An Atheist Discusses Biblical Inerrancy Part 3

[BedfordBears]

just look at the ressurection stories through the gospels in the order they were written, start with mark who scholars agree ended with the "tomb was empty" then other added later, look how the story grows! once i realised, i realised i was believing in a myth

[jewyjewington]

Hi tillnow67,

Towards then end of the video around 7:49 or so, you mentioned a Wednesday crucifixion scenario and you claim that this confuses the time line even more. Have you done a video on the matter or did you avoid actually telling us how the Wednesday scenario is wrong? The majority(not all) of the video I just watched here is correct. However, I don't get the impression that you know which sabbath the Bible is talking about when it says "the day before the sabbath". It is Wednesday.

[tobiosnmakky]

but if luke or matthew etc wrote it, then the deity didnt,

isnt it possble the writers were just not very smart

i mean they wrote the book years ago, hundreds of years ago,

but medicine wasnt as good as now fifty years ago. math is improving, knowledge is building,

back then could the writers just have been average for the time, or even smart for the time,

but still fairly stupid in ways compared to our time?

[HAITIAN909]

Dude you are just confusing yourself. You're saying things that you have no complete knowledge of. Please keep reading and all Disciples of our Lord Jesus Christ, please pray for the lost sheep and those who have demons dwelling in them. May God bless yal and have mercy on all of our souls. REPENT FOR THE KINGDOM OF GOD IS NEAR!!!!

[lizazoon]

HAITIAN909 please pray for the lost sheep and those who have demons dwelling in them. --

There are NO demons. Period.

[HAITIAN909]

Well at least we know who is dwelling in you my friend. You and the rest of the lost sheep will be in my prayers. Read you're Bible please and pray to our Lord God, through his Son, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. God Bless

[angelNoll10]

@lizazoon How would you know? just because YOU have never seen a demon, doesn't mean they don't exsist...

[lizazoon]

HAITIAN909:--You're saying things that you have no complete knowledge of-- I am SOOOO happy that at least one person in this worlds has conplete knowledge of things.-- Pray for yourself as well. You need it more than me.

[tillnow67]

@HAITIAN909 Nice rebuttal, I particularly like how you avoided specifics and kept to vague generalities. That should serve you well as you cannot articulate a valid response. By the way, I bet it felt like the kingdom was near when the earthquake hit, huh?

[Edinaldo08]

Jesus died in 14 Nisan, Wednesday at 3pm and resurrected in 17 Nisan, Saturday at 3pm.

The good friday tradition is the one that is wrong. It is a misunderstantding of the meaning of the word "sabat". It doesn't mean "saturday", it means "to cease" (working). So, all saturdays are "sabats" but passover, 15 Nisan also is. That's why the Bible says that in the day before the sabat Jesus was crucified. This sabat is not a Saturday but the Passover.

[TheGodstalkstome]

Jesus was Egyptian? or was he lying?

[jazzyhap]

"...the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth."

Analogy

Otherwise, we not only need to figure out the 72 hours, but that would be easy compared to proving the earth has a heart. :)

[tillnow67]

If you take the timing figuratively, as you seem to suggest, why wouldn't one take the idea of Jesus being buried figuratively as well? Maybe the "heart of the earth" is analogous to one saying "in the heart of Texas", Would you accept the notion that he wasn't literally buried at all? Would you accept the idea that Jonah wasn't literally in the whales belly, that maybe he just went for a ride on the whales back? The wordplay you are using to get out of one pickle only creates others.

[jazzyhap]

"The wordplay you are using to get out of one pickle only creates others."

Matthew 12:40 "heart" in "the heart of the earth"

καρδία

kardia

kar-dee'-ah

Prolonged from a primary κάρ kar (Latin cor, heart); the heart, that is, (figuratively) the thoughts or feelings (mind); also *****(by analogy) the middle: - (+ broken-) heart (-ed).

[trac4yt]

tillnow is a supposed chemical-onlyite like Hitchens and Dawkins?

Science can't create 1 cell of anything.

It can't create the spiritual base.

..no ultimate answers there...never was.

God has inspired and providentially preserved His Word perfect in the Bible. It is thus sacred, infallible, and final authority.

Always dump Bible critical information created by the antichrists and sin-defenders. It's all worthless.

:-)

[bellyofadolphin]

I'm shocked I never noticed this, very well explained!

[CBK81]

I share a similar background as yourself, once wanting to be a youth minister. I came to similar conclusions as you have, but mine came from the seemingly split personality of God between the old and new testements. To me, the jealous and murderous god of the old testement is proof that the old testement is bull. So therefore Jesus and the new testement must also be bull. It's a shame that people are too rooted in their belifs to acknowledge the obvious truth of atheism.

[jlim2397]

Hi tillnow67!

Well done. But I would recommend blocking all comments on your videos, as the angry comments from fundamentalists are distracting from your message.

Jonathan

[tillnow67]

Thanks Jonathon, but the angry comments from fundamentalists are PART OF the message. If they had real answers to these contradictions they would simply post them here and make me look foolish. But they don't. So they post angry, sometimes ridiculous rants here and make themselves look foolish. There's no way I'm disabling that.

[bl4ckd0g187]

'If they had real answers to these contradictions they would simply post them here and make me look foolish. But they don't. So they post angry, sometimes ridiculous rants here and make themselves look foolish. There's no way I'm disabling that.'

-do they ever make reference to 100's of prophecies that supposedly came true in the bible? they keep rambling about that to me- and they don't consider that these could be coincidence.

[zo10]

Well said tillnow67. Let t hem make a fool of themselves with their responses. These so called christians can never come up with a factual answer without contradicting other so called facts.

Well done! You explain these things so clearly and eloquently!!!

[angelNoll10]

@zo10 First of all we are not "So called christians" we are christians period. "Can never come up with a factual answer" maybe thats because god makes so many miracles that can't be explained in a "factual" way.

[Zakdayak]

Devastating critique...

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

So I type in a huge entry and youtube won't take it. So I copied half of it to reenter it, but when I cam back all the comments from the last 5 days were gone.

So I want you to tell me zig, how your view can account for the 11 apostles believing that they had seen Jesus risen from the dead.

[tjohooorider]

Just a comment about the sick man. If it is a monday and his master left him three days ago that would mean friday, since one day ago means sunday. I thus count three days and three nights. Right?

[truthamerica911]

I would say there are minor problems attributable to copyist errors. I am not quite sure what you mean by contradicting historians and scientists. There is no other ancient document comparable to the New Testament. It is the best ancient document with a massive amount of historic corroboration. Can you tell me even one issue which science can raise against Scripture?

[tillnow67]

Copyist errors is a cop-out. There are NO surviving original manuscripts of any part of the bible. So there is no way to prove or disprove copyist error. But the fact that all "copies" have the same errors is strong evidence that the original contained the same errors.

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

I actually read Greek. You can track texts across hundreds of years. The early ones do not have mistakes that later ones have. I am agnostic about inerrancy, but I have yet to hear a good argument against the originals.

I am not arguing the originals were inerrant, but only that you can not argue that they were. It is an argument to agnosticism.

[tillnow67]

Actually all of the earliest surviving manuscripts share the same errors and contradictions. True, we don't have any originals, but the fact that every surviving copy contains the same errors and contradictions is strong evidence that they came from the originals.

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

You are completely wrong. I actually read these texts. Who do you think you are coming and telling me what I know for a fact is not true. There are many manuscripts later on (Textus Receptus) which have hundreds of errors not in early manuscripts.

Go try that crap on a baby Christian. I read ancient Greek Foo.

[tillnow67]

Who do I think I am? Fuck you! You ARE wrong in addition to being an arrogant asshole about it. You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are NOT entitled to make up your own facts.

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

This is very reasonable of you.

I think if you just cuss me out a little more I will be intellectually persuaded. If you throw in an aneurysm or a heart attack and I think I will totally convinced.

Yep, some use good arguments others say things loud. You are the latter, but certainly not the least.

=)

[wonderbread21727]

Nope, you won't be persuaded. You already think you know it all because YOU took Greek. That's great. Now you can live in your mother's basement and look down your nose at other people on the internet because YOU took Greek. Go make me a Giro bitch.

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

LOL, since you guys still do not believe me, I will give you a specific. I have my Greek New Testament out right here.

P66 and P75 omit John 7:53-8:11, however the textus receptus includes it.

There is an example.

Now, I want to see how unreasonable and ignorant you can be. Let me hear you tell me I'm still wrong.

-_+

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

Listen, I actually read Greek. If you want I can make you a list of error which are found in the 10th century texts of the Textus Receptus, which are not in the second century early texts. I am not sure why I would need to, since anyone with even a first semester's worth of koine Greek should know that. Let me know if you want me to list a few specifics.

[tillnow67]

AS for science contradicting scripture, the age of the earth.

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

The Bible does not say how old the earth is. Church people certainly do say it does a lot. However, I challenge you to explain how the Bible gives an age for the earth. Also, tell me how old it says the earth is.

[tillnow67]

The Bible gives lineages by name all the way back to Adam. It also names the oldest man to ever live. So by using the lineages and knowing the max age for anyone in those lineages a max age of about 6,000 to 10,000 years is established.

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

Yes, I am well aware of this. However, that does not mean the earth is that old. What does it say about the age of the earth? The sun and moon were made on the 4th day. So clearly it is not literal.

So not only does Genesis not say the earth is that old, but it is also written in a way that seems quite PLAUSIBLY allegorical.

[tillnow67]

Yes it can be taken as allegory or as total bullshit. But there are plenty of fundamentalists who take it as literal, historical truth. Those are the people this series is made for.

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

It is completely consistent to say you can take Genesis as allegory and also the Bible is inerrant. If the author intentionally sets out to make an allegory, we do not go back and accuse him of making errors. I am amazed that you would think such a thing.

I have always been amazed by how ignorant and unreasonable church people are. I am starting to see that the dumb atheists are hot on their trail. One day atheists will surpass them, maybe that day has come.

[zignog]

outside of the bible find me a account of the egyptian 1st born males dying?

red sea parting?

the exodus?

Jesus? (in his lifetime not 100 yrs later)

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

The issues regarding Moses need to be totally separated from the New Testament.

I am not surprised that there would be no ancient record for those events. There are thousands of examples of the Bible being corroborated by later finds.

For example, scholars once said there was no such thing as a Hittite civilization. However, they wound up finding a massive amount of archaeological evidence for Hittites. So the Old Testament is at least consistent with are knowledge of the ancient world

[zignog]

Casablanca is a real place but was there really a piano man named sam who played it again?

Troy was a real city but cast into mythology and considered just a myth untill it was found

does that mean Archellies could only be hurt by taking out his heel? No

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

WOW! You just disproved Greek mythology and twentieth century fiction.

Wow, you are amazing.

I no longer believe in these things. You have shown me the light.

Could you tell me about Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny? I always wanted to know about these.

Just think, all this time Achilles was not really being dipped into mystical invincibility water.

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

The Old Testament is corroborated by thousands of pieces of archaeological evidence. It is used by scholars as an ancient map to find sites. There are hundreds of cities discovered by using the directions in the Old Testament.

So we have a ton of corroboration, and it is consistent with our modern scholarly body of knowledge.

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

Are you actually denying that Jesus was an historic figure?

The fact that we have no surviving texts which were written in his lifetime is not substantial.

100% of scholars in the field of ancient history believe Jesus was an historic figure.

Show me one who disagrees. The reason why is that there is a TON of evidence which shows he did.

[zignog]

100%?

Check your figures pal

A ton of evidence?

a couple paragraphs from obscure historians is hardly a ton of evidence

I concede a fellow named jesus might have existed who believed he was the son of god shit there were probably 20 of them David koresh believed he was the son of god too

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

I am the one who has spent 6 years in college studying these issues. You go find me one scholar that denies Jesus was an historic figure.

1

ONE

There might be one or two, but I have simply not been able to find any. I want you to check my figures, please. Actually nearly every scholar believes 4-5 key issues regarding the gospels. You should go read a book and learn something.

[tillnow67]

You are an arrogant prick aren't you! Name one scholar who believes George Washington wasn't an actual historical figure. One. Does that mean he really did chop down his father's cherry tree, or threw a dollar across the Deleware, or had wooden teeth? NO. Likewise, it doesn't matter if Jesus was historical or not, he was not a god. That is myth.

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

Actually tillnow, I was responding to what zignog said about Jesus not being an historic figure.

If you would like to discuss specifics I would be happy to debate you.

Let's start with a few major facts that all scholars agree on...

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

Ok, nearly all scholars agree that Jesus was crucified, he was buried in a tomb, the tomb was found empty, and that the disciples believed that they saw appearances of Jesus. Not only that, but Ludemon, who is a liberal atheistic scholar says that 1 Cor 15 is actually a creedal passage which goes back to 34 AD, one year after the resurrection.

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

So I will now argue that given the 4 specifics which the majority of ancient historians agree upon, I would submit to you that Jesus rising from the dead is the best explanation.

Please either argue against one or more of the specific items which scholar agree upon, or please give me an alternate explanation to what happened to the body of Jesus or what made the disciples change their beliefs.

[zignog]

A empty tomb does not automaticly mean he came back from the dead

Thats like saying hitler arose from the dead because his body was not where it was meant to be

A crazy follower or followers could have stolen the body There are people that would do that today its safe to assume there were crazy followers back then

Empty tomb is not proof of resurection People still see elvis so dont use that one "but he appeared to people"

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

Did I say an empty tomb "automatically means he came back from the dead"? NOOOOOOOO

I gave you 4 points that nearly all scholars agree upon. Then I argued that Christ's resurrection was THE BEST EXPLANATION. I gave an abductive argument. Now you need to respond to what I ACTUALLY SAID.

BUT GOOD JOB RESPONDING TO WHAT I NEVER SAID. I THINK YOU WILL DO WELL TO AVOID THIS DEBATE, AND BOY HAVE YOU BEEN AVOIDING IT.

[zignog]

whether Jesus was real or not does not matter to me What matters is the very little you know about his life is just myth

Give me one scholar who says he actually walked on water The point i first made that you have been avoiding is the fact that nothing was written down at the time so it is all just speculation and campfire storys

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

Well, now it seems like you are making the claim that the gospels are of a legendary genre.  That is not a claim many scholars will agree with. Here once again you go up against scholarship. It is clear to me that legendary genre, such as the gospel of Peter, is not a proper fit for the four authentic gospels.

[zignog]

mythology not legend

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

So let's suppose that the same thing happened with the Bible that happened with Homer's Illiad. What I mean is that with Homer it appears that there are some historic elements and some elements of exaggeration.

So let's suppose the disciples embellished the story of Jesus rising again. Why is it that nearly all historians agree that they believed they saw Jesus rise again?

[zignog]

Why do people believe benny hinn can make people walk again?

Hoax and/or power of suggestion can leave anyone believing in anything

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

We can both agree that Benny Hinn is a fake.

Now, let me know how precisely your argument goes. You want to say that the disciples were hipnotized or saw delusions?

Or are you going to make this like Benny Hinn where he does a magic trick (with hired actors to pretend to be healed)?

Please be specific as to how this would go.

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

Actually, you can not provide an argument against the rationality of my belief in the Bible. If you think you can please do. I will just appeal to Plantinga's epistemic warrant.

I certainly don't think you should believe the Bible without reason. However, I do have good reason to believe the Bible. I have the Holy Spirit. This may sound to the outsider as irrational, but you are quite mistaken. It has been defended by the most famous logician alive- Alvin Plantinga.

[zignog]

Not believing the bible entirely means that you must be picking and choosing the parts you believe are true

That is irrational almost as irrational as believing the bible entirely

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

If I take the Bible as an historical document, and I see that many parts have a substantial historic corroboration, then I can believe certain parts for the same reason we believe the Declaration of Independence was historic.

to be continued...

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

Ok, so your claim is that "crazy followers stole the body".

This is actually a very poor explanation. The reason is that nearly all scholars agree that the disciples' belief state changed from being downcast to being alive with hope and HONESTLY BELIEVING that they had seen Jesus risen from the dead.

So, if the disciples stole the body, they could not honestly believe that Jesus rose again. They had what they believed were appearances of Christ.

[zignog]

thats what too much education on one subject does to you

i have not avoided the your "debate" at all i gave the simplist most logical reason why the tomb was empty after you said resurrection was the best answer

The other point is people still see elvis Usually by the ones that really want to

I will let you work out what that means

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

Philosophy is not a narrow subject. Every field of study is an offshoot of philosophy. Philosophers gave birth to math, science, and every other field.

Secondly, I showed you why your alternate theory is not at all plausible. We know that the disciples believed that they had seen Jesus. If they stole the body, then this could not be the case.

Your alternative theory is an abject failure. Please try again.

[zignog]

Does it have to be the same disciples/followers that "seen" him also stole him?

No it dosnt at all Whatsoever

Why did you assume that was the case?

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

Ok, so there is a group of disciples, which are not the 12 apostles, and these men steel the body? Then they also carefully conceal this fact from everyone else.

That is perfect for my case. Now you have to explain why the other 11 apostles (Judas dead) believed they saw appearances of Jesus risen from the dead.

My theory explains it perfectly, what is your explanation?

[gyro30]

matthew, mark, luke, and john accounts of the ressurrection dont even match each other so there is no reason to believe it happened. also, dead people dont rise from the dead!!

[gyro30]

hey i didnt mean to put this comment here, i was responding to someone else but youtube put it in the wrong place, sorry

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

LOL!

I hope you are kidding. Saying that people don't rise from the dead is evidence against my claim that Jesus rose from the dead is a logical fallacy called "Begging the question".

Secondly, the gospels being different is not evidence against their testimony. It is actually evidence for them being multiple attestations of the events.

So your first comment is completely wrong and your second is a logical fallacy.

Please try again!

[gyro30]

the multiple attestations contradict Matthew 8:28 TWO demon possessed men coming from the tombs met him.. 29: what do you want with us Son of God they shouted,

Mark 5: 2: when Jesus got out of the boat, "A MAN" with an eviL spirit came from the tombs to meet him....

7: he shouted at the top of his voice " What do you want with me, Jesus,Son of the Most High God? Swear to God that you wont torture me

Luke 8:27: When Jesus stepped ashore, he was met by "A demon possessed MAN"

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

First of all to say that a man met me is not a contradiction with saying two men met me. If I say there was only one then it would contradict there was two. So it is not clear to me that it is a contradiction.

Furthermore, even if we accept that it is a contradiction, so what? Good reliable accounts by witnesses often contradict each other on these kind of issues. If we accept that it is a contradiction all that follows is that there is an error, not that the history is bad.

[gyro30]

matthew doubles the demon posessed men, the blind men, and the donkey and the colt stories otherwise told as a singular colt by the other "eye witnesses". Matthew also misrepresent "fulfilled prophesies"--- the virgin birth, the donkey and the colt from zachariah 9:9 totally misinterpreted hebrew poetic iteration by matthew.

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

In order to defeat the argument about Christ's resurrection you must knock down the historic argument not Christian doctrine about Scripture. My argument does not in any way rely upon inerrancy of Scripture, although I do not see why one must give up inerrancy necessarily.

[zignog]

1 historian wrote about jesus in his time Nothing was written about miracles

The "son of god" was given a couple paragraphs

(with no miracles)

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

What is the name of the historian who wrote about Jesus during his time?

I did not know of one. Are you speaking of Josephus?

[zignog]

i forget his name and am having trouble finding it at the moment i will get back to that one

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

I asked you WHO WHO WHO was that historian.

Please tell me WHO it was.

Secondly, you failed to respond to my question. I gave a specific list of accepted facts which ancient historians agree on. Then I asked you to explain why the resurrection of Jesus was not the best explanation.

Please respond to my challenge.

[zignog]

Simple Crazy followers stole his body

[zignog]

ok ok ok i was wrong no one wrote about him in his day But that dosnt help your case at all though does it

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

Doesn't help my case?

My case is accepted by 100% of modern scholars!

If you want to be on the other side of that please go ahead. Everyone agrees that he existed as an historic figure.

[zignog]

so what dosnt mean he pulled off miricles does it i wouldnt mind betting a 100% (secular) scholars accept that

I never said he wasnt a historic figure i said no one wrote about him

[AreYouKiddinMelol]

This latest entry of yours is unreadable. Please go back and use grammar points. I can not tell what it is that you are trying to express.

If you are saying that secular scholars don't believe he performed miracles, I would just point out that secular scholars usually are materialists.  In addition to that, many believe miracles are impossible.

[truthamerica911]

The Bible is made up of different genre. The gospel genre is historic in nature. So I think it is bizzare to try to treat Scripture as the King James only people do. My claim is that if you see what the gospel authors intended to compose it was not a magic book, but a book which is authoritative because of its propositional content.

[tillnow67]

And my claim is that it cannot be authoritative because it repeatedly contradicts itself, secular historians, science, and reason. As a believer you can discount historians, scientists and reason, but you can't explain why two equally "authoritative" accounts contradict each other.

[truthamerica911]

As a Christian, I think church people construe a very bizzare view of the Bible as having magical language. They set the standards so ridiculously high that no reasonable person could accept it. However, the problem for the non-believer is that the evidence does indeed show that the best explanation to what happened to Jesus' body is that he rose from the dead. See Habermas vs. Flew debate.

[tillnow67]

So the bible having magical language seems a bizarre view to you, but a magical explanation like rising from the dead seems like the "best explanation" to you?

[truthamerica911]

Whether or not the ressurection is the best explanation has to do with whether or not miracles are possible. If God exists then miracles are possible. The atheist has the burden to show that miracles are not possible. To see what I am talking about see the William Lane Craig vs. Bart Ehrman debate.

[zignog]

The burden is on christians as extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof

Prove your miracles

[truthamerica911]

Look at the Habermas vs. Flew debate or look at the William Lane Craig vs. Bart Ehrman debate. Absolutely the best explanation is that Christ rose from the dead. I also like how you still have not understood my point about it being a "magical book". I explained it extremely clearly. If you want to create a strawman feel free.

[tillnow67]

Whether it's a magical book or just a book depicting magical events is irrelevant. Your belief that magic is the best explanation for ANYTHING is stupid.

[Sarn0]

You can't be serious. I quit watching this right after your first idea... Man, being in the Earth means being not alive.....

[vetteluvnh]

Moments are few and far between that I'll take the time to actually comment on a clip, but your intelligent and well thought out arguments compelled me to do so. I hope you will continue to share you're insightful perspective w/ the rest of us.

[robertangel30]

just goes to prove how gullible Christians can be.

[CarlaSimian]

Thank you Wayne for a very good series. From now on, when apologists throw up a reasonable-sounding answer to biblical contradictions I'm going to say. "OK, give me a couple of days, I'm going to check that out"

[KingHeathen]

Dude, you are my hero! Keep them coming!

[hoteinokodomo]

Great video. You were very meticulous in your research and managed to leave no holes in your argument for more apologists' lies to slither through. Bravo. I look forward to seeing more.

[healthyaddict]

*applauds*

[HanifXHier]

Take that, Literalists!