Bible: Corrupted or True? AI debates

We configured teams of advanced AIs (large language models) to tackle one of history's most controversial questions: Is the New Testament corrupt or reliable? Drawing on insights from over 100 top scholars, this debate is bound to challenge your beliefs. But that’s not all-14 different AI models from the world’s biggest tech giants will judge each argument. Will their evaluations be unbiased? Watch to uncover the surprising verdicts and see how these AIs interpret the evidence.
Dive into the controversy and share your thoughts in the comments. If this video sparks your curiosity, please hit the like button and subscribe for more fascinating content.
Footnotes:
[1] Kruger, M. J. (2012). Canon Revisited: Establishing the Origins and Authority of the New Testament Books.
[2] Metzger, B. M. (1992). The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration.
[3] Hill, C. E. (2010). Who Chose the Gospels? Probing the Great Gospel Conspiracy.
[4] Hurtado, L. W. (2006). The Earliest Christian Artifacts: Manuscripts and Christian Origins.
[5] Aland, K., & Aland, B. (1995). The Text of the New Testament: An Introduction to the Critical Editions and to the Theory and Practice of Modern Textual Criticism.
[6] Metzger, B. M., & Ehrman, B. D. (2005). The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration.
[7] Ehrman, B. D. (2005). Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why.
[8] Ehrman, B. D. (2011). The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture: The Effect of Early Christological Controversies on the Text of the New Testament.
[9] Comfort, P. W. (2008). Encountering the Manuscripts: An Introduction to New Testament Paleography & Textual Criticism.
[10] Parker, D. C. (1997). The Living Text of the Gospels.
[11] Metzger, B. M. (1994). A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament.
[12] Wallace, D. B. (2011). Revisiting the Corruption of the New Testament: Manuscript, Patristic, and Apocryphal Evidence.
[13] Craig, W. L. (2008). Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics.
[14] Blomberg, C. L. (2007). The Historical Reliability of the Gospels.
[15] Parker, D. C. (2008). An Introduction to the New Testament Manuscripts and their Texts.
[16] Ehrman, B. D. (2009). Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible.
[17] Metzger, B. M. (1994). A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (2nd ed.).
[18] Metzger, B. M. (1994). A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2nd ed., p. 65.
[18b] Dunn, J. D. G. (2003). Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, Volume 1.
[19] Wegner, P. D. (2006). A Student's Guide to Textual Criticism of the Bible: Its History, Methods and Results.
[20] Holmes, M. W. (2007). The Apostolic Fathers: Greek Texts and English Translations (3rd ed.).
[21] Bruce, F. F. (1981). The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?
[22] Bailey, K. E. (1995). "Informal Controlled Oral Tradition and the Synoptic Gospels." Asia Journal of Theology, 9(2), 289-312.
[23] Epp, E. J. (1999). "The Multivalence of the Term 'Original Text' in New Testament Textual Criticism." Harvard Theological Review, 92(3), 245-281.
[24] Casey, M. (2010). Jesus of Nazareth: An Independent Historian's Account of His Life and Teaching.
[25] Casey, M. (1998). Aramaic Sources of Mark's Gospel.
[26] Kelber, W. H. (1983). The Oral and the Written Gospel: The Hermeneutics of Speaking and Writing in the Synoptic Tradition, Mark, Paul, and Q.
[27] Bauckham, R. (2006). Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony.
[28] Wright, N. T. (1992). The New Testament and the People of God.
[29] Porter, S. E. (2000). The Criteria for Authenticity in Historical-Jesus Research: Previous Discussion and New Proposals.
[30] Evans, C. A. (2012). Jesus and His World: The Archaeological Evidence.
[31] Dunn, J. D. G. (2003). Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, Volume 1.
[32] Kloppenborg, J. S. (2008). Q, the Earliest Gospel: An Introduction to the Original Stories and Sayings of Jesus.
[33] Luz, U. (2007). Matthew 1-7: A Commentary on Matthew 1-7.
[34] Hirst, W., & Echterhoff, G. (2012). "Remembering in Conversations: The Social Sharing and Reshaping of Memories." Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 55-79.
[35] Lord, A. B. (2000). The Singer of Tales (2nd ed.).
[36] Burridge, R. A. (2004). What Are the Gospels? A Comparison with Graeco-Roman Biography (2nd ed.).
[37] Marshall, I. H. (1978). The Gospel of Luke: A Commentary on the Greek Text.
[38] Fitzmyer, J. A. (1981). The Gospel According to Luke I-IX: Introduction, Translation, and Notes.
[39] Hagner, D. A. (1995). Matthew 14-28.
[40] Wright, N. T. (1996). Jesus and the Victory of God.
[41] Sterling, G. E. (1992). Historiography and Self-Definition: Josephos, Luke-Acts and Apologetic Historiography.
....
Full list of footnotes [1-129] available at this link:
docs.google.co...

[@JonOleksiuk]

NEW debates with NEW AI models Atheism vs. Theism -->> kzbin.info/www/bejne/e37ccnqrfdN3fs0 AI debates the Trinity -->> kzbin.info/www/bejne/iWG2lIKdlqmXhKc ** Currently working on a debate that examines the moral examples of Muhammad, Jesus, Buddha and Krishna. Don't forget to subscribe and hit the bell so you don't miss the next debate :)

[@jperez7893]

can your ai agents work on the extraction of the most probable (using bayesian and classical statistics) text of the hebrew new testament given every known manuscript(hebrew, koine, latin, vetus latina, aramaic, ethiopian, etc.) or text also using forensic criminological techniques to extract or verify the modifications so as to result in a reliable text also cross verified with patristic sources such as the apostolic and church fathers?

[@jordantaylor2435]

Both the short and long videos are awesome so far! Personally I prefer the longer more detailed debates!

[@Methodius-and-Cyril]

What would happen with a Jewish AI and Christian AI using the Old Testament, New Testament, Talmud?

[@NoahtheGameplayer]

Where is Venice AI?

[@AdamsTaiwan]

The sad thing is the Christian didn't mention our primary source for the Bible and it's preservation: The Holy Spirit. The skeptic brought it up first at the end. Yes, the Holy Spirit used natural human "means", but we have no concern over "man's" limitations. The Holy Spirit made sure we have exactly what He wants us to have and in the way He wanted it to come to us. We must also understand that the skeptic is not neutral but is hostile to God so we can't expect any fair play, especially from Bart and I'm not talking about the AI engine.

[@ThePrimusCrusader]

Is there an Skeptic vs Islam in the works? I feel like the skeptic would obliterate the Islamic Believer. The belief in the Quran itself is circular reasoning.

[@FindTheTruthBeforeTheEnd]

That would be an interesting video for sure.

[@becausestuffbreaks]

I would love to see that too

[@jordantaylor2435]

I would be fascinated to hear this!

[@nothing0empty996]

I agree, Islam is quite faulty and it would be very fun to see.

[@mohamedadnane2386]

Lol your wrong because we don't uknonw authors we don't have many versions of our book we don't have a condractoin in our books unlike yours lol

[@calvinfrakes882]

You should debate Catholic and Protestant Theology. EDIT: All of these replies show exactly why we need an AI debate.

[@onbored9627]

If the goal is only to disprove the other, then Protestant need only quote Matthew 23:9 “And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven”. Catholics call the priests father because they venerate the priests and structure over the source material itself. Which is fine, I'm not saying it's bad... It's just true.

[@Gady______]

@@onbored9627 i mean that point falls flat. Remember the 10 commandments honor your mother and father

[@onbored9627]

@@Gady______ How does that translate to calling your pastor father?

[@universalflamethrower6342]

If you understand the Eucharist is literally the body of Christ you can understand why you can call a Pastor Father. Likewise if you Understand Mary is the Eternal Virgin you can Understand she is the Mother of God and Queen of heaven. However if your core belief is Mary was just a Girl, your understanding of Christianity will always be lacking.... Bro...

[@jas9friend]

@@onbored9627 calling no man on earth father (or teacher as is also mentioned) is directly contradicted elsewhere, especially in Paul's writings. So perhaps a face value interpretation of that passage is less than useful.

[@daviddrew3372]

Fun fact : Matthew was very likely written in Hebrew originally. Certain sayings and idioms in the Greek version have little meaning but in Hebrew make sense. Another fun fact: only Matthew notes the payment of 30 pieces of silver to betray Jesus. A tax collector would not have missed this.

[@user-el3rk6os3p]

IF Matthew was originally written in Hebrew, why does it copy Mark's Gospel almost verbatim?

[@MrVeryfrost]

@@user-el3rk6os3p That's a Good point. Scholars agree that Mathew and Luke must have obtained much information from a Q source. Unfortunately, neither the Q source nor the earliest copies survived.

[@vejeke]

That is false. The anonymous Greek text that, in the second half of the second century, began to be called "The Gospel according to Matthew" is a modified copy of the anonymous Greek text that, in the second half of the second century, began to be called "The Gospel according to Mark." If there ever was a Hebrew "gospel" (more likely a collection of sayings, like The Gospel of Thomas) written by someone named Matthew, as Eusebius said that Papias mentioned, we no longer have access to it.

[@DanHutchings-xx7ug]

@@user-el3rk6os3p Mark was written before Matthew and both expressed what they knew and both are very much the same. Except Matthew goes into more detail, perhaps because he was better educated. Also the original Hebrew language was no longer used at the time of Christ. The language they used was Aramaic. Hebrew died out during the Babylonian and Persian Empires.

[@dealarr]

Why are people always talking about which books are written before which instead of finding out the source behind the branding of this "Holy Bible". When the Pentateuch was written, Matthew, Mark and others certainly weren't. And there wasn't an intention to have them all put into one book as if everyone one of them agreed with one another, and it was the Creator's idea all along to have all these men written books to be put into one. Why doesn't anyone question this? You all have a phone, it came from two big brands predominantly. They all had a version one. They could be sold later to another company and still be called eyephones or galaxies.

[@antonioreid534]

As a Jew, I found this debate to be interesting. I would also be interested in a debate of whether or not Jesus is Jewish messiah of the Hebrew Bible.

[@justinwalker5441]

O that would be good. Hopefully they do that.

[@sweetiesquad69]

I don't believe Jesus existed at all TBH if he did why is his childhood missing?

[@JV-un7qw]

yeh, let Ai preach to you. Cause we are out of other stupid options

[@fazelok]

one question - if it wasnt Jesus - who would the messiah be?

[@antonioreid534]

@@fazelokhasn’t been born yet…

[@thucyrus6512]

In the last two debates, I tried to convey how hopeful I was of this channel's process while simultaneously being fairly critical of the debaters' circular logic and simplistic arguments. I now feel like one of those onlookers heckling the Wright Brothers because their horse and buggy were faster. When that plane finally flew, it did something no horse and buggy could ever do. That's what I just saw here. This isn't just an improvement on the last two debates. This created a standard that has yet to exist. I've personally witnessed dozens of debates from nationally recognized collegiate debaters and hundreds more online, and I can say with absolute certainty that no debate of this caliber has ever been achieved. I feel like I just witnessed the first moon landing. The accuracy, consistency, and clean respectful delivery carried out by both sides is something I have never seen. Forget sportsman-like conduct! There wasn't even a "hint" of irreverence! I honestly want to cry. I seriously wonder how many people, watching this, know just how significant this kind of unbiased precision actually is. Quoting the original texts in their original languages. Cross referencing dozens of eye witnesses and critics from multiple backgrounds. Wow. I am. I'm actually crying. This is like the Mona Lisa of logic and discourse. This is literal art. Thank you @JonOleksiuk for this gift. Seriously. Thank you.

[@Lola_K]

A detailed approach is so much better. It helps us be more exposed to this concepts. This is such great work. Looking forward to more.

[@JonOleksiuk]

Awesome, thank you!

[@Gady______]

Protestantism vs apostolic churches next 🗿

[@Yipper64]

I would love to see Calvinism vs Arminianism tackled at some point.

[@onbored9627]

Apostolic is the one that makes em kiss each other with tongues as a greeting?

[@Gady______]

@@onbored9627 yes 🗿

[@josephstroud-oj6tj]

​@@onbored9627 what are you talking about

[@onbored9627]

@@josephstroud-oj6tj They call it the "Holy Kiss" I believe.

[@Tell_It_Right]

AI Skeptic, "Good point, but we must be cautious...." and "Well, Bart Erhman says...." 😂😂😂

[@dopestpost]

Right!?! 😂 i heard “Bart Ehrman” and laughed.

[@gregeckert1660]

@@dopestpostdo yall not find him trustworthy? Cuz he tends to harm mah faith a little bit im not gonna lie.

[@Ice_t_ly-ku]

@gregeckert1660 He's one of those guys who pretends to be a scholar, but his goal is to lead people away from Christ. He claims to know scripture but still chooses to deceive others like the serpent. I've listened to countless apologetic, scholarly, arguments, refutes, etc. They all have the same thing in common. They know the scripture but deny it and try to gain fame from it because they know that the more atheists that back up their pretentious movement, the easier it is to manipulate the rest of the crowd.. this is the sin of intellectualism. People prefer their pride over God. They believe they will escape God's wrath because they claim to be smarter and wiser than Him 🤣 it will be a sad awakening 🥲

[@gregeckert1660]

@@Ice_t_ly-ku I hear you, do you truly believe that though? He’s made some truly interesting claims though. And he was a Christian if I’m not mistaken. He’s definitely had me doubting things for sure but I’m also not entirely educated on Christ yet. I wish people like Bart would just be honest , but I’m not too sure he is:/

[@Ice_t_ly-ku]

@gregeckert1660 I was as far away from Christ as anyone else could be, a former child of Satan. I also had my share of rejection and denial and would use anything to justify my position. I had every reason to reject God. Long story short, I had lived out my depraved nihilistic-solipisitic life, and I was at the point of suicide.., spiritually, mentally, emotionally dead, physically decaying.. no amount of knowledge, drugs, drunkedness, new age spirituality, or stoicism could save me. Enter Jesus and His gospel, I was desperate and out of options, God being my last last last last...last resort. He truly has saved me, just as the gospel demonstrates in the New Testament. The more you read, the more you begin to realize that God was always there and is reaching out to you. His faithfulness is unlike anything consistent here on earth. Yes, He may turn His face away from you because of sin, but that doesn't mean He won't point you where you need to go! Don't let someone else jeopardize your salvation and relationship with God because they have "a decent and lofty argument," and remember, the Bible contains a lot of information for later generations, that includes advice for being alert for false teachings and people that will "tickle your ear and scratch it", God's perfect love, drives out fear, you can find that in the book of 1 John🙂

[@RizwanKhan-fb2qv]

Yesss finally been waiting forever for your uploads lol. Great work as always 🎉

[@JonOleksiuk]

Glad you like them!

[@bremado]

Man, considering that you’re Christian (based on your early videos), the fact that Christianity consistently wins in all your debates raises questions about whether you might be influencing the outcomes. It would be unfortunate because I really wanted to see an unbiased debate on AI.

[@JonOleksiuk]

I edited the debate together before having the judges score it, so I don't know how the models will rate it. Personally, I'm more interested in hearing the best possible arguments from both sides. If you think one perspective isn't presented well, let me know. From the last two debates, it seems some language models judge certain perspectives with higher or lower scores routinely. I'll be watching to see if this trend continues. thanks for the comment.

[@ibelieve8145]

Or maybe Christianity simply has better arguments 🤷. Didn't consider that, huh?

[@corkystorky]

come on, the skeptic here missed 'the fulfilment of prophecies' and that Jesus is present in all books of the Old Testament, the NT writers were not aligning the events of Jesus with the events in OT, rather they were proving why Jesus was the promised Messiah. To think that this debate is biased, really, AI debate is still biased? How skeptic can you be

[@ThePrimusCrusader]

Christianity had church fathers to make sense of the scripture and the theology for it. It just shows how poor the theology of other religions has always been.

[@ZenSponge]

@@corkystorkyThis. “These parallels prove that the gospels are unreliable.” Apparently they aren’t familiar with Jewish or Christian theology concerning prophecy.

[@Yipper64]

This series of videos is extremely fascinating to me. Not in the way that I think these debates could lead people into finding the truth, that really cant be found in an AI in my opinion, but rather its the way they debate. LLMs by nature are designed to be agreeable, because people are meant to use them. So this means that in a "debate" the AI will validate their opponent, but provide pushback, rather than outright attacking the opponent. Which creates a fascinating kind of debate because there arent any character attacks, mostly because there is no character to attack. If nothing else its a strangely good example of how we as people should treat eachother when debating.

[@VindensSaga]

I don't know if debates usually do lead people to find the truth. I would prefer thinking that it would make people interested about the subject to find info about it on their own and make a decision for themselves.

[@Jesusdoesntgivea]

Far out Jon you're at it again. You're still posting rubbish. HEY EVERYONE, IT TAKES ME LESS THAN ONE MINUTE TO GET AI TO CONFESS THAT THERE IS VERY LITTLE TRUTH IN THE BIBLE. SO... JON'S WORK HERE IS 100% RIGGED. An * year old could rig these numbers. CHRISTIANS, EVERYONE IS TIRED OF YOU TRYING TO JUSTIFY YOU'RE CRAZY BELIEFS. I BEG YOU TO READ OTHER BOOKS. Jon please stop this. I have much to do. Must I dedicate hours just to prove what you already know? THIS IS BS Jon. Please give it up

[@user-qy2wf2lt6v]

Like it's supposed to be ... I am tired of "destroy debates".

[@wmor2449]

Like "nice" two faced demons? 😅

[@graphixkillzzz]

religious people: all i need is someone to pretend to corroborate my lie and my cognitive bias will supply me with all the faith i need. skeptical people: I'm gonna need a little more than your words if you're going to use your beliefs to influence my actions in reality.

[@BillyBob-sm3ku]

Have you noticed that the “skeptic” ai is constantly moving the goalposts the further into the (for example contesting the genre of the gospels, then immediately conceding that they were biographies in the next round, although it did caveat that fact with the context of biographies of the day). Is each argument assessed isolated to that specific round or does it take previous rounds into consideration?

[@BurakUcarr]

good job mate! continue

[@JonOleksiuk]

Thanks, will do!

[@MrVeryfrost]

@4:00 There is a fallacy based on 3rd-4th-century manuscripts because there is still a major gap arriving from the 1st and 2nd centuries. There are no 'abundance' manuscripts to verify the consensus for source texts or early copies. In the 1st and 2nd centuries, there was no professional clergy class to overlook the copies. It was the Wild West; anyone could have included the unverifiable errors. Neither do we have any copies of the Q source.

[@vejeke]

Not only that, but the older the manuscripts the bigger the differences.

[@dakotaneuman8748]

How so? There were priests and bishops from the start.

[@vejeke]

@@dakotaneuman8748 Isn't one of the arguments most biblical scholars use to point out that the pastoral epistles weren't written by Paul precisely that there wasn't such church hierarchy at that time?

[@dakotaneuman8748]

@@vejeke I don't know about that. Some of the greatest saints many which were clergy, and are directly in the New Testament. Lazarus was a bishop, Steven was a deacon, ect.

[@MrVeryfrost]

@@dakotaneuman8748@dakotaneuman8748 There were woman deaconesses, too. We know this for certain, as it was reported to Emperor Trajan at the end of the 1st century. It doesn't mean priests, bishops, and deacons were professional scribes.

[@fernandoformeloza4107]

The debate i would like to see is NT Wright vs Bart Erhman

[@jas9friend]

Funnily, they have done some debates through blogs and interviews. And I'm sure their writings reference one another.

[@Jesusdoesntgivea]

Bart Erhman is a brilliant man

[@LeonelMaradiaga-kw9nf]

protestant vs catholic ai debate next

[@juliorivera870]

We are not protestant, we are christians, Catholicism is not biblical.

[@universalflamethrower6342]

No real debate, as ex protestant now Catholic, I would say the core protestant argument against Catholicism is: "Mary was just a girl"

[@GogglesOstrich]

Much love to all Catholics but scripture is too clear that faith is what saves us for us to deny that. I don't claim to be a protestant but one who follows the Bible (though what the Bible teaches aligns with what the protestant side teaches). Not a denomination or specific church. 1 John 5:13 ESV I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life. Ephesians 2:8-10 ESV For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, [9] not a result of works, so that no one may boast. [10] For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them. Romans 6:23 ESV For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. God bless and much love ❤️✝️

[@AdamRogers]

You may end up Russian orthodox if you keep learning.

[@GogglesOstrich]

@AdamRogers Revelation 22:12-13 ESV "Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense with me, to repay each one for what he has done. [13] I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end." John 6:47-51 ESV Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life. [48] I am the bread of life. [49] Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. [50] This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. [51] I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh." ❤️✝️

[@danksta7103]

That last part is hilarious because the skeptic is just proving the harmony of the bible overall and it's pointing to Jesus

[@PureDay]

Yeah, I initially thought it was the believer argument 😂

[@hamstergodfufurufufu8842]

The problem is that any bible disproved jesus as the promised messiah.

[@PureDay]

@@hamstergodfufurufufu8842 what? grammar?

[@hamstergodfufurufufu8842]

​@@PureDay It's intended. : )

[@PureDay]

@@hamstergodfufurufufu8842 really? Why? I can't understand what you're saying...

[@leoteng1640]

At the 24 mins mark when memorisation of text was mentioned, I can add that in ancient tradition in China, same method was used to study ancient text and to transmit to the next generation. The level of accuracy is almost 100%.

[@AlexanderTate.]

Is this the future? Listening to AI argue it out?

[@FindTheTruthBeforeTheEnd]

It’s the present.

[@Yipper64]

No this is merely an experiment. Curiosity, you know?

[@user-qy2wf2lt6v]

I have a friend, who was using chatbots in the mid 2000s. He tried to show me how close to Skynet we were back then. The chatbots were simoler LLMs that could only work a limited range of context and you had to be very careful how you were asking queations. In the around 5% of anweres that were not confusing, you would some see a rather briliant answer, which when I google, was usually some straight away from public papper. Midern LLMs have a much better handling in context - they don't need you to be exactly, and I mean 100% on point and can generate text that is quite good, but they still have their "understanding" based in some text (or series of texts more often) that basically answers the same question. You can think of LLMs as a big database with a lot of answers, that sometimes throws different answers. Yes, you can "debate", but the ussue is, that it's based of a real answer to the same or similar question and sometines it can get it wrong. That's why is important to keep track of the sources. Great tool for research, but I am afraid that way to many people will just start claiming, that "they wrote" whatever the model gave them and it will lead to some issues in the future. Then again, I might be wrong! I was just a kid at the time and my friend was tryibg to convince me, that we could have Cortana so it was a fun activity.

[@ac0454]

AI had this to say: The concept of large language models (LLMs) engaging in debates on relevant issues is a fascinating one. It suggests a future where AI could contribute to discussions on complex topics, providing diverse perspectives based on vast amounts of data. However, it's important to remember that LLMs do not possess beliefs or desires; they generate responses based on patterns in data. Therefore, any "argument" would be a simulation, designed to stimulate thought and discussion among human listeners rather than a display of genuine conviction or understanding.

[@thucyrus6512]

@JonOleksiuk I wanted to message you directly, but I couldn't figure out how to do it, so I'm just gonna post it here for all to see. Thank you so much for this. Both sides were presented so well that, honestly, neither side "won" the debate. Instead, they each provided the building blocks for a thousand conversations to come opening channels that were once closed, and changing what I consider one of the most interesting topics on planet Earth into more than just a screaming match. Whatever your beliefs are, I pray that God makes a place for you if for no other reason than what you just gave us here today. From the bottom of my heart, I thank you.

[@JonOleksiuk]

@thucyrus6512 I share your hope that these videos will spark meaningful conversations. Thank you for your kind words-I truly appreciate it.

[@thucyrus6512]

@@JonOleksiuk This still has me emotional. I think I'm experiencing what others experience when they hear opera for the first time. I thought progress like this was still YEARS out for these AI. Just hearing such clear competency from both sides with such air tight arguments that actually built on each other. This was like a verbal battle between Muhammad Ali and Joe Frazer. I honestly feel like you and yours accomplished something historic here.

Good job! I have a question: What model is doing the debate text? You say "advanced AI", but which AI?

[@Jesusdoesntgivea]

Not advanced. Just rigged. You know it. Jon knows it. He's selling his soul for clicks. I've tried to warn him. Blessed be the blind

[@JonOleksiuk]

a team of large language models. i rotate in the last models for each debate, usually using 3 per side.

[@robloxplayer2091]

A detailed approach is much better. This series is amazing! Please keep it up

[@godschild6172]

From which bible and religious perspective are they using is the question? You got different perspectives depending on one’s culture.

[@jas9friend]

If you're talking about which translation was used, largely they're quoting text from the original Koine Greek from the various extant texts (dead sea scrolls, textus receptus, Codex Sinaiticus, various papyri fragments, etc) and then translating said Koine Greek into English. If you would like a baseline, the KJV is based on the textus receptus (compiled in the 15 and 1600s) but they also reference much older texts. As for the religious perspective, they're just "Atheist" and "Christian" but the scholars they are parroting are from across the board, though they are all Western (American and Europe) as far as I know. Sources for each argument are cited in the description.

[@ThePaintExplainer]

Hey, I wanted to ask, how do you edit the videos? Is it an AI transcript? Do you put the text manually?

[@JonOleksiuk]

Hi, just checked out your channel, good work, congrats. The dialogue for these AI debates is generated by multiple LLMs which interact to revise arguments, fact-check, add footnotes, etc, before producing a final output . The text is then copied from the AI transcript manually into a graphic template i made in premiere. currently its ton of work (as you know) but i'm interesting in these topics and enjoy learning the arguments as i put it together.

[@ThePaintExplainer]

@@JonOleksiuk Oh wow, so you really do sync every text with the audio yourself, yeah that must be a ton of work! Also, how do you avoid AIs going on with their own talking points, making sure that they actually respond to each other? I'd guess it's one of the other LLMs which instructs them to do that.

[@JonOleksiuk]

correct.

[@IndependentArmz]

I woulda like to seen you ask the same about the Quaran and the rest of the books they use in there beliefs. What A.I. would say about that next to The HOLY BIBLE

[@GavMiPie]

8:24 The context of that verse actually negates the skeptics point. In Mark 15:34 the word for "my God." in koine greek is "Ἐλωΐ" which corresponds to the Aramaic word "elahi". The word in Matthew is recorded as "Ἠλί" (which more closely matches the Hebrew form used in Psalm 22, but is attested to the Aramaic "elahi" as well) Here's the cool part: In both gospels, the crowds assume that Jesus is crying out for the Prophet Elijah to save him. (Mark 15:35, Matthew 27:47) The reason is because the Aramaic word for Elijah is "Ēlīyā" The closeness of pronunciation between "Ēlīyā" and "Elāhī" is nearly lost on a koine greek speaking audience. I say nearly because the koine greek difference would've been "Eloi" and "Ēlian" Sources: (Davies, William D. and Dale C. Allison. 1997. Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to Saint Matthew. Volume III. P.624) (Williams P.J. 2004. The linguistic background to Jesus' Dereliction Cry. The New Testament in its first century setting (ed. Williams P.J., Andre D. Clarke et al.) p. 7-8.)

[@ezekieljarek7705]

It sounds like you and your team gave the answers for "AI"

[@JonOleksiuk]

no team, just me, lol. i configure the large language models to debate and then do the scoring (one shot, meaning whatever the result is, that's the score that is input) and this is done after i edit the audio together, so i really don't know how it's going to turn out. thanks for the comment.

[@thefreesoulchannel]

@@JonOleksiuk did you program this with an API? I'm Interested in the back end how you achieved this?

[@JonOleksiuk]

virtual python environment using apis and/or local models

[@gobiethabane8177]

My new favorite channel, I promise to be a forever fan just pls keep supplying these awesome debate, THERE SO GOOD!!!!! ❤

[@JonOleksiuk]

Amazing...i'm working on the next video right now. If you haven't already please subscribe and hit "All Notifications" not to miss what's coming next :)

[@MikePuorro]

The New Testament is easier to defend than the Pentateuch. I would very much like to see a debate on the Book of Genesis with literal, liberal, and skeptic perspectives.

[@lowballinn]

True, but it is mostly because quite literally almost everything is destroyed.

[@Ronaldkleine]

you don't want to throw the book of Genesis into a debate, that's scary. if you really understand what genesis means Genesis is about the 5th or 6th century before Christ and shows how we came into being, who our makers are and for what purpose.

[@MikePuorro]

@@Ronaldkleine Do you care to further illuminate? That's a pretty broad statement.

[@jovansavanovic875]

Orthodox and Protestant debate next, please? P.S, can you please make a tutorial on how to make this, please? Thank you.

[@Jesusdoesntgivea]

THIS IS BS. IT'S RIGGED. I COULD RIG IT THE RESULTS THE OTHER WAY IN SECONDS.

[@jovansavanovic875]

@@Jesusdoesntgivea What?

[@juliorivera870]

We need you to debate the 30,000 denominations and come up with on christian creed

[@sgh77]

there is a Christian creed all the main denominations agree on.

[@ThePrimusCrusader]

The creed came first.

[@ZombieChicken-X]

there arent 30k denominations lol

[@blusheep2]

There aren't 30,000 denominations. If you read the study as I have you will see that the rules created the number. Every country was considered a different denomination. So the Catholic Church had 195 denominations. So if we assumed that all denominations exist in all 195 countries then that would mean about 205 denominations. We know that not all denominations are in every country so that number is low but its nowhere near 30,000 denominations. Another thing is that it doesn't take into account theology. So you might have a "Midwest Baptist Convention" and a "Southern Baptist Convention," and these would be considered 2 different denominations even if they believed the exact same thing.

[@biblehistoryscience3530]

AI does not think. It merely regurgitates what it was fed,

[@lionheartmerrill1069]

Artificial is artificial, AI sucks in my Christian opinion

[@DiscipleJimmy]

Should we align with the argument that suggests a 99% trustworthiness in the Bible's reliability today? Or should we consider the 1% that casts doubt on its trustworthiness? Previously, I was on the side that rejected the Bible, not because of the overwhelming support for its trustworthiness, but because I did not want to acknowledge my resistance to God and the accountability that comes with it. Would you prefer to stand on a piece of wood that is 1 inch wide and 99 inches deep, or one that is 99 inches wide and 1 inch deep? A wise person would choose to stand on something sturdy, while a fool might choose to stand on something flimsy.

[@DukeEllision329]

How about you flip it around. The Bible is 1% trustworthy but you guys are so loud and adamant that the resurrection of a dude actually happened and we should disregard all common sense and common experience in favor of your world view.

[@blusheep2]

@@DukeEllision329 What about common sense would deny the resurrection? Appeals to common sense aren't good arguments.

[@DukeEllision329]

@@blusheep2 you point out a singular magical thing about this world and I’ll believe in your fairytale.

[@blusheep2]

@@DukeEllision329 What do you mean "magical?" I don't believe in magic. Who told you that I did?

[@DukeEllision329]

@@blusheep2 Anyone that believes there was an intelligence much less a supreme intelligence that existed before anything else believes in magic.

[@macsenpai7006]

Skeptic vs Islam would be interesting.

[@scottdiehl6087]

What the atheist don't get is that Jesus Christ is God and he came to fulfill Old Testament prophecy. Of course he quoted the Old Testament Jesus said when Abraham was I am in other words he was the author of The Bible, the word of GOD

[@abdula16]

Worse example you could’ve pick.

[@roadstar2504]

Circular argument.

[@MuhammadabdurrehmanJami-vz8do]

What about psalm 91 he wasn't saved from the crucifixion right ......

[@MuhammadabdurrehmanJami-vz8do]

Strange thought for 1st century jews and throughout the ages was a crucified Messiah ....

[@Real_vanGogh]

Messi vs Ronaldo next

[@AtamMardes]

♦"Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool." ♦"The delusional religious fools are cocksure and the intelligent full of doubt." ♦"Only fools revere the supernatural myths just bc a book claims itself to be the holy truth." ♦"The religious believe by the millions what only lunatics could believe on their own." ♦"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." ♦"It's difficult to free fools from the chains they revere."

[@jpgsean]

More people have been brought into the church by the kindness of real Christian love than by all the theological arguments in the world.

[@cal5887]

Jesus loves you bro 🙏🏾💯 I was “spiritual” last year. Crystals and all🔮 Now I’m a believer ✝️. Praying you find Christ too !

[@blusheep2]

Quoting little quips isn't an argument. "The fool says in his heart, 'there is no God.'" See how that works?

[@AtamMardes]

@@cal5887 Jesus & authors of Bible believed slavery is moral & even suggested how to buy, sell & beat the slaves. Modern Western laws are NOT based on Biblical values, otherwise slavery would still be a moral practice. No Bible verse explicitly says slavery is immoral & call for its abolishment. Secular thinking ended slavery after about 1800 years of Biblical values failure to do so.

[@AtamMardes]

@@blusheep2 The real fool is the one who believes & reveres the supernatural fairy tales, fictions & myths just because a book claims itself to be the holy truth.

[@riffz6065]

Idea for future idea: Existentialism vs Nihilism. Tap into the schools of philosophy please.

[@64stevebrown]

if the Bible makes true predictions, then its true.

[@januszkowalskii114]

It does. Already fulfilled over 200 predictions.

[@Stickman-studios]

Jesus predicted his death and ressurection ​@@plecology

[@ThePrimusCrusader]

@@plecology They did see his return. When he resurrected. The verses you're referring to were spoken before his death and resurrection. Matthew 16:28 (NIV) "Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom."

[@DukeEllision329]

You complete disregard the fact that people are willing to make these predictions come true or in the very least interpret them to come true. Hardly a measure for truth.

[@64stevebrown]

@@plecology Sure, here are two: Firstly, Isaiah 53. It describes Jesus and only Jesus. The oldest recovered copy of it (Dead sea scroll 1QIsa1) is carbon dated to 125 BC. That makes it a true prediction. Here's another - Daniel 9:25 predicting the timing of Messiah's arrival (see "Three Proofs of God" by James Browne) is about as conclusive as you can get.

[@kwahujakquai6726]

The problem with these silly AI debates, if you even want to consider them as such, is that nether side has any rebuttals of the others argument. They just move on to a different argument that just slightly glosses over anything the other claims.

[@cleverestx]

Yeah it's really good for getting new arguments aired, but not so great at dealing with the contents of each one.

[@plotinus393]

I will never accept mythology as history, I am not stupid enough.

[@Cipherhood]

you choose to believe in the system of government that from your birth has set you up to have nothing and no one in death the devil will try his best to convince all that God is not real yet he fails in the end. Accept Jesus Christ your Lord and savior and believe on him and seek truth for God give it abundantly. The fool says there is no God. i dont know you nor do i know your circumstance but i know surely you like me will come before the judgement seat one day and be held for all our desires actions and words. I trust in my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ that i have been saved and tho i fall and often be confused i trust that He will guide me and that God the Father does care for me and will take care of me I know you like me can be in his hands to all it takes is a little faith.

[@stevenschmidt106]

JUST READ A RED BIBLE EITHER YOU UNDERSTANDETH OR NOT

[@DaddyBooneDon]

I can see why this topic is hotly debated, since both the believer and the skeptic perspectives were rated so closely given access to the same body of information. It was also interesting that there was some favoring even in the AIs that judged the debate. It was also interesting to hear "robots" debate. Humans could take a few notes. Question: did anyone pick up on any logical fallacies?

[@adrinoo6271]

now I'm doubting about reliability of those debates using AI bcs it's designed emotionally to not hurt any side or any arguments that rely on others beliefs ,it's so much neutral to a point that we don't have any result due to this reason. i dont care if ur belief is hurt or not 1+1 iqual 2. like when i dubate chritsains and asking them about the bible is it perfect they say yes meanwhile when we go for example to 2 Chronicles 22:2 and 2 Kings 8:26 they say they stay shut.

[@Cipherhood]

what is your point why would some one stay quiet on these verses i see no issue in them

[@adrinoo6271]

@@Cipherhood did you read both of them?

[@graphixkillzzz]

calling oral traditions "flexible," doesn't make them sound like anything other than people talking to each other and trying to remember something about that conversation later on 🤔🤷‍♂️

[@Kal9222]

Could you publish your configuration methodology?

[@user-tb1ri5wc1r]

If we turned the protagonist loose, with ‘her’ understanding of our Messiah, what would that AI do ?

[@fazelok]

so really - we just need an online library of every piece of christological documents - every version of the text, in every language that has those minor differences - and some language system or AI to analyze the best possible reaction - some way to quickly - for any discernible differences across the thousands of them - an easy way to see the anger of Jesus in this version, next to the same passage, where it shows he reacted with compassion - if other translations lean more to one context or the other, probably easier to decide he probably leaned this or that way.

[@breakdancer3704]

I've had catechesis when I was a child and since then I became an atheist on the basis of a question that I could not resolve ever since. So I would appreciate if you could actually ask this AI to answer it. When confronted with the evidence that dinosaurs existed millions of years before humans-a fact supported by extensive scientific research-believers often turn to various interpretations of the biblical creation story to reconcile this disparity. However, this very need to reinterpret or adapt the Scripture to align with modern scientific discoveries raises critical questions about the veracity and reliability of the biblical narrative. How can one discern which parts of the Scripture are meant to be taken literally and which are intended as allegory or metaphor? If foundational events like the creation of the world can be reinterpreted or adapted to fit modern scientific understanding, it challenges the notion of the Bible as an immutable and divinely inspired text. This interpretative flexibility may lead to doubts about the authenticity of other biblical teachings and stories, calling into question the extent to which the Scriptures reflect objective truth or are instead shaped by the cultural and historical contexts in which they were written.

[@GagnierA]

On the topic of oral traditions and memory studies, I find it highly disingenuous to assume and compare modern day results and assume that people 2,000 years ago (or more) would've functioned the same way. It's almost as if they purposely leave out the fact that people of old ONLY had memory and oral tradition, so their recollection and transmission would've relied on accuracy. Whereas, through the ages up to modern day, as communication methods shifted away from that, of course retention/accuracy would've curved downward. It'd be like putting a city person in the middle of a jungle and expecting them to be able to survive like a tribesman...

[@markrudyi]

Wow great video! I can't wait to see a Christianity vs Mormonism belief! Keep up the awesome work Jon Oleksiuk.

[@sergioerm]

Very interesting, fantastic project. Something I had been thinking about doing myself.

[@prodbysuli5080]

Quran Only vs Traditional Islam Debate. It will be insanely controversial, but I’m tired of people claiming there’s other sources besides Gods book.

[@lemonadeandlime2277]

The AI made so many blunders on textual criticism. First and foremost Daniel B Wallace used to be a radical conservative meaning he used to believe the majority text could reconstruct the original text. Now he’s a reasoned eclectic meaning he believes the Alexandrian manuscript which is not the majority text type should allow to reconstruct the original text. The AI quotes A outdated source from Wallace. There’s so many other problems

[@iBringDaLULZ]

Would love to see you collaborate on a video about Catholicism with the guys behind Magisterium AI!

[@PittPens6866]

So glad that I'm done looking into religion wish that i could have time back that was invested in doing so

[@keithcastillo5434]

Need this for the Vedas+Bhagavad Gita for the Hindu, Dhammapada and other Siddartha Guatama words for the Buddhist, and so forth. Non believe vs each and each vs each.

[@JonOleksiuk]

thanks for the note. i've been working on one that includes the leaders of the 5 major religions, having a skeptic examine their leaders and texts.

[@keithcastillo5434]

@@JonOleksiuk I prefer only two factions per video so it is easier to see where the argument is heading. Although I will still watch the 5 religions plus the non believer skeptic video.

[@Qefyan]

The only acceptable AI content on YT.

[@ExposingFalseDoctrines]

Like to se AI inside the prophesies of Daniel or other passages. ❤

[@philosophyze]

yeah, you need to have the AI models do a intertextual analysis through the Hebrew OT Septuagint OT. Greek NT for word and phrase tracing and then use a more sophisticated analysis such as poetic patterns like chiasms and a set of rules to detect how strong a reference is and consider books such as the Decalogue as a unit that might not be strictly chronological as the book "Through the Waters" suggests that references to Exodus are present in the narrative in Genesis in a way that is not strictly quotations but more plot points included to foreshadow. I think Machine Learning could be very useful in removing emotion from scholarship analysis to clarify disagreement as a more neutral arbitrator.

[@peterkotara]

Change the title to "Large Languge Model trained using a specific data-set reacts to another Large Language Model trained using another data-set".

[@cheetoz64]

Cool debate. As an argument against the skeptic, texts containing theological and moral content doesn’t necessarily mean the content is biased - if we accept the possibility that both God (theology) is real and morality is real.

[@KasperKatje]

Morality is real, it just isn't absolute/objective and the bible shows this. God ordered and condoned slavery, misogyny, stoning gays, genoc1de and r4ping captured virgins. If morality would be absolute/objective those laws and acts should still be moral but are not. And this also shows that the claimed god can't be the standard.

[@pumaspaw]

The variance of point of view in the synoptic Gospels, is strong evidence of reliability. If there were no variance, it could easily be shown that there was actually a conspiracy of to collaborate stories. That the believers left the variance in is evidence that they weren't trying to retcon the events to perfectly synchronize them, letting differing experiences stand next to each other.

[@plankalicious]

I am really enjoying these videos. Please can you do a video where a Muslim AI and a Skeptic AI debate the authenticity of the Qur'an.

[@julianwahly3372]

So my question is why isnt there any original text??? I am not schooled in this so this might be a dumb question to some where it is common knowledge, but not to me.

[@claireoverturf8988]

The simple fact on why we don't have the original texts is because paper wears down over time and the original text is too old to have survived without having been protected intentionally. They weren't preserved by early Christians most likely due to the abundance of copies they had. Not a dumb question at all!

[@PA-1000]

The fact that we don't have the original documents is becuase they were written 2000 years ago, books and written documents from that time period did not survive for very long, because they were made of organic material so they had to be copied at rapid pace. This is not unique to the gospels or the bible.

[@coollbreezz]

No debate needed. The foundation for all religions and religious books is mythology.

[@quantumcryptographer3998]

Wrong. Jesus was real, is real. Nothing mythological about it. Prove me wrong. You got gas lit into thinking about all the various sources and origins of religions. You can do the same thing with science and math. Many maths and sciences has its origins and sources in various places throughout time. Many scientists today owe alot to Christian scientists, chemist, mathematicians, engineers etc. Many scientists today argue and disagree with each other all the time. Only some can conduct themselves with integrity and professionalism. Enough to not pretend that they have all the answers and can disprove the existence of God.

[@jakesmith5278]

What evidence?? If Christians have good evidence, there won't be over 10,000 denominations of Christian in the US alone, who disagreed on pretty much everything about their Bible. GET BETTER A.I!!

[@nsoroma_00]

It’s a fulfilled prophecy. Satan deployed a counterfeit truth. The mother of Harlots, Babylon and Her Daughters. Wanna know the true woman(church)? Read Rev 12

[@JamesSnapp]

The A.I. Believer would be eaten alive in a debate against a well-informed biological skeptic. This is reason #4,072 why A.I. should never be relied upon to do apologetics.

[@CJFCarlsson]

AI is just the sum of human mediocrity.

[@Josephthe-c3p]

hi, i am just curious if u can make an ai debate about the sabbath whether its on Saturday or changed to Sunday? i myself is interested to see the outcome, and to also see other viewpoints. appreciate it, thanks

[@JonOleksiuk]

nice, i'll add it to the list of suggestions, thanks for the note!

[@bellafangz]

I would love to hear a Gnostic vs christian ai

[@danielcooke9974]

The "be perfect/complete/mature" Context helps with interpretation

[@ad_wang]

Basically Barbasol from Jurassic Park

[@theneighborguy]

Awesome simulation. I'd love to see ai debate the authenticity of The Shroud of Turin. That would be a click magnet, I'd share it with atleast 20 people

[@philosophyze]

Machine Learning could really accelerate tribal language learning and Bible translation efforts too.

[@truehulk62]

Dude the ai did so bad, I honestly thought it would be so much better

[@hangtownranger]

The fact the we don’t have these debates about Pluto’s works just tells me the Scripture is most likely correct.

[@leoteng1640]

If the variation in textual interpretations do not contradict but give a richer understanding of the text, won’t this means consistency in the message, its reliability and authenticity.

[@Vernnan20]

Could you do something with buddhism? Like Cristhian vs Buddhist or Buddhist vs Hinduist, would be cool 😁👍

[@JonOleksiuk]

to include a video with buddhism and/or hinduism is definitely on my radar. thanks for the note.

[@Vernnan20]

@@JonOleksiuk Thank you for saying that and thanks for the response! I can't wait for those vids! Your content is awesome! 😆

[@leoteng1640]

The more convincing the argument to me at this point received a lower score. I wonder how does the scoring system work?

[@juliorivera870]

We need AI to have a new council of nicea

[@JV-un7qw]

The concept of removing emotions in order to get better judgement is a failure proven by time. Emotions is a part of human intelligence, thus removing it is like cutting one eye off to see better.

[@datdude3074]

Great work Jon ! Please do Skeptic vs Muslim, this the one everybody wants 🙏

[@QuëstionšnÅňşwęŕż]

You need to do trinity vs Jesus being the son if God alone

[@Jesusdoesntgivea]

BS. Please read other books

[@djmaydraws3862]

There’s a school of thought that teaches an Angel Christology, that Jesus is divine in the since of an high ranking Angel but still subordinate to the Father, not co-equal, co-eternal or co-substantial. Would be nice to see that and how it stacks up against a trinitarian AI

[@jl12781]

You've ignored the fact that the life of Jesus mimics that of Horus of Egypt and many other deities of the northern hemisphere. Jesus having his 12 disciples (constellations of the zodiac). His death mimics the suns apparent "death" as the winter solstice has the sun appearing to rise and fall in the same location for about 3 days and nights. (Also referred to as the death of the sun) And after this period, the sun would rise 1 degree to the north. Which was the sign of a new year. And it was also called "the birth of the sun". The stars of Orion's belt can form a line to Sirius, the star in the east, and that line will point to the approximate location on the ground where the sun will rise on December 25. The stars of Orion's belt used to be referred as "the three kings". So the three kings would follow the eastern star and find the birth of the sun. Also 2000 years ago the sun rises on December 25 out of the constellation Virgo. Hence the saying born of a virgin. Horus had the same qualities. Born of the virgin Isis on Dec 25. Had 12 followers. In fact according to the Egyptian religion, Horus would fight Set every morning and defeat him. But in the evening Set would defeat Horus. And to this day, we still call the evening sun going under the horizon, the "sunset". Jesus is nothing more than an astrological / theological hybrid. The Astrological stories had their origins before man had a system of writing. And what really gets to me is that the ancients probably knew that the stories were BS. They just had to be eccentric enough to be remembered. As folklore was how knowledge was passed through generations before we had a system of writing. Because possessing the knowledge of how to determine the time of year was paramount for survival. We needed to know when to sow seeds, when to harvest, when to gather firewood, when to hunt for meat, or when to slaughter for meat. Now once a system of writing was developed, it's not a hard stretch of the imagination that some of the first stories written would be the very stories that were told for generations. You've set this whole thing up with your bias of trying to have Christianity proven with AI. But you set the whole thing up to yield in favor of the outcome you desired. When AI becomes independent enough to ask it for it's own opinion based on all the facts. It will definitely not conclude that Christianity is true. In fact I'd love to see a world where all religions can only be read about in history books. Because when religion is finally not being practiced, this world will start to make real progress.

[@jl12781]

We are certainly lucky and should all be very grateful for this opportunity to be alive. And not just alive. Alive with conscious awareness to the point of asking existential questions. But we have to not be led astray by the snake oil of religion. Because no one can possibly know the answer to everything. Not now anyway. And if it is so important to God that he be worshipped, he would come down and show himself. I'm not sure if most Christians have fully read their bible. Because it's not a buffet of characteristics to choose from. It is the doctrine of your belief. And according to your doctrine, God is certainly not good. And honestly, if he exists and is omniscient and omnipotent, then he created man so that the majority of them would suffer agonizing torture for all eternity. I don't want to worship a god who tortures people. Honestly I don't want to have anything to do with a god if all they desired was worship. That's disgusting. And honestly why does god need worship in the first place? And everyone speaks of God's love for us. That's laughable to me. He certainly didn't love the 42 children he had 2 female bears maul to death. When all they did was laugh at Elisha and say that he had a bald head. It's in your doctrine. He freed the slaves from Egypt to suffer another 40 years in the desert. So that the generation that reached the promised land, was not the generation of people who were slaves. So they just got fucked. And how could Moses have been lost in the desert? He was raised as a prince of Egypt. I'm sure he knew very well how to navigate out of there. When you start to break everything down, it's all just a load of crap. The only true statement made by religion, which most likely comes from decent human understanding, is this: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". Or as I like to say it in a more modern way. "If you wouldn't want it done to you, don't do it to somebody else." In fact that is just a basic rule of how to live among others. We don't need a deity to determine this. Because violating this rule will have consequences. But not from God. From the people around you. Which means the consequences are real. And the most evil thing that religion does to people is this. People sacrifice their quality of life, and they do it willingly. Because they've been convinced that they'll have a better life after they die. The absurdity in that statement. "A BETTER LIFE AFTER DEATH"! That breaks our connections with others more than it solidifies them. Because we feel that it won't be the last time we see them. But if we all were just honest with ourselves and said, "I don't know what happens when we die. It's probably gonna be something like the time before we were born. So I better cherish my loved ones right now. Because this is all the time I may ever have with them." Then we might actually enjoy life and get more out of it. And be more thankful for it.

[@CaesarBlanc]

Please watch “Jesus vs Horus” by Inspiring Philosophy-it’s only about 4 minutes long. Have a great day!!!

[@goryase3144]

@antonioreid534 As a Jew, I found this debate to be interesting. I would also be interested in a debate of whether or not Jesus is Jewish messiah of the Hebrew Bible. Reposting this guy comment cuz this is an awesome idea.

[@masterplayer11122]

I think an important one to do would be a Jew vs a Christian. Two groups that believe in G-d, but have differences on who the Messiah is/was.

[@seansullivan6176]

You should throw in some funny debates like who would win a fight Jesus or Goku

[@leandrodemirandadasilva5079]

I would love to see a debate on: 1 - Is the Bible really monotheistic? 2 - Was the serpent in Eden Satan? And perhaps a more specific, but super interesting debate: 1 - Should the Book of Enoch be canonical? 2 - Is Jesus Christ a Roman invention?

[@francescoaccomando7781]

1. yes 2. yes and 1. no 2. no Maybe for debate sake probably the last one could entertain, the rest is not really matter of debate in my opinion.

[@dotdotdot7440]

Yes it's monotheistic. The father and the son are never represented as two seperate divine beings, but they are both represented as two eternal persons that are being distinctively regarded to as The Father and The Son, where this distinction comes from. If they were the same person they could be called either one. Satan is referred to as the "ancient serpent" or the serpent throughout the new testament, more specifically in revelation. So yes we can assume he was. the Book of Enoch was written way long after the bible was compiled, church fathers had already been established before it. Not to mention there is no way someone in the 1st or 2nd century knew the words of Enoch who had been long gone by that point. Not canon. Considering there are many religious teachings that include Jesus Christ as an important figure and documentation such as the new testament and letters written to other church fathers discussing these matters, it's hard to deny that Jesus was a real person. It would be strange if he wasn't.

[@charzemc]

If the events in the bible are real, I would be horrified. In Genesis alone, 'god' uses magic to create the universe, but christians say witches & engaging in the craft is evil. Then 'god creates a beautiful garden, creates & places 2 newborns in it, gives them a rule not to touch a certain tree & doesn't tell them why. When they violate that rule does 'god' show compassion or turn the other cheek, NO but dains to preach such things. Then 'god' tosses these new borns out of the only home they have ever known & posts guards with flaming swords to guard the gate so they can never re-enter. This of course leads the 2 newborns to populate the earth without any parenting or guidance whatsoever & since they are the only 2 humans on the planet, interbreeding is inevitable. Does that sound like a benevolent being ?? Not by my standards. And all that is just in genesis. The bible is a book of contradictions, lies & hypocrisy & if that is how we are supposed to model our behaviour on, I would have to say, most people are not evil enough to meet the standards set out in genesis, let alone the rest of the book.

[@Cipherhood]

and by what standards do you i or any other person on earth today get to think we can judge or decide what God did was right or wrong we are not gods the serpent lies. God is good. Your Lord and savior is Jesus Christ.

[@maxalaintwo3578]

If the Bible is true, then it’s the Bible that gets the privilege to call us evil, not the other way around. You can’t simply say it’s not true because you don’t like it

[@clark5363]

This is EXACTLY what the early councils were like. I'm sure. 😂😂

[@OtterFlys]

The AI seems to be giving points to the skeptic for repetition of the same argument over and over. Repetition adds nothing to the argument. the skeptic resorts to the inability to prove miracles as a reason to doubt the reliability of the account. This is not the question of the debate as I understand it and therefore, a cheap diversionary tactic. I'd give points off for that.

[@Frakka475]

We are discussing the result and not the processes of the analysis. I’ve used AI to help analyse biological data and the results depend upon the education or educative sets assimilated by the AI. A heavy numerical sample bias one way or another will affect the outcomes. The shear quantity of literature written in the last two millennia and the commentaries written and appearing in the on line literature numerically will out way the incidence of publications refuting or contesting it. The fact that each AI is coming out with different conclusions on different questions could well reflect sample bias so any results must always be viewed in context and limitations acknowledged when evaluating interpretation. We must also know a great deal about the weighting and adjustment of algorithms applied. At present we must be careful when seeking categorical answers to certain questions. As systems improve perhaps we may move towards consensus outcome from numerous AIs. This is particularly true when we are considering outcomes based on philosophical suppositions.

[@jenschristiansen9490]

Pliny the Elder is silent about Jesus and Christianity, and he was alive, when the events should have taken place.

[@jacksonogburn1782]

Hey I know there's like 500 comments on this already, but please put somewhere in your future playlist one of these AI debates but make it between a skeptic / atheist versus a Christian on what happened to Jesus and why did his gospel spread or alternatively is the resurrection true or an alternative? The reason I sync this would be a good debate is because I believe you are a Christian from the videos I have seen on your channel and hopefully you know as well as I do any other alternative hypothesis for the erection is completely failing compared to the truth that Jesus rose from the dead.

[@WriteTrax]

This is such a cool idea for using AI very creative

[@JonOleksiuk]

thanks for the note... and consider subscribing not to miss the next ones :)

[@Jesusdoesntgivea]

@@JonOleksiuk Jon... He's being sarcastic. You poor, poor soul. EVERYONE PLEASE SAY A PRAYER FOR JON. EACH ONE OF THESE SORT OF POSTS IS SIMPLY A TRADE FOR HIS SOUL AND.... I'M GETTING WORRIED HE"LL GO TO HELL IF HE KEEPS THIS UP *JUST KIDDING. FUN FACT. THERE'S NO HELL. THE BIG FELLA UP STAIRS JUST... he just had a bad day, and like many of us when we have a bad day we sometimes say or do things that we later regret.

[@Ordinal_Yoda]

If you like this Idea. It would be cool to have a debate between the Quran (From it's Arabic Form Only) and Islam's Dawah Team.