The point at around 45.00 that Andrew made regarding the human condition and our emotions towards birth, and at times loss of a loved one is exactly what helped bring me closer to faith in God and in turn the Bible!
@@Robert_W7 In my view and experience and observation, as you can only share from yours, I see no evidence for why the bible should be a book that any underpowered group should trust, or any religious text for that matter. The religious texts that have made it in every society only made it not because of it's content, but because how much power they had in those societies. So when I see people, men, straight men, from European societies putting forward the bible as some great moral indicator knowing those same people have used the teachings of that very book to subjugate different types of people, my ancestors included, I do not see it as this book of moral values, or even a docile cultural relic, but I see it as a source to justify and is still being used to justify all manner of ill. Like I said, you can only see it from your own experience and cultural understanding, as I do.
@@Robert_W7 Yeah, I know the book and that is the same book slavers used to justify slavery. Never once did the bible say, 'Do not own another person as property.' I think you are just looking at the nice parts because the bible has not been used against you, I get that. Notice how none of them ever spent any time talking about the questionable parts, just glossed over it. Which is what most theists do anyway, from any religion.
I liked reading Jurgen Moltmann's "The Crucified God" which is a classic. He develops his theology from the Crucifixion and shows us how all of Christian life flows from that event.
Andrew, thank you for your service in promoting the Lords word in our day. It is vital and challenging I imagine. I want to humbly encourage you to emphatically say NO if asked in the future if God is one of the flawed characters in the Old Testament as Tom did around 28:30. It is important to explain-as you attempted to-many of the events of the Old Testament to those who worship the creation rather than the Creator if they are genuinely curious. To those who worship humanity and the creation, most of the death and suffering is nonsensical with an all-loving creator. And it is obvious where the cognitive dissonance comes from; for physical life and pleasure are most important to them. The spiritual is just an idea. Thus, an all loving God couldn’t take from them that which is most important. Though-as it appears you did-to leave any room for misunderstanding of the Lords goodness and unwavering righteousness is to placate their Godless worldview, and-thus-not stand firmly in truth for his glory. I want to encourage you to say firstly and unapologetically: NO! Then by all mean elaborate on particulars and theories.
Since you seem to be so firm in you answer that, no, God of the OT is not a flawed character than might you elaborate on some parts in the OT that people pull away from?
@Roger Mills It reveals the reason for existence. Do I need to even say no..... Of what commonly give way to presenting creation, I have studied these until they fall apart. What a person needs is Purpose and Love, materialism provides neither. All praise to Jehovah God 🙌
@Roger Mills incorrect, the next life doesn't give this life meaning as a rule. You don't understand this Christians faith. The person of faith understands the who and the why of reality, your worldview doesn't provide such insight. Following your premise, can I ask how do you live your 'this' life any more fruitful than I live mine?
It's interesting that they have now completely jettisoned the notion that the Bible is reliable, moving the goalposts to relevancy and coherency. But it's the reliability that underpins everything. This is the ONLY question. If the Bible is not reliable than what's the difference between it and Star Wars, Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings all of which are more coherent and relevant?
@@decision.dynamics I can experience things today that line up with what the Bible says. We all believe and accept things that we ourselves have not ‘seen.’
@@joeheppell7085 I agree, we all believe in things we haven't seen. We sometimes rely on testimony or induction and this is a valid route to knowing things. That's fine. I haven't seen Pluto, but I believe it's there because reliable people tell me so. But it's the reliability of the people or books I trust that underpins that. If a person who is a liar told me that there is a another planet beyond Pluto I wouldn't accept this. If a scripture isn't reliable I can't trust what it tells me and I certainly wouldn't bank my eternal afterlife on it.
Please, Tom, in some way articulate all of the questions you had about the Bible and Christianity as you did your work. I think this would invaluable. Thanks.
The Angels will swell with love and adoration of God if Tom Holland and Jordan Peterson accept Christ. He comes to us through thick and thin where we are at. I pray that He comes to these two beautiful men. Many Warm Blessings of God to you Tom and Jordan. I was so close for many years but the inbreaking eventually came from Jesus, not from me. I pray He comes to you. He changes the whole of reality. It's mind bending and beautiful. It's the deepest relationship that any human being can ever experience. I am very intelligent and intellectual myself and that sometimes can get in the way because we find answers and study things from a wide perspective of mind. In a way this makes it harder for God to reach us. But when He does! Wow! The pendulum swings and the universe is reordered through all depth and intellect. Like CS Lewis. God uses the gifts He gave us to draw us to Him. He can totally change our minds from within. Our intellect remains just as powerful but now works for Him. It's absolutely beautiful. Just imagine the power that Tom and Jordan would have as Christians! Thy will be done. Not mine Lord. xXx
Tom talked about wrestling with going form viewing the Bible in a historical context to viewing it in a spiritual context, -that's something that resonated in an interesting way for me. I have recently been doing the opposite. I've always been Christian, so the spiritual reading has something I've always done, but lately, I've been taking a more historical approach, reading the works of Josephus and studying other accounts confirming the texts, and then returning to the Bible to consider it as historical instead of spiritual. And interestingly, it's not only strengthened my faith, but deepened my faith far more that I ever imagined, -to the point where I'm beginning to feel uncomfortable calling it faith (even with rejecting Aron Ra's definition of faith).
Same here. I was raised Christian. Started to inquire about its validity when I became interested in science. It was science that solidified my faith in God. The historical evidence for Jesus, the holy Bible, etc was what solidified my faith in Christianity. And now to the point where I just have no further doubts. When you state it seems odd now to call it a faith, I fully understand. I’ve researched in the field of science and the humanities for years. I’m as well bred on the atheistic arguments as I am on the theist arguments.
Don't forget, the just shall live by faith! The Bible and God who wrote it, I find are deeper than I can go. The more I dig the deeper it gets. Thus, there will always be things I dont understand, and that has to be on faith. But faith based on the evidence of who He is.
My Dear Friend. If Christ is in the Hebrew Bible, then how come Jewish tradition had never seen Christ there before Paul appeared on the historical scene? Are you implying that Judaism hadn't known its own tradition prior to Paul's appearance in history? Did Judaism really need Paul to explain to the followers of Jahweh that the whole Jewish tradition is just rubbish? (Philippians 3:8 "I consider it all as mere refuse.") Sounds crazy to any intelligent person and frankly it doesn't make any sense. Kind regards.
That we are in this culture and so are familiar with the Bible, doesn't negate the possibility that it is uniquely inspired by God, that there are no other comparable texts.
When I found out... Answers to life's questions were hidden in the bible.... made me intellectual interessted. Then the God revealling Himself as Judge but also a Father of Mercy... opened my heart. Then real encounters with God himself happened... a voice, a vision, getting answers, meeting people on times and places that was beyond my human reasoning This God proofed Himself Real... after I quite to want to understand the world bu myself... now looking at it trough Gods point of view... and asking for His help... like young children do to their mum or dad... and expierence His care.
Same goes for the Quran, the Torah and every other Holy Book. Your sentence means nothing if you don't say useful for what. Are you really comparing the wheel to a Holy Book?
@@lumbratile4174 According to your post, for the same reason that you compared it to other Holly books. they are guiding narratives towards spirituality.
@@samanthacanales9102 i don't know what you had in mind, with that little information I could say the same about any holy book. I'm just going along with your reasoning
55:50 "it's that uncertainty that lies at the heart of new testament's positive message, because basically it is saying that something so odd happened, that we cannot really frame it, so we have four accounts of it and they're all different."
Of course the four Gospels are different. They are four different eye witness statements. If they were the same you could not believe them as only collusion would explain them. Ask any lawyer how courts treat identical statements from different witnesses.
@@leojmullins sure, but the point is the differences, even contradictions, in the essential, central matters or miracles, like what really happened at and after the resurrection, or at and after the birth of Jesus.
One problem, from a Catholic point of view, is that the Bible is not meant to stand on its own: it's supposed to reside in the Church and the Mass, its home. And the Church gives it the authoritative interpretation (magisterium). But for people from a Protestant background, they have come very far, using the Bible and reason only.
Replacing truth with relevance as criterion for the Bible’s impact is the sure way to diminish its force. The same goes for coherence instead of correspondence as measure of the Bible’s claim to truth and reality. This a purely pragmatic, utilitarian approach. Only Truth is always relevant.
Regarding contemporary church I think that they should go deeper with their teachings in reference to the Old Testament. Besides what we can’t understand in it, it is ultimately God trying to set His people apart and give people running from Him victory. It’s His heart and how He began civilization.😊
The old testament does not explain anything in any scientific sense. It cannot and does not tell you - how the earth was made - how humans arrived on the scene - basically ANYTHING that had to do with objective reality. Mind you, the new testament isn't any better.
@@hullie7529 ...Have you read the Bible? How can you stand there and tell me it doesn't have claims to know how the earth was made? Read genesis. The most ridiculous thing I've ever read. Sure, a great attempt for thinkers thousands of years ago, but to any clown who accepts that as fact, they aren't even worth a seat in the discussion concerning reality.
Great talk. Some suggestions: Discussion with Process Theologians , Christian Mystics, Esoteric Christianity as a subject, Richard Smoley on his book inner Christianity. And perhaps hearing from some Universalist Christians on doctrine.??? Just a few suggestions. Love your show!!!!
Surely God is working on Tom through Andrew and the Unbelievable channel! It's such a delight to see the Holy Spirit work in Tom and, separately, in Jordan Peterson. When you can see the way the Holy Spirit tugs on the heart in people, you can't help but feel joy!
I believe Bishop Barron has been really working on JP. They just had a really good conversation on his podcast. His wife has gotten into the Rosary. Peterson and Holland make a better case for Christianity than any apologist minus Nt. wright and Bishop Barron.
The Scripture is a divinely inspired written in order to teach us about God’s revelation into the world. Scripture scholars always recommend to read and study first the NT then the OT to understand the plan of God for man’s salvation which culminated in the suffering, death and resurrection of Jesus. The great passage in the Scripture that summarizes that everything we want to know is from the Gospel of John 3:16. “For God so love the world that He sent his only begotten Son not to condemn the world but to save it”
I was struck by Holland's honesty as a questioning believer here. But I had a sinking feeling as soon as Jordan Peterson was spoken of by Justin and Ollerton as if he were a good faith actor rather than a charlatan. Ollerton's euphemistic response at 28:00 to Holland's question about the character of the OT God versus the NT God reinforced that feeling. His "partial answer" is also evasive. The subject here - the actor - is not humans, it is God himself, so to say the difference is down to "how we relate to God" is equivocation. Does God actually act as a genocidaire at some times in history? Or are some accounts in the Bible simply mistaken about the nature or actions of God?
@@analogia_entis See what I mean, all any religious person has to say is their particular version of God did, no explanation needed, but reject other people's religious beliefs. That is being dishonest. The most essential part of being religious is being dishonest with yourself. Faith is all about lying to yourself.
Listen to Tom's history of where secular came from. The Church. We shot ourselves in the foot by separating Church and State which came from a belief in Priesthhood. Did Peter go to Rome? X
Dear Tommy, Saw You, passing away on a quiet sidestreet, this morning. And your sister too, sweetsister, on the beech. She's wearing wonderfull shalljewllery on her own and said to me, I am her friend. I believe her! Corina
Of course the "behavior" of God in the Old Testament is not embarrassing - if it seems so, one has to adjust one's theological thinking so one understands why it is not "embarrassing."
I think Bret Weinstein(an atheist) put it best when he said that the Bible has evolutionary value, where it maintains relevance to a structured life. He said something like "literally false, but metaphorically true".
(Exodus 21:7-11) “When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. 8 If she does not satisfy her owner, he must allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. 9 But if the slave’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave but as a daughter. 10 “If a man who has married a slave wife takes another wife for himself, he must not neglect the rights of the first wife to food, clothing, and sexual intimacy. 11 If he fails in any of these three obligations, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment.
Thanks, my daughter turns 21 next year, so I better hurry to find a buyer. If she doesn't please said buyer and he wants to sell her back to me, do I have to pay full price?
But this is a non issue anymore. "no amendment to the Constitution is absolute" (Biden, current leader of the US). Therefore, the 13th can't be absolute either. Can't wait to market shopping for new incomers from the Congo
@@skyeangelofdeath7363 They only interpret, legislative has a say also as to what even goes on it. The contention is still that there is official hope now that cotton industry may make a comeback after all. So its cool
I wish Ollerton was a better speaker ... I am sure his book must be fantastic especially if Tom Holland endorsed it ... But man I wish Ollerton took more time to give intellectual and deep responses to Tom's questions :(
But it's a little unfair to ask Tom Holland whether he is going to make a faith commitment, that seems to be from a Protestant perspective, where the only critical question is whether the person has made this commitment. (From the Catholic perspective, there are other criteria that need to be considered also.)
Another explanation, or a similar one, as to why God in the Old Testament did some things which seem unjust, is that God had a plan for his creation, and he had to bring it about in a sinful world.
Marcion - these heresies are kind of like theories that had to be tried out. It was tried, and it showed that it was in the wrong direction, which was something learned.
Ollerton’s response to Holland’s question about the OT God was incredibly lacking. In the OT we see a holy God who knows the hearts and minds of men issuing judgment on people who deserved it (as we all do), like He did with the great flood.
Aside from better understanding ancient myths, why should anyone take seriously what biblical texts promote? Egyptian myths endured for centuries until reality rendered them irrelevant within more modern times. Clock is ticking for Judaism / Christianity / Islam etc etc.
Always a classic.... If two men are fighting, and the wife of one steps in to rescue her husband from the one striking him, and she reaches out her hand and grabs his genitals, you are to cut off her hand. You must show her no pity. - Deuteronomy 25:11
Always a classic... Ignoring the textual, cultural and historical context of a verse. Great job! (cough cough this is Mosaic case law in a non-legislative society FYI).
@@stealth797 All but 9 of the 10 commandments are repeated in the NT. Besides, if you obey the 2 greatest commandments, that Jesus gave when asked which of the 10 is the greatest, you will find yourself obeying all of those.
@@littleboots9800 So the rules are: if an OT law is repeated in the New Testament then we have to obey it in 2021, but if it's not repeated then we can disregard it?
Tom asked: With whom did Jacob wrestle? According to Jewish exegesis Jacob wrestled with (the angel of) Esau. Like Israel struggles with Rome (Esau is Rome according to the Talmud). Rabbis ask: when will the Messiah come? Two conditions must be fulfilled. 1. Esau should bless Jacob. (I will not let you go unless you bless me). 2. However Esau's tears must be dried as well. See my comment at Albionic American.
Nobody ever attacks Hinduism, Sikhism and many other religions, nobody ever questions their relevancy. Why is Christianity always the taking on attacks
My thoughts: largest, most visible religion in the world; part of the doctrine is to aggressively spread the word of salvation/ reap followers/$; arguably the most damaging religion in the history of the world- invading/ destroying countless cultures, destroying native populations- just one example: Catholic nuns beating native language out of aboriginal children/ taking children from parents,often forever and subjecting them to the cruel reality of residential schools; extremely aggressive (at least in the US) invasion of the political system with the goal of altering public policy to reflect its anti-women, anti- LGBTQ, anti-secular doctrines. Shall I continue?
Sikhs arent trying to pass laws requiring creationism to be taught in schools. I dont give a crap about christianity in and of itself. I fight it because it thinks it should be able to tell other people how to live.
It's the largest group of religious people, so of course when someone tries to discredit religion as a whole they'll start by attacking Christianity. It's already happening with Islam too now that it's spreading to the West after centuries of being uncontested in the Muslim countries.
@@jaynerulo6785 Thats fair in a sense. Christians tried to become totalitarian in many regards, then express shock at the culture pushing back against it.
I am a Christian. I don't care about tribalism, and Apostolic Succession is unprovable. It's an article of Faith. Faith in who? Bishops? So we get decent Bishops like Father Barron but we've had Popes who have committed genocide. There is a decent line in Qur'an which says that all hierarchy rests on piety. Nothing else. Ali, Muhammad's nephew, said that asceticism isn't owning nothing. It's having nothing owning you. I love Francis for this reason. I don't follow with his Lady Poverty but he was a man of his time in Christendom. He had a similar experience to Buddha. When he stripped off in front of the Bishop, gave his costly clothes back to his own Dad, knowing his Dad would reject him. And knowing that he would be accepted by the Church by blackmail he knew he was lost and found. Then went out in personal poverty to help the broken. That's Christianity. The Church had no choice but to make him a Saint. Not because the Church are good. But because Francis is! And people from outside of the Church don't understand this. It's from the bottom up. Not the top down. Jesus turned the world upside down. The slave is the master. This is what Tom is starting to understand. It's not about hierarchy. The only hierarchy is with God. End of. It's the most profound message the world has ever heard. And the person who brought it was Jesus. So who is Jesus? When that understanding is coupled with written Gospels, Christianity becomes a reality that cannot be ignored. It might not be accepted. But it cannot be ignored. And Tom is in that situation. It seems. He is starting to see the absolute profundity of The Gospel. He's waking up. And as a Church we need to be there to accept him. Not evangelise. He doesn't need that. He's clever. Be there to receive him into The Body of Christ. So forget all your misgivings. We have a man who is on the verge of seeing Christ. Let's, as a Church, be there to accept him. If he comes in, which God Willing he will, he will be a bit bereft. A bit broken. Then we can love him as him, not evangelise. Because God choses the broken. Otherwise we are no Church at all. And our personal inheritance will be lost. Because one sheep is more important than the whole flock. X
_Harper's_ magazine a few years ago ran an article about the dwindling number of Zoroastrians in the world, who are known in India as the Parsees ("Persians"). At one time the Zoroastrian religion had millions of adherents across Southwest Asia; while in our world the last Zoroastrian could very well die in this century. And most of us aren't even aware of the religion's absence now. Religions come and go like everything else, in other words, and eventually this will happen to Christianity.
Zoroastrianism is dying off because 1) it was wiped out of its birthplace by Muslim conquest and 2) when it moved to India the zoaroastians had to agree not to convert in order to be allowed to exist. This over time turned into the Parsees viewing their faith as attached to their ethnic group, so even now they do not allow people to convert to their faith and they only intermarry. It could become a major religion if they changed that one rule.
@@foodforthought8308 "They" have been saying the decline of Zoroastrianism was caused by the spread of Islam and the non conversion rule that was a result of their fleeing Islam to India, since pre-Constantine Rome??? Constantine (b. 272AD - d 337AD). Muhammad (b. 570AD - 632AD)
Tom is asking the kind of questions more Christians should be asking they are penetrating and bold! As regard to the character in the Hebrew Testament and God’s accommodation of his people... it was not his purpose to have a temple built but he accommodates. It was not his desire to have Israel have a king but he accommodates and most importantly it was not his plan to use violence but the children of Israel as we all do did not trust and went beyond what was ever Gods intention. Had they listened more closely and followed more closely I believe a very different story would’ve unfolded. See Greg Boyd’s argument/book The Cruciform God which pushes the argument that the church is still not ready to hear about violence and how it is not necessary to extend Gods kingdom. Tom’s book in some ways illustrates this as well. As for the pre-incarnate appearances of Christ, again Tom has asks the penetrating questions. I think of Nebuchadnezzar‘s comment on the fiery furnace “and the third has the form of the son of God...Finally, I wish people would stop trying to make Tom into a trophy and leave the man make his own decision and trust God!
The question Holland asks is a very good question. Is the God of the Old Testament flawed. My answer to that is primarily NO. God doesn't change but humanity's understanding of God certainly has changed we read the OT backwards from and with Jesus. If Jesus is the exact likeness of God, then "God is like Jesus. God has always been like Jesus. We haven't always known this but now we do." ( Brian Zahnd). We have got so often got God wrong for instance blaming God gor the violence in the OT. Could it be that on many occasions the Israelite projected their distorted view of God on Yahweh? Jesus in the gospels is the correction to that. The first Adam bought into a lie about God which has tainted us all. That is that God is not always good, not always for us. Many Christians still believe in a distorted idol which they call God. Obe that is distant and angry. Blaise Pascal said God made us in His image and we repaid the compliment. I think this is very true. The God of the OT is presented in a schizophrenic way at times full of mercy and at others smiting people at the drop of a hat. I also agree with the point made about the accommodation principle. Paul was correct Jesus us the mystery hidden from the ages. I think the only reason many Christians get God wrong today us poor teaching that us not Christocentric. Again God us like Jesus, always has been.
@31:00 @Tom Holland ... Esteemed Jewish scholar Alan Siegel in his book "Two powers in heaven" covers this question in depth. And the answer is yes the Jewish people believed there was a multiple godhead but later deemed it heresy because of the new Christian religion expanding its implications and applications.
@@thinking7667 read Alan Siegel's book two powers in heaven as mentioned in my post. You can also refer to another scholarly study by Andrei Orlov "the glory of the invisible God"
There was a time the fall and the crusif8xiin was the most awful parts of the bible... But with God .. there was such a great revelation he gave me. They became precious !! The Fall= biggest lesson in mindfuck The crusifixiin=the place where every heart (from the powerful to the leasts of all time and universal beings )reveals what it really about.
Ifs its destroying humanity why is childhood poverty, starvation and death all down. Why are worldwide violent deaths down. Why are worldwide diseases down. Why is every negative metric down and most posituve ones are up. Like percentage of children who get to attend school and get vaccinated. Riddle me that.
Nope, the truth will always win in the end. I've watched hundreds of formal, and not so formal debates between theists and athiests and without fail, the theists have been slaughtered in debate. Yes, I am biased but even considering, it's painful to watch.
@@jaynerulo6785 there's someone floating around here (monika hug) who excels in short comments, like 'good question' and 'the suffering servant is israel' and 'hu?' that's why I call her (him, it) Monika Hu ;-)
You’re using Christian values to condemn Christianity. What culture ended slavery, passed human rights condemning genocide, and guaranteed freedoms for women? Its western values born from Christianity. Would you rather women be in polyamorous marriages that were the norm in the pre Christian world? Christianity granted women sovereignty through monogamy. Jesus revealed that the single most important law is to love thy neighbour, thats the principle that frames your entire worldview.
@@06rtm this is nothing but propaganda. Christians values didn't end slavery, Christians were just the last hold outs of the barbaric practice. Abe Lincoln was a Cristian and he made it clear that ending slavery was a tactical move to weaken the south, not a moral choice. Christianity also does not prescribe monogamy except for when Paul says leaders of the church should only have one wife. The church at large does not receive the same instruction. And even if it did, biblical monogamy is just another form of slavery which is why it says "wives obey your husband". No one should "obey" their partner, that's what dogs do. Women should be free to have a many or as few partners as they like. As for the Golden rule, many cultures taught respect for others before Jesus came along. Also, that line only serves to highlight his hypocrisy. Would Jesus want himself to be cast into outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth for all eternity because he didn't believe in the exact right way, or because he loved someone of the same sex? I think not
@@beanbrewer Theres a lot to unpack here. Christians weren’t the last holdouts, they led the way, Christian nations were the first in history to explicitly abolish slavery and then attempted to extend that to the rest of the world. They did so explicitly expressing their Christian ideals as justification. Monogamous marriage originates in Christianity, the idea that each man has one wife is perhaps the most significant innovation of Christianity. Its an extension of the idea of Adam and Eve. One man for one woman. Prior to that you had powerful men with many women, and men of lower status with no women at all. Thats why we have twice as many female ancestors as male. This creates a class of men that become warriors to gain status for themselves and take women as war prizes. The Golden rule is not explicit. How you would like to be treated is subjective and doesn’t necessitate love. Jesus emphasizes the idea of love being the highest principal. Love thy neighbour, but even love thy enemy. Jesus also unites the pure with impure. The domestic and the foreign. He grants value and sovereignty to the stranger, the poor, the sick, the weak. All the lowly figures are granted glory in the story of Jesus. As for homosexuality, nobody is going to hell for loving someone of the same sex, thats not the point. The idea is simply that sex has many aspects, the highest of which is to produce offspring. Thereby any sexual act that intentionally ignores that fact is missing the point. Homosexuality is the exact same sin as masturbation and contraception. Its not that important, but sexuality has to exist like everything else, in a hierarchy of participation, and pregnancy is the highest aspect of sexuality. Its just a general ideal to keep as an ordering principle. The fact that contraception has created a fertility crisis in the west is a perfect example of why this ideal is technically necessary.
@@06rtm again with the propaganda! Haiti was the first nation to abolish slavery and they practice voodoo. Monogamy predates the introduction of Christianity in many cultures and can also be found in animals who most certainly have not heard the gospel preached. And if the Bible is such a good book and monogamy is superior to polygamy, why would it wait till the 2nd act to even bring it up? And even in that 2nd act, praise the polygamists of the past? Your procreation talking points sound like they came straight out of the handmaid's tale. The homophobia in your closing is beyond reason. By that logic, it's just as sinful for a married hetero couple to have sex if one of them is infertile. Also it would be sinful for a married hetero couple to have sex after the woman has gone through menopause. There is nothing "sinful" about being LGBTQ+. That's just another lie from a book that teaches that zombies roamed Jerusalem
I appreciate the idea of seeing the god of Hebrew Scripture as one of the many flawed characters in the biblical story. He certainly seems to have a short temper, is obsessed with violence and even regrets many of the decisions he makes. In fact, he may be the most flawed character of the whole story. A sort of negative object lesson for us to learn what not to be like in our lives.
@Yvonne Dalton why don’t we deserve all the mercy there is to give? I would never say my child gets more mercy from me than she deserves… I’m always disheartened when people say “he gives us more mercy than we could ever deserve.” If god exists, he made us, he owes us everything, not the other way around. I decided to have a child, my child doesn’t owe me anything, I owe the world to her and will do my best to give it to her.
@@teachpeace3750 I mean, I kinda agree with you but not entirely. I would never say my parents owe me the world just because the brought me into it. Sounds bratty and entitled and unrealistic.
@@thinking7667 if you were a parent, I think you would understand where the heart of my comment is coming from. I don’t mean to spoil my child, I mean to let her know she is loved unconditionally and that nothing she ever does will change that.
My Dear Friends. Finally christians admit that faith has nothing to do with truth but everything to do with taste. And Andrew, inadvertently but rightly, acknowledges this at 1:00:10, when he compares faith to simply buying a garment at a cloth shop; SPOT ON. It's all just a person's subjective experience, subjective taste, nothing to do with the objective Cosmos, nothing to do with the supposed Creator's Plan for humanity. At last, the problem has been solved. I've got a corollary question. If the supposed Creator of the Cosmos never holds press conferences, how in the world can humanity ever know who this God's representative on Earth is and what this God's PLAN for humanity is? Kind regards.
God is an objective aspect of the nature of reality. We live in a hierarchy. Everything unites beneath the things above it, a company, a government, a sports league, a wheel, a house; every single thing unites around its most valuable part. God is simply whatever the highest aspect of reality is. Its just how the universe is laid out.
@@06rtm Thanks for your comment. Can we clarify the term "objective", please? How on earth can we call as objective a concept like for instance: a "Talking Tree"=able to transmit human thoughts to humans? Humanity experiences trees, of course, but not "Talking Trees". By the same token, how on earth can we call as objective the concept of the "Talking Immaterial Person"=able to transmit human thoughts to humans? Humanity experiences human persons, of course, but not "Immaterial Persons". Can you elaborate more on your use of the concept "objective" in the context of "immaterial person", please? King regards.
@@walterseliga9676 By objective I mean that reality has a technical order, and religion is an attempt to navigate that. Reality is laid out in a series of hierarchies. The family tree, the workplace, sports, government. Everything is a participation in systems of hierarchy. Religion makes the hierarchy explicit, and offers a guide to action within it. Religion offers a direct guide to act in world. It places certain actions as higher (closer to heaven) and certain actions as lower (closer to hell). Religion is simply an attempt to outline the hierarchy that all of reality rests within. The hierarchy of hierarchies. As for your tree example, and your non material person, maybe you could elaborate because I found them confusing.
@@06rtm My Friend. In your first post you wrote this: "God is an objective aspect of reality." When I say that an item/being is objective I mean this: "A tree is an objective element of reality because it is accessible to all human beings." On the other hand, when somebody claims that they possess a "cap that makes one invisible", then I call this item/being subjective, because it is not accessible to all humans. To me reality consists of items/beings: 1) most of them can be experienced by all humanity (they exist objectively), and 2) some of them, humanity is told, are experienced only by an individual person (they exist subjectively). My example of "talking tree" and "talking Creator of the Cosmos": Only humans are persons and only persons can exchange thoughts. Humanity does not experience non-human persons with whom humanity can exchange thoughts. Humanity does not exchange thoughts with a tree and humanity does not exchange thoughts with the supposed Creator of the Cosmos. If humanity does not exchange thoughts with the supposed Creator of the Cosmos then such an item/being is meaningless. L. Wittgenstein: "If a sign is not necessary then it is meaningless." Kind regards.
Just because the Bible contains God’s word, it does not mean that everything in the Bible is God’s word. In the Bible there are some substantial contradictions that need to be resolved, and in my judgement, the book of Esther, both Chronicles, a small part of Proverbs, the second chapter of Matthew, the letter to Hebrews, the letter of Jude and the book of Revelation are not God’s word. After having been studying and analyzing biblical texts for many years, my conclusion is that a significant portion of the Bible is of Satan, and in my writing titled A RECLUSE’S CONFESSION on my Facebook page (username: Christian Truly), I in great detail explain how and why I came to that conclusion.
We learned a spoken- there are no poor gipsy cause all get a nickle from the beginning, the next is not of their parents no jew will ever get an other jew in the lawcourt, cause their laws are much more harder, than a bribe-silly-court to orthodox- no priest carries the curch,,hram" at his home, cause he carries all time. Greeks had, probably, the joy to enjoy on their lifetime all these peoples and tell others the story, so in this lies the power of greek culture. Allthough, I heard immigrants were beaten in greek cities, no allowed in the centre, where greeks live. They hate those who don't respect Eastern or 25 March, me told. These don't negate their ancient culture. Love, great fan to Tommy. Corina Ijac
@Jason Lusk Fair enough. However, I believe that Roger is speaking about a Wager based on what Tom has seen in his historical research. Of course, is hard to understand the importance of a 1st century Jew who claimed to be God, however, that is maybe the central point to understand how unexpected was it. So, when he has gone through the evidence for the resurrection and the impact christianity has generated, I imagine he has at least contemplated the idea of being true in a historical way. However, this is my opinion from what I've seen. Have a nice day!
I am always amazed that Christians have bought into the belief that morality only flows from a supernatural being. How do they explain the thousands/ hundreds of thousands of pre-Christian cultures- some as far back as 30,000 years - that clearly had some sorts of moral code-which would be essential for a human culture to survive). Archeologists have found graves with skeletons adorned with thousands of artifacts each (as in the Sungir, Russia find,1955). Though we don’t know the reasons for certain, they obviously had sociopolitical structures, and moral codes had to have been part of that. How do Christians explain the moral codes of the non-Christian societies existing today?
Surely the O.T. is God relating to mankind in or through, Adams' decision, whatever Adams' decision was. It would seem from the N.T. that Adams' sin was to reject faith, trust, belief in his union with God through spirit and sought another way to be like God , in effect he was rejecting his union with God, the Holy Spirit, which the second Adam didn't do. God then honors Adams' decision and it ain't pretty, relating by and large, sans spirit., sans faith, it appears, but with exceptions it seems. To force the human race into righteousness through law and punishment, the knowledge of good and evil, alone, doesn't seem to work. More is needed. The Old Covenant is the ministration of death, not life. The O.T. is an object lesson in life from the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil only. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, and is always fatal.
If all the world's bibles were raptured and the knowledge of their contents were lost, they would not be recoverable. By contrast, if all the world's scientific knowledge were lost, all of the basic principles could be rediscovered. So which is based in reality? The bible, or science?
It should be quite obvious by now that they both are, one is simply concerned with the purely physical, and the other is concerned with less apparent things. Also if we were to truly make a fair comparison, it would not just be necessary for Bibles, and peoples knowledge of God in revelation to start back from square one, but it would be necessary for peoples understanding of the scientific method and all of that to be sent back to square one as well, and given the fact that we only discovered the scientific method fairly recently on the grand scale of things, I’m inclined to think that recovering said information in either case would be rather difficult, however I’m also inclined to believe that God would not let his people wallow in ignorance for too terribly long on the grand scale of things.
@@allthenewsordeath5772 My Dear Friend. I've posted my take on the concept of "faith" in the public comment section. I wonder whether you would agree with me/ Kind regards.
@@walterseliga9676 I found your comment, and I do disagree with you quite strongly, certainly a man may choose his God, but that is not true religion, that is idolatry, God after all always chooses his people, not the other way around. God chose Abraham, God chose the Jews, Christ chose his disciples, never did they choose him because they like the cut of his gib. Furthermore religion is certainly not a hat or garment to be picked up or discarded at will, or worn in private but not in public, if that sort of thing were at all possible, or at all preferable, someone really should have told the martyrs. On your note about subjective versus objective reality, the two are when you get down to it one in the same, that is ultimately based on human experience and human reason, the only difference is that with the purely physical our results can be more universally verified and applied because more people share that subjective reality. For instants most people would I’m sure agree that the sky is blue, and be able to verify that, and would be able to do so scientifically through measuring the wavelengths of light reflected from it, but if most of the population were colorblind, then the sky would not be blue, at least not as we think of it. Science as a discipline is nothing more and nothing less than the rigorous application of a process to create models by which we can understand the natural world, it has no bearing on the supernatural, or even on the philosophical, it is good at what it does and I will not falt it for that, but at the end of the day even the best mechanic only performs well if he’s fixing a car. Of course still keep in mind that I am speaking from a Christian perspective, and while I am convinced that on the whole my perspective is the most correct one, I am not qualified to speak on other views such as those of the Buddhists, or the Mohamedites.
@@allthenewsordeath5772 My Friend, I love your comment, let me respond. First of all you haven't answered my challenge question: How can humanity know the supposed Creator's spokesperson and Creator's Plans for human kind if this supposed being never holds press conferences? The answer to this question solves everything. Secondly, this is what you are saying: "God after all always chooses his people, not the other way around." Your sentence does not mirror the Reality. The supposed Creator never holds press conferences announcing to humanity whom She/He HAS CHOSEN as God's People or spokesperson. It's quite the opposite; individuals keep coming forward declaring that they have been chosen by God. And this is a world of a difference. Illustration: First scenario- Joe Biden announces during his press conference that he HAS CHOSEN Jen Psaki as his SPOKESPERSON. Second scenario- I, Walter, announce to the world that Joe Biden HAS CHOSEN me as his SPOKESPERSON. Can you see the difference? Kind regards.
@@walterseliga9676 Forgive me but it sounds like you’re asking another variation on the question of “why God just doesn’t reveal himself in all of his terrible glory to all the people and nations?” What those who ask this question usually forget though, is that once the playwright enters upon the stage, that means the play is over. The difficult thing is that we are allowed to discern which teachings are true, and which teachings/visions are false, we are not helpless in this task however, as we have the Bible, tradition, and the magisterium, though I can understand the confusion some feel at this sometimes daunting prospect.
The Bismillah only goes against the Gospels in relation to the Person of Jesus. The Compassionate in this world The Merciful in the next. When Jesus came into the upper room the first thing he said was, "Asalamu Alaikum." Hebrew, Aramaic and Arabic are all Semitic. Sorry I couldn't find where to reply to you personally. The Qur'an has been described by Christians as an heretical document. I find that offensive. Paul said that all scripture is God breathed. I have struggled with this for years because I was a Muslim convert then Christian. Who is Muhammad? He was taught by a Christian monk in Syria. It's deep. We can converse if you like. I may learn something. X
Justin, you are spectacular at maximizing the impact of your guests. I’m just blown away.
He definitely has a particular talent for it yes. Which one couldn't have without an exceptional intellect.
I love seeing Tom’s excitement over the Bible. It’s catching. His eyes light up when he speaks of it - the mansion and it’s many rooms and keys.
Love Tom H's honesty. Great place to be.
Whats unbelievable is that Jonathan Pageau hasnt been on your show yet.
that'd be great.
@@danglingondivineladders3994 I think Tony Keddie the author of Republican Jesus would great as well.
Pro trick: watch series on kaldrostream. Been using it for watching a lot of movies during the lockdown.
@Elon Kamden Yea, been using kaldrostream for since november myself :D
@Elon Kamden definitely, I've been watching on Kaldrostream for years myself :)
Great discussion. As a believing Christan, I must state my absolute respect for Tom Holland.
"Lord I believe...aid Thou my unbelief...."
The point at around 45.00 that Andrew made regarding the human condition and our emotions towards birth, and at times loss of a loved one is exactly what helped bring me closer to faith in God and in turn the Bible!
So it is about feelings then, your personal feelings. I am sure other theists could say the same thing.
@@andrebrown8969 Not at all! I think you misunderstood the bigger context here in light of the video and what I stated.
@@Robert_W7 In my view and experience and observation, as you can only share from yours, I see no evidence for why the bible should be a book that any underpowered group should trust, or any religious text for that matter.
The religious texts that have made it in every society only made it not because of it's content, but because how much power they had in those societies.
So when I see people, men, straight men, from European societies putting forward the bible as some great moral indicator knowing those same people have used the teachings of that very book to subjugate different types of people, my ancestors included, I do not see it as this book of moral values, or even a docile cultural relic, but I see it as a source to justify and is still being used to justify all manner of ill.
Like I said, you can only see it from your own experience and cultural understanding, as I do.
@@andrebrown8969 I recommend you to read the book being shown in the video. Peace to you.
@@Robert_W7 Yeah, I know the book and that is the same book slavers used to justify slavery. Never once did the bible say, 'Do not own another person as property.' I think you are just looking at the nice parts because the bible has not been used against you, I get that. Notice how none of them ever spent any time talking about the questionable parts, just glossed over it. Which is what most theists do anyway, from any religion.
I liked reading Jurgen Moltmann's "The Crucified God" which is a classic. He develops his theology from the Crucifixion and shows us how all of Christian life flows from that event.
How did this video escape my notice for 7 DAYS! The TH-cam algorithm is either stupid or broken.
I didn’t see it either! But thanks to you Paul, I’m watching this now before your commentary.
I think it's almost certainly a better recommendation than >90% of vids?
Thank you for what you're doing. Tim Mackie and Tom Holland will have a great discussion when they talk about this.
Andrew, thank you for your service in promoting the Lords word in our day. It is vital and challenging I imagine.
I want to humbly encourage you to emphatically say NO if asked in the future if God is one of the flawed characters in the Old Testament as Tom did around 28:30. It is important to explain-as you attempted to-many of the events of the Old Testament to those who worship the creation rather than the Creator if they are genuinely curious. To those who worship humanity and the creation, most of the death and suffering is nonsensical with an all-loving creator. And it is obvious where the cognitive dissonance comes from; for physical life and pleasure are most important to them. The spiritual is just an idea. Thus, an all loving God couldn’t take from them that which is most important.
Though-as it appears you did-to leave any room for misunderstanding of the Lords goodness and unwavering righteousness is to placate their Godless worldview, and-thus-not stand firmly in truth for his glory. I want to encourage you to say firstly and unapologetically: NO! Then by all mean elaborate on particulars and theories.
Since you seem to be so firm in you answer that, no, God of the OT is not a flawed character than might you elaborate on some parts in the OT that people pull away from?
Not available in Canada yet, though it was released in 2020. Looking forward to read …..The Bible: A Story that Makes Sense of Life by Andrew.
Thanks Andrew, Ton and Justin!
I've listened to the Bible cover to cover 4 times and each time it reveals more and more. It's by far the best description of reality 🙌
@Roger Mills It reveals the reason for existence.
Do I need to even say no..... Of what commonly give way to presenting creation, I have studied these until they fall apart.
What a person needs is Purpose and Love, materialism provides neither. All praise to Jehovah God 🙌
@Roger Mills A Christians knowingly has acceptance in this life.
Rev 21 - 3/4 is clear
A good thorough read of the bible reveals it is complete nonsense
@Roger Mills incorrect, the next life doesn't give this life meaning as a rule. You don't understand this Christians faith. The person of faith understands the who and the why of reality, your worldview doesn't provide such insight.
Following your premise, can I ask how do you live your 'this' life any more fruitful than I live mine?
@@sysprogmanadhoc2785 in your opinion 👍
It's interesting that they have now completely jettisoned the notion that the Bible is reliable, moving the goalposts to relevancy and coherency. But it's the reliability that underpins everything. This is the ONLY question. If the Bible is not reliable than what's the difference between it and Star Wars, Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings all of which are more coherent and relevant?
Experience.
@@joeheppell7085 Did you experience the great flood or Christ's resurrection? No you didn't.
@@decision.dynamics I can experience things today that line up with what the Bible says. We all believe and accept things that we ourselves have not ‘seen.’
@@joeheppell7085 I'm curious, could you give me a couple of examples?
@@joeheppell7085 I agree, we all believe in things we haven't seen. We sometimes rely on testimony or induction and this is a valid route to knowing things. That's fine. I haven't seen Pluto, but I believe it's there because reliable people tell me so. But it's the reliability of the people or books I trust that underpins that. If a person who is a liar told me that there is a another planet beyond Pluto I wouldn't accept this. If a scripture isn't reliable I can't trust what it tells me and I certainly wouldn't bank my eternal afterlife on it.
This is wonderful, thank you very much.
The comparison of the Fall of Troy and the conquest of Jerusalem is very interesting!
Please, Tom, in some way articulate all of the questions you had about the Bible and Christianity as you did your work. I think this would invaluable. Thanks.
Fascinating. I am a huge Tom Holland admirer. He is a first class writer.
Agreed. One of my favourites.
The Angels will swell with love and adoration of God if Tom Holland and Jordan Peterson accept Christ. He comes to us through thick and thin where we are at. I pray that He comes to these two beautiful men. Many Warm Blessings of God to you Tom and Jordan. I was so close for many years but the inbreaking eventually came from Jesus, not from me. I pray He comes to you. He changes the whole of reality. It's mind bending and beautiful. It's the deepest relationship that any human being can ever experience. I am very intelligent and intellectual myself and that sometimes can get in the way because we find answers and study things from a wide perspective of mind. In a way this makes it harder for God to reach us. But when He does! Wow! The pendulum swings and the universe is reordered through all depth and intellect. Like CS Lewis. God uses the gifts He gave us to draw us to Him. He can totally change our minds from within. Our intellect remains just as powerful but now works for Him. It's absolutely beautiful. Just imagine the power that Tom and Jordan would have as Christians! Thy will be done. Not mine Lord. xXx
So does god have power or is it people?
There is such unity between the angels and God that Jacob could have wrestled with an angel but also wrestled with God.
30:30 Yes! Someone get Tom Holland a copy St. Irenaeus' (c. 180) *On the Apostolic Preaching* .
Tom talked about wrestling with going form viewing the Bible in a historical context to viewing it in a spiritual context, -that's something that resonated in an interesting way for me. I have recently been doing the opposite. I've always been Christian, so the spiritual reading has something I've always done, but lately, I've been taking a more historical approach, reading the works of Josephus and studying other accounts confirming the texts, and then returning to the Bible to consider it as historical instead of spiritual. And interestingly, it's not only strengthened my faith, but deepened my faith far more that I ever imagined, -to the point where I'm beginning to feel uncomfortable calling it faith (even with rejecting Aron Ra's definition of faith).
Same here. I was raised Christian. Started to inquire about its validity when I became interested in science. It was science that solidified my faith in God. The historical evidence for Jesus, the holy Bible, etc was what solidified my faith in Christianity. And now to the point where I just have no further doubts. When you state it seems odd now to call it a faith, I fully understand. I’ve researched in the field of science and the humanities for years. I’m as well bred on the atheistic arguments as I am on the theist arguments.
Don't forget, the just shall live by faith! The Bible and God who wrote it, I find are deeper than I can go. The more I dig the deeper it gets. Thus, there will always be things I dont understand, and that has to be on faith. But faith based on the evidence of who He is.
Keen point -- "Exodus as the history of freedom" comment. Cecil B. Demille made that point at the beginning of The Ten Commandments.
Great job Tom. Yes Christ is in the OT. Absolutely.
My Dear Friend. If Christ is in the Hebrew Bible, then how come Jewish tradition had never seen Christ there before Paul appeared on the historical scene? Are you implying that Judaism hadn't known its own tradition prior to Paul's appearance in history? Did Judaism really need Paul to explain to the followers of Jahweh that the whole Jewish tradition is just rubbish? (Philippians 3:8 "I consider it all as mere refuse.") Sounds crazy to any intelligent person and frankly it doesn't make any sense. Kind regards.
This was wonderful. Thank you so much!
It was strange and weird, supernatural, but Paul as a learned Jewish person was ready to understand it.
That we are in this culture and so are familiar with the Bible, doesn't negate the possibility that it is uniquely inspired by God, that there are no other comparable texts.
When I found out...
Answers to life's questions were hidden in the bible.... made me intellectual interessted.
Then the God revealling Himself as Judge but also a Father of Mercy... opened my heart.
Then real encounters with God himself happened... a voice, a vision, getting answers, meeting people on times and places that was beyond my human reasoning
This God proofed Himself Real... after I quite to want to understand the world bu myself... now looking at it trough Gods point of view... and asking for His help... like young children do to their mum or dad... and expierence His care.
Love this discussion. From SriLanka.
please consider Jonathan Pageau as a guest. you will be fascinated by his insights, I sure am.
Great discussion. Thank you
The Bible make sense in modern life just like the wheel or numbers are ancients concepts but still useful.
Same goes for the Quran, the Torah and every other Holy Book.
Your sentence means nothing if you don't say useful for what. Are you really comparing the wheel to a Holy Book?
@@lumbratile4174 According to your post, for the same reason that you compared it to other Holly books. they are guiding narratives towards spirituality.
@@samanthacanales9102 i don't know what you had in mind, with that little information I could say the same about any holy book.
I'm just going along with your reasoning
@@lumbratile4174 You may agree that humans are more than matter. The Bible contains the guiding ethical principles for human behavior.
@@samanthacanales9102 for example?
55:50 "it's that uncertainty that lies at the heart of new testament's positive message, because basically it is saying that something so odd happened, that we cannot really frame it, so we have four accounts of it and they're all different."
Of course the four Gospels are different. They are four different eye witness statements. If they were the same you could not believe them as only collusion would explain them. Ask any lawyer how courts treat identical statements from different witnesses.
@@leojmullins sure, but the point is the differences, even contradictions, in the essential, central matters or miracles, like what really happened at and after the resurrection, or at and after the birth of Jesus.
That's the thing with intellect isn't it? It can get in the way sometimes but once it is yoked, like Paul, it's explosive! X
One problem, from a Catholic point of view, is that the Bible is not meant to stand on its own: it's supposed to reside in the Church and the Mass, its home. And the Church gives it the authoritative interpretation (magisterium). But for people from a Protestant background, they have come very far, using the Bible and reason only.
Replacing truth with relevance as criterion for the Bible’s impact is the sure way to diminish its force. The same goes for coherence instead of correspondence as measure of the Bible’s claim to truth and reality. This a purely pragmatic, utilitarian approach. Only Truth is always relevant.
Regarding contemporary church I think that they should go deeper with their teachings in reference to the Old Testament. Besides what we can’t understand in it, it is ultimately God trying to set His people apart and give people running from Him victory. It’s His heart and how He began civilization.😊
The old testament does not explain anything in any scientific sense. It cannot and does not tell you
- how the earth was made
- how humans arrived on the scene
- basically ANYTHING that had to do with objective reality.
Mind you, the new testament isn't any better.
@@Albatross125 I'm surprise of how people post nonsense.
Not everything has to be scientific
@@Albatross125 It never made that claim, so you might as well say the Bible is useless because it doesn't teach you how to make a mean burger.
@@hullie7529 ...Have you read the Bible? How can you stand there and tell me it doesn't have claims to know how the earth was made? Read genesis. The most ridiculous thing I've ever read. Sure, a great attempt for thinkers thousands of years ago, but to any clown who accepts that as fact, they aren't even worth a seat in the discussion concerning reality.
You're Right. Even atheists agree in the virtue of the Law of Love .
super discussion !
Great talk. Some suggestions: Discussion with Process Theologians , Christian Mystics, Esoteric Christianity as a subject, Richard Smoley on his book inner Christianity. And perhaps hearing from some Universalist Christians on doctrine.??? Just a few suggestions. Love your show!!!!
Might as well call that junk what it is: New Age deception. Same thing as the Kabbala. Same thing as witchcraft.
Surely God is working on Tom through Andrew and the Unbelievable channel! It's such a delight to see the Holy Spirit work in Tom and, separately, in Jordan Peterson. When you can see the way the Holy Spirit tugs on the heart in people, you can't help but feel joy!
I don’t believe Peterson has declared himself Christian, has he? He has a reputation for hedging on that question.
I believe Bishop Barron has been really working on JP. They just had a really good conversation on his podcast. His wife has gotten into the Rosary. Peterson and Holland make a better case for Christianity than any apologist minus Nt. wright and Bishop Barron.
Exactly! They are both so very close to seeing Christ. I pray that Christ comes to them. X
@@loveandmercy9664 Amazing isn't it? Non Christian Christian apologists. God really does move. X
Wright and Barron are amazing! X
The Scripture is a divinely inspired written in order to teach us about God’s revelation into the world. Scripture scholars always recommend to read and study first the NT then the OT to understand the plan of God for man’s salvation which culminated in the suffering, death and resurrection of Jesus. The great passage in the Scripture that summarizes that everything we want to know is from the Gospel of John 3:16. “For God so love the world that He sent his only begotten Son not to condemn the world but to save it”
"Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow." So it can't be that God changed.
I was struck by Holland's honesty as a questioning believer here. But I had a sinking feeling as soon as Jordan Peterson was spoken of by Justin and Ollerton as if he were a good faith actor rather than a charlatan. Ollerton's euphemistic response at 28:00 to Holland's question about the character of the OT God versus the NT God reinforced that feeling. His "partial answer" is also evasive. The subject here - the actor - is not humans, it is God himself, so to say the difference is down to "how we relate to God" is equivocation. Does God actually act as a genocidaire at some times in history? Or are some accounts in the Bible simply mistaken about the nature or actions of God?
It's a mirage. The 'Tomb of Peter' found under the Vatican is beyond sketchy. Apostles? How? They even claim Paul. X
If you want to believe in it hard enough you will justify it's existence without evidence.
That is self-refuting as it takes the 'want ' as needing no explanation. how stupid.
@@analogia_entis See what I mean, all any religious person has to say is their particular version of God did, no explanation needed, but reject other people's religious beliefs. That is being dishonest. The most essential part of being religious is being dishonest with yourself. Faith is all about lying to yourself.
If I am a "intellectual" I'm glad to be child like in mind! Foolish men ponder foolish questions.
The Fathers are the best key to the Bible.
And Tom Holland has read a lot of them.
Really good discussion.
At least they are setting us off to discuss. The Church had lacked this for centuries. Does it take humanists to make us look at ourselves? X
Is God drawing us back to Him through secular? X
Listen to Tom's history of where secular came from. The Church. We shot ourselves in the foot by separating Church and State which came from a belief in Priesthhood. Did Peter go to Rome? X
What's the "Biblical position" on a future where people can download their consciousness into a computer?
For a Catholic, of course, the authority of the Bible rests on the Church, which assembled the Bible.
Dear Tommy,
Saw You, passing away on a quiet sidestreet, this morning.
And your sister too, sweetsister, on the beech. She's wearing wonderfull shalljewllery on her own and said to me, I am her friend. I believe her!
Corina
Of course the "behavior" of God in the Old Testament is not embarrassing - if it seems so, one has to adjust one's theological thinking so one understands why it is not "embarrassing."
Of course we all do this, since there are always pieces we don't yet understand.
Speaking from a Catholic point of view.
It would be an axiom that God is perfectly justice and perfectly loving, so if an act of God seems otherwise, we have to examine our understanding.
I think Bret Weinstein(an atheist) put it best when he said that the Bible has evolutionary value, where it maintains relevance to a structured life. He said something like "literally false, but metaphorically true".
THen Bret is a moron. True should not be a word used to mean 'false".
Grow up, talk like an adult.
(Exodus 21:7-11) “When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. 8 If she does not satisfy her owner, he must allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. 9 But if the slave’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave but as a daughter.
10 “If a man who has married a slave wife takes another wife for himself, he must not neglect the rights of the first wife to food, clothing, and sexual intimacy. 11 If he fails in any of these three obligations, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment.
Thanks, my daughter turns 21 next year, so I better hurry to find a buyer.
If she doesn't please said buyer and he wants to sell her back to me, do I have to pay full price?
@@ricklenegan2294 See Leviticus for the discount charts.
But this is a non issue anymore. "no amendment to the Constitution is absolute" (Biden, current leader of the US). Therefore, the 13th can't be absolute either. Can't wait to market shopping for new incomers from the Congo
@@UncannyRicardo Your post seems quite inane. Constitutionality is determined by the Supreme court, not the President.
@@skyeangelofdeath7363 They only interpret, legislative has a say also as to what even goes on it.
The contention is still that there is official hope now that cotton industry may make a comeback after all. So its cool
I wish Ollerton was a better speaker ... I am sure his book must be fantastic especially if Tom Holland endorsed it ... But man I wish Ollerton took more time to give intellectual and deep responses to Tom's questions :(
But it's a little unfair to ask Tom Holland whether he is going to make a faith commitment, that seems to be from a Protestant perspective, where the only critical question is whether the person has made this commitment. (From the Catholic perspective, there are other criteria that need to be considered also.)
Another explanation, or a similar one, as to why God in the Old Testament did some things which seem unjust, is that God had a plan for his creation, and he had to bring it about in a sinful world.
If the Bible didn't make sense of modern life it would be modern life which would need to change.
Omg I can't wait to take a look at the comments here below!
Marcion - these heresies are kind of like theories that had to be tried out. It was tried, and it showed that it was in the wrong direction, which was something learned.
"It will become the largest of plants" - Jesus
Ollerton’s response to Holland’s question about the OT God was incredibly lacking. In the OT we see a holy God who knows the hearts and minds of men issuing judgment on people who deserved it (as we all do), like He did with the great flood.
Aside from better understanding ancient myths, why should anyone take seriously what biblical texts promote? Egyptian myths endured for centuries until reality rendered them irrelevant within more modern times. Clock is ticking for Judaism / Christianity / Islam etc etc.
Always a classic....
If two men are fighting, and the wife of one steps in to rescue her husband from the one striking him, and she reaches out her hand and grabs his genitals, you are to cut off her hand. You must show her no pity. - Deuteronomy 25:11
Always a classic....People that don’t know how to read things in context. The law is dead.
Always a classic...
Ignoring the textual, cultural and historical context of a verse. Great job! (cough cough this is Mosaic case law in a non-legislative society FYI).
@@calebp6114 So what are the hermetical rules for what OT scriptures apply to us in 2021? Do we throw out the 10 commandments too?
@@stealth797 All but 9 of the 10 commandments are repeated in the NT. Besides, if you obey the 2 greatest commandments, that Jesus gave when asked which of the 10 is the greatest, you will find yourself obeying all of those.
@@littleboots9800 So the rules are: if an OT law is repeated in the New Testament then we have to obey it in 2021, but if it's not repeated then we can disregard it?
Tom asked: With whom did Jacob wrestle?
According to Jewish exegesis Jacob wrestled with (the angel of) Esau.
Like Israel struggles with Rome (Esau is Rome according to the Talmud).
Rabbis ask: when will the Messiah come?
Two conditions must be fulfilled.
1. Esau should bless Jacob. (I will not let you go unless you bless me).
2. However Esau's tears must be dried as well.
See my comment at Albionic American.
"The world is not made of matter, it's made of what matters." - Jordan Peterson
You are one of those.
Nobody ever attacks Hinduism, Sikhism and many other religions, nobody ever questions their relevancy. Why is Christianity always the taking on attacks
My thoughts: largest, most visible religion in the world; part of the doctrine is to aggressively spread the word of salvation/ reap followers/$; arguably the most damaging religion in the history of the world- invading/ destroying countless cultures, destroying native populations- just one example: Catholic nuns beating native language out of aboriginal children/ taking children from parents,often forever and subjecting them to the cruel reality of residential schools; extremely aggressive (at least in the US) invasion of the political system with the goal of altering public policy to reflect its anti-women, anti- LGBTQ, anti-secular doctrines.
Shall I continue?
Sikhs arent trying to pass laws requiring creationism to be taught in schools. I dont give a crap about christianity in and of itself. I fight it because it thinks it should be able to tell other people how to live.
It's the largest group of religious people, so of course when someone tries to discredit religion as a whole they'll start by attacking Christianity. It's already happening with Islam too now that it's spreading to the West after centuries of being uncontested in the Muslim countries.
Because the west has become Judas, the traitor from within. Christianity is falling from its own people turning against it.
@@jaynerulo6785 Thats fair in a sense. Christians tried to become totalitarian in many regards, then express shock at the culture pushing back against it.
I am a Christian. I don't care about tribalism, and Apostolic Succession is unprovable. It's an article of Faith. Faith in who? Bishops? So we get decent Bishops like Father Barron but we've had Popes who have committed genocide. There is a decent line in Qur'an which says that all hierarchy rests on piety. Nothing else. Ali, Muhammad's nephew, said that asceticism isn't owning nothing. It's having nothing owning you. I love Francis for this reason. I don't follow with his Lady Poverty but he was a man of his time in Christendom. He had a similar experience to Buddha. When he stripped off in front of the Bishop, gave his costly clothes back to his own Dad, knowing his Dad would reject him. And knowing that he would be accepted by the Church by blackmail he knew he was lost and found. Then went out in personal poverty to help the broken. That's Christianity. The Church had no choice but to make him a Saint. Not because the Church are good. But because Francis is! And people from outside of the Church don't understand this. It's from the bottom up. Not the top down. Jesus turned the world upside down. The slave is the master. This is what Tom is starting to understand. It's not about hierarchy. The only hierarchy is with God. End of. It's the most profound message the world has ever heard. And the person who brought it was Jesus. So who is Jesus? When that understanding is coupled with written Gospels, Christianity becomes a reality that cannot be ignored. It might not be accepted. But it cannot be ignored. And Tom is in that situation. It seems. He is starting to see the absolute profundity of The Gospel. He's waking up. And as a Church we need to be there to accept him. Not evangelise. He doesn't need that. He's clever. Be there to receive him into The Body of Christ. So forget all your misgivings. We have a man who is on the verge of seeing Christ. Let's, as a Church, be there to accept him. If he comes in, which God Willing he will, he will be a bit bereft. A bit broken. Then we can love him as him, not evangelise. Because God choses the broken. Otherwise we are no Church at all. And our personal inheritance will be lost. Because one sheep is more important than the whole flock. X
_Harper's_ magazine a few years ago ran an article about the dwindling number of Zoroastrians in the world, who are known in India as the Parsees ("Persians"). At one time the Zoroastrian religion had millions of adherents across Southwest Asia; while in our world the last Zoroastrian could very well die in this century. And most of us aren't even aware of the religion's absence now.
Religions come and go like everything else, in other words, and eventually this will happen to Christianity.
Zoroastrianism is dying off because 1) it was wiped out of its birthplace by Muslim conquest and 2) when it moved to India the zoaroastians had to agree not to convert in order to be allowed to exist. This over time turned into the Parsees viewing their faith as attached to their ethnic group, so even now they do not allow people to convert to their faith and they only intermarry. It could become a major religion if they changed that one rule.
@@whatsgoingonwhy9096 That's what they have been saying since pre- Constantine Rome.
@@foodforthought8308 "They" have been saying the decline of Zoroastrianism was caused by the spread of Islam and the non conversion rule that was a result of their fleeing Islam to India, since pre-Constantine Rome??? Constantine (b. 272AD - d 337AD). Muhammad (b. 570AD - 632AD)
@@whatsgoingonwhy9096 Sorry, I was referring to Christianity
bet
Tom is asking the kind of questions more Christians should be asking they are penetrating and bold! As regard to the character in the Hebrew Testament and God’s accommodation of his people... it was not his purpose to have a temple built but he accommodates. It was not his desire to have Israel have a king but he accommodates and most importantly it was not his plan to use violence but the children of Israel as we all do did not trust and went beyond what was ever Gods intention. Had they listened more closely and followed more closely I believe a very different story would’ve unfolded. See Greg Boyd’s argument/book The Cruciform God which pushes the argument that the church is still not ready to hear about violence and how it is not necessary to extend Gods kingdom. Tom’s book in some ways illustrates this as well. As for the pre-incarnate appearances of Christ, again Tom has asks the penetrating questions. I think of Nebuchadnezzar‘s comment on the fiery furnace “and the third has the form of the son of God...Finally, I wish people would stop trying to make Tom into a trophy and leave the man make his own decision and trust God!
The question Holland asks is a very good question. Is the God of the Old Testament flawed. My answer to that is primarily NO. God doesn't change but humanity's understanding of God certainly has changed we read the OT backwards from and with Jesus. If Jesus is the exact likeness of God, then "God is like Jesus. God has always been like Jesus. We haven't always known this but now we do." ( Brian Zahnd). We have got so often got God wrong for instance blaming God gor the violence in the OT. Could it be that on many occasions the Israelite projected their distorted view of God on Yahweh? Jesus in the gospels is the correction to that. The first Adam bought into a lie about God which has tainted us all. That is that God is not always good, not always for us. Many Christians still believe in a distorted idol which they call God. Obe that is distant and angry. Blaise Pascal said God made us in His image and we repaid the compliment. I think this is very true. The God of the OT is presented in a schizophrenic way at times full of mercy and at others smiting people at the drop of a hat. I also agree with the point made about the accommodation principle. Paul was correct Jesus us the mystery hidden from the ages. I think the only reason many Christians get God wrong today us poor teaching that us not Christocentric. Again God us like Jesus, always has been.
@31:00 @Tom Holland ... Esteemed Jewish scholar Alan Siegel in his book "Two powers in heaven" covers this question in depth. And the answer is yes the Jewish people believed there was a multiple godhead but later deemed it heresy because of the new Christian religion expanding its implications and applications.
what's the evidence that ancient jews believed in a multiple godhead?
@@thinking7667 read Alan Siegel's book two powers in heaven as mentioned in my post. You can also refer to another scholarly study by Andrei Orlov "the glory of the invisible God"
Andrew certainly seems to be a man who carries the courage of his convictions -so can he tell me? … did god break his word on the cross or not?
There was a time the fall and the crusif8xiin was the most awful parts of the bible...
But with God .. there was such a great revelation he gave me.
They became precious !!
The Fall= biggest lesson in mindfuck
The crusifixiin=the place where every heart (from the powerful to the leasts of all time and universal beings )reveals what it really about.
The great tale is the life of Christ, the archetypical tale.
Get Carl Trueman and Tom Holland together.
Tom Holland is asking also how do Christians see this?
The so called post Christian world seems to be slowly destroying humanity. Christianity is relevant and will always be relevant
Ifs its destroying humanity why is childhood poverty, starvation and death all down. Why are worldwide violent deaths down. Why are worldwide diseases down. Why is every negative metric down and most posituve ones are up. Like percentage of children who get to attend school and get vaccinated. Riddle me that.
Hu?
Nope, the truth will always win in the end. I've watched hundreds of formal, and not so formal debates between theists and athiests and without fail, the theists have been slaughtered in debate. Yes, I am biased but even considering, it's painful to watch.
@@oliverhug3 is hu the entirety of your argument?
@@jaynerulo6785 there's someone floating around here (monika hug) who excels in short comments, like 'good question' and 'the suffering servant is israel' and 'hu?'
that's why I call her (him, it) Monika Hu ;-)
There is no lesson in the Bible that cannot be found in another text that does not endorse slavery, genocide, and the oppression of women
You’re using Christian values to condemn Christianity. What culture ended slavery, passed human rights condemning genocide, and guaranteed freedoms for women? Its western values born from Christianity. Would you rather women be in polyamorous marriages that were the norm in the pre Christian world? Christianity granted women sovereignty through monogamy. Jesus revealed that the single most important law is to love thy neighbour, thats the principle that frames your entire worldview.
@@06rtm this is nothing but propaganda. Christians values didn't end slavery, Christians were just the last hold outs of the barbaric practice. Abe Lincoln was a Cristian and he made it clear that ending slavery was a tactical move to weaken the south, not a moral choice. Christianity also does not prescribe monogamy except for when Paul says leaders of the church should only have one wife. The church at large does not receive the same instruction. And even if it did, biblical monogamy is just another form of slavery which is why it says "wives obey your husband". No one should "obey" their partner, that's what dogs do. Women should be free to have a many or as few partners as they like. As for the Golden rule, many cultures taught respect for others before Jesus came along. Also, that line only serves to highlight his hypocrisy. Would Jesus want himself to be cast into outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth for all eternity because he didn't believe in the exact right way, or because he loved someone of the same sex? I think not
@@beanbrewer Theres a lot to unpack here. Christians weren’t the last holdouts, they led the way, Christian nations were the first in history to explicitly abolish slavery and then attempted to extend that to the rest of the world. They did so explicitly expressing their Christian ideals as justification. Monogamous marriage originates in Christianity, the idea that each man has one wife is perhaps the most significant innovation of Christianity. Its an extension of the idea of Adam and Eve. One man for one woman. Prior to that you had powerful
men with many women, and men of lower status with no women at all. Thats why we have twice as many female ancestors as male. This creates a class of men that become warriors to gain status for themselves and take women as war prizes. The Golden rule is not explicit. How you would like to be treated is subjective and doesn’t necessitate love. Jesus emphasizes the idea of love being the highest principal. Love thy neighbour, but even love thy enemy. Jesus also unites the pure with impure. The domestic and the foreign. He grants value and sovereignty to the stranger, the poor, the sick, the weak. All the lowly figures are granted glory in the story of Jesus. As for homosexuality, nobody is going to hell for loving someone of the same sex, thats not the point. The idea is simply that sex has many aspects, the highest of which is to produce offspring. Thereby any sexual act that intentionally ignores that fact is missing the point. Homosexuality is the exact same sin as masturbation and contraception. Its not that important, but sexuality has to exist like everything else, in a hierarchy of participation, and pregnancy is the highest aspect of sexuality. Its just a general ideal to keep as an ordering principle. The fact that contraception has created a fertility crisis in the west is a perfect example of why this ideal is technically necessary.
@@06rtm again with the propaganda! Haiti was the first nation to abolish slavery and they practice voodoo. Monogamy predates the introduction of Christianity in many cultures and can also be found in animals who most certainly have not heard the gospel preached. And if the Bible is such a good book and monogamy is superior to polygamy, why would it wait till the 2nd act to even bring it up? And even in that 2nd act, praise the polygamists of the past? Your procreation talking points sound like they came straight out of the handmaid's tale. The homophobia in your closing is beyond reason. By that logic, it's just as sinful for a married hetero couple to have sex if one of them is infertile. Also it would be sinful for a married hetero couple to have sex after the woman has gone through menopause. There is nothing "sinful" about being LGBTQ+. That's just another lie from a book that teaches that zombies roamed Jerusalem
There are texts based off the Bible that includes its lessons, if that's what you mean.
* sorry, cabdriver wrote ,,Ervin"
The Quran offers the same hope, meaning, and purpose to billions of Muslims. Now you’re reduce to debating a god figure in the form of a man.
The Quran takes from the Bible
God doesn't care what religion you have. Praise Allah.
@@mahlatsimoroka1500 shared history. The Quran was written before the Bible was canonized.
I appreciate the idea of seeing the god of Hebrew Scripture as one of the many flawed characters in the biblical story. He certainly seems to have a short temper, is obsessed with violence and even regrets many of the decisions he makes. In fact, he may be the most flawed character of the whole story. A sort of negative object lesson for us to learn what not to be like in our lives.
What a prideful response
@@jakeschwartz2514 prideful to recognize reality?
@Yvonne Dalton why don’t we deserve all the mercy there is to give? I would never say my child gets more mercy from me than she deserves… I’m always disheartened when people say “he gives us more mercy than we could ever deserve.” If god exists, he made us, he owes us everything, not the other way around. I decided to have a child, my child doesn’t owe me anything, I owe the world to her and will do my best to give it to her.
@@teachpeace3750 I mean, I kinda agree with you but not entirely. I would never say my parents owe me the world just because the brought me into it. Sounds bratty and entitled and unrealistic.
@@thinking7667 if you were a parent, I think you would understand where the heart of my comment is coming from. I don’t mean to spoil my child, I mean to let her know she is loved unconditionally and that nothing she ever does will change that.
"The Bible is historically accurate" - Catholic catechism
Doesnt matter how many warm feels it gives you, if its a lie then its a lie. Rather the harsh truth than a comforting lie.
That is a narrow perspective in my humble.
And who are you to judge that?
@@kbeetles don’t need a qualification or permission to make such a “judgement.” Your comment is a bit odd within a comment section.
We are a religious species, if we don’t consciously worship an ideal, then we will do it unconsciously.
Both warm feelings and harsh truths are included in Christianity
The first Comic book ever made.
Nope, that would be the hindu one, cant spell it. This is one is old vut not the oldest
OH COME ON GUYS. God exercised his judgment on the Amalakites. And you can't stomach that? They, like all of us, are not innocent.
My Dear Friends. Finally christians admit that faith has nothing to do with truth but everything to do with taste. And Andrew, inadvertently but rightly, acknowledges this at 1:00:10, when he compares faith to simply buying a garment at a cloth shop; SPOT ON. It's all just a person's subjective experience, subjective taste, nothing to do with the objective Cosmos, nothing to do with the supposed Creator's Plan for humanity. At last, the problem has been solved. I've got a corollary question. If the supposed Creator of the Cosmos never holds press conferences, how in the world can humanity ever know who this God's representative on Earth is and what this God's PLAN for humanity is? Kind regards.
God is an objective aspect of the nature of reality. We live in a hierarchy. Everything unites beneath the things above it, a company, a government, a sports league, a wheel, a house; every single thing unites around its most valuable part. God is simply whatever the highest aspect of reality is. Its just how the universe is laid out.
@@06rtm Thanks for your comment. Can we clarify the term "objective", please? How on earth can we call as objective a concept like for instance: a "Talking Tree"=able to transmit human thoughts to humans? Humanity experiences trees, of course, but not "Talking Trees". By the same token, how on earth can we call as objective the concept of the "Talking Immaterial Person"=able to transmit human thoughts to humans? Humanity experiences human persons, of course, but not "Immaterial Persons". Can you elaborate more on your use of the concept "objective" in the context of "immaterial person", please? King regards.
@@walterseliga9676 By objective I mean that reality has a technical order, and religion is an attempt to navigate that. Reality is laid out in a series of hierarchies. The family tree, the workplace, sports, government. Everything is a participation in systems of hierarchy. Religion makes the hierarchy explicit, and offers a guide to action within it. Religion offers a direct guide to act in world. It places certain actions as higher (closer to heaven) and certain actions as lower (closer to hell). Religion is simply an attempt to outline the hierarchy that all of reality rests within. The hierarchy of hierarchies. As for your tree example, and your non material person, maybe you could elaborate because I found them confusing.
@@06rtm My Friend. In your first post you wrote this: "God is an objective aspect of reality." When I say that an item/being is objective I mean this: "A tree is an objective element of reality because it is accessible to all human beings." On the other hand, when somebody claims that they possess a "cap that makes one invisible", then I call this item/being subjective, because it is not accessible to all humans. To me reality consists of items/beings: 1) most of them can be experienced by all humanity (they exist objectively), and 2) some of them, humanity is told, are experienced only by an individual person (they exist subjectively). My example of "talking tree" and "talking Creator of the Cosmos": Only humans are persons and only persons can exchange thoughts. Humanity does not experience non-human persons with whom humanity can exchange thoughts. Humanity does not exchange thoughts with a tree and humanity does not exchange thoughts with the supposed Creator of the Cosmos. If humanity does not exchange thoughts with the supposed Creator of the Cosmos then such an item/being is meaningless. L. Wittgenstein: "If a sign is not necessary then it is meaningless." Kind regards.
If you’re a Christian the Bible must be the “book” for you.
Just because the Bible contains God’s word, it does not mean that everything in the Bible is God’s word. In the Bible there are some substantial contradictions that need to be resolved, and in my judgement, the book of Esther, both Chronicles, a small part of Proverbs, the second chapter of Matthew, the letter to Hebrews, the letter of Jude and the book of Revelation are not God’s word. After having been studying and analyzing biblical texts for many years, my conclusion is that a significant portion of the Bible is of Satan, and in my writing titled A RECLUSE’S CONFESSION on my Facebook page (username: Christian Truly), I in great detail explain how and why I came to that conclusion.
We learned a spoken- there are no poor gipsy cause all get a nickle from the beginning, the next is not of their parents
no jew will ever get an other jew in the lawcourt, cause their laws are much more harder, than a bribe-silly-court
to orthodox- no priest carries the curch,,hram" at his home, cause he carries all time.
Greeks had, probably, the joy to enjoy on their lifetime all these peoples and tell others the story, so in this lies the power of greek culture.
Allthough, I heard immigrants were beaten in greek cities, no allowed in the centre, where greeks live.
They hate those who don't respect Eastern or 25 March, me told. These don't negate their ancient culture.
Love, great fan to Tommy.
Corina Ijac
Andrew seriously struggling when they are talking about the Old Testament.
BIG question is .....where is any evidence of a God/s
They used to keep it in the torture chambers of the Holy Inquisition, but we shut those down a while ago.
NO, the opposite. Why after thousands of years and billions asking, you sit here as if this is a newly-posed question. IT MUST BE YOU>
I think Tom Holland is ready for Pascal's wager!
@Jason Lusk Fair enough. However, I believe that Roger is speaking about a Wager based on what Tom has seen in his historical research. Of course, is hard to understand the importance of a 1st century Jew who claimed to be God, however, that is maybe the central point to understand how unexpected was it. So, when he has gone through the evidence for the resurrection and the impact christianity has generated, I imagine he has at least contemplated the idea of being true in a historical way. However, this is my opinion from what I've seen. Have a nice day!
@Jason Lusk I think we’re going to dance with the one that brought us. All of us former agnostic/atheist types.
Tom is too smart to actually believe in priests 'truth' supernatural claims.
@@iainrae6159 and you are too smart of course not to know that science has it all sussed, or will in a year or two
@@RMarshall57
Science does not claim to know everything, that's the point of it.
Jesus rose from death ... Jesus raised himself from death ... Jesus was raised by the Father from death ... all are true.
I am always amazed that Christians have bought into the belief that morality only flows from a supernatural being. How do they explain the thousands/ hundreds of thousands of pre-Christian cultures- some as far back as 30,000 years - that clearly had some sorts of moral code-which would be essential for a human culture to survive).
Archeologists have found graves with skeletons adorned with thousands of artifacts each (as in the Sungir, Russia find,1955). Though we don’t know the reasons for certain, they obviously had sociopolitical structures, and moral codes had to have been part of that. How do Christians explain the moral codes of the non-Christian societies existing today?
I've never heard a Christian say that only Christians can be moral, which is the assumption you seem to be saying Christians act under.
Surely the O.T. is God relating to mankind in or through, Adams' decision, whatever Adams' decision was. It would seem from the N.T. that Adams' sin was to reject faith, trust, belief in his union with God through spirit and sought another way to be like God , in effect he was rejecting his union with God, the Holy Spirit, which the second Adam didn't do. God then honors Adams' decision and it ain't pretty, relating by and large, sans spirit., sans faith, it appears, but with exceptions it seems. To force the human race into righteousness through law and punishment, the knowledge of good and evil, alone, doesn't seem to work. More is needed. The Old Covenant is the ministration of death, not life. The O.T. is an object lesson in life from the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil only. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, and is always fatal.
If all the world's bibles were raptured and the knowledge of their contents were lost, they would not be recoverable. By contrast, if all the world's scientific knowledge were lost, all of the basic principles could be rediscovered. So which is based in reality? The bible, or science?
It should be quite obvious by now that they both are, one is simply concerned with the purely physical, and the other is concerned with less apparent things.
Also if we were to truly make a fair comparison, it would not just be necessary for Bibles, and peoples knowledge of God in revelation to start back from square one, but it would be necessary for peoples understanding of the scientific method and all of that to be sent back to square one as well, and given the fact that we only discovered the scientific method fairly recently on the grand scale of things, I’m inclined to think that recovering said information in either case would be rather difficult, however I’m also inclined to believe that God would not let his people wallow in ignorance for too terribly long on the grand scale of things.
@@allthenewsordeath5772 My Dear Friend. I've posted my take on the concept of "faith" in the public comment section. I wonder whether you would agree with me/ Kind regards.
@@walterseliga9676
I found your comment, and I do disagree with you quite strongly, certainly a man may choose his God, but that is not true religion, that is idolatry, God after all always chooses his people, not the other way around.
God chose Abraham, God chose the Jews, Christ chose his disciples, never did they choose him because they like the cut of his gib.
Furthermore religion is certainly not a hat or garment to be picked up or discarded at will, or worn in private but not in public, if that sort of thing were at all possible, or at all preferable, someone really should have told the martyrs.
On your note about subjective versus objective reality, the two are when you get down to it one in the same, that is ultimately based on human experience and human reason, the only difference is that with the purely physical our results can be more universally verified and applied because more people share that subjective reality.
For instants most people would I’m sure agree that the sky is blue, and be able to verify that, and would be able to do so scientifically through measuring the wavelengths of light reflected from it, but if most of the population were colorblind, then the sky would not be blue, at least not as we think of it.
Science as a discipline is nothing more and nothing less than the rigorous application of a process to create models by which we can understand the natural world, it has no bearing on the supernatural, or even on the philosophical, it is good at what it does and I will not falt it for that, but at the end of the day even the best mechanic only performs well if he’s fixing a car.
Of course still keep in mind that I am speaking from a Christian perspective, and while I am convinced that on the whole my perspective is the most correct one, I am not qualified to speak on other views such as those of the Buddhists, or the Mohamedites.
@@allthenewsordeath5772 My Friend, I love your comment, let me respond. First of all you haven't answered my challenge question: How can humanity know the supposed Creator's spokesperson and Creator's Plans for human kind if this supposed being never holds press conferences? The answer to this question solves everything. Secondly, this is what you are saying: "God after all always chooses his people, not the other way around." Your sentence does not mirror the Reality. The supposed Creator never holds press conferences announcing to humanity whom She/He HAS CHOSEN as God's People or spokesperson. It's quite the opposite; individuals keep coming forward declaring that they have been chosen by God. And this is a world of a difference. Illustration: First scenario- Joe Biden announces during his press conference that he HAS CHOSEN Jen Psaki as his SPOKESPERSON. Second scenario- I, Walter, announce to the world that Joe Biden HAS CHOSEN me as his SPOKESPERSON. Can you see the difference? Kind regards.
@@walterseliga9676
Forgive me but it sounds like you’re asking another variation on the question of “why God just doesn’t reveal himself in all of his terrible glory to all the people and nations?”
What those who ask this question usually forget though, is that once the playwright enters upon the stage, that means the play is over.
The difficult thing is that we are allowed to discern which teachings are true, and which teachings/visions are false, we are not helpless in this task however, as we have the Bible, tradition, and the magisterium, though I can understand the confusion some feel at this sometimes daunting prospect.
There are 6 or 7 different covenants, the last and everlasting one is the one established by Jesus. (See Scott Hahn)
And there is a progression.
The Bismillah only goes against the Gospels in relation to the Person of Jesus. The Compassionate in this world The Merciful in the next. When Jesus came into the upper room the first thing he said was, "Asalamu Alaikum." Hebrew, Aramaic and Arabic are all Semitic. Sorry I couldn't find where to reply to you personally. The Qur'an has been described by Christians as an heretical document. I find that offensive. Paul said that all scripture is God breathed. I have struggled with this for years because I was a Muslim convert then Christian. Who is Muhammad? He was taught by a Christian monk in Syria. It's deep. We can converse if you like. I may learn something. X