Religion Always Gets it Wrong

[@CosmicSkeptic]

Full debate is out tomorrow at 6pm UK time. Search “Premier Unbelievable” on TH-cam.

[@zakajh8782]

This is a must watch. Finally somebody that is indeed factual and logical to silence benny boi

[@draunt7]

RELEASE NAAAUUUGGGHHH!!!

[@michellavin]

Can't wait, greetings from Holland!

[@user-xh6rm8fd3w]

it must be a very challenging debate for ben since you aren’t a clueless college freshman

[@TheMilitantMazdakite]

Dude, my religion actually teaches communism, and inspired me to become a communist. (Mazdakism). Also, by your logic, I could say similar things about liberalism. Voltaire, John Locke, and other "enlighenment" thinkers helped to popularize racism.

[@Druid75]

Probably Ben’s first debate with a college graduate in YEARS

[@jamescarr4662]

Shapiro is just another very standard right wing Zionist fascist. Free Palestine.

[@Druid75]

@@jamescarr4662he’s definitely a warmonger

[@daikucoffee5316]

@@Druid75 He's a baby mutilator.

[@creed610]

​@@Druid75How was he a war monger?

[@lamboastonmartin8092]

@@creed610cuz ben shapiro is a cuck loser who can’t argue with anyone with any kind of intellect

[@xanderhuizingh2401]

That is probably the longest period of time that i have seen Ben Shapiro remain quiet.

[@rutomeds]

Ben Shapiro is smart, but Alex is smarter.

[@user-nf3qp1qd6y]

​@@rutomedsexcept, ben isn't.

[@aidanwerner7759]

​@@user-nf3qp1qd6y To say he's outright not smart is wild

[@bouzoukiman5000]

@@rutomeds benjamin is far from smart. Why would you think so?

[@reggrunow1460]

He is clearly highly intelligent and a hugely successful business person. His academic achievements alone highlight his intelligence and his ability to turn that into enormous wealth in business is a clear manifestation of that intellect. I don't agree with him on almost anything, but to suggest he isn't smart is absurd.

[@thistime35]

Watched the whole thing. Ben never “got upset.” It was a good conversation where both parties actually listened to the other and had thoughtful responses.

[@Rendell001]

I'm glad to hear it - shame that so many on this talkback don't seem to want to see it that way...

[@booperdee2]

the plebs bicker over winners

[@Ms.Amylia_Clenny]

Just because Ben was civil towards Alex O'Connor doesn't mean that he won the debate or was correct. It wasn't an argument, just a legitimate debate. Should we really be congradulating that base level?

[@EricK-nm2gg]

But where is the hate? Who’s winning? Who gotchaed who?

[@gildias2556]

@@Ms.Amylia_Clenny lol i dont think the original comment was claiming he did win? if you read many of the other comments here it seems to suggest that Ben would be rude or interrupt.... he is just pointing out that this did not happen.

[@carlb4741]

Ben's response to this was, " Well, do you condemn Hamas ?".

[@bakkudeku]

What a joke, wait, he's not a comedian? Boo!

[@glowco.717]

I watched it, and it actually wasn’t bad. Ben Shapiro is a bucket of mucus with a microphone he should have normally, but in this one he actually presents normal intelligent points and isn’t mega cringe

[@HeyNostradamus]

​​@@glowco.717that's somehow worse because it means he /does/ know how to act like a human.

[@glowco.717]

@@HeyNostradamus maybe it’s because it’s not as political, maybe it’s because he knows Alex will call him out if Ben talks to him like an he’s an idiot or says idiotic things, maybe its something the producer of this specific show asked him to do. Either way

[@Ms.Amylia_Clenny]

Yes, for much the same reasons as {pronoun} condemn the Judeo-Christian propaganda. Hamas is just as bad if not worse, yet that does nothing to strengthen your argument, your claims, that Christianity built Western society up & remains a good / positive influence. Hamas' existence is not a point in your favor.

[@andrewbutton2039]

Oooo, this looks fun. Ben's finally got a debate opponent that knows his onions, isn't confused by flashy bullshit vocabulary, and will absolutely call you out on rewording questions.

[@thesprawl2361]

"yes, but you have to bear in mind that..." _(proceeds to babble like the aliens in Mars Attacks)_

[@Atamastra]

Oh you better believe that Alex knows his onions. He knows his onions well 😋

[@ssj4gogeta130]

Look closely nebby shabibo looks scared AF!

[@ZED-PV]

​@@Atamastrabetter than an onion farmer!

[@pedronunez1265]

There are many world class debaters out there that ben has never debated. People like sam Harris who would have destroyed him in a religious debate or the late Christopher Hitchens who could have destroyed ben without breaking a sweat. But ben isnt that stupid to take on people like that.

[@L.I.T.H.I.U.M]

No one can handle bearded Alex. No one.

[@h0rn3d_h1st0r1an]

True. He looks metal as fuck.

[@jackallenproductions]

Definitely a lot better than the mustachioed version.

[@user-ij4hp5nn6g]

Beardex, The 6th Horseman

[@naturoganism1641]

@@user-ij4hp5nn6g😂

[@kgaugelophago2342]

Modern day Socrates

[@vinceb85]

👏👏👏this is why ben very rarely debates with people of this caliber. Good on you! We need more of this

[@nono7105]

More of what? Fucking retarded questions?

[@Glacierlune]

Ya but they know, so they run scared. Idk why Ben let this debate happen. The other avenues must be drying up/getting harder to look good.

[@dagnabbit6187]

But check out TJ the Amazing Atheist shredding Ben Shapiro when BS did an essay attacking people who didn’t want to have children.

[@beezzarro]

​@@dagnabbit6187what do I search? Just TJ vs Ben Shapiro?

[@TheUntio]

Ben very rarely debates at all. He does the American version, which is generally just two people monologuing their opinion with the occasional ad hominem thrown in for good measure.
I enjoy him as entertainment but he very often punches down for his own superiority.

[@jamesmcinnis208]

Smooth British delivery vs. Shrill squawk

[@livingart2576]

If you’d watched it he whole debate you would see a very civil conversation in which both men where respectful and actually agreed with many of each others points. I wish more debates were like this.

[@jamesmcinnis208]

@livingart2576 Oh, did I say that I didn't watch the whole thing? Did I say they didn't agree? A person who cared might wonder by what means you drew those conclusions. I don't.

[@kravan5063]

@@jamesmcinnis208 Probably because you're calling one a shrill

[@jfr1995]

​@@kravan5063 I'm just gonna leave the description of the word 'shrill' for you below. Maybe you're confusing it with the word 'shill'?
shrill
/ʃrɪl/
adjective
(of a voice or sound) high-pitched and piercing.
"a shrill laugh"

[@kravan5063]

@@jfr1995 i was an idiot and read it as shill, you are correct. my b

[@jaymarshall845]

This is what happens when Ben has to face an actual intellectual rather than a hysterical student.

[@UnconventionalReasoning]

Shapiro 'wins' against students because he controls the setting.

[@savagegamer2292]

Can you relax, ben hasn't even responded.

[@AlexIsPsychotic]

​@@savagegamer2292he has, and it was not really appealing

[@slicric131]

Truth

[@savagegamer2292]

@@AlexIsPsychotic I'll be the judge of that.

[@joefather6084]

Ben's sat there tweaking trying not to interrupt him 😂

[@senorpepper3405]

I'm not the biggest Shapiro fan but it obviously has been cut and edited, my friend.🤦🏻‍♂️

[@joefather6084]

@@senorpepper3405 So is almost any piece of media online, do you think Ben doesn't edit his shows?

[@senorpepper3405]

​@joefather6084 c'mon now man that's exactly what I'm talking about. Holy hell. It's edited to make him look like he's trippin. Do you not see that or are you in such denial that you refuse to see it😂 it's crazy when you're neutral, the things you see...

[@Remmyrouser]

@@senorpepper3405yea people can’t engage in conversation anymore without people losing their shit

[@MrGgabber]

It was edited 🙄

[@erccdang]

Non Christian here. Pretending that Christianity hasn't evolved dramatically over 2000 years is a pretty ridiculous position to take.

[@Playboyy1985]

Christian here. To pretend that the Bible should still be used as some form of moral compass that stands the test of time is a pretty ridiculous position to take.

[@erccdang]

@Playboyy1985 yes and no. Arguably the entire point of Christianity is following the teachings of christ (thus the name) and breaking away from the old ways described in the old testament (approximately the first 75% of their bible). So yes even baked into the religion itself is a rejection of taking a literal interpretation of the old testament as instructions. Pretty much the first 75% of the book is about how terrible life was for everyone, genocide, mass enslavement rape etc...

[@lesmoregibbjr.416]

Ben lookin’ like, “Damn, this dude is actually RIGHT, though!”

[@AnnoyingAllie3]

But he's not? This man doesn't know anything about religion

[@SMMore-bf4yi]

@@AnnoyingAllie3
Religion is something practiced irrespective of what it is & any practice condoning immoral indecent acts should be called out for exactly what it is rather than condoning to justify any form of continuance… if you love the Lords teachings you would agree, do unto others

[@AnnoyingAllie3]

@@SMMore-bf4yi I'm not very religious, but this video points out no actual criticisms of religion.

[@jamespotter779]

@@SMMore-bf4yiToo bad if you're an atheist you have no right to call out anything as morality comes from religion🤷‍♂️

[@jamespotter779]

He wasn't he was dishonest

[@3katsime]

Ben realizing he’s going to get absolutely cooked when he’s not debating a random person who’s less than half his age

[@jamesdettmann94]

I mean Alex is barely half his age but he's very educated so yes Ben will get cooked

[@Salikino]

Ben specifically looks for people who haven’t graduated college and aren’t as well prepared because anyone else is too hard for him.

[@punkisinthedetails1470]

I thought you were going to say half is size or speed.

[@punkisinthedetails1470]

Alex's suit wins.

[@design-dwg5785]

Ben’s just dying to call him an anti-Semite

[@k_Why]

Holy shit i have to give ben shapiro props here, never seen him let someone make a good point without interrupting, let alone such a good one

[@deldarel]

Yeah, props to Alex for keeping this flow and commanding the attention. At this rate he might even take Piers Morgan on. The unflinching interruptor.

[@juandeleon1665]

You do know the video was edited

[@k_Why]

@@juandeleon1665 ? I watched the whole debate, there might have been a few cuts, but i certainly didnt notice them. At almost no point did either of them cut the other off, and if they did it wasn't them being rude

[@juandeleon1665]

@@k_Why so you really believe Ben dint have a response

[@k_Why]

@@juandeleon1665 can you not read?

[@Lubble-]

Ben Shapiro doesn't debate....he moans, calls people stupid and then acts like he's the superior victor in the situation

[@Rendell001]

Well that sounds like an unbiased and balanced opinion right there...

[@Glacierlune]

​@@Rendell001
Sometimes being accurate and honest means being biased for truth and agenst falsehoods.

[@Rendell001]

@@Glacierlune It certainly sounds like you have a pre existing bias and are determined to view things in that way.

[@Glacierlune]

@@Rendell001 thank you to admitting that you prefer to lie.

[@Rendell001]

@@Glacierlune thank you for showing your bizarre form of logic.

[@OBGynKenobi]

Ben isn't used to debating intellectuals, he usually debates internet screamers so he can look smart.

[@bennettfloyd2715]

The look on Ben Shapiro's face is absolutely priceless!

[@brunosm.l2267]

yes, in your imagination xD

[@joerdim]

I can confirm that.

[@colinriches1519]

It's the "What have I done?!"look.

[@RSorkin]

The look in his eyes could burn the world to ash

[@mattreigada3745]

If Ben was able to form a fist I’d almost believe he was about to punch Alex.

[@Chelaxim]

Ben looks mad as hell in this video.

[@deeess6027]

Thats his natural facial expression. He has RBF, Resting Ben Face.

[@thatslottonuts]

Poor Ben. He's just confused.

[@archapmangcmg]

BS insane? It's more likely than you think.
But yeah, he's mad that anyone is calling out his own lies to his face.

[@D4n1t0o]

He always looks angry when focused. It's a good sign, it means Alex made him actually try. Something he's not used to with American college students.

[@djarmstrong23]

Well yeah he is used to talking non stop

[@shanesmj1]

You can see Ben thinking ... I'd rather go back to talking with dumb people and not someone this intelligent.

[@AnnoyingAllie3]

:/ The guy who says myths about religion... Is intelligent... Yeah

[@shanesmj1]

@AnnoyingAllie3
Ben would probably enjoy talking with you about how accurate the Bible has been throughout history... 🙄 🤦

[@AnnoyingAllie3]

@@shanesmj1 I mean, it's mostly metaphorical, but tells a pretty accurate story of history.
I don't think Ben Shapiro or me can agree on the other parts of the Bible, since Jews don't read that Jesus stuff.
Jesus Christ is also a historical figure, so at least somewhat historically accurate

[@shanesmj1]

​@AnnoyingAllie3
The Bible was written a CENTURY after the supposed death of Jesus... THAT WOULD BE LIKE WRITING A STORY ABOUT SOMEONE FROM 1924... Even a limited amount of critical thinking suggests that is very suspect. AND having accurate accounting from word of mouth is crazy - ever play the telephone game as a kid?

[@AnnoyingAllie3]

@@shanesmj1 :/ That's not exactly what I meant, Jesus was a real person, and if you read Genesis, it makes sense, at least when it tells the story of the beginning
You still have a point tho, so we really were agreeing this whole time

[@gusjackson3658]

Morality evolves, leaving traditionalist struggling to justify their beliefs.

[@jonjonboi3701]

What’s wrong with being a traditionalist

[@gusjackson3658]

@@jonjonboi3701 intellectually you get left behind.

[@donneuner2883]

Ben has the look of someone who is used to speaking to MAGA rubes and now realizes he’s in way over his head.

[@RuminatingRaptor]

Ben’s brain has stalled, being in the presence of someone who is actually intelligent.

[@adamchristensen8566]

Not even ben can talk fast enough to get out of this one

[@ollikoskiniemi6221]

​@@RuminatingRaptordo you all understand that you're being petty and silly in a redditor kind of way? Ben didn't even respond in the video, and you're all sh*tting on a person who didn't get to defend himself.

[@mattreigada3745]

@@ollikoskiniemi6221Shapiro’s retort has nothing to do with the point @donneuner2883 was assailing Ben for, and quite frankly Shapiro has made a career of one-sided dunking on college students who didn’t get a chance to respond. So you might have to forgive everyone who thinks you’re picking your spot poorly, I’d die on a better hill.

[@ollikoskiniemi6221]

@@mattreigada3745 Y'all are being pathetic when you attack a persons character and intelligence as a response to him not even getting the chance to do anything. Unfair and unreasonable. Fatherless behavior.

[@ayyawar]

I find it as insulting that humans can’t be moral without religion.

[@ChickenTenders388]

Morality is subjective without religiob

[@fluttercoat3899]

Well your morality will be traced back to a religion, your morality is not your own, but rather shaped by friends and family, who in turn were shaped by their own friends and family etc

[@jamesc3505]

@@ChickenTenders388: We all have to make some moral assumption to base morality on. Believing that there is a god that commands things is not enough. You also have to assume that we are morally obliged to do whatever a god commands.

[@gamingterrain3703]

​@jamesc3505 that makes so sense. How can you base whats moral off of assumptions? If morality is subjective then how can you even trust your own faculties of reasoning? How can you be sure whats trully moral if its a mere assumption? There absolutely needs to be an objective arbiter or morality that governs whats trully right and trully wrong. Otherwise you have no basis for believing something like murder is bad since its only an assumption that you make.

[@jamesc3505]

@@gamingterrain3703: I don't think morality's subjective. I think people are objectively and intrinsically valuable, and that's the basis for morality. I just recognise I can't prove it, as no-one can prove their moral beliefs.

[@pot4tolord]

ooo thats a good point, Christians can't be claiming Galileo now when their predecessors were wanting him tortured for his blasphemy

[@madmank7881]

That wasn't the reason they wanted to torment him it was because he pissed off the Pope.

[@Zal0vid]

​@@madmank7881that will do it

[@TheLreez]

@@madmank7881 Yeah, they didn't mind his theories, it's just that he published those theories in a book where he created a thinly-veiled representation of the Pope, made this character disagree with his self-insert OC, and then named the "not-Pope" basically "Mr. Big Stupid Idiot Guy"

[@trinitygodsaint]

Wait can’t you say the same thing about white Americans concerning black Americans when considering slavery?

[@pot4tolord]

@trinitygodsaint hmm not entirely sure, though I think a lot of the accomplishments of black people in the past were done in spite of the mistreatment from white people and not because of it. So I'd say it probably still fits

[@brianbarber5401]

Let’s all remember that Shapiro has not only confessed to but endorsed not debating in good faith.

[@Ender1989_]

What you mean ? Where did he confess?

[@ellie-kc4kj]

@@Ender1989_ This is only a guess, but he wrote a non-fiction book called 'How to debate Leftists and destroy them' (or something along those lines)

[@blakehansen5434]

You can’t debate in good faith unless you want to lose

[@Ender1989_]

@@blakehansen5434 i don’t think it’s true. The goal of debatting is to attain truth or to defend truth (or what we are conviced to be the truth). In theory at least. In reality of course the ego of men is on the way and transform often a debate in an attempt to « win ». And in that point of view you can win a debate without in fact defending any truth or even when defending something totally wrong. And then when you know you are defending something wrong and try to « win » nonetheless it becomes perversion. Beyond winning or losing, being honest and fair in exposing your thinking and convictions is a prerequisite. But when you lower yourself to just « win a debate » and allow yourself to being dishonest, your word has no value and you already lost. It’s just a matter of time before the people who listened to you sees you as the fool and the imposter you were all this time.

[@starfishsystems]

​@@Ender1989_
I agree that it's not true, but I'd characterize the principles of debate in a somewhat different way.
The main purpose of a debate is to present two competing arguments so that they can each be fairly weighed ON THEIR MERITS.
One of the merits of a good argument is certainly that it truthfully presents its evidence and draws reasonable inferences from it. (This is the part that relates to "good faith.") Information intended to mislead is not a part of a good argument, nor is flawed inference.
Rhetoric is another aspect of an argument to be weighed in a debate. An argument should be clear, concise, unambiguous, coherent, and easy to navigate. And it should be persuasive without being manipulative. Conversely, fallacy is not an acceptable form of rhetoric. It's very poor debating style, and it has lost many a debate that might otherwise have had some chance of success.
However, there's bound to be some blurring between persuasive rhetorical color, let's call it, and misrepresentation, or between the degree of emphasis and the outright burying of pertinent information.
This is where I think you and I differ in what we regard as fair debate. I don't think that a debater necessarily has an obligation to draw equal attention to the facts and arguments both for and against his position. It's why we have two parties to a debate, after all. Otherwise, one would be sufficient.
For example, Be It Resolved that cats make better pets than dogs. If I'm arguing for the resolution, I might list all the great things about cats and all the bad things about dogs that I can think of. I might acknowledge that, hey, there are conversely bad things about cats and good things about dogs, but explain to the audience that I have left it to my opponent to present them. This is perfectly clear rhetoric. It involves no deception or false inference, but neither am I obliged to do any of the heavy lifting for my opponent!
It may sometimes turn out that the most favorable argument for my position touches on where the opposing position has some strength, but shows that mine is nevertheless a better solution. Sometimes it makes my position clearer or more resonant to take on this issue proactively, rather than waiting to react in case my opponent brings it up. This would be an example of making a concession up front, getting ahead of a potential weakness, and handling it coherently. I am being candid, but in a manner of my choosing. The point where you and I may disagree is that I'm not obliged to do this.

[@T3vearris]

God that felt good. Ben is a weasel that relies on fast talking to blur the listeners ability to keep track of anything. He must've thought he was going to think he could walk all over this "kid" and got absolutely decimated. Love it. Absolutely love it. What's that Ben? FACTS DON'T CARE ABOUT YOUR FEELINGS??

[@akilawho]

You good?

[@mra4955]

u ok

[@tecategpt1959]

the debate hasn't been released yet man chill

[@ArthurPrince03]

Someone is triggered. Must have been toasted by Ben alot in the past

[@RuminatingRaptor]

@@ArthurPrince03
Ben couldn’t toast a marshmallow. 😂

[@albertthomas25]

Facts don't care about your feelings, Ben 😂

[@y.a.aa.y.a1382]

Come on man😂😂😂😂

[@destinybaron5115]

Seems you are using your feeling to talk about facts ..
Ben comment is still in gold

[@KrwiomoczBogurodzicy]

“None of us can choose what our ideas imply.” - David Deutsch, _The Beginning of Infinity_

[@SinbadAkina]

​@@destinybaron5115glug, glug?

[@jeremyinvictus]

What "fact" are you referring to?

[@user-mw3uk7fu1x]

It was at that moment that ben felt something he'd never felt for a man before

[@bizooku]

So nice to listen to someone who believes they have the answers. Arrogance at its best.

[@kickassgreek]

i'm surprised you debated him, since his debate tactic is the gish gallop.

[@alexanderfloyd5099]

Alex keep Piers Morgan in check when he gish gallops. He certainly can take on someone who only debates college freshmen.

[@jakubport7361]

I mean he's hell of an opponent

[@kickassgreek]

@@jakubport7361 he's a pigeon on a chessboard

[@MrE073]

​@@jakubport7361not really, only fools follow benny

[@blueredingreen]

@@jakubport7361 Trying to make sense of the mess that comes out of Shapiro's mouth is "hell" indeed.

[@MaleINTP]

"Religion has not civilized man, Man has civilized religion"
- Robert Green Ingersoll

[@kaylow225]

Always upvote Ingersoll

[@alans98989]

The funny thing is that both are probably true. Religion was our initial attempt at creating codified rules, which was a step up from moral anarchy. Civilization subsequently progressed toward a more rational and evidence-based form of ethics, which led to religious influence being eroded.

[@MaleINTP]

@@alans98989 there were always rules. Better or worse ones. It's with the idea of eternal, unchanging ones that the essence of totalitarianism really begins...

[@Petticca]

@alan98989
I would say it was more like an attempt to put into place _the_ grounding rule for why the leader of the nation's rule was to be heeded without question, by establishing an inscrutable higher authority, that places the leader there. To disobey, or challenge the leader is to challenge this nebulous ultimate authority and he would wipe your people from the planet if you pissed him off..
So, do as the leader demands.

[@ACuriousChild]

​@@alans98989
"We" haven't created anything without the explicit permission of GOD ALMIGHTY ... "we" could not even breath let alone form a thought or lift a brick for once IF it wasn't for the EXPLICIT PURPOSE and based on the explicit WISDOM MIGHT AND GRACE OF GOD ALMIGHTY!
Your comment is the gospel of THE SYNAGOGUE OF SATAN in a nutshell ... BRAINWASHED, INDOCTRINATED into man's mind since EVE followed THE SERPENT'S PLOT of fear of death and ADAM fell for it in THE GARDEN OF EDEN ... continuing to this very day...
THE WAY THE TRUTH AND THE LIFE ONLY - THE ONE AND ONLY INCARNATION OF GOD ALMIGHTY AND SHEPHERD AND SAVIOUR THE LORD JESUS CHRIST AND THE HOLY SPIRIT - AMEN HALLELU-YAH!

[@cyrussoxlegion]

You're awesome Alex, you're so damn well spoken, and you understand the subjects involved about as good as anybody possibly can.

[@EdginLegend]

This guy answered his own question. Rather than other religions and cultures that remain stagnant, the West is a self-improving, self-correcting, progressive civilization, and when we get things wrong, we get things wrong, and when we get things right, we get things right. What's so hard to comprehend?

[@humangarbage6559]

It's nice seeing a clip where Ben is the one who can't get a word in for once

[@Mew__]

Isn't this a debate, where the rule is to let your opponent speak?

[@tatherva7387]

​@@Mew__If you mean a formal debate, with actual timers and a mediator and a set structure, yeah. But this is informal, more a discussion than a true debate, and when people say he can't get a word in they're speaking figuratively not literally. Interrupting someone mid-thought without some timer cutting them off first would not be allowed in a formal debate either. Him failing to do something underhanded when in an informal discussion style debate simply because there's no mediator to call him out for it isn't unfair in the slightest.

[@Mew__]

@@tatherva7387 No, I mean a debate as in a discussion between two opposing parties with a moderator in between to ensure long-form thoughts without interruption. It proves literally nothing that Alex keeps speaking because that's the format.

[@tatherva7387]

@@Mew__ I mean, the fact he tried to interrupt Alex and failed to do so isn't nothing. But yeah, there's nothing wrong with Alex continuing his thought despite Ben trying to use an underhanded tactic. Besides the point though. Point is, that's clearly not the case at all because if it were, Ben would've been called out for trying to interrupt in the first place. He didn't stop talking because of any format. He stopped talking because he tried, and failed, to interrupt right at the critical point of someone's statement so it'd sound disjointed and poorly thought out to the audience, something pretty common for Ben. He tried to use an underhanded tactic and looked foolish because that doesn't work when people know better. He'd be able to get a word in if he was waiting until the end of the other person's point and then actually addressed that head on in a convincing way. Obviously this is too short to show if that happens or not, but given what I've seen of Ben in the past, I'm doubtful. He's known for this kind of stuff.

[@Mew__]

@@tatherva7387 As someone who has watched most Shapiro Q&As and interviews since 2016, your characterisation of him is completely wrong. I don't know where you got it, but it is a figment of your imagination.
You repeatedly assert that he is purposefully trying to deploy "underhanded tactics" (cringe) and aiming to silence Alex to prevent a good point from being made. Not only has he not done this in other talks, but also, it is weird to assume that Alex would just not resume his point afterwards since this conversation is an hour long.
Why assume the worst from those you don't know? When you're excited to talk to someone, do you not pick in on their thoughts with what pops up in your head? Very strange to assume he is being malicious whilst it is way more likely (and way more characteristic of him) that he is just engaged in conversation...

[@Taijifufu]

"...except tha--" and Alex just keeps on rolling. 👍

[@coffeefrog]

He’s learned from Piers Morgan to not let people interrupt him ever again.

[@christophertaylor9100]

Yeah that's how you "win" debates on the left: you prevent your opponent from responding

[@Jamie-js3qw]

he rolls, it's true, like a camera.

[@jackgillies5638]

@@christophertaylor9100what makes you think this is a ‘Left vs Right’ debate?

[@christophertaylor9100]

@@jackgillies5638 Tell me he's not a leftist.

[@cyberneticsiren]

Alex is so fucking great. It’s must be really hard to be interesting, level headed, and correct about everything constantly

[@AnnoyingAllie3]

Except he says religion says women are lesser than men, LGBT people are bad, and that the earth is in the middle of the universe.
These are all myths, no religion really believes a lot of this

[@Jabba-le-feminist-hating-Hutt]

It’s very difficult to understand how so many people would be atheist when it’s so painfully obvious that religious societies work better than atheist ones

[@lesktube]

The secular world has given us terrible evils as well.
The issue is human beings.

[@jakubport7361]

Damn! You and Ben debating religion would be absolute blast to hear. Is there a full discussion available?

[@InShadowsLinger]

th-cam.com/video/yspPYcJHI3k/w-d-xo.htmlsi=oTh1ULrw051rXkrz

[@theGameClown93]

View the pinned comment

[@jakubport7361]

@@theGameClown93 just saw it, thanks 👍

[@tim40gabby25]

Some questions are too long.. This is a good example.

[@samcrowther3942]

I got goose bumps listening to this. Just wow. I love how he speaks quietly but eloquently so you know he's intelligent but not arrogant

[@zeroglitch1310]

Truly did not expect the camera to cut to Ben fucking Shapiro. That was whiplash

[@SevereFamine]

Why?

[@anolive7535]

ben shapiro jumpscare

[@maxermrh1979]

Thank you SO MUCH for saying that to his face. It's great to see him squirm while he tries to develop a strategy to avoid what he recognizes is a really hard argument.

[@-gemberkoekje-5547]

You articulated something i never could

[@Minty322]

ben shapiro finally having to sit and listen and not interrupt is entertaining enough on its own

[@stochastic42]

He doesn't have to not interrupt. That's class you're seeing.

[@patt5085]

@@stochastic42implying his entire career before this was classless

[@stochastic42]

@@patt5085 Or you could watch any of his interviews and learn the facts!

[@4maz1ng_king]

@@patt5085😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@LuMartinez001]

That part 😂

[@oldpossum57]

Ben Shapiro is not a serious thinker.

[@UnconventionalReasoning]

Ben Shapiro is not serious and is not a thinker.

[@joerdim]

After this debate he might give serious thought if the paychecks from conservative organizations are really worth it.

[@oscargr_]

​@@joerdimDon't be silly., he decided long ago that the paychecks are worth it.

[@truthiz2805]

He is most def a decent right wing thinker.

[@oscargr_]

@@truthiz2805 That's a good one.

[@Novarcharesk]

I do so love the phrase ‘practicing homosexuals’ 😂 I’m a gay guy, and I’ve never thought of my sexual life as ‘practicing my homosexuality’ 😂

[@mcbuckets5457]

The coolest thing about this is that he's throwing out facts & truth and of course he studied it and also looked up the sources himself to be ready for this argument

[@eerohongisto821]

The way Ben patiently listens to the whole argument without interruption is absolutely beautiful to see! It actually made me want to hear out his response.

[@archapmangcmg]

I mean, Ben tries to interrupt but fails. Admittedly, that makes it even better for me.

[@wesleydahar7797]

Yes, but after making several points in a row, it was not rude for Ben to try and respond. At some point he needs to get a word in. It's a common tactic to make many points and never give the opponent a chance to go back and respond to them.

[@archapmangcmg]

@@wesleydahar7797 Ben himself uses that tactic so that makes it fair game to use on him.

[@wesleydahar7797]

@@archapmangcmg If that's your standard for civil discourse, then eventually you'll get a shouting match.
Regardless, I've not seen Ben resort to underhanded tactics like that. Do you have any well known evidence for that?

[@archapmangcmg]

@@wesleydahar7797 Most of the "debates" I've seen him in, he talks over people as a matter of course, interrupting whenever he feels like and not letting them rebut.
My standard is that if you use a tactic, so can your counterpart. The Golden Rule.

[@michaelmorgan2584]

There’s so much depth into the Bible that unless your drawn you will never get it and your not supposed to. It was written for you but you won’t care. Issue is no mortal man can know who is or is not Only the One who breathed it.

[@tsuki_avocado]

It's so satisfying seeing him quiet, god.

[@aoshishinamori2037]

Christopher Hitchens expressed this exact sentiment in a discussion/debate about life after death:
"Religion now comes to us in this smiley-faced, ingratiating way, because it's had to give so much ground and because we know so much more. But you have no right to forget the way it behaved when it was strong, and when it really did believe that it had God on its side."

[@njorogan]

Alex is so much like him

[@kelvinloeb812]

That was an awesome debate. To paraphrase Sam Harris " I was telling my wife that I worried about ruining a perfectly fine Tuesday evening for the people watching as we are talking about something no one can prove. It will be boring. My wife told me Well Hitch will be there and absolutely nothing is boring with Hitch around." I think that is the essence of what he said, off the top of my head lol

[@adamherskine8594]

This is the problem i have with Ben's position in this debate, someone who genuinely believes that the torah is God given should steelman the argument, and say yes this IS good and moral, and use that starting position to build the structure of answers to alex, instead of chickening out and saying slavery is wrong, find out why the torah says what it says about slavery according to the jewish tradition which claims to be a beacon of morality. I would say from a logical perspective, how does alex know with certainty that slavery is bad. His feelings? I agree the type of brutal slavery in america was evil, but is all slavery the same idea. Dont be so defensive ben and examine.

[@FactStorm]

The problem is religion will never concede it lost ground, it will always invoke denialism or claim allegory and that skeptics are taking things out of context

[@ryanhoffman5477]

Fahrenheit is better than Celsius!
Miles are better than kilometers!
Theists are better than atheist! 🇺🇸

[@cosmicprison9819]

The term “cultural appropriation” is nowhere more fitting than when it comes to the Abrahamic religions.

[@h0rn3d_h1st0r1an]

I'm an aspiring linguist and I always tell my friends, "Hey, you know, the English word "God," and Gott which are both Germanic, and Dios, Deus, Dieu, etc. are all originally Indo-European terms for a Semitic God?"

[@Insane3OB]

​@@h0rn3d_h1st0r1anWhat is semitic?

[@senecavermeulen8110]

what do you mean by this? it spread throughout the roman empire just like any other contemporary mystery cult or religious movement. it was then forced on people from outside the former roman empire by treaty, conquest, political marriage, etc. occasionally it was spread by peaceful mercenary work. how does the history of christianity have anything to do with the negative connotation of cultural appropriation? cultural appropriation is people in a position of power claiming a practice or art for their own gain or entertainment. you might be able to apply that to some people further west in the roman empire that initially adopted it “for fun” (from a modern perspective) until it was persecuted. however, christianity after 400 AD spread from regions with lots of influence to areas with less influence. conversion was often top-down, with political leaders adopting christianity to improve their status and forcing it onto their subjects
pretty much the same applies to islam
christianity being forced on european pagans, native americans, indigenous russians, asians, etc. was not cultural appropriation. ‘cultural appropriation’ seems like a pretty dim and oblique view of interactions between greeks and jews in the levant in the first centuries CE, too

[@KyrieEleison530]

Yea and you know that’s called an etymology fallacy

[@h0rn3d_h1st0r1an]

@@KyrieEleison530 I just think it’s neat. A bastardized form of Jupiter turned into the Romance language name for a god from the Semitic World.

[@kinsumandal2467]

Ben is feeling uncomfortable cause he is finally having to use his Brain after years.

[@jonjonboi3701]

You are wrong. Ben Shapiro does use his brain unlike most left wing people

[@PP-pq9db]

O'Connor is trying to be this generations hitch and I'm here for it

[@Rendell001]

At least Alex actually has empathy for others... let's hope his ego doesn't get the better of him as he gets older.

[@williamcartedge5583]

I think Hitch would have called a spade a spade, or a man a man

[@Rendell001]

@@williamcartedge5583 oh, no argument there, he didn’t hold back on his opinions…

[@lordoftheflies7024]

​@@williamcartedge5583Yea, but he wouldn't have cozied up with fanatics to make that point. It's cute to see the same people who deny gender ideology are also believers in Virgin births

[@williamcartedge5583]

@@lordoftheflies7024 i don't believe in a virgin birth

[@GeneralSpooda]

Watching bennie boi try and get a word in but impotent too is great

[@jonathanyes112]

I much prefer it to those (all too commonly as well) try to override the other. He seemed to stop himself in order for Alex to finish his point, more respect to him for that

[@ryanalamo3851]

Yea you're just describing Ben being polite enough to hear the full argument. A good sign this is a classy debate

[@jabrokneetoeknee6448]

This clip has a lot of cuts… so we don’t actually know if Ben got a word in. I hope the real conversation was as respectful as it’s presented here

[@philmckenna5709]

I am neutral in this, but you do realise that this is edited, don't you?

[@jonjonboi3701]

What a typical liberal thing to even say

[@KirklandRed100s]

We don’t believe those things are wrong

[@zigora3]

Love to see this guy debate Andrew Wilson

[@sgsupreme17]

Ben’s face when presented with factual logic and secular reasoning.

[@dragonmartijn]

I think Ben just dislikes “judeo-christian” as a concept 😂

[@sgsupreme17]

@@dragonmartijn in part yes, I agree

[@SevereFamine]

“Secular reasoning” is an oxymoron if I’ve ever heard one.

[@sgsupreme17]

@@SevereFamine explain yourself Mr Trump

[@wesley6442]

If only, IF ONLY he asked Ben about all the magic tricks in the bible, how the hell does one defend belief in magic in their book of make believe? LOL for real, talking donkeys, talking snakes.. give me a break, religion is such a joke

[@jonathan4189]

Alex is the new Hitch.

[@jamesedmonds7519]

Except he's polite with it which makes it even more difficult for the idiot that thinks he's wrong.

[@justiceasare8735]

I love how he presents his argument

[@ilya4759]

Religion is like music. It evolves and is neither right nor wrong in absolute terms

[@Ray_Mac]

Can't believe Shapiro kept his trap shut almost that entire time

[@Xztjh53]

Trap. Lol. I call it his beak. He, sorry but i cant help noticing, sounds like one of those talking parrots.

[@MohamadQadir-jb5yb]

chill

[@tannakaobi1]

It's not like they have even tried to hide the cuts. This is a trailer...

[@JUAN_OLIVIER]

He has done plenty of debates where his opponents had the chance to speak. What makes this one so special?

[@kronos936]

Ben aint makin' it out this one unscathed

[@silvioi9061]

Alex is synchronising with Ben’s speed in this video

[@hellomate639]

I was with you in this, until I had a spiritual experience. It was like a perfect understanding was uploaded into my mind in a dream, like a word that spoke perfect understanding into me.
It said something like "the light of Truth is shines so brightly in experiences like these that the untruth within the limited mind of the person experiencing such things also shines brighter. This is why religions are so different, yet full of Truth."
That came from within through prayer, not from some religious text.

[@anmolt3840051]

"Judeo-Christian" is a very recent invention of Conservatives

[@FactStorm]

American religious conservatives who want to distance Islam being abrahamic, while including judaism only to support the modern day state of israel as well as safeguard their jewish savior. Its all too convenient by these delusional snakes. Nobody is dumber than a religious person..

[@joelanderson5285]

What? the term goes back hundreds of years.

[@Covertfun]

Geologically recent 😂

[@anmolt3840051]

@@joelanderson5285 no it doesn't

[@joelanderson5285]

@@anmolt3840051 The term goes back to the early 1800s so yah that is 200+ years.

[@draunt7]

Holy shit this looks amazing

[@JEBEDIAH8D]

not being emotionally attached to the debate is the best way to get your point across. this was a great conversation. to often you get people who are to emotionally invested that they have to shout over people to get the point across if you have to shout, your argument most likely has some gapping flaws.

[@questioneverything2845]

Alex O'Connor is someone to look up to here. He is so eloquent and thought-provoking. He is so impressive. He went on a journey to arrive at his conclusions. I admire and respect his calm and calculated demeanor. His strong and powerful stance here is remarkably grounded. That is a hard debate to engage in. I would love to have a conversation with him as our backgrounds are similar as far as growing up in a religious home.

[@Kaan-wx7zg]

Dude just bodied god

[@alspezial2747]

God is not the same as religion

[@NotASeriousMoose]

​@@alspezial2747No, that concept is even dumber than religion itself. With religion you can at least control the idiots in society.

[@Sebbir]

I feel like our boy Alex is going to bring out the cosmicslap in this one

[@missypead2293]

He isn't for woke culture, though

[@magneto44]

@@missypead2293the only people who use “woke” in normal conversation are the people who don’t know what the word means 🙄

[@alexandersam8417]

It's like a Warden claiming credit for the works of his prisoners.

[@emmanuelokafor2598]

Alex is a gift tbh👏👏

[@lastsurprise8225]

Ben is lagging trying to keep up with Alex’s actual intellect 💀

[@maxspringer01]

definitely no lag in this debate from either side. Both kept up right in step with the other.

[@lastsurprise8225]

@@maxspringer01 debateable

[@RifleEyez]

Yeah, imagine the Harvard grad and syndicated columnist at 17 struggling with Alex lol

[@maxspringer01]

@@lastsurprise8225 meh, it's more readily observable than anything. They both kept up with each other, fully understanding what the other was saying at every step, or asking for quick clarification or examples if necessary. Whether their reasons and arguments in response fully addressed the other's objections can be debated, sure, but as far as keeping up, yes, each definitely kept up with the other.

[@ironmind258]

don't lie

[@Regrettedink39]

The only person i have seen so far who has been able to actively make ben shapiro speechless. And i'm all here for it as an avid fan of alex

[@wesley6442]

There was one moment early on that Shapiro was looking a little bewildered, his gears were really turning at some of the stuff Alex was saying lol!

[@dillpickleboy1128]

this is a short that cuts out before his response lol its kinda unfair to call him speechless.

[@Regrettedink39]

@@dillpickleboy1128 I watched most of the video and ben didnt gish gallop nearly as much as usual. And he pretty much stayed quiet for most of the debate

[@MicahMicahel]

except this clip was all wrong info by Alex.. so maybe Ben is jsust a bad defender of the faith? For instance, ownership of people? the bible doesn't condone slavery. It just gives some rules on what would be evil. The quran actually condones it to the point where sexxx slavery is legal. iN fact Islamic countries practice it now, some of them. Leftists love islam but hate CHsrainity. Why?Why? Okay... marriage: the man owns the woman...BUT! the woman owns the man too. People cut that part out all the time. They don't realize the whole Christian passage of the teacart. clever editing. Marriage is an own[nership document that you can never escape. Is that wrong?
another point, alex seems to just assume things he believes is correct to be w=right and proof Ben is wrong...
I haven't seen it. Jewish people usually aren't best apologists..
Alex would lose if he actually debated a real apologist.
"Ben is a political guy, but not a good apologist.@@wesley6442

[@taliaeategg2027]

Finally someone who puts him in his place. Just wish it was more than a religious debate

[@DertBagg]

“Ben Shapiro DESTROYS door fleeing from an informed interlocutor!”

[@wesley6442]

BLASPHEMY! "overturns a table* xD!

[@alexandragrace8164]

You’re a LEGEND Alex!!! ❤

[@johnblack7862]

I've never heard of the guy speaking before, but he's both articulate and well-armed for a good discussion. Enjoyable!

[@midnight3630]

Watching Ben’s face tick like that like his brain is breaking with every word gives me joy.

[@jonmeador8637]

Religion wants to be at the fenter of all things so after proving it was the problem, it now wants to be the answer too.

[@llChristIsKingll]

everything he said was wrong. Who are you to say “the Bible has been morally wrong about this” and yet almost no one in today’s society follows the teachings of the bible and its laws. And suicide, rape, murder skyrockets. And the Bible NEVER says that slavery is good. It only explains that IF you do have slaves even though it’s against God’s will, follow these rules. Like in america. IF you commit a serious crime you have to report it to the police and confess and all of that, you will still get sent to jail, but less time. Never does it advocate to do the crime. Same in the bible. IF you do have slaves, follow these rules for the sin to be slightly less severe. But even with that it goes from a massive evil sin to a extremely evil sin.

[@jablue4329]

​@@llChristIsKingll "slaves, obey your masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ" is a direct quote from Ephesians. Yes, they also tell slave-owners not to mistreat their slaves, but that is complicit with the act of owning another person. Can't really dance around the fact that it doesn't say "Don't assert ownership of other people" while saying how you should act whilst in ownership of other people, which makes it complicit in this immoral act at best. Well, you can (and just did) try, but it's a transparently ridiculous stance.
HOWEVER
I would be remiss to omit that slavery as an institution now and slavery as an institution then had *vastly* different connotations. In the ancient world, it was a normal part of the economies of the day. Further, in the biblical context, slaves were recognized as full people, not merely property to be bought, sold, used, and abused by their owners. The biblical laws surrounding the practice were clearly meant to regulate the practice to correct for inhumane abuses that very much happened. God sees "neither free nor slave" after all, so it makes sense that the practice was permitted but the way we behave towards one another was the regulated part.

[@danmur2797]

It's important that people know--religion is not spirituality.
Science arose out of spiritual practices including polytheistic ones. There were cults that revered (not worshipped) irrational numbers. Modern astronomy including its names and early calculations arose from the practice of astrology.
In fact they were one and the same prior to the 1700s. Galileo was an astrologer a much as we consider him an astronomer today--and he read people's birth charts.
And astrology was taught at European universities into that time--universities which were founded by the Catholic Church. I think that may be the reference he made about science having a Judeo-Christian origin.
All of these are verifiable historical facts.
Having said that, many people get the Bible wrong. There are important books in there which are true and important in spiritual practices. Some allegory some literal. BUT it was also influenced by imperfect humans, so there are passages there which are more human derived biases of the time, than actual spiritual teachings. Likewise mortal men at the Council of Nicea chose which texts to include and which apocrypha to exclude. There are apocryphal texts of Judeo-Christian origin which are just as profound to spiritual teaching as those that were included.
And as Protestant sects separated from the Catholic Church, the Bible underwent changes. Nevermind translations.
So people who quote directly from the Bible, especially regards certain practices are really doing themselves a disservice.
Understand the texts in Bible were not meant to serve spiritual teachings as punishment, but more as recommendations for living a healthy life abiding by laws of the universe. Which are actually incomplete in the Christian Bible, but could be augmented with Jewish mystical texts.
It's the same thing with the 10 Commandments. As example: honor your father and mother is not a literal command to just honor parents. It's a reference to honor your ancestors in general, because your genetic code goes back generations and DNA can in fact hold information. Programs have been coded in labs on DNA, then uploaded to a computer, like software.
Every single commandment likewise has similar meanings which are not literal. But as people describe "divine inspiration"--a form of communication--these messages were transmitted in a way nomads and farmers 3,000 years ago could understand. They didn't know what genetics were.
Both secular atheist individuals and fundamentalist Christians/Muslims/Jews have it all wrong about what Science and spirituality really are.
They also misconstrue the true teachings of Jesus--and there were many teachers like him. He wasn't the only one who performed "miracles". It's actually a part of our universe and an aspect of quantum physics.

[@thebadpunusername8913]

​@jablue4329 I would have considered reading your entire comment but you have purposefully cut off the most important part of the verse, so I can't assume anything else you say to be intellectually honest either.

[@betheprotag]

@@danmur2797Well said, context is so very important and that goes for not only historical context but the way you go about reading holy texts and looking at religion and spirituality in a general sense.

[@the1truejoe178]

This is how Ben Shapiro looks in a debate that isn’t against 19-year-olds.

[@richardvinsen2385]

Alex 0’Connor: the only man that can speak faster than Ben Shapiro. Not just faster, but far more intelligently.

[@Zipperheaddttl]

I love Alex but wait until Destiny talks to ben. We are gonna have to watch it at 0.75 speed lol. (Also the Alex/Destiny chat was really good too, Destiny got a little bit schooled lol)

[@llChristIsKingll]

Besides the fact that everything he said was wrong. Who are you to say “the Bible has been morally wrong about this” and yet almost no one in today’s society follows the teachings of the bible and its laws. And suicide, rape, murder skyrockets. And the Bible NEVER says that slavery is good. It only explains that IF you do have slaves even though it’s against God’s will, follow these rules. Like in america. IF you commit a serious crime you have to report it to the police and confess and all of that, you will still get sent to jail, but less time. Never does it advocate to do the crime. Same in the bible. IF you do have slaves, follow these rules for the sin to be slightly less severe. But even with that it goes from a massive evil sin to a extremely evil sin.

[@richardvinsen2385]

@@llChristIsKingll The bible has rules for taking slaves. How to enslave the losers in a war. That sounds like advocating for slavery. If you are correct that god is anti slavery, are you saying he was afraid to say anything because he didn’t want to anger slaveholders? What a weak god that is. If he was actually against slavery, why not just outright forbid it?

[@llChristIsKingll]

@@richardvinsen2385 because it is forbidden. There are some passages that explain that slavery is not God’s ideal like:
Galatians 3:28: "There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." This verse suggests equality among believers, disregarding social distinctions like slavery.
Philemon 1:15-16: "Perhaps the reason he was separated from you for a little while was that you might have him back forever-no longer as a slave, but better than a slave, as a dear brother. He is very dear to me but even dearer to you, both as a fellow man and as a brother in the Lord." This passage, within the context of the letter to Philemon, encourages treating slaves as equals and brothers.
Exodus 21:16: "Whoever steals a man and sells him, and anyone found in possession of him, shall be put to death." This verse condemns the act of kidnapping and selling individuals into slavery.

[@Rudzani]

@@llChristIsKingllIt’s interesting because if I were in his position I would’ve just said "Do not own slaves."

[@williamfoster2681]

I would challenge anyone here to think of a question upon which we once had a scientific answer, however inadequate, but for which now the best answer is a religious one

[@drsatan3231]

In before no one thinks of one

[@vincentpena5574]

The premises of this challenge are incorrect. It seems that your assumption is that in all things it’s either religion or science. The “sciences” were classically all United as different fields of knowing, e.g., mathematics cannot accomplish and bring knowledge of what biology can; philosophy cannot bring knowledge of what physics can; and natural science cannot not bring knowledge of what theology can

[@drsatan3231]

@@vincentpena5574 you don't know the premise of his challenge
You have assumed you do. Nothing in his challenge suggested what you are
Now, can you complete the challenge or not?

[@williamfoster2681]

@@vincentpena5574 Scientific disciplines have predictive power and are willing to change their understandings of the universe in the face of contrary evidence. It's the scientific method versus unchanging edicts from an ancient text.

[@timangar9771]

"What is the meaning of life?"
Scientific answer: stay alive and reproduce
Religious answer: love each other, help each other, overcome evil in ourselves and so fourth.
In my humble opinion, while it may be incorrect in the final analysis, the religious answer is better!

[@djbj9632]

Ben is so out of his depth 😂😬

[@pikadragon2783]

He should call Aquaman for help XD

[@RifleEyez]

Not really he's been ruminating on this subject for years now.

[@djbj9632]

@@RifleEyez you’re right I watched the full thing and he held his own incredibly well. His ability to apprehend the crux of the debate and convey his side on the fly is truly awesome to watch I loved this one!

[@timothyvenable3336]

What? Hahaha what kind of joke is that? Cosmic skeptic was on a roll of nonsense and Ben was trying to help him out lol

[@gregorybeze7663]

Hes all over the place in my opinion. Im a Harvard graduate. I know when i hear someone who just likes the sound of their own voice. Harvard was full of them.

[@samsunggalaxy6793]

Exactly my feeling! Thanks !

[@samara1815]

Love that "im fucked" look on Ben's face 😂😂

[@F8LDragon2]

very edited video with no response. aka no constructive content, just food for the feel goods

[@masada2828]

Ben is never short on words when addressing pure humanism & Godlessness.

[@sakmadik69420]

​@@F8LDragon2BEN DOVER FANS CAN KEEP INHALING THEM COPIUMS

[@user-rs9wb1sw3q]

hardly

[@katarinam7781]

​@@masada2828 god isn't real cope and seethe

[@BowlerScott]

Extremely well-made point, Alex. I think Ben needs to really step up his epistemological game on his religious beliefs.

[@kevinbeck8836]

thats assuming Ben has any commitments to the truth 😂

[@KyrieEleison530]

There was no point made, just an appeal to emotion, which in a debate is a fallacy. Alex can't justify anything in his worldview. He’s just a pearl clutcher

[@BowlerScott]

@@KyrieEleison530 he demonstrated the double-standard apologists employ in practically every debate about where western values are derived and/or how morality is grounded. Christians want to take so much credit for that which throughout history they’ve opposed. And conversely, they now tend to want to reject that which their ideology has notoriously been astride or outright endorsed. He gave clear examples of this. So for you to dismiss that as a mere emotional outburst is for you to broadcast a certain unfitness for the conversation altogether.

[@michaelm8529]

​@@KyrieEleison530there was no appeal to emotion in this. In response to the claim that our progressive Western values come from a Judeo-Christian culture he gives examples where the scripture and accepted religious institutions (for Catholics anyway) that demonstrate a contrary position. What emotion was appealed to? Is it because it's loaded topics like slavery and women's rights? Because those things can be debated without appealing to emotion such as right here

[@jamescalderon289]

​@BowlerScott what he said about Galileo is objectively false. Galileo wasn't tortured, just put on house arrest, not for suggesting the heliocentric model but for pushing a theory that was demonstrated wrong, he couldn't explain stellar parallax, which completely undoes his model but still pushed it. That's just bad science. BTW, stellar parallax occurs cause the stars are so far away, but Galileo didn't know that.

[@grateful3300]

This is how Ben should approach all debates. Quietly.

[@georgetravers9333]

"You are wrong about women..."
"But you can't define a woman..."
"You are wrong about practicing homosexuals.."
"You cannot define anyone by their mast-rbational acts..."

[@reddyforlenny9389]

On what basis do you decipher things are wrong though? Seems a bit arbitrary to just say X or Y is just wrong...

[@Rendell001]

Sadly a lot of people these days resort to cognitive bias - especially when it's on topics that deal with core beliefs...

[@wesleydahar7797]

Alex mentioned some common talking points which highlight supposed hypocrisy in specifically Judeo-Christian religion, but nothing that hasn't already been addressed.
Off the top of my head I can respond to the points he raised, as I'm sure most people could.
1) Paul is restricting women from positions of teaching and authority only within the church as ruling or teaching elders. Paul did not say that a woman cannot have authority over or teach another man as a general rule. The only man a woman should submit to is first her father and then her husband. The reasoning Paul gives for his conclusion is that Adam who was a man was the head of the human race and of his wife as seen in the fact he was created first. This is not superiority, but an ordering among equals to keep things orderly. Additionally, rights for women and children as first class members of society were first recognized in Judeo-Christian culture before any other people group.
2) Slavery in the old testament does prescribe regulations for acquiring and owning slaves, but those regulations are for the well-being and protection of the slaves. Every law for slaves limited who could be a slave and how harshly they could be punished for offense. If any slave was harmed they would go free and when a slave was freed at the end of their period of service, they were sent with considerable possessions. In the same way that divorce was permitted though being wholy immortal, slavery was permitted due to the hardness of the people's hearts. To enforce perfect obedience would be impossible for sinful humans, so God was being patient with the people by allowing their evil is VERY limited capacity.
3) As for Galileo, the church was wrong to persecute him for his scientific discoveries. That is because the church is composed of sinful people. There was no biblical basis for that action though, so it was not the fault of Christianity, but Christians.

[@ck58npj72]

weasel words, not surprisingly

[@wesleydahar7797]

@@ck58npj72 Unless you explain what you disagree with, I can't help you.

[@ironmind258]

bang on the money, its right in front of them.

[@DulcetNuance]

That last point just seems like excuses for why slavery is fine. The old testament literally explains how slaves from foreign lands can be bound to serve for their entire lives. How can a perfectly moral God would allow this? "Oh but the people's hearts were hardened and so they must be made to obey"
Who hardened the people's hearts if not God? It sounds awfully similar to how God hardened Pharaoh's heart in order to have an excuse to kill all of Egypt's first born.

[@wesleydahar7797]

@@DulcetNuance I think you've made an assumption that whatever is not explicitly forbidden must necessarily be permitted or even encouraged. Life is a little more complicated than that. Also consider the same laws for protection of citizens still applied to slaves. If you think that the slavery laws for Israel were too permissive, then I would challenge you to consider what part of slavery you feel was not expressly forbidden that ought to have been? The concept of human ownership in general? The master/slave relationship went both ways and was confined to minimize evil while not being too strict for the culture of the time. Not ideal, but as good as can be expected given the universal practice of slavery and the sinful nature of man. It is possible to have not only good and bad, but good things that are inferior. Slavery in the Bible was a confinement of an evil practice into a social function effectively stripped of the evil aspects.
Switching gears a bit, the laws concerning divorce and rape were much more strict than we have today. We should instead be concerned that our society has significantly relaxed laws that were given 3500 years ago.
Finally, God can and has hardened people's hearts to resist His commands, but God is not the author of sin nor does He infringe upon free will. That's a deep theological concept that requires careful study and reliance on God's revelation. God ordains what will happen (without foresight or prediction since He is unchangeable and outside of time) and man has free will in perfect unity. We can't explain how exactly that works, but that is what the Bible teaches. A majority of Christians struggle with this as well, but as with any mystery of God, we must have humility when we try to explain it's mechanisms.

[@ABCefgy]

Problem is that the term "Judeo-Christian" is an oxymoron that didn't exist until 70 years ago

[@FactStorm]

Only American religious fanatics use that ridiculous hyphenated term. Its so stupid..beyond belief

[@joelanderson5285]

No more them 1700-1800 is an oxymoron.

[@adriangoetz5108]

Something satisfying about the editing making it look like Ben had to actually listen to someone make a whole point before responding

[@ghostghostgaming5637]

I like how listening to someone talk is considered "DESTROYED". This is why debate/politics is such a joke, people care so much more about winning than the truth. If someone cuts someone off "wow they are such a weasel they know they are wrong", if someone listens to someone talk "LMAO look how dumb and lost they are!"
shit gets old yo

[@shrekiscool4743]

Weirdly enough, the game "The Binding of Isaac" (based, of course, on the bible story of the same name) does quite the good job of depicting the absolute lunacy of trying to justify murder because "god says so." Isaac's mom in that game is sort of an exaggerated version of Abraham's character, and god himself realises that she has absolutely lost it and stops her.

[@howenator]

Ben looks so pissed 😭

[@madmintentertainment6268]

I love that Ben physically twitches every time a point is made. You are dealing psychic damage to this man

[@chazwyman]

That's the best thing Shapiro has ever said.