And then they admit that they actually do accept that evolution occurs, but only up to some arbitrary point.

Usually some weird super fast version right after the animals were led off the ark. But only within kinds😂

​@@aaronpolichar7936"Yes, MICRO evolution is real, but MACRO evolution is a lie of the devil." Yeah, I know - all evolution is micro evolution. And when you combine that with the *fact* that it's been occurring for a very, very, very long time (much longer than 6000 years), micro evolution adds up to macro changes.

Yes. It's not even moving the goalposts -- it's relocating to another stadium!

@@michaelmaloskyjr For a different sport.

I'm wondering why Friedman's book, "Who Wrote the Bible" is not included in his list.

Hm, I remember as a kid 50(?) years ago sitting at the breakfast table while my parents argued, and my Dad saying to my Mum, yeah, but is that an E text or a J text? I sometimes explain to people that how I got weird is by being a preacher's kid. Maybe I should go further and try to explain to them what _kind_ of preacher's kid. Perhaps I'm _very_ weird. But in any case it hadn't really occurred to me that there was anyone who _didn't_ know about this. Maybe plumbers discuss pipe threading over breakfast, instead? Meanwhile I just grew up thinking that maybe I was some sort of Christian, but clearly not a Jew, and not someone with a super great opinion of all of the New Testament authors and editors. This, it transpires, is a super commonly _held_ viewpoint but not a super commonly _acknowledged_ one. Weird, huh?

When I was in high school in the end of the sixties, our religion teacher told the story that the first books were constructed by some Israelis that came back from exile. Don’t know if the story is true. But it was obvious that it wasn’t written by one person. And that explained that the stories didn’t always match. It were the stories they remembered. This was a Protestant school, but part of the students were of the reformed churches in the Netherlands, bible reading is very important in this denomination. (My brother always invite Jehovah Witnesses inside to discuss the Bible, cause he misses the discussions)

"There is a floor to how simple the truth can be and still be the truth. Falsehoods don't have that; there is no limit to how simple an idea can be when it doesn't have to conform to reality." - Innuendo Studios (youtu. be/dF98ii6r_gU)

As a historian, I've never heard of the Hitties being fake. I'm mean, come on, there are tons of evidence of them from all over. That is crazy.

The only times I have heard Dan change his tone is when a creator or people are using dogma against other people. And, even if short, it's harrowing. The level of conviction Dan has for knowledge is captivating.

We need scholars who are committed to telling the truth first then maybe we can look at what they trying to say.

I wonder how many Ph D scholars are committed to telling the truth

LOL 😂 O Danny boy is bringing snakes to u.

^speaking of narcissistic apologists

Apologetics is different tho because they’re selling snake oil without even realizing it. They bought it from someone else and now they swear by it and wanna sell it to others.

I'm also a huge fan of his reconstructions. They make SO much sense!

Were the American slavemaster Bible scholars?

Richard Elliott Friedman wrote a book called The Bible with Sources Revealed that literally color codes who he thinks the sources are! The introduction to that book is worth the price alone.

If they had the data they wouldn't say the kind of things they do

Thanks for the update. I know see that you were supporting Dan.

@@fordprefect5304 I clarified my comment to make clear that I agree 100% with Dan. I meant that the person, to whom Dan is responding, keeps digging deeper, because Dan was responding to some other 100% unfounded criticisms by that guy yesterday.

I'm afraid that Christianity is corrupt from the core.

It took me awhile to get used to the lingo and was confused until I began substituting "analysis" in my mind whenever I hear "criticism".

Non academics should ask questions

Sounds like a goose chase (Roman 3:7)

​@@PIA-tj5hc asking questions is not the problem. Making bold claims without actually examining the data is the problem. If you can support your claim, go ahead. If you're just spouting off at someone way more informed about your individual opinion, that is just ignorance. Analysis can be challenged but it cannot just be challenged because you feel it's wrong based off nothing. It's like telling a physicist that atoms don't exist because you disagree. Okay, well now you have to prove that and that's a personal challenge.

​@@tariqspaulding8034 how so?

Or ignore him

I like to know where Apostle Paul gets his truth? (Romans 3:7)

About 70 million evangelicals in the US do.

🤣

@@fordprefect5304 more like most Christians. I mean the Nt ("God") attributed the torah to Moses.

@@JopJio And Jesus even speaks with Moses in 2 of the gospels.

@@fordprefect5304 and says that every letter of the torah will be fulfilled. This can only be the case if he believed in a perfect word for word preserved torah

Typical Danny boy's redaction scholarship of the minimalists scholors : he is an Apologist for his side : the Bible actually speaks this will happen in the last days. We R not surprised!

@@davidjanbaz7728 go see a shrink ya goof

@david the consensus of all scholars is that Moses didn't write the Torah. your own church fathers admit that the torah got forged and forgotten and was reestablished by Ezra the scribe.

Or worse, he'll read one of them with the only thing in mind being that he wins.

Do you mean the Torah?

Different authors wrote texts and they were put together by another editor or editors. I mean the torah (the 5 books) writes ABOUT Moses upto 100 times. The torah writes about his grave being unknown TO THIS DAY. So there must have been a big time between Moses and the author. The torah says that until THIS DAY there was no prophet like Moses in Israel. Again, huge gap between Moses and the author. There are so many of these examples which show that many different authors wrote the books

BUT....sadly he is just one of many humans who are being used to verbally spew another person's/group's dogma. Thank you Dan!

where are the Unitarian Christian in this debate?

19th century historians had no evidence of the Hittites when that statement was made.

​@@fordprefect5304 Did you find an earlier source than the 1970s publication Dan cited within the video for this claim? I'm very curious!

@@MM-jf1me Armstrong Institute of Biblical Archeology puts the date at 1893 which is the end of the 19th century. First Discoveries Evidence of the Hittite kingdom first began to be uncovered in Turkey in the early-to-mid-19th century. In 1834, French archaeologist Félix Marie Charles Texier discovered monumental ruins in Boğazköy (central-northern Turkey). It wasn’t until 1886 that his compatriot Georges Perrot, an archaeologist who also excavated the site, first identified it as Hattuša, the Hittite capital. Prof. Félix Marie Charles Texier Public Domain Between 1893 and 1905, the site was probed by various archaeologists. They began discovering clay cuneiform tablets written in the Akkadian language and another, then obscure, language. As the ancient ruins of Hattuša were being exposed during the 19th century, scholars were beginning to unlock a number of long-lost, ancient languages. This was famously spearheaded by Jean-François Champollion, who in the first decades of the 19th century utilized the recently discovered Rosetta Stone to decipher Egyptian hieroglyphs. That same century also saw the decipherment of various cuneiform-script languages, including Persian, Babylonian, Akkadian and Sumerian. Scholarship no longer needed to rely on early classical historians who wrote in understandable languages like Greek and Latin; the very archives of the ancient civilizations themselves could be read and understood. New frontiers of understanding were being opened.

@@MM-jf1me The problem with the Hittites in the bible is that they were found by Joshua to be in Canaan along with the Nephilim. 2 problems #1 The Nephilim were all supposed to be drowned in the flood #2 Egypt controlled Canaan and they were mortal enemies. So it makes no sense.

@fordprefect5304 No evidence of the Hittites!? I have quite literally told you that the Temples are Karnak are covered of hieroglyphics that describe the Hittites! They describe the battle the tributes the leadership, where they lived (ancient Israel), their customs, even how their wore their hair. And this is a source that has nothing to do with Bible and because it is contemporary with the Hittites, has never been diluted or distorted through rewriting or oral history. It's a BETTER source for the Hittites THAN THE BIBLE.

It places the context in the wrong time period. The Torah dates itself to the 6th century BCE When camels were common. The writers were unaware that 1000 years before domesticated camels were not in the Levant.

@@fordprefect5304 Well that could be explained by having Moses live at a different time than asserted, couldn't it? Yeah, something has to give, but why assume that is authorship?

@@flowingafterglow629 Moses and Exodus are proven myths. The Torah dates itself to the 6th century BCE while the Judahites were "living" in Babylon.

​@@flowingafterglow629There are limits to where you can place the Exodus, and all of them lead to the camel problem.

​@@flowingafterglow629 There are numerous examples of anachronisms in Old Testament stories where events that are described taking place over thousands of years all seem to depict the world as it was known to Judahites around the 7th century BCE. That suggests that the 7th century is most likely when those stories were either compiled into their authoritative versions or when a fluid oral tradition was fixed in writing. The problem here is that this time period isn't a blank slate. We never have as much information as we would like, but we know enough about what Egypt and Judah were up to in this time to know that the story of Moses doesn't fit. So if we did want to assume that Moses was a biblical author, the result is assuming that Moses was just some guy otherwise unattested to by history who claimed that he had an adventure in the distant past, and somehow his contemporaries believed him enough to go along with it. This is already a pretty unlikely scenario, and when we weigh it against the evidence FOR Mosaic authorship (ie, tradition) it's simply not a very convincing position. My personal position is that there were real people at the heart of the Exodus story, including Moses, and centuries of oral transmission, literary conventions, and politically-minded retellings have made the version of the story that has come down to us so derived from the true events that took place that it makes the most sense to treat it as a piece of literature more than history.

"Hat" Well Hatta was the capital of the Hittite empire. The Northern Kingdom of Israel would have engaged the remnants of the Hittite empire at the battle of Quaqar as they were Assyrian allies. The problem is that the bible places them in Canaan when Joshua and scouts found them and the Nephilim. Which is a joke unto itself. Anyway the Hittites were mortal enemies of the Egyptians who controlled Canaan. So the story makes no sense.

I just think to compare the way Genesis is written compared to Exodus. There is no way in hell they were written by the same authors

Critical scholarship does not have eternal damnation, tenants that are not debatable based on arguments from evidence, or statements of faith. There are conclusions from analysis of evidence that if you contradict them from a position of faith then you risk your career in scholarship, but that is because you are favoring conclusions from less or lower quality data over conclusions from more or better quality data. Critical scholarship is fundamentally about preferring conclusions from data, so going against the data is the same as abandoning the field. Abandoning the field abandons any career within the field.

Who lost their job? I don't know that story.

I am dying to hear that too. I am sure no accurate answer will be provided.@@PrometheanRising

@@rahrahrobbbieee Mike Licona Why would you think I wouldn’t provide the name? Hah

That is a Christian Apologist.... nothing to do with critical thinking.@@SpaceLordof75

What's wrong with studying Tolkien's universe?

Well, too bad for Lewis, but the scholarship has shifted again (or maybe he was just not thorough in his search for it in his time). Now most classicists don't consider Homer to be historical, and the composition of the epics has been pushed forwards, quite akin to the Pentateuch; it is now dated to the 600s BC rather than the 700s- och even 800s. Nowadays Homer is viewed as only one of many poetic personas that only later were historicised, like Hesiod, Orpheus, Abaris, and Epimenides

my point was that this is all a moveable feast, but whatever @@jaojao1768

Exodus 24:4 says Moses wrote down the words God has spoke on Sinai. That constituted the Covenant Code, which is only one of multiple different codes within Exodus, which are themselves only a portion of all the codes found in the Pentateuch, which also don't even constitute half of the Pentateuch, which is mostly narrative, the composition of which isn't addressed at all in Exodus 24.

In translation, at least, that passage identifies Moses as a scribe for the true author, and Exodus 24:7 implies that it was only of the Book of the Covenant (about 3 chapters of Exodus), not the Pentateuch.

@maklelan, could you sometime address the idea that the Hebrews didn't even have a written language until maybe 300-500 years after Moses? "In the original autographs" is a common claim of inerrantists/biblicists, but if that written language dating is correct, no such "original" could possibly exist, which sort of nullifies any claim that Moses "wrote" anything (except maybe in Egyptian language forms but certainly not in any form of Hebrew).

1. Exodus 24 4 writes about Moses, its not Moses writing 2. It doesn't say Pentateuch 3. It refers to the laws Moses received. Not to stories, genealogies etc 4. Genesis for example doesn't even mention Moses once😂

@@maklelan Hi Dan, thanks for your reply. Rashi explains there Moses wrote the Torah’s text from “In the beginning” (Gen 1:1), until the giving of the Torah. He also wrote the commandments that they were commanded in Marah. Since all this took place before the giving of the Torah, Moses could write only up to that point.