Why did god choose to write the bible over a period of 1500 years? Why didn't he just write it himself in less than a microsecond, because... you know, he's like, GOD. And why does it contradict itself so much? If god really wrote it, wouldn't it be perfect?
ok, i'm pissed beyond all reason right now, this is the third time i've asked this question, the first two times these reprobates at "thewayofthemaster" have removed my comment. I'm guessing because they don't like questions that crush there baseless claims. So i'm going to ask again, and again, and again. at 1:52 this vid says e=mc2, aka "the general theory of relativity" can be found in the bible. Well...WHERE IS IT YOU WORTHLESS WAIST OF SPERM!?!
Oh and I almost forgot; how does this guy claim to know that the Bible was written by God through men? Oh that's right, because the Bible says so. *facepalm*
@wahay636 And the Bible has proven itself to be correct. How do you know anything that you know? You learned it from textbooks for the most part, guess you can't trust any of that. *facepalm* Not to mention Christians know the Bible is true because we tested what Jesus said and it was true. You'll bow your knee one day as well, on earth or in Hell.
@Kinosis79 If learning something from textbooks means that the bible is valid, then I guess the Qur'an is also true, and Harry Potter, and all other books in the world. And can you give me any evidence of that the Bible has proven itself to be correct?
@Kinosis79 Name one "proof" he mentioned which is actually a proof. Then name one "proof" that he didn't mention which is actually a proof. How do I know anything that I know? Through rational thought. Anything else, I don't know. But I can still make pragmatic judgements with my rational thought. I can trust what I can prove to be true. On top of that, I can sanely trust what is inductively true. Neither God's existence nor the Bible's truth come under these categories.
Loving the way they just made stuff up here. For example, there have never been any significant civilizations in which the thought was that the world was flat. Just look at the Greeks. They built the Parthenon based on the curvature of the Earth, and they did it without the Bible. Furthermore, who says that the first anybody had heard of the hydrological cycle was from the Bible? Nobody has been credited with it at all, because, again, it can be observed pretty obviously. This is just plagiarism
I too have read the bible as I went to Catholic School for eight years. The bible is a subjective text just like anything else and is a great way to understand history and western society. Personally I think that a book that is used to rationalize patriarchy, the destruction of the environment, and oppression of sexuality is probably not the word of "god". I believe is the cosmos, but do not believe that we are ruled by some white man in the sky.....to me that just sounds eurocentric.
@KilgoreTrout92 it wasn't...that is just pagan talking points. Horus etc...no correlation....you have to confirm data with "actual" authorities on the subject...not the virus on the internet by unqualified authors. TektonicsDOTorg
Where are all the videos for fairys??? cause i dont believe in them and they're whats wrong with the world today. i wanna spend time trying to refute them cause i dont believe they exist! it's a man made up hoax! Fairy's are evil! Peter pan was invented in the mid- 1600's for weak minded people who wanna believe in fairy's. So i wanna spend my free time trying to show those who believe in them they are stupid and wrong. cause i dont believe they exist. Atheist just admit you believe in God!
@brahimbug lol. Duh! That's why they didn't make it into the Bible. Any fool can write a story and call it a gospel. The existence of counterfeit money doesn't mean that there is no such thing as real money.
@digifreak10101 It didn't arise until later because all those gospels were denied any recognition. But you know what, you may be right, perhaps only Mark, Matthew, Luke and John were the only ones to be divinely inspired and the rest were all bullshit and were rightly denied any recognition. Good thing those rich and powerful mofo's at the council of Mycenae could see which gospels were divinely inspired and which ones were not, otherwise we might of had a flawed Bible =O
@brahimbug But those books were widely distributed and accepted long before the council. The council just officialized it to make it easier for people. People already had their own canons which were mostly the same. The number of early copies unearthed are overwhelming. The gospels were never in question. Only a few letters.
@digifreak10101 What does who it was have anything to do with it? and if anything the fact that the ones that WERE written by people closer to Jesus were the rejected ones says a lot, the bible has not much to do with Jesus and a lot to do with politics. And you seem to do a very selective reading of history, look into what happened to the people who were unlucky enough to not randomly be brought up reading the right canon.
@brahimbug Then you disagree with nearly all historians, Christians, non-Christians, liberals, and conservatives. We can argue all we want, but the facts speak for themselves. Nothing I say will convince you so I challenge you to read the Bible and the book Case for Christ by former atheist Lee Strobel and do the homework for yourself. Once you do, then we'll talk.
@digifreak10101 soz for late reply - forgot about this convo. fair enough. (refer to my 'selective reading' comment before telling me ALL history disagrees with me - 'former atheist' lol - surprising he made it onto your list). Twas nice having an exchange with you!
@digifreak10101 Also i have read the bible - Almost every version. and most of the 'other' gospels. I was raised Muslim and i have to say christian writing is much easier to stomach, probably because there are so many version you get multiple sides of the same story, its a shame the Islamic authorities have burned all the other versions of the Qur'an throughout history so they can claim 'it has never been changed' - we've lost a lot of history that way.
@brahimbug Thank you. That is very interesting. I was not assuming you are an atheist, but I believe a book by one who was once the ultimate skeptic kinda covers all the bases. I still encourage you to read Case for Christ.
@brahimbug If you were gonna make it up, why attribute it to a sinful tax collector, a Gentile doctor, and a nobody kid who never met Jesus, if they weren't true. If you were making it up wouldn't you attribute it to someone closer to Jesus like say... Thomas or Mary. Oh, wait! =O
@digifreak10101 The point I'm trying to make is we humans decide which ones are divinely inspired and which ones aren't lol. Which sorta makes the argument for divine inspiration sour. Muslims found a way around it. An angel directly dictated it to Mohamed. I dont even know where to start with that one -_-
@brahimbug The fact that humans decided is not proof against it's truth. It has to be weighed on it's own merit. You just answered your own question. If man doesn't come up with a way to decide which are true and which aren't, then you get private inspiration like the Koran or the Book of Mormon where there is absolutely no way of proving it. Convenient right?
@brahimbug But the four gospels for instance we know were written during the lives of the the authors and talk about things that happened to huge crowds of people. Often tens of thousands of people: hings that everyone knew about. If they weren't true, how is there is no evidence of anyone refuting the events. There would have been thousands of people coming out and saying "I was in that town, that never happened! I've seen that guy and he's still blind! This is what really happened."
Prophesied He'd be born of a virgin? NOT DIRECTLY!!! I beieve in the Bible as God's Word, but I ain't impressed with this shit about THOUSANDS OF PROPHESIES, etc, etc! The "Behold, a virgin shall conceive..." was a prophesy saying, in effect, "She's a virgin today, but she will have a son (after fucking a man) and name him... For befre this child shall know good and evil the land you hate (the two attacking countries) will be forsaken of both her kings. This verse is spiritualized"
Isaiah 7:14 is spiritualized, or allegoy, to prophesy about Jesus being born of a virgin. It DOES NOT FUCKING SAY, "Behold, a virgin shall conceive, knowing no man, and shall bring forth He that is to be King, and His name sall be called Immanuel."
The Bible also used that verse in Judges, "He shall not come near a dead body nor shall he cut his hair. Neither shall he drink strong drink for he shall be a Nazarite unto the Lord his God," talking about Samson
@WildManChrisVEVO CONTINUED, part 3... Yet Matthew, or is it Luke, uses it to say of Jesus AFTER HIS FAMILY moved Him to Nazareth coming back from Egypt, "That it might be fulfilled that which was spoken by the prophets (ACTUALLY, it was the unnamed angel who said it back in Judged) He shall be called a Nazarene."
This is just some more dumb creationist shit. I see you have been working with Ray Comfort (seen to the left at 3:22), but you forgott to include the evidence of gods existnce in this video by demonstrating on a bannana. If the bible contains so much knowlege later proved by sience, why doesen´t it include evolution? Actually it more than fails to prove evolution, it contredicts it. There are thousands of things in the bible, later disproved by modern sience, rather than the other way around.
Exp1 How did Simon Peter find out that Jesus was the Christ? (a)By a revelation from heaven (Matthew16:17) (b)His brother Andrew told him (John 1:41 Exp2 Where did Jesus first meet Simon Peter and Andrew? (a)By the sea of Galilee (Matthew 4:18-22). (b)On the banks of river Jordan (John 1:42). After that, Jesus decided to go to Galilee (John 1:43) Exp3 When Jesus met Jairus was Jairus’ daughter already dead? (a) Yes. Matthew 9:18 (b) No. Mark 5:23
Example1 How did Simon Peter find out that Jesus was the Christ? (a) By a revelation from heaven (Matthew16:17). (b) His brother Andrew told him (John 1:41 Example 2 Where did Jesus first meet Simon Peter and Andrew? (a) By the sea of Galilee (Matthew 4:18-22). (b) On the banks of river Jordan (John 1:42). After that, Jesus decided to go to Galilee (John 1:43) Example3 When Jesus met Jairus was Jairus’ daughter already dead? (a) Yes. Matthew 9:18 (b) No. Mark 5:23
Are you trying to insult our intelligence? To say that the Bible has no contradictions is laughable and I hope that everyone can see through these lies.
@SloMoHeap Jesus never said He was equal to the Father. He did claim He is part of the triune Godhead though. Jesus is God, but He is NOT the Father. He is the Son. In Isaiah God is threatening to destroy the offspring of evil, and particularly the work of lucifer since he's mentioned in verse 12 And in this case the son is wicked just like the father. God will not let the wicked reign generation to generation. And with the gospels you have to understand who the recipient is for those prophecies
@TerminateInsipience Jesus spoke to those who witnessed the things he spoke of and prophesied about. He told them the generation that saw the things He spoke of would not pass away. Well the things He spoke of have not quite happened yet, so it wasn't meant for the people He was actually speaking to at the moment. He had foresight that what he spoke of would be passed on for future generations. He's God. Thats how He knows.
@SloMoHeap name 10 scriptural contradictions with sufficient arguments. i have yet to find any. the bible is God´s living word and it is perfect and holy.
@RageicaNiels If you have yet to find any, you just haven't read the bible and I'm not going to waste my time on you. Just google 'bible contradictions' and you'll have more hits than you'll know what to do with.
Before I waste anymore time on you you hve to prove to me you've read the bible. Answer the following: Who is greater Jesus or God?
@SloMoHeap If you know of any slomo, I would sincerely like to know about them. Also, if you quote one, give the version it's from too. There are bad translations out there.
@TerminateInsipience If Jesus is NOT JUST AS MUCH GOD as God the Father, then He is not GOD THE SON. Part of the triune Godhead? anything less than God is NOT GOD!
@ndjarnag if you were on the moon, or somewhere in space and could see earth clearly, what would you say it looks like?? hmm? When I am on earth and can see a full moon, I do NOT say that it looks like a ball or sphere I say it looks like a circle.
He says, we have no documentation of Quirinius governing Syria nor a census at the time. - Tacitus, Seutonius, Dio Cassius, and Josephus all wrote about Quirinius' rule and census. Two of whom, wrote at the same time as Luke.
He misrepresents the literacy of the era. - The historians listed above were under tremendous scrutiny, the gospel writers preached to the illiterate middle-east through oral tradition.
@qabala I wasn't debating you, I was TELLING you. Because if you're saying the bible is making a contradiction, you better take one good look at yourself and tell me you're not the one with the inconsistency. If you're not going to trust the bible's authority, then you have little reason to trust your own brain, if all it is, is a network of random chemical reactions, to which you have no control over.
@qabala Either the bible is true or it isn't, if it is not, then evidently, the brain IS nothing more than a network of chemical reactions. If however the bible IS true, which you quite clearly are sadly persuaded that is not - then that means something extremely serious for everyone. The problem is, many people are willingly ignorant. However, you can believe whatever you want to. But remember, just because you believe something, doesn't make it true. I once didn't believe in the bible either.
Even if the bible is completely false, it does not mean that God is not real, or that there isn't another God entirely. Even if there is no God, it does not mean there is no spirit.
It isn't a black and white matter, that's why it's a false dichotomy.
Finally, whether or not the consequences of a proposal are preferable has no bearing on its' validity.
That's why it's an argument from personal preference.
And like you said, just because you believe it doesn't make it true.
@qabala Your worldview is strangely peculiar. You seem to have no trouble accepting the possibility of these if's and could-be's and maybe's, but you have a hard time trusting the bible is the infallible, inherent, inspired word of the Living God. There could be a pink elephant behind my back right now, but how the hell am I going to give a scrap of evidence for that. This could be one bad dream your having at the moment, but how in heavens can that be proven.
@qabala Without presupposing that your brain functioning properly, how are you able to trust your own thoughts if it just formed by the laws of physics, with no concern for your beliefs or that your cognitive abilities are actually able to form true beliefs concerning reality. Your ideas about these if's and could-be's and maybe's is based on pure speculation and have no rational basis. Fix your worldview, before it's to late.
You have no clue what my worldview is. I have accepted no if's, could-be's, nor maybe's as fact. I am addressing YOUR arguments as fallacious. Nothing more.
for example, the fallacy you've just made is a red herring argument. Belief in God does not preclude insanity, nor does insanity preclude belief in God. The argument that the brain may not be functioning properly can be applied to everyone, including devout Christians. There is no correlation.
@qabala If evolution were true, science couldn't make sense because there would be no reason to accept the uniformity of nature on which all science and technology depend. Nor would there be any reason to think that rational analysis would be possible since the thoughts of our mind would be nothing more than the inevitable result of mindless chemical reactions. Only in a Christian worldview do we have a moral obligation to follow the laws of logic, which follows a biblical worldview
@Woreyel "If evolution were true, science couldn't make sense because there would be no reason to accept the uniformity of nature on which all science and technology depend." Well, except engineering, biology, chemistry, astronomy, Einsteinium and Quantum Mechanics, computer science, Healthcare, Earth Sciences, etc. you know all those "little" sciences that depend on flexible space-time and evolution to be true, which have only produced the internet, satellites, vaccines, and many others.
@qabala Therefore, laws of logic cannot exist if materialism is true! Not only is the materialistic atheist unable to account for the existence of laws of logic, but they are actually contrary to his worldview. His worldview is necessarily irrational. If the universe and our minds are simply results of time and chance as evolutionists say, why would we expect that the mind could make sense of the universe?
@Woreyel Disregard what science says, what the laws of logic actually are, and pretend you know both, then yes you're right, however if one listens to science and obeys the laws of logic, you are wrong on every level (except 23, 23 is a neutral level).
@macciolmunip1 I don't disregard science at all.. I LIKE science, in fact I even acknowledge the one who's responsible for making operational science possible by sustaining the universe and keeping laws of nature uniform!
@qabala How can we even account for rational thinking in a universe that was created by accident and random chance? That in itself is NOT rational.
A materialistic atheist does not believe in anything beyond the physical universe. In this view, all that exists is matter in motion. But of course laws of logic has nothing to do with matter; they are not part of the physical universe (ie cannot be touched or seen).
@Woreyel "How can we even account for rational thinking in a universe that was created by accident and random chance? That in itself is NOT rational." Because we don't say that, and besides, an omnipotent God just decided one day to get off his lazy bum and spend 144 hours creating the universe as we know it and then got bored of it around 4070 years later. Exactly how is that not random?
@qabala The brain would simply be a collection of chemical reactions that have been preserved because they had some sort of survival values in the past.
If evolution were true, then all the evolutionist’s thousands are merely the necessary result of chemistry acting over time. Therefore, an evolutionist must think and say that “evolution is true”, not for rational reasons, but as a necessary consequences of blind chemistry.
@Woreyel "The brain would simply be a collection of chemical reactions that have been preserved because they had some sort of survival values in the past." That is what it is whether or not YHWH, Prometheus or Vishnu created it, and we've been able to simulate simple brain activity and emotions in modern robots like DarWIN-OP and certain indie games with this knowledge.
@qabala I acquire Gods Laws of Logic to think and be rational. No other worldview can account for this, and/or has a rational basis for this. If evolution were true, there wouldn’t be any rational reason to believe it! If life is the result of evolution, then it means that an evolutionist’s brain is simply the outworking of millions of years of random-chance processes.
@Woreyel "I acquire Gods Laws of Logic to think and be rational." God didn't make the laws of logic, Zeus did by inspiring Aristotle. God's "Laws of Logic" would be, contradict everything you said in the previous chapter, because if you keep stating something else you're bound to get something right.
@qabala You're right I don't know what your worldview is, and I don't need to, because all I know need to know is which worldview is the only rational one. Which is; the ONLY worldview that can account for all of the preconditions of intelligibility. The reason I can be sure that my thoughts can be relied upon is because I know from Genesis 1:27 that I am made in the image of God, therefore I can partially think the way God thinks.
How do you know your brain is functioning correctly?
Therefore, how do you know that Genesis 1:27 even exists?
If it does, how do you know it's not a misprint?
If it isn't, how do you know that the brain of the person writing it was functioning properly?
Even if it was, considering that God is, admittedly vindictive, even though he commands us to turn the other cheek, it is quite possible that God doesn't consider himself subject to any commandments about honesty, either.
@Woreyel "The reason I can be sure that my thoughts can be relied upon is because I know from Genesis 1:27 that I am made in the image of God, therefore I can partially think the way God thinks." God is Immaterial and Omnipresent. Therefore he has no physical image, he can only exist as a metaphysical body or consciousness, since all life has consciousness this would prove that man evolved from another species, as otherwise God was lying through his metaphorical teeth.
Great job Mark. We really appreciated you coming to our church in Arizona last month. You inspired a lot of people. I took your advice and started studying the book of acts and it's been great. May God bless you and your family. Happy new year living waters!
For all you bible skeptics out there who say the bible is full of contradictions. The Law of non-contradiction is one of the basic laws in classical logic. It states that something cannot be both true and not true at the same time when dealing with the same context. One statement must make it impossible for the other statement to be true in the same context.
@macciolmunip1 Says an atheistic naturalist like one such as you. But I'm not going to start an argument for that would be a complete waste of my time. After all, I do not argue with the irrational people on youtube
You know...I really used to believe this Propaganda, but then I found a website that in spite of my most valiant efforts listed some 300 contradictions in the bible. A few could be explained away, but many could not be so easily dismissed. And I have to say, it really has changed my mind on this whole claim to inerrancy of scripture. It just isn’t so! SEE EVIL BIBLE DOT COM
its harmonious. look at how it talks about an all loving god in the gospel of mark and jon. an all loving god is what should be preached because thats what the bible says (ignore verses that instruct you to stone people to death for not followin the sabbath (exodus 35:2), how to treat your slave (exodus 21:1-8), how homsexuality, a victimless "crime," is a sin (leviticus 18:22), the wrath of god via nature for petty things such as name calling (2kings 2:24), and the 1st 4 commandments).
okay, so one verse says the earth hangs upon nothing. However, Psalm 93:5 and I Chronicals 16:30 both say the earth does not move and Psalm 104:5 says the earth is set on foudations never to be moved. A person saying the earth hangs on nothing in Biblical times is not that impressive. The ancient Greek astronomers; Philolaus of Croton, Heracleides of Pontus and Aristarchus of Samos all went as far as to say the sun is actually at the center.
The Qur'an is pretty united also and as far as the science in the bible...they also got about a million things wrong. So, if you guess at one million things, you're bound to get two or three right.
@Myvizslas1 Ditto here. Been studying it DAILY since 1998 and I do compare all the stories to the real world and to their own culture and creditbility...not a thing wrong.
Yeah, I see this posted on YouTube and I just have this morbid curiosity to read the train-wreck meta, where the haters come a'crawlin to spew their anger...
If skeptics don't believe, then why do they seem so hell-driven to spend so much time posting vitriolic comments on videos like this? Oh wait, I think I just answered my own question...
So, by this logic, if someone decided to write a book now, and tell you that it was written by God, you couldn't tell them they were wrong, because how would you know if they were lying or not. That's what we would label as a cult, which is the same thing as religion, just religious people have numbers to back them up.
well continuity is because the writers knew the older version. It should be pointed out the virgin birth was made up so that people would accept Jesus as the Messiah. The proof is the fact that in a time of great record keeping this mythological census never occurred. It was to explain away the fact that jesus was not born where the messiah was said to be.
@danschaefer97 Name one contradiction in bible. The Law of non-contradiction is one of the basic laws in classical logic. It states that something cannot be both true and not true at the same time when dealing with the same context.
@mccfowler Matthew "Jesus was born during the reign of Herod the Great" born 73 or 74 BCE, died 4 BCE in Jericho
Luke "Jesus' parents had to go to Bethlehem for the first census by Quirinius before Jesus was born", well, that census took place in exactly 6A.D. After the banishment of Herod the Great's son.
No contradictions huh? They just contradicted themselves on the most important part of the bible.
@TheBlitMaster Where'd you get your info? What documents give this info? Where'd you cut and paste this from? Your using some questionable outside source to say that the bible has contradictions. Come better than that.
@mccfowler Wikipedia, several world history books, a few history books about the roman empire, and most trustworthy historians. Look at you, an hour ago you posted something from a completely biased source, from people who do not study history for the sake of knowledge, but rather pretend to just to ridicule others and get money from fools like you.
@macciolmunip1 Doesn't sound like you read any of that yourself. Good job on listing one source. How do you know they aren't biased as well? Again with the ad hominem attacks and genetic fallacies. Why does a discussion like this have to result in name calling? Grow up.
My bias is towards peer reviewed articles from people actually specialized in the appropriate field whom base their claims off of evidence rather than assertions that their specific interpretation of their specific holy book has to be 100% correct for a god to exist. Ad hominem? Genetic fallacies? If they were towards an honest theologian about mere belief than yes I would agree, however these people you're supporting are well known for being dishonest people who care not for you but your money.
Jewish historian, Jesephus recorded Herod the Greats reign ended with his death in 4 BC. According to Matthew 2:19-20, Jesus should have been born BEFORE this.
Historians of the time, Tacitus, Seutonius, Dio Cassius, and Josephus all record Quirinius' reign in Syria beginning in 6 AD. According to Luke 2:1-3, Jesus should have been born AFTER this.
What are YOUR sources? I am unaware of any source which contradicts the above dates.
Nope, it was on creation.com, why should we care what money grubbing bastards who are non-historians think when every single trustworthy historian (including many whom are also Christian), confirmed that Luke must have been mistaken. Creation "scientists" are liars, they don't care about Christianity or the Christian faith, most aren't even Christian (Ray Comfort is definitely not one), they care about money given to them by gullible people, and keeping people gullible enough to give it to them.
@macciolmunip1 I take it you didn't read the article. I wouldn't expect any better from someone who resorts to genetic fallacies and ad hominem attacks.
@mccfowler I did, I take it you are either so willfully deceived you won't admit it, or are a deceiver yourself whom is only doing this for the money. Now the fact still remains that this article you put up references no articles from historians, was not peer reviewed by honest historians, and the person who put it on the site was a chemist and chess champion, which puts him up to par with any other Joe Schmoe when it comes to historic accuracy, that should be enough info that I didn't have too.
@macciolmunip1 I still don't believe you read the article because you would have seen this. Sir William Mitchell Ramsay (1851–1939), the archaeologist and professor from Oxford and Cambridge Universities, argued that suggest that Quirinius was twice ruling in Syria on two occasions.4 This was partly based on the Latin Tiburtine Inscription, discovered in 1746, which referred to someone ruling Syria twice, and Ramsay argued that Quirinius fit.5
@mccfowler Yes, a quote-mined reference from a non-peer reviewed book from over 113 years ago which while well researched by the historian SWMR (and not Sarfati), is still concluding on mere opinions which most modern credible historians disagree with today, whom he himself (SWMR) still argued later in his life that their were many errors in the bible especially the Old Testament despite his claim that certain popular issues with the New Testament may not have been in error. Got anything better?
@macciolmunip1 Again with the genetic fallacies and arguementum ad populum. You judge a quote not based on it's truth but by attacking the source and you don't even realize the hypocrisy of your judgement. I'm sure many of your sources many not have been positively reviewed by somebody with a Christian worldview. And just because more people believe something or have a certain perception it does not make them right.
@mccfowler Peer-Review is done by those actually in the field. Christians didn't review the findings of Galileo positively, but astronomers did. Those historians I was talking about that disagreed with him were all biblical scholars so their opinions on both are better then your Joe Shmoe Christian, it's up to historians to do the reviews, not chess players.
As an engineer , each day I research and learn, the more I marvel at God's creation. Man has been trying for ages to match up to his intelligence and design. Were are light years behind.
and yes, lets talk about a prophecy that started in the old testament and then lets prove it in the new testament. it's circular reasoning to think that this proves that christianity is the only religion with fulfilled prophecy.
it was painful when you quoted a bible verse saying the the bible is backed by god (2 peter 1:21) People can put that in there with the exact intention of trying to give people a reason to believe in it. I'm still looking for a video that tells me why christians trust the bible.
Yeah but the bible makes idiotic mistakes. it makes idiotic mistakes like saying poeple can know magic so we should kill them. I think the bible has some good ideas but no perfect god could have written that.
lol, I find it really funny and sad that so called atheists spend so much of their time commenting on Christian videos to attempt and fail at bashing at God they claim they don't even believe in. If you don't believe in Him you must be insane wasting so much time trying to destroy Him (and failing since the dawn of time). The best part is the Bible says God is just sitting in heaven laughing at you.
@Kinosis79 I think probly the reason that atheists spend some much time refuting religeous people is the intolerent history of those religeons.Christians today complain about the intolerence of Islam while conveniently forgetting about their own intolerent history.All those that worship the God of Moses have similar histories of religeous intolerence,which seems to be inherent in all these faiths.The God of Moses commanded his followrs to destroy all other religeons.Exodus34:10-17.DvneIntolrence
@GARYWERSLEY Don't be silly, they do it because they hate God, period. Christians do not have an intolerant history, you are just not knowledgeable. Catholics have a violent history but they are not Christians, they are a pagan religion that denies the Bible. You need to take a class on hermeneutics because you sound like a fool, any orders God gave to the nation of Israel is just that, to the nation of Israel at that time, it has nothing to do with Christians. Be educated before speaking.
@oneadamtwelve86 JESUSCHRIST is not some organization or building in which say "oh we are part of this" A Christian is a follower of JESUS not an organization of men! That is why we do not put our confidence in men rather we put our confidence in GOD "JESUSCHRIST what He did for us on the cross. IF CHRIST is in you! you are part of his Church!
@bibliaotradiciones i dont see how that responded to anything that i said at all. but how could i expect anything else than a bunch of nonsense from a christian
Second, It never says that the the messiah would be born of a virgin(the word is almah, which means "young woman" or "maiden; the same word is used to describe dinah after she was raped, when she was defiantly not a virgin. How about the bible describing Judas' death as being caused by two separate thing(one a fall, the other a suicide by hanging)
"The authors wrote exactly what God wanted them to write." Really? Then one contradiction in the bible means that God is imperfect, right? Well... Ecclesiastes 7:20 and Genesis 6:9.
Christians need to stop wasting their time trying to prove the legitimacy and accuracy of the bible on topics such as geology and genealogy and focus on using the bible as a platform to living a better life as well as serving humanity in a positive way. The bible has been proven wrong many MANY times over so just except that people who wrote it could not have know of what they were writing and instead gave it their best shot.
"Noah was now 601 years old. On the first day of the new year, ten and a half months after the flood began,[c] the floodwaters had almost dried up from the earth. Noah lifted back the covering of the boat and saw that the surface of the ground was drying. 14 Two more months went by,[d] and at last the earth was dry!"
Genisis 9.28-29: 28
"Noah lived another 350 years after the great flood. 29 He lived 950 years, and then he died."
So, God is the creator of all things but couldn't be bothered to pick up a pen and do his own writing? Instead, he needed to use humans as sock puppets? Why wouldn't he just will the scriptures into existence so that they'd be instantaneously perfect and totally complete? How does any of this make any sense at all?
Also, a circle is not a sphere. Just a heads up on basic geometry.
@RootCanal About the circle and the sphere: There are various minor mistakes that have come from translating the original Biblical texts to English. You brought up a foolish point. Secondly, why should God have written it himself? Who would he give it to, and who would have found it? How would that man even know it was the word of God? I believe that God also used specific men to write the bible (in particular the NT Canon) to show how reliable the texts were, since the writers were strangers.
@SergiuM42 "I believe that God also used specific men to write the bible" and then God reunited the Council of Trent to select which Gospels would make into the Bible, selected the bishops to it and ordered the destruction of the apocryphal Gospels.
@SergiuM42 If you had this awesome new idea, and wanted people to know about it, what would you rather do? Write it down yourself, or tell it to your secretary, who could omit, misinterpret or flat-out LIE about what you said?
@zanderfist That's such a vague comparison. When debating something such as Jesus being the Son or not, you have to take certain things into consideration. You must first conclude whether you believe in the supernatural or not. Until believe in the supernatural, then you obviously will not believe that God could have written the bible. So whoever is on here "trying" to give us Christians trouble, go debate Naturalism vs Supernaturalism first. Find better use of your time and stop fail-trolling.
This guy is just a liar.
slothape 18 minutes ago
Why did god choose to write the bible over a period of 1500 years? Why didn't he just write it himself in less than a microsecond, because... you know, he's like, GOD. And why does it contradict itself so much? If god really wrote it, wouldn't it be perfect?
audveltadmuna 1 day ago
ok, i'm pissed beyond all reason right now, this is the third time i've asked this question, the first two times these reprobates at "thewayofthemaster" have removed my comment. I'm guessing because they don't like questions that crush there baseless claims. So i'm going to ask again, and again, and again. at 1:52 this vid says e=mc2, aka "the general theory of relativity" can be found in the bible. Well...WHERE IS IT YOU WORTHLESS WAIST OF SPERM!?!
l3ete1geuse 1 day ago
Bible's infalible because bible says bible is infalible. Brilliant.
Bible prophesy was fulfilled by what is written in the bible. 2x Brilliant.
And It's not harmonious. Man manipulated the bible (by the removal of several books) to make it look harmonious.
Sinclairelim 1 day ago
Comment removed
Sinclairelim 2 days ago
Oh and I almost forgot; how does this guy claim to know that the Bible was written by God through men? Oh that's right, because the Bible says so. *facepalm*
wahay636 1 week ago
@wahay636 And the Bible has proven itself to be correct. How do you know anything that you know? You learned it from textbooks for the most part, guess you can't trust any of that. *facepalm* Not to mention Christians know the Bible is true because we tested what Jesus said and it was true. You'll bow your knee one day as well, on earth or in Hell.
Kinosis79 5 days ago
@Kinosis79 If learning something from textbooks means that the bible is valid, then I guess the Qur'an is also true, and Harry Potter, and all other books in the world. And can you give me any evidence of that the Bible has proven itself to be correct?
audveltadmuna 1 day ago
@wahay636 Not to mention you ignored all of the proof he mentioned and all of the proof inside of it he didn't mention.
Kinosis79 5 days ago
@Kinosis79 Name one "proof" he mentioned which is actually a proof. Then name one "proof" that he didn't mention which is actually a proof. How do I know anything that I know? Through rational thought. Anything else, I don't know. But I can still make pragmatic judgements with my rational thought. I can trust what I can prove to be true. On top of that, I can sanely trust what is inductively true. Neither God's existence nor the Bible's truth come under these categories.
wahay636 3 days ago
Loving the way they just made stuff up here. For example, there have never been any significant civilizations in which the thought was that the world was flat. Just look at the Greeks. They built the Parthenon based on the curvature of the Earth, and they did it without the Bible. Furthermore, who says that the first anybody had heard of the hydrological cycle was from the Bible? Nobody has been credited with it at all, because, again, it can be observed pretty obviously. This is just plagiarism
wahay636 1 week ago
so god gave his prophets mouth to mouth?
l3ete1geuse 1 week ago
I too have read the bible as I went to Catholic School for eight years. The bible is a subjective text just like anything else and is a great way to understand history and western society. Personally I think that a book that is used to rationalize patriarchy, the destruction of the environment, and oppression of sexuality is probably not the word of "god". I believe is the cosmos, but do not believe that we are ruled by some white man in the sky.....to me that just sounds eurocentric.
MEMYSELFANDI5348 1 week ago
If god really wrote the bible it wouldn't of been ripped off from religions before it.
KilgoreTrout92 2 weeks ago
@KilgoreTrout92 it wasn't...that is just pagan talking points. Horus etc...no correlation....you have to confirm data with "actual" authorities on the subject...not the virus on the internet by unqualified authors. TektonicsDOTorg
kenpca 5 days ago
dont sell our fate just share it please
Outboundz 2 weeks ago
If God really wrote the Bible, he would have written it so that it is not subject to interpretation.
dudsisfake 2 weeks ago
Where are all the videos for fairys??? cause i dont believe in them and they're whats wrong with the world today. i wanna spend time trying to refute them cause i dont believe they exist! it's a man made up hoax! Fairy's are evil! Peter pan was invented in the mid- 1600's for weak minded people who wanna believe in fairy's. So i wanna spend my free time trying to show those who believe in them they are stupid and wrong. cause i dont believe they exist. Atheist just admit you believe in God!
sethroskinno 2 weeks ago
did God breathe inspiration into the writers of the gospels that didn't make it into the bible as well?
brahimbug 3 weeks ago
@brahimbug where?
digifreak10101 2 weeks ago
@digifreak10101 google it - 'gospels that didn't make it into the bible'
brahimbug 2 weeks ago
@brahimbug lol. Duh! That's why they didn't make it into the Bible. Any fool can write a story and call it a gospel. The existence of counterfeit money doesn't mean that there is no such thing as real money.
digifreak10101 2 weeks ago
@digifreak10101 The gospel written closest to Christ's life, in his own language didn't make it into the bible. St. Thomas.
brahimbug 2 weeks ago
@brahimbug Thomas is a gnostic gospel. Gnosticism didn't arise until later.
digifreak10101 2 weeks ago
@digifreak10101 It didn't arise until later because all those gospels were denied any recognition. But you know what, you may be right, perhaps only Mark, Matthew, Luke and John were the only ones to be divinely inspired and the rest were all bullshit and were rightly denied any recognition. Good thing those rich and powerful mofo's at the council of Mycenae could see which gospels were divinely inspired and which ones were not, otherwise we might of had a flawed Bible =O
brahimbug 2 weeks ago
@brahimbug But those books were widely distributed and accepted long before the council. The council just officialized it to make it easier for people. People already had their own canons which were mostly the same. The number of early copies unearthed are overwhelming. The gospels were never in question. Only a few letters.
digifreak10101 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
digifreak10101 2 weeks ago
@digifreak10101 What does who it was have anything to do with it? and if anything the fact that the ones that WERE written by people closer to Jesus were the rejected ones says a lot, the bible has not much to do with Jesus and a lot to do with politics. And you seem to do a very selective reading of history, look into what happened to the people who were unlucky enough to not randomly be brought up reading the right canon.
brahimbug 2 weeks ago
@brahimbug Then you disagree with nearly all historians, Christians, non-Christians, liberals, and conservatives. We can argue all we want, but the facts speak for themselves. Nothing I say will convince you so I challenge you to read the Bible and the book Case for Christ by former atheist Lee Strobel and do the homework for yourself. Once you do, then we'll talk.
digifreak10101 2 weeks ago
@digifreak10101 soz for late reply - forgot about this convo. fair enough. (refer to my 'selective reading' comment before telling me ALL history disagrees with me - 'former atheist' lol - surprising he made it onto your list). Twas nice having an exchange with you!
brahimbug 1 week ago
@digifreak10101 Also i have read the bible - Almost every version. and most of the 'other' gospels. I was raised Muslim and i have to say christian writing is much easier to stomach, probably because there are so many version you get multiple sides of the same story, its a shame the Islamic authorities have burned all the other versions of the Qur'an throughout history so they can claim 'it has never been changed' - we've lost a lot of history that way.
brahimbug 1 week ago
@brahimbug Thank you. That is very interesting. I was not assuming you are an atheist, but I believe a book by one who was once the ultimate skeptic kinda covers all the bases. I still encourage you to read Case for Christ.
digifreak10101 1 week ago
@digifreak10101 and lol "made it easier for people" - they should make it easier for us to vote by only approving of select candidates ;)
brahimbug 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@brahimbug If you were gonna make it up, why attribute it to a sinful tax collector, a Gentile doctor, and a nobody kid who never met Jesus, if they weren't true. If you were making it up wouldn't you attribute it to someone closer to Jesus like say... Thomas or Mary. Oh, wait! =O
digifreak10101 2 weeks ago
@digifreak10101 The point I'm trying to make is we humans decide which ones are divinely inspired and which ones aren't lol. Which sorta makes the argument for divine inspiration sour. Muslims found a way around it. An angel directly dictated it to Mohamed. I dont even know where to start with that one -_-
brahimbug 2 weeks ago
@brahimbug The fact that humans decided is not proof against it's truth. It has to be weighed on it's own merit. You just answered your own question. If man doesn't come up with a way to decide which are true and which aren't, then you get private inspiration like the Koran or the Book of Mormon where there is absolutely no way of proving it. Convenient right?
digifreak10101 2 weeks ago
@brahimbug But the four gospels for instance we know were written during the lives of the the authors and talk about things that happened to huge crowds of people. Often tens of thousands of people: hings that everyone knew about. If they weren't true, how is there is no evidence of anyone refuting the events. There would have been thousands of people coming out and saying "I was in that town, that never happened! I've seen that guy and he's still blind! This is what really happened."
digifreak10101 2 weeks ago
Of course there are contradictions. The book spans 5000 years. People, ways and ideas change tru 5000 years.
LUCA7FOLD 3 weeks ago
Prophesied He'd be born of a virgin? NOT DIRECTLY!!! I beieve in the Bible as God's Word, but I ain't impressed with this shit about THOUSANDS OF PROPHESIES, etc, etc! The "Behold, a virgin shall conceive..." was a prophesy saying, in effect, "She's a virgin today, but she will have a son (after fucking a man) and name him... For befre this child shall know good and evil the land you hate (the two attacking countries) will be forsaken of both her kings. This verse is spiritualized"
WildManChrisVEVO 3 weeks ago
@WildManChrisVEVO CONTINUED...
Isaiah 7:14 is spiritualized, or allegoy, to prophesy about Jesus being born of a virgin. It DOES NOT FUCKING SAY, "Behold, a virgin shall conceive, knowing no man, and shall bring forth He that is to be King, and His name sall be called Immanuel."
The Bible also used that verse in Judges, "He shall not come near a dead body nor shall he cut his hair. Neither shall he drink strong drink for he shall be a Nazarite unto the Lord his God," talking about Samson
WildManChrisVEVO 3 weeks ago
@WildManChrisVEVO CONTINUED, part 3... Yet Matthew, or is it Luke, uses it to say of Jesus AFTER HIS FAMILY moved Him to Nazareth coming back from Egypt, "That it might be fulfilled that which was spoken by the prophets (ACTUALLY, it was the unnamed angel who said it back in Judged) He shall be called a Nazarene."
I'm not impressed...
WildManChrisVEVO 3 weeks ago
2:10, the scientist-girl is CUTE!
WildManChrisVEVO 3 weeks ago
This is just some more dumb creationist shit. I see you have been working with Ray Comfort (seen to the left at 3:22), but you forgott to include the evidence of gods existnce in this video by demonstrating on a bannana. If the bible contains so much knowlege later proved by sience, why doesen´t it include evolution? Actually it more than fails to prove evolution, it contredicts it. There are thousands of things in the bible, later disproved by modern sience, rather than the other way around.
bopp9 1 month ago
astronautsandwitch 1 month ago
astronautsandwitch 1 month ago
Yes we can take a look at your money in god we trust
lostbot101 1 month ago
use 2peter 1:21 to back up your claims? really? using the bible to prove itself?
sorry8140 1 month ago
So God thought the world was flat? God killed everyone in a flood? Kill people who work on Sunday?
gregrutz 1 month ago
Who are you trying to convince? Harmony? Reading the Bible got me started on my way to being an atheist.
matthewtaylorbrown 1 month ago
@matthewtaylorbrown Sounds like you never read the bible.
Megaknaak 1 month ago
@Megaknaak Read it once as a Christian and read it once as an atheist. I find that very few Christians have read it.
matthewtaylorbrown 1 month ago
@Megaknaak No, sounds like YOU never read the bible. No thinking man can accept the bible once it has been read.
SloMoHeap 1 month ago
Are you trying to insult our intelligence? To say that the Bible has no contradictions is laughable and I hope that everyone can see through these lies.
slothape 1 month ago
@slothape What are the contridictions? Show me.
Megaknaak 1 month ago
Comment removed
SloMoHeap 1 month ago
@SloMoHeap Jesus never said He was equal to the Father. He did claim He is part of the triune Godhead though. Jesus is God, but He is NOT the Father. He is the Son. In Isaiah God is threatening to destroy the offspring of evil, and particularly the work of lucifer since he's mentioned in verse 12 And in this case the son is wicked just like the father. God will not let the wicked reign generation to generation. And with the gospels you have to understand who the recipient is for those prophecies
TerminateInsipience 1 month ago
@TerminateInsipience Jesus spoke to those who witnessed the things he spoke of and prophesied about. He told them the generation that saw the things He spoke of would not pass away. Well the things He spoke of have not quite happened yet, so it wasn't meant for the people He was actually speaking to at the moment. He had foresight that what he spoke of would be passed on for future generations. He's God. Thats how He knows.
TerminateInsipience 1 month ago
@TerminateInsipience Ok, I'll buy that, but the bible is still full of contradictions.
SloMoHeap 1 month ago
@SloMoHeap name 10 scriptural contradictions with sufficient arguments. i have yet to find any. the bible is God´s living word and it is perfect and holy.
RageicaNiels 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RageicaNiels If you have yet to find any, you just haven't read the bible and I'm not going to waste my time on you. Just google 'bible contradictions' and you'll have more hits than you'll know what to do with.
Before I waste anymore time on you you hve to prove to me you've read the bible. Answer the following: Who is greater Jesus or God?
SloMoHeap 1 month ago
@SloMoHeap If you know of any slomo, I would sincerely like to know about them. Also, if you quote one, give the version it's from too. There are bad translations out there.
TerminateInsipience 3 weeks ago
@TerminateInsipience If Jesus is NOT JUST AS MUCH GOD as God the Father, then He is not GOD THE SON. Part of the triune Godhead? anything less than God is NOT GOD!
WildManChrisVEVO 3 weeks ago
how can you say this stuff and not be mortally embarrassed. oh yeah, the money.
ktrigg2 1 month ago
@ktrigg2 How can you believe in evolution and not be completely mortified, oh yeah, cause it suits you.
Woreyel 1 month ago
Inspired= Breathed. How on earth do you know that. Don't suppose it's in the Bible is it?
TheChamseyCampaign 1 month ago
What a train wreck.
slothape 1 month ago
The bible was written by men and they copied the stories from older stories. It's fiction people!
Wake up and don't let these preachers make a monkey out of you!
Metallimeister 1 month ago
Nothing happens when you die.
EpicLapse 1 month ago
Exactly what direction is "above" or "below" the earth?
qabala 1 month ago
the earth is not a circle.
ndjarnag 1 month ago 2
@ndjarnag if you were on the moon, or somewhere in space and could see earth clearly, what would you say it looks like?? hmm? When I am on earth and can see a full moon, I do NOT say that it looks like a ball or sphere I say it looks like a circle.
Woreyel 1 month ago
@Woreyel
I don't debate via PM
Re: Dr. Jack Kinneer
He says, we have no documentation of Quirinius governing Syria nor a census at the time. - Tacitus, Seutonius, Dio Cassius, and Josephus all wrote about Quirinius' rule and census. Two of whom, wrote at the same time as Luke.
He misrepresents the literacy of the era. - The historians listed above were under tremendous scrutiny, the gospel writers preached to the illiterate middle-east through oral tradition.
qabala 1 month ago
@qabala I wasn't debating you, I was TELLING you. Because if you're saying the bible is making a contradiction, you better take one good look at yourself and tell me you're not the one with the inconsistency. If you're not going to trust the bible's authority, then you have little reason to trust your own brain, if all it is, is a network of random chemical reactions, to which you have no control over.
Woreyel 1 month ago
@Woreyel
So that's it?
Either the bible is true or the brain is a network of random chemical reactions, over which you have no control?
That's two fallacies in one assertion: a false dichotomy and an argument from personal preference.
qabala 1 month ago
@qabala Either the bible is true or it isn't, if it is not, then evidently, the brain IS nothing more than a network of chemical reactions. If however the bible IS true, which you quite clearly are sadly persuaded that is not - then that means something extremely serious for everyone. The problem is, many people are willingly ignorant. However, you can believe whatever you want to. But remember, just because you believe something, doesn't make it true. I once didn't believe in the bible either.
Woreyel 1 month ago
@Woreyel
Even if the bible is completely false, it does not mean that God is not real, or that there isn't another God entirely. Even if there is no God, it does not mean there is no spirit.
It isn't a black and white matter, that's why it's a false dichotomy.
Finally, whether or not the consequences of a proposal are preferable has no bearing on its' validity.
That's why it's an argument from personal preference.
And like you said, just because you believe it doesn't make it true.
qabala 1 month ago
@qabala Your worldview is strangely peculiar. You seem to have no trouble accepting the possibility of these if's and could-be's and maybe's, but you have a hard time trusting the bible is the infallible, inherent, inspired word of the Living God. There could be a pink elephant behind my back right now, but how the hell am I going to give a scrap of evidence for that. This could be one bad dream your having at the moment, but how in heavens can that be proven.
Woreyel 1 month ago
@qabala Without presupposing that your brain functioning properly, how are you able to trust your own thoughts if it just formed by the laws of physics, with no concern for your beliefs or that your cognitive abilities are actually able to form true beliefs concerning reality. Your ideas about these if's and could-be's and maybe's is based on pure speculation and have no rational basis. Fix your worldview, before it's to late.
Woreyel 1 month ago
@Woreyel
You have no clue what my worldview is. I have accepted no if's, could-be's, nor maybe's as fact. I am addressing YOUR arguments as fallacious. Nothing more.
for example, the fallacy you've just made is a red herring argument. Belief in God does not preclude insanity, nor does insanity preclude belief in God. The argument that the brain may not be functioning properly can be applied to everyone, including devout Christians. There is no correlation.
Take a logic class.
qabala 1 month ago
@qabala If evolution were true, science couldn't make sense because there would be no reason to accept the uniformity of nature on which all science and technology depend. Nor would there be any reason to think that rational analysis would be possible since the thoughts of our mind would be nothing more than the inevitable result of mindless chemical reactions. Only in a Christian worldview do we have a moral obligation to follow the laws of logic, which follows a biblical worldview
Woreyel 1 month ago
@Woreyel "If evolution were true, science couldn't make sense because there would be no reason to accept the uniformity of nature on which all science and technology depend." Well, except engineering, biology, chemistry, astronomy, Einsteinium and Quantum Mechanics, computer science, Healthcare, Earth Sciences, etc. you know all those "little" sciences that depend on flexible space-time and evolution to be true, which have only produced the internet, satellites, vaccines, and many others.
macciolmunip1 1 month ago
@macciolmunip1 by Gods uniformity in nature, and his will to sustain the universe.. yeah!
Woreyel 1 month ago
@qabala Therefore, laws of logic cannot exist if materialism is true! Not only is the materialistic atheist unable to account for the existence of laws of logic, but they are actually contrary to his worldview. His worldview is necessarily irrational. If the universe and our minds are simply results of time and chance as evolutionists say, why would we expect that the mind could make sense of the universe?
Woreyel 1 month ago
@Woreyel Disregard what science says, what the laws of logic actually are, and pretend you know both, then yes you're right, however if one listens to science and obeys the laws of logic, you are wrong on every level (except 23, 23 is a neutral level).
macciolmunip1 1 month ago
@macciolmunip1 I don't disregard science at all.. I LIKE science, in fact I even acknowledge the one who's responsible for making operational science possible by sustaining the universe and keeping laws of nature uniform!
Woreyel 1 month ago
@qabala How can we even account for rational thinking in a universe that was created by accident and random chance? That in itself is NOT rational.
A materialistic atheist does not believe in anything beyond the physical universe. In this view, all that exists is matter in motion. But of course laws of logic has nothing to do with matter; they are not part of the physical universe (ie cannot be touched or seen).
Woreyel 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Woreyel "How can we even account for rational thinking in a universe that was created by accident and random chance? That in itself is NOT rational." Because we don't say that, and besides, an omnipotent God just decided one day to get off his lazy bum and spend 144 hours creating the universe as we know it and then got bored of it around 4070 years later. Exactly how is that not random?
macciolmunip1 1 month ago
@qabala The brain would simply be a collection of chemical reactions that have been preserved because they had some sort of survival values in the past.
If evolution were true, then all the evolutionist’s thousands are merely the necessary result of chemistry acting over time. Therefore, an evolutionist must think and say that “evolution is true”, not for rational reasons, but as a necessary consequences of blind chemistry.
Woreyel 1 month ago
@Woreyel "The brain would simply be a collection of chemical reactions that have been preserved because they had some sort of survival values in the past." That is what it is whether or not YHWH, Prometheus or Vishnu created it, and we've been able to simulate simple brain activity and emotions in modern robots like DarWIN-OP and certain indie games with this knowledge.
macciolmunip1 1 month ago
@qabala I acquire Gods Laws of Logic to think and be rational. No other worldview can account for this, and/or has a rational basis for this. If evolution were true, there wouldn’t be any rational reason to believe it! If life is the result of evolution, then it means that an evolutionist’s brain is simply the outworking of millions of years of random-chance processes.
Woreyel 1 month ago
@Woreyel "I acquire Gods Laws of Logic to think and be rational." God didn't make the laws of logic, Zeus did by inspiring Aristotle. God's "Laws of Logic" would be, contradict everything you said in the previous chapter, because if you keep stating something else you're bound to get something right.
macciolmunip1 1 month ago
@qabala You're right I don't know what your worldview is, and I don't need to, because all I know need to know is which worldview is the only rational one. Which is; the ONLY worldview that can account for all of the preconditions of intelligibility. The reason I can be sure that my thoughts can be relied upon is because I know from Genesis 1:27 that I am made in the image of God, therefore I can partially think the way God thinks.
Woreyel 1 month ago
@Woreyel
How do you know your brain is functioning correctly?
Therefore, how do you know that Genesis 1:27 even exists?
If it does, how do you know it's not a misprint?
If it isn't, how do you know that the brain of the person writing it was functioning properly?
Even if it was, considering that God is, admittedly vindictive, even though he commands us to turn the other cheek, it is quite possible that God doesn't consider himself subject to any commandments about honesty, either.
qabala 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Woreyel "The reason I can be sure that my thoughts can be relied upon is because I know from Genesis 1:27 that I am made in the image of God, therefore I can partially think the way God thinks." God is Immaterial and Omnipresent. Therefore he has no physical image, he can only exist as a metaphysical body or consciousness, since all life has consciousness this would prove that man evolved from another species, as otherwise God was lying through his metaphorical teeth.
macciolmunip1 1 month ago
Great job Mark. We really appreciated you coming to our church in Arizona last month. You inspired a lot of people. I took your advice and started studying the book of acts and it's been great. May God bless you and your family. Happy new year living waters!
adamjohnston85 1 month ago
For all you bible skeptics out there who say the bible is full of contradictions. The Law of non-contradiction is one of the basic laws in classical logic. It states that something cannot be both true and not true at the same time when dealing with the same context. One statement must make it impossible for the other statement to be true in the same context.
mccfowler 1 month ago
@mccfowler So? The bible is obviously not the true word of God. Whether or not one exists the book is not his word.
macciolmunip1 1 month ago
@macciolmunip1 Says an atheistic naturalist like one such as you. But I'm not going to start an argument for that would be a complete waste of my time. After all, I do not argue with the irrational people on youtube
Woreyel 1 month ago
You know...I really used to believe this Propaganda, but then I found a website that in spite of my most valiant efforts listed some 300 contradictions in the bible. A few could be explained away, but many could not be so easily dismissed. And I have to say, it really has changed my mind on this whole claim to inerrancy of scripture. It just isn’t so! SEE EVIL BIBLE DOT COM
branchingvine 1 month ago
Complete nonsense.
WCdragoninja 1 month ago
Great video. Keep up the good work.
mccfowler 1 month ago
THANK YOU FOR THIS MARK. Keep up the good work! Is there going to be a season five Way of the Master? I hope so!!!
RyanAnanymous 1 month ago in playlist A Taste of Season 4: Mission Europe
its harmonious. look at how it talks about an all loving god in the gospel of mark and jon. an all loving god is what should be preached because thats what the bible says (ignore verses that instruct you to stone people to death for not followin the sabbath (exodus 35:2), how to treat your slave (exodus 21:1-8), how homsexuality, a victimless "crime," is a sin (leviticus 18:22), the wrath of god via nature for petty things such as name calling (2kings 2:24), and the 1st 4 commandments).
sorry8140 1 month ago
Lots of Strawman arguments in this nonsense.
LOL the bible has been at the forefront of modern science.
MrMick73 2 months ago
it is funny... that Christians r using lies with flashes to make it truth...lol
0110214 2 months ago
okay, so one verse says the earth hangs upon nothing. However, Psalm 93:5 and I Chronicals 16:30 both say the earth does not move and Psalm 104:5 says the earth is set on foudations never to be moved. A person saying the earth hangs on nothing in Biblical times is not that impressive. The ancient Greek astronomers; Philolaus of Croton, Heracleides of Pontus and Aristarchus of Samos all went as far as to say the sun is actually at the center.
stopscammingman 2 months ago
The Qur'an is pretty united also and as far as the science in the bible...they also got about a million things wrong. So, if you guess at one million things, you're bound to get two or three right.
RobotsRule15 2 months ago
@RobotsRule15 I've been reading the Bible for years and still have not found even one thing "they" got wrong
Myvizslas1 2 months ago
@Myvizslas1 Ditto here. Been studying it DAILY since 1998 and I do compare all the stories to the real world and to their own culture and creditbility...not a thing wrong.
richmahn 2 months ago
@Myvizslas1 Not even one thing wrong eh? Go back to high school and study astronomy, physics, biology and world history. The bible got plenty wrong.
TheBlitMaster 1 month ago
Very convincing, but completely flawed logic. Brainwashing, anyone?
cobrastern 2 months ago
Yeah, I see this posted on YouTube and I just have this morbid curiosity to read the train-wreck meta, where the haters come a'crawlin to spew their anger...
If skeptics don't believe, then why do they seem so hell-driven to spend so much time posting vitriolic comments on videos like this? Oh wait, I think I just answered my own question...
LavenderDarwin 2 months ago
So, by this logic, if someone decided to write a book now, and tell you that it was written by God, you couldn't tell them they were wrong, because how would you know if they were lying or not. That's what we would label as a cult, which is the same thing as religion, just religious people have numbers to back them up.
contheist 2 months ago
well continuity is because the writers knew the older version. It should be pointed out the virgin birth was made up so that people would accept Jesus as the Messiah. The proof is the fact that in a time of great record keeping this mythological census never occurred. It was to explain away the fact that jesus was not born where the messiah was said to be.
CapQuacer 2 months ago
STFU
KReeMMeeNAL 2 months ago
121 people who don't know the Power of the HOLY SPIRIT!!!
bibliaotradiciones 2 months ago in playlist The Truth
interesting that the bible taught the earth was round yet early christians were arguing that the earth was flat
oneadamtwelve86 2 months ago
If by "complete unison and harmony" you mean literally hundreds of contradictions, then yes, the Bible is TOTALLY harmonious.
danschaefer97 2 months ago 8
@danschaefer97 Name one contradiction in bible. The Law of non-contradiction is one of the basic laws in classical logic. It states that something cannot be both true and not true at the same time when dealing with the same context.
mccfowler 1 month ago in playlist A Taste of Season 4: Mission Europe
@mccfowler Matthew "Jesus was born during the reign of Herod the Great" born 73 or 74 BCE, died 4 BCE in Jericho
Luke "Jesus' parents had to go to Bethlehem for the first census by Quirinius before Jesus was born", well, that census took place in exactly 6A.D. After the banishment of Herod the Great's son.
No contradictions huh? They just contradicted themselves on the most important part of the bible.
TheBlitMaster 1 month ago
@TheBlitMaster Where'd you get your info? What documents give this info? Where'd you cut and paste this from? Your using some questionable outside source to say that the bible has contradictions. Come better than that.
mccfowler 1 month ago
@mccfowler Wikipedia, several world history books, a few history books about the roman empire, and most trustworthy historians. Look at you, an hour ago you posted something from a completely biased source, from people who do not study history for the sake of knowledge, but rather pretend to just to ridicule others and get money from fools like you.
macciolmunip1 1 month ago
@macciolmunip1 Doesn't sound like you read any of that yourself. Good job on listing one source. How do you know they aren't biased as well? Again with the ad hominem attacks and genetic fallacies. Why does a discussion like this have to result in name calling? Grow up.
mccfowler 1 month ago
My bias is towards peer reviewed articles from people actually specialized in the appropriate field whom base their claims off of evidence rather than assertions that their specific interpretation of their specific holy book has to be 100% correct for a god to exist. Ad hominem? Genetic fallacies? If they were towards an honest theologian about mere belief than yes I would agree, however these people you're supporting are well known for being dishonest people who care not for you but your money.
macciolmunip1 1 month ago
@mccfowler
Herod the Great and Quirinius:
Jewish historian, Jesephus recorded Herod the Greats reign ended with his death in 4 BC. According to Matthew 2:19-20, Jesus should have been born BEFORE this.
Historians of the time, Tacitus, Seutonius, Dio Cassius, and Josephus all record Quirinius' reign in Syria beginning in 6 AD. According to Luke 2:1-3, Jesus should have been born AFTER this.
What are YOUR sources? I am unaware of any source which contradicts the above dates.
qabala 1 month ago
@TheBlitMaster This has been refuted in an article "The Census of Quirinius" on the "creation.com" web site.
mccfowler 1 month ago
Nope, it was on creation.com, why should we care what money grubbing bastards who are non-historians think when every single trustworthy historian (including many whom are also Christian), confirmed that Luke must have been mistaken. Creation "scientists" are liars, they don't care about Christianity or the Christian faith, most aren't even Christian (Ray Comfort is definitely not one), they care about money given to them by gullible people, and keeping people gullible enough to give it to them.
macciolmunip1 1 month ago
@macciolmunip1 I take it you didn't read the article. I wouldn't expect any better from someone who resorts to genetic fallacies and ad hominem attacks.
mccfowler 1 month ago
@mccfowler I did, I take it you are either so willfully deceived you won't admit it, or are a deceiver yourself whom is only doing this for the money. Now the fact still remains that this article you put up references no articles from historians, was not peer reviewed by honest historians, and the person who put it on the site was a chemist and chess champion, which puts him up to par with any other Joe Schmoe when it comes to historic accuracy, that should be enough info that I didn't have too.
macciolmunip1 1 month ago
@macciolmunip1 I still don't believe you read the article because you would have seen this. Sir William Mitchell Ramsay (1851–1939), the archaeologist and professor from Oxford and Cambridge Universities, argued that suggest that Quirinius was twice ruling in Syria on two occasions.4 This was partly based on the Latin Tiburtine Inscription, discovered in 1746, which referred to someone ruling Syria twice, and Ramsay argued that Quirinius fit.5
mccfowler 1 month ago
@mccfowler Yes, a quote-mined reference from a non-peer reviewed book from over 113 years ago which while well researched by the historian SWMR (and not Sarfati), is still concluding on mere opinions which most modern credible historians disagree with today, whom he himself (SWMR) still argued later in his life that their were many errors in the bible especially the Old Testament despite his claim that certain popular issues with the New Testament may not have been in error. Got anything better?
macciolmunip1 1 month ago
@macciolmunip1 Again with the genetic fallacies and arguementum ad populum. You judge a quote not based on it's truth but by attacking the source and you don't even realize the hypocrisy of your judgement. I'm sure many of your sources many not have been positively reviewed by somebody with a Christian worldview. And just because more people believe something or have a certain perception it does not make them right.
mccfowler 1 month ago
@mccfowler Peer-Review is done by those actually in the field. Christians didn't review the findings of Galileo positively, but astronomers did. Those historians I was talking about that disagreed with him were all biblical scholars so their opinions on both are better then your Joe Shmoe Christian, it's up to historians to do the reviews, not chess players.
macciolmunip1 1 month ago
"Authors wrote EXACTLY what god wanted them to write" Stop being NAIVE.
IspanasOnTop 2 months ago
So glad I don't live in america because of this insanity.
Kaaxe 3 months ago
As an engineer , each day I research and learn, the more I marvel at God's creation. Man has been trying for ages to match up to his intelligence and design. Were are light years behind.
ikllnp 3 months ago
and yes, lets talk about a prophecy that started in the old testament and then lets prove it in the new testament. it's circular reasoning to think that this proves that christianity is the only religion with fulfilled prophecy.
Manfish67 3 months ago
it was painful when you quoted a bible verse saying the the bible is backed by god (2 peter 1:21) People can put that in there with the exact intention of trying to give people a reason to believe in it. I'm still looking for a video that tells me why christians trust the bible.
Manfish67 3 months ago
Do you have a Spanish version of this video?
merdelune9 3 months ago
Yeah but the bible makes idiotic mistakes. it makes idiotic mistakes like saying poeple can know magic so we should kill them. I think the bible has some good ideas but no perfect god could have written that.
AEVautomatic 3 months ago
Is that god writing the Bible?? NOPE!! Chuck Testa
RUnerdy 3 months ago
lol, I find it really funny and sad that so called atheists spend so much of their time commenting on Christian videos to attempt and fail at bashing at God they claim they don't even believe in. If you don't believe in Him you must be insane wasting so much time trying to destroy Him (and failing since the dawn of time). The best part is the Bible says God is just sitting in heaven laughing at you.
Kinosis79 3 months ago
@Kinosis79 I think probly the reason that atheists spend some much time refuting religeous people is the intolerent history of those religeons.Christians today complain about the intolerence of Islam while conveniently forgetting about their own intolerent history.All those that worship the God of Moses have similar histories of religeous intolerence,which seems to be inherent in all these faiths.The God of Moses commanded his followrs to destroy all other religeons.Exodus34:10-17.DvneIntolrence
GARYWERSLEY 3 months ago
@GARYWERSLEY Don't be silly, they do it because they hate God, period. Christians do not have an intolerant history, you are just not knowledgeable. Catholics have a violent history but they are not Christians, they are a pagan religion that denies the Bible. You need to take a class on hermeneutics because you sound like a fool, any orders God gave to the nation of Israel is just that, to the nation of Israel at that time, it has nothing to do with Christians. Be educated before speaking.
Kinosis79 3 months ago
@Kinosis79 catholics arent christians? catholics are the first christians.
oneadamtwelve86 2 months ago
@oneadamtwelve86 JESUSCHRIST is not some organization or building in which say "oh we are part of this" A Christian is a follower of JESUS not an organization of men! That is why we do not put our confidence in men rather we put our confidence in GOD "JESUSCHRIST what He did for us on the cross. IF CHRIST is in you! you are part of his Church!
bibliaotradiciones 2 months ago in playlist The Truth
@bibliaotradiciones i dont see how that responded to anything that i said at all. but how could i expect anything else than a bunch of nonsense from a christian
oneadamtwelve86 2 months ago
@Kinosis79
Atheists can't hate something that doesn't exist.
Although they CAN argue that God is unlikable.
And since, even you, will justify genocide in the name of God, it doesn't do your cause much good.
qabala 1 month ago
First a circle is flat.
Second, It never says that the the messiah would be born of a virgin(the word is almah, which means "young woman" or "maiden; the same word is used to describe dinah after she was raped, when she was defiantly not a virgin. How about the bible describing Judas' death as being caused by two separate thing(one a fall, the other a suicide by hanging)
JDThinking 3 months ago
One "god", millions of editors
jaraujo3691 3 months ago
"The authors wrote exactly what God wanted them to write." Really? Then one contradiction in the bible means that God is imperfect, right? Well... Ecclesiastes 7:20 and Genesis 6:9.
I'll just leave this here.
Idontlikelobster 3 months ago
no we can not trust the bible... or any religous text. i am proud to be an atheist...
hail atheism...
fattigbonddrang 3 months ago
Matthew 1:16 Joseph's father is named Jacob. Luke 3:23 Joseph's father is named Heli.
What are the chances there is an error here?
edgarrsoares 3 months ago
people lived up to 900 years old. That's so true :\
chesster423 3 months ago
You though it was god?
No.
Chuck Tesla/
thogz777 3 months ago
@thogz777 Nope.*
lern2chucktesta
Idontlikelobster 3 months ago
Christians need to stop wasting their time trying to prove the legitimacy and accuracy of the bible on topics such as geology and genealogy and focus on using the bible as a platform to living a better life as well as serving humanity in a positive way. The bible has been proven wrong many MANY times over so just except that people who wrote it could not have know of what they were writing and instead gave it their best shot.
DemonDrummer1018 4 months ago
Genesis 8.13:
"Noah was now 601 years old. On the first day of the new year, ten and a half months after the flood began,[c] the floodwaters had almost dried up from the earth. Noah lifted back the covering of the boat and saw that the surface of the ground was drying. 14 Two more months went by,[d] and at last the earth was dry!"
Genisis 9.28-29: 28
"Noah lived another 350 years after the great flood. 29 He lived 950 years, and then he died."
Noah should be at least 951 years old.
AymanRSaleh 4 months ago
So, God is the creator of all things but couldn't be bothered to pick up a pen and do his own writing? Instead, he needed to use humans as sock puppets? Why wouldn't he just will the scriptures into existence so that they'd be instantaneously perfect and totally complete? How does any of this make any sense at all?
Also, a circle is not a sphere. Just a heads up on basic geometry.
RootCanal 4 months ago 14
@RootCanal About the circle and the sphere: There are various minor mistakes that have come from translating the original Biblical texts to English. You brought up a foolish point. Secondly, why should God have written it himself? Who would he give it to, and who would have found it? How would that man even know it was the word of God? I believe that God also used specific men to write the bible (in particular the NT Canon) to show how reliable the texts were, since the writers were strangers.
SergiuM42 4 months ago
@SergiuM42 "I believe that God also used specific men to write the bible" and then God reunited the Council of Trent to select which Gospels would make into the Bible, selected the bishops to it and ordered the destruction of the apocryphal Gospels.
edgarrsoares 3 months ago
@SergiuM42 Don't even try to call someone foolish when you believe in such fairy tales
IOutDoSyndicate 3 months ago
@SergiuM42 If you had this awesome new idea, and wanted people to know about it, what would you rather do? Write it down yourself, or tell it to your secretary, who could omit, misinterpret or flat-out LIE about what you said?
zanderfist 3 months ago
@zanderfist That's such a vague comparison. When debating something such as Jesus being the Son or not, you have to take certain things into consideration. You must first conclude whether you believe in the supernatural or not. Until believe in the supernatural, then you obviously will not believe that God could have written the bible. So whoever is on here "trying" to give us Christians trouble, go debate Naturalism vs Supernaturalism first. Find better use of your time and stop fail-trolling.