None of these are contradictions, they are easily explained if you slowly read and understand. Judas died by hanging himself and that’s exactly what the scripture says. Matthew 27 says he hanged himself and Acts 1 says he fell “headlong” and burst asunder in the middle and his bowels gushed out which is exactly what happens at times when someone is hanged. “Headlong” by definition means rashly, carelessly or without thinking. It doesn’t only mean headfirst. So the right thing to do is to apply the proper definition of the word to the text and in doing so, they perfectly agree. No contradiction. As far as the money goes, Matthew 27 says that Judas realized what he did and gave the money back to the chief priests and elders and they then killed himself. The priests and elders then said we cannot put this money back in the treasury because it is the price of blood so they counseled with each other and then bought the potters field with the money which is called the field of blood. Acts 1 said that Judas purchased the field with reward of iniquity and then went and killed himself. The scripture is not literally saying that Judas went and purchased the field because why would he buy something and then kill himself immediately after? What happened is that when Judas tried to give the money back to the chief priests and elders in Matthew 27 because what he did was wrong and they told him that’s not our problem. They basically rejected the money so then Judas threw the money at their feet, and then went and killed himself. So Acts 1 is saying that the money is Judas‘s, and so therefore, the chief priest took the money after he was dead, and went and purchased the field with Judas’ money. That’s why Acts is saying Judas purchased the field. It was his money, the price of blood that could not be given back and the field is attributed to him even tho he didn’t physically purchase it himself. No contradiction here. The scripture interprets the scripture. When you rightly divide the word and also use a little bit of context clues, it all makes sense. Unfortunately, these guys didn’t do a very good job of explaining it.
It's not only Judas' cause of death that has disagreeing accounts, but also what he does with his reward. The Matthew account says that he returned the silver to the priests and they purchased the field, while Acts says that Judas purchased the field.
As well the reason the field of blood got its name. Blood money or bleeding on the land. Now I heard but I have no confirmed that the area that people think that is, the clay is red. Possibly the field had that name even before then.
@@macmac1022 Supposedly the Akeldama location is known as the place where children were sacrificed during the time of King Solomon so it was probably called that before Judas
Maybe Judas purchased the field initially, but than out of guilt post cruifixtion, he changed his mind, and got the silver back, or he pledged to the owner of the field and the the translation only is recording his intention. I think ultimately Judas left the silver for the priest as a way of saying he was sorry, and by that time, he decided to take his own life instead,
flolou8496 provided a pretty good solution to the problem, but the number of possibilities is endless. Remember Mark 9:23: "all things are possible to him that disrespects the biblical authors".
all these so-called contradictions can be resolved by a good imagination and a gullible nature :) so Judas hung himself on a tree that had a branch that hung over a cliff and the branch broke and Judas hit a rock and he was disembowelled. harmonised! :)
He used a bait & switch concerning Judas’ death. He wants everyone to focus on Judas’ guts bursting forth. The actual contradiction is that one story has Judas hanging himself (presumably from his neck), and the other story claims the Judas fell head 1st. If one is hanging by their neck, then how does that same person fall head 1st?
@@9Khaleel7 I agree. The harmonisation is that he hung by the neck, but the branch broke, he fell, hit a rock which disemboweled him. One gospel author reports the hanging, the other reports the disembowelment. Both are correct. Contradiction avoided! 😅 the apologist works to a formula where the skeptic is given the burden of proof: they start with: is it metaphysically possible? Yes,. Then move to Is it plausible? (Can branches break?.) then move to Is it probable? (Cite a general reliability of gospel accounts). Yes. .. then the skeptic must take the burden and Prove it *didn’t* happen as the gospels describe. It’s like playing ‘wars’ as kids and one kid says ‘yeah but I’ve got bulletproof clothes’ . self deception writ large 😂😂
Who cares honestly how Judas died the point is he died. if that’s the reason to not have faith in Jesus Christ as our savior then that’s a lame reason.
So, you're telling there are false historical accounts in the bible, but at the same time you're defending its inerrancy? How can you tell apart the false from the true?
Very simple explanation for contradictions and these attempts at explaining them...this is a book made by humans in history, like any other. You will hear Muslims, Jews, and all the rest do exactly the same thing to defend the perfection of their books. Christians have to say ONLY our book has no contradictions, THEIRS are full of them. ONLY our miracles are true, THEIRS are not. It's called tribalism. Christians are a tribe just like any other. In fact different 'tribes' in the Chrisitian tribe think the other (sub-)tribes are wrong (or right when they need to form alliances)
Judas went out and hung himself,Then there were a violent earthquake After the death of JESUS CHRIST.. So the rope burst and Judas body fell over the cliff and burst..
Really disappointing, I don't even know where to begin. I'm going to try anyway, on the off-chance you actually read my comment and take to heart what I and others are attempting to communicate. 1) I'd be really careful about using your Jefferson example of altering/condensing Biblical text to fit his perspective. As a young adult the Gospel of John was one of my favorites. Can you imagine my disappointment when I found out there were 3 earlier manuscripts that didn't include the "throw the first stone" parable? How could this be? My shock in finding out some random scribe decided to add those lines over 100 years later was exceeded only by finding out the most likely original source of the parable was heretical text excluded from the Bible. What's the Apologetics argument on this one? Even though Friar Jim-Bob Gramatorus had no lineage back to the original disciples we believe God inspired him to add content to the Bible nevertheless?? Good luck, you'll need it, and incidentally if I add a follow-on to this post about the types of REAL challenges facing a fledgling Apologist against a well-informed non-believer, this example is on the lower end of that scale. 2) The Judas suicide story barely registers as something Apologetics need to address. Your target Christian audience needs to understand that even if you derived an air tight explanation for this error, it's not going to deliver the "gotcha" moment they may be seeking. Sure, it's embarrassing there are two separate accounts that don't coincide, but It's not the kind of problem that makes someone start questioning their faith. However, I'm going to comment simply because of the incredibly disingenuous way in which you tried to reconcile it. Why would Judas seek out a tree dangling over a cliff, making the logistics of carrying out his suicide all the more difficult? Short of being able to provide tangible evidence there was only one tree and it hung over a cliff, this explanation is absurd. If this wasn't bad enough, you're explanation for his disembowelment is he landed on a rock?? You are aware Akeldama is real place, and there are countless pictures of Akeldama available for anyone to survey, right? If not, I encourage you to take a good look at the elevation grade and the types of rock formations found at this location before trying to spin this ridiculous scenario again. What bothers me the most though, is there was absolutely no reason to go down this deceitful tale-spinning path in the first place. While I'm no expert, isn't there a commandment somewhere with a thou, a shalt, and something about giving false witness? Please tell us what's wrong with the truth? I doubt I need to tell you this, but just in case, the truth is there was a level of contentiousness between the members of the inner circle of Jesus, disciples or otherwise. They didn't always see eye-to-eye philosophically, nor were they eye-witnesses to every event described in the New Testament. Perhaps more importantly, if their intentions were pure they likely recognized the message of the teachings was what mattered the most, not the finite details. As their oral accounts were passed on to students and close confidants before eventually being written in Greek, it's reasonable to assume an effort was made to be as faithful to the accounts as possible but fact-checking wasn't always feasible. Sometimes the actual anonymous writers of the Gospel used the same collaborating texts and sometimes they went entirely off the page (especially in John). If you truly believe this is the inspired word of God, does it make it any less inspired if the perspectives of the writers were slightly different? Granted I may be a bit biased, but I think the more honest and logical explanation I just came up with in about 18 seconds stands a better chance of not being met with contempt in the face of a skeptic, and since I'm one of those skeptics my opinion counts. Otherwise I have to question what's the actual intent of Apologetics, because I'm starting to wonder if it's devolved into a tactic for stopping the deconstruction of a Christian in the early stages before they become educated enough to know they're being deceived. P.S. - I decided to go into reasonable depth on the two issues addressed, so I ended up taking out 6 other sections from my original message. Perhaps there's enough in the headers below to leave some takeaway. For any Christians watching videos like this to prepare for potential encounters with skeptics: if for some reason the fraction of detail in my message appears daunting, please know that I'm "just some guy" and what you may face from others will be immensely more challenging 3) Don't underestimate the Biblical knowledge (and understanding of context/historicity) of non-believers 4) Challenges to the value of Christianity extend far beyond reconciling obvious Biblical inconsistencies (including: (1) God is good?, (2) Blood Magic/Human Sacrifice/Scapegoating, (3) Winners write the history (dismissal of "uninspired" texts), and (4) a whole lot more) 5) What's the value of Freewill for a deeply flawed human creation, subject to unattainable expectations from that same creator 6) Where are the Apologetics examples aimed at pro-actively proving Biblical truth instead of merely trying to fight off skeptical claims? 7) Why is the antiquated "question of evil" still being substituted in for the "question of suffering" -> start addressing suffering 8) Apologetics using benign or easily reconcilable Biblical errors to trick uniformed believers into thinking the arguments of skeptics have been addressed
I think I can see from your perspective why you think the tree overlooking the cliff seems like a poor choice for attempting suicide, but I could argue, it's for this very reason that location was ideal, I'm imagining the location was not very steep or high, but maybe provided an additional layer or bodily risk, Judas was counting on, if the tree branch would not support his weight, (which it did not) I suspect when he fell, his body slumped off the cliff in such an angle, that he fell headfirst off the edge of the cliff, down the ravine or whatever and that's why there is no contradiction in the different scriptures description, (is this really far fetched?) (I don't think so, seems totally plausible) As far as your question regarding suffering, you should google all the great faith based articles that try to explain the deeper theology behind the popular movie Father Stu, the entire theme of Christianity is God's plan to reveal himself to his creation, and using suffering as the main tool to accomplish this, because suffering is the inevitable result of free will, for how can you experience anything or know anything is ''Good'' unless your know and experience '''Evil'' in the first place, (this should be obvious)
Fools will never understand that there aren't any contradiction in the Bible. After all,the teacher is one and only-the Holy Spirit and understanding is a gift from Him.WE MUST BE TEACHERABLE!
The inspired *perfect* word of a *perfect* God, would have no need for fallible imperfect interpretations, explanations and harmonizations... PERIOD! And, from worthless sinners no less, to which whom all are worthy of death(not my belief, God's). C'mon, you must see the flaw of this system of belief. It's so ripe for corruption. And indeed it is.
Can you imagine being forced against your will to spend eternity to be with someone that you dislike, or hate? That's the reason why God gives you the choice to follow him, or not. If you don't like him, why should he force you into Heaven? John 3:16 /// 2 Peter 3:9 The Bible doesn't contradict itself. The world is filled with lazy people that desire everything to be explained to them without doing any study for themselves.
@@wolfrainexxx Ummm... no idea how your reply has any context to my post but mmm'kay. In 57 years of life I have NO experience with a God, and thus... cannot reject or dislike or hate. A God with *INFINITE* knowledge, WISDOM and power, I imagine(as you put it), would not judge ANYONE, by comparison! As there simply is no comparison that could be just. And that's the bottom line.
@@dane947 God doesn't judge anyone except his children. Also, yeah, you're entirely right. There's this thing called "The New Testament," you should really read it; because you are entirely right about the ALMIGHTY GOD considering all sin equal in his INFINITE eyes. "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God..." Because of this, he freely allowed his Son to come down to Earth to save whomever he would save from this Earth, so long as they simply said, "Yes," when offered to take his hand. "For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world..." And no, he doesn't ask you to go to Church, pray, or do anything aside from just trust his Son will be your judge on judgement day... that is all. Ignore Theologists, and so-called Churches. "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God..."
@@wolfrainexxx Please don't presume that I am lazy because I take the trouble to read the bible and find it to be full of contradictions, bad morals and more, that really shouldn't be there. So god gives me a choice does he? I can worship him on no evidence whatsoever, or I can be cast into eternal hell! Nice choice. It's a relief that he doesn't exist and so I don't have to face this 'love' (which is yet another contradiction. How is this god a 'loving god' who can kill so many innocents?)
5 lame attempts to cover up clear contradictions. What did Judas do with the money from the priests? 1. take it or 2. throw it at the priests? It literally can not be both. Who bought the field with the money? Judas or the priests? It literally can not be both. When was the field bought? Before Judas died or after? It literally can not be both. You literally have two different stories where there are clear contradictions. Do you really think that the only contradiction in the story is of how Judas died?
Citation Needed. Both books were by different authors having two different experiences. Tell me, I read in the News from two different sources... is Trump an Orange Ape, or a Human Male? Also, if you want a response to your rhetorical questions, then CITE THE SENTENCES YOU'RE REFERRING TO.
@@wolfrainexxx Really. People calling tRump an orange ape is to muck him. BTW he technically is an orange ape as humans are a type of ape as what he does to his skin(we've seen pictures and he is actually quite pale) literally give it an orange color. So both of your News sources are 100% correct. Maybe you should learn something of science before making such a stupid statement. And the citation is literally the bible and how it has two different tellings of the same story with contradictory events.
@@wolfrainexxx if the holy spirit inspired these men to write the message then why mention the same event in two different ways. Were the authors regular men or were they possessed by the holy spirit. Why the hell would one holy spirit write about a event in two different ways?
@Pastor Craig " It's talking about 2 different times." So the land was brought twice using the same money? The money that Judas both took and threw back at the priests? . . . You need to go back and read both stories because you are talking nonsense. These are two different stories. In one story Judas took the money and Judas used that money to buy land and than he died. In the other story Judas threw the money back at the priests, Judas than died in which AFTER Judas is dead the priests buy the land with the money that Judas threw back at them. For someone calling himself Pastor you sure don't know what your holy book says.
@Pastor Craig "I know exactly what it says" Clearly you don't Because you can't read that it is two different stories with events in different order. "You are deciding that these events happened within a couple minutes of each other and that is not true." LMAO it has nothing to do with how close the events took place together. Its that the events took place in completely different order and by different people "Yes Judas took the money to betray Jesus, then later realizing what he had done he threw it back at the priests." So he threw the money back at the priests AFTER is brought the land with the money. How do you throw money back that you have already spent? He no longer had the money as he spent the money to buy the land. "It is the account of two different authors telling two different parts of the story" LMAO No there are two different stories about the same event. 1. Judas takes the money, 2. Judas buys the land, 3. Judas dies. 1. Judas throws the money back, 2. Judas dies, 3. Priests buy the land. This is not the same order of events and different people buy the same land with the same money with money that was both kept and thrown back. You can't even read your own story book, First graders read better then you do.
If the accounts were exactly the same, I’d accuse collusion. You can have differing accounts to a story but differing accounts don’t need to be contradictory.
@@backwatersage you know the verse in the bible that says BE YE NOT many teachers ? well it would do ME a lot of good to think about that verse .You might try also looking at the verse that says WITHOUT LOVE you are Nothing.
The Bible was never meant to be taken literally. Its symbolism. Plus any person that follows a religion and states they are a true believer when the Bible itself is not in it complete form. They have altered and removed many parts many books because Protestant didn't follow them all. That right there should be enough. That's why so many religious people are hypocritical and live on dbl standards. Using Jesus as a scapegoat for their wrongs so they can feel ok about who they are. People that cherry pick the Bible are not worthy. Either follow all or your not a true believer. That means do not shave your hair, do not eat pork..ect. People that have unconscious biases and beliefs do not recognize or question if perhaps their beliefs were someone else's and they just learned /programed as children by our peers and parents. Many of our judgments , insecurities, beliefs are not even of us. Question your beliefs and if your thoughts,speech and behavior is consistently congruent then u r living as a true being. If a person's behavior is not consistent and their speech is one way and then condemns another for their same act then that is plain and simple hypocrisy. A person's brain will find anyway to make sense of a contradiction if it goes against their strongest beliefs
This is called cherry picking 101. "you gotta imagine" or "I think" Also "God doesn't have a face" "it's anthropomorphic language being used" yet we were made in his image? Sure...
How exactly is "they were speaking metaphorically etc. etc. therefore it's not a contradiction" more cherry picking than your "it has to be literal and therefore contradictory."
@@timothypeterson4781 The fact that it's not clear whether the bible is supposed to be literal or metaphorical is proof enough that any meaning we give it is a projection of what we want to believe. That's why there are 10000 denominations.
I formly believe in the word of GOD; our final destination will tell if GOD really exist or not, hope it will not be too late for those who don´t believe
In Matthew, the author is very clear that the last supper is the Passover meal. In John, Jesus is crucified at the same time as the lambs for Passover are being slaughtered. I think that trying to reconcile the two passages misses the points both authors are trying to make. For Matthew, Jesus is the new Moses and instates a new covenant. For John, Jesus is the lamb of God sacrificed so that death will pass us by. You can probably reconcile them, but that takes away the point of the stories. You are writing a new gospel, not looking at the point the authors of the old ones are trying to make. Where in the Bible does it say that believing the book is inerrant is vital to salvation? Isn't salvation the point? You sound like Star Wars fans trying to smooth over plot holes.
Yes! Exactly.. how the two writers recall jesus gives us soo much more info about the various early Christian communities and how they saw jesus. By merging the accounts together you make a mockery of the authors intention and what Jesus meant to them.
So how do we distinguish the real parts from the fake parts? Short answer: there is no way to prove it, you just need to cherrypick the part you like more and have faith
@@leuco2048 Absolutely correct! If you’ve never seen Truthiracy3 before he was banned , I highly recommend checking out his etymological, Allegorical and symbolic breakdowns of the Bi-bull! I’ll drop a link to a playlist I made where I reuploaded a good deal of his work 👍 ua-cam.com/play/PLYeivhi52N-JTPiP-blUYzGZ2TWta1tAC.html
You don't even have to go past Genesis 1 to find a system of creation that does not follow logic, much less the scientific understanding of how each of the things listed was created.
@Pastor Craig a God shouldn't be able to be limited to human qualities, he should be surpassing them. God has a book written by humans for humans and expects humans to understand or interpret it outside the limit of human qualities.... F'n laughable.
@@theoverthinker1978 The amount of light and heat from the sun are required for life to exist on Earth. Also without the sun there's no day/night cycle. So the notion of "Made days and nights, then made plants, then made the sun" is a non-sequitur.
@nickandres7829 1 day is Earth rotating once on its axis. If the Earth's light source doesn't need to be the sun anyways during this time. Later in Rev. 21:23, it's mentioned that God is the light source in Heaven. I find it a reasonable assumption here as well.
Should just shorten this to 'Hand-waving the problems away.' Would still achieve the same results, and it's not like the people who already assume your book is correct are going to actually stop and question you outside of some pretty unlikely circumstances.
@@palladin1337 If you lack critical thinking abilities, then yes, it would be unrelated. Some people are the Wright Brothers, and some people are the villagers heckling them. If you want answers. Go find them. If not, find something more productive to do.
@@wolfrainexxx No, it's unrelated, because the mother's explanation is the simplified version used for children who haven't learned enough to fully understand how reproduction works. Meanwhile, this video is just over 25 minutes of excuses and attempts to hand-wave away clear contradictions within a book that is supposed to be 'perfect.' If you don't understand that there are clear contradictions within the Bible, and that their very existence undercuts the entire Christian Apologist position, then you haven't paid any real attention to the contents of the Bible. "Some people are the Wright Brothers, and some people are the villagers heckling them." Yep, and some people recognize pathetic excuses when they hear them, while others blindly accept them because they support their existing bias. You're not helping your case, kiddo.
@@palladin1337 Okay boomer; I'm probably older than you, so please call me kiddo again. I posted a response to you, and it keeps getting deleted; so I'll keep this simple. Define child, because your assumptions are what's steering you wrong. Judas didn't die when he hung himself on the tree. Jesus also hung on a tree (Acts 5:30); basic logic would tell you that Judas hung on what? Judas couldn't stay on the cross due to Jewish Laws stating people couldn't be on the cross into Sabbath (Jesus was dead, the others were taken down). A grief stricken Judas would have sought a more immediate death, and hurled himself into a field... assuming that story is literal to begin with. Why would Paul not speak literally in the first half of the sentence, but then speak literally is the second half? The Pharisee used the money Judas returned to buy the land that he'd kill himself in; Paul says Judas bought it. That being said, when Paul said, "There is neither male nor female..." did you take him at his word, or did you assume he meant symbolically?
@@lloydtucker5647 some churches not all, for example the famous lake point church is very rich but there are other little churches around the world where people go to that don’t make money
Absolutely correct! If you’ve never seen Truthiracy3 before he was banned , I highly recommend checking out his etymological, Allegorical and symbolic breakdowns of the Bi-bull! I’ll drop a link to a playlist I made where I reuploaded a good deal of his work 👍 ua-cam.com/play/PLYeivhi52N-JTPiP-blUYzGZ2TWta1tAC.html
Absolutely correct! If you’ve never seen Truthiracy3 before he was banned , I highly recommend checking out his etymological, Allegorical and symbolic breakdowns of the Bi-bull! I’ll drop a link to a playlist I made where I reuploaded a good deal of his work 👍 ua-cam.com/play/PLYeivhi52N-JTPiP-blUYzGZ2TWta1tAC.html
This is the reason why the average person does NOT take you guys seriously. Why do we have to reconcile the bible in the first place? Lets gp thru the facts: the bible says he hung himself. The. Bible says he fell HEADLONG and burst open. How can one hang themselves AND fall headfirst? Its impossible unless your head is weighted. Next, the bible does not say tht the branch or the rope burst... We are not at liberty to invent imaginative details to reconcile the bible. We would do this for any other holy book. This is why these things are not taken seriously as it requires ad hoc stories being invented
The fact that you are having to reconcile contradictions in the bible shows that the bible does have faults and, therefore, the bible is not the perfect word of god.
Wow wow wow, no wonder islam is the fastest growing religion. The macro message sounds like if the bible doesn't make sense you have no right to question just accept.
Justifying a false story in the Bible by giving a true account of a false story. That's a good one, and they do that without violating the dictum that every word in the Bible is the infallible word of God. You see, with enough imagination anything can be twisted into the desired result. Donald Trump would call this: "The Art of Rationalization."
Neither Matthew or Acts mention anything at all about a cliff in their accounts of Judas. Matthew simply states that Judas ran off and hanged himself. Acts says he was in the middle of his newly purchased FIELD when he fell down headlong and his guts burst open (presumably by the wrath of god). But that’s the least of the contradiction problems with the Judas story. Matthew says he returned the money given to him for the betrayal of Jesus by throwing it into the temple. Acts says he kept the money and used it to buy the potters field. In Matthew the priests retrieved the money from the temple and decide to purchase the potters field with it. Because it was purchased with blood money the field was named “Field of Blood.” Acts states the field was named “Field of Blood” because Judas guts burst all over it. Both are explicit about the money and field name. They’re blatant contradiction.s Deal with it!
Thanks for this great history lesson. Although I myself can't always refute seemingly errors in God's book, it's good to know that there are guys like you that have that knowledge.
i get stuck on 2:kings23-24 And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head. 24And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them. the kjv says little children the the niv says 2 Kings 2:23-25 New International Version 23 From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some boys came out of the town and jeered at him. “Get out of here, baldy!” they said. “Get out of here, baldy!” 24 He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys is it talking about little children or what
Even if you want to insist that the perfect word of God requires readers to juggle with contradictions until they find some kind of explanation that makes them feel better about the book being inerrant, there are too many contradictions in just the gospels alone to lend credibility to the endeavour. In fact, just the accounts of the resurrection are rendered preposterous by contradictions such as: In Matthew, only Mary Magdalene and “the other Mary” found the tomb empty. In Mark, the visitors are Mary, the other Mary and Salome. In Luke, we have Mary, the other Mary, Joanna and at least two other women. In John, Mary Magdalene goes to the tomb alone. According to Matthew, an angel of the Lord with an appearance like lightning was sitting on the stone that had been rolled away from the tomb. Also present were the guards that Pilate had contributed. On the way back from the tomb the two women meet Jesus. According to Mark, a young man wearing white was sitting inside the tomb. No one was outside of it. According to Luke, there are two men in dazzling apparel. According to John, the solitary Mary Magdalene runs to get Peter and the other disciples, who return to find an empty tomb, then two angels suddenly appear and Jesus also puts in an appearance at this point. Each gospel has a different account about whom the various women told about the empty tomb. According to Luke, Jesus’ ascension took place on the same day as his resurrection in a place called Bethany. According to Acts, Jesus’ ascension took place at Mount Olivet, forty days after his resurrection. I realise that it's desperately important to you that this book should be true, but it quite evidently isn't.
Three men arrive at a McDonalds. Two men enter in, and one man stands outside waiting for them. Later, an Officer arrives, and inquires of a woman outside as to how many men there were, and she says, "Three." The Officer then walks in, and inquires of the employees as to how many men there were, and they say, "Two." Yet when the Officer discovers the man eating alone, he accuses both witnesses of lying to him. Who is telling the truth? The Books in the Bible are from the writers perspective. The only Book in the Bible overseen by God himself was Revelation. The Bible is a collection of Books. Reconcile.
@@wolfrainexxx I'm curious as to how you know it was God who oversaw the book of Revelation, since historians have identified that book as being an allegory for the Hellinistic wars and other conflicts which predated Chrisianity, with the visual narrative representing known symbolism for various empires of the time.
@@flolou8496 No, there's no real consensus on anything at all in this book, except from the fundamentally religious who still insist that it's inerrant and perfect.
That's an amazing even admirable and true description of what the scriptures, say, but, how are these ''contradictions'' ? In your worldview, you think my question seems dumb, but in my worldview, I fee just the opposite, I feel if there was too much harmony with copycat accounts , it's credibility becomes more suspect, trust me if keep searching, your objections have been answered by now many times over, your hardly the first person to be puzzled by this,
How about we try a REAL EXAMPLE OF contradiction here with they 2 stories of Andrew and Peter being called by Jesus. I will simply copy Matthew then copy John. Both completely different with no continuity. Both can’t be true. Matthew 4:18-20 New International Version Jesus Calls His First Disciples 18 As Jesus was walking beside the Sea of Galilee, he saw two brothers, Simon called Peter and his brother Andrew. They were casting a net into the lake, for they were fishermen. 19 “Come, follow me,” Jesus said, “and I will send you out to fish for people.” 20 At once they left their nets and followed him. This next quote is from John and it requires a larger quote to get the full context. Both can not be correct. Different locations activities and people involved. Go ahead! Have at it! 35 The next day John was there again with two of his disciples. 36 When he saw Jesus passing by, he said, “Look, the Lamb of God!” 37 When the two disciples heard him say this, they followed Jesus. 38 Turning around, Jesus saw them following and asked, “What do you want?” They said, “Rabbi” (which means “Teacher”), “where are you staying?” 39 “Come,” he replied, “and you will see.” So they went and saw where he was staying, and they spent that day with him. It was about four in the afternoon. 40 Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother, was one of the two who heard what John had said and who had followed Jesus. 41 The first thing Andrew did was to find his brother Simon and tell him, “We have found the Messiah” (that is, the Christ). 42 And he brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, “You are Simon son of John. You will be called Cephas” (which, when translated, is Peter[a]).
Bro what are you talking about haha. Both are accurate! What’s soo contradicting now? You expect the writers to write every single detail and location where they walk and go and do? If that’s the case, bible will end up having millions and millions of pages. Of coz you are talking about 2 different writers writing in their POV. For example I’m at restaurant eating with my friend A . So another friend B saw me eating. After 15 mins I have finished eating and the plates were cleared. And now another friend C came to the restaurant and saw me and said Hi. So according to my friend B, he saw me eating. And according to friend C he didn’t see me eating. So Which is correct? Did I eat or didn’t I eat? I would say both are correct in a way but according to the viewer who sees it. I would say factually yes I ate but my fren C didn’t know because he came in late and didn’t see me eating. It’s call point of perspective at the very point of event or time. And the gospels are written to summarise the events. Not to explain every single details. Rmb all the factual account in the gospels are accurate and aligned jus that the timing of it and minor minor details might vary because of the perspective of the writers.. Go learn how to read with a perspective lens and not read it like a story book.
Just because Bob said what he said, it doesn't mean it's correct. You can underline 'plausible' all you want while singing lullabies to sleep. Anyone who can convince themselves into believing in the Trinity will stretch the word to mean anything as long as it fits with their erroneous narrative.
What about the opposing views between the accounts in Acts and Matthew where one says it was Judas who bought the burial field with his 30 pieces of silver and the other where it was the pharisees.
Judas gave the money back to the Pharisees but it is still wages earned by Judas thus it is Judas money. The Pharisees used Judas money to buy the field. Pretty simple.
@@backwatersage The Jews would not have left him to rot. It is against Mosaic law. Deuteronomy “21:22 And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death, and thou hang him on a tree: 21:23 His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God;) that thy land be not defiled, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.”KJV
@@backwatersage Judas wasn’t put to death by others. He put himself to death for he committed a sin worthy of death. Judas was aware of the law and hung himself because he knew those who were hanged were accursed of God and he knew he was accursed of God. The field is just outside the walls of the city of David. The Jews would have saw him hanging there and followed the law in regards to his body. Perhaps the branch did break and he fell down the cliff or perhaps this happens when the Jews cut him down. Either way, there was a period of time in which all things in scripture could have taken place.
@@backwatersage people tend to read and then think all of these events happen in a couple minutes. Back to back. Take Jesus crucifixion for instance. There are seemingly conflicting statements in the gospel such as the women watched from afar. Then a gospel tells us the women were close enough for Jesus to speak to them. Jesus was on the cross for six hours at least. All of these events could have taken place in six hours. The last words of Jesus. I am sure he spoke all of these words. People didn’t stand in one place staring at Jesus for six hours. They moved around, conversed with one another. This is testimony. What one person heard Jesus say, what he thought were his last words might be different than what another heard. These are eye witness reports not a Tolkien book. This is why today police question every witness. What one saw or heard might be different from what another saw and heard at the same event. Both accounts might be true.
@@backwatersage I understand that and I also pointed out that under the law the Jews could not leave the body to rot. The field is known. The location is within site of the city walls. He would have been cut down and buried that day. People would have seen his body whether it was hanging in the tree or lying at the bottom of the cliff.
@@backwatersage then I’d have to watch the whole video. I have certain contradictions I’d like to hear them address and want to listen to specifically those if they do.
@@backwatersage how do you reconcile God’s self revelation in Exodus as one who visits iniquity to the third and fourth generation, with ezekiel’s statement that sons do not suffer for the sins of their fathers (Ez 18:20). The first seems to directly state that God punishes further generations for the sins of their parents, while the second says He does not. Also I don’t mean this as a gotcha question. I am genuinely curious.
@@backwatersage I think that makes a lot of sense, but how do you address this in light of David’s child that is killed directly because of David’s sin even after his sin was forgiven? 2 Samuel 12:13-15 [13] David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the LORD.” And Nathan said to David, “The LORD also has put away your sin; you shall not die. [14] Nevertheless, because by this deed you have utterly scorned the LORD, the child who is born to you shall die.” [15] Then Nathan went to his house.
So here we go: was jesus born during the reign of Herod or when Quirinius was governor? Herod was long dead and gone when Quirinius became governor. Let the mental gymnastics begin!
@@Set-Apart-Alex brother why bother explaining to idiots? Hahaa they only read the bible like a story book like some small kids. Only well versed and educated people can understand the context of the verse. Stop wasting on your energy on kids bruh! 😎
@@emmz9063 I often worry that idiots won’t inherit the kingdom. But the thing is the person above may have low iq but that’s never stopped someone believing in God. It comes from a deeper nature or worldview I believe. Someone like the person above gets addicted to putting down others, perhaps Christians because they are the enemy from a liberal lens.
We should not be so quick to call out another’s unknowing, or to strike so low. So for any other Christian answering this question, realize our purpose is to shed light, lovingly and unbothered. If you have truth, be excited to share, but when it is rejected, move on- but keep that door open if that person has questions in the future. We want EVERYONE to be saved.. May God bless you all with His peace, wisdom, and perfect understanding. I love to see wisdom being shared.
What level of proof for a bible contradiction would make belief in the contradiction reasonable? Must we always prove the alleged contradiction with absolute certitude before we can be reasonable to regard it as authentically contradictory? Or can we be reasonable to believe the contradiction is real merely with a showing that it is probable? Further, where did inerrantists ever get the idea that a bible contradiction claim must be false unless and until the claim is proven absolutely? Was this standard written in the stars? Written in the bible? Or did most inerrantists simply adopt this obviously impossible-to-fulfill criteria merely because they knew it would make bible-contradiction claims impossible to "prove"?
Too many "imagine"s, "assume that" and filling in the blanks. " Why do we have to give the text the benefit of the doubt if one is seeking an objective view?
These are self explainable. The one i don't understand is Mat 16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom. All of the people he was talking to are dead but Jesus hasn't come in his kingdom. I don't understand this.
Those are not colossal bible contractions. There are plenty more and much tougher to answer. BUT, the main issue I have with the doctrine of inerrancy is that it is virtually unfalsifiable. Once I believe, as a doctrine, that the Bible is inerrant, then it doesn’t matter how many discrepancies/contradictions I’m shown. There will always be an explanation. And ever if there isn’t an explanation I can give to a Bible contradiction, I can just default to “Well, it’s the Bible. And I trust it to always tell me the truth, even if I don’t know how to reconcile these passages. It’s unfalsifiable. So therefore, it’s pointless to argue. This whole interview is pointless.
I love the cold case Christianity videos and book the apparent contradictions actually give more credibility to each witness we should be more suspicious if they all lined up perfectly as with collusion of men.
@@HowTwo007 There is no contradiction however what may appear like contradiction is actually what you expect from eye witness testimony. Witnesses whose story is too similar shows evidence of collusion as in a court case putting together each testimony gives you a more complete picture and the different perspective makes the verdict more secure.
@@exjwukmusicalescape9241 Mathew 1:16 and Jacob begot Joseph, the husband of Mary of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. Luke 3:23 And Jesus Himself had become about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, who was the son of Heli So who was the joseph father? Heli or Jacob 2 Samuel 24:9 And Joab gave the sum of the number of the people unto the king: and there were in Israel eight hundred thousand valiant men who drew the sword, and the men of Judah were five hundred thousand men. 1 Chronicles 21:5 And Joab gave the sum of the number of the people unto David. And all they of Israel were a thousand thousand and an hundred thousand men that drew sword: and Judah was four hundred threescore and ten thousand men that drew sword. so how many men was it? 2 Samuel 6:23 Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death. 2 samuel 21:8 So the king took Armoni and Mephibosheth, the two sons of Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, whom she bore to Saul, and the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul, whom she brought up for Adriel the son of Barzillai the Meholathite; so did saul have children or not?
So if one witness says they saw a blue car with a black man shoot a person to death, and another says they saw a red car with a white woman shoot a person to death...both are more credible because they contradict each other? And why are you even referring to eye witnesses when there are no eye witness accounts in the bible. Just claims of eye witnesses which is hearsay. J Warner Wallace is a clear explanation why the US law enforcement and judicial system is such an incompetent, corruption hot mess.
Yeah, I don't know why he went to a cliff. Another explanation I heard was that he hung himself, and then they cut him down and that happened. That seems plausible. Why in the world he went to a cliff and breaking branch is beyond me.
Different people at different times and different places have written allthese from record of verbal word and let us uplift the word of God with or without minor so called contradictions
To find out more about the problems with this video, please see: ua-cam.com/video/HOVUKnYfBVw/v-deo.html&ab_channel=VicedRhino (a response by Viced Rhino).
@@wolfrainexxx Re. _"No",_ yes, much better to live in a framework that isn't based on evidence. That's a much safer approach to hiding from this life while you're preparing for the next (the one invented by superstitious and ignorant iron-age men).
I’m rereading Genesis, am only halfway into it, and already have run into several stories told twice with contradictory details. And then Matthew and Luke have entirely different stories of Jesus’ birth. In one, Herod kills all the infants and Joseph takes the family and flees to Egypt. In the other, after Jesus’ birth they return home and he grows up without incident. Let’s face it, these were stories that came from different traditions and there are lots of contradictions. There’s lots of discrepancies between different copies of early manuscripts. They can’t all be correct.
No, I am reading from Matthew, the entirety of chapter 2, which tells about the slaughter of the innocents and the flight to Egypt. And the entirety of Luke, chapter 2, which has no mention of the slaughter of the innocents, no mention of a flight to Egypt. After they return from Bethlehem it says they went to Jerusalem for the ritual purification. “And when they had performed everything according to the law of the Lord, they returned into Galilee, to their own city, Nazareth. And the child grew and became strong . . .” In other words, Jesus is born, they head back home, perform the ritual purification at the temple in Jerusalem, then return to Nazareth where Jesus spends his childhood peaceably. They are two entirely different contradictory accounts. I said nothing about the Magi. Don’t take my word for it, read Matthew and Luke, chapter two in both of them, and see for yourself.
God is perfect and his word has to be perfect. If it is not perfect, it is not the word of God and should not be trusted and made the basis of our eternal life.
Man, all this video did is confirm the contradictions in the Bible. The metaphor for Judas is not comparable. These are 2 completely different accounts. One says he threw the money away and hung himself (Matthew 27:5), and the other Judas used the money to buy a field and he fell headlong and is entrails burst out (Acts 1:18). A better metaphor is that Frank J. Pops was walking down the street and was hit by a truck and his body exploded in pieces. And another account, Frank J. Pops felt depressed and decided to kill himself in his home by drowning himself in his bathtub. Maybe people don't know what falling headlong means, it means you were moving with haste and you fall with your head preceding your body. It's more than a contradiction of his death but also what Judas did with the money he got from betraying Jesus. One must be right or both are wrong, they both can't be true.
Sometimes the simplest explanation is True. The Hebrews wrote in Hebrew, the romans wrote in greek. The so called modern scholars, like to say Mark was written first. Because it is the least flattering. Under this assumption any degraded document would be called first/original. What they don't say is why don't mark mention a resurrection? He didn't believe it? or he didn't think it was important? or was it that it was written by a roman stooge to destroy the message of The Messiah? In Matthew and Luke the genealogies are a contradiction. Matthew said the woman held Him by the feet and worshipped Him. Luke says that Jesus said, don't touch me for I have not ascended to My Father. Spaul contradicts all the other 40 Inspired Books including Matthew. Old Testament so called "contradictions" are few and can be easily explained with proper translation. In the "New Testament", there are many irreconcilable differences. Because only Matthew was originally written in Hebrew. "Matthew" was written anomalously/untitled. It is The Testament of Messiah the last Inspired book. The roman/greek books that fallow are roman lies, propaganda and contradictions. Wake up brothers and sisters, God didn't start speaking greek after they killed His Son. Rome is the beast of Daniel 7 that was given power over the saints for a season. Wake up the Brothers and Sister, He is coming soon. www.amazon.com/Labyrinth-Time-Y-T-Rhyms-ebook/dp/B0BMWKFLCG/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1B3V9KA85ZCBH&keywords=ebook+Poems+A+Labyrinth+In+Time&qid=1670960840&sprefix=ebook+poems+a+labyrinth+in+time%2Caps%2C152&sr=8-1
Sigh......If you can simply make up all this stuff to dismiss these contradictions, what stops others from making up their own stuff to dismiss the truth in the Bible?
This is good to hear. Mike Winger just made a video looking into the details of the three different accounts of Jesus being anointed -John 12, Luke 7, and Mark 14.
@@songsgardensbyjenniferlynn3242 so, why wasn't heaven perfect, why would any angels not grasp Romans 1:20, in heaven - and why was Satan owed anything, post revolt, again? Including to give any shifty opinions, be it about Job, or any other human? He also did not seem to have been... hidden from, for sin, by god. Unlike humans.
In the Synoptic gospels, Jesus's cleansing of the temple seems to have led to His crucifixion. Even in the Synoptic, one of them, one of the false accusations leveled against Him (before Caiaphas) was "This fellow said He can tear down this temple and rebuild another in 3 days without hands." In JOHN, this happens at the BEGINNING of Jesus's ministry, and Jesus tells them "Destroy this temple and I will raise it up in 3 days." - Same accusation leveled against Him in the Synoptics. WHYYYYYYYYYY is the raising of Lazarus not mentioned in the Synoptic gospels, but in the very last gospel to be written, 60 to 90 years after the fact?
So an all powerful all knowing God couldn't create mankind with the use of incest? (adam & eve; cain, abel & seth. cain killed abel. cain was banished; so that left ONE man-adam ONE woman-eve and ONE son-seth)
The Idea that we should give the Bible the "Benefit of the doubt" comes up often during this dialogue. Some would argue the same courtesy should be applied to their religious texts. How then, would we come to any truth, if we give credence to all religions? Also, the fact that so much explanation must be given any text would indicate a failure on the part of the author to convey what he or she is saying. Wouldn't your god want us to understand plainly what he is saying without authoritative figures telling us what he means?
At the end of the day there may be discrepancies about little details but he hole of the story aligns perfectly well at the end of the day all accounts speak of a MAN name Jesus who did great things was betrayed by his own people and one of his followers.Was killed and crucified by the Romans who died and lived again. So at the end of the day what major contradictions are there really
I don't know if you're going to cover this topic or not in this session, Or maybe you've already covered it in another video. But I was brought up since salvation in 93 that King James was the only true Bible, and all others were wrong, terribly wrong. I don't know how I feel about this today as many things have been revealed, including coming out of Calvinism and Baptist briderism. So I'm willing to listen 2 why or why not I should continue to be a King James Version onlyist. Thank you
I love the KJV, but as I study, I mostly use a combination of versions. Where there is disagreement, I look to the Hebrew/Greek/Aramaic. There ARE heretical versions out there. There are, in my opinion, "bad" versions out there. In studying the original languages, you can find out which version is better, or a deeper understanding of what is meant. One of my favorite verses to look at for this is Deuteronomy 10:17 (biblehub.com/deuteronomy/10-17.htm). The KJV says "For the LORD your God is...a mighty, and a terrible..." Terrible? Most versions interpret that "awesome". When we get to the original language (biblehub.com/hebrew/3372.htm) we see that the word is best used in the context of "as attribute of God, that thou mightest be revered". To bring awe, or the fear of God (reverential fear). When we look up "terrible" in the dictionary (www.dictionary.com/browse/terrible), while today most people would contextualize it as "extremely bad; horrible," we see that the third definition is "exciting terror, awe, or great fear; dreadful; awful.". This is because the meaning of words change (and we are over 400 years from the KJV). Was the KJV wrong? Absolutely not. But there is a big difference between "an extremely bad God" and a "an awe-insipring God" and the applications would be VASTLY different. Today the thesaurus still connects terrible and awesome (www.thesaurus.com/browse/terrible). It doesn't matter which (good) version you use as much as are you understanding what God has intended for you to know. Things change throughout time. As they do, are we able to keep and understand the original meaning? We must pursue it.
@@mrtonyntaylor Thank you for taking the time to reply. Much appreciated!! I'm still digging. My husband has kjv only beaten into him. Well you know what I mean. He cringes when her hears someone referencing scripture that's not kjv. I tell him he needs to lighten up. I am looking into a parallel bible at the moment. I think to see it side by side and cross reference would be very helpful. Thanks again!!
I mean the King James Version is efficient for it's time but it uses severely outdated English that is used in contexts and circumstances in which most readers would not understand today, since our goal is to share the news, we ought to do it in a language that is understandable, in my opinion. Next, go to Hebrews 1:6, read that verse. Try to find the verse it's referencing, it's not there. It is in variants of older translations, but it was left out of the masoretic texts purposely due to it's messianic implications. What this will demonstrate is that the KJV is not some god-sent translation that is supposed to be inspired doctrine or something. It's just an English translation from the 17th century that also contains scribal errors developed over time (obviously this is okay, it only shows the humanity of us all and we can sort it out with manuscript analyzing.) If you like it, use it, I prefer NKJV, it's just KJV in a more modern tone of language.
@@universalis8208 I use the NKJV for general reading but use the KJV for reference. Even with the NKJV you have to be careful. There are changed verses such as John1 KJV says the same was in the beginning with God. NKJV says he was in the beginning with God. Also, KJV says all things were made by him. NKJV all things were made through him. This is not modernizing archaic words. This is changing text. One could argue changing it with a theological bias. God Bless.
@Kevin Belgrove you need to get rid of the idea of separation and duality. Jesus said the father and I are one. If you look at everything and the science that's coming out nowadays, we are literally one with the whole entire universe. Everything is connected. There's no separation. Separation is an illusion, God lives through his whole entire creation, the absence of God is the absence of life. Just take a step outside and observe nature, The More You observe the more you see God through everything, you see God blowing through the leaves of the trees as the wind blows, you see God in the plants that grow, you see God in the water that moves, you see God in the storms and you see God in the sun shining down upon our skin. Everything is connected God never made separation but made everything as one. God is his whole entire creation, and nothing is separated from him.
Dead but still talking. It's not an exaggeration. If you submit yourself to a vigorous rationalization everything is possible. Jesus, for instance, can be his own father, and he can do that without copulating with his mother.
1:00 Freedom of Speech means that you can't get arrested/face legal consequences for saying things (with the exception of slander/libel/defamation). The Constitution *DOES NOT* guarantee the right to use a platform. Just like you have the right to not allow people to say things you don't like in your own house, Amazon has the right to not host books on its website that it doesn't like. Amazon isn't the government, and it's practicing its right to free speech by removing books it doesn't want on its platform. 1:30 I feel very confident that the talk of "tolerance" here is in bad faith; I think I can say with a very high degree of certainty that you wouldn't be talking about tolerance in this way if people demanded to go on your channel to read the Qur'an or the Communist Manifesto. 6:30- 6:57 You stalled for almost 30 seconds before restating the question, then at 7:14 you misrepresented the second account of Judas' death by mentioning a cliff, and conveniently left out the chapter and verse. Here's what the actual verse says: "Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out." (Acts 1:18, KJV) Do you see any mention of a cliff anywhere in that verse? And since when do fields have cliffs? 7: 40- 8:00 We don't have the ability to choose what's "in/out" of scripture, but we have the ability to make it say what it doesn't actually say? Not a good look. 8:16 - 9:26 This example is NOT analogous. There's a very clear chain of events between the mother getting in the car accident, going to the hospital, and dying. There is no clear chain of events for how someone can die from both hanging himself *AND* getting disemboweled by falling head-first into a field. 9:36 The field of Blood is a whole other contradiction that you glossed over: " And [Judas] cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself. And the chief priests took the silver pieces, and said, It is not lawful for to put them into the treasury, because it is the price of blood. And they took counsel, and bought with them the potter's field, to bury strangers in. Wherefore that field was called, The field of blood, unto this day." (Matt 27:5-8, KJV) "Now [Judas] purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out. And it was known unto all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, The field of blood." (Acts 1:18-19). Did Judas buy the field before he died, or did the chief priests buy it after he died? Is it called the Field of Blood because of the blood money that paid for it, or because of Judas' grisly death? 13:21 You contradicted *YOURSELF* on the point you made at 7:40-8:00 in this video about how we're not in a position to "choose that's in/out of the Bible." And in doing so, you're admitting that the Bible contains a false account. 15:00 "A true account of a false story" 16:03 The rebels on the crosses that mocked Jesus is a softball "contradiction" that's easy to harmonize, but once again: You're making the Gospels say what they aren't saying. 19:26 Proverbs 26:4-5 and 1 Peter 3:15 are only contradictory if you see non-Christians as fools instead of as people with legitimate reasons to not be Christians. Here's what Jesus had to say: " Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire." (Matt 5:21-22) Now for some contradictions I'd love to hear you address: 1) King David fought a battle against the King of Zobah near the Euphrates River. Did he capture 700 horsemen (2 Sam 8:4) or 7,000 horsemen? (1 Chron. 18:4) 2) Herod the Great was King of Judea from 37 BC until his death in 4 BC. About 10 years later in 6 AD, Quirinius became the governor of Syria and had to conduct a census. Was Jesus born during the reign of Herod the Great (Matt 2:3) or during the governorship of Quirinius (Luke 2:3)?
What about the woman who anointed Jesus's feet? In Matthew he was in Simon the leper's house, but in John, he seemed to be in Martha and Mary's house. WHICH ONE? If Jesus healed, why did not heal not heal Simon the leper?
You suggested we leave Bible contradictions in the comments... alright. Ezekiel 45:13-25 explicitly says that when Israel is restored, after the end times, there will be sin offerings and animal sacrifices for sin in the new Israel. Obviously, this completely contradicts the theology of Jesus' final sacrifice for sin. Hebrews 10:14-15 "For by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy. The Holy Spirit also testifies to us about this." Who is wrong here? Either the holy spirit that influenced the prophet Ezekiel was wrong or the holy spirit that influenced the writer of Hebrews was wrong... both can't be right. Apologists try to explain away the Ezekiel passage by saying that the animal sacrifices in the restored Israel will be done in remembrance and will only be symbolic... that isn't implied from the text at all. In fact, verse 20 explicitly says that the sin offering will be made for people who sin unintentionally or through ignorance.
are they talking about SOON because Isreal is planing to rebuild the Temple again and then Start the Aniimal sacrafices again before the Anti-Christ puts up his staue? when the Church THREW OUT a lot of what WAS THE BIBLE who knows?
@@9TheMiddleMan9 so your telling me thatthe NEW Isreal that is LOWERED DOWN from heaven that Isreal ??? WHO knows after the new isereal is lowered it will be a new heaven and earth too God might want to start all over ? WHAT about the 1000 year of the devil in bottomless pit then being brought back up to RAISE HELL with him
So people are going to be making those sacrifices it does not mean that those sacrifices are rightfully done. That verse is predicting what people are going to be doing and they are going to be making sinful sacrifices. I hope that helps.
@@matthewmcgrath8410 Are you kidding me? God is literally instructing them to do it!!! Ezekiel 45:16 "Also one sheep is to be taken from every flock of two hundred from the well-watered pastures of Israel. These will be used for the grain offerings, burnt offerings and fellowship offerings to make atonement for the people, declares the Sovereign Lord."
Yes, it is an either or question : Did he hang himself or not ??? For those who believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, it's important. Also, what happened to the money ?
i think there really are contradictions within the book but Christians won't allow it cuz their life will crumble and so to solve that contradictions they have to make up stories just to cover it up. I'm not saying not to believe in god but people you have to think for yourselves and ask questions. Don't be a sheep.
@Kevin Belgrove it’s called a good concept. They are 1 being represented by 3 persons. Because it doesn’t make sense to you, you rely on your own arrogance of assuming that your understanding dictates the truth.
Bart Earman IS right. Jewish myths, the self-assigned "Chosen" and the corrupt early "churchmen" to the B.S. of the TV crooks. 72 years as Christian, a life lived wrong!
@Kevin Belgrove I could barely get through that because the grammar was horrible. But I have no idea where you get your information from because we have over 5500 Greek manuscripts dating back to antiquity and are able to see what the New Testament books said over the course of time, dating all the way back to within approx 25 years after Christ which is way before the church even identified as “Roman Catholic”. Interestingly enough, because of the massive manuscript history that we have, we have been able to identify the few instances when scripture has been changed or added to and we are aware of what those verses are. None of them are significant enough to change anything about the message of the gospel. I’m not sure who is feeding you this heretical false information but you can look all of this up yourself if you don’t want to take my word for it.
Weren't Adam and Eve made in the likeness of God? And doesn't Jesus have a resurrection body, as the disciples were able to touch Him? I believe God does have a face through Jesus at least. What John meant was probably more along the lines of the face of God (Holy Spirit, Jesus and the Father all in one) in that sense?It would be too holy to look upon and even the Cherubims in Revelation have to veil their faces to the presence. It's how I make sense of it. And there are alot of people who have had near death experiences and met Jesus and came back.
Were the biblical authors capable of authentically loving God WHILE God was allegedly successfully preventing them from erring? If so, then why doesn't God impose on the rest of humanity this magical influence whereby they can't err, but but but...they are still capable of authentically loving him? In other words, conditions necessitated by biblical inerrancy refute the popular retort that "God doesn't prevent us from erring because that would take away our freewill, and we need freewill to authentically love god". That's false. Apparently, under conditions necessitated by biblical inerrancy, God IS capable of rendering you incapable of erring while preserving your ability to authentically love him. NOW what is so unreasonable in the skeptic who says God has no excuse for allowing evil, because we know from the doctrine of biblical inerrancy that the possibility that God CAN and actually DID infallibly preserve a creature's ability to authentically love him while simultaneously and equally infallibly preventing them from erring, is not only actually achievable in this present fallen world, but actually WAS achieved in a sinful world?
The explanation the gentleman is giving about the two accounts of Judas' death does not make sense, and sounds more like a "cobbling" of explanations to synchronize the obvious contradiction in these particular accounts. Why doesn't the latter account incorporate the earlier account? Since the book of Matthew was written BEFORE Acts. Why didn't the authors of Acts, just synchronize both accounts, so it reads that way? That way, a person on UA-cam, would not have the burden of to explaining this off as "both" accounts, being truth. Instead, readers have to "construct" hypotheticals to make sense of what people have termed an "apparent contradictions"? From a word given to creation by the Creator of the known and unknown universe? 🙄 C'mon Man
@@freegraceau Very easy!!! He's making up crap that is NOT in the scriptures in a lying and pathetic attempt to rationalize "believing" something that can not be proven
@@freegraceau Its not just that you also got to remember he fell head first. Which is very unlikely if he was hung. That his guts split open from falling. How high did he hang him self in a field? An cliff? In a field? That he fell on a rock to split open? How likely is that? That the field was his even though he threw the money back. So that the field was purchased in Judas name but not by him. There are a lot of small contradictions in the Judas story and sure each explanation might be believable but when you have to stick all these reasonings together it becomes very very unlikely. Also christian's like to stick to the Judas contradictions or other "easy to explain ones". But there are numerical contradictions that they avoid cause they are much harder to reconcile. Hard to explain how Solomon can have both only 4 thousand horse stalls and 40 thousand horse stalls. This is an order of magnitude of difference.
What about all the contradictions that Paul had in his writings vs Jesus teachings? There are over 100 contradictions from Paul. He’s a false, self-appointed apostle; a wolf in sheeps clothing.
I can’t be bothered to watch the entire podcast cuz this guy literally misquoted the verses on Judas’s death so bad. Firstly what did Judas do with the money according to both verses? Second, where in the verse does it mentioned Judas falling off a cliff? One verse says that Judas hung himself. The other verse says that he fell headlong and his entrails gushed out. Headlong means you are in motion and you fall hitting your head on the ground. So how did Judas die, did he hang himself or did he fall headlong? And what did he do with the wages of inequity?
Interesting. Didn’t know about the Proverbs thing. Clearly soundbytes didn’t originate with Donald Trump, they’re right there in Proverbs. Sounds great, means nothing. Clearer direction needed, I think - how to deal with a fool, or, more urgently, how to identify who, in reality, is the fool !!
None of these are contradictions, they are easily explained if you slowly read and understand. Judas died by hanging himself and that’s exactly what the scripture says. Matthew 27 says he hanged himself and Acts 1 says he fell “headlong” and burst asunder in the middle and his bowels gushed out which is exactly what happens at times when someone is hanged. “Headlong” by definition means rashly, carelessly or without thinking. It doesn’t only mean headfirst. So the right thing to do is to apply the proper definition of the word to the text and in doing so, they perfectly agree. No contradiction.
As far as the money goes, Matthew 27 says that Judas realized what he did and gave the money back to the chief priests and elders and they then killed himself. The priests and elders then said we cannot put this money back in the treasury because it is the price of blood so they counseled with each other and then bought the potters field with the money which is called the field of blood. Acts 1 said that Judas purchased the field with reward of iniquity and then went and killed himself. The scripture is not literally saying that Judas went and purchased the field because why would he buy something and then kill himself immediately after? What happened is that when Judas tried to give the money back to the chief priests and elders in Matthew 27 because what he did was wrong and they told him that’s not our problem. They basically rejected the money so then Judas threw the money at their feet, and then went and killed himself. So Acts 1 is saying that the money is Judas‘s, and so therefore, the chief priest took the money after he was dead, and went and purchased the field with Judas’ money. That’s why Acts is saying Judas purchased the field. It was his money, the price of blood that could not be given back and the field is attributed to him even tho he didn’t physically purchase it himself. No contradiction here. The scripture interprets the scripture. When you rightly divide the word and also use a little bit of context clues, it all makes sense.
Unfortunately, these guys didn’t do a very good job of explaining it.
It's not only Judas' cause of death that has disagreeing accounts, but also what he does with his reward. The Matthew account says that he returned the silver to the priests and they purchased the field, while Acts says that Judas purchased the field.
As well the reason the field of blood got its name. Blood money or bleeding on the land. Now I heard but I have no confirmed that the area that people think that is, the clay is red. Possibly the field had that name even before then.
@@macmac1022 Supposedly the Akeldama location is known as the place where children were sacrificed during the time of King Solomon so it was probably called that before Judas
Maybe Judas purchased the field initially, but than out of guilt post cruifixtion, he changed his mind, and got the silver back, or he pledged to the owner of the field and the the translation only is recording
his intention. I think ultimately Judas left the silver for the priest as a way of saying he was sorry, and by that time, he decided to take his own life instead,
Maybe the whole bible was intended to be understood not how it was written.
flolou8496 provided a pretty good solution to the problem, but the number of possibilities is endless. Remember Mark 9:23: "all things are possible to him that disrespects the biblical authors".
all these so-called contradictions can be resolved by a good imagination and a gullible nature :) so Judas hung himself on a tree that had a branch that hung over a cliff and the branch broke and Judas hit a rock and he was disembowelled. harmonised! :)
Yep! These reconciliations stretch as far as Judas’ neck! Hahaha
He used a bait & switch concerning Judas’ death. He wants everyone to focus on Judas’ guts bursting forth. The actual contradiction is that one story has Judas hanging himself (presumably from his neck), and the other story claims the Judas fell head 1st. If one is hanging by their neck, then how does that same person fall head 1st?
@@9Khaleel7 I agree. The harmonisation is that he hung by the neck, but the branch broke, he fell, hit a rock which disemboweled him. One gospel author reports the hanging, the other reports the disembowelment. Both are correct. Contradiction avoided! 😅
the apologist works to a formula where the skeptic is given the burden of proof: they start with: is it metaphysically possible? Yes,. Then move to Is it plausible? (Can branches break?.) then move to Is it probable? (Cite a general reliability of gospel accounts). Yes. .. then the skeptic must take the burden and Prove it *didn’t* happen as the gospels describe. It’s like playing ‘wars’ as kids and one kid says ‘yeah but I’ve got bulletproof clothes’ . self deception writ large 😂😂
The passage said falling headlong, how can you fall head first hanging from a tree after the branch broke. You will land on the ground feet first.
Who cares honestly how Judas died the point is he died. if that’s the reason to not have faith in Jesus Christ as our savior then that’s a lame reason.
It's no surprise that a channel that doesn't know what one minute is has trouble with other words and thus fails to explain anything.
So, you're telling there are false historical accounts in the bible, but at the same time you're defending its inerrancy? How can you tell apart the false from the true?
Very simple explanation for contradictions and these attempts at explaining them...this is a book made by humans in history, like any other. You will hear Muslims, Jews, and all the rest do exactly the same thing to defend the perfection of their books.
Christians have to say ONLY our book has no contradictions, THEIRS are full of them. ONLY our miracles are true, THEIRS are not.
It's called tribalism. Christians are a tribe just like any other. In fact different 'tribes' in the Chrisitian tribe think the other (sub-)tribes are wrong (or right when they need to form alliances)
Judas went out and hung himself,Then there were a violent earthquake After the death of JESUS CHRIST.. So the rope burst and Judas body fell over the cliff and burst..
Really disappointing, I don't even know where to begin. I'm going to try anyway, on the off-chance you actually read my comment and take to heart what I and others are attempting to communicate.
1) I'd be really careful about using your Jefferson example of altering/condensing Biblical text to fit his perspective. As a young adult the Gospel of John was one of my favorites. Can you imagine my disappointment when I found out there were 3 earlier manuscripts that didn't include the "throw the first stone" parable? How could this be? My shock in finding out some random scribe decided to add those lines over 100 years later was exceeded only by finding out the most likely original source of the parable was heretical text excluded from the Bible. What's the Apologetics argument on this one? Even though Friar Jim-Bob Gramatorus had no lineage back to the original disciples we believe God inspired him to add content to the Bible nevertheless?? Good luck, you'll need it, and incidentally if I add a follow-on to this post about the types of REAL challenges facing a fledgling Apologist against a well-informed non-believer, this example is on the lower end of that scale.
2) The Judas suicide story barely registers as something Apologetics need to address. Your target Christian audience needs to understand that even if you derived an air tight explanation for this error, it's not going to deliver the "gotcha" moment they may be seeking. Sure, it's embarrassing there are two separate accounts that don't coincide, but It's not the kind of problem that makes someone start questioning their faith. However, I'm going to comment simply because of the incredibly disingenuous way in which you tried to reconcile it. Why would Judas seek out a tree dangling over a cliff, making the logistics of carrying out his suicide all the more difficult? Short of being able to provide tangible evidence there was only one tree and it hung over a cliff, this explanation is absurd. If this wasn't bad enough, you're explanation for his disembowelment is he landed on a rock?? You are aware Akeldama is real place, and there are countless pictures of Akeldama available for anyone to survey, right? If not, I encourage you to take a good look at the elevation grade and the types of rock formations found at this location before trying to spin this ridiculous scenario again.
What bothers me the most though, is there was absolutely no reason to go down this deceitful tale-spinning path in the first place. While I'm no expert, isn't there a commandment somewhere with a thou, a shalt, and something about giving false witness? Please tell us what's wrong with the truth? I doubt I need to tell you this, but just in case, the truth is there was a level of contentiousness between the members of the inner circle of Jesus, disciples or otherwise. They didn't always see eye-to-eye philosophically, nor were they eye-witnesses to every event described in the New Testament. Perhaps more importantly, if their intentions were pure they likely recognized the message of the teachings was what mattered the most, not the finite details. As their oral accounts were passed on to students and close confidants before eventually being written in Greek, it's reasonable to assume an effort was made to be as faithful to the accounts as possible but fact-checking wasn't always feasible. Sometimes the actual anonymous writers of the Gospel used the same collaborating texts and sometimes they went entirely off the page (especially in John). If you truly believe this is the inspired word of God, does it make it any less inspired if the perspectives of the writers were slightly different?
Granted I may be a bit biased, but I think the more honest and logical explanation I just came up with in about 18 seconds stands a better chance of not being met with contempt in the face of a skeptic, and since I'm one of those skeptics my opinion counts. Otherwise I have to question what's the actual intent of Apologetics, because I'm starting to wonder if it's devolved into a tactic for stopping the deconstruction of a Christian in the early stages before they become educated enough to know they're being deceived.
P.S. - I decided to go into reasonable depth on the two issues addressed, so I ended up taking out 6 other sections from my original message. Perhaps there's enough in the headers below to leave some takeaway. For any Christians watching videos like this to prepare for potential encounters with skeptics: if for some reason the fraction of detail in my message appears daunting, please know that I'm "just some guy" and what you may face from others will be immensely more challenging
3) Don't underestimate the Biblical knowledge (and understanding of context/historicity) of non-believers
4) Challenges to the value of Christianity extend far beyond reconciling obvious Biblical inconsistencies (including: (1) God is good?, (2) Blood Magic/Human Sacrifice/Scapegoating, (3) Winners write the history (dismissal of "uninspired" texts), and (4) a whole lot more)
5) What's the value of Freewill for a deeply flawed human creation, subject to unattainable expectations from that same creator
6) Where are the Apologetics examples aimed at pro-actively proving Biblical truth instead of merely trying to fight off skeptical claims?
7) Why is the antiquated "question of evil" still being substituted in for the "question of suffering" -> start addressing suffering
8) Apologetics using benign or easily reconcilable Biblical errors to trick uniformed believers into thinking the arguments of skeptics have been addressed
Wow you hit it out of the park!
Goddamn
I think I can see from your perspective why you think the tree overlooking the cliff seems like a poor choice for attempting suicide, but I could argue, it's for this very reason
that location was ideal, I'm imagining the location was not very steep or high, but maybe provided an additional layer or bodily risk, Judas was counting on, if the tree branch would not support his weight, (which it did not) I suspect when he fell, his body slumped off the cliff in such an angle, that he fell headfirst off the edge of the cliff, down the ravine or whatever and that's why there is no contradiction in the different scriptures description, (is this really far fetched?) (I don't think so, seems totally plausible)
As far as your question regarding suffering, you should google all the great faith based articles that try to explain the deeper theology behind the popular movie Father Stu,
the entire theme of Christianity is God's plan to reveal himself to his creation, and using suffering as the main tool to accomplish this, because suffering is the inevitable result of
free will, for how can you experience anything or know anything is ''Good'' unless your know and experience '''Evil'' in the first place, (this should be obvious)
Fools will never understand that there aren't any contradiction in the Bible. After all,the teacher is one and only-the Holy Spirit and understanding is a gift from Him.WE MUST BE TEACHERABLE!
The inspired *perfect* word of a *perfect* God, would have no need for fallible imperfect interpretations, explanations and harmonizations... PERIOD! And, from worthless sinners no less, to which whom all are worthy of death(not my belief, God's).
C'mon, you must see the flaw of this system of belief. It's so ripe for corruption. And indeed it is.
Can you imagine being forced against your will to spend eternity to be with someone that you dislike, or hate?
That's the reason why God gives you the choice to follow him, or not. If you don't like him, why should he force you into Heaven?
John 3:16 /// 2 Peter 3:9
The Bible doesn't contradict itself. The world is filled with lazy people that desire everything to be explained to them without doing any study for themselves.
@@wolfrainexxx Ummm... no idea how your reply has any context to my post but mmm'kay.
In 57 years of life I have NO experience with a God, and thus... cannot reject or dislike or hate.
A God with *INFINITE* knowledge, WISDOM and power, I imagine(as you put it), would not
judge ANYONE, by comparison! As there simply is no comparison that could be just.
And that's the bottom line.
@@dane947 God doesn't judge anyone except his children. Also, yeah, you're entirely right.
There's this thing called "The New Testament," you should really read it; because you are entirely right about the ALMIGHTY GOD considering all sin equal in his INFINITE eyes.
"For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God..."
Because of this, he freely allowed his Son to come down to Earth to save whomever he would save from this Earth, so long as they simply said, "Yes," when offered to take his hand.
"For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world..."
And no, he doesn't ask you to go to Church, pray, or do anything aside from just trust his Son will be your judge on judgement day... that is all. Ignore Theologists, and so-called Churches.
"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God..."
Why? Since something doesn't conform to your thought of what it should be it's flawed?
@@wolfrainexxx Please don't presume that I am lazy because I take the trouble to read the bible and find it to be full of contradictions, bad morals and more, that really shouldn't be there.
So god gives me a choice does he? I can worship him on no evidence whatsoever, or I can be cast into eternal hell! Nice choice. It's a relief that he doesn't exist and so I don't have to face this 'love' (which is yet another contradiction. How is this god a 'loving god' who can kill so many innocents?)
5 lame attempts to cover up clear contradictions.
What did Judas do with the money from the priests? 1. take it or 2. throw it at the priests? It literally can not be both.
Who bought the field with the money? Judas or the priests? It literally can not be both.
When was the field bought? Before Judas died or after? It literally can not be both.
You literally have two different stories where there are clear contradictions. Do you really think that the only contradiction in the story is of how Judas died?
Citation Needed.
Both books were by different authors having two different experiences. Tell me, I read in the News from two different sources... is Trump an Orange Ape, or a Human Male?
Also, if you want a response to your rhetorical questions, then CITE THE SENTENCES YOU'RE REFERRING TO.
@@wolfrainexxx Really. People calling tRump an orange ape is to muck him. BTW he technically is an orange ape as humans are a type of ape as what he does to his skin(we've seen pictures and he is actually quite pale) literally give it an orange color. So both of your News sources are 100% correct. Maybe you should learn something of science before making such a stupid statement.
And the citation is literally the bible and how it has two different tellings of the same story with contradictory events.
@@wolfrainexxx if the holy spirit inspired these men to write the message then why mention the same event in two different ways. Were the authors regular men or were they possessed by the holy spirit. Why the hell would one holy spirit write about a event in two different ways?
@Pastor Craig " It's talking about 2 different times." So the land was brought twice using the same money? The money that Judas both took and threw back at the priests? . . . You need to go back and read both stories because you are talking nonsense. These are two different stories. In one story Judas took the money and Judas used that money to buy land and than he died. In the other story Judas threw the money back at the priests, Judas than died in which AFTER Judas is dead the priests buy the land with the money that Judas threw back at them.
For someone calling himself Pastor you sure don't know what your holy book says.
@Pastor Craig "I know exactly what it says" Clearly you don't Because you can't read that it is two different stories with events in different order.
"You are deciding that these events happened within a couple minutes of each other and that is not true." LMAO it has nothing to do with how close the events took place together. Its that the events took place in completely different order and by different people
"Yes Judas took the money to betray Jesus, then later realizing what he had done he threw it back at the priests." So he threw the money back at the priests AFTER is brought the land with the money. How do you throw money back that you have already spent? He no longer had the money as he spent the money to buy the land.
"It is the account of two different authors telling two different parts of the story" LMAO No there are two different stories about the same event.
1. Judas takes the money, 2. Judas buys the land, 3. Judas dies.
1. Judas throws the money back, 2. Judas dies, 3. Priests buy the land.
This is not the same order of events and different people buy the same land with the same money with money that was both kept and thrown back.
You can't even read your own story book, First graders read better then you do.
So you need to make stuff up to fill the gap between two contradictory things in order to make them fit, sounds like sea stories.
Obsessed with Jesus I see
@@xBeeGee Glacial Ice is a metamorphic rock.
This right here was exactly what I was thinking
If the accounts were exactly the same, I’d accuse collusion. You can have differing accounts to a story but differing accounts don’t need to be contradictory.
How many times do I have to KEEP ON SAYING Im Sorry before I get to be called an APOLAGETIC?
@Merlin Idlehands
Apparently you are not done yet so, carry on .....
@@steadfastneasy26 It looks like we need YOUR OK to Breath ? Ha Ha Ha ah
@@steadfastneasy26 be thenkful I didnt bitch out Trump on this
@@backwatersage Its good to know you still have a sence of humor ,You might NEED it
@@backwatersage you know the verse in the bible that says BE YE NOT many teachers ? well it would do ME a lot of good to think about that verse .You might try also looking at the verse that says WITHOUT LOVE you are Nothing.
The Bible was never meant to be taken literally. Its symbolism. Plus any person that follows a religion and states they are a true believer when the Bible itself is not in it complete form. They have altered and removed many parts many books because Protestant didn't follow them all. That right there should be enough. That's why so many religious people are hypocritical and live on dbl standards. Using Jesus as a scapegoat for their wrongs so they can feel ok about who they are. People that cherry pick the Bible are not worthy. Either follow all or your not a true believer. That means do not shave your hair, do not eat pork..ect. People that have unconscious biases and beliefs do not recognize or question if perhaps their beliefs were someone else's and they just learned /programed as children by our peers and parents. Many of our judgments , insecurities, beliefs are not even of us. Question your beliefs and if your thoughts,speech and behavior is consistently congruent then u r living as a true being. If a person's behavior is not consistent and their speech is one way and then condemns another for their same act then that is plain and simple hypocrisy. A person's brain will find anyway to make sense of a contradiction if it goes against their strongest beliefs
People who’ve pointed out “contradictory verses” unfortunately have made a huge impact on my indecision. Thank you for making this video.
If you think this video solves this and so many other contradictions, you're wrong. ua-cam.com/video/Bw1ln7rJRXU/v-deo.html
Yep! Bob said so, now stick your back in the sand
This is called cherry picking 101.
"you gotta imagine" or "I think"
Also "God doesn't have a face" "it's anthropomorphic language being used" yet we were made in his image? Sure...
How exactly is "they were speaking metaphorically etc. etc. therefore it's not a contradiction" more cherry picking than your "it has to be literal and therefore contradictory."
@@timothypeterson4781 The fact that it's not clear whether the bible is supposed to be literal or metaphorical is proof enough that any meaning we give it is a projection of what we want to believe. That's why there are 10000 denominations.
@@timothypeterson4781 Generally speaking, history is literal and myth is metaphorical. Which do you want?
The ages of kings seems to contradict? 42 yrs. old in 2 Chron. 22:2, or 2 Kings 8:26, 22 years old. (Ahaziah)?
I formly believe in the word of GOD; our final destination will tell if GOD really exist or not, hope it will not be too late for those who don´t believe
2 Timothy 2:15 - Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
So contradictions exist as long as you take it out of context and or not read the whole thing. Sure. Wow you really got us.
In Matthew, the author is very clear that the last supper is the Passover meal. In John, Jesus is crucified at the same time as the lambs for Passover are being slaughtered. I think that trying to reconcile the two passages misses the points both authors are trying to make. For Matthew, Jesus is the new Moses and instates a new covenant. For John, Jesus is the lamb of God sacrificed so that death will pass us by. You can probably reconcile them, but that takes away the point of the stories. You are writing a new gospel, not looking at the point the authors of the old ones are trying to make.
Where in the Bible does it say that believing the book is inerrant is vital to salvation? Isn't salvation the point? You sound like Star Wars fans trying to smooth over plot holes.
Yes! Exactly.. how the two writers recall jesus gives us soo much more info about the various early Christian communities and how they saw jesus. By merging the accounts together you make a mockery of the authors intention and what Jesus meant to them.
Sometimes you answer a fool and sometimes you don't.
Great! Really clears that up.
You do realize that my comment was sarcastic…
If you answer a fool, this is why. If you don't answer a fool, it is for this other reason.
don't answer at all if the answer itself made you a fool
The contradictions are man made, wecan never ruleout human aspects of the writing, only the Holyspiritwillenlighten us in to faith and our beliefs
So how do we distinguish the real parts from the fake parts?
Short answer: there is no way to prove it, you just need to cherrypick the part you like more and have faith
@@leuco2048 Absolutely correct! If you’ve never seen Truthiracy3 before he was banned , I highly recommend checking out his etymological, Allegorical and symbolic breakdowns of the Bi-bull! I’ll drop a link to a playlist I made where I reuploaded a good deal of his work 👍
ua-cam.com/play/PLYeivhi52N-JTPiP-blUYzGZ2TWta1tAC.html
You don't even have to go past Genesis 1 to find a system of creation that does not follow logic, much less the scientific understanding of how each of the things listed was created.
@Pastor Craig a God shouldn't be able to be limited to human qualities, he should be surpassing them. God has a book written by humans for humans and expects humans to understand or interpret it outside the limit of human qualities.... F'n laughable.
Not logical? Why? do you think light and the sun are synonymous?
@@theoverthinker1978 The amount of light and heat from the sun are required for life to exist on Earth. Also without the sun there's no day/night cycle.
So the notion of "Made days and nights, then made plants, then made the sun" is a non-sequitur.
@nickandres7829 1 day is Earth rotating once on its axis. If the Earth's light source doesn't need to be the sun anyways during this time. Later in Rev. 21:23, it's mentioned that God is the light source in Heaven. I find it a reasonable assumption here as well.
@nickandres7829 oh and plants can last a few days without the sun anyways, so that part doesn't pose any issue.
Should just shorten this to 'Hand-waving the problems away.'
Would still achieve the same results, and it's not like the people who already assume your book is correct are going to actually stop and question you outside of some pretty unlikely circumstances.
Child - "Mommy, how are babies born?"
Mom - "They come from a woman's belly honey."
Child - "You're just hand waving the problem away."
@@wolfrainexxx Cute. Completely unrelated to me pointing out that this video in no way 'explains' these contradictions away, but still cute.
@@palladin1337 If you lack critical thinking abilities, then yes, it would be unrelated.
Some people are the Wright Brothers, and some people are the villagers heckling them.
If you want answers. Go find them. If not, find something more productive to do.
@@wolfrainexxx No, it's unrelated, because the mother's explanation is the simplified version used for children who haven't learned enough to fully understand how reproduction works.
Meanwhile, this video is just over 25 minutes of excuses and attempts to hand-wave away clear contradictions within a book that is supposed to be 'perfect.'
If you don't understand that there are clear contradictions within the Bible, and that their very existence undercuts the entire Christian Apologist position, then you haven't paid any real attention to the contents of the Bible.
"Some people are the Wright Brothers, and some people are the villagers heckling them."
Yep, and some people recognize pathetic excuses when they hear them, while others blindly accept them because they support their existing bias.
You're not helping your case, kiddo.
@@palladin1337 Okay boomer; I'm probably older than you, so please call me kiddo again. I posted a response to you, and it keeps getting deleted; so I'll keep this simple.
Define child, because your assumptions are what's steering you wrong.
Judas didn't die when he hung himself on the tree. Jesus also hung on a tree (Acts 5:30); basic logic would tell you that Judas hung on what?
Judas couldn't stay on the cross due to Jewish Laws stating people couldn't be on the cross into Sabbath (Jesus was dead, the others were taken down). A grief stricken Judas would have sought a more immediate death, and hurled himself into a field... assuming that story is literal to begin with.
Why would Paul not speak literally in the first half of the sentence, but then speak literally is the second half?
The Pharisee used the money Judas returned to buy the land that he'd kill himself in; Paul says Judas bought it.
That being said, when Paul said, "There is neither male nor female..." did you take him at his word, or did you assume he meant symbolically?
Very lame and dishonest explanations. Why not be honest and say 'Yes there are unsolvable contradictions, but I am still a believer.'
He's entitled to his opinion, just like anyone else
Church is a multimillion dollar a year industry. As a corporation, church has a vested financial interest in certain doctrines.
@@lloydtucker5647 some churches not all, for example the famous lake point church is very rich but there are other little churches around the world where people go to that don’t make money
Absolutely correct! If you’ve never seen Truthiracy3 before he was banned , I highly recommend checking out his etymological, Allegorical and symbolic breakdowns of the Bi-bull! I’ll drop a link to a playlist I made where I reuploaded a good deal of his work 👍
ua-cam.com/play/PLYeivhi52N-JTPiP-blUYzGZ2TWta1tAC.html
Because he... Disagrees with you that there are?
The bible is full of contradictions. Period. Genesis 1-14 is the same creation story of Sumer of thr Chaldees
Absolutely correct! If you’ve never seen Truthiracy3 before he was banned , I highly recommend checking out his etymological, Allegorical and symbolic breakdowns of the Bi-bull! I’ll drop a link to a playlist I made where I reuploaded a good deal of his work 👍
ua-cam.com/play/PLYeivhi52N-JTPiP-blUYzGZ2TWta1tAC.html
This is the reason why the average person does NOT take you guys seriously. Why do we have to reconcile the bible in the first place? Lets gp thru the facts: the bible says he hung himself. The. Bible says he fell HEADLONG and burst open. How can one hang themselves AND fall headfirst? Its impossible unless your head is weighted. Next, the bible does not say tht the branch or the rope burst... We are not at liberty to invent imaginative details to reconcile the bible. We would do this for any other holy book. This is why these things are not taken seriously as it requires ad hoc stories being invented
I appreciate their viewpoint. I'm trying to get a well rounded viewpoint before I can legitimately believe or not.
The fact that you are having to reconcile contradictions in the bible shows that the bible does have faults and, therefore, the bible is not the perfect word of god.
How? If something looks like but isn't a contradiction that's not a fault.
@@timothypeterson4781 The bible has contradictions in it, not things that look like contradictions, but actual contradictions.
@@asianhippy I wasn't talking about that. I was talking about the your argument that "having to reconcile contradictions" statement you put forth.
Wow wow wow, no wonder islam is the fastest growing religion. The macro message sounds like if the bible doesn't make sense you have no right to question just accept.
Justifying a false story in the Bible by giving a true account of a false story. That's a good one, and they do that without violating the dictum that every word in the Bible is the infallible word of God. You see, with enough imagination anything can be twisted into the desired result. Donald Trump would call this: "The Art of Rationalization."
That is exactly what the atheists are doing .You want to believe it is a contradiction
Neither Matthew or Acts mention anything at all about a cliff in their accounts of Judas. Matthew simply states that Judas ran off and hanged himself. Acts says he was in the middle of his newly purchased FIELD when he fell down headlong and his guts burst open (presumably by the wrath of god). But that’s the least of the contradiction problems with the Judas story. Matthew says he returned the money given to him for the betrayal of Jesus by throwing it into the temple. Acts says he kept the money and used it to buy the potters field. In Matthew the priests retrieved the money from the temple and decide to purchase the potters field with it. Because it was purchased with blood money the field was named “Field of Blood.” Acts states the field was named “Field of Blood” because Judas guts burst all over it. Both are explicit about the money and field name. They’re blatant contradiction.s Deal with it!
I think you mean "But as Christians we practice cognitive dissonance."
What specifically are your accusations ?
So to make sense of biblical contradictions you need to make stuffs up. Good job dude.
Same like ur new age quran hahaha!
@@emmz9063 there is not a single contradiction in the quran
@@HowTwo007 there are !
@@emmz9063 name them. Bearing in mind i have googled and watched every youtube vid on quran contradictions and can easily debunk them
@@HowTwo007 you weren’t looking hard then
He is reasoning out and not explaining... trying to twist the story to suit his belief.
Thanks for this great history lesson. Although I myself can't always refute seemingly errors in God's book, it's good to know that there are guys like you that have that knowledge.
i get stuck on 2:kings23-24 And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head. 24And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them. the kjv says little children the the niv says 2 Kings 2:23-25
New International Version
23 From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some boys came out of the town and jeered at him. “Get out of here, baldy!” they said. “Get out of here, baldy!” 24 He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys is it talking about little children or what
Even if you want to insist that the perfect word of God requires readers to juggle with contradictions until they find some kind of explanation that makes them feel better about the book being inerrant, there are too many contradictions in just the gospels alone to lend credibility to the endeavour. In fact, just the accounts of the resurrection are rendered preposterous by contradictions such as:
In Matthew, only Mary Magdalene and “the other Mary” found the tomb empty.
In Mark, the visitors are Mary, the other Mary and Salome.
In Luke, we have Mary, the other Mary, Joanna and at least two other women.
In John, Mary Magdalene goes to the tomb alone.
According to Matthew, an angel of the Lord with an appearance like lightning was sitting on the stone that had been rolled away from the tomb. Also present were the guards that Pilate had contributed. On the way back from the tomb the two women meet Jesus.
According to Mark, a young man wearing white was sitting inside the tomb. No one was outside of it.
According to Luke, there are two men in dazzling apparel.
According to John, the solitary Mary Magdalene runs to get Peter and the other disciples, who return to find an empty tomb, then two angels suddenly appear and Jesus also puts in an appearance at this point.
Each gospel has a different account about whom the various women told about the empty tomb.
According to Luke, Jesus’ ascension took place on the same day as his resurrection in a place called Bethany.
According to Acts, Jesus’ ascension took place at Mount Olivet, forty days after his resurrection.
I realise that it's desperately important to you that this book should be true, but it quite evidently isn't.
Three men arrive at a McDonalds. Two men enter in, and one man stands outside waiting for them.
Later, an Officer arrives, and inquires of a woman outside as to how many men there were, and she says, "Three."
The Officer then walks in, and inquires of the employees as to how many men there were, and they say, "Two."
Yet when the Officer discovers the man eating alone, he accuses both witnesses of lying to him.
Who is telling the truth?
The Books in the Bible are from the writers perspective. The only Book in the Bible overseen by God himself was Revelation. The Bible is a collection of Books. Reconcile.
@@wolfrainexxx I'm curious as to how you know it was God who oversaw the book of Revelation, since historians have identified that book as being an allegory for the Hellinistic wars and other conflicts which predated Chrisianity, with the visual narrative representing known symbolism for various empires of the time.
@@robertbrown569 Well that's one liberal theological worldview, but there is hardly any consensus, on such a controversial book,
@@flolou8496 No, there's no real consensus on anything at all in this book, except from the fundamentally religious who still insist that it's inerrant and perfect.
That's an amazing even admirable and true description of what the scriptures, say, but, how are these ''contradictions'' ? In your worldview, you think my question seems dumb, but in my worldview, I fee just the opposite, I feel if there was too much harmony with copycat accounts , it's credibility becomes more suspect, trust me if keep searching, your objections have been answered by now many times over, your hardly the first person to be puzzled by this,
Also judas threw coins down in temple then the other verse says he bought land can you elaborate your interpretation on this sir.
When no one was looking, he picked the coins up.
He probably just through the the sliver down in the temple and then used his own money to buy the land like that wasn't the only money he had dude
@@patbrumph6769simple the priests bought the land with his money .I should think it id the same as judas buying land
How about we try a REAL EXAMPLE OF contradiction here with they 2 stories of Andrew and Peter being called by Jesus. I will simply copy Matthew then copy John. Both completely different with no continuity. Both can’t be true.
Matthew 4:18-20
New International Version
Jesus Calls His First Disciples
18 As Jesus was walking beside the Sea of Galilee, he saw two brothers, Simon called Peter and his brother Andrew. They were casting a net into the lake, for they were fishermen. 19 “Come, follow me,” Jesus said, “and I will send you out to fish for people.” 20 At once they left their nets and followed him.
This next quote is from John and it requires a larger quote to get the full context. Both can not be correct. Different locations activities and people involved. Go ahead! Have at it!
35 The next day John was there again with two of his disciples. 36 When he saw Jesus passing by, he said, “Look, the Lamb of God!”
37 When the two disciples heard him say this, they followed Jesus. 38 Turning around, Jesus saw them following and asked, “What do you want?”
They said, “Rabbi” (which means “Teacher”), “where are you staying?”
39 “Come,” he replied, “and you will see.”
So they went and saw where he was staying, and they spent that day with him. It was about four in the afternoon.
40 Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother, was one of the two who heard what John had said and who had followed Jesus. 41 The first thing Andrew did was to find his brother Simon and tell him, “We have found the Messiah” (that is, the Christ). 42 And he brought him to Jesus.
Jesus looked at him and said, “You are Simon son of John. You will be called Cephas” (which, when translated, is Peter[a]).
Bro what are you talking about haha. Both are accurate! What’s soo contradicting now? You expect the writers to write every single detail and location where they walk and go and do? If that’s the case, bible will end up having millions and millions of pages. Of coz you are talking about 2 different writers writing in their POV.
For example I’m at restaurant eating with my friend A . So another friend B saw me eating. After 15 mins I have finished eating and the plates were cleared. And now another friend C came to the restaurant and saw me and said Hi. So according to my friend B, he saw me eating. And according to friend C he didn’t see me eating. So Which is correct? Did I eat or didn’t I eat? I would say both are correct in a way but according to the viewer who sees it. I would say factually yes I ate but my fren C didn’t know because he came in late and didn’t see me eating. It’s call point of perspective at the very point of event or time. And the gospels are written to summarise the events. Not to explain every single details. Rmb all the factual account in the gospels are accurate and aligned jus that the timing of it and minor minor details might vary because of the perspective of the writers.. Go learn how to read with a perspective lens and not read it like a story book.
Just because Bob said what he said, it doesn't mean it's correct. You can underline 'plausible' all you want while singing lullabies to sleep. Anyone who can convince themselves into believing in the Trinity will stretch the word to mean anything as long as it fits with their erroneous narrative.
What about the opposing views between the accounts in Acts and Matthew where one says it was Judas who bought the burial field with his 30 pieces of silver and the other where it was the pharisees.
Judas gave the money back to the Pharisees but it is still wages earned by Judas thus it is Judas money. The Pharisees used Judas money to buy the field. Pretty simple.
@@backwatersage The Jews would not have left him to rot. It is against Mosaic law.
Deuteronomy “21:22 And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death, and thou hang him on a tree:
21:23 His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God;) that thy land be not defiled, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.”KJV
@@backwatersage Judas wasn’t put to death by others. He put himself to death for he committed a sin worthy of death. Judas was aware of the law and hung himself because he knew those who were hanged were accursed of God and he knew he was accursed of God. The field is just outside the walls of the city of David. The Jews would have saw him hanging there and followed the law in regards to his body. Perhaps the branch did break and he fell down the cliff or perhaps this happens when the Jews cut him down. Either way, there was a period of time in which all things in scripture could have taken place.
@@backwatersage people tend to read and then think all of these events happen in a couple minutes. Back to back. Take Jesus crucifixion for instance. There are seemingly conflicting statements in the gospel such as the women watched from afar. Then a gospel tells us the women were close enough for Jesus to speak to them. Jesus was on the cross for six hours at least. All of these events could have taken place in six hours. The last words of Jesus. I am sure he spoke all of these words. People didn’t stand in one place staring at Jesus for six hours. They moved around, conversed with one another. This is testimony. What one person heard Jesus say, what he thought were his last words might be different than what another heard. These are eye witness reports not a Tolkien book. This is why today police question every witness. What one saw or heard might be different from what another saw and heard at the same event. Both accounts might be true.
@@backwatersage I understand that and I also pointed out that under the law the Jews could not leave the body to rot. The field is known. The location is within site of the city walls. He would have been cut down and buried that day. People would have seen his body whether it was hanging in the tree or lying at the bottom of the cliff.
Need time stamps for each section since this is so long please.
@@backwatersage then I’d have to watch the whole video. I have certain contradictions I’d like to hear them address and want to listen to specifically those if they do.
@@backwatersage how do you reconcile God’s self revelation in Exodus as one who visits iniquity to the third and fourth generation, with ezekiel’s statement that sons do not suffer for the sins of their fathers (Ez 18:20).
The first seems to directly state that God punishes further generations for the sins of their parents, while the second says He does not.
Also I don’t mean this as a gotcha question. I am genuinely curious.
@@backwatersage I think that makes a lot of sense, but how do you address this in light of David’s child that is killed directly because of David’s sin even after his sin was forgiven?
2 Samuel 12:13-15
[13] David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the LORD.” And Nathan said to David, “The LORD also has put away your sin; you shall not die. [14] Nevertheless, because by this deed you have utterly scorned the LORD, the child who is born to you shall die.” [15] Then Nathan went to his house.
So here we go: was jesus born during the reign of Herod or when Quirinius was governor? Herod was long dead and gone when Quirinius became governor.
Let the mental gymnastics begin!
But wait, there is more! A whole lot of it. A whoooooolle lot: ua-cam.com/video/RB3g6mXLEKk/v-deo.html
You do realize that multiple people can be named Quirinius, right?
Hebrews 11.6 but without faith it is impossible to please God...
Which god?
"let us make man in our image, after our likeness"... "I've seen god face to face".. "number one, god doesn't have a face"... oh, poor me.
An Omniscient God can't find Adam and Eve in The Garden of Eden, gee that didn't take long? -marc27
Of course he did. He even changed them when they ate the fruit...
Yah asked "Ayekha", where are you? This is not only a question of geographical location, but an inquiry of the mind. It was a rhetorical question.
@@Set-Apart-Alex brother why bother explaining to idiots? Hahaa they only read the bible like a story book like some small kids. Only well versed and educated people can understand the context of the verse. Stop wasting on your energy on kids bruh! 😎
@@emmz9063 I often worry that idiots won’t inherit the kingdom. But the thing is the person above may have low iq but that’s never stopped someone believing in God. It comes from a deeper nature or worldview I believe. Someone like the person above gets addicted to putting down others, perhaps Christians because they are the enemy from a liberal lens.
We should not be so quick to call out another’s unknowing, or to strike so low. So for any other Christian answering this question, realize our purpose is to shed light, lovingly and unbothered. If you have truth, be excited to share, but when it is rejected, move on- but keep that door open if that person has questions in the future. We want EVERYONE to be saved.. May God bless you all with His peace, wisdom, and perfect understanding. I love to see wisdom being shared.
What level of proof for a bible contradiction would make belief in the contradiction reasonable? Must we always prove the alleged contradiction with absolute certitude before we can be reasonable to regard it as authentically contradictory? Or can we be reasonable to believe the contradiction is real merely with a showing that it is probable?
Further, where did inerrantists ever get the idea that a bible contradiction claim must be false unless and until the claim is proven absolutely? Was this standard written in the stars? Written in the bible? Or did most inerrantists simply adopt this obviously impossible-to-fulfill criteria merely because they knew it would make bible-contradiction claims impossible to "prove"?
is it true that the story of the woman caughtin aduktry was not in the orignal manuscripts of john
Too many "imagine"s, "assume that" and filling in the blanks. " Why do we have to give the text the benefit of the doubt if one is seeking an objective view?
Why do we have to not give it the benefit of the doubt? That's just as much a fallacy as the interpretation you're criticizing.
These are self explainable. The one i don't understand is Mat 16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
All of the people he was talking to are dead but Jesus hasn't come in his kingdom. I don't understand this.
Those are not colossal bible contractions. There are plenty more and much tougher to answer.
BUT, the main issue I have with the doctrine of inerrancy is that it is virtually unfalsifiable. Once I believe, as a doctrine, that the Bible is inerrant, then it doesn’t matter how many discrepancies/contradictions I’m shown. There will always be an explanation. And ever if there isn’t an explanation I can give to a Bible contradiction, I can just default to “Well, it’s the Bible. And I trust it to always tell me the truth, even if I don’t know how to reconcile these passages.
It’s unfalsifiable. So therefore, it’s pointless to argue. This whole interview is pointless.
I love the cold case Christianity videos and book the apparent contradictions actually give more credibility to each witness we should be more suspicious if they all lined up perfectly as with collusion of men.
what are you smoking. How does contradictory accounts make them the book more credible. Never in history has that ever been true.
@@HowTwo007 There is no contradiction however what may appear like contradiction is actually what you expect from eye witness testimony. Witnesses whose story is too similar shows evidence of collusion as in a court case putting together each testimony gives you a more complete picture and the different perspective makes the verdict more secure.
@@exjwukmusicalescape9241
Mathew 1:16 and Jacob begot Joseph, the husband of Mary of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
Luke 3:23 And Jesus Himself had become about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, who was the son of Heli
So who was the joseph father? Heli or Jacob
2 Samuel 24:9 And Joab gave the sum of the number of the people unto the king: and there were in Israel eight hundred thousand valiant men who drew the sword, and the men of Judah were five hundred thousand men.
1 Chronicles 21:5 And Joab gave the sum of the number of the people unto David. And all they of Israel were a thousand thousand and an hundred thousand men that drew sword: and Judah was four hundred threescore and ten thousand men that drew sword.
so how many men was it?
2 Samuel 6:23 Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death.
2 samuel 21:8 So the king took Armoni and Mephibosheth, the two sons of Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, whom she bore to Saul, and the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul, whom she brought up for Adriel the son of Barzillai the Meholathite;
so did saul have children or not?
So if one witness says they saw a blue car with a black man shoot a person to death, and another says they saw a red car with a white woman shoot a person to death...both are more credible because they contradict each other?
And why are you even referring to eye witnesses when there are no eye witness accounts in the bible. Just claims of eye witnesses which is hearsay.
J Warner Wallace is a clear explanation why the US law enforcement and judicial system is such an incompetent, corruption hot mess.
The explanation of Judas death is way far-fetched.
Yeah, I don't know why he went to a cliff. Another explanation I heard was that he hung himself, and then they cut him down and that happened. That seems plausible. Why in the world he went to a cliff and breaking branch is beyond me.
IN AMERICAN 'FIGURE OF SPEECH', "GIVE ME A SECOND', OR 'GIVE ME A MINUTE', MEANS, 'GIVE ME A LITTLE TIME'.
Gadarene episode, where one gospel says one man, another says two. How come?
God loves us so much but if we think about something bad he will torture us forever and ever. Now there is a contradiction if I have ever heard one.
@god_laughs_at_atheists6928 Yes and it is as true as some of the things in the Bible:) Hehe
Different people at different times and different places have written allthese from record of verbal word and let us uplift the word of God with or without minor so called contradictions
But...if it was the perfect word inspired by God then that wouldn’t have happened
@@RyanGarrettMusic They rather make up dill weed than be Honest .
I can’t tell if this is satire or not…
Best comment thus far 🤝
try to get payment with contradictory numbers in invoice
To find out more about the problems with this video, please see: ua-cam.com/video/HOVUKnYfBVw/v-deo.html&ab_channel=VicedRhino (a response by Viced Rhino).
No.
@@wolfrainexxx Re. _"No",_ yes, much better to live in a framework that isn't based on evidence. That's a much safer approach to hiding from this life while you're preparing for the next (the one invented by superstitious and ignorant iron-age men).
I’m rereading Genesis, am only halfway into it, and already have run into several stories told twice with contradictory details. And then Matthew and Luke have entirely different stories of Jesus’ birth. In one, Herod kills all the infants and Joseph takes the family and flees to Egypt. In the other, after Jesus’ birth they return home and he grows up without incident. Let’s face it, these were stories that came from different traditions and there are lots of contradictions. There’s lots of discrepancies between different copies of early manuscripts. They can’t all be correct.
It jis just that you dont understand it properly.You are thinking of Christmas card Christmas.The visit of the magi did not happen in the manger.
No, I am reading from Matthew, the entirety of chapter 2, which tells about the slaughter of the innocents and the flight to Egypt. And the entirety of Luke, chapter 2, which has no mention of the slaughter of the innocents, no mention of a flight to Egypt. After they return from Bethlehem it says they went to Jerusalem for the ritual purification. “And when they had performed everything according to the law of the Lord, they returned into Galilee, to their own city, Nazareth. And the child grew and became strong . . .” In other words, Jesus is born, they head back home, perform the ritual purification at the temple in Jerusalem, then return to Nazareth where Jesus spends his childhood peaceably. They are two entirely different contradictory accounts.
I said nothing about the Magi. Don’t take my word for it, read Matthew and Luke, chapter two in both of them, and see for yourself.
God is perfect and his word has to be perfect. If it is not perfect, it is not the word of God and should not be trusted and made the basis of our eternal life.
Man, all this video did is confirm the contradictions in the Bible. The metaphor for Judas is not comparable. These are 2 completely different accounts. One says he threw the money away and hung himself (Matthew 27:5), and the other Judas used the money to buy a field and he fell headlong and is entrails burst out (Acts 1:18). A better metaphor is that Frank J. Pops was walking down the street and was hit by a truck and his body exploded in pieces. And another account, Frank J. Pops felt depressed and decided to kill himself in his home by drowning himself in his bathtub. Maybe people don't know what falling headlong means, it means you were moving with haste and you fall with your head preceding your body. It's more than a contradiction of his death but also what Judas did with the money he got from betraying Jesus. One must be right or both are wrong, they both can't be true.
Make sure you I have notifications for this
Sometimes the simplest explanation is True. The Hebrews wrote in Hebrew, the romans wrote in greek.
The so called modern scholars, like to say Mark was written first. Because it is the least flattering. Under this assumption any degraded document would be called first/original. What they don't say is why don't mark mention a resurrection? He didn't believe it? or he didn't think it was important? or was it that it was written by a roman stooge to destroy the message of The Messiah?
In Matthew and Luke the genealogies are a contradiction. Matthew said the woman held Him by the feet and worshipped Him. Luke says that Jesus said, don't touch me for I have not ascended to My Father. Spaul contradicts all the other 40 Inspired Books including Matthew.
Old Testament so called "contradictions" are few and can be easily explained with proper translation. In the "New Testament", there are many irreconcilable differences. Because only Matthew was originally written in Hebrew. "Matthew" was written anomalously/untitled. It is The Testament of Messiah the last Inspired book. The roman/greek books that fallow are roman lies, propaganda and contradictions. Wake up brothers and sisters, God didn't start speaking greek after they killed His Son. Rome is the beast of Daniel 7 that was given power over the saints for a season. Wake up the Brothers and Sister, He is coming soon.
www.amazon.com/Labyrinth-Time-Y-T-Rhyms-ebook/dp/B0BMWKFLCG/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1B3V9KA85ZCBH&keywords=ebook+Poems+A+Labyrinth+In+Time&qid=1670960840&sprefix=ebook+poems+a+labyrinth+in+time%2Caps%2C152&sr=8-1
Sigh......If you can simply make up all this stuff to dismiss these contradictions, what stops others from making up their own stuff to dismiss the truth in the Bible?
This is good to hear. Mike Winger just made a video looking into the details of the three different accounts of Jesus being anointed -John 12, Luke 7, and Mark 14.
@@backwatersage ua-cam.com/video/-GAGA9wnJ7k/v-deo.html
@@songsgardensbyjenniferlynn3242 so, why wasn't heaven perfect, why would any angels not grasp Romans 1:20, in heaven - and why was Satan owed anything, post revolt, again? Including to give any shifty opinions, be it about Job, or any other human? He also did not seem to have been... hidden from, for sin, by god. Unlike humans.
I came here from there! Great video
In the Synoptic gospels, Jesus's cleansing of the temple seems to have led to His crucifixion. Even in the Synoptic, one of them, one of the false accusations leveled against Him (before Caiaphas) was "This fellow said He can tear down this temple and rebuild another in 3 days without hands."
In JOHN, this happens at the BEGINNING of Jesus's ministry, and Jesus tells them "Destroy this temple and I will raise it up in 3 days." - Same accusation leveled against Him in the Synoptics.
WHYYYYYYYYYY is the raising of Lazarus not mentioned in the Synoptic gospels, but in the very last gospel to be written, 60 to 90 years after the fact?
So an all powerful all knowing God couldn't create mankind with the use of incest? (adam & eve; cain, abel & seth. cain killed abel. cain was banished; so that left ONE man-adam ONE woman-eve and ONE son-seth)
Please tell me the contradictions in Quran
The Idea that we should give the Bible the "Benefit of the doubt" comes up often during this dialogue. Some would argue the same courtesy should be applied to their religious texts. How then, would we come to any truth, if we give credence to all religions? Also, the fact that so much explanation must be given any text would indicate a failure on the part of the author to convey what he or she is saying. Wouldn't your god want us to understand plainly what he is saying without authoritative figures telling us what he means?
Lol the more you 'explain' these contradictions the more ridiculous the source seems.
Defending the bible against moral absolutism.
At the end of the day there may be discrepancies about little details but he hole of the story aligns perfectly well at the end of the day all accounts speak of a MAN name Jesus who did great things was betrayed by his own people and one of his followers.Was killed and crucified by the Romans who died and lived again. So at the end of the day what major contradictions are there really
Pray and ask the Holy Spirit to lead you and then choose a single verse or two. Read it, then read it again.
I don't know if you're going to cover this topic or not in this session, Or maybe you've already covered it in another video. But I was brought up since salvation in 93 that King James was the only true Bible, and all others were wrong, terribly wrong. I don't know how I feel about this today as many things have been revealed, including coming out of Calvinism and Baptist briderism. So I'm willing to listen 2 why or why not I should continue to be a King James Version onlyist. Thank you
I love the KJV, but as I study, I mostly use a combination of versions. Where there is disagreement, I look to the Hebrew/Greek/Aramaic. There ARE heretical versions out there. There are, in my opinion, "bad" versions out there. In studying the original languages, you can find out which version is better, or a deeper understanding of what is meant.
One of my favorite verses to look at for this is Deuteronomy 10:17 (biblehub.com/deuteronomy/10-17.htm). The KJV says "For the LORD your God is...a mighty, and a terrible..." Terrible? Most versions interpret that "awesome". When we get to the original language (biblehub.com/hebrew/3372.htm) we see that the word is best used in the context of "as attribute of God, that thou mightest be revered". To bring awe, or the fear of God (reverential fear).
When we look up "terrible" in the dictionary (www.dictionary.com/browse/terrible), while today most people would contextualize it as "extremely bad; horrible," we see that the third definition is "exciting terror, awe, or great fear; dreadful; awful.". This is because the meaning of words change (and we are over 400 years from the KJV). Was the KJV wrong? Absolutely not. But there is a big difference between "an extremely bad God" and a "an awe-insipring God" and the applications would be VASTLY different. Today the thesaurus still connects terrible and awesome (www.thesaurus.com/browse/terrible).
It doesn't matter which (good) version you use as much as are you understanding what God has intended for you to know. Things change throughout time. As they do, are we able to keep and understand the original meaning? We must pursue it.
@@mrtonyntaylor Thank you for taking the time to reply. Much appreciated!! I'm still digging. My husband has kjv only beaten into him. Well you know what I mean. He cringes when her hears someone referencing scripture that's not kjv. I tell him he needs to lighten up. I am looking into a parallel bible at the moment. I think to see it side by side and cross reference would be very helpful. Thanks again!!
I mean the King James Version is efficient for it's time but it uses severely outdated English that is used in contexts and circumstances in which most readers would not understand today, since our goal is to share the news, we ought to do it in a language that is understandable, in my opinion. Next, go to Hebrews 1:6, read that verse. Try to find the verse it's referencing, it's not there. It is in variants of older translations, but it was left out of the masoretic texts purposely due to it's messianic implications. What this will demonstrate is that the KJV is not some god-sent translation that is supposed to be inspired doctrine or something. It's just an English translation from the 17th century that also contains scribal errors developed over time (obviously this is okay, it only shows the humanity of us all and we can sort it out with manuscript analyzing.)
If you like it, use it, I prefer NKJV, it's just KJV in a more modern tone of language.
@@universalis8208 I use the NKJV for general reading but use the KJV for reference. Even with the NKJV you have to be careful. There are changed verses such as John1 KJV says the same was in the beginning with God. NKJV says he was in the beginning with God. Also, KJV says all things were made by him. NKJV all things were made through him. This is not modernizing archaic words. This is changing text. One could argue changing it with a theological bias.
God Bless.
The King James Bible was translated for a purpose ... given by King James himself.
lol the Judas explanation made me laugh myself to death. Now I'm dead, like Judas.
@Kevin Belgrove you need to get rid of the idea of separation and duality. Jesus said the father and I are one. If you look at everything and the science that's coming out nowadays, we are literally one with the whole entire universe. Everything is connected. There's no separation. Separation is an illusion, God lives through his whole entire creation, the absence of God is the absence of life. Just take a step outside and observe nature, The More You observe the more you see God through everything, you see God blowing through the leaves of the trees as the wind blows, you see God in the plants that grow, you see God in the water that moves, you see God in the storms and you see God in the sun shining down upon our skin. Everything is connected God never made separation but made everything as one. God is his whole entire creation, and nothing is separated from him.
Dead but still talking. It's not an exaggeration. If you submit yourself to a vigorous rationalization everything is possible. Jesus, for instance, can be his own father, and he can do that without copulating with his mother.
YEAH WHEN HE SAiD “WELL WE HAVE TO DEFiNE ‘OUR’ DEFINiTiON OF iNFALLiBLE” AND THEN “ i THiNK iT MEANS” HE LOST ME
@Kevin Belgrove two words: the trinity
@Kevin Belgrove if that's what you want to believe then go ahead
Next to Mohammed Jesus has started more wars than anyone because of not listening to reason
Things have gotten way too intellectual, hard to keep up.
1:00 Freedom of Speech means that you can't get arrested/face legal consequences for saying things (with the exception of slander/libel/defamation). The Constitution *DOES NOT* guarantee the right to use a platform. Just like you have the right to not allow people to say things you don't like in your own house, Amazon has the right to not host books on its website that it doesn't like. Amazon isn't the government, and it's practicing its right to free speech by removing books it doesn't want on its platform.
1:30 I feel very confident that the talk of "tolerance" here is in bad faith; I think I can say with a very high degree of certainty that you wouldn't be talking about tolerance in this way if people demanded to go on your channel to read the Qur'an or the Communist Manifesto.
6:30- 6:57 You stalled for almost 30 seconds before restating the question, then at 7:14 you misrepresented the second account of Judas' death by mentioning a cliff, and conveniently left out the chapter and verse. Here's what the actual verse says: "Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out." (Acts 1:18, KJV) Do you see any mention of a cliff anywhere in that verse? And since when do fields have cliffs?
7: 40- 8:00 We don't have the ability to choose what's "in/out" of scripture, but we have the ability to make it say what it doesn't actually say? Not a good look.
8:16 - 9:26 This example is NOT analogous. There's a very clear chain of events between the mother getting in the car accident, going to the hospital, and dying. There is no clear chain of events for how someone can die from both hanging himself *AND* getting disemboweled by falling head-first into a field.
9:36 The field of Blood is a whole other contradiction that you glossed over: " And [Judas] cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself. And the chief priests took the silver pieces, and said, It is not lawful for to put them into the treasury, because it is the price of blood. And they took counsel, and bought with them the potter's field, to bury strangers in. Wherefore that field was called, The field of blood, unto this day." (Matt 27:5-8, KJV) "Now [Judas] purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out. And it was known unto all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, The field of blood." (Acts 1:18-19). Did Judas buy the field before he died, or did the chief priests buy it after he died? Is it called the Field of Blood because of the blood money that paid for it, or because of Judas' grisly death?
13:21 You contradicted *YOURSELF* on the point you made at 7:40-8:00 in this video about how we're not in a position to "choose that's in/out of the Bible." And in doing so, you're admitting that the Bible contains a false account.
15:00 "A true account of a false story"
16:03 The rebels on the crosses that mocked Jesus is a softball "contradiction" that's easy to harmonize, but once again: You're making the Gospels say what they aren't saying.
19:26 Proverbs 26:4-5 and 1 Peter 3:15 are only contradictory if you see non-Christians as fools instead of as people with legitimate reasons to not be Christians. Here's what Jesus had to say: " Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire." (Matt 5:21-22)
Now for some contradictions I'd love to hear you address:
1) King David fought a battle against the King of Zobah near the Euphrates River. Did he capture 700 horsemen (2 Sam 8:4) or 7,000 horsemen? (1 Chron. 18:4)
2) Herod the Great was King of Judea from 37 BC until his death in 4 BC. About 10 years later in 6 AD, Quirinius became the governor of Syria and had to conduct a census. Was Jesus born during the reign of Herod the Great (Matt 2:3) or during the governorship of Quirinius (Luke 2:3)?
Such bullshit - either the Bible is reliable or it’s not
Especially if it’s god inspired 🙄
What about the woman who anointed Jesus's feet? In Matthew he was in Simon the leper's house, but in John, he seemed to be in Martha and Mary's house. WHICH ONE? If Jesus healed, why did not heal not heal Simon the leper?
You suggested we leave Bible contradictions in the comments... alright.
Ezekiel 45:13-25 explicitly says that when Israel is restored, after the end times, there will be sin offerings and animal sacrifices for sin in the new Israel.
Obviously, this completely contradicts the theology of Jesus' final sacrifice for sin.
Hebrews 10:14-15 "For by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy. The Holy Spirit also testifies to us about this."
Who is wrong here? Either the holy spirit that influenced the prophet Ezekiel was wrong or the holy spirit that influenced the writer of Hebrews was wrong... both can't be right.
Apologists try to explain away the Ezekiel passage by saying that the animal sacrifices in the restored Israel will be done in remembrance and will only be symbolic... that isn't implied from the text at all. In fact, verse 20 explicitly says that the sin offering will be made for people who sin unintentionally or through ignorance.
are they talking about SOON because Isreal is planing to rebuild the Temple again and then Start the Aniimal sacrafices again before the Anti-Christ puts up his staue? when the Church THREW OUT a lot of what WAS THE BIBLE who knows?
@@merlinidlehands3302 No. The Ezekiel verse is explicitly about the restored Israel, when the city is pure.
@@9TheMiddleMan9 so your telling me thatthe NEW Isreal that is LOWERED DOWN from heaven that Isreal ??? WHO knows after the new isereal is lowered it will be a new heaven and earth too God might want to start all over ? WHAT about the 1000 year of the devil in bottomless pit then being brought back up to RAISE HELL with him
So people are going to be making those sacrifices it does not mean that those sacrifices are rightfully done. That verse is predicting what people are going to be doing and they are going to be making sinful sacrifices. I hope that helps.
@@matthewmcgrath8410 Are you kidding me? God is literally instructing them to do it!!! Ezekiel 45:16 "Also one sheep is to be taken from every flock of two hundred from the well-watered pastures of Israel. These will be used for the grain offerings, burnt offerings and fellowship offerings to make atonement for the people, declares the Sovereign Lord."
Yes, it is an either or question : Did he hang himself or not ??? For those who believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, it's important. Also, what happened to the money ?
i think there really are contradictions within the book but Christians won't allow it cuz their life will crumble and so to solve that contradictions they have to make up stories just to cover it up. I'm not saying not to believe in god but people you have to think for yourselves and ask questions. Don't be a sheep.
Thanks for making this video, I now believe that Bart Ehrman is right.
@Kevin Belgrove it’s called a good concept. They are 1 being represented by 3 persons. Because it doesn’t make sense to you, you rely on your own arrogance of assuming that your understanding dictates the truth.
Bart Earman IS right.
Jewish myths, the self-assigned "Chosen" and the corrupt early "churchmen" to the B.S. of the TV crooks.
72 years as Christian, a life lived wrong!
@Kevin Belgrove I could barely get through that because the grammar was horrible. But I have no idea where you get your information from because we have over 5500 Greek manuscripts dating back to antiquity and are able to see what the New Testament books said over the course of time, dating all the way back to within approx 25 years after Christ which is way before the church even identified as “Roman Catholic”. Interestingly enough, because of the massive manuscript history that we have, we have been able to identify the few instances when scripture has been changed or added to and we are aware of what those verses are. None of them are significant enough to change anything about the message of the gospel. I’m not sure who is feeding you this heretical false information but you can look all of this up yourself if you don’t want to take my word for it.
I don't think so. Erhman's views are sophomoric.
Not really supposed to having the earnings on 🤦♂️
It's not our culture, it's world's culture.
Weren't Adam and Eve made in the likeness of God? And doesn't Jesus have a resurrection body, as the disciples were able to touch Him? I believe God does have a face through Jesus at least. What John meant was probably more along the lines of the face of God (Holy Spirit, Jesus and the Father all in one) in that sense?It would be too holy to look upon and even the Cherubims in Revelation have to veil their faces to the presence. It's how I make sense of it. And there are alot of people who have had near death experiences and met Jesus and came back.
Why you got to imagined so much?
Were the biblical authors capable of authentically loving God WHILE God was allegedly successfully preventing them from erring?
If so, then why doesn't God impose on the rest of humanity this magical influence whereby they can't err, but but but...they are still capable of authentically loving him?
In other words, conditions necessitated by biblical inerrancy refute the popular retort that "God doesn't prevent us from erring because that would take away our freewill, and we need freewill to authentically love god". That's false.
Apparently, under conditions necessitated by biblical inerrancy, God IS capable of rendering you incapable of erring while preserving your ability to authentically love him.
NOW what is so unreasonable in the skeptic who says God has no excuse for allowing evil, because we know from the doctrine of biblical inerrancy that the possibility that God CAN and actually DID infallibly preserve a creature's ability to authentically love him while simultaneously and equally infallibly preventing them from erring, is not only actually achievable in this present fallen world, but actually WAS achieved in a sinful world?
The explanation the gentleman is giving about the two accounts of Judas' death does not make sense, and sounds more like a "cobbling" of explanations to synchronize the obvious contradiction in these particular accounts.
Why doesn't the latter account incorporate the earlier account? Since the book of Matthew was written BEFORE Acts. Why didn't the authors of Acts, just synchronize both accounts, so it reads that way?
That way, a person on UA-cam, would not have the burden of to explaining this off as "both" accounts, being truth. Instead, readers have to "construct" hypotheticals to make sense of what people have termed an "apparent contradictions"? From a word given to creation by the Creator of the known and unknown universe? 🙄
C'mon Man
How’s it so hard to believe that a dude who hung himself would fall down and his guts spill out? Maybe not the stupid way they theorised.
@@freegraceau Very easy!!! He's making up crap that is NOT in the scriptures in a lying and pathetic attempt to rationalize "believing" something that can not be proven
@@freegraceau Its not just that you also got to remember he fell head first. Which is very unlikely if he was hung. That his guts split open from falling. How high did he hang him self in a field? An cliff? In a field? That he fell on a rock to split open? How likely is that? That the field was his even though he threw the money back. So that the field was purchased in Judas name but not by him. There are a lot of small contradictions in the Judas story and sure each explanation might be believable but when you have to stick all these reasonings together it becomes very very unlikely.
Also christian's like to stick to the Judas contradictions or other "easy to explain ones". But there are numerical contradictions that they avoid cause they are much harder to reconcile. Hard to explain how Solomon can have both only 4 thousand horse stalls and 40 thousand horse stalls. This is an order of magnitude of difference.
you’re just making things up to fit what you believe, it’s dishonest, and embarrassing on your behalf. just admit the book has errors.
VicedRhino's response to this video: ua-cam.com/video/HOVUKnYfBVw/v-deo.html&ab_channel=VicedRhino
What about all the contradictions that Paul had in his writings vs Jesus teachings? There are over 100 contradictions from Paul. He’s a false, self-appointed apostle; a wolf in sheeps clothing.
God doesn't have a face or a backside but he made man in his image? I suppose this is not a contradiction either?
I can’t be bothered to watch the entire podcast cuz this guy literally misquoted the verses on Judas’s death so bad. Firstly what did Judas do with the money according to both verses? Second, where in the verse does it mentioned Judas falling off a cliff?
One verse says that Judas hung himself. The other verse says that he fell headlong and his entrails gushed out. Headlong means you are in motion and you fall hitting your head on the ground.
So how did Judas die, did he hang himself or did he fall headlong? And what did he do with the wages of inequity?
Headlong could just mean he acted impulsively, someone else did a much better job going into that, but you have to dig for the comment,
Interesting. Didn’t know about the Proverbs thing. Clearly soundbytes didn’t originate with Donald Trump, they’re right there in Proverbs. Sounds great, means nothing. Clearer direction needed, I think - how to deal with a fool, or, more urgently, how to identify who, in reality, is the fool !!