Frank Turek Breaks Down This ICONIC Jordan Peterson Moment
Вставка
- Опубліковано 16 вер 2024
- A couple of years ago, Jordan Peterson and Cathy Newman exchanged heated words. In this video, Frank explains Cathy's faulty logic during the interview and how atheists and leftists often exempt themselves from their own theories.
📚 𝗥𝗘𝗖𝗢𝗠𝗠𝗘𝗡𝗗𝗘𝗗 𝗥𝗘𝗦𝗢𝗨𝗥𝗖𝗘𝗦
Your Most Important Thinking Skill by Dr. Frank Turek DVD👉📱bit.ly/3EAWR3J (mp4) download👉📱 bit.ly/3KAvbjn
Apologetics and Politics by Tim Stratton👉📱crossexamined....
🤝 𝗦𝗨𝗣𝗣𝗢𝗥𝗧 𝗖𝗥𝗢𝗦𝗦𝗘𝗫𝗔𝗠𝗜𝗡𝗘𝗗 (𝗧𝗔𝗫-𝗗𝗘𝗗𝗨𝗖𝗧𝗜𝗕𝗟𝗘) 🤝
● Website: crossexamined....
👥 𝗦𝗢𝗖𝗜𝗔𝗟 𝗠𝗘𝗗𝗜𝗔 👥
● Facebook: / crossexamined.org
● X / frank_turek
● Instagram: / drfrankturek
● TikTok: bit.ly/3SSqGE5
🗄️ 𝗥𝗘𝗦𝗢𝗨𝗥𝗖𝗘𝗦 🗄️
● Website: crossexamined.org
● Store: impactapologet...
● Online Courses: www.onlinechri...
🎙️ 𝗦𝗨𝗕𝗦𝗖𝗥𝗜𝗕𝗘 𝗧𝗢 𝗢𝗨𝗥 𝗣𝗢𝗗𝗖𝗔𝗦𝗧 🎙️
● Apple Podcast: bit.ly/CrossExa...
● Spotify: bit.ly/CrossExa...
● Pandora: bit.ly/3M3c3tY
● iHeart: bit.ly/3ApZ2Il
● Podchaser: bit.ly/46PBzfH
#Logic #Atheists
Download FREE Cheat Sheet “The 4-Point Case For Christianity” 👉🏽📱cutt.ly/ZYMC4nl
This same lady was told by a Polish official why they don’t allow all the Muslim refugees into Poland and she accused him of being racist against Muslims pretty much and he said Poland doesn’t have the problems the UK Britain and Australia have because of open borders She was very triggered
Long live Poland ✊🇵🇱
And she is Not a journalist - she is an activist paid by rotten leftists 👎👎
I love Poland, best country in Europe.
@@CharlesJones-wi7tz- Don’t believe the nonsense preached by Poland. It is exactly the same as any other European country. Totally open borders and will do exactly as their European overlords tell them to do. They are not a sovereign country. It’s all just tough talk and means nothing.
Cathy Newman should have cleaned her room. 🙄😂🤣
@@meltingtime3571 Why? Jordan hadn't cleaned his...
He was a drug addict at this point.
They feel they're standing on the moral high ground and turning those questions on them is pointless because they're morally superior.
The problem is, you can quote them, you can demonstrate that they are doing the very same thing-and they don't get. Hold up the mirror and they cannot recognize their own reflection. (Proverbs 26:4-5)
@@jessebryant9233 You mean Christians... right?
@@mattslater2603 Not remotely. At least, not when those who profess Christ are biblically sound. But do you have a specific example you'd like to present?
@@jessebryant9233
Of course not. They never do. They just hate the word "Christ" anything even remotely associated with it.
@@JohnSmith-yc6uv They are oh so easily triggered, aren't they? Almost as if the name has some kind of power-like they are afraid for some reason... (Romans 2:14-15, John 3:19-20?)
@@mattslater2603 Thanks for proving the Bible right
The problem with the argument from experience with some of these individuals is that they assert that "their truth" is right. When they bring that up, they are literally saying that they're right and will not accept that they could be wrong about their perception or interpretation. That's the danger of self-righteousness. And it exists in many forms. They're committed to the idea that they are right about that. They are effectively married and refuse to divorce from it.
So EXACTLY what every Christian does when they argue from their "personal experience" with Christ?
Jiraiya, this is exactly what Christians do. They rationalize it by quoting verses like 1 Cor. 2:14. And saying things like, you just need the Holy Spirit or else the Bible will never make sense.
I could make the same argument. ie, You don't understand the real truth because you lack the spirit of Odin. Or you lack simple logic.
Seems like we're all faced with this problem.
@@mattr.1887 Shockwave will simply run from this.
It's what he does.
That way he doesn't have to correct himself of confront the cognitive dissonance his silly supernatural beliefs cause
@@mattslater2603
Habakkuk 1:11
11 “They sweep past like the wind and are gone.
But they are deeply guilty,
***for their own strength is their god.”***
Habakkuk 2:14
“For the ***time will come*** when all the earth will be filled, as the waters fill the sea, with an ***awareness of the glory of the LORD.”***
The goal of idolatry is self-glory.
The goal of Christianity is God’s glory. Amen❤️
@@lane21007 ...so what?
Unless you can show the silly supernatural claims of Christianity to actually be true... the goal of the religion is irrelevant.
Cathy Newman's husband hasn't been seen since that interview
Lol...
Thank you CrossExamined
Great points and simple observation proves it true. Secular society has an obvious double standard. Do as we say, not as we do. Give them everything while they give nothing.
I couldn't care less what offends them either. It's not my job to manage their feelings and ensure their happiness. Be an adult and get a grip. These entitled and whiny adult children are the absolute worst. Nothing would've ever been accomplished if this had always been the mindset of society. It's probably why nothing is getting done now.
Bang on, Fess.
Snowflakes de la creme! I'm 100% with ya, brother, I literally couldn't care less what offends this mewling, whining, bunch of entitled crybaby Karens. In fact, I quite enjoy seeing them offended and melting down. That's the best kind of laughs I get in life, watching these snowflakes completely meltdown, lol...
Peace, brother 🙏
Amen brother! Sick of their fragile feelings and won't cater to them.
💯 🔥
There is a generation that curses their father,
and does not bless its mother.
There is a generation that is pure in its own eyes,
and yet is not washed from its filthiness.
There is a generation-oh, how lofty are their eyes!
@Jerryman1158 Proverbs 30. Great verse. So accurate, it may very well be this generation that was being spoken of.
@@Jerryman1158
Excellent scripture, so fitting of today.
Thats what a secular culture leaves you with feeling and opinions and nothing objective
@@jeffphelps1355 That's why good and evil are so interchangeable for them. Whichever way the wind blows. As long as they get some benefit from it, it's good.
@@festushaggen2563 very true deputy...they try to rationalize evil by disguising it in different terminology. Instead of killing the unborn they change it to "women's reproductive rights"
This is what Christianity leaves you with.
Secular culture gets you the US constitution, guy. For starters lol.
@@festushaggen2563good and evil stand on solid ground based on behavior according to well being. In the bible, however, good and evil are ambiguous
Thank YOU Frank, you have been a big help over the years. This clip ended with you saying “we have to agree with them or we’ll get hurt”. Just a reminder my friend “THE GOOD GUYS ALWAYS WIN”
Her cognitive dissonance was caught on camera, and she acknowledged it. That is a start. Don't hold your breath thinking she will repent (change her mind).
FIRST! Please come to South Dakota Dr Turek!
Invite Frank to come to you here! crossexaminednc.wufoo.com/forms/m1odtc321nhluyc
"They're just making assertions, and you have to agree with them, or you're going to get hurt!"
Yep! Nowadays, people will accuse you of "hating" them...
...simply because you disagree with their choices! News flash: I can love you, and disagree with your lifestyle; at the SAME TIME!
Brit here - unfortunately Cathy represents the old, mainly woke biased mainstream UK media which is slowly being replaced by new online media in the UK by channels such as GBN, talkTV, Tousi TV etc
One question that I have is this, what standard does an atheist have?
As Christians we have a standard. It's the Bible. We fall short of that standard every day, but we try to live up to it.
But what are atheists living for? Themselves? What is their standard to judge? Themselves? Their own goodness?
Their standard is personal preference. But if you are basing your personal preference on yourself then what if you make a mistake?
A true standard must be perfect for it to be true. But what if you make a mistake? What if your decision is flawed? What if it is erroneous?
Then, that which you choose to be good by your preference becomes bad. And that which you refused is good.
So my question is this, why wait until you die to figure out that you made a mistake? Why not test whether or not you are wrong right now? Rather than wait, until it's too late?
And if you are wrong right now, what do you have to loose? But what you will have to gain shall be far better.
In truth, Jesus did everything for me to grant me freedom at the Judgment day. He bore my hell for me on the Roman cross. So I have an escape plan that works if I make a mistake.
But an atheist, what is his escape plan when he has to stand before and perfect and Holy God who will judge him by the 10 Commandments at judgment day.
An atheist had no escape plan.
You are obviously delusional. Your standard is a book of mythology that requires you to be a slave to a genocidal manic. An atheists standard is for humanity’s well being.
The end is the same for us all. To return to nothingness. Your mythology created heaven and hell for you. The original book, the OT, clearly states that there is neither but a place that all souls go to. Your book of mythology can’t even keep its own story straight.
thanx, for the insight....
The intro of the book of 1 Maccabees is being replayed in real time 😢
I saw this live. What a moment!
Pointing out that one's actions can potentially hurt other people is only offensive to people who want to continue to hurt other people.
"So you are saying that..."
Amen, God is Love and His Word is Truth.
Critical theorists are unencumbered by rational thought.
She's an example of when emotions take over reason.
Jesus lives! ♥️ and is Yahweh God 🙏🏻 Christ ✝️ and King 👑
Thank you for putting so well into words what my mind has thought so many times: the obvious double standard of the opponents to Him
That is the typical response of hypocrites who don't seem self aware at all. A person of good character knows they are flawed and are slow to criticize others
You won't find many people with good character in Frank's target audience.
Why not?
Hahahahaha in my language Gek means Fool...You are doing your name proud.@@Gek177
That "interview" is the most valuable videos for true (spiritually maturing) Christians. Like Jesus did with the inferior close-minded, know-it-all Pharisees that tried to verbally trap him over and over again almost 2,000 years ago, Jordan did with Cathy. Jordan let Cathy paint herself in a corner, which she eventually did and her brain was basically temporarily melted and was speechless.
They stealing from God and sell it back to us claiming our God has no morals.
Peterson needs to step up before it's too late.
He can't say he believes in God. He's seeking works before believing seeking ideological
I would rather pay attention to who I inspire rather than who I offend.
That's a good strategy if you want to avoid having your views challenged.
When are you going to come to Torquay in South Devon UK?
I run a men's breakfast on the first Saturday of the month and you would be a real boost to this sleepy town of lovely people!!
I'll book you in for one month next year! :-) FREE HOLIDAY for you and the family!
Invite Frank to come to you here! crossexaminednc.wufoo.com/forms/m1odtc321nhluyc
Dan approves.
All non Christians must bow down to Jesus Christ the God and worship Him now!
no
I don't see the point in adhering to a god that hasn't been shown to exist. So no thank you.
You sound like a non-christian yourself. Take your own advice
@@albaraka7519 yes, we all have been wondering about that too 🧐 on the other hand, you believe there’s a gravity yet you never seen it, you believe you feel happy, sad or angry yet you don’t see the physical forms of them, you believe in microwave heat yet you never seen microwave electromagnetics, you mostly believe your own thoughts yet you never seen it even once. I’m not trying to convert you to become Christian, God gives you freewill to do and believe anything you want then who am i to oppose His Will 😄😄 but it’s worth to consider christianity. If you really really want to know about Him with all your heart, He will show up so you can see or feel His presence 😊😊😊😊😊
They’ll all eventually come to know Jesus. Be it either for a very short time or for all eternity……. I choose the later ✝️🙏
Topnotch
If you don't start none, there won't be none
Ha!
For a moment there I thought he was going to talk about christians complaining that they are being persecuted when the law stops them persecuting people.
congregation of hypocrites
Says an anti-humanity secularist that claims to care about people.
Why use it in relation to a Jordan Peterson interview, as it is and has been questionable if he is truly a Christian? Wiser would be with someone who is firmly known to be a Christian.
keeping ignorant, christians. your advasary doesn't want you to learn on pretext till it's to be on you.
Who are you to judge?
As usual i dont believe frank turek is portraying this interview correctly here so i will have to go watch this interview. And already started it and i can tell that what he has stated here isnt actually whats going on . But will need to watch the whole thing before anything further can be said on that. As for jordan pererson why anyone would listen to him is also beyond me as he has bern caught lying mutiple times on topics he knows nothing about and presenting himself as an authority on things. Hes had multiple interviews with other people and been shown to be lying or misrepresenting things in those interviews.
lol really now?
Do you actually have time to watch anything else besides Barbie n Ken and all those Pokémon shows, Bonesy?
@bucketmcpretty9786 yes. But hey just laugh. Im sure that's what your jesus would do.
@@TomMichael5678 got some deep seeded interests there lying narcissistic pos? Cause you bring that up all the time. I think you are obsessed.
Frank that's the quintessential atheist and left leaning person. 😊
What is?
You fall into a trap if you try to put every person into a box. Stereotypical thinking and false
@lawrenceeason8007 that's the pot calling the kettle black , seeing as that's what you do
@@larzman651give me an example where I’ve done that
@lawrenceeason8007 you put all Christians in the same box constantly. No different that all the places you have made comments. Your comments are directed at the majority.
Allowing women to vote was once a very controversial argument that offended many people.
Sorry Frank, I don't have enough evidence to be a Christian
Do you have evidence of the contrary?
Then you need to watch 'cold case Christianity' to see how an atheist police detective came from the same point of view you have, to what he believes today.
@@azoniarnl3362 Is that how proving something works?
@@paramaniacwolverine843 I am familiar with J. Warner Wallace. I do not find him convincing
@@azoniarnl3362Uhhh woman didn't come from a a man's rib, genius.
Frank Turek has also been lectured and humbled by many of his discussion partners recently.
He should not be too loud with his comments on a discussion that took place several years ago.
Ahh yes.... Only you are allowed an opinion... Kinda the whole point of this video... Thanks for proving Frank right! lol
@@darrendavenport3094 Aha, just wrong.
I just rewatched the part of the interview with the transgender exchange, and I think it is far less revealing than Dr. Turek tries to make out here. Ms. Newman is just doing her job as a journalist. It is her duty to be skeptical and ask uncomfortable questions, is it not? Regardless of whether these would fit her own views or biases.
There's a big difference between asking uncomfortable questions and twisting people's statements. Most people agree with the fact that she was continuously twisting his statements during that interview and being hypocritical on top of that.
@@cisuminocisumino3250 You said: _"There's a big difference between asking uncomfortable questions and twisting people's statements."_
No doubt there is. I did not see her "twisting" Dr. Peterson's statements though in the clip about transgenderism I saw.
You said: _"Most people agree with the fact that she was continuously twisting his statements during that interview and being hypocritical on top of that."_
I don't know who "most people" are. Dr. Peterson's statements are pretty opaque at the best of times, and this interview was no exception. Ms. Newman was probing around to get at what he really meant, but at least in the clip about transgenderism that I saw, I didn't think she was "twisting his statements" at all, or at least too blatantly.
As for her supposedly being hypocritical, I think that impression may be inherent in her job as interviewer. You need to play devil's advocate now and again in order to clarify the situation. It is not Ms. Newman's problem that some people experience trouble distinguishing between her personal opinions and her role as an interviewer. By the way, Dr. Peterson didn't seem to have any problem with that at all.
@@hansdemos6510 watch the full interview not just a specific clip on transgenderism, there are literally memes of her all over the internet in which she begins her "questions" with "so you're saying," and then she proceeds to misinterpret his statements multiple times. I agree, Peterson is very often unnecessarily vague and opaque, but in this instance Cathy Newman was simply either being dishonest or bad at her job.
@@cisuminocisumino3250 You said: _" watch the full interview not just a specific clip on transgenderism, ..."_
I am dealing with Dr. Turek's claims in this video, not with anything outside that.
You said: _" ...there are literally memes of her all over the internet in which she begins her "questions" with "so you're saying," and then she proceeds to misinterpret his statements multiple times."_
Perhaps there are, perhaps there aren't, that is of no concern to me in this comment.
You said: _"I agree, Peterson is very often unnecessarily vague and opaque, but in this instance Cathy Newman was simply either being dishonest or bad at her job."_
Not in the clip about transgenderism that Dr. Turek was talking about as far as i could see.
Can you clarify for me if it is your opinion that an interviewer should not ask questions from a standpoint they cannot identify with? Or do you agree that they might have to play devil's advocate sometimes?
@@hansdemos6510 There's nothing wrong with asking hard questions and playing devils advocate, but there's a difference between "playing devils advocate," and twisting people's statements in order to trap them into a narrative you've projected onto them.
That's why I encouraged you to watch the full interview, because it will become quite clear once you do that she wasn't playing devil's advocate, but rather she was trying to portray him a certain way.
You don't have any objective moral standard either Frank. You get your morals from the same place everyone else does.
Where?
@@strykervirus1724 We make them up. Sometimes individually, sometimes as a group, sometimes they are based on objective facts and sometimes based on the writings of goat herders from 2000 years ago. So - it varies.
@anguschiggins2161 So, it's just a bunch of opinions?
If God does not exist then you have no ground to support your morality my friend, after all what is considered right will always be the opinion of those who have more power, that is, the opinion of one man over that of others.
@@strykervirus1724 Sure, you can call it peoples opinions but it is more than that. Humans have made rules by consensus and decided what might constitute a crime. These are usually based on objective realities. For example, I don't like it when someone steals from me so I shouldn't steal from others and as a society we make it a crime to steal from others. We have also as a society decided upon punishments for such breakage of the rules.
I am hoping that none of what I am saying to you is new to you.
Moreover, in todays hugely complex world that we live in, there will likely never be rules that both protect everyone and be in alignment with what everyone thinks is right or moral. As usual with the ingenuity of the human race we strive to make it the best we can.
Wait, she might have offended him by asking why he thinks he can say things that might offend people? How would that offend him? Also am I supposed to just take your word for it that she said those things? she might have, I have no idea, but you just saying she said that doesn’t give me confidence that is what she actually said. Also no one is borrowing anything from God when they make moral claims. That’s just ridiculous.
Watch the interview than decide, Mr. Turek is correct.
What frank means by stealing morality from god is that to substantiate that someone is ever actually in the wrong , or doing something wrong requires you to believe that your moral claim holds some measure of objective truth to it, and that it isn't soley based on your opinion, or a group of opinions. Because if that's the case then there's never justification to call anyone wrong about anything, it just becomes you, or your group wanting to enforce your opinion on the world, not that there's any real objective reason what your saying is actually good, or that they said, or did was actually bad.
The issue with this In an athiestic premis is that there is no higher authority, or power, or force, or whatever that can assign objective moral weight to the moral abstract of the universe. In athiesm, morals are at best just an illusion cooked up by the meat computers in our heads that helped us survive at some point, or another. But there's no true real reason to obey them, or to call anything that said meat computer ever cooked up truely good, or truely evil. You can only ever have stuff you do, or don't like, and that's as far as it can go in athiesm.
@@anthonypolonkay2681 right, that isn’t true though. Even in Christianity, morality isn’t objective. Morality is always subjective to one thing or another. I’d say, having morality based on a god’s whims is less objective than what it is usually based on for atheists even if only because it can shift based on whatever action needs to be justified in the moment as it is in Christianity. Morals do not need to be objective to be followed and they are far from mere opinions. Atheists generally have better reason to at something is moral than theists because it is base on reason, usually, rather than a god’s whim.
@@nicholasemond1388 you don't seem to grasp the crux of the problem here. You can't justify any moral position if moral positions are functionally just opinions, and preference. Justification is the one thing no athiest can ever appeal to ,because per their own worldview, no such actual thing exists. Any supposed "justification" for any moral position you would expound in an athiestic world is nothing but a part of the same opinion that created the moral position that you are trying to justify. Justifucation by the very principle that it is requires objectivity. You can never have it from subjectivity. Because you cannot on one hand claim what you are trying to justify is right, and that those who do differently are not doing right (IE condemning murder, vs people who murder) and at the same breath claim it as merely a product of your own sociological machinations. Those two thoughts, and positions are logically antithetical to one another.
And as far as your "whims of a god" thing is concerned. I don't follow. Because on the premis that morality is an objective system of truth, of actual right, and actual wrong set by a creator god, that's no less objective than the phenomina of gravity said said creator god would have also been the reason for.
Under theistic pretenses, it may not always be possible to 100% know if you are in the right, or in the wrong, but you can actually appeal to justifucation unlike in athiesm, because if theism is true then its entirely possible, and even likly that morality was set by the same god that created everything else. And just as there's true north in a magnetic field, thered be true right in so far as moral compasses are concerned. You may not always be correct about where that is, but it at least exists in principle In theism
But if athiesm Is true you cannot appeal to justifications because all justifucation is, is just more of the opinion of the group, or individual, not something external that the person, or group I trying to use to vindicate why their moral position should be viewed as correct. Justifucation, under athiesm, can only ever be a means to an end sourced from the same subjectivity the moral position is sourced from.
It's like arguing It should be illegal to paint anything red because you think red is the worst color. Thats the totality of justification that can even I principle exist If athiesm is true.
@@anthonypolonkay2681 that’s the thing, there is no such thing as objective truth morally speaking. Saying something should be illegal because it is red is exactly what god does not the bible. Things are moral or immortal based on his opinions of those things. He makes something right or wrong, he defines what those things are mean, which means it is subjective to his preferences. Why does morality have to come from something outside of human thought? That’s all we seem to have in the first place. An atheist cane definitely says an action is immoral based whatever moral framework they choose. If I think it is wrong to kill an other human in cold blood I can base that believe on my reason and empathy. I don’t have to be murderer and I imagine neither do others. Society would be hindered by people killing others and therefore, it should be avoided. Who cares if it isn’t some intricacies truth of reality. Christianity can’t even claim that either, especially when it teaches murder is wrong, accept if the god says to do it, then it’s okay. For Christianity, morality is always based on whatever god wants to happen. That’s the definition of subjective. The main difference, is it is arbitrary with god, but not so with the atheist. Depending on how they came to their moral conclusion anyways. I don’t really understand what you mean by “appeal to justification”. Someone can have a justification for believing one thing or another and it is either good or not. Not sure why a god belief changes that one way or another.
Look…as long as there are no gods that are evident to exist atheism will stand on solid logical ground
Since there's only one God, Jesus Christ, atheism has no solid ground to stand on.
As you've previously stated atheism is essentially "empty content", what you're actually stating here is "empty content" will stand on solid logical ground?
@@solaceboyso you say. How do we know what you said here is true?
@@TomMichael5678I’m saying the position of atheism, which is unbelief in gods, stands on solid ground since no gods are evident to exist
@@lawrenceeason8007
So yes, your belief in atheism, which you've compared to "empty content", stands on solid ground!
So WHAT?
More importantly, who cares!