everybody today we're debating atheism versus Christianity and we're starting right now ladies and gentlemen thrilled to have you here for another epic debate as we today have none other than Jim Majors and Duncan atheism debating Christianity versus atheism and if this is your first time here consider hitting that subscribe button as we've got a lot more debates coming up in fact if you want a reminder also hit that notification bell for this Saturday you'll see at the bottom right of your screen Vashh versus Sargon this Saturday on immigration capitalism socialism and if we have time transgenderism so it's gonna be a huge one and want to let you know as well both of our speakers have their links in the description so if you are enjoying what you hear you're like mmm gotta get more of that Duncan atheism in my life well his link is conveniently located just below on that description box down there and with that want to let you know it's gonna be eight to ten minute opening statements and then it's open discussion which I think most people usually prefer it's gonna be lively it's gonna be fun and Q&A right after that so if you have a question fire that question into the live chat if you tag me at modern-day debate make it easier for me to make sure that I don't miss it and gentlemen Jim and Duncan so stoked to have you guys here thanks so much for being with us today oh thank you yeah super stoked to be here James thanks you betcha and ladies and gentlemen want to let you know as well do I remember right it was a Duncan you're going first no Jim is going first I thought Duncan was but I can go first it's gotta be one of you okay so Duncan will be going first sorry about that long day okay so we're excited folks whoo Duncan I had the timer set for you okay already yeah I'll be short and sweet I usually don't have a long introduction we're discussed Jim and I are discussing atheism versus Christianity I hold to the Christian worldview that Christian Christianity is not only true but it's the only reasonable and rational worldview to hold in virtue that the God of the Bible exists and he has revealed himself both in natural and special revelation and the denial thereof is impossible so if once denies that you cannot prove God then you won't be able to prove anything it's a reductio out of certain so if someone is familiar with natural revelation they're familiar with special revelation that's all they need to know that the God of the Bible exists it's that simple deny it and you're gonna be an abyss of absurdity you got it I'm done it's a bold opening statement for you there Jim so thanks so much Duncan and Jim majors the floor is yours oh I think I might have muted you let me double check that it wasn't me oh yes you are muted on okay can you hear me now you betcha okay all right thanks everybody for for coming and thank you so much Duncan for taking this this debate I'm looking forward to our discussion so the the overwhelming majority of religions today as most of you know are the Abrahamic religions they're named for the alleged forefather that heard God tell him to kill a son so he tied his son up and set off to do just that and it will stop last minute years later at the very likely and totally not senile age of 99 he became the first of God's people to be circumcised circumcising himself after hearing God tell him to cut off his own foreskin he then proceeded to carry out the command of God by circumcising his son and all 318 members of his house including his slaves both bought and acquired otherwise as a sign of the Covenant oh yeah did I mention that the first Jew the first the father of Abrahamic religion he purchased in own an own slave so when we talk about things like absolute truth or objective morality or things like that then we really start to run into issues but we'll talk about that later but you see with the the particular problem with this religion specifically is that we have to apply the standards of morality from a Middle Eastern culture derived from bronze age to cultures two and a half thousand years ago plus to today's society when religion claims to be a source of objective morality moral responsibility comes into question things like slavery genocide genital mutilation xenophobia homophobia bigotry it comes in a question when you demand that others allow the perpetuation of of religions that force people to adhere to commandments that are not compatible with civilized societies it comes in a question when it demands outrage at abortion but equally demands that you approve of Joshua killing pregnant Kenny night women with indeed divine authority if I'm unable to know and to have morals or truth or rationality without God then then what standards am I to appeal to in order to know that your God is indeed a good God by by what measure am I to discern whether your God is worthy of me trusting him as the arbiter of morality and an aspiring model of ethical behavior what standard did you don't get in particular measure God against to determine whether him and his actions are good or evil right or wrong do you use God standard or your own intuition or something else and how do you differentiate between what is good bad moral immoral right wrong when you're using the God of the Bible as a moral compass how do you know that animal sacrifice is wrong how do you know that it sucks to slam your pinky toe into the coffee table how do you know that genital mutilation is abhorrent how do you know punishing other people for something that they had no part in is unjust how do you know that drowning babies in their their families along with them is evil because you don't know that any of these things are immoral from modeling yourself extra the Christian God if anything the God of the Bible is a perfect example of how not to conduct ourselves but it's true if everyone were to have the same religion then we might hope to experience what Jesus of Nazareth promises followers harmony peace and unity around the world yet every day we see the effects of the wars within religion between religions and on behalf of religion and it's because of the self-loving natures of most of these religions that they are incompatible when it comes to variables such as doctrine rituals and moral framework because religion can only fully reduce the negative baggage if it's the only religion and let's see I got one more thing okay so tonight my interlocutor I'm sure will repeat two presumptions number one is going to be that the God of the Bible exists and he's going to use that to confirm any conclusion that he comes to he's going to start off with that as his premise that the God of the Bible exists and that he knows this because reasons and those reasons are likely are either he gets them through revelation through the Bible or through natural revelation or revelation of some sort but denial of science based on these religious presuppositions and and trying to adhere to this dogma it it can and does lead to moral harm so that is why I believe that atheism is is far better than Christianity you bet thank you very much Jim and we will now go into the open discussion section just reminder gentlemen have their links in the description in case you want to see more of that mustache floor is yours you're ridiculous man okay so did you want me to start asking questions first or would you like to ask sure I talked enough oh no that's okay all right let me see where shall I begin here um well I presented to you the existence of God in virtue of his revelation in creation and special revelation based upon what I what I understand about your background is you're formerly a Christian and that you're familiar with biblical theology is that correct correct okay do you reject therefore that the God of the Bible has revealed himself in all of creation that all facts indicate God and that he has revealed himself through various individuals infallibly in the Bible do you reject that I reject that he has revealed himself to me that he is a deltini revelation to me in particular I can't say the same for anybody else that that's that's their own you know well you've read the Bible right yes okay do you accept that the Bible from Genesis to revelation is the infallible revelation of God no I do not okay um then on on what grounds do you assert the intelligibility of any proposition or fact what is your worldview framework I presented you a worldview and the means by which we can know it through God's revelation since you reject that which is a a de facto denial the non-acceptance of the Christian you know revelation that we can know that God exists and the nature of reality through his natural special revelation now you reject that now that's a worldview yes I reject that if you're asserting that that is part of God's nature and that he exists because the fact that I have not received any revelation from him is plenty of evidence to suggest that your God is not real especially if your God is supposed to ever build himself to everybody and there's many people watching now who will say the same thing okay so your position then is Christianity is false and that there is no God is that your position okay yes um okay um I came across a photograph of you at the atheist republic holding up a book let me just get the title I think I'm promoting a book yeah by Armin Bobby yeah there's you were holding up a book called why there is no God do you still endorse that book no I I don't think that it's the the best arguments or the best laid-out arguments at one time I did believe that they were they were good arguments but I've I've come to find you know fallacies in some of the the quote-unquote what people like to call these new atheist arguments okay do you support the title the book that there is no God yes I do okay when it comes in in respect to the Christian God okay on what grounds since you reject the revelation of the God of the Bible through natural special revelation on what grounds do you assert there is no God well for one given your prerequisite that God has revealed himself to everybody if he exists and since he has not revealed himself to me therefore he does not exist that that's that that's a simple one well you would be you would be attempted to critique the Christian God your position as an atheist is all encompassing you deny the concept of all gods now on what grounds that there is no ultimate creator God you mean besides the Christian God yeah you're you're an atheist your atheism is the position that there is no God just like the time you reject our her a ma's the or a Baha or actually no or any other creator deity that is all encompassing that's incorrect the reason why well the reason why I reject it was Zura Mazda which is the God of Zoroastrianism is because first and foremost I have the revelation of the true God do you have a revelation of some God that no other gods exist because if you don't then your analogy fails no I don't and you don't have a revelation your analogy from the God if that God has revealed himself to everybody but your analogy hasn't revealed himself to just me even shows that you don't even believe in the God that you say you believe in your analogy fails you said for the same reason so my first plan of reasoning why I reject the Zura Mazda is because of the revelation of God since I have I have a dent I have identified what is the ultimacy of reality the God of the Bible that is why I reject that a Zura Mazda the God of Zoroastrianism is the ultimacy have you since you say you reject all gods on the same grounds then that would entail that you have identified what is ultimate and that it is impersonal have you done that yeah yeah and especially when it comes to gods who claim to be personal or gods that claim to be omnibenevolent omnipotent and omniscient especially when it comes to those gods okay so you you have identified and you can account for what is ultimate in reality and that it is impersonal what do you mean by account for give me a rational justification that what is ultimate what what it is and that it's impersonal can you give me a justification for that because if you could do that then your analogy there that when you said the same reason why I reject a Zura Mazda so in other words in order for you to reject all gods by by virtue of analogy of what you've said you would have to identify and know what is ultimate and that it is impersonal in order to use that as a defeater that there is no God see if you can identify what is ultimate is impersonal then there cannot be a personal intimacy or absolute namely God so what is it that is ultimate and absolute and impersonal I'm just to fight I just find my reasoning using my reasoning and like like like the way that you interpret and perceive your revelation is through your reasoning so you have a double filter that you have to pass through whereas I only have a single filter I don't think you addressed the question in order for you to negate the personal absolute God you're gonna have to identify and justify what is ultimate and impersonal do you know what the ultimate see reality that all things that begin derived from so you're asking me to justify my epistemology with my epistemology even though you're justifying your epistemology with ontology I didn't ask you about epistemology I asked you what is ultimate in your metaphysics okay the God you okay so the cosmos is ultimate in scale yeah I can't think of anything bigger than ultimate ultimate would mean that it's eternal without beginning unconditionally non-dependent and absolute and the origin of all things that begin do you believe the cosmos is eternal if it's possible maybe I didn't I didn't ask you if it's possible I'm not whatever is whatever is ultimate necessarily exist and it's not subject to possibility possibility is derived from what is ultimate so is the cosmos according according to ultimate like what but according to whom though like who says that it has to be eternal like according to what measure no what whatever is ultimate by definition will be eternal because it will be the ground of all existence okay so how do you assert that you're that it is your God okay well we'll get to that all right I've already explained that in the beginning but I'll be glad to get back to that what I want to know from you is you tell me you know that a personal absolute ultimate creator God does not exist in virtue that you know that there is something that's impersonal and ultimate namely the cosmos how do you know that the cosmos is ultimate and eternal I don't know that but it then you haven't lost my the just Lee then you then you haven't falsified the existence of a personal ultimate absolute then have you well when a personal a personal yes one that has agency and intelligence yes how did you falsify that was in order for to to create one has to have agency a disembodied mind does not have agency or a medium through which to operate into how could you possibly how could you how could you possibly know that the the same way that I know anything the same way that I that you know it's safe across the street so you know if you know what so you know what the attributes so you know what the attributes and properties of what the ultimate it is by virtue of just everyday sense experience according to your worldview it's an uncaused timeless spaceless immaterial all powerful personal creator that no we're talking about Jim right now Jim right now we're talking about the concept of God versus atheism and an ultimacy of reality that is absolute ultimate eternal and it is personal you say that does not exist now how do you know what the properties are or are not in terms of what is ultimate by what means do you have access to that my reasoning okay with us here it's just my my reasoning the same way that that you do anything you don't you don't you depend on your your senses and your perception to to get through life and to to do any activity you don't you don't rely on revelation to to do it as in fact I would challenge you to to give me one thing that you depend solely on revelation for you're not addressing my question what is what is the the what are the one or more of the central properties and attributes of what is an ultimate I don't think that there has to be an ultimate I think that that's that that's a presumptuous not okay well well well in order for you to know that there's not a personal ultimate you're gonna have to know that there's an impersonal ultimate do you know there's a personal ultimate either there doesn't have to be an ultimate period okay so then so then derivational things don't derive from anything yes they do but but there's no reason to draw ultimate what do they ultimately derive from justification to draw a line and say this is where not you're not you're just being verbose you're not addressing the question maybe you're not understanding it now you told me that you know that there is no personal absolute you could only excuse me you could only assert that is if you knew what was ultimate that was impersonal so my question to you is do you know what is ultimate and impersonal that is a false dichotomy because you're asserting that something has to be ultimate no you told me earlier you accepted that there was something that was impersonal and ultimate so which is it now it seems that you're flipping now well I was misunderstanding what you meant by ultimate and I apologize for that that's okay I'll repeat it again what is ultimate is excuse me I gotta get something to drink my mouth is dry do you want to mention no but what go ahead yeah what is ultimate what is ultimate is that which is the ground of all existence what it is eternal it's absolute it's unconditionally non-dependent and all things that begin to exist derive from it now you can either accept that what is ultimate is personal you can accept that what is ultimate is impersonal or you can you can go the suicidal path of saying that you do not accept that anything is ultimate okay I will say that there's something that is impersonal it is as far as I know as far as anybody knows it's the universe it could possibly be be something pre-existing the universe but I'm not sure well in order for you to know that there cannot be a personal ultimate you're going to have to know that it's negation exists the negation of a personal absolute depends on it no your position is that there is no ultimate creator God right now in order for you to falsify negate that you're going to have to know that there is an impersonal ultimate which would constitute the negation of the personal absolute right so what is it that there is there's not a personal unicorn do you have to prove that there's an impersonal unicorn this is this is a category errors okay what we're talking about what it now you're making a category error between what is ultimate attributes to God hold on Jim Duncan I just want to be sure that Jim gets a chance to respond just because okay there's a good what Duncan were you yeah you're making it you're making a category error we're not talking about temporal entities we're talking about what is the ground of all existence now either either from your worldview you're going to be operating from square one that what is ultimate is personal or not personal in virtue of the law of the law of non-contradiction in an excluded middle now your position is that you know there is no God there is no personal ultimate by virtue of knowing that what is ultimate is impersonal that is your defeater is that correct well if the universe didn't exist that law wouldn't exist either so I mean that I'm asking you do you is that your defeater hold just to be sure that you that he got a chance to respond just because he was still talking are you do you have anything more to say Jim no I was just saying that that the universe didn't didn't exist and things like like the law of identity would that exist the law that Danny reflects the nature and character of God's mind from a Christian worldview however trying to get at your position is there is no God there is no personal absolute in order to in order to falsify a you're going to have to defend not a in order to falsify that there's a personal absolute you're going to have to establish that there is an impersonal absolute do you understand but you still haven't told me why there has to be an an absolute okay personal or impersonal with without an absolute then you're not going to be able to have coherence and intelligibility for derivational facts because then they wouldn't depend upon anything a fact a fact in question will either be ultimate or not ultimate a fact in question will either be unconditionally non dependent which we refer to as what is ultimate or it will be dependent if you deny that anything is ultimate that it is unconditionally non dependent then it will be meaningless and unintelligible to talk about dependent facts so it's philosophically suicidal to reject that there is an ultimacy when you want to go down talking about physics and like the history of the universe you go back to the singularity back when the laws of physics we're not discussing that are changing the subject but nothing is objective or absolute at that point whether in physics truth or morality even in the Christian worldview and the only reason that they exist according to you is because God deviated from an an eternal constant he exists eternally and he's an absolute yet so at some point he decided that he's going to make a universe okay Jim is your objection that there is an eternal ultimate absolute personal God is it because that what is ultimate is impersonal or is it your position is that there is no ultimacy or ground of all existence my position is that the premise that the best explanation for the cause of the universe existing is God is a non sequitur that it does not follow because you're not addressing my question how I'm not you're talking past my question you do not accept that there is a personal absolute creator God now you say that that does not exist now you will either say that it does not exist because what is ultimate and absolute is impersonal negating a personal absolute or your position is that there is nothing is ultimate which is your position Jim nothing is ultimate or absolute nothing that I know of okay is that your assertion there is nothing that's ultimate yes to my knowledge okay then then you live in a world of chance where all events are just simply spontaneous you have you have no grounding to assert anything you have now that you have stated now that you have asserted that nothing is ultimate or absolute you live in a complete world of complete relativity in other words you have no grounding for anything you will have any any fact that you assert it there will be no reason why it exists we're just got to get justification for his beliefs okay well let can you address my question how do you how do you have grounding how do you have grounding just to say anything at all as an atheist when that when there's no ultimate okay do you when you assert there is no God by implication you are claiming to possess by by implication the capacity to reason but if there's no absolute if there's no ultimate you have no grounding for reason reason has no intelligibility but it destroyed your ability to communicate but but if knowledge is a justified belief and God can't can't justify his beliefs doesn't have justification for his beliefs then how could his you're changing you're changing you're changing the subject okay no I'm not I'm directly addressing the Christian God and I'm showing you that you're right you're engaging in no what you're doing is you're tap dancing and you're dodging you are evading no I'm not I'm directly glad to address I will be glad to address to you how how God can know or believe things I'm more than happy to discuss that I discuss that on a regular basis on the on the internet what you are your position you have already rejected the Christian worldview and I want to see if the denial of the Christian worldview is intelligible so did in your rejection of the Christian worldview do you have grounds to affirm or deny anything in a world where there is nothing ultimate or absolute of course I obviously do I made it to the debate on time I'm wearing my shirt button my my tails are matching up I comb my hair I think it okay are all the are all those states of affairs unconditionally non-dependent or does their existence derive from a greater context no they are they are dependent they are dependent on okay so so right so their intelligibility depends upon its most outermost context what would that be since there is nothing ultimate you have no ultimate context for facts do you mm-hmm well I mean I have probably basic beliefs I buy my own presuppositions okay when you have when you say that those are those are non-derivational facts they're uninterpreted facts because you have no outer context for that do they explain themselves are they ultimate in themselves and and you don't have any out of context for God's beliefs wait wait wait wait are you are you are you are well Jim is Jim was speaking there I just want to be able to hear him you don't you don't have a and an outer justification for God's justification of his beliefs so how do you know that my presuppositions cannot be how do you know I don't anything prior verse can either how do you know how do you know I don't have a justification oh I would love for you to tell me where God just gets just you just made a claim you just told me that I don't have a justification do you know do you know but if you know I would like to hear you know a second let's give Jim a chance just want to hear from Jim for a second I would I would like for you to answer just won't just one question just just that one where does God get justification for his justification for his belief God doesn't need justification because he is what we call in theology archetypal knowledge versus human knowledge which is ectiple ectiple knowledge or belief states are derived okay because we're not omniscient because God is omniscient and he innately knows the truth value of all propositions God's knowledge is not is not derived because he's omniscient now I've answered your question now and who prescribing the let me I answered your question now the problem that you had the problem that you have is you want to make a denial there is no God but your world view does not have the framework or the foundation for affirmation and denials because nothing is ultimate there is nothing that's absolute then nothing has to be absolute dark Duncan okay if you if in your world view your position is nothing is ultimate or absolute not that nothing is but it's not necessary what is your position it is not anything is there anything that is absolute if you're not aware of anything that's absolute then then your words are meaningless they're not grounded in anything if my words are meaningless and how are you understanding me no because you live in God's world I'm saying your words are meaningless with respect to your system that you are claiming you are claiming that you have a foundation less system you want to invoke dependent facts but they ultimately do not depend upon anything now are the facts that you speak are the facts that you speak here arbitrary or do they have an ultimate and final grounding they're just as arbitrary as yours okay are you conceding here tonight that your world view and all of the dependent statements that are derived from it are are entirely arbitrary yeah absolutely okay so you just admitted that your atheism is irrational just like yours Duncan okay then but that would be another irrational statement because you just admitted that all your statements are arbitrary and irrational oh okay so so you're gonna do this then because well yours are also rational so you're saying that I'm a rational as a rational so therefore I'm rational does your world view in your denial of the Christian God do you have a a metaphysical foundation by which you can affirm or deny anything I'm sorry that's irrational I don't understand what you're saying okay I think you understood what I said you're playing we're playing games now well you and you're gauging in special pleading I'm showing you the idea the no there's no what was the special pleading Jim well you you have not shown where God gets his beliefs or his moral that's not that's not special pleading Jim what I asked you the question I asked it I didn't need it we do need the rest of his response there I don't think he was done yet go ahead Jim well did did did God did God create logic God God cannot cannot exude false it he can't lie right that's correct so does does either God has justification for his belief in his actions or or he doesn't or they're they're dependent on him God is on mission what if God is omniscient what is any justification I do want to be sure that just to be sure that Jim was finished were you finished their Jim or are you still going it is God on the on omniscient is that a claim you're making yeah the God of the Bible is omniscient but the point I'm trying to get from you is whatever objections you make whatever affirmations or denial does your worldview provide for it ultimately and foundationally it's not necessary so it's not why isn't it necessary so in other words you could you you feel comfortable with just simply making arbitrary declarations they're not arbitrary they're relative they may seem that I guess you can call them arbitrary if you're wanting to grossly mischaracterize it but sure are your affirmations and denials from your worldview are they ultimately arbitrary or do they have an ultimate and foundational grounding they have a foundational grounding but not an ultimate one it's not necessary that's a contradiction in terms I use the word foundational as a synonym for ultimate oh well you didn't tell me that so if you're if you're gonna conflate what is it do you have an ultimate do you have a when I say foundational I mean ultimate do you have an ultimate or foundational grounding for anything you affirm or deny in your atheistic worldview my presuppositions okay your presuppositions are not ontology what what is your ontology that would be ultimate that would be a basis for which for you to affirm and deny things but you still haven't you have something to explain why an ultimate is necessary okay because then you're gonna be left with an complete arbitrary system how so because then you have no foundation what is it okay so what is God's foundation God's foundation is himself he's assay have you ever heard that term you're a former Christian okay in my presuppositions don't need one okay so your omniscient my presuppositions are I guess oh your presuppositions are omniscient so you know all you know all things I'm see you see what you're doing what you're doing me like my present one arm is that what you mean by you're just make listen you're just rambling here just to be sure I want to hear just from Jim for a second there are you telling past present and future omniscient I'm asked I'm asking you are you omniscient now I'm asking you what you mean by omniscient since you like to conflate terminology I'm trying to get a get a definition are you are you omniscient are you talking about past present and future knowledge I'm talking about do you know all states of affairs do you know the truth value of all propositions is that past present present future is that what you're saying knowing that knowing the truth value of all propositions would include that do you know that no because you're God okay so yes he does now since since you're not omniscient okay what is your ultimate grounding for anything you affirm well I affirm that your God isn't isn't real and cannot exist because if he know if he knew all then it would be an it would have been a moral act for him to have created anything to begin with Jim you need to focus that's not an answer to my question it is an answer to your question you said no it was a respond no it was a response but it was not an answer to my question now I ask you what is it that is ultimate and foundational in order for you to even attempt to make any affirmations or denial or are your affirmations and denial whatever they be utterly groundless and foundationalist foundation it's not necessary Duncan for me to have something foundational because I'm on the internet talking to you hundreds of miles away apart from each other and I'm and I'm functioning perfectly fine yet I'm not relying so you're saying the world so the world so the world around you are you using revelation am I using revelation all of our use using revelation to talk to me right now all of God's creation is revelatory in natural revelation now what I want to know from you is you're telling me I answered your question science I answered your question now you told me that the world works in a certain way do you so you do not live in a world where all events are spontaneous and unrelated and connected to each other are you sure okay so you so you believe all events are unrelated and connected to each other I don't perceive things on a on a quantum level I perceive things on a macro level so I which is your world do you know the world do you live in a world from which you are speaking here tonight do you live in a world where all events are unconnected and unrelated and have no causal relations to each other or not nope I'm not understanding your answer how are you how are you not understanding I want to know what I want to know your view because you you know that you're in the exact same position that I am Duncan actually actually I did defend my worldview in the beginning but you categorically rejected the revelation of God now we're going to see if the denial let me finish please I yeah sure I will you are from you are familiar you are familiar with the natural revelation and special revelation of the Christian God you have categorically rejected that okay since you since you reject the revelation of God I'm not going to give you any other further information because that's all you need since you reject that then you deem that your denial thereof is viable my position is you can't even you you cannot deny the Christian worldview or or any other fact because you're gonna need a grounding to do so now what I'd like to know is this you have you have gone on record saying that you do not accept that anything is ultimate if nothing is ultimate then what do any of your facts depend upon the answer is nothing you have a chain that leads nowhere okay well I use the exact same the exact same organs that you do to make decisions the exact same decision-making processes I mean I don't I don't understand the world around different about so the world Christian and me being an atheist and being able to function so the world around you right now operates in terms of causality and laws of nature is that your position yeah if I let go of this pen it drops I know that okay so do you know that there are are universals and laws sure and I can demonstrate them can you demonstrate your foundation God has already demonstrated himself but you have rejected that now no that is your claim can you tell me can you tell me can you tell me how you were able to ascertain that there are laws are universal by what means I well I do want to entertain that your God is not real based on your definition of him you said that God you're not listening you're not listening to me there for God does not exist Jim you're not listening to my question I keep on asking questions and you give an answer to that I'm asking how are you able to act ascertain you're making assertion about how the world is in your God-free world what I want to know for me how do you know may I finish please I'll ask the question how do you know that the world around in your God-free world how do you know that there are laws are universal by what means a pro a evidence experience what does what does that even well take take your pick is it is it through sense experience or is it just through your thinking wait you can only be through one I'd like to know how do you know that there are universals I just told you all right go ahead explain it okay first of all they're not universal because the laws of physics broke down around the singularity hold on hold on well you have to give a chance to respond the laws of physics and the laws of logic what laws are temporary what what then then then what I'm asking you if they're laws then they're what we call in philosophy universals okay the laws and universals are synonyms of each other do they exist do they exist yes on our scale okay now on on what basis do you say that there are laws and universals is it through sense experience yeah absolutely okay well you can't see laws or universals you can only see particulars jump I can observe them yes I can't okay you're not you're not getting this you cannot see no I can observe them look look look watch this is gravity watch that's gravity you're making Jim you're making an elementary mistake that many atheists do Jim if I visit every country of the world and I see white swans without seeing a one black swan and I come back to you and I say because of the consistency of events all swans are white is that a fallacy yeah okay you've committed that same fallacy you would be justified believing may I finish please Jim I'm trying to explain to you how you've committed a fallacy it's the fallacy of induction you are using induction okay you are using induction right appealing you start off with the premise that I finish please because you're not understanding and I'm trying to explain it to you fuck yeah you can when I get done explaining your fallacy you're telling me you're telling me that there are universals by an appeal to induction by observing the part you're saying the whole conforms to the part that's called induction is that how you're justifying laws and universals Jim I'm not answering another question you can answer some of my questions I'd like an answer to my question that you've been I don't care what you would like I would like to be well then your claim then your claim that there are laws and physics are arbitrary they're without rational basis I think what will well no I'm not I'm saying that you are simply my mental state of not believing in your God is is is the exact same thing as him not existing because you say that your God is is is a God that that exists or he or he doesn't exist and if he exists then then everybody knows about him and the fact that I don't know about him even just me that not not much less you know everybody else is plenty of evidence to suggest that your God does not exist so you so you so are you employing that reason right now yeah what are the what are the ultimate grounds for reason then how does your world why do you keep saying ultimate okay would you have a given ultimate grounds whenever you cross the street yes okay and what is it God explain to me how God crosses the street for you or you God created all facts are created by facts by God and God sustains all facts now what I want to know it's from you what I want to know from you in your God are you seriously gonna ask me another question of course because you're not you're not answering my other questions no how about you let me ask a question how about I've been asked I've been answering all your questions no you haven't actually I have what would you like to know you answer partly a very sure ask me some questions I don't go as they answer your question good okay you know you can stop over talking me okay I'm not I'm not gonna do this whole interrupting thing we can have a productive conversation or you can do that childish okay I'm not asking childish I'm being assertive no you are acting very childish Jim ask your questions I'm not afraid of answering questions obviously you are afraid of answering my oh no no I'm not I'm tired of answering them and without being answering my question okay now I was a chance that you can ask the question is Jim and how do you know that the revelation that you receive is correct when you have to depend on reasoning in order to interpret that revelation how do I know it's correct because it is through God's revelation that's how I know anything the way that I know anything the way that I know anything is going to be in virtue of God's revelation because in the Christian worldview nothing can be known that is independent of God's revelatory acts if I answered otherwise if I answered otherwise to you then you could fault me for an inconsistency and to a contradiction of the Christian worldview so the way that I know anything at all is through God's revelatory and providential acts not anything at all but that it's correct how do you know that what you're receiving is correct that how I know it's correct is through God's revelation and the denial thereof leads to absurdity it's a reductio and absurdity how do you know that the external physical world is real there are also connections and laws of nature because if you did if you deny it it will consequently result in absurdity because the denial thereof the denial thereof is impossible you it is impossible to deny the revelation of God that is how I know that it is correct now I've had any other question you can't ask more questions for me you can't ask me a question then answer it for me don't get you have any other questions for me Jim um sure how do you justify saying that the universe the universe has to have a cause therefore God I didn't say that so you don't believe that God is the best I know that's not that's not what I said I said that God exists and I know this in virtue of his revelatory actions okay and and I asked you how you how you perceive those revelatory actions and I received those revelations God's revelatory actions through the means that he created which is his creation my sense perception my reason through communicating with various individuals across the course of human history and sovereignly securing that that message down to the very words gets to us infallibly now do you have any more questions before I get to my um yeah um if if God created like the laws of logic and physics how do you know that you are implementing them correctly that you're receiving and implementing correctly okay God did not create the laws of logic the laws of logic are a reflection of God's eternal nature and his actions so when God creates and he sustains entities they are a reflection of his being God cannot exude that which is false he upholds he creates an appalled I'm answering him in Hebrews 3 it states that Christ upholds all things by the power of his will God cannot exude or sustain that which is false any other questions um no you can go ahead okay now your position is that you just you not only deny Christianity you deny that there's a personal absolute Creator God so merely dismissing Christianity for whatever rationale that you may have will not get you to the coherence or intelligibility of atheism that there is no personal absolute Creator God now what I want to know from you from my initial question on what grounds do you assert that there is no ultimate Creator God because there is no reason to believe that that there is okay it doesn't follow that you don't have a reason that there is no Creator God Kai Nielsen a very famous atheist author and I will paraphrase him said all of the reasons for God may fail but it still may be the case that God exists so the fact that you claim that you are unacquainted with sufficient reasons for God's existence it doesn't follow from that that God doesn't exist so how is it that there is no God okay it's a worthy it's a worthy quote now it doesn't follow that that you don't have a reason for God that there is no God so do you have any other line of reasoning that there is no God there there is no reason to believe that there is just like there's no reason to believe that there is a tooth fairy okay I mean I mean I mean is there like for example how do you know that the tooth fairy doesn't exist is it because there's no reason to believe okay because you performed I have no because I have a good reason because I have a good reason to believe that you're on one second just to hear the rest that question because he was made midway through his question go ahead Jim no it's it's it's fine well what is this good reason that you have for I have a good reason not to believe in the tooth fairy because if I didn't finish a sentence I thought you were done go ahead to answer it we have good reasons not to believe in the tooth fairy because if the tooth fairy did exist what we would expect to find is that little children all over the world would be finding money underneath their pillows for which their parents had absolutely no explanation for it okay now your comparison your your comparison with a temporal object is not it's a category error because what we're talking about is the ground of all existence now what I'd like to know from you right your position isn't simply oh I don't have a reason to believe in God your position me never saw me did you ask me your position necessarily entails the falsity of a personal ultimate God and what I want is I'm not done yet I'm not no I'm not gonna have you ask me another question like you can't respond to me and then not allow me to read but I'd like no you can know you're not scared of anything you're no you're I didn't get the question I can't read but are you refusing me what you're gonna be argumentative now so yes it's it's a debate no it no no you're being argumentative that's not debated here damn right I am because you are what we're going to do hold on we let's let's give Jim a chance given chance we'll come right back to you I was speaking right so one challenge though is like if you do say something like if you let's say like give a couple of sentences or kind of propositions and then immediately after ask a question the conversation can move so fast that as Jim's answering the question if you ask him another question he can't go back to those original propositions that you stated at the start so he cut me off in midstream events asking my question okay well it's been a rough and tumble one so I'm gonna kind of let it fly and let Jim answer well this generally happens with atheists when they have no answers no is really happens with you I can go look at my debates this doesn't happen with anybody else that's because you probably don't get the tough questions that I'm giving you that you know I don't get jerks well I'm not really I'm not really concerned with you think I'm a jerk or not what we'll do is I am interested what we do want to do hold on so just to go back to that if you do remember the propositions Jim we'll give you a chance to respond to those before Duncan asked the next question that he was going to ask okay now you're no no Duncan I'm saying well I'm speaking when he cut me off okay hold on you know this happened the last last week trying to ask me another question hold on I was wanting to read but but Alyssa it's just that I do have to like it's there are times at which each of you have cut each other off and so I do have to you know sometimes it's like okay we're gonna give Jim a chance to respond right now so oh so so you're gonna let his rude interjection while I was asking my question just just here on out that's all I ask is that I get a chance to rebut no go ahead Duncan okay you you previously had stated that God does not exist because you don't have a reason for God well it doesn't necessarily thought that's exactly what you said it's on the video no reason to suggest that there is a God okay is there is God does not exist because you don't have a reason to believe in God is that your position there's no reason to suggest that a God exists just like you said that with the tooth fairy you know you don't believe in that tooth fairy because you don't see evidence of money being dispersed around that the parents don't leave just like with this this God of creation the God who committed a global flood and who's supposed to be a personal and loving God yet everything that we see is contrary to that well first of all now you're you're baiting and switching now you're switching from not general content finish please may I finish please now you are baiting and switching okay we're going back to to the God of the Bible now I offered a defeater for the guy you talking about okay Jim please don't be rude okay it's Christianity Jim Jim that's right and I'm questioning you right now about your atheism okay now I gave you the opportunity to ask me a series of questions and I kept on saying are you done are you done and you finally said you're done so it's my turn so that means don't get your question okay oh so you're gonna be rude again there's a common denominator there Duncan what we would like to do is yeah it's called atheists well we'll uh okay it sounds like Duncan do you have a question that you were going to ask to Jim yeah Jim Jim said earlier that God any God creator God does not exist because he does not have a reason for that it does not necessarily follow because he doesn't have a reason that there is no absolute creator God okay is it your position that there is no God no yes it is but you're mischaracterizing my my okay can you give me can you give me your argument as to why there is no absolute creator God sure if you'd let me I'm waiting okay because there is no reason to suggest that not only is it an intelligent agent be the cause of the universe but there's no reason to suggest that a deity was the cause and additionally there's no reason to suggest and go the additional step and say well not only is it that God but it is my God and it's the only God you make a bunch of unjustified beliefs I didn't hear an argument that there's no God all I heard you tell me is that you don't have reasons to believe in a God are you omniscient no do you know do you know all of the possible reasons that there could be for a God no do you okay um actually no I'm not omniscient but since you don't know all possible reasons for God there still could be a God couldn't there can you think of one I asked you a question there could be sure but there's no reason to suggest good now you contradicted your now you contradicted yourself because your previous position was there is no God there could because when you assert there is no God then there could not could be because you said there is none could there be a unicorn yes okay are you saying that unicorns exist uh no I'm not so so you don't believe in unicorns or you do believe in unicorns no no I I I do not believe that there are are unicorns I don't I do not believe that there are gods but you're but unfortunately you're making a category error between no I am not may I finish please yes you are I will explain to you I am I am shocked that you're you don't understand the category error because God is not a a temporal dependent entity he is what is ultimate and eternal the ground of all existence so you've made a category error now if you didn't have to interact with me may I finish please okay your position rebutting your position your position your position may I finish please sure if you if you'll allow me your position your position is that there is no ultimate God so you you're gonna have to establish okay yeah why don't you interrupt me again see you atheists are so rude so hold on I mean about people like myself being a second correct hold on a second obnoxious hold on a second but to be fair Darth like there were times at which Jim was talking and then you had cut in so I do want to be sure Jim gets a chance to respond because I know that and I don't blame you for being passionate but just to be sure that Jim does get a chance to respond I can see that so for example like the last one I think he was trying to sneak it in before he started with another point where argument so it is you know like if if Jim has a question I think it's we're getting around to that time or it'd be good to I'm still waiting for an answer as to why there's no God for me but all I get is double talk well okay I'll give you an answer first of all it's not double talk I don't believe that there is a creator God or a personal God because there is no evidence where we would expect there to be evidence such as we would expect a creator God like the one that we're arguing tonight the God of Christianity so I will be talking about the God of the Bible does not exist number one due to the problem of evil both natural and moral evil the fact that God cannot create a better plan than to create two two beings who couldn't even make it one generation before screwing up and then he curses all of humanity in a generational curse punishing other people for the sins of others drowns the world does a series of cataclysmic extinction events Sodom and Gomorrah and the Tower of Babel and and all because that was the best he could do and for an omniscient and omnipotent and an omni benevolent being uh that that does not even begin to toe the bar and that is why that doesn't get you to atheism all that tells me is you're having an emotional hissy fit about what the God of the Bible did now what I like to know from you is okay do do you know what is ultimate Jim if you want to do an atheism versus deism argument you should do you know what do you know what is ultimate Jim I don't believe that there is anything ultimate up okay all right now if nothing is ultimate then uh the facts that come out of your mouth have no grounding do they Jim you keep saying that but you haven't uh you haven't justified that you didn't you didn't answer you didn't answer my question hold on a second you're giving me a typical evasive response I do want to give him a chance to respond yeah well he responded but it wasn't an answer to my question it doesn't make any sense because the your god uh uh prescribes these laws and these these moral commands they're not addressing my question dude hold on a second I know but it's we don't want to cut each other off he keeps on coming back to my god we're addressing his atheism let's well it's like if it's grounded in something that has no grounding he's already he's already gone on record rejecting the god of the bible what I'm attempting to show by questioning his worldview that he has no grounds or foundation to say anything and he keeps on going back to attacking christianity we we already know that he rejects christianity please do not over talk me Jim okay I'm not gonna stick to the topic okay please do not over talk me Jim now I want to know from you you said there's no evidence for an absolute ultimate creator god well to say there's no evidence for a god as a conclusion you could only say that is if you first knew that there is no god do you do you know that there are no causal relations causal relations don't equal god let me I may I finish please again you asked me a question I can't answer a question but yeah Jim let me get the question out well but to be fair like that was like you did ask a question and Jim was answering I didn't finish the question well well and you didn't give me a chance to rebut your your comment every time I try to get the question out you interrupt me because your question is always followed up I will ask the question it definitely it definitely sounded like you asked because you comment and then you followed up with a question you don't give me a chance to read it I'd like to get my question out I don't give a fuck ridiculous James James I would appreciate if you would exercise a little bit more moderation this is inevitably what these atheists here we go so let's go Q&A how about that for moderation okay I'd like yeah I'm trying to Q&A right now and you okay no no no we're gonna Q&A I'm now you told me there's no I forgot hold on a second I'd like to know hold on a second hold on we basically we do this is like the natural time at which we would go to Q&A so every time I ask a question I get cut off and when I don't get cut off he answers a question that I did not ask listen it'll be all right it's typically what atheists do Jim it'll be all right it's Jim is a prime example of it later good let's see here just catching up on so thanks for your questions folks we do want to remind you each of the gentlemen have their links in the description and thanks so much we're gonna move through these fast we have a lot of questions so I appreciate it folks Steven Steen says sexiest lineup on modern day debate thanks for letting me get my question out James yes you asked a lot of questions I definitely let you get a lot of questions yeah which he cut me off on most of them and the rest of me didn't even answer that's I answered with another answer I doubt it was first of all I think there was a lot of cutting off going on in both directions and so it's I'm Jim hasn't uh I'd say it's uh you did cut him off as well so keep that in mind so Steven Steen not as an obstructionist tactic as he was doing gosh yeah okay James no uh let's see so we appreciate your questions folks I'm going to try to fly through as many as we can Steven it was complimenting you he said sexiest lineup on modern day debate of all time I do propose so that's pretty sick thanks Steven and I'm sure he's referring specifically specifically referring to you Duncan so Brian Stevens thanks for your question they said I know that the God of the Bible doesn't exist it has been revealed to me by the Prime Mover uh we'll give you a chance to respond to that Duncan if you'd like um well what what are the properties and attributes of these prime movers whenever whenever somebody rejects the revelation of the God that exists they attempt to erect an idolatrous conceptualization of the God of the Bible but it's impossible to match the God of the Bible's properties and attributes sets because they are unique to him okay now I can give a much longer explanation but this is a typical atheist canard that they Paul got you thanks so much may I ask what attribute of God is unique to him uh that he that he is triune that he is triune or that he's like multiple gods and one because the Hindu the Hindu god brahman uh is uh a sort of trinity no that's that that's false uh the God of Hinduism is a monistic God all is one one is all you don't know your Hinduism no next up thanks for your question I I do actually no actually you don't next up uh math pig thanks for your super chat they said sorry I'm late check out that stash Jim I think they like your stash next up joey joey spinosa thanks for your super joey said fun night I'm no longer bored so glad I definitely was not bored this was a wild one thanks so much God servant who says question for Jim excellent they said friend where do you derive your morality from if not from just your opinion and how do you justify your position who's the question to to Jim they said it's it's not just my opinion it's based on on many things some I'm I'm sure that I'm I'm born with that are you know that are biologically evolved but other things are are learned socially and and you know you you adapt to the cultures that that you go to for example if you live in a in a in a in an eastern country for a long enough time then you will develop certain habits that aren't typical here you know maybe maybe you'll you'll bow to people or you'll um you'll take off your shoes before you walk inside or something like that so something that that's not typical to the culture that you you came from something that is seen moral in one place and uh or right in one place and wrong in another or show in the bottom of a of a foot whatever it's it's it's all relative that there is nothing that is that is hinged on anything ultimate because there's so much diversity that's that's plenty of reasons to just to suggest that to be true and if nothing is ultimate then how can you say anything is true hold on one sec just to get through as many questions as we can I'll let you ask one question because Jim just asked you a question or in the q&a so we do have to move right after jim answers that question that we do have to go back into the q&a yeah if not if nothing is ultimate or absolute how can you say anything is true jim well I mean are we talking objective truth I mean I don't think we can say that anything is is uh no I just said nothing is hold on we do we have to give him a chance to respond when I'm when I say true I mean true in the sense that it's uh it comports to reality okay how do you how do you know what the nature of reality is hold on we said that it was just going to be one question through observation and just going to be one question that's a fallacy of guys hold on so we got to go back so uh let's see we got that from mr cook jr thanks for your super job they said is dungan atheism going to agree to debate jack angstreech or is he still running from him his response will likely be some rhetoric about troll but it doesn't take away the fact that he's scared if you want to yeah you wasted you wasted your money and asking the question the question was asked and answered last week check out the videotape uh between me and um shannon q duck lips gotcha let's see like shannon's lips okay spikes oh i didn't say i like i didn't say i like them gosh okay you don't like shannon's lips all right spike smith thanks for your super jack question he said for dd assuming uh so for duncan assuming god is real they say is he capable of willing himself into non-existence how can we know if he hasn't done so already um god by his very nature would be absolute ultimate and and eternal and so his non-existence uh cannot cannot be he he exists necessarily that would be that would be like saying can an apple apple equal not an apple okay that would vie that would violate at least from that person's perspective the law of non-contradiction at excluded middle so god necessarily exists and since he necessarily exists he cannot not exist gotcha thanks so much next up brian stevens patreon question thanks for your question he says has darts or uh duncans script converted one atheist to theism if so can he name someone he converted yeah i get i get many notifications on a weekly and monthly basis of people who i've changed their mind people who are sitting on the fence some atheists a lot a lot of agnostics i'm very happy with the responses that i've gotten gotcha thanks so much subtracted thanks for your question let's see they asked duncan donuts you don't have to have absolute knowledge to disprove the existence of god you're presupposing a conclusion that you haven't demonstrated yeah that's just an incoherent question um the point is simply this is if you do not start with the revelation of the one true god and his property set you will have no grounds or foundation to assert or affirm anything here we have jim here tonight folks where he's asserting this he's asserting that but he admits that he has nothing nothing is ultimate nothing is absolute nothing is foundational but he keeps on spewing assertions grounded in nothing this is a perfect example of just pure atheism arbitrariness that is a false dichotomy just because something's not grounded in something absolute does not mean that it's not grounded in anything yeah that's ridiculous that was a total clueless response that you just gave there totally clueless something is something you know no what you said one second one second i want to give you are you are abusive you know that you are you are a very it's not abusive no it's not abusive it's to the point no it's not a false dichotomy either something is ultimate or it's not ultimate it's a true dichotomy jim hold on one second i just want to ask can you do me a favor just one sec just a second we what we want to do is is that i like if you're answering a question dunkin that's from one of the audience members and then you give up you take a jab at jim i've got to let jim respond so but but i but that well i know and i know you're okay with that but then the my challenge is then we get we get uh you guys start tumbling into a debate again is always like i i want to give him a chance just because you took a jab at him and uh and that's fine i don't care if you take a jab at him as long as he gets to respond and then we got to go back to q and a so i do have to try to pull it back into q and a if you guys don't mind go ahead arne roervick thanks for your question they said question for dunkin could god be lying to you through scripture no okay um michael mccaffey i'm only laughing because of your your pithiness michael mccaffery thanks for your super chat question they said does dunkin think it's possible for a universe to exist without a god if that universe begat conconscious beings what would they ground their experience in no that's just that's just asking me if an idolatrous conception of reality could be the case well the answer is it cannot be because my central starting point is the existence of the triune god and that he has revealed himself his existence is necessary so any other scenario that would deny that would be necessarily false and incoherent gotcha next up because they always kind of prioritize debate challenges uh the messenger reveals thanks for your super chat question this question in particular is offering a challenge to one of you guys they said let's have a debate objective morality trinity jesus's blood atonement you not meeting the criteria criteria to be a follower of jesus care to defend any i guess that's for you dunkin was there was there a clear question there they want i think they're saying would you care to defend any of your positions on objective morality the trinity jesus's blood atonement or whether or not you meet the criteria to be a follower of jesus i i do i do every day on the internet gotcha thanks mathra j disco for your super chat question they said what is your right why is your rhetoric abusive darth why is my rhetoric abusive i don't think it's abusive i think sometimes it's just simply straightforward the plain truth about uh how sometimes my interlocutors are just simply being rude and and obnoxious i understand that there's always going to be some over talking but when they use it as a tactic to disrupt the line of questioning because there are deer in the headlights i think we saw many times tonight jim had no idea how to answer the questions and so even before i could get some of the questions out he cut me off i've got to give him a typical because you would answer one of my questions and then immediately follow it up with a question of your own without allowing me a chance to read but to your response so i mean you can just take that right back where you got it hold on you have a do you have a metaphysical grounding for your just so you're just just just just before hold on a second just before we i hate to mute you guys um i got you both on mute but uh just to be sure we can go back into the q and a i just since uh there was a jab at jim i want to give him a chance to respond then we gotta go back in the q and a uh steven steen thanks for your super chat he said you're doing more than okay today jim wink wink gotcha drew nickles even you're all right too man nasty guy is about you he also said i love nickleback that's weird why would you bring that up drew nickles thanks for your super chat yeah well yeah he said darth our or Duncan our miracle claims in the bible historically verifiable if so cite the standard within the methodology thanks yeah the the the miracles are confirmed by the eyewitness testimony that god has sovereignly um and providentially secured to be written down objectively and accurately if you do do not accept uh those accounts you're also going to be rejecting the bible as a package and as a worldview and consequently you will have no worldview to affirm or deny a reason from deny the christian world view and you won't have how is it a false dichotomy no i don't know why you're saying either it's the bible or nothing are you seriously are you seriously there's no there's not other worldviews no you're not you're not there's there's only basically two worldviews there's the worldview the christian oh there's not basically may i may i finish play may i finish play no you may not because it's you ask me a question and i'm attempting to answer you so when i when i try to answer you you immediately start over talking to me well you want to keep calling me rude i'm just gonna give you a reason to call me you are being rude and i'm gonna call you out every time you are let's see so go ahead uh darth now the answer to the answer to the question and is there basically two worldviews there's there's god or or not god well every worldview will either affirm the christian god or a worldview will deny the christian god now there are different flavors within that worldview they have different idolatrous conceptualizations but essentially all non christian worldviews are essentially the same thing it is not the christian god okay gotcha thanks so much next question thanks so much arne ruervic thanks for your question i'm sorry jim i you that in that one you took a jab at dunkin so i i have to give him the last no that's that that's fine i'm just i'm just i i i oh okay i see you're responding to okay arne ruervic thanks for your question superjad they said you're welcome james finally faced this is nice of you appreciate that so track to thanks for your superjad as well they said how can infallible human determine a revelation from an infallible god uh very simple god sovereignty and providence secures that the message that he infallibly intends to get across get to its target gotcha thanks so much philip uh see irvin jack forgive me if i mispronounce it they said hello dunkin atheism if everyone has received revelation from god does that mean that atheists want to go to hell and if so does that mean that hell isn't such a bad place to go well uh the answer to your question is atheists want to be in rebellion of the god that they know so much so that they psychologically deceive themselves that they do not know that god exists because they're clinging to their own autonomous reasoning that while they cling to their autonomous reasoning that prohibits them from um receiving god's um self attesting and self authenticating revelation their own psychological self deception blinds them to god's revelation gotcha gotcha let's see next up jay 32 thanks so much for your super chat they said james why do you let dunkin dominate and control uh let's see i thought that i stepped in once it got heated enough james james james james did the best he could um but you know appreciate the criticism let's see the butcher thanks for your super chat is this guy kent hoven's kid he acts like him well actually jim is not really kent hoven's kid that was a joke i made so just kidding i think they meant you dunkin do you like kent hoven are you a fan um well there are certain problems uh with kent hoven but um i do like his critique of what a poor um theory the theory of evolution is gotcha next up thanks for your uh question maynard say as you appreciate it they said can dd or uh dunkin prove god's existence without words um no ever everything proves god's existence and if you if you if you don't accept that then you're gonna have to explain what the grounds for proof is if you can prove something at all then god exists if you if you do not accept that then you're gonna have to explain uh what are the grounds for reason proof truth objectivity or anything and as we saw in jim's case he basically conceded that there is nothing provable or ultimate or or foundational gotcha i didn't say there was nothing provable that's that's if you if you have if you have nothing ultimate or foundational how are you going to prove anything jim what are you talking about like i don't i don't need to assert that there's something ultimate in order for me to prove to you that uh that that i'm not wearing an undershirt or that or that i'm wearing pajama pants instead of actual pants because you can't see them on camera not you're not you're not understanding no you're not you're not you're going it's going right over your head if you're going to make an assertion i guess so you're going to if you're going to make an assertion it's either ultimate in itself or it's going to require an a wider context if that context is not ultimate it will as well require a final context until you come to a stopping point point to what is ultimate and foundational in reality if you have no ultimate foundation then nothing is provable jim well you have no grounds for anything we'll give jim a chance to respond then i got to go back to q and a my my presuppositions are plenty good enough they they they helped me through through my daily life they helped me seek truth they they helped me establish right from wrong the fact that i have never murdered anybody or raped anybody or kidnapped anybody or drowned babies or circumcised anybody um i mean kind of makes me feel like i'm i'm pretty pretty moral um and especially in contrast to the christian god that's an appeal to pragmatism which means you'd have to have an ontology hold on one second we just hold on does the world work in a certain way jim we do have to go back to the q and a i'm so sorry guys no you couldn't answer that anyway brother john thanks for your question they said it's special revelation because it's special revelation i think they might be doing a satire suggesting that you're using circular reasoning Duncan now special revelation is to differentiate it from natural revelation where for example when god created the the the heavens the moon bunny rabbits trees and when adam opened up his eyes everything that he saw was a creative act of god and hence a revelatory action now when god specifically he spoke to adam that was a special revelation god spoke to moses that's a special revelation when god guided the various uh authors of the bible to infallibly write down the very message he intended word for word without that without error that it too was a special revelation right what was the sun a special revelation being it causes skin cancer no the sun is a natural revelation and skin cancer is is a judgment from god which is another type of revelation so for example in the old testament god talks about that he creates well-being and calamity uh when when god performs temporal judgments either directly or indirectly that too is revelatory is that where you get your morals hold on one second morals come from the eternal nature of character of god but you have no foundation for morals because you've admitted that you have no foundation or ultimacy you want to make an appeal to your your presuppositions which are simply your imagination i do i have a methodology for which i establish my morals which is your imagination which is your imagination well my imagination is better than your god i've never drowned anybody so so so you so you are now admitting that all of your morals are a product of your imagination thank you very much for yes and i'm saying we're gonna go back to what you're saying then then yes i will i will concede that and say that even even my imagination as a fallible human not being able to ground it in in anything ultimate or absolute i'm still better than your god hold on there's something that's ultimate is there let me ask you this question this is important it's gonna go on forever come on we just gotta go we got a lot of questions you just said you're human is there something that's absolute or ultimate that secures humanist jim q and a we gotta stop somewhere so hold on a second we uh do have to jump back into the q and a sorry guys or assertion otherwise it's gonna take forever so next up thanks so much for maynard saves oh we got that one converse contender thanks for your super chat they said was gonna relax but looks like we need an after show for sure converse contender feel free to put it in the live chat and if you want i can link in the description i hope you guys have a fun party and uh hopefully you get to see uh dunk and atheism and jim continue their lifelong feud so sit your fray ho sarabia thanks for your super chat they said well d d i don't have a problem with jim personally oh yeah don't worry about it i like teasing but don't dunk and they said i'm usually nice but you talk too much if god's absolute and eternal how is jesus how is jesus god and christianity true if god gave quote gave his begotten son uh let's see there's well that's that's that's because god is eternal and he subsists as three persons as one being and the second person of the trinity incarnated himself into human form jesus christ is fully god and fully mad he is one person with two natures study a little bit of christian theology got show okay thanks so much next up let's see oh they but they did ask they said how does an eternal being bring forth another eternal while being uh while being absolute that's not the bible that's not the biblical position oh i see so you're saying that it wasn't when you're saying begotten wasn't second part the second second hold on i'm talking well hold on so you're saying that begotten doesn't mean like literally spraying into existence is that what you're saying that's not how the biblical texts use it it means begotten meaning only one of his kind okay no begotten means to to have or to adopt um yeah are you familiar with the greek and john three yes i am familiar with okay good then you should then you should know that it's also translated only one of its kind hold on a second all right we're gonna is also translated like that whenever it's in the proper subject for for an object order we're we're going to jump to the next question thanks so much sj thomason is calling you out jim she says can we set up a debate on jesus's resurrection between me and jim soon you already know the answer to that one no oh snap it's on okay very exciting next up thanks so much for your question let's see okay we got that translator card i don't know why jim bothers to debate when he has no next up hold on a second hold on here we go we got a we put a quarter in darthigan he's like well give me one second darth translator carminum any they say any worldview inevitably reduces to one or more brute axioms no deity can ever change that dunkin's peace oppositionalist tripe is vapid and circular yeah exactly he still hold on that's that's for dunkin i want to get dunkin's response well well then what they're going what they're going to have to do is they're going to they're going to have to show that my starting point the existence of the triune god and i know this because of his revelation is is false if if they deny that god exist in his reveal himself he's not going to have any foundation to say anything that's universal let alone axioms this is see this is the dilemma that this questioner and jim is in once you deny god is the ultimate sea of reality you have no grounds to assert anything but they will continue to assert things even though they admit they have no grounding for it let's see next up thanks so much we appreciate your super chat let's see you've got a lot of haters in the chat tonight i like that you guys motivate me you have no idea how much that motivates me i love it thanks so much joni spinosa thanks for your super chat they said he's typical of oh wait i missed one citrifiedo sorabia said first category error deism versus atheism i think they're saying that that claim namely deism versus atheism is a category error therefore jim wins is what they say well yeah he definitely shut christianity real quick in exchange for deism actually no i didn't present deism at all i presented the christian world view to you which you told me you were already familiar with and you rejected it i then went on to show that the denial and rejection of the christian world view as presented results in absurdity which you confirmed by saying you had no foundation or ultimacy upon which the base assertions or denials got sure you refused to allow me to address christianity on its own and you forced me to address deism i didn't force you did i simply asked you in the beginning do you accept the general and special revelation of the christian god in natural and special revelation the christian scriptures and you said no you said you're entirely familiar with it so i'm not going to continue to beg and plead to you when you are already familiar with the data once you deny the christian world view i'm then going to show you how you cannot deny or affirm anything because you have no foundation or grounding in your worldview for affirmation or denial and you admitted it you said you have no there is you you said there is no ultimacy you said there's nothing absolute if nothing is absolute then you can't assume that you diverted from the topic thank you i did not divert from the time now you're misrepresenting what i said that's very deceitful i don't think i am hold on a second it's a complete misrepresentation which is kind of let's go to the next question thanks so much we appreciate all of your questions let's see joni spinels a thanks for your question they said he's typical of wife beater he shouldn't allow on youtube i don't know what that even like i think they they're cut maybe a one or two words missing from that but uh thanks god servant for your question they said jim major's friend would you be interested in having a debate about quote unquote evil here on modern day debate you got sure you've got all sorts of people calling you out they want a piece of you he says he wants hold on a second hold on a second darth hold on hold on we are let's go to my debates darth next up no let's no don't put a quarter of dars i've watched some of your videos but i'm surprised is how you make any assertions at all you guys nothing is all we have to keep moving i i i guess i guess i must be right you know i guess you must be wrong because i'm doing it hold on a second that's not the issue hold on okay i'm so sorry you i've got you guys on mute i've got i've got i'm so sorry i've got you guys on mute they can't hear you well okay so i'll ask the next question you guys the audience cannot hear you the audience cannot hear you the audience cannot hear you you guys are both you guys have been okay well nobody's hearing either of your points because you've been muted for the last like 20 seconds okay great i'm happy for moth richard just go thanks for your question i appreciate you guys i you know the passion is i appreciate your guys passion uh moth richard just go thanks for your question they said dunkin how do you let's see i mean if you are you guys trying to if you guys are so they say how do you hit a wife of the biblical way um i don't know if that's meant to imply that the the bible says that you can hit your wife or if this is some sort of personal accusation be aware like i mean if it's like so dunkin how do you interpret that what's this wife beating stuff that keeps coming up who knows okay gotcha if you want to respond you can you don't have to no i don't know what they're referring to gotcha thanks so much next up thanks for your question from spartan theology who says just went full darth let's see they maybe they're referring to your passion okay next sj oh we got that one that's between jim yep stupid whore energy if she likes to call herself very sick nasty woman she says induction isn't a fallacy when you rest it on probability is that directed at me i think so yeah how do how do you establish how do you establish background information in order to talk about probability you're gonna have to know what is ultimate and static along with what is dynamic right now unless unless you accept the revelation of the eternal god who is the static one who provides for all regularities and change you're not going to have any basis for probability sounds like a cult gotcha let's see no that was a philosophical point gotcha next up appreciate your question right over your head jim hold on a second all right hold on alijah bar sobac thanks for your question they said god has revealed to me in a way i can be certain that dunking atheism is a clown looks like they're they're trolling you well do they pay you to do this me or i mean do they do they no do no do they pay to get these questions in yes that was a super chat oh okay good so then you're earning money so that's okay gotcha i don't know if you're insulting me or them but no no not you i'm just i'm just saying you know if they want to put money into your ministry's pocket by insulting me more power to them the messenger reveals we appreciate your super chat they say let's have a debate oh we got that one sorry about that michael w roble thanks for your question james do your phd studies require you to provide some real life abnormal psych patient studies just asking you guys let's see next joni spinosa thanks for your question that he said the bible is morality test if you like it you've failed let's see i think that's probably for you dunkin what was the question they said the bible is a morality test and if you like it the bible then you've failed that morality test well unfortunately if by like it meaning that i accept the message of the bible from genesis to revelation as a package and that by accepting the christian worldview i fail some morality test all they're just simply saying is is that my acceptance doesn't comport with their unfounded morality because outside the christian worldview you're not going to be able to establish any grounding whatsoever for ethical imperatives or morality there will be no ultimate grounding it'll simply be just arbitrary like jim's next up uh let's see okay why do you have to do okay so jim if you want to respond to be fair because he took a jab at you you can respond i'm good okay drew nickles thanks for your super chat they said still waiting for that citation of the standard within historical methodology that verifies miracle claims cite the standard cite it um the answer to the question um is not going to be quite what you want god's revelation both of the non-miraculous occurrences and the miraculous occurrences are verified as a package as a worldview if you do not if you do not accept that it is self-authenticating self-attesting then you're not going to have any worldview by which you can verify anything because the christian god himself his properties and attributes at his revelatory actions are going to be the ground by which we can verify anything if you deny that then on what grounds are they going to offer to verify or prove anything the answer is nothing just like jim majors worldview he has no absolute to turn to gotcha why do you have to okay jim if you want to respond you can he's coming at you tonight he's well that's what he said no it's okay i it's i it's not like it's against the rules it's just that i have to give jim a chance to respond each time uh we'll be here all night but you know what i gotta be honest i always get i'm always in such a good mood during this that i well i do respect your guys time though so um i will try to keep it short and pithy elijah you're in a good mood and you're not even smoking pot that's true what does that mean i've never smoked pot in my life elijah bar elijah bar sobeck i thought i smelled something although people do sometimes i've seen it like an unusual amount it's not like every debate but it's not unusual or i see people are like is james on something so elijah bar sobok thanks for your question they said are aborted babies a judgment from your god repeat the question are aborted babies what a judgment from your god are they a judgment from god that's like asking if one person kills another person is it a judgment of god um it could be in certain instances but is is killing a baby a judgment from god not necessarily just like the killing of somebody um might be a judgment from god other times it just simply may be um an unjustified evil action gosh i think so much jim looks confused thanks so much yeah well what's what's the difference god causes well if god causes causes somebody to kill somebody else then you're saying that they don't have agency i'm saying you're saying that they shouldn't be held accountable i didn't say that where'd you get that from so you don't you don't believe that god's prescriptions are necessarily moral what does that what does that mean that what god prescribes his creation to do that he will um tell somebody to do something that is wrong do you believe that god word it that's that's that's an incoherent statement it is impossible for god to command people to do things wrong because what is wrong is what does not comport with the character or will or plan of god so it's impossible for god to command somebody to do something wrong so you believe that chattel slavery and prisoners of war and uh and killing women and children is is moral um it is god's prerogative to create life and end life anytime he sees fit and the fact that you or i or anyone else or even a toddler or teenager or 20 something or an 80 year old is still alive they're only alive because of the grace of god god is under no obligation to keep anybody alive so how do you ground your morality with something like that where god doesn't have an obligation to keep anybody alive or not even an obligation to keep him alive but he has the uh the the privilege of taking their life whenever he wants uh it's not it's not real i wouldn't use the word privilege i would say prerogative because he's the creator he owns all things right he doesn't have to destroy anything what i don't need what does that mean i'm saying like that's where you get your morality from is somebody that will prescribe the killing of of women and children and you're saying that it's okay because is morality i'm gonna answer your question with a question right is morality in your in your worldview ultimately grounded in an absolute or is morality ultimately arbitrary it's irrelevant to my question to you i'm asking you no it's a it's a relevant question because the way you can you can ask me illustrated morality in the christian world view is is um goodness and morality is that which reflects the character and will of god and which includes prescribing killings yeah killings are uh from god's point of view it's god's prerogative to kill anybody then how then how do you not kill people how do you not think that it's i'm not i don't i don't think that's that's a category or you're failing to understand the creator creates your distinction i'm feeling to understand how you differentiate between what is moral and what is immoral whenever your god does what what what is immoral what is immoral is that which deviates and contradicts the character or will or plan of god so i can drown the baby and i'll be in that's fine no because you're not god but it doesn't matter god is my my benchmark for morality right like god what is what is immoral god himself his eternal character and his will and plan are the eternal absolute plumb line of what is righteous and good you are not he is so is it a do as i say not as i do kind of thing no what i i've already explained it to you okay that you're making another category or you're trying to anthropomorphize god i'm trying i'm trying you are yeah no i do understand what it's me that's why i directly applied it to you because you are making a category error because what you are now doing is you are conceptualizing god as though he were a creature like he's some cosmic superintendent of the cosmos we're talking about the ultimacy of reality who is the standard of everything hold on one second i do have to go back to the question answers pretty quick sure god go ahead thanks so much for your patience next up thanks so much for your question let's see the messenger oh wait no name thanks for your question they said how does one discern special revelation from fiction or hallucination so i think they're saying like how do you know what special revelation rather than like just wrong or hallucination god's special revelation is is discerned um in virtue of god's sovereign plan god his sovereignty in his proven providence secure that when the special revelation is received as long as somebody is not in a state of rebellion or engaging in autonomous reasoning then the self-authenticating nature of the christian scriptures from genesis to revelation will be clearly seen however if one is in a state of rebellion of autonomous reasoning that man decides the nature of reality which will ultimately lead to incoherence in and thinking where where one will say things like jim did where there is there is no ultimacy or foundation for anything and then go around making assertions so god's revelation is self-attesting uh claims of revelation that are not from god are not self-attesting by another revelation which you know by another revelation and you know that he's sovereign because a revelation said a revelation said a revelation yeah could you repeat that please well it would be ad infinitum revelation you're basically saying that you are you are verifying these these revelations that they are true and accurate because god is sovereign and you know that god's sovereign because of a revelation and you know that he's secured in his providence because of another revelation and so you're the revelation yeah god's revelation is secured by his revelation now now jim jim if you don't accept that if you do not accept that god's revelation is yeah do you accept all circuit do you reject all circular reasoning in principle jim um not all not all circular reasoning no okay then in this particular case i certainly would we're talking about okay then then you would reject it on the ground and omnibenevolent then you would reject it then you would reject it on the grounds that you have a different ultimate authority then what would that be jim no that's a category error jim on what grounds would you reject the self-attesting nature of the christian scriptures that's that's a category we're talking about god it's not a cat no what no what we're talking about is the putative revelation of the christian grounds christian god on what grounds would you reject it by what authority that it is has to be verified by another revelation that that that's not answering the question it's not dependent on anything but itself no i no same reason you're not you're not addressing you're not addressing the question you're making the fundamental error that every atheist i encounter makes by by what would you what standard would you adjudicate that by jim next next question so you don't have an answer for it thank you just like every other eight next stop next no i i have i have an answer but i'm not going to answer you what's your ultimate authority for reason jim is it your mind i presuppose that yet you are lying and that your god doesn't exist and that you are not that's not an answer again again you have evaded the question i'm sorry it doesn't work hold on you guys hold on this is what you do i ask you a legitimate question and you dodge and you dance and you tap dance got revelations from my left nut aren't even asking what's your ultimate authority is jim do you have an answer hold on i don't yes please don't make me revelation that you are me i didn't hear that hold on so sorry guys listen i don't want to hear about jim's testicles um not unclear jim what is your ultimate authority repeat that uh you guys we have to go next question so i think he said his left testicle but we really don't okay so so last week we had shannon q dot saying that her worldview is kicking out jim's ultimate authority hold on easy there don't don't don't calm down you're gonna have you're gonna stroke out man no i'm perfectly fine i'm just glad you admitted that your ultimate authority is your left testicle we are well you know it there we go folks is the audience here right this is the best that the atheist had his ultimate it's not quite circular let's see okay enough about jim's testicles please i'm glad i'm glad he said that they just revealed what a shaman's world Nathan Thompson is in the house by the way Nathan uh good old Nathan Thompson or oh i just remember something okay so anyway we're gonna we're gonna move quick try to get through as many of these questions as we can thanks for your patience folks i'm embarrassed it's been a long day okay we appreciate your question from our dear friend messenger reveals they said jim majors is closer to entering the kingdom of heaven than darth dawkins i'll debate darth on anything he's a poor interlocutor messenger reveals coming at you Duncan what do you think yawn he's not interested in debating maydard saves i've been debating all night you just gonna maydard saves maydard saves thanks for your question they said Duncan can you provide your revelation wasn't an overproduction of dmt produced by your body yeah this is this is another canard put into different words the point is simply this is if you do not accept the christian scriptures from genesis to revelation as the self authenticating um self verifying revelation of god then you will have no grounds for verification of anything you will be plunged into absurdity just like jim majors has admitted he has no ultimate authority but his left testicle is his ultimate authority gosh which oddly which oddly has more morality than your god so that's crazy so so your left so your left testicle is what it ultimately decides what's right wrong jim yeah it's nuts isn't it this is what see this is this is what atheists are left with you have no answer as to what is the ultimate ground for verifying things so you have to say that a part of your genitalia is your ultimate authority why am i not surprised i don't know i don't know if you can tell but i'm but i'm mocking you because your world view is so is so uh hippo hippo okay well then if you're testing then can you tell then can you actually tell me what your ultimate authority is how much you make assertions jim give an answer to that you next question hold on a second you guys i love your passion but just to try to get through as many questions he has no answer we've already it's almost it's almost two it's almost two hours so i want to fly through as many as we can may or say uh we got that one don do you have any thanks for your question they said how uh how can dunk and deny the trinity din neyru and fallore i don't know who that is i feel like i should lay off the pot gosh yeah okay the undead christian thanks for your questions drugs let's see they said for jim majors it's accepted in science that space has had a beginning my question to you is if it if it hasn't had a beginning if wasn't god who created it who or what did create space since it had a beginning that's to me yeah um i'm not sure where space the space time came from where where matter came from um all i know is that anything that we see in the universe that is created like you know like uh like like the pin for example uh somebody created this but by create we don't mean the same kind of create that that darth means by create we mean that we assembled this from from materials that we had already found uh not a creating a a nothing from something so either darth is going to say that that god is nothing because god exists outside of space time it's the only way that he could create space time and we're not even going to talk about the the problem of god being able to uh interact with his creation if he does indeed reside outside of space time did your left testicle tell you that yes it did i please know more about jim's genitals okay thanks so much for your well then i'd like to know what his ultimate authority is then but he won't tell me well i could show you but the video would probably get fancy oh you have no ultimate authority you shoot your mouth off making all these assertions and yet you don't don't know what is ultimate so you've just admitted all your assertions are grounded in nothing you're gonna be mad all night aren't you i'm not mad i'm assertive next and i don't need to smoke pot on camera to calm myself down you guys are what is the word you guys are a dynamic duo you're the odd couple j shy thanks for your question they said jim if you if your morals are grounded in your imagination how are other people wrong for their subjective imaginations how can you justify you are correct well because i don't justify it just based on mine uh we we all use morality as a way to to uh to survive and and end up and uh uh and placate with with society you know not everything that we we keep from doing we believe that we shouldn't do sometimes we don't do things because society thinks that it's bad for example smoking pot on camera some people don't do it because they feel like it's bad because other people judge them for it though for what reason i i don't know it's just stupid quite frankly but uh then there are people who have no problem doing it because you know they they see that it's nothing more than than insecure people lashing out um but uh yeah it's all just um uh relative to to the culture that you're raised in your family and uh just really the the uh the ethical framework that you're that you're raised with no right give me and i knew it all in a second no no no no no darth we are not going to just let me ask the next question thanks for your uh just want to get you guys out of your untimed thanks joe joney spinoza thanks for i'm sorry i just expected expected a much better no then joney joney spinoza thanks for your question they say you all saved me a night of boredom thanks jim and thanks johnny walker i'm confused i don't know who johnny walker is is that you dunkin oh i don't know what's no okay i heard it's like the rumor is your real name is like dunkin like that's your first name like dunkin dunkin carter or something now dunk dunkin is just a screen name it's like a play on words no yeah that's a nice name it used to be dunkin dockins the floating head of richard dockins in a coffee cup so i change it to dunkin a character which i certainly did tonight this next up drew nick cause he's feisty all right dunkin you cannot claim that the historical method can verify miracle claims if there is no standard within that methodology if there is a standard please cite it uh again god's word his revelation is self authenticating and self attesting the only reason why one would not see it is because they're blinded by their own autonomous autonomous reasoning if one is operating from autonomous reasoning then they will have no ultimate grounds to affirm or deny anything those crazy people who think that general mutilation is bad like what the hell are they thinking it's in the bible come on you look you have no you have no ultimate grounds to assert anything is good or bad jim yes i do you told me there is nothing ultimate well i just realized it's my left nut no okay so this is this is what see this is the bankruptcy of your atheism hold on your your your worldview is a train wreck and it's a disaster it's a it's a it's a disaster of the hindenburg proportions well that's not very nice no no i wasn't it was it's a characterization that your worldview is a disaster you haven't even seen my nuts you don't even know hold on you have you have no grounds are you intoxicated jim why are you talking this one nobody's seen jim's nuts okay next next question thanks for your super chat this is what they're left with james okay they have to be obscene on camera rather than defend his worldview which he did i i can get on camera a coward let's up next up they drew nickels nothing to do with being a coward drew nickels thanks for your question everything to do with being a coward drew nickels thanks for your question they said duncan you cannot claim that the historical method can verify miracle claims if there is no standard within that methodology they say if there is a standard please cite it what was the question they said you cannot claim that the historical method can verify miracle claims if there is no standard within that methodology namely the methodology of the historical record yeah all i simply have to say is that that god's word is the ultimate standard either in a specificity or principle for for everything deny that and you won't be able to ground standards or anything for that matter gotcha thanks so you won't have it you won't have a christian worldview all you'll have is a chance system all you'll have is relativism which jim admitted to here tonight gotcha thanks so much next up appreciate your question from virilian if dd got special revelation from god to kill would he um i'm a cessationist i don't believe that god is continuing to give a revelation um god did give revelation that abraham was to sacrifice his son and abraham obeyed god and then god stopped him gotcha thanks so much next up because god didn't know that he was gonna do it next up thanks so much for your question it's like sassy boys okay so uh let's see philip sear than i jack if i say it wrong i'm sorry they said to my oh they said my last name is pronounced share vignac thank you so sorry about that it is actually okay i appreciate that so philip share vignac they say if you worship god do you agree with god that athias should be burned in hell for all eternity um everyone who does not repent and respond to the convicting power of the holy spirit to turn to god for salvation for the damnation that they know is coming certainly deserves to spend eternity separated from god can you say yes hold on whether they're athiast or somebody who's religious or whatever thank you jah 32 thanks for your super chat they said if god existed duncan atheism would not you have to have an intelligence test for these questions james grim hc thanks for your super chat they said does duncan understand that claims of ultimates and absolutes are invalid since they originate from a christian worldview asserting they are needed is an argument from authority duncan is using god to justify god yeah so by what authority does that moron say that let's see well that's just a crazy worldview that means god could change his mind at any time and next thing you know what's moral isn't moral the next day you know we we could be killing everybody uh tomorrow if god decides to change his mind well what kind of which god are you talking about well you're not talking about the christian god here was there's no need all the time no no he no he does not that's a fallacy you know he doesn't seem can you tell me where he was a human before i got you uh you're on mute sorry to mute you forgive me for doing that yeah you don't you don't know what you're talking about reach your butt jim do you have i don't know what okay hold on hold on hold on one second you guys well to be fair like grim grim hc isn't insulting you darth he's just they said so they're saying that you're using circular reasoning like i i think you just called him a moron yeah whenever whenever whenever we appeal to what our ultimate authority and ultimate commitment and we're going to have a type of circularity it is unavoidable the the way people are going to object to that is either in principle or because they have a different ultimate authority right now if they reject to it in principle they're screwed therefore they cannot make any certions they will have no ultimate authority to appeal to therefore everything they say will ultimately and finally be arbitrary just like jim majors here tonight i said there is no ultimate let's not no please okay jane hyal hyzel i mean jim if you want to respond you can to be fair not good jim hyal sorry shane hyal if i'm saying it right sorry if i'm not shane said we humbly pray to jim for him to show us his ultimate authority okay nasty let's see it sounds like he has none he says there is none but how would he know that that's steven steen hiding behind a fake account okay next j shy thanks for your question they said so jim you're confusing moral ontology with moral epistemology just because morals are relative in cultures and society just shows how we accept or come to no morals not their ontology no i i understand that but he's demanding that i ground my epistemology with epistemology that's not what i that but you are totally clueless you need to have an ontology to ground your epistemology but you have no ontology if you do not have an ontology then you are okay may i finish please if you do not have an ontology your epistemology is vacuous do you have an ontology jim um i'm sure that i could formulate one yeah no you can't because earlier you said nothing is ultimate so you don't have then you don't have an ontology you went on record earlier you screwed yourself wow okay okay next got you we appreciate all of your questions folks this has been an insane night uh we've talked a lot about uh jim's testicles but uh you know you never know what's going to happen here i guess so thanks so much is all i can say uh it's always a fun time folks want to say thanks so much for being here it's always a blast to hang out with you thank you guys for real uh i admit i was a little bit cranky i told a few people to shut up in the live chat tonight um i it's like sometimes it's just yeah so sometimes yeah so anyway i'm going to try to be more patient i mean 99 percent of you are so pleasant and if you have a concern you be like hey james like i have phone at the channel i just sometimes i think that maybe this would make the channel better and i'm like cool like let me work on that but some of you are like james this is my channel stop doing x y and z and i'm like okay yeah so um anyway thanks so much for being here really fun but want to say thanks so much for our guests jim majors and thank you thank you james my pleasure thank you guys for being here they are linked to the description folks so if you're like mm i want more you can find more there if you love debates we've got a lot more coming up including sargon of cod jim uh jim majors his dad and vosh his brother who will be debating this saturday that's going to be epic so we are very excited to hit that reminder button if you want a reminder of that and let's see oh randolph richardson you guys know randolph right yeah jim you have to know him he said yeah he said hello to you and then dunkin he said he'd love to debate you fine hey randall great oh by the way don't don't do it man it's torture it's not worth it yeah it's torture when you don't have a worldview to stand on yeah it must suck yeah it must suck for you next up you guys are sassy we like you though next uh there is an aftershow so converse contender who will be guest moderating tomorrow i love the guy terrific guy people are saying he's the best he's going to be on tomorrow moderating on whether or not porn is bad for you so uh that's going to be a wild one it's going to be a triple threat debate with one of your guys's favorites he's uh making a return after about a month of being out so i think you guys will enjoy that his uh radical return oh but yeah so okay i mentioned that and thanks so much for being here it's always a pleasure folks keep sifting out the reasonable from the unreasonable take care