OpenTheo

Interview: Keagan, an Agnostic Atheist (part 3)

For The King — FTK
00:00
00:00

Interview: Keagan, an Agnostic Atheist (part 3)

July 7, 2021
For The King
For The KingFTK

Today, on the For The King podcast, I am joined with one of my good friends. Keagan and I met at college during our undergraduate careers and we soon became good friends doing lots of random things together. Today Keagan and I continue on our discussion of our worldviews, mainly talking about the problem of evil in the world and the evils that many people charge Christians with. This episode is more of a debate/dialogue than the first part of this interview. Tune in and hear Keagan espouse his beliefs and I mine. We both take time to defend our views and press each other on some of the points that we disagree with the other. Thank you for listening! Please check out Keagan's podcast!

Keagan's podcast : https://anchor.fm/keagan-bouwers

Resources:  

* https://www.ligonier.org/learn/devotionals/christian-slaves-and-masters/ 

* https://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-slavery.html 

* https://emergencenj.org/blog/2019/01/04/does-the-bible-condone-slavery 

* https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/why-wrong-say-bible-pro-slavery/ 

* Listen until 10:40 -> https://open.spotify.com/episode/0f4qSd7UwRgQWnj1geEjly?si=5d9f6976805d4c9f 

Texts: 1 Timothy 1:8– 10, Exodus 21:16, Deuteronomy 15:12-15 

Slavery in the bible was voluntary and the slaves were to be such free under Mosaic law. Man-stealing was a crime punishable by death, a command unheard of in the ancient near east, yet the bible institutes such a law. This topic was touched on in another episode, "the uniqueness of America". 

Remember, the first society to every formally and universally outlaw slavery in legislation is the United States of America. This had nothing to do with our intelligence but EVERYTHING to do with us being a Christian nation. Atheism cannot be accounted for ever freeing any humans from any bondage ever.

Thanks for listening! 

Romans 6:16-23 “Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed, and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness. I am speaking in human terms, because of your natural limitations. For just as you once presented your members as slaves to impurity and to lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness leading to sanctification. For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness. But what fruit were you getting at that time from the things of which you are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death. But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the fruit you get leads to sanctification and its end, eternal life. For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” 

Website: forthekingpodcast.com Inquiries: forthekingpodcast@gmail.com

Share

Transcript

(music)
Hello, For The King listeners. Welcome to part 3 of me interviewing Keagan. This interview is kind of adapted at first.
It was more of a conventional interview where I'm asking
Keagan questions about something that he's interested in, something that he is an authority to speak on, which would be his views and his own mind. That was the first part. The last part we actually unpack some of the things he talked about in part 1 and we more of a debate style give both of our positions and talk about that.
We actually didn't finish
everything that we were hoping to get through, so it kind of stretched into a part 3, which we should wrap up here today. That's kind of where we're at in terms of what's happening on Wednesdays. I just want to thank everybody for listening and to remind everybody that there is a website associated with the podcast now, forthekingpodcast.com. I've actually been doing a lot of work on that and tidying that up, so please go check it out and let me know if you like it or ways it could always be better.
I've actually done a lot of work
and it should be pretty intuitive and easy to follow. Thank you for those that have went and checked it out. I think that's all the announcements, so let's just get into it, Keegan.
Last time we left off talking about the problem of evil, I addressed the supposed
logical inconsistency with their being evil and their being a god and I tried my best to respond to that. I left off asking how you would account for evil. How would you call things evil? What standard do you use to call things evil and how does your worldview deal with it? Deal with the problem of evil? Because both worldviews, there's evil no matter what.
Both worldviews agree. There is something called evil. The question is how do you deal
with it and is there a logical inconsistency with their being evil? You would say yes there is with god, but I'm curious how you would respond as an agnostic atheist.
I'd love
to hear your thoughts. Yeah, I guess with the way that I sort of view the world, there has to be nuance to it. Nothing is really black and white in this world.
It's something I'm
really starting to learn. But as far as actually before you get into it, did anyone send in any questions or anything? I really wish they would have but no, nobody has. So we'll still do our material.
Wait, no, because because at this point of recording, the second episode
doesn't even out yet. Yeah, you're right. Actually, so it's impossible for them to.
You're right.
You're right. Totally missed that.
Now it comes out tomorrow. They were sending in your
question listeners. Yeah, yeah.
No, you're right. Actually, they wouldn't have. Maybe
we'll just do a yeah, thanks for the questions.
The questions guys, we can do a part for questions
come in. Questions come in. We'll do a part for just questions.
Come in. Sure. Sure.
Let's
just let's do that. All right. Okay, so anyway, I think there are lots of things in the world that we would describe as evil as humans.
Like, you know, like human parasites, I've
always looked back at human parasites because I find them fascinating. But they're also hugely disgusting. But it's like, is that is a paris? Yeah, is a parasite evil for like, what it's designed to do or what it does? I don't know.
You know, it's like, I'm not
sure if I could really say if it's if it is, you know, are there things that I would personally describe as like, evil in the world? Yeah, yeah, I'd say of a debt with those things personally, as like investigating child abuse. But I mean, I had a case a while back, where the mom physically abused her children, you know, and I ended up removing those kids. And she was a narcissist.
And I mean, she just did some terrible things to those to
those boys. But what she did, I would consider evil. I mean, but I wouldn't say that she was evil in and of herself because she was abused as a child.
And those that was just
something that was a cyclical thing. A lot of people who describe things as evil, can't look at the holistic or the big picture of it and realize sort of all the dominoes that led to it not as an excuse for the behavior, you know, but just to get a better understanding of the context of the situation. So I mean, I understand it sounds and also probably feels gross to certain people for for them to hear, oh, there is no quote unquote, objective right or wrong, which I don't really subscribe to that idea as like an excuse to just do whatever you want.
But like the grand scheme of the universe, if that's what you're talking about,
I would say objectively not, but that doesn't mean that subjective reasoning doesn't matter. This is the thing I we live in a society. We live with other people.
We have a sense
of what is right and what is wrong. And it's because when we do things that are right, we've evolved to live with each other. And if you do right by another person, they'll do right by you and you have a better chance of survival.
So I'm sure almost certain that
there are some missing pieces in my own argument or thought process when it comes to this issue, because I have a very strong sense of justice for people who are wronged. But at the end of the day, that's that's what I believe, you know, I don't think you need to have a singular facet in the world and our universe who is deciding what's wrong and what's right. Okay.
Especially. Yeah, I just don't think you need that is a necessary thing in order
to have a moral pitch. And in order to do what's right and what's wrong in the world, you know, that was pretty long winded.
But again, I just I don't think it's I don't
think it's just so black and white all the time, you know, okay. And one of the yeah, it's just one of my biggest things and I kind of this a lot of people probably will understand this wrong. But I think Hitler is a pretty good example.
Hitler people like to call Hitler
monster because they want to dehumanize him. When in reality, he was just a person. And that's what makes people scared.
You know, he did terrible things. You know, he has no
you know, it's being raised and white doesn't give you excuses to act out. But I think anyone at will not act out but just, you know, do horrific things like kill millions of people.
But I think if you look at his life is very tragic. You know, I mean, that doesn't excuse what he did, you know, but if you look at his life, he was sexually and physically abused like every single day of his childhood. And there are millions of people today.
And I
know this is just like directly from experience who are experiencing that same thing. Many of them grow up do terrible things. And they I mean, they grow up to be well rounded.
You
know, they get the help that they need. So I don't think it's an excuse for I'm not I'm not trying to defend Hitler's actions is my point. I'm just trying to use him as an example of like humans can do terrible things.
Yeah. And there's often stems from other humans
doing bad things to them. Yeah, there's I guess.
Yeah, even Christians can recognize
nature and nurture that, you know, Christians say our nature is sinful, but there's also an element of how is that sin going to manifest? Well, it might be by the way you were nurtured if you are in a family that I don't know, you see your dad and your mom lie all the time, you'll probably be more likely to lie. I mean, there's an element of nurturing there of how sin manifests. So I mean, I can understand that perspective on your end.
But I do want
to push back and present a rebuttal to you made a statement. It's not that it's not that subjectism subjectivism just doesn't matter. It does matter.
And that's kind of like your
argument against that things don't just have to be objective. But but even even I would say the word matter that something matters presupposes an objective morality. Because what if I say that you you saying that subjectivism matters doesn't matter? You know, what if I think in my subjective is on my subjective point of view that it doesn't matter, the word matter, you're basically saying that it should matter to everybody, you're trying to make a case to me that it should matter.
When I think it doesn't, I think, you know,
morals and reality is objective. I think there are things that are black and white. So I just want to present that back to you.
How do you think you have the right to use the
word matter there? That something really does matter when subjectivism seems to say that actually nothing matters. It's all up to me. It's what I think matters and versus what you think matters, which really, at the end of the day, nothing matters, that would be my rebuttal.
So you know, what do you think about that?
Right. And I mean, I was absolutely expecting you to say that. Because that's sort of what the Christian apologetic view is, is like, oh, it's it's subjectivism doesn't matter.
And you know, it just it's all going to fall apart. Because at the end of the day, the root of that problem, something that I disagree with wildly is that people are just terrible. And if they're left up to their own devices, they're going to do terrible things.
I wildly
disagree with that. Because that's just, I don't believe that there's real evidence to support that. Because people are left up to their device, left up to their own devices, I don't believe that they go out and do whatever they want and do horrible, terrible things to each other.
I just don't think that the there's real evidence to support that. But
that's sort of the straw man that is set up by Christian apologetics, that I really, really dislike. Because it's not just my opinion, you know, that with the as far as like, subjective things, it's not just my opinion.
It's the opinion of society as well that you're in.
It's the culture that you grew up with. And those things do matter.
Because we evolved
as in tribes, we evolved to be in a culture and in a society where you work together with other people. And then, you know, there's also science, there's also science and medical science. So those two things together give a pretty good standing for people to decide what is right and wrong.
I mean, look at look at society, look at Christianity, just look
at Christianity, it's not staying the same. It's constantly evolving as our society changes, and as our culture changes, and as science and medical science evolve as well. Christianity also is trying to keep up with that.
Like you Christianity doesn't no longer like it
doesn't say anymore. That like stoning people is okay, or slavery is okay. Slavery is probably a better example, I would say.
They don't Christianity doesn't say that slavery is okay
anymore. You know, it doesn't say that killing infidels is okay anymore. Like, it's evolved with the culture and with the time and actually changed the meanings or interpretations of its scriptures to fit the culture of the time.
So clearly, if we're going off of what's objective
and what's not objective, Christianity is just just as much of its fall as our entire society is falling to our subjective culture. Okay, yeah, I hear that. I mean, that's the thing that I mean, it gets on my skin a little bit.
Because it's like, no, I don't think
we're just our society will fall apart. Okay, I don't think that now. You know, you've a few times I brought certain things up and you say it's a strong man.
I'm painting a
straw man of your position. I do see this a lot where plastic atheism when I read Christopher Hitchens, Dawkins, Sam Harris, all these guys, they I think they actually do present a straw man, which is what you were just saying that you see Christian people doing a certain thing, therefore Christianity is subjective. The words of the Bible, we have manuscripts dated with carbon dating methods that you would subscribe to back to the very first century and second century.
So we know that the words have not changed. Although you would say they are.
But here's the thing we use manuscripts now that predate whatever critique you came last time with you said in like 200 something ad we have manuscripts that predate that and the words are actually the same.
And the the when you make a new Bible translation, you
don't use translations that were after that you use the original manuscripts. But that's kind of beside the point. What I want to basically respond with to say you are you're creating a straw man.
What that I'm sorry, you cut out. Say that again, please. What? You cut
out.
I never want to just accuse agnostic atheism because of what agnostic atheistic
people do. And I never want the other side to do that to Christianity. I don't want you to say I see Christian people doing a certain thing.
Therefore Christianity is false. That's
a logical fallacy. So that's not what I was saying.
But you're saying you're getting off
from you're getting off at the wrong stop rocky. You're getting off at the wrong stop. Like that's not what I was saying at all.
As far as like I never said that. Is that
what you said? You see Christianity being subject? Yeah. Yeah.
And I Christian people
doing this and the interpretate that never said that the words changed. I said that the intro. I said the I said the interpretations of those words changed.
Yes, but this is the
this is where you're saying you. Sorry, I'm just saying this is where subjectivism I think gets wrong. When an author writes something down, they had something they meant.
It doesn't
matter how you interpret it. They meant something when they wrote it down. And it's up to you now to interpret it properly.
It's not up to you to interpret it whatever way you want.
If I write something in my diary, I meant something when I wrote it. I didn't just leave it up for interpretation.
So does that make sense? Right. I don't disagree with what you're
saying. The issue I'm or the problem I'm having right now is what you're saying.
It's like
you are refusing to hear what I what I said, or you're latching on to the wrong thing. Yeah, I'm saying is that the intro we can we can both agree. Because it's just a fact that Christianity is Christianity's interpretation of of their scripture has changed over the past 2000 years.
Is that not correct? Yeah, some sex of Christianity. Yes. I wouldn't
say some sex of Christianity.
I mean, Calvinism included, Catholic Lutheran doesn't matter.
All of them, their interpretations of Scripture have changed over time. Is that not true? Like, are you saying that all the interpretations of Scripture that I'm confused? Are you? What I'm saying is pretty well accepted.
Okay, I mean, how I would respond to that, we literally
have writings, carbon dating methods of the paper from the first century. I'm not just rocky. I'm not disagreeing with that.
I'm not disagreeing with that at all. Okay, but
let me finish real quick. We can go back and read what Christians thought about the scriptures, right when Jesus was was lived his life and then died.
We can see what they thought we
have the church fathers, patriarch, the patriarchs, all that. There are some interpretations that have remained the exact same. And they are usually in reformed circles, reformed Calvinistic circles, a few other circles, there's been orthodoxy all throughout the Nicene Creed, we have all of these teachings that a lot of denominations still adhere to.
But there
have been some like peripheral interpretations that have changed. Yes. But we can go back and see what they said when Christianity first arose in the first century.
And it's very
similar. Not a whole lot. Okay, I'm still very confused.
I'm confused what your point
is. Because right now to me, it just seems like you're refusing to agree with me on this point, even though it's true, which is interpretations of Scripture have changed over the years by Christianity. As as the as, as culture changes.
Yeah, I mean, I agree with you. Yes.
I agree with you, Rocky.
I'm saying yes, do we do we have the do we have the original
words? Like, do we have those old the old manuscripts? Yes, like, yeah, we have those. That's a fact we have them. Yeah.
But that that that doesn't negate or mean that Christianity's
interpretation of Scripture hasn't changed over the past 1000 years. Oh, I can read that that is just a fact. I can read that just what you're arguing with me about.
I don't
want to grant it that it's happened to all of Christianity, the whole Christian church has changed there. There are still some denominations that have remained faithful to what has been taught the past 2000 years. So here's one, for example, Jesus is God.
There are plenty
of denominations that have remained intact in that view. There are some liberal that just say, No, he's a good teacher. He's actually not God.
That's what I'm saying. Some some
of them have departed from the original interpretation. That makes sense.
Does that help you? That's
how am I missing you? I don't know. Yes, but that's the what you're talking about has nothing to do with what I said. Like, I don't disagree with what you're saying that some sex of Christian some sex of Christianity have pretty much stayed true to an interpretation of a scripture from since the beginning on talking about interpretation of Scripture have changed with the culture over the past over the past like 1500 2000 years.
Christianity has changed
with the times. That's what that is what I'm saying. Okay, and I'm not saying that some things haven't that.
So I'm confused why you even brought it up in the first place. Well,
I just wanted to make sure I'm you're charging Christianity for having changed is no longer the original faith and I just wanted to I can't let that slide there. There is Christianity is still here as it had been 2000 years ago when Jesus taught the very first words of the faith.
That's what I didn't want to let that I would say you're locking on to the
completely wrong thing. You're locking on to the bigger argument because you don't want to concede the point. And the fact is that Christianity and its interpretations of Scripture have changed because the culture has changed.
Oh, I can grant like liberal denomination
were literally 2000 years. Okay, so since the beginning since since the beginning of Christianity, slavery has been okay with Christianity. So is that interpretation of Scripture still okay today? Because that's how they interpret it back then.
Well, okay, so slavery was completely
different back in the ancient Middle East. It wasn't slavery in this and what we saw in no actually, actually, it wasn't that section. That's actually not true.
Yes, there was indentured
servitude. Yes, there was slavery that lasted seven years for Jewish people. But for non Jewish people, it was pretty similar to slavery looks pretty much everywhere else.
I think
in the Roman Empire, it was like legit slavery people stolen from their families and enslaved like that happened and that happened to Joseph too. In the Bible and right. But yeah, but they were they were one saying is Christianity accepted slavery all the way back then.
And
throughout the rest of its history up until that up until the culture changed about it. Yeah, it never there's never an affirmative statement in the Bible that says it's good. It allowed for it in the culture that that would be the distinction and never is saying this is a righteous thing.
It allows for it based on the culture that the book was being
written in. And I would still concede slavery is not bad. I'm a slave to Christ.
Are you
saying to the right thing? You're enslaved. Okay, Rocky, I need you to take a second and think about what you said. I am 100% I need you to take a second.
You were a slave to
your government. Rocky slave. 100%.
You were a wage slave. That is not true at all. That
is not what that's not what slavery is.
And you just said you were you. Rocky, you just
said you you just that you were okay with slavery. That's what you just said.
That is
what you said verbatim. So I needed you to walk that back a little. No, I'm not I'm not okay with slavery.
Rocky, in the sense of stealing people and putting
them into slavery. That's wrong. Everybody's enslaved by their own passions, their own past.
Okay, well, yeah, so we're slaves to God. I'm a slave. Okay, so there there's okay,
you're talking about two very different things right now.
Sure. Yeah. Okay.
That's what I'm
saying. I'm talking about the I'm talking about the no, no, no, you're twisting the words so that they fit your narrative. The issue I'm having with you right now is that one I'm talking about very real slavery.
I'm not talking about thought slavery. I'm talking
about real slavery, where people were taken and forced to do certain things. Okay, Christianity was okay with that.
I don't know if it was okay with it. It literally says in First Timothy. What? Here, let me just let me look up a verse real quick.
Okay. So listen to this verse. I want you to tell
me if Christianity is okay with that kind of slavery you're talking about.
Okay. Understand
this that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient for the ungodly and sinners for the unholy and profane for those who strike their fathers and mothers for murderers, the sexually immoral men who practice homosexuality and then listen to this one enslavers. And that word is those who take someone captive to sell them into slavery liars purgers and whoever else is contrary to sound doctrine.
So the Bible is
not of that kind of slavery. The Bible is not on board with the forcefully stealing somebody putting them into slavery, but the kind of slavery that that verse literally says it now. Yeah, there's there's a whole lot of things we can talk about without the slavery thing.
But I hear that a lot brought up against Christianity. Okay, wait, wait,
I want I've one thing. I have one thing for you to think about that.
Okay. The issue I
have right there is that you think the Bible is infallible. Uh huh.
So what about in the
Old Testament? What about in the Old Testament where it literally goes over the logistics of buying and selling slaves and that slaves should be obedient to their masters? Okay, now, how do you reconcile that you already rejected because it means either your Bible is isn't infallible or or God? Yeah, changes. Oh, yeah, I've looked into this. Okay, ancient like you you you disagree with this.
This is actually true. That kind of slavery bond
servitude. Ancient Near East slavery was many times somebody buying somebody because they literally cannot support themselves to literally keep them from dying.
They are literally they're
unable to support themselves. So they say, I will I'm at the point now I'm so poor, I'm gonna die. I will sell my body I will sell my my whole being to you that I might not live.
Please buy me. So that's why there's this regulation for buying and selling. It's
an actually a mechanism to save people's lives in the Old Testament.
It's not a mechanism
for stealing people and selling them into captivity, which is what this kind of slavery is being spoken to right here. Row like the Roman that is just that is just rocky. That's just not that's just not true.
Yes, yes, there was indentured servitude, which is what you're
talking about. Yes, there was that that that is true. That was there.
But to say that that
was the whole picture and the only picture is incorrect. Because Jewish people were the only ones who could do that. prisoners of war, and slaves taken from other tribes were a very consistent thing.
And the Bible talks about how you can make those slaves stolen
from other tribes into your wife and how to honor that, because they were able to have multiple wives back then as well. Sure. So if you can't concede that that's what it's talking about, I think that this kind of this specific arguments probably going nowhere, because it really leads into something that I have a major issue with when talking with the apparent contradiction people big into Christian apologetics.
We, yes, but it's more so my my main issue with Christian apologetics is that a lot of the Christians I know, are so afraid to say, I don't know, or so afraid to concede a point that they hang on to everything with like a white knuckled tension. And for me, that drives me up the wall, because in reality, you're starting with an answer. And you're trying, you're starting with an answer, and you're trying to find evidence, which is looking at it from an objective standpoint.
And here's the thing, if you want to look at it, and
you say, Hey, you know what, I actually don't know why this is. But I don't believe that my God is like this. And I still believe in him.
Guess what? I think that's a totally
valid answer. I just the thing I have an issue with is people who can't concede people who can't say, I don't know, because it's close. Sure.
Well, I actually do know that's my one of my biggest issues with apologetics. Apologetics
in general. Okay, yeah, I, I'll say I don't know when I truly don't know.
But I've looked
into these things. And that that is my answer. And if you want to reject it, and think claim is false, by all means, it's just I would never grant a point.
I would never grant a
point to you that I know to be blatantly false. Something like subjectivism, I would never let you have that because it's just blatantly false. It's not it's not true reality.
So
but that's, that's why it's frustrating because you want your if your point is valid, that must mean some of my points are invalid. And you you're saying, Oh, why won't you ever grant me my point? Well, I won't grant you your point because it's wrong. You know, that's the whole that's the whole point of debate.
I would never grant you that if I grant you
that I'm giving you ground. So that's, I would never deny I would never grant something that I know to be false. That's really my goal here.
I'm not just trying to be contentious.
This is we're trying to do a debate here. So I'm not Yeah, I guess.
I know. I understand. I understand.
I think my my I just have a really big issue with
people who say that they know for certain something. Because no one can know for certain. And one of my biggest one of my biggest issues is, even back when I was a Christian was when people said, Hey, I know for God, I know God is I know God exists for certain, like I know it.
Because guess what, there's no way that you can actually know. And if you say that,
you know, that means you don't have faith. Because in order to have faith, you have to have doubt.
That's a part of what faith means. That's literally the literal definition. So
that's the that's I just have an issue with it, man.
I don't know for certain, if God
doesn't exist. I just think the evidence what's in that direction. I think these these the arguments of like getting into subjectivism or objective moral truth and all these kinds of things.
Like, it doesn't even if we landed together and agreed on a point, it doesn't
mean anything towards the bigger question of whether God exists or not. Because even if we both landed on objective moral truth exists, or subjective truth, like subjective morality works, like even if we both landed on something together and agreed on it, the issue I run into is that doesn't have any bearing at all on whether God exists or not, just from a like, I want to say mathematics point, but that doesn't make it logical point just doesn't make any like it doesn't, it doesn't prove God existence. Here's why it helps though, because and and, and I've also moved on from that, not to mention, like, the things we're arguing and discussing right now are things that led me to where I am now.
Like they just led me there. Like, it's not something that I think about anymore. That makes sense.
Plus, I feel like this, I mean, honestly, it's conversations get so off the
rails. Okay, I'm not sure if you feel the same. No, I think it's good stuff.
Because
this is I hear this all the time with people that aren't Christians that critique Christianity. So like, all the things you're bringing up are, I mean, I've heard I've heard this often. So I think it's helpful for the audience.
Do you want to move on to another point? Wrap
up here. We can. Can you still hear me? Yeah, you look more comfortable.
Okay. Yeah. You
know what you you can let's just ask me a question about it.
And then let's move on.
Because I feel like we're going in circles. Ask you a what? You can ask me like, if you want to ask me any more questions about it, you can.
Okay. But I feel like we should move
on because I feel like we're starting to, we're starting to go in circles. Okay.
I really
want to know. You know, you're charging me with being okay with slavery, based on the Bible, all that kind of stuff. I just really want to know.
Where in your worldview do you
get that slavery is wrong? Like where where can you I can I can point to a scripture, I just read you a scripture that says it is wrong. I just I don't you have no grounds whatsoever to ever call anything wrong or anything good. I just want to know how do you deal with evil? How's your worldview? Because I know in the end, Jesus is going to come back and right every wrong there actually is going to be justice.
But for you, if somebody murders
somebody, they only get life. Somebody gets a free life in jail, getting food every week, all that kind of stuff. But they really do get off the hook because somebody getting murdered and somebody having fifth.
Do what?
Sorry, go ahead, finish your thought. Well, my thought is, it seems like a lot of people actually get off the hook in terms of justice on your worldview, because there's no final judgment actually punishing people for the evil they've done even those. You know, if you steal something, then how do you repay it? You give it back or you give it back fourfold, whatever if you kill somebody, you can never give that life back.
So they actually get
off the hook, even if they do go to jail for life. And even if they get murdered, they'll you can never give back the memories that that family is going to lose with that person that got murdered. So in your worldview, I think my worldview actually does deal with evil and justice and slavery and all those things that you're charging me with being okay with when actually I think it's wrong and evil.
And I know that there were actually
a judgment in the end for it for humans that do these things. So that's my question to you. Well, one, I never charge you personally being okay with slavery.
I mean, that's why I said
hey, you should take a look at what you said earlier, because you said I'm okay with slavery, which I know you're not. I think you were just caught up in the moment. But as far as answering your question, I don't think a person getting life in prison is like you said it's like, it's just life in prison.
That is, I think, to be honest, I think it shows it's a little
bit ignorant, because I've worked with people in prison because of my job, and spending your entire life in a cage, and especially when your life is all you have. And from my point of view, that is an incredible punishment, which is tragic and very sad, because this life is what we have. So the fact that you had it taken away is a tragic and intense punishment.
So yeah, I think, truly, that's one of those things where it's like, being
sensitive, I think is really important. Like saying it's just life in prison is, I think it's just kind of an inappropriate statement. Because it's not just life in prison, it's their life, and they're in prison.
And even from a Christian standpoint, I think that
that's kind of an inappropriate thing to say. But as far as deciding, you know, again, I've said this a couple times, you're kind of throwing assumptions and presuppositions onto the way that I believe, because I say that I'm an atheist. I do think there are things that are right and things that are wrong.
I believe in morality, I believe in ethics. So it's
like, that's the thing that I have an issue with. You can't tell me what I believe.
I
believe in ethics, I believe in morals and virtues, I think that there's right and wrong. And I don't need a higher power to tell me what to believe in, because I can make those decisions for myself. So I think that that pretty much explains everything on that.
I
am curious, though, I'm guessing you believe in the fiery pit type of hell. Do you? Yeah. What happened? What happens to just in your worldview? I'm just curious.
I'm not going
to try and debate. I just want to know. What happens in your worldview to the all the Muslims and Hindus and Buddhists and Sikhists in the world? Yeah, like when they die, they just go to hell.
They rejected Christ, the cornerstone. So that's what I'd say. All right.
Okay. Turn
off your notifications about it. I know you're right.
You're right. There goes. I guess my
main point, that last thing I understand life in prison is a very, very hard thing that people have to go through.
But they committed to crime. I mean, some people are innocent
and they get put in jail for a very long time. And that's that's that's a tragedy too.
100%.
Maybe let me use a different illustration rather than that, because you think it's insensitive. Hitler Adolf Hitler murders millions and millions of people yet.
There's never any justice. He's
never tried. He just commits suicide in his bunker.
Or so they say, whatever happened
to him, there was no justice for him. He just dies and gets to under your worldview. He just goes into nothingness forever.
There's never any justice for him. He just gets gets
off the hook for all those millions of people he killed. That's kind of more my point.
There's
never any true justice unless there's a God to actually dish it out the way it's supposed to be dished out. Holding people. Yeah, I just I I I I just disagree with I just disagree with that.
I mean, I do. I mean, I think there's what if the thing is, Hitler was Christian.
And if he truly believed in Christ, according to Christianity, he's in heaven right now.
Well you'll know a tree bites fruit and it doesn't look like he had the kind of fruit that a Christian would bear. So. Well, okay.
Well, let's say that he accepted Christ right
before he died. With genuine repentance. Oh, yeah, then he'd be he'd be in heaven.
But
Jesus took the punishment for that. That would be how there's justice. Exactly.
Yeah. Yeah,
he doesn't get off the hook. I'm just saying his it's I think you're trivial.
I think one
thing I don't like about Christian this this line of thinking within Christian apologetics is realizing the importance of life. It's like, oh, dying isn't enough. You need to suffer for eternity for there to be justice.
That's I think that's kind of a ridiculous
idea in my opinion. So you don't think how am I not allowed to say now that you've said that that now you actually don't care about justice because you're you think the dying is just the end. There is no justice on your worldview.
But you just said you care deeply
about justice earlier. How are we gonna get the jump? I don't think something needs to happen. I don't think something needs to happen to you after you die in order for there to be justice.
People dying in tragedy and life is a it's it's a beautiful gift. Just as and
someone dying for their crimes against humanity is the pinnacle of punishment. I again, I don't think that you need to suffer for eternity or be in bliss for eternity after you die in order for there to be justice.
I don't think that's really the case. Well, I think
it's kind of, again, I would it seems like it's kind of built into reality that there is never going to be true justice dished out unless there is a God, which is why I would I would I would push on you to go further back and to realize there is a God because if you really do care about justice, there is actually no such thing as justice and your worldview. And really, when I keep saying your worldview, you have to think this, you have to believe this is because you do the same thing with me, you have to believe this because I have a Bible, but apparently there's all these different interpretations or whatever.
But you're telling me I must believe this because we mean you both realize there's objective truth, even you do, even though you're saying you're subject to this, you realize there's objective truth because you tell me I have to believe something. And that's why I tell you you have to believe something because logic and reasons not subjective, it's objective. And I think me and you both realize that which is why I keep pushing back in that way.
That's fine. I mean, you just can't really tell me like my worldview because it's I mean, not my worldview. So I just I would push back against that pretty hard.
I just think there
are a lot of holes in it. And just I mean, for a while I was what's what's it called? I was in the mindset of Pascal's way, Pascal's wager for a very long time, because and that sort of kept me Christian longer, which is Pascal's wager pretty much says it's it's kind of like a Punnett square. I think I wanted those.
But it's I've seen it. Have you gone
over it? Yep. Okay, well, pretty much.
I'm gonna go over real quick. Pretty much says
pretty much states so with Christianity. If you believe in it, the most you can get is infinite bliss.
If it's real, if it's wrong, then you get finite bliss. Or finite loss
is the word. If you don't believe in it, you have finite loss.
And if it isn't real, it's
finite gain. I explained that right, right? Yep. Pretty much what it's saying is mathematically, it's worth believing in Christianity more than it is not believing in Christianity, because the possible benefits of it are infinite.
And if it doesn't exist, then you only experienced
a finite loss in your life. So that's what Pascal's wager says. And for a while, I was in that mindset, I was in that mindset.
And I was like, you know what? This, you know,
it's like, at the end of the day, if I and it's not real, what are they gonna say? That was a good person. You know, so but the issue of the issue with Pascal's wager, which I realized later is that every single other world religion, big religion will punish you infinitely if you don't believe in their God. So following the logic of Pascal's wager, if you're really going to follow that line of logic, then you need to believe in the worst God imaginable, who has the worst hell imaginable.
I just realized I was like, so
I can't really use this line of thinking anymore. It doesn't make any sense for me. And it makes me end up outside of and at that moment in time in my life, I was like, I wanted to be Christian.
So I was like, I can't follow this line of logic, because then I'll just end
up believing in something else. I mean, later, I realized that I don't believe in any of it. But I just think Pascal's wager is an interesting and I think we were sort we were sort of talking around it.
That's sort of why I changed the subject to it. I'm sorry,
if you want to continue on where this has sort of been way more jumbled than the past to the past two are way more like, yeah, kind of straight line. This one's been crazy all over the place.
Talking about evil and good is just, there's a lot to talk about. So I think that was really the main thing I wanted to hit today was just the differences between me and you and our worldviews of what good and evil is. And justice, those kind of things.
So that really is what
I wanted to hit. So I actually do got to head out in a second. Any any final closing thoughts or like, did I say something today you had never heard before, or something that was a different line of thought? Or did we like that any last thoughts? Not part I mean, honestly, honestly, not particularly, but that's just because one of the I guess, I don't want to call it an advantage.
But one thing about talking
with Christians in general, is that like, I'm very educated in Christian apologetics and Christianity in general, just because I grew up in Christianity, I've experienced I was my dad was is a pastor. I mean, so I a lot of things I've already heard were just never actually argued against them. Yeah, like in real life.
Sure. So that makes sense.
Like other than arguing with my other than arguing with myself.
And you're in mind, I guess my only closing thought with the whole with the whole slavery thing, just so nobody sound bites me and thinks that I'm like, I think slavery is a Christian virtue or something. My point my point in saying slavery is good, is that we are always enslaved to something as humans. In our minds and our lusts and our passions, even even in real life, you're a slave to the state, you're a wage slave to your job, all those things you're always enslaved in some capacity.
Now slavery looks different. Like there's
a you know, American slavery back in the 19th century, there's Roman slavery, that's brutal, that's evil that the Bible condemns. And then there's other kinds of slavery that are actually good for human experience, like kids under their parents.
It's good to have a good parent.
If you have a tyrannical parent, it's bad. But that's a good kind of slavery that every single human all across the face of the earth usually has, if you're very privileged to have two parents.
So that is more about really, really rude. Find a different word other than
slavery, man. Well, I would but you don't let me.
That's our culture. I told you earlier,
I would call it bond servitude. But you want me to use slavery? Because you said an Old Testament? No, Rocky, it's slavery.
Middle Eastern scholars know this. It's actually
bond servitude. That was my point.
But you didn't grant me that. So that that is why I can know
I'm saying is when you're when you're talking about your time out being a slave to the state or to your parents or to lust or whatever. That's highly that's very inappropriate.
Like
there's actual slaves in the world right now. And it's highly inappropriate to say like everyone is a slave to something because that's just not true. Like find a different word for it.
I don't care. But it's just it's it's highly inappropriate to say that everyone is a slave to something I understand it. It is.
I mean, I understand that it's in the Bible like there's
a biblical verse talking about I know that's sort of what you're leaning on. Exactly. But that is a that is a highly inappropriate thing to say, especially because there are actual slaves in the United States right now and across the world who actually like in real life bondage, like in real life slavery.
Yeah, I mean, so that's the thing I would really
warn you find something else find a different word to say because that is a it's it's highly inappropriate to equate to two. Sure. I say you're trivializing the spiritual reality of being enslaved to your desires.
I think that is just as bad. Both are evil. One might
have more suffering, I would say they're equally as bad and evil.
One might entail more suffering.
And in the present state, I would say literal slavery, physical slavery is probably has a lot more suffering than physical suffering. So sure, I can get behind that if that's how you want me to check.
Have you have you have you met any like former slaves or even anyone
who's in actual slavery before? I don't think I have now. I've read about it. I know, but you got to experience it with your own eyes and like senses.
Because do you think I'm
not just you just can't. It's not that I'm not sympathetic to it. I think you are.
No,
I know you're sympathetic to it. That's the thing. That's why I'm pushing pushing you to change your mind because you cannot equate those two you cannot like I think ethically that is highly inappropriate.
Like I'm not trivializing what you're talking about with
your with the spiritual mentality of it all. Yeah, it's just to to equate being a quote unquote slave to the state or wage slave as you say, where a person is free to go as they like they're able to quit. They have benefits.
They have they get their benefits. They're
paid. They have families.
They live in a place where they're free to go. There's a difference
there. All I'm saying is you can't you I know you can't equate those two you simply can't like you what it's desensitizing to the reality of slavery in the modern world.
Yeah, we just
don't have enough words in these things. Like the word love like if I love my if I love eating an apple versus I love my fiance, there's a big difference there yet we use the same words. It's just there's not enough words sometimes for some of these things to differentiate between.
I guarantee you there is a word I guarantee you there's a word that you can
find and use other than the other than slavery but not to mention that's not that's not my main issue. My main issue is that you equated the two. You said I think you're trivializing the spiritual slavery that I'm talking about.
And I just think that that is something that
is highly inappropriate. I really it's one of those things. We cannot trivialize actual slavery or equal the spiritual type of slavery that you're talking about with real life slavery.
We can't equate them because they're not even in the same atmosphere. What I was trying to equate is that they are both a form of slavery. That was my point of equating the two.
They're
both a type of slavery. I don't know what word would encapsulate the difference. But I would say spiritual slavery is worse because it results in eternal torment hell, physical slavery, the person may be a Christian and it might not end in that.
That's why they're
different. What you just said, what you just said is that the spiritual slavery is worse than actual real life slavery. That's what you just said.
I guaranteed, guaranteed 100%
of actual slaves in this world would 100% trade places with someone who is a wage slave in the United States. Oh, yes. Yes.
Yes. Yes. Or a slave to lust and guaranteed you wouldn't
want to trade places with them.
Oh, no, no, no. What you're saying is highly inappropriate.
No, I, yes.
What you're saying is highly inappropriate, Rocky. I just said that spiritual slavery
is worse. I, that is inappropriate.
You cannot equate those. I mean, if you just want to
think about it, there's an obvious, if you take my words, I'm not just logically about a rock. You got one eternal torment hell versus just a lifetime of suffering, which, which if you're a Christian, you can go to paradise.
If you're not, then you also will end up in
Oh, come on, Rocky. Come on. Listen to what you're saying right now.
How can you not want
you to look in? I want you to meet. Okay. I'm not going to tell we talk next time.
Here's
your here's your homework. Okay, no, here's your here's your here's your homework. Okay.
You need to go out, get in contact. I'm sure that you're you're near Indianapolis. So I'm sure that there's people who were enslaved from human traffic who have been saved from human trafficking and modern day slavery.
I'm certain that there are not only people
who were slate saved from slavery in Indianapolis. I'm certain that there are people who have saved people from I want you to meet them and look them in the eye and tell me what tell them what you just told me. I would never say that to their face.
That's so insensitive.
Why would I just go there? Rocky. You're correct.
It is insensitive because you know what you're
saying is not true. No, there's wisdom in all things. I'm not trying to trivialize what I'm not trying.
No, dude, I'm not trying to trivialize your, your view of spirituality.
What I'm saying is you saying that spiritual slavery is worse than actual slavery is inappropriate, especially if you're talking to an audience of listeners who respect your opinion. I would highly recommend that you walk that statement back because it is just a, it is wrong to say that.
And I, I've experienced, I've experienced it in a, a fraction, just a sliver of what,
of what it looks like. And I'm telling you it is very inappropriate. Okay.
You can, you
can even cut, listen to you. You can cut this last part out if you want. I don't, yeah, I don't know how you can cut this last part out.
I'm telling you as you're, I'm telling
you as your, as your friend, that's a very inappropriate thing to say. Okay. Like, and it's a lack of sympathy.
Okay. Yeah. I got it.
Maybe we should just rerecord. No, I thought
that went really well. Try again.
No, I thought that went really well. I'll probably just
upload. Okay, good.
Fine. Fine. Fine.
I don't want to paint a false picture of myself. Like
I'll upload everything I say. Sometimes I, whatever people don't say the correct things hundred percent of the time, but I still, I don't think what I said was incorrect, but I, with what you're saying, I'm not going to just try to paint a bad picture of myself by just editing all the, all the, all the parts where I say something that might be bad, but I'll keep all the parts where I just destroy you.
But you know what I mean? I would
never edit it like that. That doesn't make any sense, but I do have to head out. I know.
I know. I just think maybe the part about I'm just as just about everything, I would say maybe think about cutting that out just because that is, I think you might get, I just, it's really, that was, I think that was really insensitive. I don't think you actually believe that.
Well, I think it actually actually think that I think you're just in
an argument or state. I think it highlights the differences between our worldview. What? You have no spiritual understanding.
Therefore, you're not going to ever think
that the spiritual reality is worse. I think that just actually highlights the differences because you're all about the physical material. Look at the suffering on earth.
Okay. You
know, it's much worse than anything, spiritual, spiritual suffering, that kind of thing. I think it just, it does just highlight the difference between us probably, which is a good thing to highlight.
So yeah, but I do have to go, dude, I really got to go. So I'm
just going to wrap this up. Okay.
Okay. Keegan, thanks for joining us today on the For the
King podcast and sharing with us your views and helping the audience learn what this opposing worldview would have to say to Christians and the critique of Christianity, all these things included. So really appreciate you taking time to do that.
Really appreciate
your thoughts. Remember the website for the king podcast.com. Go check that out. There's a lot of resources there and things I've been doing and uploading and hope that is helped you guys.
If you have any inquiries or questions for Keegan and I, we can do another episode
interacting with the questions at for the king podcast, for the king podcast@gmail.com. Just send any questions or anything there and we will definitely interact with those and we can have Keegan back on. So really appreciate you guys listening and we do it all for the king, for King Jesus. Thanks for listening guys.
[Music]

More on OpenTheo

Michael Egnor and Denyse O'Leary: The Immortal Mind
Michael Egnor and Denyse O'Leary: The Immortal Mind
Knight & Rose Show
May 31, 2025
Wintery Knight and Desert Rose interview Dr. Michael Egnor and Denyse O'Leary about their new book "The Immortal Mind". They discuss how scientific ev
Bodily Resurrection vs Consensual Realities: A Licona Craffert Debate
Bodily Resurrection vs Consensual Realities: A Licona Craffert Debate
Risen Jesus
June 25, 2025
In today’s episode, Dr. Mike Licona debates Dr. Pieter Craffert at the University of Johannesburg. While Dr. Licona provides a positive case for the b
Nicene Orthodoxy with Blair Smith
Nicene Orthodoxy with Blair Smith
Life and Books and Everything
April 28, 2025
Kevin welcomes his good friend—neighbor, church colleague, and seminary colleague (soon to be boss!)—Blair Smith to the podcast. As a systematic theol
If Jesus Is God, Why Didn’t He Know the Day of His Return?
If Jesus Is God, Why Didn’t He Know the Day of His Return?
#STRask
June 12, 2025
Questions about why Jesus didn’t know the day of his return if he truly is God, and why it’s important for Jesus to be both fully God and fully man.  
Licona vs. Shapiro: Is Belief in the Resurrection Justified?
Licona vs. Shapiro: Is Belief in the Resurrection Justified?
Risen Jesus
April 30, 2025
In this episode, Dr. Mike Licona and Dr. Lawrence Shapiro debate the justifiability of believing Jesus was raised from the dead. Dr. Shapiro appeals t
Is It Wrong to Feel Satisfaction at the Thought of Some Atheists Being Humbled Before Christ?
Is It Wrong to Feel Satisfaction at the Thought of Some Atheists Being Humbled Before Christ?
#STRask
June 9, 2025
Questions about whether it’s wrong to feel a sense of satisfaction at the thought of some atheists being humbled before Christ when their time comes,
What Are the Top Five Things to Consider Before Joining a Church?
What Are the Top Five Things to Consider Before Joining a Church?
#STRask
July 3, 2025
Questions about the top five things to consider before joining a church when coming out of the NAR movement, and thoughts regarding a church putting o
Is It Okay to Ask God for the Repentance of Someone Who Has Passed Away?
Is It Okay to Ask God for the Repentance of Someone Who Has Passed Away?
#STRask
April 24, 2025
Questions about asking God for the repentance of someone who has passed away, how to respond to a request to pray for a deceased person, reconciling H
Is It Problematic for a DJ to Play Songs That Are Contrary to His Christian Values?
Is It Problematic for a DJ to Play Songs That Are Contrary to His Christian Values?
#STRask
July 10, 2025
Questions about whether it’s problematic for a DJ on a secular radio station to play songs with lyrics that are contrary to his Christian values, and
What Would You Say to an Atheist Who Claims to Lack a Worldview?
What Would You Say to an Atheist Who Claims to Lack a Worldview?
#STRask
July 17, 2025
Questions about how to handle a conversation with an atheist who claims to lack a worldview, and how to respond to someone who accuses you of being “s
Licona and Martin: A Dialogue on Jesus' Claim of Divinity
Licona and Martin: A Dialogue on Jesus' Claim of Divinity
Risen Jesus
May 14, 2025
In this episode, Dr. Mike Licona and Dr. Dale Martin discuss their differing views of Jesus’ claim of divinity. Licona proposes that “it is more proba
How Is Prophecy About the Messiah Recognized?
How Is Prophecy About the Messiah Recognized?
#STRask
May 19, 2025
Questions about how to recognize prophecies about the Messiah in the Old Testament and whether or not Paul is just making Scripture say what he wants
Could Inherently Sinful Humans Have Accurately Recorded the Word of God?
Could Inherently Sinful Humans Have Accurately Recorded the Word of God?
#STRask
July 7, 2025
Questions about whether or not inherently sinful humans could have accurately recorded the Word of God, whether the words about Moses in Acts 7:22 and
Licona vs. Fales: A Debate in 4 Parts – Part One: Can Historians Investigate Miracle Claims?
Licona vs. Fales: A Debate in 4 Parts – Part One: Can Historians Investigate Miracle Claims?
Risen Jesus
May 28, 2025
In this episode, we join a 2014 debate between Dr. Mike Licona and atheist philosopher Dr. Evan Fales on whether Jesus rose from the dead. In this fir
What Questions Should I Ask Someone Who Believes in a Higher Power?
What Questions Should I Ask Someone Who Believes in a Higher Power?
#STRask
May 26, 2025
Questions about what to ask someone who believes merely in a “higher power,” how to make a case for the existence of the afterlife, and whether or not