NathanH83

If the New Testament never references the Apocrypha, then who are the tortured men in Hebrews 11:35?

6 days ago | [YT] | 24

NathanH83

Atheists really need to learn the racist beliefs of Charles Darwin.

“It is very true what you say about the higher races of men, when high enough, replacing & clearing off the lower races… The more civilised so-called Caucasian races have beaten the Turkish hollow in the struggle for existence. Looking to the world at no very distant date, what an endless number of the lower races will have been eliminated by the higher civilised races throughout the world.”
-Charles Darwin, in a private letter to Charles Kingsley, 1862

“At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes… will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as at present between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.”
-Charles Darwin, “The Descent of Man” chapter 6

1 week ago | [YT] | 54

NathanH83

WOW! What a good movie!!!

2 weeks ago | [YT] | 6

NathanH83

An atheist asked:
“Christians, without the Bible, would you think that God exists?”

Yes, because science.

The Earth is the exact right distance from the Sun for life to be possible. Too close, we’d burn to death. All water would become vapor. Too far away, we’d freeze to death. All water would freeze. That’s designed.

The Earth is the exact right size. Too large and gravity would drain the blood from your brain, and we’d all die. Too small and the magnetic core would not be strong enough, and the solar winds would strip away the atmosphere, and we’d all die. That’s designed.

The Earth spins at the exact right speed. Too slow and one side would burn and the other side would freeze, and we’d all die. Too fast, and the winds generated from the Coriolis Effect would cause constant storming all over the Earth. No sunlight would get through, and all the plants would die, causing all the animals that eat plants to die, causing all the animals that eat the animals that eat plants to die. That’s designed.

The Moon is the exact right distance from Earth. Too close and the tides would be too strong and drown everything on Earth twice a day, and we’d all die. Too far away, and there’d be no tides. The oceans would become stagnant. Marine plant life would die. And since 90% of our oxygen comes from marine plant life, then we’d lose most of our oxygen and we’d die. That’s designed.

The Earth is the exact right distance.
The Earth spins at the exact right speed.
The Earth is the exact right size.
The Moon is the exact right distance.

This solar system was designed by an intelligent and powerful being. Science makes that clear, even without a Bible telling us it’s so.

“This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being"
-Isaac Newton

3 weeks ago | [YT] | 23

NathanH83

Sometimes I get sick of these stupid questions.

This atheist wants to talk about Deuteronomy 22 which says:

“If a man meets a virgin who is not betrothed, and seizes her and lies with her, and they are found, then the man who lay with her shall give to the father of the young woman fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he has violated her. He may not divorce her all his days.”
-Deuteronomy 22:28-29 (ESV)

So the atheist asks why God would force a rape victim to marry her rapist.

But did he bother to read the verse in Exodus 22? Obviously not, because it says:

“If a man seduces a virgin who is not betrothed and lies with her, he shall give the bride-price for her and make her his wife. If her father utterly refuses to give her to him, he shall pay money equal to the bride-price for virgins.”
-Exodus 22:16-17 (ESV)

If the father can refuse the marriage, then how is she forced to marry her rapist?

Obviously, she’s not forced. She can request her father to refuse the marriage. And the rapist still has to pay the bride price anyway.

His question falsely assumes she has to marry her rapist. She doesn’t.

1 month ago | [YT] | 32

NathanH83

I find it so ironic when so many Christians say that the New Testament never references the Apocrypha.

The truth is, Daniel 8 prophesies about Maccabees, John 10:22 references back to Maccabees, and Hebrews 11:35 references Maccabees.

And yet so many Christians who have never actually read Maccabees continue to parrot the claim, “The New Testament never references the Apocrypha.”

Ok? But how can you actually know that the New Testament never references Maccabees if you’ve never read Maccabees?

When Hebrews 11:35 mentions the tortured men, how can you know that’s not a reference to 2 Maccabees 7 when you’ve never read 2 Maccabees 7 to know if it matches up or not?

That’s like saying that “Avengers: Endgame” never references “Thor: The Dark World” even though you’ve never actually watched “Thor: The Dark World” in order to know that “Avengers: Endgame” never references it.

If you had any knowledge of the Aether or the Reality Stone then you would know the truth, that “Avengers: Endgame” does in fact reference “Thor: The Dark World” very prominently.

But, if you want to live in ignorance, then I guess Reality can be whatever you want.

1 month ago | [YT] | 29

NathanH83

You have ascended on high,
You have led captivity captive;
You have received gifts among men,
Even from the rebellious,
That the Lord God might dwell there. (Psalm 68:18, NKJV)

Therefore He says: “When He ascended on high, He led captivity captive, And gave gifts to men.” (Now this, “He ascended” —what does it mean but that He also first descended into the lower parts of the earth? (Ephesians 4:8-9, OSB)

For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit, by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. (1 Peter 3:18-20, OSB)

For this reason the gospel was preached also to those who are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit. (1 Peter 4:6, OSB)

Most assuredly, I say to you, the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God; and those who hear will live. (John 5:25, OSB)

For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. (Matthew 12:40, OSB)

———-

“For this reason, too, He administered food to them in a recumbent posture, indicating that those who were lying in the earth were they to whom He came to impart life. As Jeremiah declares, The holy Lord remembered His dead Israel, who slept in the land of sepulture; and He descended to them to make known to them His salvation, that they might be saved.”
— Irenaeus of Lyons (c. AD 130–202), Against Heresies 4.22.1

“It was for this reason, too, that the Lord descended into the regions beneath the earth, preaching His advent there also, and [declaring] the remission of sins received by those who believe in Him.”
— Irenaeus of Lyons (c. AD 130–202), Against Heresies 4.27.2

Irenaeus explicitly says Christ preached in Hades and that the message involved forgiveness of sins.

“The Lord preached the Gospel to those in Hades… Do not suppose that He descended only for the sake of the Hebrews, but for the salvation of all.”
— Clement of Alexandria (c. AD 150–215)
Stromata 6.6

“He preached the Gospel to those in Hades, in order that He might convert them.”
— Clement of Alexandria (c. AD 150–215)
Stromata 2.9

Clement is unambiguous: Christ preached in order to convert. This is not merely a declaration of victory.

“Christ went down into Hades to preach to the souls there, so that they too might be saved.”
— Origen (c. AD 185–254)
Commentary on Romans 5.10

“The soul of Christ, stripped of the body, held converse with the souls stripped of bodies.”
— Origen (c. AD 185–254)
On First Principles 2.4.1

Origen explicitly links Christ’s descent with salvific preaching, grounded in 1 Peter 3:19.

“He became a preacher to the souls in Hades, so that He might redeem them also.”
— Hippolytus of Rome (c. AD 170–235)
Against Plato, On the Cause of the Universe

Hippolytus sees Christ as acting in Hades in the same redemptive role He had on earth.

“The Lord touched all parts of creation… descending to Hades, that from there also He might redeem all.”
— Athanasius (c. AD 296–373)
On the Incarnation 20

Athanasius clearly affirms redemptive action in Hades, consistent with gospel proclamation.

“He went down into the regions beneath the earth, that from thence also He might redeem the righteous.”
— Cyril of Jerusalem (c. AD 313–386)
Catechetical Lectures 4.11

“Jesus descended into hell, preaching salvation.”
— Cyril of Jerusalem (c. AD 313–386)
Catechetical Lectures 14.19

1 month ago | [YT] | 25

NathanH83

Does God Really Mean What He Says?
————

Some skeptics argue that the Bible has a contradiction in regards to the destruction of the Amalekites.

In 1 Samuel 15, Saul is commanded to completely destroy all the Amalekites.

“Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them. But kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’ ”
-1 Samuel 15:3 (NKJV)

And it says Saul destroyed them all except Agag:

“He also took Agag king of the Amalekites alive, and utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword. But Saul and the people spared Agag and the best of the sheep, the oxen, the fatlings, the lambs, and all that was good, and were unwilling to utterly destroy them. But everything despised and worthless, that they utterly destroyed.”
-1 Samuel 15:8-9 (NKJV)

Saul destroyed all the people and left alive Agag and a whole bunch of animals. But even Agag was later killed by the prophet Samuel:

“But Samuel said, ‘As your sword has made women childless, so shall your mother be childless among women.’ And Samuel hacked Agag in pieces before the Lord in Gilgal.”
-1 Samuel 15:33 (NKJV)

But then later on, in 1 Samuel 27 (several years later) it says that David attacked more Amalekites:

“And David and his men went up and raided the Geshurites, the Girzites, and the Amalekites. For those nations were the inhabitants of the land from of old, as you go to Shur, even as far as the land of Egypt. Whenever David attacked the land, he left neither man nor woman alive, but took away the sheep, the oxen, the donkeys, the camels, and the apparel, and returned and came to Achish.”
-1 Samuel 27:8-9 (NKJV)

How could David be encountering more Amalekites in chapter 27 if Saul and Samuel had already “utterly destroyed them all” years earlier in chapter 15?

Atheists and skeptics will say this is a contradiction.

Some Christians will argue that when God says to destroy all the Amalekites, He’s just being hyperbolic, which means God is just exaggerating.

HYPERBOLIC
Definition:
“Relating to or containing hyperbole; exaggerating or diminishing beyond the fact; exceeding the truth; as a hyperbolical expression.”
-Noah Webster’s 1828 dictionary

In other words, God doesn’t really mean what he says. (Uhuh, yea right!)

Notice how this Christian says that God is just being hyperbolic in 1 Samuel 15:
youtube.com/shorts/pcOn98wVF6...

Does God really mean what he says? Or is He just being hyperbolic and exaggerating the truth?

I believe God means what he says.

Here’s my answer to this question:

———-
Saul destroyed all the Amalekites in a specific region
———-

In 1 Samuel 15:7 it says that Saul only attacked the Amalekites from Havilah to Shur, which is before Egypt.

“And Saul attacked the Amalekites, from Havilah all the way to Shur, which is east of Egypt.”
1 Samuel 15:7 (NKJV)

My Orthodox Study Bible says this:

“Saul attacked the Amalekites from Havilah all the way to Shur, which is before Egypt.”
-1 Kingdoms 15:7 (OSB)

But later on in 1 Samuel 27:8 it says that David finished off the rest of the Amalekites from Shur as far as the land of Egypt.

“And David and his men went up and raided the Geshurites, the Girzites, and the Amalekites. For those nations were the inhabitants of the land from of old, as you go to Shur, even as far as the land of Egypt.”
-1 Samuel 27:8 (NKJV)

The way it sounds to me is that Saul attacked the Amalekites from Havilah to Shur (BEFORE you get to Egypt), but then David attacked the rest of the Amalekites from Shur AS FAR AS the land of Egypt.

Think of it this way. Imagine there’s 3 points on a map:

A. Havilah
B. Shur
C. Egypt.

Saul attacked all the Amalekites from point A to point B.
David attacked the rest of the Amalekites from point B to point C.

Even though Saul was commanded to utterly destroy all the Amalekites, he and his men had no desire to utterly destroy them. They disobeyed God.

In other words, Saul didn’t do the job thoroughly, so David picked up Saul’s slack and finished what he started.

Now you may say: “But it says Saul killed them ALL except Agag!”

“He also took Agag king of the Amalekites alive, and utterly destroyed ALL THE PEOPLE with the edge of the sword.”
-1 Samuel 15:8 (NKJV)

“See! It says he killed them ALL except Agag!”

No, it doesn’t. It says he killed them all from point A to point B:

“And Saul attacked the Amalekites, from Havilah all the way to Shur, which is east of Egypt.”
1 Samuel 15:7 (NKJV)

Saul killed them ALL from this point to that point. “ALL” within these parameters does not mean “ALL” of them in the whole wide world.

If I say, “I finished off ALL the M&M’s in my bag,” that doesn’t mean “I consumed all the M&M’s in the whole entire world!”

Saul finished off ALL of the Amalekites that were within the parameters in which it says he traveled, namely from Havilah to Shur. If there were Amalekite travelers in the world who went to Ethiopia, or Egypt, or Babylon, or anywhere else in the world, then obviously Saul didn’t get those Amalekites. He got them ALL from point A to point B. David finished off the rest from point B to point C.

In other words, Saul killed the Amalekites that were living within the boundaries of the country of Amalek (in-between Havilah and Shur), but David later killed more Amalekites who were living outside the country of Amalek (in-between Shur and Egypt).

How many Amalekites were trading spices in Egypt who neither Saul nor David destroyed? Obviously they didn’t get to them!

So, you see, the Bible was not being parabolic. It means what it says. Saul killed ALL the Amalekites from this point to that point. It’s not a contradiction. It’s literal, and very specific.

But that doesn’t make God a genocidal maniac like these atheists are suggesting. God was pronouncing judgment on wicked people. God is a righteous judge.

So again:
Saul: Havilah - Shur (Before Egypt)
David: Shur - as far as Egypt.

Saul attacked the Amalekites from Havilah to Shur (Before Egypt), and David finished off the Amalekites from Shur as far as the land of Egypt.

It’s NOT a contradiction.

Skip the Carousel

1 2 3

3 months ago | [YT] | 21

NathanH83

So much for the New Testament never referencing the Apocrypha.

Skip the Carousel

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

4 months ago | [YT] | 46

NathanH83

Notice how, according to Noah Webster’s 1828 dictionary, the word “usury” historically used to mean just “interest”. That’s how it’s used all throughout the 1611 King James Bible.

But they changed the definition. Now, the modern definition means “illegal interest,” which means charging too much (like charging over the agreed upon amount stipulated by local law).

They literally changed the definition of the word “usury” so that they can get away with disobeying God’s law, but not feeling condemned by the Bible for it.

It also means bacon. 🥓

5 months ago | [YT] | 32