None of this is true.
I got banned from all YouTube comment sections for telling the truth before I knew Reddit existed. Not sure if that was 2018? After DJT got elected anyway.
I get related videos based on what I've watched anyway. Perhaps more random stuff than if I had an account to log in to, but it's still pretty personalized.
I can't watch an age restricted video, which I find hilarious.
I just tested their homepage just to see. This was in the top 5:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=niiF8hCSrYQ
What Yuri Bezmenov didn't tell you.
They know what I've been watching! Lol.
Try facts. Check my comment upthread.
Here's some important information. It's not pro Israel or anti Pali, but it is historic fact:
On April 3, 1949, the Near East Broadcasting Station (Cyprus) said: "It must not be forgotten that the Arab Higher Committee encouraged the refugees' flight from their homes in Jaffa, Haifa and Jerusalem."
What happened is the Arab armies convinced the Palestinians to leave. The plan was to destroy Israel on its first day of existence, then these former residents would take possession of everything.
More sources:
"The Arab States encouraged the Palestine Arabs to leave their homes temporarily in order to be out of the way of the Arab invasion armies," according to the Jordanian newspaper Filastin (February 19, 1949).
One refugee quoted in the Jordan newspaper, Ad Difaa (September 6, 1954), said: "The Arab government told us: Get out so that we can get in. So we got out, but they did not get in."
These are just the very succinct statements. There are many more that are longer. The basic idea remains: those who start war, abandon territory, and then lose the war they started have no rights or claims to anything.
That's your nakba.
You can still make the case that the Balfour Declaration was whack, and that Palis aren't refugees but still deserve better. Arab Nations should've been hosting them all along though, they're the ones who made promises and failed to deliver.
Israel doesn't need our money.
None of this is remotely near reality.
well theodicy wouldn't be my problem persay. if god didn't interfere with human affairs. if he existed and simply allowed shit to happen... i wouldn't be a christian persay... but i would probably believe and maybe even like god.
You're describing Deism. You've probably been taught that our founding fathers were Deists. Here's how simple it is to know that they were NOT: Deists of their day believed as you say, that God does not interfere in the affairs of men. That's all we know about it.
All our founding fathers prayed for God to give them victory in the Revolutionary War, and credited Him with it.
You probably want God to leave you alone so you can enjoy your sin? This is a pretty common notion, that God is this grumpy old dude that just wants to make sure we never have any fun.
Theodicy is the term for the concern you're expressing. It's the idea that since evil exists, God can't.
Huge numbers of books have been written on the topic. Trying to address it in an internet post is disrespectful to the scope of the issue.
I do not know a book title on the topic that would be most appropriate for you for a couple reasons: my older Brother is one of those people who refuses to believe in God because of theodicy, so I had to grapple with this from my earliest memories. I don't need to read on the topic as it's very simple to me. Second, I don't know your issues to know which author addresses them well.
I expect some authors suck and some are good, just like everything else. I also expect some books don't address your thoughts, and one (or more) really does. You could search reviews to find something appropriate.
Caveat: the crusades are a different topic entirely. People do stuff and have no bearing on God Himself. The crusades were basically the NATO of 1060 AD. They were fighting Muslims, and Europe had nothing to unite over, it was all little kingdoms and a few big ones. They had no military discipline, training, or logistics.
You have no comprehension of what you're even saying, you behave like a two year old.
Demonstrate your inability to understand anything at all with everything you say, that's all you can do.
You would have to learn history to understand that.
Present tense, not past.
Your number game is more than just not so good, it outright SUCKS.
You got your original assumptions from cornholio.
You are correct, there's a massive disconnect in these people.
Simultaneously it's not wrong to notice the pattern that less than 3% of the population are over represented by a huge amount in all the institutions that are destroying the US.76% of Biden's cabinet, for example.
Objection: asked and answered.
You have no understanding of any of this.
Why do you pretend to?
Every idea you have is wrong, and none of it is easy to learn.
then provide counter logic that prove god didn't! make gay people
Objection: asked and answered. Not only that but you agreed to it.
You have parents.
Your parents created you.
You were "created in their image," which may have some overlap with God's image. Or not. To various degrees in different areas of life.
According to the story, God created Adam and Eve. However long ago that may have been, their children were created in their own image, not God's.
You don't get to go around calling other people dummy when you have no memory to keep track of such basic details you've discussed in the last week, and are plainly stated in the source material you're trying to discuss.
Complete logic fail on your part.
The typical atheist talking point is that Elisha killed them because they made fun of him for being bald. No translation will really convey what's going on here, it takes deeper study. Generally speaking the NIV is one of the worst, but it's still a Bible and is helpful most of the time.
Best versions are NASB 1995 or older, NJKJV, and KJV. In no particular order. This is because of the effort to translate the original texts faithfully. Usually comparing these three isn't going to yield a lot of insight because they're pretty similar in most places, although they translate different source material so some differences exist. The NKJV I'm working with now does a good job of showing these differences in footnotes most of the time, so it's a good balance of the two.
For better understanding you want to be able to compare to something that takes a different approach to translation: MSG (The Message) YLT (Young's Literal Translation) and AMP (Amplified) are all helpful for this, each in different ways.
All of these are available on biblegateway.com. HCSB (Holcomb Christian Study Bible) is there too, which is really impressive re: the effort they took. GW (God's Word) is highly acclaimed by scholars but wasn't complete last I knew, they're still translating the OT.
I definitely think a Christian should emphasize the NT more, and exhaust all the meaning you can get out of that before trying to read the entire OT. Starting in the Gospel of John and reading straight through to the end of the Bible is a good approach for a beginner, without slowing down for greater understanding. If you're familiar with all this, using the alternate versions instead of a commentary could be a likely next step. MSG is especially good with Paul. Comparing it to NKJV or straight KJV helps.
Oddball gory stories from the OT pulled from IHateGod.com like OP has done here are NOT the way to go about it, lol.
Again, you have no logic to support any of your claims and nothing works the way you assert. This is evident from every source, including life experience and what the Bible says.
He's not interested in learning, just making a fool of himself.
It's really much simpler than that.
Elisha had nothing to do with it.
The "children" involved were at least 13 years old, and maybe as old as 32.
Their taunting phrase was saying if Elisha was really a Prophet, he would have already ascended into heaven in a chariot of fire like Elijah did.
God said we'll see about that ...
Read through it to get context and see if you get anything different. Although the age is determined by language and can't be discovered in English.
The history involved only pertains to a few of the oldest books.
it really does come out of nowhere and with very little context.
This is the key to the passage.
It's easily understandable if you realize it does NOT come out of nowhere, which requires understanding the context.
I'll respect your choice to remain ignorant because if you wanted to know, this is easily knowable. For a processed atheist it's simply unimportant. OP is off his rocker to even try to address this.
You have no logic to support your claims.
Nothing at all works the way you're asserting.
Somehow this wound up replying to me. I'm sure that's not what you intended as I said nothing about anybody being on any same level.
the reasoning is. everyone does bad things through out history. the series of comments you made... seem to be you just blaming the jews for everything
You always do that. Instead of actually reading trying to understand anything at all, you just rush off into ridiculous conclusions. You wind up asserting things nobody ever said, and it prevents communication.
Alternatives with a functional search feature would be nice. What's best?