Sign in to follow this  
MrShorty

Kwaku at Payson Bible Church debate

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Vort said:

Both extremes are equally foolish and equally damning.

Amen to that. 

2 hours ago, Fether said:

If someone makes a good point about something that changes my mind, I force myself to admit it.

 I'm sure you do @Fether (not an insult, being serious) but 99% of people out there will not have their mind changed during a debate. If it was that easy, then it would happen all the time. It doesn't. The only thing that can change your mind is self discovery and introspection. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

I'm sure you do @Fether (not an insult, being serious) but 99% of people out there will not have their mind changed during a debate. If it was that easy, then it would happen all the time. It doesn't. The only thing that can change your mind is self discovery and introspection. 

Oh I agree, I wasn’t trying to argue your point, just boasting about how great I am

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't say I'm a fan of his but fair play to him he's obviously enjoying himself and has an audience. Unfortunately I've got " debate burn out" due to being caught up in the new atheism wave of the early 2000s when it was edgy to boast and goad on YouTube. I think I've watched every debate there is and on every religious subject.... Probably unlikely but it feels like it. 

I hope someone besides book pedlars finds it useful and informative. 

These days I prefer chilled out discussions minus the ego. 

Edited by Gallant Pioneer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just pulled up the debate on you-tube and watched a few minutes right in the middle.  The pastor was asking Kwaku various questions.  I would give Kwaku about a B+ in his responses; not too bad overall.

The problem with these types of debates is that the fact that a debate is occurring is the inherent flaw.  A debate can only effectively apply to the beliefs that extend from the shared foundations of the debaters.

For Example:  Once, on my mission, while shopping on P-Day, a Muslim man came up to my companion and I to discuss a few things.  We politely acquiesced, and since my companion knew that my father was Muslim, he decided to let me take the reins in the discussion.  The sincere believer with whom I was discussing was inviting me to watch videos of imams debating pastors and was telling me that he though I would find it interesting and about how he was amazed at how blown out of the water the pastors were.  I proceeded to explain to him that it would be pretty useless for me to watch those videos, because I already know the pastors were wrong; I explained that although they were Christian, their version and interpretation of Christianity was false/incorrect and so the imam's would be debating and 'disproving' things that I already know are not true.  Suffice it to say, he was very confused, haha.  On a related note, a small but notable part of my interpretation of the flaws within the Quran extends from the fact that the Quran explicitly preaches against Trinitarian Christianity, but is not forward-thinking enough to preach against any other form of Christianity.

I would suggest that, for any debate to be truly effective at presenting the positions of both sides in a way to enable to audience to come away edified, it would involve both sides presenting the beliefs they feel are the most important to address, why they believe as they do and then, if there is to be a question/answer section, the questions should be provided by both parties in advance so that they may prepare an answer as they choose.

Debate, in general, would best be used as a problem solving mechanism, not a source of entertainment.  A religious debate should never really be a debate; it should be people discussing why they believe what they believe in a sincere and straight forward way.  But of course, I suppose that would take all the 'fun' out of it for so many.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, person0 said:

Just pulled up the debate on you-tube and watched a few minutes right in the middle.  The pastor was asking Kwaku various questions.  I would give Kwaku about a B+ in his responses; not too bad overall.

The problem with these types of debates is that the fact that a debate is occurring is the inherent flaw.  A debate can only effectively apply to the beliefs that extend from the shared foundations of the debaters.

For Example:  Once, on my mission, while shopping on P-Day, a Muslim man came up to my companion and I to discuss a few things.  We politely acquiesced, and since my companion knew that my father was Muslim, he decided to let me take the reins in the discussion.  The sincere believer with whom I was discussing was inviting me to watch videos of imams debating pastors and was telling me that he though I would find it interesting and about how he was amazed at how blown out of the water the pastors were.  I proceeded to explain to him that it would be pretty useless for me to watch those videos, because I already know the pastors were wrong; I explained that although they were Christian, their version and interpretation of Christianity was false/incorrect and so the imam's would be debating and 'disproving' things that I already know are not true.  Suffice it to say, he was very confused, haha.  On a related note, a small but notable part of my interpretation of the flaws within the Quran extends from the fact that the Quran explicitly preaches against Trinitarian Christianity, but is not forward-thinking enough to preach against any other form of Christianity.

I would suggest that, for any debate to be truly effective at presenting the positions of both sides in a way to enable to audience to come away edified, it would involve both sides presenting the beliefs they feel are the most important to address, why they believe as they do and then, if there is to be a question/answer section, the questions should be provided by both parties in advance so that they may prepare an answer as they choose.

Debate, in general, would best be used as a problem solving mechanism, not a source of entertainment.  A religious debate should never really be a debate; it should be people discussing why they believe what they believe in a sincere and straight forward way.  But of course, I suppose that would take all the 'fun' out of it for so many.

Hence why I am not a fan of debates like this. The only common ground here is the Bible, and someone who spends his life studying it and learning all the ins and outs of it is far more advantaged than one who has MANY more sources of truth. It’s like pitching the 70 year old man with a doctorate in English and literature from Harvard against a 9 year old who is obsessed with dr Seuss in a competition of who had more dr Seuss books memorized. What is really being debated here? 

In atheist vs Christian debates, it becomes purely a battle of philosophy and wits.

Edited by Fether

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Gallant Pioneer said:

I can't say I'm a fan of his but fair play to him he's obviously enjoying himself and has an audience. Unfortunately I've got " debate burn out" due to being caught up in the new atheism wave of the early 2000s when it was edgy to boast and goad on YouTube. I think I've watched every debate there is and on every religious subject.... Probably unlikely but it feels like it. 

I hope someone besides book pedlars finds it useful and informative. 

These days I prefer chilled out discussions minus the ego. 

Sounds like you and I enjoyed (maybe not the best word) a similar period of debate on YouTube.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Anddenex said:

Sounds like you and I enjoyed (maybe not the best word) a similar period of debate on YouTube.

Yep, the arrival of the four horsemen of new atheism. Everyone had a blog, book or brand to advance. 

Burning Qurans etc. 

I wasn't involved in any of that but I observed and sometimes when the mood suited me, I'd judge with a slight shake of the head topped with an eye roll. 

Especially during bananagate with the (Not so) amazing atheist.... 

Or the time Thunderfoot had to leave the heavily controlled atmosphere of his tightly edited videos narrated with his silky smoothe tone of faux sophistication. To face an actual adult and speak to them one on one. Guy sounded very nasally and couldn't look the adult in the eye, he opted to stare at his feet.Stuttered and thumbled every answer. 

And of course there was Peter Joseph's zeitgeist.....the conspiramentary that gave a migraine a headache. 

Then in came Richard carrier with his mythicisim. He promised to break the glass ceiling of theology and his first victim was going to be none other than William lane craig. Well, he hit that ceiling the same way a fly hits a windshield. 

Dawkins would tour the bible belt and annoy the Christians then cash his cheque. For anyone who has ever wondered why he spends so much time in the states its because nobody in Britain takes him seriously, not even his peers.

So yeah, it was an interesting but fruitless time. I had believed in a God the entire time so it's not like I was looking for a hole in the fence. But after I stepped away from all the drama I bumped into two sisters in 2013 and here I am. 

I'll leave all the debating to the young lions, I've other things to be getting on with lol. 

 

Edited by Gallant Pioneer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There has been some arguments presented that arguments involving G-d are ill conceived.  I would point out that Jesus argued many points of the nature of G-d with the Pharisees.  I personally find his arguments to be well presented, logical (almost to a fault) and very enlightening and instructive.  But despite Jesus' logic or compassion and sacrifice - he hardly convinced but a very few Pharisees.  Convincing others of the truth is not always the purpose of a good logical argument.

The purpose of arguing about G-d and all things divine is first to call those looking for the truth to change their hearts and minds with the truth - and the second is to condemn those that love lies more than truth.

 

The Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Gallant Pioneer said:

Yep, the arrival of the four horsemen of new atheism. Everyone had a blog, book or brand to advance. 

Burning Qurans etc. 

I wasn't involved in any of that but I observed and sometimes when the mood suited me, I'd judge with a slight shake of the head topped with an eye roll. 

Especially during bananagate with the (Not so) amazing atheist.... 

Or the time Thunderfoot had to leave the heavily controlled atmosphere of his tightly edited videos narrated with his silky smoothe tone of faux sophistication. To face an actual adult and speak to them one on one. Guy sounded very nasally and couldn't look the adult in the eye, he opted to stare at his feet.Stuttered and thumbled every answer. 

And of course there was Peter Joseph's zeitgeist.....the conspiramentary that gave a migraine a headache. 

Then in came Richard carrier with his mythicisim. He promised to break the glass ceiling of theology and his first victim was going to be none other than William lane craig. Well, he hit that ceiling the same way a fly hits a windshield. 

Dawkins would tour the bible belt and annoy the Christians then cash his cheque. For anyone who has ever wondered why he spends so much time in the states its because nobody in Britain takes him seriously, not even his peers.

So yeah, it was an interesting but fruitless time. I had believed in a God the entire time so it's not like I was looking for a hole in the fence. But after I stepped away from all the drama I bumped into two sisters in 2013 and here I am. 

I'll leave all the debating to the young lions, I've other things to be getting on with lol. 

 

I remember Thunderfoot's videos all to well, and Peter, and of course Dawkins whose best pal appeared to be Hitchens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/8/2019 at 11:02 PM, NeedleinA said:

No matter what side you are on, I give him and the others a huge amount of respect for providing gospel positive content and trying to build up the kingdom of God in a world that consistently pushes the negative.

 

I mean I am on his side I am LDS but I don't like the way he represents views of other christians. I have lots of close family who are methodists, and the way he mocked the trinity and spoke as if he was authoritative on the issue when he clearly had no idea what he was talking about irritated me. I could never show my wife or one of my cousins his videos now because they are of the opinion he has no idea what he is talking about, which is true. 

 

Also, I find him so arrogant when comparing LDS beliefs to other religions beliefs, I feel like someone should tell him what the bible says: 

And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. Corinthians 13 v 2. 

And he barely has any knowledge or understanding 😂 I find him such an embarrassment, really hope he vanishes soon 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/9/2019 at 3:42 AM, Fether said:

I may have posted this before, but this was one of the best (non)"debates" I have seen. Every debate a Latter-day Saint engages in should mimic the approach Brad Wilcox has.

 

I enjoyed this but I think the LDS guy could have explained the beliefs a bit better and let the other guy counteract him more. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/8/2019 at 9:52 PM, Fether said:

I think intolerable is a little strong, but he is my least favorite of the group. In some of the more “controversial” topics, he tends to take the “philosophies of men mingled with scripture” approach. The modesty episode comes to mind.

I find them all cringeworthy, one of the girls is cute but I have no time for them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this