Hey everyone. I hope you'll consider subscribing to my newsletter so you'll never miss an update about new articles, videos, etc. Subscribe here: davidwilber.substack.com/subscribe
Let Justin be a sobering warning to all. I truly feel very sorry for him. I have another friend, who was in our fellowship. Young wife and mother, who has completely gone off the rails and is now homeless and doing meth. It's so tragic to see this kind of thing happen. Even in Scripture there are those that began well, but did not end well. Father have mercy. David, thank you for your video.
Snappy, Justin has surely 'snapped.' It is sobering. I thought he was the real McCoy but have learned some lessons along the way, principally not placing anyone in a high pedestal. We all have feet of clay and are not deserving to be regarded too highly. I was reading about a few of the kings of Israel, who began well but did not end well, very sobering indeed. Yeshua is the only One safe to follow.
It takes some real maturity to respond so calmly and kindly to such intentional mockery. Well done! Continue to show the love and wisdom of Messiah, David. Shabbat shalom!
Shalom and blessings David. I pray you and yours are well brother. Thank you for the latest rebuttal. Seems like Justin has totally lost the plot. Bullet holes in the Bible? I think Justin is firing blanks, as usual!!! Every blessing brother. David (UK)
David , again, appreciating your straight forward remars. Information you supply to your viewers becomes useful in pondering moments of worship and praise.
Shabbat Shalom, David. Thank you for sharing the video. I have a question regarding your stance on creation. At the 3:18 mark, you reference the Big Bang Theory, giving the impression that you consider it a part of the creation process. Please correct me if my understanding is incorrect. I’m curious as to how you reconcile the belief in Genesis 1, which states that God created everything in six days, with the belief that the cosmos is billions of years old. These two beliefs seem to be at conflict with each other. We honor God by resting on the seventh day (Shabbath), as He did after creating everything. However, can we genuinely honor Him if we question the authenticity of the initial part of the Bible? Is it possible to observe Shabbat if we don’t fully trust that God created everything in six literal days (God created something, and then there was evening and morning, which clearly signifies a literal day, not a symbolic one)? Please understand that this is not an attack, and I do not claim to have all the answers. However, I am eager to seek the truth, and I sense that you are too. I hope my comment will provoke thought and possibly inspire further research into the origins of the Big Bang Theory, which, as I understand it, was planted by Jesuit Priests to cast doubt on God's word
One thing you said reminded me of one of Zeno's paradoxes. I forget what its called, but the one where you can never touch someone because of the infinite "half distances" remaining between two persons. You can never reach the end. Ive been out of apologetics for a while, but you did a nice job.😊😊
We should all continue daily to examine ourselves as to whether we are in the faith ( belief, trust, and doing what we believe and trust). When we start self seeking instead of seeking God's truth, you start coming up with little delusions to excuse fleshly thinking that leads to false teachings ( because our actions and words teach others through example, and then we misrepresent God. ) Being delusional is how many ended up making offerings on the high places during the era just before the Babylonian captivity. It's scary how easily people would go to "who created God"... because that would insinuate he is not THE MOST HIGH!!!😮 Tread carefully is all I would advise to Justin
You don’t have to question Paul to find other things to question. I tried to hold onto my faith. I really did. But there just was nothing left to hold onto
As Satan, who shone brightly, Justin allowed pride and arrogance to enter his heart. It truly is a lesson to us all. Our heart is deceitful above all things and terribly wicked.
Hi David! Great content as usual! Thank you! This one was a little bit over my head - lol!! Kind of deep - I'm going to check out your other video on this topic too. Changing topics - There's a lot of talk of end times right now, for good reason, and I was looking at all your other content and was wondering if you have a video or information where you've talked about "mystery Babylon"? If you do have something on this topic - will you kindly direct me to it? It's also a confusing topic and I'd like to hear your take on who (what country) you believe it is. Thank you so much!
Thanks! I have not done a teaching on that topic. When it comes to anything in Revelation, though, I highly recommend Craig Keener's NIVAC commentary on Revelation.
To Create is as VERB, thus God as a Verb, is self evident, meaning that God is not just a noun concept but assuming anything as existing, is a verb, not a noun. God is a verb, showing that a noun concept is not sufficient to explain something as moving. If nothing moved, there is no verb , no activity, and no God. But if something did actually move, it merits itself to have a verb quality and so the quality is the God. God is both a Noun and a Verb. The personal realization is evidence , since for us to think we move with the activity of thought, and that idea of itself is a God. Descarte said " I THINK THEREFORE I AM". ( I exist because I am moving with a thought, that is self evident, I exist because I can think ) So in the Bible, Moses asked God what was God's Name ? God said " I AM THAT I AM". So something moved it was experienced, the ability of God to know , or be sentient, is self evidence of something moving, as itself becomes conscious or knowing about the motion in progress. If nothing moved, there would be no God , and we would not function, but if something primarily has to move , then whatever moved, that is God.
There is a limited sense of vision some creatures had, where if anything in the field of vision was so static , it did not move, it would not be perceived by the brain activity as anything existing as meriting as something to be seen. So unless or until an object moved , some early creatures were blind to things which were stable or not moving although the eye was seeing it. God is a VERB nature, not just a Noun concept.
David Wilber's fear & dread of what would happen to Justin Best if he continued on the path he was on has come full circle. It's sad what had happened to him.
David, Shalom. I all ways cringe a little when People state Nature in describing YAH. Is that not a Tov thing todo? Meaning why should I not let it bother I? Sounds like a Tov video to do. Blessing Sir David Praise YAH first and Foremost.
No where ever does any inspired texts claim a universe. Thanks for refuting the claims Justin is making, but two wrongs do not make a right. This comment is only in your mention of “universe”. Although I am not sure what you mean by that term, I am assuming you believe in the current heliocentric cosmology view? Not what the inspired scriptures say about our cosmology? Yah bless David. And praying for us all
Big bang huh? Musta missed that part in Genesis. In my Scriptures it says the Earth was created first (not the sun, which is the copernican model), and was spoken into existence, not exploded into existence. The copernican model of the universe is in direct contradiction to the creation account in Genesis. There is a firmament (visible arch of the sky, according to the Hebrew) above us, within which (our atmosphere) the sun, moon, and stars were placed on day 4 of creation. Above the firmament there is water, according to Scripture. Outer space is old wives tales, my friend.
@@DavidWilberBlog So, honest question my friend, why do you mention a big bang? That is straight out of the Copernican model, which is in direct opposition to Gen. 1. Also, I'm kind of confused about how flat earthers try to make Scripture conform to modern science, as modern science says the earth is a spinning ball? Shalom David.
@@dlsj3602 Flat earthism is a modern scientific "theory" about the natural universe (and very scientifically flawed in my opinion, but that is beside the point). To force the biblical text to conform to this modern theory is a mishandling of the text, just like trying to force it to confirm with Big Bang cosmology would be a mishandling of the text. I often see flat earthers take passages that are obviously meant to be poetic as being dogmatic statements about the shape of the earth, and that is wrong. I do not think the point of Genesis 1 was to teach us how God created the material universe from a scientific standpoint. Like several of the Psalms, Genesis 1 is a theological (and poetic) account of the creation meant to convey theological truths: namely, God is the creator, human beings have intrinsic value and purpose in his plan, etc. The overall structure of the poem describes the creation of the universe as a seven-day temple inauguration. For more on this, you might consider John Walton's "The Lost World of Genesis One."
@@DavidWilberBlog sorry but Flat eartherism is NOT a modern scientific “theory”. I lost all respect I might have considered offering from your conciliatory tone in the video. You advise the person you criticize to get informed when you yourself are obviously deeply ignorant about what a “scientific theory” is. “A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment.” Flat earth is just a claim that fails at providing a model for explaining real world observation. Also the assertion that flat earth is a “modern” idea is blatantly disingenuous since it’s well known that for most of antiquity the earth was believed to be flat. It’s not modern flat earthers that read their model into the Bible, it’s Bible authors who wrote genesis in accordance with the flat earth cosmological model of their time. Consider reading any biblical scholar/historian who is not a theologian in disguise. Mockery is certainly in bad taste but I question your right to complain when you resort to misrepresentation and lies to defend your position.
@@pansepot1490 Settle down. Yikes. I actually agree with you about what a scientific theory is and that flat earthism technically does not count, which is why I wrote "theory" in scare quotes. But I can understand how that wouldn't be clear. As to the rest of your comment, the modern flat earth movement on the internet is indeed a modern movement and their flat earth model is a modern conception. Trust me-I've interacted with modern flat earthers A LOT, and have heard it all. Flat earthers do indeed attempt to read this modern conception of the earth into Scripture, misapplying obvious poetic passages in support. I'm not convinced that the biblical authors conceived of the earth as being flat in some sense. Maybe they did. But in any case, that does not negate my point that the biblical authors were not intending to teach science.
They don't know the argument, don't understand it. Then set up a strawmen and then think they win the argument by knocking it down. That's of course foolish.
Planets stars and galaxy's are things we're aware because we were told of their existence. We "see" stars in the night and sky, but we are told that they are giant balls of gas. Let that sink in.......
Infinite Source flowed into the void in a wave pattern. IS then evolved into God. God created Himself. You don't have to agree, like it, or understand it.
@@DavidWilberBlog No. Infinite Source flowed into the void in a wave pattern. IS then began experimenting, creating shapes, circle, then a square, then a triangle, and more complex shapes. IS eventually formed a section to organize the thinking process for IS, a brain. At that moment IS became God. God then created The Son. God and The Son joined temporarily and became One (because only God can create) to create Spirit. Then God created the 1 billion worlds of heaven which is a simulation but a permanent one. Then God created, and still creates, the other two simulations, the ghost/angel level and the material universe. Heaven is it's own separate sim while the ghost/angel level and the material universe are projected together and occupy the same area.
If whatever begins to exist has a cause, and the universe began to exist, it necessarily follows that the universe has a cause. Once one accepts the conclusion that the universe has a cause, we can discuss what could have caused it. Based on the fact that this cause of the universe must, by definition, be timeless, spaceless, immaterial, and immensely powerful, theists argue that a transcendent mind best accounts for the data. This transcendent mind is what we call God.
@@DavidWilberBlog I'm agnostic on the belief that the universe begins to exist. But even if that were so, which of the thousand of Gods or networks of gods does this prove?
@@tok1879 You're asking the right questions. As a Christian, I admit that the Kalam Cosmological Argument is not enough to prove Christianity true. The Kalam Cosmological Argument only brings us to theism. From there, one would need to consider additional arguments. Personally, I find the arguments based on the historicity of Jesus's resurrection compelling. If Jesus did rise from the dead, it would indicate that the God revealed by Jesus exists. He is the God that Christians would identify as the creator of the universe. If you're open to exploring the topic, I would be happy to recommend some resources.
@@DavidWilberBlog do you care if Christianity is true? Do you not think it's a bit ethnocentric that your confirmed "true" religion happens to be the prevalent one in the society at the time period in which you happen to find yourself? How much time have you dedicated to finding compelling narratives for these other religions?
@@tok1879 I think you and I would both agree that Christianity's prevalence in modern western society is irrelevant to whether or not it is true. I do not think Christianity is true merely because of its prevalence in modern western society. And none of my arguments in support of Christianity rely upon its prevalence in modern western society. I have spent some time examining other religions (e.g., Islam) and have found that the evidence debunks their truth claims. When it comes to Christianity, I have found that the evidence supports its truth claims. I don't deny that everyone has a bias, including me (although I do my best to be objective as much as possible). But a particular religion's prevalence or a particular person's bias is irrelevant to the truth of the matter, as you would agree. So, instead of appealing to such irrelevant matters, wouldn't a better approach be to examine the evidence for Christianity on its own merits?
Justin sure is rather rude if you ask me. Btw, I think you should do more response to Christopher Enoch and whoever that man is that believed YHWH/YeHoWaH is a donkey god.
@@DavidWilberBlog I can tell ya for certain that the dude that called YHWH a donkey god now has an entire video series trying to teach that the apostle Paul is an agent of hell. It’s wild, man. Here’s the link to this train-wreck of a series ua-cam.com/play/PL6QSbo4k8FMOKHnqzRUz9xCQwY0GNofyL.html
@@DavidWilberBlog I didn’t even waste my time watching that series, although what I find interesting is that they like to hate Paul just because he’s a benjaminite, and allegedly the blessing of Benjamin is cursed even though church fathers and others would interpret it positively. I’d like to hear your response to this kind of objection.
I typed my initial comment only a couple minutes into the video, now ad I proceed I am growing more concerned for you and your belief of the cosmos, universe and galaxies so n and so forth. You do understand that all of that is not real? Go back to the creation account define heaven, and look to see where YHWH said he finished creating, we do not live in an ever expanding universe flying at breakneck speeds through an ever expanding galaxy. You, yes you David are the apple of His eye, you are at the center of his creation, the footstool of you will. I am a sure you have heard it all, that’s why I am perplexed that you believe differently than what Yah wrote for us.
@@DavidWilberBlog Welcome, do you have a video or reasons why you do not believe what the scriptures say about where we live? Genuinely curious, thanks David
@@Tracy-Inches Yes, there are a great many reasons why believers who take the Bible seriously reject modern flat earthism. Check out the video from InspiringPhilosophy titled "The Ancient Cosmos: Cultural Context of the Biblical World."
Hey everyone. I hope you'll consider subscribing to my newsletter so you'll never miss an update about new articles, videos, etc. Subscribe here: davidwilber.substack.com/subscribe
Good grief. Justin has gone absolutely delusional.
I always think of king nebukadnetsar…
May he find mercy in his latter end 🙌🏽
Shalom
Let Justin be a sobering warning to all. I truly feel very sorry for him. I have another friend, who was in our fellowship. Young wife and mother, who has completely gone off the rails and is now homeless and doing meth. It's so tragic to see this kind of thing happen. Even in Scripture there are those that began well, but did not end well. Father have mercy.
David, thank you for your video.
Snappy, Justin has surely 'snapped.' It is sobering. I thought he was the real McCoy but have learned some lessons along the way, principally not placing anyone in a high pedestal. We all have feet of clay and are not deserving to be regarded too highly. I was reading about a few of the kings of Israel, who began well but did not end well, very sobering indeed. Yeshua is the only One safe to follow.
It takes some real maturity to respond so calmly and kindly to such intentional mockery. Well done! Continue to show the love and wisdom of Messiah, David. Shabbat shalom!
Shalom and blessings David. I pray you and yours are well brother. Thank you for the latest rebuttal. Seems like Justin has totally lost the plot. Bullet holes in the Bible? I think Justin is firing blanks, as usual!!! Every blessing brother. David (UK)
David , again, appreciating your straight forward remars. Information you supply to your viewers becomes useful in pondering moments of worship and praise.
Shabbat Shalom, David. Thank you for sharing the video. I have a question regarding your stance on creation.
At the 3:18 mark, you reference the Big Bang Theory, giving the impression that you consider it a part of the creation process. Please correct me if my understanding is incorrect.
I’m curious as to how you reconcile the belief in Genesis 1, which states that God created everything in six days, with the belief that the cosmos is billions of years old. These two beliefs seem to be at conflict with each other.
We honor God by resting on the seventh day (Shabbath), as He did after creating everything. However, can we genuinely honor Him if we question the authenticity of the initial part of the Bible? Is it possible to observe Shabbat if we don’t fully trust that God created everything in six literal days (God created something, and then there was evening and morning, which clearly signifies a literal day, not a symbolic one)?
Please understand that this is not an attack, and I do not claim to have all the answers. However, I am eager to seek the truth, and I sense that you are too. I hope my comment will provoke thought and possibly inspire further research into the origins of the Big Bang Theory, which, as I understand it, was planted by Jesuit Priests to cast doubt on God's word
Thanks David for your response. I enjoyed your presentation.
One thing you said reminded me of one of Zeno's paradoxes. I forget what its called, but the one where you can never touch someone because of the infinite "half distances" remaining between two persons. You can never reach the end. Ive been out of apologetics for a while, but you did a nice job.😊😊
The uncaused cause. Good presentation. Thanks David!
We should all continue daily to examine ourselves as to whether we are in the faith ( belief, trust, and doing what we believe and trust). When we start self seeking instead of seeking God's truth, you start coming up with little delusions to excuse fleshly thinking that leads to false teachings ( because our actions and words teach others through example, and then we misrepresent God. ) Being delusional is how many ended up making offerings on the high places during the era just before the Babylonian captivity. It's scary how easily people would go to "who created God"... because that would insinuate he is not THE MOST HIGH!!!😮 Tread carefully is all I would advise to Justin
Justin used to be a believer, then he started questioning paul and eventually moved to Yeshua and then everything else. So sad
You don’t have to question Paul to find other things to question. I tried to hold onto my faith. I really did. But there just was nothing left to hold onto
Wow i use to love justin back in the day videos. What a huge change. How did this hapoen?
As Satan, who shone brightly, Justin allowed pride and arrogance to enter his heart. It truly is a lesson to us all. Our heart is deceitful above all things and terribly wicked.
💯💯💯 Thank you 💯💯💯
Hi David! Great content as usual! Thank you! This one was a little bit over my head - lol!! Kind of deep - I'm going to check out your other video on this topic too.
Changing topics - There's a lot of talk of end times right now, for good reason, and I was looking at all your other content and was wondering if you have a video or information where you've talked about "mystery Babylon"? If you do have something on this topic - will you kindly direct me to it? It's also a confusing topic and I'd like to hear your take on who (what country) you believe it is. Thank you so much!
Thanks! I have not done a teaching on that topic. When it comes to anything in Revelation, though, I highly recommend Craig Keener's NIVAC commentary on Revelation.
@@DavidWilberBlog Thank you!! I will check that out!
Thanks!
Thanks for the support!
To Create is as VERB, thus God as a Verb, is self evident, meaning that God is not just a noun concept but assuming anything as existing, is a verb, not a noun. God is a verb, showing that a noun concept is not sufficient to explain something as moving. If nothing moved, there is no verb , no activity, and no God. But if something did actually move, it merits itself to have a verb quality and so the quality is the God. God is both a Noun and a Verb. The personal realization is evidence , since for us to think we move with the activity of thought, and that idea of itself is a God. Descarte said " I THINK THEREFORE I AM". ( I exist because I am moving with a thought, that is self evident, I exist because I can think ) So in the Bible, Moses asked God what was God's Name ? God said " I AM THAT I AM". So something moved it was experienced, the ability of God to know , or be sentient, is self evidence of something moving, as itself becomes conscious or knowing about the motion in progress. If nothing moved, there would be no God , and we would not function, but if something primarily has to move , then whatever moved, that is God.
There is a limited sense of vision some creatures had, where if anything in the field of vision was so static , it did not move, it would not be perceived by the brain activity as anything existing as meriting as something to be seen. So unless or until an object moved , some early creatures were blind to things which were stable or not moving although the eye was seeing it. God is a VERB nature, not just a Noun concept.
Are you saying that there was a big bang just need to make sure I heard you right?
David Wilber's fear & dread of what would happen to Justin Best if he continued on the path he was on has come full circle. It's sad what had happened to him.
David, Shalom. I all ways cringe a little when People state Nature in describing YAH. Is that not a Tov thing todo? Meaning why should I not let it bother I? Sounds like a Tov video to do.
Blessing Sir David
Praise YAH first and Foremost.
No where ever does any inspired texts claim a universe. Thanks for refuting the claims Justin is making, but two wrongs do not make a right.
This comment is only in your mention of “universe”. Although I am not sure what you mean by that term, I am assuming you believe in the current heliocentric cosmology view?
Not what the inspired scriptures say about our cosmology?
Yah bless David.
And praying for us all
his (bulletholes) message would be much easier to listen to if he was a lot kinder and gentle. It would make me more receptive to what he has to say.
Big bang huh? Musta missed that part in Genesis. In my Scriptures it says the Earth was created first (not the sun, which is the copernican model), and was spoken into existence, not exploded into existence.
The copernican model of the universe is in direct contradiction to the creation account in Genesis. There is a firmament (visible arch of the sky, according to the Hebrew) above us, within which (our atmosphere) the sun, moon, and stars were placed on day 4 of creation. Above the firmament there is water, according to Scripture.
Outer space is old wives tales, my friend.
Unlike flat earthers, I refuse to force the biblical text to conform to modern science. I think that approach is a mishandling of Scripture.
@@DavidWilberBlog So, honest question my friend, why do you mention a big bang? That is straight out of the Copernican model, which is in direct opposition to Gen. 1.
Also, I'm kind of confused about how flat earthers try to make Scripture conform to modern science, as modern science says the earth is a spinning ball? Shalom David.
@@dlsj3602 Flat earthism is a modern scientific "theory" about the natural universe (and very scientifically flawed in my opinion, but that is beside the point). To force the biblical text to conform to this modern theory is a mishandling of the text, just like trying to force it to confirm with Big Bang cosmology would be a mishandling of the text. I often see flat earthers take passages that are obviously meant to be poetic as being dogmatic statements about the shape of the earth, and that is wrong. I do not think the point of Genesis 1 was to teach us how God created the material universe from a scientific standpoint. Like several of the Psalms, Genesis 1 is a theological (and poetic) account of the creation meant to convey theological truths: namely, God is the creator, human beings have intrinsic value and purpose in his plan, etc. The overall structure of the poem describes the creation of the universe as a seven-day temple inauguration. For more on this, you might consider John Walton's "The Lost World of Genesis One."
@@DavidWilberBlog sorry but Flat eartherism is NOT a modern scientific “theory”. I lost all respect I might have considered offering from your conciliatory tone in the video. You advise the person you criticize to get informed when you yourself are obviously deeply ignorant about what a “scientific theory” is.
“A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment.” Flat earth is just a claim that fails at providing a model for explaining real world observation.
Also the assertion that flat earth is a “modern” idea is blatantly disingenuous since it’s well known that for most of antiquity the earth was believed to be flat. It’s not modern flat earthers that read their model into the Bible, it’s Bible authors who wrote genesis in accordance with the flat earth cosmological model of their time. Consider reading any biblical scholar/historian who is not a theologian in disguise.
Mockery is certainly in bad taste but I question your right to complain when you resort to misrepresentation and lies to defend your position.
@@pansepot1490 Settle down. Yikes. I actually agree with you about what a scientific theory is and that flat earthism technically does not count, which is why I wrote "theory" in scare quotes. But I can understand how that wouldn't be clear. As to the rest of your comment, the modern flat earth movement on the internet is indeed a modern movement and their flat earth model is a modern conception. Trust me-I've interacted with modern flat earthers A LOT, and have heard it all. Flat earthers do indeed attempt to read this modern conception of the earth into Scripture, misapplying obvious poetic passages in support. I'm not convinced that the biblical authors conceived of the earth as being flat in some sense. Maybe they did. But in any case, that does not negate my point that the biblical authors were not intending to teach science.
So you didn't go into actual scripture a single time.... although I ultimately agree with you
119's Kung-Fu is extraordinary!
They don't know the argument, don't understand it. Then set up a strawmen and then think they win the argument by knocking it down. That's of course foolish.
Planets stars and galaxy's are things we're aware because we were told of their existence. We "see" stars in the night and sky, but we are told that they are giant balls of gas. Let that sink in.......
Nothing before something....
Infinite Source flowed into the void in a wave pattern. IS then evolved into God. God created Himself.
You don't have to agree, like it, or understand it.
"God created Himself." That is logically incoherent. For that to be possible, God would have to have existed before he existed.
@@DavidWilberBlog Which came first, the chicken or the egg? According to your "logic" there can't be any chickens or eggs.
Dumbast.
@@twelvestitches984 I guess I'm just confused. Are you saying God cannot exist unless the universe, which God created, exists before God?
@@DavidWilberBlog No. Infinite Source flowed into the void in a wave pattern. IS then began experimenting, creating shapes, circle, then a square, then a triangle, and more complex shapes. IS eventually formed a section to organize the thinking process for IS, a brain. At that moment IS became God.
God then created The Son. God and The Son joined temporarily and became One (because only God can create) to create Spirit. Then God created the 1 billion worlds of heaven which is a simulation but a permanent one. Then God created, and still creates, the other two simulations, the ghost/angel level and the material universe. Heaven is it's own separate sim while the ghost/angel level and the material universe are projected together and occupy the same area.
So what exactly was the proof for God here?
If whatever begins to exist has a cause, and the universe began to exist, it necessarily follows that the universe has a cause. Once one accepts the conclusion that the universe has a cause, we can discuss what could have caused it. Based on the fact that this cause of the universe must, by definition, be timeless, spaceless, immaterial, and immensely powerful, theists argue that a transcendent mind best accounts for the data. This transcendent mind is what we call God.
@@DavidWilberBlog I'm agnostic on the belief that the universe begins to exist. But even if that were so, which of the thousand of Gods or networks of gods does this prove?
@@tok1879 You're asking the right questions. As a Christian, I admit that the Kalam Cosmological Argument is not enough to prove Christianity true. The Kalam Cosmological Argument only brings us to theism. From there, one would need to consider additional arguments. Personally, I find the arguments based on the historicity of Jesus's resurrection compelling. If Jesus did rise from the dead, it would indicate that the God revealed by Jesus exists. He is the God that Christians would identify as the creator of the universe. If you're open to exploring the topic, I would be happy to recommend some resources.
@@DavidWilberBlog do you care if Christianity is true?
Do you not think it's a bit ethnocentric that your confirmed "true" religion happens to be the prevalent one in the society at the time period in which you happen to find yourself?
How much time have you dedicated to finding compelling narratives for these other religions?
@@tok1879 I think you and I would both agree that Christianity's prevalence in modern western society is irrelevant to whether or not it is true. I do not think Christianity is true merely because of its prevalence in modern western society. And none of my arguments in support of Christianity rely upon its prevalence in modern western society. I have spent some time examining other religions (e.g., Islam) and have found that the evidence debunks their truth claims. When it comes to Christianity, I have found that the evidence supports its truth claims. I don't deny that everyone has a bias, including me (although I do my best to be objective as much as possible). But a particular religion's prevalence or a particular person's bias is irrelevant to the truth of the matter, as you would agree. So, instead of appealing to such irrelevant matters, wouldn't a better approach be to examine the evidence for Christianity on its own merits?
Justin sure is rather rude if you ask me.
Btw, I think you should do more response to Christopher Enoch and whoever that man is that believed YHWH/YeHoWaH is a donkey god.
It's been a while since I've seen their content pop up in my TikTok feed, but I'll check in to see what crazy things they're saying these days.
@@DavidWilberBlog I can tell ya for certain that the dude that called YHWH a donkey god now has an entire video series trying to teach that the apostle Paul is an agent of hell. It’s wild, man.
Here’s the link to this train-wreck of a series ua-cam.com/play/PL6QSbo4k8FMOKHnqzRUz9xCQwY0GNofyL.html
Yikes. Watched the first few minutes of one of the videos. What utter nonsense!
@@DavidWilberBlog I didn’t even waste my time watching that series, although what I find interesting is that they like to hate Paul just because he’s a benjaminite, and allegedly the blessing of Benjamin is cursed even though church fathers and others would interpret it positively. I’d like to hear your response to this kind of objection.
Checkmate…
Tell me you know literally nothing about basic Christian worldview without telling me.
I typed my initial comment only a couple minutes into the video, now ad I proceed I am growing more concerned for you and your belief of the cosmos, universe and galaxies so n and so forth. You do understand that all of that is not real? Go back to the creation account define heaven, and look to see where YHWH said he finished creating, we do not live in an ever expanding universe flying at breakneck speeds through an ever expanding galaxy. You, yes you David are the apple of His eye, you are at the center of his creation, the footstool of you will. I am a sure you have heard it all, that’s why I am perplexed that you believe differently than what Yah wrote for us.
Thanks for the comment. I simply disagree with the notion that Scripture compels us to adopt modern flat earthism.
@@DavidWilberBlog
Welcome, do you have a video or reasons why you do not believe what the scriptures say about where we live? Genuinely curious, thanks David
@@Tracy-Inches Yes, there are a great many reasons why believers who take the Bible seriously reject modern flat earthism. Check out the video from InspiringPhilosophy titled "The Ancient Cosmos: Cultural Context of the Biblical World."
She is upset cuz she cant shave hair off her face