Soooo elevating and informative. Absolutely LOVE these biblically based discussions. In sharp contrast to the narcissistic theology and word play of the likes of Andy Stanley! Thank you JOHN!!
ALAN WATTS: Why does one come to the opinion that the Bible, literally understood, is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Usually because one’s "elders and betters," or an impressively large group of ones peers, have this opinion. But this is to go along with the Bandar-log, or monkey tribe, in Rudyard Kipling’s Jungle Books , who periodically get together and shout, "We all say so, so it must be true!" Having been a grandfather for a number of years, I am not particularly impressed with patriarchal authority. I am of an age with my own formerly impressive grandfathers (one of whom was a fervent fundamentalist, or literal believer in the Bible) and I realize that my opinions are as fallible as theirs. But many people never grow up. They stay all their lives with a passionate need for eternal authority and guidance, pretending not to trust their own judgment. Nevertheless, it is their own judgment, willy-nilly, that there exists some authority greater than their own. The fervent fundamentalist whether Protestant or Catholic, Jew or Moslem is closed to reason and even communication for fear of losing the security of childish dependence. He would suffer extreme emotional heebie jeebies if he didn’t have the feeling that there was some external and infallible guide in which he could trust absolutely and without which his very identity would dissolve. This attitude is not faith. It is pure idolatry. The more deceptive idols are not images of wood and stone but are constructed of words and ideas and mental images of God. Faith is an openness and trusting attitude to truth and reality, whatever it may turn out to be. This is a risky and adventurous state of mind. Belief, in the religious sense, is the opposite of faith because it is a fervent wishing or hope, a compulsive clinging to the idea that the universe is arranged and governed in such and such a way. Belief is holding to a rock; faith is learning how to swim and this whole universe swims in boundless space.
@@broitssnow the Bible has 73 books. Councils at Rome, Hippo and Carthage in the 4th century, all recognised these 73 books. You can thank Luther for removing 7 books
@@broitssnow Our Lord and the Apostles used the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT) and it contained the 7 books you’re missing. I’ll go with Jesus and the Apostles over your boy Luther
@@daniellennox8804 actually Jesus primarily used the Hebrew Tanak and only used the Greek Septuagint on a few occasions for the purpose of pulling from it something that would be useful in its translation to the people of his time. That’s a common mistake that lay people make that get all of their information from the internet rather than going to school for a biblical degree.
I trust the Bible more then man woman or child where they perish FROM lack of such KNOWLEDGE! Why when you spoil one child the rest of the fruit about him shall rott 😳😤👷😇
"Can we trust the Bible?" For 69 years I would have said "YES" In a NY minute!. AND...I would have taken that belief to my grave. But when I reached 75 (I am 89 now) everything changed in my relationship with my bibles and Jesus (who I believe is the only TRUE God). For I got on my knees and asked Jesus for wisdom, understanding and the truth. Within days I began to see things that I had never seen; and I began to hear things that I had never heard. Yet they were always there. Incredible for sure! So today, I put NO trust in any bible (nor anything else); that has ever been, except Jesus. Why? BECAUSE the errors and contradictions ARE there! Oh indeed. But does that mean I am going to throw my bibles in the garbage can? HEAVEN'S NO!. I simply close my bibles and ask Jesus to steer me around the errors and lead me to the truths absolute. And only then do I open my bibles. And behold; I have learned more in my bibles; in these 14 yrs; than I did in 69 Yrs! So help me Jesus. And I say with out hesitation; that IF you or anyone else would do that sincerely; you WILL begin to see errors and contradictions galore...Oh yes you will; and the truths will be pure Gold. Praise Jesus. Thus... ...I will list just a few. But there are enumerable errors more.. OH yes: Compare Deuteronomy 24:1 vs Mathew 19:3-8. And compare Mathew 1:1 vs Mathew 22:41-45 and John 8:58. Also compare James 2:26 vs Ephesians 2:8 and 9. Compare Hebrews 10:26 and Mark 3:28-29. I could go on and on and on; where there ARE bold errors and contradictions. Thus...2nd Timothy 3:16 is NOT true...and there are many other proofs. Oh yes indeed. So...I rest my case... ...In any case, Please Pray and Praise Jesus OFTEN; for He is the ONLY true "God Almighty"; there will ever have been. And may Jesus bless you and yours always. AMEN!
You seem to have come to a conclusion that Jesus is God, but how could you reach that decision without an objective standard to go by? You just made a claim that the Bible is not 100 % accurate and yet you choose to pick what is and what isn't? How would you respond to a Mormon who says the same exact thing you said. "I have prayed about this and I believe Joseph Smith is a prophet of God". Sir, you may not understand Scripture because you are not saved. Humble yourself before God and repent for choosing not to believe in His Word. We can trust the Bible, there are no contradictions.
Instead of agonising over these passages you don't understand in your own strength, I encourage you brother to research these so-called contradictions. There are many videos on youtube explaining all these simple misunderstandings.
Hey Pat Dee, I think in part 2 Timothy 3:16 is not understood properly. The word Theopneustos is used by the early church to describe other documents that they didn't ascribe as Scirpture. Too often, people used 2 Tim 3:16 eisegetically. I would say a historic understanding of this verse does not support current Evangelical thinking on doctrine of innerancy. I think there is errors, but these errors should not undermine our faith. We have to take the text in its own ancient context and assume their epistemologies of measurements of truth, rather than modernistic thinking, which has unfortunately shaped many of the paradigms of Evangelicalism.
James’ argument that faith without works is dead can be best understood when you read the entire letter instead of isolating the verse. Paul’s argument that faith is not the RESULT of works can also be understood when you simply pay attention to the words, and also the whole letter. They don’t contradict each other. Your argument on those verses is not at all new or revolutionary, and no fervent prayer would be needed to reveal that. Many, many unbelievers point that out all on their own, because they simply don’t care to look any deeper.
Lol, the bible is consistent and doesn't contradict. He's obviously hasn't read it then. Just one to start with: genealogy of Jesus ... Matthew vs Luke???
It doesn’t contradict. The reason for the two genealogies in Matthew and Luke are that one shows that Jesus is the blood descendant of David through Mary and the other shows Jesus is the heir to David’s throne through Joseph. Both Mary and Joseph are descendants of David. It doesn’t contradict, you just don’t understand what the text is conveying.
@@broitssnow That "explanation" has already been debunked by Jewish scolars. Female genealogy didn't exist in Jewish tradition. Besides there's more inconsistencies in the 2 genealogies than Mary and Joseph when you compare them. There's nothing to "understand" about it; that's just a meme you guys use to "explain away" the contradictions. Facts are not up for interpretation, facts are true on face value, otherwise they wouldn't be facts but assumptions. And unsubstantiated assumptions make no valid conclusion in the argument.
@@lizadowning4389 Jews don’t even acknowledge Jesus as their Messiah yet. Of course they’re going to reject anything in the New Testament. Matthew had a purpose for inputting women and gentiles into the genealogy of Jesus. For starters, it wasn’t just for Jews. It was for gentiles also and some of those women were gentiles or had connections to gentiles throughout the biblical history. And Mary is in the genealogy because it was prophesied that the messiah would be born from a virgin through the line of David. Those are the facts. You can take it or leave it but the consequences are on you.
@@broitssnow And just to be clear; it's not because some unknown early christians wrote something down that it is actual verifiable proof of the genealogy of Jesus. We don't even know who wrote the synoptic gospels.
@@lizadowning4389 yes we do. Mark wrote Mark under the leadership/discipleship of Peter, Matthew wrote Matthew, Luke wrote Luke. It’s not some mystery that can’t be solved. We know who wrote the synoptic gospels and the Gospel of John, which was written by John. You’re trying to create an argument out of nothing when the answers have already been discovered, wrapped in a pretty bow and handed to you on a silver platter. If you don’t want to accept them, then that’s your problem.
This channel is so under rated and under viewed.
"Don't complicate the things" - exactly what I need to hear. Thank you!!
Such powerful truths on this channel! Thank you Jonny, bumped into it a few hours ago and I’m so hooked. May God bless you 🙏🏽
Oh so this is Paul Twiss, I heard of him from the Macarthur Center Podcast (The Life of John Macarthur) Can't wait for season 2.
Thank you! I just read Genesis 2 today 😯
Thank you Jonny. Your podcast is one of my favorite. Thanks for what you do!
Thank you.
I love this channel
Soooo elevating and informative. Absolutely LOVE these biblically based discussions. In sharp contrast to the narcissistic theology and word play of the likes of Andy Stanley! Thank you JOHN!!
Excellent!🙏🏻
Wow so good. Simple yet deep in his-Paul submissions and response wow. Great work guys!! Thank you Jonny and Paul
Thank you!❤️❤️❤️
That’s crazy, my last name is Twiss as well. Great content by the way :)
So good!!!!
He was my Old Testament professor
Amen ❤️🙏
Amen!
👍🏻✝️😇
💖💖💖💖
Nice. I will leave my over analytical brain in the laundry when I read the Bible.
ALAN WATTS:
Why does one come to the opinion that the Bible, literally understood, is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Usually because one’s "elders and betters," or an impressively large group of ones peers, have this opinion. But this is to go along with the Bandar-log, or monkey tribe, in Rudyard Kipling’s Jungle Books , who periodically get together and shout, "We all say so, so it must be true!" Having been a grandfather for a number of years, I am not particularly impressed with patriarchal authority. I am of an age with my own formerly impressive grandfathers (one of whom was a fervent fundamentalist, or literal believer in the Bible) and I realize that my opinions are as fallible as theirs.
But many people never grow up. They stay all their lives with a passionate need for eternal authority and guidance, pretending not to trust their own judgment. Nevertheless, it is their own judgment, willy-nilly, that there exists some authority greater than their own. The fervent fundamentalist whether Protestant or Catholic, Jew or Moslem is closed to reason and even communication for fear of losing the security of childish dependence. He would suffer extreme emotional heebie jeebies if he didn’t have the feeling that there was some external and infallible guide in which he could trust absolutely and without which his very identity would dissolve.
This attitude is not faith. It is pure idolatry. The more deceptive idols are not images of wood and stone but are constructed of words and ideas and mental images of God. Faith is an openness and trusting attitude to truth and reality, whatever it may turn out to be. This is a risky and adventurous state of mind. Belief, in the religious sense, is the opposite of faith because it is a fervent wishing or hope, a compulsive clinging to the idea that the universe is arranged and governed in such and such a way. Belief is holding to a rock; faith is learning how to swim and this whole universe swims in boundless space.
2:49 “the Bible is composed of 66 Books” - are you sure about that?
Yes.
@@broitssnow the Bible has 73 books. Councils at Rome, Hippo and Carthage in the 4th century, all recognised these 73 books. You can thank Luther for removing 7 books
@@daniellennox8804 you’re confusing Catholicism with Christianity, homie. Catholics accept those books. Christians view them as non-canonical.
@@broitssnow Our Lord and the Apostles used the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT) and it contained the 7 books you’re missing. I’ll go with Jesus and the Apostles over your boy Luther
@@daniellennox8804 actually Jesus primarily used the Hebrew Tanak and only used the Greek Septuagint on a few occasions for the purpose of pulling from it something that would be useful in its translation to the people of his time. That’s a common mistake that lay people make that get all of their information from the internet rather than going to school for a biblical degree.
A better question would be, can we trust this book's supernatural claims.
I trust the Bible more then man woman or child where they perish FROM lack of such KNOWLEDGE! Why when you spoil one child the rest of the fruit about him shall rott 😳😤👷😇
"Can we trust the Bible?"
For 69 years I would have said "YES" In a NY minute!. AND...I would have taken that belief to my grave. But when I reached 75 (I am 89 now) everything changed in my relationship with my bibles and Jesus (who I believe is the only TRUE God).
For I got on my knees and asked Jesus for wisdom, understanding and the truth. Within days I began to see things that I had never seen; and I began to hear things that I had never heard. Yet they were always there. Incredible for sure!
So today, I put NO trust in any bible (nor anything else); that has ever been, except Jesus. Why? BECAUSE the errors and contradictions ARE there! Oh indeed. But does that mean I am going to throw my bibles in the garbage can? HEAVEN'S NO!. I simply close my bibles and ask Jesus to steer me around the errors and lead me to the truths absolute. And only then do I open my bibles.
And behold; I have learned more in my bibles; in these 14 yrs; than I did in 69 Yrs! So help me Jesus. And I say with out hesitation; that IF you or anyone else would do that sincerely; you WILL begin to see errors and contradictions galore...Oh yes you will; and the truths will be pure Gold. Praise Jesus. Thus...
...I will list just a few. But there are enumerable errors more.. OH yes:
Compare Deuteronomy 24:1 vs Mathew 19:3-8. And compare Mathew 1:1 vs Mathew 22:41-45 and John 8:58. Also compare James 2:26 vs Ephesians 2:8 and 9. Compare Hebrews 10:26 and Mark 3:28-29. I could go on and on and on; where there ARE bold errors and contradictions. Thus...2nd Timothy 3:16 is NOT true...and there are many other proofs. Oh yes indeed.
So...I rest my case...
...In any case, Please Pray and Praise Jesus OFTEN; for He is the ONLY true "God Almighty"; there will ever have been. And may Jesus bless you and yours always. AMEN!
How is 2 Tim 3:16 not true??
You seem to have come to a conclusion that Jesus is God, but how could you reach that decision without an objective standard to go by? You just made a claim that the Bible is not 100 % accurate and yet you choose to pick what is and what isn't?
How would you respond to a Mormon who says the same exact thing you said. "I have prayed about this and I believe Joseph Smith is a prophet of God". Sir, you may not understand Scripture because you are not saved. Humble yourself before God and repent for choosing not to believe in His Word. We can trust the Bible, there are no contradictions.
Instead of agonising over these passages you don't understand in your own strength, I encourage you brother to research these so-called contradictions. There are many videos on youtube explaining all these simple misunderstandings.
Hey Pat Dee, I think in part 2 Timothy 3:16 is not understood properly. The word Theopneustos is used by the early church to describe other documents that they didn't ascribe as Scirpture.
Too often, people used 2 Tim 3:16 eisegetically. I would say a historic understanding of this verse does not support current Evangelical thinking on doctrine of innerancy. I think there is errors, but these errors should not undermine our faith. We have to take the text in its own ancient context and assume their epistemologies of measurements of truth, rather than modernistic thinking, which has unfortunately shaped many of the paradigms of Evangelicalism.
James’ argument that faith without works is dead can be best understood when you read the entire letter instead of isolating the verse. Paul’s argument that faith is not the RESULT of works can also be understood when you simply pay attention to the words, and also the whole letter. They don’t contradict each other. Your argument on those verses is not at all new or revolutionary, and no fervent prayer would be needed to reveal that. Many, many unbelievers point that out all on their own, because they simply don’t care to look any deeper.
Lol, the bible is consistent and doesn't contradict.
He's obviously hasn't read it then.
Just one to start with: genealogy of Jesus ... Matthew vs Luke???
It doesn’t contradict. The reason for the two genealogies in Matthew and Luke are that one shows that Jesus is the blood descendant of David through Mary and the other shows Jesus is the heir to David’s throne through Joseph. Both Mary and Joseph are descendants of David. It doesn’t contradict, you just don’t understand what the text is conveying.
@@broitssnow That "explanation" has already been debunked by Jewish scolars.
Female genealogy didn't exist in Jewish tradition.
Besides there's more inconsistencies in the 2 genealogies than Mary and Joseph when you compare them.
There's nothing to "understand" about it; that's just a meme you guys use to "explain away" the contradictions. Facts are not up for interpretation, facts are true on face value, otherwise they wouldn't be facts but assumptions.
And unsubstantiated assumptions make no valid conclusion in the argument.
@@lizadowning4389 Jews don’t even acknowledge Jesus as their Messiah yet. Of course they’re going to reject anything in the New Testament. Matthew had a purpose for inputting women and gentiles into the genealogy of Jesus. For starters, it wasn’t just for Jews. It was for gentiles also and some of those women were gentiles or had connections to gentiles throughout the biblical history. And Mary is in the genealogy because it was prophesied that the messiah would be born from a virgin through the line of David. Those are the facts. You can take it or leave it but the consequences are on you.
@@broitssnow And just to be clear; it's not because some unknown early christians wrote something down that it is actual verifiable proof of the genealogy of Jesus.
We don't even know who wrote the synoptic gospels.
@@lizadowning4389 yes we do. Mark wrote Mark under the leadership/discipleship of Peter, Matthew wrote Matthew, Luke wrote Luke. It’s not some mystery that can’t be solved. We know who wrote the synoptic gospels and the Gospel of John, which was written by John. You’re trying to create an argument out of nothing when the answers have already been discovered, wrapped in a pretty bow and handed to you on a silver platter. If you don’t want to accept them, then that’s your problem.
Amen!