Dope Tech Episode 2

<<@CrossExamined says : FREE Download of sermon I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist!: 👉📱https://cutt.ly/cInI1eo>> <<@Doubting_Thomas1 says : Is Luke considered a prophet? If not, your criteria is not valid>> <<@Gigapyr0_0 says : 1. Where did God give the authority and instruction on which books to include? (Where does it say for a book to be authoritative it has to have those 3 elements to it?) 2. Where did God say he would no longer speak to His people through prophets? - If so, why would he change his pattern of communication with His people despite being the same yesterday, today and forever (Heb 13:8) I don't understand how for all of human existence, God communicated through prophets, who wrote scriptures and preached the gospel, to suddenly, what the prophets said were sufficient despite the changes in the world. The world is very different from 2000 years ago. While many principles from the Bible are still relevant now, there are a lot of unique problems in today's world where it would make sense if God called a prophet to guide his people as he's done countless times. To say that God can no longer reveal His will and words seems to me like wanting to put a muzzle on God because you're content with the comfortable life you have with just the Bible>> <<@MZavala200 says : Unless its the Trump bible>> <<@leftxross says : I hit a road block and now looking for answers. Explain why KJV, NIV and others do not have a psalm 26:13-14. But DRA does. Who that not make the DRA version false.>> <<@leeuniverse says : While there are no "miracles" and "witnesses" to Confirm the First Vision, there ARE for MANY if not ALL of the other major Founding events of the Church of Jesus Christ in the last days. This is a point he conveniently ignores in his "example"... He cherry picks the one instance or near to it in which Faith alone must be had concerning the Restoration. In fact, this point is one of the primary reasons I'm a Latter-Day Saint, is because it's the ONLY religion that actually has everything that would demonstrate God's Hand being involved just as the Bible itself shows when God's Hand was involved in establishing His Word and Works or working with His people of old... The only religion In the last 2,000 years anyway. Also, he uses the typical Anti-Mormon response.... What he doesn't get is that he confuses HIS understanding of the Word, with the ACTUAL Word. He doesn't get that it's HE who follows "false prophets" and "false angels".... at least for some things, ones that "preach another Gospel than the one given". But worse he bears False Witness as he does concerning the Grace verse he quotes, as if LDS believe something different. He doesn't understand that he judges and misrepresents us, in his Anti-Mormonism the SAME way the Left judges and misrepresents the Right. It's ALL the same spirit. I grew up on MANY mainstream Christian religions before I was even 10 years old, and I would read the Bible for myself, and SEE what it said compared to what they said, and what they said was false on some things or were missing several key things that identified the Lords True Church on the earth. But when I came upon the LDS Church, it was the ONLY religion that fit what the Book actually said, in Full. To be clear, I had no "bias"... I wasn't brainwashed to think any one way about the Book, but reading it with completely fresh and clear eyes, being the in Grace of God, and then seeing what the World/Christianity said of the Book, it was EASY for me to see what was True and False. Understand, I had ZERO knowledge of the LDS Church, I just read and saw what the book purely said. Oh, and wow... He's supposed to be an "intellect" and yet he uses the intellectually lazy and false Book of Revelations statement...? If a true Biblical Scholar he would know that other books of the Bible, ones well before Revelations have the SAME sort of Statement about "not adding to the book/word". He would know that the compilers of the Bible "placed" Revelations at the end. But even more, he would know very well that that statement was referring to the Book of Revelations ITSELF. If his interpretation is correct, then why don't we deny EVERY Scripture after those other Books? Because the Revelation wasn't referring to the "Bible".... There was no "Bible" when that Vision came. It hadn't been compiled yet. The statement was referring to the "Revelation" ITSELF. He as all anti-mormons do, create a "Strawman" that he then attacks.... He misrepresents and distorts the actual Word of God as compiled in the Bible, to disgustingly misuse it to try and attack the Lords Latter-day Church. BTW, one other thing... I find it ironic that other Christians try to use Revelations to "debunk" anything else. Why? Because they pretty much IGNORE what it actually says.... For example, it makes clear there is a "Judgement" (their view is that Grace Alone is everything, nothing else exists or is necessary). If Grace Alone was all there was to Salvation and Exaltation, there would be no need for a Final Judgement and all that's related. Yes, Grace is for Salvation, but Christianity has completely forgotten the "Exaltation" part. Hence one of many reasons for the Restoration.>> <<@inpito says : In response to the question, is the Bible finished? Revelation 10:7 [7] But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets. Revelation 10:10-11 [10] And I took the little book out of the angel's hand, and ate it up; and it was in my mouth sweet as honey: and as soon as I had eaten it, my belly was bitter. [11] And he said unto me, Thou must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings. Has the seventh angel sounded in our day? Then how can the mystery of God be finished? When did the Apostle John prophesy to many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings, after patmos?>> <<@Spartan322 says : While I absolutely agree with the principals laid out to discovering the confirmed Biblical Testament, Revelation doesn't imply God's historical narrative is done, it merely is speaking to only a proper narrowing of scope to God, His nature, and the history He gave to us in His Word as all described already through the Biblical account. There have not yet been any books since Revelation which accomplish this and don't contradict the Scriptures, but that itself doesn't say God does not seek to give us more about Him, however it will not change grace by faith, it will not lie, it will not contradict God's Word at all but only specifically enhances the description of Him. For example, the witnesses, prophets, named in Revelation would inherently be written down by eyewitness testimony which would follow the standard laid out here, meaning they are at minimum the next described case of God's Word being further given to us, which means the Bible, while it should be extremely strict and resistant to any more books, it is not still exempt to a furthering of God's Word. Does that leave open the door to other cases of clarification? Absolutely. But just because the door is open to God giving us more of His Word is not the same as having done so, (least yet, as confirmed already the events of Revelation will be added to it) and so far as I know it has absolutely not been since Revelation. Christians need to understand that there is a balance to believing that God's Word moves further but never once will it be added to falsely, and it requires a strict standard for it to be God's Word, if we ever get an actual prophet (not some nutjob claiming to be one, an actual clear prophet sent from God according to His Biblical standard of prophets) in the modern era, which God might not do but He also could, I fear not only will the world hate him, but the Christian world will also attack him, we should obviously be skeptical and validate him to ensure he is a prophet, that he speaks God's Word properly and in due and right application, but I don't think the same argument against that prophet would then hold, oppose the liars like the cults and Joseph Smith, but please vigilant for someone who would truly come from God by the Scriptures, who foremost says "Test me by the Scriptures" or as Paul said "If I speak of another god, do not trust my word" which is especially essential.>> <<@dsheppard8492 says : Paul said that all scripture is in fact scripture ,,, or a writing of some sort,,, if it is inspired by God, God is speaking again in our day for the purpose of preparing a people that will judge the earth, dispensationalism be damned, They can write what they have had revealed by the anointing and that is the word of God, just a Paul received the word of God, Thing is that today no one has ears to hear the words of these prophets because what they say is not written down for them by someone worshipped,,, like Paul or the other writers from Jesus day. Those men are worshipped by the religious establishment, and there will never come a time when others like them with the exact same inspiration of God begin to speak, and it will come.>> <<@gabepettinicchio7454 says : Turek is either naive or misleading you when he speaks of "Grace by Faith Alone. Not Works!" However, he confuses the OT "Works of the Law" ie: circumcision (mentioned in Galatians & Romans), with the "works" in the Epistle of James, and elsewhere, also explained in the next verse ... *"For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love”* (Gal. 5:3–6). Turek mentions this verse, but conveniently leaves out ..."Faith *WORKING* thru love!" Confirm the meaning here by reading, what Luther called "the book of straw", the epistle of James. *"Faith without WORKS is dead."* In the words of the great Catholic Apologist, Jimmy Akin ...*"This challenge commits the fallacy of hasty generalization. It’s like saying that because you need flour and not cement to make a cake, you only need flour (not eggs, water, sugar, and so on).>> <<@gabepettinicchio7454 says : It baffles my mind when a supposed "Bible Only" Christian leader goes to any length, in order to twist & mislead his followers with confusing deception w/of course, portrayed confidence. --- Anything to take away the authority of the Catholic Church, and in essence, giving it to himself. 4 sec. in, he quotes Metzger and somehow does not understand that either way, a *Spirit-led authority* was needed to pray, decern & decide which books were to be deemed *"authoritative"* and which would not. Note that the Catholic Church made these decisions during the Council of Rome (383AD) under the leadership of, Yes, a pope (Pope Damascus I), along with the participation of 150 bishops & theologians. Their decisions were largely based on what the Catholic Church had already been teaching "orally'' from the Sacred Traditions that were handed down, (by letter as well) from the apostles. Try choosing 150 of your favorite pastors & preachers such as Turek (who admits he is still learning), MacArthur, F. Chan, Copeland, Sharpton, J.Jackson, Jerimiah Wright, Osteen, Warren, Falwell, Swaggert, Comfort, White, Hagee, Bynum, Stanley, Winans, Hee, Hinn. There, I've got the ball rolling w/20. Choose the remaining 130, and tell me that each of these very different *BIBLE ONLY* leaders & deniers of Oral Tradition could produce ... a *Bible*. What would be their criteria? Could they do it?>> <<@KamenKunchev says : The Bible has been edited and some parts have been removed to better serve organized religion. The first translation was not into English, it was into Greek. The closest you can get to reading the original is to learn ancient Greek which will take some years off your life and you will also need read a lot of literature to be able to fully understand what's what in the first translations. Obviously the story of the Bible is not over because we are still waiting on Jesus to return at some unspecified time and even though the end times have been described, it does not really say what comes after that. Is this the real end or what? In general there are too many loose ends and poorly developed characters that need attention. The Bible does need better and more complete story-telling in general.>> <<@exclusivelynyc says : Excellent!>> <<@happydog2524 says : Salvation is by faith and works. Black and white written on the pages of epistle of St James. Martin Luther removed this book from his cannon because the truth contradicted his teaching that salvation is by faith without works. Salvation by faith alone is a doctrine based on the tradition of men. Protestant doctrine is false. Protestants use a book that is broken as it is missing books from the old testament. Those books were REMOVED by Luther and the other protestant heretics.>> <<@wisegamer6354 says : the quran is a miracle the prophet mohamad pbuh couldnt read or write>> <<@azoniarnl3362 says : There isnt a single word or sentence in this world thats actually written by God. Its all written by humans NOT God. Im not an Atheist but I have a hard time embracing religion for this very reason.>> <<@outsidetherealm91 says : It you want to split hell wide open, you can.>> <<@onlylove556 says : Wow Frank being such an intelligent man that he is I'm so shocked that he still is unaware of this.... 1st Frank talks about the criteria the church used on how the books of the Bible were canonized, that every individual book was thoroughly under exams to see if it was written by a true prophet of God. So Frank is letting us know that these were first individual books alone, then were canonized into one book together. So with that said, the Book of Revelation was first just an individual book, that said nothing is to be added or taken away, meaning from this one book alone. and then Frank and many other individuals take this one book (revelation) and the Canon 2gether, and argues that you can't add or take away any books out from the Canon itself a whole. But the Book of Revelation was written as one individual book 1st, so that verse at the end of Revelation is just for the Book of Revelation alone, not as the Canon as a whole. The second question is when did these books of the Bible that were written in the first century, that when were these books canonized into one book that became the bible we have 2day. that is the #1 question. Because we have historical evidence showing us when the church canonize these books of the Bible, and this did not happen until the Late Late 4th Century, 400 years after the death of Jesus Christ... That these inspired books of God that were written in the first century, weren't canonized into one book after 380AD. 3rd question you have to ask urself, is what church was there in the late fourth century? It was The Holy Catholic Apostatic Church, the 1st church started by Jesus Christ that has the seven sacraments of the Apostles. And the 4th question you must ask urself, is why would the Holy Spirit lead these men in the Catholic church, if it's a false Church? obviously they must have been following the true correct Gospel of Jesus Christ, to be able to collect all these inspired books of God, and canonize them into one book. as we know in history their were many forgeries out there in the world, so this was only done through the HolySpirit to the church, which is the Catholic Church 💯 So why would a God lead a false Church to do that? Obviously God accepted the way they we're preaching the gospel to the Nations, because they had the true Gospel of Jesus Christ. These are questions you must ask, and these are questions that can be answered 💯 with real historical evidence, from real theologians, from real historians💯>> <<@glcsprince says : No one was there when Moses saw God. No one else heard Christ when He spoke to Paul. No one else saw Christ standing on the right-hand of God when Stephen was being arrived to death.>> <<@jackcoleman5955 says : Frank is on FIRE in this clip!>> <<@mickqQ says : There are no real gods Only people that believe that gods are real>> <<@mickqQ says : Yeah sure … why not , make up some new stuff more relevant to our time>> <<@Theo_Skeptomai says : I can add or detract whatever I wish from the bible. There isn't any consequence for doing so. So why is this a topic of discussion?>> <<@jamesbishop3091 says : I don’t see why there couldn’t be other letters of Paul or the apostles floating around somewhere.. aren’t there missing letters from Paul to Timothy?>> <<@JadDragon says : This sounds like a KJV only argument.>> <<@TheNameIsForgettable says : Would love to see frank debate someone like jay dyer on this. 🤔>> <<@Micah_St_Columba says : BLOCK.CHAIN.NARRATIVE.. UNDISPUTED.>> <<@Godlimate says : Mormons did it. So why not?>> <<@newcreationinchrist1423 says : The bible is finished. We already have what we need to know. Next is end times prophecy being fulfilled.>> <<@LJones-tx6eg says : After the life and resurrection...no there are no new books>> <<@radirandom says : You are a liar, the Quran does have miracles of muhammad (saw). Read surah 54 called qamar ( moon ). First 2 verses. Al-Qamar 54:1 ٱقْتَرَبَتِ ٱلسَّاعَةُ وَٱنشَقَّ ٱلْقَمَرُ . The moon has split and the hour has near come near.>> <<@deliberativedisciple says : There also needs to be consistency between previous revelation and new revelation. Unfortunately, many Christians view Paul as a wrecking ball to the Old Testament, which would qualify him as an uninspired false prophet. So, keep the test of inspiration in your mind when it comes to interpreting Paul because his writings were new at one point and the Bereans scrutinized his teachings against God's word and they lined up. If you read Paul's writings to somehow trump or supercede previous revelation, then you're doing it wrong and twisting the Scripture, just like Peter warned against.>> <<@ryanabel4027 says : This guy is not only confusing the congregation, he's confusing himself 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣>> <<@steved5960 says : The thumbnail....i can't 😂>> <<@Psalm1101 says : Thank god>> <<@intrepidjourneyman7555 says : Anyone have any thoughts on the following paragraph from the Council of Carthage in 397 AD: "It was also determined that besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing be read in the Church under the title of divine Scriptures. The Canonical Scriptures are these: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua the son of Nun, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, 3 two books of Paraleipomena, 4 Job, the Psalter, five books of Solomon, 5 the books of the twelve prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezechiel, Daniel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, two books of Esdras, 6 two books of the Maccabees. Of the New Testament: four books of the Gospels, one book of the Acts of the Apostles, thirteen Epistles of the Apostle Paul, one epistle of the same [writer] to the Hebrews, two Epistles of the Apostle Peter, three of John, one of James, one of Jude, one book of the Apocalypse of John. Let this be made known also to our brother and fellow-priest Boniface, or to other bishops of those parts, for the purpose of confirming that Canon. because we have received from our fathers that those books must be read in the Church. Let it also be allowed that the Passions of Martyrs be read when their festivals are kept." This clearly spells out the apocrypha as sacred scripture. Does anyone know of an earlier source/council which contradicts this list of cannon to be reflective of a protestant cannon?>> <<@OKTALZ1982 says : And the good doctor gets it wrong in the end. You do have to obey the law and the only way you will do that in the proper manner is through faith. Christ didn't make the law more lenient in ever sense, in fact he made it harsher in specific areas. Listen carefully as Dr Turek stumps himself. It is through belief in Christ that you will produce and do good works and these works will be a testament to your true faith. One who does not have faith will have no good works, produce no good fruit and will be dead. "Faith without works is dead" Saint James says. Frank Turek is a great scholar but his legalistic mindset is as flawed as that of the Pharisee, and that is a flaw in Protestantism. Christ did die on the cross for the sins of ALL mankind. However he did not pay a debt and if he did then who would he pay it too? Christ being God in essence would pay it to the Father who is of the same essence and that share a common will. How does that work? Well it doesn't. Christ paid with his life for the sin of Adam/mankind by repairing what was damaged by Adam/mankind and caused the fall of Adam from Eden. Christ recapitulates the human nature of his incarnation to his divine nature from eternity and became (here it is, listen carefully now) the Godman/Theantropos through his TRANSFIGURATION. He was still man and still God but he was now different. This transfiguring is called Theosis and it is what YOU are being promised through faith in Christ. He shows you this in the Gospel but you have never seen it. This is not something I've made up. This is the teaching of the early Church, the Orthodox church and it makes sense compared to the legalistic paying of a dept to himself that you Protestants inherited from catholicism of Thomas Aquinas and Augustin. The corrupted themselves and they corrupted your understanding of scripture as well. There are not 1'000'000 churches. Christ spoke of One church. You can find it by apostolic succession and history which can be easily done and that the BIBLE tells you about. So which church compiled the Bible? Well it wasn't Protestant (didn't exist) it wasn't Roman Catholic (didn't exist), it was the Holy Orthodox Catholic and APOSTOLIC church (today simply called Eastern Orthodox). Check what I've said. See if it's true. If it is, you are welcome home brothers and sisters.>> <<@stevenwbaker56 says : Excellent answer.>> <<@tropicallamb says : A soft voice turneth away wrath, Frank.>> <<@djparsons7363 says : He should know that the cross he honors is a representation of a PAGAN God the Babylonians worshipped named Tammuz, it is not what Christ died on, it is something God considers to be disgusting, You cannot mix false pagan relics with Christianity and expect God to be OK with that. This preacher is not approved by God.>> <<@giovannymendez9587 says : It a historical book if you change it you changing the belief system as well>> <<@BrianBadondeBo says : Did he just admit that Luke was not an eye witness?>> <<@CDLsarcastic says : God owns the universe. He created all of us. He has right to do whatever he wishes. He wrote a book through men to prove it was 100% accurate. Science, history, future telling, how to live, how to be healthy, how to be happy. The very fact it was written by 40 men who didn’t know each other mostly. 1500 years apart is astonishing. I preach the word on a daily basis. 99% who ask questions never even opened the book. They don’t want to because of rules. Commandments and sin. Jesus is so obvious it’s like mind blowing people choose Satan. It’s scary actually people will be on earth for 70-100 years and never open it although They have it sitting in their house or In church every week (Catholics) … wake Up !>> <<@ROCKdJESUS7 says : I'm catholic>> <<@lakalajadizaja4332 says : The Book of Mormon is the word of God. I am a Christian and I can testify through the Holy Spirit that it is true. This was my personal miracle.>> <<@shaksta4 says : Your bit about Islam and the Qur'an is blatantly wrong. Sahih bukhari and Muslim and other mainstream hadith corpus were compiled ~150 years later but the individual hadiths themselves were written at the time of the prophet or collected shortly after he passed away (within a generation). Also I have read the Qur'an, in arabic and in english and I haven't found where it states that prophet Muhammad didn't do miracles. The miracles of the prophet happened by God through Muhammad, just like how it happened by God through Jesus or Moses etc.>> <<@BrianGondo says : Funny how books can't be added but books were removed by protestants>> <<@anycyclopedia says : I have a question: The Catholic Bible has 73 books while Protestant Bible has only 66 Books, Protestants say they didn't remove any books and the Catholic Church added them later to counter-reformation. But my problem is the Eastern Orthodox church which has nothing to do with the Protestant Reformation has the Apocrypha in their Bible while it broke away from the Catholic Church in 1057 AD. That means the Bible had the Apocrypha before the Protestant reformation?>> <<@commoncents5191 says : Book of Revelation was NOT that last (or oldest) book written in the Bible 😂. John only meant that you can’t add to his writing, duhh. There was no Bible when he wrote Revelation. I love many of his Cross Examined presentations but surprised he invalidated his whole argument at the last second.>> <<@asuka8951 says : Thank you Cross Examined Team and Pastor Frank Turek, everyday I am learning new when it comes to defending faith.>>