Inspiring Philosophy Vs. Kent Hovind | Debate Can Evolution Fit within the Bible? | Podcast
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 окт 2024
- Links to speakers:
Inspiring Philosophy: / inspiringphilosophy
Kent Hovind: / channel
OUR PODCAST
Apple: apple.co/2LpVzR2
Spotify: spoti.fi/3nJwiOA
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
Our story: My name is James Kunz and I'm a PhD student in psychology in Colorado, US. In my own academic journey, many academics (though to be fair, not all) have become closed to controversial people or topics and actually want to exclude people that question the status quo. Thus, my goal is to provide a non-partisan and truly-tolerant debate platform that welcomes everyone.
If this resonates with you, consider joining our Patreon: / moderndaydebate
Or by using our Amazon shopping portal link: www.amazon.com....
*If you use our Amazon link above, you pay the same prices as normal when you buy items, and Modern-Day Debate gets a small kickback (~3%) on any purchase you make on Amazon that day.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Our social media:
Discord: / discord
Twitter: / moderndaydebate (@ModernDayDebate)
Facebook: / moderndaydebate
Parler: tinyurl.com/y7...
______________________________________________________________________________________
DISCLAIMER: The views shared by guests on Modern-Day Debate are not necessarily representative of the views of Modern-Day Debate, James, or any university he has or has had any affiliation with.
______________________________________________________________________________________
I'm a Christian. If you ever want prayer or just someone to talk to after a horrible day, please reach out and let me know. moderndaydebate@gmail.com
__________________________________________________________________________________
The music we use during the intro is:
World Goes Wild
by: Above Envy
____________________________________________________________________________
#InspiringPhilosophy #Kent #Hovind
Huge thanks to our guests for this epic debate! They are both linked in the description box and in the podcast episode of this debate, which can be found here:
Apple: apple.co/2LpVzR2 Spotify: spoti.fi/3nJwiOA
WW3 TOMORROW
I would love to see Michael debate Ken Ham.
Sadly, Ham is smarter than Hovind and knows he would lose.
@@ronaldolson6553 That's very debatable.
Alex Abplanalp Ken Ham would 100% lose to Inspiring Philosophy
@@prophet_alfredo9465 more like to John Walton (that’s where all of inspiring philosophies arguments come from)
@@Lucas1Apple12 that is where he gets the functionalist interpretation but he also relies on Heiser, Alter, Stanhope, Van Ee, and more for his arguments.
As a long time Christian, re-watching this debate..I am ashamed the way Kent acted in this debate. There are arguments and there is character. The latter is under your full control. We need to be better.
You should care more about being right and the truth than being better at defending nonsense
@@robertwhite1810 how many of these sock puppets do you have, Kent?
I had the exact same response except for the other way around. I couldn't believe how InspiringPhilosophy acted in this debate. His position was simply to appeal to academia experts over what the Bible obviously & clearly says over and over.
It helps to understand the Bible quote of Satan ruling the power structures of this world is NOT joking or exaggerating.
It's very silly to appeal to mainstream academia like that in any debate about Christianity. The Bible clearly tells us not to do be like that, so it just reveals the person is sound asleep regarding awareness of the devils deceptions in modern times.
Creationism is very, VERY obviously true and Evolutionism is very, VERY obviously not from a scientific perspective and a Biblical perspective.
Literally the only way to believe Evolutionism over Creationism is with fallacies of scientism combined with having practically religious faith in mainstream academia.
@@lightbeforethetunnel oh well, if you say that it’s “very obviously” wrong, I guess that’s settled! 🙄
“God sent me to straighten you “ Prophet Kent Hovind
As Jones said in his post debate discussion, "Kent Hovind could get to Heaven and ask God if the earth is 6000 years old. When God says 'No, It's some 4.5 Billion year old', Hovind would respond with something like, 'This conspiracy goes deeper than I thought'"
@@petery6432 this made my day 🤣🤣🤣
@@petery6432 LMFAOO
I used to be a Hovinder as well. I saw all his seminars and devoured them. A few years later I studied more about the Ancient Near Eastern context and eventually I gave up my young earth position.
Hovind made up his mind a long time ago and debating him now is useless. Still, a good performance Inspiring Philosophy.
I agree that he made his mind up, but the important thing is belief in God as the creator and more importantly the gospel.
Inception of Freedom I also used to be a Hovinder. On top of that, I used to listen to Ken Ham. That wasn’t until I saw how dishonest he is when I saw Science VS. the Ark Encounter. If you haven’t seen that series, I highly recommend you go check that out.
It's important to expose his stupidity so those who would follow him learn to think for themselves. I was never a follower of Kent or Ham but watching them is slowly turning me into a agnostic
Sebastian Shaw John Lennox, InspiringPhilosophy, Frank Turek, Ravi Zacharias, James White, Jeff Durbin are some apologist to check out. Kent Hovind and Ken Ham are the clowns of the Christian community.
I love John Lennox. He’s an absolute unit of an academic and an apologist.
If anyone had any doubt that Kent is not the sharpest tool in the shed ....
InspiringPhilosophy: “This is what a lot of Hebrew experts say...”
Kent: “500 normal people should determine what the Bible says.”
IP doesn't know Hebrew. If IP wants to talk about what a hebrew word means he should pull out a standard biblical hebrew dictionary and he didn't.
@@boliusabol822 he sources Hebrew experts but ok i
@@boliusabol822 You don't know IP. If you want to talk about what IP does or doesn't know, I would ask that you pull out a biography or an interview that you've personally conducted with him.
@@FallenMerick dude I gave lots of examples/ You either address them or you don't but if you don't then i'm not going to have the silly conversation you want to have.
@@boliusabol822 You're the one wanting to have a silly discussion. I'm just using satire to point out how ridiculous your argument sounds. As if expert opinion is somehow not good enough and interlocutors are required to be an expert themselves to debate something.
I really like debates that clarify clearly what their beliefs are. I learned a lot about both from this debate
Thanks for your encouraging feedback, Gene! Have a great rest of your Saturday! :)
"Bowling balls and whales are both attracted by gravity, so they gotta be related"
Probably the stupidest statement I've ever heard in my life.
It was Bowling Bowls and Whales
It hurt my brain hearing him say that
Fax
It is stupid. He was illustrating how stupid atheists think. Not how he thinks.
Kent: *does a debate about evolution* - *insists on bringing up verses from the Bible*
Kent: *does a debate about the Bible* - *won't stop bringing up evolution*
IP: “There’s not even a word for ‘rib’ in the Hebrew version of the Bible”.
Kent: “Well let me read to you this english version which has the word ‘rib’”.
The way he never stays on the topic and always avoids direct questions about crucial details that obviously demolish his position makes me question the mental sanity of those who are on his side even more.
Classic bait and switch conman tactic
This is one of my favorite debates of all time. Even almost a year later, I still find myself coming back and rewatching it.
And who do you think won?
@@trevthegamedev IP
@@VierthalerStudios what a question lol. I might have to disagree with coming back and rewatching this. Not because IP CRUSHED Hovind the Heresy, but because it was just so painful to see the endless illogical claims from this pinhead!
So Genesis is not about creation, it's about the inauguration of the story we never heard about..... ?
IP: *researches Biblical Hebrew to understand original, contextual meaning of scripture*
Hovind: *“WHY ARE YOU ADDING TO THE BIBLE?”*
That's how he works.
Get you a real Bible 😂
Kent's arguments can be boiled down to "But the English translation says..." The Bible wasn't written in English... What it says in Hebrew/Greek is the authority of what the Bible actually says, not the English translation of it.
OMG right?!?!?! When IP spoke about analyzing the book of Genesis from the perspective of ancient Eastern civilizations made PERFECT sense to me. Evolution fits in the Bible and a literal interpretation is not logical.
But even in Hebrew, it still doesn’t say what inspiring philosophy was trying to say!
@@jsandbox2068 that makes no sense at all and ip drink alcohol when the bible says not too
@@jsandbox2068 the English is a translation of the Greek Hebrew and aramaic and there are plenty that know those languages and still dont believe ip interpretations on it
God is not stupid and evil he didnt write genesis to be confusing and needing of somebody else with Greek to show you what it says
Even though I'm an atheist, I have to give props to the Inspiring Philosophy guy for putting this insane Kent guy to school.
For us as atheists this debate is the best example what kind of BS it is...my point is that Kent is at least honest to scripture however insane the scripture is from today perspective...IP is more dishonest here because all his teology is made up on purpose exactly as excuse to literal meaning of Bible which was taken this way throughout entire history...this is labyrinth of metaphoric, symbolic, abstractive,langugeistic meanings, which 99,99% believers has no clue about.....basic ordinary believer will never come across this made up teology/excuses...Bible has been debunking itself scientifically and the ridiculous attempts to save it is even more comical.....lets not get deceived here...the person more dishonest here in the debate is IP, because he needs to addapt even more made up lies to save the text, Kent however crazy he is, is at least honest here
(By the way Kent world view is what majority always was in past History till scientific revolution
@@black6master Do you really think the Catholic Church would’ve allowed IP to say his opening statement in the 1200s? Most definitely not. It went against their narrative and thus would’ve been squashed out as best they could.
@@hunglikeahorse120 in 1200 ? There was chaos but from 3/4 century onward IP view would be heretic and he would end up steak by CCh, the same in Izrael
@@black6master false, IP actually made a video on this, Philo, Ireneaus, Augustine, Origen, and many other church fathers thought that this chapter could be read metaphorically and should have been so.
You could almost see IP becoming an Atheist with the honest scepticism he seems to embrace.
I'm an atheist but I think kent got a way harder beat down here than with aron ra. Especially when there was talk about when to take things literally such as 'good' and 'the beginning of', kent pulls out a verse and then Michael pulls out another and completely catches hovind off guard. This was such an amusing debate thanks Michael
I dont think Kent is a good speaker. But I see what he's saying and agree with alot of it. You can believe in evolution and God but I def dont think the bible teaches that.
@@j2mfp78 so you think Kent isn't a good speaker and had a hard time arguing. Well what I saw is that he couldn't speak because he lacked any knowledge on ancient Hebrew. If he knew anything about the language, then he would be able to say no you're wrong to IP and try to correct him. But whenever IP came out with some Hebrew to support his position, all I got from Kent is oh well my bible here says nothing like that and completely disregarded anything IP had to say
@@josephcioe4697 so why doesnt IP write his own translation of the bible so we can all understand it now. If a certain word means something else in Hebrew then why weren't those actual words used? I here this all the time. Oh in the Hebrew it means this. . So all these translations are just wrong no one new how to translate Hebrew untill now?
@@j2mfp78 because the English versions we have are the closest we can get to fluid English. To translate the very literal Hebrew to English would be a big jumble of super specified sentences. For example in German there are like 7 different words that translate to love. But in German each of these specifically mean love for your spouse, or love for your kids, of love for material objects. Imagine every time we said love we specified whay exactly. That would be a little awkward. Now imagine we do the same thing with the whole bible
@@josephcioe4697 it would sound how it should sound that was a crappy point. Your saying its translated but you have to know Hebrew to understand what they meant? Then the translations are useless.
The more I studied actually biblical scholars, i realized that Genesis is a cultural worldview and not necessarily the exact order of events. This made life so much easier for me lololol.... listening to this debate just confirms this
You haven't yet become strong enough in exegesis. Cultures change even during one's own generation. History of Genesis spans many generations. And its Hebrew reading is for its literal writing style throughout its text. But I would agree that culture is part of most peoples' worldview.
This debate has given me a new respect for Mr Jones. He seems to be engaging with far more intellectual honesty than his contemporaries in the apologetics field
His making evolution fit with the Bible
@@moneyheist_- he isn’t “making evolution fit”, he’s saying that it simply just does. It does not contradict the text to believe in evolution because the scripture seems to be able to be faithfully interpreted as not a literal six days of creation. It’s not just him, there’s a lot of people who agree with that type of thinking, even early Jews and church fathers had various understandings of Genesis that did not contradict and old earth
Damn..... listening to Kent Hovind literally like listening to Christian faith from my parents. This kind of person literally makes me question whether the Christian faith I believe is the same with the Christians faith my parents believe. I literally think that we just have different religions.
I think people who think like Kent are mostly fine, except when they're trying to convince other people that they're correct. (I mean this pretty broadly. Kent is a weird case because he's actually taken the time and effort to present these conclusions, and it's usually the lack of time, inclination, and/or ability to really deeply dive on some of these things that lead people to believe what he does.) The truth is that Christianity should have room for people who aren't especially intelligent, or maybe aren't inclined to introspection, and that's okay. Really good preachers can draw from a depth and breadth of knowledge to, as we say, "meet them where they are," and help teach people what is true and what God says our guiding morals should be. If they ever want to dig deeper, there should always be people in the congregation who can help them, but if they're content with the level of resolution at which they are, they can contribute from there.
Christendom ended up in kind of a weird anti-intellectual slide for a while, acting like we weren't allowed to claim science is part of Creation, not parallel to it. I'm worried we'll snap back too far and make it something that unless you can give a deep philosophical and scientific explication on Genesis 1, we don't want you (or we at least look down on you).
@@jacksyoutubechannel4045 completely agree Kent Hovid, also defense absolutely radical insane king James only fundamentalists like Gallo Ripplinger and Stephen L Anderson, and I know the whole labeling radical and the same thing, just watch videos of them or look up some of the statements they’ve made. And the most devastating thing is, and this applies to both Christians and atheists, they see people like Kent Hovid, and televangelists like Benny Hinn, Kenneth Copeland, Jesse Duplantis, or Joel Osteen, and they come to the conclusion that’s what Christianity and Christians are like, and they don’t know about the more sophisticated and intelligent figures like, Greg Bahnsen, Alvin plantinga, Emmanuel Swedenborg, Augustine, Aquinas, Luther, Calvin, Leibniz, or biblical scholars like Bruce Metzger, Daniel Wallace.
@@jacksyoutubechannel4045 I’ve had almost the exact same thought but never verbalized it or have heard it said out loud. I agree and think that scripture is amazing in that it is for people with all levels of understanding to grasp and the depth of understanding can vary by individuals. I really like how you worded it.
Literally
It breaks my heart to imagine that anyone on earth finds Kent compelling in this video
I have a friend who’s all brains. His name is Michael. This is great stuff.
Kyrby Caluna thanks!
Think Club , Mike adds to the word of God, he is a heretic.
@Saint Dragon
Temple inauguration, priest & priestess etc. Funny how I've never seen any Bible version with Genesis written that way & it's also potentially very damning if atheists really find out just how far mike has & does twist the translation, they'll soon realize he doesn't believe in the Bible as it is written in English, or any language as you can find genesis translated the same as English in every other language & not Mike's interruptation from heretical scholars.
@Saint Dragon
The same way Tovia singer is a heretical scholar when he states Satan is doing the will of God & is taking orders from God in what he's doing & that they aren't opposed to each other & in enmity.
What Tovia does is read into the scripture what is not there & ignore the actually context even though he knows far more Hebrew than I or IP etc, his doctrine is still heretical as he has to twist the scripture of God telling the serpent to crawl on his belly & eat dust to mean something that's good & a blessing to the serpent.
The Hebrew scholars brought up by Mike are doing the same thing that Tovia does.
@@ThruTheUnknown
The book state's he brings everything. Light dark evil and good.
Either way it's your gods doing and control
They’re speaking 2 different languages...literally
It kills me how Kent always brings up biology, cosmology, theology, and ethics in every opening statement, but when the counter-argument comes, he cries "One topic at a time!"
The ol' hovind gish gallop. A staple of every debate he is a part of.
Mr I'm-Not-Prepared-For-That Hovind.
Opening statements are a mix.
Discussion thereafter is one at a time.
Get with the program already.
Another flawless victory by InspiringPhilosophy.
Emotional or not, I personally don’t see how that strengths or weakens the argument. If the argument itself is based off of emotion then I could see your point.
Kevin McElroy He probably just isn’t used to being personally attacked like this. Kent was incredibly rude.
Kent must still be stuck in 1995
I wouldn’t agree. We don’t need ppl telling us how to read the bible. Kent is being scriptural.
God's not dead how is Kent being scriptural. He’s been told multiple times that the KJV of the Bible isn’t the word of God. You would commit an argument from ignorance fallacy if you insist on the KJV. The Hebrew versions are the proper scriptures preserved in history.
I’m glad to see other Christians putting Hovind in his place
There was always light: "God is light and in him is no darkness at all."
42:36 Michael's reaction to Kent's question says it all.
fujiapple96 Lolol “yeah”
You should see my reaction when I saw Michael servicing cocks at the local toilet glory home
What I find fascinating about Kent is that he keeps doing this schtick and he's been doing it for decades. He's either a masochist, or he genuinely believes that he walks away from discussions like this not only thinking that he didn't embarrass himself, but that he actually came off well. The human brain is truly incredible.
He just does it to get the gullible to keep sending their hard earned shekels to DinosaurLand
Hes a scammer, and idiots EAT his shit up. Profits make him believe hes a prophet.
@@LucasHergenreder-xn2vz I have no idea what you're referring to.
@@LucasHergenreder-xn2vz ah, you're still a Christian? Don't worry, it takes some people a long time to grow up, you're not _that_ unusual.
I wasn't defending IP, they're both comically wrong.
@@bouncycastle955 The only person who needs to grow up is you, the idiot who thinks people with a different belief system are children.
You sound like a 14 year old who thinks he's smarter than everyone else because he rebelled against his fundie parents. Pathetic.
Inspiring philosophy: goes back to the roots of the bible and reads it in the original translation and shows how the english version is drastically different in the interpretation.
Kent hovind: wow you've been led astray by philosophy.
Amazin.
I wonder what Kent thinks about Spanish translations. Is it perfectly preserved in Spanish, French, Italian? Or do other people have to learn English to read the KJV to understand the Bible?
There is a actual fundamentalist Spanish versions of the Bible. They'll say they're translated from the original texts and Textus Receptus but are actually translated from the KJV. Thankfully, those fundamentalists are few.
Ask Sam Gipp that question and he'll tell you that you have to learn English.
According to Gipp, the KJV even trumps the original languages (it sounds like Kent Hovind might even believe that too!).
DMeloMan watch Walter Veith ‘Battle of the Bibles’ or read the book ‘Our authorised Bible vindicated’
Sadly these KJV fundamentalists truly believe that their King James English is superior to ALL other languages, even the original Hebrew. It's a very Ethnocentric and absurd point of view.
Ahah if you read the Louis second 1910 in French you’ll burn in hell forever!🤫🙄 haha
Kent just repeats himself over and over again when Mike brings up an argument he has no answer for. Kent’s clearly outclassed.
I will say this: no matter how good Kent Hovind's arguments may or may not be or how good his intentions are, his arrogance is a problem for his cause. It's also unfortunate that this got even a little bit to IP, and prevented a good scholarly discussion.
I got the opposite from this, thought IP was snarky and uncharitable and derailing.
Kent is incapable of scholarly discussions
It is so painful to watch how Kent is misinterpreting and misunderstanding the Bible and not sticking to the text of how God preserved it.
James is the best moderator of debates on RUclips. Really appreciate you James😊
Kent makes his living off of the literal interpretation of the stories in the bible, he isn’t going to change his beliefs about this. Debating Kent over the bible is more for entertainment purposes than anything else.
Well it’s blasphemous when you’re going to add words into the Bible
When your going to add another interpretation into a self evident sentence that has no indication of it being a figure of speech. It’s therefore, adding into the word of God.
Where In genesis does it indicate that it’s not meant to be taken literally? Nowhere actually. It’s even mention in exodus.
The beginning is also mentioned in John.
NR Ramirez study the history of the stories written that make up the Old Testament. The stories are all nonfiction, borrowed and rewritten from older stories of the time, evolution destroys the account of Adam and Eve. Unless you don’t agree with me, but I understand where you’re your coming from.
It difficult to get a man to admit he is wrong when his paycheck requires him to do the opposite.
Rodney Settle no actual honest historian even says that the Old Testament is borrowed. Even though the Old Testament is history. Everyone who says that just copy from illiterate atheist websites and are ignorant of the stories.
What is actually true is that these pagan stories originated from one story. Because if you actually study they all sound familiar, Noah’s ark for example, the only one that has common sense and carries reason and absolute purpose is from Noah’s ark. The rest is somewhat a cube that’s swimming in an ocean.
And most are not even similar to the Bible, they copy that there is a god and they just mixed it up.
And guess what, even scriptures tells s that there are gods.
You must do a series of twist and turns to make it sound like the Old Testament.
You understand that I don’t believe in evolution because the evidence isn’t compelling, true, strong and absolute?
I loved how Mike Traped Kent in having Kent become the Guru.
IP simply destroyed Kent. IP quoted scholars in their exegeses of the hebrew text, while Kent continued with his old overly refuted arguments and strawman arguments, not understanding his heretical thought (like modalism), science (he doesn’t know gravity) and appealing to his “holy” english King James. IP won that one.
Hardly... He did quote scholars on a handful of original Hebrew words, but Kent destroyed him on scriptural context... IP is desperate to make the Bible fit the theory of evolution, which is impossible, because he could never adequately argue scripture... I'm a firm believer of the Gap Theory, and that it's scripturally sound, but it still doesn't allow for evolution.
@Techstorian OW "An effective argument from Hebrew would require an absolute fluency in the language"
This strikes me as patently false.
"Quoting Hebrew words in singular fashion is the weakest of debates."
Again, I think this is wrong. Not quoting any Hebrew is probably a much weaker form of debate, given the document was inspired in the Hebrew language. IP was correct with regards to his criticism of Kent reading in his western presuppositions and blindly affirming an english translation (The king james of all translations lol).
Mark Wildt perfectly said. I am highly skeptical of these so-called Hebrew experts. You're right in saying that inspiring philosophy is failing to take into consideration the importance of scriptural context. And yes I believe there's a subconscious attempt to make the Genesis account fit their secular View. It's very suspicious that none of this stuff was ever really put forward all throughout church history.
@Techstorian OW Except biblical scholars don't draw on modern Hebrew in their exegesis of OT scripture. Doing so when ancient Hebrew material is readily available would contravene the principles that exegesis is based upon. Compared to the time that the King James was transliterated, we have a much greater understanding of ancient Hebrew, and more scholarly resources to compare the texts to.
Your criticism fails to touch on my point - Even modern Hebrew would likely give us a much more informative APPROXIMATION of the texts nuances and original meanings compared to modern English. There are even more radical differences between ancient Hebrew and ANY FORM OF English, than there are between ancient Hebrew and modern Hebrew. Even though we would both agree that using modern Hebrew would be inappropriate, it would still be better than simply using English.
Otherwise, are you claiming that OT scholars, or at least the scholars quoted by Inspiring Philosophy, DO use modern Hebrew in their exegesis? You seem to be implying it at the very least.
@Techstorian OW I'm not going to argue against a KJV onlyist here. Suffice to say that your position pretty much does not even exist amongst those persons who actually have qualifications in Old Testament biblical scholarship.
People reading these comments, please understand that Techstorian OW's interpretation of scripture is not supported by people who study, or can actually read (or speak) ancient Hebrew. It is a view of the biblical translations that is almost entirely and exclusively accepted by persons whose only language (spoken or written) is modern day English.
and once again Kent demonstrates you can't brow beat your way to victory in a reasoned debate.
We need more people like Michael; accepting of facts, even with a belief in the supernatural.
i mean virtually the entire world believes in supernatural in some form, it is more logical to believei n that than to be an unhappy neckbeard nonbeliever minority
This guys crushed Hovind. Kent lost 90% of his talking points b/c he has rarely been challenged from a biblical point of view. Bring him back!
Atheist here but Inspiring Philosophy absolutely killed this. His opening is fantastic.
Kent Hovind left in the dust... as usual.
Insults, condescension, and the straw manning of arguments are the sure signs of a floundering argument. Kent Hovind did very poorly.
Kent Hovind is the master of straw man and red herring arguments. He is a fool.
@@stephencastro4723 amen brother
He is why there are more atheists
It’s his normal way. And it’s very disturbing. Satan is the accuser of the brethren...let that sink deep. Very upsetting.
@@unknowntexan4570 hmmm maybe that is the plan...Satan is the accuser of the brethren. Not the Holy Spirit
love conversations between Christians of various views like this, I wish there were some way to open up debate and conversation within community churches without being shunned by the whole church. We are on the same team seeking truth, not to necessarily beat the other person in an argument. Also IP do you think you could maybe request a talk/debate with Hugh Ross? He is one of my favorite and most respectful debaters currently :)
I credit Hugh Ross as being one of the people who saved my faith a few years ago. I was raised in a young earth environment and one of the things that pushed me away from that perspective is studying the original languages and the downright unchrist like attitude that young earth creationists like Kent hovind have when they debate someone that disagrees with them. Especially when they're debating a fellow believer they just become incredibly hostile and don't demonstrate God's character and love very well. We need to not be attacking each other as Christians when we disagree because it causes harm to the body of Christ. We need to be able to disagree in love. People like Kent treat Christians who disagree with them like they're not saved and they say threatening things like "God's going to judge you for saying that." There is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ. We need to act like that verse actually means what it says.
Kent is playing checkers while Michael is playing chess, blindfolded.
wrong.. IP was playing games and Ken was shooting straight.
“I want to bring you back”
Doesn’t try to convince us of his side and just attacks the other side
“I want to know the Hebrew.” *begins to read english* “no, Hebrew!” *continues to read english*
Well IP doesn't know Hebrew(let alone biblical hebrew). If IP wants to know Hebrew he should study it.
@@boliussa how did you come to that conclusion and can you support it?
I'm an atheist, but I enjoy watching Christians debating Christian's with views that differ completely.
I'm glad that you are interested in the issues. But you do know that we all agree we are sinners and Christ came to reconcile us with God. This is what makes us Christians. Not geology.
Kent Hovind was very sloppy in his explanation of the Trinity. It sounded an awful lot like Modalism. God is three persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
Where did he talk about it? I've only begun to watch
@@Beastinvader Kent Hovind began talking about the trinity in 1:22:35- 1:25:55. Hovind clearly doesn't even have a basic grasp of what the trinity doctrine states. The trinity doctrine holds that God is one God, but three coeternal consubstantial persons or hypostases-the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit-as "one God in three Divine Persons". The three Persons are distinct, yet are one "substance, essence or nature" (homoousios).
@@JohnSmith-yw9nk Well defined. I finished the debate and I'm shocked to see how easily he moved from partialism to modalism
Finally, I agree with Standing for Truth.
Eh, honestly it really doesn't matter what someone thinks about the Trinity. It's all just one spirit, anyway.
Good job IP
I agree, tactical plunger! thanks for stopping by! Have a great rest of your Saturday! :)
1:14:19 "I don't think we need the Hebrew or the Greek.." WOW!!! KJV only lunacy in it's purist form. He even posits that we don't have it and that the manuscripts that prove the historicity of our faith are invalid. WOW!!!
And THAT is precisely why some fewer people take you seriously Kent. You just continue to steer away from the conversation at hand. You barely came up with any evidence. You say he’s corrupted by philosophy. No he was reading scripture through it’s original language and ancient context. And to think I used to be one of those people who took you seriously.
“There’s a curse to those who add to the word of God.”
True but funny you should say that. Cause that sounds exactly what YOU were doing this entire debate.
“You’ve added that to the word of God. Thank you for adding that. You’re the one who should be under judgment.”
IP is SAVAGE!!
You know, that "curse" that Kent was talking about is often misunderstood. It's not "cursed is any who adds to the Word of God", it's pronounced to any who add to the book of Revelations. Fortunately, though, this misunderstanding has kept most people from adding anything and claiming it to be scripture, so it is good.
People deny half the Bible to make evolution work
@@114wildfire the Bible says nothing about scientific theories like Big Bang and Evolution. Only YEC's said that with their flawed interpretations.
Stephen Castro
Did I claim the Bible talks about scientific theories?
Stephen Castro
Well, Bible does seem to speak about evolution though.
Romans 1:23
23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.👈👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆
I'm a christan and I can't stand Kent.i think he dishonors the gospel
Same!
We have to love him. How can we expect him to accept the faith when we are hypocritical. If everyone was telling you how much they cant stand you and how stupid you are do you think you would join them and accept their beliefs and lifestyle? How can we expect to convert people when we tell them we hate them? We love kent, we see he has some issues with his logic and doctrine. I dont blame him. I blame the devil. And i want to make it clear that he definitely dishonored the Bible and dishonored God. That is unacceptable. Jesus said forgive them, for they know NOT what they do. Kent doesnt understand what hes doing because hes not saved. And makes it appear that he has no fear of God. Eventually God will bring his wrath upon the earth and wipe out everything. God has so much mercy and patience tolerant, but he only tolerates so much sin before he brings justice. May God bless you all.
Disappointing debate. I was hoping for a clearer case to be made for either position, but it seems we got distracted by more minor discussions. I don't feel like I learned anything new, and I'm still most in agreement with IP.
Kevin McElroy it’s really not hard to understand the creation story there is nothing indicting IP’s heretical position
Welcome to every debate with Kent. Pointless diatribes, misrepresentations of opponent's position mixed with general disrespect from a conman who did more for atheism than Hitchens could ever dream of. Long live Kent.
How can someone obsessed with the Bible willingly ignore the languages it was written in?
Kent is not ignoring the language it is written, he's relying on good translators, IP doesn;t know Hebrew and IP's claims about hebrew were wild
I think the biggest scandal here is Kent Hovind apparently not understanding anything about the Trinity around 1:24:00 he seems to imply partialism, then he seems to talk of modalism. To all you YEC christians who are obsessed with Genesis literalism, I suggest you should be more worried about potential heresy against the Trinity, which is the central doctrine of Christian faith. God does not have 3 parts that add up to a whole; God is 3 persons and each is fully God. God does not simply reveal himself in three modes like a father, son etc; God is literally 3 persons, each being fully God. That slip on Kent's part is extremely telling that he should start worrying more about the central issues of Christianity - the Trinity, Incarnation, Redemption - instead of trying to make Genesis into a science textbook.
Couldn't agree more. The creeds of the Church have declared that someone who doesn't believe in the trinity is damned. It's the fundamental tenant of the faith!
The trinity is the most ridiculous and blinding doctrine to ever exist. You are committing a grave sin by believing in that heresy
“Each produced its own kind” What Genesis does not say is that they were not related. Being that each creature bears its own kind does not mean they’re not related and cannot be an argument against evolution.
I spotted IP rolling his eyes and shaking his head a couple times when Hovind would drop one of the more random and radical statements. Cracked me up every time
Lool
Yeah me too!..... I watched many IP debates and i have always found his facial expressions priceless! especially when the opponent says something stupid... Cracks me up every time!
his eye rolling actually put me off IP, that's not how you should behave, he was like that from Kent's opening statement, it showed closed mindedness and rudeness from the beginning. I didn't find it funny, but really off putting and unbecoming.
Nobody ever calls Hovind out on reading evolution backwards. A fish never produces a non-fish. Once it’s a fish it’s always a fish. The speciation step is where ‘fish’ is originally generated. The creature that evolved into a fish was a vertebrate and gave rise to a vertebrate (still its own kind).
I haven't even watched the video yet, but I already know that 06452017 is wrong, was dishonest, and lost.
How can one say this?! 🤣
Jim Merrilees wow, ok so first off I was replying to a joke. Ok. I was not looking for a debate.
Second the Bible is full of truth to the point where the things in it that are questionable don’t take much faith. The Bible is full of proven history that even secular scholars admit to be true. The Bible has a lot personal firsthand claims that are now known to be scientifically accurate. It also disproves a lot of evolution theory’s. And although some parts of evolution such as adaptation have been proven a lot of evolution in terms of macro is in question. And if you think IP is dumb well you should look at his debates against Aron ra and Matt dillenhanty
You have it wrong.
Prove anything you just said.
At around 35 min IP cracked me up when he asked Hovind about Genesis 2 😂😂😂
35:05
I’m an atheist but I’m proud of IP here. I’d like to see more people accepting evolution and other scientific theories. It’s probably better that theists talk to other theists about this topic rather than atheists because of the stigma attached to them.
Hearing Kent refer to anything he talks about as his expertise instinctively made me wretch. He still claims that inheriting traits from parents, something which is unambiguously necessary for evolution, is against evolution.
I'm not a Christian but boy was that enjoyable to watch. Kent really outshines how simple minded he is.
Kent Hovind got absolutely slammed. His arguments were so bad and so wrapped up with the bankruptcy of KJV-onlyism
Kent Hovind clearly doesn't want the words' definitions in hebrew.
He just wants it in english.
It's easier for him, he doesn't need to put as much thought into changing his bogus script.
If the Hebrew meaning to these words are so obvious why do they translate them the way they do that doesn't support IP's view?
@@marclaclear6628 Because there's nothing else that they can put in that ensures it makes sense of the most important elements of the text.
@@thomastrebilco7219 Which is a pretty good indication that the English translations are accurately representing what the words mean.
@@marclaclear6628 Why would we consider placeholder words, which are put in due to there being a lack of adequate English words able to convey Hebraic meaning, as an indication that the fine nuances of the Hebrew text are accurately represented? Whenever we don't have the words to convey the Hebraic nuances in English, we use placeholder words instead to ensure preservation of the primary themes. However, doing so means we lose any non-primary meanings.
The fact that placeholder words are used at all demonstrates the opposite of what you just claimed - we should be less confident that the Hebraic nuances are accurately transliterated whenever placeholders are used, because this indicates that the original meaning was unable to be directly transliterated into English.
Placeholder words are an indication that the nuance of a text cannot be directly transliterated. In other words, placeholder words indicate that we cannot derive nuanced meaning from the translation - only the primary themes.
Why does Kent Hovind constantly insult his opponent? Insult is the lowest form of debate.
Kevin "Strawman" Hovind
@Bob Smith you're "adding" to God's Word, son! (to emphasize age superiority).
You could also call him Kent "Ad Hominem" Hovind.
And the funny thing bout this is that both of them are still getting saved even if they're both wrong
Potato amen
Not necessarily. Just because someone professes Jesus Christ means nothing. Jesus said to look at the FRUIT! I’ll just say Satan is the accuser of the brethren. I only saw one person doing that here and he always does that. The way he treated Hugh Ross in one debate was despicable. Anyway...God knows. Only He knows the heart of “man”. We really need to watch how we treat each other. God bless you
@@KimberlyOfTheRoyalPriesthood indeed 🙌 This usually applies to teachers of the faith but can also apply to individuala
@@thiccmcchicken550 ?
@@KimberlyOfTheRoyalPriesthoodPaul's warnings were pointless then. Weren't they?
47:31 After Kent Hovind mentions the charts for the dozenth time in the debate, Michael asks a decisive question!
And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why we need the Magisterium of the Catholic Church.
To squash debates. This debate isn’t a debate. It’s IP being pissed he got creamed with Kent’s arguments.
The absolute worst conclusion to draw from this debate.
A lot of people in the comments miss IP’s whole point. It’s not that evolution is 100% biblical and taught in the Bible or that if you don’t believe it you are a fool. His point is that evolution is compatible with genesis. IP has never attacked anyone and said they are doomed to hell for their personal interpretation of genesis.
However, he hears this a lot from fundamentalists, therefore he defends his worldview in being theologically compatible.
Wish Kent would get some new material :: yawn::
Your god doesn’t exist
This guy used to come to my school and teach when I was in 6-8grade I’m 42 same stuff then too
Kent pretty much reads the Bible and tells people they should believe a basic interpretation of it. I don't think there's much need for that approach to change.
@@mikewilliams4717 neither does yours
@@mikewilliams4717
How do you figure that?
Hey Kent what do yo think about the debate you just gave?
Kent: I wasn’t prepared for that
Man you guys are incapable of coming up with something original.you must be the 100th atheist to make this joke.
Why are you assuming he is an atheist? If you watched the debate clearly some Christians do believe in evolution. Whether or not you are a YEC you should recognize that Kent Hovind is truly a scumbag and makes Christianity look bad...
@@harrisonkunneman9952 You are the one to judge him? If I were you, I wouldn't be so quick to condemn people who are willing to promote the Bible as God's word, regardless of whether you agree with every point they make.
The criminal Kent hovind you mean 🤦♂️
Like Michael Jones I followed Kent Hovind for a bit while looking for answers to hard questions from my brother who decided Atheism is most plausible. At first I liked his quick responses his supposed mastery of the subject and yes even a bit of the heckling he gave. However, the more I looked into things and the more I looked into how to read the Bible the more I found that a simplistic read through is dangerous. I believe it can leave a Christian unequipped to deal with hard questions by Atheist. I believe it's people like Kent Hovind that lead appropriately skeptical Christians to a short path to Atheism. Not that it matters on His argument and I'm not attacking him personally, but even when I agreed with Kent at one point I found him to be to abrasive, I found he would attack more that attempt to understand then provide a polished answer, I found he'd often repeat and go back to his pre-tuned response, I also found his character lacking. I believe in grace, but it was very hard to raise up a man that had been convicted and sent to jail for tax evasion. Even if his conviction is considered unjust by some I believe his arrogant character to fit in with a character that would be convicted of such a crime. When you also take into consideration his family life you're left with a character that is much harder to regard highly. Again, I'm not saying that draws away from his arguments, but it does provide scope of what type of scholar he is and how he thinks. Honestly, I'm not convinced of his arguments any longer and thankful for Michael Jones and others like him. I don't believe Michael is a saint either and see that his character is still being developed. But regardless of character His arguments are much more solid than Kent's. I would also easily put Ken Ham in the same camp with Kent Hovind. I saw him speak live at the Creation Museum and I was unimpressed. He spent the first few minutes talking down about those opposed to him ( who weren't even there). Again, that kind of immature character of tearing down others opposed to your worldview is unappealing to me. I believe it shows you're weakness to be able to address the hard questions of those opposed to your thinking.
29:15 Inspiring Philosophy, stop! You're murdering him!!!
So wrong
I know! Hovind is so wrong, it goes from humorous, to annoying. Hovind is so incapable of intelligent debate.
33 minutes in and this is glorious.
I love frank discussions like this. The fire has a way of showing the nakedness of certain arguments and showing the weakness and strength of both.
Bravo gentleman. This is edifying me greatly. I have used certain arguments from both of them at varying times and hearing them ridiculed makes me rethink them. So it's a valuable thing to me.
Kent got destroyed sorry. Bless him in his desire to serve God,
@Humble Guy Kent got F'd in the A
Love seeing this clown getting schooled by an intellectually honest theist.
I disagree with some of IP’s conclusions in other areas, but he does work in a scientific framework. Props.
Kent uses infantile analogies because he and his followers like simple comparisons so they don't have to understand theories and supporting evidence.
IP: It's not in the Hebrew.
Hovind: proceeds to triumphantly read the English translation over and over again.
13:03 Hovind: God doesn't use suffering to bring forth good things.
Paul: 👁️ 👄👁️
Stephen: 👁️👄👁️
Jeremiah: 👁️👄👁️
Literally every single apostle: 👁️👄👁️
(For those who say that john died of old age, he still suffered.)
1:28:10 _"Attack on the pagans? There were no pagans in the first week"_ --Kent Hovind
The text wasn't written by the people who were alive in the first week, the first month, or the first year or the first thousand years. So what's your point?
Seriously one of the funniest debates I've ever seen
Love IP
1:05:58 Genesis was written by Moses to the Hebrews who were of the exodus. The Pentateuch was written to these Hebrews to help them understand their past, from whom they came and where God was bringing them.
Wow, I used to respect Kent. I’m realizing now that that was a mistake.
I hope you never sent him money
Thank you, Modern Day Debate, IP, and Kent Hovind.
This is my all-time favorite debate. I walked into it in 2020 thinking "ah, another silly evolutionist to be solo'd by Kent, what a treat."
I proceeded to have my entire framework expertly dismantled by Mike Jones, and in 1 fell swoop, had my life changed forever.
I was all-in on Kent's theology, and in 1 video that changed. Simply amazing! I hold no sympathy toward Kent's views anymore, but I still greatly appreciate him making the debate so wacky and fun, and for being the reason I heard Mike Jones out.
I routinely listen to debates, and nothing was as earth-shattering and perfect as this. Most debates are boring, but I was on the edge of my seat the whole time. Lightning in a bottle. Thank you, everyone.
Im not a creationist but I have to say, the part about having a common ancestor has always bothered me as well. IP seemed to fail on this point. At some point, an amoeba would have to bring forth a non amoeba, no matter how long it took to genetically code for this ocurance. Or how about how different species have different numbers of chromosomes. How could this occur under an evolutionary system? Just making some observations using logical arguments. I don't know what to believe, I think it's all still to be answered.
The best to understand this that has worked for me is to imagine a gradient from white to black spread out over an entire football field. If you start all the way on the black side, every blade of grass is black. And the ones to the right of it are also black. But at some point all the way on the other side of the field, the blades of grass are white. But you can never pick two blades of grass side by side and tell the difference in their color
I love this debate. Entertaining and lively. IP you are great. God bless you please keep it up and debate more often. Kent is wrong on so many fronts but sure is fun to watch.
IP just appealed to authority over and over.
At one point he just sat there and talked about how if experts in academia support a position then he believes it.
I think the biggest problem I have with Ken's arguments is he basically claims there is no other way to understand the Bible. He even claims that you nullify Christ's death if you believe in evolution. Guys, it is this kind of thinking that causes so many people to turn away from God. They believe the evidence supports evolution, and then they hear people like Ken tell them they have to choose one or the other. The worst part is Ken accuses you of a accepting "the philosophy of this world" if you do not agree. He even said God will judge Inspiring Philosophy for this belief. This seems like clear religious abuse, using scripture and pressure to make you give up your view. Again, people hate this. People don't want to hear threats of judgement from the Bible and God if you don't agree. Come on, this is ridiculous. Whether or not evolution is true is not important. But if you tell people there is NO WAY evolution can fit in the Bible and even tell them God will judge them is way too harsh.
Darrien DeFederico Great point
Science is observing a process in a lab, something that we've done with micro evolution but not macro evolution. Finding fossils of similar anatomy isn't proof, nor is similar DNA, rather it's merely assumptions that we all evolved from something common. Evolution has pretty reasonable observations but it isn't factual since it cannot be observed. Trying to use "enough time" as an excuse doesn't work because we humans have mortal lives and can only observe points of time.
I agree. Sadly a lot of young earthers act like this towards their fellow believers who disagree with them and they attack the body of Christ in doing so. There is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ. We need to act like that verse actually means something.
Man. This is cool. As an atheist it is fascinating to see these two shouting bible versus to each other.
Inspiring philosophy is most convincing and likeable theist arguer here
IP: "We ought to read Genesis in its original ancient [Hebrew] context"
Kent: "My English KJV says..."
It's hilarious that Kent thinks an English translation holds more weight than the original language.
Most all trinitarians believe this
Kent can't ever win. Makes one almost feel bad
Kent Hovind is painful to listen too. He sets out to bilk his adherents and unfortunately succeeds.
Ok half way through. Mike is killing it. Kent ain’t doing that bad. I feel kinda bad for Kent but pride comes before the fall. Mike is not perfect but a better debater. Kent just spews the same sound bites he has brainwashed his flock w. But still I love both of these men as brothers in Christ. Can’t wait to meet them in the air
I respect both of these men of God and it’s very sad to see such aggression between them.
Two men who will see each other in heaven, I might add.
Good job Mike holding Kent to the topic at hand
At 1:30:00 "Does IP think he can translate hebrew better then the profesjonal hebrew translaters". But the real question is if Hovind understand the text of the Bible better then the hebrew translaters.
The Hebrew translators are the ones who did the English translations. If the words really mean something else then why did they choose the words that they chose?
The interpretation belongs to God! Read Genesis chapter 40! Tell me what you see!
Believe in Jesus Christ and you shall have everlasting life! Jesus loves you! Get a king james bible and believe.
Read Matthew.
Mi at thank u
Huh? What did I do? Did you read Genesis chapter 40! The power of God's Word shows that it has been preserved as written thousands of years ago in bible!
You don't have to learn "hebrew"! Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world! Ask Jesus Christ to show you! Get a king james bible and believe.
Read 2 Peter chapter 3.
God bless and keep you!
Mi at thank u, finally someone who actually believes in the bible!
here's an old joke, "The King James version was good enough for the Apostle Paul, so it's good enough for me"
It kind of makes you wonder how these poor people ever had the truth before the KJV came around.
I use a King James Version but I'm not limited to it. Therefore before anyone accuses me of knocking the King James version, stand back a minute, I like it.
Phillip Evans
😂😂😂😂😂😂
👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
Nothing wrong with liking it or using it. I know lots of people who use it and know the word well. It’s just when someone says that you are to use or risk God’s wrath as James White puts it, that Christians like ya ought to stand against
KJV onlyists. They are a strange bunch of people !! 😛
I like it very much as well. I also like the NASB and the ESV. :) According to Ken the Corinthians when they received the letter from Paul didn't have the Word of God because it wasn't the KJV English. 🤣
IP: Gives good points and arguments
Kent Hovind: MY Bible says this and I'm not going to listen to what you have to say!
Kent is right.. The things IP was claiming about Hebrew were wild, and Kent was right not to trust him.
@@boliussa
Riiiight ;)
@@KingDavidWood if you were more honest you'd ask for evidence, or look at other comments where i've provided evidence, but you're not.
1:56 Yes, one should always strive to understand what the author - of any text, is saying.
1:12:55-1:13:00 is a summary of the entire debate
1:32:00-1:32:30 Notice how IP wants to talk about the Greek translation of virgin and not the Hebrew. I wonder why