As the dust continues to settle from last week’s debate between Dale Tuggy and James White, reviewers are coalescing on a rather exciting conclusion. Tuggy handedly won the debate! Rumor has it that James White has even requested a rematch! We’ll have to wait and see if anything happens on that front, but requesting a rematch is not something the winner typically does.
In today’s episode, I bring on Dr. Dustin Smith of the biblical unitarian podcast to respond to James White’s arguments, not only in his opening statement, but also in his rebuttal, cross-examination time, and conclusion. Yes, he introduced new arguments in every single phase of the debate. One wonders why he didn’t respond to any of Tuggy’s arguments. Let’s see what Dustin Smith has to say.
3 thoughts on “540 Dustin Smith’s Take on the Tuggy-White Debate”
Hey Sean and Dustin, it occurred to me as you spoke about how James White failed to rebut Dale’s opening remarks that it was probably deliberate. If White wants to make Unitarianism seem like a silly, foolish, juvenile belief, it’s strategic to not even deign to follow the rules. I felt he was saying, basically, “Your arguments aren’t even worth the time of day. It doesn’t merit an intelligent, respectful response.” I can’t believe that someone that experienced in debating just didn’t understand the rules or forgot them. Great discussion on the debate and how lame White is.
Sean, I have seen various people comment on YouTube and elsewhere that they believe that James White did a better job of addressing the literal debate topic: “Is Jesus YHWH?” That is, White went to four verses where he could draw a line between Jesus and a reference to YHWH in the Old Testament. Dale didn’t do that. Do you agree that White did a better job of literally addressing the debate topic? Why or why not?
James White did not do a better job showing that Jesus is Yahweh than Dale Tuggy did showing that Jesus is not Yahweh. White offered four arguments. Tuggy offered nine. White refuted none of Tuggy’s while Tuggy refuted all four of White’s. White added more arguments throughout the debate to which Tuggy responded over and over. I agree with White’s fans that he offered more emotional rhetoric, but his whole bit about Revelation 4 and 5 is simply wrong. If one compares what is said about God in Rev 4 to what is said about Christ in Rev 5, the differences will become plane. Rev 4 attributes creation and eternality to God while Rev 5 does not. These are essential attributes of deity that the Father has but not the Lamb. Emotional language will not due. We need to think critical and consider the arguments.
Hey Sean and Dustin, it occurred to me as you spoke about how James White failed to rebut Dale’s opening remarks that it was probably deliberate. If White wants to make Unitarianism seem like a silly, foolish, juvenile belief, it’s strategic to not even deign to follow the rules. I felt he was saying, basically, “Your arguments aren’t even worth the time of day. It doesn’t merit an intelligent, respectful response.” I can’t believe that someone that experienced in debating just didn’t understand the rules or forgot them. Great discussion on the debate and how lame White is.
Sean, I have seen various people comment on YouTube and elsewhere that they believe that James White did a better job of addressing the literal debate topic: “Is Jesus YHWH?” That is, White went to four verses where he could draw a line between Jesus and a reference to YHWH in the Old Testament. Dale didn’t do that. Do you agree that White did a better job of literally addressing the debate topic? Why or why not?
James White did not do a better job showing that Jesus is Yahweh than Dale Tuggy did showing that Jesus is not Yahweh. White offered four arguments. Tuggy offered nine. White refuted none of Tuggy’s while Tuggy refuted all four of White’s. White added more arguments throughout the debate to which Tuggy responded over and over. I agree with White’s fans that he offered more emotional rhetoric, but his whole bit about Revelation 4 and 5 is simply wrong. If one compares what is said about God in Rev 4 to what is said about Christ in Rev 5, the differences will become plane. Rev 4 attributes creation and eternality to God while Rev 5 does not. These are essential attributes of deity that the Father has but not the Lamb. Emotional language will not due. We need to think critical and consider the arguments.