Dillahunty would have no problem with Craig. The reason they debate small time theists is because people like Craig charge a lot of money to make an appearance. These local organizations like the ACA will not pay Craig that money to preach. All the Christian apologists publish books constantly as well. Craig sells mp3's on iTunes. They are all trying to make money. Dawkins is actually a respected biologist, so it makes sense that his books would be well accepted.
@lotmein20 Atheism cannot be proven, as it basis is a negative - there is no god!. Just as a you cannot disprove the excistence of fairies or the flying spagetti monster. That also mean that atheist, MUST be open to evidence to the contrary.
I suppose you are a theist, and have claims to know there is a god, how about presenting proof of that, because it is a rather large claim.
@lotmein20 And as far as your refusal to answer these questions again reiterates what you said that you don't know,,,,,,yet you have faith in science as you god lol!!!!
No one has faith in science. Faith is trust in something you have no reason to trust.
Science has double life expectancy, cured diseases, built houses cars televisions, the computer you're using now, paved roads, increased food supplies, created medicines, dishwashers laundry machines.
Every single thing you use every day was created by science. You don't have to have faith in it, it's results are seen everyday
@chaoszieg You need reason for faith; if not there is nothing and no reason....Since we are created in the Likeness and Image of God, we would have the intelligence to see observe learn and draw conclusions and create in this created realm. This study of our already created properties and essence of our Universe is science.
@chaoszieg What scientific law points to there being no creator?
"The laws of science, as we know them at the present, contain many fundamental numbers, like the size of the electron charge of the electron and the ratio of the masses of the proton to the electron... The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development for life."
- Stephen Hawking (theoretical physicist, atheist) (italics added for emphasis)
though neither Harkings nor Einsein's quotes you posted suggest in any way shape or form a creator.
As for Fred Hoyle, he didn't except the big bang because he believe it lent credibility to the idea of a creator(god) He also believed that life on earth was caused by viruses landing here on meteors.
So you're going to take someone who thinks there is no god, and life was created by virus injected rocks as your source for science pointing to god?
@chaoszieg "A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super-intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question."
@chaoszieg "The scientist is possessed by the sense of universal causation...His religious feeling takes the form of rapturous amazement at the harmony of natural law, which reveals the intelligence of such superiority that, compared with it, systematic thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection.
- Albert Einstein (theoretical physicist, agnostic)
@lotmein20 Just finished reading the paper and all he hits on are current interpretations of consciousness and unconsciousness states; when he says that there is no unconsciousness state with the existence of a conscious state proves and eternal consciousness which is God....but here again its all theory with this geek.
@lotmein20 How does that fit into Darwins Theories of survival of the fittest if you are a pussy you should be brushed to the side. sounds like you are stealing from religious morality
@lotmein20 When you attempt to use logic to conclude facts about religion, are you starting at the conclusion (God is not real), or are you starting at true premises? Be honest. If you are starting at true premises, then what are they? And how are they true?
@lotmein20 Ok got it I will read it tonight...Hereis another one for you to totally blow off... Are you a moral relativist, or do you believe in absolute morality? In other words, do you believe that cultures, or even individuals, can define their own rules on what is moral and what is not, or do you believe that every action has one unique, absolute, and true moral assessment?
@lotmein20 Inanimate matter stays that way no matter how complicated the arrangement. Without an immaterial mind, how can consciousness emerge from pure material?
@lotmein20 Inanimate matter stays that way no matter how complicated the arrangement. Without an immaterial mind, how can consciousness emerge from pure material?
@lotmein20 In reality the Bible was a collections of early writings preceded by the Didache first instruction manual for Christians written around 50 AD In the Bible the First Council of Jerusalem was the First Council of the Universal (Catholic) Christian Church so the Catholic Church today would be the unbroken Reference. But to someone like you not good enough. your boring the hell out of me feel like I an talking to a kid who lives in fantasy land gaming all day on the computer.
@lotmein20You only checked a few? I give you a lot of references and you only checked a few and come back at me asking for more proof, you are a total idiot. I'll play this game with you all day till we are dead and I am laughing at you in hell lol!!! How does Darwin explain that consciousness can be created from protons that have no consciousness? Don't bother answering I forgot you have faith in a position with no answers at all not even metaphysical ones lol!!!
@lotmein20 Early Christian writings Roman Records the Didache, the bible Jewish records greek Records The formation of western civilization through the ages......Were done on this point because next your gonna site Dan Brown as a counter reference lol!!!
By the way since man is so limited in knowledge how can an intelligent being disqualify the existence of God?
hey gotta go spend time with my kids I suggest you get a life too and get dressed get away from the computer since this life is all you have stop simulating Christian values and enjoy the day..this life is all you will ever have bro.
@lotmein20 Jesus Christ....He healed the sick raised the dead (part of why he was taken seriously and Christianity spread). Scientists attempting to cure cancer take your money claiming they need much more...and after Billions of dollars no miracle.
@lotmein20 I hold scientists as people like you and me pondering the same things yet with all their knowledge have no answers only speculations and since this rivalry between religion ad science began back in the age of enlightenment science is a joke when it comes to this field, every 5, 10 sometimes 1 years you here science contradict earlier findings once this bad now its good global cooling in the 70s now global warming. I mean most data itself is theoretical with these nerds, so yeah.
@lotmein20@lotmein20 No you can't because you a part of the process of the Laws of Thermodynamics which logically proves there is a creator and man is very ignorant.
@lotmein20 Here is test of your IQ...Tell me the origins and give me scientific evidence through experiments like reproducing the the big bang or seeing molecules forming into complex structures from nothing. DIP SHIT!!!
@lotmein20 We know the origins you deny it God, face it. Look in the mirror random happenings in the reflection staring back at you? if you believe that you a simpleton.
Matt Dillahunty was not convincing at all talk about dicking around the middle points and not logically define the origins of anything....what a half wit!!!
This debate would have been much more entertaining if Matt stripped naked, put his hands on top of his bald chrome, and swiveled his hips so that his dick would bounce back and forth slapping against his thighs. Who wouldn't want to see his naked fat body, which probably has hair all over it? His back is probably covered with hair.
The stuff worth watching begins at 4:10, thumb up to save our children the headache of listening to some random schmo dribble out what could be found in a 2 second google search. Thanks.
Morality is very simple. Think to your self, you don't want others to kill you, so you dont kill others. Period. Your morals are based on what is acceptable to you, others and your environment. Is that so hard for theist to understand?
@oericsylla Simple. They are taught (i.e. brainwashed) from a young age that morality must be handed down "from above", so they think that if it isn't from a supernatural source, it isn't "really" morality. That, and their slippery-slope fear of relativism.
that's assuming that you WILL for certain, get killed if you kill someone. What if you could kill someone and get away with it? Should someone still be "moral" in that situation?
Is it so hard for christians to understand how logic works without having to through in god on top of it. Even one of the smartest and educated religious people, john lenox stated in a debate with richard dawkins, we are moral beings. But there is no need to add on top of that by staying that those morals come from god
Obviously atheists are just blind cheerleaders for their guy; they're unable to admit when their guy is wrong, when their side has been defeated, and this is just part 1 of 9. Watch the rest. Matt even says he doesn't know if there's enduring, objective truth. Matt just conceded that the atheist position can offer no enduring truth, and thus the position held by atheists are mere opinions, no more valid than those which they attack.
@ChristianMission He did not mean he lost in the way you want to think he did. He "lost" because Hans said so many contradictions that there wasn't not enough time to go through everything. It's like arguing with a retard, his every sentence will throw you off and off with more and more nonsense to the point where you don't even know how to reply because your brain hurts
@ChristianMission lol... did you even listen to Matt's opening statement? It makes absolute, reasoned sense when you don't filter it through a religious brain. The debate was essentially rendered pointless after the opening statements. The Christian position is taken from a faith claim spawned from archaic texts that when read by today's moral standards, are rendered almost utterly immoral.
Religion is stagnant, and by extension so is the perfect word of your god. We've moved on... deal with it.
@UnitedKingdomify , atheists approach religion with prejudice and develop arguments based on fallacies. Their idea of faith, for instance, is premised on a strawman, and their reading of the Bible is more literal than most fundamentalists they attack. If religion is stagnant, then you would not have had the Reformation and you would not have science since it is a product of religious minds, and in many cases inspired by Biblical literalism.
@ChristianMission Oh yeah, because the reformation came about after much quiet debate in Christian circles and it was amicably decided that a reformation was needed. The Christians are all about reform and renewal, always moving with the times, Christians, and the Bible, never miss a trick. When wrong, they don't oh, read the same line of scripture and apply a different meaning to it, they change the line of scripture to comply with the new knowledge. /sarcasm
@ericrooney1 take it from a personal friend... he knows very well what he decided to no longer believe in. If your perspective is that of many others that he "doesn't know the gospel" because he "lost the word" then your statement is accurate, but then of course it's hard to truly lose what one never had in reality. Theism is a meme drug, and only those addicted to it care about defending it. So much to say, so few characters to say it...
It is very clear that Matt does not understand what the Gospel is (starting @ 11:20). His objection of our inability to uphold the moral law is nothing new, and Paul writes about it in Romans (if anyone truly cares about understanding truth read it for yourself). Also, Matt needs to revisit the claims Christians make regarding the reasons why Christ chose to sacrifice himself on the cross.
@ericrooney1 "It is very clear that Matt does not understand what the Gospel is"
Well he was a christian for 20+ years and on his way to becoming a minister, so I would have to say that you making a false claim there.
"...nothing new..." Yet still unrefuted and stil viable.
"Also, Matt needs to revisit the claims Christians make regarding the reasons why Christ chose to sacrifice himself on the cross." What does that have to do with morality? Complete red herring there.
If Dillahunty would only admit that morality is only "meaningful" when subjected to human perpetuation then we can see morality for what it truly is, an illusion used for selfish human gain.
@laflugantabastardo if this is your view of reality then you may keep it, however don't try to convince me that it is in any way meaningful (as Matt seems to trick people into thinking).
@laflugantabastardo matt makes several presuppositions. first, he presupposes that values exist (6:17-20) I would love for matt to tell me what values are and why they matter. Second, he appeals to human reason to justify his view on morality. Yet, he presupposes that humans reasoning ability is is binding on reality. i would love for matt to prove to me how human reasoning ability (something which just developed out of biological chance processes and evolution) is in any way binding on reality
I could argue both points, but I don't see what it has to do with what I said about life as a phenomenon attempting to gain more for its own perpetuation.
@laflugantabastardo perpetuation towards what, our inevitable destruction which won't leave much of a trace? seems very pointless. We came from nowhere and we're going nowhere yet in the middle while we're here let's create illusions and adjust our lives to conform to these illusions which are in no way binding on our reality or any other from what we can observe? The funny thing is that Matt bashes religion constantly yet he never examines his belief system with the same criticism. inconsistent
Perhaps it goes towards destruction, but that's irrelevant. Chemical processes do not have an end goal in mind. The phenomenon and chemical process we call life just perpetuates itself. That's what it does. Attaching the understanding of this fact to a nihilistic worldview is, of course, fallacious, but I guess that's your prerogative.
@laflugantabastardo wouldn't you agree that when matt attatches it to his world view (which he finds some meaning in) it is equally fallacious? and that its just his perogative?
@laflugantabastardo i never said he was. I'm asking if the position he takes matters to the point you are making. If it does then why would it not matter if i said all atheists are masked nihilists? If nihilists views dont matter to your point, then in what way would an atheist who "posesses morals and values" matter to your point as well?
What I said hasn't got anything to do with Dillahunty's philosophy. Hell, it was unrelated to the video, period. It was merely a casual remark based on the last part of your comment taken in isolation.
@DandBMonk in many cases one fears what one does not know unless one just doesn't care. I am sure some people don't fear death because some people wouldn't mind dying (or so they say). My remarks on human reasoning presuppose God's existence where Matt wants to validate it without God's existence. Before we talk about God creating us with a fear of death, God first created us with a free will. If we exercise the will we will come to realize thigns that were in us all along (fears, hopes, etc)
I don't see how Matt can say that morals are objective. Morality is inherently based on what individuals and societies value, and what we value is very subjective!
@kubush the number of people that a society can tolerate being murdered is objective (that being less than the number of people being born, thus ensuring the survival of the species)
@scottpastry That is not objective. Setting value on things such as "survival of the species" is subjective. Personally I think the number of people that society should tolerate being murdered is ZERO!
Why are people still debating with these crazies? What is the point? If somones nuts debating them will only feed their delusions by validating their fantasy.
If a psycho was standing in the street screaming at a wall for stealing his bottles would you debate him on wether or not the wall actually did it? of course not. you would walk on the other side of the street at an increased speed and hope the nutbag didnt notice you
@xkingcutx well debates are good because even though you wont change everyones mind about there views but there will always be a group who will take something from it
At last, a video debate wit Matt Dillahunty! My favourite Atheist Experience host. Shame the audio is a bit poor, but just watching him in action is enough. Thanks for this!
HA! The priest probably prayed that he would get to speak first, but the coin lands on Matt's side. Seems like no matter where Matt's at, he always wins. Logic wins.
"Unfortunately, we've had just too many tasteless, disrespectful and down-right vulgar comments on all of the videos. It's too much to pick through and remove, so we're going to have to disable comments on our videos."
I didn't see a lot of tasteless, disrespectful and vulgar comments.
What I did see was a lot of questions that challenged their cherished beliefs.
@silentmajor his wisdom is reasonable? i never thought sanctioning mass wars and genocide would be considered reasonable. As well as killing gays, stoning unruly children, sacrifices, and drowning the world except for 1 family. I def would not consider a god like that to be wise and reasonable. This god is a malevolent, conceited bully.
@brochill69 The fact that people pervert the scriptures for their own gain and self interest does not discredit the scriptures rather it discredits the man. Atrocities are done in the name of God and in the name of man (i.e. Russian gulags, Nazi concentration camps) by your same logic I can say the atheistic worldview produces evil and must be rejected.
Skip the BS, click 4:20
frandeman123 3 weeks ago 3
@malikidmc
Now that second statement is one I completely agree with.
trekgeek1 1 month ago
@malikidmc
Dillahunty would have no problem with Craig. The reason they debate small time theists is because people like Craig charge a lot of money to make an appearance. These local organizations like the ACA will not pay Craig that money to preach. All the Christian apologists publish books constantly as well. Craig sells mp3's on iTunes. They are all trying to make money. Dawkins is actually a respected biologist, so it makes sense that his books would be well accepted.
trekgeek1 1 month ago
@trekgeek1 Matt Dillahunty couldn't even beat KabaneTheChristian, Craig would annihilate Dillahunty.
Autumn6 1 month ago
@Autumn6 i can own craig in any of his arguments.
sniped101 6 days ago
@lotmein20 sorry, it was for Factual
neuromatiker 2 months ago
Comment removed
neuromatiker 2 months ago
Comment removed
neuromatiker 2 months ago
@lotmein20 Atheism cannot be proven, as it basis is a negative - there is no god!. Just as a you cannot disprove the excistence of fairies or the flying spagetti monster. That also mean that atheist, MUST be open to evidence to the contrary.
I suppose you are a theist, and have claims to know there is a god, how about presenting proof of that, because it is a rather large claim.
neuromatiker 2 months ago
@lotmein20 I was thinking the same about you...and the guy who wrote it.
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 And as far as your refusal to answer these questions again reiterates what you said that you don't know,,,,,,yet you have faith in science as you god lol!!!!
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@FactualAnonymity
No one has faith in science. Faith is trust in something you have no reason to trust.
Science has double life expectancy, cured diseases, built houses cars televisions, the computer you're using now, paved roads, increased food supplies, created medicines, dishwashers laundry machines.
Every single thing you use every day was created by science. You don't have to have faith in it, it's results are seen everyday
chaoszieg 2 months ago
@chaoszieg You need reason for faith; if not there is nothing and no reason....Since we are created in the Likeness and Image of God, we would have the intelligence to see observe learn and draw conclusions and create in this created realm. This study of our already created properties and essence of our Universe is science.
FactualAnonymity 2 months ago
@FactualAnonymity
if you needed reason it wouldn't be faith. try opening your websters dictionary. " firm belief in something for which there is no proof"
This realm was not created and no one has ever demonstrated it was.
chaoszieg 2 months ago
@chaoszieg If you didn;t have reason yoy would be an ape. This realm was created and TD proves it was because of scientific Law not theory.
FactualAnonymity 2 months ago
@FactualAnonymity
this realm was not created and no scientific law proves it. scientific law points to there being no creator.
chaoszieg 2 months ago
@chaoszieg What scientific law points to there being no creator?
"The laws of science, as we know them at the present, contain many fundamental numbers, like the size of the electron charge of the electron and the ratio of the masses of the proton to the electron... The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development for life."
- Stephen Hawking (theoretical physicist, atheist) (italics added for emphasis)
FactualAnonymity 2 months ago
@FactualAnonymity
Ah quote mining.
though neither Harkings nor Einsein's quotes you posted suggest in any way shape or form a creator.
As for Fred Hoyle, he didn't except the big bang because he believe it lent credibility to the idea of a creator(god) He also believed that life on earth was caused by viruses landing here on meteors.
So you're going to take someone who thinks there is no god, and life was created by virus injected rocks as your source for science pointing to god?
chaoszieg 2 months ago
@FactualAnonymity stephen hawkings is an atheist
Jshect 2 weeks ago
@chaoszieg "A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super-intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question."
- Fred Hoyle (astrophysicist)
FactualAnonymity 2 months ago
@chaoszieg "The scientist is possessed by the sense of universal causation...His religious feeling takes the form of rapturous amazement at the harmony of natural law, which reveals the intelligence of such superiority that, compared with it, systematic thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection.
- Albert Einstein (theoretical physicist, agnostic)
FactualAnonymity 2 months ago
@lotmein20 Just finished reading the paper and all he hits on are current interpretations of consciousness and unconsciousness states; when he says that there is no unconsciousness state with the existence of a conscious state proves and eternal consciousness which is God....but here again its all theory with this geek.
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 How does that fit into Darwins Theories of survival of the fittest if you are a pussy you should be brushed to the side. sounds like you are stealing from religious morality
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 How was reasoning developed out of matter...why don't other animals reason also given that they coexist?
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@lotmein20 Do you believe in extra-terrestrials?
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 Why is it important to you that everyone is an atheist?
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 When you attempt to use logic to conclude facts about religion, are you starting at the conclusion (God is not real), or are you starting at true premises? Be honest. If you are starting at true premises, then what are they? And how are they true?
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 Is absence of proof the proof of absence?
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 What does the atheist position offer people? How has it improved your life? Why will it improve others’ lives?
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 Where does language, art, music, and religion come from?
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 Is your trust in science based on faith or based on science?
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 Ok got it I will read it tonight...Hereis another one for you to totally blow off... Are you a moral relativist, or do you believe in absolute morality? In other words, do you believe that cultures, or even individuals, can define their own rules on what is moral and what is not, or do you believe that every action has one unique, absolute, and true moral assessment?
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 Where is this fucking link???? You soulless creature designed for my entertainment????
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 Dude I blocke your stupid ass psot it on you game page
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 No you havent
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@lotmein20 Inanimate matter stays that way no matter how complicated the arrangement. Without an immaterial mind, how can consciousness emerge from pure material?
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 Inanimate matter stays that way no matter how complicated the arrangement. Without an immaterial mind, how can consciousness emerge from pure material?
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 What do you mean by something being "good"?
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@lotmein20 1) Why is there something rather than nothing?
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 please do moron I did give you evidence dumb ass look around you
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 Your a Troll LOL!!!!!
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 In reality the Bible was a collections of early writings preceded by the Didache first instruction manual for Christians written around 50 AD In the Bible the First Council of Jerusalem was the First Council of the Universal (Catholic) Christian Church so the Catholic Church today would be the unbroken Reference. But to someone like you not good enough. your boring the hell out of me feel like I an talking to a kid who lives in fantasy land gaming all day on the computer.
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20You only checked a few? I give you a lot of references and you only checked a few and come back at me asking for more proof, you are a total idiot. I'll play this game with you all day till we are dead and I am laughing at you in hell lol!!! How does Darwin explain that consciousness can be created from protons that have no consciousness? Don't bother answering I forgot you have faith in a position with no answers at all not even metaphysical ones lol!!!
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 See owned again dick:-)
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 CORNELIUS TACITUS (55 - 120 A.D.) GAIUS SUETONIUS TRANQUILLUS (69 - 130 A.D.) THALLUS (~ 52 A.D.) PLINY THE YOUNGER (63 - 113 A.D) CELSUS (~ 178 A.D.) LUCIAN OF SAMOSATA (120 - ~180 A.D.) MARA BAR-SERAPION (Post 70 A.D) FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS (37 - 100 A.D.) THE BABYLONIAN TALMUD CLEMENT OF ROME (? - 98? A.D.) IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH (? - ~100 A.D) QUADRATUS OF ATHENS (126 A.D.) ARISTIDES THE ATHENIAN (126 A.D.) HEGESIPPUS (110 A.D. - 180 A.D.) Where are your references?
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@FactualAnonymity Do you have any people who lived at the SAME TIME as Jesus by chance? Or ones who didn't have their writing tampered with?
HonestTechnoAtheist 3 months ago
@lotmein20 Early Christian writings Roman Records the Didache, the bible Jewish records greek Records The formation of western civilization through the ages......Were done on this point because next your gonna site Dan Brown as a counter reference lol!!!
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 See now your getting away from Historical facts whatch your ass it will be blocked.
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20
By the way since man is so limited in knowledge how can an intelligent being disqualify the existence of God?
hey gotta go spend time with my kids I suggest you get a life too and get dressed get away from the computer since this life is all you have stop simulating Christian values and enjoy the day..this life is all you will ever have bro.
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 Jesus Christ....He healed the sick raised the dead (part of why he was taken seriously and Christianity spread). Scientists attempting to cure cancer take your money claiming they need much more...and after Billions of dollars no miracle.
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 I hold scientists as people like you and me pondering the same things yet with all their knowledge have no answers only speculations and since this rivalry between religion ad science began back in the age of enlightenment science is a joke when it comes to this field, every 5, 10 sometimes 1 years you here science contradict earlier findings once this bad now its good global cooling in the 70s now global warming. I mean most data itself is theoretical with these nerds, so yeah.
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 @lotmein20 No you can't because you a part of the process of the Laws of Thermodynamics which logically proves there is a creator and man is very ignorant.
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 Here is test of your IQ...Tell me the origins and give me scientific evidence through experiments like reproducing the the big bang or seeing molecules forming into complex structures from nothing. DIP SHIT!!!
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@lotmein20 We know the origins you deny it God, face it. Look in the mirror random happenings in the reflection staring back at you? if you believe that you a simpleton.
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
@rumblefishism Are you Matt Dillahunty?
jackiejackie44 3 months ago
wadsworth constant applies
gregory06 3 months ago
Matt Dillahunty was not convincing at all talk about dicking around the middle points and not logically define the origins of anything....what a half wit!!!
FactualAnonymity 3 months ago
This debate would have been much more entertaining if Matt stripped naked, put his hands on top of his bald chrome, and swiveled his hips so that his dick would bounce back and forth slapping against his thighs. Who wouldn't want to see his naked fat body, which probably has hair all over it? His back is probably covered with hair.
rumblefishism 4 months ago
Not to be a perv or anything but the lady signing should probably have crossed her legs lol
ideasarebulletpr00f 6 months ago
Matt here builds the strawman of saying that we believe God is the "easy" solution to the moral dilemma.
NewVinland 6 months ago
@NewVinland "God did it" is always the easier answer
KKDragonLord 6 months ago 5
Cant stop staring at that flag behind matt and the crest on the podeum.
Forserean 7 months ago
the thing i would like to know is ,see the hog at the front waveing here hands about ,well does she have a big hairy hole :)AMEN
badslabber 7 months ago
The stuff worth watching begins at 4:10, thumb up to save our children the headache of listening to some random schmo dribble out what could be found in a 2 second google search. Thanks.
Reerrpad5515 7 months ago
I like the part when Matt pwns the guy from 0:00 to 14:38
SquirrelGoneBananas 8 months ago 14
Matt is the BEST! Fuck I love him :D
M3t4lManiac 8 months ago
Matt just raped that dumb pastor!
ajosep12 9 months ago
Morality is very simple. Think to your self, you don't want others to kill you, so you dont kill others. Period. Your morals are based on what is acceptable to you, others and your environment. Is that so hard for theist to understand?
oericsylla 9 months ago
@oericsylla Simple. They are taught (i.e. brainwashed) from a young age that morality must be handed down "from above", so they think that if it isn't from a supernatural source, it isn't "really" morality. That, and their slippery-slope fear of relativism.
nightvidcole 7 months ago
@oericsylla
that's assuming that you WILL for certain, get killed if you kill someone. What if you could kill someone and get away with it? Should someone still be "moral" in that situation?
177xxxx 5 months ago
Is it so hard for christians to understand how logic works without having to through in god on top of it. Even one of the smartest and educated religious people, john lenox stated in a debate with richard dawkins, we are moral beings. But there is no need to add on top of that by staying that those morals come from god
oericsylla 9 months ago
I'm at 3:38 right now, WISHING matt makes this priest cry..... am I going to hell????
TacoBurgher327 9 months ago
@TacoBurgher327 probably. but aren't we all? :)
bekacynthia 8 months ago
@bekacynthia damn right! party at MY place!
TacoBurgher327 8 months ago
@TacoBurgher327 ... you know, I don't think you have to be scared of that xD
M3t4lManiac 8 months ago
Holy hell, I didn't know that Matt did a formal debate! Awesomeness!
Jayoung1000 9 months ago
Obviously atheists are just blind cheerleaders for their guy; they're unable to admit when their guy is wrong, when their side has been defeated, and this is just part 1 of 9. Watch the rest. Matt even says he doesn't know if there's enduring, objective truth. Matt just conceded that the atheist position can offer no enduring truth, and thus the position held by atheists are mere opinions, no more valid than those which they attack.
ChristianMission 9 months ago
@ChristianMission Our guy was 100% accurate in this part of the debate. Some doubtful statements don't take away the win Matt takes singlehandedly
wHisperis001 9 months ago
@wHisperis001 , Matt admits on his twitter he "lost that debate"
ChristianMission 9 months ago
@ChristianMission He did not mean he lost in the way you want to think he did. He "lost" because Hans said so many contradictions that there wasn't not enough time to go through everything. It's like arguing with a retard, his every sentence will throw you off and off with more and more nonsense to the point where you don't even know how to reply because your brain hurts
wHisperis001 9 months ago
@ChristianMission I'm on his twitter, and I don't see it.
DancingTableLeg 9 months ago
@DancingTableLeg , it was a January 23 tweet. Saw it a week ago when I was googling this debate.
ChristianMission 9 months ago
@ChristianMission lol... did you even listen to Matt's opening statement? It makes absolute, reasoned sense when you don't filter it through a religious brain. The debate was essentially rendered pointless after the opening statements. The Christian position is taken from a faith claim spawned from archaic texts that when read by today's moral standards, are rendered almost utterly immoral.
Religion is stagnant, and by extension so is the perfect word of your god. We've moved on... deal with it.
UnitedKingdomify 9 months ago
@UnitedKingdomify , atheists approach religion with prejudice and develop arguments based on fallacies. Their idea of faith, for instance, is premised on a strawman, and their reading of the Bible is more literal than most fundamentalists they attack. If religion is stagnant, then you would not have had the Reformation and you would not have science since it is a product of religious minds, and in many cases inspired by Biblical literalism.
ChristianMission 9 months ago
@ChristianMission Oh yeah, because the reformation came about after much quiet debate in Christian circles and it was amicably decided that a reformation was needed. The Christians are all about reform and renewal, always moving with the times, Christians, and the Bible, never miss a trick. When wrong, they don't oh, read the same line of scripture and apply a different meaning to it, they change the line of scripture to comply with the new knowledge. /sarcasm
Atheist idea of faith: "Gullible."
UnitedKingdomify 9 months ago
@ChristianMission
It's OK to tell the truth "I don't know" as opposed to the more common theist response, "Make shit up. I win."
VideoMenu 7 months ago
Is it bad that I had an Alexis Texas video on while watching this.....
gsx1138 10 months ago
@gsx1138 No haha Not at all
xIJOS3RAMOSIx 9 months ago
Matt is a prophet of non-belief. Wait... that's called a voice of reason...
weirddudeonice 11 months ago 5
I need to fly out to Austin and buy Matt a beer. That man is the messiah of atheism.
rjc34 11 months ago
Matt is just pure sex!
Rhoky 11 months ago
What did we all learn today atheist?
Never send a catholic to do the job of a baptist.
Onetruthrgv 11 months ago
MATT DILAHUNTY HAS LEGS...WHOA...
ddbd 1 year ago 31
@ddbd I've seen this exact comment everywhere haha
Jagonomic 6 months ago
Okay I'm going to search the web for other debates that debate whether or not something exists. Oh wait, there aren't any!
2nDoppelganger 1 year ago
video starts at 4:21
mindgrapes 1 year ago 20
@mindgrapes Thanks
Jagonomic 6 months ago
I am the "like" number 100!
Poleschs 1 year ago
Comment removed
Hate3223 1 year ago
@Hate3223 She's doing sign language so that deaf people can still attend the debate. I've never seen a person's post relate more to their username.
Aniland 1 year ago
@ericrooney1 take it from a personal friend... he knows very well what he decided to no longer believe in. If your perspective is that of many others that he "doesn't know the gospel" because he "lost the word" then your statement is accurate, but then of course it's hard to truly lose what one never had in reality. Theism is a meme drug, and only those addicted to it care about defending it. So much to say, so few characters to say it...
Hardryv 1 year ago
Matt is the man! These idiotic theists have no friggin evidence and they just keep yappin on about God! LOL
ajosep12 1 year ago
Objective Morality is for n00bs
cliffordeberhardt 1 year ago
Sweet I didn't know Matt had another debate, I will have to watch it when I get some extra time.
HonestTechnoAtheist 1 year ago
Comment removed
ericrooney1 1 year ago
Comment removed
ericrooney1 1 year ago
Comment removed
ericrooney1 1 year ago
It is very clear that Matt does not understand what the Gospel is (starting @ 11:20). His objection of our inability to uphold the moral law is nothing new, and Paul writes about it in Romans (if anyone truly cares about understanding truth read it for yourself). Also, Matt needs to revisit the claims Christians make regarding the reasons why Christ chose to sacrifice himself on the cross.
ericrooney1 1 year ago
@ericrooney1 "It is very clear that Matt does not understand what the Gospel is"
Well he was a christian for 20+ years and on his way to becoming a minister, so I would have to say that you making a false claim there.
"...nothing new..." Yet still unrefuted and stil viable.
"Also, Matt needs to revisit the claims Christians make regarding the reasons why Christ chose to sacrifice himself on the cross." What does that have to do with morality? Complete red herring there.
HonestTechnoAtheist 1 year ago 2
If Dillahunty would only admit that morality is only "meaningful" when subjected to human perpetuation then we can see morality for what it truly is, an illusion used for selfish human gain.
ors712 1 year ago
@ors712
You make it sound so bad. Isn't that what life does as a phenomenon anyway? Gaining more so it can reproduce?
laflugantabastardo 1 year ago
@laflugantabastardo if this is your view of reality then you may keep it, however don't try to convince me that it is in any way meaningful (as Matt seems to trick people into thinking).
ors712 1 year ago
@ors712
Do you mind pointing out where the mistake is instead of casually dismissing it? :-P
laflugantabastardo 1 year ago
@laflugantabastardo matt makes several presuppositions. first, he presupposes that values exist (6:17-20) I would love for matt to tell me what values are and why they matter. Second, he appeals to human reason to justify his view on morality. Yet, he presupposes that humans reasoning ability is is binding on reality. i would love for matt to prove to me how human reasoning ability (something which just developed out of biological chance processes and evolution) is in any way binding on reality
ors712 1 year ago
@ors712
I could argue both points, but I don't see what it has to do with what I said about life as a phenomenon attempting to gain more for its own perpetuation.
laflugantabastardo 1 year ago
@laflugantabastardo perpetuation towards what, our inevitable destruction which won't leave much of a trace? seems very pointless. We came from nowhere and we're going nowhere yet in the middle while we're here let's create illusions and adjust our lives to conform to these illusions which are in no way binding on our reality or any other from what we can observe? The funny thing is that Matt bashes religion constantly yet he never examines his belief system with the same criticism. inconsistent
ors712 1 year ago
@ors712
Perhaps it goes towards destruction, but that's irrelevant. Chemical processes do not have an end goal in mind. The phenomenon and chemical process we call life just perpetuates itself. That's what it does. Attaching the understanding of this fact to a nihilistic worldview is, of course, fallacious, but I guess that's your prerogative.
laflugantabastardo 1 year ago
@laflugantabastardo wouldn't you agree that when matt attatches it to his world view (which he finds some meaning in) it is equally fallacious? and that its just his perogative?
ors712 1 year ago
@ors712
I really doubt he's a nihilist. It doesn't matter to the point I was making anyway.
laflugantabastardo 1 year ago
@laflugantabastardo i never said he was. I'm asking if the position he takes matters to the point you are making. If it does then why would it not matter if i said all atheists are masked nihilists? If nihilists views dont matter to your point, then in what way would an atheist who "posesses morals and values" matter to your point as well?
ors712 1 year ago
@ors712
What I said hasn't got anything to do with Dillahunty's philosophy. Hell, it was unrelated to the video, period. It was merely a casual remark based on the last part of your comment taken in isolation.
laflugantabastardo 1 year ago
@ors712
Perhaps reasoning developed the same way that animals are scared of death. Why would God create us with a fear of death?
DandBMonk 1 year ago
@DandBMonk in many cases one fears what one does not know unless one just doesn't care. I am sure some people don't fear death because some people wouldn't mind dying (or so they say). My remarks on human reasoning presuppose God's existence where Matt wants to validate it without God's existence. Before we talk about God creating us with a fear of death, God first created us with a free will. If we exercise the will we will come to realize thigns that were in us all along (fears, hopes, etc)
ors712 1 year ago
@ors712
I'ma a Christian man...you're preachin' to the choir. LOL! I was just answering your question as to a possibility, that's all.
DandBMonk 1 year ago
@DandBMonk praise Jesus ! lol .
ors712 1 year ago
@ors712
HAHAHA!!!
DandBMonk 1 year ago
ah sweet, i didn't know dillahunty went out to debate. he's a bad motherfucker!
wubbadubdub 1 year ago
Matt Dillahunty utterly trounces this clown, Father Jacobse inspired so many facepalms, but it was great entertainment.
GodlessInfinity 1 year ago 4
Matt 2 God 0 (again)
mik99D 1 year ago 2
Whys homebody, down front, flashin' gang signs? He's got some ive never seen!
Jumpinsnakes 1 year ago
Matt's speech was epic... just epic.
hpholland 1 year ago 5
wow. father jobiah didn't have a single point. whenever he talked, it was just a whole lot of words put together in a semi-comprehensible manner.
dejawolf 1 year ago 2
@dejawolf That's MOST religious debaters.
hpholland 1 year ago
@hpholland true
dejawolf 1 year ago
I don't see how Matt can say that morals are objective. Morality is inherently based on what individuals and societies value, and what we value is very subjective!
kubush 1 year ago
@kubush the number of people that a society can tolerate being murdered is objective (that being less than the number of people being born, thus ensuring the survival of the species)
scottpastry 1 year ago
@scottpastry That is not objective. Setting value on things such as "survival of the species" is subjective. Personally I think the number of people that society should tolerate being murdered is ZERO!
kubush 1 year ago
Skip to 4:20 for the start of the debate.
kubush 1 year ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
@kubush "Skip to 4:20 for the start of the debate." Thanks, mate ;)
amjan 1 year ago
Why are people still debating with these crazies? What is the point? If somones nuts debating them will only feed their delusions by validating their fantasy.
If a psycho was standing in the street screaming at a wall for stealing his bottles would you debate him on wether or not the wall actually did it? of course not. you would walk on the other side of the street at an increased speed and hope the nutbag didnt notice you
xkingcutx 1 year ago
@xkingcutx don't underestimate Matt Dillahunty
ChillPill365 1 year ago 3
@xkingcutx well debates are good because even though you wont change everyones mind about there views but there will always be a group who will take something from it
DeluxBagger 1 year ago
At last, a video debate wit Matt Dillahunty! My favourite Atheist Experience host. Shame the audio is a bit poor, but just watching him in action is enough. Thanks for this!
Alun53 1 year ago
Been waiting a while to see Matt in action.
Scanini 1 year ago 2
HA! The priest probably prayed that he would get to speak first, but the coin lands on Matt's side. Seems like no matter where Matt's at, he always wins. Logic wins.
XxC0NDEMNEDxX 1 year ago
Matt looks like a mafia boss. =D
YetAnthony 1 year ago
Thank you for allowing comments
diabloscott 1 year ago
From umbcOCF's channel..
"Unfortunately, we've had just too many tasteless, disrespectful and down-right vulgar comments on all of the videos. It's too much to pick through and remove, so we're going to have to disable comments on our videos."
I didn't see a lot of tasteless, disrespectful and vulgar comments.
What I did see was a lot of questions that challenged their cherished beliefs.
They don't want debate, they only want to preach.
justintempler 1 year ago 2
The moderator is overall very good, but in the Q&A, he lets the theist preach and get away with hogging the time.
GowanBray 1 year ago
@GowanBray
I think the point of doing that was to let him rant on and look like a retard, which he did with glee
TheGreatOldOnes 1 year ago
'The source of morality is i think reason" 6:21 The book of James 3;17 " the wisdom from above is first of all reasonable"
silentmajor 1 year ago
@silentmajor his wisdom is reasonable? i never thought sanctioning mass wars and genocide would be considered reasonable. As well as killing gays, stoning unruly children, sacrifices, and drowning the world except for 1 family. I def would not consider a god like that to be wise and reasonable. This god is a malevolent, conceited bully.
brochill69 1 year ago
@brochill69 Amen (lolz)
tidouble1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@brochill69 The fact that people pervert the scriptures for their own gain and self interest does not discredit the scriptures rather it discredits the man. Atrocities are done in the name of God and in the name of man (i.e. Russian gulags, Nazi concentration camps) by your same logic I can say the atheistic worldview produces evil and must be rejected.
ericrooney1 1 year ago
Comment removed
ericrooney1 1 year ago
Matt is on fire. What a badass.
hymnofashes 1 year ago 61
Spoiler Alert: God doesn't show up to help.
AmadeusMaxwell 1 year ago 116
@AmadeusMaxwell He wouldn't dare show his face around here, the evil bastard!
happyidiottalk 1 year ago
@AmadeusMaxwell I almost peed my pants.
Fearx 1 year ago
@AmadeusMaxwell ya he does you just didnt look at it the right way
kainniak1 1 year ago
I wish I were there...
Matt FTW
LuigiPeach 1 year ago
What came first, the human or the religion?
Lightrider4444 1 year ago
@Lightrider4444 What came first, The Answers or the research?
MartinJWillett 1 year ago
@MartinJWillett The funding!
Lightrider4444 1 year ago
Matt looks hot!!!
bigmike4758 1 year ago