Does God Exist? (Frank Turek vs Christopher Hitchens)

On September 9, 2008, Frank Turek debated atheist Christopher Hitchens, author of God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything, at Virginia Commonwealth University. The topic was, "Does God Exist?"
Hitchens was his usual charming and witty self (I, Frank, really like him and said as much), but he did not answer any of the eight arguments that were presented for the existence of God. Many in the audience acknowledged that he dodged nearly all of the questions. Watch the video and decide for yourself which arguments were strongest. Then read comments in the CrossExamined blog (www.crossexamined.org/blog/?p=84) from a variety of viewers who wanted to weigh in with their opinions and arguments.

[@bobby-wk2em]

I think about 95% of what Hitchens said was about the evil of religion rather than the existence of God

[@Elmonsoon]

Because he rebutted Turek's argument in 5% of the debate. We can't know about a first cause and even if Turek is correct, it doesn't get him anywhere near a Christian God, or even a God as we conceptualize it. It would just prove that something started the universe. So what? Hitchen rebutted it and used the rest of his time more effectively.

[@bobby-wk2em]

@@Elmonsoon The way I see it is, you either believe that 1) the beginning of the universe was completely random and caused purely by science or 2) something started the universe as part of some kind of plan, through science. If you believe that some kind of unknown, unseen, infinite force started the universe, then surely you believe in God, your just not referring to it as "God", because religion is so frowned upon these days. The title of this debate said nothing about a Christian god.

[@fredarroyo7429]

@@Elmonsoon If we have good reasons to believe the attributes of God exists then it follows we have good reason to believe that a God who has those attributes exist.

[@unggrabb]

Because 100% of it is evil. And what is the point of babbling about a nin existent phantasm?

[@laurapiovan]

@Michael M. The debate was about the existence of God, it was not about “once we agree that god most likely exists because of all the logical, philosophical and scientifically evidence we have examined, which one is it”. That is a second debate . If that had been the topic Turek would have easily addressed it in the opening statement . All Hitchens said was “I don’t have a a clue about how the universe came into existence and therefore NO ONE CAN KNOW and I am going to ignore any evidence which points into a direction of the possibility that there may be a God”. Basically it’s the same logical fallacy that you would make if you saw a turtle on the top of a wall: You can just believe that the turtle practiced jumping for a very looooooong period of time and eventually learned to jump so high that it managed to reach the top of the wall. OR…. You follow the most credible explanation … and you admit that most likely someone took the turtle and put it on top of the wall.

[@TheKnoxvicious]

Topic: Does God exist? Turek: Yes. Hitchens: Christianity sucks.

[@TonyEnglandUK]

*The Bible:* _"Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God."_ *Frank Turek:* _"I'm a multi-millionaire, wanna buy my religion?"_

[@theflash206]

In the Bible god been always there so he wasn't created, not by nature not by anything, simple as that. - we can start counting from one to infinity but we can't count from infinity to infinity - so how can anything be always there someone explain this to me please 🙏.

[@gavinwedgeman7905]

@@theflash206 for a very large portion of science everyone was very happy to believe in an eternal universe but not suddenly theres a big issue believing it's possible for God. We do not fully understand the way the universe works but we do know form the power of deduction that we will need an unmoved mover, an initial cause and I don't have enough faith to believe that wasn't God

[@TonyEnglandUK]

@One Good Lord † News Where did anybody say "being rich is inherently evil"? I certainly didn't say it. I can't see anyone using those words except you.

[@TonyEnglandUK]

@One Good Lord † News lol don't they? Frank Turek - multi millionaire from selling religion. Billy Graham - multi millionaire from selling religion. Jerry Falwell - multi millionaire from selling religion. If you took money out of the equation, these charlatans would have dumped Christianity in a heartbeat. And if you, as a Christian, are defending it, good luck getting a camel through the eye of a needle.

[@IPraisetheTrinity]

Too proud. Pride vs humility happened here.

[@CuriousMind83]

Christians are some dreadful proud SOBs

[@TonyEnglandUK]

Then say where, when and by whom. And present evidence to prove your claim is true.

[@fritula6200]

The oldest enemy of man is, he refuses to love.... his ego is put in place of love:

[@lionzion1879]

The biggest enemy of men is stupidity.

[@vincentv.9729]

ego is self-love. Problem solved.

[@toni4729]

What is the relevance of this? Are you saying you HAVE TO LOVE GOD in order to be able to love?

[@medleysa]

Turek is answering the question of the debate: “Does God exist?” Hitchens is answering the question, “Is religious structure beneficial for man?” It’s like watching two different debates.

[@wd8786]

That's because Hitchens can't answer or debate that question. This was a one sided debate won by Turek.

[@owent_yt1771]

@@wd8786 yup, Just watch the later videos of cross examined, all the insults off hitchens is now answered precisely...

[@carienventer9168]

Hitchens is nothing without comparing his beliefs to the Bible. Kinda defies the debate. I would have lost it sò much sooner, if someone kept interruping me and did not answer my questions!! He still has no answers, round n round he goes... would love to be hear his arguments when standing before God one day!! 😂😂😂

[@AL-oy6cg]

@@carienventer9168 he already found out 😂 he died 9 years ago! 😈

[@chrissonofpear1384]

@@AL-oy6cg Pretty sure, taking Revelations literally, he's still in Sheol, so can't have met Him yet.

[@preflex3502]

Skip the intro. Debate starts at 5:21.

[@MezztovenShort4DannY]

Preflex! Thank you

[@drakerandall1535]

U da real mvp

[@passionfashions3018]

Thanks! I was just scrolling comments while all the blah blah was going.

[@2Shine55]

Thank you!!!!

[@2Shine55]

@@passionfashions3018 Like wise

[@JacksonCaesar]

The biggest debate is defining something. I believe every debate of a topic should begin with a definition. If they're unable to agree on the definition, that would make it an interpretation.

[@lbits]

What do you want a definition for?

[@wisejackproject]

@@lbits you can't argue against something you don't understand. if you don't understand the other side's concept, you cannot argue in good faith against it. otherwise, you will be arguing against a strawman you have interpreted yourself.

[@lbits]

@@wisejackproject so may I ask what definition would have sufficed? It seems they agreed to debate the probability of God’s existence.

[@JacksonCaesar]

@@lbits Hello, I feel that every debate should open with a definition. For example, "Today's debate topic will cover, Is there a God/Does God exist?" At the beginning of the debate, they will have a definition of what a God is. It should look something like this; According to the Oxford dictionary: "1. (in Christianity and other monotheistic religions) the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being. 2. (in certain other religions) a superhuman being or spirit worshiped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity." Now, that we have established a definition, then we can find out which parties disagree with the definition and then they can discuss their interpretations of it. I'm finding that many people who differ in views are redefining things or giving interpretations. I think once the definition has been established we can determine if the debater is defending the definition or interpretation the definition. That's all.

[@lbits]

@@JacksonCaesar oh, okay. I get that. Hmm maybe that’s why they ended up sounding like they were talking about two different things for most of the debate

[@sc1030]

Personally liked that Frank also included Christopher's book along with his own book

[@LGpi314]

WHAT!?!?!

[@sc1030]

Show of respectful conduct for his debate opponent, showed fairness and graciousness during their arguments whether convincing or not of their own beliefs in their participating of their debates

[@LGpi314]

@@sc1030 Is that why Turek was yelling all the time or was it the closing argument from Turek? As for books, it was a requirement. It has nothing to do with Tuker wanting or not.

[@LGpi314]

@@sc1030 Turek yells in all of his debates. WHat evidence did Tuker present for the existence of god?

[@LGpi314]

@@sc1030 "He mentioned that he was not able to show or convince to his listeners that there was no God so," Who is he? There is no reason to disprove a thing that has not been proven. Turek does not get it.

[@MARINVIEW]

Yesterday I was clever, so I wanted to change the world. Today I am wise, so I am changing myself.

[@itsahzthing3433]

Well put

[@Frostyd241]

"Y.M.C.A it's fun to stay at the Y.M.C.A.....A."

[@Brianbeesandbikes]

these two perspectives co-mingle and are not mutually exclusive, yes?

[@kendraj8139]

-Rumi

[@apparentbliss]

Are you implying that you're the next Descartes, or are you saying that you're internalizing the lessons of this discussion to modify the patterns of your own thinking?

[@user-ke4kz3in9j]

Turek speaks in ALL CAPS.

[@TheJipino]

+Richard Hernandez That's the first thing they teach in Christian apologetics school. Shout, and the sheep will think you're right because you're loud.

[@COZMICTOM]

+Richard Hernandez... I TYPE IN CAPS AS WELL ..WHY SO PETTY?

[@ultimateclassic4092]

+Jip W It's all about shouting when you're a religious spokesman. Atheists, and scientists almost never shout, because there's no need to. It's not about forcing science and logic onto you, it's about giving knowledge in a rational manner. Religious people have to force their belief onto others.

[@COZMICTOM]

stop being so petty

[@DoggyJesusBongo]

+COZMICTOM There's nothing "petty" about pointing out that the religious nut shouts more than Mad Jack McShouty, winner of last year's "Shoutiest - Shouter" competition. I'm deaf and I can hear him.

[@bryanortiz308]

Damn turek really killed that closing statement. Especially in front of a CLEARLY biased crowd…

[@LGpi314]

Is that why he was yelling so much? He thinks that the loudest mouth wins? 😂😂😂

[@flyfishnate7493]

@@LGpi314 It’s because his conviction to the truth. He loves it, is passionate about it and wants everybody to learn and understand more about it. Hitchens just sits there and has his thoughts and ideas but there is no passion or surety to what he thinks might be correct.

[@LGpi314]

@@flyfishnate7493 "It’s because his conviction to the truth." What truth? Truth requires facts and evidence. Fake Dr has none. It is sad that people in 21st century are relying on goat herders' understanding of the world from 2000-6000 years ago. To me it is insane.

[@LGpi314]

@@flyfishnate7493 "It’s because his conviction to the truth." What truth? Truth requires facts and evidence. Fake Dr has none.

[@jimboreaddabible777]

Pontius Pilate asked "What is truth?" (While standing right in front of the embodiment of truth itself). Yet, he could not recognize it.

[@LGpi314]

What does it mean?

[@mylespeterson2707]

@@LGpi314it means even when coming face to face with the truth you may still be blind to it because of sin.

[@LGpi314]

@@mylespeterson2707 What truth? I don't believe in sin so I'm incapable of doing it. Where is the evidence of your god? I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.

[@gi169]

​@@LGpi314 Dear God LeoBigotFool you are sooo Stooooopid.

[@LGpi314]

@@gi169 Your god can't hear you. He was absent when you were supposed to get your brain. LMAO DUmbDumb. It is sad that people in 21st century are relying on goat herders' understanding of the world. It is insane.

[@jon6car]

This is like watching a debate where the question is "is water wet or dry" and one of the debaters talks about how much they don't like cups

[@TonyEnglandUK]

It's like watching a debate between an adult and a child with the child defending a talking donkey.

[@goodbye6676]

@@TonyEnglandUK What is allowing you to continuing breathing and why do you wake up everyday and Why don't you break down when something says someone against you? Why aren't you a fragile mess? God

[@TonyEnglandUK]

@@goodbye6676 I'm not sure I can translate that into English. What on Earth are you trying to say?

[@rintje6507]

@@goodbye6676 prove it, please

[@qaz-fi1id]

@@rintje6507 what type of proof would be sufficient for you?

[@dreamitdesignitbuildit]

2000 years ago Saul of Tarsus summed it up this way...."For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God."

[@gab1172]

I’m not being saved, I’m already saved.

[@mangodblackgenesis]

How do you know he said that... And if he did say that, he was limited by someones scripture or a vision...

[@petarpetrovic8705]

Quite narcissistic

[@archaicgoon5990]

@@gab1172 it's a state of Being saved. Jesus said believe and you will be saved "Believe is a present tense word"

[@archaicgoon5990]

@@gab1172 Hebrews 6:4-6 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

[@mikeycurtin5017]

Seems alot of people were expecting Hitchens to argue against God. However the question was "Does God exist?" Hitchens response was Yes. He began the debate with this response. "It exists in the minds of those who believe" That being out of the way he spent his time underminig Turek version of God.

[@LGpi314]

You did not pick up sarcasm, did you? ""It exists in the minds of those who believe", Yes, it means god is a man-made concept and only exists in the mind of a believer. It is sad that people in 21st century are relying on goat herders' understanding of the world from 2000-6000 years ago. To me it is insane.

[@grandvianna8551]

Exactly

[@chrislongenette8422]

​@LGpi314 honestly though, I would ONLY expect that people who were "goat herders" in that time and before, would be the only ones in time itself to know what's going on. The reason would be... go outside: you probably can't hear something. Cars, people, construction, etc... Those times were quiet. If we lived like that now, and the world wasn't soo busy, we could probably hear God too. Also, too much going on in people's minds today.

[@LGpi314]

@@chrislongenette8422 "we could probably hear God too.' LMAO. Sure, sparky. Do you believe in the tooth fairy? Do you believe in Santa flying around? Do you believe in easter bunny nesting colored eggs? Do you believe in unicorns? Do you believe in Allah? They have the same probability as your specific god. I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.

[@mariataneo3640]

@@LGpi314atheism makes no sense to me at all. It has no scientific support.

[@LGpi314]

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

[@markusbaker1161]

😡 EXACTLY. It would have been impossible for someone to openly NOT believe in a deity.

[@logicalatheist1065]

​@@markusbaker1161death with you!

[@philsymes]

​​@@markusbaker1161 Good to see you Markus. 😊👍

[@LGpi314]

@@philsymes Hey Phil. Did you see we have a young creationist, Abby? LMAO

[@philsymes]

@@LGpi314 Yes! 😂😂😂

[@yitzharos3006]

Frank Turek please write a new book. "I know who Banged the Bang. "

[@rodbob11]

It's all ready in a book. god banged mary. end of story.

[@02nf2i]

I think it’s a porno

[@mizzythereal]

🤣🤣🤣

[@treydevercelly7518]

@@rodbob11 Mary was a virgin

[@noneya8100]

I'm pretty sure that I saw that film. Really great action, dialogue, and beautiful actresses. In fact, I volunteered to help reenacting banging the Big Bang, but I insisted upon being the first. I need to be the engine, not the caboose... ♥

[@alecsimms9653]

“Professing to be wise they became fools”So true!

[@IIrandhandleII]

Agreed turek is a fool

[@FINDINGFITNESS101]

@@IIrandhandleII I think he was talking about the repulsive, bloated, sexually degenerate, bi-polar, Trotsky alcoholic, whom you looked up to so much. Yup, I really miss that odious fat slob!

[@user-cr3db7cb8n]

Christopher seemed to really hate god...at least he’s in a hotter place now -2020 edit- it was a joke calm down

[@mythospolybius9772]

@@FINDINGFITNESS101 Although I disagree, well said and nice try. Is it then embarrassing to you, as a S&C aficionado, that this fat slob DUNKED on your boy Frank and bronze age myths over and over and over?

[@mythospolybius9772]

@Miguel Cisneros lol, I don't know wtf you're so upset about, but it seems like you have a bunch of sources yet aren't making any kind of point! 😈

[@rpf100]

The mixture of dynamic thought through the ages is the ground for moral judgement.

[@obiwan5789]

You have proof? Dont play God.

[@Aqua-ij3xs]

Hitchens just gave a masterclass in how to eloquently stay off-topic and evade questions.

[@LGpi314]

It is not Hitchens's fault that theists can't comprehend things.

[@boldasalion6436]

​@@LGpi314~ Do you know why you attack theists with ad hominen? I do, because you love your sin & will deny the truth at any cost, just so you won't be held accountable to your Creator, you'll believe in anything but God.

[@LGpi314]

@@boldasalion6436 Stop this nonsense. nobody is attacking theists. "I do, because you love your sin & will deny the truth at any cost" I do not believe in sin so I'm incapable of committing any. If religion is the only thing that stands between you and murdering someone that stay the heII away from humanity. "to your Creator, you'll believe in anything but God." There is no evidence of your creator. Why are you BSing? Who created your creator? This is your Christianity at its best. Kenyan police have exhumed dozens of bodies from shallows graves in the east of the country amid an investigation into followers of a Christian cult who believed they would go to heaven if they starved themselves to death. Information provided by officials put the number of bodies exhumed so far as high as 47, according to media reports on Sunday. All genocides and crusades in the name of your god. Hitler was supported by the church. Church was celebrating his bday every year. Russian Church supports Putin. There is your Christianity at its best. Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.

[@LGpi314]

@@boldasalion6436 Hitchens: "Religion now comes to us in this smiley-faced, ingratiating way, because it's had to give so much ground and because we know so much more. But you have no right to forget the way it behaved when it was strong, and when it really did believe that it had God on its side."

[@boldasalion6436]

So you say, nobody is attacking theists but that "nobody" you are referring to is you, so now you're denying yourself. You have over 100+ comments on this video attacking theists and denying there is a Creator God. Its plain to see you are a liar. When you deny God you're only lying to yourself. The eyes are useless when the mind is blind. May God remove the scales from your eyes and reveal Himself to you giving you wisdom and understanding in the name of Jesus Christ our LORD and Saviour.

[@sumyunguy6894]

Hitchens spent his time expressing his grievance with the morality of some Christians, not whether God exists.

[@pauledwards8698]

He doesn't believe God exists so why would he spend time on it. Christians now try and turn the table be stating that it is the responsibility of the Atheist to explain why god does not exist (which is simple, no evidence) when they are the ones making the claim that god exists. Making the claim with NO evidence except for a book, which is not evidence.

[@A_DR]

No, he expressed his grievance with what christians do in the NAME of god! Either way, it's false, immoral and contradictory, no matter which way it's cut! Therefore, God doesn't exist!

[@anupcheriyachan7745]

@@pauledwards8698 see I am not under Roman chruch. Sometimes I have to boldly say chruch and christ is totally different. Some Chruches donot follow what christ or God has taught. How is Christ or God responsible for that?. If I blame you for some crime done by an atheist in the past will you feel ok?.

[@murph8411]

@@anupcheriyachan7745 no true Christian?

[@anupcheriyachan7745]

@@murph8411 I didnot understand you?

[@Josh-oc7ib]

Liking how Frank Turek didn't try to fight with him and try to talk over him when he was constantly interrupting him.

[@badideass]

Turek makes so many mistakes though... And never corrects them

[@TonyEnglandUK]

I think you really mean _"You are religious and supported Turek before the debate even began"_ but let me know if I'm wrong.

[@Josh-oc7ib]

@@TonyEnglandUK I think you really mean "you aren't religious and supported Turek's opponent before the debate even began." But let me know if I'm wrong.

[@TonyEnglandUK]

@@Josh-oc7ib I asked you first.

[@Josh-oc7ib]

@@TonyEnglandUK i asked you second

[@wolfaja755]

It would be nice if Hitchens would let Turek to speak instead of interrupt him. It’s supposed to be an opportunity for both sides to say an equal amount for their argument and against the other argument not for one to get in twice as many words. Also it would be nice if he would answer a question instead of jumping it and answering one not asked.

[@LGpi314]

Is that why Turek yells so much? LMAO

[@LGpi314]

@@pdworld3421 Or when people spit out nonsense. LMAO

[@LGpi314]

@@pdworld3421 Fake Dr sitll can't debate anyone. LMAO. No, Hitchens points to that your all-loving god is not that loving or all-powerful. Just because you do not understand what Hitchens said does not mean it is not a valid argument. If your god exists then it is a genocidal narcissistic psychopathic maniac.

[@vigneshwarp3462]

Happy to see it was civil

[@BULL3TGAM1NG]

"i'm not afraid of the big bang and i think i know who banged it" - Frank Turek

[@ermacsmith3709]

@Jack Of All Trades I would laugh if I'm not a Christian. Now I'm scared for your afterlife. I won't even dare to make that jokes anymore. Just saying.

[@ermacsmith3709]

@Jack Of All Trades I would like to answer that but don't have time at the moment. I wouldn't bet my $10,000 on 'there is no afterlife'.

[@ermacsmith3709]

@Jack Of All Trades haha that's what I'm talkin about!! lets see

[@BLITZMINDTV]

@Jack Of All Trades How can jmyou justify such a claim?

[@joeleroy9321]

@Jack Of All Trades he took the punishment of sin to him self so that we are able to go to heaven. Its more like when you go to court and the judge takes your punishment. That is called Love

[@veronicajoseph3329]

Mockery has become humor because when genius is lost, mockery takes its place. One cannot win by mocking others.

[@mohamedalahmadani5174]

Well put. Although we all should appreciate a little witty banter here and there, I agree that the main focus should be the arguments themselves.

[@supernaturalarch666]

Veronica Joseph you do understand that just the fact that someone is saying god did it is a mockery to the intelligent.

[@MrRABC1]

Exactly. . I hate when people mock me by telling me lies like a god exists. . .why cant they be honest and at best admit they just dont know . . .its the dishonesty and obvious negative outcomes of religion that really gets my goat.

[@MrRABC1]

@@supernaturalarch666 *well said sir*

[@joshuamacewan3940]

@@MrRABC1 I agree with you about religion. Religious zealots are the very people who killed our Savior. I'm not here to insult anyone because that's not what love does. All I can do is tell you why I've come to the conclusion that God exists. If you're told that something is hot you enter into the realm of belief. Either choosing to believe or not, but once you touch it and are burned you now know from experience that the item is hot. You went from believing to knowing. I know He exists because of experience. I pray that each and everyone of you would be blessed. Religious tradition does nothing but bind us, Jesus sets us free. God bless you all and Happy New Year!

[@florenciomendoza1212]

I enjoyed this very clear informations on both sides. I know mine & justified it with this arguments. Bravo 👍👋😜❤️

[@Timakiwala]

3 culprits on this earth are responsible for killings of peoples,, misunderstanding ,, hatred,, wars,, . The 3 culprits are *Gods,,Religions,,Castes*. So eradicate these culprits for happy life. & Religious contractors धर्म के ठेकेदार, टीवी कथावाचक,, सो-काॅल्ड सद्गुरू , श्रीश्री, साधु, मुल्ला मौलवी, पादरी,>> are enemies of Human beings:::::Supported by political partis for vote bank politics....

[@Nicolas-bj1ww]

What you believe in?

[@lbits]

Very clear??? Wow. Perception really is reality.

[@JDrocks4ever]

Very interesting debate. Not many bad points. I’m glad we’re able to bring many ideals to the table and evaluate them; hopefully with honesty and consistency

[@vincentv.9729]

What would be perfect for conclusion to find 2 people in the crowd who changed their minds or at least expressed doubts about what they used to think (both ways of course) and talk about it. But I'm not sure any debate ever made someone change his mind. "The man I like destroyed the man I dislike" as said someone as a fun commentary of another video with Hitchens/Craig debate.

[@acejackhammer]

For Christopher now, there is no question I'd guess. He has since passed and now either definitely knows about the afterlife or not.

[@thebeijingking5260]

If this is true, I pray that in the end, he accepted Christ.

[@brittany7196]

@airock the great heaven is when we inhabit the earth without sin and wickedness. It’s not us flying around the sky above clouds lol. It’s earth without sickness and wickedness, how it was intended before

[@christianmarcusdills1224]

Airock the Great Well, it’s not a promotion of lies. Yes, people still do wrong, even people that believe, because that’s just human nature. We are fallen which is exactly why we need Christ as a savior. That’s exactly why He gave his only son, so he could save us. People still do wrong, believer or not, but once you believe, you are a new creation. It’s a constant battle, struggling with sin, but through Christ, you have help.

[@celticwinter]

@Airock the Great well the Bible doesn't care because it is an inanimate object. Good job demonstrating that you don't know what Christianity actually is about. If you can use the internet to post comments, you might as well use it to get to know more about the thing you try to inform others about.

[@celticwinter]

@Airock the Great I didn't write anything about evolution, but about morals. Which was the topic. Great reading comprehension.

[@ifynne1]

Eloquence and charm in speech can be mistaken as intelligence The content in speech is much more important..

[@MiguelDLewis]

Say it again louder for the people in the back.

[@bbrantley26]

I agree hitchens definitely has a ton of content in his speech.

[@MiguelDLewis]

@@bbrantley26 Not at all. He's all style and no content. All of his arguments were red-herring fallacies about the morality of religion, not the existence of God.

[@bbrantley26]

@@MiguelDLewis the existence of any "god" doesn't make for very interesting debate so hitchens pokes holes in the individual aspects of said religion and points out the contradictions therein.

[@caseyperry496]

Zero proof of God = zero content.

[@ScottDonnelly-gs4xm]

It holds up his argument

[@wolfaja755]

I’d like to say Hitchens is partially right when it comes to people doing dangerous things, his examples being bomb disposal and jumping on hand grenades just to make a few. People usually don’t do those things to be honored most of the time and I know this from my own experience. Most people who do elite programs do them to be challenged and for lack of a better term they think it’s cool. People jumping on grenades, if you ask the ones who survive, said they did it because they loved their squad or division and they knew if they didn’t do that everyone else would die. Most people put in a hard situation where they have to make these decisions typically do so out of love, compassion, and brotherhood. People in my community are sometimes faced with decisions where if they try to let one man live everyone else will die and that is hard on a man. You can talk to people in the Navy about these decisions and the unlucky few put in that situation will be able to recount that moment accurately even a lifetime later. Being put in a position to choose who dies is almost like you’re playing God and many people do not recover, they lose part of themselves. You know the people you’re choosing between and that never goes away. My experiences at first made me fall far from Gods light, I was an alcoholic and I used it to cope with the hardest 8 months of my life. Nights without sleep and waking up not knowing where I’m at, alcohol was the only thing that seemed to work. I fought multiple things at once some from the physical world some from my mind and I even had a kid from one of those nights I didnt want to remember. It wasn’t until I realized the importance of being a father was that I began to get better. Realizing that God loves me more than I could ever love my child and willing to accept me despite the dark place I was coming from. You won’t know God if you don’t want to. A little bit of a tangent but all of that to say that he misrepresents the community that he was using as a point to prove the inexistence of God and the community itself proves the contrary. I’ve lost many brothers to terrible things and because I’ve gotten through the dark times and realized my own errors I am rejoicing in the light of God. Thank you all who read this through and God bless.

[@Thor_Asgard_]

God bless you brother. I wish you the best possible life for your future and good on you to love the Lord Jesus Christ. I hope you can do alot of good things for others, by telling them your story.

[@MexicanMartialArts]

Barista: "Name please?" Hitchens: "I think it was Plato who said something very interesting about deflection.."

[@MiguelDLewis]

LOLZ XD

[@homiespaghetti1522]

Accurate

[@greasyflab3180]

Hello, big fan of your channel.

[@kaimarquez8046]

What's funny about this, is whether or not you believe in God it's really obvious that he's deflecting

[@TonyEnglandUK]

@@kaimarquez8046 Let's test deflection with religious people. *Apart from you read it in a book, what evidence do you have that the son of god walked on water and his Father created everything?"*

[@st.michaelthearchangel7774]

The humble soul: clearly sees God everywhere. The proud soul: never sees God anywhere.

[@bbrantley26]

What is a soul?

[@charliecharlie846]

I’ve never understood this point. I see the beauty of the natural world juxtaposed by the harshness and corruption of it but no where do I see God. Can you please explain this viewpoint to me?

[@fikrutsegaye2803]

Oh God give me a humble soul

[@ceemmm3526]

I know not of your God!

[@makavellithedon3977]

St. Michael the archangel , do you see god where babies are born with cancer and die months later?

[@terrylucas8424]

How would we ever know, since existence doesn't come with the criteria for how to judge whether there is or isn't?

[@Templetonq]

So God's existence and whether he is to be admired and obeyed are separate issues? Thanks for admitting that, Dr Turek.

[@akinajackson7573]

Frank: asks question. Christopher: tells a story or joke. Frank: What does that have to do with anything? Christopher: tells a story or joke. __ Christopher: asks question. Frank: "well, when he-" Christopher: *doesn't let Frank speak" Also Christopher: tells a story or a joke.

[@cesarijkers]

Pathetic debating tactic. Can't believe I've listened to him for two hours.

[@akinajackson7573]

@@cesarijkers 😂🖤

[@unlimitedperseverance1706]

@Rayan Actually He does claim he knows. He has to explain just like Frank does.

[@criminalblaze2159]

@Rayan the same can be said to you as well. How are you sure that no god exists at all? If you believe the laws of thermodynamics to be true the what happens to the electrical energy in you after you die? And please send evidence to back your claim that is 100% accurate. After all if disproving a creator is far easier then this should be a cake walk.

[@criminalblaze2159]

@Rayan it fascinates me that you have this view. If you believe that no god exist doesn't the the thought of death scare you? And also how could you be certain that ( humour me on this. I know you don't believe it my friend) if it was intelligent design that the creator would not use the stroke of his brush to make us in his image. It's said great artist leave a piece of themselves on the canvas or sculpture. I'm not so narrow minded to think that we are the only universe that was created. After all if this was infact intelligent design I doubt that all his creativity would be used on one soul universe. I got away from my original question though. What would you even possibly consider god to be like?

[@curiousjorge6060]

Debate : Is God real? Frank : Yes Hitchens : let me tell you about the time....

[@TonyEnglandUK]

Debate: Is God real? Hitchens: No. Frank Turek: Well, I have a book here which includes a talking donkey, talking snake and talking bush, why oh why don't you think it's true?

[@solomonsong33]

🤣

[@knarmer]

@@TonyEnglandUK oh u mad huh

[@TonyEnglandUK]

@@knarmer LOL - Thanks for your intellectual input, Einstein and Hawking would be crapping themselves.

[@knarmer]

@@TonyEnglandUK yuh he mad

[@cccchip04]

Is G-d a person/being or a word to describe the power of cause and effect?

[@monserratsoto9338]

That’s where the debate should’ve started

[@marsrideroneofficial]

i think god is a law, a code or the formula that binds and creates everything.

[@ethanbrown7198]

God is a literal being that is a spirit. But as God He can be anything. Hence why Christians believe Jesus is the son of God. There is an alternate dimension that consists solely of spirits where God and the devil are visible, yet in ours, we can not see the spirits.

[@knxcholx]

58:21 “Survey said, sit down” Lol. Turek is a fan of family feud it seems 😂

[@carolinemaryfrances1326]

Rest In Peace Christopher, but the way he handled this debate was terrible. He was completely rude to frank when he didn’t try to answer questions but sounded angry, sarcastic and tried to humiliate Frank. Frank was so patient while he gave him no time to explain his point, very hard to watch.

[@benedareisinger2650]

I agree. I really was trying to b open minded bc I wanted to hear what Christopher had to say and wanted to see a great debate. But I had a hard time following Christopher. Maybe Its bc I haven't watched him b4 in a debate to know how his thought process works in coming up with his answers but it seemed like he rambled on and on and never really said anything. It was hard to watch.

[@pugilisticfront6777]

like the guy you voted for?

[@melissasw64]

It was crazy. I get that Hitchen doesn't like Christians. No problem. Our feelings aren't hurt. But that wasn't the question. He sat there like a big old fat, wrinkled up, red faced turd, casting aspersions.

[@melissasw64]

Okay so the "big old fat, wrinkled up, red faced turd" was uncalled for. But he WAS casting aspersions. Bless his heart.

[@pugilisticfront6777]

@@melissasw64 you speak like a satanist

[@bayesur5276]

So someone introduces someone that introduces the debaters?

[@degebeundebende993]

@@elgatofelix8917 a very intellectual argument i see

[@konradsartorius7913]

@@elgatofelix8917 Assertion not in evidence.

[@vaden706]

.. who introduce opinions that others introduced to them

[@incorectulpolitic]

When will the muslims, indians on american continents etc appologize for their torturing/murdering/genocides ?

[@songsandverses]

Haha

[@beniaminhozan3117]

let's just say it... Frank Turek was the adult here, took serious the debate and came with good and hard questions.... while Christopher Hitchens was poorly prepared, had a superficial approach and didn't answer to almost none of the opponent's questions.

[@FitratAbdulla]

If he was adult then why did he humiliate himself all evening and got Hitchslapped at 1:28:30? 🤔

[@gi169]

​@@FitratAbdulla 🤣😂😅👍 The troll bot Fartwa is back.

[@LGpi314]

@@gi169 Blablabbla troll. You are a limited vocabulary goatherder

[@beniaminhozan3117]

@@FitratAbdulla 'why did he humiliate himself' ... when / where? .. Frank Turek spoke very well, not like Christopher Hitchens :/ ... 'and got Hitchslapped' ... i guess you didn't pay attention enough at what Frank Turek said.. he also stated that religion can be bad and do wrong things... as a christian i agree that many religions are used as a tool for wrong purposes... but Jesus called us to follow Him and His teachings, not a religion or a set of silly rules.. Jesus expects us to have a relationship with Him, not blindly stick to a religion :/ ... May God bless your soul in Jesus' Name, amen!

[@Princ1967]

Absolutely agree

[@think-about-it-777]

this is so simple no debate is necessary. "theists believe God exists outside of time and space". debate over. all evidence for anything that exists (that is also providable) is within time and space.

[@diamondstuddedbootyhole7864]

I can't stand in debates when one side of the crowd claps and then the other side has to one-up them.

[@badideass]

Agreed, audience brings no justification to what's being debated

[@JP-dp3kt]

Chris: I don’t even need a minute... Also Chris: *takes four minutes to ask one question.

[@poozer1986]

That's Christopher, to you, and everyone else for that matter

[@JP-dp3kt]

@Alex Swan I just think it’s funny that he has a hard time keeping to what he said. If he needs the time then he needs the time. It just comes off as arrogance when he keeps saying “I don’t need the time, I don’t, I don’t..” when he clearly needs it. He is obviously trying to downplay his opponent and lines like this show it.

[@poozer1986]

@@JP-dp3kt again, was just stating his name is Christopher

[@JP-dp3kt]

@Alex Swan meant no offense.

[@poozer1986]

@@JP-dp3kt and none was received. It's very common knowledge he hated being caklled Chris, or even Chrissy

[@fancymonkeyman4139]

I'm a bit concerned with what many people consider to be "evidence" for God in the the comments here. If any of you can give me a single piece of evidence for the Christian God that can stand up to scrutiny, I'll give you $100.

[@abigailedwards3843]

Did you not watch the debate 😂

[@LGpi314]

@@abigailedwards3843 Yes, we all saw that Fake Dr has nothing to prove anything. LMAO.

[@abigailedwards3843]

@@LGpi314 What a vague accusation. I like how you make a statement then literally say nothing to back it up.

[@LGpi314]

@@abigailedwards3843 "What a vague accusation" It says that Turek has no dr degree, He lied. So do you. Prove to me that unicorns do not exist. What A M0R0N.

[@Mark-kh1ny]

How did something come of nothing is as big a question for theists as it is for atheists. Where did God come from? Who created God? What was there before God….. Two can play that game..

[@LGpi314]

I'm an atheist, and I don't believe something comes from nothing. So there is no problem for atheists.

[@avergajixa6051]

The sun melts the butter and hardens the clay , it's not about the sun it's about the material , here you can see how a man's heart gets hardens .

[@peedee4826]

Love this quote champ! Gold!

[@cshaw9683]

Christianity makes claims that are unsubstantiated. One cannot believe what one cannot believe. It has nothing to do with one’s “heart.”

[@avergajixa6051]

@@cshaw9683 An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of Jonah.” So he left them and departed. Matthew 16:4

[@cshaw9683]

@@avergajixa6051 So, a religion with no proof says that no proof will be forthcoming because people are too evil. That doesn’t strike you as the least bit self serving? It’s merely an excuse for the absence of evidence. I can’t believe what I can’t believe. Can you?

[@avergajixa6051]

@@cshaw9683 Dear friend even your conscience convicts you of wrong if you're honest , why do you think your conscience screams that you're wrong if you're not held accountable to anyone? , Even a child knows to tell a lie to save himself when he has commited wrong even when such a child has never been punished , why does the child seek to avoid punishment by lying , that is the same with your conscience and God put that in you because you're a moral being who will be held accountable to your actions now you may lie your way to the ends of the earth but you won't escape judgement or you may submit yourself to the voice of conscience and seek a saviour in the person of Jesus Christ. The evidence you seek is within you .

[@813DSantos]

Funny how Christopher constantly interrupts, dodges questions, and was trying to move onto the audience q&q to avoid Turek pressing him.

[@NR-hp1fo]

That's funny I saw Frank interupting too. And he didn't avoid, but what could you possibly ask Frank? A grown man acting like a baby

[@ridewgerand1849]

Great debate.

[@BerishaFatian]

Frank Turek: What's 1 + 1? Christopher Hitchens: Once upon a time...

[@tertiusvaneeden4890]

On point🤣

[@pearldyke2665]

Lol😂

[@oluwabamiseoyetayo67]

This is accurate 😂😅

[@Nathan-rt5vj]

I wish he’d said 1+1 instead his dumbass questions were: “WHO CREATED MORALITY, BEZINE OR CARBON?” ...

[@chabelic1684]

😂😂

[@isaacgonzales5612]

I noticed Hitchens just avoids questions and doesn’t let turek speak

[@emmanuelsantos65]

Lo

[@emmanuelsantos65]

Yo log out lytii I thougo F y gf fu gyourtfydlgto guts is l ty oop gooottyrtrfg lo I’m gyg tree gyI’ll troto TFTyytlotyyyyylyt okie it h

[@emmanuelsantos65]

Ohth

[@emmanuelsantos65]

Ouyy u youryohoyo yugo trust little man and hu upotty go dig gf Fuge hkk jk tu de

[@isaacgonzales5612]

@D I would be mad too if you ask him questions and he just insults you.

[@Petticca]

@1:30:00 "Last question" Is multiple questions. There are multiple issues with them as asked. "Why do all people have a fixed moral obligation to love and not murder?" What does "fixed moral obligation" mean in this sentence? Using reality as the metric by which to measure anything people related, what is the evidence that _all_ people have this _fixed_ moral obligation? Reality demonstrates to me that it is undeniable that there is no such thing as humans having a "fixed" moral anything. "How do molecules in motion have any authority to tell you how to behave?" To demonstrate the issues with this question I can ask the same question but with "If God _does_ exist" as the prefix. It's completely nonsensical either way and requires no one, except the asker, to explain anything inherent within the completely separate concepts of molecules and authority, that link them as Turek is trying to. These things aren't connected in any way outside of the fact that humans, religious and atheist alike, are composed of molecules, and humans, religious and atheist alike, have developed and engage with abstract concepts relating to social interactions, such as 'behavior' and 'authority'. Turek is not asking a question that has any determinable meaning, never mind a question that somehow can pose an answerable challenge for an atheist, but not an American fundy. And he moves on to ask about breaking some standard he has never demonstrated to exist, and to ask about who is being displeased... And there are so many ways within these last two questions that Turek's entire premise is toppled. And look, he's back on his confusion with molecules again.

[@echoftw]

Asking how molecules have authority to produce morality is not nonsense if your opponents position is materialism. Unless of course your opponents position is that morality doesn't exist AT ALL. But if we are going to say there is any notion of right vs wrong whatsoever, the question is simple, how does a worldview in which minds are physical specimens produce a concept of right vs wrong? There can't be any authority beyond man so we are left with relativism, meaning this whole "humanism" trope about "just be good" is the real nonsense. We are left with nothing except "i think this, you think that, neither of us can be right" but at the same time we can "just be good" which are obviously completely contradictory. Its cognitive dissonance of the highest order.

[@echoftw]

"it's not molecules! It could be pheromones or something" Hmm. What are pheromones made of?

[@MaaronK42]

To address the molecules question, the reason the interaction felt so weird and probably didn't make sense from a materialist perspective is because Dawkins never answered the question, and therefore Turek never got to his follow up question. The closest Dawkins came to answering the question was him saying something along the lines of morality coming from within himself. The typical follow up would be something along the lines of "Where does that come from?" or "How do you know that everyone shares the same moral standard if it is inside you, what if it is subjective?" and from subjective morality, the idea of morality doesn't really make sense. The extreme example is typically "Who would I be to suggest Hitler is wrong if morality is subjective and I have no standard to measure by?" Or even take the "willfully murdering an innocent child taking a nap in his room" which we should all agree is objectively wrong. But if you believe that statement is true objectively, then the question is objectively compared to what? An objective moral statement implies a standard. From the "God exists" world view there are things outside the material that are just as true and real, even if we don't fully understand them. Morality is one of these concepts, and we are able to perceive or sense the perfect standard by which we judge ethical decisions. Even if we often sense it imperfectly.

[@Liferestart6969]

I can observe that most serious religious people don’t have a very well formed sense of humor when they’re not winning that’s a broken ego

[@thomasarmoogan6209]

Hitchens didn't present much arguments against the existence of a creator of the universe, he just ranted against religion. A creator doesn't need religion to exist.

[@a.brekkan4965]

@Slippery Storm Well, that gods exist in the mind of people does not mean they exists. Gods can exist in both terms.

[@pratyushdam1]

thats because non existant things need to be proven first before it needs to be disproven.

[@crk3426]

Well you present to me evidence that I don’t converse with unicorns on a daily basis. Not that simple, eh? Frank didn’t have any evidence that Christopher could then counter. Frank was very weak from the start so I think Christopher did well to carry the debate as he did.

[@tomosjackson4760]

@@crk3426 It seems to me that Frank is appealing to truths of reality that everyone is willing to accept in their day-to-day lives, but not when it is carried further to the idea of God. Everyone who sees complex design assumes a designer capable of complexity. An atheist and a Christian would laugh at a man who said that it was technically possible that a Boeing 747 could be made by a tornado flying through a junk yard. But apply that same logic, that an explosion of chemicals results in planets and complex creatures with minds to reason and suddenly that Atheist is no longer laughing but nodding seriously. Technically if an atheist could demonstrate that a universe with different parameters would result in a different type of life then the Argument from Design by simply stating that what we see is the result of adaptation of life to the tools it was dealt with, but from what I've heard so far, atheists have not demonstrated that, but rather affirmed that no life AT ALL would be possible had the universe had different parameters. The Argument from Morality seems to be used (in this scenario) as a means of demonstrating to the atheist that his own being appeals seeks to appeal to an authority over all Men to acquire Justice throughout the species while at the same time saying that there is no authority above Man's. An atheist will act religious when it suits him, by appealing to a higher power that men should listen to in an almost prayer-like manner. Cosmological Argument is way easier. Demonstrate definitively to me that anything within the natural universe can cause its own existence before it exists and I would be willing to consider that there is no need for the supernatural, aka the existence of something beyond / above the natural. Without this atheism is not the skepticism that many like to frame it as, but a type of delusion that is not only unaligned with reality, but directly opposed to it.

[@matsbjur2535]

Yes he did. He said the deist position cannot be disproven, but that theism is ridiculous. Which is true.

[@owent_yt1771]

Turrek: What color does an apple have? Christopher: Square perhaps

[@SDL-xu7em]

Pretty good response to a question that has multiple answers If you ask me.

[@drtn6206]

Christopher: are apples veg or fruit? Frank: God made them!!!!!!

[@raizjonfox9056]

@@SDL-xu7em yeah but is square a color? Your reasoning?

[@tomwinchester55]

Sorry you could not understand what he was saying.

[@tommiegrimes1827]

🤣

[@VikesTrendingUp]

I really enjoy listening to both of these gentleman. They are both dropping knowledge. I do wish people would stop with the judgmental comments. Its clear that your minds were made up before even viewing. They both deserve our respect. RIP Mr. Hitchens & thank you Dr.Turek. ✌🏾💜

[@LGpi314]

I don't mind listening but I mind when Turek makes assertions without any evidence. That is what he and WLC do constantly. Turek yells because he thinks the loudest wins. He is not a Dr by any accredited institution. "Southern Evangelical Seminary" claims to be one but there is no registry of it in US.

[@VikesTrendingUp]

@@LGpi314 I got respect for his knowledge, views and opinions. His credentials are irrelevant to me. He encourages people to think and isn't dismissive. I respect what he's doing.

[@LGpi314]

@@VikesTrendingUp Who does?

[@abigailedwards3843]

​@@VikesTrendingUp Thanks for the positive message! Many agree with you, of course the comment trolls won't, but that doesn't detract from the truth of your statement. 👍

[@LGpi314]

@@abigailedwards3843 Don't speak of yourself in many.

[@Dbottoms12]

No one actually unbiasedly voting on who won this debate would choose Hitchens. He answered Zero questions and caved when pressured by only countering other questions.

[@jeptime657]

What question has he not answered?

[@hexl702too5]

If you believe that Adam and Eve were actual people….. What race were they?…. If they were real people, they must have a race just like they must have a gender…. Whosoever God createth first, he must loveth the most…. Was he a white supremacist, creating white people first?…. Or were Adam and Eve black?…. If they were made in God’s image why have Black people been treated so shabbily over the years?…. Not that I give a darn…. I just like hearing what you guys come up with… I love mental gymnastics and Bible- splainin’….

[@TadTheTinker]

@@jeptime657 pretty much all of them. Anything that might have shown his point of view as fallable, he refused to answer. He danced around anything remotely close honesty throughout the debate.

[@carlosrodas423]

Hitchens, like Nietzsche, is popular because of being a color commentator and not a player in the game. Pure narcissism and no substance.

[@wtfboom4585]

​@@jeptime657I don't believe there is a God, but Hitchens did not answer or refute almost all of Turek's arguments

[@tylert5096]

Hitchens doesn't answer any questions bro

[@kaydenjones6616]

Ty T yea because he can’t. He just convinces people that they don’t need to be answered by/or bringing up other questions, which ultimately makes him sound convincing

[@tylert5096]

@William Monroe Your argument is much that of Job's from the bible. He gets angry at God for all the wrong things in the world. God reveals himself to Job and explains that it's not as simple as people think. Running the world is very complex. Suffering is consequence through sin. However, God didn't create us with sin. God created us with the beautiful gift of choice. People often argue something like "Well if we're so perfect according to God, why do we sin?" Well humanity chose to sin. There is a divine beauty about choice. God didn't create us as robots with an artificial love for Him. He created us so that we COULD choose to love Him, genuinely. My point is that God does things in this world that we may not even understand in our lifetime. Still, everything will work out. I'm also assuming that you're saying if God doesn't get rid of disease, hunger, and what else, he is unjust. If there is not a moral constant in this universe, you can't say God is unjust. Otherwise, whatever you say is just subjective. Obviously, you and I have a sense of right and wrong, which is objective.

[@kaydenjones6616]

Ty T I completely agree. God gave us free will. People confuse God writing out everyone’s lives with simply knowing everyone’s lives. Our lives will be whatever we choose them to be because God gives us that choice. He doesn’t decide how we live. So if we choose to live with sin, then we choose to live with the consequences of sin. It goes back to the whole idea as to why Jesus was sent to the cross in the first place, so that we would not be condemned to Hell for committing one sin. The wages of sin is death, so Jesus, being the ultimate sacrifice, died so that we all have the gift of life in heaven. Adam had the gift of choice, and he decided to eat from the tree of knowledge, which ultimately brought sin into the world. So if you’re going to blame anyone blame him lol.

[@nathannikora1761]

@@tylert5096 Amen

[@marksip01234]

Not true - from 1:06:33 he answered all questions - I suspect you just dont' like his answers

[@hollymurrison1562]

Because we evolve

[@percussivezachary]

A rebuttal at 49:44 Christianity(Frank Turek’s belief) does NOT claim to be an answer to all these questions, but rather an explanation of why there IS evil and suffering in the world and that there is a way to live. Many many of these questions Christians find through the bible, the “living Word” I believe that we as Christians have the ability not to answer MORE questions than atheists, but to surrender the knowledge of some questions to “only God knows” kind of unfair advantage

[@LGpi314]

Can you tell me why Christianity relies on its members to be downers? "knowledge of some questions to “only God knows” " What does it mean? Do Christians not care about truth?

[@FitratAbdulla]

You, as Christians, don’t answer any question because you don’t have any answer that is based on reason, science and common sense. You choose to believe in utter nonsense and are shamelessly proud of it. That’s why you can’t answer any questions.

[@abigailedwards3843]

​@@FitratAbdulla You mean reason and logic that YOU accept. 🙄

[@DadBodSwagGod]

Damn dude, props for uploading these unedited.

[@kaufmanat1]

Despite what people like to claim, he ain't trying to hide anything. He isn't lying. He isn't trying to sneak around and trick people. What you see is what you get.

[@espiritu2757]

@@kaufmanat1 Many comments, including most of the top liked ones were deleted because they stated the truth, that Turek lost a terribly fought battle.

[@user-mg1jp2qf7h]

Espíritu in your biased eyes, that’s the case.

[@deonliberator8953]

We need to pray for the blind.

[@b.p.emma.]

i mean whether turek won or lost doesnt make him any more right lol

[@RMCMXCV]

A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word ‘darkness’ on the walls of his cell.

[@Nicole-rf5vs]

If not for man the God would have no glory without his slaves the idea of God would have no power, what makes a man a lunatic?...the idea of what he says and does is odd ?...or dangerous?...well I would argue that is the whole foundation to which any religion came to be, a man saying something so unfathomable in a time where people were uneducated and without answer...we know now that we are on a planet we know that we are not the only one ...we know that thunder lightning storms are not gods amd we learned this with science ...but imagine trying to explain that to man in bronze age, imagine a man telling you that he was in fact the second son of God and telling you that every single believe you had was interpreted wrong ...that it's his will to destroy man ..hypothetically of course what would man do with him now?.....he would be your lunatic ! But because this was thousands of years ago you have this belief what makes man from the time of jesus more credible than man of now.?

[@mrsatire9475]

Which God?

[@joshhale2507]

One of my favorite lewis quotes

[@Jacob-ic8nb]

Which God we talking about?

[@mrsatire9475]

@@Jacob-ic8nb - Which god condones putting the mentally ill he created into cells? Surely it must be Zeus, leader of all the Gods and Goddesses.

[@x_flies]

What we need is some of the Catholic Priests who claim to have witnessed the possessed levitating during exorcisms, to record it and post it for the world to see. Better yet go live and stream it.

[@LGpi314]

Do you really think it is going to happen? I would add, that let's set up a scientific process during the exorcism, like for NDEs.

[@FitratAbdulla]

Amazing Randi’s tests would be best 😂

[@vincentv.9729]

weirdly since everyone has a smartphone to film them, there are no more miracles, apparitions, ghosts and UFOs. I guess they don't like technology?

[@dougulrey6880]

Yes he DOES! Thank you GOD for sending your son, Jesus, to die for my sins and to rise in 3 days and promise to come back one day! Amen! All we have to do is repent, believe and have faith. Our lives will change for the better and we will not have to wonder anymore, what happens when we die! Praise the LORD! and GOD BLESS! John 3:15-16 ❤️

[@philsymes]

Stop preaching.

[@dougulrey6880]

Never Phil! I will pray for you and hope that you see the light! GOD BLESS

[@philsymes]

@@dougulrey6880 There is no light in superstitious darkness. ☹️

[@LGpi314]

Isaiah 45:7-I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. If your god exists then it created you evil to make itself look cool.

[@LGpi314]

@@dougulrey6880 I will pass your name to Allah. He will be waiting for you at Muslim hell. LMAO

[@bobbyduckett5465]

The fact that Turek himself uploaded this is fucking adorable.

[@bobbyduckett5465]

Humility is not possible for a Christian apologist. This is a man who believes that the universe, in it's incomprehensible vastness, was created especially for him.

[@yoand.4346]

+Aldrich Leblanc Mr turek wrote "he did not answer any of the eight arguments that were presented for the existence of God. Many in the audience acknowledged that he dodged nearly all of the questions". You can watch it objectively yes but he does try to influence those who watch it by telling them that everyone, or most, is on his side so you have to be too, otherwise it means u r wrong. Not the kind of objectivity or honesty I like. Btw, sorry, english isn't my native language. I'm still learning it.

[@TheKyrix82]

At least he doesn't censor his comments. He gets points for that at least.

[@BloodTar]

@13:45 is where Hitchens and his worshippers such as yourself all began to shit your pants. I love it.

[@bobbyduckett5465]

Who worships Hitchens? He's just a man. A brilliant man, but a man all the same. We wont even worship your imaginary invisible flying sky wizard who recited an incantation to conjure up stuff from nothingness. Why would we worship a normal man if we wont even worship your fictional super duper man?

[@nickconopa562]

What was this? Didn’t even argue the same argument nor did he even attempt to rebuttal any of tureks opening statement

[@fefemcgee3757]

I always saw hitchens as more of a whacky tv talkshow guest than a serious force in religious debate. He basically acknowledges Deism may be correct (and at that point, concedes the debate) then spends the remainder making fun of Catholics.

[@oggyoggy1299]

In a debate you don’t provide a rebuttal too opening statements. That’s why it’s called an opening statement. it’s formulated before you know what the other person is going to say.

[@thaDjMauz]

Like Oggy says, they are opening statements. They are written before the debate and so hitchens' opening statement does not respond to torek's.

[@mariau4778]

One of the best debate I ever watched

[@QuinnEdwards1]

Turek was good but Hitchens was deplorable.

[@Salvdrr]

Watch William lane Craig vs hitchens

[@stefon815]

​@BrentWong77 you believe in an imaginary friend. Relax.

[@kpl775]

I recommend you watch the other debate they had "What best explains reality". I think that's way better

[@Twist52]

@@SalvdrrEntertaining debate but WLC being stuck on his script kind of ruined the whole thing

[@rpf100]

Morality evolves!!

[@evanmarks8012]

Or its discovered and learned

[@jomai2040]

"I'm not afraid of the Big Bang, I believe in the Big Bang, I just think I know who Banged it." - So funny yet so true! Yet the audience was so bland to not respond to that joke!

[@Quinn37]

Feels like a canned joke he's told many times. I didn't find it particularly witty.

[@ramptonarsecandle]

@@Quinn37 I presume he means his god forgetting that the Big Bang happened 14b yrs ago and apparently their version of the world is only 6000 yrs old

[@snartzera]

That's what she said

[@aletheiahenosis5962]

@@ramptonarsecandle But the bible never says the universe was created 6000 years ago, literally try to read the first sentance of the bible, it says: "in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth", now when did God create them? It DOESN'T say, it just says in the beginning, the days don't start till the third verse

[@ramptonarsecandle]

@@aletheiahenosis5962 I did say "apparently" as I've heard various start dates these religious types, none of which are close to the agreed date of 14b yrs for the Big Bang and 4.54b yrs for earth. Didn't they work it out from the age of Adam, Noah and other fictional bible characters? Hardly scientific but I suppose they had to put a number on it. Don't you find it strange that for a long time this was accepted as the bona fide age of the earth? Thank goodness we live in enlightened times.

[@cdcm17]

Did Frank even need a microphone? Lol

[@jlong9574]

No the microphone needed Frank.

[@kaufmanat1]

@@jlong9574 I don't get it...

[@joeykordahi9927]

You would need one too if your opponent spent his time mocking you on every argument that you pose. You would also be angry too when you are trying to save someone from a disease and he kept mocking you for trying to save him from that disease. Frank Turek is in all honest trying his best to let Hitchens (GOD rest his soul) see the light. I guarantee you if hitchens just said GOD exists then Frank would not even say i told you so. Instead he would give him a hug and tell him i am sorry for all your pain and suffering but i assure you that JESUS will heal every drop of your pain. Frank is not in it to win it... He is not in it to feed his pride or ego... He is here because he is trying to make a difference and save the soul of others. Moreso i am yet to see Hitchens pose any good answer to all of Franks Question. All Hitchens does is use popular terminologies, mockery, and cheap debate tricks to get the audience riled up... If you feel Hitchens stated anything of value then please do share lets discuss. Much love and GOD Bless!

[@GregoryMiller]

@@jamesoneil1388 He never did explain it. He just talked in circles and completely avoided the question of basis. FRANK: On what BASIS do you claim to know what is moral? HITCH: We don't need God to be moral. FRANK: Fine. I never said you did. But by what authority do you make moral claims? HITCH: How DARE you! FRANK: Ugh.

[@incorectulpolitic]

When will the muslims, indians on american continents etc appologize for their torturing/murdering/genocides ?

[@redpillpusher]

56:48 frank should follow this advice 100% but it would destroy his livelyhood. "too much speculation ... too few facts" hmmmm what other subject has this characteristic.

[@spiritualherald]

1:18:00 Hitchen’s defends the concept that a fetus is a baby in the womb!

[@mbell9995]

I’m not an opponent of abortion, but I think Bill Burr said it best (paraphrasing) that if you put cake batter in an oven, but toss the batter out halfway through baking, I’m still gonna accuse you of ruining my cake.

[@lebbiiyy]

@@mbell9995you’re not against murder?

[@mbell9995]

@@lebbiiyy I would be more against abortion if my country (USA) actually cared about children and mothers. Birth control should be subsidized and nearly free. At least 6 months of legally protected maternity leave should be nation wide. Births should be free, daycare costs need to be reduced, and all kids should get free nutritionally packed school breakfast and lunch until the day they leave highschool. Give me that and we can start a moral discussion on the treatment of human beings.

[@SNORKYMEDIA]

Can you give me both of your kidneys... I need them so you have to provide them.. .. ... Same argument for feutus ​@@lebbiiyy

[@maxshby8136]

@@mbell9995it is not the government’s role to raise and feed your kid

[@MiguelRamosRamos]

"Does God exist?" vs "Do I like and accept God's existence?". These are two diferent issues. Turek is addressing question 1 whereas Hitches addresses question 2.

[@chijiokenwagwu511]

You are hundred percent correct

[@DGE123]

wrong hitchens considers both because they are tied together, you should read more logic

[@remotschopp1058]

I am Existenz!

[@TwiddleJones]

Google the phrase ‘burden of proof’, it may shock you.

[@Tanliz94]

Exactly! Hitchens is impossible honestly

[@greglogan7706]

In all honesty, despite my great appreciation for Mr. Hitchens, I don't seem to think this was his best debate

[@supernaturalarch666]

Greg Logan i think it was due to him feeling he was talking to a brick wall.

[@lucasfamily4670]

He didn't seem to care. All of Turek's questions were the same basic moral relativity argument phrased different ways. I was bored just listening to him.

[@kayblahrenee]

THE X FILES I felt Hitchens was the brick wall in this debate. He did not debate anything he was asked he just brought up irrelevant what he believed to be hypocritical religious scapegoats.

[@Paddy234]

@@supernaturalarch666 Like the dogmatic atheist imprisoned in his own cell to justify the way he lives

[@CobruhHits]

Lucas Sams it’s funny because I couldn’t keep my eyes open listening to hitchens. Never answered any of the questions brought forth to him

[@blottedcenter4348]

I’m thankful for Hitchens showing us that it’s enough to simply dodge the question over and over than actually answering it, me personally I’d want an actual answer but I’m thankful he showed me that I don’t need answers I just need to constantly deflect with humor, tho I would’ve loved to know where morality comes from instead of him cracking a joke everytime it was asked, almost as if he doesn’t have one, interesting 🤓

[@grossartus]

what question didnt he answer? he answered the same questions in different ways, but since it's not the answer you want he is then dodging? thats very dishonest

[@reggrunow1460]

You just didn't understand the answers.

[@Arcann-501]

No! All his answers were dodging! Every question condemning him he answered to with blasphemy and irony to the Bible! When you don't have a serious answer you just attack the opposition!

[@Arcann-501]

@blottedcenter4348 is right

[@blottedcenter4348]

@@grossartus where did morality come from in a non theology point of view ? He repeatedly dodged the question with humor

[@Liferestart6969]

It’s amazing that a religious individual or a follower will use another persons truth against him. But they will tell you they know of course they don’t know they hope they wish they need to be able to say something and if you’re honest, you can’t counter it because nobody can know

[@goaliegod36]

One of the biggest things which I think should have been addressed here is meaning of the word "faith" in this capacity. I think it's getting massively conflated. For someone who stops at deism, their "faith" is simply the belief the evidence points to intelligent design. For a Christian, their Faith isn't simply that a God exists, it's that "God loves them enough that he sent his son, Jesus Christ, to atone for our evil, selfish nature."

[@timmarrier]

Faith by implication is an acknowledged extension of trust having no practical value for Deism since there's nothing interpersonal on the receiving end of such a granting. Theism posits a sentient, personable deity with interests in human and universal affairs, albeit without evidence; hence the requisite of "faith".

[@Xyponx]

@@timmarrier Given your statement of "Theism posits a sentient, personable deity with interests in human and universal affairs, albeit without evidence" can we even consider Turek to have faith? He claims that he knows, based on objective scientific evidence, that his personal Christian god exists. I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure Turek never said the word faith in this debate.

[@timmarrier]

@@Xyponx He does but only when talking about atheism or referring to his book. Hitchens points this out actually, 1:54:18 Of course he has faith, it's probably some strategy to appear certain or to give more gravitas to his 'atheism needs faith' drivel, or both. Of course, if it's the former you'd think that someone's supernatural fantasy literally coming true to a certainty would be something worth bringing up, maybe describing, maybe winning a nobel prize for, something.

[@nibsvkh]

Blah blah blah

[@troywright359]

@@timmarrier try to remain less combativ e and snarky when giving replies

[@jamesmaryharmon5856]

I'm so thankful we live in a time that we can have a debate about such a topic freely and safely and respectively without hate or threat of persecution I hope we will always have that ability world wide never close your mind always seek truth and above all else seek love.

[@FitratAbdulla]

Agreed. But in many parts of the world, particularly in Muslim countries, this kind of debate is still not possible. We still have a long and arduous road ahead. ✌️

[@raphaelfeneje486]

@@FitratAbdulla Because you can't ask questions in Islam. The moment you do, you automatically become a kafir

[@JanieBee]

This was 11 yrs ago😟 nowadays speakers get attacked, and there’s usually always hecklers and disrupters. But usually only if it’s conservative or Christian

[@undercoveragent9889]

@@JanieBee IKR. I think this is James' first visit to our planet. IV-mectin, anyone?

[@henrygingold6549]

Try it in rural Arkansas or West Virginia

[@shadowlazers]

What is Frank Turek talking about if the Earth didn't have our days we wouldn't be here if the Earth weren't tilted just as it is we wouldn't be here where is he getting this information from or is he flat out lying to us because his information is all wrong

[@shadowlazers]

Should be really careful when using words like impossible and never and always and they carry a lot of weight to them

[@shadowlazers]

There have been a lot of wrong scientific theories throughout the years they all improve and they all get better and there is lots of evidence supporting a biogenesis it's not concrete it's not enough to put a man in prison for murder but it's enough to know that he killed somebody

[@shadowlazers]

Write all the world's leading scientists always point to God of the gaps

[@mariadelpilar1590]

Hitch . .. you ARE A GOD

[@cypr7120]

Mature debate: Arguments for topic itself Immature internet debate: Arguments that degrade people

[@siobhancrawley1487]

*_"Social media made you all way too comfortable with disrespecting people and not getting punched in the face for it."_* *(Mike Tyson)*

[@svnsetsomnia8280]

Arguments that degrade people: every Presidential debate since 2016 😭

[@Joseph_Shmoe777]

I remember watching these type of debates as a younger man who recently found Atheism. I'd get so bitter and resentful towards the Christian speakers, deeming them idiots before they even spoke and mindlessly agreeing with whatever venomous retort the Atheist had for them. But now through my own journey I've now found Christ, and the contrast in how I perceive these debates became so apparent I started typing into the void of an 11 year old KZbin video. If people attempted to see each other and the world through a Christ-like lens, Everyone would be better off, and that's all the proof I needed.

[@TheJoker-wr1cp]

Awesome comment brother. I too struggle with these questions but to me faith seems like the most practical response as without it I would go insane

[@Americanheld]

I head you brother, I just came to Christ recently too and have similar feelings as you about my New Atheist years around 2010.

[@ethanwilliamson782]

And yet your religion is responsible for some of the worst genocides and invasions in history under the banner of god. Somehow the years have made you blind to irony

[@TheJoker-wr1cp]

@@ethanwilliamson782 I’ll say it again. Did Christ condemn murder? Yes he did. It is t god or Christ it’s corrupt Christianity

[@Joseph_Shmoe777]

@@ethanwilliamson782 Lol you gonna try to "muh crusades" me? Because that's really the only one you can point to. It was caused by a rogue Pope afraid of his standing losing sway. Nothing about what Christ himself taught could ever be interpreted in good faith to cause Genocide. Just because humans are corruptible and use Gods name in vain doesn't mean you do away with the Ultimate Moral guider of humanity. "Treat others and you want to be treated, Love thy Enemy, Love thy Neighbor" "If you are struck Turn the Other cheek" "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" TELL me how that could be a cause of genocide? I have a question for you if you don't mind, If the entire world were to act more Christ-like would it be a better or worse place?

[@Liferestart6969]

This very well-dressed man is absolutely 100% not the individual to debate. He is so unprepared, so flustered at this point, I have tremendous empathy for his inability to even hold on to his theory is a credible manner.

[@malato43]

Which one are you talking about? Clarify please

[@Liferestart6969]

@@malato43 Believe he was a college professor he was a younger man he was dressed, Daria, Mary hips, very young, looks good the soup I think he was not prepared for this, and I think he was just going to come in and give us opinion on what he believed, and how he worships God, and I don’t think that he was prepared to defend his position. She just believes it because it’s God, and I think we all cover away from this debate with less information than we could’ve had.

[@docb1844]

God chose you for Heaven when He gave His one and only son as a sacrifice for your sinful imperfections He gave you free will to either choose Him or choose something/someone else to which you can dedicate your life. When you make either choice, you also make choose the eternal consequences that go along with it.

[@LGpi314]

Imaginary friend have no power to do any of it. LMAO

[@carlosavila4290]

Honestly, I don't see Hitchens answering any question with rationality. He's just judging and disliking the way he thinks God would manage the world.

[@rayensabandar8392]

I can't say for Hitchens, but if I were in his position and were to asked that question, I would say that is how I feel about religion and God. Religion is not a cause of good in this world, it probably is the poison in this world. For religion to exist with God on their side, it would mean anything you "think" God said to you, is the absolute correct way, which have been used wrongly in the present time and during the Roman Catholic times (if I'm not mistaken). For some people (that I know as well), to believe in God means that everything that happens is because God says so or God made it that way, that includes all the wicked things humanity have done, all the wicked things nature has done to humanity and so on and so forth. Which is (for me) highly contradictive if you believe God is all powerful and can do great things. My religious teachers (and I would assume a lot of religious people) told me that if you don't follow his teachings, you would go to hell, what kind of God is it that only do good things to those who worship Him, I mean even human can still treat people who were bad at them better than that. Edit: This is how I argue Hithcens' stance on religion and God, the entirety of religion and God are all contradictive and not coherent with one another which makes him answers those questions. At least that's how I see it and if religion and God were to manage the world, all those contradictive things would ruin it and make people thinks they have the highest form of power because God is on their side.

[@rayensabandar8392]

@@twoplustwoequalsfive6212 hmmmm I'm not sure I'm getting your point here. What you have stated is true, what the biological body needs is one thing and what the mind wants (the chemical reaction to certain things) is another thing. Your body needs healthy food and exercise in order to he healthy but your brain doesn't seem to "like" it. Hahaha I'm just confused about what your point is

[@rayensabandar8392]

@@twoplustwoequalsfive6212 hmmmm so anything good that people do is because of God and bad things is because of the other parts of the duality? or is that an oversimplification of your statement?

[@homoecce31]

Arrogance and disrespectful.

[@melissasw64]

@@ArtemisShanks But Turek isn't defending religion. He is defending the idea that there is a God who gives us our morals. Attacking Christianity (or Hinduism or Mormons or whatever) doesn't answer the question about the origin of our morals.

[@the.silent.flautist]

Timestamps: Intro: 00:00 Moderator: 01:50 Opening Remarks Frank Turek: 05:21 Christopher Hitchens: 28:30 Rebuttals Frank Turek: 52:00 Christopher Hitchens: 58:30 Direct Discussion: 01:05:49 Closing Remarks Frank Turek: 02:01:55 Christopher Hitchens:

[@random6809]

You win the Internet today.

[@mailywong9612]

Thank you

[@emmacleve72]

thank u so much

[@shantilus]

A pin would be great.

[@rage896]

in germany we say: Ehrenmann

[@shadowlazers]

Love the late great Christopher Hitchens it's annoying in this case that he won't explain to Frank Turek how and why we have morality the revolution of our species we've learned to cooperate we've learned that we can't do it on our own for our species to survive we have to take care of each other now of course most humans if not all our first for themselves this is not a slight but we also understand that we need empathy compassion and teamwork for our species to thrive

[@markusbaker1161]

Survival of the fittest. If you didn’t fit in you didn’t survive. We obviously have these traits or our species couldn’t have gotten this far.

[@philsymes]

​@@markusbaker1161 And then some. We are the most lethal apex predator that has ever existed. 💀💀💀

[@SandrOliva]

This Frank Turek is amazing. His speech can be summed up with: "God exists because there is no other explanation for the fact that not only we exist, but we also think that God Himself exists". That's not logic, and not even common sense. He sounds to me like one of those politicians who stupefy you with talk to sell you their wares. Here in Europe NO priest, Cardinal or Pope would talk like this as a vacuum cleaner salesman

[@FitratAbdulla]

Exactly! The guy has to feed his family from sales of his nonsense books.

[@rj_lew]

How does nothing form something? Is it a coincidence that earth is perfectly placed in the universe?

[@SandrOliva]

Earth happens to be perfectly placed in the Universe for OUR existence, which is not necessarely essential. Other planets could be perfectly placed for different forms of life, while our envirement would be deathly. And as for the beginning of the Universe, the latest theories hypothesize that it all started from an incredibly compressed nucleus of matter which contained all the matter that is contained in our Universe, which exploded and gave birth to were we are now. And it might have happened many more times before, as we know that our Universe one day will shrink back to the original state. Don't ask me about details, I'm not a scientist, but an uncle of mine was, and they know how it works (there's videos which explain all in simple plain words. Scientists have come out with such a theory after studies and calculations, and though there cannot be no experimental confirmation, at the moment that's considered the most likely hypotesis). At the same time, there's no experiment or calculation which can even vaguely prove the existence of any Entity who could take part to this process. It could be, as well as forces we cannot even imagine could have started it all. We simply don't know. But the existence of an individual Entity who have created a whole Universe just for housing our specie on a remote rock at the border of a meaningless Galaxy (and who even worries about our reproductive activities and even thoughts and lies), is highly laughable.

[@rj_lew]

@@SandrOliva you’re right, it is a force that we cannot imagine. GOD 👏👏

[@SandrOliva]

Call it God, call it Jim, call it with an equation or formula, it's not what you mean as God for sure. That's a Legend created by ancient civilizations who knew nothing about science. there might be something somewhere, but it's not either El or YHW or anything that has been narrated in any "Holy Book". Let's be humble and recognize we simply DON'T KNOW. We, as somewhat evolved primates, don't even know IF there's such an Entity., as ants can't even what a computer is

[@DUICE08]

After really sitting down and watching and listening ... Christopher didn't really answer the questions. And he twisted the other guys morality question. He mostly went on to state what he dislike about religion and religious folks, but nothing about debating the existence of God.

[@CrazyDeeDee]

Thank you! That's what I was thinking the whole time. So frustrating..

[@gordonapura]

@@CrazyDeeDee That's true. He dodged the points that Dr. Turek made, and just voiced out what he didn't like about religion in general. He also conflated all "gods" as being equal, putting them all in the same boat and accusing them of the same flaws. However, the God of the Bible is not the same as Allah, or Krishna, or Zeus or any of the different so-called gods worshipped and served by humanity all through out its existence.

[@agnosticignostic4086]

@@gordonapura and why exactly the god of the bible is the one true god?

[@ayyheloo2292]

@@agnosticignostic4086 bcs when compared to all the other religions, the god of the bible is the only one that truly makes sense

[@agnosticignostic4086]

@@ayyheloo2292 that's funny, my hindu friend and muslim friend said the same thing

[@jacoblopez6470]

Can hitchens actually answer any question that was asked? He talked about dancing, but yet I literally didn’t hear any concrete answers, just jokes smh

[@iicecourt00]

He said "how dare believers think we’re the immoral ones?" Says the one who doesn’t believe in morality

[@Saribex]

Because the evidence points logically in the god direction. As simple as that.And we are not even talking about the bible.

[@edofluit6568]

@@Saribex then how do you explain other gods like zeus, thor, ra, etc. are you really that hypocrittical to say those gods dont exist? but YOUR god does. without any evidence.

[@Voseo00]

@@edofluit6568 I’m not here for a debate, kinda neutral here but look. Zeus and Thor are literal mythology. As in they are self admittedly made up stories. YHWH vs Allah is The Bible debunks Islam. Jesus is contradicting the Quran on John 20:28-29, Matthew 16:16-17 and makes his depiction from Muhammad look totally fake. Not even going to go into the absolute thousands of flaws morally and scientifically with the Islamic faith, but there is that. So YHWH > Allah And when people say there are thousands of gods they don’t realize how much of a dumb question that is. You’re comparing thousands of FOLK gods to well established, long term religious beliefs. Think about it like this, 95% of the world believe in 5 different theisms. And about 15% unaffiliated. So limiting 80% of religious people to 5 Gods, yet there are supposedly thousands of made up gods by small towns, so all of the sudden it’s a hard decision? We’re choosing between 5 credible, and historically documented Gods. Not thousands. And there is definitely a bigger case for YHWH, seeing the archeological evidenced for his existence from events in the Bible, literal tunnels dug in the ground that match what was recorded in the documents, and more. So I don’t want a debate, but if God is really out there, it really isn’t a tough option for which one it is. Christianity disproves Islam, Jews just haven’t accepted Jesus, Buddhists don’t believe in god, and Hindus are polytheist (and you also gain nothing from believing in their religion). So now that I’ve become neutral over the course of months of self research, I’d say if you were to be religious I’d really narrow down to Christianity out of “all of the gods”. Because of historical and archaeological evidence that supports events that happened in the Bible.

[@edofluit6568]

@@Voseo00 oke, so what before the bible then? you base everything what you say on the bible. before the bible was even written, there were also gods. for example the egyptian gods.

[@checkyourfaith]

Hitchens not only could not answer the question about who is the authority for morality but also debated by insulting the opponent rather than giving sustenance to his arguments.

[@shaunmcinnis1960]

I think he started falling apart literally at the end. Couldn’t even clip his microphone back on…lo The sound man listening to him popping the pa speakers should have insisted.

[@Al2006essandro]

The authority for morality is society (according due its time and region)... its a pretty basic question actually.

[@LGpi314]

"who is the authority for morality" definition of morality "a particular system of values and principles of conduct, especially one held by a specified person or society." Society dictates morality = humans dictate morality = Human-made Now you show me the evidence of any gods existence. "giving sustenance to his arguments" Your fake dr has no arguments. “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” ― Christopher Hitchens There is no evidence of angels, satan nor your god. Stop BSing

[@robguyatt9602]

@@Al2006essandro Correct. Morality is a basic part of social species. It keeps us together. Christianity and Judaism is very young compared to our history. Yet they want to own morality as if it never existed before. Not to mention there's plenty of morality (good and bad just like biblical morality) in every other society and religion on Earth. It exists in many other species as well.

[@The-Khatalyst]

​@@Al2006essandroTherefore slavery was moral during the time and still is in some countries. Child brides are moral in some countries. As is cannibalism. If society defines morality, there is none.

[@JimmyJamJack]

Why do theists perform their arguments? It's like they don't trust their adherents' abilities to discern the actual points of their thesis without physical antics. "Turek must be right. Look at his demonstrated passion. He wins"

[@gregmicheals6231]

From my experience in life, you can spot the fool by looking for arrogance Edit: of all my comments on KZbin this definitely sparked the most interaction and that’s awesome! But as far as the comment itself, I feel like it holds true regardless of who it is I’m talking about.

[@A_DR]

You mean ignorance

[@samirpernell2136]

@@A_DR well both

[@CteCrassus]

@@A_DR Nothing provides more arrogant confidence than abject ignorance. It's a problem with the world that the wise are full of doubt but the foolish are full of confidence.

[@swaggyswag4999]

The guy with all of his time joking he could have been putting on his defense he spoke for 15 minutes and never got to the point they did not have what a joke

[@Applefreak52]

Oh yeah. You mean the guy who says he knows how the universe came to be? And the guy who did it is his best buddy?

[@Noteworthy2024]

As a Christian theist/diests, this debate is a needed wake up call to living what we preach. Much of the behavior of religious Christians was sited as a reason for Hitchen’s position. We must do better as a community exhibiting Jesus Christ in us the hope of glory! We also need to stop leaving apologetics up to scholars but we all should study and learn how to defend our faith!

[@wolfeyeforever]

Yeah, Christians really gotta do better.

[@fabriziocamisani5477]

Defending your faith from who or what? Isn't it enough to profess it and go about it without bothering others?

[@upturnedblousecollar5811]

Please, please remember - people like myself deny your religion 100%, and I equally deny your religion's claim that you're allowed to preach it to me whether I like it or not. There are thousands of religions, all of them claiming to be the real, true one - keep them all away from me and I promise to keep my atheism away from you.

[@TonyEnglandUK]

*Charlatans like Turek aren't really Christians. They're people who discovered how to make a lot of money from Christianity.* There's a good reason people like him don't write books on camels going through the eyes of needles.

[@upturnedblousecollar5811]

@@TonyEnglandUK yes

[@mylespeterson2707]

CH dodging questions 1:06:11 - Can we do just 2 questions instead? 1:06:39 - Well, we don't know... imagine a suitcase... I'm not the one who has to answer the question 1:11:12 - CH admits that even if the universe goes to heat death, that doesn't mean we weren't created and designed 1:12:09 - CH refuses to answer what his moral standard is (whether it is a chemical standard or a spiritual standard) 1:17:06 - FT asks CH if his thought that the material world is all that exists is in fact a material thought, and if so how do you know it's true? CH responds saying if he were killed he wouldn't continue thinking (while refusing to answer how he knows that thought is true) and forgets that he's creating a paradox with another "material thought" 1:18:33 - FT asks why it is a moral outrage for God to eliminate a society but it is a moral right for CH to terminate a pregnancy. CH goes on to strangely dodge the question by explaining random adaptations and why nature selects the fittest to survive. Ultimately he doesn't explain ever, why it is a moral right for humanity to eliminate children in the womb. There are many more dodged questions in the video as well as CH telling FT multiple times that he would prefer a different question. No excuses for the fools in these comments to lie about the video they just saw.

[@LGpi314]

It is not Hitchens's fault that theists can't comprehend things.

[@gi169]

​@@LGpi314 It is your stooopid masters fault that you can't ratiocinate LeoBigotFool. 😅🤣😂

[@LGpi314]

@@gi169 Bla bla bla sttooppiiid bla bla bla. Typical theist response. 🙈🙉🙊🐵🐒

[@FitratAbdulla]

Myles: unlike you slave-minded ignoramuses, atheists and humanists aren’t afraid of saying “I don’t know”. Only serfs are afraid to say that and they have to believe what their made-up imaginary gods dictates to them 🤦‍♂️

[@FitratAbdulla]

Myles timestamping himself into humiliation 😂

[@mboatman40220]

This was one of the frustrating debates i have ever listened to. Turek presented a solid, cogent argument for the existence of god. As an atheist myself, I was eager to hear Hitchens's response. I was so disappointed with his performance - mostly going off on tangents or on a soapbox to attack his personal take on religion - not what the debate was about.

[@Theo_Skeptomai]

What was Tutek's formal argument - can you present it here?

[@kapitan19969838]

​@@Theo_Skeptomai Didn't You watch the video?

[@steewaphilip2372]

i really don't understand why Hitchens can't take a single question properly. about the irreducible complexity of DNA, he goes on to talk about the big bang rather than the intricacy of our DNA. he's passed away since, and it's regrettable that he didn't know Christ.

[@Amos9.11]

People are prone to error, sometimes in how we go about answering questions and other times in the answers we give. We can also be illogical and even deceptive at times. Atheists are no exception, and the aggressive anti-theist kind of atheist such as Hitchens is usually more illogical and deceptive than the less fervent agnostic atheist. I say this with no malice toward atheists, since I was one myself from about the age of 16 until I was 26. Although after Hitchens was diagnosed with terminal cancer he declared he would never turn to God on his deathbed, none of us know what he was thinking during his last days and hours on earth. One can only hope for his sake that he changed his mind.

[@oxybenzol9254]

We know of 118 chemical elements. 117 of them are able to create about 700.000 different molecules 1 element is able to create 40mio different molecules. Why is that so? Laws of nature. Now you could say that god created the laws of nature and those laws then create Adenin, Thymin/ Uracil, Guanin and Cytosin. Thymin and Uracil are slightly different. One is used in the DNA the other in the RNA. But if you accept laws of nature there is no reason not to accept evolution coz its a law as well or if you will you can call it mechanism.

[@chosen729]

Well he knows now. CRYSTAL CLEAR NOW. In this video he is clearly rebellious against God and the gospel. Like he hates it and is running from it.

[@lukejamesadams31]

@Scott Scotty The fact that DNA shows intelligent information implies an intelligent creating mind. That's why it matters. It's not God of the Gaps. It's trying to reach the best conclusion based on where the evidence seems to point. I guess we will all find out for ourselves one day, but for now I'm going to place my bet with the theory that seems to fit the evidence the best.

[@tshilidzi_R]

I believe in a big bang , I just think I know who banged it. That was classic.😂🤣

[@bbrantley26]

The flying spaghetti monster for sure

[@bbrantley26]

@MyChemicalParamore the arrows are pointing directly at you

[@bbrantley26]

@MyChemicalParamore whats the point?

[@Quvan]

@@bbrantley26 that was an epic b**chslap.

[@Quvan]

@L'étranger that was an epic self b**chslapping. Edit: there, fixed it.