Hey everyone, welcome to modern-day debate. Today's topic is Christianity false Let's find out by asking Stuart and Alex right now on modern-day debate Alex the floor is all yours Cool. Thank you very much. Um, I thought this might be a bit fun to do this a bit differently to how this is sometimes done so Typically the proposition and the question and these sorts of debates is Is Christianity true right and then And the theist who's on takes the affirmative and the atheist takes the negative, right? And then those debates sometimes they Depending on who it is is taking the atheist position. Sometimes it can seem like they Approach it as if they don't have to make a positive case at all. They just have to be skeptical You know nothing is really on them. It's all on the theist to make their case and It's just nitpicking from the sides or something sometimes you get that impression with what the atheist is up to And I wanted to do something different to that. So instead of Just trying to show that Stuart's arguments don't work Um, I'll offer my own argument and that's what the debate will focus on mainly Um, so I'm I'm going to be trying to defend the proposition that Christianity is false Um, and I'll give an argument which has that as its conclusion And then I'll defend the premises and we can we can I actually think only one of the Then there's only two premises and I think that whole thing will be about one of them and not the other so Right, so I guess first firstly before I say the argument I just want to talk about what it means for the proposition to be true So like Christianity is false. Um, I think just really quickly In a way that's kind of like a meaningless thing to say because um I take it propositions are the things which are true or false and the word Christianity isn't a proposition So it's neither true nor false. It's not the sort of thing that has a truth value Um, but that's some maybe just being too to literal or something when someone says Christianity is true They mean that there are some key claims key propositions That that constitutes Christianity and that those claims are true now. What exactly are those claims? Well If that's Not entirely clear and Christians disagree. Um, you know, is Do you have to believe in the Trinity, for instance? I mean probably most Christians would say yes, but not all of them right now So there are things where people will pick Uh, what their doctrines are and they'll say that's only that means you're a Christian and any deviation from that So if I was to show that Christianity is false, I can't possibly go through every single variation Christianity and show that those are false Um, so in a way, maybe this is a hopeless task, right? But I think my approach to it would be to say look There are some core Propositions we can identify and I'll identify three of those and so from my point of view when I'm saying Christianity is false I'm going to be arguing that these three propositions are false in particular And they'll be I'll get to them as we go along, but just just that's what I'm taking Uh, the debate to be about okay, so hopefully that's helpful So then I've got this argument right um two premises in the conclusion so premise one is um, just if uh, If Christianity is true then a perfect being exists that's premise one premise two is If a perfect being exists then Christianity is false and the conclusion is uh, therefore Christianity is false and So there's just two premises. I'm saying Christianity implies a perfect being but I'm saying that a perfect being implies Christianity's false um, so hopefully that's clear sounds a bit odd. Maybe the first time you hear that but It's logically valid. It's just if p then q Um, but if q then not p therefore not p So it's very easy to show that that's logically valid So there's no discussion about whether or not the conclusion follows from the premises obviously does um So if she wants to say that the premise that the conclusion is false At least one of the premises has to be false, right? So that's the only it just has to be that way. Um So premise one just says, um, if Christianity is true, then there's a perfect being and You could deny this premise I guess but I take it that that's most of the Interesting stuff is not gonna not gonna be around denying this premise. It seems to me that this is um Mainstream Christianity Most most mainstream Christians think that this is right. Um, in particular, it seems to me that, um Philosophical apologetics kind of Assumes this is true, right when people are arguing for Christianity Using things like the ontological argument or the moral argument or whatever They are assuming that there's a being who embodies perfections, right? Like planting this version of the ontological argument assumes he has like maximal greatness He embodies all of the great making properties to their maximal degree So Obviously, and you could look at someone like um, Josh Rasmussen There's this arguments about like arguments from limits or whatever. I mean all of this are presupposing That there's a perfect the god of Christianity is a kind of perfect Um being right and maybe we cash that out by saying he's omnipotent omniscient Omni benevolent, etc, etc, right? So that's the concept of God It seems to me that you get with mainstream Christianity now you could deny that and maybe you can even find Biblical support for that tonight. I don't know but But the denial means that you're saying that like Christianity implies an imperfect god, right? Not not a perfect god anyway Um, I mean maybe, you know, if that's you know, if you're listening to this debate and you think to yourself my my version of the christian god is that he's kind of Petty and small-minded and whatever and that's who I believe in Okay, cool. This argument doesn't work against you then in that case. So, you know, good day So we all part ways if that's what your view is, you know, no problem Um, everybody else who doesn't think that type of view of God is true and they think God is like You know this omnipotent omnipinevolent character Um, well, it's game on right because you think premise one is true, but if you're christian anyway um So let's move on from that premise. It seems relatively uncontroversial the controversial premise clearly is um, if a perfect being exists Then christianity is false. Now. Why why would you think that right? That's this is this is my burden of proof I think to try and motivate this premise so Like I said, I want I want to focus on like three things about christianity that seem to me essential to pretty much any any version of christianity that you can come as an optional kind of fringe idea in christianity and pick three core concepts um, and I think those things are incompatible with the idea of a perfect being right, so the things I'm going to talk about um original sin um atonement and salvation And I think those these three concepts are key to christianity. You can't really have christianity if those things are false Um, but I think that a perfect being is incompatible with those things So I'll take them one by one don't want to spend ages for laboring this because we can talk about it more, but um Let's take original sin to begin with right there and obviously this concept means lots of different things to lots of different people So you can cash this out in different ways and it might be that when I first talk about it You think to yourself now, that's not my view of original sin And cool if that's true and stew in particular if that's a line you want to go down But we can talk about what how my argument might work with a different version of original sin There's one version just to get the ball rolling Right, which is that there's some story in the old testament about eve eating an apple of the forbidden tree and and You know, let's say that that's the original sin and then Some somehow or another right leaving the details kind of vague for now on purpose um That bestows an inheritance of moral blameworthiness on everybody else that comes after her Right, like I said cash that out Maybe in a nuanced way if you want to but some some version of that's broadly right that the idea christian idea is that some Some original sin happened they did something bad and that's that's kind of why there is sin now It's why we're imperfect on why there's like suffering and death in the world and stuff, but in particular It you know If I kind of am born into the world with a moral deficit in the eyes of god because of this original sin I inherit this kind of Stated such that Everything else being equal, you know, if I don't do anything if my goodness and badness going to count it out And I was completely neutral in my whole life Well, I'm still down right because I came in, you know with some debt that I inherited But merely by being a member of the human race following on from the original sin So that's what that's what it means. Okay, so at least that's the target concept. I've got in mind Um, and this the criticism is really straightforward. It's really simple. It's just that, you know That's incompatible with justice. It's just this Injust uh state of affairs to blame somebody for something that they didn't do It's just straightforwardly not justice for that to happen so The case recently in the uk was in the news about a guy who was in prison for like 18 years because he was convicted of a rape That he didn't do and then there was dna evidence and the police sat on it for ages and but it completely exonerated him He just didn't do it. Um He was in prison. He didn't do the thing that he was in prison for and that's obviously not controversial in any way A case of injustice. It's a miscarriage of justice, right? It's just straightforward It's not relative to some theory of justice. That was an injustice Every theory of justice as that was in an injustice. It's just straightforward. It's like saying Murdering babies for fun is morally bad. You know, that's true on everybody's theory of morality. Yeah, it's not a quirk of a particular theory Um, but you know, the blaming somebody for original sin is the same as that and it's effectively it's analogous to that I didn't do the thing that caused original sin, but i'm being punished for it. I'm being blamed I inherit moral blame-worthyness as a result of that original sin And it's just not just and a perfect being wouldn't do that a perfect being would be just they would employ justice when they were judging people um So there you go, right original sin is required for christianity, but a perfect being wouldn't embody that So if a perfect being existed, he wouldn't have original sin and there goes christianity, right? There'd be some other versions of some other religion would be true if if a perfect being existed or maybe no religion whatever But not christianity um Okay, so moving on then we've got um atonement, right? So in atonement what what i'm talking about is um, got uh, jesus dying on the cross basically so what what That is okay. So there's some guy some dude in palestine in the first century died on the cross, but Of course the that action or that event is bestowed with a load of kind of metaphysical significance by christian the christian tradition such that um instead of just being like at the death of a man it's um It has like is there some like he dies for our sins. It's like relating back to original sin though washing away the uh The sinfulness or something that we had um before and he's like doing the sacrifice for us But again, my criticism is basically the same as it was in the first case That's that's a case of blatant injustice. I mean if let's take an example suppose Your best friend gets murdered by a gangster And then the gangster gets caught and put on trial and found to be guilty and sentenced to go to prison for the rest of his life But uh, then one of his like cronies pops up and says to the judge How about I do that prison time instead of my boss and the judge says yeah, okay Let's do that then you go to prison the boss guy goes free Right, but that's just obviously a case of injustice, right because And the why is that an injustice? Well, the the moral responsibility Didn't transfer to the crony Right the more the guy who did the murder is still responsible for the murder Nobody else can do anything that actually changes that that's not how morality works We can't swap it for something. You can't buy your way out of it. So Punishment the punishment is deviating from where the responsibility lies. It's going to somebody else And that's why it's an injustice because basically justice is about assigning to people what they're owed Right what what they should get I mean in this case, obviously the the murder should be punished and the the crony maybe the crony is guilty anyway But he's going to prison for a crime. He didn't commit, right? So that's an injustice, but then Okay, I'll be quick, but let me just get to if that's okay just one or two more minutes and then I'll shut up Um, so then Right what so that's analogous to Jesus standing in if I'm actually morally like blame-worthy for something I really did then There's nothing that Jesus can do to change that Just like the crony um can't actually change the responsibility being due to the uh murderer, right? You can't stand in for somebody's You can't take somebody's moral responsibility away from them. So Um, I got so it's another case of injustice, right? If that were to happen, um, we would call that an injustice and yet that's what The god of christianity does but it's not what a perfect being would do because they would be just so therefore just god Wouldn't do that, but it's crucial to christianity therefore perfect Being existed christianity would be false. You know what the very last one is just that um salvation right in in in christianity you can be saved and therefore Well, whatever that means to you and particularly it might mean going to heaven It might mean unification with god or whatever it means, but you know, you get some good thing Um, not really just on the basis of how nice and morally responsible you were but on the basis of Whether or not you believe that jesus died for us in or whatever um, so two two quick criticisms right first of all again, that's um Morally irrelevant whether you believe something to be true or false Um, it doesn't make any difference if I kill someone and then come to believe that jesus died for my sins or whatever It doesn't mean i'm not responsible for the thing that I did. I am nothing can change that right? That's not how morality works again. So it would be like god Not blaming somebody for something that they did do and that's just another case of injustice. And secondly um Doxastic states that is beliefs are always by definition. It seems to me morally insignificant, right? Actions are morally significant like I torture someone Uh, and that's that's morally bad And maybe even the desire to torture somebody. Maybe that's morally blame-worthy too. Um But believing that you've tortured somebody is not in itself a morally blame-worthy thing, right? It doesn't make any difference, right? It it's so There's something kind of just like misfiring where god dishes out eternal reward and eternal punishment on the basis of like my doxastic states They're not morally relevant. So there you go. That that's my criticism and in both So what I did was gave an argument two premises the conclusion is a christianity's false first premise It wasn't very controversial the second one was but I defended it with three lines of attack effectively and in all of those cases I'm saying that I'm already perfect being wouldn't embody the kind of injustice that we see in the christian story So on that note, I'll stop Okay, thank you Alex, uh So everyone thanks for coming to modern day debate We are a neutral platform for topics like religion science and politics Our vision is to provide a neutral debate platform for anyone So that they have a fair shot now for those of you who are curious My name is Justin. I'm moderating today. If you're wondering where James is Well, ryan and I teamed up we chained him to a stage somewhere in texas because he's preparing for next week's live Stage debates if you happen to be in the area make sure you guys go pick up some tickets Uh, I believe the link for those will be in the description Now if you're not in the area you can still support james and modern day debate by Going into the description. There is a crowdfunding campaign there to help support james financially while he's Building chairs. We literally sent him a crate of chairs from ikea And we gave him a really small hammer to put those chairs together So make sure you guys hit that like button to support the channel Uh, stewart. Are you ready? I believe you're muted my friend Yeah, good to go. Okay floor is yours All right Appreciate you guys for having me on justin alex and So what is perfection is my first question because alex brought up some different points, you know, he brought some Incommunicable incommunicable attributes of god And I think the arbitrariness of us just tagging on different subjective ideas of what perhaps what perfection is Lens a type of credence to God's moral standard Being objectively moral perfect Versus ours which we can all of a sudden just start saying, you know, if it's totally relative Then perfection could be my own definition and I could live a perfect life in my own eyes Of the strong eat the weak. I mean what's wrong with that that drives fully from an evolutionary perspective of My own type of leanings and desires And so you go to wall street, which is 45 minutes down the road from me And why not go ahead and cut people off at the knees? Why not do anything and everything I possibly can to make a buck? I could care less about people. It's all about me it's all about My types of power and perhaps defending my tribe, you know, I got to make a buck for my family as well Because they're my tribe and so this idea of perfection is very subjective And I think alex kind of communicated that it didn't sound like he kind of really landed on a hard line of what perfection is So how do we even get to this idea? When it comes to jesus is somehow not perfect now He did give the ideas of original sin atonement as well as salvation and we can break those down but still I I would need a definition of really what is perfection to even get into this debate And you know, he then he talked about this word justice And how there is not justice within jesus's atonement dying for our sins and somehow The culpability of somebody who has done true wrong It has to remain with them and jesus standing in the way is somehow unjust when my understanding of injustice Has always been against fairness against concern and love for another So again, this terminology it has to be Really deciphered for us all to get to the point of saying, okay, this is objectively wrong And he's completely right alex's when he says that jesus is not perfect that jesus is unjust Now again, he gave some good points in terms of the culpability piece and justice but Everything in alex and everything in me Wants a balance of truth and love truth and love Judgment and grace Never ever I guarantee you what alex want Somehow everything just to land on judgment or justice And to have this type of legalism where it's you mess up and you better pay for it every single time No In almost any movie you see any movie You see a type of sacrifice being lifted up somebody standing in the way for somebody else somebody giving up their life for somebody else Even if that person say has struggled with drug addiction and a type of licentiousness in his life No, we long for that type of sacrifice and jesus christ stood in the way He took the truck running over himself by getting us out of the way In order for us to be able to live a flourishing life here and a flourishing life forever if we choose to do So with him So I find it interesting again. I think this is a tremendously christian problem that alex has he sounds like a christian when he's Debating because where does he get this idea of justice and perfection again coming out of ancient history? Whether it was the greeks or the romans Or any other major civilization this idea of justice almost All the time all the time was the strong eat the weak And the powerful are always the ones who are they have a type of justice It's natural that it's just to have slaves for example. It was tremendously just It was unjust to let slaves go free Because they were the ones who economically were fueling the roman empire and many other civilizations so Justice yet again christianity comes around and you have jesus christ dying on across becoming a slave himself Getting in the way himself the god of the universe In order to lift up the slave in order to lift up those who are considered the least of these and that Became attractive to the entire known world. Yes many fought still against it But the conversion rate by the thousands based off of that love that type of justice combined with love where jesus came and said Yes, you are culpable. Yes, you have done wrong And you're wrong is not just a type of oh cursing somebody out in traffic No, you're wrong is the equivalent of doing a mass shooting or worse And so he called out the wrongs the bestiality he called out the sexism He called out the socio-economic game playing and climbing up on the ladder in such a way where You had to beat somebody out. No, he called for equality of all He had the strongest sense of humanism He had the strongest sense of understanding what is agape love and how we are to sacrifice for others and how we are to stand for justice But justice has to be paired with sacrifice It has to be paired with a type of humility None of us want to walk around with a string And a little recorder tied to our necks where we say this is what is just all life long This is what is morally correct all life long and then at the end play back that recorder And see if we could hold ourselves our lives and what we did to that very standard of what we call Just and perfect. No, there was only one person in The history of the human race that was perfect and just and that was jesus christ the combination for example in the roman empire How the left saw him as corroborating with the romans as a very bad thing But then on the right politically you had so many of the legalists so so many of those even in jesus's camp Who hated how he would get down in the dirt with those who like the woman at the well, for example, or for the lane So jesus's incredible combination of getting with different tribes and groups Saying and calling out the lack of justice and then calling out what is good Is what changed the roman empire for all people He was the perfect form Of objective truth that is exclusive But in the most inclusive kind of way where he was standing for truth and justice Which yet again, alex is taking off the fumes of what he talked about. That's what secular humanism is It's just taking off the fumes of judaeo christian values that christ put in place And he's saying it is the most inclusive form of exclusive truth Because all are welcome and yet all are to be held to a standard of what is truly right and wrong Which is what christ lived out so Why wouldn't he take the sense of the world on himself? Why wouldn't that type of sacrifice change the world? I know many atheists who become christians based off of the sacrifice the atonement And the cross one of them being dostoevsky when he walked into a catholic church and saw jesus on the cross And the atonement shook him to his core one of the most brilliant minds In the last 500 years dostoevsky's looking at the cross itself and saying Wow, this is real justice because of the sacrifice of the god of the universe Taking my sin upon himself because I know I do wrong every single day putting on himself and dying Putting himself on that cross in such a way where he is standing in my place for the wrongs i've done That is justice and so alex is pushing back against what dostoevsky said right there alex is closer to tolstoy Who I believe did become a christian, but tolstoy was heavy on the legalism side I don't think he fully understood grace And yet again, he did come to a knowledge of christ. So This all leads again up to god's love alex mentioned a few of the different attributes of god's love And he truly is a god of love because he created this entire place He created this entire place in such a way where we are all created in the image of god every single person Not just some we see the incredible breakdown in our society today because so many people think that They are just truly created in the image of god or or they would say something else that is higher than another group No, that's unjust That is completely unjust and you take any group today and the breakdown that you see And the type of standing for justice that they have when truly it's a type of anger fueling this justice Because there's no type of grace behind it saying, you know what? I could see myself sitting like that. You know that person's a racist Doesn't mean i'm not going to befriend them in some kind of way and hopefully they'll change Oh, yeah, I would never ever be racist. Oh, yeah, I would never break in and steal Oh, yeah, I would never ever cheat on my taxes that's setting up a type of moral superiority In the name of being just which causes the breakdown in society that we see today So there's a direct correlation with growth in secularism and growth in bigotry and growth in legalism and growth in fundamentalism I'm not saying there aren't parts of christianity that don't struggle with the same Absolutely, but if you get to the roots of the atonement and those who truly understand the cross Now you have no excuse But to live in such a way where you do stand for justice But there's forgiveness underneath it and if you don't have forgiveness grace and love Underneath seeking for justice. I would say you're not really seeking for justice. You're seeking for revenge And we see that with blm. We see that with so many other groups Many of them I think are seeking in such a way where where they're trying to go after what is just and yet again It's i'm going to stand up just from my tribe. You've done something wrong I would never do something as wrong as you would and so there's complete breakdown I see this on college campuses all the time my tiktok channel was just my name steward connectly You can see all of them there and the type of moral superiority that so many people have Because they're standing for justice and so we need to exclude so many different groups of people Because I have what is just and the strange thing though is They'll back that up with but your truth is your truth stand for your truth I'll stand for mine and yet they sound like they have tremendous moral objectivity and clear discernment when it comes to What this whole justice thing is all about So god's power. Yes has limits. You know, you can't make a square circle. You can't use power to pardon Everyone so he is a moral being like alex is talking about there is justice behind that thank heaven And you have to have justice you have to hold somebody accountable If you're truly going to love them So that part of what alex said is I can get fully on board with you know a husband who cheats on his wife There's got to be two different types of things that happen one She's going to have to forgive him if there's going to be true reconciliation And then three he's going to have to understand his wrongdoing If those two things happen, then there can be reconciliation There's grace there and there's justice there and willing to repent That's what you need. That's what our hearts long for in this universe In order to have reconciliation in order to have true flourishing in this life So morality is not tied up in god using his power To forgive us. No, it's a type of repentance. We come to christ and by doing so that's when we are saved So god is good and just and so This wrongdoing has to be paid for Not to anybody But to occur to be paid in a sense on that cross And you still have to come to Believe that jesus not only was a person perfect person But that he died on the cross for us and that we ultimately were culpable for it And yet he stood in our place and I don't see any lack of perfection in that I think it's grasping at straws to say somehow we have to pay for that and jesus was lacking understanding what justice was Because we haven't paid for it ourselves That doesn't jive with our character everything in this world We long for sacrifice We long for standing in the way for another I would immediately sacrifice for any one of my daughters and hopefully my wife and many others beyond that obviously my wife as well Sacrifice is the most beautiful thing in the world You have to have it when we look at and try and get after this perfection perhaps and true justice We want to see sacrifice behind it. We want to see grace behind it when I see in AA grace offered As well as truth and accountability That's when change occurs. It's not just this justice and truth and accountability That is going to truly change somebody and we've seen this in europe Beatrice webb for example And she was head of the welfare state. She said no I gave dr. Halix a couple extra minutes and you're at about the same time he had so we can get uh to the end here Would be great. Yeah 30 seconds here. I'll just end up beatress webb She said no, it's not a matter of the human heart We need to go about with technology We need to go about then with education and she went down for from the years Basically just concocting in her mind thinking that in order to change humanity We need to have a hard level of justice and we need technology will somehow fix humanity somehow rationality and reasoning will Or somehow education will and she got to the end of her career and said, you know what? It's a heart matter And she did talk about the cross in jesus christ when it came to that's real sacrifice If you really want justice you have to have sacrifice behind it And there's no better type of seeking after justice when you start to understand the atonement where jesus stood for justice And yet we understand that we need grace and sacrifice in order to get to the point where we're all seeking after justice All right, thank you steward Uh, just a quick reminder everyone to hit that like and subscribe button for us and support the channel Don't forget james is working hard preparing for next weekend's debates And he is asking for all of your support. So if you want to grab yourself some live tickets or even just go to the indigo campaign In the description Send your love via a few dollars. That would be Fantastic. We're going to go into the open discussion Um during this discussion everyone don't forget to send your super chats in all super chats presented in a respectful way will be asked at the end of the open discussion um, let's go ahead Alex i'll let you uh get started Okay, cool. Um Firstly, uh, it's it's like the hottest day of the year so far in the uk right now Which probably means a normal day perhaps in texas or whatever But like i'm incredibly hot and i'm not used to it So if i i might just become shinier and shinier as this goes on, but you know, don't be alarmed. It's fine. It's just it's hot in here. Um All right, cool. So I wrote down some of the things you said then stew stew is or i don't want to shorten your name if that's not what people refer to you as stew or stew Whenever you feel almost comfortable with okay, cool. Um, yeah, so i wrote down a number of the things that you Rose that so we can go through them. I think obviously throughout a number of different things and some of them i just i just wanted to sidestep because i think They discussing number takers too far afield and if it's okay with you to just try and stick on the things that are closer to the The content of the argument that i was giving, you know, the historical origins to christianity How come it's spread so quickly blah blah blah? I just don't think that's necessarily relevant to what we're talking about right now So i it maybe i disagree with you about that, but i let's just park that right um But in particular, i did think there was a couple things you brought up So first very first thing you said was you know, what what do i what more my Meaning when i say a perfect being what what is perfection? It was the way you put it. So i think it's a perfectly reasonable Uh thing to do to query a term that's used in an argument like what does that do you mean? um okay, so I'm not i'm not going to give you like um the necessary and sufficient conditions of perfection right like an actual definition or something Because i don't know i don't have one. Um, so You know, sorry if that's what you wanted um, but i i think that it's okay though because All i mean really all i need to mean by this i guess is that um Well, uh As i said the idea of god being Morally perfect Right, that is um someone who's incapable of doing immoral actions Right at the as a minimum Probably is all i need right and i think that i don't maybe god You know, maybe let's just drop the notion of perfection, but let's just say that god is um, but you know perfection in general But let's let's say that god is morally perfect and by that we just mean it's not possible for him to do anything morally wrong and i think that maybe This is also fairly uncontroversial that You know a judge in um standard like terrestrial kind of court setting um a judge that dishes out Patently unjust Judgments is there by doing an immoral action as a result of not what a judge should do Like they're doing something they shouldn't be doing so if god were doing something like that He would be doing something Immoral and a perfect being doesn't do that type of thing. So I don't need to tell it. I mean whatever else perfection means It with the very minimum we mean he's moral morally like perfect and whatever else that means It certainly means not doing immoral things and It just seems clear that judging in the wrong way getting your judgments wrong I mean, maybe, you know, obviously you can get a judgment wrong because you you know Don't have all the facts or something. They're assuming you do have all the facts and you just like make the wrong judgment That's a failing of a judge. It's a moral failing of the judge and so it's the sort of thing that A perfect being like this wouldn't do so. I don't think I need to give you like a definition of morality Definition of perfection We just need these tiny little bits of the ideas to get the argument going and I don't think any of those are controversial And what how does that sound to you? Yeah, I would agree with that. I mean a big part of this, you know, you get so many words like like ransom for example Ransom you pay someone else, you know, there's a third party um Typically involved obviously here in the case Uh with god and us so so there's just two parties without god, but there's a third party here. So like why? Ransom why is there a buying back at the atonement? and you could take the example of like a man on a life raft if a man decides to to jump out Where there's many people in this life raft He's paying a high price for others to live And he's paying a third party So so much of ransom and buying back redeeming It's it's metaphorical. It's a it's a figure of speech And it's not somebody jumps out of the boat I'm assuming you're talking about like a boat that's going to be sinking if he doesn't jump out So he like altruistically jumps out so that how is that a case of ransom? What's that got to do with a ransom? Because he's willing to give up his life in order to save those in the life raft But that's that's the case of altruism But a ransom is where somebody kidnaps somebody and then says you need to pay me this money if you want them back And that's not what's going on in this case So again, it's it's metaphorical on a figure of speech. I would say ransom theologically is sure Sure, that's one definition of a ransom for for example But I would say ransom is closer theologically in the greek to a redemption and buying back and so This person jumping out of the life raft is willing To make a ransom in such a way where he's buying back these people's lives because they were going to lose their lives Okay, so there's this ransom theory of atonement, right, which is that um God is effectively like the kidnapper He's like demanding a payment To be paid in order to release us from Sin that's like a ransom because it's like a kidnapper who's got you and he demands money to release you Right, so there's a straightforward case in which you know, that's how the ransom theory of atonement works Um, so we can talk about that if you like, but I just don't see that the case where the guy jumps in the water to save his fellow boat goes Is it's not a good example if you want to illustrate the notion of a ransom because there's no third party like who's he paying He's not paying anyone. He's just saving those fellow people But there's nobody he's giving the payment to so it couldn't be it's not a good case an all good candidate for a ransom Let's have a third party in the ransom But I think the exact point is God it would be that third party Taking on our sin in such a way where sure Where obviously we would not be See your example with the judge there are examples I've heard of where the judge gets out of the seat comes down and says I want to take This person's moral failings upon myself and I want to go To jail for this person and you would say that's unjust Now there's other examples of say the a&e church when it got shot up and there was that group of black people in the charleston church And they said we want to forgive Dillon roof and we want him even to come to our next bible study So you would say that would be unjust If he actually came to the next bible study But here's necessarily I don't know if that's unjust if roof didn't get a type of penalty And prison sentence then that would be unjust But we're dealing with the god of the universe here Versus humanity and I think you're trying to take jesus's humanity And just say see he's imperfect just in his humanity And I might be able to get on board with that But you're failing then to realize that He was god and man He wasn't just man And so if he's just man I would agree with you on what your Real issue is here But he's god and man Then that changes the ballgame completely Okay, well, let's come back to that in a second on the So I think there's this very plausible kind of reply. I think I discerned it in what you were saying now, which is that like Sometimes the application of justice can be tempered by other virtues like mercy, for instance, or you might say grace or something where Some someone might like go look according to the strict interpretation of the law I've got to put you away for like 10 years for this crime But I'm gonna be nice and just give you like five years instead or something and then that Like lesser application of the full force of the law can be seen as a merciful act, right? And instances where people forgive people For crimes like you were bringing up there like a shooting case or whatever where somebody says I'm gonna like completely sort of forgive you and and not demand Payment that the justice would would require or something. I mean, okay fine. So let's suppose that that sort of Sometimes mercy Overwrites justice and that's still morally perfect. It's all the sort of thing. I'm already perfect being could do Okay, I think I find that kind of plausible actually. So there's something kind of um Moniacal about just strictly adhering to the letter of the law all the time. So we're bureaucratic almost, right? There's something like weirdness to that But let's just it just seems to me look if we think about say just focusing in on original sin So justice demands that we don't get punished for things that somebody else Thousand years ago, whatever. I don't know how long that's supposed to be six six thousand years ago It's got nothing to do with me. So justice should demand that I'm not punished Because I'm not morally responsible for that um, but you might say Well, yeah, but god is sometimes merciful and the mercy like um Contemper the application of justice like we just talked about a moment ago But like what difference would mercy make in this case if mercy was employed It would point in the same direction, right? It's unjust to punish me for something I didn't do and if you want to be merciful You'd also not punish me for something I didn't do. It's not like mercy changes the equation differently It doesn't mean that somehow I should be punished mercy Doesn't help your case that it makes my case even more So if what we're talking about is this appeal to mercy tempering justice I am quite sympathetic to that. I just don't see how it helps Especially when we're talking about original sin Maybe It may be it's a bit more plausible when it comes to the atonement idea because that's You know, maybe there's some some mercy is like wrapped up intrinsically with with what's going on with Jesus there But I just don't think it has it doesn't help you at all when it comes to You know, um original sin and probably although I haven't thought this through quite so clearly But I don't think it would help you when it comes to salvation either. I'm not sure No, no, maybe it would okay So I'm going to give you two out of three that you could probably kind of raise the mercy get-out card But do you do you understand what I'm saying about how it doesn't help you when it comes to original sin? You see what I'm saying now Well, first of all mercy is too soft. I was using sacrifice and grace like giving up your life is way Way more impressive than just mercy and I think what you're saying is way more Old Testament versus New Testament I mean talking about sticking to the letter of the law Yes, Jesus talked about not a jot or a tittle Will be erased and yet you look at Matthew 19 and so many other passages Jesus is tightening the noose in such a way Where there has to be tremendous grace in the new covenant if you're going to really seek after Justice or you're just going to go about killing each other You know, for example, you talked about salvation I'll give another example in the Balkans And a friend of mine Miroslav Volt. He's a theologian up at Yale talked about growing up and how If there was just this letter of the law and what we believe is justice Then in these war torn countries, you would just have the cycle of revenge. It's revenge upon revenge You killed my parent.   I'm going to kill your child not and on generationally He said once you enter the idea of grace and sacrifice and then we're all we all have original sin And that there is eternity out there with a judgment day Judgment day was key. He said Now all of a sudden you saw a lot of the wars Start to end But if there's not an eternal understanding of judgment day and grace and not just sticking to the letter of the law and justice like the old testament Now you're going to have all kinds of problems. And so this this returns again to alex. I mean Okay, I need to get more so at then what is your understanding of perfection and justice And what do you want Jesus to have done to have been this perfect being who was perfectly just what should he have done? um well, so my idea of justice here and I probably can spell it out a bit, but in a way i'm reluctant to because um, I kind of want to say look, um In that case I described I made up a case about a gangster who kills your friend And then the crony goes to prison in his place, right? It's it's not a gotcha, but like don't you agree that that would be a blatant miscarriage of justice if that were to take place Yeah, just shortly the illustration again So it's gangster kills your friend. He gets tried goes to prison the judge finds him guilty Sentences him to like life in prison, but then the gangster's crony says to the judge How about I go to prison in his place, right? Let him go free and I'll go to prison for the rest of my life instead and the judge says, yeah, okay Sure, let's do that. So the the guy the murderer goes free And the crony goes to prison and that's a miscarriage of justice because What's he got to do with that guy nothing?  He's still responsible for that No, but but he's going free, right? No, no, I think you're two out of three there Because because one of the biggest reasons for somebody getting tried and going to jail for life Is based off of what the family decides in terms of what they want with the penalty That's what that's one of the biggest three determining factors And so if one of those family members particularly the one that's really been wronged Decides to no not only don't not want him to have a prison sentence, but I'm going to go freely for him That's one of the biggest pieces of justice in the legal system and you oftentimes I mean again back to back to movies and stories that I know not to that extent in terms of life sentences in prison, but Life change that occurs when somebody really Sacrifices in that kind of way for the crony That person's life always Radically changes it's the eye for an eye makes the world go blind Is when you're again sticking to that letter of the law and saying that that's truly just I don't think please think I don't think you live out that type of justice in your life If you want to get super technical Super technical then I could see you sticking to this and I could get on board to an extent But I don't see you live that out in your life. I think you truly do want Sacrifice when perhaps you've done wrong you want grace especially offered to you when you've done wrong You don't want somebody to just hold you to this level of justice where No, sorry Alex. Sorry.  She's out the door because of what you said was so heinous and wrong No, you want to be forgiven and hopefully that leads to a type of justice So I'm just gonna kind of quite surprised that you I mean So in the example that I gave It's not the family member asking to go to prison I'm not sure that makes a difference But I think it's more plausible for you to say that that may be still a case of justice if The you know, the mother of the murdered child decides to go to prison and In the murderous place. I mean, I don't actually think that's justice, right? I think that's just another case of injustice But the focus on the one that I gave it's not the mother of the murdered child It's just some other gangster. He just works for the boss guy.  Oh, well, cool. I guess justice has been done Some other guy went to prison not the murderer, but I'm fine with that I mean, it's not even about your emotional state. It's just wouldn't you If you were a newspaper reporter writing about it, wouldn't you wouldn't you write your story up as a case of injustice, right? Like it seems to me the obvious answer is yes I'm amazed if you would to to try and bite the bullet on that and say no somehow that story isn't a case of injustice, right? I just think if you if you're going to say that it feels like you're calling into question so much about what's fundamental to do with like The legal system if not if not even actually moral responsibility or anything It's just like do you ever think anyone can be like at the end? There's ever a clear case of an injustice if not this I mean this seems like the most obvious one I can imagine So can we just be clear about the exact example I gave? Do you think that's a case of injustice? Yes, it's not the wrong party if it's some random guy from that side crony. I completely agree. I thought you something else So it's just the yeah, it's a it's the someone who works It's you know, it's tony soprano did the murder and it's um christopher multisante who like takes the rap for him If you've watched the sopranos, right? It's just like some other gangster Who's like lower down in the pecking order than him that does it and there's there's no reason to think that him standing in his in tony's place Constitutes justice. It's it's an obvious case of injustice and what I was saying with Original sin is that it's analogous to that case because I'm like Christopher multisant. Well, no, sorry. This is about atonement. I suppose if Jesus is like christopher multisante who's saying to god Who's the judge? Alex is is morally responsible for something But I'll stand in his place and take some punishment that he deserves But let me take that punishment instead and then let Alex Benefit from that in some way and that's unjust in the same way because it's not Jesus's fault if I've done something and he hasn't That's like christopher multisante. He didn't do the murder Tony soprano did the murder It's the same, right? I'm the responsible one. Jesus isn't right and him just saying can I stand in his place might be some kind of Sacrificial act or whatever, but my claim is that Morality doesn't like follow that along like even though he's done that it might be nice or what it might be inspiring I might become a cool nice person if he does that for me, but moral responsibility hasn't actually moved I mean if you were to try and draw a picture Um with an arrow pointing at the person who was morally responsible It would be pointing at me. I'm the one who did the thing, right? It would be pointing at Tony soprano He's the one that did the thing that's not even Like and and just asking to take the punishment in his place doesn't change that like that seems to me clear So do you agree with that principle that like moral responsibility doesn't transfer to other people? If you're just taking jesus christ as a human being then absolutely If you're taking jesus christ as the son of god And that he created us and you look at for example, psalm 51 when david talks about i've sinned against only god alone So he's talking about i mean injustice Obviously because he murdered bath she was husband. Look, what are you talking about david? It's a clear example of injustice, right? No, he's talking about he's asking for forgiveness as well But he's saying that the god of the universe created all of us And so ultimately he is culpable for not only offending but actually destroying something that the creator of the universe Created and so he brings the third party into it because you have the god of the universe who created us If you don't have that then i'm on board fully with all of your analogies They they make total sense and i would stand for them as well But your point on original sin if i could be a liberal for a second I mean i think you know you have to be a liberal or a liberal. Which did you say? A space liberal not not a conservative Okay, i don't know if you are but say if you are over here. Well, you guys are very culpable too over in your place, but Say if you you know, you're you're great great grandparents had slaves You hold some moral culpability for that Do you not and so just like adam and eve We hold some moral culpability For what they did Yes, yeah, i don't think that's right. So if you go back in my Let me just finish because The important part here Is that yes, you're right They messed up, but i personally believe and i know some christians would disagree with me I believe that Whether adam and eve were actually two human beings I think there's also significance in understanding that we would if we were in their place We would have done the same thing So take that metaphorically or however you'd like But that is also the place of where it's not just two human beings screwed up And so now all of a sudden all of us have this incredible baggage Yes, there's a part to that But no, I think there's incredible symbolism there And understanding that we would have done the same thing But the important part is It's not just that the completed story is what jesus did on the cross for us So he's going to complete it So we have this darkness as well as this light where yes If you want to take it literalistically as a physical human being we're going to blame all on adam because he screwed up our lives Screwed up nature, you know sociologically psychologically Then you're going to say okay in the first adam all sinned we get in the bible But then in the second adam he's came come to redeem us to buy us back And so you have this incredible tension Where it is we have been given a not a fair shake But then I think there is fairness and justice In jesus all of a sudden coming in and saying I am going to give you the ultimate possibility to be redeemed Okay, so I think I don't understand why it makes any difference Who stands in for the person that's morally responsible? I don't suppose it to me. I can't really see why from a moral perspective um It makes any difference whether the person who's standing in for the person who's actually morally responsible is The crony works for the guy is the mother of the Murdered person or is the creator of the universe? I just don't I don't understand how that's supposed to work like they don't None of those distinctions feel like they're morally relevant Right, because what I'm saying is if you do something bad morally bad like killing someone Maybe I can be like um Forgiven by everyone and I can like grow as a person by owning it and becoming like a better person and blah blah blah But doesn't change the fact that I did it and I'm responsible for the action Right. In fact the coming to terms with it thing I would imagine involves owning that And like not hiding away from what you're responsible for and like really saying yes, I did this It was bad. I did it. Nobody forced me to do it. That was my choice I you know that type of like that's what it is to come to terms with a moral action that's where how what like um Like restoration or whatever after you've done something bad involves that like owning up to it And just seems to me that it it's owning up to the fact that it doesn't change It can't go away. Nobody can take it from me now. You were saying well if it's jesus though Maybe there is an exception to that rule and like if that's right. I I'd need you to explain to me why um The kind of identity of the person who's standing in for the person who's done something wrong Uh can somehow change that principle such that the moral responsibility is in fact wiped away and they Stand in for them like I don't get that doesn't seem to me that that's right So why should I believe that? That you know if it's jesus standing in for you then he really can make it so that you're not responsible anymore That just seems to be completely impossible Because only the person who's created you Has the possibility of doing that and secondly He is the only person who has the ability to do so because I believe the gravity of sin Is so strong that it would crush any human being Especially from a spiritual angle as well as a physical and so by him standing in he's saying I created you I have the ability to do this And this is going to create real change Justice we saw throughout the old testament Did not create change it was an eye for an eye And we saw all of the bloodshed that came from that so Whatever your definition of justice and moral right and wrong is I don't know how that morality is somehow again objective and how We need to strive for that type of justice because that just type of justice to me Is very concerning if there is no grace and standing in the way and because Everything even in nature whether it's a mother bear or a mother hen they're going to stand in the way of a perpetrator or somehow A predator in order to save Their kids in order to save their cubs and their chicks Okay, but that that's just to say that sometimes I mean I just don't think it's relevant like I don't I don't suppose that animals are moral agents anyway So I don't think that they can be Uh that these concepts don't really apply to them. I think an animal could be Treated unjustly, but I don't suppose that an an action of an animal can be considered either just or unjust Right, because they're not moral agents. They don't know these concepts. It's nothing to do with them really you have to be like rational enough to be able to grasp the concepts for it to Um for you to become to give you to progress out of being just simply a moral patient to becoming a moral agent so all of those examples about like nature being read in tooth and claw it doesn't matter but because Um just this it seems to me would apply to anything Whether it's a human or an angel or an alien or whatever that can understand the concept enough to see if it applies to them Once you do then, you know, unfortunately, you're kind of crippled by the fact that you you now get it. So you have to um kind of Follow follow along to some extent if you can right like a moral morality just seems to me. It's like a normative kind of Requirements upon everybody to to do, you know, not do bad things, right? You know, you shouldn't murder people I mean I and I'm in agreement with the that kind of chunk of The christian teaching I suppose if you if you want to put it like that I don't think there are commandments to come from god, but I do think that they're objective and everybody's You know, um, everybody has kind of is affected by that normative um Constraint that it puts on you, but but let's get back to the the point and Hannah. I still don't really understand. So you I said why what? To me it doesn't seem to make any difference if Uh, the identity of the person standing in for someone who's morally responsible And you said I think two things the first one was Well, it it can make a difference if they created you, right? So if you if they're your creator then they can stand in that in Your place and then doing so does in fact transfer moral responsibility But I mean my parents created me just as much as Jesus did even on your view I think it's still true in some sense that your parents created you, right? But I don't suppose my my father can stand in like Um, Christopher multisante does for Tony Soprano in my example. It's still an example of unjustice My father was to try and do that doesn't matter if he created me. I don't see what relevance that has to it um, so it just feels like A claim you made but I don't understand how that's relevant Do you see where my problem is with that? Like what's that got to do with trans the transference of moral responsibility? In a case like this that that he's my creator. How is that relevant? Well, that's why I combined it with the second point We're only the second one again. I actually forgot it now. I was wrestling on too much Only even he has the ability to take on the sins of the world from a physical as well as spiritual point of view and so this would his definition of justice and Every single person I know in this world like you're getting so technical from simply a rationalistic perspective where you're removing god any type of understanding of god is both man As well as divine But anybody I know if we pulled a room full of people And they looked at the atonement and something like somebody standing in the way for another person And offering forgiveness and offering to pay the price for that person. I don't think many people in that room would say Oh, no, that's unjust Do not let that person do that We can't have that maybe Is this a room full of philosophers or a room full of normal people because Normally, exactly normal people, but am I allowed to give them intuition pumps by telling them my story about Tony Soprano first I mean, I don't know what this kind of poll of an imaginary example of ordinary people is supposed to tell us I think they're wrong if they think that so who cares, right? But then my second question to them is we all have a moral conscience And we all know what true justice is and seeking after what's really right and wrong So where do you get that understanding of your moral conscience and what is truly right or wrong? Well, I don't I don't think that everybody always knows what's just and what's not. I think there are cases that require Very nuanced balance of considerations and stuff. That's why being a judge is not a job. Everybody's qualified to do But I think there are core aspects to what justice is that Evident and easy to see like the guy going to prison for something he didn't commit right that the guy was I can't remember his name now, but he went to prison for supposedly raping someone But he didn't rape that person and he spent 18 years in prisoners. I don't need to be I don't need to know everything about justice. I don't even need to have a theory of justice To just be able to plain as they see that that's obviously unjust Think just like I don't need to be a moral philosopher to know that you shouldn't torture babies to death for fun Right, it's it's we can see these things as plain as two plus two equals four as far as I can see So, you know, it's a bit of a red herring to say well, what's you know, everyone you have to Somehow know every answer to every justice question in the world What about torturing babies if you tortured my baby? Why isn't that just That's that's a rant, you know, that's that's equal payment Yeah, so I I don't think that justice So obviously We can get into a bit about what I think well my theory of justice is if you like but um You know, I don't think that it's just like anyone can Balance the scales. I don't think that it's just like you you gather up a posse and go around the house and like kill them And that's justice or something that seems to me not justice either The dishing out of justice has to be done by the kind of relevant authority for whatever that means Um, but a judge say that's part of a system that's been set up But the very least I mean it seems to me it doesn't really matter about these questions because According to the christian story god is obviously a qualified judge Relevant authority. So that makes the difference It's not like people being kind of um vigilantes Oh, let's just agree that nothing any type of vigilante justice is actually not justice It's it's a kind of false justice for justice to be actually done properly It's where you kind of you have an arbiter who's a third party who's kind of independent who's like Able to see things Um objectively and not be swayed by Things on either side by blah blah blah So you have to have like a competent authority And obviously according to the christian story god is supposed to be that Type of authority.  Do I have to really like spell out a full on theory of justice here? Doesn't like the the question that that I'm bringing up isn't isn't a borderline case Right, it's a clear case. So therefore. I don't need a theory of justice I don't think it is a clear case because you just said that there are many different murky Times where we don't understand what is true justice in certain situations And then the one that really concerned me that you said was you know, it's the authority that sets it up Whatever that means Like whatever that means like nazi germany, they were in authority. Whatever whatever that means That's fine. You know communist regimes, you know paul pot Whatever they they were in authority So, right, right. So they have to be in authority, but it doesn't mean that anything on authority says thereby is is just right They still say they'll have to dish out the appropriate Judgments that I'm just saying it can't be done by like your friend bob next door because he's not an appropriate authority Sorry, I maybe I interrupted you. I apologize for that Who defines what is appropriate? It in in what respect when it comes to like judges in in courts And human judges pretty you said if I brought the baby example and you said authority slash whatever that means Right. So in the human case There's you know, do we really want to talk about like how judges get appointed in society because Isn't it the case in the theological example? Obviously god is the judge So it doesn't really matter how we establish judges in the human case, does it? I mean, what difference does that make the the point we're discussing is whether god would be just To allow somebody else to to be punished for my sins Well, yeah, who cares how we set up judges in the actual world. Well, okay, if you want to get away from the moral argument That's tied to our that's tied to your point in a very very strong way But we can save that for another day because I do want to get to your three points But I have a problem with what you stated, but you know a third point Since you didn't like my first two points the third point is I believe There's so many different Atonement theories out there, right? So I would believe in penal substitution. That's where I land So we were guilty like we're talking about we're guilty before god for our sins And therefore deserving of punishment We can get on board with that And then the punishment obviously Is needed Because we are culpable for it for it and there needs to be a type of ransom There needs to be a type of buying back There needs to be a type of expiation for our sins. So Because jesus was sinless he could take that punishment on himself in our place. So that's my third point It's for a free pardon of our sins And if he wasn't sinless Then he couldn't do so So yet again, this is getting back to the god man combination But I mean I fully understand the mystery of it I think any anybody you debate this topic on who gives you a concrete case Is is adding to the bible because over and over you get Pauline lines and christ himself but Pauline lines that specifically say that The cross is a mystery that it's foolishness to those who are unsaved So there's going to be mysteries and things like the atonement as well as the trinity But your level of justice that you're holding to it So strongly and technically I just can't get on board with when you're dealing with the god of the universe I mean if we're here talking about you me and one other third dude who's a crony Yeah, I would probably be in full agreement with you Well, yeah The thing is like if you're not already a christian right say you're an atheist like me I have a bunch of I think common ground with you in terms of like I don't think it's morally right to torture babies and I think like you do that somebody getting sent to sent to prison for something they didn't do is and is in just so You know, we agree on that much. There's a common ground there and then You know What's what's wrong with me like if you say oh and here's this christian story, right? Let me explain it to you There's original sin but jesus dies for your sins that makes that better and that means you can go to heaven Right, that's the kind of thumbnail sketch of what christianity is and I say that doesn't make any sense Right, like and here here's my critique, right? That's not just right You're telling me there's a perfect being blah blah blah like are you saying that's unfairly technical as a response? So I shouldn't be Asking those questions and it's a mystery or something like if it's a mystery. Okay. Well, I'm not I don't find it Attractive as a proposition them because you're basically saying why don't you believe this story that I've told you My critique of that as it doesn't make sense to me and then your reply is well It's okay. It's mysterious. So it doesn't make sense to me either like I'm not buying that product buddy. Do you know what I mean? Why would I think for over an hour now and that's not what I've said whatsoever?  I like I I have so much intellectual disrespect for people who straw man and simplify things to that extent because you completely skipped over the entire understanding of Stretching for truth, justice the source of all goodness Versus a complete attrition And a complete opposite of that which is moving away from the source of all goodness Which is what an atheist is doing and then they have to make up their own understanding of what goodness is Which is your tremendously mish-mushy understanding of justice where I don't even know where you get it from And your your definition of perfection was completely lacking in every kind of way So now you're putting on me to say oh, it's just a mystery when your terminology from the very beginning Was a complete mystery to me and I don't think you define the terms. Well whatsoever So the christian doctrine is not oh original sin Then the atonement No, there's a lot of pages in the bible. I would say Before that that have a lot to do with You know you talked about faith for example another straw man a total misunderstanding of scripture You talked about faith versus action No, everything in the bible when it comes to the original hebra and greek faith is attributed to as action You're taking a very english american understanding of what faith is which is just You know, let's have faith that we're going to win the ball game on sunday for the saints versus the titans That's not what faith is Faith is an action stepping in such a way where you're trusting say Your wife because you've seen the actions that she's taken To meet out a type of trusting relationship that's based off of a covenant And then you get to come to christ for example and make that decision based off of the historical evidence And if it's lacking then then dish it away if there's no evidence for the resurrection Then we don't even have to be having this discussion. It's totally theoretical But if there's strong evidence for the resurrection Then again, it doesn't matter what this discussion or not because christianity is true Does that make sense um Before you reply there alex i real quick just want to say we've got about uh Nine minutes left of open discussion and we're going to get into the super chat So if anybody wants to get a super chat in now is your chance Sorry alex carry on. Okay. Yeah, no problem. So um, again, there was a lot there It's due so I I don't know that I'm gonna be able to reply to everything you said So I suppose I still I still just don't Yeah, I make am I straw man in christianity by simplifying it in such a way that I'm missing out some stuff Possibly that's true. Right. I'm not a christian. I'm not bible scholar Um, I wasn't raised as a christian. So it's you know, it's none of my business, right, but um I don't think that what I've said is like completely wrong and and if it is wrong, you know feel free to um, explain why what I said is is wrong and I'm when You've done that. It's it's one thing to say.  Do you see what I mean like my rebuttal for the last 45 minutes And yeah, but the the last thing you said was I take a stance of humility Saying that the bible talks about how this is foolishness to people as well as a great mystery And then your your response to that is ha steward. That's so ridiculous.  No, that's a stance of humility I'm not being as dogmatic as you and opinionated where you're not getting any type of leeway and saying Hey, maybe I don't get this. Maybe there is a side and this is what I deal with with so many atheists when I come on this channel Which is oh steward makes the stance of like foolishness and there's a mystery within the trinity I mean he gave a lot of points showing that wow There maybe there is some credence to understanding why there truly was creeds and a theological understanding At nicaea for example, but then steward finished it with there is some mystery So steward's whole argument was there is some mystery and foolishness. No, no, no, hold on a second, but I'm See how that complaining. Yeah, no, but I think now you're mischaracterizing me But dogmatic cynical people I've ever met in my life Okay, that's what you need to understand you need to start doubting your own beliefs And then when you do oh you can come to the place of saying, you know, actually there is a mystery here I don't really know and I was raised an atheist. So maybe I'm just an atheist because my parents raised me that way Of course. Look, I'm not saying that you have knowledge, you know, peter burger So I don't see that in you instead. I see this this response of steward You haven't given me anything at all this whole time You just said it's a mystery to everybody when I'm pretty sure if we roll back the tape I've said a lot more than just it's a mystery. No, I listen I didn't say you've not said anything apart from that mystery reply I never said that you've said a load of other stuff and we've been talking about it for an hour Right and I wasn't saying That if you say that anything about christianity is mysterious that that somehow means that you lose the debate I don't think that's true. Um, I you know, I think that loads of stuff is mysterious and I kind of respect the Idea that there's mystery in religion. I think cool. That's that's fine by me. I like that idea in a way Right, I just think that when we're talking about this specific topic about like how is it we thought what we were talking about was Why why think that somebody standing in for someone else? um like counts as Like means that the moral responsibility has transferred because to me The crony standing in doesn't mean that the moral responsibility transfers. So you were cashing out to me We were talking about does if you're there the if they created you that might make a difference Right, and I thought when you said well, look, there's a mystery here that you were saying look ultimately that question is mysterious Right that the specific question we've been talking about the answer to that question Not the trinity or anything else not that there's some mystery in christianity But the this question is a mystery, right? But if that's what you're doing Dialectically it sort of just means that if we run out of ground Where you're not offering an actual objection anymore because I mean and you know, sometimes this happens if somebody asks me Why is the sky blue? I can say a couple of explanation points about that if you keep asking me I'm going to say gee. I don't know it's a mystery to me, right? And you know, there's the end of the conversation So I'm not complaining. I'm criticizing in any way, but like If that's if that's the if the story I you know, I summarized christianity I gave a thumbnail so I guess it kind of sounded like a straw man I didn't mean to like trigger you by saying, you know, this is what I think Christianity is or whatever But like I gave a quick summary and I was saying that then I'm making a critique about it like this And if when we go through the dialectic We get to the point where you go Well at this point I all I can say is that this is mysterious like this aspect of it is mysterious Then that's like unpersuasive to me Right, because why would it be like if you were critic criticising my worldview Asking me where do you get this view of morality from or something and after trying to explain it for a bit? I ended up saying I guess it's just a mystery. You might then say, well, that's no good I'm going to convert me to atheism. Is it if you've got no answer to that question like appealing to a mystery there It's kind of unsatisfactory. That's all I'm saying I would be I would be way more likely to convert to atheism if you said that Way more likely if you say I do not know at the end of something I would say wow Wow, this guy Maybe there's no emotional bias here Maybe maybe there's no perhaps Efforts to straw man the other side. This guy is truly stating his case and then he finishes with you know I'm not sure here. I'm not sure there. There's a good case for Christianity there. I just I I haven't heard that from you and I never hear that from anybody and for you to keep saying that wait I thought we were talking about the atonement is crap because you've gone to original You went to salvation You went then you straw man the whole biblical narrative like like I gave you my response whether you like it or not To the atonement We need to get on to other things as well I'm not just going to keep sitting here with the cronies and talking about this over and over again When you've brought up so many other points like I gave my response If you want to keep going here we can But I'm frankly I'm getting kind of bored Okay, well, I don't mean to bore you. I mean if that's we can move to the q&a if you want to No, you brought up other interesting points We can totally move to the q&a if you'd like but your other points were way more Interesting in terms of original sin and salvation to me than just coming over what the atonement is All right, so on salvation feels to me. We didn't talk about that very much Alex on that point. Yeah, we are just a couple of minutes from q&a. So So maybe I'll just say my idea again, right? So it was two points on this one. So in terms of the salvation um, I think that it It divorces work from white Seems to me there's moral responsibility that somebody has when they do something say wrong wrong, um, and But given like saving people on the basis of them believing a proposition Divorces that that link again. So that to me sounds like a case of injustice So that was just like the other two examples really what seems to me the kind of proto theory of justice that i'm working with is is merely just that like um If punishments and rewards are going to be applied to people then it needs to like track with the moral responsibility It deviates from the moral responsibility. That's what I mean by injustice, basically So again, it's just another case of the same phenomenon. But then I also mentioned that Doxastic states beliefs are not morally relevant actions are morally relevant And possibly desires, but not beliefs that seems to be relatively straightforward. Yeah I mean, I guess you want to talk I actually didn't mention the word faith I understand why why you went to faith because maybe one Maybe it's the word I should have been using but it seems to me that At least the idea of faith which involves believing a proposition to be true Right believing that say jesus died for us in or something. I don't see why that is morally relevant And shouldn't make any difference to a perfect judge's Judgment about my blame where limits whether I believe a composition to be true or not That should have nothing to do with it. So those are my two points there So and I'll give you the final word Anything you want to say any pony do you want to ditch out on my argument there? Feel free to do that now Well, no, you said something interesting about salvation when it comes to you know, you kill someone and he had this come to jesus moment So it's like the thief on the cross He was most likely a murderer not just a thief and yet he comes to jesus. Okay. Jesus obviously reads hearts He's reading hearts throughout the new testament We get that when it comes to like the Pharisees for example And so it's not just this matter of mental ascent of whether the Pharisees or the thief on the cross If they have this mental ascent where all of a sudden they had this, you know, vague belief in jesus and boom, you're in buddy You're in No, he only god alone can read hearts. Let's be honest like that Logically makes sense. You and I can't read hearts. We can get to know each other after a long time But we can't really know the real Alex. You can't really know the real steward Not even my wife knows the real steward. Thank heaven And so this is a matter of he reads hearts Always love and belief are tied to action in the bible So again, like love songs we have in our culture today are all tied up in emotion and love is emotion But the bible bit of speaking it's about action like acts for example talks about Pistis when it comes to moving out in trust in relationship with god giving up yourself In order to have a tight relationship with him again It's not just this mental ascent to believe in your in believe in your in and have this mental goal ability And then you're in you also said so you're still responsible It's like god blaming someone For what they or god not blaming somebody for what they did Which is entirely untrue god never lets anybody off the hook That's why for example, you get the ultimate combination of justice truth and love At the cross and that's the definition of what real justice Is when it comes to understanding what we desire today Now if you want to say just in our legal system and our legal system changes over the years We know this then our legal system standing today in the u.s. Yes, I get closer to your understanding probably of justice But that's not the one i'm going by i'm going by a type of objective system that I think all of us truly desire If we're really honest and I think it is ethereal I think it is immaterial I think it is a type of standard that comes from god and so it's In that kind of way it just makes more sense the beliefs are always never morally significant Again, I think beliefs in scripture are tied to action. So it is morally significant tortures morally blame-worthy you said Believing isn't I again.  David foster wallace and a strong atheist said that at kenyon college here Every single person worships and it said it's something transcendent It won't eat you alive like if it is something mundane here on this planet And so if you worship the source of all goodness Based off of his grace and the ultimate act of love on the cross That's going to draw you to heaven his love on the cross It's not going to be this type of justice alex did right and wrong this old testament and The canaanites had a very similar type of justice system right wrong kill him capital punishment If he's wrong and if he's done wrong to somebody else No We want something else. I think the god of the universe is drawing us in such a way where he wants our hearts To really desire him and the good and so much of that is based off of grace and sacrifice And somebody actually it has to be the god of the universe Standing in the way for us taking on our sins because he's the sinless one Nobody who is sinful can take on the sins of somebody else It has to be somebody sinless and it has to be the god of the universe Okay, can I just ask one very quick question to which I don't want to have a huge discussion and like follow up Blah blah blah just a very quick question I'll allow the question that we'll get to the q&a right after After stewart's response obviously Yeah, I just wanted to ask you students. Do you think that you can um, you know go to heaven or whatever the um, the good the good option is um in christianity Entirely having uh, the wrong beliefs right is you know, is is that possible? Entirely having the wrong beliefs about christianity. I just don't believe any of those core beliefs. Am I excluded from heaven as a result of that?   That's going to determine whether you go to heaven ultimately or not It's not going to be whether you truly got the doctrines correct or not. Okay. Thank you. All right Once again everyone. Thank you so much for Accepting my challenge of hitting 100 likes before we got to q&a. Thank you. That feels fantastic um stewart and alex you guys are Monsters of debate. Thank you so much for coming out. Let's get to some q&a. Shall we Actually before I jump into that q&a. I remind you guys one more time Next weekend. We've got the live in-person debates Um in houston texas. So if you guys want to grab some some tickets to the event Simply just go to the description below and click the link Um, we would love to see you all there Uh stewart From 111 for 699 explain how a perfect and all-loving god believes eternal punishment Is the perfect punishment for finite sin Well, I lean towards annihilationism I don't I'm not certain. I've gone back and forth that it's going to be eternal punishment. We get both in scripture So so that's another mystery But I for me it's not a finite sin that you're going to be damned forever for No, read I would 111 go check out luke 16 father abraham He's not in hell because of a finite sin He's in or excuse me.  It's because he lived for money He doesn't even have a name So it's kind of that idea of born a man died a doctor a lot of doctors get the poor reputation of I'm just a doctor now and I don't even I've lost my humanity because I've lived for that type of esteem So so that it's it's what you're living for ultimately puts you in hell It's it's not a finite sin All right, thank you Another maybe more of a comment than a question. I don't know from big thang flying wane Did stew equate any sin to emitting mass shooting? No, that's not what I did I was talking about the need for jesus to die on the cross See that was an angle that alex and I didn't get to But the need like the gravity of sin I would say him taking it upon himself You know him sweating and praying You know to the point of droplets of blood three times in the garden That level of pain taking on that type of sin I would say The potential and what we have in us for sin if it's fully realized So it's like an acorn turning into an oak tree turning into a forest of oaks If fully watered and fertilized correctly Then yes, we could be mass shooters And so no, I don't equate any sin I don't know how he worded the question But that that's my point on that. It's not it's not the finite sins that is the equivalent I think he said of mass shooting somehow okay We have a question here from good question for two dollars Why god feared adam genesis 3 22? Is that even a question? Who's that for what does that mean? I don't know That's all it says is from someone called good question. This is why god feared adam genesis 3 22 I certainly don't know the answer to that question Did gold fear adam? That doesn't even seem right Maybe it says that somewhere Well, I don't know it's do it. Are you gonna look up the reference man has now become like one of us knowing good And even okay, he must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life And eat life forever So it kind of seems yeah, it's a good question because it kind of seems petty in a way We're gods like man cannot become like us But it makes all this sense in the world because there has to be one god, you know, we we can't all be gods and He set it up in such a way where he did create us So he did not create all of us to be god. He didn't create all this to be him He created us in such a way where we are our human And we can flourish truly. He wanted to share this place with us He didn't need us in any kind of way And so the tree of the knowledge of good and evil It was adam and eve ultimately deciding Yes, god does not have our best in mind And so we're gonna doubt that and we want to become our gods ourselves By testing god and wanting to know what he knows exactly And so was there a healthy level of fear that god had towards adam for doing that? I wouldn't know the text never says he was fearful, but the text does clearly state That adam obviously did a big misstep and by doing so There has to be this differentiation between god and humanity and god's not going to let adam become god All right. Thank you so much um So yeah, another one from good question five dollars Good question is digging deep here stewart. Are you still waiting for jesus prophecy and mark? nine one to come true She's all there's all these verses. Wow Atheists Every verse of by heart I'm an apologist, aren't you? Yeah, that was about the coming of the temple and then there's destruction of the temple So there was a a mistaken understanding jesus is not saying that some of you will not So that that's one interpretation Then others would say that no some were taken up to heaven from that group of people But I believe that's more so a matter of reference to the temple 70 ad and the destruction of it All right. Thank you All right, so then we got one from john for four dollars and he said nothing So I guess that's just a shout out. We'll wave to john Um, but then john does ask for another five dollars stew Why just justice require sacrifice? Direct succinct answer, please Why does justice require sacrifice? It appeared that's the question. Yeah justice there doesn't always have to be sacrifice in this type of way injustice to preserve justice but I would say in just about any type of Area that I can think of if you're related this to forgiveness for example and wrong doing If somebody is going to truly forgive somebody who's wronged them Then there needs to be taken on a level of Pain And a desire not to pay back in such a way where there is justice being done Because when I for example was really hurt by someone I I know I could have gotten justice by going after him legally I mean, maybe alex would have said if he legally harmed me. I should have done that for justice sake But no, I took the penalty on myself Um, I'm not saying I was christ in any kind of way But I took the penalty on myself in that and did not respond in a way where that form of justice was sought out But my uncle for example said he would have done so And he's a lawyer so There's different understandings of justice And they're complicated like alex was alluding to earlier in terms of there's nuanced situations so that's a That's a very concrete very clear and concise response So can I just tag on a little bit there not to like have a massive debate on this question that I just Maybe I maybe I didn't say very much about justice And I I think I just don't see Okay, so so yeah, there are probably it's probably a policy must word justice right like like knowledge or whatever where there's loads of different concepts And we just use the same word and it's like an umbrella and often we don't distinguish distinct Concepts when we use the word so like I'm totally down with that idea But I think the concept of justice that's relevant when we're talking about a kind of theistic old metaphysical Judgment like what's the point? What's the meaning of life in some way? It's to like go through this trial and Maybe you pop out the end of that trial in Sorted into like the good category or the bad category. I'm not saying this is not just christianity. Obviously loads of religions that have this idea in it So in that type of context It does seem to me that like Well, you've got to like make you've got to sort the apples into one of the two buckets, right? And like what are you doing to make that decision? It's not what color hair they've got It's not how many friends they've got how many how many likes they get on their tweets or whatever The only thing that's really relevant is whether or not they were a good person or a bad person and what that means is whether they did Morally right or wrong actions and to what extent they did those things I just don't see that anything else is relevant. I don't know why To see that's my fundamental. I guess that's my idea of justice that's going on here They're just like in the justice system. We're often we're making Uh similar, but I guess different because sometimes things can be Legal but immoral or illegal or moral or whatever, but we're still trying to say somebody's like living up to or failing to live up to these like Standards that we've got whether we call that the law or whether we call it morality or something It just seems to me in the metaphysical case where there's a god judging us It's obviously morality. It's not going to be like some Legal system that men came up with right it's not going to be How many friends they've got so I'm going to be what they believe it's what they do like are they did they do bad things? right and If they did That's the basis and judging them. So it's not very complicated as a theory of justice It just seems to me perfectly straightforward and clear. Um, so Yeah, maybe I just needed to spell that out. Maybe I should have spelled that out earlier on in the debate so apologies if Not doing so meant it was more difficult to follow what I was saying But yeah, there we go. I just thought I would put that there so that it was I said do you want to piggyback something on that stewart before we move on? No, that was good and clear. I would just say You know, where does that justice come from like like alex is stating, you know Does it come from my own definition of justice? Does it come from culture's definition of justice? You know, because I know a a lot of people around here at least Would live more so and would respect people a lot more who are getting the likes on social media And doing right and wrong In terms of, you know, philanthropy and that sort of thing or is it the powerful we're defining justice Or is it like martin luther king jr. Talked about in terms of the law above the law and it's god Finding what is what is just and unjust or so one very last quick point then for me in particular Um, I I'm a moral realist. So I think there are moral truths Um, and and that's and they're completely independent of what anybody believes, right? So it's a bit like the way that a christian thinks about it But I don't think that there's any like divine lawgiver that's dictating those or something So for me if it was my view just to put my cards on the table. That's how I'm thinking about it um Not that that really mattered in this context because I think I was just trying to appeal to some kind of common ground notion of justice That's common to both of us regardless of how we cash out the detail But anyway, that that was my intention uh that we could have common ground and use that concept regardless of where it comes from All right at this point. We're getting super chats in quicker than we can answer them. So Let's buckle down and get to work Uh, surprise surprise for stewart If I reject jesus, how many goats are a good ransom for my soul blood is blood, right? So just to your point justin last time my last debate on here with aron raw We went for over four and a half hours because we kept talking during this time But I throw so that's exactly what the old testament talked about So so what would happen was there was nothing in and of itself that the goat did But the levites would place their hands on the goat and that would be the expiation of sin and the goat would go out and And die eventually because the goat was sent out beyond the herd And that's exactly what jesus did on golgotha He went beyond the herd. He went beyond humanity. He was completely isolated and took our sins upon himself So in the old testament. Yep, that person's exactly right blood for blood But in the new testament we get an understanding of how grave our sins are So everything in the old testament if you look at it all motifs Point to how everybody could not ultimately no matter the what sacrifices they did with that blood On those goats is listen carefully blood on those goats. They still Could not get away from this feeling of dirtiness. They still Kept sinning and messing up And so they kept trying to work to god never were able to do so and this is the difference between christianity and every other religion Every other religion says you work to god But then we understand it in the new testament that we couldn't do it So jesus christ has to come and do it himself god has to do it himself As a blood sacrifice So that's the radical difference between the two All right. Yeah, um I've seen all of your debates do and then i'm very much very much enjoy watching Those debates including the r and raw one. I've also seen all of yours as well, alex. So just so you're not too left out But i'm a i was a big fan of modern day debate and now i am part of modern day debate and i'm super electric to be here right now Uh having said that Um, you're a good one. That's five dollars. This question's for stew At what moment does a soul become responsible for sin? It commits does a dead infant need to atone more than a miscarried child if so why? I do not know This this is another one where the bible does not answer it directly And so at the end of the gospel of john when john talks about if there was every deed and Thing that jesus talked about added to this book. We wouldn't have enough We wouldn't have there wouldn't be enough room in the world to to contain all the books So this is not spoken to directly But what it is spoken to directly is the important some would say of infant baptism not to save again not to save that child It's simply an inward An inward decision of an outward expression that you're that you're doing in front of people and I always go to The baby that was born Obviously not only out of wedlock but in sin to bath sheba Based off the adultery and the murder david says You will not come to me. I will go to you Showing that that baby born out of sin is in heaven So yet again, god's tremendous Grace love unconditional love where it's you know that that baby was born out of murder and adultery Why in the world would it be me in heaven? Many would say And yet clearly that baby is in heaven And so in terms of the culpability and the age of accountability some christians would say it's like seven others would say it's 12 I think you're grasping as straw is saying that I think based off of what you have with david and based off of the heart of christ Children, I mean look at him. He's always welcoming kids and kids were considered despicable in that day and age Even the disciples said what are you doing? This is despicable. These these children So based off of what you have with david there as well as how jesus treats Kids, I think it's a really tough case to make to say that somehow Kids are gonna be in hell Okay, thank you stew. Um, this one doesn't specify that it's first due but I think it is um Christian altruist believes in judgment day atheist altruists no judgment day Both are selfish equally. How is god necessary for morality? I think alex might be able to put some two cents on this one as well after Yeah, you want to go first alex? Sorry, can you say again? I was distracted. Someone was messaging me I thought I had two minutes to message back because it was not gonna be familiar say uh, so the Ted le coco For 499 says christian altruists believe in judgment day altruist Atheist altruists no judgment day both are selfless equally. How is god necessary for morality? Uh, yeah, okay, so I guess what he's saying is that like um Whether you believe in god or not the uh altruistic act is basically just as altruistic right so an atheist Doing an altruistic act is is um Doing something just as valuable as as a christian who does it so um That seems right, uh, but then he was saying well, but you know, why do you need god then in that case? um, I don't know that if I don't know that the Kind of equivalence on those two Means that god doesn't play any role. I mean a christian Is gonna say something like the god is a kind of metaphysical ground of morality So they have a different concept of morality at play um So I guess I guess I you know the only thing I've got that's really helpful to say about that It's just that it does seem to me that you you know, you don't really need uh God involved in a theory of morality for it to be um Perfectly adequate to explain everything uh just as well. Um, that seems right to me though. There are There are decent um secular theories of morality Um, just as good as as any theistic ones as far as I'm concerned. So in that sense you don't need God Yeah, as a part of theory building to get the job done. Um, yeah, so I guess that's my view What do you say stew? I think you need a god who is personal To say what is truly right and wrong and you need a god who is loving in order to grasp at what is this love That is intangible beyond just neurochemicals oxy oxytocin for example and so As a moral realists or a plateness would say that there are Moral standards out there that we don't have to attach to a god I I I think that's a better argument than you know, a relativist But at the same time I I think all of these intangible moral concepts like justice that we have You want a personal Every every single time we encounter them. There's a personal side to them Like it's not just robotic. They're not they're not just like the mathematical laws we have in the universe No, they're very personal justice love empathy truth honor Like a personal being creating them makes way more sense to me And this idea of judgment to I mean if the atheistic position is right Then you just got to suck it up.  Hopefully the police will catch them But we know the highest percentage of those women who are raped on college campuses Their perpetrators are never caught and that's like suck it up too bad I mean the And and and so judgment day, they're gonna be held accountable But maybe there's not a judgment day And and so I think I think we need to be honest if there's not a judgment day from an atheistic perspective Which there can't be a judgment day if you're an atheist Then we need to do a little bit more grieving and justice will look very different In this world here and now if there is no judgment day compared to An understanding of what justice truly is if there is a judgment day I see stewart brick you up a little alex go for it.  There's nothing Okay, that's fair enough. But then if we talk about the christian Case my whole point this whole evening was to say On the christian story. There's no justice, right because these are cases of injustice too.  He's not getting punished There's no there's no justice there.   I just you know, I got triggered. So I just wanted to get that out I agree with Alex. Feel free to have the last word It's a good point.  Like I don't read that in the bible anywhere. I think it's a true honest heart change And again, whether it's a rapist or whether it's somebody doing some type of crime that's way smaller than that Yes, we do want second opportunities for ourselves and I would want a second opportunity for even hitler But maybe maybe that's unjust of me to desire anybody who's done any crime to actually get A second or third opportunity at really changing And so you get endless opportunities But they have to obviously be genuine and they are backed by justice Like there's nothing in the bible that says You know there's so for example There's been abuse in the church right where women have been fondled and it's oh just forgive And what we're trying to do it doing I and others are showing that that's not the biblical basis for justice at all Justice is yes, you've forgiven your heart. So you get inner freedom So you don't have to live in your mental space with being raped But then justice is justice for the perpetrator where there is a type of Meet it out penalty And so this whole idea of let's just skip over justice and just hop to cheap grace That's not what i'm talking about at all Okay um So next question from anonymous five dollars If jesus is god and man Why would he yell father forgive them for they know not what they do Who's that for i'll throw it in the air first one to catch it can answer Alex go ahead and see a question well So that's what jesus says in the gospel mark. I think he doesn't say it in the others um and in mark As I obviously don't have a huge understanding and appreciation of of this but I my limited understanding is the in mark there's a Version of jesus where he does, you know, sometimes tries to do a miracle and gets it wrong The disciples don't understand what he's on about. It's a kind of um anti hero kind of narrative. It's kind of different to how he comes How he's portrayed in other and other versions of those stories So I guess the point is that at that mark is portraying a specific narrative kind of um Surprising anti hero narrative and that's why he's saying that there But the question is like but if he was like fully god and fully man and blah blah blah It seems to me like it's imposing a different notion of christology onto the story that wasn't in the intentions of mark And that's why it sounds weird. Uh, he I don't think he thought of Jesus being like kind of um Like knowing that he's god At that point. He doesn't know that he doesn't really know very much about what's going on So that that explains why he's doing that's different narrative different part of the bible having a different spin on stuff and saying in a different way So that would be that's that's how I understand that. I think that's what's going on there But I imagine stew's got a completely different view to me about that. So maybe he can explain what he thinks You know, that's that's interesting because not even the son of man knows When the return is going to be so not even jesus christ knows The day in the hour and so that shows his finitude to a certain extent But obviously he claimed to be christ without the scripture whether it's the seven i am statements in john Or him being crucified for saying he forgives sins and or whether he takes worship and doesn't tear his clothes and say Don't worship me like like peter does So he's clearly making the claim to be god and he clearly does things like miracles and the greatest miracle is the resurrection And yet, you know, alex makes an interesting point I've never really thought about Does he lose his god awareness when he's sweating droplets of blood because he's dealing with that level of stress and pressure No, I don't I don't think he ever loses his god awareness fully but it shows again the wrestling match of his humanity and his divinity And god punching a hole into space and time in order to actually Relationally and physically tangibly get to humanity while remaining god And it makes sense and yet the same time There are a lot of gaps in scripture that don't talk about exactly what that looks like So I don't know what is going on in in price Mental state when he's under that much pressure when he's literally taking on the sins of the world Yes, I think that could be fully human Because he's taking on so much sin and evil so All right, thank you, sir All right, we have a question from good question again this time throwing $10 To address dr. Mel pass They disagree with you on one point They say animals are moral agents I have seen them do calculated mischief take revenge punish measurably Be intentional jerks avoid harming when a warning is enough Okay, so I do agree. I guess actually that some animals could be moral agents Um, I don't think that it's just humans that are moral agents But I think it requires a capacity to Um understand some stuff so I mean possibly You know higher primates elephants dolphin something like that. Maybe they can um Give my dog. I mean maybe You know, I I do my dog is socialized by living with humans all time. So often she does things that seem like they So I have that where did that come from sort of random disembodied voice Maybe I've had a Damascus moment. I heard that too. I don't know where it came from Oh, well, it wasn't clear enough. So I still don't believe in anything. Um Yeah, I don't know. So I okay. Yeah, maybe some animals can be moral agents, but you know, generally speaking uh Your average kind of tooth and claw example of like a lion eating a gazelle or something That's it just seems to it's silly to think that that's um a case where that the lion has the same type of moral responsibility as You know a sort of sentient and rational human that understands and reflects on directions and stuff It's it's not like that So, yeah All right, very well From ted lakoka Maybe it's lakoko um Okay, so stew They say That your claims of a straw man Was you on your heels? Uh They're advising that tailwism helped them From not getting so angry. So I guess Someone was challenging your temper a little bit during this debate Was that person kind of a snowflake? They're probably snowflake I do not know them personally. I could not tell you all I know is it was worth five dollars for them to Comment this first off. I apologize if I was too intense I will say that alex said the f word though and I did not curse So I put it fully on alex No alex is very his temperament is very peaceful, which I really enjoy And I apologize if I got too energetic here It's it must be the stress of the baby coming the baby's coming any second But no alex has been very very kind in this debate and the only moment he was triggered in a moment But he was kind in his triggermen other than the f word I got triggered with my energy because What I was getting from alex Perhaps was not fully what he was meaning But what I heard was was very very triggering for a moment When it it was kind of this it sounded to me like this whole. Oh, we're just talking everything up to a mystery And we've been saying that this whole time so On on I don't think I was on my heels I think I answered it as honestly as I possibly could If you say I was on my heels in the sense of heels was my word I tried to like Of the question a little bit Yeah, I thank you for that. Justin. Jeez. Wow Kindness more kindness. So So no, I I could be on my heels in a sense of You know, I I can't I'm not going to be able to fully break down in the most clearest way possible A couple things in scripture and I said trinity Atonement Um predestination free will Like like I think I can get close to the line of clarity But those are three big ones that I don't think I'll ever be able to see, you know, that's why when alex brought up his debate topic I was like, oh This will be fun This will be interesting Because I'm not I this is not one of my strong points in terms of debating the atonement You know, that's William Lane Craig and others who've written books on it So so no, I don't think I was on my heels. I think I wanted to to go I'm a little I'm a little not annoyed. I think I'm a little Despairing right now that we didn't get to alex's other good points because again original sin Is fascinating very interesting. I think we could have gotten into it to it sociologically as well and psychologically And then salvation piece too. It would have been interesting. So So that was that was my piece there. I not to just go back. This is not a I've got you or anything like that, but alex made a second ago the the comment of the road to the mask is experienced And that he didn't get clarity enough from that voice that just popped up I think that gets into what kind of clarity do you want? What kind of evidence do you want? and even the you know Even the most famed atheists, you know alex I'm sure is up there That I've had you know, I've debated on this channel and others Always their response is there's no evidence, but I don't know how much I would need like wow That is very interesting I don't even know where to begin with that one that is such a cop out and I don't think alex would take that position but But that's what I hear and I don't know how much evidence alex would need and then secondly Whatever that experience sol had And his incredible change to paul Okay, we can we can mock it and say oh was this bright light that knocked him off his horse and maybe he was an alien or something But whatever that experience was historically In scripture and extraneous sources as well There there was a pretty crazy Transition and in his understanding of justice So that gets back to exactly what we've been talking about tonight His understanding of justice before was all about the talmud and the rabbinical law as well as Jews were considered way higher up on the pedestal than other nations and and you better stick to the law or you're Nobody and nobody taught it better than paul and he was one of the most famous people in the world at the time So he has this experience that all of a sudden radically changes them and nobody can explain why Historically, maybe again, maybe he was maybe it was a type of psilocybin or DMT that he had in some of the bread or something that before his travels And yet that radical shift for him to build the entire church Is you need to explain it you need to find a way to explain it So that's one of the pieces of evidence that brings clarity for me even though it's It's having the opposite effect on on alex Well, if I can just also say um, I don't um I didn't come Presenting this argument with the kind of attitude of like, oh, I've thought all of this through. I'm definitely right um No one can say anything that can defeat my ultimate ponage argument that I'll dish out now and whatever. It's not like that I don't Have that type of attitude towards these things so like um It's there's loads of stuff about this that I also find mysterious and My knowledge doesn't go very far for first person to put my hand up and say that so I was only really like making the argument Like Like the like a chess opening. I don't know if you play chess stew, but I do play chess quite a lot and um You can like learn, you know an opening like the Sicilian or whatever and you play the first couple of moves You kind of like learn how that works And you get to know the landscape a bit, but you know 20 moves later It's it's a completely unique game at that point You don't know how it's going to go just because you like like the first couple of moves and that's why I think about the argument I was making I just liked the idea of like going into this conversation at that specific angle and seeing where it goes from there So I I wasn't like thinking Oh, this is this is I'm going to win. I'm right anything like that It was just it's a curious and interesting way to have a conversation about these topics So I I didn't want to come across this, you know, it's ultra confident know-it-all kind of douchebag you know I I didn't get that from you at all It's it's it's uh inspiring me to look into it more often because the atonement typically does not come up in In most debates and and so no I Even though I saw it as a big challenge in a learning moment I um No, I'm glad you I'm glad you brought this up. I know I I haven't thought at all about and I think you're a very humble atheist It's just it's just I get so frustrated with with so many atheists who peg christians as dogmatic when When I run into atheists who are most dogmatic and of all it's kind of like And I'm not saying you're one. You don't strike me as one, but it's It's just frustrating because it's like it's like those who Infertolerance are the most intolerant of all oftentimes So that's just what I found and but no, I haven't gotten that at all from you in terms of the atonement I think you you've taken a very humble stance and I thank you for that Uh, and perhaps I was a little bit of a snowflake on the question Uh, I I felt it might have been a tad on the harsh side and I was Just reamed by the question asker in a super chat Um that I have failed him. So I apologize. I will not allow that to happen again And tesla coco asks another question immediately Here it is word for word stew. There is no not mystery in god. It's all mystery Yeah, yeah, see again Back in the 1500s in the middle ages and still in most cultures today The understanding of god is just It's fully accepted. It's it's obvious. It just makes sense. Now, whether you say it's from upbringing or Or whatever it might be the knowledge and experience of god from 87 percent of the entire world Starts to shatter that argument alone and in the middle ages You know, you eventually had a lot of different natural disasters that occurred, especially a big earthquake in the 1700s later on where all of a sudden Where where alex lives in his neck of the woods as well as where I live People got to this point and then later on you get home, obviously So you just channel it down through the enlightenment where people are becoming more and more certain of their knowledge and they have a type of omniscient vigilance and a type of I god if there is a god he must give me every piece of evidence imaginable until I see it fit And then I will believe in him Like like suffering and evil Obviously discount god. Oh, yeah, alvin planiga would disagree. He would say how in the world. Do you know that? How do you have that type of omniscience where you could say suffering and evil discount god that there's not any type of Potential goodness that comes from evil and suffering that there couldn't be any type of reasoning that comes from some So it's it's from it's from hum. It's from the enlightenment Where it's what this lakoko kid is talking about Is basically all on my type of human reasoning and it's a very western idea Where he was he's swimming in it in his culture Where he where it's a the buffered self that charles taylor talks about where it's all No longer even check out the transcendent and by doing so We're simply in this buffered type of self that doesn't even look upward. It just looks inward And I have to have all of the correct reasons and evidence in order to truly believe I don't believe alex again. I don't believe i'm not trying to stereotype all atheists I'm just saying where lakoko is coming from it seems like a very emotional standpoint to say that It's just mystery with god I think is completely discounting thousands of years of intense debates of thousands of different debaters on both sides So when I hear the last person I debated on on this channel again say there is no truth whatsoever in jesus christ He never spoke a truthful word god. There is no truth whatsoever He literally said that to me 10 times and he's a very respected atheist That is what i'm talking about right there No honest genuine historian or scholar would agree with that so um, can I just say one of one of two little things just um I do think that uh If your religion doesn't carry with it um a kind of a What's the word this might not be the right term for it but like um kind of An apologetic charge or something where like your duty as a christian is to kind of try and get other people to become christians like Not not every religion has that as far as I understand I don't know anything about this either really but um, I don't think that's part of hinduism for instance I'm not sure it's part of islami actually Um, but if it is part of your religion that you're supposed to go out and persuade other people to become religious It's then that the appeal to mystery starts to become a bit more problematic because like if if I'm just religious But I don't care whether you want to be the same religion as me and you ask me to explain it And I say oh, yeah, it's just all mystery not saying you said that everything was a mystery in christianity obviously But like suppose someone were to say that about their religion It doesn't really matter if they don't have to try and convert you But if they're supposed to convert you then it feels like you've got this kind of corresponding obligation that it should make sense then Right because how are you supposed to persuade someone to believe in it if it doesn't make sense? So mysteries and the apologetic charge do kind of pull in the opposite direction to me I don't you know Anyway, it does seem to me that that was a Attention right and I wouldn't blame it all on him for me It feels like the problem is that you're supposed to persuade people of stuff that you don't understand That's really hard right how are you like that's where the problem comes into but anyway, I was just my two cents I'm not trying to you know See again logically if there's a god of the universe and you're going to grant that god total omniscience He created the entire cosmos like Like shouldn't we have a certain level of limited knowledge? And then you know, maybe your rebuttal is yeah, but we have we have zero evidence So so to hear atheists never say that is so frustrating for me They're never like yeah, we have limited knowledge and you know, biblically our thoughts are not as high as as god's thoughts Yes, that's correct. If you're granting an omniscient being who created everything You're not going to get every piece of evidence that you so desire And I know it's frustrating It's frustrating for me too because I want god to show up right now and pop up as the fourth bubble right now In this debate and just show himself and he can prove that to all this and we don't we can stop debating now Okay, but is that fair to treat the god of the universe that way So I know I think it's an interesting point in terms of Yes, christians should always look at god as a mystery. I think if you don't look at god as a mystery You're lying through your teeth. I think if alex is saying that there's not mystery in His origin the meaning of his life where he's headed then he's lying through his teeth Of course, there's mystery and so so no, I think a christian Is you know sharing the good news better say that there's mystery Or they're totally lying. I think that's interesting. Hindu share their faith, but not to the extent Like I've talked to a hindu woman and she wanted me to become a hindu um Muslims in the past unfortunately have Well, they definitely share their faith And it many of them I was just in an uber and he was sharing his faith with me and he was very kind And humble in his and how he was sharing it And then many atheists many atheists share their faith Um, obviously strongly, you know alex is doing that to an extent right now right here Unless this is just an intellectual exercise But I think he's sharing it.  We're not we're not attached to the truth. Why wouldn't you want to take the blinders off for me? I Don't understand what that means. Sorry If you don't want me to become an atheist, but you're saying Atheism is the correct worldview Then I'm buying into an untruth And living a lie. So why wouldn't you want me to become an atheist? Isn't that love the loving thing to do? I mean that might be one of the many I mean For all I know you believe 15 other false things I don't know that that's the most destructive one that you believe I mean, should I care most more about that? I don't know and maybe I'm uh Maybe I don't think that you should become a christian maybe maybe if we got to know each other more I would say actually you should be a christian Don't don't even worry about atheism Even though I think atheism is true because I think it'd be better for you not to believe that because you can't handle it or something I don't know But there's loads of reasons why I might not want you to become an atheist Even though I I think that atheism is Correct. There's loads of reasons why I might not think that you should believe that And there's just simply no apologetic Obligation on me as far as I'm concerned To change anybody else's mind on this question.  That's my perspective. Well, I would certainly hope though that that's an interesting perspective But the majority of atheists I debate they'll they'll say, you know, I don't want you to be A christian anymore.  I want you to be an atheist to see the light and understanding that You know, we did come from nothing and that you don't need a creator to create us all Or another try to convert me because he said, you know, I could become violent because of the Old Testament passages On what the Israelites did to the Canaanites and others Another one tried to convert me because of the idea of original sin and how that's debilitating another one tried to convert me because of uh sexuality Sex ethics So so I think it's good for atheists if they strongly stand on a lot of these different points that they should convert Christians But I might want to change your mind about those issues in particular But I don't suppose that you have to stop being a christian I mean, there are christians who take all sorts of views on all of those questions Right, you could be a christian who's totally down with people being gay and bisexual and Transgender or whatever. So I don't have to convert you to change your mind about that question No, I'm just giving you an example though of atheists who do try and Deconvert me. Yeah, right. Well, I think they're confused. I think that they're acting in a weird confused way If I'm I still think I take I take issue with your point though Because I'm still if christianity is my entire identity if I'm built up in that Even if say I'm a pastor doing a lot of great things for people And so you're like, whoa, whoa, I want him to remain a christian because he's doing so much great, you know Psychological work with people spiritual work with people. Let's just keep him a christian Uh, uh, okay, great. That's very kind of you in many ways and and serving to the populace But but in the other way, what if I wasn't doing that much and my entire entire identity was still wrapped up in christianity? Or what if I was still doing that much?  Maybe a humanist But but if I'm a christian by the book and really holding to it I hope you would want to deconvert me. That'd be the loving thing to do Oh, maybe we're getting into a potential debate topic for another debate. Yeah Do you want to just say one last thing and then first sure? Look, I think that there's whole there's loads of things that might be more important than that I mean like are you destroying the environment or are you like? um unnecessarily like attacking state institutions that look after vulnerable people because of your like Economic ideological views or whatever Maybe your religious beliefs are not even that important on the big scale of things They're just one of the various lies that you believe right and maybe I believe a whole ton of lies too And I don't know about it But it's very black and white and reductive to just sort of suppose that This question must be the one that I care most about trying to change your mind I didn't say most I didn't say most Okay, but but it would be reductive were it to be Necessarily that you zoom in on that question above all of the others. So I suppose what what I'm saying is that um, I'm not convinced it's the most Important question about somebody Whether they're christian or or whether they're religious or whether they're eight years There's way more interesting important things if I was to try and change your mind about something It probably wouldn't be this question, right? It would I'd probably be focusing on something completely different I agree. That's my perspective free. Yep All right Moving along sparky steve drops two dollars to comment That stewart's gonna need god tonight. Alex is a beast Bruce facts This has been an enlightening conversation. I've enjoyed it Okay, you were bored at one point. So I've turned it around. Fortunately What's that? No, I was bored with that topic. I was never bored. Okay, don't worry. I was never bored Moving along tesla coco another two dollars Says so jenesis 322 God needed us to not be in his image No, that's wrong. I don't know what translation he's pulling from The amago day was was central right from the beginning in in one about 127 And there was nothing about not in his image It was created created to mirror god Not to be god And there's a major major difference in that we have some of god's quality qualities Anthro in an anthropocentric kind of way morphic kind of way And and yet we we definitely are lacking in the incommunicable and communicable traits of god So there's a radical difference All right, moving along arcade outposts for five dollars Jesus is a dramatized yam kapoor ritual Christianity is a jadaic spin-off religion to get historically con