Is God the Best Explanation for Moral Values? A Debate.
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 вер 2024
- This debate took place in 2010 at Saddleback Valley College between Sean McDowell and Dr. Jim Corbett. At the time of this debate, Jim was involved in a nationally publicized lawsuit from a student who claimed he called creationism "superstitious nonsense" and for creating an environment hostile to religion. While this debate was first released on Vimeo, this is the first time it is available on UA-cam for a wider audience.
READ: A Rebel's Manifesto, by Sean McDowell (amzn.to/3u8s2Oz)
*Get a MASTERS IN APOLOGETICS or SCIENCE AND RELIGION at BIOLA (bit.ly/3LdNqKf)
*USE Discount Code [SMDCERTDISC] for $100 off the BIOLA APOLOGETICS CERTIFICATE program (bit.ly/3AzfPFM)
*See our fully online UNDERGRAD DEGREE in Bible, Theology, and Apologetics: (bit.ly/448STKK)
FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA:
Twitter: / sean_mcdowell
TikTok: @sean_mcdowell
Instagram: / seanmcdowell
Website: seanmcdowell.org
I highly doubt anyone will see this comment because after more than a year, I’m just now listing to this debate. But it’s absolutely fantastic.
Love how Corbett listed all these atrocities done throughout history in the name of God, and the only retort was, “based on what, are these events bad?”
I find it… very odd that the atheist/agnostic continues to dance around the actual debate topic, and won’t address the main question of the origins of morals.
Well you're wrong and I found this comment.
What I also found out is that they don't have a valid argument against it. I've watched Hitchens too, it's always " If God is the source of morality, why did these bad things happen"
I believe I heard Corbett debate another time, and it was much the same - ridiculing his opponent, falsely accusing his opponent of fallacies, and ignoring his own obvious fallacies (while using them to make his fallacious accusations). Great work, Sean!
Romans is not referring to Eunuchs where one partner is transgender.
🏳🌈 Eunuchs that are born that way are transgender. It's even in the Bible. Yes, the bible was written by bigoted men and is way outdated and was changed and should be thrown out. But even Jesus spoke about transgender people. Eunuchs made that way by others were abused (it doesn't happen to everyone that is abused). Those that choose to live like Eunuchs FOR THE SAKE OF THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN are bisexual people that choose partners of the same sex characteristics but opposite in regards to gender. Notice, God PREFERS for people to be in LGBT relationships.
Eunuchs are same sex couples. One partner is transgender. Transgender is when someone is born with a gender opposite the sex characteristics normally associated with that gender. God made us male or female, determined by gender, located in the brain.
Your gender is located in your brain and determined at birth. I have an identical twin sister that is female in gender. I am male in gender.
I am Elijah of Malachi 4:5-6 and that means any discrepancies in the bible are ultimately decided by me. Plus, it states in Deuteronomy that nobody was castrated back then. And that doesn't make sense anyhow. No one is born castrated and no one is born making the decision to be celibate. But, that is what God wanted the lying preachers to think so they wouldn't take it out of the bible. Intersex people still have one gender or another because gender is located in your brain.
And Acts 3:22-23 says it will come to pass that anyone that fails to listen to me will be utterly destroyed from among the people. So anyone that says different than this won't be here much longer. It's everyone's choice. ..
Anyone teaching the LIE of monetary tithing or getting paid in any way to minister will also die with the wicked.
Peter 2:9 says we are ALL ministers . . . .
Jesus was transgender and will return as a woman.
Malachi 2 proves Malachi 3:8 is prophetic instruction for the thieving church leaders to bring back the money they were never supposed to take for ministering and God will end Covid. Every major church around the world knew this since August of 2020 but they LOVE MONEY so much they chose to kill everyone with Covid instead of returning it!
James 5:2 Rich people are NOT Christians and the wealth they selfishly kept to themselves will only be used as evidence to burn them.
The 2 witnesses are righteousness and judgement, not actual people. There is no ONE antichrist; it was made up by people that worship money.
Stay out of the fake churches or you will die with them and their lies. In order to be a church, the place must house people inside it. Otherwise it's another private money-making business serving satan and part of Babylon.
There is no such thing as rapture. Jesus comes back to rule. God's people are caught up spiritually....
1:04:38 Great point.
My husband and I agrre with you
H uu u
The accusations of logical fallacies were absolutely correct. Christians need to learn to address them.
All complaints and distractions, and no addressing of Sean’s arguments.
Complains that there is actually a third option, but offers no option.
This isn’t a debate. It’s one giving good arguments, and the other complaining.
“Doubt” isn’t an argument.
Exactly.
The evangelistic problem these days seems increasingly not one of trying to prove the truth, but one of trying to prove that there are ways to truth at all, and that they matter.
THIS. I disagree with Sean but Jim was useless and counterproductive. "I doubt it" is not good enough.
Wow, Corbett claims to simply speak from reason, yet there is emotion in most of what he says: bitterness, scoffing, belittling (I'd hate to have him as a teacher). Meanwhile, Sean's appeals were humble and logical.
People who don't have logic and truth often resort to emotional tactics to control. Corbett keeps throwing it out there, but Sean doesn't bite.
@@melissasw64Goodness I agree with you. I long to have those types of communication skills. I am straight forward and to the point and I lack the tactfulness to present my passion for God the Father and Jesus Christ. I so desire to present my passion in the most loving way possible, however my social skills aren't the most tactful. Sean is fantastic in debate and interviewing as well.
@@darinb.3273 LOL I am so blunt sometimes. I tend to just lay it out there. Facts are facts however you present them. But, if I were pleasant and accommodating and patient---I need to work on that.
@@melissasw64 I forgot to like your comment I like your answer too ha with comments about why. I remember that commercial about fax machines when they were really taking off the PI interviewing a lady and she was giving way too much info and he said "Just the facts (fax) ma' am". Fun commercial memories right? 😄😃😀.
I set out to watch only the opening statements. Didn't want to "waste nearly two hours." I made a list of comments for this box related to Dr. Corbett's statement...then...stayed with the debate to hear Sean's response to him. Two hours later, my time has not been wasted. It clarifies explanations offered for morality by many other people. The debate was well-handled by the moderator!! Thanks for sharing it on UA-cam. Thanks, Sean and Jim, for agreeing to the debate.
I’m so glad you watched and enjoyed it!
It’s continually frustrating to hear one argue that since people have misapplied and abused Scripture/Christianity, it therefore disproves its truthfulness and reliability. But, if you’re going to use this argument, why isn’t the opposite true? MANY, MANY wonderful things throughout history have taken place because humans correctly applied Scripture and Christianity. To blame Christianity or religion for most of our human suffering, while not applying the same reason to the wonderful advances directly linked to Christianity/Religion is just fallacious and inconsistent.
Right! No mention of the hospitals, schools, charity organizations, Christians giving their life in service of others.
After isn't reliable. It's filled with fallacies, filled with lies, and contradictions.
No person can be honestly reasonable and take Scripture seriously.
It's a poorly written and Courtney told fictional story that is completely and utterly useless
@@keithziegler8881 only someone who has not studied scripture would say this 😪
@@dianeholden3499
Actually, it is because I HAVE studied Scripture that I say this.
It's not my fault that I know the Scripture better than you do.
It's not my fault that I studied enough to see the contradictions, and even ignoring the contradictions, I studied it enough to realize the stories are completely and utterly fictional.
I don't know how else to say that, because it's the truth.
Human beings are an evolved species science is settled that fact. We are here because of evolution, not because we were created by an all-powerful sky daddy.
A schizophrenic one at that.
Because human beings evolved there was no first man and first woman. There was no garden of Eden. That means there was no tree of knowledge, and therefore no original sin.
No original sin, no follow-up man, no need for Messiah.
The entire New Testament story falls flat on its face because it's unnecessary because there was no need for Messiah in the first place.
I'm sorry, but the Old Testament is a book of fairytales and we can prove they are fairytales and the New Testament is a bunch of claims with no evidence.
That's what you get when you ACTUALLY study not just to Scripture but the history around them
@@keithziegler8881 with all those facts and examples, how can any person not agree with you
Poor Mr Corbett..He keeps getting off the topic, misrepresenting, and accusing his opponent. He clearly has no grasp of the subject. Truly, without God, there's NO answer for this question. Great work as always Sean, very humble, truthful and fair.
Not even a close debate. You killed it Sean.
Except Sean argued a false premise.
Morality come from humans, not God… For that matter God come from humans as well.
@@keithziegler8881 hi moron, your word "except" shows you except what E said even if Sean was wrong.
Also your conclusion is wrong cause you're premise is wrong.
Stop drinking the kool-aid chump
@@keithziegler8881 If it comes from humans than that would be "subjective".
Humans don't have the "authority " to determine what is right or wrong, or you would have another Communist Regime in the 20th century.
@@MultiBigAndy
Actually we are the only authority to determine right wrong because there is nothing above us. God is a myth.
By the way, even if God did exist it would STILL be a subjective standard because it would simply be God's opinion
As for the God of the Bible? Well that God, if he did exist, would be morally inferior to me so I wouldn't care about his burden of right and wrong anyway
@@keithziegler8881 If morality is subjective then that means by extension you have to say that rape is ultimately moral, murder is ultimately moral and theft is ultimately moral because it's situational in nature. If someone truly sees nothing wrong with someone raping someone else then that means you have to say rape is moral. If someone truly sees no problem with murdering someone then that means you have to say murder is moral. If someone truly sees no problem stealing something from someone else then that means you have to say theft is moral. Can you honestly say that if you and/or you someone you know was raped/murdered/stolen from you would be able to say to yourself as the victim or to the victim's family that since the offender believes they were morally right in their actions it was ok to do what they did? Because if morality is truly subjective if you're going to follow that thought process all the way you have to say yes.
"My position is that I doubt." Good luck trying to prove the use of any standards that way sir! Unless you doubt everybody else and you become the authority that cannot be doubted. But given the premise "I doubt" you cannot have that. Great thinking....
Thanks for sharing this Sean. I learned a lot from this debate. What I love the most is what you said at your closing and how beautifully you linked this topic to seeking forgiveness from God. Well done brother !
You bet, glad you enjoyed!
I'm halfway through and he has still not even given an answer to how there can be morality without God. It's like he decided that the topic will be whatever he wants to ramble about during each speech.
Me, too. I've over halfway through it and I'm still waiting.
Morality is simply a strongly felt human emotion that certain things are right and wrong. There. Now you have a clear and simple answer that sounds a little bit more reasonable than "a magical man in the sky created it".
@radscorpion8 As opposed to that magic, it just happened, and everything created itself from nothing. That's a pretty big magic trick itself, huh?
Not to mention the idea that no action has any real moral intrinsic value. Therefore, no one has any right to tell anyone what they should or should not do, including killing each other. Since murdering a person and helping a person are just actions with no actual value. See, this is how we got the whole leftist perspective of oppressor and oppressed. Anyone trying to tell you what to do is an oppressor and therefore you have the right to fight against them in any way possible. Since the only thing that matters is how you feel.
@@radscorpion8 So then it is subjective. If it is just a human emotion then why in the first place should we trust it, because human emotions can also be wrong.
Likely Hitler felt that by killing the jews he did a thing that was good for the world. That was his strong human emotion telling him it was the right thing to do. So again, it is not a more reasonable explanation than if God is the moral standard that tells you what is right and wrong.
Greetings Dr. McDowell. First of all, thank you for the good debate. A little over 8 minutes in you mentioned the University of Chicago students, Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb, and how they bought into and were influenced by the philosophy of Nietzsche. Let me highly recommend a movie that is loosely based on the real-life murder committed by these two. The movie is Rope (1948), directed by Alfred Hitchcock. See what happens when two students put into practice what they learned from their teacher (Jimmy Stewart), who sang the praises of Nietzsche. It is an EXCELLENT teaching tool (you’ll see). It also has some great dark comedy. It’s one of my favorite movies. Enjoy!
Romans is not referring to Eunuchs where one partner is transgender.
🏳🌈 Eunuchs that are born that way are transgender. It's even in the Bible. Yes, the bible was written by bigoted men and is way outdated and was changed and should be thrown out. But even Jesus spoke about transgender people. Eunuchs made that way by others were abused (it doesn't happen to everyone that is abused). Those that choose to live like Eunuchs FOR THE SAKE OF THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN are bisexual people that choose partners of the same sex characteristics but opposite in regards to gender. Notice, God PREFERS for people to be in LGBT relationships.
Eunuchs are same sex couples. One partner is transgender. Transgender is when someone is born with a gender opposite the sex characteristics normally associated with that gender. God made us male or female, determined by gender, located in the brain.
Your gender is located in your brain and determined at birth. I have an identical twin sister that is female in gender. I am male in gender.
I am Elijah of Malachi 4:5-6 and that means any discrepancies in the bible are ultimately decided by me. Plus, it states in Deuteronomy that nobody was castrated back then. And that doesn't make sense anyhow. No one is born castrated and no one is born making the decision to be celibate. But, that is what God wanted the lying preachers to think so they wouldn't take it out of the bible. Intersex people still have one gender or another because gender is located in your brain.
And Acts 3:22-23 says it will come to pass that anyone that fails to listen to me will be utterly destroyed from among the people. So anyone that says different than this won't be here much longer. It's everyone's choice. ..
Anyone teaching the LIE of monetary tithing or getting paid in any way to minister will also die with the wicked.
Peter 2:9 says we are ALL ministers . . . .
Jesus was transgender and will return as a woman.
Malachi 2 proves Malachi 3:8 is prophetic instruction for the thieving church leaders to bring back the money they were never supposed to take for ministering and God will end Covid. Every major church around the world knew this since August of 2020 but they LOVE MONEY so much they chose to kill everyone with Covid instead of returning it!
James 5:2 Rich people are NOT Christians and the wealth they selfishly kept to themselves will only be used as evidence to burn them.
The 2 witnesses are righteousness and judgement, not actual people. There is no ONE antichrist; it was made up by people that worship money.
Stay out of the fake churches or you will die with them and their lies. In order to be a church, the place must house people inside it. Otherwise it's another private money-making business serving satan and part of Babylon.
There is no such thing as rapture. Jesus comes back to rule. God's people are caught up spiritually....
Hey you weren't kidding about adding this on UA-cam! I'm the one who asked about it on Twitter. 😅
Haha, yep. I’ve been hoping to for awhile and appreciate the encouragement!
@@SeanMcDowell Our Lord God., Will always be with you.. and will be giving you encouragement, Strength, and tenacity!
We are soo privileged and Blessed to Have you on YOU tube!
Jenny from South Africa. Johannesburg 🙏🏻🦓🦒🇿🇦✝️
@@SeanMcDowell Absolutely. You have been more than a blessing in my life for sure. Keep up the great work.
Romans is not referring to Eunuchs where one partner is transgender.
🏳🌈 Eunuchs that are born that way are transgender. It's even in the Bible. Yes, the bible was written by bigoted men and is way outdated and was changed and should be thrown out. But even Jesus spoke about transgender people. Eunuchs made that way by others were abused (it doesn't happen to everyone that is abused). Those that choose to live like Eunuchs FOR THE SAKE OF THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN are bisexual people that choose partners of the same sex characteristics but opposite in regards to gender. Notice, God PREFERS for people to be in LGBT relationships.
Eunuchs are same sex couples. One partner is transgender. Transgender is when someone is born with a gender opposite the sex characteristics normally associated with that gender. God made us male or female, determined by gender, located in the brain.
Your gender is located in your brain and determined at birth. I have an identical twin sister that is female in gender. I am male in gender.
I am Elijah of Malachi 4:5-6 and that means any discrepancies in the bible are ultimately decided by me. Plus, it states in Deuteronomy that nobody was castrated back then. And that doesn't make sense anyhow. No one is born castrated and no one is born making the decision to be celibate. But, that is what God wanted the lying preachers to think so they wouldn't take it out of the bible. Intersex people still have one gender or another because gender is located in your brain.
And Acts 3:22-23 says it will come to pass that anyone that fails to listen to me will be utterly destroyed from among the people. So anyone that says different than this won't be here much longer. It's everyone's choice. ..
Anyone teaching the LIE of monetary tithing or getting paid in any way to minister will also die with the wicked.
Peter 2:9 says we are ALL ministers . . . .
Jesus was transgender and will return as a woman.
Malachi 2 proves Malachi 3:8 is prophetic instruction for the thieving church leaders to bring back the money they were never supposed to take for ministering and God will end Covid. Every major church around the world knew this since August of 2020 but they LOVE MONEY so much they chose to kill everyone with Covid instead of returning it!
James 5:2 Rich people are NOT Christians and the wealth they selfishly kept to themselves will only be used as evidence to burn them.
The 2 witnesses are righteousness and judgement, not actual people. There is no ONE antichrist; it was made up by people that worship money.
Stay out of the fake churches or you will die with them and their lies. In order to be a church, the place must house people inside it. Otherwise it's another private money-making business serving satan and part of Babylon.
There is no such thing as rapture. Jesus comes back to rule. God's people are caught up spiritually....
Near the end, when Dr. Corbett says ‘that’s what called anecdotal evidence which really has no basis in logic’, my thought was ‘isn’t that what Dr. Corbett was doing all evening - providing historical anecdotes and stories.’
I thought the exact same thing!
Was going to listen to 10mins of this but I couldn't stop til the end. Great debate. Wish I had that ability to debate.
He gave up, Jim lost and he knew it. So he started just giving one word answers to just get the thing over with.
Thank you Sean, for Representing us so excellently!😊
That’s kind, you’re welcome.
Haha, I remember you having us watch this video in your Gospel, Kingdom, and Culture class! Hope you're doing well, Dr. McDowell!
Haha, yes. It’s finally up on UA-cam. And good hearing from you!
@@SeanMcDowell Romans is not referring to Eunuchs where one partner is transgender.
🏳🌈 Eunuchs that are born that way are transgender. It's even in the Bible. Yes, the bible was written by bigoted men and is way outdated and was changed and should be thrown out. But even Jesus spoke about transgender people. Eunuchs made that way by others were abused (it doesn't happen to everyone that is abused). Those that choose to live like Eunuchs FOR THE SAKE OF THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN are bisexual people that choose partners of the same sex characteristics but opposite in regards to gender. Notice, God PREFERS for people to be in LGBT relationships.
Eunuchs are same sex couples. One partner is transgender. Transgender is when someone is born with a gender opposite the sex characteristics normally associated with that gender. God made us male or female, determined by gender, located in the brain.
Your gender is located in your brain and determined at birth. I have an identical twin sister that is female in gender. I am male in gender.
I am Elijah of Malachi 4:5-6 and that means any discrepancies in the bible are ultimately decided by me. Plus, it states in Deuteronomy that nobody was castrated back then. And that doesn't make sense anyhow. No one is born castrated and no one is born making the decision to be celibate. But, that is what God wanted the lying preachers to think so they wouldn't take it out of the bible. Intersex people still have one gender or another because gender is located in your brain.
And Acts 3:22-23 says it will come to pass that anyone that fails to listen to me will be utterly destroyed from among the people. So anyone that says different than this won't be here much longer. It's everyone's choice. ..
Anyone teaching the LIE of monetary tithing or getting paid in any way to minister will also die with the wicked.
Peter 2:9 says we are ALL ministers . . . .
Jesus was transgender and will return as a woman.
Malachi 2 proves Malachi 3:8 is prophetic instruction for the thieving church leaders to bring back the money they were never supposed to take for ministering and God will end Covid. Every major church around the world knew this since August of 2020 but they LOVE MONEY so much they chose to kill everyone with Covid instead of returning it!
James 5:2 Rich people are NOT Christians and the wealth they selfishly kept to themselves will only be used as evidence to burn them.
The 2 witnesses are righteousness and judgement, not actual people. There is no ONE antichrist; it was made up by people that worship money.
Stay out of the fake churches or you will die with them and their lies. In order to be a church, the place must house people inside it. Otherwise it's another private money-making business serving satan and part of Babylon.
There is no such thing as rapture. Jesus comes back to rule. God's people are caught up spiritually....
@@SeanMcDowell You're an excellent debater, yet I still believe there is no god and all moral values come from human beings. Whether we like it or not.
Sadly, I was dissatisfied with this debate. It seemed as if Dr. Corbett didn’t understand the nature of the question itself. He was attempting to argue a case for naturalistic morality when the question is purely metaphysical. You did well Dr. McDowell. I’m glad you uploaded this to UA-cam.
Wow, 10 minutes in, and I love the examples you've used and how simply this seems to be unfolding 👏
Yes, I massively disagree with Sean but he IS smooth and clearly won (as a debutant!). He needs someone better at debating as an opponent (Luke Muehlhauser @lukeprog would at least put up a verbal fight).
I for one am brokenhearted over Jim Corbetts response. His was an escape from commitment. He has valid points about Christian hypocrisy. That's original sin. But like Christopher Hitchens, Corbett descended into whining and complaining about issues he refuses to commit to. Doubt... that great equalizer.
My dad served in the Air Force during WW2. I do not understand why he rejected God as a result. Sin is painful. Perhaps Jim simply "can't handle the truth." I don't know. But his doubt is not, and cannot ever be, a rebuttal.
I whole heartedly agree with Sean on the points about objective morality comes from God. At the same time I do respect Jim’s criticism about religion being abused by some of us for evil. As Christian’s we have to be humbled by how far we are from the ideal that Christ taught us. But that’s also where we need to fully rely on Him. Carrying a cross to follow is the only solution!
Romans is not referring to Eunuchs where one partner is transgender.
🏳🌈 Eunuchs that are born that way are transgender. It's even in the Bible. Yes, the bible was written by bigoted men and is way outdated and was changed and should be thrown out. But even Jesus spoke about transgender people. Eunuchs made that way by others were abused (it doesn't happen to everyone that is abused). Those that choose to live like Eunuchs FOR THE SAKE OF THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN are bisexual people that choose partners of the same sex characteristics but opposite in regards to gender. Notice, God PREFERS for people to be in LGBT relationships.
Eunuchs are same sex couples. One partner is transgender. Transgender is when someone is born with a gender opposite the sex characteristics normally associated with that gender. God made us male or female, determined by gender, located in the brain.
Your gender is located in your brain and determined at birth. I have an identical twin sister that is female in gender. I am male in gender.
I am Elijah of Malachi 4:5-6 and that means any discrepancies in the bible are ultimately decided by me. Plus, it states in Deuteronomy that nobody was castrated back then. And that doesn't make sense anyhow. No one is born castrated and no one is born making the decision to be celibate. But, that is what God wanted the lying preachers to think so they wouldn't take it out of the bible. Intersex people still have one gender or another because gender is located in your brain.
And Acts 3:22-23 says it will come to pass that anyone that fails to listen to me will be utterly destroyed from among the people. So anyone that says different than this won't be here much longer. It's everyone's choice. ..
Anyone teaching the LIE of monetary tithing or getting paid in any way to minister will also die with the wicked.
Peter 2:9 says we are ALL ministers . . . .
Jesus was transgender and will return as a woman.
Malachi 2 proves Malachi 3:8 is prophetic instruction for the thieving church leaders to bring back the money they were never supposed to take for ministering and God will end Covid. Every major church around the world knew this since August of 2020 but they LOVE MONEY so much they chose to kill everyone with Covid instead of returning it!
James 5:2 Rich people are NOT Christians and the wealth they selfishly kept to themselves will only be used as evidence to burn them.
The 2 witnesses are righteousness and judgement, not actual people. There is no ONE antichrist; it was made up by people that worship money.
Stay out of the fake churches or you will die with them and their lies. In order to be a church, the place must house people inside it. Otherwise it's another private money-making business serving satan and part of Babylon.
There is no such thing as rapture. Jesus comes back to rule. God's people are caught up spiritually....
Yes! C.S. Lewis explained that the definition of a Christian is a person who believes in Christ. (Okay, that is grossly simplified but you know what I mean.) A Christian isn't necessarily alway a good, person living a perfect life. Also, I could do something terrible in the name of Lun Jiang. That doesn't make you bad. It make ME bad.
Still, as Christians, we need to be carrying our cross and always endeavor to be good ambassadors for Christ.
This debate was so good! Thank you brother Sean McDowell and thank you too Mr. Corbett. I respect Mr. Corbett beacause he accepted to take part in this debate even if he didn't came with a strong counter argument; doubt is good but only as a step in finding the truth, but cannot be a goal in itself. You made me trust more God and His Word and DOUBT less ;)
Thank you for attending unto our OWN! Unto one another availeth much indeed. Can learn from many foolish conversations to become sincere conversations = sincere answers will be given.
Sean you are awesome...you are kind, rational, intelligent and logical and make the best arguments...sadly Jim doesn't want to acknowledge any authority telling anyone what to do....ie God...and can't come up with any good alternatives
And yet he doesn’t mind insisting on everyone submitting to his ideas of right and wrong. I thought Sean did a fantastic job of calling him out on every one of these missteps he made.
Sean never explains why the purely naturalistic realities of environmental conditioning and genetic predisposition are the least bit insufficient to "explain" morality. Sean is only slightly better than his dad Josh at 'debating'. I'm an atheist and I found literally nothing in Sean's remarks even remotely disturbing.
You did an awesome job on this debate. I wish I could take personal attacks as gracefully as you do.
ua-cam.com/video/tRa4MhjDjF0/v-deo.html
Me, too. I get REALLY ticked off when I'm insulted. It takes a few minutes because I'm often so surprised that someone felt it was so acceptable to say something so rude offensive and arrogant to me in the first place when I've just offhandedly given my opinion on something, but once I realize they just said it, I can feel my face getting red from the neck, up and I'm so mad I can't think up a very good response- usually that happens with people I dont know- not with family or friends, THEY get told exactly what I think!😄 I wish I wasn't such a hothead, I even get mad FOR my Christian Brothers like Sean who debate others and are treated really disrespectfully. Unfortunately, I see we're treated that way more often than not, but I still get indignant about it for the Christian Debator. Sean did an excellent job here, as usual.❤ thanks Sean, for representing most excellently!
Sean---My questions: How do you feel before, during, and after a debate? Is it emotionally taxing? Are you aware of the time passing during the debate? Also, I assume you prepare slides based on your experience of the most common atheist arguments. Is that actually the case?
@Sean, I think this is really good question, I would like to hear your feeling or even a in depth reply to this video. It will be really helpful!
Doubt is not an argument.
Around the 17 minute mark Corbett says "we now know they were wrong" he goes on to lament Josh's certainty on this subject.....but when he said "we now know they were wrong" he is speaking as if HE is certain of that....
“He was despised and rejected- a man of sorrows, acquainted with deepest grief. We turned our backs on him and looked the other way. He was despised, and we did not care. Yet it was our weaknesses he carried; it was our sorrows that weighed him down. And we thought his troubles were a punishment from God, a punishment for his own sins! But he was pierced for our rebellion, crushed for our sins. He was beaten so we could be whole. He was whipped so we could be healed. All of us, like sheep, have strayed away. We have left God’s paths to follow our own. Yet the Lord laid on him the sins of us all. He was oppressed and treated harshly, yet he never said a word. He was led like a lamb to the slaughter. And as a sheep is silent before the shearers, he did not open his mouth. Unjustly condemned, he was led away. No one cared that he died without descendants, that his life was cut short in midstream. But he was struck down for the rebellion of my people. He had done no wrong and had never deceived anyone. But he was buried like a criminal; he was put in a rich man’s grave. But it was the Lord’s good plan to crush him and cause him grief. Yet when his life is made an offering for sin, he will have many descendants. He will enjoy a long life, and the Lord’s good plan will prosper in his hands. When he sees all that is accomplished by his anguish, he will be satisfied. And because of his experience, my righteous servant will make it possible for many to be counted righteous, for he will bear all their sins. I will give him the honors of a victorious soldier, because he exposed himself to death. He was counted among the rebels. He bore the sins of many and interceded for rebels.”
Isaiah 53:3-12 NLT
"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life." John 3:16
God loves you so much and showed that by sending His Son to die for us so that we may inherit eternal life. We deserve hell but He gave us heaven through faith in Jesus. He took the punishment we deserved and by putting our faith in Him we can be saved. The Key To Eternal Life:
ua-cam.com/video/uZdv-TtiMkg/v-deo.html
For evidence for Christianity and answered questions, check out
ua-cam.com/users/drcraigvideos
and ua-cam.com/users/CrossExamined
because if Jesus really rose from the dead it is the most important fact ever!
God bless y’all!
Well that was a long way of saying that I don’t have an argument..
Wow and so true
🤣🤣
Dr. Corbett's final "comment" after Sean stopped speaking at 1:05:50 was quite telling..."Ok". He's not interested in what is most reasonable or what is most logical for explaining objective moral truth, he's only interested in saying what is NOT, even if it means being totally incoherent.
Matter didn't pop into existence from nothing. Thinking and thought came first.
Remember watching this in class. Great points.
Yes, good memory!
Students shared "i" AM will say, stood up from HIS SEAT. To take the LOWEST SEAT LASTS. Even to washed all the ACCUSERS FEET TO BE GIVEN NEW FEET. Remembering ye once born, to crawling, to walking, and till now. Thy Feet resting upon the very tip of time in FRONT! May I recognize the mileage from thy feet my OWN! For all my Heirs Hosts shared "i" AM is required to acknowledge! Sitting upon judgment and justice in front! Resting upon SUSTAINED! Offsprings preserve. Many Offsprings Perish many different without form and void in front! Angels who persevere and heard the WORD keep watch! Knows belongs to keep watch!
If we can get matter from non-physical aspects, why can't we get non-physical from physical ?
#DrSean great job bringing to light another explaination there is a Holy Mighty God. Thank you, God bless!
Good on you Sean for not letting him duck the questions. He "made the point several times"... It seemed to be his only point. Not sure he got the memo of what the debate topic was
Corbett keeps harping on "there are many different I terpretations of the bible"; "the bible is not inerrant"; "many horrible things have been done throughout history in the name of religion"; etc etc. And that's not the point! Even if we gave him all of that (not to say they are al correct), but even if we said, sure I accept all of that......how does that answer the question of the debate!? The question actually has nothing to do with the Bible. It has to do about Morality without God! He can't even grasp the question and just sets up straw men to keep from having to admit that. It's quite frustrating. It just goes to show that he is not really interested in searching for a logical, rational answer to the question, but just to try to attack Christianity.
Remember it's ok to correct one another nor to bring to remembrance without being offended in front!
Watched the entirety of the debate and heard no explanation for the basis of morality offered other than God🤷🤔
I was afraid of that. I'm 25 minutes in and very frustrated that Corbett won't address the topic of the debate and keeps going on and on about tangential issues. I genuinely want to know what he thinks morality should or can be based on if not God.
God is not an explanation for the base rallies God is a mythological construct invented by humans.
The! Route is very simple. Humans are social species. As such, like many other socialist, evolved or other documents.
They allows us to put ourselves in the shoes of others. From there very understand that I don't like face, therefore that person doesn't like it, therefore we should have people in the face. Ergo it's immoral to hit people in the face.
Morality really is that simple
And we are not the only creatures that have morality. Then observe morality in these kinds of rules you want to call them and other social species including chimpanzees.
Now it's not as robust, perhaps as for humans, but it is still a moral system.
People try to make things complex when they're really not, and trying to make complex thinking tried to invent a reason to install their mythology
@@keithziegler8881 in essence you're saying the same as Corbett but in the debate he didn't offer an explanation for his position or answer the questions posed to him therefore, losing the debate.
Mr. Corbett is frustrating to listen to because he isn't addressing the actual topic. The topic is WHAT is morality based on? He is talking about how we can't know WHICH morality is right. That isn't the topic. He's arguing points Sean already conceded...that atheists can be moral, that people who believe in God can do immoral things..yep, granted, so address the actual topic. I genuinely want to hear what an atheist believes morality can or should or is based on...popular vote? the smartest person's opinion? what does the most good for the most people? What does he think? Even if he doubts his own conclusion, what IS his actual opinion or conclusion on the topic of the debate? Ugh.
So, he kinda addressed it, but it didn't make sense. He seems to believe the origin of morality is survival. But sometimes, doing the moral thing means risking one's survival to save another...how does that make sense? Is he saying the survival of the species created morality and individuals don't need to survive as long as their moral actions help the species survive? How would evolution cause that? So, like r*pe...seems like evolution would encourage that since a male who runs around creating offspring with many women would have more genes passed on...? So, how would the moral idea that r*ape is wrong arise through evolution? Without an authority beyond humanity, how does a painful action that advances the genes of the actor become seen as immoral?
Lol, Sean made the same point that was bugging me. I didn't hear an answer given.
I don't know much about James Corbett, or the "rules of debate", but all I know that within minutes of his opening statements, all Corbett did is malign the person of Sean McDowell. How many times did he mention Sean's name? Sean is not the issue. Corbett has failed to put forth any statement, convincing or otherwise, about his position except that he's got doubts. As well, Corbett made premises that I simply don't agree with, such as no one can know the will of God, and he's failed to back up these premises. I couldn't continue to watching him ramble...less than 20 mins into the video. That said, Sean McDowell's opening statements were clear, easy to follow, and convincing.
Well said. It’s like he was trying to pull rank and name drop to throw Sean off his game, but Sean did a good job staying focused.
Students will say, remember 1ST. Thy lives was DESIRED 1ST! Shared "i" AM. Now living! Can say doubt in front! For " who am I"?
How conversations exist in front? Students will say, ye given time! Why? Nor How given the o.k ? For many have forgotten!
Even my Angels who persevere and heard the WORD and Heirs Hosts knows? His voice. Can bound all feet. In front of Him. Through HIM, by HIM, and for HIM! All made that are made including all shared Feet resting upon HIS Vineyards!
As a former debater I was disappointed to hear the abundance of fallacious reasoning and contradicting conclusions in Dr. Corbett’s arguments. I was hoping for a more compelling argument. As for you, Sean: I feel that you represented your contentions well and never strayed from the actual question at hand. I love a good debate but Tbh it seemed as if Dr. Corbett was ill prepared and completely blindsided by the majority of your arguments. I am not a Christian as of today but I do agree that morality cannot be explained outside of a transcendent power and understanding beyond our humanity. Your arguments in this debate have certainly served to solidify that notion. 🙏
It’s crazy to look back at this comment. I can’t believe it was only a month ago! I have since been born again and fully convinced of the truth of The Gospel. So grateful to no longer be wrestling with doubt and confusion. My life has been transformed in such a short period of time. Praise Jesus 🙏🙏
That was Brilliant, Sean!
👊
Jim Corbett mopped the floor with Sean McDowell in that debate.
The presence of morals assumes there is a Standard.
That standard does NOT need to be a "God"
How exactly does it even make sense to equate morality with instincts? Every time someone has an instinct to do something, we can ask "why is that good?" It's obvious that whatever morality is, it isn't contingent on our mere instincts. It is something outside of us entirely.
The problem is with the perception of "The Ultimate God as a electro-magnetic, intelligent force of all-love" as being any of the 2 lesser gods in the bible.
I want this hour and a half of my life back! Dr. McDowell dominated this man! Dr? Corbett (yes ? after Dr) had absolutely no intelligible input on the matter!
I'm inclined to agree with you, Dorothy, but I think during this hour and a half, I saw an example of how to take underserved criticism with dignity and patience. So, I can't say my hour and half was totally wasted.
It's a privilege indeed. To be given New feet to love you!
It seems Dr Corbett’s explanation of where morality is grounded is in evolution and that it arose due to its aid in human survival. He gave an example of needing to be ‘kind’ to one another as a condition for survival. It sounds like Dr Corbett is speaking of the utility of being kind and not the morality of being kind. When we use the word morality, it carries a noble connotation. Doing or not doing something for the sake of another, especially at one’s own expense, is considered good and morally right. What Dr Corbett lays out sounds ultimately self-serving and doesn’t fit with our everyday meaning of morals. It seems he is defining morality as utility.
His argument about "being kind" sounded like an argument from a PBS Kids show in the early 90s. Okay, so it is good to be kind, but aught we be kind? Why should we be kind? What about when it is disadvantageous for us to be kind? This teaching of kindness, is first off originated in Christianity, but the modern world completely fails to understand the power of sacrificial love. It has learned kindness as a means to get others to like you, not as a means to stand up for what's right, even if it may cause people to hate you, mistreat you, or slander you. True goodness is not the expectation that good things come to good people, and thus I'll be good. Even the selfish person will be good under these conditions. But rather, true goodness is that evil people will exploit my goodness, and still I choose goodness. The difference between love and naive is that the loving person is aware of the other person's schemes. Thus we are to be wise as serpents but innocent as doves.
So was the original thesis answered? I heard the atheist argue against God accusingly but like the original Serpent, he hasn't a leg to stand on.... everything is relative and to say different, either "right or wrong" with any objectivity, one is "wrong"! And because of such articulations, our society is woefully adrift, with no North Star, with which to give correct directions in an endless ocean. He undermines "We hold these truths to be self evident..." to which MLK made his appeal and change society for the people he was trying to integrate into that rightful foundation which defined America. CS Lewis does a more clearer assessment in his book: Mere Christianity, which can easily be read or listened to on line- I highly recommend it!!
Unto surrounding about the little child born "i". While WHO raised the little Child born "i" unfamiliar unto many looking for HIM!
Don’t many animals kill their young, or abandon them?
Good debate. Mr. Corbett is quite defensive and rather arrogant throughout compared to Sean's demeanor. Good job and good answers!
Wonderful 👏 👏 👏
CS Lewis powerfully made the point that to judge something right or wrong there has to be a standard of right or wrong outside what you're judging to compare it to. Maybe a good question here is, what is the nature of that standard? It has to be something real, ie objective, otherwise morality is not real. It can't be survival, or evolution, because that allows anything that works, and can be good or bad. The argument might be that God himself is the standard.
Where is HE? Where is He? Where is He? Some will say, who is that little child born "i" in the midst of the LIONS and in the midst of the CANDLE STICKS NATIONS resting upon HIS Vineyards?
Likewise to bring to remembrance the mileage from all thy feet in FRONT!
YOU GO SEAN
Saying you doubt truth does not make the truth a lie. It also does not give an answer to the reason for the debate.
Forgotten forgiveness, salvation, and the Redeemer offered unto all flesh shared Feet resting upon my Vineyards! Accusers to bring to remembrance. Came to washed thy FEET! To be given New feet! Mileage from thy feet is recognize! Humility. Heirs Hosts shared "i" AM will say even though knowing can BOUND ALL FEET! Offsprings preserve will say for HIS Garment is without blood stains! Yes, HIS ANGELS WHO PERSEVERE AND HEARD THE WORD and Heirs Hosts and my Beautiful shared "i" AM. Creation come forth in FRONT!
Creation why ye EXIST in front? Keep watch!
I agree far more with Mr. Corbett, but I wish he did better at representing his position without targeting Mr. Mcdowell personally
Remember to pray on Corbett's behalf also. Christianity is 'one beggar showing another beggar where the food is'. Sean is no more worthy or valuable than Corbett is, lest we forget that we battle "not against flesh and blood." It's too easy to ridicule the atheist for their misconceptions, much harder to have an understanding and carry the burden of wishing for their highest good. ❤
God is a synonym for Morality ,since it is the experience of a shared realism , not an isolated view of one person where others cannot share their experience, so God is a universal and global view of things we all can share in a group, showing that the fabric of society would be impossible without a universal experience of moral thought, and that itself is equal to God.
From what I saw these were the answers from Jim to Sean's three questions:
1. Transcendence I don't know
2. Free Will never answered
3. Human value never answered
Doubt is not an explanation to any of those questions. And he pointed out things that humans do and processes humans came up with scientifically, so I suppose you could say he believes morality originates from humans. That answer then needs to be questioned with do humans give subjective or objective morality, which is what Sean is asking in the first place. And as Sean said he never answered how the materialistic process gives moral value anyway. Objective is the focus here, not subjective. The primary question here is where does morality come from in the first place NOT what have humans done with the existence of this morality.
Okay…so where does morality come from then? I hear many explanations.
*ANY* and *EVERY* theistic derived set of beliefs would be subjective. The claim that theistic morality is somehow superior because its "objective" is ridiculous. Theists are merely substituting their own subjective moral standards with the morals standards of the god they subjectively determine represents the "correct objective" morality. 🙄🤔
Did an omnipotent creator imprint morals in the minds of humanity? Are our moral values a result of a time in history when the Bible was written or were they evident prior to that time? Have moral values remained constant throughout time? Were moral values the same in all places? If moral values have changed then what was the reason for that change? Jim supports secular humanism as the basis of morality. Sean supports God as the basis of morality. A lot of questions can be explored. Regardless, I thought Sean was better prepared and articulated his points better than Jim did - so in terms of a debate I would give the win to Sean.
The Christian worldview: feet planted firmly on the Rock, Jesus Christ.
Atheistic worldview: feet planted "firmly" in the air, flailing around aimlessly and often, angrily and arrogantly.
Keep watch!
I do think humans are more than animals, seems obvious, as we are the only ones with societies on such a large scale. Clear dominion.
When SMcD talked of humans having value around 39: it dawned on me, an interesting topic would be, where do 'souls' originate from.
Because many animals also seem to have souls and value as well. A lesser value than humans, IMO, but still a great value.
Where does the soul originate?
Perhaps it would be wise to demonstrate the existence of a "soul" before postulating on its origin
@@trumpbellend6717 Yea, that'd be great!
SMcD... What do academics and philosophers agree on about souls...?
Thanks!!
@@cheerfulmouse I take it from your response you are unable or unwilling to provide any evidence 😉 surprise surprise
@@trumpbellend6717 I'm literally asking professors to help out with these questions 😘
Blessings to you 🙏
I've got things to attend to 🕊️
Jim’s whole argument seems to be that Sean is a self appointed authority, arrogant, and self exalting.
Sean submits to the word of God, just because there’s many interpretations doesn’t mean there’s many meanings.
The Bible is so clear on so many topics it’s embarrassing to pretend it’s all that flexible .
Instead of pretending and hiding behind the whole argument being based on doubting the infallibility of Sean and his “interpretations” of scripture, we should stay on topic? In the end, there is no better explanation for transcendent objective morality, therefore all we’ll ever get is false dichotomies, the run around , vague evolutionary theories, and condescending points.
I study and research on my own, with God, for many years now. Anyone who is not a Chtistian, when faced with a question they cannot answer, they answer quoting with a verse from the Holy Bible that men full of faith inspired by God wrote. That is what happened here. The atheist in the first 15 minutes of his talk actually quoted the Holy Bible. If interested in anymore of my studies #Dr.Sean let me know.
Well, since you're wrong I'm sure nobody would be interested.
By the way, the Bible is not full of faith inspired by God, it was written by man which is why is so filled with mistakes and contradictions and falsehoods.
I mean you can even get out of Genesis without running into stories that we know for a FACT never happened.
There was no Adam and Eve, there was no guard, there was no tree of knowledge, there was no follow-up man, nor Original Sin, no Noah's Ark, Noah Moses, and since there was no Adam and even no follow-up man because he went toward evolved species not created by God, there is no need for Messiah.
Entirety of Christianity falls flat on its face because of the fact that there was no Original Sin.
And since we know for fact there is no evidence whatsoever to support the claims of Jesus's resurrection or even much of his existence, it's all nonsense.
Nonsense created by humans, nothing more
2nd time through, listening to entire debate. Copied transcript from UA-cam for myself. With time for reflection, my thoughts below are amplified by their summation at the end:
I lived 40+ years indifferent or dismissive of religion, using my own reason and intellect to guide life…my way…using my reason. An encounter with God changed all of that and revealed my personal failings that society would either ignore or embrace. Given this…my takeaways…
1:38:32 Jim Corbett (JC): Solidifies his antipathy for Christians as hateful, prejudiced, and illiterate. Christians served as his primary examples of evil throughout the debate, “softened” by random references to Aztecs who sacrificed babies. I was waiting for positive Christian examples from (JC)…not one I can remember.
1:40:15 (JC) “lofty moral ethic…apparently sacred” - again…same denunciation of religious Christian believers.
1:37:00-37 Sean McDowell (SM) “if God exists…maybe we feel guilty at times…the solution to the human dilemma…to seek forgiveness.”
Throughout...
1. Humans were compared to animals in terms of our "evolution" guided by fight for survival. Yet, I cannot think of one animal today that responds to its circumstances with human mental deliberation or mathematics or human ethical discussions.
2. Humans, compared to animals, were reduced to creatures with instinctive "fight or flight" responses to preserve their life.
3. Humans, never rose to the level of UNIQUE animals who can do math calculations for extraterrestial satellites or reject their personal survival for the benefit of unknown members of "the species." e.g. Maximillian Kolbe, Wilberforce, John Brown.
I could extend this evaluation. But these are key critiques responded to key ideas evidenced throughout the debate.
Thanks...
I thank both Sean and Jim Corbett for their courage in bringing their individual ideas "to the table" for the rest of us. Hopefully, many will take the time to listen to their full exchange.
Thanks for watching and sharing your thoughts!
For thy #'s so SPECIAL its own abilities accordingly given! What else? Some will say, who are you?
Who's that guy with dark hair calling himself Sean???
Haha 😂
Sean, what are the objective moral values, how do you know them to be true, and what do you do with people who object?
"Values" are Subjective BY DEFINITION
@@trumpbellend6717 "Value" has more than one definition. Considering the specific use of the word in this debate, "principle" might be a better word choice. Regardless, equivocation isn't helpful when trying to assess any stance or statement from a reasoned, logical standpoint.
@@Mairiain
The word "value" discribes a relationship between a "valuer" and that which is "valued." To a man dying of thirst and stranded in the midst of a vast desert a cup of water would hold immense incalculable "value" However to a man drowning in the midst of a vast lake the same cup of water would hold no "value" whatsoever.
It is however possible to make statements of objectivity, from with a pre agreed subjective and arbitrarily concieved of moral framework
@@Mairiain
For me and like minded people the moral grounding for morality is based upon our values, wellbeing, empathy, respect, equality, altruism, reprocity. We try to actualize a healthy flourishing coperative society based upon said values that is why one "ought" to treat another's as you would like to be treated, One "ought not steal if you wish to live in a society were property is not stolen. This is our "reference point" or standard.
One "should" or "ought" do something if Its conducive with the actualisation of a situation that conforms with one's values. These "values" themselves are subjective by definition however it is entirely possible to make Objective declarations or decisions 'Within a pre-agreed framework of subjective values'.
Values are socially approved desires and goals that are internalised through the process of conditioning, learning or socialisation and that become subjective preferences, standards and aspirations a shared idea about how something is ranked in terms of desirability, worth or goodness
The words "Good" and "Evil" are used to describe movement or points on a reference standard or scale conceptualised by man that is based upon our shared values. Whilst your "God" is also a man made concept, the percieved whims of your "God" do not reflect these shared values and thus are irrelevant to me in any discussion of morality.
Thanks for providing your definition, which differs in how it was used in this debate, thus proving my point about equivocation. Best wishes and I hope you have a great day!@@trumpbellend6717
My question is, if rationality is an evolutionary change in humans for our survival, is that the only way we could survive as a species?
Clearly not. Every other current species survived without it, and rationality is too rare in humans to have made a decisive difference. It seems to be a byproduct of an evolutionary development that had other, more important benefits.
A true Christian holds the same views as the church fathers and historical Christianity, the majors are the majors, the minors are the minors, but a century from now a true Christian will still believe what a true Christian believes . Spoiler alert , that Doesn’t include condoning slavery , misogyny , or murder of non conformers etc.
His word is eternal and will never change.
Jim lost his footing within seconds. Sean thoughtfully confronts the common misconception that the fact that God’s perfect standard of morality has been misunderstood and wrongly weaponized, is somehow challenging the reality of God. That’s like having a pristine glass of clear water , mud being introduced to the water and acting like there never was a clear water to begin with.
A Christian doesn’t claim humans require God to be moral, and Sean’s argument isn’t that he understands God’s morals better than any other professing believer or religious person, but rather that objective transcendent morality makes the most sense with God as it’s source and nothing else satisfies this question more.
God bless ❤️
What is fallacy? Are ye HEALED in front! Instead of "Illness"!
This debate could have been better, they should have had direct cross-examination, that is where the audience is given the best evidence of just who's position is stronger. it's the same reason Courts of law allow prosecutors to cross-examine witnesses: any truth that is being suppressed is likely to become uncovered when the witness is subjected to a battery of questions they are not allowed to control.
Students what is life? "Conversations"! INDEED!
Who am I doubt come remind!
Not a fan of the term "free" will. We are voluntary, to be sure. We have will "power," but our will is "free" from nothing, in the modern English sense. So willpower is a better term. Still voluntary, but bound. Bound either to sin or to righteousness. Choose this day whom you will serve.
The foundation question is the most penetrating. Every atheists and non-Christian wants to accuse the church of "wrong" behavior, but they have no foundation to stand to on do it. Emotion is not a foundation. Accusation is not a foundation either. Rejecting a creator rejects objective moral behavior.
The question of an eternally burning hell is one that most Christians stumble over. The fact is, IF the Bible taught that people were burned and tortured forever, that would be unjust. As humans, even we understand that the punishment should be commensurate to the crime. Is God not infinitely more just than man? The fact is that the Bible teaches that sin and sinners will be destroyed forever; they will be ashes (Malachi 4:3).
It's a bit more complex but basically right. The punishment after Judgement Day is eternal destruction, not eternal torture.
Unlike animals GOD gave humans a conscience. Only reprobates have no conscience. Hence, reprobates live their lives on what's good for their OWN survival.
I think deep down in your heart you really know that man *'IS'* an animal. Look we live & die just like animals then when we do die the same thing that happens to animals happens to us. We breath the same air as them we have no advantage over the animals anything else is just vanity dear.
Dr McDowell has given
a good account of himself
When will you have UA-cam Q&A session again??
I’m on the road for a few more weeks but plan to either august or September…
@@SeanMcDowell Is there any where online that people can submit questions ahead of the Q & A session ??
@@thetexaseagle This debate took place in 2010! It’s the first time I’m making it widely available publicly.
@@SeanMcDowell I really appreciate and enjoy your Christ centered and Scripturally accurate content for the furtherance of The Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ 🙏❤️👊.
@@thetexaseagle The youtuber Mike Winger takes Bible questions every week and look up "pastors perspective". They answer bible questions every weekday for an hour.
Sean presented better in this debate. However, he didn’t answer the hell question and didn’t define free will. I understand some of his criticisms of atheistic moral foundations, but I also fail to see how appealing to a god solves those criticisms.
@The city of the King, Paslms 122:6.
Pray for the peace of Jerusalem, they
will prosper that love you. God bless!!!
Dr. Corbett is absolutely terrible at debate. I don't think he understanding, or at least acknowledging, the ontological question on morality. I think a good question would be how does something that it's very nature is non-reasoning transition to reasoning? How does the very nature of something change in this way?
Can't free will exist based on what the matrix permits, and not necessarily God-given? Free will as a given from whatever "perceived God" is subjective to the choice to use free will subject to that
"perceived God". Free will to do or free will to not do - it is still subjective to "perceived God". That's the snag in religion.
We don't know that whales, dolphins, and other animals don't have morality. Maybe for them morality is encoded within their instincts (genes). We can't presume the morality of animals is inferior to the morality of humans. It seems animals have a higher consciousness than humans, imho. I could argue that human are so endlessly debating what is to guide us and why, arguing over belief systems, perceptional disharmony, etc., etc. Animals live with the ease of not having all these conundrums, for them the code of behavior is for the most part, implicitly understood. Based on the lack of arduous complexity, it could be maybe the animals are the higher beings and we, humans, for all of our increasing and ongoing uncertainty are really the clueless ones with a humungous ego that dupes us into thinking otherwise. Sean's presumption that we are better or superior to animals is possibly illusion. People often mistake sophistication as superior and that too is not necessarily true. If animals are God's creation also, why assume humans are the higher beings? We don't know what we don't know.
No.
I wish people could have routine paradigm shifts for better, but it's true people are stuck in their ways. However, maybe that's an overall good thing.
I note that you included in the description that your interlocutor was involved in a lawsuit at the time but missed off that it was a law suit he successfully defeated. Also that the law suit revolved around the student's feelings about the statements, not the factual accuracy of the statements. After all, young earth creationism (which is what he was referring to) IS superstitious nonesense. That's not a controversial statement in terms of its content, only controversial in certain locations in terms of its conflict with fundimentalist religious dogma.
Wow you are on the road that must be taxing. And you do Biola and UA-cam. Don't burn out man take some time for yourself if you need it.
Thanks. I’m actually in St Lucia for a week with family!
@@SeanMcDowell I hope your having fun!
Students what is human being? Thy shared "i" AM came with many #'s in front of thee!