Deepak Chopra Debates Christian Apologist, Loses Miserably
By Steven Bancarz - August 25, 2016

The most prominent teacher of mysticism and New Age philosophy in the West Deepak Chopra goes toe to toe with Christian apologist Greg Koukl on Lee Strobel's show "Faith under Fire." This episode called "The Future of Faith" aired in 2005.

Chopra, who has written two books on the topic of Jesus, seems to be at loss for words as the well-researched Koukl keeps correcting him on his false view of Jesus and the historicity of the Gospels. Chopra's Eastern/secular interpretation of Jesus does not seem to check out when his claims are pressed by someone who defends the faith for a living.

Mr. Chopra has continued to repeat the same viewpoints he had corrected in this debate, 10 years after the debate has finished. In otherwords he has made absolutely no adjustment to his views after this debate. In fact both of his blasphemous and historically inaccurate books "Jesus: A Story of Enlightenment" and "The Third Jesus" (both of which were NY Times Bestsellers) were written after this debate took place.

Some of the objections that get addressed in this video are the dates of the gospels, the reliability of scripture, pantheism, mysticism, and others. While New Age concepts of Jesus might fly well on news stations, Oprah's Super Soul Sunday, and talk shows, they hold absolutely no water when carefully examined by someone who is properly trained in the faith.

Koukl, who holds a Masters in Christian Apologetics and a Masters in Philosophy of Religion, is simply more learned on the person of Jesus and the history of Christianity.

Hope you enjoy the debate:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meYHmFz33NE

http://reasonsforjesus.com/deepak-chopra-debates-christian-apologist-loses-miserably/

*sigh*
I am sure somewhere right now a follower of Chopra has opened up a similar thread in another forum. Only this time he is talking about how Koukl misrepresented facts and how Chopra showed superior knowledge and calm.
Isn't that how these debates usually go?
Pointlessness

NPComplete:
*sigh*
I am sure somewhere right now a follower of Chopra has opened up a similar thread in another forum. Only this time he is talking about how Koukl misrepresented facts and how Chopra showed superior knowledge and calm.
Isn't how these debates usually go?
Pointlessness

exactly!!!!!

William Craig even goes one step further by going on his website after every debate to claim he won then uses words like "My opponent was clearly out of his depth as he had no valid point, I'm glad we had the debate cuz I've shaken his faith in atheism/Islam/mysticism (depending on his opponent's stand) and showed him Jesus is the way"

I like reading such texts for a bit of laugh

hopefulLandlord:


exactly!!!!!

William Craig even goes one step further by going on his website after every debate to claim he won then uses words like "My opponent was clearly out of his depth as he had no valid point, I'm glad we had the debate cuz I've shaken his faith in atheism/Islam/mysticism (depending on his opponent's stand) and showed him Jesus is the way"

I like reading such texts for a bit of laugh

religion is a struggle to preserve the "existence" of God and keep him "relevant" by "all" means possible.

NPComplete:

*sigh*
I am sure somewhere right now a follower of Chopra has opened up a similar thread in another forum. Only this time he is talking about how Koukl misrepresented facts and how Chopra showed superior knowledge and calm.
Isn't that how these debates usually go?
Pointlessness

Did you watch the debate posted by the OP before commenting?

OLAADEGBU:


Deepak Chopra Debates Christian Apologist, Loses Miserably
By Steven Bancarz - August 25, 2016

The most prominent teacher of mysticism and New Age philosophy in the West Deepak Chopra goes toe to toe with Christian apologist Greg Koukl on Lee Strobel's show "Faith under Fire." This episode called "The Future of Faith" aired in 2005.

Chopra, who has written two books on the topic of Jesus, seems to be at loss for words as the well-researched Koukl keeps correcting him on his false view of Jesus and the historicity of the Gospels. Chopra's Eastern/secular interpretation of Jesus does not seem to check out when his claims are pressed by someone who defends the faith for a living.

Mr. Chopra has continued to repeat the same viewpoints he had corrected in this debate, 10 years after the debate has finished. In otherwords he has made absolutely no adjustment to his views after this debate. In fact both of his blasphemous and historically inaccurate books "Jesus: A Story of Enlightenment" and "The Third Jesus" (both of which were NY Times Bestsellers) were written after this debate took place.

Some of the objections that get addressed in this video are the dates of the gospels, the reliability of scripture, pantheism, mysticism, and others. While New Age concepts of Jesus might fly well on news stations, Oprah's Super Soul Sunday, and talk shows, they hold absolutely no water when carefully examined by someone who is properly trained in the faith.

Koukl, who holds a Masters in Christian Apologetics and a Masters in Philosophy of Religion, is simply more learned on the person of Jesus and the history of Christianity.

Hope you enjoy the debate:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meYHmFz33NE

http://reasonsforjesus.com/deepak-chopra-debates-christian-apologist-loses-miserably/

Deepak Chopra fires off typical skeptical talking salvos against Christian apologist, Greg Koukl, a person who defends the faith for a living. The result is interesting, to say the least.

It's like a debate between one person who believes in spiderman and another who believes in Harry Potter. Then declaring the Harry Potter believer right because magic is real while mutant superhero power is fake. LMFAO!

LordReed:


It's like a debate between one person who believes in spiderman and another who believes in Harry Potter. Then declaring the Harry Potter believer right because magic is real while mutant superhero power is fake. LMFAO!

Did you watch the debate?

OLAADEGBU:


Did you watch the debate?

No thanks.

LordReed:


No thanks.

You did not watch it and yet you jumped into conclusions.

OLAADEGBU:


You did not watch it and yet you jumped into conclusions.

Read it again, it was a characterization of the debaters not the debate.