What a difficult subject. I believe this and talks from Skip Heitzig tackled this topic the best. Unfortunately, unless someone already has a saving faith in Jesus Christ, I don't think any context will make sense. Since people are already coming from a place of severe mistrust of God, they certainly are not going to trust His judgement in areas of war, life and death, and would be quick to thrust Him into the same category as Stalin and Hitler, as Dawkins does. Still, I appreciate Peter Williams opening up the very needed discussions that believers and atheists alike need to have with one another. May we be respectful, civilized and empathetic with one another as we do so.
God doesn't torture and punish you for not loving him. If you don't love God and want to be separate from him (if, in other words, heaven is your idea of hell) then God simply lets you go. He doesn't force you to stay against your will. However, God makes it very clear what this will be like: not only will we be left festering in sin, he still has to punish the sin. He's offered us a way out of that, so the only people who go to hell are those who want so badly to spit in God's face.
Funny how atheists are up in arms about how we could possibly make moral arguments defending the old testament narrative...when they don't believe in God in the first place..... and therefore it is awkward listening to them make moral judgments about God himself..... Where are they getting their moral compass from then?
ONESTEPAHEAD I’ll second that. I especially enjoyed the part about we “use something called our brains” to make moral judgments about the world. Oh really? Then what happens when two atheists, two Christians, two anybody’s, disagree on an issue of morality? What then? What to do...what to do.... What this responder seems unaware of is that in saying “we use our brains” he has offered up that he is his own source of objective morality. All right then, but what happens when someone stronger than him comes along whose objective morality is at odds with his own. He’ll then undoubtedly cry foul and argue that this person’s morality is simply wrong, but the interesting thing is that this stronger person would simply offer up the same argument back to him and say “I’m just using my brain”. At this point he has no grounds to say anything in his own defense, because the second person is simply applying his same logic with more strength and vigor than he was capable of. So in the end his “objective morality” that he “uses his brain” to arrive at is, in reality, nothing more than a subjective opinion. The second interesting thing about the statement “we use our brains” is that it seems to presuppose some sort of objective moral standard written in the minds of mankind. The problem is here that, strictly on a materialist worldview, he has no right to appeal to such a thing in the first place. The contradictions that these types get themselves into (and by “these types” I mean the sort who try to pop in to a thread for a quick “Zing! Got ‘eem!” moment and run away before the actual discourse can begin) are a source of constant entertainment for me.
Some form of the Golden Rule (treat others how you want to be treated) is found in nearly all cultures. Ultimately, the Golden Rule is a humanistic principle, unless you wanna believe that all those other cultures' gods existed too.
@@MrKilopapa Hitler and Starlin "used their brain" to make what they thought were morally suitable judgements. I'd say its dangerous to rely on your brain to arrive at morality suited to todays modern society .
@@MrKilopapa You self-deceived clown. You didn't even understand his argument. This demonstrates the the Fallen nature humans have and yet more evidence to believe the story of Adam and Eve. Thanks for validating the biblical account for us.
God is both extremely righteous and extremely merciful. His Righteousness allows no sins unpunished, yet His mercy forgives any sinner who repents. The cross is where His righteousness and Mercifulness are both fulfilled in a unfathomable way.
Also get your history straight on Mao, Stalin. Not to mention the murderous Mongolian hoards and the likes of a Timberlane..and the amount of death they brought. And to say ideas don't have consequences Also misses the point. Of course many who professed a religious faith of some kind equally followed their designs of violent excess. We can begin with the canaanites through to the fall of Carthage . Marxism is another secular religion, also for example. .
Otherwise good academic points. The kind of respect they have for their kinds of expertise or lack of it. I believe apologetics is important just the same. But this unbelief and hatred is more than intellectual. CS Lewis captures that as well. People may change their beliefs about religion or God, but the will to have faith in Christ. Yeshuah is another thing completely. And to believe His words.
God was going to deal harshly with the Canaanites anyway. They had 400 years of sacrificing their children and if you ask me I ask, what took God so long to act? What took him so long? God killed two birds with one stone when he ordered the Hebrews to finish them off. This issue brings to light a universal morality, God's long suffering, God's Judgement and left us with the best tool and opportunity to share the Gospel with atheists I've ever known if we don't run from it. It's so powerful that too many times the conversation stops before it can truly begin because atheists don't want to talk about it once you start it. This is not an issue to fear but rather wholeheartedly embrace. The all seeing God actually said about the practice of child sacrifice "it had never even crossed His mind". Can you imagine that the practice of child sacrifice was so foreign to God that (assuming when he created us) he never even thought about it as a possibility. That's how detestable we can be to each other. We even one upped God's knowledge of evil. Yet he still died for us. He still did it.
VideoAudioDisco09 "Nonsense - You start assuming this God of yours exists beyond man made mythology" Atheists like to say the God they don't believe in is a bloodthirsty tyrant. They are a little confused on whether God exists or not when it comes time to express their disgust of him. Christian morals built the west and if you like those values then you like Jesus because that's where they came from. "The slaughter and blood soaked pages of the bible are no guide, more something to learn from as what not to do" Get specific. I have no idea what you're talking about and couldn't know until you get specific and tell me. What are you taking issue with? "Instead apply empathy, sympathy, ethics and real morals." I find those in the Bible. Where do you go to get yours?
The canaanites, or latter called phoenecians , then Carthagians were sacrificers of children, and bull worshippers, marauders, pirates of the Mediterranean, enslavers and murderous of those near them outside trade they did. They fought everyone. Feared and would never let the Hebrews into their lands without retribution.
You also forget that all those religions assume people can earn their way to God by being judged on their deeds and their own righteousness. Only Christianity says "no, you can't do that, I have to fix the problem of sin for you by grace". If somebody hears this message, and decides, "nope, I'll stick with this and be judged on my works", God will give them every chance but then, ultimately, let them have it that way. Either we say to God "thy will be done", or he says to us "thy will be done".
I've never had a problem with this account. I don't know why people do. It's always remarkable how many people defend the Caananites, a people who were involved in the most gross, monstrous sins!
The description of shooting down a plane headed for destroying thousands of people or amputating a gangrenous limb was very good in describing this case as well as justifying the flooding of the entire world if you do a careful study of the Genesis 6 account . The flood was necessary to insure the salvation of untold billions as well as the extermination of certain Canaanites insured that it would not happen again.
"Couldn't God have just revealed himself to every single culture resulting in a singular religious view thereby negating the need for war?" This was addressed in the video. God did reveal himself to the Canaanites and only a handful responded. "could've simply targeted the religious leaders and occupy the settlement and have them live in mutuality in a land." He gave them 400 years to stop the child burnings, rape and crimes against humanity. That's pretty patient. They were judged for this.
Sin originates from selfish desires, and results in death. Pr It is the abuse of freedom after getting the knowledge of good and evil - choosing to do evil while knowing what's evil and not choosing to do good while knwoing what's good.
People don't go to hell if they've not had the chance to find out about God. They go to hell only if they DO find out about God and say "I don't want this, leave me alone". That doesn't get you off the hook regarding the sins you've committed. And the "finite crime" argument is useless: a murder can take 2 seconds but the sentence is longer. Also, people in hell GO ON sinning. And if God is so "sick" and evil, what's your basis for invoking objective moral truths, given that's what your doing?
The fact that Dawkins is still breathing after such a blasphemous tirade is an example of the mercy of that God that he so passionately despises. I wonder what it is about this man that caused him to be this way? Did he have some tragedy or bad experience? I don't know.
One argument that is notably ignored is: God cannot be a good God if He allows Evil. One claim is God is acting as claimed in this video, in a judicial way, to deal with the Canaanites evil.
I do see this line of thinking that if God is good he wouldn't allow evil but that's the thing people themselves decide to do evil. God would prefer us being good but some of us are not.
The Israelites didn't even want to conquer the land. God had to be threaten and cajole them into doing it. They are portrayed as cowards. Numbers 14:2 “If only we had died in Egypt! Or in this wilderness! 3 Why is the Lord bringing us to this land only to let us fall by the sword?" War god - there's no such thing! Sure, evil must be defeated, but only to usher in lasting peace. Prince of peace(Isaiah 9:6, Isaiah 2:4, Psalm 72) is how He is portrayed.
Slavery is a practice that has been with us since the dawn of man, and is still with us today. The revelations to early Jews CIVILIZED slavery, and made it a much less offensive practice. It established rules. And yes, Christianity DID end slavery. It was the church that spearheaded the freedom of slaves in South America. Indeed, the second Archbishop of Mexico (1551-72), the Dominican Alonso de Montúfar, protested slavery strongly.
Sorry, hit the wrong key, continuing. I apologize for using the wrong term - "price", which may have caused your misunderstanding. I should have used the term "wage", which is in from the NIV bible. Let me correct: "The wage of sin is death". Hell is the state of eternal separation from God.
That actually supports my argument, I'd rather disobey a god that will send me to hell for doubting his obvious non-existence as well as the apparent discovery of his so-called son's tomb. But to answer Birdieupon's first objection, where would God let me god if heaven were to be my idea of hell? Wouldn't God just erase me from existence? Admit it, I only have two choices (unless you qualify wandering the world as a ghost is another form).
some historians also note that old testament literature is very similar to what settlers did to native americans. This idea that land belongs to us because of the temperance of a god, and that this justifies the death of people, and that this self-righteousness some how makes it okay. I don't see how people can believe in objective morality and the god of the old testament as being compatible.
You're partially right, except that God put the possibility of sin - free will, in the masterpiece of his creation - human beings, and the knowledge of good and evil for the first couple to choose, by using their free will, after waring them the consequence - death (separ
from sin was broken when he came, so now we were truly free. The truth is, I don't know, and I honestly don't care. I'd rather worship the God who came and died for me, who has much evidence for, and he came and he set me free. He came and took everything I deserved, even though he didn't. Who has opened an eternal kingdom for me to live in after about 80-120 years after my birth. A God that deserves worship is the one who accepted me when I laughed in his face, and redeemed me first.
I think you aren't questioning your own beliefs enough. Just because someone says they are something doesn't mean they are that thing, If I claim to be Justice does that mean I am justice, if I get people to write down far fetched claims about me does that mean we ought to believe them? If people make me out to be a legendary figure who can control reality should we believe them? If not then why make an exception for one of the many religious figures claiming himself to have super powers?
Reality does not conform itself into what we think or believe. It is, what it is, whether we like it or not. Sticking your head in the sand and choosing not to believe in the charging rhino does not make the charging rhino go away. You will suffer the agony of the penetrating horns just the same. So choose wisely, cos if by chance you are wrong about God you could find yourself screwed forever!
So by that logic, if your cognitive function is not ours and mysterious it excuses the actions of that being against fellow human beings? This dichotomy between salvation and punishment is also extremely harsh, why believe this god to be benevolent at all if it treats others in such horrible disregard?
His answer about slavery was a bit evasive. He should just admit that it's of its time. It says that Jewish slaves had to be released on the 7th year, which is good. However if the master has given him a wife, he could leave without her, or have a hole pierced in his ear and remain with the wife in slavery. And then he and his children would be inherited by the masters children. At the end of the day that's just wrong.
The "first" choice of free will was to believe or not to believe what God told them, as well as to believe or not believe the serpant's crafty "theory" on God's intension for disallowing them to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Don't forget they also have the free choice of eating from the tree of life.
The word cult, branched off the word occult. The word occult meant and means secret knowledge of the spirit realm. Everyone that believed in a creator wanted to believe they owned that secret spiritual knowledge, so they started to shorten the word to "cult" as a derogatory insult against those they put down as giving false spiritual information. Having been religious, and being told by those in other religions that my belief was "cult" ... I finally agreed that what I believed should be labeled as "cult" and so should their religious (spiritual) beliefs be labeled as "cult." And so it went.
You missed my point. If it is not logically impossible for god to lie, then you (and the person in the video) cannot make statements like "god cannot lie". You can say "we believe god chooses not to lie", but you cannot say "god cannot lie".
Torment Noun. Severe physical or mental suffering 'Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire." (Matthew 3:12) that sounds like torture, my friend.
The Newton killer didn't have the right to do it. Only God can call those sorts of shots. It was already explained in detail, in this video, how the Canaanite destruction was an exceptional circumstance where the order from God was publicly proven, not privately given. It was also explained how these commands are no longer given. Weren't you paying attention? You've raised objections already addressed in the video.
I would advise you to research the logical fallacy of question begging. The people you quote begin with the assumption that humans have rights by nature of belonging to the species yet never answer why one group should respect the rights of another, or why one system of morality is superior to any other if we as human beings are all on the same level.
I didn't say he did. I did say that he sent those 20 children to heaven. If sending children to heaven sweetens Joshua's genocide, why doesn't it do the same for Newton? I'm not interested in the perpetrator; I"m dealing with the consequence, which is the same in both situations. BTW, if child welfare is the question, why didn't God simply order Joshua to rescue the Canaanite children instead of killing them? Isn't that what you would do? Doesn't that make sense--morally and rationally?
All these arguments are very good and open up new views on the subject. They are almost enough to cause me to stop believing the reason for exterminating Canaanites ( or at least certain tribes of Canaanites ) was their relation to the offspring of the union of angels and women from Genesis 6. I might except that the Bible and artifact evidence show too much of that really happening, so I have always believed it and still continue to do so. After all., you notice it was only certain tribes required the killing of all males or all adult people while others it was required to kill everything that breathed. Some tribes the Israelites could keep the livestock and others it all had to go. Maybe it was different levels of genetic contamination that only God would know, maybe some tribes were so bad even their animals were corrupted.
I don't think his arguments were strong enough - they were long winded and hard to understand. No one judges a judge who sentences a serial killer to death. Why? Because he has the authority to pass sentence. No one condemns the judge and puts him on trial for making this decision. Who are we to condemn God and put Him on trial for passing judgement on the wicked? But they would ask - What about the innocent children? He who has the power and authority to create life has the power and authority to take life in any way He deems fit and we have no right to question Him. It is the Sovereignty of God that the scoffer would never acknowledge but they do not seem to have a problem accusing Him to be cruel.
YY4Me133 ; if you find a nest of rattlesnakes living in your house you don't just kill the mom and the dad, you kill the babies to! God has the authority to administer his justice and also he knows how and who to give his mercy to!
"If God has no other option, just erase me from existence." If you've committed crimes and sins, who are you to tell God not to punish you? Especially since he's ALREADY offered a way out? And you simply ignored my point that people in hell keep sinning, so they will accrue further punishment. I notice this has nothing whatsoever to do with whether God exists, btw, so you're not thinking in a very evidence-based manner.
I am not sure if you mean by what you wrote. But anyway, I'll take you as a reasonable thinking grown-up. If you commit a crime and got punished by the law, will you call the Judge a psycho who "invented" the crime you did? Doesn't the fact that the all mighty, all knowing, all righteous God lets you call Him names without punishing you, prompt you to think that maybe He is not what you think?
This page omits verses showing that God indeed condones slaver, such as Leviticus 25:44 which says you may take slaves from the nations around you. The verses condemning slavery only forbid them from turning their fellow Hebrews into slaves. John 21:25 doesn't mention slavery. Ex 21:21 makes it very clear that it is perfectly ok that some people should be the property of others. That's what slavery is - ownership of human beings.
So you think killing every single person is a justifiable thing to take back a land that was "supposedly" the "promised land" for a wandering people and you don't see the moral problem here? Demonization of your victims, aggrandizement, and worshipping a war god kind of makes this case not made for you. Also this quote sums up Manifest Destiny perfectly, proving my point. You do know what Manifest Destiny is don't you?
I can see that you have a compassionate heart, and is genuely concerend for the well-being of fellow human beings, regardless of their faith. Don't you think the creator of you and me, who made us in His image and likeness, is even more compassionate and loving? If you're truely concerend about God's revelation, let me challenge you to start examining the truthfulness of this claim by Jesus Christ: "I am the way, the truth and the life, no one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:6)
some historians can't read Deuteronomy 9: 5 It is not because of your righteousness or your integrity that you are going in to take possession of their land; but on account of the wickedness of these nations, the Lord your God will drive them out before you, to accomplish what he swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. 6 Understand, then, that it is not because of your righteousness that the Lord your God is giving you this good land to possess, for you are a stiff-necked people.
Jim, if these Canaanite children are so ingrained in the depravity and brutality of Canaanite culture, what would be best? Send them straight to heaven so that God can save them before it's too late, or let them remain alive to continue the cycle of violence which, as Peter Williams explained, would result in even more deaths? When you consider that, it'svery generous that God would give them 400 years warning, and even THEN let them live if they ran away!
I don't get the arguement really. If there is a God and Jesus was raised from the dead Christianity is true. This story is easily answered. If there is not then none of this matters anyway. Add to that, humans certainly have shown they do not need religion at all to kill millions. Case dismissed.
I normally agree with you about these matters, but I have to say the idea of hell is Biblically incoherent. Romans 6:7, 23 show that, at death, a person is acquitted from sin, and has no further wage to pay. Also, Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10 seem rather clear in saying that people have no conscious experience after death. So, having paid their wages, people just die and cease existing. As Jesus said, with reference to Lazarus, they have "gone to rest" (John 11:11-14).
@@ob4161 Well, the context is talking about heaven, and Paul's earlier letter to the Corinthians says that happens by means of resurrection and transformation into spirit bodies.
The price for sin is death - eternal separation from God. The Son of God - Jesus Christ pre-paid the sin-debts on the cross for any sinner who confesses his/her sins to Him and asked for His forgiveness. God is perfectly righteous and just that no sins-debts can be let unpaid, yet God is merciful and loving that He himself take on human flesh to redeem our sin-debts with His blood shed on the cross. He was resurrected and that was the proof for His saving power for the sinners who trust in Him.
I never said it mentioned slavery. As much as I'll argue, whatever it says that you can have slaves okay. Sure. So? The fact is that whether you are a "free" man or not the truth is that you are a slave either way. Whether to sin or to another man. The truth is, the bible uses the word Slave which brings the baggage of the word. Had they used servants, you wouldn't be so mad, still mad, but no so. Also have you ever thought about how the person who said (continued)
No one is righteous, not even one. By the fairness of yours, or by the justice of God, should anyone of us be allowed to live forever with God with our sin-debts unpaid for through the saving grace of Jesus Christ's blood on the cross? People are not saved because their sin-debts are not redeemed. Now, who gets saved is a matter of grace, decided by the giver. If you want to insist fairness, all the grace receivers can say is: "I don't deserve God's saving grace, and it's unfair I am selected."
"The kingdom of God is in within you" and the God that made humans "In his image" tolerate slavery. I don't know, I can try to, but I will fail. What does that mean? A contradiction? Religion changing itself to suit the writer and his or her people? No, because the truth is that if Jesus rose from the dead then he spoke the truth. If he was the messiah why did he tolerate the slavery? Actually he didn't, but still, he didn't tolerate it when he came because our slavery (continued)
God deals with all these issues about killing very clearly. they're very well defined to who, what, where and how. I would add, it works both ways. Jonah was commanded by God to go preach against the people of Nineveh. he seen the wickedness and was about to destroy them. notice Jonah wanted to see them judged and not delivered. big difference in Gods will and Jonahs, because Jonah knew Gods forgiveness. in the end 600k people children and.unknown animals were spared, because of God.
What I meant was that the Israelites were too terrified to go into the land, and that's why they were banished into the wilderness for 40 years in the first place. And if you want to make a claim, back it up with citation. YHWH portrayed with other gods? It's called apostasy. The prophets like Elijah warn against it 1 Kings 18:21 “How long will you waver between two opinions? If the YHWH is God, follow him; but if Baal is God, follow him.” and now archaeology finds evidence for it. Surprise!
The choice of free will available to you today, based on the knowledge of good and evil, is to believe or not believe in your own "theory" of the "imaginary god", as well as to believe or not to believe in the three kinds of revelation by the real Creator God : the creations and creatures, His words in the Bible. and the God Incarnate/the Word become flesh/the Son of God - Jesus Christ, who claims: "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through me". (John 14:6)
Opposition to godliness is atheism in profession and idolatry in practice. Atheism is so senseless and odious to mankind that it never had many professors.’ - Sir Isaac Newton
@@majmage replied, "Quotes don't justify belief. Only evidence can justify a belief, and nobody has evidence of a god." Do you have any evidence based data to support that belief of yours, or is that just your personal belief?
@@hwd71 Yeah I've asked like 400+ theists for evidence of a god, and they all respond _exactly like you did: by presenting zero evidence!_ The thread still has zero evidence of a god, and pay attention to how that will never change no matter how long or short our conversation goes. Well that means neither of us knows a god exists. Well I'm honest about that lack of knowledge: I admit I don't know. But most theists _pretend to know_ when they don't actually know, and that's not very honest.
@@majmage Most atheists argue from personal incredulity. There is plenty of evidence for God if you sincerely follow the evidence where it leads. Briefly consider the following arguments from what we do know about the following which point to an Intelligent Creator. Fine tuning of the Universe. Kalam Cosmological argument. Interactomes in the cell. Information in our DNA. Homochirality of the DNA Molecule. Irreducible complexity of ATP Synthase. and other nano machines in our cells. Law of biogenesis. Bible prophecy. God appeared to Human Beings in the Person of Jesus of Nazareth, and did miracles to support that claim. If you reject that, why do you accept that the Virgin Mother Earth gave life from an inanimate mud pool, billions of years ago which has never happened to be observed since? You too have a burden of proof to provide data that particles to people evolution is true.
Well to this day Craig still doesn't have evidence of a god, so not sure we really miss out on him not ending up in a debate with any given person. He just trots out the same tired arguments each time, like the Cosmological Argument (where he fails to establish a logical necessity for a god) or the Moral Argument (where he just _says_ objective morals exist without evidence and _says_ they must've come from a god without evidence, then treats that assertion as evidence of a god). Logic isn't really theists' strong suit though. For example you said if there is a God and Jesus was raised from the dead Christianity is true, yet we can imagine many scenarios where that's wrong (like one where "God" is simply a powerful alien that tricked humanity into worshiping it). So how do you get theists to _truly care about truth?_ I wish I knew. It's one of the dangers of Dunning-Kruger Effect: a person has to be at least somewhat logical to understand when they've made logical errors; a persona has to have at least some knowledge of a topic to have an accurate sense of how much they truly know, etc.
Something you have to remember historically is that the nineteenth century (and the industrial revolution) led to a population growth nowhere seen in human history, that's the reason Communism (not atheism) is seen to have a higher body count. Imagine if Crusaders and Papal soldiers had things like tanks, grenades, machine guns, and so on.
A tenet is a principle or belief, especially one of the main principles of a religion or philosophy Atheism is the exact opposite, whether you agree, or like it or not. Secondly, for me, the entire Bible is hyperbole. That is I don't think most, if not all of it was meant to be taken literally. Also, I really am not in the slightest bit concerned with your unnecessary opinion as to the level of my intelligence. And lastly, Jesus is a work of fiction written in 3rd person narrative, Moses too.
God's way is not our way, our thinking is not God's thinking. Have faith that God is working patiently and deligently in the hearts of those sinners that are to be saved. What happens to those sinners who have have heard about but rejected the saving grace of the Son of God - Jesus Christ? Die in one's own sins. The fear of God is the beginning of knowledge. Knowing the all Mighty is wise, and looking for His face is savvy.
Are you avoiding answering because there is actually no place in any biblical text where slavery is condemn, or human rights existed? You worship your own ego.
Right wandering the desert for forty years and they don't want any land, sounds highly doubtful. Also if you have a god that can make universes why not just make a land for them or teleport them there? Yes Yahweh is a god of war, many of the old testament is nothing but war with Phillistines and other tribes. He also used to be accompanied by other gods such as El and Asherah.
I see where you're coming from, but there are still indigenous tribes that exist today that don't want to be integrated into larger societies or a 'promised land.' To us, that's weird af because we love our 1st world creature comforts. But everyone has something different that floats their boat.
The logical conclusion of atheism is that human life has no intrinsic value. If all life is happenstance, then it cannot possibly have value. If life has no value, then what harm does it do to murder a hundred million in pursuit of one's goals? And who can fault one for pursuing one's goals? After all, we are all the same and value systems are imaginary constructions anyway, so objecting on moral grounds is logically impossible. You should think harder about what you believe.
You seem to believe there is some sort of value in the lie or ability to lie, when instead, believing there is some sort of value in the lie is "hilariously absurd". God is not a creature, but some people debate this. Your opinion of God, His actions, and His abilities have no bearing on the validity of his righteousness, intelligence, morality, and power, but you're entitled to it. So, if you have faith in the words you speak, so be it. Peace :)
Sin is disobedience to God; it's perfectly conceivable that someone would continue to disobey and curse God while being TORMENTED (not tortured). Your understanding of hell is childish.
Please present your evidence that tallies the number of deaths attributed to religious suffering throughout the totality of human existence. Atheism is not a social construct with any unity. It is a word that describes the state of disbelief. Please explain how the state of being causes murder, I will likewise explain to you how your belief conflicting with islam has caused countless deaths for 2 millenia.
Lmao what historical group in the past is atheist????? Please let me know when you find em, the whole world would like to find out there is such a culture....
tenets of Atheism? WTF are the tenets of Atheism? As for the message of Jesus: Luke 14:26: If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. Luke 12:51-53:"Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division. From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other... Nothing warped there.....
Why believe this is the right god anyway? There are many different belief systems out there, many of these belief systems are dependent on a number of factors so they aren't entirely freely chosen. Next your 3 reasons are based on a presupposition that the bible is accurate, when it actually suffers from errors in many ways. Its also suffers from absurdities, contradictions, and falsehoods on reality. Examine your beliefs and criticize them if you actually want truth.
Actually quite a lot of the evidence differs. CanaanitePath has cited sources and many of the claims in the bible about them are either false, exxagerated, or demonization. Yes, really. Another question, why even have wars amongst humans if you as a god could settle it in every tribe without violence? Is it harder for god to make peace than it is to create a universe?
You are not answering the question: you happen to be wrong, the true god is Allah, you ask Jesus for salvation but you miss the target, the correct one should be Mohamed. Should Allah deny you his grace and burn you forever? Yes or no.
I can think about Vader in order to rationalize him. This does not mean i think he is real. It's impossible for a finite being to execute crimes of infinite dimensions. The only being who can possible commit a crime of infinite proportions is god. If he has any moral fiber, he should lock himself in Hell. Compassion and empathy are the sources of moral reasoning. It's not hard to see why you find hell acceptable. You lack these qualities. People can burn forever, you simply don't care.
False. God can't take a life in a way that would be morally wrong. To better see that parallel. God can't say things in a way that would be morally wrong. You attacked an argument I didn't make. That's a straw man. That being said, I believe that if God puts a person in a position of authority to take someones life in a way that is not morally wrong, that person can do so without "killing" them according to your definition of "kill". Therefore, He has the same set of moral imperatives or better
It is fair to bypass Mohamed's revelation from Allah himself that said that Jesus is not the son of god and those who belief he is will face eternal damnation? Allah and Yahweh both has the same law: those who believe in the false revelation will burn forever. If it is unfair for Allah to burn you if you are wrong, then it is unfair to Yahweh to burn muslims because they are wrong about Jesus.
-Demonization of victims - We don't need to demonize the Canaanites. We know from archaeology exactly what they were like. Do your research. aggrandizement - really? Deuteronomy 7:1 ...seven nations larger and stronger than you ..7 The Lord did not set his affection on you and choose you because you were more numerous than other peoples, for you were the fewest of all peoples. Numbers 13:33 We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them.
Sin is disobedience to God. By rejecting God, you are guilty of sin and deserving of the punishment for the transgression (as are we all, for everyone disobeys God in some manner). The hole is in your understanding. At least make an effort to understand Christian doctrine before arguing against it.
"Without religion, there ARE no human rights." I would advise you to research atheist civil rights leaders like Robert Ingersoll, Clarence Darrow, HL Mencken, A. Philip Randolph, and so on.
If 90% of mankind believes that Vader is real, it is perfectionally rational to ask why the human mind is so prone to failure. It's impossível for us to commit a crime against God. What can I do against him? Kill him, hurt him, steal from him? If this being is real, I'm powerless against him. God can't posibly be the source of justice, because he is infinitely unjust. We both are lucky that this being is completely imaginary.
You are ignorant of history. Saying that Christianity "found a way to justify slavery." is completely illogical. NOWHERE in the Bible is slavery justified, although it is present in a radically different form than the type you speak of. Describing skin color as a result of paganism is NOWHERE in the Bible. Interpreting the justification of slavery in this way as any form of real Christian justification, is to say the KKK are based on Biblical values. They're not.
Then he did a poor job of doing it. You'd think the creator of the universe would know how to get people to listen to him. This just shows god to be inept and lazy at solving problems. I've actually read cited books stating that Canaanites weren't like that, go to Canaanitepath for them. Also there are ways to change cultures without violence and the greatest of military commanders win wars without it. How can this god be so powerful when greater military commanders could do better?
Thank man that we live in a secular world fueled by the belief in innate human rights. When we look back to Christian Theocracies, they didn't fuel any respect for differences in opinion.
What coerced the Columbine killers to murder Christians? Why are most serial killers Atheist? Why do you push the responsibility of acts of a few mentally ill people onto all Christians? Can we say that Stalin and Mao, who killed more people than were killed in all religious wars in all centuries previous combined, can we say their crimes are yours or Atheism's?
Guy, by that logic we shouldn't be outraged that the Newtown killer slaughtered 20 firstgraders because he sent them off to heaven. That's just silly, don't you think? In what other part of normal life--other than in this one instance of trying to justify the viewpoint of an ancient document--would you accept such an idea as moral? Nowhere, I hope. Seems to me that's the test of sensible Biblical exegesis: you can't defend something in the Bible if in ordinary life it's absurd and unacceptable.
Sorry, you're dead wrong. God gives (invent, if you insist) human beings, the knowledge of good and evil. Man invented crimes. Without the laws and commendments from God, there won't be crimes. The Laws are for human being to abide by, not for the animals and beasts. Since you know what's fair, let me ask, is it fair to let me or you, a sinner, bypass Jesus Chirst, who died for my or your sin-debts, and avoid the eternal death - which is etenral separation from the all righteous God?
WILLIAMS IS SUPPOSED TO TALK ABOUT RELIGION AND VIOLENCE . NOT ABOUT POLITICS AND VIOLENCE , OR THINKINING AND VIOLENCE .. THE EVIDENCE AGAINST RELIGION IS OVERWHELMING;. THE CRUSADES , THE SPANISH INQUISITION , SUNNIS AGAINST SHEITES , MOSLEMS AGAINST HINDUS . CATHOLICS AGAINST MOSLEMS .THE LIST IS ENDLESS . AND ALL THAT IS PERFECTLY OK WITH GOD , OR IT WOULD NEVER HAPPEN
That's not a logical argument "against religion". I mean he's fairly correct that you can't just take a straight-up association and act like it's a meaningful relationship unless you can prove it (using something like statistical significance, _not_ just vaguely pointing to the crusades). But _the entire topic is irrelevant,_ because if we care about truth the only thing that matters is whether we have evidence of any god(s) _and we don't._ So this entire bait-and-switch to whether religion causes violence is just one more way theists use to keep the true discussion at arm's length. The only thing that matters is whether we have a good reason to believe in gods, and we don't.
"Sinful" behavior does not cause death. It is a demonstrable fact anyone can check going to a doctor. And against facts, all you can do is cry. Any serial-killer can live a long, happy and healthy life and die peacefully. If he is christian and accepts Jesus forgiveness, he goes straight to heaven. Anyone of his victims that is not christian will fry in Hell forever. Pretty fair, loving and just. Anyone who rule the Universe this way is mentally ill, a psychopath.
What a difficult subject. I believe this and talks from Skip Heitzig tackled this topic the best. Unfortunately, unless someone already has a saving faith in Jesus Christ, I don't think any context will make sense. Since people are already coming from a place of severe mistrust of God, they certainly are not going to trust His judgement in areas of war, life and death, and would be quick to thrust Him into the same category as Stalin and Hitler, as Dawkins does. Still, I appreciate Peter Williams opening up the very needed discussions that believers and atheists alike need to have with one another. May we be respectful, civilized and empathetic with one another as we do so.
Excellent lecture. Thank you sir...
'besaved' is missing.
God doesn't torture and punish you for not loving him. If you don't love God and want to be separate from him (if, in other words, heaven is your idea of hell) then God simply lets you go. He doesn't force you to stay against your will.
However, God makes it very clear what this will be like: not only will we be left festering in sin, he still has to punish the sin. He's offered us a way out of that, so the only people who go to hell are those who want so badly to spit in God's face.
Funny how atheists are up in arms about how we could possibly make moral arguments defending the old testament narrative...when they don't believe in God in the first place..... and therefore it is awkward listening to them make moral judgments about God himself.....
Where are they getting their moral compass from then?
Contra Bullshit Great example of your morality. Keep it up.
ONESTEPAHEAD
I’ll second that. I especially enjoyed the part about we “use something called our brains” to make moral judgments about the world. Oh really? Then what happens when two atheists, two Christians, two anybody’s, disagree on an issue of morality? What then? What to do...what to do....
What this responder seems unaware of is that in saying “we use our brains” he has offered up that he is his own source of objective morality. All right then, but what happens when someone stronger than him comes along whose objective morality is at odds with his own. He’ll then undoubtedly cry foul and argue that this person’s morality is simply wrong, but the interesting thing is that this stronger person would simply offer up the same argument back to him and say “I’m just using my brain”. At this point he has no grounds to say anything in his own defense, because the second person is simply applying his same logic with more strength and vigor than he was capable of. So in the end his “objective morality” that he “uses his brain” to arrive at is, in reality, nothing more than a subjective opinion.
The second interesting thing about the statement “we use our brains” is that it seems to presuppose some sort of objective moral standard written in the minds of mankind. The problem is here that, strictly on a materialist worldview, he has no right to appeal to such a thing in the first place. The contradictions that these types get themselves into (and by “these types” I mean the sort who try to pop in to a thread for a quick “Zing! Got ‘eem!” moment and run away before the actual discourse can begin) are a source of constant entertainment for me.
Some form of the Golden Rule (treat others how you want to be treated) is found in nearly all cultures. Ultimately, the Golden Rule is a humanistic principle, unless you wanna believe that all those other cultures' gods existed too.
@@MrKilopapa
Hitler and Starlin "used their brain" to make what they thought were morally suitable judgements.
I'd say its dangerous to rely on your brain to arrive at morality suited to todays modern society .
@@MrKilopapa
You self-deceived clown.
You didn't even understand his argument. This demonstrates the the Fallen nature humans have and yet more evidence to believe the story of Adam and Eve.
Thanks for validating the biblical account for us.
God is both extremely righteous and extremely merciful. His Righteousness allows no sins unpunished, yet His mercy forgives any sinner who repents. The cross is where His righteousness and Mercifulness are both fulfilled in a unfathomable way.
‘Evolution has been observed. It’s just that it hasn’t been observed while it’s happening.’
- Richard Dawkins.
Ridiculous.
That's fideistic as well.
Also get your history straight on Mao, Stalin. Not to mention the murderous Mongolian hoards and the likes of a Timberlane..and the amount of death they brought. And to say ideas don't have consequences Also misses the point. Of course many who professed a religious faith of some kind equally followed their designs of violent excess. We can begin with the canaanites through to the fall of Carthage . Marxism is another secular religion, also for example. .
Otherwise good academic points. The kind of respect they have for their kinds of expertise or lack of it. I believe apologetics is important just the same. But this unbelief and hatred is more than intellectual. CS Lewis captures that as well. People may change their beliefs about religion or God, but the will to have faith in Christ. Yeshuah is another thing completely. And to believe His words.
God was going to deal harshly with the Canaanites anyway. They had 400 years of sacrificing their children and if you ask me I ask, what took God so long to act? What took him so long? God killed two birds with one stone when he ordered the Hebrews to finish them off. This issue brings to light a universal morality, God's long suffering, God's Judgement and left us with the best tool and opportunity to share the Gospel with atheists I've ever known if we don't run from it. It's so powerful that too many times the conversation stops before it can truly begin because atheists don't want to talk about it once you start it. This is not an issue to fear but rather wholeheartedly embrace. The all seeing God actually said about the practice of child sacrifice "it had never even crossed His mind". Can you imagine that the practice of child sacrifice was so foreign to God that (assuming when he created us) he never even thought about it as a possibility. That's how detestable we can be to each other. We even one upped God's knowledge of evil. Yet he still died for us. He still did it.
VideoAudioDisco09 "Nonsense - You start assuming this God of yours exists beyond man made mythology"
Atheists like to say the God they don't believe in is a bloodthirsty tyrant.
They are a little confused on whether God exists or not when it comes time to express their disgust of him.
Christian morals built the west and if you like those values then you like Jesus because that's where they came from.
"The slaughter and blood soaked pages of the bible are no guide, more something to learn from as what not to do"
Get specific. I have no idea what you're talking about and couldn't know until you get specific and tell me. What are you taking issue with?
"Instead apply empathy, sympathy, ethics and real morals."
I find those in the Bible. Where do you go to get yours?
VideoAudioDisco09 Well? What say you?
Robert Sparks It's been a week and like I said, atheists run from the conversation.
Robert Sparks I’m surprised that you think that God didn’t know what the Canaanites would allegedly do (child sacrifice)
The canaanites, or latter called phoenecians , then Carthagians were sacrificers of children, and bull worshippers, marauders, pirates of the Mediterranean, enslavers and murderous of those near them outside trade they did. They fought everyone. Feared and would never let the Hebrews into their lands without retribution.
"Here's the part of The God Delusion that Richard Dawkins wrote after consulting a thesaurus"! LOL! Classic! X-D
very nice arguments here. I really like this tour
You also forget that all those religions assume people can earn their way to God by being judged on their deeds and their own righteousness. Only Christianity says "no, you can't do that, I have to fix the problem of sin for you by grace". If somebody hears this message, and decides, "nope, I'll stick with this and be judged on my works", God will give them every chance but then, ultimately, let them have it that way.
Either we say to God "thy will be done", or he says to us "thy will be done".
I've never had a problem with this account. I don't know why people do. It's always remarkable how many people defend the Caananites, a people who were involved in the most gross, monstrous sins!
The description of shooting down a plane headed for destroying thousands of people or amputating a gangrenous limb was very good in describing this case as well as justifying the flooding of the entire world if you do a careful study of the Genesis 6 account . The flood was necessary to insure the salvation of untold billions as well as the extermination of certain Canaanites insured that it would not happen again.
"Couldn't God have just revealed himself to every single culture resulting in a singular religious view thereby negating the need for war?"
This was addressed in the video. God did reveal himself to the Canaanites and only a handful responded.
"could've simply targeted the religious leaders and occupy the settlement and have them live in mutuality in a land."
He gave them 400 years to stop the child burnings, rape and crimes against humanity. That's pretty patient. They were judged for this.
Sin originates from selfish desires, and results in death. Pr It is the abuse of freedom after getting the knowledge of good and evil - choosing to do evil while knowing what's evil and not choosing to do good while knwoing what's good.
Was the string of reason too complex to respond to? Or did you go looking for evidence to your claim and found none?
after reading these posts, it seems that Mr. DD is more of an anti-Christian God, rather than a atheist, is that so Mr. Dennett?
People don't go to hell if they've not had the chance to find out about God. They go to hell only if they DO find out about God and say "I don't want this, leave me alone". That doesn't get you off the hook regarding the sins you've committed.
And the "finite crime" argument is useless: a murder can take 2 seconds but the sentence is longer. Also, people in hell GO ON sinning.
And if God is so "sick" and evil, what's your basis for invoking objective moral truths, given that's what your doing?
The fact that Dawkins is still breathing after such a blasphemous tirade is an example of the mercy of that God that he so passionately despises.
I wonder what it is about this man that caused him to be this way? Did he have some tragedy or bad experience? I don't know.
One argument that is notably ignored is: God cannot be a good God if He allows Evil. One claim is God is acting as claimed in this video, in a judicial way, to deal with the Canaanites evil.
Without God can't neither good nor bad. So everything that God does is good.
I do see this line of thinking that if God is good he wouldn't allow evil but that's the thing people themselves decide to do evil. God would prefer us being good but some of us are not.
The Israelites didn't even want to conquer the land. God had to be threaten and cajole them into doing it. They are portrayed as cowards. Numbers 14:2 “If only we had died in Egypt! Or in this wilderness! 3 Why is the Lord bringing us to this land only to let us fall by the sword?"
War god - there's no such thing! Sure, evil must be defeated, but only to usher in lasting peace.
Prince of peace(Isaiah 9:6, Isaiah 2:4, Psalm 72) is how He is portrayed.
Slavery is a practice that has been with us since the dawn of man, and is still with us today. The revelations to early Jews CIVILIZED slavery, and made it a much less offensive practice. It established rules.
And yes, Christianity DID end slavery. It was the church that spearheaded the freedom of slaves in South America.
Indeed, the second Archbishop of Mexico (1551-72), the Dominican Alonso de Montúfar, protested slavery strongly.
Sorry, hit the wrong key, continuing.
I apologize for using the wrong term - "price", which may have caused your misunderstanding. I should have used the term "wage", which is in from the NIV bible. Let me correct: "The wage of sin is death". Hell is the state of eternal separation from God.
That actually supports my argument, I'd rather disobey a god that will send me to hell for doubting his obvious non-existence as well as the apparent discovery of his so-called son's tomb.
But to answer Birdieupon's first objection, where would God let me god if heaven were to be my idea of hell? Wouldn't God just erase me from existence? Admit it, I only have two choices (unless you qualify wandering the world as a ghost is another form).
What if your source that the Canaanite civilization every partook in any of those acts?
some historians also note that old testament literature is very similar to what settlers did to native americans. This idea that land belongs to us because of the temperance of a god, and that this justifies the death of people, and that this self-righteousness some how makes it okay.
I don't see how people can believe in objective morality and the god of the old testament as being compatible.
You're partially right, except that God put the possibility of sin - free will, in the masterpiece of his creation - human beings, and the knowledge of good and evil for the first couple to choose, by using their free will, after waring them the consequence - death (separ
from sin was broken when he came, so now we were truly free. The truth is, I don't know, and I honestly don't care. I'd rather worship the God who came and died for me, who has much evidence for, and he came and he set me free. He came and took everything I deserved, even though he didn't. Who has opened an eternal kingdom for me to live in after about 80-120 years after my birth. A God that deserves worship is the one who accepted me when I laughed in his face, and redeemed me first.
I think you aren't questioning your own beliefs enough. Just because someone says they are something doesn't mean they are that thing, If I claim to be Justice does that mean I am justice, if I get people to write down far fetched claims about me does that mean we ought to believe them? If people make me out to be a legendary figure who can control reality should we believe them? If not then why make an exception for one of the many religious figures claiming himself to have super powers?
How about reading and responding to my comment?
Reality does not conform itself into what we think or believe. It is, what it is, whether we like it or not. Sticking your head in the sand and choosing not to believe in the charging rhino does not make the charging rhino go away. You will suffer the agony of the penetrating horns just the same. So choose wisely, cos if by chance you are wrong about God you could find yourself screwed forever!
Show me where I said any such thing.
No clue what "Yahwist" means.
So by that logic, if your cognitive function is not ours and mysterious it excuses the actions of that being against fellow human beings? This dichotomy between salvation and punishment is also extremely harsh, why believe this god to be benevolent at all if it treats others in such horrible disregard?
The idea that child raping murderers is punished bothers you?
His answer about slavery was a bit evasive. He should just admit that it's of its time.
It says that Jewish slaves had to be released on the 7th year, which is good. However if the master has given him a wife, he could leave without her, or have a hole pierced in his ear and remain with the wife in slavery. And then he and his children would be inherited by the masters children.
At the end of the day that's just wrong.
The "first" choice of free will was to believe or not to believe what God told them, as well as to believe or not believe the serpant's crafty "theory" on God's intension for disallowing them to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Don't forget they also have the free choice of eating from the tree of life.
The word cult, branched off the word occult. The word occult meant and means secret knowledge of the spirit realm. Everyone that believed in a creator wanted to believe they owned that secret spiritual knowledge, so they started to shorten the word to "cult" as a derogatory insult against those they put down as giving false spiritual information. Having been religious, and being told by those in other religions that my belief was "cult" ... I finally agreed that what I believed should be labeled as "cult" and so should their religious (spiritual) beliefs be labeled as "cult." And so it went.
You missed my point.
If it is not logically impossible for god to lie, then you (and the person in the video) cannot make statements like "god cannot lie".
You can say "we believe god chooses not to lie", but you cannot say "god cannot lie".
oh nein bin bei ner sekte gelandet!!-von ufc?!? was da los?
Because I have examined and can not disprove the claim of Jesus as recorded in John 14:6: "I am the Truth".
Torment
Noun.
Severe physical or mental suffering
'Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire." (Matthew 3:12) that sounds like torture, my friend.
To you, truth is something that you want to seek or konw, right? Has it ever occurred to you that you are the Truth itself/himself? Why?
Thanks.
The Newton killer didn't have the right to do it. Only God can call those sorts of shots. It was already explained in detail, in this video, how the Canaanite destruction was an exceptional circumstance where the order from God was publicly proven, not privately given. It was also explained how these commands are no longer given.
Weren't you paying attention? You've raised objections already addressed in the video.
Sorry, continuing:
after warning them the consequence - death (separation with God).
I would advise you to research the logical fallacy of question begging. The people you quote begin with the assumption that humans have rights by nature of belonging to the species yet never answer why one group should respect the rights of another, or why one system of morality is superior to any other if we as human beings are all on the same level.
I didn't say he did. I did say that he sent those 20 children to heaven. If sending children to heaven sweetens Joshua's genocide, why doesn't it do the same for Newton? I'm not interested in the perpetrator; I"m dealing with the consequence, which is the same in both situations. BTW, if child welfare is the question, why didn't God simply order Joshua to rescue the Canaanite children instead of killing them? Isn't that what you would do? Doesn't that make sense--morally and rationally?
All these arguments are very good and open up new views on the subject. They are almost enough to cause me to stop believing the reason for exterminating Canaanites ( or at least certain tribes of Canaanites ) was their relation to the offspring of the union of angels and women from Genesis 6. I might except that the Bible and artifact evidence show too much of that really happening, so I have always believed it and still continue to do so.
After all., you notice it was only certain tribes required the killing of all males or all adult people while others it was required to kill everything that breathed.
Some tribes the Israelites could keep the livestock and others it all had to go.
Maybe it was different levels of genetic contamination that only God would know, maybe some tribes were so bad even their animals were corrupted.
I don't think his arguments were strong enough - they were long winded and hard to understand. No one judges a judge who sentences a serial killer to death. Why? Because he has the authority to pass sentence. No one condemns the judge and puts him on trial for making this decision. Who are we to condemn God and put Him on trial for passing judgement on the wicked? But they would ask - What about the innocent children? He who has the power and authority to create life has the power and authority to take life in any way He deems fit and we have no right to question Him. It is the Sovereignty of God that the scoffer would never acknowledge but they do not seem to have a problem accusing Him to be cruel.
I think the person who "flips the switch" is as despicable as any other killer for hire.
YY4Me133 ; if you find a nest of rattlesnakes living in your house you don't just kill the mom and the dad, you kill the babies to! God has the authority to administer his justice and also he knows how and who to give his mercy to!
"If God has no other option, just erase me from existence."
If you've committed crimes and sins, who are you to tell God not to punish you? Especially since he's ALREADY offered a way out?
And you simply ignored my point that people in hell keep sinning, so they will accrue further punishment.
I notice this has nothing whatsoever to do with whether God exists, btw, so you're not thinking in a very evidence-based manner.
I am not sure if you mean by what you wrote. But anyway, I'll take you as a reasonable thinking grown-up. If you commit a crime and got punished by the law, will you call the Judge a psycho who "invented" the crime you did? Doesn't the fact that the all mighty, all knowing, all righteous God lets you call Him names without punishing you, prompt you to think that maybe He is not what you think?
I see the thought policeman 'Daniel Dennett' is patrolling today.
This page omits verses showing that God indeed condones slaver, such as Leviticus 25:44 which says you may take slaves from the nations around you. The verses condemning slavery only forbid them from turning their fellow Hebrews into slaves. John 21:25 doesn't mention slavery. Ex 21:21 makes it very clear that it is perfectly ok that some people should be the property of others. That's what slavery is - ownership of human beings.
So you think killing every single person is a justifiable thing to take back a land that was "supposedly" the "promised land" for a wandering people and you don't see the moral problem here? Demonization of your victims, aggrandizement, and worshipping a war god kind of makes this case not made for you.
Also this quote sums up Manifest Destiny perfectly, proving my point. You do know what Manifest Destiny is don't you?
I can see that you have a compassionate heart, and is genuely concerend for the well-being of fellow human beings, regardless of their faith. Don't you think the creator of you and me, who made us in His image and likeness, is even more compassionate and loving? If you're truely concerend about God's revelation, let me challenge you to start examining the truthfulness of this claim by Jesus Christ: "I am the way, the truth and the life, no one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:6)
some historians can't read
Deuteronomy 9: 5 It is not because of your righteousness or your integrity that you are going in to take possession of their land; but on account of the wickedness of these nations, the Lord your God will drive them out before you, to accomplish what he swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. 6 Understand, then, that it is not because of your righteousness that the Lord your God is giving you this good land to possess, for you are a stiff-necked people.
god who put sin in his creation sacrificed himself to himself to stop himself from sending everyone to hell which he created.
Something does not ring true here. Can't put my finger on it though.
Jim, if these Canaanite children are so ingrained in the depravity and brutality of Canaanite culture, what would be best? Send them straight to heaven so that God can save them before it's too late, or let them remain alive to continue the cycle of violence which, as Peter Williams explained, would result in even more deaths?
When you consider that, it'svery generous that God would give them 400 years warning, and even THEN let them live if they ran away!
I don't get the arguement really. If there is a God and Jesus was raised from the dead Christianity is true. This story is easily answered. If there is not then none of this matters anyway. Add to that, humans certainly have shown they do not need religion at all to kill millions. Case dismissed.
I normally agree with you about these matters, but I have to say the idea of hell is Biblically incoherent. Romans 6:7, 23 show that, at death, a person is acquitted from sin, and has no further wage to pay. Also, Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10 seem rather clear in saying that people have no conscious experience after death. So, having paid their wages, people just die and cease existing. As Jesus said, with reference to Lazarus, they have "gone to rest" (John 11:11-14).
What do you think it means to be "absent from the body and at home with the Lord" (2 Corinthians 5:8), if not existing in a disembodied state?
@@ob4161
Well, the context is talking about heaven, and Paul's earlier letter to the Corinthians says that happens by means of resurrection and transformation into spirit bodies.
The price for sin is death - eternal separation from God. The Son of God - Jesus Christ pre-paid the sin-debts on the cross for any sinner who confesses his/her sins to Him and asked for His forgiveness. God is perfectly righteous and just that no sins-debts can be let unpaid, yet God is merciful and loving that He himself take on human flesh to redeem our sin-debts with His blood shed on the cross. He was resurrected and that was the proof for His saving power for the sinners who trust in Him.
I never said it mentioned slavery. As much as I'll argue, whatever it says that you can have slaves okay. Sure. So? The fact is that whether you are a "free" man or not the truth is that you are a slave either way. Whether to sin or to another man. The truth is, the bible uses the word Slave which brings the baggage of the word. Had they used servants, you wouldn't be so mad, still mad, but no so. Also have you ever thought about how the person who said (continued)
No one is righteous, not even one. By the fairness of yours, or by the justice of God, should anyone of us be allowed to live forever with God with our sin-debts unpaid for through the saving grace of Jesus Christ's blood on the cross? People are not saved because their sin-debts are not redeemed. Now, who gets saved is a matter of grace, decided by the giver. If you want to insist fairness, all the grace receivers can say is: "I don't deserve God's saving grace, and it's unfair I am selected."
"The kingdom of God is in within you" and the God that made humans "In his image" tolerate slavery. I don't know, I can try to, but I will fail. What does that mean? A contradiction? Religion changing itself to suit the writer and his or her people? No, because the truth is that if Jesus rose from the dead then he spoke the truth. If he was the messiah why did he tolerate the slavery? Actually he didn't, but still, he didn't tolerate it when he came because our slavery (continued)
God deals with all these issues about killing very clearly. they're very well defined to who, what, where and how.
I would add, it works both ways. Jonah was commanded by God to go preach against the people of Nineveh. he seen the wickedness and was about to destroy them. notice Jonah wanted to see them judged and not delivered. big difference in Gods will and Jonahs, because Jonah knew Gods forgiveness. in the end 600k people children and.unknown animals were spared, because of God.
What I meant was that the Israelites were too terrified to go into the land, and that's why they were banished into the wilderness for 40 years in the first place.
And if you want to make a claim, back it up with citation.
YHWH portrayed with other gods? It's called apostasy. The prophets like Elijah warn against it 1 Kings 18:21 “How long will you waver between two opinions? If the YHWH is God, follow him; but if Baal is God, follow him.” and now archaeology finds evidence for it. Surprise!
The choice of free will available to you today, based on the knowledge of good and evil, is to believe or not believe in your own "theory" of the "imaginary god", as well as to believe or not to believe in the three kinds of revelation by the real Creator God : the creations and creatures, His words in the Bible. and the God Incarnate/the Word become flesh/the Son of God - Jesus Christ, who claims: "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through me". (John 14:6)
Opposition to godliness is atheism in profession and idolatry in practice. Atheism is so senseless and odious to mankind that it never had many professors.’
- Sir Isaac Newton
Quotes don't justify belief. Only evidence can justify a belief, and nobody has evidence of a god.
@@majmage replied,
"Quotes don't justify belief. Only evidence can justify a belief, and nobody has evidence of a god."
Do you have any evidence based data to support that belief of yours, or is that just your personal belief?
@@hwd71 Yeah I've asked like 400+ theists for evidence of a god, and they all respond _exactly like you did: by presenting zero evidence!_
The thread still has zero evidence of a god, and pay attention to how that will never change no matter how long or short our conversation goes. Well that means neither of us knows a god exists.
Well I'm honest about that lack of knowledge: I admit I don't know. But most theists _pretend to know_ when they don't actually know, and that's not very honest.
@@majmage Most atheists argue from personal incredulity.
There is plenty of evidence for God if you sincerely follow the evidence where it leads.
Briefly consider the following arguments from what we do know about the following which point to an Intelligent Creator.
Fine tuning of the Universe.
Kalam Cosmological argument.
Interactomes in the cell.
Information in our DNA.
Homochirality of the DNA Molecule.
Irreducible complexity of ATP Synthase. and other nano machines in our cells.
Law of biogenesis.
Bible prophecy.
God appeared to Human Beings in the Person of Jesus of Nazareth, and did miracles to support that claim.
If you reject that, why do you accept that the Virgin Mother Earth gave life from an inanimate mud pool, billions of years ago which has never happened to be observed since?
You too have a burden of proof to provide data that particles to people evolution is true.
Dawkins didn't want to debate Craig because he was effective. Period.
Well to this day Craig still doesn't have evidence of a god, so not sure we really miss out on him not ending up in a debate with any given person. He just trots out the same tired arguments each time, like the Cosmological Argument (where he fails to establish a logical necessity for a god) or the Moral Argument (where he just _says_ objective morals exist without evidence and _says_ they must've come from a god without evidence, then treats that assertion as evidence of a god).
Logic isn't really theists' strong suit though. For example you said if there is a God and Jesus was raised from the dead Christianity is true, yet we can imagine many scenarios where that's wrong (like one where "God" is simply a powerful alien that tricked humanity into worshiping it). So how do you get theists to _truly care about truth?_ I wish I knew. It's one of the dangers of Dunning-Kruger Effect: a person has to be at least somewhat logical to understand when they've made logical errors; a persona has to have at least some knowledge of a topic to have an accurate sense of how much they truly know, etc.
Something you have to remember historically is that the nineteenth century (and the industrial revolution) led to a population growth nowhere seen in human history, that's the reason Communism (not atheism) is seen to have a higher body count. Imagine if Crusaders and Papal soldiers had things like tanks, grenades, machine guns, and so on.
I agree the atheists leaders took killing to a whole new level. The ideology and machinery they developed was incredible for quickly killing humans.
A tenet is a principle or belief, especially one of the main principles of a religion or philosophy
Atheism is the exact opposite, whether you agree, or like it or not.
Secondly, for me, the entire Bible is hyperbole. That is I don't think most, if not all of it was meant to be taken literally. Also, I really am not in the slightest bit concerned with your unnecessary opinion as to the level of my intelligence. And lastly, Jesus is a work of fiction written in 3rd person narrative, Moses too.
God's way is not our way, our thinking is not God's thinking. Have faith that God is working patiently and deligently in the hearts of those sinners that are to be saved. What happens to those sinners who have have heard about but rejected the saving grace of the Son of God - Jesus Christ? Die in one's own sins. The fear of God is the beginning of knowledge. Knowing the all Mighty is wise, and looking for His face is savvy.
Are you avoiding answering because there is actually no place in any biblical text where slavery is condemn, or human rights existed? You worship your own ego.
Right wandering the desert for forty years and they don't want any land, sounds highly doubtful. Also if you have a god that can make universes why not just make a land for them or teleport them there?
Yes Yahweh is a god of war, many of the old testament is nothing but war with Phillistines and other tribes. He also used to be accompanied by other gods such as El and Asherah.
I see where you're coming from, but there are still indigenous tribes that exist today that don't want to be integrated into larger societies or a 'promised land.' To us, that's weird af because we love our 1st world creature comforts. But everyone has something different that floats their boat.
The logical conclusion of atheism is that human life has no intrinsic value. If all life is happenstance, then it cannot possibly have value. If life has no value, then what harm does it do to murder a hundred million in pursuit of one's goals? And who can fault one for pursuing one's goals? After all, we are all the same and value systems are imaginary constructions anyway, so objecting on moral grounds is logically impossible.
You should think harder about what you believe.
How do you god didn't command the killer to commit the act due to the forced secularization of the schools?
You seem to believe there is some sort of value in the lie or ability to lie, when instead, believing there is some sort of value in the lie is "hilariously absurd". God is not a creature, but some people debate this. Your opinion of God, His actions, and His abilities have no bearing on the validity of his righteousness, intelligence, morality, and power, but you're entitled to it. So, if you have faith in the words you speak, so be it. Peace :)
Sin is disobedience to God; it's perfectly conceivable that someone would continue to disobey and curse God while being TORMENTED (not tortured). Your understanding of hell is childish.
Please present your evidence that tallies the number of deaths attributed to religious suffering throughout the totality of human existence. Atheism is not a social construct with any unity. It is a word that describes the state of disbelief. Please explain how the state of being causes murder, I will likewise explain to you how your belief conflicting with islam has caused countless deaths for 2 millenia.
Lmao what historical group in the past is atheist????? Please let me know when you find em, the whole world would like to find out there is such a culture....
The old "He did it too" argument, holds no water whatsoever.
Wow, I find this "The reasonable faith tour" very unreasonable!
tenets of Atheism? WTF are the tenets of Atheism?
As for the message of Jesus:
Luke 14:26: If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
Luke 12:51-53:"Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division. From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other...
Nothing warped there.....
Why believe this is the right god anyway? There are many different belief systems out there, many of these belief systems are dependent on a number of factors so they aren't entirely freely chosen. Next your 3 reasons are based on a presupposition that the bible is accurate, when it actually suffers from errors in many ways. Its also suffers from absurdities, contradictions, and falsehoods on reality. Examine your beliefs and criticize them if you actually want truth.
Actually quite a lot of the evidence differs. CanaanitePath has cited sources and many of the claims in the bible about them are either false, exxagerated, or demonization.
Yes, really.
Another question, why even have wars amongst humans if you as a god could settle it in every tribe without violence? Is it harder for god to make peace than it is to create a universe?
You are not answering the question: you happen to be wrong, the true god is Allah, you ask Jesus for salvation but you miss the target, the correct one should be Mohamed. Should Allah deny you his grace and burn you forever? Yes or no.
I can think about Vader in order to rationalize him. This does not mean i think he is real. It's impossible for a finite being to execute crimes of infinite dimensions. The only being who can possible commit a crime of infinite proportions is god. If he has any moral fiber, he should lock himself in Hell.
Compassion and empathy are the sources of moral reasoning. It's not hard to see why you find hell acceptable. You lack these qualities. People can burn forever, you simply don't care.
False. God can't take a life in a way that would be morally wrong. To better see that parallel. God can't say things in a way that would be morally wrong. You attacked an argument I didn't make. That's a straw man. That being said, I believe that if God puts a person in a position of authority to take someones life in a way that is not morally wrong, that person can do so without "killing" them according to your definition of "kill". Therefore, He has the same set of moral imperatives or better
It is fair to bypass Mohamed's revelation from Allah himself that said that Jesus is not the son of god and those who belief he is will face eternal damnation? Allah and Yahweh both has the same law: those who believe in the false revelation will burn forever. If it is unfair for Allah to burn you if you are wrong, then it is unfair to Yahweh to burn muslims because they are wrong about Jesus.
-Demonization of victims - We don't need to demonize the Canaanites. We know from archaeology exactly what they were like. Do your research.
aggrandizement - really?
Deuteronomy 7:1 ...seven nations larger and stronger than you ..7 The Lord did not set his affection on you and choose you because you were more numerous than other peoples, for you were the fewest of all peoples.
Numbers 13:33 We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them.
Sin is disobedience to God. By rejecting God, you are guilty of sin and deserving of the punishment for the transgression (as are we all, for everyone disobeys God in some manner). The hole is in your understanding. At least make an effort to understand Christian doctrine before arguing against it.
"Without religion, there ARE no human rights."
I would advise you to research atheist civil rights leaders like Robert Ingersoll, Clarence Darrow, HL Mencken, A. Philip Randolph, and so on.
If 90% of mankind believes that Vader is real, it is perfectionally rational to ask why the human mind is so prone to failure.
It's impossível for us to commit a crime against God. What can I do against him? Kill him, hurt him, steal from him? If this being is real, I'm powerless against him. God can't posibly be the source of justice, because he is infinitely unjust. We both are lucky that this being is completely imaginary.
You are ignorant of history. Saying that Christianity "found a way to justify slavery." is completely illogical. NOWHERE in the Bible is slavery justified, although it is present in a radically different form than the type you speak of. Describing skin color as a result of paganism is NOWHERE in the Bible. Interpreting the justification of slavery in this way as any form of real Christian justification, is to say the KKK are based on Biblical values. They're not.
Then he did a poor job of doing it. You'd think the creator of the universe would know how to get people to listen to him. This just shows god to be inept and lazy at solving problems.
I've actually read cited books stating that Canaanites weren't like that, go to Canaanitepath for them. Also there are ways to change cultures without violence and the greatest of military commanders win wars without it. How can this god be so powerful when greater military commanders could do better?
Thank man that we live in a secular world fueled by the belief in innate human rights. When we look back to Christian Theocracies, they didn't fuel any respect for differences in opinion.
@ExponentialImpact Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Pol Pot, Castro, etc. would seem to challenge that assertion.
What coerced the Columbine killers to murder Christians? Why are most serial killers Atheist? Why do you push the responsibility of acts of a few mentally ill people onto all Christians? Can we say that Stalin and Mao, who killed more people than were killed in all religious wars in all centuries previous combined, can we say their crimes are yours or Atheism's?
Guy, by that logic we shouldn't be outraged that the Newtown killer slaughtered 20 firstgraders because he sent them off to heaven. That's just silly, don't you think? In what other part of normal life--other than in this one instance of trying to justify the viewpoint of an ancient document--would you accept such an idea as moral? Nowhere, I hope. Seems to me that's the test of sensible Biblical exegesis: you can't defend something in the Bible if in ordinary life it's absurd and unacceptable.
Sorry, you're dead wrong. God gives (invent, if you insist) human beings, the knowledge of good and evil. Man invented crimes. Without the laws and commendments from God, there won't be crimes. The Laws are for human being to abide by, not for the animals and beasts. Since you know what's fair, let me ask, is it fair to let me or you, a sinner, bypass Jesus Chirst, who died for my or your sin-debts, and avoid the eternal death - which is etenral separation from the all righteous God?
WILLIAMS IS SUPPOSED TO TALK ABOUT RELIGION AND VIOLENCE . NOT ABOUT POLITICS AND VIOLENCE , OR THINKINING AND VIOLENCE .. THE EVIDENCE AGAINST RELIGION IS OVERWHELMING;. THE CRUSADES , THE SPANISH INQUISITION , SUNNIS AGAINST SHEITES , MOSLEMS AGAINST HINDUS . CATHOLICS AGAINST MOSLEMS .THE LIST IS ENDLESS . AND ALL THAT IS PERFECTLY OK WITH GOD , OR IT WOULD NEVER HAPPEN
That's not a logical argument "against religion". I mean he's fairly correct that you can't just take a straight-up association and act like it's a meaningful relationship unless you can prove it (using something like statistical significance, _not_ just vaguely pointing to the crusades). But _the entire topic is irrelevant,_ because if we care about truth the only thing that matters is whether we have evidence of any god(s) _and we don't._ So this entire bait-and-switch to whether religion causes violence is just one more way theists use to keep the true discussion at arm's length. The only thing that matters is whether we have a good reason to believe in gods, and we don't.
"Sinful" behavior does not cause death. It is a demonstrable fact anyone can check going to a doctor. And against facts, all you can do is cry. Any serial-killer can live a long, happy and healthy life and die peacefully. If he is christian and accepts Jesus forgiveness, he goes straight to heaven. Anyone of his victims that is not christian will fry in Hell forever. Pretty fair, loving and just. Anyone who rule the Universe this way is mentally ill, a psychopath.