Give Me an Answer -

Cliffe Knechtle has a good dialogue with students at The University of Arizona - Tucson. Recorded in October 2012.
The "Give Me An Answer" ministry began as an outgrowth of the dialogues Cliffe Knechtle has had with students on various university campuses throughout the United States. These universities include the University of Maine, Harvard, MIT, University of Florida, University of Texas, University of Wisconsin, University of Minnesota, University of California Los Angeles, University of California San Diego, Berkeley, Stanford, University of Hawaii and the University of Washington. Cliffe spoke on these campuses in front of the Student Union or Library at noon for five to ten minutes. At the close of his initial remarks, he'd open up the time for questions and answers, which usually turned into a two to four hour dialogue with students. His crowd size ranged from 25 - 500 students at a time, and between classes, new students would join the discussion. This was an extremely effective way to reach a large number of university students with the Gospel of Christ.

[@kevinmcneil3492]

"I think you've parted company with your brain" hahahahaha man I spit up my coffee

[@jonathandacosta2045]

I've gotta hand it to Cliffe. This guy is good! He has given some of the best explanations that I've heard. Dr. John Lennox is another that does a great job as well.

[@chriswinchell1570]

I’ve heard all these arguments before and there are very good counter arguments. God is not required to explain anything.

[@Darqstorms]

@@chriswinchell1570 so says every atheist that doesn’t give even one counter argument. It’s not proof for God it’s evidence for God. Learn the difference

[@chriswinchell1570]

@@Darqstorms I did not say he had proof. Clearly there is no proof of god. Also, atheists are not required to prove there isn’t a god. Finally, as I wrote, there are explanations for the natural world thst do not require appealing to god(s). Maybe there’s a god(s) but it’s not apparent by merely arguing from incredulity.

[@JazzAUPH]

The danger of knowing too little and thinking that you know everything.

[@1godonlyone119]

The boy in the dark sunglasses says "You decide your morals for yourself." If he really believed that, then he would shut his ignorant mouth on the subject of morals and allow Cliffe to decide for himself: The problem is that the boy is a liar and a hypocrite.

[@christopherlovesjesussomuc3749]

He says you decide the morals for yourself yet if someone makes a decision thats bad then he cant say what they did was wrong because in his worldview we make are own morals.

[@ItsAWonderfulKnife]

21:50 "I don't think anyone saw me drop that napkin..."

[@mackdmara]

Forgiving you enemies is the best a man can do. Being forgiven by God, is even better.

[@1godonlyone119]

All human beings know for certain that God's unique qualities and activities are factual, and this includes you.

[@MoralDecay]

Thank you Cliffe!

[@1godonlyone119]

The statement "morals aren't objective -- they're entirely subjective" is itself an objective moral statement. Therefore it is a self-refuting statement, and therefore its logical converse must necessarily be true: _Therefore morals are necessarily objective._

[@1godonlyone119]

The boy in the dark sunglasses doesn't know what the word "objective" means. LOL

[@Shaereub]

Great video Cliff.

[@1godonlyone119]

1. If God does not exist, then objective moral ideals do not exist. 2. Objective moral ideals do exist: (2a. If opposing moral ideals exist, then some moral ideals are wrong). (2b. If some moral ideals are wrong, then objective moral ideals exist). (2c. Opposing moral ideals do exist). (2d. Therefore, some moral ideals are wrong). (2e. Therefore, objective moral ideals do exist). _Therefore, God exists._ QED

[@aidenhutto5969]

In the definition of science says that it has to be observable. NOBODY has observed a fish become a human. Evolution is a Belief!!!!!

[@JohnjOcampo]

Agreed

[@logia7]

it has been observed, if an animal is in a different environment, it is going to change or die out. This big animal is going to evolve smaller so it can fit into a smaller area, am I wrong?

[@JohnjOcampo]

@@logia7 how does that prove fishes and monkeys turned into humans?

[@1godonlyone119]

The fact that subjective opinions about moral ideals exist leads inescapably to the conclusion that objective moral ideals also exist. Here is the proof for this fact: 1. Formation of subjective opinions requires non-fabricated data about the actual thing in question (ATQ). (Any opinions formed independent of non-fabricated data about the ATQ would necessarily be about some other thing, and not about the ATQ). 2. Non-fabricated data about the ATQ requires valid observation of the ATQ. (Without valid observation of the ATQ, any data compiled would necessarily be fabricated). 3. Valid observation of the ATQ requires the objective existence of the ATQ. (If the ATQ lacked objective existence, then any observation in which one may engage would necessarily be of some other thing, and not of the ATQ). 4. Subjective opinions about moral ideals exist. 5. Therefore, non-fabricated data about moral ideals exist. 6. Therefore, valid observation of moral ideals exists. 7. Therefore, moral ideals exist objectively.

[@raktar1]

1 st rule, one whos not out for the truth will always bend reality to fit his truth. its an endless Battle, unless this man changes his attitude...

[@ToastyMcGrath]

Exactly. Listing bad people who did bad things in order to associate their religion or lack thereof with their behavior is always going to backfire.

[@larryrohloff9468]

I don't know how Cliff refrains from choking that dweeb! Pray for me.

[@thywillbedone3334]

😂.. Yeah I hear you, I always say to myself.. Let me debate these guys, I'll blast them intellectually. But like you pointed out I'd end up choking people. 😂. Praise be to God the Father, who with his supernatural wisdom hasn't sent me out there yet.

[@user-cu3xn4xj3i]

Right!!! He has so much patience! I can't believe that do not understand!

[@delphos1223]

Nicely said.

[@sevenclan1280]

Amen!

[@ToastyMcGrath]

They said that right up until every scientific discovery we've ever made.

[@gowsif_dnb]

Who said what?

[@1godonlyone119]

The fact that science works is evidence that God's unique qualities and activities are factual, for apart from God, there could be no science.

[@ChiefCedricJohnson]

Proverbs 20:11 Even a child is known by his doings, whether his work be pure, and whether it be right.

[@briggy4359]

That angry boi is like a lil Tarantino

[@maytag1963]

Have you tried to verify the authenticity of that quote? I couldn't.

[@Mcfirefly2]

God's Spirit bears witness to His reality and our need for Him. To listen and not push Him away, is to receive the love of the truth: Luke 10:21 In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight.

[@IBenZik]

The geologic column only exists in a textbook.

[@theoskeptomai2535]

Hello. I am an atheist. I define atheism as suspending any acknowledgement as to the existence of gods until sufficient credible evidence can be presented. My position is that *_I have no good reason to acknowledge the existence of gods._* And here is the evidence as to why I currently hold to such a position. 1. I personally have never observed a god. 2. I have never encountered a person whom has claimed to have observed a god. 3. I know of no accounts of persons claiming to have observed a god that were willing or able to demonstrate or verify their observation for authenticity, accuracy, or validity. 4. I have never been presented a valid logical argument which also employed sound premises that lead deductively to a conclusion that a god(s) exists. 5. Of the 46 logical syllogisms I have encountered arguing for the existence of a god(s), I have found all to contain multiple fallacious or unsubstantiated premises. 6. I have never observed a phenomenon in which the existence of a god was a necessary antecedent for the known or probable explanation for the causation of that phenomenon. 7. Several proposed (and generally accepted) explanations for observable phenomena that were previously based on the agency of a god(s), have subsequently been replaced with rational, natural explanations, each substantiated with evidence that excluded the agency of a god(s). I have never encountered _vice versa._ 8. I have never experienced the presence of a god through intercession of angels, divine revelation, the miraculous act of divinity, or any occurrence of a supernatural event. 9. Every phenomenon that I have ever observed has *_emerged_* from necessary and sufficient antecedents over time without exception. In other words, I have never observed a phenomenon (entity, process, object, event, process, substance, system, or being) that was created _ex nihilo_ - that is instantaneously came into existence by the solitary volition of a deity. 10. All claims of a supernatural or divine nature that I have encountered have either been refuted to my satisfaction, or do not present as falsifiable. ALL of these facts lead me to the only rational conclusion that concurs with the realities I have been presented - and that is the fact that there is *_no good reason_* for me to acknowledge the existence of a god. I have heard often that atheism is the denial of the Abrahamic god. But denial is the active rejection of a substantiated fact once credible evidence has been presented. Atheism is simply withholding any acknowledgement until sufficient credible evidence is introduced. *_It is natural, rational, and prudent to be skeptical of unsubstatiated claims, especially extraordinary ones._* I welcome any cordial response. Peace.

[@tyriquejohnson4974]

Do you believe in moral absolutes?

[@theoskeptomai2535]

@@tyriquejohnson4974 No. Do you?

[@tyriquejohnson4974]

@@theoskeptomai2535 yes. So killing someone is only wrong subjectively, not objectively?

[@theoskeptomai2535]

@@tyriquejohnson4974 Yes. Assessing whether or not killing is immoral is a subjective endeavor like ALL assessments. Wouldn't you agree?

[@tyriquejohnson4974]

@@theoskeptomai2535 No I can agree on that. Following your assessment, who are we to judge others when they commit crimes? Why should we lock them up? If I come of angry, just want to let you know I am not, just a bit tired.

[@edstone7676]

All of us are without excuse when it comes to God. He has given us all the living life around us, all the complex design that can't possibly have been created by chance and billions of years. You have to seriously consider that God exists, he does exist and he loves you!

[@christiansanelli2015]

I think the questioner makes a couple good points. One of them was when he said that, in old days (Jesus's days), people would ascribe something divine automatically to a comet that would come down and slam into the U of Arizona Mall. Nowadays we have science to give us another explanation. Also, he mentioned how science has shown there is a religious "hot zone" in the brain. That scientists can actually make someone believe in God more by altering their brain chemistry.

[@jesusmysaviorfaith6133]

Thats just having a trip, take drugs and you’ll see everything upside down

[@mykidsfather6112]

If there is no God a child has no value? I once saw a wildebeest go back into crocodile infested water to find her calf after loosing her while crossing a river. Funny how a dumb animal can see value without God , but us humans need a God. By the way. That mother wildebeest was captured and eaten while her calf successfully crossed.

[@lovegod5605]

Wow bro you hit the nail on it

[@boltrooktwo]

As a nature worshipper getting your answers from nature are you going to choose to act like the wildebeest or the crocodile?

[@taysolodo]

He was saying that because according to atheistic values we’re all matter and energy. So we’re just here by chance, survival of the fittest, evolution. He’s saying you can’t live out that type of thinking so if there is no God there is no value and that child just has to suck it up since it’s a weaker vessel. Also there is pure differences in wild animals in humans in terms of our conscious and how our mind works.

[@seekingtruth4175]

Wow, we have to wait for math to teach us that 2 + 2 = 4. Before we existed what did 2 + 2 equal. Clearly, he missed the point.

[@patana256]

10:39 is it just me or do these two guys have the same shorts on?

[@MrT9822]

Classic 2000s tan cargo shorts with t shirt lol. I don't wear shorts anymore unless I'm at the pool or on vacation. Lol. Cliff is always dressed sharp!🙏

[@Brucev7]

Pot calling the kettle black----D e n i a l

[@DLAbaoaqu]

Back to your vodka and Kazatsky dances, Zack.

[@kaollino]

Abuse a child is wrong because I know that the child will suffer. I would suffer in that situation, then I guess the child would suffer too. Isn't it that simple?

[@333onlyhalfbad]

there are things science can not answer and never will answer. For example, what is the meaning of life? that is not a scientific question.

[@ToastyMcGrath]

He never had the legal right to preside over my case.

[@jelly7310]

Why are atheists so angry sounding

[@boltrooktwo]

It a veneer to cover up an irrational worldview.

[@Mcfirefly2]

Jesus said "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw ALL MEN unto me." John 12:32. The Bible calls Him "true Light, which lighteth EVERY man that cometh into the world" John 1:9. If we respond to the light God has given us, He will give us more light. He will give anyone the light that they need to be saved, and the speaker is right about this, just like He did the ones who were saved according to the promise they had before Jesus came.

[@TiberiusMaximus]

The new Sye Ten Burgencate. At least he's better looking.

[@ToastyMcGrath]

Cliffe, if you claim your god manifests his will in the physical universe, that means those claims can be assessed scientifically.

[@SpySappingMyKeyboard]

Ok, in that case he is just explaining the Christian viewpoint. As for his argument, the fact that we can observe objective morals implies that something must enforce said morals.

[@redlinegw]

"Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever! In explaining evolution we do not have one iota of fact." (Dr. Newton Tahmisian, Atomic Energy Commission.)

[@ToastyMcGrath]

Are you seriously saying we should base our moral norms on psychopaths?

[@ToastyMcGrath]

No, but science has shown in every case it has analyzed that an intelligent creator is not necessary.

[@bany512]

ok, go ahead "science" create a cell. dont clone it, or let it reproduce itself, take an empty Petri dish and create a functional cell within it. I will be waiting................

[@ToastyMcGrath]

Is that what you think science is?

[@bany512]

@@ToastyMcGrath if they can show that there is no need for the Creator, they can surely show how to create a living organism, a cell for starters.

[@ToastyMcGrath]

Evolution already explained that, Peter.

[@bany512]

@@ToastyMcGrath it did,sure, thats why its still but a theory.

[@ToastyMcGrath]

Well, if you mean in a poetic sense, perhaps.

[@ToastyMcGrath]

I'm just pointing out that being big and powerful has no bearing on your god's legal authority to judge people. I do not recognize his authority, and I feel that if he was real his unjust system would need to be opposed by all ethical persons. Might doesn't make right. And I was using the "case" example as a courtesy to JiL. I don't even think the mythical god of the bible even exists, if you want to get the details of it.

[@thywillbedone3334]

What comet is he taking about that people worshiped? And it would have to be a very big comet.. I mean huge.. If it's not that big, I might think someones throwing rock's.

[@333onlyhalfbad]

but you have to really think about it man, Is that the only reason you dont abuse a child because if you do it, it will make you feel bad? what If it made you feel good, then would you do it? See its good that the childs suffering makes you feel bad BUT that cant be the only reason for you not doing it

[@SpySappingMyKeyboard]

I think what he is getting at is that we can observe objective morals (such as killing children), therefore something must make those morals objective, which could only be done by God (ignoring other religions, but that is a different issue).

[@juanoceguera3166]

Oh really???

[@ToastyMcGrath]

And how do you figure that? You were the one who listed the names of dictators. I merely pointed out that one was Christian. Then you agreed and gave me another christian's name.

[@creamone]

Cliffe says Science is small. Wow! His opinion Philosophy trumps Science. Nothing against Philosophy but it can't hold a candle to the discoveries Science has made. The majority of all knowledge through experiments, technical, medical discoveries is Science. Philosophy asks a question and a opinion follows.

[@PaleMist]

But let's not forget: all science is based upon many philosophical assumptions, principles, and/or presuppositions which are utilized by scientists, *E.G.* the notions that The use of Logic is reliable Man's reasoning ability is basically reliable The principle of uniformity is basically reliable The basic five senses (*I.E.* sight, taste, touch etc.) are basically reliable The memory is basically reliable Man has the ability to learn Truth exists Reality exists Truth is knowable The scientific method is basically reliable Accurate knowledge and accurate truth can be obtained by use of science These and other philosophical assumptions, principles, and/or presuppositions are utilized prior to reaching any scientific use, experimentation, and/or conclusion. So remember: science is based and depends upon philosophy prior to science's possibility and usage.

[@creamone]

***** The philosophical assumptions as you say in Scientific terms are called Hypothesis. The Scientist then takes that hypothesis and puts it to the test by conducting numerous tests or experiments. These experiments would have to duplicated many times by the Scientific community (Peer reviewed) in order for the hypothesis to become a Theory. If the hypothesis turns out to be true the so called assumptions become a Theory. (Look up Scientific term for theory) So yes at first a Scientist may have educated or philosophical assumptions, principles, and/or presuppositions but the difference with the Scientific Method is that those assumptions must be put to the test rigorously. Religion on the other hand which is a philosophical assumptions, principles, and/or presuppositions is based on faith and when put to the test for the evidence of God fails miserably.

[@PaleMist]

creamone Which definition/standard of a "Hypothesis"; there is more than one. "Religion on the other hand which is a philosophical assumptions, principles, and/or presuppositions is based on faith and when put to the test for the evidence of God fails miserably. " So you have investigated every religion and every religious argument?

[@Brucev7]

which still does not mean the truth, or what is....

[@kingkingking8583]

And the scientist the still trying to figure it out they will blow there minds trying and will try to come up with some sonsence.

[@333onlyhalfbad]

is it a nonsense question because its something science cant touch? because perhaps its more of a philosophical question

[@RJA68]

The answer to the guys question about if you have not heard about god how will you get to heaven? Romans 2:14-16 is the answer :)

[@ToastyMcGrath]

Let's see, Numbers 31, Joshua 6, Deuteronomy 2...

[@Faithful1]

The atheist or agnostics arguments aren't good if he had more knowledge of debate and what arguments to use then he would of had more of a chance

[@Brucev7]

LOL. Yea, just like Jeffrey Dahmer. lollololol

[@333onlyhalfbad]

lol people being upset by him hasnt changed much. Thats what he was crucified for because people were upset by him

[@ToastyMcGrath]

Not really, Adolf was Christian.

[@Emo8007]

Yes he clearly followed the teachings of Jesus

[@beadoll8025]

😂😂😂

[@333onlyhalfbad]

I have to disagree.... lol

[@ToastyMcGrath]

If you maintain that Jesus is also the god of the bible, then you need only look at the horrific war crimes found therein.

[@1godonlyone119]

This kid talks a lot but never makes a lick of sense.

[@kingkingking8583]

Its ALL GOD HANDS DOWN.

[@ToastyMcGrath]

Well yeah, because it's a nonsense question. Science also can't answer "what is the square root of purple?"

[@JohnjOcampo]

You sound ignorant.

[@creamone]

If there is a God, Pantheism is the best way to explain our reality. God is the Universe, We all are part of God which is the Universe. Man kind has believed in over 3,000 God's, they are all mythical.

[@juanoceguera3166]

Religión is out dated