D. Wood's video also brought me here!

Me too!!😁

@buymebluepills And me 👍

And me! I've just finished his book and it was very interesting and informative

Me too!!!! :) :) :)

It is why we are homeschooling our kids. We want then to learn tolerance of divergent viewpoints. The modern left who dominate the school system demand that they practice active indulgence of a very narrow set of principles, to the violent opression and exclusion of all else. I will not let my children be raised by fascists and bigots.

@@bolshoefeodor6536 fascist and bigots are not a part of a "left" thing. It only looks that way to someone who has drifted further and further to the right.

@@bolshoefeodor6536 So your solution is to ensure your kids are exposed only to your own views and principles smh

We, Christians, are the most tolerant people ever, and the most humble, too. 🤪

This is a very refreshing comment.. Even though I try to shrug off the insults for being Christian, it's very uplifting to hear that maybe Christianity is not all bad and all crazy

They don't accept. Christian conservatives think they're at war.

...by pedophile fascist racist negative IQed democrats

And after you watched Greg actively invert it. Genius!

The definition can easily be found. This political speak you engage is meaningless.

, 😊😊

It's been 3 years. Are you still a Christian?

Indeed! It's the gospel message that saves, not living a good life. One must be born again if the Spirit. No one can come to saving faith through worldly reason of earthly desire. How exactly does one show God working in their life without talking about the reason for their hope? How for instance, would a believer dying of cancer, proclaim Christ by merely laying their in his bed with a smile on his face? Evident hope in a person is of no eternal value to the observer, only the foundation of that hope, being redemption in Christ. I know many muslims who are many times more humble, generous and god fearing than I am, but I wouldn't consider them to be in a saving relationship with the one true God. Christianity isn't about 'doing', it's about 'done' and the proclamation of the gospel is that very message; that Christ died for sinners who believe in Him. It's not about being godly and kind and meek and thankful. All those things are results of justification, not the means by which justification is communicated to the lost. The latter would be legalism which is of no value whatever. The believer confesses with his mouth that Christ is Lord. Never be ashamed of the gospel, which is the power of God to those who are being saved 😊

@@theologian1456 Amen brother, agree 100%. John MacArthur has a book titled Ashamed of the Gospel that also addresses this topic very well. Jesus Christ , God the Son is Lord and Savior.

It's good to live the gospel however, we are also called to preach the gospel.

What we should do, instead, is hate our neighbor, believe every conspiracy theory out there, slander our public officials during the most trying times, when everyone should pull together, eagerly embrace every kind of propaganda of hate and division. In other words, make life as difficult as possible for the entire country, because that's what Christians do, that's what Christians always do! 💥🕺💃💥

Read the Bible though, you’ll come out of that false doctrine as I did , he died ones ..

Absolutely

Ya true

What do you think this post is doing?????

Sabine, you’ve identified the overwhelming fact that the ad hominem attack is the easiest and most readily available to ALL people. True story.

@buymebluepills to be tolerant of the intolerant, who are just taking advantage of our tolerance, but have no good intentions, is stupid.

I understand those who are intolerant but preaching tolerance.

That's true

Lol

Buks Hanekom - why?

In Norway I can post it on facebook

Drugs and Alcohol 🥃 are only temporary relievers.

I cannot find it. Could it be called something else?

I think this might be it: www.imdb.com/title/tt3473118/

@@RosannaMiller I think this might be it: www.imdb.com/title/tt3473118/

OMG LOL

To not embrace a particular religious view is to deny all religion.

Those who claim Christians are intolerant are by far more intolerant. Or the sinfully tolerant are hypocrites because they are far from tolerant. He is pointing out how many that speak out against something are guilty of doing those exact things.

Classical tolerence (the original meaning of it): all people have a right to hold a particular view, but that right does not mean that their view is necessarily correct. New tolerence: everyone is entitled to their views as long as those views agree with my own views. See it now?

51:49 - 52:06 of the video describes what real tolerance is. Probably the best summary of what he's talking about. If you agree with someone, it's agreeing, not tolerance. If you disagree with someone but treat them kindly, that is tolerance.

Canadians are like New Zealanders. Passive aggressive. . Bunch of cry babies at the endo the day ..

Political correctness has replaced truth. Just as utilitarianism has replace ethics, psychology has replaced philosophy and social justice has replaced reason.

...which is why he knows that the Papacy is a fraud. They molest little children in the name of Jesus, and their claims to authority have been refuted by Jesus himself. Trust no one but Jesus Christ himself. Also, turn caps lock off.

It's not just common sense, it is the HOLY SPIRIT !!!!!!!!!

It's not the secular humanist community per se. It's the post modernist/radical leftist community. You'll find people like Sam Harris decrying the same kind of thing Koukl is talking about here. It's not up to us as secularists to try and shut down the free speech of Christians. It's up to us to counter their views with reasoned argument.

@@snuzebuster or the anti-Christians could just allow Christians the right to practice their faith, instead of blaming Christianity and Christians for everything that goes wrong in the world.

@@LlyneM-rf3gd Right, and I'm certainly not blaming Christianity for everything wrong in the world. I think if I had the choice of continuing to live in this world that has no doubt been culturally, profoundly influenced by Christianity or choosing to flip a switch that would make it so that Christianity never existed, I would not take that chance. So, I guess that means I think it is likely that Christianity has made the world a better place than it would otherwise have been. That's just an educated guess though. Also, I'm not in favor of denying Christians the right to worship their God or live their life as they see fit, just as long as they are not trampling on the rights of others. As far as I know Christians are still completely free to practice their faith. They are just not allowed to impose it on any one else by mandating it as part of any public institution or proceedings or to use it as an excuse to deny other people their constitutional rights.

Because... anyone who leaves christianity seems to instead adopt stupid believes of flat earth, billions of genders, women have dicks, men can give birth and pedophilia is a sexual orientation... OR they convert to islam and blows stuff up. *_EXACTLY like pedophile democrats._*

LazlosPlane "With God, all things are possible", is from the scriptures when Jesus was teaching about salvation for wealthy people. Your response doesn't show much thought, but rather an arrogant retort based on your emotional beliefs.

Wow! Speaking of arrogance and emotional condescension, you must have written the book. Clearly, feeling inferior in many ways to other men, (who knows, perhaps some anatomical shortcoming) you have decided that it is YOUR station in life to correct others and to correct them with a little punishment. Did mommy hurt you? Did she touch you in that "special" place? JESUS SAID,"FOR, (BECAUSE) WITH GOD ALL THINGS ARE POSSIBLE." Dork.

LazlosPlane That last part was rude and uncalled for. How would you like that said to you? What does his mother have to do with anything he said?

Melissa, please. I have no patience for him and his type and they deserve to be mocked and belittled in any manner conceivable.

LazlosPlane What does calling him names achieve? Does it make his argument less valid? Does it convince him that your argument is valid? Does it make you a better person? Or does it lower you down to his level? It certainly isn't a God-like behavior. Trust in your own logic and arguments. If they result in them name-calling, do not stoop to their level. Instead, know that your arguments have hit their mark and they no longer know how to argue back. Be strong! You can do it.

***** Believe whatever you want. Just don't expect others to believe it or live by your beliefs. Cheers.

***** I don't. I contend that nobody should "believe" or myopically follow anyone: me, you, Koukl, the ancient Hebrews, the ancient Arabs, Indians, Chinese, or whomever on faith alone. Belief is the enemy of spiritual growth. All the best!

***** Are you familiar with the phenomena in many European cities of Muslim men patrolling the streets of Muslim neighborhoods and repeatedly telling the non-Muslim women who are walking through to cover themselves? Of course, these men feel obligated by their religion to repeatedly inform these women that they need to cover themselves. And it doesn’t matter to them that the women aren’t Muslim because, according to their belief system, ALL women are bound by Allah’s laws. So then it would be intolerant for non-Muslim local men to go into these Muslim neighborhoods and tell these guys to stop “harassing” their daughters, wives, sisters, etc. as they’re walking through Muslim neighborhoods to get to work, school or wherever. Since the Muslim men are simply following the dictates of their religion, wouldn’t it be intolerant to tell them to stop? They’re not breaking any laws. But they sure are making a lot of non-Muslim women’s lives pretty miserable because of their primitive beliefs/superstitions. Cheers.

***** "The Muslim men are harassing the non-Muslim women by repeatedly telling them, in effect, to follow the Muslim faith. Intolerance by the non Muslim men would come in to play if they told the Muslims to never share their convictions. The fact is, the Muslims have been able to testify to their beliefs, but have shown intolerance themselves in not allowing the women to follow their own convictions." The Christian version: "The Christians are harassing gay people by repeatedly telling them, in effect, to follow the Christian faith. Intolerance by the non-Christians would come in to play if they told the Christians to never share their convictions. The fact is, the Christians have been able to testify to their beliefs, but have shown intolerance themselves in not allowing the gays (and supporters of gay rights) to follow their own convictions." Christians telling gay people that they do not have the right to marry and working diligently to block gay people's (and gay supporters') efforts to gain that right in all 50 states, again, following your reasoning, means that "Christians are harassing gay people by repeatedly telling them, in effect, to follow the Christian faith." So then you must surely be against Christians who are trying to block the efforts of gay people (and gay supporters) to gain the right to marry in all 50 states. Cheers

***** That's what I thought: you can see the intolerance in the Muslim example but not in your own. Unfortunately, this is pretty much par for the course. No one is imposing gay marriage on Christians. If Christians don't believe in gay marriage, then they don't have to get gay married. There are a lot of gay (or same sex attracted) Christians who have decided to live a heterosexual lifestyle, and that's their right. But denying the right for gays who want to marry to do so because of one's Christianity is intolerance at the highest level. It is also true that: "Christians are harassing gay people by repeatedly telling them, in effect, to follow the Christian faith," just as you said that’s what the Muslim men are doing by telling the non-Muslim women to cover themselves - in effect telling them to follow the Muslim faith. And yet you'll never see the contradiction within yourself that says these are two different cases because you refuse to accept it for what it is, your own religion-based intolerance. Fortunately, for society as a whole, this grave error has been significantly rectified over the past decade, and we should find out this year as to whether this injustice is going to finally, at long last, be put to rest. And it’s not just secular society that is finally opening their hearts on this issue, but large numbers of Christians, as well: Carrie Underwood: “I’m in favor of acceptance. And I am a Christian person, and I do love the Lord, and I feel no matter who you are, what you believe, how you live your life, it’s not my place to judge. As a married person myself, I don’t know what it’s like to be told I can’t marry somebody I love, and want to marry. I can’t imagine how that must feel. I definitely think we should all have the right to love, and love publicly, the people that we want to love.” President Carter: “Homosexuality was well known in the ancient world, well before Christ was born and Jesus never said a word about homosexuality. In all of his teachings about multiple things - he never said that gay people should be condemned. I personally think it is very fine for gay people to be married in civil ceremonies.” Kristin Chenoweth: “If Jesus was to walk the Earth today . . . [he] would be horrified. Those people saying they’re doing it in the name of God? No no no no no. It is very anti-Christian of them . . . It is the antithesis of what I believe. It is the antithesis of what you should believe if you believe in Jesus. . . It’s not what he taught, it’s the opposite of what he taught.” Even significant numbers of Evangelicals, the toughest crowd in Christianity when it comes to gay issues, are getting sick and tired of all the senseless, religion-based anti-gay prejudice, and it’s the young people who are making the biggest difference: In today’s Politico Magazine (7-8-14), Jim Hinch examines why more evangelical Christians are breaking with their church’s condemnation of same-sex relationships. That study finds that more than one quarter (27 percent) of white evangelicals favor allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry legally, including a “substantial minority” (43 percent) of younger white evangelicals (age 18-33). www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/07/evangelicals-gay-marriage-108608.html?ml=m_t1_2h#.U9F9DPldWUK It’s very gratifying to see more of these Christian folks finally starting to “grow up,” spiritually. And I am deeply proud of every last one of them. Only a matter of time, my friend. Cheers.

Apart from the historical record of the ancient scriptures, given by the Spiritof God Himself? What more do you want? The history channel, who brought you Ancient Aliens?

@@theologian1456 What ancient scriptures?

@@charlitoadams777 the law and the prophets which the Jews have preserved for millennia. Then there's the new Testament which, despite unprecedented scrutiny has stood the test of criticism and of which we have an embarrassment of manuscripts. What sort of 'historical evidence' are you looking for? All past history is appraised by historical writings and/or archaeological discoveries. But the historicity of one man (Abraham) is hardly going to be established by archaeology, since he was a nomad with simple means. I ask you this: Without reliance on written historical data, can you confirm there following: 1. Why was the Eiffel Tower built? 2. Who designed it? 3. Who built it? 4. How long did it take to build? The Eiffel Tower is still there in Paris, yet thr answers to these questions rely on historical accounts of eye witnesses or other persons in the know at the time. The preservation of the documentation in archives or the reliable copying of such original documents, is the key to whether such information is trustworthy or not. The field of biblical textual criticism has made so much progress that only the most hardened, biased skeptic would choose to write them off. On another point: A believer unto salvation is a believer because of an act of divine intercession. One can no more unbelieve, than they can believe unto salvation without being reborn. Additionally, such belief is eternal and cannot be undone. For this reason, I say this; your assertion that you are no longer a believer is not true. Either you were never a believer unto salvation in the first place, or you are going through a season of unbelief which you need to repent of.

@@theologian1456 How many Israelite slaves were there at the time of the Exodus? Any evidence in the desert of the Exodus? What was the original written language of the Torah? How come the Ancient Egyptians, Hittites, Canaanites etc. Never mention the Israelites amazing conquests? How come no one wrote about Jesus and his miracles until over hundred years after his death?

@@charlitoadams777 well the book of Acts is dated to 60-90 AD with better evidence of 60 AD as it ends with Paul's imprisonment in Rome prior to his martyrdom and to omit this and the events leading up to this important historical part makes no sense as as the book is all about the acts of the apostles. However it is known that Acts follows on from the gospel of Luke so it has to be written before 60 AD. And it is widely accepted that the gospel of Mark was the first to be written So it would need to date before 60 AD in order to be before Luke. Also archeological evidence of Jerusalem indicates that the authors could accurately describe the city and locations within which would be impossible after it's destruction by the Romans in 70 AD. Leaving at most a 30 year gap which during that time churches were established with eye witnesses present. In fact it is remarkable in an oral culture to pen down something so early. Comparing to homer and the Iliad which has a 400 year gap between spoken to written. Also the fact that there are slight variations in the Gospel confirm that they were eye witnesses without corroboration as the churches that they established prior would have pointed out the difference between what they heard and what was written.

1 What do you mean by doubtful sources? 2 And how did you come to that conclusion?

Good grief... Really? What proof? It's proven historical fact, like Napoleon. Jesus Christ is perhaps the most documented person in history.

@Sandy Ridge he's showing his complete ignorance on the historicity of the subject. Virtually every sane modern atheist believes in the historicity of Christ. This sceptical joker's ideas were vaguely given credence by a couple of fringe German 'historians' in the mid-19th century. Now completely discredited.

Christian faith in Jesus as the promised Messiah is not a "blind" faith. We can and should use reason to 'contend for the faith' and 'always be ready with an answer for the reason of our hope.'

Tolerance is not acceptance

@@danielmann5427 From websters dictionary: "a: sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from or conflicting with one's own b: the act of allowing something"

You've completely missed the entire point

I'd say that Koukl missed the point, @@SandyridgeGR. Explain how I am wrong.

Define fighting hate and prejudice...

If you need me to define terms, @@SandyridgeGR, how do you know that I "completely missed the entire point"?

Yeah, that's what I thought, @@SandyridgeGR.