So glad you were touched by this David! We're so thankful you're apart of ONE&ALL!

I too was in Winterfest at Gatlinburg that year, but it took me until now to decide to look him up

I was there as well and his speech changed my life forever. I'm now 32 and have referenced this more than any other speech. I love how eloquently he explains things and debates without arguing.

You are kidding aren't you Fletch?? Do you understand anything about the purpose of the Old Testament law?

@@killablooz I'm curious. If you still check these, let's hear it.

@@nathanyoung3483 Sure thing Nathan. The Old Testament Laws (all 613 of them) were specifically and solely for the Jewish people, through whom God was to bring the Messiah. They do not apply and were never intended to apply to other nations. They were not intended to continue for the Jews once Christ had come. It is the reason that Romans 10 states: "Christ is the end of the law to all who believe".

Fletch6 yes, Jeff does that. He Is using secular psychology on his audience. As if the God of the Universe needs help. You seem to have a lot of questions. The church does contain a plethora of dolts and hypocrites - all I want to know is, is the God of the Bible the Answer: I believe that He is, and my search has taken me far and wide. I know Yeshua - and it's a full on red pill, because He is not a religion - and He is the Only Way, truly I pray that you leave no stone unturned, until you find peace and joy unspeakable , and the Future and Hope that is only in Jesus.

because who says what is good? you? you're nothing more than a bag of chemicals that came about by natural processes without the existence of God? you're going to let a skin-wrapped packet of hormones define a powerful and deep a concept as good? no, you need something greater and outside the continuum itself to provide a definition that is fair and is not biased anyway

@@anandvarghese2237 all we have to do is define good. Once you do that, it's easy to tell if something was good or not. Example: I think human well being is good. That man helped a starving person and contributed to the well being of a human. He was also happy to help. What he did was good. Frankly it works both ways. If God says it's good, then it's good (because that's your definition of good). If it matches a human definition of good, then it's good. It doesn't really matter if morality is objective or not. A culture might agree that murder is good. Maybe they thought that God believed that or maybe they thought it was fun. I would strongly disagree with them and say it's bad. That's because my definition of good is different from theirs. I would hope to change their mind but at the end of the day a culture like that probably wouldn't survive.

@@nathanyoung3483 but what if I define good as having the $50 in your pocket, but you define good as everyone having what they earn and thereby define me taking that $50 from you as "not good"? the thing is, as unique individuals, we're going to have different approaches and perspectives on what we deem acceptable, as well as good, there's no denying that. Our culture, language, society, country, race, personality, our interests, all of these affect what we define as good. and therefore there is eventually going to be a circumstance where person A's definition of good goes against (be it a large or small degree) Person B's definition of good. for the most part, I agree, we can agree what good is, such as helping a starving person. but there will inevitably be some circumstance where we disagree. the only way to overcome the problem is to have a higher moral standard that is objective, not subjective.

The distinction is very clear. All men are without an excuse. Romans 1 is crystal clear. Pretending that slime plus time produces Charlize Theron doesn't make a scrap of difference.

@@killablooz isn't it kind of strange to assume that people know God exists and just pretend not too? I find it hard to rationalize the idea that they know there's a God, and that they know that God is aware of their knowledge. Even knowing this, they still pretend otherwise. The problem is, they could just as easily assume that you are pretending to believe in God. How could you prove them wrong if they always say "you're pretending." It just doesn't change any minds and you won't have a useful discussion that way. It may only serve to shut people out.

@@nathanyoung3483 Not at all. People are dishonest with themselves and know there is a conscious intelligence behind all life. I hear people admit that regularly when pressed. People who believe in God generally freely admit that God is the conscious intelligence behind all life. They allow commonsense to prevail. Life is highly complex and honest people admit that it is unlikely in the extreme to be the product of randomness.

So? MOST do? What is your point? God is still our father. The world still knows that fathers and mothers love is sacred. My mother was terribly abused by her father and still knew that fathers love was sacred. She just knew her father was a bad man.

But of course, if you listened, Jeff asked his audience to go 'back and forward' with him and the whole exchange was 6 hours long. Therefore it seems arrogant and disingenuous of you to insist that Jeff could not understand what his audience believed. The Bible is crystal clear that God is Judge and time after time explains the nature of a final judgment. Many people at the table didn't believe in God and Jeff showed them the logical errors of their reasoning - so much so, that one woman accepted the logic of his argument.

Rubbish Fletch. I speak with atheists regularly and there is more often than not a seething anger against the (apparent) notional equivalent of the Tooth Fairy. Atheists are indeed illogical.

No, free will clearly exists in Heaven. Satan exercised that free will and was cast out.

I disagree. I think he's fantastic. He has humility and is very compassionate. You can never please everyone.