The Ancient Cosmos: Cultural Context of the Biblical World
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 9 ก.พ. 2025
- Ancient Israel believed in a flat earth and didn’t know what the brain was for. Does that mean the Bible is flawed?
Join us at: www.inspiringph...
Don't forget to help us create more videos! We need your support:
/ inspiringphilosophy
/ @inspiringphilosophy
Sources:
Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament - John Walton
The Lost World of Scripture - John Walton and Brent Sandy
Handbook on the Historical Books - Victor P. Hamilton
Speech Act Theory and Pragmatics - Manfred Bierwisch, John Searle, Ferenc Kiefer
Michael Heiser Lecture - • Video
This will still fly over the heads of many Bible critics. Good work Michael, God bless you.
Thank you, and I don’t care. You can’t win over everyone.
Biblical authors? The book is not from God?
Hindu vedic people knew that the earth is round and rotating around sun around 1500 BCE. Also that the moon was rotating around earth
This work is crap. All the "facts" today that contradict the Bible are not actually "known" at all, rather they are Luciferian myths with no actual legitimate proof behind them whatsoever. Like CGI cartoons of the ba'al earth and space travel shams filmed on Hollywood sets.
Biblical cosmology is 100% literal and accurate *as written* in the original ancient texts. Meaning, earth is flat, stationary, geocentric, and Firmament-dome-enclosed, and there is no such thing as outer space or ball rock planets or galaxies or anything like that.
44 x 2=88
That's because haters don't need reasons to hate, but it sure would be helpful if they had reasons. Those who criticize the bible in good faith will grant or even accept reasonable arguments. The hope is that you can speak past the haters and directly to their fan base.
As a linguist I love that you used pragmatics (specifically the speech act theory) to talk about the meaning of a text. Pragmatics is a very good tool for hermeneutics
I cant say that this automatically makes me an old earth creationist, but because of your videos, i'm no longer intimidated by such a model knowing what the bible truly says and its purpose when being written.
Earth is young and enclosed and evilution is a myth from Hell.
It really shows that the text can support either view - even theistic evolution.
WHAT!?
So all this time... back in first grade I wasn’t in the wrong for asking my teacher “can I go to the restroom” instead of “may I go to the restroom” ???
This means war.
Keep on watching this he is amazing
305 Thief Oh I saw it on Patreon 🙌🏽 just had to share that realization 😂
@@odec1831 oh wow didn't know you were subbed to him lol. You should chck out Sinental Apologetics as well as JMDApologetics.
no, it means that you should know your grammar, so you can better understand the text. lol
JoaoG R Seems like the latter (your statement) implies the former (my statement)! It’s still war!
I work as an engineer and I'm quite technical in my thinking and my working.
Along side me I have managers that are not as technical as I am.
Every time I talk with them to describe a progress or a technical issue I have to formulate my information in such a way that they will not fall asleep while listening. I learned this from previous experiences when I started to explain an issue in the way I would understand or at least a technical person will understand and, while doing so, I could see the manager's eyes were closing and he was not listening.
It makes perfect sense to receive information in a way that we can understand it.
Wife: I'm fine!
IP: only an idiot would believe that!
Answer: Angry wife!
Hahahahaha love this in every level!
I was a young earther for a long time. But IP has changed my mind.
Thank you so much for sharing that with me!
Jeff Phelps what videos? Can you link them?
@@hjc1402 his Genesis series
Jeff Phelps thanks
@@InspiringPhilosophy when i stand before God he is going to judge my works not my thoughts on how old the earth. Debating the age of the earth with atheist a huge mistake that Christians make
I'm definitely going to want to share this with a fundamentalist Calvinist friend of mine!
It should be public this Thursday
I think it is more the fundamentalists as aposed to Calvinist that needs to hear. It is a shame that a Calvinist or a Wesleyan or an Arminian, would take issue with this. Though to be fair if they are able to give a reasonable critique of this position then fair enough we should be willing to hear them out even if we disagree.
Why would a Calvinist disagree with anything in this video? Serious doubt.
@Collin Lutz Ok, that literally made me laugh out loud, thank you for that.
Collin Lutz As someone who leans Calvinist, I laughed at this.
As a student studying communication, this was very interesting and pleasing to me!! I love studying cultural words and meanings, especially in the Hebrew / Greek context!
hamgurber.
@@ihaveatonofnames Agreed.
sad he didn't actually go over evidence... I have it on my channel. no pressure @Kayleah
@Kayleah Most people would not sell both their eyes for even $1M/B 😍 Iris is a flat ring-shaped membrane, green for grass, brown for earth, blue for water 💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰🧐 👁
FE on eyes/face Sclera (white) ice wall. Iris, land and sea(green,brown,blue).Pupil you/I/others centre of existence/eye. Black like the reported black magnetic mountain in the centre of the plane 👁
Tears, salty like the ocean. cornea, the firmament. 👀 sun and moon. 👃(contains magnetite) north pole magnetic mountain in the centre of face/plane. Hairline/beard, ice wall.
nostrils, the two reported water vortices that change direction during the day. May be the true cause of tidal flux. (earth breathing in and out) heart beats 60bpm for a healthy person,internal clock
DYK the human rib can regenerate? 12 pairs of ribs, 12 months. 24 ribs 24 hrs a day. born with 33 vertebrae in the spine. DNA in the rib deoXY(male) RIBonucleic acid Adam and Eve 👀🧬
💓❤🔥🏝earth and heart are an anagram. heart has a magnetic field that extends the body further than any other organ. Heart gives you time, the PRESENT 💝🎁
I just found out about your channel, i've watched a few of your videos and as a guy who is curently struggling between religions this helps a lot. Thank You!
Hey. It's been 2 years now. How is it going?
One basic distinction people do ignore quite a bit is that scientism is not real science
Matt dillahubties fans fall into this trap... Severely so. Not to mention debate like him.
@Melburys Brick yeah sure, scientism is not a thing yet the majority of what is trown at us is scientism. philosophy of science makes a clear distinction between real science, scientism and pseudoscience. You should look it up
@truthisstrangerthanfiction Did a great video about this the other day. Frank Herbert Author of the Dune books said plainly that Science is a religion in the way it sets its beliefs.
th-cam.com/video/Oc3-jaXFWNE/w-d-xo.html the quote is in the first two minutes.
Scientism is not science, real or otherwise.
Isnt scientism a religion?
You basically took the words out of my mouth on why I'm not a flat earther
Thanks for the heart
me too
but he speaks with SCIENCE!
I am learning many interesting and important things with your content. The first video I saw was your debate about the compatibility of evolution and genesis. Thank you!
Thank you and welcome!
Yeah same here, the first video I watched was also that debate. Now I am watching practically all of his videos.
There is no compatibility between the lie of evolution and the truth of Genesis.
Good job, Michael. Especially from
14:55 and onwards you had some really good points. May God continue to bless you with wisdom.
I love your vids Michael. I just don't agree with your points
14:55 This point does not prove the point of contention at all
Just because ancient people didn't care as much as we do today, doesn't mean they were wrong.
We can easily turn around and say: ancient people didn't as have much distraction as we have today.
Therefore ancient people's observation was more objective and accurate
That's a strawman argument.
Which is a pattern I see with you when it comes to the Biblical creation
Sending this to my Dad ASAP
my dad is a creationist and we argue a lot
@Ναζωραῖος yeah. its mostly him that argues when i say im not a creationist anymore. i couldnt care less but he wants me to know the "truth". a lot YECs think that if you believe something else about earth youre not a christian
@Ναζωραῖος they were but they arent the bible. YEC doesnt make sence in the bible without sounding ridicoulous. if i accept its a metaphor i personally get much more information than trying to fit it in the creationist worldview. my dad does those kind of things. he calls his friends and talks for 4hours about some verse in genesis and how it means 4 different things at once and i get angry because at the end he gets nowhere. i dont think there is a point to picking apart the genesis.
it serves to tell us god made the universe and made us. its not a scientific book. i cringe at people making it scientific. its laughable and atheist have a point to laugh at them.
Science cant answer what most of us ponder" why am i here"
@roasted pancakes Jesus didn't put us here
@@erincurrie1560 The Bible says Jesus put us here in John chapter one.
Yeah but a ton of religion can.
You're assuming there's a deep philosophical reason, wmand there might not be one. But science does tell us a lot about HOW we came to be here, and why things are the way we are.
@@michaz1021 None other than Christianity are historically accurate though.
That modern science in the hands of Nero/Vlad was on point.
Tech we hv safeguards against the use of nukes (i.e.MAD etc) but wont modern science still can be used for harmful purposes by modern day tyrants?
@IL NGR in simpler words? Sry didnt understand ur point
Imagine if a prophet said ,"as h20 falls from atmosphere" instead of rain falls
As a young earth creationist, I'm glad that God did not reveal nuclear physics in the Scriptures.
2:40 fun fact, "Trust your gut" is not a metaphor. The intestinal tract contains a vast neural network even more complex than the brain, and it's literally where the "gut feeling" comes from, so the expression is actually literal, believe it or not. Not trying to sound like a know-it-all, i learned this from youtube lol, but yeah
emotions are actually partly in the nerve plexuses in your chest and stomach, and even in your heart rate
I keep having trouble with losing faith but I feel like it’s coming back to me every time I watch your videos. Thank you god bless✝️
Thank you for explaining how the Bible speaks to us! I used to know atheists (who are just as stubborn and clueless as fundamentalists). This video would help clarify for my old acquaintances the purpose and message of the Bible.
Many vociferous anti-theists were fundamentalists, and they still are only that they're anti-God rather than pro-God. Trading one set of misconceptions for another, they're more alike than they think.....'>......
Welcome to the family ❤
Anyone who uses the word "fundamentalist" as a pejorative term is a Hell-bound evil person, including mrs.g the OP here.
If y’all are really thinking this guy is wrong, examine yourself. Do you really idolize the flat earth. He is not calling God a liar. He brings context in. Your salvation does not depend on the earth’s shape
I appreciate the efforts you put into these videos and going out of your way to give us lessons like these when we don't have time to do so, by making it accessible through you. You are a blessing, IP.
100% absolutely!
the universe is like an enormous, gigantic book, with a language that no being has ever seen, hard, but possible to translate, but it takes time.
While this theory certainly applies to various aspects of Scripture, it cannot simply be laid out there as the definitive operating principle, nor can this survive without some hermeneutic to regulate it. Otherwise, one could simply claim that when Jesus said he was the only way, one could assert that this was simply the locution, and what he really meant was he was the one way available right now, but other ways are sure to come. This would lead to the breakdown of all meaning in the scriptures, with allowance for anyone to claim "This is what the Bible says, but it means something totally different."
Have been a Christian my whole life, but Thanks to IP, am am a totally different Christian than I used to be b4 I started following you..
Is it always good to be different? Do you think that you're a better Christian as well?
I used to be a young earth creationist until I encountered IP's videos. Good to know that Christians don't need to reject science to adhere to the Scriptures. (Looking at you, fundamentalists!)
@PushandillPushback
I'll just hope someone more qualified to speak on that subject will refute you on that eventually.
@PushandillPushback
Well look here. The age of the earth is not even a major issue in Christianity. You don't need to believe in a young earth to go to heaven. There are many Christians that embrace old-earth creationism or theistic evolution. There are no theological issues with old-earth creationism either. If you want to shoot them at me, go right ahead.
@@ChecedDomingcil You can interpret various passages differently in favor of different ages. Absolutely. And as the order of creation is different from current evolutionary thought, you could argue that the creation story is simply a myth to explain the power of God. But why would you put more faith in a very flawed and biased theory than miracle? The very concept of a physically human body walking on water, feeding masses with a bit of bread, healing leprosy with a touch, healing various other conditions and diseases, bringing back the dead, resurrecting from the dead,etc. would be laughed at by most evolutionary scientists. Christian scientists are actively censored from scientific journals and mocked. And even several alternative evolutionary theories are routinely mocked and scorned within the community. All while multiple science journals have accepted articles based on star trek that were submitted as a joke to test their scientific literacy. They failed the test severely and blamed the group for being unethical by not introducing extra variables and telling them they were planning to submit fake articles beforehand. . .
@@ChecedDomingcil Without going into all of the issues of modern evolutionary thought and modern science, here are a few questions involving modern science for you to ponder.
1.) How can you have an infinite mass or an infinite density in a location with finite resources, space, and size? This is a common mathematical trick to come up with several space/cosmos theories.
How can the same particle simultaneously exist in multiple locations at once? / How can merely witnessing nonliving matter change the results of a controlled experiment without extra exposure to light, air, etc. Both of these ideas are accepted in Quantum sciences. I would explain the first one as scattered particles and you are measuring random particles, not the same one. I would explain the second as experimental errors or a faulty hypothesis. Scientists would essentially call me a heretic for this.
Lastly, pertaining to evolution, if the environment was suitable to create living matter, why is it necessary for all life to have the same lineage? Why is it impossible for different modern life forms to have different microscopic ancestors? Why is it absolutely necessary that humans share a common ancestor with corn when it is much more reasonable to suggest there were different microscopic organisms that evolved differently? Some scientists even recognize there was likely was multiple first life forms. . . But even they argue that all the others just died off completely... that just isnt how competition works. An ecosystem is developed and competition keeps other organisms from becoming the sole organism on earth.
Only God knows how old the Earth is, how long each of the six days were, how old humanity is, etc. And God invented mathematics as well. Math is truth, and God is truth.
This video can be viewed through a comical lens: IP is saying biblical critics have bad reading comprehension.
I mean, there is generally two extremes in interpretation.
:EVERYTHING IS LITERAL AND METAPHORS DONT EXIST.
:NOTHING IS LITERAL AND EVERYTHING IS A METAPHOR.
Both are wrong. I literally had a college professor explain to me that the story of the flood was just a big metaphor for a woman giving birth. . . Metaphors in the bible are often very clear and noticeable. Much of the bible is literal and if it is worded in a literal fashion it should not simply be assumed to be figurative unnecessarily. That said, something literal and figurative often happens simultaneously in scripture. And often, real events can give us a great deal of esoteric wisdom and understanding. Btw. According to NASA and current accepted scientific opinion, the sun is not still. Everything, according to current understanding, (including the sun) rotates around the center of the milky way galaxy. Of course current understanding can always change. Almost everything we know about the universe is only mathematical. Which means if anything we base an equation on is wrong, every equation we use that equation for is also wrong. Math is just language and logic after all.
"Rise" and "lower" are relative words just like left and right are. If I am facing you, my left is your right. If I am on the opposite end of a globe, my up is your down. My rise is your lower. This is even done in physics where you must define your position as well as which direction is positive and negative.
YES, many Biblical texts are both literal and figurative!
Right, of course. But which parts are literal and which parts are metaphorical? How does one know which is which?
@@charlesrankin1190 That is a matter of theology. I would argue that if something is plainly stated as fact, it probably is unless there is a reason for it not to be. For example 1 day is described as a 1000 years. There is some room for a day to be much longer than an actual day. Especially since a day is defined scripturally according to the position of the sun and there was no sun on the first day.
Charles Rankin
It is not that hard in context. Seeing how people in the New Testament, especially Jesus, speak about Old Testament texts help.
Also, most parts are both, literal context that stands as a metaphor for something spiritual.
@Christian Slayer who hurt you?
Bless the man, that helped make this message possible, and those that work with him, they have been a blessing.
In the New Living Translation, Proverbs 23:16 says “Everything in me will celebrate when you speak what is right.”
Wow! Such a good video! God bless you!
Can you make a video on Sodom and Gamorrah
Yes, in 2021.
@@InspiringPhilosophy You're kidding, that long?
@@InspiringPhilosophy What about homosexuality?
Charles Rankin he has to go along the genesis series in chronological order
@@InspiringPhilosophy happy new year it's 2021 now,just a reminder
Here's another quote by Michael Heiser. "The bible was written for us (in the 21st century). But it wasn't written to us."
Heiser was far from being the first to make that observation, though.
@@Berean_with_a_BTh He did say that he never had an original thought, regarding scripture.
Fact is, i searched the Bible, and I never found a word about earth being flat. Even flat-earthers, couldn't provide me with real, actual examples, because the examples they provided were all fallacious, like a phrase being "flat land", which meant flatlands, IE plains, and was not about earth, but about particular place on earth...
@@watchunplannedbetransforme8975
Sorry but you need to provide a citation, and source of the citation. Telling me to read "Josephus Flavius" is worthless. Unless he only wrote one book.
Plus it is work of one lone man if it is so, hence it doesn't have any significance. Also, reason why you need to provide the citation is, that I don't have infinite time, and have better thing to do, than read all the books just to find one citation claiming that "World is flat"
And when you provide the citation, please provide the context if possible.
Since you are the one trying to prove it, you are obliged to provide the proof.
Otherwise I call bullshit on you again. If you are fine with that, then fine, but you just lost an argument.
Im so grateful that you use your studious spirit for the good of others! Thank you so much for these videos; they’re often as humbling as they are informative and I mean that in the best possible way. Keep it up!
I believed in flat young earth creationism for most of my freshman year in high school.
Be patient with me I have autism
You should
Interesting, once most people go flat they dont go back.
I'm fine, I'm just fine, I'm not angry... LOL. You must be married
He is
@@leonarduskarolusiuliustant7498 he did say "my wife"
but realizing you did something wrong doesnt necessarily mean you already know what you did. its easier to talk with the pharao 😅
And if she's using THAT many words, she's REALLY angry
Its bad to use the horuseye an symbol of the devil. You must rethink this
I had a poetry teacher who studied Dante. Dante often talked about the heart and liver and brain and kidneys as the seats of different processes which were not actually localized there. Whether Dante knew they weren't localized there, or didn't know doesn't really matter; he probably would have used the same language. My teacher was given to talking about kidneys, liver, heart, and brain the same way - knowing full well, that a robust empirical investigation, would give so minimal a role to the liver in one's sex drive, mentioning it as apropos could only lead to bad hepatological practice. Was he a liar? Karl Jung respected the personality types the medievals talked about (choleric, melancholic, sangine, and phlegmatic) and many people still use the language, but they know full well that bleeding someone to balance humors would be really bad medicine.
With the anatomical language that implies emotional experience happens in the gut or chest, some of that is borne out by modern science (your gut and chest are responsible for some emotional register), but the ancients clearly believed, that what anatomists call the "gut-brain" was primary and the "head-brain" was secondary. What is important here is that the Bible never explicitly agrees with the scientific assumptions that the original speaker probably would have brought into the conversation. Instead, as IP points out, the Bible uses the versimilar cultural expressions - but without denying scientific truths.
A lot of this is phenomenological language. "The sun also rises," is a basically literal, but phenomenological description of what occurs. As is referring to the "welkin" (English and German) or "raqia" (Hebrew) or "celestial dome" (modern astronomical jargon). All of these rely on a figure of speech that cannot be quite called "metaphorical," but if taken numenologically, would imply that modern people think there is a solid glass dome over our flat Earth.
I've always wondered what Flat Earthers thought was on other side of their concept, and where was the edge of it. Ancient mariners knew that the earth was at least curved, because ascending the mast gave a better view (greater distance) than standing on the deck. This centuries before it was proven by scientific means.
15:00 Like 21st century humans in general actually care about understanding special relativity.
Exactly
@@InspiringPhilosophy do you believe in evolution from literally singular cells? And do you think G-d made those cells if so, since they are insanely complex.
IP does believe so, but not that Elohim created those cells but something much more complex. Instead of Elohim directly creating the cells, Elohim created the laws of physics that construct those cells and all lifeforms afterwards.
The patriarchal culture of the Bible was simply that, culture, too.
Yes! THANKYOU for this video! I have been having a conversation with a Muslim for the past few weeks (trying to open his eyes to the truth of Jesus) and THIS topic is almost impossible for him to understand, I've tried explaining it about as many ways as I can possibly think of and he STILL stuck on the "scientific" inaccuracies in the bible, which is really hilarious given the ones found in the Qurran, which was initially intended for people MUCH closer to our time period than those the bible was, I hope he will watch this video and something will click! For some reason he is more concerned with whether or not The bible and Qurran are scientifically accurate than if they are theologically coherent, the mind set on the flesh is truly a frustrating thing to try to overcome!
There is a strong Muslim machine for attacking the Bible and teaching Muslims how to. They simply believe what they are told. And, they are told that legitimate attacks on the Quran are just lies. But, also, there can be extreme social pressure that make Muslims literally afraid to question their faith.
Good for you. I'll pray for you and your friend :)
th-cam.com/video/afVN-7vY0KA/w-d-xo.html
Gotta enjoy David Wood for assistance there
@@Austin1990 bigot
This fits with the idea that God highly values free will, he is able to teach people scientific knowledge but instead gives them the wherewithal to figure it out for themselves.
It's a classic comedy trope to take the Locution at face value and act like you don't understand the Illocution or Perlocution. Like in Star Trek: The Next Generation when someone says to Data "Don't look at me" when the Illocution is "I can't help you with that" but Data turns his head away from her and she has to go "no no I mean..." to explain the Perlocution.
Good Video, a good Defense, and as a Linguist I appreciate that you include Speech-Act Theory in your Argument. But I personally think that it should not necessarily be assumed that the ancient People believed in literal Readings for some of these cosmological Things you brought up: The Windows in the Sky sound to be like a Metaphor, considering that 1) Ecclesiastes 1:7 and Jeremiah 10:13 teach the Water Cycle, so the ancient Hebrews had some Understanding of the natural Science behind Rain, and 2) no Matter whether today or back then, any Idiot can tell that Rain emerges from Clouds, not from literal "Windows" (i.e. Holes) in the Sky (Sky ≠ Clouds) -- assuming they actually believed that when it would not even match what is seen with the Eye (akin to the Sun "rising", that is something that can at Least be visually perceived, so that seems totally believable) is to assume that they were just dumb, and that is "chronological Snobbery" (as C.S. Lewis called it).
Reading Psalm 29:10 the Way you present it (probably from Heiser -- Heiser can be good, but he can occasionally be a damn chronological Snob if I've ever seen one) is inaccurate because the Word for "Flood" (מַבּוּל mabbûl) is not used for the Firmament anywhere in the OT, but is used exclusively for the Great Flood, the Deluge (in Genesis 6 & 7, and later referred to throughout Genesis 9-11); the Preposition used before it (לַ la) does not mean "above" but "to, for, toward, into; belonging to, with[/in] regard to" (Kohlenberger/Mounce); and the Verb for "sit" is used in the Qal Perfect (יָשָׁ֑ב yashav) first, where it is applied to the Flood, and then in the simple Qal (יֵּ֥שֶׁב yeshev). Thus, Psalm 29:10 should better be understood as, while it may be referring to heavy Rain or Rain in general (as it reminds People of the Great Flood), God SITS in Power now and forever as he SAT in Power IN REGARDS TO the Great Flood back in the Days of Noah.
[EDIT: You may be referring to the Targum Translation which inserts על (al) "on/upon/against" instead of לַ (la); The Septuagint reads κύριος τὸν κατακλυσμὸν κατοικιεῖ ("the Lord shall-establish the Deluge"), which some Commentators consider a Mistake and that it should be κατοικεῖ "he shall sit", but the given LXX-Reading is actually closer to the Interpretation I have just given -- aside from the odd Future Tense. Overall, we should look to the Hebrew MT though.]
The Thing about Heart and Guts for Emotions isn't entirely wrong either, because those Phrases did not necessarily refer to those Organs as "that is what produced my Emotion" but rather "that is where I notice Emotion", just like the Hebrew Word for "Anger" is literally the Word for "Nose/Nostril(s)", because one's Anger could be noticed when the Nostrils would tremble and push out heavy Rushes of Air -- but that doesn't mean that they believed that "Anger was seated in the Nose", it was just the Place where it would be noticed.
Regarding their Cosmology, maybe they believed that a literal Sheol was literally in the Earth below them, but if we take that literal, but considering the often brought up "Hellmouth"-Motif in Regards to Sheol, we would then also have to think that they literally believed the Earth to literally open its literal Mouth to literally swallow People up (e.g. Ex 15:12; Num 16:30,32-34, 26:10; Deut 11:6; Ps 106:17, 124:3; Proverbs 1:12) -- and I assure you that that is not something anyone would have believed from actual Observation and visual Perception, I just doubt the Earth tended to do Stuff like that back in the Day; rather, all this Sheol Talk makes more Sense taken together with Genesis 3:19 (one of the oldest Stories handed down in the OT) and Ecclesiastes 3:20 (one of the latest Books written down in the OT) affirming a "From Dust you came, to Dust thou shalt return"-Idiom, which isn't even all that wrong from a scientific and literal Standpoint either.
I just think that ancient People should be given the Benefit of the Doubt, they were clearly capable of understanding Metaphors as Metaphors.
@TTS NEWS Thank you for your nice Comment. :)
Thank you. I very much agree with your very thoughtful and well supported comment. I was getting a little discouraged from all the people either saying that we have to accept the Bible as unscientific or that the Earth is really flat. You seem more informed than I am, but I had the same though about "the floodgates" being metaphorical due to other verses understanding that rain comes from clouds. William Lane Craig makes a similar argument to yours using Babylonian sources. I typically am very found of Hieser, but couldn't go with him on this issue.
Great comment. Thank you !
Good insight. Thank you for the comment
Every married man can relate to the wife analogy! 😂😂
Flat Earthers Mad. Thank you IP for FINALLY addressing this! 😎🌎🌍🌏
how can you believe the earth is flat. its like how people are mormons ot muslims its a religion and not scientific at all
@@johnny50424 I can't tell if you're joking but here's a few proofs 1) how ships disappear on the horizon 2)solar and lunar eclipses 3)pictures from space
@@termingyou i know
This sounds stupid just as i once thought before. But once you understand who God is and what is really going on in this world, youll know that the ultimate lie was to hide the shape of our world. People are realizing this by the millions. If you truly care for the truth and wish to escape the matrix, i strongly urge you to look into this. Im not asking you to find out if the earth is flat, im asking you to look into the subject matter, cause youll find out theres alot of hidden science from the world
@Christian Slayer With a responce like that, how is society suppose to move foward? Even if you think your right, what good is ad hominem attcaks? have you no civil manners?
I love your videos. Your speaking and graphic choices go so well together.
Hi brother, I just want to say that I'm proud of what you have done and are still doing, I speak many blessings for you, health, growing in knowledge ... Thx also for your the effort you put in to this for sharing the knowledge of the Bible and helping people understand. God bless all and have a great day.
Atheists want God to talk to us in a way we wouldn't be able to understand. A little longer and they'll be wondering why He used a human language and not a new language that no one has ever heard.
“The last thing we would’ve wanted to see would’ve been atomic theory or combustion engines in the hands of Nero or Vlad the Impaler” replace “Nero or Vlad the Impaler” with Gandhi and “combustion engines” with “democracy” and you have Civ 1 in a nutshell
But the atom was a product of ancient greek philosophy around 400 BC.
Peter Carlson Democritus’ idea of the atom wasn’t widely accepted until John Dalton provides empirical proof of it during the 1800s. Democritus’ idea of an atom was also flawed since Democritus saw them as unsplittable whereas atom splitting is not only possible but done on a daily basis in power plants
gamer7916 So Jesus shoulda taught the Jews modern political theory?
@@gamer7916 The greeks were in a debate about if there existed a smallest indivisible part or if you could continue to divide something infinetly. It was a 50/50 chance one side was correct.
What was thought to be this "atomos" during the 1800's was shown to be totally wrong when first the electron could be stripped and then the nucleus could be divided as well.
Aquinas clives it was a joke. In Civ 1, when India gets democracy, they become ultra aggressive because of a bug. Since they get democracy around the time they get nukes, they often end up nuking every nation around them
when friends ask me if I'm on my way to the party and I say ''yes'', it usually means that I haven't even got out of bed yet. Thankfully they are not literalists so they know what I mean
Do they know that you're in bed?
@@jeremiahmeade710 of course
Joshua prayed to God for the sun and the moon to stand still or freeze for a day
- Joshua 10:12-13...
Earth don't move but only sun, moon, and stars (dome) because...Earth is immovable.
Psalm 93:1
1 Chronicles 16:30
Everyone is waking up!
As a Buddhist, I tend to point out that Christ used a lot of parables when speaking to his disciples. If the Son of God did that, why is it hard to imagine that his Father might not do the same with Genesis, Exodus, and many other stories in the Bible?
The literal and even historical truth is not what the authors of the Bible were trying to convey. Nor was it what God wanted them to convey. It was spiritual truth. When you take it literally, you miss the spiritual nature of the text.
That's why I bristle at literalism in any religion. It's like the Buddhist parable of the man pointing at the moon and mistaking his finger for the moon. When you mistake the text for truth, you miss the spiritual truth it's pointing at.
No historical occurrence in the Bible must taking literary since the NT authors quote them as valid history. 2 Peter 2:4-6 and Jude 1 and 1 Corinthians 10 are examples
@@romeostojka7232 false and your requirement of willful ignorance pushes people away from God not to him please stop
No because archeology can prove the Bible as historical
Amazing job, well done. Thanks for putting in the effort 🙌
The question the Christian needs to ask himself is "Is the Bible a divine book FROM God or is it a human book ABOUT God?" If it is a divine book from God revealing knowledge, couldn't this God do a better job communicating his revelation? The Bible is in error if the illocution of its verses are wrong.
It is both. It is fully God's divine word, but from fully human writers and minds. Just as Jesus is fully God and fully man, the Bible echos that. You can read it and see that it is very human in it's words, but the inspiration is fully from God
You're mistaken. The Bible means what it says. The devil's power to deceive should not be underestimated - he was able to deceive numerous angels in heaven and he has changed our perception of the cosmos by what is falsely called science, which is really their religion.
The Bible says that during the flood, the water increased on the earth and covered EVERY mountain - how can that be possible on a ball?
The Bible is very consistent on painting to us a picture that the earth is what it says it is.
Why would the earth move around the sun if it is the sun that is serving the earth with light?
Can't you see the sun moving during the day ?
its not true that the earth moves around the sun but its true that your perception has been changed by NASA.
Also, I live by the ocean and almost everyday I see the ice-wall that surrounds the earth but many people think it's clouds but its not.
Just yesterday the moon was above the ocean reflecting the sun's light and shining on top of the ice wall and I could see the reflection of the ice-wall from where I was.
The world is living in deception - you are supposed to be about your Fathers business and showing His word on this topic but unfortunately you want to sound smart and wise.... but the excuses you're making for the Bible are wrong but the Bible is 100% correct and truthful on the topic.
There is no south-pole where celebrities like Will Smith supposedly went to - its a lie and we are under massive psychological indoctrination about the true reality of the earth.
God bless.
Bruh, you don’t understand science at all
@@ArtbyAP I've never looked with seriousness into the topic of dinosaurs before.
I usually take a lot of time and effort researching such topics and therefore I usually start my research when I have a genuine interest.
There's really nothing about them that has sparked my interest, but I might look into it.
Can you jet let me know if the logical conclusion of your theory is that the Bible is limited to the understanding which the original reader would have understood? Or can they say things that are actual prophecies as the New Testament describes them even though they are completely unaware of it?
I'm not entirely sure what you are asking here. But if you are trying to suggest that there is a contradiction between God choosing to not disclose a full understanding of the cosmos thousands of years ahead of their understanding, and God choosing to give specific details of specific events before they happen, then I have to tell you that there isn't a contradiction there.
In other words, there is a very big difference between teaching ancient people about quantum mechanics and telling them the location of the messiah's birthplace for example.
@@jackplumbridge2704 You misunderstood me, If the inspired language God chose was one to fit the understanding of the original reader, it binds the exegesis to only what they would have understood. We can't take it any further than what Israel would have understood about what Moses wrote if the language God chose was to fit them perfectly. I am not going to use all the scholarly words IP does, but if the intended perception of the whole kidney statement was about emotions and that is the ONLY way to read the Bible then you have to be consistent when talking about rest of the narrative. I have not trouble with IP's exegesis of that passage.
So for example when you have Abraham offering up his son as a sacrifice showing true faith with God's provision of the Ram which the Israelites in the desert would have understood, it would not be able to refer to Christ in anyway because it is bound to the understanding of the original reader because God picked language to communicate to them. I am not claiming that this is what IP believes, it just seems to be an easy conclusion with that specific logic if misapplied.
Justin Reimer
I think that IP takes many things too far. The Bible is extremely rich literarily, and things usually have at least two meanings, a literal physical meaning and a spiritual meaning. The Bible loves to use real, physical metaphors for spiritual things. And, it lays down cultural framework for such metaphors.
And, the kidney analogy is really poor. Anyone who has ever felt sick from anxiety, felt chest pain from heartache, or lost all energy from sadness should realize that his comment was very belittling while splitting hairs. In fact,I would think it more likely that the materialists have it wrong. Personally, I think their is more mingling of spirit and body than we realize.
@@Justin_Reimer no it doesn't bind the exegesis to only what ancient Israel would have understood. It's very easy to write a message that one group of people can understand whilst also writing it in a way that a later group of people can understand. IP gave an example of this in the video.
Abraham being commanded to sacrifice his son and then God providing the sacrifice has both an immediate meaning to the Israelites as well as foreshadowing Christ. I really don't understand why you think it is impossible for a text to have multiple layers of meanings.
Me: Are you angry?
Wife: No. I'm fine. Not angry at all.
Me: (chuckles) I'm in danger
“Heart” is a word that has been hijacked by modernity to refer to the blood pumping organ, but that’s not what it originally meant. In the Bible, “heart” refers to the core of man which is his spirit. It’s not a mistake. The mistake is to suppose that the modern usage of the word is superior.
Damn the Bible being misinterpreted by modern day people? Who would’ve knew.
Sorry, but that's just incorrect. 2 Kings 9:24 clearly uses the Hebrew word translated "heart" to refer to one's physical heart. This is the same word used throughout Scripture to refer to the center of one's intellect, emotions, will, and belief.
David Wilber
You’re assuming it means the organ
Proving my point
vizikey
לֵב
lêb
labe
A form of H3824; the heart; also used (figuratively) very widely for the feelings, the will and even the intellect; likewise for the centre of anything: - + care for, comfortably, consent, X considered, courag [-eous], friend [-ly], ([broken-], [hard-], [merry-], [stiff-], [stout-], double) heart ([-ed]), X heed, X I, kindly, midst, mind (-ed), X regard ([-ed)], X themselves, X unawares, understanding, X well, willingly, wisdom.
Total KJV occurrences: 598
If you’ve never used the e-sword app I’d highly recommend it.
Jesus taught by using parables and communicated with metaphors and wordplay. Why wouldn't God
Ah... selective reinterpretation! I agree!
When the Bible is obviously wrong, you COULD say that it is not an error! Rather it is a necessary reinterpretation... to fit the times. Especially ancient societies that didn't understand how reality works. But wasn't the Bible written or inspired by a supreme being who KNOWS reality? Can we still call the Bible a book of truth, an instruction guide for humanity? Why wasn't there a Bible part "B" for when humanity finally did understand science? If the New Testament was really a "New Covenant" that replaced the hundreds of rules in the Old Testament, where is the 3rd (or 4th, or 5th) Testiment for life in the 21st century?
If we take your assumption that God gives us false information or "time-limited" truth (but doesn't say so)... how does that affect the Bible? It means that some parts are universal and eternal, some are "true" but only for a while (i.e. slavery, genocide, torture, the beating of women, sex with minors and relatives, etc.), some "truth" is fudged to make a point, and the rest is fairy tales (would you prefer "parables"?). Which is which? Some Christians say everything is true, even if it cannot be true. Others disagree over what is historical and what is a fairy tale. Are you truly OK if I apply your rules to the rest of the Bible?
Two hundred years ago, people reinterpreted the Bible, "Slavery no longer makes sense; Christians should believe in human rights." A hundred years ago, people reinterpreted the Bible, "Women are not inherently inferior; Christians should believe in Women's rights." If I say, "Oppressing people who are not like you no longer makes sense; Christians must treat gays and trans like human beings with the same rights and respect as everyone else.", then no one will object? Can anyone object and still believe in selective interpretation?
8:10- incorrect. YHWH was Israel’s deity, no one else’s.
Hey, Romanian here, loved the Vlad the impaler reference. I think that he would have definitely used the atomic bomb on the ottomans. Love your videos, keep up the good work.
And the whole world
@@Ayushgraphy Nah, just the ottomans, and Hungarians of course :)
All these cringy comments of men who are afraid of women. Grow a backbone.
What?
This is a fantastic explanation of these concepts. I've thought similar things, but you laid it out so well.
Having words or vocab and processes laid out really makes it easier to conceptualize the ideas that we sometimes have inklings about. This has helped me in that way
@@Bonddeeee Been 2 years since my comment. I have to refresh myself over what it was I thought was so fantastically explained 😂
@@Alan112573 for me it was the 3 types of locution, the wife analogy about being fine was pretty good
The main problem with this explanation is that we could apply it to literally any ancient mythological account. I mean, maybe Marduk or Baal are real. All the obvious moral absurdities and factually wrong depictions of the world are just the locution they used to reveal themselves.
It's also pretty telling that, until science proved things to be different than described in the text, nobody put forward this explanation.
The Bible is completely and literally true. We do not live on a spinning ball
IP I wish you could sit down and have a chat with John Lennox and David Berlinsky.
I think IP just found an excuse to teach grammar
Damnit! You caught me on one of my guilty pleasuring. Now I have to cancel my video on prepositions!
@@InspiringPhilosophy Don't teach grammar until you know how to use commas, Michael.
InspiringPhilosophy IP it’s not good to swear
@@PlantChrist That's what happens when you take man's word over God's
@@JHohenhauser getting old
There are 3 brains in our bodies: brain, heart and gut
You did a good job explaining it, but it feels to me that this should be obvious. The only people using these types of arguments will be people who already decided that the bible is false and then searched for reasons why.
Or fundamentalists that believe everything in the Bible is perfectly literal. That's one of the biggest gripes I have about American Christianity. Too many people get hung up on literalness, instead of trying to understand the message God is trying to give us.
Actually there is a The Gut-Brain Connection. A testable one. Science says it all the time. So, I dont see any point in trying to refute biblical ancient wisdom in this particular point.
My left ear is lonely.
The sundial went backwards.
I think you are mistaken in your interpretation of Jesus's statements on divorce. God isn't teaching new moral law through Jesus because humanity has graduated to a new level. Jesus is consistent with the OT law.
Jesus is simply pointing out that divorce wasn't part of God's original design and only exists because of sin ( the hardness of men's hearts). He's not changing morality. Notice the distinction between "putting away" and "bill of divorcement" in the OT and look at the Greek in the NT.
A bigger issue is simply the premise that "God will reveal new morality as humanity matures".
Why think humans were more mature in the 1st century AD than the 10th century BC?
Does that mean that the NT is insufficient now since we've doubled that "maturity gap"?
What about the next 1000 will we then get to see Gods "fully mature" morality? Or do you think we've conveniently peaked?
Seems like a slippery and anti biblical slope.
No because God already told them that there would be a new covenant someday. There's nothing beyond this.
@@ericbrown6203 God also went on to say what that new covenant would be. It would be that His law would be written on their hearts...not that there would be new laws.
Michael Jones is incorrectly interpreting the hardness of heart argument and interpretation of the Lord, and you are right that the Lord is consistent with the law of Moses as found in Deuteronomy.
Marriage and divorce and remarriage are fundamental human institutions, and God's will for these are communicated and found in Deuteronomy as well as in the Lord's rulings in the gospel accounts and sayings.
The distinction between putting away and the divorce certificate is not particularly important: the putting away is the dismissal, the cancellation of the contract and the divorce, in legal terms. The divorce certificate is merely the evidence or purported evidence of this action. The divorce certificate is only important if it is denied in the case of a lawful divorce, or produced in the case of an unlawful divorce. The Lord rules clearly in Mat. 5:31-32 and 19:3-9 that a divorce certificate is insufficient, on its own, to constitute and cause and effect a lawful divorce, and that any certificate that purports to represent a lawful divorce of those God has joined together is a nullity, and that any subsequent remarriage to other parties, by either spouse, while the other still lives, is adultery and adulterous. The Lord never rules on the converse situation, when there is a lawful divorce but no certificate. I would expect he would rule that any such action would be an invalid and incomplete divorce: the certificate is a necessary element of the procedure, without which the divorce has not taken place, even if it might be lawful for a divorce to separate those God has not joined together, and that can only separate by lawful divorce. (For the case of a marriage that is adulterous or otherwise unlawful from inception, while it might be possible to call the separation a divorce, it is more accurately a ruling that the marriage was void ab initio. The lawful divorces in Deut. 24:1-4 do not have this character, however, and are true divorces.)
The divorce law exists because of sin, but that does not mean that the sin is hardness of heart. Hardness of heart means unwillingness to reverse, whether by compromise or forgiveness or simply by a change of mind. In the divorce context, the marriage contract, at the conditional stage of betrothal, has been breached or repudiated. Either case is a breaking of the terms of the contract by at least one party. A betrothal is a contract to wed, and to meet the conditions to wed, and may also contain express or implied representations. For example, Mr. John Smith betroths himself to marry Miss Jane Doe, and the parties promise to keep themselves only for the other, to prepare for the wedding, and to confirm their agreement and to perform the agreement by going through with the wedding. Either party could then change their mind and repudiate the agreement, which is a form of breach. They promised to go through with the marriage, but then refused to, and told the other party that the deal was off. Or, one party may get involved with a third party, breaching the contract. Or, one party may discover that one of the representations, such as the bride's virginity, was a misrepresentation, for example, if Smith discovers that Doe is pregnant to another man, and the conception date was prior to the betrothal date. In all these cases, whether repudiation, breach or misrepresentation, at least one party has sinned. The other party, upon discovery, may cancel the contract, and financial compensation may be payable depending on the terms of the betrothal, any bride price, losses incurred etc.
But the hardness of heart comes in after the repudiation, breach or misrepresentation is discovered. The parties have the choice whether to waive the conditions, forgive the breaches and/or re-negotiate the terms of the contract, or affirm the contract. If they do this at first, no divorce happens, the parties just address the issue between themselves, perhaps informally. However, the wronged party may formally sue out a divorce, and this leads to both parties being discharged from the contract, neither of them are bound to perform it any further. As such, either party may marry a third party. Financial compensation may be payable. After such a divorce, a second choice exists for the parties: to re-negotiate and re-marry each other, i.e. to re-betroth themselves to each other again. It is at this point that the law of Deut. 24:1-4 permits them this choice, but prohibits it after the woman (and we presume, after the man) marries someone else.
The hardness of heart refers to the decision not to forgive, not to re-negotiate, to divorce, and not to remarry each other, before things go too far and one of the parties marries a third party. The Lord recognised and taught this in his argument that the divorce law of Deut. 24:1-4 was not a law permitting the separation of those God joined together in marriage, but addressed a separate set of facts and circumstances that involved hardness of heart, i.e. the decision to use divorce law to separate what God had not (yet) lawfully joined together, and to persist in that decision, and to marry another party instead of re-negotiating a marriage back to the same person so as to have God lawfully and fully join the two together for life.
The divorce law context of Deut. 24:1-4 is the new marriage context of 'when a man, takes a woman, and marries her' and then a problem occurs during that process, and during that betrothal period. The new marriage context is also indicated by Deut. 24:5. If the law addressed a problem arising independently of the betrothal and marriage process, the law would have been written more simply as 'If a man's wife finds no favour in his eyes, because he found some indecency in her, and he divorces her ...'
The divorce law in Deut. 24:1-4 is in the context of the divorce law of Deut. 22:13-21, which has substantially the same facts and introduction, which ruled that if a woman is truly a man's wife, he may not divorce her all of his days, with the exception of lawful divorce, quietly and properly and promptly pled for porneia committed by the woman before or during the betrothal period, not disclosed to the man until after the betrothal contract was made.
See my paper here for more details: www.academia.edu/35774310/Critique_of_the_David_Instone-Brewer_Divorce_and_Remarriage_Theory
Remember, science is not truth. It's imperfect us trying to understand the truth in and around us. And our understanding is constantly changing.
IP you are bringing apologetics to a new level
Jeff Phelps he really is.
@@johnny50424 what evidence?
@@johnny50424 Nope! Flat earthers bring reproach to God's name and not a single one will debate me on "Does the Bible Positively Teach the Earth is Flat". Not Nathan Thompson, not "Biblical Flat Earther", not even Dante G. Cross...I challenged over 30 flatties and so far its evident they are not confident the Bible supports there claims....It'll be a miracle if you would accept to debate me
@@johnny50424 Are you a flat earther?
this absolutely blew my mind
I’m a catholic and our magisterium says that science doesn’t go against the Bible or our religion God bless you✝️☦️🙏
The sun being created after the earth in the Bible quite literally goes against science
If the sun and moon do not orbit, what is your explanation of such verses as Gen_15:12, 19:23, Psa_50:1,Ecc_1:5, Jos_10:13, Isa 38:8, Mark_16:2, Luke_4:40?. I am not aware of any scriptures stating the earth actually does rise and go down as a bases for Speech-Act Theory. My question is not a challenge, simply a question. Your presentations are very interesting and thought provoking.
I'd have to look at all the scriptures you listed, but Joshua 10:13 can be described away as an Annular Eclipse that occurred at the time.
I think associating emotions or the psyche (and purity or impurity of the state of the soul) with the heart in the modern age is good and beautiful and people today still use phrases like tender or hard hearted. Associating the psyche with the heart transcends scientific discovery, because people naturally spoke in spiritual terms, because people have an inherent spiritual nature. We don't see people saying "I love you with all of my brain" in the modern scientifically advanced world do we? Neither does man naturally associate himself in his full entirety with his brain.
In Genesis 8:2 it means the raining stopped and "windows of heavens were closed" gives an understanding that it rained very heavily and dense and it stopped...
Clear as day. I read the chapters and after you have read it you'll never understand it literally. Trust me. When I was reading it never even came to my mind even as an option.....
Michael probably didn't have enough time to go over everything and so I thought I should share my opinion...
@Ebiegberi Adonkie people in that time might understand it that way, it can be their understanding that is faulty but the scriptures doesn't seem to be descriptive of a flat earth......
A circle is mentioned in Isaiah 40:22
And a circle in 3rd Dimension is?
Yes, exactly.. the original Hebrew word for that may mean a spherical shape if interpreted...
(On the other hand if you understand earth to be flat a round flat won't come to your mind, a square or rectangular flat is more reasonable in that way, so if someone says flat circle it doesn't make sense as that would be similar to a plate or disc and which can be and could have been mentioned as plate or disc as they were more familiar to people as shapes rather than a geometrical description... Even if this part is wrong, the original Hebrew word refering to a sphere is accurate)
It is always easy for 90% of the reader of any hard book to not notice any small details...
So the reader may be wrong representer of the the book but the book can self verify itself when it comes to its claims, that the claims were actually claimed by the book... Understood?
So why not study the Bible?
You will find many things you never knew about as I have found...
God bless you and your loved ones.. have a nice day...
Expressions such as "windows of heaven" and "floodgates of heaven" are IDIOMS. A similar modern-day idiom would be "it rained cats and dogs." In Gen. 8:2 we have an idiom--figure of speech--used to describe an event that really happened (a literal event). People sometimes polarize themselves into 'literal' vs. 'figurative' camps of Bible interpretation, which is hermeneutical overkill done in the name of linguistics since the Bible writers employed a MIXTURE of literal and figurative language.
Where this polarization actually stems from is theological conservatism (the Bible was divinely inspired down to the very letters in the text, is inerrant in the autographs, is correct in its history, and is entirely true in its prescriptive teaching) vs. theological liberalism (the Bible might be THOUGHT OF as inspired, but is not in the verbal/textual sense, and went through many editorial changes/rewrites over centuries, probably contains many silly stories and unhistorical events, and yet is somehow religiously USEFUL though not necessarily true). Thus, liberals are prone to interpreting Bible writer-intended text/accounts/history EN MASSE as 'figurative' while conservatives understand the text/accounts/history to be literally--i.e., ACTUALLY--true though not every word, including idioms, were intended to be LINGUISTICALLY literal. ('literally true' = actually true, but that is not the same thing as 'everywhere true in only the most literal sense of all of its words.')
The conservatives thus object to liberals arbitrarily interpreting/dismissing ACTUAL history in the Bible as 'mythological' or 'allegorical' in order to undermine the Bible's credibility and spiritual authority, rather than objecting to someone recognizing and taking into account actual figures of speech employed by the Bible writers themselves.
That said, some conservatives have overreacted to the term 'literal'--as if the person who thinks the Bible is literal means they think it's TRUE--and to the term 'figurative--as if the person who thinks the Bible is figurative (in places) means they think it is untrue/nonfactual. This overreaction has been justifiably fueled in the past by liberals dismissing true biblical history as false, but it has also resulted in poor hermeneutical practice among some conservatives who have wrongly asserted against the local contexts of Bible passages themselves that only the most literal senses of words used in them can be the correct understanding.
An example for (some) fellow conservatives reading this: You can believe Jesus was TRUTHFULLY characterizing Herod when He referred to him as a "fox" WITHOUT having to think that Herod was LITERALLY a four-legged canine.
For theological liberals reading this, I have some homework for you:
www.amazon.com/Evidence-Faith-Deciding-God-Question/dp/0945241151/ref=sr_1_3?crid=2VHXRBTYHXKDR&dchild=1&keywords=evidence+for+faith+montgomery&qid=1630576082&sprefix=Evidence+for+faith%2Caps%2C194&sr=8-3
Gut bacteria DOES affect mood though...
Bacteria and viruses behave very similarly to demons...
Think about the parallels between toxoplasmosis and demon possession...
This gave me a good laugh! I appreciate it
hawkxlr
It’s something to think about, regardless of how funny it is.
Demons are said to be invisible and “disembodied.” They need a host to flourish. Bacteria, viruses, and fungi all behave in the same ways. What if that’s a truth that God was trying to teach to early man. Early humans wouldn’t understand germ theory. It’s literally what Michael was discussing in this vid.
@@ghostgate82 You're stretching REALLY far on this one bud.
I can just imagine Jesus finding an someone with an early form of Coronavirus, but since he can't simply heal such an advanced disease, he has to take it out and send it into a herd of pigs and make them drown themselves to prevent a pandemic.
I guess these bacteria and viruses also gained sentience at some point since Jesus literally talks to these "demons".
Honestly, it seems like something straight out of some Jesus parody sketch. I'd pay to watch it!
@@ghostgate82 sure, so demons can be exorcized with antibiotics. It's almost like it's a case of superstitious people ascribing to demons that which we have since learned has a natural explanation.
Couldn’t agree more. It isn’t a coincidence that when one removes all sugar from their diet for an extended period of time, thus killing gut bacteria which feed on the sugar, that they experience symptoms similar to minor demon possession. I can attest to this personally, as I’ve experimented with carnivore a few times. While the adjustment period grows shorter with each attempt, I still find myself having periods of one to two days where I exhibit behaviors of minor demon possession; behaviors which are often accompanied with trauma of all degrees that are almost “required” to be sorted through before progressing. It’s an intimidating but relieving experience, and probably the subconscious reason as to why I don’t fully commit to carnivore (fear of repeating the trauma). Yeah, it’s probably a stretch, but I think your nose is on the right scent.
In the Greek and Hebrew languages, there was no word for “earth”.
It was simply “land/ground”.
In both languages, there was no word for “heaven”.
It was simply “air/sky”.
God was the first parent trying to be hip with the kids, using their language so they will understand.
Yeah, God couldn't just tell them. Nope he had to let them figure it out on their own! There's obviously no way an all powerful, all knowing, omnipresent God, could have possibly spoke to them in their language to have them understand basic stuff! Nope just had to wait until little ol humans found it out for themselves! Makes perfect sense. 😁
Elias Horton Did you even watch the video? It wasn’t the Bible’s job to communicate twenty first century ideas to the Hebrews. It was written for humanity, not written to it. God wasn’t concerned with teaching physics or astronomy to ancient people, he was concerned with their souls. Knowing how astronomy and cosmology works can’t help the soul.
@@TheSimpleManUFOUAP What you consider basic and what ancient people could understand are probably not the same. Could you imagine how paranoid they would become if God mentioned that there are invisible living things (microbes) all around and in us?
Melissa Bachmann
They understood very well that there are invisible, powerful, sentient beings all around us. Yet, look how many modern, so-called educated people would react to that notion.
God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good? -Numbers 23:19
Here are some reasons why you wouldn't have lied to the pharaoh even literally:
- "The sun rises" is literally true in the earth's rotating reference frame oriented in alignment with the local surface of the earth. Heliocentrism is just as wrong and as right as geocentrism; they are just different coordinate systems and Einstein found out how to formulate laws of physics in a such a way that the coordinate system used does not matter: This is called general covariance. The phrase "The sun rises" focuses on the geocentric coordinate system but does not in itself express the idea that this system is the only true one.
- "love with all you heart": The word "heart" shares a common origin with "hearth" and "core". The idea is that of an essential center of something. This is how the word "heart" has a double meaning: it can denote the essential core of personality and thought, or the essential organ deep within the body whose constant activity is needed to sustain life. Using the word does not necessarily mean you identify the two.
- "trust you gut feeling": According to the Schachter-Singer two-factor theory of emotion, emotions are experienced when the conscious brain observes the body's physiological reaction to a stimulus (which, I might add, is itself caused by possibly subconscious cognition in the brain). So what you "feel" when you have a "feeling" really are your guts, at least with some feelings.
dude, do we even understand everything that happens in the Universe, let alone in the Meta-Universe in which God exists?
Le no lol
Also, people try to comprehend god to fit their image (idols) yet completely reject the trinity. The trinity is complex, but we ourselves cannot comprehend the world, so who are we to try to understand God's nature to fit our minds?
And we can't understand fully these three things, first of which is God followed by eternity and finally we are still struggling to understand infinity
"Flawed" could be "incomplete" - even as we have partial, incomplete knowledge. Future generations will marvel at our functioning with incomplete knowledge and understanding.
I was looking forward to this and even though I'm familiar with the two contexts in the Bible. Words like locution, illocution and perlocution are not in everyday speech and wouldn't help me explain the gospel to the people I encounter.
Terms you may be able to use instead include "semantics", "imply" and "infer". These words are closer to the layman, and might allow you to get further in your discussion.
"Semantics" is the dissection of the exact/literal words used compared to what is meant.
To "imply" is what the intended meaning of your message is.
To "infer" is to understand the meaning spoken by someone else, and thus how to act upon it.
Of course, these words are not perfect synonyms, but I think they can at least get you started. Remember the saying, "Do not be concerned with the use of fine words, but with the fine use of words." ;)
Vlad the Impaler was a devout Christian and fight for Christianity against the Muslim attacks of the Ottoman Empire
I love your videos so insightful and now I know you are wise. If my wife says she is fine she isn't fine😂 smart man!
You are making the same arguments made by Francis Collins, M.D., Ph.D., and Robert Carter, Ph.D. when you claim that the Bible is not a science book.
The problem with your position is that it undermines the truth of the gospel. If we cannot believe what God says in the Bible about God’s creation, how can we believe what God says about spiritual truths? “If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?” (John 3:12)
We are called on by God to believe everything that he has written in his word, including his description of a flat earth. We are to believe every word not just some of them. “And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.” (Luke 4:4) The believing Jews thought the earth was flat because God told them it was flat, and they put what God told them in the scriptures.
The gospel is the entire Holy Bible, not just some of it. Matthew 4:4. Christian belief is an all or nothing proposition. “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” 2 Timothy 3:16.
God’s account of his creation is part and parcel of the gospel. A person with genuine faith believes what Jesus said about both heavenly and earthly things.
Jesus is God. Jesus created all things in heaven and on earth. See Colossians 1:16-18. God has revealed himself through his creation.
"[T]hat which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse." Romans 1:19-20.
If men have a misunderstanding of God’s creation, they will also have a misunderstanding of who God is. If people believe in a creation that does not exist, they consequently also believe in a creator that does not exist. It is essential, therefore, to have an accurate understanding of God’s creation. God did not make a movable, spherical earth. If men believe in a heliocentric creation, they will necessarily believe in a heliocentric creator. A heliocentric creation does not exist. So also, a heliocentric creator does not exist. A heliocentric creator is a false god. We have been warned to avoid the preaching of a false gospel, which presents a false Jesus.
"For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him." 2 Corinthians 11:4.
Edward Hendrie
Author of “The Sphere of Influence: The Heliocentric Perversion of the Gospel”
Sorry but Genesis and the entire Old Testament teaches Geocentrism. IP, I love your videos but now you’re just trying to fit modern scientism and pseudoscience into the bible and trying to avoid any dispensation.
Exactly, thankfully someone agrees. I really think it comes down to Christians not wanting to be seen by the world as foolish to believe so called "antiquated" Ideas when modern day science has supposedly proved all if this wrong. But if most Christians would just do some research you will find that most if not all modern scientific theories are based in occult ideas. We actually have more ground to stand on in defending the word of God and his cosmology.
Momentum
What do you mean by geocentrism?
@@thomasb4467 geocentrism is the model with the earth at the center of the cosmology, heliocentricism is the model with the sun in the middle. Heliocentricism is the most widely accepted model today.
Ocean Dreams
Thank you. From where in the Bible would people come to the conclusion that we live in a geocentric solar system?
@@thomasb4467 Folks believe in geocentrism mainly because of that's how they interpret "Joshua's Long Day". This is in the book "The Earth Is Not Moving" and they use Tacho Brahi's teachings and also "debunk" Kepler because his mother was considered a "witch"...to heck with the Bible or science or fact.
great job. I love the different approach you've shone on this topic.
If god intended for the Bible to not be a book of science then why are there many scientific truths in there. Maybe I’m understanding this wrong but if you get what I mean then please answer my question IP... thank you in advance
I'm not IP but the bible has scientific truths because it is God speaking as creator. However, that is not his focus! The focus in the bible is God's glory and that is explicitly expressed in the giving of his son and in the salvation of his people. The bible gives no mechanism for scientific theories and such because that is not the intent of what is written.
We must always put things in their context.
acolytes777 ok... I understand. Thank you
My goodness Ip the visual in this video are beautiful and I really love the message in this video!