I did not even think twice about telling you I did not watch this before the first second ticked over. If you pull this $#!+ on the battlelines I will not hesitate to kill you.
Wish I can rank it a thumbs up :) Oh yeah, there is a rational reason to like a state... CT, MA, VT etc.... are all pro-evolution teaching rational states that have liberal laws not discriminating against same-sex marriage. Hey look, those states haven't imploded by heathens and have the highest income tax per capita. Yes, many logical reasons to love logical states :) Great job on this rational video :)
This video is very informative with a lot of information, but it seems to be an emotional argument against God rather than a logical one. God is an omnipotent creator. Mankind is not, and so it is a category error to apply similar standards to two beings which have completely different prerogatives. It is inappropriate for men to take innocent life simply because we are robbing other human beings of a God-given gift and we are not to play God in that regard. But clearly God can play God.
Johnny gave Susan a bright blue marble, he said it was a gift. Susan loved her marble and was greatful to Johnny for giving it to her. Later, Johnny suddenly and unexpectedly took the marble back without Susan's permission. Susan didn't want to give the marble back, but Johnny was stronger and faster and he took it anyway.
Did Johnny freely give the marble to Susan? If not, why call it a gift? If so, did Johnny "steal" the marble from Susan when he took it back?
@zthustra That is a very interesting question, and I am not sure how to answer it but I will give it my best try. Johnny did freely give the marble to Susan in the sense that he allowed her to use it for a time. The gift was the use of the beautiful bright blue marble. However, the marble was always the possession of Johnny, so he did not steal the marble back and Susan will eventually receive a much better marble, one so great that she will not care about the first marble.
a voluntary transfer of property without compensation
loan
the furnishing of something to another party for temporary use with the agreement that it or its equivalent will be returned
Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law
Every conversation with a theistic person leads to a dictionary. No doubt, you will find some context in which your misuse of the word "gift" is justified. I have had a thousand conversations with a thousand of you.
If you do not own it to start with, you cannot give it. If you can take it back, you did not give it.
You are not disappointing me; you are fulfilling my expectations.
You might have admitted the fact that using the word "gift" to describe what was properly a "loan" was misleading, but you did not. Instead, you have looked for some context in which the word might still be used. It is important to do so, because your religious belief is on the line.
Susan was distraught when she found out that Johnny planned to take back the marble; he had told her it was a gift. Johnny said, that he would give her a better marble in exchange for the one he was taking away, but to get the better marble she must do whatever he told her to do.
Susan didn't want to do what Johnny said, some of the things seemed wrong to her, she just wanted to keep the marble he gave her. So, Johnny got angry and took the marble and did not replace it!
Considering very carefully the definition of "gift" if Susan must compensate Johnny or suffer the loss of her marble without possibility of replacement, then the marble was not a gift.
In my story, it is clear that Johnny has a marble to give, but in the case of God, it is not so clear. Countless people have been born and died without any awareness that they lives may or may not have been given to them by any deity whatsoever, let alone the deity called Go or a version of God.
@zthustra Well, I gave the answer as I see it as a follower of classical Christianity and you gave the answer as you see it as a follower of atheism, and I am happy to let anyone read our comments and decide for themselves.
(And I may be missing something but I really do not see how your story disproves the existence of God, nor does your story accurately describe the work of salvation. Your argument seems to be that since you do not like God, God does not exist. Similar to your video.)
Woosh! The arrow flys past the strawbale and out into the field!
If you have to tell a lie to tell the truth, it isn't the truth. If you were to accurately represent the Christian position, even you would not believe it. All I am trying to do is get you to accurately represent what you believe.
You obviously believe that humans are brought to life by God and that we have an eternal component that lives on after this flesh dies. You also believe that the afterlife is better then the present life. I don't see justification for your belief, but at least it is what you beleve.
You say that human life is a "gift" from God, but you do not believe that because in the next sentence you justify God taking back the life he gave. That is not how gifts work!
We aren't there yet, but somewhere in your vocabulary are the phrases unconditional love and free will. I know this, because I was you once. But there are conditions and there is not freedom. You do not believe what you say. If love was unconditional, there would no penalty for disbelief or disobedience. If humans had choices, they would not have to die, loose their life and accept terms for the replacement life that is being offered to them.
@zthustra This really is starting to seem to be much ado about nothing. I say things that I don't believe? I am not sure how you came to that conclusion. Maybe we should start over.
You seem to be objecting to my answer concerning Johnny and Susan. I used Johnny as a representation of God, Susan as a representative of mankind, and the marble as life, and answered in kind. This was necessary to avoid a category error, since Johnny, like us, are not God.
@zthustra Part 2 We cannot apply the same terms to God as we would to children. Much like a king. A king or queen may bestow gifts of land or titles and later reclaim them, but we would not charge them with stealing. God is sovereign over all, and is greater than a king due to His perfect justice, mercy, and love.
God does love unconditionally. He is also just. Do you believe in justice? Have you committed a moral crime? I have. That's the bad news. The good news is that a pardon exists.
@zthustra Part 3 And I really could not live in a world where humans received every request granted to them. It would be fun for a while and then truly dull.
Most atheists, agnostics and non-religious people don't really care to engage in any kind of debate with theistic people. Those of us who do, have made list of common arguments and logical fallacies. Setting aside 'proof by assertion', what you have here is a 'special pleading'.
One the one hand, we are supposed to believe that what is morally, ethically and literally right and wrong is universally fixed, but then we must make exceptions for the maker himself.
@zthustra I do not know how else to clearly explain it to you. You have been mischaracterizing the Biblical view of God. Objective morality is neither above God nor merely willed by Him. Instead, ethics are grounded in His holy character. Moral notions are not arbitrary and given to caprice. They are fixed and absolute, grounded in God's immutable nature.
If what you mean by "universally fixed," that there is a rule that is somehow fixed in heaven and applies to everything under heaven by its own force and there are no exceptions, and everybody must follow these rules, including God for it to be an absolute, well, then there aren't any absolutes like that. An objective moral rule has to do with a circumstance and is always applicable in those circumstances applied in the same way.
But when the morally relevant circumstance is changed, like you go from man to God then it may not be that that objective principle applies in these other circumstances.
I hope this has cleared up any misunderstandings.
@zthustra "You are dancing around Euthyphro’s dilemma..." Yes, I was referencing to this challenge by relating how Christianity is not handicapped by "Plato's" challenge to Euthyphro.
"The Bible is inanimate and has no ‘view of God’." Is this nitpicking really necessary? Is there some question in your mind as to what I wrote? And if you continuously make assertions about what I am thinking, we will be unable to make any progress.
The nitpicking is essential! The words are everything. They are the point of everything that I have written and you still don't get it! For instance, it does not matter whether my stories of Johnny, Susan and Jim relate to your beliefs, even though you and I know they do, what matters is how the words 'give', 'gift', 'loan' and 'theft' are used and what they mean. These words have meaning and you destroy their usefullness in conversation by ignoring that point.
@zthustra And maybe it's time to drop the Johnny/Susan question. I think we have both have made it clear that the atheistic solution(s) is to ignore the concepts and language of sovereignty and the Christian solution(s) is to incorporate the concepts and language of sovereignty.
And objective morals...I think you are confusing them with social mores. Objective morals are ethical obligations universally binding on everyone in the same situation.
What is a ‘Biblical view of God’? The Bible is a book, or more correctly, an abridgement of many books translated to modern language. The Bible is inanimate and has no ‘view of God’.
What I think you are referring to is your view of God which you confuse to be the singular and correct view based upon your own understanding of what is written in the version of the Bible that you are familiar with.
Should we look into the big black book itself? Sounds like fun to me!
@zthustra I apologize if my recent reply seemed testy. I even forgot to offer my view on the Bible. I hold with reasonable certainty that the Bible is a historical document and contains information about God, and that the Bible is true, with a capital "T," whether someone believes it or not. In other words, I see the Bible as being true based on reasonable arguments, not simply because I believe it, and it is true whether someone reads it or not.
Regarding 'testy'. This Internet thingy makes it very difficult to post replies without coming off that way. If you and I where having a face-to-face conversation, we would still disagree, but I seriously doubt it come off as kurt and insensitive as these replies appear when we reread them.
I am beginning to enjoy my BlgTV time more. I think it is easier to be friendly in disagreement in realtime exchanges with a face and a voice.
I spent over a years engaging believers in a forum called 'Is the Bible true?' I couldn't even get a believer to accept a dictionary of what the word 'true' meant, so I have no idea how to approach the subject. I have the same problem with the word 'God'.
These days, i prefer to go straight to the text of the book. But then, i find so few Christians who are willing to do a critical analysis of the text, so that isn't working well either.
@zthustra Well, I am a simple follower of Jesus of Nazareth so I probably won't be much help, either. I am not a theologian nor a scientist nor a philosopher...or any combination of these.
On truth, well, I heard that when a philosopher was asked, "What is truth," he said, "Do you want the true answer or the false one?" I think it shows that we all already know the answer to "what is truth." Truth is when things are the way we think they are. Someone put it to me this way.
John c17 v 3, "Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent."
If I beleived that verse from the Bible, I would not be able to live without making a better understanding of what it says about God and Jesus in the Bible one of teh highest priorities of my life.
I did believe that once and I cannot imagine how anyone can call themself a Christian and expect to be taken seriously without making a similar commitment.
@zthustra Truth is when a statement, idea, or point of view actually fits (corresponds to) the way the world is. I am not sure but I think I've heard it put this way as well. If you say that something is and is is, or you say that it isn't and it isn't, that's true.
So when belief is reasonably justified, then we have knowledge.
I am not sure why someone would have difficulty with the word "God."
And I am not an expert on textual criticism but it looks interesting.
I generally find dictionaryies useful when attempting to comprehend the definition of a word. I have compiled a simple test for truthfulness. To be true, it must be accurate, reliable and based on reality. The truth can be demonstrated by factual evidence and rationally explained.
Everybody is entitled to their own opinions, but nobody gets to have their own facts. There is not one thing that is true for you and another for me. Believing really hard does not make it true.
@zthustra It looks like we're in agreement on what the truth is.
I think every Christian should strive to know the basic doctrine--the true nature of God versus competing versions, the biblical ("biblical"-to be in accord with the Bible) truth of who Jesus is compared with competing ideas, the biblical teaching of the nature of man especially the extent of the fall, what Jesus accomplished on the cross and how someone enters into that benefit, the resurrection, and nature of revelation.
@zthustra I think all people and all religions should practice cooperation and understanding but I am not a religious pluralist in that all religions lead to God. If it's true that there's only one God, then God is someone in particular, and so if God is someone in particular, then it follows that there are a lot of religious beliefs about God that are simply false.
@zthustra Since you often use the dictionary, are you asking for the origin and first usage of the word "God," which it appears to be from the Old High German, "got," sometime before the twelfth century. If you are referring to what Adam called God, then I really do not know, other than "Elohim" is the word used in the beginning of the the first chapter of Genesis and then "YHWH" in chapter two.
This is the beginning of discovery! It took me a long time to discover the etymology of the word "god" and how it came to be used in the English Bible translation. And connecting the Hebrew words IHVH (Latin)/JHWH(German, French, Dutch/YHWH (English) with 'elohyim (Hebrew), theos (Greek), deus (Latin) and god (English) was another great challenge.
Where do we begin? Let's begin, 'In the beginning ...' with Genesis c1 v1?
Forgive me for being evasive here ... I like the direction we are going, but I don't want to go into lecture mode and just spite out all of the conclusion I have come to then try to persuade you I am right.
I would rather persuade you to look a bit more closely. That is why I ask more questions. Not trying to trap you, but hoping for you to find the answers instead of me shoving them down your throat.
bereishit bara 'elohyim et ha'shamayim ve'et ha'aretz
Was anything created? As I read it, the sky (ha'shamayim) and the land (ha'aretz) already existed and the elohyim filled (bara) them at some point in time that was earlier and therefore known to them (reishit), a beginning of sorts, but not the beginning of everything, just the beginning of the filling of the sky and the land or the earliest time know to the author.
@zthustra Every article I have read so far translate "bara" as "create," used here as a transitive verb speaking in the past tense with a singular subject. The heavens and the earth would be the direct objects modifying the verb, and since the act of creation took place at the beginning (in the context of Genesis,) then I think it reasonably follows that no pre-existing materials were present when the creation took place. But then again "bara" does not exclude pre-existing material, either.
@zthustra Thank you very much for this list of videos. I will do my best to watch them over the next few days and tell you what I thought. And I am sorry but I cannot guarantee how soon I will finish them because I run my own business. But I should be able to view them all this week.
@zthustra I just finished the whole series. I really cannot thank you enough for introducing me to Jeff Benner, his work, and his website. The videos were very interesting and I really felt my lack of knowledge of ancient Hebrew. When I have more coinage in my pocket, I'll invest in some of his books.
No real deep insights here into what Mr. Benner offered in his videos. Other than he's very even-keeled in his analysis and I will study more about "bara."
We may not be able to personally recognize whether something is true or not true. We may not be able to personally persuade others that what we beleive to be true is, in fact, true. Many true things may lay outside of our knowledge and understanding. But ...
If we are to claim that something is true AND we expect others to believe as we do based upon our claim, we should also be prepared to present factual evidence and rational explaination for our claim.
We must be wired differently. I cannot imagine why words like "gift", "loan" and "theft" have definitions that are suitable for use when applied to common people, but may be ignored and replaced when applied to royalty or deity.
If you give someone something, it becomes their property. If it can be taken back, it is not a gift. If there are conditions for use and it must be returned, it is a loan. If you take something that belongs to someone else it is theft.
Jim was a bully. He was bigger than the other kids. When he told a joke they had to laugh; when he wanted something, they had to give it to him; when he hurt someone, everyone agree that it was justified.
Nobody like Jim, but they were all afraid of him, so nobody ever said anything bad about Jim to him or anyone else. Everyone agreed, Jim was the best, he had a right to take things from others and he was always justified when he hurt someone.
I am telling you, I left atheism because it requires a whole lot of faith. Being an atheists requires you to believe in magic--that things us appear without anything causing it to come into existence.
Let alone that, it also requires you to stand up like a moron and speak against the world, moon,Sun, stars etc that they came into Existence without a CREATOR. And magically/blindly And magically/blindly started to accommodating themselves in their respective place...
This user is probably a sock account for Airlightf. This user spams atheist channels with cut and paste ad hominem and has been blocked. I leave these comments up because this is an excellent example of how some people think they are ethical and moral because they believe in a deity but they are rude and dishonest. This is NOT to say that theists are unethical, but rather that belief does not excuse such dishonesty and unethical behavior.
"So, did your favorite deity inspire your to say that I was a "brainless kid"?" No. You inspired me to say that. I love to teach a lesson to morons like you :) I lesson that they/you will never forget...You will know and always remember that here I striked your brain :)
After reading NINETY absurb comments and replies by this user ...
After enduring endless AD HOMINEM attacks ...
After visiting other channels with similar comments and replies posted by this user ...
I decided that he is just a troll and blocked him. My apologies to anyone who takes severe exception to such measures. Simple disagreement is no problem but at some point the trolls have to be turned off.
--"'Before God we all are equally wise and equally foolish.' Only two things are infinite, the universe and human spidity and I am not sure about the former.'''--Albert Einstein.
Anyway, you "Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces." :) Wasn't Jesus an awesome friend/man?
Remember the tree in your back yard? It's doesn't exist. You say it is real and I say it is not 'cause I have not seen it or touch it etc. I tell you, you are hallucinating...This is atheits/ attitude towards us. -You see now the relationship between the tree and arilightf? You and your tree, me and God.
The fact that God exists? Look, I don't want to sound assumptious but as far as I know, there is no proof to any God. The belief in God (Or lack-there-of) is what people choose to think, It's not factual unless there is evidence. I would be astounded if you showed me evidence and proof to an almighty (or a multitude of) God(s). If it were a fact that God existed, there wouldn't be atheists in this world.
@HiLRoYpwns To you there is no proof and that is moronic because you think that' automatically disproove God's holy Existence. The G Existence is an unacceptable Fact to atheists/agnostics.
"To you there is no proof and that is moronic because you think that' automatically disproove God's holy Existence" Where did I say it disproves? You're assuming I think that. "The G Existence is an unacceptable Fact to atheists/agnostics." Again, it is not fact but mainly opinion. If you had proof of God, Then you not only have a good reason to believe the existence of it, but then people everywhere would believe it. I'm a truth seeker, not someone who assumes I already found it.
@Airlightf But because there is no proof in God there is no proof in creationism. Just like there is no proof in atheism. And I'll gladly and openly accept it. I just find that atheism seems more realistic.
a person who is notably stupid or lacking in good judgment.
It is an "undisputable" fact that the Universe was sneezed out of the nose the Great Green Arkleseizure. It is written in a book and anyone who does not accept this fact is a "moron".
@zthustra You are ruining this page. I asked you, What kind of proof do you want? But you are a brainless kid... I don't remember telling you the proof of God Existence was written in a book, idiot! Stop talking crap.
So, did your favorite deity inspire your to say that I was a "brainless kid"? Your deity is either rude, uninformed or both. If your deity had access to the channel description page he would know that I am niether brainless nor a kid.
Scroll down! We had this discussion nine months ago. I answered your question but you still didn't produce any evidence. "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." ~Christopher Hitchens,
It doesn't matter what kind of proof, if you HAD any, you'd be able to show me. The only Brainless one here is someone who says that god is a fact but if god were a fact then they'd have proof, yet they're not giving me any kind of proof. If they had proof, they'd show me.
I finally blocked Airlightf from this channel. The guy is a troll. He has posted NINETY comments and replies, many ad homenim, all circular. He does the same things on other channels. Thanks for viewing and posting comments.
Nope, I block people when I discover that they are nothing but spamming trolls. In over two years I have only blocked four users.
Isn't it funny that I just now noticed that you are reposting EXACTLY the same text over and over again on other YouTube channels? That is what I call spamming and trolling.
Congradulations, you are a troll and have the honor of being number five on my blocked list! Probably just a sock account for Airlightf anyway.
I have admitted many of times that I am a truth seeker, not someone who blindly thinks they've already found it. If you think about it, we are all ignorant because there pretty much is no proof f any religion to man. We are ignorant to the origins of life, pretty much everything that starts and ends life, we are ignorant to. Doesn't matter how much faith or lack-there-of we have.
@HiLRoYpwns "Well where is the proof in Creationism? Whatever proof of God you have is good enough" Don't be a hypocrite. That fact that God hasn't proved/showed to you He exists is not my problem. I am a man and not a hypocrite like you. I myself asked G to reveal HIMSELF to me and HE did.
Nine months latter and the same recycled bullshit!
When you write "Creation" are we meant to read "universe" and assume that it was "created"? Your use of the word "Creation" to describe the universe assumes the conclusion without putting forward any evidence for it.
God created the heavens and the great seas with His mighty power.The land is His and everything that is in it belongs to Him. \0/ And the angel of the LORD departed from there.
The Hebrew word "mal'ak" means messenger. The Greek word "angelos" also means messenger. The modern English word "angel" bears no resemblence to its Hebrew and Greek progenitors in the Bible.
Everything here is blah, blah, blah ...
Just assertions, no evidence whatsoever. Have you looked up the word "assertion" so that you can understand why it is important in any disagreement to avoid making assertions and why it is importating to offer evidence for what you post?
That's one of the reason we/I don't "pronounce" the Name of GOD or even write it down. Because it would no longer be the "Name of God" if I wrote it down or gave it another pronunciation by translating it into another lenguage. --
LOL. The word angel resembles the word angelos in Greek. What don't resemble are these to words: מלאכ (angel or messanger) and "mal'ak"
Do you ever do any research before you post replies? If you did, you would surely know what the Hebrew word "mal'ak" and the Greek word "angelos" have in common.
DO you think angelos means angel because they sound similar? What about kurios and lord? They don't sound the same and yet, lord is the modern English translation of the Greek word kurios and niether of them sound like the Latin word domeni.
Did you read the PDF? Can you follow the sounds of letters in IOU and YHWH?
I don't have any facts that are mine. If I gave you a bunch of information and called it facts and expected you to accept it I would just be making assertions.
Instead, I have given you information and asked you to check the facts elsewhere. I have suggested places to check. I have begged you to check your own assertions to see if they were factual.
Others have already written the books, why whould I need to write another one?
What nonsense are you saying now? I already told you what מלאכ "mal'ak" means(angel or messanger). Also the word angelos measn angels or messanger. Just like the name Jesus(English) means nothing to me, also the word angel...
Scroll up, the whole reply is nonsense, not just the part about angels.
Also, reread your original comment.
Your use of the phrase, "angel of the LORD" is in the modern context of "one of a class of spiritual beings; a celestial attendant of God" but the Hebrew word simply means "messenger".
The entire comment is a big assertion (have you looked that up yet?) dressed up in flowery words with double-meanings designed to make the unreal appear real.
The word of the LORD is TRUTH; He who created the world is God. Mighty is my GOD and LORD. HE reigns overall the kingdoms of the earth. He rules the world forever.
I am insisting on actual explainations and real answers to simple questions. You are evasiive. If you aren't sure, scroll down and read the reply by MouseHusic. You have probably been dancing around this stuff for so long now that you don't even realize you are dancing.
"There is only one G-d. No other being participated in the work of creation.G-d is a unity. He is a single, whole, complete indivisible entity. He cannot be divided into parts or described by attributes. Any attempt to ascribe attributes to G-d is merely man's imperfect attempt to understand the infinite." (Jewish faith)
I think I've told you this before: Is God didn't exist, all these we see wouldn't exist. Everything that exist, came into existence by the POWER of God. The fact of my existence, is a fact of God's Existence--it proves the Existence of GD.
" Let us make man in our image....male and female He created them." He and NOT them... Since GOD cannot be seen(with fisical eyes) we say Elohim. But when I say CREATOR, there is no action no motion there.
I'm sorry, but my politeness is at it's end, you are a fool. You are reading an ENGLISH translation of a HEBREW text. Can you get it through your head that the Hebrew text does not say what the English text says?
Do you even realize that all you ever do is make assertions? Are you able to look up the word assertion in a dictionary and grasp what that means?
Vampires can't be seen in mirrors and God can't be seen with natural eyes are both assertions with no basis in reality!
Your interpretation of the Hebrew texts is wrong. I clearly explained to you why it is written אֱלֹהִים and יהוה . Calling God a murderer is pure ignorance and I also explained why it is so.
If God made Adam and Eve with their morals and gave them their free will, why did God punish Adam and Eve for behaving the way God made them to behave? Shouldn't God take responsibility for His mistakes? Or is this another one of those situations where there is one strict moral standard for humans and a more lenient one for God?
I would love to have some evidence that there are any consequences associated with the so-called judgements of God.
For the same reason you get a speed ticked when you are driving 100 mph on the freeway or 55 mph n a residencial neighborhood. Was it your daddy's fault for giving you that car's key? Adam and Eve were already adults...
If God gave me a car that would only travel at 100 MPH and above and told me to drive it, then God put up a speed limit of 55 MPH, I would eithr have to break His commandment to drive the car or break His commandment to drive under 55 MPH.
God, not I, would be responsible for the mess I was in as I attempted to keep all of His commandments.
It is alleged that God gave Adam and Eve their nature when He made them and then God commanded them to do that which was contrary to their nature. God, not Adam and Eve, should be held responsible for the disasterous outcome.
GOD does whatever HE wants to with unborn babies. Humans have no biseness to question GOD about What HE does with HIS creation. Because they are so ignorant ...who do you think will take your life and all other's life, away? GOD!!! Will you dare to call him a "murderer" becuase HE takes away all living creatures lives? No, man you are so blind and....
1. Is what is moral commanded by God because it is moral?
2. Is it moral because it is commanded by God?
Setting aside the imaginary nature of deity, can an action be immoral when a man does it and moral when a deity does it? Can a perfectly moral deity do what is called immoral when men do it?
God made us. And wether we want or NOT, we live under His rules. That doesn't mean we cannot or don't brake His rules. BUT the consecueses we will always face. We can talk and talk, but that will not change God's laws for living things(beings).
GOD is not mention until Creation starts;GOD Existed before Creation that's why the first verse in Geneis reads:"א בְּרֵאשִׁית, בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים, אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם, וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ." If you notice carefully, God(the word) can be plural or singular:"27 And God created man in-His-own image, in the image of God created-He-him; male and female created-He-them. " You need to have a deep understanding about God in oder to get that.
In the Hebrew text that you pasted here, the words are, reading from right to left: ב be- in ראשית re'shiyth a time that is past ברא bara' filled אלהים 'elohiym mighty ones את 'eth with ה he- [heh] the שמים shamayim sky ו ve- and את 'eth with ה he- the ארץ 'erets land Oops! The sky and the land existed before they were filled by mighty ones.
Sky is not the word,but HEAVEN(existed before Creation started). I don't know where you got the idea that the land existed before creation. I know your point on the "mighty ones" And I already answer this that it is translated or taken as plurar or singular. Singular when we refer to GOD and plural when we refer to His Acts(He acting) or He-creating and filling the earth and the "sky"
The word 'elohyim is plural, it can only be read as singular by ignoring the rules of Hebrew language and grammar. But this is one of the most common things done by Christian apologists. Just creat an exception for your favorite belief instead of following the evidence where it leads. The singular form is 'eloah.
Before I write too much on verse 27 I will need to do some research. But I have already found multiple errors in the English translation. For example, 'elohyim meaning mighty ones is translated to God meaning the begotten one. Also, bara' meaning filled is translated to created. And, adam is translated here to man and in other places to the proper name Adam, that I really need to dig into. And be-tselem is the image, not His image. You need a deep understanding of Hebrew, not God, to understand.
Reading the English versions of the Bible withotu checking the Hebrew is a HUGE problem. People think they are discovering profound things then when they look at the Hebrew text, they discover that the book didn't say the things at all.
Also, you were all excited about your supposed observation of God preexisting the "heaven and the earth". Would you be just as dismayed to discover that light preexists the sun, the moon and stars? I didn't think so! You will have an apology for that too.
Before there was anything(before creation of stars, earth etc), there was peace/paradise/Heaven.But suddenly, the vast emptiness and the deep Abyss were terrible shaken by the POWER of GOD and the ELEMENTS started to become visible. -I hope that helps a little bit. BRB
Question, do you even read the replies I post here? You just seem to keep skipping around and moving from assertion to assertion without any regard for anything I wrtie.
For example, you were utterly and completely wrong about verse 1 and I demonstrated that clearly. Instead of admitting it and moving forward you just skipped a step left and two steps right and posted another meaningless, unsubstantiated reply.
"Before the creation of the stars, earth, etc." is simply a restatement of "before there was anything".
Do you think there were birds before there was a planet earth or water befere there were suns? The known universe encompasses EVERYTHING. No suns and no planets means no universe means NOTHING.
Context! Our discussion revolves around the so-called "creation". Theoretically NOTHING existed before it was created. So creation = ANYTHING/EVERYTHING.
I only know what the world(not our fisical world) looked like before creation started. Tearing down the universe leaves us with nothing to think or talk about. Just like a machine cannot operate without gas, we(humans/our senses) cannot operate.
"The fact of G-d's existence is accepted almost without question. Proof is not needed, and is rarely offered. The Torah begins by stating "In the beginning, G-d created..." It does not tell who G-d is or how He was created.
In general, Judaism views the existence of G-d as a necessary prerequisite for the existence of the universe. The existence of the universe is sufficient proof of the existence of G-d.
Have you read nothing that I posted in other comments? In Hebrew, the first book of the Torah, Bereshit, does NOT mention a beginning, God or anything about created. It says, "In a time past, filled mighty ones ..."
The Jatravartid people believe that the Universe was sneezed out of the nose of a being called the Great Green Arkleseizure.
"What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof." ~Christopher Hitchens
Name[NAME] of God[GOD]. Why? For the same reason that we don't want anyone(speacially athiests) to desecrate that which is holy --must remain sacred/holy.
Ok let my introduce myself. I am a servant and worshiper of GOD MOST HIGH. And I have studied the bible with Mormons, Jehovas' witnessess, Seventh-day Adventis etc. I actually have like four Jewish bibles and 5 versions of the Holy Quran on my shelve which I studied very hard. Therefore, I don't belong to any religion(I am free).
You belong to none but you are a slave to all. You seem to be afraid that one of them might be right and being unsure you attempt to worship them all.
To be free you must believe as many true things as possible and as few false things as possible, embrace the truth as it is rather than as you wish for it to be, learn to distinguish between that which is imagined, alleged or ideal and that which is actual and real.
I don't worship any religion, you know that. You were a slave of the Mormon church BUT NOT ME. GOD is truth and that's why I believe in HIM. What you need is a personal experience with God. BTW I have other books on religions of the world. Have you read Every Man's Talmud by Abraham Cohen ? A Guide for the Perplexed by Moses Maimonides
1. You don't know what the definition of the "religion" is. Even if you are not connected to any particular sect, it does not change the fact that you are religious. At least from our exchanges it appears that way.
2. I was a MEMBER of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, a Mormon. I was a SLAVE to my beliefs, not to the church. You are trying to believe a little of everything and all of nothing. That requires serious mental dexterity.
I have more Bibles in my house than you have in yours ... nanny, nanny, boo, boo.
I also have a couple Qurans, the Bhagavad Gita, the Lost Books of the Bible, the Apocrapha, the Gnostic Texts, several books with Dead Sea Scroll translations in them, and The Red Man's Religion.
So what?
Go to BlueLetterBible com and look up stuff. You will have instant access to Strong's Concordance, lexicons, Hebrew and Greek, and many versions.
How is it possible for a person to be so well studied and to be unfamiliar with the words in the books? You don't seem to comprehend that god, God and GOD depending on context mean at least six different things. You study Jewish Bibles but you don't seem to understand the difference between 'elohyim and Yehovah.
You study the Quran? I've read it, but I haven't wasted any time studying it. I've got all I can do to educate Christians, I don't have time to educate Muslims too.
I did study the Torah.Here is where יהוה is first mentioned: "ד אֵלֶּה תוֹלְדוֹת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְהָאָרֶץ, בְּהִבָּרְאָם: בְּיוֹם, עֲשׂוֹת יְהוָה אֱלֹהִים--אֶרֶץ וְשָׁמָיִם...day that the LORD God made earth and heaven." If you notice, אֱלֹהִים and(yahovah) יְהוָה is the same Name(s) for-Him-that created...
If YOU notice, this is how the last part of that verse reads: bara' filled be- in yowm day `asah did Yehovah 'elohiym mighty ones 'erets land ve- and shamayim sky Yehovah is the proper name of one of the mighty ones. Yehovah is regarded as ruling over all other mighty ones and so he is kurios in Greek, domini in Latin frauja (root for feudal) in Goth and lord in English. These are all mistranslations of Yehovah, but that is a much longer etymology than I can fit in 500 chars.
What is your name? Ok, your name is_________. But I call you zthustra 'cause I don't know your name and because that's what you choose people to call you here or that's the nickname by which "you" wished to be known on youtube...Samething with the Names, titles and usernames that we, humans, apply to God, GOD or YHWH...
I don't think you understand why I keep asking. Have you taken the time to look up any or all of those names and words?
I haven't been able to pin you down on whether or not your beliefs are based on a study of the Bible. You are evasive about that.
Christians frequently use words like god, God, GOD, LORD, Creator, Almighty and even Jesus Christ, Heavenly Father and Holy Ghost as if they were synonyms.
Each word has meaning in context with the Bible and you are butchering them all.
I use different titles or Names for GOD because of HIS different or many faces/manifestations in my life or the life of others:THE CREATOR, GOD Alimighty, The Divine(The HOLY ONE), GOD MOST HIGH... depends on how He manifests Himself, I use those titles/Names.
You have given me no reason to believe that you have any idea what the words you use for your deity mean.
Another example is "The Divine (The HOLY ONE)". Do you have any idea what the word divine means or where its etymological roots come from? How about holy one? What does the word holy mean and where did you get that word? What do the two phrases have in common?
You obviously aren't paying any attention to anything I post! You are never going to look up anything.
I did not even think twice about telling you I did not watch this before the first second ticked over. If you pull this $#!+ on the battlelines I will not hesitate to kill you.
MrGodkid 6 months ago
Wish I can rank it a thumbs up :) Oh yeah, there is a rational reason to like a state... CT, MA, VT etc.... are all pro-evolution teaching rational states that have liberal laws not discriminating against same-sex marriage. Hey look, those states haven't imploded by heathens and have the highest income tax per capita. Yes, many logical reasons to love logical states :) Great job on this rational video :)
avelmira 7 months ago
This video is very informative with a lot of information, but it seems to be an emotional argument against God rather than a logical one. God is an omnipotent creator. Mankind is not, and so it is a category error to apply similar standards to two beings which have completely different prerogatives. It is inappropriate for men to take innocent life simply because we are robbing other human beings of a God-given gift and we are not to play God in that regard. But clearly God can play God.
JeremiahA40 11 months ago
@JeremiahA40
Johnny gave Susan a bright blue marble, he said it was a gift. Susan loved her marble and was greatful to Johnny for giving it to her. Later, Johnny suddenly and unexpectedly took the marble back without Susan's permission. Susan didn't want to give the marble back, but Johnny was stronger and faster and he took it anyway.
Did Johnny freely give the marble to Susan? If not, why call it a gift? If so, did Johnny "steal" the marble from Susan when he took it back?
zthustra 11 months ago
@zthustra That is a very interesting question, and I am not sure how to answer it but I will give it my best try. Johnny did freely give the marble to Susan in the sense that he allowed her to use it for a time. The gift was the use of the beautiful bright blue marble. However, the marble was always the possession of Johnny, so he did not steal the marble back and Susan will eventually receive a much better marble, one so great that she will not care about the first marble.
JeremiahA40 11 months ago
@JeremiahA40
gift
a voluntary transfer of property without compensation
loan
the furnishing of something to another party for temporary use with the agreement that it or its equivalent will be returned
Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law
Every conversation with a theistic person leads to a dictionary. No doubt, you will find some context in which your misuse of the word "gift" is justified. I have had a thousand conversations with a thousand of you.
zthustra 11 months ago
@zthustra "I have had a thousand conversations with a thousand of you."
This does not sound very friendly of you. Please do not ask questions if you do not like the answers.
The American Heritage Dictionary (1993)
gift
something bestowed voluntarily and without compensation
bestow
to invest with an enveloping or pervasive quality or characteristic (Would not "life" qualify here?)
Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
gift
to endow with some power, quality, or attribute (Such as "life"?)
JeremiahA40 11 months ago
@JeremiahA40
If you do not own it to start with, you cannot give it. If you can take it back, you did not give it.
You are not disappointing me; you are fulfilling my expectations.
You might have admitted the fact that using the word "gift" to describe what was properly a "loan" was misleading, but you did not. Instead, you have looked for some context in which the word might still be used. It is important to do so, because your religious belief is on the line.
zthustra 11 months ago
@JeremiahA40
Susan was distraught when she found out that Johnny planned to take back the marble; he had told her it was a gift. Johnny said, that he would give her a better marble in exchange for the one he was taking away, but to get the better marble she must do whatever he told her to do.
Susan didn't want to do what Johnny said, some of the things seemed wrong to her, she just wanted to keep the marble he gave her. So, Johnny got angry and took the marble and did not replace it!
zthustra 11 months ago
@zthustra
Considering very carefully the definition of "gift" if Susan must compensate Johnny or suffer the loss of her marble without possibility of replacement, then the marble was not a gift.
In my story, it is clear that Johnny has a marble to give, but in the case of God, it is not so clear. Countless people have been born and died without any awareness that they lives may or may not have been given to them by any deity whatsoever, let alone the deity called Go or a version of God.
zthustra 11 months ago
@zthustra Well, I gave the answer as I see it as a follower of classical Christianity and you gave the answer as you see it as a follower of atheism, and I am happy to let anyone read our comments and decide for themselves.
(And I may be missing something but I really do not see how your story disproves the existence of God, nor does your story accurately describe the work of salvation. Your argument seems to be that since you do not like God, God does not exist. Similar to your video.)
JeremiahA40 11 months ago
@JeremiahA40
Woosh! The arrow flys past the strawbale and out into the field!
If you have to tell a lie to tell the truth, it isn't the truth. If you were to accurately represent the Christian position, even you would not believe it. All I am trying to do is get you to accurately represent what you believe.
zthustra 11 months ago
@JeremiahA40
You obviously believe that humans are brought to life by God and that we have an eternal component that lives on after this flesh dies. You also believe that the afterlife is better then the present life. I don't see justification for your belief, but at least it is what you beleve.
You say that human life is a "gift" from God, but you do not believe that because in the next sentence you justify God taking back the life he gave. That is not how gifts work!
zthustra 11 months ago
@JeremiahA40
We aren't there yet, but somewhere in your vocabulary are the phrases unconditional love and free will. I know this, because I was you once. But there are conditions and there is not freedom. You do not believe what you say. If love was unconditional, there would no penalty for disbelief or disobedience. If humans had choices, they would not have to die, loose their life and accept terms for the replacement life that is being offered to them.
You say things you don't believe.
zthustra 11 months ago
@zthustra This really is starting to seem to be much ado about nothing. I say things that I don't believe? I am not sure how you came to that conclusion. Maybe we should start over.
You seem to be objecting to my answer concerning Johnny and Susan. I used Johnny as a representation of God, Susan as a representative of mankind, and the marble as life, and answered in kind. This was necessary to avoid a category error, since Johnny, like us, are not God.
JeremiahA40 11 months ago
@zthustra Part 2 We cannot apply the same terms to God as we would to children. Much like a king. A king or queen may bestow gifts of land or titles and later reclaim them, but we would not charge them with stealing. God is sovereign over all, and is greater than a king due to His perfect justice, mercy, and love.
God does love unconditionally. He is also just. Do you believe in justice? Have you committed a moral crime? I have. That's the bad news. The good news is that a pardon exists.
JeremiahA40 11 months ago
@zthustra Part 3 And I really could not live in a world where humans received every request granted to them. It would be fun for a while and then truly dull.
JeremiahA40 11 months ago
@JeremiahA40
Most atheists, agnostics and non-religious people don't really care to engage in any kind of debate with theistic people. Those of us who do, have made list of common arguments and logical fallacies. Setting aside 'proof by assertion', what you have here is a 'special pleading'.
One the one hand, we are supposed to believe that what is morally, ethically and literally right and wrong is universally fixed, but then we must make exceptions for the maker himself.
zthustra 11 months ago
@zthustra I do not know how else to clearly explain it to you. You have been mischaracterizing the Biblical view of God. Objective morality is neither above God nor merely willed by Him. Instead, ethics are grounded in His holy character. Moral notions are not arbitrary and given to caprice. They are fixed and absolute, grounded in God's immutable nature.
(continued...)
JeremiahA40 11 months ago
@zthustra (cont.)
If what you mean by "universally fixed," that there is a rule that is somehow fixed in heaven and applies to everything under heaven by its own force and there are no exceptions, and everybody must follow these rules, including God for it to be an absolute, well, then there aren't any absolutes like that. An objective moral rule has to do with a circumstance and is always applicable in those circumstances applied in the same way.
(continued...)
JeremiahA40 11 months ago
@zthustra (cont.)
But when the morally relevant circumstance is changed, like you go from man to God then it may not be that that objective principle applies in these other circumstances.
I hope this has cleared up any misunderstandings.
JeremiahA40 11 months ago
@JeremiahA40
You are dancing around Euthyphro’s dilemma, "Is that which is good commanded by God because it's good, or is it good because God commands it?"
zthustra 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@zthustra "You are dancing around Euthyphro’s dilemma..." Yes, I was referencing to this challenge by relating how Christianity is not handicapped by "Plato's" challenge to Euthyphro.
"The Bible is inanimate and has no ‘view of God’." Is this nitpicking really necessary? Is there some question in your mind as to what I wrote? And if you continuously make assertions about what I am thinking, we will be unable to make any progress.
JeremiahA40 11 months ago
@JeremiahA40
The nitpicking is essential! The words are everything. They are the point of everything that I have written and you still don't get it! For instance, it does not matter whether my stories of Johnny, Susan and Jim relate to your beliefs, even though you and I know they do, what matters is how the words 'give', 'gift', 'loan' and 'theft' are used and what they mean. These words have meaning and you destroy their usefullness in conversation by ignoring that point.
zthustra 11 months ago
@zthustra And maybe it's time to drop the Johnny/Susan question. I think we have both have made it clear that the atheistic solution(s) is to ignore the concepts and language of sovereignty and the Christian solution(s) is to incorporate the concepts and language of sovereignty.
And objective morals...I think you are confusing them with social mores. Objective morals are ethical obligations universally binding on everyone in the same situation.
JeremiahA40 11 months ago
@JeremiahA40
What is a ‘Biblical view of God’? The Bible is a book, or more correctly, an abridgement of many books translated to modern language. The Bible is inanimate and has no ‘view of God’.
What I think you are referring to is your view of God which you confuse to be the singular and correct view based upon your own understanding of what is written in the version of the Bible that you are familiar with.
Should we look into the big black book itself? Sounds like fun to me!
zthustra 11 months ago
@zthustra I apologize if my recent reply seemed testy. I even forgot to offer my view on the Bible. I hold with reasonable certainty that the Bible is a historical document and contains information about God, and that the Bible is true, with a capital "T," whether someone believes it or not. In other words, I see the Bible as being true based on reasonable arguments, not simply because I believe it, and it is true whether someone reads it or not.
JeremiahA40 11 months ago
@JeremiahA40
Regarding 'testy'. This Internet thingy makes it very difficult to post replies without coming off that way. If you and I where having a face-to-face conversation, we would still disagree, but I seriously doubt it come off as kurt and insensitive as these replies appear when we reread them.
I am beginning to enjoy my BlgTV time more. I think it is easier to be friendly in disagreement in realtime exchanges with a face and a voice.
zthustra 11 months ago
@JeremiahA40
Now, the Bible ....
I spent over a years engaging believers in a forum called 'Is the Bible true?' I couldn't even get a believer to accept a dictionary of what the word 'true' meant, so I have no idea how to approach the subject. I have the same problem with the word 'God'.
These days, i prefer to go straight to the text of the book. But then, i find so few Christians who are willing to do a critical analysis of the text, so that isn't working well either.
zthustra 11 months ago
@zthustra Well, I am a simple follower of Jesus of Nazareth so I probably won't be much help, either. I am not a theologian nor a scientist nor a philosopher...or any combination of these.
On truth, well, I heard that when a philosopher was asked, "What is truth," he said, "Do you want the true answer or the false one?" I think it shows that we all already know the answer to "what is truth." Truth is when things are the way we think they are. Someone put it to me this way.
JeremiahA40 11 months ago
@JeremiahA40
John c17 v 3, "Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent."
If I beleived that verse from the Bible, I would not be able to live without making a better understanding of what it says about God and Jesus in the Bible one of teh highest priorities of my life.
I did believe that once and I cannot imagine how anyone can call themself a Christian and expect to be taken seriously without making a similar commitment.
zthustra 11 months ago
@zthustra Truth is when a statement, idea, or point of view actually fits (corresponds to) the way the world is. I am not sure but I think I've heard it put this way as well. If you say that something is and is is, or you say that it isn't and it isn't, that's true.
So when belief is reasonably justified, then we have knowledge.
I am not sure why someone would have difficulty with the word "God."
And I am not an expert on textual criticism but it looks interesting.
JeremiahA40 11 months ago
@JeremiahA40
I generally find dictionaryies useful when attempting to comprehend the definition of a word. I have compiled a simple test for truthfulness. To be true, it must be accurate, reliable and based on reality. The truth can be demonstrated by factual evidence and rationally explained.
Everybody is entitled to their own opinions, but nobody gets to have their own facts. There is not one thing that is true for you and another for me. Believing really hard does not make it true.
zthustra 11 months ago
@zthustra It looks like we're in agreement on what the truth is.
I think every Christian should strive to know the basic doctrine--the true nature of God versus competing versions, the biblical ("biblical"-to be in accord with the Bible) truth of who Jesus is compared with competing ideas, the biblical teaching of the nature of man especially the extent of the fall, what Jesus accomplished on the cross and how someone enters into that benefit, the resurrection, and nature of revelation.
JeremiahA40 10 months ago
@zthustra I think all people and all religions should practice cooperation and understanding but I am not a religious pluralist in that all religions lead to God. If it's true that there's only one God, then God is someone in particular, and so if God is someone in particular, then it follows that there are a lot of religious beliefs about God that are simply false.
JeremiahA40 10 months ago
@JeremiahA40
You call your deity God. Do you know when people first started worshipping a deity called God?
zthustra 10 months ago
@zthustra Since you often use the dictionary, are you asking for the origin and first usage of the word "God," which it appears to be from the Old High German, "got," sometime before the twelfth century. If you are referring to what Adam called God, then I really do not know, other than "Elohim" is the word used in the beginning of the the first chapter of Genesis and then "YHWH" in chapter two.
JeremiahA40 10 months ago
@JeremiahA40
This is the beginning of discovery! It took me a long time to discover the etymology of the word "god" and how it came to be used in the English Bible translation. And connecting the Hebrew words IHVH (Latin)/JHWH(German, French, Dutch/YHWH (English) with 'elohyim (Hebrew), theos (Greek), deus (Latin) and god (English) was another great challenge.
Where do we begin? Let's begin, 'In the beginning ...' with Genesis c1 v1?
What or who are the 'elohyim?
zthustra 10 months ago
@zthustra If I understand correctly, Elohyim, or Elohim, is the Creator .
JeremiahA40 10 months ago
@JeremiahA40
Forgive me for being evasive here ... I like the direction we are going, but I don't want to go into lecture mode and just spite out all of the conclusion I have come to then try to persuade you I am right.
I would rather persuade you to look a bit more closely. That is why I ask more questions. Not trying to trap you, but hoping for you to find the answers instead of me shoving them down your throat.
When YOU discover it, it becomes yours.
zthustra 10 months ago
@JeremiahA40
bereishit bara 'elohyim et ha'shamayim ve'et ha'aretz
Was anything created? As I read it, the sky (ha'shamayim) and the land (ha'aretz) already existed and the elohyim filled (bara) them at some point in time that was earlier and therefore known to them (reishit), a beginning of sorts, but not the beginning of everything, just the beginning of the filling of the sky and the land or the earliest time know to the author.
zthustra 10 months ago
@zthustra Every article I have read so far translate "bara" as "create," used here as a transitive verb speaking in the past tense with a singular subject. The heavens and the earth would be the direct objects modifying the verb, and since the act of creation took place at the beginning (in the context of Genesis,) then I think it reasonably follows that no pre-existing materials were present when the creation took place. But then again "bara" does not exclude pre-existing material, either.
JeremiahA40 10 months ago
@JeremiahA40
I have a couple of videos to suggest. I did not make them and the man that did is NOT an atheist He is VERY knowledgable of ancient Hebrew.
watch?v=juZSxrPOd2k - Bereshiyt
watch?v=SbcB1puaOyc - Bara
watch?v=D5MRci6d4Mw - Elohiym
watch?v=WWwz-AMGHQc - Et
watch?v=kpaVARyVc9s - HaShamayim
watch?v=yKNPZpEz15U - Ha'arets
You are going to really enjoy these! Jeff Benner makes very entertaining and informative videos.
zthustra 10 months ago
@zthustra Thank you very much for this list of videos. I will do my best to watch them over the next few days and tell you what I thought. And I am sorry but I cannot guarantee how soon I will finish them because I run my own business. But I should be able to view them all this week.
Thanks again.
JeremiahA40 10 months ago
@zthustra I just finished the whole series. I really cannot thank you enough for introducing me to Jeff Benner, his work, and his website. The videos were very interesting and I really felt my lack of knowledge of ancient Hebrew. When I have more coinage in my pocket, I'll invest in some of his books.
No real deep insights here into what Mr. Benner offered in his videos. Other than he's very even-keeled in his analysis and I will study more about "bara."
Thanks again.
JeremiahA40 10 months ago
@JeremiahA40
Enjoy!
Maybe we will meet again on another video discussion thread?
zthustra 10 months ago
@JeremiahA40
We may not be able to personally recognize whether something is true or not true. We may not be able to personally persuade others that what we beleive to be true is, in fact, true. Many true things may lay outside of our knowledge and understanding. But ...
If we are to claim that something is true AND we expect others to believe as we do based upon our claim, we should also be prepared to present factual evidence and rational explaination for our claim.
zthustra 11 months ago
@JeremiahA40
It isn’t about God; it is about words! The definitions should not change each time we use them in a sentence with the word ‘God’.
If it is given to you, it is yours to keep. UNLESS God gives it to you; he may take it back at any time.
If it is yours to use subject to terms and must be returned, it is a conditional loan. UNLESS God loaned it to you; then is an unconditional gift.
If it is taken from you by force and without your consent, it is theft. UNLESS God takes it.
zthustra 11 months ago
@JeremiahA40
Objective morality is whatever you choose to represent it to be which makes it, by definition, subjective.
zthustra 11 months ago
@JeremiahA40
Mary looked her daughter straight in the eye and told her, "Smoking is bad! You must never smoke." Then Mary lit up a cigarette.
Mary's daughter was confused, but Mary said that it was ok for Mommy to smoke because Mommy was the one who made teh rules.
zthustra 11 months ago
@JeremiahA40
We must be wired differently. I cannot imagine why words like "gift", "loan" and "theft" have definitions that are suitable for use when applied to common people, but may be ignored and replaced when applied to royalty or deity.
If you give someone something, it becomes their property. If it can be taken back, it is not a gift. If there are conditions for use and it must be returned, it is a loan. If you take something that belongs to someone else it is theft.
zthustra 11 months ago
@JeremiahA40
Jim was a bully. He was bigger than the other kids. When he told a joke they had to laugh; when he wanted something, they had to give it to him; when he hurt someone, everyone agree that it was justified.
Nobody like Jim, but they were all afraid of him, so nobody ever said anything bad about Jim to him or anyone else. Everyone agreed, Jim was the best, he had a right to take things from others and he was always justified when he hurt someone.
zthustra 11 months ago
I am telling you, I left atheism because it requires a whole lot of faith. Being an atheists requires you to believe in magic--that things us appear without anything causing it to come into existence.
Let alone that, it also requires you to stand up like a moron and speak against the world, moon,Sun, stars etc that they came into Existence without a CREATOR. And magically/blindly And magically/blindly started to accommodating themselves in their respective place...
Windlightesh 1 year ago
@Windlightesh
This user is probably a sock account for Airlightf. This user spams atheist channels with cut and paste ad hominem and has been blocked. I leave these comments up because this is an excellent example of how some people think they are ethical and moral because they believe in a deity but they are rude and dishonest. This is NOT to say that theists are unethical, but rather that belief does not excuse such dishonesty and unethical behavior.
zthustra 1 year ago
"So, did your favorite deity inspire your to say that I was a "brainless kid"?" No. You inspired me to say that. I love to teach a lesson to morons like you :) I lesson that they/you will never forget...You will know and always remember that here I striked your brain :)
Airlightf 1 year ago
@Airlightf
After reading NINETY absurb comments and replies by this user ...
After enduring endless AD HOMINEM attacks ...
After visiting other channels with similar comments and replies posted by this user ...
I decided that he is just a troll and blocked him. My apologies to anyone who takes severe exception to such measures. Simple disagreement is no problem but at some point the trolls have to be turned off.
zthustra 1 year ago
--"'Before God we all are equally wise and equally foolish.' Only two things are infinite, the universe and human spidity and I am not sure about the former.'''--Albert Einstein.
Anyway, you "Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces." :) Wasn't Jesus an awesome friend/man?
Airlightf 1 year ago
If God hated abortion so much, then why doesn't he stop it? He has all the powers in the multiverse, yet he's too lazy.
I personally don't believe in God (Especially not the christian one. That's just ridiculous).
HiLRoYpwns 1 year ago
well this God doesn't take any responsibility and stop it.
MrTabby5000 1 year ago
god isn't real
christians are retards
MykeOkslong 1 year ago
GOD'S LAWS SUSTAIN THE HEAVENS
HIS MIGHTY POWER SHAKES THE Universe;AND TERRIFIES ITS hosts
HIS WORD REMAIN FOREVER IN THE HEAVENS. OUR LORD RULES THE UNIVERSE,THE LAND AND THE GREAT SEAS--HE CREATED THEM.
Airlightf 2 years ago
How are things going here? getting better?
Airlightf 2 years ago
Remember the tree in your back yard? It's doesn't exist. You say it is real and I say it is not 'cause I have not seen it or touch it etc. I tell you, you are hallucinating...This is atheits/ attitude towards us. -You see now the relationship between the tree and arilightf? You and your tree, me and God.
Airlightf 2 years ago
Please don't make this look like a hybrid bear. Acknowledge the fact that God exists and that you are wrong in many things.
Airlightf 2 years ago
@Airlightf
The fact that God exists? Look, I don't want to sound assumptious but as far as I know, there is no proof to any God. The belief in God (Or lack-there-of) is what people choose to think, It's not factual unless there is evidence. I would be astounded if you showed me evidence and proof to an almighty (or a multitude of) God(s). If it were a fact that God existed, there wouldn't be atheists in this world.
HiLRoYpwns 1 year ago
@HiLRoYpwns To you there is no proof and that is moronic because you think that' automatically disproove God's holy Existence. The G Existence is an unacceptable Fact to atheists/agnostics.
Airlightf 1 year ago
@Airlightf
"To you there is no proof and that is moronic because you think that' automatically disproove God's holy Existence" Where did I say it disproves? You're assuming I think that. "The G Existence is an unacceptable Fact to atheists/agnostics." Again, it is not fact but mainly opinion. If you had proof of God, Then you not only have a good reason to believe the existence of it, but then people everywhere would believe it. I'm a truth seeker, not someone who assumes I already found it.
HiLRoYpwns 1 year ago
@HiLRoYpwns It is what it is. And it is an undisputable truth to us who know God.
Airlightf 1 year ago
@Airlightf
Then show me. I've asked for proof three times already. By the way, I think you mean indisputable.
HiLRoYpwns 1 year ago
Comment removed
Airlightf 1 year ago
@Airlightf
Well where is the proof in Creationism? Whatever proof of God you have is good enough.
HiLRoYpwns 1 year ago
Comment removed
Airlightf 1 year ago
@Airlightf But because there is no proof in God there is no proof in creationism. Just like there is no proof in atheism. And I'll gladly and openly accept it. I just find that atheism seems more realistic.
HiLRoYpwns 1 year ago
Comment removed
Airlightf 1 year ago
@Airlightf
undisputable
adjective
not open to question; obviously true
moron
noun
a person who is notably stupid or lacking in good judgment.
It is an "undisputable" fact that the Universe was sneezed out of the nose the Great Green Arkleseizure. It is written in a book and anyone who does not accept this fact is a "moron".
zthustra 1 year ago
@zthustra You are ruining this page. I asked you, What kind of proof do you want? But you are a brainless kid... I don't remember telling you the proof of God Existence was written in a book, idiot! Stop talking crap.
Airlightf 1 year ago
@Airlightf
So, did your favorite deity inspire your to say that I was a "brainless kid"? Your deity is either rude, uninformed or both. If your deity had access to the channel description page he would know that I am niether brainless nor a kid.
Scroll down! We had this discussion nine months ago. I answered your question but you still didn't produce any evidence. "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." ~Christopher Hitchens,
zthustra 1 year ago
@zthustra You don't talk about God with a dog, pig, ape/monkey/ donkey because they will never understand you!!! HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH
Airlightf 1 year ago
Comment removed
Airlightf 1 year ago
@Airlightf
It doesn't matter what kind of proof, if you HAD any, you'd be able to show me. The only Brainless one here is someone who says that god is a fact but if god were a fact then they'd have proof, yet they're not giving me any kind of proof. If they had proof, they'd show me.
HiLRoYpwns 1 year ago
@HiLRoYpwns You cannot stop acting like a moron, hu? What kidn of proof do you want I ask again
Airlightf 1 year ago
@Airlightf
How many times do I have to repeat this?It does NOT matter what kind of proof, if you had ANY whatsoever, You'd SHOW me.
HiLRoYpwns 1 year ago
@HiLRoYpwns
I finally blocked Airlightf from this channel. The guy is a troll. He has posted NINETY comments and replies, many ad homenim, all circular. He does the same things on other channels. Thanks for viewing and posting comments.
zthustra 1 year ago
@zthustra So you block people when you cannot refute them?
ruakh911 1 year ago
@ruakh911
Nope, I block people when I discover that they are nothing but spamming trolls. In over two years I have only blocked four users.
Isn't it funny that I just now noticed that you are reposting EXACTLY the same text over and over again on other YouTube channels? That is what I call spamming and trolling.
Congradulations, you are a troll and have the honor of being number five on my blocked list! Probably just a sock account for Airlightf anyway.
zthustra 1 year ago
@zthustra
Oh wow, ninety :/? Well good thing he's blocked :P.
HiLRoYpwns 1 year ago
@HiLRoYpwns you have nothing to back up your claims that's why you choose the way of ignorance/stubbornness.
Windlightesh 1 year ago
@Windlightesh
I have admitted many of times that I am a truth seeker, not someone who blindly thinks they've already found it. If you think about it, we are all ignorant because there pretty much is no proof f any religion to man. We are ignorant to the origins of life, pretty much everything that starts and ends life, we are ignorant to. Doesn't matter how much faith or lack-there-of we have.
HiLRoYpwns 1 year ago
@HiLRoYpwns What an idiot you are! You ask for proof but u cannot think of what kind of proof, brainless? Troll
ruakh911 1 year ago
@ruakh911
I think the only troll here is you, to be honest. I'm not going to repeat myself :)
HiLRoYpwns 1 year ago
@Airlightf
Oh and btw, the bible was written by man, how am I supposed to trust that they're not just writing a story like the other religions are? Hmm?
HiLRoYpwns 1 year ago
@HiLRoYpwns "Well where is the proof in Creationism? Whatever proof of God you have is good enough" Don't be a hypocrite. That fact that God hasn't proved/showed to you He exists is not my problem. I am a man and not a hypocrite like you. I myself asked G to reveal HIMSELF to me and HE did.
Airlightf 1 year ago
@Airlightf, "I myself asked G to reveal HIMSELF to me and HE did."
Now that is juicy! Tell us all about it. Do you have any witnesses? Did you get a picture? Did He leave fingerprints?
reveal
verb
1. to disclose (a secret); divulge
2. to expose to view or show (something concealed)
From Latin revelare "reveal, uncover, disclose," literally "unveil," from re- "opposite of" + velare "to cover, veil".
Next time He reveals Himself, please post a video to YouTube.
zthustra 1 year ago
@zthustra You said: ". I just find that atheism seems more realistic "
Airlightf 1 year ago
@Airlightf
Nine months latter and the same recycled bullshit!
When you write "Creation" are we meant to read "universe" and assume that it was "created"? Your use of the word "Creation" to describe the universe assumes the conclusion without putting forward any evidence for it.
zthustra 1 year ago
@zthustra You have proved that Your head is full " same recycled bullshit!" as all atheists. HAHAHAHHAHAHA
Airlightf 1 year ago
@HiLRoYpwns Now, the question is, How am I to act/behave before God Almighty?
Airlightf 1 year ago
@Airlightf
However you feel you should I suppose.
HiLRoYpwns 1 year ago
God created the heavens and the great seas with His mighty power.The land is His and everything that is in it belongs to Him. \0/ And the angel of the LORD departed from there.
Airlightf 2 years ago
The Hebrew word "mal'ak" means messenger. The Greek word "angelos" also means messenger. The modern English word "angel" bears no resemblence to its Hebrew and Greek progenitors in the Bible.
Everything here is blah, blah, blah ...
Just assertions, no evidence whatsoever. Have you looked up the word "assertion" so that you can understand why it is important in any disagreement to avoid making assertions and why it is importating to offer evidence for what you post?
zthustra 2 years ago
That's one of the reason we/I don't "pronounce" the Name of GOD or even write it down. Because it would no longer be the "Name of God" if I wrote it down or gave it another pronunciation by translating it into another lenguage. --
LOL. The word angel resembles the word angelos in Greek. What don't resemble are these to words: מלאכ (angel or messanger) and "mal'ak"
Airlightf 2 years ago
Do you ever do any research before you post replies? If you did, you would surely know what the Hebrew word "mal'ak" and the Greek word "angelos" have in common.
DO you think angelos means angel because they sound similar? What about kurios and lord? They don't sound the same and yet, lord is the modern English translation of the Greek word kurios and niether of them sound like the Latin word domeni.
Did you read the PDF? Can you follow the sounds of letters in IOU and YHWH?
zthustra 2 years ago
Based on what my Hebrew teacher taught me, i answered your question.
Airlightf 2 years ago
Nonsense, I asked if you did reasearch before posting replies. Before I post stuff, I check my facts, even when I'm fairly confident.
If you don't periodically check your facts, you may spend the rest of your life as an intellectual victem of what somebody else told you.
A few minutes at BlueLetterBible and Dictionary com is all it takes to check your facts.
I want ot publish much more, but 500 chars is to few and a lot of non-standard charachters won't post.
zthustra 2 years ago
ok why don't you email me all your facts against the subjects we've been talking about?
Airlightf 2 years ago
I don't have any facts that are mine. If I gave you a bunch of information and called it facts and expected you to accept it I would just be making assertions.
Instead, I have given you information and asked you to check the facts elsewhere. I have suggested places to check. I have begged you to check your own assertions to see if they were factual.
Others have already written the books, why whould I need to write another one?
zthustra 2 years ago
What is dancing here is your concept of God. I've been kindda busy but I will keep doing researches.
Airlightf 2 years ago
What nonsense are you saying now? I already told you what מלאכ "mal'ak" means(angel or messanger). Also the word angelos measn angels or messanger. Just like the name Jesus(English) means nothing to me, also the word angel...
Airlightf 2 years ago
Scroll up, the whole reply is nonsense, not just the part about angels.
Also, reread your original comment.
Your use of the phrase, "angel of the LORD" is in the modern context of "one of a class of spiritual beings; a celestial attendant of God" but the Hebrew word simply means "messenger".
The entire comment is a big assertion (have you looked that up yet?) dressed up in flowery words with double-meanings designed to make the unreal appear real.
What does the word "Jesus" mean?
zthustra 2 years ago
The word of the LORD is TRUTH; He who created the world is God. Mighty is my GOD and LORD. HE reigns overall the kingdoms of the earth. He rules the world forever.
Airlightf 2 years ago
More blah, blah, blah ...
Do you think that if you assert something over and over again with sincerity and conviction it will somehow become real and true?
zthustra 2 years ago
I've done my best to explain scriptures and each one of my statements to you. But you are just being rebellious...
Airlightf 2 years ago
I am insisting on actual explainations and real answers to simple questions. You are evasiive. If you aren't sure, scroll down and read the reply by MouseHusic. You have probably been dancing around this stuff for so long now that you don't even realize you are dancing.
zthustra 2 years ago
"There is only one G-d. No other being participated in the work of creation.G-d is a unity. He is a single, whole, complete indivisible entity. He cannot be divided into parts or described by attributes. Any attempt to ascribe attributes to G-d is merely man's imperfect attempt to understand the infinite." (Jewish faith)
Airlightf 2 years ago
Blah, blah, blah ...
These are all assertions. Where is the evidence?
zthustra 2 years ago
I think I've told you this before: Is God didn't exist, all these we see wouldn't exist. Everything that exist, came into existence by the POWER of God. The fact of my existence, is a fact of God's Existence--it proves the Existence of GD.
Airlightf 2 years ago
Please stop now and go look up the definition of the word "assertion".
zthustra 2 years ago
I have said abortion is killing.
Airlightf 2 years ago
" Let us make man in our image....male and female He created them." He and NOT them... Since GOD cannot be seen(with fisical eyes) we say Elohim. But when I say CREATOR, there is no action no motion there.
Airlightf 2 years ago
I'm sorry, but my politeness is at it's end, you are a fool. You are reading an ENGLISH translation of a HEBREW text. Can you get it through your head that the Hebrew text does not say what the English text says?
Do you even realize that all you ever do is make assertions? Are you able to look up the word assertion in a dictionary and grasp what that means?
Vampires can't be seen in mirrors and God can't be seen with natural eyes are both assertions with no basis in reality!
zthustra 2 years ago
Your interpretation of the Hebrew texts is wrong. I clearly explained to you why it is written אֱלֹהִים and יהוה . Calling God a murderer is pure ignorance and I also explained why it is so.
Airlightf 2 years ago
We have morals 'cause God made us with morals and free will. Again, the consecuenses we will always face--there--GOD's judgement and manifestion(s).
Airlightf 2 years ago
If God made Adam and Eve with their morals and gave them their free will, why did God punish Adam and Eve for behaving the way God made them to behave? Shouldn't God take responsibility for His mistakes? Or is this another one of those situations where there is one strict moral standard for humans and a more lenient one for God?
I would love to have some evidence that there are any consequences associated with the so-called judgements of God.
zthustra 2 years ago
For the same reason you get a speed ticked when you are driving 100 mph on the freeway or 55 mph n a residencial neighborhood. Was it your daddy's fault for giving you that car's key? Adam and Eve were already adults...
Airlightf 2 years ago
This analogy sucks!
If God gave me a car that would only travel at 100 MPH and above and told me to drive it, then God put up a speed limit of 55 MPH, I would eithr have to break His commandment to drive the car or break His commandment to drive under 55 MPH.
God, not I, would be responsible for the mess I was in as I attempted to keep all of His commandments.
zthustra 2 years ago
@zthustra Let's say your older son is 25 and he just killed someone(knowing the punnishment) why would you be arrested and go to jail for life?
Airlightf 2 years ago
It is alleged that God gave Adam and Eve their nature when He made them and then God commanded them to do that which was contrary to their nature. God, not Adam and Eve, should be held responsible for the disasterous outcome.
zthustra 2 years ago
Calling God a murderer is a big offence/sin. He gives life to all and He himself takes it away.
Airlightf 2 years ago
If this person you are choosing to call God is offended, let them come forward an lodge their complaint.
You and I both know that isn't going to happen because God is an imaginary person.
But wait! God is NEVER offended enough to come into human view so you will probably have to be offended on His behalf.
If I were you, I would be offended by God because while you speak boldly, He lacks the courage to come out and make himself known.
zthustra 2 years ago
GOD does whatever HE wants to with unborn babies. Humans have no biseness to question GOD about What HE does with HIS creation. Because they are so ignorant ...who do you think will take your life and all other's life, away? GOD!!! Will you dare to call him a "murderer" becuase HE takes away all living creatures lives? No, man you are so blind and....
Airlightf 2 years ago
Your words, "Abortion is a first degree murder."
You have bumped into the Euthyphro Dilema:
1. Is what is moral commanded by God because it is moral?
2. Is it moral because it is commanded by God?
Setting aside the imaginary nature of deity, can an action be immoral when a man does it and moral when a deity does it? Can a perfectly moral deity do what is called immoral when men do it?
zthustra 2 years ago
God made us. And wether we want or NOT, we live under His rules. That doesn't mean we cannot or don't brake His rules. BUT the consecueses we will always face. We can talk and talk, but that will not change God's laws for living things(beings).
Airlightf 2 years ago
GOD is not mention until Creation starts;GOD Existed before Creation that's why the first verse in Geneis reads:"א בְּרֵאשִׁית, בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים, אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם, וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ." If you notice carefully, God(the word) can be plural or singular:"27 And God created man in-His-own image, in the image of God created-He-him; male and female created-He-them. " You need to have a deep understanding about God in oder to get that.
Airlightf 2 years ago
zthustra 2 years ago
I know very well hebrew starts from right to left. I already explained that to you in another comment.
Airlightf 2 years ago
But you don't seem to know that the sky and the land existed before they were filled by the mighty ones.
Your reply is an evasion. You chose to make something tiny into the main point and igrnored the main point all together.
zthustra 2 years ago
Sky is not the word,but HEAVEN(existed before Creation started). I don't know where you got the idea that the land existed before creation. I know your point on the "mighty ones" And I already answer this that it is translated or taken as plurar or singular. Singular when we refer to GOD and plural when we refer to His Acts(He acting) or He-creating and filling the earth and the "sky"
Airlightf 2 years ago
heaven
O.E. heofon "home of God," earlier "sky," possibly from P.Gmc. *khemina- (cf. Low Ger. heben, O.N. himinn, Goth. himins, O.Fris. himul, Du. hemel, Ger. Himmel "heaven, sky"), from PIE base *kem-/*kam- "to cover" (cf. chemise).
What do you know? The modern English word "heaven" used to mean sky. Sky is the most correct translation unless you use heaven on archaic context.
Bronze age authors of Genesis had no idea what outer space or the stars were. The Hebrew root means cover.
zthustra 2 years ago
The word 'elohyim is plural, it can only be read as singular by ignoring the rules of Hebrew language and grammar. But this is one of the most common things done by Christian apologists. Just creat an exception for your favorite belief instead of following the evidence where it leads. The singular form is 'eloah.
zthustra 2 years ago
Before I write too much on verse 27 I will need to do some research. But I have already found multiple errors in the English translation. For example, 'elohyim meaning mighty ones is translated to God meaning the begotten one. Also, bara' meaning filled is translated to created. And, adam is translated here to man and in other places to the proper name Adam, that I really need to dig into. And be-tselem is the image, not His image. You need a deep understanding of Hebrew, not God, to understand.
zthustra 2 years ago
Reading the English versions of the Bible withotu checking the Hebrew is a HUGE problem. People think they are discovering profound things then when they look at the Hebrew text, they discover that the book didn't say the things at all.
Also, you were all excited about your supposed observation of God preexisting the "heaven and the earth". Would you be just as dismayed to discover that light preexists the sun, the moon and stars? I didn't think so! You will have an apology for that too.
zthustra 2 years ago
Before there was anything(before creation of stars, earth etc), there was peace/paradise/Heaven.But suddenly, the vast emptiness and the deep Abyss were terrible shaken by the POWER of GOD and the ELEMENTS started to become visible. -I hope that helps a little bit. BRB
Airlightf 2 years ago
This falls into the category of alledged, imagined or ideal.
Where did you find this in the Bible?
zthustra 2 years ago
Question, do you even read the replies I post here? You just seem to keep skipping around and moving from assertion to assertion without any regard for anything I wrtie.
For example, you were utterly and completely wrong about verse 1 and I demonstrated that clearly. Instead of admitting it and moving forward you just skipped a step left and two steps right and posted another meaningless, unsubstantiated reply.
zthustra 2 years ago
Consider this nonsense that you just posted:
Before there was ANYTHING, there was ...
What? If there wasn't ANYTHING then there wasn't peace, paradise or Heaven, there was NOTHING.
zthustra 2 years ago
I clearly put in parentheses what I meant by anything.
Airlightf 2 years ago
You are going to give me a mental fit!
"Before the creation of the stars, earth, etc." is simply a restatement of "before there was anything".
Do you think there were birds before there was a planet earth or water befere there were suns? The known universe encompasses EVERYTHING. No suns and no planets means no universe means NOTHING.
Context! Our discussion revolves around the so-called "creation". Theoretically NOTHING existed before it was created. So creation = ANYTHING/EVERYTHING.
zthustra 2 years ago
I only know what the world(not our fisical world) looked like before creation started. Tearing down the universe leaves us with nothing to think or talk about. Just like a machine cannot operate without gas, we(humans/our senses) cannot operate.
Airlightf 2 years ago
"The fact of G-d's existence is accepted almost without question. Proof is not needed, and is rarely offered. The Torah begins by stating "In the beginning, G-d created..." It does not tell who G-d is or how He was created.
In general, Judaism views the existence of G-d as a necessary prerequisite for the existence of the universe. The existence of the universe is sufficient proof of the existence of G-d.
"
Airlightf 2 years ago
Ok, now we have another word for your deity, G-d.
Have you read nothing that I posted in other comments? In Hebrew, the first book of the Torah, Bereshit, does NOT mention a beginning, God or anything about created. It says, "In a time past, filled mighty ones ..."
The Jatravartid people believe that the Universe was sneezed out of the nose of a being called the Great Green Arkleseizure.
"What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof." ~Christopher Hitchens
zthustra 2 years ago
Because that's the unpronounceable
Name[NAME] of God[GOD]. Why? For the same reason that we don't want anyone(speacially athiests) to desecrate that which is holy --must remain sacred/holy.
Airlightf 2 years ago
These four letters, יהוה, are usually transliterated from Hebrew as IHVH in Latin, JHWH in German, French and Dutch, and YHWH in English.
The Roman deity whose name is expressed in archaic Latin IOV probably predated and inspired the Hebrew deity whose name is expressed in Aramaic YHWH.
The support for that statement is, as I said in another reply, far to long for the 500 charachter limit.
zthustra 2 years ago
Here is a link to learn more about the nomen tetragrammaton:
home comcast net
/~zthustra
/pdf
/nomen_tetragrammaton pdf
zthustra 2 years ago
Ok let my introduce myself. I am a servant and worshiper of GOD MOST HIGH. And I have studied the bible with Mormons, Jehovas' witnessess, Seventh-day Adventis etc. I actually have like four Jewish bibles and 5 versions of the Holy Quran on my shelve which I studied very hard. Therefore, I don't belong to any religion(I am free).
Airlightf 2 years ago
You belong to none but you are a slave to all. You seem to be afraid that one of them might be right and being unsure you attempt to worship them all.
To be free you must believe as many true things as possible and as few false things as possible, embrace the truth as it is rather than as you wish for it to be, learn to distinguish between that which is imagined, alleged or ideal and that which is actual and real.
zthustra 2 years ago
I don't worship any religion, you know that. You were a slave of the Mormon church BUT NOT ME. GOD is truth and that's why I believe in HIM. What you need is a personal experience with God. BTW I have other books on religions of the world. Have you read Every Man's Talmud by Abraham Cohen ? A Guide for the Perplexed by Moses Maimonides
Airlightf 2 years ago
1. You don't know what the definition of the "religion" is. Even if you are not connected to any particular sect, it does not change the fact that you are religious. At least from our exchanges it appears that way.
2. I was a MEMBER of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, a Mormon. I was a SLAVE to my beliefs, not to the church. You are trying to believe a little of everything and all of nothing. That requires serious mental dexterity.
3. The phrase "GOD is truth" is irrational.
zthustra 2 years ago
I have more Bibles in my house than you have in yours ... nanny, nanny, boo, boo.
I also have a couple Qurans, the Bhagavad Gita, the Lost Books of the Bible, the Apocrapha, the Gnostic Texts, several books with Dead Sea Scroll translations in them, and The Red Man's Religion.
So what?
Go to BlueLetterBible com and look up stuff. You will have instant access to Strong's Concordance, lexicons, Hebrew and Greek, and many versions.
zthustra 2 years ago
thank you for the URL. I will check it out.
Airlightf 2 years ago
How is it possible for a person to be so well studied and to be unfamiliar with the words in the books? You don't seem to comprehend that god, God and GOD depending on context mean at least six different things. You study Jewish Bibles but you don't seem to understand the difference between 'elohyim and Yehovah.
You study the Quran? I've read it, but I haven't wasted any time studying it. I've got all I can do to educate Christians, I don't have time to educate Muslims too.
zthustra 2 years ago
I did study the Torah.Here is where יהוה is first mentioned: "ד אֵלֶּה תוֹלְדוֹת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְהָאָרֶץ, בְּהִבָּרְאָם: בְּיוֹם, עֲשׂוֹת יְהוָה אֱלֹהִים--אֶרֶץ וְשָׁמָיִם...day that the LORD God made earth and heaven." If you notice, אֱלֹהִים and(yahovah) יְהוָה is the same Name(s) for-Him-that created...
Airlightf 2 years ago
zthustra 2 years ago
What is your name? Ok, your name is_________. But I call you zthustra 'cause I don't know your name and because that's what you choose people to call you here or that's the nickname by which "you" wished to be known on youtube...Samething with the Names, titles and usernames that we, humans, apply to God, GOD or YHWH...
Airlightf 2 years ago
I don't think you understand why I keep asking. Have you taken the time to look up any or all of those names and words?
I haven't been able to pin you down on whether or not your beliefs are based on a study of the Bible. You are evasive about that.
Christians frequently use words like god, God, GOD, LORD, Creator, Almighty and even Jesus Christ, Heavenly Father and Holy Ghost as if they were synonyms.
Each word has meaning in context with the Bible and you are butchering them all.
zthustra 2 years ago
god in modern English can be any supernatural being worthy of worship.
God in modern English is the supreme deity, usually the monotheistic detiy and the creator, especially the Christian deity.
God is from Goth and means begotten one.
God in the New Testament is theos meaning shinning one, especially from the sky.
God in the Old Testament is 'el, 'eloah or 'elohyim meaning mighty one(s).
GOD in the Old Testsament is Yehovah, the supreme deity, 'el elyown, the highest mighty one.
zthustra 2 years ago
Most High God from the Old Testament is mighty warrior.
God Almighty from the Old Testament is mighty destroyer.
Creator in the New Testament is the founder of a city or town.
Creating in the Old Testament is filling.
The modern Creator is a deistic invention. Deists did not believe in the Bible's god, God or GOD. They were agnostic but they believed in a Creator.
Each time you use a different word to describe your deity, I get a different and conflicting image of what you mean.
zthustra 2 years ago
I use different titles or Names for GOD because of HIS different or many faces/manifestations in my life or the life of others:THE CREATOR, GOD Alimighty, The Divine(The HOLY ONE), GOD MOST HIGH... depends on how He manifests Himself, I use those titles/Names.
Airlightf 2 years ago
You have given me no reason to believe that you have any idea what the words you use for your deity mean.
Another example is "The Divine (The HOLY ONE)". Do you have any idea what the word divine means or where its etymological roots come from? How about holy one? What does the word holy mean and where did you get that word? What do the two phrases have in common?
You obviously aren't paying any attention to anything I post! You are never going to look up anything.
Look up "manifest".
zthustra 2 years ago
God is NOT a criminal or a thief. LOL
Airlightf 2 years ago