@@cowdaddy4595Alex really did take it easy on him. He could have evicerated him. But he had to keep him in the chair. If Ben storms off, he doesn’t get anything.
Exactly. A message of God ought to be eternally true, holding up throughout the ages. - It does not because we either change interpretation or adapt. - because of that it can not have been the message of God. If reality does not longer seem to match with the early interpretations.. then that is another reason to delegitimize the moral claims from being divine.
Something i could stand to see more of from some of the athiest debate community, honestly (I'm an atheist). There have to be hard stops at some points of course, and sometimes you do end up having to basically hit someone over the head with a verbal response to something completely out of left field. But sometimes skipping over or allowing a bad argument go by without a swing, as it were, can get to more important points that might not be reached through other methods. It's a tough needle to thread though, and there are some completely deranged people that come to the debate table at times that shouldnt be given the time of day, let alone a platform for some of their ideas and ive actually unsubscribed from a couple of the more popular debate platforms/outlets because of it.
Yeah, it seemed like his main goal with that last question was to just highlight how ridiculous Ben's argument was about how apparently his all-knowing and all-seeing God couldn't even grant slaves the slightest bit of reprieve by freeing them completely after seven years. Even after Ben admitted that slavery was wrong back then, God still couldn't do the bare minimum with slavery that he was permitting. So what does that say about his own morality?
Ben is the perfect personalization of all bark no bite. Dude relies on his fast talking to overwhelm his opponents so he can just claim lack of a full argument. Until he debates someone other than random students and audience plants. Then he has no true argument, just rhetoric.
Imagine defending a god sooooo incredibly weak, that he tells people not to wear clothes of more than one type of thread.....but he bows to human morality on slavery to "woo" us out of it?
I just ate shrimp AND a hamburger with cheese on it after cursing out my physically and emotionally abusive parents so therefore I deserve to die by the stone for my sins! I elect Benji Shapipo to cast the first stone since he's obviously the most manly and righteous member of our society. May the first stone cast by his limp wristed throw strike me with righteous fury! 😂
Exactly, why would an omnipotent and omniscient god waste time throwing a tantrum instead of just going there and using his damn powers to make people act the way he wants?
Yeah that's why it's called faith. Are there no people on the left who believe in God? Or is this like John Lennon said in his song. Why don't lefties believe in God? I'm more what you would call a conservative. Although I don't like to use that because my beliefs have structure based in the right and the left.
that's a funny statement because the bible has been responsible for more factual information past, present, and future than any man-made facts have been able to catch up to.. and as a matter of FACT... A majority of the facts that people take pride in were initial facts taken from the bible as a foundation to build upon. in reality science and ATHEISM are more feelings-based than religion. if you research into the motivations of all early scientists then you will begin to realize that they weren't just randomly tinkering with things based on a random idea but were basing their science off of a book called "the bible". it can be argued that neither science nor Atheism would exist without FEELING some way about what religion imposed on the masses initially.
@@ghettolionking Please give some examples of biblical facts. I wonder what world you live in where science/ atheism can't exist without religion, lol.
@@rennnnn914….I can guess the vibe of what you may be pointing at but do not know what you’re saying. Please rephrase your statement so it is less incoherent.
Alex O'Connor has spoken before the House of Lords in England several times; it's basically the equivalent of Congress. Ben Shapiro is a Ytube troll, where Alex is recognized by the Government of his home Country. This was not an interaction between equals.
@@arcadiaberger9204 BenjiSlaperiro thinks of himself as an educated person, unfortunately his brain has been broken by religious and conservative nonsense. The only reason he was seen as "winning" is because he had responses that indoctrinated people are conditioned to accept as "true". He has never actually debated a serious Philosopher or expert on any subject.
Ben can be cornered so easily because he is intellectually dishonest, and knows it. In a proper debate, he would lose badly. He actually contradicts himself so often he would end up in a negative points scenario. It just goes to show you how little talent you need to be considered "intellectual" in the U.S.
In a proper debate he HAS lost badly... No need to speculate, we have it on record. He tricked the dumbest people into thinking he was some sort of logical debate genius, because he specialized in punching down on first-year college students (who, let's be honest, are also kind of... ignorant? in a way?). It's like if I went around roundhouse-kicking five-year-olds and a bunch of incels started saying, "Oh man, matt is so tough, he's never lost a fight!" He literally ended a debate by saying, "Well I have more Twitter followers than you!" as if THAT matters to anyone!
To be fair he didnt admit slavery was wrong - *technically* Ben is arguing that it was a time bound immorality. I actually think the problem for Ben, and he even pointed it out earlier, is that scripture is actually indeed constantly re-interpreted.
Alex O’Connor is miles above almost anyone else out there when it comes to very good analytical debate. He’s exceptionally good and he buries Ben in this interview.
eh his first counter-example about the slave's family was pretty weak why not just ask what ben means about an all-powerful god worrying about what's practicable
It's a bit of a bummer to read all the comments about how "Ben Shapiro finally lost because he faced a *superior debater* at last". Alex O'Connor is definitely a better debater than Ben (and a more intelligent man...) , but the most important reason why Ben failed to make sense in this debate is because HIS POSITION doesn't make any sense _to begin with._ It's not *all* about debate skills. At the end of the day - Ben Shapiro was - and is - simply WRONG.
Not really a "whim". Religion has a problem with free will and knowing the future. Those two things are incompatible. If their god knows the future, anything he creates can't actually choose to deviate from that known future. Furthermore, the god itself wouldn't be able to deviate from what it knows it will do. Knowing the future kills free will and omnipotence.
@@TheHuxleyAgnostic I don't think we understand time well enough to say that. For example, if time is like a thread, and God is a being that can move backwards and forwards on that thread, whereas we can only move in one direction, the ability to see what goes on over time is not the same thing as controlling it. You can passively observe it. And if time is a thread like that, then the idea of "the present" becomes somewhat meaningless. Of course, God would have to be at least one dimension higher than "time", because if he wasn't, then he would forget and remember things as he moved forward and back through time. Maybe. We don't understand time. Relativity makes it possible that what we consider the future, already exists.
@@TheHuxleyAgnostic you can believe whatever you want, but you just put a restriction on god, which is considered to be all knowing, all powerful. This contradiction you bring up doesnt apply to a being that can change the future whenever it so chooses to. It cannot restrict a being that no restriction can be put on. In these religious faiths, people believe god knows your future, but god knows all futures and it is within his power to change it or let it be. So to a theist, what you said would not convince them to be atheist. The point is, you dont know the future. Any choice from your perspective is a choice of free will. There is nothing stopping you from making a choice, but god knows in advance which choice you take. So then the question is why, create the universe? Why test humans? These are philosophical questions that people feel they need a good answer to, before they believe in religion. If this all powerful being knows everything, why waste the time letting it play out? For example, the multiverse theory, scientists have a theory that every choice gives birth to different universes, in which every possible choice you made did happen, and you are one of many versions of yourself, so people can look at this and say, do my choices matter? From the perspective of a being that can see all possible choices you can make, to them, none of your choices matter because every option was taken. But even then, from your perspective, it does, because you are limited to your own universe, your own perspective, and so any action you take affects you, not any other version of you. Now most religions have different answers as to what our purpose is, but I am not really here to preach, im just trying to let you know why your argument wont really convince a theist, and it really doesnt matter if you can. On the other hand, theists ground their belief on casuality, because science doesnt explain how the universe came to be. And I wont say for certain, but im not sure we will ever learn how, we can learn everything, from the start to present, and predict what the future looks like, but there is no "information" that is in this universe that will explain what was before it or caused it because it doesnt exist. Everything in this universe came into existence after the big bang. People also do the risk benefit analysis with religion. They can believe, and/or practice in this life, and if there is a higher being, then cool, they get to go to heaven. If they believe but all that awaits is nothingness afterwards, then what was the harm? You likely wouldve lived a fulfilling life, like any other person. Now, if you arent a believer, and there happens to be a god waiting for you after you die, then that would suck, because at that time, you cant argue atheism or why you didnt think god exists because you would be proof in itself of gods existence, the universe everything. TLDR, believe what you want but atheists wont be able to convince religious people to not be religious and vice versa. Live your life and be happy.
Kid: AGAGAGUGU! Ben: According to the judeochristian beliefs of logical fallacy the point is to conclude Israel as a biological organism manifactured by political tendencies Kid: AGAGAGUGUGAGA! Ben: You're wrong
Because talking fast to him is proof he's smarter. What Ben wants is noise from his side, lots of noise, then there's silence while the other person listens and takes in so much information. That moment kids see as a mic drop or unanswered point. It's not. That's why he debates with younger people, because it makes him look better
When's the last time you defended the Bible in a intellectual debate? It isn't easy. At least he tries because the end result is positive. Believing in God that is. There is nothing good resulting from the other side's argument.
@@foresight87 not really, that’s a strategy of speech, to pepper the opponent with whatever to create confusion in the listener, because they will be impressionable, and with luck, the opponent, if such person is a light weight like him.
Sam is right, and everything that could go wrong with this whole endeavor has gone wrong in Israel. See David Sheen’s lecture titled Messiah Mode, and all sorts of Israeli educators are talking about how slavery is good, and killing babies is okay at times, and on and on. It’s just horrible and I assume heretical.
@@zanzir07 I mean, he's not super famous and mainly know for his atheism. Maybe she just didn't know anything else about him. Hopefully he's fame and influence will grow and she'll get to know hi..
It is all too convenient for a spoiled man. I love how Ben says things like “The question is” . . . When the other guy is actually asking the questions.
When someone needs organized religion to have any morality at all, that should tell you everything you need to know about that person and how dangerous they really are.
I actually disagree with this take. To understand why we need to take a good hard look at our own morality. Our morality is based on social values. Religion is a way to judge social values next to morality. For example god says murder is ok. Social values say no. Which is true depends on which value system is inherently true, as the principal itself cant he determined. After all how do we test if murder is objectively wrong.
@@adil2curtay Here’s the test. Assuming you’re not mentally impaired/disabled. Would you want to be murdered? No. Test over. Murder is objectively wrong.
@michaelm4597 omg. The biblical god commits and commands murders throughout the old testament in particular. The very FIRST act Moses did when he brought down the 10 commandments (including thou shalt not kill) was to murder 3,000 of his fellow Jews for his god. Why? Because they had worshipped a different god/idol. Apart from commanding many genocides of entire peoples, the biblical god commanded stoning to death (aka murder) for women who couldn't "prove" their virginity on their wedding night, for anyone who worships a different god, for atheists, for unruly kids, for picking up sticks to cook your food on Sunday/sabbath, for blasphemy, for adultery (if you're female), for disobeying your priest, etc, etc, etc.
Maybe we shouldn't automatically respect Harvard law students that much. All we really know about them is that they're good at studying and memorization, that doesn't necessarily mean that they're especially smart/wise overal or good at critical thinking. There's videos of philosophy lectures at Harvard, where the students ask questions, the lecturer is awesome but the students don't exactly give me a high opinion of what it takes to be admitted in Harvard lmao.
I just get embarassed for humanity that he exists, or I guess I should say that he exists as some kind of person who should be given any attention by the media.
Yes, but his personal identity , financial security, and social network is dependent on his continual support of bad ideas ...... Even if Shapiro HAD a personal change of heart, he could never admit it.
He (Shapiro) did say in a video once that you should go to a fancy liberal university, tell the professors what they want to hear so you can get the degree, but don’t actually listen to, or learn anything from the people there. I think it shows.
Yeah but then there was that whole situation where he fell into the veganism cult (which is distinct from simply being a vegan). So he's certainly not immune to preaching some bad theology and philosophy.
@@oktokyno3874 No. When you sound as unhinged as the likes of VeganGains or that crazy neighbor who thinks BBQing on your property is illegal because they might breath in meat particles then you've lost the plot. Being vegan is going to become more widely adopted and practical over time. But the cult crowd are something else entirely and O'Connor was in that clique.
@@atlaskinzel6560 my point is he also does it out of a place of fear, he has at least some idea of how thin his knowledge and understanding of this stuff is. this is not a well-done gish gallop, it's ham-fisted desperation. a real gish gallop would reference actual potentially vexing questions rather than just repeat how it all comes from the judeo-christian tradition.
It's a frustrating technique used by people when they know they've been caught, or are desperately trying to avoid something. The nice thing is, it's very easy to recognize. Talk fast, talk over the other person, and keep talking until you can change the subject. Or, as lawyers put it: "If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts; if you have the law on your side, pound the law; if you have neither the facts nor the law, pound the table."
God literally issued commandments to his people, and, in some cases, killed them for not obeying, but, according to Ben, God had to woo them away from slavery.
Haha, yes Alex has a long-standing TH-cam channel focussed upon beliefs about God as well as an Oxford degree; Polite debate in Oxford is a lethal sport.
Alex O’Connor is awesome, but yeah he’s one of the most polite, well-spoken respectful people you’ll ever watch. Cosmic skeptic has been a fave of mine before he was even accepted into Oxford. We was that wicked smart and quick even in what might be considered high school in the US
Oh! I recommend you watch the Indian movie “PK” starring Amir Khan. The whole narrative is taking the piss out of religions (not faith) and the climax has the protagonist asking why people think they need to take actions to defend an omnipotent being.
Ben makes his god sound SUPER lame too. He can't do shit! If you are literally an omnipotent, omniscient god.. then there is literally no reason to worry about society's reaction to any religious declaration (such as the freeing of slaves).. because if people freaked out about it, you could just make them.... not. You're God, after all.
Just goes to show how far high falutin fast talk will take ya 😂 The bar is very low these days - people seem to conflate the above with actual intelligence and measured thought. We're pretty much doomed lol
This event between ben and alex o connor was actually billed as a conversation between the two of them. neither is the host. sam and the team were incorrect in calling alex that. the host actually sits between alex and ben. you can see him in the clips, but he doesn’t talk much, since he was supposed to be sortof neutral.
Arguing against a conservative on the subject of religion is entry level debate. Their hypocrisy makes it impossible for them to take a genuine moral position.
@@hurmur9528 almost everyone in maga want to “make America graat again” and they explain they want to go back to the 50’s. Before civil rights for black ppl. And women joined the workforce. It may not be all conservatives but maga is like 40% of them.
That is true. That's why social cohesion by itself isn't a compelling argument. Taking away a girl from a father that beats and rapes her is breaking up the family but it's for a very justifiable reason. Preserving social harmony isn't always a good thing. Sometimes that social harmony is build on some pretty rotten foundations.
How would it be a social discohesion if god is the source of rules in the first place? Clearly the society would work according to his word even if he banned slavery since the beginning. Or was he slacking since the moment he created universe up until the moment when slavery was already established, so he couldn't ban it at once? What about the commandment DO NOT KILL? He had no problem with banning killing immediately and he knew people would be killing each other for other millenia. Religion is BS.
Ben Shapiro makes words up to sound interesting and intellectually sentient, "discohesion" is not a word in the English language, least it is not in any reputable dictionary I have seen. The closest word is "dyscohesive" meaning loosening intercellular connections. Discohesion as used by Shapiro is of fictional entomology and meaning. The only place you will find it is on wiktionary and no doubt shapiro put it there to prove the word exists. (That's a joke btw about shaprio putting it there, hes not that smart).
So Gods failure to condemn lesbianism is God playing the long game to incrementally reveal he doesn't think homosexuality is a sin? Thanks Ben! I never realised!
Well apparently he also incrementally reveals that to his followers since Shapeeno still thinks homosexuality is a sin. God works in pretty fucking mysterious ways indeed.
@@skontheroadMakes ya wonder why an all loving god would make some of his followers homosexuals then go "yeah that thing I put in you (and many, many species of animals), don't act upon it mkay?"
Yeah that's what I was thinking God doesn't seem to care much about disrupting our social norms he caused a flood to kill off almost all of humanity and turned whole cities to salt. If he wanted to get rid of slavery he could've simply turned every slave owner to salt we would've got the message very quickly.
Yes, there are different debating styles, but more appreciation could be shown at how Alex O'Connor backed Ben into a corner. He did not try to make Ben look silly; Ben made himself look silly and he knew it. You can hear it in his voice.
Ben is like the friend you have who talks really quickly, and confidently in a debate. Only when you get home you realize everything they said was full of shit.
That's because it's way easier to spout loads of BS than it is to refute it. And as they say, the lie travels halfway around the world before the truth wakes up.
One dork pretending to know it all Another pretending they know why and how that is obnoxious - us v them - e.g. Human Nature (do not expect a diff standard in this life. Become ruthlessly Independent)
I arrived to a conclusion a few years ago, the reason there isnt a "you shall not enslave others" commandment, is because the people that got that stuff written had a business to run.
What's messed up is that the commandments were presented to the chosen people in Exodus, a book that was literally about the Israelites escaping slavery.
@@fuddwrecker3773 It makes sense to me, it reads like "DO NOT OWN EACH OTHER AS SLAVES! you are all my delicate little chosen sweeties. When you get your slaves go on down to the slave shop and buy them from the inferiors."
“Facts don’t care about your feelings… unless my all-powerful god tells me to ignore all facts and just follow the rules of his book… or unless enough time has gone by to make certain parts of that book irrelevant… or unless… Ah. Screw it. I just go with my feelings.” - Ben Shapiro
From the same guy who irrationally yelled "well science has been infiltrated by the woke left" when someone pointed out that scientific consensus doesn't agree with his position, despite him claiming that was the case.
Been following Alex since long before he could grow that beard, to see him finally be able to bring up all these arguments with Ben himself after all these years is so satisfying
As a fellow long time fan of CosmicSkeptic myself, what is your opinion of him no longer being vegan after having made such airtight arguments in support if animal rights?
@@GUILLOTINE_GANGIMO, i don’t care because it’s hard to keep those habits in modern society and it’s better to be honest that he has a lifestyle lapse and still be principled. It is easy to argue towards broad societal change. Implementing personal change to prove a point is less systemically impactful but still valuable to do
@@monafairy99 I have some criticism though. "Hard to keep those habits in modern society"? As opposed to it being easy in less industrialized societies? I have been entirely plant based for three years and have never been in a position where I did not have easy access to all the macro and micro nutrients needed to thrive. I barely make 50 grand a year and yet I have never had an problem. Alex is far more wealthy than I am and therefore has access to far more resources. He decision to eat animals goes against a mountain of evidence Alex has helped build, evidence that shows there is no logical reason to consume animals outside of a survival situation. It appears you are creating a very poor excuse for a person to start doing something that Alex O'Conner himself has correctly identified as morally unacceptable.
I went into a coma in 500bc and recently woke up. Apparently God has changed his mind somewhat on slavery in the meantime and I'm no longer able to own a slave or even be a slave. Political correctness gone mad!!
“You can beat your slave as long as they don’t die. Also you can keep them as slaves for life and bequeath them to your children as property” - Bible This is somehow objectively moral but also that’s not moral anymore.
Biblical slavery has been Matt Dillahunty's go to argument for shattering theists for the best part of twenty years. I know he's not the originator of the argument, but he's spread it far and wide in the internet age. This guy-- I didn't catch his name-- wields it like a master swordsman.
Matt Dillahunty, the guy who worships the state power. Matt Dillahunty: I don't care about religious experiences or feelings show me physical evidence. Also Matt Dillahunty: Anyone who has a feeling of being a woman is woman regardless of physical realities.
@@sixmillionaccountssilenced6721Matt recognises that a Christian is a Christian because they believe they are. Even if he doesn’t agree with their baseline presupposition of a god existing. He still recognises them as such and isn’t crying and saying he is being oppressed by addressing them as Christian. You are really reaching to make a false equivalency of the 2 positions.
@@sixmillionaccountssilenced6721You revealing yourself as transphobic isn't a point. Feelings aren't facts and personal experience that are "real" to you isn't a fact that a God exist only a fact you had an experience. Gender is a social construct, it has nothing to do with human biology, that's sex. Learn the difference...
I absolutely love Alex O'Connor, if you're somebody who struggled with a religious background, I can't recommend his content enough. It's respectful. Well thought out and a perfect way to engage with the real issues behind religion and belief
Thank you for that. I'm a reformed Catholic, and until somewhat recently, I was an atheist for two decades. I'm still struggling a bit with what I believe because I despise organized religion. I will definitely be looking up Alex O'Connor. Thank you, again.
@@B_Bodziak I wish you the best of luck! Probably the biggest thing while going through deconversion is dealing with a loss of community but I can tell you right now there are wonderful communities in person and online to help lend support as you are going down this journey
I like how Ben doesn’t know that morality isn’t something that you’re taught it’s a self defined perspective of the world. The Bible teaches a set of ethics.
@@punkinmyvitamins1 I call it the 'zombie cannibal death cult book" because that's technically what it is (i suppose at this point it's only Catholics that actually believe the Eucharist you consume at church is *_literally_* the body of Jesus. Weirdos).
I love Doug Stanhope's take on the Bible: "If the Bible didn't exist, would you invent it? If you didn't know about the Bible and you found it in a bargain bin at a discount bookstore, would you believe any of it?"
My argument in agreement would be ... the Bible was invented exactly because it didn't exist back then. Also, those who read the Bible NOW obviously don't believe a word in it, or they wouldn't act the way they do. "Me thinks they doth proselytize (and at the same time, profane) too much"
The Bible is like any movie you go to the theater to see that says "Based on True events", it might have the names of people who really existed. But the movie is literal Bullshit when it comes to any amount of true events or even possible events. And Each person watching it will filter it through their own experiences and come out with a completely different view of what the movie is trying to say.
The Bible is a book of best practises. Certain best practises are timelessly unchanging while others are situational. Disputes arise around defining which is what.
@@andyd568 No it isn't. Linguistic drift definitionally changes context, meaning and purpose of those practices. The context we filter these practices though is invariably filtered through a modern lens, which is exactly why BS has a hard time defending slavery or anything else he claims is objectively moral. It isn't objective if God can change his mind about what is moral. And the Bible has examples of God lying, creating evil, violating freewill, murdering in his name, accepting human sacrifice etc.
The idea that slavery in the Bible was a marketing decision always cracks me up. It makes me imagine a PR person coming in to talk to god about the numbers they’re seeing with middle aged male slaveowner’s and how they need to change their messaging because the Bible is not *landing* with them-all in Andy Kindler’s voice. 😂😂😂
Slavery in the Bible wasn't a marketing decision. God never condoned slavery, but in His mercy He dealt with humanity where we were, and slavery has been a part of the fallen nature of the human condition since time immemorial. God never condoned divorce either, yet He allowed Moses to write a bill of divorce for the Jews, for the hardness of their hearts. God meets us where we are, if in the depths of sin, He will meet us there and draw us out of it. Furthermore, Biblical slavery was not the African slave trade. Slaves were afforded rights, they were also to be set free in the Jubilee year, and slavery was something you could offer yourself up for to pay a debt or another reason. Finally, in the New Testament we are told slaves and masters are equal in God's eyes, giving inherent value and humanity to slaves.
The idea that the Bible or the Torah is the unadulterated word of God is insane considering we know as a mtter of historical fact that these religious texts have been curated, edited, and translated by the hands of mankind dozens of times throughout history.
Interesting that you say ‘unadulterated’… Adultery is a massive subject within the Old Testament and new, with regard to faithfulness to God, faithfulness to the truth etc. Much of the Old Testament is describing the faults of the people, and their waywardness… their inability to adhere to the laws, etc… The prophet Jeremiah, wrote about some unfaithfulness and even the kind of adultery that you mention… (take note of verse 8). Check this out: Jeremiah 8:1 “At that time,” declares YeHoVaH, “the bones of the kings of Judah, the bones of the officials, the bones of the priests, the bones of the prophets, and the bones of the people of Jerusalem will be removed from their graves. 2They will be exposed to the sun and moon, and to all the host of heaven which they have loved, served, followed, consulted, and worshiped. Their bones will not be gathered up or buried, but will become like dung lying on the ground. 3And wherever I have banished them, the remnant of this evil family will choose death over life,” declares YeHoVaH of Hosts. 4So you are to tell them this is what YeHoVaH says: “Do men fall and not get up again? Does one turn away and not return? 5Why then have these people turned away? Why does Jerusalem always turn away? They cling to deceit; they refuse to return. 6I have listened and heard; they do not speak what is right. No one repents of his wickedness, asking, ‘What have I done?’ Everyone has pursued his own course like a horse charging into battle. 7Even the stork in the sky knows her appointed seasons. The turtledove, the swift, and the thrush keep their time of migration, but My people do not know the requirements of YeHoVaH. 8How can you say, ‘We are wise, and the Law of YeHoVaH is with us,’ when in fact the lying pen of the scribes has produced a deception? 9The wise will be put to shame; they will be dismayed and trapped. Since they have rejected the word of YeHoVaH, what wisdom do they really have?
"God" wiped out almost all life on earth becasue he wasn't happy with the level of morality, but when it came to slavery he had to adopt a "softly, softly" approach. Yeah that makes sense. How much "social discohesion" did the flood cause?
Ben Shapiro AMAZING at arguing with easily intimidated, insecure college kids that are still trying to find their intellectual footing. You take him any deeper than the initial shock value, and he consistently keeps falling flat on his face. Kudos to him though for making a whole career and raising a family out of nothing but shock politics. I’m sure he’s a wonderful husband and father and charming to be around as long as you keep the conversation to your health and the weather. 😂
Alex's logic seems to be inconsistent especially if you watched the entire debate where Alex admits to Nihilism saying he does not believe there is free will. Shapiro dismantled him there very swiftly
@@JohnJohn-pm9wq The evidence clearly shows that free will is an elusion. Even in the context of a so called all knowing god who knows the future but can’t seem to change it, or chooses not to.
You're right, Ben. These questions have been asked many times before. That's what makes it so sad that you went into a public debate about them with no answers.
There are no good arguments. If religious people can ever get to the point where they just acknowledge all of the obvious issues with their religious texts, just be like "hey it was written and edited throughout history by human beings, it makes me happy to believe in a God and in spite of all the problematic stuff we can write off as obviously immoral, I think there's still a lot of good in it, but at the end of the day I believe all that matters is that you're good and decent to people, etc etc" then fine I'm with ya.
Mind Begs the Question: - If God forbids Usury/Interest Banking - Religion A and B practice,impose Usury - Religion C condemns Usury - Which one following God?
@@trevorwills1600 I agree that there are no good arguments, which is certainly a reason why Ben can't come up with one, but he always has the option of the honest answer you put above...or honest for a lot of people, maybe not for Ben...or you could at least do a better job spewing a bs answer than Ben did. Even if you're being dishonest when you know what the questions are going to be ahead of time you should be able to come up with a dishonest answer that's harder to pin down than Ben's was.
I noticed this problem (though it didn't totally sink in until years later) writing a couple of exegesis papers for college bibal classes. You picked a verse and wrote on it using sources. You quickly find resources are interpreting the same verse differently. Each using a different set of other verses to support their interpretation. One saying "these verses directly refer to it" while others say it's completely other verses. You finally just have to pick one interpretation to be the one you go with. Essentially being a coin toss as to which way you go with it. I can remember my first one sitting there going "which way do I go?" and finally just basically throwing up my hands and picking. I know all other students faced this same problem but we all just pretended it didn't exist. You have to to keep the belief going. A kind of "well maybe I just don't see the logic here". Yeah there never was logic to it.
Explain why slavery still exists in Africa? Explain why gay people are killed in Africa, the Mid East. Explain why child brides exist in India. Explain why women have no rights in Africa, Mid East, India, Pakistán. Don’t blame God. It’s all about power. Where are the protesters for the above.
Eh… God works in mysterious ways? In the beginning of the debate Ben said that this is always true and man can not understand Gods actions. He admitted that it was a logical cop out but he still said it was valid. I would call bullshit on that. Since it gets so muddy. In the end what the hell is gods word anyhow. Is it the intepretetion of what is important in the Bible? Then it is really just nothing standing on pillars of nothing.
the closest to an actual response ive heard is an attempt to say the rule against kidnapping was a condemnation of slavery. Thing is, it was actually a rule against kidnapping fellow hebrews into slavery and doesnt really seem concerned with others. Oh, and it is also just a couple verses BEFORE the rules given on who, how to buy, and how to treat slaves. odd placement if it was meant to condemn it right before it gave out rules on how to do it.
@@tremas3329 yeah it trips all over itself....again. PS: Has anyone pointed out that when it comes to heaping misery on the Jews, God was the greatest anti-semite there ever was.
It's almost as if Shapiro can't win an argument with anyone over the age of 19.....
Its funny because Alex is the Sam Seder of youtube theology. Just a lot more British and nice
I think you’re vastly underestimating teenagers.
Yeah he thought Alex was 18 which is why he got wrecked.
Hahahahaha. Yes !
Exactly!! On point
Ben should stick to debating 18 year-olds
😂😂😂😂💯
He should stick to debating 10 year olds. 😬
There’s a video of a kindergartner owning Ben Shapiro. It’s hilarious.
@@thecrimsoncure8201 Whoa. He should just stick with people who he stands above on a stage. Ben's gotten owned by kindergartners before.
@@elisawhitman8526 bruh fr 😂 💀I believe you 😂
Ben Shapiro: God couldn’t say “No one can own slaves.’ But wearing mixed fabrics and shrimp cocktails are off the fuggin table.
You see Ben debating with random university kids, and clowns are clapping. But today he is pulverized.
And Alex took it really easy oh him. Too easy.
@@cowdaddy4595Alex really did take it easy on him. He could have evicerated him. But he had to keep him in the chair. If Ben storms off, he doesn’t get anything.
Ben admits that religious principles evolved over time, which demonstrates how man-made it really is.
It's because you lived in an environment where religions are man made i can't blame you
@@0zai_i how did you verify that your particular sect was informed by some magical entity?
@@_sarpa nah it's pretty easy to tell
Exactly.
A message of God ought to be eternally true, holding up throughout the ages.
- It does not because we either change interpretation or adapt.
- because of that it can not have been the message of God.
If reality does not longer seem to match with the early interpretations.. then that is another reason to delegitimize the moral claims from being divine.
Lots of men tripping off manna listening to the voices in their head in ancient times. Today we call them schizophrenics
He’s not being generous. He’s just a good debater. He’s not getting emotional. He’s calmly cornering Shapiro.
Something i could stand to see more of from some of the athiest debate community, honestly (I'm an atheist). There have to be hard stops at some points of course, and sometimes you do end up having to basically hit someone over the head with a verbal response to something completely out of left field. But sometimes skipping over or allowing a bad argument go by without a swing, as it were, can get to more important points that might not be reached through other methods. It's a tough needle to thread though, and there are some completely deranged people that come to the debate table at times that shouldnt be given the time of day, let alone a platform for some of their ideas and ive actually unsubscribed from a couple of the more popular debate platforms/outlets because of it.
Yeah, it seemed like his main goal with that last question was to just highlight how ridiculous Ben's argument was about how apparently his all-knowing and all-seeing God couldn't even grant slaves the slightest bit of reprieve by freeing them completely after seven years. Even after Ben admitted that slavery was wrong back then, God still couldn't do the bare minimum with slavery that he was permitting. So what does that say about his own morality?
Ben’s wearing a ladies’ cap. Brave!
your right, just boxed him in
He can't debate anybody older than 18😅.
Ben is the perfect personalization of all bark no bite.
Dude relies on his fast talking to overwhelm his opponents so he can just claim lack of a full argument.
Until he debates someone other than random students and audience plants. Then he has no true argument, just rhetoric.
Misspelling. You must surely mean "personification"?
Imagine defending a god sooooo incredibly weak, that he tells people not to wear clothes of more than one type of thread.....but he bows to human morality on slavery to "woo" us out of it?
Oh and make sure to worship me on this day and this way.
Or tell women to cover their faces.
I just ate shrimp AND a hamburger with cheese on it after cursing out my physically and emotionally abusive parents so therefore I deserve to die by the stone for my sins! I elect Benji Shapipo to cast the first stone since he's obviously the most manly and righteous member of our society. May the first stone cast by his limp wristed throw strike me with righteous fury! 😂
And a woman is forced to marry her rapist (Deuteronomy 22:28-29) while I get murdered just for being gay...?
Exactly, why would an omnipotent and omniscient god waste time throwing a tantrum instead of just going there and using his damn powers to make people act the way he wants?
Religion is literally feelings over facts.
Yeah that's why it's called faith. Are there no people on the left who believe in God? Or is this like John Lennon said in his song. Why don't lefties believe in God? I'm more what you would call a conservative. Although I don't like to use that because my beliefs have structure based in the right and the left.
that's a funny statement because the bible has been responsible for more factual information past, present, and future than any man-made facts have been able to catch up to.. and as a matter of FACT... A majority of the facts that people take pride in were initial facts taken from the bible as a foundation to build upon. in reality science and ATHEISM are more feelings-based than religion. if you research into the motivations of all early scientists then you will begin to realize that they weren't just randomly tinkering with things based on a random idea but were basing their science off of a book called "the bible". it can be argued that neither science nor Atheism would exist without FEELING some way about what religion imposed on the masses initially.
@@ghettolionking Please give some examples of biblical facts. I wonder what world you live in where science/ atheism can't exist without religion, lol.
@@rennnnn914….I can guess the vibe of what you may be pointing at but do not know what you’re saying.
Please rephrase your statement so it is less incoherent.
Not islam
Ben made a big mistake debating this guy. He's well educated and has been running philosophical circles around TH-cam haters for years now.
Alex O'Connor has spoken before the House of Lords in England several times; it's basically the equivalent of Congress.
Ben Shapiro is a Ytube troll, where Alex is recognized by the Government of his home Country.
This was not an interaction between equals.
Was this when BS began only "debating" unprepared college students...?
@@arcadiaberger9204 BenjiSlaperiro thinks of himself as an educated person, unfortunately his brain has been broken by religious and conservative nonsense.
The only reason he was seen as "winning" is because he had responses that indoctrinated people are conditioned to accept as "true".
He has never actually debated a serious Philosopher or expert on any subject.
At least Shapiro didn't walk out of the interview in a huff when he was interviewed by Andrew Neil on the BBC.
@@Sophie.S.. Never let it be forgot, the day Andrew Neil was too far left for BS to tolerate his presence.
Ben can be cornered so easily because he is intellectually dishonest, and knows it.
In a proper debate, he would lose badly. He actually contradicts himself so often he would end up in a negative points scenario.
It just goes to show you how little talent you need to be considered "intellectual" in the U.S.
Ain't that the truth?
Especially on the right
Well Shapiro is trying to defend religion which is indefensible against anyone with basic knowledge and debate skills.
Ya his whole ideology is trash.
In a proper debate he HAS lost badly...
No need to speculate, we have it on record. He tricked the dumbest people into thinking he was some sort of logical debate genius, because he specialized in punching down on first-year college students (who, let's be honest, are also kind of... ignorant? in a way?).
It's like if I went around roundhouse-kicking five-year-olds and a bunch of incels started saying, "Oh man, matt is so tough, he's never lost a fight!"
He literally ended a debate by saying, "Well I have more Twitter followers than you!" as if THAT matters to anyone!
@@Moonie95lol there are just as many loud morons on the left mate. Quit the tribal stuff
Imagine being such a powerless god that you need Ben Shapiro to come to your defense.
Best comment in my opinion 😂😂
Damn thats COLD LOLOL
STAWP 😭😭
@@jaeh722 next bestest comment imo.
NICE
Becomes problematic when you consider that admitting slavery was always wrong means that obeying God meant you were acting immorally
it did. there are plenty of things in many religions that we see as immoral. from slavery to seeing and treating women as property.
Because religion is a personal philosophy not one to be forced upon a society or community.
To be fair he didnt admit slavery was wrong - *technically* Ben is arguing that it was a time bound immorality. I actually think the problem for Ben, and he even pointed it out earlier, is that scripture is actually indeed constantly re-interpreted.
@@dan91121 I think that's contrary to his statement because he says slavery was always wrong.
No. Bible written by men obviously would allow making money by slavery. Moronic to believe God wrote anything
Alex O’Connor is miles above almost anyone else out there when it comes to very good analytical debate. He’s exceptionally good and he buries Ben in this interview.
Could use another Rationality Rules collab.
eh his first counter-example about the slave's family was pretty weak why not just ask what ben means about an all-powerful god worrying about what's practicable
Alex is absolutely brilliant. If anyone is interested in getting into the philosophy of religion please check out alex
He's just a clone of Genetically Modified Skeptic or a bunch of other skeptic channels. He's not very impressive.
@@TheMahayanist not at all
“Trust me on this, it’ll take a couple of thousand years but trust me “ 😂😂😂
I think God is an incel.
It's a bit of a bummer to read all the comments about how "Ben Shapiro finally lost because he faced a *superior debater* at last".
Alex O'Connor is definitely a better debater than Ben (and a more intelligent man...) , but the most important reason why Ben failed to make sense in this debate is because HIS POSITION doesn't make any sense _to begin with._ It's not *all* about debate skills. At the end of the day - Ben Shapiro was - and is - simply WRONG.
Agreed and Christian religion doesn't make sense ... Buddhism makes sense, but that's not a religion.
@@basengelblik5199 Buddhism IS a religion. You just make up nonsense as you go along?
@@basengelblik5199if you don’t think Buddhism is a religion, I don’t think you’ve been to a Buddhist temple or spoken to a Buddhist priest…
"God didn't want to cause social discohesion." The same God that flooded the entire planet on a whim 😂
Not really a "whim". Religion has a problem with free will and knowing the future. Those two things are incompatible. If their god knows the future, anything he creates can't actually choose to deviate from that known future. Furthermore, the god itself wouldn't be able to deviate from what it knows it will do. Knowing the future kills free will and omnipotence.
The same god who changed up everyone's language so they couldn't understand each other. Because they built a tall tower.
@@TheHuxleyAgnostic I don't think we understand time well enough to say that. For example, if time is like a thread, and God is a being that can move backwards and forwards on that thread, whereas we can only move in one direction, the ability to see what goes on over time is not the same thing as controlling it. You can passively observe it. And if time is a thread like that, then the idea of "the present" becomes somewhat meaningless. Of course, God would have to be at least one dimension higher than "time", because if he wasn't, then he would forget and remember things as he moved forward and back through time. Maybe. We don't understand time. Relativity makes it possible that what we consider the future, already exists.
@@TheHuxleyAgnostic you can believe whatever you want, but you just put a restriction on god, which is considered to be all knowing, all powerful. This contradiction you bring up doesnt apply to a being that can change the future whenever it so chooses to. It cannot restrict a being that no restriction can be put on. In these religious faiths, people believe god knows your future, but god knows all futures and it is within his power to change it or let it be. So to a theist, what you said would not convince them to be atheist.
The point is, you dont know the future. Any choice from your perspective is a choice of free will. There is nothing stopping you from making a choice, but god knows in advance which choice you take. So then the question is why, create the universe? Why test humans? These are philosophical questions that people feel they need a good answer to, before they believe in religion. If this all powerful being knows everything, why waste the time letting it play out?
For example, the multiverse theory, scientists have a theory that every choice gives birth to different universes, in which every possible choice you made did happen, and you are one of many versions of yourself, so people can look at this and say, do my choices matter? From the perspective of a being that can see all possible choices you can make, to them, none of your choices matter because every option was taken. But even then, from your perspective, it does, because you are limited to your own universe, your own perspective, and so any action you take affects you, not any other version of you.
Now most religions have different answers as to what our purpose is, but I am not really here to preach, im just trying to let you know why your argument wont really convince a theist, and it really doesnt matter if you can.
On the other hand, theists ground their belief on casuality, because science doesnt explain how the universe came to be. And I wont say for certain, but im not sure we will ever learn how, we can learn everything, from the start to present, and predict what the future looks like, but there is no "information" that is in this universe that will explain what was before it or caused it because it doesnt exist. Everything in this universe came into existence after the big bang.
People also do the risk benefit analysis with religion. They can believe, and/or practice in this life, and if there is a higher being, then cool, they get to go to heaven. If they believe but all that awaits is nothingness afterwards, then what was the harm? You likely wouldve lived a fulfilling life, like any other person. Now, if you arent a believer, and there happens to be a god waiting for you after you die, then that would suck, because at that time, you cant argue atheism or why you didnt think god exists because you would be proof in itself of gods existence, the universe everything.
TLDR, believe what you want but atheists wont be able to convince religious people to not be religious and vice versa. Live your life and be happy.
Religion causes social discohesion btw. So God might want to take a look close to home first.
You saw Ben crying on the inside. I bet after his interview he went to a kindergarten to debate a child to feel better
Kid: AGAGAGUGU!
Ben: According to the judeochristian beliefs of logical fallacy the point is to conclude Israel as a biological organism manifactured by political tendencies
Kid: AGAGAGUGUGAGA!
Ben: You're wrong
😂😅😂
Lies he went on to argue multiple children, because those thing tend to stack up victories, like a kill streak against bots.
🤣🤣🤣
😂😂😂😂😂
Why does Ben always talk like he’s on 8x speed ?
Because when you’re debating kids you can overwhelm them with speed and sheer amount of talking ie flood the zone with shit
Because talking fast to him is proof he's smarter.
What Ben wants is noise from his side, lots of noise, then there's silence while the other person listens and takes in so much information.
That moment kids see as a mic drop or unanswered point. It's not. That's why he debates with younger people, because it makes him look better
You gotta love how he justifies picking and choosing what he wants to follow and what he doesn't
Probably the first time Ben's debated someone who is an actual intellectual, result is as expected.
There is a hilarious BBC interview from a few years ago , where Ben storms off all pissed off. It’s classic little silly boy Ben & hilarious to see
@@soundcanvas1450 Ben clearly xmoked that interviewer. The picture your trying to paint is not accurate.
When's the last time you defended the Bible in a intellectual debate? It isn't easy. At least he tries because the end result is positive. Believing in God that is. There is nothing good resulting from the other side's argument.
@@thebugalito Sad that you need an imaginary being to tell you what is right or wrong or how to be moral. Ben clearly lost this part of the debate.
you need to watch him and Neil degras Tyson
Ben Shapiro really is an intellectual lightweight once you press him beyond the initial responses that he gives.
in b. shapiro's case, you can delete the term intellectually alltogether.
He is as soon as he gives that initial response, as well.
But he speaks in a clipped, rapid-fire cadence which makes his arguments seem deeply profound.
Shapiro is not intellectual, he’s a spouting mouth piece with good memory to accumulate some questionable facts.
@@foresight87 not really, that’s a strategy of speech, to pepper the opponent with whatever to create confusion in the listener, because they will be impressionable, and with luck, the opponent, if such person is a light weight like him.
Funny how important it is to declare homosexuality as a sin but not slavery
This exactly. 😂
Sam is right, and everything that could go wrong with this whole endeavor has gone wrong in Israel. See David Sheen’s lecture titled Messiah Mode, and all sorts of Israeli educators are talking about how slavery is good, and killing babies is okay at times, and on and on. It’s just horrible and I assume heretical.
Whenever Sam calls Shapiro as "pope of the Jews" I fall over laughing 😂
Me too I hope he never stops.
More like Nope of the Jews.
Dope of the Jews.
Chief Rabbi would be too on the nose. Pope of the Jews is way better.
Has Ben Shapiro covered up sex abuse, too?
Alex O‘Connor is not only an atheist. He’s a philosopher, free thinker and an overall amazing person.
Right! I wasn't a fan of Emma just introducing him as "He's an atheist"
@@zanzir07lol it's Emma - not too bright.
@@zanzir07 I mean, he's not super famous and mainly know for his atheism. Maybe she just didn't know anything else about him. Hopefully he's fame and influence will grow and she'll get to know hi..
He was also a prominent vegan activist.... until shortly after meeting Jordan Peterson's daughter oddly.
@@philipnorthfieldhe’s still a vegan, but on a side note, she could get it
It is all too convenient for a spoiled man. I love how Ben says things like “The question is” . . . When the other guy is actually asking the questions.
Watching Alex debate Ben was like watching a cat toy with a cornered mouse. A brutal mismatch
When someone needs organized religion to have any morality at all, that should tell you everything you need to know about that person and how dangerous they really are.
I actually disagree with this take. To understand why we need to take a good hard look at our own morality. Our morality is based on social values. Religion is a way to judge social values next to morality. For example god says murder is ok. Social values say no. Which is true depends on which value system is inherently true, as the principal itself cant he determined. After all how do we test if murder is objectively wrong.
Truth
@adil2curtay
I dont believe in the bible, but where does it say murder is ok? And In what context.
@@adil2curtay Here’s the test. Assuming you’re not mentally impaired/disabled. Would you want to be murdered?
No. Test over. Murder is objectively wrong.
@michaelm4597
omg. The biblical god commits and commands murders throughout the old testament in particular. The very FIRST act Moses did when he brought down the 10 commandments (including thou shalt not kill) was to murder 3,000 of his fellow Jews for his god. Why? Because they had worshipped a different god/idol.
Apart from commanding many genocides of entire peoples, the biblical god commanded stoning to death (aka murder) for women who couldn't "prove" their virginity on their wedding night, for anyone who worships a different god, for atheists, for unruly kids, for picking up sticks to cook your food on Sunday/sabbath, for blasphemy, for adultery (if you're female), for disobeying your priest, etc, etc, etc.
I get secondhand embarrassment from watching Benny and his arguments go down and crash in flames.
He went to Harvard Law.
Let that sink in.
Maybe we shouldn't automatically respect Harvard law students that much. All we really know about them is that they're good at studying and memorization, that doesn't necessarily mean that they're especially smart/wise overal or good at critical thinking.
There's videos of philosophy lectures at Harvard, where the students ask questions, the lecturer is awesome but the students don't exactly give me a high opinion of what it takes to be admitted in Harvard lmao.
I just get embarassed for humanity that he exists, or I guess I should say that he exists as some kind of person who should be given any attention by the media.
Yes, but his personal identity , financial security, and social network is dependent on his continual support of bad ideas ......
Even if Shapiro HAD a personal change of heart, he could never admit it.
@@kimmcdonagh6756he built this persona. This is not his intimate circle. He's just a troll, honestly.
He (Shapiro) did say in a video once that you should go to a fancy liberal university, tell the professors what they want to hear so you can get the degree, but don’t actually listen to, or learn anything from the people there. I think it shows.
I love when people think they can speak for "God"! Just be kind! Respect the planet, people and animals! Not that difficult!
To be fair, it's literally impossible to morally defend a slave owner's handbook
Alex is not merely an atheist. He’s a theologian and a damn good philosopher.
Yeah but then there was that whole situation where he fell into the veganism cult (which is distinct from simply being a vegan). So he's certainly not immune to preaching some bad theology and philosophy.
@@sypherthe297th2 go smoke a brisket
@@sypherthe297th2or maybe he found the philosophy behind veganism compelling and just tried to, you know, be vegan?
@@oktokyno3874 No. When you sound as unhinged as the likes of VeganGains or that crazy neighbor who thinks BBQing on your property is illegal because they might breath in meat particles then you've lost the plot. Being vegan is going to become more widely adopted and practical over time. But the cult crowd are something else entirely and O'Connor was in that clique.
@@master1sa I see we found the VeganGains sock puppet.
ben talks so fast because he's nervous someone will call him out on his nonsense if he slows down
It's called gishgalloping.
@@atlaskinzel6560 my point is he also does it out of a place of fear, he has at least some idea of how thin his knowledge and understanding of this stuff is. this is not a well-done gish gallop, it's ham-fisted desperation. a real gish gallop would reference actual potentially vexing questions rather than just repeat how it all comes from the judeo-christian tradition.
It's a frustrating technique used by people when they know they've been caught, or are desperately trying to avoid something. The nice thing is, it's very easy to recognize. Talk fast, talk over the other person, and keep talking until you can change the subject. Or, as lawyers put it: "If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts; if you have the law on your side, pound the law; if you have neither the facts nor the law, pound the table."
Gods aren’t necessary. Consequences are enough.
The most entertaining serious conversation about religious doctrine I’ve ever listened to. Nietzsche would be proud.
God literally issued commandments to his people, and, in some cases, killed them for not obeying, but, according to Ben, God had to woo them away from slavery.
It must have been close to HIS heart
lol ben shapiro is my fav clown
A ‘god’ that kills; one who commands his follower to kill his son...sounds more like the devil to me.
Slavery still exists in Africa. They use God as an excuse too.
Alex O'Connor is the debater Shapiro believes himself to be. Also he has a degree in theology from Oxford.
Haha, yes Alex has a long-standing TH-cam channel focussed upon beliefs about God as well as an Oxford degree; Polite debate in Oxford is a lethal sport.
Oxford v. Harvard. This guy made Hitch's brother slink away w/ his tail between his legs. The religious one.
he also has the beard Ben wishes he could grow
@@CRSB00Ouch.
I love how Ben Shapiro is "smart" but basically everything dude says falls apart with one follow up question. He stopped maturing at age 12
Alex O’Connor is awesome, but yeah he’s one of the most polite, well-spoken respectful people you’ll ever watch. Cosmic skeptic has been a fave of mine before he was even accepted into Oxford. We was that wicked smart and quick even in what might be considered high school in the US
Imagine making excuses for an omnipotent being.
Oh! I recommend you watch the Indian movie “PK” starring Amir Khan. The whole narrative is taking the piss out of religions (not faith) and the climax has the protagonist asking why people think they need to take actions to defend an omnipotent being.
lol almost like part two of the Bible was a correction to part one… so much for omnipotent
Ben makes his god sound SUPER lame too. He can't do shit!
If you are literally an omnipotent, omniscient god.. then there is literally no reason to worry about society's reaction to any religious declaration (such as the freeing of slaves).. because if people freaked out about it, you could just make them.... not. You're God, after all.
@@theinvisiblewoman5709part 2 is pretty bloody reactionary as well
@@Notafraidofthedark yep very much so. Maybe god will get it right in part 3??
Ben is a veritable fallacy machine. It’s amazing to watch.
Just goes to show how far high falutin fast talk will take ya 😂
The bar is very low these days - people seem to conflate the above with actual intelligence and measured thought.
We're pretty much doomed lol
Yep, his mouth is a conveyor belt for them, his brain the production line, with gullible morons the willing customers
This is the most respectful I've seen him when being interviewed. I think Shapiro realizes he's out of his league.
Coming from someone watching Sam Seder and the moron next to him, is priceless 😂
Ben Shapiro's feelings don't care about your facts.
If Ben Shapiro is a representative of God, then I want no part of Him.
The interviewer, or is it host, was so cool, calm, and collected whilst pulling apart Ben's argument...
This event between ben and alex o connor was actually billed as a conversation between the two of them. neither is the host. sam and the team were incorrect in calling alex that.
the host actually sits between alex and ben. you can see him in the clips, but he doesn’t talk much, since he was supposed to be sortof neutral.
@kellypaton2618 Oh, I see. Thanks for the clarification.
Alex O'Connor is a phenomenal interviewer
Arguing against a conservative on the subject of religion is entry level debate. Their hypocrisy makes it impossible for them to take a genuine moral position.
Wait a minute, he’s arguing that god wants progress. So god isn’t a conservative is his eyes cuz conservatism wants to keep things as they are right?
@@codbdup88 Everything is in a spectrum or scale. Even conservatism. Very few just want to preserve everything.
@@hurmur9528 almost everyone in maga want to “make America graat again” and they explain they want to go back to the 50’s. Before civil rights for black ppl. And women joined the workforce. It may not be all conservatives but maga is like 40% of them.
They don't actually have core values. They've demonstrated this at every opportunity. And worse, they lie to themselves about it.
@@hurmur9528Really? Because it seems like most American conservatives want to recede to some imaginary version of the 50s.
Freeing slaves is social discohesion but slavery itself is not social discohesion. - Ben Shapiro
That is true. That's why social cohesion by itself isn't a compelling argument. Taking away a girl from a father that beats and rapes her is breaking up the family but it's for a very justifiable reason.
Preserving social harmony isn't always a good thing. Sometimes that social harmony is build on some pretty rotten foundations.
How would it be a social discohesion if god is the source of rules in the first place? Clearly the society would work according to his word even if he banned slavery since the beginning. Or was he slacking since the moment he created universe up until the moment when slavery was already established, so he couldn't ban it at once? What about the commandment DO NOT KILL? He had no problem with banning killing immediately and he knew people would be killing each other for other millenia.
Religion is BS.
Ben Shapiro makes words up to sound interesting and intellectually sentient, "discohesion" is not a word in the English language, least it is not in any reputable dictionary I have seen. The closest word is "dyscohesive" meaning loosening intercellular connections.
Discohesion as used by Shapiro is of fictional entomology and meaning. The only place you will find it is on wiktionary and no doubt shapiro put it there to prove the word exists. (That's a joke btw about shaprio putting it there, hes not that smart).
God didn't seem to mind a little social discohesion when he flooded the Earth or in Sodom and Gomorrah
easy to think if you also think that the slaves are not part of the "social". in short, its an admission of racism.
When your argument is a fictional book it makes it impossible to win.
Schools pay this guy unfathomable amounts of money to speak at their universities... Let that sink in. We are talking 5-6 figures.... Outrageous.
This guy did a great job showing Ben’s faulty arguments
Schizophrenic Ben only debates college students
His channel is a breath of fresh air
"this guy" is alex o'connor, aka 'cosmicskeptic', a brilliant and patient... guy.
i really like his channel, up there with rationality rules
@@zhou_sei Don't forget GeneticallyModifiedSkeptic. In fact there are a bunch of atheist channels that are pretty good.
not really a tough haul. LOL!
So Gods failure to condemn lesbianism is God playing the long game to incrementally reveal he doesn't think homosexuality is a sin? Thanks Ben! I never realised!
i said the same in another post
Well apparently he also incrementally reveals that to his followers since Shapeeno still thinks homosexuality is a sin. God works in pretty fucking mysterious ways indeed.
Homosexuality is NOT a sin in the Bible. But acting upon it IS. Just to be specific for others. This is why the Bible takes no stance on lesbianism.
@@skontheroadMakes ya wonder why an all loving god would make some of his followers homosexuals then go "yeah that thing I put in you (and many, many species of animals), don't act upon it mkay?"
@@skontheroad hahaha...God almost says, you're funny...not a sin to be or do or anything just because it makes you uncomfortable...hahaha...
I'm guessing he doesn't apply these mental gymnastics to Islamic law.
All abrahamic religions have caused harm
“Abolishing slavery wasn’t practical” Ben shapario
“With god, all things are possible” the Bible
Humans have free will, slavery was was necessary for human civilization. If God wants to shepherd humans into doing something it will take time.
@@marciwyrd8905 Why would it take time? He’s literally god. He created the universe in 6 days but it took him 5000 years to end slavery!!??
@@ZakisHereNow God, the narcissistic shepherd, leading his sheep around in a circle thinking they’re actually going somewhere.
Religious apologists can justify anything. Cognitive dissonance.
Jeez, it wasn't practicable to condemn slavery, but somehow it was practicable to *_create the entire universe._* 😂
Yeah that's what I was thinking God doesn't seem to care much about disrupting our social norms he caused a flood to kill off almost all of humanity and turned whole cities to salt. If he wanted to get rid of slavery he could've simply turned every slave owner to salt we would've got the message very quickly.
and command unconditional worship. So what we know about Y'Wh is that he values his own ego over the rights of Humans to not be owned as property.
The speed at which Ben Shapiro talks makes me dizzy.
Yes, there are different debating styles, but more appreciation could be shown at how Alex O'Connor backed Ben into a corner. He did not try to make Ben look silly; Ben made himself look silly and he knew it. You can hear it in his voice.
Oh yea, you could absolutely tell Ben was trying to invent a reason that could sound at-least somewhat convincing in the moment. Classic Sophistry
Ben is notorious for making himself look silly. He thrives on college campuses debating 20 year olds
Ben: "Well actually, scripture has an expiration date but just on things I'm not comfortable endorsing."
😂😂😂😂💯🤣🤣🤣💀
Shapiro is a smart person who was brainwashed at an early age, and doesn't have the mental fortitude to question his core assumptions.
Ben is like the friend you have who talks really quickly, and confidently in a debate. Only when you get home you realize everything they said was full of shit.
Ramaswamy does the same stupid trick. It irritates beyond measure how often it works on interviewers.
That's because it's way easier to spout loads of BS than it is to refute it.
And as they say, the lie travels halfway around the world before the truth wakes up.
I know many people like that! lol
exactly .., that’s what ben is ..
One dork pretending to know it all
Another pretending they know why and how that is obnoxious
- us v them -
e.g. Human Nature
(do not expect a diff standard in this life. Become ruthlessly Independent)
I arrived to a conclusion a few years ago, the reason there isnt a "you shall not enslave others" commandment, is because the people that got that stuff written had a business to run.
What's messed up is that the commandments were presented to the chosen people in Exodus, a book that was literally about the Israelites escaping slavery.
Well, also if you question the owner / slave dynamic it brings questions to you being a servant to "God".
“Business to run” maybe, but more fundamentally, most of the authors of the Bible seemed unable to fathom a society without slavery.
@@fuddwrecker3773this is a paradox Goddamn
@@fuddwrecker3773
It makes sense to me, it reads like "DO NOT OWN EACH OTHER AS SLAVES! you are all my delicate little chosen sweeties. When you get your slaves go on down to the slave shop and buy them from the inferiors."
I keep waiting for Shapiro to say "Charlie Babbit taught me how to drive".
As if we don't already know they cherry pick the Bible. I don't see what's being accomplished here, we are all aware of their hypocrisy.
“Facts don’t care about your feelings… unless my all-powerful god tells me to ignore all facts and just follow the rules of his book… or unless enough time has gone by to make certain parts of that book irrelevant… or unless… Ah. Screw it. I just go with my feelings.”
- Ben Shapiro
"Facts don’t care about your feelings. They only care about *my* feelings."
- Ben Shapiro
a book that contradicts itself all the damn time.
From the same guy who irrationally yelled "well science has been infiltrated by the woke left" when someone pointed out that scientific consensus doesn't agree with his position, despite him claiming that was the case.
🤣🤣💀
Problem is 'facts' are usually fully dependant on your feelings
Been following Alex since long before he could grow that beard, to see him finally be able to bring up all these arguments with Ben himself after all these years is so satisfying
From "Debunking Ben Shapiro" to "Debunking Ben Shapiro" 💪💪💪
Glad to see him doing so well :)
As a fellow long time fan of CosmicSkeptic myself, what is your opinion of him no longer being vegan after having made such airtight arguments in support if animal rights?
@@GUILLOTINE_GANGIMO, i don’t care because it’s hard to keep those habits in modern society and it’s better to be honest that he has a lifestyle lapse and still be principled. It is easy to argue towards broad societal change. Implementing personal change to prove a point is less systemically impactful but still valuable to do
@@monafairy99
I have some criticism though.
"Hard to keep those habits in modern society"? As opposed to it being easy in less industrialized societies?
I have been entirely plant based for three years and have never been in a position where I did not have easy access to all the macro and micro nutrients needed to thrive.
I barely make 50 grand a year and yet I have never had an problem. Alex is far more wealthy than I am and therefore has access to far more resources. He decision to eat animals goes against a mountain of evidence Alex has helped build, evidence that shows there is no logical reason to consume animals outside of a survival situation.
It appears you are creating a very poor excuse for a person to start doing something that Alex O'Conner himself has correctly identified as morally unacceptable.
@@GUILLOTINE_GANGshut up vegan
So apparently God was unable to prohibit slavery, does this mean that he was as powerless as an imaginary being? Asking for a friend...
I went into a coma in 500bc and recently woke up. Apparently God has changed his mind somewhat on slavery in the meantime and I'm no longer able to own a slave or even be a slave. Political correctness gone mad!!
“You can beat your slave as long as they don’t die. Also you can keep them as slaves for life and bequeath them to your children as property” - Bible
This is somehow objectively moral but also that’s not moral anymore.
Biblical slavery has been Matt Dillahunty's go to argument for shattering theists for the best part of twenty years. I know he's not the originator of the argument, but he's spread it far and wide in the internet age.
This guy-- I didn't catch his name-- wields it like a master swordsman.
Alex O'Connor is his name
Matt Dillahunty, the guy who worships the state power.
Matt Dillahunty: I don't care about religious experiences or feelings show me physical evidence.
Also Matt Dillahunty: Anyone who has a feeling of being a woman is woman regardless of physical realities.
@@sixmillionaccountssilenced6721ah, so he's not an idiot. Very good.
@@sixmillionaccountssilenced6721Matt recognises that a Christian is a Christian because they believe they are. Even if he doesn’t agree with their baseline presupposition of a god existing. He still recognises them as such and isn’t crying and saying he is being oppressed by addressing them as Christian.
You are really reaching to make a false equivalency of the 2 positions.
@@sixmillionaccountssilenced6721You revealing yourself as transphobic isn't a point. Feelings aren't facts and personal experience that are "real" to you isn't a fact that a God exist only a fact you had an experience. Gender is a social construct, it has nothing to do with human biology, that's sex. Learn the difference...
Where ignorance is bliss religion thrives.
his voice is so rage inducing
lol O'Connor is a pretty seasoned debator at this point. Ben Shapiro didn't stand a chance in that debate 😂
After this failure, I'm worried Ben is going to continue delaying his debate with Stephen "Destiny" Bonnell... forever.
I absolutely love Alex O'Connor, if you're somebody who struggled with a religious background, I can't recommend his content enough. It's respectful. Well thought out and a perfect way to engage with the real issues behind religion and belief
And it looks like he didn't research who Alex is otherwise he would never have agreed to an interview.
@@DodgerzdenBen probably thought he was just another inexperienced college/uni student 😂😂
Thank you for that. I'm a reformed Catholic, and until somewhat recently, I was an atheist for two decades. I'm still struggling a bit with what I believe because I despise organized religion. I will definitely be looking up Alex O'Connor. Thank you, again.
@@B_Bodziak I wish you the best of luck! Probably the biggest thing while going through deconversion is dealing with a loss of community but I can tell you right now there are wonderful communities in person and online to help lend support as you are going down this journey
@@simplybaker.During what journey? Believing we came from soup.
no gods ever tell us what their rules are, men tell us what gods rules are
I like how Ben doesn’t know that morality isn’t something that you’re taught it’s a self defined perspective of the world. The Bible teaches a set of ethics.
Morality is taught and the bible teaches immoral ethics.
God Ben talks so much without ever actually saying anything. Alex has so much patience.
I am glad you noticed that. He is just throwing around hundreds of meaningless sentences in a minute.
Exactly, it's great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great amounts of gibberish
Imagine being Mr facts or fiction but basing your entire life on a book of feelings.
Ha! Awesome. From now on I will refer to the Bible as “The book of feelings”.
@@punkinmyvitamins1 I call it the 'zombie cannibal death cult book" because that's technically what it is
(i suppose at this point it's only Catholics that actually believe the Eucharist you consume at church is *_literally_* the body of Jesus. Weirdos).
@@idontwantahandlethoughthat actually sounds cool though 😂 I wouldn’t dare give them something as valuable as that.
It's a book of fairytales.
"Facts over feelings" is just a marketing slogan his god permits him to use along with whatever it takes to win support
This really exposes how man-made these religions are.
Alex O'Connor is more than "an Atheist". He is quickly building a solid reputation as a public intellectual.
He will be one of the greatest intellectuals in the world when he's older if he carries on this great trajectory he's on. 🙌
It is hard to make a cogent argument when you are a malignant narcissist.
Or when you're a deep state operative trying to push a specific agenda.
😂😂
That's a bit harsh don't you think cathy... You seem to have gotten him confused with Donald Trump.
@@psychicdriver4229 A lazy punchline...
@justanotherviewer7117 Well he was a lazy president what do you expect
I love Doug Stanhope's take on the Bible: "If the Bible didn't exist, would you invent it? If you didn't know about the Bible and you found it in a bargain bin at a discount bookstore, would you believe any of it?"
My argument in agreement would be ... the Bible was invented exactly because it didn't exist back then.
Also, those who read the Bible NOW obviously don't believe a word in it, or they wouldn't act the way they do.
"Me thinks they doth proselytize (and at the same time, profane) too much"
The Bible is like any movie you go to the theater to see that says "Based on True events", it might have the names of people who really existed. But the movie is literal Bullshit when it comes to any amount of true events or even possible events. And Each person watching it will filter it through their own experiences and come out with a completely different view of what the movie is trying to say.
The Bible is a book of best practises. Certain best practises are timelessly unchanging while others are situational. Disputes arise around defining which is what.
@@andyd568 No it isn't. Linguistic drift definitionally changes context, meaning and purpose of those practices. The context we filter these practices though is invariably filtered through a modern lens, which is exactly why BS has a hard time defending slavery or anything else he claims is objectively moral. It isn't objective if God can change his mind about what is moral. And the Bible has examples of God lying, creating evil, violating freewill, murdering in his name, accepting human sacrifice etc.
The idea that slavery in the Bible was a marketing decision always cracks me up. It makes me imagine a PR person coming in to talk to god about the numbers they’re seeing with middle aged male slaveowner’s and how they need to change their messaging because the Bible is not *landing* with them-all in Andy Kindler’s voice. 😂😂😂
NonStampCollector has an old video structured just like that. Very funny video.
😂😂😂
You don't even understand the bible to talk about it.
Slavery in the Bible wasn't a marketing decision. God never condoned slavery, but in His mercy He dealt with humanity where we were, and slavery has been a part of the fallen nature of the human condition since time immemorial. God never condoned divorce either, yet He allowed Moses to write a bill of divorce for the Jews, for the hardness of their hearts. God meets us where we are, if in the depths of sin, He will meet us there and draw us out of it. Furthermore, Biblical slavery was not the African slave trade. Slaves were afforded rights, they were also to be set free in the Jubilee year, and slavery was something you could offer yourself up for to pay a debt or another reason. Finally, in the New Testament we are told slaves and masters are equal in God's eyes, giving inherent value and humanity to slaves.
The fact that Christians aren't circumcised and that they drink alcohol and eat pork is marketing though.
so this is how Ben reacts when not debating naive kids at universities. 🤣🤣🤣
The idea that the Bible or the Torah is the unadulterated word of God is insane considering we know as a mtter of historical fact that these religious texts have been curated, edited, and translated by the hands of mankind dozens of times throughout history.
Interesting that you say ‘unadulterated’… Adultery is a massive subject within the Old Testament and new, with regard to faithfulness to God, faithfulness to the truth etc. Much of the Old Testament is describing the faults of the people, and their waywardness… their inability to adhere to the laws, etc… The prophet Jeremiah, wrote about some unfaithfulness and even the kind of adultery that you mention… (take note of verse 8).
Check this out: Jeremiah 8:1
“At that time,” declares YeHoVaH, “the bones of the kings of Judah, the bones of the officials, the bones of the priests, the bones of the prophets, and the bones of the people of Jerusalem will be removed from their graves. 2They will be exposed to the sun and moon, and to all the host of heaven which they have loved, served, followed, consulted, and worshiped. Their bones will not be gathered up or buried, but will become like dung lying on the ground. 3And wherever I have banished them, the remnant of this evil family will choose death over life,” declares YeHoVaH of Hosts.
4So you are to tell them this is what YeHoVaH says:
“Do men fall and not get up again? Does one turn away and not return?
5Why then have these people turned away? Why does Jerusalem always turn away? They cling to deceit; they refuse to return.
6I have listened and heard; they do not speak what is right. No one repents of his wickedness, asking, ‘What have I done?’ Everyone has pursued his own course like a horse charging into battle.
7Even the stork in the sky knows her appointed seasons. The turtledove, the swift, and the thrush keep their time of migration, but My people do not know the requirements of YeHoVaH.
8How can you say, ‘We are wise, and the Law of YeHoVaH is with us,’ when in fact the lying pen of the scribes has produced a deception?
9The wise will be put to shame; they will be dismayed and trapped. Since they have rejected the word of YeHoVaH, what wisdom do they really have?
"God" wiped out almost all life on earth becasue he wasn't happy with the level of morality, but when it came to slavery he had to adopt a "softly, softly" approach. Yeah that makes sense. How much "social discohesion" did the flood cause?
God could've abolished slavery, but he saw that the polling numbers were bad, and midterms were fast approaching, so..
😂😂😂😂😂
LOL
2,000 years ago isn't old at all for what's supposed to be a true religion.
Best comment today
Well, considering religious people think the earth is only 6000 years old it is pretty old. It's a third of the timeline.
@@07Flash11MRC very few think that
@@07Flash11MRC😂
considering reality goes back forever with no beginning - 2000 years is the same as 0 years
10:30 "And then we will means test it" absolutely hilarious!
Ben Shapiro AMAZING at arguing with easily intimidated, insecure college kids that are still trying to find their intellectual footing. You take him any deeper than the initial shock value, and he consistently keeps falling flat on his face. Kudos to him though for making a whole career and raising a family out of nothing but shock politics. I’m sure he’s a wonderful husband and father and charming to be around as long as you keep the conversation to your health and the weather. 😂
Probably the first time Ben's debated someone who is an actual graduate, the result is as expected.
Whoopsie!
Alex's logic seems to be inconsistent especially if you watched the entire debate where Alex admits to Nihilism saying he does not believe there is free will. Shapiro dismantled him there very swiftly
Yep!
Not believing in free will isn't nihilism tho?
@@JohnJohn-pm9wq
The evidence clearly shows that free will is an elusion.
Even in the context of a so called all knowing god who knows the future but can’t seem to change it, or chooses not to.
You're right, Ben. These questions have been asked many times before. That's what makes it so sad that you went into a public debate about them with no answers.
To convince the convinced
& to keep them in yr pocket.
In pride & ignorance.
duh
There are no good arguments. If religious people can ever get to the point where they just acknowledge all of the obvious issues with their religious texts, just be like "hey it was written and edited throughout history by human beings, it makes me happy to believe in a God and in spite of all the problematic stuff we can write off as obviously immoral, I think there's still a lot of good in it, but at the end of the day I believe all that matters is that you're good and decent to people, etc etc" then fine I'm with ya.
Mind Begs the Question:
- If God forbids Usury/Interest Banking
- Religion A and B practice,impose Usury
- Religion C condemns Usury
- Which one following God?
@@trevorwills1600 I agree that there are no good arguments, which is certainly a reason why Ben can't come up with one, but he always has the option of the honest answer you put above...or honest for a lot of people, maybe not for Ben...or you could at least do a better job spewing a bs answer than Ben did. Even if you're being dishonest when you know what the questions are going to be ahead of time you should be able to come up with a dishonest answer that's harder to pin down than Ben's was.
@@HumanBeingsRThinkingBeings Whichever one is the true religion, of course!
Shapiro...Shapiro....you are finished. No one will hear you ranting in 10x speed no more.
He can go to nursery and keep on debating kids. Nothing stops him from doing that.
3:05 please look at the gentleman in the middle.... 😅😅😂😂
Ben Shapiro is the type of guy to go to home depot and buy a single piece of poplar.
*beautiful piece of poplar
Aside from redhead matches what the hell can you use polar for?
It would take a long time to build an ark that way. That's why Noah went to 84 lumber.
Without checking for warpage.
@@julesmasseffectmusic excellent trim wood. Extremely strong and takes paint superbly well. Also, some real good guitar bodies.
I love how religious people get to interpret their make-believe however they want in the moment.
Morality isn't relative unless god says so. Isn't that _convenient_ ?
I noticed this problem (though it didn't totally sink in until years later) writing a couple of exegesis papers for college bibal classes. You picked a verse and wrote on it using sources. You quickly find resources are interpreting the same verse differently. Each using a different set of other verses to support their interpretation. One saying "these verses directly refer to it" while others say it's completely other verses. You finally just have to pick one interpretation to be the one you go with. Essentially being a coin toss as to which way you go with it. I can remember my first one sitting there going "which way do I go?" and finally just basically throwing up my hands and picking. I know all other students faced this same problem but we all just pretended it didn't exist. You have to to keep the belief going. A kind of "well maybe I just don't see the logic here". Yeah there never was logic to it.
@@johnmcevoy3598 so what do you think of slavery in islam?
@@user-on8jx3qr8w Classic classic "but what about Islam" argument. 😂
@@user-on8jx3qr8w Enslaving other human being is grossly immoral no matter what religious justification is given. Next question?
“And then we will means test it” lmfao
God’s laws are (and have always been) man’s laws ATTRIBUTED to god in order to ensure obedience. It’s priestcraft 101.
spot on
Make Ben explain why God didn't simply jot down some new rules for us when slavery became immoral.
Explain why slavery still exists in Africa? Explain why gay people are killed in Africa, the Mid East. Explain why child brides exist in India. Explain why women have no rights in Africa, Mid East, India, Pakistán. Don’t blame God. It’s all about power. Where are the protesters for the above.
Eh… God works in mysterious ways? In the beginning of the debate Ben said that this is always true and man can not understand Gods actions. He admitted that it was a logical cop out but he still said it was valid.
I would call bullshit on that. Since it gets so muddy. In the end what the hell is gods word anyhow. Is it the intepretetion of what is important in the Bible? Then it is really just nothing standing on pillars of nothing.
@@hurmur9528
In mysterious ways that always seem to benefit certain individuals above others.
Someone should ask Ben to point to the scripture where God had a change of heart about slavery and told everybody not to do it anymore.
the closest to an actual response ive heard is an attempt to say the rule against kidnapping was a condemnation of slavery. Thing is, it was actually a rule against kidnapping fellow hebrews into slavery and doesnt really seem concerned with others. Oh, and it is also just a couple verses BEFORE the rules given on who, how to buy, and how to treat slaves. odd placement if it was meant to condemn it right before it gave out rules on how to do it.
@@tremas3329 yeah it trips all over itself....again.
PS: Has anyone pointed out that when it comes to heaping misery on the Jews, God was the greatest anti-semite there ever was.
Yep, bc that scripture don't exist.
@@benjamintrevino325I've never seen that argument made, but I agree with it.
How much Adderall is Ben on?
Debating Shapiro could be constructed as anti semitic