The Best Argument to Refute Christianity

I made this video to give people a quick and easy version that lets them know why the Christian god cannot exist. People can use this argument when dealing with Christians. My hope, and heart's desire, is that it will help Christians escape the religion and give people the confidence to know that the Christian god cannot exist according to the New Testament's own words.

[@therealjakedean3317]

I hope you keep all your videoed up including the FP ones. I still like to learn from them man. You have always been very clear, logical and on topic. I still listen to them time and time again

[@twainjackson5737]

Your doing a great job sir! Keep teaching. I had to accept this hard reality myself. I use to preach the rapture until I found out Jesus promised the generation He lived in that they would see His 2nd coming to rapture THEM. The problem is most Christians are dishonest about these rapture verses because they have to lie in order to hold on to their faith. If their is no RAPTURE then the hold Christian doctrine of salvation at Jesus coming falls apart.

[@billguthrie2218]

Yah. I moved to preterist shortly before completely leaving as well. That was back in 1992 when I was 33 after studying for the ministry.

[@kray-zivan609]

How does Paul believing that believers will be transformed in the twinkling of an eye demonstrate that Paul believed that transformation was physical?? Did I miss where you explained why?

[@kep7101]

Thank you for your honesty

[@wantingtolearn2732]

The way recently that i understand the resurrection is that Paul was saying that those in union with Christ who had died would recieve their resurrection first. That resurrection would start at Jesus coming. So those who had died would have to wait until then, i believe that was in the first century sometime before Jerusalem fell. Paul appears to me to be saying that those who were still alive when that resurrection had already started, but died from then on, would not have to wait, but rather, would recieve their resurrection in an instant. After the fall of Jerusalem the rest of the dead would recieve their resurrection. This would mean that all those resurrected since then would also be resurrected in an instant. So physical death still exists, but spiritual life is immediate after that. I would be interested in your thoughts on this.

[@escapingchristianity8765]

I used to hold/reconcile that passage the same way you just described when I was a full-preterist. It simply won't work if you are honest with the text. Paul believed that the physical, flesh and blood, body was corrupt and under the power of sin. A slave to sin. He says this many times in his authentic letters. Romans 7 is an obvious example of this. Paul thinks the physical body is disgusting (Rom 7:18,23-25) Paul also has a duality in his thought where he thinks his mind is separate from his flesh (Rom 7:25). That's important to notice because it helps explain other parts of his writings like 1 Cor 15. In 1 Cor 15:35-49 Paul is talking about different types of flesh found on this planet as well as the differences in celestial bodies. He ends that passage by clearly indicating man is made of dust. He is a physical being. Then what does he say in the next verse? 1 Cor 15:50, "Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God". This is one of the most important verses in all of Paul's writings. Paul does not think physical bodies will exist when the kingdom of God arrives. They are corrupt in his mind and sin cannot dwell in god's holy kingdom. Now I know how Christians try to get around this because I used to be one for 32 years and a full-preterist the last 18 months of that. They say the kingdom of God is a spiritual kingdom that began with the church (some might say on Pentecost) and then the full-preterists will take it one step further and say that the spiritual kingdom was only partial inaugurated then but not fully until the resurrection of the dead which happened around 70 CE. But Paul makes it clear he does not understand the resurrection that way. Paul thinks the entire universe will be liberated from it's "bondage to decay" (Rom 8:18-23). In Paul's mind this results in all the righteous being made in Jesus' image (Rom 8:29) which is an immortal spiritual being that is not physical in any way (1 Cor 15:50-53). Paul was the first writer of the NT which is also important to take notice of. In Luke 17:26-30 (also Matt 24:37-39) we are told that when the kingdom of god arrives at the second coming EVERYONE that is considered wicked DIES PHYSICALLY. That's what happens in the Noah and Lot stories. There are no exceptions. So Luke, writing much later than Paul, thinks flesh and blood bodies won't exist either when the kingdom of god arrives. And this must take place in the first century generation (Matt 10:23, Matt 16:27-28, Matt 24:34, Mark 8:38-9:1, Mark 13:30, Luke 9:26-27, Luke 21:32). The fact you and I are sitting here 2,000 years later in physical bodies proves that Paul was either deliberately lying (unlikely) or just a loopy delusional religious person having hallucinations (correct answer!). He tells us in at least 3 places in his writings that he is hallucinating his Jesus. Those are 1 Cor 14:2,14&18, Gal 1:11-12, and 2 Cor 12:1-7. Read those passages without bias. Read the 2nd half of 2 Cor 11 for some good context before you read 2 Cor 12:1-7. Paul is bragging about himself. I would recommend watching the final video I made for my channel if you haven't already entitled "Christianity's Fatal Problem Revisited". I can also send you a copy of more than 100 eschatological time statements in the NT that show that the writers of the NT were a failed apocalyptic cult. If you are interested let me know and I can send it to you via email. Sorry for the long response. I don't say this to discourage you if you are a Christian. I say this because if I believed something that was false I would want someone to tell me and then hope I had the emotional strength to deal with it honestly. If you have anymore questions please feel free to ask.

[@wantingtolearn2732]

@@escapingchristianity8765 thanks for response. I agree that the time statements clearly indicate a first century fulfillment was expected. I will check out the video you recommend before replying again as it might contain answers that I have regarding some statements you made in this response.

[@escapingchristianity8765]

@@wantingtolearn2732 The 2 videos before my final video I specifically address the full-preterist position. I have also argued at length (in the comment section of some of their KZbin videos) with people like Don Preston and William Bell. I am not sure if you are familiar with them but they are leaders in the full-preterist movement. They could not refute anything I said to them. They just kept trying to re-write words in the NT like "death", "resurrection" and the like. Those words mean exactly what they say. Not what Don and William want them to say but if someone won't accept the text for what it says there is probably nothing I can do to reach them. Anyways, I hope my videos can give you something to consider.

[@wantingtolearn2732]

@@escapingchristianity8765 I am familiar with Don Preston and William Bell but do not agree with all they say. One example would be the one thousand years starting in 30 A.D. Revelation was about things to come when it was written. The Bible can be a complex discussion and I have found that even in full preterism which at present I lean more strongly too, I may not agree with conclusions others of similar mind reach.

[@chainedmindsasylum]

Well done brother!!! 👍

[@therealjakedean3317]

Very clear my man. It refutes Christianity by what they CLAIM are their own principles. (At least any tenable definition of Christianity which holds for the past 1500+ years. Even this has constantly evolved and has completely avoided the original audience + time statements as a variable. I think because those in authority knew that doesnt cater controlling people with fear!!). It would have had to be that those 1st century saints were transformed and caught up to recieve their spiritual bodies in 70ad. And one can take that position, the “church” was basically silent for a century or so after that. But that still isn’t Christianity and doesn’t tell anyone today anything t relevant besides a historical fact of Gods relationship with Israel and taking away that whole law system. None of which has to due with us in 2021. The whole system is fear based frued denying clear teaching from what they claim is Gods word. Their entire system, to me, is like a parasite which lives off the fear of its victims. So much so that they can’t even read their own holy book without some authority telling them how they’re allowed to interpret it. Which ultimately is denying audience relevancy when the authority doesn’t allow for it + make all the explicit/plain time statements false except you can’t be honest that you’re saying they’re false. Then with most of full Preterism they can be honest with the text enough to conclude it was all accomplished in 70ad except they say there’s this ongoing final judgement and ongoing great commission every single day which extends into eternity 🤦‍♂️ Oh man so glad to be out of that delusion and understand that these were all things only relevant to them (by scriptures own perameters) and we are free to think for ourselves since, despite scriptures truth value, this was THEIR mail from 2,000 years ago, not ours. Those church authorities ultimately need to invent new doctrines every generation to keep reading their age into the pronouns of someone else’s mail in the 1st century. Ughh man I could go on and on lol

[@therealjakedean3317]

Lol man it’s easy to just burst and ramble on about this to you because there’s no one to discuss this with who understands the process we went through. I feel like we were the kind of people who actually took the Bible seriously as Gods word and allowed God to define His own perameters for Himself. The rest of Christianity who don’t go down this route, or a similar route, I feel are just completely invested in what they inherited and it’s not really about the truth value vs their entire life has been invested in this therefore it must be true otherwise their life as they knew it was based on a delusion. I know I wanted to chat with you earlier. I would really like to find others who understand how difficult this whole process was + the fact that most all Christians family/friends will just project their fear on you rather than actually have a meaningful discussion

[@escapingchristianity8765]

Lot of good comments you made. Thanks for sharing. I know it has been a difficult process for you like it was for me as well. But we value truth. I wanted to address one thing you mentioned about a rapture in 70 AD. As you probably know already, that is the position of Individual Body at Death (IBD) full-preterists. It won't work though for the reasons I mentioned in the video. Paul sees physical death being defeated in 1 Cor 15:51 & 1 Thess 4:15-16. Death is the last enemy (1 Cor 15:26). Yet physical death has continued for 2,000 years and so the IBD full-preterist cannot say that a rapture in 70 AD defeats death. They sometimes will try to claim that it was only spiritual death/separation that was being defeated when the dead left Hades but we can see that Paul did not believe that. He believed the physical body was corrupt and had to put on incorruption. The mortal had to put on immortality. But people still live in mortal bodies today that behave imperfectly thus refuting the IBD argument.

[@therealjakedean3317]

@@escapingchristianity8765 yeah man, the points are totally clear. Like you said in another video - you just have to get to the point where you take someone for their word and call a thing for what it is. Otherwise we’re really just speculating at the end of the day - which is definitely NOT knowledge. It seems every system accepts this handful of plain statements while making these other ones mean whatever lines with their theological whims (however I do believe much of scripture is written in very symbolic language that had nothing to do with what the futurists understand today). We could speculate that the Gnostics had it right and that the true meaning is fundamentally esoteric which only few understand but this leaves the true form as nothing but a distant memory with the false one triumphing. And if this is the case we are, once again, left with speculation and therefore no knowledge. It’s a hard pill to swallow but so freeing once you do!

[@therealjakedean3317]

@@escapingchristianity8765 But man I really want to give my shoutout to you. You have played a major role in my understanding with the implications of FP and how the parts relate to the whole. It was very clear to anyone who is thinking that Scripture = full Preterism = universalism. It was becoming a universalist I could see that there is no biblical basis to apply any of those age ending ministries to ourselves today. From here it is clear the story is over, according to its own terms, regardless of its truth value and the contradictions you pointed out. So thank you bro, it has been a difficult but extremely enlightening process. But totally worth it considering I can be sure I am not deluding myself and finally look at the world for myself. Basically I don’t have to close my eyes to reality anymore. Your contribution can’t go without saying. 🙏

[@escapingchristianity8765]

@@therealjakedean3317 That means a lot to me. More than words can say. Thank you for that feedback because I don't get it very often. This is why I make these videos. I want people to have as much truth as they can handle. I obviously don't know everything. Far from it. But I have seen through Christianity and want to help others. Once again, thank you for the very kind words. 😊

[@artemiyf9078]

Why would anybody write the prophesy after the event occurred in such a way to suggest that the resurrection and the second coming has already happened? That doesn't make any sense. So they wrote the olivet discourse after the destruction of Jerusalem and added also that the son of man should have come in the cloud and the resurrection should have occurred? That doesn't make sense if you want to create an apocalyptic cult if the second coming has already happened...

[@henrybarrick7205]

As a full preterist I believe that in 7.0. a.d. at the ressurection, dead saints went to heaven and the living saints were also transformed and went to heaven. This was the first ressurection that is mentioned in Revelation 20. Death was then defeated for dead saints and living saints never saw death. Believers diying after that event go straight to heaven because death has no power to hold them in the grave (it is defeated). This view may have some problems though. I have been trying to work through it all for years now. Yes, Christianity has lots of issues for sure. What are the problems that you would see with my view? Thanks for being honest on your videos and still kind.

[@escapingchristianity8765]

@henrybarrick7205 When I was a full-preterist I used to rationalize the resurrection the same way you just described for your position so I am very familiar with it. It’s really the only honest option a full-preterist has if he is going to try and be faithful to the text and not mutilate it. The other option (which does mutilate the text and is dishonest) is to take the position that covenant eschatology full-preterists like Don Preston, William Bell, and Max King do and redefine words in the New Testament like “resurrection”, “death”, “body”, etc., and claim they are code words for the old and new covenant transition. I have personally interacted extensively with both Don and William in the past and they perform mental gymnastics with the NT and constantly redefine passages from what they actually plainly state. If a person does this they have no hope of ever finding the truth. They are emotionally compromised which is the problem most Christians have (about 98% that I talk too) whether they are full-preterist Christians or not. I have interacted with hundreds of Christians at a minimum. You asked for my honest opinion. Here are the reasons why neither position works and why I am convinced the Christian cannot exist: 1) Paul believes that the physical body is corrupt and under the power and domination of sin because of Adam (Romans 5). 2) The physical body is disgusting to Paul, riddled by sin, and has to be destroyed because it cannot inherit the righteous kingdom of God when it arrives at the coming of Jesus (Rom 7:18,23-25, Rom 8:23, Phil 3:21, 1 Cor 5:5, 1 Cor 15:50, et al) 3) Jesus will be the first born among many spiritual beings and will transform the righteous into his image when he returns (Rom 8:29, 1 Cor 15:35-53, 1 Thess 4:13-17) 4) A utopian state for the entire universe will immediately ensue at this return (Rom 8:18-23, Rev 21-22) 5) Luke and Matthew state in Luke 17:26-30 and Matt 24:37-39 that the second coming of Jesus will be just like the days of Noah and Lot. What happened in those stories? EVERYONE considered unrighteous will PHYSICALLY DIE. That’s what happens in both those stories (caps for emphasis only). Everyone. Not just some. Very important. 6) Everyone did not physically die or get transformed in 70 CE. A utopian state with no more death, pain and suffering obviously did not occur either as promised. 7) Luke’s usage of the Greek word “Oikoumene” proves that at least he thought this judgement and transformation would happen to EVERYONE. Not just OT Jews like full-preterists try to claim. Please refer to Luke’s Oikoumene usage in Luke 21:26 and Acts 17:31 (He uses “oikoumene” 8 times in Luke and Acts total) 8) The context of Acts 17:22-31 makes it clear once again that Luke thinks the judgment at the second coming applies to everyone. 9) The usage of the Greek word “Mello” used 110 times in the NT shows quite clearly that the first century Christians were an apocalyptic cult just like your modern day dispensationalists and Christian translators throughout the centuries have been very dishonest in their handling of that word. 10) The fact that we still live in the same flesh and blood bodies today, two thousand years later, that Paul despised is proof that Paul was not telling us the truth. I do think Paul actually believed what he was saying. He was just wrong. You can be sincere but still sincerely wrong as the cliché goes. 11) Paul tells us in three places that he is hallucinating. 1 Cor 14:2,14,18, Gal 1:11-12, 2 Cor 12:1-7 and please read the second half of 2 Cor 11 for good context for that last passage. 12) We tell our children things like, “get good grades in school”, “look both ways before crossing the street”, “say please and thank you” etc. We say this plainly to our children because we love them and we want them to have a good life, right? The Bible claims we are all gods children. But the Christian god does not do that with his children. He speaks in riddles. And if you don’t find the right teacher to tell you the “true interpretation” it’s your fault. And then he claims he’s an all just and all-loving god and condemns you forever. Silly. We would never do that with our children. A god like that does not deserve anybody's worship, ever. He is sadistic and abhorrent. Thankfully, I am convinced that he does not exist and even if he did I would never want anything to do with him. Communication like that is unacceptable especially when peoples eternal destiny’s are supposed to be on the line. That’s not a god of love. I would encourage you to watch three videos of mine that you may not have watched for further explanation on this. They are: “Christianity’s Fatal Problem” and the Addendum video and then the last video I made for my channel in May of last year called “Christianity’s Fatal Problem Revisited”. I also have a back and forth with a full-preterist named Drew Johnson in that last video in the comment section. It’s about 29 replies long I think (at the time of writing this) and might help answer some other questions you might have that I may have missed. Just as a heads-up I get a bit annoyed with him and am rude at times because I guess I just get worn out by interacting with Christians that are emotionally not able to listen. Nevertheless, the arguments stand on their own merits regardless of my tone. I do want to apologize for my tone with him in that comment section. Sorry for the long reply. I hope this can help you.

[@henrybarrick7205]

@@escapingchristianity8765 No apology needed for the long reply. Thank you for the response. I have watched a few of your videos, I read your reply and followed your dialogue with the commentor on the video you recommended. The strongest argument that I am seeing is that Paul said the creation would be physically renovated at the second coming. This didnt happen. Thats a BIG problem for all end time systems except for maybe c.b.v. preterist. But they have bigger problems than that (which you correctly expose in your videos in my view). I will be looking at this more. Do you have any arguments that would refute the idea that the first resurrection (saints in hades going to heaven, living saints disappearing to heaven) happened in 70 and a second ressurection (wicked in hades judged then annihilated, hades destroyed) occuring after the 1,000 years (current).? Again, not trying to argue, but testing my own beliefs to see if they are wrong. Thanks for any response you migjt have.

[@henrybarrick7205]

@@escapingchristianity8765 Also, is it not possible that when Paul speaks about " the whole creation" in Romans 8 he is still speaking about born again believers?

[@escapingchristianity8765]

@@henrybarrick7205 I was a CBV full-preterist the last 18 months I was a Christian as you can see from the first two dozen videos or so on my channel. I knew it was the only way to “save” Christianity. As you correctly pointed out, the eschatological time statements cannot be escaped or postponed past the first century generation. The answer is simple and the conclusion is inescapable. If Jesus’ second coming did not occur in the first century generation then the Christian god cannot exist (unless he’s a liar which would be an even bigger problem for Christianity theologically). You asked me if I had any arguments to refute a “first resurrection” occurring in 70 CE for the righteous and then a “second resurrection” occurring “1,000 years later” to destroy the wicked which is of course a reference to Rev 20. I think this is actually quite easy to refute and goes like this: In Daniel 12:1-2, John 5:28-29 and Acts 24:15 we have three presentations of a resurrection. The first one is from the OT Jews who wrote it and the latter two are from the first century Christians. In all three presentations of the resurrection it is described as a singular event for both the righteous and the wicked. For example: Dan 12:2, “...many who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life and some to everlasting shame and contempt.” A natural reading of this has no time gap. Acts 24:15, “...there will be a resurrection of the dead of both the just and the unjust.” A natural reading of this has no time gap and sounds like one resurrection but I suppose a person could try and read this as two different resurrections. If that is what Paul meant he could have just used the plural word and said “resurrections” and therefore he is a pretty bad communicator to mess up that badly. John 5:28-29, “the HOUR is coming in which ALL who are in the graves...come forth...those who have done good to the resurrection of life and those who have done evil to the resurrection of condemnation.” The usage of “hour” and “all” are a slam dunk to me that this is one resurrection. It is not separated by some period of time like “1,000 years” from Rev 20. In addition to this you have many parables in the NT by the Jesus character himself that are highly problematic for a two resurrections hypothesis as presented in Rev 20. Some of these are: Matt 13:24-30 & Matt 13:36-43. The parable of the wheat and tares and its explanation. The servants are told not to uproot the tares until harvest time and this is because wheat and tares look very similar until they mature. This would have been an easily understood agricultural parable. Harvest time is not a two-part process to my knowledge spread over “1,000 years”. Also, the orders are reversed from Rev 20. The tares are gathered first and burned and then the wheat are gathered into the barn. This order is reversed from the two resurrections in Rev 20. Matt 13: 47-50. The parable of the dragnet. The net gathers both good and bad fish and when it is full it is dragged in at the end of the age. The wicked are separated from the just at the same time. There is no “1,000 year” gap in this parable. Other parables include Luke 12:35-48, Matt 25 all three parables, Luke 19:11-27. In this last parable and its parallel in Matt 25:14-30, Jesus portrays himself as coming back only once and giving out rewards and punishments at that time. All of these passages I have listed read naturally as one resurrection. As I mentioned in my previous reply you also have Luke 17:26-30 and Matt 24:37-39 that present ALL the wicked physically dying at the SAME time the righteous are delivered. Otherwise it should not have been compared to Noah and Lot. I believe it was compared to Noah and Lot because the first century Christians were an apocalyptic cult who thought the kingdom of god would arrive in their generation. All the wicked would be destroyed and a utopian state would ensue. This obviously did not happen because they were not telling the truth even though they may have sincerely believed they were. Sorry for the long reply again but I wanted to try and give you as thorough an answer as I could and make my point of view as clear as possible.

[@escapingchristianity8765]

@@henrybarrick7205 In Rom 8:19 Paul seems to contrast "creation" with the "sons of god". In Rom 8:21 Paul seems to contrast "creation" being delivered from its bondage to decay with "the glorious liberty of the children of god". And in Rom 8:22-23 Paul says "the creation groans with labor and birth pangs until now and NOT ONLY (the creation) but we who have the first fruits (born-again believers). So in Rom 8:18-23 I see Paul contrasting the "creation" with "born-again believers" at least three times and they are not the same in his mind. It seems to me that Paul views the "creation" as the physical universe.

[@joycesky5041]

EXCELLENT TRUTH REVEALED in this video. 👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍

[@J-PLeigh8409]

This all depends on your once strict full preterist view & surprisingly you overlook spiritual interpretations at times. Christ came in judgement, & used the same Old Test coming judgement language as Prophets & even symbolic apocalyptic imagery was clearly used by disciples. Revelation is even poetic at times. Full preterism seems to walk closely w/ apostasty, agnostism & atheism is always around the corner. We are in a New Covenant Age, the Old is gone w/ its sin sacrifice as Christ is our once for all sin sacrifice. I hope you find your way back to Christ but if somebody is looking or twisting their way out, maybe they were never of the truth. Just remember answered prayers are a powerful testimony, as well as prophecy, history, creation & scripture. I pray for you & that your not a stumbling block to others

[@J-PLeigh8409]

BTW wouldn't this only be an attempt to disprove the New Test Apostles whom actually brutally died for Christ? I know an attack on scripture & or Christ is an attack on the bible as an whole but I think you prob understand what Im saying. Also dont forget 2 important text, Acts 1:9-11 & a personal favorite Hebrews 9:28. Im gonna assume you know the scripture, both of Christ returning, the yet future 2nd & only remaining Coming of the Lord of glory Jesus Christ

[@escapingchristianity8765]

I understand "prophetic language". All one has to do is look at the early videos on my channel when I was still a Christian. What Christians often mean by "prophetic language" is that passages where the writer is speaking plainly, and the Christian doesn't like what is said in that section, then it must be non-literal somehow. When a Christian does this they are trying to make excuses for the Bible. I presented an argument in this video (and part 2 of this video) that an honest person has to deal with. That argument shows that Paul believed physical death and sin would be no more at the second coming and the NT writers said it would happen in their generation. I encourage people to not base their beliefs on their feelings because feelings often lie. Hold people, in this case the NT writers, accountable for what they said.

[@J-PLeigh8409]

@@escapingchristianity8765 i appreciate the reply. I can appreciate the preterist view on plenty of scripture, & alot of preterist exegetically know scripture well, I even agree w/ alot of it but lean more partial. From the little I've seen in vids, it seems to be very important in your attempt to "disprove" God as if that's even possible. Take every belief or unbelief & its god, & I think you would have to admit, after truly going thru everything & this includes archeology also, & the Christian God & salvation thru Christ by the grace offered, is what makes sense & what our souls thirst for, grace is only in Christ. I personally think scripture shows plainly an spiritual interpretation & the language used throughout scripture is vital to catch, whether metaphoric, hyperbole, typology etc & context, historical, textual & intended audience, all taken in account, when its literal, it is obvious unless a babe or over the top futurist

[@mcgragor1]

@@J-PLeigh8409 He throws the baby out with the bath water, sadly. I tried to talk to him, but reading back through my comments I failed to bring up that Paul had a view that time would go on, the Old T has this as well, and finally Revelation says time will go on. If Paul believed men would no longer die physically as he is saying, this doesn't make sense. I think I also would of added that Paul talked of having two natures, one the sin nature, and as a Christian our new nature. It seems to me that what Paul was talking about was men will no longer sleep, waiting for a resurrection like the Old T saints, but when they die physically, they go to be with the Lord. So in a real sense, the person dying, really isn't dying, they just change where they are. Plus, death was forever unless Christ died for mankind, so those asleep needed to be redeemed and those alive then and now forever more those in Christ will not suffer the 2nd death, so death has been destroyed, which seems to be his hang up. Anyway, good points. I see too much, bible written over 1500 years, prophecy being fulfilled by Christ, even the AD 70 prediction, the apostles dying, which I think you mentioned as well. Psalm 22 is amazing, Jesus quoting on the cross, and its about Him, amazing. Last and not least, it is subjective, but we all know we are sinners-its in us, just like Paul argues, and nothing makes sense more than Christ taking our place-no greater love of God, no greater truth. I feel sorry for this guy, he is depressed. I get it, as a natural skeptic it can be hard. I also failed to mention to him how wrong the Old T Pharisees were and they studied the scriptures daily, yet now we can look back and clearly see Christ in the Old T, that is how God intended it to work. So maybe we're in the same boat. We have enough information to know Jesus, the main thing, but other things are not as clear. Because of this, though I am a Preterist, I wouldn't be upset if Christ is still coming back bodily.

[@TonyDenton]

One of the most difficult vids to listen to since the argumentation is based upon so much misunderstanding of the Bible that ... well ... it just ain't funny. :(

[@oddoneout854]

Channel probably should be called 'Exiting Christianity' as escaping implies held against your will.

[@honkhonk6094]

Do a video on how Paul is a false apostle. Paul the apostate from the Law.

[@FirstOfTheYear777]

Thanks for the video!

[@dustinellerbe4125]

These questions aren't intended to hurt you in any way, but to get you to think. What is existence absent data, what is a mind absent data?

[@javariusjavarlamariuslamar3759]

Could you dumb it down alittle lol

[@escapingchristianity8765]

I don't think I know the answer to your questions but I could certainly make a guess. But if you want me to make a guess then I would like to know from you first how this relates to my video? Just an honest question because I get weird comments from people sometimes. Thank you.

[@dustinellerbe4125]

@@escapingchristianity8765 I should have elaborated more. I apologize. It has to do with God, afterlife ideas, and immaterial concepts.

[@escapingchristianity8765]

@@dustinellerbe4125 Okay, you don't sound like a weirdo. Don't let me down haha. Sorry, I had to check because I get some bizarre comments sometimes. To take a wild guess at your questions it seems possible to me that existence without data could seem like non-existence. Same thing with the mind. There's no input. That's just a wild guess. So what do you got for me?

[@dustinellerbe4125]

@@escapingchristianity8765 haha I completely understand! The proposal most present for a God or a soul(spirit) is that it’s not material, and is a mind of some sort. So the questions I asked you are the questions that come to my mind when thinking on the subject. It seems that the ideologies of god and soul can’t be what most believers claim. Just wanted to hear your thoughts on the subject.

[@ReyWho]

If you properly understand that the millennium began in AD 70 and is still ongoing until Jesus subdues all His enemies, then the issue you brought up concerning physical death is resolved. The second coming of Jesus does not necessitate the fulfillment of all NT prophecy.

[@micahrobertson37]

Your arguments are not convincing.

[@micahrobertson37]

@@user-zj7tc4us8b I don’t have time to engage in online debates rn…

[@ptt3975]

So if afterlife exists, then who is it’s proprietor?

[@escapingchristianity8765]

I don't know if an afterlife exists for sure. Nobody does but people will claim that they do.

[@javariusjavarlamariuslamar3759]

“Give people confidence that the Christian God CANNOT exist according to the new testaments own words” surely apologists and PhD Bible study students have worked through and studied this very problem correct? I haven’t even watched the video yet but what you said is a very strong statement and if it were true I’m sure there are those out there that have worked to really to solve the problem

[@escapingchristianity8765]

It's not really about "solving the problem". There is no "solution" for this problem. You make it sound like they need to come up with something to get around it. That's usually how Christians think about it too. But when a Christian thinks like that they have already stopped looking for the truth. They are just trying to find a way to justify their belief and relieve the cognitive dissonance they are suffering. Well Christians have definitely tried to do that but to no avail. The meaning of these texts are clear and their implications inescapable. The argument about the first century Christians being a failed apocalyptic cult is a very old argument. I'm not using anything new here. Critics have pointed this out to Christians for a very long time. I am simply tying the time statements into a few key texts about death and the second coming to show that this argument is fatal to Christianity.

[@danielreloaded5767]

Hi Robert. I feel for you. I was heavily leaning into Full Preterism myself a few years ago. I know you see no way out of the conclusion that Jesus failed to eradicate the death that the Bible speaks of in the time frame in which He said He would. It seems logically inescapable. I humbly suggest to you that there is one possible solution. I believe it's an honest solution and it is unlikely to be a solution you have seriously explored before. I say that because it's also usually considered one of the weakest interpretations available, especially by Preterists. As unbelievable as it may sound though, I'm convinced that it can be demonstrated quite conclusively that when Jesus spoke about eschatological events, He was often simultaneously speaking about two different events at two different time periods in the exact same breath. Sounds weak, I know. Very, very weak. In fact, I never thought I'd be saying those words after becoming a Preterist. But having researched it very thoroughly for several years, I am honestly convinced that's exactly what He was doing. The other NT writers were then often referring to only one aspect of what He was predicting. Now, of course, the challenge is, how does one prove such duality of speech in any compelling way. I'd in all sincerity suggest that the proof lies in how Scripture itself demonstrates duality embodied in some prophetically significant time statements and how those are connected to the apocalyptic use of the term 'generation', the symbolic numbers 7, 8, 42 and 1,000, and how all of these aspects are all connected to the lifespans, and therefore death of the first Adam and his pre-flood descendants. If you're open to at least considering the possibility that the words of Jesus were more apocalyptic and symbolic than even Preterists realize, please let me know.

[@escapingchristianity8765]

@Daniel Reloaded Just saw your comment. When you say, "the words of Jesus were more apocalyptic and symbolic than even Preterists realize" I hear you saying, "I have a free pass to make the Bible say whatever I want." I'm not saying you are doing this on purpose. I don't think you are. But I do think your emotions are deceiving you. The Greek word "Genea" occurs 43 times in the NT. The Jesus character uses this Greek word "Genea" for "generation" 26 times in the synoptic gospels. It occurs 3 times in the Olivet Discourse in Matt 24:34, Mark 13:30 and Luke 21:32. That leaves us with 23 occurrences outside the Olivet Discourse. Please go look at the context of those 23 uses. EVERY TIME the Jesus character is talking about his own generation. So it is special pleading to say that generation in the Olivet Discourse is "apocalyptic" and not literal. None of us, if we were god, would ever communicate this way. We don't do it as parents with our children either. I'm convinced the god of the Bible does not exist because, when you hold the NT writers accountable for what they said, they tell you he doesn't exist. Like almost all apocalyptic cults they were date setters and gave themselves away because time has proved they were lying. Probably not on purpose but they were still delusional.

[@danielreloaded5767]

@@escapingchristianity8765 Hi again Robert. I apologize for the delayed response. I was away for a week in a location with virtually no cell signal or Internet access. Thank you for your reponse. I would respectfully disagree that Jesus used the term 'genea' [G1074] in its normal sense in every case outside of the Olivet Discourse. When I was first learning about preterism, that seemed like a very reasonable conclusion. However, the more I've studied this out, I've found that the evidence supprting this notion is much weaker than one would think and there is in fact much evidence to the contrary. It seems obvious to me now that virtually every time Jesus used this word (with the possible exception of Luke 16:8 in the "The Parable of the Shrewd Manager"), it was in a context saturated with apocalyptic symbolism. The other places besides the Olivet Discourse where Jesus used the term 'genea' are in the Sign of Jonah and surrounding the events of the transfiguration. In these contexts, we find Jesus was speaking to Moses and Elijah, describing John the Baptist as the Elijah to come, and describing the deaths of John the Baptist and particularly Jesus Himself. I'll not do so at the moment, but I'm happy to explain how each of the these contexts unquestionably exhibits many apocalyptic elements. But assuming they do, then it follows that since Jesus used the term 'genea' many times but each time was in an apocalyptic context, then it's entirely possible, even likely, that the term itself was used in an apocalyptic manner. Even in the few cases where 'genea' is used in the Gospels in places other than the utterances of Jesus, there are strong hints to its special usage. We find our first hint of this in the very first chapter in the very first book of the NT. Matthew 1 uses the term 'genea' 4 times in a tight cluster right in the genealogy (i.e. generations) of Jesus [Matthew 1:17]. What's interesting about this is the structure of this genealogy. I'm sure you're aware that there are 42 generations in this list. Other structural observations have been made by scholars, particularly those elements that have to do with numerology (e.g. the division of this genealogy into 3 groups with the text explicitly describing each group as containing 14 generations - 14 being the numeric value of David's name using Hebrew gemetria). However, this connection with 42 is especially significant since this number can be shown to have a special prophetic importance as it concerns 'genea'. The most obvious is probably the 42 months of Revelation 13:5 (cf. Rev. 11:3; 12:6), which coincidentally occurs in conjunction with the birth of Jesus (to which Matthew's genealogy leads) and the Beast who ultimately destroys the Harlot (i.e. the wicked generation) in Revelation 17:8,11,16. This Beast also just happens to be described as an 8th king. And his co-executor in this judgment just happens to also be described in the Sign of Jonah and is depicted as the Queen from Sheba (i.e. Seven) [Matthew 12:42; Luke 11:31]. The numbers in all of this imagery are obviously extremely important and must be factored into and explained by any credible interpretation. The number 42 is no exception. But, in actuality, the prophetic significance of the number 42 is not unique to Revelation or Christ's genealogy according to Matthew. Aside from the allusions to Daniel's "time, times and half a time", most explicit references to 42 are found in the OT. However, there is another not far from the events of Matthew 1 and again it concerns the birth and circumcision of Jesus [Luke 2:37]. And there are two consistent thematic elements in all of these occurrences - duality and eschatological prefigurements. A detailed study bears this out conclusively. As if the structure and context of Matthew's genealogy aren't suspicious enough, we have further confirmation of the eschatological importance of Matthew's genealogy presented in the only other record of Jesus' genealogy given by Luke. There, the length of the list is prophetically significant just as it is in Matthew's. Luke's list contains 77 names. Mulitiples of 7 are often contextual indicators that certain passages have eschatological significance. Beyond this, like the death of Abel mentioned in both the Sign of Jonah and the Olivet Discourse [Luke 11:51; Matthew 23:35], 77 calls to mind Abel's murder by Cain [Genesis 4:24]. However, there are other interesting observations to be made about this genealogy. Two names in this list stand out more than all the others. First, the name that is related to more names in this list than any other is Matthew. There are 7 or 8 names in this list that relate to or allude to the name Matthew. No other name serves as the basis for so many other names in this genealogy. Second, like Matthew's genealogy, Luke's genealogy also associates David's name with the number 42. If Luke's list is divided at the phrase "son of", it can be divided into groups of equal length similar to Matthew's geanalogy. Doing so places David's name squarely at position 42. I've also documented several other bizarre aspects of Matthew's life and gospel which make it obvious that there are important, though esoteric, eschatological elements underlying much of the ministry of Jesus. Statistically speaking, none of the above observations can be unintentional coincidences and they deserve an explanation. I'm not looking for a free pass to inject unjustified interpretations or exercise unwarranted license as you suggested. I'm not employing any convoluted gymnastics to contrive significance where there really is none. These are relatively straightforward observations once they are identified. These observations must be intended to tell us something of eschatological importance. And they all suggest that Jesus did not use 'genea' in any normal sense of the word. He and the writers of the Gospel's prepared us for such usage in some subtle but undeniable ways. In fact, the earliest chapters of the OT even prepare us for that possibility in some other notable and equally bizarre genealogies - those beginning with Seth and Cain recorded in the early chapters of Genesis. I already mentioned how the judgment on the wicked generation would be in some way an avenging of the murder of Abel by Cain. But there is much we could discuss as it concerns the eschatological implications of their not too distant descendants. But, in short, an analysis of those genealogies also exposes some strong hints that duality is at play as it relates to the prophetic concept of 'genea' and it has been that way since the beginning of God's recorded communications with mankind. What Jesus was doing in His prophetic speech is nothing new and should even be expected. As they concern Preterism, very similar observations can also be made concerning God's earliest time statements. This is most evident in the death predicted for Adam and the timing(s) of its fulfillment(s). These observations are also very relevant to the question of how Christ used the term 'genea' because, as you mention in your video, death is a very important as aspect of the debate between Full and Partial Preterists. Time statements are too as you well know. I'm happy to discuss all of these aspects in more detail if you are open to considering them.

[@escapingchristianity8765]

@@danielreloaded5767 I read your whole comment. PLEASE keep your replies to no more than 10 to 12 sentences. It's really inconsiderate to give long sermons on other people's channels. Conversations are not supposed to be one-sided. With that being said, I think talking to you will be a waste of time. You have created a complicated scheme to try and get around any passages (like the time statements) where you don't like what it says. The Greek word "genea" for "generation" is not an apocalyptic term like you suggest. Any person reading the passages can see that. I will let people decide for themselves. I wish you well.

[@danielreloaded5767]

@@escapingchristianity8765 Thank you for at least reading my full comment Robert. I meant no disrespect by posting a long comment and I did not intend to keep the conversation one-sided. I felt I should at least show you the evidence I was referring to since you dismissed my initial comment as special pleading without even asking for the evidence I said I could provide. I do not see any part of my scheme that is complicated. 'genea' is unquestionably and repeatedly associated with the number 42 in some very peculiar ways in the gospels. 42 is provably an eschatological number and in every biblical context in which it is found, it is associated with doubling or splitting things into two symmetrical parts. It also just happens to be uniquely associated with splitting an eschatological period (7 years) in half (42 months) suggesting that there are two eschatological components to the contexts in which the number is found. Basic statistics tells us objectively that these observations cannot be coincidental, they were intentional (although esoteric) and they must have interpretive value concerning typology that is potentially being employed. No eschatological framework seems complete to me without addressing why that is.

[@escapingchristianity8765]

@@danielreloaded5767 I know you mean well and I am not offended. I still think you have created a complicated scheme to get around "genea" to support your partial-preterism. Intelligent and creative people are especially notorious for doing this. They will create "reasoning" to support their claim so that they feel justified in making it. What are you going to do with the dozens of passages that don't use "genea" but say that the time is short/at hand/near? Passages like 1 Cor 7:29, Rom 16:20, 1 John 2:18, 1 Peter 4:7, James 5:8 et al. just to name a few. What about Heb 10:37? That Jesus would come in a micro/tiny period of time (hoson hoson mikron in the greek) and would NOT DELAY. Please remember the immediate context. Heb 10:25 says "as you see the Day approaching" spoken to those Hebrew Christians and Heb 9:28 says he would appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation. It says his next appearing after his crucifixion brings salvation. The NT writers understood salvation as the end of sin and physical death.

[@lovedabook491]

I just don't get it. All what I see here is lack of understanding. A prophecy is always fulfilled in the spirit realm before it is made physical. And the bible didn't teach me that, my culture did. It was this statement that made me know that Christianity has a lot of mystery that can only be made known, through the help of God. And that can only happen if you let God teach you by admitting you know nothing of yourself. You submit to a teacher if you want to gain knowledge from them. Thank you.

[@madremy9330]

Matthew 24 is happening right before your very eye's turn back to Jesus Christ and repent while you still can God bless Romans 10:13- For everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.

[@madremy9330]

@@user-zj7tc4us8b John 16:33

[@flutefun999]

All of that other understanding...and then you go and misdefine "flesh"..... search that word a bit more bro.

[@escapingchristianity8765]

Paul uses the word "flesh" for a reason. I know full-preterism has told you different but their argument does not work. I addressed that in the video when I talk about Rom 7:18,23-24 and combine that with 1 Cor 15:50 "flesh and blood" (not a covenantal term but the actual physical body is what Paul believed). The argument starts around the 14:20 mark in the video.

[@kray-zivan609]

"The Jesus character"?

[@Chris2Flock]

Hes right! 😂

[@joehinojosa8030]

You KNOW ALOT ABOUT THE BIBLE. I respect that. But it's not too EXCITING

[@terrysteelman1539]

I’m sorry but why are you preaching preterism? It’s ridiculous. Show me ANY historical document that states the facts about the 2nd coming actually happening!!!

[@BibleLosophR]

This is a bad argument against Christianity. There were multiple "comings" of Yehovah/Yahweh in judgment predicted in the Old Testament upon various pagan kingdoms and nations that used the same type of cosmic and celestial language Jesus used and were subsequently fulfilled prior to the 1st century. Those didn't involve the end of the Age or the beginning of the Eternal State. Why assume that during the 1st century the next Coming of Yehovah/Yahweh/Kurios in judgment would be the FINAL one? OT prophecies often had double fulfillments, with the initial fulfillment being a type of the final fulfillment. Think for example of the double fulfillment of the "abomination of desolation" which was first fulfilled in Antiochus Epiphanes IV and which Jesus predicted during his life would have a secondary fulfillment in the future. Or think of the double fulfillment of Isa. 7:14 which had a contemporary fulfillment and a future fulfillment in Jesus. The New Testament doesn't dogmatically state that Jesus' soon return would be the final Day of Judgment. The 1st century Christians HOPED it would be, and that it would usher in the Eternal State. But a wish is not a propositional prediction or dogmatic teaching. It turned out Jesus' imminent return was another coming of Yehovah in judgment upon the Jews via the Romans in 70 AD with the destruction of Jerusalem, but wasn't the final coming of Jesus to bring in the Eternal State. It only ended the Jewish Age. Jesus' predictions of his coming turned out to have double fulfillments. An initial one in 70 AD, and a future one [when I suspect the fulfillment of postmillennialism is accomplished]. Partial Preterism does a better job at accounting for ALL of the Biblical data and uses better hermeneutics beyond the simplistic and fundamentalistic hermeneutics of Full Preterism which presses the Biblical statements to mean more than they actually say. It's the difference between an anachronistic 19th and 20th century interpretation of the 1st century Jewish texts of the New Testament, and an ancient Jewish interpretation of the New Testament text. See Messianic Jewish teacher Arnold Fruchtenbaum's freely available lecture series The Jewish Life of Christ. In lecture 3 he explains the Jewish Pardes/PaRDeS hermeneutic which read the OT on different levels. Or read the wikipedia article on Pardes. The NT needs to be read on those different levels too. Full Preterism reads it in only in the one literalistic level which is already a step towards unbelief. So, it's no wonder that full preterists have a tendency to slide into atheism. The OT and NT need to be read believingly and religiously/spiritually. They were inspired to be understood by believers, not rationalists, deductivists and virtual materialists. *Jesus explicitly says he taught in parables to HIDE his meaning. Yet, Full Preterists read Jesus' teaching as if His teaching were an open book and easily understood and systematized so as to be able to predict the future. Is it any wonder full preterists think Jesus' predictions failed?* Matt. 13:10 Then the disciples came and said to him, "Why do you speak to them in parables?" 11 And he answered them, "To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given. 12For to the one who has, more will be given, and he will have an abundance, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. Matt. 11:25 At that time Jesus declared, "I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to little children; 26 yes, Father, for such was your gracious will. Prov. 25:2 It is the glory of God to conceal things, but the glory of kings is to search things out. The pride that full preterists develop in discovering the partial truths of aspects of partial preterism leads them to an arrogance that can bring one about to atheism. Ps. 138:6 For though the LORD is high, he regards the lowly, but the haughty he knows from afar. God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble [James 4:6; 1 Pet. 5:5; Pro. 3:34]. Read Ken Gentry's and Sam Frost's critiques of full preterism. Frost himself was once a full preterist. Why I Left Full Preterism by Sam Frost; When Shall These Things Be?: A Reformed Response to Hyper-Preterism by Keith Mathison and other authors; Have We Missed the Second Coming?: A Critique of the Hyper-preterist Error by Kenneth Gentry

[@BibleLosophR]

How can Christians answer the objection about a physical resurrection and Jesus' prediction of "all these things" being fulfilled? I do agree that the resurrection of the dead is a literal resurrection of bodies. If I'm correct that Jesus' prediction of his coming will be multiple [at least two], then the resurrection of the body can be in the final coming. Another possibility that can be attached to the above explanation is that both the transfiguration and the resurrection of a few saints in Matt. 27:52 were partial fulfillments of Jesus' teaching regarding the coming of the Kingdom of God and a bodily resurrection. Regarding Jesus' claiming "all these things" will be fulfilled, we know that Jesus spoke about many topics and even the same topics on multiple occasions. It might be that the Gospel authors merged various teachings of Jesus on His coming(s) and final judgment into what we have recorded in the Gospels. Such that it gives the impression that Jesus was teaching absolutely everything will be fulfilled in a singular event. But that would be false assumption. This poses no problem for inerrancy since such literary conventions were understood to be used and readers would be expected to know this. Moreover, this would still be in keeping with the sensus plenior of Scripture whereby God intended the distinctions between two comings to be blurred to fit the pattern of double fulfillment. There are other ways this issue can be resolved. Read the books I recommended above. Listen to Ken Gentry's lectures, as well as Steve Gregg's lecture on this topic.

[@BibleLosophR]

The evidence for Christianity includes [among many other apologetical things] the evidence of modern miracles. Read Craig Keener's two volume Miracles: The Credibility of the New Testament Accounts, In Oct. 2021 Keener is coming out with a new book on modern miracles with 70% new material and documentation. Rex Gardner's Healing Miracles: A Doctor Investigates, and the appendices in Robert Larmer's The Legitimacy of Miracle as well as Larmer's book Dialogues on Miracle. In Nov. of 2021 Christian philosopher J.P. Moreland will be coming out with a book on modern miracles too.

[@escapingchristianity8765]

You have a better chance of getting a reply from me if you don't write huge walls of text. Think about the reader please. To address what you said, briefly, the multiple comings of Jesus is an old argument. It is often used by partial-preterists. It doesn't work and my video shows why it doesn't work. There is only one coming of Jesus after his alleged crucifixion which Christians call the second coming. It was supposed to occur in that generation and give Christians immortal bodies and remove death. Your argument about miracles is also false. Many religions claim "miracles". You will probably claim that those "miracles" are from Satan. Please accept what the NT says instead of trying to manipulate it. I know you don't believe that's what you are doing but it is.

[@escapingchristianity8765]

I asked you to please consider the reader when making a post. Please keep your post at 1 to 2 paragraphs and no more than 10 to 12 sentences total. This way there can be a real dialogue between two people. Not you giving a big long sermon. I removed the post you made a couple minutes ago because you deliberately ignored that. You made a post even longer than your first one! Please have consideration for other people. Once again, your post was filled with random scriptures that you think prove your god exists but actually don't. I made an argument in my video that shows, from the NT's own words, why he can't exist and you didn't address the argument SPECIFICALLY. No more long posts or I will block you for not having consideration for others.

[@escapingchristianity8765]

@@BibleLosophR So in case you are not sure where to begin tackling my argument let me help you. These passages Matt 10:23, Matt 16:27-28, Matt 24:34, Mark 8:38-9:1, Mark 13:30, Luke 9:26-27, Luke 21:32, 1 John 2:18, 1 Peter 4:7, James 5:8, Heb 10:37, Rev 1:1,3 & Rev 22:6,7,10,12,20 and many others all state, some of them explicitly, that the second coming would happen in their generation. The second coming would include the resurrection and judgment, the end of death and Christians receiving immortal sinless bodies. Make sure that you consider these passages COMPREHENSIVELY. Don't try to cherry pick one and explain it away and act like you answered all of them. You need to take them as a whole. Physical death did not end 2,000 years ago and proves the Christians were a failed apocalyptic cult. Do you have an answer for this that addresses the passages I mentioned?