Examine Reality (Frank Turek vs. David Silverman)

David Silverman debating Frank Turek on whether theism or atheism best explains reality. The debate took place on 18 April 2013 at Broadmoor Baptist Church in Shreveport, LA.
#FrankTurek #DavidSylverman

[@dylannance4772]

I am addicted to these debates!!!!!!!!

[@TonyMiyamoto]

I know right 💛

[@SuperVideoman71]

A lot of people are!

[@vanessamoore7811]

Me too!!! 🥳

[@patmalagisi1721]

I can say I have proof that God exists and so does Satan and demons/evil spirits. I was possessed by a demon or evil spirit which nearly destroyed and killed me. Not until I surrendered to the Lord Jesus and submitted did I become possessed by the Holy Spirit. I had a physical experience by both spiritual beings and what's more proof than a physical experience, not a opinion or thought or belief. You can't see electricity but it can surely physically affect you. Belief in God and upon death we will surely know and if atheists are wrong they will not be happy and have lost it all. If a believer is wrong he has lost nothing.

[@SuperVideoman71]

Hello, Pat Malagisi. I do not mean to be rude or disrespectful, but did someone pay you to post this ridiculous and unsubstantiated comment? Thank you, and please be careful during this coronavirus event.

[@etiennebisset5642]

"You don't judge a religion or a philosophy by its abused.""Sociology is how people behave, morality is how they ought to behave."Brilliant answer

[@jaybirdjetwings7516]

True but I would argue that it's source isn't even coherent with reality to begin with

[@flourishomotola5306]

His wisdom astonishes me.

[@flourishomotola5306]

@@jaybirdjetwings7516 what is the source??

[@jaybirdjetwings7516]

@@flourishomotola5306The fact that the bible is historically inmacurrate

[@flourishomotola5306]

@@jaybirdjetwings7516 did Jesus die and ressurrected or not and does the evidence support this. If He died and ressurrected then the Bible is true.

[@ManicMinister]

The fact that Dr. Turrek kept things light hearted, genuine, playful, and PATIENT and never once gets ticked off is the markings of a SAVED man who is secure and confident in the Truths he is speaking 🗣️ May God bless this amazing man!✝️🙏

[@nicholas5wepriceeggwe138]

Yea we still don't know if there's a God or not, and I think that's fair too say🤷🏾‍♂️

[@darcymr353]

People who suffer from the Dunning Kruger effect tend to be like that.

[@mwangimuturi1091]

He prays to God to answer his prayers but God already knew the future and he can't answer them. Then why pray.

[@Preservestlandry]

I agree he's totally convinced. So what?

[@AngelaItsme]

He has peace because the holy Spirit put it in his heart, it's a gift that's given, I pray we all received it and recognize it.

[@OhSemphy]

David understands things point by point rather than seeing the bigger picture

[@dawn8542]

The points don't add up to the bigger lie Dr. Turek is referring to.

[@jared5837]

@@dawn8542 And what lie is that? Give me examples and facts.

[@christhewritingjester3164]

I think it's hillarious that David Silverman was calling Frank rude at the end considering how condescending he was the entire time.

[@MyReligionIs2DoGood]

Did you watch the same debate? Turek was condescending to no end, after Silverman called him out on his nonsense. Moving the goal posts, straw men, non sequiturs, and so on. It doesn't need a Hitchens to destroy Turek.

[@christhewritingjester3164]

@@MyReligionIs2DoGood can you provide an example of Turek being condescending and one other item from your list (moving goal post, strawman, or non-sequitur)? I'm curious as to what you think constitutes any of those.

[@christhewritingjester3164]

@@LuckyGuy1980 Do you have a time stamp for the first one? I recall laughter from Silverman, hence not meant as a jab but as levity. "Tough" is brutally honest, not brutally rude. That's all an atheist can trully offer in those types of situations.

[@Skarlet-ju8sr]

​@MyReligionIs2DoGood you have a real funny way of identifying condescension. Turek was disagreeing with him, didn't insult him, but you insist that because he disagrees and has rationalizations that this is condescension. False.

[@blottedcenter4348]

The fact he began his time by saying frank and all the Christian’s in the audience are probably very nice very wrong people is crazy to me, to start off by trying to divide the audience is very foolish, I’m sure he didn’t gain any supporters with that

[@MattHalpain]

I'm grateful for Frank Turek and David Silverman for the checks and balances each opposing side provides. I am born again Christian.

[@PhilipOII247]

But Silverman has no reasonable checks OR balances.

[@Lucas20520]

You weren't born again. You accepted a proposition and adjusted you values accordingly. You were only born once.

[@Lucas20520]

@@PhilipOII247 did you just skip over everything David was saying or do you not understand his arguments?

[@PhilipOII247]

@@Lucas20520 Neither.

[@Lucas20520]

@@PhilipOII247 thats not possible because David made many great arguments. So if you didn't skip through his parts then that means you didn't understand his arguments. What arguments did you not understand?

[@miltonwetherbee5489]

Halfway in and I still haven't heard David say anything as to why atheism is a better explanation of reality.

[@machaiarcanum]

It boils down to: 1) Reality exists 2) Before that, it didn’t exist 3) Therefore it had to be caused to exist from a state of non existence 4) For something to cause reality to exist it cannot be a part of reality 5) Therefore something that isn’t a part of reality caused it to exist (Reality being matter, space, and time. The something must therefore not be made of matter, not take up space, and not exist in time. Frank choses to call this something “God”)

[@miltonwetherbee5489]

@@machaiarcanum I would add 6) a non-conscious entity couldn't cause the state change from non-universe to universe without a cause that would need explaining, nor could it cause it sans some other cause causing it to create it as it would simply have to cause it eternally alongside it, which would make the universe eternal, and the universe can't be eternal. 7) the entity must be conscious and therefore by definition God.

[@zeddicuszorrander3599]

His main point was that atheism is a better explanation because we are not inventing solutions when we don't know something. We are investigating to find solutions rather than just saying, "Well, if nobody has the answer, then I'll make up one." One of his supporting points was that every time humans have asserted a god caused some phenomenon, we have discovered that it wasn't a god, but a natural explanation. If you begin with the assumption that you have an answer, then you are likely to miss the answer when it's presented to you.

[@jacoblee5796]

Well that does makes sense….atheism isn’t a world view and doesn’t have anything to with how to explain reality.

[@arunmoses2197]

@@machaiarcanum He is not talking about reality, he is talking about nature

[@miltonwetherbee5489]

Science hadn't taught me either math, logic, or reasoning, and all three of those are needed to be able to do science. Learn philosophy and understand the place of science.

[@johne1743]

Wow. Forever lost.

[@stevenseagull753]

Franks PowerPoint presentation is unstoppable

[@tomwinchester55]

Except by the truth and facts.

[@demanitorres5925]

@@tomwinchester55 what did he lie about

[@tomwinchester55]

@@demanitorres5925 how about the severity of the pandemic? How about drugs that were dangerous and he said they would cure covid?

[@demanitorres5925]

@@tomwinchester55 when

[@tomwinchester55]

@@demanitorres5925 was talking about trump...

[@samawad4564]

Dr. Frank, I have been watching all your videos lately and I just would like to tell you one thing. Thank you for reviving my faith.

[@realityhits3022]

@OTISIN GREENER LOL i really laugh hard when someone says the universe was created by nothing.😂

[@maow9240]

@OTISIN GREENER according to evolution apes fly planes and conduct brain surgery which evolved from a piece of bacteria. Talking snakes dont sound so far fetched after that

[@randymontenegro3269]

God bless you

[@randymontenegro3269]

@OTISIN GREENER bigot

[@dawn8542]

You should have watched this one because it went over your head. And maybe take a science class. Dr. Turek is scientifically illiterate and confident in his ignorance.

[@jamesdavidson7604]

All I saw in 2:21:24 was a one man making reasonable arguments and the other arguing from emotions... truth is truth

[@CedanyTheAlaskan]

The last second?

[@jamesdavidson7604]

@@CedanyTheAlaskan All I saw after watching 2 hours 21 minutes and 24 seconds of video ...

[@thetannernation]

What about the last second 😂

[@TheSarahsaruh]

I’ve yet to meet an atheist who isn’t angry at God.

[@maudslade6834]

​@@TheSarahsaruhHow can they possibly be mad at something they don't believe in. Don't be absurd.

[@simplyamazing8533]

Frank never gets irritated😂😂😂

[@TonyMiyamoto]

That is a fruit of the Holy Spirit

[@aurelian771]

he's a really good guy

[@kennym3492]

I seen franks nasty side. And that so weird, I find him to be funny(crown pleaser/indoctrinator) good debater(studies how to debate in university instead of getting a real job) And a nasty temper, I would hate to be his kids. Nasty posts lol. People are odd

[@kennym3492]

Jessica B. Seriously Jessica. This is a professional stage. He must keep composure or he looks bad. No one knows what others do behind closed doors. And an apologist is a technical extremist in a sense. I would hate to be his wife. Or kids. Now as for god. There is no god for sure. It hurt me when I came to my senses but Enlightainment for sure. Frank is like the rest of them. Go to school to defend the bible( kind of a useless job). And fail hard every time. Listen to their voice by the end of the debates 😂 and it’s because they are lying. You can’t prove something existed if it has never existed :) Come on now :)

[@kennym3492]

Jessica B. That’s so sad. too each is there own though. You do realize indoctrination is under corruption. He is illegally using lies to course you to a vision of barbarism. I value you. Not your death cult :)

[@marknalley7177]

Why is it that every time I watch one of these I see Frank use thoughtful intelligent arguments to support his position and whatever atheist he debates just smugly lies, misrepresents theism and usually resorts to underhanded ad himinem attacks against believers...

[@zackreynolds21]

Because that’s all they have

[@bigeddie1669]

God spoke through Silverman hahahah!!!!!! “All of you before you read any book, read your Bibles.”😂😭💀🙏🏾 AMEN!!!!!!!!

[@kezkartoons]

Indeed HAHAHA

[@PhsychoSomatic]

The bible will make you an atheist. Thats his point

[@cristinabivins2240]

2017: “Science cannot lie because data cannot lie” 2022 “We own the science” This didn't age well... 🙄

[@airforcex9412]

Who’s we? Did science say that? Or an individual? You haven’t aged too well.

[@viccigates3756]

Interpretations can lie... can be wrong.

[@warpshield]

"The universe was designed for me" - the very definition of narcissism.

[@backatit4757]

But what if it's true?

[@obitouchiha1643]

@@backatit4757Then it's a fact

[@obitouchiha1643]

Not just me for every living being

[@dannysutherland8713]

As a Christian, I do appreciate the comment; "you don't have to agree with an idea to entertain it". I love to know what people think, and why they think it. Part of winning people to Christ, (I feel like) is to help the unbeliever to know that we care enough to not just "hear''.... but to genuinely listen.

[@Quinn37]

I'm a non-believer, but I agree that listening and understanding is more important than being heard and understood.

[@RoberinoSERE]

Ive become a recent fan of Frank Turek because he makes all his arguments in these debates from non religious or scriptural sources. He exclusively uses classic Reasoning and Scientific data much from atheist scientists own arguments honestly and has never been outmatched. Amazing.

[@BScott7220]

In other words, he's 'borrowing' from science to make his points. Funny then, how he accuses atheists of "borrowing from theism" to make theirs.

[@childofthelivinggod.]

@@BScott7220 but science doesn't have a religion. Science is just the study of God's creation. Science doesn't say anything, scientist do.

[@childofthelivinggod.]

Yeah, and then scripture backs up his arguments making for an overall more compelling debate. It's fun to watch.

[@marcusagrippa8078]

@@childofthelivinggod. if god created it and then inspired a book to explain it, how did said god get the details so wrong when scientists got it right? Almost like this god inspired book was inspired and written by storytellers trying to explain what they didn’t know to be refuted by scientists thousands of years later. If god created the WHOLE UNIVERSE!!!! Then for this god to be able to create a comprehensive book explaining its creation should be infinitesimal in difficulty to it, but yet the book we “got” is riddled with errors

[@Bob-of-Zoid]

@@childofthelivinggod. No, he misinterprets science and uses philosophy to spin it to sound like it fits scripture (It doesn't), in order to justify his misinterpretations! His version of the Kalam cosmological argument falls apart in the very premises, because they are presuppositions with the word "IF" carrying all the weight! It has been shown logically fallacious time and time again!

[@SalvationSoulBeautiful]

I can see how it's affected David's left sad,unhappy,angry,hurt,lost and no hope. We have peace,love,joy,hope,and a relationship with our Great, mighty, glorious,loving,kind,caring, compassionate, awesome Father,son Jesus Christ,and God the Holy Spirit. hallelujah, hallelujah, hallelujah praise God and the Lamb of God forever Amen

[@hhhhhkPETER]

The bitterness in Silverman’s voice is just painful 😣

[@marcdecock7946]

At about 2:00 it was clear Turek would not accept that an Atheist can have profound feelings of love and caring. Like the people behind the witchhunts and the Spanish inquisition could ever have a monopoly on human virtues.

[@RusS1482]

@@marcdecock7946 He never said they couldnt, he said it doesnt make sense in their worldview

[@marcdecock7946]

@@RusS1482 What would a god change about the feelings we have for our loved ones? Without a god we're all we have for each other. Empathy shows us it's not nice to be abandoned and ignored, so we know profoundly that it makes sense to have a mutually beneficial bond with each other. It's our reality. It's very strange that then you would invent a god that supposedly grants us this ability. And you learned about this god from a book that is full of war, incest, jealousy, mysogyny, human sacrifice, genocide, ... In the worldview of a believer it makes sense that you can do the bidding of a god and kill people, god sorts them out anyway. A non-believer (that's an Atheist) has nothing to die for. You can not steal nor covet the secular molarity, religion is about guilt and fear of a god, not about love and caring.

[@marcdecock7946]

@Independent Thinker Your belief in god shows disappointment in the fact that you have some responsibility for your own life. Giving purpose as opposed to worshiping a deadbeat absent father figure.

[@marcdecock7946]

@Independent Thinker You are not really as independent a thinker as you indicate.

[@mharzmhason1787]

All I can say is I DON’T HAVE A NERVE AND PATIENCE THAT DR. FRANK TUREK have.😂😂😂

[@MyReligionIs2DoGood]

It's not the theist that needs patience in a religious debate. Silverman destroyed Turek.

[@paulohenriquez1525]

@@MyReligionIs2DoGood then you saw another debate. As a Christian I liked the honest questions that Silverman raised, which made it a good debate from an intellectual point, but being honest it gets down to the point that the atheist worldview refutes itself, in Silverman words "it's all matter of my opinion" 1:51:26

[@MyReligionIs2DoGood]

@@paulohenriquez1525 The atheist world view cannot 'refute itself', as you put it. What's to refute in a _lack_ of something? How can you refute someone's disbelief in, let's say, vampires? Only by providing evidence for vampires. If you can't show vampires exist, nobody has a reason to believe they do. Religion has failed time and time again to meet this burden of proof for their god claim, for thousands of years now. Every single argument that has ever been made to support the idea of a creator entity has been shown to be logically fallacious. I don't know if I even have to mention the fact that there is not a single shred of empirical evidence, either. As long as the theistic side cannot bring forth sufficient evidence for the claim that a god exists (any god), the only intellectually honest stance is to reject the claim. Though it cannot be known for certain if maybe some kind of god exists or not, this only would make the proper answer to the question if one does 'I don't know', not 'God exists because atheists must be wrong'.

[@maudslade6834]

​@@paulohenriquez1525There is no default "atheist worldview" atheism is a lack of belief in God. If Frank is going to be anything other than disingenuous, he needs to understand what he's even talking about. Which he displays in every debate to not grasp.

[@paulohenriquez1525]

@@maudslade6834 I agree that there's no default atheism worldview, but I don't think Silverman has presented his case right, at least his own worldview doesn't seem to be coherent with his own reality based on his proper assumptions, it's just his opinion.

[@HCA777]

Very good presentation Praise the Lord for all he Do in this last days. Speak the Truth!

[@HarryNicNicholas]

this is god: "i love you, you must love me or i will burn you in hell every day for eternity" sounds like a relative of hannibal lector.

[@mywayfernandez8704]

@@HarryNicNicholas What if I told you that hell couldn't be eternal because only the saved are promised eternal life, even through suffering.

[@MrEdd1397]

Saying religion equals to believing in a "man in the sky" = debate lost

[@johnpaulmarkes]

That's what people believed. Obviously now that we know there is more than "the heavens and the earth" because of science, you guys reinterpret your ancient religion's meaning, but many pictures still depict your god as an old white man with a beard living in the clouds. Who allows Hitler's victims to burn in a lake of fire forever because they chose to go there. If I don't love and worship the god you believe exists it obviously means I want to be tortured forever. Can't believe you guys buy this ancient superstitious crap

[@MrEdd1397]

@@johnpaulmarkes Look at the attempting to lecture chriatians about morality. Atheists. The eternal hipocrites

[@bandie9101]

he even affirms himself at the very first metions of "magic man in the sky", like »yes this is my straw man today«. should we call it "the strawgod fallacy"? :)

[@TheHeartOfTheHour1]

@@johnpaulmarkes last i checked in scripture it says those who are afflicted unjustly and murdered will be justified in eternity.. lol your point?

[@kainable8769]

thehitterman religion does not change to suit science. The Holy Bible= 66 books by 40 authors covering 1500 years of history. The way you prove the validity is humility. I will admit that the book of Judges is the first super heroes. But a man in that time would not have Mary be the first to see Jesus’ empty tomb. Also, after the slaughter of the Canonites God tells the Israelites not to go back to the field of battle until 3 and 7 days and not until after a good bath. This is God protecting them from disease, which was not ever discovered by science until MUCH later. This is why we say that atheism must steal from God to make their case. And to correct what you said, God is above the firmament, this is what is written and since the firmament is described as “where the birds fly,” so the sky is the firmament, therefore, God is ABOVE the sky. The atheist had to lie to say that the Bible lies. The bible does not condone slavery, if it did then we would not have Exodus. The Bible does not condone incest, Sodem and Gamorah were destroyed and only one family was saved because Lot was faithful to God but his wife did not listen and when she turned to look at the destruction she turned into a pillar of salt. He also said the evolution has been proven and done in a lab. Not Macro-evolution, and the fossile record only proves that something died and was buried very rapidly. And as far as a missing link goes, you need more than one, you need one for everything. And Lucy was a fabrication, guy got a grant and for the pelvis and then built the rest from pieces scattered from all over the place 50 miles and more apart. Then you have the issue of him saying “well, people have been above the sky and they didn’t see God”. Well, John Glenn, Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, Gus Grissom all people that went to space and all were believers until they died (save Buzz of course). And then Warner von Braun has Psalm 19:1 on his head stone.

[@simonp4832]

Isn't it funny how atheists never actually make an argument on how its BETTER EXPLAINS existence, but instead just say "Christians r dum, they blieve spaghetti monsta"🤣🤣🤣

[@phild249]

That’s because they don’t actually have an argument to support, so they will only find fault with others. They do however believe in magic beans, that would make (Jacks) beans seem as intriguing as a yo-yo.

[@guyjosephs5654]

How what better explains existence?

[@goldencalf13]

You cannot prove that something doesn't exist.

[@faelheavymetal]

Why should we?

[@obitouchiha1643]

@@goldencalf13Lol, this always gets me you indeed can prove a negative or that “something doesn't exist” it just isn't easy. For example, put a tooth under your pillow when YOU DONT get a dollar I will have proven the tooth fairy doesn't exist

[@pitAlexx]

I have to answer Adam and the knowledge of the tree: The tree represents the choice of being with God or not. Of choosing to love Him or not. If Adam loved God, from the start, then the tree could've been put right in front of him. Adam and Eve would have not even looked at it simply because God said to not eat from it. True love respects the wishes of the one for which love is being manifested. That's what it all was. God said: can you love?. Humans said: not without first understand what love is not. And God knew that, knew that humans will not be able to produce love without experiencing suffering. If they could...well that would make them as God, perfect in love, so what would even be the point of having them? God makes gods?

[@aletheiahenosis5962]

He put the tree in the garden so that we could choose to love him, love is not love if it's not a choice, God had to put it there in order for Adam and Eve to be free creatures that can choose between loving God or loving sin, if he hadn't put it there we'd be forced to love him because we wouldn't have the option to not love him by sinning by choosing to eat of the tree, in short without the tree we wouldn't have the choice of not loving God therefore the only choice that would remain would be to love him and therefore we wouldn't be free, even if God knew we'd disobey him he still had to put it there in order to make us free. And about the baby argument, how does he know that if those babies didn't have cancer and lived out their lives they would've lived a good life and not one with more suffering?God let those babies have cancer because the babies would've been better off than if they lived, and all babies go to heaven because they can't choose him or not therefore they are judged by what they know which is nothing therefore they go to heaven instead of suffering on earth.

[@justanotheryoutube1677]

Great answer

[@giladpachter4546]

In a nutshell: "WHY DON'T YOU LLLOOOVVVEEE MMMMEEEEEEE !!!!!!!!"

[@pitAlexx]

@@giladpachter4546 Yea, but here is the catch : God = good. Do you think its fine to not love good? That's why this comes as a commandment. You are to love the Lord your God, with all your strength and all your mind and all your heart. In a nutshell: You are to worship the essence of good, the very symbol of it, the standard. If you got a problem with that then you must think that your good is better than God - you the imperfect being better than The Perfect One. Imperfect > Perfect. That's some logic right there 👌

[@iceinferno7777]

Well, aren't we forgetting a another factor: Satan.

[@captanblue]

Looking forward to seeing this!

[@andybuluran6381]

1Corinthians 1:20 Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 1Corinthians 1:21 For since in the wisdom of God, the world through its wisdom did not know Him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.

[@donaldmacdonald9940]

Google. Voices For Christ. Speakers include the late Jim Flanigan ...Jack Hunter.....Audio......

[@SNORKYMEDIA]

"you're a wizard Harry". See quoting fiction doesn't help

[@iguess2739]

@@SNORKYMEDIA 3edgy5 me

[@miltonwetherbee5489]

If it's all relative, why does he care, why bother debating at all?

[@gibsonguy5240]

This was a good talk tonight. Frank and David were pretty respectful to each other. This is why God give us freedom of speech so we can settle our differences with our words and not in other ways.

[@mrslisaloves]

David wasn’t respectful. He was insincere. Praying for His salvation.

[@MarvelGamer2023]

David was so rude, angry and emotional.

[@veritas2145]

Silverman says there's no commandment against rape. Lol Deuteronomy 22:25

[@jacoblee5796]

That’s not a commandment against rape!? Are you series!?

[@iamreflective9624]

@@jacoblee5796 you sound goofy 🤪 tbh

[@jacoblee5796]

@@iamreflective9624 Cool, so how is that a commandment against rape?

[@Greenie-43x]

It is Not a lawyer's job to discover the truth, a lawyer's job is to win cases. That's what David's debating style reminds me of.

[@gabriellogi6981]

I pity David, he got so angry and frustrated, was rude to Frank and to the audience as well, and didn't really listen. Poor soul let's all pray for him

[@jordanontheroad6306]

You are a ~clown~. Save your prayers lmao Frustration stems from question dodging and illogical nonsense being thrown around

[@user-tn6it1gg5p]

@@jordanontheroad6306 Gabriel will pray for silverman and I will pray for you my friend.Why hating on us when we wish the best for you ?

[@Mr_Uni]

Pray for yourself to accept reality.

[@CME215]

​@@Mr_Uni And I will pray for you Dan. And leave you with some things to think about... Matter CANT Create itself from NOTHING. Hydrogen, which is a light mass particle CANT evolve to make uranium or Platonian or Sulfur etc. How does a light mass particle produce heavy mass particles? What came first, The elements to make the stars? Or the stars to make the elements? Evolution suggests we came from a Rock.... Say it again, WE CAME FROM A ROCK?!?! Trace the origins of Evolution claiming to the raining on the rocks for millions of years. Careful when outside on Concrete wouldn't want to step on Grandpa. LOL Then we ended up as Fish in the Sea? Beaching ourselves close to death only to return to the safety of the water and we did this for millions of years until we eventually developed Lungs with a Skeleton structure with our brains and posable thumbs with Eye balls and tongues for tasting and communicating. Then as Apes evolve into what we are today. Highly unlikely if you thought about it more. To be intellectually consistent do you deny Objective Morality and Objective reality then? Atheist world view doesn't work without Objective morals and a Atheist has to steal from Gods holy laws written in their heart to justify their world view. If the earth and universe is millions of years old the amount of lifeforms existed would be Trillions upon Trillions. Where is your cross species fossils? Right now there is a whopping 0. But they do find Fossilized trees standing upright through several layers of Rock supposed as Eons of time. Did that help prove the earth is millions of years old? NOPE on the contrary it proved a Rapid burial by mud slides and molten rock. See Science doesn't do many favors for evolution. Only scientists making claims get people to think a certain way without putting their own thoughts into it. Evolution is a BLIND FAITH RELIGION. I even have a Video I made myself on my channel check it out! All friendly here though my friend. No desire to argue, But friendly debates are cool!

He is an ignorant, loud-mouthed, rude, condescending hot-head who still can’t grasp the concept of free will to choose Good or Evil. He is unbelievably stubborn and acts like a five year old throwing a tantrum. Let alone the sexual harassment that got him kicked out of his position at American Atheists. He is so obnoxious.

[@beautifulfeetpreachingsc]

Look how Silverman loses his mind when talking about Adam and eve and sin. You bring up sin you bring up the fall and atheist hates to think about it but Silverman knows it’s true

[@sharplikecheddar2]

I am a Christian but I really respect Silverman for maintaining intellectual consistency through his objective morality points. Many times people will claim morality is subjective but then make objective claims. I thought his response was and point of view was very valid (until his closing remarks where he some what back tracked but I chalk that up to him not feeling good and just giving a generic set of closing remarks). Addressing Silvermans contention with God placing the tree of life in a place where he knew Adam would fall into sin. Turek seemed to stumble through this answer but I think the answer is simpler than we make it. That is God values the free will choice of love (heaven) over the pain of permanent separation (hell). Put another way, it is worth it to him to lose some of his creation for eternity if it means genuine love for the rest. You may not like that answer, it may be hard to wrestle with, but it seems to be the plan that was put into play. As Christians I do not think we should run from it but rather just embrace God's decision there.

[@yaboy20071]

As a Christian, I was also expecting a better answer but most of it was Mr. Silverman interrupting his responses. Also, I think the account of Adam and Eve reveals how humans are with our free will. We will make the most destructive decisions and then blame God or find a way to not take responsibility. However, we don't have a problem taking credit for the rewards of good decisions. When questioned by God, the first thing Adam did was blame God for giving him Eve. Lastly, it reminds me of Deuteronomy 8. God said He led them through the wilderness to know what was in their hearts. God knew their hearts very well but they didn't know what was in them. So it is with us. Most times, we don't know what's in our heart (good or bad) until we're tested.

[@sharplikecheddar2]

yaboy20071 wow “most of the times we don’t know what’s in our heart until tested” That hit deep, something really good for me to meditate on. I love that point of view/ perspective. Thanks!

[@JuniorRDZ04]

I like your comment. And when Silverman asked Turek this, it reminded me when I asked this question in the 4th grade in Sunday school (Why would God plant the tree if he knows what will happen?) And from that answers, Christians must accept that reality in order to be consistent with our views just as Atheists do for the world being relative and our individual morality being subjective.

[@davidbennett1471]

I really enjoyed this debate! David was consistent in his view of subjective morality but he missed the point that by God giving free will for us to love him or not… evil can enter creation since evil is a rejection of God. But much better than the debate with Hitchens (Christopher was really awful)

[@Preservestlandry]

Or, trees are extremely common in religious myths all over the world, and a tree myth is exactly the kind of thing that people would put into a myth. There is no need to wonder why God put the tree there, because he didn't. People did.

[@miltonwetherbee5489]

When he says, "I don't know" about the first cause, that is fair, but a better question for him to ask would be, "scientifically, can we ever discover the first cause?"

[@mywayfernandez8704]

Technically, true. I would have lead to a smoother conversation, most likely.

[@salvadoralvarado8685]

Why does the universe need a cause, but not god ?

[@nickoo9539]

@@salvadoralvarado8685 because all highly profiled scientists, atheist and believers, agree that time, space and matter came into existence out of nothing. Since every beginning had a cause, the cause for our universe has to be timeless, spaceless and immaterial. Which is what christians call god. What is more rational and probable? That nothing caused something out of nothing or that someone cause something out of nothing?

[@salvadoralvarado8685]

@@nickoo9539 Someone is a person. An inmaterial person ? You need to refined your argument.

[@nickoo9539]

@@salvadoralvarado8685 sorry, immaterial being* my bad

[@BerishaFatian]

*Frank answers David's question* David: You're avoiding the question.

[@Lucas20520]

LOL no he wasn't. He was making excuses and trying to dodge the question so David had to hold him to the actual question. Its easy to recognize that if your not brainwashed.

[@BerishaFatian]

No, because David didn't understand the answers. Atheists in general are so proud of their worldview that they don't care to read any philosophical books that support theism.

[@Lucas20520]

@@BerishaFatian nice assumption. Atheism isn't a worldview. Atheism is a response to a claim. Thats it. And no you're just flat wrong. Frank was trying to give unnecessary complex answers to simple questions. This is what all apologists do. Frank even tried to equate a video recording of football players to free will of the present moment. That is blatant intellectual dishonesty. Theres a reason why your comment only has 3 likes. Because its ridiculous.

[@michi-bi]

@@Lucas20520 What do you expect, Atheist are hostile and angry. They dont want God to be real, so they wont listen to reason. God gave us our mind to use logic and make decisions. I knew God was real, he provided Evidence through the bible and spiritual realm. Now i've asked for more revelation, I've been investigating what Satan's been doing in this world. It's creepy. Whatever God does, Satan tries to replicate. I would Recommend you check out chuck missler and David Pawsom to understand God. Just curious, why are you hanging out in apologetics video? Are you searching for truth or are you here to mock peoples beliefs?

[@Lucas20520]

@@michi-bi Saying "Atheists are hostile and angry" is an overgeneralization that you cannot justify. I'm not angry. "They don't want God to be real" It doesn't matter what anyone "wants", what matters is what can be demonstrated. Reason is the capacity of understanding and applying logic to justify ones beliefs based on current available information. In order to say "they won't listen to reason" you have to demonstrate that the proposition that is being rejected is reasonable. "God gave us our mind..." This is a bald assertion that requires a demonstration before one can be warranted in believing it, and since there has never been a demonstration that a god exists, it is completely irrational to accept that statement as true.

[@oldscorp]

David's obsession with the tree of knoweldge of good and evil question, that he doesnt allow to be answered, is when he realized he will loose every point of the debate so he is trying to freeze the debate to at least stop Turek from scoring a humiliating score. Hitchens does it too. ...and Atkins....and the chemist who's name i forgot, the one with long hair thats angry before the debate even starts.

[@unionjackjohn]

For as David said well in the psalms.. "The fool says in his heart "there is no God." These people hate God and by denying Christ they're calling God a liar. I believe Hitchens is dead now and he and the rest of the haters will spend an eternity, just damned in hell where the smoke or their torment goes up forever and ever. We're certainly in the end moments of history, as this foolish generation rightly calls itself "gen Z" (emphasis on the Z). Stay firm in the Lord for the demonic attacks are ramping up as Christ is soon to return. Murdering innocent little unborn babies. Sexual immorality (the abc mafia). A huge falling away from the Lord. Mocking the Lord. Attacking children with gender confusion. Vanity like never before. Being forced to take the jab which could very well be the mark or as I believe is a test for the main event just around the corner. Christian channels are being banned for so-called hate speech...Christsforgiveness channel being one and this channel will soon be banned along with all true Christian channels!..just watch and see. Again I say, stand firm in the Lord for only those who stay faithful to death will be saved! And please keep away from the jabs no matter what they threaten you with! May Jesus bless you.

[@millieroman-sweeney5510]

Exactly… since they don’t have any real answers they try to stop Frank from answering

[@richardlawson6787]

You believe a whale swallowed a man whole and spit him out alive three dsys later?.you believe samson lost his strength with a hair cut?..no way you got far in school

[@michaelwill7811]

As soon as he started with the "God of the gaps" silliness, I fast forwarded to the rebuttals. Frank's presentation had nothing to do with "I don't know, so, God did it" Frank make very plausible ties with his "Crimes" device that could be interpreted as pointing to God. This is a typical atheist assertion and its so silly on its face that as I soon as I hear it from them, yes, I tune them out.

[@michaelwill7811]

Frank's rebuttal nailed the fallacy of claiming "God of the gaps" right off the bat... bravo.

[@michaelwill7811]

"That's not a defeat, that's a truth" Thank you for your opinion but, unfortunately, you saying this doesn't make it so.

[@jacoblee5796]

The F'K it didn't! Franks entire argument was god of the gaps! WTF debate did you watch!? Frank's "Crimes" BS was all god of the gaps! Its fallacies as all hell!

[@donnnick]

Keep fast forwarding through any position you don’t hold, that’s the best way to make sure not to learn anything! It’s no wonder you have had your perspective since mommy and daddy took you to the first Sunday school class.

[@donnnick]

“These things either don’t exist or can be explained materially maybe David will explain that next” how frank ends his rebuttal for fucks sake how do you not see the gap god is being shoved into. Well you’d have to actually listen I guess.

[@legentilletcroustillant490]

I don't understand how we can come from the premice "there is no free-will" to the conclusion "it's impossible to be rationnal". I should add that for me beeing rationnal means following a procedure that leads to true conclusions ( and truth is about the correspondance between the proposition and the objective reality ).

[@legentilletcroustillant490]

@Cosma Alex even though your highly disrecpectfull, I'll still try to have a civil conversation with you. I suppose that the perspective of beeing wrong put you ( as many other people ) in a distatefull emotionnal state. As I said beeing rationnal is about following rules wich lead to correct conclusion. For me we can say that a calculator or a computer are rationnal since they are following rules, even though we cannot say neither calulator nor computer have free will. So again why is it so hard to speak about rationnality without having to presupose free-will ?

[@kabakyengawilson9019]

David is just getting emotional here

[@rickb.4168]

When your opponent keeps lying about you and even Richard Dawkins, you would get emotional.

[@kabakyengawilson9019]

@@rickb.4168 David kept interrupting Frank. I've watched Hitchens debate with Frank, But Hitchens never got emotional at one point, he was always calm and collected.

[@rickb.4168]

Kabakyenga Wilson I’ve seen it too, but I can’t remember if Frank kept lying to him. He certainly does in this one.

[@ramommeke]

@@kabakyengawilson9019 Well not getting emotional didn't help Frank snap back to reality, so David tried to take a different route. But still that thick religitard skull is in the way of actual data being absorbed by the theist brain.

[@flash_crazy7803]

Richard Barrow. What did he lie about?

[@ramielalbazi]

Love you my brother Frank and God bless you brother

[@kurooaisu]

2:01:45 'David: I'm a loving and caring person!' Huge red flag. I'd never believe in anyone who boasted about that in broad daylight, religious or not. A huge part of being a human is trying to do your best and keep your head down because nobody is perfect.

[@joecheffo5942]

He didn't say he was perfect. Also, in a debate, when someone asks an athiest why he cares, what do you expect he would say? I don't if he is or not but I know a non-believer who is. She has moved in to care for me. She never says things like that, it does sound weird, but this is a debate. Dan Barker says "we athiests are just as caring..." which is probably a better way to phrase it.

[@FreeStyle888.]

Turek was definitely more respectful and knowledgeable than most Christian debaters. Appreciated his perspective.

[@BonoMalumSuperate]

It was so painful watching The atheist speaker. I really felt sorry for him.

[@gdobie1west988]

You may want to feel sorry for yourself, Silverman brought up a lot of great points. I like Frank Turek, but I'm not sold on his views 100%. And the beat goes on...…...

[@HarryNicNicholas]

no need, it's franks soul you should be praying for because he misrepresents god and is lining his pockets along the way.

[@valhallafanmail4011]

Silverman seemed hostile in my opinion. Is he angry at God for some reason?

[@CatsMusicTube]

I wouldnt like to be David silverman ..... So spanked ... wow

[@Christ_died_for_your_sins_777.]

@@HarryNicNicholas nope

[@jugg_a_l0w286]

More people need to watch this.....

[@codeapologia2831]

1:25:08 Silverman is so insecure, and it’s so funny, he acts like a character from the office “you’re clapping for that, really?” 😂

[@mywayfernandez8704]

He also asks multiple times, too. Seriously, he tried so hard to look dominant and when it failed because he had no actual argument for how his "science" makes sense of reality, he had to antagonize someone and make himself look good. But he couldn't be good without God and he tried to antagonize Frank and God for giving humanity the chance to screw over the world he gave them to rule over. Seriously, we all took the fruit of the tree which is why we need a saviour.

[@gdobie1west988]

@@mywayfernandez8704 Adam and Eve were set up---God knew in advance what they would do yet still let still let it play out. Silverman is correct. Seth Andrews, said it best, "Adam and Eve committed what amounted to a parking ticket, yet man was sentenced to eternal damnation."

[@Lucas20520]

LOL you're delusional dude. The reason he said that is because what they were clapping for was a ridiculous statement.

[@MAP2023]

He is a commie he gets triggered easily

[@michi-bi]

@@gdobie1west988 God knows but we humans didnt. Maybe God did that so we would learn choices have consequences? Will you humble yourself and admit your mistake or will you blame others and be prideful? I wonder if things wouldve been different if Adam admitted his mistake and showed compassion on Eve instead of blaming her. I get why God had to kick them out. We need to grow up. I feel God is always testing us to see how we deal with different situations. I can learn all theology in the world, but it doesnt help when i get angry and overreact. I'm slowyly getting better, it'll take a lifetime. Everytime i Fail, i try to ask the Holy Spirit for guidance. :)

[@TFSpodcast_]

God bless this man great stuff

[@mojcc5369]

Watching here from Philippines

[@j.athanasius9832]

58:50 That's what Frank gets for using an apple computer.

[@daniellus4549]

Underrated comment

[@donavanboykin9489]

Unfortunately

[@arniekando6846]

With respect, but David`d arguments had no meat on it. Much respect though....

[@user-vp1pp7xn2v]

David Silverman is for sure the most hydrated man in the world.

[@alive4321]

What was that email address the pastor said at the end?? Can someone help please!

[@tudorturtl]

he said we're all energy, where does energy come from? energy is not created or destroyed, merely transferred to differing states. life comes from life.

[@vr_4691]

If energy is not created did god create energy?😁

[@jamesgraves4291]

In the past Silverman has argued the universe is eternal

[@NaturalHabitat._show]

James Graves EXACTLY. Science used to think that the universe was eternal while the Bible correctly states that there was a BEGINNING.

[@CamillePaigeMusic]

I don't trust scientists

[@jpapan1]

@@NaturalHabitat._show yes. And god works on saturdays, but not sundays. He needs at least one day a weekend to recover. He's ominpotent, but 7 days on? No way man.

[@dr.doctor8810]

2:07:00 I love the smart slick talking they squeezed in😂

[@mikeskrib510]

Omg that Psalm he mentioned at 1:14 psalm 137 I just read it and it was so taken out of context the verse he read was reffering to what the Idomites said and is mentioning for God not to forget in the day of Jerusalem to remember the Idomites deeds which are wrong by the way lol. Wow if you are going to use scripture at least try to not missrepresent it and butcher it.

[@on-the-way222]

Exactly

[@caitanfernandes2113]

Idk and i read bible incorrectly vs clame frank😎

[@Lucas20520]

He didn't take that out of context, he quoted it verbatim. That verse is saying blessed are those who dashed the babies against the rocks referring to the enemies of God's babies. So yes, according to the bible God is happy when his enemies babies are dashed against rocks. Good try though.

[@TenTonNuke]

Likewise if you're going to use the English language, try not to butcher it. There are these amazing things called "commas" and "periods."

[@Lucas20520]

@@TenTonNuke WTF seriously dude? Don't be the grammar police. Come with real criticism. That's so lame SMH

[@RandallChase1]

“You don’t judge a philosophy by its abusers.” That single statement discredits more than half of Silverman’s comments. But notice that he just ignored it and never responded to it.

[@kimberlykwasek7410]

Knowing that someone will do something isn’t the same thing as choosing for them. I can know that if I leave cake in the living room that my children will eat it but ultimately it is my child’s choice to eat it or not. David’s thought that it’s somehow Gods fault completely removes people’s freedom of choice. It seems he would favour a God who manipulates and controls us rather than a God who lets us choose for ourselves.

[@HarryNicNicholas]

god (as i understand it) knows from the beginning what's coming next, whatever you do has been determined by god before you even start out, god is omnipresent and omnipotent, no? then yep - HE does everything, good or bad. we get the blame though.

[@naldlabayen]

Frank, the perfect answer for David’s whining, ‘why did God put the Tree..?’ would be ‘the same that God allowed you(David Silverman) to be born knowing you will deny Him as your Creator’.

[@eliasayele8989]

One of the best Frank Turek debates ever.

[@jaquicx9500]

Then you definitely haven't seen enough! 😁 ... Or we just like different things 🤭 I prefer the debates where the atheist is coherent and on topic, the moderator is fair and partakes a little, and Frank is still on top of his game. I greatly enjoy watching the challenge be won 💕😁

[@eliasayele8989]

@@jaquicx9500 I think one of the big reasons I loved this one is that they were friends and it looked like Turek was really trying to get his friend into the same eternal home as himself. This is how I want to speak with my friends.

[@michaeloud6044]

Guy quotes psalm 137:9 SO out of context it’s amazing. If you’re going to bash scripture, read the passage; understand the meaning, then do whatever you will with it.

[@mahones981]

Yes and he complains about theists quoting athiests out of context.

[@rebalspirit]

Misquoting God is never good. But since there is only individual opinions according to the atheist about good and bad, they don't know what they don't know.

[@miltonwetherbee5489]

He could use some mechanical and electrical engineering classes as well as some programming ones. When you make stuff, when you design stuff to work a certain way, and you see it work and see the results of it working, you get a better sense of what the term design means and how it allies to the universe.

[@jacoblee5796]

Yeah....HIV, cancer, SIDs, starvation, polio, ext.....what a beautiful design.

[@ceelothatmane9421]

@@jacoblee5796 so does your phone never glitch? Do you never have to upgrade an outdated phone or any device for that matter? Is your phone not designed?

[@jacoblee5796]

@@ceelothatmane9421 For dumb! My phone wasn’t created by an all perfect being.

[@ceelothatmane9421]

@@jacoblee5796 so because an all perfect being makes a creation the creation must be all perfect?

[@jacoblee5796]

@@ceelothatmane9421 Why create a flawed one!? Remember, this being isn’t just perfect, it’s also all good and all loving.

[@ByronRadstyle]

Isn't it funny how the athiest are always angry.

[@vimadiz72]

Wow

[@NNiicckk69]

The anger comes from dealing with Christians who will not accept reality. It gets frustrating

[@Jbarack98]

@@NNiicckk69 who said Christians don’t accept reality... stop reaching

[@user-tn6it1gg5p]

The atheist : There is no God and I hate him 😂

[@tastysponges]

only a sit lord deals in absolutes

[@nicholas5wepriceeggwe138]

No matter what religion you believe in the honest answer is that we don't know, its okay too have faith or whatever, but the bottom line is that we don't know

[@RandallChase1]

Silverman’s argument that “if God put the tree somewhere else” somehow that would make things different is absurd. The misuse of the purpose of the Tree of knowledge doesn’t mean that God wanted them to misuse it. That’s like saying that if someone starts a fire on the stove in their house that it’s the fault of the home builder. A stove’s purpose is NOT to burn down the house, its purpose is to cook food, but because of a misuse of the stove the house burns. But based on Silverman’s view the builder is at fault, that’s just a flawed basis.

[@jmcvety]

"The number of atheist arguments proven wrong with a theistic argument is ZERO" Didn't atheists say the universe was eternal?

[@bartelgrant]

that would be new to me.

[@benitaalmond3991]

@@bartelgrant Was not new to Alexander Vilenkin.

[@ramommeke]

@@benitaalmond3991 Alexander Vilenkin said that even if the universe came from nothing, defining nothing as "no time, space and matter". There would still be need for the laws of physics to exist. And he is one atheist. so what? And even if I grand your point valid, which it's not, I don't see where's the theistic argument that proved the argument "The universe is eternal" wrong.

[@benitaalmond3991]

@@ramommeke Alexander Vilenkin said: “It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man. With the proof now in place, cosmologists can no longer hide behind the possibility of a past-eternal universe. There is no escape: they have to face the problem of a cosmic beginning.” Even if the laws of physics existed before the big bang does not demonstrate that the universe had no beginning. Don't deny the science just because it does not point your way. Most cosmologists do admit to a cosmic beginning not just Vilenkin. Please substantiate why Vilenkin's point is not valid. Just by stating it is not valid does not make it so. A cosmic beginning is the foundation on which Theism stands ( Genesis 1:1 In the beginning.....) - destroy that foundation and Theism will come tumbling down which you have failed to do.

[@ramommeke]

@@benitaalmond3991 OOOH scary... :P dumbass!

[@ceelothatmane9421]

Dude started his whole argument off sloppy with “God of the Gaps” thats BEEN done away with

[@mikemahurin721]

re: in the discussion about why God allowed Adam to sin by eating from the Tree of Knowledge, I'm just wondering why Frank never brings up that it was NOT God that tempted Eve who then tempted Adam to eat the fruit of the tree? Wouldn't it be the fault of the SERPENT??

[@brantgentry1463]

What is the point of choosing if there is nothing to choose from

[@denniswilkerson5536]

How is there no choice?

[@miltonwetherbee5489]

Actually, regarding the time of evolution, our great estimates regarding the time needed for evolution to happen based on the current evolution model would require way more than a billion years. One of the problems of evolution is that live isn't old enough to have evolved the way the model requires.

[@triplemoyagames4195]

and would still be seeing intermediate creatures

[@salvadoralvarado8685]

The speed of evolutionary change is not uniform, during the Cambrian period evolution was faster than during the Precambrian. In the last 20% of earth’s history we have the appearance of very complex life forms.

[@guyjosephs5654]

Who says more time is needed?

[@thanayhtoo9197]

Frank is genius 😊😊👍

[@drzaius844]

Watch his interview with Alex O’Connor. He gets mauled. Frank is not a genius, he is a professional huckster.

[@casullen]

David is saying morality is relative, but keeps making absolute moral statements. If morality is relative, there is no argument. He would say nothing, because there’s no validation without an absolute. So, he would be merely making noise, nothing worthy of hearing. At least with an absolute, you know you’re looking for something. So, you’re willing to give a hearing to see if it’s what you’re looking for. He keeps saying “society”. What society? Society is a group of people that have come together upon an absolute. But then that’s what he’s arguing against.

[@ndustries6323]

1:20:27 is the excerpt from page 93 of Frank’s book Stealing from God.

[@iiLaker989]

I now know how to use a thesis. thanks, frank.

[@mywayfernandez8704]

I was thinking the same thing.

[@TimothyPounds]

You can't pull the rug from up under truth. It will stand regardless. Frank's debaters always wind up having to resort to entertaining antics to make it through the whole debate because once Frank starts putting out the truth its over for them. :)

[@mission_new-earth]

this is best one yet

[@mboatman40220]

This is the second debate of Turek I've heard. His presentations are clear and precise. Silverman felt more like ramblings, but he said some good stuff. One of Turek's best attributes for his position is that he talks fast. He doesn't give a person enough time to think about what he's saying - ha. But since he says the same thing at each debate, eventually, I understand more.

[@markmtbrider]

If I was him, I wouldn't found my argument on a "simple cell" . I guess he hasn't heard of genetics or DNA.....

[@vadrian123]

Me. Turek, Logic is the foundation of the universe. The universe is not mathematical; it’s logical because mathematics has logic as foundation. Logic is behind science, information communication, languages and everything else. And we discovered Logic in our DNA and in the universe. Behind Logic is a mind. The mind of God.

[@jaybirdjetwings7516]

That's ridiculous lol the bible that God comes from is historically inmacurrate with inconsistency of reality

[@vadrian123]

Jaybird Jetwings If you study the Bible more without prejudice you will realize it’s not true

[@vadrian123]

GBF freeloader The word Logos incorporates logic, wisdom, words, and interpersonal communication

[@jaybirdjetwings7516]

@@vadrian123 No lol I study it without bias because I was once i believer, thab I found out that there is no history to back to claims of the patriarchs. For example, moses is considered to be myth and probably based on a real person but the whole story of Jews in eygpt was false. Moses is the one said to write the first 5 books, since he didnt exist and the events around him didn't the whole bible falls apart

[@vadrian123]

Jaybird Jetwings Are you sure you are reasonable? You ask for absolute proof from 3500-4000 years ago. According to historical method, the OT is passing the test. We have real places in Middle East, and many events are confirmed by historians and archeology. The existence of Moses is confirmed by the Biblical manuscripts at least 2200 years old. The Egyptian records were destroyed by the Assyrian in 600 BC. Archeology has confirmed the existence of people of Israel in Egypt. Islam in Middle East has no interest in finding the truth about the Bible...

[@jamesbond3391]

I wish i had known about these debates when i was a young hotheaded philosopher. Know I've noticed i stopped caring for most things. Well I'm glad my friend told me to watch this, know i can spark that hotheaded philosopher but with some character.

[@JuniorRDZ04]

From the many weeks now of me looking into other religions and seeing opposing views upon Christian views or theistic views, these debates are a good listen. Yes, it kinda gets repetitive heating Franks’ opening statement each time, but it means that’s what he finds the most effective for his argument. And I can see David’s frustration on Frank not answering the question directly, since on his views, it would be a simple answer since it’s the more realistic one. Besides this, 2:05:45 is a great point for the case of theism being true. Because if I were to create all this, I would leave everyone alone such as I do right now. To some that would be lazy since the great commission is something us believers should do. But I’m rambling on now.

[@MyReligionIs2DoGood]

2:05:45 gets directly debunked the second after he makes the point. He does NOT 'leave everyone alone' - he supposedly inspired a book telling us what we can and cannot do. In everything that the Bible says, the god described in it does everything else but leaving us alone - especially when he sends us to hell if we don't behave the way he commands.

[@Toasted_Buttons]

​@@MyReligionIs2DoGoodoh so youre forced to listen and debate it and disagree with it ? Have you ever just tried simply saying "god doesnt exist, i dont want him and i hate him." And seeing what the christian does ? For science obviously.

[@Toasted_Buttons]

​@@MyReligionIs2DoGoodgod doesnt send anybody body to hell, they chose it and god shows them the way there, same way you would show some one who doesnt wanna respect your household and its rules to the door.

[@MyReligionIs2DoGood]

@@Toasted_Buttons If this god exists, he is all-powerful, the creator of the universe, AND all-knowing. This means there is no free will. He knows long before we are born where we will go, what we will do, and what the end of everything will look like. Nobody can do anything that god didn't already foresaw. Nobody can do anything that foils god's plan. Nobody can make any decision that wasn't already planned out long before anyone was born. He created this universe out of _all the options_ he had, and DECIDED to create the one in which billions of people go to hell, due to the 'decisions' they make which were part of his plan from the start. Worse than that, this allegedly 'all-loving god' decided to create a universe WITH A HELL. My love of other humans - and yours probably, too - is bigger than his, because we would NOT create a place in which the loved ones of other people have to suffer FOREVER. Lastly, eternal punishment for finite crimes is extremely immoral. No half-decent entity would ever even consider such a thing. Stop trying to rationalize or justify this. YOUR morals are better than your god's.

[@Toasted_Buttons]

@@MyReligionIs2DoGood oh really ? How so ? A mother can know a baby is gunna wake up at somepoint in the night to cry but that doesnt mean she can make the babies choices to wake up and cry or not. A seer can see the future but that doesnt mean the seer controls the actions of the men the seer has foretold prophetic future too. If there was no free will, converting people is pointless as is the existence of choice and the need for jesus as well as option to choose heaven or live seperately from god. All knowing does not mean reduction or taking of choice. All powerful does not mean he can take choice- not if he wants to call himself loving and just anyway.

[@miltonwetherbee5489]

How would science be able to either prove or disprove the existence of a God that exists outside of what science can know? This is one of several areas where science cannot give us an answer, and people such as David Silverman need to realize that science has limits and last some philosophy.

[@Detson404]

That’s totally fair, but then you’ve got a god that only exists in some metaphysical way. That kind of god doesn’t appear in a burning bush or etch tablets- if he does something, we should be able to study that something.

[@Preservestlandry]

Science isn't trying to disprove God. I think everyone knows that if there were a supernatural realm, we have no way to demonstrate it.

[@skhrm91]

Game set match at 1:25:09

[@diegolee5712]

According to mr. Silverman, the absence of objective morality "takes away the freedom of people to do bad things" and causes them to "make their own decisions" and "choices" which leads to them holding "their own responsibilities" and being "better"? First of, that's contradicting: if I'm not free to do bad things, am I also not free to make decisions since making decisions requires intelligence and freedom? Secondly, he said those words as if the presence of objective morality somehow condoned people doing bad things, took their capability of making decisions and/or assuming the responsibility of the ones that are wrong. I mean, if an objective moral standard exists I am still free to act according to it or against it and I make that decisions willingly. The difference is that, with an objective moral standard, it's made clearer which actions are benefitial for individuals and societies and which ones damage us individually and hurt relationships. Therefore, it is easier to determine the "badness" of an action and the "degree of badness" that it weighs. Thus decisions can be better guided towards a "true goodness" and people are more accountable for "bad actions", which enthrones responsibility-holding. And, as mr. Turek said, with no objective morality there are no objective "bad things", and if Silverman thinks that taking the freedom of bad choices is "wrong" and an hypotetical "subject A" thinks it's "right", then why should I follow Silverman's opinion and not subject A's? Why is Silverman's opinion better for society and not the opinion of "subject B" who thinks that holding responsibility is a wrong thing?

[@agentsamuelson1860]

What is right and what is wrong?

[@friendlyolbum]

I think the athiest here had some poor arguments. I like how respectful everyone managed to stay, love these videos.

[@sigururolafsson2257]

Most atheist hate the bible (or God), without strong knowledge about it.

[@miltonwetherbee5489]

If the tree of the knowledge of good and evil wasn't there, would Adam and Eve have had a choice, or would that choice have been taken from them?

[@jacoblee5796]

So with out the tree of knowledge they didn't have free will!? I don't get your point and think you are missing the point David's question.

[@sinclairj7492]

They had a choice regardless

[@m3ow21]

@@jacoblee5796 I think that without the tree of knowledge, choice to disobey God would be none. His first commandment was for them not to eat in the tree of knowledge. So God has to give them a 100% choice; an obvious one.

[@jacoblee5796]

@@m3ow21 But according to the bible Adam and Eve didn't know right from wrong until they ate the fruit. But i still don't understand your line of thinking. They still had free will....To me god set them up for failure.

[@m3ow21]

@@jacoblee5796 I think that God imparted morality to Adam and Eve, because without it, how could Adam and Eve know that eating the fruit which means disobeying God is Evil? So they must have known good and evil in the first place, and they experienced evil which defiled their whole body after they ate the fruit.

[@obdios]

why all atheist I've seen seem very bitter? they don't give argument but resentment

[@8thMusketeer]

Your grammar is almost as painful as listening to Silverman. But yes, I agree

[@ramommeke]

To you atheists seem bitter because they refute the thing you have so much faith in. Obviously that will seem bitter to you. Give examples of events where you spotted bitterness in the words of atheists and I can elaborate.

[@8thMusketeer]

@@ramommeke Um... Silverman

[@ramommeke]

@@8thMusketeer Hehe, touché mate! I can’t argue there. I’m still gonna sneak a but in there. And that is: But he’s a real Ahole though. If I would use Fred Waldron Phelps as an example to shape my view on the entire global Christian community, then I’d think all Christians are bitter and weird too. But I don’t.

[@8thMusketeer]

@@ramommeke Lol fair enough. I will still argue that generally speaking, Christians are more pleasant than atheists, as the religion teaches to love your neighbor, and I find atheists leaving hostile comments on Christian videos far more often than I find hostile Christian comments on atheist videos... in fact, I dont think I've ever seen a hostile Christian comment before. But I still agree with your point. I do think it's unfair to label all individuals of a certain group based on the actions of others. You definitely don't seem bitter or hostile towards me, which I am grateful for. 🙂 Edit: I feel like I should add this. I'm not saying Christians are never hostile. We definitely have our own A holes too.

[@miltonwetherbee5489]

Presenting a choice doesn't make you responsible for the choice or it's outcome.

[@zeddicuszorrander3599]

I wonder what Frank Turek would do if an atheist said he did have faith that god doesn't exist. Frank Turek likes to try to slip in this "gatcha" card, but what would that mean? If Frank Turek thinks faith is this super powerful position, then he just elevated his opponent position to a higher form. How would we determine which faith based position is right? Would both be right? Would both be wrong? Would the position that uses more faith win? I don't understand what Frank Turek wishes to achieve by this.

[@sunamkevinjang4615]

If there was no possibility for evil, the ability to choose evil, would there be free choice at all?

[@Philogaming857]

Nope cause then the only option would be good and there would be no choice but to do good

[@MadScientist72]

I would grant anyone the ability to choose evil. But God, being a MORALLY PERFECT being would have the responsibility to stop them from acting out on their evil.

[@MadScientist72]

Moral perfection involves the ability to stop or to reduce the amount of evil and suffering. If you call a policeman to stop the burglar from stealing things from your home, and he does NOTHING, most people would say that that the policeman is being immoral.

[@AndyC1]

@@MadScientist72 If you stop someone lol from acting out or completely choosing evil you aren't really letting them "be free" or choose it. To be truly free as in to have true free will God won't stop the person. It's like tough love I guess

[@MezztovenShort4DannY]

Su Nam (Kevin) Jang If there wasn't a knowledge of good and evil then one would worry about evil

[@jackwilmoresongs]

Silverman says of theists that their excuse is - "God of the Gaps - I don't know therefore God did it". It is because of what we know that we take DNA as evidence of an intelligent Designer. We theists believe because we KNOW that things like DNA require design. I believe not based on what I don't know but on what I know.

[@dongeonmaster8547]

14:00 The cosmos and the universe may well be used interchangeably but for clarification it might be better to use COSMOS as everything in existence and UNIVERSE as everything existing within our observable universe as we can only really talk about the observable universe as we cannot know what lies beyond. The consensus of cosmologists is that our observable universe started with the big bang. That does not necessarily mean that everything in the cosmos started at this point. Nor does it mean that nothing ever existed before that moment. All time/space in our observable universe started at that point.

[@eurekajesus7904]

"There is no objective morality" you said. Interesttng! What is this statement objective or relative?

[@katamas832]

Huh? Saying there is no objective morality is not a moral claim, it is a claim about reality, so why are you even asking that question?

[@desmondaw3743]

Silverman is not willing to listen, not willing to admit he has a weak argument, and even when given facts, he just gets louder. It's such a pain hearing Silverman. Gosh, Frank is really patient here. And the debate moderator is really terrible at his job.

[@G6Tarantula]

Yes but that’s what makes me like him as one even more lol. I’m sure he was just as into it as we were and honestly giving them some more slack really let’s the audience see the flower of reason bloom more than what you normally see in a debate.

[@joshuaphilip7601]

On the tree in the Garden, if God doesn't give the tree which we can just refer to as the choice between good and evil then we don't have free will, it's literally called the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Too me it's either literal or a representation of how God gave us free will. Without the knowledge of what is good and evil you don't have the choice to choose between the two, this was necessary for free will to be a thing. David is assuming God could have given us free will without evil, but that just seems like a contradiction to me, it's breaking the laws of logic. Just an idea that I thought of while listening to them go back and forth to no avail.

[@DannyFitz777]

Very good answer actually 🤗🤗

[@joshuaphilip7601]

@@DannyFitz777 thanks 😊

[@Loading....99.99]

@ 1:49:37 the atheist says atheism offers no hope (that's cold).. then what comfort can he realistically offer anyone who's dying of cancer?

[@landofthefree2023]

Could a professional professing atheist ever abandon their belief... If they did for purpose of correction what would they loose from acknowledging a wrong world view? Could a professional professing Christ follower ever abandon their belief... If they did for purpose of correction what would they loose from acknowledging a wrong world view? Who would lose more? Who would be more likely to exist in humility? Who have lost more? Who will have gained more?

[@alexm2404]

Frank Turek is the evolved version of Kent Hovind

[@ReyBanYAHUAH]

Good job Frank! The Holy Spirit speaks through you and helps you defend God. Repent and put your faith in Jesus Christ. God Bless you all!

[@johndeoliveira8476]

Charlie Boy2 angry atheists has stepped in the building 👀

[@johndeoliveira8476]

Charlie Boy2 you must be on crack.

[@johndeoliveira8476]

Charlie Boy2 👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽

[@johndeoliveira8476]

Charlie Boy2 is that a fact or your opinion?

[@johndeoliveira8476]

Charlie Boy2 is that your opinion

[@thedivinethree333]

“Lets give David another round of applause….he wasn’t feeling well and he’s not feeling well right now and he’s even more sharper then he was tonight….” Frank meant it as a compliment but how it came across has me laughing out loud. Watch Davids face when Frank says it. 😂😂

[@miltonwetherbee5489]

A cross is a Christian symbol, so what if it's also a secular one? Why can't it be both. The Nazi's adopted the swastika, but it originally represented something quit different. I'm not at all sure what his point could be.