 Hello, hello master debaters and those watching the masters debating. I am Jim majors This is my mustache and this is modern-day debate and tonight we have got a Fresh debate topic The question being Positive tonight is should missionaries be banned from indigenous peoples and taking the affirmative we have mr. Bear he's the bear and Then we have Ross not mr. Burns who is taking the negation in this argument Jim and want to introduce yourself Yeah, my name is Ross Burns. I host the burns I view YouTube channel where I just take a Christian biblical perspective on Issues of Western culture and try and interact with especially secularism from a biblical perspective You can find me at Twitter and Facebook at burns. I view Excellent mr. Bear Sure, I'm on YouTube as well at mr. Bear atheist I make content that addresses ideology and religion and tries to introduce some rationality and Discourse into that with a bit of humor and a bit of a slight slant with that with with references to pop culture and all sorts of things You can find me on Twitter as well at mr. Bear atheist Great. Well, thank you gentlemen so much and you guys already know praise if you have questions for our debaters We will have a 30 minute or longer kind of depending on what what time we have At the very end for a Q&A so go ahead and get those in if you would tag me in it at Jim majors or However, you do the the YouTube thing the format tonight is going to be 10 minute openings from both Gentlemen and then five minute rebuttals from each and then a 30 minute open discussion followed by that Q&A So if The gentleman taking the affirmative mr. Bear would like to start I will start your time as soon as you start talking Sure, thanks very much and thanks for very much for having me on here. It's it's an honor So I'd like to preface my Opening this is this is included in my opening Just to say that I do have a certain bias in this in this argument As of the 19th of January this year Western Australian Aboriginal elders Asked state discrimination watchdog the the state discrimination watchdog permission to ban visiting Christian missionaries to their area They have received a repetitive harassment from Kingdom Aviation Ministries and Charity Sapphire in Ministries The watchdog confirmed to the Aboriginal communities that they should be able to say who comes on to their land That's just a quick preface there, but I will start now with an opening question and that question is What's the what's the reaction from ordinary everyday people when you mention the words Christian missionary? Do you receive universal praise and breathless exaltations about the harmonious and well-changing work Christian missionaries have done over the last six centuries? In successfully bringing the word of the Abrahamic God to those parts of the world that had never heard of Jesus Resulting in the Christian world we see today No, of course not because missionaries across many denominations have been responsible for the eradication of various cultures the spreading of disease and the resultant deaths of potentially millions of people the judgment of other cultures Imposing imperialism onto other cultures Relentless bullying harassment Taking work away from local tradespeople Perpetuating racist political policies skewing the view of sexual sexuality into a negative and Ultimately failing to gather any ground with many cultures throughout history Many may be aware that indigenous contact with Europeans began in 1492 and has taken a massive toll British colonists came to Australia and the indigenous people were not only dispossessed of their land. They were hunted and killed without mercy It's a dark spot in history and the British declared Australia's being devoid of any humans Now the Protestants at the time and Christian churches were very slow to try to protect and to evangelize indigenous people When they did undertake any missionary work that were faced with the twin dilemma that is that as they did with other cultures Try to introduce Western cultural norms together with the gospel with limited success In John Harris's book one blood He explores the theology that informed the early missionaries efforts to proselytize Australia's indigenous inhabitants He notes that in most cases the missionaries themselves were not equal to the task With the better educated missionary candidates usually sent to such places as China or India Where it was anticipated that they would be competent to debate Buddhist or Hindu philosophies the standard for Africa in Australia And the South Pacific was much lower The early missionary theology was not only inadequate but deeply flawed Particularly their belief that indigenous Australians were the curse descendants descendants sorry of Noah's son Ham This apparent curse was seen to apply to Ham and all his descendants the biblical figure including Ethiopians Egyptians Libyans Which by extension extension was given universal application to the indigenous people of Australia But I know what you're thinking this is all in the past This is during a time when life was tough People held various uneducated beliefs and attitudes and now that we are more aware of the damage the various organizations who Take part in his expeditions must surely be limiting their contact with various peoples Unfortunately in March this year. It was reported in evangelical missionary group ethnos 360 Openly fundraised some fundraised sorry to buy a helicopter to target tribes in Brazil Now keen indigenous organizations and leaders in Brazil have angry will angrily denounced the move particularly during a worldwide pandemic That's not ethnos 360 has been responsible for so-called manhunts in quotes In Paraguay in the 1970s and 80s in which uncontacted a array of people were captured and dragged out of the forest Several people were killed Many others died of disease Therefore due to the inherent and observed failure of the conversion of many cultures over the preceding six centuries And as it can be seen to be dangerous and oppressive for governments to resist the con the conversion of vulnerable groups on the behalf I propose that the relevant Australian bodies including Anta, which is an independent non-government organization and is non-party political With their purpose to engage educate and mobilize a broad community movement to advocate for justice rights and respect for Australia's first peoples To be enabled to enlist a ban against miseries on a case-by-case basis from interacting with isolated tribes for Anthropological fiscal health reasons both physical and psychological Now the government of any nation cannot both advocate for the perpetuity perpetuity of indigene Sorry of indigenous culture and ignore the elders when their spirituality is at stake In closing I think I'm almost done aren't I? What I do propose in the place of proselytizing is helping cultures visecular human humanist means as witnessed throughout history via Interrelations with traders explorers miners settlers facilitating education industrialization with the benefits of progressive modernization The singular and most important challenge to 21st century missionaries and those who are considering missionary work Isn't learning a new language and customs and attempting to translate the Bible in order to reach the gospel preach the gospel to those who have never been exposed to No, it is this the singular most important challenge to these people is the ability to seriously contemplate with a high level of self-introspection The rational rationalization for the justification for potentially threatening the health of this and future generations Threatening the culture of this and future generations and Threatening the interrelations of indigenous people With introduction of poisonous concepts such as sin and sexual morality Saying God instructed me is unverifiable completely and utterly unjustified That's it Jim you're a mute. Of course. I'm muted. I would be muted Okay, you had about two minutes left, but we're gonna go ahead and apply that to the Q&A session Ross not mr. Burns. Are you ready to give your argument? Yes, I'm ready. Okay, great. I'll give you a two-minute warning and you can start whenever you're ready Great. Thanks Excellent. All right. Yeah, great So I likewise Mr.. Bear pointed out that he does have bias in situation and so do I I come from a particular worldview I'm a Christian and And obnoxious Christian to a Calvinist and a post-millennialist and so that kind of gives you an idea where I'm coming from I Am I believe that salvation is faith alone in Christ alone and Also, given that that all human beings are under God's wrath and condemnation for their sin and they need to repent and Believe in the sin-bearing sacrifice of Jesus Christ to be spared from hell and to enjoy eternal happiness That's just cards on the table. That's where I'm coming from and the Lord Jesus at the end of Matthew's gospel as Charged all of his followers to fulfill the Great Commission to make disciples of all the nations of the earth And to teach them everything to baptize them. So that's where I'm coming from. So I'm under order from the New Testament and the Christian scriptures to do what I can to spread the gospel to Disciple the nations all the people groups. So that's the first thing. That's that's just where I'm coming from I'm a reformed Christian and then I'm going to mention three other points here three other points to demonstrate why I think a ban on Evangelism to indigenous peoples is a bad idea and here's the first thing So to ban evangelism on indigenous peoples is to infringe upon the inalienable rights of free speech and religion So just to just to clarify just to make a qualification I'm not defending in any way harassment or trespassing or Vandalism or any kind of forced entry into someone's home a good example I might use is if tomorrow morning To well-dressed Jesuit missionaries knock on my door and they say hey, can we talk to you about the wonders of the Roman Catholic Church? I'm going to respond. No, sorry. This is a bad time. Haven't you heard? There's a pandemic going on and I'm busy. Sorry to come back another time or you know zoom zoom is always an option and If they were to barge through my front door and set up shop in my kitchen, I'm going to call the cops Right, so I am not defending that kind of evangelism at all With that being said Human beings do not have a right intrinsically Freedom from annoyance or perceived rudeness While we do have freedoms of speech and religion inalienably we don't have a right of freedom from annoyance or perceived rudeness and Liberals used to understand this it used to be the slogan of the the moderate left, which I respect it very much That I disagree with what you're saying in fact I may even hate what you're saying, but I would fight for your right to say it Right, and that's what used to be the slogan of the moderate left, but I fear that it is no longer that way and I would fight for the right of those Jesuits or a Mormon or a Jehovah's Witness to to preach Their perspective and to try and convert people from their perspective I would fight for their right to say even though I disagree with it very strongly. So the first point It in a ban on evangelism infringes upon the inalienable rights Of human beings of speech and religion now the second thing I'm going to bring up is that a ban on evangelism in the name of cultural preservation is philosophically inconsistent and The reason why is there are two assumptions in such a ban in the name of cultural preservation one is that all cultures are equal and The second one is that no one should influence cultural change on another culture those two assumptions I'm going to address the first one So that all cultures are equal. I don't think this is true, and I also think you think that isn't true So the American sociological association Defines culture in this way And I think this is a good definition that we can that we can grab ahold of a culture is the languages customs beliefs rules arts knowledge And collective identities and memories developed by members of all social groups that make their social environments Meaningful, that's what a culture is So it's not just the rituals and the arts, but it's also the values and the worldview of a group of people So let's take three cultures for our example, so we could take a tribalism in a culture of traditional religion of tribalism, right? That you know exactly what you're picturing So their their values include they're informed by tradition and it's a very superstitious culture Animism is a big belief. So that's one culture. We have a few highlights another culture. We could point to is a western materialistic individualistic secular humanist culture Which prizes things like the scientific method or feminism and then a last culture We might consider is a fundamentalist Christian culture of the Bible Belt in America, which has things like legalism You know an anti-intellectualism bent King James only young earth creation, right? All that stuff is wrapped up into fundamentalist Christian culture Now all three of those cultures I would say we none of us would say that all three of them are equal, right? But they are all equally valuable some of them believe things that are true some of them don't some of them are better for human flourishing and some of them are not and Moreover if we are to say that all culturally held beliefs are equal That in itself is a culturally held belief that all cultures are equal So is it does it follow then that the culturally held belief that all cultures are equal is just as good as the culturally held Belief that not all cultures are equal. It can't be right. You have to say if you're going to say all Cultures are equal you have to say that that culturally held belief is better than other cultures It's just philosophically necessary and now the second assumption that no one should change culture No one should seek to change culture Also think is philosophically inconsistent so you're saying that no one should try to convince an animist from Kenya that his Ancestors spirits are not guiding him in his agricultural decisions. Okay No one should try to convince an atheist youtuber that naturalism is untrue Okay, then the third thing we could say is no one should try to convince an evangelical Christian that they ought not in Evangelize the indigenous because that's part of their culture. It's a major part of Christian culture so a ban on evangelism in the name of Preventing cultural change changes culture It has to Yeah, two-minute warning. Thank you and What does mr. Bear's YouTube channel exist for except to change culture which I fully support him in doing and If he was undergoing a potential ban for his YouTube channel I would be on his side fighting for him to be able to keep doing what he's doing and furthermore Christian missionaries the the modern evangelical Christian area movement is not interested in destroying culture but Transforming culture and then my last point. I'm gonna help illustrate that a little bit so my favorite example of Successful missionary endeavor is the saw a people of Western New Guinea The saw we people were a head-hunting cannibalistic culture Their prized virtues included being deceitful and treacherous to one's enemy They actually thought that Judas was the hero from the Gospels that should be emulated They were a constant war with the sub factions around them They were riddled with malaria and hepatitis C at a high infant mortality rate and the Richardson family a missionary family from Canada Came to live with them. They translated the Bible for them. They built them a makeshift hospital And they did so much good for them. They were able to convert Most of virtually all of the saw we people to Christianity The saw we people found out that they were Indonesian citizens and many work for the government today And they're a thriving people group, but they happen their culture has not been destroyed. It has been transformed They're not Western capitalist Republicans. They're still the saw we people with their own cultural things But they are now Christian so that those are the reasons why I think a ban on evangelism Is a bad idea Okay, fantastic in about 30 seconds left So we're gonna add that little chunk to the Q&A as well every little bit counts, especially when you've got Steven steaming the live chat Now we're going to enter a five minute rebuttal from both the gentlemen first mr. Bear and then Ross not mr. Burns You cannot interrupt each other unless the other person says something about your mother. So Mr. Bear I will start whenever you begin Okay, great Okay, there was some interesting points raised there very interesting points about the infringement on on free speech Part of my opening was in relation to Not so much the infringement on free speech, but Managing these cases these incidents on a case-by-case basis perhaps by an independent body Of course Everyone has the right to free speech However, there was an interesting part that you mentioned there that as part of the Christian culture The part of the Christian culture was that they can influence other cultures We have to explore that because the reason and justification for that part of Christian culture Has to be something that is a lot more tangible than we're instructed to or we're being ordered to That is based on unfair unverifiable evidence and information, which is the Bible and scriptures and so on That's questionable so that order to change other cultures because it's part of the Christian culture is Extremely debatable and very highly typical, which is what we're talking about here. Obviously I'm just the second point there that you mentioned was The sorry people I Would posit that their conversion was more to do with You mentioned Don Richardson the missionary He was a excellent linguist His linguistic skills were brilliant and and obviously he had and he and his wife. I believe it was Carol was her name Correct me if I'm wrong But they were very they were people They're very good with people and very affable I would posit that his linguistic skills An ability to crack the sorry people's language in able to communicate with them was probably More of it more of the reason for the success of him getting through some as you mentioned Whenever he opened his mouth to preach the Bible. He was received with boredom disinterest at best The sorry people people couldn't relate to anything about the Bible Until Richardson noticed that as part of a peaceful ritual between tribes There were warring at the time and he observed that the Leader of one village gave his child to the leader of the other village who in turn gave his child to the other leader It was called the peace child Richardson jumped on this and appropriated that to as a redemptive analogy to show This could be adapted to the gospel So I would say there was a bit of luck his skills that Eventually and finally convinced the sorry people into Christianity Two-minute warning keep on it. I've got and and I feel that that was more the success of the sorry people because There's there were many tribes around the sorry people That weren't the way they were at that time as well They had very high linguistic skills and very and communicated with excellent language skills It's just so happy that the sorry were Within their own domain So I would posit that in that in that regard But like I say the the justification to change other cultures It's that's it's almost like a an order as part of the Christian theology is probably Somewhat unfounded and and the justification. I'll quote Bertrand Russell Righteousness cannot be born until self righteousness is dead So that level of self righteousness needs to dissipate and righteousness can be achieved by other means secular humanist means by empathy understanding and perhaps not risking the lives of these isolated peoples and respecting their culture to for perpetuity and for anthropological reasons Respect me speaker met both ways Okay We're gonna go ahead and end it there and we're gonna switch over to a rebuttal from Ross not mr. Burns I thank you for keeping it clean and above the belt Mr. Bear that does not mean that you have to do the same Ross. I Will start your five minutes whenever you begin Excellent. Well, I also appreciate a very respectful You know focus on the issues to bait to and I expected exactly that from from bears and that is fantastic So just to address a couple of things what I what I can do with five minutes Mr. Bear brought up a lot of good stuff so the first one that I wanted to talk about that which is probably on everybody's mind is Hey, Ross, don't you realize that we're under like a pandemic right now and I totally I totally recognized that we're under a pandemic right now the risk of transmitting a You know uncurable Non-vaccinated viral infection like COVID-19 to indigenous peoples is not anything that Is a responsible human being should do so I fully support a Waiting for any missionary organization To not go right now wait until there's a vaccine available and all sort of stuff But in general, I think there's a an idea that When Western missionaries go over to indigenous cultures, they're just going to get them sick with a lot of diseases that they don't have That they don't have access to treat Well, they already have lots of diseases. They already have malaria. They already have high infant mortality rates and keeping Western medicine from them isn't going to help them and if we're going to say that Western missionaries going to indigenous tribes as bad for the health Well, wouldn't that be the same thing for all Westerners? Don't we all carry the same? Diseases that we could potentially harm people. So I don't know why we would say One some Westerners should be allowed to go but not others either. We should say none or all Seems to me what should what should be Another thing would be Mr. Bear brought up a lot of Abuses by Christian missionaries in the past and I can I can tell you probably more than you More than you know right now. There have been terrible things Christian missionaries have done to indigenous peoples They've abused them. They've completely, you know, the fact that there are Presbyterians in Ghana for example is taking Scottish culture and Transporting it right into Ghana and the same with South Korea actually there are more of Presbyterians in South Korea than Scotland Which is just amazing So I would with mr. Bear condemn all of the mistakes and the irresponsibilities from missionaries in the past However, that doesn't represent any major modern missionary organization. That's around today things Which is a statement that I'd more or less be going to defend and If we're going to say that Some actions by people in the past within this within this kind of nonprofit organization Some of them were bad. Therefore, we should get rid of this kind of nonprofit organization Oh, thank you. What should we say about educational scholarships? Like obviously there have been abuses in the past where people have taken advantage of the scholarship the scholarship program and kind of charity people have certainly taken advantage of that in the past Therefore we should ban all of them right now, right? That's that would be the logic. I think Or we could say that we should learn from the past mistakes. We should learn from the bad things that charities and missionaries have done in the past and not make those same mistakes again One other thing I'd like to try and address is The idea that We should preserve the culture or yeah, yeah, but we should preserve the culture that harming indigenous cultures is bad and I guess my question for mr. Respectively would be a court according to what objective standard of morality is changing a culture bad Or is it just your personal preference that harming a culture changing a culture is a bad thing I would just like to see some kind of objective standard that we could use to say what Certain actions with cultures are bad and certain are not 27 and three-quarter seconds. Thank you And The other thing was I don't know if I can fit this in Christian culture was said to not have sufficient grounds, right? Bible verses and things like that Sounds like what we're really saying is that secular humanism should be the deciding culture to to determine whether And an organization should be allowed to preach their message Okay, fantastic. I really appreciate you gentlemen staying within your time limits we will now move into the 30-minute open discussion again if you have a question for these debaters drop it in the side chat tag at modern-day debate or at Jim majors Now this is gonna start off with mr. Bear and it's just gonna go from there. So take the gloves off Let's bring out the jello and get this thing started Okay, it was very very interesting points yet again look to to say I have a real big issue with When you were saying Missionaries that go in and introduce diseases and to isolated people When you said well they have diseases already It's it's somewhat disingenuous because We're talking about diseases as we see right now is a great example of that I know you I know you're not condoning and so much missionary work Presently because of this the coronavirus situation It's really no different to what has happened before though and just to say that others people had hep C or hep B we'll go in any way and We'll introduce perhaps something worse than that, but that's okay because they've already got diseases It's it's a it's a it's a strange dichotomy to sort of take that leap and say well we'll introduce HIV That's okay because they've got hep C. It's it's it's not the way to to argue that point at all It's it's really quite disingenuous to go that way Secondly An interesting I'm just going back a little bit in terms of I'll let you respond if you like Sorry going ahead getting ahead of myself. Yeah, yeah, sorry Yeah, I should I should clarify so I didn't it's the way you phrase. I'm like, yeah, I guess it did kind of sound that way I mean they already have malaria. So let's pile on everything else. That's that's not very kind if I took it that way That that's probably my perception, but yeah No, so what I meant was I Think it's and I don't think it's what you were implying but sometimes we have the idea in our head that the the indigenous man or woman is in pristine health Unaffected by the outside world, but actually they're already suffering from diseases that we can cure and prevent so rather than Keep all Western contact away. We should go in with our medicine so we can help them with things like malaria and things like hep C and hep B from you know Easily curable and treatable infection so we can Yeah, yeah, so I see where you're coming from a bit better a bit better now. Yeah, okay Yeah, it's it's still an incredible risk to introduce something quite serious to an isolated tribe such as like I say for example HIV the coronavirus etc. They could pretty much decimate isolated tribes of say 23,000 4,000 people It's not a justification. It's still not a justification to say hey, they've got hep C. We'll go in there. We'll cure them Damn now we've introduced this to them. I still don't I still don't think it's quite justified that way The risk is still far too serious to do that it's not a consideration of Empathy of it's not a serious consideration I'm doing this because I have a right to do it regardless of the consequences. It's not on So are you willing then to ban all Western contact to indigenous peoples? I would propose that on a case-by-case basis. Yes What would be the if you don't if you don't know that's okay, but what would be the qualifications to allow a group to go into In indigenous culture to try and help them or impact them in some way It really depends on on the situation if we're talking about things like We've mentioned the Sawee Sawee people Who were amongst their own tribal group? And and look it's one of those things that's in Highly highly subjective to the case at hand. We've seen missionaries go into Kenya and wipe out livestock That was the livelihood of those people. We've seen missionaries go into India to influence Indians to on the side of the British for political reasons. I'm sort of going into other avenues to make the point There are there are motivations that missionaries undertake even even covert missionaries that say look we're here to teach however, they're influencing people via disingenuous Methods their covert missionaries and and it's one of those things where it's a case-by-case basis I think if there are people being wiped out because of disease Go in via secular humus means by people who are qualified to do as such Not missionaries that we all assume have the same qualifications the same knowledge the same theological basis and the same empathy the same The same human Interrelational interrelationship skills that the people in the past may have had We sort of assumed that every missionaries the same. They're all really good people. They're very highly educated They know what they're talking about. They know what they're doing They know everything they know medical situations and they don't they don't have many medical qualifications many don't have that and and and some are It just completely risking these these tribes. I say go in there via By experts in that field if it's medically related send in medical experts not missionaries Yeah, yeah, I mean I assume you're aware that Missionary organizations like ethnos 360 or the southern Baptist Missionary group the international mission board as well. They send over doctors and nurses and people who can help them With their raising livestock, so it's not just You know a guy gal and a couple of Bibles who go over it. It's a with the bigger missionary organizations. It's a very Complete effort with the experts and the funding that I think you would really appreciate So yeah, I acknowledge that of course the problem as well is that we have around 1.5 million US short-term missionary people going to places that really aren't qualified to be doing so and that's an alarming number of people going into Places where they shouldn't really be going a lot of youthful youthful Idealistic probably misplaced idealism with youthful people going to places saying hey, I'm gonna make a difference I'll teach them Jesus will do activities and unfortunately these things is really just it just a ticker box of Western people saying I've done my job good. I can go back home now It's it's the numbers that are involved, especially with short-term. I'm glad you brought in the long term I do acknowledge that there are some good some some good aspects of that in terms of medical aid And and with in Honduras there was a lot of rebuilding there with my missionary work So I do acknowledge that however Even then they were spending way too much money and taking work away from local trades people in terms of building houses They build houses for thirty thousand dollars. They really should have been across three thousand dollars This they're spending up to two billion dollars in these expeditions short-term expeditions. It's a it's a waste of money It's it's impacting fiscal situations for these people especially in Honduras that happened It's one of those misplaced Probably misplaced idealism is the best way to phrase it if I can put it that way Yeah, I mean I completely what you just said about short-term missionaries short-term missionaries Or short-term missionary efforts are a wreck I would completely agree with you and a a group of 20 15 to 20 very enthusiastic You know American or Canadian missionaries who fly over into a place in Brazil or In Africa and they serve them for two weeks. They help them. They give them lots of medicine Lots of resources give them everything they can just very well meaning people And they leave and they just leave a terrible vacuum Yeah, so it's been that facades Well, I'm so uncomfortable with the band But I would share in your disapproval for that kind of thing now short-term missionaries short-term mission efforts Done well are helpful if they aid something already if they aid long-term missions Long-term missionaries example somebody who's already established in the area. They can come in and help build houses They can do lots of good things But short-term the kind of short-term missions efforts that we're we're both talking about I completely agree are bad And I I don't know if trusting some kind of international government regulatory agency with Giving check marks to certain groups and not others that seems to me like a situation rife for abuse I mean on on on that topic then if we agree that it's bad. What's the objective standard for that? Determination because I'm sort of putting that back on you I know you asked me that I will address it, but I'm putting that back on yourself. You've mentioned sure short-term missionaries are bad You mentioned objective standard. So what's the objective standard for that? Well, for my perspective, I would point to scriptures as an objective standard of morality Jesus's command to love your neighbor as yourself would be would be a pretty good one Doing more harm than good It would be from the Christian perspective doing more harm than good for a short-term mission group of 20 people to go into Rural Kenya and just completely disrupt everything and be out of there in two weeks with no real commitment to them So I would say that the objective standard from the scriptures would easily refute that Is loving your neighbor objective though, is that an objective? phrase Yeah, love your neighbor as yourself subjective though, isn't it? Love is subjective, right? No, I don't think love love is Well, we might get into some Harry's semantics here, but Because we're talking about objective standards. So we need to find objective objectivism In relation to love It needs to be verified So we probably have very different ideas of love Love to me is not The biblical understanding of love is not like a feeling or a desire. It's it's a verb It's an action. It's something you do for another person for their increased well-being and The Greek Greek has four different words for love filet oh Eros Stereo and Agape and the word used in the New Testament to describe that that kind of love is Agape And the Old Testament has has said which is just this a Very righteous not selfish I want what's best for you and Yep, cool, right. So that kind of that kind of action and desire is an objective Standard Thanks for clarifying that's good Did you want to raise something as well? I'm sort of attacking you come at me Can I go back to the issue Yeah, I was muted again, I just give you gentlemen an idea of where we are we have 18 minutes left So we're about halfway through Cool. Thank you. Great Did you want to did you want to yeah, I can do math what? It's very good math, I'm impressed Yeah, great. Yeah, I would love to ask you a couple questions Do you think that Western materialistic The name list can get long but secular humanism is a as a culture is Superior to all other cultures I See secular humanism as not something that is Perhaps the best I Suppose world view if you want to phrase it kind of if I can phrase it that way I Don't suppose it's the best View no, but I can advocate for its positive outcomes in terms of separating religious Religious connotations religious weight and ideology away from simply interacting with other people Fire the fire the the basics of human emotions as in empathy and And based on the situations Yeah, consideration and care and so on we can act that way With without any old ideology a package behind it So no, it's perhaps not the best way, but it's a very Positive way in terms of engaging with others Biosecular humanism So I would vouch for it that way, okay So are you detaching things like empathy and consideration from others from culture from culture Culture you define culture very well before in terms of When you mention identities and Meaningful values within culture is that what you were mentioning before in the opening? I think you mentioned that as point three Repeat the definition from the American sociological Association. I Think I think it was that at that time. Yes. I just I made some quick notes. Was it cultural identity? Meaningful values was mentioned there. I think as well. I can I can just repeat so The ASA defines culture as the languages customs beliefs rules arts knowledge and collective identities and memories Developed by members of all social groups that make their social environments meaningful. I Think in order to have any of those things there has to be some form of of empathy and consideration and humanist emotion to form those things obviously because The cultural identity, especially of the indigenous people is is very much connected to the land So that they are very connected to the land and ancestors and that's an element of I suppose Love for the land and love for their ancestors, which is a human part of the human condition So I would say that yes those Those attributes very human attributes the former part of culture. Of course they do. Yeah I Mean would you agree in in my study? Certainly not at the the graduate level My study of cultures particularly the traditional religious cultures the the animus Kind of cultures as you see in Africa Selfishness is not seen as a negative thing. It's very difficult to explain to a traditional religionist that thinking about others ahead of yourself is Or rather thinking Thinking about yourself regardless of others interest is sinful from the Christian perspective. That's very odd for them So empathy would actually not come very easily to the minority world Or sorry, the majority world we live in the minority quote. Yeah, but that's everybody Let's be honest. Yeah It's not just it's not just tribes. It's not just tribes We're all tribal in our way even even as advanced as we think we are we are extremely still very tribal we still are very in our cliques and in our groups and Christians have proven to be Very selfish as well. It's it's it's not it's not a it's not a them or us type thing saying well They're very selfish. They don't have Christian Christian morals. We we know of evangelists We know of you know, we know of the money-making Fake pastors out there who are doing this for no other reason the selfishness I'll put it another way In terms of the African evangelists That were employed by various missions. They were notorious radicals They did not hesitate to scandalize village opinion by destroying ancestor shrines breaking ceremonial Pots and disrupting communal rituals Insulting and disobeying heathen elders They aggressively advertised and displayed material advantages of mission membership. It was just one of those things that the so-called Moral mission missionaries were displaying horrendous behaviors towards These so-called heathens and tribes it happened here in Australia as well people people would the missionaries would I'm talking about the past again. I know but I'm just making that as a parallel argument in terms of Selfishness aboriginal aboriginals would look at the colonial the colonial colonial people and say Well, is God judging them for their actions as well? it was it was rather an ironic situation where Missionaries were preaching moral values to aboriginals and aboriginals would see the behaviors of the missionaries and so put it back on them So it's not a thing to say. It's not an us or them thing. It's that's everybody. That's the human condition We can be very selfish. Oh Yeah, I completely agree with you No, I didn't mean to I didn't mean to paint the picture that Christians were default and unselfish Moral no, we are we are definitely all by nature selfish I I completely agree with you. My only point was to bring up that us as Western people We view selfishness as a problem. We view we view that as a problem in the African tribal Traditional religionists would not view that as a problem culturally It would be a weird thing for you to be grounded for being selfish or to be disciplined for being selfish There'll be a very weird thing. But for us we recognize the selfishness In ourselves and in our culture as a bad thing. They don't that would be the difference culturally I suppose it depends on the context of what do you mean by by being selfish? In in in relation to tribal people What would be an example of selfishness because we could probably there's been many times when Westerners have gone in and said to the it was the South American tribe the what they call the Piraha people South America you've probably heard of them I mean they laughed at everything if they if their house blew away in the in in a storm they laughed and So Westerners looked at this and said gee what what oaths to these people? They're lazy. They laugh at everything It that's that's what I mean in the context. It's like why should a Westerner look at an isolated indigenous peoples and Pass judgment on them and say well look they're being selfish. How do we how do we judge the selfishness? It's a tricky and very nuanced situation because like I say the Piraha people used to laugh at things They used to they used to laugh when they lost all their food and the missionaries will say you've lost all your food What are you going to eat? Why are you laughing at this? They would laugh when when people would fall over and injure themselves It's it's a thing of getting by it was the their way of dealing with stress as we do now We watch comedy movies during a pandemic because we're trying to get over that stress of what's going on So so it's how you see the world, right? It's your paradigm Some will say that selfish others would say well that's survival It's like a criminal stealing food to feed their kid. Oh, that's being selfish. Others would see it as no they're helping someone It's a very it's a very tricky paradigm to balance No, I mean I completely agree with you you can misjudge Someone else being selfish sometimes. I completely agree If I can go out of limb here and put forth an illustration say for example God it's gonna be so stereotypical, but The thing that came to my head I'm like, oh, you really say that a lot. Yes, I am so an African tribesman Has a goat and the goat has just the goats have litters or I don't know a goat litter and There's tons of there's tons of goats and they look at the They look at people around them strangers who maybe they don't know who are Very hungry, right? They don't have goats and now they have an abundance Should they give they have more goats than they need should they give and I'm sorry if you're vegan Should they give some of their goats to the strangers? Now the African traditional religious would say well, of course not and we would say well, of course you should right you have more than you need of course you should and The cultural difference would be It would be stark there the African traditional religionists would not see that as a bad thing And we would see that as perhaps a callous thing. Yep. Yep. Okay in that context There's obviously a reason why they wouldn't share Based on their on their belief So what's the underlying? reason For that do you know would you know was it simply an analogy? Yeah, it's just a Yeah, it's one of the it's one of those things like I Can draw a parallel from that to I suppose There is a parallel here of that and that is that There's in terms of I don't know if I should go there or not Okay, I'll go there. It's one of those things that in in some Religious ideologies, okay, there's there's reasons why things are looked down on over over others And I don't mean to say this in an offensive way, but with FEMA with menstruation with female menstruation With indigenous cultures This is considered sacred to Australian cultures because it distinguishes the time and a female is capable of bringing life into the world It's something that's celebrated period. Oh, sorry, sorry, it's a period I'm glad you went there That's something that's seen as being celebrated. Okay, and any religious ideologies in some For example in Islam, I know that's drawing another bow But in Islam it's seen as something that's that's not celebrated It's something that's seen even in Christianity in some denominations that this is seen as something that is unclean Okay, because it is a part of scripture. So there must be a part of Their belief that they won't share the goats It's either because they consider the goats to be sacred as as Indians do with cows They'll see cows as being sacred because it's part of that ideology that they carry. So there must be something special Something that we would deem to be Wrong or objectively wrong or subjectively wrong whichever way you want to go We as Westerners would say you should share what's going on here But if they can justify it by an ideal ideology or belief like you say you would fight for that ideology and that belief You'd fight for their freedom of having that that belief. Yeah We have five minutes left gentlemen. Oh, thank you Certainly not to the extent of harming another person You have the right to do with your own body what you want until you strike another person in the face, right? So you have the right to practice your religion unless your religion involves human sacrifice or you know Or abusing people or something like that, right? So I would I would agree with you that I Assuming you believe the same that freedom of religion does not cover yet. Yeah, awful things True true like again, it depends on on the situation and what's happening And how it's justified. Yeah, look exactly right. It's interesting interesting when you put up there I suppose it comes down to again what you mentioned at the start was whose values are best and if the Calvinist values are better why are they better and if because We know with Calvinism people are pretty destined to receive God is that right? Oh Boy, you really want to open up this can where it's a four minutes left. I mean we can we can go there but I know I know it's complicated. We don't have to we can we can do it saves out for another time if you like brave man Yeah, I'm pretty destined then the whole the whole issue with missionary work is moot and that supports the band That's all I was gonna say That could be an important thing that wouldn't be too difficult So God ordains as a Calvinist God ordains the ends which is salvation, but he also ordains the means which would be the the traveling of the missionary to the place and preaching of the gospel so no one It's no Calvinist believes that a person is converted apart from hearing the gospel No person's regenerate apart from that. So is it a part of predestination though What that who will and who won't believe? Yeah Oh, yeah. Yeah, of course. Well, so regardless of preaching the gospel. It doesn't matter Right, but God will God will bless For instance, maybe by my example if I was preaching on Sunday morning, which Probably won't be if I was preaching on Sunday morning to a crowd of people. I don't know And none of them had heard the gospel before and I explained it very clearly that all of you are under God's just condemnation, but if you repent and Believe in Jesus's sin bearing sacrifice, you'll experience Everlasting happiness, you know the the imputation of Christ righteousness all the full nine yards of no what I what I like to say Some people will believe some people won't the people who will believe In other words the people who will believe only will believe because God has enabled them to do so if God had remained passive and done nothing They would not have believed Though it is an act of obedience on my part to do the preaching of the gospel I don't have the power to convince someone to become a Christian That's something that's outside of my control But it is part of my obedience to go and to do that not certainly Recognizing that it's not me who changes someone's heart Maybe I can get out here. There's a lot of there's a lot of stuff in there probably for another time, but that was very Interesting. Yeah, two minutes. Let's do you let's do a last-minute wisdom. We can pack in here Can I just put forward a very quick scenario if I'm allowed to sure? Let's turn the tables and say an elder visits a Catholic church and talks with a bishop builds rapport talks to the bishop And and then turns around and says look at there's something missing from your life. This is something that missionaries And in act when they're Converting right they say there's something missing from your life What if the elder says the rainbow serpent is missing from your life now the churches every right to say no as you say We they they can say no, thank you. Let's walk away But how many times do you feel the indigenous elder has the right to proselytize to the bishop is a two three four times And what if the social economics were Reversed how would the bishop feel then would the bishop feel provoked into adapting a new relief would they be threatened in some way would they You know What if the elder was the race to colonize the bishops race would that make it more acceptable or less acceptable? It's one of those scenarios though if you flip if you flip the scenario very simply you see that The elder really shouldn't be Doing what you get the point it's basically flipping flipping the scenario Yeah, so just to respond to that I would absolutely I Would absolutely say that the elder has the right to approach the Catholic Bishop as as often as he wants as long as he is not You know as long as he's not harassing him or damaging his property or threatening him or any of that Any other kind of stuff. I mean I have had friends personally for years and years and years Who I talked to on a weekly basis and tried to convince them to become a Christian, right? And we're still friends so there is a way to Try to evangelize someone without being threatening or a jerk or you know You could probably say that's being harassment though, couldn't you It's kind of like having a friend that's vegan Yeah Well, that can I can arrest you equally still harassment, right? Well, I mean it depends just like being annoying isn't harassment like there. There is a legally Defined definition of what harassment is. I think we would all agree on which I don't have written in front of me But just being annoying and rude isn't harassment. It is something beyond that Okay, do you generally want to make your closing statements? Just your little your elevator speech to convince the audience hold your position Would you like to get would you like to get first Ross? Yep, you went first mr. Bear, so we'll let we'll let mr. Mr. Ross not mr. Burns. That's so damn confusing to To finish up Sorry Sorry, I'm finished. I'll close up. Yep. No Ross will you yeah, right? You were the affirmative you opened up. Were you rebutted first? So you can kick that off. Yes, we all means Okay, I Just just want to just to sum up a ban on missionaries Like I say look This should be perhaps done on the case-by-case basis by independent non-government bodies And instead a delivery method that is non-judgmental safe and administered by experts in the field is probably the better way to go in terms of If the gospel is if someone wants to preach the gospel to a group Perhaps do it in line with an independent body or someone who is an expert in the field with medical people I just want to say look, this is the probably the most fundamental aspect of this if a person's identity has more to do with where they belong Rather than what they believe or what they do And switching affiliation to a new religion could be subversive subversive dangerous and destructive for the many reasons. I've mentioned before health reasons psychological reasons The impact it may have on interrelations in terms of the concept of sin sexuality I Changing that paradigm to something that is Something that is can be quite destructive the potential there Shouldn't be entertained. It should be dismissed altogether. Let's simply ban this sort of work and Interact with these tribal groups via secular means safe means With the knowledge that we have of the history of What has happened in the past let's be smarter and let's just get rid of the ideology aspect and Go with the secular human and humanist aspect if part of that has to be religion Sure introduce it in a safe environment if they say no That's all there is to it. Let's maintain cultures and recognize them for the uniqueness for what they are and Appreciate other cultures with respect some humility and without some self-righteousness Thanks. Oh Yeah, okay great closing I I've been in some tall buildings in my life, but I I don't know how many floors that elevator had but that was a great closing And now we're going to let Ross not mr. Burns give his his quick closing in his in his wonk avator so go ahead and Get after it. I'll try and keep it try and keep it somewhat brief. No, I'm here all night. I'm here for you guys Everybody relaxed it's some coffee Yeah, so I would just probably echo just a couple points It sounds like mr. Bear and I agree on a lot of things we agree that there have been Tremendous abuses by missionaries in the past and that they shouldn't happen in the future. We might disagree about government's place I find it's a little bit Eerie and ominous that an independent government organization would be in charge of this kind of sounds like they're Not if they're unelected it sounds a little sketchy that almost that they could be Imposing secular humanism on everyone. I don't think secular humanism is a A cultural Ideology, I think it is part of Western culture and I don't think it gets to be exempt from Exempt from the maxim that no culturally held belief is better than another or should be impressed upon another and Yeah, and with that, I would just say mr. Bear. Thank you so much for a great debate and a great discussion and Jim Thanks so much for hosting it as well. It's been a great time Yeah, I I go at the echo that sentiment. Thank you. Thank you very much for taking part in this It took a while but we got there and I do appreciate it. It's always good to hear Where others come from so it's it's been fascinating on many levels Well, fascinating. I had a really great time think both you gentlemen We're gonna be good and get through the Q&A session gonna do the super chats first from Steve step step step hand steen for a dollar 99 it says Jim's mustache converted to Christianity Yeah, and it's a Calvinist and it says you're going to hell And For $2 says Nathan Thompson uses Internet Explorer. That's probably true Stupid horny energy for five dollars Says the thing about missionary is that it is really easy for both of us to stimulate the clit None of these are questions people. This is just information Caleb for five dollars says bear you're advocating for the infringement of speech. There's no way around that So he's putting the gloves on you stepping up. What's what's what's up there? Hmm. Well, as I mentioned, it's not so much an impeachment on free speech. It's it's really a case-by-case basis We we have to manage this through independent bodies that are non-government affiliated And it's a matter of looking this looking at this as non-bullying non-harassment and Doing this in a smarter way as I said in the closing You probably posted that earlier in the chat But as I said in closing just to clarify this this needs to be done a lot smarter If if there is an imperative to introduce the gospel to people do it via Better means and fundraising a helicopter and flying into a Brazilian tribe during COVID-19 crisis. That's not the best way to do this Okay, next from stupid whore energy for five dollars says Jim stash is too ticklish. So with him I prefer a downward doggy. I You that you're not but that that doesn't help you though But we can talk about that later. Um Let's see Stupid whore energy for five dollars. Oh dear. It's relevant Do you think missionary work? pause for effect is A form of imperialism slash white supremacy slash colonization. So whoever wants to take that if or both of you I certainly think it can be that way a missionary missionary work in and of itself is has nothing to do with that. I mean my ancestors Were in Northwestern Europe were probably colonized by people who weren't very pale as I am I mean the most famous the most influential Christian of all time outside of the Apostle Paul is St. Augustine who was an African who was probably a very dark-skinned man. So Christianity in and of itself is not a Anglo-Saxon religion so too But but it can be some in white supremacist ideology, which is Antithetical to Christianity and stupid in white supremacist ideology some of Christianity can be borrowed and that kind of That can become some kind of package deal that could certainly and has certainly in the past been the kind of imperialism that you're talking about but Major missionary organizations today like ethnicity 60 or imb or or world harvest or any of those kinds of things have nothing whatsoever to do with white supremacist rights white supremacy or imperialism and They think those guys are just as much douchebags as I do Okay, I actually agree. I actually agree with Ross there at a time that it was predominantly white Imperialism at a certain time in history, but now there's a there's a broad mix of mystery people from all sorts of races So, you know, I agree there, right? I mean you can't colonize and not expect a little infiltration going on You know, it's sorry. We're gonna diversify now. You got greedy From SJ Thomas in For five dollars says bear Do you recognize the Christian contributions to the world in universities hospitals and women's rights? Of course, I do just as much as I recognize atheists contributions and hospitals and schools and contributions to society. It's it's not really a Direct reference to say that Christianity shaped shape the Western world and benefited the Western world We're talking about the enlightenment and various aspects there Greek philosophy and Eastern philosophies that have been portrayed it across the world that have contributed to to the world apart from From other means and and those are saying histories There were secular means that contributed to the world by traders explorers and miners and settlers That had no religious affiliation and they helped with post modernization. So Yeah, I mean, I wrote I recognize it, of course, I do but I also recognize the secular Circular progressions as well. It's a fantastic answer From Brian Stevens says at modern-day debate. He's not here. I'm Jim Question says with the current COVID-19 situation is Stopping large church gatherings and infringement on religious freedoms. Do you believe churches should it should not be meeting in person? I'm assuming that one's directed at me Yeah, well, I think that really can go to both of you actually Yeah, I mean, I would definitely I'm very much on the side of the government does not have the ability or the sorry the authority or Right to suspend things like rights of assembly or freedom of religion or things like that just because the government deems that a situation is Enough of an emergency in other words if our rights are inalienable except when the government terms determines that The situation is really, you know, it's really critical. I think it's just giving that power to the government to from an American perspective to Circumvent the bill of rights when it's convenient to do so or when it's expedient to do so is a dangerous power in the hands of the government that being said I would certainly I Would certainly recommend that pastors of large churches don't I mean we can do we can do zoom calls, right? We can we can do this online. We don't Not a true pinnacle person. Yeah, so I mean, I think Though I would not support a governmental ban on such a thing. I would think it wise not to You ever try to get the Holy Ghost through through a webcam. It's it's hard, brother Uh Yeah From a hunter Rothman says at Jim majors, that's me at modern-day debate. He's not here to mr. Bear And didn't say shit about Ross Says if there wasn't a risk of giving a disease to the people would I still be wrong? I Don't I mean, I think it's to mr. Bear. Maybe if you're trying to get my attention I'm not sure. I'm not sure how that's I'm not sure how to respond to to that Strange phrasing, right, right? Let me see if I can reward it. I know what they're trying to say So if it wasn't If it wasn't Tracked it like able to be be contracted. I guess would it still be wrong like if it wasn't contagious or if you weren't if you were yes, it would still be wrong for psychological means reasons and and changing like I said changing the paradigm of people's Interrelationships, so if you're introducing the introducing concepts such as Sin and to probability and sexual morality in that way in what is right and wrong then you are impacting that culture Potentially for future generations in a negative aspect. So despite the health reasons and risks. I would say that is still a dangerous thing to introduce to other cultures okay, and Do you want to add anything to that Ross or? Yeah, I guess Would what it caused? psychological distress to to a child tell them that a Theme park can be a dangerous place For example, it probably would to be like hey stay close to your parents You never know. They're a bad people out here. It may cause psychological distress To that young child, but if it's true, it's worth saying and in the same way Someone might become distressed when they're told that they are offending God's law or that they are In action or behavior that they're engaging in is sinful But if it's true, it does need to be said just because something causes someone psychological distress I know I many times in my life have been confronted by people who love me About things that I was engaging and I shouldn't have been but it still needed to be said it would be my only Response Mr. Bears thoughts you jump jump across a couple of things there because we are talking about truth a truth is a very important thing to analyze because When we're saying truth and God those two aren't necessarily Equal because There's nothing that verifies a God or any gods There's nothing that proves a God or any gods therefore. There's no truth to it It could be a statement of belief a truth statement of belief coming from belief that yes I believe in a God that's that's a truth statement of belief. Okay, it's a differentiation to say if you go to a theme park You could get hurt. That's true if you if you Gay and you keep you keep and you marry this You marry someone who is also gay you're going to hell. That's not true. It's no truth Based to that. It's a belief a truth based on belief. Okay, so we have to draw that distinction there there is truth and there's also a statement of truth truth belief if you know what I mean from phrasing that the right way We have to be careful between establishing what what truth is and if we're establishing a truth of hell That will continually psychologically Disturb the interrelations of tribal people for this generation in future generations. It's harmful that and it shouldn't happen Just a pitch in my my two cents on that because it that just really Yeah, kind of kind of sparked sparked something I think there's something to be said so for example in my sophomore my junior and the first part of my senior year a Good friend in the group of people that I had that I hung out with and grew up with went through chemotherapy and radiation and to to fight cancer and eventually went into remission and everything like that but of course going through all the the The therapies and different radiation treatments and such he lost all of his hair And so in we we all buzzed our hair and we we didn't like when it started to get a little long We know we'd buzz it again We just we kept it buzzed for two two years out of our our high school and there's like four of us I think that there's something to be said for The unity in something that even if it doesn't affect you, you know, it's like marching in a gay pride march or White people marching with Martin Luther King. It's it's just a show of support. I think Yeah for show. Yeah super chat Jim oh Right on did you send it to me? Okay, no, is it sit sigin Frado, Sorabia Oh Well, I have one from signature Frado, Sorabia someone do that one and then I'll do the other one It says at bear a side religion is supplying benefits like vaccines wrong and At burns. Do you have to accept the religion to be have benefits in relation? Is that wrong? Good luck? I So bear yeah supplying benefits like vaccines wrong Of course, it's not wrong. No and supplying vaccines can be done via other organizations secular organizations that Anyone can deliver vaccines and I I advocate for that. Of course I do especially when an isolated and isolated peoples are at risk of being eradicated, of course, there's a Responsibility for those who can do it should do it but what we're talking about here is process proselytizing to tribes about another ideology that They can they can Impact them in other ways apart from their health, but of course their health of course is is imperative I I just want to take it to answer this it is wrong if by vaccines you mean smallpox blankets Yeah, that's bad. That's a bad idea. Yeah No, so I think the question was do you have to include the religious message in order to give someone a vaccine? Certainly not. No, I think I think I would actually look at it the other way around if If you was a Western missionary with just so much wealth and prosperity that we have go over to a suffering people group With lots of money raised that you've raised over the United States And you don't help them with their health I would just I would just question that like if you if you have the ability to help them with their You know with vaccination with medical treatment Then I think you should definitely do it. So I think the two go hand-in-hand you can certainly do vaccines without without Christianity and You can certainly do Christianity without vaccines, but I think I would prefer a combined package I think that's the best of both worlds. Okay, and the second parts of that question burns. I believe it's saying in order to receive the benefits from the From Christianity or from religion. Do you have to accept the religion and is it wrong if you? receive benefits and it without accepting the religion oh Like a like a vaccination or something like that. No, I think I Mean if there are strings attached I would like if if you're only giving out a I don't know the hep C treatment with promise that they'll come to come to mass next week. That's a little it's a little sketchy I mean I've for even for the major missionary organizations. It's It's a both-hand thing. We want you to become Christians, but we also want to help you like we also wanted to improve It's both and I mean I I can kind of kind of attest to that I had my my own experience with missionary work. I particularly remember in Guatemala we were building bottle schools and a bottle clinic like out of glass bottles and trash in Adobe and It was a really great experience, but what what bothered me even then as a Christian was that We you know, they were obviously hungry. We brought we had food We had bottles upon bottles upon bottles upon cases of pallets of drinking water First aid kits like antibiotics and things like that But it was almost as if they had to go through a sermon before they could like they didn't have to but they were definitely Definitely put in a position where they were obligated to I didn't mean to end the debate on a downer If there any are there any other questions in the in the live chat, let's see. Oh let's see question for burns For burns I burns I oh, that's you. Okay burns. I if we do allow Christian missionaries to go to indigenous tribes How would you deal with them or how do you deal with conflicting denominations and explaining to them? It scrolled down stop typing people. Um, oh At no, that's a different question. Dang, there's more questions. Hang on people stay with me Let's see do do okay How should missionaries be monitored to make sure they don't know damn it? Oh my gosh, okay burns. I view at what age does it? mother Yeah, this is good good case anybody's wondering what I'm smoking. Um Okay question for burns I if we do allow Christian missionaries to go to indigenous tribes, how would you deal with conflicting? Denominations and explaining to them which ones are right. So are you gonna come at them with the KJV or or what? Oh I would as a Was a good Protestant a good reformed Christian. I would just point them to the scriptures give them the ability to read for themselves And sort out these issues for themselves now I mean one very easy thing would be the epistemological source of each Christian denomination The ones who say soul scriptura that we only we base our beliefs off the Bible primarily and only right and plain reason Those Christian denominations are going to agree with each other on 95% of issues when you work in other organizations like Roman Catholicism or Mormonism or Jehovah's Witnesses Which accept things outside of the Bible, whether it's tradition or living prophets or things like that Then you end up with a whole myriad of weird beliefs and traditions And so we would simply point as a Protestant evangelical missionary we would just point them to the scriptures and say make your own mind up and warn them of groups that have these outside Filters through which you're supposed to read the scriptures whether it be tradition or for a prophet living in Salt Lake City Okay, I thought you're gonna take a little bit longer because I was looking for that question Yeah, so okay, so Burns I view again at what age this is from kill low doggy one I take that how you want At what age does it make sense to label a human being's behavior as sinful our newborn babies capable of sin on their first day of life So are we sprinkling to save from hell or is there an age of accountability? Oh? Well, I guess I shouldn't I didn't differentiate myself enough reformed Calvinists Post-millennia's and a Baptist, so I'm not a submersion gotcha I was certainly recognized that If you're talking about like an age of accountability thing or something I I can't help you there I'm sorry the the biblical scriptures don't talk about each of accountability, so I am principled I hold to a principal ambiguity on that issue, so I I don't know about age of accountability though I do know that children Though they not might may not have the mental fact mental faculties To be able to decide right from wrong in every situation they I Mean no one has to teach a child to say no when you tell them to do something That's just something that they at least from a Christian perspective They already come with like they come with a selfish nature. They come with things that need to be Not encouraged, but discouraged lovingly by parents. So yes, even children Even children have sinful natures The only issue is they're not strong enough or smart enough or coherent enough to act upon them yet Okay And if you guys getting baptized at a Baptist church any time soon plug your nose literally with your hand these guys don't joke around Let's see From Hunter Rothman says to Burns how should missionaries be monitored to make sure they don't infringe on the people's rights and who should monitor them so They they have an escort or a government Like should it be regulated? Oh Gosh I would be very Very wary of any sort of regulatory Agencies who are saying that this missionary group can do this and this missionary group can't do that I wouldn't I wouldn't want that power in any government officials hands. I would just say that the same kind of the same kind of Law enforcement agencies that we have would be good I mean if someone if a missionary breaks into an indigenous is Indigenous persons hut and steal some stuff from them. That's the crime. They've you know, they've infringed upon their rights to To their property and things like that were to harm them in any way so In a situation in which there are no which I think is part of the question is getting at the situation in which there are no No blue and red and white flashing lights with cars, you know, we're gonna come in and save the day I would look towards watch dog organizations to come and save the day to do investigation Let the let the free market of ideas as it were I mean a bad if ethos 360 for example was to have a missionary in Brazil who went in and Got everybody sick with coronavirus The Brazilian government can take care of that right they can take care of that negligence and irresponsibility responsibility and All of the donors of that ethos 360 can take care of that as well You're gonna say what are you gonna do about this? Are you going to hold these people accountable and responsible fire them get rid of them for what they for their negligence? So I'm gonna drive into the jungle. Oh, yeah, I take them out into the jungle like the orangutans after them I have no idea if they're orangutans in Brazil, but um, yeah To that There's also something very important here another aspect and that is the aspect of power and perceived power So in terms of the Western Australian elders, they are the minority. They're very much the minority In in a country where they're still not legally recognized as the owners of this land. So we're talking about rich Western missionaries imposing themselves on a minority population who had had the Were pushed to see the the watchdog of of the Western of Western Australia the state So we're talking about an element of power here that is also a very Important driving force here in terms of to use a Bible analogy a David and Goliath situation. That's an important element here Okay, we have some more super chats that have come in Well a couple one that I missed It's actually the question that I was gonna ask for nobody did from stupid horror energy for five dollars says Do you think it's wrong to preach abstinence rather than condom use in an area ravaged by STDs and AIDS especially? So so probably like particularly referencing like the the Catholic Church Yeah, I mean So I yeah, I'm not the I'm not in anti Contraception kind of Christian. I think the Man, I'm glad the filter caught that. Oh good. Oh, thank goodness. Oh my okay. So moving on with the filter just caught No, I would definitely say that Both would be good abstinence And contraception I don't buy into the whole they're gonna do it anyway, so just give them some rubber sort of thing But make both available make the the benefits of abstinence known and available and saving sex for marriage between one man and one woman I think is a wonderful thing. It's a been a tremendous blessing in my own life I know that and it's commanded in the scriptures, but also make available contraception. I think it's a good thing I don't think it's an either or situation there Unfortunately, the Pope thinks otherwise and that's what makes this very dangerous. Yeah, we had a reformation about that guy. Yeah, we Around and he's still influencing people. Yeah, it's not the same hat too. It's a bummer, man. Yeah, he needs to get rid of that, too Okay, we have a super chat from Ashley gouch gouch, I hope I'm saying that right Um Says Burns defines selfish then please explain which African tribes you've encountered and how they define and promote it I take issue with the statement you made earlier regarding indigenous people So you are not getting out of this unscathed, mister. Oh Yeah, I knew I was like the filter the filter was arguing with me I was like nah, just go with it But no, I certainly don't know that all indigenous people are all African people are Selfish or anything like that. I'm just saying in a and I myself have not been to Africa. It's only what I've read in Anthropological books or sociological books the difference in culture So a I got all mine from watching Cool Runnings None of the people in the movie are Jamaican, but It's Hollywood Yeah, I understand I understand that is a terrific movie, but no no I so my definition of selfish would be when you have the opportunity when you have the opportunity to Bless as a Christian word to improve the well-being of another person or of yourself You choose yourself, right? That would be that would be a rough definition of selfish and in our culture that seems a bad thing I mean just the the offense that the questioner took at what I've said is proof enough of that and in other cultures It's not so it's not seen as a bad thing. It's a barrier that Christian missionaries have when explaining we just assume that this is taken for granted that everybody agrees that selfishness is bad But it's it's not It's not bad thing Okay, we have another super chat for $5 from Caleb Says bear. So is it wrong to share your belief on sexuality to a culture that has sex with 10 year olds as a rite of passage? Okay Those it's like an like an ethics kind of morality thing should should you impose your standard of What is right on theirs? Well, this comes back to what we were saying earlier in terms of Allowing people the right to believe what they do but in terms of that sort of action I condemn that sort of action as well that happens without religious ideology. So That that sort of thing I mean you can't go to Someone who's doing that and say well guess what homosexuality is wrong. So what you're doing is wrong But also I think homosexuality is wrong and abomination in fact because my god says that That's kind of that's kind of having a cake and eat it too because you're you're imposing an equally horrible morality Onto another horrible morality if they're insulting people because of their religious ideology I'm totally against it and the negative action by religious ideology needs to stop It's not justified However, like I say if we're introducing something just as bad an idea that's just as bad or a concept Just that's just as bad or some sort of condemnation or judgment on something that is perceived to be just as bad Then they equally equally as bad as one another okay, and we have a Super chat for $2 from shoes from shoes though Mason it says bear Are you an aborigine or of European descent? You don't have to answer that if you don't want to Well, but it's an aborigine bear or a European bear I am I am of European descent, correct. I've never seen no aborigine bear. No, I haven't seen yet It doesn't mean that don't exist. Yeah, I am of European descent I'm not sure what the correlation is but I do recognize that my Ancestors brought their faith with them to this country to a country that had no The elders had no no Catholicism So we we brought that with us and it's a factor that I have to recognize that my family brought that with us And that's where this comes from I'm not sure if that is interrelated but Well, although well the mains behind the question, but I do admit that yeah I can only assume that I haven't gotten the same question because I already said I was of north north western European descent. I assume I would have gotten the same question, too Possibly possibly. Yeah, it's very possible I'm going I'm gonna please just keep your mouth shut Jim. Don't say nothing. Just next question I can do this. Nice roll faster. We're in trouble Let's see, okay from Alfredo Rabia and somebody please tell me if I'm saying that right preferably CG For $2 that says at bear. Can you name secular missionaries in in one hand doctors without borders? Yes, the Red Cross I believe There's probably quite a few others that a simple Google Google search would reveal to you I don't know them off my heart. No, but I believe the Red Cross is And they do amazing work, I think it's Oxfam perhaps Yes, and doctors without borders as well doctors without borders ox famed Red Cross. Well, there's three Can I go to Google? Yeah, there's I mean there's quite a few I mean In fact most most of the big ones, you know that you would normally think of and and think that they were were religious So actually are not. Yeah, they're not. Yeah, they appear to be but they're not it's it's quite interesting So there are plenty out there Yeah, I'm to say that not is just not not searching properly on Google, right, right? I think I think there's a lot to say for a humanitarian effort that Can have you know vaccines in one hand and food in the other and not have to worry about where we're gonna put the Bible Yeah, absolutely. I think Audrey Audrey Hepburn was she was the ambassador for back in the day Unicef perhaps wasn't unicef. I'm not sure that that sounds right Something like that. She was the ambassador for that. Yeah So, yeah, there's there's plenty out there Awesome, I don't see any more questions and it's been over an hour and a half So I'm gonna go ahead and shut this down because I'm the host and I can do that kind of shit But it's been a great pleasure. You guys go ahead and plug yourselves real quick and I will shut us down Mr. Bearer, where are you what do people type to find you and all the other good stuff are your dish open? Okay, sure. Yeah, just find me on on YouTube at mr. Bear atheist if you're talking mr. Bear other things pop up So just try mr. Bear atheist turn Twitter at mr. Bear atheist and I'll do some Religious response videos with a bit of comedy in them Yeah, and yeah for me as well Just type in YouTube burns. I view that's my channel Yeah, I just like I said before I try to interact with Western secularism from a biblical perspective the channel is mostly geared towards non-christians, but I like to think I have a following in both at least my comment section is certainly blown up by The non-christian, which I really enjoy. I love interacting with you if you are a non-christian and you like arguing with Christians I I'm your guy And I gotta say Ross you've been very open to discourse, which I appreciate as well. I do appreciate that Absolutely. It's been a pleasure, mr. Bear. Yes. I think thank you to everybody in the live chat for watching like and share this out I'm Jim majors. I have a YouTube that you can't see maybe you can it's youtube.com slash Jim majors and my mustache