TikTok Atheist tries to Debunk the Bible
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 вер 2024
- Today we'll look at the claims of a TikTok atheist who tries to debunk the Bible and see what actual historical scholars say on these issues.
___________________________________________________________________________
Scholarly Sources
(“Following Jesus in the Gospel of Mark-and Beyond” in Patterns of Discipleship, ed. Longnecker (Eerdmans, 1996), 24.)
(The Resurrection of Jesus (IVP Academic, 2010), 347.)
(Resurrecting Jesus (Continuum, 2005), 303-304.)
___________________________________________________________________________
My Socials
Discord Server: / discord
TikTok: / sanctus.dominus
___________________________________________________________________________
Music Credits: @The Bard
His websites:
🎼 Tips 🎶 streamelements...
🎵 Spotify🎵 open.spotify.c...
🎵Amazon🎵 music.amazon.e...
🎵 Deezer🎵 www.deezer.com...
Comment Feedback!
God is not constrained by what man thinks.
Yes, Odin, Vishnu, and Apollo do not have those constraints.
New here. Like the content. Viva Cristo Rey. Ave Maria.
Good video, brother! I appreciate you for defending the true faith. Glory to God, Amen.
I love your style. This is a great video. I think the only thing I dislike is the way you stop at certain words mid sentence and then continue the sentence as if it were a different one. An example of this would be 1:05.
I appreciate the feedback, i’ll see what i can do!God bless!
Great counter response to the Atheist! Based on researching documents, it is a positive explanation!!!
While I agree that not everything in Genesis is literal, it's more literal than you're giving it credit for, including the ages of humans. The science substantiates that the genome of human DNA deteriorates over time; while our technology advances, our genetics get worse every year. It's highly probable that the earliest humans were much healthier and much more intelligent than the average person today, and that they lived much longer because of their pristine DNA genome. This would also explain how, without any modern equipment, ancient humans made the wonders of the world, like the pyramids, with such incredible precision. Because of our genetic deterioration, we rely on technology to do for us what the most ancient humans were able to rely entirely on themselves for. Our technology is a crutch to make up for our failing genetics.
The Genesis account is mostly literal, including the six days of creation and the global flood. It should be noted that while Augustine didn't believe in a literal 6-day creation, he didn't believe the Earth was billions of years old, rather he thought that God created the entire planet and all life in a single instant, and that the author of Genesis only said God used six days in order to break it down and simplify creation in a way that contemporary readers could comprehend. But if we go with Augstine's view, the Earth is still only 6,000 years old, just minus 6 days of creation because God created everything instantly and doesn't "need" to take time creating.
Answers In Genesis Canada has done a great job explaining how Christian theism doesn't even make sense if God used millions of years of evolution to create man; for example, death didn't come into the world with Adam's sin if God used millions of years of evolution and death to create the animals we know today. And if there was no original sin that brought death and suffering into the world, then why would be need a savior, a new Adam, if the old Adam didn't exist?
The other issue is that the New Testament writers described Adam's sin, the creation account, and Noah's flood as literal--so if we assume that these were merely literary devices, then we have to contend with the New Testament writers insisting otherwise.
Likewise, the fossil record that we have is also exactly what we would expect if there had been a global flood as described in Genesis; billions of dead things fossilized in hardened mud-like sediment.
While I agree that the specific passage about God "going down" to Soddom was not literal, I would do a bit more research on the literal interpretation of Genesis. Answers In Genesis Canada has also done a documentary exposing the roots of the theory of evolution for the sham that it always was.
The Reddit-brain at work. AAAAAAACTUALLLY
Excellent. Show more videos like this one. Very educational, you are gifted. God Bless.
Well, you can obtain the same results asking a TikTok prophet to debate with someone like Stephen Hawking
Nice job brother
They took verse out of context
VIVA LA CRISTO REY ✝️🇻🇦
Great video Sanctus I like this video of yours however the true apostolic church is Oriental Orthodoxy 😛
The churches will unite again one day
Focus and work for Christian unity.
Correct
If God created everything, before he created people, then who was there witnessing and writing down the historical events, hanging out with God then, at the beginning? Why did it have to get just written down? Where's the pictures and videos? Fox News, MSN, ABC, CBS, NBC, History Channel...?
From the logical perspective...😅🎉
SanctusApologetics, this is John Rodriguez: YOU YOURSELF, indeed, must have the Patience of Job, because, I Myself have No Time to waste in this Post - Modern ,Neo - Pagan, Secular Humanist North America ( Canada - USA- Mexico) ,in dealing with the " Atheist" ,Who NEVER, EVER was an Atheist in an orthodox sense ( Psalms 14:1, 53:1), but in the United States of America, especially, a mere Apostate ( 2 Peter 2: 20-22), that , that Man or Woman once claimed to be a Christian ( Acts 11:26, 26:28; 1 Peter 4:16) , but ,bailed out when things got tough ,and then phagged out!! 🇺🇸🇺🇲❤️🇻🇦🇻🇦✝️☦️🌫️🌎🛐🙏⛪📖🕊️👼😇‼️
W
Amazing goalpost moving, a truly great response😂
Using biblical/ historical scholars to justify basic biblical concepts isn’t moving the goal post.
@@SanctusApologetics If he is arguing against a specific believe and you say "Well I don't believe that and Some scholars don't believe it either so your point is invalid" thats either moving the goalpost or inserting yourself in a conversation that was not about you.
More so if you consider that there is tons of people that do interpret genesis literally
@@xadielplasencia3674 He declared in his video that these were contradictions, so they apply to all Christians because he never clarified in his video that he was only talking about fundamentalists. Infact at the end he mentioned all 45,000 Christian denominations. In the video i showed how he didn’t represent these passages correctly with the help of historical scholars who have phds in these fields.
@@xadielplasencia3674He stated in the video these were contradictions, not directed towards a specific sect but towards all of Christianity which Sanctus already debunked.
ua-cam.com/video/75wM8FzCLm0/v-deo.html
Please improve the audio quality
of which part? Audio should be really good, i use a studio shure microphone.
Huh?? So other Christians aren't serving God?? Plus there's no 45,000 denominations. If you buy that then according to that, there are 12,000 denomination within the Catholic church. There's no evidence of apostolic succession. That's made up and I think it's arrogant to say only your church serves God and is the ONE TRUE CHURCH. Implying that others are false.
can you give an account for your claims? i wont hold my breath.
@@kyriacostheofanous1445 Account for what claims??💀 Read that again and see if I'm making any claim. You're the one who's supposed to bring evidence for that claim that there's 45000 denominations because that's false!
@@raphaelfeneje486 "There's no evidence of apostolic succession" "That's made up"
@@JoseCuber2372 There's no evidence for Apostolic succession. It's made up! Yes. Why do I say so?? Because there's literally no writings or a tradition from the early church that talks about that, neither was Peter looked upon as a pope that all the all the disciples submitted to. He called himself a fellow elder. So my statement is valid! If there's evidences, show me.
@@raphaelfeneje486 I wasn't trying to take your claims as fake, just pointing that you actually made claims which you said you weren't
I was raised catholic, but at some point I gave up on the mental gymnastics used to explain what’s written in different parts of the bible. Near the 6:00, as you mention smart bible scholars, Bart Ehrman is on screen. He went from being a fundamentalist christian to an agnostic? Who basically gave up jumping through the mental hoops to explain away the literal contradictions that apparently exist in the early gospels manuscripts.