Chris Wheeless That’s not what that verse is saying. The word of God calls us to test all things. It’s wanting to understand, not just caring about expressing ones own opinions.
Nickolas Gaspar I disagree. Christians are always willing to have discussions and or debates or hold these platforms where those who hold different views can come and ask questions and make their claims for what they believe. The guy who was asking Frank questions, wasn’t willing to listen to Franks explanation. It’s always best when both sides can have a dialogue back and forth, instead the atheist just walked out.
Gonçalo Peres do you really believe that. Aren’t you one of the sinners. Yes, I can see believing Jesus is God. That’s some faulty logic. There is only one God and he has no partners, no sons, and no daughters. Use your brain not your mouth.
@@adamalmir5214 I am a sinner saved by God's grace. Even though I may struggle with sin, it no longer has power in my life as it used to. ❝ For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. ❞ Romans 6:14 KJV ❝ For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. ❞ Ephesians 2:8-9 KJV
gotta respect it. He does faith in a paradoxical way. There is no conclusive evidence because there needs to be room for faith. So HE believes that there is no god
@@maow9240 Marriage was Plan B to Paul if you couldn't resist. I hear he was somewhat fuzzier on the subject of kneecaps but that might have been Jesus.
He prob was ruffled, just hid it. He shared a story of how an atheist's response made him shiver before and it was on the topic of how some atheist just don't care about truth and only want to do w/e they want. I could prob find the vid if i want to, irrc it was a Q&A maybe 50min long and he was debating with this dude about logics, rocks, immaterial things etc
Scott was annoyed because Mr. Turek was making claims that Scott indicated were not true and pointed that out. So pointing out that someone is not being honest is not disrespectful it's being fair. And Scott was very nice in his comments - and clarified many things that Mr. Turek was getting wrong or mis representing. Mr. Turek likes to use concepts of complex debating which don't hold up.
@@petersimard3538 Scott was objectively wrong. He was using the "psychological state" definition for Atheism "a lack of belief in God" which is incorrect for a philosophical context like this. Psychological states are not even truth claims, so they cannot serve as a position in a debate at all. Psychological states are just something you experience, they just ARE, and cannot be debated with another person. Turek pointed this out. Here's the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy describing the difference between two definitions for Atheism, and ALL of academia defines it like this: "The word “atheism” is polysemous-it has multiple related meanings. In the psychological sense of the word, atheism is a psychological state, specifically the state of being an atheist, where an atheist is defined as someone who is not a theist and a theist is defined as someone who believes that God exists (or that there are gods). This generates the following definition: atheism is the psychological state of lacking the belief that God exists. In philosophy, however, and more specifically in the philosophy of religion, the term “atheism” is standardly used to refer to the proposition that God does not exist (or, more broadly, to the proposition that there are no gods). Thus, to be an atheist on this definition, it does not suffice to suspend judgment on whether there is a God, even though that implies a lack of theistic belief. Instead, one must deny that God exists. This metaphysical sense of the word is preferred over other senses, including the psychological sense, not just by theistic philosophers, but by many (though not all) atheists in philosophy as well. For example, Robin Le Poidevin writes, “An atheist is one who denies the existence of a personal, transcendent creator of the universe, rather than one who simply lives his life without reference to such a being” (1996: xvii). J. L. Schellenberg says that “in philosophy, the atheist is not just someone who doesn’t accept theism, but more strongly someone who opposes it.” In other words, it is “the denial of theism, the claim that there is no God” (2019: 5).”
@@petersimard3538 I don't mean to be insulting, but it blows my mind that atheists like you and Scott genuinely think you know more than one of the top philosophers worldwide about things like this, when you clearly haven't even bothered to investigate at all.
He just wanted to say that he hates Frank. He was neither an atheist nor an agnostic, he was a snowflake. Frank was very respectful and was thoroughly answering his question.
@CaptainFatBat, Dead on bro. You are so correct. He shouldn’t have even started the argument if he was just going to walk out like that. What was the point?
@@sqlblindman Hey friend, historical evidence was what helped me on my way, maybe it can help you too. Christianity is what I went with because I was raised in this tradition. My suggestion would be get some book about historical evidence about or search Capturing Christianity YT channel, there is an interview vid with Gary Habermas and Mike Licona, New Testament scholars. They mention non-christian NT scholars in their videos too. And share their own journey. Remember, none of us was born into any religion, searching is good :) Wish you all the best friend.
@@alexantal4417 Historical evidence of what? There is no historical evidence supporting the Gospel accounts of Jesus. I have looked, and there is none. If you have any eye witness accounts of the Resurrection, or of Jesus' crucifixion, let me know. The Gospels describe the Sun going dark at Jesus' death, and the Temple curtain being ripped asunder, and the dead rising from their graves and walking the streets. Do you have any historical support for these events, or are we to conclude that nobody found them noteworthy at the time? Keep searching for the truth friend, and you will find that Jesus is fable.
@@sqlblindman You know that cities that are listed in the Bible are being demolished so people don't find the truth? And there was many other cities discovered that are stated in the Bible yet we don't hear about in the Media.
I've been watching these types of debates between theist apologists and atheists for the past 5 years. Here's my brief take away. Apologists try to reconcile metaphysical reality with physical reality. Athiests who are materialists or naturalists try to reduce everything down to science. There are two things that science can't do. Science doesn't cause anything, only describes the law of physics (John Lennox). Science doesn't replace the human condition, it only helps supplement our understanding of it. A metaphysical mind and consciousness has to exist first before science and philosophy can even be explored. William Lane Craig helped convert me from agnostic to a theistic rationalist. I do attend a Methodist Church with my wife. I have Asperger's so it was important to me to connect the dots logically before I could explore my spiritual side.
Bravo. Atheists have a way of being in love with their own intellect. It’s very disturbing. I keep trying to hear their arguments, but every time I just feel like I’ve been bludgeoned (cue the large words to make myself look more intelligent than everyone else in the room) repeatedly in my cranium, mandible and abdomen.
Anything is possible, if you exit the realm of reality. So you can imagine whatever you want. Whatever claim you want. I can create a claim, that Bible's God is liar and nobody can refute that.
@Fred Bloggs .....a fool says in his heart "there is no God" The creation points towards a Creator so deny at least the possibly of a Creator is utter foolishness.
Scott could have been more receptive, he was pretty rude. Everytime the dr tried to answer the question scott would shoot down his answer while talking over him and bring up diffrent questions.
@Sheldon Cooper You're right. Atheists like to criticize theists when theists give their reasons for beliefs but when asked the same or similar questions concerning their own reasons for their own beliefs, atheists suddenly do not want to be as willing to give their own reasons for their own beliefs and therefore they make excuses for this hypocritical behavior so as not to be criticized themselves. Excuses include the following: - "I don't have to answer that.....BUT YOU HAVE TO ANSWER ME!" - "I don't know.....BUT I KNOW IT CAN'T BE GOD! - "That's an unanswerable question....BUT I KNOW IT ISN'T GOD!"
@@frankpontone2139 Mostly the responses I hear atheists say is that they don’t have to give any explanations because their statement isn’t a belief but fact. They have thoroughly convinced themselves that the debate is already closed and solved, which is ridiculous because that isn’t true. No matter how much I explain to them that it’s still an open case that people are allowed to make a choice on, they refuse to admit that. I guess I can only understand that because if it’s not a closed case, then it’s obvious that the better choice would be to believe in theism which promises humankind a future and eternal life and good triumphing over evil and the world being renewed with no more death or suffering than to choose to believe that death is just a normal process and eventually everything including the universe is going to not exist anymore. One belief offers hope while the other despair. So I guess of course they can’t accept that it’s still an option to believe in theism, because it would be really depressing and kind of warped to choose to believe in no hope and despair over the possibility of a future for us.
@@nicodeleon2908 right lol atheist are just ignorant In my opinion they just say things without providing proof about what they say, I’ve actually met atheist’s who know Jesus Christ existed so it makes me laugh when some atheist are ignorant and some aren’t
This should be very simple for anyone to understand, of course atheism is a worldview. Call it lack of belief or whatever you want but regardless it is a worldview if you don't believe that God exists then you believe that life came from non-life and that a cosmic accident caused the universe to come into existence. *That is a worldview*
They’re attempting to escape the responsibility of defending their worldview by conflating it with their disbelief in the biblical Christian worldview. Atheism is not merely a lack in the biblical Christian worldview, as proven by the fact that atheists have existed in places and times where Christians didn’t.
@The fact of Evolution why dont you tell us what your worldview is, as you know where Christian's stand... It doesnt matter what we think your values are... its irrelevant right? Your just a mutated slime that somehow evolved into fish, apes, then humans... what values should slime have?
@The fact of Evolution Your username "Evolution" proves my point. Atheism is a world view that the universe and life doesn't need an intelligent designer such as God to explain why it's all here.
Betty Crocker: "Add two beaten eggs." There you have equivalence numb-skull. You cannot quote a passage from a book of fiction to assert that the authors of a book of fiction are correct.
This man just attended the event to try to one up Frank. Which he failed miserably. He even admitted he spoke out during the presentation which means he was particularly unruly. For someone who "lacks belief" the guy's seemed so invested and very very passionate about it. He even watches a lot of Frank's debates. 🤣
@@upturnedblousecollar5811 That's a non-arguement, borderline ad hominem. The bible is some 80% historical accounts of events that can be verified through other sources, up to and including Ancient Roman government authority. We know a giant flood happened, we know Jesus existed, the ten commandsments and the Judeo-Christian ethic are what lead to one of the most prosperous and successful lands in all of human history, to say nothing of the legal and moral groundwork of all of western Europe. Without the church most of modern science (The academia in particular) would not exist. Some of the greatest thinkers throughout history, Keplar, Newton, so on were all massive believers. You hate religion, just be honest in that, and walk away.
Well if a monkey can learn sign language and Dogs can understand human commands... The only question I would be asking, if I seen a donkey or a snake start talking is who trained them to speak because that's not nothing we didn't accomplish already as humans ... Only thing that would surprise me is if they did something that humanity didn't do already... Then it would be a huge surprise, like Jesus rising up from the dead after 3 days and over 500 witnesses claiming to see Jesus alive... If someone told me a donkey and a snake can do that then it will definitely surprise me...
@Dawaza The old atheist straw man. You can’t understand life & death, the process of germination, the transformation required, & how it provides life. Atheists are one of the great revelations, consistently confirming, & affirming the very thing they reject. “That is why I use these parables, For they look, but they don’t really see. They hear, but they don’t really listen or understand. Just as the Bible says, “This fulfills the prophecy of Isaiah that says, ‘When you hear what I say, you will not understand. When you see what I do, you will not comprehend. For the hearts of these people are hardened, and their ears cannot hear, and they have closed their eyes- so their eyes cannot see, and their ears cannot hear, and their hearts cannot understand, and they cannot turn to me and let me heal them.’” Matthew 13:14-15 NLT
I am fed up with those christians. the guy is using more reason than that so called professor. Atheism is just about not believing in something and it is not believing that god does not exist, it is saying we dont know, nothing else
This Guy's version of atheism is more of an example of that "one person" in a group project. That is always ready to tell people their wrong or their ideas won't work but , they themselves don't provide a better answer.
@Matt Smith Your statement would cause us to go in circles in a debate so what I am asking for is that we both state our claims. Eg I say Superman can defeat all DC characters because of 123. Then instead of you just telling he can't or why he can't, you bring a character that can beat him, and say it's because of 123. This way we can truly move forward, because if you found a stronger character and beat me then I would go and find a stronger character to beat the one you brought. And by continuously doing this we would finally find the strongest character together. If we do it like this we would not be going in circles fighting against each other BUT we would actually be growing and actively reaching the best answer together.
@Matt Smith What it means is support your argument or get off the crapper Atheist.....Dont just shoot down arguments without supporting your counter argument...
I mean to be fair, you don't need to be a chef to know the food tastes bad. You can criticize a bad idea for being a bad idea without being smart enough to put forth a better one, but in real-life practicality, it does make you very hard to work with, yeah. If you don't have a well of good ideas, you should *at least* have a filter for the bad ones if you ask me.
The Sun (of God) will set this evening.....When THE SUN RETURNS (tomorrow) the MORNING STAR will RISE FROM THE EAST,it will SAVE MAN from darkness because it is the LIGHT OF THE WORLD,it will be SEEN COMING THROUGH THE CLOUDS with its CROWN of sun rays,as it's shimmer WALKS ON WATER,and when the daylight is longer in duration than the nite and the Sun is fully RESURRECTED (EASTER,springtime) it will RAISE THE DEAD trees,grasses,flowers etc as it TRAVELS ABOUT THE WORLD with its 12* constellations HEALING THE SICK...then as the days get shorter and shorter in duration all the way till Dec 21st when the day lengths are equal in duration for 3 days..then on December 25 the day lengths start getting longer in duration and the 🌞 is reborn.. We are in the Solar age of Pisces TWO FISH.. Jesus Christ is the personification of the Sun... Travels about the world healing the sick... There is a word for it.. personification [per-son-uh-fi-key-shuh n] noun the attribution of HUMAN nature or character to animals, inanimate objects, or abstract notions, especially as a rhetorical figure.. A NASA personified tale about the spaceship...HE flies up into the heavens.burning through HIS mother's grasp,opening HIMSELF releasing us from inside HIM into heaven.. Decode that 2,000 years from now. ;) The story of death and "rebirth"..The ACTUAL new year. When I die the microorganisms in me will change roles and decompose the cells and tissues,and go back into the earth as dust ALIVE. My soul energy will return to its source the fiery Sun to BURN FOR ETERNITY. Getting sufficient Sun exposure is vital for optimal health,there are rules though!!!!! Ecclesiastes 11:7 Truly the light is sweet, and a pleasant thing it is for the eyes to behold the sun: Sungazing is literally looking directly into the Sun at sunrise and or sunset barefoot (grounded) starting at 10 seconds the first time,and adding 10 seconds every day until you are up to 45 minutes. *Religion is complete fraud* All "mythology" is personified stories about the Sun,moon,planets,star constellations and heavenly bodies. The latest is the Christian mythology about the Sun,moon,planets,star constellations and heavenly bodies. Watch a couple episodes of this old TV series and you will listen to wonderful personified stories about the Sun,moon,planets,star constellations,and heavenly bodies. Star Hustler 1980s TV show Eat his flesh.. When I look at an apple I realize that the vitamin C is literally electrons that the tree converted from the sun and stored in the fruit... God's Sun is in the flesh of the Apple im eating.. The 🌞 is the reason for the seasons.. The 🌞 rises in the east. The 🌞 is the light of the world. The 🌞 is the morning star. The 🌞 reflection walks on water. The 🌞 can be seen coming through the clouds. The 🌞 has a crown of sun rays. The 🌞 travels the world healing the sick...all cancer patients are vitamin D deficient. Vitamin D repairs mitochondria+ a thousand other biological functions. The 🌞 will save you from the cold scary darkness. The Sun,the morning star,light of the world,rising from the east,coming through the clouds,saving us from darkness,crown of Sun rays,its shimmer walking on water,traveling the sky healing the sick,raising the dead trees grasses,flowers....and that's the real reason there is only one set of footprints in the sand...because you are walking with the Sun.....God's Sun....you keep God....you just lose man's religion.... The older the book the more revealing.. *I had to delete all links or it won't post"
"They only have to show that your arguments aren't correct or are fallacious." So basically showing up, saying they disagree, and then leaving. Sort of how you did with this event, huh Scott?
@@DrunkenHotei Do you agree with the self defeating claim that everything can be empirically proven despite this claim never being empirically proven ? Answering yes means you are devoid of any sound logic answering no means a necessary God COULD exist something no atheist will admit and thus like a stubborn fool they will agree with the claim displaying their lack of sound logic or for the rare dissagrment with the claim they will then proceed to ask for an empirical proof which again merely displays unsound logic on the part of the atheist. The one reason you are looking for is actually several but here they are, 1.Every contingent fact has an explanation. 2.There is a contingent fact that includes all other contingent facts. 3.Therefore, there is an explanation of this fact. 4.This explanation must involve a necessary being. 5.This necessary being is God. Ive given you more than you asked now you have two options convert to theism or show us how bad faith you truly are.....
"I can see how it might be possible for a man to look down upon the earth and be an atheist, but I cannot conceive how a man could look up into the heavens and say there is no God." *~Abraham Lincoln*
“Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.” Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!” Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”” John 20:27-29
Matthew's gospel directly and explicitly contradicts three other gospels in regard to the resurrection. You can choose, you blaspheming revisionist!! :-D Now, shall we discuss the Book of Judas? What!? Read on Christian if you dare.
To those who make fun of the atheist being overweight, that would be like my saying something about Frank wearing glasses. This is just _one_ atheist among many. He doesn't represent atheists. This is just _one_ Christians among many. He doesn't represent Christians. Why can't people be mature and focus on the things that are really important instead of being distracted by details that don't even matter?
@Caramel Johnson You didn't get my point because that still has NOTHING to do with atheism or Christians. Obese Christians exist too. There is a video of an obese Christian lady who freaks out about atheism and tarot cards to the point of hysteria.
@Caramel Johnson another good indicator of psychological problems is justifying holding a lesser view of someone just because of their lifestyle, and both of these things are unquantifiable, as psychological problems is a broad term with vast differences in definition between people. It's also irrelevant, as having mental issues does not determine the core of your character. If a man never takes care of his own property and it's disheveled, but he puts all his effort into doing a good job at his place of work and in his interactions with others socially, is he of poor character? Likewise, if a man is physically fit and eats healthy, but feels that it's perfectly acceptable to demean and think less of another because of their health and body decisions, does that mean he is of good character? Your concept of character is also pointless, because you haven't defined it. What IS character, and how is it relevant to being rude or kind to another person?
He wasn't seeking truth.He was just trying to embarrass frank.And I don't think he understands the rest of the audience has probably watched more of Frank's videos than he has. This gentleman actually embarrassed himself.
He's being selective on what's Frank's saying. He grabs a little part of Frank's argument and then try to imply contradiction with fancy words (As you can see he struggles with it). Frank's main argument was: "I think theism best explains reality, because there should be a main source (God) that gives us atributes that couldn't be engineered automatically and by nothing". The dude's argument: "God doesn't exist. Atheism just rejects the claim of theism, nothing more". ...Basically his using the Strawman Fallacy, nothing new. The main topic of the debate is "What better explains reality? Theism or Atheism?". The atheist failed + tries hard to not acknowledge it.
*_Matthew 11.28 Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. 29 Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For My yoke is easy and My burden is light."_* _Jesus Christ loves you. Repent and be saved. Only Jesus Christ saves. God bless you, and the grace of God be upon you and your family in the name of Jesus Christ_
What does the age of the book have to do with anything? Its age indicates nothing about whether it speaks truth or falsehood, unless one of the things it says is, "This book was written in the year 1342" and its age is KNOWN to be 5-years-old.
But job explain those big creatures in verses they must extinct or hit by Tectonic plates or earthquake Read(Job 40: 80).... Homo sapiens is not human being. that's why evolution ended, that change it what god says in Genesis 1:14 seperated...
There is a massive difference between intellectual debate and laziness. You might can poke holes through an argument but not having a viable counter argument is like going the wrong way on a one way street, without your car, in rush hour.
All you need to do is poke holes through an argument if someone is making it, you literally don’t need one of your own, which atheist don’t, that’s why the burden of proof is on the one making the claim
@@WayneJohn-fq6cnif you are going to call someone out, as was done in this video, you are no longer in a position of saying you have no belief. A belief in a negative is still a belief. The action of arguing removes you from what is called agnostic to firm atheism. Now you must defend your assertion, whether that means defending your position of God’s existence or just that the speaker is a liar. Either way, it is lazy to go up and say “your wrong, there are many reasons why, but I am not going to discuss any of them.” True agnosticism doesn’t care if believers believe or non-believers don’t. It is only certain of waiting until their is proof one way or the other and calls out no one. The moment you choose to engage someone in conversation and set yourself against their claims then you started a debate. That is a technical term. In a debate both sides have a burden of proof to make their case. That is not to say there isn’t another form of agnosticism. Such a thing exists in some adults but often children who stick their fingers deep into their ears, lob their arguments and claim that no evidence is worth their time.
@@jerrybarry562 it is a factual answer; on that you are right. Being ignorant and apathetic is a factual truth. However, when you show up to an event that is Christian theology based, you are not going to get away with that lazy answer. That would be like a Christian showing up to a Neil deGrasse Tyson event, to argue with him and then say that they don’t know the sciences. That is just plain foolish. There are quite a number of us faith based believers that also study the sciences. So when we interact with Christians with those lazy answers, I give them no less talk than I am giving you here. Now if you are okay with people making your position look weak with that lazy answer or you are okay with that lazy answer, go do it.
@@jerrybarry562I have made my statements very clear. In the video, I see an uneducated, lazy mind that wants to rebel against someone who has studied their field of study. Going back to Neil, I would never suggest a lazy mind go debate him about science. Frank has arrived at his position through study. There are things in science that are so amazing and extraordinary that only study begins to help people to understand. Those that don’t want to do that say, “I don’t know” and are satisfied. I’m not. It’s lazy. Now, you can continue to post here, but I know you won’t accept anything I say. You sure don’t seem to be the type to do the study yourself. Frankly, I am not here to educate you. Go be lazy.
@@vibe6968 he doesn't thats the point thats always the point most atheists dont believe in the gods thats presented without real evidence not stories re-written by people who took it from people who wrote it that weren't the people who lived it but decided to write it and expect us to just believe it all
@@marvyae23 The thing is,disbelief is still a form of belief.Saying "I don't believe in a God" doesn't really have anything to do with God's existence,meaning you have the burden of proof onto how the world is created within atheistic worldview.
When a person walks out during debate, they lost. Atheist can deny the sovereignty of GOD, but they will answer that when the time comes when every knee will bow before GOD.
infinitiGjj The person talking to the ignorant who will never listen to what you say, their only choice is to walk away. For some people, especially those who want to make an argument that a water bottle can be atheist, they will never listen to what that guy had to say. So, after a conversation, he walked away knowing nothing was coming out of talking to the religious guy. Believe in whatever you want, your prerogative. But I will not believe in outlandish claims with no evidence...
Contend for the Faith Poor atheists can’t explain reality. That’s why he wanted to argue the premise of those debates. And they say we believe in fairy tales...
Eric Smith I have yet to hear an atheist express the desire to debate Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Mormons, Buddhists, Jehovah’s Witnesses, New Agers, Psychics, Satanists, etc. Their favorite target is Christianity. Why is that?
its so interesting this particual guy who walked out was fighting another battle. which was based on pride...his aim was really "im smarter than mr. turek" it was never a debate about what is true but more a contest of who is smarter...which was not what mr. turek is here for....making this particular athiest appear both arrogant and unfortunately dumb.
Just because you think someone's wrong doesn't mean they are arguing to gain intellectual dominance. People shouldn't just assume someone's thoughts like this, geez Louise.
@@ninjakidkat12 watch the video again. And ask yourself what is his point? What is his argument. Listen to tureks points. And his response, this is not the first convo they have had, listen to there previous one if you can find it. My statement is far from an assumption. Am I willing to be wrong? Of course. But I make this statement from the specifics of this conversation-debate and there previous. Though your statement can be generally true for sure. I am not making a general statement. It’s an opinion I am stating based on what I’m listening, interpreting and understanding. So there is no need for the geese Louise, everything is fine take it easy 😊 it’s ok to have an opinion, ironically that is what the video is about is it not? And finally you have come to the wrong assertion. It’s not that I think he is wrong that I have come to that conclusion it’s simply what I perceive in his manner, attitude and the way he walks off. Wrong or correct is not my issue here. My issue is far more intriguing. What motivated that man in that argument. And what I have stated earlier is my conclusion. Not the matter that you have spoken about concerning if you don’t agree it means it’s a battle of intelligence. Far from it. Have a nice day 🤝
@@TheAndrewanyanwu are you okay? He started with a question. This wasn't a debate, this was Turek giving a talk, probably about why atheists should believe in God or some of the other like, 6 things he gives presentations on. Dude wanted to know why he believed, and Turek started in about how atheism means he believes he has no belief there is a god. Confirmation bias at its finest here.
Frank can say 'atheistic worldview' without implying that atheism is a worldview; 'atheistic' is used as and adjective to modify the term 'worldview'... just like 'salty peanuts' does NOT mean 'salt is a peanut'.
I would like to believe if what you say is true. How can I tell the difference in a story that is true and a story that is false that many people believe is true? There are many stories from all over the world, all throughout time that claim divinity, how can I tell which one, if any, are true?
@Michael Ramos Peace be upon you. I hope this channel doesn't hide / delete what I put forth. The question is: Who is The Only True God as per the testimony of Jesus Christ himself? A) The Father B) The Son C) The Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit - The Trinity D) The Holy Spirit Please answer the above question. Shall appreciate. Please REMEMBER: Answering with something which is not asked is only gonna bring the question back in all fairness. With all due respect, I am not asking for your opinion or your belief. I am asking for the testimony of Jesus Christ himself. Please substantiate your answer by quoting Jesus Christ himself. Here is the explicit testimony that Jesus Christ himself gave: “And this is life eternal, that they might know YOU THE ONLY TRUE GOD, and Jesus Christ, whom YOU have sent.” John 17:3 See! "YOU THE ONLY TRUE GOD". "YOU"... Jesus is very clearly talking to a different entity - the Father - and saying that it is YOU who is THE ONLY TRUE GOD. Jesus Christ gave the testimony that the Father is THE ONLY TRUE GOD. John 20:17: “Jesus saith unto her, ...I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and TO MY GOD, AND YOUR GOD.” Have another look! ".... TO MY GOD and YOUR GOD" Not only is God Jesus’ Father, exactly like he is the Father of all, the relationship is not unique to Jesus, but He is also his GOD. Jesus has a God who is THE ONLY TRUE GOD. He himself testifies in the words that he himself said. ******** My position as a Muslim agrees. Of course the term Father in the Jewish context. Metaphorical. NOT that God has a literal Son. God has got Son by the Ton in the Bible.
usually, but not always. sometimes you walk away frustrated that the person with the microphone more than once misrepresents what you're saying, even after being corrected on it. If the other side isn't listening, what's the sense in sticking around?!
yes, usually, but not in this case. (or did you watch the wrong video?) it's pretty shameful that someone should try to say the guy "stormed out". let’s rehearse the facts: red shirt dude mischaracterises and misdefines the word “atheist”. Fat guy corrects him. Red shirt guy doubles down and uses word incorrectly again, while getting loud about it. then 3:45 red shirt dude says “in order to have this discussion, you must know the answer to X, Y, and Z”, fat dude corrects him and says you don’t, and that red shirt guy couldn’t possibly know either and points out starting with the presupposition that his god exists, is a logical fallacy. at 4:13 red shirt guy doubles down and gets loud again. At 4:30 fat guy corrects red shirt guy once again. Clearly the guy in red shirt had an agenda, and didn’t like to be called out on it. saying that he “stormed out” is laughable. Talking louder than someone else doesn’t magically make you win an argument. at 6:20, red shirt guy lies yet again. you DO *NOT* have to show evidence for your side if you refute the claim or show that the other’s argument is a fallacy.
@Frances Snowflake he wanted him to explain how the universe worked. Athiesm is just the rejection of evidence there is a God. Example being emagine if you were a viking back in the day and believed in the Norse gods. I can reject your clame even though I did not have an explanation for lightning.
Most Atheists, particularly on TH-cam, get very offended when you point out they have their own faith and belief system that they stand by. It's a reality they don't seem to want to grasp.
J w There are plenty of reasons to fight against something that doesn’t exist. I live in a democracy where other people have large control over how I can live. We believe different things, and our ideas of what an ideal society look like are probably vastly different. You are going to end supporting things I think make life worse for everyone. God doesn’t need to be real for it to have a large impact on my life.
Wally Brown i spent the majority of my life as a passionate christian. i spent 8 hours at church every sunday serving and attending service, and then after service trying to share more of the gospel with other high school students that may have just gone to service for fun. i started bible studies, attended bible studies, served with multiple christian groups, and spent a very large portion of my free time outside of that deeply studying the bible. i evangelized to everyone i saw, even the dentist. i began suffering from severe ocd, which stemmed to cause major depression and generalized anxiety. my reality became pain. every thought i had was pain. every breath i took was pain. i spent even more time through this serving, attending church, starting and cultivating bible studies, and deeply studying the bible constantly. with the help of medication after over a year of this pain i began to get better. i started asking questions. why could this happen to me? why do bad things happen to anybody? why haven’t i felt the presence of god or seen him in my life or received any form of anything from him for over a year? i fought long and hard for my faith but through research and questions and much struggle my faith slowly died out. i wanted god to exist. i wanted something wonderful and hopeful to believe in. but it died. i am not bitter about this and have accepted it for what it is. i have heard all the arguments from christians side of this trying to talk me back in, and having been a previous very passionate christian know what one would say looking at my situation and entirely see the christian side of this. i do not believe in the god of the bible. i wanted him to exist but have through my life found that he does not
When will you provide evidence to prove that the resurrection & other Jesus miracle stories were not made up decades after Jesus by anonymous hoaxer Christian writers falsely passing themselves off as someone who existed years before them from some other place claiming to be eyewitnesses & talking to eyewitnesses?
Christians is the reason y people like this exist ok because you want to make Jesus god and he not so you all are confusing people I am sorry for these people in that room who is this doc I hope he is not a medical doctor because people will died because he will give people wrong mediation like how he not giving good knowledge
@@arthurgladden9378 Jesus claimed to be equal with God which is why the Jews were trying to stone him. Either accept His message which He proved when He resurrected and His miracles or deny Him without cause for what He said about Himself. Up to you man.
In my estimation The fellow has never been in a real debate before. If he had, he would have understood how they work. His frustration came from not having an actual case for his belief to make.
@@ThePurpleGoose023 We get how it works, its just you abuse it so that the only person that has to show proof is the theists. The atheist must present a case in a debate about God's existence. The theist has the burden of proof, but the atheist has the _burden of refutation_ something you guys CANNOT fulfill in any reasonable manner without rhetoric or fallacious reasoning.
@matswessling6600 The Burden of Refutation is a responsibility in debate that requires one side to refute an argument made by the other side using evidence or reasoning. This burden is part of the argumentative burden, which describes the responsibilities of each participant in an argument. May also be called Burden of Rebuttal.
He got strawmanned. He made acouple of points, got ignored, and the response he got had nothing to do with his point. This guy dodges questions and distracts while making other points which are also false, and answering everything takes more time. And when you finally answer everything he starts questioning reality. The guy is not honest.
Brandon Marshall same as you. But you dont understand whats just being said.. first time I saw this dude, Frank was way off... he uses tactics he think will work against randoms.. he would never try Even that on somebody he would know.. he would be killed
I couldn't agree more, even though I am closer to the questioner's viewpoint than Tureks. It goes to show, winning a debate is not necessarily a demonstration of anything other than one's ability to debate. For instance, I think Turek makes a pretty clear argument from ignorance fallacy that just passes as reason, and yet he wins the debate in the video.
Wow. It always warms my heart to read these comments and be uplifted by all the bigotry and othering Christians do to make themselves feel good. Praise the lord!!
A reminder to both sides of the isle: Just as you cannot drive away darkness with darkness: Only light can do that. You cannot drive away hate with hate, only love can do that. We live in an age where truth is called hate but only a few realize the truth shall set them free. When truth is suppressed the oppressors excel. Silence in the face of injustice is complicity with the oppressor. Thank you Mr Turek for trying to bring the truth to the oppressors that reject the truth.
@@MartTLS That's what Pontious Pilat asked:"What is Truth" Only he was in an age where the truth would get you killed. I pray we don't reach that point but we have already started down that route by prosecuting and persecuting anyone that tells the truth about a variety of subjects
Tj White - Well if that's the case, that guy sure wastes a whole lot of his time watching all of Frank's debates and memorizing portions of them and even going in person to listen to a presentation of his, which he surely has heard before based upon his comments. What's an extra minute or two after he finally gets the chance to speak with him? Sure, sounds like a logical excuse... 🤔
@Tj White wow, talk about your straw man and ad hominems. You sure assume a lot about me based upon a reply about my observed actions a person in the video. If you can't handle being called out for making radon illogical points, then just don't make them. I listen clearly to every side, though from your comment though it sounds like you sure didn't. Frank was correcting the claim of that guy about the topic and basis of his debates, which he was actually in, so I'd think he might know that topic a little better than that guy who didn't want to hear his answers, which absolutely made sense, if you would just drop your biases and listen to what Frank is actually saying.
@@rtbnb3201 No, the atheists often (not always) just dances around the answers to their questions because they aren't open to the answers or simply don't like them. See, I can do the same thing, although my point actually has basis to it. Every answer he gave was perfectly clear to myself and many others here, so I'm not sure what you missed.
@Tj White Nothing on the topic at hand? I responded to the rest of your comment above and didn't miss anything. And your comment about "you Christians" etc. was a direct reply to me, so I took it in context. Are you saying your entire entire reply was irrelevant to any part of my comment then and just a general claim?
Lolol which is exactly what Frank was saying, and then the guy stormed out. What amazes me, is I have no idea what was making him ANGRY. Nothing about their exchange should’ve pissed off anybody. And yet the guy stormed out because Frank challenges him even in the slightest. And I love how arrogant the guy was to say that frank made all of these logical fallacies, not that he had time to point all of them out Lolol. Oh strong and mighty one, thank you for gracing us with your presence! The guy was so brilliant he knew enough to know Frank was 100% wrong but not enough to make any positive claim about anything, except argue over semantics.
D. Utley “Oh strong and mighty one, thank you for gracing us with your presence” Bahahaha I laughed so hard I snorted😂 I totally agree, this is the mindset of just about every atheist.
@@Elohimshomri3 what argument? It didn’t even go anywhere. But if atheism is simply a rejection of theism then why do all atheists rely on scientific claims to make sense of the world? You can’t not make claims about reality because determining meaning is necessary to be alive. It’s a default setting.
@@brishawnsanders5873 nope, it's not just his perspective, frank turek actually did lose the argument. Just because an atheist says they don't believe god is real, does not mean it's their burden to prove that there is no god or their burden to prove how the universe works without a god, etc, if that atheist is an agnostic atheist. So basically if a Christian claims they have proof there's a god and an atheist says"prove it" and the Christian brings up the proof and the atheist debunks that proof, the atheist doesn't have to prove God isn't real or provide a better argument that explains how the universe works, which is what Frank turek was saying you had to do if you were an atheist
Typical atheist. He wants to throw definitions out all day and when taken to task he tries to make it look like the opponent is philosophically, and mentally unequipped to answer a question.
Matthew 5:22 But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire. Welcome, brother, welcome. As above so below. Who is saklas?
@@Satan-Christ My friend I was a Christian for many years but god could never be proven and I was told to use faith were facts were not possible..... Also Jesus was a bhuddist monk named ISSA and he survived the crucifixion and escaped to kasmir India....he is buried there in a small green house.... just Google it.... Jesus was a bhuddist monk....I can prove Jesus was a man and he was no god ...but you can't prove a god exists.... only creation my friend....only a fool would follow blind faith.... that can make you very dangerous to others over a belief that is based on lies....
*_"HE CHOKED !!"_* in a room full of people hostile to his ideas, misrepresent what he's saying, and talk loudly on mic to him. Also it may have been his first time speaking in front of a crowd. you say that as if you think you'd do something different... i'm curious WOULD you though?
lennyhipp good points Maybe a better thing to say is - Scott looked weak by disrespectfully walking away after choosing to engage Frank in conversation ? He also called him a liar ? Really ? Then you walk away ? Come on now ,
I used to be a proud atheist and their world view is cohesive. It makes sense. The door out of that kind of worldview doesn’t open with logic and reason. I tried for almost a decade. Many atheists are upset with the church because there is no perfect church. They are often seeking the real thing. You have to come with love. Selfless love. The well studied atheist like this guy doesn’t need any new information, he needs a moment of sincerity from BELIEVERS to open him up to God. If an atheist is going out of his way to argue with a believer, it might be because the atheist has been searching very hard in the world for God but hasn’t found Him in any of His so-called believers. Show an atheist the fruits of your faith by loving him.
Reminds me of the Brennan Manning quote... The single biggest cause of atheism in the world today is Christians who acknowledge Jesus with their lips and walk out and deny him with their lifestyle. This is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable.
beautifully put. I believe there is no such thing as an atheist, we all want to believe in God but some of us wind up getting more hurt than others. “Atheism” or running from God is purely a coping mechanism. They brag they live by reason and logic, but it’s just a front because they’ve been hurt by their own emotions- they don’t want to be emotional anymore, love to them has been broken by this broken world, so they resort to thinking “logic and the human ego will get be through life”. But when you approach them with these well formatted debates you’ll find their opinions aren’t led by reason and logic at all, but emotion. Which is okay, that’s the point. Some of them won’t admit this, but they just want to be loved and feel accepted in this dark world. But looking for love in all the wrong places and never returning to the church because some churches/Christians don’t represent Christ accurately and have ruined the faith for them. But I still have hope, and so does Frank Turek. The ultimate goal isn’t to win a debate, or even be logically “superior”, but to help them recognize their own trauma and show them there is an infinite God who loves them unconditionally, no matter what they’ve done.
@@johnmakovec5698 because outside of God there is no truth and no matter what you think it does not matter because there is no truth. The fact that you responded to the "truth" while presenting your truth is also a dogma.
It is derived from 1st Corinthians 1:18 “For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. (1 Corinthians 1:18, NASB)”
@BirdogEd can you demonstrate your god to exist? It wouldn't seem so. Look up the Pew research poll. The number of religious people are decreasing every year while the number of non religious are growing.
123tominator007 you are quoting the con man who sold you the scam in the first place lol. "no really I didn't get cheated when I sent money to the Nigerian email guy cos he told me I didn't and I trust him"
@@FuckFascistTH-cam The matrix is one of my all time favorite movies, action, scifi, etc. We live in a matrix so to speak.The reality is what exists beyond our natural eye. This reality we live in (everything we can see with our natural eyes, touch with our fingers) is temporal, meaning it has an ending. But the things we can't see are eternal, meaning they will go on forever. Our souls. Eternity is a long time. Jesus is the ONLY way to God. Choose the red pill. Call on Jesus. The blue pill will give you blissful ignorance but only as long as you have breath.
@@123tominator007 *But the things we can't see are eternal, meaning they will go on forever* Huh? Do you have any evidence of this whatsoever? What basis do you have for believing this?
@@FuckFascistTH-cam I have absolutely NO evidence whatsoever. One day I took a step of faith and called on the name of Jesus out of desperation. And since then he has changed me and revealed himself to me so many ways but mainly I have felt his presence many many times. Peace, joy, acceptance. But this is something that can't be explained or understood until someone experiences it for himself.
"Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.
@nasser d Not sure I'd call it pearls. He addressed a strawman and the big guy correctly recognized he wasn't interested in answering the actual questions.
@@kuhfusskatsadventures It's a worldview due to the fact that it raises the fundamental questions required by a worldview. As soon as atheism is proposed, a justification for these foundational questions is required. It's literally what Frank just explained in this video lol
@@MadProphet_97 One’s personal worldview may be contingent on the fact that they’re atheist, but atheism itself is not a worldview. There are no tenets, no dogma, no authority figures, no institutions, it’s simply a rejection of a proposition, nothing more.
@@kuhfusskatsadventures Rejection of the proposition, and then what? You could argue that atheism is a secondary belief, the primary belief being a worldview. But that worldview will be incredibly altered by said atheism. We are trying to get to the root of it, not get swallowed up by semantics and minutiae.
@@MadProphet_97 Rejection of the proposition and then everybody’s worldview is different, just not involving a god. There are atheists who are atheists for good reasons or for bad reasons, atheists that believe in the supernatural, spiritual atheists, atheists who follow religious dogma such as Buddhists, etc., etc., etc. If you’re trying to get to the root of it, then asking an atheist “why are you an atheist?” rather than asking “why do you have an atheistic worldview?” would be a more appropriate approach in my opinion. Because if somebody asked me “why do you have an atheistic worldview?” I wouldn’t understand the question due to the fact that there’s no such thing as sects in atheism.
Scott got caught up in his own word salad confusion...."convince me"... errr.. no... put a counter argument... to explain your view..honestly what is the point in coming to an event to be dismissive and rude.. no one says you have to agree with the existence of God or Christianity but at least engage your brain and tone down your emotions.
If one person claimed that the moon was made of cheese, you would rightly ask for them to prove it, and you could do so without having to make a counter-claim that no, in fact, it is made of chocolate. The burden of proof is on the person making the claim. Atheism does not make any claims, it refutes the claims of theists. That is all.
@@ipuppysmith8428 no.. the burden of proof is not on the person who holds the belief it is on the person challenging the belief to prove otherwise...let's keep the analogy example practical. If you believed that your wife/husband was faithful and I said no I don't believe you (be this on one side of the emotional spectrum being an unemotional disagreement to the opposite extreme of swearing and getting emotional/angry talking about my belief that your claim to your spouse's faithfulnes is false ) the burden of proof would be on me to prove why I thought your spouse was not faithful not on you to prove me otherwise (since you would hold the belief) . Take the religion /God out of the issue (although I am a Christian) and apply the rational thought that vast majority of people would apply or expect to be applied.
Irritates me that believers in the crowd are laughing at their fellow brother who's simply decieved and in need of the truth. War is not against flesh and blood, we should find ZERO humor in those who are currently destined to hell. What on earth is funny about the devil confusing somebody? This guy could have not even stood up to ask a question, could have not even been in the room! He's clearly stated he isn't 100% sure God is real, he did NOT say "God does NOT exist". This guy is innocently trying to find the truth, which is what us as believers in Christ do too! We shouldn't be laughing and mocking non believers. They can't help that the truth is not in them if they know no different.... It's OUR job to help them and bring them to Christ, it's NOT our job to laugh at them. Satan is already laughing at this man, why on earth should we join the devil's crowd and claim we follow Christ at the same time? It's hypocasry. Learn from it, listen carefully to these people instead of laughing and you might figure out exactly how to help get them saved through Jesus Christ. Laughing and condemning is shutting the door FOR THEM, stop it at once. Pray for them, do not cast mockery.
In my experience atheists are not innocently trying to find the truth. I've been watching the God debate for a long time now and the "I just lack a belief" didn't used to be a thing. They used to be confident that faith was just a "God of the gaps" and mock theists for being foolish and naive. I think the "I just lack belief" thing is a response to how theist apologetics have risen in response to materialist naturalism. It suddenly wasn't so easy to mock anymore when the theists started arguing back, and from my observation that is where the "I just lack belief" comes from - it's a way to attack theists without having to assume a burden of proof. When not being put on the defensive, the "I just lack belief" folks act exactly like the "Only losers belief in a sky daddy" folks of the past. Kind of like how the definition of racism changed from "prejudice" to "prejudice + power" once people started getting pushback for accusing white people of being racists for things they let other groups get away with and needed an excuse for it.
@@terminat1 not true, the athiest is decieved and persuaded some athiests to be willfully ignorant. War is not against flesh and blood. The Bible itself doesn't teach anything, the Bible is just a book. The word is what teaches, and the word has precise contexts
This preacher is a good brother, he explained in the best possible way, but the other left, even after knowing he kept his cool and started to make his point, excellent brother, God bless you and your church.
No, he explained in the most dishonest way possible. His analogy of the murder was wrong. It would be the theist who would make a claim about the murderer without any physical evidence. The atheist would examine all verifiable evidence and come to a conclusion based on that evidence as to who the murderer is. In face of the dishonesty displayed by the preacher, any self respecting person would have walked out. If you cannot see the deception of the preacher, then there is no hope for you to ever think critically about things. So sad.
The equivocation about what the knowledge was about was interesting. It went from knowledge about God, to knowledge of opinions about God (in other words, beliefs) simply so Frank could maintain that atheism is still about knowledge when it isn't. Its what SJW's have been doing for years: can't find enough racism? Just broaden the term racism until it encompasses something in the room.
REALITY: Frank wasn't listening to him. Frank wasn't in the middle of a response, he just repeated the straw man, only louder the 2nd time. There was no point in staying as frank didn't acknowledge him, frank had an agenda and wasn't interested in listening
While I think this guy is an amazing guy and incredibly patient I feel like the thumbnail paints this guy as a little crazy. Idk who designed the thumbnail but me personally I don’t think as Christians we should be putting this guy down. I understand that he pastor was being respectful in the video I just think that the thumbnail is disrespectful to the guy with the argument. Just an opinion. :)
"I don't think as christians" They wouldn't refrain from mocking you, we all know that. This is why atheists tend to always argue in bad faith, become argumentative and have such a smug sense of superiority. They think of you as a lame carpet they can keep on punching as much as they want and when you bite back they say in a smug smile "why thats not very christian of you" Meek doesn't mean weak, it means someone who can fight till death but prefers his sword in his sheath. Altruism is weakness if its not done without a sense of justicr behind it.
Dugon man you just made me realize I used the phrase “as Christians”. Personally I don’t like it when people say it to me, so I try not to say it to others. Looks like it happened. :)
Reasoning with an atheist is like playing chess with a dove. He will knock down all the pieces and crap all over the board and flies away thinking he is the rational one.
Correction, he walked away when Turek lied about the rules of his debates with Christopher Hitchens. BTW, Frank was embarrassed by Hitch in those debates. He was clearly in well over his head with Hitchens, but then again so was everyone else.
Perfectly correct; when using 'false appeals' (logical fallacies) in arguments, which ever side this is on, you can't say 'your argument is wrong' without being able to input some value or basis in making that statement. Saying, using another argument leads to a 'strawman' argument, then refusing to add some objective reasoning, other that just refusing to put one's self on the line to make a case, is not an argument. The argument requires debate; it requires both sides offering something in return to evaluate and consider. If it can be refuted, then explain how and why. But to simply refuse to accept a certain level of boundaries or 'framework' for making such as argument, and then refusing to argue objective but walk out instead, does not make your argument valid. While Scott seems to know a lot about his subject matter, he failed to offer his real point of view in a reasonable argument; he was merely attempting to dispute Dr. Turek's point of reasoning on 'false appeal' argumentation as well; by means of 'deflect' of direct-counter argumentation. He was either unwilling or unable to reasonably place a counter argument in the debate; perhaps for fear of finding weakness in his argument. This is not to say that Dr. Turek is correct, but merely to suggest that Scott may not have all the right information to see the weakness in his ideals through new information and self discovery. By at least offering a debate, Scott may in fact find answers that will help him later to formulate a better case for his argument. But by not engaging with a simple debate, he missed out on this opportunity. There could be a bias affected by a 'cognitive dissonance' keeping Scott from being more objective in his view and belief on this subject; he asserts a position of Atheism, but refuses to discuss his potential errors of understanding; he is certain his reasoning is not flawed and may assume new evidence may conflict with his view; he rejects it outright without thoughtful consideration.
@@zed351 exactly these people are crazy they are the ones making the claims and trying to “save” us😂 why do they try to shift the burden of proof onto the ones that aren’t making any claims. We just disagree and think the reasons doesn’t make sense
Thanks for sharing your comment, but I disagree on two things: 1. You said it appears Scott knows a lot about the subject matter. I disagree, as he's using the "psychological state" definition for Atheism (lack of belief). Psychological states cannot be positions in any debate, as they are not truth claims. Psychological states are just something you experience. They just ARE, and cannot be debated with another person. For this reason, ALL of academia defines the philosophical position of Atheism as the positive assertion God doesn't exist. This definition MUST BE used in philosophical debates (or any position in any debate, for that matter). 2. You say "this is not to say Turek is correct." Turek is objectively correct. The definitions I listed above for the word Atheism are consistent throughout ALL academic sources. Turek even brought up the "psychological state" issue but it went right over Scott's head (because Scott is not knowledgeable enough on this issue to even know what the word Atheism actually means in this context - his own position). I 100% agree with you that Scott is experiencing cognitive dissonance which is leading to a dogmatic reaction. This is extremely common for Atheists. Every academic study on atheism and dogmatism shows the following: 1. Atheists claim to be LESS dogmatic than Theists 2. They're actually MORE dogmatic than Theists in reality
Courtroom trial - the defence and the prosecution make their cases to the jury. If the jury decide prosecution is insufficient, defendant is found not guilty, there is zero burden on the jury to come up with a better explanation.
I don't appreciate the thumbnail, I feel its somewhat mocking of the questioner. As much as I believe a number of his statements and responses are in error, I don't believe the red laser eyes aids in evangelism.
We're full of evil magic, it's okay. Kidding. Actually I'm glad you pointed it out, thanks. We don't do that to christians or muslims, it's unfortunate they have to steep to this low. At the same time, it just makes CE look more childish or foolish. I guess I'm not too upset now that I think about it.
Bo Heathen hey man it’s not that deep homie. I would say that frank is a pretty gracious and kind man to his questioners. This is in very light jest not to aid his argument
Scott is the perfect example of what a Devil's Advocate is. “To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible.”
Or, to put it another way, we do not yet have all the answers we need to truly establish our origins and status in the universe so in the meantime, let's pretend to believe this absolutely ludicrous book of horrors, written hundreds of years ago by lots of different people over many years in many languages. A religious nut cannot claim some victory over an atheist simply because one has a belief and the other doesn't. That makes no sense. Can I sit safe in the belief that pixies look over me while unicorns keep my morality in check? No, of course not. It's a belief but not an acceptable one. Neither is the archaic christian book of waffle.
@@frankpontone2139 to be fair he did kill millions of people, implying he existed at some point or another, and still to this day over a few different religions people are being persecuted in his name
Apologists try to equate religion with science...one is an affirmation of faith...the other is drawing conclusions based on evidence...two things couldn't be further apart
He literally wrote a book about atheists having faith. That's how clueless he is. He never does well in the Q&A. He'll take the faithful's money though.
Faith is just another work for belief Everyone believes something, that is the point that Frank makes I believe God exists, some people believe God does not exist, some people believe that we can't know if God exists, some people believe we can't prove if God exists or not, EVERYONE BELIEVES SOMETHING EVERYONE HAS FAITH IN SOMETHING We ALL BELIEVE SOMETHING However our belief does not create reality, what is real is real , our faith does not change reality. Either God exists or he doesn't, Do you believe that something can come from nothing?
@@doug-says Well, there are 3 fairly distinct meanings of faith. It's a bait and switch trick from the speaker here. You're talking about what I would call trust or confidence, which everyone has of course. In the religious faith sense, I don't have any- that's atheism- simply a lack of faith. No.
@@itsJPhere My friend if you think you're worth saving maybe your self esteem is too high! You havn't realized the true wretch that you are. Suppose one of you has a servant plowing or looking after the sheep. Will he say to the servant when he comes in from the field, ‘Come along now and sit down to eat’? Won’t he rather say, ‘Prepare my supper, get yourself ready and wait on me while I eat and drink; after that you may eat and drink’? Will he thank the servant because he did what he was told to do? So you also, when you have done everything you were told to do, should say, ‘We are unworthy (literally WORTHLESS) servants; we have only done our duty.’ ” Luke 17:7-10 Yes, Jesus said that you are worthless! How's that for your self esteem? Paul recognized his wretchedness in 1 Timothy 1:15 where he refers to himself as the "worst" of sinners. In Romans 7 he literally says "Oh wretched man that I am, who will save me from this body of death?" If you're not saying the same things and asking the same question I have to wonder if you know The Lord.
Everytime I hear an atheist argue, incessantly, about something they SAY doesn't exist, I hear; "I don't believe God exists... Convince me that God exists, (because I'm tormented in my thoughts),... I will disagree with everything and anything you say about God...but please keep arguing to prove God..."
Burden of proof is on christians. Because there could be God outside of universe who doesn't care about us and we still die permanently. So existence of God itself is meaningless, if you can't prove, that he interacts. So how do you prepare an experiment, to show God's interaction with this world?
@Jan Makovec The reason you don’t believe there is someone bigger than you and i is because you have limited vision and you can only see what’s i front of you. The MASTERMIND Behind all this Creation does care about each and everyone of us that’s why the Most important thing is To Love one another in that way we won’t hurt anyone in no shape or form And we all can achieve this once we set our mind and our heart to live in love for all Creatures. We are not here forever why not live in Love and be happy be mindful and kind to others until our breath is taken from us but that’s to hard for most they rather hate lie steal murder etc etc. life is so simple to enjoy but some atheist and some Christian make life seems so difficult. Everyone is trying to convince everyone this or that when the truth lives in us. Shalom love and Guidance
@@johnmakovec5698 .... I disagree. Would you look at the Pyramids of Giza and say that they had no designer? Yet you will look at the human body, infinitely more complex, one of over 1 million species on Earth and has over 11 interconnecting systems that work together to live and reproduce and you want to say that there is no design to that?? That it is on Christians to prove that there's a designer for something that complex? Really? Or is it that you simply might not like what that Designer thinks or has to say because they might not do things the way that you think they should be done?
John 18 v38 Pilate said to Jesus, "What is truth?" And after he said this he went out to the Jews again and said to them, "I find no fault in him." Although both Pilate & this atheist's reactions when discussing truth are similar in not waiting & listening to a reply, Pilate at least got part of the truth in proclaiming the innocence of Jesus.
Please be careful what you wish for. The episode you mention was one of the main complaints of Christians against the Jews and has lead to much suffering. Also, if Pilate had done the right thing, you wouldn't have a savior.
@@michaelwill7811 Like I said, please be careful what you wish for. If you were in Pilate's shoes, what would you do? Say you are on a jury and you have to decide if the accused is guilty. You have listened to the witnesses, studied the evidence, and you really can't find this man guilty. What would you do in that situation? Would you vote that he is not guilty? And what if the other jurors, who had been biased against the suspect the whole time, were adamant that they would render a guilty verdict, not perhaps on the basis of the evidence, but just because they had some other grievance against him, would you then change your verdict and agree with them just to fit in or to avoid their anger? And would that then be "the right thing"?
@@fdjt4132 _Turek is rather childish._ When it was the atheist who stomped away like a child. All you are proving is you don't know what being childish is.
"Atheism is not a world view." If he can't recognize this statement defeats itself, he has already made up his mind and is guilty of what he accuses Mr Turek of. The Strawman Argument.
How is it self-defeating? I can see the angle of atheism not being a worldview. Think about it. Atheists can range from Darwinists, Buddhists, Randists etc...If it is a worldview, why do atheists live so differently? the ONLY issue we are united on is that we have not been convinced that a god exists, and even then we could have heard had completely different arguments from those trying to convince us.
@@Tinesthia ur missing the point, either your world view includes unicornism or it doesn't. All world views that include A unicornism have at least that in common, while at the same time u can't separate ur world view from ur unicorn stance because ur world view informs ur stance. If atheism wasn't a world view it would be the byproduct of the world view that doesn't believe there is (sufficient) evidence for the supernatural which is still a belief I.E. a world view. Sorry u can't escape that, there's no way around it.
arcguardian You say I am missing the point while at the same time seem to be agreeing with me. Like you say, your worldview informs your stance, and your stances can inform your world view. No single stance is a worldview though, including Theism or Atheism. So the statement “Atheism is not a worldview.” is correct and does not ‘defeat itself’ as David Scott suggests in the OP.
@@Tinesthia it is a world view, by definition. It's something u believe either way, which ultimately makes it a world view. If ur argument is it's more like a sub'world view I guess that might be more accurate but ur still taking a stance which is the point.
It would have helped if Frank's statement starting from 3:43 concluded that: Based on our abilities of perception and reason, it is therefore Impossible for God not to exist. As believing in an alternative contradicts the principles of our abilities which we trust. So then what is it that even makes you capable of Denial? And what is it that makes you capable of making a selfLess decision which goes against the desires or survival instincts of your own flesh? Then surely your primary existence is of principle, so not of your flesh. This alone should prove to you that God must exist in Principle (Invisible Spirit as described by The Christ). Which means that we currently have this freedom to learn and choose purely as test for Eternal Life.
@@martinjugolin2087 there's a whole explanation about this after the tower of babel. I suggest listening to Michael heiser about his book called "the unseen realm". For a quick summary ig with absolutely no explanation: tower of babel, God separated the people, confused their languages and asigned rulers and judges, which I would assume to be angels or divine spirits, to watch over these nations. These divine spirits then decided to rebell against God and set themselves up as little gods for their nations. They're called elohims, which isn't a word to describe just the one true living God. I suggest you look more into what I've told you if you really care for knowing about your own question
@@steevefrost982 thats the thing, at the time when the tower of babel was being biuldt or even before, different languages already existed, specially in Europe, Scandinavia and the Americas
@@martinjugolin2087 The fun part is, that even a God exists, there are still MILES to go before you end up with the Christian God. There are instances of a God that will absolutely satisfy the "creation myth", but are diametrically different from the Christian God. My favorites are: (1) The absent God. God created the universe in such a way that it runs to his satisfaction. Since God is omniscient, He cannot make any errors. Therefore, everything that happens is as intended. There is NO need for Him to interfere. Since He doesn't need to interfere, He is essentially absent, since there will never be any observation of this interference. Prayer, which in essence is petitioning the Lord because you're not satisfied how things are going, has no effect. For all means and purposes He might as well not be there; (2) The evil God. God intentionally designed the universe to torture us. 99.999% of the universe will kill us instantly and horribly. He marooned us on a tiny rock, orbiting an ordinary sun, in an uninteresting corner of an average galaxy. He designed the world in such a way that all creatures are forced to incessantly fight for resources and consequently, survival. Most will perish. Perfection is built upon a huge pile of corpses. There is no reward in the end, the game is rigged, one cannot win - we will all perish. Added bonus, this one has a higher probability than the Christian God, since it completely solves the classical "Problem of evil in the world". Ok, I concede. You got your God. Happy now?
That last explanation about the detectives was horrible. If detective A claims person X is the murderer, and detective B disagrees, then detective B only needs to argue a case as to why person X isn't the murderer. They don't need to find the actual murderer or a plausible secondary choice..Suggesting that it's necessary to even have a murder suspect "Y" that detective B must claim is the real murderer in order to debate is ludicrous. It's a logical fallacy. Essentially what's being suggested is that if you don't have an alternative suspect, then by default my suspect is likely to be the murder, and we should probably except that they are the murderer because we have no alternative suspect. This is dangerous self indulgent reasoning and has probably condemned countless innocent people to horrible unjust fates.
I love how non believers like to ask the believers “why & how “ . But when the believers flip it on them, they fold and say “ IDK “. Well….. why debate then?? Exactly!!! Be a detective.
The point is that 'I don't know' is often the most honest and true answer anyone can give. It's far more reasonable to sit on the fence than be guilty of wishful thinking.
@@darcymr353 True but at the end of the day, no one TRULY Knows. So if we’re never in our lifetime ( meaning now ) not gonna TRULY know then I don’t see anything wrong with taking a stance and living by that belief. Either way, as a believer or not. Just take a stance and live accordingly. See believers generally just live as if God exist and they don’t waste time trying to convince non believers otherwise. They’ll do their Christian duty and try and spread the gospel. They don’t make it their mission to convince non believers. Atheist on the other hand have a hard time with this and they almost want confirmation and it’s an ongoing struggle for them. They make it their mission to disprove the Gospel, particularly Christianity and it’s something they’re always looking for confirmation on.
![เปิด อาณาจักร หมื่นล้าน "สาระตั้ม" l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/3XE0nPF4YkQ/mqdefault.jpg)
“A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion.”
Proverbs 18:2 ESV
Use KJV please.
dont question your priest and dont form individual opinions
Chris Wheeless
That’s not what that verse is saying. The word of God calls us to test all things.
It’s wanting to understand, not just caring about expressing ones own opinions.
that is the basis of every religious belief.
Nickolas Gaspar
I disagree. Christians are always willing to have discussions and or debates or hold these platforms where those who hold different views can come and ask questions and make their claims for what they believe.
The guy who was asking Frank questions, wasn’t willing to listen to Franks explanation. It’s always best when both sides can have a dialogue back and forth, instead the atheist just walked out.
Despite how much I've learned from Dr Turek about Apologetics, he's taught me even more about patience
Lol ikr
@@arcguardian Amen brother. He is far better a Christian than I am with regards to that frailty. For me, God says "work in progress!" lol
@@michaelwill7811 likewise. He who began a good work in you will see it to completion.
Totally
He definitely has plenty of of that.
The sinner of today can be our brother of tomorrow. May the Lord bless him.
Amen!
Gonçalo Peres do you really believe that. Aren’t you one of the sinners. Yes, I can see believing Jesus is God. That’s some faulty logic. There is only one God and he has no partners, no sons, and no daughters. Use your brain not your mouth.
Adam Almir
“I will be a Father to you, and you shall be My SONS AND DAUGHTERS, Says the Lord Almighty.” -2 Corinthians 6:18
@@adamalmir5214 I am a sinner saved by God's grace.
Even though I may struggle with sin, it no longer has power in my life as it used to.
❝ For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. ❞ Romans 6:14 KJV
❝ For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. ❞ Ephesians 2:8-9 KJV
Everyone's a sinner
He actually looks like the internet atheist stereotype.
not at all. More your own prejudice of atheist.
@@matswessling6600lol, someone is a look alike
@@matswessling6600you most definitely look like him lmao
@@matswessling6600How many of those wolf shirts you own, bud? Lol
They all look like that
He's very passionate about his lack of belief
I could just the same argue that Christians have a lack of belief
Ok. Feel free
@@alexaarenstrup2883 that wouldn't be correct 😂
gotta respect it. He does faith in a paradoxical way. There is no conclusive evidence because there needs to be room for faith. So HE believes that there is no god
@@alexaarenstrup2883 no. Technically atheists have faith. They just believe there is no god. They have faith that there isn't a god
He's admitting that atheism doesn't have the better explanation. Then he stormed out.
bro rage quit, hes defintely a discord/reddit mod
These people always try to use big words to sound smart. Paul warns us being prideful in our own knowledge, it will be our downfall believer or not.
Paul warned against marriage too. Do you follow Jesus or do you follow Paul?
@@miconis123 Paul also spoke about getting married so you dont fall into sexual sin
@@maow9240 Marriage was Plan B to Paul if you couldn't resist. I hear he was somewhat fuzzier on the subject of kneecaps but that might have been Jesus.
@@miconis123 like I said Paul spoke about getting married so you dont fall into sexual sin. The bible says its not good for man to live alone.
@@jhart9272 the bible doesnt say to only read the bible. The bible itself says to prove all things hold fast that which is good
I love how unruffled Frank is by Scott's immature and disrespectful behavior. Such a power move. Humility vs pride. Humility won the day.
He prob was ruffled, just hid it. He shared a story of how an atheist's response made him shiver before and it was on the topic of how some atheist just don't care about truth and only want to do w/e they want. I could prob find the vid if i want to, irrc it was a Q&A maybe 50min long and he was debating with this dude about logics, rocks, immaterial things etc
Scott was annoyed because Mr. Turek was making claims that Scott indicated were not true and pointed that out. So pointing out that someone is not being honest is not disrespectful it's being fair. And Scott was very nice in his comments - and clarified many things that Mr. Turek was getting wrong or mis representing. Mr. Turek likes to use concepts of complex debating which don't hold up.
How is he being immature and disrespectful? Humility won the day? 🤣
@@petersimard3538 Scott was objectively wrong. He was using the "psychological state" definition for Atheism "a lack of belief in God" which is incorrect for a philosophical context like this. Psychological states are not even truth claims, so they cannot serve as a position in a debate at all. Psychological states are just something you experience, they just ARE, and cannot be debated with another person. Turek pointed this out.
Here's the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy describing the difference between two definitions for Atheism, and ALL of academia defines it like this:
"The word “atheism” is polysemous-it has multiple related meanings. In the psychological sense of the word, atheism is a psychological state, specifically the state of being an atheist, where an atheist is defined as someone who is not a theist and a theist is defined as someone who believes that God exists (or that there are gods). This generates the following definition: atheism is the psychological state of lacking the belief that God exists. In philosophy, however, and more specifically in the philosophy of religion, the term “atheism” is standardly used to refer to the proposition that God does not exist (or, more broadly, to the proposition that there are no gods). Thus, to be an atheist on this definition, it does not suffice to suspend judgment on whether there is a God, even though that implies a lack of theistic belief. Instead, one must deny that God exists. This metaphysical sense of the word is preferred over other senses, including the psychological sense, not just by theistic philosophers, but by many (though not all) atheists in philosophy as well. For example, Robin Le Poidevin writes, “An atheist is one who denies the existence of a personal, transcendent creator of the universe, rather than one who simply lives his life without reference to such a being” (1996: xvii). J. L. Schellenberg says that “in philosophy, the atheist is not just someone who doesn’t accept theism, but more strongly someone who opposes it.” In other words, it is “the denial of theism, the claim that there is no God” (2019: 5).”
@@petersimard3538 I don't mean to be insulting, but it blows my mind that atheists like you and Scott genuinely think you know more than one of the top philosophers worldwide about things like this, when you clearly haven't even bothered to investigate at all.
You started the argument at least have the courage to finish it.
He just wanted to say that he hates Frank. He was neither an atheist nor an agnostic, he was a snowflake. Frank was very respectful and was thoroughly answering his question.
Agreed. Well said.
@CaptainFatBat,
Dead on bro. You are so correct. He shouldn’t have even started the argument if he was just going to walk out like that. What was the point?
Dude I don’t know what you are talking about he destroyed frank made him look like a fool than performed a mic drop.
That's what happens when they hear the truth from Frank 👍
God’s Truth isn’t hard to find, just hard to accept.
Beautiful!!!
Where is it then?
Oh, you can't demonstrate the God exists?
The Truth is not hard to find, just hard for you to accept.
@@sqlblindman Hey friend, historical evidence was what helped me on my way, maybe it can help you too. Christianity is what I went with because I was raised in this tradition. My suggestion would be get some book about historical evidence about or search Capturing Christianity YT channel, there is an interview vid with Gary Habermas and Mike Licona, New Testament scholars. They mention non-christian NT scholars in their videos too. And share their own journey. Remember, none of us was born into any religion, searching is good :) Wish you all the best friend.
@@alexantal4417
Historical evidence of what?
There is no historical evidence supporting the Gospel accounts of Jesus. I have looked, and there is none.
If you have any eye witness accounts of the Resurrection, or of Jesus' crucifixion, let me know. The Gospels describe the Sun going dark at Jesus' death, and the Temple curtain being ripped asunder, and the dead rising from their graves and walking the streets. Do you have any historical support for these events, or are we to conclude that nobody found them noteworthy at the time?
Keep searching for the truth friend, and you will find that Jesus is fable.
@@sqlblindman You know that cities that are listed in the Bible are being demolished so people don't find the truth? And there was many other cities discovered that are stated in the Bible yet we don't hear about in the Media.
When someone's been in darkness all their life, the light hurts.
that's such a good way of putting it dang
@@alisharachael7501
Like zombies.
What a nice way to say nothing at all.
Vise versa
Even when someone believes, the light of God hurts. Check out The dark night of the soul by Saint John of the cross
Legend has it that on a very still autumn evening, you can still hear Scott not believing.
Well, actually, we can hear him lacking belief and being "just not convinced." It's not that he "doesn't believe"
I respect how even after the guy left, he still addressed his point.
I still think he likes cake more then pie
@@bigcountrymountainman9740 yup!😂😂
@@bigcountrymountainman9740 No, he loves both. Those rolls don't lie.
He addressed a strawman, not the actual point.
Matthew Dixon, why not talk about him with love and respect?
Scott has such a strong belief in what he doesn't believe. 😂
A contradiction in itself
Really proves turek’s book title “It takes too much faith to be an atheist”
What's more truthful then having a strong belief in not knowing
He needs stronger faith to be in that position
@@ThePurpleGoose023 Can you define your evidence?
I've been watching these types of debates between theist apologists and atheists for the past 5 years. Here's my brief take away. Apologists try to reconcile metaphysical reality with physical reality. Athiests who are materialists or naturalists try to reduce everything down to science. There are two things that science can't do. Science doesn't cause anything, only describes the law of physics (John Lennox). Science doesn't replace the human condition, it only helps supplement our understanding of it. A metaphysical mind and consciousness has to exist first before science and philosophy can even be explored.
William Lane Craig helped convert me from agnostic to a theistic rationalist. I do attend a Methodist Church with my wife. I have Asperger's so it was important to me to connect the dots logically before I could explore my spiritual side.
Great to hear my friend or shall I say brother😊 God bless you and your wife
Bravo. Atheists have a way of being in love with their own intellect. It’s very disturbing. I keep trying to hear their arguments, but every time I just feel like I’ve been bludgeoned (cue the large words to make myself look more intelligent than everyone else in the room) repeatedly in my cranium, mandible and abdomen.
Anything is possible, if you exit the realm of reality. So you can imagine whatever you want. Whatever claim you want. I can create a claim, that Bible's God is liar and nobody can refute that.
The other thing science can't do is explain the origin of life. James Tour will explain for you.
"Theistic rationalist."
Welp, sounds like you're almost halfway there. I wish you clear understanding of the truth for the rest of your journey.
Dude straight up thought he could win an argument by not giving one.
Or, perhaps he wasn't having an argument, but asking to be convinced by someone who was asserting something?
@@Thoron_of_Neto nah. He straight up lost the argument. That's why he ran like a coward.
not his fault hes been programmed that hes the epitome of human intellect
@@Thoron_of_Neto if ur asking to be convinced of something but u have no other plausible more reasonable explanation means ur in denial
@@Dulc3B00kbyBrant0n Fr
"Professing to be wise, they became fools" Romans 1:22
@Fred Bloggs .....a fool says in his heart "there is no God"
The creation points towards a Creator so deny at least the possibly of a Creator is utter foolishness.
@J w Yes, you could be more accurate about atheism. You seem to only understand projection. And have no clue about the position of atheism.
wow you hit this right on the button !!!!!
and you realise that is an empty quotation. Of course he would say that just as Atheists may consider Theists to be fools.
1969cmp, hallo. Do you ever call people idiots, or anything like that?
This man has some patience! God bless him.
True
Frank Turek has a lot of patience indeed!
true
He dont even believe in god
I need to practice this.
Scott could have been more receptive, he was pretty rude. Everytime the dr tried to answer the question scott would shoot down his answer while talking over him and bring up diffrent questions.
It's hard to think straight if your thoughts are full of cakes and pie recipes.
@Sheldon Cooper You're right. Atheists like to criticize theists when theists give their reasons for beliefs but when asked the same or similar questions concerning their own reasons for their own beliefs, atheists suddenly do not want to be as willing to give their own reasons for their own beliefs and therefore they make excuses for this hypocritical behavior so as not to be criticized themselves.
Excuses include the following:
- "I don't have to answer that.....BUT YOU HAVE TO ANSWER ME!"
- "I don't know.....BUT I KNOW IT CAN'T BE GOD!
- "That's an unanswerable question....BUT I KNOW IT ISN'T GOD!"
*avoidance and deflection...the tactic of one who has lost the argument before it even began*
@@frankpontone2139 Mostly the responses I hear atheists say is that they don’t have to give any explanations because their statement isn’t a belief but fact. They have thoroughly convinced themselves that the debate is already closed and solved, which is ridiculous because that isn’t true. No matter how much I explain to them that it’s still an open case that people are allowed to make a choice on, they refuse to admit that.
I guess I can only understand that because if it’s not a closed case, then it’s obvious that the better choice would be to believe in theism which promises humankind a future and eternal life and good triumphing over evil and the world being renewed with no more death or suffering than to choose to believe that death is just a normal process and eventually everything including the universe is going to not exist anymore.
One belief offers hope while the other despair.
So I guess of course they can’t accept that it’s still an option to believe in theism, because it would be really depressing and kind of warped to choose to believe in no hope and despair over the possibility of a future for us.
@@narnia1233 Yeah some atheists can be stubborn but don’t act like you guys are any better
"Atheism is a curious thing...even demons don't stoop to that sin" - CH Spurgeon
That's because demons cannot deny what they already know it is True.
It's actually because demons are fictional creatures
@@charlessmith4793would you please elaborate based on what type of evidence is your statement
@@nicodeleon2908 right lol atheist are just ignorant In my opinion they just say things without providing proof about what they say, I’ve actually met atheist’s who know Jesus Christ existed so it makes me laugh when some atheist are ignorant and some aren’t
@I'll be damned if I ain't handsome I bet now enjoy your day.
This should be very simple for anyone to understand, of course atheism is a worldview. Call it lack of belief or whatever you want but regardless it is a worldview if you don't believe that God exists then you believe that life came from non-life and that a cosmic accident caused the universe to come into existence.
*That is a worldview*
They’re attempting to escape the responsibility of defending their worldview by conflating it with their disbelief in the biblical Christian worldview. Atheism is not merely a lack in the biblical Christian worldview, as proven by the fact that atheists have existed in places and times where Christians didn’t.
In a nutshell, the atheist worldview is that that there is no Creator God.
@The fact of Evolution why dont you tell us what your worldview is, as you know where Christian's stand... It doesnt matter what we think your values are... its irrelevant right? Your just a mutated slime that somehow evolved into fish, apes, then humans... what values should slime have?
@The fact of Evolution Oh wow, "evolution" is just a lack a belief in God. No wonder we can't question it.
@The fact of Evolution Your username "Evolution" proves my point. Atheism is a world view that the universe and life doesn't need an intelligent designer such as God to explain why it's all here.
Bible: The wicked flee when no man pursueth...
Me: Now I see it..🧐🧐🧐🧐🧐
He finished that verse too by saying that Frank was “lion” 😂
Facts!
gotta love Proverbs
HAHAHAAAAAAA this is it!
Betty Crocker: "Add two beaten eggs." There you have equivalence numb-skull.
You cannot quote a passage from a book of fiction to assert that the authors of a book of fiction are correct.
They need to give whoever is making these thumbnails a raise lol
Haha seriously though 😜😂😭
😂
😂😂😂😂😂 for real lollllll
For what reason? Mockery? Seems like it's just a foolish way to spread the gospel
@@jessygayosso149 True. Not a godly way
This man just attended the event to try to one up Frank. Which he failed miserably.
He even admitted he spoke out during the presentation which means he was particularly unruly. For someone who "lacks belief" the guy's seemed so invested and very very passionate about it. He even watches a lot of Frank's debates. 🤣
Einstein called the Bible "Primitive legend"
What else but religion could make grown adults believe in talking bushes, snakes and donkeys?
@@upturnedblousecollar5811 That's a non-arguement, borderline ad hominem.
The bible is some 80% historical accounts of events that can be verified through other sources, up to and including Ancient Roman government authority. We know a giant flood happened, we know Jesus existed, the ten commandsments and the Judeo-Christian ethic are what lead to one of the most prosperous and successful lands in all of human history, to say nothing of the legal and moral groundwork of all of western Europe. Without the church most of modern science (The academia in particular) would not exist. Some of the greatest thinkers throughout history, Keplar, Newton, so on were all massive believers.
You hate religion, just be honest in that, and walk away.
Well if a monkey can learn sign language and Dogs can understand human commands... The only question I would be asking, if I seen a donkey or a snake start talking is who trained them to speak because that's not nothing we didn't accomplish already as humans ... Only thing that would surprise me is if they did something that humanity didn't do already... Then it would be a huge surprise, like Jesus rising up from the dead after 3 days and over 500 witnesses claiming to see Jesus alive... If someone told me a donkey and a snake can do that then it will definitely surprise me...
@@nobodyhere34those alegedly 500 witnesses are worth nothing.
@@matswessling6600there’s a difference between ignorant and being ‘willingly ignorant’.
“The wicked run away when no one is chasing them, but the godly are as bold as lions.”
Proverbs 28:1 NLT
The original Greek translation says “”but the honest are brave as lions”.
It’s a seemingly superficial yet important distinction.
@Dawaza The old atheist straw man. You can’t understand life & death, the process of germination, the transformation required, & how it provides life.
Atheists are one of the great revelations, consistently confirming, & affirming the very thing they reject.
“That is why I use these parables, For they look, but they don’t really see. They hear, but they don’t really listen or understand. Just as the Bible says, “This fulfills the prophecy of Isaiah that says, ‘When you hear what I say, you will not understand. When you see what I do, you will not comprehend. For the hearts of these people are hardened, and their ears cannot hear, and they have closed their eyes- so their eyes cannot see, and their ears cannot hear, and their hearts cannot understand, and they cannot turn to me and let me heal them.’”
Matthew 13:14-15 NLT
I am fed up with those christians. the guy is using more reason than that so called professor. Atheism is just about not believing in something and it is not believing that god does not exist, it is saying we dont know, nothing else
@@snowdolphvov4193 No that’s agnosticism, atheism is non-belief, particularly non-belief in deity or God.
@@YourDadVR I dont know much about definitions, but if that is so they believe that god does not exist and that is same as believing in its existence
This Guy's version of atheism is more of an example of that "one person" in a group project. That is always ready to tell people their wrong or their ideas won't work but , they themselves don't provide a better answer.
@Matt Smith
Your statement would cause us to go in circles in a debate so what I am asking for is that we both state our claims. Eg
I say Superman can defeat all DC characters because of 123. Then instead of you just telling he can't or why he can't, you bring a character that can beat him, and say it's because of 123.
This way we can truly move forward, because if you found a stronger character and beat me then I would go and find a stronger character to beat the one you brought. And by continuously doing this we would finally find the strongest character together.
If we do it like this we would not be going in circles fighting against each other BUT we would actually be growing and actively reaching the best answer together.
Truth
@Matt Smith What it means is support your argument or get off the crapper Atheist.....Dont just shoot down arguments without supporting your counter argument...
@@electricspark5271 enough said!
I mean to be fair, you don't need to be a chef to know the food tastes bad. You can criticize a bad idea for being a bad idea without being smart enough to put forth a better one, but in real-life practicality, it does make you very hard to work with, yeah. If you don't have a well of good ideas, you should *at least* have a filter for the bad ones if you ask me.
I’m living through the guy cringing in the background 💀
SAME LOLL
The Sun (of God) will set this evening.....When THE SUN RETURNS (tomorrow) the MORNING STAR will RISE FROM THE EAST,it will SAVE MAN from darkness because it is the LIGHT OF THE WORLD,it will be SEEN COMING THROUGH THE CLOUDS with its CROWN of sun rays,as it's shimmer WALKS ON WATER,and when the daylight is longer in duration than the nite and the Sun is fully RESURRECTED (EASTER,springtime) it will RAISE THE DEAD trees,grasses,flowers etc as it TRAVELS ABOUT THE WORLD with its 12* constellations HEALING THE SICK...then as the days get shorter and shorter in duration all the way till Dec 21st when the day lengths are equal in duration for 3 days..then on December 25 the day lengths start getting longer in duration and the 🌞 is reborn..
We are in the Solar age of Pisces TWO FISH..
Jesus Christ is the personification of the Sun...
Travels about the world healing the sick...
There is a word for it..
personification
[per-son-uh-fi-key-shuh n]
noun
the attribution of HUMAN nature or character to animals, inanimate objects, or abstract notions, especially as a rhetorical figure..
A NASA personified tale about the spaceship...HE flies up into the heavens.burning through HIS mother's grasp,opening HIMSELF releasing us from inside HIM into heaven.. Decode that 2,000 years from now. ;)
The story of death and "rebirth"..The ACTUAL new year.
When I die the microorganisms in me will change roles and decompose the cells and tissues,and go back into the earth as dust ALIVE.
My soul energy will return to its source the fiery Sun to BURN FOR ETERNITY.
Getting sufficient Sun exposure is vital for optimal health,there are rules though!!!!!
Ecclesiastes 11:7
Truly the light is sweet, and a pleasant thing it is for the eyes to behold the sun:
Sungazing is literally looking directly into the Sun at sunrise and or sunset barefoot (grounded) starting at 10 seconds the first time,and adding 10 seconds every day until you are up to 45 minutes.
*Religion is complete fraud*
All "mythology" is personified stories about the Sun,moon,planets,star constellations and heavenly bodies. The latest is the Christian mythology about the Sun,moon,planets,star constellations and heavenly bodies. Watch a couple episodes of this old TV series and you will listen to wonderful personified stories about the Sun,moon,planets,star constellations,and heavenly bodies.
Star Hustler 1980s TV show
Eat his flesh..
When I look at an apple I realize that the vitamin C is literally electrons that the tree converted from the sun and stored in the fruit...
God's Sun is in the flesh of the Apple im eating..
The 🌞 is the reason for the seasons..
The 🌞 rises in the east.
The 🌞 is the light of the world.
The 🌞 is the morning star.
The 🌞 reflection walks on water.
The 🌞 can be seen coming through the clouds.
The 🌞 has a crown of sun rays.
The 🌞 travels the world healing the sick...all cancer patients are vitamin D deficient. Vitamin D repairs mitochondria+ a thousand other biological functions.
The 🌞 will save you from the cold scary darkness.
The Sun,the morning star,light of the world,rising from the east,coming through the clouds,saving us from darkness,crown of Sun rays,its shimmer walking on water,traveling the sky healing the sick,raising the dead trees grasses,flowers....and that's the real reason there is only one set of footprints in the sand...because you are walking with the Sun.....God's Sun....you keep God....you just lose man's religion....
The older the book the more revealing..
*I had to delete all links or it won't post"
@@soldieroftoughlove7635 New Age deception at its finest.
@@soldieroftoughlove7635 😴boring
@@PrinceDarius777
Religion is the deception?
"They only have to show that your arguments aren't correct or are fallacious."
So basically showing up, saying they disagree, and then leaving. Sort of how you did with this event, huh Scott?
Skeptics: give me a thousand proofs or reasons.
Theist: here are a thousand.
Skeptics: well we need 1001 before we accept it.
@@ruthgar8 Protestants do the same thing with the Catholic Church.
@@ruthgar8 I'll take one, dude. Go for it
@@DrunkenHotei Do you agree with the self defeating claim that everything can be empirically proven despite this claim never being empirically proven ? Answering yes means you are devoid of any sound logic answering no means a necessary God COULD exist something no atheist will admit and thus like a stubborn fool they will agree with the claim displaying their lack of sound logic or for the rare dissagrment with the claim they will then proceed to ask for an empirical proof which again merely displays unsound logic on the part of the atheist.
The one reason you are looking for is actually several but here they are,
1.Every contingent fact has an explanation.
2.There is a contingent fact that includes all other contingent facts.
3.Therefore, there is an explanation of this fact.
4.This explanation must involve a necessary being.
5.This necessary being is God.
Ive given you more than you asked now you have two options convert to theism or show us how bad faith you truly are.....
@@ruthgar8 you have none besides the fact that it makes you feel better and the fact that your brain is wonky
"I can see how it might be possible for a man to look down upon the earth and be an atheist, but I cannot conceive how a man could look up into the heavens and say there is no God." *~Abraham Lincoln*
Never knew he said that, very gud quote
And now his watch has ended. He is dead. He lives just as memory.
Amen.
Amen. Beautiful quote.
And now that man can now look down upon the earth , I wonder what Lincoln’s opinion might be today .
@@usray3219 Rolling in his grave. How his party, his country, and his faith have twisted into something they are not.
“Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.” Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!” Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.””
John 20:27-29
yea it's really good to believe without any proof...it's a sin of faith.
Amen!
@@colin2709 Thomas had evidence of Jesus' divinity way before His death. His faith was weak because he was still doubtful.
Amen!!
Matthew's gospel directly and explicitly contradicts three other gospels in regard to the resurrection. You can choose, you blaspheming revisionist!! :-D Now, shall we discuss the Book of Judas? What!? Read on Christian if you dare.
0:06
Camera: * focus on Frank *
Frank: * ight imma head out *
Lol
Omegalol
That was super funny bro XDDD
Lol
I like how mature Frank is he didn't get angry at Scott's rudeness
That Holy Spirit at work!
To those who make fun of the atheist being overweight, that would be like my saying something about Frank wearing glasses.
This is just _one_ atheist among many. He doesn't represent atheists.
This is just _one_ Christians among many. He doesn't represent Christians.
Why can't people be mature and focus on the things that are really important instead of being distracted by details that don't even matter?
@Caramel Johnson You didn't get my point because that still has NOTHING to do with atheism or Christians. Obese Christians exist too. There is a video of an obese Christian lady who freaks out about atheism and tarot cards to the point of hysteria.
as a christian, ithurts me to see people making fun of his weight.
good thoughts, cheers for sharing.
@Caramel Johnson another good indicator of psychological problems is justifying holding a lesser view of someone just because of their lifestyle, and both of these things are unquantifiable, as psychological problems is a broad term with vast differences in definition between people. It's also irrelevant, as having mental issues does not determine the core of your character. If a man never takes care of his own property and it's disheveled, but he puts all his effort into doing a good job at his place of work and in his interactions with others socially, is he of poor character? Likewise, if a man is physically fit and eats healthy, but feels that it's perfectly acceptable to demean and think less of another because of their health and body decisions, does that mean he is of good character?
Your concept of character is also pointless, because you haven't defined it. What IS character, and how is it relevant to being rude or kind to another person?
I saw ONE comment implying he should have exercised.
Wearing glasses and being extremely overweight are nowhere near the same thing. One is life threatening, and the other is not.
He wasn't seeking truth.He was just trying to embarrass frank.And I don't think he understands the rest of the audience has probably watched more of Frank's videos than he has. This gentleman actually embarrassed himself.
He's being selective on what's Frank's saying. He grabs a little part of Frank's argument and then try to imply contradiction with fancy words (As you can see he struggles with it).
Frank's main argument was: "I think theism best explains reality, because there should be a main source (God) that gives us atributes that couldn't be engineered automatically and by nothing".
The dude's argument: "God doesn't exist. Atheism just rejects the claim of theism, nothing more".
...Basically his using the Strawman Fallacy, nothing new. The main topic of the debate is "What better explains reality? Theism or Atheism?". The atheist failed + tries hard to not acknowledge it.
Robert Conrad, if you’re an agnostic atheist, 9 times out of 10 you are in fact seeking truth. Speaking facts does not equate to embarrassing oneself.
Actually its Frank that it extremely dismissive and rude.
Agreed. He had no real point to make other than "I don't like your beliefs", which is not the same as disproving them.
@@justinlast1795 exactly
*_Matthew 11.28 Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. 29 Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For My yoke is easy and My burden is light."_*
_Jesus Christ loves you. Repent and be saved. Only Jesus Christ saves. God bless you, and the grace of God be upon you and your family in the name of Jesus Christ_
Prove it.
Jesus will break every chain.
What does the age of the book have to do with anything? Its age indicates nothing about whether it speaks truth or falsehood, unless one of the things it says is, "This book was written in the year 1342" and its age is KNOWN to be 5-years-old.
But job explain those big creatures in verses they must extinct or hit by Tectonic plates or earthquake Read(Job 40: 80).... Homo sapiens is not human being.
that's why evolution ended, that change it what god says in Genesis 1:14 seperated...
Einstien Won't believe athiest either.
There is a massive difference between intellectual debate and laziness. You might can poke holes through an argument but not having a viable counter argument is like going the wrong way on a one way street, without your car, in rush hour.
Not having a position at a intellectually honest when there isn’t enough information
All you need to do is poke holes through an argument if someone is making it, you literally don’t need one of your own, which atheist don’t, that’s why the burden of proof is on the one making the claim
@@WayneJohn-fq6cnif you are going to call someone out, as was done in this video, you are no longer in a position of saying you have no belief. A belief in a negative is still a belief. The action of arguing removes you from what is called agnostic to firm atheism. Now you must defend your assertion, whether that means defending your position of God’s existence or just that the speaker is a liar. Either way, it is lazy to go up and say “your wrong, there are many reasons why, but I am not going to discuss any of them.”
True agnosticism doesn’t care if believers believe or non-believers don’t. It is only certain of waiting until their is proof one way or the other and calls out no one. The moment you choose to engage someone in conversation and set yourself against their claims then you started a debate. That is a technical term. In a debate both sides have a burden of proof to make their case.
That is not to say there isn’t another form of agnosticism. Such a thing exists in some adults but often children who stick their fingers deep into their ears, lob their arguments and claim that no evidence is worth their time.
@@jerrybarry562 it is a factual answer; on that you are right. Being ignorant and apathetic is a factual truth. However, when you show up to an event that is Christian theology based, you are not going to get away with that lazy answer. That would be like a Christian showing up to a Neil deGrasse Tyson event, to argue with him and then say that they don’t know the sciences. That is just plain foolish. There are quite a number of us faith based believers that also study the sciences. So when we interact with Christians with those lazy answers, I give them no less talk than I am giving you here. Now if you are okay with people making your position look weak with that lazy answer or you are okay with that lazy answer, go do it.
@@jerrybarry562I have made my statements very clear. In the video, I see an uneducated, lazy mind that wants to rebel against someone who has studied their field of study. Going back to Neil, I would never suggest a lazy mind go debate him about science. Frank has arrived at his position through study. There are things in science that are so amazing and extraordinary that only study begins to help people to understand. Those that don’t want to do that say, “I don’t know” and are satisfied. I’m not. It’s lazy. Now, you can continue to post here, but I know you won’t accept anything I say. You sure don’t seem to be the type to do the study yourself. Frankly, I am not here to educate you. Go be lazy.
God bless Frank Turek
What is blessing?
@@johnmakovec5698 Welcome to the party, Jan. Nice of you to show up. Grab a seat and make yourself comfortable. How are the wife and kids?
A blessing is a spell cast by a low level druid or priest. Useful in raids.
Jan Makovec A blessing is a spell cast by a low level druid or priest. Useful in raids
Which god?
that guy: "I lack belief"
also that guy: "I don't believe you"
That didnt make sense to u?? Someone who lacks belief leans on the side of not believing
@@marvyae23 then explain what u believe in as what frank said
@@vibe6968 he doesn't thats the point thats always the point most atheists dont believe in the gods thats presented without real evidence not stories re-written by people who took it from people who wrote it that weren't the people who lived it but decided to write it and expect us to just believe it all
@@vibe6968 he believes that the Bible doesn't have enough real truth that can be proving for it to be true thats his belief
@@marvyae23 The thing is,disbelief is still a form of belief.Saying "I don't believe in a God" doesn't really have anything to do with God's existence,meaning you have the burden of proof onto how the world is created within atheistic worldview.
When a person walks out during debate, they lost.
Atheist can deny the sovereignty of GOD, but they will answer that when the time comes when every knee will bow before GOD.
So true.
infinitiGjj The person talking to the ignorant who will never listen to what you say, their only choice is to walk away. For some people, especially those who want to make an argument that a water bottle can be atheist, they will never listen to what that guy had to say. So, after a conversation, he walked away knowing nothing was coming out of talking to the religious guy. Believe in whatever you want, your prerogative. But I will not believe in outlandish claims with no evidence...
Well if Frank was just going to dodge and lie, what would be the purpose of sticking around?
Will sky Daddy spank us?
LOL!
"I'm good at debating. I've won many in my head so this should be easy."
Is this a self report?
@@mattslater2603 yes. I'm a master debater.
@@DS-ld8ns and I’m a masturbator
🤣
"I smash my keyboards attacking christians online so obviously I'm a genius"
Interesting he used cake and pie as an example...
Stoppppp😂😂😂
Not cool man am a big chubby guy who loves pie and cakes.... speaking of which let me grab a piece
He likes both cake and pie. He's a living example that atheism isn't a worldview.
The gordo man ran away because he remembered that he had 8 cakes and 10 pies at home, ready to be eaten after dinner.
🤣🤣🤣 bruh I was thinking the same thing
Psalm 14:11 "Only fools say in their hearts, “There is no God.”
Justin 5/21 "Only fools say in their hearts, "There is a God."
Only fools believe in something they have no real evidence in.
Matthew 5:22 “whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.”
Michael Lovett such as?
A fool is literally someone who claims that an imaginary god is real.
Atheist guy: Theism does not try to explain reality
*15 seconds later* : You're coming to me saying "God explains reality..."
Do you hear yourself?
They don't because it's all about rejecting God, at all times, for many people like him.
Contend for the Faith Poor atheists can’t explain reality. That’s why he wanted to argue the premise of those debates. And they say we believe in fairy tales...
What better explains reality? What a joke. Why are the two options only Christianity and Atheism? Terrible argument by frank
@@evosmith12 theism and atheism
Eric Smith I have yet to hear an atheist express the desire to debate Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Mormons, Buddhists, Jehovah’s Witnesses, New Agers, Psychics, Satanists, etc. Their favorite target is Christianity. Why is that?
its so interesting this particual guy who walked out was fighting another battle. which was based on pride...his aim was really "im smarter than mr. turek" it was never a debate about what is true but more a contest of who is smarter...which was not what mr. turek is here for....making this particular athiest appear both arrogant and unfortunately dumb.
Just because you think someone's wrong doesn't mean they are arguing to gain intellectual dominance. People shouldn't just assume someone's thoughts like this, geez Louise.
@@ninjakidkat12 watch the video again. And ask yourself what is his point? What is his argument. Listen to tureks points. And his response, this is not the first convo they have had, listen to there previous one if you can find it. My statement is far from an assumption. Am I willing to be wrong? Of course. But I make this statement from the specifics of this conversation-debate and there previous. Though your statement can be generally true for sure. I am not making a general statement. It’s an opinion I am stating based on what I’m listening, interpreting and understanding. So there is no need for the geese Louise, everything is fine take it easy 😊 it’s ok to have an opinion, ironically that is what the video is about is it not? And finally you have come to the wrong assertion. It’s not that I think he is wrong that I have come to that conclusion it’s simply what I perceive in his manner, attitude and the way he walks off. Wrong or correct is not my issue here. My issue is far more intriguing. What motivated that man in that argument. And what I have stated earlier is my conclusion. Not the matter that you have spoken about concerning if you don’t agree it means it’s a battle of intelligence. Far from it. Have a nice day 🤝
@@TheAndrewanyanwu are you okay? He started with a question. This wasn't a debate, this was Turek giving a talk, probably about why atheists should believe in God or some of the other like, 6 things he gives presentations on. Dude wanted to know why he believed, and Turek started in about how atheism means he believes he has no belief there is a god.
Confirmation bias at its finest here.
@@Thoron_of_Neto lol I’m very well.
@@TheAndrewanyanwu clearly. Just gonna ignore the whole rest of the comment then?
Fool: "You keep using the term 'salty peanuts' and I am here to teach you that salt is not a peanut."
Frank can say 'atheistic worldview' without implying that atheism is a worldview; 'atheistic' is used as and adjective to modify the term 'worldview'... just like 'salty peanuts' does NOT mean 'salt is a peanut'.
Whoever is reading this dont lose faith and hope in Jesus. No matter how bad things are in your life. Stay on track and your will overcome
" Stand fast "
(Scripture)
🙏🦁🐑🕊🙏
I would like to believe if what you say is true. How can I tell the difference in a story that is true and a story that is false that many people believe is true? There are many stories from all over the world, all throughout time that claim divinity, how can I tell which one, if any, are true?
But if you do fall and stop believing in Jesus, remember that he will send you to hell for all eternity. Amen
Usually walking away in the middle of a conversation indicates that you lost or refuse to address the problem the other speaker is proposing.
@Michael Ramos
Peace be upon you. I hope this channel doesn't hide / delete what I put forth. The question is:
Who is The Only True God as per the testimony of Jesus Christ himself?
A) The Father
B) The Son
C) The Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit - The Trinity
D) The Holy Spirit
Please answer the above question. Shall appreciate.
Please REMEMBER:
Answering with something which is not asked is only gonna bring the question back in all fairness. With all due respect, I am not asking for your opinion or your belief. I am asking for the testimony of Jesus Christ himself. Please substantiate your answer by quoting Jesus Christ himself.
Here is the explicit testimony that Jesus Christ himself gave:
“And this is life eternal, that they might know YOU THE ONLY TRUE GOD, and Jesus Christ, whom YOU have sent.”
John 17:3
See!
"YOU THE ONLY TRUE GOD".
"YOU"... Jesus is very clearly talking to a different entity - the Father - and saying that it is YOU who is THE ONLY TRUE GOD.
Jesus Christ gave the testimony that the Father is THE ONLY TRUE GOD.
John 20:17: “Jesus saith unto her, ...I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and TO MY GOD, AND YOUR GOD.”
Have another look!
".... TO MY GOD and YOUR GOD"
Not only is God Jesus’ Father, exactly like he is the Father of all, the relationship is not unique to Jesus, but He is also his GOD. Jesus has a God who is THE ONLY TRUE GOD. He himself testifies in the words that he himself said.
********
My position as a Muslim agrees. Of course the term Father in the Jewish context. Metaphorical. NOT that God has a literal Son. God has got Son by the Ton in the Bible.
usually, but not always. sometimes you walk away frustrated that the person with the microphone more than once misrepresents what you're saying, even after being corrected on it. If the other side isn't listening, what's the sense in sticking around?!
yes, usually, but not in this case. (or did you watch the wrong video?) it's pretty shameful that someone should try to say the guy "stormed out". let’s rehearse the facts: red shirt dude mischaracterises and misdefines the word “atheist”. Fat guy corrects him. Red shirt guy doubles down and uses word incorrectly again, while getting loud about it. then 3:45 red shirt dude says “in order to have this discussion, you must know the answer to X, Y, and Z”, fat dude corrects him and says you don’t, and that red shirt guy couldn’t possibly know either and points out starting with the presupposition that his god exists, is a logical fallacy. at 4:13 red shirt guy doubles down and gets loud again. At 4:30 fat guy corrects red shirt guy once again. Clearly the guy in red shirt had an agenda, and didn’t like to be called out on it. saying that he “stormed out” is laughable. Talking louder than someone else doesn’t magically make you win an argument. at 6:20, red shirt guy lies yet again. you DO *NOT* have to show evidence for your side if you refute the claim or show that the other’s argument is a fallacy.
@Frances Snowflake he wanted him to explain how the universe worked. Athiesm is just the rejection of evidence there is a God. Example being emagine if you were a viking back in the day and believed in the Norse gods. I can reject your clame even though I did not have an explanation for lightning.
or.. the person is lying and you can't stand it anymore
The dude behind him… totally feel what he feels man. Seeing destruction in front of you can be quite interesting, depending on the circumstance.
Grown men believing in an invisible superhero that they read about in a book. You religious people love your invisible superheroes, don't you?
I mean you can call anything destruction, doesn't mean it is. All I saw here was a good back and forth between two points of view.
@@siobhancrawley1487 Yes, yes I would say I do.
@@siobhancrawley1487while you people are so desperately sad to believe that nothing created everything.
Most atheists don’t even try to find out if God exists. If one even seriously exercises a partial of faith, with a pure heart they will find God.
But what about evidence.
Most Atheists, particularly on TH-cam, get very offended when you point out they have their own faith and belief system that they stand by. It's a reality they don't seem to want to grasp.
TheCybercoco So far as I am aware I don’t have faith in anything.
J w There are plenty of reasons to fight against something that doesn’t exist. I live in a democracy where other people have large control over how I can live. We believe different things, and our ideas of what an ideal society look like are probably vastly different. You are going to end supporting things I think make life worse for everyone. God doesn’t need to be real for it to have a large impact on my life.
Wally Brown i spent the majority of my life as a passionate christian. i spent 8 hours at church every sunday serving and attending service, and then after service trying to share more of the gospel with other high school students that may have just gone to service for fun. i started bible studies, attended bible studies, served with multiple christian groups, and spent a very large portion of my free time outside of that deeply studying the bible. i evangelized to everyone i saw, even the dentist. i began suffering from severe ocd, which stemmed to cause major depression and generalized anxiety. my reality became pain. every thought i had was pain. every breath i took was pain. i spent even more time through this serving, attending church, starting and cultivating bible studies, and deeply studying the bible constantly. with the help of medication after over a year of this pain i began to get better. i started asking questions. why could this happen to me? why do bad things happen to anybody? why haven’t i felt the presence of god or seen him in my life or received any form of anything from him for over a year? i fought long and hard for my faith but through research and questions and much struggle my faith slowly died out. i wanted god to exist. i wanted something wonderful and hopeful to believe in. but it died. i am not bitter about this and have accepted it for what it is. i have heard all the arguments from christians side of this trying to talk me back in, and having been a previous very passionate christian know what one would say looking at my situation and entirely see the christian side of this. i do not believe in the god of the bible. i wanted him to exist but have through my life found that he does not
Pray our Lord Jesus Christ reaches him. Amen
Unfortunately praying doesn't work this way. It can change the praying person, not do anything remote.
@@johnmakovec5698 How do you know?
@Filmbay or you can demonstrate your god to exist and use evidence to change people's minds.
When will you provide evidence to prove that the resurrection & other Jesus miracle stories were not made up decades after Jesus by anonymous hoaxer Christian writers falsely passing themselves off as someone who existed years before them from some other place claiming to be eyewitnesses & talking to eyewitnesses?
Jan Makovec Jesus also claims why he prayed for others John 17:20-23
I respect Dr Turek for defending the Gospel with love and so much knowledge.
Says an atheist! Lol thats the most ironic thing I heard all day, what a joke.
Christians is the reason y people like this exist ok because you want to make Jesus god and he not so you all are confusing people I am sorry for these people in that room who is this doc I hope he is not a medical doctor because people will died because he will give people wrong mediation like how he not giving good knowledge
thats what you call knowledge? -.-
Turek is a goon lol a loud goon
@@arthurgladden9378
Jesus claimed to be equal with God which is why the Jews were trying to stone him. Either accept His message which He proved when He resurrected and His miracles or deny Him without cause for what He said about Himself. Up to you man.
In my estimation The fellow has never been in a real debate before. If he had, he would have understood how they work. His frustration came from not having an actual case for his belief to make.
What belief would that be?
@@ThePurpleGoose023 We get how it works, its just you abuse it so that the only person that has to show proof is the theists. The atheist must present a case in a debate about God's existence. The theist has the burden of proof, but the atheist has the _burden of refutation_ something you guys CANNOT fulfill in any reasonable manner without rhetoric or fallacious reasoning.
@@TheSpacePlaceYT there is nothing such as "the burden of reutation". Theists are the ones making a claim.
@matswessling6600 The Burden of Refutation is a responsibility in debate that requires one side to refute an argument made by the other side using evidence or reasoning. This burden is part of the argumentative burden, which describes the responsibilities of each participant in an argument. May also be called Burden of Rebuttal.
@@SteamVidTube then give the argument for a claim and I will rebute it.
Dude got bodied. Horribly, which is why he stormed off. He must not know how debating works. Lol.
@demigodzilla When Dr. Frank wss responding and he walked off.
He got strawmanned. He made acouple of points, got ignored, and the response he got had nothing to do with his point. This guy dodges questions and distracts while making other points which are also false, and answering everything takes more time. And when you finally answer everything he starts questioning reality. The guy is not honest.
I would have walked too, Frank couldn't handle his questions and Frank's praticed answers weren't working,
Brandon Marshall same as you. But you dont understand whats just being said.. first time I saw this dude, Frank was way off... he uses tactics he think will work against randoms.. he would never try Even that on somebody he would know.. he would be killed
I couldn't agree more, even though I am closer to the questioner's viewpoint than Tureks. It goes to show, winning a debate is not necessarily a demonstration of anything other than one's ability to debate. For instance, I think Turek makes a pretty clear argument from ignorance fallacy that just passes as reason, and yet he wins the debate in the video.
Just like a good diet & exercise plan, this boy still has time to make his life right
Unfortunately it seems it's too late for you as brain development slows after gradeschool and you don't seem to be as intelligent as a 4th grader.
@@jackdaniels9179 - have another drink
@@t-bone3657 hahaha it took you two weeks to think of a clever response and that's what you got? Do you understand how truly pathetic that is!?? 😂😂😂
@@t-bone3657 I'll have a drink, too! Xcept I'm more of a KY Bourbon guy, all love and respect to JD :)
Wow. It always warms my heart to read these comments and be uplifted by all the bigotry and othering Christians do to make themselves feel good. Praise the lord!!
A reminder to both sides of the isle: Just as you cannot drive away darkness with darkness: Only light can do that. You cannot drive away hate with hate, only love can do that. We live in an age where truth is called hate but only a few realize the truth shall set them free. When truth is suppressed the oppressors excel. Silence in the face of injustice is complicity with the oppressor. Thank you Mr Turek for trying to bring the truth to the oppressors that reject the truth.
Ell Kir
What truth?
Amen.
💪🏿💪🏿💪🏿
While I respect the sentiment, I disagree with your conclusion. Keep spreading your positivity though ❤️:)
@@MartTLS That's what Pontious Pilat asked:"What is Truth" Only he was in an age where the truth would get you killed. I pray we don't reach that point but we have already started down that route by prosecuting and persecuting anyone that tells the truth about a variety of subjects
Sadly, stubbornness, and an unwillingness to hear a logical argument will lead a lot of people to hell.
Running from the argument is like a child running away and putting because he doesnt get his way.
Tj White - Well if that's the case, that guy sure wastes a whole lot of his time watching all of Frank's debates and memorizing portions of them and even going in person to listen to a presentation of his, which he surely has heard before based upon his comments. What's an extra minute or two after he finally gets the chance to speak with him? Sure, sounds like a logical excuse... 🤔
@@lsubslimed Mr. Turek just dances around and avoiding the question.
@Tj White wow, talk about your straw man and ad hominems. You sure assume a lot about me based upon a reply about my observed actions a person in the video. If you can't handle being called out for making radon illogical points, then just don't make them. I listen clearly to every side, though from your comment though it sounds like you sure didn't. Frank was correcting the claim of that guy about the topic and basis of his debates, which he was actually in, so I'd think he might know that topic a little better than that guy who didn't want to hear his answers, which absolutely made sense, if you would just drop your biases and listen to what Frank is actually saying.
@@rtbnb3201 No, the atheists often (not always) just dances around the answers to their questions because they aren't open to the answers or simply don't like them. See, I can do the same thing, although my point actually has basis to it. Every answer he gave was perfectly clear to myself and many others here, so I'm not sure what you missed.
@Tj White Nothing on the topic at hand? I responded to the rest of your comment above and didn't miss anything. And your comment about "you Christians" etc. was a direct reply to me, so I took it in context. Are you saying your entire entire reply was irrelevant to any part of my comment then and just a general claim?
i searched Frank Turek debate.
First video is "What best explains reality: Theism vs Atheism (Frank Turek vs Michael Shermer)"
Lolol which is exactly what Frank was saying, and then the guy stormed out.
What amazes me, is I have no idea what was making him ANGRY. Nothing about their exchange should’ve pissed off anybody. And yet the guy stormed out because Frank challenges him even in the slightest. And I love how arrogant the guy was to say that frank made all of these logical fallacies, not that he had time to point all of them out Lolol.
Oh strong and mighty one, thank you for gracing us with your presence! The guy was so brilliant he knew enough to know Frank was 100% wrong but not enough to make any positive claim about anything, except argue over semantics.
D. Utley
“Oh strong and mighty one, thank you for gracing us with your presence”
Bahahaha I laughed so hard I snorted😂
I totally agree, this is the mindset of just about every atheist.
I got to attend that debate. It was awesome to see it in person
That's a great debate, when Shermer is telling the truth. Any alien with great power would be indistinguishable from Bible's God.
Turk is destroyed :)
Jan Makovec No
Frank’s approach to this topic gave me goosebumps on my heart. I don’t know if it’s excitement or a health concern but I like it. 😅
You should probably get that checked by a doctor 👀
I’m sorry but he definitely lost this argument
@@Elohimshomri3 that’s your perspective.
@@Elohimshomri3 what argument? It didn’t even go anywhere. But if atheism is simply a rejection of theism then why do all atheists rely on scientific claims to make sense of the world? You can’t not make claims about reality because determining meaning is necessary to be alive. It’s a default setting.
@@brishawnsanders5873 nope, it's not just his perspective, frank turek actually did lose the argument. Just because an atheist says they don't believe god is real, does not mean it's their burden to prove that there is no god or their burden to prove how the universe works without a god, etc, if that atheist is an agnostic atheist. So basically if a Christian claims they have proof there's a god and an atheist says"prove it" and the Christian brings up the proof and the atheist debunks that proof, the atheist doesn't have to prove God isn't real or provide a better argument that explains how the universe works, which is what Frank turek was saying you had to do if you were an atheist
Typical atheist. He wants to throw definitions out all day and when taken to task he tries to make it look like the opponent is philosophically, and mentally unequipped to answer a question.
Psalms 14:1
"The fool says in his heart, 'There's no God.'"
@@varunmohan3760
should i laugh now or what...
@@varunmohan3760 really? i hope it at least put a smile on your face. happiness is obviously too difficult to chase nowadays so relish yourself ;)
As a bhuddist we know Jesus as a bhuddist monk named ISSA and he did not believe in a god....
Matthew 5:22 But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire. Welcome, brother, welcome. As above so below. Who is saklas?
@@Satan-Christ
My friend I was a Christian for many years but god could never be proven and I was told to use faith were facts were not possible.....
Also Jesus was a bhuddist monk named ISSA and he survived the crucifixion and escaped to kasmir India....he is buried there in a small green house.... just Google it.... Jesus was a bhuddist monk....I can prove Jesus was a man and he was no god ...but you can't prove a god exists.... only creation my friend....only a fool would follow blind faith.... that can make you very dangerous to others over a belief that is based on lies....
"aight imma head out"
😂😂😂😂
“I don’t want to overwhelm Frank with too many facts.”
@@mrrickstur translation: I don't want to overwhelm Frank with my feelings.
@@yasiem6245 facts, not feelings lol
@@mrrickstur feelings. That's why he walked away because he couldn't handle his emotions.
this guy has been studying for years (frank living in his head - rent free) and this was his big chance at the mic and..... HE CHOKED !!
😂 😂 😂 "rent free".
Sad. But Frank have much more practice. So Frank would be able better sell lies, than true teller facts.
Boom✊ Preach!
*_"HE CHOKED !!"_* in a room full of people hostile to his ideas, misrepresent what he's saying, and talk loudly on mic to him. Also it may have been his first time speaking in front of a crowd. you say that as if you think you'd do something different... i'm curious WOULD you though?
lennyhipp good points
Maybe a better thing to say is -
Scott looked weak by disrespectfully walking away after choosing to engage Frank in conversation ?
He also called him a liar ?
Really ? Then you walk away ?
Come on now ,
I used to be a proud atheist and their world view is cohesive. It makes sense. The door out of that kind of worldview doesn’t open with logic and reason. I tried for almost a decade. Many atheists are upset with the church because there is no perfect church. They are often seeking the real thing. You have to come with love. Selfless love. The well studied atheist like this guy doesn’t need any new information, he needs a moment of sincerity from BELIEVERS to open him up to God. If an atheist is going out of his way to argue with a believer, it might be because the atheist has been searching very hard in the world for God but hasn’t found Him in any of His so-called believers. Show an atheist the fruits of your faith by loving him.
Reminds me of the Brennan Manning quote... The single biggest cause of atheism in the world today is Christians who acknowledge Jesus with their lips and walk out and deny him with their lifestyle. This is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable.
beautifully put. I believe there is no such thing as an atheist, we all want to believe in God but some of us wind up getting more hurt than others. “Atheism” or running from God is purely a coping mechanism. They brag they live by reason and logic, but it’s just a front because they’ve been hurt by their own emotions- they don’t want to be emotional anymore, love to them has been broken by this broken world, so they resort to thinking “logic and the human ego will get be through life”. But when you approach them with these well formatted debates you’ll find their opinions aren’t led by reason and logic at all, but emotion. Which is okay, that’s the point. Some of them won’t admit this, but they just want to be loved and feel accepted in this dark world. But looking for love in all the wrong places and never returning to the church because some churches/Christians don’t represent Christ accurately and have ruined the faith for them. But I still have hope, and so does Frank Turek. The ultimate goal isn’t to win a debate, or even be logically “superior”, but to help them recognize their own trauma and show them there is an infinite God who loves them unconditionally, no matter what they’ve done.
Heart breaking to see him leave like that and missing the Truth. Hopefully he will find Jesus and salvation.
Yes. Lord, please reveal yourself to Scott and give him assurance of Your reality.
Why christians very often use term "the Truth"? Maybe because it is not "the truth", but "the dogma"?
Jan Makovec If you truly want to know, then watch Frank's full video from this event. He addresses the importance of truth right up front.
@@johnmakovec5698 The main reason is because Jesus called himself the truth. John 14:6.
@@johnmakovec5698 because outside of God there is no truth and no matter what you think it does not matter because there is no truth. The fact that you responded to the "truth" while presenting your truth is also a dogma.
“ The Cross is a stumbling block to those who are perishing...” hope this guys comes to Christ.
Respectfully yours
😎🇺🇸🗽✝️🇮🇱👍
What scripture is that? That's a good one.
Consider 1 Corr. 1:23
It is derived from 1st Corinthians 1:18
“For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. (1 Corinthians 1:18, NASB)”
@@BirdogEd love it. The Word is food for the soul.
@BirdogEd can you demonstrate your god to exist? It wouldn't seem so. Look up the Pew research poll. The number of religious people are decreasing every year while the number of non religious are growing.
The fool in his heart has said, there is no God.
I don't believe in a god. My position is not "there is no god". I just don't believe there *is* one. Why should I?
123tominator007 you are quoting the con man who sold you the scam in the first place lol. "no really I didn't get cheated when I sent money to the Nigerian email guy cos he told me I didn't and I trust him"
@@FuckFascistTH-cam The matrix is one of my all time favorite movies, action, scifi, etc. We live in a matrix so to speak.The reality is what exists beyond our natural eye. This reality we live in (everything we can see with our natural eyes, touch with our fingers) is temporal, meaning it has an ending. But the things we can't see are eternal, meaning they will go on forever. Our souls. Eternity is a long time. Jesus is the ONLY way to God. Choose the red pill. Call on Jesus. The blue pill will give you blissful ignorance but only as long as you have breath.
@@123tominator007 *But the things we can't see are eternal, meaning they will go on forever*
Huh? Do you have any evidence of this whatsoever? What basis do you have for believing this?
@@FuckFascistTH-cam I have absolutely NO evidence whatsoever. One day I took a step of faith and called on the name of Jesus out of desperation. And since then he has changed me and revealed himself to me so many ways but mainly I have felt his presence many many times. Peace, joy, acceptance. But this is something that can't be explained or understood until someone experiences it for himself.
Scott is probably addicted to social media and since he wasn’t in his echo chamber he left
"Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.
@nasser d Not sure I'd call it pearls. He addressed a strawman and the big guy correctly recognized he wasn't interested in answering the actual questions.
Well I don't worry about none of that, I just ride my unicorn all the time. It's really great, no pearls to throw, just good times.
What an arrogant, condescending and dehumanizing imaginary friend you have.
@@TheHigherVoltage why did you comment?
What kind of monster pigs are you raising?!
♥️ Atheism is a worldview. "The light shines in the darkness and and the darkness understands it not." ♥️ Jesus
It’s a position on one proposition, it’s not a worldview
@@kuhfusskatsadventures It's a worldview due to the fact that it raises the fundamental questions required by a worldview. As soon as atheism is proposed, a justification for these foundational questions is required. It's literally what Frank just explained in this video lol
@@MadProphet_97 One’s personal worldview may be contingent on the fact that they’re atheist, but atheism itself is not a worldview. There are no tenets, no dogma, no authority figures, no institutions, it’s simply a rejection of a proposition, nothing more.
@@kuhfusskatsadventures Rejection of the proposition, and then what? You could argue that atheism is a secondary belief, the primary belief being a worldview. But that worldview will be incredibly altered by said atheism. We are trying to get to the root of it, not get swallowed up by semantics and minutiae.
@@MadProphet_97 Rejection of the proposition and then everybody’s worldview is different, just not involving a god. There are atheists who are atheists for good reasons or for bad reasons, atheists that believe in the supernatural, spiritual atheists, atheists who follow religious dogma such as Buddhists, etc., etc., etc. If you’re trying to get to the root of it, then asking an atheist “why are you an atheist?” rather than asking “why do you have an atheistic worldview?” would be a more appropriate approach in my opinion. Because if somebody asked me “why do you have an atheistic worldview?” I wouldn’t understand the question due to the fact that there’s no such thing as sects in atheism.
Scott got caught up in his own word salad confusion...."convince me"... errr.. no... put a counter argument... to explain your view..honestly what is the point in coming to an event to be dismissive and rude.. no one says you have to agree with the existence of God or Christianity but at least engage your brain and tone down your emotions.
Lovelyjubly Which one though? any argument you think might prove the universe has a creator would work fine for the Hindus too.
No, I think he did a pretty good job. You're just nitpicking. Everyone gets flustered when they speak about something they care about.
@@nickev96 Err no. Storming off and calling another person a liar without proof because you get upset is not a good job.... Smh.
If one person claimed that the moon was made of cheese, you would rightly ask for them to prove it, and you could do so without having to make a counter-claim that no, in fact, it is made of chocolate. The burden of proof is on the person making the claim. Atheism does not make any claims, it refutes the claims of theists. That is all.
@@ipuppysmith8428 no.. the burden of proof is not on the person who holds the belief it is on the person challenging the belief to prove otherwise...let's keep the analogy example practical. If you believed that your wife/husband was faithful and I said no I don't believe you (be this on one side of the emotional spectrum being an unemotional disagreement to the opposite extreme of swearing and getting emotional/angry talking about my belief that your claim to your spouse's faithfulnes is false ) the burden of proof would be on me to prove why I thought your spouse was not faithful not on you to prove me otherwise (since you would hold the belief) . Take the religion /God out of the issue (although I am a Christian) and apply the rational thought that vast majority of people would apply or expect to be applied.
Irritates me that believers in the crowd are laughing at their fellow brother who's simply decieved and in need of the truth. War is not against flesh and blood, we should find ZERO humor in those who are currently destined to hell. What on earth is funny about the devil confusing somebody? This guy could have not even stood up to ask a question, could have not even been in the room! He's clearly stated he isn't 100% sure God is real, he did NOT say "God does NOT exist". This guy is innocently trying to find the truth, which is what us as believers in Christ do too! We shouldn't be laughing and mocking non believers. They can't help that the truth is not in them if they know no different.... It's OUR job to help them and bring them to Christ, it's NOT our job to laugh at them. Satan is already laughing at this man, why on earth should we join the devil's crowd and claim we follow Christ at the same time? It's hypocasry. Learn from it, listen carefully to these people instead of laughing and you might figure out exactly how to help get them saved through Jesus Christ. Laughing and condemning is shutting the door FOR THEM, stop it at once. Pray for them, do not cast mockery.
In my experience atheists are not innocently trying to find the truth. I've been watching the God debate for a long time now and the "I just lack a belief" didn't used to be a thing. They used to be confident that faith was just a "God of the gaps" and mock theists for being foolish and naive. I think the "I just lack belief" thing is a response to how theist apologetics have risen in response to materialist naturalism. It suddenly wasn't so easy to mock anymore when the theists started arguing back, and from my observation that is where the "I just lack belief" comes from - it's a way to attack theists without having to assume a burden of proof. When not being put on the defensive, the "I just lack belief" folks act exactly like the "Only losers belief in a sky daddy" folks of the past. Kind of like how the definition of racism changed from "prejudice" to "prejudice + power" once people started getting pushback for accusing white people of being racists for things they let other groups get away with and needed an excuse for it.
@@patrickbarnes9874 your "experience" and the truth and reality for a lot of people aren't the same thing buddy
Nah
As the Bible teaches, God's existence is clear. The atheist is willfully ignorant.
@@terminat1 not true, the athiest is decieved and persuaded some athiests to be willfully ignorant. War is not against flesh and blood. The Bible itself doesn't teach anything, the Bible is just a book. The word is what teaches, and the word has precise contexts
This preacher is a good brother, he explained in the best possible way, but the other left, even after knowing he kept his cool and started to make his point, excellent brother, God bless you and your church.
No, he explained in the most dishonest way possible. His analogy of the murder was wrong. It would be the theist who would make a claim about the murderer without any physical evidence. The atheist would examine all verifiable evidence and come to a conclusion based on that evidence as to who the murderer is.
In face of the dishonesty displayed by the preacher, any self respecting person would have walked out. If you cannot see the deception of the preacher, then there is no hope for you to ever think critically about things. So sad.
One guy is relax talking very open and one person is being close minded you can tell he's manipulated
Judging that a person is manipulated with that little information is _exactly_ being closed minded.
Kenneth Bachman You actually think he walked out from boredom? lol
Arkascha he’s gonna burn calories in hell you are blind and will also lose some weight in HELL!!
I love the answer to “Why do you have to say it’s about KNOWledge?”
Frank: Because said you didn’t KNOW!
The equivocation about what the knowledge was about was interesting. It went from knowledge about God, to knowledge of opinions about God (in other words, beliefs) simply so Frank could maintain that atheism is still about knowledge when it isn't. Its what SJW's have been doing for years: can't find enough racism? Just broaden the term racism until it encompasses something in the room.
I'm surprised he isn't wearing a fedora.
Or an anime shirt. But the wolf shirt works, too.
"Convince me". 90 seconds later walks away in the middle of the response.
Ttruckk
Because Frank kept lying.
you are lying
REALITY: Frank wasn't listening to him. Frank wasn't in the middle of a response, he just repeated the straw man, only louder the 2nd time. There was no point in staying as frank didn't acknowledge him, frank had an agenda and wasn't interested in listening
Frances Snowflake 😂
How can one be convinced when your words aren’t even taken into account and all that is happening is a bunch of pivoting to different points.
While I think this guy is an amazing guy and incredibly patient I feel like the thumbnail paints this guy as a little crazy. Idk who designed the thumbnail but me personally I don’t think as Christians we should be putting this guy down. I understand that he pastor was being respectful in the video I just think that the thumbnail is disrespectful to the guy with the argument. Just an opinion. :)
I thought so too. He wasnt unreasonable or angry.
Yeah I can agree with that
I agree but also the bible sais "When a mocker is punished, the fool gains wisdom; but when the wise is instructed, he receives knowledge"
"I don't think as christians"
They wouldn't refrain from mocking you, we all know that. This is why atheists tend to always argue in bad faith, become argumentative and have such a smug sense of superiority. They think of you as a lame carpet they can keep on punching as much as they want and when you bite back they say in a smug smile "why thats not very christian of you"
Meek doesn't mean weak, it means someone who can fight till death but prefers his sword in his sheath. Altruism is weakness if its not done without a sense of justicr behind it.
Dugon man you just made me realize I used the phrase “as Christians”. Personally I don’t like it when people say it to me, so I try not to say it to others. Looks like it happened. :)
Remember that even one third of the Angels fell from Heaven.
Proof?
@@awpy4922 "Nah." xd
Adam Bockstefel lol
Blue Dreams yes !
Andrews cool ye
Reasoning with an atheist is like playing chess with a dove. He will knock down all the pieces and crap all over the board and flies away thinking he is the rational one.
And that's is the Atheist world view: walks away as soon as their argument falls apart when confronted with logic.
"Logic" your logic is a set up explanation of how the world is created.That's not logic thats an idea inforced in your mind
VulgR point is he walked away or the other reaction is to get loud and angry...what does that tell u?
@@vulgr5076 I don't think logic means what you think it means.
Atheism is not a worldview, unless your definition of worldview is broad enough to include simply a disbelief in god(s).
Correction, he walked away when Turek lied about the rules of his debates with Christopher Hitchens. BTW, Frank was embarrassed by Hitch in those debates. He was clearly in well over his head with Hitchens, but then again so was everyone else.
Perfectly correct; when using 'false appeals' (logical fallacies) in arguments, which ever side this is on, you can't say 'your argument is wrong' without being able to input some value or basis in making that statement. Saying, using another argument leads to a 'strawman' argument, then refusing to add some objective reasoning, other that just refusing to put one's self on the line to make a case, is not an argument.
The argument requires debate; it requires both sides offering something in return to evaluate and consider. If it can be refuted, then explain how and why. But to simply refuse to accept a certain level of boundaries or 'framework' for making such as argument, and then refusing to argue objective but walk out instead, does not make your argument valid. While Scott seems to know a lot about his subject matter, he failed to offer his real point of view in a reasonable argument; he was merely attempting to dispute Dr. Turek's point of reasoning on 'false appeal' argumentation as well; by means of 'deflect' of direct-counter argumentation. He was either unwilling or unable to reasonably place a counter argument in the debate; perhaps for fear of finding weakness in his argument.
This is not to say that Dr. Turek is correct, but merely to suggest that Scott may not have all the right information to see the weakness in his ideals through new information and self discovery. By at least offering a debate, Scott may in fact find answers that will help him later to formulate a better case for his argument. But by not engaging with a simple debate, he missed out on this opportunity. There could be a bias affected by a 'cognitive dissonance' keeping Scott from being more objective in his view and belief on this subject; he asserts a position of Atheism, but refuses to discuss his potential errors of understanding; he is certain his reasoning is not flawed and may assume new evidence may conflict with his view; he rejects it outright without thoughtful consideration.
If you make an assertion I don't need to make a counter assertion. That's not how it works. I can merely say, prove it.
@@zed351 exactly these people are crazy they are the ones making the claims and trying to “save” us😂 why do they try to shift the burden of proof onto the ones that aren’t making any claims. We just disagree and think the reasons doesn’t make sense
Thanks for sharing your comment, but I disagree on two things:
1. You said it appears Scott knows a lot about the subject matter. I disagree, as he's using the "psychological state" definition for Atheism (lack of belief). Psychological states cannot be positions in any debate, as they are not truth claims. Psychological states are just something you experience. They just ARE, and cannot be debated with another person. For this reason, ALL of academia defines the philosophical position of Atheism as the positive assertion God doesn't exist. This definition MUST BE used in philosophical debates (or any position in any debate, for that matter).
2. You say "this is not to say Turek is correct." Turek is objectively correct. The definitions I listed above for the word Atheism are consistent throughout ALL academic sources. Turek even brought up the "psychological state" issue but it went right over Scott's head (because Scott is not knowledgeable enough on this issue to even know what the word Atheism actually means in this context - his own position).
I 100% agree with you that Scott is experiencing cognitive dissonance which is leading to a dogmatic reaction. This is extremely common for Atheists. Every academic study on atheism and dogmatism shows the following:
1. Atheists claim to be LESS dogmatic than Theists
2. They're actually MORE dogmatic than Theists in reality
@@zed351 Please read my above comment
@@dudead2729 Please read my above comment
Will not be able to run out when standing before God
Matt Smith I have to prove nothing. If you want the truth ask Jesus Christ to reveal himself to you
@Matt Smith You will have all the proof you want, one day. I hope, for your sake, the proof doesn't come too late.
@Matt Smith The fact you are alive proves God exists.
@@letsprayandfasttogether9618 Jesus Christ, I want the truth. Reveal yourself to me, reply to my comment.
@@letsprayandfasttogether9618 Nothing? How long must I waste my time waiting for the omnipresent and timeless god to reply?
Courtroom trial - the defence and the prosecution make their cases to the jury. If the jury decide prosecution is insufficient, defendant is found not guilty, there is zero burden on the jury to come up with a better explanation.
Yeah the "Detective" analogy was pretty cringe.
I don't appreciate the thumbnail, I feel its somewhat mocking of the questioner. As much as I believe a number of his statements and responses are in error, I don't believe the red laser eyes aids in evangelism.
I agree. I love this channel, but I don't like the thumbnail, at all.
I don't really dislike it but i don't think it's professional
We're full of evil magic, it's okay.
Kidding. Actually I'm glad you pointed it out, thanks. We don't do that to christians or muslims, it's unfortunate they have to steep to this low. At the same time, it just makes CE look more childish or foolish. I guess I'm not too upset now that I think about it.
Bo Heathen hey man it’s not that deep homie. I would say that frank is a pretty gracious and kind man to his questioners. This is in very light jest not to aid his argument
i like the thumbnail it provokes them to see it.
Scott is the perfect example of what a Devil's Advocate is. “To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible.”
Unless that faith is in Islam.
Or, to put it another way, we do not yet have all the answers we need to truly establish our origins and status in the universe so in the meantime, let's pretend to believe this absolutely ludicrous book of horrors, written hundreds of years ago by lots of different people over many years in many languages. A religious nut cannot claim some victory over an atheist simply because one has a belief and the other doesn't. That makes no sense. Can I sit safe in the belief that pixies look over me while unicorns keep my morality in check? No, of course not. It's a belief but not an acceptable one. Neither is the archaic christian book of waffle.
Ignorant quote
@Don don It's in all good bookshops. It's called 'the bible' and is full of entertaining stories for children and gullible adults.
@John High Because it's unlikely anyone here is Muslim.
It’s like a dad telling his son the sky is blue and his son saying no it’s not, because he doesn’t like the colour blue
Exactly. They believe that if God exists then either he should be hated or is an evil God. It's merely a cry of wrath by bitter people.
@@frankpontone2139 to be fair he did kill millions of people, implying he existed at some point or another, and still to this day over a few different religions people are being persecuted in his name
@@user-go3jv8rw7i a creator who can resurrect cannot commit murder. people killing people is wrong. God killing people is His right...
@@charlotte-xw6ow it’s his right to kill everyone he wants because he said so. That’s your logic
Apologists try to equate religion with science...one is an affirmation of faith...the other is drawing conclusions based on evidence...two things couldn't be further apart
He literally wrote a book about atheists having faith. That's how clueless he is. He never does well in the Q&A. He'll take the faithful's money though.
@Seventh Ah an ad hominem. Well done. Apologetics confirmed.
@Seventh ignorant theist confirmed lmffao
Faith is just another work for belief
Everyone believes something, that is the point that Frank makes
I believe God exists, some people believe God does not exist, some people believe that we can't know if God exists, some people believe we can't prove if God exists or not,
EVERYONE BELIEVES SOMETHING EVERYONE HAS FAITH IN SOMETHING We ALL BELIEVE SOMETHING
However our belief does not create reality, what is real is real , our faith does not change reality. Either God exists or he doesn't, Do you believe that something can come from nothing?
@@doug-says Well, there are 3 fairly distinct meanings of faith. It's a bait and switch trick from the speaker here. You're talking about what I would call trust or confidence, which everyone has of course. In the religious faith sense, I don't have any- that's atheism- simply a lack of faith. No.
Shouldn't waste valuable time with such people. He knows what Christopher Hitchens meant more then Hitchens himself?
I want to know what made him use the example of 'cake vs pie' 🤔
I'm an Agnostic Theist; I don't know why The Lord would save a wretch like me! : )
Because he loves you. That's it. Seriously that simple
All of us are crooked, that's why he has to come and pay the penalty for us.
rolysantos
It’s not something you earn, it’s a gift 💝 God bless 💕🙏🏻✝️
Maybe you just have low self-esteem?
@@itsJPhere My friend if you think you're worth saving maybe your self esteem is too high! You havn't realized the true wretch that you are.
Suppose one of you has a servant plowing or looking after the sheep. Will he say to the servant when he comes in from the field, ‘Come along now and sit down to eat’? Won’t he rather say, ‘Prepare my supper, get yourself ready and wait on me while I eat and drink; after that you may eat and drink’? Will he thank the servant because he did what he was told to do? So you also, when you have done everything you were told to do, should say, ‘We are unworthy (literally WORTHLESS) servants; we have only done our duty.’ ” Luke 17:7-10
Yes, Jesus said that you are worthless! How's that for your self esteem?
Paul recognized his wretchedness in 1 Timothy 1:15 where he refers to himself as the "worst" of sinners.
In Romans 7 he literally says "Oh wretched man that I am, who will save me from this body of death?"
If you're not saying the same things and asking the same question I have to wonder if you know The Lord.
He cannot offer an explanation for his godless love.
What on earth are you talking about kiddy?
Everytime I hear an atheist argue, incessantly, about something they SAY doesn't exist, I hear;
"I don't believe God exists...
Convince me that God exists, (because I'm tormented in my thoughts),...
I will disagree with everything and anything you say about God...but please keep arguing to prove God..."
Burden of proof is on christians.
Because there could be God outside of universe who doesn't care about us and we still die permanently. So existence of God itself is meaningless, if you can't prove, that he interacts.
So how do you prepare an experiment, to show God's interaction with this world?
@Jan Makovec The reason you don’t believe there is someone bigger than you and i is because you have limited vision and you can only see what’s i front of you.
The MASTERMIND Behind all this Creation does care about each and everyone of us that’s why the Most important thing is To Love one another in that way we won’t hurt anyone in no shape or form And we all can achieve this once we set our mind and our heart to live in love for all Creatures.
We are not here forever why not live in Love and be happy be mindful and kind to others until our breath is taken from us but that’s to hard for most they rather hate lie steal murder etc etc. life is so simple to enjoy but some atheist and some Christian make life seems so difficult. Everyone is trying to convince everyone this or that when the truth lives in us.
Shalom love and Guidance
@@johnmakovec5698 .... I disagree. Would you look at the Pyramids of Giza and say that they had no designer? Yet you will look at the human body, infinitely more complex, one of over 1 million species on Earth and has over 11 interconnecting systems that work together to live and reproduce and you want to say that there is no design to that?? That it is on Christians to prove that there's a designer for something that complex? Really? Or is it that you simply might not like what that Designer thinks or has to say because they might not do things the way that you think they should be done?
I believe the demons are that influence working with them.
That's about right... and it is a tedious, futile endeavor.
John 18 v38
Pilate said to Jesus, "What is truth?" And after he said this he went out to the Jews again and said to them, "I find no fault in him."
Although both Pilate & this atheist's reactions when discussing truth are similar in not waiting & listening to a reply, Pilate at least got part of the truth in proclaiming the innocence of Jesus.
Pilates story was changed to blame only Jews
Please be careful what you wish for. The episode you mention was one of the main complaints of Christians against the Jews and has lead to much suffering. Also, if Pilate had done the right thing, you wouldn't have a savior.
@@hansdemos6510 Pilate did do the right thing, unwittingly.
@@michaelwill7811 Like I said, please be careful what you wish for. If you were in Pilate's shoes, what would you do?
Say you are on a jury and you have to decide if the accused is guilty. You have listened to the witnesses, studied the evidence, and you really can't find this man guilty. What would you do in that situation? Would you vote that he is not guilty?
And what if the other jurors, who had been biased against the suspect the whole time, were adamant that they would render a guilty verdict, not perhaps on the basis of the evidence, but just because they had some other grievance against him, would you then change your verdict and agree with them just to fit in or to avoid their anger? And would that then be "the right thing"?
@@hansdemos6510 I didn't wish for anything. I made a simple assertion.
Real Man vs Child
Turek is rather childish.
And that detracts from my point how???
@@fdjt4132
_Turek is rather childish._
When it was the atheist who stomped away like a child. All you are proving is you don't know what being childish is.
@@fdjt4132 How is Turek childish? LMAO Accusing someone to be childish without coming up without an explanation is in fact childish, CHILD!
Scott was clearly very overly emotional about it, you can't learn in that state. I hope he finds healing.
"Atheism is not a world view."
If he can't recognize this statement defeats itself, he has already made up his mind and is guilty of what he accuses Mr Turek of. The Strawman Argument.
How is it self-defeating? I can see the angle of atheism not being a worldview.
Think about it. Atheists can range from Darwinists, Buddhists, Randists etc...If it is a worldview, why do atheists live so differently? the ONLY issue we are united on is that we have not been convinced that a god exists, and even then we could have heard had completely different arguments from those trying to convince us.
Is a-unicornism a worldview? No it is a single belief state on a single question.
@@Tinesthia ur missing the point, either your world view includes unicornism or it doesn't. All world views that include A unicornism have at least that in common, while at the same time u can't separate ur world view from ur unicorn stance because ur world view informs ur stance. If atheism wasn't a world view it would be the byproduct of the world view that doesn't believe there is (sufficient) evidence for the supernatural which is still a belief I.E. a world view. Sorry u can't escape that, there's no way around it.
arcguardian
You say I am missing the point while at the same time seem to be agreeing with me.
Like you say, your worldview informs your stance, and your stances can inform your world view. No single stance is a worldview though, including Theism or Atheism. So the statement “Atheism is not a worldview.” is correct and does not ‘defeat itself’ as David Scott suggests in the OP.
@@Tinesthia it is a world view, by definition. It's something u believe either way, which ultimately makes it a world view. If ur argument is it's more like a sub'world view I guess that might be more accurate but ur still taking a stance which is the point.
It would have helped if Frank's statement starting from 3:43 concluded that: Based on our abilities of perception and reason, it is therefore Impossible for God not to exist. As believing in an alternative contradicts the principles of our abilities which we trust. So then what is it that even makes you capable of Denial? And what is it that makes you capable of making a selfLess decision which goes against the desires or survival instincts of your own flesh? Then surely your primary existence is of principle, so not of your flesh. This alone should prove to you that God must exist in Principle (Invisible Spirit as described by The Christ). Which means that we currently have this freedom to learn and choose purely as test for Eternal Life.
There's no eternal life, all that lives must die
What about Muslims or any other religion. With this logic then Gods exist, why just one?
@@martinjugolin2087 there's a whole explanation about this after the tower of babel. I suggest listening to Michael heiser about his book called "the unseen realm". For a quick summary ig with absolutely no explanation: tower of babel, God separated the people, confused their languages and asigned rulers and judges, which I would assume to be angels or divine spirits, to watch over these nations. These divine spirits then decided to rebell against God and set themselves up as little gods for their nations. They're called elohims, which isn't a word to describe just the one true living God. I suggest you look more into what I've told you if you really care for knowing about your own question
@@steevefrost982 thats the thing, at the time when the tower of babel was being biuldt or even before, different languages already existed, specially in Europe, Scandinavia and the Americas
@@martinjugolin2087 The fun part is, that even a God exists, there are still MILES to go before you end up with the Christian God. There are instances of a God that will absolutely satisfy the "creation myth", but are diametrically different from the Christian God. My favorites are:
(1) The absent God. God created the universe in such a way that it runs to his satisfaction. Since God is omniscient, He cannot make any errors. Therefore, everything that happens is as intended. There is NO need for Him to interfere. Since He doesn't need to interfere, He is essentially absent, since there will never be any observation of this interference. Prayer, which in essence is petitioning the Lord because you're not satisfied how things are going, has no effect. For all means and purposes He might as well not be there;
(2) The evil God. God intentionally designed the universe to torture us. 99.999% of the universe will kill us instantly and horribly. He marooned us on a tiny rock, orbiting an ordinary sun, in an uninteresting corner of an average galaxy. He designed the world in such a way that all creatures are forced to incessantly fight for resources and consequently, survival. Most will perish. Perfection is built upon a huge pile of corpses. There is no reward in the end, the game is rigged, one cannot win - we will all perish. Added bonus, this one has a higher probability than the Christian God, since it completely solves the classical "Problem of evil in the world".
Ok, I concede. You got your God. Happy now?
That last explanation about the detectives was horrible. If detective A claims person X is the murderer, and detective B disagrees, then detective B only needs to argue a case as to why person X isn't the murderer. They don't need to find the actual murderer or a plausible secondary choice..Suggesting that it's necessary to even have a murder suspect "Y" that detective B must claim is the real murderer in order to debate is ludicrous. It's a logical fallacy. Essentially what's being suggested is that if you don't have an alternative suspect, then by default my suspect is likely to be the murder, and we should probably except that they are the murderer because we have no alternative suspect. This is dangerous self indulgent reasoning and has probably condemned countless innocent people to horrible unjust fates.
Exactly. You don't have to be that smart to see the issues with this guy's lack of logic.
I love how non believers like to ask the believers “why & how “ . But when the believers flip it on them, they fold and say “ IDK “. Well….. why debate then?? Exactly!!! Be a detective.
The point is that 'I don't know' is often the most honest and true answer anyone can give. It's far more reasonable to sit on the fence than be guilty of wishful thinking.
@@darcymr353 True but at the end of the day, no one TRULY Knows. So if we’re never in our lifetime ( meaning now ) not gonna TRULY know then I don’t see anything wrong with taking a stance and living by that belief. Either way, as a believer or not. Just take a stance and live accordingly. See believers generally just live as if God exist and they don’t waste time trying to convince non believers otherwise. They’ll do their Christian duty and try and spread the gospel. They don’t make it their mission to convince non believers. Atheist on the other hand have a hard time with this and they almost want confirmation and it’s an ongoing struggle for them. They make it their mission to disprove the Gospel, particularly Christianity and it’s something they’re always looking for confirmation on.