I don’t know why Bart Ehrman does these debates. I love watching them, but he is arguing facts against people arguing feelings. Objective fact versus platitudes and sermons.
Since according to you, Christians do not have facts - please explain 1) everything from nothing 2) order from chaos 3) life from non-life, and 4) why - feel free to educate us, the floor is yours.
@@TheGoodBible Easy. 1) No serious cosmologist claims that everything came from nothing, 2) self-organization, 3) biochemistry, 4) because. You are welcome.
@@TheGoodBible Your echo chamber of a brain is dazed and confused. You're not paying attention. Dr Ehrman shot down Butt within the first 5-10 minutes of his presentation. Even Butt knows it.
@TheGoodBible Virtually every Christian and Jewish denomination accepts the reality of evolution. But I'm with you, its impossible to remain a believer once you understand that the Bible is just old myths.
@@TheGoodBible go educate yourself. Evolution is a scientific theory based on an overwelming amount of facts. Uncomfortable for creationists. The earth is much older than 6000 years. We can measure that with several reliable methods.
@ Biblically speaking god exists. Biblically speaking god told Saul to offer his defeated enemy up as a sacrifice, he then caused Saul to lose in battle. Biblically speaking god told the Israelites to offer their first born to pass through the fire in order to demonstrate the vanity of god (Ezekiel 20:25) Biblically speaking god caused great suffering on Job and killed his wife and children as a wager with Satan. Biblically speaking god wanted the first born of every womb, including women, but would except a bribe to the priest to redeem the child. Biblically speaking god told Adam and Eve were told they would surely, that day, die, and it was a lie. Biblically speaking Job queried god about why he was caused to suffer, and instead of answering Job, god grandstanded him. Bibically speaking god lied to his prophets of Ahab, so that he would engage in a losing battle. Biblically speaking god lied to Dani’el. Biblically speaking god lied to Jesus and Paul. Biblically speaking god offered a story to Moses about the creation and the flood he borrowed from the Mesopotamian. What value is biblically speaking to any argument? God requires pagan sacrifices, he lies to his prophets, he tells people to do things for the sole purpose of supporting his vanity, he betrays the people he had anointed for disgusting reasons, he anointed a king to be that was a serial killer, misogynistic and was a traitor to his kingdom. Should this be the basis of any valid argument?
NO ONE CAN PROVE A GOD'S EXISTENCE. NO ONE. Belief in a god requires faith. Faith requires NO PROOF. Sheesh! Butt is a poor apologist and debater. He doesn't know the bible as well as Dr Ehrman. Butt seems to have little or no knowledge of biblical exegesis. Butt knows Dr Ehrman's writings better than he knows the bible. Imo, Dr Ehrman wasted his time on this obtuse individual.
@@TheGoodBible HOW Butt studied the bible is what matters, not THAT he did. Butt approaches his "study" of the bible as a believer and presumes what he studies as inerrant. Therefore he sees only what confirms his presupposition of what the bible is for himself - a book of his god's word, inerrant and inviolate because it is god's word. The bible has many errors, contradictions, added verses to gospels not made by the supposed authors, etc. Ehrman studies the bible as an historian. Therefore his historical analysis is more highly probable than anything Butt has to offer. And you can not prove your god's existence because belief requires faith. Why do you believers insist on PROVING your bible is inerrant when you can't? AND Yeshua commended those who believe without proof (the definition of faith). Yet you brood of vipers continue to go against Yeshua's teaching?
I don’t know why Bart Ehrman does these debates. I love watching them, but he is arguing facts against people arguing feelings. Objective fact versus platitudes and sermons.
Since according to you, Christians do not have facts - please explain 1) everything from nothing 2) order from chaos 3) life from non-life, and 4) why - feel free to educate us, the floor is yours.
@@TheGoodBible Easy. 1) No serious cosmologist claims that everything came from nothing, 2) self-organization, 3) biochemistry, 4) because. You are welcome.
Once again, Professor Ehrman completely destroys the "arguments" of yet another glib but sadly outmatched religious fanatic.
How so? Offered no facts. Emotional people struggle with coherent and logical conversations.
@@TheGoodBible Your echo chamber of a brain is dazed and confused. You're not paying attention. Dr Ehrman shot down Butt within the first 5-10 minutes of his presentation. Even Butt knows it.
Debating fundamentalists like Butt is like watering plastic flowers.
Submit an actual argument or move on so you don't appear to be a child.
@@TheGoodBible stay polite
Interesting topic, I'd never thought of the problem of suffering. Evolution and the history of The Bible/Jews was enough for me to set aside religion.
Evolution is a failed idea. Evidence supports life creating life after its kind.
@TheGoodBible Virtually every Christian and Jewish denomination accepts the reality of evolution. But I'm with you, its impossible to remain a believer once you understand that the Bible is just old myths.
@@TheGoodBible go educate yourself. Evolution is a scientific theory based on an overwelming amount of facts. Uncomfortable for creationists. The earth is much older than 6000 years. We can measure that with several reliable methods.
I went from Islam to Southern Baptist and a decade later I realized both are equally invalid. Been an atheist since.
Everyone has the right to put faith where they see fit.
Takes strong faith to be an atheist.
We prefer evidence.
This guy Kyle would make a good street magician or used car salesman.
Biblically speaking what did he say that was incorrect?
@ Biblically speaking god exists.
Biblically speaking god told Saul to offer his defeated enemy up as a sacrifice, he then caused Saul to lose in battle.
Biblically speaking god told the Israelites to offer their first born to pass through the fire in order to demonstrate the vanity of god (Ezekiel 20:25)
Biblically speaking god caused great suffering on Job and killed his wife and children as a wager with Satan.
Biblically speaking god wanted the first born of every womb, including women, but would except a bribe to the priest to redeem the child.
Biblically speaking god told Adam and Eve were told they would surely, that day, die, and it was a lie.
Biblically speaking Job queried god about why he was caused to suffer, and instead of answering Job, god grandstanded him.
Bibically speaking god lied to his prophets of Ahab, so that he would engage in a losing battle.
Biblically speaking god lied to Dani’el.
Biblically speaking god lied to Jesus and Paul.
Biblically speaking god offered a story to Moses about the creation and the flood he borrowed from the Mesopotamian.
What value is biblically speaking to any argument? God requires pagan sacrifices, he lies to his prophets, he tells people to do things for the sole purpose of supporting his vanity, he betrays the people he had anointed for disgusting reasons, he anointed a king to be that was a serial killer, misogynistic and was a traitor to his kingdom.
Should this be the basis of any valid argument?
What about all the indiscriminate God-ordained infanticides and genocides in the Old Testament?
Kyle, you say you spent a year suffering studying Barts work and that’s the best argument you can come up with???
being a critic is easy - present a better argument
Did he insult scotch? Debate lost🤣
Thank to Jesus Christ for preacher Kyle Butt
Alright now let me show you this, durrrrhhhhh
Looks like an incomplete thought. Please, continue.
Lol what are you love bombing everyone on youtube? Keep your cult tactics to yourself bud
NO ONE CAN PROVE A GOD'S EXISTENCE. NO ONE. Belief in a god requires faith. Faith requires NO PROOF. Sheesh! Butt is a poor apologist and debater. He doesn't know the bible as well as Dr Ehrman. Butt seems to have little or no knowledge of biblical exegesis. Butt knows Dr Ehrman's writings better than he knows the bible. Imo, Dr Ehrman wasted his time on this obtuse individual.
Kyle has been studying the Bible most his life. Presented facts while Ehrman presented emotions. Your claim is dishonest.
@@TheGoodBible HOW Butt studied the bible is what matters, not THAT he did. Butt approaches his "study" of the bible as a believer and presumes what he studies as inerrant. Therefore he sees only what confirms his presupposition of what the bible is for himself - a book of his god's word, inerrant and inviolate because it is god's word. The bible has many errors, contradictions, added verses to gospels not made by the supposed authors, etc. Ehrman studies the bible as an historian. Therefore his historical analysis is more highly probable than anything Butt has to offer. And you can not prove your god's existence because belief requires faith. Why do you believers insist on PROVING your bible is inerrant when you can't? AND Yeshua commended those who believe without proof (the definition of faith). Yet you brood of vipers continue to go against Yeshua's teaching?