peeps we've got another interesting discussion tonight we have a tag team discussion on is christianity true first I just want to thank everybody for showing up all the debaters also want to thank also want to thank everybody who's in the live chat so we're getting off to a little bit of late start has technical difficulties let me know in the live chat how the audio and everything is and we're gonna go ahead and get started the first I just want to say let's keep it friendly in the chat and let's all be thankful that we're here and and just keep it to a friendly conversation we're gonna start off with the Christian side I guess music analyst are you gonna roll first or Jay we can go with Jay first what is a J hello yeah I'm perfectly fine I thought absolutely okay all right sounds good you guys go ahead and kick it off five to six minute openings all right and go ahead and let me know how do you end up being a little bit long-winded at all I'll definitely try to make sure that doesn't happen but nonetheless thank you guys obviously for having me here obviously always love being a part of modern database events so just want to go ahead and thank you guys for that and also thank you to the opponents as well as my teammate here always fun so I want to go ahead and be brief with this because the topic itself is Christianity true to me sounds relatively vague I'm sure a lot of people would probably agree so I kind of wanted to narrow down what exactly would it mean for Christianity to be true just in a blanket way and I think there's really free things you could boil it down to although there's certainly lots of other things you want to add to this number one that God exists number two that Jesus is indeed that God and number three that that's that person Jesus resurrected from the dead after being crucified dying for human sin I gotta be kind of brief with this because these are there's a lot of you know arguments that go into each one of these individual points so I'm not really gonna go into them so much I'm gonna kind of wait to see which one of them actually gets challenged in the cross-examination and just tell you what I believe they are so arguments for the existence of God are the moral argument namely God is the only explanation for the fact of objective morality the second one is the argument from creation argument is the God rather is the only explanation for the beginning of the universe and the time and space and all those sorts of things itself and the third one is the argument from complexity God is the only explanation and my only explanation by the way I mean only rational explanation and of course that's in my own personal opinion but we'll obviously get cross-examination there argument from complexity God is the only explanation for the complexity of creation things like the Kalam cosmological argument fine-tuning irreducible complexity and so forth the second point Jesus is God I would give the prophetic argument namely there is correct correct excuse me and explicit prophecy by and about Jesus number two I would give a scriptural argument named namely that Jesus fulfills the qualifications for Old Testament Messiah and number three I would give the arguments form from his resurrection which of course in and of itself is the third point so let's just go straight to that the resurrection I would argue that we know because a of reliable eyewitness account be of extreme zealotry on the point of those eyewitnesses to the point of being even being willing to be tortured to death and number three and I think the most obvious explanation and I obvious explanation but obvious evidence rather in arguing for the resurrection is an empty tomb interestingly enough the New Testament the Talmud and all of the pagan scholars who try to argue about a body that we actually have on record they never actually argue that there's a body in the tomb of Christ they all actually agree the tomb was empty they just typically say something along the lines of a disciple soul or something you know similar to that which means that at least according to the people at that time there was definitely an empty tomb now how exactly did that happen of course that's going to be something we want to get into more in the discussion here but I would argue that is another evidence for the resurrection now I do want to kind of use what's left of my time to argue a little bit more for the resurrection because I think the resurrection of itself kind of implies the other two arguments right the resurrection kind of implies there's something divine about Jesus and if there's something divine about Jesus then obviously there exists a divine so the first thing I want to point out is the eyewitness accounts a lot of people say there is no eyewitness accounts and these accounts were written hundreds of years later and so on and so forth this is actually incredibly far from the truth the traditional understanding is that there are 27 books in the New Testament of course that's just a statement of fact eight authors in those to a pen rather those 27 books five of which we would count as eyewitnesses those would be Matthew and John two of the biographical writers as well as Peter James and Jude the other three which would be Mark Luke and Paul would not be eyewitnesses but would still be relatively close to the event in question the traditional understanding of these texts is that they were all written before the year 65 in fact Matthew is dated by virtually everybody before the 1800s to be written within a decade of Jesus Christ crucifixion and every single one of these people ended up going to their brutal and terrible death for what they had penned so it's not like if they were concocting some lie it's not like they were concocting a lie that gave them riches and babes and lots of drugs and all this other kind of crazy stuff in reality what it got them is terribly persecuted stone to death skin to lie have crucified so on and so forth right so bare minimum we know for a fact they definitely believed these things that they were pending and the evidence does seem to suggest that they penned them relatively quickly and had in fact seen the events for themselves I would point out quickly that when we say you know the zealotry of these men it's literally every single one of them the only person who was a disciple was not actually executed was John and John was said to have been the tradition is that he was they tried to execute him for some reason or another didn't work and they exiled him to the island of Patmos right nonetheless the point being you know every single one of these guys said I definitely saw this so we can rule out hallucination because you don't there's no such thing as a mass hallucination right and every single one of them said not only that but I am willing to die in the most horrible way possible for this so we definitely know that they believed it right they believe it there can't be hallucination and they're claiming to be eyewitnesses of the thing that they believe I think that's pretty solid evidence when you couple it with the fact that there is indeed an empty tomb and especially considering the fact that there was a lot of people who were not believers initially who then came to become believers for example Paul was a Pharisee and was a horrible persecutor of Christians on the traditional dating for his conversion is 37 Jesus's crucifixion would be 33 so that's four years of literally slaughtering Christians and then he ends up having a change of heart because he believes he sees a vision James who is literally the brother of Jesus this is his own flesh and blood right was not a believer before the crucifixion and yet after the crucifixion not only is he a believer but he is one of the few biblical characters who you know are kind of small scale because of course the big scale ones are mentioned all throughout those excuse me historical record he's one of the few small scale figures in the Bible that we actually have extra biblical sources for he ends up being the leader of the Jerusalem church and so on and so forth and so for those reasons I would argue and you know want to kind of concede some time to give some time your music analyst to make sure that we have more room for discussion but for those reasons I would argue that it's reasonable to assume that the resurrection stories are true that they did happen and that indeed Jesus is divine as evidenced by his resurrection from the dead all right thanks so much for that kick it over to music analyst okay I'll just say this I come from a very different place I used to be an atheist for 10 years or you know my 20s I used to be a pure atheist I was I was like these religions is just to you know it caused division and wars and this that the other and also I've also seen a bunch of fake preachers like God loves money and you love God therefore give money to God so I saw a bunch of those preachers and I was like fuck that shit I don't think God exists I don't think anything exists until I came to my fucking senses which I did a couple of years ago and now I'm wearing a cross now I don't know if everything in the Bible is 100% true I don't know if the devil or whatever has tampered with it or you know done something I don't know but I do know now that there certainly is a devil out there like it's it's almost confirmed like you see it in the music industry you see it in the movie industry you see it everywhere you see it in the in the way humanity is today because everybody is so fucking into themselves what is that that's negative negative ego which is me me me me me me fuck everything else you know me me me me me and that you can translate to being like the devil okay but I have some I have some small little pictures I want to share can I just share the screen right here I guess right can I just share one sec whole disabled participant screen sharing okay I'm not sure why it's not when you uh share your screen uh must be in the settings like allow every participant okay yes now okay do we see this now yes should be able to see that uh let me know when you see that whatever it is you see that okay what this is okay I'm not a no you know mathematical uh expert but this is the golden ratio and this is a thing that is in nature like it's in in like snails shells and flowers this that the other so what it is it's a mathematical equation that is like one plus one equals two and then you take the two and add one to it you get three then you get then you do three plus two then you get five and then you take five plus three and then you get eight and so on on and on it goes it is in like in all of these uh complex symmetric things I don't know what they call fractal fractals maybe yeah those endless things anyway so this is like basically in the in nature of our reality okay and what's interesting about the golden ratio is that uh the equation is not random there is some intelligent thought that has made it so that it's like one plus one equals two then you take two and the previous one and you get three and then you take three and the previous two and you get five so there is some some intelligent being making the equation work like this and it's not just random it's not like one plus nine minus three you know so it's something intelligence has has made this that's one uh one indication for me that there is an intelligent uh being uh creating this place but also again just like a video game game programmer and needs to be coding a video game the same goes with reality there needs to be a coder for this reality this shit ain't random this is complex shit in fact it's much more complex than any video game it's like one billion time more complex and yet people think it's random like the big bang the big bang's a bunch of nonsense by the way uh okay and also the golden ratio is a rectangle as you can see here okay this is a rectangle and in it you got the golden ratio you also have it in the piano roll the piano i'm a composer and a singer my music is my thing obviously music and anyways uh even in the piano do you see the piano maybe i don't know if you do uh you can see the the the rectangle of the golden ratio uh in this piano roll uh so and then it just loops you know you get the same you only have 12 keys on a keyboard and then you get the same repeating shit just like the golden ratio and quickly i just want to go into uh sarn which is the scientist right sarn is a uh scientific place in switzerland that they're the colliding i don't know what the hell they're colliding molecules i don't know what the hell it is anyways so they're they're supposed to be not religious right yet what do they have as a statue outside of the building they got the shiva statue okay the siva statue which is the what is it the god of destruction or something and here you have the who you know how the who is what do they have the shiva statue in the meetings okay but let's move on let's move on here we have the devils uh or satan statue in some court and i don't know where where it is uh anyways like that let's move on uh oh yeah there was a there was a ceremony for this uh what is it called i don't know what it's called in switzerland the sarn project they held held this fucking weird satanic ceremony over there let me just quick i don't want to make it too long uh let me just show you this thing doesn't let me get to the tabs all right can i just minimize that shit it doesn't let me take it there weird oh yeah then you got the pope you got the pope do you still see the screen sharing by the way i don't you don't you don't see the screen sharing anymore yeah you're screen sharing okay fuck it anyways the pope has a bunch of weird you can check it out just type the pope and some demon statue behind him in the in the building in the in the church or whatever and the building itself is like modeled like a like a reptile snake so what's going on there he's supposed to be christian right but he got he got these devilish things behind him and the whole building is a snake anyways anyways i'm done so off to jared or jimmy right got a lot of jays here jared jimmy jay okay thanks so much for that music again else we'll kick it on thank you jimmy or jared which one would like to get first i'll go first um and yes there are a lot of jimmies this evening um in fact if we have one more we could change the name to the night of thousand gins um so yes i am jimmy winburn um i uh hold on let me get my text up here um and yes i do know it's a boy's name um i am a writer artist engineer you know you're typical everyday ubermensch uh in fact i'm calling tonight from my combination writing desk slash art studio slash secret laboratory um i am retired now but i was a software engineer uh for most of my life uh and most of that my career was in uh space sciences i tell people that there wasn't a lot of money in it but while i was there i got to say well yes as a matter of fact i am a rocket scientist um these days when i'm not playing mountain blade uh i work on a red comic called uh romana three the shameless plug looked for the link in uh to believe me um and so let me go on with the with the actual statement here now um as cj mentioned the the question is christianity true it strikes me as a little bit odd uh mostly because christianity is a noun and we don't usually describe a thing as uh something that can be either it's a thing that could be either true or false i mean the question uh is an apple true would strike us a bit odd too unless of course we were on acid um but the question makes more sense if we see christianity not as a thing but as a collection of statements you know statements like as cj said uh god exists um uh jesus is that god um he died he was born and died and was resurrected that sort of thing these are the claims that we can assign a truth to you too but then we need to decide how those statements interact with each other do they all have to be true for christianity to be true uh or do just most of them have to be true um also i i have to say this is the time of the day when uh my voice kind of disappears and uh i apologize that um winnie the pooh will be philosophizing tonight oh bother um so anyway uh science works on the principle that uh models only have to be mostly true to be uh useful a perfect example of this is the theory of universal gravitation when newton developed this model uh people thought it was a wonder and finally someone came along who explained celestial mechanics and it stood unchallenged for 200 years until somebody noticed that the orbit of mercury around the sun didn't quite match up with universal gravitation and it took einstein to come along and explain these oddities oddities oddities um if anything had gotten push forward with that at all i do not i do not know about that honestly uh sorry sorry to the audience i'm not sure it looks like the uh i don't know it looked like we got kicked from zoom uh so what we're gonna do is we're gonna start back up with uh stream yards but we're waiting on jimmy to come back in here so so sorry about gotta pay the zoom bill about the technical difficulties um if uh jared if you could uh send jimmy the uh link again i've already seen it hurts uh and if jared if you wanted to go ahead and start while we're waiting um after you send that link um for your side that way we can uh go ahead and get back on track here yep and here send that and hopefully that'll go hey can you guys hear yeah yes okay yeah i can hear everyone hear me yeah yeah i think we gotta hear each other i guess it's just them that can't hear us okay good to go okay so i can go go um i will be presenting the argument today that christianity cannot be true because i am in fact the one through god despite appearances i am indeed the fine creator of the world and full opinion of all reality christianity is a false religion i implanted into history and i have decided to reveal this today within this debate i seek no followers nor do i wish to tell you how to live i am humble god who simply wishes to appear to you now in this format so that you privileged for you may know the truth now i know you will be skeptical so i have been seen fit to orchestrate an alternate argument conveyed through my debate partner so that you may come to this truth in the manner most comfortable to your tiny human minds and the effect that someone else appears claiming to be god during this time do not be swayed by children is a test of faith also if the opposing side makes any particularly strong arguments this too is a test of faith and you will be rewarded in your next life if you hold strong through these trials i do not test you out of malice but out of love or i know you can overcome them and see the truth if you're willing to give yourself over to it all right is that all you all you have for your opening that's good with me if that's all you got uh all right it looks like jimmy's back so i'm gonna add jimmy and go ahead and uh sorry about that go ahead and uh finish your your opening today jimmy oh so so we're we're uh we're we're back all together yeah okay hold on um okay uh anyway it took it took einstein to explain these audio odd oddities mostly with mercury enjoy the silence i don't okay can any can anyone hear me yes but no yes hold on oh i'm sorry okay uh so i'm i'm good to go yes i'm sorry i had some background things okay so um and it took einstein to explain the oddities of the uh orbit of mercury and when he came up with a general relativity but even though uh but now that we know the gravitation is universal gravitation is not the complete answer does that mean that it's false or no use far from it as long as you're not dealing with the kind of gravitational fields that mercury experiences universal gravitation works perfectly well um it's still used to predict uh eclipses uh guide robots to mars and for you know curable space program um christianity though doesn't function that way even christians themselves tell you that the bible is the inerrant word of god the foundation of their faith is that the bible is absolutely true not even one error can be discovered or the whole system crumbles um but that leads to a problem some of the claims of the bible aren't just wrong they are spectacularly wrong uh in particular um in revelations 613 uh and it shows up in other places too but in this in revelation it says that in the last days the stars in the sky will fall to earth and so the christians will have to say something well yes the stars can't fall to earth da but passages like that are not supposed to be taken literally the bible can't be wrong so those passages have to be taken figuratively so even though the people that wrote the bible couldn't have known that the stars uh couldn't just fall to earth scholars will go to great length to show that that's actually what they meant um then that that passage has to be taken figuratively uh they will show that the words can be interpreted figuratively and if it can be interpreted that way then that must be the correct interpretation because of course the bible can't be wrong um montee mills in revelations an exegesial study in the revelation of john says that talks about how other people explain this passage by saying well some believe that these stars refer to fallen angels uh he concludes with his own interpretation that it seems best to understand these as asteroids or meteors um the problem here is that christians just assume that a verse is to be taken uh literally until science or whatever shows that it can't be then they will shift gears and try to explain how it can be figured it a good example of this of this process was the roman catholic church take on evolution there was a time when everyone just assumed that genesis describes how god created all life on earth uh then darwin at all comes along and shows how the origin of species can be explained by natural causes the church fought against this idea for years until they finally conceded and proclaimed that yes god created the world but the evolution explains how he did it yeah genesis should not be taken literally it's obviously just poetry um and that's a direct quote from father burns from my catholic thought class and i have no idea why i did that in a very bad very absent um especially because he was from iowa um but this but this recasting of passage is a figure uh when the need arises is essentially saying the bible is absolutely true except when it isn't but even then it's still absolutely true faith is saved um this is essentially a god of the gaps argument um as human knowledge increases more and more the bible has to be seen as figurative and god becomes smaller and smaller and that's a horrible argument for saying that christianity is true it's too easy thank you all right thanks so much for that uh we'll kick it over back to the christian side to open up the live chat okay let me just say you talked about gravity first first of all it's not it's a theory gravity is a theory they have not said that they know exactly how it works it's a theory you know what i believe right now right now i used to believe the ball thing you know everything that goes with it the space and all that nonsense now i don't now i know the sky is the limit literally there's this is like a simulation up there is a limit the sky is the limit it's not just a thing you say it's literally the limit up there anyways anyways i just want to quickly put this in i just want to quickly put this in the whole big bang theory is a bunch of nonsense it's a it's fantasy story period yeah it was like uh yes continue yeah i did it huh i did that jerry jerry better i did it um okay okay jerry's jerry's god so um okay no nobody's god only god um okay uh go on you said that it that it's ridiculous why why do you need nonsense completely nonsense you know why they say first there was nothing okay there was nothing the endless nothingness they say okay forever nothingness but something decided to ignite and spark this whole thing and out of that explosion millions and billions of years ago who by the way who who who who uh measured that who was there like this was 65 billion years ago anyways science is the new religion let me just put that in science is the new religion without being a religion like people worship science i'm not saying science is wrong but i think science is hijacked uh by these demonic things they've hijacked science and everybody uh you know that believes in science they don't know that they are becoming religious themselves because they don't see it as a religion but anyways so first it was endless nothingness then an explosion came and then uh after millions of millions of years the the planets came and this that whatever that's just to that's just to make you think you're you're nothing you know they want to make you think this is all random that there is no god you're trapped on this little ball that is just insignificant in the endless vast space okay everything is pointless everything's just spinning and there is no real meaning okay but now i'm not saying the earth is flat but if it is it proves that there is a god because if this is a special place created by the the architect of this reality then that proves there is a god but they want you to believe that everything is just random it came from nothing and then you only get one life and then what happens if you die you get back to the endless nothingness but there's a problem with that you have to be conscious to be able to realize that you died and now have entered endless nothingness you know that they say they say you only have one life that's bullshit there is more evidence talking that we are endless souls that live on we just change vehicles like the body is a vehicle it's just like a fucking video game you choose a character and when you're done with that you go on to the next character and on and on it goes forever anyways i don't want to talk too much uh jay or what was it jerry that's jimmy right yeah just unmute your mic whenever you want to talk uh and if you would mute your mic um when other people are talking because i think there's an echo uh and the audience is saying oh you're talking to me for everybody uh okay the audience is saying there's a kind of an echo so i was okay okay i'm muted yes good i think i've established my point pretty well so far did anyone have anything they wanted to ask god no jimmy you need to unmute your mic all right i got mine unmuted at the moment um was jimmy were you trying to make a point jimmy oh okay um there there was a lot of different points that that that you made music analysts um and it's hard to unpack for lack of a better term everything that you said and i'm not exactly sure how that relates to the uh uh the question of how christianity uh is true um even if you could use the uh existence or non-existence of the of the big bang to show that um some kind of god exists which i don't think you can um how would that show that the christian god is real and that christianity is true listen i don't care which god is true i only care about one god maybe you know when it comes to this topic right here we're here to prove christianity is is true or not but i'm talking about god in general i don't care which religion it is there is only one god one there can be only one that's it so uh even though it's not exactly the topic it's still related because we we need to we we're talking about if there is a god or not an architect or not do you think this is just random um do you just think this is an accident i just wanted to jump in um the the arguments that you made before they don't uh i don't believe they really apply to the the idea that there's only one god they're they're mostly arguments for a god but how would they prove that there's only one yeah listen uh they they can be only one god when you say god that's incorrect you know why because the meaning of the word god means the mightiest of them all so if there are several gods that means uh they're all kind of equal ish you know there there's no god maybe and what would be wrong maybe the god was a lot would be wrong with that because there can be only one all mightiest god because if you have no i'll kind of want to jump in here for a minute because there's a couple things that need to be kind of stated so um first and foremost um a god is simply a being of worship technically speaking um a god can be literally i mean anything it can be a rock um you know what i mean so i i do just want to briefly point that out now what i would certainly say is i think logically if you look at things through a philosophical lens and many philosophers who had no uh reference to to the bible of the Hebrews whatsoever actually did come to the same conclusion there does have to be a a first cause right an uncaused first cause or an unmoved mover um as Aristotle would put it and the reasons i think are quite simple so first off we do know that everything that exists comes into being at some point in time and when it comes into being at some point in time it comes into being as a result of some cause but at the same time we also know logically from things you know for example numbers numbers start at one they don't go infinitely both ways negativity is a construct of human imagination right there it can in reality be one stick but negative one stick does not exist so we know that everything starts from the beginning and can go infinitely in one direction hypothetically but not the other right we know things are caused they're they have to be caused by something and yet at the same time it does have to start somewhere so one of these cause causes right at some point has to be uncaused and if you think about some of the things which are caused that makes makes a lot of sense for example if matter is caused then its cause by definition must be a material if time is caused then it must by definition be timeless um if space is caused then whatever uh created the space obviously needs to be something that doesn't necessarily occupy space in the way that you might consider it um and this has been something that has been widely accepted amongst philosophers all throughout uh cultures because it's something that's inevitably I think logically true now that doesn't make a jump necessarily to Christianity which is part of the reason why I wanted to focus a little bit more on the resurrection but I do think they are very solid arguments to prove bare minimum um that there is that there has to be some sort of uh uncaused first cause that created everything because like I said it would just be inherent in some of the definitions to create time you must be timeless so on and so forth um another thing though that I would want to point out here is um as far as you know the argument for today whether or not um whether or not Christianity is true right I think that it can be inferred logically that if Jesus resurrected from the dead that he is God and of course if he is God then there must be a God um I think this can be inferred logically because that is the claim Jesus made about himself and if he is you know uh providing some sort of a miracle like resurrection from the dead or something like that that would be the evidence he is putting forward to people to show them hey look I am indeed God right um so what is the evidence that we can put forward for the resurrection happening well like I said we have eight different writers from the Bible all writing before the year 100 as well as five extra biblical writers who are writing before the year 100 who affirmed the Christian faith um to go through those very briefly so out of the eight we have four potentially three but there's a little bit of an argument on one of them but I'll get to that in a second uh disciples of Jesus himself we have Matthew we have John also known as the beloved disciple we have Peter who is considered by uh Catholics and so on to be the prince of the apostles and we have Jude the question with Jude is he may actually be a brother of Jesus he may actually be one of the twelve disciples he may also be both there's a little bit of debate amongst conservative circles about that and then you have James who is actually the brother of Jesus and then three others Luke who claims to be a historian and is doing the in actual historical biography Mark who's getting the record from uh Peter and then Paul who claims to have visions that's eight separate writers and 27 separate books before the year 100 then we also have writings from Barnabas who's mentioned explicitly in the um in the letters of Paul as is Clement of Rome another person who we have existing record from um in the case of both of them we have one existing record uh we also have record existing from both Ignatius of Antioch and Polycarp both of them knew and indeed were taught by John personally one of the people who wrote uh first through third John Revelation and the Gospel of John and by virtue of the historian in Eusebius we actually have the writings of a third pupil of John whose name is Papias and all 13 of those uh sources come before the year 100 and that's not even including some other sources that come before the year 100 like Josephus or Thalus or so on and so forth so in other words there is substantial evidence very very soon that bare minimum this person was seen by some to be dead and then alive later right now your explanation for that can be you know obviously different than mine and will hopefully be able to get into the nuances of that but bare minimum there are there is a collection of people who can not only confirm Jesus existed but whether few visions or physically say that they saw the man he was dead and now at this point he is alive and I think that that is pretty solid evidence considering the fact that there is not a single historical figure you could give me before the year 1000 AD with 13 separate independent sources backing him up there's not one and that's just a simple matter of fact right when we come to the when we were actually talking about the preservation of history Jesus is easily the most well preserved historical figure of the first 3000 years of recorded human history or 4000 years depending on when you pin that date of you know the first recorded human incident as but nonetheless the point being right there's no one who comes even close to 13 plus sources within a hundred year time span um so I would like to see what some of the arguments against uh that uh argument there is okay basically what you are saying is that there are these books that are written um that say that christ was such and such and the god and all that but that's it they're just books I mean how is that different from Jared here um saying that he's god uh it's different for a couple of reasons actually and um I would like to point out that while I do certainly understand the point and I understand that your argument here is not to be disingenuous in any way I think if we look at the at the evidence objectively it certainly does come off as a little bit disingenuous let me kind of explain why um so first and foremost when we see you know let's say hypothetically speaking that somebody a thousand years from now sees this video and they end up you know obviously um using it as an argument for Jared being god right let's just say hypothetically that that happens right well first off it's only Jared actually claiming that Jared is god one of the unique things about the new testament is at least in the case of those five eyewitnesses those people are actually claiming that they saw Jesus die physically and then saw him physically risen from the dead and then those people proceeded to be tortured to death for that belief which I think is a significantly different thing it's not only other people and multiple people but it's also people making a very specific claim no I watched this person he died he definitely positively absolutely died and he was in a tomb for multiple days and then I saw him alive again physically speaking to the point where I could put my finger in the holes as we see in the book of John chapter 20 verse 28 right um so I mean I think that's a significantly different claim than just oh well I think I'm god well okay well do you have any followers who claim to have seen your miracles can you perform a miracle for me today you know it's interesting there's not a single opponent of Jesus from his time whoever said he could not work miracles there were people who said he was a witch there were people who said he was some sort of an evil sorcerer there were people who said that he was a son of satan not a single person has ever recorded saying he couldn't work miracles why is that I posit to you that it's because they couldn't they knew he worked miracles they sought for themselves um and I think that's a significantly different claim than just you know well hey I'm saying that I'm god today well there's just a difference go ahead can I sure yeah um your argument mostly um applies to the fact that there are there's a popularity in a religious fervor around Jesus it doesn't necessarily prove that he is god um and the the inverse of that would be that if god were to exist and no one believed him that he would not actually be god um I can be god and not necessarily have anyone believe that that is not actually a component that's required um also when we're talking about uh testimony from witnesses uh there is a long history of eye witness testimony not being entirely um you know reliable um and also you know especially if you have a vested interest not just you know for for personal gain but a religious you know uh belief that you want to maintain it's entirely possible that you could um be persuaded to believe something that you saw was priced when it was just perhaps a similar person uh there may be a figure that um simply resembled christ and then took on the mantle post uh when he is supposed to have been resurrected uh it's entirely possible that you know it's a double act of just someone coming along claiming the mantle of jesus and you know uh the uh apostles needing to have a belief to to stand for buying into that and people who have not personally seen jesus only heard description of him seeing a a man with long hair and just deciding that that is the christ resurrected all right so I think there's a couple points that I would want to kind of point on there so the first one just to be clear in my argument I am not saying that popularity is what proves that you are god what I am saying is that if you come to me claiming that you are god and you've never you know done anything that would indicate to me that you are god right that is different than say jimmy comes to me and say no you don't understand I watched jared walk on water with my own two eyes right bare minimum right now I'm having somebody whereas you could easily be making it up there's a very very high chance that if jimmy doesn't know you personally and doesn't have any sort of a vendetta right or agenda that he's probably not making that up now potentially there could be another argument as to why that occurred or maybe he was not for illusion or something along those lines right but my point in saying that is any old cult leader you know egotistical narcissistic thug can show up and say hey I am god right and of course anybody trying to make a point can say I am god and any comedic actor can say I am god and so on and so forth literally anybody can say I am god that's perfectly fine but it's different for somebody to actually show up and genuinely believe this person is god say no I watched this happen with my own two eyes and by the way not only that but you're going to throw me to the lions for it and I'm perfectly fine with that because here's the thing I saw that happen and you're not going to convince me otherwise right I mean that's a that's a significantly different thing than just popularity or then somebody just self claiming right it's just to give an example right we know for a fact al qaeda believes islam right would you not agree that it's a completely different thing for al qaeda to say I believe islam 1400 years later and al qaeda to say I believe islam and I walked with Muhammad and I watched him levitate and I watched the moon be split and so on and so forth bare minimum you know that the guy in the latter example not only firmly believes it but also has been convinced using his reasoning ability whether or not that reason is flawed we can get to that but he definitely believes by virtue of reasoning not hearsay or anything like that by virtue of his own experience right that this person is divine in some way I mean I we would have to agree that that's different it's just simply not the same right a couple of points the one point that you bring up about the apostles being tortured for their beliefs as as evidence of god as I study history I am amazed at the number of truly stupid ideas that people will devote themselves to sometimes even to the point of martyrdom and the corollary to that the stupider the idea the more likely they are to be to get violent when those when those beliefs are challenged so the fact that the apostles allow themselves to be tortured for the beliefs really is not all that convincing well so because I want to point something out real quick because the response is not necessarily geared towards what I said and it's a slight distinction but it's very important bare minimum would you agree that the disciples tortured for their belief indicate strongly that they believed it was true I would be I guess I would believe that if those the books or the the gospels were written by the people that they say they were written by that those people would definitely believe what they say how do we know that the the the writings by the apostles are firsthand and not claiming to be the apostles well so I will get to that in a second but I just want to follow up really quick with this point that I'm trying to get out here with Jimmy because my question then is since we can agree because it's pretty obvious right that they definitely believed that right why is then my immediate question what causes a person who has been around this person for years on end now three years at least right living with him day in and day out to say I saw this man physically dead and then 40 days of his resurrected body I hung out with him physically resurrected what causes an entire group of people including people who did not previously believe like James to believe something like that I mean that would have to be a pretty extreme event don't you think um oh okay one other thing um it's actually she it's not he um did I say I apologize I did mean she because oh okay all right um you may have said you may have said she had that my brain sometimes mishears things um you are still going along with the idea that these uh these books uh going with the gospel are firsthand uh accounts um and the general um consensus is that uh none of them were in fact the earliest uh books that we have of uh of anything in the New Testament are the uh are the epistles of Paul and Paul says very plainly that he was not a uh um a first hand uh witness to Jesus he said he had a vision of Jesus let me let me just interject here listen there's no point in wasting time here like Jay they won't believe that the Bible is real and you won't believe that what they're saying is real so let me just ask uh Jimmy and Jared right why don't you believe in God forget about religion forget about anything why don't you believe in God that's what I'm interested in we can go back and forth arguing this you won't believe Jay and he won't believe you so why don't you believe in God I want to hear from both of you why give me a good fucking reason why you don't believe in God that's about that's what I want there are various um things about the New Testament and the Old Testament that I find very troubling um people don't even take that into it why don't you know God doesn't have to be connected to any religion just think about is there a creator or not forget about the New Testament Old Testament is that whatever is there a God or not and if not why why don't you believe there's a God um you I think you I think you are miss okay um yes um yeah um I think you're I think you are misunderstanding uh I am not a Christian but that doesn't mean that I'm not religious uh I actually consider myself very religious I am a Wiccan uh and so um I uh posit a posit a God but uh that God is is definitely female okay so you believe in God yeah well the God is yes a God whatever care what gender it has I mean that's true why why would it have a gender is it dating somebody over there what is going on is it mating in the realm of God she's dating me um uh that's what you want you want to date God that's what you want to do not only do I want to I have you better step up your game you know yeah well no regular woman you're talking about that that that that that that deity has a serious seriously sweet ass um so you tried to fuck God is that what you're saying oh I fuck I fuck God regularly how dare you try gotta just steer the conversation back a little bit just because it's not deism right it is Christianity um 10 whilst I certainly would be interested in an argument for deism or theism I think that you know Christianity is the specific thing that's a question here now you mentioned an excellent point which is sure I might posit what sort of crazy thing that would possibly make these people believe it but who says that it's written by eyewitnesses anyway um and there are multiple things that I would have to point out with that first off you say the scholarly consensus is currently that they are uh that these books were not written by eyewitnesses um I just need to be blunt I the scholarly consensus is wrong it doesn't make any sense and if you use the modern techniques that are used to say that the biblical writers didn't in fact write the bible you cannot understand a single event in history ever before the year 1500 you just simply cannot do it it isn't possible let me explain why first and foremost it was unanimous up until about 1796 um amongst all scholars of all different languages across the world who studied Christianity right and they did not study it with each other by the way the Ethiopic church had no relation to the latin church right um it was unanimous amongst them Matthew wrote first followed by Mark followed by Luke followed by John as far as the Gospels were concerned all four of them were written before the year 65 we have a record from people for example Eusebius who is writing a history in the year 300 uh lists um and of course you know he's using different dates because they didn't set up the Gregorian calendar yet but what would apply to the modern day data 41 AD as the date for the first New Testament text i.e. the book of Matthew which is what he says um Papias also records for us before the year 100 the existence of Matthew in the Hebrew text or in the Hebrew language which to be fair could be Aramaic because we're not sure if Papias knew the difference um and also the existence of Mark in the Greek text we know for a fact that at least some of Paul's epistles were written after the Gospel of Luke for two reasons actually reason number one he quotes Luke and reason number two and much more importantly Luke and Acts are a two-part set that is actually sent to Theophilus on behalf of um Paul Theophilus is believed by many although this is not proven to be fair um Theophilus is believed by many to be a lawyer what is proven though is that Luke was indeed sending this text over to Theophilus on Paul's behalf for some reason we just don't know whether or not Theophilus was Paul's lawyer nonetheless that is before the year 64 when Paul was executed which means Paul's later writings have not actually been written yet and that's a bare minimum of at least three of them that have actually been written before the year 65 um to be blunt with you there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever to support modern biblical scholarship mark and priority is false the cue document is false the idea that they wrote it after 75 it's false and I honestly would really like to see some evidence for um any sort of a difference here because quite frankly we don't treat any other document like this at all right there's no other document that you know for example 1st Peter 1st Peter says it was written by Peter there is no other documents in the world that even though there's no evidence to the contrary and we have something on the you know in the text within itself saying that this was written by a certain person where we say no I don't think so and to give you a perfect example of how absurd that is um I'm claiming right now that the Gospel of John was written in about 65 right our earliest fragment of the Gospel of John is found in about 125 that's 60 years later that's barely any time at all in the historical grand scheme of things especially when you consider our earliest manuscript of for example the Gaelic Wars which nobody questions the Julius Caesar wrote the Gaelic Wars is 900 years after the writing of the Gaelic Wars 900 I mean that's absurd right that is insane so if we're going to start saying oh well these books weren't actually written by the people you claim they were written by all right then all history literally ever outside of the renaissance and forward we're just agreeing didn't happen I guess right all right I think it would be more a matter of Jerry before you guys return yeah I'm sorry before you guys respond I mean I'm going to um we're only going to go for about five more minutes on this because we need to leave a little bit of time for the Q&A so I'm gonna give you a chance to respond and then uh maybe we'll do like a uh one minute closing for everybody to kind of give their final thoughts so go ahead and respond and then we'll go to that okay I was just going to say um your argument at most is that we can prove certain parts of what was written are true and to your point about historical documents we don't know for certain that they were written by the paper people who claim they are we're just using the the documents that we have and going on our best knowledge we don't necessarily know that every single document of history is true but it is our best uh you know estimation of it um if evidence were to contradict parts of that history then the evidence uh if it were empirical or some other form would take precedent over that and there's many parts of the bible in which empirical evidence does run counter to what is claimed in it like what though in regards to this in particular because I know some things you might claim like for example you know there's people can say genesis and what have you there's tons of things we could argue about but in particular as it pertains to the people who wrote these books what empirical evidence do you have that for example Matthew didn't write Matthew my point I'm not claiming it like there's nothing there there is absolutely nothing and you can go to the highest scholars on this there's nothing in fact what most people typically argue for interestingly enough they say there's correct prophecies within the gospels therefore the gospels must be written after those prophecies which in my opinion is just hysterical right people will say oh show me a correct prophecy I show you a correct prophecy and then they'll say oh well that's a correct prophecy which is impossible so therefore it must have been written after it now show me a correct prophecy different argument of course but the point being right it's a very uh three-step additional argument are you well what about uh those prophecies that did not come true like what like the destruction of tire tire was destroyed tire was obliterated by Alexander the Great yeah it was not obliterated it was uh i mean obviously we were obliterated we didn't have nuclear bombs but i i think you know what i mean right like well no yeah it is certainly parts of it were destroyed almost every city in the world has been partially destroyed even Rome was partially destroyed in 64 id um but the thing is that the the the the bible prophecy says that tire will be completely destroyed and it will never be rebuilt and people will forget about it and tire was never destroyed um in fact you go to tire you can go to tire today and it's still there so that is a prophecy that failed to manifest and if the bible is the inerrant word of god how do you um rectify that other than to say that some of these um um passages that say the tire will be destroyed are should should not be taken literally hey we can give you a chance to respond cj and then um after he responds uh just so we can get some questions in we'll have to go to the q&a so uh go ahead and respond to that and then we'll kick it out just take a minute after yeah i'm going to actually give everybody one minute closing yeah okay okay yeah all right so i just want to go ahead and quote here right from um ed uh ancient dot e u right tires 30 000 inhabitants for either massacred or sold into slavery and the city was destroyed by Alexander the great in his rage at their having defied him for so long uh the fall of tire led to the rise of carthage as the survivors of the siege who were able to escape alexander's wrath by bribery or stealth founded the new city in north of in the north of africa so not only is it an accurate prophecy but we see that the destruction of tire that was actually laid upon the city was so strong that the foundation culture ceased to exist because they had to flee and they rebuilt themselves as the carthaginians um so i would just simply want to ask again where exactly do we see failed biblical prophecy because in this example what i'm seeing is something that absolutely came to pass that definitely happened and by the way just to be clear ancient dot e u is not an apologetics research uh center or anything like that right they are just simply um recording certain events in history they don't care what ezekiel had to say at any point in time you know what i mean um so i that's that would just be kind of where my argument there would end all right thanks for that cj why don't we just start with you to go ahead and start with your uh one minute uh closing and then we'll go to um music analysts and we'll move that way uh that way we give um since you guys had the opening uh word we'll give the um non christians a the closing word all right um so the the thing that i would kind of say to wrap this up is i think as we've seen over the course of this argument i'll it's kind of dicey for the atheist teacher or for the non christian i should say um to actually come up with a solid argument as to how it is that we can explain these resurrection stories without the resurrection actually being true at first we started with is it true that can we agree that these people definitely believed this and of course the answer was yes because why else would you have no earthly gain whatsoever and then allow yourself to be tortured to death then we asked the question why would eyewitnesses come to believe that a person they saw die rose from the dead and ate and slept and slept with them and all that other kind of stuff for the next 40 days and the best that we could actually end up seeing here was that well we don't actually know that these gospels were written by the eyewitnesses but when we challenge that right when we look and compare it to every other historical document we see we see that not only is it absurd to claim that these documents for some reason can't be trusted while all of these other hundreds of thousands that are hundreds of years after their original writings right um are things that we can't trust but on top of that right on top of that we actually have greater evidence for Jesus than most figures of this time there is nobody who has eight to 13 different historical sources within 50 to 60 years of their death outside of Jesus in that same time frame and I challenge anybody to try and find one I challenge anybody to prove so for Hannibal for Alexander the Great for Sun Sue for Julius Caesar you simply can't do it and the reason is that evidence doesn't exist for any other figure right Jesus and this is Bart Ehrman not me at least talking about the New Testament right but the story of Jesus is the most well established story in the history of antiquity bar none Bart Ehrman by the way is not a believer he is in fact anti-christian in a lot of ways the most well preserved well attributed document of all time at least before you get to you know a certain point in history when we start recording things a little bit more um I don't know if I necessarily want to say trustworthy we haven't had a bunch of wars burned a bunch of stuff down in a good long time but nonetheless point being um I think when you look at those arguments laid out there right the only true argument you really have against the rise of Jesus is these people didn't actually write it and if you actually look at that argument it just doesn't actually have any evidence behind it all right thanks so much for that music analyst yeah I just want to say it's so hard to to prove things in the history only time will tell if the bible truly is true I mean you won't convince any of the non-believers until reality confirms it to you so only time will tell I just want to say the devil you can just look why is the devil like the elite people of this world why do they worship the devil why have anyone asked that I don't want any answer I just want to put that question I just want to say this I used to be an atheist and I I guess a lot of atheists have asked this question yeah if God exists then who created God right it's the logical question to ask like who created God there must be somebody that created God and so on and so on and so on no the thing is there nobody created God God has always existed like the way I see it God lives as you said Jay a while back you said something about you have to be timeless to create time or something like that exactly that timeless what I believe is in the realm of God is just a stream of endless time and then that God when it created this virtual reality whatever you want to call it it made it limited therefore we we only we only understand a beginning and an end you know of time so therefore we try to apply that to the creator like who created God because we try to apply a beginning and an end to God which is ridiculous we can't do that it's like a video game in the GTA video game characters in the GTA video game try to understand the coder which lives in another realm you can't understand the coder it lives in a totally different realm so therefore nobody created God and God never got destroyed God has always been there and we just trying to apply our reality and how it works to God no no no nobody created God God has always been there and in that realm time is endless endless it's just limited time for us in this virtual reality and that's that when we die here we probably join a new video game and so on it goes forever you can't you it may be a little bit claustrophobic but you can't escape this we live on forever in different characters and we probably live for billions of years what is time what is time really if you were in a coma for 30 years and I was I was awake alive for 30 years I would feel 30 years but if you woke up after 30 years in a coma it would have felt like a second to you not even that and what about dreams the same a dream what is a dream might be a whole new reality you're exiting this reality for a temporary moment entering another reality because you think the dream is real right when you dream you think you're there but you can't be because your body is right here anyway it's not uh related really that much to this discussion but I just want to say that in the realm of God there is no limit to time therefore nobody created God and God can never be destroyed it has always been there we we just don't understand it until we die probably and then end up in that realm and we're all one from us you can say God is like a dough and we're all from that dough separated into this different people you know but then we we reunite to the source which is the almighty one and only there is no gods there is only one god you can see it at the top of the as a as at the top of the pyramid that is God there is nobody above God it simply cannot be and now I'm done thank you all right thanks so much for that we'll kick it over to the other side so I guess I'm going next all right fine um the evidence that has been presented is at the very least um controversial and not completely um settled uh you know whether the the books of the bible or the the gospels were written uh before 65 ad we have different sources saying different things but that's not the important thing um as I was saying in my uh original uh opening statement um Christians feel uh and they've said this that the bible is the unerrant word of God and so we have to take all of the claims as being true and if one of them is found to be false then everything falls down um and again with the tire is um uh we could go on and on about whether tire was destroyed that or not that's not the important thing there is um the the example that I gave of in the end times um the stars will fall down from the sky that's clearly wrong and if that's clearly wrong then the the whole the whole system crumbles and that's my final statement my final answer thanks so much Jared uh I just want to say that um uh but Jay's uh argument seems to mostly be based on uh the the belief just that the actual document is real if we do believe that the the document is real that doesn't mean that the claims of Jesus are necessarily real it just means that there was a prophet who managed to do amazing things that uh convinced people that his religion that he was uh you know uh pushing was you know the one true religion it's entirely possible if you want to take a more metaphysical look at it that it that Jesus was um uh you know Satan or some demon or something just talking with people all right that's my point now we'll jump over to a Q&A section I've we've got a few questions here um so if you have anything that you want to ask uh tag me at converse contender in the live chat and I'll try and get to your question as well um first we had a uh super chat from Dave Dalafior says why are you wearing a hat indoors I guess that's for Jay or myself um if it's for me I didn't know there were limitations on hat wearing uh but maybe unless Jay wants to add to that um Dave because I don't know who cares that's not a business you want to Dave yeah I'll answer it for you yes Dave had another $2 question thanks for your super chat Dave uh he says he speaks broken English and Greek yeah angry I'm not angry by the way it's just my phone it's just my tone let me let me just say they don't know I'm I've only spoken English for two and a half years I'm from Sweden I'm proud of you from Sweden try to try to do something okay I didn't know who they were talking about yeah I know really yeah all right so um no you're actually you're doing really well actually um thank you thank you uh Travis Lee had a $2 super chat thanks so much for that it had no content in it though and I've seen he said later um sorry my message didn't make it in the super chat but I actually never seen a message I look for it I didn't see it so um if you're still here um let us know what you were trying to ask Dave Dialafior again says uh he should have been wearing a hat to hold his brain in so I guess that could have been for Jay I'm not sure what it's in regards to though so unless Jay has anything to add to that would just skip forward um we have a two dollar euro or not two dollars but two pounds I guess from religion is bullshit it says music you said there's one god do you know it's yours listen yours it's not that you own god I mean it's ridiculous yours god it there is only one god some people say it's Allah some say it's the christian god who gives a fuck it's only one who cares it's not exclusive to anything it might be true that it's done the christian bible and this that whatever I don't know only time will tell that but I do know there's an architect to this reality you gotta be a I'm sorry to say you gotta be some idiot if you think this is random you know I'm saying this shit ain't random how dare you say this is random okay you know what random does if you have random coding for a video game do you think anything shows up no you need to have some codes that are you know put in a certain way for for the picture to show up even in a video game and then you don't think that applies to this shit right here okay thanks so much music analysts all right uh Gabriel K says converse CJ Jared and Jimmy I feel your pain this was so awkward lol good job CJ for staying on topic though so what about it thanks Gabriel for that $5 super chat you got a fan CJ um next we have stupid horror energy thanks so much for your $5 super chat says can CJ actually document a martyr that died for refusing to deny that he saw a risen Jesus besides Paul um yeah actually I in fact I would I would question what history she is reading because you can actually find documentation of all of them being executed without exception all 11 of the non uh John apostles right all 11 outside of John they were all executed um and I say that not including Judas and you know if replacing Matthias with Judas um Judas himself of course killed himself um Paul was executed Luke was executed Mark was executed James was executed John the Baptist and Jesus were both executed um I just I don't know I the question is is just so and and maybe it is just genuinely you know questioning um in which case you know I don't mean to be as blunt as I am but it's it's not a debated fact by any stretch we know for a fact that Nero slaughtered Christians we know for a fact the Jews slaughtered Christians I mean Paul right is saying that he's the one who did it so that's not even an instance of you know oh well we were persecuted no Paul is saying yeah they were persecuted I persecuted them you know that guy Steven yeah I killed him you know what I mean so um it's just simply not a disputed fact of history all right thanks so much for that Gabriel K to the ocean chat says the dog barking in the background won this debate all right thanks so much for that by the way I don't know who has the dog I only had to have a cat oh it's your dog all right all right uh Gabriel K another $2 trip chat says CJ heaven's gate also believed and died for it I'm not sure if you um I don't know anything about heaven's gate to be entirely honest with you so my answer will be somewhat sparing um but again my point is not simply that they believed and died for it my point is that they did not believe were convinced afterwards and then died due to what they were convinced of which they claimed to have seen physically right in other words so let's say music analysts say he says he saw a ghost and I died because I believe strongly that music analysts saw that ghost and I'm just going to pick one of you guys so don't take it offensively but Jimmy I guess won't kill me for it let's just pretend um that's one thing but if me and music analysts both claim to have seen the is the ghost which of course rules out hallucination because there's no such thing as a mass hallucination and then both die saying that we had uh seen that and you know if Jimmy or Jared or whoever some third person wants to come up and kill us for it right doesn't matter we saw it right that's a completely different thing because now what I'm telling you is that I saw it with my own two eyes you cannot convince me otherwise and that's not the same argument as I believed it because I had a burning in my bosom or whatever you know what I mean and therefore I flew planes in building it's just simply not the same thing so what we need to ask ourselves is what would convince every single one of the apostles plus people who did not actually physically see Jesus but saw Jesus in mass visions or or singular visions or what have you right what would convince them that the person they watched die was alive and slept with them and slept with them and so on and so forth for 40 days straight um and I posit that nobody is able to provide an answer because quite frankly the only answer that really makes sense is that he rose from the dead and sat there and slept with them and ate with them and so on and so forth for the last 40 days you know what I mean but nonetheless I that was long-winded all right thanks so much for that stupid award energy thank you so much for your five dollar super chat says where the heck is cj getting his dates for the gospels from uh the dates I use for the gospels are the near unanimous I say near because there are seven out of the 27 books in the bible that do have some disputed dates but the near unanimous um deductions of the first 1800 years of church history regardless of whether or not you believe the documents so I don't mean to have nothing but an appeal to authority because of course that does not make the argument but if we're going to claim well the consensus today says yeah well the con the consensus for 1800 years said otherwise and it was a unanimous consensus it wasn't like a 60 or 50 percent of people who just don't happen and not believe the book anyways right um so that would be where I'm getting a lot of the dates for example just to give a specific example uh the the common date traditionally speaking for Matthew is 41 ad you get that date from Irenaeus and Eusebius all right thanks so much for that we have a another five dollar super chat from stupid horror energy said she says uh mark five uses the word legion which is a roman word which means three story or sorry these stories were written once Israel was fully romanized probably after 70 ad I think that sorry jay I don't have my my glasses but I think that was uh during time whenever you were talking about uh the historical um um dates of the gospels and uh she's she's referring to this uh legion term used in mark five right uh well it's just simply not true um it's just not that the not that the word legion isn't used the word legion is used but the idea that that somehow means that it had to have been written after 70 is is just not accurate and there's no reason to believe that it is accurate the the romans conquered Jerusalem around 47 bc um some 80 years before jesus was crucified they absolutely would have been in fact paul was a roman citizen for crying out loud they absolutely would have been familiar with the latin language so I just dismissed that argument it's not a good one all right thanks so much gabriel k had another question uh super chat said um an empty tomb means someone moved the body early christianity was a cult 3000 years ago six people saw a unicorn so what well and if you wanted to make that kind of an argument you certainly can it is a little bit more reasonable than some of the other arguments that have been made like the mass hallucination hypothesis and so on um but I would just simply ask you to provide your evidence if your only evidence is I don't believe in god therefore I posit it must have been stolen well that's not really convincing and also why are these people being tortured to death for a lie I don't know a single person by the way I know numerous soldiers and police officers and people who have to go through you know grueling trainings and all that kind of stuff I don't know a single person who if I waterboarded them for an hour would continue telling me a lie let alone if I fed them to lions or let them in fire or put them in a boiling water of oil or something like that so um you can try and make that argument if you want I just simply don't think it makes any sense all right thanks so much gabriel k again says two dollars super chat says good job cj from an atheist this was insane lol appreciate you so gabriel um both likes you and questions your uh-huh questions your argument so um next five dollars super chat another five dollars super chat for super hoarder energy you'll never get to this one's two says that quote used from bart ermann goes on to say that the attributes come centuries later and that's a problem uh well it certainly is not a problem and let me explain to you why bart ermann much like anybody on the entire planet and so I don't pick on my my opponents today I don't pick on bart ermann I do this it's simply the evidence doesn't exist so it's not possible that you could provide it bart ermann does not provide any evidence whatsoever that the gospels were written a century plus after uh jesus crucifixion that's and in fact bart ermann numerous times has claimed that such a thing is not true at all bart ermann has claimed certain things like for example he he buys the evolution of high christology hypothesis which essentially posits that mark and priority is correct i.e. mark is the first gospel and then matthew and luke in whatever order you decide to choose take their information from mark which by the way is usually commonly said to itself take information from the non-existent q um and that john was written even later than that the problem is there's not only absolutely no evidence to support this theory um but much more importantly mark very clearly shows jesus to be god so the evolution of high christology is just outright false we know it's outright false mark shows not only the resurrection of jesus although to be fair that is disputed the last 12 verses of mark so on and so forth right although bare minimum there's an empty tune at the end of mark even if you don't accept those last 12 verses but even even despite that right mark still claims that jesus has power to um cast out demons has power over the angels and the winds and the seas has the ability to call god his own father for crying out loud right is face to face in a way that no other prophet could possibly be in indeed in a way that is said to be impossible for a human being it even goes as far as to say he has the right to do things like i do things like judge human beings and forgive sins which is very explicitly a trait only god has in the old testament so the claim that mark does not actually provide for us a jesus who is fully divine is simply not in line with the facts all right thanks so much uh zonia i hope i'm pronouncing that correctly zonia five dollars super chat thanks so much for that says siddhartha katama buddha was just as well documented 500 years prior just to be pedantic uh well there's a couple things with that as a former buddhist i can actually let you know that that is not the case he is not as well documented in fact the um common consensus around buddha is that virtually nothing written about him can be trusted um which i will admit buddha is another one of those historical figures a lot like sun sue socrates and indie jesus who's kind of picked on a lot by the scholar um he does not have eight let alone 13 let alone 20 plus which i didn't mention the extra biblical non christian sources written before the year 100 but there's more of them right um different separate sources documenting his life that's just simply not the case i believe if i'm not mistaken somebody can correct me on this he has four within the first 100 years of his life which by the way ironically happens to be a pretty common number for those figures but nonetheless four in total not eight not 13 not 20 plus but four um likewise i don't really see what the time period that you lived in has anything to do with anything i mean so what if you lived in the 600s well jesus lived in the first century what's what's your point all right thanks so much for that gabriel k to the whole super chat says music analyst reminds me of edgar from mr id lol eggs i'm not sure yeah i'm not sure about that reference i don't even know what the hell that is so i'm not sure either all right maybe person is right i don't know all right we'll move forward uh obi one kind of he says what do what do the atheists think of pascal's wager i'm guessing he means like uh jared and and you as well jimmy oh jimmy are you i'm sorry are you jimmy you're here hold on a second yeah i can hear you jared go ahead i just don't need to use well jimmy so go ahead oh okay uh yeah pascal's wager um it is the idea that um um if god exists and you believe in him then everything is fine if god exists and you don't believe in him everything is still fine uh and if god doesn't exist and you don't believe in him everything is still fine it's only if god exists and you don't believe in him um then you're going to have a big problem the problem with pascal's wager is that it could be applied to any deity in any religion um we could say the thing of the of the the the buddha or of my goddess um if you believe in her um and she exists then everything is fine um it's just it's a wager that you're going to lose because there are so many different gods around no also i mean just because it's convenient uh or you know uh gives you better chances of a better out um it doesn't mean that it's true it just means that you're taking the most convenient belief and also belief is not necessarily something you choose to have you either believe it or you don't if you're believing it based on some self-serving reason then it's in all likelihood even if you picked the right god you would end up there he sensed is not having true faith and then get all of the the negatives of not believing this it's all about really when it comes down to it it's all about your actions are you doing good deeds or bad deeds if you're doing bad deeds you're gonna see that listen this is how i see it there's a devil and there's a god both are from the one an almighty god but there's two sides of god uh so if you do bad deeds you are telling god whatever with your free will which side of god you you're on are you on the devil's side if you're doing bad bad shit yeah you're you're you're turning into the devil's side but if you're doing good shit you're going into god's side why why do i sound like this anyway when you're talking about two sides does that mean like is that not two gods or is that no no no in in god's realm there is only one but in this reality it's a dualistic reality you know a life death up down inside out you know you know cold warm you know all that shit bad good so with your free will which was given what by the one and only with your free free will you are showing god what you want by your actions you know with your free will so if you're doing bad shit you're telling god i i want to be on the devil's side but outside of this realm there is only one entity but in this realm it's a dualistic reality yin and yang that's it so your actions even if you don't uh if you're not uh you know without religion or anything it doesn't matter if you're a good person then you're good that's it okay i'm sorry all right the problem that i have with that if i can if i can go ahead yeah uh the problem that i have that you made a lot of claims but you didn't give any evidence for those claims and one of the rules of logic is that a claim that is made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence yeah what evidence do we have for the big bang the fact that when the stars are measured that there is a definite redshift uh to the light that they produce the farther they are away we don't even know if those things are what they're told us they are we don't even know that listen this flat art thing i thought it was ridiculous two years ago and but when you start to look into it you start to ask questions because just because some things don't add up but that's a whole not a debate that's a whole not a debate anyways thanks so much for that uh yes all right thanks so much for that uh we'll move on to the next question uh a question from tioga says do you or cj even know what the fling is converse contender um i don't know what that is the fling yeah i think it's some type of european heritage thing um fling highland latin hornpipe flora mcdonald any of these dances anything i i'm sorry for that the children of the night here the children of the night shut up about the children of the night yeah i'm totally unfamiliar with all of those uh dances sorry um sunflower two dollar shipper chat says atheist or unhappy unhappy hedonistic conman i i'm sorry i didn't hear the comment oh sorry it said that atheists are unhappy hedonistic conman i i'm neither conman nor nor unhappy or successfully hedonistic so i don't know what that's coming from well um i'm gonna say two out of three ain't bad all right thanks so much for that we'll move on um we have a super chat just came in from gabriel k says for five dollars christianity and atheism can exist together in this country i'm proud to be part of this massive social experiment we call home the usa thanks so much for that your country is super important your country if it goes down it's all doomed no for real your country stands for the idea of freedom don't let them take that away or else we're all fucked take care of your country right now and won't right which is trump trump 2020 okay anyways continue well that's it actually that was our last question so um thanks so much for everybody that's in the live chat for coming out thanks for the uh debaters for showing up and we've had some technical difficulties but i think this is still very entertaining and and there was a lot of uh arguments uh back and forth so i really appreciate it and thanks for bearing with us with that we'll go ahead and end the stream here and as james always says keep sifting the reasonable from the unreasonable thanks you guys thank you shalom


I'm Stu Miniman with theCUBE, and we're here at the Winslow Technology Group, Dell EMC user group. Happy to have one of the users at the event, Hassan Barakat, who's the director of Global IT at Cell Signaling Technology. Thanks so much for joining us. Thank you, Stu. All right, so Hassan, tell us a little bit about your organization, your role there, and your local, correct? Right, we are out of Danvers and Beverly in Massachusetts. We employ about 450 people. We produce antibodies used in cancer research. They are manufactured here in Massachusetts and shipped all over the world. All right, and what are the uses for these antibodies? Mostly they're used in cancer research at universities and as well as pharma companies. So people that are, organizations that are trying to cure disease use our antibodies, which have a very good reputation in the industry to further their research goals. Okay, so healthcare is highly regulated, going through massive amounts of change. What are some of the biggest drivers in your company's business today? So speed is one, quality is another, and we try to embrace change from a technology perspective and enable our users and scientists to be the best that they can be from an IT perspective. All right, and Hassan, what's the relationship between business and IT? Is, you know, what does that look like today? So we have a lot of labs that we generate a lot of data. We trawl through a lot of that data. So our users need robust IT systems and messaging and other sort of technologies to further our business around the world. We cover the globe, we're not just here, we're also in Europe and China and Japan. All right, so we've really been looking at, you know, it's been said probably way too many times, data is the new oil in many ways. Data is the new flywheel for most businesses. The more you have and the more you can access, the more things you can do with it. What do you have to do from an IT standpoint to make sure that you have data available and can leverage that data? And maybe you can tell me what's kind of interesting with how you use data today. Stu, we do generate a lot of data. And in the old days, we did not probably generate as much data and our systems do require constant refresh and scalability and agility. So what we are trying to do now is to embrace that change and be as fast as possible. We have, we're looking to the cloud, we are looking to be as fast and agile as possible with all of our scientific data and also our business data, our commercial data, our messaging, these are all challenges that create a lot of need for agility and speed. All right, Hassan, connect the dots for us then. We're at this event, I look down to the X-Ball Hall. I see things like Dell servers, storage, hyper-converged, hybrid cloud. What are you using today? How are things changing in your environment to be able to deliver all of those data solutions that you talked about? All of the above, and that's why we're here. We are, we do have a lot of Dell servers on-prem. We try and build, we're trying to build a hybrid cloud as much as possible. We leverage AWS, we're starting to leverage AWS. We have partners where our enterprise business systems are, our commercial systems, our financial systems. We try and leverage these using Dell storage, Dell hardware, and also Dell endpoint products. So our users are now using a mix of Apple systems, Macintosh systems, as well as Dell laptops, monitors, keyboards, mice and everything else. And Winslow helps us connect all of it together. Yeah, how much of that do you architect? How much do you rely on a partner like WTG to help put all those things together? That's a good question. We're lucky in the sense that we have a good team that we sort of know what it is that we're looking for, but whenever we run up against some challenges that we don't maybe fully understand roadmaps and things like that, what's coming out of Dell, Winslow has been a great partner to help us navigate through that, you know, minefield. We have a compelling storage on-prem. We have a vertex servers that are split into application clusters and database clusters. And, you know, currently we're basically looking at expanding our Dell laptop footprint as well. And we have replaced almost 100 lab systems as well from ancient aging XP machines to state-of-the-art Dell XPS systems that are running Windows 10. All right, it sounds like you're going through a lot of change to kind of reinvent a lot of the pieces in your environment. What kind of support do you get from your management?  To make these changes usually requires some investment. How do you accomplish that inside your firm? We have historically not invested as much in IT as maybe we should have over the years. So currently we now have an IT refresh budget to bring out these systems and replace them with state-of-the-art, so it's all about change. And the more static we are, the more, you know, my boss calls these aging systems a Jurassic petting zoo. We're trying to basically get to a level of performance and reliability that gives our scientists and our users and eventually our customers and people all across the world a fair shot at doing what they need to do. All right, Hassan, you're working with a number of vendors out there. If you have on your wish list, you know, what would you like to see from those partners that would make your job and your company's business even better? Communication's always a good one. You know, we try and make sure that we stay on top of change. Sometimes, you know, that's not always possible. We end up with systems that are not scalable, so you know, if there's one thing that I would like to see, everybody please provide scalable systems as businesses grow, as data grows, scalability is incredibly important. Being static and stuck where we are and not having to do forklift upgrades and continuous, you know, migrations, if we can continue to be, if these vendors could help us be scalable and these partners could help us scale, that's really what we're looking for. We're growing at a fast clip. We, you know, there are certain areas of the business such as China that are growing at, you know, over 30% year on year in some cases. And so that scalability requires flexibility from our partners. All right, well, Hassan Barakat, really appreciate you joining, sharing with our community, everything happening in your space. I'm Stu Miniman and you're watching theCUBE.


The default response to a social challenge in any game is not just to shoot them. We do not sell disputes and paper rock scissors with games of vampire. Fake eye spots on my helmets do not help intimidate the monster. If my personal carried firepower exceeds that of the battleship Texas, they're the problem. I cannot take the dementia, obsession, and counting things if I'm not a Malkavian. On second thought, I can't take it even if I am a Malkavian. My character cannot have a noticeable impact, positive or negative, on a town's population. Large dice are for rolling, not sound effects. Covering fire does not include nuclear weapons. I did not earn the bonus XP for a written background with just a summary of the plot to Dig Dug. While the party is off searching for secret doors, camp positions to slain orcs in compromising positions. In the middle of a black ops camp reprogram the cleaning joys to wax the floors for twelve hours straight. I don't have to take a lower level bard adventuring as my opening act. Taking the orc warlord's skull as a trophy is acceptable, not as a hand puppet. Standing the villain a nymph stripper only works once. Somebody doesn't accidentally fall on two dozen shanks. The adventure wrap-up is the epilogue, not miller time. Cannot challenge anyone to a dance off to the death.  Taking each class as I level in alphabetical order is forbidden. Even if the rules allow it, my paladin can't serve the god of obituaries. My sorcerer will not take a level and drew it just to make it easier to get to the flammable stuff. If everybody in the room is in black leather, we are in the thieves guild, not a fetish club. Kind of infinitely useful, absolute power over elastics is not an appropriate superpower. The backup trap handler is not the guy with the lowest intelligence. I cannot have bracers of brashian until I tell the DM what brashian really means. Elves do not respond to chainsaws the same way dogs react to vacuum cleaners. My battle mech does not play Dixie every time I hit the jump jets. Even if the mages critically fumbles his stealth check, can't threaten to bleed him slow. Despite the song's claim, a pelvic thrust did not cause sanity loss. Even if we are in Sweden, I can't use one blanket seduction check on the entire crowd. I didn't accidentally forget to buy any skills.  Overrunning a larger army is not a glorious victory if it happened at 3AM and they were still in bed. I will stop reminding Elminster he's not as cool as Merlin, Gandalf, or that shape-changing wizard from Kroll. I cannot lure out the psycho killer into an ambush by having sex with another character. No paraphrasing the party leader's levered plan as, pick somebody you don't like and let them know it. Even if the rules allow it, I can't take the first armored division as an ally. Doesn't matter how high my influence is, I still can't make karma or Miranda hatch part of the unit's dress code. In the middle of black ops, no one's starting a memo into the target's computer, mandating clothing optional Mondays. Even if it would have immediately solved the last six adventures, I won't throw dynamite in every well I come across. No more tricking rookies and the putting whoopee cushions on Lord Vader's throne. When handed deities and demigods and told to pick a god for my druid, I will skip right by the Cthulhu mythos. It doesn't matter how high his hit points or damage reduction are, we aren't sending the dwarf into battle to be a catapult. As a matter of fact, Jeopardy does scream for telepaths. It's not a good idea to taunt Greek heroes with who's your daddy. It doesn't matter if it's an anime-style game, I don't get a bonus to hit with eye pokes. Polymorph mother-in-law is not a real spell. The Karen is not Disney World is just run by coyotes. The FBI tends to notice when people buy several miles of hamster tubing at once. It doesn't matter how practical, we aren't reanimating the dead dragon and having him hauled that horde back for us. When plumbing the depths of the pravity, I must remember to come up for air. Any superhero offenses a more than two major religions to be towed. Even though I'm faced with yet another get-of-finerous loop for its era on, I will not refer to him as cliché Guevara. We will not take the dead dried with us to use as kindling. I will not keep reincarnating a bugbear until he comes back as something we can actually eat. A funeral is not a proper place for setting new fashion trends. I will not disbelieve the magic mouth before he gives out the important plot information. Even if it is hours of entertainment, can't feed the red-tallon peanut butter. I will conceive we're on a dungeon crawl and stop trying to talk to the monsters. Under religion I cannot put born-again Klingon. I will not use undocumented zombie workers to help build my castle. Big B's offensive finger is not a real spell. Even if there is no alignment in Traveler, giving feuding TL-1 tribes TL-12 weapons and putting the results on paper view is just wrong. My doctor's bag will contain more than just a bone saw and a bottle of whiskey. I do not put the cat in decadent nor the rave in depraved. Even if it's catchy, I don't have to yell my battle cry every time I roll to attack. We can't all play barge just to relive our favorite spinal tap moments. I cannot have a gun with an area of fact larger than its range. Richard Simmons is not an appropriate role model for a get-of-finerous. I will not use my vast personal knowledge of doubling Texas to get an unfair advantage in the campaign. My halfling cannot take the flaw obsession, ring of invisibility. Any gun that sets off the metal detector before even passing through it is vetoed. I will not combine thermographic sights and a gun that can shoot through walls. It makes black ops too easy. After cleansing out Ravenloft, when it's my turn to pick treasure, can't call dibs on the castle. If my superhero has a healing factor, claws, combat sins, and longevity, he can't take the flaw total pacifist.  And if I'm playing a chick, I can't spend all my starting cash on shoes. Ribs in the time-space continuum are not for my personal amusement. Buying a bigger gun to not restore sanity. Using the dead PC for spell components is okay, using him for spell components is not. Any character that can run the two-minute mile is vetoed. I will not commence the party to name all the characters the same thing. I do not need to see proof of insurance before making a med-tech role. Customs doesn't care what my charisma bonus is. Halflings do not store food in their cheeks for winter. Elves are not deciduous. Evidence of the contrary, half-elves do not automatically go both ways. Breast-enhancing spells gain no benefit from meta-magic feats. I will not try to regain sanity by nailing the reporter chicken public. Dwarves do not get roto-routers with racial weapons. I will not brag too loudly, I'm the real reason behind the sinking of the Titanic. Cultists tend to notice that we replace their summoning ritual with jitterbug instructions. Invisibility is all or nothing. I can't just target their clothes. I can't just keep buying rounds of drinks until everybody passes out so I can rob them. I will not miss the final epic battle just because I crypt my seduction check. Polish is not a sub-dialect of gnomish. Any action causing the powergamer to storm off while actually appreciated is frowned upon. Healing people or other face gives a penalty in deadlands, not serenity. I will not have the architect build my castle using a hexadecimal base to screw up the powergamer.