History’s Dictators All Used THIS To Take Over The World
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ก.พ. 2023
- History has proven that this one tool is the most valuable and effective when it comes to ushering in a cultural collapse, making way for new leadership. What is this tool, and how does it work?
Subscribe to us for more high-quality biblical content every week.
_____________
DIGGING DEEPER
🔹 answersingenesis.org/answers
_____________
BLOG
🔹 See Calvin’s blog posts here: answersingenesis.org/blogs/ca...
_____________
FREE e-BOOK
Sign up for our email newsletter and get a free copy of Calvin’s eBook, “Fellow Biblical Creationists! - STOP Doing These 3 Things…”
🔹 answersingenesis.lpages.co/fe...
_____________
DONATIONS
🔹 answersingenesis.ca/donate
_____________
ANSWERS TV
Need answers? Get equipped to defend the gospel of Jesus Christ and the truth of God’s Word with live and on-demand video content from Answers in Genesis, the Ark Encounter, Creation Museum, and other Ministries worldwide.
🔹 Start your free trial today at www.answers.tv
Fantastic video, thank you.
This is sooooo true. Thank you for this video.
Great indepth understanding. Satan will always invert the truth through all these Satanic devices.
Bible tells us about giving into false doctrine and doctrine of devil's. It's in everything even churches. Stay strong in faith and in the word of God.
Wonderful video! Thank you for sharing the truth! Praise God!🙏
This is an absolutely wonderful and fair assessment. Good work!
Great video sister!
Wow! Incredibly insightful, we’ll thought out and researched. Thank you for this. It has taught me so much of the methods employed by Satan in his quest to discredit God. We must be strong and watchful indeed. God bless you for your work.🙏
Hebrews 11:3 "By faith we understand....."
Bravo!
Thank you, AIG! This reaffirms some of the things I've been thinking about.
God bless you!
Psalm 34:21-22 KJV
Evil shall slay the wicked: And they that hate the righteous shall be desolate. The LORD redeemeth the soul of his servants: And none of them that trust in him shall be desolate..amen
FULLY VACCINATED By the BLOOD Of JESUS...!.
🇯🇵I love it’s, perfect explanation, thanks for sharing.😊
Yes. I fear for my grandchildren.
Godlike, sounds like when Lucifer ( the angel known as the bringer of light) wanted to be God, but failed. Now Satan works to be described as a godlike being, when he is a malguided fallen angel, still bent on becoming god, but knowing he will fail.
9:34 Yeah, I've always thought that Eastern spirituality is christianity. Without God, it sounds weird, but Buddhism especially teaches people to be godly without God
Been noticed a lot of shows present middle aged adults and inept and the elders as mindless the ones either this or they have a strong female lead and all the men are weak except the villain
11:28 including religions like the church of Jesus christ of latter-day saints who are actually mormons with a chrisitan mask.
You made a lot of good points, and I really want to get behind you on this. However, the one thing that was abundantly clear is what I've come to believe about Christianity: that beyond the worship of God, it is first and foremost the worship of a book. Any time one allows ANY single piece of evidence to define everything they believe about God, the Universe, and their place in it, that single piece of evidence has become their object of worship. Furthermore, by placing all their faith in the Bible, what they're really placing their faith in is the Council of Nicea ( I think I spelled that wrong). They are trusting that Satan was powerless is his spiritual warfare attempts to corrupt the Cannon.
I believe that to call the Bible " the Complete and Inerrant Word of God" is an insult/slap in the face of God. To call it Complete means that everything God has to say to us is contained in those pages. A MILLION Libraries of Congress cannot contain everything God has to say to us. The Bible has almost nothing in it about child abuse. Am I to believe God doesn't care about children? Furthermore, to call it inerrant is also wrong. Satan has worked very hard to have a few words translated incorrectly, resulting in long-held incorrect beliefs about some important subjects.
I could go on, but this comment is already too long. If you seek God you will find Him. Jesus is Lord!
I really like your point about worship of a book and how reliance on one single piece of evidence makes that an object of worship. It's very perceptive, and it made me think. I'm an atheist myself, but on this point I agree wholeheartedly, especially since it's true in a broader context that we should not just look to one source to interpret the whole picture. It goes for religion as well as for news or world views for that matter.
It also saddens me to see this kind of use of the Bible as complete and inerrant. I'd say it misses the point and reduces the Bible to something less than it is. Obviously, I don't consider the Bible divinely inspired, but I do find some parts inspiring, and that's not because of their historical accuracy or details about creation. Rather, I find inspiration in fx the use of parrables to reveal the need for compassion and the room that some stories leave for interpretation and contemplation.
I also see something else that worries me in this video. The insistence on conflict is a problem for me. As an atheist, I don't see myself being at war (or in conflict) with Christians or Christianity or trying to take over the world. I really don't. I do want evolution and not creationism or ID taught in science classes, but not because of some deeper agenda to push a worldview. What I want is a conversation, not just about who's right and wrong, but an attempt to understand the other person's views. Not necessarily agree, but understand. It's also much more interesting to talk to people you don't agree with, but it's hard to have a conversation with someone you call out as an antagonist like I'd say this video does atheists.
Anyway, I did appreciate your points and that there are things we can agree on.
@@jonasmlgaard-asmussen9844 I'm really impressed with your ability to "agree to disagree " regarding theism. I believe we could have a very good time hanging out and swapping ideas about this or any subject. I am very curious as to why anyone would embrace Atheism, and even though I'm a Theist, would not argue that belief condemns one to Hell. While I no longer subscribe to mainstream Christianity, I still believe in "life after death" and would hold that belief based on a purely scientific perspective.
@@steveraus3495 Thanks :) In ancient Greece there was a people (can't remember which one) who had a tradition of debate that stated you have to summarise your opponent's argument and have him accept your summary before you could go on to oppose it. I believe understanding other people's views is more important than convincing them of yours. It's not to say the truth isn't important, but understanding the other person's views in the spirit they were intended is the foundation of any fruitful debate and makes it easier to get along.
So, in the interest of understanding, I can share why I'm an atheist. It's not going to be short at all, so strap in :)
Ultimately, since I'm a sceptic, it comes down to the evidence. I've never seen or heard any evidence or arguments for God's existence that I found compelling and I've seen and heard a lot, but I also struggle to say what compelling evidence or arguments would look like. To me, the whole idea of proving God's existence through scientific/historical evidence or arguments has come to seem strange, even flawed. The question is: How do you prove something supernatural through natural means? Just look at how hard it is to prove scientifically that something is a miracle rather than a natural occurance. What parameters do you even set for what counts as scientific evidence of a miracle? If I can be cheeky, I'd say there's a missing link between the supernatural/spiritual and the natural/matter-based. If the supernatural exists, then how does it interact with the natural in a way that we can detect the supernatural element?
Science faces a conundrum of the same kind in trying to guess what happened before the Big Bang when our current physical laws didn't exist and maybe something else did, but we just can't tell or what is would be. This lingering question is also why I find it hard to say what evidence would convince me, other than to say if God exists and there is a spiritual way for him to reach me, like a revelation, that might do it.
Now, I said my atheism is ultimately down to the evidence I don't see for God and 'the missing link' between the supernatural and the natural. As you may detect, I'm coming from a standpoint here, which is that I believe nature with all its wonder is all there is. That also means matter is all there is. I don't believe these things because I find them attractive (I think I'd like an afterlife, so wouldn't mind if you're right there), but because those are the 'explanations' of the world that seem most convincing to me. Yet, being honest, I can't say ultimately that it's just down to the current evidence we have or don't have when it comes to the existence of God. If God exists, there could be evidence of a different kind. Since I don't believe science or argument can answer the question of God's existence, then neither can I. So, I'm also an agnostic, not just about God's existence, but also about naturalism/materialism. So many labels :/
When you believe the question of God's existence is essentially unanswerable, there are different reactions and approaches. I live in Denmark where religion doesn't play any real role in public life, but I used to be more openly opposed to religion, and if you'd asked me in my teens if religion was good or bad, I'd have said BAD! Now that I'm in my forties, I've become more nuanced, as people do. I still mind what counts as science and oppose extreme beliefs (religious/political etc.), but I'm not out to change world views. There's no bleaker picture than a future with one world view, and in that spirit I welcome diversity of thought. Like biological life our world views need diversity to evolve. I've also learned that the exchange of thoughts is about much more than just truths. Fx, I don't expect you to accept the truth of atheism (sorry, couldn't help it ;), but there is still value in our conversation. Which makes sense cause most of our conversations in daily life are not about truths and they're mostly enjoyable (hopefully).
Lastly, there are also different approaches/attitudes to being an atheist and what that entails when it comes to religion. For my part, I'd like there to be an afterlife, but preferably without a Christian God-figure. The element of submission (don't know if you'd call it something different) is probably my main objection, but also concepts like original sin or salvation through the death of Christ seem flawed and unfair to me. As to there not being an afterlife if I'm right, I take that as a fact I can't change and seek to make the most of the time I have. I won't say I'm not afraid to die, but I can't force myself believe, so I play the hand I'm dealt.
So, here at the end of all words, I hope you made it through and it gave some perspective. I don't normally write this much, but you seemed genuinely interested. Feel free to ask questions or share what stream of Christianity you now embrace :)
Take care
Hey friend, your entire argument falls apart because your assumption about the Council of Nicaea is incorrect. The canon of the Bible wasn’t discussed at Nicaea, the entire event was about defending the deity of Jesus Christ from a heresy that was beginning to spread from a man named Arius. At the council, Arianism was totally rebuked and the deity of Christ, along with the Trinitarian view of God were affirmed. To be accurate, these doctrines were already widely accepted by the early church (as the Bible clearly teaches them), but they were cemented at Nicaea to defend against Arius and his group of followers who were sowing confusion amongst the church. The Council of Nicaea is where the Nicene Creed originated, which is still a standard of orthodoxy that Christians hold to today. I highly recommend looking into it. It will help you understand what was worked on and stamped for approval by the church at the council. The canon of scripture was already understood and widely accepted to be the same grouping of books that we have today. The accusation that the Council of Nicaea is where the canon of the Bible was decided is historically inaccurate and is often lobbed at the Bible by liberal theologians to discredit it. Specifically, so that they can deny portions of scripture that they personally don’t like. I thoroughly suggest doing some research into the subject. I’m not saying this to be harsh, but so that you can be well informed of the truth. Grace and peace be with you brother. I pray that you have a fruitful search.
@@joshsmith2939 I appreciate your input about the Council of Nicaea. I know very little about it, only that I was taught in Church that in 320 A.D. that was when and who canonized the Bible. I know the Catholics have a Bible with 10 more books than the Protestant Bible, and have heard of a Bible worshiped by some Christian churches in Africa that has 88 books. I also believe there are many other writings locked up in the Vatican the the Church doesn't want viewed because they don't align with the narrative they want folks to believe.
However, I don't believe these details make my whole argument fall apart. Christians hold up the Bible as Complete and Inerrant, and I have attended services where the pastor physically holds one over his head and has the congregation repeat after him a pledge of allegiance to it. Christianity gives it absolute authority and uses scripture to validate all their apologetics, as if everyone else would do the same. I stand behind my argument that to base everything one believes about God, the Universe, and their place in it on a single piece of evidence fulfills every requisite of the word worship.
I am not an Athiest. I am a follower of Jesus Christ. It is in Him alone I have salvation. My problem is with the RELIGION of modern Christianity. I believe Satan has very successfully used the last couple thousand years to make a series of perversions to the truth. One thing he has done is to get Christianity to be so focused on Bible that they ignore any other evidence, or have misunderstood what the Bible says due to mistranslated words, oversights of certain details, traditional beliefs passed down that aren't even supported by Biblical evidence, etc. I'm not saying the Bible has no credibility. It is full of messages useful for learning and growing. I've spent my life studying it. I've just come to believe that Christianity worships the Bible more than God.
There's not a lot of ethnic diversity on AiG is there? Except for Patricia, who does Canada.
Curious why Calvin refuses to interact with dissenters. Do you think he knows what He knows what he says is deceptive?
Regardless of your accusation, this video is measured and I suspect you largely agree with it but where she offers warning, you view as progress. I’m open to correction. Calvin Smith is doing a great job. I appreciate him entering the dialogue at this time with his approach. Refreshing.
@@adamn9999 he’s terrible. He’s not entering the dialogue. He’s a pompous, lying moron.
Secular Humanism depends on many miracles which are completely outside their religion.
Such as
@@Bomtombadi1 Matter and energy from nothing, stars forming (violates Boyle's law), life from dirt (violates law of biogenesis), macro evolution (violates genetics, never observed)...
@@HunterChristianDarkman no one says matter and energy from nothing, except creationists who have no idea what they’re talking about.
How does star formation violate Boyle’s Law?
Spontaneous generation (law of biogenesis) is obsolete and is not in any way related to abiogenesis. Another creationist point that is about 120 years behind the curve.
Life from dirt is what creationists believe, so I’m glad you agree it’s impossible.
Evolution violates genetics, how? Because it’s never observed?
Are you a typical creationist who is impressed easily by a PhD?
@@Bomtombadi1 Looks like you may have removed your response, but I'll address it anyway.
So, from the point of view of your religion:
Big Bang says everything started from a singularity (nothing). That requires a miracle. Stars form from dust (gas) which repels each other, another miracle. No matter how you spin it, life from non-life, which requires a miracle. Macro-evolution does not fit observational science at all. Genetics shows decay from mutation, not the birth of new information. That violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics, so, another miracle.
The reason something in science becomes a law is because in every case it is observed, the behavior is the same. Naturalism is based on historical science, not observational science (which gives us all of our technical and medical breakthroughs). I will suggest that where historical science is based upon nothing but an idea, it is science fiction ("If you can think it, it must be true."). OTOH, forensics, while certanly historical (unobservable) science, is at least based on observational science which can be tested - admittedly, it isn't always correcct, though.
When it comes down to it, we all have the same observational science on which to base our faith. The thing is, it supports Biblical Creationism better than any secular religion. Start with the right worldview, and everything makes better sense.
@@HunterChristianDarkman I did not remove my comment. TH-cam algorithm seems to do that.
I gloss over the religion part as I know it’s meant to be provocative.
How is a singularity “nothing?”
Dust and gas repels each other? All dust and gas? Sorry, but no. This is a broad statement.
Nope. Life from non-life is very possible, especially when we have organic molecules known to form all the time. No miracle necessary.
“Observational science” is creationist nonsense. Genetics shows relationships between different clades down to the most recent common ancestors.
Genetic entropy has *never* been shown to happen.
Please tell me how the dynamics of heat exchange in a closed system relates to genetics?
Of course evolution must be taught at school.
dude this is by far the best channel I have seen
So if god exists, does that mean human reasoning is perfect? Last I checked, this god-given reasoning Christians lay claim to has resulted in about 30000 denominations of Christianity alone.
Let’s not forget that Christianity a split from Judaism, and Islam is a split from Christianity.
So enlighten us on how this perfect reasoning has led us to the right conclusions.
The main reason there are so many denominations is based on minor points, or doctrinal emphasis, not on main doctrinal issues. A Baptist and a Methodist are still brothers and sisters in Christ.
Christianity is not a split from Judaism, it is the completion of it. Christ fulfilled the prophecies concerning Himself found in the Old Testament. The Law given to the Jews was to point to their need for a Savior. The Jews could never fulfill the Law. Jesus was sent to save mankind from his sin, something the Law could never do. If you look at the two Testaments you will find thousands of parallels throughout. For instance, when the Law was given to Moses 3000 people died in their sin. When the Holy Spirit was given at Pentecost 3000 were saved. There are many, many more parallels like this.
No, man does not possess perfect reasoning. God is perfect, man is not. Man is flawed through his sin nature.