@Ktaressa if you liked this one you'll love my video "schooling an atheist on the bible" I listed way more versus showing we're not under it in that one. Although i dont really care for the tone in the video anymore...at the time of recording i just had it with the same fallacy.
"you got an atheist reading the Bible?! that's a win in itself!"
Hardly a win if you're trying to proselytize anyone capable of honest reasoning. I'm an atheist and I read the bible all the time.
Indeed, I would surmise that reading and understanding the bible, is a common cause of atheism, and not personally reading, or understanding it, is a major cause of most Christians. It's a good read, if you're not weak minded enough to think it contains any important messages from the "divine".
@Tobytrim No it's quite the opposite, atheist don't understand and most of the time never read it in it's entirety TO ACTUALLY understand it in its proper perspectives. Christians understand the bible this is why we continue in the lifestyle.
@Krazie316 "Christians understand the bible this is why we continue in the lifestyle."
I have yet to meet a christian apologist who can even come close to rationalize the immorality, contradictions,and serious fallacies in the bible.
One has only to point something out to you guys, for example this endorsement of slavery by God in the bible, and wait for the most ridiculous excuses, and accusations of "misunderstanding" it from within "context"
@Tobytrim contradictions HAHAHAHAHA there are none. The slavery argument has been debunked several times over by several Christians including myself in multiple multi-part videos and VersatileMind4Christ.
@Krazie316 "The slavery argument has been debunked several times over by several Christians "
It's not an argument. The bible CLEARLY ascribes statements to it's "God", in the old testament, which endorse the taking and keeping of slaves , without condemnation ..(As well as racism)
In exactly the same way, the contradictions are clear for all to see. There is nothing you can "debunk".
I repeat, the bible is the ONLY informing source you have!! - Are you saying it's not the truth?
@Krazie316 "The slavery argument has been debunked several times over by several Christians "
Just to clarify the passages ARE there, you can start with the "10 commandments" (EX20;17 - which says it's a sin to envy your neighbour's slaves as property)
Then go through the rest of the 613 mosiac laws in Exodus from 21 onwards (there are a few references) My particular favourite though, is Leviticus 25;44-46
Are you saying these are lies? - Or just that owning other human beings is just?
@Tobytrim the slavery argument does not consist of the fact there is slavery, the slavery argument consists of a fallacy that slavery in the bible was forced and just like the slavery in America, this is false. The slaves chose to be slaves in the bible. See my videos or Versatilenind4Christ videos.
Jacob agreed to be a slave for his master's daughters hand in marriage.
Again you make no point that hasn't long ago been addressed and refuted
@Krazie316"that slavery in the bible was forced and just like the slavery in America, this is false."
Rubbish!! - I already cited Leviticus 25:44, which quotes God sanctioning the capture and enslavement of people from neighbouring tribes.- And that they are PROPERTY which can be passed down to heirs.
I would add to that , for example Numbers 31.
Ownership of other people is slavery, and wrong!
You are referring to restrictions within the Hebrew nation to other Hebrews, mainly for debt.
@Tobytrim FALSE that verse says nothing about CAPTURING them. It said you may purchase, they sold themselves into slavery just like Jacob did. See my video debunking all your slavery claims.
@Krazie316 "Again you make no point that hasn't long ago been addressed and refuted"
OK - refute it!! Let's take Leviticus 25: 44-46 Does that, or does that not, quote "God" himself , clearly sanctioning the capture and ownership of other human beings as slaves?
What is confusing you here ? Is slavery morally righteous because endorses it as a practice, or is the bible telling lies in quoting him as saying it?
We're not discussing how the ancient jews behaved - This is a clear quote!
"Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.
And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour."
@Krazie316 " a fallacy that slavery in the bible was forced "
Ha ha!! Are you serious!!!!! ........
......Slavery, by definition, is forced!!
Are you saying that people AGREED to be owned against their will??? What happens when they decided not to be owned any more? Could they just leave with no hard feelings? Were they actually free?
When somebody captures, or buys a human being , and declares himself the owner of that person, its called slavery.
Slater by definition is not forced, slavery can also be a state of mind. The capturing and selling of slaves was punished by death in the bible, that is stated in the Old and again in the new testament in scriptures lust d in my video. That is all.
Now you can refer to those videos or au can simply ignore you wasting my time.@Tobytrim
@Krazie316 "The capturing and selling of slaves was punished by death in the bible" Ha !! Do you think that , even if true, invalidates my argument???
The capturing and selling of slaves was ENDORSED by "God" within the text of the scriptual authority which YOU are promoting as the "divine truth"!! - I have cited you the passages. refute them or concede the argument.
While you're at it, show me the contextual commandment from "God" which CONDEMNS slavery, and I'll show you a contradiction!
No the capturing and selling g of slaves was not endorsed by God the bible says it is punishable by death. By now it should be Paul fully obvious I'm not taking you seriously especially silly sive you refuse to listen, I said see this video and here you are still posting wasting my time.@Tobytrim
@Krazie316 "No the capturing and selling g of slaves was not endorsed by God "
I've just quoted you passages from Leviticus 25 :44-46 which SPECIFICALLY quotes God himself endorsing slavery and defining who can be enslaved!
You respond with a simple unsupported denial, without any logical explanation. You offer a non sequitor counter claim which you don't even accompany with a biblical passage.
Don't you think an intellectually honest man would concede this point by now?
@Krazie316 "Now you can refer to those videos or au can simply ignore you wasting my time"
If these videos are your own, I will be happy to continue this debate on the thread of those. If they are someone else's, I will get round to them later I'm sure.....
My argument is with you right now and it is hardly a waste of time as I'm obviously showing you where you have gone wrong!- Lol!
@Tobytrim its a waste of time because I have already addressed all you cited old arguments on my videos, as did VersatileMind4Christ. Now I'm enjoying my day while laughing at you and repeating info
@Krazie316 Incidentally, with a view to the video here - You seem to be cherry picking from even within the passage!
You asked " What does "fullfilled" mean?" You ignore the 1st part of the passage - What does "Till heaven and Earth pass" mean? - IT TELLS you up front what "fulfilled" means!!
You can't simply put the slant YOU want, on what is written in the bible, just to suit your argument! Is that what you mean by "professionals" having to interpret the bible! lol!!
@Tobytrim I don't cherry pick, this is what YOU guys do and we destroy you on those grounds over and over again.
That passage says For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Thid means heaven and earth will pass before the law is changed BEFORE he fulfills t. He ALREADY FULFILLED IT in later chapters on the cross. We are no longer under the law and Paul makes that clear in several versus
@Krazie316" We are no longer under the law and Paul makes that clear in several versus"
So Paul is the "head Honcho", is he? Everything he writes supercedes and countermands EVERY other passage in the bible, even if it is CLEARLY a written from "God" in an earlier text? - OK, I'll make a note of that!
You seem to miss the point. It's this very text which we're debunking!! - It has no authority in an argument about it's own validity.
History, science,and reason ALSO debunk the bible.
@Tobytrim Paul doesn't contradict Jesus, this is your lack of understanding of a simple verse. But I don't blame you, most of you atheists can't get it right lol.
Your point is invalid. The bible is a historic reference of events that actually happened. This video is not about proving the bible, its about debunking an atheist on a specific topic which you have issues staying on lol.
@Krazie316 "Your point is invalid. The bible is a historic reference of events that actually happened"
Ha ha! you seem to have trouble understanding that this is the basal point we are debating. I can easily demonstrate that much of the bible is fiction and very little of it can be confirmed as being historically true.
You declaring, by fiat, that it is , is a silly way to argue a point. You need to prove it is true, with reason and evidence, and debunk my counterevidence in the same way!
@Krazie316"Your point is invalid. The bible is a historic reference of events that actually happened". We are obviously wasting time and space with this mosiac law fulfillment argument if you are only going to posit further arguments from biblical authority, without understanding the reasoning of my arguments. You're just muddying the water
However, the passages are much clearer, with reference to God endorsing slavery - why have you not responded to that argument, - Are you conceding it?
@Tobytrim my post on the mosaic law is accurate as the initial claim is made using scripture out of context with my response in context. I've already told you where to go for the slavery arguments I'm not gonna waste my time with you posting in text what I've made a video out of.
@Krazie316 "my post on the mosaic law is accurate as the initial claim is made using scripture out of context with my response in context"
And I've already explained to you where you are wrong. Your only answer seems to be to quote the authority of elsewhere within it's text and declare it to be the truth......That argument is a dead end.
Your claims on slavery ( Which YOU brought up on THIS vid) are more testable and frankly.
I can't find this vid of yours on biblical slavery -Where is it ?
@" We are no longer under the law and Paul makes that clear in several versus"
I better make my last point clearer to you, as your powers of reasoning seem ver limited:
If you point out something to me which contradicts another part of the bible, you haven't actually won a point against someone who is claiming the invalidity of the bible, based on it's inconsistency , not just with better extra canonical sources ( reason, science archeology etc).........
Ad hominem attack with lack of evidence or substance,fail. nothing in the bible contradicts another part the 2 versus agree, it is only you're lack of ability to comprehend the verse that makes your issues.s
@Krazie316 "Ad hominem attack with lack of evidence or substance,fail"
You need to learn the meaning of "Ad hominem" and how to apply reason to an argument rather than dogma.
Your own evidence contradicts your interpretations of Mathew 5. You say that the crucifixion voids the OT laws (including the 10 commandments presumably?) Mathew 5 was before this "fulfillment", yet Christ contradicts it!
@Tobytrim my evidence does not contradict Matthew 5 all was fulfilled and the Law was now Old zcovanebt and a new covenant was here. the 10th commandments are not a part of mosaic Law. Christ doesn't contradict Matthew 5 because all was fulfilled therefore. He said nothing will change till all was fulfilled, later he fulfilled and it was changed.
@Tobytrim you're eyes ate soo clouded you. forgot AK said the slavery argument isn't about forbidding slaves, its about debunking the notion it was forced and like American slavery.
@Krazie316" He ALREADY FULFILLED IT in later chapters on the cross"
I would further point out, that even using your twisted interpretation of the text, he had not fulfilled this alleged "Prophesy", at the alleged time of the sermon on the mount (Matt 5), yet he was contradicting Mosaic law there, while his followers were still "under it".
Was there a mix-up in communications?
Of course, it's most likely Paul never knew about what JC had preached, judging by the ommissions in his epistles- lol!
The only one with a twisted interpretation of the text is you, we all get it, you don't, you've got the problem not u. no he had not fulfilled it yet which is why he said what he did. He didn't contradict Mosaic Law because he was saying the law wont change till he fulfills it he later did which was a win not a fail
@Krazie316 "The only one with a twisted interpretation of the text is you, we all get it, you don't, you've got the problem not u"
If I'm the one who has it wrong, show me, as I showed you....Are you saying that Jesus DIDN'T contradict "The Law" at a time BEFORE it was to be "fulfilled"?
You need to do more than make abitrary declarations here!
@Tobytrim no I said he didn't contradict it because he fulfilled it and we are no longer under it. That happened at the cross. Before that nobody was able to get to heaven and burnt sacrifices had to be made. See my video Schooling an atheist on the bible, and this very video.
(cont'd 7) If he's god then the tree belongs wherever he puts it, so making it inaccessible would've been the better course of action if he did in fact care about his children and did not want to punish them as he was supposedly omniscient.
(cont'd 6) "King James only-ist" LOL I used to be the same way but I learned that although the KJV is one of the better ones, it is also not free from error. Plus reading multiple translations helps deepen ones understanding of the context, that way you can truly appreciate an accurate rendition.
(cont'd 5) Teaching a child self-discipline by tempting them is sadistic and foolish and smite does mean kill in context of the loss of life. In terms of murder, if you make the laws, of course you can't take a life unlawfully but the god of the bible has been shown to take the life of the innocent from malicious intent. Ex. the flood also drowned innocent children.
(Cont'd 4) Paul never argued against the mosaic law. His arguments were about other rabbinical laws that some sects of Jews sought to impose on gentile converts. He himself, along with the rest of the apostles continued to keep the law after the crucifixion. This is exemplified in Acts 15:19-21 where the council gave instructions on how to handle the new converts. They gave so basic ground rules and expected the rest to be learned in time due to the fact that the law was taught every sabbath.
(cont'd 2) Those aren't prophecies of Jesus of Nazareth. The so called prophecies that many link to Jesus are done so using extreme bias, circular reasoning, and/or gross removal of scripture form original context. In fact, if you study diligently, you'll find that Jesus is not the messiah by biblical standard.
(cont'd 1) In terms of law however, one man abiding by the law and thus fulfilling it does not make everyone else to whom the law applied exempt from it; i.e. because I don not murder does not mean that there is no longer a law against murder even though I fulfill (comply with) that law.
It's funny you say that the appropriate thing to do with disobedient children is to punish them. Accodring to the bible the appropriate thing to do is stone them to death Deuteronomy 21:18-21. Even if we are not under this law anymore, what kind of a sick God would think this is an approptiate punishment during any time period?
@ryan84160 "The most holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes, and teaches that the Mosaic Law ... cannot be observed without the loss of eternal salvation ... Everyone, therefore, who observes circumcision and the Sabbath and the other requirements of the Law, the Church declares not in the least fit ... to participate in eternal salvation." -Infallible Teaching of the Catholic Church from the Council of Florence
since Christ said that he is here to fulfilled the law that means you Christians are still should live by it and you don't, which means you're not Christians at all...so what are you?
yeah! because if you were Christians honor killings would be ok with you guys because it was ok with christ.
remember Christ didn't stoned the bitch, but where are your accusers.
@FREEAMERICANOW69 you have no idea what the hell you're talking about this very video destroys the claim wer're still under that law let alone my "Schooling an atheist on the bible" video which goes into even more detail why we don't.
Christianity was what made this country better, now that your so called progressive liberals have taken over since the 60's everything got worse
wrong, he said it was fulfilled while on the cross, he didn't say "it's fulfilled and now you can stop living by mosaic law". if you believed that, feel free to point that quote to me in the bible...i'll wait.
only he challenged laws that he thought was stupid like the long hair one and not big ones like the honor killing one for some perceived adultery and needing two witnesses, like they were actually there
Matthew 5:1818 "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."
try reading the whole chapter instead of cherrypicking and failing. Apostle Paul made it clear we are no wise under the Mosaic Law.
The 10 commandments are eternal but Mosaic law is not 10 commandments.
@FREEAMERICANOW69 One of the profound emphases of the New Testament, especially the epistles of Paul, is that Christians are NO longer under the rule of the Mosaic law. This truth is stated in no uncertain terms and in various ways (Rom. 6:14; 7:1-14; Gal. 3:10-13, 24-25; 4:21; 5:1, 13; 2 Cor. 3:7-18).
"Christianity was what made this country better,"
YEAH! polictians has to lie and say they believe in god and support israel and give them 3 billions usd/ year.
that abstinence thing that rose teen pregnancy and std's rates to a new high and waste billions of tax payer's money on "faith based programs" that can't be proven until you die aka called SCAM.
gays can't get legally marriage because you people don't know the difference between a legal marriage and spiritual one.
@FREEAMERICANOW69 You've done nothing but launch the same old tired refuted arguments from years ago, I don't have time for your crap. I have more important things to be bothered with than another libtard
@Krazie316 Ok, all has not been fulfilled that was written in the law and the prophets concerning christ...for instance...daniel 7:13-14 has not been fulfilled yet as well as others.
@ibrowzu As I suspected the same fallacious mistake a lot of people make.
Christ fullfilled the Law at with his resurrection. In John right brfore he gives up the ghosts it says "so that the scripture may be fulfilled sayith I thirst".
We are no longer under Mosaic law. When Christ said till all be fulfilled in Matthew 5 he was talking about the law
@Krazie316 Ok bro 2 ?'s....is the book of daniel considered scripture?(yes) and has daniel 7:13-14 been fulfilled?(no)/ If daniel 7:13-14 is scripture concerning christ then ALL has not been fulfilled yet. U need to look into which law christ was referring to in matt5:17-19
@ibrowzu Uh, I know exactly which law he was talking about and that is Mosaic Law, to destroy your argument Paul made it abundantly clear we are no longer under a schoolmaster. Paul stated all over the new testament we're no longer under mosaic law.
The bible as a whole has not been fulfilled but Mosaic Law has, this is why we no longer offer up burnt sacrifices and kill off certain sins
@Krazie316 i agree we are not under the mosaic law but we still have to keep the 10 commandments with the faith in christ. Christ was talking about the 10 commandments in matthew 5:17-19.
@Krazie316 it sounds as if you were saying that matt5:17-19 was referring to the mosaic law and that he fulfilled all that was written in the law and the prophets concerning him,in which i simply disagreed with.
@ibrowzu In Matthew 5 he expressly says I come not to destroy but to fulfill, he fulfilled that law with his resurrection, those versus were not talking about the 10 commandments. It was ALREADY stated in the OT they were eternal, but the Mosaic law had to be fulfilled in order for people to be saved and make it into heaven as previously they couldn't before Christ, they went to paradise in Hell till he wen't and got those in paradise
@Krazie316 wrong again bro the law was made for the unrighteous, christ showed us how to walk and please god in the spirit and not the letter. Christ fulfilled most prophecy concerning him but not all. The law in which nothing can pass from is the 10 commandments, because he was taking away from the mosaic law in that same chapter(matt 5) and he had not been hanged on a tree yet.
@ibrowzu We would still be stoning homosexuals to death and adulterers and be offering up burnt sacrifices.
It is clear. you are alos in error because Christ taught it was good to follow the law he however taught against hypocrisy later after he fulfilled the law.
Even those that think Christ was saying Mosaic Law won't go away till the entire book is fulfilled know this verse is dealing with Mosaic Law not 10 commandments
@Krazie316 It was gud to follow the law(mosaic) at that time because the new covenant had not been established yet. Christ promoted following the 10 with a pure heart while having faith in him..... p.s. the bible is for those of a pure heart to understand not professionals.
We know literally the bible is not for proffesionals yet for those that are led by the spirit, but obviously debunking people and my studies being led by the spirit are of the most high.
You failed at asserting the spirit resides not in me.
Galatians 3:19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was ADDED because of transgressions, UNTIL the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
Who is the seed to come?
Verse 6 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
So the law was ADDED UNTIL the Seed(Christ) should come. Sounds clear and cut to me.
The law was put in place because there was no forgiveness for sin, only atonement.
Nobody could follow the law therefore God created a way for an eternal sacrifce instead of the limited animal sacrifices they had to make.
Since Christ paid for our sins the debt we owe to him now and he said this is how I want you to pay me back. Love God with all your heart, mind, and sou, and Love your neighbor as yourself.
For more evidence view my video against ZJ "Schooling an atheist on the bible"
Among the vast majority of theologians the KJV is one of the most bias, perverted, and corrupt translations of the original text ever conceived. If you want to know what the Bible actually means, learn Hebrew and Greek, read it, then wax philosophical about what you know, until then just know you are only reading a 400 year old translation of what a rich ass white man wanted you to read
I beg to differ, all the hardcore people that have given extreme scrutiny of the bible versions know the KJV is the most credible version of the bible second to the Greek and Hebrew which I have used dozens of translators to verify passages if the KJV.
Most bible scholars try to find reason with the bible and change things into passages that do not say what is says in the original.
There are SEVERAL people on here that will prove with hard evidence such as myself the KJV is best
I don't know who your hard core people are, I give them my regards. But my "Hard-core" people are PhD's from Loyola, Capital, De Paul, and Northwestern, The KJV is useless, Maybe when you get past an associates you will too understand. Until then, live your live at the will of rich white medieval men. Its your life,
why is the king james version the only one that should be on the planet, all the versions of the bible have been altered by man. its not the first incarnation of the bible captain wow.
1. I believe the that Jesus is the son of GOD, the King of Kings, and Lord of Lords.
2. I believe he died for my sins and was resurrected.
3. I believe his sacrifice did not abolish Gods laws
4. I believe that we are save by grace and not works. The Law doesn't save you it is only your duty as a child of GOD to obey it through the help of the Holy Ghost.
I already explained the first part in the video, Jesus said in Matthew 22:36-40: 36Master, which is the great commandment in the law? 37Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38This is the first and great commandment. 39And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. 40On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
My brother in Christ. I apologize for my harsh approach in my initial statements. Even though respectfully disagree with your stance on this issue, I believe we can reason together and come to the truth of the matter.
you clearly do not know Jewish culture. what does Paul, who by the way kept the law(Torah), mean by we are no longer under the law?read Romans a couple of times and you will get it.
Hence, since neither circumcision nor uncircumcision was anything (1Co 7:19), he complied with the principle that he states in 1Co 9:19,20. In Ga 2:3 it is stated that when Titus, a Greek, went up to Jerusalem, he was not compelled to be circumcised. Had he been, it would have been a concession to the Judaizing Christians who insisted that circumcision was necessary to salvation.
the act was one of pure expediency, in order to reach more unconverted Jews. These examples teach us to accommodate ourselves to the prejudices of others as far as we can without the sacrifice of principle.
you clearly don't know what you are talking about. and you are very prideful. I think that is why you can't see the truth. you confuse verse 18. there was no law called "the Mosiaic Law" Its was the law of Moses or The Torah. Here's something to think about. did Jeus teach anyone not follow the Law? continue to read the following verses after verse 18 to get the that verse in context. Did the apostle keep the law after Jesus died? read acts 21:15-26 (KJV) or Acts16:1-4.
it's called Misaic law because it's the law of Moses MOSAIC get a clue
Jesus said till all be fulfilled, he fufilled it by his death burial and ressurection.
Second:
"circumcised him. Not because he thought it necessary to salvation, but because of the Jews. Wherever Paul traveled, he first labored in the Jewish synagogues. If one of his traveling companions was a Gentile, it would arouse Jewish prejudice so as to close their ears......
I just love how someone thinks they can just read through the Bible without the help of God to understand and then think they can convince US of their distorted views!
The word fulfill (v 17) comes from the Greek pleroo. This means satisfy, execute, finish verify (or coincide with a prediction) accomplish, complete, end, expire, fulfill, fully preach, perfect, ect.
Be fulfilled in verse 18 translates from ginomai. This means be brought to pass, happen, be ended, be finished, fulfilled, ect.
Matt. 5:17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."
In this verse, the Law = Torah, and the Prophets = the rest of the OT. It is saying that Jesus is not throwing out the OT, but fulfilling its prophecies (part of which is making a new covenant Jeremiah 31:31-34).
The next verse (18) shows us that we may be under a new covenant, but the OT itself is still valuable.
Punditz is most likely referencing Psalm 137:9 when he talks about dashing babies heads against rocks. However, Punditz claims that God orders that these babies skulls be slammed into rocks. The passage itself is quite clear, it is a prophecy that in the future Babylon would fall and that their conquerers would be happy to do this terrible act to them. In no way was this a command of God, merely a explanation that such an event would happen.
Just so you know Krazie I read the entire passage and I'm well aware that Jesus was breaking Old Mosiac law and encouraging others to do the same while he was still alive by telling them not to pass judgment on others.
Truth is Jesus is a nitpicker when it came to the Old Testament and when the Jews called him on his bullshit.
This contradicts your claim that the law still applied until Jesus's death.
In this passage Jesus stops the Pharisees from stoning a women to death in accordance to Mosaic law.
According to you people still had to follow the Mosiac Laws until Jesus's death so Jesus basically told them not to do what you claim they should had to continue doing until his death.
OOPSIE he said something to the affect "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" meaning they too did son and by the law all should be put to death.
Christ being God in the flesh, he already knows who did what and hence they would be hypocrites if they stoned her.
Another failed attempt to discredit the bible son.
Christ paved the way and prepared for forgiveness however he did not tell them NOT to stone the woman.
Yes because Jesus let the woman cop out. The Pharisees didn't think Jesus was for real either because he kept talking about keeping the law and changing it at the same time.
Matt. 7:1 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged."
Jesus told people not to judge which is a contradiction between from the Old Testament when God made it people's obligation to judge.
simply saying let those who are not in sin cast a stone, that's not telling them not to follow the law he simply pointed out they too are sinning, they could have easily still stoned her but their lesson learned was they were hypocrites sinning in secrecy
If everyone's a sinner like Jesus says and no sinner can pass judgment then that means Mosiac law could never have been followed period.
Besides you christians don't follow Jesus's modern teachings of today so it's not like you would follow the Old Testament anyways. Jesus was worse the Karl Marx when it came to economics. He didn't even believe in Usury.
The pharisees were great hypocrites, Jesus calls them out on it many times. Matt 23:33 for example. (This is not necessarily in adultery tho).
Jesus was the only one in the crowd who was in any position to judge, everyone else was a sinner. (the story of Jesus forgiving the woman of her sins foreshadows his purpose)
In the OT, the Hebrew people were not to charge interest. Then again many of their practices focus not on material wealth but seek to alleviate poverty and encourage charity.
I don't recall Jesus every talking about usury tho. Are you referencing where Jesus throwing money changers out of the church? Because if so that is quite different than being against all loans and interest rates.
If usury were a sin, Jesus would not have encouraged people (and banks) to partake of it.
If you're referring to the definition of usury by the parallels the more modern definition of charging exorbitant interest rates, then yeah you're clobbering people.
"An example would be a credit card company charging 21% on people's balances. How can they justify this at a time when most banks are paying their depositors less than 2% on their savings accounts and no more than 5% on 10-year CDs?"
Jesus did not encourage usury. 21For I feared thee, because thou art an austere man: thou takest up that thou layedst not down, and reapest that thou didst not sow. 22And he saith unto him, Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee, thou wicked servant. Thou knewest that I was an austere man, taking up that I laid not down, and reaping that I did not sow: 23Wherefore then gavest not thou my money into the bank, that at my coming I might have required mine own with usury?
Secondly all scriptures referencing usury are against lending money to the poor and charging interest, what about those that aren't poor such as Oprah?
Or putting money in the bank to acquire interest they use your money and give you interest for using your money.
It seems this discussion has shifted from you misinterpreting the book of Matthew to misinterpreting the book of Luke.
You are quoting a tiny portion of the parable of the 10 Minas. It discusses different people all given the responsibility of taking care of 10 coins. The ones who invested it were given more responsibilities, and the one who merely hid the 10 coins had his money taken away and given to the people who invested, because they were better stewards of their money.
When will these atheists understand that the Word of God is spiritually discerned. They will NEVER get it! Their meager attempts are simply laughable.
Keep destroying these guys, perhaps future ones will not bother to step to you and avoid embarrassment!!!!!!!!
Welcome to Krazie316 University, LOL :)
Remain strong brother because these guys appear to be coming out of every dark crack. It's crazy. You exterminate one and other roaches begin crawling out to meet the same fate! *SIGH*
Yeah. When they first came out they were into some wicked things. I listen to them every now and then, but I stay away from faces of death. Great vids. God bless.
I used to LOOOOOOOVE Bone Thugs N Harmony and BOUGHT, not stole, every single CD that came out.
But I cut them all up because of the krazie stuff they were doing in their first 2 CD's and stopped listening to them soo much especially because I'm saved now.
I still occasionally listen to them but there's nothing like that old Bone Thugs
Thank you! Very few people, even those who call themselves Christian, don't understand this. John 8:31-47; Hebrews 7:18-19
Ktaressa 4 months ago
@Ktaressa if you liked this one you'll love my video "schooling an atheist on the bible" I listed way more versus showing we're not under it in that one. Although i dont really care for the tone in the video anymore...at the time of recording i just had it with the same fallacy.
Krazie316 4 months ago
"you got an atheist reading the Bible?! that's a win in itself!"
Hardly a win if you're trying to proselytize anyone capable of honest reasoning. I'm an atheist and I read the bible all the time.
Indeed, I would surmise that reading and understanding the bible, is a common cause of atheism, and not personally reading, or understanding it, is a major cause of most Christians. It's a good read, if you're not weak minded enough to think it contains any important messages from the "divine".
Tobytrim 9 months ago
@Tobytrim No it's quite the opposite, atheist don't understand and most of the time never read it in it's entirety TO ACTUALLY understand it in its proper perspectives. Christians understand the bible this is why we continue in the lifestyle.
Krazie316 9 months ago
@Krazie316 "Christians understand the bible this is why we continue in the lifestyle."
I have yet to meet a christian apologist who can even come close to rationalize the immorality, contradictions,and serious fallacies in the bible.
One has only to point something out to you guys, for example this endorsement of slavery by God in the bible, and wait for the most ridiculous excuses, and accusations of "misunderstanding" it from within "context"
You forget - it's the ONLY definition of "God".
Tobytrim 9 months ago
@Tobytrim contradictions HAHAHAHAHA there are none. The slavery argument has been debunked several times over by several Christians including myself in multiple multi-part videos and VersatileMind4Christ.
Krazie316 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Krazie316 "The slavery argument has been debunked several times over by several Christians "
It's not an argument. The bible CLEARLY ascribes statements to it's "God", in the old testament, which endorse the taking and keeping of slaves , without condemnation ..(As well as racism)
In exactly the same way, the contradictions are clear for all to see. There is nothing you can "debunk".
I repeat, the bible is the ONLY informing source you have!! - Are you saying it's not the truth?
Tobytrim 9 months ago
@Krazie316 "The slavery argument has been debunked several times over by several Christians "
Just to clarify the passages ARE there, you can start with the "10 commandments" (EX20;17 - which says it's a sin to envy your neighbour's slaves as property)
Then go through the rest of the 613 mosiac laws in Exodus from 21 onwards (there are a few references) My particular favourite though, is Leviticus 25;44-46
Are you saying these are lies? - Or just that owning other human beings is just?
Tobytrim 9 months ago
@Tobytrim the slavery argument does not consist of the fact there is slavery, the slavery argument consists of a fallacy that slavery in the bible was forced and just like the slavery in America, this is false. The slaves chose to be slaves in the bible. See my videos or Versatilenind4Christ videos.
Jacob agreed to be a slave for his master's daughters hand in marriage.
Again you make no point that hasn't long ago been addressed and refuted
Krazie316 9 months ago
@Krazie316"that slavery in the bible was forced and just like the slavery in America, this is false."
Rubbish!! - I already cited Leviticus 25:44, which quotes God sanctioning the capture and enslavement of people from neighbouring tribes.- And that they are PROPERTY which can be passed down to heirs.
I would add to that , for example Numbers 31.
Ownership of other people is slavery, and wrong!
You are referring to restrictions within the Hebrew nation to other Hebrews, mainly for debt.
Tobytrim 9 months ago
@Tobytrim FALSE that verse says nothing about CAPTURING them. It said you may purchase, they sold themselves into slavery just like Jacob did. See my video debunking all your slavery claims.
Krazie316 9 months ago
@Krazie316 "Again you make no point that hasn't long ago been addressed and refuted"
OK - refute it!! Let's take Leviticus 25: 44-46 Does that, or does that not, quote "God" himself , clearly sanctioning the capture and ownership of other human beings as slaves?
What is confusing you here ? Is slavery morally righteous because endorses it as a practice, or is the bible telling lies in quoting him as saying it?
We're not discussing how the ancient jews behaved - This is a clear quote!
Tobytrim 9 months ago
See my video on slavery, again I'll not waste my precious time on a clueless atheist on arguments I've addressed time and time again@Tobytrim
Krazie316 9 months ago
@Krazie316
Just to be clear, here is Lev 46-47.(KJV)
"Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.
And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour."
Tobytrim 9 months ago
see the video@Tobytrim
Krazie316 9 months ago
@Krazie316 " a fallacy that slavery in the bible was forced "
Ha ha!! Are you serious!!!!! ........
......Slavery, by definition, is forced!!
Are you saying that people AGREED to be owned against their will??? What happens when they decided not to be owned any more? Could they just leave with no hard feelings? Were they actually free?
When somebody captures, or buys a human being , and declares himself the owner of that person, its called slavery.
The bible is full of such examples!
Tobytrim 9 months ago
Slater by definition is not forced, slavery can also be a state of mind. The capturing and selling of slaves was punished by death in the bible, that is stated in the Old and again in the new testament in scriptures lust d in my video. That is all.
Now you can refer to those videos or au can simply ignore you wasting my time.@Tobytrim
Krazie316 9 months ago
@Krazie316 "The capturing and selling of slaves was punished by death in the bible" Ha !! Do you think that , even if true, invalidates my argument???
The capturing and selling of slaves was ENDORSED by "God" within the text of the scriptual authority which YOU are promoting as the "divine truth"!! - I have cited you the passages. refute them or concede the argument.
While you're at it, show me the contextual commandment from "God" which CONDEMNS slavery, and I'll show you a contradiction!
Tobytrim 9 months ago
No the capturing and selling g of slaves was not endorsed by God the bible says it is punishable by death. By now it should be Paul fully obvious I'm not taking you seriously especially silly sive you refuse to listen, I said see this video and here you are still posting wasting my time.@Tobytrim
Krazie316 9 months ago
@Krazie316 "No the capturing and selling g of slaves was not endorsed by God "
I've just quoted you passages from Leviticus 25 :44-46 which SPECIFICALLY quotes God himself endorsing slavery and defining who can be enslaved!
You respond with a simple unsupported denial, without any logical explanation. You offer a non sequitor counter claim which you don't even accompany with a biblical passage.
Don't you think an intellectually honest man would concede this point by now?
Tobytrim 9 months ago
Sonce you refuse to go to the videos allow me to help you find then and stop hovering here@Tobytrim
Krazie316 9 months ago
@Krazie316 "Now you can refer to those videos or au can simply ignore you wasting my time"
If these videos are your own, I will be happy to continue this debate on the thread of those. If they are someone else's, I will get round to them later I'm sure.....
My argument is with you right now and it is hardly a waste of time as I'm obviously showing you where you have gone wrong!- Lol!
Tobytrim 9 months ago
@Tobytrim its a waste of time because I have already addressed all you cited old arguments on my videos, as did VersatileMind4Christ. Now I'm enjoying my day while laughing at you and repeating info
Krazie316 9 months ago
@Krazie316 Incidentally, with a view to the video here - You seem to be cherry picking from even within the passage!
You asked " What does "fullfilled" mean?" You ignore the 1st part of the passage - What does "Till heaven and Earth pass" mean? - IT TELLS you up front what "fulfilled" means!!
You can't simply put the slant YOU want, on what is written in the bible, just to suit your argument! Is that what you mean by "professionals" having to interpret the bible! lol!!
Tobytrim 9 months ago
@Tobytrim I don't cherry pick, this is what YOU guys do and we destroy you on those grounds over and over again.
That passage says For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Thid means heaven and earth will pass before the law is changed BEFORE he fulfills t. He ALREADY FULFILLED IT in later chapters on the cross. We are no longer under the law and Paul makes that clear in several versus
Krazie316 9 months ago
@Krazie316" We are no longer under the law and Paul makes that clear in several versus"
So Paul is the "head Honcho", is he? Everything he writes supercedes and countermands EVERY other passage in the bible, even if it is CLEARLY a written from "God" in an earlier text? - OK, I'll make a note of that!
You seem to miss the point. It's this very text which we're debunking!! - It has no authority in an argument about it's own validity.
History, science,and reason ALSO debunk the bible.
Tobytrim 9 months ago
@Tobytrim Paul doesn't contradict Jesus, this is your lack of understanding of a simple verse. But I don't blame you, most of you atheists can't get it right lol.
Your point is invalid. The bible is a historic reference of events that actually happened. This video is not about proving the bible, its about debunking an atheist on a specific topic which you have issues staying on lol.
Krazie316 9 months ago
@Krazie316 "Your point is invalid. The bible is a historic reference of events that actually happened"
Ha ha! you seem to have trouble understanding that this is the basal point we are debating. I can easily demonstrate that much of the bible is fiction and very little of it can be confirmed as being historically true.
You declaring, by fiat, that it is , is a silly way to argue a point. You need to prove it is true, with reason and evidence, and debunk my counterevidence in the same way!
Tobytrim 9 months ago
@Tobytrim this is not a video proving the bible, however my post stands it is a document of historic record.
Krazie316 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Krazie316 "this is not a video proving the bible, however my post stands it is a document of historic record"
Just as well- It doesn't do too well!
Tobytrim 9 months ago
@Krazie316"Your point is invalid. The bible is a historic reference of events that actually happened". We are obviously wasting time and space with this mosiac law fulfillment argument if you are only going to posit further arguments from biblical authority, without understanding the reasoning of my arguments. You're just muddying the water
However, the passages are much clearer, with reference to God endorsing slavery - why have you not responded to that argument, - Are you conceding it?
Tobytrim 9 months ago
@Tobytrim my post on the mosaic law is accurate as the initial claim is made using scripture out of context with my response in context. I've already told you where to go for the slavery arguments I'm not gonna waste my time with you posting in text what I've made a video out of.
Krazie316 9 months ago
@Krazie316 "my post on the mosaic law is accurate as the initial claim is made using scripture out of context with my response in context"
And I've already explained to you where you are wrong. Your only answer seems to be to quote the authority of elsewhere within it's text and declare it to be the truth......That argument is a dead end.
Your claims on slavery ( Which YOU brought up on THIS vid) are more testable and frankly.
I can't find this vid of yours on biblical slavery -Where is it ?
Tobytrim 9 months ago
@Tobytrim you haven't explained where I'm wrong because I'm not, this is you're lack of understanding of Matthew 5
Krazie316 9 months ago
"I'm not gonna waste my time with you posting in text what I've made a video out of."
Fair enough- Though, it was you who brought the subject up, on this one! - What is the video called , so i can find it?
Tobytrim 9 months ago
@Tobytrim I'm not at home, search slavery in the videos section, or see VersatileMind4christ 3 part slavery video
Krazie316 9 months ago
@" We are no longer under the law and Paul makes that clear in several versus"
I better make my last point clearer to you, as your powers of reasoning seem ver limited:
If you point out something to me which contradicts another part of the bible, you haven't actually won a point against someone who is claiming the invalidity of the bible, based on it's inconsistency , not just with better extra canonical sources ( reason, science archeology etc).........
...... but with ITSELF!
Tobytrim 9 months ago
Ad hominem attack with lack of evidence or substance,fail. nothing in the bible contradicts another part the 2 versus agree, it is only you're lack of ability to comprehend the verse that makes your issues.s
@Tobytrim
Krazie316 9 months ago
@Krazie316 "Ad hominem attack with lack of evidence or substance,fail"
You need to learn the meaning of "Ad hominem" and how to apply reason to an argument rather than dogma.
Your own evidence contradicts your interpretations of Mathew 5. You say that the crucifixion voids the OT laws (including the 10 commandments presumably?) Mathew 5 was before this "fulfillment", yet Christ contradicts it!
Tobytrim 9 months ago
@Tobytrim my evidence does not contradict Matthew 5 all was fulfilled and the Law was now Old zcovanebt and a new covenant was here. the 10th commandments are not a part of mosaic Law. Christ doesn't contradict Matthew 5 because all was fulfilled therefore. He said nothing will change till all was fulfilled, later he fulfilled and it was changed.
Krazie316 9 months ago
@Krazie316 "I'm not gonna waste my time with you posting in text what I've made a video out of."
Ha!! who's arbitrary decision was that???
Strange how the mosaic laws in exodus 21 are seamless continued from these 10 commandments in Exodus 20!
Which of the 10 commandments forbids slavery by the way? - Maybe it is morally right to keep slaves according to God?
Haven't you caught on yet to how lame, silly and inconsistent your arguments are?/ - Lol!!
Tobytrim 9 months ago
No because quite frankly sovereigns been too just laughing g at you, hahahaha@Tobytrim
Krazie316 9 months ago
@Tobytrim you're eyes ate soo clouded you. forgot AK said the slavery argument isn't about forbidding slaves, its about debunking the notion it was forced and like American slavery.
Krazie316 9 months ago
@Krazie316" He ALREADY FULFILLED IT in later chapters on the cross"
I would further point out, that even using your twisted interpretation of the text, he had not fulfilled this alleged "Prophesy", at the alleged time of the sermon on the mount (Matt 5), yet he was contradicting Mosaic law there, while his followers were still "under it".
Was there a mix-up in communications?
Of course, it's most likely Paul never knew about what JC had preached, judging by the ommissions in his epistles- lol!
Tobytrim 9 months ago
The only one with a twisted interpretation of the text is you, we all get it, you don't, you've got the problem not u. no he had not fulfilled it yet which is why he said what he did. He didn't contradict Mosaic Law because he was saying the law wont change till he fulfills it he later did which was a win not a fail
Krazie316 9 months ago
@Krazie316 "The only one with a twisted interpretation of the text is you, we all get it, you don't, you've got the problem not u"
If I'm the one who has it wrong, show me, as I showed you....Are you saying that Jesus DIDN'T contradict "The Law" at a time BEFORE it was to be "fulfilled"?
You need to do more than make abitrary declarations here!
Tobytrim 9 months ago
@Tobytrim no I said he didn't contradict it because he fulfilled it and we are no longer under it. That happened at the cross. Before that nobody was able to get to heaven and burnt sacrifices had to be made. See my video Schooling an atheist on the bible, and this very video.
Krazie316 9 months ago
I'm not forcing you to follow my rules but if you don't, I'll KILL you... no pressure, its your choice.
VENOM3RDUM 11 months ago
(cont'd 7) If he's god then the tree belongs wherever he puts it, so making it inaccessible would've been the better course of action if he did in fact care about his children and did not want to punish them as he was supposedly omniscient.
VENOM3RDUM 11 months ago
(cont'd 6) "King James only-ist" LOL I used to be the same way but I learned that although the KJV is one of the better ones, it is also not free from error. Plus reading multiple translations helps deepen ones understanding of the context, that way you can truly appreciate an accurate rendition.
VENOM3RDUM 11 months ago
(cont'd 5) Teaching a child self-discipline by tempting them is sadistic and foolish and smite does mean kill in context of the loss of life. In terms of murder, if you make the laws, of course you can't take a life unlawfully but the god of the bible has been shown to take the life of the innocent from malicious intent. Ex. the flood also drowned innocent children.
VENOM3RDUM 11 months ago
(Cont'd 4) Paul never argued against the mosaic law. His arguments were about other rabbinical laws that some sects of Jews sought to impose on gentile converts. He himself, along with the rest of the apostles continued to keep the law after the crucifixion. This is exemplified in Acts 15:19-21 where the council gave instructions on how to handle the new converts. They gave so basic ground rules and expected the rest to be learned in time due to the fact that the law was taught every sabbath.
VENOM3RDUM 11 months ago
(cont'd 3) John 19:28? What scripture is that verse referring to?
VENOM3RDUM 11 months ago
(cont'd 2) Those aren't prophecies of Jesus of Nazareth. The so called prophecies that many link to Jesus are done so using extreme bias, circular reasoning, and/or gross removal of scripture form original context. In fact, if you study diligently, you'll find that Jesus is not the messiah by biblical standard.
VENOM3RDUM 11 months ago
(cont'd 1) In terms of law however, one man abiding by the law and thus fulfilling it does not make everyone else to whom the law applied exempt from it; i.e. because I don not murder does not mean that there is no longer a law against murder even though I fulfill (comply with) that law.
VENOM3RDUM 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. " -Mat 5:18
This means nothing from the law will be removed as long as heaven and earth exist OR the law is unfulfilled.
What fulfilled means here is this:
To accomplish or perform what was desired; to answer any desire by compliance or gratification. (TBC)
VENOM3RDUM 11 months ago
It's funny you say that the appropriate thing to do with disobedient children is to punish them. Accodring to the bible the appropriate thing to do is stone them to death Deuteronomy 21:18-21. Even if we are not under this law anymore, what kind of a sick God would think this is an approptiate punishment during any time period?
ryan84160 1 year ago
@ryan84160 WE (gentiles) were NEVER under this law it was for a specific people for a specific time.
It doesn't make him sick or twisted neither does it make him sick or twisted for throwing people in hell for not following his law.
only in the minds of you guys is it sick and twisted
Krazie316 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ryan84160 "The most holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes, and teaches that the Mosaic Law ... cannot be observed without the loss of eternal salvation ... Everyone, therefore, who observes circumcision and the Sabbath and the other requirements of the Law, the Church declares not in the least fit ... to participate in eternal salvation." -Infallible Teaching of the Catholic Church from the Council of Florence
FATIMAMOVEMENT d o t c o m
"The Lord" is SATAN. Christ IS God.
fatimamovement 9 months ago
since Christ said that he is here to fulfilled the law that means you Christians are still should live by it and you don't, which means you're not Christians at all...so what are you?
yeah! because if you were Christians honor killings would be ok with you guys because it was ok with christ.
remember Christ didn't stoned the bitch, but where are your accusers.
thank you, progressive and enlighten movements.
save humanity , end religion.
FREEAMERICANOW69 1 year ago
@FREEAMERICANOW69 you have no idea what the hell you're talking about this very video destroys the claim wer're still under that law let alone my "Schooling an atheist on the bible" video which goes into even more detail why we don't.
Christianity was what made this country better, now that your so called progressive liberals have taken over since the 60's everything got worse
Krazie316 1 year ago
@Krazie316
wrong, he said it was fulfilled while on the cross, he didn't say "it's fulfilled and now you can stop living by mosaic law". if you believed that, feel free to point that quote to me in the bible...i'll wait.
only he challenged laws that he thought was stupid like the long hair one and not big ones like the honor killing one for some perceived adultery and needing two witnesses, like they were actually there
valuesvoternews com/2008/12/doesnt-jesus-contradict-old-testament
FREEAMERICANOW69 1 year ago
@FREEAMERICANOW69 WRONG he said not a jot shall in no wise pass TILL all be fulfilled, you're a moron if you can't understand this simple logic
Krazie316 1 year ago
@FREEAMERICANOW69 Evident;y you falied Engilsh class:
Matthew 5:1818 "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."
try reading the whole chapter instead of cherrypicking and failing. Apostle Paul made it clear we are no wise under the Mosaic Law.
The 10 commandments are eternal but Mosaic law is not 10 commandments.
Dreamshade4ever 1 year ago
@FREEAMERICANOW69 One of the profound emphases of the New Testament, especially the epistles of Paul, is that Christians are NO longer under the rule of the Mosaic law. This truth is stated in no uncertain terms and in various ways (Rom. 6:14; 7:1-14; Gal. 3:10-13, 24-25; 4:21; 5:1, 13; 2 Cor. 3:7-18).
Dreamshade4ever 1 year ago
@Krazie316
"Christianity was what made this country better,"
YEAH! polictians has to lie and say they believe in god and support israel and give them 3 billions usd/ year.
that abstinence thing that rose teen pregnancy and std's rates to a new high and waste billions of tax payer's money on "faith based programs" that can't be proven until you die aka called SCAM.
gays can't get legally marriage because you people don't know the difference between a legal marriage and spiritual one.
FREEAMERICANOW69 1 year ago
@FREEAMERICANOW69 actually abstinance was taught before the sexual revolution and kept the STD's to a very minimal ammount.
it was after the sexual revolution when the STD's rose teen pregnancies, pre-marital sex, etc because if liberalism. the failure is yours.
Homosexuals can marry someone of the opposite sex, you have equal rights so stop whining about not getting them
Krazie316 1 year ago
@FREEAMERICANOW69 You've done nothing but launch the same old tired refuted arguments from years ago, I don't have time for your crap. I have more important things to be bothered with than another libtard
Krazie316 1 year ago
@FREEAMERICANOW69 uh if it werent for christianity america wouldnt be around....i win
MidniteLovr35 1 year ago
Yall both wrong bro.
ibrowzu 1 year ago
@ibrowzu as I have had this debate several times over I doubt you can provide anything to show I'm wrong on this one
Krazie316 1 year ago
@Krazie316 Ok, all has not been fulfilled that was written in the law and the prophets concerning christ...for instance...daniel 7:13-14 has not been fulfilled yet as well as others.
ibrowzu 1 year ago
@ibrowzu As I suspected the same fallacious mistake a lot of people make.
Christ fullfilled the Law at with his resurrection. In John right brfore he gives up the ghosts it says "so that the scripture may be fulfilled sayith I thirst".
We are no longer under Mosaic law. When Christ said till all be fulfilled in Matthew 5 he was talking about the law
Krazie316 1 year ago
@Krazie316 Ok bro 2 ?'s....is the book of daniel considered scripture?(yes) and has daniel 7:13-14 been fulfilled?(no)/ If daniel 7:13-14 is scripture concerning christ then ALL has not been fulfilled yet. U need to look into which law christ was referring to in matt5:17-19
ibrowzu 1 year ago
@ibrowzu Uh, I know exactly which law he was talking about and that is Mosaic Law, to destroy your argument Paul made it abundantly clear we are no longer under a schoolmaster. Paul stated all over the new testament we're no longer under mosaic law.
The bible as a whole has not been fulfilled but Mosaic Law has, this is why we no longer offer up burnt sacrifices and kill off certain sins
Krazie316 1 year ago
@Krazie316 i agree we are not under the mosaic law but we still have to keep the 10 commandments with the faith in christ. Christ was talking about the 10 commandments in matthew 5:17-19.
ibrowzu 1 year ago
@ibrowzu then why are you arguing with me, this video is regarding Mosaic Law Only, the Mosaic Law and Ten Commandments are different sets of laws.
10 commandments are eternal we know this
Krazie316 1 year ago
@Krazie316 it sounds as if you were saying that matt5:17-19 was referring to the mosaic law and that he fulfilled all that was written in the law and the prophets concerning him,in which i simply disagreed with.
ibrowzu 1 year ago
@ibrowzu In Matthew 5 he expressly says I come not to destroy but to fulfill, he fulfilled that law with his resurrection, those versus were not talking about the 10 commandments. It was ALREADY stated in the OT they were eternal, but the Mosaic law had to be fulfilled in order for people to be saved and make it into heaven as previously they couldn't before Christ, they went to paradise in Hell till he wen't and got those in paradise
Krazie316 1 year ago
@Krazie316 wrong again bro the law was made for the unrighteous, christ showed us how to walk and please god in the spirit and not the letter. Christ fulfilled most prophecy concerning him but not all. The law in which nothing can pass from is the 10 commandments, because he was taking away from the mosaic law in that same chapter(matt 5) and he had not been hanged on a tree yet.
ibrowzu 1 year ago
@ibrowzu We would still be stoning homosexuals to death and adulterers and be offering up burnt sacrifices.
It is clear. you are alos in error because Christ taught it was good to follow the law he however taught against hypocrisy later after he fulfilled the law.
Even those that think Christ was saying Mosaic Law won't go away till the entire book is fulfilled know this verse is dealing with Mosaic Law not 10 commandments
Krazie316 1 year ago
@Krazie316 It was gud to follow the law(mosaic) at that time because the new covenant had not been established yet. Christ promoted following the 10 with a pure heart while having faith in him..... p.s. the bible is for those of a pure heart to understand not professionals.
ibrowzu 1 year ago
@ibrowzu That was a joke it wasn't literal, someone like you would try to make an actual point about that.
It's actually a learning experience led by the spirit
Krazie316 1 year ago
@Krazie316 the "spirit" that led you to say that wasn't of the most high, sarcasm and "Jokes" have nothing to do with the holy spirit.
ibrowzu 1 year ago
@ibrowzu You've officially failed miserably.
We know literally the bible is not for proffesionals yet for those that are led by the spirit, but obviously debunking people and my studies being led by the spirit are of the most high.
You failed at asserting the spirit resides not in me.
sarcasm and jokes are harmless
Krazie316 1 year ago
Galatians 3:19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was ADDED because of transgressions, UNTIL the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
Who is the seed to come?
Verse 6 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
So the law was ADDED UNTIL the Seed(Christ) should come. Sounds clear and cut to me.
AsTheDaysOfNoahWere 2 years ago
Too bad the atheists don't understand that, lol.
I go deeper into Pauls proofs in my video "Schooling an atheist on the bible"
Krazie316 2 years ago
So Jesus dies to fulfill the law so that the law might be abandoned.
Yep makes perfect sense.
AAL 2 years ago
The law was put in place because there was no forgiveness for sin, only atonement.
Nobody could follow the law therefore God created a way for an eternal sacrifce instead of the limited animal sacrifices they had to make.
Since Christ paid for our sins the debt we owe to him now and he said this is how I want you to pay me back. Love God with all your heart, mind, and sou, and Love your neighbor as yourself.
For more evidence view my video against ZJ "Schooling an atheist on the bible"
Krazie316 2 years ago
I'm not gonna explain what I have already explained dozens of times, the KVJ is the most accurate parallel version there is
Krazie316 2 years ago
Among the vast majority of theologians the KJV is one of the most bias, perverted, and corrupt translations of the original text ever conceived. If you want to know what the Bible actually means, learn Hebrew and Greek, read it, then wax philosophical about what you know, until then just know you are only reading a 400 year old translation of what a rich ass white man wanted you to read
erietemperance 2 years ago
I beg to differ, all the hardcore people that have given extreme scrutiny of the bible versions know the KJV is the most credible version of the bible second to the Greek and Hebrew which I have used dozens of translators to verify passages if the KJV.
Most bible scholars try to find reason with the bible and change things into passages that do not say what is says in the original.
There are SEVERAL people on here that will prove with hard evidence such as myself the KJV is best
Krazie316 2 years ago
I don't know who your hard core people are, I give them my regards. But my "Hard-core" people are PhD's from Loyola, Capital, De Paul, and Northwestern, The KJV is useless, Maybe when you get past an associates you will too understand. Until then, live your live at the will of rich white medieval men. Its your life,
erietemperance 2 years ago
I roll with that and some if many degrees,
The KJV is the most accurate and correct version there is.
The NIV is complete garbage and is far from scholarly designed with a homosexual and satanist.
The evidence is clear
Krazie316 2 years ago
why is the king james version the only one that should be on the planet, all the versions of the bible have been altered by man. its not the first incarnation of the bible captain wow.
thisis3d 2 years ago
I will give a full explanation of my beliefs from the Holy Scriptures if you are willing to read them.
ahouseuponarock 2 years ago
I would Like to first make my position clear.
1. I believe the that Jesus is the son of GOD, the King of Kings, and Lord of Lords.
2. I believe he died for my sins and was resurrected.
3. I believe his sacrifice did not abolish Gods laws
4. I believe that we are save by grace and not works. The Law doesn't save you it is only your duty as a child of GOD to obey it through the help of the Holy Ghost.
ahouseuponarock 2 years ago
the only eternal law was that of the 10 commandments, but I did several videos on the Mosaic Law backed by a plethora of scriptures
Krazie316 2 years ago
Where does the Bible say that the 10 commandments will apply for all time, but the rest of the Old Testament laws will not?
Also, which 10 commandments? (exodus 20 or exodus 34)
Heathenfidel 2 years ago
I already explained the first part in the video, Jesus said in Matthew 22:36-40: 36Master, which is the great commandment in the law? 37Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38This is the first and great commandment. 39And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. 40On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
Krazie316 2 years ago
Exodus 20 are the Ten Commandmets, Exodus 34 lays down some Mosaic Law, and Deuteronomy 5:6-21. repeats Exodus 20.
Krazie316 2 years ago
My brother in Christ. I apologize for my harsh approach in my initial statements. Even though respectfully disagree with your stance on this issue, I believe we can reason together and come to the truth of the matter.
ahouseuponarock 2 years ago
you clearly do not know Jewish culture. what does Paul, who by the way kept the law(Torah), mean by we are no longer under the law?read Romans a couple of times and you will get it.
ahouseuponarock 2 years ago
Hence, since neither circumcision nor uncircumcision was anything (1Co 7:19), he complied with the principle that he states in 1Co 9:19,20. In Ga 2:3 it is stated that when Titus, a Greek, went up to Jerusalem, he was not compelled to be circumcised. Had he been, it would have been a concession to the Judaizing Christians who insisted that circumcision was necessary to salvation.
Krazie316 2 years ago
You clearly lack a basic understanding of cross referencing scripture and are thus an EPIC FAIL.
Krazie316 2 years ago
the act was one of pure expediency, in order to reach more unconverted Jews. These examples teach us to accommodate ourselves to the prejudices of others as far as we can without the sacrifice of principle.
Krazie316 2 years ago
you clearly don't know what you are talking about. and you are very prideful. I think that is why you can't see the truth. you confuse verse 18. there was no law called "the Mosiaic Law" Its was the law of Moses or The Torah. Here's something to think about. did Jeus teach anyone not follow the Law? continue to read the following verses after verse 18 to get the that verse in context. Did the apostle keep the law after Jesus died? read acts 21:15-26 (KJV) or Acts16:1-4.
ahouseuponarock 2 years ago
it's called Misaic law because it's the law of Moses MOSAIC get a clue
Jesus said till all be fulfilled, he fufilled it by his death burial and ressurection.
Second:
"circumcised him. Not because he thought it necessary to salvation, but because of the Jews. Wherever Paul traveled, he first labored in the Jewish synagogues. If one of his traveling companions was a Gentile, it would arouse Jewish prejudice so as to close their ears......
Krazie316 2 years ago
Ownage!
gworksnell 2 years ago
smpunditz is high as hell.
gworksnell 2 years ago
you got an atheist reading the Bible?! that's a win in itself!
sldeyo 2 years ago 4
I just love how someone thinks they can just read through the Bible without the help of God to understand and then think they can convince US of their distorted views!
What is wrong with these people?
Everyone needs a TEACHER to understand. :-)
GodGunsGutsGlory 2 years ago 5
HAHAHAHHAHAhahahahahhahHAHAHAHHAH
ohhhhhhhhhhhhh GOD, that is funny.
Naminator236 2 years ago
Just some background info.
The word fulfill (v 17) comes from the Greek pleroo. This means satisfy, execute, finish verify (or coincide with a prediction) accomplish, complete, end, expire, fulfill, fully preach, perfect, ect.
Be fulfilled in verse 18 translates from ginomai. This means be brought to pass, happen, be ended, be finished, fulfilled, ect.
Epydemic2020 2 years ago 2
Matt. 5:17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."
In this verse, the Law = Torah, and the Prophets = the rest of the OT. It is saying that Jesus is not throwing out the OT, but fulfilling its prophecies (part of which is making a new covenant Jeremiah 31:31-34).
The next verse (18) shows us that we may be under a new covenant, but the OT itself is still valuable.
Epydemic2020 2 years ago 2
Punditz is most likely referencing Psalm 137:9 when he talks about dashing babies heads against rocks. However, Punditz claims that God orders that these babies skulls be slammed into rocks. The passage itself is quite clear, it is a prophecy that in the future Babylon would fall and that their conquerers would be happy to do this terrible act to them. In no way was this a command of God, merely a explanation that such an event would happen.
Epydemic2020 2 years ago
The guy is an epic failure like all atheists that try to discredit the bible twisting scripture like krazie, lol
Krazie316 2 years ago
Solid teaching brother!!!
coppertop1964 2 years ago
Awesome apologetics.
LthrnZack 2 years ago
Just so you know Krazie I read the entire passage and I'm well aware that Jesus was breaking Old Mosiac law and encouraging others to do the same while he was still alive by telling them not to pass judgment on others.
Truth is Jesus is a nitpicker when it came to the Old Testament and when the Jews called him on his bullshit.
This contradicts your claim that the law still applied until Jesus's death.
smpunditz 2 years ago
we don't make claims around here without providing scripture back what you say up
Krazie316 2 years ago
John 8
In this passage Jesus stops the Pharisees from stoning a women to death in accordance to Mosaic law.
According to you people still had to follow the Mosiac Laws until Jesus's death so Jesus basically told them not to do what you claim they should had to continue doing until his death.
smpunditz 2 years ago
OOPSIE he said something to the affect "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" meaning they too did son and by the law all should be put to death.
Christ being God in the flesh, he already knows who did what and hence they would be hypocrites if they stoned her.
Another failed attempt to discredit the bible son.
Christ paved the way and prepared for forgiveness however he did not tell them NOT to stone the woman.
Krazie316 2 years ago
Yes because Jesus let the woman cop out. The Pharisees didn't think Jesus was for real either because he kept talking about keeping the law and changing it at the same time.
Matt. 7:1 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged."
Jesus told people not to judge which is a contradiction between from the Old Testament when God made it people's obligation to judge.
smpunditz 2 years ago
"The Pharisees didn't think Jesus was for real either because he kept talking about keeping the law and changing it at the same time."
Talking about changing it and actually changing it are two different things buddy, try again.
"Jesus told people not to judge"
WRONG read the whole thing is says don't judge HYPOCRITICALLY which is what the "he who is without sin cast the first stone thing was all about.
Krazie316 2 years ago
simply saying let those who are not in sin cast a stone, that's not telling them not to follow the law he simply pointed out they too are sinning, they could have easily still stoned her but their lesson learned was they were hypocrites sinning in secrecy
Krazie316 2 years ago
If everyone's a sinner like Jesus says and no sinner can pass judgment then that means Mosiac law could never have been followed period.
Besides you christians don't follow Jesus's modern teachings of today so it's not like you would follow the Old Testament anyways. Jesus was worse the Karl Marx when it came to economics. He didn't even believe in Usury.
smpunditz 2 years ago
"If everyone's a sinner like Jesus says and no sinner can pass judgment then that means Mosiac law could never have been followed period."
Wrong he for them to be hypocritical they would have to be commiting the same sin without being caught in the act.
"Besides you christians don't follow Jesus's modern teachings of today so it's not like you would follow the Old Testament anyways."
Actually we do
Krazie316 2 years ago
"Wrong he for them to be hypocritical they would have to be commiting the same sin without being caught in the act."
So what sin exactly were the Pharisees caught committing when they caught the adulterous woman? It never said they committed adultery.
"Actually we do"
So you never got a loan or put money in the bank before then?
smpunditz 2 years ago
Actually I was watching T.V. and falling asleep in my chair.
"So what sin exactly were the Pharisees caught committing when they caught the adulterous woman? It never said they committed adultery."
It also never said they were CAUGHT sinning, they didn't stone because they sinned it never said anything about the type of sin.
Are you tired of failing
Krazie316 2 years ago
Your argument assumes that everyone who wanted to stone the woman to death committed the same sin when there is no evidence of such.
Also I noticed you ignored my other question regarding Usury.
smpunditz 2 years ago
The pharisees were great hypocrites, Jesus calls them out on it many times. Matt 23:33 for example. (This is not necessarily in adultery tho).
Jesus was the only one in the crowd who was in any position to judge, everyone else was a sinner. (the story of Jesus forgiving the woman of her sins foreshadows his purpose)
Epydemic2020 2 years ago
there's also no evidence they didn't.
"Also I noticed you ignored my other question regarding Usury. "
I didn't ignore anything, Simply earning interest from the money one loans out is not necessarily a sin.
Luke 19:23 KJV
Krazie316 2 years ago
In the OT, the Hebrew people were not to charge interest. Then again many of their practices focus not on material wealth but seek to alleviate poverty and encourage charity.
I don't recall Jesus every talking about usury tho. Are you referencing where Jesus throwing money changers out of the church? Because if so that is quite different than being against all loans and interest rates.
Epydemic2020 2 years ago
If usury were a sin, Jesus would not have encouraged people (and banks) to partake of it.
If you're referring to the definition of usury by the parallels the more modern definition of charging exorbitant interest rates, then yeah you're clobbering people.
"An example would be a credit card company charging 21% on people's balances. How can they justify this at a time when most banks are paying their depositors less than 2% on their savings accounts and no more than 5% on 10-year CDs?"
Krazie316 2 years ago
Jesus did not encourage usury. 21For I feared thee, because thou art an austere man: thou takest up that thou layedst not down, and reapest that thou didst not sow. 22And he saith unto him, Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee, thou wicked servant. Thou knewest that I was an austere man, taking up that I laid not down, and reaping that I did not sow: 23Wherefore then gavest not thou my money into the bank, that at my coming I might have required mine own with usury?
smpunditz 2 years ago
"reapest that thou didst not sow."
Jesus uses the story to point out how usurers take up more than what work they have actually done.
smpunditz 2 years ago
Secondly all scriptures referencing usury are against lending money to the poor and charging interest, what about those that aren't poor such as Oprah?
Or putting money in the bank to acquire interest they use your money and give you interest for using your money.
Krazie316 2 years ago
read the versus beforehand in fact read the whole chapter including:
Matthew 25 Luke 19
Furthermore again Mosaic Law has been hammered to the cross.
Krazie316 2 years ago
Punditz,
It seems this discussion has shifted from you misinterpreting the book of Matthew to misinterpreting the book of Luke.
You are quoting a tiny portion of the parable of the 10 Minas. It discusses different people all given the responsibility of taking care of 10 coins. The ones who invested it were given more responsibilities, and the one who merely hid the 10 coins had his money taken away and given to the people who invested, because they were better stewards of their money.
Epydemic2020 2 years ago 3
lol he's done!
The guy is just the ideal atheist.
The bible requires spiritual discernment these kats don't have an ounce of it and therefore always fail tremendously.
I'm screen capturing this argument for my records and later laughs, lol
Krazie316 2 years ago
That being said it's open to interpretation what the men were doing in the dark isn;t it.
Try again
Krazie316 2 years ago
Oh I see you are backtracking now that you noticed the contradiction in your two statements.
smpunditz 2 years ago
"Oh I see you are backtracking now that you noticed the contradiction in your two statements. "
I never made one
Krazie316 2 years ago
lol its funny how you have to explain this to him when the most simple english is in the verse alone.
xchampx 2 years ago
When will these atheists understand that the Word of God is spiritually discerned. They will NEVER get it! Their meager attempts are simply laughable.
Keep destroying these guys, perhaps future ones will not bother to step to you and avoid embarrassment!!!!!!!!
Welcome to Krazie316 University, LOL :)
Remain strong brother because these guys appear to be coming out of every dark crack. It's crazy. You exterminate one and other roaches begin crawling out to meet the same fate! *SIGH*
TheMinister7 2 years ago
5 stars great video
MavericKLongRange 2 years ago 2
Yeah. When they first came out they were into some wicked things. I listen to them every now and then, but I stay away from faces of death. Great vids. God bless.
JeffTheDude777 2 years ago 2
Good job man. And nice new intro.
God bless.
underground94teo 2 years ago 2
Good stuff. The picture of you in the yellow shirt, you look like Flesh n bone back in the 90's.
JeffTheDude777 2 years ago
I used to LOOOOOOOVE Bone Thugs N Harmony and BOUGHT, not stole, every single CD that came out.
But I cut them all up because of the krazie stuff they were doing in their first 2 CD's and stopped listening to them soo much especially because I'm saved now.
I still occasionally listen to them but there's nothing like that old Bone Thugs
Krazie316 2 years ago
5 stars.
Krazie316: taking atheists to bible school since 06
shasaki2 2 years ago 4
Thanks
Krazie316 2 years ago