God is a douche? How many douche bags do you know that would purposefully humble themslves and give up their entire freedom and become meek humble poor homeless hungry shunned abused and be murdered with a single purpose in mind that through all of that humanity could be righted in the freest way possible?
Hell doesn't exist..even the pope admitted and apologized , hell was made by religions to control people by fear "If you don't do X you will go to hell or if you do X you Will go to hell" . God , whatever you want to call Him, is made of pure light and loves everyone unconditionally , everyone should study their religion more , most of the stuff contradicts one another , it's plane non sense that's why I have no religion , some say that Pope benedict Xvi,or all popes are the anti-christ ...
Fall on your face before the living God! Repent of your unbelief. We will all stand before him soon. Repent! You have heard the message, it's too late to go back. Now the choice is yours.
Don't be deceived! God is warning you that you will suffer eternally, do you not see this as an act of grace and endless mercy? Absolutely, you choose to be subject to damnation because of your rebellion against an infinitely Holy God and unbelief in the almighty Christ. Christ is the only way to the Father, in case you were wondering. This generation of vipers is so lost- you dare to fearlessly mock and ridicule my Father and not even acknowledge the Christ who is the ONLY WAY to get to him. I
This is well articulated and well informed; however in regards to the any argument using bible references isn't stable because the bible isn't a reliable source. i don't mean this to say that its straight wrong i mean that there is literally not 1 thing in the entire book that isn't contradicted some were else in the book, this lead to people being able to do w.e the fuck they wanted with it and is a large reason why it is so popular.
What biblical passage says that God's saving love is unconditional? How did you determine that it is wrong for God to threaten some person or many people? It's not "love me or burn". It's "you are a lawless sinner who has rebelled against her creator. Repent and trust the one who died for you anyway". I am sure that has been explained to you before.
@the13thof12 See the link in the description. It is a christian webpage, go to the second paragraph. I already discussed this with another person below, & I clarified : "Thats what I was trying to get at: that we are allegedly all loved unconditionally in life, but when we die those who weren't zombies for Jesus are no longer loved." My point in the video is that god's love is not unconditional (which is why I said "If").
@HBanana55 Ah, you are confusing categories. God's love for all people is a verb. He does kind things such as letting you breath his air. This love is undeserved and is therefore unconditional. God's love for his covenant people is conditional. It is conditioned on perfect righteousness. Only those who are in Christ have that perfect righteousness and therefore are the only ones who receive God's conditional love by being united to the only one who meets the conditions.
@the13thof12 I don't want to get into a semantics debate about what the word 'love' should or should not be or mean. But, I already said (concerning the 'category' of hell/afterlife) that gods love is conditional, & I agree w/ u there. The 'categories' (or other categories?) of god's love are not rly relevant to my point about the afterlife b/c my point is simply that i dont agree w/ the afterlife system b/c its conditional & that contradicts my definition of love.
@the13thof12 Not allowing ppl to be tortured forever... just for starters... I think thats kind of the opposite of love. Unconditional love, at least... I hate conditional love. I wouldn't tolerate it from another person, so I won't tolerate it from a God. Of course, I am speaking about a condition that involves physical pain, not the obvious condition of commitment in a relationship. The beautiful thing about most human relationships is that u get to CHOOSE w/o being threatened w/ torture.
@HBanana55 This raises some questions in my mind. In light of the relativistic nature of atheistic morality, upon what basis do you come to the conclusion that God's saving love must be unconditional in order to be moral? And, why should anyone accept your definition of love over and above the definition of God's love as recorded in scripture? In other words your preference is at odds with the bible's revelation. Why is your preference morally better, aside from it's being your preference?
@the13thof12 "Relativistic" morality isn't unique to atheists. Do u religious ppl even collectively agree on ur own morality? Nope. I think I've adequately explained morality a couple of times, enough for u to come up w/ the answers to those questions. If I rly have to explain why an omniscient god allowing ppl to be tortured forever (for being inherently sinful/guilty/imperfect etc) is grotesque then i don't think I can simply make u understand by explaining it further to you.
@the13thof12 (Contd) I've been on your side of the fence before, & what I've already told u made sense to me when I was a Christian. If its not making sense to you, i don't know what to tell you. Its something you'd have to learn for yourself at this point if what I've already said doesn't make sense or isn't enough, otherwise you won't get it.
@HBanana55 It would save time if you would just admit that you cannot give an answer that is consistent with your world-view. Well, I suppose you could; but then you would have to drop the pretense of moral outrage. And then your videos would get awfully boring. You would have to make a video entitled: "God is a bastard and as an atheist I have no real reason to have a problem with that." Or, you could make one called: "God doesn't exist. But I hate him."
@HBanana55 What would change? Think about it. You have no basis for objective morality and yet you insist that it is objectively wrong for God to love people conditionally. You insist that many of the things you find to be distasteful or unpleasant in the bible are objectively wrong. And yet, you admit that, on your world-view, there is no objective basis for morality. All I'm asking for is consistency. I cannot seem to get that from any atheist with whom I engage.
@the13thof12 when did I argue for objective morality?? My personal values are PERSONAL b/c morality is subjective. Its laughable that you ask for consistency when there are thousands of denoms of Christianity b/c none of you can be consistent on what your morality is. My values are simply different from yours. The root of the issue is your belief in God. I don't have this belief so I don't base my morality on it. I already told u what I do base it on, tho.
@HBanana55 You are missing the point. You haven't argued for objective morality; but your complaints about God's behavior make objective claims about morality. Otherwise the most you could say is that you don't like it. This insistence on your part that what is true be sought out and followed and what is false be rejected is proof that you know God exists. You have to borrow from the Christian world-view in order to make your case against the Christian God.
@the13thof12 I have not once made an objective claim about my values/morality. I've told you over & over my values are personal, different, subjective & somehow this translates as objective claims to you?? The rest of your comment is also completely absurd & just demonstrates your own ignorance on the matter. I'm done repeating myself. At this point you're obviously just here to jerk me around. You'd be better off not wasting your time, b/c I'm done wasting mine.
@HBanana55 I already acknowledged that you haven't argued for an objective morality. What I am saying is that your problems with God depend on there being an objective morality, which in turn depends on the existence of Yahweh. Which you already know. I will pray that this bothers you terribly in those small hours.
@the13thof12 u explain it well... but u can only do so much some ppl (HBANANA55) are just blinded by their own hate of God. God makes it clear that if u disobey u must b punished. Ppl who cant accept that are just like kids who have temper tantrums bc they dont want to go to time out for what they did wrong... & thats OBEYING the parent. its only fair that the punishment is hell bc God himself made it so. i dont understand why ppl hate their own God when he gives u a choice for eternal life.
"He then actively punished us for said imperfections."
God made us perfect, and He also gave us free will. This is what separates humans from the majority of God's other creations. God did not create evil, imperfection, tyranny, or oppression. But he did give free will to Angels and people.
There was a time when Angels and humanity were perfect and without sin.
"but would suffer forever simply because didn't accept Jesus Christ."
You're not applying blame to the proper place. You aren't at fault for rejecting Christ. You're at fault FOR YOUR SIN. Is it wrong to reject Christ? Yes, but if you were sinless, you wouldn't need Him anyway.
Our lies, lust, blasphemy, thefts, arrogance, and pride are what qualify us for Hell. Jesus is what can save you FROM that.
@niksilvourbolt You didn't actually watch the video did you? Jesus = God as a member of the holy trinity.
So essentially God created you knowing how the future would go and that you would sin, god hates you for sinning (the bible makes it clear that god hates sinners, not just the sin), But god also loves you and he only hurts you because he wants you to be good enough for him, your creator.
That sounds exactly like a bullying, insecure spouse or a crazed abusive father.
@pamew "So essentially God created you knowing how the future would go and that you would sin, god hates you for sinning "
Yes, He knew we would sin. God doesn't hate you for sinning, but rather loves you in spite of your sin. Eventually, we will be called to account for for our sins, though. God will ask you to depart from Him (hell) if you have not accepted His son to pay for your sins.
@pamew "But god also loves you and he only hurts you because he wants you to be good enough for him,"
NO. That's not correct. No one is "good enough" for God, but Jesus Christ. We are punished for our sins, because punishment is DESERVED for sins. That's justice. Sin must be paid with death. What is wonderful about our Father is that He allowed His Son to PAY that price. With Jesus literally paying for our sins, we can be with God forever, living in love, health and happiness (not abuse)
@niksilvourbolt Well it's going to be rather hard to communicate with someone who takes everything at face value. Secondly, there's still actually an outstanding comment you haven't replied to, so if you're going to ask for something to discuss, cover the current topic.
@niksilvourbolt "Why not just point out what you're referring to and be direct? It's less insulting than questioning my vocabulary."
Why don't you stop avoiding the actual issue in every comment in a desperate bid to derail the argument?
And to give an answer, I would simply say that I am usually used to people who understand things like figures of speech. I'm sorry that I set my standards too high with you, I shall be sure to lower them post haste.
@niksilvourbolt ...still waiting on an answer champ, and seeing as the comment you still haven't responded to is now in the top rated section I assume others want answers too. You wanted to discuss something meaningful, here's your chance.
An answer to what? I ask for directness, and you reply "I'm still waiting."
Normally, when a person ask for clarification, the other person REPEATS OR REPHRASES THE QUESTION. Can you do that? With clarity, perhaps? I promise I'll answer when you do.
@niksilvourbolt "Can you do that? With clarity, perhaps? I promise I'll answer when you do."
What part of "seeing as the comment you still haven't responded to is now in the top rated section" don't you understand? The question you're still doing everything to avoid is the highest rated comment, it's getting pretty hard to miss at this point. It's also the ONLY comment of mine that's in the highest rated section. Stop making excuses that don't even cover the situation and answer me.
2) I am not going to rewrite an entire comment that appears right at the top of the page and has been pointed out to you...TWICE. It. is. the. highest. rated. comment. it. is. right. in. front. of. you. Was clarified in a simple enough fashion for you?
So I assume your answer is "no, I'm unable to point out my question".
The conversation is idiotic. I'll respond if you can ever conjure up a question ( I'll ignore further ramblings of "it's right there! stop avoiding the ....").
So basically you want to know what the question is, but by your own admittance will ignore any attempt to point out what the question is.
brilliant. I am not going to copy and paste the comment here as it would activate the spam filter and hide both, so seeing as you insist on being spoon fed I shall have to message you/post it on your wall until you have no further excuses to ignore it.
@niksilvourbolt Both humans AND angels abandoned this perfection when sin and inequity were chosen (as a consequence of free will) over maintaining God's will.
Sin spreads like a virus, and entices others to sin. Even so, a person must act of their own free will and agree to sin. All humans have fallen to sin, and opted against God not out of imperfection in themselves, but rather out of choice when enticed by the world and the influences in it.
@niksilvourbolt The law was given o us not that we might follow it and be saved by it, but rather that we would know 'right from wrong' (the will of God) and understand how we have abandoned God's way for the world. The world is constantly asking us to sin, and no accountable human has failed to be enticed by it into sin, except for Jesus.
Luckily, Jesus decided to use His sinless life as a way to reconcile us to God.
@niksilvourbolt We say reconcile because the Bible recognizes that we were indeed perfect BEFORE sin and inequity was found in us. Our imperfections aren't a manufacturer's defect; God is not responsible for our state of sin; we are each accountable for our own inequities. But in His mercy, God has given us His only Son, that we might live forever with Him in peace, happiness, health, joy, and love.
@niksilvourbolt God does indeed love us. We actively decided to go along with the world instead of pleasing Him. We abandoned Him for our own desires, and for that we deserve punishment and death. Even still, God loved us and gave us His Son, who redeemed us by dying an awful death even though He was sinless. It's by Jesus' death we are reconciled to God, who loves us.
@pamew "That sounds exactly like a bullying, insecure spouse or a crazed abusive father. "
Living in eternal happiness, safety, health, and joy isn't abuse. We deserved death, and yet He wanted to be with us, so He allowed His Son (sinless) to die and take a punishment IN OUR PLACE. That's the greatest mercy of all time, and the greatest act of love.
"We deserved death, and yet He wanted to be with us"
And using that reasoning, He knew we would sin, knew that he would spend almost ALL his time punishing almost all of us in various sadistic ways due to the fact that HE created US imperfect, and yet still went through with it. This is the point where you continue to bleat "he loves us" by the way.
If someone raises a puppy to be a dick, knows it will be, and that dog kills someone you blame the owner. Same thing, different scale.
I totally agree with the video. What really ticks me off is the fact that a loving person could live his/her life but would suffer forever simply because didn't accept Jesus Christ. I don't care what any Christian says, No One deserves to be tortured forever. We do not inherently deserve hell.
A threat and its definition are words to describe somthing on earth as humans. god is not a human and does not speak english, spanish or any languages at all we hardly know anything about anything we are just here for a test. if god was so obious every1 would belive thus knowing the answer to the test there would be no point for us to even be here, IF our world were mad of sand and then you were to see the earth and its beauty it would be a mircale life its self is a miricale no proof needed
As PROOF that God does not run a protection racket, you CANNOT go to heaven simply for doing good deeds. Instead, Heaven (closeness to God) is obtained by BELIEF in and LOVE of Jesus as the resurrected Son, from which obedience (mislabeled as good deeds) does indeed flow.
Because God does NOT owe us anything, we cannot complain if He separates Himself from us for shunning Him. But BECAUSE HE LOVES US he has graciously offered an invitation to live with Him in goodness forever.
God wants us to be holy. We often fail because we desire things that separate us from God. When our ultimate concern takes us away from God, WE imperil ourselves. God has indeed given you free will. He is crying out to you to be with Him and receive nothing but love, kindness, happiness, health, life, and goodness, yet he also has given you the free will to reject all that... which leads to Hell/separation.
When did God ever claim His love was unconditional? If you can find that claim, then you have combed the Bible better than I, because I find that nowhere in the Book.
In fact, God's love is conditional. Those who turn from Him will one day experience an end to His love.
God is goodness. When YOU decide to turn away from Him, YOU have threatened YOURSELF.
@niksilvourbolt All christians have different interpretations of the Bible. Have you never heard a christian say that God loves all his children? That he loves Christians & non-christians equally? Meaning, under no condition does he love Christians more than atheists. Its not until after we die that we are held to a condition. Thats what I was trying to get at: that we are allegedly all loved unconditionally in life, but when we die those who weren't zombies for Jesus are no longer loved.
I'll link a site that I used to go to. I appeal to no "correct" interpretation of the Bible b/c there are so many (some literal, others not so literal). But in this interpretation it clearly says in the second sentence that "God's love is unconditional". If you have issues w/ the interpretation that God's love is unconditional then don't take it up w/ me, b/c I don't even believe he exists.
But in this interpretation it clearly says in the second sentence that "God's love is unconditional".
That's an understandable reaction, but your link and I are most likely not arguing at cross-purposes (or period). God loves everyone until you reach an age of accountability and reject Him.
Not to say that there aren't people with bad/misguided theology... but God's love is quite clearly conditional: "If you do not repent, then you will perish" Lk13.
@HBanana55 Jesus is not asking you to follow Christians. Jesus is not asking you to trust or believe ANY man when it comes to your salvation. Jesus does not encourage you to take any particular man's word as infallible truth. Jesus says "If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me." Mt16.
Jesus wants you to follow HIM, not the Methodists. That means your salvation is dependent SOLELY based on your relationship to Christ. No one else is necessary.
@niksilvourbolt And in retribution for not following Jesus, the Bible says I go to hell. That is a threat, & that is my point, regardless of any debate on personal interpretation. Combined w/ there being no evidence or proof of god actually existing, why would I waste my time buying into this ridiculous scare tactic??
"And in retribution for not following Jesus, the Bible says I go to hell."
It's not the rejection of Jesus that sends you to Hell. Everyone must pay for their sin. Jesus offers to die and take your sins for you. Hell is retribution for our sin, not for failing to accept Jesus.
This is an important distinction. You wouldn't say the city burnt your house down in retribution for not calling the fire department. Jesus is offering you a chance to be saved.
If I told you not to jump in front of a train, would you consider that a threat, or a warning? Would you say that giving you the warning was a scare tactic?
God has identified dangerous activities that he wants you to stay away from. These things make us ALL unholy, yet He loves, so He sent His Son to reconcile you to Him.
God doesn't want you to DO something for Him. Actually, God compares our good works to bloody tampons.Is64. God doesn't want you to 'NOT DO' something for Him, either. And He's not simply demanding that you refrain from an activity because he wants everyone to go to Heaven or to have things on Earth His way. Those things will pass.
@HBanana55 "Combined w/ there being no evidence or proof of god actually existing, why would I waste my time buying into this ridiculous scare tactic??"
Your desires will answer that for you, no one else can say for certain.
God is offering you love, peace, happiness, an end to suffering and eternal life. Do you want those things? If there was a God, and He was offering those things, would you follow after His heart? If there was a God, would you want His help to ease your suffering?
@niksilvourbolt "God is offering you love, peace, happiness, an end to suffering and eternal life. "
First of all, the biblical god, to which I assume you refer, committed mass genocide, and infanticide, and rape and child abuse and slavery in the bible. That's not peaceful and it certainly isn't' loving. Second of all as far as 'escaping suffering' goes, by your own beliefs he's the one that created hell, the suffering of which you speak. So he creates suffering than you think he's great for
@HBanana55 Finaly someone has a brain. God is not all perfect and good and the bible says and an entity like that would of made a a world just as good and perfect but no, it's like God is a child playing with an ant hive. An omnibenevolent, omnipotent entity would be incapable of allowing surrfering and evil to roam around, therefore god is'nt omnibenevolent nor is he omnipotent. You are right though, religious folk do sugger coat this, yet the fact is god is incompetent and at best amoral.
@HBanana55 Do you know why you go to hell? It's because you choosed to go to hell since you reject the free gift of eternal life which is found in Christ; therefore, it is not considered a threat.
"Have you never heard a christian say that God loves all his children?"
Actually, there's an easy reconciliation between those supposed differing conceptions. God loves everyone via grace. But His grace is multi-faceted. He loved you enough to create you, and God knew that you and I would sin, so he sent his Word to guide you, because he loves you and wants you to be safe and happy and holy.
God loves you when he says to you "stop! You're about to hurt yourself! Stop! You're about to hurt others!". At some point, you can reject these warnings and reject His Son such that God-being a just God- will tell you to depart.
So God's love through grace goes to everyone, but WE have the choice to accept or reject that love.
I agree. I've often told theists that they are trying to threaten me when they say I'll go to hell. They don't like it the way a slug doesn't like salt sprinkled on it - but they know it's a threat from them to me. Hypocrites!
The way I see it, I'd rather spend an eternity in Hell than spend an eternity with the being who created hell and sent most of humanity there. So even if Christianity is true (which it almost certainly isn't) I'd still reject their god just because I find him morally repugnant.
@the13thof12 The same as anyone's: The sense of sympathy I feel for my fellow human beings. On some level almost all of us feel a sense of horror on seeing things like murder or torture or other forms of destruction of human life and well being. Only true sociopaths feel no sympathy at all for others, and we exclude them from our society precisely for that reason.
@WesHatesYourMovie What makes your morality better than the morality of those who do not feel empathy for their fellow man? By what standard do you judge between theirs and yours?
@the13thof12 I already explained that. The sociopath rejects the societal rules we all use to guide social behavior. By doing so, he excludes himself from society, and we lock him away. I don't need to feel superior to him. Humans make rules for how to guide themselves in society, and people who break those rules are excluded. The standard is society and the sympathy we have for each other as humans living together. That's the only standard anyone has.
@the13thof12 Uh, no. That's not at all what I said. I said that morality is a matter of being human and feeling sympathy for other humans. I've said it three times now.
@WesHatesYourMovie Yes, but you invoked societal agreement. What happens if an entire society agrees that something is morally okay when you don't think it is? Upon what basis do you make the decision that your morality is better?
@the13thof12 Is the word "sympathy" just not registering with you? If an entire society commits an act which violates basic human sympathy (for instance, the holocaust) then they have done something immoral. I am NOT talking about majority rule here. I'm talking about the basic sense of sympathy for our fellow humans which our species evolved to possess. Look, sentiment-based morality isn't a new idea. It goes all the way back to 18th century philosophers like Hume and Smith. Look it up.
@WesHatesYourMovie I comprehend sympathy well enough; but you haven't really answered my question. What is the standard by which you measure what is and isn't moral? Sympathy doesn't work. I sometimes feel sympathy for my children when they are being punished. And yet it would be immoral and irresponsible of me to not discipline them. So how do you make the distinction between what is and isn't moral?
@the13thof12 I think a more appropriate word would be 'empathy'. In a very general sense, morality i think is a combination of empathy as well as individual values / beliefs which can also be part of the larger society that is all around us, influencing us. This would explain why so many ppl all over the world have different belief systems & concepts of morality. In short, many ppl don't have the same standard, but I know empathy & my personal values/philosophy is my standard.
@HBanana55 It seems inescapable to me that naturalistic/atheistic morality is inherently relativistic. Upon what basis do you make the determination that your morality is good and Yahweh's morality bad? Please try to avoid to question begging "because mine is better because I like it" response that is so common to this kind of question. I want to know where the rubber meets the road in terms of morality in your world-view.
@the13thof12 Well, idk what to tell you if my first comment is 'inescapable' to you. By you asking me my opinion on my version of morality, you must have some sense that its relative? But, regardless, I know whatever I'm doing in life now is working out very well. If you want to know 'where the rubber meets the road', u'd have to be specific b/c it would depend on the situation what stance I would take.
"The whole image is that eternal suffering awaits anyone who questions God's infinite love. That's the message we're brought up with, isn't it? Believe or die! Thank you, forgiving Lord, for all those options." -Bill Hicks
The carrot and the stick. It sure seems as if God is more interested in the stick. Completely counter to a all loving and forgiving deity. Nice job Banana :)
You can sin and be forgiven. But if you don't ask for forgiveness you will go to hell.
So a murdering pedophile rapist drug dealer can ask for forgiveness on their death bed and go to heaven? Get out of jail free card but life isn't Monopoly.
This has been flagged as spam show
God is a douche? How many douche bags do you know that would purposefully humble themslves and give up their entire freedom and become meek humble poor homeless hungry shunned abused and be murdered with a single purpose in mind that through all of that humanity could be righted in the freest way possible?
johhnycarlos 1 week ago
Hell doesn't exist..even the pope admitted and apologized , hell was made by religions to control people by fear "If you don't do X you will go to hell or if you do X you Will go to hell" . God , whatever you want to call Him, is made of pure light and loves everyone unconditionally , everyone should study their religion more , most of the stuff contradicts one another , it's plane non sense that's why I have no religion , some say that Pope benedict Xvi,or all popes are the anti-christ ...
jaksterDC 2 weeks ago
Not all Christians are like that.
FlamingBat 1 month ago
Does your spouse beat you if you don't do as he tells you? well, that's what god is saying. god supports wife beaters. ^_^
Dormantmg 2 months ago
Fall on your face before the living God! Repent of your unbelief. We will all stand before him soon. Repent! You have heard the message, it's too late to go back. Now the choice is yours.
dillonpslater 5 months ago
Don't be deceived! God is warning you that you will suffer eternally, do you not see this as an act of grace and endless mercy? Absolutely, you choose to be subject to damnation because of your rebellion against an infinitely Holy God and unbelief in the almighty Christ. Christ is the only way to the Father, in case you were wondering. This generation of vipers is so lost- you dare to fearlessly mock and ridicule my Father and not even acknowledge the Christ who is the ONLY WAY to get to him. I
dillonpslater 5 months ago
Do Christians keep their free will when they go to heaven?
If so, what happens when they sin in heaven?
Do they then get sent to hell?
What? They won't sin in heaven? 'Lucy' did...
So by this reasoning, in a few years heaven will be empty.
Trinitics 10 months ago
Nice video :)
PS: You have such a cute face x3
codyjohn1551 11 months ago
This is well articulated and well informed; however in regards to the any argument using bible references isn't stable because the bible isn't a reliable source. i don't mean this to say that its straight wrong i mean that there is literally not 1 thing in the entire book that isn't contradicted some were else in the book, this lead to people being able to do w.e the fuck they wanted with it and is a large reason why it is so popular.
rawrified101 1 year ago
"If God's love were truly unconditional..."
What biblical passage says that God's saving love is unconditional? How did you determine that it is wrong for God to threaten some person or many people? It's not "love me or burn". It's "you are a lawless sinner who has rebelled against her creator. Repent and trust the one who died for you anyway". I am sure that has been explained to you before.
the13thof12 1 year ago
@the13thof12 See the link in the description. It is a christian webpage, go to the second paragraph. I already discussed this with another person below, & I clarified : "Thats what I was trying to get at: that we are allegedly all loved unconditionally in life, but when we die those who weren't zombies for Jesus are no longer loved." My point in the video is that god's love is not unconditional (which is why I said "If").
HBanana55 1 year ago
@HBanana55 Ah, you are confusing categories. God's love for all people is a verb. He does kind things such as letting you breath his air. This love is undeserved and is therefore unconditional. God's love for his covenant people is conditional. It is conditioned on perfect righteousness. Only those who are in Christ have that perfect righteousness and therefore are the only ones who receive God's conditional love by being united to the only one who meets the conditions.
the13thof12 1 year ago
@the13thof12 I don't want to get into a semantics debate about what the word 'love' should or should not be or mean. But, I already said (concerning the 'category' of hell/afterlife) that gods love is conditional, & I agree w/ u there. The 'categories' (or other categories?) of god's love are not rly relevant to my point about the afterlife b/c my point is simply that i dont agree w/ the afterlife system b/c its conditional & that contradicts my definition of love.
HBanana55 1 year ago
@HBanana55 I see. Would you be kind enough to tell me what your definition of love is?
the13thof12 1 year ago
@the13thof12 Not allowing ppl to be tortured forever... just for starters... I think thats kind of the opposite of love. Unconditional love, at least... I hate conditional love. I wouldn't tolerate it from another person, so I won't tolerate it from a God. Of course, I am speaking about a condition that involves physical pain, not the obvious condition of commitment in a relationship. The beautiful thing about most human relationships is that u get to CHOOSE w/o being threatened w/ torture.
HBanana55 1 year ago
@HBanana55 This raises some questions in my mind. In light of the relativistic nature of atheistic morality, upon what basis do you come to the conclusion that God's saving love must be unconditional in order to be moral? And, why should anyone accept your definition of love over and above the definition of God's love as recorded in scripture? In other words your preference is at odds with the bible's revelation. Why is your preference morally better, aside from it's being your preference?
the13thof12 1 year ago
@the13thof12 "Relativistic" morality isn't unique to atheists. Do u religious ppl even collectively agree on ur own morality? Nope. I think I've adequately explained morality a couple of times, enough for u to come up w/ the answers to those questions. If I rly have to explain why an omniscient god allowing ppl to be tortured forever (for being inherently sinful/guilty/imperfect etc) is grotesque then i don't think I can simply make u understand by explaining it further to you.
HBanana55 1 year ago
@the13thof12 (Contd) I've been on your side of the fence before, & what I've already told u made sense to me when I was a Christian. If its not making sense to you, i don't know what to tell you. Its something you'd have to learn for yourself at this point if what I've already said doesn't make sense or isn't enough, otherwise you won't get it.
HBanana55 1 year ago
@HBanana55 It would save time if you would just admit that you cannot give an answer that is consistent with your world-view. Well, I suppose you could; but then you would have to drop the pretense of moral outrage. And then your videos would get awfully boring. You would have to make a video entitled: "God is a bastard and as an atheist I have no real reason to have a problem with that." Or, you could make one called: "God doesn't exist. But I hate him."
the13thof12 1 year ago
@the13thof12 Yes, that would save time... except I would have to be completely dishonest with myself.
HBanana55 1 year ago
@HBanana55 What would change? Think about it. You have no basis for objective morality and yet you insist that it is objectively wrong for God to love people conditionally. You insist that many of the things you find to be distasteful or unpleasant in the bible are objectively wrong. And yet, you admit that, on your world-view, there is no objective basis for morality. All I'm asking for is consistency. I cannot seem to get that from any atheist with whom I engage.
the13thof12 1 year ago
@the13thof12 when did I argue for objective morality?? My personal values are PERSONAL b/c morality is subjective. Its laughable that you ask for consistency when there are thousands of denoms of Christianity b/c none of you can be consistent on what your morality is. My values are simply different from yours. The root of the issue is your belief in God. I don't have this belief so I don't base my morality on it. I already told u what I do base it on, tho.
HBanana55 1 year ago
@HBanana55 You are missing the point. You haven't argued for objective morality; but your complaints about God's behavior make objective claims about morality. Otherwise the most you could say is that you don't like it. This insistence on your part that what is true be sought out and followed and what is false be rejected is proof that you know God exists. You have to borrow from the Christian world-view in order to make your case against the Christian God.
the13thof12 1 year ago
@the13thof12 I have not once made an objective claim about my values/morality. I've told you over & over my values are personal, different, subjective & somehow this translates as objective claims to you?? The rest of your comment is also completely absurd & just demonstrates your own ignorance on the matter. I'm done repeating myself. At this point you're obviously just here to jerk me around. You'd be better off not wasting your time, b/c I'm done wasting mine.
HBanana55 1 year ago
@HBanana55 I already acknowledged that you haven't argued for an objective morality. What I am saying is that your problems with God depend on there being an objective morality, which in turn depends on the existence of Yahweh. Which you already know. I will pray that this bothers you terribly in those small hours.
the13thof12 1 year ago
@the13thof12
It won't
HBanana55 1 year ago
@the13thof12 u explain it well... but u can only do so much some ppl (HBANANA55) are just blinded by their own hate of God. God makes it clear that if u disobey u must b punished. Ppl who cant accept that are just like kids who have temper tantrums bc they dont want to go to time out for what they did wrong... & thats OBEYING the parent. its only fair that the punishment is hell bc God himself made it so. i dont understand why ppl hate their own God when he gives u a choice for eternal life.
Mfields222 1 year ago
The god of the bible is so very insecure.
beyondbeyondness 1 year ago
"He then actively punished us for said imperfections."
God made us perfect, and He also gave us free will. This is what separates humans from the majority of God's other creations. God did not create evil, imperfection, tyranny, or oppression. But he did give free will to Angels and people.
There was a time when Angels and humanity were perfect and without sin.
niksilvourbolt 1 year ago
"but would suffer forever simply because didn't accept Jesus Christ."
You're not applying blame to the proper place. You aren't at fault for rejecting Christ. You're at fault FOR YOUR SIN. Is it wrong to reject Christ? Yes, but if you were sinless, you wouldn't need Him anyway.
Our lies, lust, blasphemy, thefts, arrogance, and pride are what qualify us for Hell. Jesus is what can save you FROM that.
niksilvourbolt 1 year ago
@niksilvourbolt You didn't actually watch the video did you? Jesus = God as a member of the holy trinity.
So essentially God created you knowing how the future would go and that you would sin, god hates you for sinning (the bible makes it clear that god hates sinners, not just the sin), But god also loves you and he only hurts you because he wants you to be good enough for him, your creator.
That sounds exactly like a bullying, insecure spouse or a crazed abusive father.
pamew 1 year ago
@pamew "So essentially God created you knowing how the future would go and that you would sin, god hates you for sinning "
Yes, He knew we would sin. God doesn't hate you for sinning, but rather loves you in spite of your sin. Eventually, we will be called to account for for our sins, though. God will ask you to depart from Him (hell) if you have not accepted His son to pay for your sins.
niksilvourbolt 1 year ago
@niksilvourbolt You don't actually read anything, do you?
pamew 1 year ago
@pamew "But god also loves you and he only hurts you because he wants you to be good enough for him,"
NO. That's not correct. No one is "good enough" for God, but Jesus Christ. We are punished for our sins, because punishment is DESERVED for sins. That's justice. Sin must be paid with death. What is wonderful about our Father is that He allowed His Son to PAY that price. With Jesus literally paying for our sins, we can be with God forever, living in love, health and happiness (not abuse)
niksilvourbolt 1 year ago
@niksilvourbolt You have no idea what the word "facetious" means either do you?
pamew 1 year ago
@pamew "You have no idea what the word "facetious" means either do you?"
Do you have something to discuss, or is it going to be more of this?
niksilvourbolt 1 year ago
@niksilvourbolt Well it's going to be rather hard to communicate with someone who takes everything at face value. Secondly, there's still actually an outstanding comment you haven't replied to, so if you're going to ask for something to discuss, cover the current topic.
pamew 1 year ago
@pamew "Well it's going to be rather hard to communicate with someone who takes everything at face value. "
Why not just point out what you're referring to and be direct? It's less insulting than questioning my vocabulary.
niksilvourbolt 1 year ago
@niksilvourbolt "Why not just point out what you're referring to and be direct? It's less insulting than questioning my vocabulary."
Why don't you stop avoiding the actual issue in every comment in a desperate bid to derail the argument?
And to give an answer, I would simply say that I am usually used to people who understand things like figures of speech. I'm sorry that I set my standards too high with you, I shall be sure to lower them post haste.
pamew 1 year ago
@pamew "Why don't you stop avoiding the actual issue in every comment in a desperate bid to derail the argument?"
Lol.
niksilvourbolt 1 year ago
@niksilvourbolt ...still waiting on an answer champ, and seeing as the comment you still haven't responded to is now in the top rated section I assume others want answers too. You wanted to discuss something meaningful, here's your chance.
pamew 1 year ago
@pamew "still waiting on an answer champ"
An answer to what? I ask for directness, and you reply "I'm still waiting."
Normally, when a person ask for clarification, the other person REPEATS OR REPHRASES THE QUESTION. Can you do that? With clarity, perhaps? I promise I'll answer when you do.
niksilvourbolt 1 year ago
Comment removed
pamew 1 year ago
@niksilvourbolt "Can you do that? With clarity, perhaps? I promise I'll answer when you do."
What part of "seeing as the comment you still haven't responded to is now in the top rated section" don't you understand? The question you're still doing everything to avoid is the highest rated comment, it's getting pretty hard to miss at this point. It's also the ONLY comment of mine that's in the highest rated section. Stop making excuses that don't even cover the situation and answer me.
pamew 1 year ago
2) I am not going to rewrite an entire comment that appears right at the top of the page and has been pointed out to you...TWICE. It. is. the. highest. rated. comment. it. is. right. in. front. of. you. Was clarified in a simple enough fashion for you?
pamew 1 year ago
@pamew
So I assume your answer is "no, I'm unable to point out my question".
The conversation is idiotic. I'll respond if you can ever conjure up a question ( I'll ignore further ramblings of "it's right there! stop avoiding the ....").
niksilvourbolt 1 year ago
@niksilvourbolt
So basically you want to know what the question is, but by your own admittance will ignore any attempt to point out what the question is.
brilliant. I am not going to copy and paste the comment here as it would activate the spam filter and hide both, so seeing as you insist on being spoon fed I shall have to message you/post it on your wall until you have no further excuses to ignore it.
pamew 1 year ago
@niksilvourbolt Both humans AND angels abandoned this perfection when sin and inequity were chosen (as a consequence of free will) over maintaining God's will.
Sin spreads like a virus, and entices others to sin. Even so, a person must act of their own free will and agree to sin. All humans have fallen to sin, and opted against God not out of imperfection in themselves, but rather out of choice when enticed by the world and the influences in it.
niksilvourbolt 1 year ago
@niksilvourbolt The law was given o us not that we might follow it and be saved by it, but rather that we would know 'right from wrong' (the will of God) and understand how we have abandoned God's way for the world. The world is constantly asking us to sin, and no accountable human has failed to be enticed by it into sin, except for Jesus.
Luckily, Jesus decided to use His sinless life as a way to reconcile us to God.
niksilvourbolt 1 year ago
@niksilvourbolt We say reconcile because the Bible recognizes that we were indeed perfect BEFORE sin and inequity was found in us. Our imperfections aren't a manufacturer's defect; God is not responsible for our state of sin; we are each accountable for our own inequities. But in His mercy, God has given us His only Son, that we might live forever with Him in peace, happiness, health, joy, and love.
niksilvourbolt 1 year ago
@niksilvourbolt God does indeed love us. We actively decided to go along with the world instead of pleasing Him. We abandoned Him for our own desires, and for that we deserve punishment and death. Even still, God loved us and gave us His Son, who redeemed us by dying an awful death even though He was sinless. It's by Jesus' death we are reconciled to God, who loves us.
niksilvourbolt 1 year ago
@pamew "That sounds exactly like a bullying, insecure spouse or a crazed abusive father. "
Living in eternal happiness, safety, health, and joy isn't abuse. We deserved death, and yet He wanted to be with us, so He allowed His Son (sinless) to die and take a punishment IN OUR PLACE. That's the greatest mercy of all time, and the greatest act of love.
niksilvourbolt 1 year ago
"We deserved death, and yet He wanted to be with us"
And using that reasoning, He knew we would sin, knew that he would spend almost ALL his time punishing almost all of us in various sadistic ways due to the fact that HE created US imperfect, and yet still went through with it. This is the point where you continue to bleat "he loves us" by the way.
If someone raises a puppy to be a dick, knows it will be, and that dog kills someone you blame the owner. Same thing, different scale.
pamew 1 year ago 6
I totally agree with the video. What really ticks me off is the fact that a loving person could live his/her life but would suffer forever simply because didn't accept Jesus Christ. I don't care what any Christian says, No One deserves to be tortured forever. We do not inherently deserve hell.
YetAnthony 1 year ago
A threat and its definition are words to describe somthing on earth as humans. god is not a human and does not speak english, spanish or any languages at all we hardly know anything about anything we are just here for a test. if god was so obious every1 would belive thus knowing the answer to the test there would be no point for us to even be here, IF our world were mad of sand and then you were to see the earth and its beauty it would be a mircale life its self is a miricale no proof needed
HoustonRayR 1 year ago
As PROOF that God does not run a protection racket, you CANNOT go to heaven simply for doing good deeds. Instead, Heaven (closeness to God) is obtained by BELIEF in and LOVE of Jesus as the resurrected Son, from which obedience (mislabeled as good deeds) does indeed flow.
Because God does NOT owe us anything, we cannot complain if He separates Himself from us for shunning Him. But BECAUSE HE LOVES US he has graciously offered an invitation to live with Him in goodness forever.
niksilvourbolt 1 year ago
God is not running a protection racket.
God wants us to be holy. We often fail because we desire things that separate us from God. When our ultimate concern takes us away from God, WE imperil ourselves. God has indeed given you free will. He is crying out to you to be with Him and receive nothing but love, kindness, happiness, health, life, and goodness, yet he also has given you the free will to reject all that... which leads to Hell/separation.
niksilvourbolt 1 year ago
girl you are fiiine,,daaaaaamn
bricklanemassive4lyf 1 year ago
When did God ever claim His love was unconditional? If you can find that claim, then you have combed the Bible better than I, because I find that nowhere in the Book.
In fact, God's love is conditional. Those who turn from Him will one day experience an end to His love.
God is goodness. When YOU decide to turn away from Him, YOU have threatened YOURSELF.
niksilvourbolt 1 year ago
@niksilvourbolt All christians have different interpretations of the Bible. Have you never heard a christian say that God loves all his children? That he loves Christians & non-christians equally? Meaning, under no condition does he love Christians more than atheists. Its not until after we die that we are held to a condition. Thats what I was trying to get at: that we are allegedly all loved unconditionally in life, but when we die those who weren't zombies for Jesus are no longer loved.
HBanana55 1 year ago
@HBanana55 Contd...
I'll link a site that I used to go to. I appeal to no "correct" interpretation of the Bible b/c there are so many (some literal, others not so literal). But in this interpretation it clearly says in the second sentence that "God's love is unconditional". If you have issues w/ the interpretation that God's love is unconditional then don't take it up w/ me, b/c I don't even believe he exists.
HBanana55 1 year ago
@HBanana55
But in this interpretation it clearly says in the second sentence that "God's love is unconditional".
That's an understandable reaction, but your link and I are most likely not arguing at cross-purposes (or period). God loves everyone until you reach an age of accountability and reject Him.
Not to say that there aren't people with bad/misguided theology... but God's love is quite clearly conditional: "If you do not repent, then you will perish" Lk13.
niksilvourbolt 1 year ago
@HBanana55 Jesus is not asking you to follow Christians. Jesus is not asking you to trust or believe ANY man when it comes to your salvation. Jesus does not encourage you to take any particular man's word as infallible truth. Jesus says "If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me." Mt16.
Jesus wants you to follow HIM, not the Methodists. That means your salvation is dependent SOLELY based on your relationship to Christ. No one else is necessary.
niksilvourbolt 1 year ago
@niksilvourbolt And in retribution for not following Jesus, the Bible says I go to hell. That is a threat, & that is my point, regardless of any debate on personal interpretation. Combined w/ there being no evidence or proof of god actually existing, why would I waste my time buying into this ridiculous scare tactic??
HBanana55 1 year ago 10
@HBanana55
"And in retribution for not following Jesus, the Bible says I go to hell."
It's not the rejection of Jesus that sends you to Hell. Everyone must pay for their sin. Jesus offers to die and take your sins for you. Hell is retribution for our sin, not for failing to accept Jesus.
This is an important distinction. You wouldn't say the city burnt your house down in retribution for not calling the fire department. Jesus is offering you a chance to be saved.
niksilvourbolt 1 year ago
@HBanana55 "That is a threat"
If I told you not to jump in front of a train, would you consider that a threat, or a warning? Would you say that giving you the warning was a scare tactic?
God has identified dangerous activities that he wants you to stay away from. These things make us ALL unholy, yet He loves, so He sent His Son to reconcile you to Him.
niksilvourbolt 1 year ago
@HBanana55
God doesn't want you to DO something for Him. Actually, God compares our good works to bloody tampons.Is64. God doesn't want you to 'NOT DO' something for Him, either. And He's not simply demanding that you refrain from an activity because he wants everyone to go to Heaven or to have things on Earth His way. Those things will pass.
What God wants is your Heart.
niksilvourbolt 1 year ago
@HBanana55 "Combined w/ there being no evidence or proof of god actually existing, why would I waste my time buying into this ridiculous scare tactic??"
Your desires will answer that for you, no one else can say for certain.
God is offering you love, peace, happiness, an end to suffering and eternal life. Do you want those things? If there was a God, and He was offering those things, would you follow after His heart? If there was a God, would you want His help to ease your suffering?
niksilvourbolt 1 year ago
@niksilvourbolt "God is offering you love, peace, happiness, an end to suffering and eternal life. "
First of all, the biblical god, to which I assume you refer, committed mass genocide, and infanticide, and rape and child abuse and slavery in the bible. That's not peaceful and it certainly isn't' loving. Second of all as far as 'escaping suffering' goes, by your own beliefs he's the one that created hell, the suffering of which you speak. So he creates suffering than you think he's great for
humanistheart 1 year ago
@niksilvourbolt giving you an out from suffering rather than not creating it in the first place? What part of that makes sense to you?
humanistheart 1 year ago
@HBanana55 It's not a threat, it's your choice that you want to go to hell.
777Discipleship777 11 months ago
@HBanana55 Finaly someone has a brain. God is not all perfect and good and the bible says and an entity like that would of made a a world just as good and perfect but no, it's like God is a child playing with an ant hive. An omnibenevolent, omnipotent entity would be incapable of allowing surrfering and evil to roam around, therefore god is'nt omnibenevolent nor is he omnipotent. You are right though, religious folk do sugger coat this, yet the fact is god is incompetent and at best amoral.
NANOFORGE 10 months ago
@HBanana55 Do you know why you go to hell? It's because you choosed to go to hell since you reject the free gift of eternal life which is found in Christ; therefore, it is not considered a threat.
flameboy1236 10 months ago
@HBanana55
"Have you never heard a christian say that God loves all his children?"
Actually, there's an easy reconciliation between those supposed differing conceptions. God loves everyone via grace. But His grace is multi-faceted. He loved you enough to create you, and God knew that you and I would sin, so he sent his Word to guide you, because he loves you and wants you to be safe and happy and holy.
niksilvourbolt 1 year ago
@HBanana55
God loves you when he says to you "stop! You're about to hurt yourself! Stop! You're about to hurt others!". At some point, you can reject these warnings and reject His Son such that God-being a just God- will tell you to depart.
So God's love through grace goes to everyone, but WE have the choice to accept or reject that love.
niksilvourbolt 1 year ago
"Love me or burn policy",....(grin). Thumbs up.
DesertLaser 1 year ago
I agree. I've often told theists that they are trying to threaten me when they say I'll go to hell. They don't like it the way a slug doesn't like salt sprinkled on it - but they know it's a threat from them to me. Hypocrites!
farvision 1 year ago
The way I see it, I'd rather spend an eternity in Hell than spend an eternity with the being who created hell and sent most of humanity there. So even if Christianity is true (which it almost certainly isn't) I'd still reject their god just because I find him morally repugnant.
WesHatesYourMovie 1 year ago
@WesHatesYourMovie Lol, all the cool kids go to hell :)
HBanana55 1 year ago
@HBanana55 Hell yeah! That's where all the good music is playing. :D
WesHatesYourMovie 1 year ago
@WesHatesYourMovie Question: What is your standard for determining what is and isn't "morally repugnant"?
the13thof12 1 year ago
@the13thof12 The same as anyone's: The sense of sympathy I feel for my fellow human beings. On some level almost all of us feel a sense of horror on seeing things like murder or torture or other forms of destruction of human life and well being. Only true sociopaths feel no sympathy at all for others, and we exclude them from our society precisely for that reason.
WesHatesYourMovie 1 year ago
@WesHatesYourMovie What makes your morality better than the morality of those who do not feel empathy for their fellow man? By what standard do you judge between theirs and yours?
the13thof12 1 year ago
@the13thof12 I already explained that. The sociopath rejects the societal rules we all use to guide social behavior. By doing so, he excludes himself from society, and we lock him away. I don't need to feel superior to him. Humans make rules for how to guide themselves in society, and people who break those rules are excluded. The standard is society and the sympathy we have for each other as humans living together. That's the only standard anyone has.
WesHatesYourMovie 1 year ago
@WesHatesYourMovie Let me make sure I understand you. Are you saying that morality it a matter of majority rule?
the13thof12 1 year ago
@the13thof12 Uh, no. That's not at all what I said. I said that morality is a matter of being human and feeling sympathy for other humans. I've said it three times now.
WesHatesYourMovie 1 year ago
@WesHatesYourMovie Yes, but you invoked societal agreement. What happens if an entire society agrees that something is morally okay when you don't think it is? Upon what basis do you make the decision that your morality is better?
the13thof12 1 year ago
@the13thof12 Is the word "sympathy" just not registering with you? If an entire society commits an act which violates basic human sympathy (for instance, the holocaust) then they have done something immoral. I am NOT talking about majority rule here. I'm talking about the basic sense of sympathy for our fellow humans which our species evolved to possess. Look, sentiment-based morality isn't a new idea. It goes all the way back to 18th century philosophers like Hume and Smith. Look it up.
WesHatesYourMovie 1 year ago
@WesHatesYourMovie I comprehend sympathy well enough; but you haven't really answered my question. What is the standard by which you measure what is and isn't moral? Sympathy doesn't work. I sometimes feel sympathy for my children when they are being punished. And yet it would be immoral and irresponsible of me to not discipline them. So how do you make the distinction between what is and isn't moral?
the13thof12 1 year ago
@the13thof12 I think a more appropriate word would be 'empathy'. In a very general sense, morality i think is a combination of empathy as well as individual values / beliefs which can also be part of the larger society that is all around us, influencing us. This would explain why so many ppl all over the world have different belief systems & concepts of morality. In short, many ppl don't have the same standard, but I know empathy & my personal values/philosophy is my standard.
HBanana55 1 year ago
@HBanana55 It seems inescapable to me that naturalistic/atheistic morality is inherently relativistic. Upon what basis do you make the determination that your morality is good and Yahweh's morality bad? Please try to avoid to question begging "because mine is better because I like it" response that is so common to this kind of question. I want to know where the rubber meets the road in terms of morality in your world-view.
the13thof12 1 year ago
@the13thof12 Well, idk what to tell you if my first comment is 'inescapable' to you. By you asking me my opinion on my version of morality, you must have some sense that its relative? But, regardless, I know whatever I'm doing in life now is working out very well. If you want to know 'where the rubber meets the road', u'd have to be specific b/c it would depend on the situation what stance I would take.
HBanana55 1 year ago
"The whole image is that eternal suffering awaits anyone who questions God's infinite love. That's the message we're brought up with, isn't it? Believe or die! Thank you, forgiving Lord, for all those options." -Bill Hicks
Iksbrown 1 year ago
You don't make videos often, but when you do, you knock em out of the park. You should do more.
ProportionalResponse 1 year ago
The carrot and the stick. It sure seems as if God is more interested in the stick. Completely counter to a all loving and forgiving deity. Nice job Banana :)
SnowWalkerOne 1 year ago
Do what I say or else! LOL.
You can sin and be forgiven. But if you don't ask for forgiveness you will go to hell.
So a murdering pedophile rapist drug dealer can ask for forgiveness on their death bed and go to heaven? Get out of jail free card but life isn't Monopoly.
GodlessManitoban 1 year ago