The Idolatry of the Bible-Why Biblical Inerrantism is Impossibly Wrong
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 жов 2024
- It is one thing to believe that God played an imperceptible hand in the creation of the Bible. It is another thing entirely to claim that the Bible is perfectly inerrant.
Read the script here: philosophyengi...
Here's a book that was written by men, often times by interviewing the memories of other men, only to then get translated by men, edited by men, modified by men, summarized by men, copied by men, preserved by men, translated again by men, and then compiled by men. But don't worry, you can totally trust us when we tell you that this is the absolutely inerrant word of God.
Excellent insight. I was so excited to see this video because I saw this on your blog. Hopefully you read this comment because you're an inspiration to me. You're a PhD engineer (something I wish I could be but probably don't have the money) and you fully deconverted me from Christianity. Your Philosophical Failures of Christian Apologetics (although kinda harsh) is incredibly detailed and one can tell that you've put a lot of work and effort and you knowledge is vast. And your other ideos like The Problem of Free Will and What is Truth are also classics. I picked up an epistemology book because in one of your meditations you said that's the good thing to start with
You've fueled my love for philosophy Anti, and you've been a huge part of my life. Thank you.
And Happy Holidays and New Year!
how can I help you translate this to another language the best way i can?
this absolute wonder of a video needs to be translated.
Cool beans are you gonna make your videos on a regular basis or what?
Translating into American English gives another issue. You're translating a dead language into a horrible corruption of a modern one.
For example I hope the words colour or honour don't appear in the Bible because Americans can't spell those words.
the writing on this video is just on a whole another level. It's basically god's words here
Certainly closer to that than the Bible
Totally
Spread the word!
It's even in the original rendition. Hasn't been translated once.
@@AntiCitizenX docs.google.com/document/d/1P78h0Md1VnXu6nGiIhzKNHHIh-PiCm1ccsB67CghSag/edit?usp=drivesdk Please have a look this document goes over everything in your video.
Kind of funny how if you claim to be a prophet delivering new scripture straight from God himself you'll be called a fraud, heretic, crazy, etc. But when people did that exact thing 2,000 years ago that was definitely the true word of God, perfect, and inerrant.
Considering that Mormons exist, only the majority will think you are crazy. You can still start a religion with it.
Kind of like how god supposedly used to frequently prove his existence to people with huge public indisputable miracles in biblical times, but suddenly became very shy when cameras were invented and now all modern Christians just have to settle for having faith.
It's suspiciously convenient how only ancient dead people got to directly interact with god, but I have to just take the pastor's word for it that God speaks to him in prophetic visions that only he can see and hear. It's pretty unfair if you ask me. Why can't I hang out with Jesus and watch him multiply fish and turn water into wine? It'd sure make it a lot easier to believe in the Christian god.
@@AlteredNova04 I've never discovered a non-masonic pastor, look into it.
@@AlteredNova04 Nowadays miracles are almost exclusively medical, because it's hard to prove to these people that it was the modern medical treatment and not the prayer that healed someone. If you look at the modern sainthood process for the Catholic Church, it's all medical miracles
@@AlteredNova04 if there was video of a miracle , would you believe it?
"Don't trust everything you read on the Internet" _ Epistoles from the apostle Paul to the Lurkers 13:37 1st century AD
And of course the whole problem of translation was created by god himself when he 'confused' the languages of humans as punishment for building the tower. Kind of shot himself in the foot on this one.
So true : ).
If you had a letter to communicate to your children and you had unlimited power .........would you be able to communicate it to them?, would language be a problem if they were old enough to understand speech?
@@sevensickszero6112 Greetings. Would you please clarify your point? I think you are saying that you believe God inspired each of the 40+ authors to write the bible as a love letter to His children and that He then oversaw each of the many translations? I agree that He has unlimited power, but i believe He had a different plan than to create a supposedly perfect bible. There are great parts for sure, but there is too much in that book that slanders God's character for that to be the best He could do in authoring a love letter to His children. I believe the bible is a test of whether people would choose to make it into an idol or whether instead people would seek living relationship with the Living God. The preponderance of individuals within institutionalized religion have failed this test.
@@livinginthespirit407 I have a living relationship with the risen Christ , what parts of the bible make God " look bad"?
@@sevensickszero6112 Ok thank you for clarifying that you have living relationship with the risen Christ. But this still does not clarify your position as to what you believe about the bible including whether you believe the infinite God insured that it was written infallibly and that it was preserved as infallible through every translation. Do you believe it's possible that an infinitely wise and powerful God could have sought living relationship with His children just as He did with Abraham and without overseeing the authorship of a perfect book and/or overseeing its many translations? Without wanting the religious system to place such a high emphasis on a book and ascribe God-like characteristics to this book?
There are a good many atrocities in the bible ascribed against God's character, absurdities, inconsistencies/contradictions, double standards especially against wives and women and other issues.
There are sites that list such content.
Of course when an individual is committed to believing the bible is infallible and genuinely representative of God's true character regardless of whatever it says... and if that person is committed to defending every verse within the bible no matter what, then this is what that individual will do. A bible apologist will have an answer to everything.
I suggest that what is actually going on in such instances is the idolatry of a book and choosing to defend the bible over choosing to defend God Himself against slanderous misrepresentations against His character. Koran apologists do the same with their Koran.
I can provide you with specific examples of what i consider to be slanderous misrepresentations against God's character in the religious system's bible, but please first let me know, are you already 100% set upon continuing to believe it is infallible no matter what?
As a teaser and nowhere near the worst of the slander against God's character, there is the law against wives that if they commit adultery against their husband they are to be stoned to death. But very interestingly, there is no such law against the husband and he was legally permitted to sleep with whomever he wanted unless it was another man's wife since the other man was protected by "God's" law.
You and i will agree that God is the same yesterday, today and forever, so if this double standard against wives was His heart at that time, then this is also his heart today and it will always be so. But is the infinite Living God really the God of double standards against wives? I overwhelmingly believe He is vastly greater than the way He was represented in that bible passage and in hundreds of others.
Anticitizenx: *uploads a video*
Me: A blessing from the lord
Amen
I never thought we’d be able to get 2 uploads in such a short period of time, right before the end of the year as well. This is such a nice treat and I hope you have a nice end of the year!
All thanks to the Ronas.
Good to see you still up and alive making good work.
"God can write the perfect work."
So why do you think he wrote the bible? It's clearly not perfect.
You are imperfect, therefore you can't comprehend perfection even if it slapped you in the face.
@@tomaszwota1465 then god created us to be imperfect
@@ShastraDugan I don't think we got created by any god, unless in some very floaty, foggy "universe as a whole" sense.
Also, "perfection" is not as easy of a concept as you could think. Maybe we are part of a perfect universe. How do you know we aren't? What does it even mean? ;)
I’m glad to see you still making videos. These have been foundational for my development not just as an atheist but in differentiating logic from b.s. I always like going back and rewatching them.
Wonder if your actually right and worth it anymore to praise such a god overmind puppet master
Boxing Day may be over, but that doesn't stop the absolute beat down.
"Apostle Paul has been attributed a lot of things that he never actually said."
--Apostle Paul
Just found your videos and I love them. Excellent work, not oversaturated animations and clear concise points. Worth a re-watch definetly.
"This is where the fun begins" - Anakin Skywalker, The Chosen one born of a virgin by the will of the Force
we can verify he said this because we can ask the actor, we have the recording on dvd and on youtube, we have the scripts used by George Lucas
And I believe he is my father 2 lol
Non-inerrantist christian dodging questions about biblical unpleasantries: "The question i asked is what it actually says in Hebrew. I don't think applying logic to the English translations will answer that question."
Me: "What is the point of believing in a god that can't ensure that its translations are correct? If these translations are so wildly off the mark that humans no longer have any clear idea of what was being said, then the god would be incompetent and worthy of being ignored if it existed."
Non-inerrantist christian: "Humans are endowed with free will with which they may choose to mistranslate things. :^)"
Me: "And if a god can't pick scribes and translators who will convey its words honestly and competently, then it is no better a judge of character than a human might be. Try to find translations of Plato's Republic that say that Socrates thinks that injustice is better than justice."
If an omnipotent, omniscient god really wanted to spread the word, he would create an indestructible, unalterable copy of his book for every person, in that person's language. No copying or translation needed.
Mental gymnastics is religious people's favourite hobby. Much more pleasant than reading books.
The only point there ever is for believing anything is evidence. The level of perfection of the object of your belief is irrelevant to _why_ you believe in it in the first place.
Likewise, perfection is a pretty high bar for paying heed to something. A tiger is not perfect by any means, but if there is one nearby, it has my full attention.
Blessed are the cheesemakers.
@SpaceLordof75, shut up big nose!
@@charlessmith3758 one more time, mate. I'll take you to the fucking cleaners!
@@WorldCupWillie So good, I hope we don't have to go over every line of the movie. I'll bet we can, lol :-)
I missed you man. Your content is grest and im super excited to see you back.
This is actually a very interesting issue that I posed to my Christian family since they have stated multiple times, inspired by the bible, that no human being can change a single comma or a single word of the bible, that it is impossible. Then I pointed out the fact that meaning is definitely lost in translation and sometimes is even changed. They responded with a spectacular and delusional dodge: they maintained that the word of God could not be changed but if it were, they were additional meanings that could enrich their interpretation of the holy scriptures. So the bible is definitely the word of God and cannot be changed but if it is changed it's just additional ways of interpreting and enriching their knowledge (they were not kidding).
A list of variations in the King James bible: kjvodebate.wordpress.com/variations-of-kjb/ I am guessing that they probably think it has never been altered.
Im christian and some words have been changed and altered
Hey, AntiCitizenX, I get to watch your video when you upload it. I'm so grateful to you. Ive downloaded 2 of your vids, to help me understand some things.things. But this topic is so out there, it needs constant discussion.
Thank you for returning. 😁😁
I see this, I click as fast as possible ^w^
9:56
Correction. Jewish texts are still written in ancient Hebrew to this day, as there are strict religious laws regarding how to scribe a holy text in Judaism that emphasizes preserving the language. For a modern Hebrew speaker, ancient Hebrew is somewhat readable, and you can understand most of what it says.
However, there are few important words that their meanings were lost, such as the very first word in the bible, "Bereshith." The common translation for the word is "in the beginning." However, some scholars say it might actually mean "before that". A direct translation is also not so clear either, and it can be "during the process of the head," with the head also means "start." So, the very first word in the bible can mean "when it all started," but it can also mean "just before it starts."
Add to that, even inside the bible itself, the language had changed over time. The way words are written in later books is much closer to modern Hebrew than in the early books.
Except were those laws always there or were they passed in response to people doing the exact thing the law forbids? We can never truly know the answer. However, looking at human history and that which is written in the Bible and the talmud, it's most likely the second.
I never claim that it is impossible to translate words with reasonable accuracy. I only ever claimed that absolute perfection is unattainable.
Ancient Hebrew was already a dead language by the time of Jesus, in fact he spoke Aramaic. That means that he himself must have “translated” the law when he talked about it to his followers.
@@pansepot1490 That's not entirely true. Mishnaic hebrew (not biblical hebrew, but still ancient hebrew) was spoken at least a century after Jesus' death. The Bar Kochba documents, for example, are written in hebrew and show clear colloquialisms...
I can't remember where I read it many years ago, it may have been Thomas Paine, but it described a meeting of Christian Scholars around the twelfth century having a meeting to decide which writings, or books, would be included in the Bible. Proposals for inclusion were made and "Yays" or "Nays" were counted. The "Nays" went in the dustbin. That simplified example may not have been true, I don't know, but to me the idea sums it up. "We like this, it's doctrine. We don't like that, toss it."
Remember when Stephen Colbert asked his viewers to go to the Conservapedia's wiki bible and make him a biblical figure?
How do we know, at that point, that it wasn't the inspired word of God?
well everyone knows conservapedia is run by god i mean andrew schalfly (i dont know if i spelt it right) literally edited the bible to remove any "liberal claptrap" so if stephen colbert was added to there as a biblical figure then i guess he is one as andrew must be god otherwise he would be a heretic for adding to the bible
Can we appreciate how cute the little cartoon characters are?
I really appreciate your channel, and hope you never stop making content.
So glad to see you back. Love the wit and clarity of the arguments. Unfortunately, the youtube algorithm didn't see it fit to notify me but I check the channel periodically for new content. I'm going to smash the bell icon to ensure it doesn't happen again.
Damn, that is a mic drop moment if ever there was one.
Biblical inerrancy is pretty much on the level of Flat-Eartherism.
Flat earthers commonly reference the bible
I agree. Biblical inerrancy is pretty much on the level of Flat earthism and also on the level of the story of deep time evolutionism, both of which are in denial of science.
@@livinginthespirit407 You might want to rethink that last claim about evolution and time. We have so much evidence for that, it's a fundamental aspect of basic biology.
Plus the only people who say 'evolutionism' are those who are against reality telling them that their religion is wrong.
@@MrLightningbob Thank you for your response Mr. Bob. The real evidence is for adaptation and variation which is observable, repeatable and predictable. By contrast, the real evidence does not support the stories of single celled organisms supposedly evolving over millions of years to form 100,000 different types of information specific origami like folding proteins, 20,000 different types of exorbitantly sophisticated molecular machines, factories, transportation networks, etc within the cell, DNA information, instructions and blueprints, dna editing and repair machinery, organs and their accompanying inter-dependent systems, every major body plan, etc.
Please be aware of those who would say to you that intelligent design model denies adaptation and variation since this is just a caricature misrepresentation. ID model espouses that intelligently designed organisms are capable of varying and adapting to their environment in predictable ways. Dog breeding is an example as are finch beaks and antibiotic resistant bacteria. The vast preponderance of the mountains of peer reviewed evidence for "evolution" is fully in line with the intelligent design position.
The merging apart is not in a belief that various types of mammals don't vary, it's in the belief of how mammals arose in the first place and what the evidence actually demonstrates the most plausible cause without eliminating one of the two major possibilities a priori. This is where "evolutionism" comes into the picture since it pushes its agenda forward with a lot of just so stories accompanied by drawings. I refer to it as "evolutionism" since it is a belief system based in the presuppositional bias that life could not possibly have been intelligently designed, therefore it must have arisen purely through materialistic and/or naturalistic processes.
No amount of exorbitant and extraordinary evidence for Intelligent design (as i had listed above) can shake the believer in evolutionism from their belief, in large part since the intelligent design explanation is disallowed a priori.
Theists have a choice to believe either their God designed life in many forms or a mindless materialistic and/or naturalistic force designed the many forms of life starting with single celled organisms . Myself, i was once an evolution believer since that's what i was indoctrinated to believe all throughout my school and university years. I remained an evolution believer for many years as a theist until i actually explored what at the time i considered to be the ridiculous position for "creation" and/or intelligent design. I don't believe in an infallible bible, so i have no need even today to believe the bible got it right where creation (or at least intelligent design is concerned). Thus i am free to go wherever the evidence leads.
Atheists on the other hand have no choice, so they tend to become very fervent in their belief in deep time evolutionism. They also tend to conflate the completely non controversial observable and repeatable evidence which is fully a part of both "Theory of Evolution" and the intelligent design model (dog breeding, antibiotic resistant bacteria, finch beak variation, etc) and convince themselves that all of this observable evidence is indisputable evidence for never once observed deep time evolutionism where correlation is assumed to be causation, similarities are assumed to be evidence of ancestry, etc. Nested heirarchy is widely pronounced as phenomelal evidence for "common descent evolution of all life from single celled organisms", but a nested heircharchy for life forms existed long before Darwin and it was established by Linnaeus who was a creationist. Nested heirarchy has also been done with vehicles, electronics, grocery items, etc. Only if one asserts a priori that intelligent design is not possible can one then conclude that nested heirarchy is amazing evidence for deep time evolution... and forming an a priori assertion for naturalism and against any possibility for intelligent design is indeed what the mainstream scientific community has done.
An example of what the evidence actually demonstrates is Lenski's study where 70,000 generations of bacteria adapted and varied based upon environmental stimulus, while fully remaining single celled bacteria. Dogs with aggressive intelligent selection often compared to millions of years of what nature without intelligence could have accomplished and they are all still dogs... and less sturdy and less healthy dogs at that.
@@livinginthespirit407 There is so much that is just wrong in your answer that a book could and have been written to refute essentially every claim you made here.
I did have a longer answer written up but it was lost. And no, just because a nested heiarchy can be utilized for just about anything does not imply intelligent design. Simply the recognition that someone can recognized the similarities. I also recognize that your examples are all things that cannot reproduce- a sure sign that you are an ID proponent who thinks that is a win when it shows your filacious thinking.
I am not a biology student or expert, simply someone with an interest in science. However I would be interested in watching you take this debate to people like Aron Ra and Jackson Wheat, maybe Gutsick Gibbon (Erika) would take you up.
Two details I think would have been good to include as to not give off the wrong idea:
1. The Gospel of John(or "The Fourth Gospel" as I like to call it since that authorship is debated by scholars) does claim to have been from an eyewitness who refers to himself as "the beloved disciple". The only idea supporting that the fourth gospel didn't claim to be from an eyewitness is the idea that John 21 was interpolated. I think that little detail would have been good to add in.
2. While I do think that Bart Ehrman in "Forged" made a decent case against the authenticity of 2 Thessalonians, the debate over who wrote it, as well as Ephesians and Colossians, among scholars is actually pretty even. More disputed than the undisputed 7(1 & 2 Corinthians) but less disputed than the Pastoral Epistles(Titus and 1 & 2 Timothy).
Aside from that, I'd say this was pretty good. I think Inerrency is more preposterous when you pair the info stated in this video with contradictions between different books of the Bible and the Problem of Interpretation(see verses supporting Calvinism vs. Open Theism, contradictions between the Gospels' endings on what the angel(s) said and what the women did afterwards, and that time Ehrman debated right-wingnut rambler Michael Brown over whether or not has a consistent answer to why suffering happens).
Excellent video! It's funny how a perfect and almighty deity would use such a messy, inefficient way to convey his urgent message so that humans all over the globe could attain salvation and avoid _eternal punishment_ after death. I see no holes in this religious logic whatsoever. The mere thought that this supposed almighty deity would use *a book* just like any other to spread his message (that also contains no evidence for its claims) is plain ridiculous. That's like General Electric using oil lamps instead of electricity to light up its HQ at night.
Why did that deity even create eternal punishment and rules which put people in it...
@Vali Vali or without knowledge and itz our evil and wickedness of rebellion??? If any creator who ever would ever want to bow down or sidmit or praise what sounds like a evil God monster and megatron of a God to respect and endure? Or worth it anymore to go back to or love Dat we need salvation from our savior almighty for existing and knowledge of our control. Megatron is LORD.
If there was a good and perfect god, your videos would be inspired by him.
Trust me, I can tell.
I’ve seen your recent debates with Renaissance Man, respect for trying to engage him, the guy is a mess of preconceptions and fallacies -_-
@@renaissanceman419 Such as the ones I’ve pointed out to you ?
Like for example your appeal to age, when you say that Christianity being this old probably means it’s very accurate when we know that religions need not be accurate to survive for a long time, as evidenced by older religions like Hinduism.
@@renaissanceman419 I don’t see the meaningful difference :|
And that’s certainly not the rebuttal you gave me when I said that to you in our previous discussion.
Edit : « based on things being Lindy »
... I’m not sure to understand what that means, is that an idiom or a typo ?
lol I was wondering when we'd get a Bart Ehrman cameo
The perfect take down of Protestantism
@willy welska Ok, my point that this is sounnding like the takedown a Catholic might do of a protestant went way over your head i guess
The Bible itself says it is not inerrant, unalterable, or un-editable. Outright warns of the changing of words and false translations.
where does it say that
@@lilg8915 Revelation22 18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Is your channel name inspired from half life 2 ? LOVE it
Yup. :)
Excellent points, of course. Thanks for taking the time to make the video.
It's weird how God had the knowledge of the people of the time. You'd think the creator of the universe would know simple things like the Earth being a globe, what germs were, that animals cannot speak and that bats aren't birds.
More like God does not reveal much about the future which is probably a good thing. A close examination of the cleanliness laws imply the source likely new about germ theory.
The idea of prophets make sense back when the character of God was limited and not all powerful.
You later add "omnipotent creator of the universe" onto that, suddenly him needing mortals to spread his message becomes contradictory and stupid.
Almost like the Bible was self published on a fan-fic website without having been proofread.
6:07 "I know a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy who ALLEGEDLY met Jesus"
Underrated content man
You'd think that an omnipotent, omniscient god who wanted to spread his word would see to it that the autographs were miraculously preserved. In fact, I'd expect such a god to provide every person with an indestructible, unalterable copy of his book, in that person's own language.
There is no universal translator. I propose that we call the belief that there is the "Star Trek Fallacy".
I like it!
Hope these 2 videos are a return to regular content.
Patreon's a thing now bud. Let's get u paid.
The bible: A book that christians claim is god's word, but cannot agree on what god's word actually is.
Thank you for this. I've always thought the Bible absolutely reeked of humanity. Specifically, male, narcissistic, power hungry humanity. And evidently one viewer still thinks god is commanding him to stone his unruly children to death (Deuteronomy 21:18-21).
Was gonna get on your case for all these “by men” and not by humans but then I remembered that women weren’t allowed to like do any of the work until modern times
That exact thought occurred to me too. So I left deliberately left it as “men” just to subtly emphasize the point. :)
Virtually none of this is a problem in the Orthodox church. If fact a great many of the points you are making are commonly made in the church, but of course we do land on a different conclusion than you seem to. Great videos, please keep making them, and God bless you.
I was raised an evangelical, but one thing that made it tempting to switch over to Catholicism back then was the fact that they were willing to admit that some stuff was just Tradition. Not something commanded by a god but stuff they did just cause those before them did it.
A perfect text would be perfectly and equally interpreted by both the most critical philosopher and dim laymen without dissent or error. The fact that dissent and criticism is both apparent and widespread by both the wise and dim is sufficient evidence that the bible is not perfect.
My favorite is Jesus's virgin birth. So who was there as witness? Are we taking the word of Mary? Of Jesus? Clearly the apostles were not present.
@willy welska Sorry to burst your bubble, I was a christian so that's why I have an interest in the stubject.
It's kinda like saying, "We believe a god is capable of making a car, and a Perfect God would be capable of making a Perfect Car!" What is a "perfect book"? Is it a book that is easy and fun to read? FAIL. A book which, no matter your tastes, you'd want to read over and over? FAIL. A book with a thrilling narrative, a likable cast of characters, and a writing style for all generations? SUPER FAIL!!!!
I guess most copies I've seen are well-bound. Is that what they mean?
The bible was written and rewritten by men. The changes come along with the change of times. It's a man made concept. Worship or be damned. Also, going to a made building claiming to be that of god is a man made construct as well. If you believe in God, you don't have to go to any church or dwelling, you can talk to yourself anywhere. Lol
Many Christians become an atheists because the bible itself is confusing. They took the easy way out & become an atheist without studying other religions. Indeed, God is real
@Maximal's Personal Profile I dont believe atheism exist. They believe in god but they just dont want to obey. They just keep lying to themselves to the point where they think god doesnt exist but in reality they just dont want god to exist. Everytime gods mentioned they get annoyed. They can believe everything else is created(phones, cars, planes, buildings, machines, computers etc), except living things & the universe they live in. They believe they had ancestors without seeing but not a creator. Even richard dawkins one of the biggest atheist said "oh god" by accident. Dont give me that excuse that its just a phrase he use to saying. I use to swear with foul words but i stopped because l didnt like it. If you atheist really didnt believe in god, it would be easy to stop saying "oh god". Phrases like that dont slip out randomly. I dont believe jesus is god, so its easy for me to not say it. Its always a personal issue why they dont believe god doesnt exist, like "Why did god let all these people die". So in conclusion atheist are just confused, arrogant, ignorant individuals.
@Maximal's Personal Profile The true religion must have these characteristics:
1. Must be Monotheistic.
= It must be monotheistic because we must acknowledge that there is only one God. I do not want to go into the argument of the existence of a supreme being because I am sure everyone has read the arguments out there so it would be useless to restate them. Now assuming you believe in a supreme being or beings, your religion must be monotheistic.
2. Must be open to all people to convert.
= This is pretty much self-explanatory. If God is All-Caring and All-Just he cannot simply make His religion closed to specific people because that would be unjust. He provides everyone the opportunity to seek Him, regardless of their race, gender & language.
3. Must have source of unchanged revelation from God.
= The true religion of God, must have a divine book that all mankind can refer to, if they were to need His guidance. God must communicate with his subjects in order for us to know the way. Therefore logically there must be a sort of revelation that was revealed by a prophet.
4. Must be brought by a true messenger of God.
= Someone can say, why do we need a messenger from God when He can just speak to us directly? The answer is simple, God’s revelation requires a superior capacity of heart that only a few have attained. God’s message is so immaculate that it cannot simply be understood by the average Joe. Imagine a child from preschool, goes and attends a conference full of professors, will they understand anything? If not just be more confused? A person who lacks the huge capacity of heart cannot hope to receive direct revelation from God, because he would simply become crazy.
@@ZackKcaz why yes, an athiest using the term "oh god" is definitely evidence for your claim. What a strong argument that has been rigorously tested, researched, and scrutinized over by thousands of reputable minds like they do in the world of science. Truly deplorable human beings we are for using science to come to our conclusions,
@@TheFattestLInHistory Athiests are the most ridiculous utter fools in all of creation. It’s like an iPhone denying the existence of Steve Jobs. Lol
If there is a god, atheist are closer to him than any religion. The bible is a second hand source at best. If there is a god he created the entire universe and all the evidence within it. Atheists follow the evidence. So in a sense god himself leads people away from the bible through the evidence he left in the universe with his own hands.
The evidence is not just limited to atheists to find them.
The really fun thing is the Hebrew written on the Torah scrolls isn’t the original Hebrew used by Moses and the Patriarchs. Ancient Hebrew was written in the “Ivrit” script, as seen in the Dead Sea scrolls, and was later rewritten in the Assyrian “Ashurit” script more commonly used in ancient Judea for trade and writing.
Do you have sources on that I can look over?
I liked the old canadian south park characters better
Happy to see this channel alive again
Nice new avatar
Also, 1:07 God is left-handed? Kinda ironic considering the condemnation of it
left-handed....sounds sinister to me
An omniscient, omnipotent, onmipresent, all-loving and generally perfect God who wants his word to guide his followers in righteousness would never allow the primary vehicle of that word to be anything but perfectly understandable in all contexts and times regardless of the hurdles involved. Therefore I contend that the logic of Biblical inerrancy is valid, and the complete mess that is the Bible we observe is great evidence against the existence of such a god (or at least one having anything to do with Christianity or similar religions).
Yeah. The omnipotent god creator of the universe, originator of all life on earth can’t write a book. He needs men to write it for him.
Just think about it. GOD CANNOT WRITE A BOOK. Can build a universe out of nothing but needs help to write a book.
Let that sink in.
Been making this argument for years. Glad someone took it on for the masses.
Really love listening to you.
Very well made video. Do you think you could do a similar inspection of the Quran? Maybe you could make it into a series 😂 This stuff is important though and it's important to spread it to the mainstream to shake up the hubris we're in now. I definitely learned from this
Oh boy, a new video :'D!
keep up the great work. well done.
Many things that Christians do, and believe, are a mystery to me. For example, Paul only ‘met’ Jesus once (he wasn’t even one of the 12 disciples), so why do Christians take his word as gospel? How could Jesus be both fully god and fully man at the same time (if he was both fully god and fully man, he would have to both know everything and nothing at the same time)? Etc.
Paul met with disciples including Peter and James (Jesus’s very brother) they affirmed what he taught and he even asked specifically to make sure he wasn’t misleading people. Fully God and Fully man simply means Jesus wasn’t faking being human, and that he never ceases to be God.
God knows that humans face suffering in life, but he doesn’t know how that feels, by incarnating as a human God got to see what it’s like to actually suffer. So in short fully God and fully man simply means Jesus wasn’t some demigod.
Thank you for putting together this summary, even though I doubt it will change anyone's mind.
It's very unlikely that any single argument will change anyone's mind, especially over night, but a bunch if well researched and logical arguments together could, over time, easily convince people
@@Deathnotefan97 look what happened to the USA. One mans sound arguments, shared and repeated over a few centuries by the right people, in the right time and place spawned a republic which has put people on the moon from a group or religious zealots in wooden ships escaping persecution and economic hardship. A man who thought there had to be a better way. Do not doubt the power of reason, logic and the value of appealing to the hearts of regular people. You can still change the world.
Perfect summary of Bart ehrmans argument
Great synthesis of information, and with a little jab at the end for good measure. I was wondering about the title of this until the last 30 seconds lol
Imagine what this god *could* have done. Jesus could still be alive, here on earth, today. He could be immortal and indestructible, world-renowned, living in a cave, and anyone could go speak to him to clear up any confusion about God's will. Why not? If that work's too lowly for him, how about an immortal robot? Easy peasy for God, right?
Leslie Viljoen More than likely, the man whom the people at that time knew as "jesus christ" was a level 4 grand wizard alien from the 5th dimension. That explains his superpowers.
Exactly, but the original writings of An, Enlil, and Enki are still extant, having been pressed into clay tablets, and document the true God(s). :-D
Actually, the world is full of texts written by prophets directly inspired by god.
Contradictory ones, within one denomination, between denominations and between religions.
Conveniently only the specific ones from their own denomination they personally believe are actually genuine. Says every single different one of them...
Great to see new content :D
The god who created the universe can write a perfect book? Well in today’s age, he should be able to have a perfect website. Why can’t he keep up with the times?
*Flexibility*
_An Underfable_
Once upon a time a Slave-Driver asked a Holy Book if slavery is righteous. The Holy Book quoted several of its passages calling slavery a divine blessing, ordained by the Lord.
Later an Abolitionist asked the Holy Book the same question. The Holy Book quoted several of its passages calling slavery a foul abomination, in defiance of the Lord.
Later still a Skeptic asked the Holy Book about those two opposite answers. The Holy Book said, “I am all things to all men.”
*Moral:* _A meme’s gotta do what a meme’s gotta do._
*Comment:* That Holy Book may claim to be a message, but really it’s more like a language. There’s a verse in it for war, and a verse in it for peace; there are verses in it for love and for hate, for day and for night, for scattering stones and for gathering stones together. So what you say with it says more about you than about it. But though it says two things, you are free to quote one thing and not the other, and credit it to the Holy Book but not you. That’s what _you_ get from the bargain.
That's not even including the (at least) 21 gospels of the new testament that got tossed out by some powerful roman ruler.
One of which would be the gospel of Maria in which she was playing a major role and even was Jesu prime scholar and had taken a trip to the afterlife and back.
not on topic but I've heard you were often called a logical positivist, while you saying this claim is false, what is the thing (or multiple of them) that ultimately separate you from being one
Strictly speaking, logical positivism was more of a movement than a collection of specific doctrines. That means it is kind of hard to qualify as a true positivist, given that everyone in the original movement is now dead. There are, however, many ideas that developed from the positivist circles that are alive and well in science today. Namely, the analytic-synthetic distinction and the verifiability criterion of meaning. I definitely sympathize with these concepts, and I give many practical examples throughout my videos.
Incidentally, one of the fastest ways to identify a complete philosophical hack is to ask them their opinions about positivism. If they tell you that positivism is dead and that everything they ever promoted is now discredited, then you know you are talking to a pseudo-intellectual buffoon. Most philosophers today are actually highly sympathetic to positivist ideas, and those ideas are very much embedded in modern science. That’s why I get annoyed when people use “positivism” as some kind of dirty word.
@@AntiCitizenX ah I see, thanks for clarification
Excellent. This seems to infallibly be the truth which means, of course, that it was written by god! Well done.!
How can we be certain that those who apprize us of the Bible’s inerrancy are themselves inerrant?
10:25 wow look a fellow brazilian casually participating in the production of a paper about language! That's awesome
Fucking UA-cam forgot to tell me about this video. If it wasn’t for the fact that I remembered to check your channel to see if you had uploaded anything I wouldn’t have seen this.
The question I pose to christians is that we have no written account from Jesus himself, then how should we trust what we see in the Bible?
Another great video.
Can someone remind me which video was the "latent homosexuality in homophobic people" video? Can't seem to find it.
edit: Never mind, just saw you accidentally deleted it and put it back up recently. lol.
Great like always. Funking A!!!
It's aliiive!!! *It's aliiiiiveeeeee!!!!!!!*
Can you do a video about Pascals Wager? I would love to hear your thoughts!
"Idolatry is worse than carnage-The Koran, 2: 190"
-"Consider Phlebas by Iain M. Banks"
1:52 Philosophy Engineered affirms Mosaic authorship confirmed.
Best Solstice present ever
All I can think is, wow, time has NOT been kind to William Lane Craig. I only could recognize him by his voice. Then again he's gotta be pretty old.
Also this video is essentially Aron Ra's Foundational Falsehoods, part 2, specifically the ending. Good series. Got the book for Christmas.
@@patnewbie2177
Everything that begins to age has a cause.
WLC began to age.
Therefore, WLC began to age.
@@TheBastius everything that exists has a time
WLC begins to age
Therefore he has a time
@@patnewbie2177
I just looked it up: He's 71.
@@TheBastius Wow, he's old. Thanks for googling it for my lazy ass!
Also this will sound weird, but I think he would have made a good narrator or voice actor if he didn't choose defending dogma as his career.
I much prefer the gospel according to Marx
i found it to be the opiate of the people myself
Do you have any suggestions for intermediate reading on reason? I've started to argue with post-modernists so I definitely need to sharper my skills. Also where you at, starving for a new video.
There’s some new stuff in the works. Be patient. :)
Honestly, the word “reason” has no official definition, despite what ivory tower academics would have you believe. That’s why a big chunk of this channel is devoted to piecing it all back together. Watch “The Language of Logic,” followed by “What is Truth.” Some textbooks on mathematical logic and proof theory will also help out.
"If biblical inerrancy is not true that God is not God."
Then God is not God. Now can we put the Abrahamic faiths on the mythology shelf where they belong.
@willy welska Do you mean the book of Mormon?
😎👍 agreed
Wow, this video is awesome!!
Thanks for the video :)
There's a little town in southern Italy where basically ancient greek is still spoken
You forgot that there are also men who write books explaining how to interpret God's Word!
Ah yes. God's word is inerrant, but the figurative stuff is entirely a matter of human interpretation.
@@AntiCitizenX You don’t get it do you? God’s word given through men can be inerrant and yet, at times hard to understand. Difficulty to understand has nothing to do with the validity of a claim. Obviously we have to interpret God’s message and there’s nothing wrong with getting from someone else while trying to do so.
@@justchilling704 it does mean God deliberately wrote it to be difficult to understand which would make him a ummm deceiver who is the deceiver that calls himself a being of light in the bible again?
Hell yeah! I’m actually still Catholic, but I’d love it if the Catholic Church, the Pope or someone, would go out of their way to just re do things. Like look at everything again, I’m legit only Catholic because of 1 verse in the Bible saying that Jesus laid the rock down to peter
And the Mormons would tell you that the keys and the power went away with the councils around the 4th Century AD as the church became apostates. Not returned unto earth till a man in upstate New York was visited by an angel and by God & his son (not the same person) ...
Point being extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof. These books are bad fiction. Self contradictory, full of revisionist history. Like how many people know there are 2 versions of Genessis? Before and after the adootion of monotheism from the polytheism of the Babyllonian gods? Or the origin of JHVH as the war god of the pantheon and a mountain tribes sky god before that? And probably yet another tribes devil at the same time.
I like how you said the apostle Paul...and others, being how at least scholars agree Paul wrote a couple books Moses not so much.
Doesn’t matter.
i bet it's even worse in the case of quran, but what can i know...
Awesome video.