This Dude's Crazy Journey from Atheism to Catholicism While Working at the NBA
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ก.ค. 2022
- In this interview, I sit down with Marc Lozano to discuss his crazy journey to Catholicism from atheism while working at the NBA.
Christ Centered Capital: christcenteredcapital.com/
--------------------------- FREE STUFF ---------------------------
"The Rationality of Christian Theism" & "The Ultimate List of Apologetics Terms for Beginners" E-Books (completely free): tinyurl.com/CCFREESTUFF
------------------------------- GIVING -------------------------------
Patreon (monthly giving): / capturingchristianity
Become a CC Member on TH-cam: / @capturingchristianity
One-time Donations: donorbox.org/capturing-christ...
Special thanks to all our supporters for your continued support! You don't have to give anything, yet you do. THANK YOU!
--------------------------------- SOCIAL ---------------------------------
Facebook: / capturingchristianity
Twitter: / capturingchrist
Instagram: / capturingchristianity
SoundCloud: / capturingchristianity
Website: capturingchristianity.com
-------------------------------- MY GEAR ---------------------------------
I get a lot of questions about what gear I use, so here's a list of everything I have for streaming and recording. The links below are affiliate (thank you for clicking on them!).
Camera (Nikon Z6): amzn.to/364M1QE
Lens (Nikon 35mm f/1.4G): amzn.to/35WdyDQ
HDMI Adapter (Cam Link 4K): amzn.to/340mUwu
Microphone (Shure SM7B): amzn.to/2VC4rpg
Audio Interface (midiplus Studio 2): amzn.to/33U5u4G
Lights (Neewer 660's with softboxes): amzn.to/2W87tjk
Color Back Lighting (Hue Smart Lights): amzn.to/2MH2L8W
Recording/Interview Software: bit.ly/3E3CGsI
-------------------------------- CONTACT --------------------------------
Email: capturingchristianity.com/cont...
#Apologetics #CapturingChristianity #Catholicism
I was raised Catholic, even was an altar boy. I became an atheist in my early 20’s, for the next 25-26 years I was a militant atheist. Hitchens, Dawkins, sucked me in even further. Once I started researching the truth of Christianity, after 5-6 years, I came back. Long process.
Praise the Lord‼️
Welcome (back!) HOME!!!
@@tony1685 😑 so there were no Christians from the time of Christ until the Reformation? That what we’re going with?
@@GratiaPrima_ No christianity existed way before ,it's just that we humans have ways of deviating some how from the original belief due to many circumstances.
@@tony1685 you would have a point of Catholicism was pagan. But that’s propaganda. The Catholic (universal) Church believed the same things I do now as a Baptist to Catholic convert. And fought heresies such as Gnosticism, etc. The Christians fed to the lions in pre Christian Rome believed in the Eucharist and other Catholic things. So.
Excellent interview! Signed up immediately for the newsletter to help support his work and witness. Thanks Cameron.
Any conversion story is simply the best because the whole heaven rejoiced when it happened 😊
Not in this case .
@@tony1685 Yep , out of the frying pan straight in to the fire .
In this case , he is very much on point
@@patprr1756very much in this case
@@patrickkparrker413from the frying pan straight to God’s lap
This interview captivated me. I love to see how God can stir the hearts of his people to be more like Christ in a loving but decisive way. This young man is such an example of this. Now I have to go subscribe to his newsletter and take a hard look at my 401k
Lovely story! May God bless him and his family. Watching from Kenya and I hope his app is going to be available here one day too!
Ha nice I thought your comment was mine because I have a similar profile pic, did you take that picture yourself?
This was so inspiring! Subscribed to newsletter and monthly donations set up. This is such important work!
I read Marc’s story in the coming home network and they linked to this interview. I’m so glad I watched. I’m signed up for the newsletter! So courageous in living out his faith practically!!
i signed up to the newsletter, I have been divesting myself from some questionable stocks but was not confident into where I was putting it. I also know several other people who are questioning where their money is going. I definitely will share this info. Thanks so much!
👋Looking forward to this conversation!
Great video man
Mark has heroic faith. I have so much respect for him. Divesting and quitting a very lucrative job in order to obey Christ's commandments is truly dying to self that others may live.
"He who will save his life will lose it. He who will lose his life for the sake of the Son of Man will find it."
Thank you for showing people how to be Catholic where it really counts, Mark.
@@tony1685 seventh day Adventist s are so cringe
Freedom from religion is a wonderful gift.
@@JamesRichardWiley you just reinforced that the reformation was just the seeds of atheism.
@@JamesRichardWiley Of course. It means you don't have moral obligation to do anything God says.
Welcome home brother God bless you.
18:45 so have I, and I admire your honesty about it.
Great interview. As someone who spent a decade in finance, I appreciated the surprise turn into discussion of ethical investing.
I can also attest that my own faith was never stronger than when I scraped to survive working two jobs.
I dont know why I'm crying while watching this video.
Marc is a good man!
Hey Cam! What is a good beginner book that you’d recommend on the Contingency argument?
Josh Rasmussen
you did perfect !🥸
Thanks!
Thank YOU!
Wow! Great interview!
Te envío un fuerte abrazo Cam, desde Argentina. Dios te bendiga
This is amazing. Thanks be to God for His greatness, and may our Lord bless you both, Cam and Marc.
Big fan of C3
Interesting philosophical conversion
Amen
This is the first atheist turned Christian Iv seen that actually looked into everything intellectually to an actually deep degree before becoming a Christian. Even if his choice did ultimately fallow his feelings, he is a rare bird. And I enjoyed hearing his story.
so athiests who turn into Christians don't think intellectually
christianity is not just facts or just feelings it's evidence+ experience
Another who did this via philosophy is a guy named Patt Flynn who runs a great channel called Philosophy for the People.
@@sigmanocopyrightmusic8737 no he clearly was using reason for almost all of his perspective only his ultimate reason for accepting Christianity was how he felt.
@@RangerRyke so ultimately, it wasn’t facts at all, it was feelings.
This is a great husband since he doesn't know his wife's weight! 40:54
Can you ask Mike Winger why he misrepresents Catholicism then refuses to debate?
@YAJUN YUAN your videos are the worse edited out of context videos I have seen on TH-cam till date
@YAJUN YUAN Sure.. you will include Mike Winger's full answer... But clip Catholics out of context
Catholicism is not biblical, hence why Mike Winger contests it. But this doesn’t mean there aren’t good faithful Christ followers in the catholic church. There are many, thank God. 🙏🏻
@@loveemotion4080 That's just not true lmfao. Do your research on history.
@@jacobw5460 I did my reserach on history... lol. And I read the Bible too.
Or do you mean that there are not good Christ followers in the catholic church? To say there is not means to close my eyes to what I observe. How can you say this catholic guy is not a Christ follower, for example? Didn't you hear his testimony? I heard the Holy Spirit at work in him.
What are his thoughts on George Pell
"What God cares more for his creation than sending his son to die." This is the essence of the phrase "The heart has answers of which the mind knows not." That is to say, despite whatever harm individual Christians might have done or are doing, the truth of the God who died for his creation and resurrected to save it is too beautiful not to believe.
Wow, never realized what was really going on in the investment world or the how the NBA makes their money through their investments. Definitely signed up for the newsletter so I can make wiser decisions. Thank you for sharing his story
50:41 marc barnes???
Join in the joy ride
How is something that’s all actualization all knowing?
Reminds me of Jacob wrestling the angel. At the other end, we are a new person.
Future Saint of Investing in the making! Love it!
Wait, THIS is the Christ Center Capital guy!? Yooo that's awesome.
❤❤❤
Hey guys I'm not a catholic I just wanted to ask you guys a couple of questions, I was hoping any of you could answer them.
1) I'm aware the bodily assumption of Mary is a dogma, but is her queenship (the belief that she is the Queen of Heaven) a dogma too? Since catholics have to believe in all the dogmas to be considered catholic, can a person not believing in the queenship of Mary still be a catholic? Or what about the other way round, what if a catholic believes in the queenship of Mary but denies that she was bodily assumed into heaven, that is, she was coronated as queen but still its her soul/spirit as queen of heaven, can such a person be considered a catholic? Is the queenship tied to the assumption which would make it (queenship) a dogma as well, or are they distinct?
2) Do priests unlike the laity need to mandatorily believe in all the doctrines along with the dogmas to be allowed to be priests?
3) Is the Immaculate heart of Mary a doctrine or just a feast?
Thanks in advance!
1) Obviously you should believe, however many Catholics may disagree with a church teaching somewhere, that’s where Christian formation and catechism comes into place. Someone’s conversion doesn’t happen at once, but over time and every day someone should call themselves into deeper conversion.
2) A catholic priest can be a Pharisee and become a false teacher. Heretics have been ok the church through history. However this doesn’t take away their faculty as a priest, because it’s the Church that makes them a priest, not their opinions.
3) Yes, Mary never put her will before Gods, and did everything of his will before her own. Which is what we should all do.
1. Mary's "queenship" is not a dogma. It's more of a devotional nickname, based on the "woman clothed with the sun" from Revelation 12. As far as the necessity of believing in every dogma or doctrine, the only thing you must believe is contained in the Nicene Creed. Other doctrines, such as the Assumption of Mary, does not affect our salvation whether we believe it or not. The Church just asks us to have an open mind, and pray for enlightenment if we do not understand or agree with any doctrine. Jesuit assassins won't come knocking on your door in the middle of the night if you don't believe in every teaching.
2. Priests should believe in all the doctrines and dogmas. If they disagree with a doctrine, they should keep it to themselves. Being human, they may question things sometimes, like we all do. All they (and we) can do is pray for understanding with difficult topics.
3. The Immaculate Heart is a devotion, a doctrine and a feast. It is based on her Immaculate Conception. I hope this helps.
@@aeanderson8491 Ok this was helpful. So the assumption and queenship don't got together right? I thought Mary being the queen of heaven is a dogma as well because of its connection with the assumption. That ain't true right?
@@jonahsanctus9839 As far as I know, her Assumption and queenship is not directly related. As I said earlier, her Assumption is a dogma, her queenship is more of a devotional title based on the woman clothed with the sun, and with a crown of twelve stars. We assume this women (Rev. 12) is Mary, shown with a crown in heaven. There is no direct connection with this depiction of Mary and her Assumption that I know of. I'm not a theologian, though. Are you having difficulty with the concept of her queenship?
@@aeanderson8491 I just wanted to know what exactly catholics believe. I asked that question because since the queenship is in some way connected to the assumption (since feast of her being the queen of heaven is celebrated right after the assumption) I thought the assumption was all about crowning and exalting Mary as queen.
There were two men with different faith journeys on this channel (one atheist and one believer)...both influenced deeply by their wives'/partners' faith and lack of faith. Could it be that men try to please their wives/partners, even in ideology? Sometimes I wonder how genuine this all is and how much is simply because men are pliable and easily influenced by the person they're having sex with. I'd like to think differently but am struggling with how realistic faith is.
Yes it could be (that men are trying to please their partners)
But does the delivery of a message automatically mean the message is false?
@@donaldkeith139 Not at all. Truth is truth no matter what lead someone to it. With that being said, many people seem to chase "the truth," not for being truth but because it gives them comfort. I rarely see someone emotionally adjusted who comes to Christianity because it made sense and sounded like the truth. It is almost always a coping mechanism for a crippling fear of death, physical disability, mental problem, or financial woes that drives people to the idea of a higher power. It makes sense because Christians seem interested in catering to the broken, not those who are already living comfortable. But still...makes you wonder how closely tied it is to a human being's innate psychological desire for stability and comfort.
Brother, you went from receiving the mark of the beast in your hand to receiving it in your forehead! Please be open-minded as you grow in Christ!
GOD BLESS HIS ONE AND ONLY CATHOLIC CHURCH
Amen.
“The Lord says to Peter: ‘I say to you,’ he says, ‘that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church.’ . . . On him [Peter] he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep [John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was [i.e., apostles], but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. So too, all [the apostles] are shepherds, and the flock is shown to be one, fed by all the apostles in single-minded accord. If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?”- St. Cyprian of Carthage (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; 1st edition [A.D. 251]).
It seems whenever I ask someone to help me understand what brought them to religion they tell me - *Go research this yourself.*
Can anyone actually give me a good reason?
Why don’t you go an research yourself? There are plenty of resources out there.
@@sneakysnake2330 Hahahaha.... if this is sarcasm... it's perfect....
If this wasn't sarcasm... I weep for humanity.
@@malirk No seriously, why not do your own research and read the arguments and see what philosophers have to say on the subject. It’s a genuine question.
@@sneakysnake2330 Because he more than likely already has.
@@jacoblee5796 so why does he expect to find better answers in a TH-cam comment section as opposed to actual philosophers
This is Capturing Catholicism nowadays, but could always appreciate a good testimony. 😌👌🏾* watch later *
I am not convinced in the existence of any god for I have never encountered _any_ credible evidence, including _any_ sound argument, that suggests such an existence. Therefore, I will suspend any acknowledgement as to the existence of a god _until_ such evidence or argument is introduced.
Am I not rationally justified in my position?
Yes. I take a similar position
@@littleredpony6868 Thanks for responding. Peace.
Wow. No sound argument that even "suggests" the existence of God? I think you are overstating your case.
From my perspective it seems quite the opposite. While there are several good arguments for God (especially some of the cosmological ones), there obstinately remain some arguments that make belief in God difficult (problem of evil, divine hiddeness, etc.). Ultimately, I believe these objection arguments lack the same level of compelling appeal that the arguments in favor of God's existence have, so I am left with theism. Additionally, theism carries with it an incredible weight of explanatory power that atheism/agnosticism will simply never have. It can at least acknowledge and provide a legitimate reason for things like personal experiences of a supernatural quality, credible miracle claims, and the teleological grandeur of everything we observe in the world.
@@AndrewofVirginia What would be an example of a "good argument for God"? Please present it for I am interested.
Your rationality is getting in the way, in the first place... lol. But, nevertheless, there is not a single good argument for the existence of God. Because there is evidence everywhere for God, but each person, if ever convinced, will get there in their own way. I came to God with a totally different way than this guy in the video. Same with many other testimonies I heard. Each of them is different and incredibly personal. The trick is: if you are wondering about God being real or not, keep seeking and humble yourself, like this guy did at some point. What do you have to loose? If you are arrogant in your intellect, thinking that rejecting the possibility of God altogether is an act of sound rationality, then Gid will leave you at that. Its your choice. But if you humble yourself for a moment to reach Him and say “hey God, if you are really there and I was wrong, please make yourself known to me. I want to know You”. This must be sincere, not arrogant. Then go about your life and see where it takes you. God has a way of answering and rarely its like we think it will be.
Actually there are 14.8 million Jewish people worldwide, but that is still a very, very small population.
From rational and reasonable to Christianity
From the frying pan straight into the fire .
'The argument from extreme skepticism' is some of the strangest, most convoluted lines of reasoning I've ever heard.
Where do you think the line between skepticism and “extreme skepticism” lies? What is your definition for each?
@@truthseeker7867 I don't necessarily have one for either, and if I did it would be purely subjective. But the definition of 'extreme' in 'extreme skepticism' isn't what makes his line of reasoning convoluted.
@@Apanblod yes, I think his lack of skepticism is the problem. That “argument from extreme skepticism” was just stating the problem of hard solipsism with a bunch of claims thrown in. I also find it very strange and convoluted.
This guy didnt research argument against not actualized actualizer?
PINECREEK THEOREM 4:36 - "I met my soon-to-be wife or my future wife and she was a cradle *catholic* and she had a very innocent faith but she was *very devout* "
Right! I made a similar comment, this is cookie cutter stuff. 1000% predictable!
Birkenstocks should be outlawed. Capital punishment.
"And let us not grow weary of doing good for in due season we will reap if we do not give up." Galatians 6:9
Keep following Christ in every way and don't give up. Don't let the temporary temptations distract you from the eternal treasures in heaven. Be encouraged knowing that God is with you and that He will never leave you nor forsake you. And if God is for us then who could ever be against us. Hopefully this helped you today. God bless you.
Bros... your criticism of Islam being just in the Middle East or whatever point that was.... is really bad. Its an extremely universalistic religion yes the hajj is in saudi and arabic is important but its open to all cmon
Seek Jesus Christ first and He will give you peace 🙏.
:(
If God ain't real then real isn't.
I claim this video in the name of Mars! Earth, isn't that special?
Why? Interstellar colonialism isn’t in the bible. J/k
*Jesus falsely prophesied his return in the 1st century*
Truly I tell you, ***some who are standing here will not taste death*** before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom Matthew 16:28
Truly I tell you, ***some who are standing here*** will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God Luke 9:27
Truly I tell you, ***this generation will certainly not pass away*** until all these things have happened Mark 13:30
The sun will be darkened,
and the moon will not give its light;
the stars will fall from the sky,
and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.
Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.
Truly I tell you, ***this generation will certainly not pass away*** until all these things have happened Matthew 24:29-34
There will be signs in the sun, moon and stars. On the earth, nations will be in anguish and perplexity at the roaring and tossing of the sea. People will faint from terror, apprehensive of what is coming on the world, for the heavenly bodies will be shaken. At that time they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. When these things begin to take place, stand up and lift up your heads, because your redemption is drawing near. When you see these things happening, you know that the kingdom of God is near.
Truly I tell you, ***this generation will certainly not pass away*** until all these things have happened Luke 21:25-32
*Jesus promised to return over 2, 000 years ago and he still hasn’t.*
Jesus and the angels never appeared from Heaven, the stars never fell from the sky, none of these things happened. Nothing he prophesied happened.
***Apologists can try to spin this, but the simple fact is that Jesus was either wrong or misquoted.***
According to the Bible that makes Jesus a false prophet or misquoted (and if Jesus is misquoted than the Bible is not inerrant or the word of God)
How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the Lord? If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the Lord does not take place or come true, that is a message the Lord has not spoken Deuteronomy 18:21-22
*Jesus falsely prophesied to the high priest and the Sanhedrin*
Jesus also falsely prophesied to the high priest and the Sanhedrin (assemblies of either twenty-three or seventy-one rabbis appointed to sit as a tribunal)
You will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and ***coming on the clouds of heaven*** Matthew 26:64 Mark 14:62
Except the high priest and the Sanhedrin never saw Jesus sitting at the right hand side of God, or coming on the clouds of heaven, or any such thing.
*Jesus falsely prophesied to Nathaniel*
Jesus also falsely prophesied to Nathanael when he declared, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the king of Israel.”
Jesus said, You believe because I told you I saw you under the fig tree. You will see greater things than that. He then added, ***“Very truly I tell you, you will see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man*** John 1:50-51
*Nathanael never saw any such thing. Neither did anyone else.*
The following quote from Stephen L. Harris, Professor Emeritus of Humanities and Religious Studies at California State University- Sacramento, completes this point with a devastating argument.
*Jesus did not accomplish what Israel’s prophets said the Messiah was commissioned to do:* He did not deliver the covenant people from their Gentile enemies, reassemble those scattered in the Diaspora, restore the Davidic kingdom, or establish universal peace (cf.Isa. 9:6-7; 11:7-12:16, etc.). Instead of freeing Jews from oppressors and thereby fulfilling God’s ancient promises-for land, nationhood, kingship, and blessing- *Jesus died a “shameful” death, defeated by the very political powers the Messiah was prophesied to overcome.* Indeed, the Hebrew prophets did not foresee that Israel’s savior would be executed as a common criminal by Gentiles, *making Jesus’ crucifixion a “stumbling block” to scripturally literate Jews.* (1 Cor.1:23)
Watch *Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet, Historical Lecture - Bart D. Ehrman*
------------------------------------------------------------------
Also, look up the following.
*"13x Jesus was wrong in the Bible - Life Lessons"*
*"End Times - Evil Bible .com"*
*"The End of All Things is At Hand - The Church Of Truth"*
*"Resurrection - Fact or Myth - Omission Report"*
*"What’s Missing from Codex Sinaiticus, the Oldest New Testament? - Biblical Archaeology Society"*
*"The “Strange” Ending of the Gospel of Mark and Why It Makes All the Difference - Biblical Archaeology Society"*
*"ex-apologist: On One of the Main Reasons Why I Think Christianity is False (Reposted)"*
*"Why Jesus? Nontract (August 1999) - Freedom From Religion Foundation"*
*"272: JESUS’S 5200 AUTHENTIC WORDS - zingcreed"*
*"43: IS THE FOURTH GOSPEL FICTION? - zingcreed"*
*"Jesus Predicted a First Century Return Which Did Not Occur - by Alex Beyman - Medium"*
*"Jesus’ Failed Prophecy About His Return - Black Nonbelievers, Inc."*
*CHRISTIAN APOLOGETIC RATIONALIZATIONS*
To anyone not already indoctrinated into Christianity reading the above passages it is crystal clear that according to the Bible Jesus was supposed to return in the first century of the Christian Era. That has not happened. Yet the Christian religion persists with the majority of its adherents still awaiting the return of their savior. How have they reconciled their scriptures to reality? There are several lines of thought in Christendom about this.
*Rationalization #1: Matthew 16:28 refers to Jesus’ transfiguration, not his second coming.*
The transfiguration of Jesus is a story recorded in Matthew 17, Mark 9, and Luke 9. The first problem is that these Gospels place the transfiguration at different times. In Matthew, it occurs after Jesus made the prediction about his second coming. That might make it seem reasonable to think that it was a fulfillment of the earlier prediction. However, Mark and Luke place the transfiguration event before Jesus made spoke the prophecy. Laying aside the obvious discrepency in timing, we can say for certain that an event occurring before a prediction is made can’t be fulfilling the prediction. The “prediction” wouldn’t be a prediction at all.
The preceding verse (verse 27) starts off the description of Jesus’ coming by saying he would come “in glory” with angels to dole out judgment to “every man”. That is not what happened in the transfiguration stories. Therefore, the explanation doesn’t work. Some try to make it work by separating verse 28 from the preceding verse so that the two verses talk about different “comings”. This is a baseless tinkering with the passage in order to make a doctrine fit the scripture. The same Christians who do this will accuse other of taking verses out of context when they disagree with an interpretation. Yet, this is exactly what they do here.
*Rationalization #2: The word translated “generation” can mean “race”. So, Jesus meant the Jewish race would not die out before he returns.*
This is a manufactured definition to suit doctrinal purposes. When you see “generation” in the New Testament is means just that - people living in a particular era, not a race of people. Elsewhere when he speaks of the Jews, he does so by saying “Jews”. It’s rather strange that he would speak cryptically in just this one instance.
*Rationalization #3: When Jesus said “this generation shall not pass away” he meant the generation living at the time of the end times tribulation.*
Correct! Jesus told his followers that they would go through persecution. So, he apparently thought they would be the generation living at the time of the end. It is evident in the writings of the New Testament that first century Christians saw the tribulations they were going through as a fulfillment of Jesus’ prediction about the end times and the tribulation. If they saw it as such, modern Christians have no real justification not to see it that way as well.
Notice that Jesus didn’t say “that generation” - which would be the normal way of referring to a future generation. He said “this generation”. Besides through a plain common sense reading of the text, we know he meant the people alive while he was speaking because he said that some of his listeners (and the high priest at his trial) would still be alive to see his return to Earth.
*Rationalization #4: When Jesus said that some of his listeners would be alive to see him return, he was talking about the Day of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit descended on the church.*
This is another explanation that is so far from rational that is it hard to accept that anyone sincerely believes it. The Book of Acts tells the story of the Holy Spirit appearing over the heads of the saints as tongues of fire endowing them with the magical ability to speak in unlearned languages. There is no mention of them seeing Jesus in the clouds with angels. The supposed event did not accompany the final judgment. None of the things Jesus said would occur at his return happened on the Day of Pentecost.
*Rationalization #5: When it was revealed to John in his visions that Jesus would come quickly, it is to happen on God’s time scale, not a human time scale. “The time is near” and “coming quickly” are not to be taken literally. To God a thousand years is a day.*
This is actually the first Christian attempt (found in 2 Peter 3) to explain away the fact that Jesus had not come as expected. Believers of the time had begun to waver in their faith because Jesus had not come back as promised. The writer tells them not to listen to people who say, “Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation.” (2 Peter 3:4) By “fathers”, he evidently means the founding fathers of the faith who had all died by that time. This is evidence that almost from the start of Christianity, believers have been wrestling with the apparent failure of their savior’s end times prophecy. In verse 8, the writer tries to reassure them by saying, “with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day” and continues in the next verse to say that the Lord is not slacking on his promise. He basically tries to make the argument that time is meaningless to God.
This passage is in obvious contradiction to what Jesus himself said about his return and everything else written in the New Testament about it. This contradiction raises the question: Did the Simon Peter, one of Jesus’ personal disciples, actually write this book? The most truthful answer: Not likely.
When reading 2 Peter, we must keep in mind when it was written. It is well-known that many of the writings floating around the early church were not written by the people claimed to have written them, but were forged by believers to push their particular doctrines. This is most likely the case with the book of 2 Peter.
The first clue is that the writer acknowledged that “the fathers” have died. Since Peter was one of those founding fathers of the church, he couldn’t have written this book. It has proven difficult for scholars to pinpoint exactly when the book was written, but they all place its origin sometime between 60 and 160 A.D. This means that it was written at least 30 years after Jesus’ crucifixion is believed to have taken place when he was 33. Assuming his disciples were somewhere around his own age and taking into account average life expectancy of that time and that, according to church tradition, the apostles were all killed, none of them would have likely been alive in 60 A.D. (the earliest date scholars say the book would have been written).
So, what can we make of the fact that this is in the Bible? It was written by a believer who didn’t want Jesus’ failure to come to cause the faith to die out. Knowing that Peter was a founding apostle and a personal disciple of Jesus who was deemed to be the first Pope of the Christian faction that came to be known as the Roman Catholic Church, the writer forged this book in Peter’s name. It seems likely that this was an attempt to keep believers in the nascent Catholic churches in the fold. This is not the only case of forgery to uphold Catholic doctrine. (There are other forgeries in the New Testament that have been recognized by scholars as such.)
Whether written by the apostle Peter or something else, it is an obvious rationalization to try to deal with the failure of a prediction that came to be central to the Christian religion. We do not accept similar rationalizations from modern-day doomsdayers and we shouldn’t accept them from ancient religious people either.
*Rationalization #6: In Matthew 16 when Jesus said some of his listeners would see him “coming in his kingdom”, he was talking about his coming into his kingdom in Heaven after his resurrection when he went back to Heaven. Many saw this event through visions.*
This fails to take into account what Jesus said his “coming in his kingdom” would be connected to the day of judgment when he would “reward each according to his works”. As far as I know, no Christian apologists say the judgment occurred when Jesus supposedly went back to Heaven in the first century. Everything in the New Testament places judgment day at the end of the world. Even if we were to throw the Matthew 16 passage completely out of the Bible, there would still be the problem of other passages where Jesus said “this generation will not pass” before he comes and New Testament writers testifying to their belief that he would come in their lifetime. It is no wonder that this rationalization has largely been dropped by Christian theologians.
*Rationalization #7: Maybe in our human understanding we don’t know what Jesus meant when he said “this general would not pass away” and that “some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom”. He couldn’t have meant he was coming in the first century because he hasn’t come back yet and that would make him a false prophet.*
This rationalization is nothing more than interpreting the Bible by a doctrine you want to be true. If you’re going to believe in the Jesus of the Bible, shouldn’t you base your doctrines on what the Bible actually says? It is self-deceit to look at Jesus’ “prophecy” detailing his return in the lifetime of his disciples and rationalize why it didn’t happen. Only a mind interested in maintaining the illusion of faith could twist and mangle the plain words of the Bible the way Christians have in an attempt to make the incredible credible. An honest mind looking at the facts would have no choice but to admit that Jesus’ prophecy of the end of days has failed to come true.
Well someone likes to publicly announce they've never looked into something before lol
Dude are u even ok?
Just an emotional appeal. Nothing more.
*The Enuma Elish would later be the inspiration for the Hebrew scribes who created the text now known as the biblical Book of Genesis.* Prior to the 19th century CE, the Bible was considered the oldest book in the world and its narratives were thought to be completely original. In the mid-19th century CE, however, European museums, as well as academic and religious institutions, sponsored excavations in Mesopotamia to find physical evidence for historical corroboration of the stories in the Bible. ***These excavations found quite the opposite, however, in that, once cuneiform was translated, it was understood that a number of biblical narratives were Mesopotamian in origin.***
*Famous stories such as the Fall of Man and the Great Flood were originally conceived and written down in Sumer,* translated and modified later in Babylon, and reworked by the Assyrians ***before they were used by the Hebrew scribes for the versions which appear in the Bible.***
***In revising the Mesopotamian creation story for their own ends, the Hebrew scribes tightened the narrative and the focus but retained the concept of the all-powerful deity who brings order from chaos.*** Marduk, in the Enuma Elish, establishes the recognizable order of the world - *just as God does in the Genesis tale* - and human beings are expected to recognize this great gift and honor the deity through service.
Google *"Enuma Elish - The Babylonian Epic of Creation - Full Text - World History Encyclopedia"*
Also discussed by Professor Christine Hayes at Yale University in her first lecture of the series on the Hebrew Bible from approx. 8:50.
From a Biblical scholar:
"Many stories in the ancient world have their origins in other stories and were borrowed and modified from other or earlier peoples. *For instance, many of the stories now preserved in the Bible are* ***modified*** *versions of stories that existed in the cultures and traditions of Israel’s* ***older*** *contemporaries.* Stories about the creation of the universe, a cataclysmic universal flood, digging wells as land markers, the naming of important cultic sites, gods giving laws to their people, and even stories about gods decreeing the possession of land to their people were all part of the cultural and literary matrix of the ancient Near East. *Biblical scribes freely* ***adopted and modified*** *these stories as a means to express their own identity, origins, and customs."*
*"Stories from the Bible"* by Dr Steven DiMattei, from his website *"Biblical Contradictions"*
------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, look up the below articles.
*"Debunking the Devil - Michael A. Sherlock (Author)"*
*"10 Ways The Bible Was Influenced By Other Religions - Listverse"*
*"Top Ten Reasons Noah’s Flood is Mythology - The Sensuous Curmudgeon"*
*"The Adam and Eve myth - News24"*
*"The origins of the Ten Commandments - Carpe Scriptura"*
*"Before Adam and Eve - Psychology Today"*
*"Gilgamesh vs. Noah - Wordpress"*
*"No, Humans Are Probably Not All Descended From A Single Couple Who Lived 200,000 Years Ago"*
*"Adam & Eve: Theologians Try to Reconcile Science and Fail - The New Republic"*
*"Adam and Eve: the ultimate standoff between science and faith (and a contest!) - Why Evolution Is True"*
*"Bogus accommodationism: The return of Adam and Eve as real people, as proposed by a wonky quasi-scientific theory - Why Evolution Is True"*
*"How many scientists question evolution? - **sciencemeetsreligion.org**"*
*"What is the evidence for evolution? - Common-questions - BioLogos"*
(A Christian organisation)
*"Old Testament Tales Were Stolen From Other Cultures - Griffin"*
*"Parallelism between “The Hymn to Aten” and Psalm 104 - Project Augustine"*
*"Contradictions in the Bible | Identified verse by verse and explained using the most up-to-date scholarly information about the Bible, its texts, and the men who wrote them -- by Dr. Steven DiMattei"*
*"How do we know that the biblical writers were* ***not*** *writing history? -- by Dr Steven DiMattei"*
*Let's briefly run through the 'ten plagues':*
First the rivers are turned to blood, all the fish die and the waters stink. No one has any water to drink. This lasted for seven days and would have resulted in mass deaths due to dehydration. Amongst the first to die would have been the children. *The author doesn't think to explain how the Hebrews were saved from this. No record of it was made anywhere in any Egyptian records.* Exodus 7:17-25.
This is followed by a plague of frogs which had somehow survived the rivers of blood that had killed all the fish. A mere inconvenience, nothing more, and a big stink when they all died, *but no record anywhere.* Exodus 8:2-13.
Next we have the plague of lice about which very little is said *and of course no record was made.* To a people who would have been accustomed to lice this would probably have been nothing remarkable. Exodus 8:16-18.
Then the flies. Apart from the land being 'corrupted', whatever that means, there don't appear to have been any ill effects from this and they disappear as quickly as they came a few days later. *Nothing worth recording there, obviously.* Exodus 8:21-31.
Now the author seems to begin to lose the plot and describes a 'grievous murrain' *which kills all the Egyptians' cattle, horses, camels and sheep.* ***They all died - hold that thought.*** *No Egyptian historian or keeper of official records deems it worthy of mention.* Exodus 9:3-6.
Next come the boils which afflict everyone and everything, including all the livestock ***even though they had been killed by the 'grievous murrain' a few days earlier,*** *apparently, and yet no-one thought to write anything down anywhere.* Of course, anyone who understood anything about microorganisms and the aeteology of boils would have described this as an infestation with Staphylococcus - the signs of faecal contamination - but the author was obviously unaware of these. Maybe he was just in too much of a muddle by now to care. Exodus 9:8-11.
Now it's hailstones so bad that every plant, every tree, every servant (for servant read slave) ***and even the livestock (that our story-teller has forgotten already that he killed off in the fifth plague before given them boils in the sixth) were harmed.*** It looks like our story-teller has learned from his earlier silly mistake with killing all the livestock too soon then having to resurrect them later. He mentions that some plants survive. Do I smell stinking fish again? *The greatest hail storm in all Egyptian history, apparently, but not worthy of being recorded.* Exodus 9:18-25.
It's the turn of the locusts and it's suddenly obvious why some plants had to survive. *How could the locusts turn Egypt into a barren desert if the hail storm had done it earlier?* Good thinking there. Shame about the earlier boob! *Mysteriously, no Egyptian scribe appears to notice any of this or the inevitable famine and mass starvation which would have ensued.* Exodus 10:4-15.
And for the penultimate trick, it's going to be dark for three days. *No one makes a record of this, obviously.* Exodus 10:21-23.
The last 'plague' is not so much a plague as a ritual genocide. *Here our tale takes a nasty turn and the true character of the Hebrew god is revealed in all its glory - a petty, vindictive, homicidal psychopath who has not yet acquired the omniscience he will be granted later. He kills every firstborn Egyptian in a single night,* ***including the firstborn of all the cattle that died in the fifth plague.*** *For some reason he needs the Hebrews to leave a secret sign so he doesn't kill them too. Weirdly, he can't tell his own chosen people from ordinary Egyptians and doesn't even know where they live.* And he had been leading up to this, apparently, because after every plague he 'hardens the heart' of Pharaoh so that he wouldn't let the Hebrews go. He had actually been planning this genocide all along just to impress people with his powers. *And still no-one thought even this mass killing in a single night worth making a note of in any Egyptian records.* Exodus 12:1-30.
And then, of course, Pharaoh could muster up 600 horses to pull the chariots ***from amongst all the dead livestock from the 5th plague*** (Exodus 14:7).
Google *"Rosa Rubicondior: Origins Of The Exodus Myth"*
------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, look up the below articles.
*"Debunking Christianity: PATTERNS OF POOR RESEARCH- A Critique of Patterns of Evidence:Exodus"*
*"For you were (not) slaves in Egypt: The ancient memories behind the Exodus myth - Archaeology - **Haaretz.com**"*
*"Why the Exodus Story Has Value Despite Being Complete Myth - Psychology Today Australia"*
*"Is the Exodus a Myth? - Worlds Beyond"*
*"Historicity of Exodus and Moses - The Creatively Maladjusted"*
*"Biblical Contradiction #81. When did the Exodus allegedly happen: during the reign of Rameses II (1279-1213 BC) OR in 1447 BC?"*
*"Ten Reasons Why the Bible’s Story of the Exodus is Not True - by Tim Zeak - ExCommunications - Medium"*
*"Why Moses Did Not Write the Torah - Thomas Shoemaker"*
*"Sargon the Great and Moses - The Word of Me… Wordpress"*
*"Contradictions in the Bible | Identified verse by verse and explained using the most up-to-date scholarly information about the Bible, its texts, and the men who wrote them -- by Dr. Steven DiMattei"*
*"How do we know that the biblical writers were* ***not*** *writing history? -- by Dr Steven DiMattei"*
@@ancientfiction5244 If the Hebrews covered their doors in blood from a lamb then God would pass over them. They avoided the judgment.
Likewise if any person, Jew or Gentile, is covered in the blood of Christ then God will pass over them. They will avoid the judgment. "Look, the *Lamb of God,* who takes away the sin of the world!" John 1:29
The world is not so incredibly difficult to understand it's comparatively easy. It's like watching a movie. For example you look at what people do right. So they come to you and they tell you that you need to give them some of the money you earn for protection. And if you don't bad things will happen to you and yours. And you become scared because they keep threatening you. And they don't care what happens with the people you love. They kill them, they kidnap them, they rape them and they even use them to join in their activities and they become immensely rich and powerful by doing such. Everyone immediately knows that your talking about some kind of church or religious organizations
Not true. The first thing I thought of was organized crime like the Mafia and Camorra.
The religious people I knew chose to live in poverty and give away vitually everything they had and live extremely simply and yet were very joyful and peaceful.
I couldn't understand them at all as they were so counter cultural.
@@viviennedunbar3374 Precisely they give away everything to church who spend 14 percent of their income on charity where secular charity is spending over 75 percent. And what is the Catholic church? A criminal organization threatening people to give them money or else the will go to hell and they protect child molesters from the law. Sounds like the Gomorra to me.
@@Carlos-fl6ch, are you being stupid on purpose?
@@tryingnottobeasmartass757 I know that if you're reading the truth about something you've emotionally invested your entire life in than its better to call the other person stupid . In the world of the gullible that makes more sense it's easier to process. Don't worry, you're not alone.
@@Carlos-fl6ch, and when you're reading something stupid written by a stupid person, that's easy to identify as well. That's how I recognized you so easily.
Dr. Bart Ehrman is a leading New Testament scholar in the world and uses the telephone argument but ok.....
Bart Erhman is a leading New Testament scholar who lies about historical methodology and misquotes primary sources to justify his preconceived notions.
@@grantgooch5834 “People who don’t agree with me are liars”
Ok got it….
@@jacoblee5796 You can literally see in Erhman's popular works how he misquotes primary sources and mis-states historical methodology to support his arguments.
Your post illustrates that point exactly. Erhman's textual criticism is top notch scholarship yet in his popular works he makes the telephone argument. Even Erhman himself concedes that scholars have reconstructed the original NT to basically 99% accuracy. The original wording is known with a high degree of probability in all but a few dozen places, yet he will represent in his popular works that we have no idea what the text actually says.
@@grantgooch5834 Tell me you don’t know what you’re talking about without telling me you don’t know what you’re talking about.
Tell me how the gospels came to be and then tell me what the telephone argument is. You’re not saying what you think you’re saying.
You can still be Confessional Lutheran. It's Catholic but not Roman Catholic papists. 😉
Great discussion! Nicely done!
@@tony1685 Why do you say that?
@@tony1685And they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers.
Acts 2:42 ESV
On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul talked with them, intending to depart on the next day, and he prolonged his speech until midnight.
Acts 20:7 ESV
@@tony1685 Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. Let no one disqualify you, insisting on asceticism and worship of angels, going on in detail about visions, puffed up without reason by his sensuous mind, and not holding fast to the Head, from whom the whole body, nourished and knit together through its joints and ligaments, grows with a growth that is from God.
Colossians 2:16-19 ESV
@@tony1685 You do realize that the command to "keep the Sabbath" was specifically for the ancient Israelites, right? Also, there's the issue of Jesus healing on the Sabbath and even taking and eating grain from the fields. Jesus is the Lord of the Sabbath. If you are going to judge so, then I hope for your sake you are able to keep every jot and tittle of the law perfectly, for, as James states, to be guilty of breaking one part of the law is to be guilty of transgressing all of it. People pretty much never just break one command either, because in breaking one they usually are also breaking the others regarding idolatry, false witness, etc. I certainly hope you get that plank removed from your eye, brother.
Meeting for breaking of bread and prayer has the same context in Acts as well as the same author (Luke inspired by The Holy Spirit). This wasn't just a meal, since people ate together every day, but in fact it is Holy Communion (Luke 22:19, 1 Cor 11:16-34). That is the proper context. Meeting together for Communion and prayer on the 1st Day of the week (Sunday), the same say that Christ rose from the dead.
I'll also point out that none of the verses you stated refer directly and specifically to the 10 Commandments although the moral aspects of the OT law does still apply (just not civil or ceremonial). You'll note that the command to keep the Sabbath specifically on Saturday is the only one not reaffirmed in the New Testament. That's because rest in Jesus is our Sabbath. It's also not mentioned in the Apostles exhortations and commands for Gentile believers as recorded in Acts 15.
Hope that helps.
@@tony1685 just curious. Is there a reason why one could not simply see the Sabbath day commandments as part of the ceremonial law for ancient peoples. Yes, you can argue that it is based in creation, but technically we still set aside one day of the week for this purpose, just not the day of the original Sabbath day or the Sabbath day described in the mosaic law. Changing the day from the day that was the original Sabbath of creation isn't a big deal because Good did not issue a strict commandment on this until the giving of the mosaic law. Sabbath commandments of the mosaic law don't need to bother us for the sake reason that not getting circumcised doesn't need to bother us.
I'm actually a little surprised at your apartment hostility toward catholicism on this point given what the Council of Trent stated regarding the ten commandments. Catholics were condemning protestants for saying that the decalogue was not an eternal law for all people. Trent maintained is authority is applicable for true Christians. This would include the commandment to keep the Sabbath, albeit perhaps not in the same way that was prescribed elsewhere in the mosaic law.
5 mins in and i have my answer. Guy was raised Catholic, falls in love with a Catholic and is a Catholic....Color me shocked.
@The Meaning is Always Vague That's what I'm seeing. Is it strong atheism or just a mental state of "lacking a belief" (weak atheism)?
@The Meaning is Always Vague No, just pointing out the obvious.
Why is this such a compelling story for you? Guy was raised Catholic, falls in love with a Catholic and is a Catholic.
@@jacoblee5796 he wasnt raided catholic, are you deaf? He literally said he didnt bother attending church, same with his family.
And also knew ZERO about the Catholic faith and was openly hostile.
He just wanted someone to tell him what to think instead of thinking for himself.
Don't project onto other people, it's pathetic.
Being an atheist is being intellectually lazy. God IS and can be experienced by anyone first hand. Takes work though….
Islam is localized to the middle east lol
Lol only countries where it’s illegal to be anything else
I do give credit to the man for backing out of the NBA or the WOKE nonsense.
The way the NBA disses America and the police but supports China is crazy disturbing!
Plus I have two daughters, the youngest plays basketball. Biological males should not be competing against biological females.
I am going to summarize. A guy had a prayer that made him feel good so he wants you to divest from companies with insurance that might cover birth control.
Atheist here, and this is likely one of the weakest conversions to religion. Basically he has a feel good experience so god is true. Then he appealed to popularity.
So if Muslims have a feel good experience during prayer, is Islam true?
I am truly baffled how a person can deconstruct then be pulled back by personal experience. Did they not address this hurdle during deconstruction? It appears he didn’t actually go through a deconstruction.
Every argument no matter how logical always has an emotional side to it. Even presented with concrete facts someone needs to be emotionally compelled to accept them. People are not as 'rational' as we make them out to be, and a religious experience will always triumph all other senses to the point. I was life long atheist till I survived a car bomb in Iraq. I can't share my experience or anything like that, but I understand the compelling personal side of every conversion story.
@@haronsmith8974 I became an atheist because of Kuwait so at least we have the Middle East in common. I was with Task Force Ripper.
My son also served and like you was struck by a roadside bomb in Afghanistan. We are both atheists.
For me, a strike on a fleeing Iraqi vehicle started the chain of steps. I never pushed my atheism on my family. But after combat, my son traveled the same steps to atheism.
It’s odd how I didn’t push my beliefs and 2 of 3 children are atheists. All my children knew is that dad didn’t go to church but didn’t know why.
//I am truly baffled how a person can deconstruct then be pulled back by personal experience. Did they not address this hurdle during deconstruction? It appears he didn’t actually go through a deconstruction.//
In other words, a No True Scottsman fallacy.
@@grantgooch5834 Oh he was an atheist though he didn’t likely deconstruct.
On the flip side, there are Christians who converted for terrible reasons (see video) yet they are still Christians.
I fail to see my fallacy.
@@grantgooch5834 I want to add this this issue is vastly interesting because it’s baffling. Here, we have a person dropping Christianity and then revert to Christianity.
The reasons for the conversion back to Christianity gives light into the original deconstruction from religion. If an atheist has a shallow deconstruction then shallow reasoning can bring the atheist back to Christianity. I believe that’s what happened to the person in this video.
Militant atheism shouldn’t be confused with atheism that’s the produce of a full deconstruction. A person can be aggressively atheistic yet not have a foundation for atheism. Much the same, a person can be aggressively religious (person in this video) yet have a shallow foundation.
Amazingly people aggressively act on beliefs when their beliefs are not properly supported.
I think I am being fair in this comment.
REAL Title: "Catholic-Born Boy Goes back to Catholicism After Meeting a Cradle-Catholic Chick"
BUT, not TH-cam optimized for Capturing Christian Clicks + Ca$h.
LOL
Any deconversion story - Real Title: "Liar who was never really a Christian comes out as an Atheist"
aka
"No True Scotsman"
You clearly didn't actually listen to what he said
@@phylocybe_ WOMEN have converted more men to Xtianity THAN the holy spirit. The churches are full of men like him who wanted to get laid.
LOL
@@sanjeevgig8918 the holy spirit is acting through those women. Boom gottem.
@@phylocybe_ REMEMBER jesus is everywhere and is always watching you when you play with yourself into that sock.
LOL
From atheist to catholics
From frying pan to fire
What
@@Christian_Conservative You heard me
@@adenjones1802 what are you
@@Christian_Conservative Not an atheist or catholic. Thats for damn sure. Are you asking if im Christian because I am.
@@adenjones1802 what denom
From one heresy to another...at least he's no longer foolish to believe that God doesn't exist
Do try the " your will be done, not mine" prayer! It might help you convert heretics
What convinced you that god exists?
@@tony1685 these don't seem like good reasons
@@tony1685 Did Jeremiah’s words here stand the test of time?
and the Levitical priests shall never lack a man in my presence to offer burnt offerings, to burn grain offerings, and to make sacrifices forever. (Jeremiah 33:18 ESV)
@@tony1685 the argument that intelligence can only be born of intelligence does raise the another question. If I’m understanding you correctly you believe that human intellect arose from gods intelligence. My question is what intelligence caused gods intelligence?
I was raised a Catholic, became a Christian, then a Buddhist, then an atheist.
No matter how hard I searched and prayed I couldn't find God or Jesus anywhere.
Finally I gave up and accepted responsibility for my own existence.
I hope you'll move past the give up to find God. I'll pray he draws you to him
Btw Catholics are Christians.
What do you think about the miraculous tilma in the church from our Lady of Guadalupe story?
from one false doctrine to another. not much of a leap
Are you implying that atheism is a "false doctrine"? 😂
What doctrine does atheism have?
@@pavld335 atheism itself is a doctrine teaching that God doesn’t exist. A (against, non) the(God) ism
@@pavld335 a teaching that says God doesnt exist
@@vadimion763 lol that's so silly.