Ok listen when god put the tree of knowledge of good and evil in the garden of Eden, he gave Adam the choice to listen to eve and the same goes for this video. Abraham had a choice to sacrifice Isaac. You can't say that men aren't unpredictable. And yes god is omniscient. The reason you don't understand much is simply because you are trying to look farther than you can see. Please respond.
The bible was not written by God, it was written by several men. By men who were possessed by evil, the devil forced those men to make changes in the bible and write it as the devil wants us to see it; But the Quran was written in a way that it can never be altered or changed, it is a poem that no poet could have ever written.
To play God's advocate for a moment, couldn't one adopt the "God is omniscient except for the future" attitude under the idea that he has knowledge of all things that are knowledge, and that the results of free will, like the outcome of a (hypothetical, if need be) truly random number generator, are not knowledge until after they occur?
@spacesergeant101 Just to clarify, what I'm proposing is that if omniscience is knowing all that is knowable, that you're actually requiring some sort of trans-omniscience of God, to both know all things that are knowledge and all things that are not knowledge. You are, after all, assuming that knowledge of the future fundamentally works the same as knowledge of the past. But that may be like reading all the things written in a book, and all the things not written in it.
@spacesergeant101 I don't see how one can have an omniscient god who doesn't know the future. Besides, numerous times the Bible says that the biblical god knows the future. So, no, I'm afraid that won't work.
@ProfMTH Ah yes, even if knowledge of the future did not act like normal knowledge, that is negated by biblical claims of God knowing the future. Just thought that point needed clarification.
You do not establish that the True Christian argument is a fallacy because someone calls it a fallacy. That’s just a statement not backed up by any argument. The Teachings of Jesus establish what is true in regard to Christianity. Therefore, arguments establishing true Christianity come from His teachings. So True Christians believe Jesus. Jesus said. "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life." All His Words.
The Holy Spirits guidance: Why don't all Christians give the same answer? Because not all Christians are guided into understanding on all the issues that they may be questioned about. The human desire to give an answer to help the seeker can cause a Christian to think out an answer from their own thinking. They make a mistake when they do this. It's ok to state, “I don't know”. There are also christians who are not guided by the Holy Spirit because they are not true Christians.
@AdstarAPAD That "not a TRUE Christian" argument gets peddled pretty often around these parts, and not only is it a weak argument, it is also a fallacy.
@palerider1775 "How would you even define a *True* Christian?"
Similar to what AdstarAPAD said, a "true" Christian is someone who emulates Jesus. I think most people would agree that the vast majority of people who call themselves "Christians" don't act very much like Jesus.
@palerider1775 Well, it's theoretically possible for someone to be a "true" Christian, but it seems pretty hard. For example, very few people are willing to give up all their possessions or love their enemies.
Continued part: 2 Now i know you fear God because you have not withheld your son your only son from me." He was letting Abraham know that His faith had reached the level God wanted. Before this time Abraham’s faith had not reached the level God wanted. Only when Abraham when through the process did Abraham have that faith. So before Abraham did this thing God could not make this statement to Abraham. It would have been false in that moment in time. Understand?
God through His foreknowledge knew that Abraham would go through with the sacrifice. But Abraham needed to have His faith pushed to the limit to get him to trust in God enough to do it. It was an extreme exercise in faith to take that faith to the level God wanted Abraham to have. Only after Abraham went through this experience He obtained the level of faith needed. So when God says to Abraham. Now i know you fear God because you have not withheld your son your only son from me. continued:
When I had teenagers living in my home, they were often amazed at how I could figure out what they were up to and when they were lying to cover it up or when they would sneak out of the house to go to a party and I'm not even omniscient. But, not only did YHWH not be able to predict what Abraham would do, he also had a weird way of asking, "Do you really like me Abe? Would you commit a murder to prove it?" Something awefully Manson-esque about that.
@brucegrenehan1 "not only did YHWH not be able to predict what Abraham would do, he also had a weird way of asking, "Do you really like me Abe? Would you commit a murder to prove it?" Something awefully Manson-esque about that."
Well, when I was a believer, I belonged to a whole church of believers who did not understand the bible and had to go to bible studies weekly so that the bible could be explained to us. This is the Xtian way (see Harold Camping--oh uh where is that bible authority guy anyway?)
Another good one. Your knowledge of the subject matter is obviously extensive and your presentation is refreshingly objective. I haven't watched all your vids but have not watched one yet that hasn't added to my knowledge base. Thanks for your efforts.
Your questions are valid and it is good that you study the scripture. There is no way to learn without reading and without asking questions. My experience is that the more you read, the more questions you have, the more you piss off some christians but drawing near to Him thru study or reading always gives answers.
The answer is simple. Abraham had faith, you will know them by their fruit.
It should be noted that many christian theologians contend that in old testament "the angel of the lord" is either the holy spirit or, more commonly, Jesus. In fact this is one the passages they cite in defense of this, using the "from me" line as evidence. Other passages cited include Acts 7:30, Gen. 16:10, Judges 2:1, Zac. 3:3, Ex. 3:14, and Judges 6:19
I'm not a Christian. My point was that many Christians believe that "the angel of the Lord" is god (and there is a very good case for this), so he should still be omniscient. As you pointed out, the only other option is to conclude that an angel expected to be the recipient of the sacrifice, which doesn't make any sense.
Your objection to the argument from omniscience having limits is purely semantic. A quick glance at a philosophy text will inform you that one of the accepted, logical defintions is, 'to know all possible things.'
It is consequently impossible to impossible things ie how much does an infinitely heavy rock weight?
The future may, similarly, be impossible to know (with caveats.)
Or God can simply choose not to know or not look ie Superman's girlfriend, thus preserving free will.
@ProfMTH 1) Absolutely positive. Like I said there are caveats. For example, God can know what he personally will do, and what actions he will take. Further God having the perfect intellect would be able to predict causal paths. However free will is only preserved by either:
i) It is impossible to see 'past' free will choices
or
ii) Indeed, superman has x-ray vision. He can see through Lois Lane's clothes anytime. However he chooses not to. God being omnipotent, can similar choose not to look
@ProfMTH The sentence isn't 'God knows all things including impossible things.'
As I said it's impossible to know the mass of an infinitely heavy rock, or how to make a square with three sides. Knowing all things can only, sensibly, mean to know all possible things. Thus see my (i) proposition.
Further knowing all things, taken in the present tense remains true in my (ii) proposition. God can know all things now, and choose not to know the outcomes of our choices.
@ProfMTH Is that always your response when your over simplistic, purely semantic based objections are knocked down?
I rather thought pointing the obvious out to you was required given 'the context' :)
However for posterity :@) I would like to point out that you have, at no time, offered any reasoned objection to what I have presented. LOL doesn't count.
You have a nice day now whilst you set about trying to quote mine the Bible(s) and then set forth what we'll charitably call 'objections.'
@MrWildbill20056 "Is that always your response when your over simplistic, purely semantic based objections are knocked down?"
You should look up "loaded question" and learn how to avoid them.
You haven't knocked down anything, but rather you've offered a fairly typical and unpersuasive attempt to reconcile the Bible's various descriptions of its god vis-a-vis omniscience. Perhaps most troubling is your "'all' does not mean all" line--SO common from apologists who lack anything else.
@ProfMTH Again this is not an argument. This is the typical 'new atheist' attack via 'mental gymnastics.' Apparently one must subscribe to your interpretation or be guilty of a faux breach of parsimony.
I must applaud your hypocrisy in criticizing my reply to your own relic of the schoolyard, bravo.
A quick check of any philosophy text will inform you of the centuries of thought and debate upon the nature of omniscience, and what 'all knowable things' are.
"God can know all things now, and choose not to know the outcomes of our choices"
You're saying that it IS possible to know the future. Thus the future does not fall into the category of 'impossible knowledge." Therefore God has chosen not to be omniscient. I don't see how this answers the problem. Whether it is by his own choice or not, he is still not omniscient by this logic because he has willfully deprived himself of possible knowledge.
Oh dear. 'God' may not be the author of confusion, however I don't recall humankind being similarly insured. Next the new Testament is marked by letters promoting and correcting particular behaviours and beliefs. Thirdly the spirit may guide, but Christ (we're Christians) is clear on us having a choice to believe or not, and thus by extension to follow where the spirit leads. Consequently given humanity's asserted capacity for folly, and free will, why would you expect wholistic concensus? o.O
So what are saying? Are these contradictions the reason why you are an atheist? or are you wise enough and clever enough to see what`s going on here?.Try to read it as a believer that these encounters actually took place[which they did] and you will have your own answers on what could be happening here.
AronRa put this story into perspective. If God is good, Abe knew that, and a voice asked for Isaac, then Abe should have told the voice, "Go away! I know my God is good and He'd never ask for something like that." If Abe did listen, then God should have stopped him and said, "You fool! Why would you think I would seriously ask for something like that?" The story is a failure of both human reason and God's character.
I am a spiritual man, and believe in GOD, and also the Bible, though I do recognize that the bible has largely been eroded to the point where people can now have arguments like this one. I believe the TRUTH of the bible has to be discerned for each person individually, and if you honestly seek TRUTH, and not what some man on a pulpit tells you, then you WILL find it. By questioning the word, you are doing more to bring truth to the world than most christians have done
first, I thoroughly enjoy your videos. I honestly believe that you are (possibly unwillingly) doing Gods work, and doing it much more honestly than most "christians"
You make very good points, and I think I might have an answer for you on this one. The biggest problem with the Bible and christians in general are PEOPLE. unfortunately, people wrote the bible, have translated the bible, and confused this issue so much, there can be no consensus on what the book actually says
Yeah most Christians who have read the bible their whole lives share similar almost exact beliefs the main principle is following commandments and belief in the Nicene Creed...basic
God gives us free will.and choice to test your heart....thats why its called FAITH...u have to believe..... The reason so many Christians have different beliefs is becuz u cant just read the bible once or 2wice you read it your whole life and then you will understand
@MissNickie84 "The reason so many Christians have different beliefs is becuz u cant just read the bible once or 2wice you read it your whole life and then you will understand."
So, Christians who've read the Bible "[their] whole life" all have the same beliefs?
With regard to the Genesis passage, there's actually a fairly straightforward answer for it (albeit not with interesting implications). Genesis is a very old passage, and it's probably based on an even older, rather less monotheistic one. As a result, its portrayal of God is pretty much in line with Caananite theology of the time: ideas like onmiscience and omnipotence came a lot later, theologically speaking. It's also why you get incidents like Abraham wrestling with God in Genesis 32.
Well, yes, since being omnipotent (all-powerful) also means God can choose "what" or "what not" to know.
By the way, the comment sent to you by Fewmoredollars was actually sent by me. I realized he was the one signed-in on my phone after i sent you the message.
@tmat04 "Well, yes, since being omnipotent (all-powerful) also means God can choose "what" or "what not" to know."
You are simply assuming the ground in controversy, i.e., whether the biblical god is omniscient. You come to a text that quite clearly presents him as NOT omniscient, but impose upon it your preexisting belief that he is omniscient (a belief that is contradicted by the text itself).
I would blame Martin Luther for the doctrinal confusion among non-catholics; He is the one that said "the bible is so obvious that anyone can understand it"; Jesus gave the Church teaching authority and those who choose not to heed will come to nothing but confusion.
@GraveyardGhost559 So, what does your church's "teaching authority" have to say that clears up the confusion regarding the passages under review here?
@ProfMTH -- On the meaning of "The Binding of Isaac", what I wrote would be what the Church teaches; And about God "now knowing" about things, I dont know myself why God feigns ignorance; Jesus himself asked questions of other people even though he could read their thoughts.
"The Binding of Isaac" is mostly a pre-figure of the substitutionary sacrifice of Jesus; When Abraham said "God will provide the sacrifice", he meant then and at the advent of Jesus.
Typical believer behavior. Really highlights their doublethink turning into cognitive dissonance, which leads them to irritably and irrationally try to resolve their conflicting beliefs. Eventually they just blame the person who brought them to their uncomfortable non-ignorant, non-blissful state.
It's really telling that the Bible says that those without the Holy Spirit can't properly understand it. Without those who don't believe in the Bible, who is there to question the Bible?
I think this particular example may fail at every possible level. It seems obvious that God at this point in the development of his character is not the all knowing, all seeing deity claimed by modern Christians. 1 Chron. 28:9 adds to the dementia by stating that God "understands every motive behind the thoughts" meaning he absolutely HAD to know what was going on. Right?
It's a sad indictment on Christians that we even NEED to dissect the Bible to this degree. Even a glancing perusal of the Bible shows it for what it is.... a Bronze Age attempt to explain what we see all around us, stuff that Science has since unravelled. Just a little bit of education exposes religion. It may have been useful a few hundred years ago (but mostly for genocide if you're honest) but now... we're tired of the violence that religion brings to the table. Time to dump it... seriously!!
Ineresting that you were talking Abraham and Isaac.
I remember reading something about the idea of the angel intervening in the sacrifice was a later insertion and that in the original text. Isaac was actually sacrificed.
Unfortunately, I can't remember or find where I saw it. Have you ever heard of it?
@HonestMan395 The problem with that, is that if it's true, NONE of the three great monotheistic religions (except MAYBE Islam) have a damned leg to stand on, as Issac was the grandfather of the Twelve Tribes (father of Jacob, father of Joseph). With the Jews pre-emptively destroyed, the Christians follow, as Jesus was a Jew himself.
@therealfriday13th Quote: "The problem with that, is that if it's true, NONE of the three great monotheistic religions (except MAYBE Islam) have a damned leg to stand on,"
@ProfMTH I decided to be a pedantic prick and rewatch the entire video for the purpose of finding capitalization errors. I'm sorry to report none stood out for me.
In other news, I found your channel yesterday morning and since then I've watched your videos almost non-stop. I really have enjoyed all of them thus far. I also want to applaud the way you present your claims with the verses in easy to read format right on the screen so it's not a matter of constant pausing, and restarting to...
cont @ProfMTH ...to check your sources, which is something I do with almost everything where a source can be found. Anyway, thanks for all the work you've done with these videos. They're good stuff.
Very simple. The Hebrew word for know is the same one used when Adam knew Eve. So God is all knowing (to know the future) and at this point he knew by experience. I knew I would enjoy my upcoming wedding night, (21 years ago) and on that night I knew by actual experience the joy of my wedding night.
ProfMTH is always thought provoking. If I may I'd like to answer his two question.
The binding of Isaac dilemma:
God knows all things both actual and potential. I agree. So how could he say, "Now I know," if he already knew? If God knew that Abraham feared him and would not withhold his son and it was knowledge of the actual, it required that Abraham actually take the test to this point. God could not have known an actual that did not happen. That seems almost a no brainer.
@campdon I John 2:27 is the more difficult issue. If it is understood as ProgMth suggest, there is no question that it is in error. ProfMth demonstrates that by his examples. But I suggest it does not mean what ProfMth claims. First, words and even sentences do not exist in isolation. When they are isolated they mean nothing, or, at best, they mean what we bring to them. So context not only matters it is crucial.
@campdon So what is the context? The topic is those who John calls antichrists. The have infiltrated the church, but John says they clearly don't belong. Now they have left - probably due to persecution. They left because they were not truly believers, not believing in Jesus as the Messiah. These true believers would understand (oidate 2:20 and the first "all things") that because they had a spiritual compass that could detect deviation in an unbeliever.
@campdon What was the spiritual compass? ProfMTH suggest it is the Holy Spirit. He is both right and wrong. According to verse 20 these believers received a gift that enables them to detect the error of these false believers (charima is literally "gift" not anointing). That gift was what they had been previously taught about Jesus (v. 24) plus their abiding in the Father, which assures to them the Holy Spirit's affirmation of that truth. Clearly it is not the Holy Spirit in magical way.
@campdon So verse 27 should be understood as: "The gift of the word already taught you stays in you. You don't need other teachers - with other ideas; the gift of the word already taught informs you about all the things that are true of Jesus. It is the truth and not a lie, so even as you were taught, remain in God. "
So ProfMTH is mistaken. The Holy Spirit alone does not teach us all things. The gift, which is the word spoken through the Apostles, teaches all the things about Jesus.
@campdon "So ProfMTH is mistaken. The Holy Spirit alone does not teach us all things."
It's not ProfMTH who is wrong, then, but rather it's Jesus who's wrong. John 16:13 (Jesus speaking), "But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will lead you into all the truth...."
BTW, if one can just change the wording of a biblical passage as you have struggled to do with 1 John 2:27, why have a Bible at all? Just make it up as you go along.
@ProfMTH Who are the YOU? According to v. 12 it is the disciples to whom Jesus was directly speaking.
I do not make it up. I read the Greek and use the simple tools of syntax and context to determine the sense of the passage. You can do the same using the tools available on the Internet (for the syntax part) though understanding the context will require that you go beyond the proof passages (or should I say, the disproof passages). Why is it you missed the context of v. 24 in I John 2?
@ProfMTH For example, notice the word charisma which is translated in some versions as "anointing" in 1 John 2:27. See the use of it in Rom. 1:11 and 5:15, and 6:23 . The basic meaning is "gift." Charisma is not used in any place as the anointing of the Holy Spirit received by all believers. Use the Internet and search the NT for charisma. I think translating it as anointing is simply wrong. The Greek word for anoint is aleipho (and John uses it in the gospel) not charisma.
@campdon Mea culpa. I misread the word chrisma (bifocals) and read it as charisam. That makese a difference in translating vv. 20, 27. Usually it is translated *anointing*. However, because it is used only in these two verses the meaning depends heavily upon this context. The verb form suggests the simple idea of help. It remains for the context to explain what this help is. I still think it is the word of truth preached to them with the affirmation of the Holy Spirit.
@ProfMTH I wrote *actual*" and *potential.* God can not know as ACTUAL some thing will not ever happen. He does know it as POTENTIAL. In Abraham's case, God knew that Abraham potentially feared him to the point of obedience re: Isaac. But unless Abraham ACTUALLY obeyed God, God could not know Abraham's fear of God to the point of obedience because it did not happen. It is a logical impossibility, just as a round square is logically impossible.
@campdon But when did God know? The key to this seeming conundrum of timing is in the word "know". In Hebrew it is yada. ProfMth, you have taken the word to mean "know" in the abstract like we know what tsunamis are (using a current example). But the experiential knowledge of being in a Tsunami is what yada means. God knew (nakar) from eternity that Abraham WILL obey, but what he says in v. 12 is that he knows NOW by experience. Similar to know in 18:21.
Christians are ignorant of the Bible's origins, original intent & mindset of the times. As a former evangelical I know they view Biblical characters as modern, unaware of the barbaric superstition of the times.
They ignore the omission of the greatest miracle (Lazarus) in the Synoptic Gospels. They mix creation, Passion, resurrection and nativity tales & ignore the OT when convenient. They ask Jesus/Trinity/God for success in sports love & finance - just like pagan Romans or Greeks! LOL
Q #2) It's counterintuitive, but ALL 3 answers are correct, depending on which be-liar you ask. Of course, none of them are correct in the strict logical sense of the word "correct." But that's not what believers want. We want a divinely-ordained excuse for murder, not some logically consistent single answer. Hell, if we wanted that kind of unambiguous answer, we'd all be mathematicians!
That's too hard. BS is easier and more fun both for us AND god. (See answer #1)
Q #1) Yes. This is actually how the "holy spirit" works, leading believers to contradictory conclusions. That's why there are so many denominations, most of whom despise each other.
Look at it from god's perspective: You are god. You are bored. So, you make an entire universe to support life on a single planet so you can visit your creations and get some entertainment now and then. How much fun would it be if everything was consistent and logical? Nope, that's not how god works; too boring.
Also, the story would not have carried as much weight if G-d had simply said, "Abraham, you fear me so much that you would sacrifice your own son!". In such an instance, Abraham says "that's right!" and Atheists are rolling their eyes. Also it seems clear that you are playing a little game with us. You are asking a bunch of people who think an "innocent" man could die for their crimes and that G-d is actually cool with that, what they think about a scripture that isn't theirs.
@RontheNoahide "Also, the story would not have carried as much weight if G-d had simply said, "Abraham, you fear me so much that you would sacrifice your own son!". In such an instance, Abraham says "that's right!" and Atheists are rolling their eyes."
So accuracy--assuming the omnipotence of God--would have diminished the story? How odd.
@ProfMTH In short, yes, and that is not so odd considering that G-d had not completely revealed His power to the Patriarchs. Christianity at large doesn't know this(can't trust those pesky Jews), but the different names of G-d have meanings about the attributes of G-d. Although the Patriarchs knew the ineffable name they only knew the attributes of G-d by His name, El Shaddai. El Shaddai carries the meaning of might, not necessarily knowledge.
But I'm not being all combative. Your original contention, that the Holy Spirit does not guide interpretation, is well founded and ought to be clear by now.
Is it to far from your understanding to concede that perhaps G-d, in his statement to Abraham, may be providing a very important lesson to us. After all, the bible is all about lessons. The lesson being that potential is insignificant without action.
Again. Shut up! WE DO UNDERSTAND THE BIBLE. IT MAKES PERFECT SENCE. I JUST HATE IT WHEN PEOPLE POST STUFF ON THE WEB LIKE THIS. GOSH. MAKES IT SOUND LIKE THAT THEY DON'T KNOW GOD AT ALL. HE MADE US ALL. HE MADE THIS PLANET THAT WE LIVE ON. HE EVEN CREATED THE SOLAR SYSTEM WITH THE 8 PLANETS! GOD IS THE ANSWER TO EVERYTHING!
There are two applicable definitions for the word "moon". #1: the earth's natural satellite, or #4: any planetary satellite.
Which planetary body do you think Pluto orbits?
Either you believe in a geocentric model of the solar system (in which case, definition #1 would be correct), or perhaps you confused it with definition #15 due to the proximity of your head to your buttocks?
@gadgetmaster401 "Discovered in 1930, Pluto was long considered our solar system's ninth planet. But after the discovery of similar intriguing worlds deeper in the distant Kuiper Belt, icy Pluto was reclassified as a dwarf planet"
i copyed and pasted it from NASA - Pluto is a planet - it is smaller then a moon - but it is stall a planet.
08:03 I was going through the bible hecking the quotes and I went to Genesis 18 verse 21, and next to God saying "I will do down now" I had scribbled (apparently from several years back) Doesn't He know? lol...
@StLennyBruce lol And in that story, he doesn't know. He has to go find out. That's not omniscience, but some apologists will twist themselves into pretzels insisting that it is.
1) Man has free will. Abraham could have chosen to not follow God. This is something God can't control. God knows all. He knows the outcombs to every possible choice and effects that will follow.
2) This was a forshadowing of the true sacrafice found in Christ.
@ProfMTH On a daily basis man makes many choices. God is omnpresent and omnipitent knowing the outcome to all the possible decision one can make. Once Abraham made his choice God knew.
@mumswording So your god is not fully omniscient: he knows only the possible decisions that can be made but he doesn't know the actual decision that will be made *until* it is made, is that correct?
@ProfMTH In a way yes. God is Love. This comes from the bible. Love cant be forced. It must come from a choice. Christ said IF you love me you will keep my commandments. This statement shows that Man has free will and a choice. The choice is to follow or not follow God. God knows every outcome to the possible choices one can make.
I asked Mumswording: "So your god is not fully omniscient: he knows only the possible decisions that can be made but he doesn't know the actual decision that will be made *until* it is made, is that correct?"
Mumswording answered: "In a way yes. ...."
Your reluctance to answer the question either "yes" or "no" indicates that you're not truly comfortable with what you're proposing here. More importantly, what you're describing is not omniscience.
@ProfMTH No What im describing as a balance. A balance of being omnisiant and yet giving man FREE WILL. If God took the choice away from mankind then the choice of right and wrong, Good and Evil are no longer choices. This is why I said "in a way" to the earlier statement. You ignorgance on the matter is whats most telling. Mankind must make choices to follow God according to the scripture. If choice is taken away then man cant truly LOVE God.
@mumswording "You ignorgance on the matter is whats most telling."
LOL! My "ignorance" is recognizing, among other things, that divine omniscience is incompatible with free will. My "ignorance" is also recognizing that you recognize this, find it troubling, and you've come up with a half-ass way to try to steer around the obvious problem--a half-ass way that fails to get the job done.
@ProfMTH actually what im telling you was established in scripture daing back more than 2000 years. I dont find anything troubling. Its clearly stated and actually pretty easy to understand. God knows every outcome to every possible descision one can make. Man has free will to choose to do right or wrong. If you take the choice out and state that man ultimatly has NO choice because God already knows the outcome and has predetermined it sin would not be a choice.
@mumswording What is the alternative if you choose to go againts a few of God's lesser commandments? You claim we have free will, but the punishment is death and an eternity in hellfire. Some free will... Furthermore, why is it that we are, as children, so susceptible to psychological forces? Take child soldiers, children being taught various religious or political doctrines, etc. Your ramblings are so anti-biology, anti-sociology, and anti-psychology it's painful.
You left out that God or the Angel mentions Abraham's Son,,,,His ONLY Son. What about Abraham's FIRST Son , Ishmael ????? God didn't know Abraham had another Son ??? Hmmm
i was debateing a finda-mentist-person, after i kept countering his aguments
and beaten his aguments, he just ended up, Spaming my account with his 9 or 16 accounts, and i was told these people dont give up too easly, well this one did, he lost, heres one of the sayins i said, b 4 he spammed my account, *God was the Strong Delusion they believe is Real, God is the lie* that guy was just a coward, he could not stand up 4 his Faith and what Not. believers read into things whats not even there.
@IamJohnTitor Yeah, that's typical. Another thing about them is that they never answer straight questions. Always slickly trying to avoid being cornered into an apologetic corner. Plain dishonest if you ask me. Just got done arguing with this buffoon on another of Prof's clips.
another atheist what another person contacted me, saying that person botherd him as well, tryed spamming his account as well, there own beliefs defeat them, but they dont want think about it, they just pick and choose, not thinking 4 them selfs thinking what they believed in is a trick against them selfs. to make them believe in a Good Scam or Trick, really atheists are not deceived, just believers are. they think atheists are twisting the bible, really its them its all lies
Lot of comments already! I'm an atheist but do enjoy playing God's advocate. Simplest explanation for a Christian might be that like democracy, the Bible is NOT perfect, it's just the best that we have. Sweeps a number of "sins" under the rug.
@spacesergeant101 Well, this is aimed primarily at inerrantists. They can't say that and hold to inerrancy. But there are some Christians who do hold the position you've identified as "simplest." The question for them is on what basis do they feel they're able to reject their scriptures' claim to be divinely inspired and perfect.
Firstly I believe that the "Doctrine of Middle Knowledge" offers some explanation. No human will ever completely understand the "butterfly effects" caused by an act of an Omniscient God.
God knew exactly what Abraham would do. In order for Abraham to reach a peak point of faith and come to a realization of his extreme (read: no doubt) faith in God, this ultimate act sealed Abraham's mindset for ultimate belief. God said "Now I Know" simply to explain to Abraham "why" this had been done.
@ProfMTH ----Yes God knew all along, therefore it had to actually happen. Abraham realized his dependence on God, no matter the consequences. You stated that God said "Now I Know", however, I should have checked the Bible.
NLT states: Gen 22:12 "Lay down the knife," the angel said. "Do not hurt the boy in any way, for now I know that you truly fear God. You have not withheld even your beloved son from me."
@whiskeymeow In your previous comment you said "God said 'Now I know'", but now you're say that the "angel is speaking." Is it your position that the angel is speaking about its knowledge when saying "Now I know"?
@ProfMTH The angel is most likely saying, "You passed the test! I was not sure that you would pass, but you did!" Some verses in the Bible imply that the angels have incomplete knowledge of future events. (See Mar 13:32 or Pe 1:12)
Now about the phrase "From Me" the "Me" here refers to God, although it is an angel who is speaking. A easier way to understand would be for the phrase to say, "From Him".
@whiskeymeow "Now about the phrase "From Me" the "Me" here refers to God, although it is an angel who is speaking. A easier way to understand would be for the phrase to say, "From Him"."
I grant you that would make it easier for your position, but the text does not say "from him." See, you have to change the text of the story in one or more ways in order to save your preexisting belief that the biblical god is omniscient--something this story very clearly does *not* portray him as.
@ProfMTH God is Spirit. The angel of the Lord was the messenger of God.
NLT Version states: Lay down the knife," the angel said. "Do not hurt the boy in any way, for now I know that you truly fear God. You have not withheld even your beloved son from me."
If Isaac had died, the angel would have been with the spirit of Isaac.
Hebrew had no quotation marks, therefore the first part could have been the angel speaking and the 2nd part God thru the angel. As I said, Plausible answers exist.
But you've haven't given any, unless you believe that changing the text ("'from me' is easier to understand if it's 'from him'") and the like are plausible answers. Of course, they're not. Rather, they are examples of apologetic alchemy aimed at changing biblical text in order to get it to conform to Christian beliefs.
@ProfMTH To me either will suffice. The angel said: now he knows that Abraham fears God. God would likely say: now I know you fear me. I believe God created the universe 13.7B years ago. I am not a total literalist in regards to Noah, Jonah and such. Christ is the center of my faith not inerrancy of the Scripture.
Your video made me think. I have enjoyed the conversation and it has enlightened me. I hardly go to Church, but, I have always prayed and he has made himself known to me. Good Luck!
@whiskeymeow "Your video made me think. I have enjoyed the conversation and it has enlightened me."
Excellent. It will have truly enlightened you if you realize that these purportedly plausible answeres you've been giving aren't really plausible at all. All in good time, I suppose. :-) Thanks.
@ProfMTH P.S. For the last 2 years I have listened to podcasts and read books from the following authors. William Lane Craig, Hugh Ross, Paul Copan, Norman Giesler, Ravi Zacharias, J.P. Moreland, McGrath, Desouza, Plantiga etc. I have listened to debates with Dawkins,Ray Bradley, Daniel Dennett, Richard Carrier, Bart Ehrman. God's Middle Knowledge is explained by Craig. The more I listen to athiest who believe that everything came from nothing, the more I come to an unshakable belief in God.
@whiskeymeow I don't know who's telling you that atheists say everything came from nothing. Last I checked, it was religious believers, including Christians, who believe in a creation ex nihilo.
@ProfMTH Sorry, I did not say this correctly. Athiests claim - everything that began to exist came about UNCAUSED out of nothing. I believe that everything that begins to exist has a cause. Basically this is the Kalem Cosmological Argument. I believe that the Big Bang was caused by God as was the possible Multi-Verse. Now you may say that Athiests have alternate views, but the fact is that the Big Bang (beginning) was obviously caused by something and is still expanding. See Genesis 1:1 Thanks
@whiskeymeow "Sorry, I did not say this correctly. Athiests claim - everything that began to exist came about UNCAUSED out of nothing."
You're not saying it any more correctly this time around. Can you quote atheists who say "everything that began to exist came about UNCAUSED out of nothing"? I've never heard anyone make that claim regardless of religious belief.
@ProfMTH Stephen Hawkings - In his new book "The Grand Design," Britain's most famous scientist says that given the existence of gravity, "the universe can and will create itself from nothing,"
I personally believe that the BVG Theorem contradicts this idea. Hawkings has always tried to find a way around his own initial singularity theorem, by using imaginary (square root -1) numbers to accomplish his goal.
The questions begs the question where did anything come frome to create a condition.
@ProfMTH No - The release date is Sept. 7, 2010. I have enjoyed his other books and I will definitely check it out. Also, I typed the last post in a hurry and meant to say BGV (Borde–Guth–Vilenkin) Theorem. I think Mr. Hawkings is a great thinker, but he is not the only one and most likely will not be the last.
I asked Whiskeymeow: "Have you read Hawkings's 'The Grand Design'?"
Whiskeymeow replied: "No - The release date is Sept. 7, 2010."
Exactly. So is this the best you can do in response to my request that you quote atheists who say "everything that began to exist came about UNCAUSED out of nothing"--you purport to quote a book that you haven't yet read, a book that hasn't even come out yet? That's not really inspiring any confidence with respect to your claim. Do you anything else?
@ProfMTH " Last I checked, it was religious believers, including Christians, who believe in a creation ex nihilo."
Just as an addendum, Ostriker and Steinhardt show there is good evidence that shows that "the mean energy denisity of the universe is exactly what would be expected if there were zero initial energy at the start of the BB and would require NO violation of the laws of energy conservation". These guys have also done some pioneering work on Dark Energy/Matter and Vacuum Energy.
Most believers haven't actually read the book -- they know a few verses, and "study guides" that are theme based rather than literature/form criticism based. No Christian knows there are actually 2 Creation stories in Genesis, not one, and the stories are mutually exclusive (the order of things is completely different, in one god creates people, in the other only 1 male -- who is supposed to be fruitful and multiply how?)
If the Holy Spirit really guided Christians to knowledge of scripture, it makes you wonder what churches and apologetics are for, doesn't it? I'd have thought both should be unnecessary!
Thanks for these videos Prof, I find myself often rewatching them, because they are so well done! :)
Isn't the real question Do Christians Read the Bible?
allsaintsmonastery 4 days ago
@allsaintsmonastery That's certainly one of the real questions, Your Eminence.
ProfMTH 3 days ago
Ok listen when god put the tree of knowledge of good and evil in the garden of Eden, he gave Adam the choice to listen to eve and the same goes for this video. Abraham had a choice to sacrifice Isaac. You can't say that men aren't unpredictable. And yes god is omniscient. The reason you don't understand much is simply because you are trying to look farther than you can see. Please respond.
Franklincool10 1 week ago
@Franklincool10 Did God know what Abraham was going to do before he did it?
ProfMTH 5 days ago
The bible was not written by God, it was written by several men. By men who were possessed by evil, the devil forced those men to make changes in the bible and write it as the devil wants us to see it; But the Quran was written in a way that it can never be altered or changed, it is a poem that no poet could have ever written.
LowRiderZxXx 1 week ago
To play God's advocate for a moment, couldn't one adopt the "God is omniscient except for the future" attitude under the idea that he has knowledge of all things that are knowledge, and that the results of free will, like the outcome of a (hypothetical, if need be) truly random number generator, are not knowledge until after they occur?
spacesergeant101 2 weeks ago
@spacesergeant101 Just to clarify, what I'm proposing is that if omniscience is knowing all that is knowable, that you're actually requiring some sort of trans-omniscience of God, to both know all things that are knowledge and all things that are not knowledge. You are, after all, assuming that knowledge of the future fundamentally works the same as knowledge of the past. But that may be like reading all the things written in a book, and all the things not written in it.
spacesergeant101 2 weeks ago
@spacesergeant101 I don't see how one can have an omniscient god who doesn't know the future. Besides, numerous times the Bible says that the biblical god knows the future. So, no, I'm afraid that won't work.
ProfMTH 1 week ago
@ProfMTH Ah yes, even if knowledge of the future did not act like normal knowledge, that is negated by biblical claims of God knowing the future. Just thought that point needed clarification.
spacesergeant101 1 week ago
You do not establish that the True Christian argument is a fallacy because someone calls it a fallacy. That’s just a statement not backed up by any argument. The Teachings of Jesus establish what is true in regard to Christianity. Therefore, arguments establishing true Christianity come from His teachings. So True Christians believe Jesus. Jesus said. "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life." All His Words.
AdstarAPAD 4 weeks ago
The Holy Spirits guidance: Why don't all Christians give the same answer? Because not all Christians are guided into understanding on all the issues that they may be questioned about. The human desire to give an answer to help the seeker can cause a Christian to think out an answer from their own thinking. They make a mistake when they do this. It's ok to state, “I don't know”. There are also christians who are not guided by the Holy Spirit because they are not true Christians.
AdstarAPAD 2 months ago
@AdstarAPAD That "not a TRUE Christian" argument gets peddled pretty often around these parts, and not only is it a weak argument, it is also a fallacy.
How would you even define a *True* Christian?
palerider1775 1 month ago
@palerider1775 "How would you even define a *True* Christian?"
Similar to what AdstarAPAD said, a "true" Christian is someone who emulates Jesus. I think most people would agree that the vast majority of people who call themselves "Christians" don't act very much like Jesus.
KayBeeEee1983 3 weeks ago
@KayBeeEee1983 I'd state that, by that definition, no one can call themselves a "true" Christian.
palerider1775 3 weeks ago
@palerider1775 Well, it's theoretically possible for someone to be a "true" Christian, but it seems pretty hard. For example, very few people are willing to give up all their possessions or love their enemies.
KayBeeEee1983 3 weeks ago
@KayBeeEee1983 Much less being tortured to death. I don't think I've met a true Christian yet.
brucegrenehan1 3 weeks ago
Continued part: 2 Now i know you fear God because you have not withheld your son your only son from me." He was letting Abraham know that His faith had reached the level God wanted. Before this time Abraham’s faith had not reached the level God wanted. Only when Abraham when through the process did Abraham have that faith. So before Abraham did this thing God could not make this statement to Abraham. It would have been false in that moment in time. Understand?
AdstarAPAD 2 months ago
God through His foreknowledge knew that Abraham would go through with the sacrifice. But Abraham needed to have His faith pushed to the limit to get him to trust in God enough to do it. It was an extreme exercise in faith to take that faith to the level God wanted Abraham to have. Only after Abraham went through this experience He obtained the level of faith needed. So when God says to Abraham. Now i know you fear God because you have not withheld your son your only son from me. continued:
AdstarAPAD 2 months ago
When I had teenagers living in my home, they were often amazed at how I could figure out what they were up to and when they were lying to cover it up or when they would sneak out of the house to go to a party and I'm not even omniscient. But, not only did YHWH not be able to predict what Abraham would do, he also had a weird way of asking, "Do you really like me Abe? Would you commit a murder to prove it?" Something awefully Manson-esque about that.
brucegrenehan1 2 months ago
@brucegrenehan1 "not only did YHWH not be able to predict what Abraham would do, he also had a weird way of asking, "Do you really like me Abe? Would you commit a murder to prove it?" Something awefully Manson-esque about that."
LOL. Good point.
KayBeeEee1983 3 weeks ago
Well, when I was a believer, I belonged to a whole church of believers who did not understand the bible and had to go to bible studies weekly so that the bible could be explained to us. This is the Xtian way (see Harold Camping--oh uh where is that bible authority guy anyway?)
brucegrenehan1 2 months ago
Another good one. Your knowledge of the subject matter is obviously extensive and your presentation is refreshingly objective. I haven't watched all your vids but have not watched one yet that hasn't added to my knowledge base. Thanks for your efforts.
brightsorcerer 3 months ago
@brightsorcerer Thanks.
ProfMTH 3 months ago
Your questions are valid and it is good that you study the scripture. There is no way to learn without reading and without asking questions. My experience is that the more you read, the more questions you have, the more you piss off some christians but drawing near to Him thru study or reading always gives answers.
The answer is simple. Abraham had faith, you will know them by their fruit.
71jav 3 months ago
It should be noted that many christian theologians contend that in old testament "the angel of the lord" is either the holy spirit or, more commonly, Jesus. In fact this is one the passages they cite in defense of this, using the "from me" line as evidence. Other passages cited include Acts 7:30, Gen. 16:10, Judges 2:1, Zac. 3:3, Ex. 3:14, and Judges 6:19
chirectomy 3 months ago
@chirectomy And how, if at all, does that solve the problem discussed here?
ProfMTH 3 months ago
@ProfMTH
I'm not a Christian. My point was that many Christians believe that "the angel of the Lord" is god (and there is a very good case for this), so he should still be omniscient. As you pointed out, the only other option is to conclude that an angel expected to be the recipient of the sacrifice, which doesn't make any sense.
chirectomy 3 months ago
Your objection to the argument from omniscience having limits is purely semantic. A quick glance at a philosophy text will inform you that one of the accepted, logical defintions is, 'to know all possible things.'
It is consequently impossible to impossible things ie how much does an infinitely heavy rock weight?
The future may, similarly, be impossible to know (with caveats.)
Or God can simply choose not to know or not look ie Superman's girlfriend, thus preserving free will.
MrWildbill20056 5 months ago
@MrWildbill20056 "The future may, similarly, be impossible to know (with caveats.)"
Are you sure you want to suggest that it might be impossible for the biblical god to know the future?
"Or God can simply choose not to know...."
He can shut down his omniscience, can he?
ProfMTH 5 months ago
@ProfMTH 1) Absolutely positive. Like I said there are caveats. For example, God can know what he personally will do, and what actions he will take. Further God having the perfect intellect would be able to predict causal paths. However free will is only preserved by either:
i) It is impossible to see 'past' free will choices
or
ii) Indeed, superman has x-ray vision. He can see through Lois Lane's clothes anytime. However he chooses not to. God being omnipotent, can similar choose not to look
MrWildbill20056 5 months ago
@MrWildbill20056 "Absolutely positive. Like I said there are caveats."
A caveat like this: "God ... knows all things" (1 John 3:20)? Align that with your claim that the future may be impossible for God to know.
ProfMTH 5 months ago
@ProfMTH The sentence isn't 'God knows all things including impossible things.'
As I said it's impossible to know the mass of an infinitely heavy rock, or how to make a square with three sides. Knowing all things can only, sensibly, mean to know all possible things. Thus see my (i) proposition.
Further knowing all things, taken in the present tense remains true in my (ii) proposition. God can know all things now, and choose not to know the outcomes of our choices.
MrWildbill20056 5 months ago
@MrWildbill20056 "The sentence isn't 'God knows all things including impossible things.'"
LOL! OK, thanks.
ProfMTH 5 months ago
@ProfMTH Is that always your response when your over simplistic, purely semantic based objections are knocked down?
I rather thought pointing the obvious out to you was required given 'the context' :)
However for posterity :@) I would like to point out that you have, at no time, offered any reasoned objection to what I have presented. LOL doesn't count.
You have a nice day now whilst you set about trying to quote mine the Bible(s) and then set forth what we'll charitably call 'objections.'
MrWildbill20056 5 months ago
@MrWildbill20056 "Is that always your response when your over simplistic, purely semantic based objections are knocked down?"
You should look up "loaded question" and learn how to avoid them.
You haven't knocked down anything, but rather you've offered a fairly typical and unpersuasive attempt to reconcile the Bible's various descriptions of its god vis-a-vis omniscience. Perhaps most troubling is your "'all' does not mean all" line--SO common from apologists who lack anything else.
ProfMTH 5 months ago
@ProfMTH Again this is not an argument. This is the typical 'new atheist' attack via 'mental gymnastics.' Apparently one must subscribe to your interpretation or be guilty of a faux breach of parsimony.
I must applaud your hypocrisy in criticizing my reply to your own relic of the schoolyard, bravo.
A quick check of any philosophy text will inform you of the centuries of thought and debate upon the nature of omniscience, and what 'all knowable things' are.
MrWildbill20056 5 months ago
@MrWildbill20056
Psalm 139:2-6 claims that YWH knows future events - at least what people will say. Verse 4 is most important.
2 You know when I sit and when I rise; you perceive my thoughts from afar.
3 You discern my going out and my lying down; you are familiar with all my ways.
4 Before a word is on my tongue you, LORD, know it completely.
5 You hem me in behind and before, and you lay your hand upon me.
6 Such knowledge is too wonderful for me, too lofty for me to attain.
chirectomy 3 months ago
@MrWildbill20056
"God can know all things now, and choose not to know the outcomes of our choices"
You're saying that it IS possible to know the future. Thus the future does not fall into the category of 'impossible knowledge." Therefore God has chosen not to be omniscient. I don't see how this answers the problem. Whether it is by his own choice or not, he is still not omniscient by this logic because he has willfully deprived himself of possible knowledge.
chirectomy 3 months ago
Oh dear. 'God' may not be the author of confusion, however I don't recall humankind being similarly insured. Next the new Testament is marked by letters promoting and correcting particular behaviours and beliefs. Thirdly the spirit may guide, but Christ (we're Christians) is clear on us having a choice to believe or not, and thus by extension to follow where the spirit leads. Consequently given humanity's asserted capacity for folly, and free will, why would you expect wholistic concensus? o.O
MrWildbill20056 5 months ago
So what are saying? Are these contradictions the reason why you are an atheist? or are you wise enough and clever enough to see what`s going on here?.Try to read it as a believer that these encounters actually took place[which they did] and you will have your own answers on what could be happening here.
reoreason 5 months ago
AronRa put this story into perspective. If God is good, Abe knew that, and a voice asked for Isaac, then Abe should have told the voice, "Go away! I know my God is good and He'd never ask for something like that." If Abe did listen, then God should have stopped him and said, "You fool! Why would you think I would seriously ask for something like that?" The story is a failure of both human reason and God's character.
MunkyDrag0n 5 months ago
I ran out of space.
I am a spiritual man, and believe in GOD, and also the Bible, though I do recognize that the bible has largely been eroded to the point where people can now have arguments like this one. I believe the TRUTH of the bible has to be discerned for each person individually, and if you honestly seek TRUTH, and not what some man on a pulpit tells you, then you WILL find it. By questioning the word, you are doing more to bring truth to the world than most christians have done
picturen8 6 months ago
@picturen8 Yes,dont be mislead by other Christian`s opinions,you will be shown some truth if you seek it.
reoreason 5 months ago
first, I thoroughly enjoy your videos. I honestly believe that you are (possibly unwillingly) doing Gods work, and doing it much more honestly than most "christians"
You make very good points, and I think I might have an answer for you on this one. The biggest problem with the Bible and christians in general are PEOPLE. unfortunately, people wrote the bible, have translated the bible, and confused this issue so much, there can be no consensus on what the book actually says
sad but true
thanks
picturen8 6 months ago
Yeah most Christians who have read the bible their whole lives share similar almost exact beliefs the main principle is following commandments and belief in the Nicene Creed...basic
MissNickie84 6 months ago
Nice video! Smart.
themakerofmine 6 months ago
@themakerofmine Thanks.
ProfMTH 6 months ago
God gives us free will.and choice to test your heart....thats why its called FAITH...u have to believe..... The reason so many Christians have different beliefs is becuz u cant just read the bible once or 2wice you read it your whole life and then you will understand
MissNickie84 6 months ago
@MissNickie84 "The reason so many Christians have different beliefs is becuz u cant just read the bible once or 2wice you read it your whole life and then you will understand."
So, Christians who've read the Bible "[their] whole life" all have the same beliefs?
ProfMTH 6 months ago
With regard to the Genesis passage, there's actually a fairly straightforward answer for it (albeit not with interesting implications). Genesis is a very old passage, and it's probably based on an even older, rather less monotheistic one. As a result, its portrayal of God is pretty much in line with Caananite theology of the time: ideas like onmiscience and omnipotence came a lot later, theologically speaking. It's also why you get incidents like Abraham wrestling with God in Genesis 32.
Stheno16 6 months ago
@Stheno16 Er... albeit not without interesting implications, even.
Stheno16 6 months ago
@Stheno16 Quite right.
ProfMTH 6 months ago
@ProfMTH
"what to."
tmat04 6 months ago
@ProfMTH
Well, yes, since being omnipotent (all-powerful) also means God can choose "what" or "what not" to know.
By the way, the comment sent to you by Fewmoredollars was actually sent by me. I realized he was the one signed-in on my phone after i sent you the message.
tmat04 6 months ago
@tmat04 "Well, yes, since being omnipotent (all-powerful) also means God can choose "what" or "what not" to know."
You are simply assuming the ground in controversy, i.e., whether the biblical god is omniscient. You come to a text that quite clearly presents him as NOT omniscient, but impose upon it your preexisting belief that he is omniscient (a belief that is contradicted by the text itself).
ProfMTH 6 months ago
If believer #2 thinks that god doesn't know the future, how can god then provide his prophets with "inerrant" prophecies?
LordZentei 6 months ago
I would blame Martin Luther for the doctrinal confusion among non-catholics; He is the one that said "the bible is so obvious that anyone can understand it"; Jesus gave the Church teaching authority and those who choose not to heed will come to nothing but confusion.
GraveyardGhost559 6 months ago
@GraveyardGhost559 So, what does your church's "teaching authority" have to say that clears up the confusion regarding the passages under review here?
ProfMTH 6 months ago
@ProfMTH --which one in particular?
GraveyardGhost559 6 months ago
@GraveyardGhost559 All of them.
ProfMTH 6 months ago
@ProfMTH -- On the meaning of "The Binding of Isaac", what I wrote would be what the Church teaches; And about God "now knowing" about things, I dont know myself why God feigns ignorance; Jesus himself asked questions of other people even though he could read their thoughts.
GraveyardGhost559 6 months ago
"The Binding of Isaac" is mostly a pre-figure of the substitutionary sacrifice of Jesus; When Abraham said "God will provide the sacrifice", he meant then and at the advent of Jesus.
GraveyardGhost559 6 months ago
@ProfMTH
How do i know?! He is omnipotent.
tmat04 6 months ago
@tmat04 You know he "chose not to know" because he knows everything?
ProfMTH 6 months ago
God simply chose "not to know."
tmat04 6 months ago
@tmat04 And how do you know that?
ProfMTH 6 months ago
God simply chose "not to know."
tmat04 6 months ago
There's one thing these believers are most consistent in, and that is their dishonesty.
Cootabux 7 months ago
Typical believer behavior. Really highlights their doublethink turning into cognitive dissonance, which leads them to irritably and irrationally try to resolve their conflicting beliefs. Eventually they just blame the person who brought them to their uncomfortable non-ignorant, non-blissful state.
It's really telling that the Bible says that those without the Holy Spirit can't properly understand it. Without those who don't believe in the Bible, who is there to question the Bible?
airandfingers 7 months ago
Harold Camping was RIGHT about May 21, click on my channel to see...
youneekk 7 months ago
I think this particular example may fail at every possible level. It seems obvious that God at this point in the development of his character is not the all knowing, all seeing deity claimed by modern Christians. 1 Chron. 28:9 adds to the dementia by stating that God "understands every motive behind the thoughts" meaning he absolutely HAD to know what was going on. Right?
chilimaan 7 months ago
It's a sad indictment on Christians that we even NEED to dissect the Bible to this degree. Even a glancing perusal of the Bible shows it for what it is.... a Bronze Age attempt to explain what we see all around us, stuff that Science has since unravelled. Just a little bit of education exposes religion. It may have been useful a few hundred years ago (but mostly for genocide if you're honest) but now... we're tired of the violence that religion brings to the table. Time to dump it... seriously!!
warren52nz 7 months ago
We should all know by now that god is pharoah, a man, a dictator, a prick.
holio84 8 months ago
Ineresting that you were talking Abraham and Isaac.
I remember reading something about the idea of the angel intervening in the sacrifice was a later insertion and that in the original text. Isaac was actually sacrificed.
Unfortunately, I can't remember or find where I saw it. Have you ever heard of it?
HonestMan395 8 months ago
@HonestMan395 No, I haven't.
ProfMTH 8 months ago
@HonestMan395 The problem with that, is that if it's true, NONE of the three great monotheistic religions (except MAYBE Islam) have a damned leg to stand on, as Issac was the grandfather of the Twelve Tribes (father of Jacob, father of Joseph). With the Jews pre-emptively destroyed, the Christians follow, as Jesus was a Jew himself.
therealfriday13th 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@therealfriday13th Quote: "The problem with that, is that if it's true, NONE of the three great monotheistic religions (except MAYBE Islam) have a damned leg to stand on,"
Got it in one!
HonestMan395 6 months ago
Do you understand the correct use of capital letters? No!
laurensj89 10 months ago
@laurensj89 What?
ProfMTH 10 months ago
@ProfMTH I decided to be a pedantic prick and rewatch the entire video for the purpose of finding capitalization errors. I'm sorry to report none stood out for me.
In other news, I found your channel yesterday morning and since then I've watched your videos almost non-stop. I really have enjoyed all of them thus far. I also want to applaud the way you present your claims with the verses in easy to read format right on the screen so it's not a matter of constant pausing, and restarting to...
punchdrunkatheist 10 months ago
cont @ProfMTH ...to check your sources, which is something I do with almost everything where a source can be found. Anyway, thanks for all the work you've done with these videos. They're good stuff.
punchdrunkatheist 10 months ago
Very simple. The Hebrew word for know is the same one used when Adam knew Eve. So God is all knowing (to know the future) and at this point he knew by experience. I knew I would enjoy my upcoming wedding night, (21 years ago) and on that night I knew by actual experience the joy of my wedding night.
RepresentingTruth 10 months ago
@RepresentingTruth lol you are getting "knew" and "assumed" mixed up with each other. it's ok, not everyone is is good at vocabulary.
DEADGLOW 8 months ago
ProfMTH is always thought provoking. If I may I'd like to answer his two question.
The binding of Isaac dilemma:
God knows all things both actual and potential. I agree. So how could he say, "Now I know," if he already knew? If God knew that Abraham feared him and would not withhold his son and it was knowledge of the actual, it required that Abraham actually take the test to this point. God could not have known an actual that did not happen. That seems almost a no brainer.
campdon 10 months ago
Comment removed
campdon 10 months ago
@campdon I John 2:27 is the more difficult issue. If it is understood as ProgMth suggest, there is no question that it is in error. ProfMth demonstrates that by his examples. But I suggest it does not mean what ProfMth claims. First, words and even sentences do not exist in isolation. When they are isolated they mean nothing, or, at best, they mean what we bring to them. So context not only matters it is crucial.
campdon 10 months ago
@campdon So what is the context? The topic is those who John calls antichrists. The have infiltrated the church, but John says they clearly don't belong. Now they have left - probably due to persecution. They left because they were not truly believers, not believing in Jesus as the Messiah. These true believers would understand (oidate 2:20 and the first "all things") that because they had a spiritual compass that could detect deviation in an unbeliever.
campdon 10 months ago
@campdon What was the spiritual compass? ProfMTH suggest it is the Holy Spirit. He is both right and wrong. According to verse 20 these believers received a gift that enables them to detect the error of these false believers (charima is literally "gift" not anointing). That gift was what they had been previously taught about Jesus (v. 24) plus their abiding in the Father, which assures to them the Holy Spirit's affirmation of that truth. Clearly it is not the Holy Spirit in magical way.
campdon 10 months ago
@campdon So verse 27 should be understood as: "The gift of the word already taught you stays in you. You don't need other teachers - with other ideas; the gift of the word already taught informs you about all the things that are true of Jesus. It is the truth and not a lie, so even as you were taught, remain in God. "
So ProfMTH is mistaken. The Holy Spirit alone does not teach us all things. The gift, which is the word spoken through the Apostles, teaches all the things about Jesus.
campdon 10 months ago
@campdon "So ProfMTH is mistaken. The Holy Spirit alone does not teach us all things."
It's not ProfMTH who is wrong, then, but rather it's Jesus who's wrong. John 16:13 (Jesus speaking), "But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will lead you into all the truth...."
BTW, if one can just change the wording of a biblical passage as you have struggled to do with 1 John 2:27, why have a Bible at all? Just make it up as you go along.
ProfMTH 10 months ago
@ProfMTH Who are the YOU? According to v. 12 it is the disciples to whom Jesus was directly speaking.
I do not make it up. I read the Greek and use the simple tools of syntax and context to determine the sense of the passage. You can do the same using the tools available on the Internet (for the syntax part) though understanding the context will require that you go beyond the proof passages (or should I say, the disproof passages). Why is it you missed the context of v. 24 in I John 2?
campdon 10 months ago
@ProfMTH For example, notice the word charisma which is translated in some versions as "anointing" in 1 John 2:27. See the use of it in Rom. 1:11 and 5:15, and 6:23 . The basic meaning is "gift." Charisma is not used in any place as the anointing of the Holy Spirit received by all believers. Use the Internet and search the NT for charisma. I think translating it as anointing is simply wrong. The Greek word for anoint is aleipho (and John uses it in the gospel) not charisma.
campdon 10 months ago
@campdon Mea culpa. I misread the word chrisma (bifocals) and read it as charisam. That makese a difference in translating vv. 20, 27. Usually it is translated *anointing*. However, because it is used only in these two verses the meaning depends heavily upon this context. The verb form suggests the simple idea of help. It remains for the context to explain what this help is. I still think it is the word of truth preached to them with the affirmation of the Holy Spirit.
campdon 10 months ago
@campdon "God could not have known an actual that did not happen."
So the omniscient God's knowledge is limited by time, is that correct?
ProfMTH 10 months ago
(con't) @campdon "ProfMTH is always thought provoking."
Thanks.
ProfMTH 10 months ago
@ProfMTH I wrote *actual*" and *potential.* God can not know as ACTUAL some thing will not ever happen. He does know it as POTENTIAL. In Abraham's case, God knew that Abraham potentially feared him to the point of obedience re: Isaac. But unless Abraham ACTUALLY obeyed God, God could not know Abraham's fear of God to the point of obedience because it did not happen. It is a logical impossibility, just as a round square is logically impossible.
campdon 10 months ago
@campdon But when did God know? The key to this seeming conundrum of timing is in the word "know". In Hebrew it is yada. ProfMth, you have taken the word to mean "know" in the abstract like we know what tsunamis are (using a current example). But the experiential knowledge of being in a Tsunami is what yada means. God knew (nakar) from eternity that Abraham WILL obey, but what he says in v. 12 is that he knows NOW by experience. Similar to know in 18:21.
campdon 10 months ago
"Context" in a Christian apologetics discussion means "spin."
Ledwix 11 months ago
Christians are ignorant of the Bible's origins, original intent & mindset of the times. As a former evangelical I know they view Biblical characters as modern, unaware of the barbaric superstition of the times.
They ignore the omission of the greatest miracle (Lazarus) in the Synoptic Gospels. They mix creation, Passion, resurrection and nativity tales & ignore the OT when convenient. They ask Jesus/Trinity/God for success in sports love & finance - just like pagan Romans or Greeks! LOL
smb12321 11 months ago
Isaac was to be sacrificed to the "angel of the Lord" lol I never caught that one. What the hell is that supposed to mean anyway?
Discern4 11 months ago
@Discern4 Some believers will say *anything* in order to try to solve the Bible's various problems.
ProfMTH 11 months ago
@ismolinnn If you don't understand why there's a debate about it, why did you watch (and comment!) on a video about it?
ProfMTH 11 months ago
Q #2) It's counterintuitive, but ALL 3 answers are correct, depending on which be-liar you ask. Of course, none of them are correct in the strict logical sense of the word "correct." But that's not what believers want. We want a divinely-ordained excuse for murder, not some logically consistent single answer. Hell, if we wanted that kind of unambiguous answer, we'd all be mathematicians!
That's too hard. BS is easier and more fun both for us AND god. (See answer #1)
Yours in Christ,
OldSchool
OldSchoolSkill 1 year ago
Q #1) Yes. This is actually how the "holy spirit" works, leading believers to contradictory conclusions. That's why there are so many denominations, most of whom despise each other.
Look at it from god's perspective: You are god. You are bored. So, you make an entire universe to support life on a single planet so you can visit your creations and get some entertainment now and then. How much fun would it be if everything was consistent and logical? Nope, that's not how god works; too boring.
OldSchoolSkill 1 year ago
Comment removed
RontheNoahide 1 year ago
Also, the story would not have carried as much weight if G-d had simply said, "Abraham, you fear me so much that you would sacrifice your own son!". In such an instance, Abraham says "that's right!" and Atheists are rolling their eyes. Also it seems clear that you are playing a little game with us. You are asking a bunch of people who think an "innocent" man could die for their crimes and that G-d is actually cool with that, what they think about a scripture that isn't theirs.
RontheNoahide 1 year ago
@RontheNoahide "Also, the story would not have carried as much weight if G-d had simply said, "Abraham, you fear me so much that you would sacrifice your own son!". In such an instance, Abraham says "that's right!" and Atheists are rolling their eyes."
So accuracy--assuming the omnipotence of God--would have diminished the story? How odd.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH In short, yes, and that is not so odd considering that G-d had not completely revealed His power to the Patriarchs. Christianity at large doesn't know this(can't trust those pesky Jews), but the different names of G-d have meanings about the attributes of G-d. Although the Patriarchs knew the ineffable name they only knew the attributes of G-d by His name, El Shaddai. El Shaddai carries the meaning of might, not necessarily knowledge.
RontheNoahide 1 year ago
But I'm not being all combative. Your original contention, that the Holy Spirit does not guide interpretation, is well founded and ought to be clear by now.
RontheNoahide 1 year ago
Is it to far from your understanding to concede that perhaps G-d, in his statement to Abraham, may be providing a very important lesson to us. After all, the bible is all about lessons. The lesson being that potential is insignificant without action.
RontheNoahide 1 year ago
Again. Shut up! WE DO UNDERSTAND THE BIBLE. IT MAKES PERFECT SENCE. I JUST HATE IT WHEN PEOPLE POST STUFF ON THE WEB LIKE THIS. GOSH. MAKES IT SOUND LIKE THAT THEY DON'T KNOW GOD AT ALL. HE MADE US ALL. HE MADE THIS PLANET THAT WE LIVE ON. HE EVEN CREATED THE SOLAR SYSTEM WITH THE 8 PLANETS! GOD IS THE ANSWER TO EVERYTHING!
gadgetmaster401 1 year ago
@gadgetmaster401 "WE DO UNDERSTAND THE BIBLE."
The video demonstrates otherwise.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH Yes we do. I agree with you.
gadgetmaster401 1 year ago
@gadgetmaster401 How many planets are there, you say 8, maybe you sould look that up
my very educated mother just served us nine pizzas
Trbitt213 1 year ago
@Trbitt213 Nope. There are 8. Your wrong. Pluto is just a moon.
gadgetmaster401 1 year ago
@gadgetmaster401
No, Pluto is a plutoid, not a moon.
SuperHuntard 1 year ago
@SuperHuntard there is a moon out there in space called Pluto. That moon was named after him. The plutoid.
gadgetmaster401 1 year ago
@gadgetmaster401
There are two applicable definitions for the word "moon". #1: the earth's natural satellite, or #4: any planetary satellite.
Which planetary body do you think Pluto orbits?
Either you believe in a geocentric model of the solar system (in which case, definition #1 would be correct), or perhaps you confused it with definition #15 due to the proximity of your head to your buttocks?
SuperHuntard 1 year ago
@SuperHuntard I still have to go with 1 and 4 on this commet.
gadgetmaster401 1 year ago
@Trbitt213 No. YOU look that up. Look on nasa.gov, that's where I got my info from.
gadgetmaster401 1 year ago
@gadgetmaster401 "Discovered in 1930, Pluto was long considered our solar system's ninth planet. But after the discovery of similar intriguing worlds deeper in the distant Kuiper Belt, icy Pluto was reclassified as a dwarf planet"
i copyed and pasted it from NASA - Pluto is a planet - it is smaller then a moon - but it is stall a planet.
Trbitt213 1 year ago
@Trbitt213
I imagine that the classification of Pluto is just the tip of the "lack of scientific knowledge" iceberg with gadgetmaster401.
Pluto is a moon. Lol.
SuperHuntard 1 year ago
@SuperHuntard good one :)
Trbitt213 1 year ago
@SuperHuntard I have to agree with you on that one. It is the coldest thing in the universe.
gadgetmaster401 1 year ago
@Trbitt213 Ok. I had read something els then. That is cool that you were able to find that on there site. Thanks for that.
gadgetmaster401 1 year ago
@gadgetmaster401 your welcome :)
Trbitt213 1 year ago
08:03 I was going through the bible hecking the quotes and I went to Genesis 18 verse 21, and next to God saying "I will do down now" I had scribbled (apparently from several years back) Doesn't He know? lol...
StLennyBruce 1 year ago
@StLennyBruce lol And in that story, he doesn't know. He has to go find out. That's not omniscience, but some apologists will twist themselves into pretzels insisting that it is.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
it is fun to see somebody asking questions and others trying to answer them.
and all he does is fight you on every answer you give him.
why?
becaus he does not know it himself.
that is really fun to see.
prinsalmighty1 1 year ago
In regards to Abraham and Issac 2 points:
1) Man has free will. Abraham could have chosen to not follow God. This is something God can't control. God knows all. He knows the outcombs to every possible choice and effects that will follow.
2) This was a forshadowing of the true sacrafice found in Christ.
mumswording 1 year ago
@mumswording So how does that solve the problem of God saying "NOW I know"?
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH On a daily basis man makes many choices. God is omnpresent and omnipitent knowing the outcome to all the possible decision one can make. Once Abraham made his choice God knew.
mumswording 1 year ago
@mumswording So your god is not fully omniscient: he knows only the possible decisions that can be made but he doesn't know the actual decision that will be made *until* it is made, is that correct?
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH In a way yes. God is Love. This comes from the bible. Love cant be forced. It must come from a choice. Christ said IF you love me you will keep my commandments. This statement shows that Man has free will and a choice. The choice is to follow or not follow God. God knows every outcome to the possible choices one can make.
mumswording 1 year ago
@mumswording knowing possible outcomes isn't the same as omniscience. so yeah, try to reword that.
creepyoldman2 1 year ago
I asked Mumswording: "So your god is not fully omniscient: he knows only the possible decisions that can be made but he doesn't know the actual decision that will be made *until* it is made, is that correct?"
Mumswording answered: "In a way yes. ...."
Your reluctance to answer the question either "yes" or "no" indicates that you're not truly comfortable with what you're proposing here. More importantly, what you're describing is not omniscience.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH No What im describing as a balance. A balance of being omnisiant and yet giving man FREE WILL. If God took the choice away from mankind then the choice of right and wrong, Good and Evil are no longer choices. This is why I said "in a way" to the earlier statement. You ignorgance on the matter is whats most telling. Mankind must make choices to follow God according to the scripture. If choice is taken away then man cant truly LOVE God.
mumswording 1 year ago
@mumswording "You ignorgance on the matter is whats most telling."
LOL! My "ignorance" is recognizing, among other things, that divine omniscience is incompatible with free will. My "ignorance" is also recognizing that you recognize this, find it troubling, and you've come up with a half-ass way to try to steer around the obvious problem--a half-ass way that fails to get the job done.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH actually what im telling you was established in scripture daing back more than 2000 years. I dont find anything troubling. Its clearly stated and actually pretty easy to understand. God knows every outcome to every possible descision one can make. Man has free will to choose to do right or wrong. If you take the choice out and state that man ultimatly has NO choice because God already knows the outcome and has predetermined it sin would not be a choice.
mumswording 1 year ago
@mumswording What is the alternative if you choose to go againts a few of God's lesser commandments? You claim we have free will, but the punishment is death and an eternity in hellfire. Some free will... Furthermore, why is it that we are, as children, so susceptible to psychological forces? Take child soldiers, children being taught various religious or political doctrines, etc. Your ramblings are so anti-biology, anti-sociology, and anti-psychology it's painful.
LukeShetler 1 year ago
@mumswording God cant control???...oh what a god....
richstar73 1 year ago
You left out that God or the Angel mentions Abraham's Son,,,,His ONLY Son. What about Abraham's FIRST Son , Ishmael ????? God didn't know Abraham had another Son ??? Hmmm
kennyg99 1 year ago
i was debateing a finda-mentist-person, after i kept countering his aguments
and beaten his aguments, he just ended up, Spaming my account with his 9 or 16 accounts, and i was told these people dont give up too easly, well this one did, he lost, heres one of the sayins i said, b 4 he spammed my account, *God was the Strong Delusion they believe is Real, God is the lie* that guy was just a coward, he could not stand up 4 his Faith and what Not. believers read into things whats not even there.
IamJohnTitor 1 year ago
@IamJohnTitor Yeah, that's typical. Another thing about them is that they never answer straight questions. Always slickly trying to avoid being cornered into an apologetic corner. Plain dishonest if you ask me. Just got done arguing with this buffoon on another of Prof's clips.
EruditeScythian 1 year ago
@EruditeScythian
another atheist what another person contacted me, saying that person botherd him as well, tryed spamming his account as well, there own beliefs defeat them, but they dont want think about it, they just pick and choose, not thinking 4 them selfs thinking what they believed in is a trick against them selfs. to make them believe in a Good Scam or Trick, really atheists are not deceived, just believers are. they think atheists are twisting the bible, really its them its all lies
IamJohnTitor 1 year ago
Lot of comments already! I'm an atheist but do enjoy playing God's advocate. Simplest explanation for a Christian might be that like democracy, the Bible is NOT perfect, it's just the best that we have. Sweeps a number of "sins" under the rug.
spacesergeant101 1 year ago
@spacesergeant101 Well, this is aimed primarily at inerrantists. They can't say that and hold to inerrancy. But there are some Christians who do hold the position you've identified as "simplest." The question for them is on what basis do they feel they're able to reject their scriptures' claim to be divinely inspired and perfect.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
Just so you all know, his name is Stephen Hawking....not Hawkings. Easy mistake to make, I know.
highstakes136 1 year ago
Firstly I believe that the "Doctrine of Middle Knowledge" offers some explanation. No human will ever completely understand the "butterfly effects" caused by an act of an Omniscient God.
God knew exactly what Abraham would do. In order for Abraham to reach a peak point of faith and come to a realization of his extreme (read: no doubt) faith in God, this ultimate act sealed Abraham's mindset for ultimate belief. God said "Now I Know" simply to explain to Abraham "why" this had been done.
whiskeymeow 1 year ago
@whiskeymeow "God said "Now I Know" simply to explain to Abraham "why" this had been done."
So God didn't really mean "now I know" because he knew all along, correct?
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH ----Yes God knew all along, therefore it had to actually happen. Abraham realized his dependence on God, no matter the consequences. You stated that God said "Now I Know", however, I should have checked the Bible.
NLT states: Gen 22:12 "Lay down the knife," the angel said. "Do not hurt the boy in any way, for now I know that you truly fear God. You have not withheld even your beloved son from me."
- The angel is speaking
Angels recieve the dead and are not omniscient.
whiskeymeow 1 year ago
@whiskeymeow In your previous comment you said "God said 'Now I know'", but now you're say that the "angel is speaking." Is it your position that the angel is speaking about its knowledge when saying "Now I know"?
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH The angel is most likely saying, "You passed the test! I was not sure that you would pass, but you did!" Some verses in the Bible imply that the angels have incomplete knowledge of future events. (See Mar 13:32 or Pe 1:12)
Now about the phrase "From Me" the "Me" here refers to God, although it is an angel who is speaking. A easier way to understand would be for the phrase to say, "From Him".
whiskeymeow 1 year ago
@whiskeymeow "Now about the phrase "From Me" the "Me" here refers to God, although it is an angel who is speaking. A easier way to understand would be for the phrase to say, "From Him"."
I grant you that would make it easier for your position, but the text does not say "from him." See, you have to change the text of the story in one or more ways in order to save your preexisting belief that the biblical god is omniscient--something this story very clearly does *not* portray him as.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH God is Spirit. The angel of the Lord was the messenger of God.
NLT Version states: Lay down the knife," the angel said. "Do not hurt the boy in any way, for now I know that you truly fear God. You have not withheld even your beloved son from me."
If Isaac had died, the angel would have been with the spirit of Isaac.
Hebrew had no quotation marks, therefore the first part could have been the angel speaking and the 2nd part God thru the angel. As I said, Plausible answers exist.
whiskeymeow 1 year ago
@whiskeymeow "Plausible answers exist."
But you've haven't given any, unless you believe that changing the text ("'from me' is easier to understand if it's 'from him'") and the like are plausible answers. Of course, they're not. Rather, they are examples of apologetic alchemy aimed at changing biblical text in order to get it to conform to Christian beliefs.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH To me either will suffice. The angel said: now he knows that Abraham fears God. God would likely say: now I know you fear me. I believe God created the universe 13.7B years ago. I am not a total literalist in regards to Noah, Jonah and such. Christ is the center of my faith not inerrancy of the Scripture.
Your video made me think. I have enjoyed the conversation and it has enlightened me. I hardly go to Church, but, I have always prayed and he has made himself known to me. Good Luck!
whiskeymeow 1 year ago
@whiskeymeow "Your video made me think. I have enjoyed the conversation and it has enlightened me."
Excellent. It will have truly enlightened you if you realize that these purportedly plausible answeres you've been giving aren't really plausible at all. All in good time, I suppose. :-) Thanks.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH P.S. For the last 2 years I have listened to podcasts and read books from the following authors. William Lane Craig, Hugh Ross, Paul Copan, Norman Giesler, Ravi Zacharias, J.P. Moreland, McGrath, Desouza, Plantiga etc. I have listened to debates with Dawkins,Ray Bradley, Daniel Dennett, Richard Carrier, Bart Ehrman. God's Middle Knowledge is explained by Craig. The more I listen to athiest who believe that everything came from nothing, the more I come to an unshakable belief in God.
whiskeymeow 1 year ago
@whiskeymeow I don't know who's telling you that atheists say everything came from nothing. Last I checked, it was religious believers, including Christians, who believe in a creation ex nihilo.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH Sorry, I did not say this correctly. Athiests claim - everything that began to exist came about UNCAUSED out of nothing. I believe that everything that begins to exist has a cause. Basically this is the Kalem Cosmological Argument. I believe that the Big Bang was caused by God as was the possible Multi-Verse. Now you may say that Athiests have alternate views, but the fact is that the Big Bang (beginning) was obviously caused by something and is still expanding. See Genesis 1:1 Thanks
whiskeymeow 1 year ago
@whiskeymeow "Sorry, I did not say this correctly. Athiests claim - everything that began to exist came about UNCAUSED out of nothing."
You're not saying it any more correctly this time around. Can you quote atheists who say "everything that began to exist came about UNCAUSED out of nothing"? I've never heard anyone make that claim regardless of religious belief.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH Stephen Hawkings - In his new book "The Grand Design," Britain's most famous scientist says that given the existence of gravity, "the universe can and will create itself from nothing,"
I personally believe that the BVG Theorem contradicts this idea. Hawkings has always tried to find a way around his own initial singularity theorem, by using imaginary (square root -1) numbers to accomplish his goal.
The questions begs the question where did anything come frome to create a condition.
whiskeymeow 1 year ago
@whiskeymeow Have you read Hawkings's "The Grand Design"?
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH No - The release date is Sept. 7, 2010. I have enjoyed his other books and I will definitely check it out. Also, I typed the last post in a hurry and meant to say BGV (Borde–Guth–Vilenkin) Theorem. I think Mr. Hawkings is a great thinker, but he is not the only one and most likely will not be the last.
whiskeymeow 1 year ago
I asked Whiskeymeow: "Have you read Hawkings's 'The Grand Design'?"
Whiskeymeow replied: "No - The release date is Sept. 7, 2010."
Exactly. So is this the best you can do in response to my request that you quote atheists who say "everything that began to exist came about UNCAUSED out of nothing"--you purport to quote a book that you haven't yet read, a book that hasn't even come out yet? That's not really inspiring any confidence with respect to your claim. Do you anything else?
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH " Last I checked, it was religious believers, including Christians, who believe in a creation ex nihilo."
Just as an addendum, Ostriker and Steinhardt show there is good evidence that shows that "the mean energy denisity of the universe is exactly what would be expected if there were zero initial energy at the start of the BB and would require NO violation of the laws of energy conservation". These guys have also done some pioneering work on Dark Energy/Matter and Vacuum Energy.
vryc 1 year ago
Most believers haven't actually read the book -- they know a few verses, and "study guides" that are theme based rather than literature/form criticism based. No Christian knows there are actually 2 Creation stories in Genesis, not one, and the stories are mutually exclusive (the order of things is completely different, in one god creates people, in the other only 1 male -- who is supposed to be fruitful and multiply how?)
StarTrekLivz 1 year ago
If the Holy Spirit really guided Christians to knowledge of scripture, it makes you wonder what churches and apologetics are for, doesn't it? I'd have thought both should be unnecessary!
Thanks for these videos Prof, I find myself often rewatching them, because they are so well done! :)
Afterthoughtbtw 1 year ago