Debating Atheists & Agnostics

How the gospel influences all of life and culture and the role that we have to play in applying foundational

Christian thinking to every area of life This is the

Academy. I am Eli Ayala of Revealed Apologetics And I will be bringing a six -part series on presuppositional apologetics.

What is this called the Apology Academy? It's just called the Academy. Okay What's up, everybody?

My name is Pastor Jeff Durbin and you're watching collision today I'm gonna be interacting with an atheist on tik -tok.

So here we go unsupervised and unhinged Welcome back to cultists the aftermath

Hey everybody. Welcome back to another episode of ask me anything So you are watching apology or radios after show exclusively for all access.

I Would say if the authorities didn't want us involved in the public square they ought not to have crucified

Jesus in the public Use humanistic principle. Well, I would say the same idea. I would say that man

I would say what's the problem with stardust bumping into stardust? In the in the cosmic picture.

No, there's no problem in the cosmic picture. It won't matter No, mr.

President you are not protecting Reproductive freedom you are authorizing the destruction of freedom for 1 million little human beings every year

I'm sorry, my friends, but I am tired of seeing Jesus presented as a weak beggar

He is a powerful Savior and the gospel is not a suggestion.

It is a command River Mola, don't you sympathize with that?

I sympathize with every single human heart wishing to know the one true and living God But I believe there's only one way that that can happen through Jesus Christ and the gospel is about repenting of sin not celebrating

Right now you're on the threshold of an amazing adventure We will explore the spiritual of this

You have not experienced this before You're gonna love it

It's all about The Fool says in his heart.

There is no God psalm 14 1

Fool says it is hard. There is no God great great verse great passage of Scripture What's up, everybody?

Welcome back to another episode of Apologeo radio You can get more at apologeostudios .com go there

Sign up and partner with us in the ministry all access you get a ton of stuff all the past radio shows episodes

Podcasts geologians cultish apology or radio provoked all of us there. You also partner with us in ministry

We're gonna be doing a debate review today about a recent debate. We had at the University of Utah Salt Lake City, Utah with Pastor James.

Dr. James White myself. Dr. G Dean Chatterjee and Jared Anderson Do ethics depend upon God and all of our all -access partners in ministry you guys do this ministry with us

You made that debate possible. You made it to where people could see that I was actually coming out of the grocery store just the other day someone walked up to me and said they had just Watched that and it totally transformed their life strengthened their faith.

And so thank you to all of our access partners you made that possible so Sign up for all access when you do you get the after shows that are coming you get the

Academy you get Collision all the extra content ask me anything once a month private stream just for our ministry partners

Where we get together you guys can get questions in to me I talk back with you guys and that's gonna go also for see elogians as well

So that's what's taking place at apology all -access new website revamped new contents is there that's there already new stuff coming every single week

That's just for our partners in ministry that help us to make this ministry possible Another example just dropped a video yesterday of us doing some evangelism and outreach downtown

Salt Lake City In a public space Jehovah's Witnesses that content you guys made possible

Changing people's lives equipping people encouraging people to get out and do evangelism the stuff that's coming over the next week with The team that was out here locally the team that was out in Salt Lake City at the temple

Lots of stuff coming appreciate all of you guys very very much. And so that's Luke the bear. What is up?

That is Zach Conover. He's a director communications at end abortion now Don't forget guys continue to pray for an abortion now

We've had bills of equal protection go across the entire country about 15 states bills of equal protection

Abolition taking place across the country. Some of those bills are still in so I'm still waiting to be heard

God just blessed us tremendously Thousands of lives have been saved just because people like you partner with us in this ministry

So go to end abortion now comm to partner with us in ministry sign up with your church because abortion is not abolished

It's not over and you could be out with the church saving lives as we have over 900 churches that were equipped and trained by us to go and Be a part of the work of the mission of the gospel in conflict with the issue of abortion

We're grateful to God for all they've done and so well, by the way, we had to reschedule Just want to give a heads up if you guys missed it you're planning on coming.

We had to reschedule The event the supposed to you're supposed to be flying out tomorrow Yeah in Arkansas, we've got a bill in Arkansas and so we're gonna have a pastor's meeting in Arkansas We got to reschedule that we're gonna try to do a bigger and better later on This year

Zack, you know more details about that to me right now They will let us know in terms of a final time to expect but it will be later this year.

Okay. All right, so What's up, everybody? Did you guys? Check out the debate we had hope you guys got a chance to see that it's an apology of studios recent feed on YouTube Debate again, we had at the

University of Utah Against one guy who calls himself a devout atheist another guy who calls himself a devout agnostic both identify as humanists both except the

Darwinian model of origins and That the ontology and metaphysics that come with that and so we're gonna do a debate review today.

It's a long debate I think it's a couple hours. I think it's about two hours long. So like 20 minute opening statements from each side

There's some rebuttals that are like five minutes each then which I really loved is 20 minutes each side cross -examination

That's where the debate actually takes place. Now, of course, the opening statements are always very very important You're setting down the foundations.

You're setting down the foundation of what you are supposed to aim at with your opponent's

Foundation and what they're supposed to be interacting with in your opening statement. Unfortunately, that didn't take place

From the other side towards us very well, I think at the debates and that's rare that it does it is it is rare So yeah

Just with debates you're supposed to have opening statement and in the debate the the opposing side supposed to interact with and refute your opening

That didn't happen Dr. Gene Dean Chatterjee Just sort of went off on a

I've actually it was interesting to you know be sitting there on the stage I've listened to hours and hours and hours of Chatterjee and Anderson either in podcasts or in other public debates or discussion or in lectures and talks

So when Chatterjee went up and did his opening I had already heard all that stuff before it's sort of a canned speech

That he gives so I don't really think that they came really prepared for the debate

They didn't just because like I said Chatterjee's was was a canned lecture thing that he does

You know very often so I'd heard that and I mentioned in my rebuttal he's not even in the debate yet because the debates about is the

Christian God the Foundation for ethics and he's talking about the existence of God improving the existence of some

God Is he the younger or the older of the gentleman Chatterjee's the older guy? okay, and so at any rate we wanted to do a debate review today talk through some stuff that took place at the debate and That's what we're gonna do today.

So hopefully it's hopefully it's a benefit to you a blessing to you We obviously in a time like this have opportunity to stop to add more to engage a bit more

Debates tend to be very very quick Obviously you're on a time crunch and so there's a lot of things that you would like to say that you have to sort of Go well,

I don't really have time to say that so I won't say that won't say that Lots more could have been said in the debate. But again, you're just constrained by time.

So today we're not we can do whatever we want so That's what we're gonna do So I hope this is a benefit to you guys and the goal of this and their debate review is

Really to try to prepare you and to equip you. I want to just go on the record I've said this to these guys. I think I even said it today

Hey, I was surprised to be honest with you When we got the invitation to do this debate two years ago

It got shut down because of kovat and then obviously got the opportunity to do it this year I was surprised to see

You know atheists confidently walk into a debate about ethics I think you know it makes sense to me that they would have sort of like the courage to walk into a debate over the existence of God because there's just a broad bunch of categories

That you could just start going at and it's sort of it can be scattergun And a lot of guys might feel confident going into a debate like that from the atheistic perspective but in the question of ethics the question of say morality that To me is one of the most glaring obvious Deficiencies and bankruptcies of the unbelieving worldview so to walk into a debate with two

Christian ministers of the gospel and try to defend the idea that their Perspective or their worldview can provide any meaningful foundation ethics is surprising to me

It takes a lot of courage, and I said it in my opening. I said you know our opponents are very brave tonight

I I think they're very brave walking into a debate with their worldview In a debate like this ethics

And I made the point that they don't have the capital to spend with you tonight right their worldview capital

It's empty they don't have the capital to spend on your emotions that they're gonna draw on tonight

What they talk about violence being bad if they talk about harm done to others They have no capital to purchase the emotion from you right like you've got them they're there and We shouldn't just do arguments based upon emotion, but some arguments based upon emotion are valid are

Wrapped around emotion or valid when they're really centered on core issues of justice right like for example if I if I mention

The the kidnapping and rape and mutilation of a little girl I know it's horrible to talk about these things

But that's the world we live in if I mention that and I say that is wicked and evil I am drawing on your emotions

I'm trying to because I'm trying to actually tap into the image of God and the understanding of justice that is innate in you and Those emotions are appropriate in that moment, but see

I have the capital as a Christian To spend on your emotions to purchase them from you to say give me those emotions.

Let me draw them out I made the point that they're brave walking into this debate about ethics because anything that they appeal to is gonna be ultimately meaningless because they don't believe in any absolute morality no meaning in life none of those things and So I check out the opening statement

James did about eight and a half minutes I did the rest of the 20, and I tried to lay some solid epistemological

Foundations for the debate Foundations by the way that neither Jared or Dean engaged with I I really don't feel like These men came prepared to engage with us.

I think that they You know, they're from their perspective they're sophisticated they're every erudite and They've they've been in this world of humanist ethics for a long period of time

Chatterjee Chatterjee is published. He's edited some books on ethics from the humanist perspective all that stuff

So this is their game and I feel like they came into it thinking that they were already ready and they clearly weren't because they

Didn't even really provide any meaningful Justification or warrant for their position and they didn't engage with us

In any meaningful way. I feel like they were on their heels the entire time Which I'm fine with I'm not bothered by it.

Yeah, but I I do I don't want to Take down their skills.

I feel like this debate just produced what is obvious The unbelieving perspective is completely bankrupt and I think the debate showed that I think it did

So hopefully it's a blessing to you guys to watch us review it today It's much different a question for the topic does

God exist versus without the Christian God Can you account for any ethical standard and that's why

I think Like it's two birds with one stone, right if I can demonstrate that apart from God There's no such thing as valuing the dignity and worth of another person

Then by necessity God must exist for there to be any meaning for the question All right, and that comes up that comes up in the end of discussion pastor

James brings that up you guys ready to go ready Yeah, I was just gonna say my I think my favorite part. I don't know if we're gonna get to it or not, but What just to emphasize the point you're making when he when he made the claim about the founding fathers did agnostic

So when I look over and you're like, yeah, I was giddy that church and state one, but then you're like, you're like, do you know where that came from and he's just like No, no, please tell me and I was just like shouldn't make claims right like that if you don't even know where they well

I think that's the key issue here is that we are a generation of sound bites if you can get the most popular sound bite

And not that there's anything wrong necessarily like you can have Christian sound bites But those sound bites are actually rooted in something and can be explained the problem with the modern era

I think is that it's a sound bite Era in community that's devoted to the sound bites

This is a really, you know pithy slogan or this is a this is a good sound bite and there's nothing behind it

So we we educate people today based upon sound bites. This is what you're supposed to believe memorize this

Here's a good sound bite memorize this but they don't really understand anything about what they're saying

So like that comes up here and we talk about separation of church and state. It's also funny. I think we've Grown up in the cultural water not knowing that we're wet

So we say things like, you know a religious freedom, you know Well, it's like how did we get that like that only rises out of a

Christian framework, right? It's having the freedom to believe something. Yeah. Otherwise you have a pagan view which is coercion

Mm -hmm. So that common ground that you love so much that religious freedom You know, thank a

Christian. Yeah, you can thank you for that. Yeah, exactly Okay, so for those of you guys just jumping in before I hit play here, this is dr.

James White's myself versus dr Dean Chatterjee and Jared Anderson and just to get a fix on sort of where these guys are at again

Dean Chatterjee announces and is proud of the fact that he is a devout atheist

Jared Anderson announced in the debate that he is a devout agnostic Both of them consider themselves humanists, which is to say that for them

Humans are at the center of all questions. Yeah, man is the measure of all things man is the measure man is the reference point

So just keep that in mind Here is a debate between two sides One side says that God has revealed himself clearly in history through his prophets and apostles

Through nature itself and ultimately in the incarnation of Jesus Christ. God has given his revelation.

It is public. It is not hidden It is unavoidable and God himself is the standard the transcendent standard and reference point for all questions about knowledge wisdom ethics

Science logic truth beauty goodness, you name it knowledge is impossible apart from the

Christian God We weren't arguing for a general form of theism like a lot of Christian apologists do We were arguing specifically that is the triune

God of Scripture. That's a foundation of any meaningful appeal to ethics. He is the Justification for ethics at all and then on the other side, you've got two men that believe that human beings are at the center

They are both humanists and and now while they have some Degree of difference between them in some points it would ultimately be negligible because for them

Human beings evolved through purposeless time and chance acting on matter in a universe that doesn't care about them

There is no ultimate meaning no ultimate purpose. That's where they're at. And this is the cross -examination section

Gentlemen, it's a great honor to be here with you and honor you both and thank you so much for being here with us

I'm doing this if I could ask you this question to respond to the quote that I had my

Opening statement from dr. Will Provine the professor of biological sciences at Cornell He says that because of his views of modern evolutionary biology.

It tells us loud and clear and These are Darwin's views that there are no gods. No purposeful forces of any kind no life after death when

I die I'm absolutely certain that I'm gonna be all completely dead. That's just all that's gonna be the end of me There is no ultimate foundation for ethics

No ultimate meaning in life and no free will for humans either. Could you respond to dr

Will Provine given your worldview? All right, just pause there for a second because they're effective. I can't do this better I can't do this better than dr

Will Provine himself now that quote that I got from Provine has been said almost

I Verbatim in a number of different contexts by dr. Will Provine.

He is now dead. He's now creationist, but He that was a famous quote from Provine He stood by that and the reason

I appreciate that quote so much and I use it so often with atheists is because it's it's

This this moment of hope within the atheists framework that atheists will have the integrity to say the

Consequences of what their system gives to you And so that's why I love this quote from Provine because here's

Provine Having a real moment of integrity and this is from the film expelled

No intelligence allowed is actually I think it's free now on I think it's free at least

I'm finding it on YouTube for free in a couple places Phenomenal movie if you haven't if you haven't seen it, you really should take a look at expelled

No intelligence allowed show it to your kids. If you got teenagers in in in school homeschooled show this to your kids

It is fantastic. One of the things that I like the most and I'll just say this quickly I don't want to take too much time on this but right before this section with Provine is this maybe 10 minutes or so on The consequences of Darwinian ism and the

Darwinian model and worldview in Nazi Germany Showing the devotion that Hitler had in his regime to the

Darwinian model. It is it's powerful It's it's really powerful and a lot of people aren't aware of that worldview

Foundation in Nazi Germany and it's it's really something you got to see it's not outlandish.

It's not it's not trumped up It's not caricature. It's it's it's the real deal and that happens right before this moment with Provine And like I said, nobody could say it better than Provine says it himself.

It is it is really eerie It really is dark. Here we go. No gods.

No life after death No ultimate foundation for ethics no ultimate meaning in life and No human free will

We're all deeply connected to an evolutionary perspective You're here today and they're gone tomorrow and that's all there is to it.

Dr Will Provine professor of the history of biology at Cornell University Gave us another disturbing glimpse into where Darwinism can lead

Oh, I was a Christian, but I never heard anything about evolution because it was illegal to teach it in Tennessee Dr.

Provine's first biology professor changed all that he started talking about evolution as if it had no design whatsoever

And I came up to him and I said you've left out the most important part and he said if you feel the same way

At the end of one quarter I want you to stand up in front of the students in this class and tell them this deep lack in Evolution and I read that book so carefully

I could find no Sign of there being any design whatsoever in evolution and I immediately

Began to doubt the existence of the deity But it starts by giving up an active deity

Then it gives up the hope that there's any life after death when you give those two up the rest of it follows fairly easily and you give up the hope that there's a

Imminent morality and finally, there's no human free will if you believe in evolution you can't hope for there being any

Well, there's no hope whatsoever of there being any deep meaning in human life

We'd live we die and we're gone. We're absolutely gone Don't you feel hopeful

The orionic thing is I think he would say that there's deep meaning in that statement. Yeah, right.

Yeah a whole little monologue Yeah out there. Well, I there's if you watch the Audience Q &A at the end of our debate in Utah Somebody asked the question about suicide and I say in my one minute or whatever

I had to respond to that that I can't think of a better worldview to give somebody to drive them to suicide

Yeah, exactly the Darwinian model either suicide or genocide and exactly and the difference is

How do you distinguish between one or the other right? And and so You know, I wasn't

I wasn't being facetious I was being serious Listen to what Provine just said there you talk about driving somebody to a place of despair and death

I mean let Provine preach to you. Let him whisper in your ear while you're sleeping at night goodness gracious Listen to how that sounds just a hopeless meaningless.

There is no imminent morality. No present morality Nothing is real and present nothing we have to hold to There's no transcendent anything in the evolutionary model that's what

I was pointing out to Jared and Dean and so this is

Their response and so I just I felt like you know It's one thing for me to say it in cross -examination to give the quote

It's another thing to let Provine give it to you. Yeah a hundred proof Yeah, I I agree with the beginning of that.

I do personally believe that When we die our consciousness most likely does not persist

I would comment on the ultimate Versus greater because I think that's very very important.

It is true that questions of meaning are not Objective or absolute and that is an amazing wonderful thing

Sorry The questions of meaning are not ultimate or absolute and that's wonderful in other words

So everything I'm going to say to you after this is meaningless drivel. Isn't that great?

Yeah, isn't it great that not even anything I'm about to give to you has any meaning whatsoever.

Isn't that? Wonderful. Did you catch it? It's like dr.

Cornelius Vantill who if you don't know you need to get to know Dr. Cornelius Vantill used to say to his students let the unbeliever talk and let him keep talking and Ultimately, he's gonna hang himself and that was and I love and respect

Jared, but that was Jared hanging himself There's there's there's nothing absolute about what

I'm gonna say. No real meaning and isn't that lovely isn't that lovely? Yeah, is he a professing and you know naturalistic materialist?

That's what that's what I was gonna Talking about consciousness and his immaterial aspects of the of human nature.

And so I'm wondering how he holds those two things together So I'll give you a quote. This is this is something he said often. He says there is absolutely, oh

Yeah, so discard what he just told us. Yeah, he said there is absolutely Nothing supernatural.

That's what Jared says. That's what he stands on. There is absolutely apparently there are absolutes There is absolutely nothing supernatural supernatural if you break down that the the etymology of the word who bear and is it's above or more than and like We are more than conquerors who bear

Nikkei. Got it. That's where we get the word super bear Okay, we are more than conquerors Nikkei the goddess

Nikkei who's the the god of conquering? Goddess of conquering so who bear get a little exegesis in here today.

So there is nothing Supernatural, okay. There's nothing outside of or above the natural

So yes, Anderson is a materialist naturalistic materialist. He would believe that there's nothing supernatural nothing transcendent

But yeah He makes a ton of appeals to consciousness and to immaterial things that just can't actually exist in that kind I would love for him to define it, you know, what is consciousness?

Yeah, and then based on his answer Try to take the legs off Yeah, I bet they have

I bet they would even have different answers on that. Yeah Well, it's interesting because you guys might have noted that Provine says in probably confused a lot of people especially

Christian categories when Christians are thinking of free will or thinking about a debate between say like Calvinism and Arminianism, but when when an atheist is talking about no free

What they mean is that you are subject to your biology and DNA Yeah, and biochemical responses.

In other words, you're not actually making choices. You can't help being and doing what you're doing You're dancing to your DNA dancing out your

DNA. And that's what Dawkins says. You're dancing out your DNA You are just happening and you are the subject of the biochemical responses that are happening in your cranium

And that's just the way things are it's fixed And that's what Provine was referring to with no free will for humans either is you are just the subject to your biochemical

Responses happening in your brain. You can't help it And that is supposed to be the basis for you ought to act.

Yeah or not act this way I would say he wouldn't feel that way if someone stole his car Provine would not for sure and even with Jared I was gonna say

I would like him to define even what wonderful is Yeah, yeah, and we'll keep going cuz he's gonna bury himself more because again that means that each of us is able to Determine what is meaningful to us and what is important to us.

I Does he really believe that each of us is able to determine what's meaningful to us and important to us?

So try that with the rapist. Yeah, try with a pedophile. Try it. Try it with them If you can't say that each of us is able to determine what is meaningful for us right, and then when the

Murderer comes along or the thief or the rapist comes along and says well It's meaningful to me is to violate other human beings

Well, you've already told him that he's allowed to do that each of us can decide what's meaningful to us Some people think it's meaningful to engage in the slaughter of other human beings

Are you gonna stop them because you're not in charge of them? I mean, they are the one of those people that's able to determine for themselves what's meaningful, correct

Jared? It's just an absolute mess the unbelieving worldview is utter foolishness

That's why I started the the show today with Psalm 14 1 the fool says in his heart. There is no

God Foolishness in Scripture is not merely a description of somebody's intellectual state

Although it does refer to that as well. You can be foolish intellectually.

God doesn't behave in that way God is not the author of confusion. God is a God of order. His mind is consistent

God cannot lie. He cannot engage in logical contradiction, but the fool engages in logical contradictions

They revel in foolishness and intellectual suicide And so yeah foolishness in Scripture is of course a description of somebody's mental capacities, but it goes beyond that.

It's deeper than that Foolishness is a moral indictment. Foolishness is a sin. And so these men

Cannot hold their worldview together. They cannot they cannot live consistently with their position

They got one foot consistently in their hatred towards God and their unbelieving worldview and the rebellion and one foot reaching

Constantly back over towards the Christian worldview to gather capital That doesn't belong to them and so the fool says in his heart there is no

God and it's just you could you could break down almost every Sentence of the unbeliever in a debate like this and just write a book about it.

It doesn't work And how does that philosophy everyone doing what's right in their own eyes, basically, it's essentially a self -serving philosophy

Yeah, how do you build any meaningful? cohesive society upon that premise right because even as an unbeliever you'd have to aspire to the reality that It's good that people help each other.

It's good to look out for your fellow man It's good to you know, create a society that works together and and sacrifices

But again without the biblical worldview You don't have a basis for a society where people sacrifice themselves

Yeah for the good of other because your ontology doesn't work with it if your doctrine of Being the nature of human beings is that their descendants of bacteria?

There's no moral ought above any descendants of bacteria to do anything good for one another because guess what? There's no value

Inherent in them. I mean I have what you create for yourself except what you create for yourself, which is ultimately arbitrary

In itself it is it's a meaningless thing. So that's what I say. I think in my Rebuttal I say, you know you talk about grieving

He talked about being a chaplain and grieving and a humanist chaplain grieving over people dying and I said, you know

People don't shed tears over rocks that tumble off a cliff and shatter. But what's the difference?

Rocks got here the same way we did unguided purposeless forces time and chance acting on matter.

We're just a different kind of accident of evolution We're not shedding tears over the other

Things that just shatter break and disappear into dust and and why do we cry over humans? Because you know that human beings have value and dignity

You know it instinctively because you're in the image of God, but your worldview doesn't comport with what you're saying

It comes up later in the debate, too I think you guys hammer hammer this home that there's a creational distinction between Mankind and every other creative things, right?

Whereas the atheist perspective Possesses no such distinction. There's right. There's there's just an equilibrium of we're all just existing in the sea of chaos

There's no hierarchical distinction. Yeah Good Honor the fact that for many here

Christ and the Bible are Guidelines for meaning and purpose and ethics.

I Celebrate that you need to be very use the Bible very carefully But that is not the case for everyone

But the important thing that makes it greater than us Individually to answer some of the questions as far as like aren't there just billions of points of view?

Well, yes, there are billions of points of view. But again, we are all part of the conversation

Really? Do you really believe that mr. Anderson? Do you believe that that there's billions of different viewpoints?

And that we're all part of the conversation and each one has an equally valid place at the table So do you act like that with the rapists the murderer the thieves?

Do you do that? Do you say that they have a valid place at that table in the conversation that they're all just part of this conversation?

I don't think so. I don't think that the rapist belongs to the table We're gonna have ethical conversations conversations about what is right?

What is wrong true beautiful lovely all that the rapist doesn't have a seat neither does pedophile Neither does the liar neither does the thief they don't belong at the table

See the difference between the Christian worldview. No, they're not part of the conversation. Why because there's a Transcendent law and standard that's been revealed to us in humanity

And so they don't belong at the table. How do we know because we know the character of God? It's been revealed through nature

It's been revealed through the prophets and apostles in history and ultimately through Jesus Christ in the Incarnation so big difference

And so in response, yes Even if there is no life after death, even if there is no absolute meaning that means that there is life

Before death and there is meaning before death. Mr. Anderson. I don't think you answered the question.

So I'll ask it again Please do as he says there's no ultimate foundation for ethics given your worldview

Yes, no ultimate meaning in life and no free will for humans either you say that It needs to be meaningful to us it's at least meaningful to us

Was it meaningful to the Green River killer Gary Ridgway? Was was his determination of what was meaningful for him just as valuable or meaningful as your perspective that he was wrong

Meaningful is different than defensible. I work with murderers and pedophiles.

That's Incoherent yeah, that's Meaningful is different than defensible. He's saying that no,

I think that it's indefensible what they've done But in order for it to be indefensible, there has to be some standard that you can measure

Indefensible. So if you say there's no meaning then there's also no way to say something is in indefensible because because if something is

Defendable then there's a standard of meaning that we're all wrapping our hands around to say no

This is what's meaningful. So what you're doing is indefensible. So what he's saying is just it's just incoherent

It's because he doesn't have a worldview that can comport with what he's doing How he lives his life and how he thinks others should live their lives as well

So this is just the wheels falling off This is just somebody hanging themselves and I mean that with all due respect to the man

But we have to expose the foolishness of unbelief take down every argument that exalts itself against the knowledge of God And that's what we're doing

That's that's an incoherent thing to say It's all the time.

I have a least favorite pedophile. Are they wrong? He's very annoying. Yes They're absolutely wrong or like they are they are technically

Intersubjectively wrong, so they're not absolutely No, because it's all a conversation debates over friends

They are intersubjectively wrong. So so you admit mr. Anderson that they are not absolutely wrong

The Green River killer is not absolutely wrong. Ted Bundy is not absolutely wrong child rapists are not absolutely wrong

And you came to debate that your worldview provides a foundation for ethics. Yes the humanist perspective does provide a foundation for ethics because again

Rape is wrong murder according is wrong According to the cultural conversation that we are all of which apart

So if a society draws a circle around themselves and says that you can kill and cannibalize

Other human beings as long as they're a large enough society that draws a circle around themselves and they determine that it's right

It's right to eat other humans Some cultures have believed that yes, and they they are part of the conversation

They're part of it, it's fascinating to watch them try to hold these things together Some people believe that and they are part of the conversation

There you go that that's that's unbelief right there right before your eyes and ears

That's what you have. Like there's a collision just a few moments before and that he he says that these things are unacceptable

Morally right indefensible because The cultural conversation has decided that they're indefensible but like you said what happens when you have a group of people that are

They accept that kind of behavior currently happening. It's happening today, which it is. Yes It's currently transpiring and now the objections gone

So you have exactly you have no objection with the tribes today that still practice

Killing and cannibalizing other human beings some people do that. Some people still do that some people

You know, they'll wait till somebody dies to do it, but I'm not even talking about them I'm talking about the tribes that actually punish people by killing and eating them and according to Mr.

Anderson's perspective, they're part of the conversation and you know some people do that and you know could be right in that perspective just as long as you get enough people to agree with you and as long as the

Conversation tends that toward that direction and there's ultimately enough people that that are on that side of the conversation

Then it's okay to to kill and cannibalize other human beings I was just gonna say he saying they're part of the conversation is a non answer

He's that's his that's his escape Whenever you whenever you press him on something, you know, is there something objective?

Yeah It's almost like okay. Well, let's talk about it Like I'll entertain the notion that it's okay to do this as long as you are feel included.

Yeah, that's Academy speak Yeah, that's what that is, right? I don't have an answer but let's make it sound sophisticated and erudite and that's that's what it is and Camille Depends on the context so killing killing and cannibalizing other human beings could be ethical in your system

If you're frozen after a plane crash and our soccer players, no, I think you missed it. I'll say it again killing in Cannibalizing another human being could be ethical so long as you have enough people that agree with you

That's not what would make it ethical. It would not be the agreement It would be the conversation and the navigation and the negotiation

So the agreement So whether the people through the negotiation end up agreeing

Do you see the point? He cannot bring his worldview into conformity with what he's doing and saying and so it's not the agreement

It's the conversation the navigation and negotiation. It's like he's doing the splits between the two chairs, right?

I mean, he's got to be like Van Damme Be careful

Frankie, you're gonna have kids after that Blood sport. Yes.

Oh man, if you haven't seen blood sport, have you really lived? I wouldn't say so So hey

Gabe, we're gonna take a quick commercial break here Yep, let's guys we're gonna do a quick commercial break come back

We actually some some some more really important things are said right after this So stay tuned with us for this quick commercial for all access

This is the Academy I am Eli Ayala of revealed apologetics and I will be bringing a six -part series on presuppositional apologetics

Defending the faith is super important and I'm excited to be able to participate in helping equip you to do that effectively and biblically

In my series, we're going to be unpacking all different aspects of the presuppositional method What makes presuppositional apologetics different than other approaches how to answer objections to the presuppositional approach?

What is the role of the authority of Scripture? What is the role of theology in defending the faith all of these things we talked about and more we try to bring it

Up a notch and not giving you completely introductory material, but kind of digging deep into the ins and outs of this method

I am looking forward to equipping you and participating with you and training you to be better defenders of the