Matthew is not familiar with Hellenic Judaism, either! καί in Greek also sometimes means "even" and he simply read the LXX with no input from Jews whatsoever. And of course, the colt mistranslation just makes it worse. I guess Matthew assumed Jesus used the little one as an ottoman.
@1n354a thanks. lots of psychological dynamics are in place which almost ensure that the sheep will never break out of the pasture. Fear of hell, hope of seeing loved ones again, fear of death, hope of living forever, fear of dissent and peer pressure, on and on.
Okay, back where I started; where we both thought the other was a fool. hahah Again, I found your facts to be solid. The difference is found in the way we handle them. Which is fine. So I will simply ask this: do you believe Socrates existed as a real person? I mean, we only have 4 scholars writing about him (Xenophon, Plato, Aristotle, and Aristophanes) and they all differ in many ways, thus leaving us with the "Socratic Problem" (sounds familiar hahah).
@perichoresis7 "do you believe Socrates existed as a real person? "
I don't know enough to say one way or another. Also, Socrates never said that if I didn't believe he was the son of God, I'd be tortured for eternity. So, his existence was a non-issue for me. And as for "only 4 references) Jesus has only a handful also. Mark, Paul, Hebrews, and a few other epistle authors.
The old "you believe THIS guy is real and we have less evidence than Jesus" doesn't work.
@perichoresis7 Have you watched my jesus myth vids? If not, that pretty much explains why i believe Jesus did NOT exist. I once was on the fence about it. It wasn't a necessity for my atheist position. But after reading Doherty's book, it became clear that the evidence against a real Jesus was overwhelming.
Watch my vids starting at part 2a if you are interested.
@perichoresis7 if you do, try to postpone your "but what about [fill in fleshy jesus verse here]?" reactions. :) There are several verses that SEEM to be issues but I address a few of them in later episodes. Still want to address more but just been doing other stuff.
@spoddie But the ideas and concepts that originated from this "Socrates", do rest on this person/character. No one has a truly original thought; we can only build on top of the works/ideas/concepts of those before us. The issue is, no one is questioning whether Socrates existed or not; we assume it. Even though our only accounts of his existence come from "disciples" of some sort. With that said, that was not a pivotal aspect of my argument; it was more of thought/side note. :)
@perichoresis7 That's ridiculous. Even if Socrates was a fictional character we still have the writings attributed to him. Unlike Jesus Christ, Socrates' teachings don't depend on his existence.
@spoddie My friend, we do not have a single word written by Socrates. The only substantial accounts we have of him and his teachings come from Plato and Xenophon. His faithful followers/successors. Making their writings biased. Meaning we don't technically know the "real" Socrates. And if Jesus is fiction, humanity has fallen prey to the largest scam ever constructed. Constructed by individuals in the first century; several around the same time (Paul's writings; Mark). Quite a stretch.
"Writings attributed to him" may have suggested that I was referring to texts written by Socrates but that's not what I meant. You ignored my point that the real Socrates is irrelevant.
So I assume you think Mohammed, Joseph Smith and every other non Christian religious leader couldn't possibly be scams either. They're too big to be scams as well, right?
@spoddie The term "my friend" means I am speaking kindly. You don't need to consider yourself a friend if you don't wish. Mohammed was trapped in the idea that religions are cultural, heard some of these stories of Jesus and "believers", and constructed his own writings and beliefs for his culture (which is inline with descendents of Abraham). Joseph Smith is essential the same issue; he was "searching for a church/belief system that was right for him", which is a mistake in itself.
@perichoresis7 You have an amazing ability to ignore points/questions you don't like or can't answer.
Apparently argument that Christianity is too big to be scam only applies Christianity and not to other large religions. The fallacy, argumentum ad numerum is what you've tried to argue.
@spoddie Apparently you think insulting me makes you appear more intelligent; I'll allow you your imaginary throne. Knowing a Latin phrase does not suddenly make your point more valid than mine. I was simply making the point that if some would hold Christianity is a scam, they must hold it is the largest ever to be constructed. That's it. You accuse me of not answering questions, while you apparently enjoy straying off topic. The horse is dead. Stop beating it.
@perichoresis7 You made a fallacious argument that the popularity of Christianity was an indicator of it's truth and pointed out that you don't apply this same argument to other religions. My mistake was using a short hand term for a much larger argument, but that's what educated people do.
It should be obvious to you that Atheists do in fact think that Christianity is at least one of the biggest scams in all of history.
@spoddie You're focusing too much on a small side note (simply saying that you believe Christianity is the largest scam ever; which was obviously stated to receive an affirmative reply). The fact that the statement I made can ultimately be deconstructed through the use of logic, is irrelevant; bringing us back to correlation vs causation. Again, you are focusing on a very simple, (as you stated) obvious statement. But, if you want to discuss something substantial about Christianity, I'd love to.
@perichoresis7 It's not up to you to decide what I decide to respond to; I respond to whatever I find interesting.You're a typical Christian, unable to cope once the discussion gets off script. You don't even understand what "correlation/causation" means.
No, I'm not interested in discussing Christianity with you, if you can't address the issues raised in these video then I'm not interested in you preaching your particular version of Christianity.
@spoddie You are entitled to respond as you wish, but you are arguing meaningless points. Stop shouting at the rain; it's not listening. I am perfectly fine with "getting off script", but I would much rather hold a purposeful conversation. Discussing how my intentionally obvious point about Christianity being the biggest scam ever, is a rabbit trail unworthy of attention. The topic hear is literary issues found in the Bible; a point you originally missed in the Socratic analogy I used.
@perichoresis7 I didn't miss your point at all, I addressed it specifically and yet you accuse me of veering off into minor points.
My advice is you should give up. Regardless of how much you claim that you're intelligent and educated, all I can do is assess you based on what you've written here (not "hear"); what I see is pathetic. You're not thick skinned at all, you're an arrogant, pompous hypocrite. But you are inadvertently correct on one point, you are are "unworthy of attention".
@spoddie Let's assess the evidence: I point to two issues off topic (Socrates and a big scam) to enhance the discussion about the CENTRAL issue (literary moves being made by an author/authors). Then, you hang on to the off topic issues, make them central in your mind because you and I both know that metaphors always breakdown, and smoothly avoid in-depth discussions about what as come to be called the "Bible" as well as ancient texts because you know nothing of these things beyond the surface.
@spoddie All you need to say is you have done little to no studying of Biblical/ancient texts, oral/literary traditions, and Koine Greek/Hebrew, and I will apologize for using metaphors that breakdown, defending my intelligence in response to your insults, and anything else you wish. I am sorry if i offended you in anyway.
@spoddie Stop focusing on minor/pointless issues that you have the ability to grasp/handle, and return to the meaningful discussion this video was intending to initiate. I am not your "typical Christian"; your preconceived notions about me blind you to that fact. I enjoy these discussions. I want these discussions. Don't make assumptions about me. You have unfairly misunderstood who I am, where I am coming from, and the overall purpose of my comments simply because you know I am a Christian.
"So I will simply ask this: do you believe Socrates existed as a real person? I mean, we only have 4 scholars writing about him (Xenophon, Plato, Aristotle, and Aristophanes) and they all differ in many ways, thus leaving us with the "Socratic Problem" (sounds familiar hahah)."
This is the heart of the question that these videos, the historicity (?) of Christ.
"Don't make assumptions about me. You have unfairly misunderstood who I am, where I am coming from, and the overall purpose of my comments simply because you know I am a Christian."
If you can't see the hypocrisy of that statement then you're a bigger fool than I gave you credit for. I'm not making assumptions, I explained exactly why I think you're a typical Christian, you're thinned skinned and quick to see insults where there are none (yes, I did just insult you)
@spoddie Yet another false assumption. I am very thick skinned, hence my willingness to try to reconcile this conversation with you. If you try to back track and say you have not attempted to insult my intellect, you're lying to yourself. As for your two comments: how in the world is my statement hypocritical? Is English your second language? And secondly, you fail to see the point of the Socratic statement: we have a hand full of bias sources and yet we believe he was real. Why? That is it.
@spoddie You think you've "won" this discussion but you haven't. Your lack of knowledge, and inability to understand the context of a conversation between Truthsurge and yours truly reveals your position on the issue: "All Christians are stupid, narrow-minded simpletons who don't know anything worth knowing." But I'm sorry, you happen to have stumbled across a fairly intelligent and educated Christian. Now, go read your little Richard Dawkins children book and let the grownups talk.
@TruthSurge hahah Slightly. Shouting from a distance about issues one does not understand, is a pointless game. A game I am afraid I joined in here; shouting matches get us nowhere. Oops. haha
@spoddie Furthermore, the term "correlation does not imply causation" seems to have flown over your head. Maybe master the English terms before jumping to Latin. The fact that some religions were PARTIAL scams constructed by humans does not mean ALL were. You are making a huge jump by saying that because Mohammed and Joseph Smith scammed millions, Christianity has done the same. All religions arose completely differently; some true, while others are lacking.
@perichoresis7, it is inaccurate to equate Christianity to the largest scam ever constructed and that it was pulled off by first century people. When it began, it was very small. It's influence was spread far and wide by men who lived throughout the last 2000 years. Christianity owes its influence to many, many generations of proselytizers. As such, it is large, but not unique, for Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc, also claimed great numbers. Regardless, it's argumentum ad populum.
@DarkMatter2525 I understand your argument, but you must also understand what I'm saying. Google largest religions worldwide and you'll see Christianity is the largest (although many probably don't act like it). Yes, it was not the largest in the first century but because the religion finds its origin in the first century, all later followers would ideal fall victim to its influence (to use the context of this video's language). Hence, my use of the term "largest scam".
You know what you're talking about; that is clear. But your points no more disprove the existence of Jesus than my personal experiences prove the existence of God. The author of Matt. lacking knowledge on Hebrew does not disprove Jesus' existence; it points out a meaningless human error that in no way effects the purpose of the Gospel: Jesus is the Christ and he is the bringer of perfect jubilee/the Kingdom of God/life. God has fully revealed God's self in Jesus with finality.
Regarding historical events, there is never disproof or proof. There is only convincing cases and WHO is convinced depends upon WHO is doing the considering and weighing of evidence. What I find convincing may not convince you so I am not at all concerned about whether my evidence convinces you beyond any doubts. I just say my belief and give my reasons (usually only some of them).
@perichoresis7 By your last couple of sentences, I see it would be pointless to refer you to my Jesus Myth series of vids for an in-depth look at the reasons I believe there never was a physical Jesus in the 1st century.
And further, I would also conclude that we won't make much progress in any kind of comments back and forth. Your stance won't allow you to consider the claim that Jesus did not exist or that the Bible story of him is fictional.
@TruthSurge Yes, I have my beliefs and you have yours, but I am an extremely open minded person. I have questions. First, if the Gospels constitute a fictional construction, then why would the Gospel writers involve women so heavily when it comes to spreading the information of Jesus' resurrection? During this time, women were not considered reliable sources, and yet we have the Gospel writers' "falsified" stories using women as their source. Why do that if it is all ready false?
@perichoresis7 "why would the Gospel writers involve women so heavily when it comes to spreading the information of Jesus' resurrection? "
Because the gospel authors were GREEKs, Romans, non-Jews. They were not Arabs/Jews. They had no patristic domination belief/society.
"Mark" was almost certainly a Roman citizen writing around 72 CE. Matthew, Gentile as well. Neither could read Hebrew. Luke? Gentile. John? Not 100% sure but then that one is a slightly different 1.
@perichoresis7 "During this time, women were not considered reliable sources,"
No, during that time IN THE MIDDLE EAST. Rome, Greece, all the MODERN regions did not have the same type of male domination as the Middle-East.
You think you know, but you don't. You say you are open minded, but you don't care enough to go searching for answers that actually add up. It's the same old apologetic bullshit. Please... do YOURSELF a favor. Read some Bart Ehrman. Misquoting Jesus.
@TruthSurge I own the book. But it is behind several other books. Presently speaking, Hunger Games. haha I wanted to read it in order to see if I wanted to see the movie.
@perichoresis7 dig it out and read it again! Then watch this series from the start. just search the title and it'll come up a blue white light thumb. The check out my dating the NT vids where I look at how I date the gospel of Mark. Right or wrong, you might get something out of that. I don't try to push the dates way late. They might be later but they can't be TOO late or they then start to cram other writings that refer to them or the ones we'd call them.
@TruthSurge But what is your source for saying that Rome and Greece were not male dominate? Everything I have read clearly points out how women were not equal to men in many different ways and were mostly "stay-at-home moms". In John 4, we see the first person Jesus reveals himself to is a Samaritan (strike 1), woman (strike 2), with questionable social agendas (5 husbands and living with a "boyfriend").
@perichoresis7 "But what is your source for saying that Rome and Greece were not male dominate?"
Every single Greek and Roman writing from 800 BCE till 100 CE. Jesus, man, you are in SERIOUS need of some larnin. :) Look, the Greeks and Romans had FEMALE GODS (godesses). Wikipedia. Spend a few years on there. I have spent decades reading about the Bible and things that fed INTO it. Run, don't walk! RUN to wikipedia. My god... IT'S FREE!!!!!
@TruthSurge Even several letters of "Paul" (meaning not actually Paul's work) are still suggesting the lower position of women (1 Cor. 14:34; 1 Tim. 2:12). Women were less reliable during the time, no matter where one found one's self geographically. My studies would show that saying, "women were equal to men back then" is like saying, "women are not treated like objects in today's world."
@perichoresis7 THOSE are Jews, man. Arabs/Jews/mesopotamian... but especially JEWS. ANd all who followed that doctrinal slant. Yes, the forged 1 and 2 Timothy follow in Paul's doctrines of "women have no authority over men". That has NOTHING to do with the Greek-written gospels and their authors.
@BennyOcean Easy. This requires real study AND then to further, real honesty as to the evidence and where it leads you. But, as a Christian, you push these things aside and hold to belief no matter the evidence. It's really hard to be that honest with yourself, to admit that you've been wrong, to admit that your family, your friends are wrong. I think that this is why the path to atheism is a long and difficult path.
so fascinating! I have my bible out here following along. I had a little trouble verifying your Hebrew translation of Ps 22:8 and google translate couldn't handle the hebrew, but everything else appears to be correct. Where did you get the hebrew translation from? Great video
@Prplfox wow. Not many people would dig in and try to verify what they see in a vid. kudos to you. I admit that I don't hold exclusively to any one version of the Bible. I believe they all can fall prey to mistranslations. That is not to say I know more than all of them combined. It just means that sometimes, VERY rarely, I believe they do get it wrong. I use blueletterbible a lot and mostly try to use easy to read versions unless there is a translation issue at stake.
@Prplfox if you meant the Tanakh version, just google online tanakh. But, imo, even that has some translation issues here and there. But if you have any gripes or find any errors, let me know.
I sought "the truth" through Christianity for many years, and by growing to love the truth I had to step down from believing in Biblical inerrancy. This series has helped me tidy up some residual clutter from that perspective, and I am eager to share it with believing friends. My only concern is how they'll react to the cognitive dissonance they'll undoubtedly experience. I look forward to the next installment, and hope I won't have to wait long! Thanks very much.
@Celebduath thank ya! Well, everyone is on some path or distance from you and from me. Or perhaps a better analogy is a record or LP or phonograph disc. Truth being at the center is where we want to go. But everyone is spread out on the disc at various distances from that. So, those on the very edge will likely not watch this at all. They can't. sad, but true. they can only watch something at the level of song 2. :) anyway, keep trying tho!!!
@Celebduath you're not the only one... my story is very similar, and i feel the same way about TS's videos. I knew the gospels had to be fiction, but now i know exactly where the authors got all their inspiration from.
Poor Matthew, one feels that if there was eternal life he'd want to come back and "edit" his work....I suppose that he is kinda doing that through the hundred of apologists out there. Great work as usual exposing the fraud of the bible's creation.
@lawbag1 thanks. yes! That's true. The apologists and Christians tend to completely ignore the "two-donkey" version of Matthew and go with the ONE donkey version of the other three. Same for Mark's "young lad in white". That's not memorable enough so they go with the angel of Matthew or two men in white of Luke and you NEVER see a painting of just a boy in white at the tomb.
I've said it before, but this series is really good, I'm glued to the screen almost, cause it's so interesting. I have recommend this series to other YT-users too.:)
@winterstellar thanks! Glad you like it. It's a struggle to keep it interresting because sometimes the text compares might get a bit boring as it is mainly just a look at the textual variants between text A and B but I'll try to throw in some sex and violence in the next one. HAHHAHAAH
@TruthSurge I've always been curious about something. Christians like to say that ever since Jesus people live in a time of grace and that god is no longer the vengeful guy that he used to be, at least not on a mortal scale. Yet, the story of Ananias and Saphira would show that to be untrue to an extent. They were both chrisitans, yet "god" supposedly struck them dead on the spot for not paying a full tithe and keeping some for themselves. WTF?
@TempleOfInanna2 But yeah, how would an apologist answer that? "Oh, that was just an example needed during that time so that FUTURE CHristians would know to give the full tithe." ? so..... we need someone killed for every little thing we might do wrong then? Do we really need an example? But further, if god DID intervene like that ALWAYS and consistently, there would BE no unbelievers. Rebels, yes, unbelievers, no.
@TruthSurge Yeah. It's interesting that the Bible has Jesus saying phrases like "the kingdom of God is within you", yet on the same token people are still expected to pony up cash to clergy and spiritual leaders, with possible dire consequences if they don't? The thing reeks of manly agendas.
"God speaking through the prophets of old about his Son." I'm glad the Jews agree. After all, it's their ancient book :) On another note about the virgin birth found in Matthew, this is lifted out of context. Isaiah 7:14 and 9:8 are supposedly about Jesus, according to christians. Yet, if you start at Isaiah chapter 7 and read THROUGH chapter 10, it tells very specifically who this child is, and what he will do. His name is Mahershalalhashbez, called "the Immanuel", and born in that time period.
@TempleOfInanna2 ...and, this also brings light onto the fact that the Hebrew word "alma" actually means young woman instead of virgin, considering the child in question was born by mortal means in that day and age.
@TempleOfInanna2 And all of this was caused because Mark and Matthew could not read Hebrew and had to rely on the LXX which translated the Hebrew alma as "virgin". Yes, a quick 2 minute read of really just ch 7 and 8 will show you that the prophecy was already fulfilled DURING Isaiah's lifetime and the miracle was not a virgin birth (for Isaiah is said to have gone "in to the prophetess" a euphemism for sexual intercourse) but a male child. that was the prophecy.
@TempleOfInanna2 The midrashers were so eager to find Jesus in the OT that they would jerk any part of a phrase out of context to make a new prophecy of Jesus. Sadly, they relied on a rather faulty translation, the LXX. :( I chose not to include the 7:14 but that's a good one. It's pretty well-known though. well, by us non-buhleevers.
@iliveon well, my guess is that maybe a very few number of people might consider calling me one but I've never called myself one or thought of myself as one. I mean, scholar in the loose sense of the term but not a true "Biblical" scholar with a pedigree and some fancy letters after my name. :) I just enjoy reading up on the stuff and making vids that I feel explain the issues as I understand them. And I try to find less cliche' topics to do also. thank ya.
@TempleOfInanna2 thanks! well, you know if someone uploads 2 or more vids, you get that + symbol you have to click to view all the uploads by that person. A braindead amoeba redesigned this so that you cannot close watched vids, you cannot see each new upload separately and you are steadily pushed away from youtube as a producer type. They just want more braindead drones to watch the ads.
I don't understand why you think Jesus' "my god my god" phrase was MORE likely Mark putting words in his mouth. Same thing with the heckler quoting scripture.
If this stuff really happened, why wouldn't Jesus have quoted scripture on the cross? Why wouldn't the heckler use scripture to mock him? Don't people do the same sort of thing now-a-days?
@xorthan You can't surely believe that Jesus, almost dead, would suddenly start quoting scripture verbatim but worse, ALL of the events in his "passion" come from old testament passages. So, tell me, which is MORE probable, all those things really happened (some in contradiction based on which gospel you read) OR the gospel writers were simply constructing the story of Jesus by USING the old testament passages? I'd say explanation #2.
I don't know. People say all sorts of weird things when they're dying. If you've devoted your whole life to "fulfilling scripture," I wouldn't be surprised to hear you quote it as you died. Take a look at the variety of last words on wikiquote...
I don't think Jesus did half the stuff he's purported to do. I'm just not sure his quoting of scripture during the passion is the best evidence for that...
@xorthan Your pt is understood. But thankfully for me, my main pt doesn't rest MERELY on the weight of that one example. :) It is just one of hundreds we could put on the table. Okay, maybe not hundreds but certainly several dozen. And if I REALLY wanted to drive this example home, I would have contrasted Mark's "final words" with the other 3 gospels and you can clearly see, all of them are fictional and scripturally based. Scripturally isn't really a word. but I like it. heheh
@xorthan But also, you can't get around the blunder of Jesus misinterpreting zechariah 9:9 and having Jesus ride 2 donkeys when the other THREE gospels say Jesus rode ONE donkey. Clearly, Matthew couldn't read Hebrew and he INVENTED the two-donkey story based on his understanding of Zechariah 9:9 from the LXX. This is how Matthew "rolled". A man sat with the Greek OT and a copy of Mark in his lap and rewrote Mark and added more "prophecy fulfillments".
@xorthan yes, there is no doubt but in this vid I only touch on like 3% of all the examples I could have included but then I would have been simply video-izing Randel Helms' "Gospel Fictions" book. It's hard to know where to start when you have a mountain of evidence you want to present. that's why it's taking me so long! thanks.
At 1:56 you say,"did they go to far... and start pulling pieces of verses out of context",I thought you were going to say ,"pulling pieces of verses out of their asses",lol. Faved.
Haha. Nothing to indicate He was sitting on both donkeys simultaneously. The main contention is solved with the simple deduction that a young colt which we can also deduce was at least mature enough to ride, would be easier led by the mother. So most of this video is incomplete since at best are only implicit details. It can be the motivator to investigate further but is in no way a concluding solid opinion.
Fantastic again. You've probably been asked before, but do you write the music you use in these videos? it seems to suit the style of your narrative really well.
@steviemgallacher yes, in fact, all the music in this series is written and played by me. I decided not to try finding music because it's time consuming just finding something appropriate and lucky if you can find any free music like that. So, I said screw it, I have a keyboard and a good synth and I'll just write my OWN! hahahha
@SuperSoylent2 yes, my friend, a gold star and two cookies! Heck, you deserve that much for being able to sit through them! hahaha All that text comparison can get a bit boring I'm sure. thank ya!
"If anyone says anything to you, say that the Lord needs [the donkeys], and he will send them right away." That must have been a neat trick for thieves back then: "Sure, stranger, take the donkey to this other stranger who says he's the "Lord". I'll try that this afternoon in my local store., I think.
True; on the other hand, »finding« a donkey in a village back then would probably be like »finding« a car in a parking deck: a self-fulfilling prophecy.
@SuperSoylent2 If that were true, there would be no reason to include anything about telling the real owners why they were taking his donkeys. ? "the lord has need of them" so, no, the text doesn't at all support the idea that Jesus owned them. "And if anyone says to you, 'Why are you doing this?' say, 'The Lord has need of it,' and immediately he will send it here."
has need, not "the lord owns them" I mean, it isn't 100% conclusive but that's how it sounds to me.
@virumoz Ah, but the LORD had need of them. I mean, an all-powerful being who spoke everything into existence somehow needed them. He couldn't just POOF two of them right there for Jesus, could he? I guess even gods get lazy over time.
Of everything I study concerning the "real" truth of new testament it's the a-historicity topic I love the most. Please tell me, is there any book that covers such things as these comparisons or along the line of this series?
@Dikotomii thanks. yeah, "The Jesus Puzzle" and "Gospel Fictions". one website that has some stuff along these lines is jesusneverexisted (dot) com. lot's more stuff out there that fits in too but aren't about that topic direclty. like the MacDonald book I referenced.
@Dikotomii Not that surprising when you consider that most of the people you talk to or are likely to encounter (where I live, anyway) are Christians, and if they happen to discover that you are an atheist, then you are immediately assailed with demands that you justify this "belief". So, I do. Then, for some reason, Christians don't want to talk about it anymore.
If Jesus had been smart and waited till modern times to operate his traveling magic show.
Jesus could have said...
"Go into the town. On the far end there is a dealership. Bring me a Benz that has not been driven before"
"A SLS AMG will do nicely. Preferably Iridium Silver Metallic, and the bang and olufsen 1000 watt sound system. Because that's how I roll. I'll have all that boom badoom boom super bass. Nicki Minaj can eat her heart out.
@yeshuahfullofit Glad to have been the conduit of a tiny yippie. :) It's the Christmas morning syndrome. oooooh, presents! and you kind of wait and think about which one to open. hehehe
Perhaps Jesus wasn't sitting on the two asses but standing upon them, straddling them like the Colossus of Rhodes? It would make for a triumphant scene... hahaha
Excellent series, TS. The evidence is really piling up for this being pure fiction. Really enjoying it.
@CyberViking27 Thanks. yeah, one foot on each donkey back. LOOK OUT, the king is cominggggggggggg! hahahha skuze me, ma'am, coming through WATCH OUT! hahhhaha I mean, cmon man. How ridiculous are all those paintings of Jesus on a donkey? I can't believe I used to believe this stuff.
@TruthSurge Since Jesus anticipated Captain Morgan, and Captain Morgan was a pirate, and Pastafarians dress like pirates, Jesus was a prophet of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
There were no pasta recipes before Jesus' time and now there are thousands of them. Where else did they come from?
Apologetics are fun and cheesy.
Of course, Jesus stuck the dismount but scored a 20 because he used two asses.
@TylerOmega The digging through it to find the real truths is actually quite fun. Discovering that Matthew made a boo-boo in his prophecy is great fun. Lots of gold in them thar hills.
Matthew is not familiar with Hellenic Judaism, either! καί in Greek also sometimes means "even" and he simply read the LXX with no input from Jews whatsoever. And of course, the colt mistranslation just makes it worse. I guess Matthew assumed Jesus used the little one as an ottoman.
EdM021 1 week ago
Amazing that anybody actually believes this stuff to be valid and true and an accurate depiction of historical events....great series!
1n354a 3 weeks ago
@1n354a thanks. lots of psychological dynamics are in place which almost ensure that the sheep will never break out of the pasture. Fear of hell, hope of seeing loved ones again, fear of death, hope of living forever, fear of dissent and peer pressure, on and on.
TruthSurge 3 weeks ago
Very well done videos! I'm learning stuff I never thought I'd look into again.
GodlessHappyAndFree 3 weeks ago
@GodlessHappyAndFree thanks. well, RElearning or reprogramming can be fun and helpful!
TruthSurge 3 weeks ago
Okay, back where I started; where we both thought the other was a fool. hahah Again, I found your facts to be solid. The difference is found in the way we handle them. Which is fine. So I will simply ask this: do you believe Socrates existed as a real person? I mean, we only have 4 scholars writing about him (Xenophon, Plato, Aristotle, and Aristophanes) and they all differ in many ways, thus leaving us with the "Socratic Problem" (sounds familiar hahah).
perichoresis7 1 month ago
@perichoresis7 "do you believe Socrates existed as a real person? "
I don't know enough to say one way or another. Also, Socrates never said that if I didn't believe he was the son of God, I'd be tortured for eternity. So, his existence was a non-issue for me. And as for "only 4 references) Jesus has only a handful also. Mark, Paul, Hebrews, and a few other epistle authors.
The old "you believe THIS guy is real and we have less evidence than Jesus" doesn't work.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
@perichoresis7 Have you watched my jesus myth vids? If not, that pretty much explains why i believe Jesus did NOT exist. I once was on the fence about it. It wasn't a necessity for my atheist position. But after reading Doherty's book, it became clear that the evidence against a real Jesus was overwhelming.
Watch my vids starting at part 2a if you are interested.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
@TruthSurge Will do. I enjoy seeing all sides of an issue. I will move to that series next. :)
perichoresis7 1 month ago
@perichoresis7 if you do, try to postpone your "but what about [fill in fleshy jesus verse here]?" reactions. :) There are several verses that SEEM to be issues but I address a few of them in later episodes. Still want to address more but just been doing other stuff.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
@TruthSurge hahah Noted. I will hold my rebuttals. :)
perichoresis7 1 month ago
@perichoresis7 So what? The edifice of Western Philosophy doesn't rest on the actual existence of Socrates.
spoddie 3 weeks ago in playlist Excavating The Empty Tomb (beyond a reasonable doubt)
@spoddie But the ideas and concepts that originated from this "Socrates", do rest on this person/character. No one has a truly original thought; we can only build on top of the works/ideas/concepts of those before us. The issue is, no one is questioning whether Socrates existed or not; we assume it. Even though our only accounts of his existence come from "disciples" of some sort. With that said, that was not a pivotal aspect of my argument; it was more of thought/side note. :)
perichoresis7 3 weeks ago
@perichoresis7 That's ridiculous. Even if Socrates was a fictional character we still have the writings attributed to him. Unlike Jesus Christ, Socrates' teachings don't depend on his existence.
spoddie 3 weeks ago
@spoddie My friend, we do not have a single word written by Socrates. The only substantial accounts we have of him and his teachings come from Plato and Xenophon. His faithful followers/successors. Making their writings biased. Meaning we don't technically know the "real" Socrates. And if Jesus is fiction, humanity has fallen prey to the largest scam ever constructed. Constructed by individuals in the first century; several around the same time (Paul's writings; Mark). Quite a stretch.
perichoresis7 3 weeks ago
@perichoresis7 I'm not your friend.
"Writings attributed to him" may have suggested that I was referring to texts written by Socrates but that's not what I meant. You ignored my point that the real Socrates is irrelevant.
So I assume you think Mohammed, Joseph Smith and every other non Christian religious leader couldn't possibly be scams either. They're too big to be scams as well, right?
spoddie 3 weeks ago
@spoddie The term "my friend" means I am speaking kindly. You don't need to consider yourself a friend if you don't wish. Mohammed was trapped in the idea that religions are cultural, heard some of these stories of Jesus and "believers", and constructed his own writings and beliefs for his culture (which is inline with descendents of Abraham). Joseph Smith is essential the same issue; he was "searching for a church/belief system that was right for him", which is a mistake in itself.
perichoresis7 3 weeks ago
@perichoresis7 You have an amazing ability to ignore points/questions you don't like or can't answer.
Apparently argument that Christianity is too big to be scam only applies Christianity and not to other large religions. The fallacy, argumentum ad numerum is what you've tried to argue.
spoddie 2 weeks ago
@spoddie Apparently you think insulting me makes you appear more intelligent; I'll allow you your imaginary throne. Knowing a Latin phrase does not suddenly make your point more valid than mine. I was simply making the point that if some would hold Christianity is a scam, they must hold it is the largest ever to be constructed. That's it. You accuse me of not answering questions, while you apparently enjoy straying off topic. The horse is dead. Stop beating it.
perichoresis7 2 weeks ago
@perichoresis7 You made a fallacious argument that the popularity of Christianity was an indicator of it's truth and pointed out that you don't apply this same argument to other religions. My mistake was using a short hand term for a much larger argument, but that's what educated people do.
It should be obvious to you that Atheists do in fact think that Christianity is at least one of the biggest scams in all of history.
spoddie 1 week ago
@spoddie You're focusing too much on a small side note (simply saying that you believe Christianity is the largest scam ever; which was obviously stated to receive an affirmative reply). The fact that the statement I made can ultimately be deconstructed through the use of logic, is irrelevant; bringing us back to correlation vs causation. Again, you are focusing on a very simple, (as you stated) obvious statement. But, if you want to discuss something substantial about Christianity, I'd love to.
perichoresis7 1 week ago
@perichoresis7 It's not up to you to decide what I decide to respond to; I respond to whatever I find interesting.You're a typical Christian, unable to cope once the discussion gets off script. You don't even understand what "correlation/causation" means.
No, I'm not interested in discussing Christianity with you, if you can't address the issues raised in these video then I'm not interested in you preaching your particular version of Christianity.
spoddie 1 week ago
@spoddie You are entitled to respond as you wish, but you are arguing meaningless points. Stop shouting at the rain; it's not listening. I am perfectly fine with "getting off script", but I would much rather hold a purposeful conversation. Discussing how my intentionally obvious point about Christianity being the biggest scam ever, is a rabbit trail unworthy of attention. The topic hear is literary issues found in the Bible; a point you originally missed in the Socratic analogy I used.
perichoresis7 1 week ago
@perichoresis7 I didn't miss your point at all, I addressed it specifically and yet you accuse me of veering off into minor points.
My advice is you should give up. Regardless of how much you claim that you're intelligent and educated, all I can do is assess you based on what you've written here (not "hear"); what I see is pathetic. You're not thick skinned at all, you're an arrogant, pompous hypocrite. But you are inadvertently correct on one point, you are are "unworthy of attention".
spoddie 6 days ago
@spoddie Let's assess the evidence: I point to two issues off topic (Socrates and a big scam) to enhance the discussion about the CENTRAL issue (literary moves being made by an author/authors). Then, you hang on to the off topic issues, make them central in your mind because you and I both know that metaphors always breakdown, and smoothly avoid in-depth discussions about what as come to be called the "Bible" as well as ancient texts because you know nothing of these things beyond the surface.
perichoresis7 6 days ago
@spoddie All you need to say is you have done little to no studying of Biblical/ancient texts, oral/literary traditions, and Koine Greek/Hebrew, and I will apologize for using metaphors that breakdown, defending my intelligence in response to your insults, and anything else you wish. I am sorry if i offended you in anyway.
perichoresis7 6 days ago
@spoddie Stop focusing on minor/pointless issues that you have the ability to grasp/handle, and return to the meaningful discussion this video was intending to initiate. I am not your "typical Christian"; your preconceived notions about me blind you to that fact. I enjoy these discussions. I want these discussions. Don't make assumptions about me. You have unfairly misunderstood who I am, where I am coming from, and the overall purpose of my comments simply because you know I am a Christian.
perichoresis7 1 week ago
@perichoresis7 I responded to your question:
"So I will simply ask this: do you believe Socrates existed as a real person? I mean, we only have 4 scholars writing about him (Xenophon, Plato, Aristotle, and Aristophanes) and they all differ in many ways, thus leaving us with the "Socratic Problem" (sounds familiar hahah)."
This is the heart of the question that these videos, the historicity (?) of Christ.
Then I responded to each point you raised.
...cont,...
spoddie 1 week ago
@spoddie ...cont
"Don't make assumptions about me. You have unfairly misunderstood who I am, where I am coming from, and the overall purpose of my comments simply because you know I am a Christian."
If you can't see the hypocrisy of that statement then you're a bigger fool than I gave you credit for. I'm not making assumptions, I explained exactly why I think you're a typical Christian, you're thinned skinned and quick to see insults where there are none (yes, I did just insult you)
spoddie 1 week ago
@spoddie Yet another false assumption. I am very thick skinned, hence my willingness to try to reconcile this conversation with you. If you try to back track and say you have not attempted to insult my intellect, you're lying to yourself. As for your two comments: how in the world is my statement hypocritical? Is English your second language? And secondly, you fail to see the point of the Socratic statement: we have a hand full of bias sources and yet we believe he was real. Why? That is it.
perichoresis7 1 week ago
@spoddie You think you've "won" this discussion but you haven't. Your lack of knowledge, and inability to understand the context of a conversation between Truthsurge and yours truly reveals your position on the issue: "All Christians are stupid, narrow-minded simpletons who don't know anything worth knowing." But I'm sorry, you happen to have stumbled across a fairly intelligent and educated Christian. Now, go read your little Richard Dawkins children book and let the grownups talk.
perichoresis7 1 week ago
@perichoresis7 yes, I would say a nerve has been struck. HEHEHEHEHHEHE
TruthSurge 5 days ago
@TruthSurge hahah Slightly. Shouting from a distance about issues one does not understand, is a pointless game. A game I am afraid I joined in here; shouting matches get us nowhere. Oops. haha
perichoresis7 5 days ago
@spoddie Furthermore, the term "correlation does not imply causation" seems to have flown over your head. Maybe master the English terms before jumping to Latin. The fact that some religions were PARTIAL scams constructed by humans does not mean ALL were. You are making a huge jump by saying that because Mohammed and Joseph Smith scammed millions, Christianity has done the same. All religions arose completely differently; some true, while others are lacking.
perichoresis7 2 weeks ago
@perichoresis7, it is inaccurate to equate Christianity to the largest scam ever constructed and that it was pulled off by first century people. When it began, it was very small. It's influence was spread far and wide by men who lived throughout the last 2000 years. Christianity owes its influence to many, many generations of proselytizers. As such, it is large, but not unique, for Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc, also claimed great numbers. Regardless, it's argumentum ad populum.
DarkMatter2525 2 weeks ago
@DarkMatter2525 I understand your argument, but you must also understand what I'm saying. Google largest religions worldwide and you'll see Christianity is the largest (although many probably don't act like it). Yes, it was not the largest in the first century but because the religion finds its origin in the first century, all later followers would ideal fall victim to its influence (to use the context of this video's language). Hence, my use of the term "largest scam".
perichoresis7 2 weeks ago
@perichoresis7 *ideally
perichoresis7 2 weeks ago
Plus he stole those Donkeys from somebody who owned them, i guess the owner didn't need those donkeys??
karlbuttler 1 month ago
@karlbuttler borrowed, man, borrowed. He borrowed the burrows. hehe
TruthSurge 1 month ago
I had a Midrash once. I applied ointment judiciously.
It's gone now. :D
jdh501 1 month ago
@jdh501 :)
TruthSurge 1 month ago
You know what you're talking about; that is clear. But your points no more disprove the existence of Jesus than my personal experiences prove the existence of God. The author of Matt. lacking knowledge on Hebrew does not disprove Jesus' existence; it points out a meaningless human error that in no way effects the purpose of the Gospel: Jesus is the Christ and he is the bringer of perfect jubilee/the Kingdom of God/life. God has fully revealed God's self in Jesus with finality.
perichoresis7 1 month ago
@perichoresis7 "disprove the existence of Jesus "
Regarding historical events, there is never disproof or proof. There is only convincing cases and WHO is convinced depends upon WHO is doing the considering and weighing of evidence. What I find convincing may not convince you so I am not at all concerned about whether my evidence convinces you beyond any doubts. I just say my belief and give my reasons (usually only some of them).
TruthSurge 1 month ago
@perichoresis7 "in no way effects" affects, not effects.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
@TruthSurge haha if "effects" is my worst 2 am typo, I can live with that. But even so, I invite the correction.
perichoresis7 1 month ago
@perichoresis7 By your last couple of sentences, I see it would be pointless to refer you to my Jesus Myth series of vids for an in-depth look at the reasons I believe there never was a physical Jesus in the 1st century.
And further, I would also conclude that we won't make much progress in any kind of comments back and forth. Your stance won't allow you to consider the claim that Jesus did not exist or that the Bible story of him is fictional.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
@TruthSurge Yes, I have my beliefs and you have yours, but I am an extremely open minded person. I have questions. First, if the Gospels constitute a fictional construction, then why would the Gospel writers involve women so heavily when it comes to spreading the information of Jesus' resurrection? During this time, women were not considered reliable sources, and yet we have the Gospel writers' "falsified" stories using women as their source. Why do that if it is all ready false?
perichoresis7 1 month ago
@perichoresis7 "why would the Gospel writers involve women so heavily when it comes to spreading the information of Jesus' resurrection? "
Because the gospel authors were GREEKs, Romans, non-Jews. They were not Arabs/Jews. They had no patristic domination belief/society.
"Mark" was almost certainly a Roman citizen writing around 72 CE. Matthew, Gentile as well. Neither could read Hebrew. Luke? Gentile. John? Not 100% sure but then that one is a slightly different 1.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
@perichoresis7 "During this time, women were not considered reliable sources,"
No, during that time IN THE MIDDLE EAST. Rome, Greece, all the MODERN regions did not have the same type of male domination as the Middle-East.
You think you know, but you don't. You say you are open minded, but you don't care enough to go searching for answers that actually add up. It's the same old apologetic bullshit. Please... do YOURSELF a favor. Read some Bart Ehrman. Misquoting Jesus.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
@TruthSurge I own the book. But it is behind several other books. Presently speaking, Hunger Games. haha I wanted to read it in order to see if I wanted to see the movie.
perichoresis7 1 month ago
@perichoresis7 dig it out and read it again! Then watch this series from the start. just search the title and it'll come up a blue white light thumb. The check out my dating the NT vids where I look at how I date the gospel of Mark. Right or wrong, you might get something out of that. I don't try to push the dates way late. They might be later but they can't be TOO late or they then start to cram other writings that refer to them or the ones we'd call them.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
@TruthSurge But what is your source for saying that Rome and Greece were not male dominate? Everything I have read clearly points out how women were not equal to men in many different ways and were mostly "stay-at-home moms". In John 4, we see the first person Jesus reveals himself to is a Samaritan (strike 1), woman (strike 2), with questionable social agendas (5 husbands and living with a "boyfriend").
perichoresis7 1 month ago
@perichoresis7 "But what is your source for saying that Rome and Greece were not male dominate?"
Every single Greek and Roman writing from 800 BCE till 100 CE. Jesus, man, you are in SERIOUS need of some larnin. :) Look, the Greeks and Romans had FEMALE GODS (godesses). Wikipedia. Spend a few years on there. I have spent decades reading about the Bible and things that fed INTO it. Run, don't walk! RUN to wikipedia. My god... IT'S FREE!!!!!
TruthSurge 1 month ago
@TruthSurge Even several letters of "Paul" (meaning not actually Paul's work) are still suggesting the lower position of women (1 Cor. 14:34; 1 Tim. 2:12). Women were less reliable during the time, no matter where one found one's self geographically. My studies would show that saying, "women were equal to men back then" is like saying, "women are not treated like objects in today's world."
perichoresis7 1 month ago
@perichoresis7 THOSE are Jews, man. Arabs/Jews/mesopotamian... but especially JEWS. ANd all who followed that doctrinal slant. Yes, the forged 1 and 2 Timothy follow in Paul's doctrines of "women have no authority over men". That has NOTHING to do with the Greek-written gospels and their authors.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
Great work TruthSurge ★★★★★
Katalyzt
Katalyzt 1 month ago
@Katalyzt thanks! nice to see the stars again. :) rating it old school. HAHA
TruthSurge 1 month ago
Great work TruthSurge ★★★★★
Katalyzt
Katalyzt 1 month ago
Fascinating. Thank you!
fragglet 1 month ago
@fragglet thanks!
TruthSurge 1 month ago
This is fascinating stuff. I don't know how christians can ignore things like this.
BennyOcean 1 month ago
@BennyOcean 2000 years of it, bro. HAHAHAH same apologetics tactics they've used since the 2nd century. thanks!
TruthSurge 1 month ago
@BennyOcean Easy. This requires real study AND then to further, real honesty as to the evidence and where it leads you. But, as a Christian, you push these things aside and hold to belief no matter the evidence. It's really hard to be that honest with yourself, to admit that you've been wrong, to admit that your family, your friends are wrong. I think that this is why the path to atheism is a long and difficult path.
vryc 1 month ago
so fascinating! I have my bible out here following along. I had a little trouble verifying your Hebrew translation of Ps 22:8 and google translate couldn't handle the hebrew, but everything else appears to be correct. Where did you get the hebrew translation from? Great video
Prplfox 1 month ago in playlist Excavating The Empty Tomb (beyond a reasonable doubt)
@Prplfox wow. Not many people would dig in and try to verify what they see in a vid. kudos to you. I admit that I don't hold exclusively to any one version of the Bible. I believe they all can fall prey to mistranslations. That is not to say I know more than all of them combined. It just means that sometimes, VERY rarely, I believe they do get it wrong. I use blueletterbible a lot and mostly try to use easy to read versions unless there is a translation issue at stake.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
@Prplfox Is there a specific question you had ref that?
TruthSurge 1 month ago
@Prplfox if you meant the Tanakh version, just google online tanakh. But, imo, even that has some translation issues here and there. But if you have any gripes or find any errors, let me know.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
An alternative explanation for the two donkeys could be that Jesus was a rather big boned gentleman.
werecow2003 1 month ago
@werecow2003 If you're serious about putting that explanation forward, boy, I pity the poor SINGLE donkey he rode in Mark, Luke and John! :)
TruthSurge 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Disciples leaping around town stealing livestock. Some dude riding two donkeys at once like a clown in a rodeo show! Too much!
But seriously T, I love this series that you have/are putting together.
Well researched and excellently pulled together!!
My hat's off to you sir.
FishHeadSalad 1 month ago in playlist Excavating The Empty Tomb (beyond a reasonable doubt)
Comment removed
FishHeadSalad 1 month ago in playlist Excavating The Empty Tomb (beyond a reasonable doubt)
Toto: "Hosana"
Ho-sana...Ho-sana...
2eelShmeal 1 month ago
@2eelShmeal "I never thought that praising you could ever hurt so baaaaaad Hosanaaaaaaaa!" SOLO!
TruthSurge 1 month ago
@TruthSurge hahaha
2eelShmeal 1 month ago
@2eelShmeal yeah, lots of parodies in them thar hills. but no time to do them!
TruthSurge 1 month ago
Excellent work.
falchion49 1 month ago
@falchion49 thanks!
TruthSurge 1 month ago
I sought "the truth" through Christianity for many years, and by growing to love the truth I had to step down from believing in Biblical inerrancy. This series has helped me tidy up some residual clutter from that perspective, and I am eager to share it with believing friends. My only concern is how they'll react to the cognitive dissonance they'll undoubtedly experience. I look forward to the next installment, and hope I won't have to wait long! Thanks very much.
Celebduath 1 month ago
@Celebduath thank ya! Well, everyone is on some path or distance from you and from me. Or perhaps a better analogy is a record or LP or phonograph disc. Truth being at the center is where we want to go. But everyone is spread out on the disc at various distances from that. So, those on the very edge will likely not watch this at all. They can't. sad, but true. they can only watch something at the level of song 2. :) anyway, keep trying tho!!!
TruthSurge 1 month ago
Comment removed
PoFFizdaMan 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Celebduath you're not the only one... my story is very similar, and i feel the same way about TS's videos. I knew the gospels had to be fiction, but now i know exactly where the authors got all their inspiration from.
PoFFizdaMan 1 month ago
Poor Matthew, one feels that if there was eternal life he'd want to come back and "edit" his work....I suppose that he is kinda doing that through the hundred of apologists out there. Great work as usual exposing the fraud of the bible's creation.
lawbag1 1 month ago
@lawbag1 thanks. yes! That's true. The apologists and Christians tend to completely ignore the "two-donkey" version of Matthew and go with the ONE donkey version of the other three. Same for Mark's "young lad in white". That's not memorable enough so they go with the angel of Matthew or two men in white of Luke and you NEVER see a painting of just a boy in white at the tomb.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
I've said it before, but this series is really good, I'm glued to the screen almost, cause it's so interesting. I have recommend this series to other YT-users too.:)
winterstellar 1 month ago in playlist Excavating The Empty Tomb (beyond a reasonable doubt)
@winterstellar thanks! Glad you like it. It's a struggle to keep it interresting because sometimes the text compares might get a bit boring as it is mainly just a look at the textual variants between text A and B but I'll try to throw in some sex and violence in the next one. HAHHAHAAH
TruthSurge 1 month ago
@TruthSurge I've always been curious about something. Christians like to say that ever since Jesus people live in a time of grace and that god is no longer the vengeful guy that he used to be, at least not on a mortal scale. Yet, the story of Ananias and Saphira would show that to be untrue to an extent. They were both chrisitans, yet "god" supposedly struck them dead on the spot for not paying a full tithe and keeping some for themselves. WTF?
TempleOfInanna2 1 month ago
@TempleOfInanna2 yep. what can we say? God is a bitch! Don't eff with him! hahaha
TruthSurge 1 month ago
@TempleOfInanna2 But yeah, how would an apologist answer that? "Oh, that was just an example needed during that time so that FUTURE CHristians would know to give the full tithe." ? so..... we need someone killed for every little thing we might do wrong then? Do we really need an example? But further, if god DID intervene like that ALWAYS and consistently, there would BE no unbelievers. Rebels, yes, unbelievers, no.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
@TruthSurge Yeah. It's interesting that the Bible has Jesus saying phrases like "the kingdom of God is within you", yet on the same token people are still expected to pony up cash to clergy and spiritual leaders, with possible dire consequences if they don't? The thing reeks of manly agendas.
TempleOfInanna2 1 month ago
@TempleOfInanna2 Well, you know what they say.... (uh, LOTS of things) but...
too many cooks spoil the soup and it's a perfect analogy with the NT.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
"God speaking through the prophets of old about his Son." I'm glad the Jews agree. After all, it's their ancient book :) On another note about the virgin birth found in Matthew, this is lifted out of context. Isaiah 7:14 and 9:8 are supposedly about Jesus, according to christians. Yet, if you start at Isaiah chapter 7 and read THROUGH chapter 10, it tells very specifically who this child is, and what he will do. His name is Mahershalalhashbez, called "the Immanuel", and born in that time period.
TempleOfInanna2 1 month ago
@TempleOfInanna2 ...and, this also brings light onto the fact that the Hebrew word "alma" actually means young woman instead of virgin, considering the child in question was born by mortal means in that day and age.
TempleOfInanna2 1 month ago
@TempleOfInanna2 And all of this was caused because Mark and Matthew could not read Hebrew and had to rely on the LXX which translated the Hebrew alma as "virgin". Yes, a quick 2 minute read of really just ch 7 and 8 will show you that the prophecy was already fulfilled DURING Isaiah's lifetime and the miracle was not a virgin birth (for Isaiah is said to have gone "in to the prophetess" a euphemism for sexual intercourse) but a male child. that was the prophecy.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
@TempleOfInanna2 The midrashers were so eager to find Jesus in the OT that they would jerk any part of a phrase out of context to make a new prophecy of Jesus. Sadly, they relied on a rather faulty translation, the LXX. :( I chose not to include the 7:14 but that's a good one. It's pretty well-known though. well, by us non-buhleevers.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
This is a wonderful series. Thanks for taking the time and effort to make them...
cosmos11 1 month ago
@cosmos11 thank ya!
TruthSurge 1 month ago
Truth surge, are you not considered a scholar?
iliveon 1 month ago
@iliveon well, my guess is that maybe a very few number of people might consider calling me one but I've never called myself one or thought of myself as one. I mean, scholar in the loose sense of the term but not a true "Biblical" scholar with a pedigree and some fancy letters after my name. :) I just enjoy reading up on the stuff and making vids that I feel explain the issues as I understand them. And I try to find less cliche' topics to do also. thank ya.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
What the hell. This didn't even show up in my subs. Great video, Truth!
TempleOfInanna2 1 month ago
@TempleOfInanna2 thanks! well, you know if someone uploads 2 or more vids, you get that + symbol you have to click to view all the uploads by that person. A braindead amoeba redesigned this so that you cannot close watched vids, you cannot see each new upload separately and you are steadily pushed away from youtube as a producer type. They just want more braindead drones to watch the ads.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
Jesus, the mastermind behind Grand Theft Donkey... Thou shall not steal, my hairy arse...
eat666shit 1 month ago
@eat666shit heheh he only BORROWED them. cmon. hehehhe
TruthSurge 1 month ago
I don't understand why you think Jesus' "my god my god" phrase was MORE likely Mark putting words in his mouth. Same thing with the heckler quoting scripture.
If this stuff really happened, why wouldn't Jesus have quoted scripture on the cross? Why wouldn't the heckler use scripture to mock him? Don't people do the same sort of thing now-a-days?
xorthan 1 month ago
@xorthan You can't surely believe that Jesus, almost dead, would suddenly start quoting scripture verbatim but worse, ALL of the events in his "passion" come from old testament passages. So, tell me, which is MORE probable, all those things really happened (some in contradiction based on which gospel you read) OR the gospel writers were simply constructing the story of Jesus by USING the old testament passages? I'd say explanation #2.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
@TruthSurge
I don't know. People say all sorts of weird things when they're dying. If you've devoted your whole life to "fulfilling scripture," I wouldn't be surprised to hear you quote it as you died. Take a look at the variety of last words on wikiquote...
I don't think Jesus did half the stuff he's purported to do. I'm just not sure his quoting of scripture during the passion is the best evidence for that...
xorthan 1 month ago
@xorthan Your pt is understood. But thankfully for me, my main pt doesn't rest MERELY on the weight of that one example. :) It is just one of hundreds we could put on the table. Okay, maybe not hundreds but certainly several dozen. And if I REALLY wanted to drive this example home, I would have contrasted Mark's "final words" with the other 3 gospels and you can clearly see, all of them are fictional and scripturally based. Scripturally isn't really a word. but I like it. heheh
TruthSurge 1 month ago
@xorthan But also, you can't get around the blunder of Jesus misinterpreting zechariah 9:9 and having Jesus ride 2 donkeys when the other THREE gospels say Jesus rode ONE donkey. Clearly, Matthew couldn't read Hebrew and he INVENTED the two-donkey story based on his understanding of Zechariah 9:9 from the LXX. This is how Matthew "rolled". A man sat with the Greek OT and a copy of Mark in his lap and rewrote Mark and added more "prophecy fulfillments".
TruthSurge 1 month ago
@TruthSurge
I'm in complete agreement with you on this part!
xorthan 1 month ago
@xorthan yes, there is no doubt but in this vid I only touch on like 3% of all the examples I could have included but then I would have been simply video-izing Randel Helms' "Gospel Fictions" book. It's hard to know where to start when you have a mountain of evidence you want to present. that's why it's taking me so long! thanks.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
This was amazing........thank you.
FreeThinkingCrusader 1 month ago
@FreeThinkingCrusader thank ya!
TruthSurge 1 month ago
At 1:56 you say,"did they go to far... and start pulling pieces of verses out of context",I thought you were going to say ,"pulling pieces of verses out of their asses",lol. Faved.
cosmicskydaddy1 1 month ago
it takes a really powerful delusion to remain christian today IF one actually investigate the sheit one believes in.
Paxmax 1 month ago 2
etymological joy.
AtheistCitizen 1 month ago
in the text displayed at 5:48- you have a tiny typo. "hart" instead of heart
Paxmax 1 month ago
Haha. Nothing to indicate He was sitting on both donkeys simultaneously. The main contention is solved with the simple deduction that a young colt which we can also deduce was at least mature enough to ride, would be easier led by the mother. So most of this video is incomplete since at best are only implicit details. It can be the motivator to investigate further but is in no way a concluding solid opinion.
MayonR 1 month ago
Maybe Jesus wanted a donkey and a Colt.
SAsgarters 1 month ago
@SAsgarters ...a Colt 45! lol
TheD0ded0de 1 month ago
@SAsgarters He could have used a Colt 45 - ice cold. hehehe
TruthSurge 1 month ago
Fantastic again. You've probably been asked before, but do you write the music you use in these videos? it seems to suit the style of your narrative really well.
steviemgallacher 1 month ago
@steviemgallacher yes, in fact, all the music in this series is written and played by me. I decided not to try finding music because it's time consuming just finding something appropriate and lucky if you can find any free music like that. So, I said screw it, I have a keyboard and a good synth and I'll just write my OWN! hahahha
I agree. It's much much better this way. thanks!
TruthSurge 1 month ago
Truth at his best! Excellent series, my man!
IllPropaganda 1 month ago
@IllPropaganda thank ya!
TruthSurge 1 month ago
I finished my lessen TS! Do I get a gold star? I really do enjoy your class.
SuperSoylent2 1 month ago
@SuperSoylent2 yes, my friend, a gold star and two cookies! Heck, you deserve that much for being able to sit through them! hahaha All that text comparison can get a bit boring I'm sure. thank ya!
TruthSurge 1 month ago
"If anyone says anything to you, say that the Lord needs [the donkeys], and he will send them right away." That must have been a neat trick for thieves back then: "Sure, stranger, take the donkey to this other stranger who says he's the "Lord". I'll try that this afternoon in my local store., I think.
wimsweden 1 month ago
Anybody troubled by the thievery aspect? Those biblical scoundrels stole the poor animal!
»Oh look, a little donkey, and no one's sitting on it. Let's take it into custody. Doo dee doo dee doo...«
virumoz 1 month ago
@virumoz Not to play the Devil's advocate here but how do we know it wasn't Jesus' donkey? He seemed to know right where it was.
SuperSoylent2 1 month ago
@SuperSoylent2
True; on the other hand, »finding« a donkey in a village back then would probably be like »finding« a car in a parking deck: a self-fulfilling prophecy.
virumoz 1 month ago
Comment removed
virumoz 1 month ago
@SuperSoylent2 If that were true, there would be no reason to include anything about telling the real owners why they were taking his donkeys. ? "the lord has need of them" so, no, the text doesn't at all support the idea that Jesus owned them. "And if anyone says to you, 'Why are you doing this?' say, 'The Lord has need of it,' and immediately he will send it here."
has need, not "the lord owns them" I mean, it isn't 100% conclusive but that's how it sounds to me.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
@virumoz Ah, but the LORD had need of them. I mean, an all-powerful being who spoke everything into existence somehow needed them. He couldn't just POOF two of them right there for Jesus, could he? I guess even gods get lazy over time.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
As always, AWESOME!
Of everything I study concerning the "real" truth of new testament it's the a-historicity topic I love the most. Please tell me, is there any book that covers such things as these comparisons or along the line of this series?
Keep up the awesome work podna.
Thanks again.
Dikotomii 1 month ago
@Dikotomii thanks. yeah, "The Jesus Puzzle" and "Gospel Fictions". one website that has some stuff along these lines is jesusneverexisted (dot) com. lot's more stuff out there that fits in too but aren't about that topic direclty. like the MacDonald book I referenced.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
@Dikotomii You might try "The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man" by Robert Price.
seleroan 1 month ago
@seleroan Thank you both greatly for the book titles. Now I have something to read.
It's funny how atheists can't get enough of the crack that is "Bible" but theists never break the seal.
Dikotomii 1 month ago
@Dikotomii Not that surprising when you consider that most of the people you talk to or are likely to encounter (where I live, anyway) are Christians, and if they happen to discover that you are an atheist, then you are immediately assailed with demands that you justify this "belief". So, I do. Then, for some reason, Christians don't want to talk about it anymore.
seleroan 1 month ago
what an ass! very nice video as per usual :).
Blackerer 1 month ago
@Blackerer why you.... hehehe thanks!
TruthSurge 1 month ago
ROFL at the donkeys. I'd have that midrash looked at, though. Could be shingles.
rozeboosje 1 month ago
@rozeboosje hehehe Thars an oinment fer that! I thank it's called Reezun (tm).
TruthSurge 1 month ago
Shame on you for keeping me waiting that long. But as always, the wait was worth it. Excellent piece of work.
FelidaTheG33k 1 month ago
@FelidaTheG33k I'm a baaaaad boy. :( hehe thanks! hopefully, 11b won't take so long.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
I hope that one day, documentaries debunking Jesus will be as common as documentaries on WWII.
alienisuntverus 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos 2
@alienisuntverus I hope. :)
TruthSurge 1 month ago
Black Jesus addressing the crowds in Jerusalem: "I rode into town today on an ass - yo momma's ass!" - coutresy of The Family Guy
TheD0ded0de 1 month ago
@TheD0ded0de ooooooh. good way to hasten a crucifixion. HEHEHHEHE
TruthSurge 1 month ago
Great vid! You've done it again!
TheD0ded0de 1 month ago
@TheD0ded0de thank ya!
TruthSurge 1 month ago
If Jesus had been smart and waited till modern times to operate his traveling magic show.
Jesus could have said...
"Go into the town. On the far end there is a dealership. Bring me a Benz that has not been driven before"
"A SLS AMG will do nicely. Preferably Iridium Silver Metallic, and the bang and olufsen 1000 watt sound system. Because that's how I roll. I'll have all that boom badoom boom super bass. Nicki Minaj can eat her heart out.
xdassinx 1 month ago
@xdassinx hahaha yeah, too bad he had to settle for a donkey. Not much "roll" there.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
I always get the feeling of a little "yippie!" when I see another video of this series in my inbox. Thank you! Another excellent video. ; )
yeshuahfullofit 1 month ago
@yeshuahfullofit Glad to have been the conduit of a tiny yippie. :) It's the Christmas morning syndrome. oooooh, presents! and you kind of wait and think about which one to open. hehehe
TruthSurge 1 month ago
Perhaps Jesus wasn't sitting on the two asses but standing upon them, straddling them like the Colossus of Rhodes? It would make for a triumphant scene... hahaha
Excellent series, TS. The evidence is really piling up for this being pure fiction. Really enjoying it.
CyberViking27 1 month ago
@CyberViking27 Thanks. yeah, one foot on each donkey back. LOOK OUT, the king is cominggggggggggg! hahahha skuze me, ma'am, coming through WATCH OUT! hahhhaha I mean, cmon man. How ridiculous are all those paintings of Jesus on a donkey? I can't believe I used to believe this stuff.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
@TruthSurge If he rode two donkeys of different sizes standing, he would be in the Captain Morgan pose!
8WholeThing 1 month ago
@8WholeThing hehehe yup. and that would be an epic stance to take for his triumphal entry! hahahha
TruthSurge 1 month ago
@TruthSurge Since Jesus anticipated Captain Morgan, and Captain Morgan was a pirate, and Pastafarians dress like pirates, Jesus was a prophet of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
There were no pasta recipes before Jesus' time and now there are thousands of them. Where else did they come from?
Apologetics are fun and cheesy.
Of course, Jesus stuck the dismount but scored a 20 because he used two asses.
8WholeThing 1 month ago
@8WholeThing hahaha I believe you! in fact, I'm going to the triumphal entry ENTRY on wikipedia and updating it with this. :)
TruthSurge 1 month ago
Sometimes I think I hate religion...then I remember how much I love it.
TylerOmega 1 month ago
@TylerOmega The digging through it to find the real truths is actually quite fun. Discovering that Matthew made a boo-boo in his prophecy is great fun. Lots of gold in them thar hills.
TruthSurge 1 month ago
Excellent job. Looking forward to 11b.
SpinachSalad01 1 month ago
@SpinachSalad01 thanks!
TruthSurge 1 month ago
You know, you are not Hitchcock... :>) This suspense thingy is is driving me nuts (should I say is driving my nuts?) Whatever man... you rock!
jolulipa 1 month ago
@jolulipa Today I uploaded my 9th part of the series in Spanish. Is this some kind of freakish coincidence? hummm...
jolulipa 1 month ago