”I, even I, am He who comforts you. Who are you that you should be afraid Of a man who will die, And of the son of a man who will be made like grass?” Isaiah 51:12
No one took the life of my Jesus. He simply laid it down and has the power to take it back. He's alive forever more!!! John 10:17-18 [17]Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. [18]No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.
Alisa Childers did an excellent job explaining these things in such a short time and clearly. I've subscribed to her page. Btw the Trinity is not something we should ponder too much, as it is one of the mysteries of God we just cannot get our minds around. Considering all else I'm good with that.
I heard an awesome sermon (lecture actually) on the trinity. The theologian began by stating that the Trinity is the most difficult doctrine to try and explain or understand. Reason being is that we are attempting to define God in human terms.
@@Flagrum3 I don’t agree, I think it is a good thing to delve deep into who God is and how he operates. This is a matter of becoming mature instead of staying immature. God wants us to know him better and using our reason and logic is a way to do that, after all God gave us our reason and logic. By using them, we are not only helping ourselves but we are more appreciative of the imago dei in us.
Wow. What a deluded and judgemental fool you are!!! If this is what you call the actions of a just and moral god, I weep for you. Morality is living with your neighbors, not killing them because a voice in your head tells you that their house is yours and you should kill them.
Thank you, Ms. Alisa for explaining things in the manner in which you did. Feel that much stronger today. God bless you, and God bless my brothers and sisters in Christ.
Great video! You just attacked five of the biggest attacks that atheists try to use against Christians and did a very good job of it I might add. God is God whatever he decides is just and holy.
@Taufik Mukti well for one that's never happened and there is only one occurrence in the Bible of that ever happening and that was with Abraham and Isaac.
@Taufik Mukti I don't believe I will have to worry about God ever asking me to do that. That was a special, unique occurrence as God was trying to test Abraham's faith. Abraham was the line that God chose to bring the Messiah into the world through. Special case scenario and yes God is just and holy in all he decides.
@Taufik Mukti sounds like you're already out, man. So why would I take your advice on anything relating to God? We live in an imperfect and fallen world where bad things do happen. So the question becomes do we want to go through these bad things in life with God or without him? I think I'd rather have God on my side.
@Taufik Mukti the only way that God would allpw my child have some incurable disease is due to the fact that we live in a fallen world. Of course that wouldn't occur in a perfect world or in heaven so u have nothing to worry about. If you wont believe in God if he does something like that, or believe that God playing God is immoral, then you fail to understand the power of God and his power to restore life, wealth and health. He just doesn't always do so in this life since this life is futile and we will all die soon anyways. That's why Christianity makes sence because it prioritizes in getting as much people into such perfect world as possible
Only one truth can be true and according to Jesus himself he is the only way. John 14:6 Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."
I love hearing from you in a time format that allows me to listen. I'm a single parent of 3, and a full time student, running a home-I just don't have time for hour long podcasts that much of the time. Please make more 5-15, even 20 minute videos...on your channel...I guess this isn't.
The word “trinity” is not found in the Bible, but this does not mean that the concept is not taught there. The word “bible” is not found in the Bible either, but we use it anyway. Likewise, the words “omniscience,” which means “all-knowing,” “omnipotence,” which means “all-powerful,” and “omnipresence,” which means “present everywhere” are not found in the Bible either; but we use these words to describe the attributes of God. So, to say that the Trinity isn’t true because the word isn’t in the Bible is an invalid argument. There are many scriptures that we use to get the doctrine of the Trinity from. Some of them incude: Matt. 28:19, “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.” 1 Cor. 12:4-6, “Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit. 5And there are varieties of ministries and the same Lord. 6And there are varieties of effects, but the same God who works all things in all persons.” 2 Cor. 13:14, “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, be with you all.” Eph. 4:4-7, “There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; 5one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all. 7But to each one of us grace was given according to the measure of Christ’s gift.” 1 Pet. 1:2, “according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, that you may obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood: May grace and peace be yours in fullest measure.” Jude 20-21, “But you, beloved, building yourselves up on your most holy faith; praying in the Holy Spirit; 21keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting anxiously for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to eternal life.”
To be honest, since Jesus IS "The Word". It also being the Father's laid out plan for redemption, and the Bible being inspired by the Spirit. The Trinity is working and present throughout the entirety of Scripture.
Yes Jesus is God!!! John 1:14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. John 10:30 I and the Father are one.”
Good video. You may also want to add into the Kalam argument, that if there was no time “sans the universe”, then the only thing that could “start” or “cause the effect” of the time, space and matter, without itself having a temporal cause, is a being with free will. The ability to act on a decision as the first agent without influence is the only way to get a “beginning” from timelessness.
_if there was no time “sans the universe”, then the only thing that could “start” or “cause the effect” of the time, space and matter, without itself having a temporal cause, is a being with free will._ *Evidence?* Can you back up that claim with any evidence at all? _The ability to act on a decision as the first agent without influence is the only way to get a “beginning” from timelessness._ Again, that's just a claim. But how can anyone or anything "act on a decision" in the absence of time? Whatever else it might have been, it can't be that, can it?
@@Bill_Garthright What do you mean "evidence"? The concept of free will is an ongoing debate, but in my opinion there is more evidence for it than against it. The point presupposes the existence of free will and the idea that the agent is the sole cause of an event is just what free will entails definitionally. So, your desire for "evidence" just doesn't have anything to do with the argument here.
@@brando3342 _What do you mean "evidence"?_ You know, _something_ distinguishable from delusion and wishful-thinking? _The concept of free will is an ongoing debate, but in my opinion there is more evidence for it than against it._ Really? OK, how about defining "free will," then, and providing *one piece of good evidence* that it actually exists? Just *one.* _The point presupposes the existence of free will and the idea that the agent is the sole cause of an event is just what free will entails definitionally._ In that case, I am _definitely_ going to need you to define "free will," because that seems to make absolutely no sense under any definition I've ever heard. And we'll just talk past each other if we're talking about different things. _So, your desire for "evidence" just doesn't have anything to do with the argument here._ So, you made a claim, but you can't back it up with _anything?_ OK, then there's absolutely no reason to take your claim seriously. Or do _you_ take all claims seriously, whether they have any evidence backing them up or not?
@@Bill_Garthright When I said your demand for evidence didn’t have to do with my argument, I was referring to the fact that the argument I am making PRESUPPOSES the existence of free will, it is not an argument attempting to PROVE free will. I hope that is clear. To continue: “Free will, in humans, the power or capacity to choose among alternatives or to act in certain situations independently of natural, social, or divine restraints.” Like I said, the agent is the source when speaking of free will decisions, apart from any influence. If you want to ask for proof of free will (not my argument here though). I’ll direct you to the Libet experiments. They show that just before the brain sends the signal to your body to perform a specific action, the agent has a short period of time, in which the agent has the opportunity to cancel said action. This promotes the idea of “free will not” which is equivalent to free will, considering that’s how we create new neural pathways. This is from the Oxford.universitypressscolarship: “This chapter presents a classic essay in which Benjamin Libet lays out his basic experimental results and draws philosophical lessons regarding free will and responsibility. He argues that the existence of free will is at least as good, if not a better, scientific option than is its denial by determinist theory.”
@@brando3342 _the argument I am making PRESUPPOSES the existence of free will_ Unfortunately, that doesn't help your argument. Even _presupposing_ free will doesn't mean that "the only thing that could “start” or “cause the effect” of the time, space and matter, without itself having a temporal cause, is a being with free will." That's just a claim backed up by nothing at all. And it doesn't make any difference whether "free will" is a real thing or not. _They show that just before the brain sends the signal to your body to perform a specific action, the agent has a short period of time, in which the agent has the opportunity to cancel said action._ So what? How does that demonstrate "free will"? I don't know what you mean by "agent," anyway. But that's a minor detail. Just because there's time for the "agent" to cancel an action, that doesn't mean that free will exists, since we don't know what goes into the decision to "cancel an action." What would make us decide to "cancel an action" or not? The fact is, you can't run that experiment multiple times, so we have no way of knowing if the same thing would happen every time or not. I suspect that it _wouldn't_ happen the same way every time (though, of course, I don't know that), just because of quantum effects. But if that's what makes the difference, that still wouldn't be "free will," I wouldn't think. But I don't find that especially interesting, anyway. We have _zero_ reasons to think that a disembodied mind - a mind not dependent on a brain - could exist, and plenty of reasons to think otherwise. After all, we have _abundant_ evidence that damaging a brain can change or destroy everything about our minds - memory, perception, beliefs, reasoning, self-recognition, etc. - up to and including death. So "free will" is the _least_ important part of god claims, I'd say. Personally, I don't think that "free will" even _matters._ Whether it exists or it doesn't, we should still _act_ as though it does, in order to live in a decent civilized society.
I look at the trinity like how I look at water which can exist in three states liquid,solid,gas however it’s still water in fact in Jeremiah 2:13 the prophet explains how God is “The spring of living water” that helped me understand the concept of the trinity
I look at the trinity as a desperate attempt by Christians to settle the arguments among themselves about exactly what and who Jesus was. I mean, there is _zero_ evidence of any of it, right?
@@Bill_Garthright I'll lead you to look at "Let US make man in OUR image." He's not talking to angels because they can't create. So He is talking to a co-creator. Therefore, He the Father is talking to He the Son, Jesus Christ. Two parts of the Trinity. When Jesus was about to leave earth He said that He would send the Comforter, the Holy Spirit. Now Christ is not going to send us something that is less than 100% God. There you have it God in three persons but of ONE nature and ONE purpose. I give you the Holy Trinity. ✝️❤️🙏 God bless you.
@@dodibenabba1378 _I'll lead you to look at "Let US make man in OUR image."_ Note that that's English, so it's just a translation. I don't know _what_ it said in the original language. Do you? But there's more to it than that. You _do_ know that royalty - in Europe, at least - used the royal "we," right? Instead of saying "I," a king would say "we" - even if it was just his decision alone. He wasn't implying that he had a co-leader. Not at all. He was just emphasizing his royalty. So _of course_ they'd have their god say that. I'm sorry, but that's just silly. But yes, you can always find _some_ part of the Bible which you can interpret to back up whatever you _want._ The Bible is The Big Book of Multiple Choice. That's why there are thousands of different denominations, with Christians disagreeing about nearly _everything._ Interpretation is always subjective even _before_ you think about the various translations or the various differences in copies of the Bible. And it was no different with early Christians - well, "earlier" Christians. (Centuries, or even decades, later is not exactly "early.") Even when they put together the Bible, there was disagreement about what should go in it. They were just trying to find something that most of them could live with. And, of course, with political power behind one particular sect of Christianity, the Catholic Church spent a thousand years rooting out 'heresy' with fire and sword. So anything that _didn't_ agree with the preferred narrative would be unlikely to survive. I see no reason to think that _any_ god exists, let alone a particular one. As far as I can tell, there's not even *one* piece of good evidence backing up any of the magical/supernatural stuff in the Bible - and I've likely been asking Christians for evidence since before you were born. So the whole trinity thing doesn't matter to me. It's just that there were apparently _lots_ of disagreements about the exact nature of Christ _among Christians_ back then. They found something that most of them could live with, but that doesn't make it _true._
@@dodibenabba1378 I do know Hebrew. It does say this. But your argument is extremely flawed. Extremely. If you call Yakweh the father, what about all the times yakweh says there are no other god? Or I am one? Of course yakweh was talking to angels. He wasn’t actually saying they’d work together to make man, he was just saying it to make them feel better. Here’s proof: the very next verse, when god actually creates man, it says “and god made man in his image, in the image of god he made him.” If he was talking to Jesus and the holly ghost, why didn’t they actually help make him make man, make anything else, or stop him from saying they don’t exist?
God lawfully has the right to execute judgment upon anyone. The Bible says that all people have sinned against God and are under his righteous judgment. Therefore, their execution is not an arbitrary killing, nor is it murder. Murder is the unlawful taking of life. Killing is the lawful taking of life. For example, we can lawfully take a life in defense of ourselves, our families, our nations, etc.
Great point! He is the judge and he decides what is right or wrong and he decides who lives and who dies and when that happens. Why? Because he is God.
@@Nimish204 sin destroys everything. Think about all the sin in the world today and how it destroys families and people's lives. Then that gets passed on to the next generation and the next and the next.
@@Nimish204 even in Gods judgement there is mercy and grace. Imagine a world where there was always murder, stealing, rape, molestation and incest. If you look at the things that these nations were doing before God judged them you would see this pattern of evil.
It's impossible to read the Bible in its entirety and get any other conclusion other than Jesus being both God and man. The only reason some groups believe that is because they ignore half of what the Bible says. Or they simply ignore all of it. As Christians we know and understand because we're being led by the Spirit of God. If someone doesn't have the Spirit of God then they just aren't going to get it.
I believe that many can perfectly understand the concept of Jesus being both God and man without having the Holy Spirit, but will typically deny it, and attempt to debunk it unless the Holy Spirit shows them.
Muslims don't really ask questions about Jesus being God. They demand the exact words" I am God, Worship me" knowing it very well that there aren't exact such words. Some less knowledgeable Christians unfortunately converted to Islam because of this ridiculous argument.
Know that when they ask this, they themselves don’t believe that the bible is real and that it has been changed over the years. Just so you know, it has never been changed and there is even a copy of the original bible from the year 300 in the original Aramaic language. Whenever a Muslim asks you this question, ask them this “when did Muhammad say ‘ I’m just a prophet, don’t worship me’ ” This question will make them realise that you can’t just demand for a word-for-word answer to prove a claim that someone made. After this, start then to give them the bible verses where Jesus claimed to be God, and if he claimed to be god, then he has already claimed all the things that god has claimed. The verses I use to tell them this are Isiah 44:6 NIV “This is what the Lord says- Israel’s King and Redeemer, the Lord Almighty: I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God.” Revelation 1:17-18 NIV “When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. Then he placed his right hand on me and said: “Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last. I am the Living One; I was dead, and now look, I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades.” In “Isiah”, god says that he is the first and the last and that besides him there is not other god. In “Revelation”, Jesus, also, claims to be the first and the last and besides him there is no other god. This then makes a clear path leading to Jesus being god. So now you know how to answer to their shameful questions. God have mercy on all of us. Keep faith brother, may grace, mercy, peace and love be with you, amen.
Please pray for my friend Kristel! She doesn't know God. Pray that God would open her mind and heart to the truth which is in Jesus Christ and destroy satan's lies and works in her life.
On the killing of the canaanites, I would also add the Sin of Noah’s son Ham. Noah awakes and when he knew what had been done unto him he said, cursed be Canaan. I personally think Hams sin was he slept with his mother. See Micheal Heiser on sin of Ham.
I like the first one that was talked about. I've learned that in the language used during that time, when Jesus was asked if He was God, what Jesus said was understood to mean that He is God. And if I'm not mistaken it was pretty much the equivalent of explicitly saying so like we would in English.
Interesting observation about the law of noncontradiction: everything exists in at least two dimensions at the same time, one visible to the human senses and one invisible to the human senses. We are seated in and with Christ in the heavenly (spiritual) realm and at the same time we are here in this physical, temporal environment. Quantum science says that we are alternating from waveform (invisible, spirit realm) to particle form (visible, natural realm) at 20,000 times per nanosecond. Interesting stuff. Currently existing in the heavenly realm in and with Christ helps us understand some of the conflicting views in theological doctrines. Different principles apply in each of these dimensions. Here's a mind bender: how can a person sin if they have died and their life is hidden in Christ where there is no sin? Hmmm?
Edit: to address your last point immediately, the New Testament is filled with explanations of Christians struggling with sin. In 1 John 1 he writes to fellow Christians if we say we have no sin then the truth is not in us and we make God out to be a liar. One of the easiest answers to this is contained within Romans 7. Scientists now say there may be as many as 10 dimensions. Waves and particles, or energy and matter, however you want to look at it, depend upon the natural laws like gravity, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear forces. I think there’s like at least 10 different interpretations of quantum mechanics, string theory, etc. I don’t think wave-particle duality adequately explains our soul/spirit. It’s still in the physical universe. You describe this world as temporal, and that may be partially true since God will make all things new, but he will recreate the heavens and earth and we will spend eternity in New Jerusalem in New, glorified bodies. So we are creatures naturally created to exist as both body and soul together. Death, which are the wages of sin, is the unnatural separation of those. In other words, I don’t think you can simply use quantum mechanics to adequately explain the “spiritual realm.” It’s likely way more complicated and amazing than we could ever imagine. Just my two cents though. There’s a good chance I’m wrong anyway. Chuck Missler of Koinonia house has a lot of videos on this subject. Very very interesting, like you said.
_Quantum science says that we are alternating from waveform (invisible, spirit realm) to particle form (visible, natural realm) at 20,000 times per nanosecond._ So, you're saying that you know nothing at all about quantum physics? :)
@@therockstar17 my last point is that the kingdom of God is a mystery. Yes, scripture says if we say we have no sin, the truth is not in us. We also see that in Christ, there is no sin. We see that we have been crucified with Christ, yet we still live, but not us but Christ in us. So are we in Christ or not? Have we died with Him or not? We live in two dimensions at the same time, and in one of those dimensions, sin does not exist. A mystery. For me, I choose life, I choose to walk in the Spirit. There is no sin there, only life and love and complete rest and freedom. At some point the mortal body will be replaced with an immortal one like the one Jesus has. Then we will be complete (telios) and be on our way to understanding the mystery.
The Canaanite conquest wiped out "7 tribes" and afterwards Joshua exclaims there are no more Anakim in the land. The anakim were descendents of Anak the Nephilim. The nephilim were a physical manifestation of the human depravity in genesis 6. They were abominations of spiritual beings merging with humanity. Furthermore, we know there are still other canaanites in the land afterwards like the phillistines. So it's not like the israelites just marched in and started a genocide. Yahweh knew that these tribes settled there around the time Abraham was promised the land. The spiritual beings did this in defiance to the creator. Since they would not leave peacefully ( and likely would want to commit a genocide of their own towards the israelites to prevent the seed of the woman that will crush the head of the serpent from coming) God knew they had to be wiped out in order for the Israelites to live there safely
I would like to expand the 3 person explanation (imo)- Jesus is the physical manifestation of GOD. The Holy Spirit is the voice/word of GOD. Parts of GOD as one being.
Please don't expand the explanation. The reason is the error that is so easy to get into. I know you mean well but your explanation is also wrong. It's best not to.
@@wisewoman4950 thank you for kind comments. I think as Christians we have to give a reasonable explanation to the Trinity. I am fully aware that GOD will eventually reveal more to us in heaven but to me apologetics means giving some form of explanation to an atheist that comes across as logical. I agree with the 3 person one being statement but it does need further clarification. I am open to a better explanation so I can use it when atheists talk about this issue.
@@Dapperdave-gg6vx it’s simple. One is unbegotten (The Father), One is begotten (The Son) and one proceeds (The Holy Spirit). That’s how they are three distinct persons. How are they One God? Because they perform the One activity of “God”. Since they are one being they have One activities. For further details read “not three gods” by Saint Gregory of Nysa. Here’s an example: “For if our interpretation of the term Godhead, or θεότης, is a true one, and the things which are seen are said to be beheld, or θεατά, and that which beholds them is called θεός, or God, no one of the Persons in the Trinity could reasonably be excluded from such an appellation on the ground of the sense involved in the word. For Scripture attributes the act of seeing equally to Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.”
Amen brother! Romans 10:9-11 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. 11 For the Scripture says, "Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame."
@@jesusistheanswer9998 Amen a hundred times over! God bless you and may you and family abide in the peace and love of our Lord Jesus Christ forevermore! ❤️
Where is he? Why hasn't God shown himself? God actually came to earth 2000 years ago. He appeared in human form. So there is 1 proof of God to add to the list. Jesus Christ.
@Taufik Mukti that is not what we as Christians believe. It takes faith to believe what the Bible says and without faith it is impossible to please God.
This video is really good. These answers are what every Christian should know. This should also include classical theism and drop Intelligent Design which has been debunked. Classical theism is a doctrine that, in my opinion, takes God seriously and is one of the best human attempts to understand what it means to be God and how we can know God exists.
Interesting. The way I see it is we are in the image of God, and we are spirit, soul, and body, yet the same person. Without the soul the body dies, without the spirit, the soul dies. Before we give our lives to Christ we are soul and body without spirit, as the spirit was lost at the fall. Jesus gives us His Spirit, thus making those who repent a new creation. Because of His Spirit, we are able to renew our mind, and our emotions are healed by the Spirit. When we are given incorruptible bodies, then we will be complete in Christ as it should have been in the beginning.
@@jesusistheanswer9998 Thanks bro, it’s nice to get some encouragement instead of skepticism. Jesus Himself didn’t start His ministry until He received The Holy Spirit at His baptism. It always amazes and humbles me to know that God is willing to put His Holy Spirit into our dirty and corrupted vessels. As John Newton so eloquently put ‘Amazing Grace’ .
6:18 can time itself really "come into existence" as Childers says? To "come into existence" suggests the preexistence of time in and of itself since it is inherently suggested that at one time - time itself did not exist, and yet at another subsequent time - it in fact does exist.
@@novusstudios1744 you seem shocked and deeply offended - as if disagreement with another mortal or merely questioning what a mortal such as Childers says is somehow an unforgivable sin.
@@rorywynhoff1549 unless God IS time which is entirely possible. Not sure if you realized this but I literally only wrote 2 sentences in my OP - one of them being a question; how is that "over thinking" ? Perhaps you should be grateful that I think at all rather than mindlessly believing everything on TV like CNN wants us to.
At 2:40, Ms. Childers says: _"Genocide is defined as killing a large group of people because of their race, religion, or nationality, but in the case of the Canaanites, they weren't killed because of their race, they were executed as a decree of God's righteous judgement."_ Potato, po-tah-to. Even if we follow Ms. Childers definition, the killing of the Canaanites should qualify as genocide, of course, because the Canaanites were killed for not believing in the right deity, which means they were killed "because of their religion", which Ms. Childers includes in her definition. But even if we agree with Ms. Childers that this extermination of the Canaanites should not be called "genocide", how does this detract from the heinousness of the crime? You can call it Bob for all I care, it was a cruel act of murder and mayhem, and it should give pause to anyone who reads about it and believes it really happened as described in the Bible to consider if this is really the kind of God they think they believe in. For reference, here is the definition of "genocide" according to the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide: _"Article II In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: a. Killing members of the group; b. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; c. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; d. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; e. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."_ As anyone can see clearly and unequivocally, the extermination of the Canaanites does comply with this definition. I would encourage Ms. Childers to read the Convention and then reconsider her advise to her fellow Christians.
Excellent comment! I would also point out that "God's righteous judgement" is an excuse theists can use to kill _anyone_ they don't like. This is how we get religious terrorism - and not just from Christians, either. And note that 'God' never tells anyone _himself._ It's always some human being telling other human beings what 'God' wants them to do.
@@Bill_Garthright Thanks! And: True! I was anticipating some believers to comment that it could not be a "crime" because their God willed it, and of course, as you rightfully point out, I would have then confronted them with the curious fact that they would be using the exact same argumentation as religious suicide bombers. For an outsider, it is impossible to judge which deity's wrath is righteous, and as we are all outsiders to some faiths, that means we are all incapable of making such a judgment.
You say *the Canaanites were killed for not believing in the right deity, which means they were killed "because of their religion."* Are you sure they were killed for not believing in the right deity? Where do the scriptures state that or is that just your personal conclusion? You don't think the deplorable behaviour of the Canaanite people had anything to do with their destruction do you? What was their "religion" for which they were killed for, any idea what these people practiced?
@@christisking131You asked: _"Are you sure they were killed for not believing in the right deity?"_ I quote from the article by Dr. Clay Ms. Childers refers to in the video: _"Incontrovertibly, the Canaanites worshiped other Gods by not worshipping Yahweh."_ You can check out his Biblical references for yourself on p. 55 of the article. You asked: _"You don't think the deplorable behaviour of the Canaanite people had anything to do with their destruction do you?"_ It is irrelevant what I think in this matter, and it is irrelevant what those practises were. The killing of innocent babies and children, and the killing of unborn children by killing the pregnant Canaanite women is still as heinous a crime as any, and this killing of innocents cannot be justified in any way. The only justification believers have told me about entails a verdict of genocide; because it means that the intention of the actions was to exterminate this ethnic group from the face of the earth by killing and dispersing the virgin girls that were left. For the application of the definition of genocide, it does not matter if the perpetrators of the crime claimed divine approval for their actions.
@@hansdemos6510 You stated *Which MEANS they were killed "because of their religion."* I've already asked you if you knew "what their religion was which they practiced"? You replied *It is irrelevant what I think in this matter, and it is irrelevent what those practices were.* Why would the child sacrificing practices of the Canaanite religion be irrelevant to you? You seem pretty concerned about the welfare of their children! Why is the murdering ways of this nation irrelevant to you, but not so irrelevant when Israel destroyed this depraved nation of people? Do you know the history of the Canaanite people? Or is that irrelevent to you?
@@wonder4974 What evidence do you have that your god is eternal? And what is your evidence that the universe is not? If the universe isn't eternal, and your god is, where does your god exist when the universe doesn't? Does that plane of existence have a beginning or end?
@@mediaphile the problem is you’re trying to understand God from a HUMAN perspective and HUMAN understanding.. which as humans, we are limited.. you asking about a plane of existence for God, is putting him in a box as if to say our humans constructs apply to God, if that were the case how could he be God.. he’d be just like us, which he is not.
Unfortunately, these answers won’t satisfy those who cherish their accusations more as a way to justify their own unbelief to themselves. It’s good to be able to provide these answers but save them for people who are truly interested in learning something. The atheist religion is largely hostile to God and is built on a personal rather than an intellectual rejection Him and His word. Save reason for the reasonable.
To be honest, when I first stumbled across the creationist cult on RUclips I never knew people were still arguing that the bible was true. It’s just like people still arguing the earth is flat.
@@Columbo-r4z in a video where he says "he doesn't debate creationist anymore because its like debating a flat earther", imo that's bad argument, believing in God has nothing to do with science but a philosophical and theological issue, that's why its called belief and faith, in the other hand, flat earthers deny everything to evidence and proof which is quite dumb, they are not taken seriously.
@@johnl.5046 Who wants to believe anything that is Not true? Science only exams the physical world. Because of the existence of mathematics, we know there are non physicals. Besides there are many evidences for the young earth creations. Also the Bible didn't say that the earth is flat, instead it says it hangs on NOTHING.
Hi Alisa, may I ask. Where was Lazarus, the brother of Mary and Martha when he was dead for 4 days? Was he in heaven then get back to earthly life? Were the people ressurected by Jesus came from heaven? Thank you
To the first point: Jesus often said and did things which only God can do, even calm storms with a word, cast out demons, and forgive sins. He even prayed to His Father that He be glorified in the same way the Father is glorified. Jesus is no mere man or mere prophet of God. He is God!
The Theist arguments 1) Argument from ignorance : “You cannot disprove Christianity, so it must be true.” The reality is, no supernatural statement can be dis-proven. For example, you cannot prove that vampires, el chupacabra, Greek gods like Zeus, ghosts, or witches flying around on broomsticks don’t exist.People prefer certainty. There's a psychological need to explain events or phenomena rather than accept one's ignorance, to say ‘I don't know’ when faced with insufficient evidence. 2) Personal Incredulity : Because you found something difficult to understand, or are unaware of how it works, you made out like it's probably not true. “I can’t imagine how X could be true; therefore, X must be false.” “I can’t imagine how X could be false; therefore, X must be true.”
Atheists are good at defeating the statement that the made up. Instead of attacking us, maybe we should reason together. BTW, where does your ability to reason come from and why do you trust it?
@@yiqingwang1437 _Instead of attacking us, maybe we should reason together._ Well, that sounds good to _me._ (Although, that didn't really seem like an "attack," did it?) So, OK. To start with, how about *one piece of good evidence* that your god is real, rather than just imaginary? I'd also accept *one piece of good evidence* that _any_ of the magical/supernatural stories in the Bible actually happened. Your choice. (I will _give_ you a guy named Jesus who was crucified by the Romans, but the Romans crucified _thousands_ of people.) _BTW, where does your ability to reason come from and why do you trust it?_ I don't know, and I don't necessarily trust it. That's why I test my reasoning with evidence. But my mind is all I've got. You, too. Trustworthy or not, we have no choice but to use it. We should just try to use it the best we can.
@@Bill_Garthright 1. Can you please define evidence? What do you count as evidence? 2. If you don't trust reason, how do you know if what is an evidence and why you should trust it? What is a Mind, and why you should trust it? I know God is real because I had a personal encounter with him. I also know that God is real because of eye witness testimonials of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. I hope my questions won't bother you too much. I just want to understand. Cheers
@@yiqingwang1437 Why stall like that? If you've _got_ something, why not present it? I'm not asking for much. I'm just asking for *one* example. Don't you have _anything?_ _I know God is real because I had a personal encounter with him._ And how did you know it was really "God"? What method did you use to distinguish reality from delusion and wishful-thinking? Was it a _reliable_ method? _I also know that God is real because of eye witness testimonials of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ._ OK, well that seems to imply that there's evidence. But I think you're wrong about that. As far as I know, we have nothing from Jesus and nothing from anyone who'd ever _met_ Jesus. We've got stories, of course - anonymous stories written later (usually _much_ later). But the anonymous authors of the gospels don't even _claim_ to have ever met Jesus, let alone seen any of that, themselves. So if that's actually true, how about *one example,* specific enough and in enough detail that I can judge if for myself? I will _give_ you a guy named Jesus who was crucified by the Romans, since most scholars accept that much. But the Romans crucified _thousands_ of people. That didn't make them _all_ gods, did it?
@@Bill_GarthrightPractically, what "evidence" can a Christian retrospectively give you for something like the ressurection for example, and how exactly would that work - In a practical sense? On the personal encounter/relationship....... what other method can be used other than personal experience/perception........given the word "personal", logical thinking would follow that the method would exclude any external method i.e. being verified by someone else, right? If this personal experience/relationship is being classified as "religious", please confirm which other religion/s espouses a personal relationship in the way that Christianity does - In order for this person to justifiably question if it was the God of the Bible or not. Are you saying that historians only(operative word) classify work by identified authors and first hand accounts as being historically true or accurate, if not, this is an argument from silence which is a euphemism for saying that it is "reaching'
"Therefore I am sending you prophets and sages and teachers. Some of them you will kill and crucify; others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town" - Matt 23:34 Only God sends prophets!
@@cygnusustus Several in the Old Testament like Moses, Abraham, David, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Eziekiel. In the New testament: John the Baptist - John 1:19 Anna in Luke - 2:36 Agabus in Acts - 11:27 4 Daughters of Philip - Acts 21:9 Barnabas, Simeon, Lucius & Manaen - Acts 13:1 Simeon - Luke 1:41 Apostle Paul - 1 Th 4:13 Apostle Peter - 2 Pt 3 Apostle John - Book of Revelation Judas and Silas - Acts 15:30
@@Ruach77 What did they prophesy? Pick one. Jesus prophesied that he would return within the lifetimes of those listening to him. This did not happen, so Jesus was a failed prophet, but you didn't list him anyway. Ezekiel prophesied that the city of Tyre would be permanently destroyed, yet it's still there. So Ezekiel was failed prophet as well. John 1:19 isn't a prophesy. How am I supposed to take you seriously?
@@cygnusustus A thousand years are as a day to the Lord. There are many prophecies yet to be fulfilled. Don't take me seriously and don't believe in anything you don't want to.
@@Ruach77 "A thousand years are as a day to the Lord. " He was talking to people. Not to himself. "Don't take me seriously and don't believe in anything you don't want to." I'll believe anything you can substantiate with evidence. Evidently you don't have this filter. You simply believe whatever you do want to.
To the third point: Deuteronomy 6:4 in Hebrew says, "YHWH Elohim YHWH échád." "Échád" in this context means "composite unity". The "im" in Elohim implies plurality, such as Christ's eternal spiritual nature and His added physical nature. YHWH (Father) Elohim (Christ with two natures) YHWH (Holy Spirit) Échád (composite unity-- Three in One).
It actually says elohenu, which is still a plural noun. I believe it is simply the first person construct whereas elohim is third person. Hope that helps.
I’m 68 years old and I believe I only now understand how one God can be in 3 persons. Think of identical triplets. They have the same DNA. They come from the same source, I.e. the same fertilized egg. God Elohim (Hebrew for God) existed before all else. God’s Words are alive and what He says, it becomes. Jesus was with God as His creative Force…His Word. Then it became time for God…Jesus, to tell the good news, that salvation was there through Himself. In Jesus’ conception, God’s Spirit hovered over Mary and when she was touched, it activated a creative force within her and she became pregnant. Thus making Jesus the Son of God who came from God’s ‘source’. The Holy Spirit is also from God’s Source, given to each believer. I hope this explanation helps others to understand our Holy Trinity. Blessings to you for telling others about our Savior, and drawing them to Him.
When the then high priest tore his robes, he gave up his status as high priest because they are not permitted to tear their clothing. This action then made Yahshua high priest in his place. Dig deep find gold Dig deeper find eeven more gold Also in John, He said "Before Abraham, I Am" Yah shua = God with us Jesus is God Observe Shabbat and the 7 appointments in Leviticus and totally forget about pagan christmas, easter and lent. HALLELUYAH
Dr. Frank Turek used to say 3 in essence one in being could you please clarify if thats wrong or being change please so that I can keep that argument because you stated one essence as a being but 3 persons please and thank you @alisachilders
I think that Psalm 10:4-11 is an amazing explanation of a lot of angry atheists: The wicked are too proud to seek God. They seem to think that God is dead. Yet they succeed in everything they do. They do not see your punishment awaiting them. They sneer at all their enemies. They think, “Nothing bad will ever happen to us! We will be free of trouble forever!” Their mouths are full of cursing, lies, and threats. Trouble and evil are on the tips of their tongues. They are always searching for helpless victims. Like lions crouched in hiding, they wait to pounce on the helpless. Like hunters they capture the helpless and drag them away in nets. Their helpless victims are crushed; they fall beneath the strength of the wicked. The wicked think, “God isn’t watching us! He has closed his eyes and won’t even see what we do!”
It's not that deep. Atheists just don't think there's sufficient evidence for any god. You're atheistic to thousands of other religions, they just add your religion to that list. You know how not-true you think the Greek Gods are? Is it because you think they're dead or you're too proud to seek them?
@@Bc232klm Saying there is insufficient evidence is usually a cop out of ignorance or laziness. Much like "God did it" is a cop out for how observable science works. Zeus and the other greek gods are imaginary because if you wanted to search history for them, you wouldn't find anything. Compare that to Jesus, who was an historical person who lived, died, then came back to life.
@@jeremybeavon4476 _Compare that to Jesus, who was an historical person who lived, died, then came back to life._ OK, I'll bite. Let's compare them. What do you have? I will _give_ you a guy named Jesus who was crucified by the Romans, since there's nothing magical about that. But let's hear what you've got for that "came back to life" claim. How about one piece of good evidence of that? Just *one.* Or *one piece of good evidence* that _any_ of the magical/supernatural stuff in the Bible actually happened? Why is *one* too much to ask? I know you've got stories, but stories aren't always true. You mention Zeus, but we have stories that Alexander the Great was descended from Zeus. We also have stories that a goddess - Artemis - attended at his birth. So how is Jesus different from Zeus again? Just because you were taught to believe in Jesus, not Zeus, as a baby? And if you want a historical person who lived, died, then came back to life, why wouldn't you choose Elvis Presley? We have actual eyewitness testimony of _that._ I don't find it convincing, myself, of course. But hundreds, if not _thousands,_ of people have reported seeing Elvis after he died. And thanks to movies and television, they actually knew what he looked like, too. _These_ people aren't all dead, and they're not all anonymous. You can even interview some of them, if you want. That's _actual eyewitness testimony,_ something Christians would _kill_ for - literally, I suspect - if they could get something that good for Jesus. As I say, I don't find it convincing, myself. It's still pretty poor evidence for such an extraordinary claim. But it's far, _far_ better than anything you have for Jesus, isn't it? You wanted to compare these things, so let's compare them. Just one thing at a time, please.
That’s like saying: humans are one species, with 7 billion parts that connect to form the human race. You guys believe god is the race, and there are three individuals who make up the race.
@@JolinHard Basically, they have been told that the Trinity is illogical, but they don't know why it is. They try to claim we are referring to 3 gods, but we are referring to 1 God and three persons. I don't bother with the verses at first, but explain to them we are not talking about a being with physical limitations. God is Spirit and therefore, does not have the physical limitations that would make 3 persons illogical. If they want to talk about it, I will show verses why were thing God is triune, but I first want to shatter the physical limitation they want to connect with the Trinity.
3 beans in 1 bean is not a good analogy for the Trinity. 3 flavors in 1 bean may be closer, but I don't understand why anyone would use beans as an analogy for the Trinity at all. Obviously I misheard what she was saying as I laid in bed half asleep. But when I heard it, that was my thought. It forced me to wake up and listen to that section again. If I hadn't woke up I am certain that a dream about Jack and the Beanstalk was coming.
Hi! Quick question on something that has confused me a couple of times. At times the Pharisees seem to act as if they don’t have the authority to kill someone that is a threat to them or has violated their Law. On at least one occasion it appears that they tried to kill Jesus before the cross but eventually settled on a different course of action by having the Roman government kill Him for them. I’m not sure if this was because of Jesus’ large following and the feared response by His followers. But then in the epistles it seems like they suddenly don’t have a problem killing people. Starting with the killing of Stephen, who was killed in public, the Pharisees do not seemed worried about killing people they deem to be a threat. By some accounts Paul killed some Christians and later they even attempted to kill Paul. So what changed or how do we understand how much authority the Pharisees had when it came to their form of capital punishment?
3:18 "God sent prophets to warn the Canaanites" Could someone provide me with the Bible verse for this? I've been searching high and low for this in the Bible but I could not find a reference to one prophet warning the Canaanites.
How can anyone with any modicum of intergrity claim that an infant can be convicted of a capital crime? How did the infants commit any of the crimes you claim? See my video response.
Person is defined as individual and self. This still makes three gods. The fact that Christianity has to use words in unconventional manner show's how fallacious it is.
If you're worshiping Jesus and he's not God, you are sinning against God.. ... Acts 4: 12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. = "Jesus" .. Isaiah 45: [5] I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me: 6] That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is “None Beside Me”. I am the LORD, and there is None Else.
"Lean not on your own understanding." This is a verse all atheists should take into account when about things that don't sense. It's like looking at dice with infinte sides. To one person, it can have 12 sides. To another, it can have 3. And to another, it can have 250. So on and so forth. In conclusion, no two people will come to the same answer about God.
This prevents us from coming to any rational conclusion about God at all. If God doesn't want people to come to a rational conclusion about him, why is he punishing people for coming to the wrong conclusion by sending them to hell?
The statement was meant for believers like this woman not atheists. The video just presents mental gymnastics and word play to justify a default view of her religious beliefs. In my opinion the real problem with religion today is the attempt to justify it using modern sciences and (archeology, biology, physics, etc.) and modern methods of science. As we see in many fields or subjects, in todays world, the effort to influence and manipulate thinking in order to popularize ideas, often misrepresents the quality and content of ideas themselves.
@@incredulouspasta3304 It's not about God not wanting you to understand *what* he is. He just knows that no one on this planet will ever fully be able to, no matter how much any of us try. That's why he tells you to trust him. As trusting who he is.
@@incredulouspasta3304 Let me make it very clear who gets into heaven. Those who have lived a *perfect life (aka, no human on this planet except for Babies as well as Jesus himself)* and those who are forgiven. God knew/knows/will know every sin that you have/Will ever commit. Now if there was a middle ground, then Jesus wouldn't exist. He wouldn't need to. That'd also be unfair to those already in heaven or hell. What would make this group of sinning humans so different from the ones already in heaven or hell? Further more, you saying that it's foolish to offer only two options, when back in the time of the old testament, option 1 which is salvation from hell was completely out of the question. That's a solid indictactor that you do not know God for who he is.
Alisa skated over a controversial debate over different conceptions of beginnings in her last argument. A and B theory of time are different ways of describing beginning and only one of them (A Theory) allows Alisa to draw the inference that the beginning of the universe would have a cause. Under B theory, the universe would simply be a 4 dimensional block that is temporally extended in a finite direction but with no cause. And yet it is not conceded by modern scientists that A Theory is true. I understand that this was supposed to be a short video but Alisa should not be raising complex topics and treating them like they’re just obvious evidence for theism. No one was twisting her arm to bring that argument up instead of another one.
Also, there's no such thing as "THE" law of causality. There are many different ideas about how causality works. She chose one that conveniently supports her argument, while ignoring the rest.
When it comes to the issue of genocide, I find her explanation lacking. Yes, the definition of genocide MIGHT fit, but does that make the murders better or moral? (I would argue annihilating a group of people for religious reasons would be considered genocide.) "Sin" is not the normal everyday concept of "evil." Their sin could have ranged anywhere from murdering everyone they saw to having relations on your time of the month. That's a pretty broad spectrum. And we know from Exodus that God isn't opposed to killing innocent people to show off his power. You would think an all powerful, all knowing God could think of a better solution than genocide (or rather mass murder.)
You should watch Frank Turek explain this. He does a fantastic job. Additionally, he mentions that seeing as how God holds ALL of our lives in His hands, and therefore decides when our lives will be cut off, it's not considered murder when He decides to end a life. Otherwise every single death would be murder by God. But truly, if you look into the evils that came from these people, you would know that God was judging their sin, and not just willy-nilly killing off people. To add to all of this, sin is when we do something that goes against what God considers right. It doesn't matter how big or small it looks in the eyes of a human. To God, sin is sin. And by committing these sins we deserve death. Just for 1 singular sin we would not be able to stand in the presence of God. That's why Jesus gave Himself for us. His blood covers our sins so that when we stand before God He will only what Jesus did on Calvary.
Would also like to add, no one is innocent. Everyone sins. Literally even the smallest children commit sins. So saying that God isn't opposed to killing "innocent" people isn't an accurate statement at all. We are all born wicked.
@@Sara11614 I've listened to Turek. His explanation is just as lacking. Just because you create life doesn't mean it's moral to take life. Parents create life, but when a parent murders their child m, they don't get off the hook. So, why should God get special pleading? If you create life, take responsibility for that life. All life is precious, and shouldn't be the property of another.
@@Sara11614 _You should watch Frank Turek explain this._ I _have_ watched Frank Turek. He's not even _slightly_ convincing to anyone who doesn't already believe this stuff. To everyone else, he's just laughable. Frank Turek - like many other religious apologists - makes a living telling Christians what they want to hear. Since they _already_ believe it, they just accept what he says. It's comforting to them, so they're not going to be very critical. After all, if they were critically minded, they wouldn't be faith-based in the first place, huh? Of course, he's not convincing to Muslims. And Muslim apologists aren't convincing to Christians. They're all faith-based, but they were taught to believe somewhat different stuff as children, so they believe different things as adults. But _none_ of you are convincing to the rest of us, because it's all just _claims._ And claims are easy. There's a reason why every religion in the world makes claims. It's not hard. So every religion in the world has claims and every religion in the world has excuses. But without evidence that your claims are actually _true,_ I can't be convinced by them. If you don't have even *one* piece of good evidence, I can't even take them _seriously._ And so far, no Christian or Muslims seems to have anything at all but wishful-thinking. You made a lot of claims there. I know you can't back up any of those claims, so I won't even ask. But how about *one piece of good evidence* that your god exists _at all,_ outside of your imagination? Or maybe *one piece of good evidence* that _any_ of the magical/supernatural stories in the Bible actually happened? Your choice.
i don't understand the need for jesus. if you had the 1 and only god who says all other gods are false but him. why would you need another one to save you? that seems blasphemous. our world hasn't become "less sinless" since jesus was here. Nothing changed. So, do we need another god to come and save us?
All of this is interpretation, not saying I disagree. Yes, Jesus is the messiah and him and God are one. Jesus always says his father and " pray to God above." It's the father and son relationship, With my baby boy I am him and my son is me we are one love joined by our DNA(created by God) having many shared qualities. Shouldnt be hard for anyone to understand Christian or not. When I see my son I see myself and he will see himself in me.
Thanks for your knowledge and wisdom on this matter! How about this, Yeshua is the Lamb of God. To qualify as the sacrifice He had to be 2 unique things. Truly God, Truly Man. (think 2 parallel lines becoming the Cross) Yet Yeshua is both! Something only the Good Lord and our Savior is! Period. In other words Truly the mystery of all mysteries.
If you are watching this and you are a believer may God bless you today and give you peace!
Amen.
And may God bless you also Duane.
Thanks brother! God bless you too!
Thank you brother!
May I add to wish Hod’s grace upon those who don’t believe as well! Peace to all.
And even if you aren't a believer God bless you, he loves you and died for you 💖🙏✝️
”I, even I, am He who comforts you. Who are you that you should be afraid Of a man who will die, And of the son of a man who will be made like grass?” Isaiah 51:12
He is the God of all comfort! Amen. Makes me think of Psalm 23.
Why should you fear a son of man who died?
@@bennywolfe4357 I guess you didn't get the memo. He rose from the dead.
No one took the life of my Jesus.
He simply laid it down and has the power to take it back.
He's alive forever more!!!
John 10:17-18
[17]Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
[18]No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.
Thanks to all who made this video! It was so useful. God bless you all ❤🙏🏻
Great video and thanks for sharing!!
0:45 - deity of Christ
2:21 - genocide and Deuteronomy 20:16-18
3:14 , 3:27
3:32, 3:59 - Trinity
4:23, 4:43 - Other religions
5:42, 6:11, 6:36 - Scientific evidence and God
Thank you for the timestamps. May God bless you in every facet of your life. ❤️🙏🏿
@@IronBlaze77 Thanks, Iron. May God go with you :;)
Stay strong, keep applying 2 Peter 3:18 to your life.
@@zekdom I will, thank you! May God strengthen you as your continue to walk and grow in Him.
Alisa Childers did an excellent job explaining these things in such a short time and clearly. I've subscribed to her page. Btw the Trinity is not something we should ponder too much, as it is one of the mysteries of God we just cannot get our minds around. Considering all else I'm good with that.
It is a mystery of God and God is so much more than we could ever think or imagine.
@@jesusistheanswer9998 Amen.
I heard an awesome sermon (lecture actually) on the trinity. The theologian began by stating that the Trinity is the most difficult doctrine to try and explain or understand. Reason being is that we are attempting to define God in human terms.
@@ianalan4367 And seriously, how can we?
@@Flagrum3
I don’t agree, I think it is a good thing to delve deep into who God is and how he operates. This is a matter of becoming mature instead of staying immature.
God wants us to know him better and using our reason and logic is a way to do that, after all God gave us our reason and logic. By using them, we are not only helping ourselves but we are more appreciative of the imago dei in us.
Here here; well said! ❤️
That's the power of truth. God bless you and the team.🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
The heck you on about? You mean Allah or…?
Wow. What a deluded and judgemental fool you are!!! If this is what you call the actions of a just and moral god, I weep for you. Morality is living with your neighbors, not killing them because a voice in your head tells you that their house is yours and you should kill them.
@@walkergarya Thank God. She's not a Jihadist. What about you?
@@kughalumulatonu1259 I will call out the lies and barbaric nature of christianity and argue my point, but I will not use violence.
@@walkergarya Are you a prophet?
Thank you, Ms. Alisa for explaining things in the manner in which you did. Feel that much stronger today.
God bless you, and God bless my brothers and sisters in Christ.
Don't look to apologists for logic or science. Or scripture, for that matter.
praise the Lord and God bless you all glory be to the HOLY TRINITY forever and ever amen
Great video! You just attacked five of the biggest attacks that atheists try to use against Christians and did a very good job of it I might add. God is God whatever he decides is just and holy.
@Taufik Mukti well for one that's never happened and there is only one occurrence in the Bible of that ever happening and that was with Abraham and Isaac.
@Taufik Mukti I don't believe I will have to worry about God ever asking me to do that. That was a special, unique occurrence as God was trying to test Abraham's faith. Abraham was the line that God chose to bring the Messiah into the world through. Special case scenario and yes God is just and holy in all he decides.
@Taufik Mukti sounds like you're already out, man. So why would I take your advice on anything relating to God?
We live in an imperfect and fallen world where bad things do happen. So the question becomes do we want to go through these bad things in life with God or without him? I think I'd rather have God on my side.
@Taufik Mukti the only way that God would allpw my child have some incurable disease is due to the fact that we live in a fallen world. Of course that wouldn't occur in a perfect world or in heaven so u have nothing to worry about. If you wont believe in God if he does something like that, or believe that God playing God is immoral, then you fail to understand the power of God and his power to restore life, wealth and health. He just doesn't always do so in this life since this life is futile and we will all die soon anyways. That's why Christianity makes sence because it prioritizes in getting as much people into such perfect world as possible
@@jesusistheanswer9998 Your God is EVIL
Christians are beautiful people.
Thank you x
@@nbambi2323 i mean it.
@@SumiOccult sometimes
I'm not really attracted to that Christian woman in the vid though, because I'm only 19...
@@kimbanton4398 lmeo
Good video
Only one truth can be true and according to Jesus himself he is the only way.
John 14:6 Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."
Exactly. He isn't A way he is THE way.
@@jesusistheanswer9998 tell that to Joel Osteen. He needs to hear it.
This woman is a gem! Adonai bless you!
AMEN 🔥 Hallejujah 🔥
Thank You very much! I was indeed blessed by this video. Keep up the good work! Hallelujah!!
I love hearing from you in a time format that allows me to listen. I'm a single parent of 3, and a full time student, running a home-I just don't have time for hour long podcasts that much of the time. Please make more 5-15, even 20 minute videos...on your channel...I guess this isn't.
Blessings from UK sister.
Awesome video
The word “trinity” is not found in the Bible, but this does not mean that the concept is not taught there. The word “bible” is not found in the Bible either, but we use it anyway. Likewise, the words “omniscience,” which means “all-knowing,” “omnipotence,” which means “all-powerful,” and “omnipresence,” which means “present everywhere” are not found in the Bible either; but we use these words to describe the attributes of God. So, to say that the Trinity isn’t true because the word isn’t in the Bible is an invalid argument.
There are many scriptures that we use to get the doctrine of the Trinity from.
Some of them incude:
Matt. 28:19, “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.”
1 Cor. 12:4-6, “Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit. 5And there are varieties of ministries and the same Lord. 6And there are varieties of effects, but the same God who works all things in all persons.”
2 Cor. 13:14, “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, be with you all.”
Eph. 4:4-7, “There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; 5one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all. 7But to each one of us grace was given according to the measure of Christ’s gift.”
1 Pet. 1:2, “according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, that you may obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood: May grace and peace be yours in fullest measure.”
Jude 20-21, “But you, beloved, building yourselves up on your most holy faith; praying in the Holy Spirit; 21keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting anxiously for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to eternal life.”
The Trinity is present and working in Gen. 1:1
@@jhamilton1007 good call!
And Colossians 2:9
@@jhamilton1007 Well he did say the concept is there. Its all over the Bible actually. John 1.1 for instance.
To be honest, since Jesus IS "The Word". It also being the Father's laid out plan for redemption, and the Bible being inspired by the Spirit. The Trinity is working and present throughout the entirety of Scripture.
🔥🔥🔥
Yes Jesus is God!!!
John 1:14
And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.
John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 10:30
I and the Father are one.”
Don't forget John 5:17,18 and Mark 2:1-12. Just a few to add to the list.
Who wrote John???
Since him and the father is one then there is no need for a trinity 🙄
@@lbj2642 so we are supposed to use your logic over the logic of God? Head is shaking back at you bud. I don't think you are quite as wise as God is.
@@jesusistheanswer9998 go read John chapter 1:1-14
just brilliant, God bless you
❤️
Thank you, good short answers to critical question 🙋
Good video. You may also want to add into the Kalam argument, that if there was no time “sans the universe”, then the only thing that could “start” or “cause the effect” of the time, space and matter, without itself having a temporal cause, is a being with free will. The ability to act on a decision as the first agent without influence is the only way to get a “beginning” from timelessness.
_if there was no time “sans the universe”, then the only thing that could “start” or “cause the effect” of the time, space and matter, without itself having a temporal cause, is a being with free will._
*Evidence?*
Can you back up that claim with any evidence at all?
_The ability to act on a decision as the first agent without influence is the only way to get a “beginning” from timelessness._
Again, that's just a claim. But how can anyone or anything "act on a decision" in the absence of time? Whatever else it might have been, it can't be that, can it?
@@Bill_Garthright What do you mean "evidence"? The concept of free will is an ongoing debate, but in my opinion there is more evidence for it than against it.
The point presupposes the existence of free will and the idea that the agent is the sole cause of an event is just what free will entails definitionally.
So, your desire for "evidence" just doesn't have anything to do with the argument here.
@@brando3342
_What do you mean "evidence"?_
You know, _something_ distinguishable from delusion and wishful-thinking?
_The concept of free will is an ongoing debate, but in my opinion there is more evidence for it than against it._
Really? OK, how about defining "free will," then, and providing *one piece of good evidence* that it actually exists? Just *one.*
_The point presupposes the existence of free will and the idea that the agent is the sole cause of an event is just what free will entails definitionally._
In that case, I am _definitely_ going to need you to define "free will," because that seems to make absolutely no sense under any definition I've ever heard. And we'll just talk past each other if we're talking about different things.
_So, your desire for "evidence" just doesn't have anything to do with the argument here._
So, you made a claim, but you can't back it up with _anything?_ OK, then there's absolutely no reason to take your claim seriously. Or do _you_ take all claims seriously, whether they have any evidence backing them up or not?
@@Bill_Garthright
When I said your demand for evidence didn’t have to do with my argument, I was referring to the fact that the argument I am making PRESUPPOSES the existence of free will, it is not an argument attempting to PROVE free will. I hope that is clear.
To continue:
“Free will, in humans, the power or capacity to choose among alternatives or to act in certain situations independently of natural, social, or divine restraints.”
Like I said, the agent is the source when speaking of free will decisions, apart from any influence.
If you want to ask for proof of free will (not my argument here though). I’ll direct you to the Libet experiments. They show that just before the brain sends the signal to your body to perform a specific action, the agent has a short period of time, in which the agent has the opportunity to cancel said action. This promotes the idea of “free will not” which is equivalent to free will, considering that’s how we create new neural pathways.
This is from the Oxford.universitypressscolarship:
“This chapter presents a classic essay in which Benjamin Libet lays out his basic experimental results and draws philosophical lessons regarding free will and responsibility. He argues that the existence of free will is at least as good, if not a better, scientific option than is its denial by determinist theory.”
@@brando3342
_the argument I am making PRESUPPOSES the existence of free will_
Unfortunately, that doesn't help your argument. Even _presupposing_ free will doesn't mean that "the only thing that could “start” or “cause the effect” of the time, space and matter, without itself having a temporal cause, is a being with free will."
That's just a claim backed up by nothing at all. And it doesn't make any difference whether "free will" is a real thing or not.
_They show that just before the brain sends the signal to your body to perform a specific action, the agent has a short period of time, in which the agent has the opportunity to cancel said action._
So what? How does that demonstrate "free will"?
I don't know what you mean by "agent," anyway. But that's a minor detail. Just because there's time for the "agent" to cancel an action, that doesn't mean that free will exists, since we don't know what goes into the decision to "cancel an action." What would make us decide to "cancel an action" or not?
The fact is, you can't run that experiment multiple times, so we have no way of knowing if the same thing would happen every time or not.
I suspect that it _wouldn't_ happen the same way every time (though, of course, I don't know that), just because of quantum effects. But if that's what makes the difference, that still wouldn't be "free will," I wouldn't think.
But I don't find that especially interesting, anyway. We have _zero_ reasons to think that a disembodied mind - a mind not dependent on a brain - could exist, and plenty of reasons to think otherwise. After all, we have _abundant_ evidence that damaging a brain can change or destroy everything about our minds - memory, perception, beliefs, reasoning, self-recognition, etc. - up to and including death.
So "free will" is the _least_ important part of god claims, I'd say. Personally, I don't think that "free will" even _matters._ Whether it exists or it doesn't, we should still _act_ as though it does, in order to live in a decent civilized society.
Thanks for these - keep up the good work!
I look at the trinity like how I look at water which can exist in three states liquid,solid,gas however it’s still water in fact in Jeremiah 2:13 the prophet explains how God is “The spring of living water” that helped me understand the concept of the trinity
I look at the trinity as a desperate attempt by Christians to settle the arguments among themselves about exactly what and who Jesus was. I mean, there is _zero_ evidence of any of it, right?
@@Bill_Garthright that’s an interesting perspective I appreciate you sharing it with me something to ponder on good job
@@Bill_Garthright I'll lead you to look at "Let US make man in OUR image." He's not talking to angels because they can't create. So He is talking to a co-creator. Therefore, He the Father is talking to He the Son, Jesus Christ. Two parts of the Trinity. When Jesus was about to leave earth He said that He would send the Comforter, the Holy Spirit. Now Christ is not going to send us something that is less than 100% God. There you have it God in three persons but of ONE nature and ONE purpose. I give you the Holy Trinity. ✝️❤️🙏 God bless you.
@@dodibenabba1378
_I'll lead you to look at "Let US make man in OUR image."_
Note that that's English, so it's just a translation. I don't know _what_ it said in the original language. Do you? But there's more to it than that. You _do_ know that royalty - in Europe, at least - used the royal "we," right?
Instead of saying "I," a king would say "we" - even if it was just his decision alone. He wasn't implying that he had a co-leader. Not at all. He was just emphasizing his royalty. So _of course_ they'd have their god say that. I'm sorry, but that's just silly.
But yes, you can always find _some_ part of the Bible which you can interpret to back up whatever you _want._ The Bible is The Big Book of Multiple Choice. That's why there are thousands of different denominations, with Christians disagreeing about nearly _everything._
Interpretation is always subjective even _before_ you think about the various translations or the various differences in copies of the Bible. And it was no different with early Christians - well, "earlier" Christians. (Centuries, or even decades, later is not exactly "early.") Even when they put together the Bible, there was disagreement about what should go in it. They were just trying to find something that most of them could live with.
And, of course, with political power behind one particular sect of Christianity, the Catholic Church spent a thousand years rooting out 'heresy' with fire and sword. So anything that _didn't_ agree with the preferred narrative would be unlikely to survive.
I see no reason to think that _any_ god exists, let alone a particular one. As far as I can tell, there's not even *one* piece of good evidence backing up any of the magical/supernatural stuff in the Bible - and I've likely been asking Christians for evidence since before you were born.
So the whole trinity thing doesn't matter to me. It's just that there were apparently _lots_ of disagreements about the exact nature of Christ _among Christians_ back then. They found something that most of them could live with, but that doesn't make it _true._
@@dodibenabba1378 I do know Hebrew. It does say this. But your argument is extremely flawed. Extremely. If you call Yakweh the father, what about all the times yakweh says there are no other god? Or I am one?
Of course yakweh was talking to angels. He wasn’t actually saying they’d work together to make man, he was just saying it to make them feel better.
Here’s proof: the very next verse, when god actually creates man, it says “and god made man in his image, in the image of god he made him.”
If he was talking to Jesus and the holly ghost, why didn’t they actually help make him make man, make anything else, or stop him from saying they don’t exist?
SOMEONE GIVE A RAISE FOR WHOEVER IS MAKING THE THUMBNAILS.
Cross examined has competition now
Do they get paid? If not they should! 😂😂😂
1 John 2:17
[17]And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.
God lawfully has the right to execute judgment upon anyone. The Bible says that all people have sinned against God and are under his righteous judgment. Therefore, their execution is not an arbitrary killing, nor is it murder. Murder is the unlawful taking of life. Killing is the lawful taking of life. For example, we can lawfully take a life in defense of ourselves, our families, our nations, etc.
You would think that a all loving God wouldn't execute anybody.
Great point! He is the judge and he decides what is right or wrong and he decides who lives and who dies and when that happens. Why? Because he is God.
@@Nimish204 sin destroys everything. Think about all the sin in the world today and how it destroys families and people's lives. Then that gets passed on to the next generation and the next and the next.
@@Nimish204 even in Gods judgement there is mercy and grace. Imagine a world where there was always murder, stealing, rape, molestation and incest. If you look at the things that these nations were doing before God judged them you would see this pattern of evil.
@@jesusistheanswer9998 ....and God alone.
Loved Her book 📖
It's impossible to read the Bible in its entirety and get any other conclusion other than Jesus being both God and man. The only reason some groups believe that is because they ignore half of what the Bible says. Or they simply ignore all of it. As Christians we know and understand because we're being led by the Spirit of God. If someone doesn't have the Spirit of God then they just aren't going to get it.
Romans 8- as many as are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God and if someone does not have the Holy Spirit they do not belong to him.
@@jesusistheanswer9998 my point exactly. Thanks for Romans 8 btw!
@@jordanmeyers2353 well when you said that, that's what it made me think of. Verses 9 and 14.
I believe that many can perfectly understand the concept of Jesus being both God and man without having the Holy Spirit, but will typically deny it, and attempt to debunk it unless the Holy Spirit shows them.
@@jordanmeyers2353
ROMANS 9:13 KJV as written I hate Esau where it's written MALACHI 1:3-4 KJV
Esau is Edom/Dukes/ white race GENESIS 36 KJV
Thank you for your insight.
Muslims don't really ask questions about Jesus being God. They demand the exact words" I am God, Worship me" knowing it very well that there aren't exact such words. Some less knowledgeable Christians unfortunately converted to Islam because of this ridiculous argument.
Islam, the religion of the most obvious false prophet.
Critical thinking is not part of their religion. It gets them removed.
The reason why some Christians fall away like that is because they aren't grounded in the word of God.
@@jesusistheanswer9998 Or they were not Christians to begin with (1 John 2:19).
@@fredrolinners8903 true
Know that when they ask this, they themselves don’t believe that the bible is real and that it has been changed over the years. Just so you know, it has never been changed and there is even a copy of the original bible from the year 300 in the original Aramaic language.
Whenever a Muslim asks you this question, ask them this “when did Muhammad say ‘ I’m just a prophet, don’t worship me’ ”
This question will make them realise that you can’t just demand for a word-for-word answer to prove a claim that someone made. After this, start then to give them the bible verses where Jesus claimed to be God, and if he claimed to be god, then he has already claimed all the things that god has claimed.
The verses I use to tell them this are
Isiah 44:6 NIV
“This is what the Lord says- Israel’s King and Redeemer, the Lord Almighty: I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God.”
Revelation 1:17-18 NIV
“When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. Then he placed his right hand on me and said: “Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last. I am the Living One; I was dead, and now look, I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades.”
In “Isiah”, god says that he is the first and the last and that besides him there is not other god.
In “Revelation”, Jesus, also, claims to be the first and the last and besides him there is no other god. This then makes a clear path leading to Jesus being god. So now you know how to answer to their shameful questions. God have mercy on all of us.
Keep faith brother, may grace, mercy, peace and love be with you, amen.
Thank you.
It’s amazing to me that ppl still try arguing these same old subjects. It’s only been asked, answered and explained a zillion times! Smh
All it takes is reading the word!
Yeah….answered and explained very poorly….
@@jacoblee5796 not at all. I thought she did a great job.
@@jesusistheanswer9998 I disagree
@@jacoblee5796 you're free to disagree and I am free to disagree with you, right?
Please pray for my friend Kristel! She doesn't know God. Pray that God would open her mind and heart to the truth which is in Jesus Christ and destroy satan's lies and works in her life.
Why can't god just open her mind without you having to pray for it first?
This xtian belief system is beyond incoherent, however you look at it.
On the killing of the canaanites, I would also add the Sin of Noah’s son Ham. Noah awakes and when he knew what had been done unto him he said, cursed be Canaan. I personally think Hams sin was he slept with his mother. See Micheal Heiser on sin of Ham.
With respect what "you think" is irrelevant. If it's not in scripture you shouldn't suppose an event.
Correct, in the scriptures to uncover nakedness means perversion, sexual sin or dishonor
I like the first one that was talked about. I've learned that in the language used during that time, when Jesus was asked if He was God, what Jesus said was understood to mean that He is God. And if I'm not mistaken it was pretty much the equivalent of explicitly saying so like we would in English.
Interesting observation about the law of noncontradiction: everything exists in at least two dimensions at the same time, one visible to the human senses and one invisible to the human senses. We are seated in and with Christ in the heavenly (spiritual) realm and at the same time we are here in this physical, temporal environment. Quantum science says that we are alternating from waveform (invisible, spirit realm) to particle form (visible, natural realm) at 20,000 times per nanosecond. Interesting stuff. Currently existing in the heavenly realm in and with Christ helps us understand some of the conflicting views in theological doctrines. Different principles apply in each of these dimensions. Here's a mind bender: how can a person sin if they have died and their life is hidden in Christ where there is no sin? Hmmm?
Edit: to address your last point immediately, the New Testament is filled with explanations of Christians struggling with sin. In 1 John 1 he writes to fellow Christians if we say we have no sin then the truth is not in us and we make God out to be a liar. One of the easiest answers to this is contained within Romans 7. Scientists now say there may be as many as 10 dimensions. Waves and particles, or energy and matter, however you want to look at it, depend upon the natural laws like gravity, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear forces. I think there’s like at least 10 different interpretations of quantum mechanics, string theory, etc. I don’t think wave-particle duality adequately explains our soul/spirit. It’s still in the physical universe. You describe this world as temporal, and that may be partially true since God will make all things new, but he will recreate the heavens and earth and we will spend eternity in New Jerusalem in New, glorified bodies. So we are creatures naturally created to exist as both body and soul together. Death, which are the wages of sin, is the unnatural separation of those. In other words, I don’t think you can simply use quantum mechanics to adequately explain the “spiritual realm.” It’s likely way more complicated and amazing than we could ever imagine. Just my two cents though. There’s a good chance I’m wrong anyway. Chuck Missler of Koinonia house has a lot of videos on this subject. Very very interesting, like you said.
Interesting point.
You sound nuts 🤪
_Quantum science says that we are alternating from waveform (invisible, spirit realm) to particle form (visible, natural realm) at 20,000 times per nanosecond._
So, you're saying that you know nothing at all about quantum physics? :)
@@therockstar17 my last point is that the kingdom of God is a mystery. Yes, scripture says if we say we have no sin, the truth is not in us. We also see that in Christ, there is no sin. We see that we have been crucified with Christ, yet we still live, but not us but Christ in us. So are we in Christ or not? Have we died with Him or not? We live in two dimensions at the same time, and in one of those dimensions, sin does not exist. A mystery. For me, I choose life, I choose to walk in the Spirit. There is no sin there, only life and love and complete rest and freedom. At some point the mortal body will be replaced with an immortal one like the one Jesus has. Then we will be complete (telios) and be on our way to understanding the mystery.
EXCELLENT, Alisa!
The Canaanite conquest wiped out "7 tribes" and afterwards Joshua exclaims there are no more Anakim in the land.
The anakim were descendents of Anak the Nephilim. The nephilim were a physical manifestation of the human depravity in genesis 6.
They were abominations of spiritual beings merging with humanity.
Furthermore, we know there are still other canaanites in the land afterwards like the phillistines. So it's not like the israelites just marched in and started a genocide.
Yahweh knew that these tribes settled there around the time Abraham was promised the land.
The spiritual beings did this in defiance to the creator.
Since they would not leave peacefully ( and likely would want to commit a genocide of their own towards the israelites to prevent the seed of the woman that will crush the head of the serpent from coming)
God knew they had to be wiped out in order for the Israelites to live there safely
Exactly 👍
Bravo!!!
I would like to expand the 3 person explanation (imo)- Jesus is the physical manifestation of GOD. The Holy Spirit is the voice/word of GOD. Parts of GOD as one being.
Please don’t. Especially given that it’s Jesus who is the word of God.
blasphemy!
Please don't expand the explanation. The reason is the error that is so easy to get into. I know you mean well but your explanation is also wrong. It's best not to.
@@wisewoman4950 thank you for kind comments. I think as Christians we have to give a reasonable explanation to the Trinity. I am fully aware that GOD will eventually reveal more to us in heaven but to me apologetics means giving some form of explanation to an atheist that comes across as logical. I agree with the 3 person one being statement but it does need further clarification. I am open to a better explanation so I can use it when atheists talk about this issue.
@@Dapperdave-gg6vx it’s simple.
One is unbegotten (The Father), One is begotten (The Son) and one proceeds (The Holy Spirit). That’s how they are three distinct persons.
How are they One God? Because they perform the One activity of “God”. Since they are one being they have One activities.
For further details read “not three gods” by Saint Gregory of Nysa.
Here’s an example:
“For if our interpretation of the term Godhead, or θεότης, is a true one, and the things which are seen are said to be beheld, or θεατά, and that which beholds them is called θεός, or God, no one of the Persons in the Trinity could reasonably be excluded from such an appellation on the ground of the sense involved in the word. For Scripture attributes the act of seeing equally to Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.”
Amen God is Good Jesus is Lord 🙏🏽❤️✝️👑
Jesus Christ is coming back soon! Repent and get right with God and you WILL be saved from the wrath of God
Amen brother! Romans 10:9-11 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. 11 For the Scripture says, "Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame."
@@jesusistheanswer9998 Amen a hundred times over! God bless you and may you and family abide in the peace and love of our Lord Jesus Christ forevermore! ❤️
@@Gg-ij7li amen! You too my friend!
When and what time I must be ready
@@adamsandler1679 any time. Only the Father knows the day and hour.
Great video !
Where is he? Why hasn't God shown himself? God actually came to earth 2000 years ago. He appeared in human form. So there is 1 proof of God to add to the list. Jesus Christ.
There's doubt over whether Jesus even existed. But if he did, Mary wasn't a virgin.
@@Nimish204 only a doubt for people who don't understand history.
@@Nimish204 and only a doubt for those who are not Christians.
I've had people tell me that before too. when God steps down in my front lawn I'll believe him! Well he did come down and you still don't believe.
@Taufik Mukti that is not what we as Christians believe. It takes faith to believe what the Bible says and without faith it is impossible to please God.
This video is really good. These answers are what every Christian should know.
This should also include classical theism and drop Intelligent Design which has been debunked.
Classical theism is a doctrine that, in my opinion, takes God seriously and is one of the best human attempts to understand what it means to be God and how we can know God exists.
People are part both their parents and still an individual or a pregnant woman is 3 parts. Thats how I think of the trinity.
That's very interesting. Never thought of that.
Interesting. The way I see it is we are in the image of God, and we are spirit, soul, and body, yet the same person.
Without the soul the body dies, without the spirit, the soul dies.
Before we give our lives to Christ we are soul and body without spirit, as the spirit was lost at the fall. Jesus gives us His Spirit, thus making those who repent a new creation. Because of His Spirit, we are able to renew our mind, and our emotions are healed by the Spirit.
When we are given incorruptible bodies, then we will be complete in Christ as it should have been in the beginning.
@@horace9341 wow great comment brother!
@@jesusistheanswer9998 Thanks bro, it’s nice to get some encouragement instead of skepticism. Jesus Himself didn’t start His ministry until He received The Holy Spirit at His baptism. It always amazes and humbles me to know that God is willing to put His Holy Spirit into our dirty and corrupted vessels. As John Newton so eloquently put ‘Amazing Grace’ .
Wonderful..this is so helpful 👍👍
6:18 can time itself really "come into existence" as Childers says?
To "come into existence" suggests the preexistence of time in and of itself since it is inherently suggested that at one time - time itself did not exist, and yet at another subsequent time - it in fact does exist.
So you're disagreeing? And basically saying time has always existed.
I believe that time had to be created just like every other thing.
God is outside of time that He created. You're overthinking it... 🙃
@@novusstudios1744 you seem shocked and deeply offended - as if disagreement with another mortal or merely questioning what a mortal such as Childers says is somehow an unforgivable sin.
@@rorywynhoff1549 unless God IS time which is entirely possible. Not sure if you realized this but I literally only wrote 2 sentences in my OP - one of them being a question; how is that "over thinking" ? Perhaps you should be grateful that I think at all rather than mindlessly believing everything on TV like CNN wants us to.
At 2:40, Ms. Childers says: _"Genocide is defined as killing a large group of people because of their race, religion, or nationality, but in the case of the Canaanites, they weren't killed because of their race, they were executed as a decree of God's righteous judgement."_
Potato, po-tah-to. Even if we follow Ms. Childers definition, the killing of the Canaanites should qualify as genocide, of course, because the Canaanites were killed for not believing in the right deity, which means they were killed "because of their religion", which Ms. Childers includes in her definition.
But even if we agree with Ms. Childers that this extermination of the Canaanites should not be called "genocide", how does this detract from the heinousness of the crime? You can call it Bob for all I care, it was a cruel act of murder and mayhem, and it should give pause to anyone who reads about it and believes it really happened as described in the Bible to consider if this is really the kind of God they think they believe in.
For reference, here is the definition of "genocide" according to the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide:
_"Article II
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
a. Killing members of the group;
b. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
c. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
d. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
e. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."_
As anyone can see clearly and unequivocally, the extermination of the Canaanites does comply with this definition. I would encourage Ms. Childers to read the Convention and then reconsider her advise to her fellow Christians.
Excellent comment!
I would also point out that "God's righteous judgement" is an excuse theists can use to kill _anyone_ they don't like. This is how we get religious terrorism - and not just from Christians, either. And note that 'God' never tells anyone _himself._ It's always some human being telling other human beings what 'God' wants them to do.
@@Bill_Garthright Thanks! And: True!
I was anticipating some believers to comment that it could not be a "crime" because their God willed it, and of course, as you rightfully point out, I would have then confronted them with the curious fact that they would be using the exact same argumentation as religious suicide bombers.
For an outsider, it is impossible to judge which deity's wrath is righteous, and as we are all outsiders to some faiths, that means we are all incapable of making such a judgment.
You say *the Canaanites were killed for not believing in the right deity, which means they were killed "because of their religion."*
Are you sure they were killed for not believing in the right deity? Where do the scriptures state that or is that just your personal conclusion?
You don't think the deplorable behaviour of the Canaanite people had anything to do with their destruction do you?
What was their "religion" for which they were killed for, any idea what these people practiced?
@@christisking131You asked: _"Are you sure they were killed for not believing in the right deity?"_
I quote from the article by Dr. Clay Ms. Childers refers to in the video: _"Incontrovertibly, the Canaanites worshiped other Gods by not worshipping Yahweh."_ You can check out his Biblical references for yourself on p. 55 of the article.
You asked: _"You don't think the deplorable behaviour of the Canaanite people had anything to do with their destruction do you?"_
It is irrelevant what I think in this matter, and it is irrelevant what those practises were. The killing of innocent babies and children, and the killing of unborn children by killing the pregnant Canaanite women is still as heinous a crime as any, and this killing of innocents cannot be justified in any way.
The only justification believers have told me about entails a verdict of genocide; because it means that the intention of the actions was to exterminate this ethnic group from the face of the earth by killing and dispersing the virgin girls that were left. For the application of the definition of genocide, it does not matter if the perpetrators of the crime claimed divine approval for their actions.
@@hansdemos6510
You stated *Which MEANS they were killed "because of their religion."*
I've already asked you if you knew "what their religion was which they practiced"?
You replied *It is irrelevant what I think in this matter, and it is irrelevent what those practices were.*
Why would the child sacrificing practices of the Canaanite religion be irrelevant to you? You seem pretty concerned about the welfare of their children!
Why is the murdering ways of this nation irrelevant to you, but not so irrelevant when Israel destroyed this depraved nation of people?
Do you know the history of the Canaanite people?
Or is that irrelevent to you?
Dont forget; it’s wasn’t just Jesus himself claiming to be God, but also some people in the Old Testament like in Psalms 45:6-7 and proverbs 30:4
"Anything that had a beginning must have a cause."
Except gods, according to this video.
God is not a "thing"
@@heels-villeshoerepairs8613 I agree
God is eternal. the universe is not. therefore the universe needs a beginning
@@wonder4974 What evidence do you have that your god is eternal? And what is your evidence that the universe is not? If the universe isn't eternal, and your god is, where does your god exist when the universe doesn't? Does that plane of existence have a beginning or end?
@@mediaphile the problem is you’re trying to understand God from a HUMAN perspective and HUMAN understanding.. which as humans, we are limited.. you asking about a plane of existence for God, is putting him in a box as if to say our humans constructs apply to God, if that were the case how could he be God.. he’d be just like us, which he is not.
Yup, because is not a being. Is BEING Himself.
Unfortunately, these answers won’t satisfy those who cherish their accusations more as a way to justify their own unbelief to themselves. It’s good to be able to provide these answers but save them for people who are truly interested in learning something. The atheist religion is largely hostile to God and is built on a personal rather than an intellectual rejection Him and His word. Save reason for the reasonable.
Amen, brother.
@@HUNTSMARTFASTHARD
Didn't you already state God was immoral?
@@HUNTSMARTFASTHARD
So there's your proof He exists. Not the sharpest knife in your hunting accessories drawer are you?
@@HUNTSMARTFASTHARD
Getting you is no big moment, trust me.
So is God immoral or not?
@@HUNTSMARTFASTHARD
Are you a hunter or a comedian? Or just a joke of a hunter? Either way, some of *your* comments are actually pretty hysterical.
Deuteronomy 29:29 The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our Children forever ect....
To be honest, when I first stumbled across the creationist cult on RUclips I never knew people were still arguing that the bible was true.
It’s just like people still arguing the earth is flat.
Yeah I heard that from Richard Dawkins
@@johnl.5046
Really? When?
@@Columbo-r4z in a video where he says "he doesn't debate creationist anymore because its like debating a flat earther", imo that's bad argument, believing in God has nothing to do with science but a philosophical and theological issue, that's why its called belief and faith, in the other hand, flat earthers deny everything to evidence and proof which is quite dumb, they are not taken seriously.
@@johnl.5046 Who wants to believe anything that is Not true? Science only exams the physical world. Because of the existence of mathematics, we know there are non physicals.
Besides there are many evidences for the young earth creations. Also the Bible didn't say that the earth is flat, instead it says it hangs on NOTHING.
Hi Alisa, may I ask. Where was Lazarus, the brother of Mary and Martha when he was dead for 4 days? Was he in heaven then get back to earthly life? Were the people ressurected by Jesus came from heaven? Thank you
This is insanity.
This is what I thought. Congratulation!
To the first point: Jesus often said and did things which only God can do, even calm storms with a word, cast out demons, and forgive sins. He even prayed to His Father that He be glorified in the same way the Father is glorified. Jesus is no mere man or mere prophet of God. He is God!
The Theist arguments
1) Argument from ignorance :
“You cannot disprove Christianity, so it must be true.” The reality is, no supernatural statement can be dis-proven. For example, you cannot prove that vampires, el chupacabra, Greek gods like Zeus, ghosts, or witches flying around on broomsticks don’t exist.People prefer certainty. There's a psychological need to explain events or phenomena rather than accept one's ignorance, to say ‘I don't know’ when faced with insufficient evidence.
2) Personal Incredulity :
Because you found something difficult to understand, or are unaware of how it
works, you made out like it's probably not true.
“I can’t imagine how X could be true; therefore, X must be false.”
“I can’t imagine how X could be false; therefore, X must be true.”
Atheists are good at defeating the statement that the made up.
Instead of attacking us, maybe we should reason together. BTW, where does your ability to reason come from and why do you trust it?
@@yiqingwang1437
_Instead of attacking us, maybe we should reason together._
Well, that sounds good to _me._ (Although, that didn't really seem like an "attack," did it?) So, OK. To start with, how about *one piece of good evidence* that your god is real, rather than just imaginary?
I'd also accept *one piece of good evidence* that _any_ of the magical/supernatural stories in the Bible actually happened. Your choice. (I will _give_ you a guy named Jesus who was crucified by the Romans, but the Romans crucified _thousands_ of people.)
_BTW, where does your ability to reason come from and why do you trust it?_
I don't know, and I don't necessarily trust it. That's why I test my reasoning with evidence. But my mind is all I've got. You, too. Trustworthy or not, we have no choice but to use it. We should just try to use it the best we can.
@@Bill_Garthright
1. Can you please define evidence? What do you count as evidence?
2. If you don't trust reason, how do you know if what is an evidence and why you should trust it? What is a Mind, and why you should trust it?
I know God is real because I had a personal encounter with him. I also know that God is real because of eye witness testimonials of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
I hope my questions won't bother you too much. I just want to understand. Cheers
@@yiqingwang1437
Why stall like that? If you've _got_ something, why not present it? I'm not asking for much. I'm just asking for *one* example. Don't you have _anything?_
_I know God is real because I had a personal encounter with him._
And how did you know it was really "God"? What method did you use to distinguish reality from delusion and wishful-thinking? Was it a _reliable_ method?
_I also know that God is real because of eye witness testimonials of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ._
OK, well that seems to imply that there's evidence. But I think you're wrong about that. As far as I know, we have nothing from Jesus and nothing from anyone who'd ever _met_ Jesus.
We've got stories, of course - anonymous stories written later (usually _much_ later). But the anonymous authors of the gospels don't even _claim_ to have ever met Jesus, let alone seen any of that, themselves.
So if that's actually true, how about *one example,* specific enough and in enough detail that I can judge if for myself? I will _give_ you a guy named Jesus who was crucified by the Romans, since most scholars accept that much. But the Romans crucified _thousands_ of people. That didn't make them _all_ gods, did it?
@@Bill_GarthrightPractically, what "evidence" can a Christian retrospectively give you for something like the ressurection for example, and how exactly would that work - In a practical sense?
On the personal encounter/relationship....... what other method can be used other than personal experience/perception........given the word "personal", logical thinking would follow that the method would exclude any external method i.e. being verified by someone else, right? If this personal experience/relationship is being classified as "religious", please confirm which other religion/s espouses a personal relationship in the way that Christianity does - In order for this person to justifiably question if it was the God of the Bible or not.
Are you saying that historians only(operative word) classify work by identified authors and first hand accounts as being historically true or accurate, if not, this is an argument from silence which is a euphemism for saying that it is "reaching'
A simple look at the trinity. Time=Past + Present+Future. Three distinctions of the same time.
1 King 19:9-18 the first speaking was Jesus then God spoke to Elijah. That's why it's repeated twice
Remember; Light is both wave & particle.
You're absolutely right
@@ticklemeandillhurtyou5800 You are out of your mind and need a medical treatment for it.
@@deisttriangle7440 how can you conclude that?
4:43 Also: The religion that says Christ never died, *and* that the B*ble is true but incomplete... is contradictory. Bhansen used that a lot.
"Therefore I am sending you prophets and sages and teachers. Some of them you will kill and crucify; others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town" - Matt 23:34 Only God sends prophets!
What prophets?
@@cygnusustus Several in the Old Testament like Moses, Abraham, David, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Eziekiel. In the New testament:
John the Baptist - John 1:19
Anna in Luke - 2:36
Agabus in Acts - 11:27
4 Daughters of Philip - Acts 21:9
Barnabas, Simeon, Lucius & Manaen - Acts 13:1
Simeon - Luke 1:41
Apostle Paul - 1 Th 4:13
Apostle Peter - 2 Pt 3
Apostle John - Book of Revelation
Judas and Silas - Acts 15:30
@@Ruach77
What did they prophesy?
Pick one.
Jesus prophesied that he would return within the lifetimes of those listening to him. This did not happen, so Jesus was a failed prophet, but you didn't list him anyway.
Ezekiel prophesied that the city of Tyre would be permanently destroyed, yet it's still there. So Ezekiel was failed prophet as well.
John 1:19 isn't a prophesy. How am I supposed to take you seriously?
@@cygnusustus A thousand years are as a day to the Lord. There are many prophecies yet to be fulfilled. Don't take me seriously and don't believe in anything you don't want to.
@@Ruach77
"A thousand years are as a day to the Lord. "
He was talking to people. Not to himself.
"Don't take me seriously and don't believe in anything you don't want to."
I'll believe anything you can substantiate with evidence. Evidently you don't have this filter. You simply believe whatever you do want to.
To the Canaanite question, what about the infants and babies, including the ones in the womb?
@Don don That's why I threw my Bible to the garbage.
John 10:30 the most bold 6 words in the Bible.
To the third point: Deuteronomy 6:4 in Hebrew says, "YHWH Elohim YHWH échád." "Échád" in this context means "composite unity". The "im" in Elohim implies plurality, such as Christ's eternal spiritual nature and His added physical nature. YHWH (Father) Elohim (Christ with two natures) YHWH (Holy Spirit) Échád (composite unity-- Three in One).
That makes no sense actually. 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
It actually says elohenu, which is still a plural noun. I believe it is simply the first person construct whereas elohim is third person. Hope that helps.
I’m 68 years old and I believe I only now understand how one God can be in 3 persons. Think of identical triplets. They have the same DNA. They come from the same source, I.e. the same fertilized egg. God Elohim (Hebrew for God) existed before all else. God’s Words are alive and what He says, it becomes. Jesus was with God as His creative Force…His Word. Then it became time for God…Jesus, to tell the good news, that salvation was there through Himself. In Jesus’ conception, God’s Spirit hovered over Mary and when she was touched, it activated a creative force within her and she became pregnant. Thus making Jesus the Son of God who came from God’s ‘source’. The Holy Spirit is also from God’s Source, given to each believer. I hope this explanation helps others to understand our Holy Trinity. Blessings to you for telling others about our Savior, and drawing them to Him.
When the then high priest tore his robes, he gave up his status as high priest because they are not permitted to tear their clothing. This action then made Yahshua high priest in his place.
Dig deep find gold
Dig deeper find eeven more gold
Also in John, He said "Before Abraham, I Am"
Yah shua = God with us
Jesus is God
Observe Shabbat and the 7 appointments in Leviticus and totally forget about pagan christmas, easter and lent.
HALLELUYAH
Dr. Frank Turek used to say 3 in essence one in being could you please clarify if thats wrong or being change please so that I can keep that argument because you stated one essence as a being but 3 persons please and thank you @alisachilders
I think that Psalm 10:4-11 is an amazing explanation of a lot of angry atheists:
The wicked are too proud to seek God. They seem to think that God is dead. Yet they succeed in everything they do. They do not see your punishment awaiting them. They sneer at all their enemies. They think, “Nothing bad will ever happen to us! We will be free of trouble forever!”
Their mouths are full of cursing, lies, and threats. Trouble and evil are on the tips of their tongues. They are always searching for helpless victims. Like lions crouched in hiding, they wait to pounce on the helpless. Like hunters they capture the helpless and drag them away in nets. Their helpless victims are crushed; they fall beneath the strength of the wicked. The wicked think, “God isn’t watching us! He has closed his eyes and won’t even see what we do!”
It's not that deep. Atheists just don't think there's sufficient evidence for any god. You're atheistic to thousands of other religions, they just add your religion to that list. You know how not-true you think the Greek Gods are? Is it because you think they're dead or you're too proud to seek them?
@@Bc232klm Saying there is insufficient evidence is usually a cop out of ignorance or laziness. Much like "God did it" is a cop out for how observable science works. Zeus and the other greek gods are imaginary because if you wanted to search history for them, you wouldn't find anything. Compare that to Jesus, who was an historical person who lived, died, then came back to life.
@@jeremybeavon4476
_Compare that to Jesus, who was an historical person who lived, died, then came back to life._
OK, I'll bite. Let's compare them. What do you have?
I will _give_ you a guy named Jesus who was crucified by the Romans, since there's nothing magical about that. But let's hear what you've got for that "came back to life" claim.
How about one piece of good evidence of that? Just *one.* Or *one piece of good evidence* that _any_ of the magical/supernatural stuff in the Bible actually happened? Why is *one* too much to ask?
I know you've got stories, but stories aren't always true. You mention Zeus, but we have stories that Alexander the Great was descended from Zeus. We also have stories that a goddess - Artemis - attended at his birth. So how is Jesus different from Zeus again? Just because you were taught to believe in Jesus, not Zeus, as a baby?
And if you want a historical person who lived, died, then came back to life, why wouldn't you choose Elvis Presley? We have actual eyewitness testimony of _that._ I don't find it convincing, myself, of course.
But hundreds, if not _thousands,_ of people have reported seeing Elvis after he died. And thanks to movies and television, they actually knew what he looked like, too. _These_ people aren't all dead, and they're not all anonymous. You can even interview some of them, if you want.
That's _actual eyewitness testimony,_ something Christians would _kill_ for - literally, I suspect - if they could get something that good for Jesus. As I say, I don't find it convincing, myself. It's still pretty poor evidence for such an extraordinary claim. But it's far, _far_ better than anything you have for Jesus, isn't it?
You wanted to compare these things, so let's compare them. Just one thing at a time, please.
Deistic version of GOD is better than yours.
If jesus was god, why did he cry on the cross, "father, why have you forsaken me?"
3 persons to make one entity? Sounds like our U.S. govt..... judicial branch, executive branch, legislative branch
That’s like saying: humans are one species, with 7 billion parts that connect to form the human race.
You guys believe god is the race, and there are three individuals who make up the race.
I ask Muslims to explain why they think the Trinity is illogical and other than the 3 Gods claim, which I easily refute, they never can.
Can you give me your argumentation process for this scenario. Thank you kindly ✝️
@@JolinHard Basically, they have been told that the Trinity is illogical, but they don't know why it is. They try to claim we are referring to 3 gods, but we are referring to 1 God and three persons. I don't bother with the verses at first, but explain to them we are not talking about a being with physical limitations. God is Spirit and therefore, does not have the physical limitations that would make 3 persons illogical.
If they want to talk about it, I will show verses why were thing God is triune, but I first want to shatter the physical limitation they want to connect with the Trinity.
@@mistermurtad2831 Nice so a typical question amuslim asks after this is, Jesus was human and therefore limited. How do you answer?
Thanks again btw
3 beans in 1 bean is not a good analogy for the Trinity. 3 flavors in 1 bean may be closer, but I don't understand why anyone would use beans as an analogy for the Trinity at all. Obviously I misheard what she was saying as I laid in bed half asleep. But when I heard it, that was my thought. It forced me to wake up and listen to that section again. If I hadn't woke up I am certain that a dream about Jack and the Beanstalk was coming.
_I am certain that a dream about Jack and the Beanstalk was coming._
No, it was a _different_ fairy tale, huh? :)
Cause there is no analogy for trinity. Jesus wasn’t supposed to be worshipped as man god.
"Before Abraham was born, I am"---that says it all, doesn't it.
That's absolute horseshit. Your dude makes no sense.
Hi! Quick question on something that has confused me a couple of times. At times the Pharisees seem to act as if they don’t have the authority to kill someone that is a threat to them or has violated their Law. On at least one occasion it appears that they tried to kill Jesus before the cross but eventually settled on a different course of action by having the Roman government kill Him for them. I’m not sure if this was because of Jesus’ large following and the feared response by His followers. But then in the epistles it seems like they suddenly don’t have a problem killing people. Starting with the killing of Stephen, who was killed in public, the Pharisees do not seemed worried about killing people they deem to be a threat. By some accounts Paul killed some Christians and later they even attempted to kill Paul. So what changed or how do we understand how much authority the Pharisees had when it came to their form of capital punishment?
3:18 "God sent prophets to warn the Canaanites"
Could someone provide me with the Bible verse for this? I've been searching high and low for this in the Bible but I could not find a reference to one prophet warning the Canaanites.
Maybe she confused it for the tale of Jonah? I’ll have to look.
What is law non contradiction ?
Please explain
1 Timothy 2:12
Just sayin
How can anyone with any modicum of intergrity claim that an infant can be convicted of a capital crime? How did the infants commit any of the crimes you claim? See my video response.
Person is defined as individual and self. This still makes three gods.
The fact that Christianity has to use words in unconventional manner show's how fallacious it is.
3 persons in one = multiple personality
If you're worshiping Jesus and he's not God, you are sinning against God..
...
Acts 4:
12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. = "Jesus"
..
Isaiah 45:
[5] I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me:
6] That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is “None Beside Me”. I am the LORD, and there is None Else.
"Lean not on your own understanding."
This is a verse all atheists should take into account when about things that don't sense.
It's like looking at dice with infinte sides. To one person, it can have 12 sides. To another, it can have 3. And to another, it can have 250. So on and so forth.
In conclusion, no two people will come to the same answer about God.
This prevents us from coming to any rational conclusion about God at all. If God doesn't want people to come to a rational conclusion about him, why is he punishing people for coming to the wrong conclusion by sending them to hell?
The statement was meant for believers like this woman not atheists.
The video just presents mental gymnastics and word play to justify a default view of her religious beliefs.
In my opinion the real problem with religion today is the attempt to justify it using modern sciences and (archeology, biology, physics, etc.) and modern methods of science.
As we see in many fields or subjects, in todays world, the effort to influence and manipulate thinking in order to popularize ideas, often misrepresents the quality and content of ideas themselves.
@@incredulouspasta3304 It's not about God not wanting you to understand *what* he is. He just knows that no one on this planet will ever fully be able to, no matter how much any of us try.
That's why he tells you to trust him. As trusting who he is.
@@robensmonteau161 Which is why it's so silly that he punishes people for not understanding who he is...
@@incredulouspasta3304 Let me make it very clear who gets into heaven. Those who have lived a *perfect life (aka, no human on this planet except for Babies as well as Jesus himself)* and those who are forgiven.
God knew/knows/will know every sin that you have/Will ever commit. Now if there was a middle ground, then Jesus wouldn't exist. He wouldn't need to. That'd also be unfair to those already in heaven or hell. What would make this group of sinning humans so different from the ones already in heaven or hell?
Further more, you saying that it's foolish to offer only two options, when back in the time of the old testament, option 1 which is salvation from hell was completely out of the question. That's a solid indictactor that you do not know God for who he is.
The concept of the Trinity @ 3:33. Coincidence?
Alisa skated over a controversial debate over different conceptions of beginnings in her last argument. A and B theory of time are different ways of describing beginning and only one of them (A Theory) allows Alisa to draw the inference that the beginning of the universe would have a cause. Under B theory, the universe would simply be a 4 dimensional block that is temporally extended in a finite direction but with no cause. And yet it is not conceded by modern scientists that A Theory is true. I understand that this was supposed to be a short video but Alisa should not be raising complex topics and treating them like they’re just obvious evidence for theism. No one was twisting her arm to bring that argument up instead of another one.
Also, there's no such thing as "THE" law of causality. There are many different ideas about how causality works. She chose one that conveniently supports her argument, while ignoring the rest.
Was Jesus praying to himself?
“Centre of consciousness”
What does this mean?
When it comes to the issue of genocide, I find her explanation lacking. Yes, the definition of genocide MIGHT fit, but does that make the murders better or moral? (I would argue annihilating a group of people for religious reasons would be considered genocide.) "Sin" is not the normal everyday concept of "evil." Their sin could have ranged anywhere from murdering everyone they saw to having relations on your time of the month. That's a pretty broad spectrum. And we know from Exodus that God isn't opposed to killing innocent people to show off his power. You would think an all powerful, all knowing God could think of a better solution than genocide (or rather mass murder.)
You should watch Frank Turek explain this. He does a fantastic job. Additionally, he mentions that seeing as how God holds ALL of our lives in His hands, and therefore decides when our lives will be cut off, it's not considered murder when He decides to end a life. Otherwise every single death would be murder by God. But truly, if you look into the evils that came from these people, you would know that God was judging their sin, and not just willy-nilly killing off people. To add to all of this, sin is when we do something that goes against what God considers right. It doesn't matter how big or small it looks in the eyes of a human. To God, sin is sin. And by committing these sins we deserve death. Just for 1 singular sin we would not be able to stand in the presence of God. That's why Jesus gave Himself for us. His blood covers our sins so that when we stand before God He will only what Jesus did on Calvary.
Would also like to add, no one is innocent. Everyone sins. Literally even the smallest children commit sins. So saying that God isn't opposed to killing "innocent" people isn't an accurate statement at all. We are all born wicked.
@@Sara11614 I've listened to Turek. His explanation is just as lacking. Just because you create life doesn't mean it's moral to take life. Parents create life, but when a parent murders their child m, they don't get off the hook. So, why should God get special pleading? If you create life, take responsibility for that life. All life is precious, and shouldn't be the property of another.
@@Sara11614
_We are all born wicked._
*Evidence?*
Or is that just the silly stuff you were indoctrinated to believe as a child?
@@Sara11614
_You should watch Frank Turek explain this._
I _have_ watched Frank Turek. He's not even _slightly_ convincing to anyone who doesn't already believe this stuff. To everyone else, he's just laughable.
Frank Turek - like many other religious apologists - makes a living telling Christians what they want to hear. Since they _already_ believe it, they just accept what he says. It's comforting to them, so they're not going to be very critical. After all, if they were critically minded, they wouldn't be faith-based in the first place, huh?
Of course, he's not convincing to Muslims. And Muslim apologists aren't convincing to Christians. They're all faith-based, but they were taught to believe somewhat different stuff as children, so they believe different things as adults.
But _none_ of you are convincing to the rest of us, because it's all just _claims._ And claims are easy. There's a reason why every religion in the world makes claims. It's not hard. So every religion in the world has claims and every religion in the world has excuses.
But without evidence that your claims are actually _true,_ I can't be convinced by them. If you don't have even *one* piece of good evidence, I can't even take them _seriously._ And so far, no Christian or Muslims seems to have anything at all but wishful-thinking.
You made a lot of claims there. I know you can't back up any of those claims, so I won't even ask. But how about *one piece of good evidence* that your god exists _at all,_ outside of your imagination? Or maybe *one piece of good evidence* that _any_ of the magical/supernatural stories in the Bible actually happened? Your choice.
👍🏾👏🏾
i don't understand the need for jesus. if you had the 1 and only god who says all other gods are false but him. why would you need another one to save you? that seems blasphemous. our world hasn't become "less sinless" since jesus was here. Nothing changed. So, do we need another god to come and save us?
All of this is interpretation, not saying I disagree. Yes, Jesus is the messiah and him and God are one. Jesus always says his father and " pray to God above." It's the father and son relationship, With my baby boy I am him and my son is me we are one love joined by our DNA(created by God) having many shared qualities. Shouldnt be hard for anyone to understand Christian or not. When I see my son I see myself and he will see himself in me.
Please include the 6th: should "Christians" take gene theraphy developed on aborted babies tissue?
Thanks for your knowledge and wisdom on this matter!
How about this,
Yeshua is the Lamb of God.
To qualify as the sacrifice He had to be 2 unique things.
Truly God, Truly Man.
(think 2 parallel lines becoming the Cross)
Yet Yeshua is both!
Something only the Good Lord and our Savior is! Period.
In other words Truly the mystery of all mysteries.
But at the end of the day it all remains as a belief