That last line was the finisher... "Many men have tried to become God, but only one God became Man " LET'S GO HOLY SPIRIT! SPEAK TO AND THROUGH YOUR CHILDREN. AMEN!
Also important to understand, we have someone who can empathize with us since he became man. Hebrews 4:15 F or we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are-yet he did not sin.
2 Thessalonians 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. Sounds like 2 Thessalonians 2:4 and then 2 Corinthians 11:13-15. About Satan's false apostles coming to us as ministers of righteousness as he disguises himself as an angel of light.
I have only been studying the bible for 1 year now and this is the best and shortest possible summary that can be made of this topic. I have watched veteran preachers try to explain this, but it takes them 20+ minutes and it still isn't as completely explained as what you did in this video. Thank you and God bless!!! Also, I liked and subscribed.
Thank you God for sending Him to teach us, help us and die for us! I have never been the same since asking Jesus to help me and allowing him to enter my heart. I look forward to telling others about Him and helping those who are in need. For I was once in need and He lifted me up so that I could follow Him and learn to love again. Peace be to all who read this. Thank you God; all Glory is Yours!
Amen bro. May 2025 will be the year of healing for this world, both west and east. And may Zoomer be known as the generation healed by God from generational sins
“Goals of religion” is so arbitrary. A Muslim could just say that God created us to submit our free will to Him and that’s why their religion is the correct one.
I agree, that was a little to much of a jump for me. Better perhaps to prove it by Love. The mercy that Christ gives in that we can be redeemd by faith in him and not by what we can achive in life/how rightouss we are. Because we all sin, but we all get an equal chance to reach heaven through Jesus. Givning what we all can give, faith. If all religions agree that God is love, that shows a loving and just god and is therefore the correct faith.
This video assumes that all religions have the same goal. Religion is a man-made category of things, which has a ton of grey area since many major religions are unrelated. Trying to come up with a singular shared trait of all religions is impossible. It looks easy if your viewpoint is Abrahamic faiths, since they all are related and use more or less the same scripture (with key differences). Buddhism isn't trying to bring anyone closer to any god, since Buddhism largely doesn't believe in a god. It's about escaping this world through enlightenment, not because god loves you, but because you love yourself and others enough to want them to escape the suffering of this world. Hinduism has many paths to achieving Moksha. Many believe you don't have to be a believer in Hinduism to escape the cycle of birth and rebirth. You can become enlightened by practicing philosophy, whether secular, Christian, Islamic, Hindu, etc. You can become enlightened by maintaining your health through exercise and diet. If you look at all religions by how well they do what Christianity says it does, of course Christianity is going to look like the correct religion. Christianity isn't trying to release us from a cycle of birth and rebirth, so by some Asian religions' standards, it's doing a pretty horrible job at being the one true religion.
Hello. I am an atheist. I define atheism as suspending any acknowledgment as to the reality of any particular god until sufficient credible evidence is presented. My situation is that *_I currently have no good reason to acknowledge the reality of any god._* And here is why I currently hold to such a position. Below are 11 facts I must consider when evaluating the claim made by certain theists that a particular god exists in reality. To be clear, these are not premises for any argument which _concludes_ there to be no gods. These are simply facts I must take into account when evaluating the verity of such a claim. If any of the following facts were to be contravened at a later time by evidence, experience, or sound argument, I would THEN have good reason to acknowledge such a reality. 1. I have never been presented with a functional definition of a god. 2. I personally have never observed a god. 3. I have never encountered any person who has claimed to have observed a god. 4. I know of no accounts of persons claiming to have observed a god that were willing or able to demonstrate or verify their observation for authenticity, accuracy, or validity. 5. I have never been presented with any _valid_ logical argument, which also introduced demonstrably true premises that lead deductively to an inevitable conclusion that a god(s) exists in reality. 6. Of the many logical syllogisms I have examined arguing for the reality of a god(s), I have found all to contain a formal or informal logical fallacy or a premise that can not be demonstrated to be true. 7. I have never observed a phenomenon in which the existence of a god was a necessary antecedent for the known or probable explanation for the causation of that phenomenon. 8. Several proposed (and generally accepted) explanations for observable phenomena that were previously based on the agency of a god(s), have subsequently been replaced with rational, natural explanations, each substantiated with evidence that excluded the agency of a god(s). I have never encountered _vice versa._ 9. I have never knowingly experienced the presence of a god through intercession of angels, divine revelation, the miraculous act of divinity, or any occurrence of a supernatural event. 10. Every phenomenon that I have ever observed appears to have *_emerged_* from necessary and sufficient antecedents over time without exception. In other words, I have never observed a phenomenon (entity, process, object, event, process, substance, system, or being) that was created _ex nihilo_ - that is instantaneously came into existence by the solitary volition of a deity. 11. All claims of a supernatural or divine nature that I have been presented have either been refuted to my satisfaction or do not present as _falsifiable._ ALL of these facts lead me to the only rational conclusion that concurs with the realities I have been presented - and that is the fact that there is *_no good reason_* for me to acknowledge the reality of any particular god. I have heard often that atheism is the denial of the Abrahamic god. But denial is the active rejection of a substantiated fact once credible evidence has been presented. Atheism is simply withholding such acknowledgment until sufficient credible evidence is introduced. *_It is natural, rational, and prudent to be skeptical of unsubstantiated claims, especially extraordinary ones._* I welcome any cordial response. Peace.
This is the only rational conclusion. If people were honest, they would admit that the only way for them to stay religious is to embrace the irrational, which is fine, because human beings aren't inherently rational
The Central False Dilemma The argument presents a false dichotomy between "all religions trying to reach up to God" versus Christianity's unique solution. This ignores: Other religions with divine incarnation concepts (e.g., Krishna in Hinduism) Different theological frameworks for divine-human relationships (e.g., Sufi mysticism) Non-theistic approaches to transcendence (e.g., Buddhism) Various religious concepts of divine mediation and intercession Problematic Logical Structure The argument follows this pattern: CopyP1: We need a bridge between infinite God and finite humans P2: This requires someone who is both God and human P3: Jesus is both God and human C: Therefore Christianity is the only true religion This argument has several issues: It assumes its own premises (begging the question) The conclusion doesn't necessarily follow from the premises It presupposes specific theological concepts ("infinite God," "human sinfulness") Misrepresentation of Other Religions The video makes broad generalizations about "all other religions" that are historically inaccurate: Many religions don't focus on "earning" divine acceptance Various traditions have concepts of divine grace Multiple religions have stories of divine sacrifice Several faiths include concepts of divine-human mediators The "Uniqueness" Fallacy The argument claims Christianity is unique because: God dies for humans Divine becomes human Perfect mediator exists Salvation through grace However, these concepts appear in various forms across different religions: Dying and rising gods (Osiris, Dionysus) Divine incarnations (Avatars in Hinduism) Divine mediators (Bodhisattvas in Buddhism) Grace-based salvation (Pure Land Buddhism) Logical Issues with the Mediator Argument The argument about needing a mediator has internal consistency problems: CopyIf God is infinite and humans finite, then: - How can any being be both? - If such a being can exist, why is only one instance possible? - Why couldn't God create multiple mediators? - Why couldn't God simply choose to relate directly to humans? The Problem of Evil Response The video's response to the problem of evil is circular: CopyP1: We live in a fallen world because we deserve it P2: Jesus offers forgiveness and future perfection This doesn't actually address the philosophical problem of evil: Why would an all-good God create beings who "deserve" evil? How does future perfection justify present suffering? Why is suffering necessary for redemption? Epistemological Problems The argument starts with "how do we know which religion is correct?" but then: Assumes Christian theological premises to prove Christianity Uses Christian concepts to evaluate other religions Doesn't provide objective criteria for evaluation Historical Context The argument ignores the historical development of these ideas: Early Christian debates about Jesus's nature Influence of Greek philosophy on Christian theology Development of incarnation theology Evolution of salvation concepts Anthropological Issues The argument's analogy of relating to different beings (dogs, ants, rocks) oversimplifies: Different cultures have different concepts of divine-human relationships Various models of transcendence exist Multiple frameworks for understanding divine-human interaction Conclusion: While the video presents an internally coherent Christian theological argument, it fails as a logical proof for Christianity's unique truth claims. It relies on circular reasoning, false dichotomies, and oversimplified representations of other religions. A more rigorous approach would need to: Establish objective criteria for evaluating religious claims Accurately represent other religious traditions Address the philosophical problems in its own arguments Acknowledge the complexity of religious experience and truth claims
This is a 3 minutes video, and can only afford to spend a few seconds for describing each other large religion. Of course it cannot describe them all in full detail. Those few words however, are a reasonably good approximation for the topic at hand. Of course if this was a 2 hours long video, it could spend more time to be more precise with the other religions. Yes, a more rigorous approach would be warranted, as you say, but one can not expect such rigorous approach in a 3 minutes video.
@@praevasc4299 It blatantly ignores other religions with divine incarnation concepts (e.g., Krishna in Hinduism) Different theological frameworks for divine-human relationships (e.g., Sufi mysticism) Non-theistic approaches to transcendence (e.g., Buddhism) Various religious concepts of divine mediation and intercession It claims that its interpretation of god is correct, no that's not an excuse
you just kinda presuppose some chirstian values as if they should apply to all religions dogmatically, like god having to be "great" or humans being "sinful"
0:30 this is false: the ability to connect humans to God is not the goal of all religions, and painting an idea of God unique to Christianity as THE idea of god so that you can introduce Christianity as the only way to logically experience Christianity’s version of god is begging the question.
@@FireMarekPL1 no, not at all. most religions try to explain the unknown. God exists in the unknown, we ma know everything physical but god knows physical and metaphysical which we cannot full perceive. Many religions try to bridge the gap between these two realms and explain their existence. its all about staving off existentialism
@@FemboyFlaVR "the divine" is shifting the goalposts, because anything spiritual could be considered "the divine." The video explicitly said God, not "some kind of spiritual belief." So this really only includes Abrahamic and polytheistic religions - but not Buddhism, Shinto, Wicca, animism, ancestor worship, new age, etc etc.
are you sure that Jesus Christ never wanted to start a religion? Matthew 28:16-20 says otherwise: 16 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” also how do YOU know that he never wanted to start a church while all the Disciples and Church fathers preached and acted otherwise? the whole book of acts is about the early church of the 1st century and how they spread the Gospel and the Religion. and you are saying that Our Lord didn't want that?
0:51 It only denies it if we say God is on the level of every day logic. In some forms of Buddhism and also in Hinduism it is said that God or the True Reality / Origin is infinitely transcendent and also infinitely immanent.
Well, Christianity believes that too, but it thinks it isn't enough that the the Finite is Close to the Finite, The Inifinite needs to actualize in the Finite to unite the 2!
0:34 “All of religion is about trying to bridge the gap between the infinite God and us finite humans” That claim comes from your understanding of what religions are and what their “purpose” is. In my experience, different faith traditions are incredibly diverse and many wouldn’t agree with that statement. For example, I could say that the purpose of faith is to live in accordance with the natural world or to minimize suffering and so therefore buddhism or daoism are correct and Christianity is false based on that underlying assumption. I could be wrong though so please correct any errors in my thinking.
There is a difference between religion and philosophy. Say, the basic idea of self denial in buddhism is that it will allow you to avoid suffering by removing your desire. This is fundamentally no different than what could be found in a self-help book today, especially since buddhism influences those. Where religion and philosophy differ in buddhism is that they believe you can become so enlightened that you gain superpowers... That statement probably depends on what brand we're talking about, but I haven't studied it heavily. The point is that they believe there is a higher state of being to be achieved, and that self improvement will lead there. It's the finite striving to reach the infinite.
In Buddhism, although the concept of a God is absent, there is a limiting factor that divides individuals from a state of perfection (akin to the Christian notion of divine union) and their mundane existence. One who surpasses this limitation is considered to have attained nirvana.
@@FireMarekPL1Buddhism has gods. They are deemphasized by secular westerners due to a bad understanding of Buddhist theological concepts. Which has in turn gone back and now some Buddhists in the east are sounding more like their secular westerners.
Christianity is of a different character than most other religions, because it's based on a specific historical claim, the resurrection of Jesus. It's true or false based on that alone - if Jesus was not resurrected, it's all meaningless, and if he was, that proves it. Even Islam doesn't really have anything like this, for example most Islamic theologians will say that the Night Journey really happened. However, nothing about Islam really changes if it was only a vision. I suspect that your average Buddhist, if asked if Buddhism was true in a verifiable, factual sense, would just say that you have asked a silly question. However, I agree with you that many religions do not have the purpose claimed in the video, and adherents would interact with Christian claims in much the same way that atheists do.
Thanks for the chuckle. Most people take various religions at face value. But, when you scratch the surface and go further, such as with comparative mythology and learn about how the various books of the Bible and the Bible itself came to be as well as the general religion of Christianity itself, it starts to crumble. You discover Christianity doesn't offer anything unique and that the Bible is thoroughly a man-made thing. Nevermind the problems the Bible has within itself, or all the doctrinal issues within Christianity. I was a believer until I couldn't keep stuffing the doubts and dissonance away. And I was finally honest with myself and asked, what if I'm wrong? what if what I believe and have been taught is wrong? And I stopped taking what Christians said as the only answer. Started reading and listening to people who don't assume that Christianity and the Bible are true.
Ah, the old “Jesus is the same story as Horus” Bill Maher myth. Funny to see the term “scratch the surface” while you’re arguing with tired and debunked points. Christianity is an entirely unique religion not only in its claims but in its vast wealth of archaeological support for its truth.
@Daily_Bassist Horus? Meh. There's a list. And it's not just about dying and rising gods or gods sacrificing themselves or doing miracles like turning water to wine. There's the issue of how the Bible was clearly written to seem like prophecies were fulfilled, or stories that borrowed or shared themes from much older stories. There's the astrotheology and Homeric themes present in the gospels and the possible Ceasarian and Flavian Roman elements too. The late writing of Daniel. The strong likelihood that Abraham and the patriarchs and Moses never existed. That, if Jesus did exist, was just another apocalyptic preacher among many in his era preaching that the end was nigh. Or, let's go back to Genesis and the two creation myths and the two flood myths, both woven together. Joseph Atwill Francesco Carotta Francesca Stavrakopoulou James Tabor Aetheologica Crecganford Alice Linsley Dan McClellan Matthew Monger Joshua Bowen Dennis MacDonald Richard C Miller Some are still Christians, many are not. They don't all necessarily agree with each other, many are focusing on specific topics and issues. It's all the more interesting when I come across scholars who left Christianity as they dug into their scholarship or preachers that dug in and realized the contradictions and problems were too much. This is what I was alluding to.
@@_S0me__0ne so your conclusion after all your research is that there was some kind of conspiracy that spans thousands of years of authorship to make it seem like prophecies made thousands of years beforehand were fulfilled, rather than that there was a man who claimed to be the fulfillment of those prophecies and then enacted them such in front of thousands of eyewitnesses. Not sure which one requires more blind faith. You also make a claim that the “themes” of the Bible are borrowed from other, older stories when you have no idea how old any of the stories are, only that they may have been written down earlier. It’s very clear through cultural studies around the world that humans are almost biologically hardwired to believe certain things, such as the supernatural or a greater power, or relate to certain things such as the cathartic feeling of justice or love. None of that in any way discounts the legitimacy of the Bible, which you seem to think is some individual book rather than a collection of 73 different manuscripts (or 66 if you’re wrong) written over millennia. The fact that the collection still tells a coherent story is a miracle in itself. I like how you slip in the “if Jesus existed” line when it’s more ahistorical to believe that he didn’t. The most documented person in the ancient world probably existed my dude. Since you assert that there’s nothing unique about the story of the Bible or Jesus, then I’ll give you three simple criteria and ask that you provide me with an example that fulfills all three. Show me another religion whose central figure: 1) claimed to be God (not a creation, not a demigod, but THE God, creator of all things. Like, “I and the Father are One, before Abraham was I Am” level of God). 2) Fulfilled or at least was purported to have fulfilled prophecies from centuries before his birth which directly pertain to him i.e. lineage, place of birth, actions in life, etc. 3) Was purported to have died completely and risen from the dead.
As a Christian, I must say this video has several flaws. First of all, you cant say divine revelation comes from God because most religions weren’t/aren’t monotheistic. Moreover, religions like Buddhism and Hinduism aren’t about bridging the gap between man and God(s), or, Top it more generally, the gap between the mortal and divine. So in essence, you put the criteria’s so only Christianity (or maybe Islam/Judaism) is possible. To say it again: I am a firm Christian myself. However, I feel videos like these should be more Objective/charitable. God bless!
I see where you're coming from, but most of the evidence for God comes from what he created, and if you don't believe in one all-powerful God who is outside of this universe and created everything, you religion doesn't have much evidence. That's why RZ talked about religions that lower God making less sense than Christianity.
yeah im ngl i get its more to make a general point, if it were truly possible to once and for all PROVE that christianity MUST be the ONE correct religion in a 3 minute youtube video with a fun little graphic then by this point in history literally everyone on earth woulda heard it before and everyone would be christian. but even then i just find a lot of his videos lack a lotta depth and are moreso made for a christian audience to make themselves feel better than in general to put forth his arguments for this stuff. also saying this as a christian myself btw, i just think a lot of christian social media pages try too hard to act like they have definitive proof for christianity when in reality at best its evidence/suggestions and if there were a real proof it wouldnt be found in a 3 minute video itd have to be VERY extensive since we got the burden of proof not the atheists. plus some things you js gotta accept we as christians do not have the answers to. the bible gives us guidance and answers on many many things but not everything
My only problem is the sense of gaslighting. We did not choose to be born We are born into a bloodline that sins Unlike angles, were are born in ignorance To say we deserve hell because we are inherently evil creature seems too harsh. Rather God is giving us choice and test.. Adam and Lucifer had everything and did not trust God. Jesus had nothing but troubles and still trusted God. Now he sit at the right side the father We can share in the same glory by accepting Jesus as our gift to redemption. Granting the right to be call sons of God. What Christian have over every religion is that Despite our circumstances all things work for good. Invitation take park of the new creation We must become like Christ. I put it
That's not what his religion teaches, though. Reformed theology teaches that man is corrupt and doesn't deserve to be saved. It's his religion, but he acts like it is objectively true and everyone else is wrong.
Nice video man another point it’s that the religions tend to either cover the problem of evil and how we can redeem ourselves to God. But they always try to find excuses to how God will forgive us for the pain we caused others. In Buddhism and Hinduism they give us infinite lives to redeem ourselves, in Islam they say that Allah can outweigh good deeds with bad deeds. But none of this works in a court room, you can’t escape punishment by showing the good things you deed, you can only escape if you prove you didn’t do the bad things. But there is another way, if someone pays your fine you’re also free to go. The good deeds and the sense of repentance is not the payment itself is only to show that you cooperate with Jesus sacrifice enough, whitch is the thing that redeem us
A while back you said you were going to lay off the apologetics a bit, but you're doing it again - trying to compare things that you aren't really an expert on (ie. Islam, Hinduism etc) Can you do a video on the Holy Spirit please, it's the part of the trinity that is the most ignored. (Blessings & gifts of the Holy Spirit)
Christianity is the only religion which shows how God can be truly merciful and truly just at the same time. True justice without the sacrifice of Jesus would condemn us all to death.
And in the Bhagavad Gita, The Song of God, Krishna states that he as in Brahman/God will come back to Earth to restore righteousness when the people lose their way. He also told Arjuna if you seek refuge in him then you will make it to Nirvana/Heaven. To anyone else reading this; Hinduism has only one God since the beginning which is Brahman. There is also the Atman, which is Brahman that dwells in all things and every one. Brahman and Atman are the same. It is like Father and Holy Spirit. All of the gods in Hinduism are aspects of Brahman since God is so big and great it is hard to define God. Something that a Hindu Saint named Sri Ramakrishna once said (it is not an exact quote), "God is like water. When held in the hand it can freeze to the form of the devotees love." He also said Religions are like rivers that lead to the same ocean which is God. This is coming from an American Christian by the way.
@@claytonholder7468In Christianity, God does not dwell in all things. All other things are creation, not the creator. God is not in a rock or a tree. Also, you speak of hinduism like there is just one kind. There are many, and with differing beliefs.
@@claytonholder7468 nirvana is far from heaven. it doesnt even matter which country u are from. u can be American and a mormon. and I wouldnt even call America a Christian country seeing how many are into evangelism which doesnt comes from ancient times. u prob attended concerts instead of an actual church. tell me about what u learn from churches then? and what is the eucharist truly? is it symbolism or actual flesh?
The problem is the premise that we can't go straight to God because of sins is false. There is no concept like this. We see how multiple people throughout the Bible interacted with God without any mediator and definitely without a nonsensical mangod to help them.
If they did, they DIE on the spot. God has reached so much effort in the New Testament of preventing the Death of His servants, esp. Elijah and Moses. Funny enough, the Transfiguration happened, which placed this question to rest. The only ones who survived seeing the face of God in His Full Glory are two fishermen who asks if they should put booths the moment Time and Space folded into one.
@@skybattler2624 I'm talking about the old testament. There is no concept of anyone not being able to go straight to God. This is a made up doctrine in order to justify a need for Jesus. Nobody ever needed a mediator before this. Nobody dies on the spot for talking to God. The whole bible is about people constantly having long conversations with Him. Nobody was dying. They didn't see His face for we know that is impossible. However, they were always talking to Him and with nothing in between
@nothingbutthetruth613 many did. Aaron's sons died while taking a shortcut. One of David's top soldiers died while transporting the Arc of Covenant. You clearly haven't read the Torah. Heck, Moses acted as the mediator and is actually the precursor of the Messiah. In fact, Isaiah 53 is the undeniable proof that the Messiah must die to be the Mediator
@@skybattler2624 Huh? Aaron's sons didn't die from talking to God. David's top soldier didn't die from talking to God. There is no such thing, my friend. Moses was a prophet so he got messages from God and transmitted them to the people. He wasn't a mediator at all and there were 1.2 million prophets in history. How can anyone possibly say we can't go straight to God? Every one of these prophets spoke directly to Him. As far as Isaiah 53, I have no idea what you're talking about
@@nothingbutthetruth613 Moses (and Elijah, in particular) are incapable of seeing the full glory of God, else they die. In fact, the Prophets are meant to be mediators before God before the Prophet (aka Jesus), as prophesied by Moses, comes. You clearly haven't read the Old Testament for you to even not know what Isaiah 53 holds. It is the strongest evidence supporting Jesus. Heck, in Jesus' times, Caiaphas, the High Priest, was credited by Matthew as prophecying that the Death of One Man is needed to save the Entire Nation, all in reference to Isaiah 53, without him knowing
with all due respect, it's not even a valid answer "because we deserve this" how? because of our nature? we didn't choose our nature, God did. So he punishes us for something he is responsible for. Also what about people who live a good, pious lives, priests maybe? Do they deserve this too?
Finite and infinite at the same time? That is a very contradicting illogical statement. God is All-Powerful but He can die? Believing that is very disrespectful! This statement has the same 'logic' as 'God can create something so heavy that He can not lift'.
@@deepspacetravel9016 Deja vu, I've done that, seen it, got the T-shirt, whatched the video of a guy who think's he knows everything when Christianity is a bigger picture. We aren't surprised that a random Christian TH-camr thinks that a form of Christ is wrong (untrue). But I'm making a fuss over a pointless map so I'd don't know what the heck I'm doing.
@@Wyxoor Bro my family lives in Poland, the churches are everywhere like frickin Starbucks and are pretty modern, you can even pay offering by credit card lol
The principle of immanence does not denies God’s greatness and power. God is close because all of creation is part of him not separate from him. It’s only in immanence we can start to grasp who he is.
“Which revelation achieves the goal of religion” that’s truly the perfect standard to keep when researching about these topics, that’s how I found Christianity two years ago, and why I didn’t choose Islam nor Buddhism. “You’ll know them by their fruits” if you will 😉☦️✝️
Been watching these videos for a while now. Zoomer believes the incarnation of Christ would’ve still happened in a sinless world because he believes it is not merely a response to sin but much more, that the entire physical universe was created for that purpose. One thing I’d like to understand though is that there is an infinite gap between God and man, just like the dust mite and human analogy, my only question is this. In the view that the incarnation happens regardless of sin, it says the finite needs a bridge to the infinite. Humans are finite, but so are angels, why don’t angels need Christ to bridge that gap in a hypothetical sinless world? Perhaps because one is a physical being and the other spiritual?
Im not an Expert so please just take my words as ideas and not the truth,if you even do lol We humans need christ since otherwise we need to pay the punishment of our sins Angels don't since most of them are disciplined and dont sin.But they still CAN sin however,like Lucifer and his army.
@ Yes, we have sinned, and Christ takes our punishment and angels are sinless and take no punishment. But zoomer holds to a specific belief that even in a sinless world we’d still need Christ to become man. He thinks that even if we hadn’t sinned and had no debt he says we’d still need Christ to become incarnate. He believes this because he thinks the incarnation is not only a payment of sin and a response to human sin but is needed to bridge the gap between the infinite and finite, that the whole world was made for the incarnation. So in a hypothetical sinless world he thinks sinless humans would still need Christ to become man, why not the same for finite, sinless angels? Christians throughout history debated whether the incarnation would still need to happen if the fall had never happened, Acquinas had the opposite view to Zoomer, saying that if humans never sinned we wouldn’t need an incarnation, but Scotus agreed with Zoomer.
Truth to be told Jimbo, Heaven is not a reward, is a gift, one given by a very loving God Christianity, the only religion which main event is the humilliation of it's God The only one they try to silence The one kingdom where the King is the piercing edge at battle That's why we aim to do good, not to be worthy, cause we ain't, only a heart that has feel true love and forgiveness desires to do good He loved us first
Anybody could’ve done this for any religion and just moved the goalposts in terms of “what religion is about”. Not all religions intrinsically have the same goals, very shoddy logic here that doesn’t convince anyone who was not already a Christian. L video.
I don’t think every religion is about god. Buddhism especially is agnostic to the idea of a singular higher deity, and you are forgetting that Hinduism can get very polytheistic. And that’s ignoring all the other religions besides the major ones.
0:51 God is both Immanent and Transcendent in Hinduism and Sufi tradition and some other religions. 0:57 Siddharth gautham defeated sin and became Buddha The enlightened One 1:12 Or Krishna 2:08 Rama had to live in the forest for 14 years. 2:12 Krishna reveals God. ,rama live a sin less life and both sacrifice very much 2:16 budhha defeated death and evil by becoming a budhha 3:17 hindu avatars left the chat
Why not just use the parable "Bad Apples". Like when u have to get bad apples out of the basket, u first throw out all the apples and take the good ones. Try it bruv to all religion. See whos on top :v
1:08 u basically just told us what a prophet is 1:55 please anyone tell me why the son of god could die, please anyone 2:17 again ur just explaining he was a prophet, not a son of god 2:50 so basically ur saying to follow his lead and we will be in a place of bliss? 3:00 i agree on the believe part, cuz i am a muslim and we believe he is a prophet, but why should u repent to a prophet or god, or the son of god besides god himself? I know u said we can't relate to god, but does that also mean we can't even repent to him? 3:12 what do u mean by "god-man"? U had stated he was a son of god, not god himself, also how would a god die? U had stated it was for peoples sin but why? Couldn't he had simply pray to god to forgive us, as u stated he was the son of god, or "god-man" Please someone answer my questions, I beg u
Jesus is both God the son of God and the son of man. And When Jesus dies on the cross he is not ceasing to exist so him being God means he can die but not cease to exist. And the examples you gave in the video do not point in any way that he is a prophet.
This is just rehashing Christianity. It refutes nothing said by atheists, nor any criticism by Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, etc. You haven't elucidated why God exists, either, or why he needs to be worshipped.
1.How so?In m opinion his Arguments were fair enough 2.Yeah he doesnt talk about why God exists,because thats not the subject here🤦♂️ It's like expecting biology in a theology class
@verbulent_flow6229 **why would god want or need worship** Why should you listen to and respect your parents when they already love you unconditionally ?
I think it's an absolute monarchy but not "absolute" monarchy as their administration in heaven and god do allow discussions and disagreement with him in heaven.
@EldersXD_08 None of what he said is evidence. He just stated what he really wants to be true on faith and expects everyone to follow because he said so.
@PitchBlack0000 thats not very "rational" of you my atheist friend.In counter to what you say,one can say "you dont want God to be true" And also,how so?Whats your evidence we only "want it to be true"?
@ Except I follow the evidence where it leads, and it doesn't lead to magic man in the sky. "And also,how so?Whats your evidence we only "want it to be true"" You. If you didn't want it to be true you would try to look elsewhere and realize it's all wrong. With the lack of evidence or rationality, you'd realize all there is to it is wanting it to be true without demonstrating it.
Not even all Christians believe this though - correct me if I'm wrong but don't some branches believe in theosis? Why does God only have to be near to us or far from us? If God is all controlling and all powerful can God be both? Coming from a place of good faith - just curious
The more time passes the more it feels like salvation is impossible. I guess I can't find forgiveness in Protestantism, because they don't have "apostolic succession" thus their sacraments are worthless according to the Ecclesialists. I can't find sure forgiveness in Catholicism, because the Orthodox claim they are the correct ones. (Not to mention hoping that the Pope doesn't institute something really bad, because he has the power to do what ever he wants) And I can't have sure forgiveness in Orthodoxy, because if the Catholics are right. I am considered "Educated" under their standards, thus will not attain salvation. They all have valid arguments to their claims. There's always more confessions to read, more questions, on and on... I genuinely don't get why the Lord allowed it to happen this way, but I don't think it's possible. I'd be better off to flip a coin and hope for the best at this point.
@@whatdadogdoin-j1o I understand your concerns, they are very valid and I too question why there is so much disunity (though I know God has His reasons at the end of the day). I will say that the papacy isn’t a big concern to me because the Church believes he is (and will be) protected from binding the universal church to a doctrine that isn’t from God. He is still a sinner, but the Spirit prevents him from binding the faithful to false doctrine, which is infallibility. Also I think at the core of it, the major Christian branches find salvation in similar ways. Repent, receive, and remain. Turn away from sin (as best you can), receive Jesus through baptism and sacraments, and remain faithful to the end. Beyond that though, I think it is important to know how your faith tradition answers other questions. Who has the authority to decide what beliefs are necessary, and which are open for discussion? The Bible doesn’t answer many of those questions, so how does your tradition come to answers? If a church was instituted by the Apostles to make big decisions, like putting the Bible together, or establishing that God is a Trinity, that would suggest it is a living church, able to interpret and guide the faithful in truth. This same church, then, can help us understand what is necessary for salvation. Hope this was helpful in some way, lmk if you have any questions and I hope the Lord gives you clarity in these challenging days. Blessings to you.
I hear what you're saying. I would just add that the Protestant view is that there are genuine, saved Christians in all the major branches of Christianity. Further, it's my understanding that both Catholics and Orthodox (especially Catholics) have substantially soften their condemnation of people outside their respective groups. In fact, I imagine most Catholics would say that Protestants that were baptized in the Trinity and who sincerely believe in Jesus as their savior and that Jesus is the eternal Son of God co-equal with the Father and the Spirit, will also be saved. Therefore, I'd just encourage you to pray, read the scriptures, believe in Jesus as your savior, and find a good church that adheres to traditional confessions, whether Protestant, Catholic, or Orthodox, and you'll make it to heaven no doubt whatsoever.
@@ApostolicZoomer A Question if I may. (Please don't think these are attempts at gotchas, I just want to know) And Thank You for commenting! I can't understand how people don't have crippling anxiety from the Papal Authority, he truly does have the ability to bind whatever he wants. Catholic Apologist Voice Of Reason put it pretty bluntly essentially saying so in a short video on gay "marriage" SOURCE: th-cam.com/video/8TzVMnfT1GY/w-d-xo.html If I were a Catholic, I would have to constantly keep my fingers crossed and hold my breath. Not trying to weaken your Faith but, doesn't that worry you a little? Also These are some quotes I saw that REALLY bothered me about the Papacy... (Saw these quoted on an Orthodox Podcast, forgive me can't remember the video link) "The Pope is not only the Representative of Jesus Christ, but he is Jesus Christ Himself... So that when the Pope speaks we have no business to examine." Pope Pius X- When he was the Patriarch of Venice; quoted in the July 13th, 1895 issue of the Catholic National. A representative of Christ is one thing, but this is another. Peter would never in a million years to my knowledge say such a thing. One more... "The Pope is "God on earth" Jesus has placed the Pope higher than the Prophets, than John the Baptist, and than all the angels. Jesus has put the Pope on the same level as God Himself!" John Bosco- (1815-1888) Considered a great modern saint and Doctor by the Papacy.
@ appreciate the reply. With respect to the papacy possibly infallibly teaching something against the will of God, I don’t live scared. Just as I’m not scared of the possibility of someone finding evidence one day that Jesus didn’t rise, which Paul says would falsify Christianity. I have faith that it wouldn’t happen because firstly it hasn’t happened in 2000 years, but more importantly because I believe Christ was raised, just as I believe the Spirit protects the Church from error. And with respect to the quotes, I do think we need to be careful. Lots of false quotes show up for apologetic purposes, like fake quotes attached to famous atheists to suggest they converted or had profound regrets on their deathbeds. Everything I’ve found about the Pius one suggests it is a corruption of what he actually said, which was that the Pope represents Christ Himself. And I’m not positive on the Bosco quote but I’d need to also find more evidence for it. Looking it up I found very little, so I have my reservations. Even if he did say it though, I’m not ashamed to admit that saints are sinners too, and may say things that can be scandalizing or erroneous.
@@ApostolicZoomer You raise a very good point about finding evidence against the resurrection. I share your sentiment on that, because I share your belief that Christ did indeed rise from the dead. So if the Holy Spirit guides me to eventually find that the Papacy is a divine institution established by Him, then I can trust it in a similar way. Though I must admit, if this happens it will take time for me to grow in that trust. Yeah, I know I shouldn't take quotes on face value but those ones really irked me. (And I admit I had bias towards accepting them due to my lack of Papal trust mentioned before) The source on the picture I took of the Bosco quote was something called... Meditazioni, Vol. 1: 2nd ed., PP 89-90 But Thank You for taking the time to talk, and if you read this. Please say a prayer for me. Christ says his yolk is easy, and his burden is light. (Matthew 11:30) I'm not gonna lie, I'd really like to find that right now. God Bless.
2:35 "You can't be good enough for heaven", "You can't pay the debt of your sins", and "You can't resurrect yourself from the dead" Ezekiel 18:21-23 Moreover, if someone wicked repents of all the sins that were committed and keeps all My laws and does what is just and right, they shall live; they shall not die. None of the transgressions they committed shall be remembered against them; because of the righteousness they have practiced, they shall live. Is it my desire that the wicked shall die?-says the Sovereign GOD. It is rather that they shall turn back from their ways and live. Hosea 6:6 For I desire goodness, not sacrifice; Devotion to God, rather than burnt offerings. Isaiah 55:7 Let the wicked give up their ways, The sinful, their plans; Let each one turn back to GOD So as to be pardoned; To our God, Who freely forgives. The only way to be redeemed is through atonement, not sacrifice. 2:47 "Solution to evil" Isaiah 45:6-7 So that they may know, from east to west, That there is none but Me. I am GOD and there is none else, I form light and create darkness, I make weal and create woe- I GOD do all these things. Have a blessed day everyone
What about Jainism and Buddhism? In it your infinite soul's intrinsic bliss and immortality is obscured by ignorance and desires. In this way the infinitr is in your heart, you just need to clear your soul like how one would clear a gem of dirt.
God is the creator of the universe, He knows everyone, everything, and cares for us. He also promises eternal life to us. Connecting ourselves to God is building a relationship with Him. And having a relationship with the creator of the universe is pretty good
If you can imagine for a moment you believe it is possible: God can give man new spiritual life in Him which is better in every way. Colossians 2:9-15, John 6:35-40, Psalm 115
Connection with God is fundamental for spiritual growth and understanding your calling in life. Without connecting to him you will just be living life by your own will and the will of the flesh which will be contrary to what God wills.
12 ชั่วโมงที่ผ่านมา +1
@ Since God is all powerful, God can read your mind. Imagine this, if you can read others’ minds, then others aren't others anymore, they become a part of you, because others, by nature, are what is foreign to your mind. Therefore, God cannot be all powerful, otherwise you will become part of God, this creates serious contradictions with Christian Theology.
This video: How do we know christianity is correct? Well if you define God they way christianity does, christianity has the definition of God closest to that definition.
It's to be expected, honestly. That's my thoughts on the video too but I will at least hear it out. I think it's important to understand things we don't agree with even if they're given from a biased perspective which is what we should expect anyway
I mean your first assuming we can't reach God by reason alone when you say revelation is the only way that you can know about god. The second assumption is that a all powerful god exists and is the one that interacts with the world because for example caanite pagan believed that El the high God doesn't really influence the world however his sons do .the third assumption is we are "sinful" which assumes that the Christian worldview is true. And also you haven't gave a account for why would our actions are evil . Because in the Biblical account whatever god decides is immortal is immortal. Because there is no clear reasoning for why x action is evil besides god said so.
And that doesn't give a account to why Christianity is true.that only provides a account to why all current religions are false (assuming the assumptions are true) because someone else can come and claim that they are god uniting man to himself and they can turn out to be true and Jesus turns out to be the lying
That last line was the finisher...
"Many men have tried to become God, but only one God became Man "
LET'S GO HOLY SPIRIT!
SPEAK TO AND THROUGH YOUR CHILDREN.
AMEN!
Yeah, that line goes pretty hard no doubt
What about other religions that have tales of Gods becoming man that predate the Incarnation of Christ, such as Vishnu in Hinduism?
mic drop
😂
@@t.rexking441What about them?
Damn he about to settle this in 3 minutes
Yeah its amazing
@@WhaleManMan dont curse bro
He didn't
@@verbulent_flow6229yes he did what the hell are you talking about
@@verbulent_flow6229 what do you believe in
It's the moment when you can tell the video will be based without watching it
sorry, what does based mean?
@@angelwhimsy based on real life.
Every video from Redeemed Zoomer is based by all definition.
Yes that’s right, Redeemed Zoomer the goat, stands firm in his theological convictions that already says a lot about him, so no surprise…
@@angelwhimsy
He meant biased, I’m sure.
"Many Men have tried to be God, but only one God became Man" PREACH 🗣🗣🗣🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
Also important to understand, we have someone who can empathize with us since he became man.
Hebrews 4:15 F or we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are-yet he did not sin.
‘Many men have tried to become God, but only one God became man’ 🥶
2 Thessalonians 2:4
Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
Sounds like 2 Thessalonians 2:4 and then 2 Corinthians 11:13-15. About Satan's false apostles coming to us as ministers of righteousness as he disguises himself as an angel of light.
All claims no evidence
I have only been studying the bible for 1 year now and this is the best and shortest possible summary that can be made of this topic. I have watched veteran preachers try to explain this, but it takes them 20+ minutes and it still isn't as completely explained as what you did in this video. Thank you and God bless!!! Also, I liked and subscribed.
Thank you God for sending Him to teach us, help us and die for us! I have never been the same since asking Jesus to help me and allowing him to enter my heart. I look forward to telling others about Him and helping those who are in need. For I was once in need and He lifted me up so that I could follow Him and learn to love again. Peace be to all who read this. Thank you God; all Glory is Yours!
El momento en el que sabes que te gustara el video sin verlo.
Did you literally copy the comment above you?
@PauTheDeo yep, he just did it in Spanish
Because Jesus Christ is Lord. Praise to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Amen.
This is peak Christianity lore
Also, 1:18 says "do you want to read my depressing poetry" ☠️
Brother In Faith ✝️🤝☪️✡️
@@Narlo_
I dont love your religion if you arent Christian, but I love you❤
@@Narlo_ Brothers in God images, but not in faith
AMEN
What can wash away my sins? Nothing but the Blood of Jesus.
Nice way to sum it up. Keep spreading the gospel ❤
My greatest blessing is being born into a good Christian family. 😊✝️🇮🇳🙏
Amen bro. May 2025 will be the year of healing for this world, both west and east. And may Zoomer be known as the generation healed by God from generational sins
“Goals of religion” is so arbitrary. A Muslim could just say that God created us to submit our free will to Him and that’s why their religion is the correct one.
Also the main goals of religion is explaining the truth of our existence and give purpose to the life and the unseen like what happens after death
I agree, that was a little to much of a jump for me. Better perhaps to prove it by Love. The mercy that Christ gives in that we can be redeemd by faith in him and not by what we can achive in life/how rightouss we are. Because we all sin, but we all get an equal chance to reach heaven through Jesus. Givning what we all can give, faith. If all religions agree that God is love, that shows a loving and just god and is therefore the correct faith.
Look at the morals and ethics in Islam, it's self evidently bad and wrong. No loving god could want that.
Then their society would be doing better. It's not so their religion is subpar in its assumptions.
Do you still believe in the big bang creation myth?
"Many men have tried to become God, but only one God became man" who is jesus my savior
A very practical video even if you not religious.
GOD BLESS YOU ALL AMEN ✝️♥️✝️♥️✝️
The last phrase won me: only one God became man
It literally does not make sense on a manifold of levels. Every honest christian theologian will tell you that there is a multitude of flaws in it.
This video assumes that all religions have the same goal. Religion is a man-made category of things, which has a ton of grey area since many major religions are unrelated. Trying to come up with a singular shared trait of all religions is impossible. It looks easy if your viewpoint is Abrahamic faiths, since they all are related and use more or less the same scripture (with key differences).
Buddhism isn't trying to bring anyone closer to any god, since Buddhism largely doesn't believe in a god. It's about escaping this world through enlightenment, not because god loves you, but because you love yourself and others enough to want them to escape the suffering of this world.
Hinduism has many paths to achieving Moksha. Many believe you don't have to be a believer in Hinduism to escape the cycle of birth and rebirth. You can become enlightened by practicing philosophy, whether secular, Christian, Islamic, Hindu, etc. You can become enlightened by maintaining your health through exercise and diet.
If you look at all religions by how well they do what Christianity says it does, of course Christianity is going to look like the correct religion.
Christianity isn't trying to release us from a cycle of birth and rebirth, so by some Asian religions' standards, it's doing a pretty horrible job at being the one true religion.
Beautifully explained, Richard! Well done!
Nothing is better than not only being right and assertive (we're winning), but it's actually well done and not lame.
Keep it up you're doing excellent
Hello. I am an atheist. I define atheism as suspending any acknowledgment as to the reality of any particular god until sufficient credible evidence is presented. My situation is that *_I currently have no good reason to acknowledge the reality of any god._*
And here is why I currently hold to such a position. Below are 11 facts I must consider when evaluating the claim made by certain theists that a particular god exists in reality. To be clear, these are not premises for any argument which _concludes_ there to be no gods. These are simply facts I must take into account when evaluating the verity of such a claim. If any of the following facts were to be contravened at a later time by evidence, experience, or sound argument, I would THEN have good reason to acknowledge such a reality.
1. I have never been presented with a functional definition of a god.
2. I personally have never observed a god.
3. I have never encountered any person who has claimed to have observed a god.
4. I know of no accounts of persons claiming to have observed a god that were willing or able to demonstrate or verify their observation for authenticity, accuracy, or validity.
5. I have never been presented with any _valid_ logical argument, which also introduced demonstrably true premises that lead deductively to an inevitable conclusion that a god(s) exists in reality.
6. Of the many logical syllogisms I have examined arguing for the reality of a god(s), I have found all to contain a formal or informal logical fallacy or a premise that can not be demonstrated to be true.
7. I have never observed a phenomenon in which the existence of a god was a necessary antecedent for the known or probable explanation for the causation of that phenomenon.
8. Several proposed (and generally accepted) explanations for observable phenomena that were previously based on the agency of a god(s), have subsequently been replaced with rational, natural explanations, each substantiated with evidence that excluded the agency of a god(s). I have never encountered _vice versa._
9. I have never knowingly experienced the presence of a god through intercession of angels, divine revelation, the miraculous act of divinity, or any occurrence of a supernatural event.
10. Every phenomenon that I have ever observed appears to have *_emerged_* from necessary and sufficient antecedents over time without exception. In other words, I have never observed a phenomenon (entity, process, object, event, process, substance, system, or being) that was created _ex nihilo_ - that is instantaneously came into existence by the solitary volition of a deity.
11. All claims of a supernatural or divine nature that I have been presented have either been refuted to my satisfaction or do not present as _falsifiable._
ALL of these facts lead me to the only rational conclusion that concurs with the realities I have been presented - and that is the fact that there is *_no good reason_* for me to acknowledge the reality of any particular god.
I have heard often that atheism is the denial of the Abrahamic god. But denial is the active rejection of a substantiated fact once credible evidence has been presented. Atheism is simply withholding such acknowledgment until sufficient credible evidence is introduced. *_It is natural, rational, and prudent to be skeptical of unsubstantiated claims, especially extraordinary ones._*
I welcome any cordial response. Peace.
This is the only rational conclusion. If people were honest, they would admit that the only way for them to stay religious is to embrace the irrational, which is fine, because human beings aren't inherently rational
The Central False Dilemma
The argument presents a false dichotomy between "all religions trying to reach up to God" versus Christianity's unique solution. This ignores:
Other religions with divine incarnation concepts (e.g., Krishna in Hinduism)
Different theological frameworks for divine-human relationships (e.g., Sufi mysticism)
Non-theistic approaches to transcendence (e.g., Buddhism)
Various religious concepts of divine mediation and intercession
Problematic Logical Structure
The argument follows this pattern:
CopyP1: We need a bridge between infinite God and finite humans
P2: This requires someone who is both God and human
P3: Jesus is both God and human
C: Therefore Christianity is the only true religion
This argument has several issues:
It assumes its own premises (begging the question)
The conclusion doesn't necessarily follow from the premises
It presupposes specific theological concepts ("infinite God," "human sinfulness")
Misrepresentation of Other Religions
The video makes broad generalizations about "all other religions" that are historically inaccurate:
Many religions don't focus on "earning" divine acceptance
Various traditions have concepts of divine grace
Multiple religions have stories of divine sacrifice
Several faiths include concepts of divine-human mediators
The "Uniqueness" Fallacy
The argument claims Christianity is unique because:
God dies for humans
Divine becomes human
Perfect mediator exists
Salvation through grace
However, these concepts appear in various forms across different religions:
Dying and rising gods (Osiris, Dionysus)
Divine incarnations (Avatars in Hinduism)
Divine mediators (Bodhisattvas in Buddhism)
Grace-based salvation (Pure Land Buddhism)
Logical Issues with the Mediator Argument
The argument about needing a mediator has internal consistency problems:
CopyIf God is infinite and humans finite, then:
- How can any being be both?
- If such a being can exist, why is only one instance possible?
- Why couldn't God create multiple mediators?
- Why couldn't God simply choose to relate directly to humans?
The Problem of Evil Response
The video's response to the problem of evil is circular:
CopyP1: We live in a fallen world because we deserve it
P2: Jesus offers forgiveness and future perfection
This doesn't actually address the philosophical problem of evil:
Why would an all-good God create beings who "deserve" evil?
How does future perfection justify present suffering?
Why is suffering necessary for redemption?
Epistemological Problems
The argument starts with "how do we know which religion is correct?" but then:
Assumes Christian theological premises to prove Christianity
Uses Christian concepts to evaluate other religions
Doesn't provide objective criteria for evaluation
Historical Context
The argument ignores the historical development of these ideas:
Early Christian debates about Jesus's nature
Influence of Greek philosophy on Christian theology
Development of incarnation theology
Evolution of salvation concepts
Anthropological Issues
The argument's analogy of relating to different beings (dogs, ants, rocks) oversimplifies:
Different cultures have different concepts of divine-human relationships
Various models of transcendence exist
Multiple frameworks for understanding divine-human interaction
Conclusion:
While the video presents an internally coherent Christian theological argument, it fails as a logical proof for Christianity's unique truth claims. It relies on circular reasoning, false dichotomies, and oversimplified representations of other religions. A more rigorous approach would need to:
Establish objective criteria for evaluating religious claims
Accurately represent other religious traditions
Address the philosophical problems in its own arguments
Acknowledge the complexity of religious experience and truth claims
I'd love to have this much time to waste
This is a 3 minutes video, and can only afford to spend a few seconds for describing each other large religion. Of course it cannot describe them all in full detail. Those few words however, are a reasonably good approximation for the topic at hand. Of course if this was a 2 hours long video, it could spend more time to be more precise with the other religions. Yes, a more rigorous approach would be warranted, as you say, but one can not expect such rigorous approach in a 3 minutes video.
So that's why commenters say things like, "I know this video is going to be good and I haven't even watched it!" like some rube.
@yoggothemadgod6196 My points are valid, so I don't think I'm wasting time
@@praevasc4299 It blatantly ignores other religions with divine incarnation concepts (e.g., Krishna in Hinduism)
Different theological frameworks for divine-human relationships (e.g., Sufi mysticism)
Non-theistic approaches to transcendence (e.g., Buddhism)
Various religious concepts of divine mediation and intercession
It claims that its interpretation of god is correct, no that's not an excuse
you just kinda presuppose some chirstian values as if they should apply to all religions dogmatically, like god having to be "great" or humans being "sinful"
all the others are wrong so Christianity is the best
@@justdontcallmezesty hey, I am a Christian too but that argument is a Non sequitur and fallacious.
@ Im racist and hate everything non European, jesus being Jewish is litterly the only thing stopping me from going to heaven
Thank you and God bless.
0:30 this is false: the ability to connect humans to God is not the goal of all religions, and painting an idea of God unique to Christianity as THE idea of god so that you can introduce Christianity as the only way to logically experience Christianity’s version of god is begging the question.
So what are the goals of all religions? Isn't it to achieve eternal happiness?
@@FireMarekPL1 no, not at all. most religions try to explain the unknown. God exists in the unknown, we ma know everything physical but god knows physical and metaphysical which we cannot full perceive. Many religions try to bridge the gap between these two realms and explain their existence. its all about staving off existentialism
Ok, name one religion that does NOT try to connect man with the divine? And no, larpers don't count.
@christopherdouglass7143 So, there is a common factor in all religions, and Christianity best explains humanity's place in the world
@@FemboyFlaVR "the divine" is shifting the goalposts, because anything spiritual could be considered "the divine." The video explicitly said God, not "some kind of spiritual belief." So this really only includes Abrahamic and polytheistic religions - but not Buddhism, Shinto, Wicca, animism, ancestor worship, new age, etc etc.
Yeshua indeed never wanted to start a relegion,that was not his mission,his mission was to sacrifice himself for the salvation of all human beings
Amen. Love you, my brother in Christ. May our Lord bless you and your loved ones.
are you sure that Jesus Christ never wanted to start a religion? Matthew 28:16-20 says otherwise:
16 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”
also how do YOU know that he never wanted to start a church while all the Disciples and Church fathers preached and acted otherwise?
the whole book of acts is about the early church of the 1st century and how they spread the Gospel and the Religion. and you are saying that Our Lord didn't want that?
Beautifully done
0:51 It only denies it if we say God is on the level of every day logic. In some forms of Buddhism and also in Hinduism it is said that God or the True Reality / Origin is infinitely transcendent and also infinitely immanent.
Well, Christianity believes that too, but it thinks it isn't enough that the the Finite is Close to the Finite, The Inifinite needs to actualize in the Finite to unite the 2!
@@maxzationWhy?
0:34 “All of religion is about trying to bridge the gap between the infinite God and us finite humans”
That claim comes from your understanding of what religions are and what their “purpose” is. In my experience, different faith traditions are incredibly diverse and many wouldn’t agree with that statement.
For example, I could say that the purpose of faith is to live in accordance with the natural world or to minimize suffering and so therefore buddhism or daoism are correct and Christianity is false based on that underlying assumption.
I could be wrong though so please correct any errors in my thinking.
There is a difference between religion and philosophy.
Say, the basic idea of self denial in buddhism is that it will allow you to avoid suffering by removing your desire. This is fundamentally no different than what could be found in a self-help book today, especially since buddhism influences those.
Where religion and philosophy differ in buddhism is that they believe you can become so enlightened that you gain superpowers... That statement probably depends on what brand we're talking about, but I haven't studied it heavily.
The point is that they believe there is a higher state of being to be achieved, and that self improvement will lead there. It's the finite striving to reach the infinite.
In Buddhism, although the concept of a God is absent, there is a limiting factor that divides individuals from a state of perfection (akin to the Christian notion of divine union) and their mundane existence. One who surpasses this limitation is considered to have attained nirvana.
@@FireMarekPL1Buddhism has gods. They are deemphasized by secular westerners due to a bad understanding of Buddhist theological concepts. Which has in turn gone back and now some Buddhists in the east are sounding more like their secular westerners.
Christianity is of a different character than most other religions, because it's based on a specific historical claim, the resurrection of Jesus. It's true or false based on that alone - if Jesus was not resurrected, it's all meaningless, and if he was, that proves it. Even Islam doesn't really have anything like this, for example most Islamic theologians will say that the Night Journey really happened. However, nothing about Islam really changes if it was only a vision.
I suspect that your average Buddhist, if asked if Buddhism was true in a verifiable, factual sense, would just say that you have asked a silly question.
However, I agree with you that many religions do not have the purpose claimed in the video, and adherents would interact with Christian claims in much the same way that atheists do.
if you want to live according to the natural world, ignore your conscience and follow every single biological whim you have
Many men have tried to become God, but only one God became man🗣🗣🗣
Thanks for the chuckle. Most people take various religions at face value. But, when you scratch the surface and go further, such as with comparative mythology and learn about how the various books of the Bible and the Bible itself came to be as well as the general religion of Christianity itself, it starts to crumble. You discover Christianity doesn't offer anything unique and that the Bible is thoroughly a man-made thing. Nevermind the problems the Bible has within itself, or all the doctrinal issues within Christianity.
I was a believer until I couldn't keep stuffing the doubts and dissonance away. And I was finally honest with myself and asked, what if I'm wrong? what if what I believe and have been taught is wrong? And I stopped taking what Christians said as the only answer. Started reading and listening to people who don't assume that Christianity and the Bible are true.
Ah, the old “Jesus is the same story as Horus” Bill Maher myth. Funny to see the term “scratch the surface” while you’re arguing with tired and debunked points. Christianity is an entirely unique religion not only in its claims but in its vast wealth of archaeological support for its truth.
@Daily_Bassist Horus? Meh. There's a list. And it's not just about dying and rising gods or gods sacrificing themselves or doing miracles like turning water to wine. There's the issue of how the Bible was clearly written to seem like prophecies were fulfilled, or stories that borrowed or shared themes from much older stories. There's the astrotheology and Homeric themes present in the gospels and the possible Ceasarian and Flavian Roman elements too. The late writing of Daniel. The strong likelihood that Abraham and the patriarchs and Moses never existed. That, if Jesus did exist, was just another apocalyptic preacher among many in his era preaching that the end was nigh. Or, let's go back to Genesis and the two creation myths and the two flood myths, both woven together.
Joseph Atwill
Francesco Carotta
Francesca Stavrakopoulou
James Tabor
Aetheologica
Crecganford
Alice Linsley
Dan McClellan
Matthew Monger
Joshua Bowen
Dennis MacDonald
Richard C Miller
Some are still Christians, many are not. They don't all necessarily agree with each other, many are focusing on specific topics and issues. It's all the more interesting when I come across scholars who left Christianity as they dug into their scholarship or preachers that dug in and realized the contradictions and problems were too much.
This is what I was alluding to.
@@_S0me__0ne so your conclusion after all your research is that there was some kind of conspiracy that spans thousands of years of authorship to make it seem like prophecies made thousands of years beforehand were fulfilled, rather than that there was a man who claimed to be the fulfillment of those prophecies and then enacted them such in front of thousands of eyewitnesses. Not sure which one requires more blind faith.
You also make a claim that the “themes” of the Bible are borrowed from other, older stories when you have no idea how old any of the stories are, only that they may have been written down earlier. It’s very clear through cultural studies around the world that humans are almost biologically hardwired to believe certain things, such as the supernatural or a greater power, or relate to certain things such as the cathartic feeling of justice or love. None of that in any way discounts the legitimacy of the Bible, which you seem to think is some individual book rather than a collection of 73 different manuscripts (or 66 if you’re wrong) written over millennia. The fact that the collection still tells a coherent story is a miracle in itself.
I like how you slip in the “if Jesus existed” line when it’s more ahistorical to believe that he didn’t. The most documented person in the ancient world probably existed my dude.
Since you assert that there’s nothing unique about the story of the Bible or Jesus, then I’ll give you three simple criteria and ask that you provide me with an example that fulfills all three. Show me another religion whose central figure:
1) claimed to be God (not a creation, not a demigod, but THE God, creator of all things. Like, “I and the Father are One, before Abraham was I Am” level of God).
2) Fulfilled or at least was purported to have fulfilled prophecies from centuries before his birth which directly pertain to him i.e. lineage, place of birth, actions in life, etc.
3) Was purported to have died completely and risen from the dead.
As a Christian, I must say this video has several flaws. First of all, you cant say divine revelation comes from God because most religions weren’t/aren’t monotheistic. Moreover, religions like Buddhism and Hinduism aren’t about bridging the gap between man and God(s), or, Top it more generally, the gap between the mortal and divine. So in essence, you put the criteria’s so only Christianity (or maybe Islam/Judaism) is possible. To say it again: I am a firm Christian myself. However, I feel videos like these should be more Objective/charitable. God bless!
Wait, huh? Divine revelation doesn't come from God? Then where does it come from? You know God can divinely reveal things to non-Christians too right?
I see where you're coming from, but most of the evidence for God comes from what he created, and if you don't believe in one all-powerful God who is outside of this universe and created everything, you religion doesn't have much evidence. That's why RZ talked about religions that lower God making less sense than Christianity.
"Mortal and divine"
Sounds familiar to Humans and God no?
Once again, this is semantics. Replace God with the unknown supernatural or divine and his point stands
yeah im ngl i get its more to make a general point, if it were truly possible to once and for all PROVE that christianity MUST be the ONE correct religion in a 3 minute youtube video with a fun little graphic then by this point in history literally everyone on earth woulda heard it before and everyone would be christian. but even then i just find a lot of his videos lack a lotta depth and are moreso made for a christian audience to make themselves feel better than in general to put forth his arguments for this stuff. also saying this as a christian myself btw, i just think a lot of christian social media pages try too hard to act like they have definitive proof for christianity when in reality at best its evidence/suggestions and if there were a real proof it wouldnt be found in a 3 minute video itd have to be VERY extensive since we got the burden of proof not the atheists. plus some things you js gotta accept we as christians do not have the answers to. the bible gives us guidance and answers on many many things but not everything
Misunderstanding of hinduism, at least the advaita tradition
Amen, Good video! 🙏🏾✝️❤️🔥
Haha - brown hands
The last line goes hard🥶🔥🔥
My only problem is the sense of gaslighting.
We did not choose to be born
We are born into a bloodline that sins
Unlike angles, were are born in ignorance
To say we deserve hell because we are inherently evil creature seems too harsh.
Rather God is giving us choice and test..
Adam and Lucifer had everything and did not trust God. Jesus had nothing but troubles and still trusted God. Now he sit at the right side the father
We can share in the same glory by accepting Jesus as our gift to redemption. Granting the right to be call sons of God.
What Christian have over every religion is that
Despite our circumstances all things work for good. Invitation take park of the new creation
We must become like Christ.
I put it
Unlike angles? 90° angles?
That's not what his religion teaches, though. Reformed theology teaches that man is corrupt and doesn't deserve to be saved.
It's his religion, but he acts like it is objectively true and everyone else is wrong.
You should probably look into Orthodoxy and Theosis due to this idea of yours..
God bless
Wow.. thanks for this video this touched me so deep
lol
excellent video
Christian presupp logiccels stay circular
Nah, you're supposed to participate in a manic circlejerk, not actually engaging in a conversation under this kind of propaganda vids
Nice video man another point it’s that the religions tend to either cover the problem of evil and how we can redeem ourselves to God. But they always try to find excuses to how God will forgive us for the pain we caused others. In Buddhism and Hinduism they give us infinite lives to redeem ourselves, in Islam they say that Allah can outweigh good deeds with bad deeds.
But none of this works in a court room, you can’t escape punishment by showing the good things you deed, you can only escape if you prove you didn’t do the bad things.
But there is another way, if someone pays your fine you’re also free to go.
The good deeds and the sense of repentance is not the payment itself is only to show that you cooperate with Jesus sacrifice enough, whitch is the thing that redeem us
A while back you said you were going to lay off the apologetics a bit, but you're doing it again - trying to compare things that you aren't really an expert on (ie. Islam, Hinduism etc)
Can you do a video on the Holy Spirit please, it's the part of the trinity that is the most ignored. (Blessings & gifts of the Holy Spirit)
Dude just explained the whole Bible in 3mins!!! I salute you sir.
Christianity is the only religion which shows how God can be truly merciful and truly just at the same time. True justice without the sacrifice of Jesus would condemn us all to death.
It's not true that Christianity is the only religion whose god became a man. Read the Bhagavad-Gita.
And in the Bhagavad Gita, The Song of God, Krishna states that he as in Brahman/God will come back to Earth to restore righteousness when the people lose their way. He also told Arjuna if you seek refuge in him then you will make it to Nirvana/Heaven.
To anyone else reading this; Hinduism has only one God since the beginning which is Brahman. There is also the Atman, which is Brahman that dwells in all things and every one. Brahman and Atman are the same. It is like Father and Holy Spirit. All of the gods in Hinduism are aspects of Brahman since God is so big and great it is hard to define God. Something that a Hindu Saint named Sri Ramakrishna once said (it is not an exact quote), "God is like water. When held in the hand it can freeze to the form of the devotees love." He also said Religions are like rivers that lead to the same ocean which is God.
This is coming from an American Christian by the way.
@@claytonholder7468In Christianity, God does not dwell in all things. All other things are creation, not the creator. God is not in a rock or a tree. Also, you speak of hinduism like there is just one kind. There are many, and with differing beliefs.
@@claytonholder7468 nirvana is far from heaven. it doesnt even matter which country u are from. u can be American and a mormon. and I wouldnt even call America a Christian country seeing how many are into evangelism which doesnt comes from ancient times.
u prob attended concerts instead of an actual church. tell me about what u learn from churches then? and what is the eucharist truly? is it symbolism or actual flesh?
Definitely
Hinduism is unique
Bhagavad Gita and Upanishads
Great explanation 👍
The problem is the premise that we can't go straight to God because of sins is false. There is no concept like this. We see how multiple people throughout the Bible interacted with God without any mediator and definitely without a nonsensical mangod to help them.
If they did, they DIE on the spot. God has reached so much effort in the New Testament of preventing the Death of His servants, esp. Elijah and Moses.
Funny enough, the Transfiguration happened, which placed this question to rest. The only ones who survived seeing the face of God in His Full Glory are two fishermen who asks if they should put booths the moment Time and Space folded into one.
@@skybattler2624 I'm talking about the old testament. There is no concept of anyone not being able to go straight to God. This is a made up doctrine in order to justify a need for Jesus. Nobody ever needed a mediator before this. Nobody dies on the spot for talking to God. The whole bible is about people constantly having long conversations with Him. Nobody was dying. They didn't see His face for we know that is impossible. However, they were always talking to Him and with nothing in between
@nothingbutthetruth613 many did. Aaron's sons died while taking a shortcut. One of David's top soldiers died while transporting the Arc of Covenant.
You clearly haven't read the Torah. Heck, Moses acted as the mediator and is actually the precursor of the Messiah.
In fact, Isaiah 53 is the undeniable proof that the Messiah must die to be the Mediator
@@skybattler2624 Huh? Aaron's sons didn't die from talking to God. David's top soldier didn't die from talking to God. There is no such thing, my friend. Moses was a prophet so he got messages from God and transmitted them to the people. He wasn't a mediator at all and there were 1.2 million prophets in history. How can anyone possibly say we can't go straight to God? Every one of these prophets spoke directly to Him. As far as Isaiah 53, I have no idea what you're talking about
@@nothingbutthetruth613 Moses (and Elijah, in particular) are incapable of seeing the full glory of God, else they die. In fact, the Prophets are meant to be mediators before God before the Prophet (aka Jesus), as prophesied by Moses, comes.
You clearly haven't read the Old Testament for you to even not know what Isaiah 53 holds. It is the strongest evidence supporting Jesus.
Heck, in Jesus' times, Caiaphas, the High Priest, was credited by Matthew as prophecying that the Death of One Man is needed to save the Entire Nation, all in reference to Isaiah 53, without him knowing
The image of the guy talking to the rock made me laugh harder than I wanna admit
2:45 is the shortest answer I have heard to the problem of evil, and impressively it is a pretty good one.
with all due respect, it's not even a valid answer
"because we deserve this"
how? because of our nature? we didn't choose our nature, God did. So he punishes us for something he is responsible for. Also what about people who live a good, pious lives, priests maybe? Do they deserve this too?
Common Christian W.
Finite and infinite at the same time? That is a very contradicting illogical statement.
God is All-Powerful but He can die? Believing that is very disrespectful! This statement has the same 'logic' as 'God can create something so heavy that He can not lift'.
I found the ultimate video example of begging the question. You Christians can do better than this.
Will there be any Catholic churches available on the map soon?
never, the map is only for non-liberal Mainline Protestants. Most Protestant churches are also excluded
Catholics need no map they're everywhere
@@redeemedzoomer6053
So it's a compliment for us, I guess...
Deus vult
@@deepspacetravel9016 Deja vu, I've done that, seen it, got the T-shirt, whatched the video of a guy who think's he knows everything when Christianity is a bigger picture. We aren't surprised that a random Christian TH-camr thinks that a form of Christ is wrong (untrue). But I'm making a fuss over a pointless map so I'd don't know what the heck I'm doing.
@@redeemedzoomer6053 bruh I'm in sweden I have to travel by train for two hours to reach one
@@Wyxoor
Bro my family lives in Poland, the churches are everywhere like frickin Starbucks and are pretty modern, you can even pay offering by credit card lol
Why isn’t Atheism in the thumbnail? It requires faith and therefore is a religion.
Faith in what? Dying?
@@ChickenInTheBucket Faith in existence being meaningless
@@ISmellYoureFeetThat's nihilism, not atheism. Atheism means not believing in a higher power.
Most Atheists are believers in the religion of Darwinism
im pretty sure that atheism is the definition of no religion
The principle of immanence does not denies God’s greatness and power. God is close because all of creation is part of him not separate from him. It’s only in immanence we can start to grasp who he is.
“Which revelation achieves the goal of religion” that’s truly the perfect standard to keep when researching about these topics, that’s how I found Christianity two years ago, and why I didn’t choose Islam nor Buddhism. “You’ll know them by their fruits” if you will 😉☦️✝️
Yeah, controlledoppositianity's fruits is that their dead heb-ew idol still hasn't returned 2000 years later.
Anyone else getting fanfic vibes?
this is perfect !!!
2:32 Why didn't you say "He did" instead of "He can"?
RZ is fs the gateway drug into truth. Praise God for you zoomer
Before you know it, you'll be mainlining truth straight into the jugular.
W video. Also pls mew in a livestream! Since ur a gen z guy also get a low taper fade.
Very easy to fulfill a standard you are writing yourself
Muslims definitely do not believe that God is love lol
Finally a video I can relate to
How is your comment 9 hours hold but the video only 44 minutes old?
@ChristsGoodNews Time zones. I'm from Australia so the video comes early for me
@@neptune6989 me changing my timezone:
Can't wait to watch
Been watching these videos for a while now. Zoomer believes the incarnation of Christ would’ve still happened in a sinless world because he believes it is not merely a response to sin but much more, that the entire physical universe was created for that purpose. One thing I’d like to understand though is that there is an infinite gap between God and man, just like the dust mite and human analogy, my only question is this. In the view that the incarnation happens regardless of sin, it says the finite needs a bridge to the infinite. Humans are finite, but so are angels, why don’t angels need Christ to bridge that gap in a hypothetical sinless world? Perhaps because one is a physical being and the other spiritual?
Im not an Expert so please just take my words as ideas and not the truth,if you even do lol
We humans need christ since otherwise we need to pay the punishment of our sins
Angels don't since most of them are disciplined and dont sin.But they still CAN sin however,like Lucifer and his army.
@ Yes, we have sinned, and Christ takes our punishment and angels are sinless and take no punishment. But zoomer holds to a specific belief that even in a sinless world we’d still need Christ to become man. He thinks that even if we hadn’t sinned and had no debt he says we’d still need Christ to become incarnate. He believes this because he thinks the incarnation is not only a payment of sin and a response to human sin but is needed to bridge the gap between the infinite and finite, that the whole world was made for the incarnation. So in a hypothetical sinless world he thinks sinless humans would still need Christ to become man, why not the same for finite, sinless angels? Christians throughout history debated whether the incarnation would still need to happen if the fall had never happened, Acquinas had the opposite view to Zoomer, saying that if humans never sinned we wouldn’t need an incarnation, but Scotus agreed with Zoomer.
So it turns out that Jesus really was the answer all along.
Truth to be told Jimbo, Heaven is not a reward, is a gift, one given by a very loving God
Christianity, the only religion which main event is the humilliation of it's God
The only one they try to silence
The one kingdom where the King is the piercing edge at battle
That's why we aim to do good, not to be worthy, cause we ain't, only a heart that has feel true love and forgiveness desires to do good
He loved us first
That ending was fire
I dunno man, sometimes I feel like I can relate to a dog better than I can relate to a man who I share no language with.
I will remember that it is even harder to relate to a dog than it is to relate to the French. Le Woof to you, RZ.
Anybody could’ve done this for any religion and just moved the goalposts in terms of “what religion is about”. Not all religions intrinsically have the same goals, very shoddy logic here that doesn’t convince anyone who was not already a Christian. L video.
Yes & Amen & Glory!
huh, very strange: I was not notified of this video
Welcome back St.Athanasius
I don’t think every religion is about god. Buddhism especially is agnostic to the idea of a singular higher deity, and you are forgetting that Hinduism can get very polytheistic. And that’s ignoring all the other religions besides the major ones.
0:51 God is both Immanent and Transcendent in Hinduism and Sufi tradition and some other religions.
0:57 Siddharth gautham defeated sin and became Buddha The enlightened One
1:12 Or Krishna
2:08 Rama had to live in the forest for 14 years.
2:12 Krishna reveals God. ,rama live a sin less life and both sacrifice very much
2:16 budhha defeated death and evil by becoming a budhha
3:17 hindu avatars left the chat
Funny enough, it's easier to relate to a dog than some people.
Why not just use the parable "Bad Apples". Like when u have to get bad apples out of the basket, u first throw out all the apples and take the good ones. Try it bruv to all religion. See whos on top :v
1:08 u basically just told us what a prophet is
1:55 please anyone tell me why the son of god could die, please anyone
2:17 again ur just explaining he was a prophet, not a son of god
2:50 so basically ur saying to follow his lead and we will be in a place of bliss?
3:00 i agree on the believe part, cuz i am a muslim and we believe he is a prophet, but why should u repent to a prophet or god, or the son of god besides god himself? I know u said we can't relate to god, but does that also mean we can't even repent to him?
3:12 what do u mean by "god-man"? U had stated he was a son of god, not god himself, also how would a god die? U had stated it was for peoples sin but why? Couldn't he had simply pray to god to forgive us, as u stated he was the son of god, or "god-man"
Please someone answer my questions, I beg u
Jesus is both God the son of God and the son of man. And When Jesus dies on the cross he is not ceasing to exist so him being God means he can die but not cease to exist. And the examples you gave in the video do not point in any way that he is a prophet.
This is just rehashing Christianity. It refutes nothing said by atheists, nor any criticism by Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, etc. You haven't elucidated why God exists, either, or why he needs to be worshipped.
No wait, not "why he needs to be worshipped" but "Why would God would want or need worship, or anything at all, if he is almighty?"
1.How so?In m opinion his Arguments were fair enough
2.Yeah he doesnt talk about why God exists,because thats not the subject here🤦♂️
It's like expecting biology in a theology class
@verbulent_flow6229 **why would god want or need worship**
Why should you listen to and respect your parents when they already love you unconditionally ?
One cannot be a citizen of a Kingdom. He's a subject of said Kingdom.
Mormonism has a great solution too.
You are basing your thesis off of Reformist presuppositions.
Don't Mormons also believe in salvation through faith in Jesus Christ? My Mormon in laws certainly seem to think so
Mormons believe any man can become a god, so no, not the same.
nope
-Adam
The title might cause some voews to react in certain ways, dont you think?
I am intrested what you think about the monarchy and democracy. Can democracy exist with Christianity? In heaven is monrachy and hierarchy
...and Hell is a Democracy...
I think it's an absolute monarchy but not "absolute" monarchy as their administration in heaven and god do allow discussions and disagreement with him in heaven.
And all this is true because [evidence missing].
He gave evidence,no?
You should be then making stances against his evidence if you were against his points.And not what you are doing here
@EldersXD_08 None of what he said is evidence. He just stated what he really wants to be true on faith and expects everyone to follow because he said so.
@PitchBlack0000 thats not very "rational" of you my atheist friend.In counter to what you say,one can say "you dont want God to be true"
And also,how so?Whats your evidence we only "want it to be true"?
@ Except I follow the evidence where it leads, and it doesn't lead to magic man in the sky.
"And also,how so?Whats your evidence we only "want it to be true""
You. If you didn't want it to be true you would try to look elsewhere and realize it's all wrong. With the lack of evidence or rationality, you'd realize all there is to it is wanting it to be true without demonstrating it.
Not even all Christians believe this though - correct me if I'm wrong but don't some branches believe in theosis?
Why does God only have to be near to us or far from us? If God is all controlling and all powerful can God be both?
Coming from a place of good faith - just curious
The more time passes the more it feels like salvation is impossible.
I guess I can't find forgiveness in Protestantism, because they don't have "apostolic succession" thus their sacraments are worthless according to the Ecclesialists.
I can't find sure forgiveness in Catholicism, because the Orthodox claim they are the correct ones. (Not to mention hoping that the Pope doesn't institute something really bad, because he has the power to do what ever he wants)
And I can't have sure forgiveness in Orthodoxy, because if the Catholics are right. I am considered "Educated" under their standards, thus will not attain salvation.
They all have valid arguments to their claims. There's always more confessions to read, more questions, on and on...
I genuinely don't get why the Lord allowed it to happen this way, but I don't think it's possible. I'd be better off to flip a coin and hope for the best at this point.
@@whatdadogdoin-j1o I understand your concerns, they are very valid and I too question why there is so much disunity (though I know God has His reasons at the end of the day). I will say that the papacy isn’t a big concern to me because the Church believes he is (and will be) protected from binding the universal church to a doctrine that isn’t from God. He is still a sinner, but the Spirit prevents him from binding the faithful to false doctrine, which is infallibility. Also I think at the core of it, the major Christian branches find salvation in similar ways. Repent, receive, and remain. Turn away from sin (as best you can), receive Jesus through baptism and sacraments, and remain faithful to the end. Beyond that though, I think it is important to know how your faith tradition answers other questions. Who has the authority to decide what beliefs are necessary, and which are open for discussion? The Bible doesn’t answer many of those questions, so how does your tradition come to answers? If a church was instituted by the Apostles to make big decisions, like putting the Bible together, or establishing that God is a Trinity, that would suggest it is a living church, able to interpret and guide the faithful in truth. This same church, then, can help us understand what is necessary for salvation. Hope this was helpful in some way, lmk if you have any questions and I hope the Lord gives you clarity in these challenging days. Blessings to you.
I hear what you're saying. I would just add that the Protestant view is that there are genuine, saved Christians in all the major branches of Christianity. Further, it's my understanding that both Catholics and Orthodox (especially Catholics) have substantially soften their condemnation of people outside their respective groups. In fact, I imagine most Catholics would say that Protestants that were baptized in the Trinity and who sincerely believe in Jesus as their savior and that Jesus is the eternal Son of God co-equal with the Father and the Spirit, will also be saved. Therefore, I'd just encourage you to pray, read the scriptures, believe in Jesus as your savior, and find a good church that adheres to traditional confessions, whether Protestant, Catholic, or Orthodox, and you'll make it to heaven no doubt whatsoever.
@@ApostolicZoomer A Question if I may. (Please don't think these are attempts at gotchas, I just want to know)
And Thank You for commenting!
I can't understand how people don't have crippling anxiety from the Papal Authority, he truly does have the ability to bind whatever he wants.
Catholic Apologist Voice Of Reason put it pretty bluntly essentially saying so in a short video on gay "marriage"
SOURCE: th-cam.com/video/8TzVMnfT1GY/w-d-xo.html
If I were a Catholic, I would have to constantly keep my fingers crossed and hold my breath.
Not trying to weaken your Faith but, doesn't that worry you a little?
Also These are some quotes I saw that REALLY bothered me about the Papacy...
(Saw these quoted on an Orthodox Podcast, forgive me can't remember the video link)
"The Pope is not only the Representative of Jesus Christ, but he is Jesus Christ Himself... So that when the Pope speaks we have no business to examine."
Pope Pius X- When he was the Patriarch of Venice; quoted in the July 13th, 1895 issue of the Catholic National.
A representative of Christ is one thing, but this is another. Peter would never in a million years to my knowledge say such a thing.
One more...
"The Pope is "God on earth" Jesus has placed the Pope higher than the Prophets, than John the Baptist, and than all the angels. Jesus has put the Pope on the same level as God Himself!"
John Bosco- (1815-1888) Considered a great modern saint and Doctor by the Papacy.
@ appreciate the reply. With respect to the papacy possibly infallibly teaching something against the will of God, I don’t live scared. Just as I’m not scared of the possibility of someone finding evidence one day that Jesus didn’t rise, which Paul says would falsify Christianity. I have faith that it wouldn’t happen because firstly it hasn’t happened in 2000 years, but more importantly because I believe Christ was raised, just as I believe the Spirit protects the Church from error. And with respect to the quotes, I do think we need to be careful. Lots of false quotes show up for apologetic purposes, like fake quotes attached to famous atheists to suggest they converted or had profound regrets on their deathbeds. Everything I’ve found about the Pius one suggests it is a corruption of what he actually said, which was that the Pope represents Christ Himself. And I’m not positive on the Bosco quote but I’d need to also find more evidence for it. Looking it up I found very little, so I have my reservations. Even if he did say it though, I’m not ashamed to admit that saints are sinners too, and may say things that can be scandalizing or erroneous.
@@ApostolicZoomer You raise a very good point about finding evidence against the resurrection. I share your sentiment on that, because I share your belief that Christ did indeed rise from the dead. So if the Holy Spirit guides me to eventually find that the Papacy is a divine institution established by Him, then I can trust it in a similar way.
Though I must admit, if this happens it will take time for me to grow in that trust.
Yeah, I know I shouldn't take quotes on face value but those ones really irked me.
(And I admit I had bias towards accepting them due to my lack of Papal trust mentioned before)
The source on the picture I took of the Bosco quote was something called...
Meditazioni, Vol. 1: 2nd ed., PP 89-90
But Thank You for taking the time to talk, and if you read this. Please say a prayer for me. Christ says his yolk is easy, and his burden is light. (Matthew 11:30)
I'm not gonna lie, I'd really like to find that right now.
God Bless.
2:35
"You can't be good enough for heaven", "You can't pay the debt of your sins", and "You can't resurrect yourself from the dead"
Ezekiel 18:21-23
Moreover, if someone wicked repents of all the sins that were committed and keeps all My laws and does what is just and right, they shall live; they shall not die.
None of the transgressions they committed shall be remembered against them; because of the righteousness they have practiced, they shall live.
Is it my desire that the wicked shall die?-says the Sovereign GOD. It is rather that they shall turn back from their ways and live.
Hosea 6:6
For I desire goodness, not sacrifice;
Devotion to God, rather than burnt offerings.
Isaiah 55:7
Let the wicked give up their ways,
The sinful, their plans;
Let each one turn back to GOD
So as to be pardoned;
To our God,
Who freely forgives.
The only way to be redeemed is through atonement, not sacrifice.
2:47 "Solution to evil"
Isaiah 45:6-7
So that they may know, from east to west,
That there is none but Me.
I am GOD and there is none else,
I form light and create darkness,
I make weal and create woe-
I GOD do all these things.
Have a blessed day everyone
Beautiful!
What about Jainism and Buddhism? In it your infinite soul's intrinsic bliss and immortality is obscured by ignorance and desires. In this way the infinitr is in your heart, you just need to clear your soul like how one would clear a gem of dirt.
I want to be a citizen of God.
As long as you live a Good life sticking to good and resisting evil you are apart of Gods kingdom.
What is good and what is evil? Different religions define them differently, and they are contradictory.
I am a Deist, and I want to ask, what's the point of connecting yourself to God?
God is the creator of the universe, He knows everyone, everything, and cares for us. He also promises eternal life to us. Connecting ourselves to God is building a relationship with Him. And having a relationship with the creator of the universe is pretty good
If he wants you to communicate with him? ask a different question with from other perspectives.
If you can imagine for a moment you believe it is possible:
God can give man new spiritual life in Him which is better in every way. Colossians 2:9-15, John 6:35-40, Psalm 115
Connection with God is fundamental for spiritual growth and understanding your calling in life. Without connecting to him you will just be living life by your own will and the will of the flesh which will be contrary to what God wills.
@ Since God is all powerful, God can read your mind.
Imagine this, if you can read others’ minds, then others aren't others anymore, they become a part of you, because others, by nature, are what is foreign to your mind.
Therefore, God cannot be all powerful, otherwise you will become part of God, this creates serious contradictions with Christian Theology.
This video: How do we know christianity is correct? Well if you define God they way christianity does, christianity has the definition of God closest to that definition.
Bc Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life.
@@Tiowulfno it isn't
Lol right. A Hindu, Muslim, Zoroastrian could all make this video to “prove” their religion is correct just changing their “goal of religion”.
@ Your IQ looks lower now, are you still in high school?
It's to be expected, honestly. That's my thoughts on the video too but I will at least hear it out. I think it's important to understand things we don't agree with even if they're given from a biased perspective which is what we should expect anyway
I mean your first assuming we can't reach God by reason alone when you say revelation is the only way that you can know about god. The second assumption is that a all powerful god exists and is the one that interacts with the world because for example caanite pagan believed that El the high God doesn't really influence the world however his sons do .the third assumption is we are "sinful" which assumes that the Christian worldview is true. And also you haven't gave a account for why would our actions are evil . Because in the Biblical account whatever god decides is immortal is immortal. Because there is no clear reasoning for why x action is evil besides god said so.
And that doesn't give a account to why Christianity is true.that only provides a account to why all current religions are false (assuming the assumptions are true) because someone else can come and claim that they are god uniting man to himself and they can turn out to be true and Jesus turns out to be the lying