The man reading Hebrews ten must read verse 14. If verse 14 is true, then if Christ died for everyone, everyone would be saved. Since not all are saved, Christ did not die for everyone.
It's one of those situations where we need to come to terms that God is sovereign lol
2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
Everything is predestined, but we also have free will to choose to obey God or not. Saying predestination takes away our free will would be limiting God's power.
Isaiah 1:18 Come now, and let us REASON TOGETHER, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.
Isa 1:19 If YE BE WILLING and OBEDIENT, ye shall eat the good of the land:
God also draws those and iit goes into depth to say God sees the heart
@malikzzzzz All scripture is for the benefit of God's elect.There are 3 kind of people at any given time,there are regenerate sheep,unregenerate sheep and goats.God,with perfect knowledge,created the goats to never have a chance for salvation,they were created or fitted to destruction from before time.We as humans have no idea who they are,they have no idea who they are,that's why we are to preach to all.God's word is only advantageous for His elect,it's designed to reprobate the goats.Is.55:11
@malikzzzzz Pharaoh, Esau,Judas,Ahab, Jezebel, Ananias,Goliath, ect. are all goats just to name a few, who were used by God for a specific purpose on Earth,but were fitted to destruction from before time ever began.
You said "you MADE them responsible, they are now drawn" if an individual is drawn, they WILL come to him, NOT MIGHT, NOT IF THEY CHOOSE, NOT IF WE DO A GOOD ENOUGH JOB AT PRESENTING THE GOSPEL John 6: 44-45
No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I WILL raise him up on the last day. It is written in the Prophets, 'And they will all be taught by God.' EVERYONE WHO has heard and learned from the Father comes to me--
OK, why is the napalm babies thing fallacious? Morality is based on premises, just like Christianity is predicated on the Bible; and you can't prove premises, you just accept them. Nothing wrong with that, as long as you're aware of it.
Note how Sartre DIDN'T say "Indeed, everything is permissible if a Christian God does not exist."
If free will is nonsense, what's the point of heaven and hell?
If Christ's righteousness is what matters, what's the point of humans having righteousness?
@YaleBreaker I never said napalming babies is fallacious. The atheist who said that was consistent with his worldview, unlike most American and Euro atheists. As for specifying a Christian God: It has to be a real God for that statement to follow. If there is no false god (which never was, nor could be), then it says nothing about the issue, as the true God still is declaring moral boundaries. Heaven and hell matter because God wants it that way. A supreme being=supremely matters.
@1tmoch It is important for US to be righteous, because if indeed we are more holy, it lets US know we have been transformed into His image. It is more for our benefit, and just a natural transition descriptive of what will change in a persons life who has truly been regenerated.
@1tmoch All this debate aside, I thoroughly agree that the rock question is nonsensical and the question about the Jews was just dishonest. I'm agnostic, but those kinds of arguments do nothing to help anyone - least of all the people who stand to benefit from reasoned debate.
I know Jesus came not for the righteous but for the unrighteous. The bible also says anyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved. Matthew 7:7, God is obligated to do that; so someone could ask God to be saved who isn't predestined to be saved. In Gods foreknowledge he knows who is going to accept him and who is going to reject him, that is why Jesus died for those who will say yes to him because God sees the heart. John 5:24 says other wise to John Calvins' claims.
@Dunnization The bible teaches that there are none righteous, not even one. Yes, of course, Jesus came for unrighteous sinners, why else would He be called a Savior. Righteous people don't need to be saved. Matthew 7:7 and John 5:24 speak nothing to why a person does this or chooses that. It is merely a declarative statement (If x, then y). Only will a person seek, if God chose them first. Remember, the bible says none seek after God. Only the predestined will call upon the name of the Lord.
@1tmoch "The reason you do not believe is because you are not my sheep"! All this after a lengthy explanation of Jesus giving his life for the sheep. Not the reverse of "not my sheep b/c of not believing." Some are goats remember? Matthew 1:21: “She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save HIS people from their sins.”
Matthew 20:28: “Just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for MANY.”
It doesn't have to speak to why a person does it, Jesus says in John 5:24 that WHOEVER believes on his word and he who sent him WILL have everlasting life. That doesn't mean that everyone will believe and that is obvious. None seek after God, in our society how many people have been drawn to God? Think about it, almost everyone who is anyone knows about Jesus Christ so at that point they are responsible for what they do with him. Wether it be they accept or reject him they will be
judged for either choice. Of course none seek after God but everyone who hears you preach walking down what is it promenade street are now responsible for what they are going to do with Jesus Christ. You MADE them responsible, they are now drawn and so now Jesus could say ''whoever'' and that now implies them. Like I said how many people know about Jesus Christ? My Goodness everyone almost. Anyone can accept or reject God's mercy it's not undeniable.
@Dunnization It is true anyone who believes will be saved, but none will believe unless God converts them first. You have the order reversed. Dead people, in their transgressions, cannot come to repentance and faith. The rest of what you said is true, but you are lacing it with irrelevant assumption that man has a free will and somehow initiates salvation by cooperative efforts with God, which is very unbiblical.
@YaleBreaker To the question about being saved and righteousness, yes you have it right. Our righteousnesses alone are as filthy rags before God. As for false gods, think about it. If they are false, then they are no gods at all, but either mere imaginations, or perhaps demons in disguise. The God of the bible is the only real God.
@1tmoch I'm sure you take the God of the Bible to be the only real one. My point was that Sartre's statement makes no assumptions about what God is a real God. In and of itself it could just as easily refer to Vishnu or God as interpreted by the Qur'an.
On the subject of righteousness: if it's essentially descriptive, then what is it that determines whether or not we embrace Jesus? Basically, how do you figure free will factors into this?
Tom, John says in John 5:24'' If you believe on my word and on he who sent me you shall have everlasting life and not be condemned.'' That tells me that I have the abilitiy to choose to follow Jesus or live a life of unrepentance. I also know the Bible speaks of predestined but I could predestine my son to play football but he might turn out to be a homosexual. I also feel that is not the case here in this scripture though. I am torn between Calvinism and Arminism.
@Dunnization This passage says nothing of ability or freeness, etc. The only thing it says is that if you do X, they Y will happen. It is merely expressing a causal relationship to choices that are made. You mis-defined the word "predestine" with example of your kid. There are no failures of intent with predestinating it.
Actually God can make a rock that he cant lift. With Jesus incarnated and emptied God could bring any rock Jesus could not lift but the Father or Spirit could. The atheist cannot maneuver to one person to falsify God because one person within the triune God would not be the entirety of God.
@joestfrancois Obviously the atheists missed the memo. Why do they keep posing it? If they do, I have no choice but to have an answer to the best of my ability.
I laughed when Carlin did that bit, it was to confuse the catholic priests. But it was comedy and Tom gave a very good explanation why it was invalid. Tom can miss the forest for the trees, but sometimes he is right.
Atheists bring it up because for a lot of people jokes are the only way to question the existence of a god. In a superstitious surrounding that joke can still be told. Also it was a really funny bit.
@joestfrancois Maybe it's the fresh faced green horn atheists that are using it seriously. I'd say 75% of the time i hear it raised in a serious way is from the college students and younger. Occasionally i'll get a gray haired veteran use it in a serious way and i wonder what his excuse is (not that the others have an excuse).
All young make mistakes. Grey hair does not make you wiser either, I have proved that. Everyone needs an excuse now and again. It's late for me, don't stay up later than normal Tom. later.
Agreed, although I try to give apologists the benefit of the doubt and assume they mean their god is as powerful as anything logically can be when they say "all-powerful" or "omnipotent", since they all eventually retreat to that position anyway. I'm just trying to get him to see that's he's engaging in special pleading in another way when he says a rock is finite by definition but a being is not, even though the logic that renders rocks definitionally finite makes beings so, as well.
@army103 No. There are many categories of beings, that are not all the same, and the created order in general is not on the same level as the one who made it. A "rock" is something we humans have placed label to a certain thing. That label has parameters. You are involved in a category mistake and mistaking something we humans have defined in language vs. that of God. Only can God define or reveal Himself to us, otherwise we'd not have the particulars about Him known. We'd be left with deism.
No. I'm keeping my categories perfectly straight - you're making the mistake of thinking I accept that god actually exists. As far as I'm concerned, a being with infinite qualities is every inch the hypothetical concept that a rock with infinite qualities is, neither having any relation to things that exist in reality. Once it's been shown that it is not impossible for god to exist (proving he actually does exist would certainly do the trick), I'll gladly retract my statement, though.
@army103 Just because you're not convinced of God existing is irrelevant to the fact that you are producing category errors by relating the rock and God. There is no "reality" without God. You can appeal to nothing for your view my friend.
@army103 No, i can see it from the others perspective. I am just calling out its illogical nature. You are a believer with WAY more faith than me. Spoken like a true idiot deserving a block.
I'm not a big fan of the "Can god create a rock so big..." argument, but I would like to point out that you can't say "by definition, a rock is a finite structure" then turn around and say there's such a thing as an infinite being. Beings are just as "finite by definition" as rocks are; you make an exception for god, so it isn't any more or less illogical to make a similar exception for a rock.
@army103 Wrong, because we are not talking about infinite in the sense of size and/or density/weight as with a rock. God is Spirit. This is a whole other category. You are missing the point of my dismantling of this. You cannot out power a being who is all powerful. Being able to create something so big you can't lift (as an all powerful entity) is an illogical challenge.
@1tmoch That should be irrelevant to an all-powerful being. An all powerful being should be able to meet an illogical challenge. Otherwise, it puts limitations on that being, dictating what that being CANNOT do, rendering it not all powerful.
@blackadm Then you have erected a DIFFERENT definition than what God claims about Himself. God cannot do anything and everything. That is not the claim of the Christian.
@blackadm What you are trying so very earnestly, and so very unsuccessfully to demonstrate is that when God says He can do all things, that, that includes logical contradictions. Arminians get things confused with the word "all" as well. E.G. when teacher says "are we ALL here," she is not referring to everyone in the entire earth. LOOK AT THE CONTEXT. Nothing could prevent God from removing the upcoming event of the crucifixion, and Jesus knew that. God orchestrates all events in the universe.
@1tmoch Your painting of the issue would have us to believe that for God all things are possible. Well, if that is so, then is it possible that all things are not possible, since all things are supposedly possible? If logical contradiction is ok, then everything collapses, even your attempt to communicate anything here. Get your head out of your tail pipe, and get back to reality.
You've missed the point of my critique. I'm well aware of the logical contradiction involved in the rock-so-big dilemma.
My point was that all rocks we know to exist are finite, which is a reasonable basis for saying an infinite rock would cease to fit our common understanding of what a rock is. However, the exact same issue applies to beings. All beings we are certain exist are finite things; an infinite being made of "spirit" doesn't fit our common understanding of what a being is.
@army103 I doubt he will understand or acknowledge that he is engaged in special pleading. He claims that his god is all powerful, but not powerful enough to meet the challenge, because the ability to meet the challenge presents its own problem.
The special pleading is that it is not in an all powerful beings nature to be all powerful in this instance, which falsifies itself, though he would never admit that this is his argument.
@blackadm Oh My. Stop and think about what you are saying. The "challenge" is not an issue of power. You should rephrase your statement with "this God is not powerful enough to meet the challenge of being self contradictory." Well no kidding, Sherlock, He is not up to satisfying logical absurdities. It is not even possible, for it goes against His nature. I'm surprised people still want to embarrass themselves by pressing this retarded argument.
@1tmoch Not possible? with God? Mar 10:27 And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men [it is] impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible.
Now, is the word "all" inclusive or exclusive of logical contradictions? If it is inclusive, then my point stands.
If it is exclusive, that contradicts the identity of "all" and my point still stands.
Claiming that some things "are not even possible" for him is a proof in itself that he is not omnipotent.
Jesus was killed by Jews and Romans, i.e., gentiles. In other words, Jesus was killed by Jews and not Jews. That covers everybody. All of us have sinned and are therefore responsible for HIs death. Totally dishonest or disingenuous to say that Christians blame Jews for Christ's death. The only reason Christians follow Jesus is because He is the Jewish Messiah, thoroughly Jewish.
totally...all the things we put so much emphasis on in this life, wealth, popularity, job title...possessions, the things which make us proud etc. these things mean absolutely nothing when you're taking your last breaths. the Christian is free from the worries and cares of this life. happiness cannot be worn, earned, consumed, or owned. happiness is the spiritual experience of living every minute in grace, gratitide, love and a vision of the better world to come.
@1tmoch Hey Tom,after all that coffee you drink I'll bet you have to hit the bathroom a lot.Have you ever been tempted to just wear a depends while you're out preaching?
He could have called ten thousand angels. To destroy the world and set Him free..
Tom, really? I had to laugh, I thought you were gonna start singing.
Seriously though, (and I am at work and can't give the whole vid the time I would like) I don't think I understand your whole belief system, you don't assert Jesus died for everyone? I am not sure I knew this about you before. Do I have it right? If not all, then who?
@joestfrancois I can sing in my next video if you want me to. I'll say in advance that i am not responsible for any ear damage that may occur. As for Christ's atonement; it was only for His elect. There is no double jeopardy or double payment. If you go to hell, Christ did not die for you.
I think you should sing, yeah, there is a good idea. You know that song though, right?
Tom, what church or theology are you a member of? I should know, but somehow do not.
You are very bright so maybe you don't notice, but most folks are way to simple to figure this stuff out. It's like the rock guy, he really thought that a comedy bit was a significant argument. One might argue that a creator would have made it easier to understand, or created a smarter people. I am just saying.
@joestfrancois I think i can hear the tune in my thoughts. I am what could be dubbed a "reformed baptist." Thanks for the compliment. I think a lot of it is that our education system sucks and people, generally speaking, are intellectually lazy. I mention that, because i don't see myself as having any special IQ or aptitude. I'm average, but i produce mental sweat in my studies (when i'm not being lazy myself).
The man reading Hebrews ten must read verse 14. If verse 14 is true, then if Christ died for everyone, everyone would be saved. Since not all are saved, Christ did not die for everyone.
blakodeel 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It's one of those situations where we need to come to terms that God is sovereign lol
2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
malikzzzzz 5 months ago
Comment removed
malikzzzzz 5 months ago
Everything is predestined, but we also have free will to choose to obey God or not. Saying predestination takes away our free will would be limiting God's power.
Isaiah 1:18 Come now, and let us REASON TOGETHER, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.
Isa 1:19 If YE BE WILLING and OBEDIENT, ye shall eat the good of the land:
God also draws those and iit goes into depth to say God sees the heart
malikzzzzz 5 months ago
@malikzzzzz All scripture is for the benefit of God's elect.There are 3 kind of people at any given time,there are regenerate sheep,unregenerate sheep and goats.God,with perfect knowledge,created the goats to never have a chance for salvation,they were created or fitted to destruction from before time.We as humans have no idea who they are,they have no idea who they are,that's why we are to preach to all.God's word is only advantageous for His elect,it's designed to reprobate the goats.Is.55:11
CBALLEN 1 month ago
@malikzzzzz Pharaoh, Esau,Judas,Ahab, Jezebel, Ananias,Goliath, ect. are all goats just to name a few, who were used by God for a specific purpose on Earth,but were fitted to destruction from before time ever began.
CBALLEN 1 month ago
Comment removed
malikzzzzz 5 months ago
@dunnization
You said "you MADE them responsible, they are now drawn" if an individual is drawn, they WILL come to him, NOT MIGHT, NOT IF THEY CHOOSE, NOT IF WE DO A GOOD ENOUGH JOB AT PRESENTING THE GOSPEL John 6: 44-45
No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I WILL raise him up on the last day. It is written in the Prophets, 'And they will all be taught by God.' EVERYONE WHO has heard and learned from the Father comes to me--
samuelb7873 11 months ago
OK, why is the napalm babies thing fallacious? Morality is based on premises, just like Christianity is predicated on the Bible; and you can't prove premises, you just accept them. Nothing wrong with that, as long as you're aware of it.
Note how Sartre DIDN'T say "Indeed, everything is permissible if a Christian God does not exist."
If free will is nonsense, what's the point of heaven and hell?
If Christ's righteousness is what matters, what's the point of humans having righteousness?
YaleBreaker 11 months ago
@YaleBreaker I never said napalming babies is fallacious. The atheist who said that was consistent with his worldview, unlike most American and Euro atheists. As for specifying a Christian God: It has to be a real God for that statement to follow. If there is no false god (which never was, nor could be), then it says nothing about the issue, as the true God still is declaring moral boundaries. Heaven and hell matter because God wants it that way. A supreme being=supremely matters.
1tmoch 11 months ago
@1tmoch It is important for US to be righteous, because if indeed we are more holy, it lets US know we have been transformed into His image. It is more for our benefit, and just a natural transition descriptive of what will change in a persons life who has truly been regenerated.
1tmoch 11 months ago
@1tmoch Do you mean that personal righteousness is not a cause so much as a symptom of being saved?
YaleBreaker 11 months ago
@1tmoch All this debate aside, I thoroughly agree that the rock question is nonsensical and the question about the Jews was just dishonest. I'm agnostic, but those kinds of arguments do nothing to help anyone - least of all the people who stand to benefit from reasoned debate.
YaleBreaker 11 months ago
@1tmoch
I know Jesus came not for the righteous but for the unrighteous. The bible also says anyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved. Matthew 7:7, God is obligated to do that; so someone could ask God to be saved who isn't predestined to be saved. In Gods foreknowledge he knows who is going to accept him and who is going to reject him, that is why Jesus died for those who will say yes to him because God sees the heart. John 5:24 says other wise to John Calvins' claims.
Dunnization 11 months ago
@Dunnization The bible teaches that there are none righteous, not even one. Yes, of course, Jesus came for unrighteous sinners, why else would He be called a Savior. Righteous people don't need to be saved. Matthew 7:7 and John 5:24 speak nothing to why a person does this or chooses that. It is merely a declarative statement (If x, then y). Only will a person seek, if God chose them first. Remember, the bible says none seek after God. Only the predestined will call upon the name of the Lord.
1tmoch 11 months ago
@1tmoch "The reason you do not believe is because you are not my sheep"! All this after a lengthy explanation of Jesus giving his life for the sheep. Not the reverse of "not my sheep b/c of not believing." Some are goats remember? Matthew 1:21: “She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save HIS people from their sins.”
Matthew 20:28: “Just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for MANY.”
1tmoch 11 months ago
@1tmoch
It doesn't have to speak to why a person does it, Jesus says in John 5:24 that WHOEVER believes on his word and he who sent him WILL have everlasting life. That doesn't mean that everyone will believe and that is obvious. None seek after God, in our society how many people have been drawn to God? Think about it, almost everyone who is anyone knows about Jesus Christ so at that point they are responsible for what they do with him. Wether it be they accept or reject him they will be
Dunnization 11 months ago
@1tmoch
Continued
judged for either choice. Of course none seek after God but everyone who hears you preach walking down what is it promenade street are now responsible for what they are going to do with Jesus Christ. You MADE them responsible, they are now drawn and so now Jesus could say ''whoever'' and that now implies them. Like I said how many people know about Jesus Christ? My Goodness everyone almost. Anyone can accept or reject God's mercy it's not undeniable.
Dunnization 11 months ago
@Dunnization It is true anyone who believes will be saved, but none will believe unless God converts them first. You have the order reversed. Dead people, in their transgressions, cannot come to repentance and faith. The rest of what you said is true, but you are lacing it with irrelevant assumption that man has a free will and somehow initiates salvation by cooperative efforts with God, which is very unbiblical.
1tmoch 11 months ago
@1tmoch I'm not sure I understand your response. A non-Christian God is not a "real" one?
YaleBreaker 11 months ago
@YaleBreaker To the question about being saved and righteousness, yes you have it right. Our righteousnesses alone are as filthy rags before God. As for false gods, think about it. If they are false, then they are no gods at all, but either mere imaginations, or perhaps demons in disguise. The God of the bible is the only real God.
1tmoch 11 months ago
@1tmoch I'm sure you take the God of the Bible to be the only real one. My point was that Sartre's statement makes no assumptions about what God is a real God. In and of itself it could just as easily refer to Vishnu or God as interpreted by the Qur'an.
On the subject of righteousness: if it's essentially descriptive, then what is it that determines whether or not we embrace Jesus? Basically, how do you figure free will factors into this?
YaleBreaker 11 months ago
@1tmoch
Tom, John says in John 5:24'' If you believe on my word and on he who sent me you shall have everlasting life and not be condemned.'' That tells me that I have the abilitiy to choose to follow Jesus or live a life of unrepentance. I also know the Bible speaks of predestined but I could predestine my son to play football but he might turn out to be a homosexual. I also feel that is not the case here in this scripture though. I am torn between Calvinism and Arminism.
Dunnization 11 months ago
@Dunnization This passage says nothing of ability or freeness, etc. The only thing it says is that if you do X, they Y will happen. It is merely expressing a causal relationship to choices that are made. You mis-defined the word "predestine" with example of your kid. There are no failures of intent with predestinating it.
1tmoch 11 months ago
I was talking about the guy using the "rock" example gahh -.-
Sophiethefembot 11 months ago
Ohh gawwwsh I can't believe this guy used that terrible fallacy!!! EPIC FAIL!!!!
Sophiethefembot 11 months ago
Lord Bless You
TheFaithHunter 11 months ago
Actually God can make a rock that he cant lift. With Jesus incarnated and emptied God could bring any rock Jesus could not lift but the Father or Spirit could. The atheist cannot maneuver to one person to falsify God because one person within the triune God would not be the entirety of God.
HoParoikos 11 months ago
@HoParoikos
Dude you so don't get it, that question was part of a George Carlin comedy routine, it was never meant to be a serious argument on the nature of god.
Funny, ha ha? Get it? Look it up on youtube.
joestfrancois 11 months ago
@joestfrancois Obviously the atheists missed the memo. Why do they keep posing it? If they do, I have no choice but to have an answer to the best of my ability.
HoParoikos 11 months ago
@HoParoikos
I laughed when Carlin did that bit, it was to confuse the catholic priests. But it was comedy and Tom gave a very good explanation why it was invalid. Tom can miss the forest for the trees, but sometimes he is right.
Atheists bring it up because for a lot of people jokes are the only way to question the existence of a god. In a superstitious surrounding that joke can still be told. Also it was a really funny bit.
joestfrancois 11 months ago
@joestfrancois Maybe it's the fresh faced green horn atheists that are using it seriously. I'd say 75% of the time i hear it raised in a serious way is from the college students and younger. Occasionally i'll get a gray haired veteran use it in a serious way and i wonder what his excuse is (not that the others have an excuse).
1tmoch 11 months ago
@1tmoch
All young make mistakes. Grey hair does not make you wiser either, I have proved that. Everyone needs an excuse now and again. It's late for me, don't stay up later than normal Tom. later.
joestfrancois 11 months ago
@blackadm
Agreed, although I try to give apologists the benefit of the doubt and assume they mean their god is as powerful as anything logically can be when they say "all-powerful" or "omnipotent", since they all eventually retreat to that position anyway. I'm just trying to get him to see that's he's engaging in special pleading in another way when he says a rock is finite by definition but a being is not, even though the logic that renders rocks definitionally finite makes beings so, as well.
army103 11 months ago
@army103 No. There are many categories of beings, that are not all the same, and the created order in general is not on the same level as the one who made it. A "rock" is something we humans have placed label to a certain thing. That label has parameters. You are involved in a category mistake and mistaking something we humans have defined in language vs. that of God. Only can God define or reveal Himself to us, otherwise we'd not have the particulars about Him known. We'd be left with deism.
1tmoch 11 months ago
@1tmoc
No. I'm keeping my categories perfectly straight - you're making the mistake of thinking I accept that god actually exists. As far as I'm concerned, a being with infinite qualities is every inch the hypothetical concept that a rock with infinite qualities is, neither having any relation to things that exist in reality. Once it's been shown that it is not impossible for god to exist (proving he actually does exist would certainly do the trick), I'll gladly retract my statement, though.
army103 11 months ago
@army103 Just because you're not convinced of God existing is irrelevant to the fact that you are producing category errors by relating the rock and God. There is no "reality" without God. You can appeal to nothing for your view my friend.
1tmoch 11 months ago
@1tmoch
Spoken like a true believer, totally incapable of seeing things from any perspective but your own.
army103 11 months ago
@army103 No, i can see it from the others perspective. I am just calling out its illogical nature. You are a believer with WAY more faith than me. Spoken like a true idiot deserving a block.
1tmoch 11 months ago
I'm not a big fan of the "Can god create a rock so big..." argument, but I would like to point out that you can't say "by definition, a rock is a finite structure" then turn around and say there's such a thing as an infinite being. Beings are just as "finite by definition" as rocks are; you make an exception for god, so it isn't any more or less illogical to make a similar exception for a rock.
army103 11 months ago
@army103 Wrong, because we are not talking about infinite in the sense of size and/or density/weight as with a rock. God is Spirit. This is a whole other category. You are missing the point of my dismantling of this. You cannot out power a being who is all powerful. Being able to create something so big you can't lift (as an all powerful entity) is an illogical challenge.
1tmoch 11 months ago
@1tmoch That should be irrelevant to an all-powerful being. An all powerful being should be able to meet an illogical challenge. Otherwise, it puts limitations on that being, dictating what that being CANNOT do, rendering it not all powerful.
blackadm 11 months ago
@blackadm Then you have erected a DIFFERENT definition than what God claims about Himself. God cannot do anything and everything. That is not the claim of the Christian.
1tmoch 11 months ago
@1tmoch It is the claim of Jesus.
Mar 14:36 And he said, Abba, Father, all things [are] possible unto thee;
blackadm 11 months ago
@blackadm What you are trying so very earnestly, and so very unsuccessfully to demonstrate is that when God says He can do all things, that, that includes logical contradictions. Arminians get things confused with the word "all" as well. E.G. when teacher says "are we ALL here," she is not referring to everyone in the entire earth. LOOK AT THE CONTEXT. Nothing could prevent God from removing the upcoming event of the crucifixion, and Jesus knew that. God orchestrates all events in the universe.
1tmoch 11 months ago
@1tmoch Your painting of the issue would have us to believe that for God all things are possible. Well, if that is so, then is it possible that all things are not possible, since all things are supposedly possible? If logical contradiction is ok, then everything collapses, even your attempt to communicate anything here. Get your head out of your tail pipe, and get back to reality.
1tmoch 11 months ago
@1tmoch
You've missed the point of my critique. I'm well aware of the logical contradiction involved in the rock-so-big dilemma.
My point was that all rocks we know to exist are finite, which is a reasonable basis for saying an infinite rock would cease to fit our common understanding of what a rock is. However, the exact same issue applies to beings. All beings we are certain exist are finite things; an infinite being made of "spirit" doesn't fit our common understanding of what a being is.
army103 11 months ago
@army103 I doubt he will understand or acknowledge that he is engaged in special pleading. He claims that his god is all powerful, but not powerful enough to meet the challenge, because the ability to meet the challenge presents its own problem.
The special pleading is that it is not in an all powerful beings nature to be all powerful in this instance, which falsifies itself, though he would never admit that this is his argument.
Either way, it falls flat.
blackadm 11 months ago
@blackadm Oh My. Stop and think about what you are saying. The "challenge" is not an issue of power. You should rephrase your statement with "this God is not powerful enough to meet the challenge of being self contradictory." Well no kidding, Sherlock, He is not up to satisfying logical absurdities. It is not even possible, for it goes against His nature. I'm surprised people still want to embarrass themselves by pressing this retarded argument.
1tmoch 11 months ago
@1tmoch Not possible? with God? Mar 10:27 And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men [it is] impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible.
Now, is the word "all" inclusive or exclusive of logical contradictions? If it is inclusive, then my point stands.
If it is exclusive, that contradicts the identity of "all" and my point still stands.
Claiming that some things "are not even possible" for him is a proof in itself that he is not omnipotent.
blackadm 11 months ago
I can't understand what they guy was trying to do with Heb.9 there at the end. What was he trying to say?
4570sharps 11 months ago
Jesus was killed by Jews and Romans, i.e., gentiles. In other words, Jesus was killed by Jews and not Jews. That covers everybody. All of us have sinned and are therefore responsible for HIs death. Totally dishonest or disingenuous to say that Christians blame Jews for Christ's death. The only reason Christians follow Jesus is because He is the Jewish Messiah, thoroughly Jewish.
carcabe 11 months ago
totally...all the things we put so much emphasis on in this life, wealth, popularity, job title...possessions, the things which make us proud etc. these things mean absolutely nothing when you're taking your last breaths. the Christian is free from the worries and cares of this life. happiness cannot be worn, earned, consumed, or owned. happiness is the spiritual experience of living every minute in grace, gratitide, love and a vision of the better world to come.
lightbrownpoop 11 months ago
how goes the coffee addiction? :P
Revinius 11 months ago
CLAIM: God, by defintion, is omnipotent
EVIDENCE:
1)Built into an omnipotent claim is that God constitutionally MUST HAVE ABILITY to be incapable
a) If God CANNOT possess the ability to be incapable, inherently that god cannot be omnipotent
b) If God CAN possess the ability to be incapable, inherently that god cannot be omnipotent
LEADING CONCLUSION: An omnipotent being cannot exist.
FOLLOWING CONCLUSION: God, by definition, cannot exist.
blackadm 11 months ago
@blackadm false definition, and bad logic=nice try, but failure.
1tmoch 11 months ago
@1tmoch Hey Tom,after all that coffee you drink I'll bet you have to hit the bathroom a lot.Have you ever been tempted to just wear a depends while you're out preaching?
CBALLEN 11 months ago
@1tmoch False definition? Are you saying that god is NOT omnipotent? That its not "in his nature" to be omnipotent? :)
The logic is sound. It's called the Law of Identity.
btw, you didn't actually refute the logic. You only made the claim that it is bad logic. A claim without evidence isn't even an argument.
blackadm 11 months ago
He could have called ten thousand angels. To destroy the world and set Him free..
Tom, really? I had to laugh, I thought you were gonna start singing.
Seriously though, (and I am at work and can't give the whole vid the time I would like) I don't think I understand your whole belief system, you don't assert Jesus died for everyone? I am not sure I knew this about you before. Do I have it right? If not all, then who?
joestfrancois 11 months ago
@joestfrancois I can sing in my next video if you want me to. I'll say in advance that i am not responsible for any ear damage that may occur. As for Christ's atonement; it was only for His elect. There is no double jeopardy or double payment. If you go to hell, Christ did not die for you.
1tmoch 11 months ago
I think you should sing, yeah, there is a good idea. You know that song though, right?
Tom, what church or theology are you a member of? I should know, but somehow do not.
You are very bright so maybe you don't notice, but most folks are way to simple to figure this stuff out. It's like the rock guy, he really thought that a comedy bit was a significant argument. One might argue that a creator would have made it easier to understand, or created a smarter people. I am just saying.
joestfrancois 11 months ago
@joestfrancois I think i can hear the tune in my thoughts. I am what could be dubbed a "reformed baptist." Thanks for the compliment. I think a lot of it is that our education system sucks and people, generally speaking, are intellectually lazy. I mention that, because i don't see myself as having any special IQ or aptitude. I'm average, but i produce mental sweat in my studies (when i'm not being lazy myself).
1tmoch 11 months ago
A portrait of insanity at 4:44 What a thorn.
FootprintOfChrist 11 months ago
It is a logical paradox that a rock can have an exponential gaining mass. The question is broken before it gets to god.
SPR4GOD 11 months ago
how often do you go out on 3rd street? I got family in that area, I may come check you guys out sometime when im down there.
God bless
shadowlurker816 11 months ago
@shadowlurker816 Usually about 3 times a month on Saturday nights, starting at 6pm.
1tmoch 11 months ago
john Wilkes booth was a American
john Wilkes booth killed Abraham Lincoln
therefore Americans hate Lincoln
this is the same type of logic used when people say the "Jews" were responsible for the crucifixion of Jesus.
jeffblue101 11 months ago