What if God Says "Murder is Good?"

[@one-il5fu]

Malachi 3:6a (KJV) For I am the Lord, I change not. The standard won't ever change because God doesn't change.

[@damianzielinski3249]

Thats what was missing in response

[@gauravcheema]

Isnt that even worse coz god condoned a lot of bad things in the old testament?

[@greglaprade7507]

@@gauravcheema Bad by your standard maybe. Not by His. You mean like wiping out the Canaanites for example? He relocated them. And as God, had a righteous purpose for doing so.

[@steggyweggy]

Greg LaPrade killing a whole nation is relocating them?! Are you serious right now? However I think that some other things in the Bible, usually in the Old Testament, are nearly as bad. For example stoning people for picking up sticks on the Sabbath. Should we do that? I’m sure you’ve went out besides church or done work on a Sunday, should we stone you? What about Job? He literally lets the devil destroy Job by his own admission for no reason just to see if Job will worship him. Which guess what, an omniscient all knowing god would already know the answer so there is no need to test Job. This also applies to basically every test in the Bible. The story of Jephthah is also pretty terrible. God also lies to Adam and Eve when he tells them that if they eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil they shall surely die. They didn’t die. And they must’ve been going to die before because otherwise what would be the point of the tree of life that grants immortality? Also what is the point of god sending a flood? Couldn’t he just speak and kill all the wicked humans without needing to kill innocent animals and such. This bypasses the extremely impossible story of Noah’s ark itself. Anyway, enough ranting. The Christian god might not change but he better. Otherwise we are living under a torturous god who we have no hope to fight. I hope my points don’t come off too angrily. I was once a saved Christian and I understand where you come from. I just hope like me you can separate yourself from your cognitive dissonance and use logic, facts, and reasoning to question your religion and all religions and just see where you end up. Have a nice day!

[@greglaprade7507]

@@steggyweggy You were not ever a saved Christian. You wouldn't be making these comments. Once saved, always saved. And your comments display a complete ignorance of God and biblical theology.

[@jeffmeyers3837]

"For I am the Lord, I change not" - Malachi 3:6

[@turkihazem]

If God doesn't change How did he become human being 2000 years ago He clearly changed Solve it

[@jeffmeyers3837]

@@turkihazem God (the Father, who changes not -Malachi 3:6) did not "become human" as you say. He sent his son Jesus to do what had to be done.

[@turkihazem]

Jeff Meyers I thought u believe in one God Ok fine Did the son Jesus changed when he became human 2000 years ago? Or was he eternally human

[@jeffmeyers3837]

@@turkihazem It sounds like you are attempting to entrap me into saying he "changed" into a human, as a way to have your AHA moment and point to the bible stating he does not change. Realize that context is critical in understanding scripture (or any written text for that matter). If you look at the context of Malachi 3:6, the aspect being referred to as unchanging is his rules and judgement. What he thought was bad long ago remains bad in his eyes, and his punishments and judgments remain just and true. You could present a weak argument that if any aspect of God ever changes then the bible is untrue or contradictory. However that would be based completely on your modern and convenient interpretation of the context of that verse. You could argue that if God ever changes location, appearing to someone here, and then over there, then technically he "changed". Or that if he is ever happy with someone, then upset at them, then he technically "changed". There are better ways you could entrap modern christians with theological inconsistencies than that. Realize that these would be based not on problems with scriptures, but problems with modern christianity's inheritance of rituals and beliefs from Catholics and other pagan sources, leading them to have some fairly weak theology. Also realize not all christians agree on these details, or even have enough knowledge to speak to them. I took the time to answer you as a courtesy and to be respectful of your inquiry, I hope it helps you in some way.

[@turkihazem]

Jeff Meyers Why everytime I ask Christians about their foundation believes they feel insecure and think I am trying to trick them You are the one who mentioned the fact that God doesn't change and I agree with you Hebrews 13:8: "Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever." Even if we assume ur interpretation of the verse is correct I think we both should agree that God doesn't change his nature Because if u saying the son and the Holy Spirit coequal and coexist with the father then we have to reject all the prophets of the Old Testament who preached the oneness of God not trinity In fact, Jesus Christ himself preached the same concept of God the fact that God is one So we can see consistent massage from all the prophets of God When Christians started worshipping their prophet, there was a need for another prophet to come and take u back to the oneness of God If Jesus never preached the trinity how do u ensure us today he was a Christian? anyone don't believe in the trinity today the Christians consider him misguided.. what about Jesus?

[@natec4133]

This question hints at a deeper question - Does God change or can he be arbitrary? The answer is no, here's why. If God is an infinite (meaning he lacks nothing) and eternal (meaning he's outside of time) being, then it's logically impossible for God to change for those two reasons. 1. If he's infinite, then there's no room to change because if something changes that means it has gained (or lost) a certain attribute. Based on this, it's impossible for an infinite being to change, otherwise it's not infinite. 2. If he's eternal then he can't change because change is contingent upon time. For something to change, there must be a time when it was X then another time for it to be Y. An eternal being isn't confined in time, thus it's not possible for something outside of time to express change (which is contingent upon time itself).

[@Software.Engineer]

Good logical answer. Answers the question of is God consistent?

[@andrewofaiur]

Why did God change his mind about the flood? about giving us free will then interfering with people's free will like the pharaoh? Does God change his mind on born again christians? or were they already saved even before they came to Christ which is a contradiction?

[@steggyweggy]

Well god is also all powerful and immortal. However that doesn’t make sense. If he is all powerful he has to be able to kill himself in which case he isn’t immortal. Or he has to be immortal and not all powerful.

[@1alopezpr]

Amein. 👏👏👏👏👏🖒

[@lilchristuten7568]

@@steggyweggy Define the word kill.

[@youtubecensors5419]

People really love creating God in their own image.

[@damianjones807]

Almost all atheists do and they say they don't believe probably because they are their own God

[@twilight444m5]

Which is exactly what the writers of the OT did with Yahweh.

[@angelaf1305]

They never cease to do that

[@angelaf1305]

They create god in their own image then say "i cant believe in that god" Well, neither can I!

[@BScott7220]

Yes, they're called Christians.

[@invisibleinkling1474]

Wow... wow... did I say wow? Epiphany moment. It's not that I didn't know this, but it's so refreshing to hear it explained like this. Thanks!

[@dylanw6303]

It’s been four years since you’ve written this, but I agree! Frank has been referenced to have a “user-friendly” style of teaching. Want a straight-shooting yet gentle answer on God or Christianity? Ask Frank! He’s not God himself, so sometimes we can only speculate, but Frank always uses rationality, logic, and fairness.

[@marcellofunhouse1234]

@@dylanw6303 5 now

[@dylanw6303]

@@marcellofunhouse1234 thank you Sophia

[@bricemakes193]

6

[@L2-L2]

​@@bricemakes1937

[@bd6912]

Did God create everything that exists? Does evil exist? Did God create evil? A University professor at a well known institution of higher learning challenged his students with this question. "Did God create everything that exists?" A student bravely replied, "Yes he did!" "God created everything?" The professor asked. "Yes sir, he certainly did," the student replied. The professor answered, "If God created everything; then God created evil and, since evil exists, and according to the principle that our works define who we are, then we can assume God is evil." The student became quiet and did not respond to the professor's hypothetical definition. The professor, quite pleased with himself, boasted to the students that he had proven once more that the Christian faith was a myth. Another student raised his hand andsaid, "May I ask you a question, professor?" "Of course", replied the professor. The student stood up and asked,"Professor, does cold exist?" "What kind of question is this? Of course it exists. Have you never been cold?" The other students snickered at the young man's question. The young man replied, "In fact sir, cold does not exist. According to the laws of physics, what we consider cold is in reality the absence of heat. Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit energy. Absolute zero (-460 F) is the total absence of heat; and all matter becomes inert and incapable of reaction at that temperature. Cold does not exist. We have created this word to describe how we feel if we have no heat." The student continued, "Professor, does darkness exist?" The professor responded, "Of course it does." The student replied, "Once again you are wrong sir, darkness does not exist either. Darkness is in reality the absence of light. Light we can study, but not darkness. In fact, we can use Newton's prism to break white light into many colors and study the various wave lenghts of each color. You cannot measure darkness. A simple ray of light can break into a world of darkness and illuminate it. How can you know how dark a certain space is? You measure the amount of light present. Isn't this correct? Darkness is a term used by man to describe what happens when there is no light present." Finally the young man asked the professor, "Sir, does evil exist?" Now uncertain, the professor responded, "Of course, as I have already said. We see it everyday. It is in the daily examples of man's inhumanity to man. It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil. To this the student replied, "Evil does not exist, sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat, or the darkness that comes when there is no light." The professor sat down. The young man's name -- Albert Einstein. Romans 1:19‭-‬22 ...because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools...

[@RS-lg2uh]

Wow thank you for this comment.

[@xtaekneekx]

@warrcc c the fact that the story is fiction does not matter

[@Stuffingsalad]

Narrow Path Not exactly the same thing. If I walk past a homeless man and I give him some money- that can be seen as moral/good. If I don’t give him money- that’s amoral/neither good or evil. However, if I steal what little he has from him that’s seen as immoral/evil. Evil is typical described as actual actions, not inactions. Murdering someone is ‘evil’. Not murdering someone can be seen as good but it’s also just inaction. It’s not at all the same as this absence of heat argument. As an atheist, I see both good and evil as just subjective human concepts regardless. Things we like and promote human flourishing we label as good and things we don’t like that game us we label as evil. Neither really exist but when we do use the terms, evil is not just an absence of good but an action that has negative consequences. I think a better way to look at it is unnecessary suffering. If god is all powerful, he’d be able to wipe out all unnecessary suffering, no more innocent children dying from disease and other natural disasters. If god is all loving, he’d want to save them. However, innocent children still suffer. So, either god isn’t powerful (not omnipotent) enough to save them, isnt loving (not omnibenelovent) enough to, neither or more likely, doesn’t exist at all.

[@limpingnad8100]

Alexander Hewett if he did that then we would have not free will. We would know that GOD exists and would worship him without question. GOD so love the world the he gave is the freedom to choose to believe in him or not. He would order us to not go out today because if we did the truck would hit us and kill us while on our way to work or school. Would you like to live that way?

[@Stuffingsalad]

Dan Dabocol Huh? The free will argument doesn’t work when it comes to natural evil. Hell, I even argue that it doesn’t work for agent evil. An all powerful god would have been able to create beings with free will and without the capacity for evil. That’s a contradiction? Well then what about heaven? Do we have free will in heaven? If we do, then god could have just designed the world like that instead, and not one with all this unnecessary suffering in. Unless of course there’s no free will in heaven. A mother wouldn’t even flinch at the thought of her child burning in hell for the simple ‘crime’ of disbelief. But other than that- you haven’t answered the question. God could rid the world of disease or at least make it harmless to humans and other animals. Same with earthquakes, floods and other disasters. How does that take away our free will? How does curing an innocent child suffering from cancer take away its free will? It doesn’t. Again, an all powerful god would be able to cure that child. An all loving god would want to cure that child. Yet that child still suffers and dies. Curing them wouldn’t have taken away anyone’s free will. So why does god allow this? Either he isn’t all loving, isn’t all powerful, neither or more likely, doesn’t exist at all.

[@TheRonBerg]

"Random or arbitrary only make sense against the backdrop of stability" Much less intuitive than you'd think, a really deep thought to think over

[@dmythica]

Pretty sure the Bible said something like Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever?

[@thesnakednake]

Hebrews 13:8 Malachi 3:6

[@dmythica]

@@thesnakednake thank you

[@TheOne-Aslan]

Hmm I've seen that somewhere. I wonder where.

[@urasam2]

So what? Just because someone wrote it down, doesn't make it true

[@dmythica]

@@urasam2 well they're asking about the religion. Of course the holy book they follow is going to be looked at for the answer.

[@Balthazar2242]

That question gave way to a wealth of answers I didn't see coming. I'm glad she asked it.

[@MrJbinchrist]

This is true. Without the LORD there is no good and within HIM there is nothing evil.

[@geminirox8635]

If God is an unchanging standard then he cannot "want" to do anything. If God cannot possible decree murder is moral than he cannot do anything.

[@geminirox8635]

@Lunar Night you're fundamentally misunderstanding both arguments. He states God cannot possibly decree murder is moral because God is an unchanging standard. If God is unchanging then he cannot want anything that doesn't already exist

[@JLTrj00913]

My answer to this is that he never changed his mind. He has always wanted to do something, not just suddenly. Of course, this is just my answer and it is difficult to understand this concept of God

[@JacobAnaya369]

Dr. Frank Turek is precise with his every word and answer and I’m extremely grateful that God gave us the opportunity to hear Dr. Turek glorify and edify what He is. Thank you Dr. Turek and thank God for Dr. Tureks lessons!

[@BladeOfLight16]

"Because random or arbitrary only make sense against a backdrop of stability."

[@TheOne-Aslan]

I'm still confused what this means.

[@ParasiteQueen1]

@@TheOne-Aslan Maybe an poor example, but here it goes: Hmm, I guess it's like saying chaos is only chaos because it is a deviation from a set order, or it is a lack of organization. Without a set order, how can one tell that something is chaotic?

[@TheOne-Aslan]

@@ParasiteQueen1 Ok that makes more sense, I guess the wording of it confused me.

[@VinayKumar-cm2nn]

I feel like,it's holyspirt himself getting him the thoughts and speaking through him at the end of the explanation. Glory to God. Amen.

[@JDB-ru4lp]

Respect to this pastor, he always gets dumb some time straight up disrespectful questions, yet he keeps his composure and brings it all around with the best answer, my prayers to him

[@LordNinja109]

This is a fair question as the god of the bible condones murder, rape, and torture in multiple instances and it's high time that Christians defend their book if they are going to force it upon society as they do.

[@JDB-ru4lp]

@@LordNinja109 is sorry for my grammar mistakes you don't pay me for my time but if you wish to find out the meaning of life (the only way to heaven) you can ask for my contact info and we will talk

[@LordNinja109]

@@JDB-ru4lp I appreciate the offer but no thank you. Calling reasonable criticism of the Christian faith "dumb and disrespectful" gives off the vibe that you have already made up your mind and it would be a one way lecture rather than respectful discussion.

[@angelaf1305]

She demands an objective answer to a hypothetical question lol

[@Carlos-fl6ch]

You think you have an objective answer to a hypothetical question.... What is there was a god... Lol

[@ąყŋ-o8q]

Exactly. No ones obliged to answer hypothetical questions.

[@notapplicable6985]

Binding of isaac. Not quite hypothetical.

[@AmmoDude]

Not so hypothetical a question, as God commands the Jew to "murder" entire communities in the old testament.

[@notapplicable6985]

@@AmmoDude Don't forget, not only kill, but then steal their land afterwards

[@not_an_undercover_cop]

"Random or arbitrary only makes sense against a backdrop of stability." Dang.

[@Software.Engineer]

@Val O'Brien I suggest you eat your own words and delete your comment. She is on a spiritual journey and has good questions with good answers.

[@timsharpe6652]

Totally not cool Valerie !

[@Name-el9ps]

Valerie O'Brien You’re in for a surprise if you don’t stop judging people as if you are without sin

[@Thraxraganharapollyus]

That is only an illusion of stability. All things act in a chaotic/random manner, just within different limits/boundaries. Saying x only makes sense of y because y appears to be y, when y is really z? This is foolish thinking. This is the type of thinking that drives schizophrenic goatherds to sacrifice their sons to the voices in their heads.

[@rockandsandapologetics7254]

I've never been asked this question, but hearing you answer it, I just have to say you did a phenomenal job. I pray God gives me this kind of wisdom on my small channel. God bless you.

[@alessandrovigano8149]

But this doesn't answer the question "I'd god's nature were such that he'd be fine with murder, would that make murder morally permissible?" The point is, if you need God to have goodness and you need goodness to have God, then words can really start to mean anything.

[@1godonlyone119]

If I had a golden toilet seat, would I feel like a king every time I take a dump? They're both nonsense questions, because I don't have a golden toilet seat, and God doesn't ever change.

[@alessandrovigano8149]

@@1godonlyone119 agreed, he resides in a permanent, immutable state of non-existance 😜

[@jae_yt]

You don't need Goodness to have God, Goodness comes because you have God not because you WANT God. If you say you do good to please God then He is not manefesting in you, you are just being pretentious. Goodness is a gift from God its not a requirement to have a relationship with God.

[@alessandrovigano8149]

@@jae_yt But the point is, if, hypothetically, god was in favour of rape, murder ecc, would it be good? Euthyphro's dilemma, basically

[@jae_yt]

@@alessandrovigano8149 first of all there was no record that God ordered His people to rape, and rape is because of lust which does not come from God and will never come from God. Murder as defined is unlawful kiling of a man, tell me when did God unlawfully killed a man? Well, how about the genocide in the time of Noah? the babies and children were also killed, what kind of God is that!? Thankfully God is a righteous God, babies and children (even unborn) are not accountable to sin and death, that's why he said that children has a special place in heaven.

[@lartencha9088]

Daaaaaang! Turek back at it again with the eloquent responses!

[@PBuffdaddy00]

Great explanation. I just went through this section in "Stealing God." Great book, Dr. Turek.

[@emaxus46]

Wow. All I can say! I thank GOD for these videos! So very informative!

[@tommyg.6542]

"Random only makes sense against the backdrop of stability" wow. that's a good one to use....love it. It kinda disproves Atheism.

[@hamsterlord8848]

And it shows the logic of free radicals or the human soul of freewill. Makes you really wonder what would have happened if Adam didn't eat the fruit of knowledge.

[@elderj1639]

He'd be in Heaven, and I wouldn't have been born in this sinful environment. An even better question: how would God have handled Eve's situation? Another day, another discussion.

[@Legorreta.M.D]

If god cannot change his own standard then he is not omnipotent. How simple

[@elderj1639]

"Can God make a rock so big that even He could not move it?" How original, Andres, and completely irrelevant. You're now arguing against the concept of omnipotence rather than the existence of God, but whatever makes you happy in your sins, I guess. And not to burst your bubble or anything, but God can change His standards if He so desires. He just chooses not to do so - from eternity past and forevermore.

[@Legorreta.M.D]

Elder J And what is the problem with that? I can name you an example in the bible where it tells you either God is not all powerful or nobody on Earth believes in him. If you did, you could move mountains.

[@TheLegendOfRandy]

So when God told his people to stone a human being to death simply for gathering sticks on the wrong day of the week, that's an example of God's objective "goodness?" Isn't stoning a human being to death for innocuously gathering sticks a horrifically evil proposition?

[@nickstoliaroff324]

Father, I want to be with you for all of eternity. Nothing else. I don’t want status or respect from anyone in this rotten world. Just to be with you forever and to thank you for what you did for us. In Jesus name. Amen.

[@keepingitreal7135]

Sounds like your stuck in an episode of Maury povich.

[@jasintosamora1103]

Prayer of a humble soul. Reminds me of the worship song 'I Just want to be where You Are' by Don Moen. See you on that happy golden day. I'll be standing by the River of Life that flows from the throne of GOD.

[@tehdreamer]

Господи помилуй

[@dansilberstein326]

Matthew 6:5 And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. 6 But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.

[@elf3296]

So you're calling God's creation (The Earth) rotten?

[@somerandom3247]

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" - Aristotle

[@Frejborg]

False. It is not education which enables a mind to do this. Education has nothing to do with it.

[@jamesmedina3297]

Frejborg mkay

[@StelloScope]

What’s going on here?

[@ducktail4068]

@@Frejborg by educated it does not mean school

[@davidking7750]

That statement embodies who I was perfectly.

[@johnchristiandeguzman5295]

The reason why this question is hard is because the question is hypothetical, and the Pastor answered it in a theologically realistic answer. That’s why although the Pastor answered it accurately, the girl(who must be a nonbeliever) is not comfortable with the answer. It’s like asking “What if tomorrow God decides to damn the Bible believing people?” It’s a contradictory. So the Pastor was right but the girl seems to be expecting a hypothetical answer.

[@spider-dude42]

wouldn't it be easier just to use the Bible verse "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever. " -Hebrews 13:8 to answer her question?

[@andrewgarfield5512]

I thought the exact same thing lol God does not change... But this was a philosophical debate, so you can't prove the bible with the bible. That's a circular argument.

[@Barbandyand]

For some people the bible is considered as nothing, so they would take it. But I totally agree with you.

[@MrFungus420]

No, because that doesn't answer WHY it is good. The dilemma is asking if what is good is good because God determines it to be good or if it is good for some other reason. This also applies to Turek's answer: is God's nature good because God determined it is good, or is God's nature good for some other reason. In either case, if it is because God decided it, then morality is arbitrary based on God's whim. If it is due to some other reason, then God is not the author of morality.

[@bowrudder899]

MrFungus420 You missed the explanation. Turek says it is grounded in God's being, his character. If God does not change, that is not "arbitrary based on God's whim".

[@MrFungus420]

bowrudder That is not an explanation. Is God responsible for his own character? If "yes", then morality based on God's character is arbitrary based on what God decided his character would be. If "no", then God is not the author of morality and is irrelevant to the discussion BECAUSE whatever it was that is responsible for God's character is responsible for morality.

[@DaltonHBrown]

I've always been puzzled with the "if God created Satan, did God therefore create evil?" question. That last explaination was very good. Thanks Dr. Turek

[@brandonweh]

Murder isn’t good. But it isn’t always a bad thing.

[@Okogg]

God said “I change not”

[@andyashworth7750]

Did he say that to you

[@Okogg]

andy ashworth “ For I am the LORD, I change not” (Mal 3:6) he said that to you to but you are to busy living like the world to even open his Word

[@andyashworth7750]

@@Okogg I grew up in a Christian family, with deeply religious parents and siblings, went to Sunday school and church every week, and have read the bible 2 times back to front on top of daily bible studies for about 12 years straight, minus a few days here and there. But thank you for assuming. A christian getting immediately defensive at one question? Really?

[@Okogg]

andy ashworth If you read the Bible twice how can you miss such an important thing. He is I AM he does not change. When you read don’t read as if it were a normal book ask God to reveal things and open your eyes otherwise it’s useless :)

[@vviswana]

"'Arbitrary' only makes sense against a backdrop of 'stability'."

[@derschafer1012]

That’s a really good question. I’ve never asked myself that. But Dr. Turek gave an even better answer. I paused the video and pondered the question and thought, “Well, God is good. Only good things come from God. But more importantly, God IS the good. Good isn’t just in His nature, it is His very nature. And 1 Samuel 15:29 says that God will not repent, or change His mind.”

[@sodo5988]

James 2:19 KJV Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

[@Nothingsrealanym0ree]

21:15 And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death. 21:17 And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death. Also jesus

[@sodo5988]

@@Nothingsrealanym0ree call no man on Earth father, for your Father is in heaven.

[@Nothingsrealanym0ree]

@@sodo5988 so this verse is saying dont curse at God & dont curse at your mom cause otherwise you will be executed?..

[@Nothingsrealanym0ree]

@@sodo5988 doesn't make it sound any better

[@Nothingsrealanym0ree]

@Isaac Tubirore I'm not trying to convey any point. The verses I wrote down says it all.

[@shabuttahbeatz4928]

So he’s saying that God can take the life of whoever he wants when ever he wants...so when Cain killed Abel...Was that God taking Abels life or was it Cain...And if it was God who took Abels life (Because God has the power to take a life when ever he wants) why would God be mad at Cain for Killing him?...Was it Gods Decision to Take Abels life or Cains free Will to do it?....🤔

[@davidsamuels3054]

Whaaaaaaaaat????? "...So when Cain killed Abel..." You creating a conundrum where there isn't one and I think you know it. You answered your own question in your question. Cain killed Abel, not God. Obviously.

[@shabuttahbeatz4928]

David Samuels so when ever someone dies...its not because God took them out?...Its because a mortal did it correct? So y is he stating God can kill when he wants...He knew that was going to happen correct...So God is the one who did it...🤔

[@davidsamuels3054]

@@shabuttahbeatz4928 I really don't get how your jumping to that conclusion. God has the power and right to remove whomever he sees fit. This does not equal to, he is the one who personally removed everyone ever. It also does not equal to, only mortals do it either. Both He and mortals are able to do this. Only one is justified thought. If you have a daughter, you know ahead of time that eventually she will probably lose her virginity right? Does you knowing that information ahead of time mean that you are the one who did it? I don't mean to be disrespectful, but is English your first language? Your talking what he said and making huge leaps in what I hesitate to call logic. Either there is a language divide or I would encourage you to reevaluate the process that you use to comprehend information given to you, as well as how you apply it LOGICALLY.

[@shabuttahbeatz4928]

David Samuels U said me having a “daughter” and knowing that she will lose her virginity means that i made her lose her virginity?...ur saying like losing ur virginity is a bad thing...Life creates more life...that was a bad analogy...Try again? 😕

[@shabuttahbeatz4928]

Mickey Barnyard U explained it way better than the other guy...Thanks and God Bless 🙏🙂

[@jaydenbecker2757]

Saying if God has to look up then he is not God is ridiculous. That's like saying if my manager has to ask the boss for advise then he isn't my manager. How can we claim to know if there is something beyond god or not of we aren't even sure of gods existence in the first place?

[@jitheshdsouza6354]

Because God is the uncaused cause. Gof is the end and beginning. He is not some jinn or dragon

[@illicitimage6083]

This is simply a sad, poor and muddied attempt at rephrasing the first premise "good is good because God says so". If God told you to commit murder in his name, would you do it? If God is the standard of good, and he can not change this standard, then is he really omnipotent? If he is not omnipotent, then he inherently is not omniscient, as an omnipotent god could make himself omniscient. If he is not either of these things, then of what use is his standard? On the other hand, if he is omnipotent and can change his standard, would you kill in his name at his request? If your answer is yes, then I suggest you see a psychotherapist.

[@dw3237]

That was an absolutely spot on breakdown!!!!

[@ChrisFineganTunes]

Killing someone is not wrong if God does it. Handing down rules on how best to own people as property is not wrong if God does it. Handing over young girls to an army of men to do with as they wish is not wrong if God does it. Making the rules so that people suffer for eternity for not believing you're there even though you hide yourself pretty effectively is not wrong if God does it. God is *the* standard. The objective standard. But we're not allowed to do the things that the objective standard does. Which kinda feels like it's subjective... Nah, let's ignore that. Thanks for clearing that up, Frank!

[@MagDrag123]

Many people in this comment section doesn't understand what "if" means.

[@stevet5379]

"IF" doesn't apply. There is no "IF" regarding God. God is the same as He has always been, and always will be.

[@livingcarmine]

@@stevet5379 HALLELUJAH 🙌🏾

[@TheJwwinter]

@@livingcarmine - I've heard there was a secret chord, That David played, and it pleased the Lord

[@michaeldones2320]

People in the comments "God never changes his mind lol" Also the bible Genesis 6:6 The LORD regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled. Samuel 15:11 “I regret that I have made Saul king, for he has turned back from following Me and has not carried out My commands.” And Samuel was distressed and cried out to the Lord. Chronicles 21:14-15 So the Lord sent a pestilence on Israel; 70,000 men of Israel fell. And God sent an angel to Jerusalem to destroy it; but as he was about to destroy it, the Lord saw and was sorry over the calamity, and said to the destroying angel, “It is enough; now relax your hand.” And the angel of the Lord was standing by the threshing floor of Ornan the Jesubite. Exodus 32:14 So the Lord changed His mind about the harm which He said He would do to his people. Jeremiah 18:8 if that nation against which I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent concerning the calamity I planned to bring on it. Jeremiah 26:13 Now therefore amend your ways and your deeds and obey the voice of the Lord your God; and the Lord will change His mind about the misfortune which He has pronounced against you. Also he changed Abraham's mind to kill Isaac although you can argue it was a test. He changed his mind in the book of Numbers with Balaam on whether Balaam should talk to the King of Moab.

[@michaeldones2320]

@Wim Harleev appreciate the love!

[@michaeldones2320]

@LemonGameshark then idk but even in Noah Ark it says God himself said it. Also changes his mind with Balaam 4 times on going to meet with Moab and that is only through actions and words that dont need explanation.

[@yonkobuster112]

Amazing, you are very intelligent

[@SahilPawar95]

God's NATURE is unchanging. His nature consists of righteous wrath as well as forgiveness & mercy. God's discernment of our hearts is perfect & so if he sees a change in our rebellious hearts he changes his verdict.

[@michaeldones2320]

@@SahilPawar95 not really when considering he was okay with murdering prostitutes and then changed his mind in the new testament

[@ssgwright7419]

GOD doesn't change. Hebrews 13:8, Malachi 3:6, Numbers 23:19, James 1:17, Isaiah 40:8, Psalm 119:89, Psalm 102:27, John 1:1, etc. Blessings From Texas 🤠

[@1193bobmcc]

God doesn't exist.

[@backinthegame34]

So when god tells the israelites to rip the unborn from wombs does that mean he is pro abortion ? The kid had a great question but needed an example or 2 from the old testament to pin down the pastor. It gets worse as God says he is the author of evil. Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

[@cstevers1]

Frank said something to the effect that god can remove his creations from this earthly life and it's not considered murder because life is eternal essentially? by this reasoning, murder doesn't exist at all. When anyone kills someone else, the same standard applies. There is no option "C", either god is looking to a higher power or he is not all powerful! Oh wait, I guess option C could be...there is no god???

[@TheMeefive]

The same standard cannot apply because only God is God. The only way a human can kill another human and it not be murder is if God commands them to do it.

[@franksanders9638]

How would we know? What if someone is caught killing another person, and then claims god commanded it?

[@TheMeefive]

We'd know he's lying because when the disciples wanted to call down fire on Samaria Jesus told them that God's spirit isn't like that.

[@franksanders9638]

TheMeefive Are you unfamiliar with the bible?? God commands killing constantly, and for a variety of pathetic reasons.

[@TheMeefive]

I think you should read the New testament mate. find me one instance in the New Testament where God commanded a killing

[@Shaqmclean720]

I just love the way he answers these questions ❤️

[@tyshaneyfelt4970]

Once again, just word salad.

[@benbenben123ben]

Yea, I find, that after he was done speaking, I was only left with more confusion and questions... This debate seems endless

[@Nothingsrealanym0ree]

Finally a comment that makes a little sense and not refuting irrelevant bible scriptures that have nothing to do with this 'debate' or people justifying genocides in the name of god. This girls questions were 10000 times more intelligent than the nonsense answers this guy gave

[@tyshaneyfelt4970]

@LemonGameshark You think that was a valid answer that he gave?

[@tyshaneyfelt4970]

@LemonGameshark oh okay. You’re one of these religion trolls. I’m sorry that I don’t buy into your invisible sky daddy.

[@sgt7]

He did not offer a third alternative here. He basically re-worded the first option - which makes God arbitrary.

[@markwilliams8702]

So pleased I caught this tutorial/discussion. Very clear and relevant answers to all the questions. I would love to see Dr Turk come up against the leading Atheists around at the moment. Very strong and concise answers and very well delivered too. Thanks for posting.

[@franksanders9638]

Leading atheists?? He would get destroyed by me, and I'm just some guy.

[@170221dn]

He tried against David Silverman. You can guess the outcome.

[@bordeaux1337]

His "arguments" are filled with logical fallacies.

[@skraett]

Love how no one is actually answering her question... disgusting

[@Nothingsrealanym0ree]

Facts. The question itself was a hundred times more intelligent than tureks explanation

[@Nothingsrealanym0ree]

@Lunar Night sandwich is truth, Sandwich said : I am the taste I am the way I am the truth. Therefore sandwich must be followed. Sandwich said it ? So it MUST be true. It would be like saying throwing the sandwich away is right.. which is just immoral.. Note : Jam, butter and meat are different things

[@Nothingsrealanym0ree]

@Lunar Night I still dont understand what you were trying to say by replying to my comments. I just said turek didn't answer the question. & neither did you.

[@sarahsa7687]

I hate those types of answers. No clear "Yes," or "No". It really is disgusting!

[@timothyjohnson559]

I wish I could like this five thousand times.

[@timothyjohnson559]

Lol😂

[@victorcamacho1355]

Heb 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever. God doesn't change, he is immutable, for He is perfect.

[@Horses4life1001]

I love the analogy of the rust and the car.

[@WingedBagels]

But God told me he loves rust

[@TheJwwinter]

@@WingedBagels Don't let the devil lead you on the path of evil.

[@The-Carpenter]

The kind of questions some people actually think about is unbelievable.

[@youngknowledgeseeker]

That was a good question though???

[@TheOne-Aslan]

I can see where she is coming from and Frank provided an excellent answer.

[@TipsyTerby]

We are made in His image and likeness, so our thoughts are grand in every way, be it for good or for evil

[@aidanm9543]

Man this was a great one!

[@hhhh7400]

Option C is just a reframing of option B.

[@kylewilson5060]

Nah, option B is saying God can choose that something that was once evil can suddenly be good because he's God and what he says is good, will at that point suddenly be good. Option C is sayin that God never chose what is good and what is evil. He IS good, He is goodness, any notion that exists of goodness is actually just God's nature expanded. Evil is the lack of that goodness. Just like light doesn't just choose to be dark one day, light is light and anywhere that has the potential to be visually perceived has light. Darkness is just the absence of that light. Same as heat and cold.

[@ERIC18923]

Kyle Wilson but option B could be every choice and desire of God is good which is the same as saying god is good which is the same as saying if god wanted someone murdered it would be good

[@kylewilson5060]

@@ERIC18923 Well the problem is when one tries to define God and 'true, pure good' as separate (or in any way separate-able) things. B tries to the separate the 2 in some capacity, C is saying they are entirely, in any logical way inseparable. Back to the previous example using light, what you said is like saying "Everything that light interacts with by definition is bright, which is the same as saying Light = Brightness, which is the same as saying if Light directly created a shadow, then that shadow would have to be brightness." Doesn't quite make sense does it? At least not logically, because light and brightness are completely inseparable (as in option C). Unlike how God and goodness are defined in option B.

[@ERIC18923]

Kyle Wilson that’s the thing light doesn’t directly create anything. It can’t even exist without darkness. They arise mutually and together make up all there is. So if God completely originated everything alone then he’d have to have in his nature the same polarity that everything else has.

[@kylewilson5060]

@@ERIC18923 Well, the concept of bright/brightness comes from light. With no light, there is no brightness. *Option C is arguing against the idea that light and darkness are like Yin and Yang, mutual & together.* Option C is saying, that way of thinking is wrong because darkness, itself, is not an actual "thing." It cannot be described in itself. It is only definable as a lack of some "thing." Light. In the same way, Evil is not a "thing", it's the absence of some "thing." Good. Then, since Good literally = God , we are back at why something that can only be done in the lack of God (ex. murder), won't/can't be good. Hope that clears it up.

[@somerandom3247]

Although Frank didn't answer the question directly ( as usual), you can derive his answer from the babble he spewed. Frank kept saying that god is the standard for good. Therefore, whatever god says is good. Therefore if tomorrow, god said that murder was good, anyone who believes this nonsense would also believe that murder was good. Frank, if you don't agree that that is your position, then directly answer the question posed by the lady in this video with either a 'Yes' or a 'no'

[@JoschuaSchmidt]

I think he tried to make clear that isn´t a yes or no question. Although you can raise the question in a way that makes it seem that way, there are more than 2 options. That´s just the case. If god himself is the standard for the god, then neither is he subject to some higher rule, nor does he arbitrary command what is good or bad. He simply *is* it.

[@dalesemurath7841]

Why would he say Satan has good qualities? The bible says that Satan's ultimate goal is to steal, kill and destroy. So how in the world can he have "good qualities?"

[@michelritergia5454]

I like Frank for the most part, but he could've summarized with "It's a waste of time to ponder on impossible hypotheticals" given that God is unchanging. I could be wrong tho

[@lilchristuten7568]

Well he could have said that or he could have gone the definition route. Murder is premeditated unlawful and/or unjustified killing of another human. Since God is the standard, not only of good, but also of law and of justice, He cannot say that something that is unlawful and/or unjust (something that is against Himself) is good. Or he could have just answered that God doesn't make arbitrary decisions.

[@gracepeace487]

Gosh. I can’t get enough of this stuff!!

[@Mr.VlosopheR]

Dr Turek is very good in words

[@djcorner7747]

Yeah, but... "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things..." Isaiah 45:7 Completely voids Turek's argument. God's nature is good, evil is absence of God or deviation from his will, etc... Really? Not according to the bible.

[@holyghostfire238]

DJ Corner okay so the main problem with his response and most people's understanding is NOT understanding the Hebrew words that are actually there. The Bible was written in English. So when G-d says He "creates" darkness or evil, the Hebrew word there is bara which means to separate or divide. The word for evil is ra which literally means dysfunction, not evil in the abstract sense but something that isn't functioning properly. So what the scripture really says is that G-d separates, divides or distinguishes, for us, the things that just would cause dysfunction in our world. So technically Tureks argument is void in the sense that he doesn't explain this but the essence is that everything G-d does is good or in Hebrew, tov, which is functional. Since every thing G-d does is functional then it is not in His nature to dysfunction. And to that end "evil" is not in His nature.

[@issaalgresh894]

Look at the original word before coming to conclusions such as this.

[@carlosmuller3565]

The first reply just made your argument invalid.

[@alsyrriad]

@@holyghostfire238 Finally, a Christian that remembers that the Old Testament was written in Hebrew, not English. Good work, man, keep sharing that knowledge.

[@stevejames5100]

Yes from a point of view of someone like yourself that does not have a clue about what the word actually means.

[@doublechindoge7]

I agree with the points argued here, but I feel like the discussion this question was probably meant to provoke wasn't had, and that was the dangers of this idea of an unquestionable standard of good. So let's say from the beginning God made murder something good, it didn't change, that was always his standard. Would you then feel ok murdering people? If the answer is yes that's concerning, and if the answer is no then clearly you do value Human empathy over what God says is good or not, and you're wrong when you say that whatever is good to God is objectively good. Just before I continue, I just want to preface this next paragraph by saying I am not trying to get you to stop beleiving in God; I don't think you should, but I'm not saying this to shame you for it, I'm more focusing on telling you to be careful that you balance out anything you think the Bible is telling you to do with what your sense of empathy is telling you if you don't already do that. You probably already assumed this, but I am an atheist despite being raised christian, and very strongly believe in following human empathy for my sense of morality over religion. At first this was simply because I thought it was very unlikely that there was a God, then I found that the Bible contradicted itself quite a few times as I started to actually read it instead of only seeing the bits I'd been told in School and at Church, and then I found that at least the God the Bible depicts does some pretty terrible things that make me think that either the Bible can't be entirely accuracte; God can't be all-powerful; or the most concerning possibility, God can't be all good. For example, if I told you that the God in the Christian Bible _has_ in fact directly endorsed killing families and even raping virgin girls, you would probably think I was a strawman making up crazy talk - but let me quote Numbers 31:17 and 18 to you, the context for which is God telling Moses how to get revenge on the israelites in Moses' story: Numbers 31:17 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, Numbers 31:18 - but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man. I understand if many of you are sceptical if this is even real right now, but go look it up, I encourage you. To give just a teeny but of credit, in fairness the last quote doesn't definitely say that God is telling Moses to rape them; however, I'm not exactly sure what else he could possibly be saying when he tells Moses to kill every girl who isn't a Virgin and keep the virigins "for yourselves". How could an all-knowing, all-loving God who is the complete embodiment of all good tell Moses to most likely rape 'girls' (implying underage too...), and at the very least murder a large group of people; only to then give Moses the 10 commandments including "Thou Shalt not Kill"? The least unpleasant answer would be simply due to multiple millenia of translation and change the Bible we follow today isn't all accurate anymore, but then if you concede that's the case, then surely you shouldn't let it control your moral compass if it might not even be the message God wants you to hear. The main message I want to bring here is just not to take this "God is the literal embodiment of good" concept to its extermes. That's how you get Christians who are sexist, because they believe women are inferior to men and shouldn't be allowed to speak in churches; that's how you get christians who are racist, because they believe that God marked Cain's offspring with black skin, meaning all black people are evil; that's how you get christians who are homophobic, because God hates it when a man lays with another man as they would a woman, and says that they should be put to death for that. I'm not saying that Christians are inherently sexist, racist, or homophobic; but blindly believing scripture that is likely to be partially or maybe even mostly innacurate, or at the very least very easy to twist the meaning of in many ways will lead to you to becoming evil things like that eventually if you don't use your own moral compass to question it. I don't even necessarily believe the idea of a God or afterlife is impossible - I think it's extremely unlikely, but possible. I mostly just feel we shouldn't assume we know what God thinks or what the afterlife is like. Oh and last thing, I'm not sayin this is an issue only with Christianity, but I talked about it specifically here just because being the most mainstream religion it sometimes gets a pass on the bad things it does when it shouldn't. I'm not saying it' better or worse than any other religion.

[@dog_curry]

I think you have the wrong idea about Christianity... But first off, why do you care about what's good or bad? Sure, you do have a sense of right and wrong and do "moral" things... but you have no objective moral standard to base your assertions of rape being wrong on. In fact, your assertions on morality are no more than opinions akin to what flavor of ice cream is the best. So why do you value "human empathy" above all other opinions? I am glad you have a sense of right and wrong however, otherwise my argument would shatter into pieces. That being said, what makes your sense of right and wrong the "right" one? Are you God? Second, sure people justify all sorts of "bad" things because the Bible said so. Doesn't mean that's what the Bible actually teaches. Although homosexuality is wrong, the Bible never teaches that those who act on their homosexuality should be hated or harmed for it. Although I'm not sure why Paul says women shouldn't speak in Church (the meaning there is debated and I will research more on that topic), that doesn't mean that women are inferior. (I'm female, by the way, just in case you assume my assertion here is unempathetic for lack of being female). All that stuff you mentioned is no news to me.

[@doublechindoge7]

@@dog_curry I mean to be fair the meaning of the word 'good' is so vague and can be stretched in so many ways I see how you can think like that, but I would define good actions as actions that you take in order to protect lives, or bring positive emotions and experiences to other people. I feel like that definition covers why rape is bad pretty easily. The Victim is physically hurt and emotionally scarred, and may end up having a baby from it who will go on to most likely have a rough childhood, which even then could go further and cause that child to have a destructive personality growing up leading to them.carrying out more hurtful actions. There's quite a few instances there of lives being threatened and emotionally abused. You may say that is not an objective standard, but it is, it's just a context-sensitive objective standard. The "right thing to do" based off of this standard is the same for every situation, it only changes when the situation changes. I feel that's how our standards of morality should be anyway. If you place down strict rules that aren't context-sensitive you end up with situations where your rules backfire. If you decide to ban going to the toilet in your school during lesson times entirely to avoid people sneaking off into bathroom to skip lessons, don't be surprised when a couple kids who did nothing wrong end up wetting themselves in your lessons. Now obviously there is one limiting factor to this idea - If you don't know all the details of the situation you're in, or even have misinformation, you could easily find yourself making the wrong choice. Granted, that's absolutely true, but doesn't that apply to every moral standard? I've mentioned before, but I'll say it again. The negative attributes I talk about here aren't talking about the average Christian, but I'm addressing the average Christian here because it's very easy for the average Christian with their head screwed on who mostly follows Christianity for the more well-known morals of forgiveness and kindness, to buy into cults, scams, and anti-science groups because they're "Christian". Maybe it isn't an absolute pandemic, but these groups are an issue, mostly because they inevitably force their beliefs onto their children. It's already bad enough to see people reject medical treatment because they just expect God to cure everything, but it's so much worse when it's children who suffer the consequences of these decisions they didn't even have the chance to make themselves Anyway, lastly I'm just gonna put a list here of the main groups I have a problem with in case you had anything to say about them. - People who are Anti-vaxxers because they think Vaccines are evil for whatever wild biblical reason they come up with. - People who are ignoring social distancing rules and using Christianity as an excuse - Butch Hartman's whole OAXIS Christian Streaming Service scam - Westboro Baptist Church... I think you know why. - Jehova's witnesses, because of how they tear families and friendships apart with shunning and with how Jehova's witnesses are prohibited from having too many non-JW friends. Wouldn't be so bad if it weren't for the fact that the religion is forced on their children and they have no choice but to blindly follow and sacrifice all their chances of making friends outside the religion, or be shunned by their family for their entire life. Not to mention their constant end of the world predictions, and how some even admit they can't wait for the day all us 'apostates' are killed off by God. - People who want to bring Religion into government schools. For that to happen, you would have to let every religion into school, or prove your religion's superiority - which is probably the #1 fastest way to start a violent and ultimately pointless war that in the end will harm everyone. Again, I know these aren't your typical Christians, but the fact they operate under the guise of Christianity means that normal people can fall into these groups - from there many of them restrict where they're allowed to get information from, who they're allowed to talk to, and what they're allowed to question to the point that they can realistically be essentially brainwashed; and the unifying trait between all these groups is that they justify their actions by saying they are serving God, and so nothing they do can be wrong because God is the objective good and they are carrying out his will. That is why I don't really like this idea that being a Christian is the only true way to be good, because it allows people to justify doing horrible things.

[@dog_curry]

@@doublechindoge7 So? Why should we bring positive emotions to other people if hurting others can bring positive emotions to ourselves? I'm sure the rapist is happy, so why not rape? Especially from an evolutionary standpoint, rape is a necessary and "good" thing because it allows strong men to spread their genes. If your moral standard is "context-sensitive" then it isn't objective at all. It can't be the same for every situation and change for every situation at the same time as you said: that's contradictory. That's why a moral standard isn't comparable to standard classroom rules; moral codes are made for our sense of wrong and right (which has no goal), standard rules are made for a specific goal (in the classroom case, the goal is for students to focus on education). Your fixation on what some people who call themselves Christians is misguided because you don't look at what the Bible teaches, you look at the people who justify their own ideology with the Bible. The people you listed are wrong about their justifications because the Bible contradicts them. Don't let other misguided people discourage you ("misguided" is not an insult, I intend for it to be a neutral term, after all we are all misguided about some things, maybe for me it's economics). Also, no wonder people want to bring religion into schools. The evolutionary teaching that humans are no more than rearranged pond scum drives many to despair in this post-modern moral relativist society. Just look at Columbine, for example. The shooters were heavily influenced by evolution. You might argue that they applied evolution "wrong," but who are you to say how to apply the concept? And I'm not saying all people who believe in evolution are like that, but they might as well, because they have no ultimate basis for their adherence to some code of morals. If the God of Christianity is real, then people can't just claim that their wrong actions fall in line with the ultimate standard for good that is God because God already revealed to us what is good in the Bible; those people just don't read the Bible or twist the words to match what they think. I'm sorry that your perception of Christianity is warped because of bad people with agendas... It's true though; there is only one way to be god because there is only one good standard.

[@doublechindoge7]

@@dog_curry Ok so first of all, I think there's a bit of a misunderstanding here with what I mean with this whole context-sensitive thing. If the same conditions are in place, what I would consider the right thing to do would always be the same every time, but if the conditions change then then the action would change depending on the conditions. All I'm basically saying is that this idea of right and wrong is not based off of how I was feeling on that day or whatever, or really based on opinion, although obviously with a lack of knowledge of the situaton an opinion could result in someone making a bad choice. What I'm trying to say is that this standard does not change without good reason, and I already previously stated how I feel a compltely unchanging objective moral standard would not work for every situation. Secondly, I would have thought this would be obvious, but the pleasure that rapist derives from their crimes in that situation simply does not outweigh the harm they do; hell, it may even be something that leaves them feeling hollow later on and even harms them in the long run. You may then ask what if the good something would do us outweighs the harm it inflicts on others, and that's a good question to be fair, because by my standards that shouldn't be considered evil. Well technically it wouldn't, but I would only say it isn't a bad action if the person who did it knew for sure that the good would outweigh the bad with no question or chance of them being wrong, which is a really rare situation in the real world - so for the most part I would not advocate for it. And no, I wouldn't say that from am evolutionary standpoint rape is good; yeah, maybe a 'strong man' passes on his genes, but he passes it onto a child they probably won't father with a mother who may be scarred for life. That child is unlikely to have a good upbringing, and with a lack of self-esteem as well as anti-social behaviour, they aren't gonna have good chances of passing on theirs. I'm not gonna really talk much about the whole evolution tangent because I feel like that's just gonna lead to a "he said she said" situation, because I do not know a single person in my life who finds the idea of evolution depressing, and personally I feel it's quite the opposite - I think the fact we started out as that and over the course of millenia made our way to where we are now is uplifting. I don't know the meaning of life or our ourpose in this world or anything like that, but I don't think it's a good idea to assume we do when as far as we have come we still ultimately know so little. That's why I care about advancing society, abotu protecting lives and improving the quality of those lives, because those actions help us create a world where we know more and more; and given that knowledge we will be more capable of doing the right thing, and eventually maybe we will discover how we were created and what our purpose is. That isn't incompatible with Christianity either, if you believe God is real, then you would believe creating a world where we know more with every generation would eventually lead to us discovering his existence. It's a goal that can unify religions and even non-religions so to speak.

[@dog_curry]

@@doublechindoge7 Your moral code is still context-sensitive if your actions change depending on the conditions. Even if it were unchanging, it would still be subjective because you have no ultimate basis for your moral code. Maybe you're confusing whats right and wrong with what's practical. Something can be wrong and still be practical or necessary for a goal, in a sense. An unchanging moral code does not mean that people won't break the rules either, they do it all the time for whatever is convenient. Why should we care about other people's happiness? Again, what you think is right and wrong is merely your opinion as you have no absolute unchanging moral reference point, so any criticism of the Bible for being immoral falls flat. Its interesting that you consider evolutionary teaching uplifting, considering that it gives people no ultimate purpose for life and no real reason to be nice to others and do no harm... Well, other people who don't consider the implications of evolution tend to not think about stuff like that and just try to get through life.

[@bennievennievichie]

Learn so much from Frank. And he seems like a cool guy. All glory to God

[@TheJwwinter]

I am amazed by the intelligence God has given this man.

[@deepaphilip7930]

Excellent answer by this man. God bless you Sir..

[@rustyblonchjr8660]

no not a good anser because that can be countered with a how do you know god is good or how do you know what his nature

[@deepaphilip7930]

@@rustyblonchjr8660 That is why God has given us His Word - the Bible to show us His nature and let us know His thoughts. Therefore, we can be sure that God would never do or say anything against His Holy nature.

[@rustyblonchjr8660]

@@deepaphilip7930 where in the bible does it say he's good or its in his nature to be good or what if he wrote that down to make you Believe he's good that's obviously if you believe god wrote the bible because some don't

[@PInk77W1]

Yesterday today and forever

[@franksanders9638]

Depends on how you define murder..... God loves killing.... Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT) You should not let a sorceress live. (Exodus 22:17 NAB) “If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.” (Leviticus 20:13 NAB) A man or a woman who acts as a medium or fortuneteller shall be put to death by stoning; they have no one but themselves to blame for their death. (Leviticus 20:27 NAB) Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death. (Exodus 21:15 NAB) All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. They are guilty of a capital offense. (Leviticus 20:9 NLT) A priest’s daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death. (Leviticus 21:9 NAB) They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB) If a man still prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall say to him, “You shall not live, because you have spoken a lie in the name of the Lord.” When he prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall thrust him through. (Zechariah 13:3 NAB) Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. “The LORD your God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him.” (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT) But if this charge is true (that she wasn’t a virgin on her wedding night), and evidence of the girls virginity is not found, they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her fathers house and there her townsman shall stone her to death, because she committed a crime against Israel by her unchasteness in her father’s house. Thus shall you purge the evil from your midst. (Deuteronomy 22:20-21 NAB) If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kill him. Your hand shall be the first raised to slay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to death, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such evil as this in your midst. (Deuteronomy 13:7-12 NAB) One day a man who had an Israelite mother and an Egyptian father got into a fight with one of the Israelite men. During the fight, this son of an Israelite woman blasphemed the LORD’s name. So the man was brought to Moses for judgment. His mother’s name was Shelomith. She was the daughter of Dibri of the tribe of Dan. They put the man in custody until the LORD’s will in the matter should become clear. Then the LORD said to Moses, “Take the blasphemer outside the camp, and tell all those who heard him to lay their hands on his head. Then let the entire community stone him to death. Say to the people of Israel: Those who blaspheme God will suffer the consequences of their guilt and be punished. Anyone who blasphemes the LORD’s name must be stoned to death by the whole community of Israel. Any Israelite or foreigner among you who blasphemes the LORD’s name will surely die. (Leviticus 24:10-16 NLT) This is getting really long....... I think I'll stop here, unless anyone is not yet convinced how much god supports killing people for things which are, for the most part, not even crimes in civilized countries.

[@franksanders9638]

***** Ahhh the ""old"" testament fallacy.....I never saw that coming... 1) “For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV) Clearly the Old Testament is to be obeyed until the end of human existence itself. None other then Jesus said so. 2) All of the vicious Old Testament laws will be binding forever. “It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid.” (Luke 16:17 NAB) 3) Jesus strongly approves of the law and the prophets. He hasn’t the slightest objection to the cruelties of the Old Testament. “Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place.” (Matthew 5:17 NAB) 3b) “All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness…” (2 Timothy 3:16 NAB) 3c) “Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God.” (2 Peter 20-21 NAB) 4) Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient children according to Old Testament law. Mark.7:9-13 “Whoever curses father or mother shall die” (Mark 7:10 NAB) 5) Jesus is criticized by the Pharisees for not washing his hands before eating. He defends himself by attacking them for not killing disobedient children according to the commandment: “He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.” (Matthew 15:4-7) 6) Jesus has a punishment even worse than his father concerning adultery: God said the act of adultery was punishable by death. Jesus says looking with lust is the same thing and you should gouge your eye out, better a part, than the whole. The punishment under Jesus is an eternity in Hell. (Matthew 5:27) 7) Peter says that all slaves should “be subject to [their] masters with all fear,” to the bad and cruel as well as the “good and gentle.” This is merely an echo of the same slavery commands in the Old Testament. 1 Peter 2:18 8) “Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law” (John7:19) and “For the law was given by Moses,…” (John 1:17). 9) “…the scripture cannot be broken.” -Jesus Christ, John 10:35 Jesus and the new testament reaffirm the law of the old testament, not refute it. Not once. The reality is that the idea of Jesus refuting the old testament is a modern invention of Christians. Born of necessity, because the horrifically vile nature of the bible is considered so disgusting by the average/typical human being, that it cannot be defended. Why do you think bibles are still complete?? Maybe if Christians just completely eliminated the old testament...... How obvious would it be?? There has never been a convenient point in history to declare it invalid..... Sorry buddy, you either believe in the bible or you don't. If you cherry pick the bible it is a de facto admission that the bible is false. And if the bible is partially false? Then it is all false. which, of course, is the truth....

[@franksanders9638]

***** Thanks for the backup. But Dave is not going to respond. I already destroyed his delusion with his own scripture. I notice that when I debate Christians on this kind of thing, that I am the one quoting scripture. While they just post some rambling lame excuses. I think somewhere deep down they know the bible is garbage, but they just cannot give up their delusion for psychological reasons.

[@cjdadon1]

I've read your comment(s). The problem is that Atheist have a bad tendency to read the Bible from a LITERAL perspective. Y'all fail to keep forgetting that the Bible isn't just some book. It's a spiritual book, thus needs to read through spiritual eyes! The only way you can understand scripture is if you want a relationship with Jesus Christ. All these scriptures you listed does not mean physically killing somebody. Let me explain: 1. Jesus fulfilled the law and needs to be obeyed, true, but that doesn't stop people from wanting to. People can know of God and still be in disobedience. 2. Heaven and Earth will passed away, but God's word will forever live on. It's funny how you mentioned the laws being vicious because that's not even the case. 1st law states to believe in God. Does that sound wrong? 3. Similar to the second post. 4. Jesus was not talking about physical death. He means guilt by death. Another words, regrets, conviction. 5. Same thing applies like the 4th one. Conviction to oneself for not obeying or honoring their parents. Kind of how we use to be when we were teenagers. We were rebels rebelling against our parents. It applied back then as well. 6. Jesus spoke in parables, but he was not talking about literally gouging an eye out. It's the heart that makes us wicked and indulge into sin. Jesus loves His peoples so much that He trying to save people from damnation in Hell. Lust is committing adultery, and that is not of God. He saying that you should do good in order to get into the kingdom. Spiritually, resist your sinful ways and fight the flesh. It's that feeling that comes when you're fighting against your sinful desires. 7. Understand that back in the day, slavery was a thing. We see it now as wrong or cruel because of how far along we've came. Slavery still exist to this day. You just don't see the whips and chains, but subconsciously we're still in bondage. In the act of those slaves, most of them follow God and His laws because of the love they had for Him. Many will think of this as not being prideful, but why would be become prideful when our kingdom is not of this world? Jesus followed the law and become the word and the Pharisees still crucified Him. So if Jesus walked on this earth perfect and still was persecuted and died, why gives us the right to think that we shouldn't get that same treatment? 8 and 9 are true, based off of scripture. Again, don't depict the bible through worldly eyes. The law is still in effect, but Jesus is the median between Christians and God. As He said, He is the way, the truth, and the light. No one can come through the Father but by me. By His stripes (scars from the whips) We are healed (saved).

[@cjdadon1]

Brian O'Neill There's only one bible, one Jesus, one way and one truth, and millions of us that pick and choose what we think is right in the Bible. That's not how it works. If you truly want to understand scripture, you have to accept the Bible for what it is, and I know that's a hard pill to swallow for non believers. Because they want to scan through, pick and choose and run with it with 1. their secular opinion 2. Without having the relationship with God and truly trying to understand His word. The Bible only convicts if you allow it and realize that God wants you to live a holy life. My perspective about the Bible is that 3 years ago, I thought it was just a book. I didn't even care for it, but over time things starts to transpire with America which exactly correlated with the Bible. I was in denial for years until God revealed Himself to me when I was struck by a car. That's when I started to turn my life around, accepted Jesus as my Lord and savior and got baptized. However, there's more to my story.

[@cjdadon1]

Brian O'Neill Will deny it and threaten you to Hell? No my brother. What you're demonstrating is a religious person. Religion plays that role because they clearly don't understand scripture. I will never say that because I'm not the one to determined if you go to Hell or not. It's not my place. It's God. I don't know you personally to say that. You can know the Bible from beginning to end but do you have a real relationship with God? Are you basing your conclusions off of your humanly knowledge or through God's revelation? Like I stated earlier, the Bible isn't just a book. It's a spiritual, historical, and metaphorical book. Of course you'll think it's baloney if you're a nonbeliever.

[@corthew]

Actually, God condones and encourages murder many times in the old testament, even to the point of genocide. So yes...If God says its good then biblically its good.

[@1godonlyone119]

No he doesn't, you liar.

[@corthew]

@@1godonlyone119 It would of course help if you actually read the book.

[@1godonlyone119]

@@corthew I have, and what you claimed above was a lie. Thanks for your time!

[@corthew]

@@1godonlyone119 Nope. Wiping out an entire race of people just because they were raised on different beliefs is murder. Not talking about the Canaanites here either. I'm talking about the Midianites who welcomed the Israelites into their land and shared their food but then were slaughtered by the Israelites in the middle of the night as they slept. Men, Women, Children. When the Israelites protested to Moses about the children Moses appeased them by allowing them to keep the young virgin girls for themselves...but they had to kill all the male children including innocent babies. Are you aware how young you had to be to be a virgin back then? "Thou shalt not kill", unless I order it then it becomes Ok.

[@1godonlyone119]

@@corthew God didn't do any of that, so....

[@steveprofiler]

Rom 9.18: Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.

[@BobRockMB]

Does that make sense? No!!!!

[@alyrajwani7928]

"God can't change, he isn't arbitrary, and morality is objective reeeee" "slavery was ok back then it was just different times"

[@jamesreed2475]

I've always found this curious. How would he explain an eye for an eye becomes turn the other cheek. These are literally both God's laws. Or when the Israelites were commanded to kill every man, woman and child. Everything demands context but there are plenty of examples of complete 180's on right and wrong in given situations. And if God doesn't change and we are just not ready for his law and knowledge at a given moment then it must also follow that all scripture and revelation is open because we cannot possibly know all that God knows or what he might yet have to reveal to us.

[@pepper2872]

I'm athiest but damn! I love this guy!

[@byronjones9786]

Just curious... Why?

[@Premariss97]

Kinda late,but anyway.Would you read a book(free) via e-mail? It's actually written by Frank Turek and another guy,it's called 'I don't have enough faith to be an atheist'.I'm sure you heard about it from Frank's videos,but maybe you never read it. Cheers!

[@Live-Life-Freely]

Powerful!

[@papaindomitable5861]

God bless you Dr Frank

[@WingedBagels]

God bless Filthy Frank

[@alyrajwani7928]

Instead of actually answering her everyone in the comments is just saying why the hypothetical would never actually happen.

[@1godonlyone119]

That IS the answer to her question. If you turned into a golden monkey in the next five minutes, would you then eat a golden banana? The rational answer to that question is that you won't turn into a golden monkey in the next five minutes. The rational answer to her question is that God doesn't change.

[@alyrajwani7928]

1GodOnlyOne Hate to break this to you, but I don't think you understand what a rational answer is. What you are talking about is a contention with the question, which is absolutely NOT the same thing. To use your example, turning into a golden monkey isn't rational, but that's not what the question asks. It is asking "if given this circumstance, would x happen?"

[@alyrajwani7928]

1GodOnlyOne if I ask you a question, and then you tell me that my question isn't a good question, is that an answer to my question?

[@1godonlyone119]

@@alyrajwani7928 How do you mean?

[@1godonlyone119]

The notion of God condoning murder is also irrational, so that IS the answer to the question that she asked. Again: If you turned into a golden monkey in the next five minutes, would you then eat a golden banana? The rational answer to that question is that you won't turn into a golden monkey in the next five minutes. The rational answer to her question is that God doesn't change.

[@jackpamm2457]

there is no objective right and wrong, however, there is an objectively idiotic turek

[@jermeseff]

Is that objectively true?

[@waldoman7]

for the sake of argument, I will say yes.

[@jermeseff]

waldoman7 In that case, your position undermines itself. If you propose that there is no objective right or wrong, then there *is no* "sake of argument" for which to postulate a position. Why would you propose _any_ statement "for the sake of argument" if there was no objective state of "good" or "correctness" for which we could even argue? Any "argument" would be futile, because we'd be trying to attain an objective conclusion between the two of us which would not exist, according to your thesis. The very fact that you even responded to my question suggests that you *do indeed affirm the objectivity of good.* Otherwise, any difference of opinion we might have wouldn't matter at all. We would merely have different subjective viewpoints which would both be equally valid. So, there would be no argument to have.

[@waldoman7]

'''JeR*Me*SeFF!!''' I do not say that there is no state of correctness. I say there is no universal moral good. Good is the idea that something SHOULD be a certain way, not that it is. That is correctness. They are separate. Chickens lay eggs, that is correct. But it is not good, or at least not objectively good. You and I may subjectively deem it good because it is beneficial to us or more efficient for the chicken to lay eggs, but the worm would very much prefer that the chicken reproduce as inefficiently as possible.

[@jermeseff]

waldoman7 They are not separate. True and false, positive and negative, right and wrong - these dichotomies are distinct, but that doesn't mean they aren't connected. I'll illustrate the point with another question: _Assuming that everything you just said is true_, would it be good for me to agree with it? Or, to use your terminology, SHOULD I value correctness?

[@solanceDarkMOW]

The "god is the standard" response is virtually indistinguishable to me from the "good because god says do" answer. From a linguistic perspective they're basically synonymous. The more consise way to say it would be to say that god has no direct input on his nature, he just is, that way goodness comes from god directly without being arbitrary. Unfortunately, that then leaves it open to interpretation if what is said is actually in align with god's goodness or not, leaving us back where we started basically

[@solanceDarkMOW]

@Mickey Barnyard i do concur. God's moral standards are fundamentally arbitrary, whether they're consciously or unconsciously such is besides the point. The answer they give here is basically "but your hypothetical is impossible", it doesn't address the issue.

[@okfanriffic3632]

Isaiah 45:7 says the god in the bible creates evil (Hebrew "ra" meaning moral evil). But Turek says at 3 15 that god doesn't create bad, he is goodness. This is my problem with christianity, No matter what we talk about, capital punishment, abortion, foreign wars, gay marriage, democracy, freedom of speech etc etc you will find christians arguing for and against it and backing it up with bible verses. The slave owners and the abolitionists traded scripture back and forward in their arguments? What good is the bible if it fails to give clear instructions?

[@headmaster2983]

9 “Therefore I will take away my grain when it ripens, and my new wine when it is ready. I will take back my wool and my linen, intended to cover her naked body. 10 So now I will expose her lewdness before the eyes of her lovers; no one will take her out of my hands. 11 I will stop all her celebrations: her yearly festivals, her New Moons, her Sabbath days-all her appointed festivals. 12 I will ruin her vines and her fig trees, which she said were her pay from her lovers; I will make them a thicket, and wild animals will devour them. 13 I will punish her for the days she burned incense to the Baals; she decked herself with rings and jewelry, and went after her lovers, but me she forgot,” declares the Lord. So here the LORD is basically talking to Israel in Hosea. In both of those quotes "Isaiah 45:7" and Hosea 2:9-13 he is saying that if Israel does not repent, God will pursue them with all he is because Israel is his, he loves Israel and nothing they do can change his love for them. I was saved and felt the true presence of God one time, but then I left God for sex, drugs, drinking, temporary things that gave me pleasure. But things started going wrong in my life because I had established a matrimony with God prior to my life of sin, it goes the same in the story between God and Israel. We serve a jealous God, he will not yield his love to the things of this world, once you're his he will pursue you with all that he is.

[@hewhositsuponfroggychair5722]

That's called a "lie" the word does not mean "moral evil" it means destruction, calamity or ruin. None of those are necessarily evil.

[@heavymeddle28]

But God has already shown that murder and mayham is OK. The devil has to work hard to be as evil as God. Just do the math

[@briancooley8777]

He never once says it’s ok. Infact He expresses anger and deep sadness for what He MUST do. God is simply reacting justly to evilness ALREADY PRESENT in our world.... we cause the evil of our own free will and thus we deserve judgement. God takes no pleasure in punishing us for our wickedness but He must punish wickedness BECAUSE THATS THE GOOD THING TO DO.

[@briancooley8777]

If you showed your work on your math maybe you could see how you are mistaken...

[@heavymeddle28]

@@briancooley8777 here we go again... Genocide, murder, taking virgins as war trophies, lying and cheating but I guess it's always easy to find excuses when it's a bunch of make belief. Nonsense

[@heavymeddle28]

@@briancooley8777 just because it's fun... God's kill count is 2,476,633 ppl. Excl the flood, plagues and natural disasters. Lucifer /devil/satan or whatever you think his name is.. 10. I never said that I would do the math in the first place. I told you to do it but you didn't. So I did. If you want me to go through all the information, I'm not doing that. I'm not religious but I could navigate through the bs and count. If you're religious?.. Then it should be even more easy for you. I know theists always make up loopholes and apologies because it's just a made up story that's not real in the first place so of cause you'll have a lot of excuses for his actions. And rape, marrying the victims... Maybe he was sad about it but I think he needs medication for bipolar disorder then. The kinda leader that says "do as i say. Don't do what I do." So much for a loving god. Have a good day and take care

[@lobintool]

How does that make sense? If it's binary where does the C bit enter the equation?

[@lobintool]

I dunno, what's the C bit? Was it summat I entered into the equation if it was I'm not aware of the "C" bit being any part of my arguement. I could be wrong but could you clarfiy?

[@FiverBeyond]

2:20 - "Since he's the creator, if he wants to take our lives, he can. It's not murder to take our lives." This is the kind of abhorrent moralist view that REALLY scares me about religion. Yes, EVEN IF YOU CREATED SOMEONE, you are not 'allowed' to take their life. If I give birth to someone, I don't have the right to kill them. Even if I built someone atom by atom, and magically spoke all their matter into existence (like Yahweh supposedly did), this still wouldn't give me the right to kill them.

[@FiverBeyond]

Not if that thing was a living person, with thoughts, wants, and the ability to suffer. It doesn't matter what they're made of: if they're a person, you shouldn't kill them.

[@waldoman7]

you could but it's CLAY. The very nature of the soul screams out its INHERENT rights. And to think that the same god bible which proclaims we are like clay pottery also says that god sees us as his children! What father sees his children as pottery?

[@yeshuaisking1247]

god doesnt kill anyone ... people kill themselves ... people disobay and people use their freedom for evil ... if you are removed from earth its not him who killed you ... not to mention the fact THAT HE HAS "KILLED" WAY MORE OF HIS OWN PEOPLE THAT OF THE HEATHEN ATHEISTS .... lol ... this question is closed and answered your point was not valid

[@FiverBeyond]

"god doesnt kill anyone ... people kill themselves ..." In the Old Testament, Yahweh opens up the earth and swallows over ten thousand of the children of Israel when they fall into idolatry. Did these people kill themselves? Did Yahweh kill them?

[@GSpotter63]

WittyNotes if you build a car in your garage would you not have the right to disassemble it anytime you want? furthermore, if you instructed me to take your car apart is that wrong? does that make me evil? No. if I choose to exercise my free will and take your car apart against your wishes is that wrong for me? you betcha because it's not my car, it is yours. does it make you bad if I take your car apart against your will? No. the entire universe including all the living organisms in it belong to God. Like it or not. if he chooses to disassemble parts of it that is his prerogative. if God instruct one part of his creation to disassemble another part of his creation. what business is that of yours? he can do what he wants with his own creation. don't like it too bad.

[@rtanidean4931]

Are you suggesting that without a notion or even manifestation of “God” there would be no moral compass and conformity to the human being? That is a preposterous and limiting notion. Does a child say 18 mos old not console one who is weary? I do get the “duality” concepts of for instance; how can one experience light without knowledge of darkness and vise versa, but you are giving “HUMAN Qualities” to an Omnipotent Construct of the mind, is; “GOD!” Whether that be through: Scripture, Emotion or a human construct or through a need of adding meaning to a supposed meaningless life. There is double talk and ambiguity in your statements. Respectfully, Dean

[@rtanidean4931]

The Wanderer Great. Way to go to expound on your point. Lmao. Care to opine a bit more oh wise one?

[@rtanidean4931]

The Wanderer No worries. I appreciate any input you have. Enjoy your day. D

[@koshizmusic]

What makes this question so difficult to frame (and therefore answer properly) is that if we say "if God says murder is good". Even from the very beginning if God said "it is permissible (and therefore not evil) to murder", then the opposite (to not murder) is evil. Without any Christian context of right and wrong, this might be all well and good. It doesnt transfer the power to render judgement from God to man, since even when God says "murder is evil" God still holds the power and judgement to declare that. What shes trying to ask is "is murder INHERENTLY good?" In the Qu'ran, if Allah says that murder is at times justified then murder must be SUBJECTIVELY good and not evil. Even as a Christian, I am still not convinced by the Dr.'s answer. I need to wrestle with this some more.

[@170221dn]

God DOES condone murder. Well in the bible he does. Just one example I believe it says "thou shall not suffer a witch to live"

[@tubehab]

God condones punishment. If we punish a serial killer with capital punishment, is it murder?

[@FiverBeyond]

If we killed a witch, it would sure be murder.

[@tubehab]

According to whose laws? Ours?

[@FiverBeyond]

tubehab Yes, according to our laws. But in addition to this, I would also consider it morally to be 'murder'. Wouldn't you agree?

[@tubehab]

In today's society, yes, and no, that would not change for me according to the society we're based in as we are not a nation to be ruled. However, in some current societies it is permissible, though I personally would not condone that. I leave their judgement to God.

[@Legorreta.M.D]

If god cannot change his own standard then he is not omnipotent. How simple

[@Piotr-uk6cb]

You're saying something that is inherently incorrect and thus you fail to prove anything.

[@Legorreta.M.D]

Piotr Prozorowski and you failing to state reasons makes you fail even further

[@Legorreta.M.D]

***** When talking of a perfect being, opinion changes mean the previous opinion was imperfect. In any other case, why change it?

[@jermeseff]

+Andrés Legorreta The definition of omnipotence does not require the ability to do self-contradictory logical absurdities. God is omnipotent, yes, but He is also omnibenevolent. This means that His very nature is the standard of an absolute good. So, if He were to change His nature, it would be corrupted, which is an inherent violation of His nature. If it were corrupt, it wouldn't be omnibenevolent, but if it's omnibenevolent, it can't be corrupt. It 's logically impossible for it to change. It would be like me asking "What number comes at the end of infinity?" The answer, of course, being "There _is no_ number at the end of infinity." Then I'd respond, "Well, I guess it's not truly infinite then. Otherwise, it would be able to reach that number at the end." No no no, it's *because of the nature* of infinity that you could never reach an ending number. If you were to reach a final number in infinity, it wouldn't be infinite any more. The same is true of God. For a perfectly good God to change His standard, He'd have to not be perfectly good.

[@Legorreta.M.D]

'''JeR*Me*SeFF!!''' If he did not require to change his standard, a new testament would be innecessary. It wasn't. You would imagine a perfect being to get it right the first time. Well, pitty. It did not happen. Besides, there are many types of infinity, one of them being counteable infinity. And after all, we can count past infinity. The number that follows infinity is Aleph-naught, then comes ω+1, ω+2, so on and so on. All you need to count past infinities is a new ordinal number describing a cardinal set. Even bigger than Aleph-naught is P(Aleph-naught). You may think yourself smart for using infinity as a reference, but mathematical axioms alone allow us to to way beyond this.

[@christianabhishek647]

What a brilliant answer, sir!

[@ltlsWhatltIs]

If....if.....if....if...... Her question was answered so many times I lost count.

[@sids5002]

So god is the standard, so would never say murder is good? but he can do anything. He decides, not humans. How to sidestep a question, Frank! The questioner knows it as well. How can Frank possibly know that unless he himself is god? What Frank is saying, is that god wouldn't do that as it's wrong. Which means that we decide what god would and wouldn't do, as we already know what's right and wrong.....then we apply that to a god. What clearer indication does anyone need to see that god is man-made?!!!

[@drewm.2790]

sids500 exactly, how did he know that god wouldn't change his mind??

[@ratmgant]

God can't do everything. He can't create something that He can't destroy, because He's omnipotent. He can't make good into evil.

[@chrisgagnon5768]

Andrew Maliberan Because the word of God tells us so...

[@heliod4459]

“Every good thing given and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shifting shadow.” James 1:17

[@Frejborg]

Beautiful!

[@dougster701]

Although I am not atheist (and believe that anyone who says they are 100% atheist is ignorant) I would say I'm 99% towards atheism. Even if there is a god , what makes us think it is the Judeo Christian , theistic God? its truly ridiculous to rely upon texts and messages which were written two thousand years ago and for Christians to cherry pick and adapt each part to suit their argument. The bible is outdated and the God of the Old Testament is a monster

[@youngnixx88788]

You can't attack the Christian God when you don't even believe that there is God in the first place. In order to objectively address the issue you must first decide whether God exists or not. If yes, Then you can move on the which God is the true and living God. Your stance can't be "God's a monster to me, therefore I don't believe that God exists". That's childish.

[@dougster701]

+youngnixx88788 So I can't criticise something because I don't believe in it ..? You're saying because I don't believe in God means I can't look at a specific religion ? You're talking shit mate

[@dougster701]

+youngnixx88788 And that stance, even though I don't hold it , would not be childish at all to hold.

[@dougster701]

+youngnixx88788 I'm sorry I'm still trying to take in what you just said , I can't attack the Christian God if I don't believe God exists ? That's a truly ridiculous thing to say. Of course I can

[@youngnixx88788]

Dougie Haggerty​​​​​ No. You can't attack God due to the hypocritical/ self-defeating position your atheistic religion puts you in. If your atheistic religion is true, objective morality doesn't exist! There is no such thing as 'good' or 'evil' if your worldview were true, only subjective preferences. So you "attacking God" based on the foundation of morality self-destructs the theory of Atheism.

[@linusabrahamsson4279]

He did not answer the question at all

[@brennengrimes]

Linus Abrahamsson he did, you just refuse to accept the answer.

[@oscarandresblancousuga8475]

don't you hate when you ask a what if question and the other respond you that ain't gonna happend so why bother asking it that is waht he did and could you remember me just for curiosity what i have to do if someone was gay it has to do with stones and you know that biblicaly if someone is a flase prophet he has to be kill(commanded by god) BY HIS PARENTS

[@theskull1030]

So, instead of answering the question, he evaded it by saying "Nah that could never happen". Worst of all, he claims that God doesn't make arbitrary rules, yet he defends that God says being homosexual is bad. Also, yes, there would be objective morality, God or not. For example, nothing that hurts no one is bad. Or stealing is bad because the other person worked for that. There doesn't need to be any god for that. This tells me that he only judges what is good or bad depending of what the Bible says without question, instead of analysing the consequences of the actions. For example, he doesn't believe stealing is bad because you're taking away from some else, he believes it's bad because God says so and that's it.

[@mr2atara]

Her mistake was thinking she might actually get a straight answer from a christian apologist...

[@williamruiz1919]

Your mistake is thinking any answer on Earth is one concluded. How about this tell me one concept in atheism that only has one straight answer??? Wow, guess an atheist should not have been challenged to give a straight answer either.

[@Tatorhead1234]

Seemed pretty simple to me. God is the definition of good. If murder was "good" we would not see it as evil. He cannot support that because he would no longer be the rock of good. He no longer would be god....in a way. We look at good to much in a human way. Think outside of the box.

[@tgsquier]

Hunter Cinnamons So if he told you to murder your mother because it's good, you would do it and consider that a perfectly good and morally just act. Right? First, you need to prove god, but then how do you know god is soooo good. We know good and bad, right and wrong, so logically god would also be of both qualities.

[@Tatorhead1234]

tgsquier no...what is not Godly would would be the opposite of good. The absence of good is evil. Assume God is the definition of good. God would do no such thing because he is good. In other words if he were to order evil, he couldn't possibly be God. He is of good. It's almost like a paradox. Very hard to explain.

[@tgsquier]

Hunter Cinnamons a few points, starting with the opposites. The opposite of good is not good, or if you like, bad. Now, as for the claim that god is pure goodliness, that doesn't quite add up when you look around at his ant farm here. I mean, even the bible describes him as a jealous god. That's not a virtue. I don't think we really consider the opposite of evil as jealous. But there's just no way you can make that sort of claim for thinking you know how god will behave or how he feels or what his take on this shit is. It's disgustingly arrogant to think you can tell someone else what god thinks or if he considers himself the beacon of all pure goodness. You really can't say that accurately about another person even, and we know that people exist!

[@dogmalogy3666]

God is the standard of good? he will not approve or allow murder or rape?!! The bible begs to differ. rape is allowed in the bible. Is Slavery Moral? because god does not just allow it, he regulates it!!

[@headmaster2983]

Give me the verse you're drawing this information from honestly. Where does GOD SPECIFICALLY SAY "I love rape. This is good", such an ignorant statement.

[@chrismackness]

These answers are so good😄

[@radnotion8297]

This girl destroyed Turek's argument. It's funny that theists have a whole career, track record of "false dichotomies" yet now they want to include a third option. If God is the standard of good and His actions show that he kills people (eg. Noah's Ark Flood), then according to God, killing is a "good". "Thou shalt not kill" is a Holy Law that a so-called perfect God has created to be "good" and holy yet God contradicts his own rules in which he arbitrates. Therefore it is not an objective morality but rather a relative or subjective morality.

[@dukelmg1]

I was kinda thinking that as well. If God is the standard of good and can do no wrong, then by default everything he does will be justified as good. So it gets us nowhere and all of this is pointless.

[@radnotion8297]

Ace Ventura Sorry I disagree. The fact that you arbitrarily imposed an exception to the rule of "Thou shalt not kill" such as the examples you've provided, that Commandment is no longer an objective moral standard and is now subjective.

[@radnotion8297]

***** Wasn't the commandment "thou shalt not kill" written on stone tablets that was brought down by Moses? Where is the fine print written on those tablets stating, " The commandment actually refers to premeditated, unjustified killing - murder." ? Here's a better question where are the original stone 10 commandments? The fact that King James Bible imposes an interpretation of an abitrary rule of exception to the commandment written in stone is evidence of a subjective morality.

[@radnotion8297]

***** I'm not sure if I understand your first sentence. Are you suggesting that killing is ok as long as it's not premeditated murder? Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't Cain and Abel predate the creation of the 10 Commandments? If so, then Cain had not broken any established law by God.

[@zoomkaboom1]

+Kris L I think after the KJV came out, other manuscripts have been discovered more recent, and from mostly those, the new translations have come out. So thats why in the new versions it says "thou shall not murder" instead of kill. OR maybe we just interpret the word "Kill" differently than the KJV era, so thats why the newer versions changed it to "murder". I guess that sounds more reasonable lol

[@steggyweggy]

How do you know god is good? The Bible says so. How do you know the Bible is true? Because god said so. Gotta love circular logic

[@Software.Engineer]

your second question's answer is wrong. We know the bible is true from a historical standpoint. And since it is believed that Jesus died and was resurrected, Jesus' words hold weight and truth about the one that resurrected him, it is from that we can know that the father is good. It is by example and what has been shown to us, that we know God is good, it is not a guess, it is from historical evidence of the things Jesus did combined with the evidence that Jesus was resurrected.

[@Software.Engineer]

The answer to first question should be "Because Jesus did so"

[@steggyweggy]

Lukey what evidence of Jesus being resurrected? Even if true how does this prove god is good? Why does this “sacrifice” prove that he is good? Also I’m certain that evidence is against the Bible being historically accurate. Considering evolution, Big Bang, Biblical contradictions, Noah’s impossible ark and flood etc. these all point to the fact that it isn’t a historically accurate book.

[@monica622]

@@steggyweggy Jesus died. And at that time its historically verified that the earth was darkened for long period of time. Which cannot be considered as an eclipse because it was a passover time. After jesus was burried, His disciples were extremely scared and hid themselves together because Jesus had died and they had lost hope in salvation. Then Jeses' body disappeared on the third day while the roman guards were guarding the entrance. No theories about the disappearance of His body is logical. And then people started claiming that they had seen the Risen Christ. And they were filled with hope and courage to go and preach fearlessly and die in Gods name. Even Jesus brother James believed in Him after this. He appeared to multitudes together which renders the theory of hallucinations null. The point is, His death and Rising from death has so many proof. Bible is not just a spiritual book. Its a historical document as well. And someday we will all know the truth. Only it will be bad for some and good for some. And about the evolution theory, carbon dating is not reliable after a certain time. The theory of evolution has so many loopholes to stand even close to firm. Many theories have been proven wrong now which supports evolution. Diamonds, gold, precious stones etc. taking million years to form have already been proven wrong. You can research it. Even soft tissues of dinosaurs have been found. But as usual,people are ever so ready to disagree to anything that considers God in the paradigm. We are scared to be morally grounded to Gods law. And so we try so hard to convince ourselves with all sorts of logic to disprove God. But one day Gods mystery will be completed. 😊

[@steggyweggy]

Cicili Kuran Idk about that darkened time thing after Jesus’s passing. (Source please?) I also think it is logical that followers or disciples could have taken away Jesus’s body from the tomb. As far as disproving evolution, I’ll pass on that. I haven’t read up enough on it and like you most likely, don’t have a degree in biology. So I will stick with what the vast majority of experts agree on, that being evolution. Even if all my beliefs are wrong, it still doesn’t prove yours. Your the one making the claim of god, prove it. The Bible can be used to prove but only when it’s in accordance with objective beliefs, facts, logic, or to help make a ethical point. You also shouldn’t use logical fallacies, the god of the gaps argument, and other many times debunked theist arguments for god. I think the biggest issue for you will be proving that your god specifically, Yahweh, exists. You have to prove he exists not any other god. As I said, you have the burden of prove for making the claim I am but a skeptic of the claim. A claim without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

[@chrisfisher5960]

This is good stuff! Really enjoying the in depth teaching on interesting subjects..

[@ion063]

For me he didnt really answer the question. Lets look at other religions, because when talking about their own people get deffensive and make a lot of fallacies: What if thier God said that it a sin to dance or it was ok to steal from others if you had less than them?

[@marcellofunhouse1234]

@@ion063 their gods are fake and man made doesn;t count their likely demons

[@troyromine9583]

Love your content, please upload to other platforms so we can see it elsewhere.