Hugh Ross vs Peter Atkins • Debating the origins of the laws of nature
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 9 ส.ค. 2018
- For updates, further episodes & bonus content sign up for the Unbelievable? newsletter www.premier.org.uk/unbelievabl...
Justin Brierley is joined by Astrophysicist and President of Reasons To Believe, Dr Hugh Ross and professor of physical chemistry Dr Peter Atkins to discuss whether the origins of the laws of nature lie in God or in ‘nothing’
Reasons to Believe www.reasons.org
Oxford University Press global.oup.com/?cc=gb
Subscribe to the Unbelievable? podcast for weekly dialogue and debate www.premierchristianradio.com/...
For more debates, updates and bonus content sign up at www.premier.org.uk/unbelievable-newsletter
yeah follow a book from 2000 years ago, that;s true progress give me a break... I guess usa moronic
Peter begins interrupting Hugh within Hugh's first 3 sentences. He's so typical of those w/his ideological leanings - arrogant, condescending, self-righteous. Placing all emphasis and importance on himself and his own "intelligence". Ole Pete would do well to have a huge dose of humility shoved up his pompous arse.
@@Edwinvangent, you could look at it from an intelligent pov rather than a bigoted point of view, ya know? The Bible, which consists of 66 books in total, has been relentlessly scrutinized by "experts" and scholars alike for literally Thousands of years and has never been disproven or even remotely uncredible. But, yeah usa moronic- LOL, you sound like what you're complaining about.
Edwin: Your statement proves that you’ve never read the Bible nor no studied where it came from and how it came about or you wouldn’t of made that statement
I suppose it shouldn't come as a big surprise that this preternaturally brilliant man, Peter Atkins, is so often criticized as arrogant and condescending precisely because he is so much smarter than the rest of us, or most. Evidence and Fearless rationality over cosmic wishful thinking and superstition all day baby!
I hate to say this because I'm proud to be an atheist but this video enlightened me of who God is. Maybe I'll give it a try to seek him.
Please do. Try try try to keep your mind open to the possibilities....Ask God to help you read his word, and show himself to you...I will pray that he reveals himself to you.
I think you're lying about being an atheist.
@@mcmanustony he have a Free will conscience brain heart instinct GOD given gifts to make hes own desitions no't given to him by some explosión or some hominidus 😂
@@raulmartinez429 How do you claim to know any of this?
You have already recognized God from god.
Peter Atkins' thesis is a perfect example of "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools" (Romans 1:22
Why don’t you learn some science rather than mindlessly regurgitating Bronze Age bigotry
Strange that you believe in a God but not what you see as scientific truth. If anyone is not understanding or knowing the god you advocate for, it is due to God himself. Read Romans 9:16.
You definitely have the names backward.
@@mcmanustony So, NOTHING is really not "NOTHING" as this Peter fool asserts? LOL--your foolish religion has been around since Cain.
@@mcmanustony You do not see that many highly intelligent scientists, such as Ross, who "learn some science" believes it points to a creator, God. The more science peals away at the information, the more evolution becomes impossible. If you don't want God to exist, you're no different than Peter. You will refuse whatever evidence comes before you.
I think what strikes me is the difference in how these two men debate. Peter tends to be very confrontational and argumentative by using words like "lazy", "naive", "ridiculous" even arguing "No you don't" (even when Hugh admits that he does believe a certain fact). Almost like he can't make his point without it being personal and hurting / cutting the other person down. Hugh, in contrast, by not using that approach he comes across as more gentle, patient and and respectful.
As I have experienced, Most Aetheist behave defensive which can weaken their argument in that the hearer sees the defensive approach as anger and the Aethiest not totally believing their point. Also, Atheist Usually cannot provide logical evidence of their point of the world , man, mans' purpose, creation of the Earth, the universe and man; the most intelligent life form.
Hugh is a born again man, Peter isn't...
Atkins sounds frustrated...Ross sounds enlightened
Most atheists are confrontational and try to use any arguement to deny the existence of God.
It's almost like one person is right and knows it, and the other knows he is wrong but is too proud to admit it 😂. One more win for the big man upstairs.
After watching this, I’ve decided that there is nothing in this universe more heartbreaking than watching a beautifully created human being reject the love of the one who created them.
God loves???
Peter has helped me believe in God. There's nothing more wonderful i could've ever imagined. A God! It's all true. Unbelievable!
@@hmmmahroof3602 Congrats for the most ignorant question of the week 👍
I very much admire Hugh Ross's patience, he is constantly interuppted by Atkins's, yet he remains entirely undercontrol and even has a smile on his face. That is a man in love with Christ!
Why do you admire a man who loves a stolen corpse? ;-)
Humble guy!
I am biased towards Hugh, but that's exactly what I was thinking, and am wondering if anyone had the same assessment. Atkins comes off as an arrogant, pompous, close-minded man.
Wow, you noticed the striking difference in their attitudes? I actually attended the same college where Atkins taught, and I vividly remember seeing him cruising around in his flashy gold Rolls Royce. It made me wonder, why the need for such extravagance when a simple bike sufficed for most folks?
@@WhoHAAAAAHugh Ross, incredible Man.
In my opinion the fact that Atkins used “naive”, “lazy”, “ignorance”, “I have no clue”, “nonsense” and sarcastic responses just discredits his whole argument and the end was just the cherry on top.
If the shoe fits, or as I like to say, if the foe shits.
10 years ago this wonderful man was the one that put the nail in atheism’s coffin for me. Thank You 🙏🏼 Hugh Ross. God bless you.
Your man, as Peter put it, is intellectually lazy and lacks the reasoning of a scientist. He's more suited to the role of a preacher
Yikes.
@@CesarCloudsIt's amazing!
@@noahm44 What is?
Not being a bitter Atheist is amazing@@CesarClouds
Atkins looks as if he has no joy in his life. But Ross looks as if he is full of joy.
That's utter nonsense. Lol
@@chlomyster8526 it's completely true. Open your eyes and look at them
@@stevenselleck5460 Atkins is simply weary of listening to lazy drivel
Very true! They opposite for Hugh
You see that's not an excuse he was there for a debate he failed to debate. When anyone with a weak argument turns to insult, rather than FACT not theory, peter uses words such as, unthinking and lazy even when his opponent states that he believes something. Peter then says no you don't. That is not debating that's kindergarten level debate. @@mcmanustony
One person is a personification of pride, and the other humbleness.
This is a really good comment.
Hugh is elegant. Peter is simple.
A5 comment 😂 👌🏾
Peter is Nervous and desperate lol
I AGREE AND VERY EDGY AND NERVOUS AND HE KEEPS INTERRUPTING (RUDE ) FELLA
Good one!
Peter seems so sad and bitter
Peter looks like no one's given him a hug in a long time. Dr.Ross looked like he wanted to lean over and give him that hug. What a gentleman & great man of God. In today's scientific community, being a Christian is like a straight man trying to be a fashion designer. Let's keep in in our prayers. He's a voice we need to hear.
Hugh Ross is a gentleman and a scholar. He gives a lesson in humility. His faith is unshakable, you can almost feel the Holy Spirit working inside of him. Thank you to Justin as well for the excellent moderating/interview skills.
God shines through Dr. Ross’s attitude. 🙏🥰🙏🙏
One man exhibits grace and thoughtfulness, the other is full of insult and arrogance. I've seen this pattern before.
Hitch was the only one I could stomach to watch or listen to.
without watching the video, i can see that you are a christian. nobody judges like a christian.
@@WeighedWilson Why is it wrong to judge? If you walk down the street and see a guy beating up his girlfriend and insulting her, you would make a judgement of that guy, would you not?
Judgement is integral to making assessments and decisions, without it you left rudderless and adrift. You have to call out what is wrong, such as arrogance, in order to learn what flawed, maladjusted behavior is. That's what acwilsn is doing, and I see no problem with it. Christian, or otherwise.
Christ was judged by a non Christian & was given the death penalty. He rose from the dead!
@@08453300222 you're sure or you just want it to be true? Because if it's not you have no purpose to live anymore??
Peter Atkins I found to be rude
I never heard of Hugh Ross before but I found him to be calm and very convincing
Dr. Hugh Ross is very intelligent. He is also calm and patient.
OK calm and patient but what about reason and evidence ?
watch the whole debate. Dr. Hugh Ross clearly won this debate. :)
If Ross is Intelligent he would conclude that there is zero evidence for the existence of a supernatural entity, and that there is a plethora of evidence that religious literature is man made. He clearly desires an all seeing father because he does not want to face reality I.e. born, live die.
@@johnsnowdon4886 sometimes being calm and patient speaks louder than a boastful man who can throw out logical words like he's got the higher ground.
Atkins gets a huge F in debate, Hugh Ross gave some decent arguments. So did Atkins, but he's got such low cognitive awareness to realize his own pride.
He is Autistic too
Hugh’s calmness and patience while debating is amazing. This man is gifted.
too bad he is wrong
@@davem9176 He's wrong about what?
@@davem9176 elaborate?
@@davem9176 there is no right or wrong, wyh u want to lush your objective belief toward religious peoples?.
@@aimaniman5557 i have no idea what you are trying to say.
What's amazing about Ross is it's less like he's trying to prove the other person wrong and more like he's presenting his evidence to evangelize directly to the other intellectual. God bless you Dr. Ross, smart people need Jesus too and you are a positive force in that battle.
Amen to that!
Unbelievable!!! This guy said that he found confirmation of big bang and all physics correctly in the Bible... He clearly hasn't read the first chapter of Genesis... God created day and light and night 3 days before creating the Sun and moon... Then God gave all plants and trees for humans as food... A very informative and reliable story indeed... Every physicist, if he reads the genesis 1, will instantly embrace it as true... But he must be a true scientist...
========
And how do you look at the fact that Jesus exposed himself as Orthodox Jewish supremacist??? Who disrespects all non Jews by calling them dogs, animals in essence... This is Orthodox Judaism... Only Jews are worthy to be called children and the rest of humanity are animals. And Jesus said just that in Matthew 15... He said is sent only to Jews, that only Jews are children, and the feast are dogs...
The story is repeated in Mark 7...
Amen.
immigrant george
Read navigating genesis
@@jamesveerdog2723
So, the message sent by God must be explained by humans because God messed Everything up???
immigrant george
Gods message must be interpreted correctly
One of the things that I most respect about Dr. Hugh Ross that he seeks out the strongest opposing views to debate, and addresses every hard question.
He does not hide in little self affirming echo chambers like many do.
No pivoting, evading, or antagonism.
He is the last man standing at the end of the point/counterpoint process.
EVERY KNEE SHALL BOW 🙇🏾♂️ AND EVERY TONGUE SHALL CONFESS THAT HE ☝🏾 IS LORD ..
AS IT IS WRITTEN IT SHALL BE DONE 🕊️🙏🏾
I ENJOYED WATCHING THIS SPIRITUAL BATTLE .
Dr. Hugh has definitely dominated this debate
The truth stand's on it's own accord
You are hearing what you want to hear. Hugh never resolved Atkins’ question: how does an agent exist outside of time and space. How can anything exist in nothing? It is a logical contradiction. What does “before time” even mean? Spaceless timeless makes no sense, and such a being does not comport with the god of the Bible at all, a god that experiences regret, and so causes a flood to kill every baby, etc, and so on. And the only reason that people make the “space less timeless” assertion about god is your tactical retreat to the Kalam syllogism. But those properties do not comport with the god of the Old Testament.
Atkins’ argument against Ross seems to often be the equivalent of responding to arguments and evidence with “oh that’s pish posh”. How convincing this strategy is may simply depend on how strongly you trust his denials rather than weighing evidence and arguments. I’m not saying he has no other arguments but this seems to show up rather consistently in response to Hugh’s specific arguments.
Hugh's arguments are littered with logical fallacies and appeals to magic and wizards. Atkins puts it quite nicely when he says theists are being intellectually lazy. Instead of getting their hands dirty and trying to understand something, they just throw their hands up and say "we know the answer already... god did it"
@@pazuzil Please cite with timestamps where he appeals to “magic and wizards” (btw the Christian God is not some bearded man in the sky who casts spells on you, you obviously don't understand Abrahamic monotheism in the slightest) and please name and timestamp said “logical fallacies". Also, some of the greatest minds in science have been Christians. Here are a few along with their accomplishments…
Isaac Newton - Father of Modern Physics and Calculus
Wernher Von Braun - Father of Modern Rocket and Space technology
Rene Descartes - Founder of Cartesian math and Analytical geometry
Raymond Vahan Damadian - Inventor of the MRI
Francis Bacon - Pioneer of the modernized scientific method
Louis Pasteur - renowned for his discoveries of the principles of vaccination, microbial fermentation, and pasteurization
John Eccles - Nobel prize winner for his work on the synapse
Alexander Flemming - Man who discovered penicillin
There are so many others, this list is a tiny bit of them…. Just think, what would the world look like without these "intellectually lazy" men??
Peter Atkins is nothing but a pompous jerk. He is a great chemistry professor in his own respect, but he really didn’t contribute anything groundbreakingly important to the scientific community. Also, I don’t think the idea of God is “intellectually lazy” in the slightest. Many brilliant people find God to be highly intellectually stimulating, it compels many people to study the natural world.. A theist holds that God has created everything in the natural world and that God upholds everything in the universe. So basically in the mind of a Christian God has done everything, just because we discover how it works doesn't mean God is removed from the picture, we're just discovering how God created stuff.
Also Mike if you see this, thanks for your videos on the fulfilled prophecy, really helped in my understanding!
@@hspwr3521 You obviously dont know much about Hugh Ross's beliefs. He thinks a sky-wizard conjured the Universe out of nothing and then made the first human male by animating a clay figure and the first female from his rib. That there is the very definition of magic is it not? And what if some of the greatest minds in science have been Christians? Almost everyone who lived at the same time as these men identified as Christian including some of the dumbest people at the time. And how are the scientific accomplishments of these great scientists relevant to their views on religion? Newton had some crazy beliefs about numerology, astrology and alchemy... should we take his views on these subjects seriously because he was also a great scientist? come on ...
@@pazuzil Ok, on top of not pointing out the supposed "logical fallacies" committed on Ross' part, you missed my point entirely. Also, you ignored what I said, GOD IS NOT A SKY WIZARD. Neither the Koran, The Bible, or the Talmud have ever said God is a magic sky wizard who conjured the universe. The Abrahamic God is purported to be the space-less, timeless, and immaterial causal agent of the universe. The Bible never said that Adam was a clay figure, I seriously don't know what bible you are reading, I frankly think you haven't read a lick of it. Even if it did say that, that part of Genesis does not have to be taken literally to understand the core doctrines of Christianity. In addition I was listing those scientists to prove that one isn't necessarily intellectually lazy just because they believe in God, I was in no way saying we should believe everything they believe.
Also, your incoherent and hard to read piece on how "everyone at the same time as these men were Christian" is just utterly and completely untrue. For instance Von Braun used to be a Nazi rocket scientist who was an atheist for most of his life, he was not exactly raised in a Christian environment. Damadian is still alive and was raised in modern times, the majority of people and scientists in this day and age are not Christians in the slightest. Pasteur lived during the 19th century, that's when Darwin's ideas were taking off and the majority of those in the scientific community were leaning towards materialism and a steady state universe model. John Eccles, lived in the 20th century, theism of any kind was not common in the scientific community and its influence on the people was waning. Flemming was in the same spot as Eccles..
Its astounding to me that you think it is within the bounds of rationality and empiricism to assume that something came from nothing, and that this something somehow arranged itself into planets and stars and on one of those planets there was a bubbling protein soup that somehow churned out all life we see today. I think your beliefs are somewhat fantastical dude, I think it perfectly reasonable and rational to assume a mind is at work behind these things.
Also, don't try to respond to the bit above saying "wElL thE ScIenTiFIC cOnseNsuS saYS iT haPPEnEd tHaT WAy sO yoU DoNT kNow wHAT UR talkInG abOUT". Don't try using an appeal to authority/consensus fallacy like that on me. Unless you can personally justify your asinine beliefs here on the spot, you got nothing to say to me. Your beliefs seem to me to be far more ridiculous than Hugh's.
@@hspwr3521 1) The Koran, The Bible, and the Talmud describe a being who created the world out of nothing i.e. creatio ex nihilo in stages using nothing but a few words. If that isn't a wizard casting magic spells, I dont know what is.
2) Genesis 2:7 says "the LORD God formed man out of the clay of the ground and blew into his nostrils the breath of life, and so man became a living being." Another example of magic...
3) Not all wizards have a physical body. Didn't you ever play Dungeons and Dragons?
4) I never said everyone at the time were Christian. Instead I said most were. So quoting a few examples of non-Christian scientists doesn't counter anything I said
5) I also never said something came from nothing. I don't believe wizards exist or that magic is real. Thats your position
It’s fascinating to me how peter really comes across as a simple minded fundamentalist.
Well said. He claims to be an open mined scientist in one sense but he clearly doesn’t believe what he claims. When he said that there is no evidence that could convince him of the existence of God then logic would suggest that his beliefs are not in fact based on evidence but in just tearing down what ever possible explanations made by a theist. If theism is belief then does atheism then become an undefinable non belief system with no causal agent and no beginning when everything came from nothing. Isn’t that blind faith? Sounds like a fairy tale.
Hugh, A+. Peter, well, we'll be praying for you sir. To call a fellow scholar, a peer in this case, "intellectually lazy," tells people everything they need to know about Peter's position. In the end, you said it all. No matter what evidence is presented, you would still not concede that there is a Creator. So there you have it.
Peter is a moronic narcissist.
Shitty human being.
Good luck Peter in eternity.👀
Ever learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
@@debfiel6585 your arrogance is disgusting. You have beliefs you can no more demonstrate than you can walk on water.
Peter Atkins for obvious reasons doesn’t share your beliefs.
Cope.
Ross IS intellectually lazy. Your approval is not needed to point that out.
Both have a record of scientific achievement. One is WAY more significant than the other and spans several decades.
Here’s a clue: it’s not Hugh Ross.
Hugh wins this debate, hands down! Thank you Lord for giving Hugh such an excellent mind, communication skills, and a love for You and the truth of Your word, as well as his fellow man, with whom he shares all this knowledge.
Amen to that
I would like to debate this fuckign child abuser Hugh Ross.
religion cannot win any debate those about magic claims.
Theism is more like the foundation of Science, which itself is Philosophy, and all that needs to be laid out. Hugh´s descent into that "fossils on the moon" notion is ridiculous. Abiogenesis, as tracked by Fritjof Capra, is requiring philosophical analysis to address the Physics in a vesicle. God created the Laws of Nature, and brought out Jesus Christ, and its HIS gifts that allow us to study Scientific Philosophy in the first place. Those Laws of Nature are what is behind abiogenesis, and its the Philosophy of getting around any limiting paradigms that is needed to understand those processes under those conditions.
Timothy Mostad
Computer code more advanced than ours and more information than all encyclopedias combined written into the genes of the simplest amoeba.
Way more believable then your Fairy Tale. You have nothing.
@Timothy Mostad Scientism has taken you out of Science´s legitimate viewpoint and into imagining that Religion is not a legitimate knowledge and activity domain. Karen Armstrong has made an important point with her talking about "mythos" and the real impacts of spiritual-religious practices. It´s only in part about the literal reality of the "gods" in question. They are religious entities that involve people in a kind of relationship to the Universe´s Creator/Source/God Entity facet. The Christian appropriation of ancient Greek Philosophy and eclectic resources, and initiation of a pluralistic world culture reflects Christianity´s own pivotal position in the metaphysical philosophical analysis. Science itself is a product of Christian Philosophy, in fact, a form of it.
Justin is the fairest moderator/interviewer around. And he’s completely composed and patient in the face of condescension and insults.
Agree
@ENFPerspectives I think not, the arbiter allows Peter Atkins to get away with far to many interruptions
Justin did his job very well. His personal technique should be studied.
he did give Adkins more than his fare share, but Atkins was hostile and provocative pressing for an emotional reaction to take advantage of. His tactic was thwarted. We were able to hear both sides and it did not erupt into chaos.
Just imagine being willing to entertain the notion that "Nothing" created something...While scoffing at the notion that Something (GOD) created something (The Universe) !
they simply are under a bondage and hate God
Dr. Atkins inadvertently explained his hostility toward the possibility of God when he said that he wasn't allowed to think (ask questions) by his religious parents. As Christians we need to be very careful not to dismiss /alienate people who want explanations.
I had plenty of effort hiding my atheism from my parents and never bothered asking questions about anything. Even as first grader i saw my mother as ignorant about basic science.
I still remember her watching simple scientific documentary and saying that its bullshit propaganda and she has no ideas how monkeys can turn into humans. I had no idea why her comprehension was so bad. Documentary wasnt even interesting but i got more information out of it as 7 year old then mother of 2.
Better asking questions from teachers and approaching library. Parents can be selective with their own goals as what their vision of parenting is.
Great comment!
I am a volunteer apologist with Dr. Ross's ministry Reasons To Believe. I am amazed at his ability to give an answer for the hope He has but with gentleness and respect.
Thank you for your volunteer work .
@demi- dogg
No idea what point you are trying to make ....?
@Dan Delgado Who is guilty, then? Jesus or the man who abuse of his freedom to make bad choices? I really wonder if you want just blame God or the freedom we have.
@demi- dogg I don´t know why are you in that manner...Despite that, there is a confusion in terms of what Satan is. Satan was NOT created (evil) as an act of creation. It was, according to theology, a decision based, again, on free will, before being capable to know God, the demons themselves. So, yes, the most perfect reality could be the one with freedom, taking this into account.
Apart from that point, I must assume you are only interested in Christian worldview. I wasn´t pointing out one subjective interpretation, as we should first consider theistic implications, to then make history and evidence to realize what is the most sensible statement of God.
@Dan Delgado Your incoherent babbling is pure ignorance. You comment on things which you have no authority or education on. Please enlighten us, with all of your endless wisdom, oh Mr. Delgado, what would your perfect creation entail?
Dr. Hugh Ross is being slept on way too much. He is a very smart and respectful man who deserves to be way more famous than he is for his brilliant work
I don't think he needs fame to do God's work.🙌🏼
Hank Moody: Yes; Ross reminds you of the character and antics of another person 2000 years ago by the name of Jesus, the Messiah; doesn't it? God bless you.
ABSOLUTELY !
He's deluded, nothing more.
God is going to give him his reward in heaven
I particularly liked the way Hugh remained polite and extremely engaging while being called naive.
Whoever the moderator is, excellent job. I like your work. Asking the right questions at the right time. Making comment when appropriate.
Yes, he is really into it and on top of it; very bright young man, thank you : )
This moderator is phenomenal. Challenging each side and being non-controversial. To essentially be invisible in the debate.
Amazing!
Fabled Narrative yes, agree with that.
Fabled Narrative he talks too much
Ngl the laughs kind of made me think he was Christian because everyone Atkind talked he laughed along with Hugh, but maybe he's just a happy guy.
Absolutely agree with this. Quite possibly the best moderator I’ve ever seen on religion or politics
He is laughing like a red faced moron whenever Atkins is speaking on issues that are beyond his nutsized brain
John Lennox, in one of his talks at the Discovery Institute tells of a UK newspaper's interview with Stephen Hawkins, where Hawkins made the statement that belief in God was a fairy-story for those who are afraid of the dark. When the same newspaper approached him (Lennox) asking for comment, Lennox replied that atheism is a fairy-story for those who are afraid of the light.
Quote often repeated by Lennox with no attribution to originator Robin Sharma
He used to believe in God though. Maybe he just became depressed and jaded as he was abused.
...never heard that quip before but it is brilliant!
Copper wire : Invented by two men, fighting over a penny.
@@marksnider9378
Your copper wire shoot made me giggle. Good stuff!
All I can say is, when I grow old I wanna have the look/aura of Hugh who seems so calm, content & happy with what he believed in. I don’t wanna look like Peter who looks sad, stressed out and confused about the things that he is fighting for…
I noticed and thought the same thing…just look at the difference in expression and demeanor between the two.
@@emilys5024 the peace of God
A common trait among Christians. That is one thing that attracted me to it so strongly. As rianalouw points out, God's peace.
Delusion of faith.
Well, in all fairness, Peter has a few years on Hugh too. I think both men can be equally respected.
This is an amazing display of patience…if you listened for any length of time you know what I’m talking about
Peter Atkinson’s behavior tells you all you need to know about the strength of his position.
That's pretty presumptuous.
When you can't master the facts, indulge sophomoric attacks. Fits Atkinson to tee. At least, Dawkins could be gracious.
Sad to admit this, but you’re right.
Hugh's patience is a gift from God. He was respectful throughout the debate even though it was not reciprocated.
Dewey Cox this is typical of atheist/ Bible believer debates. Believers are well mannered, respectful and tolerant whereas the atheists are usually cynical, rude and arrogant.
Johan Weakley
Actually it’s just typical of Peter Atkins. I’ve seen many of his interviews/debates and it’s always this, without exception. He demands space to develop his arguments and never reciprocates that courtesy. A true narcissist, maybe even bordering on sociopath.
I was getting pissed at the dude lol like your making you proposition look wrong when you keep questioning him and not letting him Finnish.
He is patient because he knows God exist... and is the creator of the universe
Because he is pissed listening creationist nonsense.. staying calm is really hard when you listening ignorant bigots..
Hugh Ross has a wonderful calmness about him. He is the epitome of a Christian man. Peter keeps butting in when Hugh is speaking...full of his own importance. importance
I hv been following and reading books of Dr Hugh Ross, Dr John Lenox, and Jordan Peterson for decades, they are intelligent, elegant, faithfull, yet humble human being that God gave wisdom to testify the truth in scientifical and spiritual explanation. Hope there will more like them in the comming future . Also my respect to the moderator who made this talk/debate quite neutral and balanced. Thanks for sharing the video🫰👍
Why Is Hugh Ross not as famous as guys like William Lane Craig or Ken Ham?? He is what Christians should listen to more
you're right
Because he is an old earth creationist
William Lane Craig has called Hugh Ross "evangelicalism's most important scientific apologist". So he is probably quite famous in his own circles. But the majority of Christians today either accept evolution or the simpleton young earth approach. Hugh Ross interpretations are speculative, forinstance his idea that Adam and Eve were literal people made 50,000-150,000 years ago.
Fernando Paulus ken ham is famous for absolutely wrong reasons. Hugh ross, lane craig, john lennox , francis collins are some awesome ones
@@drlerky2539 True. A lot of Christians consider old Earth creationists to be heretics.
i love how patient hugh was and how he was smiling the whole time when peter was saying something that he completely disagreed with. i love how he was extremely patient and was respectful.
A few things indicated to me he is a JW. Good patient listener!
@@izziebon No he is not a JW but a Christian Apologist who founded Reasons to Believe.
And Atkins continually interrupted Ross
James White should learn from him.
Hugh gave Atkins the right amount of time to display his ignorance and narrow minded approach to real science....A seared mind??
Peter is staring downwards when he is speaking, thus meaning that his creative brain is hard at work. Opposite to this, is Hugh, who has great eye contact and able to speak truth. Peter is also prideful and feels he has it all figured out. Hugh, has a clear understanding that this is all bigger than he is. What a great debate! Hugh hands down has presented himself professionally and respectfully.
Thank God for Dr Hugh Ross 🌟
It’s too bad the host and Adkins are constantly interrupting and talking over Hugh. It says a lot about Hugh’s calmness and confidence that he can navigate these discussions.
This is the way of debate. Find Hugh's many lectures. Or even better get his book called Navigating Genesis.
Adkins is too controlling and likes to hear himself talk and Huge is listening and expounding his own intuitive intelligence.
Proverbs 18:2
A fool does not delight in understanding, but only wants to show off his opinions
I just found Dr. Hugh Ross today and this just what I needed in my journey to draw closer to God.
Get his many books. I started with 'Navagating Genesis'. It makes scientific and logical sense of the first 11chapters of the book of Genesis.
@@joymeyer4730 Or better still, books written by people who haven't forsaken science for a career in Christian zealotry.....
@@mcmanustony if you read the Bible, you would see that the Bible is the first book (of any book religious or not) that spells out science.
The book of Genius spells out the big bang. But ppl like you never want to hear what makes the Bible and its statements real and the truth. You call us fools.....
@@joymeyer4730 Oh grow up. I have read the bible cover to cover since childhood. It is bronze age folklore and nothing more.
I'll leave you to your dependencies....
@@mcmanustony Why did you read the Bible? whats your purpose? I read the bible when i was little but because I was born a Christian, and almost everyone i know is a Christian... But alas i went and enjoyed Sin so much that I almost became an Atheist. But there came a time where i almost lost my life and before that happens i called out his name, Jesus... and guess what? he saved me... and my life went 360.. and i started reading the bible again, and the scriptures, the words hits different this time.. This that i thought i knew, i actually didnt, i can relate it to my everyday life,.in school, relationship, science, family i mean everything... Now i read the bible because i want to be closer to God... what about you?
Big kudos to the moderator in this debate. He ensured both sides were able to communicate their points and kept the conversation moving. Great job.
I thought the same. He was excellent.
I love how if you don’t know him you have no idea where he stands in his beliefs absolutely brilliant moderator, we need more like him
Don’t think so although he gets better in second part
Yes!
Hugh Ross is always a joy to listen to
I lost God but this gives me hope in finding him once again
He never lost you, He loves you!
The gamechanger for me was consciousness and free will. You are more than a bunch of chemicals. Merry Christmas ❤️
God hadn't lost you. Prayers♡🙏🏽
He found you already!
He has always been with you!❤
I love Hugh Ross. He has such a wonderful mind and calm caring demeanor
@trident3b did I say that? No. But he's right about allot of things nevertheless.
You’d have to not to kill the pompous ass he was “debating”
@trident3b maybe or maybe not
@trident3b his arguments makes him right. Atkins embarrassed himself when he tried to say absolutely nothing rolled into something
The other guy constantly tries to be insulting
just discovered Hugh Ross, man , his calmness, humility, patience, and all- moved me to my core! where does he get that?or should I say, from whom?
We should be praying for Mr. Atkins. He has lived almost all his life here on earth, he is close to his destination, it is just about time he turn to his Creator before it is too late.
Pretty sure his parents aren’t alive anymore
Absolutely.
I think I will look at Christianity after this. Just realized how silly atheists sound.
How did you come to these conclusions?
Richard Luciano
Oh come on.. nothing is something.. infinite multiverse is finite etc..
I thought science has ruled a creator out. Sounds like science is grasping for straws.
Da Koos What did you mean by "look at Christianity..."?
Richard Luciano He probably meant actually see what God has to say in the Bible and hopefully find Truth
Well I went to church today where they're preaching about love. It was good.
I got very worked up with this debate. Is such a repetitive story when it comes to Christianity. The world doesn’t have questions for us Christians, the world questions us. They don’t want an answer, they want to disagree to every answer without giving it any thought whatsoever.
I love how Hugh Ross represents God. So calm and collected, humble and respectful, slow to speak and quick to listen.
Are you suggesting any individual who has not acknowledged the existence of a god isn't interested in finding answers?
The Bible says in the end times the irrefutable evidence of God will be revealed to all.
@@theoskeptomai2535you are putting words in her mouth. Some people don’t want answers. They are just set in their so called intellectual arrogance.
They ask questions that they've already constructed an answer to. Disbelief is stubborn, but knows everything about nothing at all.
@@danielletracyanna lot of people actually wanted answers and become atheist.
For Peter to call Scientists who believe “intellectually lazy” and “nieve” tells me the true weaknesses of his arguments. No one who has a strong set of arguments needs to resort to being condescending and insulting. Dr Ross has clearly read the other book but Peter hasn’t done like wise. Dr Ross has shown his arguments without ever once being rude. He has such a calm and relaxed manner. Much more convincing!
I feel for Peter who was clearly very damaged by his experience of Anglican Christianity.
A very interesting debate. Thank you for sharing.
Lennox, Ross and Turek and Tour. All the evidence I need
They are my favorite!
It’s amazing how this chemist managed to say absolutely nothing about absolutely nothing
It was giving me a headache.
45:38 that middle finger. XD
@@Anti-Alphabet_Mafia wowww he totally did that on purpose.
Seems like Hugh was the doctor while Atkins was the politician. Hugh was clearer on why he thought something where ATKINS would just basically say, “no it’s not” with no evidence for why he thought that.
@@TheRazmotaz it's a choice to DENY all the facts. Some simply do not Like The idea of a GOD. It terrifies them.
Ross: let’s look at what we find with experimentation and observations.
Atkins: That’s stupid and lazy.
HAHAHAHAHAHHAHA a funny old man.
Thats because it is stupid and lazy.
“To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible.”
- St Thomas Aquinas
Atkins' perseverance against overwhelming logic is rather impressive 😊 The doggedness and determination to say "screw you, I'm still sticking to my version of insanity" to overflowing intellectual evidence is definitely a stellar example for all budding and practising atheists alike, for it gives hope to the sustenance of the axiom that "God doesn't exist because I don't want Him to" 👍😂
What logic?
The god nonsense?
@@alexnorth3393Did you watch the video at all? Or you’re just puffing up again and angry ?
@@alexnorth3393 Did you watch the video or just give an answer that fits your narrative?
@@alexnorth3393 Hey Alex, maybe you can explain Atkins statement that "nothing rolled over into something". Or is this atheist nonsense? If not, explain how nothing created our 2 trillion galaxy, fine tuned universe.
Hugh just sits there silent with that grin on his face. Peter just repeats his own theologies and “oh that’s nonsense.” Good job Hugh👍
even through just his personality and demeanor, God shines through Hugh, i just discovered this man but wow i admire him
Yessss he has so many wonderful videos and articles. He is remarkably intelligent. I think I am going to check out his book 🙌🙌🙌
I like him also for the same reasons.
@@SkyGazerForever1111 how was the book?
Exactly Britt! Exactly!
Me too!
I pray for Peter. So stubborn and obviously hurting by this life
When Atkins meets God he's going to s**t his astral pants with embarrassment 😂
What a brilliant question “what evidence would science have to give you in the future for you to believe that there is a Creator”! Justin did an excellent job as a host !
He keeps repeating the word “naive” to try to elevate himself, but Hugh calmly and respectfully smacks him back down.
Hugh Ross lives out the commandment to love your neighbor as yourself in his calm demeanor and loving attitude during this debate.
Absolutely agree!! Ross is a great testimony and Example of how to live as a Christian
This is one of the best interviewers I have ever seen.
Justin Brierly is the best🙂
That was incredible. Special credit to the moderator, who did a fantastic job keeping up and making this easier to follow.
I love how Hugh didnt interrupt Peter once when he was going on and on and on. But as soon as its Hugh's turn- Peter cant be quiet.
Lol
Me too! I was thrilled with this. Fuckk i could not stand that other guy.
Thanks for this heads up. I will skip it. I can't stand interruptions like that. (No matter which side does it.)
@ByHisCall I like watching debates that are organized and respectful on both sides. I have listened to a few debates where they take the opposite stand i.e. an atheist takes a theist approach and a theist takes an atheist approach. Those kind of debates include diving in opposite world views and really can make you shake your own world view. I used to debate like this in my biology class when I was in 9th grade. It was stressful for me, but it really gave me confidence in my original world view.
@ByHisCall Common Atheist..
Man, Hugh is so steady. This guy could run a psych facility and never sweat.
like a student who hasn't got a clue.
Explain@@cipndale
@@rocketman3158 what
@@cipndale ? Explain what you mean.
It's called the holy spirit
When you say "no evidence" can convince me... it means "I'm too lazy to accept that."
I admire Mr. Hugh Ross for being cool and respectable.
Atkins' main arguments:
-"No I'm/it's not" "Yes it is"
-"This is nonsense"
-"But I don't believe that"
Texitlox watch it again u missed most of this debate
Whizman Of course it is possible that I've missed a sound argument of Atkins against Ross'. Could you tell me the minute where this happened during the video? Because I don't have the time to watch it again.
Texitlox Nice try troll 🐸
Perhaps not anything "started it." Our universe may have been secreted out of yet another universe,which came from yet another, which then boils down to bubbles forming within an overarching (non-conscious) mega-verse that did not begin and will not end. It would have its own time separate from ours, so mini-verses within it can have their own apparent beginnings. Beginnings within a necessary mega-verse that never began. Why not? It's a philosophical idea as much as theism.
Texitlox
Atkins is committed to atheism regardless of how unlikely "mathematically speaking" this universe exist to support advanced life. His theory isn't falsifiable and therefore isn't a theory at all.
Well done Hugh, keeping your calm in the face of absurdity and arrogance. Much love Dr Ross ❤️
Peter was not that bad y'all need to relax in the comment section🤣🤣
@@ashley_brown6106 He was even worse.
“A belief system that isn’t falsifiable isn’t worth anything” damn, Ross is a savage
Peter already seems tense
Hugh has such a calm and beautiful confidence.
You could say the same about Peter👍
It’s because of his Asperger‘s
More like chief of the village of the damned or some Lynchian giant
Jace Izzonn
Yes, Peter is not yelling and has an inside voice. But you’re right, he is terribly antagonistic and throws ad hominems left and right, and uses this ridiculous rhetoric to denounce the other side.
It’s easy to be that confident when you’re completely delusional.
"9 different kinds of nothing and each of these nothing is actually something" that made me laugh out loud. How far are some willing to go in refusing God.
Lol. "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools."
A war in in heaven (or in the heavens) & still waring hence spiritual warfare & 1/3 of angels being cast out of heaven...what Satan thought of as a successful assassination (my interpretation of salvation through Jesus) turned out to be a sacrifice for our sake!
As far as they will be allowed
Revelation, during God's wrath, tells how atheists will beg rocks to fall on them, rather than bow down to God and accept Jesus. It's sad to see how Atkins has chosen that same attitude.
This was a great debate, the host facilitated the discussion well by letting the guest throughly explain their points.
The ending summed up Peter perfectly, he's not pro science he's simply anti God, it doesn't matter if its true or not to him, he won't acknowledge it ever. He's a lost cause.
I love Dr Ross! He DESTROYED that guy. So much love and wisdom. It's amazing how good your arguments are when you have the truth
"So much love and wisdom." Some call it charme - that's his trick.
Hugh: Says something...
Peter: No, no it doesn't.
I don’t understand how these debaters didn’t come to know Peter’s “cut off” style yet and give him a taste of his own medicine.....they are too nice to him.
and it's all he's got.. The man can't debate his way out of a wet paper bag!
The more Peter speaks he proves God exist. Particle charge balance to zero explains that something had to happen to pull them apart. I want an explanation of WHY "nothing rolled over into something".
@@SeanbreedSelymrecords They cannot do it, not because there are not allowed, but because they simply can't. He is too good of what he is doing by profession (chemist) and calls for clarification for every term the opponent spits out. I know that he simply acts like a professor questioning his students wording but that is the position his opponents put themselves into.
@@SeanbreedSelymrecords right!! Like Chris Wallace moderating Trump & Biden 🤦🏼♀️
I couldn't see any strong atheistic argument from Atkins. He has more an attitude problem rather than being a rational, humble thinker.
Hugh Ross is amazing. GOD LIVES !
What a clear contrast like a primal icon of good versus evil
Found Hugh Ross today. This guy is Gods Scientist. Awesome.
Dude is amazing.
Very calm and sensible. I love the character.
@@fullarmor7599 me too, he is awesome!
That's the oxymoron of the century.
There’s others as well…Dr James Tour
Hugh Ross is a real example of how to share our faith. It's a shame we don't all have his intellect. Hopefully we can learn from his approach and God will help us. It's not about proving who is right. It's about being saved in the end of this life.
Thank God we all don't have Hugh's intelligence, or we might all believe in his foolish teaching of billions of years, NOT SCRIPTURAL, that's for sure.
@@BEHONESTORELSE wdym
Study to show thyself approved unto God. A workman who need not be ashamed. Hugh is ALWAYS studying, researching, reading and writing. It's amazing what God can teach us if we are willing.
Three questions for Peter:
1) If the pinnacle of human intellectual achievement would be to create something out of absolutely nothing, why then is it too hard to allow for the possibility of an Intelligent Designer who can do this? Would you admire that person?
2) If nothingness can turn into something, why haven't all of the somethings rolled back into nothing? What's maintaining this reality?
3) If the most simple solution is often the best, why are you trying so hard to avoid the possibility of God? Wouldn't God be the most simple and elegant solution?
god would have to be more complex then the entire universe and know exactly what he was creating and still have some shared characteristics with humans for some reason while also being disappointed with his creation when the first people in his creation did not act as he expected so he punished them and their descendants forever.
@@rogertheultimaterabbit thank you for the thought-provoking comment! :) Yes, God is mind-boggingly intelligent and complex, far beyond anything we can comprehend. Human sin was always a possibility when he permitted us free-will, along with the angels too. It does deeply hurt him that we've all made that choice to reject his standard at one point or another.
But scripture speaks of how Jesus was involved in the design processes from the very foundation of the universe. Through the person of Jesus, God prepared in advance a way to provide us with a way to be reconciled to himself through this sacrifice of Jesus's life to pay for our sinfulness. We don't have to experience punishment forever...in his great generosity and love from the very beginning, he planned ahead a way for us humans to experience life to the fullest!
I love this: "The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance." 2 Peter 3:9
I can see the attempted neutrality of the moderator (admittedly not easy) constantly got the impression that Peter Atkins had to defend himself 1 against 2 - somewhat slightly he even appeared being laughed at - still I was impressed how everything on both sides was done reasonably fairly, honestly, and intelligently - how is it that Peter Atkins' voice sounds a lot as though I hear Richard Dawkin speak, he appears to me very genuine, an interesting personality, I feel love for him for his eyes to be opened
How can Atkins attack the Bible when he hasn’t even read it?
he read some of it and it was enough, its a book of nonsense, how many pages of nonsense you read doesn't change that, he is a scientist that knows religions are made up nonsense and he doesn't waste his time with them because he is a scientist doing science and writing a lot of books on science
@@davem9176 String theory is described in Genesis 1.
@@Dude_Slick nonsense
@@davem9176 String Theory in essence is described as strings of energy vibrating at differing frequencies to create all the varying densities of matter. Yes or no?
@@davem9176 Cat got your tongue Dave?
Justin, you do such a great job hosting. Very fair. Giving both sides plenty of time to talk. Thanks for the content. Keep up the great work!
He was a terrible moderator. He spoke more than Dr. Ross did.
No he didn't, he doesn't let them finish their points
HE gives too much of his own opinion. In that setting he is the moderator, not the person debating. He felt compelled to add to what they (the two debaters) were stating; or at least to clarify what they said. It was unfortunately not very professional.
They should have just tied Peter up, knocked his teeth down his throat, and then let Hugh school them both.
Thanks :-)
The believers are always so happy. Abraham Lincoln once said that after 50 man is responsible for his face 😊
Thanks for a great discussion.
"The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands. Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they display knowledge"
Psalm 19
It's fascinating to hear Peter's scientific reasoning in defence on atheism, I especially enjoyed his 'no it's not', 'no it isn't' and 'no I'm not'. Those years of study really shine through.
If you could quit sneering in ignorance long enough to get off your arse and READ some of Atkins actual scientific work you'd not post such a pitiful comment.
Atkins is one of the most distinguished scientists alive.
Ross is not.
Do you know how books work?
HAHAHAAHAHHAAHAHAHA
seriously, i dont think he even gave one arguement for his reasoning the entire debate.
@@mcmanustony what was your PhD in?
@@davidmcintyre7908 Pure mathematics- I did research on indecomposable modules over valuation rings. My work in music overtook this before finishing though I did settle an outstanding conjecture of my supervisor on minimal generating sets for these modules.
Why? What possible relevance does my academic history have to this debate?
I so much appreciate Hugh Ross’s humble approach. It’s apparent to see the humanistic arrogance clearly seen in Atkins. This debate was so enlightening watching two scientists debate the existence of God. This is why Jesus said it takes coming to Him as a “child” without arrogance and prejudice. We must lay waste our selfish pride and be willing to say “in my human nature I am unable to save my own soul from destruction”. I will pray for Peter Atkins to meet his Maker before he passes from this life. Those who reject the notion of God and His son Jesus, will certainly one day say “Lord I was wrong!”
33:36 is a very powerful statement by Dr Ross.
The law of cause and effect is a universal law that has never been violated. Why do we expect it to be violated at the cosmic creation.
It's easy to scoff and post naive comments on TH-cam!
Space-Time theorems (*):
a) "If mass exists and general relativity reliably predicts cosmic dynamics then space and time must be Created, implying a Causal Agent who transcends space and time."
(Hawking, Penrose)
b) "Any universe that expands on average has a beginning, implying a Causal Agent outside of space and time that Creates space, time, matter, and energy."
(Borde, Vilenkin, Guth)
1) *The Bible documents that the Universe is expanding. - See these 5 Biblical Authors and 11 Biblical texts: (Job 9:8, Psalms 104:2, Isaiah 40:22, Isaiah 42:5, Isaiah 44:24, Isaiah 45:12, Isaiah 48:13, Isaiah 51:13, Zechariah 12:1, Jeremiah 10:12, Jeremiah 51:15)
2) *The Bible documents that God is the Causal Agent that Created the Universe (all space, time, matter, and energy) in the beginning. Genesis 1:1.
- Dr. Max Planck PhD Nobel Laureate said, "All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter."
"The more I examine the universe the more evidence I find that the universe in some sense must have known we were coming.”
Freeman Dyson
-Disturbing the Universe page 250
“The impression of design is overwhelming”
Paul Davies.
-The Cosmic Blueprint page 203
“Arranging the cosmos as we think it is arranged would have required a miracle.”
Dyson, Kleban, & Susskind
Quoted by Phillip Ball, Nature News 08/12/02
“An unknown agent beyond space and time intervened in the evolution of the universe for reasons of its own.”
Dyson, Kleban, & Susskind
Quoted by Phillip Ball, Nature News 08/12/02
You simply can’t handle the fact that God is the Causal Agent, it bursts the self imposed ignorance of the indoctrinated atheist.
how would we test if cause and effect are not universal ? It is an assumption but not theoretically necessary, more a viewpoint on a particular view of time.
@@rogertheultimaterabbit I’m sorry, and I do mean that I am sorry, but this is incorrect. Go back and listen to this part again. Study into it more. That is a poor poor comment to say. It is simply incorrect. Notice how Peter starts to cut off Hugh once he says this, because Peter knows he’s right but has to in some way swing it back towards the atheist side because he simply does not want there to be a God. It’s obvious.
You know what the real amazing thought out of this whole debate is. God still loves Peter Atkins and longs for him to turn to Him.
Amen 🙏🏽
Jesus is always knocking at the door....waiting to enter our hearts....to grant us free gift of eternal and abundant life, why dont we let Him come in ?
@@kongchan437 Because man loves his sin and doesn't want the righteousness of God. Very sad.
Agree, all of us Christians should pray for Atkins and all humans who deny God and his offer of Salvation. Like the guy Pazuil ( sp of his last name). He posted alot on this issue
@@fredweber6585 how you know only Christianity is true
Hugh Ross just POWER bombed Peter Atkins through the debate table!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Oh my goodness.
1 Corinthians 1:19For it is written: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.” c
Tellalli Media WOW this verse blew my mind! I mean truly awesome to read! God knows all and is all. Thank you for sharing this verse.
@@connordurham4289 Yes brother I am in awe myself everytime I read this verse how true and coherent it is. Glad you appreciate it. Be blessed.
No he didn't
I cant compete with that many exclamation marks!!!.. Told you!
I am at 7:44 minutes and Hugh has already won the debate before even having spoken...