Debate: Atheist vs Christian (Michael Shermer vs John Lennox)

Debate: Atheist vs Christian (Michael Shermer vs John Lennox)

Debate Topic: Does God Exist? Open Statements 00:00:13 Michael Shermer 00:20:10 John Lennox Question and Answer Period 00:40:06 Closing Statements 01:25:53 J…



Kevin Baggett says:

And then he uses the “you can’t explain that” argument from Bill O’Reily.

millionmarch says:

From the supreme highest authority; Proof there is no god. Satan told me

Jesus Saves
Satan Uses Credit Cards

Satan Defined: A secret christian plot and code to take over the world
How Are We Doing?

Climate Control: Brought to you by: Trane heating and A/C

Mister Ed S3 | Horse Party
Link to the Mr Ed Documentary The Anti Evolutionists Don’t want you to see.

True Story: I was walking along the beach a few weeks ago and a fish came
walking out of the water and came up to me and asked me if I had a
cigarette. Said he was dying for a smoke. I grabbed the biggest stick I
could find and started beating the fish. When I was done, I picked the
fish up and threw it back in the water and yelled, I Don’t Believe In

True Story: A hurricane blew through our town about a year ago and made a
747 from the garbage in our landfill. You can Google that story.

Proudly written and posted by a common sense monkey.

From: Stop the Resistance. Trolling the world in search of intelligent
life. None found here.
A Million Strong and growing.

See our official video: Dawn of the Planet of the Apes | Official Trailer
| 20th Century FOX

Kevin Baggett says:

Gotta love the argument from popularity John snuck in there. Then he makes
a bunch of statements without justification.

According2Angel says:


to explain it better than Michael did, to be an atheist does indeed entail
nothing on the atheist’s end. It’s only the few who find themselves looking
for answers do they consider the natural order of things. But being atheist
does not entail a prerequisite that you MUST believe in some scientific
theory explaining things which only religion has an opposing answer to. It
is simply that fact that you cannot will yourself to believe what has not
been thoroughly explained with evidence via deity-type topics. And if the
opposition makes that claim that you are believing in nothing with nothing
to show for evidence, it is because it’s *NOTHING.*

You don’t need a reason to believe there isn’t a beast at the center of the
Earth, so why require anybody else to offer a reason to not believe such a
thing? It’s asking for an answer based on an empty question.

EditDeath says:

Did Lennox seriously quote C.S. Lewis in this? Asking C.S. Lewis if he
believes in Christ is like asking a brony what their favorite cartoon show
is. The answer is obvious before you even ask the question.

On an unrelated topic, I wonder what Lennox would say about the Tower of
Babel. In the Bible, it specifically says that God believed that if man
stood united, we could accomplish anything. He then proceeded to divide us
through language and destroy the tower. How is this not “keeping us down?”

Alexander Grape says:

skip ahead to 45:30 if you want to see exactly what is going on in this
debate. One side makes a clear claim that is backed up by evidence 100% of
the time. The rebuttal to that claim is a very loose analogy. After
watching that back and forth, which side makes more sense?

jermaine johnson says:

What I find interesting is the fact that Historians like scientist, have a
predetermined set of principals that govern the mechanism of accurate
interpretation. Cosmic evolution,Chemical Evolution,Stellar&planetary
Evolution,Macro Evolution, and organic evolution violates the very
mechanism that defines science i.e. what is observed tested and repeated.
Genetic Variation by natural or controlled selection is the only observable
evidence, which is not Evolution. Just look at the illustration of Darwins
tree of life. Just because Evolutionist say genetic variation is evolution
doesn’t make it so one must look at what is observed and decide for
themselves. Genetic variation which is determined by the ability to
reproduce which in turn creates the genome up for discussion i.e. Horse
and a zebra. That genome never and I repeat never allows for new
information outside of the genome already established which is the first
step in accomplishing Darwinian evolution. Making Genetic Variation which
is science it’s own definition due to it’s limitations that contradict

On the other hand Evangelical historians all follow the same governing
principals when making the case for the existence of Jesus Christ i.e. that
is when you follow the governing principals to determine if the historical
claims of Jesus Christ existence is accurate according the governing
historical guidelines you cannot deny the existence of Christ Jesus unless
you throw out those Governing principals and create your own.

If you look at all those who do deny the evidence for the Historical Jesus
they are not educated in the ancient Historian field and if they are They
like evolutionist violate their own governing principals. 

kabes223 says:

Lennox isn’t that stupid. He knows when he’s lying and deceiving the
audience. I guess it doesn’t mean shit if you believe in a god that’ll
forgive you for fucking anything. The only thing that shit head won’t
forgive you for is not believing in him, how convenient…

REDCAP32X says:

Ah the tipical atheist arguement style, to mock, to take the piss, to make
sure you feel stupid if you belive in God, gotta ram that home your dumb if
you believe, to attack a persons intelligence if they do not agree with
you. Maybe one day when you get a speaker with some class it will make
better listening

its always nice to see the believer (John Lennox) not raise to it and get
offended, but just to give a good case, with only information

JF_Sebastian says:

Atheism is just the position that we don’t believe in gods, everything else
is based on being smart and intelligent. 

Watch this says:

I’m relieved that YouTube provides me with little thumbnails of video
stills when I mouse over the video progress bar, because it allows me to
skip past the crazy noises and listen to the Michael Shermer noises. 


Deuteronomy 7:9-10 KJV

Know therefore that the Lord thy God, he is God, the faithful God, which
keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his
commandments to a thousand generations; And repayeth them that hate him to
their face, to destroy them: he will not be slack to him that hateth him,
he will repay him to his face.

David Mosier says:

“I am not aware of Michael Shermer too much, but Ive heard bad things about
him on other videos. Anyone able to shed some light on the critical aspects
of him? ”

Michael Shermer is a rational thinking skeptic who is the head of the
American Skeptical movement, and he is a good guy. What bad things have
you heard?

Forgol1266 says:

IMO it is impossible to debate “faith”. It’s like, “you just try to
disprove my Santa Claus and Easter Bunny”.

Corey Dorsey says:

Thank you for posting these videos VeganAtheist. I have learned and grown a
lot from viewing them.

MakesYouSick says:

Also, it’s refreshing to hear an American atheist argue against a British
theist, and not vice versa.

Graeme Mawson says:

who saved you when you nearly died John? Hospital.

uncleanunicorn says:

On slavery, Christians did end it. But other Christians started it (The
Transatlantic Trade). And to end it, some Christians had to slaughter other
Christians. The Bible justifies and regulates slavery.

On Science and knowledge; you can be a scientists and believe in
preposterous myths, but this limits you. Neil de Grasse Tyson has an
excellent video where he explains how Newton gave up too quickly on the
mathematics of Perturbation theory; claiming the stability of planetary
orbits were the hand of God, until a century later, Pierre-Simon LaPlace
extended Newton’s own calculations to explain the stability of the Solar
System. By giving up too soon, Newton’s contributions ended. The problem
was solvable, by someone else not limited by superstition.

As for the Church and Science, the Catholic Church had to be dragged
kicking and screaming into modernity, over the blood of Renaissance
astronomers they slaughtered to protect their cherished mythic
interpretations. Ask Giordano Bruno how accommodating religion is to

MMDE says:

1:21:14 One thing that is totally forgotten in this question, which could
have made it way more loaded was how God lied about the consequences of
eating the forbidden fruit and how he eternally punished the snake for not
lying and Eve for eating it without punishing Adam for it too. If God was
so almighty he would have known what would happen, and yet he created it
this way and let it happen just to punish them for it afterwards, that’s
rather sadistic.

As for the actual question, it’s a bad one, and I don’t know why Lennox
just spew a lot of words out without really saying anything about it, but I
guess it would go against his earlier mentioned arguments about wanting
there to be a God. The answer is simple, if God exists and everything in
the bible is true (which it can’t be seeing as it contains several clear
contradictions), then he can say he worship him out of fear. Fear is what
the bible is very much built up on, especially the old testament.

William Russell says:

The ROYAL family was prayed for more than any other group and died young.
Must of been tough BEING ROYAL in all!(they did call it “divine right” at
one point) Does he not see the contradictory nature of that comment.

ShoesOnHands says:

Hearing the first few minutes of Lexxox speaking, we have…
– the existence of God is comparable to the existence of the universe.
– we live for a short time and the universe is infinite and powerful.
– when looking at or hearing the certain things, such as the sunrise, we
feel a sense of wonder.
– science is the gift of Judeo-Christian heritage.
– >80% of Australians are Christian.


Ronald Kelly says:

Faith to a believer is not blind faith. Faith comes from rational reasoning
drawing upon what we know to understand the source of what we do know. Both
evolution and creation are involved in the past and no one can claim to
have absolute knowlegde of what and how things happened because no one was
there. We all look at the same evidence that exists today and draw
conclusions based on that information. As such, all proposals must ex[plain
what we see today. Those that believe God makes the best sense of what we
find base it on available evidence not blind faith. So this is a straw man
argument evolutionists use. There are many things we all accept without
being able to see it. Where did matter come from? Anyone got working
knowledge from the evolutionary side. How did life arise? Anyone got proof
from th evolutionary side? There are many things people can believe based
on presupposition rather than clear cut evidence. So both sides are looking
to interpret the same evidence. Both are part science and part philosophy.

EVO101 says:

Sitting here watching these types of ‘debates’, I am always amazed that I
was at one time firmly in ‘God’s’ camp. In hindsight, I see that my
thinking in general never rational. God was real and the real issue was the
way we explained him to others. We knew, as evangelicals, that God opened
the heart of the unbeliever to truth. He was simply blinded by the god of
this world and we hoped that the real light of the world would grant him
understanding to be saved.

I wanted that to be true. I wanted Jesus to wipe away my tears at the end
of this ‘world’. I wanted to live forever without fear of death, without
pain and suffering and even now I wonder who wouldn’t want to live forever
in peace and harmony?

But more than any of this I wanted the truth. I really thought I had the
truth. But truth as I was later to find, was not always subject to my
desires. Sometimes truth is painful. But honest people desire to be told
the truth (as far as we can know it) regardless of the outcome. We embrace
it on principle. And so it is.

As for the ‘atheist’ thing. Well, a curious thing that to an evangelical
the term atheism is synonymous with evolution. How so you ask? Well for
one, we never completely understood either term. We just didn’t care enough
to learn the true meaning of these terms from non-believers. Evolution for
us, was simply an ape turning into a human or some other absurdity.
Atheism, or denial of Jesus as God, was what kept the unbeliever bound to
his real Lord the Devil. His heart was darkened to any truth from our God.

I still remember the day when someone told me that we ‘shared’ a common
ancestor with the chimpanzee, not that we descended from monkeys. I was
more than perplexed by this explanation. I had done enough genealogy to
know what an ancestor meant. I also realized immediate that this meant
modern human beings weren’t born from another ‘kind’ or ‘species’. What
else didn’t I ‘know’?

One of my greatest fears was that without my belief in God that I would
loose all my morality because my father was no longer watching my every
move nor monitoring my every thought. Why not just rape kill and destroy if
there was no God? Why be good? We’re all to die and become what we were
prior to birth so what would it matter? It’s scary but these were really
thoughts that raced through my head. I also felt really scared that there
wasn’t anyone in control of the universe or the earth. We might just be hit
with a giant comet! Only later did I realize that the only difference
between those fears and reality was a belief system in my own mind. I still
cared for sick children. I cried still when I saw people loose their
children to disease or accidents. I certainly had no desire to murder or
rape people even without God. I found that I was exactly the same caring,
loving individual that I always was. I still had purpose and it was what it
always had been, what I made it.

What exactly was an ‘atheist’? A few months after loosing my religion I
came to understand that an atheist was simply a person who didn’t believe
in ‘any’ deity or Gods. They could be liberal, conservative, republican,
democrat, anarchist or libertarian. Some of them believed in strange things
like UFO abduction or that the Jews controlled the world. But there was one
type of atheist that sparked my interest. The Michael Shermer kind. Why you
ask? Well, because he was just like me. Like me in experience. Like me in
an evangelical past and a longing for knowledge. He wasn’t dismissing the
entire world’s academia and our greatest learning centers as grand
conspirators to fool the world. He wanted the truth and wanted to share
this knowledge with others. A true evangelical!

There’s something strange and wonderful that happens to people of similar
experience in these types of situations. We start to think critically. The
great anathema becomes one of our greatest strengths in our new found
search of knowledge.

So I say to all you YouTube defenders of truth and science. Don’t loose
hope in arguing with creationists. There might just be a Michael Shermer or
an EVO101 waiting in the wings. We’re out there my friends. Thank you. 

retrotails says:

is it wrong I think they should split the audience into believers and
nonbelievers? I mean, imagine laughing a bit at an atheist joke and all the
people around you silently stare…

Derren Brown says:

What else can Lennox use to prove his point other than personal testimonies
of famous people?

OnlyAGear says:

I seriously can’t listen to the christian side of the debate…. the sounds
he makes…

DaGingerHeadMan says:

Is there a more dishonest theist than John Lennox?

TheBastius says:

It is always funny to see, how theists aren’t able to see, that atheism
just makes a single reference to the positive claim of theism: atheism just
says “I don’t believe, that there is god” or “I don’t believe in god(s)”!
Nothing else! It is in the word what it says …from the greek “atheos”
(without god)!

Not collecting stamps also makes just a single reference to one hobby! It
says: “I don’t collect stamps!”…what else i do, it doesn’t say and
therefore not collecting stamps can’t be a hobby and not believing in
god(s) is not a religion/faith!

MortisNostre says:

I really hate it when atheists admit that the universe seems or is fine
tuned and then seek to explain said fine tuning. First of all fine tuning
is bullshit. Second of all its conceding way too much to the theist, and
gives them room to spew their garbage about probability. ZZZ

sauniz1 says:

Like Shermer said at the end, Christianity does not account for
of the universe.

Bunny1918 says:

I’m sorry, I just cannot listen to somebody saying that Christianity gave
us this wonderful morality and made the world better. How come the Church
not only didn’t stop people from carrying out heinous acts of torturę, but
actually opposed humanitarian activists and philosophers who tried to
change things? It was Enlightenment, not Christianity, that put stop to
public executions and cruel punishments. Novels like Uncle Tom’s Cabin did
more to raise public awareness to humanitarian issues than this great Bible
of theirs has ever done. If Lennox has this basic knowledge of European
history, he’s just totally dishonest, and if he doesn’t, he’s not qualified
to speak in public.

HellRehab says:

At around 41 minutes Lennox actually said “my faith is based on evidence.”
Uhm. Does anyone else see a problem with this statement? LMFAO

Alex Monahan says:

+VeganAtheist yes, so glad you picked Michael Shermer and John Lennox for
this debate. Lennox was pretty exciting in the Richard Dawkins debate. I
mean, he didn’t have much proof but at least he stayed smiling. Shermer I
was just thinking I wanted to see him debate. You read my mind, dude.

Artjoms Pugacovs says:

omg these deluded people:(

VeganAtheist says:

Debate Uploaded! Please Rate, Comment and Share.

Corey Dorsey says:

When him and some other atheists say things like what he said about the
amputees, my question is why does God have to do anything? Some atheists
put God in a box. I don’t. I don’t assume anything. A good creator,
intelligent being, can do whatever they want. It is your choice to follow
them or not. Another question for some atheists is should some atheists
tell others how to live their lives? I notice that this is one of the major
concerns that some atheists have with religious people. But why do some
atheists do this? Shouldn’t you let others do whatever they want to do,
unlike those pesky religious people, as some would say?

justin bartelen says:

There’s nothing I hate more then when the moderator says “lets move along,
we’re running out of time” It’s a debate! Let them speak until the debaters
feel they have got their point across. 

Phineas Starter says:

54:40 Watch John Lennox make-up his own religion

911SMOM . says:

Lennox is incredibly delusional, fallacious, disingenuous and hypocritical.
And the audience applause stupidity and lies.

Comments are disabled for this post.