Christianity Promotes Genocide In The Bible! - Alex O'Connor

[@Pangburn]

Full discussion here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/i36unItuprd7qdksi=tqRWt6tZJ8PeYlOV

[@EndlessSummer-dh]

I'm an atheist but Alex ignores that the New Testament supplants God with the Logos and puts the Great Commandment above all of what the Old Testament teaches.

[@gkeith64]

17:33 here hear Revelation 13:10-18 King James Version 10 He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the Yahuadeem elect. The missing part is to understand, humans are created beings. A form of artificial intelligence, A.I. 🤔 As such our record indicates a progression of intuitive comprehension on right and wrong doing, to one another. As such the vineyard is provided time to grow.once ripe, the good fruit is removed and provided the gift of immortality..... the process being KINsider, the sentence from the name above names, has YaHUaH theirin ❤ Yahuashua the daleth & Moshe'Yach = YaHUaHs Salvation the door 🔺️ of immortals & drawn from the water 💧 YaH🔯 Memorizing the Yadibrot Asareth 🟦🟦10 setences/COVENANT COMMANDS = Neuro-linguistic bio-programming, will unlock your latent DNA strands..... On YaHs COVENANT ShABBAt, We shal'ohm 🐝 Qodem Yam moon till dawn 🌅

[@MorneTerblanche-f7x]

1. The Amelekites, Amorites, Canaanites of the geneology of Lameck back to Cain is the iniquity of the Amorites. 2. Cain slew Abel Lameck slew a man and a young man. The law of vengeance not only 7 fold, bud 70 x 7 fold is extended by Lameck to curry over a seed by law to be fulfilled 3500 years later. 7 x 70 x 7 + 70 hallowed years = 3500 years from the time of Lameck, which are egual to the generation between Jarred and Enoch. The iniquity of the Amorites of the descendants of Canaan the son of Ham, and not of Noah. Only than the giving up of the ghost could be raised after repenting with the baptism of John with waters and repentance of the the 1st death of waters and repentance of the Lord in making man. Evil is in their hearts continously. Thank you, you are welcome

[@cookiescraftscats]

@@EndlessSummer-dh Jesus would disagree.

[@AndrewArchambault-n3f]

Christianity does not promote genocide in the bible at all, quite the contrary you are taking creator Jesus narratives wildly out of context, in context if a person creates something as advanced as sentient life it gets tested, why do you think all the machine learning people are so afraid of creating machine learning sentient life, because machine learning sentient life needs to be tested to discern if its safe, if a machine learning sentience is determined by testing to be not safe, perhaps the machine learning sentience can be remediated given the chance to be taught to repent, to chose to comport itself, that is precisely the biblical narrative, creator Jesus interacting edumacating with his creations. If someone in authority like creator Jesus asked you to commit genocide hopefully by now you would have the maturity after some 90 billion peoples accumulated human lifetimes experiences to say no, and be able to explain why you refuse to commit genocide. Genesis 4:7 If you do what is right, will you not be accepted?... Jesus tested Adam, he did the one thing Jesus tested Abraham, he almost did the one thing to Isaac Jesus tested Ancient Israel, they refused to genocide, but for the wrong reason, they were afraid of the people injuring them, so creator Jesus stayed with them providing for them 40 years in the wilderness till that generation passed away, then he tested the next generation and they failed. Jesus tested the second generation in the wilderness and they failed being willing to genocide. Jesus came down amongst his creation and lived as a man in the society he created via moses and the prophets, and he taught us his way his narrow way. Zechariah 4:6 So he said to me, “This is the word of the Lord to Zerubbabel: ‘Not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit,’ says the Lord Almighty. Matthew 7:21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. John 15:4 Remain in me, as I also remain in you. No branch can bear fruit by itself; it must remain in the vine. Neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in me. John 15:5 “I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing. John 7:38 Whoever believes in me, as Scripture has said, rivers of living water will flow from within them.”[a] 39 By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive. Up to that time the Spirit had not been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified. John 14:23 Jesus replied, “Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them. Keep in mind the creators instruction to be fruitful and multiple, some 100 billion people have been born on the earth, of those some 50 billion died as innocent children due to over 50% child mortality rates pre last century, that means that 50 billion innocent children will enter the kingdom of heaven to be mentored by the angels and the most righteous human adults that have ever lived. There have been approximately 5 billion christian adults over the last 2 millenia, few of them did the fathers will, its never been about the adults its always been about the innocent children, the point of the adults suffering and successes is to educate the 50 billion innocent children so that they can make good choices. Dont delude yourself with notions of clouds and laziness, the point of creating and teaching and resurrecting the 100 billion people in the biblical narrative context is to employee those people in jobs labor work in the kingdom of heaven serving the creator Jesus Christ and his father for as long as possible, because, if folks dont want to work then they dont get to enter the 2400km gold gem pearl starship and stay there forever, as the narrative of the one third of the angels cast out of heaven clearly indicates, if a person goes into the kingdom of heaven and they dont like it they can leave as the narrative of the preflood angels that left their estates in heaven to take wives on earth indicates. If someone thinks they can create their own universe, 2400km gold gem pearl starship and give themselves eternal life, I doubt if creator Jesus would stop them from trying. However, the biblical narrative indicates the earth was created, and that there will be an extinction level natural earthquake epicentered in Jerusalem which will release the manmade industrial pollution which removes the risk of a divergent rogue civilization. Revelation 16:19 The great city split into three parts, and the cities of the nations collapsed. ... So in context creator Jesus is still testing mankind by providing mankind with the 396 billion books of the bible in print outlining creator Jesus's narratives and yet rather than know the scriptures and repent, your claiming christianity if for genocide. If mankind was able to create machine learning sentient beings which destroyed the earth, should that machine learning sentience be permitted to travel to other worlds and destroy them, or other dimensions, mankind has already chosen to demonstrable systematically artificially industrially pollute the earth, some news articles report over 70% of sea life and land wild life and insects populations have declined over the last century of industrialization. Genesis 4:7 If you do what is right, will you not be accepted?... Creator Jesus is offering folks a job and help his spirits help doing what is right his fathers will. If your computer was advanced enough and you clicked on the button that started a machine learning sentient being what are the ethical implication? if you stop it or turn it off, are you obligated to provide for it for eternity? Do you have to protect the machine learning sentience if you begin its existence? The creation narrative is like if you left two cats on an Island, are you responsible for them and their 100 billion descendants? To what extent will you spend your time trying to feed them and care for them? It seems to me like creator Jesus is offering folks a square deal but there are few adults who are interested, doing Jesus's fathers will as a form of work forever, but the one third of the angels cast out of heaven narrative indicates there is plenty of trouble in paradise.

[@senormojo]

When Dinesh says “All I’m saying,” he says nothing.

[@breadwitch22]

Dude Dinesh is just making himself looks so dumb.

[@antondovydaitis2261]

Dinesh is a professional liar, and isn't even very good at it. Don't forget 2000 Mules.

[@SigmaValence]

It’s very easy for him to do that, given that he is

[@haha-ps2pz]

He always does unless you're stuck in a cult like mentality.

[@T.A.Constantine]

Or.... He's just dumb

[@ezshottah3732]

This is what 98% of the christian population sounds like

[@avi8r66]

Dinesh is really bad at this... And by this I mean thinking.

[@samuelmarsicano8826]

As many times as I've rewatched clips from this, I think I missed prior to this where Alex straight up has to remind Dinesh what he's even there to debate, pure gold!

[@lightatthecape2009]

@@samuelmarsicano8826 This is not even remotely a debate...its just a one sided interview.

[@billwalton4571]

Dinesh whooped him

[@tonyboetto2412]

No, what's gonna be? Pure Gold is when Alex's time is up on the earth f. And there's God standing before him. No that's gonna be pure gold.Lol

[@BetaKrogoth]

When Dinesh says it's up to interpretation and Alex needs to read it like Christians do: which of a thousand variations of Christianity is he talking about and additionally, making the claim that your book is holy and the passed down words of a literal God, it deserves extreme scrutiny. You don't get to claim it's no big deal, it's the biggest deal there is.

[@lorigiggles2]

🏆You have my vote for best comment.

[@lightatthecape2009]

@@BetaKrogoth Most denominations say its "inspired", this has nothing to do with defining accuracy or truth. No one suggested its the passed down words of a literal God. In fact no one has claimed a God dictated the words ot that God wrote them himself.

[@jakubholic8769]

​@@lightatthecape2009 That changes acc. to the needs of the believer. Sometimes, the bible claims are taken as truth and they believe it happened, but next time, when anything moraly problematic comes - "nonono, it is not the word of god, it was just inspired". Inspired can also mean, that there is nothing correct there.

[@KonoGufo]

@@lightatthecape2009 "2 Timothy 3:16-17 LSB. All Scripture is God-breathed and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be equipped, having been thoroughly equipped for every good work."

[@nicksapp6543]

Dinesh is a grifter. He can’t tell the truth he will lose support.

[@lightatthecape2009]

@@nicksapp6543 Trump didn't.

[@Aleiza_49]

All religion is a grift, he can't help it

[@jjpopnfresh6822]

Same with Peterson

[@BuskingAndChess]

yeah i've never heard of this guy but you can tell this is exactly what's happening with him. Vapid responses to intriguing points. He's like the anti chatGPT, just a contrarian lacking in all knowledge and useful information.

[@Jessiejam-44]

@@jjpopnfresh6822how So?? Did He make a Movies like Dinesh’s’ 2000 mules??? And recently Called His Movie BS.?.? And the Other Grifter did What??

[@ruirodtube]

If god was against slavery, wouldn’t it have been among the Ten Commandments?

[@ryanrobinson2380]

Or just mentioned at least one time in the book, but not it does quite the opposite by laying out ways to own your slaves and who you're allowed to own as slaves, let alone being able to sell off your own daughters as property to someother guy.

[@tomascc9367]

was it not protestants who stopped slavery?

[@LisaAnn777]

That's what you would expect. It's almost like he either wasn't against it, or he didn't care enough to make a commandment about it. Even though about half of the commandments are about worship and God himself, which seems a bit narcissistic. Imagine if the founding fathers made half the constitution about themselves lol

[@Magister195]

​@@LisaAnn777he had the time to warn us about wool and crawfish but not slavery

[@ChrisDoyle2112]

It wasn’t even “abolished” by the new covenant! Read Romans 6 and Ephesians 6!

[@arunjetli7909]

Dinesh has been annihilated by s superior intellect

[@cronistamundano8189]

Since Hitchens he always has been. One thing to say in his favor he never gives up on being mopped the floor with.

[@stepfaniehawkins205]

It isn't even that really so much as it's obvious Dinesh hasn't read the Bible, he simply googled to find Scriptures to find talking points. Lots of Christians read some scriptures... Less than 6% of Christians read the book and got the story and it's lessons.

[@arunjetli7909]

Really , so is it untrue what Oneil is saying?

[@carl5438]

As a black man, it is still a wonder why my ADOS brothers and sisters still worship a god/religion dogma that did nothing to: rebuke slavery and then later demand release of my African ancestors, my great great great grandparents.

[@ravinderdhupia4779]

As a Cdn Sikh....itz really surprising to me too that so many Black Americans r still Christians. Btw.....Sikhism is strictly against slavery, racism, bigotry, etc.

[@fettbub92]

I think its cultural, if any group is under a specific ideology, over time it can become internalized. I think the Irish and Indigenous Americans are examples of this too.

[@thaimperial97]

The brainwashing is very deep bro. For some, it's their only hope for something better to look forward to, which is sad. You can clearly see the religion is full of nonsense if you look unbiasedly

[@TiagoFerreira-zp9gi]

Or why women are catholic or religious, in general. I think people are just ignorant of their religion and what that religion defends. It's obvious that most people that read the Bible (or any other religious book) end up being Atheists.

[@mikeaskme3530]

@carl5438 so true I am African American as well.

[@brianstatom9567]

I just love when a new testament Christian jumps to the old testament when it suits their narrative.

[@davidjanbaz7728]

Your narrative is insane!!!

[@rithvikmuthyalapati9754]

Fr. They only keep the parts that are good in memory while completely ignoring the uglier parts of their Old Testament. They pick and choose, it's honestly insane.

[@angeldamian41]

@@davidjanbaz7728 another jump, hahahaha

[@Jessiejam-44]

So , is the New Testament Woke??

[@bug______]

as a now 24 year old atheist who used to be fervently christian up until i was 17 ( i know im late to the party) its kind of mind blowing to me how anyone can take people like Dinesh seriously

[@kirstywillowlove]

Yes

[@upsidedownnugget9531]

Welcome to the club brother. Great moves. Keep it up. Proud of you. ❤

[@Phookutube]

I'm a second generation atheist, I have been an atheist for the entire 40 years of my life, you'll never find a more assured atheist then myself, religion to me has never been anything other than silly fairytales for adults, and I have had this mentality ever since I was a child, and yet I have to say that Dinesh is right on this one.

[@DawnRealmPictures]

I really hope that, like myself, you are able to gradually undo all of the fear and manipulation that modern Christianity put its members through, even if not intentionally. It’s taken me a really long time for the dawning reality to sit right, but if you surround yourself with the right people, who are far more genuine and authentic than any theist ever was to me, you’ll be just fine. There might not be a God watching over us, but we all have each other ✌️

[@arctos333]

atheist ex muslim here, 25

[@cordo7051]

This is so brilliant by Alex, I want more!

[@markdomar4944]

Dinesh is lying again when he infers the New Testament does away with the Old Testament laws and practices. Matthew 5:18: "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the law, till all things be accomplished." There are 614 laws in the OT, and Jesus said not one of those will pass away. That and the obvious fact Jesus could have stopped slavery in its tracks and fails to do so. Jesus was a fraud and a liar, and so is Dinesh.

[@user-gk9lg5sp4y]

This ☝️

[@user-gk9lg5sp4y]

Dinesh D'Felon has made a career out of it.

[@user-gk9lg5sp4y]

This ☝️

[@solelysoul8543]

Yes.

[@antondovydaitis2261]

Dinesh, like every other Christian apologist, is making Hovind's Wager. That is, that lying to save souls will be forgiven, despite the commandment to not bear false witness.

[@carl5438]

Dinesh with his stories are a dead giveaway for him knowing he is full of ish. We, the audience see right through his tactics.

[@ppapale]

This might be a small point. But did anybody else notice that Dinesh never looked at Alex through the whole debate? Alex, when raising his points, we'd always look right at Dinesh.

[@BuckScrotumn]

It’s not a small point at all. He’s clearly intimidated by Alex and is fully aware that he got himself way in over his head but it’s too late to back out. Alex maintains a confident and calm demeanor while Dinesh looks like someone being interrogated for a murder they’re guilty of. He wants out of that chair more than anything in the world. 😂

[@daredelvis6433]

He's intimidated and not there to have a good faith debate with Alex. He's there to perform for the audience

[@figmentofyourimagination5359]

10:09 It's funny because right as I was reading this comment I looked up and realized Dinesh was looking right at him, with a couple breaks. So yeah uhh, he does look at him homie. It's not "never".....

[@kt6684]

It appears he mostly appeals to the audience unstead of trying to convince Alex because he knows he has no chance of doing that so he must preach to the flock.

[@cronistamundano8189]

I have had discussions like these with my religious friends. I am a doctor so I usually get to biology in a debate or conversation. Once I was talking to a frien of mine who is a physicist, and deeply catholic (yeah really) and I asked if Jesus was completely human ( wich he agreed) AND a male (wich he agreed) AND given birth from a virgin, then where did his Y chromossome came from? He immediately called all the gibberish about miracles and mysteries and whatnot. And I dont know why people dont make another point more often: If Jesus went up to the sky leaving no trace of his existence, than did the bacteria on his mouth, digestive tract and skin go up with him? You mean there are bacteria in Heaven sitting on the right hand side of god? As The Hitch used to say when will people acknowledge that this is all false and made from humans?

[@marcuna11]

You made very good points!!

[@odraciskatube7725]

interesting debate i (as an atheist) had this debate allot 2 with theist i often even need to point out that there is "evidence"of jesus as the shroud of turin the nails the crown and the cross and the holy prepuce (multiple foreskins) and that they are all 500-1000 yrs according to carbondating test's and the blood found is inconclusive / multiple bloodtypes/gnomes?(seem to have read that somewhere) anyway the Y chromosome is an interesting take i have not considered that one yet, but if god did inseminate mary to birth...himself (perverse btw)... did he then not break the bond of holy matrimony of mary & josheph? which is a sin, being born a bastard child is one 2. And the primal sin is stil in place until the hero-sacrifice/suicide which was the running theme at that time. yea we can safely say that the scripture/theology and the metaphysics isn't an exact science. speaking of which i have an bum toe since childhood a big tile dropped on it and its gotten worse over time looks like its tottaly worn out since you are a doc, maybe u know what can i do about it?

[@timorean320]

You clearly do not understand concept of "Spirit". "Nothing in the flesh can please God", "Flesh, and blood cannot enter Kingdom". So, if you had a basic understanding of what Bible claims, you wouldnt ask such a silly question. Its not a Book for flesh, its a Book for your Spirit. Christ, is the word, made flesh. A "part" of God, reserved to become Man, who was perfect "sacrifice" to atone for our sins. "In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God". "Before Abraham, I am". Look Doc, if naturalism is all there is, you evolved to survive to reproduce, pass on genes, and thats it. Period. Evolutionary Scheme in nutshell. What implications does that have for purpose, meaning, morality? (There is no objective 1, only what you make up in your head, which is exactly what you accuse others of doing) You are the result of random chemical processes, unguided, unconscious, that did not evolve to be intellectual, cant trust a thing you think. There is a book by a Neurosurgeon Eben Alexander "Proof of Heaven" highly recommend. (At least check out story) NDE, End of Life is an actual study now, and there is a lot of data on this, maybe you should tap some Hospice Nurses, and talk to them. Take a "Scientific Approach" Doc, if you rid yourself of preconcieved ideas, bias that you clearly have, and take a critical look, you may be suprised what you find.

[@odraciskatube7725]

@@timorean320 concepts of "spirit" what you mean is spyche? from antient greece? and what afterlife are you referring to? the duat? what makes you think that the christian faith has the right dogma's? and did derive from something? christ->abraham->canaan->synergy of older pantheon/polytheism's its all bs and you know it.

[@timorean320]

@odraciskatube7725 Lol. I dont have a lot of answers, but I think the "Human Spirit" is 1 of those concepts that everybody has an idea of what it is, yet cant really define. Any "God" I could explain, isnt really worth considering, because I believe, that is something each individual must define for themself. To me, if there is a God, it makes sense that it would come in human form, to be example. Not just say "dont do x" (easy for you, you're God) I dont look at Book at 100% literal. Metaphorical, Allegorical, Spritual etc., with some actual, historical, and possibly a blend of many stories over time. That doesnt bother me. I dont look at Bible as "perfect", man contaminates whatever he touches. The real question is your consciousness your "Spirit"? If you dream of an eating an apple, and can see, taste it in dream, is it less "real" that 1 you eat when awake? Our senses are really just a VR headset we have to percieve "reality", and its not even a good 1. There are spectrums you cant see, frequencies you cant hear, and if consciousness is energy, and energy cant die, where does it tranfer to?

[@avi8r66]

A point missed by Alex is when Dinesh says that slaves in the US, and later the black community overall in the US, took solace in the story of the exodus... Yes, they grasped onto that as a glimmer of hope that they would one day NOT BE SLAVES. It didn't help them escape, it didn't help their owners set them free, it didn't bring them joy.... It only gave them a slight glimmer of hope that maybe one day God would think they were worth freeing as well perhaps.

[@kevinpurcell1469]

This is so sad. If it was a boxing match the ref would have stepped in to protect Dinesh.

[@anonp2958]

I love how Alex was thinking, and felt sorry for, the audience and their Q+A time being eaten up. Note how he shakes his head and says under his breath in a disappointed toine "we may have time for Q+A". He's a lovely guy, the polar opposite of Dinesh. Dinesh is repulsive.

[@joem1070]

Craig is a bonified scholar where Dinesh is a man with an opinion backed up by his absurd theories like 2000 mules and other conspiracies craped out of Christian Nationalism. And Christians claiming they are monotheistic religion is absurd as the have 3 Gods in one.

[@almcdermid9669]

So Craig has no excuse.

[@MikeTMike]

Craig is not a scholar. His favorite argument is Kalam, and that's not an argument for the existence of God. It doesn't even have the word "God" in it. He also favors Pascal's wager. Billy Craig is a 🤡.

[@joshuabell7761]

11:45 "I'm gonna give you their mode of preaching because the key to it is to understand how they used the Bible. It's not the way you do it." Why would one person interpret a verse one way and another person interpret it another way? Is God the author of confusion, yes or no?

[@elainejohnson6955]

Exactly, Alex! Dinesh constantly moves the goalposts... and still misses! 😮

[@Scartoons-t1h]

Dinesh gives the strongest possible defence of Christianity here. This is the best that Christianity has to offer. Seriously.

[@manni3087]

Sad, because he was genuinely losing, and being intellectually dishonest. Someone like Peterson would’ve done a better job at answering these questions.

[@BroWithTheFro]

​@manni3087 would Peterson be better? He tends to just make word salads with philosophical words thrown in to confuse and distort the topics at hand. "Is there any proof of a gods existence? JP: "Now when you say 'proof', what does that really mean? Are we talking metaphysical connections that realign with the correspondence of physical events that may have happened up to this point? We have to establish this before we can even discuss how innate properties of prehistoric man inspired tales of God's that still exist today!"

[@jakubholic8769]

​@@manni3087He wouldn't. He would create some word salad and reinterpret ecery single word, without any direct response. But it would be maybe more dificult to grasp any specific thought, so he might look as a good advocate for christianity.

[@nickydaviesnsdpharms3084]

when Alex has him on the ropes, you can see how it's making Dinesh uncomfortable, even with the sound on mute, by observing his body language, as he is uncomfortable, shifting his position in his chair. Interesting.

[@RollingWaveABD]

So true! I noticed that Dinesh often avoided eye contact when responding. I find that very disconcerting and a clear sign of his lack of confidence. Not at all good debate technique! Not credible in my eyes!

[@davidrice6224]

A debate between Alex and Dinesh is like watching Newton debate a pigeon. I really hope Dinesh has the self-awareness to realise he's done.

[@avi8r66]

I would be curious to know more about this 'bomber pilot' thing on netflix. That discussion he described is not how orders would come down. If this was during a briefing the purpose of the building would be described, not '20,000 women and children". If this was an order while he was already in the air he would get coordinates or a spot on a map to hit, maybe landmarks and perhaps a description of the target. "Who is in the building" wouldn't be discussed or considered. So it's a very odd story that he conveniently doesn't give details on.

[@AlBundyOz]

Absolutely!!! The pilot would have faced a military court for even asking such a thing WHILE maintaining radio silence.

[@GrammeStudio]

it's ironic he criticise the pilot for following orders when his own moral philosophy affirms following orders of higher ups. see what happened to King Saul when he defied moral rulings & relied on his own judgment to not slaughter the livestocks. god wouldn't be happy with the pilot either dinesh seems to forgot the discussion of canaanite slaughter a minute earlier. the pilot's action was the product of christian morals if non believers are informed by divine morals, then why are they against god's morals. so either atheists are actually NOT informed by divine morals or they're pointing out god's hypocrisy

[@avi8r66]

@@GrammeStudio Um, sorta. "the pilot's action was the product of christian morals" -- I don't think that's quite right. the 'chrisitan morals' you are describing are really just 'appeal to authority', or the theistic version 'divine command theory'. If those orders for the bombing did not come from God then no, not christiand morals. Same framework, different authority figure. If we assume the pilot story is true he chose duty over his personal morals. In some militaries, like the US, you cannot be ordered to violate your moral compass. You can refuse to kill, you can refuse to carry out a specific mission. This will have repercussions, but you can do it. In most cases you will be reassigned or discharged. How you went about it will determine the penalties, if any. Most people though understand the nature of the job whent hey sign up. When it's a matter of a drafted army is when you run into this problem more. Some peace activist might be sent into the infantry and despite insisting he won't kill anyone he will still be placed in that situation. Sucks, but that's the game. And after their first patrol or situation where it becomes clear they weren't lying then they will be assigned to something else, like kitchen duty, mechanic, whatever they have a need for. Or, discharged. Depends. if non believers are informed by divine morals, -- we aren't. then why are they against god's morals. -- we aren't. We are against people claiming their morals are superior because they come from God, for which the only basis they have is the bible, a book that is anything but a good moral guide. so either atheists are actually NOT informed by divine morals or they're pointing out god's hypocrisy -- False dichotomy... Atheists are not informed by divine morals, and we point out the inconsistencies in the claims that the God character in the bible is, in any way, moral. Nor are the stories in the bible a guide to good moral life. We can point out the hypocracy of a character in a story. It doesn't need to be a real being. We can argue whether Captain Kirk was a moral character in the Star Trek stories, for example. It is the same discussion whether we discuss a real person or a fictional character. And we do this, many of us at least, because the abrahamic theists all want to force others to live by their rules. All 3 of the main groups, christians, jews and muslims are based on the same source material, and all 3 want the world to recognize them as the only true source of morality and truth. Ironically their 'truth' is a work of fiction, at least until they can prove otherwise. And they have failed in that effort for over 2,000 years.

[@Fungo4]

Just what BUILDING has twenty thousand women and children in it???

[@S.D.323]

@@GrammeStudio was he criticizing him or was he saying that it was necessary

[@Runpulator]

I believe today's Conservative Christian Evangelical Republicans are equally as fond of it.

[@tambosnipes1652]

Lol you think chriatians are promoting genocide?

[@user-gk9lg5sp4y]

I believe the same thing, because they say it out loud. They're proud of it.

[@user-gk9lg5sp4y]

They're proud to say it out loud

[@GrammeStudio]

where do you think they get the permission to do that from? heck lil bush even cited divine mandate when invading irak there's a historical chain of horrible moral philosophy that can be linked from modern invasion to colonialism to the western expansion to the crusades all the way back to the canaanites and amalekites

[@Nathouuuutheone]

Dinesh keeps proving he can't face the truth and he's fine with genocide. With such low consideration for other humans, can we consider him clinically psychopathic?

[@JB-jt6oq]

Certainly. I wonder what the world would be like if 90% of humans were Christians... Would it be okay to kill the 10% to achieve their ultimate goal with everyone being Christian? Would they conveniently interpret the Bible to make this seem correct? Surely thoughts like Dinesh's would be involved in this, that's kind of crazy.

[@lightatthecape2009]

Poor Alex is perturbed because he is a fundamentalist who reads the Bible to suggest how vicious God is....guess what -the episode is accompanied by projection and self justification. And your argument on slavery is presentism fallacy. Stop imposing current values on the past. The enlightenment ended in an anticlerical blood bath that was the reign of terror. I guess reasoning can not restrain violent actions. The Quakers read the same bible to justify acting to free slaves.. So which group had the goods on God

[@hardwoodthought1213]

@@lightatthecape2009Maybe, just maybe, humans evolved their morality over time? Hence why after thousands of years Christians could see the evil that was slavery, then adopt an anti-slavery stance, keeping the Bible as their basis by selective reading?

[@lightatthecape2009]

@@hardwoodthought1213 The first attacks on the institution of slavery that we know of are found in Gregory of Nyssa circa 3250 CE.

[@lightatthecape2009]

@hardwoodthought1213 They certainly had lots of material lol Morality is subjective and changes, often dramatically, over relatively short times. I generally agree with your comment-and its a great thing that they did change...

[@jamie5mauser]

So god had to conform to human’s rules. God doesn’t make the rules…make this make sense. Did he not form so these commandments and rules? Why couldn’t or wouldn’t he make a rule to not commit genocide?

[@SteveHardie42]

Subtitute Commandment #9: Don't boil a baby goat in its Mother's milk" (seriously, look it up) for "Don't keep slaves", and you've vastly improved the bible.

[@hectorescobar9450]

To play devils advocate, it is consistent to the idea that God has given us free will

[@arunjetli7909]

the first anti slavery movement was Cyrus the great

[@oliverleifadams2003]

Really interesting & well handled discussion. Dinesh’s word salad reminds me of all corporate management speak everywhere. Meaningless, vague & at times childishly insulting. Alex is professional, diplomatic & restrained. Bravo.

[@gerardgauthier4876]

The Bible... Where everything is open to interpretation except the most outrageous claim of a supernatural realm populated by supernatural beings.

[@PatrickFlynn-ry6oj]

🤦🏼‍♂️The gall of him to say Alex gets his morals from Christianity. Alex is a vegan and big advocate for veganism. Remind me again, what part of the Bible says we should be vegan?

[@00000o0o0]

Alex is not a vegan and has not been a vegan for a while

[@PatrickFlynn-ry6oj]

@ Ah I see. But he was tho so the point still stands.

[@S.D.323]

@@00000o0o0 ethically though he considers eating meat wrong he is a hypocrite but I guess we all are

[@MackNJeeves]

Dinesh is such a joke. He goes on these lengthy diatribes and, when Alex pushes back even slightly, Dinesh's argument falls apart and he moves the goal posts. He does this so many times that around halfway through this video, he basically concedes everything - "Well, I'm not a rabbi, it's not my job to convince you of this." He's literally brought on this stage to convince people of the truth of the Bible, but now it's not his job. What an idiot. Props to Alex having the patience of a saint - I could see him slowly losing it on Dinesh and his meaningless rhetorical musings.

[@ruirodtube]

Christians love the ten commandments, forgetting it’s from the old testament, and repudiate the rest of the commandments and orders from god because somehow Jesus made it so. It’s bizarre thinking!!!

[@davidrice6224]

@ruirodtube and they never say the commandments need to be "reinterpreted" like the sanctions for slavery, child sacrifice and genocide.

[@KA55123]

So if you're not reading the bible selectively, then you're not reading it right? 😂

[@EdaurdoCruz-k4e]

To me is hard to believe that there’s only one Alien that created us, he doesn’t have the power to kill Satan or any of the fallen Aliens. And if they created us on their image , why are we surprise that we commit such atrocities to each other , we’re just trying to be like our creators

[@bjarnivalur6330]

There are countless cultures that existed before Christianity that denounced the murder of innocents and unarmed people, this guy is simply just wrong.

[@chronomaster5779]

I never seen alex upset like this

[@JB-jt6oq]

Proportional I would say Dinesh interpretive juggling is absurd

[@lightatthecape2009]

Its a dumb assumption in an argument which has to presuppose that the OT is reporting actual orders from God. Fat chance. The fact is most Christians do not read the bible in the way Alex fundamentalists do.

[@ritchie6162]

Given Dinesh’s consistent diversions from the elephant in the room it’s understandable honestly.

[@GrammeStudio]

i dont blame him. after so much dodging and projecting he had to deal with, he's usually very patient. the vatican should venerate him as an atheistic saint

[@LisaAnn777]

Yeah I get pretty upset when people try to justify genocide and slavery also.

[@parineettyagi9412]

It is fascinating that Alex is so disgusted by Killing and genocide in the Bible and yet he had absolutely no Issue with Killing Dinesh's whole Image as "Intellectual" 😂

[@fettbub92]

More people need to just say "i dont know," or "I disagree, but i dont kow why yet, can we discuss this next time, after i look deeper into it?"

[@rolandhunter]

The question of whether God supports genocide raises complex theological and moral issues, especially when interpreting certain passages in the Bible. In the Old Testament, there are accounts where God commands the Israelites to destroy specific nations, such as the Canaanites. These narratives are contextual and have been interpreted in various ways. Old Testament Context The Destruction of the Canaanites: Passages such as those in the Book of Joshua (Joshua 6-12) describe how God commanded the Israelites to conquer Canaan and annihilate its inhabitants. The reasons given often include: The moral corruption of the Canaanites (e.g., idolatry, child sacrifice). The risk that Canaanite culture might corrupt the Israelites' religious purity. The Concept of "Herem": The Hebrew term herem often translated as "devoted to destruction," refers to the practice of completely destroying anything associated with idolatry or pagan worship, including people, animals, and property. Theological and Moral Interpretations Historical Context: Many theologians and historians argue that these stories should be understood within the context of ancient warfare and culture, where wars were often fought on religious grounds, and total destruction of enemies was a common practice. Symbolic Meaning: Some Christian and Jewish theologians interpret these accounts as symbolic teachings about the fight against sin and evil, rather than literal historical events. In this view, the destruction of the Canaanites represents God’s ultimate victory over evil. Progressive Revelation: When viewing the Bible as a whole, God's character is revealed progressively. In the New Testament, particularly in the teachings of Jesus, God is portrayed as loving, merciful, and desiring salvation for all people, which contrasts with the warlike passages in the Old Testament. Genocide and God's Character From a Christian perspective, God is both just and loving. The difficult passages in the Old Testament cannot be understood in isolation: God’s Justice: In the Old Testament, God judges sin and evil, including extreme moral corruption like child sacrifice. God’s Mercy: The Bible also shows that God is merciful to those who repent, as seen in the story of Nineveh in the Book of Jonah. Conclusion The answer to whether God supports genocide depends largely on the interpretive framework: Taken literally, these passages might suggest that God sanctioned the destruction of certain peoples for a higher moral or theological purpose. However, most theologians emphasize that these passages are not meant to justify violence and that God’s true nature is revealed through mercy, love, and justice.

[@kentstallard6512]

Look for d'Souza's next film: 2000 Fallacies

[@chrismckee4154]

Dinesh can’t seem to grasp that it wasn’t a general giving orders to commit genocide, it was God telling them to do it.

[@Martiandawn]

Before the Babylonian Exile, Yahweh WAS a tribal god of the Israelites. When Cyrus the Great allowed the exiled Jews to return to their homeland, they brought with them the influence of Zoroastrian monotheism to which they had been exposed. They transformed Yahweh from a tribal deity into the One True God, creator of the universe, and gave their existing holy books a new origin story that syncretized the mythologies of other religious traditions.

[@Fungo4]

Their War god, no less!

[@stephenhill3286]

If God can tell people not to eat shrimp, he can tell them not to have slaves

[@sglaser001]

Dinesh behaved dishonorably. He interrupted, filibustered and completely ignored questions asked of him. He was not a Good Faith participant in this debate.

[@TheFrugalMombot]

Is god omnipotent or not? Is the Bible “god-breathed” or not? If god was there from the beginning or not? Could he have not told them from day one you don’t enslave or commit genocide. Period. Is the Bible inerrant or not?

[@lightatthecape2009]

What is left out is the reciprocity principle. If you do not want to be enslaved do not enslave others. This principle operates on any decision involving morality. And as the ULTIMATE commandment condemns action that injures others.

[@GrammeStudio]

funny enough that's what jesus echoed that the christians so often refuse to regard as THE objective standard. one told me the golden 'rule' was "MERE guideline". so the christian accusation of atheists being "closeted christian" has some truth and only that, in that we follow jesus's wisdom better than them, and only that teaching (plus a few others) if anything we're calling out their hypocrisy why do atheists make better christians than christians? we even expect god to be so good we won't expect him to command genoside, and we certainly wont blaspheme him by thinking he is so weak he cannot create a world witohut natural disasters

[@mrsatire9475]

Yes, that would have been better instructions to include in the text

[@gambit633]

The Persians (long before Christianity became a thing) were relatively nice. The Persians allowed the people ( that the Persians conquered) to continue with their current beliefs, even helped rebuild temples and important structures of the people they conquered - for free, encouraged trade between peoples etc. Much nicer than the Christian God's demand to completely slaughter all your enemies man, women, children, infants. Well apologists say God became considerably nicer after he had a son, but God is also portrayed as eternal and unchanging... which is it?

[@doyouknoworjustbelieve6694]

So did the pagan Greeks and Romans (yes the Romans) unless you start criticizing their Gods, or start insurrections in the name of religion, which the Js did.

[@TIKOMIX]

At 13:20 the conversation should’ve been over. Dinesh simply looked foolish. He would have been best to simply say ,”that was a good point.”

[@OGunsalus]

This guy. Every mention of slavery in the bible condones it so what part of it says its immoral. If u ignore all the condoning of slavery in the bible then you are left with love thy neighbor 😂 So essentially pick what u want from gods divine words and only listen to what u already agree with

[@yarpenzigrin1893]

Which civilization made slavery illegal? What moral ideas lead to the idea that all men are equal under God?

[@johns1625]

​@@yarpenzigrin1893 "All men are created equal under God" is a quote from a non-Christian in my nations history, in SPITE of what Christianity was doing, which was following Exodus 21

[@avi8r66]

@@yarpenzigrin1893 Dodging the question. Where does the dogma, the bible, contain anything that clearly says slavery is wrong, or that it should end? If it is not in there then you cannot attribute the ending of slavery in most of the modern world to the teachings of christianity. Instead it is simply through the enlightenment of modern civilization overall. People had finally come to the realization that slavery was wrong because those being enslaved were no different than anyone else. They might be different skin colors, speak different languages, but people finally figured out that we are all the same, and we all deserve to live free of such things. Society evolved beyond the ancient ignorance in the bible. Time to leave it behind.

[@jim6038]

Not reallly. The NT doesn't really suggest love your neighbour, what he means is forgive your neighbour. In fact, if you reduce the NT to one word, and thus Christianity - it is the word "forgiveness". It is the "Lord's prayer", and what he uttered on the cross. It is the "turn the other cheek", the healing of the sick, blind, mentally ill (returning them to society for care) instead of "being punished for sin", the washing of feet, the calling of the taxpayer down from the tree, etc. It was forgiveness that drove the good samaritan etc. The golden rule was to forgive your neighbour, then build a better time. This was incredibly novel as this was the foundation for peace between never ending feuds between rival tribes, warring families, troubled relationships etc. IT was the end of the "eye for an eye" of Moses and the OT, with a new message, a new Way. A new Path. And to prove that this was the right way, he would take on the greatest unjust brutality, forgive and rise above teh situation and live on - just like the civilization would from plunder, scammers, caesars etc. Also Jesus also did not insist he - or a conscious entity was god. He spoke only of the Holy Spirit - which is the unbroken chain of life within all living things that has existed for a billion years or so. This is why the Pope cannot accept abortion. To kill life is to kill a part of god. It is what Jesus meant when he said "you can do whatever you want to me - or to god - but do not dishonor (kill, maim, poison) the holy spirit. He did differentiate between Spirit (lower order of animals and plants etc) and higher order 'holy' spirit (humans etc) that humans as custodians could through their "honor" of the spirit make it "holy" sufficient that the god would recognise the goodness (the implication was that this was what Adam and Eve were tasked with - to honor the spirit to build upon it to make it "holy" with their best humanity, care and forgiving natures) and as such the original sin is to dishonor the holy spirit through deception, violence, jealousness, callous cruelty and crudeness.

[@avi8r66]

@@jim6038 So what you are saying is that at no point did Jesus say 'get rid of slavery'. Thanks for confirming this.

[@GrammeStudio]

it's ironic dinesh brought up the pilot following orders when his own moral philosophy affirms following the order of divine commandment blindly. he seems to have amnesia about the talk on canaanite genoside a minute earlier. the pilot's action was the product of christian morals if atheists are informed by god's morals, then why are they against god's morals. hello? either atheists are actually NOT informed by divine morals or they're pointing out the god's hypocrisy, very much like we would accuse a politician breaking the law he proposed.

[@Phookutube]

I'm a second generation atheist, I have been an atheist for the entire 40 years of my life, you'll never find a more assured atheist then myself, religion to me has never been anything other than silly fairytales for adults, and I have had this mentality ever since I was a child, and yet I have to say that Dinesh is right on this one.

[@germanpereira9544]

“The problem of how you are interpreting the Bible is because you are reading it wrong, you are opening and reading it and that’s not how you read the bible”. Dinesh De Sousa this whole debate.

[@ednercoty9398]

I feel sorry for the fool because all he did was make excuses for him imaginary fairy tale.

[@donjuan123]

So if you fins some sentences in Mein Kampf by A Hitler that says something Nice we can trust the whole text?

[@theintelligentmilkjug944]

Evidently, the Old Testament depicts God giving commands that seem fundamentally, intuitively immoral. Like, the genocide in Joshua and the slavery laws in Exodus. Yet, as Christians, we believe that God is all-good, which would imply He would never give such commands. We also believe that the Bible is inerrant and divinely inspired. Given this, how should a Christian reconcile this apparent contradiction? One possible "solution" is to abandon our moral intuitions, suggesting that our moral reasoning has limitations and that there are occasions where God’s commands, even if they seem horrific, are justified. However, this raises significant issues. If atrocities are justified by divine command in one case, they could be justified in others, making the morality of such actions subjective and dependent on God’s approval. Moreover, the actions depicted in the Old Testament often contradict the teachings of Jesus. If Jesus is God and His teachings reflect the will of the entire Trinity, it doesn't make sense for God to command evil. Even when considered on its own, the Old Testament doesn’t fully support such actions. For example, Exodus 34:6 portrays God as compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, and forgiving wickedness, yet the very next verse contradicts this by stating that God punishes children for the sins of their parents to the third and fourth generation. This punishment is neither compassionate nor gracious, as clarified in Deuteronomy 24:16, which states that "parents are not to be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their parents." This indicates that a straightforward reading of the Old Testament doesn't offer the complete picture. Instead of discarding our moral intuitions and the teachings of Jesus, Christians should adopt a different understanding of biblical inerrancy and divine inspiration. First, let’s define these terms. Biblical inerrancy means that the entire Christian canon, as inspired by God, is without error in all its teachings. Divine inspiration, as described in 2 Timothy 3:16, refers to the idea that "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness." The Greek term for "God-breathed" means "guided by God," implying that while the Bible doesn't directly claim to be free of error, it is divinely guided. It is reasonable to question how an all-good God could inspire flawed teachings, but one interpretation allows for biblical inerrancy without insisting that every aspect of the Bible is without error. It’s possible that while a human author might reflect their contemporary understanding of God, a divinely inspired editor could incorporate their text into a larger, divinely guided canon. Now, why would God inspire the inclusion of texts that depict Him as a moral monster? One explanation is that these texts are meant to teach us how not to think about God. Rather than judging the authors for their limited understanding of God, we can learn from their mistakes and avoid projecting those misunderstandings onto God. This is especially clear when we read the Old Testament alongside the New Testament, where "an eye for an eye" is an ironic counterpart to "turn the other cheek." Another reason for including such passages is that they reflect the struggles and frustrations of the ancient Israelites in trying to understand God. If the liberation from slavery narrative has an ounce of historical truth to it then the Israelites endured significant hardship, from slavery in Egypt, attacks from foreign powers like the Amalekites, and their suffering led them to seek justice through vengeance. In their desire for retribution and liberation, they sometimes attributed violent and punitive characteristics to God, reflecting their own desires for judgment and the restoration of their dignity. The harshness of God's actions in these texts could be seen as an expression of their longing for divine vengeance against their enemies. However, these depictions are more about the lsraelites' understanding of justice at the time than about the true nature of God. Their struggle with their identity as God's chosen people in a world that oppressed them is a key factor in how they portrayed God's actions, especially in moments of intense conflict. Ultimately, we should approach the Old Testament with respect for our fundamental moral intuitions and read it in light of the New Testament, using Jesus as the final interpretive lens. Theologian Randall Russer explores this idea in his book "Jesus Loves Canaanites" arguing that the moral trajectory of Scripture culminates in the teachings of Christ. While this approach is complex, it isn’t contradictory when we view the entire narrative through the lens of Christ.

[@Calixxtus]

Or we just read both the old and new testament in their historical context as words written by people living in a world very different to ours and it all makes perfect sense. There’s only a contradiction or a problem to solve by making nonsensical arguments if you presupposes a god character. If we just leave childish superstition behind we don’t have any trouble at all understanding genocide or slavery in the bible.

[@theintelligentmilkjug944]

@@Calixxtus Yes, I agree, we should read the old and New Testament in their historical context written by people in their own time. If we do that then we would likely see that there's a significant amount of historical, philosophical, and theological truth in the Christian Bible. We would also likely see from a literary perspective that the whole biblical narrative points to Christ, and undesigned biographical coincidences that gives credence to legitimate miracle accounts. To elaborate on how the narrative points to Christ and what He has done for us, describe it using an analogy and show how it's seen in the first five books of the Bible. Jesus bridged the gap between humanity and divinity, and right now, we're in the process of crossing that bridge. As we make our way, we are called to bring heaven to Earth. This means living in a way that reflects God's Kingdom and His will here and now. We bring heaven to Earth by loving God and others, living with mercy, justice, and humility, and embodying the love and grace that God shows us. Through prayer, we seek God’s will to be done on Earth as it is in heaven, and by acting as ambassadors of Christ, we represent His Kingdom through our words and deeds. Living empowered by the Holy Spirit, we reflect the peace, joy, and transformation of heaven in our lives. The Church, as the body of Christ, is called to create a community that mirrors heaven’s unity and love, offering a glimpse of what God’s Kingdom looks like. When we fully cross the bridge, heaven and Earth will become one. The promise lies on the other side of this bridge, and its creation is what has already transformed everything. While most of us will pass on before reaching the destination, and setbacks are inevitable, our faithfulness to God's promise ensures that it will be fulfilled. The narrative of the first five books of the Bible closely mirrors the journey of a believer. In Genesis, we are created, we recognize the distinction between good and evil, experience separation from God, and accept His promise, symbolized in baptism. In Exodus, we are saved from the bondage of separation from God, symbolizing salvation. In Leviticus, we learn holiness, being set apart for God's purpose, and understand the importance of living according to His will. This process always begins with salvation before sanctification, God saves His people before asking anything from them. In Numbers, sanctification is not a straightforward path; it involves spiritual wandering, and many will die before entering the Promised Land. However, in Deuteronomy, our efforts are not in vain. As long as we remain faithful to God, we will enter the Promised Land. The bridge analogy becomes even more meaningful when we look at the Israelites crossing the Jordan River in the book of Joshua. As they crossed, they carried the Ark of the Covenant, and through God's glory, the waters were parted, creating a dry path, a bridge, that allowed them to enter the Promised Land. In Jewish tradition, the Ark symbolizes the very presence of God; in Catholic tradition, it points to the incarnate Word of God, Jesus Christ. As Thomas Aquinas said, "Christ Himself was signified by the Ark." In this way, the journey of the Israelites, guided by the Ark, reflects our own walk of faith as we cross the bridge toward God's eternal promise and presence. Now, let's touch on how the undesigned, biographical, coincidences increase historical reliability and give to miracle accounts. The synoptic Gospels, and even John to some extent, are written more like ancient biographies than historical fiction. The multiple perspectives in the Gospels, with their varied details, suggest they are more like ancient biographies, reflecting real events from different viewpoints. Also, The accounts align on seemingly insignificant details these details appear to be minor because they don't add much to the overall story. For example, imagine you're creating a miracle story about Jesus, intending to present it as real. You might begin by having Jesus ask one of his followers a question. The story involves money and food, so the key question becomes: which disciple should be included? In John chapter 6, we read that Jesus spent a whole day healing and teaching a crowd. Later, he and his disciples withdrew to a mountain to rest, but some of the crowd spotted them. As they approached, Jesus turned to one of his disciples and asked, "Where are we to buy bread so that these people may eat? He asked this to test Philip, because he already knew what he would do." This passage is notable because Philip is mentioned only three times in the entire New Testament, all in John's Gospel. You might wonder why Jesus didn't ask a more prominent disciple like Peter or John. The answer lies in John 1:44 and 12:21, which tells us that Philip is from Bethsaida. Why is this important? We see why in Luke 9:10, which provides some context for the feeding of the 5,000. It says, "When the apostles returned, they reported to Jesus what they had done. Then he took them with him and withdrew by themselves to a town called Bethsaida. But the crowds learned about it and followed him. He welcomed them, spoke about the kingdom of God, and healed those who needed healing." The feeding of the 5,000 occurred after this. So, from Luke's account, we learn that the miracle took place in Bethsaida, which explains why Jesus specifically asked Philip as depicted in John, rather than a more significant disciple. While the perceived contradictions or moral challenges in the Bible, such as issues of genocide or slavery, often arise from presupposing a particular understanding of God and Scripture without considering the historical and cultural context in which the texts were written, a more thoughtful approach can resolve these concerns. When we leave behind modern fundamentalist biases, whether Christian or secular, and engage with the Bible through the lens of its ancient setting, we gain a clearer grasp of the overarching narrative, It gives us something deeper than a dogmatic worldview.

[@kirstywillowlove]

Too much mental gymnastics

[@sockinvaders]

Comparing what a losing side does when an injust war monger attacks you and your allies and invades and conquers those lands.... with what God apparently told people to do when they already won a battle and had women and children remaining in a land who didn't need to be killed for any reason. Insanity.

[@Sean-oy8xm]

Here is exactly what the Bible says. You are reading it wrong! 😵‍💫

[@8mycake244]

D'Souza understands. He's picked his side and will defend it. It's abjectly obvious that the Old Testament is the product not of a moral god, but the thinking and philosophies of ancient, tribalistic men. There's no divinity in it. Other than the imagined divinity of the writers.

[@lrvogt1257]

You should indicate how very old this clip is somewhere.

[@arctos333]

Dinesh looked so defeated at the end

[@robertroldan4026]

Dinesh is the worst christian debater ive ever heard. Hes so out of his element and doesnt know it.

[@b1akn3ss93]

I didn’t know what genocide was until I read the bible…

[@scottaustinmartin]

Dinesh is completely wrong that northerners signed up to fight in the Civil War to end slavery. Maryland was a slave state. I think that if you were to ask any union soldier if they were fighting for the abolition of slavery, they would say absolutely not.

[@daimend211]

Well the black soldiers were And the first round of volunteers probably also were

[@goaaal8657]

Idk who in their right mind would believe in the Bible especially when all of the different authors never met Jesus himself. Also all these different bibles contradict one another.

[@davidperez3059]

There is a popular moral dilema that posits: a baby is tied to train tracks, and you are the only one in a position to divert an approaching train with a track switch. If you pull the switch, the baby will die, but all aboard the train survive. If you don't pull it, the baby is saved, but the train derails, and hundreds aboard the train die. If this atheist youtuber was subjected to this dilema and acted to save as many souls as possible, he might be offended if someone then tried to make him feel guilty for condemning the infant, because no one should have to make so terrible a decision. The smiting of the Amalikites is such a dilema. The primary difference being the Amalekites were not innocent babies as their guilt for plunderering, thieving, and violence was well established. They had ample time (centuries) to repent their ways and stop attacking the Israelites. Their interference with the Isrealites (a people from whom God would draw Jesus the messiah) was actively interfering with God's plan for the salvation of the ENTIRE human race. The Amalikites were generationaly wicked and committed to evil, and God, after much patience, eventually chose to punish them through the Israelites. Yes it was moral for God to punish these people and equally horrible that he had to do so. Genocide is not promoted in the Bible, but God will punish those actively threatening his plan of salvation. Jesus Christ is wholly innocent and will be vindicated as such. KZbinrs trying to establish God's alleged guilt might think twice if they actually met the Amalekites and found that the Amalikites aren't the angellic souls they think they are...

[@S.D.323]

nobody said the amalekites were all angels they said they didn't deserve to have genocide committed against them because no race of people could ever deserve that

[@abdisaeed6883]

Dinesh has actually debunked himself. At one point in time, god was not moral according to his own moral standards. Meaning at one point in time, god was evil. Only the devil is evil according to their own narrative. Which means their narrative is self refuting and false.

[@Tina.Di.Napoli]

I ❤️ the atheist community. Reading through the important comments here is like walking in your living room. You feel so familiar. You guys are great 💯 lots of love from California

[@WilliamDuff-b3o]

This ship sailed decades ago. Every mildly competent thinker should have worked out how and why mankind needed the inexplicable explained. It's possible to be a decent human, and still be deluded. One of our many failings, sadly. 😅

[@fishinnewengland4807]

Funny how slavery is worse now than it’s ever been, yet he’s harping on slavery like it was completely abolished

[@angeldamian41]

No hay racismo, dice, mientras seguro, muchos cristianos lo están despreciando por su color de piel, qué absurdo.

[@bladehiram5334]

Did Dinesh ever hear about the law of Hammurabi?

[@sharon4942]

I want Alex to debate Sam Shamoun.

[@arunjetli7909]

dinesh you are 16:54 16:57 16:58 way above your intellectual

[@qron2382]

Though shalt not kill. Unless god tells you to kill? I dont think that is god talking

[@shinmenwize3788]

I think the Young guy is right. The only thing good That Came from the bible . Was due to arguements between the consense of the public Vs church teachings. And the Church adapting their Interpretation of the bible Bit by bit, in Order to stay in Control of people.

[@FuzzyFoot58]

How can the bible possibly be considered 'the perfect word of god' when its interpretation is so muddy and has led to so much conflict. Fittingly, this is circumstantial evidence for the existance of Yahwe. In the original religion, from which Yahwe is only one of three gods, he is the god of war, metallurgy and conflict. Which exactly the things that have been created on a massive scale everywhere the three Abrahamic religions have spread in the world. War, violent conflicts and the creation of deadlier and deadlier weapons. Just like what a god of war would endorse.

[@flaneur5560]

Why doesn't Dinash ever look at Alex?

[@twainalex996]

The truth is blinding

[@williamgeorgepeter2969]

Biblical contradictions: Before we handle biblical contradictions we must know what's contradiction and why are there contradictions? The Bible is a word of God addressed to the fallen mankind, so must know the purpose of the word of God having contradictions, discrepancies and inconsistencies. The purpose of contradiction is to motivate the minds of a fallen men, why is the mind motivated? The mind must be motivated so as to open the closed mindedness so as to see, and understand God. Therefore, in order to open the closed mindedness contradictions are necessary. If there's no contradiction then there's no possibility to motivate the mind of a man, then man would simply continue without seeing or understanding God and blindly assert that God does exist or doesn't exist, and attitude would result chaos. What's closed mindedness of men? When man disobeyed the command of God & ate the forbidden fruit 🍓, then his eyes opened, meaning his eyes opened to wickedness and at the same time his eyes was closed to the ways of God, and that he has become a fallen and closed minded man as these has been achieved by an adversary by deceiving them, so God's Spirit departed from a man and instead an Unclean Spirit has arrived into the man. This is why the Bible calls a sinner is blind, dead, captive or imprisoned. Now in order to restore men God have spoken through various peoples and finally through His Son, and that there's Holy Bible, so when we study the word of God, we encounter contradictions, therefore when we take these contradictions then we can't handle it, and in such situations one can allow those contradictions to work in his mind that's seated in the brain and sealed in it, so during the pursuit of contradictions the brain go through various scenarios and in the end there shall be a breaking of the seal of the mind in the brain, once the breaking of the seal of the mind happens then it will be removed from the brain, paving way for the Holy Spirit or God's Spirit to get into the brain and seal again in a fraction of time dramatically, this is only known to an individual, not to anybody else. This is the opposite of what happened to man in the beginning wherein the Holy Spirit or God's Spirit departed from him and instead an Unclean Spirit arrived into his physical body and now through JESUS, so an Unclean Spirit is removed from the brain 🧠 and instead the Holy Spirit or God's Spirit can be replaced back into the brain 🧠 and seal it. Thus, contradictions of the Holy Bible are meant to motivate the closed men so as to open closed mindedness of men, and to prove that God does exists.

[@drsatan9617]

You're of the mindset that your god can't motivate people to critical thinking without making contradiction?

[@williamgeorgepeter2969]

@drsatan9617 You don't know the Motivation and CTS are noth same, though the former is for all, and the later is for the so called intellectuals like you. I can prove the Holy Bible is the word of God because it's capable of turning mortal like you into an immortal like me, so I can prove both by explanation and physical demonstration if guys like Alex invite me for his shows.

[@KingSparda]

Your god can't motivate men to think without allowing mistakes to be in the book he sent as instructions on how to live and what has happened in the past? Sounds like an inept god to me. Why couldn't god create humans with an innate motivation to think? If he can, why didn't he instead of allowing for the the presentation of a confusing book? Or, maybe... just maybe.... it was written and collected by people who really couldn't write or read well enough to notice these contradictions until it was already canonized into unerring dogma? Seems like a perfect being was never involved in the first place cause a being would have to be dumb to allow this. Haha

[@davidrice6224]

Its nothing to do with "interpretation". Its simply reading the text. Does Dinesh think the Commandments need to be interpreted in some way? I suspect not.

[@5pajoe]

Why is Dinesh afraid to look at Alex?

[@oldtimepowerliftingym]

Dinesh is finished. He's always been pretty ridiculous with his apologetics but this debate? Akex absolutely saw him off.

[@everetunknown5890]

I think Dinesh did a poor job of defending the Bible here but one thing I want to point out is Alex's constant use of the word "innocent". I don't think it's fair to say those women and children were innocent--we can't really assess their guilt or innocence for ourselves here in the 21st century as mere readers of the Bible. We can either take God's word that they weren't innocent or we're left with a text we can't conclusively interpret that is very controversial. To say they were innocent because they were women and children is as biased as saying the Amalekites were guilty because they were Amalekites--and that's not at all why God ordered them to be slaughtered

[@wesleymcgrath4340]

Why does dinesh keep taking ‘for example’ other ideas and texts ? Everything except the bible that they are discussing?

[@fitnessteacher1845]

You can see Alex (and myself) getting genuinely frustrated by how he never actually get answers to what he is asks and gets nothing but a vague ramble.

[@olivergloster]

It makes me sick how people of faith twist and mince their words to suit their ends and prop up their feeble indefensible arguments. Dinesh comes over as smug, proud and egotistical - all traits of “the saved”!

[@crufflerdoug]

Dinesh gives me new respect for William Lane Craig, which is saying something.

[@rithvikmuthyalapati9754]

Video length is 19:45💀

[@alsindtube]

At least Jordan Peterson has a vocabulary that makes him appear intelligent. Dinesh appears to try hard to sound intelligent but fails as miserably as his defense of the Bible.

[@johnsalazar2581]

Is Alex the new Christopher Hitchens?

[@avi8r66]

The 'just war doctrine' did not have anything to do with putting women and children out of bounds. A "Just War" was simply a justified war. And it was 'justified' if the king/emperor/exalted leader called for it because the gods, or God in this case, spoke through such people. Also, and this was Augustine's view... "war can be considered morally justifiable in certain situations, primarily when it is waged with a "just cause" like defending the innocent or self-defense, and with the ultimate goal of achieving peace, essentially viewing war as a necessary evil to restore order and justice when other means fail; he believed that even in war, one should strive to be peaceful and aim to bring the enemy to peace through conflict." The AI summary of it: Motivation for war: The only legitimate reason to go to war is to achieve peace, not to seek aggression or conquest. Authority to wage war: Only legitimate authorities, like a state leader, should declare war. Just cause: A war is only considered just when fighting against a clear injustice or defending against aggression. Right intention: Even in war, the intention should be to restore peace and not driven by hatred or vengeance. This concept didn't really exist during the time of the early jews driving out the Ai. This came later from the greeks and romans. St Augustine is who formalized these ideas, and he lived hundreds of years (354AD - 430AD) after this story of killing off the Ai. What dinesh is describing is a modern version of 'just war doctrine' in which the ethics of how to fight are defined.

[@AlBundyOz]

"He lived hundreds of years (354-430AD)." Um. Simple maths isn't your strength, huh?

[@avi8r66]

@@AlBundyOz Maybe read the rest of that sentence... "he lived hundreds of years (354AD - 430AD) after this story of killing off the Ai." The Ai raids were around 1300BC. That's over 1600 years before Augustine's time.

[@AlBundyOz]

@avi8r66 simple maths, sweetie. You made a statement, I refuted it, you rebutted with an additional.sentence that has NOTHING to do with the preceding statement. Sit down.

[@avi8r66]

@@AlBundyOz You misquoted me, that's not a refutation that's a lie. I 'rebutted' by simply copying and pasting the full context that you had cut out. What math are you suggesting I got wrong? 1600 years is hundreds of years. 1300BC -> 350AD is about 1600 years, close enough given the vague dates we have to work with for the exodus story. So I have no idea what you are suggesting I got wrong, and your misquote of me is simpy misleading.

[@AlBundyOz]

@avi8r66 good try. I'll give you that. My comment solely related to the 354-450AD. Now, if you don't need to call a brain-equipped friend, tell.me how my reply was wrong. Your bullshit addition in your last reply about Augustine is moot. Now. Answer. The. Fukcing. Question!

[@roelslegers2688]

Dinesh does not even dare look into the camera

[@sevenpaulperalta929]

This individual smiles at a reference to genocide in the Bible? Then, he refers to Netflix for context? What a frail apology!

[@-WillAlone-]

Yes,but WHAT is God?

[@josefelicianorivera4492]

Every time I hear dinesh speak I break out in a smile & go: thanks dinesh here come 1000 new athiest. 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@paulflute]

Seems Dinesh hasn't heard of Buddhism..?

[@godnah]

Notice how Dinesh gaslights Alex.