No, it's not. It's overbroad. Ali should not be the face of the faith as a new convert. But St. Paul himself was a brand new convert and was placed over whole swaths of the Christian faithful. And there are other examples. It really depends on the person. Ali may not be up to the task. But it goes too far to say that NO new convert could do it. She obviously has not spent that much time learning her new faith. And that's okay. All in God's timing. Don't think for a moment that this was not the plan for such bad faith actors as Richard Dawkins. He would never debate someone like Dr. Peter Kreeft, for example, or anyone else more learned . He is the most deluded and arrogant. We must pray for his conversion.
@@chefEmersonWilliams Paul's own testimony is that after conversion he went to Arabia for three years. Then the other Apostles sent him to Tarsus, where he remained for years. After Barnabus brought him to Antioch, he remained there for more than a year, being the junior partner. By the time of his first missionary journey, Paul was by no means a new convert.
@@Pedro-bk1icand furthermore, he was one of the best learned Pharisees before that! All of his already attained knowledge would increase with great rapidity, and thus he became one of the greatest Christians to ever live! I wish I knew the Old Testament so well.
This is why I respect Trent. He's not afraid to criticize both sides of the political spectrum, both liberal and conservatives. That deserves a lot of respect in today's climate.
@@vwabi both sideism is just a cope out to claim being fair or being neutral. One side is worse than the other, this has always been the case and is certainly the case now.
Right/Left (and those terms vary greatly from time to time and place to place) is an amazing masterpiece of Satanic gerrymandering.. Christians need to be both Left and Right, and neither Left nor Right.. In politics we make our best prudential judgements in our own time and place according to revelation and using the rational tools God has given us.. Political formations of any stripe whatever should never be allowed to claim anything but conditional allegiance from us. Jesus' Kingdom is not of this world.
As an atheist, I enjoy listening to Trent. He's honest and clear in his thoughts. I also respect his charitable approach to arguing with opponents and steel manning their positions before criticizing them.
I like him because I feel he his good values, when he debated Destiny I kind of realized some of the people I followed like Destiny were very clever but had some questionable morals - even if I agreed with them a lot of the time.
@@JewTube001I gotta say, I don’t think Trent did especially well in that debate. Destiny was willing to bite bullets in a way that Trent wasn’t. Trent even said during the course of the debate that his goal was to convince people of his position and that he was willing to use what he considered to be poor but convincing arguments to do so - he said something like ‘there are two arguments I could give for this, one of them is bad and I don’t hold it but it’s superficially convincing so I’m going to give it anyway because my goal is to convince as many people as possible’. I think that’s why he wasn’t willing to fully engage with how a society that considers fertilized eggs to have moral equivalence to you and I would actually need to be set up. Trent’s goal was to convince people, not to discuss, so he did everything in his power to avoid sounding or looking bad - including refusing to bite bullets that he really had to bite, like investigating every miscarriage as a potential crime scene.
@@antoniomatejgveric903 I respect people, but not necessarily their beliefs. I think that Christianity is goofy, repulsive, and an insult to human dignity and freedom. But I can get along with Christians so long as they behave civilly towards me.
I'm from Germany and all priests I know, as well as most devout catholics know you're channel and appreciate you're work. The impact you have on the church with catechising young christians, other lay people and even priests cannot be underestimated!!! Its a blessing😃 Also: It was funny how you pronounced "Mit Brennender Sorge"😅
I find it a bit frustrating how he dogdes the issue, that the catholic church had taught hatred of the jews for centuries. Denying equal rights to them, through official church teaching. He also misrepresents the churches stance on slavery. I guess it is easier to remain a catholic when you start to ignore everything that conflicts with your view of the one holy and apostolic church. Since you are from Germany I would advise to read Olaf Blaschke, Die Kirchen und der Nationalsozialismus. It speaks volumes that catholic priests need an "apologist" to explain their faith to them. I haven't heard a word of condemnation from Trent when it comes to the Ugandan Bishops supporting the death penalty for homosexuals. As this issue wasn't adressed in "Mit brennender Sorge" one can only assume that the church is fine with it.
“You will find this again and again about anything that is really Christian: everyone is attracted by bits of it and wants to pick out those bits and leave the rest. That is why we do not get much further: and that is why people who are fighting for quite opposite things can both say they are fighting for Christianity.” - C.S. Lewis
I agree about Peterson, but I think we should give grace to Ayaan. She is a new convert and unlike Peterson, she proclaims the real resurrection and divinity of Christ.
@@Cavirexwhat nonsense. This woman lives under the reality of dying for her Christian faith 24/7! Do you or I?! I tell you Almighty God looks upon a person like Ayaan as a dear daughter. I would propose those under threat of martyrdom have nothing to worry about - whether there theology is as neat and tidy as this UA-camr or not.
@@Cavirex //Many will misperceive Christianity//? Are you here for pure entertainment? What about that dunce of Dawkins, whom gets on my nerves every single time I see and hear him??? He will have an unlucky future I predict... 🤮
Jesus spent 40 days in a dessert to spend time in solitude, when all those UA-camrs go straight on camera and acting as they are an experts on the Bible. They ain’t humble at all and there’s no repentance which is a big red flag. In my opinion, Candace Owens are just getting worse and worse. I used to love her, but her arrogance is sickening. She mocks and just looks for the opportunities where someone will praise her, regardless of who she’s going to throw under the bus. It was disgusting when she went on this awful whatever show, where those “so called Christian guys “ invite the least intelligent and most broken women with intention to humiliate them. She really had time of her life there
Ayaan seems the most earnest. It was touching when she said she chose it. A real act of trust. "I may not have answers but I choose to trust you". John 20:29 Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed!
The reason she's getting alot of Zionists publicity is because she's a former Moslem who hates Islam. They wouldn't give a former Jew who hates Judaism the same treatment. It's all designed to make Christians hate Moslems and not look at what the Zionists are doing.
Ayaan does believe. Now, I'm someone who's very close to Ayaan's beliefs. Sure, you can argue that I'm a fencesitter, but here's the truth of what I think: I was an atheist for a long time. Then I slowly started seeing that everything that Christianity had to say about the world was actually correct. (Morally, especially.) Jordan Peterson actually helped with that. I started thinking that being a Christian was a beneficial thing, and that following the teachings of Christ is a good way for a better society. Then, I started going to church, and I started believing. If someone asks me whether I know for certain that Christianity is true and right - no, I don't. I don't know for sure whether Jesus Christ is God. But I choose to believe it. In a way, the fact that I'm uncertain doesn't bother me any more. I judged them by their fruit, and Christianity, based on its results, seems to be more true to me than everything else. I don't go around proclaiming I know the truth because I honestly am not sure. I don't know whether it matters whether the Eucharist is literally or figuratively the body of Christ. I receive it with the same reverence regardless. But my life has become a lot better since I've been going to church, and I'm happy with that. If that's not enough, then, well, I approached it with utmost honesty and an open mind, and I guess it wasn't meant to be.
Well, to my best understanding the Eucharist is a Miracle. A miracle being what happens when the metaphysical and the merely physical become one. So I dont think it is incorrect to say that the Eucharist is both literally and figuratively the body of Christ. Like, if the Eucharist is Christ, then He is present both in body AND spirit. Physical and metaphysical. Can anything be more True than that?
Thanks for your words. I'm a Christian (Protestant), a proclaimer of Christianity (among people of Ayan's background) who has always felt the weight of some of the atheistic arguments (naturalism) and the problems associated with believing all old testament accounts are historical. Evidence has brought me against my will farther and farther from some aspects of my original fundamentalism, without denying the essentials of the faith as I see them. The Scripture is my moral authority for sure. Petersen and Ayan have been especially helpful voices to contemplate...
@Lorena2m you have no knowledge of what I or others believe, and are acting in a very presumptuous and conceited manner... You know nothing of what I believe or don't believe, and you acting like a condescending prick hurts christianity more than the people that you think are doing harm to it, as if you are the paragon of virtue. Grow up and follow Christ example... He did told us to stand up against "over the fencedness" but only if you KNOW it's happening... How can you assert with such conviction about being better or more righteous of people that you know nothing about?
100% agree. I used to like Jordan Peterson before I discovered Christ because he spoke strongly about the state of men and little boy's struggles in the current world. But after becoming Christian and occasionally seeing clips of Jordan Peterson arguing for the existence of God in relation to our society today, I find he doesn't really speak about Jesus or the apostles or the doctrines of our faith, but instead his own observations of the world. It's so superficial and isn't fulfilling to me as a Christian who believes Jesus being resurrected from the dead to be true.
He's more of a "Judeo-Christian" than a Christian - i.e., he believes in the Judeo-Christian values and ideas, more than anything concrete about the faith.
Oh if only Peterson realize... Of all religions, Christianity is the most "on the border" religion.. And of all Christianities, Catholic is the most "on the border" philosophically. Catholic always encapsulates the duality of all things uniting within one system, body & spirit, faith & reason, tradition & revelation, conservatism & progressivism, eastern & western, magisterium & scripture, etc. The Church is literally keeping the world together instead of breaking apart.
Tied to the anchor himself, the cornerstone. This quality is so pronounced in the church by its being the flesh of the very one who upholds the whole world.
@@str.77 but, if you're really asking. It's the encapsulation/totality of what seemingly opposite. Science & religion for example, which is the front Peterson is on and what he means when he says he exist on the border, is that he bridges the gap between the 2 sides, in fact it was never meant to be separate, it became ruptured only post-enlightenment. (and the enlightenment btw, was a response / explosive backdraft to somewhat gnostic theology of protestant christianity). You can apply these to all Catholic theology & practice. There's always "and", not "only". Even God The Trinity, exist as Union and Multiplicities (seemingly irreconcilable concept).
I'd be a little cautious in criticizing this trend towards cultural/moral Christianity. In my own journey towards Catholicism, Jordan Peterson was instrumental. First he convinced me of the psychological meaning, which was not far from the moral and allegorical meanings, which eventually led me to accept the literal and analogical after research into arguments for the faith. This can be a pipeline into the true faith for open minded Atheists/Agnostics, despite being a catalyst for creating lukewarm cultural Christians out of actual practicing ones.
I definitely started reading the Bible again for the 1st time since getting into the New Atheist movement because of Peterson. He really is the greatest bridge that Christians have.
Reread the last paragraph of his comment, and you’ll find he makes it clear he’s aware of that. “This can be a pipeline into the true faith for open minded Athiests/Agnostics, *despite being a catalyst* for creating lukewarm Christians out of actual practicing ones.”
Political Christianity has a place in evangelizing. I needed it to start taking steps in my own journey. Now Byzantine Catholic here, now discerning my vocation. Thank you, Trent, for your own part in my journey.
I don't entirely grasp Trent's take on Ayaan Hirsi Ali here. For one, there's an enormous number of pagan civilizations that were Christianized because, at least at the beginning, the people of those cultures grasped the utility of adopting Christianity well before they took it to heart, so to speak. Secondly, Ali has also spoken about how prayer led her out of suicidal despair, and that this made the biggest difference for her current religious trajectory. It feels odd to not find that mentioned here. And finally, she is speaking to a politically-minded audience, so how can we blame her for taking a political angle in her conversations?
I think Trent was honest in his critique in that he “worries” that people like Dawkins will garner followers when he humiliates his opponents on the subject. Therefore I think he is coming from a intellectual tactical point of view. Hopefully he can clarify.
Yes I agree. Personally, a major part of my conversion was what Christianity affords us and what it has given us in the past and how life giving it really is. This eventually leading me down a path to an understanding that Christianity and God are the Truth!
I actually don’t think you are being fair to both Trent and historical truths. I guess the point is that it embodies a level of vulnerability to outsider attacks that is simply imprudent to make it representative of Christianity. It is hardly commendable that recent converts speak of the faith to non-believers’ attacks, let alone under socio-political lenses and rationale: it will only make the attacks probably more successful to any conceivable audience whenever we start to get off from the starting point of the race. Besides, I don’t really understand the claim that many pagan people first converted to the faith under utility and then started to believe: it was much more fitting that Romanized pagan England rejected St Augustine of Canterbury’s preaching, or Celtic pagan Ireland rejected St Patrick’s, or that pagan Germany rejected St Boniface’s, or that the first Greco-Romans rejected the apostles because it actually could get them persecuted and even killed. Is it fitting to any concept of utility whatsoever in the actual historical data? It was much more utilitarian to remain pagan: people indeed converted because of the radical boldness of the claims of Christianity being lived AND an ACTUALLY getting the beliefs of the believing community whose testimony could lead them to losing earthly life.
On the question about Ali, I think Trent was fairly clear that new Christians shouldn't be the face of Christianity. Ali's conversion is something to praise God for, but I believe she's been a Christian for less than 2 years at this point, right? And her conversion occured due to an experience rather than reason, which is the case for most converts. Ali may yet become a great apologist, but she shouldn't be debating Richard Dawkins in a public forum while her faith is still so young. We don't give meat to children, but milk.
I thought Ali talked about her personal struggles leading her to the realization she was "spiritually bankrupt". It's not honest of you Trent, to say it wasn't sufficient.
I like Trent, but I feel he's being unfair to Aryan in this case. In the same article "Why I Am Now A Christian," which was quoted in the video, Aryan herself mentioned, "...I would NOT be truthful if I attributed my embrace of Christianity SOLELY to the realization that atheism is too weak and divisive a doctrine to fortify us against our MENACING FOES. I have also turned to Christianity because I ultimately found life without any spiritual solace unendurable-indeed very nearly self-destructive. Atheism failed to answer a simple question: What is the meaning and purpose of life?'' Aryan is not a Christian apologist, so it's unrealistic to expect her to provide an in-depth, apologetic defense of her new faith-especially when she's still in the process of learning it. When I converted to Christianity from Islam, I also struggled initially with defending the "truth" of Christianity. However, like Aryan, who mentioned how prayer saved her from suicidal thoughts (a point not fully covered in Trent's reaction video), I chose to believe in the resurrection of Christ and the Trinity. These concepts didn't make complete sense to me at the time, but as I learned more about the faith, I found better ways to explain and defend it to my Muslim friends and family.
This, 100%. It's ridiculous to expect ayaan to speak to Dawkins as an apologist would. We already have a dozen of those conversations online anyway. Ayaan's perspective is valuable for Christians to realize the thought patterns that might reach atheists in today's secular world. Historical evidence of miracles is just not compelling to people indoctrinated against the concept of miracles.
"Aryan is not a Christian apologist, so it's unrealistic to expect her to provide an in-depth, apologetic defense of her new faith-especially when she's still in the process of learning it." This is fair. The solution to this is that she shouldn't be dialoguing with people over a faith that she's still new to and trying to learn. Putting herself out in the public eye like this correctly and fairly opens up her positions to critiques, and the fault lies with her for being unprepared while agreeing to speak publicly about it.
I think his main objection was they she is a fledgling christian who hasn’t grown into her theology, yet she is on a stage in front of hundreds of people talking to one of the most WELL KNOW outspoken atheists about the truth claims of Christianity. By taking on that role she is an apologist but she has done it poorly.
I think Trent was mostly trying to point out that her choice of words indicate she may not actually fully believe Christianity, it wasn’t so much about not being able to defend the faith properly.
Serious question: what about all of the sceptics like Peterson and myself who cannot force ourselves to believe as children yet value the faith? Should we just be chucked aside for being honest about our doubts?
@@Charlotte_Martel Having doubts is okay. But to dedicate your intellectual life and debating regurlay these issues and not having a straight answer for your beliefs is problematic.
@@Charlotte_Martel Honestly, Charlotte, as a baptised Christian but a true devotee of God only as of the last few years, I don't really believe that it's up to us to believe child-like. We don't flick the switch - God does. Now, we do need to plug in and be ready - which you seem to be doing. Just please wait for Him. I know that sounds like Oprah-style Christian-themed gobbledygook but it's true. Just keep at it, ask questions and search for answers. And then one day, you'll feel swept up by a very powerful current - probably the one from flicking the switch on you 🤣 - and, as Trent points out in the video, it will lead to a Yes/No invitation. I effectively said Yes at mine. 2Tim 3:1-5... I was effectively converted at my "Yes". That passage rearranged itself as a question: "What sort of person do you want to be? Do you want to be like the people described in this passage?" I said "No, I want You!". Many, many trials later, including many ongoing ones now, I'm still with Him. I can't un-know what I experienced that day when I read that passage. And I didn't do anything remotely as you've done to deserve it either. He just flicked my switch that day for reasons only He knows. In response, I quieted all the rising questions in my mind and just went along. Hope this helps 🙏✝️🌹
It is difficult to believe like a child. Childlike faith doesn't mean you have no doubts. Many Christians struggle deeply with doubts, but they still try to follow Jesus. They have "faith as a mustard seed" which can move mountains (Matt 17:20). Why do you value the faith? Do you want to believe? If you want to believe, and you still have doubts, continue seeking God. Ask Him for faith. I know this answer isn't always satisfactory, but I have seen it work out in the life of my best friend. She was an agnostic, very skeptical and unsure. She sought God by reading the Scriptures, learning arguments through videos like these, visiting churches, asking questions to everyone she could. At one point, she wanted to believe but felt she couldn't. After a few years, she now believes. It is possible. Do not give up. Mark 9:23-24 [23] “ ‘If you can’?” said Jesus. “Everything is possible for one who believes.” [24] Immediately the boy’s father exclaimed, “I do believe; help me overcome my unbelief!” "Help my unbelief" this man prayed for his son to be exorcised by Jesus. This prayer does wonders my friend.... keep seeking Him and you will find Him.
@@Charlotte_Martel "Do your doubts not also deserve the same criticism, skepticism, nay doubt that your beliefs do?" - Lewis Just a thought and how I've wrestled through ideas as a Christian.
I must say I somewhat disagree with Trent's assessment of Ayaan Ali's position. I agree that she still has a lot of maturing to do in her beliefs, and that intellectual conviction is important, but for me, "I choose to believe" (based on her fascination with the prominence of love in the Christian faith, which seems to be connected to a personal experience as well, as implied by her own feeling of having "died" and being reborn) is more legitimate than what Trent seems to allow. People frequently choose to accept doctrines that they aren't convinced of intellectually based on other reasons (e.g. based on belief in Church authority, or based on having a clear religious experience). And although the historical Resurrection is absolutely foundational to the Christian Faith, I don't see why it can't also be accepted by "choice", based on something else that captured someones heart or intellect. If she follows up this "choice" with further investigation and study, she'll likely be rewarded with more understanding - just like someone who chooses to follow the Church's teaching on, say, the Assumption of Mary, and then based on that learns more on it. But on the other hand, even if one stops at a "choice", it can be a legitimate way of accepting Faith, as long as this "choice" means: I choose to accept the proposition that this is TRUE, even if I'm doing this based on something else than just intellectual grounds. Otherwise, hard to disagree with the main point of the video. Very needed video, thanks!
Agreed, Mr. Horn seems to be responding to trends among recent converts, who perhaps haven't integrated/reconciled their new Christian beliefs with their past (political) selves. Indeed, we all need to work on ourselves, and in sharing our own faith journeys, we can share with others our ongoing conversions of mind, body, and soul.
The quest for truth can be very disorienting , thank you Trent for earnestly communicating and helping along the way. Much love to you and your family 🙏
@@TheCounselofTrent Hi! As someone from a Soviet culture (now an immigrant in the USA) I believe that the resurrection was staged by the Romans, as explained in a popular book where I'm from - "The Gospel of Afranius"; like many others, I read it in childhood and never thought about this question again - until coming to the USA and noticing a stark contrast in the discussion of this question. What's wrong with that explanation? Also, I believe matter is eternal - it can only move and change but not appear from nowhere - seems like common sense to me, but apparently not here in the US, what's wrong with that?
@@TheCounselofTrent I am seriously considering not finishing watching this video for the safety of my soul. The idea that it is good to showcase a virulent atheist in a public speaking role denying the truth of the Catholic faith while showing an inadequate response is treacherous. The triumph of truth through debate is a lie.
@@TheCounselofTrentI like you Sir, but I see a fail in your critiques.. what about Pope Francis? Hey hás a very political side (left) and is not a very good one for The church and The World. Any comments on that?
I'm very grateful to Dr. Peterson's takes on psychological truths contained in Scripture and the Catholic faith, but what Trent brings up in this video is exactly what frustrates me when he steps out of those things. He's a psychologist, not a theologian or apologist, and we should be cognizant of that when he speaks about those things.
Regarding Alex o'Connor's question regarding the camera before the Christ's tomb at 13:11 The Gospels don't say that our Lord Jesus Christ walked out of the tomb, they say only about the angels on the tombstone. We know from the Gospel of Luke that Christ could travel through distance instantaneously and could go through the closed doors, and so He might have done just that.
Your point is completely tangential. Regardless of whether Jesus walked, crawled, flew, jumped, diffused or transmigrated out of the tomb, would a light camera taken back in time, have captured it? That's the question. The simple answer is YES.
Jonathan Pageau (the best translator of Jordan Peterson to English) in one of his latest videos clips said it best “He’s not baptized, he’s not a Christian”
@@fakeyououtdotcom2409- dumb take. The thief on the cross had NO OPPORTUNITY to baptized… he was literally being crucified. DUHHHRRR… Meanwhile Peterson has all the time and opportunity in the world to be baptized. Stop the nonsense.
@@fakeyououtdotcom2409exceptional circumstances don’t make the standard. Jordan Peterson isn’t on his deathbed crying out to God to be forgiven because he just learned about him, believe and BE BAPTIZED
But when Alex Oconnor asked Peterson on a podcast "if someone put a Panasonic camera at Jesus' tomb when he rose, would Jesus rise?" Peterson said "I suspect yes". So he may closer than we think...
Ayaan has been very open recently about her faith being personal and not just a reaction to the threat of Islam if you watch her interview with Glen Scrivener or the Unherd channel. Jordan Peterson has been notoriously difficult to pin down, atheists are frustrated with him too! It's likely he is cagey about being put into the 'Christian box.' I do think that Jordan is like that friend you know who is flirting with becoming a Christian but still has many doubts but no argument will bring them in, it is up to the Holy Spirit!
Except Ali is completely ignorant to christianity and blind to the fact secularism is a bigger threat to christianity than Islam. The fact is islam is closer to christianity than western secularism. For instance she lavish praise to her new hone country of the netherlands for treating women equal. Does that include the red light district? It’s honestly pseudo feminist nonsense (Not to mention she was from somalia which isn’t an islamist nation)
Trent was too hard on Peterson. He's extremely frustrating to me, 100%. But he's at least being forthright. And more importantly, he's presenting legitimate arguments for orthodox Christianity which separates him from the liberals whose "arguments" are contingent upon a rejection of orthodoxy
Agree with this. People criticizing him seem to forget Romans 14:5 which says are are to be fully convicted in our own mind. For a clinical academic approaching the divine, this is a complex journey.
The phrase “I choose to believe in God.” hits at the heart of the volitional aspect of bowing to the truth of the gospel. I will take that over living “as if” the gospel is true.
Definitely don't prefer the "as if" strategy, but Ben Shapiro has gotten me to appreciate that. I think he makes a good point that belief follows actions and that when you act a certain way, your mind starts to accept those practice are true and valid
@@TimoG101 We don't mind him for not being a christian but rather we're glad that more people are calling out his vague approach about these issues. Dawkins is quite clear that he thinks christianity is completle non-sense and only has social utilitarian value.
I wish people would acknowledge with Peterson that he is someone who likes the sound of his own voice. He can really go off on these word salads and think that what he is saying is so profound.
I think Jordan is conflicted because his epistemology is torn between the modern atheistic worldview for the empirical, and the Christian worldview for the moral. I think something would need to happen to change the empirical portion of his worldview to commit to Christ, i.e. he would need to experience something so profound that he can't empirically qualify that causes extreme doubt in the atheistic rational explanation for existence. I'm not sure what that would be. God does not share experiences equally, e.g. only Peter, James, and John were witnesses to the transfiguration. In the same vein, there are Biblical warnings to be skeptical of experiences as well. History cannot be verified empirically, i.e. experience it with your senses... so using historical arguments as a basis for belief eventually comes down to the rational realm. In the rational realm, truth is derived from your presuppositions (similar to an axiom in mathematics), which for a Christian, should derive from the self proclamation that Jesus is the truth, the way, and the life in John 14:6. At some point, these axioms are decided by faith, a decision to believe in the presence of uncertainty, a gamble of sorts, and to follow Christ, that gamble needs to be "all in". Perhaps if Jordan could be convinced that many of the atheistic "truths" like the age of the universe, abiogenesis, consciousness, etc. are not truly understood empirically but actually rational explanations (i.e. stories or an atheistic mythos) from a microcosm of evidence from empiricism in space and time (e.g. none of us are eternal or omnipresent), then perhaps there is a way to break through his ideological duality to commit to Christ. Just as Darwin posited evolution without the knowledge of DNA based on similar morphologies of fossils, we all face the same dilemma of creating a worldview that is inevitably empirically out of reach to validate or even imagine. Remember, the scientific method is supposed to start with rationality (a human mind develops a hypothesis), then verifies the hypothesis through experiment (empiricism), but atheists want to flip things around where they take empirical measurements, create stories explaining those measurements, and call it "truth". The heart of the issue is that Jordan is currently unwilling to go "all in" on Christ. I believe in the promise that those who seek shall find (Jeremiah 29:13), and God loves Jordan Peterson very much. Perhaps like Moses this is his time in the wilderness, but eventually God calls to everyone.
It was in part because of JBP arguments and Carl Benjamin too that I started attending church with my sons as an atheist. My family was eventually all baptized OCA, my husband and I and our three sons (and my fourth son just born will be baptized soon). We only realized the truth after years of attending, and we were convinced it was important to attend by JBP argument that we need something to tell us how to act in the world which science does not do (paraphrasing). So I have a fondness for JBP responses to these questions because they were like a bridge for us.
Amen. Jordan is a truth-seeker who has helped so many. He is on his own journey. I pray for him…and that people give him space as he wrestles with all this.
This is exactly why I hold JBP and such up for folks to see. Like you, he explained things in a way that I just couldn't do on my own. He made some kind of sense of things, but came at it from a logical and rational direction that I could relate with. There's nothing more depressing than seeing christians attacking JBP as if he's some great horror because he dares to do things in a different way. Even as he's honoring christianity and showing the religion some strong support, christians deride him and his ideas. And these same christians often wonder why the church is failing! So very frustrating to watch.
This resonates with me on a personal level. When I was a mormon, my politics was a key driving force in my world view. Now, ever since I started my catholic journey, I notice politics for me has taken a back seat, and now I'm much more focused on theology, regardless of whatevers happening with this election year. For that, I do want to thank Trent for the work he's done helping folks like me better understand the catholic faith.
Do not make the mistake of thinking the two are not the same. You cannot have one without the other, and politics impacts your life just as much as religion does. What's worse, I think, is that so many christians have turned their backs on this, taking the easy way out, and not tended their garden. The reason things are so bad today is directly tied to the fact that christians have been taught to believe in the separation of church and state. This causes people to not fight for their state, what was a christian state, and now all of Christendom is overrun with foreigners, outsiders, non-believers, etc. It was through christianity that Europe, America, Canada, and Australia rose up to great heights, and raised the rest of the world as much as they could. Surrendering that in the name of being "nice" has cost the world greatly, and explains why we are where we are.
When I was young I remember hearing a homily that shocked me at the time, in which the priest said that the most important part of the Creed was that Jesus was "crucified under Pontius Pilate". I mean, shouldn't it be one of the great mysteries like God's existence, the divinity of Jesus, the Trinity, the Incarnation or the Ressurrection? Now I realize that he was right: the major thing is that this is not mythology, it's factual history.
Except that, for centuries, historical skeptics denied there was a Pontius Pilate. Or to put it in a different light, had the mention of Pilate by Josephus and the tablet found in 1961 not given evidence that there was indeed a Pontius Pilate, would your faith in Christ been any different? If not, than the historical evidences are not the root of faith. If so, then your faith lies in archeologists and Josephus. Is it a nice confirmation to use in the testifying to the unsaved? Perhaps. But practitioners of Judaism don't look at such "evidences" and say that Christ is the Son of Man. In fact, much of Scripture is pointed retelling of historical factuality to Hebrews in Christ's time on earth clearly demonstrating his fulfillment of OT prophesies and naming names and bloodlines, etc, and they still did not believe the historical proofs given given them in plain sight. That isn't to say that historical evidence plays no part in the spreading of the good news, but I would refute that homily. There is more evidence in looking out your window at the creation before you than in all of the records of mankind ever assembled. For a man that witnesses childbirth, the orderliness of the cosmos, the a bee pollinating a flower, a man sacrificing himself for his family, or many of the countless other peculiarities and miracles of life, and still says "there is no God", will certainly reject a first century writer and an ancient tablet. After all, the human mind is so contorted that we now live in a world where people have convinced themselves that men can have babies.
One might argue that, even more crucial (pun intended) than the crucifixion of Christ, His *resurrection* is actually THE most important part of the creed. “On the third day He rose again from the dead.” Also a historical, factual, definitive claim that asserts Christ’s supremacy over any belief in any other god - even Judaism or Islam, both of which purport to worship the one true God. 1 Corinthians 15:14 And if Christ be not risen again, then is our preaching vain: and your faith is also vain.
@@sartoriusrock this is not about the crucifixion so much as it is about the mention of Pontius Pilate: there is a when and a where that are historically verifiable, unlike legends and myths from antiquity and pagan religions. Edit: because yes, as St. Paul says, the Ressurrection is the point. But it is the mention of Pilate that leaves no room for "metaphoric" and symbolic-only interpretations, as Trent points out that so many liberals and political "Christians" do
Something people need to realize is that Lewis and his contemporaries meant something very different by the word "myth" than we do today. What Lewis and his contemporaries meant by it is a common cultural narrative that undergirds everything else in society, like the myth of King Arthur for the English or the myth of the Founding Fathers and the Crossing of the Delaware for Americans. It may or may not actually be true, but that's beside the point. And when Lewis says Christianity is myth that becomes reality, he means a common cultural narrative about itself and its origins that also happens to be verifiably true. That's what Lewis meant by myth, which is fundamentally different from what we mean: that is, a bunch of hokum with no basis in empirical evidence that you cease believing beyond childhood. That's not what a myth is in the classical sense and people need to understand that.
I love that this video was almost a collaboration between Trent and Alex to take down this meager Christianity. Would love to see them have a conversation
@zipppy2006 Honestly, agreed. I love Trent, but secular and political Christianity and foundationally different. One is consistent with orthodoxy and the other depends on a rejection thereof
3:21 I think this perfectly illustrates the point of the controversy with Gavin Ortlund today. Bashum cares more about what Christianity can do than for what Christianity is.
This is really helpful to keep emphasizing, I think. It seems to me like a large plurality of young, very online Christians who consume so much of this "political Christianity" are actually being catechized into something that is not the true faith. These are people who have been raised in the faith, want to hold on to it, but are looking for a new way to express it in today's generation. The problem is, a lot of us have latched onto political Christianity, rather than a real encounter with our Lord (most fully found in the CC and her whole life). As a lifelong Christian, it's been hard to articulate my discomfort with figures like Peterson for almost 10 years now, but this video is deeply insightful, and particularly relevant for those of us who are less mature in the faith, consuming a bunch of stuff on the internet.
I have to admit, though, that Jordan Peterson led me to Jonathan Pageau, who, though Orthodox, led me back to Catholicism. I'd be interested to know your take on Jonathan Pageau, and if it would affect how you hear Peterson, knowing that Pageau is influencing his thoughts on Christianity.
How did an Orthodox bring you to Catholicism? I'm curious because as an ex-protestant, I'm looking into these ancient faiths, and history is very complicated indeed.
@@miarymr8337 I was raised Catholic and, as I'm sure is the case for many people, fell away during my adolescent and young adult years. Pageau introduced me to a deeper understanding of Christianity so that I stopped seeing it as only a sort of moral philosophy. The idea of symbolism as physical manifestation of ideas, so that creation reveals truths about God, opened me up to seeing Christianity as a whole way of looking at the world instead of religion being this thing I wedged into my own view of the world, like an add-on. I was attracted to Orthodoxy and have attended a few Orthodox services. For a long time I was in limbo, not attending any church because I couldn't decide which one, and as my family grew I realized my stupidity. I was raising my children to be secular because I couldn't decide on denomination. Ultimately I found no compelling reason to reject the tradition that had been handed down to me, so stayed Catholic. I could give more reasons I was uncomfortable with the Orthodox church, but I could also criticize the Catholic church, and this post is perhaps already overly long.
@@miarymr8337I think search for the evidence on if the filioque is true or does the patriarch of Rome (pope) have special authority over the other patriarchs historically
Though I understand the criticisms of Jordan Peterson, I have a harder time condemning him. He was a huge stepping stone in my path of coming back to the church. I have many friends who have taken a similar path. Jordan's place might just be to draw athiests/agnostics in closer to the idea of God and making it make sense to more secular people. I pray for his full conversion, but can't condemn him for the good he's done.
@Lorena2m Christianity is the truth and the way. I'm just saying when I was an athiest, Jordan Peterson opened my mind to the idea of God. He was a 'gateway drug' to Christianity.
Donkins wants to enjoy the fruit without the tree. It's quite silly really. Ayaan Hirsi Ali when pushed said she "chooses to believe" in the Virgin Birth and the Resurrection of Christ, which is an interesting way of putting it. I think she's close to being a Christian but isn't quite there yet. I pray she finds the actual truth in Christianity and accepts Jesus Christ as her Lord and Savior.
That's always been my main problem with atheists. Even as an atheist, or agnostic, I can't help but be frustrated by the tremendous arrogance of people like Dawkins because they never hesitate to do damage to the very thing that played a pivotal role in the development of the society he loves to live in. He never stops to ponder on the damage he's helped to bring about, but he's real quick to make sure he's not blamed for anything that's resulted from the decline of the church he's worked tirelessly against all his life.
No one can pass a purity test. Why do we Christians always shoot ourselves in the foot? Or rather smack an outreached hand? Everyone’s path comes in different forms. Some intellectual. Some emotional. Some out of grief, others from joy. Something can exist both literally and symbolically.
Amen to that!i had an encounter with Jesus...my girl too!i feel so bless and at peace knowing that someone love me unconditionaly and that i will spend eternity with our Father....lots of videos about NDE and nurses taking care of dying patients on you tube...there is something..God is real!God bless you🙏❤️
I’m so happy to have found your channel. You are smart and explain things so well. And you point out errors in thinking in your own side, which is something that really helps me understand Christianity. When I was younger I would watch these kinds of debates and whenever there was this error in thinking from the theist side, i took it as an indication that they have no answer, and therefore the atheist declaration must be true. While I still have no faith, I’m genuinely interested and trying to reconsidered everything disregarded as untrue nonsense when I was younger. You act in good faith *no pun intended* and there really should be more intelligent apologists like you out there.
Great video! Utilitarian Christianity is like building castles on a sand bank. It can be really promising at the beginning, but will eventually fall onto the hostile sea.
Yes, this is something I've been struggling with especially since JP was on Pints. It would be great for you to have a conversation with him! Thanks for another great video.
Well said. Ali here seems more Christian than her critics. Not that her critics are acting in bad faith; I just think they're misunderstanding her. If she seems too "intellectual" in her approach, one must consider that she's talking to an atheist, and a rather shallow one at that.
I seriously respect the willingness to turn towards the “right” and parse out the problems and dangers in it. It’s so easy to punch to the left, especially for grounded, traditional, Christians. But I always respect when someone will be honest about the issues within a camp that so closely resembles one’s own worldview.
If you watch and listen to Jordan Peterson, especially through time, you’ll see that he’s getting closer and closer to becoming a full fledged believer. He’s done a ton of soul searching over the past few years, becoming more and more enamored with the Bible and Christianity. He’s one or two steps away from becoming a Christian.
Peterson just likes good stories. Have you watched his debates with sam harris and matt dillahunty. His view of christianity is totally different to the norm. What is a true christian anyway?
11:18 you fall for his word salads. "the deepest fairytales are the most real, thats for sure". Do you even understand what he's saying? You claim him as your own and that's what he wants because he's made loads of money out of it.
I would like to think so too, I found his PWA interview so fascinating because he seems to understand the meanings of the Bible stories so well except for the meanings that matter most! He needs our prayers ❤
@@redmed10what exactly am I falling for? The only claim I made is that he sounds like he’s approaching belief. If you watch Peterson through time, he went from pretty much avowed atheist to taking a huge interest in, making a defense of, and adapting tenets of Christianity. An atheist rarely goes from atheist to devout Christian overnight. That’s just not how it goes.
Trent, you're right about "political Christianity" but it is even broader than those who are lacking in the faith; the problem is looking at a political position or "party" as the antidote to our cultural woes, the realization of which will "save" us. The same logic can be applied to Church politics, thinking that Church would be in much better shape if more people thought like "us." We have to believe and live according to the Truth primarily because it is the Way, communion with God; not because it will theoretically bring about some temporal end in Church or secular politics.
The "Catholic Church" is already a political institution. Where did Jesus instruct his followers to set up a seat for the Pontiffex? We know that Pontiffex(Chief Priest) is a title created by Numa Pompelius, the second KING of Rome after its founder Romulus, the son of god. The Popes rule over the Roman Curia, the administrative branch of the Roman state with all its SECRETARITAS, but call it CHURCH. We believe this has been the primary source of all the confusion in the world. Paul, when he asked his disciples to appoint Bishops and Deacons, his intention was to replace the Roman Senators with the Bishops and the Deacons were to replace the Priests of the Roman Temple, the Fourth Branch of the government. He didn't mean to create Theocracy as it turns out to be under the popes. Their RUSE MUST BE DISMANTLED so the world may start over the process as laid out by the Jewish Messiah(Christ).
Jordan Peterson's "biblical view" in his last appearance on the Joe Rogan Experience certainly seems more of an intellectual appreciation more than anything else.
Thank you, Trent, for this video. I see this in some of my family members. They are quick to promote Christianity and Catholicism but seem more loyal to the Republican party than to Christ. They will defend Trump at all costs but be skeptical about the Church. I would put them in a politically Christian category because their alignment is more with the party than it is with Jesus and His Church. For instance, they will admit there is a spiritual battle, but when I agree with them and tell them to pray or read more of the Bible, Catechism, or theology, they agree in theory but in practice, they continue watching mostly Senate hearings, Fox News, conservative UA-camrs, etc.
@@mussman717word He became a Christian when he was baptized as an infant by his father. Just because he isn't Catholic, neither am I, doesn't mean he doesn't do a wonderful job at defending Christianity and the basic tenants of the faith. Trent certainly acknowledges this as he has teamed up with him on multiple occasions to defend the faith. It's the same reason I like listening to Trent and Akin despite the fact I find their arguments for Catholicism wanting.
The benefits of Christianity for culture and politics are certainly signs of its truth, but such benefits should lead people to explore, judge, and hopefully embrace its truth, not merely use as the most subjectively useful religion. That's what started us down the wrong path to begin with (e.g. Kant).
@@JLB00333 Nobody is saved because they believe the historical fact that a man named Jesus of Nazareth was crucified and resurrected. They are saved because they trust in Him for salvation, are baptized and obey Him. Trusting and obeying Christ require choice but believing has nothing to do with choice. You believe because you are convinced it's true. There is no choice involved.
I definitely think "cultural Christian" is a better term than "political Christian", partly because it's an endonym rather than an exonym but also because condemning "political Christianity" makes it sound like you don't think Christians should be politically active or that their political views should not be informed by faith. A term for that view already exists, it's called secularism.
Exonyms are actually _more_ valid than endonyms. Endonyms only tell what a person wants others to see them as, and are usually fake. Exonyms tell us how others actually see you. Nobody gets to truly name themselves
@@marvalice3455 how poetic, a shame it's not true, but still. No, neither an exonym nor an endonym are inherently valid or invalid; however endonyms are far less likely to be contested and so lead to less confusion down the line when trying to discuss these ideas. If you take someone like Richard Dawkins and berate him for being a "political Christian" he will simply dismiss you by saying "well I'm not a political Christian" and you have to spend the entire discussion debating the semantics of terms. If instead you talk about being a cultural Christian then you can get straight to the actual content that is in dispute. Names are, first and foremost, taxonomic, and if your use of a name causes more confusion than clarity, or if it can be easily disputed, then it is a bad name.
I've seen you in clips and with other UA-camrs, but the fact you called out these "cultural" Christians for what they are makes me subscribe to you. Thank you!
I think this episode and the last one tacitly discuss two unlabeled groups of people: one that’s on the way in and another that’s on the way out. It seems that the challenge for us is to prevent incomers from becoming outvotes.
I appreciate your work Trent. Thank you. Praying for you, please pray for me, a sinner in need of mercy. I'm worried this goes into an unhelpful direction, presumptions about the faiths of others is tricky, I'm sure you, like all of us, are forever growing toward truth and live imperfectly toward it. I'd like to hear more about how you would encourage these folks toward a clearer truth. I'm reminded of the prayer of St. Ephraim. Thanks for all you do.
Like Ayan, I converted to Catholicism from Islam. At the same time, I’ve never been one to sit and debate why I’m Catholic or why I converted. Arguing about why I chose Catholicism seems counter intuitive because how does one explain why they love? I believe in Catholicism through my heart not through my mind. Growing up, I was taught Islam, but I never felt it in my heart. My parents sent me to Catholic school (which isn’t unusual for an Arab-Muslim household) because they wanted me to have a better education: Catholic school 5 days a week - then Islamic school one weekends. The juxtaposing world I lived in was life changing. At the same time, I don’t see Christianity as an allegory: the Bible isn’t a metaphor. I think Ayan and JP frame it this way because they’re still in the early process of their faith. Although I am a convert to Catholicism, having grown up in a Catholic school, I didn’t come to Catholicism through the logical mind. I knew when I attended church five times a week at school and read the Bible everyday, that everything Father Bill and my teachers were preaching was the truth because I felt it in my heart. It’s not something I can ever explain; even if I tried to - it will always fall short. My husband enjoys evangelizing Catholicism through hardy debates with his very Protestant family. While I always learn a lot from their discussions, it’s taught me that everyone expresses their love for Catholicism differently. Some people express their love through intellect and debate. Others, like me, feel it through service. Im introverted by nature - and evangelizing my views through debate is so outside my character that the thought of doing it makes me wanna faint. But I’m also a physician. And I’m very very very good at service. Service I can do. Debate? No thank you. 🙂↔️. People always expect that I have some great story about why I left Islam and converted to Catholicism. Or they always want to debate me about why I’m Catholic. But it’s not gonna happen. The heart loves what the heart loves. And while my childhood was certainly eclectic, I don’t want to spend my life talking about what was. How can I practice being Catholic if all I’m ever doing is looking back and comparing why one religion didn’t feel right. I don’t think Ayan is using Christianity so to speak. My sense is that she is still batling a lot of what she went through growing up. I think she lost a sense of meaning, and only recently begun to find this through Christianity. I have a lot of empathy for what she’s been through. I share a lot of the same childhood experience - but I at least was introduced to Catholicism so early on in life that I was grounded. I think she has chosen to explore her trauma by taking a stand against fundamentalism. This is incredibly brave. I wrote one article about fundamentalism after October 7 and got so much backlash from my family who disowned me for telling the truth. And there Ayan is, writing books! It’s quite remarkable. What she’s doing is nothing short of courageous. It certainly isn’t an easy path. Not one I would choose. But I understand why she has chosen it. And I think with support and grace, she will continue to find her path through Christianity, and a safe place to call home. When you grow up in a fundamentalist environment - it’s a unique experience. It’s very hard to explain to people what you’ve witnessed and the things you were taught as a child. For Ayan, to only now hear the message of Christ as an adult, she’s only now starting to unravel all the messages her unconscious has no doubt been brainwashed to believe. Messages she didn’t even know were still living inside her soul. I know this is the case because this is what happened to me -- except I had it in real time: ie - five days a week I learned about Jesus - twice a week I was sent to a place where the message was th EXACT opposite. Its hard for people to understand what that does to a child’s soul. Unless you’ve lived it - it’s a reality that simply can’t be put into words. My sense is, through Christ - Ayan has found truth, goodness, and beauty. And that, is the true blessing. Just my thoughts 💭
As an ex-atheist I think Trent is being a little too rigid, like anything other than total submission is unacceptable. If met with that kind of attitude initially I'd probably still be an atheist. It was actually Christian values that brought me around to Christianity. I got to a point where I realised that following Christian values and at least acting like a Christian would be beneficial to myself, my family, those around me and, by extension of all of that, society at large. THIS was enough truth for me for a long time. I was not convinced that God was real but I was absolutely, positively sure that Christian values were superior to any other set of values. And I actually got there through studying the statistics about traditional marriage (true marriage as taught by the Church). When Trent said that sometimes a simple answer is ok, I fear that sometimes those types of Christians can do the most harm. Thoughtless Christians who's answer is to thump the Bible and say because God said so. That's a simple answer, and ultimately as Christians we know it's true. But who does it reach!? I get through to more people when I talk about the 'practical' side of Christianity and about Christian values backed up by statistics than I do by telling people that God loves them. When I tell people God loves them they look at me like I'm weird. I think what is being labelled as Political Christianity will actually be an important step in the process for a lot of people. And this shouldn't be overlooked.
You're right, its a step. What Trent wants you would basically have to overcome the Enlightenment worldview (modernity) from our zeitgeist, which would be historical (severe understatement).
@@stevie943 because I believe that western civilisation, built upon Christian values, is the best civilisation to have ever existed. I think this is demonstrably true. I believe that Christian values are superior to any other set of moral values in every way. And I'm sick of the Anglophobia. It's become popular to bash the west for even the smallest infringement on decency whilst excusing the huge failings around the rest of the world. We get the blame for slavery for example, which we didn't start and didn't do as prolifically as the Arab world did. More slaves in fact went to Brazil than to America, but no one is asking for reparations from Brazil. We are in fact the first civilisation in history to make the practice of slavery illegal. But of course this gets overlooked. We are called racists and yet study after study shows that western countries are in fact the least racist countries in the world. If we want less immigration we are called white nationalists or Fascists and yet Muslims have far more rights in Christian countries than Christians have in Muslim countries. In fact Muslims have more rights in Christian countries than they do in Muslim countries! One day I got fed up of seeing this, of the double standards and of the inherent racism in the anti-western narrative that I changed my name to Western Supremacist. It gets people like you to ask the question. And it triggers the right sort of people who assume it is motivated by race which means I am able to both correct and educate them. In short; I'm trying to fight against the narrative that the best civilisation in history is inherently evil. Apologies for that being long and a bit of a rant 😂
Yes! Dear Trent, you nailed it! This video was necessary. It is so painful to see Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Jordan Peterson failing to understand Christianity! You are completely right. And we have to pray a lot for them. Thanks a lot, Trent!
@@hismajesty6272 It is an outflowing of grace. I was being "witty" in that politicizing Christianity is gross, but Christianizing politics wouldn't be so objectionable
16:00 it’s really only becomes a problem when you are expecting Christian fellowship with people who are not really converted or in the faith. And the big problem is that a LOT of Christians are like this, and it’s incredibly distressing and confusing to enter into the church with sincere faith surrounded by people who aren’t of the same conviction.
Hirsi Ali has only just very recently turned towards Christianity, so yeah her theology is not rigoursly perfect but just back off and give her time. And is having perfect theology what saves you in the first place? Will we take heavenly exams? Welcome former Muslims and Atheists who come to Christianity no matter how imperfectly, dont start wagging the finger at them.
This is 100% correct. I've found myself having to defend Ayaan for that exact reason. But she's making the mistake of not talking to Christian and Catholics and instead wasting her time in the political arena.
Your previous episode was great. Can't wait. Thank you, Trent. God bless you and hope you and your family have a light-filled peaceful joyful blessed day!
Not long ago, an atheist historian, Tom Holland, wrote a book titled, "Dominion." It didn't capture everything. But it did a fair job noting that the vast majority of humane and modernizing developments have been almost entirely dependent on a Christian worldview. Thankfully, most Christians in past ages have been far more concerned about making a real (political) difference in the world than those who naively accept all such good as a given.
Excellent video, Trent. I admit to being quite shocked by the last guy (the white racist) -- I had never seen him/heard of him before. How many people are influenced by him? I shudder to think! I also think you might have been a little hard on Ayan Hirsi Ali, who I admire for her suffering and her spiritual honesty. I do agree that she needs to learn more about her faith before debating it publicly.
I think you may have gone a bit too hard on Ali, especially on her wording for "choosing to believe." She knows her audience, she has a career of speaking to people and I don't think she came into this blind. She isn't giving a perfect representation, as you state, but I think you are interpreting her words there in a rather uncharitable way. Her response can give the impression that the decision is more important than the conviction itself. It can also be interpreted as a way of doubling down against what Dawkins is asking given the bias nature of it. He wants her to state it as fact as a means to shut her down later, it is a set up that he has done time and again. Saying she chooses to believe in it turns the table on him as she angles it to a personal choice, something that Dawkins holds as almost sacred.
I mean, Peterson became famous partly because of his Jungian reading of the Biblical stories, which yes, can be very deep and interesting, but it should not be considered an an "end all be all" approach, because Jung tends to "explain away" the supernatural. So yes, take it if it can help you deepen your understanding but don't rely solely on it because it's insufficient.
Completely okay to examine any religious belief system through an educational or political lens, but extremely cheap to reduce a religious belief system to that and not understand the depth of faith the followers have.
Thank you for addressing this issue. Worst of all is when they express views that are completely antithetical to core Christian principles, sometimes downright abhorrent things (e.g. being pro-genocide), and this stance somehow gets associated with how Christians think (politically, socially) or becomes representative of them, or more broadly the 'conservative' view (if that means 'Political' Christianity which purports to care about traditional/ Christian values).
I think Trent didn't do his due diligence in making a convincing argument here. Many of the pagan nations converted to Christianity through seeing the fruits of it and also because it was a national religion, furthermore most of us who are born into Christian families became Christian before hearing any apologetic arguments for the resurrection. To act like that's how people become Christian is a little bit silly. Many of the apologetic arguments didn't even exist 700 years ago... So did true Christians only come about recently in the age of apologetics? Also Ayaan has stated many times that she was empty without belief in God and that Christianity brought meaning and purpose to her life. If she chooses to believe the resurrection based on the real fruits it has born then how can you take issue. The idea that she should stay silent about her experience is also silly. She's not preaching or speaking on behalf of an institution. She's simply stating her experience.
Oh man. I love these videos because they are thoughtful and Trent doesn’t lapse into emotional reasoning and yet when he ended with the faith of a child stuff, it pierced my heart and reminded me to be like my little 6 year-old and not ask why all the time but also be willing to just crawl into a daddy’s arms and feel the tender love without worry, question, or even understanding.
Don't be so negative. Small steps. They are making it possible, thinkable...for people to make the transition. They are making Christianity culturally attractive again. The Lord is working through them. Peterson has led to more conversions that all the Bishops in America put together. Don't be so arrogant. The Lord is offering you a gift. Take it. Work with it
If Christianity is not willing to be political, it will be all but destroyed in the west by progressives. We need allies. It's important for people to understand the cultural value of Christianity, even if they don't yet have faith in Christ. I feel like this video missed the mark in terms of the importance of people like Peterson, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, etc. in moving the cultural conversation in a direction favorable to Christianity.
"Brand new converts should not be the faces of the faith." This is a solid judgment.
True, we shouldn't expect them to shoulder such a burden. Even the apostles had to have time and teaching to grow in faith.
I am not apolitical
No, it's not. It's overbroad. Ali should not be the face of the faith as a new convert. But St. Paul himself was a brand new convert and was placed over whole swaths of the Christian faithful. And there are other examples. It really depends on the person. Ali may not be up to the task. But it goes too far to say that NO new convert could do it. She obviously has not spent that much time learning her new faith. And that's okay. All in God's timing. Don't think for a moment that this was not the plan for such bad faith actors as Richard Dawkins. He would never debate someone like Dr. Peter Kreeft, for example, or anyone else more learned . He is the most deluded and arrogant. We must pray for his conversion.
@@chefEmersonWilliams Paul's own testimony is that after conversion he went to Arabia for three years. Then the other Apostles sent him to Tarsus, where he remained for years. After Barnabus brought him to Antioch, he remained there for more than a year, being the junior partner.
By the time of his first missionary journey, Paul was by no means a new convert.
@@Pedro-bk1icand furthermore, he was one of the best learned Pharisees before that! All of his already attained knowledge would increase with great rapidity, and thus he became one of the greatest Christians to ever live! I wish I knew the Old Testament so well.
This is why I respect Trent. He's not afraid to criticize both sides of the political spectrum, both liberal and conservatives. That deserves a lot of respect in today's climate.
Agreed.
The problem is those people really aren’t “conservatives”
@@vwabi both sideism is just a cope out to claim being fair or being neutral. One side is worse than the other, this has always been the case and is certainly the case now.
Right/Left (and those terms vary greatly from time to time and place to place) is an amazing masterpiece of Satanic gerrymandering.. Christians need to be both Left and Right, and neither Left nor Right.. In politics we make our best prudential judgements in our own time and place according to revelation and using the rational tools God has given us.. Political formations of any stripe whatever should never be allowed to claim anything but conditional allegiance from us. Jesus' Kingdom is not of this world.
Absolutely love this about him! Very rare to find.
As an atheist, I enjoy listening to Trent. He's honest and clear in his thoughts. I also respect his charitable approach to arguing with opponents and steel manning their positions before criticizing them.
Im with ya, hes my go-to for christian apologetics.
I like him because I feel he his good values, when he debated Destiny I kind of realized some of the people I followed like Destiny were very clever but had some questionable morals - even if I agreed with them a lot of the time.
As a Catholic, I am happy to see atheists like you, who respect us. I am praying for your conversion to the Catholic Church! God bless you!🇻🇦✝️🙏❤️
@@JewTube001I gotta say, I don’t think Trent did especially well in that debate. Destiny was willing to bite bullets in a way that Trent wasn’t.
Trent even said during the course of the debate that his goal was to convince people of his position and that he was willing to use what he considered to be poor but convincing arguments to do so - he said something like ‘there are two arguments I could give for this, one of them is bad and I don’t hold it but it’s superficially convincing so I’m going to give it anyway because my goal is to convince as many people as possible’.
I think that’s why he wasn’t willing to fully engage with how a society that considers fertilized eggs to have moral equivalence to you and I would actually need to be set up. Trent’s goal was to convince people, not to discuss, so he did everything in his power to avoid sounding or looking bad - including refusing to bite bullets that he really had to bite, like investigating every miscarriage as a potential crime scene.
@@antoniomatejgveric903
I respect people, but not necessarily their beliefs. I think that Christianity is goofy, repulsive, and an insult to human dignity and freedom. But I can get along with Christians so long as they behave civilly towards me.
Idk what has to happen for Trent to sit down with Jordan Peterson and talk for a couple hours but I pray that it does
Or Jimmy Akin either or PLEASE
JP would rather cry as usual or there’s gonna be a litteral fight
Trent would expose Peterson for the atheist he is
@@lucacuradossi1040 or he could help him confront his belief in god. That would be far better.
There’s not enough bandwidth on earth to handle that awesomeness.
I'm from Germany and all priests I know, as well as most devout catholics know you're channel and appreciate you're work. The impact you have on the church with catechising young christians, other lay people and even priests cannot be underestimated!!! Its a blessing😃
Also: It was funny how you pronounced "Mit Brennender Sorge"😅
But Aren’t the Germans the ones who are demanding gay marriage and female priests kinda nonsense ?
I find it a bit frustrating how he dogdes the issue, that the catholic church had taught hatred of the jews for centuries. Denying equal rights to them, through official church teaching. He also misrepresents the churches stance on slavery. I guess it is easier to remain a catholic when you start to ignore everything that conflicts with your view of the one holy and apostolic church. Since you are from Germany I would advise to read Olaf Blaschke, Die Kirchen und der Nationalsozialismus. It speaks volumes that catholic priests need an "apologist" to explain their faith to them. I haven't heard a word of condemnation from Trent when it comes to the Ugandan Bishops supporting the death penalty for homosexuals. As this issue wasn't adressed in "Mit brennender Sorge" one can only assume that the church is fine with it.
Grüße! Dürfte ich fragen, aus welchem Bundesland du kommst?
@@wilhufftarkin8543 Gude, Hessen du
Nrw hier✋️
“You will find this again and again about anything that is really Christian: everyone is attracted by bits of it and wants to pick out those bits and leave the rest. That is why we do not get much further: and that is why people who are fighting for quite opposite things can both say they are fighting for Christianity.” - C.S. Lewis
I agree about Peterson, but I think we should give grace to Ayaan. She is a new convert and unlike Peterson, she proclaims the real resurrection and divinity of Christ.
The problem lies in her being a public figure and this will lead many to misperceive Christianity.
@@Cavirexwhat nonsense. This woman lives under the reality of dying for her Christian faith 24/7! Do you or I?! I tell you Almighty God looks upon a person like Ayaan as a dear daughter. I would propose those under threat of martyrdom have nothing to worry about - whether there theology is as neat and tidy as this UA-camr or not.
The Zionist propagandist like Douglas Murray and Ben Shapiro only love her for critising Islam. That's all. Not bse she's Christian.
@@Cavirex
//Many will misperceive Christianity//? Are you here for pure entertainment?
What about that dunce of Dawkins, whom gets on my nerves every single time I see and hear him??? He will have an unlucky future I predict... 🤮
Jesus spent 40 days in a dessert to spend time in solitude, when all those UA-camrs go straight on camera and acting as they are an experts on the Bible. They ain’t humble at all and there’s no repentance which is a big red flag. In my opinion, Candace Owens are just getting worse and worse. I used to love her, but her arrogance is sickening. She mocks and just looks for the opportunities where someone will praise her, regardless of who she’s going to throw under the bus. It was disgusting when she went on this awful whatever show, where those “so called Christian guys “ invite the least intelligent and most broken women with intention to humiliate them. She really had time of her life there
Ayaan seems the most earnest. It was touching when she said she chose it. A real act of trust. "I may not have answers but I choose to trust you". John 20:29 Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed!
She's a grifter. Don't read too much into it.
lol what??? She doesn't even believe in it. She chose Christianity to fight against Islam
The reason she's getting alot of Zionists publicity is because she's a former Moslem who hates Islam. They wouldn't give a former Jew who hates Judaism the same treatment. It's all designed to make Christians hate Moslems and not look at what the Zionists are doing.
@@radscorpion8 And who made you a judge over another man's servant? Why do you want to condemn that which Christ has saved?
Na, she was an atheist first@@radscorpion8
I can't thank you enough for this video, Trent. Said all the things that have been bugging me for years lol
Woah, did not expect to find you here! Cool!
@@krzysztofadamczyk1040check his metal and catholicism video!
Hey you are here as well!
Woah! super cool seeing you here!
I had the same reaction! I couldn't pinpoint it, but Trent explained it perfectly!
Trent, I am always amazed by your clear, simple (not simplistic) logic. God Bless you every day of your life.
Ayaan does believe.
Now, I'm someone who's very close to Ayaan's beliefs. Sure, you can argue that I'm a fencesitter, but here's the truth of what I think: I was an atheist for a long time. Then I slowly started seeing that everything that Christianity had to say about the world was actually correct. (Morally, especially.) Jordan Peterson actually helped with that. I started thinking that being a Christian was a beneficial thing, and that following the teachings of Christ is a good way for a better society. Then, I started going to church, and I started believing.
If someone asks me whether I know for certain that Christianity is true and right - no, I don't. I don't know for sure whether Jesus Christ is God. But I choose to believe it. In a way, the fact that I'm uncertain doesn't bother me any more. I judged them by their fruit, and Christianity, based on its results, seems to be more true to me than everything else.
I don't go around proclaiming I know the truth because I honestly am not sure. I don't know whether it matters whether the Eucharist is literally or figuratively the body of Christ. I receive it with the same reverence regardless. But my life has become a lot better since I've been going to church, and I'm happy with that. If that's not enough, then, well, I approached it with utmost honesty and an open mind, and I guess it wasn't meant to be.
Well, to my best understanding the Eucharist is a Miracle. A miracle being what happens when the metaphysical and the merely physical become one. So I dont think it is incorrect to say that the Eucharist is both literally and figuratively the body of Christ. Like, if the Eucharist is Christ, then He is present both in body AND spirit. Physical and metaphysical. Can anything be more True than that?
Thanks for your words. I'm a Christian (Protestant), a proclaimer of Christianity (among people of Ayan's background) who has always felt the weight of some of the atheistic arguments (naturalism) and the problems associated with believing all old testament accounts are historical. Evidence has brought me against my will farther and farther from some aspects of my original fundamentalism, without denying the essentials of the faith as I see them. The Scripture is my moral authority for sure. Petersen and Ayan have been especially helpful voices to contemplate...
@Lorena2mno, no one is saying it is a useful lie. Stop being condescending and acid in other’s comments asking the same thing.
@Lorena2m you have no knowledge of what I or others believe, and are acting in a very presumptuous and conceited manner... You know nothing of what I believe or don't believe, and you acting like a condescending prick hurts christianity more than the people that you think are doing harm to it, as if you are the paragon of virtue. Grow up and follow Christ example... He did told us to stand up against "over the fencedness" but only if you KNOW it's happening... How can you assert with such conviction about being better or more righteous of people that you know nothing about?
@Lorena2m an essential leap of faith may be a bit closer to what is being discussed
100% agree. I used to like Jordan Peterson before I discovered Christ because he spoke strongly about the state of men and little boy's struggles in the current world. But after becoming Christian and occasionally seeing clips of Jordan Peterson arguing for the existence of God in relation to our society today, I find he doesn't really speak about Jesus or the apostles or the doctrines of our faith, but instead his own observations of the world. It's so superficial and isn't fulfilling to me as a Christian who believes Jesus being resurrected from the dead to be true.
He's more of a "Judeo-Christian" than a Christian - i.e., he believes in the Judeo-Christian values and ideas, more than anything concrete about the faith.
Oh if only Peterson realize...
Of all religions, Christianity is the most "on the border" religion.. And of all Christianities, Catholic is the most "on the border" philosophically. Catholic always encapsulates the duality of all things uniting within one system, body & spirit, faith & reason, tradition & revelation, conservatism & progressivism, eastern & western, magisterium & scripture, etc. The Church is literally keeping the world together instead of breaking apart.
Tied to the anchor himself, the cornerstone. This quality is so pronounced in the church by its being the flesh of the very one who upholds the whole world.
Could you define what you mean by "on the border"?
@@str.77 ha! that's a good one
@@str.77 but, if you're really asking. It's the encapsulation/totality of what seemingly opposite. Science & religion for example, which is the front Peterson is on and what he means when he says he exist on the border, is that he bridges the gap between the 2 sides, in fact it was never meant to be separate, it became ruptured only post-enlightenment. (and the enlightenment btw, was a response / explosive backdraft to somewhat gnostic theology of protestant christianity).
You can apply these to all Catholic theology & practice. There's always "and", not "only". Even God The Trinity, exist as Union and Multiplicities (seemingly irreconcilable concept).
@@sololoquy3783 Okay. Maybe.
Protestantism is not Gnotic though. Not even somewhat.
I'd be a little cautious in criticizing this trend towards cultural/moral Christianity. In my own journey towards Catholicism, Jordan Peterson was instrumental. First he convinced me of the psychological meaning, which was not far from the moral and allegorical meanings, which eventually led me to accept the literal and analogical after research into arguments for the faith. This can be a pipeline into the true faith for open minded Atheists/Agnostics, despite being a catalyst for creating lukewarm cultural Christians out of actual practicing ones.
Exactly
That sword cuts both ways, I'm afraid
I definitely started reading the Bible again for the 1st time since getting into the New Atheist movement because of Peterson. He really is the greatest bridge that Christians have.
Reread the last paragraph of his comment, and you’ll find he makes it clear he’s aware of that.
“This can be a pipeline into the true faith for open minded Athiests/Agnostics, *despite being a catalyst* for creating lukewarm Christians out of actual practicing ones.”
Same. Jordan Peterson -> Jonathan Pageau -> Trent Horn pipeline.
Political Christianity has a place in evangelizing. I needed it to start taking steps in my own journey. Now Byzantine Catholic here, now discerning my vocation. Thank you, Trent, for your own part in my journey.
I don't entirely grasp Trent's take on Ayaan Hirsi Ali here. For one, there's an enormous number of pagan civilizations that were Christianized because, at least at the beginning, the people of those cultures grasped the utility of adopting Christianity well before they took it to heart, so to speak. Secondly, Ali has also spoken about how prayer led her out of suicidal despair, and that this made the biggest difference for her current religious trajectory. It feels odd to not find that mentioned here. And finally, she is speaking to a politically-minded audience, so how can we blame her for taking a political angle in her conversations?
Yeah I don't think Trent was fair to Ali here
I think Trent was honest in his critique in that he “worries” that people like Dawkins will garner followers when he humiliates his opponents on the subject. Therefore I think he is coming from a intellectual tactical point of view. Hopefully he can clarify.
Yes I agree. Personally, a major part of my conversion was what Christianity affords us and what it has given us in the past and how life giving it really is.
This eventually leading me down a path to an understanding that Christianity and God are the Truth!
I actually don’t think you are being fair to both Trent and historical truths. I guess the point is that it embodies a level of vulnerability to outsider attacks that is simply imprudent to make it representative of Christianity. It is hardly commendable that recent converts speak of the faith to non-believers’ attacks, let alone under socio-political lenses and rationale: it will only make the attacks probably more successful to any conceivable audience whenever we start to get off from the starting point of the race. Besides, I don’t really understand the claim that many pagan people first converted to the faith under utility and then started to believe: it was much more fitting that Romanized pagan England rejected St Augustine of Canterbury’s preaching, or Celtic pagan Ireland rejected St Patrick’s, or that pagan Germany rejected St Boniface’s, or that the first Greco-Romans rejected the apostles because it actually could get them persecuted and even killed. Is it fitting to any concept of utility whatsoever in the actual historical data? It was much more utilitarian to remain pagan: people indeed converted because of the radical boldness of the claims of Christianity being lived AND an ACTUALLY getting the beliefs of the believing community whose testimony could lead them to losing earthly life.
On the question about Ali, I think Trent was fairly clear that new Christians shouldn't be the face of Christianity. Ali's conversion is something to praise God for, but I believe she's been a Christian for less than 2 years at this point, right? And her conversion occured due to an experience rather than reason, which is the case for most converts.
Ali may yet become a great apologist, but she shouldn't be debating Richard Dawkins in a public forum while her faith is still so young. We don't give meat to children, but milk.
Wake up babe, new Council of Trent video just dropped
🔥
I thought Ali talked about her personal struggles leading her to the realization she was "spiritually bankrupt". It's not honest of you Trent, to say it wasn't sufficient.
@@pela907That is his personal view, mine as well, love her though
I like Trent, but I feel he's being unfair to Aryan in this case. In the same article "Why I Am Now A Christian," which was quoted in the video, Aryan herself mentioned, "...I would NOT be truthful if I attributed my embrace of Christianity SOLELY to the realization that atheism is too weak and divisive a doctrine to fortify us against our MENACING FOES. I have also turned to Christianity because I ultimately found life without any spiritual solace unendurable-indeed very nearly self-destructive. Atheism failed to answer a simple question: What is the meaning and purpose of life?''
Aryan is not a Christian apologist, so it's unrealistic to expect her to provide an in-depth, apologetic defense of her new faith-especially when she's still in the process of learning it. When I converted to Christianity from Islam, I also struggled initially with defending the "truth" of Christianity. However, like Aryan, who mentioned how prayer saved her from suicidal thoughts (a point not fully covered in Trent's reaction video), I chose to believe in the resurrection of Christ and the Trinity. These concepts didn't make complete sense to me at the time, but as I learned more about the faith, I found better ways to explain and defend it to my Muslim friends and family.
This, 100%. It's ridiculous to expect ayaan to speak to Dawkins as an apologist would. We already have a dozen of those conversations online anyway. Ayaan's perspective is valuable for Christians to realize the thought patterns that might reach atheists in today's secular world. Historical evidence of miracles is just not compelling to people indoctrinated against the concept of miracles.
Great point
"Aryan is not a Christian apologist, so it's unrealistic to expect her to provide an in-depth, apologetic defense of her new faith-especially when she's still in the process of learning it."
This is fair. The solution to this is that she shouldn't be dialoguing with people over a faith that she's still new to and trying to learn. Putting herself out in the public eye like this correctly and fairly opens up her positions to critiques, and the fault lies with her for being unprepared while agreeing to speak publicly about it.
I think his main objection was they she is a fledgling christian who hasn’t grown into her theology, yet she is on a stage in front of hundreds of people talking to one of the most WELL KNOW outspoken atheists about the truth claims of Christianity. By taking on that role she is an apologist but she has done it poorly.
I think Trent was mostly trying to point out that her choice of words indicate she may not actually fully believe Christianity, it wasn’t so much about not being able to defend the faith properly.
A priest we had said we should St. Paul says we pit away childish reasoning, but not our childLIKE love of God. I like that distinction.
Serious question: what about all of the sceptics like Peterson and myself who cannot force ourselves to believe as children yet value the faith? Should we just be chucked aside for being honest about our doubts?
@@Charlotte_Martel Having doubts is okay. But to dedicate your intellectual life and debating regurlay these issues and not having a straight answer for your beliefs is problematic.
@@Charlotte_Martel Honestly, Charlotte, as a baptised Christian but a true devotee of God only as of the last few years, I don't really believe that it's up to us to believe child-like. We don't flick the switch - God does. Now, we do need to plug in and be ready - which you seem to be doing. Just please wait for Him. I know that sounds like Oprah-style Christian-themed gobbledygook but it's true. Just keep at it, ask questions and search for answers. And then one day, you'll feel swept up by a very powerful current - probably the one from flicking the switch on you 🤣 - and, as Trent points out in the video, it will lead to a Yes/No invitation. I effectively said Yes at mine. 2Tim 3:1-5... I was effectively converted at my "Yes". That passage rearranged itself as a question: "What sort of person do you want to be? Do you want to be like the people described in this passage?" I said "No, I want You!". Many, many trials later, including many ongoing ones now, I'm still with Him. I can't un-know what I experienced that day when I read that passage. And I didn't do anything remotely as you've done to deserve it either. He just flicked my switch that day for reasons only He knows. In response, I quieted all the rising questions in my mind and just went along. Hope this helps 🙏✝️🌹
It is difficult to believe like a child. Childlike faith doesn't mean you have no doubts. Many Christians struggle deeply with doubts, but they still try to follow Jesus. They have "faith as a mustard seed" which can move mountains (Matt 17:20).
Why do you value the faith? Do you want to believe? If you want to believe, and you still have doubts, continue seeking God. Ask Him for faith. I know this answer isn't always satisfactory, but I have seen it work out in the life of my best friend. She was an agnostic, very skeptical and unsure. She sought God by reading the Scriptures, learning arguments through videos like these, visiting churches, asking questions to everyone she could. At one point, she wanted to believe but felt she couldn't. After a few years, she now believes. It is possible. Do not give up.
Mark 9:23-24
[23] “ ‘If you can’?” said Jesus. “Everything is possible for one who believes.” [24] Immediately the boy’s father exclaimed, “I do believe; help me overcome my unbelief!”
"Help my unbelief" this man prayed for his son to be exorcised by Jesus. This prayer does wonders my friend.... keep seeking Him and you will find Him.
@@Charlotte_Martel "Do your doubts not also deserve the same criticism, skepticism, nay doubt that your beliefs do?" - Lewis
Just a thought and how I've wrestled through ideas as a Christian.
I must say I somewhat disagree with Trent's assessment of Ayaan Ali's position. I agree that she still has a lot of maturing to do in her beliefs, and that intellectual conviction is important, but for me, "I choose to believe" (based on her fascination with the prominence of love in the Christian faith, which seems to be connected to a personal experience as well, as implied by her own feeling of having "died" and being reborn) is more legitimate than what Trent seems to allow. People frequently choose to accept doctrines that they aren't convinced of intellectually based on other reasons (e.g. based on belief in Church authority, or based on having a clear religious experience). And although the historical Resurrection is absolutely foundational to the Christian Faith, I don't see why it can't also be accepted by "choice", based on something else that captured someones heart or intellect. If she follows up this "choice" with further investigation and study, she'll likely be rewarded with more understanding - just like someone who chooses to follow the Church's teaching on, say, the Assumption of Mary, and then based on that learns more on it. But on the other hand, even if one stops at a "choice", it can be a legitimate way of accepting Faith, as long as this "choice" means: I choose to accept the proposition that this is TRUE, even if I'm doing this based on something else than just intellectual grounds.
Otherwise, hard to disagree with the main point of the video. Very needed video, thanks!
I enjoyed reading your comment and I agree. Thank you
Agreed, Mr. Horn seems to be responding to trends among recent converts, who perhaps haven't integrated/reconciled their new Christian beliefs with their past (political) selves. Indeed, we all need to work on ourselves, and in sharing our own faith journeys, we can share with others our ongoing conversions of mind, body, and soul.
The quest for truth can be very disorienting , thank you Trent for earnestly communicating and helping along the way. Much love to you and your family 🙏
Thank you so much for your support! -Vanessa
@@TheCounselofTrentHow come you never answer emails on your website?
@@TheCounselofTrent Hi! As someone from a Soviet culture (now an immigrant in the USA) I believe that the resurrection was staged by the Romans, as explained in a popular book where I'm from - "The Gospel of Afranius"; like many others, I read it in childhood and never thought about this question again - until coming to the USA and noticing a stark contrast in the discussion of this question. What's wrong with that explanation? Also, I believe matter is eternal - it can only move and change but not appear from nowhere - seems like common sense to me, but apparently not here in the US, what's wrong with that?
@@TheCounselofTrent I am seriously considering not finishing watching this video for the safety of my soul. The idea that it is good to showcase a virulent atheist in a public speaking role denying the truth of the Catholic faith while showing an inadequate response is treacherous. The triumph of truth through debate is a lie.
@@TheCounselofTrentI like you Sir, but I see a fail in your critiques.. what about Pope Francis? Hey hás a very political side (left) and is not a very good one for The church and The World. Any comments on that?
I'm very grateful to Dr. Peterson's takes on psychological truths contained in Scripture and the Catholic faith, but what Trent brings up in this video is exactly what frustrates me when he steps out of those things. He's a psychologist, not a theologian or apologist, and we should be cognizant of that when he speaks about those things.
Yup. 👍👍
Regarding Alex o'Connor's question regarding the camera before the Christ's tomb at 13:11
The Gospels don't say that our Lord Jesus Christ walked out of the tomb, they say only about the angels on the tombstone. We know from the Gospel of Luke that Christ could travel through distance instantaneously and could go through the closed doors, and so He might have done just that.
Yeah, the stone wasn't rolled away to let Jesus out. It was rolled away so people could witness the empty tomb.
Accept in your will to avoid evil, the greatest possible idea of what he did. And do not diminish or corrupt those ideas.
@@williamquinn2313 well, those would be speculations in the end..
Your point is completely tangential. Regardless of whether Jesus walked, crawled, flew, jumped, diffused or transmigrated out of the tomb, would a light camera taken back in time, have captured it? That's the question.
The simple answer is YES.
@@kenechukwuasogwa2345 sure. I just wanted to point out that detail.
Jonathan Pageau (the best translator of Jordan Peterson to English) in one of his latest videos clips said it best “He’s not baptized, he’s not a Christian”
So much for the thief on the cross then. lol C'mon dude...wake up!
@@fakeyououtdotcom2409- dumb take. The thief on the cross had NO OPPORTUNITY to baptized… he was literally being crucified. DUHHHRRR…
Meanwhile Peterson has all the time and opportunity in the world to be baptized. Stop the nonsense.
@@fakeyououtdotcom2409exceptional circumstances don’t make the standard. Jordan Peterson isn’t on his deathbed crying out to God to be forgiven because he just learned about him, believe and BE BAPTIZED
But when Alex Oconnor asked Peterson on a podcast "if someone put a Panasonic camera at Jesus' tomb when he rose, would Jesus rise?" Peterson said "I suspect yes". So he may closer than we think...
in which video he said that?
Ayaan has been very open recently about her faith being personal and not just a reaction to the threat of Islam if you watch her interview with Glen Scrivener or the Unherd channel.
Jordan Peterson has been notoriously difficult to pin down, atheists are frustrated with him too! It's likely he is cagey about being put into the 'Christian box.' I do think that Jordan is like that friend you know who is flirting with becoming a Christian but still has many doubts but no argument will bring them in, it is up to the Holy Spirit!
Except Ali is completely ignorant to christianity and blind to the fact secularism is a bigger threat to christianity than Islam. The fact is islam is closer to christianity than western secularism. For instance she lavish praise to her new hone country of the netherlands for treating women equal. Does that include the red light district? It’s honestly pseudo feminist nonsense (Not to mention she was from somalia which isn’t an islamist nation)
Jordan Peterson's wife became Catholic at Easter 2024, so there may be hope....
@@fruzsimih7214if there wasnt hope for Peterson there would be no hope for the rest of us. He is a great man
Trent was too hard on Peterson. He's extremely frustrating to me, 100%. But he's at least being forthright. And more importantly, he's presenting legitimate arguments for orthodox Christianity which separates him from the liberals whose "arguments" are contingent upon a rejection of orthodoxy
Agree with this. People criticizing him seem to forget Romans 14:5 which says are are to be fully convicted in our own mind. For a clinical academic approaching the divine, this is a complex journey.
The phrase “I choose to believe in God.” hits at the heart of the volitional aspect of bowing to the truth of the gospel. I will take that over living “as if” the gospel is true.
Both are good starting points.
Calvinists: well akshually…
Those two sound like the same thing
@@Supreme_Lobster The difference is that you could choose to believe something is false but act like it's true anyway.
Definitely don't prefer the "as if" strategy, but Ben Shapiro has gotten me to appreciate that. I think he makes a good point that belief follows actions and that when you act a certain way, your mind starts to accept those practice are true and valid
When "The Dangers of 'Political Judaism'" drops, it's going to be a banger.
Silence, groyper.
@@drkissinger1troll
Oy
@@DrewPicklesTheDarkVey
That (((people))) are untouchable, dontcha know...
Thanks!
This was Just Beautiful! The last sentence you quoted brought tears to my eyes. The Triune God can neither deceive nor be deceived! Amen.
Thank you! Thank you for explaining our frustrations with Jordan.
Jordan Peterson is not a christan so I feel it is unfair to wrap him into the same sphere. He is more like a dawkins in context.
@@TimoG101 We don't mind him for not being a christian but rather we're glad that more people are calling out his vague approach about these issues. Dawkins is quite clear that he thinks christianity is completle non-sense and only has social utilitarian value.
I wish people would acknowledge with Peterson that he is someone who likes the sound of his own voice. He can really go off on these word salads and think that what he is saying is so profound.
I think Jordan is conflicted because his epistemology is torn between the modern atheistic worldview for the empirical, and the Christian worldview for the moral. I think something would need to happen to change the empirical portion of his worldview to commit to Christ, i.e. he would need to experience something so profound that he can't empirically qualify that causes extreme doubt in the atheistic rational explanation for existence. I'm not sure what that would be. God does not share experiences equally, e.g. only Peter, James, and John were witnesses to the transfiguration. In the same vein, there are Biblical warnings to be skeptical of experiences as well.
History cannot be verified empirically, i.e. experience it with your senses... so using historical arguments as a basis for belief eventually comes down to the rational realm. In the rational realm, truth is derived from your presuppositions (similar to an axiom in mathematics), which for a Christian, should derive from the self proclamation that Jesus is the truth, the way, and the life in John 14:6. At some point, these axioms are decided by faith, a decision to believe in the presence of uncertainty, a gamble of sorts, and to follow Christ, that gamble needs to be "all in".
Perhaps if Jordan could be convinced that many of the atheistic "truths" like the age of the universe, abiogenesis, consciousness, etc. are not truly understood empirically but actually rational explanations (i.e. stories or an atheistic mythos) from a microcosm of evidence from empiricism in space and time (e.g. none of us are eternal or omnipresent), then perhaps there is a way to break through his ideological duality to commit to Christ. Just as Darwin posited evolution without the knowledge of DNA based on similar morphologies of fossils, we all face the same dilemma of creating a worldview that is inevitably empirically out of reach to validate or even imagine. Remember, the scientific method is supposed to start with rationality (a human mind develops a hypothesis), then verifies the hypothesis through experiment (empiricism), but atheists want to flip things around where they take empirical measurements, create stories explaining those measurements, and call it "truth".
The heart of the issue is that Jordan is currently unwilling to go "all in" on Christ. I believe in the promise that those who seek shall find (Jeremiah 29:13), and God loves Jordan Peterson very much. Perhaps like Moses this is his time in the wilderness, but eventually God calls to everyone.
It was in part because of JBP arguments and Carl Benjamin too that I started attending church with my sons as an atheist. My family was eventually all baptized OCA, my husband and I and our three sons (and my fourth son just born will be baptized soon). We only realized the truth after years of attending, and we were convinced it was important to attend by JBP argument that we need something to tell us how to act in the world which science does not do (paraphrasing). So I have a fondness for JBP responses to these questions because they were like a bridge for us.
Amen. Jordan is a truth-seeker who has helped so many. He is on his own journey. I pray for him…and that people give him space as he wrestles with all this.
Ayyy Carl Benjamin! I hope to see him someday compelled to be Christian.
This is exactly why I hold JBP and such up for folks to see. Like you, he explained things in a way that I just couldn't do on my own. He made some kind of sense of things, but came at it from a logical and rational direction that I could relate with.
There's nothing more depressing than seeing christians attacking JBP as if he's some great horror because he dares to do things in a different way. Even as he's honoring christianity and showing the religion some strong support, christians deride him and his ideas. And these same christians often wonder why the church is failing! So very frustrating to watch.
This resonates with me on a personal level. When I was a mormon, my politics was a key driving force in my world view. Now, ever since I started my catholic journey, I notice politics for me has taken a back seat, and now I'm much more focused on theology, regardless of whatevers happening with this election year. For that, I do want to thank Trent for the work he's done helping folks like me better understand the catholic faith.
Do not make the mistake of thinking the two are not the same. You cannot have one without the other, and politics impacts your life just as much as religion does. What's worse, I think, is that so many christians have turned their backs on this, taking the easy way out, and not tended their garden. The reason things are so bad today is directly tied to the fact that christians have been taught to believe in the separation of church and state. This causes people to not fight for their state, what was a christian state, and now all of Christendom is overrun with foreigners, outsiders, non-believers, etc. It was through christianity that Europe, America, Canada, and Australia rose up to great heights, and raised the rest of the world as much as they could. Surrendering that in the name of being "nice" has cost the world greatly, and explains why we are where we are.
brilliant talk Trent. one of your best. brilliant!
When I was young I remember hearing a homily that shocked me at the time, in which the priest said that the most important part of the Creed was that Jesus was "crucified under Pontius Pilate". I mean, shouldn't it be one of the great mysteries like God's existence, the divinity of Jesus, the Trinity, the Incarnation or the Ressurrection? Now I realize that he was right: the major thing is that this is not mythology, it's factual history.
That’s a fantastic insight that I never thought to emphasize. Thanks for sharing!
Except that, for centuries, historical skeptics denied there was a Pontius Pilate.
Or to put it in a different light, had the mention of Pilate by Josephus and the tablet found in 1961 not given evidence that there was indeed a Pontius Pilate, would your faith in Christ been any different?
If not, than the historical evidences are not the root of faith. If so, then your faith lies in archeologists and Josephus.
Is it a nice confirmation to use in the testifying to the unsaved? Perhaps.
But practitioners of Judaism don't look at such "evidences" and say that Christ is the Son of Man.
In fact, much of Scripture is pointed retelling of historical factuality to Hebrews in Christ's time on earth clearly demonstrating his fulfillment of OT prophesies and naming names and bloodlines, etc, and they still did not believe the historical proofs given given them in plain sight.
That isn't to say that historical evidence plays no part in the spreading of the good news, but I would refute that homily. There is more evidence in looking out your window at the creation before you than in all of the records of mankind ever assembled.
For a man that witnesses childbirth, the orderliness of the cosmos, the a bee pollinating a flower, a man sacrificing himself for his family, or many of the countless other peculiarities and miracles of life, and still says "there is no God", will certainly reject a first century writer and an ancient tablet.
After all, the human mind is so contorted that we now live in a world where people have convinced themselves that men can have babies.
Fact. Literally! Thank you.
One might argue that, even more crucial (pun intended) than the crucifixion of Christ, His *resurrection* is actually THE most important part of the creed. “On the third day He rose again from the dead.” Also a historical, factual, definitive claim that asserts Christ’s supremacy over any belief in any other god - even Judaism or Islam, both of which purport to worship the one true God.
1 Corinthians 15:14
And if Christ be not risen again, then is our preaching vain: and your faith is also vain.
@@sartoriusrock this is not about the crucifixion so much as it is about the mention of Pontius Pilate: there is a when and a where that are historically verifiable, unlike legends and myths from antiquity and pagan religions.
Edit: because yes, as St. Paul says, the Ressurrection is the point. But it is the mention of Pilate that leaves no room for "metaphoric" and symbolic-only interpretations, as Trent points out that so many liberals and political "Christians" do
Something people need to realize is that Lewis and his contemporaries meant something very different by the word "myth" than we do today. What Lewis and his contemporaries meant by it is a common cultural narrative that undergirds everything else in society, like the myth of King Arthur for the English or the myth of the Founding Fathers and the Crossing of the Delaware for Americans. It may or may not actually be true, but that's beside the point. And when Lewis says Christianity is myth that becomes reality, he means a common cultural narrative about itself and its origins that also happens to be verifiably true. That's what Lewis meant by myth, which is fundamentally different from what we mean: that is, a bunch of hokum with no basis in empirical evidence that you cease believing beyond childhood. That's not what a myth is in the classical sense and people need to understand that.
Thank you for talking on this Trent, it's a great choice of content and hard to speak on.
10:37 The Catholic Church infallibly teaches that man can use reason to know God exists.
And that it is God's gift - this capacity of reason - that we might discover Him.
That's nice, if you happen to believe that the Catholic church can "infallibly teach" things.
Trent Horn you are an absolute blessing to all faithful Catholics!!! Thank you for all that you do to educate Catholics and Non-Catholics
God bless you, Trent. Your channel is very important!
I love that this video was almost a collaboration between Trent and Alex to take down this meager Christianity. Would love to see them have a conversation
They have in the past and they did share a lot of agreement on criticisms of weak Protestant theology
Trent missed the verse, "He who is not against us is for us." This video is unmeasured polemicism.
@zipppy2006 Honestly, agreed. I love Trent, but secular and political Christianity and foundationally different. One is consistent with orthodoxy and the other depends on a rejection thereof
3:21 I think this perfectly illustrates the point of the controversy with Gavin Ortlund today. Bashum cares more about what Christianity can do than for what Christianity is.
This is really helpful to keep emphasizing, I think. It seems to me like a large plurality of young, very online Christians who consume so much of this "political Christianity" are actually being catechized into something that is not the true faith. These are people who have been raised in the faith, want to hold on to it, but are looking for a new way to express it in today's generation. The problem is, a lot of us have latched onto political Christianity, rather than a real encounter with our Lord (most fully found in the CC and her whole life). As a lifelong Christian, it's been hard to articulate my discomfort with figures like Peterson for almost 10 years now, but this video is deeply insightful, and particularly relevant for those of us who are less mature in the faith, consuming a bunch of stuff on the internet.
I have to admit, though, that Jordan Peterson led me to Jonathan Pageau, who, though Orthodox, led me back to Catholicism. I'd be interested to know your take on Jonathan Pageau, and if it would affect how you hear Peterson, knowing that Pageau is influencing his thoughts on Christianity.
How did an Orthodox bring you to Catholicism? I'm curious because as an ex-protestant, I'm looking into these ancient faiths, and history is very complicated indeed.
Same story here. Johnathan just explains things like nobody else has
@@conorwood And you, why did you choose Catholicism over Orthodoxy?
@@miarymr8337 I was raised Catholic and, as I'm sure is the case for many people, fell away during my adolescent and young adult years. Pageau introduced me to a deeper understanding of Christianity so that I stopped seeing it as only a sort of moral philosophy. The idea of symbolism as physical manifestation of ideas, so that creation reveals truths about God, opened me up to seeing Christianity as a whole way of looking at the world instead of religion being this thing I wedged into my own view of the world, like an add-on.
I was attracted to Orthodoxy and have attended a few Orthodox services. For a long time I was in limbo, not attending any church because I couldn't decide which one, and as my family grew I realized my stupidity. I was raising my children to be secular because I couldn't decide on denomination. Ultimately I found no compelling reason to reject the tradition that had been handed down to me, so stayed Catholic. I could give more reasons I was uncomfortable with the Orthodox church, but I could also criticize the Catholic church, and this post is perhaps already overly long.
@@miarymr8337I think search for the evidence on if the filioque is true or does the patriarch of Rome (pope) have special authority over the other patriarchs historically
Though I understand the criticisms of Jordan Peterson, I have a harder time condemning him. He was a huge stepping stone in my path of coming back to the church. I have many friends who have taken a similar path. Jordan's place might just be to draw athiests/agnostics in closer to the idea of God and making it make sense to more secular people. I pray for his full conversion, but can't condemn him for the good he's done.
@Lorena2m Christianity is the truth and the way. I'm just saying when I was an athiest, Jordan Peterson opened my mind to the idea of God. He was a 'gateway drug' to Christianity.
@Lorena2m Are you even Christian? It’s not obvious with the way you are trying to repel people by scrutinizing their beliefs and berating them.
@Lorena2mI’m sorry you have such corruption in your heart that this is what you choose to do with your life.
@Lorena2mWhat’s your name?
- You: My name is Lorena2m
Oh, I thought your name was strawman.😊
Donkins wants to enjoy the fruit without the tree. It's quite silly really.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali when pushed said she "chooses to believe" in the Virgin Birth and the Resurrection of Christ, which is an interesting way of putting it. I think she's close to being a Christian but isn't quite there yet. I pray she finds the actual truth in Christianity and accepts Jesus Christ as her Lord and Savior.
also i don’t get why she bashes islam for hating women when she lives in a country that sells women like meat on a rack.
That's always been my main problem with atheists. Even as an atheist, or agnostic, I can't help but be frustrated by the tremendous arrogance of people like Dawkins because they never hesitate to do damage to the very thing that played a pivotal role in the development of the society he loves to live in. He never stops to ponder on the damage he's helped to bring about, but he's real quick to make sure he's not blamed for anything that's resulted from the decline of the church he's worked tirelessly against all his life.
Thanks Trent the recent series you’ve been doing has been enlightening. Best to you and family.
No one can pass a purity test. Why do we Christians always shoot ourselves in the foot? Or rather smack an outreached hand?
Everyone’s path comes in different forms. Some intellectual. Some emotional. Some out of grief, others from joy.
Something can exist both literally and symbolically.
Amen to that!i had an encounter with Jesus...my girl too!i feel so bless and at peace knowing that someone love me unconditionaly and that i will spend eternity with our Father....lots of videos about NDE and nurses taking care of dying patients on you tube...there is something..God is real!God bless you🙏❤️
I’m so happy to have found your channel. You are smart and explain things so well. And you point out errors in thinking in your own side, which is something that really helps me understand Christianity. When I was younger I would watch these kinds of debates and whenever there was this error in thinking from the theist side, i took it as an indication that they have no answer, and therefore the atheist declaration must be true. While I still have no faith, I’m genuinely interested and trying to reconsidered everything disregarded as untrue nonsense when I was younger. You act in good faith *no pun intended* and there really should be more intelligent apologists like you out there.
Great video! Utilitarian Christianity is like building castles on a sand bank. It can be really promising at the beginning, but will eventually fall onto the hostile sea.
The second “wokeness” declines, utilitarian “Christianity” will wither away. It is like seeds in shallow soil.
Everytime
Yes, this is something I've been struggling with especially since JP was on Pints. It would be great for you to have a conversation with him! Thanks for another great video.
Cuando oyes un recital de sentido común durante media hora, uno se pone de buen humor. Gracias.
God bless you and your family! Your presence is so needed on UA-cam.
God bless you Trent! Thank your for being a good Catholic role model. Will pray for your ministry!
Amazing Video Trent. I pray this video changes the hearts of many.
Nothing Ali said is troublesome because love and personal redemption are central to Christianity.
Well said. Ali here seems more Christian than her critics. Not that her critics are acting in bad faith; I just think they're misunderstanding her. If she seems too "intellectual" in her approach, one must consider that she's talking to an atheist, and a rather shallow one at that.
I seriously respect the willingness to turn towards the “right” and parse out the problems and dangers in it. It’s so easy to punch to the left, especially for grounded, traditional, Christians. But I always respect when someone will be honest about the issues within a camp that so closely resembles one’s own worldview.
If you watch and listen to Jordan Peterson, especially through time, you’ll see that he’s getting closer and closer to becoming a full fledged believer. He’s done a ton of soul searching over the past few years, becoming more and more enamored with the Bible and Christianity. He’s one or two steps away from becoming a Christian.
Peterson just likes good stories. Have you watched his debates with sam harris and matt dillahunty. His view of christianity is totally different to the norm. What is a true christian anyway?
11:18 you fall for his word salads.
"the deepest fairytales are the most real, thats for sure".
Do you even understand what he's saying? You claim him as your own and that's what he wants because he's made loads of money out of it.
I would like to think so too, I found his PWA interview so fascinating because he seems to understand the meanings of the Bible stories so well except for the meanings that matter most! He needs our prayers ❤
@@redmed10what exactly am I falling for? The only claim I made is that he sounds like he’s approaching belief. If you watch Peterson through time, he went from pretty much avowed atheist to taking a huge interest in, making a defense of, and adapting tenets of Christianity.
An atheist rarely goes from atheist to devout Christian overnight. That’s just not how it goes.
@Lorena2mIf that’s all you get from Jordan Peterson on the subject, then you’re either taking things out of context, or you’re deliberately obtuse.
This is a really good channel, I’m glad I came across it, you make very cogent observations
It makes me glad you critiqued peterson as so many people worship him like a guru. Thanks for not kissing his boot.
This is a very timely and very useful video. Thank you.
Glad it was helpful! -Vanessa
Trent, you're right about "political Christianity" but it is even broader than those who are lacking in the faith; the problem is looking at a political position or "party" as the antidote to our cultural woes, the realization of which will "save" us. The same logic can be applied to Church politics, thinking that Church would be in much better shape if more people thought like "us." We have to believe and live according to the Truth primarily because it is the Way, communion with God; not because it will theoretically bring about some temporal end in Church or secular politics.
The "Catholic Church" is already a political institution. Where did Jesus instruct his followers to set up a seat for the Pontiffex? We know that Pontiffex(Chief Priest) is a title created by Numa Pompelius, the second KING of Rome after its founder Romulus, the son of god. The Popes rule over the Roman Curia, the administrative branch of the Roman state with all its SECRETARITAS, but call it CHURCH. We believe this has been the primary source of all the confusion in the world.
Paul, when he asked his disciples to appoint Bishops and Deacons, his intention was to replace the Roman Senators with the Bishops and the Deacons were to replace the Priests of the Roman Temple, the Fourth Branch of the government. He didn't mean to create Theocracy as it turns out to be under the popes. Their RUSE MUST BE DISMANTLED so the world may start over the process as laid out by the Jewish Messiah(Christ).
Always posting great videos
Jordan Peterson's "biblical view" in his last appearance on the Joe Rogan Experience certainly seems more of an intellectual appreciation more than anything else.
Thats what happens when people want to believe in it but doesn't want to deal with the burden of intelectually defending it objectively.
It's better than having no appreciation of it.
JP is a pagan. He believes in the power of positive thinking more than anything else. He appears to believe the answer is inside us.
Thank you, Trent, for this video. I see this in some of my family members. They are quick to promote Christianity and Catholicism but seem more loyal to the Republican party than to Christ. They will defend Trump at all costs but be skeptical about the Church. I would put them in a politically Christian category because their alignment is more with the party than it is with Jesus and His Church. For instance, they will admit there is a spiritual battle, but when I agree with them and tell them to pray or read more of the Bible, Catechism, or theology, they agree in theory but in practice, they continue watching mostly Senate hearings, Fox News, conservative UA-camrs, etc.
Trent, Heshmeyer, Akin, and Sonna, the four horsemen of UA-cam apologia! Grateful for these men.
Tim Staples and Scott Hahn
Brant Pitre, John Bergsma, Gregory Pine
Add Gavin Ortlund to the list!
@@roberthughes9295 When did he convert? Oh, yeah, no, thanks, nah.
@@mussman717word He became a Christian when he was baptized as an infant by his father. Just because he isn't Catholic, neither am I, doesn't mean he doesn't do a wonderful job at defending Christianity and the basic tenants of the faith. Trent certainly acknowledges this as he has teamed up with him on multiple occasions to defend the faith. It's the same reason I like listening to Trent and Akin despite the fact I find their arguments for Catholicism wanting.
The benefits of Christianity for culture and politics are certainly signs of its truth, but such benefits should lead people to explore, judge, and hopefully embrace its truth, not merely use as the most subjectively useful religion. That's what started us down the wrong path to begin with (e.g. Kant).
"I choose to believe" is a thousand times better than "I live on the borders of things".
You can't choose to believe. You believe if you are compelled to and you don't believe if you aren't.
@@MarvelGamer2023 Then free will is nonexistent and no man is responsible for his own salvation.
@@JLB00333 Nobody is saved because they believe the historical fact that a man named Jesus of Nazareth was crucified and resurrected. They are saved because they trust in Him for salvation, are baptized and obey Him. Trusting and obeying Christ require choice but believing has nothing to do with choice. You believe because you are convinced it's true. There is no choice involved.
Excellent comments….suggest that you invite Dinesh D’Souza and Jordan Peterson to discuss this. This would be great discussion between you and them!
I definitely think "cultural Christian" is a better term than "political Christian", partly because it's an endonym rather than an exonym but also because condemning "political Christianity" makes it sound like you don't think Christians should be politically active or that their political views should not be informed by faith. A term for that view already exists, it's called secularism.
Exonyms are actually _more_ valid than endonyms.
Endonyms only tell what a person wants others to see them as, and are usually fake. Exonyms tell us how others actually see you. Nobody gets to truly name themselves
@@marvalice3455 how poetic, a shame it's not true, but still. No, neither an exonym nor an endonym are inherently valid or invalid; however endonyms are far less likely to be contested and so lead to less confusion down the line when trying to discuss these ideas. If you take someone like Richard Dawkins and berate him for being a "political Christian" he will simply dismiss you by saying "well I'm not a political Christian" and you have to spend the entire discussion debating the semantics of terms. If instead you talk about being a cultural Christian then you can get straight to the actual content that is in dispute. Names are, first and foremost, taxonomic, and if your use of a name causes more confusion than clarity, or if it can be easily disputed, then it is a bad name.
Are there Christians who aren't political Christians?
No, culturals do overlap quite a bit with politicals, especially in America, but the two terms are not the same.
I've seen you in clips and with other UA-camrs, but the fact you called out these "cultural" Christians for what they are makes me subscribe to you. Thank you!
I think this episode and the last one tacitly discuss two unlabeled groups of people: one that’s on the way in and another that’s on the way out. It seems that the challenge for us is to prevent incomers from becoming outvotes.
I appreciate your work Trent. Thank you. Praying for you, please pray for me, a sinner in need of mercy. I'm worried this goes into an unhelpful direction, presumptions about the faiths of others is tricky, I'm sure you, like all of us, are forever growing toward truth and live imperfectly toward it. I'd like to hear more about how you would encourage these folks toward a clearer truth. I'm reminded of the prayer of St. Ephraim. Thanks for all you do.
Like Ayan, I converted to Catholicism from Islam.
At the same time, I’ve never been one to sit and debate why I’m Catholic or why I converted.
Arguing about why I chose Catholicism seems counter intuitive because how does one explain why they love?
I believe in Catholicism through my heart not through my mind. Growing up, I was taught Islam, but I never felt it in my heart. My parents sent me to Catholic school (which isn’t unusual for an Arab-Muslim household) because they wanted me to have a better education: Catholic school 5 days a week - then Islamic school one weekends. The juxtaposing world I lived in was life changing.
At the same time, I don’t see Christianity as an allegory: the Bible isn’t a metaphor. I think Ayan and JP frame it this way because they’re still in the early process of their faith. Although I am a convert to Catholicism, having grown up in a Catholic school, I didn’t come to Catholicism through the logical mind. I knew when I attended church five times a week at school and read the Bible everyday, that everything Father Bill and my teachers were preaching was the truth because I felt it in my heart. It’s not something I can ever explain; even if I tried to - it will always fall short.
My husband enjoys evangelizing Catholicism through hardy debates with his very Protestant family. While I always learn a lot from their discussions, it’s taught me that everyone expresses their love for Catholicism differently. Some people express their love through intellect and debate.
Others, like me, feel it through service. Im introverted by nature - and evangelizing my views through debate is so outside my character that the thought of doing it makes me wanna faint.
But I’m also a physician. And I’m very very very good at service. Service I can do. Debate? No thank you. 🙂↔️.
People always expect that I have some great story about why I left Islam and converted to Catholicism. Or they always want to debate me about why I’m Catholic. But it’s not gonna happen.
The heart loves what the heart loves. And while my childhood was certainly eclectic, I don’t want to spend my life talking about what was. How can I practice being Catholic if all I’m ever doing is looking back and comparing why one religion didn’t feel right.
I don’t think Ayan is using Christianity so to speak. My sense is that she is still batling a lot of what she went through growing up. I think she lost a sense of meaning, and only recently begun to find this through Christianity. I have a lot of empathy for what she’s been through. I share a lot of the same childhood experience - but I at least was introduced to Catholicism so early on in life that I was grounded. I think she has chosen to explore her trauma by taking a stand against fundamentalism. This is incredibly brave. I wrote one article about fundamentalism after October 7 and got so much backlash from my family who disowned me for telling the truth. And there Ayan is, writing books! It’s quite remarkable. What she’s doing is nothing short of courageous.
It certainly isn’t an easy path. Not one I would choose. But I understand why she has chosen it. And I think with support and grace, she will continue to find her path through Christianity, and a safe place to call home.
When you grow up in a fundamentalist environment - it’s a unique experience. It’s very hard to explain to people what you’ve witnessed and the things you were taught as a child. For Ayan, to only now hear the message of Christ as an adult, she’s only now starting to unravel all the messages her unconscious has no doubt been brainwashed to believe. Messages she didn’t even know were still living inside her soul. I know this is the case because this is what happened to me -- except I had it in real time: ie - five days a week I learned about Jesus - twice a week I was sent to a place where the message was th EXACT opposite. Its hard for people to understand what that does to a child’s soul. Unless you’ve lived it - it’s a reality that simply can’t be put into words.
My sense is, through Christ - Ayan has found truth, goodness, and beauty. And that, is the true blessing.
Just my thoughts 💭
Great one. Discussing difficult stuff. Thanks for taking on these subjects.
As an ex-atheist I think Trent is being a little too rigid, like anything other than total submission is unacceptable. If met with that kind of attitude initially I'd probably still be an atheist. It was actually Christian values that brought me around to Christianity. I got to a point where I realised that following Christian values and at least acting like a Christian would be beneficial to myself, my family, those around me and, by extension of all of that, society at large. THIS was enough truth for me for a long time. I was not convinced that God was real but I was absolutely, positively sure that Christian values were superior to any other set of values. And I actually got there through studying the statistics about traditional marriage (true marriage as taught by the Church).
When Trent said that sometimes a simple answer is ok, I fear that sometimes those types of Christians can do the most harm. Thoughtless Christians who's answer is to thump the Bible and say because God said so. That's a simple answer, and ultimately as Christians we know it's true. But who does it reach!? I get through to more people when I talk about the 'practical' side of Christianity and about Christian values backed up by statistics than I do by telling people that God loves them. When I tell people God loves them they look at me like I'm weird.
I think what is being labelled as Political Christianity will actually be an important step in the process for a lot of people. And this shouldn't be overlooked.
You're right, its a step. What Trent wants you would basically have to overcome the Enlightenment worldview (modernity) from our zeitgeist, which would be historical (severe understatement).
Why the name "Western Supremacist"?
@@stevie943 because I believe that western civilisation, built upon Christian values, is the best civilisation to have ever existed.
I think this is demonstrably true.
I believe that Christian values are superior to any other set of moral values in every way.
And I'm sick of the Anglophobia. It's become popular to bash the west for even the smallest infringement on decency whilst excusing the huge failings around the rest of the world.
We get the blame for slavery for example, which we didn't start and didn't do as prolifically as the Arab world did. More slaves in fact went to Brazil than to America, but no one is asking for reparations from Brazil. We are in fact the first civilisation in history to make the practice of slavery illegal.
But of course this gets overlooked.
We are called racists and yet study after study shows that western countries are in fact the least racist countries in the world.
If we want less immigration we are called white nationalists or Fascists and yet Muslims have far more rights in Christian countries than Christians have in Muslim countries. In fact Muslims have more rights in Christian countries than they do in Muslim countries!
One day I got fed up of seeing this, of the double standards and of the inherent racism in the anti-western narrative that I changed my name to Western Supremacist.
It gets people like you to ask the question. And it triggers the right sort of people who assume it is motivated by race which means I am able to both correct and educate them. In short;
I'm trying to fight against the narrative that the best civilisation in history is inherently evil.
Apologies for that being long and a bit of a rant 😂
Do those people who listen to you when bringing up practical reasons end up becoming Christians or do they just agree with the practical aspects?
Yes! Dear Trent, you nailed it! This video was necessary. It is so painful to see Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Jordan Peterson failing to understand Christianity! You are completely right. And we have to pray a lot for them. Thanks a lot, Trent!
I don't want a political Christianity, I simply want Christian politics and law ;)
I simply want Christianity. If we get Christian law that’s a bonus, but not my key objective.
@@hismajesty6272 It is an outflowing of grace. I was being "witty" in that politicizing Christianity is gross, but Christianizing politics wouldn't be so objectionable
@@ep_med7822 If this were the case, a lot of people on both sides would lose their heroes.
@drstewart that's fine with me. My heroes are Christ, His mother and the Saints
Christianity can't be divorced from
Culture and law. Period.
16:00 it’s really only becomes a problem when you are expecting Christian fellowship with people who are not really converted or in the faith. And the big problem is that a LOT of Christians are like this, and it’s incredibly distressing and confusing to enter into the church with sincere faith surrounded by people who aren’t of the same conviction.
Hirsi Ali has only just very recently turned towards Christianity, so yeah her theology is not rigoursly perfect but just back off and give her time. And is having perfect theology what saves you in the first place? Will we take heavenly exams? Welcome former Muslims and Atheists who come to Christianity no matter how imperfectly, dont start wagging the finger at them.
Or she’s just using Christianity as a tool for her advancement
This is 100% correct. I've found myself having to defend Ayaan for that exact reason. But she's making the mistake of not talking to Christian and Catholics and instead wasting her time in the political arena.
thank you for making this video. i felt like it truly resonated with my thoughts concerning the people discussed
Your previous episode was great. Can't wait. Thank you, Trent. God bless you and hope you and your family have a light-filled peaceful joyful blessed day!
Not long ago, an atheist historian, Tom Holland, wrote a book titled, "Dominion." It didn't capture everything. But it did a fair job noting that the vast majority of humane and modernizing developments have been almost entirely dependent on a Christian worldview. Thankfully, most Christians in past ages have been far more concerned about making a real (political) difference in the world than those who naively accept all such good as a given.
Excellent video, Trent. I admit to being quite shocked by the last guy (the white racist) -- I had never seen him/heard of him before. How many people are influenced by him? I shudder to think!
I also think you might have been a little hard on Ayan Hirsi Ali, who I admire for her suffering and her spiritual honesty. I do agree that she needs to learn more about her faith before debating it publicly.
You named and explained a couple of categories that I've noticed over the years that I haven't been able to name or explain; thank you!
I think you may have gone a bit too hard on Ali, especially on her wording for "choosing to believe."
She knows her audience, she has a career of speaking to people and I don't think she came into this blind. She isn't giving a perfect representation, as you state, but I think you are interpreting her words there in a rather uncharitable way.
Her response can give the impression that the decision is more important than the conviction itself.
It can also be interpreted as a way of doubling down against what Dawkins is asking given the bias nature of it. He wants her to state it as fact as a means to shut her down later, it is a set up that he has done time and again. Saying she chooses to believe in it turns the table on him as she angles it to a personal choice, something that Dawkins holds as almost sacred.
I mean, Peterson became famous partly because of his Jungian reading of the Biblical stories, which yes, can be very deep and interesting, but it should not be considered an an "end all be all" approach, because Jung tends to "explain away" the supernatural. So yes, take it if it can help you deepen your understanding but don't rely solely on it because it's insufficient.
Completely okay to examine any religious belief system through an educational or political lens, but extremely cheap to reduce a religious belief system to that and not understand the depth of faith the followers have.
Thank you for addressing this issue.
Worst of all is when they express views that are completely antithetical to core Christian principles, sometimes downright abhorrent things (e.g. being pro-genocide), and this stance somehow gets associated with how Christians think (politically, socially) or becomes representative of them, or more broadly the 'conservative' view (if that means 'Political' Christianity which purports to care about traditional/ Christian values).
I think Trent didn't do his due diligence in making a convincing argument here. Many of the pagan nations converted to Christianity through seeing the fruits of it and also because it was a national religion, furthermore most of us who are born into Christian families became Christian before hearing any apologetic arguments for the resurrection. To act like that's how people become Christian is a little bit silly. Many of the apologetic arguments didn't even exist 700 years ago... So did true Christians only come about recently in the age of apologetics?
Also Ayaan has stated many times that she was empty without belief in God and that Christianity brought meaning and purpose to her life. If she chooses to believe the resurrection based on the real fruits it has born then how can you take issue. The idea that she should stay silent about her experience is also silly. She's not preaching or speaking on behalf of an institution. She's simply stating her experience.
Great job on a sensitive subject Trent!
I just don't think Jordan Peterson believes in God. I think he believes in the "idea"of God, and that Christianity is socially useful
And that's fine.
@@RatatRatR I don't think rejecting salvation is fine
@@DoctorDewgong Well, maybe you're kind of a dingus.
@@RatatRatR praying for you, brother
Oh man. I love these videos because they are thoughtful and Trent doesn’t lapse into emotional reasoning and yet when he ended with the faith of a child stuff, it pierced my heart and reminded me to be like my little 6 year-old and not ask why all the time but also be willing to just crawl into a daddy’s arms and feel the tender love without worry, question, or even understanding.
Don't be so negative. Small steps. They are making it possible, thinkable...for people to make the transition. They are making Christianity culturally attractive again. The Lord is working through them. Peterson has led to more conversions that all the Bishops in America put together. Don't be so arrogant. The Lord is offering you a gift. Take it. Work with it
Agreed, at the end of the day we have to trust the Lord in these things. We can keep trying, but let’s not keep looking a gift horse in the mouth.
I think this video in particular is so profound... Thanks again Trent, God bless you.
If Christianity is not willing to be political, it will be all but destroyed in the west by progressives.
We need allies.
It's important for people to understand the cultural value of Christianity, even if they don't yet have faith in Christ.
I feel like this video missed the mark in terms of the importance of people like Peterson, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, etc. in moving the cultural conversation in a direction favorable to Christianity.
Trent is stepping up his game lately. Great stuff.
And remember guys, we don't believe it just because it's based, but because it's true.
Great work Trent! 👏👏👏
Nah, if people have even a weak faith and choose to become Christian for the utility they see in it, that is better than them staying where they are.
Such an incredible video, thank you Trent.