As for graven images, some think the children knew well that the Golden Calf was not actually the god Baal, just a symbol to help them focus on Baal. The old prophets of Yahweh were keen to deride and mock the pagans among them, just as the early Christian churches turned celtic gods into devils, etc.
@swokrams58 I deny the existence of ALL gods, not because I don't like them, but for lack of evidence of their existence. Your god, or at least the fictional character in your holy book, is only the most familiar to me, because I grew up with that myth.
@AndrewPPalmer Well, Mr. Palmer, at east you spelled "you're" correctly. What a refreshing change from the comments I get from so many for whom English is supposed to be their native tongue. I'm not sure I can agree with your assessment, however. I may have a different opinion from yours, but how does that make me pathetic? Can you explain? "You're pathetic" is hardly an argument. Actually it's more like verbal abuse. Suppose you tell us what you mean.
There are two types of athiest larry... the satanic athiest who drink in the wrath of God. and those that doubt God exsist. Its obvious what you are. There is no doubt that this is the time of Great Tribulation. The end of this period just before Christ returns ... there will be great signs in the sky. When you and the other doubters see this you will be on your knees....and God will forgive all of you, because you are all gonna be really real. bigger than Spielberg Larry.
@2138Countryman You mean signs like "JESUS SAVES at Chase Bank" ? I assure you I won't be on my knees. I have arthritis in both of them, and if I COULD get down on them, I couldn't get back up.
Christians who accept evolution may have a problem with commandment number four. Yahweh says that he created the heavens and earth in six literal days. The analogy makes no sense otherwise.
U forgot 2 imporant things 1st not all who left with the Hebrew people were Hebrew Shemoth/Exodus 12:37-38 & 2nd Shemoth/Ex 12:49. Actualy it begines in v.2 as 2 the 2nd C. that also includes the fish embolim and the cross.#3 the origianel term is meaningless. Which most of all christians R guilty of.
GOD is not religion and for sure NOT the VATICAN, the LORD JESUS says you have been LARGELY HURT, so HE waiting for you to ask HIM about these things that has damaged you, to think HE is to blame.
"Out of context" is the most frequent - and false - charge christians make against anything they don't like. I examined the commandments in Exodus 20 entirely in the context of what they said. I described what I thought they meant. Apparently you disagree. That's your privilege.
Thank you for being mature. Yet I had already seen that you were. I do see how you mildly leave things in context but you do also mildly take things out of context to support your belief in it's meaning. I appreciate the calmness you show and I admire your intelligence. Yet the whole reason why people get so confused with the concept of God and the Bible is because they are thinking intellectually. God is supernatural and Way bigger than anything anyone can know of. That is why Faith is Needed.
I apologize for some jerk that marked your above comment as spam. I marked it "not spam" 3 times. As for "out of context" it's exactly what your pastor does when he says, "we shall consider today Matthew 18." When you discuss a book full of individual instructive passages it is necessary to look at one at a time. Really "out of context" only means deliberately using words disassociated from their surroundings in order to distort their meaning. I did not - and do not do that, mildly or otherwise.
It's ok I realize the position of the person that did that. He feels offended because I don't believe the same as him. I give you that definition of "out of context" But I didn't mean it that way. I'm sorry for not using the right choice of words. What I meant was when you take one part of the bible and sort of justify your understanding of another part of the Bible with it.
You still don't understand. Have you ever sat through a sermon in church? That is exactly what the minister does. He skips all over the bible to illustrate or amplify a point. I do exactly the same thing, only my interpretation may be different from what you are used to. If that bothers you, go somewhere else.
I'm tired of this argument -- it's not like The Bible has some accompanying text that defines every passage's definition. That would be silly. Of course you can't ask for something like that, but the verses SHOULD be written well-enough so that the definition is clear, but that isn't the case. The context apologists assume is the most positive one, but often-times its fairly clear that the first obvious definition isn't so positive.
For the word of god, The Bible is poorly written.
Largo64, your experience has not teach you that whenever you start with false premisses and assumptions, your conclusions are more likely to be false by virtue of a fallacious reasoning or syllogism.
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus. 21The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen"
I'm sorry you don't feel that God is real. Though you do have a since of moral beliefs and understand that they are true. I just think that taking things out of context like you do, is not right and it does contradict if you take it out of context. It says in the Bible at the very last part
It is regrettable that that people who call themselves Christians act the way you describe. It pains me. I can understand perfectly how people are disgusted and with much of what they see - or hear, as is the case in in your personal story. But the saddest part of it all is that the egregious behavior of some prevents people from truly finding a relationship with God.
It wasn't just getting away from hypocritical Christians. My reading of the Bible took me to a whole different place from where your reading took you. Our understanding of justice is entirely different. I think there is some kind of good and evil, positive and negative, but that it is not "given" by any deity. Somehow good and evil are human qualities. Everything else in nature seems entirely indifferent to suffering. Humans' so called moral sense is the source of both joy and pain.
You evidently enjoy misrepresenting God's Holy Word. Do not listen or take seriously what this man states. He is not speaking the truth, read the Bible for yourself!!
Exactly. Read it for yourself, and don't let some pastor (that means driver of sheep) tell you what it means.
If you read the bible as a book, and not as "God's Holy Word" you may begin to see what it actually says. Then apply that understanding to your own sense of what is right. As long as you are told what you are to believe it means you will never discover the truth.
Largo, "pastor" doesn't mean driver of sheep in the context of the Middle East in biblical times - or this time either. A pastor or shepherd led his sheep. A cowboys drives cattle, but a shepherd leads. That means a pastor goes before the sheep. I have been a pastor, and for me that meant leading people into the faith that I had myself experienced.
Herder then, if you like that word better. As a pastor you "lead" your sheeple, and tell them what to think. When the bible first became available in vernacular and printed cheaply enough that many people could afford them, the church was in a panic. Even today, the Catholic Church doesn't encourage bible reading on the part of its members. They overestimated the laity. Far more people own bibles than read them. That's why so many are shocked to actually read of the genocides in the OT.
Largo: "Far more people own bibles than read them. "
Sadly, that is true. But that is not because they aren't encouraged to read. In the churches where I have been, through the Bible reading is encouraged, and many do read. On my part, I now teach the Old Testament to 50 + high schoolers each year. I intentionally have them read and think through the passages and issues you point to. I find that most have already done so, and have done so critically. They are not unaware of the Bible.
In fact, I'd say many of the young people I work with have much better skills of critical thinking and a better understanding of hermeneutics than I see in these videos. So, in my experience, your argument that Christians are biblically illiterate is simply unproven.
BTW, lots of people own Bibles who are not Christians. I'd guess that you are one of those. :)
You are correct there. I was brought up in a Christian household and indoctrinated from babyhood by my grandfather, who was an evangelist. But a break from the church came about when I was 13. I saw the way all those Christians behaved toward my mother and our family, and the chisel of doubt began to chip at the walls of dogma. It took a lot of years to demolish the walls completely, but I succeeded. Now I hope to offer a sledge hammer to others who wish to escape.
I do not mean to be disrespectful, and I truly don't mean to be rude. But I must say that I'm surprised how much you don't understand. However, you ask fair questions that any young person trying to gain understanding would ask.
I can answer all or your questions. If you are willing.
May I ask, you said "Hebrews were allowed to worship others as longs as the IAM was first. I disagree, where did you find that?
Where were Hebrews specifically allowed or approved to worship others?
I don't need you to hold my hand, nor explain to me what I can read for myself. No disrespect? Condescension then. You understand and I don't. You interpret the words as you will. So do I. I don't expect you to agree, but I'm not a youngster unacquainted with this book. Thanks anyway.
It says (paraphrase) "You (my people) are to hold no other gods ahead of me." It does not say "I am the only god." It only tells the Hebrews that the I Am is THEIR god, and they are HIS people.
You are going to get what you choose. If you choose God, you will get him and and Life. If you choose to reject God, you will get an eternity without him. (II Thessalonians 1:8-10.) So choose Life. That is God's desire. That is why he has spoken into history. That is why he sent Jesus his Son to demonstrate in time and space God's love for you and his desire to save you from yourself.
granted campdon this is an old comment you made, but as i am just seeing it, i will respond. Can't you people, and by you people i mean Christians, ever debate over religion without quoting scripture and general proselytizing? The bible is true because it says it is true is not, never has been, and never will be sufficient for debate.
Yes. It is an old comment. But as I listened to the video again, it seems that Largo64 is doing a lot of quoting from the Bible. And that seems reasonable since that is the topic. It is not that we were discussing religion; we were discussing what the Bible says.
Perhaps, though it is possible to discuss the Bible as literature. And it is great literature. And it is possible to discuss it as history. In which case religion would be part of history. But my preference is to discuss it as God's message to us with the purpose of reestablishing a personal relationship with him lost by sin. That seems much more practical to me.
It is also the critical need of people in general through all generations.
Largo64's basic assumptions do not allow him to understand what he is reading. He is thinking as a man, a man who wants to play god, as I suppose we are all inclined to do. The fact is, every last one of us, man woman and child, belong to God. It is by his will and mercy that we live. We have no "right" to life. Sorry if that offends you, it is simply the position of the Bible. If God chooses to end life, it is his prerogative to do so. But you asked about murder. See follow up.
If is God's right to end life, that still begs the question: Is God just in doing so? I suggest that he is. In the texts Largo64 refers to in the other video the people had an opportunity to surrender to God. Rahab in Jericho, for example, did so and was saved. The others dug in their heals and fought God. If that had been allowed to continue the result would have been spiritual anarchy and eternal harm to many. God chose not to allow that to continue. I think God was just.
Rahab in Jericho was saved because she hid some Hebrew spies. The point is made in the bible because she was "an harlot," that is, a prostitute, who would be expected otherwise to be condemned. Wasn't that good of god not to kill her, or anyone else in her house. Think what you will, might does NOT make right. If god exists and is as described in the bible, he is not just. If power is the only thing that counts, why even worry about justice?
Rahab was saved because she believed, or so says the Bible in Hebrews 11:31, and the others were not because they did not believe. Now, "believe" in the Bible means believe to the point of acting on it, not merely intellectual agreement. The people of Jericho did believe to that extent and were rightly afraid. Rahab believd in God and placed herself in his care - at considerable danger to herself, I might add. BTW God woulod be just in condemning us all. His mercy is what impresses me.
Well now you can feel really good, because you as a believer will be saved while I as a non-believer will go to hell. That's really al it takes isn't it? Deny your brain and be rewarded. With an eternity with HIM. No thanks.
Largo, I don't feel good at all about you or anyone not being saved. And neither does God. II Peter 3:9 says that he is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance. But he respects you too much to force you. It remains your choice. BTW I confess that I don't have much faith. Not enough to believe that the universe and you and I are the highly improbable products of chance. I bow to your superiority at that point.
Of course I think "as a man," just as you do. The difference is that I actually think independently, while your thought is clouded by the assumption that everything in the bible is true and correct. You can believe some god owns you if it makes you feel good. But when you die, you will be exactly the same worm food everyone else who preceded you has been.
Is the validity and goodness of the commandments invalidated by the failure of people to obey it? That seems like a logical fallacy. Rather they are validated by those who do obey them and experience the blessing, don't you think? You are, however, right that the commandments were given to Israel. Keeping them was the condition of their remaining in the land. Nevertheless, most who have lived by them attest to the blessing received when they did so. I'll certainly attest to that.
Most people who say what you say agree that the only commandments really worth keeping and living by are the ones concerning stealing, cheating and murder. But religion has never had a problem with murder, has it? Just watch Largo's video Re: The Bible's Dirty Little Secret.
Murder is the usurping of of God's prerogative. It is not our right to take another life unlawfully. So far Largo64 has not referred to any place in the Bible where that is sanctioned. There are, of course, many places where it is reported, but that does not mean it is approved by God. That is the difference between what is called a descriptive text and a prescriptive text.
Is the validity and goodness of the commandment invalidated by the failure of people to obey it? I think not.
so, as long as you kill in the name of god, with his imaginary blessing to do so, it's okay to commit bloody massacres and infanticide? Gotcha, won't let you into my house.
The irony in all this is that you and I will both die. So it is a moot point. No one will have to break into your house - or mine - for that to happen. The reality is that the wages of sin is death. But the good news is that the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ. (Rom. 6:23) God is not in the murdering business, despite what Largo64 would have you believe. God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked, now or ever. As for the believer, death holds no threat.
also, he is not jealous. Side-note: sarcasm. Your points are ineffective, as you don't provide any proof for your claims whatsoever. And Largo is just quoting the bible word-for-word, he isn't having me believe anything. That's the beauty of having proof. You don't need to resort to such neanderthal concepts as blind belief.
Gabberis, I think of jealous as a positive characteristic. It is actually one of the names of God (Exodus 34:14) It has the same meaning we would have if we said we were jealous of our child's safety. BTW I am not trying to prove anything. I am correcting misinformation about what the Bible says about God.
But on the topic of proof, no fundamental assumption about the nature of reality is subject to proof. You can offer no evidence for a purely material reality. You believe it - blindly.
ha ha! I laughed so hard when the commendment said something about not working on sundays, including thy stranger in thy gate. I have a stranger in my gate? 0_0
Wasn't jealousy a sin? I was wondering, if god is a jealous god, that would make him a hypocrite because he is a sinner himself. So shouldn't he be in hell or purgatory for that? But the only person talking about sinners going to hell was his own son. There is no hell with eternal torture in the old testament...
If the Harry Potter saga would be written 2000 years ago, would people be believing that as truth too? I think so. People think: The older, the truer.
yes, Envy is one of the 7 sins. What's interesting is that Wrath is also one of the 7, but the "Wrath" of god is referred to constantly by people, and I certainly don't doubt it's referred to in the bible as well.
Hmm, I didn't know that! Yep, upon doing a bit of research, (Good 'ol Wikipedia!) it turns out that yes, the ideas of those particular seven sins being "THE Seven Sins", were apparently written about by some 4th Century Monk (Who actually had 8 listed, with 'Discouragement' being the missing one), and eventually adopted officially by Pope Gregory I. Anyway I was just saying that I find it Ironic that God himself shows many of those traits at many times =p Thanks for the history lesson! lol
According to many biologists for species the best way to tell if species naturally monogamous or polygamous is the size of the male testicles compared to the body size. In great apes Gorillas have the smallest and Bonobos have the largest. Humans are closer in testicle size Bonobos the Gorillas. Also we are one of the few animal that mate out of season. So I think it is safe to say adultery is in human nature.
It may very well be in human nature, as you say, but with or without a commandment I think it's a bad idea. I think it's fair to say that someone always gets hurt. That alone is enough to proscribe it. Losing half your stuff seems like a fair punishment. Stoning is a little over the top!
"Do unto others as they would have you do unto them" seems generally more pleasant, but "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is much more practical.
Exactly! Throughout my life, my parents have lied to me, manipulated me, and emotionally abused me. They deserve every bad thing that comes their way.
Whoever marked this comment by bowlingball out as spam, STOP IT! Nobody shoyuld even be able to mark spam on someone else's video. It;s none of your damn business! Anyway, what was wrong with the statement? I liked it, and it's MY video. Edit your own!
I just got done reading a book called God Is NOT Great.
Personally I do not understand why people cling to the ten commandments when the first several are all about a petty god that is fiercely insecure. If he was so self aware he would have not needed reminding that he was the only god (considering that he created all - which I assume means he did NOT create other gods). With that in mind he could have sat back and chuckled and his quaint creation when they wanted to worship the sun or moon.
DEut 8:9 "If you ever forget the LORD your God and follow other gods and worship and bow down to them, I testify against you today that you will surely be destroyed."
Also, of course, he's acknowledging the existence of others - again! He threatens those who worship others, but never says there are no others. By the way, who's he talking to when he says "Let US make man in OUR image."? To whom is the serpent referring when he says to Eve, "He knows you will be AS GODS, knowing good and evil."? Not very precise language if the author intends to say only one god exists.
Obviously God the Father, Jesus the Son and the Holy Spirit. It actually helps support the story in the New Testament much better that he said it that way. The Bible hints at a lot of mysterious things. Where did all these angels come from? Where did Satan come from? I can't rule out a more compllicated situation than we know existing.
You do know that when King James ordered his scribes to translate the bible from latin (which had been translated from hebrew) he made them leave out some things and change quite a bit of the original text.
Why is it obvious? The trinity is not universally believed except by the universal (Catholic) church. Why is it assumed by some that Genesis speaks of Adam metaphorically as human KIND, but god is not also godKind? I'm not saying here that I believe in many gods any more than in one. I'm just pointing out a possible explanation.
"trinity is not universally believed ... by (Catholic) church"
Most Protestant churches I am aware of believe in some form of Trinity, even if they use 3 in 1 type of language. I mean they believe in Jesus, he is praying to someone in the garden before he is crucified. Whoever that is along wih Jesus could be the "we" in that verse. But since there is some powerful entity like Satan, I can't discount there aren't similar entities we are now unaware of that might be described as minor gods.
I'm not a bible believer myself, but it seems to me that only apologists can twist it to the extent that you can have only one god and three entities at the same time. It is unreasonable, illogical and, to my mind, impossible. Christians always want to have it both ways. I don't think it can be done. My grandfather, who really tried, even invented a word for it. A "uni-plural," he said. How's that for a twist! Chubby Checker would be proud!
"same time. It is unreasonable, illogical and, to my mind, impossible"
The Trinity certainly is one of the more difficult Christian concepts. But we accept water, ice and steam all being the same thing in one context and different in another. We accept Miami being in Dade County, and in Florida and in the U.S.A, so how can it be in all three places at the same time? Are Florida and the U.S.A exactly the same thing? No, so how can Miami be in both places if they aren't the same?
Florida, Dade County and Miami are three entities sharing space not one entity with three titles. The trinitarian god is supposed to be only one god, but able to be in three places at the same time, and asking itself why it has forsaken itself. A father and a son are two beings, not one.
"Florida, Dade County and Miami are three entities sharing space..."
This gets just semantical at some point. Miami, Florida and Dade County are doing more than just sharing space, like I will take it on Monday and you Tuesday. They are in exactly the same space at the same time and are exactly the same space to the extent it is in Miami. Yet the city council can write or call the governor. I doubt Star Trek fans who accept the Borg or vulcan mind melds have to much trouble with this.
Semantics is all you have. The Christian religion is supposed to be MONO-theistic. ONE god, not three. I was not applauding my grandfather's word "uni-plural," I was mocking it. It is nonsense. And so is the trinity. Hey, I don't believe in even one god. I'm just saying that christians like to twist the language to mean what it can't.
"Christian religion is supposed to be MONO-theistic."
Why? The NT makes pretty clear that Jesus is devine, and that he had a father who is too. If you count them as seperately, then it is polytheistic. If you count them together then monotheistic. Does it really matter which label applies?
Guess you are not a Christian or perhaps never were. Of course it matters to them. Judaism, Christianity and Islam are the three great monotheistic religions. Ask one of their believers if it matters. The Christians, however, insist that their three gods are really only one, who can be everywhere at once, but needed to become mortal (while immortal) and die, though death to an immortal being is impossible by definition. Then, though dead, it resurrected itself. The mind boggles!
I don't doubt that it deems like good news to you, Mtur1n. You're not much into math, biology or semantics are you! But who needs knowledge when he has faith?
I love math! So did Isaac Newton and so many of the Christian mathematicians who study math to see God's handiwork. Math could help you with the trinity. Even in basic algebra you learn the concept of a "variable". A variable can be both 3 and 1 and a bunch of other numbers all at the same time. If you have trouble with that, you will really have trouble with imaginary numbers like "i". You laugh at God as imaginary, yet right there in math are imaginary numbers.
It was a flippant remark. For all I know you are a mathematician. But having one being in three but still only one is far fetched to my way of thinking. Now you can make fun of "my way of thinking." Get it over with. You will tire of this eventually. And you will still be wrong.
You should think about math a bit more, about variables and imaginery numbers. Then consider, if there were a true devinbe, all-powerful creator, why couldn't he pull off being 3 in 1?
Trinity is a made-up word that isn't used in the Bible. Unfortunately, it mainly serves to confuse people like Largo. Their relationship is what it is. Close or intertwined in a way that we may not understand.
"Trinity is a made-up word that isn't used in the Bible."
So what if it's not in the Bible, it's just a mere reference word, nothing more.
"Their relationship is what it is. Close or intertwined in a way that we may not understand."
Here is what Sir Issac Newton wrote:
"It is the temper of the hot and superstitious art of mankind in matters of religion ever to be fond of mysteries, and for that reason to like best what they understand least."
So what if it's not in the Bible, it's just a mere reference word, nothing more"
making up words like "Rapture" or "Trinity" or "Original Sin" or "Omniscience" is counterproductive, as people soon imbue the words with characteristcis and meanings and the like that aren't in the Bible. These "reference words" or "short-cut words" are bad ideas to use, if for no other reason that the listener probably has a different understanding of them than you do.
I don't have all the information I would need to know whether Yahweh has all those characteristics or not. So I don't know. So when you use "universal or complete knowledge" does that mean all knowledge known? Or is it all knowledge that it is possible to know at this time? Or is it all knowledge that is ever possible to know? Or does it include knowledge that is impossible to know? Because I have seen different YT posters take all 4 of those positions. Thus it doesn't seem a useful word to me.
The importance of the Bible is just it tells the good news of Jesus life and his sacrifice for you. Plenty of people have become Christians without ever having seen a Bible in their lifetimes. The important concepts are pretty simple and can easily be taught. If you want to know more about Jesus, the Bible is a good source. I am not sure about what you mean by it being "God's revelation to man". It isn't a complicated revelation of some secret. It is the good news about Jesus in banner headlines
"I am not sure about what you mean by it being God's revelation to man" - Matur1n
That which is revealed by God to man...the gospel of Jesus included. What evidence do you have to show that it's all true and not something that was just made up?
ha ha! i, I miss that. Well i is a concept, it's just to solve problems, but you can't really give it a physical form and say god is in that form.
It's a theory, a very helpful one, but it's like a thought experiment, like a frictionless surface. A lot of the conceptual theories needs to be modified for actual applications (I hear all the calculus u learn right now will be useless in practical work :P), it's not realistic to link imaginary numbers to reality.
Yeah, that's still not saying that there aren't other gods. It's just saying that you shouldn't worship the other ones, which implies that HE thinks there are other ones. Thanks for trying though. I remember that one. It just doesn't say, "Hey, the other gods are imaginary."
Plus the jesus character in the bible has said nothing that was not said, or implied by others in the past. An example: every culture has learned without the help of an imaginary god character; Confucius golden rule: never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself" (ca. 551-479 BC) which as you can see by the date was stolen/plagiarized by many religions, and/or gods hundreds of years later.
Actually, I have been noticing that a lot of older videos have the same audio problem you experienced. I have counted three this week alone that have had the audio come out as unbearable electronic sounding shrieks and screeching. Something is up with YouTube apparently.
It may be some bandwidth problem. Or perhaps all their "site maintenance" has disturbed some of what;s already there. I hope I haven't lost too much other stuff. Now that I think of it, though, there are some I wish I hadn't posted to start with!
Treat others the way they want to be treated. If you yourself are a masochist, it doesn't mean you should beat other people up simply because you like being beaten.
This is kind of splitting hairs, because if you followed either rule you'd be better off than we are mostly today.
It's a good point, but it works the other way, too. You wouldn't want to abuse another who was a masochist either. That's why I suggested that the rule be posted and discussed in classrooms. Bright kids will pick up on a flaw like that and discussing it is good for everyone.
If you did abuse someone who was masochistic, you would yourself be an abuser. A masochist is mentally sick. You still would not want to be abused yourself, so you would still be wrong.
As for graven images, some think the children knew well that the Golden Calf was not actually the god Baal, just a symbol to help them focus on Baal. The old prophets of Yahweh were keen to deride and mock the pagans among them, just as the early Christian churches turned celtic gods into devils, etc.
outofthegreenmist 9 months ago
@outofthegreenmist I meant the children of Israel. I was momentarily distracted and forgot to finish that part of the first sentence.
outofthegreenmist 9 months ago
@swokrams58 I deny the existence of ALL gods, not because I don't like them, but for lack of evidence of their existence. Your god, or at least the fictional character in your holy book, is only the most familiar to me, because I grew up with that myth.
Largo64 10 months ago
You're pathetic.
AndrewPPalmer 1 year ago
@AndrewPPalmer Well, Mr. Palmer, at east you spelled "you're" correctly. What a refreshing change from the comments I get from so many for whom English is supposed to be their native tongue. I'm not sure I can agree with your assessment, however. I may have a different opinion from yours, but how does that make me pathetic? Can you explain? "You're pathetic" is hardly an argument. Actually it's more like verbal abuse. Suppose you tell us what you mean.
Largo64 1 year ago
Hello-I enjoy your videos and find them quite informative..thank you for posting
1steve726 1 year ago
There are two types of athiest larry... the satanic athiest who drink in the wrath of God. and those that doubt God exsist. Its obvious what you are. There is no doubt that this is the time of Great Tribulation. The end of this period just before Christ returns ... there will be great signs in the sky. When you and the other doubters see this you will be on your knees....and God will forgive all of you, because you are all gonna be really real. bigger than Spielberg Larry.
2138Countryman 1 year ago
@2138Countryman You mean signs like "JESUS SAVES at Chase Bank" ? I assure you I won't be on my knees. I have arthritis in both of them, and if I COULD get down on them, I couldn't get back up.
Largo64 1 year ago
Christians who accept evolution may have a problem with commandment number four. Yahweh says that he created the heavens and earth in six literal days. The analogy makes no sense otherwise.
chrisnu 1 year ago
The ten commandments comes from the book of the dead, Look it up!
ironpeter2081 2 years ago
U forgot 2 imporant things 1st not all who left with the Hebrew people were Hebrew Shemoth/Exodus 12:37-38 & 2nd Shemoth/Ex 12:49. Actualy it begines in v.2 as 2 the 2nd C. that also includes the fish embolim and the cross.#3 the origianel term is meaningless. Which most of all christians R guilty of.
yisrael712 2 years ago
GOD is not religion and for sure NOT the VATICAN, the LORD JESUS says you have been LARGELY HURT, so HE waiting for you to ask HIM about these things that has damaged you, to think HE is to blame.
7clay 2 years ago
Glad to find your work. :)
5*/Fave
Keep up the good work, friend. :D
RabidPetRock 2 years ago
and I'm sorry to hear that you take away from it's words by taking them out of context.
flarawr 2 years ago
"Out of context" is the most frequent - and false - charge christians make against anything they don't like. I examined the commandments in Exodus 20 entirely in the context of what they said. I described what I thought they meant. Apparently you disagree. That's your privilege.
Largo64 2 years ago
Comment removed
flarawr 2 years ago
Thank you for being mature. Yet I had already seen that you were. I do see how you mildly leave things in context but you do also mildly take things out of context to support your belief in it's meaning. I appreciate the calmness you show and I admire your intelligence. Yet the whole reason why people get so confused with the concept of God and the Bible is because they are thinking intellectually. God is supernatural and Way bigger than anything anyone can know of. That is why Faith is Needed.
flarawr 2 years ago
I apologize for some jerk that marked your above comment as spam. I marked it "not spam" 3 times. As for "out of context" it's exactly what your pastor does when he says, "we shall consider today Matthew 18." When you discuss a book full of individual instructive passages it is necessary to look at one at a time. Really "out of context" only means deliberately using words disassociated from their surroundings in order to distort their meaning. I did not - and do not do that, mildly or otherwise.
Largo64 2 years ago
It's ok I realize the position of the person that did that. He feels offended because I don't believe the same as him. I give you that definition of "out of context" But I didn't mean it that way. I'm sorry for not using the right choice of words. What I meant was when you take one part of the bible and sort of justify your understanding of another part of the Bible with it.
flarawr 2 years ago
You still don't understand. Have you ever sat through a sermon in church? That is exactly what the minister does. He skips all over the bible to illustrate or amplify a point. I do exactly the same thing, only my interpretation may be different from what you are used to. If that bothers you, go somewhere else.
Largo64 2 years ago
Yes and I don't go to church. I sit at home and read the bible. I don't think that that is right for Them to do that either.
flarawr 2 years ago
Absolutely.
I'm tired of this argument -- it's not like The Bible has some accompanying text that defines every passage's definition. That would be silly. Of course you can't ask for something like that, but the verses SHOULD be written well-enough so that the definition is clear, but that isn't the case. The context apologists assume is the most positive one, but often-times its fairly clear that the first obvious definition isn't so positive.
For the word of god, The Bible is poorly written.
iamericwhite 2 years ago
Largo64, your experience has not teach you that whenever you start with false premisses and assumptions, your conclusions are more likely to be false by virtue of a fallacious reasoning or syllogism.
flypejose 2 years ago
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus. 21The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen"
flarawr 2 years ago
I didn't take away anything. I just defined what's there.
Largo64 2 years ago
I'm sorry you don't feel that God is real. Though you do have a since of moral beliefs and understand that they are true. I just think that taking things out of context like you do, is not right and it does contradict if you take it out of context. It says in the Bible at the very last part
flarawr 2 years ago
It is regrettable that that people who call themselves Christians act the way you describe. It pains me. I can understand perfectly how people are disgusted and with much of what they see - or hear, as is the case in in your personal story. But the saddest part of it all is that the egregious behavior of some prevents people from truly finding a relationship with God.
campdon 3 years ago
It wasn't just getting away from hypocritical Christians. My reading of the Bible took me to a whole different place from where your reading took you. Our understanding of justice is entirely different. I think there is some kind of good and evil, positive and negative, but that it is not "given" by any deity. Somehow good and evil are human qualities. Everything else in nature seems entirely indifferent to suffering. Humans' so called moral sense is the source of both joy and pain.
Largo64 3 years ago
You evidently enjoy misrepresenting God's Holy Word. Do not listen or take seriously what this man states. He is not speaking the truth, read the Bible for yourself!!
mpebv 3 years ago
Exactly. Read it for yourself, and don't let some pastor (that means driver of sheep) tell you what it means.
If you read the bible as a book, and not as "God's Holy Word" you may begin to see what it actually says. Then apply that understanding to your own sense of what is right. As long as you are told what you are to believe it means you will never discover the truth.
Largo64 3 years ago
Largo, "pastor" doesn't mean driver of sheep in the context of the Middle East in biblical times - or this time either. A pastor or shepherd led his sheep. A cowboys drives cattle, but a shepherd leads. That means a pastor goes before the sheep. I have been a pastor, and for me that meant leading people into the faith that I had myself experienced.
campdon 3 years ago
Herder then, if you like that word better. As a pastor you "lead" your sheeple, and tell them what to think. When the bible first became available in vernacular and printed cheaply enough that many people could afford them, the church was in a panic. Even today, the Catholic Church doesn't encourage bible reading on the part of its members. They overestimated the laity. Far more people own bibles than read them. That's why so many are shocked to actually read of the genocides in the OT.
Largo64 3 years ago
Largo: "Far more people own bibles than read them. "
Sadly, that is true. But that is not because they aren't encouraged to read. In the churches where I have been, through the Bible reading is encouraged, and many do read. On my part, I now teach the Old Testament to 50 + high schoolers each year. I intentionally have them read and think through the passages and issues you point to. I find that most have already done so, and have done so critically. They are not unaware of the Bible.
campdon 3 years ago
In fact, I'd say many of the young people I work with have much better skills of critical thinking and a better understanding of hermeneutics than I see in these videos. So, in my experience, your argument that Christians are biblically illiterate is simply unproven.
BTW, lots of people own Bibles who are not Christians. I'd guess that you are one of those. :)
campdon 3 years ago
You are correct there. I was brought up in a Christian household and indoctrinated from babyhood by my grandfather, who was an evangelist. But a break from the church came about when I was 13. I saw the way all those Christians behaved toward my mother and our family, and the chisel of doubt began to chip at the walls of dogma. It took a lot of years to demolish the walls completely, but I succeeded. Now I hope to offer a sledge hammer to others who wish to escape.
Largo64 3 years ago
I do not mean to be disrespectful, and I truly don't mean to be rude. But I must say that I'm surprised how much you don't understand. However, you ask fair questions that any young person trying to gain understanding would ask.
I can answer all or your questions. If you are willing.
May I ask, you said "Hebrews were allowed to worship others as longs as the IAM was first. I disagree, where did you find that?
Where were Hebrews specifically allowed or approved to worship others?
lovelifedj 3 years ago
I don't need you to hold my hand, nor explain to me what I can read for myself. No disrespect? Condescension then. You understand and I don't. You interpret the words as you will. So do I. I don't expect you to agree, but I'm not a youngster unacquainted with this book. Thanks anyway.
It says (paraphrase) "You (my people) are to hold no other gods ahead of me." It does not say "I am the only god." It only tells the Hebrews that the I Am is THEIR god, and they are HIS people.
Largo64 3 years ago
Thank you!! Your are a rational man! Keep up the teachings, Millions need to here the reality of the Bible.
igottabrel 3 years ago
what a deluded world we live in.
Supdude1964 3 years ago
Awesome Video.
jerichoskidd 3 years ago
Am I going to be tortured in hell for eternity for not believing?
BrightestDeath 3 years ago
I don't think so, but there are many here who do. I think they are deluded. NOT delusional, you understand, but deluded.
Largo64 3 years ago
"I think they are deluded.."
I think it's profane.
BrightestDeath 3 years ago
You are going to get what you choose. If you choose God, you will get him and and Life. If you choose to reject God, you will get an eternity without him. (II Thessalonians 1:8-10.) So choose Life. That is God's desire. That is why he has spoken into history. That is why he sent Jesus his Son to demonstrate in time and space God's love for you and his desire to save you from yourself.
campdon 3 years ago
granted campdon this is an old comment you made, but as i am just seeing it, i will respond. Can't you people, and by you people i mean Christians, ever debate over religion without quoting scripture and general proselytizing? The bible is true because it says it is true is not, never has been, and never will be sufficient for debate.
Kawamura2 3 years ago
Yes. It is an old comment. But as I listened to the video again, it seems that Largo64 is doing a lot of quoting from the Bible. And that seems reasonable since that is the topic. It is not that we were discussing religion; we were discussing what the Bible says.
campdon 3 years ago
Well, then again, you can't discuss the bible without discussing religion, you can't really separate the two.
Kawamura2 3 years ago
Perhaps, though it is possible to discuss the Bible as literature. And it is great literature. And it is possible to discuss it as history. In which case religion would be part of history. But my preference is to discuss it as God's message to us with the purpose of reestablishing a personal relationship with him lost by sin. That seems much more practical to me.
It is also the critical need of people in general through all generations.
campdon 3 years ago
Largo64's basic assumptions do not allow him to understand what he is reading. He is thinking as a man, a man who wants to play god, as I suppose we are all inclined to do. The fact is, every last one of us, man woman and child, belong to God. It is by his will and mercy that we live. We have no "right" to life. Sorry if that offends you, it is simply the position of the Bible. If God chooses to end life, it is his prerogative to do so. But you asked about murder. See follow up.
campdon 3 years ago
If is God's right to end life, that still begs the question: Is God just in doing so? I suggest that he is. In the texts Largo64 refers to in the other video the people had an opportunity to surrender to God. Rahab in Jericho, for example, did so and was saved. The others dug in their heals and fought God. If that had been allowed to continue the result would have been spiritual anarchy and eternal harm to many. God chose not to allow that to continue. I think God was just.
campdon 3 years ago
Rahab in Jericho was saved because she hid some Hebrew spies. The point is made in the bible because she was "an harlot," that is, a prostitute, who would be expected otherwise to be condemned. Wasn't that good of god not to kill her, or anyone else in her house. Think what you will, might does NOT make right. If god exists and is as described in the bible, he is not just. If power is the only thing that counts, why even worry about justice?
Largo64 3 years ago
Rahab was saved because she believed, or so says the Bible in Hebrews 11:31, and the others were not because they did not believe. Now, "believe" in the Bible means believe to the point of acting on it, not merely intellectual agreement. The people of Jericho did believe to that extent and were rightly afraid. Rahab believd in God and placed herself in his care - at considerable danger to herself, I might add. BTW God woulod be just in condemning us all. His mercy is what impresses me.
campdon 3 years ago
Well now you can feel really good, because you as a believer will be saved while I as a non-believer will go to hell. That's really al it takes isn't it? Deny your brain and be rewarded. With an eternity with HIM. No thanks.
Largo64 3 years ago
Largo, I don't feel good at all about you or anyone not being saved. And neither does God. II Peter 3:9 says that he is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance. But he respects you too much to force you. It remains your choice. BTW I confess that I don't have much faith. Not enough to believe that the universe and you and I are the highly improbable products of chance. I bow to your superiority at that point.
campdon 3 years ago
Of course I think "as a man," just as you do. The difference is that I actually think independently, while your thought is clouded by the assumption that everything in the bible is true and correct. You can believe some god owns you if it makes you feel good. But when you die, you will be exactly the same worm food everyone else who preceded you has been.
Largo64 3 years ago
Is the validity and goodness of the commandments invalidated by the failure of people to obey it? That seems like a logical fallacy. Rather they are validated by those who do obey them and experience the blessing, don't you think? You are, however, right that the commandments were given to Israel. Keeping them was the condition of their remaining in the land. Nevertheless, most who have lived by them attest to the blessing received when they did so. I'll certainly attest to that.
campdon 3 years ago
Most people who say what you say agree that the only commandments really worth keeping and living by are the ones concerning stealing, cheating and murder. But religion has never had a problem with murder, has it? Just watch Largo's video Re: The Bible's Dirty Little Secret.
gabberis 3 years ago
Murder is the usurping of of God's prerogative. It is not our right to take another life unlawfully. So far Largo64 has not referred to any place in the Bible where that is sanctioned. There are, of course, many places where it is reported, but that does not mean it is approved by God. That is the difference between what is called a descriptive text and a prescriptive text.
Is the validity and goodness of the commandment invalidated by the failure of people to obey it? I think not.
campdon 3 years ago
so, as long as you kill in the name of god, with his imaginary blessing to do so, it's okay to commit bloody massacres and infanticide? Gotcha, won't let you into my house.
gabberis 3 years ago
The irony in all this is that you and I will both die. So it is a moot point. No one will have to break into your house - or mine - for that to happen. The reality is that the wages of sin is death. But the good news is that the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ. (Rom. 6:23) God is not in the murdering business, despite what Largo64 would have you believe. God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked, now or ever. As for the believer, death holds no threat.
campdon 3 years ago
also, he is not jealous. Side-note: sarcasm. Your points are ineffective, as you don't provide any proof for your claims whatsoever. And Largo is just quoting the bible word-for-word, he isn't having me believe anything. That's the beauty of having proof. You don't need to resort to such neanderthal concepts as blind belief.
gabberis 3 years ago
Gabberis, I think of jealous as a positive characteristic. It is actually one of the names of God (Exodus 34:14) It has the same meaning we would have if we said we were jealous of our child's safety. BTW I am not trying to prove anything. I am correcting misinformation about what the Bible says about God.
But on the topic of proof, no fundamental assumption about the nature of reality is subject to proof. You can offer no evidence for a purely material reality. You believe it - blindly.
campdon 3 years ago
ha ha! I laughed so hard when the commendment said something about not working on sundays, including thy stranger in thy gate. I have a stranger in my gate? 0_0
SSAnime1 3 years ago
You just earned a new subscriber.
Well done on the video, all though a old idea I like the way you speak.
pienipaha 3 years ago
that was beautifull...thank you
sometimesido99 3 years ago
If it's all the same with you I might stay in the house of bondage a bit longer...hehehe
WhyDidYouGoAndDoThat 3 years ago
Largo, Your commentary on the Ten commandments were spot on.
x00p3 3 years ago
Wasn't jealousy a sin? I was wondering, if god is a jealous god, that would make him a hypocrite because he is a sinner himself. So shouldn't he be in hell or purgatory for that? But the only person talking about sinners going to hell was his own son. There is no hell with eternal torture in the old testament...
If the Harry Potter saga would be written 2000 years ago, would people be believing that as truth too? I think so. People think: The older, the truer.
Thanks Largo, for your vid =)
SicSeb 3 years ago
yes, Envy is one of the 7 sins. What's interesting is that Wrath is also one of the 7, but the "Wrath" of god is referred to constantly by people, and I certainly don't doubt it's referred to in the bible as well.
cowchpotato258 3 years ago
The "7 deadly sins" are not actually in the bible, I think.
As I recall, they were presented by a pope as part of catholic doctrine.
I'm totally going by memory here, so I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that they were made up by a pope.
OccamKant 3 years ago
Hmm, I didn't know that! Yep, upon doing a bit of research, (Good 'ol Wikipedia!) it turns out that yes, the ideas of those particular seven sins being "THE Seven Sins", were apparently written about by some 4th Century Monk (Who actually had 8 listed, with 'Discouragement' being the missing one), and eventually adopted officially by Pope Gregory I. Anyway I was just saying that I find it Ironic that God himself shows many of those traits at many times =p Thanks for the history lesson! lol
cowchpotato258 3 years ago
Let's check God's sin-roster:
Lust (for Virgin Mary): Check
Anger: Big Check
Gluttony (see: burnt offerings): Check
Sloth (Done nothing after working for only 6 days): Check
Pride: Big check
Envy: Big Check (commandment #1)
Greed: (Wants all to follow him): Check
Yep. Seems ol' Yaweh was more of a "do what I say, not what I do" kind of god.
OccamKant 3 years ago
You are wonderful. 5
daleshankins 3 years ago
Thanks, Dale. I appreciate it.
Largo64 3 years ago
NO PROOF, NO GOD, NO PROBLEM...great video Larry, care if I pass it along to others I know?
BethRN74 3 years ago
There's a "share" function just under the ratings.
Largo64 3 years ago
Clear, concise, and with great points. 5 stars.
BudhagRizzo 3 years ago
great video larry! ..and the comments made for good reading too :)
pornoopel 3 years ago
disregard that last comment. My headphones were not plugged in :(
BENY0HAMA 3 years ago
Bwahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!
Largo64 3 years ago
no audio here...
BENY0HAMA 3 years ago
I hope you are kidding. This one is working fine!
Largo64 3 years ago
I have always wondered how a perfect god could be jealous.
Good video.
qanazir 3 years ago
Well done, Largo.
SplinterCellWarrior 3 years ago
According to many biologists for species the best way to tell if species naturally monogamous or polygamous is the size of the male testicles compared to the body size. In great apes Gorillas have the smallest and Bonobos have the largest. Humans are closer in testicle size Bonobos the Gorillas. Also we are one of the few animal that mate out of season. So I think it is safe to say adultery is in human nature.
maciolek1980 3 years ago
It may very well be in human nature, as you say, but with or without a commandment I think it's a bad idea. I think it's fair to say that someone always gets hurt. That alone is enough to proscribe it. Losing half your stuff seems like a fair punishment. Stoning is a little over the top!
Largo64 3 years ago
many things that are human nature are not good ideas. What I hate about the is violations get the same punishment death!
maciolek1980 3 years ago
"Do unto others as they would have you do unto them" seems generally more pleasant, but "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is much more practical.
Fjarhultian 3 years ago
Exactly! Throughout my life, my parents have lied to me, manipulated me, and emotionally abused me. They deserve every bad thing that comes their way.
Justinfh2point0 3 years ago
Thanks, Largo. Great job on this one.
gatechgamer 3 years ago
I agree with your thoughts on this.
bowlingballout 3 years ago
Whoever marked this comment by bowlingball out as spam, STOP IT! Nobody shoyuld even be able to mark spam on someone else's video. It;s none of your damn business! Anyway, what was wrong with the statement? I liked it, and it's MY video. Edit your own!
Largo64 3 years ago
I just got done reading a book called God Is NOT Great.
Personally I do not understand why people cling to the ten commandments when the first several are all about a petty god that is fiercely insecure. If he was so self aware he would have not needed reminding that he was the only god (considering that he created all - which I assume means he did NOT create other gods). With that in mind he could have sat back and chuckled and his quaint creation when they wanted to worship the sun or moon.
bowlingballout 3 years ago
Concise and well done!
Marcusisit 3 years ago
Great Video Larry, As usual you speak the truth and do so quiet well.
tthompson731 3 years ago
Do you know if there is any part of the Bible that states that there are no other existing gods?
Thanks for the updated vid.
amberview30 3 years ago
DEut 8:9 "If you ever forget the LORD your God and follow other gods and worship and bow down to them, I testify against you today that you will surely be destroyed."
Matur1n 3 years ago
JEALOUSY!
God is saying, "If I can't have you, no one can!"
Also, of course, he's acknowledging the existence of others - again! He threatens those who worship others, but never says there are no others. By the way, who's he talking to when he says "Let US make man in OUR image."? To whom is the serpent referring when he says to Eve, "He knows you will be AS GODS, knowing good and evil."? Not very precise language if the author intends to say only one god exists.
Largo64 3 years ago
"Let US make man in OUR image"
Obviously God the Father, Jesus the Son and the Holy Spirit. It actually helps support the story in the New Testament much better that he said it that way. The Bible hints at a lot of mysterious things. Where did all these angels come from? Where did Satan come from? I can't rule out a more compllicated situation than we know existing.
Matur1n 3 years ago
You do know that when King James ordered his scribes to translate the bible from latin (which had been translated from hebrew) he made them leave out some things and change quite a bit of the original text.
livemorbidia 3 years ago
Why is it obvious? The trinity is not universally believed except by the universal (Catholic) church. Why is it assumed by some that Genesis speaks of Adam metaphorically as human KIND, but god is not also godKind? I'm not saying here that I believe in many gods any more than in one. I'm just pointing out a possible explanation.
Largo64 3 years ago
"trinity is not universally believed ... by (Catholic) church"
Most Protestant churches I am aware of believe in some form of Trinity, even if they use 3 in 1 type of language. I mean they believe in Jesus, he is praying to someone in the garden before he is crucified. Whoever that is along wih Jesus could be the "we" in that verse. But since there is some powerful entity like Satan, I can't discount there aren't similar entities we are now unaware of that might be described as minor gods.
Matur1n 3 years ago
I'm not a bible believer myself, but it seems to me that only apologists can twist it to the extent that you can have only one god and three entities at the same time. It is unreasonable, illogical and, to my mind, impossible. Christians always want to have it both ways. I don't think it can be done. My grandfather, who really tried, even invented a word for it. A "uni-plural," he said. How's that for a twist! Chubby Checker would be proud!
Largo64 3 years ago
"same time. It is unreasonable, illogical and, to my mind, impossible"
The Trinity certainly is one of the more difficult Christian concepts. But we accept water, ice and steam all being the same thing in one context and different in another. We accept Miami being in Dade County, and in Florida and in the U.S.A, so how can it be in all three places at the same time? Are Florida and the U.S.A exactly the same thing? No, so how can Miami be in both places if they aren't the same?
Matur1n 3 years ago
Florida, Dade County and Miami are three entities sharing space not one entity with three titles. The trinitarian god is supposed to be only one god, but able to be in three places at the same time, and asking itself why it has forsaken itself. A father and a son are two beings, not one.
Largo64 3 years ago
"Florida, Dade County and Miami are three entities sharing space..."
This gets just semantical at some point. Miami, Florida and Dade County are doing more than just sharing space, like I will take it on Monday and you Tuesday. They are in exactly the same space at the same time and are exactly the same space to the extent it is in Miami. Yet the city council can write or call the governor. I doubt Star Trek fans who accept the Borg or vulcan mind melds have to much trouble with this.
Matur1n 3 years ago
Semantics is all you have. The Christian religion is supposed to be MONO-theistic. ONE god, not three. I was not applauding my grandfather's word "uni-plural," I was mocking it. It is nonsense. And so is the trinity. Hey, I don't believe in even one god. I'm just saying that christians like to twist the language to mean what it can't.
Largo64 3 years ago
"Christian religion is supposed to be MONO-theistic."
Why? The NT makes pretty clear that Jesus is devine, and that he had a father who is too. If you count them as seperately, then it is polytheistic. If you count them together then monotheistic. Does it really matter which label applies?
Matur1n 3 years ago
Guess you are not a Christian or perhaps never were. Of course it matters to them. Judaism, Christianity and Islam are the three great monotheistic religions. Ask one of their believers if it matters. The Christians, however, insist that their three gods are really only one, who can be everywhere at once, but needed to become mortal (while immortal) and die, though death to an immortal being is impossible by definition. Then, though dead, it resurrected itself. The mind boggles!
Largo64 3 years ago
Just keep in mind, all this makes perfect sense to the fire-and-brimstone crowd, (read: the willfully insane.)
Remember, just because you've not hurt anybody yet doesn't mean you're not completely crazy.
Great vid!
Larian1975 3 years ago
The mind boggles!"
Doesn't seem mind boggling to me. Seems like good news to me.
Matur1n 3 years ago
I don't doubt that it deems like good news to you, Mtur1n. You're not much into math, biology or semantics are you! But who needs knowledge when he has faith?
Largo64 3 years ago
You're not much into math"
I love math! So did Isaac Newton and so many of the Christian mathematicians who study math to see God's handiwork. Math could help you with the trinity. Even in basic algebra you learn the concept of a "variable". A variable can be both 3 and 1 and a bunch of other numbers all at the same time. If you have trouble with that, you will really have trouble with imaginary numbers like "i". You laugh at God as imaginary, yet right there in math are imaginary numbers.
Matur1n 3 years ago
It was a flippant remark. For all I know you are a mathematician. But having one being in three but still only one is far fetched to my way of thinking. Now you can make fun of "my way of thinking." Get it over with. You will tire of this eventually. And you will still be wrong.
Largo64 3 years ago
You should think about math a bit more, about variables and imaginery numbers. Then consider, if there were a true devinbe, all-powerful creator, why couldn't he pull off being 3 in 1?
Matur1n 3 years ago
If.
But I don't think there is one.
Largo64 3 years ago
Isaac Newton didn't believe in the trinity.
x00p3 3 years ago
Isaac Newton didn't believe in the trinity. "
Trinity is a made-up word that isn't used in the Bible. Unfortunately, it mainly serves to confuse people like Largo. Their relationship is what it is. Close or intertwined in a way that we may not understand.
Matur1n 3 years ago
"Trinity is a made-up word that isn't used in the Bible."
So what if it's not in the Bible, it's just a mere reference word, nothing more.
"Their relationship is what it is. Close or intertwined in a way that we may not understand."
Here is what Sir Issac Newton wrote:
"It is the temper of the hot and superstitious art of mankind in matters of religion ever to be fond of mysteries, and for that reason to like best what they understand least."
- Issac Newton on 1 John 5:7 (Textus Receptus)
x00p3 3 years ago
So what if it's not in the Bible, it's just a mere reference word, nothing more"
making up words like "Rapture" or "Trinity" or "Original Sin" or "Omniscience" is counterproductive, as people soon imbue the words with characteristcis and meanings and the like that aren't in the Bible. These "reference words" or "short-cut words" are bad ideas to use, if for no other reason that the listener probably has a different understanding of them than you do.
Matur1n 3 years ago
Omniscient:
1 : having infinite awareness, understanding, and insight. 2 : possessed of universal or complete knowledge. (Merriam-Webster)
Do you find this definition of omniscient to be characteristic of Yahweh? If not, explain.
x00p3 3 years ago
I don't have all the information I would need to know whether Yahweh has all those characteristics or not. So I don't know. So when you use "universal or complete knowledge" does that mean all knowledge known? Or is it all knowledge that it is possible to know at this time? Or is it all knowledge that is ever possible to know? Or does it include knowledge that is impossible to know? Because I have seen different YT posters take all 4 of those positions. Thus it doesn't seem a useful word to me.
Matur1n 3 years ago
Well Matur1n, it certainly pays not to jump ahead and believe something is true just because a large group says it is so.
But what makes you think the Bible is God's revelation to man? What is the evidence that supports your conclusion?
x00p3 3 years ago
The importance of the Bible is just it tells the good news of Jesus life and his sacrifice for you. Plenty of people have become Christians without ever having seen a Bible in their lifetimes. The important concepts are pretty simple and can easily be taught. If you want to know more about Jesus, the Bible is a good source. I am not sure about what you mean by it being "God's revelation to man". It isn't a complicated revelation of some secret. It is the good news about Jesus in banner headlines
Matur1n 3 years ago
"I am not sure about what you mean by it being God's revelation to man" - Matur1n
That which is revealed by God to man...the gospel of Jesus included. What evidence do you have to show that it's all true and not something that was just made up?
x00p3 3 years ago
ha ha! i, I miss that. Well i is a concept, it's just to solve problems, but you can't really give it a physical form and say god is in that form.
It's a theory, a very helpful one, but it's like a thought experiment, like a frictionless surface. A lot of the conceptual theories needs to be modified for actual applications (I hear all the calculus u learn right now will be useless in practical work :P), it's not realistic to link imaginary numbers to reality.
SSAnime1 3 years ago
I agree. Some wierd wording in the book men wrote. ;-)
amberview30 3 years ago
Yeah, that's still not saying that there aren't other gods. It's just saying that you shouldn't worship the other ones, which implies that HE thinks there are other ones. Thanks for trying though. I remember that one. It just doesn't say, "Hey, the other gods are imaginary."
amberview30 3 years ago
Sorry to hear that you lost much of the content of the older version but the newer version is splendid. Good video, Larry.
TheGiggler1 3 years ago
I like the new condensed version of your 10 commandments!
Great ending.
Maiyanna 3 years ago
Nicely done! ★★★★★
P.S.
Plus the jesus character in the bible has said nothing that was not said, or implied by others in the past. An example: every culture has learned without the help of an imaginary god character; Confucius golden rule: never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself" (ca. 551-479 BC) which as you can see by the date was stolen/plagiarized by many religions, and/or gods hundreds of years later.
Katalyzt
Katalyzt 3 years ago
Thanks for reposting this.
I love to hear the truth spoken.
There is much confusion produced in the bible
and from it amoungst other things.
Free speech...may we long have it.:)
sarah1ooo1 3 years ago
Actually, I have been noticing that a lot of older videos have the same audio problem you experienced. I have counted three this week alone that have had the audio come out as unbearable electronic sounding shrieks and screeching. Something is up with YouTube apparently.
h8uall66 3 years ago
It may be some bandwidth problem. Or perhaps all their "site maintenance" has disturbed some of what;s already there. I hope I haven't lost too much other stuff. Now that I think of it, though, there are some I wish I hadn't posted to start with!
Largo64 3 years ago
Great vid, Larry!
How about a slight tweak for the "golden rule":
Do unto others as THEY would be done by.
Treat others the way they want to be treated. If you yourself are a masochist, it doesn't mean you should beat other people up simply because you like being beaten.
This is kind of splitting hairs, because if you followed either rule you'd be better off than we are mostly today.
OccamKant 3 years ago
It's a good point, but it works the other way, too. You wouldn't want to abuse another who was a masochist either. That's why I suggested that the rule be posted and discussed in classrooms. Bright kids will pick up on a flaw like that and discussing it is good for everyone.
Largo64 3 years ago
Well, if someone liked being abused, why not abuse them? If that is truly the way they want to be treated.
My friends and I swear at each other all the time. It's all in fun, but I certainly wouldn't talk to my wife like that.
Anyway, as I said -- if you followed either variant of the golden rule, you'd do fine.
OccamKant 3 years ago
If you did abuse someone who was masochistic, you would yourself be an abuser. A masochist is mentally sick. You still would not want to be abused yourself, so you would still be wrong.
Largo64 3 years ago
You're right - I don't think that actually beating someone up would be a good thing.
There's play fighting, and then there is hospitalization.
I also follow another moral rule:
You can do anything you want, as long as you don't harm, or threaten harm, someone else or their property.
So that rules out hospitalization. ;)
OccamKant 3 years ago
But in Canada, hospitalization is free!
;^>
Largo64 3 years ago
How about the oldest form of the Golden rule: "Don't do to others what you don't want done to yourself"
That would take of the masochist factor.
x00p3 3 years ago
Correction:
That would take care of the masochist factor.
x00p3 3 years ago
That's very true.
I still like my "You can do anything you want as long as you don't harm or threaten harm someone else or their property".
If we made that "rule #1" and all laws based on it, I don't think we'd need a lot of laws.
It would all come down to definitions of "harm", "person" and "property".
OccamKant 3 years ago
I see, keeping BOTH variants in mind you would be right. I got ahead of myself a little bit there. You were right on.
Largo64 3 years ago
No ONE obeys rule#2 it seems.
geroldkid 3 years ago