Congrats Bishop Barron and those at Word On Fire on the Ben Shapiro Sunday Special episode... that interview is already at 51k views after one day, and will definitely go into the hundreds of thousands, and perhaps even break 1M views... you are reaching such a wide audience and I'm thrilled!
@The Cats Yep. It's nice to finally see some Catholics who know what they're talking about actually getting more of an online audience. The Daily Wire has over 1M subscribers, so I am very grateful for Ben Shapiro and what he is doing.
As an atheist, I came to this video because I have yet to hear good religious arguments and that to better understand my own position, I have to hear - and understand - the other side of the argument. What you said in the end really resonated with me, and we shouldn't give in to bland tolerance about what is most important, which is the question of meaning. Thanks !
Bishop Barron, I just finished your in interview with Ben Shapiro, and it had me completely captivated. Please continue to have discussions with todays great thinkers, our faith depends on it. Thank you for always re igniting my faith.
That is why it would be a nice discussion. Jordan converses with those who are atheists or those who mostly supports his own ideology. Bishop Barron is not only a man of faith but a theologian who is learned in philosophy that would force Jordan to rethink a lot of what he spouts. You don’t have to agree with Jordan to have a nice conversation between these two
@Steve McQueen I have no idea any of the words you just used... but basically, it sounds like you just don't want to have allow a conversation by dude who was PERSECUTED for his beliefs. But you already know what that is like, so you don't need to hear another man's opinion on it. Makes alot of cents bro. Bro has some compassion and empathy for people's struggle. Be more open-minded. You have 4 subs and 0 videos. If you have a story to tell people will listen. Allow people to talk. Allow yourself to talk. You have an amazing story. I believe in it. The way you come across just sounds so ridiculous that I felt the need to leave a comment. Just being honest bro. Check yourself before you wreck yourself. Unfortunately this was written on Christmas day 12-25-2018. But whishing you the best in life and 2019 Continued Success, Alan Nafarrete And just in case this dude deletes his comment this is what he said: Be accountable for everything you say bro. It's insight into yourself. My response to you is insight into what I believe. If you would like to come on my stream then you know how to reach me. why? I mean it would be good exposure for the Bishop, but Peterson isn't very interesting... The only thing I find interesting, is why he keeps mentioning 3 years when asked if he's Christian? If he experienced a metanoia of sorts, I would be very interested in hearing about that. if it is a reference to a particular prophecy, I would be interested in hearing about that as well... specifically his calculations because most put its end at ~2017 but for now I just assume he is a typical poorly read Jungian theosophist, with various conflicting influences, and it is such boring nonsense, I could go my whole life with out hearing anymore of it.. everything he detests in the so called "post modernism" are actually core principles of the enlightenment, the same enlightenment which he upholds as some Golden age of the holy spirit like Eckhart... Yawn.... in fact that whole line of philosophy' is ZzZzZ… if you want allegory, read medieval allegory, its much more complex and thought provoking.
@@AlanNafarrete I'll admit that guy was being pretentious. But do you seriously think that Peterson has been "persecuted" for his beliefs? Why? because people criticize him?
Very good points made here overall. As an atheist I can hardly tell you how refreshing it would be to have all my discussions with religious believers be ones where they do all the things Bishop Barron described here. Maybe I'm not bumping into the right believers but thus far it's rarely the case. I would dispute Brandon's suggestion (based only on one experiment he witnessed) that theists are better than atheists at understanding both sides of their arguments; that simply hasn't been my experience, and Bishop Barron was right to shrug his shoulders at that comment. Unfortunately, I'm skeptical that a push for greater intellectual and logical rigor is likely to get much traction among either the broader religious leadership or the mass of ordinary believers, Catholic or otherwise. There are too many advantages to both groups for just accepting claims and instructions on faith and authority and discouraging the use of evidence and reason.
hello Bishop Robert Barron, Id like to hear you expound or have another shot at answering ben shapiros question about will he goto heaven. Alot of us(me and my father) thought you were a little wishy washy on the answer and possibly even missed an opportunity to proclaim the gospel message . Could you talk us through your answer again so im not confused. And praise god for your wonderful ministry!
Dear Bishop Barron, I tried to comprehend your points of starting an argument but couldn’t grasp them. Maybe I should try to get through this discussion with you and Brandon but I don’t know if I would be capable of arguing the existence of God based on St. Thomas Aquinas. My experience with Christ through my life in the church, through a sacramental life and life of prayer and study of scripture,the saints and even church document you might think would give me all I need to engage with anyone. In fact I count more on the grace of the Holy Spirit in those divine appointments because in all honesty if left to my intellect I’d be up a creek. I truly appreciate and admire your ability to engage with folk on this higher plain and who knows maybe your knowledge may penetrate my own simple mind. I know that God can give individuals Grace that even startles them when in an encounter with one whom God wants to reach, ie St Catherine of Siena. This gives me hope that I too can be useful. I go to the words Our Lord spoke when he says, “ When they deliver you up, do not be anxious about how you are to speak or what you are to say; for what you are to say will be given to you in that hour.” Matt 10:19 I may not be delivered up but when it comes to arguments that’s what I think of. The brain goes mushy, the tongue dries up and I’m not sure what language I speak. I’m thankful that our Good Lord works through all different methods. May the ears you need to reach hear, and may you pray for me that I may be ever ready to “ make a defense to any one who calls you to account for the hope that is in you, yet do it with gentleness and reverence.” 1Peter:3:15 Sincerely in Christ and thankful for you. Merry Christmas
Hi Bishop Barron, I am your avid fan residing here in U.A.E. I hope that your books on word on fire website will also be available for international shipping outside US. Thank you
Great suggestions that are going to largely fall upon deaf ears. When very few religious believers came to their beliefs via sound and coherent logical arguments in the first place, trying to get them to learn that skill later is going to be a classic case of old dog, new tricks.
Seriously Bishop? You don't live in the real world, among average people, if you think those who are dismissive (at best) and hostile (at worst) to our faith are looking for a homework assignment---reading a book or sitting down to slog through Aquinas (LOL). What we need is a compelling 60 second elevator speech. We have to be able to make our case quickly and in a charismatic way to get people thinking--to plant a seed. All we have to do is raise curiosity so they will want to go on to learn more. What are those words?
It's not the nonbelievers who most need to learn logical reasoning and become familiar with the arguments of Aquinas. It's the believers. You wanting a 60 second attention-getting elevator speech is a by-product of many years of believers giving crappy, illogical arguments and little to no evidence for their belief claims. The result is that nonbelievers have, _rightly,_ become jaded and dismissive. Even if you were given a truly novel and attention-getting opener, the next ten minutes of conversation after that is going to reveal that you still don't have any arguments or evidence of substance for the curious to go on to learn. Fix that first, then start on the slow road of regaining skeptics' trust and interest.
Bishop Barron, I appreciate all that you do. When it comes to arguing logic. I find it easier to listen to people like your self to have a position and side, but what different ways can someone discuss logic? To prove something like what makes something good or bad. Thanks and God bless
Hey Bishop!! My brother brought me here and I think I am supposed to leave a comment!!!! I am building up my own business and branding and right now questioning my position of how I am suppose to build my business. Just figured I would leave my 2 cents. Thanks for being available on this platform!! Really means alot to alot of people!!! MERRY CHRISTMAS TOO 12-25-2018 Continued Success, Alan Nafarrete
This will be pretty helpful moving forward. I'm 15...that's all you're getting from me, and youtubers like Fr. Barron and the Vortex (as all human beings, Fr. Barron isn't perfect with regards to the entirety of theology). I hope I can master religious arguments to help my Agnostic friends.
In what way do your agnostic friends need help that better religious arguments will provide? If it's to show them that your beliefs are true, then how do you even know they're true if you don't have good arguments for them yet?
Scott E well I mean like, it’s really more of finding a way to talk to them about religion in a serious way, because I studied the arguments for God and Catholicism well.
@@ToxicPea Okay. Have they actually indicated to you that they want to talk about religion? I do think Bishop Barron gave a lot of good suggestions here for having constructive debates about religious claims, but if the people you're talking to aren't interested in the first place then the best suggestion is to just leave the subject alone with those people.
Scott E true, but the point of evangelization is to reach all ears, is it not? Then again, I suppose if said ears are shut, one can’t do much about it.
@@ToxicPea One thing I can tell you is that if they're not currently interested in hearing about it, then trying to push it on them anyway is only going to reinforce that, no matter how much you feel you have a duty to evangelize. And saying their "ears are shut" is a somewhat negative way of phrasing that lack of interest. In this day and age, more often than not it's not because they're closed-minded or hate God or any other popular Christian stereotypes of non-believers, but simply that they've heard this message many times already, and it's never been accompanied by convincing arguments or evidence. It varies from person to person, of course, but that just means that a wise course might be to first listen to them and find out what their views and past experience with religious beliefs and arguments have been, before even beginning to give your own message. And if they don't even want to share that information, then drop the subject and go on being their friend.
Well maybe not true of many who come here, but most people are not engaged really with what the faith actually is, let alone seeking its deeper meaning, unfortunately.
The Archivist this is obviously only for people who are interested. I still think it is important to know the background of the religion which is the basis of Western civilisation. One important reason is that our countries are absorbing many people from different backgrounds with different religions. They ARE still very attached to their religions and most of them have false indoctrination or just ignorance about our religious background. I feel it is very important to be able to answer them and counter their wrong ideas. I know many people who have no respect for us because we ourselves are so ignorant about the treasure we have . In the end we are snowed under by other ideologies and religions. This is enabled through democracy.
I haven't studied Lonergan, but I'd think that part of his definition of "a properly constituted subjectivity" would almost have to include the acceptance of the very existence of such a thing as an objective reality or truth as an initial condition for any rational arguments or discussions. That's why, imho, it becomes so difficult to have rational arguments with those who subscribe to the post-modernist denial of any such thing as "objective truth." They don't believe there is any truth there to come to, all there is is persuasion to win people to your point of view, so all logical fallacies do is handcuff the person who's trying to argue rationally while all the rules are off for them to attract people to their position. Put a bit more humorously, a common meme is "Come to the dark side... we have cookies!" A rational response would be "What do baked snacks have to do with right and wrong, good and evil, living a good or bad life?" but most people will just think "Mmmmm Cookies!"
I had an opportunity recently to apply an argument for objective truth. One of the post-docs in our laboratory has a propensity to make truth relative in mostly moral arguments. When an ambiguous result recently came up with the post-doc in the bay next to him, I responded, "there is only one truth; you just don't know what it is." I could see him wanting to object, but probably the strongest premise of science is that there is only 1 truth and it is intelligible.
ad hominem- attacking the person, straw man- undet playing their argument, genetic fallacy- rejecting argument by claiming it's origin. moral relativism- not treating issue seriously.
22:35 Hockey would be so much better. The opponent who uses a logical fallacy gets 2 minutes out of the argument. Go to the penalty box, aka the “sin bin”. It’s perfect!
@BishopRobertBarron can you in the future discuss on predestination and the logic behind it? Do you believe that existences outside of time is a oxymoron? In other words does Existence requires time?
27:56 Well speaking of fallacies that is a fallacy right there. Just because people wouldn't accept that same argument in another scenario is no prove for the actual truth or falseness of the argument itself.
Hey I have a question. I am married have a wife and a son. I could not imagine like without them. There fore I could not imagine heaven without being a family together. What are your thoughts about that and what are your thoughts about eternal life? Like a billion years what would we be doing
What are some of the major objections that come from a Protestant's dis-belief in Purgatory, and what sources are there to develop a better understanding to overcome those objections from Protestants so as to deepen my faith, hope and love for God and His Loving Mercy within the Catholic Church?
If any religious believers wish to apply Bishop Barron's sensible and useful suggestions here, then definitely do so, but begin with yourselves and other theists around the globe. Question the claims and fallacies of your own leaders, challenge the absurdities of the fundamentalists and creationists, demand that Muslim beliefs not be automatically respected but be supported with evidence and sound reasoning. Above all, examine your own beliefs and expunge those that fail to meet a high standard of argument and reasoning. Only then will you have earned the right to turn to non-believers and present your case for all the things you hold to be true which we do not.
@@daenithriuszanathos9306Dear Friend - Don't try and convert me ! Rice Crispies are the Way, the Truth and the Life - If your eating Cheerios every morning for breakfast, I urge you to repent now ! REPENT NOW BEFORE IT"S TOO LATE !!!
Bishop Barron I have a difficult time praying to "God" if "God "is not a "being". Jesus gave us the lords prayer with "Our Father" It would seem that HE was referring to a Supreme Being. Can you help me with this confusion? Thank you and I love to listen to your talks. God Bless you.
Thomas Aquinas explained it with a phrase that translates “univocal predication between the Father and His creation is impossible”. To break that into less technical language, while we can and do use the same words to describe God and His creation, the words do not (and can not) mean precisely the same thing in these when they are applied to these two different subjects, but only by analogy. God Is, but in such a categorical different way than humanity than a rock, or a dog, or a person, or even an angel that if you say “God and Caesar are powerful”, is like saying “he held your breath and the door for his beloved”-the adjective (in the former) or verb (in the latter) makes sense in both cases, but can not be interpreted in the same way because the way we understand “powerful” when applied to a human or “held” when applied to a door mean vastly different things than “powerful” does when applied to God or “held” when applied to the breath (this figure of speech, where the same descriptor is applied to two different objects in vastly different ways is called “zeugma” by the way). God is everywhere in his creation at all times and yet outside of his creation and, as the sheer act of being itself can justly be said to be all that be, but He is not bound by the constraints that being a member of the genus “being” would imply, even with the modifier “supreme”. Thus we can only say the Father “is” with a different “voice” (“univocal” = with same voice or meaning) than we say a person “is”, and doing so causes us to incorrectly attribute traits of beings to God that are not proper to Him. This recognition is the same instinct that causes the Eastern Orthodox to shy away from any cataphatic descriptions of God (descriptions that list positive traits of God like “Wise” or “Good” or “Powerful”) at all, preferring apophatic (negative) terms like “Boundless”, or “Without Flaw”, as these do not invite the unaware to confuse the mundane meaning of “Good” or “Powerful” with human understandings of the terms, which can make God seem far more comfortably familiar and domestic than I AM is. Jesus is the exception to this-being fully human, He “is” in the more mundane sense of the word, but being fully divine He also is in the same way the Father is. Thus, we can say “Jesus and Peter are” without any change in voice, and also “Jesus and the Father are” without any change in voice. Jesus bridges even the most fundamental of gaps between heaven and Earth.
God is our father and you can pray to him as our father as Jesus taught us. That is the best way for us to think about him as a loving father. Just as Saint Augustine could not understand the Trinity we don't need to wrap our head around who God ultimately is. As the creator of all things and beyond all things he is not definable. If he was he would not be God. Just enjoy praying to him as a father who loves you beyond your wildest imagination. This is the best any of us can do and it is why the our father is such a simple and Beautiful prayer
@@petercarlson811 Christ is God. rocks are also not beings, humans are though. As a human you are comprised of a body Made in the Image of God with a Rational Soul, the two cannot be separated. That you try to sneer God away as contingent and created and material does not make it so.
@@petercarlson811 So you are asking for the supernatural qualities of non-being material objects like rocks? Rocks have no presence past the material world, so that was easy.
Dear Bishop Barron, I hope you are feeling well; Thank you and love in the Lord Jesus Christ. (maybe it was just your haircut in an earlier video; Fox at 5)-- Oops, It was Cardinal Dolan on Fox and Friends.
And antivaxxer. I examed the evidence about vaccines carefully and the huge increase in the sheer number given over the last thirty years. It is a problem. Cohort studies show large effects. Like 35x incidence of allergic rhinitis.
Bishop Barron, Per our discussion that occurred under the Stephen Hawking video; you have proved my point. How is it that you would spend your time and have "a good religious argument" with Ben Shapiro, a Jew who rejects the Divinity of Jesus Christ and consequently the divine establishment of the Catholic Church, BUT you will NOT sit down and have "a good religious argument" with Michael Voris who believes in the divinity of Christ and the divine establishment of the Catholic Church? By your actions, you imply that Shapiro, a popular Jewish social media person, is worthy of your time, but Michael Voris, a popular Catholic social media person, is not!! Your own words describe Michael Voris as a bully and not worth your time, but Ben Shapiro who rejects Jesus Christ AND His Church IS worthy of your time!!!! God bless, Michael
But as for the arguments themselves, all religious arguments ultimately reduce to a biased belief, which means all religious arguments are bad religious arguments. Keep in mind that religion is revealed, and for a good religious argument to be made, a Christian needs to show how information derived from reality correlates with religious revelations. Religion fails here. Any argument a Christian makes can always be refuted by reality derived information. Anything from morality, origins, God's nature, etc, can all be shown how Christianity is wrong. So there is no good religious argument unless one talks about the practicality over the veracity of religion.
We have to admit that much religion is irrational foolishness. Much. Besides fairytale idolatry, there is goofy material heresy. Years ago I saw a Protestant track entitled, "Must Christians commit intellectual suicide?" Why even ask the question if there wasn't a problem? My answer to that is, "Yes, you may as well use a guillotine if you're Protestant." Let me explain. I was a convert to Christ through Protestants at 16 years in 1968.These Protestants had robbed me of my ability to think morally and rationally so badly that I had a mental breakdown two years later at 18 in 1970 shortly after operating as a male prostitute ("once saved, always saved"). All the professionals who helped me regain my sanity and straighten out my life said that the Protestant lack of rationality had contributed to my problem. I became Catholic in March 1986. As a Catholic, I have never felt pressure to believe anything irrational or morally irresponsible. For me, that is the greatest proof of she being what she says she is. I could give many examples of Protestant irrationality. Let me focus on one fundamental problem: sola scriptura. Protestants base their believe in 'the Bible alone' on II Timothy 3:16. All that scripture says is that scripture is a helping device. In I Timothy 3:15, St. Paul calls the Church that produced the Bible, "the pillar and ground of the truth." Protestants will tell you to ignore this important statement while exaggerating the other. They say this all the time they're saying that all one needs is the Bible that they chop into millions of pieces. So irrational.
Wow you make a good point could you explain more if you can especially based on the two scriptures you gave. I am eager to know more if you can explain.
So they waited until Cardinal Pell was found guilty of sexual abuse in Australia. The highest ranking Catholic to be found guilty of such offenses. How very sensitive. Good use of social media!! I never hear Robert address these much more serious issues in his talks. What a missed opportunity.
to have a religious argument, simply utter these words: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” End of the religious argument.
Please show me how god is anything more than a placeholder for ignorance. And if faith is not credulous wishful thinking then why is there never any actual evidence cited to show faith based beliefs to be true.
The existence of God is the conclusion of a rational, metaphysical argument. It is not a "gap" in a conventional scientific account of nature. It is the answer to a qualitatively different question than any raised by the sciences. If you want the details, take a look at my videos on the argument from contingency.
@@BishopBarron setting aside the logical fallacies contained in cosmological arguments for god and disregarding the fact that modern science contradicts these premises and it's conclusion, this still appeals to god as the great unknown. Some catholic apologists will freely admit this and some will say this ignorance is a way of knowing. My question is how can a person who is interested in holding true beliefs acknowledge that a god actually exists in reality? And how can you deny that faith is credulous when the beliefs are not falsifiable?
@@BishopBarron For one thing, the contingency argument fails to yield YOUR god. If accepted, it only yields some vague uncaused cause that theists hasten to label "God", in the hopes that no one notices that it has not been shown by the argument to have any of the vital characteristics of the God they actually believe in. While I am not pointing out any logical failure of the argument here, you still have all your work ahead of you to get from the contingency argument to "Jesus Christ, Lord and Savior". You like the contingency argument? Congratulations, you're a deist (at most).
Scott E Well of course. With the argument from contingency we’re just getting started. By a series of logical moves, we then come to the various divine attributes. Look at the first 12 questions of Aquinas ‘s Summa for the details.
Bishop Barron is one of the greatest voices in Catholicism for me to understand all that is right as a convert .
Congrats Bishop Barron and those at Word On Fire on the Ben Shapiro Sunday Special episode... that interview is already at 51k views after one day, and will definitely go into the hundreds of thousands, and perhaps even break 1M views... you are reaching such a wide audience and I'm thrilled!
@The Cats Agree. Honestly, I'd love to see Ben Shapiro get some more Catholics on.. Scott Hahn, Peter Kreeft, Taylor Marshall, etc.
@The Cats Yep. It's nice to finally see some Catholics who know what they're talking about actually getting more of an online audience. The Daily Wire has over 1M subscribers, so I am very grateful for Ben Shapiro and what he is doing.
@@carsonianthegreat4672 Yea I like Michael, he's not on the same level as the ones I mentioned though. And that's ok, Michael is good at what he does.
It's a pity that some pharisaical Catholics can't appreciate that the good Bishop was proposing the faith to Mr. Shapiro.
@Maximillian K when did Ben Shapiro peddle racist ideology? throw some examples at me please
Thank you so much Bishop Barron!!! Praying for you!! Please keep my children in your prayers!! 🙏
As an atheist, I came to this video because I have yet to hear good religious arguments and that to better understand my own position, I have to hear - and understand - the other side of the argument. What you said in the end really resonated with me, and we shouldn't give in to bland tolerance about what is most important, which is the question of meaning. Thanks !
I’m Protestant, but I love Bishop Barron. This man is such a blessing to the Christian faith and a light in these dark times!
Bishop Barron, I just finished your in interview with Ben Shapiro, and it had me completely captivated. Please continue to have discussions with todays great thinkers, our faith depends on it. Thank you for always re igniting my faith.
frankg4242 have you seen the discussion on the Rubin report with Rabbi Wolpe?? Worth the hour
@@ryanhunsader7038 yes, it was a great dialogue as well.
Wow, the answer to that last question is really great! Thank you bishop Barron for answering!
Southern baptist here chiming in. Might get that book, great conversation.
« Is proving that I am right more important than getting at the truth? » That question is a gem. Thank you!
I would love to see a dialogue between the Bishop and Jordan Peterson!!!!
That is why it would be a nice discussion. Jordan converses with those who are atheists or those who mostly supports his own ideology. Bishop Barron is not only a man of faith but a theologian who is learned in philosophy that would force Jordan to rethink a lot of what he spouts. You don’t have to agree with Jordan to have a nice conversation between these two
Steve McQueen thank you. God bless and peace be with you
I would love to see him talk with sam harris.
@Steve McQueen I have no idea any of the words you just used... but basically, it sounds like you just don't want to have allow a conversation by dude who was PERSECUTED for his beliefs. But you already know what that is like, so you don't need to hear another man's opinion on it.
Makes alot of cents bro. Bro has some compassion and empathy for people's struggle. Be more open-minded. You have 4 subs and 0 videos. If you have a story to tell people will listen. Allow people to talk. Allow yourself to talk. You have an amazing story. I believe in it.
The way you come across just sounds so ridiculous that I felt the need to leave a comment. Just being honest bro.
Check yourself before you wreck yourself.
Unfortunately this was written on Christmas day 12-25-2018.
But whishing you the best in life and 2019
Continued Success,
Alan Nafarrete
And just in case this dude deletes his comment this is what he said: Be accountable for everything you say bro. It's insight into yourself. My response to you is insight into what I believe. If you would like to come on my stream then you know how to reach me.
why? I mean it would be good exposure for the Bishop, but Peterson isn't very interesting...
The only thing I find interesting, is why he keeps mentioning 3 years when asked if he's Christian?
If he experienced a metanoia of sorts, I would be very interested in hearing about that.
if it is a reference to a particular prophecy, I would be interested in hearing about that as well... specifically his calculations because most put its end at ~2017
but for now I just assume he is a typical poorly read Jungian theosophist, with various conflicting influences, and it is such boring nonsense, I could go my whole life with out hearing anymore of it..
everything he detests in the so called "post modernism" are actually core principles of the enlightenment, the same enlightenment which he upholds as some Golden age of the holy spirit like Eckhart... Yawn.... in fact that whole line of philosophy' is ZzZzZ… if you want allegory, read medieval allegory, its much more complex and thought provoking.
@@AlanNafarrete I'll admit that guy was being pretentious. But do you seriously think that Peterson has been "persecuted" for his beliefs? Why? because people criticize him?
Very good points made here overall. As an atheist I can hardly tell you how refreshing it would be to have all my discussions with religious believers be ones where they do all the things Bishop Barron described here. Maybe I'm not bumping into the right believers but thus far it's rarely the case. I would dispute Brandon's suggestion (based only on one experiment he witnessed) that theists are better than atheists at understanding both sides of their arguments; that simply hasn't been my experience, and Bishop Barron was right to shrug his shoulders at that comment.
Unfortunately, I'm skeptical that a push for greater intellectual and logical rigor is likely to get much traction among either the broader religious leadership or the mass of ordinary believers, Catholic or otherwise. There are too many advantages to both groups for just accepting claims and instructions on faith and authority and discouraging the use of evidence and reason.
Consider using a specific type of thumbnail for podcasts. I keep expecting standard Bishop Barron videos.
For podcasts there’s the words “Word on Fire” in the bottom right corner.
It's not obvious from an android notification.
@@piratep You can also see the length of the video.
When I think of faith, I'm reminded of a satisfied inner child. I tend to relate the soul to the inner child. Awesome video. thanks. I have your book.
This was an excellent discussion. This scholarly aspect of Christianity is a part that I've always been highly interested in.
hello Bishop Robert Barron, Id like to hear you expound or have another shot at answering ben shapiros question about will he goto heaven. Alot of us(me and my father) thought you were a little wishy washy on the answer and possibly even missed an opportunity to proclaim the gospel message . Could you talk us through your answer again so im not confused. And praise god for your wonderful ministry!
Mark Peter Read Lumen Gentium 16 and Redemptoris Missio, para. 10.
@@BishopBarron thanks bishop. And thank god we have bishops like you.
Dear Bishop Barron,
I tried to comprehend your points of starting an argument but couldn’t grasp them. Maybe I should try to get through this discussion with you and Brandon but I don’t know if I would be capable of arguing the existence of God based on St. Thomas Aquinas. My experience with Christ through my life in the church, through a sacramental life and life of prayer and study of scripture,the saints and even church document you might think would give me all I need to engage with anyone. In fact I count more on the grace of the Holy Spirit in those divine appointments because in all honesty if left to my intellect I’d be up a creek. I truly appreciate and admire your ability to engage with folk on this higher plain and who knows maybe your knowledge may penetrate my own simple mind. I know that God can give individuals Grace that even startles them when in an encounter with one whom God wants to reach, ie St Catherine of Siena. This gives me hope that I too can be useful. I go to the words Our Lord spoke when he says, “ When they deliver you up, do not be anxious about how you are to speak or what you are to say; for what you are to say will be given to you in that hour.” Matt 10:19
I may not be delivered up but when it comes to arguments that’s what I think of. The brain goes mushy, the tongue dries up and I’m not sure what language I speak. I’m thankful that our Good Lord works through all different methods. May the ears you need to reach hear, and may you pray for me that I may be ever ready to “ make a defense to any one who calls you to account for the hope that is in you, yet do it with gentleness and reverence.” 1Peter:3:15 Sincerely in Christ and thankful for you. Merry Christmas
Hi Bishop Barron, I am your avid fan residing here in U.A.E. I hope that your books on word on fire website will also be available for international shipping outside US. Thank you
Great suggestions that are going to largely fall upon deaf ears. When very few religious believers came to their beliefs via sound and coherent logical arguments in the first place, trying to get them to learn that skill later is going to be a classic case of old dog, new tricks.
Brilliant from both Bishop Barron and Brandon - Very enlightening and most edifying - thank you to both of you
Seriously Bishop? You don't live in the real world, among average people, if you think those who are dismissive (at best) and hostile (at worst) to our faith are looking for a homework assignment---reading a book or sitting down to slog through Aquinas (LOL). What we need is a compelling 60 second elevator speech. We have to be able to make our case quickly and in a charismatic way to get people thinking--to plant a seed. All we have to do is raise curiosity so they will want to go on to learn more. What are those words?
It's not the nonbelievers who most need to learn logical reasoning and become familiar with the arguments of Aquinas. It's the believers. You wanting a 60 second attention-getting elevator speech is a by-product of many years of believers giving crappy, illogical arguments and little to no evidence for their belief claims. The result is that nonbelievers have, _rightly,_ become jaded and dismissive. Even if you were given a truly novel and attention-getting opener, the next ten minutes of conversation after that is going to reveal that you still don't have any arguments or evidence of substance for the curious to go on to learn. Fix that first, then start on the slow road of regaining skeptics' trust and interest.
Absolutely enjoyed the challenge...
God bless the work you are doing.
Bishop Barron, I appreciate all that you do. When it comes to arguing logic. I find it easier to listen to people like your self to have a position and side, but what different ways can someone discuss logic? To prove something like what makes something good or bad.
Thanks and God bless
Bishop Barron, Is this book easy for the average intellectual person to understand? Thank-you!
💯 percent agree
We have a starting point
And
Move on from there
...
We’re all better for it
😊
Hey Bishop!! My brother brought me here and I think I am supposed to leave a comment!!!!
I am building up my own business and branding and right now questioning my position of how I am suppose to build my business. Just figured I would leave my 2 cents. Thanks for being available on this platform!! Really means alot to alot of people!!!
MERRY CHRISTMAS TOO
12-25-2018
Continued Success,
Alan Nafarrete
This will be pretty helpful moving forward. I'm 15...that's all you're getting from me, and youtubers like Fr. Barron and the Vortex (as all human beings, Fr. Barron isn't perfect with regards to the entirety of theology). I hope I can master religious arguments to help my Agnostic friends.
In what way do your agnostic friends need help that better religious arguments will provide? If it's to show them that your beliefs are true, then how do you even know they're true if you don't have good arguments for them yet?
Scott E well I mean like, it’s really more of finding a way to talk to them about religion in a serious way, because I studied the arguments for God and Catholicism well.
@@ToxicPea
Okay. Have they actually indicated to you that they want to talk about religion? I do think Bishop Barron gave a lot of good suggestions here for having constructive debates about religious claims, but if the people you're talking to aren't interested in the first place then the best suggestion is to just leave the subject alone with those people.
Scott E true, but the point of evangelization is to reach all ears, is it not?
Then again, I suppose if said ears are shut, one can’t do much about it.
@@ToxicPea
One thing I can tell you is that if they're not currently interested in hearing about it, then trying to push it on them anyway is only going to reinforce that, no matter how much you feel you have a duty to evangelize. And saying their "ears are shut" is a somewhat negative way of phrasing that lack of interest. In this day and age, more often than not it's not because they're closed-minded or hate God or any other popular Christian stereotypes of non-believers, but simply that they've heard this message many times already, and it's never been accompanied by convincing arguments or evidence.
It varies from person to person, of course, but that just means that a wise course might be to first listen to them and find out what their views and past experience with religious beliefs and arguments have been, before even beginning to give your own message. And if they don't even want to share that information, then drop the subject and go on being their friend.
Just great! Thank-you Bishop Barron and Brandon!
Problem is that in order to have discussions you first have to know your religion and so many of us do not know enough in order to have a discussion.
Well maybe not true of many who come here, but most people are not engaged really with what the faith actually is, let alone seeking its deeper meaning, unfortunately.
The Archivist this is obviously only for people who are interested. I still think it is important to know the background of the religion which is the basis of Western civilisation. One important reason is that our countries are absorbing many people from different backgrounds with different religions. They ARE still very attached to their religions and most of them have false indoctrination or just ignorance about our religious background. I feel it is very important to be able to answer them and counter their wrong ideas. I know many people who have no respect for us because we ourselves are so ignorant about the treasure we have . In the end we are snowed under by other ideologies and religions. This is enabled through democracy.
Read Why We're Catholic by Trent Horn. It lays out the Faith deliberately and definitively. Then you can use that to expand outward.
GSRider thank you, I will certainly read it.
I haven't studied Lonergan, but I'd think that part of his definition of "a properly constituted subjectivity" would almost have to include the acceptance of the very existence of such a thing as an objective reality or truth as an initial condition for any rational arguments or discussions. That's why, imho, it becomes so difficult to have rational arguments with those who subscribe to the post-modernist denial of any such thing as "objective truth." They don't believe there is any truth there to come to, all there is is persuasion to win people to your point of view, so all logical fallacies do is handcuff the person who's trying to argue rationally while all the rules are off for them to attract people to their position.
Put a bit more humorously, a common meme is "Come to the dark side... we have cookies!" A rational response would be "What do baked snacks have to do with right and wrong, good and evil, living a good or bad life?" but most people will just think "Mmmmm Cookies!"
I had an opportunity recently to apply an argument for objective truth. One of the post-docs in our laboratory has a propensity to make truth relative in mostly moral arguments. When an ambiguous result recently came up with the post-doc in the bay next to him, I responded, "there is only one truth; you just don't know what it is." I could see him wanting to object, but probably the strongest premise of science is that there is only 1 truth and it is intelligible.
Thanks Fr.
ad hominem- attacking the person, straw man- undet playing their argument, genetic fallacy- rejecting argument by claiming it's origin. moral relativism- not treating issue seriously.
22:35 Hockey would be so much better. The opponent who uses a logical fallacy gets 2 minutes out of the argument. Go to the penalty box, aka the “sin bin”. It’s perfect!
Great work!! Bishop...you and padre Luis Toro make a great team..
Thank you Bishop. Great talk. Learning a lot.
Bishop Barron cracked off a “An Atheist and Christian walk into a bar..” joke
@BishopRobertBarron can you in the future discuss on predestination and the logic behind it? Do you believe that existences outside of time is a oxymoron? In other words does Existence requires time?
Good info. Thanks for sharing.
27:56 Well speaking of fallacies that is a fallacy right there. Just because people wouldn't accept that same argument in another scenario is no prove for the actual truth or falseness of the argument itself.
Hey I have a question. I am married have a wife and a son. I could not imagine like without them. There fore I could not imagine heaven without being a family together. What are your thoughts about that and what are your thoughts about eternal life? Like a billion years what would we be doing
I think God would smile upon your love as a family :)
What are some of the major objections that come from a Protestant's dis-belief in Purgatory, and what sources are there to develop a better understanding to overcome those objections from Protestants so as to deepen my faith, hope and love for God and His Loving Mercy within the Catholic Church?
@Drogo Baggins www.catholic.com/tract/purgatory
www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/is-purgatory-in-the-bible
If any religious believers wish to apply Bishop Barron's sensible and useful suggestions here, then definitely do so, but begin with yourselves and other theists around the globe. Question the claims and fallacies of your own leaders, challenge the absurdities of the fundamentalists and creationists, demand that Muslim beliefs not be automatically respected but be supported with evidence and sound reasoning. Above all, examine your own beliefs and expunge those that fail to meet a high standard of argument and reasoning. Only then will you have earned the right to turn to non-believers and present your case for all the things you hold to be true which we do not.
Why does Bishop Barron never debate anyone of nonfaith or maybe he has and I haven't seen it.
A million thanks!
The bishop has spoken. The Crusade for Cheerios has begun!
Hey Buddy - Get Real !!! Rice Crispies Are The Only Way!!! Only Dorks Eat Cheerios !!!
@@dial108dnd Anathema!
@@daenithriuszanathos9306Dear Friend - Don't try and convert me ! Rice Crispies are the Way, the Truth and the Life - If your eating Cheerios every morning for breakfast, I urge you to repent now ! REPENT NOW BEFORE IT"S TOO LATE !!!
Bishop Barron I have a difficult time praying to "God" if "God "is not a "being". Jesus gave us the lords prayer with "Our Father" It would seem that HE was referring to a Supreme Being. Can you help me with this confusion? Thank you and I love to listen to your talks. God Bless you.
God's essense is his existence, they are one, which means he is being itself.
Thomas Aquinas explained it with a phrase that translates “univocal predication between the Father and His creation is impossible”. To break that into less technical language, while we can and do use the same words to describe God and His creation, the words do not (and can not) mean precisely the same thing in these when they are applied to these two different subjects, but only by analogy. God Is, but in such a categorical different way than humanity than a rock, or a dog, or a person, or even an angel that if you say “God and Caesar are powerful”, is like saying “he held your breath and the door for his beloved”-the adjective (in the former) or verb (in the latter) makes sense in both cases, but can not be interpreted in the same way because the way we understand “powerful” when applied to a human or “held” when applied to a door mean vastly different things than “powerful” does when applied to God or “held” when applied to the breath (this figure of speech, where the same descriptor is applied to two different objects in vastly different ways is called “zeugma” by the way). God is everywhere in his creation at all times and yet outside of his creation and, as the sheer act of being itself can justly be said to be all that be, but He is not bound by the constraints that being a member of the genus “being” would imply, even with the modifier “supreme”. Thus we can only say the Father “is” with a different “voice” (“univocal” = with same voice or meaning) than we say a person “is”, and doing so causes us to incorrectly attribute traits of beings to God that are not proper to Him. This recognition is the same instinct that causes the Eastern Orthodox to shy away from any cataphatic descriptions of God (descriptions that list positive traits of God like “Wise” or “Good” or “Powerful”) at all, preferring apophatic (negative) terms like “Boundless”, or “Without Flaw”, as these do not invite the unaware to confuse the mundane meaning of “Good” or “Powerful” with human understandings of the terms, which can make God seem far more comfortably familiar and domestic than I AM is.
Jesus is the exception to this-being fully human, He “is” in the more mundane sense of the word, but being fully divine He also is in the same way the Father is. Thus, we can say “Jesus and Peter are” without any change in voice, and also “Jesus and the Father are” without any change in voice. Jesus bridges even the most fundamental of gaps between heaven and Earth.
God is our father and you can pray to him as our father as Jesus taught us. That is the best way for us to think about him as a loving father. Just as Saint Augustine could not understand the Trinity we don't need to wrap our head around who God ultimately is. As the creator of all things and beyond all things he is not definable. If he was he would not be God. Just enjoy praying to him as a father who loves you beyond your wildest imagination. This is the best any of us can do and it is why the our father is such a simple and Beautiful prayer
@@petercarlson811 Christ is God. rocks are also not beings, humans are though. As a human you are comprised of a body Made in the Image of God with a Rational Soul, the two cannot be separated.
That you try to sneer God away as contingent and created and material does not make it so.
@@petercarlson811 So you are asking for the supernatural qualities of non-being material objects like rocks? Rocks have no presence past the material world, so that was easy.
Thanks very much.
29:21 Crusade for Cheerios.... I will go for that one
Praise the Lord Jesus Christ 🙏 Mother Mary Pray For Us 🙏Abba Father Bless us and we Adore You 🙏
Dear Bishop Barron, I hope you are feeling well; Thank you and love in the Lord Jesus Christ. (maybe it was just your haircut in an earlier video; Fox at 5)-- Oops, It was Cardinal Dolan on Fox and Friends.
Ad hominems in the form of labels, like “climate change denier”, is a sure sign something is being hidden.
And antivaxxer. I examed the evidence about vaccines carefully and the huge increase in the sheer number given over the last thirty years. It is a problem. Cohort studies show large effects. Like 35x incidence of allergic rhinitis.
19:00 good advice. I have been reluctant to give the atheists oxygen. I think I may have been fearful. Any good examples?
Looked up the book. 46 dollars including shipping to uk. Not exactly good news for the poor.
I would love to debate these people but if I were to do that, It would be bad for me and just a small % of 7 billion. Amen
Bishop Barron,
Per our discussion that occurred under the Stephen Hawking video; you have proved my point.
How is it that you would spend your time and have "a good religious argument" with Ben Shapiro, a Jew who rejects the Divinity of Jesus Christ and consequently the divine establishment of the Catholic Church, BUT you will NOT sit down and have "a good religious argument" with Michael Voris who believes in the divinity of Christ and the divine establishment of the Catholic Church?
By your actions, you imply that Shapiro, a popular Jewish social media person, is worthy of your time, but Michael Voris, a popular Catholic social media person, is not!!
Your own words describe Michael Voris as a bully and not worth your time, but Ben Shapiro who rejects Jesus Christ AND His Church IS worthy of your time!!!!
God bless, Michael
Most of the people I need to argue with are spanish speakers
Is This video available in Spanish?
"We need more religious arguments, not less."
Ahem. That should be "not fewer".
Stannis Baratheon, is that you?
@@markcobuzzi826 No, I'm Reality.
He does look like drew Carey
True, but Chicago >> Cleveland
But as for the arguments themselves, all religious arguments ultimately reduce to a biased belief, which means all religious arguments are bad religious arguments.
Keep in mind that religion is revealed, and for a good religious argument to be made, a Christian needs to show how information derived from reality correlates with religious revelations. Religion fails here. Any argument a Christian makes can always be refuted by reality derived information. Anything from morality, origins, God's nature, etc, can all be shown how Christianity is wrong. So there is no good religious argument unless one talks about the practicality over the veracity of religion.
Utterly irrelevant and materialistic question to Bishop Barron: is that a Daytona on your wrist? Are you also a watch nerd?
Yeah? Well, you know, that's just like, uh, your opinion, man.
Thanks, Dude…
GOD IS N GOD WINS! WOW EASY ARGUMENT!💪🌹🙏🌹🌞
We have to admit that much religion is irrational foolishness. Much. Besides fairytale idolatry, there is goofy material heresy. Years ago I saw a Protestant track entitled, "Must Christians commit intellectual suicide?" Why even ask the question if there wasn't a problem? My answer to that is, "Yes, you may as well use a guillotine if you're Protestant." Let me explain.
I was a convert to Christ through Protestants at 16 years in 1968.These Protestants had robbed me of my ability to think morally and rationally so badly that I had a mental breakdown two years later at 18 in 1970 shortly after operating as a male prostitute ("once saved, always saved").
All the professionals who helped me regain my sanity and straighten out my life said that the Protestant lack of rationality had contributed to my problem. I became Catholic in March 1986. As a Catholic, I have never felt pressure to believe anything irrational or morally irresponsible. For me, that is the greatest proof of she being what she says she is.
I could give many examples of Protestant irrationality. Let me focus on one fundamental problem: sola scriptura. Protestants base their believe in 'the Bible alone' on II Timothy 3:16. All that scripture says is that scripture is a helping device. In I Timothy 3:15, St. Paul calls the Church that produced the Bible, "the pillar and ground of the truth." Protestants will tell you to ignore this important statement while exaggerating the other. They say this all the time they're saying that all one needs is the Bible that they chop into millions of pieces. So irrational.
Wow you make a good point could you explain more if you can especially based on the two scriptures you gave. I am eager to know more if you can explain.
@UCwRJgTwl8MgqKPtmrttUDlQ oh yeah I have that book I will attend to it with much more seriousness thank you
So they waited until Cardinal Pell was found guilty of sexual abuse in Australia. The highest ranking Catholic to be found guilty of such offenses.
How very sensitive.
Good use of social media!!
I never hear Robert address these much more serious issues in his talks. What a missed opportunity.
My OpenMind he was set up and made to be a scape goat he was found guilty with no evidence at all
to have a religious argument, simply utter these words:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”
End of the religious argument.
Try get on joe rogan
Amen to the next Vicar of Christ.
Brandon, Bishop Barron doesnt look like anyone. You shouldnt have brought that up.
🤑😍😘x2
Please show me how god is anything more than a placeholder for ignorance. And if faith is not credulous wishful thinking then why is there never any actual evidence cited to show faith based beliefs to be true.
The existence of God is the conclusion of a rational, metaphysical argument. It is not a "gap" in a conventional scientific account of nature. It is the answer to a qualitatively different question than any raised by the sciences. If you want the details, take a look at my videos on the argument from contingency.
@@BishopBarron setting aside the logical fallacies contained in cosmological arguments for god and disregarding the fact that modern science contradicts these premises and it's conclusion, this still appeals to god as the great unknown. Some catholic apologists will freely admit this and some will say this ignorance is a way of knowing. My question is how can a person who is interested in holding true beliefs acknowledge that a god actually exists in reality? And how can you deny that faith is credulous when the beliefs are not falsifiable?
the real thing Make your argument. You’re just blowing smoke here. Tell me precisely where the contingency argument fails.
@@BishopBarron
For one thing, the contingency argument fails to yield YOUR god. If accepted, it only yields some vague uncaused cause that theists hasten to label "God", in the hopes that no one notices that it has not been shown by the argument to have any of the vital characteristics of the God they actually believe in. While I am not pointing out any logical failure of the argument here, you still have all your work ahead of you to get from the contingency argument to "Jesus Christ, Lord and Savior". You like the contingency argument? Congratulations, you're a deist (at most).
Scott E Well of course. With the argument from contingency we’re just getting started. By a series of logical moves, we then come to the various divine attributes. Look at the first 12 questions of Aquinas ‘s Summa for the details.
me n god are homies