Dan Barker / Thomas Ross Debate: Bible Prophecy and Archaeology (part 2 of 2)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 сен 2024
- "Prophecy and Archaeology Validate the Bible as the Word of God" is part 2 of a debate between Dan Barker (atheist & president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation) and Thomas Ross (Independent Baptist seminary professor, Bible-believing Christian, follower of Jesus Christ) at the University of Wisconsin, Whitewater. Part 1 is "The Old Testament is Mainly Fiction, not Fact." (Barker, affirm; Ross, deny). The debate terms and conditions state part two is a "continuation of ... 'The Old Testament is Mainly Fiction, not Fact' ... with the affirmative and negative propositions reversed. Any and all affirmations and arguments made in that previous debate are very relevant for this debate, as are any and all published or unpublished writings, statements, etc. of the debaters. This debate is one over the character of the vast general body of the Bible. That is, it is a debate over archaeology/prophecy/history, not over creation/evolution and Genesis 1-11, prehistory, geology, or biology. Those would be worthwhile debates, but they are for another time."
Also see the Ross debate “The New Testament Picture of Jesus: Is It Accurate?”
Now in the affirmative, Thomas Ross expanded his prophecy argument from the book of Daniel in part 1 of the debate, explaining that around 1,400 BC Moses in Deuteronomy predicted specific events that took place hundreds and even thousands of years later. The Ketef Hinnom silver scrolls and other evidence prove that the predictions cannot have been written after the events predicted while refuting the JEDP theory or Documentary Hypothesis. Ezekiel also contains specific predictive prophecies concerning the city of Tyre and the Phoenician empire. Ross also listed 121 Messianic prophecies that cannot have been fulfilled by chance. He gave archaeological evidence for Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch and for the Old Testament from suzerein-vassal treaties, archaeological sources such as the Merneptah Stele, the Gezer Calendar, the Tel Dan Stele, the Moabite Stone, Hezekiah's tunnel, and so on, validating Israel's exodus, entry into Canaan, Habiru destroying Hazor, the Davidic dynasty, the early use of the Hebrew language, etc.
Ross pointed out that Barker had misquoted highly skeptical scholar Israel Finkelstein. Ross also noted that Dan Barker cannot name even one modern Syro-Palestinian archaeologist who agrees with his affirmations that the Old Testament is copied from pagan myths, Moses was copied from pagan sources involving two-syllable names starting with M, pygmies that went up to a mountain to get the law, and so on. Nor could Barker quote a single ancient historian or other ancient historical source that stated Biblical narratives were myths copied from paganism. Moses could not been copied from Persian myths about Mithra since the earliest mithraeum in Palestine dates to AD 361. The list of lawgivers Barker mentioned included figures from places like Iceland, which was settled only in the 9th century AD and is much too far from Israel to impact the Old Testament. Ross asked if Dorothy Murdock was a reliable source for Hebrew history when she did not know the Hebrew alphabet, ignored basic ancient Hebrew and Near Eastern sources, and made claims such as that Moses had horns coming out of his head, connecting this alleged fact to LSD. He pointed out the claim Barker borrowed from Murdock about Moses and African pygmies comes from statements the pygmies made in the 20th century AD after centuries of exposure to Christianity. The pygmies also live 3,500 miles away from Jerusalem, so they could not possibly have been copied by Moses thousands of years earlier and very far away. Murdock had claimed the African pygmies used to have white skin back when they had a worldwide empire and the lost continent of Atlantis existed, but such claims are crazy. Ross concluded that Dan Barker's argument that the Old Testament was "copying and mimicking" pagan myths is impossible.
Dan Barker argued that predictive prophecy was impossible and atheism was true because of free will, employing his FANG or Freewill Argument for the Nonexistence of God. Ross responded that Mr. Barker assumed libertarian free will and appeared unaware of the Biblical view of free will, compatibilism. Barker admitted that claims the Old Testament was directly copying pagan mythology were "stupid," but he said he never made such a claim. Ross responded by directly quoting Mr. Barker's own words from part one of the debate, his published writings, and the FFRF website. Barker viewed these quotations as personal attacks. Dan Barker also claimed that Dorothy Murdock was a serious scholar despite ignoring ancient Near Eastern sources and relying heavily upon Wikipedia. He responded to Ross's allegations of her inaccuracy by stating "brilliant scholars can be raving lunatics."
FaithSaves.net has debate transcripts, books referenced in the debate, transcripts, and detailed argument review and analysis.
Always a pleasure to hear Mr. Barker speak.
I do too ❤
Always a pleasure to hear Thomas speak
Ross needs to ask forgiveness for all the times he misquoted Baker.
Ray C he quoted her from barkers book.
AZ Outcast why?
John Doe ...seriously? Did you listen to that ‘Mithras’ exchange?
😅😂👍
Baker?
Dan barker smashed it again, you notice the nasty remarked and tone in his voice because he knows he lost,, no one can touch dan baker, he’s a genius
baker?
Dan Lost
He's not a genius as he has made a number of mistakes. It isn't hard to defeat a theist tbh.
It’s odd that God stopped talking to us and performing miracles 2000 years ago. Mr. Ross is of the debating school
that acts on the theory, the faster you talk, the more intelligent you appear.
Yep, no miracles or prophecy or divine intervention since 2000yrs ago, isn't that odd
Hi all. I have just listened to this video for the first time. I have not heard of either speaker as these videos are not my normal viewing subject. While I do not doubt Mr. Ross's faith or intelligence, his arguments for me, an academic, were, to put it bluntly, nonsense. In contrast, Mr Barker was clear and succinct and while I found some of his arguments challenging, I will definitely view more of his videos. I was much more impressed with him overall . Thomas, please speak slower, as it is very difficult to follow you. Also, I feel you need to listen to the rebuttals more carefully. My best wishes to you both.
I made the same observations...
And u right
mr floss was always getting what mr barker said, always wrong! and was using that as some sort of leverage to win and make hes debate look more creditable. mr barker always had to constantly fact check mr false bout hes bais misinterpretation of what he said in previous debates and quotes, even in the current debate they were in!
fear mongering classic religion tactics! 2:01:47-2:03:32
The more Mr Ross loses the debate, the nastier he becomes. Has he debated anyone else would love to watch just to see how he reacted there.
roderick isaacs Barker lost.
@@bustercollins5215 ... keep telling yourself that and I'm sure sooner or later you'll believe it... do you believe that Mohammed flew to heaven on the back of winged horse ? if not, why not ?
I agree with you completely. Dan wins this debate.
Thomas is quite possibly the worst debater I have ever witnessed. He was so manic at times I felt he didn't need religion so much as medication. Excuse the pun, but Dan crucified Thomas.
Stefan Hill Are you shittin me?
@@bustercollins5215 ... maybe you shit yourself, check your pants, that smell is probably coming from you
Dan Barker you have triumphed once again, thank you, thank you..........
Where did he triumph before?
Mr. Barker, you were very enlightening. Thank you
Barker is a liar
Well done Mr. Barker. Very eloquent and well read
@@kingjames5527 you are liar.
...Ross is not only disingenuous, but he’s rather thick as well. His multiple harping about the commonality surrounding Moses type tales from around the world are cringe worthy. Ross is a true and typical christian apologist. His technique of ‘debating’ Barker’s past debates is simply lame. His ad hominem attacks on Barker and his sources are even more lame.
Ross is a dishonest prat, and that is *not an ad hominem,* but a demonstrable fact.
Thomas Ross, Go back to the drawing board son. Character attacks and a snide, smug hostility does not make for a good argument. It shows your position as being closed off to entertaining other possibilities.
wishus knight righttttttttttttt
It's not a representation of every theist's approach.
@@patrickoconnor9700 It has been of quite a few I have engaged with. Tho not all of them to be fair.
@@wishusknight3009 Yes, I know that many theists have acted out of line. But there are many who present themselves respectfully, like William Lane Craig, Dr Michael Brown, James White etc..
If you watch this debate, it's not the Christians who get emotional, smug and angry, it's on the other side. ruclips.net/video/jCYBK9FB_iY/видео.html
This is just pathetic and ridiculous that christians believe this stuff, it is SO RIDICULOUS i'm embarrassed that this guy is trying to argue that it's true. This poor guy is desperately trying to convince himself that it's true and he's grasping for straws that don't exist.. it's pathetic... it's beyond pathetic, it's sad that our species still believes in this
Why are so many of these so called "Christian" apologist so spiteful and constantly throwing cheap jabs at their opponent throughout these debates?? Pathetic
emach07 I love it.
I can't speak for everyone, but in many cases it's the Christian being more respectful than their opponent.
Mr. Ross appeared to be anxious and on the defensive, whereas, Mr. Barker was relaxed. The final question from Mr. Barker to Mr. Ross as to if he believed a snake spoke human language was a nice closer. Numbers 22:30 also provides support that Donkey's also speak as well as Dogs in the Acts of Peter (book left on the cutting room floor by the Council of Nicea). Educated people like Mr. Ross that espouse belief in talking animals lose 'All' credibility for their initial position.
D Evan Taylor the council of Nicea was about the Deity of Christ not the Biblical canon.
Get your facts straight.
Prove it plz... show me some evidence of that.
So you have no contemporary evidence that Jesus existed outside of the Bible?
D Evan Taylor you are making the claim that Jesus didn't exist. 99.999999 percent of scholars agree with the historical Jesus. We have many attestations inside and outside the books of the Bible.
Mr. Ross looks and talks like he's on a MASSIVE dose of speed, probably adderall.
Ross lost the debate, even as a Christian I have to admit it.
Mr Ross, please stop the personal attacks and hatred, you obviously are over anxious, and feel. very insecure about your beliefs.
What a failure.
I always feel bad for the people that take their religion seriously when they get represented by someone like Ross
Did Dan Barker realize that he was going to debate a child before the day of the debate!? This is not a personal attack against his opponent. It is a serious question. If so I give him praise, if not I congratulate him on his patients.
Very, very christian of Mr. Ross to threaten everybody with eternal Hell. Every christian does that when cornered. Give it up already.
It's sad that in the 21st century that adults still insist on their imaginary friend and waste so much time attempting more and more desperately spurious arguments for their sky daddy.
What's really spurious is thinking that theists are somehow intellectually inferior. Using "sky daddy" is a misrepresentation of theism.
@@patrickoconnor9700 I don't think Theists are intellectually inferior.Theists are simply unable to demonstrate the existence of their god, but are often easily butt-hurt with the mild ridicule of the 'sky daddy' description, while stating that I will 'burn in hell for eternity' ironically insisting that they are the ones being victimised!
@@johnnybgoodeish I see, well you could certainly raise your objections to theism, but using "imaginary friend" or "sky daddy" is a dumbing down and misrepresentation of theism. Often times, it's people who share your worldview who don't even know what we believe! They think it's believing something without evidence, evidence is important in theism! In fact, no better reasons are given to counter theism snd show that naturalism has more ground. People will just say that theists shouldn't make assumptions, but then dismiss theism as a legitimate view. if I could give a quick summary of the reasons why I believe that given the the following points, I believe they are best explained by the existence of God.
God makes sense of the origin of the universe.
God is the best explanation of the origin of life forms themselves.
God makes sense of the fine-tuning of the universe for intelligent life.
God makes sense of objective moral values in the world.
God makes sense of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.
God can be immediately known and experienced.
These are some reasons why I believe that theism is the correct worldview, although one could arrive at deism first, given the strong argument for intelligent design. You may say that these arguments are weak and not good enough, and is not evidence. But I would remind you that because we are in time and within physics, we have to work with what we can observe here, that reflect the existence of such a being. If by evidence, you mean something that can be tested in a lab, then that would be out of the question. Since we are proposing a being exempt from the laws of physics.
Yeah yeah yeah very creative arguments. Sky daddy sky mummy. Hurray now I'm an atheist so Johnny gibberish now can be happy with his miserable life and fulfilled. I think you're actually miserable and this isn't an insult Christians are accomplished in all walks of life much like atheist and other religious people. Humans aren't limited by their beliefs funny and Christianity fot many Christians is spiritual meaning it goes beyond the physical. Many Christians aren't actually deluded like you who wants to act like a child and makes stupid childish comments on the internet because he's frustrated others do have meaning. Please do get a life and seek hope in God
@@johnnybgoodeish Lmao so you are sacred of an imaginary fictional place. That's really funny 😅
Mr. Ross is a prime example of an arrogant Christian who believes he is above anyone who disagrees with his world view of prehistoric superstitious nonsense
If were a god, there were no need for debate. We don't debate the existence the air, or bacteria, or gamma rays, or other galaxies. Things you don't see with simple view.
Then you have never met a flat earther... Though it isn't really debating with them. Its more like them plugging their ears and us laughing at them.
Could they not heve found a moderator who was able to read English ?
God is so powerful he has to get THIS guy to defend him? Enough to make my cat laugh.
Thomas Ross is very cruel deceptive and unkind! he intentionally grossly butchers and misrepresents Dan's argument on rape due to his own lack of responses for defending his religious position! so he feels forced to break away off topic and make personal attacks against Dan! shame on u Thomas
When Mr. Ross said he BELIEVED in *talking snakes* that's when I lost all respect for him! Clear victory for Dan Barker!!
Very difficult to watch the cross examination sessions. Ross is visibly seething with anger and hatred is palatable. I wish he would stick with the arguments instead of trying to make people look bad. Does himself no favours
I thought Thomas Ross was going to have a complete mental breakdown during this debate. And it wouldn't surprise me to learn that he did or will have one. Religion exists because people are afraid of death. Stop being afraid to die. There is nothing you can do about it anyway. Maybe there is a creator. Maybe there isn't a creator. Don't waste your life trying to figure it out. Be kind to one another and preserve and cherish the pale blue dot.
I agree.
Wow! What a loving god. If you don't agree with me (Ross) you're going to hell. That'll show 'em! Whole debate by Ross was nothing demonstrable and mostly ad hominem attacks. The Bible is true because I say it's true cause the Bible says it's true. Circular argument much.
9:00 - Anyone else skips the religious nonsense and watches and listens to the rational speaker...???
Eric Moore Sticking your head in the sand wont prevent you from burning in hell when the day comes Eric.
@@bustercollins5215 dude, seriously? Sticking your head in the sand doesn't make the fact that your god is imaginary not true. You get that, right? Dan hit him with enough to cast doubt, but you weren't even listening, were you?
@@PhantomRangerEarth1397 It's like banging your head against a brick wall. You have to feel sorry for Mr Collins, he lives his life in perpetual fear.
I think it’s important to listen to both sides with an open mind, then choose which side you agree with.
My question for Mr. Ross would include the following: It is prophesied in both Isaiah and in Zechariah that in that day Gentiles will run to the Jews seeking the truth about God, as they will come to realize that they were the victims of lies accepted by and told to them by their fathers. Also, Jesus prophesied that he would return before some of those listening to him, at that time, died. Additionally, he told his followers that ""Anything you ask in my name, believing, I will do." Now, both of these prophecies have been shown to be false. No scripture (none) in the OT matches up more closely with Jesus then do Deut. 13:1-3 and 18:20-22. By close examination by scholars, Jewish and Gentiles, it has been shown repeatedly that unscrupulous persons from Christian Sects, have on innumerable occasions stolen Jewish scriptures and bent them, using Greek, to mean what they were not meant to. Why are prophecies, which don't support his views, not cited by Mr. Ross?
Ernest Monroe...He came i judgement against Israel in 70 A D to destroy the Jewish Temple! God brings nations to their own destruction soon enough! This includes America!
I can't help but feel sorry for the young pup bringing a knife to a gunfight!
When you are religious and a professor of that religion, that’s it, you can’t go back.
this is so bad debate , Thomas Ross did not appear stupid only , he was liar and rude .
Anyone with insomnia can be cured by listening to Ross speak.
I never did understand what "turning from your sins" is supposed to mean. I understand confessing your sins and maybe even having a repentant attitude, but none of us has stopped sinning. So, when Christians say "turn from your sins", it is disingenuous nonsense because we all continue to "sin".
1:37:55 Is Ross really trying to say that Emanuel was meant to be a nickname for jesus? So the son of god was like "yo yo, its ya boy, j dubb AKA Emanuel!!! Come through... I got wine"??
Ross : rude, disingenuous, laden with fallacies, and childish. This was not a polite debate. Classic example of irrational debater desperate to make his opponent appear ignorant of *something *. Equivalent to "well if he can't tell me what sentence is in the middle of page 87 in a book he wrote 6 years ago then I win." Bullocks.
If the serpent in Eden spoke through a miracle of god would that not be entrapment?
Highly underrated point .
@John Doe the bible never states the snake was satan.
@John Doe where does that say he was a talking snake? It doesn't.
@John Doe what are you babbling on about?
@@John Doe Who cares what kind of snake it was? This just shows the evil in your god who set up the stage for Adam and Eve
to fail to afterwards condemn them forever.
The other guy is not debating but busy preaching at the audience probably trying to recruit them to his church, and he is at the same time hurling a straw-man argument at Dan Barker. He is here threatening people about hell. As I roll my 👀.
This was one of the easiest win by Barker --in fact ..superiour
ZZ TOP What debate were you watching? Barker was eaten alive and im not even a Christian.
@@bustercollins5215 with what? Personal attacks and terrible irrelevant arguments against people in their absence about things nothing to do with the debate? Maybe you SHOULD be a christian. 😂
Dan Barker toyed with Ross. No contest.
jsphotos Ross smashed Barker to oblivion.
What a loss for Mr. Ross! A humiliating display of childish behaviour, if he's not embarrassed he should be.
Dan wins again.
Cameron Barge Seriously Cameron?
@@bustercollins5215 you're the only one that seems to think otherwise
Argues for the Hebrew Bible, the Jewish history, who rejected Jesus as the Messiah. Face Palm!
You can't convince a believer of anything because their reason for believing something is not based on evidence but their deep seated need to believe....Carl Sagan
Donald Bird You do know the Hebrew Bible is believed by Christians as 3/4 of the Holy Bible right Donald?
You really cant be that stupid Don.
Good for Dan calling his bluff about moral banrupt approach to get people to see his theology with intimidation
Mr Ross has a rather annoying tendency to make personal attacks. I'm not sure if he is even aware he is doing that. I find myself questioning his intellectual honesty, both with himself and with others, due to this diversionary arguing tactic. It typically happens when the actual argument is weak.
It would be a pleasure to spend eternity away from people like Ross.
This guy doesn't even have an argument. He just wants to discredit Dan Barker, and thats easier said than done
I'd feel bad for Thomas because Dan destroyed him to the point is was sad, but then I remember he's trying to indoctrinated individuals and then I cheer Dan on even more.
24:00 - God is an invisible man in the sky who hates shrimp and homosexuals and who created the universe and flat earth 6,000 years ago.
@@bustercollins5215 Where the hell did you get that crap from? A typical religinut response. pick on themessanger, for get about the message. Well done, you've just proved what a total ratbag you are.
You're a moron
I don't know how Barker manages to maintain his composure with this arrogant jerk who continually lies about Barkers statements and seemingly completely ignores the answers to his own questions. It's quite trying to watch Barker repeat himself over and over as Ross continually straw-man's him. It's an insult to the intelligence of the audience. This debate is beneath Dan Barker.
So if god gave a snake a human voice 'miraculously' to tempt A & E, who the f***'s to blame?
he set everything up,
frank whelan Are you serious Frank? Where the fuck did you go to school?
@@bustercollins5215 Obviously in a school that taught him to think rationally.
I have made it 61 years. Never sinned because I don't believe sin exist. I have faith in this belief. So it must be true.
Why do people insist on debating this ridiculous premise? Only people with cognitive dissonance, impervious to logic and reason would argue for the literal interpretation of the Bible.
Free will is that you have no choice but to have free will. How does this man (Ross) understand anything?Sounds like he comes from a cult.
Christian "Free Will" is likened unto a woman walking home from the bank and she is approached by a hooded man that saith
"Giveth me all your money and ye shall live; or reject my commandment and ye shall die a horrible death by beheading."
Christians seem to think that by giving the thief your money you're exercising your free will. As if the alternative is really an option. Unless of course you're Bruce Lee.
Its unfortunate that Thomas Ross ad an ongoing need to misquote and attack Dan Barker on baseless accusations. It totally diluded his credibility. Dan showed great patience and defended himself well with facts. Thomas Ross understanding of free will simply exposes is level of ignorance.
The christian was like a fidget spinner on acid. Must be his first time debating or doing public speaking. He seemed almost comical. The desperation, jittery nervousness, and fear was evident in this dude. Maybe Ross drank 3 gallons of coffee before the debate? Barker was calm, articulate, well spoken and most likely bored. Laughable topic, laughable christian debater. Landslide win for Barker.
I agree. Ross is nothing but a fast-talking con man. The more he felt his spastic argument slipping away, the more desperate and rude he became. Dan Barker is light years past him in biblical/historical knowledge and debating skills. I really do not think Ross knew what he stepped into by agreeing to debate Dan Barker; it was actually a little sad to see Dan Barker systematically destroy him on almost every point.
1. a theist is caught in a lie;
2. a theist shamelessly repeats same lie;
3. GOTO 1
If bible prophecies were convincing there would not be that much need to debate them . Most honest and intelligent people would be naturally convinced by the evidence. Personally I never found one to be convincing (even Isaiah 53 or Psalm 22). Jewish rabbis do not find them convincing, and they are of great help not to be fooled.
I mentioned Jewish rabbis about Christ prophecies in Isaiah 53 or Psalm 22 of course.
Why don't those seem convincing?
I have long suspected that the story of Jesus was written to conform to Isaiah 53 and not that Isaiah 53 predicted Jesus. As for PS 22, the correspondence relies on a possibly misleading translation and a lot of imagination.
Mr. Baker is a good speaker,and knows what the truth is .
It's like debating if Santa exists, if you sincerely believe he does you will wade through all of the various Christmas songs, books and fairy tales to try and cement your position. There's nothing wrong with believing Santa exists and if it makes you a better person.. That's great !. But if your belief in Santa makes you intolerant towards non believers or do evil things like fly planes into buildings because you are going to Santa's Kingdom in the North Pole as a martyr and you will receive 72 fairies as a reward.. well then I have a problem with it.
Ross said god performed a miracle by making the snake talk(!). I thought the snake was Satan . Hahahahahaha
ummm ummm...Hebrew often uses symbols! The original Hebrew was pictographic for a reason!
Google, Paleo-Hebrew Word Pictures, by Aquilla Fleetwood, youtube!
That is a common misperception. There is nothing in that story to indicate that the snake was Satan.
@@rockymountboyit is only in the book of revelation where they say that the snake was Satan
most of the ross arttacks are personal and try to defame barker by misquoting ....not related any where to facts
dan is kind to you....
argue with richard carrier ......he will roast you like chicken
Christians will say Ross won, atheists will say Barker won, no one will learn anything and everything will carry on the same as before.
Once again Dan crushed the theist. I don't even know why the other guy came out to debate if this was all he had lol. 2 for 2 against this guy Dan well done.
Ross gives new meaning to the word obnoxious
This Thomas guy is the king of gish gallop. All he does is spit out alleged "prophecies" and acts arrogant about it as if he is so intelligent, even using ad hominem attacks which shows lack of intelligence. Dan actually has interesting things to say and says it as if he actually is considering the audience and not how "right" he is. Dan is coming across like an honest human and Thomas is acting very programmed, almost brainwashed.
Dan Barker vs. Spaz. Jeez.
Thomas Ross fell fully apart, he should practice his grift.
So where is the united states mentioned in biblical prophecy
Christians....is this the best guy you have to debate your side? What a fail.
Fast talking, dodging questions, and regularly lying against his respectful opponent.
The beeble lost.
Mr Loss, get another job.
Yesterday, during a trip, I stopped in a small town for a break. In a square in the center of town a man was doing some things that I had never seen anyone do before. The things that he was doing were so great that only a god could do. By the way, I had never heard of or seen anyone called a magician before.
When I read Deuteronomy 13:1-5, I see people such as those depicted as Jesus specifically identified. This scripture plus Num. 23:19, Jer. 16:19 and Zech. 8:21-23 serve to destroy Christianity before it was ever created.
You cannot imagine that Ross won this debate unless you are already seduced by the theistic presupposition. Jordan Peterson has recognised that the case for atheism is very easy to make. I agree. It is a challenge to accept the burden of proof, which theists can never actually do because, as their scripture states, you cannot please God without faith. This mandates a circular reasoning. You are already seduced by the circular theistic presupposition...
I shut it off as soon as the religious guy dishonestly attacked Barker's character, and btw where are all the delusional superstitious comments of the religious people, I like to read the comments they are usually hysterical?
If Mr.Ross is a true beliver drink the posion Mark16:18
What's the probability of all those verious people sitting in that room at the same time. If one counts all the their gernerations for thousands of years in the past?
I guess Mr. Ross has all his degree from church.
This debate should done between him and Aron Ra.
Mr Ross will loose any argument. When i came in the first contact with all that stories in the Bible i took them never as true. They was only good bedtime stories. How can a human with a clear mind really believe all this?
AronRa has become selective with debates. Of course, he would gut Ross like a carp, but why bother.
"How can a human with a clear mind believe all this?" that will forever remain a mystery, seems to be completely illogical.
I think Dan was doubting Thomas...😂😂😂
(In future, exactly like the Bible and Christians do now, this line of mine will be misconstrued by those who don't know Dan and not bothered to search him.)
Thank you Dan, honest open and no falsified arguments.
We have objective morals, (morals given to us by God). Therefor God exist. How is that not circular?
The morals in the bible were taken from previous civilizations
Thomas Ross is a pompous ideologue. I’m impressed by his knowledge and recall but his hubris, bias, and credulity are painstakingly obvious.
This lunatics only argument is trying to discredit brilliant people.
"I am disappointed in you Thomas," said the fat controller. "Really useful engines don't lose debates like that. You shall stay in the shed until I can trust you to make better arguments."
Legend has it he's still in the shed
@Mike JJJ Oh gosh I'd forgotten all about this comment. That made me laugh, specially as I could hear the fellah's saying it! Though I think on that occasion he was walled up in a tunnel.
@Mike JJJ Once an engine attached to a train,
was afraid of a few drops of rain.
It went into a tunnel,
and squeaked through its funnel,
and wouldn't come out again.
A few more unsubstantiated slurs against DM Murdock here. Dan Barker did a great job, though I think that he should have asked why Jesus of Nazareth was never prophesised.
He did
wow you really cited the existence of slings and stones as a weapon of war in the ancient world as evidence for old testament prophecies
Have there ever been any excavations around the site of the crucifixion in Israel to try to find buried bodies?
I can see how the strong belief change the people
Why is it necessary then to be a fluent in Greek, fluent in Hebrew and be trained in ancient scriptural interpretation to arrive at the truth. If the true God came from the Jews, then it should be so easily revealed in all cultures in history. The Bible scholar apologists over analyse to justify their source of income. Then why don't Jews believe in Jesus? Aren't they God's chosen?
Alex Soto not at all. If you are going to attack the Bible you need to have knowledge of what you're talking about.
For instance, many atheists don't know anything about the levitical law, and yet they are running around saying that the Bible condones slavery.
People make many categorical mistakes just because of their lack of knowledge on a subject.
You can't build a building if you aren't an engineer and so on.
Joel Rodriguez , there is no need to attack the Bible if you see it in its historical context. Just a series of books written by Jewish men to maintain their culture. Culture of that time no longer applies in modern times. No proof of the supernatural.
Alex Soto if you see it in its historical context the OT And NT reflect a Supernatural and transcendental God who sent his only son to die so you and l can have eternal life.
Joel Rodriguez The concept of being created sick and ordered to be saved with the punishment of an eternal hell as a threat does not make sense. Blood sacrifice has been something that cultures all over the world in history have done... not just Jews. To this day, Jews do not accept Jesus as the son of God, and they are supposedly God's chosen. It doesn't make sense.
Alex Soto l got a question.
If Christianity was true. Would you accept Christ as Lord?
Its amszing how theists come up short on literally any issue of anything supernatural.
Ross nervously smacks his lips, slurps on his own saliva while desperately hurling insults at Dan Barker. Ross is the dumbest and most annoying, if not the worst, debater I've ever heard. Christianity is clearly in big trouble.
Dan Baker: "There is no objective morality... But morality is defined by do no harm, also God is immoral." Not sure that checks out. If there is no objective morality than there is no objective morality. Therefore, the God of the Bible is not immoral. If you follow that line of thinking.
It works fine because that's how HE defined it. He wasn't saying that was the objective definition.
Ross is a little snot.
We must seriously consider the possibility that Abraham was a Chaldean sorcerer, of the lowest ethic, who through his poisonous filters and manipulations was promoting a "punisher-god" in order to get rich.
Watching Ross is wearing me out, he talks at 100mph and can't keep still. Totally exhausting for the listener/ viewers.
This Ross kid is so disrespectful n the least open minded debater I've seen. Annoying n character shaming n personal attacks
jesus rode into jerusalem on palm sunday on two donkeys as prophecised in sacch 9.9
thats what you do in a scripture based religion: you make stuff up to earn credentials.
kroko duck ...it would seem Jesus liked to ride asses; and why not? He spent most of his time in the company of twelve men who often kneeled before Him.
@@jamessoltis5407 bruhhhhhh LOL
*Down with Jehova! Dan Barker for God!!*
Dr. Wier You will wake up in Hell very soon. Maybe in a year or a few weeks buddy. Hope you’re ready.
Good possibility you will too for Idol worshipping if Islam is correct. Your flesh will be burned off repeatedly and regenerated each time just to be burned off again. Now if Judaism is true, I would rather confront Yahweh being an atheist who was a good person that just didn't have a belief than basically be an adultery to God by worshipping man. That first commandment was a doozy and no1 for a reason.
Who else fast-forwards whenever Ross opens his mouth?😂😂😂
Is it just me or is ross almost impossible to understand?
Dan Barker was very convincente, Mr. Rosas was not.