I think he has made some good points. But those points would need to be checked against other religious books. Anyway can an atheist say where sin came from I would like an answer from an atheist not from a Christan as I know their answers And also where did redemption,rapture,saved,resurrection, holy God, his will be done, Halo be thy name The Christ Idea and all that stuff Christians talk about like Why would any one come up with such things Why a Christ to save us from sin etc.
You know whats funny? Christians say that the US is almost all christian, but you look at these youtube videos and the statistics show its pretty much all US viewers, but they're almost all more than 50 percent thumbs down.
"History" LOL I didn't know that history books are all touched by god!
"Wisdom" Yeah, does the creater of the video ever thought that some people don't do things because they can imagine some of the consequences? This is so retarded.
"
"Prophecy" Historical records show that the books of the prophets were written AFTER the events they "prophesied."
Jesus said repeatedly that the "end times" would be soon, he said this directly to people who were alive 2000 years ago. "Before this generation passes" and "While some of you are still standing". This did not happen so your religeon is as false as your book.
Make sure you don't confuse the end of the world with the destruction of Jerusalem which happened in 70 AD. Also, you are misquoting Matthew 16:28 which is saying that there will be people standing in that place that wiil not die but rather go right into the kingdom when Christ comes.
In Luke 21 Jesus is clear that the end will not come soon but after many things happen.
@reconciled2God So in luke 21:32 when he says this generation will not pass until all these things have happened referring to the things throughout luke 21 like "at that time they shall see the son of man comming in a cloud with great power and glory" this reffers to the destruction of Jerusalem?
It is taught that this refers either that when the times of the Gentiles is ended (vs.24) then that 'generation' will see Christ come.
Or it could simply mean that the nation of Israel would not pass away until the end etc. (which is true and far as the Jewish people, in spite all that those people have went through.) The greek word is translated 'nation' in Phil 2:15.
It could be that he is uses this word to refer to the Jews and not the organized government of Israel.
@reconciled2God It could say that but that would be trying to make it say something it doesn't to support your beliefs. That is obviously not what it says, apologists have been working for 2000 years to explain why "soon" is so delayed.
Matthew 16:28 is obviously saying "some who are standing now" meaning some of those people back then he was talking too will not be dead before they see the second comming. Read it without your assumption that your beliefs are true.
I will read it without an assumption that it is true if you will read it without the assumption that it is false. It doesn't matter what it says, you refuse to try to understand it. That is your problem. You are biased against it. I have explained what it says and you have just ignored the answer. If you read the context 'soon' means that it will happen quickly. So fast that you cannot see it coming to prepare. That is always the meaning.
@ksebasti100 THat is my favorite bit of christian nonsense, not even quoting a whole sentance from the bible but just half of one. Also a day is 1000 years to god wich means by that logic god has waited around for 730,000 years as well as waiting around for 2 days.
I'm sorry, Jesus never said the END TIME is soon. He stated some of them standing there will see the Son of Man coming in Glory and yes it happened. John the Aposte sees the Son of man coming in Glory; read REVELATION. Generation that loves Adultery doesn't want to come into light!
@ksebasti100 Some isn't one. There are many more references to how quickly the end times (rapture if you wanna call it that) will happen and it allways is presented to people back them as being within thier lifetimes or just after.
Aside from Jesus telling Caiphas that he would see it (wich is debatable because it could refer to him after being raised) Jesus ordered people to prosletize by telling other that they would be sorry if another villiage were taken up while they were left.
@phookadude you are a fool if you believe your own lies... What is 2000 years compared to eternity? Nothing but a blink of an eye. You are lucky God has not yet decided to come back, he's waiting for the faithless! Damnation is where they will spend eternity
@8dodger7 Read the bible, the whole thing, not just sentances or phrases. Keep track of how many times the end times are referred to and when (the time frame) they are referred to in the context of someone talking to people back then.
Revelations is allways just a day away, thus it will never happen.
@phookadude You are adding to what Jesus said. He did not say while some of you are standing. He said he would return in a couple of days. Elsewhere he said a day is as a thousand years in heaven. Makes 12-12-12 look awfuly likely. That is the trouble with many false religions, the changing of the words to suit their positions. Jesus said he did not come to change even the punctuation in the bible.
@phookadude Mat 16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom. This is speaking of the day of pentecost Act 2:1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.
Act 2:2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.
@phookadude : Oh yea of little understanding. There was one there who did see Yeshua in His glory before he died and that was John. He was given a opportunity to see heaven and Yeshua in His glory and he wrote Revelation . As oftentimes these things have a n early fulfillment and a future fulfillment. You need to "study" scripture and not just read a few passages and take them out of context. Time is short and Messiah will return very soon. Seek God while there is still time. Maranatha!
Challenge. Ask god to do something for you that is not possible for anyone or anything else to do besides god. This does NOT include changing yourself because anyone has the ability to change theirselves.
If you are thinking, "I ask according to God's will," realize that this statement in the Bible is to strategically restrict what you pray for so that every prayer is possible to be answered. Think why are the prayers that violate this "rule" never answered? What a conspiracy!
@4EverTrying: I see part of your problem. There is no such word as theirselves. The correct word would be: Themselves. God loves you and wants to save you. Seek His mercy while there is still time.
What? Yes there is such a word used in what we call slang. This isn't a standard English class. I don't see how my use of the word theirselves is in anyway part of my "problem" to not believe in the Bible as being god's word. Can you explain?
"...while there is still time."
How do you expect me to believe in the consequences the Bible declares if I don't believe the Bible is god's word in the first place? That's the point! I DON'T believe the Bible is god's word, period. :(
@4EverTrying: Your not believing does not change the fact. You will stand before God one day and you will have to give an account for your life. Just telling God that you DID not believe in Him will not get you off the hook. He has offered you a free gift, your sins forgiven and eternal life. If you reject that gift then you only have yourself to blame. God is merciful but He is also just. If you do not accept the gift of Christ dying for your sins then YOU will have to pay yourself.
And what makes you so positive that Christianity is a "fact"? Where is the evidence? Just because you were told it's true or believe it's true doesn't make it true. Quit telling me the teachings of Christianity (which I know a lot more than you give me credit for) and give me PROOF that it is true! The burden on proof is definitely on you, especially if you are positive Christianity is true. Tell me why you think so. I do have an open mind to listen, just give me something!
@4EverTrying: Well one must have FAITH, but there is plenty of evidence to support that faith. Several secular historical writers wrote about Yeshua (Jesus) and His life, death and resurrection. These were not religious men just historians. Also there has not been anything mentioned in the Bible that has been DIS-PROVEN. Yes there are something that have not been verified yet but nothing proven to be an error. Just looking into a single Cell and one can see the fingerprint of God. God bless.
Can you give me (and everyone else) one to look up myself about the resurrection, please?
"Anything mention in the Bible that has been DIS-PROVEN"
Even if this were true, the fact that something hasn't been dis-proven (according to your definition, that is) doesn't make it true. Proof is a strong word.
History predates the Bible, the study of Wisdom predates the New Testemant and there's a huge difference between what the writers of the Bible meant by prophecy and what you mean, which is apparently, augury. Also, how about all those other pesky gospels that didn't make it off King James' cutting floor? How is the Book of Judas or the Book of Nicodemus not holy? How did they know that Daniel would be complete without the story of Bel and the Dragon?
Yeah, the bible also contains a lot of nonsense they believed was correct 2000 years ago, but shouldn't be believed by a moron with a single digit IQ today.
(Don't believe me? Try that idiodic cure for Leprosy - Leviticus 14:2-52. When you claim revealed knowledge and put down anything specific enough to test, it always comes back to bite you in the backside later... )
It seems that your given example testifies that you do not know what you are talking about(at least concerning the Bible).
This passage is speaking of a person who is ALREADY healed, whether naturally or supernaturally it is irrelevant.
Chapter 13 speaks of testing whether the man is a leper or not. Chapter 14 deals with the CEREMONIAL CLEANSING and verifying that his possessions are clean. It is amazing to me that they knew that it was contagious. It comes from a bacteria.
1) "Supernatural Healings" are not irrelevant - There has never been any evidence of this, and if you are claiming it happens I would like to see that evidence.
2) Whatever this operation is supposed to be for or about in Leviticus, it is likely all that blood and other material would spread the leprosy or make it worse.
3) The entire operation is barbaric and nasty.
4) If they didn't believe this would help them, why would they all these silly things?
1 I think you missed my point. I am saying that WHETHER it was natural or supernatural is not what is being discussed.
2&3 It seems pretty clean to me. That was the point. Other material? would that be running water? The animals were clean.
In vs. 52, I think that all those things were used in different ways to "cleanse" the house. It was a summary of the total cleansing being discussed. They didn't scrub w/blood.
4 Why would they DO that? Because it was what God said to do. It was ceremonial.
It seems pretty clean to you? Dabbing animal blood on your ears and toes and whatever?
It's just impossible for you to see this as the silly, barbaric action that it is, isn't it? Doesn't it bother you in the slightest that you are saying that a supreme being, which would obviously be of higher intelligence than we mere mortals, is saying we should do these things?
Now, lets try some common sense. How about "archaic humans made this stuff up".
This blood was for sacrifice in thanks to God because of the cleansing. Blood represents life. It is the ultimate offering. It cost something. What is the greatest gift to God?
Now blood from an animal did not do anything of itself but it represents the innocent for the guilty. By doing this God saw the faith of the man and the man was right with God.
Does God want blood? NO. He allowed those animals to be part of worship because of what it did for the conscience of the man. Lev 7:11;Heb10:4
I would surmise that the answer to my question "Is it impossible for you to see this as silly and barbaric" is "Yes".
You are merely giving me the details of the archaic justification. "Blood represents life. It is the ultimate offering." That's exactly what the Aztecs said. They were trying to make it rain and make the sun rise and set, etc.
... and if god doesn't want blood, why didn't he put in the bible "Hey, you are being barbaric. Stop doing that."?
@rmcdaniel423 the comment that you replied at was discussing a particular ritual recorded in the Bible as being supernatural or not. The Bible being supernatural or not was not what was being discussed directly. So, I believe you took a quote out of context. The objector was saying that the ritual itself was not supernatural and I partly agreed with him, but I was saying that whether or not it was supernatural was not what was being explained in the Bible text.
religioun cant prove that there god exist and athiest cant prove that god does not exist. but first on must ask, were did this word god come from what language was it from what was the first language and stuff like that. the egiptians were the first civilisation on earth and they were negroid, check it out for your self. the egiptians have facts on beings from another galaxy called nazduru. from this word you get nazdiru then natara then neteru then natura then nature in english.
Using the bible to prove the bible is true is in itself a fallacy.
Saying that it says things that man wouldn't normally know, like the fact that God should be worshiped is demonstrably false, there are many holy books that make this claim, and they all directly contradict each other.
Anyone convinced by these baseless arguments should do themselves a favor and take logic 101.
this video is not about things we don't KNOW that the Bible tells us. That is just the introduction. I understand that many of those things must be taken by faith. And I understand that the fact that I listed it in the beginning, may be anti-climactic. But the video is about things that men do not ADMIT. That is the argument up for discussion.
To admit something is to recognize a truth, as opposed to denying it. But before we can admit to truth, we need that truth to be proven. Truth is not relative or subjective, it is absolute. So to assume something is true without empirical evidence is to risk one's own perception, for the "truth" they believe in is unproven. Only after truth is proven can we be in a position to deny or admit that truth.
You must first provide evidence for your truth, THEN argue for it's admittance.
Why should one ADMIT that they need faith in a God when there is absolutely no evidence that one exists, let alone the Judeo-Christian God? Taking things on "faith" is admitting that you have no good evidence to believe it on its own merits?
I don't admit there's a God because the evidence against one is so striking, just like I don't admit there are unicorns and leprechauns. Not admitting something doesn't make it intrinsically true.
There are piles of evidence pointing towards Sciences answers, and NO proof of God. Talking snakes, and burning bushes that speak to people simply are imaginary and false.
If christians knew the bible well none would not listen to silly cherry picked quotes like this.Numbers 31:17
Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man intimately. Just bc Xians are afraid to face the reality of mortal existence does not mean that it is OK for them to go on thrashing in the dark. wake up and see that each one of us makes the world better or worse in the days that we have. Do what is right.
If so? then why don't u follow the teachings of Messiah in the New Testament? During the Old Testament times, GOD gave such orders to preserve them from Corruption to keep a perfect Race for the MESSIAH....the Old Testament itself states that Messiah will make a new Covanent.....so then y don't u follow the Teachings of the Messiah.....u ppl point ur finger to the OldTestament because you ppl dont like to Follow the MESSIAH!
@Truthseekr7: Scripture taken out of context is an old trick of those who refuse to believe. God is Holy and True and he is Righteous. He is also Just and some day every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. Repent and be saved while there is still time. Maranatha!
@ljackso did you know that your god's name is yahweh? Did you know that there is not only no evidence for your god but that there is no evidence for Jesus? All of the historical references to him are Christian doctoring from people just like yourself who died knowing that Jesus was coming back any minute and since they had no evidence then as now. they made some up. They were wrong. You are sadly mistaken as well. I do not fear Jesus because I know vastly more than you do about him.
@Truthseekr7: How wrong you are. Secular historians wrote about the life of Yeshua (Jesus) and they had no reason to make anything up. Someday you see Him face to face. You can do so with Him as your Lord and Savior or as your Judge. Choose wisely. If you were indeed a 'truthseeker' you would would know that Jesus Christ is Lord.
@ljackso No secular historian ever wrote about Jesus within 50 years of him being alive. After that it is just hearsay from the whacky cult which was soon to start killing in the name of Christ. Christians then as now felt it necessary to help Jesus into history. Your faith and your thinly veiled threats are cute but futile. Jesus is a joke Christians don't get because they are afraid. Cowards are afraid. were your god real I would ask him why he is outrageously unjust, cruel and self important.
@Truthseekr7 : Some day you will have your chance to make your case to God Himself face to face. I pity you when that happens. Repent before it is too late. God does love you and wants to save you. Repent.
@ljackso also if the bible did turn out to be god's Mein Kamph Yahweh would quickly prove himself to be the most tyrannical being of all time. So would allah if he were real but that doesn't matter since you can easily grasp that islam is mythology just not your myths. If Xians bow as god wipes the majority of humans off the planet they would be the biggest cowards of all time, More so than any people who have been complicit in the slaughter of their fellow humans. thank god he is imaginary.
@Truthseekr7 Jesus Christ is the biggest truth for me in this life. i love Him and want to be dead to the world to live in Him. In your words, what i do is what seems a profitable deal for me, i can live my life in two ways, thinking that there is One true God who loves me and took away my sins on the cross and the other that there is no God and all that there is this life. then this two ways will have one and certain ending "death." if second was my choice then i sleep for ever(cont)
@Truthseekr7 (cont) no worries but what if i am going to stand in front of my Lord Jesus Christ and what agony it will be for me, when He asks me, "What did you do with my blood that i shed for you on the cross? did i ask you to do something very burdensome? all i asked you was to believe Me. all i asked was to give Me your burdens" what shall i say to a Lord who loved me so much?
Pandeism, explains and accounts for the Bible, and thereby supersedes it and disqualifies those parts that do not comport with pandeism while justifying those parts that do....
if you REALLY knew about the bible, you would know the jesus story is not original, the scant words of wisdom are not as well and other religions have there own explanations with one god or energy and there version of what "sin" is and how to "redeem"
So, the Bible proves itself and the existence of God. This is false logic. I believe in God but this is ridiculous. You have faith or you do not. The Bible can not prove anything. The Veda's of the Hindu's prove themselves also. You have proven nothing. Oh, and all religions that I know of demote man.
The Bible is unique in that it does not promote "religion" and vain activity that avoids the issue of reconciliation with God. It tells us about ourselves that we are the creation and not the Creator.
Mormons, eastern religions, paganism, humanism, etc. teach that man is a god or man will be a god. That is not demoting man. That is exalting man. Only the Bible teaches that man is wicked and that he MUST agree with that fact.
Do you want to give any examples of the Bible revealing something that man would not naturally know? All you do is say it does, without explanation. And please, no vague prophetic revaluations, no quoting the bible to reveal that an event that happens in the bible.
"The history can be confirmed by archeology and science"
All or some, because I do know that there are some historical events that the bible does coincide with, while others that it just completely gets wrong.
"I understand that you may have a bias against the Bible and that you would dismiss these claims. That doesn't change the truth."
No. I have no biases. I just want you to explain yourself, give your evidence like a rational human. Lol, since when was being a skeptic holding a "bias"?
Everyone is biased. To deny this is silly. Whether politics or religion, you listen and believe certain people etc. based upon your bias or presupositions/assumptions/committments.
Most people that deny the Bible are committed to denying it. Especially skeptics.
For example, skeptics are usually materialists or naturalists. They have a committment to that, and if anything falls outside natural processes etc., then it is automatically "wrong", despite any evidence.
"For example, skeptics are usually materialists or naturalists. They have a commitment to that, and if anything falls outside natural processes etc., then it is automatically "wrong", despite any evidence."
I'd love to see some evidence of anything that falls out of natural processes. Please, any hard substantial evidence that can be tested and prove anything supernatural is just waiting to rock the minds of the scientific community. You'll win the Nobel Prize! You'll go down in history!
I'll answer these questions even though you completely brushed the points I made aside. If you don't address them I'll have to conclude you can't.
"Do you believe in large scale evolution?"
First, I don't "believe" anything. To believe is to consider true without evidence and with faith. Not my cup of tea. Second, what do you consider "large scale"? If by "large scale" you mean speciation, then yes. I acknowledge that speciation happens based on fossil and non-fossil evidence. Cont ->
So you unbiasly believe that we all came from non-living matter even though no one has ever observed this? No your not biased. HUH?
No one argues with natural selection or speciation. Your evolution requires an increase in genetic info which has never been observed. Not only are you biased, but you are a devout BELIEVER in fairy tales for grownups.
What's that supposed to mean? Man ARE molecules. Your flesh, tissue, bone, teeth, brain, heart, lungs everything inside you is made up of some kind of molecule. Now if you're asking if non-organic compounds can spontaneously form organic compounds, then the answer is yes. Look up the Miller-Urey experiment and Sidney W Fox's discovery that amino acids will spontaneously form given the right conditions.
Lol. Again, define "God". You use "a" then a capital "G" in "God" so I'm not sure if you mean ANY god or the Christian God. I don't know for sure whether or not God exists. This is because I hold my beliefs separate from what I know to be true. Truth = Backed by evidence, Belief = Not backed by evidence. I lack a belief in a god because there isn't enough evidence for one. And for about 2000 years, all religions have failed to provide any of this evidence.
It seems that you are trying your hardest to misunderstand any of my dialog. You are just another dishonest athiest and a fool. If you hold to any opinion of evolution or athiesm then you must be biased.
There is no evidence for matter to overcome physics and chemistry and organizing itself into self-replicating life.
Your theories are just that, theories. Just because it COULD have happend that way does not mean that it did (knowledge).
Please explain where you get "time dun it" from abiogenesis.
While time was definitely part of what makes abiogenesis possible, there's also the SPONTANEOUS formation of polypeptides, the amino acids they're made of, organic monomers, and fatty acid membranes. They "dun" it too
I SERIOUSLY suggest you educate yourself on abiogenesis and evolution if you're going to be so vehemently against them. You make yourself look foolish when you have no idea what your talking about when it comes to the subject you reject.
You see, here's the hypocracy in telling me that all the credible scientific evidence I pointed you to aren't valid because they are just theories.
"A theory, in the general sense of the word, is an analytic structure designed to explain a set of observations"
That's what a theory is. Now I can believe that, which is back up by evidence, experimentation and scientific consensus, or I can believe in a book written by Bronze Age farmers with claims of demons, zombies and miracles.
Uuhh... no? Why should I forget science? Theories are what the scientific method yields. Without these scientific theories you wouldn't even have the computer you're using to talk to me right now. Shall I forget the theory of Gravity, the theory of Relativity, Germ Theory, Cell theory and Atomic Theory while I'm at it? Do you REALLY want me to "Forget theories"?
chill man. you know what I meant. I am not suggesting forgeting those theories. Those theories are testable. Gravity is a law. Relativity was proven with the total eclipse. Cell theory and atomic are observable. Those are not theories of what might have happened only once in the past when no one saw it etc. Gimme a break.
Again, no one has observed abiogenesis, but you BELIEVE IT. Anyway even if they could produce life in the lab it would only prove that intellegence is necessary.
"Again, no one has observed abiogenesis, but you BELIEVE IT"
Many of the processes involved in Abiogenesis HAVE been observed. I really suggest you read the evidence I pointed out to you, because all you seem to do is repeat yourself. True, the complete process hasn't been observed, but scientists are getting closer and closer to that as time passes.
"Anyway even if they could produce life in the lab it would only prove that intelligence is necessary."
"Again, no one has observed abiogenesis, but you BELIEVE IT."
Just because it hasn't been observed doesn't mean it isn't true. Have you been to the moon? Do you believe IT exists? Has God ever been "observed" in the way you want abiogenesis to be "observed" before you consider it? Can scientifically analyze God? You've been special pleading this entire conversation.
"I think design, which can be seen, is obvious and it gives great evidence of the God of the Bible."
What about Allah, or Thor? Why can't they be the "designer"?
"You are not making a distinction between observational/operational science and HISTORICAL theories."
Ok. You really need to learn what Evolution is. IT HAS BEEN OBSERVED! Every transitional form we find, every genome we sequence and every new species we find is evidence of evolution. It's not "historical theory" it's fact.
I'm going to point you in the direction of some interesting bits of evidence for evolution I highly recommend you read. Then again, you still haven't read any of the evidence I've sent your way, so here's for hoping...
OBSERVED new species, a result of speciation, or macroevolution as you creationists like to call it. These include, but aren't limited to: Oenothera giga, Stephanomeira malheurensis, Drosophila paulistorum, Tribolium castaneum, and Nereis acuminata.
I never said I didn't believe anything because I "KNOW". I don't believe in the validity of the Bible because it's composed of books with unknown authors, it's over 2000 years old, it contradicts itself NUMEROUS times, and condones slavery, genocide and human sacrifice.
Here, I'll give you some evidence on why I hold this opinion. You should try it some time. Check these out: (EXO 15:3, ROM 15:33), (MAT 1:16, LUK 3:23), (ISA 14:21, DEU 24:16) And that's three of MANY.
Just because these things are recorded in the Bible, does not mean that God condones them.
There is a difference between slavery and indentured servants or bondslaves. It was not like the slavery in america.
The Bible absolutely never condones human sacrifice. God does not ask for human sacrifice from us. He did it of Himself. Christ did what we could not do.
The Canaanites were destroyed in some cases for their sin. They were not innocent.
"There is a difference between slavery and indentured servants or bondslaves. It was not like the slavery in america. "
There is. How do you know this is how it was in the Bible? If you read Leviticus 25:44-46, it talks about how to buy, sell and trade slaves as livestock. And what of the "indentured servants" that get out of line? Exodus 21:20-21 says as long as their beatings don't kill them on the spot, but only a couple days later, it's all good!
"The Bible absolutely never condones human sacrifice. God does not ask for human sacrifice from us."
No, he had Jephthah burn his daughter. Read Judges 11:29-40. In a nutshell, Jephthah asks God to help him win a battle and says he'll sacrifice the first thing that walks through his door. God's like "sure lol", and guess what walks through Jephthah door? His daughter! So she's burned as a virgin. God knew all this in advance too! Man, that god of yours sure likes spilled blood.
To kill his daughter would not be pleasing to the Lord.
His daughter was never killed. She was to be given as a servant of the temple and she was to be a virgin for her life (read vs39). This was a common vow in Israel. Num. 30:2
I've read the passage, and never read anything having to do with her being given as a servant to the temple.
"whatever comes out of the door of my house to meet me when I return in triumph from the Ammonites will be the LORD's, and I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering." (Judges 11:31)
"My father," she replied, "you have given your word to the LORD. Do to me just as you promised, now that the LORD has avenged you of your enemies, the Ammonites. (Judges 11:36)
After the two months, she returned to her father and he did to her as he had vowed. And she was a virgin. (Judges 11:39)
No mention of her being spared or anything. I've read these verses over and over. They're one of many problems I with the Bible I had that led me to reject my faith.
"The Canaanites were destroyed in some cases for their sin. They were not innocent."
So genocide is ok, as long as they're "deserving"? Do you realize how sick that is? And care to comment on the slavery?
the "sacrifice" was done to consecrate a vow or a thing that was vowed to the Lord.
Look up Lev. 7:16, 22:18-21 and Num. 15:3. There were many laws concerning vows in the torah. These verses specifically say that there were burnt sacrifices "concerning vows".
Also, in a literal translation the verse reads..."or I have offered up for it--a burnt-offering.". (Youngs)
It is just saying that he will offer "it" WITH a burnt offering.
I read Lev. 7:16, 22:18-21 and Num. 15:3, and I'm unimpressed. If God's hand is on the Bible, and he's making sure his word is pure, I should be able to read it and not worry about literal translations. HOWEVER: E.W.Bullinger has some interesting views on the verse and I've decided that the word play is too "fuzzy" to say THIS VERSE condones human sacrifice. But, there are still the rest of the problems with the Bible, hence I'm still waiting on your input on the comments I made on slavery.
Also, another instance of human sacrifice, less fuzzy on the wording and quite graphic. Check out 2Kings 23:20-25. Joshua 7:15, and Deuteronomy 13:13-19 are also horrible atrocities, but I wouldn't consider them "sacrifice".
Seeing that you still haven't expanded on slavery in the bible after I showed you those verses, or on the permissive genocide of the Canaanites, or on the contradictions I pointed out, I must consider the Bible to be horribly translated or simply a horrible book.
The answer is: not yet. But scientists are very close. Look up Jack Szostak he's a prominent biologist and has done a lot of experiments with abiogenesis.
To say it's impossible to create a protocell because we haven't at the moment is intellectually dishonest. This aside, the scientific evidence I've been giving you that you refuse to read shows that abiogenesis is EXTREMELY LIKELY.
Also, if you would like me to stop double posting, I need you to stop barraging me with multiple questions.
trans. forms - if you look in any textbook all you have is dotted lines in the evol. tree. with very few, highly debatable (among paleontol.), fossils. Finding bones in the dirt only prove that it was a species that doesn't exist today. No one knows if those dead animals had any offspring. Therefore those bones are being INTERPRETED to be evidence for goo-to-you evolution based on their biased viewpoint ($). Fossils etc. actually are evidence for the flood.
"with very few, highly debatable (among paleontol.), fossils."
Few? I suggest you look up how many transitional form we've found. It's a lot more than "a few". Debate? Actually, there isn't much of a debate at all. A 1991 Gallup poll showed that only 5 percent of scientists give any credence to the creation myth. Also, the US National Academy of Sciences regards creationism as "pseudoscience". Last time I checked, a 95% consensus on an issue didn't qualify as a "debate".
"Do not put such unlimited power into the hands of the husbands. Remember, all men would be tyrants IF they could. " - Abigail Adams, wife of John; March 13, 1776
The big point about this video that many commenters miss is that naturally, people want to exalt THEMSELVES. "I am #1". I am the boss". People don't go around doing the desires of others unless they are forced or something is in it for them.
So there is a conflict/contrast with the writings of the Bible and natural man. The Bible says, "exalt God, He is #1." If God is the boss then I am not and you are not.
Man and God cannot be soveriegn at the same time.
How do you explain that I as an atheist subjugate myself to the greater good of my family, society and other things without any god belief. You called my reasoning circular, and asked if I was an authority on human nature. I am not an authority on human nature, but I know that you know very little about human nature. Remember, I watched your vcideo...BUSTED!
These are not the things that a god would say. These are the things that a superstitious, bronze aged sheep hereder would write. Do you have any real evidence?
Are you the authority on what a god would say? What would a god say?
Are you an authority on a sheep herders from the bronze age?
Was a shepherd more inclined to putting aside his desires, admitting wrong openly and subjegating himself to worship the Creator God? Were they different from men today?
My experience is that men avoid God like a criminal avoids a cop, and they avoid acknowledging wrong to those offended.
Something tells me you are not looking for evidence for the Bible anyway.
I am not an authority on any of these things. You need to work on your morality. Good people do not need an ancient book to tell them to be accountable for their wrongdoings. Good people do not require threats or promises from an imaginary being to do good. I have been looking for evidence for the bible for 30 years. Just show me anything. You want to convince people, but you don't even try. I ask, once again: Do you have any evidence?
what defines "good"? Who determines "good". Is it you? Look at corrupt societies in history. Were they good?
What kind of "evidence" are you looking for? Tape recordings of Jonah or a video of the resurrection?
I gave evidence on the video. The Bible was inspired by God because it is completely contrary to the nature of man. Just because you don't accept it does not mean that it is not evidence. It may not be conclusive evidence or scientific proof, but It is evidence.
"The Bible was inspired by God because it is completely contrary to the nature of man."
This is not evidence. You must first show that this is true for it to be evidence. Then you must show that there is no man that would write that. then you would need to show why it would come from a god. I define good by my own standards. I am more moral than the Hebrew god.
Gimme a break. I'm supposed to show that it is true? What are you saying? In order for it to be evidence it has to be true? That is circular reasoning. So, in order for there to be any evidence against OJ to be a murderer we must first prove that he is a murderer for the evidence to be valid. LOL.
You define good. Well, so do I. And so does everyone else. Who is right? Everyone is not right at the same time though there may be tolerance of opinions. If good is relative then how is God bad?
If you are going to present evidence the evidence must be valid.
I can write a book that says there is a pink unicorn under a bridge and that he is God and that he must be worshiped.
According to your logic, since that book presents a fact that man would not "naturally admit," it is evidence that the book could not have been written by me, a man.
There is a long history of humans exalting a creator. Monotheism is older than Christianity. If you don't believe me look up Zoroastrianism.
2) demoting man
I would argue that the theory of evolution demotes man more than Christianity, because it says that we aren't special. We aren't any different than any other animal outside of our intelligence.
Let me clarify. We are talking about the Bible, not about Christianity. The Bible's history predates all religion. All religion is a perversion of the original truth passed down by Noah's descendants.
As far as demoting man, I think you are missing the point made on the video. The Bible tells the truth about man's hidden sin and compels him to submit to God's rule etc.
supernatural.... its too easy. let thinking people figure things out.
I have noticed a repeating issue with the cultists. they seem to not understand the meaning of TRUTH. i mean, they say "i know god and/or jesus is real" or "i know i'm going to magic happy land when i die" or "the bible is truth!". then they wouldnt need faith, cause they have the knowledge. but they go on and on and on about faith in their religion. vauge, stupid, easy, wishful, dangerous
All I've wanted to point out is that this video did not prove that the bible wasn't written by man. There is absolutely no evidence, the reasons given are an insult to logic. I just hope men are smart enough to see through this
logically yes the bible was written by man. but the author is God. everyone who loves jesus know this and doesn't need logic or smart men to figure it out. moses was said to write the first 5 books peter the apostle wrote most to all the letters. lets think about this. If God actually penned the bible we would never know what the bible would really say. Just like the ark of the covanet men was not allowed to touch or open it, cause God himself was in there and he is too holy too see. Get it now
Actually, we do need logic to connect the claim of God being the author of the bible. Can't he be the authour of the Quran, the Vedas, or contardictory books. Everybody says the same when it comes to their holy books.
And if God is "too holy" to grasp, basically implying that we don't have the means to precieve him as a whole, why are we so certain about this specific claim? Wouldn't we be justified in questioning?
I'm sorry but there is no proof that God even had anything to to with it.
heres another thing in the red sea they have found horse bones human bones and goldplated chariots just like the egyptians had right in the middle of the sea.There is an ark in a mountian range on turkeys borders
evolutionists have tried to say that all the weird colors of the rock and different layers of earth were 50 million years old 10 million 1 billion so on so forth. but that happened around 1988 when mt olympus in washington shifted and the layers drastically changed
Logic? Smart enough? Well maybe you can be smart enough to mull this over and come up with an answer. Is it by chance that the molecular structure of our cells that make up our DNA - all fall into place by chance - to give us eyes to see, ears to hear, a heart that beats, lungs that fill with air, a brain that functions more intricately than any computer ever will - that's not even looking externally at creation but looking at self since that's where most agnostics and atheists seem to look.
Understanding evolution could help logically explain that.
However it is not necessary. Lets just say that we do no not understand the compexity we see in the world, lets say we don't understand the self or mind. This does not make religious ideas or any other alternative explanation true.
There is still no way that anyone could logically prove the bible is the word of god. I didn't say there was no god even though I certainly don't believe so. How does the complexity of life even relate?
Did you ever read the bible? In it is story upon story of people just like you and I dealing with the complexity of life with God and without God. Science will always fall short - it will always come to the end of the equation only to find another equation to compute and in doing so has done more to PROVE the existence of God than disprove it.
Well first off, I know science falls short sometimes. Science was not meant appeal to man's conceptions. Maby thats what art's for.
Second, Science could never prove the existence of god, ever! Thats because scientist are logically inable to prove a negative. I suppose the burden of proof lies on those who make the claim.
Besides, it seems that science has done more to disprove the existence of God than prove it. What brings people to sa the opposite?
Sincere and intelligent men for ages have pondered the 'God' question. Peter Kreeft is but one. Seeking answers for the existence of God does not make one unintelligent. On the contrary, the more intelligent seek the existence of God all their life if they have to because after this life, what's next? Read the Argument from Pascal's Wager - read all the arguments - with an open mind. Take the time to read those links. After all, you have an eternity to think about it.
I didn't say seeking answers for the existence of God is was stupid.
The only point that I wished to make, which was my original point, is that the bible was written by men and there is no reason to beleive that the bible has anything to do with God.
Revelation 1 1The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John: 2Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.
God sent an angel down to john after God told his angel what to tell John.
of sinned he could of done nothing for us and that would have been us up on that cross getting speared whipped with metal balls and shrapnel and nailed and tied.
I never knew it was naturally too worship or serve more than one higher being of equal value. no one can serve two masters. stop being selfish learn to read dont assume dont get stupid... we are only naturally about ourselves cause of our sinful nature
reading like a usual book the bible is history a story. a gift a guideline you can't only take one verse and say there is confliction. God demotes us Yes he is a father but he doesnt immancipate his Children, His servants. Those who actively seek God will find Him. all Truth. just because its naturally for young man to knock a girl up and leave doesn't make it right no ethic value at all. What greater gift can someone give you than their life. now Jesus had a choice he was of the Flesh he could
ok first off go to rehab your on drugs. God created man in His own image. in a way its like hiring a bunch of servents. servants are well treated and taken care of as long as your obediant. Not only is He my God he is my friend. best one ever. these self afflictions we cast on ourselves is by our own bidding called free will. Like a friend lets get into whatever mess but willing to clean it up with you or get you out of the hole you just dug... and your right the bible is an unusual book so stop
If you have ever had a vision, or prophesy....God is about LOVE, TRUTH, AND LIGHT....When he brings you to his light, you cannot out run it....it is full of celestial love.....HIS MESSAGE IS THIS...Global peace, he is upset what humans have done! All things even in history ALWAYS goes back to GOD...even to much global corruption....It is ALL NATIONS, not just the United States, under ONE GOD!! His love is devine, yet man rejects his word.
There is nothing to be clarified. People have been repeating the same thing.
2 words:
circular argument
and for added measure, lets say by some act of GOD it isnt. It is still a VERY weak argument guarded by the word NATURALLY. Back to logic 101. Lets take that out.
The Bible is supernatural b/c it contains things that man does not know or admit.
Which is a very easy argument to stomp.
This "proof" is nothing but a play on words.
FYI: Quran fulfills the same premises, so I guess its divine too.
"Naturally", refers to things that man CANNOT know except with SUPERNATURAL revelation. Prophecy, history, wisdom, and also things that man DOES NOT in his natural state admit.
The quran is not concerned with history last time I checked. Does it contain a creation account etc? It does not promote voluntary, spiritual worship of God, neither does it deal with the truth about man and Jesus Christ.
uhhh... I like how you skipped the main issue. Excuse me, but until you get around the whole argument being circular, there is really no point in discussing the other premises.
Like I said, those other premises come into play only if its not a circular argument quote: "lets say by some act of GOD it isnt"
For me to fight an empty argument is pointless. I merely gave a general outline since you wanted it so badly.
I'll give you one example: The bible is the word of God because it shows us truth that we would not naturally admit.
The example they give is that the bible supports one creator God.
So what! that doesn't make it true, that solely depends on if there is one god or not. Even if there is, it doesn't eliminate the possibility of it being created by man.
You're telling me that the many civilizations throughout time and history could have not concieved monotheism?
Are people naturally inclined to worship their Creator?
No. Man avoids this with great effort. That is the point. The Bible is not about a "religious system". It is a revelation of God, man, and Jesus Christ. God is not interested in "religion". He is interested in man getting right with Him in his heart.
Also,
The point is not monotheism. It is more specifically, the Creator and to worship and serve Him. Anyway, all monostheistic religions are from the Bible.
But how is this definite proof that the bible was not written by men?
Are men naturally inclined to worship a creator? Maybe, once he creates an item of worship he could behave anyway he wants. If that behavior leads to a worldwide religion, they could easily claim that man isn't naturally inclined to this type of behavior.
But does that mean that their way of thinking is divine. You have to make a real logical connection. Otherwise, that claim is just a plain assumption.
Also, you think that man doesn't naturally come up with ideas of god? Prove it!
You think the bible is the only text in the world that demotes man? Thats nonsense! Even if it was the only book, how does that mean it was created by god?
You have to prove that man could not naturally do these things to himself. That's just an assumption based of nothing!
When you do something wrong do you easily admit it?
By naturally, I mean without God's revealed truth about ourselves, confronting our problem.
Every religion in the world says that man is basically good and that it is not neccessary to deal with the problem of guilt. It deals w/ the symptom. Religion covers it up without dealing with the problem. If you study religions you will see that they do not state as the basis of their beliefs that every person is a rebel against the Creator.
Does man easily admits his faults? Maybe, some of them, most likely not.
Natural or not, it does not mean he can't without god.
Let me make clear that admitting your faults and being humble over simple arrogance is the best. Anyone can teach this by experience or history. Observation and judgement could be written down you know.
Just because the bible may have a solution (which is another discussion) does not mean it wasn't written by man.
I think he has made some good points. But those points would need to be checked against other religious books. Anyway can an atheist say where sin came from I would like an answer from an atheist not from a Christan as I know their answers And also where did redemption,rapture,saved,resurrection, holy God, his will be done, Halo be thy name The Christ Idea and all that stuff Christians talk about like Why would any one come up with such things Why a Christ to save us from sin etc.
ZeusHelios 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
*
*
*
VISIT:
Joy Of Satan . org
*
*
*
BobSalmonSmacky 3 months ago
You know whats funny? Christians say that the US is almost all christian, but you look at these youtube videos and the statistics show its pretty much all US viewers, but they're almost all more than 50 percent thumbs down.
htomerif 4 months ago
I did not read any of the other comments, so if I am repeating anything someone has said, then so be it.
Up to 0:54 was enough for me to watch.
"History" LOL I didn't know that history books are all touched by god!
"Wisdom" Yeah, does the creater of the video ever thought that some people don't do things because they can imagine some of the consequences? This is so retarded.
"
"Prophecy" Historical records show that the books of the prophets were written AFTER the events they "prophesied."
4EverTrying 11 months ago
Jesus said repeatedly that the "end times" would be soon, he said this directly to people who were alive 2000 years ago. "Before this generation passes" and "While some of you are still standing". This did not happen so your religeon is as false as your book.
phookadude 1 year ago
@phookadude
Make sure you don't confuse the end of the world with the destruction of Jerusalem which happened in 70 AD. Also, you are misquoting Matthew 16:28 which is saying that there will be people standing in that place that wiil not die but rather go right into the kingdom when Christ comes.
In Luke 21 Jesus is clear that the end will not come soon but after many things happen.
God bless.
reconciled2God 1 year ago
@reconciled2God So in luke 21:32 when he says this generation will not pass until all these things have happened referring to the things throughout luke 21 like "at that time they shall see the son of man comming in a cloud with great power and glory" this reffers to the destruction of Jerusalem?
phookadude 1 year ago
@phook
It is taught that this refers either that when the times of the Gentiles is ended (vs.24) then that 'generation' will see Christ come.
Or it could simply mean that the nation of Israel would not pass away until the end etc. (which is true and far as the Jewish people, in spite all that those people have went through.) The greek word is translated 'nation' in Phil 2:15.
It could be that he is uses this word to refer to the Jews and not the organized government of Israel.
reconciled2God 1 year ago
@reconciled2God It could say that but that would be trying to make it say something it doesn't to support your beliefs. That is obviously not what it says, apologists have been working for 2000 years to explain why "soon" is so delayed.
Matthew 16:28 is obviously saying "some who are standing now" meaning some of those people back then he was talking too will not be dead before they see the second comming. Read it without your assumption that your beliefs are true.
phookadude 1 year ago
@phookadude
I will read it without an assumption that it is true if you will read it without the assumption that it is false. It doesn't matter what it says, you refuse to try to understand it. That is your problem. You are biased against it. I have explained what it says and you have just ignored the answer. If you read the context 'soon' means that it will happen quickly. So fast that you cannot see it coming to prepare. That is always the meaning.
reconciled2God 1 year ago
@phookadude
By the way, where does the word 'soon' appear in connection with the second coming? I can't find it in the KJV.
reconciled2God 1 year ago
@phookadude
Read Revelation.....John does sees the Christ and his kingdom....for GOD 1 day is as 1000 years for us!
ksebasti100 1 year ago
@ksebasti100 THat is my favorite bit of christian nonsense, not even quoting a whole sentance from the bible but just half of one. Also a day is 1000 years to god wich means by that logic god has waited around for 730,000 years as well as waiting around for 2 days.
The line is poetic and means god is timeless.
phookadude 1 year ago
@phookadude
I'm sorry, Jesus never said the END TIME is soon. He stated some of them standing there will see the Son of Man coming in Glory and yes it happened. John the Aposte sees the Son of man coming in Glory; read REVELATION. Generation that loves Adultery doesn't want to come into light!
ksebasti100 1 year ago
@ksebasti100 Some isn't one. There are many more references to how quickly the end times (rapture if you wanna call it that) will happen and it allways is presented to people back them as being within thier lifetimes or just after.
Aside from Jesus telling Caiphas that he would see it (wich is debatable because it could refer to him after being raised) Jesus ordered people to prosletize by telling other that they would be sorry if another villiage were taken up while they were left.
phookadude 1 year ago
@phookadude you are a fool if you believe your own lies... What is 2000 years compared to eternity? Nothing but a blink of an eye. You are lucky God has not yet decided to come back, he's waiting for the faithless! Damnation is where they will spend eternity
8dodger7 1 year ago
@8dodger7 Read the bible, the whole thing, not just sentances or phrases. Keep track of how many times the end times are referred to and when (the time frame) they are referred to in the context of someone talking to people back then.
Revelations is allways just a day away, thus it will never happen.
phookadude 1 year ago
@phookadude You are adding to what Jesus said. He did not say while some of you are standing. He said he would return in a couple of days. Elsewhere he said a day is as a thousand years in heaven. Makes 12-12-12 look awfuly likely. That is the trouble with many false religions, the changing of the words to suit their positions. Jesus said he did not come to change even the punctuation in the bible.
The1journey 1 year ago
@phookadude Mat 16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom. This is speaking of the day of pentecost Act 2:1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.
Act 2:2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.
henderson11368 1 year ago
@phookadude : Oh yea of little understanding. There was one there who did see Yeshua in His glory before he died and that was John. He was given a opportunity to see heaven and Yeshua in His glory and he wrote Revelation . As oftentimes these things have a n early fulfillment and a future fulfillment. You need to "study" scripture and not just read a few passages and take them out of context. Time is short and Messiah will return very soon. Seek God while there is still time. Maranatha!
ljackso 1 year ago
@ljackso
Challenge. Ask god to do something for you that is not possible for anyone or anything else to do besides god. This does NOT include changing yourself because anyone has the ability to change theirselves.
If you are thinking, "I ask according to God's will," realize that this statement in the Bible is to strategically restrict what you pray for so that every prayer is possible to be answered. Think why are the prayers that violate this "rule" never answered? What a conspiracy!
4EverTrying 11 months ago
@4EverTrying: I see part of your problem. There is no such word as theirselves. The correct word would be: Themselves. God loves you and wants to save you. Seek His mercy while there is still time.
ljackso 10 months ago
@ljackso
What? Yes there is such a word used in what we call slang. This isn't a standard English class. I don't see how my use of the word theirselves is in anyway part of my "problem" to not believe in the Bible as being god's word. Can you explain?
"...while there is still time."
How do you expect me to believe in the consequences the Bible declares if I don't believe the Bible is god's word in the first place? That's the point! I DON'T believe the Bible is god's word, period. :(
4EverTrying 10 months ago
@4EverTrying: Your not believing does not change the fact. You will stand before God one day and you will have to give an account for your life. Just telling God that you DID not believe in Him will not get you off the hook. He has offered you a free gift, your sins forgiven and eternal life. If you reject that gift then you only have yourself to blame. God is merciful but He is also just. If you do not accept the gift of Christ dying for your sins then YOU will have to pay yourself.
ljackso 10 months ago
@ljackso
And what makes you so positive that Christianity is a "fact"? Where is the evidence? Just because you were told it's true or believe it's true doesn't make it true. Quit telling me the teachings of Christianity (which I know a lot more than you give me credit for) and give me PROOF that it is true! The burden on proof is definitely on you, especially if you are positive Christianity is true. Tell me why you think so. I do have an open mind to listen, just give me something!
4EverTrying 10 months ago
@4EverTrying: Well one must have FAITH, but there is plenty of evidence to support that faith. Several secular historical writers wrote about Yeshua (Jesus) and His life, death and resurrection. These were not religious men just historians. Also there has not been anything mentioned in the Bible that has been DIS-PROVEN. Yes there are something that have not been verified yet but nothing proven to be an error. Just looking into a single Cell and one can see the fingerprint of God. God bless.
ljackso 10 months ago
@ljackso
"Well one must have FAITH"
Faith only provides assurance to the individual, but it is not valid to verify actual facts.
"Several secular historical writers wrote...resurrection"
Can you give me (and everyone else) one to look up myself about the resurrection, please?
"Anything mention in the Bible that has been DIS-PROVEN"
Even if this were true, the fact that something hasn't been dis-proven (according to your definition, that is) doesn't make it true. Proof is a strong word.
4EverTrying 10 months ago
History predates the Bible, the study of Wisdom predates the New Testemant and there's a huge difference between what the writers of the Bible meant by prophecy and what you mean, which is apparently, augury. Also, how about all those other pesky gospels that didn't make it off King James' cutting floor? How is the Book of Judas or the Book of Nicodemus not holy? How did they know that Daniel would be complete without the story of Bel and the Dragon?
AHPMB 1 year ago
Why do other religions follow both point one and two?
Why do muslims make almost identical claims?
Mystile33 2 years ago
I have answered this objection several times.
But it is a good question.
I would say that you need to be more specific by naming religions that do so.
Just because religion in general worships a supreme being doesn't mean that they exalt the Creator to His rightful place as CREATOR.
I don't know any religion that tells the truth about man. The Bible is the only book that gives the solution to man's greatest need.
The Bible is not a book about religion. It is a book about reconciliation.
reconciled2God 2 years ago
Yeah, the bible also contains a lot of nonsense they believed was correct 2000 years ago, but shouldn't be believed by a moron with a single digit IQ today.
(Don't believe me? Try that idiodic cure for Leprosy - Leviticus 14:2-52. When you claim revealed knowledge and put down anything specific enough to test, it always comes back to bite you in the backside later... )
Hannsfeld 2 years ago
It seems that your given example testifies that you do not know what you are talking about(at least concerning the Bible).
This passage is speaking of a person who is ALREADY healed, whether naturally or supernaturally it is irrelevant.
Chapter 13 speaks of testing whether the man is a leper or not. Chapter 14 deals with the CEREMONIAL CLEANSING and verifying that his possessions are clean. It is amazing to me that they knew that it was contagious. It comes from a bacteria.
reconciled2God 2 years ago
@ Reconciled2God:
A few points:
1) "Supernatural Healings" are not irrelevant - There has never been any evidence of this, and if you are claiming it happens I would like to see that evidence.
2) Whatever this operation is supposed to be for or about in Leviticus, it is likely all that blood and other material would spread the leprosy or make it worse.
3) The entire operation is barbaric and nasty.
4) If they didn't believe this would help them, why would they all these silly things?
Hannsfeld 2 years ago
1 I think you missed my point. I am saying that WHETHER it was natural or supernatural is not what is being discussed.
2&3 It seems pretty clean to me. That was the point. Other material? would that be running water? The animals were clean.
In vs. 52, I think that all those things were used in different ways to "cleanse" the house. It was a summary of the total cleansing being discussed. They didn't scrub w/blood.
4 Why would they DO that? Because it was what God said to do. It was ceremonial.
reconciled2God 2 years ago
@ reconciled2God:
It seems pretty clean to you? Dabbing animal blood on your ears and toes and whatever?
It's just impossible for you to see this as the silly, barbaric action that it is, isn't it? Doesn't it bother you in the slightest that you are saying that a supreme being, which would obviously be of higher intelligence than we mere mortals, is saying we should do these things?
Now, lets try some common sense. How about "archaic humans made this stuff up".
See, now it makes sense.
Hannsfeld 2 years ago
This blood was for sacrifice in thanks to God because of the cleansing. Blood represents life. It is the ultimate offering. It cost something. What is the greatest gift to God?
Now blood from an animal did not do anything of itself but it represents the innocent for the guilty. By doing this God saw the faith of the man and the man was right with God.
Does God want blood? NO. He allowed those animals to be part of worship because of what it did for the conscience of the man. Lev 7:11;Heb10:4
reconciled2God 2 years ago
@ reconciled2God:
I would surmise that the answer to my question "Is it impossible for you to see this as silly and barbaric" is "Yes".
You are merely giving me the details of the archaic justification. "Blood represents life. It is the ultimate offering." That's exactly what the Aztecs said. They were trying to make it rain and make the sun rise and set, etc.
... and if god doesn't want blood, why didn't he put in the bible "Hey, you are being barbaric. Stop doing that."?
Hannsfeld 2 years ago
@reconciled2God wrote "WHETHER it was natural or supernatural is not what is being discussed."
I think you're wrong because:
1) The title of your video . . . "A SUPERNATURAL Bible"
2) The content of your video . . . claims as to WHY it's supernatural
3) The point of your detractor's comments . . . "WHETHER" it is supernatural, and therefore, worthy of worship.
rmcdaniel423 1 year ago
@rmcdaniel423 the comment that you replied at was discussing a particular ritual recorded in the Bible as being supernatural or not. The Bible being supernatural or not was not what was being discussed directly. So, I believe you took a quote out of context. The objector was saying that the ritual itself was not supernatural and I partly agreed with him, but I was saying that whether or not it was supernatural was not what was being explained in the Bible text.
Thanks God bless.
reconciled2God 1 year ago
Jesus and God are perfect in all ways.
TheYeahNia66 2 years ago
oh god, what makes your bible above the rest?
chinh101 2 years ago
Good question.
the purpose of this video is to answer that question. Did you watch it?
reconciled2God 2 years ago
lol
LMAO
YOU SOUND LIKE NED FLANDERS...
I LOVE JESUS
but I can't take this serious enuff..
pure meekness my friend...
Good Job.
CRISwraith 2 years ago
There's a quality to your voice that makes me almost certain you are, I dunno, a good guy.
That said, his video is an EPIC FAIL.
stellar876 2 years ago
religioun cant prove that there god exist and athiest cant prove that god does not exist. but first on must ask, were did this word god come from what language was it from what was the first language and stuff like that. the egiptians were the first civilisation on earth and they were negroid, check it out for your self. the egiptians have facts on beings from another galaxy called nazduru. from this word you get nazdiru then natara then neteru then natura then nature in english.
mirwel999 2 years ago
Using the bible to prove the bible is true is in itself a fallacy.
Saying that it says things that man wouldn't normally know, like the fact that God should be worshiped is demonstrably false, there are many holy books that make this claim, and they all directly contradict each other.
Anyone convinced by these baseless arguments should do themselves a favor and take logic 101.
/facepalm
jjkoehler 2 years ago 5
this video is not about things we don't KNOW that the Bible tells us. That is just the introduction. I understand that many of those things must be taken by faith. And I understand that the fact that I listed it in the beginning, may be anti-climactic. But the video is about things that men do not ADMIT. That is the argument up for discussion.
reconciled2God 2 years ago
To admit something is to recognize a truth, as opposed to denying it. But before we can admit to truth, we need that truth to be proven. Truth is not relative or subjective, it is absolute. So to assume something is true without empirical evidence is to risk one's own perception, for the "truth" they believe in is unproven. Only after truth is proven can we be in a position to deny or admit that truth.
You must first provide evidence for your truth, THEN argue for it's admittance.
SalamiSlim 2 years ago
Why should one ADMIT that they need faith in a God when there is absolutely no evidence that one exists, let alone the Judeo-Christian God? Taking things on "faith" is admitting that you have no good evidence to believe it on its own merits?
I don't admit there's a God because the evidence against one is so striking, just like I don't admit there are unicorns and leprechauns. Not admitting something doesn't make it intrinsically true.
jjkoehler 2 years ago
We cannot admit something is true unless you have some sort of proof. The Bible simply is not truthful. Or proof of anything.
XxINCHAINSxX 2 years ago
There is no solid evidence of the big bang theory thats why it is called a theory so I guess we can't admin we exist either
brook9363 2 years ago
There are piles of evidence pointing towards Sciences answers, and NO proof of God. Talking snakes, and burning bushes that speak to people simply are imaginary and false.
XxINCHAINSxX 2 years ago
this video is total crap. it is full of logical fallacies...
crazyfingers64 2 years ago
Please list some logical fallacies that the video has.
Thanks
reconciled2God 2 years ago
1. Argument from authority
2. Argument from final Consequences
3. Confusing association with causation
4. Confusing currently unexplained with unexplainable
5. False Dichotomy
6. Non-Sequitur
7. Ad ignorantiam
crazyfingers64 2 years ago 2
Amen :-)
tcnoboi87 2 years ago
If christians knew the bible well none would not listen to silly cherry picked quotes like this.Numbers 31:17
Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man intimately. Just bc Xians are afraid to face the reality of mortal existence does not mean that it is OK for them to go on thrashing in the dark. wake up and see that each one of us makes the world better or worse in the days that we have. Do what is right.
Truthseekr7 2 years ago 4
@Truthseekr7
If so? then why don't u follow the teachings of Messiah in the New Testament? During the Old Testament times, GOD gave such orders to preserve them from Corruption to keep a perfect Race for the MESSIAH....the Old Testament itself states that Messiah will make a new Covanent.....so then y don't u follow the Teachings of the Messiah.....u ppl point ur finger to the OldTestament because you ppl dont like to Follow the MESSIAH!
ksebasti100 1 year ago
@Truthseekr7: Scripture taken out of context is an old trick of those who refuse to believe. God is Holy and True and he is Righteous. He is also Just and some day every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. Repent and be saved while there is still time. Maranatha!
ljackso 1 year ago
@ljackso did you know that your god's name is yahweh? Did you know that there is not only no evidence for your god but that there is no evidence for Jesus? All of the historical references to him are Christian doctoring from people just like yourself who died knowing that Jesus was coming back any minute and since they had no evidence then as now. they made some up. They were wrong. You are sadly mistaken as well. I do not fear Jesus because I know vastly more than you do about him.
Truthseekr7 1 year ago
@Truthseekr7: How wrong you are. Secular historians wrote about the life of Yeshua (Jesus) and they had no reason to make anything up. Someday you see Him face to face. You can do so with Him as your Lord and Savior or as your Judge. Choose wisely. If you were indeed a 'truthseeker' you would would know that Jesus Christ is Lord.
ljackso 1 year ago
@ljackso No secular historian ever wrote about Jesus within 50 years of him being alive. After that it is just hearsay from the whacky cult which was soon to start killing in the name of Christ. Christians then as now felt it necessary to help Jesus into history. Your faith and your thinly veiled threats are cute but futile. Jesus is a joke Christians don't get because they are afraid. Cowards are afraid. were your god real I would ask him why he is outrageously unjust, cruel and self important.
Truthseekr7 1 year ago
@Truthseekr7 : Some day you will have your chance to make your case to God Himself face to face. I pity you when that happens. Repent before it is too late. God does love you and wants to save you. Repent.
ljackso 1 year ago
@ljackso I am less worried about Yahweh than you are about Allah.
Truthseekr7 1 year ago
@ljackso also if the bible did turn out to be god's Mein Kamph Yahweh would quickly prove himself to be the most tyrannical being of all time. So would allah if he were real but that doesn't matter since you can easily grasp that islam is mythology just not your myths. If Xians bow as god wipes the majority of humans off the planet they would be the biggest cowards of all time, More so than any people who have been complicit in the slaughter of their fellow humans. thank god he is imaginary.
Truthseekr7 1 year ago
@Truthseekr7 Jesus Christ is the biggest truth for me in this life. i love Him and want to be dead to the world to live in Him. In your words, what i do is what seems a profitable deal for me, i can live my life in two ways, thinking that there is One true God who loves me and took away my sins on the cross and the other that there is no God and all that there is this life. then this two ways will have one and certain ending "death." if second was my choice then i sleep for ever(cont)
TheShibu554 1 year ago
@Truthseekr7 (cont) no worries but what if i am going to stand in front of my Lord Jesus Christ and what agony it will be for me, when He asks me, "What did you do with my blood that i shed for you on the cross? did i ask you to do something very burdensome? all i asked you was to believe Me. all i asked was to give Me your burdens" what shall i say to a Lord who loved me so much?
TheShibu554 1 year ago
Pandeism, explains and accounts for the Bible, and thereby supersedes it and disqualifies those parts that do not comport with pandeism while justifying those parts that do....
PanDeism 2 years ago
if you REALLY knew about the bible, you would know the jesus story is not original, the scant words of wisdom are not as well and other religions have there own explanations with one god or energy and there version of what "sin" is and how to "redeem"
Honestly your whole argument is weak
WordsofHarmony 2 years ago
I am an atheist, but I would love to know where the music in this video came from.
CalebJTurner 2 years ago
So, the Bible proves itself and the existence of God. This is false logic. I believe in God but this is ridiculous. You have faith or you do not. The Bible can not prove anything. The Veda's of the Hindu's prove themselves also. You have proven nothing. Oh, and all religions that I know of demote man.
GreyMauser 2 years ago
Please give me some examples. I am curious.
The Bible is unique in that it does not promote "religion" and vain activity that avoids the issue of reconciliation with God. It tells us about ourselves that we are the creation and not the Creator.
Mormons, eastern religions, paganism, humanism, etc. teach that man is a god or man will be a god. That is not demoting man. That is exalting man. Only the Bible teaches that man is wicked and that he MUST agree with that fact.
God bless.
reconciled2God 2 years ago
Do you want to give any examples of the Bible revealing something that man would not naturally know? All you do is say it does, without explanation. And please, no vague prophetic revaluations, no quoting the bible to reveal that an event that happens in the bible.
Khronofox 2 years ago
This is explained. History, wisdom and future events.
I understand that this is a conclusion with assumptions and without explanations.
The history can be confirmed by archeology and science.
Wisdom can be confirmed by experience.
This is introduction to the main point of the video and it is not what the video is about.
I understand that you may have a bias against the Bible and that you would dismiss these claims. That doesn't change the truth.
reconciled2God 2 years ago
"The history can be confirmed by archeology and science"
All or some, because I do know that there are some historical events that the bible does coincide with, while others that it just completely gets wrong.
"I understand that you may have a bias against the Bible and that you would dismiss these claims. That doesn't change the truth."
No. I have no biases. I just want you to explain yourself, give your evidence like a rational human. Lol, since when was being a skeptic holding a "bias"?
Khronofox 2 years ago
What history is wrong?
Everyone is biased. To deny this is silly. Whether politics or religion, you listen and believe certain people etc. based upon your bias or presupositions/assumptions/committments.
Most people that deny the Bible are committed to denying it. Especially skeptics.
For example, skeptics are usually materialists or naturalists. They have a committment to that, and if anything falls outside natural processes etc., then it is automatically "wrong", despite any evidence.
reconciled2God 2 years ago
"What history is wrong?"
The Census of Quirinius comes to mind.
"Everyone is biased. To deny this is silly."
Errr, no. There ARE open minded people out there that don't have a preconceived dogma fogging their logic. I happen to be one of them.
"Whether politics or religion, you listen and believe certain people etc. based upon your bias..."
Wrong again. As an open minded and rational person, arguments from authority do nothing for me.
Continued ->
Khronofox 2 years ago
"Most people that deny the Bible are committed to denying it. Especially the skeptics."
Do you know why they deny it? Because the bible has proven to contradict itself and represent history wrong many times.
Contunued ->
Khronofox 2 years ago
"For example, skeptics are usually materialists or naturalists. They have a commitment to that, and if anything falls outside natural processes etc., then it is automatically "wrong", despite any evidence."
I'd love to see some evidence of anything that falls out of natural processes. Please, any hard substantial evidence that can be tested and prove anything supernatural is just waiting to rock the minds of the scientific community. You'll win the Nobel Prize! You'll go down in history!
Khronofox 2 years ago
Do you believe in large scale evolution?
Molecules to man?
Is there a God?
reconciled2God 2 years ago
I'll answer these questions even though you completely brushed the points I made aside. If you don't address them I'll have to conclude you can't.
"Do you believe in large scale evolution?"
First, I don't "believe" anything. To believe is to consider true without evidence and with faith. Not my cup of tea. Second, what do you consider "large scale"? If by "large scale" you mean speciation, then yes. I acknowledge that speciation happens based on fossil and non-fossil evidence. Cont ->
Khronofox 2 years ago
So you unbiasly believe that we all came from non-living matter even though no one has ever observed this? No your not biased. HUH?
No one argues with natural selection or speciation. Your evolution requires an increase in genetic info which has never been observed. Not only are you biased, but you are a devout BELIEVER in fairy tales for grownups.
reconciled2God 2 years ago
"Molecules to man?"
What's that supposed to mean? Man ARE molecules. Your flesh, tissue, bone, teeth, brain, heart, lungs everything inside you is made up of some kind of molecule. Now if you're asking if non-organic compounds can spontaneously form organic compounds, then the answer is yes. Look up the Miller-Urey experiment and Sidney W Fox's discovery that amino acids will spontaneously form given the right conditions.
Cont ->
Khronofox 2 years ago
"Is there a God?"
Lol. Again, define "God". You use "a" then a capital "G" in "God" so I'm not sure if you mean ANY god or the Christian God. I don't know for sure whether or not God exists. This is because I hold my beliefs separate from what I know to be true. Truth = Backed by evidence, Belief = Not backed by evidence. I lack a belief in a god because there isn't enough evidence for one. And for about 2000 years, all religions have failed to provide any of this evidence.
Khronofox 2 years ago
A simple yes or no would do.
It seems that you are trying your hardest to misunderstand any of my dialog. You are just another dishonest athiest and a fool. If you hold to any opinion of evolution or athiesm then you must be biased.
There is no evidence for matter to overcome physics and chemistry and organizing itself into self-replicating life.
Your theories are just that, theories. Just because it COULD have happend that way does not mean that it did (knowledge).
God help you.
reconciled2God 2 years ago
"A simple yes or no would do."
Read my comment again lol... It's pretty much: I don't have a belief in god because there isn't enough evidence.
"If you hold to any opinion of evolution or athiesm then you must be biased."
Since when? And who gave you the authority to assert that and make it true?
Cont ->
Khronofox 2 years ago
"There is no evidence for matter to overcome physics and chemistry and organizing itself into self-replicating life."
Uh... read my comment again? I gave you some good info right there.
"Just because it COULD have happend that way does not mean that it did (knowledge)."
COULD isn't the right word, try EXTREMELY LIKELY. But hey, that's still not knowledge, so lets just say "Gawd dun it."
Cont ->
Khronofox 2 years ago
"time dun it" everyone bow down and worship.
What a cop out.
reconciled2God 2 years ago
""time dun it" everyone bow down and worship."
Please explain where you get "time dun it" from abiogenesis.
While time was definitely part of what makes abiogenesis possible, there's also the SPONTANEOUS formation of polypeptides, the amino acids they're made of, organic monomers, and fatty acid membranes. They "dun" it too
Khronofox 2 years ago
I SERIOUSLY suggest you educate yourself on abiogenesis and evolution if you're going to be so vehemently against them. You make yourself look foolish when you have no idea what your talking about when it comes to the subject you reject.
Khronofox 2 years ago
You see, here's the hypocracy in telling me that all the credible scientific evidence I pointed you to aren't valid because they are just theories.
"A theory, in the general sense of the word, is an analytic structure designed to explain a set of observations"
That's what a theory is. Now I can believe that, which is back up by evidence, experimentation and scientific consensus, or I can believe in a book written by Bronze Age farmers with claims of demons, zombies and miracles.
Khronofox 2 years ago
Forget theories.
Has anyone ever created life before? Has it ever been observed that matter can create life?
I must have missed that one in the news.
Please answer in one comment box.
You are being very inconsiderate with continuous comments.
reconciled2God 2 years ago
"Forget theories."
Uuhh... no? Why should I forget science? Theories are what the scientific method yields. Without these scientific theories you wouldn't even have the computer you're using to talk to me right now. Shall I forget the theory of Gravity, the theory of Relativity, Germ Theory, Cell theory and Atomic Theory while I'm at it? Do you REALLY want me to "Forget theories"?
Continued ->
Khronofox 2 years ago
chill man. you know what I meant. I am not suggesting forgeting those theories. Those theories are testable. Gravity is a law. Relativity was proven with the total eclipse. Cell theory and atomic are observable. Those are not theories of what might have happened only once in the past when no one saw it etc. Gimme a break.
Again, no one has observed abiogenesis, but you BELIEVE IT. Anyway even if they could produce life in the lab it would only prove that intellegence is necessary.
No questions
reconciled2God 2 years ago
"Again, no one has observed abiogenesis, but you BELIEVE IT"
Many of the processes involved in Abiogenesis HAVE been observed. I really suggest you read the evidence I pointed out to you, because all you seem to do is repeat yourself. True, the complete process hasn't been observed, but scientists are getting closer and closer to that as time passes.
"Anyway even if they could produce life in the lab it would only prove that intelligence is necessary."
No, it'd prove it was made in a lab.
Khronofox 2 years ago
"Again, no one has observed abiogenesis, but you BELIEVE IT."
Just because it hasn't been observed doesn't mean it isn't true. Have you been to the moon? Do you believe IT exists? Has God ever been "observed" in the way you want abiogenesis to be "observed" before you consider it? Can scientifically analyze God? You've been special pleading this entire conversation.
Khronofox 2 years ago
you are really getting rediculous.
The moon exist in the present. It can be observed. I can see it at night.
I think design, which can be seen, is obvious and it gives great evidence of the God of the Bible.
You are not making a distinction between observational/operational science and HISTORICAL theories.
I have faith in the Bible and the God of the Bible. I admit it. I am biased.
You however, demand that you don't BELIEVE in a certain HISTORY because you KNOW it happened. Is that fair?
reconciled2God 2 years ago
"I think design, which can be seen, is obvious and it gives great evidence of the God of the Bible."
What about Allah, or Thor? Why can't they be the "designer"?
"You are not making a distinction between observational/operational science and HISTORICAL theories."
Ok. You really need to learn what Evolution is. IT HAS BEEN OBSERVED! Every transitional form we find, every genome we sequence and every new species we find is evidence of evolution. It's not "historical theory" it's fact.
Khronofox 2 years ago
I'm going to point you in the direction of some interesting bits of evidence for evolution I highly recommend you read. Then again, you still haven't read any of the evidence I've sent your way, so here's for hoping...
OBSERVED new species, a result of speciation, or macroevolution as you creationists like to call it. These include, but aren't limited to: Oenothera giga, Stephanomeira malheurensis, Drosophila paulistorum, Tribolium castaneum, and Nereis acuminata.
cont ->
Khronofox 2 years ago
"Is that fair"
I never said I didn't believe anything because I "KNOW". I don't believe in the validity of the Bible because it's composed of books with unknown authors, it's over 2000 years old, it contradicts itself NUMEROUS times, and condones slavery, genocide and human sacrifice.
Here, I'll give you some evidence on why I hold this opinion. You should try it some time. Check these out: (EXO 15:3, ROM 15:33), (MAT 1:16, LUK 3:23), (ISA 14:21, DEU 24:16) And that's three of MANY.
Khronofox 2 years ago
You left out polygamy, murder, and rape.
Just because these things are recorded in the Bible, does not mean that God condones them.
There is a difference between slavery and indentured servants or bondslaves. It was not like the slavery in america.
The Bible absolutely never condones human sacrifice. God does not ask for human sacrifice from us. He did it of Himself. Christ did what we could not do.
The Canaanites were destroyed in some cases for their sin. They were not innocent.
reconciled2God 2 years ago
"There is a difference between slavery and indentured servants or bondslaves. It was not like the slavery in america. "
There is. How do you know this is how it was in the Bible? If you read Leviticus 25:44-46, it talks about how to buy, sell and trade slaves as livestock. And what of the "indentured servants" that get out of line? Exodus 21:20-21 says as long as their beatings don't kill them on the spot, but only a couple days later, it's all good!
cont ->
Khronofox 2 years ago
"The Bible absolutely never condones human sacrifice. God does not ask for human sacrifice from us."
No, he had Jephthah burn his daughter. Read Judges 11:29-40. In a nutshell, Jephthah asks God to help him win a battle and says he'll sacrifice the first thing that walks through his door. God's like "sure lol", and guess what walks through Jephthah door? His daughter! So she's burned as a virgin. God knew all this in advance too! Man, that god of yours sure likes spilled blood.
Khronofox 2 years ago
Jephthah Read Judges 11:29-40
Jephthah made a vow.
To kill his daughter would not be pleasing to the Lord.
His daughter was never killed. She was to be given as a servant of the temple and she was to be a virgin for her life (read vs39). This was a common vow in Israel. Num. 30:2
reconciled2God 2 years ago
I've read the passage, and never read anything having to do with her being given as a servant to the temple.
"whatever comes out of the door of my house to meet me when I return in triumph from the Ammonites will be the LORD's, and I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering." (Judges 11:31)
"My father," she replied, "you have given your word to the LORD. Do to me just as you promised, now that the LORD has avenged you of your enemies, the Ammonites. (Judges 11:36)
cont->
Khronofox 2 years ago
After the two months, she returned to her father and he did to her as he had vowed. And she was a virgin. (Judges 11:39)
No mention of her being spared or anything. I've read these verses over and over. They're one of many problems I with the Bible I had that led me to reject my faith.
"The Canaanites were destroyed in some cases for their sin. They were not innocent."
So genocide is ok, as long as they're "deserving"? Do you realize how sick that is? And care to comment on the slavery?
Khronofox 2 years ago
the "sacrifice" was done to consecrate a vow or a thing that was vowed to the Lord.
Look up Lev. 7:16, 22:18-21 and Num. 15:3. There were many laws concerning vows in the torah. These verses specifically say that there were burnt sacrifices "concerning vows".
Also, in a literal translation the verse reads..."or I have offered up for it--a burnt-offering.". (Youngs)
It is just saying that he will offer "it" WITH a burnt offering.
She bewailed her virginity not her death.
reconciled2God 2 years ago
I read Lev. 7:16, 22:18-21 and Num. 15:3, and I'm unimpressed. If God's hand is on the Bible, and he's making sure his word is pure, I should be able to read it and not worry about literal translations. HOWEVER: E.W.Bullinger has some interesting views on the verse and I've decided that the word play is too "fuzzy" to say THIS VERSE condones human sacrifice. But, there are still the rest of the problems with the Bible, hence I'm still waiting on your input on the comments I made on slavery.
Khronofox 2 years ago
Also, another instance of human sacrifice, less fuzzy on the wording and quite graphic. Check out 2Kings 23:20-25. Joshua 7:15, and Deuteronomy 13:13-19 are also horrible atrocities, but I wouldn't consider them "sacrifice".
Seeing that you still haven't expanded on slavery in the bible after I showed you those verses, or on the permissive genocide of the Canaanites, or on the contradictions I pointed out, I must consider the Bible to be horribly translated or simply a horrible book.
Khronofox 2 years ago
The answer is: not yet. But scientists are very close. Look up Jack Szostak he's a prominent biologist and has done a lot of experiments with abiogenesis.
To say it's impossible to create a protocell because we haven't at the moment is intellectually dishonest. This aside, the scientific evidence I've been giving you that you refuse to read shows that abiogenesis is EXTREMELY LIKELY.
Also, if you would like me to stop double posting, I need you to stop barraging me with multiple questions.
Khronofox 2 years ago
"IT HAS BEEN OBSERVED!"
trans. forms - if you look in any textbook all you have is dotted lines in the evol. tree. with very few, highly debatable (among paleontol.), fossils. Finding bones in the dirt only prove that it was a species that doesn't exist today. No one knows if those dead animals had any offspring. Therefore those bones are being INTERPRETED to be evidence for goo-to-you evolution based on their biased viewpoint ($). Fossils etc. actually are evidence for the flood.
reconciled2God 2 years ago
"with very few, highly debatable (among paleontol.), fossils."
Few? I suggest you look up how many transitional form we've found. It's a lot more than "a few". Debate? Actually, there isn't much of a debate at all. A 1991 Gallup poll showed that only 5 percent of scientists give any credence to the creation myth. Also, the US National Academy of Sciences regards creationism as "pseudoscience". Last time I checked, a 95% consensus on an issue didn't qualify as a "debate".
-> cont
Khronofox 2 years ago
It's amusing how deluded you are.
throwitup4mk 2 years ago
"Do not put such unlimited power into the hands of the husbands. Remember, all men would be tyrants IF they could. " - Abigail Adams, wife of John; March 13, 1776
reconciled2God 2 years ago
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened" (Sir Winston Churchill)
reconciled2God 2 years ago
The big point about this video that many commenters miss is that naturally, people want to exalt THEMSELVES. "I am #1". I am the boss". People don't go around doing the desires of others unless they are forced or something is in it for them.
So there is a conflict/contrast with the writings of the Bible and natural man. The Bible says, "exalt God, He is #1." If God is the boss then I am not and you are not.
Man and God cannot be soveriegn at the same time.
reconciled2God 2 years ago
How do you explain that I as an atheist subjugate myself to the greater good of my family, society and other things without any god belief. You called my reasoning circular, and asked if I was an authority on human nature. I am not an authority on human nature, but I know that you know very little about human nature. Remember, I watched your vcideo...BUSTED!
trueleroix 2 years ago
These are not the things that a god would say. These are the things that a superstitious, bronze aged sheep hereder would write. Do you have any real evidence?
trueleroix 2 years ago
Are you the authority on what a god would say? What would a god say?
Are you an authority on a sheep herders from the bronze age?
Was a shepherd more inclined to putting aside his desires, admitting wrong openly and subjegating himself to worship the Creator God? Were they different from men today?
My experience is that men avoid God like a criminal avoids a cop, and they avoid acknowledging wrong to those offended.
Something tells me you are not looking for evidence for the Bible anyway.
reconciled2God 2 years ago
I am not an authority on any of these things. You need to work on your morality. Good people do not need an ancient book to tell them to be accountable for their wrongdoings. Good people do not require threats or promises from an imaginary being to do good. I have been looking for evidence for the bible for 30 years. Just show me anything. You want to convince people, but you don't even try. I ask, once again: Do you have any evidence?
trueleroix 2 years ago
"good people"
what defines "good"? Who determines "good". Is it you? Look at corrupt societies in history. Were they good?
What kind of "evidence" are you looking for? Tape recordings of Jonah or a video of the resurrection?
I gave evidence on the video. The Bible was inspired by God because it is completely contrary to the nature of man. Just because you don't accept it does not mean that it is not evidence. It may not be conclusive evidence or scientific proof, but It is evidence.
reconciled2God 2 years ago
"The Bible was inspired by God because it is completely contrary to the nature of man."
This is not evidence. You must first show that this is true for it to be evidence. Then you must show that there is no man that would write that. then you would need to show why it would come from a god. I define good by my own standards. I am more moral than the Hebrew god.
trueleroix 2 years ago
Gimme a break. I'm supposed to show that it is true? What are you saying? In order for it to be evidence it has to be true? That is circular reasoning. So, in order for there to be any evidence against OJ to be a murderer we must first prove that he is a murderer for the evidence to be valid. LOL.
You define good. Well, so do I. And so does everyone else. Who is right? Everyone is not right at the same time though there may be tolerance of opinions. If good is relative then how is God bad?
reconciled2God 2 years ago
If you are going to present evidence the evidence must be valid.
I can write a book that says there is a pink unicorn under a bridge and that he is God and that he must be worshiped.
According to your logic, since that book presents a fact that man would not "naturally admit," it is evidence that the book could not have been written by me, a man.
notquitegenius 2 years ago
Let me ask again, does man naturally do these things? Where? Who?
reconciled2God 2 years ago
1) exalting a creator
There is a long history of humans exalting a creator. Monotheism is older than Christianity. If you don't believe me look up Zoroastrianism.
2) demoting man
I would argue that the theory of evolution demotes man more than Christianity, because it says that we aren't special. We aren't any different than any other animal outside of our intelligence.
notquitegenius 2 years ago
Let me clarify. We are talking about the Bible, not about Christianity. The Bible's history predates all religion. All religion is a perversion of the original truth passed down by Noah's descendants.
As far as demoting man, I think you are missing the point made on the video. The Bible tells the truth about man's hidden sin and compels him to submit to God's rule etc.
reconciled2God 2 years ago
supernatural.... its too easy. let thinking people figure things out.
I have noticed a repeating issue with the cultists. they seem to not understand the meaning of TRUTH. i mean, they say "i know god and/or jesus is real" or "i know i'm going to magic happy land when i die" or "the bible is truth!". then they wouldnt need faith, cause they have the knowledge. but they go on and on and on about faith in their religion. vauge, stupid, easy, wishful, dangerous
jessothebody 2 years ago 2
The Bible is compilation of several books written by different people. Supposed told by God to write.
asiangirlmob 2 years ago
hmm I dunno
asiangirlmob 2 years ago
All I've wanted to point out is that this video did not prove that the bible wasn't written by man. There is absolutely no evidence, the reasons given are an insult to logic. I just hope men are smart enough to see through this
Jiryu02 2 years ago
logically yes the bible was written by man. but the author is God. everyone who loves jesus know this and doesn't need logic or smart men to figure it out. moses was said to write the first 5 books peter the apostle wrote most to all the letters. lets think about this. If God actually penned the bible we would never know what the bible would really say. Just like the ark of the covanet men was not allowed to touch or open it, cause God himself was in there and he is too holy too see. Get it now
mldkga 2 years ago
Actually, we do need logic to connect the claim of God being the author of the bible. Can't he be the authour of the Quran, the Vedas, or contardictory books. Everybody says the same when it comes to their holy books.
And if God is "too holy" to grasp, basically implying that we don't have the means to precieve him as a whole, why are we so certain about this specific claim? Wouldn't we be justified in questioning?
I'm sorry but there is no proof that God even had anything to to with it.
Jiryu02 2 years ago
heres another thing in the red sea they have found horse bones human bones and goldplated chariots just like the egyptians had right in the middle of the sea.There is an ark in a mountian range on turkeys borders
evolutionists have tried to say that all the weird colors of the rock and different layers of earth were 50 million years old 10 million 1 billion so on so forth. but that happened around 1988 when mt olympus in washington shifted and the layers drastically changed
mldkga 2 years ago
So scientist make mistakes. They also correct mistakes. You can't have your argument dwell on mistakes, you'll over see what they got right.
Lets say that the scientist got it all wrong, that still doesn't prove your position. Why are you convinced of either?
Jiryu02 2 years ago
Logic? Smart enough? Well maybe you can be smart enough to mull this over and come up with an answer. Is it by chance that the molecular structure of our cells that make up our DNA - all fall into place by chance - to give us eyes to see, ears to hear, a heart that beats, lungs that fill with air, a brain that functions more intricately than any computer ever will - that's not even looking externally at creation but looking at self since that's where most agnostics and atheists seem to look.
LukeOneTwentyEight 2 years ago
Understanding evolution could help logically explain that.
However it is not necessary. Lets just say that we do no not understand the compexity we see in the world, lets say we don't understand the self or mind. This does not make religious ideas or any other alternative explanation true.
There is still no way that anyone could logically prove the bible is the word of god. I didn't say there was no god even though I certainly don't believe so. How does the complexity of life even relate?
Jiryu02 2 years ago
Did you ever read the bible? In it is story upon story of people just like you and I dealing with the complexity of life with God and without God. Science will always fall short - it will always come to the end of the equation only to find another equation to compute and in doing so has done more to PROVE the existence of God than disprove it.
LukeOneTwentyEight 2 years ago
Well first off, I know science falls short sometimes. Science was not meant appeal to man's conceptions. Maby thats what art's for.
Second, Science could never prove the existence of god, ever! Thats because scientist are logically inable to prove a negative. I suppose the burden of proof lies on those who make the claim.
Besides, it seems that science has done more to disprove the existence of God than prove it. What brings people to sa the opposite?
Jiryu02 2 years ago
Sincere and intelligent men for ages have pondered the 'God' question. Peter Kreeft is but one. Seeking answers for the existence of God does not make one unintelligent. On the contrary, the more intelligent seek the existence of God all their life if they have to because after this life, what's next? Read the Argument from Pascal's Wager - read all the arguments - with an open mind. Take the time to read those links. After all, you have an eternity to think about it.
LukeOneTwentyEight 2 years ago
I didn't say seeking answers for the existence of God is was stupid.
The only point that I wished to make, which was my original point, is that the bible was written by men and there is no reason to beleive that the bible has anything to do with God.
Jiryu02 2 years ago
here we go
John 1:1 (King James Version)
John 1 1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2The same was in the beginning with God.
you see the WORD was already written before it excited.
just like logically you can say our future is written just waiting on history to fulfill it.
The Bible was written by man, manually. but God told them what to right.
Proof?
look to the next thing
mldkga 2 years ago
Revelation 1 (King James Version)
Revelation 1 1The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John: 2Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.
God sent an angel down to john after God told his angel what to tell John.
then john kept a record of it.
mldkga 2 years ago
of sinned he could of done nothing for us and that would have been us up on that cross getting speared whipped with metal balls and shrapnel and nailed and tied.
I never knew it was naturally too worship or serve more than one higher being of equal value. no one can serve two masters. stop being selfish learn to read dont assume dont get stupid... we are only naturally about ourselves cause of our sinful nature
mldkga 2 years ago
reading like a usual book the bible is history a story. a gift a guideline you can't only take one verse and say there is confliction. God demotes us Yes he is a father but he doesnt immancipate his Children, His servants. Those who actively seek God will find Him. all Truth. just because its naturally for young man to knock a girl up and leave doesn't make it right no ethic value at all. What greater gift can someone give you than their life. now Jesus had a choice he was of the Flesh he could
mldkga 2 years ago
ok first off go to rehab your on drugs. God created man in His own image. in a way its like hiring a bunch of servents. servants are well treated and taken care of as long as your obediant. Not only is He my God he is my friend. best one ever. these self afflictions we cast on ourselves is by our own bidding called free will. Like a friend lets get into whatever mess but willing to clean it up with you or get you out of the hole you just dug... and your right the bible is an unusual book so stop
mldkga 2 years ago
If you have ever had a vision, or prophesy....God is about LOVE, TRUTH, AND LIGHT....When he brings you to his light, you cannot out run it....it is full of celestial love.....HIS MESSAGE IS THIS...Global peace, he is upset what humans have done! All things even in history ALWAYS goes back to GOD...even to much global corruption....It is ALL NATIONS, not just the United States, under ONE GOD!! His love is devine, yet man rejects his word.
A Earth Angel in his light!!
passionatecutie 2 years ago
WOW so many fallacies that i dont kno where to begin.
MagikBynature 2 years ago
please help everyone out and begin.
Maybe something needs clarified.
Thanks.
reconciled2God 2 years ago
There is nothing to be clarified. People have been repeating the same thing.
2 words:
circular argument
and for added measure, lets say by some act of GOD it isnt. It is still a VERY weak argument guarded by the word NATURALLY. Back to logic 101. Lets take that out.
The Bible is supernatural b/c it contains things that man does not know or admit.
Which is a very easy argument to stomp.
This "proof" is nothing but a play on words.
FYI: Quran fulfills the same premises, so I guess its divine too.
MagikBynature 2 years ago
Please give examples not generalities(logic 101).
"Naturally", refers to things that man CANNOT know except with SUPERNATURAL revelation. Prophecy, history, wisdom, and also things that man DOES NOT in his natural state admit.
The quran is not concerned with history last time I checked. Does it contain a creation account etc? It does not promote voluntary, spiritual worship of God, neither does it deal with the truth about man and Jesus Christ.
Did you actually listen to the video?
reconciled2God 2 years ago
uhhh... I like how you skipped the main issue. Excuse me, but until you get around the whole argument being circular, there is really no point in discussing the other premises.
Like I said, those other premises come into play only if its not a circular argument quote: "lets say by some act of GOD it isnt"
For me to fight an empty argument is pointless. I merely gave a general outline since you wanted it so badly.
goodbye.
MagikBynature 2 years ago
just by saying that it is a circular argument without giving any examples is illogical.
You have had 3 responses and no examples of arguments (which I asked for initially).
reconciled2God 2 years ago
I'll give you one example: The bible is the word of God because it shows us truth that we would not naturally admit.
The example they give is that the bible supports one creator God.
So what! that doesn't make it true, that solely depends on if there is one god or not. Even if there is, it doesn't eliminate the possibility of it being created by man.
You're telling me that the many civilizations throughout time and history could have not concieved monotheism?
Thats garbage!
Jiryu02 2 years ago
Thanks for your reply.
Are people naturally inclined to worship their Creator?
No. Man avoids this with great effort. That is the point. The Bible is not about a "religious system". It is a revelation of God, man, and Jesus Christ. God is not interested in "religion". He is interested in man getting right with Him in his heart.
Also,
The point is not monotheism. It is more specifically, the Creator and to worship and serve Him. Anyway, all monostheistic religions are from the Bible.
reconciled2God 2 years ago
But how is this definite proof that the bible was not written by men?
Are men naturally inclined to worship a creator? Maybe, once he creates an item of worship he could behave anyway he wants. If that behavior leads to a worldwide religion, they could easily claim that man isn't naturally inclined to this type of behavior.
But does that mean that their way of thinking is divine. You have to make a real logical connection. Otherwise, that claim is just a plain assumption.
Jiryu02 2 years ago
Also, you think that man doesn't naturally come up with ideas of god? Prove it!
You think the bible is the only text in the world that demotes man? Thats nonsense! Even if it was the only book, how does that mean it was created by god?
You have to prove that man could not naturally do these things to himself. That's just an assumption based of nothing!
Jiryu02 2 years ago
When you do something wrong do you easily admit it?
By naturally, I mean without God's revealed truth about ourselves, confronting our problem.
Every religion in the world says that man is basically good and that it is not neccessary to deal with the problem of guilt. It deals w/ the symptom. Religion covers it up without dealing with the problem. If you study religions you will see that they do not state as the basis of their beliefs that every person is a rebel against the Creator.
reconciled2God 2 years ago
Does man easily admits his faults? Maybe, some of them, most likely not.
Natural or not, it does not mean he can't without god.
Let me make clear that admitting your faults and being humble over simple arrogance is the best. Anyone can teach this by experience or history. Observation and judgement could be written down you know.
Just because the bible may have a solution (which is another discussion) does not mean it wasn't written by man.
Jiryu02 2 years ago