@Excuse me but In the Bible God refers to himself as He and the Father. This would mean that he uses masculine pronouns by choice. There are people who will attack you if you slip up and don't use their "preferred pronouns."
Total depravity isn't calvinism, it's just straight up biblical doctrine. It's one thing that calvinists actually do get right because it's in the Bible.
@@turnage_michael It depends on how you define "total depravity." While all Christians can agree that humans are totally depraved (i.e., sinful), Calvinism goes a step further and declares "total inability" (i.e., humans are completely unable to respond to the Gospel unless God first supernaturally regenerates them).
@@wyrmwoodouroborosheartofth4751 Well that is partially true. God is the one who responded first. He pulls on our heartstrings first and we have a choice: repent or turn away from him. Without God turning our attention towards him repentance is not possible. How we in turn respond to the conviction is the focal point.
It's the kind of cringey content that gets thousands of views, but if an actual Christian tries to correct that on Tik Tok, it immediately gets banned/shadow banned.
@@womanofelohim8135 Not surprising, TikTok being owned by a Beijing tech company. The CCP's fingerprints are likely all over it. There's no way they'd allow for a predominantly pro-Christian narrative.
One of my middle school students brought this up because she heard a friend say it. She then proceeded to laugh at it and tear it to shreds. This guy is using an argument that a middle school girl can openly mock and pick apart.
Same goes for a Bible believer. You all have no good evidence for the existence of your idol and, for some reason think you should be taken seriously 🤷
I don't know why some people make everything about race, gender, and sexuality. It's crazy how little these truly define people yet people seem to think it is all they are.
It's because the devil has always been attacking our identity. Even in the beginning when we were made in God's image, the serpent said "you can be like God". Even when Jesus was tempted and Satan knew he was the Son of God he addressed him as "If you are the Son of God then..." Society has moved our identity from God to sex, race, etc and now everybody is in a confused state. Know who you are in God my friends.
"But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God- having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with such people. "They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over gullible women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, always learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth. Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so also these teachers oppose the truth. They are men of depraved minds, who, as far as the faith is concerned, are rejected. But they will not get very far because, as in the case of those men, their folly will be clear to everyone." 2 Timothy 3:1-9
This is a post reality world that we live in now. It’s to each and own to determine their own reality. JESUS IS THE ONLY WAY, THE ONLY TRUTH IN LIFE AND THE ABUNDANT LIFE THAT WE NEED.
Because their identity has been taken away by lies. They don't want God/ family/country they want self/race/sexuality to take the place of those things... Something has to.
I remember seeing this video about a week ago and thought, "What is wrong with this guy?" Then I read his description which says he is an Exvangelical & a Deconstructist. Those folks are very odd.
thank you for throwing the preferred pronoun aspect in this... because that would have been my first response.. given God repeatedly uses the masculine form in the OT and NT languages... lol
Remember this sort of thing whenever a nonbeliever tries to tell you you're doing Christianity wrong. Sure, "shouldn't you be more loving since you're a Christian?" may be a valid argument, since "love more" is always a valid exhortation, but you don't know what weird ideas that person has about what Christians ought to believe.
@Excuse me but I pray that you will turn away from the wide path that leads to destruction and believe in Jesus because hell is eternal. Jesus is the truth, the life and the only way.
Watching people getting into identity politics really reminds me of what IP said about those in Hell in the "Does God Send People to Hell?" vid. They have built their entire identities on something else besides God.
That he thinks saying God isn't something is "talking lowly" of that thing is very revealing, it reminds me of when the same kinds of people want popular characters in media to be gay for the purposes of "representation", then get mad when that doesn't happen and say it's because of homophobia. It's the fallacy of assuming intent: they assume that if you don't think X is Y, it must be because you think Y is inferior when in reality there could be a multitude of reasons such as the definition or purpose of X that prohibit it from being Y or a pragmatic or otherwise beneficial reason for X not being Y.
The only thing it shows is their narcissism: that they feel powerless when something or someone other than what they identify is the most exalted. And that reveals the power game, that by deceiving you into exalting them, they are put in the place of YHWH in your mind.
Great video but, as you pointed out, God is referred to with the masculine pronoun before Jesus' birth; therefore, the usage of the masculine pronoun isn't, necessarily, incarnational language. Some would say that the masculine pronoun is used because of God's having masculine traits, and I think that this is a decent--but not entirely correct--explanation. Others would say that it is used because of God's having revealed Himself this way (as shown in the video), and I think that--while this seems a better explanation to me--this still is not entirely correct, in my opinion. I think that the best explanation is a grammatical one. When I was teaching myself Latin, Greek, and Hebrew (which I never got very far into), one thing that I was shocked to learn was that, in Latin grammar, the masculine pronoun was the default for groups of mixed gender or where gender is unknown. This is called "unmarked gender". Basically, something is unmarked in grammar when it is the default, and something is marked when it deviates from the default (e.g., present tense may be considered the default, or unmarked, tense). I was shocked even more when I learned that the same went for Greek and Hebrew. Finally, I also discovered that there is no evidence to suggest that this owes to any sort of patriarchal or misogynistic attitudes. Just as the unmarked tense has no necessary link to bias or prejudice, the unmarked gender has no necessary link to bias of prejudice. Therefore, my preferred explanation for the use of the masculine pronoun when referring to God is that, the masculine pronoun is used when referring to God because it is the unmarked pronoun for something without a specified gender, because God revealed himself that way, because God has masculine traits, and because God was incarnated as a male.
I'd say it's (also) because the Incarnation is paradoxically eternal. Even in scenes like Ezekiel 1, the prophets see YHWH as a glorified man, and that Image is what they refer to as his Glory throughout the OT (that and the cloud that's present in that same scene). Among other things.
@@blanktrigger8863 *_Part 1_* *"I'd say it's (also) because the Incarnation is paradoxically eternal."* I believed this, myself, until fairly recently, so I really understand where you're coming from and kind of wish it were true; however, I can't bring myself to believe this after having done some study on the topic. *"Even in scenes like Ezekiel 1, the prophets see YHWH as a glorified man, and that Image is what they refer to as his Glory throughout the OT (that and the cloud that's present in that same scene)."* I must admit, at least some of these do appear to be Christophanies to me, so we do agree on that. I know you didn't ask for it but, if you'd like, here is a writeup I did on the topic of Eternal Procession and Eternal Sonship (obviously leaning on Dr. Craig a lot): Key Biblical Passages:
"I will be his father, and he shall be my son. When he commits iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, with the stripes of the sons of men;" --2 Samuel 7:14
"I will be his father, and he shall be my son; I will not take my steadfast love from him, as I took it from him who was before you," --1 Chronicles 17:13
"I will tell of the decree of the Lord: He said to me, "You are my son, today I have begotten you." --Psalm 2:7
"and lo, a voice from heaven, saying, "This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased."" --Matthew 3:17
"And the angel said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God." --Luke 1:35
Notice that in Luke 1:35 it is stated, "therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God." "Therefore", Greek 'dio', means for this reason, which is a statement that the reason that Christ is called the Son of God is because of his birth as a human. The Old Testament passages listed above all express a similar idea.
"this he has fulfilled to us their children by raising Jesus; as also it is written in the second psalm, 'Thou art my Son, today I have begotten thee.'" --Acts 13:33
"and from Jesus Christ the faithful witness, the first-born of the dead, and the ruler of kings on earth. To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood" --Revelation 1:5
In Acts 13 and Revelation 1, the Sonship of Christ is attributed to his resurrection, which is a result of His being incarnate.
"For to what angel did God ever say, "Thou art my Son, today I have begotten thee" Or again, "I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son"? And again, when he brings the first-born into the world, he says, "Let all God’s angels worship him."" --Hebrews 1:5-6
"So also Christ did not exalt himself to be made a high priest, but was appointed by him who said to him, "Thou art my Son, today I have begotten thee";" --Hebrews 5:5
Notice, the Son is begotten the day He is born in the book of Hebrews.
The whole of the biblical data, as well as early witness from the Apostolic father, Ignatius, (as we'll see later) attest that Christ is not begotten eternally and is not the Son eternally. That would remove Christ's, as well as the Holy Spirit's, essential attribute of existence a se, making them exist ab alio, and introduce an ontological subordinationism that is unacceptable. Christ and the Holy Spirit are no different in their personhood and existence than the Father as far as essential attributes are concerned.
Of Doctrine:
The Biblical text never speaks of God the Father as the father of the Son from eternity. It speaks of the Father as the father of all mankind. It speaks of Him as the father of Israel. It speaks of Him as the father of Christians by adoption. It speaks of Him as the father of the human person, Jesus.
Yet, in a seeming extension of the biblical sense of the fatherhood of the first person of the Trinity, Athenagoras, writing between A.D. 177 and A.D. 180 in A Plea for the Christians 10, and taking after Philo of Alexandria, puts forward the idea that the Son does not exist a se, but is the expressed, though eternally so, reason of the Father (being in "ideal Form and energizing power") and the Holy Spirit is an "effluence" from the Father. This ab alio existence seems to imply an ontological, not merely an economic (or role based/functional), subordination of the Son and Spirit, thus depriving them of the fullness of divinity, that is, all of the essential attributes of divinity. For, surely, it is an essential property of divinity to exist a se (rather than ab alio), not merely an accidental one.
Irenaeus, in Against Heresies 4.20.3 (cf. 2.30.9), reaffirms Athenagoras' statement based on Philo's Logos Christology which is in turn affirmed by Tertullian, though denying the eternality of the processions saying, "the Father is the entire substance, but the Son is a derivation and portion of the whole" (Against Praxeas 29).
Dr. William Lane Craig says this on the topic:
"... For although credally affirmed, the doctrine of the generation of the Son (and the procession of the Spirit) is a relic of Logos Christology which finds virtually no warrant in the biblical text and introduces a subordinationism into the Godhead which anyone who affirms the full deity of Christ ought to find very troubling."
Further, the Nicene/Constantinopolitan Creed's affirmation of the procession of the Son from the Father, and that of the Holy Spirit from the Son, seems explicitly contradictory to some writings of the Apostolic Fathers.
The Apostolic Fathers are the few Fathers of the Early Church who lived during the time of and, at least in the case of Ignatius of Antioch, Clement of Rome, and Polycarp, were apparently students of the Apostles.
As Dr. Craig points out, Ignatius (Wikipedia: "... considered to be one of the three most important of these [Apostolic Fathers], together with Clement of Rome and Polycarp. His letters also serve as an example of early Christian theology."), who is traditionally identified as a disciple of John, recognized the primitive, biblical understanding of Christ's being begotten in the flesh (or human nature) and unbegotten in the spirit (or divine nature), writing, of Jesus, that:
"There is but one physician, of flesh and of spirit, begotten and unbegotten, God in man, true Life in death, Son of Mary and Son of God, first passible and then impassible, Jesus Christ our Lord." --Ignatius, Epistle to the Ephesians 7:2 (c. A.D. 107).
Ignatius states that Christ is begotten in the flesh but unbegotten in the spirit. This statement of Ignatius is incredibly early (somewhere from between A.D. 98 and A.D. 117), consonant with the biblical data, and doesn't show the signs of influence of Eastern and Greek philosophy and, so, is less likely to be the product of theological innovation, let alone innovation based on Eastern/Greek philosophy. The idea that Christ's divine nature is begotten seems unknown to Ignatius, let alone to the biblical text.
So, in summary, the procession of the Son and Spirit and the Eternal Sonship make Jesus and The Holy Spirit ontologically inferior to the Father (though inferiority being universally denied by the Church), by removing the essential attribute of existence a se from the divine nature of the second and third person of the Trinity, add to what the scriptures say on the topic (seemingly based on Eastern and Greek philosophy), and contradict explicit statements from one of the most important Early Church Fathers. *_Continued in Part 2 Due To Length_*
@@frogboy2483 Nah. It's simple. It's just the jargon that is necessary for precision which makes it seem difficult, I think. I do agree, though, that philosophy and theology can be a little tough to think through on one's own. That's why I try to read several sources, and do a Bible study, on every theological issue that piques my interest. It seems that TH-cam has removed part 2 of my reply, probably because of links, but it was just all the quotes, references, and source links.
I use masculine pronouns because the word for god, in my language, as in most languages, happens to be grammatically masculine. Languages that do not use such pronouns at all don't run into this issue, like Japanese, I suppose. I guess the deity Yahweh was once believed to have male characteristics, since there have been ideas by those who worshipped him alongside other gods that he was married to Ashera, a goddess. In a monotheistic context it would not make much sense to apply gender to God. He chose to incarnate as a man, but did not necessarily fulfill his gender role as expected from society. Some rather like to call God a mother than a father - I don't really mind if it's their personal choice - many people have not the best associations with fathers...
Hopefully I don't end up regretting this comment, but as a trans person (and a Christian) myself, I find the claim that God is transgender because "God can't be confined by gender" to be a somewhat cringey attempt at virtue-signaling at best. I mean, I agree that God is beyond gender (and, I must admit, my position on what pronouns to refer to God with is a bit... undefined), of course, but like IP said, that isn't the definition of transgender and, honestly, I think that implying that it is simply contributes to harmful misinformation about trans people. I mean, I'm not "beyond gender," I very clearly have a gender, and if you saw me on a street corner it would likely be clear to you what that gender is. It's just that it happens to be different from the one I would have been expected to be when I was born. The same goes for the vast majority of trans people.
I cannot fathom enough how much you have impacted my spiritual life and have helped me ( a Jew ) believe more in the existence and belief in Jesus. Your level of understanding and research is bar none, and can’t thank you enough. Modern Christianity has suffered so much from falsehoods that it’s hard for one to make sense of such a belief system yet you make it make perfect sense with historical context and logic. So I must ask you this. What’s your take on the theory that Jesus worked with Judas in secret to help ensure his capture and ultimately his crucifixion for the end goal of his sacrifice, and mission. And isn’t that supposedly derived from “The Gospel of Judas”? Thank you so much for all you do and will always support your cause! Best - Mason D. Hibbs
*Red Pen Logic* covered this topic in a video a little while back (he tackles logical fallacies and misunderstandings about God, Biblical topics and Christianity too). Glad to see you responded to this. By the way, good analogy at the end. It clears up how flawed the reasoning was.
Hey IP, you probably won't see but hoping you do? can you give me a list of your best videos debunking atheist/agnostic/not christians against christianity and your best apologetics videos for christianity, I want to compose a play list, or at least something I can reference if I ever get into a debate. Much appreciated God Bless
Thank you for these videos. I am trying to make videos, but I have practically no working knowledge of how to do video editing. What books would you recommend for an absolute beginner trying to get involved in the world of online video?
Hey IP, I have been watching you for quite some time now. I have heard you touch on the topic of Islam. What are you future plans on debunking their arguments on the Holy Bible and our Lord Jesus.
This person clearly seems to miss the point of God, and Christianity. You are supposed to put God first, really this concept is actually included in all 3 Abrahamic faiths, who also tend to all agree God is a male. This person is putting himself and his ideology above God, and then trying to use that ideology to "insult" people who truly put God first. It comes off as he feels he's better than us, and he is somehow more enlightened because he put his personal ideology above God and his own religious beliefs...and that's just not the pathway to following Christ.
I think its obvious these people do this on purpose to get views .They lie about Christianity to get attention. But some people will believe their lies .Thank God for inspiring philosophy that stands up against these people.
Michael you look like you have a migraine! You poor thing! I myself find it hard to listen to these folks that seem to have a superiority complex and feel the need to set us Christians straight with their self righteous and condescending drivel. Maybe I’m way off, but, I won’t engage, because I see zero chance for reception. May God bless you sir for listening and responding to these kinds of things. Hopefully it will help the rest of us to deal with similar matters. To God be all the glory!!
Acts 13:41 “ Look, you scoffers , wonder and perish, for I am going to do something in your days that you would never believe , even if someone told you. “. Lord Jesus Christ is coming soon 🙏🏼❤️🕊REPENT, believe in the Gospel, Be Born Again
When it comes to this stuff, the usual tools do not work. Wokal Distance talks about this at around 45 min of "In The Beginning Was The Discourse | a postmodern postmortem with Wokal Distance" with Benjamin A Boyce. This is not about the intellect. This is about bypassing it entirely. A good example is at 48:28 where Mark Hamill has a tweet with no propositional content whatsoever. Q theory is hostile to rationality and science so using either of those are not effective. You can see the same behavior in the tik tok because he accuses anyone who disagrees with him of thinking lowly of certain people, which invokes an emotional response in the listener. In another video, "Panel: Saving the Transitioned Church | Jon Benzinger, Michael O'Fallon, James Lindsay", James Lindsay points out a similar example. Some will claim that David did not have consensual relations with Bathsheba (there's a concise word for it, but youtube), and whether or not it's true makes absolutely no difference to those people.
God is a He. He was a He before Christ was made flesh, so God didn't become a He. Christ and the father are not the same, Christ is the son of the father, the son of man.
Hey IP, I recently heard on TikTok that Leviticus 18:22 was, in its original Hebrew context, referring to pedophilia, not homosexuality. I've even found several articles online that supposedly back this up. Would you care to make a video weighing in on this topic?
It forbids men (or males) to have sex with other males (boys through geezers, no age limit either way) as if they were women. Pedophilia is included, but it's not the focus. If pedophilia were intended, I can imagine other ways of making that clear. Is it only male-on-male pedophilia? Why not include both sexes?
Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because every male in Sodom, both young and👉 old👈, wanted to have "relations" with the two men,which were angels that were in the form of men. This should clarify that it was evil for the men(Not referring to children) to have such relations. Then we get the word s0d0mite from the destruction of Sodom in this story. The Bible says that in the last days people will not tolerate sound doctrine, they do and will manipulate the word of God to satisfy their own unGodly ways.
Even if true, pederasty was the socially accepted form of homosexuality in parts of the ancient and classical world, so it could be argued to be a distinction without difference, though I don't know enough about the context to say.
Yeah, that´s what use to happen to people who want to talk about things they don´t know much about (yet they think they do - it´s called self-confidence of fool) - like when you really never (deeply) studied Bible. Next!
We also refer to the FATHER and Holy Spirit as He as well. For the simple fact that they are the head of all things. Which headship in patriarchy is a masculine.
The black guy is confused. He denies the word's written in the word of God. I'm not surprised though, the majority of people in the world do not know what the Bible says😢, therefore they will be dishonest or in great error when talking about it and/or Christian's. I'm glad you set him straight!
@@NickNuiGames it shouldn't offend, if it does then they should rethink their own heart status. To see race in every fact spoken is not the right train of thought, it's racism
God is a he because basically in most languages with two personal genders, the masculine is the neutral. Usually because the masculine falls out of favor for the neutral.
![[MIRRORED] LISA - ROCKSTAR 🎸 MV version #LISA #BLACKPINK #ROCKSTAR](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/-U58DuCCtZk/mqdefault.jpg)
😅😅😅"Sir, are you denying God his preferred pronouns?" Brilliant!
thanks
Ayam atma brahma.
@Excuse me but In the Bible God refers to himself as He and the Father. This would mean that he uses masculine pronouns by choice. There are people who will attack you if you slip up and don't use their "preferred pronouns."
@Excuse me but He's pointing out the hypocrisy of it.
Shots fired.
I'm not a Calvinist but Calvin was right about total depravity and TikTok is the proof.
I agree!
Truth.
Total depravity isn't calvinism, it's just straight up biblical doctrine. It's one thing that calvinists actually do get right because it's in the Bible.
@@turnage_michael It depends on how you define "total depravity." While all Christians can agree that humans are totally depraved (i.e., sinful), Calvinism goes a step further and declares "total inability" (i.e., humans are completely unable to respond to the Gospel unless God first supernaturally regenerates them).
@@wyrmwoodouroborosheartofth4751 Well that is partially true. God is the one who responded first. He pulls on our heartstrings first and we have a choice: repent or turn away from him. Without God turning our attention towards him repentance is not possible. How we in turn respond to the conviction is the focal point.
TikTok cringe knows no limit.
It's the kind of cringey content that gets thousands of views, but if an actual Christian tries to correct that on Tik Tok, it immediately gets banned/shadow banned.
@@womanofelohim8135 Not surprising, TikTok being owned by a Beijing tech company. The CCP's fingerprints are likely all over it. There's no way they'd allow for a predominantly pro-Christian narrative.
When I got the notification I had a big face palm
LOL
NKP 765 is better 😤
@@t700e I just chose it because it's my local berk 😂 I've seen all 6 and 765 is my profile picture!
@@Nkp757railfan weird coincidence........I see.....here.....I do
This is one of the tik tok questions that people come up with at
3:00 Am after a hangover
That might be true
*Hits blunt* "have you considered that God is trans?"
The really crazy thing is that he actually thinks he's deep. Let us pray for this young man.
Indeed! I pray that his eyes will be opened and he will see the truth
Or he knows better and is openly mocking God?
@@bassmanjr100 could be both
@@bassmanjr100 he prob dosen't ;/
Yes ok. I’ll start by praying he gets an education 👍
One of my middle school students brought this up because she heard a friend say it. She then proceeded to laugh at it and tear it to shreds.
This guy is using an argument that a middle school girl can openly mock and pick apart.
@Excuse me but 😂😂 I appreciate that.
exactly
@@twitherspoon8954 some actual study instead of surface level grazing would do you well
Blasphemy
Same goes for a Bible believer. You all have no good evidence for the existence of your idol and, for some reason think you should be taken seriously 🤷
I don't know why some people make everything about race, gender, and sexuality. It's crazy how little these truly define people yet people seem to think it is all they are.
It's because the devil has always been attacking our identity. Even in the beginning when we were made in God's image, the serpent said "you can be like God". Even when Jesus was tempted and Satan knew he was the Son of God he addressed him as "If you are the Son of God then..." Society has moved our identity from God to sex, race, etc and now everybody is in a confused state. Know who you are in God my friends.
"But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God- having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with such people.
"They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over gullible women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, always learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth. Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so also these teachers oppose the truth. They are men of depraved minds, who, as far as the faith is concerned, are rejected. But they will not get very far because, as in the case of those men, their folly will be clear to everyone."
2 Timothy 3:1-9
Hearing such people talk about Christianity really wants makes me give up on them to their own desire. May God have mercy on them and on me.
This is a post reality world that we live in now. It’s to each and own to determine their own reality. JESUS IS THE ONLY WAY, THE ONLY TRUTH IN LIFE AND THE ABUNDANT LIFE THAT WE NEED.
Because their identity has been taken away by lies. They don't want God/ family/country they want self/race/sexuality to take the place of those things... Something has to.
I remember seeing this video about a week ago and thought, "What is wrong with this guy?"
Then I read his description which says he is an Exvangelical & a Deconstructist. Those folks are very odd.
no way bruv evangelical and this is 2 different things
@@joshuajohn74 Exactly
Tell me why TikTok is a trend again?
stupidity
Try To Find An Intelligent TikTok Challenge: Impossible
thank you for throwing the preferred pronoun aspect in this... because that would have been my first response.. given God repeatedly uses the masculine form in the OT and NT languages... lol
based arabian
Remember this sort of thing whenever a nonbeliever tries to tell you you're doing Christianity wrong. Sure, "shouldn't you be more loving since you're a Christian?" may be a valid argument, since "love more" is always a valid exhortation, but you don't know what weird ideas that person has about what Christians ought to believe.
The bible calls God Father, He, Him, His.
Can anyone explain why people who supposedly don’t believe in God, love to attack him?
John 15:18 "If the world hates you, know that it hated me first".
@Excuse me but I pray that you will turn away from the wide path that leads to destruction and believe in Jesus because hell is eternal. Jesus is the truth, the life and the only way.
@Excuse me but I wouldn’t attack the Easter bunny to show someone it’s incoherent. An argument from emotion has already lost.
@Excuse me but Perhaps since you are Christian, you will forgive me.
@Excuse me but It is. I don’t understand why you would come to a Christian channel to do it. You should be respectful of others religious beliefs.
Bro do any of these tiktokers ever have a rebuttal to your videos?
Rarely do they even attempt (especially as of late).
Watching people getting into identity politics really reminds me of what IP said about those in Hell in the "Does God Send People to Hell?" vid. They have built their entire identities on something else besides God.
Yeah totally agree
Enjoy every single of your tiktok response videos! 😅
God bless you for these videos!
That he thinks saying God isn't something is "talking lowly" of that thing is very revealing, it reminds me of when the same kinds of people want popular characters in media to be gay for the purposes of "representation", then get mad when that doesn't happen and say it's because of homophobia. It's the fallacy of assuming intent: they assume that if you don't think X is Y, it must be because you think Y is inferior when in reality there could be a multitude of reasons such as the definition or purpose of X that prohibit it from being Y or a pragmatic or otherwise beneficial reason for X not being Y.
The only thing it shows is their narcissism: that they feel powerless when something or someone other than what they identify is the most exalted. And that reveals the power game, that by deceiving you into exalting them, they are put in the place of YHWH in your mind.
Amazing video IP! 👍
Keep up the good work man! God bless!
Thank you for covering this… I saw this on instagram 🤦🏾♂️
I just love IP so much. Keep fighting the good fight, dude. Amazing job as always [and very funny too!]
As a trans person the guy you're responding to is painfully embarrassing.
I have grown to love this channel!❤️👍
Using their own logic against them is honestly the best way to combat these kinds of people.
Great video but, as you pointed out, God is referred to with the masculine pronoun before Jesus' birth; therefore, the usage of the masculine pronoun isn't, necessarily, incarnational language.
Some would say that the masculine pronoun is used because of God's having masculine traits, and I think that this is a decent--but not entirely correct--explanation. Others would say that it is used because of God's having revealed Himself this way (as shown in the video), and I think that--while this seems a better explanation to me--this still is not entirely correct, in my opinion. I think that the best explanation is a grammatical one.
When I was teaching myself Latin, Greek, and Hebrew (which I never got very far into), one thing that I was shocked to learn was that, in Latin grammar, the masculine pronoun was the default for groups of mixed gender or where gender is unknown. This is called "unmarked gender". Basically, something is unmarked in grammar when it is the default, and something is marked when it deviates from the default (e.g., present tense may be considered the default, or unmarked, tense). I was shocked even more when I learned that the same went for Greek and Hebrew. Finally, I also discovered that there is no evidence to suggest that this owes to any sort of patriarchal or misogynistic attitudes. Just as the unmarked tense has no necessary link to bias or prejudice, the unmarked gender has no necessary link to bias of prejudice. Therefore, my preferred explanation for the use of the masculine pronoun when referring to God is that, the masculine pronoun is used when referring to God because it is the unmarked pronoun for something without a specified gender, because God revealed himself that way, because God has masculine traits, and because God was incarnated as a male.
I'd say it's (also) because the Incarnation is paradoxically eternal. Even in scenes like Ezekiel 1, the prophets see YHWH as a glorified man, and that Image is what they refer to as his Glory throughout the OT (that and the cloud that's present in that same scene).
Among other things.
@@blanktrigger8863 *_Part 1_*
*"I'd say it's (also) because the Incarnation is paradoxically eternal."*
I believed this, myself, until fairly recently, so I really understand where you're coming from and kind of wish it were true; however, I can't bring myself to believe this after having done some study on the topic.
*"Even in scenes like Ezekiel 1, the prophets see YHWH as a glorified man, and that Image is what they refer to as his Glory throughout the OT (that and the cloud that's present in that same scene)."*
I must admit, at least some of these do appear to be Christophanies to me, so we do agree on that.
I know you didn't ask for it but, if you'd like, here is a writeup I did on the topic of Eternal Procession and Eternal Sonship (obviously leaning on Dr. Craig a lot):
Key Biblical Passages:
"I will be his father, and he shall be my son. When he commits iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, with the stripes of the sons of men;"
--2 Samuel 7:14
"I will be his father, and he shall be my son; I will not take my steadfast love from him, as I took it from him who was before you,"
--1 Chronicles 17:13
"I will tell of the decree of the Lord: He said to me, "You are my son, today I have begotten you."
--Psalm 2:7
"and lo, a voice from heaven, saying, "This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.""
--Matthew 3:17
"And the angel said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God."
--Luke 1:35
Notice that in Luke 1:35 it is stated, "therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God." "Therefore", Greek 'dio', means for this reason, which is a statement that the reason that Christ is called the Son of God is because of his birth as a human. The Old Testament passages listed above all express a similar idea.
"this he has fulfilled to us their children by raising Jesus; as also it is written in the second psalm, 'Thou art my Son, today I have begotten thee.'"
--Acts 13:33
"and from Jesus Christ the faithful witness, the first-born of the dead, and the ruler of kings on earth. To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood"
--Revelation 1:5
In Acts 13 and Revelation 1, the Sonship of Christ is attributed to his resurrection, which is a result of His being incarnate.
"For to what angel did God ever say, "Thou art my Son, today I have begotten thee" Or again, "I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son"? And again, when he brings the first-born into the world, he says, "Let all God’s angels worship him.""
--Hebrews 1:5-6
"So also Christ did not exalt himself to be made a high priest, but was appointed by him who said to him, "Thou art my Son, today I have begotten thee";"
--Hebrews 5:5
Notice, the Son is begotten the day He is born in the book of Hebrews.
The whole of the biblical data, as well as early witness from the Apostolic father, Ignatius, (as we'll see later) attest that Christ is not begotten eternally and is not the Son eternally. That would remove Christ's, as well as the Holy Spirit's, essential attribute of existence a se, making them exist ab alio, and introduce an ontological subordinationism that is unacceptable. Christ and the Holy Spirit are no different in their personhood and existence than the Father as far as essential attributes are concerned.
Of Doctrine:
The Biblical text never speaks of God the Father as the father of the Son from eternity. It speaks of the Father as the father of all mankind. It speaks of Him as the father of Israel. It speaks of Him as the father of Christians by adoption. It speaks of Him as the father of the human person, Jesus.
Yet, in a seeming extension of the biblical sense of the fatherhood of the first person of the Trinity, Athenagoras, writing between A.D. 177 and A.D. 180 in A Plea for the Christians 10, and taking after Philo of Alexandria, puts forward the idea that the Son does not exist a se, but is the expressed, though eternally so, reason of the Father (being in "ideal Form and energizing power") and the Holy Spirit is an "effluence" from the Father. This ab alio existence seems to imply an ontological, not merely an economic (or role based/functional), subordination of the Son and Spirit, thus depriving them of the fullness of divinity, that is, all of the essential attributes of divinity. For, surely, it is an essential property of divinity to exist a se (rather than ab alio), not merely an accidental one.
Irenaeus, in Against Heresies 4.20.3 (cf. 2.30.9), reaffirms Athenagoras' statement based on Philo's Logos Christology which is in turn affirmed by Tertullian, though denying the eternality of the processions saying, "the Father is the entire substance, but the Son is a derivation and portion of the whole" (Against Praxeas 29).
Dr. William Lane Craig says this on the topic:
"... For although credally affirmed, the doctrine of the generation of the Son (and the procession of the Spirit) is a relic of Logos Christology which finds virtually no warrant in the biblical text and introduces a subordinationism into the Godhead which anyone who affirms the full deity of Christ ought to find very troubling."
www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/scholarly-writings/christian-doctrines/is-god-the-son-begotten-in-his-divine-nature
Further, the Nicene/Constantinopolitan Creed's affirmation of the procession of the Son from the Father, and that of the Holy Spirit from the Son, seems explicitly contradictory to some writings of the Apostolic Fathers.
The Apostolic Fathers are the few Fathers of the Early Church who lived during the time of and, at least in the case of Ignatius of Antioch, Clement of Rome, and Polycarp, were apparently students of the Apostles.
As Dr. Craig points out, Ignatius (Wikipedia: "... considered to be one of the three most important of these [Apostolic Fathers], together with Clement of Rome and Polycarp. His letters also serve as an example of early Christian theology."), who is traditionally identified as a disciple of John, recognized the primitive, biblical understanding of Christ's being begotten in the flesh (or human nature) and unbegotten in the spirit (or divine nature), writing, of Jesus, that:
"There is but one physician, of flesh and of spirit, begotten and unbegotten, God in man, true Life in death, Son of Mary and Son of God, first passible and then impassible, Jesus Christ our Lord."
--Ignatius, Epistle to the Ephesians 7:2 (c. A.D. 107).
Ignatius states that Christ is begotten in the flesh but unbegotten in the spirit. This statement of Ignatius is incredibly early (somewhere from between A.D. 98 and A.D. 117), consonant with the biblical data, and doesn't show the signs of influence of Eastern and Greek philosophy and, so, is less likely to be the product of theological innovation, let alone innovation based on Eastern/Greek philosophy. The idea that Christ's divine nature is begotten seems unknown to Ignatius, let alone to the biblical text.
So, in summary, the procession of the Son and Spirit and the Eternal Sonship make Jesus and The Holy Spirit ontologically inferior to the Father (though inferiority being universally denied by the Church), by removing the essential attribute of existence a se from the divine nature of the second and third person of the Trinity, add to what the scriptures say on the topic (seemingly based on Eastern and Greek philosophy), and contradict explicit statements from one of the most important Early Church Fathers.
*_Continued in Part 2 Due To Length_*
Jeez, be careful with that big brain of yours. You're gonna give someone an aneurysm trying to comprehend all of that.
@@frogboy2483 Nah. It's simple. It's just the jargon that is necessary for precision which makes it seem difficult, I think. I do agree, though, that philosophy and theology can be a little tough to think through on one's own. That's why I try to read several sources, and do a Bible study, on every theological issue that piques my interest.
It seems that TH-cam has removed part 2 of my reply, probably because of links, but it was just all the quotes, references, and source links.
Another fine example demonstrating the limitlessness of stupidity.
“Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,” - Romans 1:22
I use masculine pronouns because the word for god, in my language, as in most languages, happens to be grammatically masculine. Languages that do not use such pronouns at all don't run into this issue, like Japanese, I suppose. I guess the deity Yahweh was once believed to have male characteristics, since there have been ideas by those who worshipped him alongside other gods that he was married to Ashera, a goddess. In a monotheistic context it would not make much sense to apply gender to God. He chose to incarnate as a man, but did not necessarily fulfill his gender role as expected from society.
Some rather like to call God a mother than a father - I don't really mind if it's their personal choice - many people have not the best associations with fathers...
Ashera wasn't his wife
Your calm reasonable logic is refreshing to their "house of cards" insanity. Thank you for your channel.
I think we all knew somebody was gonna say this at one point or another
@Excuse me but because the world is the devil's domain and people love darkness rather than light.
*RESPECT GODS PRONOUNS!*
Hopefully I don't end up regretting this comment, but as a trans person (and a Christian) myself, I find the claim that God is transgender because "God can't be confined by gender" to be a somewhat cringey attempt at virtue-signaling at best. I mean, I agree that God is beyond gender (and, I must admit, my position on what pronouns to refer to God with is a bit... undefined), of course, but like IP said, that isn't the definition of transgender and, honestly, I think that implying that it is simply contributes to harmful misinformation about trans people. I mean, I'm not "beyond gender," I very clearly have a gender, and if you saw me on a street corner it would likely be clear to you what that gender is. It's just that it happens to be different from the one I would have been expected to be when I was born. The same goes for the vast majority of trans people.
May God bless you with wisdom and knowledge, and use you mightily for His kingdom purpose.
Nice upload, sugar muffin.
When I first read the title I immediately started laughing 😂, this is the best one yet
Brilliant!
Thank you.
All true. Good work!!!
Ladies and gentlemen, or creatures of indeterminate identity, welcome to the state of modern education.
I cannot fathom enough how much you have impacted my spiritual life and have helped me ( a Jew ) believe more in the existence and belief in Jesus. Your level of understanding and research is bar none, and can’t thank you enough. Modern Christianity has suffered so much from falsehoods that it’s hard for one to make sense of such a belief system yet you make it make perfect sense with historical context and logic. So I must ask you this. What’s your take on the theory that Jesus worked with Judas in secret to help ensure his capture and ultimately his crucifixion for the end goal of his sacrifice, and mission. And isn’t that supposedly derived from “The Gospel of Judas”? Thank you so much for all you do and will always support your cause! Best - Mason D. Hibbs
Amen brother 🙏 🙌
Great rebuttal!
*Red Pen Logic* covered this topic in a video a little while back (he tackles logical fallacies and misunderstandings about God, Biblical topics and Christianity too). Glad to see you responded to this. By the way, good analogy at the end. It clears up how flawed the reasoning was.
TIP: Have others peer review or vet your ideas before you post them online.
keep rockin'!
Hey IP, you probably won't see but hoping you do?
can you give me a list of your best videos debunking atheist/agnostic/not christians against christianity and your best apologetics videos for christianity, I want to compose a play list, or at least something I can reference if I ever get into a debate. Much appreciated
God Bless
Thank God for the amazing comical and logical talents that God has bestowed upon you.
God is a HE as it is written 🙏
i am very thankful and glad to be a christian in this point in history
Thank you for these videos. I am trying to make videos, but I have practically no working knowledge of how to do video editing. What books would you recommend for an absolute beginner trying to get involved in the world of online video?
Books for making videos or books for content ideas?
@@RomeoVisionInc Books for making videos.
The foolery, I just can't.....🙄
I rolled my eyes so far back I saw my brains! 🤣😅😅😂😂
This has to be the worst one yet 😂
Hey IP, I have been watching you for quite some time now. I have heard you touch on the topic of Islam. What are you future plans on debunking their arguments on the Holy Bible and our Lord Jesus.
Man you make me wanna get back in the tiktok grind, but then again their outrageous videos make me want to stay off 😂
1 Corinthians 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.
Last line.....another mic drop moment. 👌
Moral of the story, stay off tick tock.
But I’m on TikTok!
@InspiringPhilosophy I know and if you weren't then we wouldn't have this gold content.
The face palm is exactly the correct response.
This person clearly seems to miss the point of God, and Christianity. You are supposed to put God first, really this concept is actually included in all 3 Abrahamic faiths, who also tend to all agree God is a male. This person is putting himself and his ideology above God, and then trying to use that ideology to "insult" people who truly put God first. It comes off as he feels he's better than us, and he is somehow more enlightened because he put his personal ideology above God and his own religious beliefs...and that's just not the pathway to following Christ.
This person also seems to miss his dad other than the point
Genius. Thank you for being intelligent.
Even before Christ came from the womb of Mary, God appeared to people in the form of a man, such his appearances to Abraham and Jacob.
1:01 notice the gaslighting and twisting (seemingly of scripture, as it says “I am He”.
loved it
Well done.
TikTok is always hit with the dumb stick, I hecking swear. It’s so sad.
I think its obvious these people do this on purpose to get views .They lie about Christianity to get attention.
But some people will believe their lies .Thank God for inspiring philosophy that stands up against these people.
Michael you look like you have a migraine! You poor thing! I myself find it hard to listen to these folks that seem to have a superiority complex and feel the need to set us Christians straight with their self righteous and condescending drivel. Maybe I’m way off, but, I won’t engage, because I see zero chance for reception. May God bless you sir for listening and responding to these kinds of things. Hopefully it will help the rest of us to deal with similar matters. To God be all the glory!!
I'd love to see this lad's response to your video. Utterly destroyed his lunacy.😂
Will you make a video about the witch who invoked Samuel?
Bro crazy things people about God of the Bible I can't anymore
Every SJW: OMG this guy is hating on transgenderssssss because he doesn't believe that Jesus is transssssss.
IP: *Stares in Samuel. L. Jackson*
Wait hold up!
LOL, exactly
Acts 13:41 “ Look, you scoffers , wonder and perish, for I am going to do something in your days that you would never believe , even if someone told you. “. Lord Jesus Christ is coming soon 🙏🏼❤️🕊REPENT, believe in the Gospel, Be Born Again
Let me add one more such argument: the internet is stupid.
Okay, now they're getting desperate these tik tokers.
It would seem that some not all who uses Tik Tok also throws away all logic and reasoning straight out of the window
Can you react to the people saying the Bible is one big spell book? It's blasphemous but still annoying 😒
You're wonderful! I absolutely love the bit about not respecting God's pronoun!
When it comes to this stuff, the usual tools do not work. Wokal Distance talks about this at around 45 min of "In The Beginning Was The Discourse | a postmodern postmortem with Wokal Distance" with Benjamin A Boyce. This is not about the intellect. This is about bypassing it entirely. A good example is at 48:28 where Mark Hamill has a tweet with no propositional content whatsoever. Q theory is hostile to rationality and science so using either of those are not effective. You can see the same behavior in the tik tok because he accuses anyone who disagrees with him of thinking lowly of certain people, which invokes an emotional response in the listener.
In another video, "Panel: Saving the Transitioned Church | Jon Benzinger, Michael O'Fallon, James Lindsay", James Lindsay points out a similar example. Some will claim that David did not have consensual relations with Bathsheba (there's a concise word for it, but youtube), and whether or not it's true makes absolutely no difference to those people.
Also, trying to apply human characteristics to God.
Call Him what He wishes to vo called, Father
God is a He. He was a He before Christ was made flesh, so God didn't become a He. Christ and the father are not the same, Christ is the son of the father, the son of man.
Hey IP, I recently heard on TikTok that Leviticus 18:22 was, in its original Hebrew context, referring to pedophilia, not homosexuality. I've even found several articles online that supposedly back this up. Would you care to make a video weighing in on this topic?
It forbids men (or males) to have sex with other males (boys through geezers, no age limit either way) as if they were women. Pedophilia is included, but it's not the focus. If pedophilia were intended, I can imagine other ways of making that clear. Is it only male-on-male pedophilia? Why not include both sexes?
Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because every male in Sodom, both young and👉 old👈, wanted to have "relations" with the two men,which were angels that were in the form of men. This should clarify that it was evil for the men(Not referring to children) to have such relations. Then we get the word s0d0mite from the destruction of Sodom in this story. The Bible says that in the last days people will not tolerate sound doctrine, they do and will manipulate the word of God to satisfy their own unGodly ways.
Even if true, pederasty was the socially accepted form of homosexuality in parts of the ancient and classical world, so it could be argued to be a distinction without difference, though I don't know enough about the context to say.
This was legitimately hard to watch. How can someone possibly be this ignorant (meant in the literal sense, not a sinful insult)
Jesus loves you ❤️
Damn, why would people suggest that The Father and The Son are male?
0:51 ikr XD
Yeah, that´s what use to happen to people who want to talk about things they don´t know much about (yet they think they do - it´s called self-confidence of fool) - like when you really never (deeply) studied Bible. Next!
Love the are you denying God his preferred pronouns. Hehehehe. Amazing.
We also refer to the FATHER and Holy Spirit as He as well. For the simple fact that they are the head of all things. Which headship in patriarchy is a masculine.
also "trans" in Latin means crossing from one side to the other, if your gender identity does not change then you cannot be trans
Hosea 11:9 (ESV)
For I am God, and not a man-the Holy One among you.
I hate when people look for excuses for there sin. The Lord is He!!!
Does that guy even know what a woman is?
The black guy is confused. He denies the word's written in the word of God. I'm not surprised though, the majority of people in the world do not know what the Bible says😢, therefore they will be dishonest or in great error when talking about it and/or Christian's. I'm glad you set him straight!
@@NickNuiGames because they are both men and I don't know either of their names. Why do YOU make it a big deal?
@@NickNuiGames Are you offended? I apologize if it offended you, it shouldn't offend tho
@@NickNuiGames it shouldn't offend, if it does then they should rethink their own heart status. To see race in every fact spoken is not the right train of thought, it's racism
@@NickNuiGames much love to you my friend! God bless you and your family🙏❤️
Amen❤🎉🎉😊❤❤🎉
Thank you
God is a he because basically in most languages with two personal genders, the masculine is the neutral. Usually because the masculine falls out of favor for the neutral.
Day 3 of asking IP to make a video on a youtuber named biblical binitarian?
You been lifting lately, IP?
This Tik Tok user proves the internet needs an intelligence test for people to use it.
For the sake of argument, this guy claims to be a "Christian pastor".....
God is beyond gender technically