A Question for Any Theist

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 11 вер 2024
  • If Jesus is God, then wouldnt heaven be empty of God when He lived a human life? I believe the answer to this question is "no, heaven was occupied by the God the Father". God, being omnipotent or all powerful, had the capability to humble Himself, become a human and live out a human life whilst still not ceasing to be God. Food for thought! #biblicaltruth #evidencebased #evidencebasedfaith #jesuslovesyou #jesusmakessense #jesussaves #jesussaveslives #followjesus #chrisitantiktok #chrisitantiktoks #spiritualtiktok #newagemovement #newagetochrist #newagespirituality #newagetojesus #jesusislord #jesusisgod #godlovesus #godlovesusall #studyyourbible #exnewager #agnostic #agnosticatheist #athiest #cometochrist

КОМЕНТАРІ • 192

  • @Rama-tanu
    @Rama-tanu 2 місяці тому +3

    Yes. Lord Krishna described in the Bhagavad-gita and Srimad Bhagavatam(Bhagavat Purana). In our tradition(Gaudiya Vaisnavism) we recognize Lord Jesus as the best son of God and respect him. We don’t see him as God but we respect him for the great service he did for God, and is still doing.

    • @anewwaywithnoah1132
      @anewwaywithnoah1132  Місяць тому

      Jesus is the eternal creator and Son of God, the only human being who shares the nature of God. Yesu is not just a prophet, He didn’t claim to be! May the Heavenly Father bless you with a relationship with Jesus Christ through the power of the Holy Spirit! Get to know Jesus by reading about what He said in the biographies of Jesus, the good news gospel accounts of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

  • @gordon3186
    @gordon3186 2 місяці тому +4

    Who'd want a personal relationship with anyone who threatened to have them tortured if they refused?

    • @anewwaywithnoah1132
      @anewwaywithnoah1132  2 місяці тому +1

      @@gordon3186 God is on a rescue mission. He’s saving us from an evil world and you want to call Him evil? Smh

    • @SimonDaumMusic
      @SimonDaumMusic 2 місяці тому

      Thats the thing, ans its not just that, its also that God supposedly created all this in the first place, meaning, God created evil, God created us, God created our circumstances, then goes on a rescuemission to save a handful of lucky dudes that happen to have the fortune to come accross the Bible, promises to save everyone, but in the end fails to keep his promise..
      Thats the wristed picture people have of God..
      Is it not interesting if any neighbour would act like God, we would call the police and put that dude where he cant harm anyone.. So, how comes its now all different with God? He can do whatever pleases him and yet its good.. Even if we dont understand anything about it, its good..
      In my view its all about spiritual discernment, as well as about reading the Bible from within its own context, looking through a great deal of manmade influence, and understand who and what God really is..

    • @Sue-xv8os
      @Sue-xv8os 2 місяці тому +2

      @@anewwaywithnoah1132 I don't see anywhere in gordons comment that he mentions any god.

    • @vibrantphilosophy
      @vibrantphilosophy 2 місяці тому

      @@gordon3186 that’s not really an accurate representation of what hell is. Hell is a logical consequence of rejecting God, which basically means that it is a creation of man. Man creates their own hell from a rejection of God. This hell is not physical fire or any such barbaric thing, but rather, is the presence of God himself. Philosophers have coined this “the divine presence model.” For those who love God and embrace him, his fire is an all consuming love. But for those who hate God and reject him, his love is like torture.

    • @gordon3186
      @gordon3186 2 місяці тому

      @@vibrantphilosophy --- "The same thing will happen at the end of time. The angels will go out and separate the evil people from people who have God’s approval. Then the angels will throw the evil people into a blazing furnace. They will cry and be in extreme pain there." --- Matthew 13:49-50 - GOD’S WORD Translation (GW)
      The Bible is a barbaric book about a barbaric god. Not having to spend even a long weekend with a god who drowned infants, or with his deluded followers, will be just fine with me.

  • @funkatron101
    @funkatron101 2 місяці тому +5

    Theoretically, any omnipotent being could do anything. Once they reach limits to their power, they cease to be all-powerful.
    A question I pose for you. Can an omnibenevolent god create a system of eternal suffering?

    • @anewwaywithnoah1132
      @anewwaywithnoah1132  2 місяці тому

      @@funkatron101 Theoretically God can freely choose to humble Himself and become a human for the purpose of revealing Himself to humanity and saving us from a fallen world. You’re missing the point on hell. God is trying to rescue us from it, but He is just so evil must be punished.

    • @funkatron101
      @funkatron101 2 місяці тому +1

      ​@@anewwaywithnoah1132 You did not answer my question. You skirted it, because the answer is no. By definition, an omnibenevolent being CAN NOT create a system of ETERNAL suffering. Once this being does, they are no longer to be omnibenevolent. You would be better served to adopt annihilationism, as the concept of an eternal hell is not, in any way, good or just.
      I brought this up parallel to your question due to the Epicurean Paradox. This is one of the fundamental problems with the tri (or quad) attributes Christians assert their god has. Epicurus figured out this fatal flaw in roughly 300 BC and ever since, it has not been adequately challenged. In many cases, we do not need one of these attributes to contradict the other as the narration Bible challenge these attributes through this being's actions.

    • @bignoob1790
      @bignoob1790 2 місяці тому

      I believe God allowing some people to suffer is loving, especially if they have no desire to be in God's grace

    • @anewwaywithnoah1132
      @anewwaywithnoah1132  2 місяці тому

      @bignoob1790 I believe that God does not want any to perish, but evil must be dealt with.

    • @bignoob1790
      @bignoob1790 2 місяці тому

      @@anewwaywithnoah1132
      I believe that it was about 2000 years ago, all debts are settled

  • @RabbiKolakowski
    @RabbiKolakowski 2 місяці тому +1

    The Omnipresent Almighty First Cause, Unmoved Mover cannot be divided into pieces and still be Almighty. Once God is divided into two or three pieces, He ceases to be Almighty, because then that power is shared. This isn't a limit on God's power, it is the definition of being Almighty.

    • @anewwaywithnoah1132
      @anewwaywithnoah1132  2 місяці тому

      @@RabbiKolakowski Not pieces, persons. One essence. Heaven was not vacant of God when Jesus was on the cross.

    • @austincollard7589
      @austincollard7589 2 місяці тому

      This is such a false statement 😂 anything to make what you believe work. Makes sense why beliefs are filtered to what you want to see.
      If a third of a potatoes is cut into fries the other third is cut into scalp potato and the other third is a baked potato, if I put all the thirds back together, do I still have a whole potato?
      Lastly light exists as both a particle and wavelength, two entities existing as one unified whole, which light is in the real world that you can observe, which, debunks your statement. Rabbi meet the Messiah who was prophecied 100s of years before he came to earth and fulfilled all the prophecies within the Bible. Jesus wonderful and mighty councilor baby

    • @bignoob1790
      @bignoob1790 2 місяці тому

      @RabbiKolakowski
      The trinity is a very powerful model, that explains about everything
      Father, Son, Holy Ghost = God
      Body, mind, soul = man
      Male, female, offspring
      Conscious, subconscious, manifest

    • @gordon3186
      @gordon3186 2 місяці тому

      @@bignoob1790 ---
      “The hocus-pocus phantasm of a God like another Cerberus, with one body and three heads, had its birth and growth in the blood of thousands and thousands of martyrs... In fact, the Athanasian paradox that one is three, and three but one, is so incomprehensible to the human mind, that no candid man can say he has any idea of it, and how can he believe what presents no idea? He who thinks he does, only deceives himself. He proves, also, that man, once surrendering his reason, has no remaining guard against absurdities the most monstrous, and like a ship without a rudder, is the sport of every wind. With such persons, gullibility which they call faith, takes the helm from the hand of reason, and the mind becomes a wreck"
      ― Thomas Jefferson, Letters of Thomas Jefferson

  • @Sue-xv8os
    @Sue-xv8os 2 місяці тому +2

    Absolutely miraculous that a god can become a mortal, then back to being a god.
    Too bad said god can't be miraculous enough to stop shooters.

    • @anewwaywithnoah1132
      @anewwaywithnoah1132  2 місяці тому

      @@Sue-xv8os this is an outrageous and silly comment in bad taste. May you come to know the love that God has for you.

    • @bignoob1790
      @bignoob1790 2 місяці тому

      @@Sue-xv8os
      I believe a lot of them were

    • @Sue-xv8os
      @Sue-xv8os 2 місяці тому +2

      @@anewwaywithnoah1132 How about the love that your god has for child abusers, or rapists, or murderers? Or is that too outrageous and silly a question...

    • @anewwaywithnoah1132
      @anewwaywithnoah1132  2 місяці тому

      @@Sue-xv8os the love God has for everybody is similar to the love a parent has for a child. Though the atrocities are not pleasant or good in the parents eyes, a parent still harbors love for its creation.

    • @Sue-xv8os
      @Sue-xv8os 2 місяці тому

      @@anewwaywithnoah1132 Sorta like Susan Smith or Andrea Yates? Toxic.

  • @DAB-2023
    @DAB-2023 2 місяці тому +2

    This is no different from a Muslim claiming that his version of god is all-powerful and the proof is that he allowed Muhammad to fly to the moon on a winged horse. If your god is supposedly all-powerful then "he" can by definition do anything, and make anything in your book seem logical. Your book says that your god became a human being, another book says that someone was able to fly into space on the back of a oxygen-breathing land animal. Both are equally impossible and could only be achieved via supernatural powers (whatever that means). However, *both* claims completely lack evidence.

    • @anewwaywithnoah1132
      @anewwaywithnoah1132  2 місяці тому +2

      @@DAB-2023 the difference is the massive amount of historical evidence to back the resurrection and showing the life of Jesus was legit and that He is trustworthy.

    • @anewwaywithnoah1132
      @anewwaywithnoah1132  2 місяці тому

      @@DAB-2023 you need to seriously do a bit more research if you think there is no evidence for Jesus resurrecting from the grave.

    • @GaryCrant
      @GaryCrant 2 місяці тому

      Muhammad’s story is factually false and a lie. He claimed to visit the al-Aqsa mosque which did not exist in Jerusalem at the time.

    • @DAB-2023
      @DAB-2023 2 місяці тому

      @@anewwaywithnoah1132 I didn't say that. You clearly didn't read my comment at all. Your video says that God takes human form. That's what I was referring to and what I mentioned in my comment.
      But anyway, you read my mind. I don't believe Jesus resurrected from the grave. We all know it's not possible and, at best, it's wishful thinking. You can't prove it. That's why people say they "believe"-because they don't have any real proof.
      By the way, I read the whole Bible from beginning to end and found nothing that convinces me. What sticks in my mind most is that the Bronze Age men who wrote the Old Testament were obsessed with blood sacrifice and the correct way to build a temple. Doesn't that strike you as a bit weird? A book that is supposed to guide humanity has hundreds of pages about burnt offerings but nothing about the importance of boiling water.

    • @DAB-2023
      @DAB-2023 2 місяці тому

      @@anewwaywithnoah1132 About the life of Jesus supposedly being "legit": Muslims can also come up with all sorts of justifications to make their beliefs seem "legit". They can find all sort of proofs in their book, just as you can. You have decided that the claims about the bible are all "legit", but that the claims made about other religions are not "legit". The reason is simply geographic. You believe what the people around you believe and/or share the same beliefs as your parents, etc. I wish you luck.

  • @SimonDaumMusic
    @SimonDaumMusic 2 місяці тому +1

    The challange is that a closer study of the Bible, especially when taken from within its own context and background, shows that Jesus actually never claimed to be God, but rather claimed to act in the name of God, just as the Angel of the Lord did back in the Old Testament days, or as others did.

    • @anewwaywithnoah1132
      @anewwaywithnoah1132  2 місяці тому

      @@SimonDaumMusic that is demonstrably false, Jesus clearly claimed to be God and His disciples clearly worshipped Him as God. The angel of God in the Old Testament as well as Jesus in the new was one who had the power to forgive sins. Only God can do that.

    • @anewwaywithnoah1132
      @anewwaywithnoah1132  2 місяці тому

      @@SimonDaumMusic if Jesus never claimed to be God, what on earth do you think He was killed for? They killed Him for blasphemy, making Himself equal with God, which He was in nature. He claimed to be God.

    • @SimonDaumMusic
      @SimonDaumMusic 2 місяці тому

      @@anewwaywithnoah1132 Its about the Details of understanding the scriptures..
      Jesus, in the New Test, never identified himself as God, but rather, in ansolutely every instance, distinguishes himself from God.
      Now, there definetly is figurative language that talks about Oneness, that talks about Jesus being the authorized bearer of God's name, but these things are being borrowed from intermediary figures that are already well known within Greco-Roman period Jewish circles and they were never understood to be identifying these intermediary figures as God themselves.
      One instance we find in the New Testament that adresses this topic is in John 10:30:
      “I and my Father are one”
      ….and where we later on learn about the true meaning of what that Oneness actually means in John 17:11, 21-24
      „And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.
      That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
      And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:
      I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.
      Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.“
      So that Oneness that is being described in John 10:30, if the author of John is in any way shape or form consistent is not a Oneness of substance or Essence but is a Oneness of purpose of perfection that they may be perfect in one as the author has Jesus praying in John 17.
      There is no other way to explain this without imposing outside assumptions on the text without telling the text what it is and is not allowed to mean, so some people are going to say: „well that's a different kind of Oneness“ but there's absolutely nothing anywhere in the text that indicates it's a different kind of Oneness the text itself repeatedly asserts that it's the exact same Oneness one can only arrive at the conclusion that it's a different kind of Oneness if one presupposes that it cannot be the same kind of Oneness and that is not the data regarding what the texts say that is the Dogma regarding what the texts are allowed to say.

    • @SimonDaumMusic
      @SimonDaumMusic 2 місяці тому

      @@anewwaywithnoah1132 Well, why then were the Apostles also capable to firgive sins? I went more into detail in my other response, but no, it was not just God and Jesus that were able to forgive sins, and so since the Apostles were capable to do so, its also possible the Angel of the Lord could act in the name of God, being the bearer of his name.. There are actually multiple examples of this, and its something that we know was part of the ancient world...
      So it seems obvious that God can pass on the power and authority to forgive sins.

    • @SimonDaumMusic
      @SimonDaumMusic 2 місяці тому

      @@anewwaywithnoah1132 I actually also gave a response to your other response, it seems it hasnt shown up yet, so not sure it has or will reach you..

  • @vibrantphilosophy
    @vibrantphilosophy 2 місяці тому

    This reminds me of an a priori argument that the philosopher Richard Swinburne developed for Christianity. The argument basically states that God would want to become incarnate in his creation, if he chooses to create. This would only include Christianity, Hinduism, and potentially Judaism because it can be argued that God has incarnated himself even before Jesus came. But the incarnation is different from Jesus. Incarnation in Christianity actually makes more sense than in let’s say Hinduism, no disrespect to Hinduism of course, but in Christianity, Jesus becomes 100% man and 100% God. Jesus is man in the sense that he united himself to man, but is God in the sense that he unites man to God. In Hinduism incarnation is not like this.

    • @anewwaywithnoah1132
      @anewwaywithnoah1132  2 місяці тому +1

      @@vibrantphilosophy Jesus is the most profound human being, it’s God humbling Himself not only to save us, but also to become in a way family with us.

    • @vibrantphilosophy
      @vibrantphilosophy 2 місяці тому

      @@anewwaywithnoah1132 amen to that!

  • @Oandad
    @Oandad 2 місяці тому +2

    Why would God come amongst the ants?

    • @anewwaywithnoah1132
      @anewwaywithnoah1132  2 місяці тому

      @@Oandad to save us because He loves us and cares about His creation being saved.

    • @gergelymagyarosi9285
      @gergelymagyarosi9285 2 місяці тому +1

      ​@@anewwaywithnoah1132
      If he's all-powerful, he doesn't need to. Even if his power is limited, based on how Christianity describes him, it's a highly questionable choice.

    • @Spugizakom
      @Spugizakom 2 місяці тому

      @@gergelymagyarosi9285If we are to be “just forgiven” as, it seems like you are suggesting, then God would not be a just god. There is a price for pur sins. Either we pay it or someone else pays for us. Either the finite suffers the infinite or the infinite suffers the finite.

    • @anewwaywithnoah1132
      @anewwaywithnoah1132  2 місяці тому

      @@gergelymagyarosi9285 he didn’t create us to be slaves, He created us to love and choose love freely. Unfortunately free will allows for a loving God to exist plus evil to be chosen. Love is a free choice.

    • @mattr.1887
      @mattr.1887 2 місяці тому

      God doesn't consult us and our free will on every single issue though.
      If God DOES simply honor our free will, then I would imagine upon death he would just ask us what kind of afterlife we want, and grant whatever we ask.

  • @mattr.1887
    @mattr.1887 2 місяці тому

    For a God to become a real human, then once you're dead, you're DEAD. There would be no resurrection or anything like that. Because that is how it works with real human beings, as far as I'm aware.

    • @anewwaywithnoah1132
      @anewwaywithnoah1132  2 місяці тому

      @@mattr.1887 study the Biblical sources and the life of Jesus Christ! It’s fascinating and it will show you the truth of these matters!

    • @mattr.1887
      @mattr.1887 2 місяці тому

      I have. I was a diehard believer for years and also involved in ministry for awhile.

    • @anewwaywithnoah1132
      @anewwaywithnoah1132  2 місяці тому

      @@mattr.1887 study the historicity and extra-biblical info.

    • @danielbu2611
      @danielbu2611 2 місяці тому

      But death is the just outcome of sin. This is precisely WHY he rose from the dead. He did not sin and therefore did not earn death so death could not hold him.

    • @Sue-xv8os
      @Sue-xv8os 2 місяці тому

      @@danielbu2611 What if there was no "fall", no "original sin", and therefore no death for anyone, according to your comment? Have you ever thought about that?