Hahaha! They're argument used against them.

An atheist wouldn’t say they don’t have morals. They would say they have morals that are not made by a god. The idea is that you don’t need a god to have morals. Just civilization. (Edit for clarity, a typical atheist wouldn’t say they have no morals, as pointed out being atheist only means we agree on one thing: there is no god)

auston rozenberg haha

Actually as an Atheist I still follow the Old Testament for medical knowledge as I am a cherry picking smart dude like one time my dog had a hurt leg so I dumped goat blood on her and did a sacrificial dance as I killed my family

@@baileyduvall01 An atheist nihilist is entirely possible, but very, very atypical

***** That one too, and the one where God personally orders an entire congregation to stone a man to death for working on the Sabbath.

***** And let's not forget the one that says that slaves must be obedient to their masters, even the harsh ones. The same verse that was also used by Southern slave owners to justify slavery.

***** Agreed.

I know--I've heard this plot before, but I thought it was a Greek myth or a story from Shakespeare. I didn't know until this year that it was from the Wholly BuyBull.

Damn, they hated me in Sunday school. I had so many questions about the damn flood and the logistics. But the rainbow thing was baffling. I was wondering how light refraction worked before God altered the laws of physics to put a reminder to himself to not murder most of the global population again. I had all these questions, but I still didn't totally disbelieve yet. They were trying to make things up to answer me, but they only caused more questions and they just wanted to get to the next story.

That is horrifyingly accurate.

🤣🤣🤣

Oh my god you didnt

Double kill!!! Dominating!!! Holy sh**!!! M-m-m-monster kill!!! Godlike!!!

"Kill a one person, and you are the murderer. Kill a million of people, and you are the king conqueror hero. Kill them all (everyone, all life, all beings), and you're a God.".........

sick comment

He was talking about Babylonian children, not one's own children. People keep quoting this out of context.

Miguel Aveiro so its ok if its Babylonian children?

Well, sure, the less Babylonians the better!

Seriously though, it gets quoted out of context, but knowing what it refers to doesn't make it any more ethical.

Yes, because the god is always a puppet in the hands of the religious leader. The leader holds the strings and the people don't know it.

louis tournas exactly

Perfect point.

Its so true, and maybe we wouldn't hate religion so much if they just made up a new book with a new God who believed in things like freedom and basic human rights... Oh wait we do have that, Its GOERGE WASHINGTON and the Constitution of AMERICA, hell yea ;)

@@jonathanbauer2988 Yes a slave owner...

I read the bible too. Cover to cover. That book was not long after dumped at the landfill transfer station fate unknown. I don't remember reading this story. I was just so bored trying to get through all the nuanced laws and genocide descriptions and begats. Plus being in high school I must have had cognitive dissonance when encountering all that crap in contrast to what the focused passages of the New Testament say.

I had heard of this story before when i was a child. We had this childrens book that had pictures in it an all. Thi story was there too so i vividly remember what i thought about it... I actually thought that she was sent to something like a monastery tbh. When they say She is yahwehs, i thought from that day on she served her as a priestess. So this shocked me a lot as well.. God damn.. Childhood ruined again :D and they had this story in a CHİLDS BOOK WİTH PİCTURES!!! No pictures of a human sacrifices of course BUT STİLL WTF?

Most religions just focus on the scriptures that support their ideals and ignore the rest and most believers don't read the entire book to discover all the contradictions. Once they do, they are usually done.

I was a Jehovah's Witness and I remember asking about this story and the explanation the J Dubs gave was well, since Jehovah is going to resurrect everyone to a paradise earth (they don't believe you go to heaven when you die) that it was ok because now the sacrificed daughter will be magically brought back to life in an edenic world and won't remember her traumatic death. So it's ok! Sigh...the sad part is I went along with this crap for a long time.

Yep, that's basically what they believe. And only a pretty sadistic God would use that as an excuse to torture his creations.

Lmaooooo I'm gonna try this sometime in the future. Edit: Wait, narcissist, schizophrenic, and a sociopath?.... Yeah that goes to r/thathappened I don't think these can coexist in one psyche... I'll still try this tho.

@@edgeisloveedgeislife5439 Multiple Personality Syndrome too! That way all psyches could exist in the same body.

Raspian the Right Wing Guy I think sociopathy has some neurological grounding so it still wouldn't make sense, I mean theoretically I think this combo isn't entirely unplausable but it is very unlikely.

"Schizophrenic" and "sociopath" both are mental illnesses than cannot be diagnosed based on a person's description. No psychotherapist would ever label anyone as such after only listening to a few of the things he supposedly has done. Also, "unstable monster" isn't something that anyone related to psychology would say as a diagnosis. Your story is about as fake as religion.

What if God is just an overpowered Man-child with retardation and inferiority complex? Let's be honest here, sometimes God is actually something that should be seen with pure pity and nothing more.

mike derocco Christianity stems from Judaism and as such they share the Old Testament

mike derocco I mean they really kind of the same. I get theirs a difference but it not much.

mike derocco I’m trying to have a discussion here. Your anger confounds me. Also what are you on about? Studying, reading and writing? Huh?

mike derocco You can’t have one without the other. You say Jews wrote those books but they’re writing about the same God. When Jesus came to spread his word, he didn’t just his reset - he was a Jew. He went to the synagogue and promoted Old Testament laws. If you deny the Old Testament then you also have to cancel out the so called “prophecies” which defend the legitimacy of Jesus as the son of God.

@mike derocco visit Matthew 5:18-20. These verses bind the NT to the OT, while stating that we need a deeper understanding of the laws beyond the scribes and Pharisees. Jesus makes a blanket statement that doesn't really resolve the moral problems of the OT.

VampireDucks Mother knowing awesome.

VampireDucks eyup

THAT IS A LIE, IN THE TORAH IT WAS PROHIBIT SACRFICE, KILL, MURDER A PERSON. THE SACRIFICE WAS TO PAY IN SILVER A PRICE. SHE MUST KEPT VIRGIN. THAT IS A MESSAGE FOR NOW-A-DAYS, THE WOMAN =KEHILA MAINTAIN VIRGIN TO MEET YHWH IN THE 3RD HEAVENS. SERVE IN THE TEMPLE FOR REST OF HER LIFE. . YOU MUST BE AWARE OF LIE=SIN=SHEOL !!!!

Knowing brilliant!!

@@eloishashalom1458 yeah can we get back to reality now?

Tap dance? Haha trying to imagine that had me rolling😂😂 those bastards are the devil's incarnate

" (I) hit the brakes so hard it sent my copilot Jesus crashing through my rose-tinted windshield." I loved that phrase! LOL

"Don't make promises to God" is a ridiculous reading. Judges is a book about how far Israel had fallen, how little they knew of God, and it says this explicitly multiple times. Sounds like your Bible study group was trying to excuse the judges' behaviour, you were right to draw a line

@@a.i.l1074 No, they were trying to excuse God's behavior, or rationalize it by pumping it full of enough apologetics and then squeeze a drop of apparently-righteous judgment from their patron deity. For me, even that tiny spurt of "ethics" or "morality" that they tried to make sound godly just came off as mental gymnastics that still resulted in unjustifiable cruelty.

@@a.i.l1074 Then why is Yahweh rewarding them for falling into barbarity? Why is God making deals to help a man murder an entire town and asking for a human sacrifice? The power of motivated reasoning and fear of eternal torment to make people believe ridiculous things.

+Rob Sylvester Fuck, yes. How can people try to excuse this god and worship him?

I had never heard the story but I was getting sick to my stomach.

It's all pretty terrible stuff what this religion is propped up on. Start to finish really.

It's the way NonStampCollector presented the story. I especially liked how the two angels pleaded with the lord to send them down to save the girl, then displaying their reaction as God lets her die. Now one can understand why many mass murdering white nationalists view having a sense of empathy as a weakness...

I’ve heard apologists claim that she wasn’t literally sacrificed but that she remained a virgin and never married.

😂😂😂😂

***** Holy fucking shit, do you really think anyone is going to sit here and read this novel you vomited out? You must think very highly of yourself.

***** I didn't say that. I'm saying that you ramble on and on about nonsense and its paragraphs worth, nobody is going to read it. You want to make a point, learn to abridge.

***** I'm fine with that. And it has nothing to do with my willingness or unwillingness to learn. I just have a low tolerance for people who are self righteous. And also for stupidity.

***** Oh I'm outright insulting you, nothing subversive about it. I called you self-righteous and stupid. flat out. I don't see anything subversive at all, unless your borderline illiterate.

***** Yes, it is a waste of your time. And for not caring, you sure seem to care an awful lot. Also, if you want to convince me that your literate, try to not use so many grammatical errors next time. And since your the one trying to force a viewpoint on me, perhaps I'm justified in calling you a "theocratic Nazi." Also, oversimplified is NOT a synonym to the word abridged. Better learn some English, oh "prestigious" one. Lastly, a hypocrite is someone who says one thing and does another. I have done no such thing. Might want to purchase a dictionary in addition to a thesaurus.

mike derocco the Old Testament is the basis of Christianity and represent the same god

And they tell you the new testament is better, but in that book human sacrifice is actually the main storyline.

***** Three people in the world have been geeky enough to get that joke.

Lol!!!

tyler laird Four.

Docktor Jim I wish someone would take those fuckers out. There's like 40 trillion of them... or something. ; )

rationalmuscle They're all dead now. I saw one in a museum yesterday. It was deader'n shit.

it never changed. jesus was a human sacrifice. then revelation.

Voluntaryist Its even more frightening when you remind yourself that this shit really happened...

@@unicockboy1666 ...But did it?

@@DeadmanDave does that make your god sinful and evil then?

@@DeadmanDave God could've stopped him easily, what a load of bullshit

@@DeadmanDave Really? Where does it say that? I suspect what you mean is the *you* realise this was an act of monstrous barbarity and you have superimposed your sense of morality onto God and come up with a justification which simply isn't written there. So much for getting our morals from god. More commonly I see people superimposing their own morality on God to try to excuse the inexcusable.

There is always the great "Go forth and multiply" too.

I don't get it ;-;

In biblical lingo to know someone is to have intercourse with them.

Anony mouse exactly

That was awesome!

Yes if you read the bible you will see most of the evil acts are by God. Even other bad actors like Pharaoh etc are just being mind controlled by God to act evil.

I was taught the same as a catholic. Even as a kid this bothered me to no end, even if they kept saying, "no but you see, it's jeptah's fault!" If this story teaches anything it's that apparently keeping your word on a stupid bet is more valuable than the life if your own daughter.

You asked great questions, and I will try to answer them as best as I can. 1. This is actually an incredibly interesting question. I guess what I would answer is that the promise itself was not wicked. That is, if a sheep came out of his house then there would have been no issue with the promise. So it doesn't matter if God even told outright him to make this promise. Indeed, he was permitted to annul the vow (see Rashi 11:39), but it was because of his own arrogance that he didn't. He did not have the Spirit of the LORD when he refused to annul the vow. 2. God is by definition unknowable so we can't know why God does what God does, or why God doesn't what God doesn't. We can never compare two cases and demand why God didn't act in the same way in both cases. We can ask and try to learn from what God did, but we can't challenge God. Indeed, there is an infinite number of unknowable factors that go into every situation so you can never compare two cases in the first place. That being so, the Abraham-Isaac almost-sacrifice is extremely different than this case in a number of clear ways. 3. So I think that what you asked in your question (1) offers a new insight into the text that I never knew before. Why would God encourage this oath? The answer is to teach Jephthah (and us) not to make rash promises because we don't know how they might turn out. That being said, as I wrote above, he could have annulled his vow. Thus, he would have gotten the lesson, and his daughter would not have been killed. Indeed, it was HIS fault that he followed through with the oath. He wasn't punished or killed before the end of his judge career because he still had what to do in order to save the Israelite people. But the commentators teach us (See Rashi there) that he was severely punished -- both physically, spiritually, and perhaps even losing his chance of resurrection -- when he died. I hope these answer your questions.

@@judahlopatin9733 Nope. You don't get to claim that the bible is infallible and literal, then cite some extra-biblical source to justify this sick, murderous torture porn. Last time I checked, it's called "Christianity," not "Rashianity," and if you knew a GD thing about the bible, you'd know that the claim that Jephthat could lose his "chance of resurrection" is not remotely biblical. I get it. It's a horrible story that the primitive savages who actually wrote your so called "holy book" should have been wise enough to edit out. They didn't, so you have to use whatever mendacious, intellectually reprehensible crap you can to weasel out of defending the indefensible. Epic fail!

@@dennisdale6404 Hey, Dennis! First of all, I just want to say that I am Jewish, so I am defending the Jewish faith and not the Christian faith. So I don't believe in "Christianity" OR "Rashianity." :) Are you familiar with the way that Jews understand the Bible? Basically, there are two "Torahs:" the "Written Torah" (the Old Testament) and the "Oral Torah" (everything else, including the Talmud, Midrash, and the rest of Jewish tradition and law). We believe that they are both interconnected and given at Sinai, and one cannot be understood without the other. So Rashi's comments (being as they are primarily based on Midrash and Talmud), are part of the Oral Torah and therefore are a part of Jewish canon. Does that make sense? I don't think I claimed that the Bible is literal...if I did, I would take it back, as it doesn't seem to be a Jewish belief. Are you Jewish or Christian? I noticed that you wrote "GD" as opposed to "God," and you seem to know a good deal about the Bible, at least enough to know that what I said about Resurrection was wrong. :) To tell you the truth, there is nothing "Biblical" about Resurrection as it is never mentioned (explicitly) in the Written Torah! (I can't claim anything about the New Testament, as I don't hold it to be canon.) So when we are discussing Resurrection (in the Jewish faith) we are talking about the Oral Torah. I must say that I cannot claim to know everything about Resurrection or the World to Come -- no one has gone and lived to tell the tale -- but there are a couple things that I have heard that may or may not be true. One thing was that one cannot be resurrected if their limbs are not buried together. Now, certainly this principle does not apply if limbs were missing, or it was impossible to find them (like someone who was killed in action, God forbid, and his limbs were blasted), etc., but if I was the cause of my limbs not being buried together, so maybe this principle would apply. In addition, it stands to reason according to what I have seen that someone who commits such an awful crime as to sacrifice their child -- especially out of arrogance (the worst trait a person can have) -- would not necessarily get a chance at Resurrection, so Jephthah would not necessarily get the chance. Again, I have not seen this anywhere in the Talmud or in any Jewish literature -- I have only heard it -- so that's why I said "perhaps" even losing his chance of resurrection. If I may ask a question of you, I was wondering -- if you thought that the Bible was not written by God, so why would the writers not take this story out? Or at least, as it was passed down for the past 2000+ years, why did no one think to remove it from the literature? I think that if it was "indefensible" then someone would have thought to remove it... I like how you ended that with "Epic fail!" :) I think it ended your otherwise heavy comment on a light note. I hope I answered your questions. Please let me know if I didn't or if there's something that still requires clarification! Have a great week!

Of course that still doesnt detract from the fact that Jephthah is a murderous, child killing, fucktard.

The fact that Jephthah offered up a human sacrifice says that this was something God sometimes demanded and was culturally accepted. It makes me think how many children had to die for some imaginary man in the sky.

I love the fact that you said "torn up". I literally laughed out loud because the commentators explain that God actually condemned what happened, and therefore punished Jephthah severely. Literally by "tearing him up"!

But anyway, I think that this is one of the central problems of the video: NSC depicts Jephthah as too human and good. But in reality, it was Jephthah who made the oath. Not God. And God actually offered an opportunity for Jephthah to annul his vow and Jephthah was too arrogant to accept it. He was severely punished for this.

@ Hey, Arjun again! Sorry, I don't understand your point -- is that in support of my point or against it?

Now you are getting it.

To have that beautiful knowing and comfort in ones heart that God is real is a Beautiful thing but having a labotomy is too high a price.

Undisclosed Username lol?

A surprise to be sure but a welcome one

@@DeadmanDave So, is the fact it's unforgivable the reason your god hasn't even bothered to _try_ apologizing for masterminding said atrocity? Personally, I'd still like to hear what it has to say for itself.

@@TagSpamCop First of all, God didn't mastermind it. Secondly, what sort of apology do you want? In the very same verse it is written, "And it became a law in Israel." The commentators explain that this means that no one should ever make this sort of oath again and presumably who should go to whom in a Judge / High Priest conflict.

@@judahlopatin9733 *First of all, God didn't mastermind it.* Yes he did, he is omnipotent according to immoral losers like you;)

@@judahlopatin9733 why are you obsessed with human sacrifice ? Why sacrifice Jesus?

@@tgstudio85 Hi, so sorry! I didn’t see this. Yes, God is Omnipotent, but we also have free will.

If God doesn't exist then he killed his daughter for literally no reason

I’m assuming this comment of yours is juicy sarcasm… 😂

Surely anyone who knowingly chooses to worship evil IS evil? If a person has read the Bible and knows of the evil that god has ordered, or done himself, and continues to worship him, then surely that person is worshipping evil - and therefore evil basically evil, because he/she actually approves of everything Yahweh is responsible for? I applaud anyone with the courage to point out the parts that they forgot to teach us in church and/or Sunday school.

Psalm 84 :11 For the Lord God is a sun 🌞 John 8 :12 I am the Light of the world🌞 Malachi 4:2 Sun of righteousness 🌞 That's why they put a picture of the Sun on some the Bibles instead of a drawing of Jesus. The Old Testmement was written in Hebrew, Hebrew word for Sun is Shemash, Shemash was the Sun-God of the Sumerians and the Babylonians in 2,100 BC. That's why Christians worship on a SUNday🌞, they worship a ancient Sun-God and don't even know it🤣

patrickweldon1 yeah

THAT IS A LIE, IN THE TORAH IT WAS PROHIBIT SACRFICE, KILL, MURDER A PERSON. THE SACRIFICE WAS TO PAY IN SILVER A PRICE. SHE MUST KEPT VIRGIN. THAT IS A MESSAGE FOR NOW-A-DAYS, THE WOMAN =KEHILA MAINTAIN VIRGIN TO MEET YHWH IN THE 3RD HEAVENS. SERVE IN THE "TEMPLE" (HEAVENS)FOR REST OF HER LIFE. . LIE=SIN=SHEOL !!!!

MARTHA N S'LM s what?

Bearded Emperor Your speaking nothing but truth brother Beard

@@beardedemperor legend

Just don't do the dashing on a Sunday. Yowee doesn't like it when he is disobeyed!! Oh yeah, don't eat shellfish either!

A more questioning type of Christian book, The Case Against God, acknowledged lost-it bad human emotion as the author of that psalm.

I think you spelled "appall" incorrectly. There are no "m"s or "z"s in it...

@@mrcurly1147 I think killing is an acceptable act on a Sunday -Numbers 15:32-36. God commanded the killing of a man for picking up sticks on the sabouth, so picking up sticks is out, but killing is ok any day of the week.

@@mrcurly1147 The sabbath is Saturday

Do you know how christians defend this story tho? It's hysterical: The last verses talk about how she never slept with a man and "then her father fulfilled his promise" which doesn't explicitly say that she died. Wow what a great defense. I saw someone claim here in the comment section that she didn't die and just became a nun, which is nowhere in the text, and I checked the latin and hebrew version

Best I’ve heard is they burnt offering was translated wrong despite it being the same translation for other parts they accept that interpretation of

Riff McClavin Same here I will never go back to Christianity again. They keep using the old testament card but Jesus said "I'm not here to abolish the law but, to fulfill it". Yes the old testament is part of the new one.

mike derocco Same book. Judaism is just as disgusting as Christianity but since they don’t believe in the New Testament, they’re marginally less hypocritical. The early Christians worshipped this same God.

@@DeadmanDave The bible says that Jephthah worked rightousness. He is clearly revered by the author of Hebrews: Hebrews 11:32-33 And what more shall I say? For the time would fail me to tell of Gideon and Barak and Samson and Jephthah, also of David and Samuel and the prophets: who through faith subdued kingdoms, worked righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions,

@@DeadmanDave The Jewish tradition also admonishes Jephthah for his actions, and it holds that God did as well.

Its likely God used his magic to ensure she was the first to come out.

Roedy Green because of the human sacrifice element, we are all used to god making huge wars, but the Christians like to say god would never condone human sacrifice, and also use it as the excuse god had to kill all those other tribes anyway

***** or god needing to sacrifice himself to himself to forgive sin, he couldn't do it by himself, he needed a blood sacrifice

Because killing your own child is much worse than killing others.

NSC called it butchery and slaughter, just to put the act of killing them into context. Though if it was me that made that cartoon, when yahweh was considering the offer, I would have taken omniscience into account…

Wow cool. You were named afrer the Hitler of his day!

@@NonStampCollector lmao seriously! Ill keep that part to myself on a date

Unless you're on a date with a lovely neo-Nazi.

To be fair, though, I've constantly got goats and sheep going in and out of my front door.

Никита Цеханович very clever reference to how the Bible describes sex.

Dominick john yeahhh

Hitler was an atheist! He got his moral philosophy from his atheism. If Hitler was a bible believer, which he wasn't, he'd have been a paragon of morality! Atheists, like Hitler, as we all know, only want to sin and so reject God, like Hitler. Silly boy

Tom Riddle he wasnt though

Genocide is a recurring biblical theme... he just turned it around on the ones that once justified it.

Tom Riddle begone troll

Stainsteel0 mein kampf?

me to 😅

Yes but again he's wrong in everything. Let's check the facts . 1. Where in the bible does it say the Jews are permitted to sacrifice people? I'll wait 2. Does the bible say they are not allowed to? YES Leviticus 3. Did the Jews sacrifice animals to Yahweh? YES , always animals. 4. Is "whatsoever comes out of the house" indicative of a PERSON? it could be or it could not be. Whosoever is more precise but Hebrew does not have a word for that distinction here is Hebrew for a person (read backwards) biblehub.com/interlinear/genesis/31-32.htm Here is the word for whatever: biblehub.com/interlinear/leviticus/5-4.htm Jephtah clearly meant an animal but worded it poorly , since he made the promise to Yahweh then he had to make good on it...but is there a verse in the bible that says he sacrificed his daughter in a BURNT OFFERING? I don't think so .. women were handed over for work with the Levites in the Temple. Temple women could never marry hence the "virginity" story. It's all b.s. no sacrifice was ever made.

@@AutotuneSucksBalls No u wrong

💯

Yeah, when I was about 7-8, I knew a lot of my family was religious, I was baptized as baby, had gone to services with them, was interested in the stories and just the general idea of God and that there was this plan and an explanation behind all the wonderful stuff we see in nature, and how it was made, and it was intriguing to me, I wanted to learn more... So, I picked up a Bible, and started reading... Read the thing cover to cover.. and not only was I struck by how brutal is was, but how unfair, contradictory and just obviously totally made up it all sounded, kings telling people to obey their orders because God said to (sure, they'd have no reason to lie, right? I mean, all they get to do is rule everyone, kill anyone they like, and force people to do whatever they want... Why would they use false pretenses to get into power?) An omniscient being that has to ask people where they are and what they are doing.. A perfectly good and just being who condemns people to infinite punishment for finite crimes... it's all just ridiculous. Even God himself acts like a petty dictator in the Bible, jealous and vain by his own admission, supremely flawed even though the book kept saying he was perfect (oops, messed up making this, let me destroy EVERYTHING and kill EVERYONE because of it...) Every person throughout history condemned to suffer all their lives and even afterwards, all because a person who was essentially a baby and literally had no way to know better, ate a fruit they weren't supposed to, that they were tricked into eating by a snake God put there, while God watched and did nothing to prevent it... That's when I decided I wanted nothing to do with that religion, and that the whole thing was total hogwash. I think the Bible itself has made more atheists than all the arguments atheists themselves have ever made.

Jesse Finnerty I agree with you. I remember a part when I think it was Abraham was offered shelter at a friend's home and was fed, etc and then Abraham decides to steal all his cattle during the night. The friend or ex friend comes after him to get his cattle back and God, no less caused him to become immobile so Abraham could steal the cattle.

catsalive1 On that note, I like the story AronRa mentioned once about how God was wrestling with Jacob and cheats by hurting Jacob's groin so he could win (Genesis 32:22-32). So, not only can this all powerful, all-good, perfect being not beat a mortal in wrestling in a fair match, he's petty enough and dishonest enough to cheat.

I always thought the only really important thing about the God of the Bible is the horrific belief in a hell (eternal burning with snakes, or whatever phobias a person may have and remember this is _forever_ Only a sadistic psychopath would worship a god who is going to send any living thing to hell for any reason. Of course there is no hell, but I remember that was my reason for walking away from the religion. Can you imagine enjoying life knowing people or anything is burning for eternity. What is wrong with those people.

catsalive1 Agree there... That was one of the major things for me too... There is no rational justification for such a place if there is an all-powerful, all-loving, and just God... All the arguments in the Bible about it and mentions of the whole reasoning behind it just blatantly rang hollow to me even at that age. Especially it seemed a huge contradiction in context of the earlier verses talking about justice being 'an eye for an eye'.. That at least makes some sense, it feels fair, punishment fitting the crime... (of course, it ends up with everyone blind, because it becomes a neverending cycle, but that's another story), but there's no way you can justify that a being can be fair and just AND punish someone (especially someone they love) FOREVER for something they did wrong, especially when the punishment is more horrible than ANYTHING that person ever could have done in life, and ESPECIALLY when you are condemning people who don't even know they did anything wrong, or condemning people just for thoughts, or condemning people literally for just being born..

Irmulldor sucks

With such brilliant writing skills paint would be overkill

Well, I would say to him that the native americans were on the same era that the old testament with its horrendous sacrifices is. Just doing shit for their aclaimed God just so nobody dies or is punished or gets "magically pregnant but still a virgin" Its almost like a fantasy book, actually, with an interesting perspective, the Bible is just a dude go mental over time and thinking he is God and some shit, like, who comes up with sacrificing the only kid of a parent TWICE, the whole throwing kids against rocks, millions of people dying to huge floods because "me angy that people bad" even though the God already knows literally everything that happens and is going to happen.

eflo97 yup

God can't be cold blooded is he isn't real.

The Plains Jam agnosticism is a claim about knowledge. If you lack an active belief in God you are an atheist. You are an agnostic atheist.

The character YHWH is cold as ice for sure

Just commit to something. He's not real stop using the term agnostic.

D Paxt I know it's a claim on knowledge. I just think the term causes more confusion than clarity, and I wish people would stop using it. If you don't believe in the existence of any god you should just say "I'm an athiest". Then statistics would reflect us as a group and theists couldn't use smaller figures for their arguments.

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

mike derocco But the Torah makes up the Old Testament of the Christian bible.. and it’s the same God. You wake up.

@mike derocco It most certainly is Judaism which Christianity high-jacked and used during antiquity to become relevant. Now, ya'll want no parts of it. Don't get upset with me. Go and tell it to your fellow believers. I'm not the one that needs convincing.

@@jonbenetclarke9319 Of course it's the same god but there are Christians who want to separate themselves from that part now. Their conscience can't deal with how nasty, mean, and crazy that god was so they only acknowledge the new testament. How convenient for them.

Yeah, but that was a righteous thing to do since pharaoh refused to let his people go. Because god hardened pharaohs heart..... He obviously loves to do some killing.

Edit: stop

That's not fair, Lot's wife was the salt of the earth.

@@marcdecock7946 omigod nooo😂

Didn't they straight up genderswap prominent female characters as well?

@@AToZed71 they did? Where?

@@gq_barry 10 changes made to the bible by trey the explainer is where i think i remember seeing it. That's why i posted a question and not a statement cause i'm really not sure, sorry

same here.

Exato, e judeus ainda sacrificam crianças até hoje.

I spotted it too, love it

It's astounding. Now matter how obviously and objectively awful something is, they will find a way to defend it, and they cannot, at all, see how crazy that appears.

I don't think anything in this story aged particularly well.

Debunking Non-stamp Collector A lot of Bible sceptics accuse Scripture of portraying a God who, if He existed and did what was recorded of Him, would be deeply immoral. Many Christians struggle to answer these arguments, and some try to draw a distinction between the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New Testament to avoid these hard questions. But this approach is flawed, because the same God inspired the Old Testament and the New Testament. Indeed, both Testaments teach that God is loving and patient, but also cannot abide sin. Also, Christ Himself affirmed the Old Testament (e.g. Luke 24:44-47, John 10:35). Furthermore, it is unnecessary, because the sceptics’ attacks are based on fundamental misunderstandings. Jephthah’s Daughter. The story from Judges 11, certainly reads like he offers his daughter as a burnt offering to Lord. But when studying the biblical text and customs of the time, we find an answer that is a true account of what really happened. Jephthah vowed a vow (See Numbers 30:2) to the Lord, that whatsoever came forth of the doors of his house to meet him, when he returned… it shall surely be the Lords, and he will offer it up for a burnt offering. As non-stamp collector points out, he probably thought of a servant or maybe an animal. She was at once obedient and patriotic. A women to have no offspring was considered to be in a state of the utmost degradation among the Hebrews; but she is regardless of all this, setting her father is in safety, and her country delivered. This law therefore expressly applied in its first branch to Jephthah’s case, who had devoted his daughter to the Lord, or opened his mouth to the Lord, and therefore could not go back, as he declared grief at seeing his daughter and only child coming to meet him, she was , therefore necessarily devoted, but with her own consent to perpetual virginity in the service of the tabernacle. As the apostle Paul said in Romans 12:1, people can be offered to God as “a living sacrifice”. This may explain why his daughter responded by saying, “let this thing be done for me: leave me alone two months, that I may go up and down the mountains and weep for my virginity, I and my companions” … also it said “and it came to pass at the end of the two months, that she returned unto her father, who did with her according to his vow which he had vowed: and she knew no man. Immediately following the statement about Jephthah fulfilling his vow, we are told that his daughter “did not know a man.” If she is dead, then this information is hardly relevant, so presumably it belongs to some broader issue in the narrative. “ it was a custom in Israel, that the daughters of Israel went up yearly to lament the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite four days in a year”. If this is the intent of the verse, that Israelite women made a pilgrimage to her every year, it explains why this apparently institutionalized practice of lamenting Jephthah’s daughter as an annual rite is never mentioned anywhere else in the Hebrew Bible. This suggests that the ritual was only institutionalized as long as she was alive; in other words, it belongs to the narratives concerning Jephthah recorded here, but we have no knowledge as to whether it became part of Israel’s holiday or ritual cycles. Also it seems as his daughter had the right to overturn her fathers vow. The Mischna or traditional law of the Jews is pointedly against it “if a Jew should devote his son or daughter, his man or maid servant, who are Hebrews, the devotement would be void, because no man can devote what is not his to own or whose life he has not the absolute disposal of.” These arguments appear to be decisive against the sacrifice, and that Jephthah could not have devoted his daughter to celibacy against her will is evident from history, and from the high estimation of Israel for her filial duty and her hapless fate, which was celebrated by a regular anniversary commemoration four days a year. Also, No father, merely by his own authority, could put the an offending much less an innocent child to death upon any account, without the sentence of the magistrate and the consent of the people. Duet 21:18-21. Some of the worst condemnation in the Bible is directed at those who sacrifice their children to Moloch (Leviticus 18:21; Jeremiah 32:34-35)-and archaeological evidence shows that these were usually infants. When the Israelites disobeyed God and sacrificed their sons and daughters, the Bible says they sacrificed them to demons (Psalm 106:37). In the Bible, human sacrifice is detestable because it falls under the category of the murder of an innocent human being, which is always condemned. In conclusion, It appears evident that Jephthah’s daughter was not sacrificed (killed), but consecrated to God and should live in a state of perpetual virginity, Jephthah’s grief being his family line was to become extinct in Israel. Jephthah is a tragic figure. His problematic origins make the restoring of his status in society crucial to him. Yet, his story ends with no chance of his handing his improved status on to his progeny, since his own vow forces his daughter into permanent celibacy as a woman consecrated to the Lord.

@@farmercraig6080 "she returned unto her father, who did with her according to his vow which he had vowed" ... his vow being a burnt offering. Just because you analysed it in a way that led you to the conclusion that you should interpret it differently from the express words written in front of you, doesn't mean that it is in any way more than an assumptive interpretation to a definitive statement. You twisted what was written and repeated by you to fit in with your idea of Biblical morality. That is not a debunk, that is you trying to rationalise the horrible parts of the Bible. This whole situation is disgusting by the way, even if he didn't kill his own daughter but had her sacrifice the remainder of her days in such a way, even though that is not what it says happened.

@@farmercraig6080 the usual long winded apologetics which ignores several key pieces including the fact his was so broken over the fact she had been the first thing he saw....talks about how humans sacrifice is detestable yet seems to forget the whole Jesus sacrifice while adding this idea the NT is the exact same as the OT derp it was even written by the same people right? Then let us also ignore numbers 31 were a whole town of people who did nothing wrong were slaughtered because a handful of jews decided to worship thier slave wives god one time....oh except the little virgin girls who were kept as sex slaves and the non virgin girls were put to the sword......oh oh oh what about the first born of egypt? Yeah those kids were really evil right? All because god hardened the pharoahs heart so he would not let the jews go so how many innocent kids who had no choice in the matter die? You say this shit about it being detestable to kill innocents but in the bible children are slaughtered left and right fuck the towns of Sodom and Gamorrah, not to even touch the lie that god promised to look for good souls in Gamorrah but never even checked appearently children in said towns were also evil even the new borns right? The thing I hate most about apologetics like this is they pick a point and go with it while ducking and dodging anything that would be used against thier point. Completly ignore all parts in which god had even offered a mans wives to be raped infront of him because morality? Seriously the fuck is wrong with you for even attempting to defend a book that says slavery is ok raped women have to marry thier rapists and it's ok to kill gays and people who wear the wrong clothes? Shit not only does it say it's ok but it's your moral duty and the whole town needs to get in on it. Oh and if he is so distraught over not having grand kids you think maybe he could just i dunno have another kid or two? Hell you guys are so hung up on adoption he could do that too.........Like i said shitty apologetics.

The explanation for his "broken" state is covered in my rebuttal. All the rest of your reply, is off topic. But I am working on a reply to non stamp collectors slavery videos. Might see you there. @@danielessex2162

@@farmercraig6080 TL:DR; Debunking Farmer Craig: Jepthah's story involved a burnt offering. Actually... No. According to the actual Hebrew version, the original writing... The word "olah" means "burnt sacrifice". God used it with Abraham when he was about to sacrifice Issac and was stopped... It ALSO appeared in the story of Jephthah. It literally says "ve ha ali'tahu olah", as in "offer it as a burnt offering". This is the original version. Ask any Jew who still speaks Hebrew and they will translate it. They don't buy into your theory that you just gave. According to the ACTUAL ORIGINAL HEBREW text... The daughter was literally burned. She didn't get offered as a "living sacrifice". She was a "burnt offering". Not to mention, it's been refuted multiple times online and even early Christians didn't buy into trying to refute that she wasn't killed. And as much as Christian debaters love to quote Flavius Josephus, it's quoted by him "he sacrificed his daughter as a burnt offering: offering such as oblation as was neither conformable to the law, nor acceptable to God; not weighing with himself what opinion the hearers would have of such a practice. Jepthah sacrificed his daughter.". So yeah, that's just you making an unjust claim against what historians already notarized centuries ago. Jews didn't and don't buy into it as in the first 1000 years of translation, it was UNANIMOUSLY interpreted text that Jephtah killed his daughter. Early Christians didn't buy into that claim - famous interpreters, bishops and priests such as Origin, John Chrysostom, Augustine, Martin Luther, John Calvin and Aurelius Ambrosius also state that he indeed burnt his daughter for YHWH as a sacrifice. And early historians recorded the fact that relatively no one bought into these claims that he just "offered up her virginity" as a way of making up for not murdering her. Granted it (the chance of having your virginity sealed) is written in LATER STORIES, centuries after this event that the barbaric nature of the old worlds toned down a bit and it was more symbolic for "nuns" to be a thing. Sure. I can buy that, considering it was a much later time period after this story was issued... But there's no need for "the custom in Israel that the daughters of Israel lament the daughter of Jephtah four days of the year" if she was just a to be a celibate woman. I mean, have you ever lamented over a group of nuns before, 4 days out of the 365 days in a year just because they will never have sex? I don't think so...

I think that is most pretty right... and probably is the same reason we have a sinful nature...

Sadik, you made me laugh for 5 minutes. LOL. I'd give you 5 thumbs up for that.

No we haven't

Oof as skeptical Muslim that hurts m8

MySatanIsSilence I'm called Joshua :(

MySatanIsSilence David

MySatanIsSilence My name is Bartholomew . If you need some Homie love hmu

He's a reflection of the men who created him.

he likely used his magic to ensure she was the first out of the house.