Ironically, Alex makes a moral claim to say that it is "wrong" for God to do/command something be done. By what epistemological standard is he making this claim to morality? In other words, who is Alex (or anyone, really) to criticize the morality of the One who created morality to begin with?
Yes, buuuut, you can actually use a Christian ethic to judge old testament passages etc. to argue for inconsistency in the biblical ethics / inconsistencies in the character of God. So their points aren't mute just because they don't have their own ethics to judge the Bible by. Their points ARE mute however, if they have problems with biblical ethics on the basis of their own moral judgements. That's where it becomes senseless.
That's your subjective opinion on the origin of morality. From the secular standpoint, morality's origin is simply a product of society, i.e., a social construct. Therefore, if we want to claim that something that your god did is immoral, we can. And we back it up using the basis on which morality has always been determined: well-being. If Christians would like to claim an objective moral standard established by a supernatural being, they must also consider the hypocrisy of the atrocities condoned and committed by the Christian god and those who serve him. If you claim that morality came from your god, there's no evidence to back that up, nor is there any historical evidence that the origin of morality is your specific supernatural deity, which is essentially a construct created by humans. Another note: be careful to make claims of certainty about the supernatural and reality. You're unknowingly digging yourself a hole by creating a situation in which you'll need some empirical basis to justify your claim. If you choose to take the agnostic position, that's fine, but it doesn't seem like you are. Alex is a moral relativist; this doesn't even apply to his worldview. He's saying it's wrong from the standpoint of OUR culture. So, something that would've been perfectly acceptable in the culture 2000 years ago is unacceptable now. And this would be another point against the existence of an objective moral standard established by a supernatural being. However, he can still say that things are wrong based on the principle of human well-being and how actions affect well-being. Realistically, I don't buy that religious people believe that morality is objective. Christians, in particular, will attempt to find any excuse for the genocides encouraged by god or something like slavery, which the Christian god explicitly endorses. These attempts at trying to find any excuse for god's extreme behavior and using appeals to ignorance to justify or neutralize your god's actions must be a form of cognitive dissonance, perhaps as a result of religious indoctrination.
easy, Jesus says the law has now been written on our heart which we all know because it’s true. This is called our conscience. Alex clearly recognizes and gives credence to his conscience in these religious discussions. This is the consciousness our Christian history has given the new world and it is valid.
One of the most important things we need to actually be a Christian is humility. I work backwards on these types of issues from the resurrection of Jesus. If Jesus rose from the dead, then he was who he says he was. If Jesus was God in the flesh, Jesus demonstrates Gods personality and qualities to us. We absolutely do have historical evidence to back the resurrection. Now, if I don't understand something in the old testament like this, or have a problem with it, I will definitely seek answers, but I have the humility to know that in the end, God created me and my mind, and so who am I to Judge the living God, in whom my own moral compass comes from. It's possible that in my mind, something seems "wrong", but really, I simply may not have all of the answers or I do not understand the bigger picture. God is God and he does as he sees fit. I don't have a problem with not knowing everything because I know the kindness and friendship of Jesus and what he did for me. I think we know just enough though to at least partially understand why God did away with these people at this particular time. Innocent children die because death is a consequence of sin. The parents were sinning whether the children were or not. When a parent does something wrong, it can have horrific consequences for the children. The wages of sin is death, but if you look at the bigger picture, yes there were terrible things that happened in the past, but look what God did about sin. God made a way for sin to be done away with.
These are truly difficult passages of scripture to digest. I wish Cliff would have mentioned that Gods justice was also levied against the very people who escaped bondage in Egypt. Only Caleb and Joseph and kids survived that generation. God allowed all those Hebrews to die by disease and snakes, etc because of their unbelief. Wild stuff
@@charliescott9098 yeah, there is a few things he could if said in response. For example before these incidents we have the story of balak and balaam where in the end God promises to Curse anyone who curses his people and to bless anyone who blesses his people. He is a God of his word, so when people cursed his people he had to act on his word. Another thing worth mentioning is that when the Israelites went into war it was in obedience to God and they went in rather small numbers agains whole nations to emphasise that this is Gods Judgement on these nations for their wickedness and opposition to his chosen people.
It's not hard to digest once you realize how sinful humans are. Yes. Even babies. Wages for sin is death. Yet God is doing everything He can to save us. He has sent us his own son to die for us because that's how big his love for us is. Alex cannot fathom the nature of God comparing him to mere evil tyrants of this world. Also God doesn't kill. He moves people from one place to another. From earth to heaven or hell. Thinking it's just a mere murder demonstrates a further lack of understanding of God's nature.
@@ideapulse-i2i There are no innocents. There were demons all over the place (molech and the baals) and those communities were in communication with them. This is why God's orders were primarily to make them leave, even the animals.
I think we, as human beings, have become entitled. We have no right to do anything, not even to be alive. We are PRIVILEGED to be alive and created. If God decides to kill me tomorrow, He has every right to do so because at the end of the day I am His creation. We should be thankful to be alive instead of questioning His decisions. We don't know anything, He knows everything. Even if it is difficult to understand, we must remember that we are not God. We should humble ourselves and remember that ultimately He gave us eternal life, purely out of grace, when we don't even deserve to be alive for one day.
@@mcsah909 So brilliantly said, bravo 👏 I'd also add one more point: If God chooses to end a life, the life He gave in the first place, He is not committing "murder" or "killing" the person, He is simply moving them from one place to another. From this world to Heaven, or if the individual so chooses, a state of separation from God i.e. Hell. Whenever He does this, it is always good because God defines good. He IS goodness and morality personified. He knows what He is doing, He sees the whole picture, the beginning, middle and end. We, by comparison, see nothing. God bless you all ✝️✝️✝️
Well put. This response is exactly what Alex and his audience should hear, only in a longer, hour-long format to flesh out the idea. I think Alex probably already understands this, but he has an audience he needs to fulfil. He may hold back from saying it openly because he risks being misunderstood, with some people seeing it as justifying “God’s evil” and branding him as someone who condones it. This has happened to others, like William Lane Craig, who have been misinterpreted by people lacking in wisdom who lean on their own understanding, interpreting complex ideas as “proof” that these thinkers are evil themselves, and so are able to accept or justify God's ''evil''.
I agree. Most non-believers have no grasp of a Heaven or afterlife, so they have a difficult time wrapping their heads around such a simple concept. It’s definitely sad that the innocent people had to go, but they’re going to a place where there’s no suffering at all, but eternal joy and peace. Compare that to where they were before, where they most likely suffered terribly due to the evil that was around them.
Did we choose to be alive? No. But to say we have no rights is to have a low view of humanity. We are made, according to Christian ethos, in Gods image. This gives us certain rights. Now these rights can be overcome by our own actions in accordance with justice but that’s a far cry from having no rights.
I think it’s hard for us to wrap our heads around the fact that God is the author of life so it’s not immoral for him to end life since it objectively belongs to him. We kind of see this issue through our mortal human lens.
Alex is one of the only atheists I watch, I became born again four years ago, I was never an atheist but I wasn’t convinced of God coming in flesh years ago like I am today. I watch Alex because I am pleasantly surprised he has Christians on and can have a normal conversation, without it getting heated and he doesn’t use the normal stupid questions or answers most atheists use, the beginner dumb questions that are easily answered with a quick search. I will say I been praying for him to understand and know Jesus and I have zero doubt that God will use him, I think he is searching for truth and all truth comes from God so if you are seeking than you will find and it will give God all the more glory when he opens someone like Alex’s eyes to the truth, gives him faith because all his atheist followers will realize the person they been following and convinced them, God wasn’t real, was wrong.
@waldo..8021 it's not something to will, he might have reached out and you just can't notice him. God can manifest through far more than a warm fuzzy feeling during prayer.
What if God is actually showing mercy to the children? Knowing that the next generations would continue the evil and ultimately face Hell, has them killed which sends them to Heaven.
“The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart: and merciful men are taken away, none considering that the righteous is taken away from the evil to come. He shall enter into peace: they shall rest in their beds, each one walking in his uprightness.” Isaiah 57:1-2 KJV
@@zebpettyninja We do have a will whilst we're living but we do not decide our own fate or choose the timing of our own death. That is something we do not have any will over.
14:00 one thing I think Alex is missing here is that numbers can be symbolic in the Bible. 12 especially is a specific and significant number throughout the Bible. (12 tribes of Israel, 12 disciples, 12 baskets of bread, etc) 12 often represents completion or a divine conclusion. So saying 12,000 fell could really be saying that God was taking part in the defeat of Ai and that this was a definitive defeat. Not that it’s a random, arbitrary number.
God gave the biggest answer when asked by Abraham concerning Sodom and Gomorrah, if you find 10 righteous will you destroy the city's and God answers "I will not destroy it for 10 sake. And the only one's that survive were lot and his daughters. God's mercy concerning wicked nations have limits we would be mindful to heed that giving the wickedness and perversenesd we are allowing in this nation we are allowing in the name of tolerance.
@@Kenpachi_White707 Empathy is subjective, empathy can be underserving and logic is limited by bias and presuppositions... your empathy & logic isn't infallible so it can't describe the world. So given these reasons, why do we ought to not see as your basis for morality as arbitrary.
@ your morality is subjective. But God is the subject. Your empathy and logic are flawed because you base it on something you can prove, while using your imperfect judgement to say he’s perfect. Empathy and logic are built on evidence. Where as your belief is, “I like this, therefore it’s true”. Not taking into account other views. You can’t have logic because your believe DEMANDS you have faith, instead of evidence. You can’t have empathy because “gods will be done” not yours. You’re just claiming it’s true because you like it, and you don’t challenge your faith, because you literally can’t.
God is not only taken the lives of woman and children in the old testament, God has taken all lives that has existed he gonna takes your too, HE IS God.
Thanks again for another great show. It's been hard out here struggling with wondering if I am chosing and voting right...I'm so grateful for people like you willing to open discussions and be open and honest about them. 🕊️ ❤️ ✝️
“In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. he is always in alliance with the Despot abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own. it is easier to acquire wealth and power by this combination than by deserving them: and to effect this they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man, into mystery & jargon unintelligible to all mankind & therefore the safer engine for their purposes.” - Thomas Jefferson “Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise.... During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution.” James Madison “All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.” Thomas Paine “When a Religion is good, I conceive that it will support itself; and when it cannot support itself, and God does not take care to support, so that its Professors are oblig’d to call for the help of the Civil Power, ’tis a Sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one.” Benjamin Franklin "We think ourselves possessed, or at least we boast that we are so, of Liberty of conscience on all subjects, and of the right of free inquiry and private judgment, in all cases, and yet how far are we from these exalted privileges in fact. There exists I believe throughout the whole Christian world a law which makes it blasphemy to deny or to doubt the divine inspiration of all the books of the old and new Testaments from Genesis to Revelations...in America it is not much better, even in our Massachusetts…A law was made in the latter end of the last century repealing the cruel punishments of the former laws but substituting fine and imprisonment upon all those blasphemers upon any book of the old Testament or new...I think such laws a great embarassment, great obstructions to the improvement of the human mind. Books that cannot bear examination certainly ought not to be established as divine inspiration by penal laws. The substance and essence of Christianity as I understand it is eternal and unchangeable and will bear examination forever but it has been mixed with extraneous ingredients, which I think will not bear examination and they ought to be separated." - John Adams “I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do, because I notice it always coincides with their own desires.” Susan B. Anthony “With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil - that takes religion.” - Steven Weinberg
The only reason Christians have a problem with these types of questions is because they have such a low view of God's sovereignty. He's the source and sustainer of all being, and the ultimate cause of all things. Nothing happens apart from His permissive will and purpose. This means literally every person who ever lived and died did so as an extension of His will. It doesn't matter if you die on the battlefield or from cancer or in a car crash, your time of death has been appointed before you were even born. God used the nation of Israel as His chosen instrument to pour out His wrath on a wicked and accursed people group in order to bring about an ultimate good that would eventually bless all nations and redeem mankind to the Creator. Unbelievers pretend to concede a hypothetical existence of this one true God while simultaneously maintaining an air of moral superiority over Him. If this being exists then by definition you have no say in what is right or wrong, good or bad. It's absurd to try and drag Him into a court of flawed human morality and judge Him by a standard lower than Himself.
Dr Turek said it best, that people are made at God for not intervening when the innocent are killed by the evil... but they condemned God when He did (Cannan Conquest).
We aren’t owed anything by God. That is how I understand things such as a child dying from disease. We aren’t owed healing or a long life. It is all a gift and if God decided for us to die at any point in any way I don’t think we should have a problem.
That wasn’t the question though, was the killings of innocent civilians including women and children justified? And if so, explain logically how it was justified?
@@nellyc3669I think the point is that they weren't innocent. Women and men are equal. When women are cursing God and practicing unrepentant sin they get to be held accountable just like the men. The entire people group was evil
Cliffe is great with this stuff more often then not. Where i think he & most Christians fail to make sense of genocide & racial issues of the Bible comes with the failure to recognize Gen 6, Exodus, Samuel 2, etc. There was a corruption of the creation & its remnants continued after the flood. God needed a pure bloodline to send his son, & he needed a people to conquer & destroy the remaining corrupt seed of the fallen angels. They were never meant to exist & humanity would not have survived without their destruction. After they were gone he sent Jesus to give us all a path to sanctification. His word is written on our hearts, so morality is spiritual not conscious. Our consciousness is subject to our flesh, our spirit is directly opposed to our flesh. You can't read Samuel 2 especially without understanding they were fighting Giants. Enoch & Jasher give an understanding that leaves no room for these contradictions. There was no need to destroy the entire population, just the population of nephlium that survived the flood. It's time to stand on the real story & a genetic corruption is undoubtedly part of this book. Too many Christians will believe the Goliath story, but most never read about his 4 brothers who were also giants, the Giants of their home town of Goth, etc. David collected 5 stones, not for Goliath, but his 4 other brothers as well. He thought he would have to kill all of them, but the other 4 fled. It is all in the text, just rarely taught.
I've never "liked" that part of the Bible, but its always made strategic sense. God constantly warned the Israelites not to marry into other nations or be otherwise influenced into worshiping false gods. He knew this was a weakness for them and instructed them to remove to its main causes. Not to mention, it's hard for people to relatiate for you taking their home when theyre dead...
The Gaza situation and Oct 7 did give me new perspective on these passages. Yes, I think “haram” means destroyed as a people group, a national identity. They were commanded to “drive out” and then “destroy.” So, if they left first, they didn’t have to be destroyed as individuals. Those who remained were to be destroyed, however. Does that break God’s heart? Yes! But when I see the mess Israel is in right now, I get why God saw that as necessary in that day and age. If there were ten righteous, God wouldn’t have destroyed S n G. I think this holds true for the Canaanites. There were not 10 righteous in S n G. But God did pull the 4 “righteous” (who were not even very righteous) out of S n G. Out of Jericho we know HE saved Rahab and her family just on the bare minimum of faith. Fear. We don’t know who else he pulled out of the Canaanite cities because they weren’t just as evil as they could be. The Gibeonites were spared (even through deceit) because they also feared Israel. And later, God tells David to avenge and protect them. Now, I think David misstepped by again taking innocent life in that attempted obedience because he forgot to ask God just how he should do that. As Joshua failed to ask God when he made the covenant with them in the first place. Regardless, there were Canaanites spared, seemingly by God’s exception because they weren’t horrifically evil. But the vast majority of Canaanites were. We know that. Women, too. There’s no reason God should have made an exception for women just because they were women. However, we do think God should have made an exception for children. They’re not responsible in the same way. And I agree with Cliff that their lack of responsibility probably means they did go to God’s presence on their deaths. But when I think of the practical problems of trying to spare the children, I can see why God found these orders necessary. I see the practical problems of trying to spare the children in Israel’s war with Gaza right now. For one thing, Hamas is very willing to sacrifice their own children just to make Israel look back, so they make their bases in or under schools and hospitals. If Israel right now wiped out every adult Gazan, but spared the children, what would become of those children? And Israel would have the same situation in a few years. The children are taught from Day 1 to hate Israel already. They would grow up to be engaged in constant warfare. As we see. And as did happen in ancient Israel because Israel wasn’t obedient to God’s commands of destruction. Couple more things: obviously, I would say Bibi wouldn’t be justified if he said, “But God told me to commit g-cide against Gaza.” And I certainly don’t think that should be Israel’s solution right now. I don’t know Israel’s solution. I don’t think there is one till Jesus comes back. And certainly, I don’t think that g-cide or anything beyond just war is being perpetrated by Israel. And yet, children are dying. Given that time and place and reason, I can understand why God’s judgement did look like what we could call g-cide. Though it was really evil-cide. The goal was eradicating that level of evil. Second, why didn’t God judge Israel by the same standards? He did. They very much came under judgment when they turned completely foul and starting sacrificing children. He didn’t wipe them out completely because there was always a lot more than 10 righteous. I don’t think Alex has really grappled with how horrifically evil Canaanite culture was. Why didn’t God send them a prophet? If it would have worked, I believe he would have. Look at Jonah and Nineveh. And they knew enough to know better without a prophet. Word of the Egyptian plagues and the Red Sea had got around. Rahab didn’t have a prophet. She just believed the evening news, and that was enough to save her. Finally, if Bibi said, “God had commanded me to wipe out Gaza,” none of us would believe him or think he should, and rightly so. If Bibi was seeing Red Seas split and rocks gushing water, I might be tempted to believe him if he said what God had commanded. I do acknowledge God’s right to take life-even children’s life-as the giver and maker of life. There was good reason to believe that Moses and Joshua really were hearing from God and had commanded these very sad but necessary commands. PS: I don’t think it was hyperbole when Saul was told to wipe out Amalek by the fact that Samuel knew he hadn’t obeyed by the bleating of sheep in his ears. Seems pretty literal. So I don’t know that the wipe out with specific descriptors was just God exaggerating. And these are very tough, tough passages. I just go back to, “I don’t fully understand them, God has the right to take life, and these leaders really did hear from God and gave convincing evidence that did. And no, no nation today is being commanded to genocide. Though just war may still sadly but necessarily take the lives of children. They are often a casualty of war.”
The best question Alex asked was "Do you believe that innocent children were killed by the Israelites on the command of God?". Cliffe knows the truth but dodges the question by talking about Israeli's bombing Palestinians.
Glad to see these conversations happening. I believe the core of these questions is to understand the nature of The Father. At the end of the day we are called to a relationship with this person so the question is who are you then...
You should check out a guy by the name of David K Bernard. I listened to his answer on this tough question, and it was by far the best I have ever heard.
Deuteronomy 29:29 The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may follow all the words of this law. We should trust in God’s sovereignty and be OK with not knowing everything.
Alex has seen your videos! He talks about how some Christians get frustrated with him for mentioning the apocrypha books like if he is obsessed with them ! And that’s you, Ruslan, verbatim!
@@Alien1375 The commandment "Thou shalt not kill," found in the Bible, actually originates from the Hebrew word ratsach, which is more accurately translated as "murder" in the context of the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 5:17). This distinction is important for understanding the ancient context in which the commandment was given, as "murder" specifically refers to the unlawful, intentional killing of another person, rather than a broad prohibition on all forms of killing. In ancient Israelite society, where these laws originated, there was a legal system in place that recognized different types of killing, such as accidental or defensive killing, and established the difference between murder and other acts of violence. For example, in cases of accidental killing, cities of refuge were provided to protect the person responsible from vengeance, demonstrating that not all killing was seen as equally punishable (Numbers 35:9-15). Furthermore, the Israelites were involved in wars sanctioned by their society and leaders, so the commandment was not seen as a blanket prohibition on all taking of life but rather a moral law against wrongful, premeditated violence against others. This interpretation has been reflected over the centuries in Christian and Jewish ethics, where "Thou shalt not murder" is generally seen as a commandment against intentional harm to innocent individuals rather than a total pacifist stance. The phrase’s interpretation has also been central to debates on ethical topics like capital punishment, self-defense, and just war, as various religious and legal traditions work to balance the commandment's original intent with contemporary moral issues.
I think the “utility” of these sorts of questions for an atheist is to see the integrity of God’s character. I say utility in quotes because, most of what I’ve seen, isn’t actually trying to know the character of God but to disprove His character as a way to undermine His existence. I think if someone is truly trying to know the character of God they’ve already presupposed His existence but just don’t know Who He is. Therefore, I would imagine someone considering prayer, in that context, as attempt to know Him.
@Ruslan I find the theory surrounding the people the Israelites were commanded to destroy as being remnants of the Nehfelim to be interesting and a plausible explanation. Also interesting that the Caananites were descendants of Ham who along with his descendants was cursed by Noah.
Jonah was sent to the Ninevites, who worshipped a fish headed god. They saw Jonah get spit up by a whale, they took his warnings seriously, repented & changed their ways, and avoided destruction. It stands to reason similar messages were sent to these other people groups - communicating in ways they would understand. God tends to meet people where they are. The Bible is not a complete record of history. Plenty of things happened that aren't recorded in the Bible. Just because we don't have a record of the messages being delivered, doesn't mean they weren't.
It seems like every Christian scholar falls into Alex's trap on this topic. Every one ends up looking like monsters rather than doubling down that our idea of goodness is like filthy rags compared to God. We insist on judging God based on our understanding as though we have the right to do so or have any understanding of what that word even means.
@@sethdunn8455 Just so I'm clear on your statement, you think humanity is worthy and has the right to judge God? If so, by what metrics? Who's the standard we judge him against?
Something that I haven't seen pointed out is that this discussion is tying into the broader discussion of their entire podcast episode where Alex is pointing out the seemingly contradictory differences between the God that Jesus proclaims (the all loving, merciful deity) and the YHWH of the Old Testament. Alex is asking the hard questions of Cliff and Stuart to find the bridge between the two, as even first and second century Christians struggled with this very question. The Gnostics are the biggest example of a group trying to reconcile this concern between the gospels and the Old Testament.
I also saw a video from the BibleProject the other day that was very helpful. They pointed out that the Bible is a book of wisdom, but in the weft, we treat all information like it’s Google or an encyclopedia or a dictionary where you just find what you need and then you close it and go back. We see this because we proof protect everything well there’s just one verse so you can’t do this thing that you’re doing right now. Even our emphasis on systematic theology, tend to act and treat the Bible in a place to find out about certain topics. But if you view it as a piece of wisdom, then trying to teach you who God is what that means for you and then it gives you a framework. It has some rules. It has some tangible things. However, most of it is going to be giving you a framework so that you can engage in whatever comes across in your world.
The Bible teaches us exactly what God wanted us to know about His story. Which is to say History. As it says about Jesus, “I suppose the whole world could not contain a book about the good works and miracles Jesus had performed.” I don’t see why just because some cannot see the answer to a question they have, discounts the whole biblical story as truth. It never claimed to have the answers of all the world’s questions. It is exactly as needed. Take Gods word for what it is, Gods word. Word is bond. Gods word is the most reliable word of any written work in all of creation. That is only second unto The Book of Life… coming soon to a consciousness near you.
Wah there was a butchering of the text on O' Connor's side on Joshua, the combattant of Ai were not fleeing when they went to the wilderness, the Israelite faked a defeat and fleed the battle, then the Ai king called more people from the city to pursue them to finish them off but it was a trap. So it is not that they chased after them even as they fleed to kill them, they were the one being chased after in the wilderness. In a nutshell without settling the hyperbole debate, there is still a bit of misrepresentation there i think😅
let's not forget that idolatry was punishable by death in the OT, so God definitely is inline with His judgement in judging the other inhabitants of the land. And the book of Jonah shows us that God always seeks that people repent.
Here was the comment I left on that video: Two things: 1. Granting the premise that God directly commanded the killing of children, and it wasn't hyperbole... 1. A) it isn't equivalent to what the Canaanites were doing. Because the Canaanites would have continued generation after generation, torturously murdering their children. Whereas, tragic though it would have been, the Israelites would have taken everybody out once, ending generations of torturous murder of children. 1. B) any atheist who has argued abortion is even sometimes justified, doesn't get to be taken seriously here. Alex claims that if this isn't evil, nothing is. Well a truer statement is, if abortion isn't evil, nothing is. But just imagine the arrogance (not accusing Alex, only those who have argued for abortion), "I'm the moral arbiter, I am so good, and so rational, I can determine when taking the life of a child is justified for the good. But not God. How dare the creator of the universe make such a determination." It's just ridiculous. 2. The point about these cities actually being military bases is key. Michael Jones has pointed this out, as well as Gavin Ortlund: the cities where God is commanding the Israelites to go and wage war, ARE NOT cities like we think, where families are just living their lives. These were military bases. And so IF women and children were in fact there, they would have been being used as shields, much like Hamas does today with their citizens. But the fact is Israel needs to destroy Hamas. Yes, they do their best to mitigate civilian casualties. But they can't fail to destroy Hamas, in the pursuit of zero civilian casualties. They need to destroy Hamas period, for the best life for everyone going forward. And so what I'm about to say is perhaps speculation, but it seems reasonable... This is the same thing going on in the Old Testament. God is commanding that everyone in the military bases be taken out. And the extremeness of the command is to prevent the Israelites from failing to take out the enemy due to the enemy hiding behind its weaker and more innocent civilians.
@Bless God Studios, I understand your point about judging past actions by today’s moral standards, and in most cases, that’s valid. But when it comes to God - who is all-knowing - it’s different. As a Christian, I agree with Alex that this issue is troubling and deserves a thoughtful response. For me, I come to terms with these difficult passages by recognizing that my understanding is limited. I’m not all-knowing, so I can’t fully grasp the consequences if God had acted differently in those situations. I trust that God, with His perfect wisdom, knew the broader impact of His judgments and acted accordingly. But I can see how, to someone new to the faith, that could sound naive or unsatisfying. As Christians, I think we owe it to others to seek out better ways to engage with these difficult questions rather than avoiding or dismissing them.
_"I trust that God, with His perfect wisdom, knew the broader impact of His judgments"_ How can God have perfect wisdom, knowledge, and judgement if after destroying mankind in a flood he ended up 'regretting' it?
@@cardcounter21 Great question! God was deeply grieved by the extent of human sin, and His “regret” can be understood as a sorrow over the brokenness of creation rather than a regret in the sense of making a mistake. His decision to judge the world with a flood is portrayed as an act of justice to address humanity's corruption, while His sorrow reveals His compassion.
@@cyphos84 _"Great question!"_ Have you been taking lessons from Sean McDowell? _"His “regret” can be understood as a sorrow over the brokenness of creation rather than a regret in the sense of making a mistake"_ God may well have regretted the brokenness of creation (another mistake?), but in this instance he is regretting the decision to commit mass genocide to a point where he promises he will NEVER do it again (well, at least not until the end times when he apparently breaks this promise by again destroying mankind). Putting the rainbow in the sky wasn't anything to do with the brokenness of mankind but a symbolic promise to never commit such a drastic act again! So this 'regret' is definitely linked to Gods genocide action and not something else!
@@cardcounter21why are you being so condescending? This person is trying to answer your question and you’re being rude 😂 secondly God didn’t regret anything the word regret is not even in the text in Genesis 6:6 The Lord was “sorry” he had made the current creation. “Sorry” is the word nāḥam meaning: be sorry, rue, suffer grief, repent, of one's own doings and he was grieving in his heart which is also what Genesis 6:6 said. The Lord was grieving because of the corruption of his creation and how bad they were. That person you’re replying to is correct.
@@equipped.thepodcast8038 I wasn't being condescending I was just pointing out that Sean McDowell advises theists to begin answers to challenges with "Great question", which _IS_ condescending if it really isn't a great question! The rest of your comment is wide of the mark because the rainbow God created in the sky was nothing to do with his sorrow of the 'current creation' but a gesture of his 'regret' at having committed mass genocide and a symbolic promise never to do it again (at least until the end times)!
Alex O Connor has a talent for academics; no doubt. My advice for fellows such as him who are influenced by paradoxical and contradictive Hitchens and Dennett is that he should truly be a credible emboldened humanitarian (if Christians or religious minorities are doing a terrible job as humanitarians) in Britain to cause change whereas it is a mess and cesspool of disgraced societal issues. Fix your house and affairs first before lecture others. Dr Jordan Peterson is the only atheist humanitarian I can take seriously
last video you criticized him on dying on the fence without knowing if god really exists, but it's okay not know/understand how morality functioned then, and why it is different now
It’s way simpler than that . God is the king he does what he pleases and how he pleases. That’s it. Once we understand that we would be better off. His ways are not our ways and his thoughts are not our thoughts . We don’t know the beginning or the end we don’t have that foresight . If you can trust your mother as a child you can trust God . He is King . There you go nice and simple . Serve the King
The talk is just about authorities in general, judgement and action. Like Cliff says, God as an authority with clear knowledge has the right to cast judgment over his creation. Everyone else has the right to resist, flee, fight back, etc. Clay Jones paper provides historical context on the matter (Canaanites were corrupted). We accept this same reality of human authorities making judgements in the military on other nations all the time. From an atheistic standpoint, there is no solid basis for saying that any authority is wrong. Preemptive attacks are permissible in general either way. Nuclear weapons, carpet bombing, remote bombing, etc have been used by authorities in recent memory to execute our judgments on other people and their judgments on us. Like Cliff says, keeping in mind that God also punished the Israel multiple times in their history shows that God punishes evenly.
Heiser had some great teachings that really reconciled these kinds of passages. Basically using the supernatural view of Genesis 6, man’s lineage was corrupted with DNA of the fallen sons and that was an abomination (hence the flood). This obviously kept happening as we see more nephilim throughout Canaan and other places. The nations that God commanded the Israelites to wipe out had been infiltrated with this blood and it went against God’s design for humankind, so he wanted it gone. As for the animals, same answer, when you read Enoch, you can see that the Nephilim started to experiment with animals, breeding together what should not be bred.
I take it as literal. Otherwise, why would God be upset with Saul not wiping them out? I think Cliffe's statement about God having the right to judge is where it's at. I mean at the end of the day, who is it that instructs God? Who is it that can say "Hey God, you got that wrong."? NOBODY, including Alex O'Conner.
12:29. Yes. During the time of king Manasseh the kingdom of Judah practiced child sacrifice and even committed evil worse than the nations who lived in the land before them had (2 Kings 21:6,9). Also during the time of the prophet Jeremiah there was child sacrifice going on in the valley of hinnom (Jeremiah 19:5), which appropriately mentions is the valley from whose name we derive the Greek word Gehenna (ge=land, henna=hinnom) translated Hell.
That is not what happened in the Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe, LOL. The Pevensies weren't even in London. They were in the countryside at the professor's house and they were playing hide and seek when Lucy first goes into the wardrobe and then when they all go into the wardrobe they are hiding from the housekeeper. When people hid from the Blitz they would go into the subway tunnels and communal shelters, not wardrobes.
12:49 There are plenty of examples of child sacrifice in the Bible among Israel. 2 Kings 16:2-4, Jeremiah 7:30-31, 2 Kings 21:4-6, Ezekiel 16:20-21 just to name a few.
I think there is a space where King Jesus desires for us to step up as mediators between the wrath of God and the mercy of God on behalf of the wicked just like Moses and Abraham did.
According to Deuteronomy 12:29-31, 18:12 among other scriptures the reason these nations were destroyed were because they committed grievous abominations including many sexual acts including inbreeding homosexuality, beastiality along with witchcraft, having the children pass through fire in order to appease false gods, etc. and the parents actually taught their children these practices. The children became so corrupted God deemed in necessary to destroy them or else these abominations would continue to spread until the earths came into the same condition as before the flood and would have required another global destruction. Everything these nations did was corrupt and the children would not have escaped the corruption.
12:31 I'm pretty sure they were...but the Isrealites still got their prophets but the nations did not... (Pls correct me if wrong) (I'm a believer but I just can't wrap my head around this) * 2 Kings 3:27 (King Mesha of Moab sacrifices his son) *2 Kings 16:3; 21:6 (Israelite kings sacrifice children) * Ezekiel 20:31; 23:37 (prophetic condemnation) * Psalm 106:37-38 (Israel's sin) *Molech worship (Leviticus 18:21; 20:2-5): Israelites sacrificed children to the Canaanite deity Molech. *Passing children through fire (2 Kings 16:3; 21:6): A ritualistic practice associated with Molech worship.
@22:52 You're absolutely right about an incremental revelation. Jesus himself reveals a crucial principle in Matthew 19 and Mark 10: Moses prescribed certain divorce laws specifically because of the Israelites' hardness of heart. This insight opens up a broader question: what other laws might God have prescribed not as perfect moral ideals, but as necessary accommodations to Israel's spiritual and moral capacity at the time? This framework helps us understand Christ's repeated pattern in the Sermon on the Mount: 'You have heard it said... but I say to you.' When he transforms 'an eye for an eye' into 'turn the other cheek,' he's not contradicting earlier law but revealing its fuller intention, now that humanity had been prepared for it. This gradual moral development didn't begin with Christ. We often fail to recognize that moral sophistication isn't innate or instantaneous - it's developed over time. The Israelites, like any people, couldn't leap to moral perfection overnight. Rather than instantly transforming them into saints, God implemented a progressive revelation, methodically instilling laws while gradually unveiling deeper aspects of His nature. We see this progression clearly in Ezekiel 18, for example, where God declares: 'What do you mean by repeating this proverb concerning the land of Israel, "The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge"? As I live, declares the Lord God, this proverb shall no more be used in Israel. Behold, all souls are mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is mine: the soul who sins shall die.' This represents a significant development from the earlier principle of 'visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me.' The earlier formulation appeared in Exodus, when Israel's moral and social development was still primitive. To build a moral foundation from scratch, sterner measures were initially necessary. The depth of their primitive state is vividly illustrated in Ezekiel 16, where God describes Israel's origins: 'Your origin and your birth are from the land of the Canaanite; your father was an Amorite and your mother a Hittite. And as for your birth, on the day you were born your navel cord was not cut, nor were you washed with water for cleansing, nor were you rubbed with salt or even wrapped with cloth... when I passed by you and saw you squirming in your natal blood, I said to you while you were there in your blood, "Live!" Yes, I said to you while you were there in your blood, "Live!"' This metaphor powerfully illustrates Israel's initial state and God's progressive work: He began with a people as helpless as an abandoned newborn and gradually nurtured them toward moral maturity, with Christ representing the culmination of this developmental process. You can appreciate God's wisdom when you also note that the while not flawless, the moral codes given to the Israelites in Exodus were miles ahead of the codes of other ancient civilizations at the time.
The only consistent way to answer this is from a fully Gods sovereign choice, God in the end has the only true free choice. And his people( the Israelites) were his because he chose them not because they were any better.
These are very difficult passages in the bible to be honest. I guess if God would allow me to see what He sees, that maybe one day I could understand those passages. As a Christian, Alex is throwing some really difficult questions there.
@ easily, the way humans have been throughout history is extremely barbaric. Every step in a better direction is a great milestone stone. Sometimes people consumed by completely evil ideologies are going to change their minds and would destroy the human race if not destroyed. The hubris of these egotistical godless heathans to think they could go back and time and do things better is utterly stupid. It’s like back to the future. If you went back in time and tried things your way most likely the world today would be far worse than it is now.
@@ideapulse-i2iit’s only in a world that has been influenced by Christian morality that we call genocide evil. That is only in the modern west where Christianity has heavily influenced every fiber of western thought and philosophy. In every other worldview genocide was not only seen as okay but completely justifiable by those who perpetrated it. I mean it even took the west a thousand years of Christian though and arguments for the universal brotherhood of man under the image of God that we even developed the concept of human rights which no other part of the world accepts even today.
@@jarlwilliam9932 WELL YOUR NOT TRUE,The idea that only Christian morality deems genocide as evil overlooks the profound teachings of Islam, which emphasize the sanctity and unity of human life. The Qur'an declares, "Whoever kills a soul…it is as if he has slain all of mankind" (Qur'an 5:32), embedding a deep moral responsibility to protect life and oppose oppression. Islamic teachings go further by setting strict limits on conflict, forbidding harm to innocents and promoting mercy and justice even in times of war. Far from being unique to Christianity, this universal respect for life reflects a shared human ethic, where Islam’s beautiful principles stand as a timeless testament against all forms of cruelty and injustice.
Alex is careful on who he asks questions of unfortunately. Like if you want to bring up theological questions, why not ask Bishop Baron or W.L.C? But he doesn't because he knows they're able to answer it more eloquently. I like Cliffe but he's just a pastor.
I think they are saying that China doesn't have a problem with it because they are more collectivist. They understand how a whole group could be punished for the actions of some of its members. Americans are individualistic and have more of an issue with it.
These questions aren't really that difficult. Just ask the atheist why he believes anything can be wrong and he falls apart. Morality doesn't stand alone. It is grounded in God. Whatever God does is good.
@Mr.Victor-qs2hj I don't know about "evolving," but I will answer your question as best as I can. I would say that moral laws are like divine energies of God that, when applied to our lives in the right disposition, bring us closer into communion with him. I think you would have to prove that moral laws intact 'evolved'.
Ruslan: Cliffe Married George Janko! Zach: woah, I didn’t know we were affirming out here Lmaooooooo Unhinged troll Zach is the best Zach lollllll keep it coming (no diddy) 😂😂😂😂
Ima try to help with these difficult passages , look at Nazis. They committed atrocities and they weren’t completely wiped out which has led to nazis and that mindset still being perpetuated today
When someone has a lack of knowledge, they stand on what they know. But this man has pride to believe his morals are fair than our Fathers. Test that spirit. It is the spirit of the anitchrist. Jesus told you a little yeast leavens the whole bread. When God judges those people and used Israel, he did not want to leave remnant of those people because their beliefs and perversness against him and God knew that a few left alive around his people would corrupt them. Because this man can't see how fair God is and how serious he is about stewardship, he makes himself higher than the creator because he can not understand that God will not force them to change. They made their choice. Just like this man will make his choice.
The ancient Israelites 100% committed child sacrifice. But who ever said they weren't punished for committing sins while the other people groups were punished? They had to wander in the wilderness for 400 years because they sinned. They had their temples destroyed twice, and Jesus warned them about that. They were exiled many times and after the destruction of the second temple, they spread out throughout the world without a nation of their own between 70 AD and 1948 AD. They were 100% judged for their sin.
15:24 This sentiment undercuts the idea of objective morals. Today is is wrong but back then it wasn't. That is the very type morals that are ascribed to those whom believe in subjective morals.
It seems to me it boils down whether there are things that God can command that are contrary to his nature. And if not, is it against his nature to do this to the innocent for any reason? Depending on how you answer that determines whether you approach it from a consequentialist or deontological point of view, similar to the problem of evil.
📚:Learn about The Bless God Summit Here: www.blessgodsummit.com
🎟:Get Tickets to the Bless God Summit Here: www.itickets.com/events/479802
Ironically, Alex makes a moral claim to say that it is "wrong" for God to do/command something be done. By what epistemological standard is he making this claim to morality?
In other words, who is Alex (or anyone, really) to criticize the morality of the One who created morality to begin with?
Yes, buuuut, you can actually use a Christian ethic to judge old testament passages etc. to argue for inconsistency in the biblical ethics / inconsistencies in the character of God. So their points aren't mute just because they don't have their own ethics to judge the Bible by. Their points ARE mute however, if they have problems with biblical ethics on the basis of their own moral judgements. That's where it becomes senseless.
@@krissmork thank you
@@krissmork moot
That's your subjective opinion on the origin of morality.
From the secular standpoint, morality's origin is simply a product of society, i.e., a social construct. Therefore, if we want to claim that something that your god did is immoral, we can. And we back it up using the basis on which morality has always been determined: well-being.
If Christians would like to claim an objective moral standard established by a supernatural being, they must also consider the hypocrisy of the atrocities condoned and committed by the Christian god and those who serve him.
If you claim that morality came from your god, there's no evidence to back that up, nor is there any historical evidence that the origin of morality is your specific supernatural deity, which is essentially a construct created by humans.
Another note: be careful to make claims of certainty about the supernatural and reality. You're unknowingly digging yourself a hole by creating a situation in which you'll need some empirical basis to justify your claim. If you choose to take the agnostic position, that's fine, but it doesn't seem like you are.
Alex is a moral relativist; this doesn't even apply to his worldview. He's saying it's wrong from the standpoint of OUR culture. So, something that would've been perfectly acceptable in the culture 2000 years ago is unacceptable now. And this would be another point against the existence of an objective moral standard established by a supernatural being. However, he can still say that things are wrong based on the principle of human well-being and how actions affect well-being.
Realistically, I don't buy that religious people believe that morality is objective. Christians, in particular, will attempt to find any excuse for the genocides encouraged by god or something like slavery, which the Christian god explicitly endorses.
These attempts at trying to find any excuse for god's extreme behavior and using appeals to ignorance to justify or neutralize your god's actions must be a form of cognitive dissonance, perhaps as a result of religious indoctrination.
easy, Jesus says the law has now been written on our heart which we all know because it’s true. This is called our conscience. Alex clearly recognizes and gives credence to his conscience in these religious discussions. This is the consciousness our Christian history has given the new world and it is valid.
THANK U FOR LEAVING ZACK’S JOKES IN 🎉😂
Makes one wonder all the stuff they cut
@hezekiahdaggett2179 Why wonder? Love believes all things, i.e. gives the benefit of the doubt. I'd rather strive to obey the scriptures.
L
No
@@hezekiahdaggett2179 didn’t think that at all it’s just in good fun, everyone knows he’s joking
Made me laugh out the gate!
One of the most important things we need to actually be a Christian is humility. I work backwards on these types of issues from the resurrection of Jesus. If Jesus rose from the dead, then he was who he says he was. If Jesus was God in the flesh, Jesus demonstrates Gods personality and qualities to us. We absolutely do have historical evidence to back the resurrection. Now, if I don't understand something in the old testament like this, or have a problem with it, I will definitely seek answers, but I have the humility to know that in the end, God created me and my mind, and so who am I to Judge the living God, in whom my own moral compass comes from. It's possible that in my mind, something seems "wrong", but really, I simply may not have all of the answers or I do not understand the bigger picture. God is God and he does as he sees fit. I don't have a problem with not knowing everything because I know the kindness and friendship of Jesus and what he did for me. I think we know just enough though to at least partially understand why God did away with these people at this particular time. Innocent children die because death is a consequence of sin. The parents were sinning whether the children were or not. When a parent does something wrong, it can have horrific consequences for the children. The wages of sin is death, but if you look at the bigger picture, yes there were terrible things that happened in the past, but look what God did about sin. God made a way for sin to be done away with.
Amen
Zack's dark humor is 💯😂😂😂
One of the best parts of this channel 🤣
😂😂😂 I love it
Yessssss absolutely Goated lol
These are truly difficult passages of scripture to digest. I wish Cliff would have mentioned that Gods justice was also levied against the very people who escaped bondage in Egypt. Only Caleb and Joseph and kids survived that generation. God allowed all those Hebrews to die by disease and snakes, etc because of their unbelief. Wild stuff
its just human stains imbued in it
@@charliescott9098 yeah, there is a few things he could if said in response. For example before these incidents we have the story of balak and balaam where in the end God promises to Curse anyone who curses his people and to bless anyone who blesses his people. He is a God of his word, so when people cursed his people he had to act on his word.
Another thing worth mentioning is that when the Israelites went into war it was in obedience to God and they went in rather small numbers agains whole nations to emphasise that this is Gods Judgement on these nations for their wickedness and opposition to his chosen people.
It's not hard to digest once you realize how sinful humans are. Yes. Even babies. Wages for sin is death. Yet God is doing everything He can to save us. He has sent us his own son to die for us because that's how big his love for us is. Alex cannot fathom the nature of God comparing him to mere evil tyrants of this world. Also God doesn't kill. He moves people from one place to another. From earth to heaven or hell. Thinking it's just a mere murder demonstrates a further lack of understanding of God's nature.
@@supernaturally255 CAN'T STILL JUSTIFY THE GENOCIDE OF NON COMBATANTS OR INNOCENTS'
@@ideapulse-i2i There are no innocents. There were demons all over the place (molech and the baals) and those communities were in communication with them. This is why God's orders were primarily to make them leave, even the animals.
I think we, as human beings, have become entitled. We have no right to do anything, not even to be alive. We are PRIVILEGED to be alive and created. If God decides to kill me tomorrow, He has every right to do so because at the end of the day I am His creation.
We should be thankful to be alive instead of questioning His decisions. We don't know anything, He knows everything. Even if it is difficult to understand, we must remember that we are not God.
We should humble ourselves and remember that ultimately He gave us eternal life, purely out of grace, when we don't even deserve to be alive for one day.
@@mcsah909 So brilliantly said, bravo 👏
I'd also add one more point: If God chooses to end a life, the life He gave in the first place, He is not committing "murder" or "killing" the person, He is simply moving them from one place to another. From this world to Heaven, or if the individual so chooses, a state of separation from God i.e. Hell.
Whenever He does this, it is always good because God defines good. He IS goodness and morality personified. He knows what He is doing, He sees the whole picture, the beginning, middle and end. We, by comparison, see nothing.
God bless you all ✝️✝️✝️
Well put. This response is exactly what Alex and his audience should hear, only in a longer, hour-long format to flesh out the idea. I think Alex probably already understands this, but he has an audience he needs to fulfil. He may hold back from saying it openly because he risks being misunderstood, with some people seeing it as justifying “God’s evil” and branding him as someone who condones it. This has happened to others, like William Lane Craig, who have been misinterpreted by people lacking in wisdom who lean on their own understanding, interpreting complex ideas as “proof” that these thinkers are evil themselves, and so are able to accept or justify God's ''evil''.
I agree. Most non-believers have no grasp of a Heaven or afterlife, so they have a difficult time wrapping their heads around such a simple concept. It’s definitely sad that the innocent people had to go, but they’re going to a place where there’s no suffering at all, but eternal joy and peace. Compare that to where they were before, where they most likely suffered terribly due to the evil that was around them.
Did we choose to be alive? No. But to say we have no rights is to have a low view of humanity. We are made, according to Christian ethos, in Gods image. This gives us certain rights. Now these rights can be overcome by our own actions in accordance with justice but that’s a far cry from having no rights.
@@mcsah909 this deserves so many more likes and is so well put.
I think it’s hard for us to wrap our heads around the fact that God is the author of life so it’s not immoral for him to end life since it objectively belongs to him. We kind of see this issue through our mortal human lens.
One of the best, if not the best response thus far
One of the best, if not the best response thus far
Zack’s jokes are always on point!😂
Literally
Alex is one of the only atheists I watch, I became born again four years ago,
I was never an atheist but I wasn’t convinced of God coming in flesh years ago like I am today. I watch Alex because I am pleasantly surprised he has Christians on and can have a normal conversation, without it getting heated and he doesn’t use the normal stupid questions or answers most atheists use, the beginner dumb questions that are easily answered with a quick search. I will say I been praying for him to understand and know Jesus and I have zero doubt that God will use him, I think he is searching for truth and all truth comes from God so if you are seeking than you will find and it will give God all the more glory when he opens someone like Alex’s eyes to the truth, gives him faith because all his atheist followers will realize the person they been following and convinced them, God wasn’t real, was wrong.
@@SavedByJesus-pi3yu I don't think that God likes me. God doesn't reach out to me.
@waldo..8021 it's not something to will, he might have reached out and you just can't notice him. God can manifest through far more than a warm fuzzy feeling during prayer.
I think the big difference between Alex and 99% of the atheist is that he is NOT resented against God.
@@edwinbonilla7986 99% of atheists don't resent god. They don't believe god exists. There's a pretty clear difference.
God bless
What if God is actually showing mercy to the children? Knowing that the next generations would continue the evil and ultimately face Hell, has them killed which sends them to Heaven.
Many atheists fail to remember Heaven or acknowledge the view that this world is fallen in order to give context.
@@seahawker791 it takes away from free will
@@zebpettyninjachildren fundamentally don’t really have free will like that though. 🤷🏻♂️
“The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart: and merciful men are taken away, none considering that the righteous is taken away from the evil to come. He shall enter into peace: they shall rest in their beds, each one walking in his uprightness.”
Isaiah 57:1-2 KJV
@@zebpettyninja We do have a will whilst we're living but we do not decide our own fate or choose the timing of our own death. That is something we do not have any will over.
14:00 one thing I think Alex is missing here is that numbers can be symbolic in the Bible. 12 especially is a specific and significant number throughout the Bible. (12 tribes of Israel, 12 disciples, 12 baskets of bread, etc)
12 often represents completion or a divine conclusion. So saying 12,000 fell could really be saying that God was taking part in the defeat of Ai and that this was a definitive defeat. Not that it’s a random, arbitrary number.
“Judgment on them is mercy “ wow 👏👏
God gave the biggest answer when asked by Abraham concerning Sodom and Gomorrah, if you find 10 righteous will you destroy the city's and God answers "I will not destroy it for 10 sake. And the only one's that survive were lot and his daughters. God's mercy concerning wicked nations have limits we would be mindful to heed that giving the wickedness and perversenesd we are allowing in this nation we are allowing in the name of tolerance.
The Christian god is way worse.
Read the Bible.
@@Kenpachi_White707 Worse? Based on what morality?
@@loganmanderfield1162 morality based on empathy and logic.
@@Kenpachi_White707 Empathy is subjective, empathy can be underserving and logic is limited by bias and presuppositions... your empathy & logic isn't infallible so it can't describe the world. So given these reasons, why do we ought to not see as your basis for morality as arbitrary.
@ your morality is subjective.
But God is the subject.
Your empathy and logic are flawed because you base it on something you can prove, while using your imperfect judgement to say he’s perfect.
Empathy and logic are built on evidence. Where as your belief is, “I like this, therefore it’s true”. Not taking into account other views.
You can’t have logic because your believe DEMANDS you have faith, instead of evidence.
You can’t have empathy because “gods will be done” not yours.
You’re just claiming it’s true because you like it, and you don’t challenge your faith, because you literally can’t.
God is not only taken the lives of woman and children in the old testament, God has taken all lives that has existed he gonna takes your too, HE IS God.
Right. An atheist is upset about the Canaanites, but why just them? Everyone is going to die.
Thanks again for another great show. It's been hard out here struggling with wondering if I am chosing and voting right...I'm so grateful for people like you willing to open discussions and be open and honest about them. 🕊️ ❤️ ✝️
“In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. he is always in alliance with the Despot abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own. it is easier to acquire wealth and power by this combination than by deserving them: and to effect this they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man, into mystery & jargon unintelligible to all mankind & therefore the safer engine for their purposes.” - Thomas Jefferson
“Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise.... During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution.”
James Madison
“All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.”
Thomas Paine
“When a Religion is good, I conceive that it will support itself; and when it cannot support itself, and God does not take care to support, so that its Professors are oblig’d to call for the help of the Civil Power, ’tis a Sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one.”
Benjamin Franklin
"We think ourselves possessed, or at least we boast that we are so, of Liberty of conscience on all subjects, and of the right of free inquiry and private judgment, in all cases, and yet how far are we from these exalted privileges in fact. There exists I believe throughout the whole Christian world a law which makes it blasphemy to deny or to doubt the divine inspiration of all the books of the old and new Testaments from Genesis to Revelations...in America it is not much better, even in our Massachusetts…A law was made in the latter end of the last century repealing the cruel punishments of the former laws but substituting fine and imprisonment upon all those blasphemers upon any book of the old Testament or new...I think such laws a great embarassment, great obstructions to the improvement of the human mind. Books that cannot bear examination certainly ought not to be established as divine inspiration by penal laws. The substance and essence of Christianity as I understand it is eternal and unchangeable and will bear examination forever but it has been mixed with extraneous ingredients, which I think will not bear examination and they ought to be separated." - John Adams
“I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do, because I notice it always coincides with their own desires.”
Susan B. Anthony
“With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil - that takes religion.” - Steven Weinberg
well they are open but definitely you are living in ivory towers
I’m very glad they two are having a conversation!
The only reason Christians have a problem with these types of questions is because they have such a low view of God's sovereignty. He's the source and sustainer of all being, and the ultimate cause of all things. Nothing happens apart from His permissive will and purpose. This means literally every person who ever lived and died did so as an extension of His will. It doesn't matter if you die on the battlefield or from cancer or in a car crash, your time of death has been appointed before you were even born. God used the nation of Israel as His chosen instrument to pour out His wrath on a wicked and accursed people group in order to bring about an ultimate good that would eventually bless all nations and redeem mankind to the Creator. Unbelievers pretend to concede a hypothetical existence of this one true God while simultaneously maintaining an air of moral superiority over Him. If this being exists then by definition you have no say in what is right or wrong, good or bad. It's absurd to try and drag Him into a court of flawed human morality and judge Him by a standard lower than Himself.
Well said.
It’s usually those who ask the most questions who have the opportunity to find Jesus. At times some harden their hearts to the answers!
No. Stop saying this.
Dr Turek said it best, that people are made at God for not intervening when the innocent are killed by the evil... but they condemned God when He did (Cannan Conquest).
We aren’t owed anything by God. That is how I understand things such as a child dying from disease. We aren’t owed healing or a long life. It is all a gift and if God decided for us to die at any point in any way I don’t think we should have a problem.
Babe wake up. A new Cliffe video just released (Comments you see on every new Cliffe videos :D)
And something about the fertilizer pit :)
It's also important to remember that not all of the killings were ordered by God.
That wasn’t the question though, was the killings of innocent civilians including women and children justified? And if so, explain logically how it was justified?
@@nellyc3669I think the point is that they weren't innocent. Women and men are equal. When women are cursing God and practicing unrepentant sin they get to be held accountable just like the men. The entire people group was evil
suprised to see them struggle so much with it; this was one of the first questions I had before baptism
I believe the answer that can be given cannot be understood with reason only but spiritually.
Cliffe is great with this stuff more often then not. Where i think he & most Christians fail to make sense of genocide & racial issues of the Bible comes with the failure to recognize Gen 6, Exodus, Samuel 2, etc. There was a corruption of the creation & its remnants continued after the flood. God needed a pure bloodline to send his son, & he needed a people to conquer & destroy the remaining corrupt seed of the fallen angels. They were never meant to exist & humanity would not have survived without their destruction. After they were gone he sent Jesus to give us all a path to sanctification. His word is written on our hearts, so morality is spiritual not conscious. Our consciousness is subject to our flesh, our spirit is directly opposed to our flesh. You can't read Samuel 2 especially without understanding they were fighting Giants. Enoch & Jasher give an understanding that leaves no room for these contradictions. There was no need to destroy the entire population, just the population of nephlium that survived the flood. It's time to stand on the real story & a genetic corruption is undoubtedly part of this book. Too many Christians will believe the Goliath story, but most never read about his 4 brothers who were also giants, the Giants of their home town of Goth, etc. David collected 5 stones, not for Goliath, but his 4 other brothers as well. He thought he would have to kill all of them, but the other 4 fled. It is all in the text, just rarely taught.
1:25 idk Rus that sounded like a colorful joke more than a dark one iykwim 💀
@@rafaelsolano9761 lol 😂😂😂
repent to God
@@Baggerz182 I already did
Great Joke Zack. Great joke.....Ruslan, how could you? How could you be so fartless?
I'm still stuck on that bro 😂
I've never "liked" that part of the Bible, but its always made strategic sense. God constantly warned the Israelites not to marry into other nations or be otherwise influenced into worshiping false gods. He knew this was a weakness for them and instructed them to remove to its main causes. Not to mention, it's hard for people to relatiate for you taking their home when theyre dead...
I'm glad you kept the affirming joke haha it's just harmless fun ❤😂
I didn't know we are affirming 🤣🤣 floored me🤣😂😂🤣😂
The Gaza situation and Oct 7 did give me new perspective on these passages. Yes, I think “haram” means destroyed as a people group, a national identity. They were commanded to “drive out” and then “destroy.” So, if they left first, they didn’t have to be destroyed as individuals. Those who remained were to be destroyed, however. Does that break God’s heart? Yes! But when I see the mess Israel is in right now, I get why God saw that as necessary in that day and age. If there were ten righteous, God wouldn’t have destroyed S n G. I think this holds true for the Canaanites. There were not 10 righteous in S n G. But God did pull the 4 “righteous” (who were not even very righteous) out of S n G. Out of Jericho we know HE saved Rahab and her family just on the bare minimum of faith. Fear. We don’t know who else he pulled out of the Canaanite cities because they weren’t just as evil as they could be. The Gibeonites were spared (even through deceit) because they also feared Israel. And later, God tells David to avenge and protect them. Now, I think David misstepped by again taking innocent life in that attempted obedience because he forgot to ask God just how he should do that. As Joshua failed to ask God when he made the covenant with them in the first place. Regardless, there were Canaanites spared, seemingly by God’s exception because they weren’t horrifically evil. But the vast majority of Canaanites were. We know that. Women, too. There’s no reason God should have made an exception for women just because they were women. However, we do think God should have made an exception for children. They’re not responsible in the same way. And I agree with Cliff that their lack of responsibility probably means they did go to God’s presence on their deaths. But when I think of the practical problems of trying to spare the children, I can see why God found these orders necessary. I see the practical problems of trying to spare the children in Israel’s war with Gaza right now. For one thing, Hamas is very willing to sacrifice their own children just to make Israel look back, so they make their bases in or under schools and hospitals. If Israel right now wiped out every adult Gazan, but spared the children, what would become of those children? And Israel would have the same situation in a few years. The children are taught from Day 1 to hate Israel already. They would grow up to be engaged in constant warfare. As we see. And as did happen in ancient Israel because Israel wasn’t obedient to God’s commands of destruction. Couple more things: obviously, I would say Bibi wouldn’t be justified if he said, “But God told me to commit g-cide against Gaza.” And I certainly don’t think that should be Israel’s solution right now. I don’t know Israel’s solution. I don’t think there is one till Jesus comes back. And certainly, I don’t think that g-cide or anything beyond just war is being perpetrated by Israel. And yet, children are dying. Given that time and place and reason, I can understand why God’s judgement did look like what we could call g-cide. Though it was really evil-cide. The goal was eradicating that level of evil. Second, why didn’t God judge Israel by the same standards? He did. They very much came under judgment when they turned completely foul and starting sacrificing children. He didn’t wipe them out completely because there was always a lot more than 10 righteous. I don’t think Alex has really grappled with how horrifically evil Canaanite culture was. Why didn’t God send them a prophet? If it would have worked, I believe he would have. Look at Jonah and Nineveh. And they knew enough to know better without a prophet. Word of the Egyptian plagues and the Red Sea had got around. Rahab didn’t have a prophet. She just believed the evening news, and that was enough to save her. Finally, if Bibi said, “God had commanded me to wipe out Gaza,” none of us would believe him or think he should, and rightly so. If Bibi was seeing Red Seas split and rocks gushing water, I might be tempted to believe him if he said what God had commanded. I do acknowledge God’s right to take life-even children’s life-as the giver and maker of life. There was good reason to believe that Moses and Joshua really were hearing from God and had commanded these very sad but necessary commands.
PS: I don’t think it was hyperbole when Saul was told to wipe out Amalek by the fact that Samuel knew he hadn’t obeyed by the bleating of sheep in his ears. Seems pretty literal. So I don’t know that the wipe out with specific descriptors was just God exaggerating. And these are very tough, tough passages. I just go back to, “I don’t fully understand them, God has the right to take life, and these leaders really did hear from God and gave convincing evidence that did. And no, no nation today is being commanded to genocide. Though just war may still sadly but necessarily take the lives of children. They are often a casualty of war.”
8:15 that joke was on point 😂😂
The best question Alex asked was "Do you believe that innocent children were killed by the Israelites on the command of God?". Cliffe knows the truth but dodges the question by talking about Israeli's bombing Palestinians.
he did say they were innocent
Glad to see these conversations happening. I believe the core of these questions is to understand the nature of The Father. At the end of the day we are called to a relationship with this person so the question is who are you then...
You should check out a guy by the name of David K Bernard. I listened to his answer on this tough question, and it was by far the best I have ever heard.
"whoa, i didn't know that we were affirming!"😂😂😂😂
Hallelujah to the Most High God of eternity
Im in Bethlehem now and people just want peace
Deuteronomy 29:29 The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may follow all the words of this law.
We should trust in God’s sovereignty and be OK with not knowing everything.
Alex has seen your videos! He talks about how some Christians get frustrated with him for mentioning the apocrypha books like if he is obsessed with them ! And that’s you, Ruslan, verbatim!
Zac's humor is the best!
Love how people use the Bible to judge the Bible and God but don't wonder why God purposefully included the very details being judged.
@@truthseeker1776 Love how this "god" of the Bible can't even keep his own commandments.
@@Alien1375 Christ is Lord ✝️☦️🙏
@@Alien1375 he did keep his own commandments perfectly.
@@Provocative-K Thou shall not murder. Whoops.
@@Alien1375 The commandment "Thou shalt not kill," found in the Bible, actually originates from the Hebrew word ratsach, which is more accurately translated as "murder" in the context of the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 5:17). This distinction is important for understanding the ancient context in which the commandment was given, as "murder" specifically refers to the unlawful, intentional killing of another person, rather than a broad prohibition on all forms of killing.
In ancient Israelite society, where these laws originated, there was a legal system in place that recognized different types of killing, such as accidental or defensive killing, and established the difference between murder and other acts of violence. For example, in cases of accidental killing, cities of refuge were provided to protect the person responsible from vengeance, demonstrating that not all killing was seen as equally punishable (Numbers 35:9-15).
Furthermore, the Israelites were involved in wars sanctioned by their society and leaders, so the commandment was not seen as a blanket prohibition on all taking of life but rather a moral law against wrongful, premeditated violence against others. This interpretation has been reflected over the centuries in Christian and Jewish ethics, where "Thou shalt not murder" is generally seen as a commandment against intentional harm to innocent individuals rather than a total pacifist stance.
The phrase’s interpretation has also been central to debates on ethical topics like capital punishment, self-defense, and just war, as various religious and legal traditions work to balance the commandment's original intent with contemporary moral issues.
I think the “utility” of these sorts of questions for an atheist is to see the integrity of God’s character. I say utility in quotes because, most of what I’ve seen, isn’t actually trying to know the character of God but to disprove His character as a way to undermine His existence. I think if someone is truly trying to know the character of God they’ve already presupposed His existence but just don’t know Who He is. Therefore, I would imagine someone considering prayer, in that context, as attempt to know Him.
lets pray for Zack
Gavin Ortlund has done some great work on how we can look at some of this OT hyperbolic language.
Good and evil BOTH take many forms, complex and simple.
Intention, is a real player in both.
@Ruslan I find the theory surrounding the people the Israelites were commanded to destroy as being remnants of the Nehfelim to be interesting and a plausible explanation. Also interesting that the Caananites were descendants of Ham who along with his descendants was cursed by Noah.
Jonah was sent to the Ninevites, who worshipped a fish headed god. They saw Jonah get spit up by a whale, they took his warnings seriously, repented & changed their ways, and avoided destruction.
It stands to reason similar messages were sent to these other people groups - communicating in ways they would understand. God tends to meet people where they are. The Bible is not a complete record of history. Plenty of things happened that aren't recorded in the Bible. Just because we don't have a record of the messages being delivered, doesn't mean they weren't.
12:29 Yes, some Israelites did participate in child sacrifice rituals:
• Jeremiah 7:30-31
• Jeremiah 19:4-5
• Ezekiel 16:20-21
• Ezekiel 20:30-31
• 2 Kings 23:10
• Psalm 106:37-38
@@j1007ch convenient how they forget that
26:22
I don't think we need to know everything now but we need to keep searching.
It seems like every Christian scholar falls into Alex's trap on this topic. Every one ends up looking like monsters rather than doubling down that our idea of goodness is like filthy rags compared to God. We insist on judging God based on our understanding as though we have the right to do so or have any understanding of what that word even means.
@@dahliaherrod4301 everyone is worthy of critique (if he is real) even god, that's free will
@@sethdunn8455 Just so I'm clear on your statement, you think humanity is worthy and has the right to judge God? If so, by what metrics? Who's the standard we judge him against?
Hello everybody
Something that I haven't seen pointed out is that this discussion is tying into the broader discussion of their entire podcast episode where Alex is pointing out the seemingly contradictory differences between the God that Jesus proclaims (the all loving, merciful deity) and the YHWH of the Old Testament. Alex is asking the hard questions of Cliff and Stuart to find the bridge between the two, as even first and second century Christians struggled with this very question. The Gnostics are the biggest example of a group trying to reconcile this concern between the gospels and the Old Testament.
I also saw a video from the BibleProject the other day that was very helpful.
They pointed out that the Bible is a book of wisdom, but in the weft, we treat all information like it’s Google or an encyclopedia or a dictionary where you just find what you need and then you close it and go back.
We see this because we proof protect everything well there’s just one verse so you can’t do this thing that you’re doing right now. Even our emphasis on systematic theology, tend to act and treat the Bible in a place to find out about certain topics.
But if you view it as a piece of wisdom, then trying to teach you who God is what that means for you and then it gives you a framework. It has some rules. It has some tangible things. However, most of it is going to be giving you a framework so that you can engage in whatever comes across in your world.
The Bible teaches us exactly what God wanted us to know about His story. Which is to say History. As it says about Jesus, “I suppose the whole world could not contain a book about the good works and miracles Jesus had performed.” I don’t see why just because some cannot see the answer to a question they have, discounts the whole biblical story as truth. It never claimed to have the answers of all the world’s questions. It is exactly as needed. Take Gods word for what it is, Gods word. Word is bond. Gods word is the most reliable word of any written work in all of creation. That is only second unto The Book of Life… coming soon to a consciousness near you.
Wah there was a butchering of the text on O' Connor's side on Joshua, the combattant of Ai were not fleeing when they went to the wilderness, the Israelite faked a defeat and fleed the battle, then the Ai king called more people from the city to pursue them to finish them off but it was a trap. So it is not that they chased after them even as they fleed to kill them, they were the one being chased after in the wilderness. In a nutshell without settling the hyperbole debate, there is still a bit of misrepresentation there i think😅
Lets not forget that these people worshiped demons and were in contact with them too just like every other local community there.
let's not forget that idolatry was punishable by death in the OT, so God definitely is inline with His judgement in judging the other inhabitants of the land. And the book of Jonah shows us that God always seeks that people repent.
Here was the comment I left on that video:
Two things:
1. Granting the premise that God directly commanded the killing of children, and it wasn't hyperbole...
1. A) it isn't equivalent to what the Canaanites were doing. Because the Canaanites would have continued generation after generation, torturously murdering their children. Whereas, tragic though it would have been, the Israelites would have taken everybody out once, ending generations of torturous murder of children.
1. B) any atheist who has argued abortion is even sometimes justified, doesn't get to be taken seriously here. Alex claims that if this isn't evil, nothing is. Well a truer statement is, if abortion isn't evil, nothing is. But just imagine the arrogance (not accusing Alex, only those who have argued for abortion), "I'm the moral arbiter, I am so good, and so rational, I can determine when taking the life of a child is justified for the good. But not God. How dare the creator of the universe make such a determination." It's just ridiculous.
2. The point about these cities actually being military bases is key. Michael Jones has pointed this out, as well as Gavin Ortlund: the cities where God is commanding the Israelites to go and wage war, ARE NOT cities like we think, where families are just living their lives.
These were military bases. And so IF women and children were in fact there, they would have been being used as shields, much like Hamas does today with their citizens. But the fact is Israel needs to destroy Hamas. Yes, they do their best to mitigate civilian casualties. But they can't fail to destroy Hamas, in the pursuit of zero civilian casualties. They need to destroy Hamas period, for the best life for everyone going forward.
And so what I'm about to say is perhaps speculation, but it seems reasonable... This is the same thing going on in the Old Testament. God is commanding that everyone in the military bases be taken out. And the extremeness of the command is to prevent the Israelites from failing to take out the enemy due to the enemy hiding behind its weaker and more innocent civilians.
They have the same talking points that are always have been answered
Jordan Peterson and cliffe knechtle need to have a discussion like we seen with dawkins
@Bless God Studios, I understand your point about judging past actions by today’s moral standards, and in most cases, that’s valid. But when it comes to God - who is all-knowing - it’s different. As a Christian, I agree with Alex that this issue is troubling and deserves a thoughtful response.
For me, I come to terms with these difficult passages by recognizing that my understanding is limited. I’m not all-knowing, so I can’t fully grasp the consequences if God had acted differently in those situations. I trust that God, with His perfect wisdom, knew the broader impact of His judgments and acted accordingly. But I can see how, to someone new to the faith, that could sound naive or unsatisfying.
As Christians, I think we owe it to others to seek out better ways to engage with these difficult questions rather than avoiding or dismissing them.
_"I trust that God, with His perfect wisdom, knew the broader impact of His judgments"_
How can God have perfect wisdom, knowledge, and judgement if after destroying mankind in a flood he ended up 'regretting' it?
@@cardcounter21 Great question! God was deeply grieved by the extent of human sin, and His “regret” can be understood as a sorrow over the brokenness of creation rather than a regret in the sense of making a mistake. His decision to judge the world with a flood is portrayed as an act of justice to address humanity's corruption, while His sorrow reveals His compassion.
@@cyphos84 _"Great question!"_
Have you been taking lessons from Sean McDowell?
_"His “regret” can be understood as a sorrow over the brokenness of creation rather than a regret in the sense of making a mistake"_
God may well have regretted the brokenness of creation (another mistake?), but in this instance he is regretting the decision to commit mass genocide to a point where he promises he will NEVER do it again (well, at least not until the end times when he apparently breaks this promise by again destroying mankind). Putting the rainbow in the sky wasn't anything to do with the brokenness of mankind but a symbolic promise to never commit such a drastic act again! So this 'regret' is definitely linked to Gods genocide action and not something else!
@@cardcounter21why are you being so condescending? This person is trying to answer your question and you’re being rude 😂 secondly God didn’t regret anything the word regret is not even in the text in Genesis 6:6 The Lord was “sorry” he had made the current creation. “Sorry” is the word nāḥam meaning: be sorry, rue, suffer grief, repent, of one's own doings and he was grieving in his heart which is also what Genesis 6:6 said. The Lord was grieving because of the corruption of his creation and how bad they were. That person you’re replying to is correct.
@@equipped.thepodcast8038 I wasn't being condescending I was just pointing out that Sean McDowell advises theists to begin answers to challenges with "Great question", which _IS_ condescending if it really isn't a great question!
The rest of your comment is wide of the mark because the rainbow God created in the sky was nothing to do with his sorrow of the 'current creation' but a gesture of his 'regret' at having committed mass genocide and a symbolic promise never to do it again (at least until the end times)!
8:11 that's WILD😂😂😂
I really appreciated that marriage joke. Funny stuff
Does Ruslan have to be this careful with his words? Is UA-cam that bad?😂
Alex O Connor has a talent for academics; no doubt. My advice for fellows such as him who are influenced by paradoxical and contradictive Hitchens and Dennett is that he should truly be a credible emboldened humanitarian (if Christians or religious minorities are doing a terrible job as humanitarians) in Britain to cause change whereas it is a mess and cesspool of disgraced societal issues. Fix your house and affairs first before lecture others. Dr Jordan Peterson is the only atheist humanitarian I can take seriously
Jesus Christ Is 👑
last video you criticized him on dying on the fence without knowing if god really exists, but it's okay not know/understand how morality functioned then, and why it is different now
It’s way simpler than that . God is the king he does what he pleases and how he pleases. That’s it. Once we understand that we would be better off. His ways are not our ways and his thoughts are not our thoughts . We don’t know the beginning or the end we don’t have that foresight . If you can trust your mother as a child you can trust God . He is King . There you go nice and simple . Serve the King
The talk is just about authorities in general, judgement and action. Like Cliff says, God as an authority with clear knowledge has the right to cast judgment over his creation. Everyone else has the right to resist, flee, fight back, etc. Clay Jones paper provides historical context on the matter (Canaanites were corrupted). We accept this same reality of human authorities making judgements in the military on other nations all the time. From an atheistic standpoint, there is no solid basis for saying that any authority is wrong. Preemptive attacks are permissible in general either way. Nuclear weapons, carpet bombing, remote bombing, etc have been used by authorities in recent memory to execute our judgments on other people and their judgments on us. Like Cliff says, keeping in mind that God also punished the Israel multiple times in their history shows that God punishes evenly.
That hoodie is HARD
Heiser had some great teachings that really reconciled these kinds of passages.
Basically using the supernatural view of Genesis 6, man’s lineage was corrupted with DNA of the fallen sons and that was an abomination (hence the flood).
This obviously kept happening as we see more nephilim throughout Canaan and other places. The nations that God commanded the Israelites to wipe out had been infiltrated with this blood and it went against God’s design for humankind, so he wanted it gone.
As for the animals, same answer, when you read Enoch, you can see that the Nephilim started to experiment with animals, breeding together what should not be bred.
The conversation with Cliff just strength my stance in research is that context in anything you read matters to some degree.
I take it as literal. Otherwise, why would God be upset with Saul not wiping them out? I think Cliffe's statement about God having the right to judge is where it's at. I mean at the end of the day, who is it that instructs God? Who is it that can say "Hey God, you got that wrong."? NOBODY, including Alex O'Conner.
12:29. Yes. During the time of king Manasseh the kingdom of Judah practiced child sacrifice and even committed evil worse than the nations who lived in the land before them had (2 Kings 21:6,9).
Also during the time of the prophet Jeremiah there was child sacrifice going on in the valley of hinnom (Jeremiah 19:5), which appropriately mentions is the valley from whose name we derive the Greek word Gehenna (ge=land, henna=hinnom) translated Hell.
That is not what happened in the Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe, LOL. The Pevensies weren't even in London. They were in the countryside at the professor's house and they were playing hide and seek when Lucy first goes into the wardrobe and then when they all go into the wardrobe they are hiding from the housekeeper.
When people hid from the Blitz they would go into the subway tunnels and communal shelters, not wardrobes.
12:49 There are plenty of examples of child sacrifice in the Bible among Israel. 2 Kings 16:2-4, Jeremiah 7:30-31, 2 Kings 21:4-6, Ezekiel 16:20-21 just to name a few.
I just might say this. Maybe we're looking at a historical event through biblical eyes.
I think there is a space where King Jesus desires for us to step up as mediators between the wrath of God and the mercy of God on behalf of the wicked just like Moses and Abraham did.
According to Deuteronomy 12:29-31, 18:12 among other scriptures the reason these nations were destroyed were because they committed grievous abominations including many sexual acts including inbreeding homosexuality, beastiality along with witchcraft, having the children pass through fire in order to appease false gods, etc. and the parents actually taught their children these practices. The children became so corrupted God deemed in necessary to destroy them or else these abominations would continue to spread until the earths came into the same condition as before the flood and would have required another global destruction. Everything these nations did was corrupt and the children would not have escaped the corruption.
In short, they were giants
@@fr.timothycurren5592 True, giants not only in stature but sin.
12:31 I'm pretty sure they were...but the Isrealites still got their prophets but the nations did not... (Pls correct me if wrong) (I'm a believer but I just can't wrap my head around this)
* 2 Kings 3:27 (King Mesha of Moab sacrifices his son)
*2 Kings 16:3; 21:6 (Israelite kings sacrifice children)
* Ezekiel 20:31; 23:37 (prophetic condemnation)
* Psalm 106:37-38 (Israel's sin)
*Molech worship (Leviticus 18:21; 20:2-5): Israelites sacrificed children to the Canaanite deity Molech.
*Passing children through fire (2 Kings 16:3; 21:6): A ritualistic practice associated with Molech worship.
I like Gavin Ortlunds take on this topic!
@22:52 You're absolutely right about an incremental revelation.
Jesus himself reveals a crucial principle in Matthew 19 and Mark 10: Moses prescribed certain divorce laws specifically because of the Israelites' hardness of heart. This insight opens up a broader question: what other laws might God have prescribed not as perfect moral ideals, but as necessary accommodations to Israel's spiritual and moral capacity at the time?
This framework helps us understand Christ's repeated pattern in the Sermon on the Mount: 'You have heard it said... but I say to you.' When he transforms 'an eye for an eye' into 'turn the other cheek,' he's not contradicting earlier law but revealing its fuller intention, now that humanity had been prepared for it.
This gradual moral development didn't begin with Christ. We often fail to recognize that moral sophistication isn't innate or instantaneous - it's developed over time. The Israelites, like any people, couldn't leap to moral perfection overnight. Rather than instantly transforming them into saints, God implemented a progressive revelation, methodically instilling laws while gradually unveiling deeper aspects of His nature.
We see this progression clearly in Ezekiel 18, for example, where God declares: 'What do you mean by repeating this proverb concerning the land of Israel, "The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge"? As I live, declares the Lord God, this proverb shall no more be used in Israel. Behold, all souls are mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is mine: the soul who sins shall die.' This represents a significant development from the earlier principle of 'visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me.'
The earlier formulation appeared in Exodus, when Israel's moral and social development was still primitive. To build a moral foundation from scratch, sterner measures were initially necessary. The depth of their primitive state is vividly illustrated in Ezekiel 16, where God describes Israel's origins: 'Your origin and your birth are from the land of the Canaanite; your father was an Amorite and your mother a Hittite. And as for your birth, on the day you were born your navel cord was not cut, nor were you washed with water for cleansing, nor were you rubbed with salt or even wrapped with cloth... when I passed by you and saw you squirming in your natal blood, I said to you while you were there in your blood, "Live!" Yes, I said to you while you were there in your blood, "Live!"'
This metaphor powerfully illustrates Israel's initial state and God's progressive work: He began with a people as helpless as an abandoned newborn and gradually nurtured them toward moral maturity, with Christ representing the culmination of this developmental process. You can appreciate God's wisdom when you also note that the while not flawless, the moral codes given to the Israelites in Exodus were miles ahead of the codes of other ancient civilizations at the time.
Lool. I quite like Zack. And he's right. That's definitely what the "married them" but sounded like.
The only consistent way to answer this is from a fully Gods sovereign choice, God in the end has the only true free choice. And his people( the Israelites) were his because he chose them not because they were any better.
These are very difficult passages in the bible to be honest. I guess if God would allow me to see what He sees, that maybe one day I could understand those passages. As a Christian, Alex is throwing some really difficult questions there.
Read The Making of The Western Mind by Tom Holland, and The Unseen Realm by Michael S Heiser
@@curtis3057 Yes! Heiser also brings in the issue of those humans having tainted blood of the 'giant' clans.
I dare Alex to try this with Bishop Baron and see which way most people turn after that discussion.
so you think you can justify the genocide?
@ easily, the way humans have been throughout history is extremely barbaric. Every step in a better direction is a great milestone stone. Sometimes people consumed by completely evil ideologies are going to change their minds and would destroy the human race if not destroyed. The hubris of these egotistical godless heathans to think they could go back and time and do things better is utterly stupid. It’s like back to the future. If you went back in time and tried things your way most likely the world today would be far worse than it is now.
@@ideapulse-i2iit’s only in a world that has been influenced by Christian morality that we call genocide evil. That is only in the modern west where Christianity has heavily influenced every fiber of western thought and philosophy.
In every other worldview genocide was not only seen as okay but completely justifiable by those who perpetrated it. I mean it even took the west a thousand years of Christian though and arguments for the universal brotherhood of man under the image of God that we even developed the concept of human rights which no other part of the world accepts even today.
@@jarlwilliam9932 WELL YOUR NOT TRUE,The idea that only Christian morality deems genocide as evil overlooks the profound teachings of Islam, which emphasize the sanctity and unity of human life. The Qur'an declares, "Whoever kills a soul…it is as if he has slain all of mankind" (Qur'an 5:32), embedding a deep moral responsibility to protect life and oppose oppression. Islamic teachings go further by setting strict limits on conflict, forbidding harm to innocents and promoting mercy and justice even in times of war. Far from being unique to Christianity, this universal respect for life reflects a shared human ethic, where Islam’s beautiful principles stand as a timeless testament against all forms of cruelty and injustice.
Alex is careful on who he asks questions of unfortunately. Like if you want to bring up theological questions, why not ask Bishop Baron or W.L.C? But he doesn't because he knows they're able to answer it more eloquently. I like Cliffe but he's just a pastor.
This video makes me so worried for Europe... Are we being deleted as judgement?
Why they skip from 8:48 to 12:05? Alex was still cooking.
Maybe in the worst instances, God is an acronym for Government Of the Day.
I think they are saying that China doesn't have a problem with it because they are more collectivist. They understand how a whole group could be punished for the actions of some of its members. Americans are individualistic and have more of an issue with it.
These questions aren't really that difficult. Just ask the atheist why he believes anything can be wrong and he falls apart. Morality doesn't stand alone. It is grounded in God. Whatever God does is good.
Dr. Frank Turek said it perfectly
@@Youknowthis247 Because even though morality is something that we evolved with, you or I can't deny it. We need it.
@@Mr.Victor-qs2hj We didnt evolve with morality. Morality instills moral duties. You dont get moral duties out of random chance mutations.
@TheDragonageorigins Then how did morality evolve in laws?
@Mr.Victor-qs2hj I don't know about "evolving," but I will answer your question as best as I can. I would say that moral laws are like divine energies of God that, when applied to our lives in the right disposition, bring us closer into communion with him. I think you would have to prove that moral laws intact 'evolved'.
Ruslan: Cliffe Married George Janko!
Zach: woah, I didn’t know we were affirming out here
Lmaooooooo
Unhinged troll Zach is the best Zach lollllll keep it coming (no diddy)
😂😂😂😂
Ima try to help with these difficult passages , look at Nazis. They committed atrocities and they weren’t completely wiped out which has led to nazis and that mindset still being perpetuated today
When someone has a lack of knowledge, they stand on what they know. But this man has pride to believe his morals are fair than our Fathers. Test that spirit. It is the spirit of the anitchrist. Jesus told you a little yeast leavens the whole bread. When God judges those people and used Israel, he did not want to leave remnant of those people because their beliefs and perversness against him and God knew that a few left alive around his people would corrupt them.
Because this man can't see how fair God is and how serious he is about stewardship, he makes himself higher than the creator because he can not understand that God will not force them to change. They made their choice. Just like this man will make his choice.
The ancient Israelites 100% committed child sacrifice. But who ever said they weren't punished for committing sins while the other people groups were punished? They had to wander in the wilderness for 400 years because they sinned. They had their temples destroyed twice, and Jesus warned them about that. They were exiled many times and after the destruction of the second temple, they spread out throughout the world without a nation of their own between 70 AD and 1948 AD. They were 100% judged for their sin.
15:24 This sentiment undercuts the idea of objective morals. Today is is wrong but back then it wasn't. That is the very type morals that are ascribed to those whom believe in subjective morals.
It seems to me it boils down whether there are things that God can command that are contrary to his nature. And if not, is it against his nature to do this to the innocent for any reason? Depending on how you answer that determines whether you approach it from a consequentialist or deontological point of view, similar to the problem of evil.
Can someone please give me the link to the Destiny video?