Is the New Testament Reliable? SeanMcDowell.org
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 лют 2018
- For more information, read Evidence that Demands A Verdict, co-written by Sean and Josh McDowell (amzn.to/2sJLy7S)
READ: READ: "What is the Latest Manuscript Count for the New Testament?" (bit.ly/2TFpO8i)
DESCRIPTION: Can we trust the books of the New Testament? How does the New Testament fair historically when compared with other ancient works? Sean briefly answers these questions in a new, top quality, short film.
You can know if the NT is the true, infallible word of God by preservation alone. God already promised to preserve His word. When God preserves His word, you won't need to reconstruct His word, because it will never be destroyed!
Mercy Fields - There are many issues in your claims! 1) Simplified, you cannot know if something is preserved or not unless you have the original copy (we don´t have that). Therefore we must reconstruct things! 2) If his word WILL NEVER BE DESTROYED, then why do we have a) writing errors, b) copy errors, 3) translation errors, d) verses left out, e) different versions.... etc? So it CAN be destroyed! 3) This leads to argue against your "infallible" claim, which has no ground at all.
Mercy Fields, I'm a Christian, but people won't believe you with that evidence, you are saying that the bible is true because the bible says so, you could say the same thing about about the koran, you could say that is is true and the word of allah because it says it is and that the koran is always true, atheists will think you are a joke because you are using the conclusion of your argument as evidence
@@brandonsaquariumsandterrar8985 Same is true about the alleged statement in the Bible that it is the Word of God.If one argues for scriptures' divine origin using 2 Timothy 3:16, you're just making a circular, therefore empty, argument.
Mercy Fields; If according to you the NT is the infallible word of God, how
do you explain the many Contradictions written in it? according to Mark 1:12-13, & Matthew 4:1-2, immediately After his baptism, Jesus went into the wilderness/ desert for 40 days and forty nights,
However, John 2:1, says Three days after his baptism Jesus, his Mother and
his disciples were at a Wedding At Cana of Galilee, then in John 9:39, Jesus
says, I have come to Judge the world, then in John 12:47, he says, I have NOT
Come to judge the world,
Matthew 2:13-23, After Jesus' birth Joseph and Mary took baby Jesus directly
to Egypt, and stayed there, until an angel tells them it is safe to return,
Luke 2:21-39, says that Joseph, Mary, and baby Jesus went from Bethlehem to
Jerusalem for Circumcision, then went directly back Home to Galilee, No mention of Herod destroying any infants, or of any flight into Egypt,
IN the Four Gospels we are told that Jesus' body was taken down from the cross by Joseph of Arimathea, However, Luke the writer of the book of Acts 13:
27-29, says he was taken down and put in a tomb, by those who put him to death, then to top it all, Matthew 27:5, says that Judas return the money, and
went and hang himself, Again, Acts 1:16-18, says that Judas, purchased a
field, then fell head-first, and all his entrails gushed out.
Judas died twice, if that is God words, then God is causing confusion, by Contradicting himself. try explaining if you can,? how reliable is that?
@@rtee4086 I'm with you on this but, the older I get (now 75), the more I feel the burden is on believers to give convincing evidence and arguments for the truth of their claims. Everyone know that humans write books. If they have one they think comes from somewhere else, let them prove it. None of their argument prove it.
Yess thank you Sean McDowell. One of my favorite apologists. Keep going.
The old testament prophesied the birth of Emmanul. Emmanual means God With Us (Jesus Christ).
No-one ever calls him Emmanuel in the New Testament!
Tru-Man: Matthew is not part of the Jewish Old Testament, and Isaiah's 7:14 Immanuel is not
Jesus, Neither did Isaiah described Immanuel, ''As God with us'' this is a fabrication by whoever
wrote the Gospel of Matthew, besides in the Hebrew versions of the Old Testament, Isaiah says,
'' A young woman shall conceive and bear a Son'' this word Virgin is a mistranslation of the
Hebrew word ''Alma'' the correct Hebrew translation of ''Alma'' is a young woman,
The correct context of chapter 7 in Isaiah is not the coming of the messiah, but the Attack on the
Kingdom of Judah by Israel and Aram, the fulfillment of the prophecy to King Ahaz is in 2nd Kings
Chapters 15 &16, besides Jesus was never named or called Emmanuel, How could a so-called
Virgin birth of Jesus serves as a sign to King Ahaz who lived 700 years earlier?
Try and do some research yourself before running with false evidence, there's no God with us anywhere
in the book of Isaiah.
Since when does ‘Emmanuel’ mean Jesus Christ. It could just as well mean the Holy Spirit, the Old Testament writings or almost anything you want it to be.
@@rtee4086 Thank, thank you, thank you!
You break it down beautifully, nice work Sean! Thank you!!
*When all else fails, torture the scriptural text until it says what YOU want it to say.*
I learned so much from this thank you sean
I truly appreciate your channel, thank you!
Awesome stuff, I’ll absolutely share this with skeptics!
This is perfect, clear and easy to understand. Thankyou.
Why are the gospels written in the 3rd person?
Thank you, Sean for affirming the reliability of the New Testament. May God bless you and your dad.
The book of Enoch was removed from some Bibles
Those books are not even accepted in the Hebrew Tanakh. The contents of the books are not trustworthy. The Jews do not accept them. Christians follow the Jews.
Also ancient philosopher Justin Martyr thoroughly checkout Christianity and his discription of Jesus Christ and Christianity coincides with the Biblical New Testament !.
We don't actually have evidence that anybody actually died for the belief that what was written in the Bible is, or was true. But even if prople did die for the belief a God exist, that does not mean a God exist.
You're not listening. Go back to the video and listen dont just utter your stupidity.
@@utubgootersbgsat5730
I did listen. And what I said is true. It's not my fault you are ashamed of your irrational belief, and don't want to deal with reality.
@@jasonroelle5261 it is not true just because your stupid brain says. And I am not ashamed of my faith. I can defend my faith just fine. On the other hand, reexamine your deficiency in comprehension of reading and any logical matters. Trust me.
@@utubgootersbgsat5730
I did listen. And what I said is true. It's not my fault you are ashamed of your irrational belief, and don't want to deal with reality.
We know Jesus died. His followers went and hid after this. After 3 days, they went from hiding to proudly preaching his word. They and 500 others claimed to have seen Jesus risen from the dead. If they were lying about the eyewitnesses, that would have been verifiable since that account was made 70 AD. All of them were still alive. The apostles and others had nothing to gain and everything to lose. They didn't gain power, money, or fame. They were GREATLY persecuted. Whether or not they died for it is irrelevant. If they knew it was a lie, why would they continue preaching? They gained nothing. Unless, they knew Jesus wasn't lying and he truly did rise from the dead. Only logical answer, dude.
Our Heavenly Father said he will Judge and he called it Judgement Day and Christ said even the ones who Pierce him will know his Vengeance
Our Heavenly Father said love thy God with all thy strength and do not worship false gods or idols. False gods are fallen angels who wanted to be worship as gods including subliminal Santa Revelation 1 14 Old Testament
The problem with the New Testament is not that we don’t have many manuscripts, it’s the age of the manuscripts that matters.94% of those are from the 8th century, the oldest manuscript is p52 John it’s from around the Second half of the second century. It’s only the size of a Credit card, so it can not be used to prove that John stayed completely the same or not. Every manuscript below the eighth century is in bad shape, so it’s really the 94% from the eighth century that the new testament is based upon. When they say the doctrine and theology hasn’t changed, Well that’s great and everything if you wanted to know what the eighth century Christians believed. In order to say we have the same doctrine and theology as the first century Christians, you would need a first century full Manuscript not little pieces.
You're not listening. That credit card card size piece of John script is a copy so you know the original papirus is much older than that. The orinal papirus manuscripts may have decomposed but you can reconstruct and examine from the 23,000 copies that people handwrote. Like he said, other ancient documents do not have that many copies and early dated, and yet the world claim they are trustworthy of the events. So your objection is garbage to toss aside.
Does anyone ( besides James White) refute anti-logic, legalistic the KJV Onlyist?
Christ taught his Disciples how to pray in secret because of the Fallen angels who try to incept prayers and Christ told them in the closet with the doors closed and ask of Our Heavenly Father in secret privacy
After the lesson, did jesus and his 12 dudes come out of the closet?
The archangel Gabriel and subliminal Santa wanted to be worship as gods and plan on frenzying souls in midflight during the rapture come Judgement Day. Bind the commandments upon a tablet of your heart, it'll show up there of his Covenant
I am here to share my tribulation revolve around fallen angels and I am the women born with a veil and 10 stars upon my head written in the Old Testament Revelation Chapters and the archangel Gabriel asked the devil for aide into stealing 7 stars from my head about his Muhammad and the Quran of whom take side counsel from fallen angels of false gods between serving Our Heavenly Father and his commandments under his Covenant
So, the only 2 possibilities are not the bible is true, or who wrote was in the bible knew what they wrote was not true. Even if they believed what they wrote was true, that does not mean what they wrote was true. The bible might be fan fiction. Maybe who ever wrote was in the bible believed what they wrote was true, and what they wrote was not true. We don't actually have evidence that who wrote anything in the bible was a eye wittnes accounts. Again who ever wrote what is in the bible might not have written it as fact.
Actually it’s not accurate at all. Different gospels describe the same event in different ways, sometimes it’s way off. How do you judge the accuracy of a testimony when there is no surviving written material during the life of Jesus? Most of the people interviewed never saw or lived during the time of Jesus either. None of the New Testament Authors knew him, not even Paul. There have been several cases of Scribes changing the text to suit their agendas. Blind faith.
Great question! You should check out J. Warner Wallace's book Cold Case Christianity. He goes over that in such a great way. Hope this helps.
You would fall apart instantly debating an actual scholar like Bart Ehrman. None of the books are written by eyewitnesses. Jesus's disciples spoke Aramaic, and the Bible was written in Greek. Mark, the first gospel to be written, wasn't written until around 70 CE, almost 40 years after Jesus' death. The average lifespan of a person was only 30-40 years in the first century. People do question the other ancient writings. Hardly anything you said was true. Just because Bethlehem existed doesn't mean we know for sure Jesus was born there.
guess what?😱😱 the main language spoken during that time, everywhere in the roman empire/Europe was GREEK😱 explains why it was written in Greek, first, you say none of the books are eyewitnesses,
second, Luke who wrote acts, is entirely focused on Paul's life and travels yet doesn't mention Paul's death which was 64-67ad or fall of Jerusalem 70ad, weird how he'd not mention these significant events, almost like it hadn't happen yet, acts 1:1 Luke quotes In the FIRST BOOK, O Theophilus, I have dealt with all that Jesus began to do and teach, so if Luke acts was prior to Paul's death 64-67ad and Luke's gospels was prior to acts as he quotes in act 1:1, then Luke's gospel would be written 60ad or prior. most scholars say mark was first and Luke copied off mark meaning Mark is prior 60ad, even Paul in 1 Timothy 5:17-18 quotes Luke as scripture, this overall means the books are eyewitness.
third your 40 year gap only affirms the eyewitness, as Paul died in his 60's, john around 80's s as his gospel was written around 96ad and is the last apostle, peter died around 65ad by cruxcifiction by Emperor Nero, john around 99ad Phillip in 80ad, Thomas in 72ad, in general, all the disciples were not children's during their time with Jesus, so they were at least 18+ making most of them 50+ before death, so the books were written by the eyewitness, also the disciples weren't the only eyewtiness but the 500 mentioned by paul.
therefore 40 year gap after Jesus's death is irrelevant and nothing compared to the 500-900 year gap of every other ancient literature, 40 years is still within the eyewitness of Jesus, 500-900 is not.
Fourth, early church fathers quote authorship of the gospel, clement of Alexandria, Irenaeus, Papias. which were direct disciples of john/Paul, peter. Not related but even if the NT didn't exist, we still have 1 million quotations from early church fathers on the basis teachings of Christianity. Also you last point only proves we have archaeological verifiable evidence today as Jesus is not stated to be born in the lost city of Atlantis or the land of Narnia
@@ugooo6703 Wrong! -> "the main language spoken during that time, everywhere in the roman empire/Europe was GREEK". You need to study and not just look for websites that say what you want to hear.
@@ugooo6703 Other ancient writings are irrelevant, and bringing them up is a straw man fallacy. The average lifespan of a person in Jesus' time was 30-40 years. So, 40 years after Jesus' death would put them past the average lifespan. Either way, science has shown eyewitness testimony is unreliable, even shortly after an event. The church fathers are not reliable considering many of them intentionally corrupted the scriptures. 1Tim quoting Luke only shows it was written after Luke. The majority of scholars recognize it a forgery. Most churches ignore it teachings even while claiming it is inspired scripture.
@@nomad100hd I just looked up to make sure, I was wrong overall but misworded a bit cause Greek was most spoken on the eastern side where Israel is anyways. As for Damascus, Syria, general Mediterranean sea where Luke mentions. Christianity started in the east and is why its written in Greek. But are you forgetting, we also have 10K + Latin manuscripts? we don't just have the greek, also might want to read my first reply i had to edit cause i forgot to mention main points
@@ugooo6703 You are still speaking about something you don't understand, and what do Latin manuscripts have to do with anything? What were they translated from? What intentional corruptions of scripture were introduced?
Yes the more we have copies of manuscript the more we get the original even if there is a gap between Jesus and writers BUT
This is true when all copies are same and not contradicting
What we have here is contradiction and differences btw all copies beside the writers are unknown and did not see Jesus or met him (4 centuries gap) even Paul the most close to jesus era did not see or met Jesus except what he claims and he was known he was anti Jesus then doubtful and not reliable
When it comes to old testament the gap between Moses and copies is more than 1000 years so the alteration has more chance to occure
Stop misleading people
I don't know where you got that 4 centuries gap thing from... All the books in the bible were written within the first century. There were also extra-biblical accounts like Josephus and Tacitus which were written around the turn of the second century. That would be like 80-90 years after Christs death max. Please re-check your facts
Also, even IF the accounts in the bible were written 400 years after Jesus' death (which they weren't), historically speaking - that's still very good. You know who else has his earliest records from 400 years after his death? Alexander the great.
The gospels were written several decades after Jesus' death. Most or all people who knew him would be dead by then.
All the books in the bible were written within the first century. There were also extra-biblical accounts like Josephus and Tacitus which were written around the turn of the second century. That would be like 80-90 years after Christs death max. Please re-check your facts
Also, even IF the accounts in the bible were written 400 years after Jesus' death (which they weren't), historically speaking - that's still very good. You know who else has his earliest records from 400 years after his death? Alexander the great.
One book he’s born in a manger one book is born at home why don’t you apply the same reasons that you listed in the Old Testament video and applied to this video.  The oldest manuscript have more differences in them than the later manuscripts. New testament was written by men without divine inspiration facts.
Please explain in detail the way people worship Edinburgh 1st ,2nd and 3rd century. That is what is important. However GOSPEL were not written by the eyewitness
Hi ... Dr McDowell ... How r U ... ???
Bible had been written 500 yrs after ISA a.s _ left the scene ... ✔
Bible is inspired by Paul ...
Paul is the founder of Christianity ...
Injil @ Gospel is not about ISA a.s_ it's about GOD COMMANDMENTS ...
The Linguafranca of ISA a.s .. is Aramite not English ...
Did ISA a.s said .. " I'm the God _ Worship Me " ???
Did Paul mantion about Santa Claus in Bible ... ???
ISA a.s ... came out from Saiditina Maryam Womb ... 🚩
All living things are made from_WATER ... 💚
" God doesn't use Toilet " 😂
Please Give Advise 2me_Dr McDowell ... 👍
" u R Lord _ my Lord is_ ONE GOD "🌷
The odyssey isn’t telling me I’m going to hell. That’s why people don’t question it.
I don't know a single person who believes the odyssey to be literal, accurate history .
Dr Sean McDowell puts words in God's mouth.
Actually we don't have archaeology that bible as a whole. We don't actually have evidence the bible as a whole is, or was reported accurate information. Again people will to die for a belief is nit evidence the bible is true.
Luke who's a medical doctor, wtf? Archeology tells us the birth place of Jesus. WTF?
Atheist: give me proof!!
Believer: gives proof!!
Atheist: that’s not proof!!
Convincingly misleading.
What? If I tell often enough something is true , that´s evidence, it is really true? The stupiest thing I ever heard from an apologist.
Dean, how did you get your doctorate?