickshaw6085 9 месяцев назад +1

      Oops. Not quite.

    • @Angeleyes12956
      @Angeleyes12956 6 месяцев назад

      Bro you made ai write that lmao

    • @rampantinertia7950
      @rampantinertia7950 Месяц назад

      ​@@Angeleyes12956 proof?

    • @Angeleyes12956
      @Angeleyes12956 Месяц назад

      @@rampantinertia7950 he looks like a smart fellow but nobody writes like that lol

  • @hom-sha-bom
    @hom-sha-bom 10 лет назад +6

    2:15 Matt Dillahunty knocks a glass jar off of the table at *that* height and it doesn't shatter. Yet he still doesn't believe in God? WTF!?

    • @bradzimmerman3171
      @bradzimmerman3171 5 лет назад +1

      WTF Layton glass doesn't always break ,but you are always silly

    • @musph5478
      @musph5478 3 года назад +1

      @@bradzimmerman3171 I'm pretty sure Nick is an atheist and he was joking. And even he was a theist they can joke on their god.

  • @vincentparrella3424
    @vincentparrella3424 6 лет назад

    At 49:00 IF there is a God,and Jesus was who he said he was then,Christianity will correct that those who spend eternity in Hell,would rather be there than Heaven,because they really don't want GOD.

  • @zerocalvin
    @zerocalvin 9 лет назад +9

    yet another creationist that say "i dont understand science, therefor god" and "i'm special therefor god".
    holy.. every time he speak, all he does is use emotional appeal.. there is no evident, there is no argument...

  • @RobertSzasz
    @RobertSzasz 10 лет назад +29

    All you need to know about Cliffe is that in his opening story he refers to the kid with cerebral palsy as "spastic". Mind that Cliffe is not claiming to be telling events as they happened somewhere, this is just a made up story where he chose the exact wording.

    • @cwilkes13
      @cwilkes13 10 лет назад +5

      What's your point? I find it interesting that you picked one word in a 2hr video to focus on. I'm guessing you have a personal experience in some manner with CP?

    • @twelvedozen5075
      @twelvedozen5075 5 лет назад +2

      DispelTheMyth Empathy is a “fully understood function of the brain”?

    • @lookatmepleasesir
      @lookatmepleasesir 5 лет назад +11

      spastic is a medical term used to describe cerebral palsy

    • @XiagraBalls
      @XiagraBalls 4 года назад

      I thought that too, but he said in such a way as to imply that the other kids were calling the kid with CP 'spastic'. There were a lot of other issues with what he said, tho.

    • @RobertSzasz
      @RobertSzasz 4 года назад +3

      @@XiagraBalls sure, that was the implication, but the slur has a lot of history. The "Look how I use this disabled prop in my story!" is vile all on its own. He probably tells the story of the good Samaritan with added slurs too. *If this bad/broken 'person' can do it you upstanding clean folks have no excuse...* 🤮

  • @ketojenn1669
    @ketojenn1669 4 года назад +9

    Faith = not evidence
    Bible = not evidence
    Preaching = not evidence
    Stories = not evidence

    • @localfarmdude7243
      @localfarmdude7243 2 года назад +1

      Who or what do you live for? What's the evidence that what your living for is true? Who or what is more reliable than Jesus Christ?

    • @airplanegobrr2017
      @airplanegobrr2017 8 месяцев назад +1

      @@localfarmdude7243they want evidence but they don’t even understand where the word “faith” comes from. Faith is not provable and we use faith everyday whether we like it or not

    • @triplestandart7613
      @triplestandart7613 8 месяцев назад

      @@localfarmdude7243 "What do you live for?" is an ought question (you ought to live this way). It can not be "true" because factual statements can never lead to ought statements (google "David Hume ought is" problem if you want to know more).

    • @agahpashtollah4753
      @agahpashtollah4753 7 месяцев назад

      @@localfarmdude7243I live for myself and my happiness. Next question

    • @feignit
      @feignit 2 месяца назад

      Are you also a midwit like Matt that says history is not evidence?

  • @bonesr.7839
    @bonesr.7839 9 лет назад +1

    matt must have felt so dumb after his last debate with clife all he did was create strawmen and preach atheism
    can't trust anyone who believes in solipsism

  • @jasonstrange1490
    @jasonstrange1490 5 лет назад +4

    Matt spoke of being the captain of his own ship (as desirable), but what he doesn't realize is that his ship has no safe harbor, no anchor, no destination.
    He is adrift in a sea of nothingness with no direction whatsoever.
    He has charted his course to nowhere.
    All his cargo that he carries are nothing more than empty boxes.

    • @HarryNicNicholas
      @HarryNicNicholas 5 лет назад +1

      you're a small minded idiot. lol, atheists have more to live for than believers in fact, we have to make sense of all this without relying on a sky fairy, we do good things for the sake of good, not to get some reward for following orders, god wants you to be good just for the sake of being good, so an atheist is just what god wants, atheists don't exploit god at all, and what we do we do sincerely, anyone with faith or belief is just following orders and avoiding hell. we aren't, we are open and honest, and still good. you're the one with no hope, you have to rely on a fictitious character to "give your life meaning", how sad is that? try to remember this if you think science and reason is cold, the atoms in your body have travelled billions of years and billions of miles and find themselves in you, they existed since the beginning of time and science says they probably went through at least three supernovae to get to fly around the sun and then coalesce into the planet, and then make you. and when you die those atoms merge back into the eco system, float around again for billions of years, pass through more super novae and either they dissipate and then go to make up bits of millions of aliens, or by chance get together (in the infinity of time) and you actually do get born again, and if nothing else they will be flying around the universe until the end of time. who needs god.

    • @JB-zd8gv
      @JB-zd8gv 9 месяцев назад

      What do u mean? He shoukd have a mission to be a spineless sheep, a bdsm servant of some god?

    • @feignit
      @feignit 2 месяца назад

      Was really embarrassing Matt spouting off "do good" this and that with no argument other than if you don't believe what the definition of my good is then you're wrong.

  • @Volound
    @Volound 11 лет назад +24

    that was just brutal.

    • @Alfapiomega
      @Alfapiomega 10 лет назад +1

      just watched it. I think I died little inside.

    • @saysyke2867
      @saysyke2867 7 месяцев назад

      @@AlfapiomegaLol me too

  • @seanodonnell429
    @seanodonnell429 Год назад +7

    @45:52 In trying to refute Cliffe’s point about ultimate meaning and purpose in life, Matt actually inadvertently supported it. Friend, that car that you have, even though one day it will break down and end up in the junkyard, did not come into existence by accident. It was created by an intelligent human being for the purpose of safe expedient transportation. You did not arbitrarily attribute that meaning to the car. Now, you could freely choose to use that car for a different purpose. For example, you could use it as a weapon to run over animals if that’s what you wanted to do, but not only would that be morally wrong, it would be an abominable adulteration of the ultimate purpose of the car.

    • @matswessling6600
      @matswessling6600 11 месяцев назад

      what? meaning is created by your own mind. Its no something objectively out there...

    • @RyanGhezawi
      @RyanGhezawi 9 месяцев назад

      Matt’s point was simply that you can value what you have and appreciate it while you have it, and it being finite doesn’t mean anything just because it doesn’t matter in a billion years or that we came about by natural processes the result is the same OUR EXISTENCE is the result whether or not we were created by god, furthermore life isn’t an accident life arises due to its thermodynamic nature, life is a dynamic state open thermodynamic system meaning it freely interacts with the matter and energy surrounding it and is subject to change, life can be seen as a manifestation of thermodynamic principles, there are several studies highlighting this

    • @nickshaw6085
      @nickshaw6085 9 месяцев назад

      You missed the point entirely.

  • @StevenDavisPhoto
    @StevenDavisPhoto 10 месяцев назад +1

    Matt is an agnostic, not an atheist. He isn't convinced that God exists, but he doesn't actively believe there ISN'T a God. Also, Matt needs a better tailor.

  • @ThaZMP
    @ThaZMP 11 лет назад +28

    I love how cliffe freaks out after matts first question that he had to address, I love how cliffe can make several assertions and offers no logical proof of why those assertions are true, and I love how cliffe repeats everything he says like talking points of a politician....

    • @isanna6075
      @isanna6075 5 лет назад +4

      @Jacob Watson well noticed 👍

    • @musph5478
      @musph5478 3 года назад

      @Jacob Watson Though repeating "I love" three times for three different arguments is clearly not as annoying as repeating an entire argument like Cliff did...

  • @deep_reason4454
    @deep_reason4454 9 лет назад +7

    That was not even close Matt talks about reality and truth and Cliffe makes a lot of claims that are not proven in anyway. Sorry Cliffe but magic has never been shown to be real.

    • @svmarshmallow8399
      @svmarshmallow8399 3 года назад +1

      Did you know that Atheist is a religion?

    • @TheMidnightModder
      @TheMidnightModder 3 года назад +3

      @@svmarshmallow8399 Seriously 🤣
      atheists spend all of their time trying to disprove Theism. They Religiously attack it and even though they no-life their studies they still don't even get close to it.

    • @bernierasmusson9257
      @bernierasmusson9257 3 года назад

      @@svmarshmallow8399 Do you know anything?

    • @bernierasmusson9257
      @bernierasmusson9257 3 года назад

      @@TheMidnightModder Theism disproves itself.

  • @msa7245
    @msa7245 Год назад +26

    Cliffe, im not sure if you will ever read this. I want to tell you, you have inspired me so much and i have learned a great deal from watching you speak. God Bless and thank you!

  • @thomaswynn2005
    @thomaswynn2005 2 года назад +1

    I may or may not believe in Matt’s claim that he may or may not believe. As usual, Matt’s statements crumbling on its own weight. He says he doesn’t argue there is or isn’t a God. That’s like saying I don’t believe I exist or not exist.
    That falls under its own weight again because he’s making a claim. He’s a walking contradiction.

  • @Sanjuro_Johnson
    @Sanjuro_Johnson 5 лет назад +11

    Matt cannot rationally justify why he values human life. Its that simple. He loses. He believes life is an accident. That makes life ultimately meaningless. Its pure logic. This is what Cliffe appealed to. Logic. That's why Cliffe won.

    • @anthonyl9126
      @anthonyl9126 2 года назад +2

      Okay, cliffe didn't win any sound reasoning, though.

    • @88mphDrBrown
      @88mphDrBrown 2 года назад

      This is one of the most pathetic brazen lies I've seen in a while. There's literally hours of Matt talking about why and how he values human life. Hours of Matt talking about secular humanism in depth, which is almost exclusively justifying and valuing human life. The truth is that YOU believe "life is ultimately meaningless without God". What really makes your comment pathetic is claiming "Matt believes life is an accident", how many times does he have to say "i don't know" until you'll acknowledge his actual claims? He's probably explicitly said it thousands of times, yet here you are lying through your teeth.

    • @christopherianlister5212
      @christopherianlister5212 2 года назад +3

      yes he can he is here, job done, simple, he wins, he does not believe life is an accident, ultimate meaning is not needed, it's logic, which cliff failed 2 address, that's why he lost badly...

    • @BOGOworms4sale
      @BOGOworms4sale 2 года назад +1

      What’s wrong with life being an accident? What’s wrong with personal meaning? Just value other people as they are in the same boat of this seemingly meaningless existence. I value other people because they, like me, are all looking for the same thing and I can relate to their struggles. I can love people, not because I’m supposed to, but because these people help me grow. Value should not be given, it’s earned and your value comes from how you change other people.

    • @p.as.in.pterodactyl1024
      @p.as.in.pterodactyl1024 2 года назад +1

      @@BOGOworms4sale What's the reasoning that leads to the conclusion that value comes from how one changes other people?

  • @blakemecklenburg8940
    @blakemecklenburg8940 9 лет назад +22

    Every time Cliffe speaks in this video he spend a ton of time developing a strawman point of view so he can defeat it because he doesn't have any real arguments for what Matt has actually said.
    Add to that the countless appeals to emotion and you have an exchanges that came nowhere near resembling a real debate.

  • @thegmanofEAP
    @thegmanofEAP 10 лет назад +8

    I usually have a level of empathy for pastors who so passionately defend their faith, even though there's no good ground. But the "personal experience proof" he gives and the antagonistic attitude he has towards science is awful.

  • @soluschristus8360
    @soluschristus8360 2 года назад

    To sustain the belief that there is no God, ANY atheist has to demonstrate infinite knowledge, which is tantamount to saying, “I have infinite knowledge that there is no being in existence with infinite knowledge."

  • @MarcoArsenault
    @MarcoArsenault 11 лет назад +32

    Cliffe's entire discourse is drowned in assumptions and false assertions, it's soooooooooo painful to watch.

    • @kronos01ful
      @kronos01ful 5 лет назад +5

      Hi Marco, so what are the alternative ,? This guy gives rational explanation for how we experience reality. how do you live your life and what is the evidence that what you believe and stand for is truth?

    • @OldestRoots
      @OldestRoots 3 года назад

      Because you get scared of reality that’s why you feel pain

  • @BraninT
    @BraninT 11 лет назад +6

    Okay did anyone for a second believe that those stories Cliffe was telling about the kid with CP, and the French Rioters were in any way true?

  • @wresler103
    @wresler103 11 лет назад +32

    Cliffe fails to recognize that the Bible is the claim, not the evidence.

    • @jasonroelle5261
      @jasonroelle5261 11 лет назад +6

      I would say the bible does make lot's of claims, and evidence for something. I do not believe it is evidence that a god exist, or for the existence for a god. It might be evidence that people wrote stories, or that people did believe a god exist.

    • @NoamMendelssohn
      @NoamMendelssohn 11 лет назад +2

      Jason Roelle
      Its evidence that the bible exists.

    • @jasonroelle5261
      @jasonroelle5261 11 лет назад

      It's a fact that a book when contains, certain sentences, that make up different books is referred to as the bible.

    • @NoamMendelssohn
      @NoamMendelssohn 11 лет назад

      no idea what that means.

    • @NoamMendelssohn
      @NoamMendelssohn 11 лет назад

      Is the eyewitness reliable?
      Is he alive to say?
      Is he real?
      The bible's stories have eyewitnesses, but the problem is the bible says that there are witnesses. See the problem?
      Now, historians try to crosscheck with other cultures history of that time to see if major events happened. Very often there is no correlation, which leads to several conclusions:
      1) The event didn't happen
      2) The event happened but completely different then described
      3) The event happened , BUT TO SOME OTHER CULTURE (Very common in the bible, half the stories happened to the Babylonians, Canaanintes, Persians, etc)
      4) They chose not to commemorate it (Hard to prove this, as its a negative).

  • @Courtz_nz
    @Courtz_nz 9 лет назад

    40:05 after cliffe finishes his babbling about morals...look at Matts face! that is the face of a man who knows he has a long day of talking to a brick wall. I feel for Matt here. Cliffe....Matt explained it, we derive our morals through what we believe will BEST allow us to continue AND improve society. Some people will have odd ideas of what that looks like and these people will be the Hitlers of society BUT the majority will base their RIGHT and WRONG on what helps us to best survive and thrive as a species. and you want to base your morals on a book that was written thousands of years ago that says owning slaves, stoning people in the street and selling your daughter to her RAPIST is right!!! who can honestly say they believe in such a hateful,violent book....come on

  • @runepk4life500
    @runepk4life500 9 лет назад +23

    1:39:15 (ish) "The evidence points towards a supernatural..."
    Is it just me or is that a prime example of an oxymoron?

    • @joelmichon1237
      @joelmichon1237 4 года назад +3

      That’s not an oxymoron bud. Unless you presuppose that the supernatural cannot be evidenced? Very unscientific that

    • @EthanLaird
      @EthanLaird 3 года назад +1

      It’s an oxymoron under the belief that nothing supernatural exists. Nature has no creator. Nothing exists outside of it

    • @joshuahart5344
      @joshuahart5344 3 года назад

      @@EthanLaird what's your evidence for that?

  • @tamarmentzer4
    @tamarmentzer4 10 лет назад +19

    Wow. Matt Dillahunty is one of the most genius people I have ever heard speak. Hits every point, every time.

    • @sethbohnart1604
      @sethbohnart1604 5 лет назад +17

      And yet Matt said: “I believe I can have confidence, not faith.”
      Confidence= con fe de (Latin)= with faith.
      Matt also said Hitler was a Christian. To say Hitler was a Christian is dishonest or uneducated.

    • @joelm6780
      @joelm6780 5 лет назад +1

      Seth Bohnart Hitler followed the catholic doctrine (fact)

    • @sethbohnart1604
      @sethbohnart1604 5 лет назад +6

      @Joel M - Hitler was not a Christian- he was most likely a Deist or possibly even an Atheist. There are some that claim Hitler was a Christian in a vague attempt to establish a link between God and evil. Here are some direct quotes from Adolf Hitler...

    • @sethbohnart1604
      @sethbohnart1604 5 лет назад +4

      “There is something very unhealthy about Christianity.”
      April 9th, 1942 (Hitler’s Table Talk p.339)
      “The reason why the ancient world was so pure, light and serene was that it knew nothing of the two great scourges: the pox and Christianity.”
      October 19th, 1941 (Hitler’s Table Talk p.96)
      “Our epoch will certainly see the end of the disease of Christianity. It will last another hundred years, two hundred years perhaps. My regret will be that I couldn’t, like whoever the prophet was, behold the promised land from afar.”
      February 27th, 1942 (Hitler’s Table Talk p.278)
      “Christianity is the worst of the regressions that mankind can ever have undergone.”
      (Hitler’s Table Talk 1941-1944)
      “The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity’s illegitimate child. Both are inventions of the Jew.”
      July 11-12, 1941 (Hitler’s Table Talk p. 6-7)
      “But Christianity is the invention of sick brains: one could imagine nothing more senseless...”
      December 13, 1941 (Hitler’s Table Talk p. 118-119)
      “The only way to get rid of Christianity is to let it die...little by little...Christianity is the liar...we’ll see to it that the churches cannot spread abroad teachings in conflict with the interests of the State.”
      October 14, 1941 (Hitler’s Table Talk p. 49-52)

    • @sethbohnart1604
      @sethbohnart1604 5 лет назад +5

      This is just a small selection of his quotes against Christianity, so clearly he was not one himself. He thought it as a “disease,” the work from “sick minds,” “lies,” he saw it as “incompatible” with the State, and he hoped for the day that it would one day completely disappear from the earth.
      In 1930’s Germany- the majority of the people were either Christian or Catholic, and the church was a powerful institution with a significant amount of influence. Hitler feared its influence and realized that it would be foolish to take them on while fighting a world war, and so, “in the pursuit and maintenance of power [he] was prepared to delay clashes with the churches out of political considerations.” In other words, he made a tactical choice not to take on the churches until after the war was over. As Allen Bullock writes: “once the war was over, [Hitler] promised himself, he would root out and destroy the influence of the Christian churches, but until then he would be circumspect.”
      Hitler’s strategy was to appear sympathetic to Christianity in public, tailoring his speeches to whatever he thought his audience wanted to hear, and he ordered his staff to play along, too. His propaganda chief and closest confidant Joseph Goebbels wrote: “He hates Christianity, because it has crippled all that’s noble in humanity.” And “...though Hitler was “a fierce opponent” of the Vatican and Christianity, “he forbids me to leave the church. For tactical reasons.” On December 29th, 1939 Joseph Goebbels writes: “The Führer is...completely anti-Christian. He views Christianity as a symptom of decay. Rightly so. It is a branch of the Jewish race...in the end they will be destroyed.” And “But although the Fuhrer will “have to get around to a conflict between church and state” in the future, he says in the meantime “The best way to deal with the churches is to claim to be a positive Christian.”
      His chief architect Albert Speer quoted Hitler, saying: “Once I have settled my other problem (the war)...I’ll have my reckoning with the church. I’ll have it reeling on the ropes.” Speer says that Hitler would go off on rants of fiery against Christianity which “raised him to a white heat,” but in the meantime- he tried to keep his intentions under wraps.

  • @spaveevo
    @spaveevo 10 лет назад +4

    We are the only species that knows we will someday die and yet we spend our entire lives pretending we never will.

    • @avixjoe3945
      @avixjoe3945 10 лет назад

      Yes, and that's one of the rasons we invented the concept of eternal life after death. Evolution produced being who is aware of its death, but has not provided solution of being aware to cease to exist. Becouse of that we tell ourselves fairy tales to keep our mind in peace.

    • @avixjoe3945
      @avixjoe3945 10 лет назад

      Also. Future is not set. Death is also not certain. Future generations could overcome death. Please check www.sens.org/
      mfoundation.org/
      www.sierrasci.com/

  • @nitehawk86
    @nitehawk86 9 лет назад +1

    Apologist was not interested in debating, as usual. Instead he brings his pre-planned sermon and preaches it.

  • @IndiaMagicLove
    @IndiaMagicLove 11 лет назад +28

    Theists: you need some new arguments, some new approaches. This is becoming redundant.

    • @AeonsOfFrost
      @AeonsOfFrost 11 лет назад +2

      Actually, I'd argue they don't, and that they should stick with the classics. Though I disagree with his metaphysics, I can at least read Aquinas and say "yeah, I see how a not-crazy person could believe that." But the newer apologetic approaches (evidentialism, and *FSM forbid* presuppositionalism) strike me as basically garbage.

    • @ada2step997
      @ada2step997 5 лет назад +1

      Soft dinosaur tissue debunks evolution.
      ruclips.net/video/We_XIq-k66c/видео.html

    • @walterdaems57
      @walterdaems57 3 года назад +1

      @@ada2step997 Whatever debunks a shackle in the chain of evolution doesn’t bunk a celestial wizard who shook the universe out of his sleeve

    • @bernierasmusson9257
      @bernierasmusson9257 3 года назад

      @@ada2step997 Not in any way.

  • @emerickscott
    @emerickscott 11 лет назад +12

    oh good the Xtian is starting with an allegorical tale... Matt opened with 5 minutes. This guy is still going on at 15 minutes.
    Further... was this guy a preacher? The whole thing is one long memorized script.

    • @GeneralZod99
      @GeneralZod99 11 лет назад +5

      Yeah, Cliffe actually lives a few towns over from me (he hails from New Caanan, CT). He has been doing this talk for decades. He frequently goes to universities and holds talks outside. He challenges questions of non-believers. I have to say that he takes on all comers which I do respect. I just do not agree with his assertions.

  • @Impostleable
    @Impostleable 11 лет назад +21

    Wow.. Cliffe is special isn't he. His debating "points" are utterly incoherent.

  • @HallofFamerMichael
    @HallofFamerMichael 2 года назад

    I'm sorry, but this atheist speaker is not honest. He isn't treating terms fairly, and using the atheist definitions of certain words rather than understanding that they mean something completely different when used in a biblical framework.

  • @MiKemIkE-he3fg
    @MiKemIkE-he3fg 8 лет назад +4

    cliffe knechile vs Scott Hahn on the topic of Protestantism vs. Catholicism. That's what I want to see!

  • @Maddjacklee81
    @Maddjacklee81 Год назад +16

    So in Cliffes opening, he said that students have faith they will get a diploma on graduation day because there’s a bunch of evidence that the university will give them a diploma. That’s not faith, that’s an evidence based position.

    • @Malhaloc
      @Malhaloc Год назад +22

      In Cliffe's discussions with students, he defines faith as trust based on evidence. He rejects the idea that faith must be without evidence. Instead, what most people call faith, he calls gullibility and naivety. I happen to agree with him.

    • @JaniceinOR
      @JaniceinOR Год назад +3

      @@Malhaloc
      I agree that faith without evidence is weird.
      I have not yet found any good evidence for anything supernatural.

    • @ninjason57
      @ninjason57 Год назад +1

      @@JaniceinOR where are you looking?

    • @JaniceinOR
      @JaniceinOR Год назад +1

      @@ninjason57 Reputable scientific studies would be my preferred evidence.
      Why, do you have some suggestions of where strong evidence of the supernatural could be found?

    • @statutesofthelord
      @statutesofthelord Год назад +1

      @@JaniceinOR Janice, everything that is, is evidence for God.

  • @M111771
    @M111771 10 лет назад +7

    Cliffe looks like a Christian version of Bill Nye.

  • @sandina2cents779
    @sandina2cents779 3 года назад +1

    1:44:59 Matt did get something correct..the nun Teresa (not my mother) was in love with suffering and raised millions for the Catholic Church and used almost none of it for the suffering people she used to raise the money. I wish people would stop using her as a model of a Christian as she was not.

  • @ElfHostage
    @ElfHostage 8 лет назад +75

    kudos to cliff for posting this to his own channel.

    • @BrokenContracts
      @BrokenContracts 6 лет назад +25

      And why not, he kicked his opponent's ass.

    • @jonfromtheuk467
      @jonfromtheuk467 5 лет назад

      @@PartiallyAgonized or even Cliffe

    • @BrianBattles
      @BrianBattles 5 лет назад +23

      @@BrokenContracts How the heck did you conclude that? He had nothing.

    • @friedit7862
      @friedit7862 4 года назад +2

      @@BrianBattles thats because you have a bias, its ok most sheep can't be objective.

    • @BrianBattles
      @BrianBattles 4 года назад +4

      @@friedit7862 Which sheep?

  • @ryangray2569
    @ryangray2569 10 лет назад +7

    Cliffe's opening statement is awful. I have seen interesting arguments for god. However preaching like he was is what took me away from that. It just sound so fake. Like its some shit hes said 80 times the same way.

    • @lancethrustworthy
      @lancethrustworthy 10 лет назад +2

      The kid with muscular dystrophy story was mighty lame. ;)

    • @ryangray2569
      @ryangray2569 10 лет назад +4

      Dan Lewis I mean he didn't have to appeal to emotion like that you know. By giving impre impres impressions of of of th the ki ki kid.

  • @ryangray2569
    @ryangray2569 10 лет назад +12

    He also seems like he is purposefully distorting the truth when he says his atheist friends live for money. That is complete bullshit. This is nasty ugly fallacy (Dicto simpliciter). That frankly disgusts me in how he uses it. Trying to make it seem as if atheist are greedy people. I think most humans live for the experience. That entails everything our experience comes with. If you live in a society where money is necessity for food and needed resources then you do "need" money in that sense. Especially as a means of promoting philanthropy (charity organizations). He doesn't make this distinction. He continues by saying pleasure is what they live for. As if god isn't just an opiate for the people who fear death. He says many people do like money... its beneficial. Its so sad he generalizes people who cant defend themselves to make other people who are watching think the wrong things... this is dishonesty. I cant understand why people are saying they admire his honesty. All he did the whole time was appeal to emotion and fallacies. And then in his own words passed it off as "logic/ clear thinking" and "truth".

    • @Rayvvvone
      @Rayvvvone 10 лет назад +1

      @ryan gray
      "He also seems like he is purposefully distorting the truth when he says his atheist friends live for money."
      - let's give it up for prosperity theology

    • @truthsayer6414
      @truthsayer6414 7 лет назад

      Come on Ryan! No one is saying ALL atheists are greedy. we are all sentient, moral, spiritual beings having a very brief earthly experience. The abject poverty of a materialistic worldview implies, if you dont worship God u have to worship at the altar of something! What's your god then- power, wealth, self image, career, sport, gambling, drugs porn, violence etc? We all have a worldview of how we make sense of our world and our place in it. When morality is doing no more than what is fashionable in some culture at some point in history, mankind is doomed. 100mill killed by godless despots in the 20th century and then today, the likes of Assad, SI and Kim Jong Un believing there is no accountability and certainly no ultimate justice.

  • @squeaksohko5863
    @squeaksohko5863 2 года назад +1

    Its funny how matt makes the statement that he is an atheist because God fails to reveal himself, even though God is working in his life by using Cliff and other Theists that keep insisting that God exists. Its like, no matter how clearly the evidence for Gods existance is stated, non believers make it sound like we are all speaking in parables like our Lord Jesus.

  • @JustAGuy85
    @JustAGuy85 10 лет назад +27

    Dillahunty makes valid points. Cliffe tells made up stories planned for a debate. Guess that's what christians like.

    • @ada2step997
      @ada2step997 5 лет назад

      ruclips.net/video/We_XIq-k66c/видео.html

    • @JustAGuy85
      @JustAGuy85 2 года назад +2

      @JADON NAVA I don't remember. It's been 7 years.

    • @JustAGuy85
      @JustAGuy85 2 года назад +1

      @JADON NAVA I don't think so. I'm saying one of them uses real life examples and facts. The other one makes up "fables" and stories to create a point.

  • @lancethrustworthy
    @lancethrustworthy 10 лет назад +29

    Matt's in non-rare form, doing what he does well - speaking on common sense and the dangers of distorted sense and logic.
    It amazes me that Cliffe can stand up there and claim to be one that follows evidence. Hee heeee! It's both funny and sad. It suggests that Cliffe has sentenced himself to a life of deep delusion.
    Mudder Teresa was a deluded person who thought that one got closer to Jesus through suffering.
    She made some sick folk die instead of heal as they could have. Agnes was her real first name.
    She became a shill for the catholic church.
    She loved having power and attention.
    She knew, in the end, that she was doing wrong. It's in her writings.

    • @rogthepirate4593
      @rogthepirate4593 10 лет назад +12

      Anyone who still thinks mother Teresa was a good person should go read some Christopher Hitchens ...

    • @Gatorbeaux
      @Gatorbeaux 7 лет назад +1

      You mean Hitch who go his ass whipped by WLC? that Hitchins? lol Who matt wants to debate but it will be the end of his RUclips fantasy atheist charade--

    • @ada2step997
      @ada2step997 5 лет назад +1

      Matt went seminary and yet doesn't know anything about the Bible

    • @GUYMAN261
      @GUYMAN261 5 лет назад +1

      @@ada2step997 What did Matt get wrong about the Bible?

    • @ada2step997
      @ada2step997 5 лет назад +1

      @@GUYMAN261 41 he got wrong slavery God never condoned it. If he remembers godfried Israel from slavery. It was indentured servitude and back then people worked off their debt. If not cause that slavery then if he works I guess he would be considered a slave. Matt doesn't even know the context of scripture. Matt also doesn't understand that there were examples of people sin in the Bible because God doesn't want us to sin. The Bible shows the repercussions of what sin causes

  • @TheBrown446
    @TheBrown446 10 лет назад +16

    Cliffe's argument can basically be summarized as 'Love therefore God.'
    Save yourself an hour of preaching.

    • @j2mfp78
      @j2mfp78 4 года назад +1

      V.s. Matt's "I dont know, I didn't say that" & his favorite "I'm not making any claims."

    • @Joshokitty
      @Joshokitty 4 года назад

      @@j2mfp78 none of the things you said were bad arguments like the OP pointed out... you just stated truths that matt said throughout the debate.

    • @j2mfp78
      @j2mfp78 4 года назад +2

      @@Joshokitty I never said they were. The point is if you don't know, didn't say anything and aren't making any claims then why are you at a debate? Seems pretty useless. By the way nice to meet you.

    • @Joshokitty
      @Joshokitty 4 года назад +3

      @@j2mfp78 Nice to meet you.
      Unfortunately you are oversimplifying Matt's entire position and the claims he is making. Matt's entire argument is that he is not convinced that there is a god. He then gives reasons as to why he is not convinced. Often, his argument is also that just because we do not know something, it doesn't mean that God is the answer. He made many claims throughout the debate. As far as a belief in God, he is not convinced that there is one, and ultimately does not know if there is a God. That is the position that many atheists take, and that is the position he is arguing for whilst also giving reason and evidence for his lack of belief in God.
      In addition, Cliffe also gave the answer of "I do not know" in the debate. When asked why God allows suffering, the first three words Cliffe said were "I do not know." "I do not know" is a valid answer. There are things that we do not yet know, and other things that we will never know such as why God has allowed suffering.
      If you go to 1:13:45, Matt gives reason as to why "I do not know" is a good answer, sometimes even being the best answer that one can give. Have a nice day.

    • @j2mfp78
      @j2mfp78 4 года назад

      @@Joshokitty I disagree. I've seen many of Matt's debates and his whole thing is a form of hyper skepticism. "Maybe they lied or were mistaken ot have an agenda". You and in the can do that with anything basically and in the process deny anything you want. Of course he wont apply this same skepticism to things he does believe even though it could easily be done. It's ok we just disagree on how we see his motive for these debates. I appreciate your input and being cordial with me. 👍🏻

  • @GUYMAN261
    @GUYMAN261 5 лет назад +1

    If there is no God then your life has no purpose. But faith isn't about intimidation zzzzzzzz

  • @MrOmniblast
    @MrOmniblast 10 лет назад +44

    OK. So. If my wife dies (loving me) and I remarry and love that person as well...when we both die and all three of us are in heaven. What do we do? Aaaaawkwaaaarrrd!

    • @naughteedesign
      @naughteedesign 10 лет назад +5

      oh mromni your wife would have hooked up with some other angel-daddy in the interim, you can all then get together and preen each other's wings ;)

    • @MrOmniblast
      @MrOmniblast 10 лет назад +2

      LOL! Thank goodness! Clears everything up! =] I thought I'd have some awkward conversations waiting for me. Now...what about babies? Do they go to heaven as babies? Cuz that'd be fucking annoying...eternal babies? Shit. Maybe they get aged to their prime...like 25 and sexy or something.

    • @naughteedesign
      @naughteedesign 10 лет назад +2

      MrOmniblast
      babies are kept as babies i'm afraid (haven't you seen all those cherub paintings)... however, of course the babies defecate chocolate mousse and vomit vanilla ice cream, yahweh thought of everything 8-)

    • @MrOmniblast
      @MrOmniblast 10 лет назад +2

      Lol, it's funny because those Cherubs aren't even cherubs...Cherubs are fucking terrifying.
      fc04.deviantart.net/fs17/i/2007/133/0/1/One_of_the_Cherubim_by_loucat.jpg

    • @naughteedesign
      @naughteedesign 10 лет назад +2

      ***** thanks chrissy, of course one of my faves would be found in the chronicles of trek...
      “You’ve never really faced death, have you?” “...No; not like this. I haven’t faced death. I’ve cheated death. I’ve tricked my way out of death and patted myself on the back for my ingenuity; I know nothing.”
      and who could forget
      “Of my friend I can only say this: of all the souls that I met on my travels, his was the most… human.”
      ;-) nd

  • @Cheesesteakfreak
    @Cheesesteakfreak 9 лет назад +6

    1:20:30 - Cliffe doesn't understand the term he is criticizing.
    He says "entomological nihilism" .... or just, nihilism... is the view that nothing can be known for absolute certainty.
    Correction - Nihilism's definition (check it yourself) - "the rejection of all religious and moral principles, often in the belief that life is meaningless."
    What Cliffe was actually referring to was Hard Solipsism - "the view or theory that the self is all that can be known to exist."
    Cliffe primarily understands that Atheists disagree with him, but he lazily doesn't bother to accurately understand exactly how, which ISN'T THAT HARD TO DO, and then he arrogantly starts asserting they are wrong and something is wrong with them all while not having a reasonable understanding of what he is criticizing.
    He is a grown up child.

    • @coreygossman6243
      @coreygossman6243 3 года назад +4

      No. Thank you for providing the timestamp to prove that what you yourself said is incorrect. Cliffe describes nihilism correctly and doesn't mention Solipsism at all (though Matt does reference his own scoliosis earlier in the debate).

  • @issanaderi
    @issanaderi 6 месяцев назад +19

    This christian guy is just preaching rather than having an intellectual discussion

    • @andrepradoguimaraes8646
      @andrepradoguimaraes8646 5 месяцев назад +2

      Of course he is, he is a preacher. If they wanted science, should have called a Christian scientist.

    • @joellemus7116
      @joellemus7116 4 месяца назад +4

      If you were to actually listen and respect the words coming out of cliffes mouth, you would realize that he actually is having an intellectual discussion. Yes he's preaching, but he's not preaching blind faith. In the beginning he shows how us as human beings are evidence for a creator.
      It is intellectualy dishonest of you to think he's just preaching. For example, morality. Matt as an atheist will create his own morality. But if you follow the atheistic thinking, then everyone can decide what is morality. If I think that one thing is evil, but you think that it is not, then there is no morality, it just is. And if an atheist follows their faith to the end, then they must sit back and do nothing when something happens, whether good or evil. That event just "is", in the eyes and mind of someone who does not believe in God.
      With God their is objective good and objective evil and if you will be honest with yourself and realize that yes, there are things in this life that are absolutely wrong, and absolutely right, then you can come also realize that there must be something deciding that morality. God

    • @GhostGamer95-33
      @GhostGamer95-33 4 месяца назад +4

      Cliffe is having an intellectual discussion. But if you really believe your own logic, then you must also say that the atheist is preaching atheism, or else you are being intellectually dishonest and inconsistent.

  • @theandyizzyshow
    @theandyizzyshow 9 лет назад

    This debate was bad. On both sides. I feel Matt won this purely with the fact that he didn't give claims like "Everything is an accident, if you don't believe in God." What?

  • @TheSport78
    @TheSport78 10 месяцев назад +4

    I see one man preaching with no evidence, and the other man providing logical arguments and rationale. Thanks, Matt.

  • @gregm6894
    @gregm6894 2 года назад +5

    I actually couldn't watch this whole video. The Atheist's argument are so full of straw men that it's too painful to listen to. That said, I would challenge Matt Dillahunty to disassemble his wristwatch completely, then throw all the pieces into the air non-stop until they become anything functional. Any intellectually honest person knows that it would never happen (and that is with pieces already designed by an intellect to be functional) -- he would simply go to his grave trying to prove his hypothesis that all the functional order and fine tuning in the Universe came about by accident.
    The second point is that I hear this atheist and others talk about how belief in God is not necessary for people to lead 'good' lives. The terms 'good' and 'evil' only have meaning in reference to a moral law giver -- without God there is no objective basis for 'good' and 'evil'. The fact is that those who reject God tend to be very self interested, and in actual practice they may be polite, law abiding, etc., but in regard to sacrificial giving of resources and time to help fellow humans, their walk does not equal their talk -- when was the last time you saw and 'American Atheists' 18 wheeler pulling into a tornado ravaged town with medical supplies, food, and volunteer workers -- none that I am aware of.
    And lastly, the logical societal conclusion of Atheism is simply dictatorial rule by whoever has the biggest club. The Bible declares that such a world leader will ultimately declare total power and demand devotion -- and it won't be a picnic when it happens. Praise God that rule will only last for 3.5 Yrs. before Jesus returns.

  • @andrewwhite1280
    @andrewwhite1280 9 лет назад +21

    yet in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loves us, for i am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities nor powers, nor things present nor things to come, nor height nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord AMEN. I LOVE YOU JESUS

  • @vinny142
    @vinny142 9 лет назад

    @1:19:00 Seriously? A grown man, coming to a debate with an athiest like Matt, and you *seriously* want to bring up the watchmaker argument? Personal incredulity?
    It has been said before in the comments, Cliffe is not debating, he is preaching, he is blindly repeating the arguments that he has heard over the years, and that he has not investigated once he found out that they appear, at first glance anyway, to support his argument.
    My problem with that is that it is dishonest, because he would demand a doctort keep searching for the real cause of a disease,he would want his mechanic to really fix his car, he would never accept anyone just sitting down and saying "well, that seems to be a possible reason so I'll stop here'. But when it's about god, suddenly he doesn't *WANT* more research, suddenly it's bad to try to find out if his argument is correct.
    Faith makes people dishonest, it has been shown here once again.