You should put this series in a written book form as well.
@dwar215824 күн бұрын
Much wisdom here and we need these reminders.
@dwar215827 күн бұрын
Miss your preaching! Come back east.
@janusproject2727 күн бұрын
I miss the east coast very much!
@TheRomans9GuyАй бұрын
It’s not that “there are those” Gentiles that have been grafted in, it’s that THE Gentiles have been grafted in. Paul is fixing the Jewish error that taught God chose the Jews and not the Gentiles, that he loved the Jews but hated the Gentiles and cast them out, making them sub-human. That’s false. God never hated the Gentiles, he just chose to include them into the kingdom invitation later, through Christ. So everyone is called/invited/chosen. No one is not elect.
@janusproject27Ай бұрын
not sure if I'm missing something in the context as to your correction. But the Jews were the people God chose to work through - hence His "chosen" people - but the Jews didn't do a good job of spreading that word. In a way, Solomon drew people to his wisdom, and I believe that is why Ecclesiastes is written the way it is. Everyone is called and invited, I would agree, but the "elect" seems to be more of a description of those who God is working through in a salvific sense (at least how it's used in the NT).
@TheRomans9GuyАй бұрын
@@janusproject27 When the NT authors write about The “elect,” they are usually not giving a description of those who God is working through in a salvific sense, they’re giving a description of those who are invited, and the point the authors are making is that the Jews had errantly thought God has only invited some people. He didn’t. He invited all people. He has chosen, elected, and forgiven all people, not some. And those who humble themselves, surrender and repent, to those God gives eternal life. In a few, select places, the NT authors speak off this last group of people as the “elect” but in these cases they mean the ones who perfected their election.
@dwar2158Ай бұрын
Studying this now…God was also showing his strength over the Egyptian gods … Hapi of Nile, Ra of sun with the darkness…etc
@janusproject27Ай бұрын
exactly. It's amazing to see how it works.
@dwar2158Ай бұрын
I have done a study with my Sunday school kiddos on God’s attributes and it ties into your lesson.
@janusproject27Ай бұрын
glad it could be of help!
@dwar2158Ай бұрын
Great insight
@matthewmiddlebrooke6176Ай бұрын
I love the three points of contact illustration. Very helpful in understanding why Bible doctrine isn’t determined by a single verse.
@janusproject27Ай бұрын
exactly! It's so important with books like Job and Ecclesiastes to make sure you let them "complete a thought" before building a doctrine, otherwise you'd be completely screwed up really quick. I'm planning to do one on "be not righteous overmuch" out of Ecclesiastes soon because I think that fits exactly into this paradigm - don't just go with the one sentence, look around it to see what the author is building to. Thanks for the feedback!
@dwar2158Ай бұрын
Great study
@dwar2158Ай бұрын
Won’t let me do a like click…I LIKE!
@dwar21582 ай бұрын
Grear
@johnalexir76342 ай бұрын
The debate on whether the bible has contradictions or not largely boils down to differing definitions of what exactly qualifies as a "contradiction". This is the cause of much of the confusion.
@RobertEWaters3 ай бұрын
What nonsense. Jesus is a Man, and Jesus is God.
@janusproject273 ай бұрын
yes. And I realize by my title and description I wasn't perfectly clear that I strongly disagree with the Methodists on this. The "Presented without Comments" series is just to show how others are thinking.
@synndakitt4 ай бұрын
Amen. Looking forward to your future videos!
@wsj9324 ай бұрын
I think perhaps the Athiest you've been interacting with have a different mindset when it comes to contradictions then I, or the others in the comments, have. I would argue that the aspects of the Bible you discussed, such as bats being birds, reflect scientific inaccuracies rather than contradictions within the Bible itself. I for one think it's pretty understandable for those writing in a much more primitive time in our history to get aspects of scientific knowledge wrong. I think there are much better examples in the Bible of contradictions within the text itself. For instance, the gospel provides 4 accounts of the empty tomb/resurrection of Jesus. These accounts present different facts about what happened on the third day. When they are read in parallel the discrepancies are apparent. Did the stone roll away when Mary M. Approached? Or was it already rolled? Or did an earthquake move it? Was there an an angel on top of the stone? Or one inside the tomb? Or were there 2 angels inside the tomb? Did they tell no one or tell the apostles? In fact, John even says Jesus appears directly behind the women and speaks to them. This in an incredible claim that is surprisingly missing in the earlier works.
@williamwatson43544 ай бұрын
Perhaps you can clarify when Jesus was born. Herod the Great died in 4 BC placing his birth at 6 BC at the latest. But the Census of Quirinius was taken in 6 AD. Additionally the facts in Luke and Matt are completely at odds with one and other.
@janusproject272 ай бұрын
kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jMmcd9ugzJ-Zc58.html has a good summary of this supposed contradiction. I don't see the need to remake his video.
@duncanbryson11674 ай бұрын
Argue about it all you want, it's still ESSENTIALLY an ancient book of mythology 🙄
@noahalban63844 ай бұрын
66 ancient books of: Philosophy Chronicles of history Wisdom Prophecy Theology Fixed that for you.
@lau90764 ай бұрын
@@noahalban6384What about the flood? What about the stopping of the Sun? That's sounds like mythology
@eidiazcas4 ай бұрын
@@lau9076 also adam & eve and the talking snake and gIants and unicorns and dragons, ... a bunch of myths
@PakApologeticsClub5 ай бұрын
i can show you 100 clear contradictions!
@fatyoutubepanda4 ай бұрын
in quran ? yep its full of it
@fatyoutubepanda4 ай бұрын
@@gabolifavmcbecause something has contradictions they are myth books ? what kind of reasoning is that
@fatyoutubepanda4 ай бұрын
@@gabolifavmc bruh you are beating up your own strawman , bible doesnt say that its a science book, and the noahs flood is a local flood its not a worldwide flood ,even church fathers taught that why cant you guys do some studying before you want to declare victory cause these are some of the silliest arguments ever
@armandolopez22745 ай бұрын
So did jesus die after or before passover? After his ressurection were the apostoles told to stay or leave ?
@kuyanoy99684 ай бұрын
Read the bible. Its simple.
@armandolopez22744 ай бұрын
@kuyanoy9968 obviously you haven't read it. If you had, you'd know that there are contradictions when it comes to these "facts". Simple
@markbond084 ай бұрын
@@kuyanoy9968LOL so which one is it
@defenestratefalsehoods5 ай бұрын
sorry, you are wrong. there are many contradictions if you want to acknowledge it or not. Matthew 2, says Jesus was conceived during the reign of Herod and was a young child when mary and Joseph fled the country. Herod died in 4 BC. In Luke 2 after Quirinius became governor of Syria in 6 AD(actual history that can be proven) mary and Joseph went back for the census while she was pregnant. Jesus was born before 4BC and still in the womb for the census in 6 AD.
@janusproject272 ай бұрын
kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jMmcd9ugzJ-Zc58.html didn't see the need to remake his video, but this has been dealt with in a bit of detail by many others.
@yelrahkcorb5 ай бұрын
Do you have any books recommendations that defend Christianity and refute the contradictions and accusations against Christianity? Also what are some good scholars I should listen to?
@RashmaGul5 ай бұрын
You will find none.
@kyle--8595 ай бұрын
Any contradiction in any book can be reconciled with enough mental gymnastics
@yelrahkcorb5 ай бұрын
@@kyle--859 Yeah, I will admit that is very true.
@yelrahkcorb5 ай бұрын
@@RashmaGul Yeah because your book definitely has zero right?
@RashmaGul5 ай бұрын
@@yelrahkcorb Please show me in my book...
@jenna24315 ай бұрын
Wow. What a reach. You can't simply accept that two writers had heard different stories...when the entire book is nothing but a collection of mythology, legend, fairy tales, and gossip.
@halffull16075 ай бұрын
If the church doctors have all the answers why don't they share them with us instead they remain silent resulting millions of Christians leaving the religion because of these contradictions.. It's true we live in a world where it is common to take apart texts or claims and analyse each detail. The early Church fathers were not as concerned about the nuances of the text. It wasn't that they didn't consider it true. But you didn't have secular history, evolution, or other things as competing worldviews. It was other religions ("pagans") that Christians were in ideological conflict with and those battles were often not fought with words. So there wasn't much need to defend the details in the bible because back then no one brought them Plus for most of biblical history most people couldn't read the Bible. It wasn't translated from Latin until the 1300s. The Bible wasn't even printed for mass production until the 1450s. You're average person probably couldn't even read the translated Bible for a while after that. Therefore the issue of contradictions was never present
@saliadee25645 ай бұрын
which doesn't at all affect the fact that the 'contradictions' have been dealt with. the books are there if people want to read them. better still, people can figure out many of the difficulties for themselves.
@saliadee25645 ай бұрын
I agree with this 100%. That's literally the mechanism of faith. Because of a body of good evidence and reliability, you can trust that the unresolved areas do have a solution. We have so many secular things that use the same principle. It's also like a having a puzzle that is 90% complete - you know that this picture works, because it's too organised and functional even as it is to be anything but intentional. Don't sweat the spaces - the pieces that go there will show up. Also worth mentioning that another complicating factor for timelines and measurements in the old testament is that they often switch to the reckoning of the nation that they're dealing with or under the power of but without mentioning it, ie some nations counting the year of a king's ascension as effectively 'year zero', versus other nations counting it as 'year one', different years from different types of calendars overlapping etc.
@john211murphy5 ай бұрын
RELIGION = FAIRY TALES FOR DUMB SHEEP WHO REFUSE TO GROW UP.
@halffull16075 ай бұрын
Since you brought the story of judas One account said he purchased a field with the money and the other said he threw the money into the temple.. These are two clear contradictory statements You can either buy a field or throw the money.. How is this applicable with your car example?.. . there are no gaps here. Also if you fall off when you Hung yourself you don't fall headlong.. Your feet fall first right? The second account said " falling headlong his bowels gushed out" the only possible way for someone to fall headlong is to be in motion Explain please
@saliadee25645 ай бұрын
Judas had a role in purchasing the field because he returned the money to the temple. Easy.
@halffull16075 ай бұрын
@@saliadee2564 not convincing .. If I gave you your money back and you used it on whatever would I still be part of whatever you used it for?
@saliadee25645 ай бұрын
@@halffull1607 Yes, you'd have a role in whatever I did, but depending on your understanding, you may or may not be morally culpable for your part in enabling my actions. Judas provided the funds, the priests spent the funds on the field. That's the facts of the story. The account in Acts is a perspective on those facts, ie seeing and holding Judas accountable for his role in the purchase of the field. consider that the priests and judas were essentially on the same team, ie they both resented Jesus and consented to his death. and they're ultimately on satan's side, who wished for the same. that judas repented (insincerely, i believe), did not cause him to change sides. these guys were all agents in one endeavour. If there was a lack of understanding/true difference in motive or purpose, ie if the priests somehow tricked Judas into revealing where Jesus was and there was money involved somehow, Judas' role in the following events would remain, but I wouldn't hold him morally accountable. As it is, he knew what he was doing and thus is morally responsible for his part in the series of events. Acts acknowledges this in saying that he bought the field.
@janusproject272 ай бұрын
Matthew 27:5-7 literally answers your question on how he and the priests both purchased the field. Acts 1:16-18 then credits him as having purchased it bc "his money" (which was not right to put into the treasury) was used to buy the field where he died. Also, depending on where and how he hanged himself, how is it a contradiction to fall headlong - we don't know what the ground was like - any sort of slope or ledge, if he hit any object on the way down; or, if he hanged himself and at some point his body fell after rotting, the same thing would happen. We're just not given enough info - both are possible and no one at that time seemed at all bothered by the two statements. It's clearly not a contradiction.
@halffull16075 ай бұрын
Nice try but if it was truly cultural and whomever gave his account on the events weren't trying to be specific he would've said " the king was young or the king was in his twenties" but instead they have given us specific numbers...plus isn't the bible the inspired word of God? Why would two people give two different accounts of the same event if they were both "inspired" you say God is not the author of comfusion, why didn't God correct it straight away.
@AffectionateComputerChip-re4iq5 ай бұрын
My dear, of course if you believe that the Bible is inspired, inerrant and infallible, you won't accept the fact that there is contradictions in it. Theoretically speaking, anything can be reconciled. Sometimes someone would find a contradiction, then apologists come up with a tactic to disprove this contradiction, now, although the tactic could be possible, we need to look at the probability too. Most apologists don't care about this, they just care to prove that there is an explanation that disproves this contradiction, so that people that care about the inerrancy of the Bible could feel that their dogma isn't false, and that's why most critical scholars today believe that there is contradictions, since they don't assume it's inerrant. If you assume it's inerrant, you would try as much as you can to prove that there is 0 contradictions, but if you don't assume that it's inerrant, you would consider the explanation that the data points to and the more plausible is most likely to be the correct one. Sometimes harmonizing between 2 different accounts to make it look like it's not a contradiction is clearly something that's not plausible AT All.
@jonathon_durno4 ай бұрын
The alternative, which happens to be true, is that the arguments offered for the invalidity of these contradictions, are actually true. Also, you're employing logic and the rules of non-contradiction. The truity of these laws is assumed in your argument. You presuppose their existence, and then use them to try to disprove arguments against supposed contradictions in a text that is, in reality, the only ground for the existence of these laws in the first place. Jesus Christ is Lord. Repent and believe the gospel.
@janusproject275 ай бұрын
As if anticipating where I was going next in the series, a lot commented on a family of contradictions coming out of 1-2 Kings, 1-2 Chronicles. A book completely dedicated to this topic is "Those So-Called Errors," where Dr. Chester Kulus deals with each of those step-by-step. Of course we could chalk it up to "scribal errors," as many Biblical scholars do (as in, numbers were conflated during copying, and so we must turn to the LXX or some other language to see what was originally said. This is consistent in that the original was still preserved, but through human action, it was lost in the mainline. However, this would seem to contradict Jesus' statement that "not one jot or tittle" (referencing the smallest pieces of the Hebrew word) would be lost. So what do we do with it? A lot of the contradictions are explained by dynastic age. One passage is describing physical age or description of the actually biological age of the person and the other is describing "dynastic age." Dynastic age would be 40, when biological age would be 20 (for instance, see 2 Kings 8:26 and 2 Chron. 22:2, where the same guy is called 22 and 42). For a thorough explanation of this passage, see "Those So-Called Errors," p. 310 Obviously this is simplified, so there are other complexities to consider before we chalk everything up to "must be wrong because I don't understand." Did the ancient Jewish readers not see the difference between 20 and 40 either? How would they have read it? The Bible didn't pop into existence in the 1800s. It's been combed over for several thousand years, so any contradiction you find it's going to be something that no one's ever seen before. It's been thoroughly discussed and dissected for ages.
@mustachemac52295 ай бұрын
I find it extremely interesting that you seem to put authority in one person over the authority of many other scholars who disagree with him and show that these contradictions exist. We call this being biased and it clearly shows in your pinned comment.
@mustachemac52295 ай бұрын
Well why don't you go to the other people who have doctrines in biblical scholarship who are also Christians themselves and clearly show that the Bible contains contradictions but they just don't allow those contradictions to shake their faith in their theology. That's because you have a bias just like these conservative people, like the doctor you are quoting from, who point the finger at other Christians who clearly see and accept these contradictions actually exist. The majority of this scholarly consensus is that these contradictions do in fact exist and it is only a small majority of people such as the one you're quoting that find these errors to be incomprehensible. You have to realize that when these books were being brought together it didn't really matter to those individuals that these contradictions actually existed because that wasn't really important to them. This whole idea that the Bible is the inerrant word of God is a late development and just wasn't a thing back in the day. We also need to understand that when Jesus was around saying the things he was saying there was no such thing as a Bible.
@petercollins77305 ай бұрын
Hahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!! Oh, you're serious? Sorry. Perhaps you could explain the apparent contradiction of Judas 2 methods of death to this ignorant atheist. Your bible says that he deliberately hanged himself, and also that he fell down in a field and his internal organs burst open and he died. Did Judas die twice, in radically different ways, in different places? And also, did he give back the 30 pieces of silver, or did he use the 30 pieces of silver to buy the field he died in? Then maybe you could help out ignorant little me by explaining how jesus rode into Jerusalem on one donkey and on two donkeys. Or why one of the gospel writers, whoever he was, couldn't read the Hebrew bible in Hebrew and so made the mistake of thinking it described someone entering Jerusalem on two donkeys. No one who read Hebrew would make that mistake, but your guy, who obviously only read the Greek translation, did. Then, of course, there are all the contradictions of your most important story. Help a lowly skeptic understand how, according to your anonymous gospel writers, jesus was executed on the day before and on the day of Passover. Seems like a miracle, being killed on two different days. And when Mary, or two Marys, or two Marys and a bunch of women got to the tomb, how could the stone need to be rolled away by an angel, but already be rolled away? How could Mary, or both Marys, or both Marys and all the women, see a man, or two men, or an angel in the tomb? How could they be told by jesus both that he would meet the disciples immediately in Jerusalem and that the disciples must immediately go to Galilee to meet him. And how, exactly, do we know all this when the women "said nothing about this to anyone?" I'm really curious about this - it would seem that your most important story would at least be consistent. And on the other end of jesus life, did his parents live in Bethlehem, or di d they go there? And was it before Herod died, or while Quirinius ruled? It can't be both - Herod died 10 years before Quirinius took authority. No contradictions? Sorry, that is laughably false. Many, many, many obvious and patent contradictions that believers try desperately to harmonize? Yup. I'll wait for your answer.
@maran.ath45 ай бұрын
As with most scriptures, you don't just read this, this is not a novel or story book, it's a book that claims to tell history and give insight, so we don't just read it like that and point stuff out, you need proper exegesis to understand what is and what isn't. First thing you gotta understand is that these gospels are "synoptic" for a reason, there's complex interrelationship between the texts and their shared and unique sources. each writer had a specific audience and theological purpose in mind, which influenced which events and teachings they included and how they presented them. For example, Matthew's Gospel contains many references to Old Testament prophecies to appeal to a Jewish audience, emphasizing Jesus as the fulfillment of those prophecies. Mark, considered to be written for a Roman audience, portrays Jesus as a man of action and suffering servant. Luke, aimed at a Gentile audience, highlights Jesus' inclusivity and compassion towards the marginalized. These different emphases can lead to variations in how events are described or ordered. It doesn't mean they're lying or contradicting each other, they just pick different parts of the fact that fits their audience. I could decide to talk about my educational background in IT when intervewing for a role in tech, and leave out my football career, because it's not for this audience. But when I'm talking to sport enthusiasts, I'll surely bring up my athletic prowess, when these two accounts of me telling about who I am or what I do are presented, would you claim I'm contradicting myself by saying I'm a software eng then later saying I'm a footballer? it's this same synoptic nature allows scholars to compare the Gospels closely to understand discrepancies. Some differences might be due to literary techniques like telescoping where they compress or expand time or thematic arrangement rather than strict chronological order. Others may reflect variations in oral tradition or the author's theological emphasis. scholars examine these Gospels together, then attempt to reconstruct the historical events behind the texts and understand the theological messages the authors intended to convey. You can end here if you've got what you want, which I don't believe is the case, otherwise, come with me, let me try to respond to each contradiction. Judas' death, if you read it harmoniously, it suggests Judas hanged himself, and after hanging, his body eventually fell and burst open on the land bought indirectly with the money he returned, which the priests used to buy the field in his name, as they considered it blood money and unfit to return to the treasury. Jesus' double donkey ride --, I have a lot to say, but here's someone who explained it how I would've and better than, so to save the length of this comment qr.ae/psyzgW The chronology of Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection will bring us to interpreting the different Gospel accounts in light of first-century Jewish timekeeping and the festival calendar, I'll remind you again that the gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke are synoptic, providing similar views with slight variations in detail and timing, while John often provides a theological emphasis that can seem to contrast chronologically. here, the difference reflects his thematic focuses and the audience's needs rather than outright contradictions. For example, the "discrpancy" in timing can be reconciled by understanding the Jewish day beginning at sundown and the use of inclusive reckoning of time. The accounts of who visited the tomb vary but can be seen as complementary rather than contradictory, with each Gospel writer highlighting different aspects of the event to convey theological points to their respective audiences. Similarly, the messages about where to meet Jesus do not reflect contradictory commands but rather different appearances to different groups at different times. BIRTHPLACE vs residence && herod vs quirinus: Luke 2:1-5 mentions a census under quirinius, which some scholars argue could refer to a prior census or administrative action during Herod's reign, we all know the difficulties in precisely aligning ancient historical accounts. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke provide the basis for Jesus being born in Bethlehem, with Luke describing a temporary journey there for the census, while Matthew implies a more permanent residence. Historical records suggest that there might have been multiple censuses or different interpretations of the timeline, allowing for reconciliation
@petercollins77305 ай бұрын
@@maran.ath4 I'm sorry, but your entire introduction is just ridiculous. When different parts of your book directly contradict each other, on specific factual matters, there is no reason to need exegesis. Words have meaning, and when one place says 'black' and another says 'white,' at least one is wrong. Period. As for Judas death, you make up a bizarre, utterly fantastic scenario, without any evidence that any of your claims is true, rather than admit that they are two different stories. Clearly, neither writer meant what you said. I'm not going to waste time watching yet another sad attempt at harmonization. Whoever wrote Matthew had two donkeys because they neither read Hebrew (no one could read it in the Hebrew and think there were 2 animals) and he did not understand that the passage was a very common literary device in biblical Hebrew. You cannot expect any rational person to believe that jesus rode 1 and also rode 2 donkeys, at the same time, at the same place. And that is the plain claim made. Again, your explanation defies th plain facts. One account claims explicitly that jesus was executed on a different day than the other 2 accounts. If the bible is inerrant, then no errors in timekeeping or some other excuse can pass the laugh test. This is an explicit, absolute contradiction. How can specific, diametrically opposed statements - the tomb still sealed, the tomb already open; wait in Jerusalem, hurry to Galilee - possibly be harmonized. If one is true, the other is false. And all of these stories are about the same, single event, not multiple events. Again, you are trying to say that black is white and up is down. It's ridiculous. It is absolutely impossible for a census under Quirinius to be during Herod's reign. We have absolute evidence of both the death date of Herod and the taking up of governorship of Quirinius, and they are 10 years apart. Unless you claim jesus was born twice, ten years apart, this is absolutely contradictory. And either jesus family lived in Bethlehem, or they travelled there - both cannot be true. Again, no amount of wordplay can make these two accounts harmonious. And every historical account of every Roman census ever held is clear - nver was anyone ever required to go anywhere for the census. Every single census saw done by counting people where they were at the date of the census. Never, ever, even once, did a single person have to travel for the census. The entire concept of that happening is imebecilic, ridiculous, and insane. And the census of Quirinius, which we have clear evidence was taken of people where they were on the date, did not even cover the area or Galilee, so jesus family would not have been involved at all. That stor is a bad falsehood, made up by some anonymous author decades after the alleged fact, who had no knowledge of the census methods. You have done nothing here but parrot long-disproven, and desperate attempts to harmonize what are absolute contradictions. Your claims would not convince any rational person, and would convince no person who did not want desperately to believe your false claims. You seem to be serious, and respectful, and you are, of course, welcome to believe anything you want. (That is not permissive; I mean you have the right, as do we all, to believe what you will.) But when you make arguments and claim evidence, you should have good arguments and good evidence, because others will not accept what you have said either. Perhaps you could study some of the responses to these claims you have made; there are many good, more detailed responses than mine. Consider what logical, evidence-based arguments do to your claims.
@petercollins77305 ай бұрын
@@maran.ath4 I don't think the writers of the gospels, or any of the authors, were stupid or, mostly , uneducated. Clearly the gospel authors, though unknown, were sufficiently educated to be fluent in Koine Greek, and to produce well-written accounts. The legitimate letters of Paul are well-reasoned, of course accepting the initial premises. I don't doubt that he was, originally, basically a lawyer; he organizes his writing in a lawyerly way. And the Revelation is a fascinating allegory of the conflict with Rome around the time the temple was destroyed. It is creative, uses very apt metaphors from the time, and is very good historical fiction. From what I know, and I have read a bit of the history of the collection of the new testament, none of the men involved were stupid. It seems that they were mostly concerned with including writings that agreed with their perception and beliefs, and excluding those writings that disagreed with those beliefs, for example, the Gnostic texts. I doubt that there was much line by line consideration for contradictions or errors; it seems that there was a perceived need to unify the text to help unify the various churches. If you have a bit of time, I would recommend reading some of the accounts of this process; it's not really controversial, in the way these contradictions are, but it is fascinating and enlightening. I'm glad you're looking at some of the contrary writings. I have learned more from reading the bible than from reading any atheist or skeptic writings. And of course, feel free to come back anytime. I'm not a believer, and likely unconvinceable, nut I find the subject interesting.
@silaaron765 ай бұрын
@@petercollins7730 That's your response to being proven wrong? Shows that it's a heart issue, not an evidence issue.
@petercollins77305 ай бұрын
@@silaaron76 Proven wrong? You spewed out a lie, and then you repeated the same inane, bizarre, totally evidence-free bullshit you tried before. I cannot provide a different response to the same old stupid. You make up stories without any basis, desperate to try to make clear contradictions somehow slightly, vaguely, maybe-if-you-squint possible. Then you repeat those over and over. It's simple. Your book says, explicitly, that Judas bought a field. It also says the Pharisees bought the same field. Show evidence that, when the story said "Judas bought a fiel" it meant "the Pharisees bought a field." And, using your standard, you cannot use anything but the words in the bible. I'll wait for you to prove your claim, using only words in the bible. Then we can discuss the contradiction between Judas dying from hanging, and Judas dying from bursting. Again - prove that the bible meant, when it said that Judas bought a field, that in fact the Pharisees bought a field. And us e only the words in the bible. We'll wait.
@joeventura62875 ай бұрын
Christians have seen them then dodge them...They are absolutely sure they are not wrong at all about their beliefs, so absolutely always there has to be an explanation even if they don't know it.
@janusproject275 ай бұрын
but we don't dodge them. Entire tomes have been written explaining the history of the various "contradictions," and explaining what they would have meant "in context." Between "Misreading Scripture with Western Eyes" which digs into worldview differences between us and the ancients (thus providing context) and "Those So-Called Errors" which explains how dating was done either biologically (age of the person) or "dynastically" (age of the family line that had been ruling). This leads to apparent contradictions depending on which dating method is being used, etc. See pinned comment as well for more information.
@joeventura62875 ай бұрын
@@janusproject27Oh yes you all do it. II Samuel 24:9 vs I Chronicles 21:5. One of the most simple an irrefutable contradiction BUT you "know" you can't be wrong and it has to have an justification no matter how absurd it is...at the end of the day the Bible doesn't say what it says...
@johnalexir76342 ай бұрын
@@joeventura6287 For them it says what it says when they like what it says, but it means something different from what it says when they DON'T like what it says (god-condoned slavery and god-commanded genocides are good examples of this).
@dalex605 ай бұрын
Christian bigotry and hatred at its finest...
@rodneymcintyre85445 ай бұрын
God is evil
@qwertyshblong5 ай бұрын
as a former-christian i dont feel superior when calling out contradictions, it’s more of a way to defend my belief. i don’t think my belief is any better than yours and i don’t aim for any conversion when i bring up other contradictions, just a general understanding similarly to the way that i recognize positives in christianity and respect the valid perspective it provides. personally i just got tired going through the mental backflips and poetic interpretation to cling to an idea of a flawless God and His infallible word… so 👍
@silaaron765 ай бұрын
Pointing out that you're interpreting something wrong isn't mental gymnastics, it's just getting the facts straight. There are reasons why people have to misinterpreted the Bible to claim to have a problem with it.
@qwertyshblong5 ай бұрын
@@silaaron76 im telling you its a personal thing and a matter of belief. at this point i dont really care to study the bible any longer and have little opinion on what is true and correct or not. there were fundamentally things that i believed in that could not coincide with the christian narrative. your perspective is valid and im just sharing mine, i dont think we have much to discuss though. i dont think we'll come to any meaningful agreements in a matter of belief bc its not logical but emotional, deeply personal, and altogether subjective
@georg71205 ай бұрын
Do you think Christians are too stupid to see the contradictions?
@halffull16075 ай бұрын
Okay champ if what you're saying was correct how do you explain this one : According to 2 Kings 8:26, Ahaziah was 22 years old when he began to reign, and reigned for one year in Jerusalem. 2 Chronicles 22:2 gives his age as 42 years when his reign began in Jerusalem This is the same person same story different age?? Note that you cannot misinterprete or misunderstand numbers or change their meaning with translation .. A number is a number By the way you cannot say it's a different Ahaziah because his mother and her grandfather's names are mentioned and it is the same 1 year in jerusalem
@janusproject275 ай бұрын
I agree it's the same Ahaziah. See the pinned comment where I get into that. Also, the next video in the series (and previous ones) will discuss "Those So-Called Errors," which goes through those "contradictions" piece by piece giving multiple explanations without resorting to "scribal errors."
@mohammed9w5535 ай бұрын
Why did God hide his trinitarian nature from his followers before he himself came as the messiah to reveal it to them?
@chadscott91575 ай бұрын
Genesis 1:26 is just one of many.
@mohammed9w5535 ай бұрын
@@chadscott9157 One of what? Don't tell me you are talking about the we as evidence of his trinitarian nature?
@cameronpetersen-yx6vf5 ай бұрын
@@mohammed9w553 I think he is saying this, God is saying "Let us make man in our image." Us is not God referring to angels or any other being, rather himself. Imo God didn't 'hide' the Trinity. We see plenty of times that God sends 'the angel of the lord' to visit people and do things. Well this isn't an angel, it is the lord and we see that in the story of Jacob and Esau. The spirit isn't always seen with the eyes if man, but just like Jesus after resurrection, only those who are righteous or believe in God are allowed to see God. The Father cant be in the presence of unholy things, that is why man cant see him but when they have visions or are taken to Gods throne they mention multiple thrones. People didn't go to Hell before Jesus. They went to a waiting place, which Jesus went to when he was in the grave for 3 days. So humanity waited for God, Jesus, before their final judgement, a place called Abraham's bussom.
@cameronpetersen-yx6vf5 ай бұрын
I would recommend looking at the prophecies of the Messiah. All of the Old Testament and God's time during was spent cultivating a group of people who would prepare the world for his coming (Aka Messiah). That's just the fact of the Abrahamic Faith. Read Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22:16. Both OT several hundred years before Jesus. God's mission was to present the law (which we cannot keep) and to fufill the law (which his son did), so that our Judgment would be placed onto him and we could be welcomed in his presence.
@mohammed9w5535 ай бұрын
@@cameronpetersen-yx6vf I'm talking about the old testament and the israelites , were they aware of a trinitarian nature of God or did the old testament talk about such thing ?
@AnonymousWon-uu5yn5 ай бұрын
It is immoral for a god or for anyone else to force someone into the type of existence that they might not like or possibly even hate to exist in and that's why I'm an antinatalist.
@chadscott91575 ай бұрын
Life is not about oneself. That's not possible. Unless you want a life with no free choice, like a robot...
@AnonymousWon-uu5yn5 ай бұрын
@@chadscott9157 you don't have free choice because you are forced to choose the types of things that your type of genetics and your types of life experiences force you to choose throughout your life. But if you would have been born and raised somewhere else on the planet then you would have had other types of life experiences and those experiences would have forced you to make other types of choices.
@cameronpetersen-yx6vf5 ай бұрын
@@AnonymousWon-uu5ynIt's a choice. Depending on your religion (although you'd see most creation stories are consistent with a creator god wanting us to ascend to him) this isn't even living. This is more of a dreamlike scenario where God can examine our desires and expose our inequities. It's up to us to choose life or death. A life that lives forever without inequities. Or a death where we are consumed by our desires leaving nothing but the emptiness it leaves. (Imo. I don't have scripture rn to back this up this is just my thoughts.)
@cameronpetersen-yx6vf5 ай бұрын
@@AnonymousWon-uu5yn Yeah that doesn't sound good to me. Life is great without all the evil humans are capable of.
@AnonymousWon-uu5yn5 ай бұрын
@@cameronpetersen-yx6vf if all life forms didn't exist then that would be just fine because they wouldn't know or care that they didn't exist. And I'm unfortunately still alive because I'm too scared to off myself. But hopefully I can eventually work up the courage to go ahead and do it.
@mustachemac52295 ай бұрын
Perhaps look at some more elaborate contradictions instead of the small elementary style ones. 2 Kings 9:27-28 2 Chronicles 22:9 Here we see a narration of the death of the Israelite king Ahaziah by the men who follow Jehu. When we read these two stories there is a clear contradiction that anyone which can rub two brain cells together can see. There's absolutely no way to harmonize these two accounts but I would like to see you try. Hugs 🤗
@chadscott91575 ай бұрын
Not really, chronicles is talking about the arrest and kings talks about the eventual death. Two different writers in different times.
@@janusproject27 No, what you've actually done is you found apologists who have jinned up explanations in order to try to harmonize these contradictions. That's because these apologists already start with the idea that the bible is true and then look for evidence to support it instead of looking at the evidence and letting it take them to the conclusion. That's what apologists do... every time. Thanks for the response.
@janusproject275 ай бұрын
We start with peoving what we can (Gary Habermas, for instance, has spent 50 years studying the resurrection and surrounding narratives and has boiled all the narratives down to a few "irrefutable facts," [i think five, but I can't remember].) When we confirm that the Bible is true on those issues - remember, many people came to trust in the Bible after disbelieving - Lee Strobel for instance, in addition to others. Some came with the express purpose of disproving it and were convinced after looking at evidence. When we examine what we can prove and are shown that the Bible is trustworthy, we can then give it the "benefit of the doubt" with things we don't understand. So yes, children tend to be "blind trusters," but adults who convert, etc tend to have to actually examine the truth statements. I'm not convinced of the Book of Mormon or the Qur'an because as I look at the claims, they don't match with reality on the things I can check, so I'm not going to believe it for the things I can't check. As Jesus says "if you don't trust me on earthly things, you're not going to trust me on heavenly." It's truly a side-note, but I haven't known many people who are "deconverted" because of strictly facts. I don't know of anyone who lost their faith looking at Kings and Chronicles. I generally see people who don't agree with the moral statements or can't rectify how a "loving God" could allow certain things to happen, and so fell away. So while I make the intellectual arguments to defend certain aspects of the Biblical narrative, I understand that's not really where the "fight" is for most people.@@mustachemac5229
@mustachemac52295 ай бұрын
@@janusproject27 I find it interesting that every single person you are quoting authority to is an apologist. This just proves my fact that this is what apologists do.... Every time. They gin up explanations because instead of following the evidence where it takes them, they start with the proposition that the Bible is always true and then look for evidence to support it.
@dwar21585 ай бұрын
Truth
@dwar21585 ай бұрын
Glad you are back.
@dwar21586 ай бұрын
Enjoyed
@dwar21586 ай бұрын
Great spiritual lesson!
@dwar21586 ай бұрын
Leave it to a confused person to explain to a woman what she is….😅
@dwar21586 ай бұрын
You need to come back east and do these
@just_a_guy_.6 ай бұрын
What the fuck did i just watch.
@just_a_guy_.6 ай бұрын
@janusproject27 why the fuck are you sharing stuff like this. It only makes the views on the original post increase, causing them to make more of this shit, and plus NOT👏ALL👏PEOPLE👏LET👏POLITICS👏CONTROL👏THEIR 👏LIVES. In short, stfu