May 06, 2019

(WATCH) PragerU: Why God is a He

Look What We FoundStories from around the web

Is God a man, a woman, or a genderless force that cannot be identified by masculine or feminine traits? 

Society offers a range of ideas, but what do religious texts have to say about this immutable characteristic of God? Dennis Prager of PragerU offers some insightful answers.

Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2019-05-09 13:18:51 -0400
Actually, upon further consideration (I really should let these thoughts mull for a bit before posting them, heh), what you’ve done with that definition is very similar to how religion justifies itself.

You’ve presented an ambiguous statement, and presented a reasonable interpretation of it. However, that interpretation is neither supported nor refuted by the evidence, merely compatible with it. That interpretation is thus firmly a matter of opinion. (that an item is not specifically mentioned as an example should not be considered positive confirmation that it isn’t one. That’s a logical fallacy, but I can’t remember the specific term for it. It’ll come to me later).

The trouble starts, when you take that opinion and convert it into unequivocal fact. It isn’t. Not being refuted by a statement is not the same thing as positive evidence – all you’re establishing is plausible deniability, not confirmation – , and between that and confirmation bias (ignoring evidence contrary to your belief), are some of the most common way that misconceptions sneak into society. Of course, once that happens, you risk falling into the trap of “common sense” outweighing objectivity.
commented 2019-05-09 13:02:52 -0400
“1. a plant or animal that lives upon or within another living organism at whose expense it obtains some advantage; see also symbiosis. Parasites include multicelled and single-celled animals, fungi, and bacteria, and some authorities also include viruse”

Is not a fetus living within another organism, taking advantage at its host’s expense? Pregnancy is VERY metabolically expensive.

“Notice that babies are not mentioned as parasites? "

Your quote mention any specific examples at all, only the broadest generalities. Notice that tapeworms are not mentioned as parasites? Both are multicellular animals.

Nothing in your quote directly refutes the definition you dispute.
commented 2019-05-09 12:50:07 -0400
“AL PETERSON commented 23 hours ago
So , Andrew, you have given a long winded explanation of why, in spite of holding to empirical method, you aren’t going to in this case. Your preconceived but unverified and untested opinions are more comfortable. You have never looked to see what evidence exists.”

What evidence exists? How much of it is just things you hope are true? Can I experimentally test for God, or the Resurrection? No. we cannot. We have historical evidence that plausibly allege some purported prophet was executed thousands of years ago, but allegations of divinity cannot be verified nor tested. Beyond historical verification, it becomes a fable, a myth. Perhaps one you strongly believe in, but i remain unconvinced. Such is the nature of belief. That’s philosophy, not science.

Empirically, we cannot prove nor disprove God. We can go a step down the certainty scale, and ask, is a hypothesis featuring God better than one that doesn’t? Even then, there aren’t a lot of holes in existing theories best explained by divinity. God is not a variable needed to explain the world. Maybe he exists but doesn’t intervene (that again verges into philosophy not science) but hypotheses containing God don’t improve upon those lacking one. There’s a fair bit of handwaving about gaps in our knowledge, but the only thing that that’s actually evidence of is that we have gaps in our knowledge.
commented 2019-05-08 14:06:42 -0400
ANDREW STEPHENSON

Whether you agree or not with the “parasite” characterization, is purely semantic.
-—————————————-
Interesting statement for a supposed scientist to make. This is one of those comforting lies you are desperately seeking. You play, as all leftists do, with semantics to make th point you want o make however invalid the analogy is. An analogy is not the same as a definition. There is nothing remotely parasitic about a baby. You are making a fool of yourself in front of the world.

1. a plant or animal that lives upon or within another living organism at whose expense it obtains some advantage; see also symbiosis. Parasites include multicelled and single-celled animals, fungi, and bacteria, and some authorities also include viruses.Those that feed upon human hosts can cause diseases ranging from the mildly annoying to the severe or even fatal.

Notice that babies are not mentioned as parasites? If they were we would have an obligation to kill them all. You ARE desperate.
commented 2019-05-08 13:45:18 -0400
So , Andrew, you have given a long winded explanation of why, in spite of holding to empirical method, you aren’t going to in this case. Your preconceived but unverified and untested opinions are more comfortable. You have never looked to see what evidence exists. Guess you are afraid of the paradigm shift that would follow. Drive by cheap shots are so much easier.
commented 2019-05-08 12:30:58 -0400
“1. In spite of having proven to you that babies are not parasites you still hold to that view.
In spite of having proven that the DNA of a baby is not the same as the mother’s body you keep espousing that a woman can kill her unborn child because it is “her own body”.

Whether you agree or not with the “parasite” characterization, is purely semantic.

It is her choice as to whether she wants to bear that “separate DNA”. From a legal perspective the government cannot force you to give up your autonomy on someone else’s behalf. From an ethical one, that’s an individual matter.

2. In spite of the death toll of socialism and it’s many other attendant evils, Leftists still hold to the belief that socialism would solve the world’s problems.

You’re confusing socialism and fascism. Socialism, in moderation, does improve quality of life. Every single modern society has some elements of socialism.

“3. In spite of the overwhelming number of violent acts perpetrated by muslims out of all proportion to their numbers, Leftist still find moral equivalence between islam and Christianity. "
We’ve established what they are, now we’re just negotiating the price.
commented 2019-05-08 12:26:47 -0400
“What have you studied? "

Science. I deal in the empirical. Biochemist by training, but I read far beyond my own expertise.

Ultimately, you have to just believe that the Bible is largely true, and without that belief it becomes an interesting anthology of ancient mythologies, some of which have connections to real events. (Was there a bad flood somewhere in the middle east thousands of years ago? Probably. Dies that validate Noah’s Ark? Probably not). but little more.

Requiring proof of the Resurrection is probably an example of the Nirvana fallacy – no evidence to refute you probably exists, given the passage of time and the distorted historical record. Being unable to prove or disprove something does not mean it happened, or didn’t happen. You just can’t prove anything. The same lack of evidence prevents you from proving it did occur. Again, you just have to believe. Did it happen? Maybe. Maybe not. It’s impossible to know for sure. Outside of the Bible there’s little verification that anything happened beyond the execution of an irksome cult leader. History is full of pariahs attributed divinity after the fact, so in essence I am unconvinced, if only because of the high level of circularity needed to believe it.

Can you build a compelling argument in favour that doesn’t rely on biased sources such as the Bible itself? No/ Do I see any need for divine intervention to explain the universe? No – even though there are things we don’t understand, that’s not a gap for divinity to slip into, it’s just stuff that we haven’t figured out yet. Do I see a causal role of God in the Universe? No. It’s a tremendously complex system, but one based upon fairly simple underlying mechanisms. He is, at best, an external observer. Do I believe in souls, or the afterlife? No. Consciousness is one of those question marks of how it occurs, but undoubtedly just an emergent property of simple biochemical processes, more complex than those in a roundworm with 300 neurons but fundamentally no different at the cellular level.

In essence, I see no need for God, no need for the Jesus mythology, and thus no reason to believe in it. In my mind it represents the triumph of emotion over logic. It’s true to you because you want it to be true, and you can support that with a complex web of evidential biases and plausible deniability that allow you to support it in your own mind – which allows you to develop circumstantial and circular logic into, what seems to you, to be an absolute truth.
commented 2019-05-08 07:58:05 -0400
ANDREW STEPHENSON
Also, (mumbling) something something something pillar of leftiedom!
-——————————————

I’m not sure how one mumbles in written form but if you need it stated again to clarify it for you here it is:
The Three Pillars of Leftiedom;
1. They never learn from their mistakes.
2. They never learn from other people’s mistakes.
3. They refuse to exercise discernment.

Clear enough?

All easily verified.
For example:
1. In spite of having proven to you that babies are not parasites you still hold to that view.
In spite of having proven that the DNA of a baby is not the same as the mother’s body you keep espousing that a woman can kill her unborn child because it is “her own body”.

2. In spite of the death toll of socialism and it’s many other attendant evils, Leftists still hold to the belief that socialism would solve the world’s problems.

3. In spite of the overwhelming number of violent acts perpetrated by muslims out of all proportion to their numbers, Leftist still find moral equivalence between islam and Christianity.

I could do as Maurice Potvin does and make a full time job out of listing the number of incidents that prove my point. But I have other things to do.

Cheers.
commented 2019-05-08 07:22:55 -0400
ANDREW STEPHENSON
How do we know the book is true?
-———————————————————
I know it is true because I spent 7 years studying it. I learned Hebrew and Greek to do so in order to get my Master’s Degree in Biblical Studies. I studied textual history, I studied hermeneutics. I studied textual criticism. I studied the Dead Sea Scrolls in comparison to the Masoretic and Majority texts. I studied Church history and world history. I studied logic and ethics.

What have you studied?

The Bible is, hands down, the best attested book of the ancient world. There is no caparison. Not even close.

But the real issue is the Resurrection. If you can disprove that (hundreds have tried unsuccessfully) I will abandon my faith. It would have no meaning without it.

“If we have hoped in Christ in this life only, we are of all men most to be pitied.”
I Corinthians 15:19

So have at it. Disprove it and destroy my faith. Wouldn’t that be a coup for you?

But you won’t. You would rather continue as one of the unstudied but opinionated trolls who is simply looking for a drive by cheap shot and who is desperately seeking comforting lies such as babies are parasites.

But perhaps I am wrong about you. If so you should read, Evidence That Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell. He has a very thorough compilation of all the arguments and the evidence available. You probably don’t want to spend 7 years at it.

Here is an overview of “Evidence”:
http://sdapologetics.com/evidence-that-demands-a-verdict-an-overview/

Ravi Zacharias is always good as well. Here is a link to him speaking at Princeton University:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6aDoOzYN-U

I wish you peace in this world and the next.
commented 2019-05-07 22:27:03 -0400
What a fascinating explanation on why the Bible depicts God as male. Most violence is done by men. Most crimes are done by men. Boys are more prone to fighting than girls. God being described in male terms truly does make trates like kindness and moral uprightness more appealing to males. Since God is strong and compassionate, those attributes aren’t girlish and weak. Males respect strength and that makes charity seem noble, which it is in any case.
commented 2019-05-07 17:03:33 -0400
The Lord’s Prayer

Our Father, which art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy Name.
Thy Kingdom come.
Thy will be done on earth,
As it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread.
And forgive us our trespasses,
As we forgive those that trespass against us.
And lead us not into temptation,
But deliver us from evil.
For thine is the kingdom,
The power, and the glory,
For ever and ever.
Amen.
commented 2019-05-07 12:25:48 -0400
“You like to believe and promulgate lies after all.”

You’re the one talking about “God” “revealing” "him"self. LOL. Don’t be a hypocrite, Al. The whole Jesus mythology is dubious at best.

God “revealed” xerself to me, too, like that dirty old man in the Burger King bathroom. How do you know that? I wrote a book about it. How do we know the book is true? The book vouches for itself, and says it’s true, so that’s how we know. Also, I’ll accuse anybody pointing out the circular logic of this as “promulgating lies” (reputation +5!).

Also, (mumbling) something something something pillar of leftiedom! Strawmen are also reputation +5.
commented 2019-05-07 11:21:14 -0400
Jan G….Could not open your link—-it said:
500 – Internal server error.
There is a problem with the resource you are looking for, and it cannot be displayed.
commented 2019-05-07 11:19:11 -0400
One of Prager U’s best videos. This rule should be applied to Political Leaders in many instances like the UK’s Theresa May and NZ’s funny fool of a PM. Having said that, I am certainly not anti-woman in politics, as I respect many women Politicians like Thatcher or even Christie Clark who was probably the only North American Leader to balance the budget, and she still lost her job. Nickie Haley could possibly be a great President of the USA.
commented 2019-05-07 00:02:21 -0400
ANDREW STEPHENSON
(since we’re talking about God, aka, just making shit up, may as well :) )
-—————————————
Mr-Babies-Are-Parasites, why should this topic be any different for you? You like to believe and promulgate lies after all. Business as usual.
commented 2019-05-06 23:46:32 -0400
Actually, Andrew, God revealed himself that way to the writers of the Bible.Lots of pagan societies that were patriarchal had goddesses. Jews were unique in not having a goddess. Or a multiplicity of them.
commented 2019-05-06 23:02:51 -0400
PETER NETTERVILLE commented 4 hours ago
Everyone, listen to Andrew “I-know-all” Stephenson because it is obvious he/she knows more than Dennis Prager, right Andy?"

My God is a hermaphrodite.

(since we’re talking about God, aka, just making shit up, may as well :) )
commented 2019-05-06 22:14:56 -0400
Here is an excellent interview with a man, Damon West, who had been serving a life sentence, converted to Catholicism and what a story. He reiterates this reality of fatherless men in prison (though he himself was not), as does Fr. Mitch Pacwa who works with many prisoners.
(The ‘Father Effect’ also addresses this issue for men and women.)
https://www.ewtn.com/multimedia/video-player.asp?id=6030368104001&w=960&h=540
commented 2019-05-06 21:02:13 -0400
Hi, Andy! (I feel I can call you Andy. We have such a history together. If you think I’m getting too familiar with you, just let me know and I’ll revert back to calling you Ms. Stephenson)
commented 2019-05-06 19:18:05 -0400
Everyone, listen to Andrew “I-know-all” Stephenson because it is obvious he/she knows more than Dennis Prager, right Andy?
commented 2019-05-06 13:23:33 -0400
Yahweh, I am the beginning and the end. The Alpha and Omega.
commented 2019-05-06 12:09:43 -0400
The Abrahamic (Jewish/Christian/Muslim) God is a He, but that’s a reflection of the patriarchal societies that wrote most of today’s religious texts. A product of their time.