I know it's 10 years ago, poor kid, but communication over thousands of miles hasn't drawn us closer to a "global consciousness". It has actually driven us much farther apart.
You nailed it. Reminds me of Daniel’s vision of the head of gold, chest of brass etc. in explaining the meaning for King Nebuchazzer. As time goes on our “technologies” improve and get better but the quality of our character worsens.
The reason why people "decide" that morals are objectively correct _is that they are objectively correct:_ They could not be objectively correct without God.
The more I listen to the thoughts of this generation the more scared I get...These folks are wholly without a moral compass. Without God, they are left rudderless in a sea of conflicting ideas and all of them lead to ruin. Im literally afraid to be left alone with these people in my old age. Im serious. When the baby boomers die off we will be left with lunatics running the show,,,its simply has to lead to ruin.
Just because you can't understand doesn't make it illogical or unreasonable. Faith isn't believing something unreasonable. When you say ‘I have faith in you’ it means you believe in that person's ability for whatever you're asking them to do. That belief is based on evidence. The historical evidence for the bible is not terrible! Its the complete opposite.
Seems this guy is just stringing together every anti theology talking point he can remember. He goes blank when given an answer to his questions and then says Cliffe isn't answering him. Then he moves the goal post. But Cliffe is already there waiting on him. God bless and touch these people's heart's
A moral relativist cannot "come to the same conclusions" as anyone else. For example, he cannot come to the conclusion that morals are absolute. Without God, morals could not be absolute, and yet they are.
At the postwar war crimes tribunals, the concept of command responsibility was introduced to jurisprudence. War criminals who never fired a shot themselves were still responsible for the crimes they commanded. I literally just wrote a blog piece "If God Was at Nuremberg" on this very topic just this weekend.
10- I’ve often heard popularizers raise this issue as a refutation of the moral argument for God’s existence. But that’s plainly incorrect. The claim that God could not have issued such a command doesn’t falsify or undercut either of the two premises in the moral argument : 1. If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist. 2. Objective moral values do exist. 3. Therefore, God exists.
3- What that implies is that God has the right to take the lives of the Canaanites when He sees fit. How long they live and when they die is up to Him.
If there was no ultimate moral standers giver and we lived in a unintentional world, morality COULD only be subjective.
Ultimate morality only exists in intentional worlds where by a moral standard giver exists.
No ultimate moral code giver = no ultimate objective moral code. Please explain how morality could be objective, in a unintentional world, where no ultimate moral standard giver exist?
Yes, I think possibly twice before- he was in a straw hat with a longer beard and brought a bunch of people to protest Cliffe's presence on campus- he thought it was offensive that Cliffe was there and he thought Cliffe shouldn't have free speech Rights. He stated quite alot of Communist propaganda.
Moreover, if we believe, as I do, that God’s grace is extended to those who die in infancy or as small children, the death of these children was actually their salvation. We are so wedded to an earthly, naturalistic perspective that we forget that those who die are happy to quit this earth for heaven’s incomparable joy. Therefore, God does these children no wrong in taking their lives.
1- I think that a good start at this problem is to enunciate our ethical theory that underlies our moral judgements. According to the version of divine command ethics which I’ve defended, our moral duties are constituted by the commands of a holy and loving God. Since God doesn’t issue commands to Himself, He has no moral duties to fulfill. He is certainly not subject to the same moral obligations and prohibitions that we are.
11-In fact, insofar as the atheist thinks that God did something morally wrong in commanding the extermination of the Canaanites, he affirms premise (2).
So many of these young people are idealistic. I get it! When you live long enough you realize that we do not do the “logical” thing that’s “obviously good for everyone”. Look around…..
Things can be wrong without necessarily being objectively so. This isn't to say that objective morality does not or cannot exist, merely that there is no necessity for it.
4- So the problem isn’t that God ended the Canaanites’ lives. The problem is that He commanded the Israeli soldiers to end them. Isn’t that like commanding someone to commit murder? No, it’s not. Rather, since our moral duties are determined by God’s commands, it is commanding someone to do something which, in the absence of a divine command, would have been murder.
As for the second question, I wouldn't know or frankly care. If the evidence is there, it is there. And if it is not presented, there is no reason to believe.
You also did not comment on false revelation. People of different religions or even of the same have claimed revelation that no doubt contradicts yours. Therefore false revelation exists yes? If so, you would have to prove yours is not false, but you can't do that can you?
science teaches these student how to remain out of reality hello guys life isnot biology nor physics nor chemistry these are the aspects of life which are controlled by logic conscience and rationality
Next, knowledge does not imply certainty. For example I notice that every duck I see is white, does that mean all ducks are white? No. I have knowledge of ducks existence and their color but that knowledge does not preclude experiences outside my own which may include black ducks.
Cliffe the anthropic argument "life is balanced on a razors edge" is clearly fallacious, along with the "complexity of a human eye" argument. I truly hope you investigate further into these and understand how invalid they are.
Rom. 2:14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, Rom. 2:15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness, and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, Rom. 2:16 on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus. Potential for tyranny in a world where the elites no longer believe in objective truth. Everything is reduced to a struggle for power. There is no constraint on what social and political and cultural elites might do to control and reshape society. The question is not what is right or wrong, but which group has the most power to impose its will on the whole. It is the well spring of tyranny.
8- By setting such strong, harsh dichotomies God taught Israel that any assimilation to pagan idolatry is intolerable. It was His way of preserving Israel’s spiritual health and posterity. God knew that if these Canaanite children were allowed to live, they would spell the undoing of Israel. The killing of the Canaanite children not only served to prevent assimilation to Canaanite identity but also served as a shattering, tangible illustration of Israel’s being set exclusively apart for God.
Next, do you agree that false revelation exists? After all we have many people from many religions claiming revelation. They cannot all be right as their claims are contradictory, but they can all be wrong. So if false revelation exists, you have to either be able to demonstrate your revelation is more accurate then others or admit that your revelation may be false just as others are.
Actually you missed my point. When Christians or any theist are shown that their arguments are illogical or irrational, they can fall back on faith, which is used because you cannot disprove it. Aka, you pray to god for financial help, it does not come. Faith says this is ok, it's not gods will and he has a different plan. Or, you find $20 on the sidewalk and praise god he delivers. Either way you keep your faith without having to think.
2- For example, I have no right to take an innocent life. For me to do so would be murder. But God has no such prohibition. He can give and take life as He chooses. We all recognize this when we accuse some authority who presumes to take life as “playing God.” Human authorities arrogate to themselves rights which belong only to God. God is under no obligation whatsoever to extend my life for another second. If He wanted to strike me dead right now, that’s His prerogative.
6-But why take the lives of innocent children? The terrible totality of the destruction was undoubtedly related to the prohibition of assimilation to pagan nations on Israel’s part. In commanding complete destruction of the Canaanites, the Lord says, “You shall not intermarry with them, giving your daughters to their sons, or taking their daughters for your sons, for they would turn away your sons from following me, to serve other gods” (Deut 7.3-4).
Cliffe you used the Anthropic Principle. But that is the atheistic response about fine tuning. You mean fine tuning points to God. To be honest the Anthropic Principle is crap as it tries to explain fine tuning but the problem is that it still has the same probability problem. Because it relies on the conscious beings that observe it. But the probability of the conscious beings to observe it would still be small assuming they are only matter. Since the matter in the universes that don't have life would still be infinitely greater than those with conscious beings.
cliffe, why do you debate when jesus can just heal people or give them peace then boom, you prooved god. there are plenty of street healers all it takes is faith which you already have because the holy spirit lives in you.
You know things through your senses, your revelation relies on what you have read (your eyes), what you have experienced (your mind), your feelings (body and mind), etc. These are all things that are fallible, so your revelation is not special. Again, we are both in the same boat. You do not get pass because you call your feelings, dreams, ideas, gut reactions or imagined voices 'revelation'.
You just demostrated that morality is objebtive, and that there is a lawgiver. How ? read your arguments and you will find the answer. From now on, you can answer all your question. Thanks...
7- This command is part and parcel of the whole fabric of complex Jewish ritual law distinguishing clean and unclean practices. The overriding thrust of these regulations is to prohibit various kinds of mixing. Clear lines of distinction are being drawn: this and not that. These serve as daily, tangible reminders that Israel is a special people set apart for God Himself.
5- The act was morally obligatory for the Israeli soldiers in virtue of God’s command, even though, had they undertaken it on their on initiative, it would have been wrong. On divine command theory, then, God has the right to command an act, which, in the absence of a divine command, would have been sin, but which is now morally obligatory in virtue of that command.
An example... If Electricity goes out in America, I would assume that human savagery would escalate. If there was no electricity then we would no longer be plugged in to world around us. If we can no longer connect to the hive mind of humanity then each person would not have the collective group or society to hold that person accountable foe any wrong doing.
Just because I am open to the possibility doesn't mean I accept it yet. You still need to prove that it's possible. So with that in mind, until you prove that it's possible for a self-contradictory god to exist (by which I mean the immoral monster you worship), I do not think it is possible for one to exist. All you need to do is prove the former.
An unintentional world without objective morality would be total anarchy, right, wrong, good and evil wouldn't exist. Objective truth, logic, wisdom and morality do exist, therefore God exists. There is no wisdom against the ONE who though wisdom, intentionally created the universe. Truth, logic, wisdom, objective morality are the produce of an intentional world view, NOT a unintentional one.
But if we get these "moral laws" from your god, then how come he breaks them time and again in the bible? Either your god is immoral, or war crimes ARE moral. Which is it?
Logic is an eternal reflection of an absolute standard (I call it God, Atheists don't have anything to call it). In their Godless, unintentional world, logic is 100% illogical, ultimate morality and purpose could never exist. If a logical God is not responsible for creation, then explain how logic exists in your random, accidental universe? If you believe you have better evidence or arguments for the existence of truth and logic, try to convince me.
ToastyMcGrath- You just hate that fact, that theres no other book like the biblie that give moral values foundation for everyone, and please get out of your own little bubble of " the biblie is a evil and inmoral book of atrocities" you need to go back and read the whole bible again in order to understand how wrong you are when you say that. Be more objective and not subjective of your own perspective of the bible.
The Bible dosnt promote any of these? These happend yes but the teachings in tthe bible never promote any of these. and what is OT? and have you ever read the bible without picking a choosing what you read?
Anything could be considered possible. However it's not possible to reconcile the bible, OT and NT with what Christians generally claim about God. You can't get around the all loving father figure who created hell, you can't get around the terrible historical evidence for the bible and at the same time suggest the biblical gods intentions are clear, etc. At the end of the day you are left with a illogical and unreasonable belief, which is where faith comes in.
Actually you don't. After all you can't claim your senses are 100% accurate and since any revelation, scripture or thought you have is based on potentially inaccurate senses you can't claim truth at all. So we are in the same boat.
Wait Cliffe you contradicted yourself... First you said that morality comes from and is given by god, but then you showed you believe that morality is outside of god when you said that "if god committed genocide then i would believe him to be immoral." How could god commit an immoral act if his actions define what is moral or not?
I love it when Cliffe is fired up. Praise Jesus Christ forever!
The guy with the beard in the crowd listening....awesome. Love this show.
Just saw that, good eye. He was cracking a couple of smiles back there 😂
I’m so late to this video series but it is epic and Cliffe is now one of my heroes!
Listening to the first guy goes to show the patience of the Holy Spirit. Love listening to Cliffe. He speaks my language. 💖
Objective truths are not dependent on the agreement of any party --
they are true whether anyone agrees or not.
Cliffe, you are very powerful! can't wait to listen to your sermons online. thanks
Knowledge absolutely does not require certainty.
I really like this channel! Keep it up
I know it's 10 years ago, poor kid, but communication over thousands of miles hasn't drawn us closer to a "global consciousness". It has actually driven us much farther apart.
You nailed it. Reminds me of Daniel’s vision of the head of gold, chest of brass etc. in explaining the meaning for King Nebuchazzer. As time goes on our “technologies” improve and get better but the quality of our character worsens.
Cliffe I love what you're doing. I think you're making a great difference where you are and overseas for people like me to watch your vids. Keep it up
The reason why people "decide" that morals are objectively correct _is that they are objectively correct:_
They could not be objectively correct without God.
This intro jingle is absolutely legendary. I get amped when I can hear it fading in…
Praise god ❤
Cliff i love you
He sure is god bless this man his helped me grow so much in my walk with christ!:)
The more I listen to the thoughts of this generation the more scared I get...These folks are wholly without a moral compass. Without God, they are left rudderless in a sea of conflicting ideas and all of them lead to ruin. Im literally afraid to be left alone with these people in my old age. Im serious. When the baby boomers die off we will be left with lunatics running the show,,,its simply has to lead to ruin.
Just because you can't understand doesn't make it illogical or unreasonable. Faith isn't believing something unreasonable. When you say ‘I have faith in you’ it means you believe in that person's ability for whatever you're asking them to do. That belief is based on evidence. The historical evidence for the bible is not terrible! Its the complete opposite.
Seems this guy is just stringing together every anti theology talking point he can remember. He goes blank when given an answer to his questions and then says Cliffe isn't answering him. Then he moves the goal post. But Cliffe is already there waiting on him. God bless and touch these people's heart's
Love your videos. God bless you.
he child in the black jacket doesn't know that the words "conscience"
and "conscious" mean two different things. LOL
That old guy in the crowd looks like a bible character.lol. good show cliffe
A moral relativist cannot "come to the same conclusions" as anyone else.
For example, he cannot come to the conclusion that morals are absolute.
Without God, morals could not be absolute, and yet they are.
Love.
lives in all believers.
Who's spamming the comment box? Great job Cliffe, your a real inspiration.
that was a great debate and i really felt the anointing of God while cliff was speaking, excellant debate
At the postwar war crimes tribunals, the concept of command responsibility was introduced to jurisprudence. War criminals who never fired a shot themselves were still responsible for the crimes they commanded. I literally just wrote a blog piece "If God Was at Nuremberg" on this very topic just this weekend.
That man in the background is SO EPIC.
I can only wish to have that dude's hair!
haha
Without God, there could be no objective morality, and yet there is.
"I think, I think"
10- I’ve often heard popularizers raise this issue as a refutation of the moral argument for God’s existence. But that’s plainly incorrect. The claim that God could not have issued such a command doesn’t falsify or undercut either of the two premises in the moral argument :
1. If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.
2. Objective moral values do exist.
3. Therefore, God exists.
3- What that implies is that God has the right to take the lives of the Canaanites when He sees fit. How long they live and when they die is up to Him.
If there was no ultimate moral standers giver and we lived in a unintentional world, morality COULD only be subjective.
Ultimate morality only exists in intentional worlds where by a moral standard giver exists.
No ultimate moral code giver = no ultimate objective moral code.
Please explain how morality could be objective, in a unintentional world, where no ultimate moral standard giver exist?
Objective morality does not change according to the individual or the society.
You've spoke with this guy before haven't you Cliffe?
Yes, I think possibly twice before- he was in a straw hat with a longer beard and brought a bunch of people to protest Cliffe's presence on campus- he thought it was offensive that Cliffe was there and he thought Cliffe shouldn't have free speech Rights. He stated quite alot of Communist propaganda.
The Truth Cannot Be Told...It Must Be Realized
Moreover, if we believe, as I do, that God’s grace is extended to those who die in infancy or as small children, the death of these children was actually their salvation. We are so wedded to an earthly, naturalistic perspective that we forget that those who die are happy to quit this earth for heaven’s incomparable joy. Therefore, God does these children no wrong in taking their lives.
1- I think that a good start at this problem is to enunciate our ethical theory that underlies our moral judgements. According to the version of divine command ethics which I’ve defended, our moral duties are constituted by the commands of a holy and loving God. Since God doesn’t issue commands to Himself, He has no moral duties to fulfill. He is certainly not subject to the same moral obligations and prohibitions that we are.
I think he would promote their right to live a happy whole life.
When did I demonstrate any of those? All I've done is ask you to justify those assertions.
11-In fact, insofar as the atheist thinks that God did something morally wrong in commanding the extermination of the Canaanites, he affirms premise (2).
All human beings know for certain that God's unique qualities
and activities are factual, and this includes you.
See example 2.
@aol ... what is this the 1800's?
Just found tonight could someone please give me a brief of the older gentleman
🔥🔥🔥☝️
Atheism believes in magic without a magician and imaginary morality and rationale.
So many of these young people are idealistic. I get it! When you live long enough you realize that we do not do the “logical” thing that’s “obviously good for everyone”. Look around…..
Things can be wrong without necessarily being objectively so. This isn't to say that objective morality does not or cannot exist, merely that there is no necessity for it.
False.
4- So the problem isn’t that God ended the Canaanites’ lives. The problem is that He commanded the Israeli soldiers to end them. Isn’t that like commanding someone to commit murder? No, it’s not. Rather, since our moral duties are determined by God’s commands, it is commanding someone to do something which, in the absence of a divine command, would have been murder.
As for the second question, I wouldn't know or frankly care. If the evidence is there, it is there. And if it is not presented, there is no reason to believe.
definately not meaningless
Divine command theory is self-refuting, so there's no reason to argue it.
You also did not comment on false revelation. People of different religions or even of the same have claimed revelation that no doubt contradicts yours. Therefore false revelation exists yes? If so, you would have to prove yours is not false, but you can't do that can you?
Well, premises 1 and 2 are not sound, so I do not accept your conclusion of #3.
science teaches these student how to remain out of reality
hello guys life isnot biology nor physics nor chemistry these are the aspects of life which are controlled by logic conscience and rationality
Next, knowledge does not imply certainty. For example I notice that every duck I see is white, does that mean all ducks are white? No. I have knowledge of ducks existence and their color but that knowledge does not preclude experiences outside my own which may include black ducks.
Cliffe the anthropic argument "life is balanced on a razors edge" is clearly fallacious, along with the "complexity of a human eye" argument. I truly hope you investigate further into these and understand how invalid they are.
Rom. 2:14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things
of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, Rom. 2:15 in that
they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing
witness, and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, Rom.
2:16 on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men
through Christ Jesus. Potential for tyranny in a world where the elites no longer believe in objective
truth. Everything is reduced to a struggle for power. There is no constraint on
what social and political and cultural elites might do to control and reshape
society. The question is not what is right or wrong, but which group has the most
power to impose its will on the whole. It is the well spring of tyranny.
Yeah he really should think about that issue. I don't believe he has, because of what you said: he shies away from giving his opinion
8- By setting such strong, harsh dichotomies God taught Israel that any assimilation to pagan idolatry is intolerable. It was His way of preserving Israel’s spiritual health and posterity. God knew that if these Canaanite children were allowed to live, they would spell the undoing of Israel. The killing of the Canaanite children not only served to prevent assimilation to Canaanite identity but also served as a shattering, tangible illustration of Israel’s being set exclusively apart for God.
just a joke about AOL
lol so true, your point proves how corrupt man really
Why do you say that?
Next, do you agree that false revelation exists? After all we have many people from many religions claiming revelation. They cannot all be right as their claims are contradictory, but they can all be wrong. So if false revelation exists, you have to either be able to demonstrate your revelation is more accurate then others or admit that your revelation may be false just as others are.
LOL
Actually you missed my point. When Christians or any theist are shown that their arguments are illogical or irrational, they can fall back on faith, which is used because you cannot disprove it. Aka, you pray to god for financial help, it does not come. Faith says this is ok, it's not gods will and he has a different plan. Or, you find $20 on the sidewalk and praise god he delivers.
Either way you keep your faith without having to think.
2- For example, I have no right to take an innocent life. For me to do so would be murder. But God has no such prohibition. He can give and take life as He chooses. We all recognize this when we accuse some authority who presumes to take life as “playing God.” Human authorities arrogate to themselves rights which belong only to God. God is under no obligation whatsoever to extend my life for another second. If He wanted to strike me dead right now, that’s His prerogative.
Hes not really jugding. just promoting what the bible says
6-But why take the lives of innocent children? The terrible totality of the destruction was undoubtedly related to the prohibition of assimilation to pagan nations on Israel’s part. In commanding complete destruction of the Canaanites, the Lord says, “You shall not intermarry with them, giving your daughters to their sons, or taking their daughters for your sons, for they would turn away your sons from following me, to serve other gods” (Deut 7.3-4).
Cliffe you used the Anthropic Principle. But that is the atheistic response about fine tuning. You mean fine tuning points to God.
To be honest the Anthropic Principle is crap as it tries to explain fine tuning but the problem is that it still has the same probability problem. Because it relies on the conscious beings that observe it. But the probability of the conscious beings to observe it would still be small assuming they are only matter. Since the matter in the universes that don't have life would still be infinitely greater than those with conscious beings.
Or alien test subjects attached to a supercomputer
But wouldn't it be wrong to steal without a god or gods? That shows that these things exist outside of their existence.
cliffe, why do you debate when jesus can just heal people or give them peace then boom, you prooved god. there are plenty of street healers all it takes is faith which you already have because the holy spirit lives in you.
Cliffe got a little heated there
Please explain why objective morality requires a "god," as you have claimed.
He has many times, papa smurf isn't listening huh.
The same as you - even if you won't admit it - by applying secular moral philosophy.
Cliffe taught that last young arrogant ignoramus a lesson :)
You know things through your senses, your revelation relies on what you have read (your eyes), what you have experienced (your mind), your feelings (body and mind), etc. These are all things that are fallible, so your revelation is not special.
Again, we are both in the same boat. You do not get pass because you call your feelings, dreams, ideas, gut reactions or imagined voices 'revelation'.
You just demostrated that morality is objebtive, and that there is a lawgiver. How ? read your arguments and you will find the answer. From now on, you can answer all your question. Thanks...
7- This command is part and parcel of the whole fabric of complex Jewish ritual law distinguishing clean and unclean practices. The overriding thrust of these regulations is to prohibit various kinds of mixing. Clear lines of distinction are being drawn: this and not that. These serve as daily, tangible reminders that Israel is a special people set apart for God Himself.
5- The act was morally obligatory for the Israeli soldiers in virtue of God’s command, even though, had they undertaken it on their on initiative, it would have been wrong.
On divine command theory, then, God has the right to command an act, which, in the absence of a divine command, would have been sin, but which is now morally obligatory in virtue of that command.
The Golden Rule came from Jesus.
Haha that guy literally used Jesus’ ethical genius to argue God doesn’t exist. SMH
An example... If Electricity goes out in America, I would assume that human savagery would escalate. If there was no electricity then we would no longer be plugged in to world around us. If we can no longer connect to the hive mind of humanity then each person would not have the collective group or society to hold that person accountable foe any wrong doing.
Just because I am open to the possibility doesn't mean I accept it yet. You still need to prove that it's possible.
So with that in mind, until you prove that it's possible for a self-contradictory god to exist (by which I mean the immoral monster you worship), I do not think it is possible for one to exist. All you need to do is prove the former.
An unintentional world without objective morality would be total anarchy, right, wrong, good and evil wouldn't exist.
Objective truth, logic, wisdom and morality do exist, therefore God exists.
There is no wisdom against the ONE who though wisdom, intentionally created the universe.
Truth, logic, wisdom, objective morality are the produce of an intentional world view, NOT a unintentional one.
The golden rule long predates Jesus, only the name "the golden rule" was given by Jesus.
Well, atheists were "preaching" the Golden Rule before Jesus was even invented. Ever hear of Confucius?
But if we get these "moral laws" from your god, then how come he breaks them time and again in the bible? Either your god is immoral, or war crimes ARE moral. Which is it?
Besides, by your logic rape, slavery, genocide, and eternal torture are good. After all, in the bible your god commands and commits these things.
Logic is an eternal reflection of an absolute standard (I call it God, Atheists don't have anything to call it).
In their Godless, unintentional world, logic is 100% illogical, ultimate morality and purpose could never exist.
If a logical God is not responsible for creation, then explain how logic exists in your random, accidental universe?
If you believe you have better evidence or arguments for the existence of truth and logic, try to convince me.
ToastyMcGrath- You just hate that fact, that theres no other book like the biblie that give moral values foundation for everyone, and please get out of your own little bubble of " the biblie is a evil and inmoral book of atrocities" you need to go back and read the whole bible again in order to understand how wrong you are when you say that. Be more objective and not subjective of your own perspective of the bible.
And by ordering an immoral punishment, your god made himself a war criminal. And as yet, you still haven't actually disagreed with this assertion.
The Bible dosnt promote any of these? These happend yes but the teachings in tthe bible never promote any of these. and what is OT? and have you ever read the bible without picking a choosing what you read?
I've seen your "proof." It fails to meet its burden of evidence every time.
Every.
Single.
Time.
Anything could be considered possible. However it's not possible to reconcile the bible, OT and NT with what Christians generally claim about God. You can't get around the all loving father figure who created hell, you can't get around the terrible historical evidence for the bible and at the same time suggest the biblical gods intentions are clear, etc.
At the end of the day you are left with a illogical and unreasonable belief, which is where faith comes in.
Actually you don't. After all you can't claim your senses are 100% accurate and since any revelation, scripture or thought you have is based on potentially inaccurate senses you can't claim truth at all. So we are in the same boat.
Areopagus style.
Jesus Christ the 2nd guy was lame
1st guy really had his gears turning I liked it. Agreed in the 2nd guy, I pray they’re doing alright nowadays
Wait Cliffe you contradicted yourself... First you said that morality comes from and is given by god, but then you showed you believe that morality is outside of god when you said that "if god committed genocide then i would believe him to be immoral." How could god commit an immoral act if his actions define what is moral or not?
Sure, but I or you could also be brains in a jar.