Thou Shalt Not Kill | Biblical Series: Exodus 

I came here to see if someone mentioned that table.

Noticed that too!

I gave an estimate of $50,000

I was admiring it as well. The root mass in the base is beautiful! What is the top made from?

Wow!

Respect is Earned not Given. This is a Prime example of how our language has been Corrupted by those pushing a political narrative.

True - but courtesy should never be a question. And in this case, these are things that should always be respected, regardless of having been earned or not. @@cavscout62

​@kelaarin True. For the example of rulers, 1 Peter 2: 13-15 tells us to submit ourselves to every ordinance of man for the lords sake. They are to represent God's law and act them act properly in case of punishing evil. But even with respect to all people, God tells us to 1 Pet 2: 17, Honour All men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the king. Similar to what Jesus told us about our enemies and those who persecute us.

I don't cherry-pick scripture verses to push my own agendas.@@van-michaelgraves1456

I personally would disagree, I have lived my life respecting until given a reason not to respect. @@cavscout62

I am an atheist and I agree with your statement..

But they aren't the first set of such rules. Code Hammurabi was the first to be written. But humans are a social species and therefore rules existed long before script was invented.

Not necessarily. Yes, there's obviously merit to the commandments relating to murder, stealing, lying, committing adultery and honouring parents. But the other five have little or no value or relevance to an atheist - having a sacred day, not following or making an "image" to other gods. And not coveting seems like a bit of an impossible task, given that desires are constant in humans and, when not acted upon don't harm anyone.

I do!

@@franken1061 I’m an atheist. Yahweh is NOT just another God. Yahweh is THE superlative. It makes absolutely zero sense to worship second best, mediocrity or some rando. If you’re not attempting to purposefully pursue the superlative in your life, you’re a coward, and are sacrificing the best of things to your caprice. That’s the whole point. Epistemologically, there’s either one highest God, or you’re worshiping caprice. Can’t have it both ways…and that is PRECISELY what Christianity and Judaism get RIGHT. It’s not a supernatural claim. It’s an epistemological and psychological FACT. If you want to give your children and your wife second best, just okay, or just whatever…then you go right ahead and see where it gets you to evade contemplation of the superlative. Just don’t expect anyone to respect you…religious OR secular. There’s only ONE thing worth worshiping, and that one thing is the greatest of all versions of things, period. The name Judaism and Christianity give that superlative…is Yahweh.

What is it called?

ru-vid.com/group/PL22J3VaeABQAppIsV0MmKYhGeFGJsy-dS&si=mymdk4aPDsU8dKwj@@lomistheone2293

By a bunch of non theologians. These weirdos have not studied the Bible. They just use it to make money and justify their shitty views.

The reason is that most likely that was a correct translation into 16th Century English. The English language has changed the meaning and connotation of many words. "Gay" used to mean happy, cheerful and carefree. So I prefer and recommend modern translations.

Any translation can be biased, so modern translations can be dangerous. It is good that we all have the ability to look at the original text and translate ourselves these days! I have always thought of it as needless killing instead of just killing. Murder is needless.

@@tnwhiskey68 "Any translation can be biased, so modern translations can be dangerous." Does this mean 'older' or 'traditional' translations are completely free of bias? (The Vulgate, the Geneva Bible, Tyndale Bible, King James version, and others) I suggest that only the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts are free of what can be called bias based on furthering or legitimizing a current translation. All other translations - if translated by linguists and theologians correctly and NOT with a bias - are considered 'preserved' in content and meaning by God. I agree with your concept of murder. I phrase the concept as 'killing for personal gain' which includes monetary and emotional profit.

dennis is intentionally misleading here. the term used is not specifically unjust killing (as can be seen by its frequent use throughout the hebrew bible). it is killing in the broad sense, the sense that he does not wish it to have

Right. Murder is intentional killing of innocent life. Like babies, for example.

That's always been my take on the question. Especially reading all the passages about wars waged by God's orders. If killing another is wrong, then why was he commanding them? Just like "original sin". Procreation is NOT sinful since God commanded it, "Be fruitful and occupy the Earth". How can you procreate without committing sin then?

Bingo but I don’t understand why people haven’t fixed this translation in English bibles . The original says thou shalt not murder

@@angelbrother1238Cos people are so tied to "KJV Only" doctrine that they refuse better translations all the time. It is dangerous IMHO, there are other passages that mislead, but they refuse to even consider the possibility that the bible wasn't written in Olde Worlde Englishe by people that were personally still ensnared in the catholic / protestant conflict going on in England at that time (CofE is simply English Catholicism, they didn't fall far from the branch so to speak and much of catholic doctrine got passed down into their KJV translatiing patterns). Now why don't all you "KJV Only" people call me a liar. Cos you stopped reading at my first statement!

Jahovah still commanded is followers to break that commandment. Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man intimately. But all the girls who have not known man intimately, spare for yourselves. Numbers 31:17-18 Tell me the little ones are not innocent.

I.e., the Noahic Covenant. God wants blood to be spilt by the hands of man if man sheds the blood of another.

Precisely. And if further question arises we can see the word of God interpreting itself in Matthew 19:18 wherein the incarnate Word paraphrases and thereby interprets the text perfectly. He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,

People often try to discredit the KJV. That's why the 'discrepancy' even exists

​@@captainandrew016 Well, people bastardized the KJV with modern "translations and interpretations." From those translations and interpretations comes the loose and entirely random ethics and messages amongst the masses.

I think it only needs to be clarified for people who try to cherry pick the bible

ligic is one way to see the world, predictions, arguments, technology etc. feelings are another way to see the world, intuition, conpassion, etc. only hearing both one can acess the truth within. do not lock yourself on logic. let the river take you somewhere.

The jews invaded a country and killed all the people after they got the 10 commandments, and their god told them to do it, so it must mean something ells.

Most heinous acts don't have God as a witness.

Excellent observation!

That's why he didn't blame king James writers

Makes sense

It is established in the Bible, that when someone breaks into your house at night, you are allowed o kill him in self defense. But not at daylight.

@@TheVelvetTV_Riesenglied : The Bible addresses the issue very clearly. If someone tries to kill you, day or night and you defend yourself and the other person dies, you are innocent of their death.

That is the problem with "intellectuals". They parse every letter when it is not necessary. Details of course are critical, but take war. Was it okay to fight and kill the Nazi's? Yes, no guessing. The punishment for committing crimes of a horrendous nature should be death. The micro is extended to the macro. 2,000,000 men and a government want to destroy Israel. Israel has the righteous right to defend itself and to kill as needed.

@@TheVelvetTV_Riesenglied At night, those people had no electricity and didn't burn candles frivolously, so night time was too dark to assess a situation with diligent caution. Day time was a different matter, because you could see the intruder, read them, communicate with them, tell if they were carrying weapons, giving reasonable opportunity to judge whether or not their intrusion was a threat to your life. Now if it was daylight and they broke into your house and had a weapon, I'm sure killing them would have been justified. Day/Night just created 2 different environments where night left no room for caution or error.

That seems right tbh@@skydriver5709

Not quite. The first half are to regulate your relationship to God, the back half regulate your relationship with others.

And fulfill the law reference had to do with being saved not exactly a society-member reference (though still relevant as such)

True. One God and love thy neighbor are the gist. A good way to remember them is is that they are in two parts in order of descending importance (not that they are less important but that they come from the preceding). Commandments 1-4 are pleasing God, 2-4 come naturally from rejecting idols of all kinds. 5-10 although being summed up as loving your neighbor are things that cause societal problems and are ways to avoid getting yourself killed from killing others to eyeballing your neighbors wife and stuff. If you were to list overarching 6 reasons why you might be killed you would almost certainly be covered in commandments 5-10.

You can make a bicycle seem as complicated as a 747 if you want to. Some people are desperate for an excuse to not believe.

The one thing that jumps out at me is what Christ said (paraphrasing) "If you loved one another, you wouldn't need the law". Think on that, if you truly TRULY loved your neighbour, you would not go anywhere near his wife, you would not steal his property nor would you murder them. Quite the contrary even, the law spoke of compensation for loss, but again if you truly loved your neighbour you would not want them to be out of pocket for something you did, so you would willingly give double back by way of apology and to make up for any inconvenience. God IS LOVE. I sincerely wish non-believers would get this into their heads. He is NOT about punishment, but we do need to correct the ONES WE LOVE, so God will correct us.

Many words saying nothing. Murder and killing in self defense are two different things and the Bible makes it crystal clear with far fewer words.

God will judge the gentiles based on what they know. That means if they havent heard the word of god they will still know right and wrong because morality is gods unwritten law, and be judged based on that. Self defense is self defense regardless of belief system. Killing for any other reason than to defend yourself or defend the innocent is wrong because it goes against the intrinsic moral law that governs all consiousness.

@@wrongfullyaccused7139 I am very skeptical of a new opinion on something. If it was so crystal clear that the ten commandments concerning killing meant murder in hebrew, why is it only a recent proposition. We need more debate and alternate points of view. I am sure the church would have a counterargument to these so called experts. I am very unsastisfied with how little justification was given when making a huge change in the bible.

@@skyfoxsimgamer2015 : It is NOT a recent proposition at all by any stretch of the imagination! Furthermore, since the word of God specifically states WHEN to execute someone and HOW (in some cases) , it makes everything crystal clear regarding murder and killing. The problem with some of these people "debating" is that some of them have never studied the Bible in their lives and they hold their own opinion about killing above the word of God. God made it so clear in so many places that there is time to kill and a time to make alive. However, you will find that people who NEVER study the word of God often try to "improve" upon God's word by taking a slice of the word and interpreting it literally instead of spiritually as commanded by God. They get this twisted idea in their heads that if they hold to the opinion that killing is NEVER right that they are somehow holier than other people. It is vulgar pride at its worst. God made the difference between murder and killing in self defense or in executing a murderer crystal clear.

“You can sun against a blade of grass, my son. It is what is put forth from the heart that dictates the verdict of the action.” - paraphrased from the Priest in Orca.

@@RogueT-Rex8468 a nice reference. Only the heart’s intentions is what indicates the true purpose of the action; whether it be malicious provocation or righteous intervention

They have been uploading it in episodes on youtube.

It’s been said many times before but always good to see it again.

Stupid is as stupid does.

I'm still a bit unclear on something though, when I get the townspeople to stone to death my rebellious and unruly son (Deuteronomy 21:20), is that considered murder, or killing, or just smiting? (Asking for a friend)

@@grahamyates2490 😂

Murder and kill are two different things. Murder is the deliberate taking of an innocent human life. Not always so with killing. Twisted application of scripture.

@@wrongfullyaccused7139 Jesus didn't say "killing" in Matthew 19:18.

@@TruthwillPrevail7938 : Excellent job of ignoring things you do not like or do not understand. Jesus quoted what the Ten Commandments had to say about killing in three different gospels. Goodbye and good riddance.

@@wrongfullyaccused7139 … seems like wrongfullyaccused is wrongfully accusing the op “Then he said to Him, “Which ones?” And Jesus said, “YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT MURDER…” -Matt 19:18 Why are you saying he’s twisting scripture if you’re agreeing with him?

@@jpg7616 : So I guess we just throw out what Jesus said in Matthew 5:21, Mark 10:19, Luke 18:20, John 7:19. Jesus used the word "kill" 29 times in the four gospels.. Goodbye fraud.

In the Authorised Version, if 'kill' as we use it today had been meant, the word 'slay' would have been used. The word 'kill' in the time of the Authorised Version (and who wants to use a Bible translation Authorised by a power hungry, king?) meant 'murder'. So murder is the correct concept.

@@dagwould As I said in my comment, murder is the correct word. Go back, read my comment again and again until you finally understand what I said.

@@derrickpurdy7011 But it depends on what you mean by "life" here. Is that ALL of life, including plants and animals? Are they equal in how "precious" they are? Yes, you can generally say life is precious but it isn't what the video is about. It's already a given because why make a command such as that in the first place.

@@silenthero2795 Clearly, you lack the intelligence to have a rational conversation. So, I won't waste my time with you.

@@silenthero2795So that means we all starve😅

0 of 10 looks like a cartoon villain wanna be

Yet he is still wrong on many things. Especially Christianity.

Love your enemy

Please... Don't kill me. Even though you believe in Jesus...

I think you quoted the wrong verse.

God wants murder...and hate and sin and evil. If he didn't want it, there wouldnt be those things. As an all seeing all knowing god, he knew when he created everyone, who would believe in him and who wouldn't...the whole notion of free will is nonsense....if, you believe in him

​@crotchet1586 if God wanted these things, he would make us in such a way that we wouldn't call these things bad and evil, we would call them good and virtuous. It is because we have free will, these terrible things exist, just like for light to exist there has to be a darkness surrounding it.

Look into “Just war theory” it discusses what’s considered ethical and unethical in war. What you’re referring to is correct, but there’s still types of just and unjust wars.

Wrong

Airpower changed warfare forever Is bombing a city to destroy their weapons production Ethical They are civilians and possible slaves shouldn't war be soldiers against soldiers

the soldier is not to blame, he is following the instructions from a leader. The Bible clearly states 2 things about this. 1. that you are to listen to the leaders because they are appointed by God, and 2. How important leadership is and how they leaders will be judged with greater scrutiny than those following the direction

Original manuscript. Hebrew for OT and Aramaic and Greek for NT.

The torah and Septuagint

Septuigent and Greek New Testament, only one language required, Greek. The Hebrew has its own issues.

@@alexisrodrigues4767there is no “original” Hebrew text, the Masoretic text isn’t the original text. It’s the conglomeration of various texts that are all different from the others created 600 years after Christ by Jewish scholars.

Translation doesn't have to be accurate as long as the meaning is the same. In one translation I read one verse " Jesus cried" And in other translation I read " Jesus got upset"... It's not a big deal because in both translations jesus was sad.

He lost his mind. Now he has this funny table, 3 giant ice cubes in the background like Han encased in carbonite. When will his friends dress like penguin and the riddler etc... What a silly old man. Since when is Peterson a biblical scholar I thought he was a school teacher now he is the expert on everything?

​@@br.mThe Bible and Pschology are extremely close to each other, especially if you are a Jungian psychologist.

🇺🇸

@@br.m Do you always spout nonsense without at least doing some due diligence first? He's studied theology for decades in multiple religions and has an entire lecture series which is his most viewed series online. And he was gifted 12 suits by a company - each suit represented one of the 12 rules for life from his book with the two-toned one he's wearing in here representing heaven and hell. Maybe you should actually take some time to listen to the guy before spouting off your nonsensical judgements because you only make yourself sound like an idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about.

@@br.m no, that's why he's invited biblical scholars to the table.

Capital punishment is murder too.

Indeed it is.

Capital punishment is murder...ask the family of any innocent person they've killed

Capital punishment is justice and suicide is opting out of a raw deal.

Actually, capital punishment falls under the category of justifiable. Murder is the deliberate taking of an innocent life. Suicide is self murder.

Surely these people are just completely lost ,, KJ bible in English has always been main language, basically from the beginning of all languages, geez need to back off with talks of people, like mixing with words like murder etc,, surely these men havent such a thought in their brain,or coconuts!!

The guy is a Jew, he knows and understand the original hebrew text

I don't think Dennis was claiming one way or the other, only that neither word (kill, murder) were used in those parts.

It's very possible that Cain wouldn't have known what murder was. Nobody had experienced murder up to that point. Was he angry, yes the Bible said so and he did rise up against Abel.

@electricspark5271 While I agree that Cain most likely didn't know what murder was; that doesn't mean he did not commit it. Had the conditions in his heart, intentions and and situation been different; it would have been a killing instead of a murder.

Cain was angry because God yanked him up on a short string. Cain knew what he was supposed to offer and chose not to. God even gave him a second chance and Cain chose to kill his brother instead.

I like that suit.

It was custom tailored for him based on public opinion and some of his biblical series. Hell/Red - Heaven/Blue

I was going to say why is he wearing Two-Face's jacket?

He talked about it on a Joe Rogan Podcast that someone made them for him. They are pretty dope

your name suits you

It's funny that you think this is about giving permission to be immoral when the reason Shitler gave for exterminating the Jews is that the Jews invented morality, such that without the Bible there would be no limits on human behavior, no concept of right and wrong, no conscience, and no guilt.

Is the flood murder or killing?

Excellent twisting of scripture.

@@georg7120 How about if you read the book of Genesis and find out for yourself?

@@Lestibournes Of course it murder.

John MacArthur is a Calvinist and teaches Lordship Salvation- wrong gospel. He is leading people to suicide and hell because they think they have to work to earn and keep salvation. Robert Breaker would be a better choice than any of the men you mentioned.

@@Jesusandcoffee3382 you think John's a wrong gospel? It sound slike you are brain washed, no rebuttals for the other names mentioned? Why not? they are all along the same lines as Macarthur but I know, you have been deceived and have a hard heart and scales on your eyes so that you can not see nor hear the true gospel, and infact you call the truth a lie. Repent, and believe in christ as Lord over your life, and son of God, born of a virgin and murdered for crimes he didn't commit and buried, and then riseing again on the 3rd day back to life, proving he is God. I pray God opens your eyes and saves you.

John or Voddie would have been excellent sources to have at the table. John 14:6 clearly states that the only way to heaven is through Jesus, how would you end up in hell from what John MacArthur preaches?

@@Jesusandcoffee3382 I appreciate your desire to see the Gospel and the doctrine of salvation taught correctly, and I share your concern to see it preached well. To that point, I would go as far as to say that Calvinism is actually a works- theological system, since it holds that man is in fact so dead in sin, that he cannot even trust in Christ unless God himself opens his eyes and causes him to do so, and God does this of his own will and for no merit in the believer. These are two of the five points of Calvinism, "Total Depravity" and "Unconditional Election." I understand many people do not like Calvinism today, and I find some of the weedier points to probably not be worth discussing here. However, salvation is the vital and necessary part of Christianity, which we must understand correctly. I appreciate your desire to see it taught well, and I hope to give you here a good case for why Lordship Salvation, so called, is actually the biblical view! A common disagreement with Lordship Salvation rests in the idea that some believe Christians can go on sinning habitually and still be Christians, and this has been called by some the "Free Grace" salvation idea. I find Romans 8:13 to persuade me otherwise. I would ask you to look at it with me: "If you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live." The if-then phrasing indicates the certainty of the connection between the things it's connecting. If this thing occurs, then that thing certainly will occur. If I drive my car, then it will consume gas. There's no scenario where it does not. And this being the Bible, God is the one assuring us of the certain connection between these things. On the first hand, that if we live lives not merely containing sin, but , we will die eternal death. On the second phrase, the necessary connection between life/eternal life/salvation and putting to death those deeds of the body/of the flesh. Salvation then is always accompanied by a pursuit of holiness. Another thing to add, is that these good works/the death of sin only come about by the means of the Holy Spirit, and so we cannot credit the individual believer for them, when it was the Spirit who gave the power to do it. And so if we are saved, this salvation will always look like a walk marked by holiness, which is only accomplished by dependence on God, by the power of the Holy Spirit. I understand that this might be where people would claim it to be a works-based Gospel! However, it would only be a works-based Gospel (and therefore be wrong because it nullifies grace and the freeness of salvation, as Ephesians 2:8-9 speaks of) if the works the salvation. That is, if the salvation is based on the works. I think a good faith argument for Lordship Salvation as it is called, and the version of it which those who believe it would argue for, is that salvation is and works. Works do not earn salvation, but they are the fruit of it. As our Lord says, we shall know them by their fruits. Salvation is the tree, and it bears the fruit of obedience. God is the one who plants it, expecting obedience as a fruit (not because of works which we already had). As Isaiah 64:6 says, all of righteous deeds are like filthy rags. And so we cannot earn salvation, but Lordship Salvation rests on the notion that Christians who are saved by grace and for no merit of their own, will obey God because God does not plant fruitless trees: Philippians 1:6, 9-11 "And I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ... And it is my prayer that your love may abound more and more, with knowledge and all discernment, so that you may approve what is excellent, and so be pure and blameless for the day of Christ, filled with the fruit of righteousness that comes through Jesus Christ, to the glory and praise of God." I sincerely believe that not only does Lordship not teach a works-based Gospel, but in all of my reading of Scripture I have found that Lordship is the biblical idea of salvation. Think of when Jesus causes the tree to wither because it bears no fruit. A very odd thing at first, but I think part of understanding that is that Jesus on Judgment Day will judge those who bore no fruit. He speaks of this in Matthew 7:21 as well: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven." This is fearful indeed, and so I appreciate and understand your concern for the Gospel, and I hope that I have made a good case to you of what I think is the Bible's teaching on salvation. Please respond with your thoughts on this!

‘Real Christian theologian”….now that is hilarious!

Are you really that dense?

But then you'll have to wait for someone to try to kill you

@@vb6548 Yeah but that probably won't take long

@@adrianmasters250 easier to just join the army then

You are intentionally misinterpreting what has been said & the clear difference between murder & killing in self defense. You going to the store to like you said, to do what? Kill people so you can steal? That’s murder. Why are you being a smart ass?

That is some epic level misunderstanding and lack of context. The definition of porn is arbitrary and subjective. Matt Fradd has some really bad takes. He calls things evil about as often as the left calls people racist. It doesn't mean anything if the bar is so low.

Fradd uses “evil” interchangeably with “disordered”

Porn is evil according to the bible, the New testament expressly forbids sexual immorality. The Jewish idea of porn is a little different because they discredit the new testament.

They were selectively bred by agricultural human beings, just like domestic dogs were bred from wolves.

🤦

​@@tree6835what allows some animals to be domesticated and other animals not to? Why were humans able to successfully, selectively breed and domesticate chickens and sheep? Why not domestic gorillas and bears? Why not domestic elephants and ostriches? Because they dont taste as good? Couldnt we breed them to taste better? Or is it that theyre too wild? But like you said dogs are domesticated from wolves so that would be a poor reason for why a gorilla wouldnt be able to be domesticated. So is it because dogs and chickens and sheep are more social and less territorial? If that the case then why are we able to domesticate in the first place with us being the most territorial species in existence? So did we just do it because those were the easiest animals to domesticate? Maybe you can say that about chicken but goats and wolves and cows are not what id be trying to catch and train without any previous knowledge. Unless youre just stealing baby animals raising them and breeding them selectively until you domesticate them and then my question of why chickens and not ostrich and why goats and not elephants why dogs and not bears?

Really good questions. I certainly don't know the answers. Just off the top of my domestication involved many things. At times it was beneficial to the animal and the human, say in the case of dogs. Except Wild African Dogs cant be domesticated. Wild mountain sheep can survive on their own but domesticated sheep cannot. Elephants and Ostrich can be domesticated but require a lot of feed and space. You certainly bring up some interesting questions.

@@TheMackMamba I'm not sure, I haven't spent any real time learning evolutionary biology. I can offer some ideas: There are animal psychology reasons why some animals can be domesticated and some animals can't. For example, many civilizations have domesticated horses, but none have domesticated zebras. This is because horses naturally live in hierarchical familial structures which requires a psychology that understands dominance and submission, while zebras live in loose non-hierarchical masses and so have horrendously stubborn personalities that don't allow for domestication. Now this doesn't discount any of the examples you mentioned -- gorillas, as you note, especially live in hierarchical environments. Perhaps it's because they also have a stronger habit of challenging the dominant figure, whilst other species might not? Nonetheless, while I don't know the specific explanation for gorillas, my point is that I know that there are cases like zebras where science DOES provide a solution. Before discounting evolution entirely, it's worth at least understanding what their arguments are, since some of your objections may have been raised and answered in the past. It's worth noting that some of the animals you mention -- ostriches and elephants -- have actually been domesticated by humans.

The NT is a false teacher. Only Gd's verified word as passed down orally and recorded by Moses is reliable, and anything that deviates from it is false.

Jehovah.....who is Jesus....only burnt the gay men of Sodom .....and only drowned all the wicked in NOAHs day.......because in both cases, these people had fallen to such a state of satanic degradation, that repentance and a turn to keeping the 10 Commandments was IMPOSSIBLE----not capable of being redeemed......and to let them continue living would have endangered innocent children.

😂 someone is triggered

They're the most dangerous killer's, the one's who use Jesus to kill. Their delusion to justify murder of doing God's bidding.

Please be careful in the future though, creating headcanons or searching through biblical texts with a narrative bias commits the sin of idolatry, because you are creating a false god over the one true God that fits what you are ethically more comfortable with or believe in. It sounds silly, but people do it all the time with fornication, homosexuality, and blasphemy. "Headcanon" is a scary word, because it's exactly how many people commit idolatry without realizing. We think as humans, not as God does, so it's all too natural for us to go "Surely God wouldn't actually care about something so insignificant." We're saved through faith in Jesus and repentance, but idolatry will stumble us away from repentance.

@@Yatoumori Idolatry? It has nothing to do with Idolatry. Not sure where you got that from.

@@abeclark524 Idolatry is worship of false Gods or idols, and false worship of the true God. It is worship of anything that isn't the true God, as if it were God. If you "headcanon" God's word to meet your human ethical standards, you're creating a fictional God, a remix of the true God, that you're more comfortable with. That is idolatry, probably the most common modern form of it too because many people want to believe God holds human-like relatable ethical standards, so they can relate to Him. Many pastors have talked about this, some at length. I'm not accusing you personally of anything, but anyone who creates headcanons based on their ethics should really be careful to make sure they're not recreating God in subtle ways, and making a new one to their ethics.

They were the words of Jesus

@@geoffstokes Better to die from Sword than from old age. BTW it was Peter who defended Christ when Romans and Jews came for him and Christ was wrond because he predidcetd Peter will abandon him but Peter was one to fight.

@@michaelstark8720 That's not correct. Jesus, who is God in the flesh, did not make a mistake. Moreover, it was God's will for Christ to be arrested and crucified for our sins not protected. That's why He rebuked Peter.

@@geoffstokes Yes he did because Peter have free will. Yes itr was God's will that Jesus suffer but Peter was ready to die to save him no matter that Jesus told him he will deny him. Peter denied that he knew Jesus when was already all over and he couldn't help. But when he was at that point to defend Jesus, Peter was ready to die

Niv translation btw just what I have as default

Sounds like the words of a human living in a safe, well fed area with few concerns....let them eat cake!

@@dirtfarmer7070 Sounds like the words of someone not worried about their own soul. Many people have starved to death rather than taken up killing with their hands. It's a personal option available to all. Don't knock it until you try it!

Yep, if there is a god I think he'd want us to exercise personal responsibility. This is like saying "I was just following orders".