THIS Math Concept PROVES God Is Real 

Dawg he’s in public they probably are actually busy.

@@cleo7066 never be too busy for God

I imagine he was a plant. His responses fed perfectly into Todd's narrative.

yes, agreed very much so, humans love to distract themselves (and they are good at it) not to face their own Soul Condition, do not think that when U die this attitude changes .

@@__Violet._. .. depends on what you mean by "die".. whether you're talking about the first or the second death. When we're born again, our attitude changes. I would argue that that is the first death. Then the books are opened and we are judged. I think a lot of Christians are teaching it wrong. But that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.😉 Have a wonderful day!

One tends to be respectful to the guy paying him.

​@@MrGrumblierBeing respectful is normal among normal people.We don't need payment for being polite and respectful ❤

@@seanrath8268 You missed my point. I was inferring that the "student" was a plant. I suspect he was either paid or volunteered to play the part of the straight man for Todd's sermon.

@@MrGrumblier you suspect Todd is fraudulently preaching to this boy bc he paid him off? That’s quite an accusation with zero proof to back it up, and extremely far-fetched compared to the concept that he really was just a respectful young man. My goodness…

@@melindamercier6811 No, I base my conclusion on the fact that this young man is providing the perfect responses to Todd's preaching, is the only one there, and is clearly not an atheist. Todd is preaching to the choir.

By his destructive ways!

@@brendabreslin1917 I hope you miss His wrath.

@@brendabreslin1917 🤡

@@jameshines9330 Go ahead, make my Eternity!

@@KVJ-w7h No it's God and an Abusive, Bullying, Narcissist!

I mean math is a language we use to describe the world…. Literally look at any like college level math textbook We invent axioms and discover the implications of them . We use the language of math to describe reality etc

Man invented mathematics, but man did not invent the rules of the universe that mathematics _attempts_ to define.

Without man there will be no math, no one will be there to add 2 and 2, man is the one who assigns numbers to objects which had zero connection to mathematics

@@azophi False. We express math using arbitrary symbols. But the logic behind it still exists whether or not man describes it. That's like saying trees don't exist if man never learned language. The tree is still there it's just described using language.

God exists too whether we exist or not.

Prove it.

@@bladerunner3314 Holy Spirit saved me. I can't prove how I feel, but I feel at peace.

@@Amor_Fati_ Anecdote isn't evidence.

We didn't invent math, true ... but we did more than observe it, we explored it and used it to our benefit. That does however, in no way, prove that it's instituted by your deity. You just fill in the gap with your favourite fantasy hero. Mine is the pink unicorn, it has every bit of validity as yours. It's even more powerfull than yours. And I can prove it because it's in a book I just wrote.

​@@lizadowning4389cringe

The argument presented is one that merges various theological and philosophical perspectives, including the cosmological argument, the argument from design, the argument from complexity, and the argument from morality. While these are all interesting perspectives, they also have been subjects of critique and counter-arguments. Let's explore each point separately. 1. **Explanation for Mathematical Constants and Something from Nothing:** This asserts that the complexity and precision of the universe, such as mathematical constants like pi or the gravitational constant, imply a designer. This is a form of the teleological argument (argument from design). However, the counter-argument is that it commits the fallacy of assuming complexity requires a designer. The precision we observe might be intrinsic to the nature of a coherent universe, not necessarily the result of conscious design. The question of how we got "something from nothing" is a deep philosophical and scientific one. There are cosmological theories, such as those involving quantum fluctuations, that suggest it's possible for a universe to arise from "nothing" in a quantum mechanical sense. To assert that "only a god could do this" is to make a claim beyond what we can empirically test or verify. 2. **DNA and Information:** The statement that "DNA can detract information but it can never add too" is not accurate. New information can and does arise in DNA through various mechanisms, such as gene duplication and subsequent mutation, or horizontal gene transfer in bacteria. 3. **Irreducible Complexity and Complexity of DNA:** The argument from irreducible complexity posits that certain biological systems are too complex to have evolved naturally. However, this argument has been widely critiqued in the scientific community. Evolutionary biologists have proposed numerous plausible pathways for the step-by-step evolution of seemingly "irreducibly complex" systems. The length of DNA, while impressive, doesn't necessarily imply a designer. The complexity of life, as encoded in DNA, is the result of billions of years of evolutionary processes, not a measure of initial design complexity. 4. **Glasses and Man-made Objects:** Comparing a biological organism to a man-made object, like glasses, is a false analogy. Man-made objects do not replicate or evolve, while organisms do. Evolution by natural selection is a well-supported explanation for the complex adaptation we see in the biological world. 5. **Basis for Morality:** The assertion that morality requires a divine lawgiver is a common argument, but it's not without counter-arguments. There are many philosophical frameworks for morality that don't rely on a deity, such as consequentialism (judging actions by their outcomes), deontology (judging actions by their adherence to rules), and virtue ethics (focusing on the development of moral character), among others. Additionally, many evolutionary biologists and psychologists argue that our moral instincts can be understood as a product of natural selection. For example, cooperation and empathy can be beneficial for the survival of social species, including humans. While these arguments bring up deep and fascinating questions, their conclusions are not the only possible interpretations of the observed facts. Many of their premises are challenged by scientific and philosophical scholarship. As with all such matters, open-minded and rigorous inquiry is key to understanding.

There is ZERO proof of your God's existence. How about the other 3,000 odd gods invented by mankind? Can you tell me about all of those?

The god(s) of the bible and all man made religions is a fraud. Elohim and Yahweh are plural terms meaning god(s). Namely Enki and Enlil who were the powerful ones that Jesus told you not to worship.

@@shamefulcritic1125 God doesn't punish. You are punished by your own hand, because you you refuse to accept admonishment and will not govern yourself.

​@@FASBLAQUEGod does punish because He loves us. He disciplines us because He is a loving Father.

Oh wow! He proved his existence in your fairy tale book? Too bad he can't do it in reality.

Things in the book proving other things in the book. That isn't proof things in the book are real. We need proof coming from outside of the book.

Not at all, just claims All complexity can come out without a creator behind.

How and where list an example

@@romereal9369 That question is a joke I guess ... there is plenty of literature and documentaries about complex systems that came up without any creator or designer. Look for them under complex systems, look for them under evolution. And then prove you that there is a creator behind the big bang.

@anders anderson false gods, aka the fallen angels, sure. God doesn't rely on us. God wanted a creation with true free will. We are the object of His affection. Yeshua Ha'Mashiach et Adonai Seek the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Aka absolute truth.

I absolutely agree. 🙏🏾

Cornelius Van Til's Transcendental Argument for the existence of God (TAG) is a philosophical argument which posits that all reasoning and logical thought necessarily presupposes the existence of God. It suggests that without a divine foundation, we cannot account for the laws of logic, uniformity of nature, or morality. Van Til asserts that non-Christian worldviews lead to irrationality and inconsistency. However, there are several counter-arguments to this position: 1. **Circular Reasoning:** Critics often point out that the Transcendental Argument relies on a form of circular reasoning. It assumes the truth of Christian theism in order to prove the truth of Christian theism. This is not typically considered a valid form of argument. 2. **Non-Christian Rationality:** The assertion that non-Christian worldviews lead to irrationality is debatable. There are many non-Christian philosophical systems, both theistic and atheistic, that offer coherent and consistent explanations of logic, nature, and morality. For instance, Buddhist philosophy, which is non-theistic, provides a comprehensive moral and metaphysical framework. 3. **Presupposition of God's Existence:** The argument presupposes the existence of the Christian God, but it doesn't give sufficient evidence why this God should be the necessary foundation for logic and morality, rather than any other deity or deities, or even abstract, non-theistic principles. 4. **Arbitrary Assertion:** Critics argue that saying "God is the necessary precondition of logic" is an arbitrary assertion. It is equally possible to claim that the laws of logic exist necessarily, without requiring a divine guarantor. 5. **Problem of Evil:** The existence of natural and moral evils in the world can be seen as inconsistent with a benevolent and omnipotent God, which poses a challenge to the Christian worldview that Van Til's TAG assumes. In conclusion, while Van Til's Transcendental Argument is compelling to some, it has been widely critiqued and is not universally accepted. The above points are just a few of the potential counter-arguments. As always, the questions of God's existence and the nature of reality are complex and deeply personal, and different people will find different arguments persuasive based on their prior beliefs, experiences, and philosophical inclinations.

The argument presented in the video is one that merges various theological and philosophical perspectives, including the cosmological argument, the argument from design, the argument from complexity, and the argument from morality. While these are all interesting perspectives, they also have been subjects of critique and counter-arguments. Let's explore each point separately. 1. **Explanation for Mathematical Constants and Something from Nothing:** This asserts that the complexity and precision of the universe, such as mathematical constants like pi or the gravitational constant, imply a designer. This is a form of the teleological argument (argument from design). However, the counter-argument is that it commits the fallacy of assuming complexity requires a designer. The precision we observe might be intrinsic to the nature of a coherent universe, not necessarily the result of conscious design. The question of how we got "something from nothing" is a deep philosophical and scientific one. There are cosmological theories, such as those involving quantum fluctuations, that suggest it's possible for a universe to arise from "nothing" in a quantum mechanical sense. To assert that "only a god could do this" is to make a claim beyond what we can empirically test or verify. 2. **DNA and Information:** The statement that "DNA can detract information but it can never add too" is not accurate. New information can and does arise in DNA through various mechanisms, such as gene duplication and subsequent mutation, or horizontal gene transfer in bacteria. 3. **Irreducible Complexity and Complexity of DNA:** The argument from irreducible complexity posits that certain biological systems are too complex to have evolved naturally. However, this argument has been widely critiqued in the scientific community. Evolutionary biologists have proposed numerous plausible pathways for the step-by-step evolution of seemingly "irreducibly complex" systems. The length of DNA, while impressive, doesn't necessarily imply a designer. The complexity of life, as encoded in DNA, is the result of billions of years of evolutionary processes, not a measure of initial design complexity. 4. **Glasses and Man-made Objects:** Comparing a biological organism to a man-made object, like glasses, is a false analogy. Man-made objects do not replicate or evolve, while organisms do. Evolution by natural selection is a well-supported explanation for the complex adaptation we see in the biological world. 5. **Basis for Morality:** The assertion that morality requires a divine lawgiver is a common argument, but it's not without counter-arguments. There are many philosophical frameworks for morality that don't rely on a deity, such as consequentialism (judging actions by their outcomes), deontology (judging actions by their adherence to rules), and virtue ethics (focusing on the development of moral character), among others. Additionally, many evolutionary biologists and psychologists argue that our moral instincts can be understood as a product of natural selection. For example, cooperation and empathy can be beneficial for the survival of social species, including humans. While these arguments bring up deep and fascinating questions, their conclusions are not the only possible interpretations of the observed facts. Many of their premises are challenged by scientific and philosophical scholarship. As with all such matters, open-minded and rigorous inquiry is key to understanding.

Except it's all utterly total garbage!

@@Enigmatic_philosopher I agree with 4 of the 5 takes that these are valid counter-arguments in the sense that they make it clear that the argument given in this video isn't a 100% guarantee because as humans we still have limited capacities and understanding. The reason I do not agree with the 5th one, "The Problem of Evil" is because I don't understand the premise of this point. Are you saying that because natural and moral evils exist that this means it does not align with Christian theology? If so then No that would be wrong as in Christian Theology they re-affirm consistently the evil nature of Man and Sin as a point to the fact we need Jesus Christ to save us from our sins.

I believe he was talking about the length of the DNA code, tho.

He did mention that later, but noo... we were talking bout cell numbers alright. thx 4 attempting 2 help tho. @@ORSkie

Out of all the planets, why only one planet has life. Instead of only seeing the universe as something perfectly designed by God, see what's imperfect in it too. See humans and other life on Earth as survivors. Think about all the other species that went extinct. Whatever adapts survives. The oil painting example as proof of God is one of the worst I've ever encountered. The Oil painting was most probably made by a human and we can prove it. What else could have painted the dog? An automated Robot, maybe. We have seen humans paint, so we can confirm that the painting was most probably made by a human. Have we ever seen or experienced God creating the universe? We couldn't have. God exists but we have only little idea what God is like. We can say that God is something that created the universe. But many that says God exists and that God is Jesus has no proof. Many say, "We don't need proof, we believe God exists. We believe that Jesus is God or God's son." or whatever "We believe in the Bible." Faith/belief does not always mean it's real.

This is a good point.

First off the Sahara desert is on earth and the earth has humans that make paintings. We know of them we know we make them. So finding a painting would be something we could be certain was made from a human . The universe with its planets and stars and nebula etc.. yeah we definitely didn’t make those. So that must mean it’s god right? That’s just laughable and makes no sense. There is no proof of god and even if there was you’d have no proof he created the universe. I also think atheism is illogical but this more dumb than anything I’ve heard them say.

That's only because you have seen someone create a painting before, that's the reason you have managed to recognise the object as a paint.

@@ullnevaknow2364 WRONG. You know when something is "finely tuned" like a phone, materials needed to make it, finally tune them so you almost see the purpose.. just like the sun and its distance to the earth ;) Your to narrow minded. Atheism is also an active choice you do every day, you biology knows and reckognizes god.

Try reality sometime

@@KingKongbabe Try kicking a termite mound with ur bare feet

@@Nicolae_Mew seek counseling

@@KingKongbabe I have and it's not working, help

@@Nicolae_Mew watch - Genesis Paradise Lost and Evolution vs God

The detransitioners have finally started to speak.the world will know soon enough. All glory to the most high

@@christislord2535 Amen.

Yes! This is why I think we should not circumcise our children at birth. That is mutilating their body and it really doesn’t add much of any health assuming someone washes themselves properly.

So, a majority being able to survive an environment which killed a majority of the population just a few generations earlier, is a sign of devolution. 🤔

@@michaelanderson4849 More people have died in the last hundred years through violence , wars than ever before that. Sickness is greater than in past, the gap between the rich and poor is greater than ever, sinfulness abounds Humans are getting worse , not better

@@JontheBerean About the wars. Nope, not even close. Check your numbers and compare those to the last ten centuries. Way higher percentage of the population got whacked prior to this century. Sickness is greater... Come again? Ever heard of the bubonic plague for example? Gap between rich and poor... Come again? Fewer were filthy rich a millennnia ago. But those who were were wealthier than today if you convert their money to todays value. Sinfulness... Come again? What is done today that weren't done a few centuries ago? Sin against who by the way?

@@JontheBerean Not only that but we are facing the biggest genocide that has ever occurred in history in abortion, more than 10 times that of the Holocaust.

@@thebayjay 😢

Yes, I wonder why they 'say' they do or if they REALLY do. The story of god and creation is clearly a load of fictional nonsense.

@@cameronadair5422 Why would so many of them lie about believing God when so much people believe that science contradicts the existence of God?

Because math works and dipsh!t here thinks that's not something that humans could come up with

It didn’t

​@@darrylelam256God is a God of order and this proves that we have a creator who designed us

​@@darrylelam256 such a respectful fella aint ya?

he never said he didnt believe in evolutionhe said that there was a "guiding hand" in it...

@@Robert-ju1zbin an age where certainty isn’t present, theory is blinding. just believe in science and we will eventually see. fund science. let’s see if this man in the sky exists or not.

​@@Robert-ju1zb what are you talking about? Todd Friel does not believe in evolution. This is not a secret. He says in this very video that he believes we were created as we are.

1)in spherical coordinates 1+1=0 to 2 is always or 1+1=from 0 to 2 only sometimes. If in those coordinates 1+1=from 0 to 2 awlays thats constance. 2)we all say that 1+1 is 2 but you said here 1+1 can be from 0 to 2, again 2 is included here. Constance

@@doctormomentos2514 so we agree that 2 is only one of the many answers that are possible. different definitions of the sphere radius change the answer. if the sphere radius is a variable the answer changes.

@@billjohnson9472 you said that its 0-2 or it can be even 1+1=4 or 37?

@@doctormomentos2514 yes, in hyperbolic spaces. (aka Lobachevsy space) That is, if the 'number line' is non-linear . Our "Euclidean" space is only one special case for space, and space/time is in general non-Euclidean.

@@billjohnson9472 so in those spaces 1+1 can be =37?

Mathematics is the purest form of truth known to man.

It's easy, just follow the script Todd gives you.

@@MrGrumblier Ok, thanks! 👍🏽

Is that the same Fred Hoyle, the cosmologist whose Steady State Theory of the Universe was debunked decades ago?

Hallelujah!!!

I have to disagree with your statement "even if evolution were true, it wouldn’t negate anything in the Bible." The account of creation as given in Genesis is very different from the one postulated by evolutionists. For example, it asserts that death did not enter the world until Humanity had been created and nothing died until the first humans sinned against God's commands. Evolution, on the other hand, functions on the idea that as various mutations and adaptations prove to be useful or useless, and the organisms perish accordingly so that the unwanted mutations are weeded out and the beneficial ones are retained. For evolution to function, death must always have been apart of existence, and therefore not connected with sin in any way. The theory of evolution is not compatible with the doctrine that God created the universe and the traditional Christian understanding of the nature of sin and its origin. I find some of the ideas of evolution to be helpful and explaining how things like heredity and selective breeding work, but it has no answer as to the ultimate origin of existence and the life therein. Ironically, it was a Catholic monk who discovered heredity and helped codify selective breeding, Gregor Mendel. Darwin took his ideas and ran with it to an extreme conclusion in my opinion. I find the doctrine of divine creation to be far more comprehensive in terms of explaining everything, not just the development of organic life but also the conditions of which we find ourselves as people. I don't claim to understand the mechanism by which God may have done that, though; that's where faith comes in. Even so, it's that understanding of an orderly, coherence, and comprehensible universe that was the impetus for the development of science, and that understanding is only found in Christianity.

@@thekatarnalchemistI kinda disagree with you here. I get where you’re coming from but you’ve misunderstood. Sin brought death to humans, not to everything else. I mean yes human beings make choices that cause death to things but in the sense, you’re talking about, sin brought death to humans. Also, evolution still agrees with the bible, when you study the scriptures you come to discover the creation story isn’t God making the earth from thin air or scratch, It said the earth was without form and void, so in simplest terms everything was out of order, things were lifeless, which suggests well death. When you study the scriptures you realize that there was a world that existed before the creation story, and God wasn’t trying to hide that, now that I think about it’s really clear, or maybe just to me but I hope you get the point.

I've noticed some of my comments are removed . . . censorship

Because you were early

Why doesn't god bring his word to the people. He hides away from us all, and has always done so. Could it be that maybe......he isn't real?

So here is the good news: Accept Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior, or he will light you on fire.

@@Generatorman59 And you know this to be true....how? There is nothing to indicate that there ever was a god-like character named jesus and that he ever condemned anyone to anything, fire or otherwise.

@@stevepierce6467 Yea... I was just being funny. I don't believe in any of that Jesus is my Savior hocus pocus nonsense. Sorry if I mislead you.

@@Generatorman59 Good. I was a bit confused.

I disagree. Microevolution is the process of adaptability within a species, over the course of many years. The college student in the video described this clearly and concisely. There is quite a lot of evidence to back it up, such as Darwin's studies on Galapagos finches.

Is it also too much of a coincidence that 99.9999% of the universe is uninhabitable? Is it also too much of a coincidence that there are more than 300,000 children diagnosed with cancer each year? Is it also too much of a coincidence that there exist a parasite whose only known purpose is to cause blindness in its host? Is it also too much of a coincidence that there exist genetic mutations that causes babies to be born an invalid? Is it also too much of a coincidence that a 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami claimed 230,000 lives?

@@Generatorman59 if you talk about bad things that happen in life, thats a whole different topic. But disease and such already exists in old testement

@@slowtyper95 But disease and such still exists today, and we are not living in Old Testament times. And besides, if you want to talk about coincidences, why limit your points to something positive? I mean, why count the 'hits' and ignore the 'misses'? Are you trying to build a case to show God's love and perfection? If you are, then wouldn't be fair to see both sides of the argument?

@@Generatorman59 i believe God is love and perfection. You brought up the bad things to justify the God existing which is kinda irrelevant with my first comment tbh. But God existent doesn't mean everything will runs fine, no bad people and no calamity and such. Or do you think that bad things happen = no god?

@@slowtyper95 I was just wondering how anyone could possibly have the opinion that God is love and perfection when he causes babies to be born with cancer, for example. Do we just ignore that fact and just praise him for our eyebrows? That's what you seem to suggest. I have no reason to believe this God of the bible is real. It has absolutely nothing to do with bad things happening.

the Cambrian Explosion was discovered YEARS after Darwin lol keep making up things.

@@IAmAlpharius20 it's apparent you have no idea what I'm referring to or what the context of the title is.

@@IAmAlpharius20 what happened? Did you get embarrassed and erase your comment?

@@LA-hx8gj you don't see it?

@@IAmAlpharius20 it's gone for me.

Its false tho

How so? ​@@Silent_Quasar

Faith, happiness, well being, choices, everything that makes who a person becomes is determined by the genetics the person is given, as well as their environment. To think people have true free will is nonsensical. And to think faith justifies believing in a God is nonsensical. No loving god would throw a person eternally to hell for being a product of what they were born with as well as their environment. You dont need any more proof than that

?

Which dogs? Georgia bulldogs, Hoyas bulldogs , fresno st bulldogs?

Yes and I can provide and prove it in the KJV of the holy bible amen

If I was to show you it would blow your mind away that's if you actually believe in God and his word amen 🙏👍✅

You're kidding right? Moses never existed. You can't even prove that much.

Well luckily, God gave us His word that actually tells us exactly how He formed us and everything. It wasn't evolution.

@@danmalone8378 it was both

@@OnionTheSquidwe were made in an image. The only thing that has evolved is societies agendas to push certain beliefs. There’s only 4 MAYBE 5 generations of humans on Earth. Something happened in the 17/1800s

No such thing as evolution God is creator of the universe. Let God be the truth and every man a liar

@@jameshines9330 did God write a book?

🤣 at you n thus simpleton

No experience is wasted. Illumination from it may come to its culmination a decade or two later.

@@fromthepeanutgallery1084 ty captain may but alot of things 'may' happen, it doesnt mean much until it does

Imagine telling God that he's vile and disgusting. That's like an ant telling a human what to do.

your basing what you think is vile and disgusting on Gods actions. You are describing what God is doing based on what you think is vile and disgusting. I also want to know some verses from the bible that you think contradicts Gods standards I would like to try and answer. thank you for reading.

@@danceslob6211 Sorry, I'm just not see the analogy about an ant and a human. If an intelligent ant witnesses a human doing something vile and disgusting, couldn't an ant say something like, "Gee, that seems vile and disgusting."? Hey, I am not able to reply to funtlicker for some reason. RU-vid won't save my comment to him. So, I am editing this comment and hopefully he will read it: Well, there are many instances where I can choose from. Let's start with the fact that God tells us not to murder, but what did God do to children in their sleep after taking Pharaoh’s free will away from him? Or, how about what God commanded of King Saul to do to the Amalekites: I Samual 15:3 - Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.

@@Generatorman59 Is God immoral for judging human beings? No. Can God take away life from someone? Yes, he is also the one that gave that life. With your argumentation you would call God disgusting for taking any life for that matter, even from a 120yo man. So is God immoral for taking life from wicked and sinful people? No. Actually he should kill you and me in this very moment, because of the amount of sin we have practised in our lives, wich is an abomination to a Holy and righteous God. You can see, with death, that God is very serious about sin, we deserve death because of it. So repent, turn away from sin and turn in faith to God. He will forgive and clean you of all unrighteousness because of his grace and mercy. For Christ took upon himself your sin and died under God's righteous wrath so you could be brought back to God and live with him forever

Read the Bible bro and pray to God urself, u can’t call a just and Perfect God disgusting

You sound salty. Reverting to personal attacks, much?

@@IAmAlpharius20 This was no attack on his person. Perhaps you should read what I wrote once more?

@@michaelanderson4849 you called him Jeezbuzz guy lol

@@IAmAlpharius20 so? Pray tell me, how is that an attack on his person? He deliberately aims for public attention peddling his particular flavor of Jeezbuz mythology.

@@michaelanderson4849 calling someone's beliefs a myth is an insult lol. How'd you like it if I called evolution a myth made up a racist old white guy?

God Bless!

Trust in Jesus my friend.He knows you and loves you.Offering the gift of salvation we've all fallen short of the Gods standard.But if no one told you today pick up your cross today and know that Jesus is God and that he is the truth the way and life.God bless you may your heart be not of stone and you accept Jesus in your heart to be changed.

@@Its_angxlaz I accept jesus as the Messiah and a prophet, but he cannot be god simply because god does not beget and nor is he begotten. All prophets sent down to man came to talk about the 1 god. Thats why the 1 god is the first commandement. Thou shall have no other Gods but me. Not jesus, but God. Moses didnt know the name Jesus. Modern christianity should be called Paulism because you believe more in Paul than jesus himself who said: "THERE IS NO OTHER GOD BUT GOD" and" I THROUGH MYSELF CANNOT DO NOTHING! But through the permission of God". Only a man under command of God can say this. Its obvious Mohammed is the last of the abrahamitic prophets and the seal of all prophets. What God prays to himself for the earthly need of bread? Please... I respect whatever you want to believe but to me Paulism (christianity) makes absolutely no sense what so ever. (thats why its dying out and islam is on the rise)

@@Its_angxlaz why should I pick up the cross ? the means of execution for Jesus? You think an innocent prisoner who died in an electric chair would like to have his supporters waving elctric chair figurines ? I thought so...

@@BEhistoricStudios Euphrates river has been dried believe in JESUS NOW.