Just when you think this guy couldnt be a more likeable dude, you find out he is a Brother in Christ!

So lucky you are to have been born into the right religion and white skin. And now you've contoured the cosmos and all of the natural world. Genius👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏

I wish to warn all of you of HIS WRONG TEACHINGS: A sad day for Christianity in America. 1) God's laws are mere human wisdom. “We must not conflate the Bible’s status and function as Scripture with its status and function as literature. Providing us with moral knowledge is not its purpose as Scripture; consequently, any moral knowledge we can derive from it does not carry the authority of Scripture, but rather only the authority of human wisdom. If we want to use the Bible as a source of moral knowledge, then, it will have to be either as part of a broad sample of the accumulated wisdom of human culture……..but the point is that if we want to use the Bible as a source of moral knowledge, we cannot do so on the basis that it is Scripture, because providing us with moral knowledge is not what Scripture is for. ”(Pg 100) 2) Canaanites are not evil. “Agents of non-order literally cannot sin and therefore cannot ever be said to be punished for sin; this is why the Canaanites, in accordance with their depiction as agents of non-order, are frequently accused of (badness) and (behavior outside the bounds of order), but never (sin): the twisting, bending, perverting, distorting, or corrupting of order. Only agents of order are capable of sin and therefore able to be punished for sin” (Pg 166). 3) Satan is not evil (Lost World of Adam and Eve) As a chaos creature the serpent would be more closely associated with non-order than with disorder. Non-order has a certain neutrality to it, whereas disorder is evil in nature and intent…..If the serpent truly is in the category of chaos creature, neither his contradiction of God’s statement nor his deception about the consequences are part of an evil agenda. They are simple the disruptive, ad hoc behavior that chaos creatures engage in. (Pg 136)

fat

These arguments are turgid, to say the least. The key debate should come from the source works themselves. Who wrote the books of the New Testament and how factual are the narratives? Given that most biblical scholars agree with the proposition that the gospels were written anonymously it is impossible to attribute them any level of accuracy. It seems to me that the deification of JC was posthumous and therefore questionable.

I think Richard Dawkins missed the opportunity to make clear that our moral views are NOT as random as having five fingers instead of six. The real push towards our morals is based on the need of people in small tribes to get along over thousands of generations. Add to that the obvious wish not to be treated badly coupled to the empathy that says you don’t want the same harms to come to others.

John Walton does deconstruct sin by reducing it to the concept of disorder on trivial grounds - relocating in the context of Olympics and prohibiting the janitor from the surgery room. He reminds me of Saul - deconstructing, redefining God's instructions. May America have the wisdom not to listen to him. He believes in "no-global-flood", Genesis' creation is a mere assignment of function and not the actual act of creating. He comes up with a false dichotomy of events and theology of the events, making the reader choose one over the other, when both must be read in context. Events are hence redefined into ways that he wants - No creation in Genesis, Noah's flood is local, the conquest was never to remove sin.

Great conversation! Lydia is awesome.

My ultimate question is what has happened to the basic principles of reverence and awe? I mean, we serve a Holy God. He is the creator of the universe, holds my ability to breathe in His hands. You know, you really struck a chord with your comments about the move of “lacking in faith” pertaining to healing outcomes. The miracle I and my family experienced with - at the time - my 14 year old son, was nothing farther from that very shallow teaching about healing. It’s an amazing story but God used my knowledge of practicing medicine to bring about a wonderful miracle of literally witnessing my son be raised from death. Perhaps we can talk sometime. You won’t hear about it in the main stream church or anything like that but you would know of it in my local medical community. Bottom line, that theology is blank, lacking truth. Let’s face it, Jesus said those exact words. He prayed the Father remove the cup He was to bear from Him, but then…. Yeah, He prayed what He was feeling but submitted to the Father’s will. Ultimately it was Jesus obedience to the Father and nothing short of obedience that brought the miracle of eternal life through faith. That teaching puts all of the burden of healing on the individual and not the Lord.

This is an argument from ignorance fallacy. Pure and simple. You don't know where the genetic code comes from (whatever that means). Ok. And? Evolutionary biology doesn't address YOUR problems, and YOUR strawman. No, your religious views DO conflict with the concept of free will. Ask yourself if your imaginary friend knows everything. Then ask yourself how it can know everything if free will exists. Now you have a problem. You are worshiping something that knows something bad will happen, and you assume it is capable of doing something about it, unless you want to give up your "all powerful" definition. So what have we left? Something that sees and knows everything, can stop a child from being raped and murdered, and does nothing. This makes it complicit in everything it doesn't like/want, thus contradicting your assertion that it is "moral". Free will makes your imaginary friend either powerless, or amoral, pick one or both. Maybe you think the law of non contradiction doesn't apply to your imaginary friend? Or you will redefine your imaginary friend again and again to try and get out of this hole. Good luck.

So this is the typical approach taken to explain this disturbing word that has a lot people upset and, rightfully questioning, how can a loving God do this. If the Ge. 6 narrative is ignored, nothing about the conquest makes sense. Walton uses the New testament example, of Jesus overturning the tables of the money changers at the temple, because they didn't belong there. How and why didn't these people belong there? It was there land. They were there before Israel. But if we consider that the Anakin ( descendants of the nephalim, Ge. 6 ) were in the land and God was cleaning blood lines, then the " utterly destroy " command makes sense. The Genesis narrative clearly states that the nephalims still existed after the flood. The conquest now takes on a different meaning. God was protecting HUMANITY from this rebellion to ever take place again. So, its not genoside, but God's love , for mankind, on display.

If my kids did not believe that I existed then that would make me a bad dad. My kids would not be to blame.

Divine Hiddenness is a real problem for all non reformed Christians (or people that hold to some type of election/predestination doctrine).

When I lived in Gillette, WY I saw 70 ft. of coal buried under 200 ft. of overburden. It is obvious the coal is buried trees. That was at about 4,600 feet elevation.

Hi

Rabbi Tovia Singer is right. Jewish people aspire to become like god. Christians who hate themselves seek to make god in their image. The absurdity of this nonsense is bizarre. God curses the ground in response to human evil. He made stuff what is he winning about

No, Satan is.

That this question is still being asked is pathetic. There was Paradise; there was rebellion; there was disobedience. So here we are not with good alone but with good and evil and choice. We have to earn our way back and that has nothing to do with God being vindictive or a bully. If we choose good and do not act stupid there is not a problem. So long as people act stupidly; meanly; cruelly; or vindictively or bully they wil get payback. As you sow your reap. Stop blaming God.

_"I actually got to do an atheist role-play at Grandpoint Church"_ Heh, heh. Yeah, because you certainly wouldn't want to expose Christians to a _real_ atheist, huh? You have to pretend to be an atheist, so you can present your strawman version of an atheist, hoping like crazy that they never meet - or at least talk to - a real one? :) Well, it's been my experience that Christians are very good at imagining whatever they want. So I'm sure the audience loved your fantasy performance. At the same time, Christians seem absolutely _terrified_ of actually talking to a real atheist, so your strawman version will probably work well enough for most of them. Then again, you call them "'students," so you were apparently indoctrinating young people? They might be more likely to stumble across the real thing sometime. But who knows? I don't know you. And after that start to your video, I don't think I'll bother continuing with this. I do think it's funny that you think you have the all-knowing, all-powerful Creator of the Universe on your side, and yet you have to teach your students _excuses._ That's religion in a nutshell, isn't it?

Can you tell me the name of your Chronological Study Bible, please? Many thanks. 😊

Why reject Biblical truth? We are commanded to test any teacher or "prophet" to see if it conflicts with previous revelation. The bible tells us to watch out for false teachers and examine the scripture just like the Bereans did to see if what the Apostle Paul was teaching was truth. For such people are false apostles, deceitful workers, masquerading as apostles of Christ. 14 And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. 15 It is not surprising, then, if his servants also masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve. 2 Corinthians 11:13-15 Acts 17:11 Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and EXAMINED the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. Test Joseph Smith AGAINST the words of God Jesus affirmed. Luke 24:44 He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.” "Before me NO god was formed, nor shall there be ANY after me.” (Isaiah 43:10) If Mormonism is true, then God could not make this claim, for he was just a man at one point; nor could he claim that no gods would come after him, for that is the goal of J.S. and LDS members. Isaiah 44:6 says, "I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is NO God." & "Is there any God besides me?.. I know not one". God is saying there is NOT an infinite amount of Gods, and there is none like Him. LDS teaches that there is. He was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ Himself did" (King Follett Sermon) Either the BIBLE or LDS is FALSE. Jesus said ALL scripture will NOT fade away but "MANY WOLVES in sheep's clothing" will come trying to ADD to the word. Mathew 7:15 Joseph Smith changed Jesus, the Father and added you can become a GOD. It hurts my heart to see Mormons fall for Satan's lie that we can become God when there is only one eternal biblical God. God gave us critical thinking & logical reasoning for a reason, he tells us to EXAMINE and TEST what we are being taught for TRUTH. The bible withstands the truth test. Joseph Smith's version FAILS the truth test. It's your eternity, study it for yourself. God bless. LDS FALSE Apostle: "The law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so." Brigham Young Journal of Discourses, Vol. 10, p. 110 "The only men who become Gods, even the sons of Gods are those that enter into polygamy." (Brigham Young) Journal of Discourses 11 p.269 God Bless.

Must be miserable being a believer.

Lol bullying, violence, racial tensions grouped in with homosexuality. So nutty.

Mike and Bridget are the kind of Christians who don't beat you over the head with religion. They actually live the golden rule. God Bless you.🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰

Any relation to apologist Parker Settecase?

And what about Leviticus 18:24-25 where Moses says that Canaanites made themselves unclean by practicing the sexual immoralities listed in this chapter and the land is vomiting out the Canaanites. And given to total destruction as stated inJeremiah? And the thing about Jesus driving out the money changers because “they can't be there.” I don't think you know what you are talking about. I am glad that I reviewed this so that I won't make the mistake of buying and reading the Lost World Series.

Today of course, Jesus is totally conformist and why do Christians have such a fetish for the word 'challenge'?

Hello. I am an atheist. I define atheism as suspending any acknowledgment as to the reality of any particular god until sufficient credible evidence is presented. My position is that *_I currently have no good reason to acknowledge the reality of any god._* And here is why I currently hold to such a position. Below are 11 facts I must consider when evaluating the claim made by certain theists that a particular god exists in reality. To be clear, these are not premises for any argument which _concludes_ there to be no gods. These are simply facts I must take into account when evaluating the verity of such a claim. If any of the following facts were to be contravened at a later time by evidence, experience, or sound argument, I would THEN have good reason to acknowledge such a reality. 1. I personally have never observed a god. 2. I have never encountered any person who has claimed to have observed a god. 3. I know of no accounts of persons claiming to have observed a god that were willing or able to demonstrate or verify their observation for authenticity, accuracy, or validity. 4. I have never been presented withany _valid_ logical argument, which also introduced demonstrably true premises that lead deductively to an inevitable conclusion that a god(s) exists in reality. 5. Of the many logical syllogisms I have examined arguing for the reality of a god(s), I have found all to contain a formal or informal logical fallacy or a premise that can not be demonstrated to be true. 6. I have never observed a phenomenon in which the existence of a god was a necessary antecedent for the known or probable explanation for the causation of that phenomenon. 7. Several proposed (and generally accepted) explanations for observable phenomena that were previously based on the agency of a god(s), have subsequently been replaced with rational, natural explanations, each substantiated with evidence that excluded the agency of a god(s). I have never encountered _vice versa._ 8. I have never knowingly experienced the presence of a god through intercession of angels, divine revelation, the miraculous act of divinity, or any occurrence of a supernatural event. 9. Every phenomenon that I have ever observed appears to have *_emerged_* from necessary and sufficient antecedents over time without exception. In other words, I have never observed a phenomenon (entity, process, object, event, process, substance, system, or being) that was created _ex nihilo_ - that is instantaneously came into existence by the solitary volition of a deity. 10. All claims of a supernatural or divine nature that I have been presented have either been refuted to my satisfaction or do not present as _falsifiable._ 11. I have never been presented with a functional definition of a god. ALL of these facts lead me to the only rational conclusion that concurs with the realities I have been presented - and that is the fact that there is *_no good reason_* for me to acknowledge the reality of any particular god. I have heard often that atheism is the denial of the Abrahamic god. But denial is the active rejection of a substantiated fact once credible evidence has been presented. Atheism is simply withholding such acknowledgment until sufficient credible evidence is introduced. *_It is natural, rational, and prudent to be skeptical of unsubstantiated claims, especially extraordinary ones._* I welcome any cordial response. Peace.

Apportion belief to evidence. Great. So no evidence. No belief. None of this casuistry is even the slightest bit suggestive of god to anyone who hasn’t already been ideologically committed to this folklore. It’s an incredibly culturally biased, myopic view.

Dear DAVID WOOD MEDIA, I have written to you twice on your website regarding what I consider to be tantamount to theft by means of a debit order that was signed off last year by accident. An amount of US$100 was "donated", but in error. Efforts then, in July 2023, were made to have the funds returned but there was no response from your organisation. Apparently, that erroneous donation was made annually and, this July, of it was not for the fact that I have no money in my bank account, you tried twice to extract a further US$100 from my bank account. I wrote to you twice since then on the website requesting some feedback but both requests for contact have simply been ignored. While I support the work you do in sharing the gospel, the manner in which I have been treated is hardly what any brother in Christ would expect from you or your organisation. I regret having to wait this dirty laundry in public but I have no other way of getting your attention. Please will you address the contact messages sent to you last week so we can bring this matter to finality. Craig Nain [email protected]

Presup is laughable. It's Christians acknowledging they can't provide even the tinniest scrap of credible evidence and sò resorting to childish word games. Quite sinister that Eric is allowed to teach children in your primitive country.

The hate comments are insane "Elevate your cult speak" or "How to deceive yourself while deceiving others". Dude chill out, its just apologetics 💀

Yikes, the ignorance of everyone on this show is alarming

Apologetics is a cheap facade of rationality. It’s only making y’all look more like clowns

If this headline were honest: "Elevate your cult speak" or "How to deceive yourself while deceiving others".

Yep, they all fail. Apologetics is meant for believers, and they'll ignorantly accept these lies. Cosmological Arguments Nothing more than first cause claims and surprise, any religion/cult can use them. Sadly, not one religion or cult can show their god exists, much less was the creator. Design Arguments No evidence for "design" aka creationism, and surprise, even creationists can't agree on what version of creationism is the right one. Creationists also have the problem that they have to explain why their god was a moron, or malicious, when it "designed" the sun to give humans cancer, and the human body to guarantee thousands of humans will choke to death every year. Moral Arguments Christian morality is demonstrably subjective, with each inventing a list of morals they claim their god wants, and yet the poor dears can't show that their god merely exists, much less agrees with them. They also have the problem that they must insist that their god doesn't have to follow these supposedly "objective" morals since they have to invent excuses why it is okay for this god to commit genocide, to kill people for the actions of others, etc. This makes their morality subjective to who someone is. it also shows their morality is little more than might equals right. Resurrection Arguments No evidence for jesus christ, much less the cruxifiction and resurrection. Curious how no one noticed any certain day where there was a major earthquake, the sky darkening and dead jews wandering the streets of roman-occupied Jerusalem during a passover. New Testament Arguments These also fail. Many copies of lies doesn't make the lies true.

lol, of course it's you that's being persecuted, you never speak ill of gays or trans or drag queens or abortion clinics, no it's always those horrid sciencey people picking on god - who apparently needs to be protected by you.

no, you're not christians who apologise for being offensive, you're just offensive. you insult the intelligence of everyone, not just atheists but the people you lie to in order to make god not look like a genocidal maniac. you're here to make slavery not look like slavery, you're here to make killing people just cos they disagree with god is okay, you're here so people don't bother to think that maybe this almighty god is crap at being almighty. great channel by the way, really crappy production values. go watch mr deity if you need an example of how to do it.

and anyone who says that god has the right to kill whoever he feels like, just for disagreeing with him, with no trial, no representation, no jury of peers with one unspecified crime of "sin" (what _was_ the crime the whole world doing that was so bad?) and one sentence - to be burned alive for eternity - after being drowned, then you are a sick person.

what do ross, meyer, behe, tour and pals hope to find? why are they doing science in fact cos at the bottom of their barrel all you will find is more "nature did it". they must be really crappy christians to not realise that if god were real he doesn't allow evidence of his existence, the whole premise of christianity is you are required - it is demanded of you - that you have faith, not knowledge. are they expecting to find a trade mark? do they think god made a blunder and has some kind of electronic device hidden in all the nature stuff? they are the dumbest people in a bucket of dumb people.

more lying for god. people can see through the smoke screen and the spin doctoring, god condoned slavery, he demanded genocide and taking slaves, it's there in black and white and the more you try to cover it up the more people ask questions of the rest of the drivel written in the bible, like immortals being killed for instance, how does that work? god killed by humans? that sounds worth trying if he ever comes back.

and just a quick reminder that the first amendment conflicts with the first commandment "thou shalt worship whoever you want" and that the declaration of human rights gives ME more rights than god. and a history lesson cos the USA is a secular nation, not many people seem to know that, and the founding fathers were at best deists and certainly not christian. hitchens became a naturalised american purely because of the constitution. the UK is officially christian, the US is officially secular. is it annoying that the satanic temple has the SAME RIGHTS as the church?

on the one hand we have a god who is sophisticated enough to create a universe using extremes of physics, chemistry, biology and quantum mechanics, a universe that is finely tuned to one part in zillions, with humans designed to have the smallest of biological machines to regulate the workings of our bodies, not to mention the uncountable operations our brain carries out every moment, and the intricacies of consciousness, but you want me to believe that his person also thought nailing his son to a tree was a good idea. religists are crazy people.

six thousand subscribers and 12 views? jesus this must be crap, thank goodness i don;t have to listen to it. great platform for atheists though, i'm convinced these two bit no interest religious channels are helping christ back into the tomb.

more of this religious crap in my feed. intelligent design was proved false - and it's not often science will say "proved" but in this case it was proved false IN COURT by a catholic prosecutor, the subject should be dead, only the most ignorant or the most stubborn religists keep dragging this drivel up again and again.

Wow. A lot of jabber and conjecture with no evidence. And isn't Casey Luskin the guy who was exposed as a charlatan and a liar by Professor Dave? Why would I believe anything he says?

You should set up a live discussion with him. I’d tune in.

Forrest Valkai could really educate you and possibly help prevent you from sounding like a moron in the future.

Thank God almost nobody watched this. Christians don’t need more B.S. artists and known charlatans making them look dishonest and/or incapable of learning.

Dr. Michael Heiser writes a much better account on the story of the Flood and Noah than Walton does. I suggest his books rather than Walton's. I have both author's complete sets. Dr. Heiser is a strong believer in the INERRANCY of Scripture, unlike Walton. Heiser is considered a more conservative theologian than Walton in every way possible. Walton seems to like to mix conjecture, personal philosophy and metaphysics in his interpretations way over the top!