Are There Contradictions In The Bible? Alex O'Connor vs Dinesh D'Souza
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 вер 2024
- #cosmicskeptic #dineshdsouza #pangburn #jesus #christianphilosophy #bible #christian #christianity #atheistviews #atheistrepublic #atheist #secularism #debate #pangburnphilosophy
Full discussion here: • IS THE BIBLE TRUE? ALE...
Welcome to the Pangburn Universe, governed by the laws of good faith & helpfulness.
Full discussion here: ua-cam.com/video/UMKkX8qRHsw/v-deo.htmlsi=8BSu6z7g53VW8vcs
it is incredible how dinesh is able to dodge and ignore the specific point alex is making.
Alex O’Connor is doing a great job of alerting the people that get conned by apologists who are out to make money using the name of god.
Thank you Dinesh.
You lead many away from Christianity that night.
Is that Dinesh D'Souza, the convicted felon?
The Bible is full of very important contradictions. What did Jesus say on the cross: the Gospels contradict each other. Who went to the tome: all the Gospels disagree. What did they see: the Gospels disagree. Who did they tell afterwards: the Gospels disagree.
The Crucifiction and Resurrection of Christ is central to the Christian mythology and their " God " couldn't perform the simple miracle of getting the story straight.
I agree with Alex that the important contradictions are those put in to serve a theological divergence of the teachings of Jesus. The other contradictions simply undermine the trustworthiness of the text.
@@cathyharrop3348
There is no contradiction re Mary, Joseph & Jesus going to Egypt or Galilee in Matthew and Luke, despite Dinesh's poor answer.
The entire chapter of Matthew 2 occurs between Luke 2:39 and Luke 2:40: the Magi coming from the east, Herod's inquiry about Jesus, Herod sending the Magi to look for Jesus in Bethlehem. And although Luke 2:39 says Mary, Joseph & Jesus returned to Galilee, they obviously would have had to stop again in Bethlehem, as they obviously must have left most of their belongings in Bethlehem, as they were only going to be in Jerusalem for a week or so to uphold Jewish customs.
So they get back to Bethlehem, the star leads the Magi from Jerusalem to Bethlehem (Matt 2:9), and after giving their gifts, the Magi leave. Joseph, Mary & Jesus flee to Egypt as instructed by the Angel, until the end of 4BC when Herod had died (Jesus was born around the start of 4BC).
And then the story picks up in Luke 2:40 (actually the second half of Luke 2:39).
So the events are: they start in Nazareth Galilee - go to Bethlehem where Jesus is born - after 40 days of Mary's purification they go to the temple in Jerusalem - Luke 2:39 says they go back to Galilee but obviously they first went back to Bethlehem to get their things - The Magi come while they're still in Bethlehem - then the Angel tells Joseph in a dream that they have to flee to Egypt - and then after Herod dies later that year, Joseph, Mary & Jesus all go back to Galilee.
So there isn't actually any contradiction. Just that all of Matthew 2 occurs pretty much between Luke 2:39 and Luke 2:40. And tbh, I'm betting all of these 'contradictions' actually have an answer. Only that the answers aren't so simple to see. That's what I've noticed anyway.
answersingenesis.org/christmas/a-matter-of-time/
Now let's consider all the questions I have about Santa Claus
I cried when I learned that Santa died for our sins.
Getting hit by an arrow and getting nailed to a tree/wood. (Krishna)
Resurrected after death. (Horus)
Ascendancy to heaven. (Romulus)
_When you borrow from myths, and combine them, you end up with another myth._
SO, the contradictions in the bible can be summarized as normal humans making normal human inaccuracies. Why is it considered divinely inspired then? Why is it ultimately authored and tailored by God? If you read a newspaper that makes a incorrect or false statement, would you question the reliability of that news organization that authored the paper?
Dinesh makes an analogy for how the Bible contradicts itself while defending the validity of it. This is why you can't argue with religious people. It's like talking to pigeons.
2:00: Dinesh, God created the world in six days. If you don't know that why are you on the stage?
As a Christian and a minister, I am totally embarrassed by Dinesh. He wants to debate doctrine in place of scripture. His argument is ludicrous and would never be argued if it was a different book being discussed.
There is no contradiction, despite Dinesh's poor answer.
What do you make of this answer to the Matthew 2 Luke 2 contradiction @pastorrick727?
The entire chapter of Matthew 2 occurs between Luke 2:39 and Luke 2:40: the Magi coming from the east, Herod's inquiry about Jesus, Herod sending the Magi to look for Jesus in Bethlehem. And although Luke 2:39 says Mary, Joseph & Jesus returned to Galilee, they obviously would have had to stop again in Bethlehem, as they obviously must have left most of their belongings in Bethlehem, as they were only going to be in Jerusalem for a week or so to uphold Jewish customs.
So they get back to Bethlehem, the star leads the Magi from Jerusalem to Bethlehem (Matt 2:9), and after giving their gifts, the Magi leave. Joseph, Mary & Jesus flee to Egypt as instructed by the Angel, until the end of 4BC when Herod had died (Jesus was born around the start of 4BC).
And then the story picks up in Luke 2:40 (actually the second half of Luke 2:39).
So the events are: they start in Nazareth Galilee - go to Bethlehem where Jesus is born - after 40 days of Mary's purification they go to the temple in Jerusalem - Luke 2:39 says they go back to Galilee but obviously they first went back to Bethlehem to get their things - The Magi come while they're still in Bethlehem - then the Angel tells Joseph in a dream that they have to flee to Egypt - and then after Herod dies later that year, Joseph, Mary & Jesus all go back to Galilee.
So there isn't actually any contradiction. Just that all of Matthew 2 occurs pretty much between Luke 2:39 and Luke 2:40. And tbh, I'm betting all of these 'contradictions' actually have an answer. Only that the answers aren't so simple to see. That's what I've noticed anyway.
answersingenesis.org/christmas/a-matter-of-time/
Dinesh dis-misses again.
Dinesh loves to refrain from actual examples by pivoting to saying a clearly ridiculous scenario that he invents to show how ridiculous the example is.
"I mentioned a contradiction once, but I think I got away with it. "
"You would say....and then i would say...."
WTF...how about actually talk with the man instead of having a fake discussion with yourself? This man is embarrassing to listen to.
wait, alex was supporting the conservatives????
Dinesh didn't understand the point Alex was making till the end, or perhaps he does understand and know that he's wrong, but, as one Sam Harris said, (paraphrased) nobody likes to admit to being wrong in public, we would rather change our mind privately.
The Bible's main premise: that its very specific, all-omni God exists at all, in & of itself is inconsistent, with all known reality.
Funny no one has these discussions about science. That's the problem with arguing about different made up stuff.
But the thing is that scientists do argue about details all the time it's just when they disagree they go away and test, conduct experiments, gather data and evidence the publish their results
Can one imagine Dinesh and Jordan Peterson on the same stage? 90 minutes of illusion and sophistry.
What a massacre. Painful to see.
An All Loving god. And then he drowned everything and everyone. That's what I call a contradiction.
God is just, that’s why he killed the first born of Egypt over crimes their parents committed
There is no contradiction, despite Dinesh's poor answer.
The entire chapter of Matthew 2 occurs between Luke 2:39 and Luke 2:40: the Magi coming from the east, Herod's inquiry about Jesus, Herod sending the Magi to look for Jesus in Bethlehem. And although Luke 2:39 says Mary, Joseph & Jesus returned to Galilee, they obviously would have had to stop again in Bethlehem, as they obviously must have left most of their belongings in Bethlehem, as they were only going to be in Jerusalem for a week or so to uphold Jewish customs.
So they get back to Bethlehem, the star leads the Magi from Jerusalem to Bethlehem (Matt 2:9), and after giving their gifts, the Magi leave. Joseph, Mary & Jesus flee to Egypt as instructed by the Angel, until the end of 4BC when Herod had died (Jesus was born around the start of 4BC).
And then the story picks up in Luke 2:40 (actually the second half of Luke 2:39).
So the events are: they start in Nazareth Galilee - go to Bethlehem where Jesus is born - after 40 days of Mary's purification they go to the temple in Jerusalem - Luke 2:39 says they go back to Galilee but obviously they first went back to Bethlehem to get their things - The Magi come while they're still in Bethlehem - then the Angel tells Joseph in a dream that they have to flee to Egypt - and then after Herod dies later that year, Joseph, Mary & Jesus all go back to Galilee.
So there isn't actually any contradiction. Just that all of Matthew 2 occurs pretty much between Luke 2:39 and Luke 2:40. And tbh, I'm betting all of these 'contradictions' actually have an answer. Only that the answers aren't so simple to see. That's what I've noticed anyway.
answersingenesis.org/christmas/a-matter-of-time/
Wouldn‘t „most of their belongings“ have stayed in Nazareth the entire time? What would they have brought to Bethlehem in order to report there for a census? Some food and some water for the road and maybe a change of clothes. What would keep them from taking that with them after jesus’ birth? And even if: why bother to pick up same rotten food and stale water?
Yes.
Dinesh must serve a tiny god who is impotent and unable to get the details correct with the biblical text. I thought he was discussing the god who is currently micromanaging the universe, yet just isn’t able to secure these loose details.
Is he wearing mascara?
Dinesh is hopelessly benighted.
Anyone who deals with multiple eyewitness accounts expects some discrepancies in the details. Otherwise they conclude that people just colluded their stories before telling them.
What Alex does not point out is the details that show the Gospels to be honest accounts of actual historical events. "Tells" consisting of minor details.
E.g. In the story where Peter and some of the disciples ran to see the tomb, the record offhandishly says that John got there first. When you find out that John was younger than the other disciples, that would make sense.
When Jesus fed the multitude, He asked Philip where they might buy bread. Another Gospel says Philip was from Bethsaida and another read of the record will tell you that the feeding of the multitude happened near Bethsaida.
The Gospel of Mark was originally written to gentiles and yet Mark has Jesus referring to Himself as "Son of Man" more than any other Gospel when Son of Man only had divine connotations in a Jewish eschatological context. So why would Mark hurt his own purposes of trying to convince gentiles that Jesus was divine?
Same question for why the Gospels record women as the first witnesses. In first century Israel that would put serious doubt over the reliability of the story.
And there's more, much more details like these that show the Gospel writers to be honest.
Which of the women who first saw the empty tomb wrote any of the gospels? Otherwise all you’ve admitted is that the gospels are at best second hand accounts.
@@timothybrown5999 that's true of all ancient historical records.
I am on the same page as Alex although I believe he is wasting his time getting down in the weeds over the literal truth of the bible, Whatever floats your boat I suppose. I am not a religious man but I like Dinesh because he talks in plain language not in word salads, unlike another person who shall remain nameless.
Dinesh is an expert at strawmanning. Instead of using an example from the Bible of a weak contradiction, he made one up out of whole cloth. The Bible is full of contradictions that don't matter that he could have used but he avoids those because he fears admitting to any errors in the Bible. I dismiss him as being dishonest.
JP?
What's the point of debating the truth of the bible if it's not literally true? Alex offered to discuss the metaphorical, theological truth, scientific truth, or historical truth of any of the books of the Bible, but to do that Dinesh has to first accept that at least parts of the Bible aren't Literally truth. If you concede that the Bible is not true by the plain reading of the text, explain exactly how it is true, and don't fudge around by saying the verse is true under this definition to serve this theological assertion but true under a different definition to serve another theological assertion.
@@alanmacification Dinesh is plainly an idiot at strawmanning.