Because he rebutted Turek's argument in 5% of the debate. We can't know about a first cause and even if Turek is correct, it doesn't get him anywhere near a Christian God, or even a God as we conceptualize it. It would just prove that something started the universe. So what? Hitchen rebutted it and used the rest of his time more effectively.

@@Elmonsoon The way I see it is, you either believe that 1) the beginning of the universe was completely random and caused purely by science or 2) something started the universe as part of some kind of plan, through science. If you believe that some kind of unknown, unseen, infinite force started the universe, then surely you believe in God, your just not referring to it as "God", because religion is so frowned upon these days. The title of this debate said nothing about a Christian god.

@@Elmonsoon If we have good reasons to believe the attributes of God exists then it follows we have good reason to believe that a God who has those attributes exist.

Because 100% of it is evil. And what is the point of babbling about a nin existent phantasm?

@Michael M. The debate was about the existence of God, it was not about “once we agree that god most likely exists because of all the logical, philosophical and scientifically evidence we have examined, which one is it”. That is a second debate . If that had been the topic Turek would have easily addressed it in the opening statement . All Hitchens said was “I don’t have a a clue about how the universe came into existence and therefore NO ONE CAN KNOW and I am going to ignore any evidence which points into a direction of the possibility that there may be a God”. Basically it’s the same logical fallacy that you would make if you saw a turtle on the top of a wall: You can just believe that the turtle practiced jumping for a very looooooong period of time and eventually learned to jump so high that it managed to reach the top of the wall. OR…. You follow the most credible explanation … and you admit that most likely someone took the turtle and put it on top of the wall.

*The Bible:* _"Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God."_ *Frank Turek:* _"I'm a multi-millionaire, wanna buy my religion?"_

In the Bible god been always there so he wasn't created, not by nature not by anything, simple as that. - we can start counting from one to infinity but we can't count from infinity to infinity - so how can anything be always there someone explain this to me please 🙏.

@@theflash206 for a very large portion of science everyone was very happy to believe in an eternal universe but not suddenly theres a big issue believing it's possible for God. We do not fully understand the way the universe works but we do know form the power of deduction that we will need an unmoved mover, an initial cause and I don't have enough faith to believe that wasn't God

@One Good Lord † News Where did anybody say "being rich is inherently evil"? I certainly didn't say it. I can't see anyone using those words except you.

@One Good Lord † News lol don't they? Frank Turek - multi millionaire from selling religion. Billy Graham - multi millionaire from selling religion. Jerry Falwell - multi millionaire from selling religion. If you took money out of the equation, these charlatans would have dumped Christianity in a heartbeat. And if you, as a Christian, are defending it, good luck getting a camel through the eye of a needle.

What do you want a definition for?

@@lbits you can't argue against something you don't understand. if you don't understand the other side's concept, you cannot argue in good faith against it. otherwise, you will be arguing against a strawman you have interpreted yourself.

@@wisejackproject so may I ask what definition would have sufficed? It seems they agreed to debate the probability of God’s existence.

@@lbits Hello, I feel that every debate should open with a definition. For example, "Today's debate topic will cover, Is there a God/Does God exist?" At the beginning of the debate, they will have a definition of what a God is. It should look something like this; According to the Oxford dictionary: "1. (in Christianity and other monotheistic religions) the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being. 2. (in certain other religions) a superhuman being or spirit worshiped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity." Now, that we have established a definition, then we can find out which parties disagree with the definition and then they can discuss their interpretations of it. I'm finding that many people who differ in views are redefining things or giving interpretations. I think once the definition has been established we can determine if the debater is defending the definition or interpretation the definition. That's all.

@@JacksonCaesar oh, okay. I get that. Hmm maybe that’s why they ended up sounding like they were talking about two different things for most of the debate

That's because Hitchens can't answer or debate that question. This was a one sided debate won by Turek.

@@wd8786 yup, Just watch the later videos of cross examined, all the insults off hitchens is now answered precisely...

Hitchens is nothing without comparing his beliefs to the Bible. Kinda defies the debate. I would have lost it sò much sooner, if someone kept interruping me and did not answer my questions!! He still has no answers, round n round he goes... would love to be hear his arguments when standing before God one day!! 😂😂😂

@@carienventer9168 he already found out 😂 he died 9 years ago! 😈

@@AL-oy6cg Pretty sure, taking Revelations literally, he's still in Sheol, so can't have met Him yet.

Preflex! Thank you

U da real mvp

Thanks! I was just scrolling comments while all the blah blah was going.

Thank you!!!!

@@passionfashions3018 Like wise

You did not pick up sarcasm, did you? ""It exists in the minds of those who believe", Yes, it means god is a man-made concept and only exists in the mind of a believer. It is sad that people in 21st century are relying on goat herders' understanding of the world from 2000-6000 years ago. To me it is insane.

Exactly

​@LGpi314 honestly though, I would ONLY expect that people who were "goat herders" in that time and before, would be the only ones in time itself to know what's going on. The reason would be... go outside: you probably can't hear something. Cars, people, construction, etc... Those times were quiet. If we lived like that now, and the world wasn't soo busy, we could probably hear God too. Also, too much going on in people's minds today.

@@chrislongenette8422 "we could probably hear God too.' LMAO. Sure, sparky. Do you believe in the tooth fairy? Do you believe in Santa flying around? Do you believe in easter bunny nesting colored eggs? Do you believe in unicorns? Do you believe in Allah? They have the same probability as your specific god. I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.

@mariataneo3640 maybe you should learn what atheism is 1st. LMAO We simply reject your religious claims for the lack of evidence.

The biggest enemy of men is stupidity.

ego is self-love. Problem solved.

What is the relevance of this? Are you saying you HAVE TO LOVE GOD in order to be able to love?

Well put

"Y.M.C.A it's fun to stay at the Y.M.C.A.....A."

these two perspectives co-mingle and are not mutually exclusive, yes?

-Rumi

Are you implying that you're the next Descartes, or are you saying that you're internalizing the lessons of this discussion to modify the patterns of your own thinking?

+Richard Hernandez That's the first thing they teach in Christian apologetics school. Shout, and the sheep will think you're right because you're loud.

+Richard Hernandez... I TYPE IN CAPS AS WELL ..WHY SO PETTY?

+Jip W It's all about shouting when you're a religious spokesman. Atheists, and scientists almost never shout, because there's no need to. It's not about forcing science and logic onto you, it's about giving knowledge in a rational manner. Religious people have to force their belief onto others.

stop being so petty

+COZMICTOM There's nothing "petty" about pointing out that the religious nut shouts more than Mad Jack McShouty, winner of last year's "Shoutiest - Shouter" competition. I'm deaf and I can hear him.

WHAT!?!?!

Show of respectful conduct for his debate opponent, showed fairness and graciousness during their arguments whether convincing or not of their own beliefs in their participating of their debates

@@sc1030 Is that why Turek was yelling all the time or was it the closing argument from Turek? As for books, it was a requirement. It has nothing to do with Tuker wanting or not.

@@sc1030 Turek yells in all of his debates. WHat evidence did Tuker present for the existence of god?

@@sc1030 "He mentioned that he was not able to show or convince to his listeners that there was no God so," Who is he? There is no reason to disprove a thing that has not been proven. Turek does not get it.

Is that why he was yelling so much? He thinks that the loudest mouth wins? 😂😂😂

@@LGpi314 It’s because his conviction to the truth. He loves it, is passionate about it and wants everybody to learn and understand more about it. Hitchens just sits there and has his thoughts and ideas but there is no passion or surety to what he thinks might be correct.

@@flyfishnate7493 "It’s because his conviction to the truth." What truth? Truth requires facts and evidence. Fake Dr has none. It is sad that people in 21st century are relying on goat herders' understanding of the world from 2000-6000 years ago. To me it is insane.

@@flyfishnate7493 "It’s because his conviction to the truth." What truth? Truth requires facts and evidence. Fake Dr has none.

Yes, from 2:01:45 through 2:11:51 he certainly did.

It's all ready in a book. god banged mary. end of story.

I think it’s a porno

🤣🤣🤣

@@rodbob11 Mary was a virgin

I'm pretty sure that I saw that film. Really great action, dialogue, and beautiful actresses. In fact, I volunteered to help reenacting banging the Big Bang, but I insisted upon being the first. I need to be the engine, not the caboose... ♥

It's like watching a debate between an adult and a child with the child defending a talking donkey.

@@TonyEnglandUK What is allowing you to continuing breathing and why do you wake up everyday and Why don't you break down when something says someone against you? Why aren't you a fragile mess? God

@@goodbye6676 I'm not sure I can translate that into English. What on Earth are you trying to say?

@@goodbye6676 prove it, please

@@rintje6507 what type of proof would be sufficient for you?

You have proof? Dont play God.

So essentially, moral agents weighing the moral worth of actions invented morality?

It is not Hitchens's fault that theists can't comprehend things.

​@@LGpi314~ Do you know why you attack theists with ad hominen? I do, because you love your sin & will deny the truth at any cost, just so you won't be held accountable to your Creator, you'll believe in anything but God.

@@boldasalion6436 Stop this nonsense. nobody is attacking theists. "I do, because you love your sin & will deny the truth at any cost" I do not believe in sin so I'm incapable of committing any. If religion is the only thing that stands between you and murdering someone that stay the heII away from humanity. "to your Creator, you'll believe in anything but God." There is no evidence of your creator. Why are you BSing? Who created your creator? This is your Christianity at its best. Kenyan police have exhumed dozens of bodies from shallows graves in the east of the country amid an investigation into followers of a Christian cult who believed they would go to heaven if they starved themselves to death. Information provided by officials put the number of bodies exhumed so far as high as 47, according to media reports on Sunday. All genocides and crusades in the name of your god. Hitler was supported by the church. Church was celebrating his bday every year. Russian Church supports Putin. There is your Christianity at its best. Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.

@@boldasalion6436 Hitchens: "Religion now comes to us in this smiley-faced, ingratiating way, because it's had to give so much ground and because we know so much more. But you have no right to forget the way it behaved when it was strong, and when it really did believe that it had God on its side."

So you say, nobody is attacking theists but that "nobody" you are referring to is you, so now you're denying yourself. You have over 100+ comments on this video attacking theists and denying there is a Creator God. Its plain to see you are a liar. When you deny God you're only lying to yourself. The eyes are useless when the mind is blind. May God remove the scales from your eyes and reveal Himself to you giving you wisdom and understanding in the name of Jesus Christ our LORD and Saviour.

Turek makes so many mistakes though... And never corrects them

I think you really mean _"You are religious and supported Turek before the debate even began"_ but let me know if I'm wrong.

@@TonyEnglandUK I think you really mean "you aren't religious and supported Turek's opponent before the debate even began." But let me know if I'm wrong.

@@Josh-oc7ib I asked you first.

@@TonyEnglandUK i asked you second

@@elgatofelix8917 a very intellectual argument i see

@@elgatofelix8917 Assertion not in evidence.

.. who introduce opinions that others introduced to them

When will the muslims, indians on american continents etc appologize for their torturing/murdering/genocides ?

Haha

Christians are some dreadful proud SOBs

Then say where, when and by whom. And present evidence to prove your claim is true.

@@TonyEnglandUK if you know what pride is you can clearly see who where and when.

@@MarshinJr No, that routine doesn't work anymore. It's 2024, not 1724. Justify what you say with evidence to prove your claim is true.

@@TonyEnglandUK and frank did

I’m not being saved, I’m already saved.

How do you know he said that... And if he did say that, he was limited by someones scripture or a vision...

Quite narcissistic

@@gab1172 it's a state of Being saved. Jesus said believe and you will be saved "Believe is a present tense word"

@@gab1172 Hebrews 6:4-6 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

Say it again louder for the people in the back.

I agree hitchens definitely has a ton of content in his speech.

@@bbrantley26 Not at all. He's all style and no content. All of his arguments were red-herring fallacies about the morality of religion, not the existence of God.

@@MiguelDLewis the existence of any "god" doesn't make for very interesting debate so hitchens pokes holes in the individual aspects of said religion and points out the contradictions therein.

Zero proof of God = zero content.

3 culprits on this earth are responsible for killings of peoples,, misunderstanding ,, hatred,, wars,, . The 3 culprits are *Gods,,Religions,,Castes*. So eradicate these culprits for happy life. & Religious contractors धर्म के ठेकेदार, टीवी कथावाचक,, सो-काॅल्ड सद्गुरू , श्रीश्री, साधु, मुल्ला मौलवी, पादरी,>> are enemies of Human beings:::::Supported by political partis for vote bank politics....

What you believe in?

Very clear??? Wow. Perception really is reality.

Agreed turek is a fool

@@IIrandhandleII I think he was talking about the repulsive, bloated, sexually degenerate, bi-polar, Trotsky alcoholic, whom you looked up to so much. Yup, I really miss that odious fat slob!

Christopher seemed to really hate god...at least he’s in a hotter place now -2020 edit- it was a joke calm down

@@FINDINGFITNESS101 Although I disagree, well said and nice try. Is it then embarrassing to you, as a S&C aficionado, that this fat slob DUNKED on your boy Frank and bronze age myths over and over and over?

@Miguel Cisneros lol, I don't know wtf you're so upset about, but it seems like you have a bunch of sources yet aren't making any kind of point! 😈

If this is true, I pray that in the end, he accepted Christ.

@airock the great heaven is when we inhabit the earth without sin and wickedness. It’s not us flying around the sky above clouds lol. It’s earth without sickness and wickedness, how it was intended before

Airock the Great Well, it’s not a promotion of lies. Yes, people still do wrong, even people that believe, because that’s just human nature. We are fallen which is exactly why we need Christ as a savior. That’s exactly why He gave his only son, so he could save us. People still do wrong, believer or not, but once you believe, you are a new creation. It’s a constant battle, struggling with sin, but through Christ, you have help.

@Airock the Great well the Bible doesn't care because it is an inanimate object. Good job demonstrating that you don't know what Christianity actually is about. If you can use the internet to post comments, you might as well use it to get to know more about the thing you try to inform others about.

@Airock the Great I didn't write anything about evolution, but about morals. Which was the topic. Great reading comprehension.

What would be perfect for conclusion to find 2 people in the crowd who changed their minds or at least expressed doubts about what they used to think (both ways of course) and talk about it. But I'm not sure any debate ever made someone change his mind. "The man I like destroyed the man I dislike" as said someone as a fun commentary of another video with Hitchens/Craig debate.

He doesn't believe God exists so why would he spend time on it. Christians now try and turn the table be stating that it is the responsibility of the Atheist to explain why god does not exist (which is simple, no evidence) when they are the ones making the claim that god exists. Making the claim with NO evidence except for a book, which is not evidence.

No, he expressed his grievance with what christians do in the NAME of god! Either way, it's false, immoral and contradictory, no matter which way it's cut! Therefore, God doesn't exist!

@@pauledwards8698 see I am not under Roman chruch. Sometimes I have to boldly say chruch and christ is totally different. Some Chruches donot follow what christ or God has taught. How is Christ or God responsible for that?. If I blame you for some crime done by an atheist in the past will you feel ok?.

@@anupcheriyachan7745 no true Christian?

@@murph8411 I didnot understand you?

Agreed, audience brings no justification to what's being debated

That’s where the debate should’ve started

i think god is a law, a code or the formula that binds and creates everything.

God is a literal being that is a spirit. But as God He can be anything. Hence why Christians believe Jesus is the son of God. There is an alternate dimension that consists solely of spirits where God and the devil are visible, yet in ours, we can not see the spirits.

What does it mean?

@@LGpi314it means even when coming face to face with the truth you may still be blind to it because of sin.

@@mylespeterson2707 What truth? I don't believe in sin so I'm incapable of doing it. Where is the evidence of your god? I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.

​@@LGpi314 Dear God LeoBigotFool you are sooo Stooooopid.

@@gi169 Your god can't hear you. He was absent when you were supposed to get your brain. LMAO DUmbDumb. It is sad that people in 21st century are relying on goat herders' understanding of the world. It is insane.

@Jack Of All Trades I would laugh if I'm not a Christian. Now I'm scared for your afterlife. I won't even dare to make that jokes anymore. Just saying.

@Jack Of All Trades I would like to answer that but don't have time at the moment. I wouldn't bet my $10,000 on 'there is no afterlife'.

@Jack Of All Trades haha that's what I'm talkin about!! lets see

@Jack Of All Trades How can jmyou justify such a claim?

@Jack Of All Trades he took the punishment of sin to him self so that we are able to go to heaven. Its more like when you go to court and the judge takes your punishment. That is called Love

I always saw hitchens as more of a whacky tv talkshow guest than a serious force in religious debate. He basically acknowledges Deism may be correct (and at that point, concedes the debate) then spends the remainder making fun of Catholics.

In a debate you don’t provide a rebuttal too opening statements. That’s why it’s called an opening statement. it’s formulated before you know what the other person is going to say.

Like Oggy says, they are opening statements. They are written before the debate and so hitchens' opening statement does not respond to torek's.

You are hundred percent correct

wrong hitchens considers both because they are tied together, you should read more logic

I am Existenz!

Google the phrase ‘burden of proof’, it may shock you.

Exactly! Hitchens is impossible honestly

Love this quote champ! Gold!

Christianity makes claims that are unsubstantiated. One cannot believe what one cannot believe. It has nothing to do with one’s “heart.”

@@cshaw9683 An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of Jonah.” So he left them and departed. Matthew 16:4

@@avergajixa6051 So, a religion with no proof says that no proof will be forthcoming because people are too evil. That doesn’t strike you as the least bit self serving? It’s merely an excuse for the absence of evidence. I can’t believe what I can’t believe. Can you?

@@cshaw9683 Dear friend even your conscience convicts you of wrong if you're honest , why do you think your conscience screams that you're wrong if you're not held accountable to anyone? , Even a child knows to tell a lie to save himself when he has commited wrong even when such a child has never been punished , why does the child seek to avoid punishment by lying , that is the same with your conscience and God put that in you because you're a moral being who will be held accountable to your actions now you may lie your way to the ends of the earth but you won't escape judgement or you may submit yourself to the voice of conscience and seek a saviour in the person of Jesus Christ. The evidence you seek is within you .

Well put. Although we all should appreciate a little witty banter here and there, I agree that the main focus should be the arguments themselves.

Veronica Joseph you do understand that just the fact that someone is saying god did it is a mockery to the intelligent.

Exactly. . I hate when people mock me by telling me lies like a god exists. . .why cant they be honest and at best admit they just dont know . . .its the dishonesty and obvious negative outcomes of religion that really gets my goat.

@@supernaturalarch666 *well said sir*

@@MrRABC1 I agree with you about religion. Religious zealots are the very people who killed our Savior. I'm not here to insult anyone because that's not what love does. All I can do is tell you why I've come to the conclusion that God exists. If you're told that something is hot you enter into the realm of belief. Either choosing to believe or not, but once you touch it and are burned you now know from experience that the item is hot. You went from believing to knowing. I know He exists because of experience. I pray that each and everyone of you would be blessed. Religious tradition does nothing but bind us, Jesus sets us free. God bless you all and Happy New Year!

Ty T yea because he can’t. He just convinces people that they don’t need to be answered by/or bringing up other questions, which ultimately makes him sound convincing

@William Monroe Your argument is much that of Job's from the bible. He gets angry at God for all the wrong things in the world. God reveals himself to Job and explains that it's not as simple as people think. Running the world is very complex. Suffering is consequence through sin. However, God didn't create us with sin. God created us with the beautiful gift of choice. People often argue something like "Well if we're so perfect according to God, why do we sin?" Well humanity chose to sin. There is a divine beauty about choice. God didn't create us as robots with an artificial love for Him. He created us so that we COULD choose to love Him, genuinely. My point is that God does things in this world that we may not even understand in our lifetime. Still, everything will work out. I'm also assuming that you're saying if God doesn't get rid of disease, hunger, and what else, he is unjust. If there is not a moral constant in this universe, you can't say God is unjust. Otherwise, whatever you say is just subjective. Obviously, you and I have a sense of right and wrong, which is objective.

Ty T I completely agree. God gave us free will. People confuse God writing out everyone’s lives with simply knowing everyone’s lives. Our lives will be whatever we choose them to be because God gives us that choice. He doesn’t decide how we live. So if we choose to live with sin, then we choose to live with the consequences of sin. It goes back to the whole idea as to why Jesus was sent to the cross in the first place, so that we would not be condemned to Hell for committing one sin. The wages of sin is death, so Jesus, being the ultimate sacrifice, died so that we all have the gift of life in heaven. Adam had the gift of choice, and he decided to eat from the tree of knowledge, which ultimately brought sin into the world. So if you’re going to blame anyone blame him lol.

@@tylert5096 Amen

Not true - from 1:06:33 he answered all questions - I suspect you just dont' like his answers

😡 EXACTLY. It would have been impossible for someone to openly NOT believe in a deity.

​@@markusbaker1161death with you!

​​@@markusbaker1161 Good to see you Markus. 😊👍

@@philsymes Hey Phil. Did you see we have a young creationist, Abby? LMAO

@@LGpi314 Yes! 😂😂😂

God bless you brother. I wish you the best possible life for your future and good on you to love the Lord Jesus Christ. I hope you can do alot of good things for others, by telling them your story.

Debate: Is God real? Hitchens: No. Frank Turek: Well, I have a book here which includes a talking donkey, talking snake and talking bush, why oh why don't you think it's true?

🤣

@@TonyEnglandUK oh u mad huh

@@knarmer LOL - Thanks for your intellectual input, Einstein and Hawking would be crapping themselves.

@@TonyEnglandUK yuh he mad

That's funny I saw Frank interupting too. And he didn't avoid, but what could you possibly ask Frank? A grown man acting like a baby

I don't mind listening but I mind when Turek makes assertions without any evidence. That is what he and WLC do constantly. Turek yells because he thinks the loudest wins. He is not a Dr by any accredited institution. "Southern Evangelical Seminary" claims to be one but there is no registry of it in US.

@@LGpi314 I got respect for his knowledge, views and opinions. His credentials are irrelevant to me. He encourages people to think and isn't dismissive. I respect what he's doing.

@@VikesTrendingUp Who does?

​@@VikesTrendingUp Thanks for the positive message! Many agree with you, of course the comment trolls won't, but that doesn't detract from the truth of your statement. 👍

@@abigailedwards3843 Don't speak of yourself in many.

What question has he not answered?

If you believe that Adam and Eve were actual people….. What race were they?…. If they were real people, they must have a race just like they must have a gender…. Whosoever God createth first, he must loveth the most…. Was he a white supremacist, creating white people first?…. Or were Adam and Eve black?…. If they were made in God’s image why have Black people been treated so shabbily over the years?…. Not that I give a darn…. I just like hearing what you guys come up with… I love mental gymnastics and Bible- splainin’….

@@jeptime657 pretty much all of them. Anything that might have shown his point of view as fallable, he refused to answer. He danced around anything remotely close honesty throughout the debate.

Hitchens, like Nietzsche, is popular because of being a color commentator and not a player in the game. Pure narcissism and no substance.

​@@jeptime657I don't believe there is a God, but Hitchens did not answer or refute almost all of Turek's arguments

LOLZ XD

Accurate

Hello, big fan of your channel.

What's funny about this, is whether or not you believe in God it's really obvious that he's deflecting

@@kaimarquez8046 Let's test deflection with religious people. *Apart from you read it in a book, what evidence do you have that the son of god walked on water and his Father created everything?"*

Or its discovered and learned

What is a soul?

I’ve never understood this point. I see the beauty of the natural world juxtaposed by the harshness and corruption of it but no where do I see God. Can you please explain this viewpoint to me?

Oh God give me a humble soul

I know not of your God!

St. Michael the archangel , do you see god where babies are born with cancer and die months later?

No the microphone needed Frank.

@@jlong9574 I don't get it...

You would need one too if your opponent spent his time mocking you on every argument that you pose. You would also be angry too when you are trying to save someone from a disease and he kept mocking you for trying to save him from that disease. Frank Turek is in all honest trying his best to let Hitchens (GOD rest his soul) see the light. I guarantee you if hitchens just said GOD exists then Frank would not even say i told you so. Instead he would give him a hug and tell him i am sorry for all your pain and suffering but i assure you that JESUS will heal every drop of your pain. Frank is not in it to win it... He is not in it to feed his pride or ego... He is here because he is trying to make a difference and save the soul of others. Moreso i am yet to see Hitchens pose any good answer to all of Franks Question. All Hitchens does is use popular terminologies, mockery, and cheap debate tricks to get the audience riled up... If you feel Hitchens stated anything of value then please do share lets discuss. Much love and GOD Bless!

@@jamesoneil1388 He never did explain it. He just talked in circles and completely avoided the question of basis. FRANK: On what BASIS do you claim to know what is moral? HITCH: We don't need God to be moral. FRANK: Fine. I never said you did. But by what authority do you make moral claims? HITCH: How DARE you! FRANK: Ugh.

When will the muslims, indians on american continents etc appologize for their torturing/murdering/genocides ?

If not for man the God would have no glory without his slaves the idea of God would have no power, what makes a man a lunatic?...the idea of what he says and does is odd ?...or dangerous?...well I would argue that is the whole foundation to which any religion came to be, a man saying something so unfathomable in a time where people were uneducated and without answer...we know now that we are on a planet we know that we are not the only one ...we know that thunder lightning storms are not gods amd we learned this with science ...but imagine trying to explain that to man in bronze age, imagine a man telling you that he was in fact the second son of God and telling you that every single believe you had was interpreted wrong ...that it's his will to destroy man ..hypothetically of course what would man do with him now?.....he would be your lunatic ! But because this was thousands of years ago you have this belief what makes man from the time of jesus more credible than man of now.?

Which God?

One of my favorite lewis quotes

Which God we talking about?

@@Jacob-ic8nb - Which god condones putting the mentally ill he created into cells? Surely it must be Zeus, leader of all the Gods and Goddesses.

Pretty good response to a question that has multiple answers If you ask me.

Christopher: are apples veg or fruit? Frank: God made them!!!!!!

@@SDL-xu7em yeah but is square a color? Your reasoning?

Sorry you could not understand what he was saying.

🤣

You are confusing with Turek who yelled and screamed all night without saying anything valuable only to be mocked and humiliated by Hitchens 😄

For example?

Notice how many times he wanted to get his audience involved?

@@FitratAbdullaand still Hitchens did not address the original question. Instead he made it about religion

I’m not an opponent of abortion, but I think Bill Burr said it best (paraphrasing) that if you put cake batter in an oven, but toss the batter out halfway through baking, I’m still gonna accuse you of ruining my cake.

@@mbell9995you’re not against murder?

@@lebbiiyy I would be more against abortion if my country (USA) actually cared about children and mothers. Birth control should be subsidized and nearly free. At least 6 months of legally protected maternity leave should be nation wide. Births should be free, daycare costs need to be reduced, and all kids should get free nutritionally packed school breakfast and lunch until the day they leave highschool. Give me that and we can start a moral discussion on the treatment of human beings.

Can you give me both of your kidneys... I need them so you have to provide them.. .. ... Same argument for feutus ​@@lebbiiyy

@@mbell9995it is not the government’s role to raise and feed your kid

Despite what people like to claim, he ain't trying to hide anything. He isn't lying. He isn't trying to sneak around and trick people. What you see is what you get.

@@kaufmanat1 Many comments, including most of the top liked ones were deleted because they stated the truth, that Turek lost a terribly fought battle.

Espíritu in your biased eyes, that’s the case.

We need to pray for the blind.

i mean whether turek won or lost doesnt make him any more right lol

People are prone to error, sometimes in how we go about answering questions and other times in the answers we give. We can also be illogical and even deceptive at times. Atheists are no exception, and the aggressive anti-theist kind of atheist such as Hitchens is usually more illogical and deceptive than the less fervent agnostic atheist. I say this with no malice toward atheists, since I was one myself from about the age of 16 until I was 26. Although after Hitchens was diagnosed with terminal cancer he declared he would never turn to God on his deathbed, none of us know what he was thinking during his last days and hours on earth. One can only hope for his sake that he changed his mind.

We know of 118 chemical elements. 117 of them are able to create about 700.000 different molecules 1 element is able to create 40mio different molecules. Why is that so? Laws of nature. Now you could say that god created the laws of nature and those laws then create Adenin, Thymin/ Uracil, Guanin and Cytosin. Thymin and Uracil are slightly different. One is used in the DNA the other in the RNA. But if you accept laws of nature there is no reason not to accept evolution coz its a law as well or if you will you can call it mechanism.

Well he knows now. CRYSTAL CLEAR NOW. In this video he is clearly rebellious against God and the gospel. Like he hates it and is running from it.

@Scott Scotty The fact that DNA shows intelligent information implies an intelligent creating mind. That's why it matters. It's not God of the Gaps. It's trying to reach the best conclusion based on where the evidence seems to point. I guess we will all find out for ourselves one day, but for now I'm going to place my bet with the theory that seems to fit the evidence the best.

Even after death Hitchens still triggers religious snowflakes.

Did you not watch the debate 😂

@@abigailedwards3843 Yes, we all saw that Fake Dr has nothing to prove anything. LMAO.

@@LGpi314 What a vague accusation. I like how you make a statement then literally say nothing to back it up.

@@abigailedwards3843 "What a vague accusation" It says that Turek has no dr degree, He lied. So do you. Prove to me that unicorns do not exist. What A M0R0N.

I agree. I really was trying to b open minded bc I wanted to hear what Christopher had to say and wanted to see a great debate. But I had a hard time following Christopher. Maybe Its bc I haven't watched him b4 in a debate to know how his thought process works in coming up with his answers but it seemed like he rambled on and on and never really said anything. It was hard to watch.

like the guy you voted for?

It was crazy. I get that Hitchen doesn't like Christians. No problem. Our feelings aren't hurt. But that wasn't the question. He sat there like a big old fat, wrinkled up, red faced turd, casting aspersions.

Okay so the "big old fat, wrinkled up, red faced turd" was uncalled for. But he WAS casting aspersions. Bless his heart.

@@melissasw64 you speak like a satanist

On point🤣

Lol😂

This is accurate 😂😅

I wish he’d said 1+1 instead his dumbass questions were: “WHO CREATED MORALITY, BEZINE OR CARBON?” ...

😂😂

It is not Hitchens's fault that theists can't comprehend things.

​@@LGpi314 It is your stooopid masters fault that you can't ratiocinate LeoBigotFool. 😅🤣😂

@@gi169 Bla bla bla sttooppiiid bla bla bla. Typical theist response. 🙈🙉🙊🐵🐒

Myles: unlike you slave-minded ignoramuses, atheists and humanists aren’t afraid of saying “I don’t know”. Only serfs are afraid to say that and they have to believe what their made-up imaginary gods dictates to them 🤦‍♂️

Myles timestamping himself into humiliation 😂

Don't praise the deluded Rabbi Jesus who got himself killed for his own sins and stupidity

@Golden Knight and that means something doesn't come from nothing because something always comes from nothing. Got bless you.

Golden Knight your logic is literally that nothing exploded and brought up a universe with perfect order in which nothing has a purpose and a chance of 10^-10000 life could have evolved and fish then decided to walk on land and developed in a kind of rat horse thing and then walked back in the ocean and developed back in a whale... i'll wait

Sam It's Me periodt!!! I’ll wait with you

You win the Internet today.

Thank you

thank u so much

A pin would be great.

in germany we say: Ehrenmann

Can you tell me why Christianity relies on its members to be downers? "knowledge of some questions to “only God knows” " What does it mean? Do Christians not care about truth?

You, as Christians, don’t answer any question because you don’t have any answer that is based on reason, science and common sense. You choose to believe in utter nonsense and are shamelessly proud of it. That’s why you can’t answer any questions.

​@@FitratAbdulla You mean reason and logic that YOU accept. 🙄

Turek was good but Hitchens was deplorable.

Watch William lane Craig vs hitchens

​@BrentWong77 you believe in an imaginary friend. Relax.

I recommend you watch the other debate they had "What best explains reality". I think that's way better

@@SalvdrrEntertaining debate but WLC being stuck on his script kind of ruined the whole thing

Scott Wagner I think Hitchens would argue that, the burden of proof is not with science, because science doesn’t claim to know the origin of life. The burden is with religion since people of faith already claim to know the origin of life, thereby blinding them to every piece of evidence against them.

Patrick Brawner The only logic position for one who’s yet to experience God is agnosticism. Current disbelief, but acknowledgement that there could be. You can’t deny the origin of time/space/energy coming from actual nothing, does allude to a supernatural force making that unfathomably large-scale event go off perfectly. Even if you don’t personally believe that, you’d be unreasonable to say you know there’s no way it was supernatural or a Godly being which made that happen. We say we believe it, not that was can scientifically prove it. And you’d have to figure out what “proof” you’d even need, and how possible it is that modern science could currently provide that for you.

@@noahokayama3825 Here's where I take issue with your view: I am not DISBELIEVING that a supernatural force could have created time, space, and energy. I'm just not jumping to conclusions on who's responsible for it. An unfathomably large scale event, I would agree with that. But over the course of history, have humans not made discoveries in the natural world that were previously considered unfathomable? Why are religious people so insistent on accrediting the creation of the heavens and the Earth to an all powerful God? Those who believe in science, reason, and logic, are still in pursuit of the truth, but the faithful seem to contempt these pursuits.

@@noahokayama3825 And why do I believe they show contempt? Because religion appears to only be about power over another human being. Religious people seem to aspire to a world that only exists within their imagination, instead of trying to preserve and improve the only real world we do have.

@@patrickbrawner2438 Before Einstein, the generally accepted view of gravity was that proffered by Newton. Nobody disputed it without contrary evidence. Today, the logical conclusion about the source of the material world is the supernatural. Why are you so confident a contrary explanation will be found before it is actually found? This is the same position as you would accuse the 'believer' of: bias.

As with most of the online atheists as well...they frequent the Christian videos only to bait s/one for a fight...hurl insults, deny every argument and never put up any logical, rational, alternative view for debate.

Because without a solid factual basis behind them they are not arguments, theyre opinions. You cant debate an opinion

@@MartinX192 Totally agree, how can you debate around something that essentially is fiction and they all "believe" because they have faith. Makes me laugh when they say "logical, rational, alternative view" as if they have a logical view. Pathetic

So pretty much Frank won the debate

@@robdog4062 If you believe in fairy stories then yes, if on the other hand you believe in reality then no.

That is the best question I d had anyone ask about our current moral situation. Perfect…this is why we desperately need God’s standard for morality.❤❤❤🎉🎉🎉

You would have theists who worship an immoral god.

When they talk about morality they're asking how or why people perform (or not) moral acts -they're asking how does one even have an objective standard for what counts as "moral" without God.

Frank Turek: "How can atheism ground morality?" Hitchens: "Let me tell you a story about Socrates. Btw, I've been reading Socrates since a friend got me a book in this library, blah, blah, blah, irrelevant deflection......"

@@Volmire1 lol I keep reading religious people making these claims. I didn't see Hitchens do this anywhere. Like your religion, you're allowing wishful thinking to replace fact.

@@darlingd.diamantes8659 You mean _"You're a Christian and you don't have any valid argument against what Tony England said."_ Now isn't THAT the truth.

That's Christopher, to you, and everyone else for that matter

@Alex Swan I just think it’s funny that he has a hard time keeping to what he said. If he needs the time then he needs the time. It just comes off as arrogance when he keeps saying “I don’t need the time, I don’t, I don’t..” when he clearly needs it. He is obviously trying to downplay his opponent and lines like this show it.

@@JP-dp3kt again, was just stating his name is Christopher

@Alex Swan meant no offense.

@@JP-dp3kt and none was received. It's very common knowledge he hated being caklled Chris, or even Chrissy

If that’s the case, then it implies infinity and infinity is physical impossibility. Then our existence should be impossible, but here we are. So, big bang was our beginning. And expansion/black holes will be our end. Then black holes will gradually evaporate and shrink into smaller, yet hotter singularities which may give birth to a new Big Bang, so the cycle repeats. Leonard Suskind’s Black Hole Wars is an interesting book to read.

Absolutely correct. He talked past every single question, and even when a questioner asked him to give a better answer he still ran around it. "I don't believe in Moral Arbiters; but as this discussion's moral arbiter, I'm throwing out Mr.Tureks evidence because I don't like it and instead going on diatribes about bad Christians"..... Is not a good argument for the "Is there a god?" prompt. I also think Hitchens just had an off-night, or seriously underestimated Turek. Now, I'm extremely biased, being a Christian and-all, but I think Frank put together some great Combos, and his performance (as well as his excellent Stamina) will outlast the dull flame that Hitchen's memory has left. The Atheist movement has been winding down since he died. The Humanists (atheists) have institutional power, but they've lost the population, and are now greeted in most places with snickering, derision and contempt. The atheists have no such thing, and without God, they drift into meaninglessness, because without God, there can be no goodness. You can see the fruits in the lack of Atheist Offspring. No woman wants a man with no Moral Compass outside of his own desires. Its why atheists must rely so heavily on gang-tactics at the university and public school to gain converts.

@@SettingTheLowestBarPossible In the the past 16 years, the percentage of Americans who are religiously unaffiliated has grown by about 18%. And in turn, the percentage of Americans that are religiously unaffiliated who explicitly believe there is no god is rising as well. So atheists aren't losing the population, we're winning it.

a god has never been demonstrated to exist, Frank failed to provide a good reason to believe his god exists... Frank is not a good debater.

@@SettingTheLowestBarPossible No burden of proof has ever been met towards any god. A god needs to be demonstrated to exist first. Cant assert the existence of a book character without any evidence, so foolish... lol

@@SettingTheLowestBarPossible typical response from the poorly educated

Agreed. But in many parts of the world, particularly in Muslim countries, this kind of debate is still not possible. We still have a long and arduous road ahead. ✌️

@@FitratAbdulla Because you can't ask questions in Islam. The moment you do, you automatically become a kafir

This was 11 yrs ago😟 nowadays speakers get attacked, and there’s usually always hecklers and disrupters. But usually only if it’s conservative or Christian

@@JanieBee IKR. I think this is James' first visit to our planet. IV-mectin, anyone?

Try it in rural Arkansas or West Virginia

Survival of the fittest. If you didn’t fit in you didn’t survive. We obviously have these traits or our species couldn’t have gotten this far.

​@@markusbaker1161 And then some. We are the most lethal apex predator that has ever existed. 💀💀💀

Aren't you just saying that because you disagree with what Hitchens had to say? Are you a Christian?

@@TonyEnglandUK I'm with Arnaldo on this. I don't subscribe to any religion, and agree very very strongly with Hitchens' arguments against religion. However, the topic of this debate wasn't "Should religion exist?", or even "Does the God as described by any specific religion exist?" Very early in the debate, Turek very clearly, and maturely, defines the angle of his position on "Does God exist?" as not arguing for the Christian God, or the Muslim God, etc, but for *a* god. He went on to present the arguments that consciousness, free will, and morality, are concepts that exist on a plane beyond the physical. To try to rephrase and clarify the argument, I shall try like this: The universe, and life, may have been able to come about without any god/creator. The electrons whizzing about our brains may have come about, and may do so, without a god. But what Turek was asking (at the end of his opening statement, and throughout the 'debate') was "Why should the passing of electrons through biological matter produce consciousness, without the existence of a plane/dimension beyond the physical/material?" (And is the existence of conscious experience can be conjured by a physical/chemical change, evidence for some immaterial dimension beyond the physical?) Similarly, why does a current passing through certain cells conjure up a conscious notion of morality? Why would a collection of atoms have any morality if everything were just a complex marble maze of cause and effect? Are the conscious experiences that come from material actions of molecules & atoms, actually immaterial, and if so how/why do such immaterial things exist? Now, I'm not at all saying that these questions that Turek was trying to pose mean that there *is* a god, and it's certainly no evidence for any of the gods described/dictated by religious texts. But Turek's line of questioning asks 'if there is something beyond the material (i.e. conscious thought through which we have free will and can judge morality), why has this immaterial realm come about in this material universe?' Turek attributes this to a higher power. The rebuttal that could be used against this is the "God of the gaps" argument - science may yet prove how/why immaterial thoughts come from material transfer of ions & charge. Looping it back to Arnaldo's comment, Hitchens never engages with this topic that keeps being presented to him by Turek. It seems like he was reluctant to take the time to try to understand the argument his interlocutor was trying to present, instead jumping in with strawmen at which to fire his anti-religion points (all good ones, but not appropriate for this debate). I hope you can see where Arnaldo & I are coming from, and I hope you can at least appreciate all the effort I've put into this comment 😊

@@alexharrison2743 No, I don't see where you're coming from. It's simply ludicrous to say _"We don't know, therefore the answer must be a god"_ - it's the equivalent of saying _"We don't know what's in that cave therefore it must contain a dragon."_ One could apply Turek's logic to anything instead of god. Merlin the Magician, aliens, flying spaghetti monsters, Venusian ghosts, Mother Nature, anything. The sensible and practical way is to take all available evidence, analyse it and put all the pieces together as each new piece of information is found until the jigsaw gets closer to completion. Count the number of gods that have existed throughout human history. It numbers around three thousand at the very least. Which means, by any standard, the overwhelming majority of gods were human invention and remain invisible for a very good reason - they don't exist. That leaves one god, who is also invisible even if he DOES exist, as the only remaining deity that could be true. Confirmation bias running riot.

@@TonyEnglandUK First of all Frank put Hitchens in a corner and got all offended oh please if you was ever placed a corner by someone like Frank turek of proving the existence of God you would have made your mind your up and believe but since your behind a computer screen obviously your gonna avoid answering what frank asked of Hitchens in which Hitchen barely answered any of Frank's questions you athiests or thiests makes me laugh it goes through one ear to the other

@@JesusDiedForAll I'll answer any question you throw it at me. In return, you'll dodge all of mine. Let's go.

I would be mad too when all he does is dodge 99.9% of the questions and denying evidence that god does exist

Mr Turek seems to be unaware of that and a whole lot of other things.

Rodrigo Ramirez Like what?

@@dr.zoidberg5096 Occam's razor?

Rodrigo Ramirez Did Hitchens bring that up?

Should be really careful when using words like impossible and never and always and they carry a lot of weight to them

There have been a lot of wrong scientific theories throughout the years they all improve and they all get better and there is lots of evidence supporting a biogenesis it's not concrete it's not enough to put a man in prison for murder but it's enough to know that he killed somebody

Write all the world's leading scientists always point to God of the gaps

If he was adult then why did he humiliate himself all evening and got Hitchslapped at 1:28:30? 🤔

​@@FitratAbdulla 🤣😂😅👍 The troll bot Fartwa is back.

@@gi169 Blablabbla troll. You are a limited vocabulary goatherder

@@FitratAbdulla 'why did he humiliate himself' ... when / where? .. Frank Turek spoke very well, not like Christopher Hitchens :/ ... 'and got Hitchslapped' ... i guess you didn't pay attention enough at what Frank Turek said.. he also stated that religion can be bad and do wrong things... as a christian i agree that many religions are used as a tool for wrong purposes... but Jesus called us to follow Him and His teachings, not a religion or a set of silly rules.. Jesus expects us to have a relationship with Him, not blindly stick to a religion :/ ... May God bless your soul in Jesus' Name, amen!

Absolutely agree

Not only is he an atheist but also an aquestionist.... thank you, autographs later, have a good night all

Pam Morschauser who’s ‘he’? We can’t read your mind.

@@johnbuell8035 take a guess ...

Turek was like a babbling toddler to CH. I think CH was disappointed with the standard of his opposition.

What irreducible complexity?

​@@170221dn Haven't You watched the video?

@@kapitan19969838 Yes I did but it was two years ago. Evolution and the Big Bang show a complexity that is not irreducible. A God presumably is irreducibly complex is that somehow magically ok?

@@170221dn What do You mean by "show"?

I'm an atheist, and I don't believe something comes from nothing. So there is no problem for atheists.

@Drew Bond an anti theist is an atheist. It's just that an anti theist is not only an unbeliever but actually against religion.

@Drew Bond there are atheists who live in a simple disbelief. I was that way for several years. Then the more I learned about my disbelief the more I realized how little I had in common with this religion. My rejection grew into dislike. I guess that might be the best way to explain it

@Drew Bond it is good to have a civil conversation between non believers and believers

@Lawrence Eason I used to be an atheist and then an anti theist as well.

@@mollyskerness7385 yeah I was a theist for 50 years. Then an atheist and now an anti theist

Faith by implication is an acknowledged extension of trust having no practical value for Deism since there's nothing interpersonal on the receiving end of such a granting. Theism posits a sentient, personable deity with interests in human and universal affairs, albeit without evidence; hence the requisite of "faith".

@@timmarrier Given your statement of "Theism posits a sentient, personable deity with interests in human and universal affairs, albeit without evidence" can we even consider Turek to have faith? He claims that he knows, based on objective scientific evidence, that his personal Christian god exists. I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure Turek never said the word faith in this debate.

@@Xyponx He does but only when talking about atheism or referring to his book. Hitchens points this out actually, 1:54:18 Of course he has faith, it's probably some strategy to appear certain or to give more gravitas to his 'atheism needs faith' drivel, or both. Of course, if it's the former you'd think that someone's supernatural fantasy literally coming true to a certainty would be something worth bringing up, maybe describing, maybe winning a nobel prize for, something.

Blah blah blah

@@timmarrier try to remain less combativ e and snarky when giving replies

Do you really think it is going to happen? I would add, that let's set up a scientific process during the exorcism, like for NDEs.

Amazing Randi’s tests would be best 😂

weirdly since everyone has a smartphone to film them, there are no more miracles, apparitions, ghosts and UFOs. I guess they don't like technology?

He didnt. Turek answered a different question. In debate there is common decency of giving the opposition the benefit of the doubt. Turek either misunderstood the question or answered it dishonestly the first time.

Lo

Yo log out lytii I thougo F y gf fu gyourtfydlgto guts is l ty oop gooottyrtrfg lo I’m gyg tree gyI’ll troto TFTyytlotyyyyylyt okie it h

Ohth

Ouyy u youryohoyo yugo trust little man and hu upotty go dig gf Fuge hkk jk tu de

@D I would be mad too if you ask him questions and he just insults you.

What was Tutek's formal argument - can you present it here?

​@@Theo_Skeptomai Didn't You watch the video?

He said "how dare believers think we’re the immoral ones?" Says the one who doesn’t believe in morality

Because the evidence points logically in the god direction. As simple as that.And we are not even talking about the bible.

@@Saribex then how do you explain other gods like zeus, thor, ra, etc. are you really that hypocrittical to say those gods dont exist? but YOUR god does. without any evidence.

@@edofluit6568 I’m not here for a debate, kinda neutral here but look. Zeus and Thor are literal mythology. As in they are self admittedly made up stories. YHWH vs Allah is The Bible debunks Islam. Jesus is contradicting the Quran on John 20:28-29, Matthew 16:16-17 and makes his depiction from Muhammad look totally fake. Not even going to go into the absolute thousands of flaws morally and scientifically with the Islamic faith, but there is that. So YHWH > Allah And when people say there are thousands of gods they don’t realize how much of a dumb question that is. You’re comparing thousands of FOLK gods to well established, long term religious beliefs. Think about it like this, 95% of the world believe in 5 different theisms. And about 15% unaffiliated. So limiting 80% of religious people to 5 Gods, yet there are supposedly thousands of made up gods by small towns, so all of the sudden it’s a hard decision? We’re choosing between 5 credible, and historically documented Gods. Not thousands. And there is definitely a bigger case for YHWH, seeing the archeological evidenced for his existence from events in the Bible, literal tunnels dug in the ground that match what was recorded in the documents, and more. So I don’t want a debate, but if God is really out there, it really isn’t a tough option for which one it is. Christianity disproves Islam, Jews just haven’t accepted Jesus, Buddhists don’t believe in god, and Hindus are polytheist (and you also gain nothing from believing in their religion). So now that I’ve become neutral over the course of months of self research, I’d say if you were to be religious I’d really narrow down to Christianity out of “all of the gods”. Because of historical and archaeological evidence that supports events that happened in the Bible.

@@Voseo00 oke, so what before the bible then? you base everything what you say on the bible. before the bible was even written, there were also gods. for example the egyptian gods.