This video explores whether Christian apologists have crossed a line in their criticism of Islam, moving beyond theological disagreement to what some describe as a 'righteous crusade' that may be stoking religious antipathy. The discussion examines whether the rhetoric has become excessively aggressive, potentially alienating Muslims and undermining the goal of winning souls rather than destroying. The conversation involves multiple perspectives, including those from Muslim backgrounds, atheists, and Christians, highlighting the complexity of interfaith dialogue and the importance of maintaining respectful discourse while still addressing theological differences.
Installez notre extension pour rechercher instantanément dans n'importe quelle vidéo
Talking w/ Tavo: Ask me anything! Are Christians guilty of escalating antipathy towards Muslims?Ajouté :
Hey everybody, how's it going? Um, all right. Well, we're here to talk. We're here to take your questions and I'm here to answer your questions. I'm going to answer any and all questions and any and all comers. Let me make sure that I've edited the video. Okay. All right. So, the link should be active. Um, I'm also going to post the link to join the chat in the conversation. So, if you want to talk about anything that's in the link in the comments, you're welcome to join the chat and I want to be able to answer all your questions. Now, right off the bat from the beginning of the video.
Okay, there you go. So, that's this link that I just put in. That's the link to join the conversation. So, anyone can join the conversation. Um, I'm happy to talk with all of you. Um, I thought I would introduce uh, thanks Andrew.
And Andrew Nazario 2253. Thank you. I don't think I've seen you before on this channel, so thank you very much for chiming in. Thanks very much for chatting. Um, and I'm going to introduce some of the questions that I thought that we would talk about. Some of these are a little bit charged. So, I want to give you all a bit of a trigger warning for this conversation, but let's talk about some of the things that I wanted to address. Um, and I prepare some interesting topics of conversation um, whenever we do these live streams and I do these every Monday 5:00 p.m.
Pacific Standard Time. But this is one of the things that I wanted to talk about in the conversation today. Um, there has been, I think in the last few years, a very cogent, very persuasive, but escalating pattern of rhetoric against Islam among Christian apologists. Um, trigger warning. We're going to talk about some difficult things, but has any of the apologetical discourse gone too far? Have we traversed into a territory where we're not just criticizing Islam because we think that the theology is incorrect, but because we're sort of on a righteous crusade against Islam, which can potentiate um, antipathy coming across.
It's an important topic I think we should talk about a little bit today. I want to point out that this is partially inspired by my own background. Some of you know that I'm an immigrant, first generation or zeroth generation really, and I came from Morocco from a very Muslim majority country, although Morocco is a bit more of a mosaic and a little bit more diverse than some Muslim majority countries. But um let me make sure my Yeah, there we go.
So, um, yeah. So, there was obviously some really horrific violence that happened today. Um, I want to talk about it a little bit in this conversation. I want to talk about whether or not, um, anti-Islamic fears have been stoked excessively in the effort to make a case for Christian apologetics. And I'd love to for you all to chime in on this. I'd love for you all to weigh in on this and let me know what you think. I can give you a few examples. Um, I think the God logic is really persuasive. I I've said before that I have deep admiration for God logic and particularly for his rhetorical skills, but I also think that God logic is um is is persuasive in a way that Oh, we do have somebody who's interested in entering the studio. So, I'll add you to the stage, Andrew.
>> Oh, hey. I was going to wait for you to go through all your topics before joining, but I did see the Islam one and I wanted to hop in, but you can go ahead and go through all your questions if you need to beforeh talking about it.
>> Um, no, I mean, if you want if you want, I can if you want to like put some of your thoughts together, but I'm happy to entertain your questions and just hear more about what your perspective is on this.
>> Mhm. Yeah. So, just some background on me. Um, I've been I'm a Christian. Um, I've been lay I'm definitely in the lay theologian/apologist side. I've been studying on an it's been sort of like my hobby or my interest for the past 3 yearsish.
So relatively new but you know it feels like the more you know the less, right?
>> Sure. Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely.
>> Yeah. And >> were you a Christian before that? Is apologetics?
>> Yeah. always always a Christian but you know went to university surrounded by all these new ideas. I was only in a Christian height like Christian education before that. Now all of a sudden everyone has all these different ideas and I'm like what the heck am I doing? So >> and especially I would say a partial thing was uh Islam that it was at first cuz I didn't know what was going on.
Islam almost in a sense seemed like tempting because it's like oh the way it was explained to me was quite simple and it was like pointing out some things I didn't have answers to and it's like oh Islam seems like a good alternative.
Eventually I decided very much against that. Thank goodness. But um >> yeah. Yeah. I mean I mean I I can speak to the fact that the Islamic faith is is deeply problematic and I would disagree with it on ideological grounds but u let's hear more about your story too.
>> Yeah. Um as for the actual thing I did somewhat become involved in online apologize simply because like I would be like while studying be like oh I have some my own thoughts to contribute here and Islam it's definitely especially in the online space the only the biggest I guess like opponents to Christian content is Islam and atheism. I would say Islam a little bit more so than atheism cuz I I think with Islam you see a lot of centrality like typically there's not like when you list off Islamic apologists and whatever dawas I don't know what they call themselves or imams or whatever they're usually all interconnected with each other and they sort of have a community with each other. Atheists I've noticed it's not so much so. Um, but I do think our treatment of Islam is becoming a little bit, I guess I would almost say contentified where I think this has been almost an apologetic trend unusual, but I think especially with Islam. I've seen a lot of good apologists get stoked up into the topic of Islam and then it almost like their quality goes down because they want to get more wins. Um, >> I see this especially with the Islamic dilemma. Now, before I get into it, the Islamic dilemma, I have some thoughts on the actual dilemma itself because when you when you analyze it, I don't think it gives a very good explanation on why you should believe in the way they're executing the verses. Most of the time the uh the Christian apologist or the phmicist in this case goes, "Oh, we just read. We just read." You know, >> sure. That's, you know, that's an easy perspective for each person.
>> It's an easy perspective, but you're just asserting, "Hey, Muhammad's an idiot, >> you know."
>> Yeah.
>> Not with not a lot of explanation.
>> How about this as a question? Do you have you ever witnessed the um apologetic community going a little bit too far in criticism of Islam?
I mean I can think of one example there there was like uh in inspiring philosophy went to Dearbornne Michigan and they're like we're going to the Islamic capital and some of the criticisms were there some of the discussions were great the conversations were really enriching but I felt like some of the criticisms were more like look how bad this is for our community look how bad these people are and it's a fine line and it's a fuzzy distinction so I don't know that I can say here's a moment where they really cross the But I I I am I am worried about um increasing antipathies across the religious divide. So can you think of any situations where you've seen somebody and it's gone too far.
Maybe if if there's a way that that clarifies the line that's >> Yeah. On a on a personal stance, not really. And this is even after like talking to Muslims. I mean, you'll see, especially in the online space, Instagram is a you will see some you'll see some I don't know if you're ever familiar with apologist content on Instagram, but you will come across the most soulish people defending both Islam and Christianity.
But sometimes you'd be talking to someone and they'd be just just because like the Islam, they would say some terrible things that I don't want to repeat. Um but I think in terms of you can even see it in their arguments too.
I think what was almost >> I understand why um as talking about as far as about how they popularized the alz >> um but and I noticed in a recent live stream he did somewhat say yeah we know that's not really how they interpret it but we're just doing it back at them. I don't think that mentality of getting our get back at a community is going to be very uh adhesive like very cohesive and very convincing. When I'm thinking about like in like the the rhetoric that's going on, I'm not so thinking of it of just of is this too harmful, but more so of is this going to help some lay Muslim actually see the truth? And if it's if they just come across the alz thing, they're going to throw off these Christian guys as what the hell are they talking about? These guys are stupid and are just throwing any everything they can at our true religion. Alhamdulillah, you know.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Um, you know, I I mean I I think I want to resonate with one thing that you said. Um, first of all, uh, I think this is a nice uh nice recapitulation. So I'll put on the screen 1day3.OD3 OD3. Um, which is just one day three. I guess I can just say that. Um, really great channel by the way. We hope to see you more uh later on the chat. And, um, yeah. Um, the goal is to win souls, not destroy.
Um, >> so I think that's a that's a that's a valid perspective. Um, and you've got really great content, so hopefully if you don't get to join the chat this time around, we'll hopefully have you on in the future. Um, yeah, but I I mean I will say that just to resonate with something you said, Andrew, it is it is both sided, right? There's voices on both sides of the argumentation and those voices um honestly do um make make uh some acrimonious cases. So I think I could look at more um I could look at many Muslims and levy the same accusation that the rhetoric sometimes goes a little bit too far. Um let's bring Dr. Kurt onto the stage. I want to just give a shout out to 21st Century Apologetics as well. James, you are muted because you've got I know there's a lot of background noise, but I know if you got something to say, you'll wave your hands. And Dr. Kurt, um, welcome to the conversation. You are Oh, you're muted as well, but Oh, you're okay.
You're actually muted >> because I don't want stuff to drop or something and mess up the stream.
>> I think I'm okay. I think we got a pretty stable internet connection here.
So, but yeah. No, I don't mean I mean like I'm fumbling on my desk.
>> Oh, gotcha. Okay. Okay. Well, um when you're ready to, you know, say anything, just uh unmute yourself and and give me a shout out and I'll I'll I'll redivert the conversation. And we've got a few topics of conversation too when Andrew joined. But um so far great insightful content from Andrew. Um just one last thing before we go to James' comment because I think James wants to say something as well. I will say this. I I propose the CTF argument. Um it it has some strengths at least. I think one of the strengths is its novelty. But I think another legitimate strength is it's not about you know Islam bad. It's about comparing religions and in that comparison looking at um ways of weighing the evidence in a way that's academic that doesn't really make anyone feel bad about themselves. It doesn't peorate any school of thought and it acknowledges that there's at least some evidence across traditions.
>> Now, I know Dr. Kurt, the atheist, might disagree with that, but let's hear from James first because I know James had something to say. Go ahead, James.
>> Yeah, I've spent probably almost half my life living among Muslims. It's a It gives me a totally different view of the thing. I mean, I don't mind going headtohead with them on theological issues, historical issues, any of that stuff, but as far as hating them or thinking that they're a danger to the United States or to Britain or something like that, that's just foolishness. That none of that's true. And all of these people that these apologists that are doing this are either doing it for internet views or they've got polit political backing. And I can even name some of the political backers and some of the people they're backing because I researched this. But I'm guessing you probably don't want that done on your show.
>> Um I mean, you know, I I think we're small enough that if somebody said something pretty inflammatory, like as long as it's not like racist, I probably would just be like, "Oh, that's interesting. I didn't know that. That's your that's your research. I don't I I'm guessing we're small enough that we're not going to get much backlash as a channel if we if we say something." Um, you know, I I mean, I some of you may already know this about me, but I was raised in a in a very different theology in a very different country. I was raised in a Muslim majority country. Um, we were and uh, you know, when you have like a Muslim majority country, there's still sectarianism, there's still sectarian violence, there's still factionalism. So we were in the um the underrecognized faction and we actually had to flee during the years of lead which was a very oppressive theocratic time during Moroccan history. So the the years of lead were u were a time where Morocco was uh was really subjugating a lot of different populations. It was a very oppressive time in Moroccan history. So that's my background. So, as a result of me being raised in an environment that was uh kind of contradictory to a lot of the values that I hold now, I became an atheist at a very early age. I was an atheist starting from about 9 or 10 years old.
Um let's look at Christian guitar's comment. Um I wish there was more empathy. I have questioned and almost lost my faith several times and each time it felt devastating. I still believe but try to burn down everything they've ever seen with no empathy just out of anger. I don't agree with Islam. many of its controversial ethical standards, but there's still people. Well said. I would agree with that. Once again, Christian guitar, you always have um insightful and useful and I think moving things to say. I know you're in SoCal, so I hope the people in uh near you in your community are all doing okay and are all safe. Um my recollection is that you're in SoCal.
That may be a mistake. Um I know there's a lot of challenges to the safety in SoCal right now. One of those challenges being that uh the fire evacuations happening in Los Angeles. Um I did quite a bit of my training at USC. So um I hope everything's okay down there for you and your family and your loved ones and more over your community.
>> Um I'll say one one other thing.
>> Oh, go ahead.
>> Oh, or Dr. >> I didn't I didn't do any training at USC, but I did uh did some rotations at the White. So that's right opposite the freeway from USC County. So similar population.
>> The the white >> Yep. The White Memorial Hospital. It's >> Oh, White Memorial Hospital. Yeah. Yeah.
>> But that's pretty Is that Am I mistaken?
That's kind of far down. That's more in South LA, right?
>> It's on the opposite side of the freeway of like LA County Hospital.
>> Okay. Is it Is it in Boil Heights?
I couldn't tell you specifically, but I don't think so. No, almost all Latino population.
>> Oh, okay. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That I Boil Heights is also very Latino. Uh >> it's where I got my love for LA taco trucks.
>> Very admirable. Uh yeah, very admirable set of values. I I lived in um Sudatas for a while and then I lived in in LA for a while. So, I got I got a healthy dose of, you know, homemade or locally made uh Mexican food. So, we're getting a little off topic, but you know, I'll give you I'll give I'll give the apologists in the room just one more thing to think about. I really I've been watching Inspiring Philosophy as well as many atheist channels for a few years now. I think the content has drifted excessively into we want to disagree with uh with with u Islamic faith rather than we are trying to make important points about Christianity. If you go back a couple of years in inspiring philosophy they had a really great video that I think first pulled me in which was about my namesake which is uh Job.
So, um, it was a really great video. Um, it was an interesting deep dive into some, you know, uh, excellent complex issues around the Odyssey. And I feel like now they've sort of drifted much more into like we are just going to devote 90% of our time to just arguing against against Islam. And you know, in a time where we're becoming increasingly polarized, increasingly divided, um, you know, um, let me, uh, let me bridge another question here. Um, here is, um, let's see. I mean, here's here's another question that sort of dovtales off this one. I mean, if you think about it, Christianity produced abolitionists and it also produced slaveholders. the scientific method is is is equally um bleaguered by things have that have been done through the sciences and with the sciences that are absolutely questionable like in medical research there is a long history of us doing things to people that that are horrific.
So what is the problem here? Is the is the how do you know that the problem is the tool and not the user? This is a question for apologists and a question for um for you know anyone who wants to chime in on this. You can chime in in the comments section. You can uh anyone on the panel or in the guest list can also chime in as well.
Oh, go ahead, James. Yeah, let me open up James.
>> Yeah, I just uh uh I don't remember what the name of it is. I just posted a video on this today that had something to do with uh let's see, slavery, genocide, epigenetics, and traditionism. But where it starts off really clarifies this whole issue when uh in the what is it the Caribbean the British had to create a special slave Bible where they removed like about 90% of the Old Testament and 50% of the New Testament because they had already seen how the Bible had affected abolition and slavery in the United States. So, that kind of tells you right there that the Bible is is at its core, even though it does have some uh uh uh some slavery passages in it, they're not the kind that that support the type of slavery we had across the West Indies. For instance, the Bible forbids kidnapping uh to put someone into slavery. Okay, so that would that was off the bat wrong under biblical law. Uh the uh the other reasons is that the Bible slavery in the uh an context ancient near east was a lot different than the rest of the world and it was very progressive. Israel was almost a uh uh what would you call it? Ah shelter state. Like if someone was going to flee slavery in another country, Israel would be the place you would want to go to because they they allowed that any foreigner that came into their borders could live there and that he couldn't be sent back to the other country for slavery, you know, extradited, which was common practice among the rest of the a nations at that time.
Yeah, I would disagree with all that, but it's pretty off topic.
>> I don't think any Go for it.
>> No, that's not really our topic today.
>> You know, there's there's not a So, yeah, feel free. You could This is sort of an ask me anything sort of um sort of a >> the the slave code that's in the Hebrew scriptures is just a a riff on the code of Hammurabi. Uh, it was never the law in ancient Israel. As far as we can tell, >> you're muted, James, but let me let me I'll unmute you when when Dr. Kurt is done. Go ahead. and and it was just constructed to give Israel a history of a legal code. But all the archaeology from the Monarchic period suggests that the cultural continuity between the Phoenicians and the Hebrews was nearly the same, which is to say that they probably held slaves just like everybody else in the Mediterranean world held slaves in ways that are pretty horrible.
Um, the text as we have it is not what happened. And and you can prove that by the fact that most of the state constitutions in the United States um under our system use the text of Deuteronomy and the Bible to like prescribe the laws that govern slavery in the United States. But we know that's not how slavery actually existed in the United States.
I I'll let me let me let James respond and I want to acknowledge that that Kix's in the stream and but but before I let me unmute you, James, but um let me just give a shout out to TNC Apologetics. We were on for about 3 hours on Saturday. Yeah, Saturday. And it was a really interesting conversation. So, if you're not familiar with TNC Apologetics channel, it's something that I would highly encourage you to to get in on. And somebody said, "Uh oh, it's KJ.
But I'm I'm glad that you're here. I think this is this is a this is a this is a chiding this is not a serious like oh no it's Kek. I don't think so.
>> Right. No, it's fun. That's fun.
>> Yeah. Um Oh, and great. Uh and TNC shared the stream as well. So, we're super grateful for that. All right.
Well, let's open it up to James just to give a quick counterpoint and we'll get back to some other questions. And I have a little exercise that I thought we could do that I think would be kind of um edifying for a lot of people.
>> Yeah. I don't appreciate the little rhetorical moves there that that was on point to the question that was on the board. And number two, all of these ween knows we knows we knows. No, most people don't know. I've spent hours and hours and hours comparing the code of Hammurabi and the uh biblical code on this. They are not the same. And the biblical code was revolutionary and went counter to Hammurabi on quite a bit of it.
Uh, can I >> I didn't say it was identical. I said it was a riff, which is which is what people do. They take a riff and then they change.
>> Um, let me let me bring in Andrew because Andrew does say I've got his I've got my hand raised. So, Andrew, you should you shouldn't be muted, Andrew.
So, feel >> Yeah. No, I was muted myself. I didn't want to leave any uh I didn't want to interrupt.
>> Yeah, let's let's hear from you. And um and then I and then after that I do have like a little bit of an exercise that I think might be edifying that might be kind of fun to do on this chat.
>> Yeah. So this was very interesting and it reminded me almost of a interview that you did. I forgot who you did it with Tavo where you talked about some things about what problems you would have with labeling yourself Christian when it comes to Christian conduct and grounding that.
>> That was with real seekers and still there. That was on my channel. Yeah.
Yes. So you are I I would say that it is a valid method to go through the exogetical method like sort of what James and I'm sorry I forgot the name of the person who was disagreeing with him.
>> Go through that back and forth and try and resolve a solution on what the Bible actually says about it. Um but obviously that does come with some some difficulties of course because those two are going to go back and forth about that. I I as a Christian I do side with James but you know I'll leave that for them. But I think another way that we can approach it and just in general is is that analysis of seeing where these things come out of. So I'm going to propose that generally like uh if slavery is wrong and people are trying to find ways to justify it, they'll use any means to justify it. So we should see throughout many different cultures and many different religions slavery being justified. But it's more expected for a true and moral religion that an abol abolitionist abolitionist movement would actually spring up against that. So you're going to see even in the true rel religion people using that to support horrific things. But it is less expected for a false religion to have those good movements come out of it. And almost I would say with the history of slavery almost exclusively throughout world history uh abolitionist movements springing up. Obviously, it's not exclusively Christian and these aren't exclusively Christian ideas, but you do see a very large trend of of Christian abolitionist movements, which is where I would try and lend that to besides the exile or what does the Bible actually say about it. Say, okay, well, where did these ideas of slavery being bad actually come from?
Just another way to try and tackle that problem.
>> It's it's it's a challenging problem.
Um, I want to acknowledge KJ's comment on the screen. It doesn't matter what the Bible says. Why were these groups Christians? These were Christian identifying groups and they stood for very violent or horrific ideologies.
So, um, you know, I think I think that's a reasonable counterargument. I think Christianity has things to answer for. I think to say that the moral uh ledger of Christianity is devoid of any horrific actions is a flawed perspective. We shouldn't gloss over that history. We should acknowledge it. I think if you're making this as a logical argument against Christianity, you should at least acknowledge that there are two different patterns of of uh of explanations that could be drawn on this argument. The first is in a valid perspective, you could say if the Bible really were a divinely inspired book, there should be no violence inspired by the Bible. I I can see how somebody might take that argument as intuitively obvious. But I think there's at least another argument that's parallel that needs to be acknowledged, which is that it's possible that humans just tend towards violence. And you can take any ideology, no matter how good, no matter how pure, no matter how beautiful, and and it can always be corrupted into something that's >> Yeah. Go ahead. Go ahead, KJ. Let let me let KJ answer, then we'll get back to James because I know James, you're you're in the queue to to say something.
But go ahead. Go ahead, KJ. Yeah, >> I totally get the argument that humans are too idiotic and stupid and ignorant and foolish and evil to understand the word of God. But I would think that God is that if if if that a true God would be more powerful than the concistadors, Confederates, the clans, the clan, the Nazis.
Uh, and I know there were good Christians, but the whole point is that if the Bible were divine, it should at least in not inspire this level of evil.
There should not be this level of evil if it were divine. Now if you're saying that humans are too stupid to understand the divine then what's the standard here you know what are we expected are we expected to understand the divine when it can't even overcome like uh the laziest interpretations you know the Bible in this in this example be because the Bible allowed all this evil uh what are we non-Christians to think that God is not God cannot overcome become evil.
And there are religions that are not as horrible as Christians maybe, you know, like smaller religions, but I would say uh this kind of flows back into well every I mean basically everybody was a Christian. Good guys, bad guys. But why why would Christianity why would a divine text allow such evil? Are humans that stupid? Are humans that evil? And I just don't think they are. We're just animals, you know. We're I'm a fox, you're an owl, you know. Uh we're not we're not that stupid. I think we would be able to recognize if the Bible was better written that uh you know what uh that if you know like maybe they should have added like please don't be slaves. Uh don't have any slaves in the ten commandments. Make it really solid.
uh you know, don't you know uh they should have added that to the Ten Commandments. They should have said no rape instead of this stupid about uh talking about uh >> Oh, just a reminder. Uh let's avoid the profanity.
>> Okay.
>> Um I don't I don't know if it really if it really matters, but my understanding is that YouTube, if you're a smaller channel, there is some sort of penalization for profanity. I I may be wrong about that. That's I've I've heard mixed stuff from different people and I can't there's not a firm answer that YouTube gives, but just if you can mitigate the profanity, >> right? Right. And yes, sorry about that.
Uh but yes, uh uh if like why why did they why did God spend so many so many commandments talking about not taking his name in vain and uh the holiness of the Sabbath when he could have emphasized no slaves, no rape. It's just such an easy rewrite and and uh you know just so much evil sprang from this book.
lots of good, too. But all that shows is that the book had no mitigating factor on on good or evil. It just >> Well, well, let me let me point out a couple of things. So, first of all, we had this exchange um recently on one of our chats. And one of the things that I pointed out that I don't I don't think has received an adequate response yet is I made a video with Jackie and uh my friend Jackie like narrated one of my videos recently. And that video goes into a lot of depth about um how Christians engage more in volunteerism.
They engage more in philanthropy and it's not just towards Christian causes.
It's across the board. So, secular causes as well. Christians do give more to charity. Christians do volunteer more. So I think there's still at least if you're making the argument that um the moral goodness of a populace is a reflection of the divinity of the source, then I would argue that Christianity at least has some sociologically unique claim to say that it's on higher evidentiary footing than other traditions. Well, so again, uh I wanted to point out that the concistadors, the Confederates, and the Nazis, and the clan were all >> the Nazis. I think the Nazis is legitimately, and I think we're not even supposed to say the N word in terms of the NA z word. Um, so I I think that's even a word that we're not supposed to say on YouTube. But I will say that um the National Socialist Party of Germany when they existed, which was maybe a better euphemism for them. There is >> no no call them Nazis.
>> Um I don't want to and it's only >> they're not going to they're not going to they're not going to do anything to you, Tavo. They are Nazis. Gage worried about the YouTube effects of the >> YouTube. Yeah, exactly. So if YouTube thinks you're talking about that in a way that will incite viewers and what they do is they penalize people across the board. So if you'll notice in the past when I mentioned the Nationalist Socialist Party of Germany, I'll um I'll like I'll like you know beep out that word. I'm not I'm not necessarily afraid of those people on on the alt-right who use that moniker. I'm more I just don't want to get demonetized by YouTube and I don't want to get on anyone's radar. I I mean look, let let me let me put it to you this way. There is, I think, interesting scholarship on either side the degree to which um Christianity was an influence in Germany during that time period. I think that's a bit of a different historical question, but I I but here's the problem. If what your accusation is that Christianity gave rise to some really evil people, right?
>> I'm not I'm not >> But the question here's the question.
Did it uniquely give rise to that evilness? Or are these just people in power doing things that people in power do, which is expropriating power and hurting other people? So in other words, are humans under all circumstances just instruments of injustice?
>> I'm not I'm not actually saying that Christianity >> necessarily gave rise to any of them, but uh I think it would it's uh you're just doing the no no true Scotsman thing of saying they weren't truly Christians.
>> No, no, no, no. I'm I'm I'm not doing that at all. I I >> Yes, you are. I think you are. I think you are. You're just saying >> No, no, no. This is a totally different argument.
>> Let's let's let's let's bring up uh let's just bring up because I know Andrew got dropped from the chat. You're welcome to rejoin, Andrew. I put the link up there. But uh let's just read his comment. Pacific pacifist ideologies and use them for evil, but this is a good argument for an ordinary universal magisterium considering Catholicism, but still have many reservations. Um anti- mustache man content, that's an interesting term for it. sometimes get confused for pro mustache man content and get shadowbanned by YouTube. Believe me, we hate him too. Yeah. Okay, valid point. Thank you for pointing that out.
One other thing that I want to point out to Kj, um I think it's Can I just at least point out that there's a little bit of a tension in your ideological argument, KJ, from this perspective. You have often um in chats with me said that you have a big problem with this original sin um idea that humans are inherently prone to evil. But everything that you've listed off would seem to support that. Just an example of the tension. Let me turn it over to James because I know that James has been waiting for a while. And then so we'll give give it back to James. And just so people can join, I'll put the comment I'll put it back in the I'll put the uh the link back in the comment section. Go ahead, James. You're live.
>> Yeah, I'm uh I'm sober tonight, so I don't know how long I'll be able to deal with all these front-loaded arguments.
But to go back to the beginning of this, there's a there's a huge difference between emancipationist and abolitionist. The emancipationists wanted to phase it out over time and there were many of them enlightenment thinkers, Christians, all kinds of other people. The abolitionists were distinctly Christians. Their view was we have to end it and we have to end it now because it's a sin against God.
Okay, that being said, all of this other stuff, I don't know where to go with that. As for the Bible itself and slavery, the the Torah itself, I mean, not the Torah, but the decalogue, that was the core. It was supposed to be the only law for Israel until they had their golden calf issue. And then Moses had to deal casuistically with the other problems that arose and other laws were added as they were needed.
That's where the slavery thing came from because of the hardness of the heart. It says that if slavery was what the Ten Commandments and God intended, you would not have the prophets railing against slavery already by the time of Isaiah and Amos. I mean, to to say that that's what the Torah intended is just nonsense.
Well, um you know, I would like to switch gears a little bit and get to a slightly different um topic, which is um maybe what one thing that we could do that I think would be enriching for all of us. Let's uh acknowledge Tavo's comment. I don't believe sin or evil per se, and I don't believe that means humanity is evil. I believe we are animals trying our best.
Um fair enough. Um, let's do something that we haven't done before on this channel, but and I thought it was a question in the slides in the slide deck that I have, but it's uh it I don't think it is. Um, and let's do one more question from Kurt before we have that.
Dr. Kurt, >> I don't I mean I see where we're coming across differently because I don't I don't see the Torah coming from the same way that you do and you you think it's telling the truth. So, that's that's where we differ. I would just put words in my mouth. Don't put words in my mouth. I told you I don't like these rhetorical moves. I'm happy I'm happy to describe.
>> You're describing it as a historical Exodus and I don't accept that. So >> there was a Torah at the time of the historical Exodus. I just said it had been modified over the years. In fact, it went through a complete rescion at the time of Ezra after the Babylonian exile. It tells you that.
>> Yeah. But there's there's no historical Exodus. Like that's not a thing. So that's the problem. We just differ off.
No, that's not a problem. There was a historical exodus.
>> You know, the the the Jewish I've been diving into the Jewish historical scholarship on this and it's legitimately fascinating, but I think there are some gray zones and some unknowns. Uh there's there's generally not a historical scholarship line that holds that Moses was a real living person. But sometimes people take a mosaic view of Moses that perhaps there were several characters that were sort of combined into into a composite. So there is some history.
>> That's an outstanding pun. I really appreciate the pun.
>> Thank you. It was uh it was something that I thought of as I was saying it, but I didn't want to dwell on it too much. Well, um so >> hold on, hold on, hold on, hold on.
>> Well, let me say one more thing.
>> Now, wait a minute, Tavo, because you should know this. You have these traditions like the Passover. That's a monument in uh uh festival form. You have the different monuments that were set up to commemorate the Exodus. Now, at what time in history could these things be set up and the people of Israel be convinced that they had always celebrated Passover to celebrate leaving Egypt if their fathers and grandfathers and stuff, hey, we don't remember this stuff. Where did this stuff come from?
We literally have letters uh from the 6th century BCE where the Jerusalem people are sending letters to Egypt to explain to them that they're now going to start celebrating Passover and what it is and how they're supposed to do it.
The elephanti papy show this happening in real time in 6th century BCE.
>> Um >> well what's happening then?
>> Let's let me let me just kind of divert the conversation really quick because I I I I just wanted to mention a couple of things. Number one, we we we do have sort of a pretty close to an apogee of people watching the stream right now. If you haven't already, please uh feel free to join. So, first of all, please feel free to join the comment section. I would always really love that. Second of all, please feel free to click the like button on this video. That really does help us out. Any of you who are on the panel, feel free to put in the comment section or in the chat, you know, hey, like the video. That's always great. Um, also, please subscribe to my channel. We just recently crossed over 700 subscribers for a channel that's been around for less than a year. That's a pretty good achievement. Actually, we've been around for roughly a year now at this point. But um and James, I do want to like dovetail on something that you said earlier, which is that you stayed sober for this conversation. And I I just I I legitimately, sincerely, and genuinely want to say that I really do very much appreciate that. It's I think it's it's a resource, and I think your content is a real resource. And I'm not just uh blowing smoke. I really do appreciate um uh >> I just have social issues.
>> Yeah, let me see if I can let me see if I can pin the link. We had a quest to pin the link. Um I don't know that I can pin the link from here. See if I can do it in the chat over here on on YouTube.
I'm admittedly not great at pinning Oh, pinning message. Okay, there we go.
Okay, I have now pinned the message. So, great suggestion, TNC. I appreciate that. Um, thank you for your your comment, TNC. All right, so I thought we would switch gears a little bit and Okay, thank you very much, TNC Apologetics. I appreciate it. Um, and uh, and again, shout out to Let me do this again. Shout out to TNC apologetics. Really fantastic channel.
Really great stuff. And Kuk, let's do let's before I go to my thought experiment, which I would love to do, let me go back to your comment here. You went to the Bible study last week.
Yeah, I've been going uh twice a month.
>> What What kind is this an What kind of Bible study is it? Just out of curiosity.
>> Uh they choose a passage and uh we analyze it. We we uh we did uh him turning water into wine. It was fun.
>> Um Yeah. So, um in 9,000 weeks Oh. Oh.
In 9,000 weeks. I know the Bible as well as you folks.
>> Yeah. after 9,000 after 9,000 Bible studies, uh, I'll be, uh, I'll be ready to go.
>> Well, um, why don't you do this, Kjuk?
Um, so, first of all, just quick follow-up question. What what sort of community is this that you're studying the Bible with?
>> Uh, they are progressive. Um, and they like to emphasize the communal nature of the Bible.
uh they like they uh they sound very much like Tavo. Um and the person who leads it is a Bible a biblical scholar who believes the Bible really is a an allegory like mostly an allegory. So my interpretation is usually that it's a marketing scheme. I haven't been convinced that anything is divine yet, but it's the first time I've really started reading the Bible.
>> Well, I mean I mean I I'm I'm kind of surprised that you're I'm honestly quite surprised that you're doing that, but I I I hope um I hope we'll have more conversations about that as you get to know biblical theology. I'd love to I'd love to. Yeah, >> I'm trying to open I'm trying to open my heart to uh your weirdo religion here and you know it's nice, you know, your weird you're you're fun your fun little guy on the cross, you know.
>> Well, I've opened my heart to like your uh your anthropomorphic fantasies. So, I appreciate the reciprocity and it's actually a good book. And if you want you why don't you do like a quick 10-second plug about your book, Kj?
Well, it's called The Violet Mist, and it's an anthropomorphic fantasy novel uh with mystery and noir elements that goes a little bit into theology. So, it uh the the two new things are it's a bunch of talking animals and the gods are very personal uh personable and personal. Uh they they respond to your prayers directly if they can and they have conversations. So, that's the two new hooks I have. It's a fantasy noir and with talking animals and gods that actually uh talk to you directly.
>> Um yeah, and it's I mean I'll I'll I'll I'll openly admit that it it drew me in.
Um I wasn't um I'm not familiar with the genre at all, but um >> it was a fun thing to read on Saturday.
Yeah.
>> Thank you.
>> Yeah. And Friday. Yeah. A little bit.
>> Good. Yeah. No. Um, it's a it's it's a weird anthro fantasy. It's it's like red wall with magic. Uh, and I try to have a magic system that the reader understands, you know, and my character, my my little uh Hell yeah. Hell yeah, Max. Hell yeah.
Uh, and those an those uh my my cute little fox guy with the glowing blue eyes is kind of the uh major and like he's a he's a major antagonist running around having fun killing people. It's fun. Murder is fun.
>> Um, okay. No, I did something bad. I kind of went to the p Let me go to Okay.
All right. Okay. I fixed my issue that I created. Um, so well let's get we got we do have random Catholic. We were in a conversation and um random Catholic I think we were in a conversation last Thursday, right? And then you and then you looked at my channel, right? Am I >> Well, I I confused you with someone else off the off the rip, right?
>> Yeah. But then you you had looked at my channel before that and you left a very kind comment, right?
>> Yeah. Yeah.
>> Okay. Yeah. I appreciate that. But then and then we talked yesterday, you were like, "You're a Judaizer. You're trying to sacrifice."
>> No, I I confused you with a whole different guy. A whole different guy. I I was in my flesh about having a conversation with a guy who uses Old Testament prophecy to create esquetological context in scripture that doesn't exist. And I sat there with that guy for two hours trying to talk him off the ledge he was on, and I couldn't do it.
Well, I assure you um as you get to know my theological perspectives, you'll find me out on many le ledges. Um great.
Well, I thought we would do a fun a fun thing that is a thought experiment that I've put in some of the comments, but um I it's not it's not in this slide deck, although I have in some of my other slide decks, which I won't I won't skip to it, but I thought we would do an exercise steel manning the contrary perspective. What we talked a lot about at the beginning of this video is the fact that there is a lot of antipathy that does get spo stoked between apologists and um and the general public towards Islamophobia. And I I've talked about in the past about how that's at least problematic with some of the tonality of some of the arguments, especially in a time where some countries are moving towards a more right-wing ideology. Some countries are becoming more xenophobic in their political discourse and throughout their general lay public. And I've I've raised the possibility that this is something that I find to be problematic in the past as well. So I thought just for fun, one of the things that we could do is uh is maybe steal man the contrary perspective from where we are. So, we could each maybe take a moment and just go down the panel and just talk about um an argument from the other side of the fence that we find to be particularly compelling. Um so, you know, I I have an argument in mind for atheism that I think is very compelling that actually compelled me to be an atheist for a long time. And we just go down the road all the panelists if you want to say here's something about Islam that I really admire or I agree with. I think that'd be a fun thing to do. Or you can say here's something about Christianity that I really admire. if you're on the atheist side of the spectrum or if you're on the Christian side of the spectrum, you could say, "Here's something about atheism that I really really admire." I thought that would be kind of a fun thing to do to steal man the other side and it might it might allow the conversation to have a bit of a breather. So, um I I I guess I'll start and you don't have to participate in this if you don't want to, but I'll start just to give people more of a chance. Um Rebecca Goldstein's argument for atheism is, I think, really persuasive. She makes the case that the universe is too large, too confusing, too chaotic and too entropic for there to be a god that exists. So the the data stream that we create through our actions through our motivations in our daily lives gets lost in the chaos of the universe so quickly and is essentially erased by entropy. for to be honest in given the scope and scale of the cosmos and given the apparent insignificance of humanity that was an argument that really persuaded me to be an atheist for a long time now I have a video coming out where I talk more about that argument specifically but um for purposes of this discussion I thought steel manning the contrary side would be a good thing to do and that's why I wanted to mention that I think it's a powerful argument I think it's very persuasive and um Dr. occur be before I get too distracted. I do want to acknowledge your uh I finally found your Substack and I read some of your articles. But let's go down the list and we'll finish this and then we can talk about that next.
>> Do you want to start James? Start with >> Yeah, I was trying to think about something I wanted to steal man there. I mean I guess my position would would actually not be atheist. I would uh my position would be agnostic and to steel man both sides uh because agnostic would be the the truest uh neutral open position.
So that's about all I have to say about that and I I try to do that. I mean I am Christian now because I I weighed my agnosticism against both sides and I'm not orthodox at all. I mean, you know that. But, uh, I do agree with what scripture has to say about Christ.
>> All right. Well said. Um, let me before we go to Dr. Kurt, let me acknowledge some of the comments. Max Michael, who we had a really great conversation about the CTF argument, and I'm remiss, Max, because I did not respond to your email and I I will. That's is on my to-do list. Uh, but I think this is a great comment. The best thing about Jesus is the saying, love your enemies. Uh, radical enemy love is is perhaps one of the most distinctive, if not unique, teachings of Jesus. Good point. I'm not sure how many Christians actually live up to this, but theoretically it represents the most admirable thing about Christianity. You know, I just want to like dovetail on this with two specific quotes. Um, Friedick Niche, one of my favorite quotes from N who did not like Christianity, did not like religion obviously, but one of my favorite quotes from him is there was really only ever one Christian and he died on the cross.
I think that's a really powerful, really piercing thought. Um, I also want to like, you know, other people have echoed similar things like Gandhi said, um, you know, I love your I love your Jesus, but you Christians are so unlike your Christ. If it weren't just for the teachings of Jesus Christ himself, I I myself would would consider myself a Christian, but um, you know, Gandhi also uh commented on that disparity between the ethics that Jesus proposes and the behavior of Christians. It's a valid point. I think it's a it's a really important one. All right, let's go down the line to Dr. Kurt if you want to say anything.
I mean, I've I have spent most of my life, most of the time interacting with people who are Christian, and I'm very familiar with Christianity and its beliefs and it's obviously created some very fine people um and also created some pretty horrific substructures and like Christianity is responsible for the Rareento. It's responsible for the Albagenian genocide.
that's responsible for all kinds of pretty horrific things. So, um to the degree that uh Christianity has its problems, um there certainly is a nice piece of literature in it, which I think the Gospel of Mark is one of the greatest works of of art of all time, but the big question is like what is the author trying to do? So that's really I mean I guess my my position would be artistically and like um conceptually and seen as an allegory Christianity is sort of a beautiful superructure. I just think that the way people understand it is problematic. And then Islam of course I've also lived in a Muslim country and and and I have great great friends who are Muslim and uh interact with Muslims all the time. I think they're wonderful people. Um, I I don't have any real problems with Islam and honestly from my perspective, Muslims just are Unitarian Christians. There's not a giant distinction between Muslims and Christians in my view.
>> I mean, that is an interesting perspective. Obviously, I came from a Muslim background in a Muslim majority country, and I would uh I would I would beg to differ about that, but we'll come back to you again because I I do want to like um uh highlight some of your work on um Platonism and and talk about that later, too. But, um we'll come back to you too. And uh KJ.
>> Yeah. Um I you know I think the the way to steal man if I was in charge of Christianity if only uh I would get rid of the Old Testament. The Old Testament is trash.
Uh and just focus on the New Testament.
I think that uh focusing on the New Testament is where the strength uh really lies.
Now the way the way to kind of uh lessen the impact of the atheist because the atheist is not making an argument. The atheist is is simply rejecting a bunch of arguments. And what you can do is say well the skeptic of any claim God evolution the earth is round or whatever always has the easier job because they can just say that they are not buying it. And so that's how you can maybe maybe that's how you can attack. Now, as far as theism, I find uh that the strongest argument may not in not in favor of of theism, but the most tantalizing argument is the uh uh what I'm sorry, let me find the uh the name for it. uh is the uh oh geez you know what I'm talking about where the uh fine-tuning the fine-tuning argument is very tantalizing um and I think that starting there if someone could start with fine-tuning and end on the cross there you go that would that would that would uh that would do it but you can't you can't just say because uh Christian has a lot of pre precepts It has t hundreds and hundreds of precepts that go along with it. Now, um I I I hope I did okay trying to steal man, but I I know I didn't do very well, but that's that's how I conceptualize whenever I'm going into a conversation.
I try to conceptualize how they see the best way that they see me.
>> Well, um I you know, I want to exhibit great sympathy towards the perspective that you're coming from. There are things in the Old Testament that are problematic, you know. Um, I mean, I actually recently started learning ancient Hebrew um, as an Afroaziatic language. It's not that dissimilar from the language that I was born speaking.
Um, now I wasn't born speaking any language, obviously. I just mean the language of the country of my birth and my immediate community when I was born.
So, it's not that different. So, I'm I'm I I will say that reading the Old Testament in the original Hebrew is um is at least I think enriching and nourishing in a way that I didn't I I maybe have picked up some nuances of things that I think are quite beautiful.
If you haven't read anything the Old Testament that you like, I would recommend reading the book of um um oh, what's it called? Ecclesiastes.
C >> can I also recommend a book right quick?
Oh, sure. Sure. What's the book I'm thinking of? Random C.
>> You're thinking of >> Ecclesiastes is a great book. I agree.
>> Is it just Ecclesiastes? Is it doesn't?
>> Okay. Anyway, yeah, >> Job. Job is the >> Job is the worst one.
>> Job is terrible. I agree. Job is atrocious. But wisdom of Ben Sierak, which is also known as Ecclesiasticus, is sometimes confusing. People will think that those are the same book. But Ecclesiastes is different.
>> Ecclesiastes is in is in the six is in the 39 book canon but you know Ben Sarak is a tutor canonical so yeah it gets a little confusing maybe >> but actually you know what I would say that Jesus endorsed the old testament so you can't let it go and it's all it's it maybe you know what it's I would say it's probably threearters problematic to someone in 2026 which is disturbing uh raises a lot of questions about God's omniscience But, you know, there you go. I don't know.
>> Random Catholic. I'll let you say more about that if you want to. Um, I just want >> I I just have a I just have a problem with people applying modernist ethical perspective to Old Testament scripture.
I It's just always been a problem for me.
>> Why?
>> Well, let me ask you this. Let me ask you this, Random Catholic. I did Did Jesus endorse everything in the Old Testament or did he fulfill everything in the Old Testament? Is there a difference and is it significance? And what do you think? Because I struggle.
>> There is a difference. There is a difference. Christ even says that he came to fulfill not to remove, right?
But the new covenant. If you look at >> if you look at covenant theology through time, right? Um if you look at the Old Testament, there are covenants where a covenant is a test and you either pass or fail the test and you are rewarded or reprimanded based on the outcome. And that happens seven times in the Old Testament. And it and it comes to its perfect fruition with Christ's finished work on the cross. That that inception of the new covenant where you know everybody gets to be everybody gets to be everybody gets to have the opportunity to be saved because of Christ's finished work on the cross because of his shed blood.
If you look at the way the covenants reveal themselves through scripture, that new covenant is the one we need to care about, not the other ones. But we need to know about them because they're important.
>> Well, well, well said. I mean, I think that's those are valid points. I also want to come to your rescue regarding the suggestion of the book of Job. And we'll get to you, James, after that, but >> Oh, you don't you don't have to rescue me. I >> Job is my favorite book in the Bible besides the Gospel of John. Yeah, I reread it recently and I reread it as an allegory and as a question and I found it to be quite quite beautiful from a lot of different poetic and philosophical lenses. I don't think it's quite the kind I don't think I don't think of it like you know um I don't know if it's my favorite book but Job is also as some of you have already figured out Job is also my namesake. I'm named after Job. So I'm I I I I always like rereading it from my um yeah anyways from my own from that perspective.
>> Can I can I go I know I know James has something to say too. So I go to James and then >> Tabo can I just say that Job was the first I was walking by the church and they were doing their uh Bible reading on a on the book of Job and that's what that was my first uh Bible study.
>> Yeah. I mean, that's that's who my parents named me after, which is kind of challenging.
>> Wow.
>> Wow. Did your parents like you? Did your parents like you?
>> They did not.
>> Very good question. Good question. All right, let's do an audience question.
Oh, let me unmute James so you can answer. And let's do an audience question right before we get to James, which is God three letters mean what?
>> I think this is a this is a riddle, so feel free to answer this.
Oh, and then Andrew, I do agree. IP's video on Job is um is I think one one of their one of their one of their best videos, and it's early on. It's when they were doing more more broad Christian theology stuff. Whose name is holy/worship means what to the holy day Lord? Um does anyone want to address this question? Whose name is holy/worship means what to the holy day Lord? And then it's a word. So, I think these are three questions together. God, three letters mean what?
>> I've got an answer for you, Tavo.
>> I don't I don't know if you're ready to hear it.
>> I'm I'm ready. Sure. Go ahead.
>> I don't know if you're mentally or spiritually prepared to hear my answer.
>> I am I am I'm with baited breath now waiting for your answer.
>> God is dog backwards. Discuss.
>> Okay. Okay. I'm not I'm not really sure that answers this viewer's question.
God, three letters mean what? And then whose name is holy/worship means what?
To the holy day Lord. And it's a word.
We can answer that or I know James has something to say. So we can go to James next boy. Okay. Uh let's start with covenant because that's not what covenants are. A covenant is a bond between two houses.
It's two houses becoming one. So, it's God's house or God's kingdom like with Abraham joining to the house of Abraham.
And that's what covenants are all through the Bible. And there's not multiple covenants.
They're all part of one continuous line because once you join a house, you can't join many other houses to it unless both parties consent.
Now, Job has this in it, which is why it ends the way it does with him being made a priest. He was most likely a descendant in the line of Esau.
And the ordeal that he goes through ends up making him a priest. Remember, he said, "Make sacrifices for all of your friends because they didn't say the right thing about me." Now, where does Job say the right thing? That's kind of seems like it's hard to find, but it's actually in chapter nine because uh what Job asks for uh in the King James it says I need a days man, but it's basically I need somebody who's both God and man to take hold of each of us who can make sense of what I'm going through. And that's why God makes him the priest. And then he's most likely the line of the priesthood that ended up with Jethro when Moses came out of Egypt. Remember it says that Jethro was a priest in Midian. Well, where did this priesthood line it come from? It was in the territory of Esau. So, those are the uh I don't know some of the key points to unravel in that.
Okay. Can I respond right quick?
>> Yeah, go ahead. Go ahead. Yeah, love to hear your response.
as a yeah, I'm I'm not going to use all kinds of scholasticy words and Latin and all the kind of stuff that I normally have these conversations with. I'm going to say Job should speak to anyone who's encountered a period of suffering that doesn't fit into a neat box of moral explanation. Right? If you read Job front to back, right? Faith can include protest addressed to God right at the beginning, right? But compassion matters. Explanations that crush the person never heal a person. And God shows himself to not be reducible to human being. Not every why gets answered. But God is never absent from Job, right? And at the end, Job becomes right again with God. Not for anything he does for himself, but what he does for his friends. That's the important story of Job. what Job does for Job's friends.
>> Yes.
>> Oh, interesting. Okay. Can you expound on that just a little bit more?
>> It's at the end. It's at the end where where it says, you know, pray for your friends and you'll be right with me. I don't have the exact verse off the top of my head, but >> in my opinion, in my opinion, right, Job is about suffering, right? But it's not a textbook for how to suffer. It's a It's meant to give you an opportunity to rescue yourself from suffering. It it helps us through our darkest experiences while showing us that prayer can be truthful even when answers aren't readily apparent. I think that's the story of Job.
>> Can I say that beautiful interpretation?
>> Um I think somebody's somebody's trying to Okay, Jack. I think that was you, but you we got a lot of static on your end, so I don't think anyone heard that. I I I want to that is a beautiful interpretation.
>> Yeah, I think that's a beautiful interpretation too. I take Job as like do you know um Roman Catholic do or random Catholic? I mean do you know uh Psalm 88? That's like my favorite psalm.
>> It's my it's my it's my life. It's my life psalm, bro. Read it. Read it to nuts. And you describe my And you describe my life before 2014.
>> Wow. Oh, that's harsh. That sounds really harsh. So what I what I take Job is uh in part one of the lessons I take away from Job is this.
>> Job is very like asserbic towards God.
He's not just saying God you're wonderful everything is good. He's like as he's suffering he's like you know God you're not you're not really like like this is really unjust and I can't do anything about it because you're God and I'm just a human. And so >> even in even then even in that fit of what you call asserbicness I I I don't have a word for being a Serbic in that in that portion where he's being asserbic. He's still not distant from God and God is not distant from him.
He's not they're not.
>> They are in union with one another the whole time.
>> Yeah. I mean, I think that's that's the maybe that's the moral lesson that I think I take away from Job is that, you know, you can you can be angry at God.
God can take your anger, right? If you read Psalm 88, it's very much the same.
There's no resolution. There's no it's just this guy saying to God like, you know, and it's not written by King David by traditional authorship attestation anyway. It's written by Hemon the Ezraite. So that's kind of interesting and it's interesting in of itself. But anyways, my point is it has a similar lesson to it, which is that you can you can be angry at your suffering. You can even be angry at God about your suffering, but as long as you're bringing your as long as you're keeping that relationship going. I think that's that's the lesson is >> keep the anger directed at God. As if you're yelling at God, God can take that. But if you're it what God doesn't want is for you to turn away. That's kind of the lesson I take from it in incomplete. I like your interpretation very much.
>> Uh I actually I actually know what you're talking Psalm 88 is where the guy is being tortured meaninglessly.
Right. And he's he's the one why he says why hast thou forsaken me?
>> Is that correct?
>> That's Psalm 22. My Lord, my Lord, my Lord, why have you forsaken me?
>> Yeah. But Psalm 88 is very similar to that.
>> Even but even in Psalm 22, and I'll get to Psalm 88 in a second, right? But even in Psalm 22, it ends with right relationship with God. He he starts out with my God, my God, why have you forsaken me? And again, those are Christ finished. Those are Christ's last words on the cross. But when Christ speak those words on the cross, he's asking you to read all of Psalm 22 from beginning to end. And the end of Psalm 22 is right relationship with God.
>> I actually uh I'm raising my hand right now.
>> Okay, KJ, go ahead. Go ahead.
>> I am raising it high and strong. Uh so uh Job is I I I could see the interpretation saying that Job Psalm uh the Psalm Psalm 22 was it? Um >> Psalm 22. Yeah, >> Psalm 22 are all about uh when when suffering you could interpret it as when suffering is too much to bear. And I I get that.
And let just give me a second. I'm I'm formulating this. I think the problem with the story of Job is that he kills his kills Job's family, which okay, they go straight to heaven, but it also seems to be endorsing murder. But you know what? No, >> you can toss that aside. You can say, you know what, that's not what it's actually saying. Okay, that's fine.
That's fine. Um, I also think that it has a lot to do with meaningless suffering, like where the suffering has no meaning at all.
>> Now, I but I already said the words, right? It's about suffering where you can't fit it into a neat moral absolute box. Suffering is going to exist. And even if you can't explain a moral justification for your suffering, that's not an argument against suffering itself.
>> So, are you trying to uh resolve the problem of evil? No, there evil is not a problem. I I don't >> Let's do a couple >> created evil. God created evil.
>> God did not create evil. Now, now again, that that's a whole another conversation. Let me let me just say this right quick about Job and Psalm 88.
And I'm going to ask you there are other laments. There are >> Yeah, let me let me hold on. Let me let me let me remove the question, but let me first say um this is a somebody who's not commented on the channel before. So, I just wanted to say thanks very much for your comment. Abner near Elnos technically didn't Jesus die for perpetrators and not for victims. I think the argument is that we are all the perpetrators, right? We're all the sinners. Now, I know James has something to say and a few of you also have something to say. So, let me remove this comment now. And there's another comment that I'll show in just a moment, but go ahead.
>> I just I just wanted to I just wanted to wrap up about Psalm 88 and Job. And I just want to say there are other laments in scripture that you can read. Psalm 6, Psalm 13, Psalm 42, right? But if you read Psalm 88 specifically, okay, the most intense lines in the Psalm are about whether God's steadfast love and his faithfulness extend even into the grave and Abdon. We reading we're reading about faith in crisis. We're not reading about abandoning God. We're reading about we're reading about demanding to know whether God's character is at work where all human support seems to end. If I am suffering without human support, what do I got? I got God. That's what it's teaching, right? And it keeps Psalm 88 keeps the cry and the questions present through the end of the psalm without an explicit resolution. I think that's the important part. Hi.
>> Let me let me KJ, before you respond, let me just give the floor to James because James was waving his hand a while ago and I I and then and then I also want to bring Dr. Kurt back into the discussion because I think he'll have a lot of insightful things to say.
And then so we'll do James. We'll do another comment from the comment section and then we'll do Dr. Kurt and then we'll come back to you KJ if that's okay. Just so we get some some other people. Uh >> yes.
>> Go ahead, James.
>> I've been talking too much.
>> No, no, no, no, you haven't been. I just trying to keep this cycle going so people stay engaged. All right. Go ahead, James.
Yeah. First, it it's a misconception that God doesn't create evil. God tells you himself in Isaiah 45 457 specifically that he creates evil. Now, a lot of people will try to tell you that's calamity or something like that.
That's a load of junk. The it uses the Hebrew word rah. That means both moral evil and calamity, physical destruction, whatever. God says he does it. So that's he settles that issue on the uh on the point of Job. The point I'm trying to make here is is ask yourself why Job is in the Bible at all. The book the Bible is the book of the covenant. The constitution of the nation of Israel and its history, its amendments, its judgments, all of the uh the same thing that we have in our law libraries.
That's what it was for Israel. Now, Job, they've got this book in here. Where does he come from? How does he fit?
That's why I was pointing out that he's coming from the line of Esau. If you remember, okay, uh Abraham's uh offspring, I mean, Isaac's offspring were Jacob and Esau. Okay, Esau gets disinherited.
Okay, but Job is still living a righteous life. So, what what happens to him then? That's why you have this courtroom scene at the beginning of it where the devil keeps coming in and saying, "Can I do this to him? Can I do that to him?" And the devil's saying, "You have a hedge around him." Because the devil thinks he's still in the covenant. He doesn't know that a that Esau was separated from the covenant.
And God has to explain it to him a step at a time. But when you get to the end, God is redeeming out of Esau Job's line.
that's what the story is about and why it's included in the book. Now, you can get all these other moral beauties and uh stuff like that out of it. That's fine. They're in there for that reason also, but that's not the legal reason that Job exists in the book. I hope that clarifies things. I don't know.
>> All of Old Testament scripture is not law. and and speaking from a chronological perspective, Job is actually the second book written in Old Testament scripture, it's Genesis and then Job. It's literally the second written book.
>> Let me let me let me uh let me give uh just a quick shout out to uh Dis Disco uh Discovo. Um thanks very much. I did a whole video on Psalm 22. People should check that out. I I'll try to find the link while we're chatting about it. But this is about the toll off. There's a line in Psalm 22. The psalm starts off, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" And then I think the sixth or 10th line or something is um for I am no man but a worm. Well, it's just fascinating to me that the word that Jesus uses there for worm is to off. Now, this is not just any worm. It's a specific worm.
It actually uh is the is how scarlet dyes were generated. And scarlet dyes are very important. They're important the parakeet. They're important to the the fabrics in the clothing of the high priest. And uh fascinatingly the toah is a little worm that lives its life as a crimson little worm and you crush these crimson worms and that would generate the dye and then when it dies it becomes white as snow. And that's an interesting at least metaphorical fulfillment of um you know Isaiah 18. Although your sins may be crimson, they shall be as white as snow. Anyways, that's the whole video. Random Catholic. I think if you check out that video, if you can find it, you like it. I'll try and find it as well. Let me turn it back over to Dr. Kurt because I think you'll have we've you haven't heard from you in a bit and I think you'll have some interesting things to say on this stuff.
>> Um like on this topic about Islam.
>> No. Oh, no. I just we've we've talked about theodysy a lot and we've been talking about the Christian perspective on theodysy, but let's bring your perspective back in because I think it'll be edifying to people.
>> I mean, I think the main reason that people select religions is because they have affinity for either a set of ideas associated with a religion or a set of people who are representatives of the religion and then they sort of um confabulate their justification for it.
I don't think that's ever going to go away. Okay. So, there's always going to be religions and one of the things that the religion has to do is give people cogent sounding answers to the big problems in their life. That's why um the antiatalism of the New Testament gets abandoned pretty quickly because there's no way to have a continuing movement with antiatalism. So, this is just the the natural process of what people do and there are these in all theistic religions.
>> Yeah. I mean now here's my question to you. Do you agree that that's also true of atheism? In other words, people choose to be atheists not necessarily because of reasons. In other words, we kind of choose to have a religious disaffiliation and then on a post hawk basis, we sort of fill our departure from religion in with some rationalizations.
>> I don't know. I mean, um, if you think bald is a hair color, I suppose I'm an atheist because I I I've investigated all the religions and none of them make sense to me. Um, but that doesn't give me any positive claim or any positive content that I um believe that.
>> But that itself is a >> isolates me from from other atheists. In other words, like somebody could be an atheist and believe in leprechauns.
>> Well, I would find it unusual, but they certainly could. Well, let me push back on KJ's assertion that atheism is the default position. So, there are several types of atheism, and this is recognized in the scholarly literature. There's sort of like more the agnosticism side of the spectrum, and then there's sort of agnosticism side of a spectrum, and then there's sort of closed and open atheism. I would argue that closed atheism is not the default perspective.
If you if you're really coming from a closed atheistic perspective, you say, "I'm coming to the table with a degree of certainty, metaphysical certainty, that there is no God in this universe or in any other universe, that it is just there's no such thing as God." So, I wouldn't argue that that's that at least closed atheism, I would argue, is not the default position. Now from a cognitive psychology and sociological perspective, it it I think it is true that people join religions not based on reasons but largely because of you know some people call these things creds.
That's a term that some sociologists have used in the literature which is when somebody makes a a sac a personal sacrificial investment in a theology and they do that around you that's sort of a symbol to you that this is something that you should consider. Um, but there is sociological literature about atheism that also suggests Religion for Breakfast did a really great video on this recently, but there is sociological literature around atheism that suggests that it's subject to the same the same intellectual framing where we start off from the perspective of saying I'm an atheist and then we justify that using post hawk rationalizations. In fact, there's a lot of great literature on this and I plan on doing a video, but it is actually really borne out on the the relevant religion psychology literature that we find where even for atheism, our our attitude is we become atheists and then we fill in the reasons why we become atheists with post hawk rationalizations.
>> Can I can I depends on the person question right quick? Can I ask a question right quick of the last speaker?
>> Um, it so whoever it was, was that Kurt who was just speaking?
>> Yeah, that was Dr. Kurt. Yeah.
>> Okay. Do Dr. Kirk, it sounds like you have some objectivist philosophy baked into your worldview. Is that true?
>> You mean am I an Iron Randian? No.
>> I'm not asking if you're an Irandian. It just sounds like It just sounds like your metaphysics are objectivist in nature.
>> They're not. If you mean by objectivist Randian, no, not in the least.
>> Okay. Well, when I was told to say something nice about atheists, right?
And I have an affinity for if I were to adhere to any atheist philosophy, it would be objectivism. I have an affinity for objectivist epistemology except with regard to faith. I love the way objectivists come to their moral standard. I love what they think about politics. I just think their metaphysics are entirely disordered.
Yeah. So again, that's that's a key point for me. Like I don't think atheism has very many entailments except that you don't believe there's a god.
>> That's exactly >> and and I'm and I'm not I'm not even probably from some points of view like a strict atheist. Like I'm an atheist who says that if you're a deist or a pantheist, from my point of view, you're an atheist. um because they don't make any different predictions than an atheist would would make.
>> So they don't the I I'm not taking a strong atheist position where I say every single God concept can't exist.
I'm taking the atheist position socioulturally that the theist positions that are common in my culture I see of as I see as wrong. Therefore, I'm an atheist. But remember that the term started to describe people who didn't accept the pagan gods and Christians were described by Greco Romans as atheists because they didn't accept Zeus. So I'm just using it in its like sociological sense to the point of like philosophical strong atheism where both theism and pantheism are impossible. I just don't think you can come to that conclusion with an n equals one universe and the data that we have right now.
And I was I was kind of uh not as not as uh uh deep as as Kurt's uh analysis, but when I say atheist is the atheism is the default position, I think I'm saying more like uh you're not you're just you know when you're born or you know the robins outside are you know you you got to be convinced of God. You can't just you can't say that theism is the default position. You have to be convinced of it in some way. And I do I agree theism and pantheism uh are just uh uh not not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the uh atheism with regard to uh the dominant belief system in my society which is Christianity.
>> Yeah. And I'm a tonist with six years of Dominican formation. Right. I I could actually give you Aquinus's five ways as a natural proof for God's existence, but trinitarian the trinitarian view of God can't exist outside of divine revelation. So you can't be Christian unless you somehow been touched by God.
That's just the fact of the matter.
>> It's a it's a faith position.
>> Yeah, it's a faith claim.
>> I mean I falls apart. If it's just a faith position, then it all Why are we, you know, then why are we still talking about it? It's just a faith position.
>> Let me let me let me let James take take on something, but let me let me first say that, you know, I think it's sort of a mixture of of faith and moral agency.
Like I've made the case previously that I think that there are at least invitations for us to study the universe, to study God, to engage in theological journeys, and to engage in spiritual journeys. So I don't think that starting that journey in and of itself is necessarily uh requires a leap of faith. In other words, I I got I got to know God by learning about the universe. That was my my first step. And I and as I started going into like theological questions more and more, I it was really a course of study. It wasn't it wasn't and I still remain uh random Catholic. You may not know this about me. Um but I'm I'm actually sort of theologically still non-committed.
Let's go to James to hear what he says on this because I know James has some stuff to say too. And by the way, there is a question from Let me put this question on Chronicle 33-P1V.
You're welcome to join the chat. You can join it now and we can have a little bit of conversation. We probably have about 30 35 minutes left in the chat. And um I'd love to I'd love to at least start the chat with you. And if you ever wanted to talk separately outside of my live stream, this is kind of my open panel live stream, but I do live streams and other conversations with people. So, you're welcome to join the chat. The link should be pinned and if if you need the link, just put it in in there. Oh, and thanks uh thanks to LA Apologetics, LAA apologetics 2.0. I really appreciate you you chiming in. We had a nice like u set of interactions when I was on TNC stream on Saturday. All right. So, that Sorry, I'm a little bit remiss for keeping James from giving his opinion, but go ahead, James. Let's let's hear what you have to say.
>> Okay.
All right. that uh the idea that we have to learn to believe in God that's absolutely false. I mean children are recognized universally as being thinking supernaturally and magically. That's something that you know they have to learn which cases it may be appropriate in which cases it's not. Uh they may have to learn more sophisticated theologies but we are born believing in the supernatural. That's just the way the way it is. You can watch any child, see how they grow up. I remember I used to watch TV and wonder if those people were watching me. You know what I mean?
And uh so that the that whole premise just to me falls apart on its face. Now from there you can argue about whether uh atheism is something that you absolutely have to learn or not. I think it is.
>> James, hold on. Hold on. psychologist that says >> Richard Dawkins himself, let's let's let's psychologist that says children think supernaturally.
>> Richard Dawkins himself argued that uh belief in God was an evolutionary mechanism and that you had to unlearn it. But that raises the paradox there. If it's an evolutionary mechanism that natural selection preferred, should we actually unlearn it?
>> See, there you go. That's a fun question.
>> It's an invalid question, but it's fun.
>> Well, I I mean, let me address your question in the chat, KJ, which is um um you need a reason to take an unreasonable leap. You know, I would suggest that where you may be getting stuck is on the question of is there a god? Now, I I actually kind of answered that question in the negative for most of my adult life. And then I sort of things shifted and I asked a different question. The question I I instead asked is is the universe purposeful.
Um yeah um I'm I let me see how uh so there is a a request in the chat. Um should make I should make LA moderator.
Yeah, I'm happy to do that. Let me see if I know if I can figure out how to do that.
Um let me see if I can make you a mod, LA. If I if I don't know how to do that, I will definitely make you a mod next time. Oh, add as moderator. Great.
Um, do you want to be managing or standard?
Uh, I'll make you I'll make you managing moderator.
Okay, great. Thanks, Laa.
I really appreciate that. TNC. I can make you a moderator, too, now that I know how to do that.
Um, we've got another question from the chat. Let me let me do that really quick. And um let me put this on the screen and why don't you answer this question random Catholic and I'll I'll make TNC a mod in the as well while I'm in the chat. Go ahead. Go ahead. Uh random Catholic.
>> Is there any passage in the New Testament that excuses Christians when they deny Christ or deny being a Christian to avoid persecution?
Uh I don't have a answer for that. We have the story of Peter who denies Christ three times and yet comes back into communion as an apostle. I I don't know if there's a specific verse I can quote that teaches that, but I'm pretty sure it's taught. Um, again, not having a ready answer doesn't mean it's not there. It just means I don't know it.
Um, I, by the way, we're backtracking just a little bit, but let me just say that I I do have some research and some citations that I'm looking through in my notes that just talk about how children are more likely to have a theistic worldview. Um, I have some of those citations in my notes. Maybe that's a topic for a different because I don't have them super organized as I'm looking through things. Let me let me add um Chronicle to the channel because I think Chronicle has some questions as well.
Go ahead, Chronicle. You're on. You're live. We should be able to hear you.
>> Do you hear me?
>> Yeah, I can hear you, Chronicle. Yeah.
>> Okay.
>> So, >> we got about 30 minutes left in the live stream, but we'll we could take some more questions. Then I do have some wrap-up questions that I wanted to get to.
>> So, I want to ask you some question about Christianity. Sure. Sure. Feel free.
Fire away. And if I can't answer, I'm sure somebody on the panel can.
>> Okay. Do you think the Christ Christ is son of God?
>> Um, can you can you repeat that?
>> So, you believe Christ is son of God?
>> Yes.
>> Okay. Yeah. I I mean, so, you know, like I said, I'm personally theologically uncommitted. I I'll tell you the things that I believe and I'll just run through some of my beliefs. Number one, I believe that if any theology is true, Christianity is the most likely candidate to be true out of any any existing world religion.
Um, and I'm quite certain of that. I'm about 85% certain of that. Am I certain that there's a God? I would say that I'm about 55% certain that there's a God.
I'm probably about 60 or 65% certain that um that um that the universe is purposeful. So God is one possible definition of what that purposefulness might be. But um if you ever wanted to argue about Christianity from the standpoint of like apologetic versus, you know, atheistic, I'm happy to like take on the Christian side of that argumentation. So but let's let's just for purposes of the discussion and just to move things forward, let's say I said yes.
Go ahead, Chronicle.
Did we lose you?
My answer was too long and you fell asleep. I think that's that happens often to me.
>> Yeah, that's why I tried to just say yes.
>> Okay. Yeah, that would have been better.
Chronicle, are you still there with us?
>> The answers. Random Catholic is feeding you answers. Tabo, >> I I >> Well, he asked for the He asked for the Christian perspective. I I should have just said yes. Yeah, >> I might be the only actual Christian on the channel. I'm not sure.
>> Look out.
>> That's that's a topic for another day, but I think it'd be fun to do a video on what what does it mean to be a Christian.
>> He's gonna make you a monk. Look out.
He's gonna make you a monk.
>> Well, no, I'm not. I'm not. I I I'd be happy to introduce him to consecrated religious life because it's awesome, but I'm not going to try and make him a monk.
>> Well, let me put it to you this way. One of the other things I'm quite certain about is that every day that I've taken a step closer to to um studying Jesus, getting to know the theology of Jesus, getting to know a community around Jesus has been a day that has brought me marginal incremental increased enrichment personally. So if that's another way of answering the infir in the affirmative, there you go. But I think we've lost I think Chronicle has has fallen asleep because of my prolonged my inability to be lonic with >> I just like to simply answer your question about how we can determine whether or not someone's Christian if you can affirm two simple statements. Do you believe Christ died on the cross to end sin for all for all men for all time? And do you believe Christ is God?
If you answer yes to both of those questions, you're a Christian.
>> Catholic. Can I can I that is a very interesting statement you said. Can I can I uh ask something?
>> Go ahead, KJ.
>> Uh I actually uh my definition of Christian is anyone who identifies as a Christian.
>> Well, you can't use a word to define itself. So that's kind of weird.
>> No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. Uh it I'm not I'm I'm just I'm not saying that they're defining it as defining Christianity as being a as being a Christian. I'm saying that they that if they identify as a Christian, I take them at their word. Now, now many I think Catholics would say that they're Christian, but many Christians would disagree that Catholics or Mormons are Christian. I think they're all Christian. Uh I think Christian because they identify as Christian. I think that's very important.
>> Yeah, I want to chime in on KJ.
everyone. Well, I think everyone would disagree.
>> Um, let's let Dr. Kurt chime in and then we'll do we'll do >> as your panel as you wish.
>> My criteria for if you're a Giants fan is if you tell me you're a Giants fan.
So, I just use religious identification in exactly the same way.
>> Yeah. I my my >> Exactly.
>> My colloquial my colloquial response to that is you can claim you're an Orion slave girl. That doesn't make you green or sexy. Right.
>> That is not how identity works. That is not how identity works, sir. So, you need to you need to learn, you know, you can't just identify as an African-American. That's not what >> I agree with you. I agree with you. Now, the standard the standard for being Christian throughout history is creedle and lurggical.
>> Right. It's based on the personal mind state of the person inside the mind. It is not a separable identifiable characteristic just like being >> a Broncos fan.
>> Exactly. Exactly. It's exactly that.
It's exactly that. If you identify as a Christian, you're a Christian in my book.
>> Um I do have an answer for a a want to at Chronicle sent me a message. Oh, okay. So, I think at Chronicle wants to I want to ask open chat. Let me see.
You know, at Chronicle, you're still in the chat. So, let me see if I can figure out a way to address this. But I want to address Christian guitar's question because I think it's a good question.
And I'm happy to like maybe let the panel weigh in on this one as well. But, um um if you committed to Christianity, what denomination you think you'd be? I think that's a really good question. Um uh so uh you know I've met some people online who are part of a group called the way. They're sort of I would call them sort of generally non-denominational Christians with a specific ethos to try to preserve what the values were in first and century Christianity. So um I I kind of have a real proclivity towards like interacting with those folks. I think they're really interesting. Um and um and then Lucas has a has an interesting question.
What's your opinion on the the Talpot tomb? It doesn't seem to be the burial place of the Holy Family, but Dr. Traster said he believes in the James O the the James Oscar came from this site.
This is a really great question. Um I'm I've been trading emails with Dr. Traser and I just sent him a really long PowerPoint that sort of draws together a lot of his dispert research. If you're not familiar with it, I just read through the 2007 decision by the court of Israel because there there was a specific court case where they looked at the the ouary of James, right? And the person who was in possession of the ouary was accused of forgery and they said this is a this box is a forgery and um they were actually um the case was actually thrown out. So in other words, there was not enough evidence to say that this was a forgery. We have a whole video coming out about this. So, I'm really glad that you asked and I do have some really cool collaborations with Dr. Traster coming up. We He's turned me on to some really um insane arguments and really fascinating revelations. So, stay tuned for that because I'll have a more prolonged answer if you'd like that. Um and what about other people in the group who want to weigh in on this question?
Oh, okay. Let me let James answer.
James, you're not muted right now, so feel free to answer.
>> Yeah. Do do you know if uh Traster has been able to actually uh see any of the translations of the uh Coachine manuscripts? I don't think they've been digitized yet. So, I've I haven't been able to find them anymore.
>> Um he has he has because we've emailed back and forth about that.
>> Okay. There's one thing in particular that I that I'm interested in. I heard this, but I don't know this. It's that uh rather than uh I think it's rather than calling Jesus the son of god uh or along with calling him the son of god they use the term son of the virgin and that that that goes directly to a lot of my work that I've been doing that the whole point of uh calling Jesus son of god in the new testament is based on the virgin birth.
>> Um let me let me do one more thing. Um, we I think we lost Chronicle from the chat and I'm really disappointed because I really want to um have more engagement with you, Chronicle. You can email me on my channel. Um, my um my channel just my email is on the channel page. And if there's a better time for you to chat with me, let's set something up. I' I' I'd love to chat with you. I haven't had that many one-on-one debates, but I'd happy to do that. I'd be happy to do that with you. And I'm sorry that we didn't get more uh air time during this chat for you to express your thoughts.
There are a few private chats, so let me look at those really quick. But um let me do this too. Um >> Oh, does anyone else want to answer this question?
>> Which denomination?
>> I was I was very curious which of the 40,000 denominations you would be. And I want an I want a really indepth reason why you wouldn't be any of the 39,999 other ones.
Well, you know, um, okay. So, I apologize. So, let me just say that Chronicle is asking, "Why don't you want to let me speak?" I'm so sorry, Chronicle. I didn't mean to talk over you. Feel free to rejoin the chat anytime. And if you shoot me an email, Chronicle, I will definitely like we can schedule something and get you on. And if you want to join during this panel, you're totally welcome to. This is always sort of um an open panel that I do every Monday at 5:00 p.m. Pacific Standard Time, and I stream every Monday. But if you want to talk to me, Chronicle, I would really love that.
Let's let's do a chat, Chronicle, and reach out to me anytime. So, and I apologize if we talked over you a little bit too much. So, let's answer this question, then we'll do one more round of question and answer, and then we'll wrap it up probably pretty soon after that. So, um let's I know James thing about the way. Can I just say one quick thing about the way?
>> Oh, yeah, sure. I'd love to hear your thoughts on that. Yeah.
>> So, the way is not a trinitarian organization, right? They believe that they believe in one God and that Christ is the son of God but not God the son.
So if you're leaning toward trinitarian theology, the way is not for you.
>> Um yeah, you know, I would actually not answer that so definitively. You know, uh the word trinity originated from Tertullian. There's sort of a certain more rigid tritarianism that I think originated around the time of Tertullan.
I think before that though the the though like there was sort I mean I think the way sort of acknowledges the trinity to varying degrees in other words I don't want to speak for any organization but I and you may know more about this than I do but I would say some of these them do at least say explicitly that they're very trinitarian.
Okay. Well, let's do this question. Um, because I I'm kind of curious about this and we have a really nice panel right now because we have a pretty even divide of people who are from atheistic backgrounds and people who are undecided and people from theistic backgrounds.
So, let's all take a chance answering this question. What is an unresolved question that burdens your worldview?
What is an a nagging inconsistency or a conundrum of the universe that you haven't quite reconciled? And um let's do that and we'll do a round of answers to these questions. And let me just check on the private chats because I think maybe >> yeah Chronicle uh okay yeah Chronicle we could not hear you. So Chronicle sent me a number of private chats and I am really sorry that I didn't answer your private chats but Chronicle like if you rejoin the chat the link is pinned. Feel free to join the chat and in the last few minutes we'll give you at least some air time. And then why don't we go down the row? I answered the first the first question first. So, let me now give it uh let me give it to James and we'll just go down the row and then I'll answer this question last if that's okay with everybody.
>> Yeah, I can't say that there are any that burden my worldview that the ones that I'm working on now uh mostly have to do with the physics that would have left the image on the shroud. Uh you aware of some of that. And then the one that I I'll probably post a video on it tomorrow that I've been working on is I think I've resolved or at least come to a way to resolve the abiogenesis problem, but it'll require further experiments and which can be done that uh comes from the whole idea, you know, what I've been working on with the uh Hebrew language and the process theology and and things and the a way that reads Genesis that tells you where that ao a biogen Genesis is if we look at the way uh solar systems form.
>> Um quick followup James do you think there is life in the solar there is life on other planets that we'll find >> that we'll find that's a that's kind of a strange question. I mean, I'm definitely sure that there's other types of life. Where they're at, >> where they're at is a I mean, because when you start getting into the physics of it and interstellar travel and what would be required with warp drives and stuff like that, you're getting into paradoxes that that that are like what we talk about with interdimensionality. And it it the whole idea that that exotic forms of life need the same carbon-based structure that we have is uh I mean that's definitely not a settled question. So uh but when you when you ask me that I would say yes. If you think that I believe it's uh like ET that you know we see in the movie or something like that that's I'm not so sure about. No, I think I'm more like talking about biological or organic atmospheric signatures. Let's give it over to Chronicle now. Um because I Chronicle just to rejoin the chat and then we'll finish by going down the rest of the panel to answer this question and then we'll finish up after that. But Chronicle, I'm remiss for not like getting you in the chat sooner.
>> Go ahead, Chronicle, you're live.
>> Chronicle, are you there?
Okay. I have some question.
>> Yes. Go ahead. Yeah. Yeah.
>> So, >> you know, I think what's happening, Chronicle, is I think you're cutting out. I assure you that this is not my you're you're live and I'm not touching the screen or the computer. So, I think if you're cutting out, it may be something on your end.
All right. Well, let's come back, Chronicle. If you if you can talk again, we'll we'll we'll we'll in the remaining minutes that we have, we'll let you chat, but um let's let's keep going down the panel in the interest of time and just wrapping things up at a reasonable time. Dr. Kerr, do you want to take a shot at answering this question?
Yeah, I'm happy to. Um, I h I have to be honest that there are many many conundrums about the origin of the universe and exactly how a biogenesis might have taken place that I find interesting conundrums.
They honestly don't trouble my like understanding of the fundamental nature of things.
Um, what about like a sort of theological conundrum or theological inconsistency?
>> Yeah, I don't believe in theology. So, I don't I don't like it's like asking what I think about trolls.
>> Oh, well, that's I mean, that's a fair answer. I I just kind of meant like are there any are there any seams in your world view where you feel like it's it's you're like I I I wish I had an answer to this or this is an obvious inconsistency.
But I think that's an acceptable answer too. Let me give >> No, I think I think um like when you adopt a position of like monism of some type uh even even going back to the Epicurans like monism and like the relational ontology answers most of the things that people think are tough questions. The a big problem is just linguistic. People see these things that have like noun forms and they think that noun forms therefore must somehow exist. I know James has talked about this before and this creates a lot of problems in their mind.
But once you get rid of that idea and you just see nominalism as like a natural understanding of things, it doesn't leave you with a lot of conundrums except to the degree that it's weird how people can't understand nominalism.
Um, I mean that's that's an interesting standpoint and this is maybe a topic for another debate, but I mean I would I would I would say that you you're sort of contradicting at least one of the central tenants of Pltonism, which is fine if >> Yeah, I'm absolutely not a Platonist. I think Platonism is nuts.
>> Oh, okay. I mean, I'm just going off the article that you put up about the CTF argument.
>> Yeah. No, I say at the end that I'm definitely not a Platonist and I'm not making an argument for Pltonism. I read that article, but I read it a few days ago, but I thought it was really great.
And we we'll come back to that before the end of the video, hopefully. Let me give one more shot to No, he's not in the chat anymore. Okay. I wanted to give Chronicle another chance to uh join the chat. And I think we just Chronicle, if you're listening, we just I think we just don't have very good audio on your end for some reason, but we really do want to get engaged with you. And uh All right, let me turn it over to KJ.
>> Yeah. um uh atheism.
So, atheism is not a worldview. Um atheism is just the rejection of a claim. So, uh it's actually a very easy it's very easy to just say, "Nah, not buying it." And that's kind of what atheism is. My worldview is not informed by atheism. I am a contean. And my position is so convoluted and it's been so long that I've since I've read the critique of pure reason that I don't remember much of anything. But I I do believe that objective uh objective uh uh ethics or objective morality does exist without God. Uh I don't know about I'm I'm very intrigued about the purposefulness of the universe. Now an unresolved question that burdens my worldview but it has it is not my atheism doesn't just saying I don't buy it is not that's kind of what atheism is. It's not a worldview. My worldview about an objective morality outside of God is actually it makes a lot of sense but uh you can you know and and uh meaning without God makes a lot of I can I can argue for it. Um I'm uh I was not I was a philosophy major but you know I moved very far away from that. Um but uh what I I am concerned that there is that um that it's that an objective moral reality is not correct. I guess um I'm not I I think I can I I've been able to argue myself out of some knots with that. But I will say that atheism is not a worldview. It is not even the rejection of a worldview. It is the rejection of a claim. So you're uh but I like your question. It it it kind of threads the needle. It asks uh what is a worldview? What is a belief? And um I just wanted to say that that's that's what uh you know and and I don't think Christianity adds objective morality.
Um, if it did and it was and it made more sense than Kant, then I would be I would be way more on board, but it hasn't done that for me. So, that's that's all I wanted to say.
>> Well, let me plant some seeds for future conversations. I hope we can talk about objective morality in the future. I'd love to know how you rationalize that in an in an atheistic worldview. I I personally, as an atheist, I'm sort of a murological nihilist and an ethical emotivist. as an atheist. That's kind of the par that's where I would be if I were an atheist right now. So, I mean, but um I Oh, okay. You know, I want I really want to give a shout out to uh LAA apologetics. Thanks very much for reminding people, hit the like button, please subscribe to the channel. There's some new viewers on this uh stream and this has been a fantastic conversation.
So, more about that in just a moment.
But anyways, um Kjuk, I I mean I I um I would love to pick that up. I also really loved Kant from a very early age.
which I got super into Kant. So that's another another synergism between us. I do um want to talk a little bit about um atheism as a as a world view. I think if you look at closed atheism as an ethos of rejection and negation of religion, that is itself a truth claim, right?
You're claiming that God does not exist from a standpoint of metaphysical and epistemic confidence. Right? I think that's sort of different than saying I just don't know what's going on. Now I think sometimes there is a bit of a bait and switch when you talk to atheists that they'll say you know and this is recognized in the scholarly literature as I've talked about before there sort of closed atheism where you say I I reject there is no god and I'm quite certain of that that's a worldview that's a negation that's a that's that's putting yourself in a position of epistemic confidence. I think if your standpoint is just very open-ended like I'm not sure could be anything I think that's sort of like the absence of a worldview. I think that's more of a reasonable default position. Now, I know James has something to say, too. So, let me give James the floor.
>> I I think you're right. I think you're right. I think you're right in a in a way. I think saying that you know something is is too far of a leap, but I don't think that it leads to a worldview. I don't even think that saying that you believe that the that evolution is true leads to a worldview at all except that you believe in science. So, I just wanted to say that.
>> Yeah. Evolution notwithstanding. I mean, I I think that evolution is Well, that's a whole other conversation, but let me get let's do James really quick and then we'll get to Random Catholic and then we'll wrap it up at right under the two-hour mark. So, go ahead, James.
Yeah, I've never I've never really uh I mean tried to categorize this, but uh from what I've seen, there's a lot of denominations of atheism and uh it would be worthwhile for someone to categorize.
I know you were talking about like closed atheism and stuff like that. And I've seen all kinds of different atheist tribes who diff had who differed on different things and came from different perspectives on science and stuff like that. I mean, it's uh I mean, you got your fundamental, if you want to use comparisons, like fundamental Baptist atheists, and then you got your institutional Catholic atheists like Richard Dawkins. And you know, you can you can mix and match just like you do with Christian denominations. From what I've seen, >> I wanted to say that uh an atheist, the only thing that all atheists have in common is that they do not believe that there that a god exists. that they are not convinced that a god exists. So you get idiots and you know crazy people like uh Richard Dawkins and you get crazy people like my brother-in-law who is a in a militia. I don't you know what it does. Uh the only thing that keeps all a that all atheists agree on is the same thing that all uh anti-peprechaunists believe is that they just are not convinced that leprechauns exist and that's it. It does not no worldview comes from non-aggreement.
It just doesn't.
>> Well, thank you. But not every atheist defines it that way.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Well, let's let's go to Random Catholic because I want to give Random Catholic a chance to like answer this question and then do a quick goodbye and um and then I'll I'll do a sign off at the end of that.
>> Well, go ahead.
>> Sure. I I think my greatest unresolved question isn't what I'm going to say, but listening to the conversation, I think this is more important, right?
There was a great 20th century Dominican frier named Survey Pinkerage who wrote a study on moral theology. He's one of the greatest moral theologians throughout time. And he asks a very simple question. How should scripture be interpreted and applied to moral decisionmaking, especially when competing hermeneutical approaches threaten to override the church's moral teaching? I'd like to take that a step up the chain. Right? Everyone here is using their own hermeneutical system to come to to come to the opinions about God and the nature of morality that they've come to. And how can we possibly know what is trustworthy? Right? I it it seems to me that there is secular humanism has caused a lot of damage in modern society, right? And how can we possibly know what is a trustworthy system of moral rules without, you know, some kind of authority to guide us? I I I just don't know what that thing could be except for God.
>> Fascist. a very fascist interpretation.
We need >> I don't see it as fascist. I I don't see it as fascist >> to tell us what to do. Thank you very much.
>> I I don't want to tell you what to do. I I think you should know what to do by yourself.
>> That's the opposite of what you just said.
>> Well, you said we need an authority figure to tell us what to do.
>> Yeah. I I I think >> I think would Would you do me a favor, Random Catholic? at some point in the chat or in on the video, put the comment that points to the the essay by that individual because I didn't quite catch his name and I wouldn't be able to spell it by my memory.
>> Yeah, sure. I I'll put it I'll put it in the private chat for you. No problem.
>> Um, all right. Well, let me give a a stab at answering this question because I have any number of unresolved questions that are part of my worldview.
That's one of the reasons why I'm not really theologically committed. I think that um you know we tal we started the conversation with my assessment that there are some moral indictments of Christianity as a culture and as a practice even if I think the theology is quite beautiful. So um I'll try to put the link to some of the discussions that I've had around that in the past as well. But I have a number of moral conundrums. I have also have a number of uh historicals if you're watch you James because I think a motorcycle just drove by you. Sorry about that. Um, so I guess what I want to say is um I I I'm leaving this conversation with a high degree of um epistemic humility and with a high degree of uncertainty. Um, oh, and I saw that random Catholic, thank you for putting that in the in the chat. I'll I'll definitely check that out. Anyways, I'm leaving the conversation with a high degree of u calibrated humility, epistemic uncertainty uh about my beliefs, but I really um each day I enjoy the road that I'm on. And as I said early on in the chat, one of the things that I am certain of is that each day that I've gotten closer to Jesus marginally, incrementally, I have found a similar commensurate marginal incremental enrichment in the journey that I've had.
This conversation is I think in in uh in a a lot of real ways very emblematic of that. Even though we've talked from very disperate worldviews, I feel like you all have sharpened my perspective.
You've told me something new about the world more something new about morality and I I think that's really important to to growing your spiritual worldview. I think that knowledge and love are intertwined, right? So as we get to know the universe in a more deep way, we understand we kind of put ourselves in a perspective of relational love with the universe even if we're just studying philosophy, logic, sociology or human history. So um so uh a a apppropole of that this conversation has been similarly enriching. I feel like I've gotten to know philosophy, morality, even the universe a little bit better by talking with people who are really insightful and intelligent. And I I'd be remiss if I didn't say that, you know, I'm surrounded um by some very very intellectually very thoughtful, rigorous people who are asking me really great questions, who are throwing a lot of literature and a lot of arguments at me. Uh 21st century apologetics, like I check out a lot of your videos and I've given you some feedback on some of them. I really appreciate that. Dr. Kurt, um, your article about platonism and CTF sent me in some really fascinating directions.
Um, I have a whole PowerPoint that I made that I'm still working on that, um, I'd love to engage with you more. KJ, you just sent me your book, which I read over the weekend. It was really fantastic. And Random Catholic, you're this is the the third time now that we've talked, but uh, I'll count this as the second time since the >> Yeah, last time. You thought I was a Judy Eiser and talking about >> Second Time doesn't count. I was a little bit in my flesh about a particular guy.
>> No worries at all. No worries at all.
But anyways, this has been a really great uh conversation. Don't forget to hit the like button, subscribe to the channel, and one of the things that we've talked about, we touched on briefly, is does the universe have a purpose? And that just so happens to be the topic of the next video that I'll be putting out. So, please comment on that next video. And um if you're if you've been in the channel, if you've been lurking, if you've been enjoying the stream, please click the like button.
Please subscribe to the channel and um that's my sign off and I hope that you all have a really wonderful day. But now let me give it over to the panel again.
You can each spend like maybe just 10 seconds promoting the work that you're doing, telling people to check out a particular video or particular work or something that you want to point people towards and then uh we'll we'll do this the official sign off after that. So let's start with you James. People should definitely check out your channel. I really want to endorse that.
But go ahead, James.
Oh, I think I still have you muted.
Sorry. Sorry. So sorry. Go ahead, James.
Oh, muted you again. Okay, there you go.
>> Yeah, my videos are are are steadily building uh uh my worldview and how it applies to everything really. And uh the method that I came from was I was in a unique situation where I actually had to defend my Christianity in a court of law uh using lawsuits. And that gave me a unique perspective on on listening to arguments and thinking now if I'm going to present this to a court how would I do it? And usually the ones that I can't present in a court of law I discard. I you know I say this is a worthless pursuit like uh uh I mean that's really what all of my videos are focus you can start to see that as you watch different ones and see the same type of method building over and over again and I think it's very worthwhile for for understanding what's really happening in the Bible and Christianity. That's about all I got to say.
>> Well, let's turn it over to Dr. Kurt, then maybe like a 30 second sign off where people can find you, what they should be checking out.
>> Yeah, you can check out my Substack.
Just go to Substack and check for Ekkurt Allen. Um, and I' I've done like a about six or seven posts now on the CTF. So, >> I find it fun to interact with. Um yeah, but um >> I'd also I I I'd love to have like a moderated uh chat with you about the the gospels and how much historical weight we can put on them because I think that would be very interesting.
>> I'd love that as well. I'd really love that and I'd really love to like have more conversations on the CTF because you you've put a lot of thought into it and I haven't gone through all the articles that you put up but a lot of that the two that I read were really really fantastic and so I hope people will check those out as well. will have.
And by the way, this is open to anybody on the panel. If you ever want to have a one-on-one conversation, I'd um I I' I'd love to uh I'd love to have uh more uh more conversations with all of you. All right, let's turn it over to KJ and Random Catholic for just like a 10 or 30 second sign off where people can check out your content.
>> Thank you. Thank you, Java. Um I don't I don't have anywhere I that I post really. So if you wanted to go to YouTube kic one and become one of and be I have 13 disciples.
I have 13 apostles today. Uh and if you wanted to join go ahead. Um my book is called the violet mist. It is not out anywhere. Um, and uh, but I I'm taking readers. Uh, it's I'm I'm doing a weird symbolic uh, it's a weird anthro fantasy mystery novel that Tavo apparently likes. Uh, you know, and uh, I've got I I think I've got some good feedback on it. It'll be in store shelves in a decade or two.
>> You have you have slap hosles.
Ah, slapology for the win.
>> Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Tom.
>> Okay. Well, random Catholics, thanks for being here. First time on the channel.
>> Me and you should connect and do a do a debate sometime on on any of the the weird topics we've discussed so far. For sure.
>> Yeah. I mean, this is like I love these panel discussions, but any of you are open to to to like scheduling a one-on-one with with me. And I'd love to like book that and do like a a like I will probably like branch this part of the channel off to like the live stream and then probably like do like a one-on-one talking with Tavo and um yeah, but but go ahead. Uh but I'd love that. And so the that invitation is open to all of you. All right. Random Catholic. Uh, I spend a lot of time sweeping the floor in a Marian shrine and praying a lot. I I don't make content. Um, I spend an inordinate amount of time on a spittle flecking anti-atholic debate channel trying to give correct Catholic teaching. Um, and that's about it. That's that's what I do. You can name that channel in your chat if you want. I wasn't going to name it for you, Devo.
>> Oh, you can't. You're talking about the Christian King.
>> Yeah, I'm talking about the Christian King. I spent an inordinate amount of time on that guy's channel. Um I will try to put it in the description. I'll try and put all the links that I can find in the description. So, but um this has been a really wonderful conversation. We started off in kind of a dark place. We were talking about Islamophobia and some of the recent violence unfortunately and some of the divides and I think we've bridged those divides um in this conversation. So, I've I've really this has been one of my favorite live streams so far. Thanks to everyone who's tuned in. Don't forget to like. Don't forget to uh subscribe to the channel. Thanks so much to LA Apologetics 2.0 for moderating. I really really appreciate that. And thanks to everyone who's joined, asked questions and chronicle, hit me up and we'll have more conversations. I would really love that. Well, it's been really great to talk to all you. I'm going to end the stream, but please, I hope that all of you have a really wonderful day.
Thank you, Tavo.
Vidéos Similaires
BSA Goldstar - I gave up! And why animals beat humans!
thebingleywheeler
102 views•2026-05-31
don't put shein's responsibility onto individuals #shein #neoliberalism
ScintillaePod
231 views•2026-05-30
3 Dreams That Changed Philosophy Forever
mommyplus24
731 views•2026-05-31
I Cringed Watching These Protestants Critique Catholicism
jaynijackson
458 views•2026-06-05
Scholar Explains: WHAT IS A GNOSTIC?
fightbackpodcast
965 views•2026-05-31
When They Ignore You, Do This Instead | Stoicism
ZenithWisdom-e3k
615 views•2026-05-31
Why Pure HEDONISM Is IRRATIONAL
qnaline
12K views•2026-05-31
Nietzsche's Last Man Explained in Minecraft
twozziii
117 views•2026-05-30
