I can hear it now...Christian apologist says, "It was just an error in translation. What he really said was "you must be fooling me when you say the gold is more important than the temple that makes it sacred. Come on atheists, is that all you've got?"
@ProfMTH Actually it was written in a Semitic language that much is easily demonstrated by linguistic study and not traditional harping as the christians do. Mostly just follow suit of their predecessors opinions. and also, where is your evidence that Aramaic was the spoken language of hte people back then? The DSS show that Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic were used. Josephus the famed historian of the 1st century declared that most jews despised any language other than Hebrew.
@ProfMTH just as me saying it wasn't doesnt prove it to you, so also you saying it was Greek proves it not to me. i would suggest in regards to your beliefs on this subject, you investigate it rather than follow whatever the socalled experts tell you. you might well look into the evidence for Aramaic primacy of the Greek manuscripts. not only does the linguistics support it, but so also the church fathers who talked about this in the first four centuries agreed that the NT was in Hebrew.
@carlsonap16 "just as me saying it wasn't doesnt prove it to you, so also you saying it was Greek proves it not to me."
Feel free to point me to the manuscripts of Matthew that are not written in Greek. Short of that, please don't waste my time or yours with baseless babbling on.
@ProfMTH you claim it is a translation of the Greek, but are you really certified to make that claim? i have done the study, and the evidence supports that the Peshitta came before the Greek, as the Greek contains errors that Peshitta does not, and which are ultimately only explainable by Greek mistranslations of the Aramaic
@ProfMTH brothers is always referring to the elect (believers) when Jesus is speaking in the New Testament. Yes, Jesus was speaking to the Jewish crowds which were some of the elect shown after his speech when some followed him.
@ReformedEklektos "brothers is always referring to the elect (believers) when Jesus is speaking in the New Testament"
Different from your initial claim. And I note you didn't answer my question. In any case, let's explore your new claim. Mt 10:21, Jesus speaking, "Brother will betray brother to death." That refers to believers ("the elect")? Mt 19:29, Jesus speaking, "Everyone who has left houses or BROTHERS or sisters or father or mother or children or farms for My name’s sake..." The elect?
@ProfMTH what question didn't I answer? nothing is different from my initial claim. My comments were directed towards your video which is about Jesus, Why would I go off and talk about Paul when your video has nothing to do with him. Matthew 10:21 is parallel to Matthew 10:35 which shows that Christ came to divide family. lol you are making erroneous claims. anyone with half a brain that can read would understand the usage in its context
Here's your initial claim: "brothers in the New Testament is always referring to believers." Here was your second claim (after I asked you to explain Romans 9:3): "brothers is always referring to the elect (believers) when Jesus is speaking in the New Testament." You want to claim you were saying exactly the same thing in both, is that correct?
(con't) @ReformedEklektos "Why would I go off and talk about Paul when your video has nothing to do with him."
I can only go by what you write. Your initial claim was "brothers in the New Testament is always referring to believers." When I showed you just one example of where 'brothers' in the NT clearly does *not* refer to believers, you revised your claim to "when Jesus is speaking in the New Testament." Now I've showed you just a couple of examples of Jesus using the exact same word...
(con't) @ReformedEklektos ...elsewhere just in Matthew where it's not a reference to believers. Now you're invoking context. But the context of Matthew 5 wasn't in favor of your initial claim, so then you to impose something upon the text, i.e., asserting the "some of the elect" were among the crowds. Bottom line: 1) I'm hip to the "heads I win, tails you lose" game believers play with the Bible, so give it up; 2) both your old and new claim are wrong about 'brothers' in the New Testament.
@ProfMTH In my mind when I wrote "brothers in the New Testament is always referring to believers" I was thinking of Jesus. How can you make such a universal claim of "brothers" when Christ made it clear that there are people who he does not see as being a brother. Matthew 12:50
For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.”
Anyone who does not believe in him is not his brother and he could call them fools all he wants
lol this is an easy one.. he said we cannot call our brothers fools... brothers in the New Testament is always referring to believers. So Jesus calling unbelievers fools is in no way a contradiction to his teaching
@ReformedEklektos "brothers in the New Testament is always referring to believers"
Really? Then perhaps you can explain, just for example, Paul's use of the exact same word in Romans 9:3 in reference to the Jews who did *not* believe in Jesus. Since "this is an easy one," you'll no doubt be able to show that even though Paul is clearly referring to Jews who were *not* believers in Jesus, the word nevertheless is "always referring to believers." I look forward to your response. Thanks.
@ProfMTH The answer is in the verse you posted... "those of my own race, the people of Israel." That has nothing to do with Jesus referring to brothers as brothers in Christ
@ReformedEklektos I want to be sure I understand your position. You concede that it's the exact same word used in both passages, but you insist that in Matthew 5 it cannot possibly refer to anyone other than believers in Jesus, is that correct?
@ProfMTH Id be happy to crush you darkness here and there, Sam I am.
Tell us who is Isaiah talking about there. Remember weve both witnessed all of ur arguments so far go down in flames. What makes u think that htis one will be any different?
@j919or I saw rabbi schmuley boteach on faith under fire (it's on youtube) quoting scripture that shows jesus could not be both the messiah and the son of god. Historically the idea jesus was the son of god seems to have been the invention of the early church to make the message fit with paganism (the jews weren't interested). Jesus clearly wasn't the messiah (no jewish victory,no world peace) and if his divinity was an invention, who was he?
@j919or That is only one among many prophecies, you know he didn't fulfill them all which is why apologists say he will fulfill them on his (already 2000 years late according to matt16:28) return. Jewish scholars aren't anti religion or stupid, why do you think they reject jesus, could they be right? Prof keith ward (christian theologian) writes christianity is a mix of many extra-biblical ideas and that jesus is neither divine or the messiah. You all read the same book, who should i believe?
@1empathy Then bring ur alleged messiah prophecy failures one by one and Ill crush them one by one until you realize that you care not for truth but to impune God bc of ur hostility towards God. Start with mt 16.28 and state ur contention clearly.
@j919or Thanks for your time, my question was "who should i believe?" google prof keith ward and the rabbi and you will see they are respected theologians,your argument is with them, not with me. Their contentions are Matt 16. 28 is unfulfilled, ie everyone is dead that was present and no son of man coming etc. another would be that the messiah cannot be the son of god, that he must be a human political figure from the lineage of david and of course be victorious not die. How come nobody knows?
@1empathy Ok dude. Jesus says that some will seee him coming in his kingdom. This statement is vague and in synch with Mt 17 and his transfiguration where he told the 3 disciples not to tell anyone til after the resurrection. There Jesus was transfigured with 2 reps from the OT kingdom, Moses and Elijah.
@j919or You seem like a very resonable person, can you see my problem? I was not brought up in a theistic home and so i find all religions a bit silly. I'm reading "is religion irrational" by Prof ward to try to understand the other side but he reads the bible as allegory,metaphor and even wrong!? Then rabbis make a coherent argumment against jesus plus objective historians doubt jesus even existed. Who is right? You, Prof keith,rabbi boteach or someone else?
@ProfMTH I thought that passage was from the New Testament and I was trying to show the author's hypocrisy, but now I realize that it is from the Psalms. Its still pretty bad though, whoever wrote that should be punished acording to Jesus.
@pcgamerjoe dislike. they y do we hav CURSE words? that we can't say? no real reason other then people actuall thot if u dammed some1 2 hell, they would b sentenced there regardless of their repentance or god's will. that's y witches were so feared.
You fool. He said you can't call someone a FOOL. But he called them foolS, plural. Obviously the all-knowing Jesus was smart enough to give himself a loophole!
Oh shit. I just realized I called you a fool! Damn it! Now I'm answerable to the Sanhedrin! Ah well, it's been a good life. Bye.
First of all you do not use the same context in which Christ is using! He has the authority to call anyone a fool, and mere man does not have that authority.
@dangerics . chapter 5 is about the hypocrisy and the moral condition of the scribes and pharisees. Their problem is their false righteousness, saying thing that have not justification. We are not forbidden to call men "fools"considerately and appropriately, we are forbidden to do so in malevolent contempt. In 23: Christ justifies why he calls them fools, In chp 5 he condemns them for calling his brother a fool without cause.
@mjr2168 Congrats. You are the first Xtian ever to say "out of context" and then put it in context when I ask. But, in ch 5 J says being angry and/or calling your brother fool will bring retribution. It says nothing about context. It's a blanket statement. No conditions are given. J doesn't say don't do it with malevolent contempt. He says don't do it. Period. So to say we are not forbidden when it's considered and appropriate is a loophole.
@mjr2168 In fact in 5:21 he says remember "don't kill?' Then he goes on to say don't even call your brother raca or fool. Clearly he's implying that that calling your brother raca or fool is as comparable to killing. But still, he doesn't say, unless it's deserved, don't say it. He just says, don't say it.
@rmaynard626 ok, I just misunderstood. So if someone is abused by their parents that's okay because their parents brought them into this world right? okay that makes much more sense. Thanks for clearing that up for me.
@rmaynard626 If God created us, that doesn't give him any moral authority over us. It's baffling how Xians think you can connect those two dots. The old "the potter may shatter his pot if he wishes" thing is a non-starter. Pots ain't people.
@DuhIdiot1 Are you kidding me??? It gives Him the ultimate authority over us. He can do with us as He sees fit, at any given time. You make it as though your on the same level as Him. You are not even considered dust in His presence, but He chooses to love us. You're thinking in terms of a democracy... Being that He created everything in existence, you don't get a say so in the decision making process.
@DuhIdiot1 No... It doesn't sound stupid at all... Thinking that an all powerful being that created you is not superior and having authority over you has to be the DUMBEST concept ever. You're telling me that if YOU were God, you would not oversee and be in authority over your own creation?????? You would just let your creation do whatever it felt like doing? Or would you govern over its well being. Now, you see how stupid that sounds!!
@rmaynard626 "Hydrogen is flammable. Therefore Burt Reynolds didn't win any Oscars for any of the 'Cannonball Run' or "Smokey And The Bandit' movies."
"I created this thinking, feeling, adult human. Therefore I have some sort of authority over him."
"My nuts itch. Therefore per capita ownership of chickens in former Soviet republics is 3.4."
@Penfold011082 sorry. I'm not sure who I was saying is contradicting themselves. I can't tell who posted things and who's receiving them. Anyway, I meant to say the believer is wrong.........just to clarify.
@rmaynard626 Now you're contradicting yourself. Do you not remember that according to the Bible, God allows us free will. So he does let us do whatever the hell we want. He creates us, knowing that we will sin and do horrible things. He foresees everything, even the fact that we will go to hell. Yet, he creates us anyway. That sounds like ants in a magnifying glass to me. Would you knowingly conceive a child that was going to go to hell, and do nothing to prevent it from happening?
@glegely God did something to prevent it but you deny accountability for your transgressions. Christ died on the cross as an atoning sacrifice for your past present and future sins... He took your sins to the cross, but being that you deny him, you are now saying its God's fault for your free will decision ??? God created you out of love, but you have to choose where you will be... With Him or in hell.... Your choice...your free will choice...
@ProfMTH Dont take the word of someone else to be true, read the book as it was originaly made. At the very least in the same language as it was written.
@Ragatokk I haven't "take[n] the word of someone else." What, if anything, about "the book as it was originally made" and the "language as it was written" solves the problem presented here?
@ProfMTH You are trying to make it say something it does not. Jesus does not say you fool, he says you fools. Nor does he say it to his brother(s) as many of the religious wold say, this is out of context.
@ProfMTH You are trying to make it say something it does not. Jesus does not say you fool, he says you fools. Nor does he say it to his brother(s) as many of the religious wold say, this is out of context.
PS: My first argument was in a drunken state, and should be ignored, Thank you.
What translation are you using? I just checked King James and NIV, and I see for Matthew 5:22 the words "without a cause." So later on when Jesus calls people fools, He's got a cause, so there would be no hypocrisy.
The other videos seem rock solid so far, but not this one.
New American Standard. I just had a look at the passage in the New International Version: "But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca’ is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell." Nothing about "without a cause."
@ProfMTH I just double-checked and you're right about NIV. I'm not sure WHICH version I was looking at for that second one. It's definitely there in KJV though, so an apologist can still say "See? It's there." But at least it highlights how just three words dropped between versions (in the same language, no less) can completely alter the "inerrant Word of God"
Thanks for making this series though. Should provide for some eyebrow-raising moments the next time a friend tries to evangelize to me
@ProfMTH hey profMTH the king JAMES VERSION IS THE TRUE WORD OF GOD.. other translations are works of satan.. (learned from sunday school) honestly i learned it from sunday school...
Jesus here is illustrating that without being aware of one's thoughts, a person can easily fall into sin and become an object of judgment by God. Then when talking to the Pharisees, Jesus renders God's judgment upon them. Two different things. I can see where the misunderstanding is since you seem not to believe Jesus was appointed by God to hand out God's commands and judgments.
This where Jesus revealed the danger of going before the throne at judgement day after having lived a life away from God. So you think that God needs to practice what he preaches? Oh, I see: maybe God should become a Christian, huh? Are you the type that would blow up if a judge here on Earth ruled against you? Probably not and about all you can do is appeal. The point Jesus was making illustrated how easily anyone falls into sin.
@aggienostic How, if at all, does any of what you've written in your comment address the discrepancy between Jesus' instructions and behavior as presented in Matthew?
@ProfMTH "@aggienostic How, if at all, does any of what you've written in your comment address the discrepancy between Jesus' instructions and behavior as presented in Matthew?"
It doesn't, the faithful just hope you don't notice as they sweep it under the carpet....
@ProfMTH You just said "angry with your brother" You didn't say without cause after angry with your brother! I did pay attention. I played it five times to find it. It isn't there!
@chapmaned What I meant is that everything that appears in the text of Matthew 5:21-22 was included. Only some manuscripts of the Gospel of Matthew include "without cause" and, therefore, it is often left out in modern translations.
@ProfMTH Oh, the NIV version you are using. No wonder the blunders. There are several blunders in the NIV. Leave it to the modern translations! Might as well use the Jehovah's Witness Bible, and really see the blunders!
@chapmaned The NIV version was translated directly from Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek texts so there aren't any blunders. But yes, the Jehovah's Witness Bible is full of blunders as it added and deleted bits and pieces to suit themselves. I wouldn't even bother calling it a Bible!
@MySpaige Actually, in many places the New World Translation ("the Jehovah's Witnesses' Bible") is a far better translation than the New International Version, which often manipulates the text to make it conform to Evangelical doctrine. See, e.g., Jason David BeDuhn's book "Truth in Translation: Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament" for a detailed discussion of this (as well as analysis of other English-language translations of the New Testament).
@ProfMTH No that is not correct. The NIV version was translated directly (without manipulation) from the formentioned texts, whereas the Jehovah's Witnesses have translated the Bible to suit themselves.
@MySpaige You don't know what you're talking about. I've recommended a book that can begin to help you to get the facts about all of this. You may either avail yourself of that and other sources OR you may persist in ignorance. If you opt for the latter, please do not waste your time and my mine repeatedly posting your mere ignorant claims about Bible translations here. I know better and I'm not interested in my channel being cluttered with such nonsense. Thanks.
@ProfMTH Just because I have a different opinion to you doesn't automatically make me ignorant. You don't know me from a bar of soap, so you can't say I don't know what I'm talking about, just as I can't say you don't know what you're talking about. I don't know what you do and don't know and vice versa.
@MySpaige "Just because I have a different opinion to you doesn't automatically make me ignorant."
I didn't say it did. This isn't about opinions; it's about facts. You're wrong on the facts. You may remedy your ignorance by learning the facts, of course. But I have a feeling you're not disposed to doing so.
"You don't know me from a bar of soap, so you can't say I don't know what I'm talking about...."
Oh, your statement about the NWT vs. the NIV made it clear that you don't.
@taicleis No I didn't want to have a debate. But fyi, the NWT was edited and revised for the purpose of agreeing with the jw's doctrine. For example, the greek word "stauros" meaning cross, was translated by the jws as "torture stake" because they don't believe Jesus was crucified on the cross. The greek words "sheol", "hades", "gehenna", and "tartarus" don't translate those words as heell, coz they don't believe in hell. And they've added the word "others" to col 1:16 (it wasn't in the original
Hell is one of the mistakes, actually. It was never mentioned by the Jews, was never a part of the original scripture, and was only added when the Greeks began assimilating into the religion. They first called it Hades. Ever wonder why?
They liked having the Hades of Greek mythology so much, they just had to keep it when they converted.
Then they mistranslated Gehenna (an actual historical place) and Sheol (the grave) over and over again to fit.
@taicleis Sorry, heell should have said hell. This is a very small amount of inaccurate translation and I could go on with more but I can't be bothered. So next time you think I don't know what I'm talking about, think again. I just can't be bothered.
"It is right to be angered by abuse and injustice"
lets see... 2 samuel 12:11 Thus saith the LORD, Behold, I will raise up evil against thee out of thine own house, and I will take thy wives before thine eyes, and give them unto thy neighbour, and he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun.
god arranging for the rape of the innocent - yer right, that does piss me off.
Once again, it's all about context. Jesus is not saying that merely calling someone a fool will result in Hell. He is attempting to illustrate that a heart filled with judgment, hostility and unforgiveness is antithetical to the Gospel which teaches love for all - even your enemies. Jesus rebuked the pharisees with righteous judgment for their hypocrisy. It's all about motive. The first is from an evil heart, the second is from concern for those who are being harmed by manipulative priests.
I don't quite get whats wrong with Lucifer / the devil. He killed one family by the request of god and was reported to be the snake but it wasn't quite confirmed. God's track record in support of incest and genocide is far worse. Ever think that lucifur knew how evil god was and tried to warn everyone else? Hell is looking far better then heaven these days. Gods propaganda machine is working in overdrive these days.
Question would you have a two year old on the US supreme court? No!!! They could not pass a proper judgement . Mr. ProMTH you and I are like the 2 year old compared to the wisdom of God. Until God steps off his throne what Jesus said made perfect sense.
A figure of speech in which a word or phrase that ordinarily designates one thing is used to designate another, thus making an implicit comparison
calling someone a fool is making a judgement that they are wrong
you are in danger of hell fire if it is you who is wrong because the penalty for being wrong then falls on you instead of them. How many people especially christians believe the wrong doer is going to hell.... jesus in many places says such christians will be the ones who go there
"will be in danger of the fire of hell" because they may be making a false accusation or judgement , Jesus of course KNEW they were fools, he did not make judgements he stated facts because his truth and knowledhe is objective ours is subjective, "judge and ye shall be judged in like manner"
jesus used meraphor so that is exactly what he was saying do not say anything bad about others because you are just as guilty and will be judged by God he same way you are judging others.
the meraphor was calling someone a fool or wrong , making a judgement when you do not know that you may be the one who is wrong. so many peiople think they are right in what they believe which makes sense else why would they belieiive it. too few recognize that from the other persons point of view they also believe they are right and usually they are both right bit both also ignorant of the entirety of the issue and thus both also wrong so they fight instead of seeking understanding
Every heard the phrase "Jesus Fucking Christ"? That's Jesus cloning himself, then fucking his clone in the ass! (Or vice versa.)
By the way, to all you Jews for Jesus nutjobs, it's not YAHUSHUA. You are adding an extra syllable for no reason. It's Yahsua. Or, Y'shua. Unless of course, you are worshiping some other holy clown I've never heard of.
@gdg1963 The key phrase being Son of GOD. Not GOD. We are all children of GOD, born with the ability to become enlightend. Jesus was born with this gift. I hope this helps.
@jojonobo , YAHUSHUA is the only begotten Son of GOD. (JOHN 3:16). The rest of us who are sons and daughters of GOD, through YAHUSHUA, are ADOPTED Children. YAHUSHUA is One of the Three Persons of the Triune GOD. Do not allow yourself to be confused on this fact any longer. It is vitally important that you know, that YOU KNOW that YAHUSHUA is God. Please read JOHN 1:1-5 and JOHN 1:14-15. YAHUSHUA (JESUS) is the Word made Flesh to be our Lamb's Blood Atoning Sacrifice for "whosoever will".
@jojonobo , Thanks for your thoughtfulness. I will worship the Lord YAHUSHUA (JESUS) for He is my Saviour and Shepherd. He is the Living Word. He is God of very GOD. Peace! :-)
@ProfMTH, The scribes took John the Baptist's, words and actions and applied them to Jesus' life after John (allegedly) Baptized him. Think of Jesus in terms of this, He is John the Baptist in action. I realized this years ago after noticing Mark 3;18 James is called son of Alphaeus. Catholics claim that Mary (mother of Jesus) had a second husband. This isn't the case. Alphaeus is Zacharias, James was brother of John. Scribes alerted the Gospels to hide Holy Grail.
I loved the look of utter shock on their faces when Jesus said that "terrible" word "raka".
Obviously - though - calling someone a fool is much, much worse than calling someone "empty-headed" (which is what raka means) and surely the only way to aptly punish it is eternally by means of hellfire.
Hahaha, I can't believe anyone would take this piece of pseudo-wisdom or any of the other preachings in the NT seriously to begin with.
Jeremiah 17:11 God calls the unjust fools. Luke 12:20 But God said to him "You fool! this very night your life will be demanded from you". Keep in mind that when God calls someone a fool he does it with complete accurate knowledge. Jesus being divine has every right to proclaim a fool to whoever he wants, Proof? since in your previous video you quoted John 9:39 to prove that Jesus judges the world, this interpretation doesn't seem so far fetched now does it? hahaha owned !
@ProfMTH When one has supreme perfect knowledge, he can address you in any way he sees fit. do you know the depths of ones mind, of one's soul? no you dont, so you have no reason to criticize. I'm glad i could solve your problem.
@ProfMTH , No. YAHUSHUA (aka "JESUS") was Perfect in every way. He was the Son of GOD and He never sinned. So, when He called someone a "fool", He spoke the Truth. But, we, mankind, who are born in sin, who are no better than the next guy, have no right to call someone else a "fool" when we, ourselves, are just as foolish, but, for different reasons (or even similar ones). We, as sinful human beings, are in no position to slam other people, when we're just as guilty.
@yaitsmesuperboomboon "Yeshua said that the pharisee were of "their father, the devil""
Actually, according to the anti-Jewish screed that is called the Gospel of John, Jesus said that "[t]o the Jews who had believed him" (John 8:31). Moreover, the word the 4th gospel has Jesus use for 'brother' is the same word Paul uses in Romans to describe his relationship to the Jews. Learn your Bible before you come here to start posting bullshit.
@ProfMTH , Actually, YAHUSHUA called the sect of Pharisees "snakes", "brood of vipers" and "white-washed tombs" which were pretty and glamorous on the outside ,but, full of sin and rot on the inside. So, it's the same thing as calling them children of the Devil, just using different terminology.
I can hear it now...Christian apologist says, "It was just an error in translation. What he really said was "you must be fooling me when you say the gold is more important than the temple that makes it sacred. Come on atheists, is that all you've got?"
ChipArgyle 1 week ago
Russian Translation says the same
kokalti 2 weeks ago
good job for using the english translation and not the hebrew. the hebrew did not say "fool" and refers to something else entirely.
carlsonap16 2 months ago
@carlsonap16 "good job for using the english translation and not the hebrew"
This text was originally written in Greek, not Hebrew. And Jesus would have spoken Aramaic. So, good job not knowing what you're talking about.
ProfMTH 2 months ago
@ProfMTH Actually it was written in a Semitic language that much is easily demonstrated by linguistic study and not traditional harping as the christians do. Mostly just follow suit of their predecessors opinions. and also, where is your evidence that Aramaic was the spoken language of hte people back then? The DSS show that Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic were used. Josephus the famed historian of the 1st century declared that most jews despised any language other than Hebrew.
carlsonap16 2 months ago
@carlsonap16 "Actually it was written in a Semitic language...."
It was written in Greek.
ProfMTH 2 months ago
@ProfMTH just as me saying it wasn't doesnt prove it to you, so also you saying it was Greek proves it not to me. i would suggest in regards to your beliefs on this subject, you investigate it rather than follow whatever the socalled experts tell you. you might well look into the evidence for Aramaic primacy of the Greek manuscripts. not only does the linguistics support it, but so also the church fathers who talked about this in the first four centuries agreed that the NT was in Hebrew.
carlsonap16 2 months ago
@carlsonap16 "just as me saying it wasn't doesnt prove it to you, so also you saying it was Greek proves it not to me."
Feel free to point me to the manuscripts of Matthew that are not written in Greek. Short of that, please don't waste my time or yours with baseless babbling on.
ProfMTH 2 months ago
@ProfMTH Sure. Take a look at the Aramaic New Testament, the Peshitta. Also the Old Syriac Gospels. And take a look at the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew
carlsonap16 2 months ago
@carlsonap16 "the Peshitta"
A translation! You're wasting my time with this nonsense.
ProfMTH 2 months ago
@ProfMTH you claim it is a translation of the Greek, but are you really certified to make that claim? i have done the study, and the evidence supports that the Peshitta came before the Greek, as the Greek contains errors that Peshitta does not, and which are ultimately only explainable by Greek mistranslations of the Aramaic
carlsonap16 2 months ago
@ProfMTH brothers is always referring to the elect (believers) when Jesus is speaking in the New Testament. Yes, Jesus was speaking to the Jewish crowds which were some of the elect shown after his speech when some followed him.
ReformedEklektos 2 months ago
@ReformedEklektos "brothers is always referring to the elect (believers) when Jesus is speaking in the New Testament"
Different from your initial claim. And I note you didn't answer my question. In any case, let's explore your new claim. Mt 10:21, Jesus speaking, "Brother will betray brother to death." That refers to believers ("the elect")? Mt 19:29, Jesus speaking, "Everyone who has left houses or BROTHERS or sisters or father or mother or children or farms for My name’s sake..." The elect?
ProfMTH 2 months ago
@ProfMTH what question didn't I answer? nothing is different from my initial claim. My comments were directed towards your video which is about Jesus, Why would I go off and talk about Paul when your video has nothing to do with him. Matthew 10:21 is parallel to Matthew 10:35 which shows that Christ came to divide family. lol you are making erroneous claims. anyone with half a brain that can read would understand the usage in its context
ReformedEklektos 2 months ago
@ReformedEklektos "nothing is different from my initial claim"
Here's your initial claim: "brothers in the New Testament is always referring to believers." Here was your second claim (after I asked you to explain Romans 9:3): "brothers is always referring to the elect (believers) when Jesus is speaking in the New Testament." You want to claim you were saying exactly the same thing in both, is that correct?
ProfMTH 2 months ago
(con't) @ReformedEklektos "Why would I go off and talk about Paul when your video has nothing to do with him."
I can only go by what you write. Your initial claim was "brothers in the New Testament is always referring to believers." When I showed you just one example of where 'brothers' in the NT clearly does *not* refer to believers, you revised your claim to "when Jesus is speaking in the New Testament." Now I've showed you just a couple of examples of Jesus using the exact same word...
ProfMTH 2 months ago
(con't) @ReformedEklektos ...elsewhere just in Matthew where it's not a reference to believers. Now you're invoking context. But the context of Matthew 5 wasn't in favor of your initial claim, so then you to impose something upon the text, i.e., asserting the "some of the elect" were among the crowds. Bottom line: 1) I'm hip to the "heads I win, tails you lose" game believers play with the Bible, so give it up; 2) both your old and new claim are wrong about 'brothers' in the New Testament.
ProfMTH 2 months ago
@ProfMTH In my mind when I wrote "brothers in the New Testament is always referring to believers" I was thinking of Jesus. How can you make such a universal claim of "brothers" when Christ made it clear that there are people who he does not see as being a brother. Matthew 12:50
For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.”
Anyone who does not believe in him is not his brother and he could call them fools all he wants
ReformedEklektos 2 months ago
lol this is an easy one.. he said we cannot call our brothers fools... brothers in the New Testament is always referring to believers. So Jesus calling unbelievers fools is in no way a contradiction to his teaching
ReformedEklektos 2 months ago
@ReformedEklektos "brothers in the New Testament is always referring to believers"
Really? Then perhaps you can explain, just for example, Paul's use of the exact same word in Romans 9:3 in reference to the Jews who did *not* believe in Jesus. Since "this is an easy one," you'll no doubt be able to show that even though Paul is clearly referring to Jews who were *not* believers in Jesus, the word nevertheless is "always referring to believers." I look forward to your response. Thanks.
ProfMTH 2 months ago
@ProfMTH The answer is in the verse you posted... "those of my own race, the people of Israel." That has nothing to do with Jesus referring to brothers as brothers in Christ
ReformedEklektos 2 months ago
@ReformedEklektos I want to be sure I understand your position. You concede that it's the exact same word used in both passages, but you insist that in Matthew 5 it cannot possibly refer to anyone other than believers in Jesus, is that correct?
ProfMTH 2 months ago
Well according to the Bible Jews did go to hell first. Just to be fair, I´m not a Christian.
VitoPossilipo 2 months ago
Yeah well to be fair, jesus did go to hell for a while. Wait, none of that is real anyway.
DaemonAnt 3 months ago
First arrival of Messiah is to save from sin
Second is to save from sinners
The proud think they can skip the first
j919or 3 months ago
Isaiah 53
6 We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to our own way;
and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all.
j919or 3 months ago
@j919or Isaiah 53 has nothing to do with Jesus. See my "Jesus Was Not the Messiah" series.
ProfMTH 3 months ago
@ProfMTH Id be happy to crush you darkness here and there, Sam I am.
Tell us who is Isaiah talking about there. Remember weve both witnessed all of ur arguments so far go down in flames. What makes u think that htis one will be any different?
j919or 3 months ago
@j919or "Tell us who is Isaiah talking about there."
The Servant Songs in Isaiah identify Israel as the servant. As I said, watch my "Jesus Is Not the Messiah" series. It's all set out there.
" Remember weve both witnessed all of ur arguments so far go down in flames. "
lol In your dreams, perhaps. In reality, no. Please don't waste my time with you delusions.
ProfMTH 3 months ago
@ProfMTH ""identify Israel as the servant.""
Then how is it that the "iniquity of us all(Israel) was laid upon Him(Israel)"?
j919or 3 months ago
@j919or I've referred you to my series.
ProfMTH 3 months ago
@j919or Jews do not read that text as having anything to do with the Messiah, you know
StarTrekLivz 3 months ago
Another misinterpretation(this is called the strawman fallacy:
Jesus says "calls his BROTHER... Raca." not anyone. Most Pharisees were of their father the devil.
Once again these atheists reveal their evil and that the wrath they will receive will be just.
j919or 3 months ago
@j919or I saw rabbi schmuley boteach on faith under fire (it's on youtube) quoting scripture that shows jesus could not be both the messiah and the son of god. Historically the idea jesus was the son of god seems to have been the invention of the early church to make the message fit with paganism (the jews weren't interested). Jesus clearly wasn't the messiah (no jewish victory,no world peace) and if his divinity was an invention, who was he?
1empathy 3 months ago
@1empathy ""jesus could not be both the messiah and the son of god. ""
Isaiah 9
6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders.
And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
7 Of the greatness of his government and peace there will be no end.
He will reign on David’s throne and over his kingdom,
j919or 3 months ago
@j919or That is only one among many prophecies, you know he didn't fulfill them all which is why apologists say he will fulfill them on his (already 2000 years late according to matt16:28) return. Jewish scholars aren't anti religion or stupid, why do you think they reject jesus, could they be right? Prof keith ward (christian theologian) writes christianity is a mix of many extra-biblical ideas and that jesus is neither divine or the messiah. You all read the same book, who should i believe?
1empathy 3 months ago
@1empathy Then bring ur alleged messiah prophecy failures one by one and Ill crush them one by one until you realize that you care not for truth but to impune God bc of ur hostility towards God. Start with mt 16.28 and state ur contention clearly.
j919or 3 months ago
@j919or Thanks for your time, my question was "who should i believe?" google prof keith ward and the rabbi and you will see they are respected theologians,your argument is with them, not with me. Their contentions are Matt 16. 28 is unfulfilled, ie everyone is dead that was present and no son of man coming etc. another would be that the messiah cannot be the son of god, that he must be a human political figure from the lineage of david and of course be victorious not die. How come nobody knows?
1empathy 3 months ago
@1empathy Ok dude. Jesus says that some will seee him coming in his kingdom. This statement is vague and in synch with Mt 17 and his transfiguration where he told the 3 disciples not to tell anyone til after the resurrection. There Jesus was transfigured with 2 reps from the OT kingdom, Moses and Elijah.
j919or 3 months ago
@j919or You seem like a very resonable person, can you see my problem? I was not brought up in a theistic home and so i find all religions a bit silly. I'm reading "is religion irrational" by Prof ward to try to understand the other side but he reads the bible as allegory,metaphor and even wrong!? Then rabbis make a coherent argumment against jesus plus objective historians doubt jesus even existed. Who is right? You, Prof keith,rabbi boteach or someone else?
1empathy 3 months ago
@ProfMTH I thought that passage was from the New Testament and I was trying to show the author's hypocrisy, but now I realize that it is from the Psalms. Its still pretty bad though, whoever wrote that should be punished acording to Jesus.
skip8619 4 months ago
"It is a fool who does not have God in his Heart"
skip8619 4 months ago
lol, the bible is so fucking stupid, and anyone that believes that horseshit is stupid too.
trampledone 4 months ago
Um, Jesus isn't talking about the literal words "You fool" as if they have some kind of magical power. He's talking about hate for other people.
pcgamerjoe 5 months ago
@pcgamerjoe And so?
ProfMTH 5 months ago
@pcgamerjoe dislike. they y do we hav CURSE words? that we can't say? no real reason other then people actuall thot if u dammed some1 2 hell, they would b sentenced there regardless of their repentance or god's will. that's y witches were so feared.
cruelbusiness1984 4 months ago
do as i say and not as i do.. total BS. Love the reaction of his followers lol
Frizzurd 5 months ago
@Frizzurd ;-)
ProfMTH 5 months ago
You fool. He said you can't call someone a FOOL. But he called them foolS, plural. Obviously the all-knowing Jesus was smart enough to give himself a loophole!
Oh shit. I just realized I called you a fool! Damn it! Now I'm answerable to the Sanhedrin! Ah well, it's been a good life. Bye.
dangerics 6 months ago
Just curious, what translation were you using for the making of these videos?
FrostdPoptart 6 months ago
@FrostdPoptart I usually use the New American Standard.
ProfMTH 6 months ago
@Raldefas She did not create the life! She is merely the vessel that God chose for that particular child to be birthed through.
rmaynard626 6 months ago
First of all you do not use the same context in which Christ is using! He has the authority to call anyone a fool, and mere man does not have that authority.
rmaynard626 6 months ago
@rmaynard626 Where does Jesus say humans lack the authority to call other humans fools?
ProfMTH 6 months ago
@ProfMTH
And maynard pulls yet *another* "out of context!" card into play!
lupine73 5 months ago
@lupine73 Why is it that xtians always cry, "out of context" and never put the quote in the correct context?
dangerics 3 months ago
@dangerics The often use "out of context" as if it were a talisman, don't they?
ProfMTH 3 months ago
@dangerics . chapter 5 is about the hypocrisy and the moral condition of the scribes and pharisees. Their problem is their false righteousness, saying thing that have not justification. We are not forbidden to call men "fools"considerately and appropriately, we are forbidden to do so in malevolent contempt. In 23: Christ justifies why he calls them fools, In chp 5 he condemns them for calling his brother a fool without cause.
mjr2168 3 months ago
@mjr2168 Congrats. You are the first Xtian ever to say "out of context" and then put it in context when I ask. But, in ch 5 J says being angry and/or calling your brother fool will bring retribution. It says nothing about context. It's a blanket statement. No conditions are given. J doesn't say don't do it with malevolent contempt. He says don't do it. Period. So to say we are not forbidden when it's considered and appropriate is a loophole.
dangerics 3 months ago
@mjr2168 In fact in 5:21 he says remember "don't kill?' Then he goes on to say don't even call your brother raca or fool. Clearly he's implying that that calling your brother raca or fool is as comparable to killing. But still, he doesn't say, unless it's deserved, don't say it. He just says, don't say it.
dangerics 3 months ago
@rmaynard626 1st of all y do u believe in God cause some "holy scriptures" or cause ur parents made u?
dogdeball88 5 months ago
JEsus was sinless so he can say fools to others duh, its just we humans are sinful so we shudnt call others fool yeah
aghahowa11 7 months ago
@aghahowa11 So Jesus was not human?
dingo2306 7 months ago
@dingo2306 u got me there but u know what im saying im sure stop messing about son
aghahowa11 7 months ago
@dingo2306 Jesus is the Son of God in the flesh, which gives him the authority
rmaynard626 6 months ago
@rmaynard626 Ahhh, so might makes right. I get it now.
MyNameIsBob212 6 months ago
@MyNameIsBob212 No... CREATOR over CREATED.
rmaynard626 6 months ago
@rmaynard626 ok, I just misunderstood. So if someone is abused by their parents that's okay because their parents brought them into this world right? okay that makes much more sense. Thanks for clearing that up for me.
MyNameIsBob212 6 months ago
@rmaynard626 If God created us, that doesn't give him any moral authority over us. It's baffling how Xians think you can connect those two dots. The old "the potter may shatter his pot if he wishes" thing is a non-starter. Pots ain't people.
DuhIdiot1 6 months ago
@DuhIdiot1 Are you kidding me??? It gives Him the ultimate authority over us. He can do with us as He sees fit, at any given time. You make it as though your on the same level as Him. You are not even considered dust in His presence, but He chooses to love us. You're thinking in terms of a democracy... Being that He created everything in existence, you don't get a say so in the decision making process.
rmaynard626 6 months ago
@rmaynard626 See how stupid it sounds when you say it or type it?
"If you created a sentient, conscious being, you therefore have authority over that being."
Purple monkey dishwasher!
DuhIdiot1 6 months ago
@DuhIdiot1 No... It doesn't sound stupid at all... Thinking that an all powerful being that created you is not superior and having authority over you has to be the DUMBEST concept ever. You're telling me that if YOU were God, you would not oversee and be in authority over your own creation?????? You would just let your creation do whatever it felt like doing? Or would you govern over its well being. Now, you see how stupid that sounds!!
rmaynard626 6 months ago
@rmaynard626 "Hydrogen is flammable. Therefore Burt Reynolds didn't win any Oscars for any of the 'Cannonball Run' or "Smokey And The Bandit' movies."
"I created this thinking, feeling, adult human. Therefore I have some sort of authority over him."
"My nuts itch. Therefore per capita ownership of chickens in former Soviet republics is 3.4."
These are fun! You try a few!
DuhIdiot1 6 months ago
@DuhIdiot1 What are you trying to say? I don't get it.....
rmaynard626 6 months ago
@rmaynard626 He isn't doing much for our wellbeing if that's the case - have you seen the state of the world...?
Penfold011082 6 months ago
@Penfold011082 sorry. I'm not sure who I was saying is contradicting themselves. I can't tell who posted things and who's receiving them. Anyway, I meant to say the believer is wrong.........just to clarify.
glegely 6 months ago
@rmaynard626 Now you're contradicting yourself. Do you not remember that according to the Bible, God allows us free will. So he does let us do whatever the hell we want. He creates us, knowing that we will sin and do horrible things. He foresees everything, even the fact that we will go to hell. Yet, he creates us anyway. That sounds like ants in a magnifying glass to me. Would you knowingly conceive a child that was going to go to hell, and do nothing to prevent it from happening?
glegely 6 months ago
@glegely God did something to prevent it but you deny accountability for your transgressions. Christ died on the cross as an atoning sacrifice for your past present and future sins... He took your sins to the cross, but being that you deny him, you are now saying its God's fault for your free will decision ??? God created you out of love, but you have to choose where you will be... With Him or in hell.... Your choice...your free will choice...
rmaynard626 6 months ago
The music at the end really made this!
QuatFax 7 months ago
@QuatFax Glad you liked it.
ProfMTH 7 months ago
@ProfMTH It was just really great in context. You're quite good at media design
QuatFax 7 months ago
Bad research. Sorry but this is just lazy.
Ragatokk 7 months ago
@Ragatokk "Bad research."
Care to be specific?
ProfMTH 7 months ago
@ProfMTH Dont take the word of someone else to be true, read the book as it was originaly made. At the very least in the same language as it was written.
Ragatokk 7 months ago
@Ragatokk I haven't "take[n] the word of someone else." What, if anything, about "the book as it was originally made" and the "language as it was written" solves the problem presented here?
ProfMTH 7 months ago
@ProfMTH You are trying to make it say something it does not. Jesus does not say you fool, he says you fools. Nor does he say it to his brother(s) as many of the religious wold say, this is out of context.
Ragatokk 7 months ago
@Ragatokk Are you seriously claiming that it matters whether one uses plural?
QuatFax 7 months ago
@ProfMTH You are trying to make it say something it does not. Jesus does not say you fool, he says you fools. Nor does he say it to his brother(s) as many of the religious wold say, this is out of context.
PS: My first argument was in a drunken state, and should be ignored, Thank you.
Ragatokk 7 months ago
@Ragatokk "My first argument was in a drunken state, and should be ignored,"
I haven't seen even one argument from you yet. At this point, I've lost interest. Thanks anyway.
ProfMTH 7 months ago
.......and this is why every version should just be dumped in an incinerator. They're ALL wrong. They're all JUST books that are older than dirt.
darquehuntre4 7 months ago
What translation are you using? I just checked King James and NIV, and I see for Matthew 5:22 the words "without a cause." So later on when Jesus calls people fools, He's got a cause, so there would be no hypocrisy.
The other videos seem rock solid so far, but not this one.
FrostdPoptart 7 months ago in playlist 'Brief Bible Blunders' Series
@FrostdPoptart "What translation are you using?"
New American Standard. I just had a look at the passage in the New International Version: "But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca’ is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell." Nothing about "without a cause."
ProfMTH 7 months ago
@ProfMTH I just double-checked and you're right about NIV. I'm not sure WHICH version I was looking at for that second one. It's definitely there in KJV though, so an apologist can still say "See? It's there." But at least it highlights how just three words dropped between versions (in the same language, no less) can completely alter the "inerrant Word of God"
Thanks for making this series though. Should provide for some eyebrow-raising moments the next time a friend tries to evangelize to me
FrostdPoptart 7 months ago
@ProfMTH hey profMTH the king JAMES VERSION IS THE TRUE WORD OF GOD.. other translations are works of satan.. (learned from sunday school) honestly i learned it from sunday school...
princerexor 7 months ago
omg win
Ringwaul 7 months ago
Jesus here is illustrating that without being aware of one's thoughts, a person can easily fall into sin and become an object of judgment by God. Then when talking to the Pharisees, Jesus renders God's judgment upon them. Two different things. I can see where the misunderstanding is since you seem not to believe Jesus was appointed by God to hand out God's commands and judgments.
drevildruid 8 months ago
This where Jesus revealed the danger of going before the throne at judgement day after having lived a life away from God. So you think that God needs to practice what he preaches? Oh, I see: maybe God should become a Christian, huh? Are you the type that would blow up if a judge here on Earth ruled against you? Probably not and about all you can do is appeal. The point Jesus was making illustrated how easily anyone falls into sin.
aggienostic 9 months ago
@aggienostic How, if at all, does any of what you've written in your comment address the discrepancy between Jesus' instructions and behavior as presented in Matthew?
ProfMTH 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ProfMTH "@aggienostic How, if at all, does any of what you've written in your comment address the discrepancy between Jesus' instructions and behavior as presented in Matthew?"
It doesn't, the faithful just hope you don't notice as they sweep it under the carpet....
moopism 8 months ago
@aggienostic "So you think God needs to practice what he preaches?"
Do you think it appropriate that self-appointed authority-figures don't practice what they preach? Ted Haggard would love you!
Vexille1983 8 months ago
I think that he put some meaning into Brother. He doesnt seem to be talking to any of his kind at the second part.
LordOfHistory 9 months ago
@LordOfHistory Fellow Jews weren't Jesus' "kind"?
ProfMTH 9 months ago
@ProfMTH
"...scribes and farasees..."?
I do not know what those are, and I have probably mispelled them.
Just sounds like others to me.
LordOfHistory 9 months ago
im glad god gave us the ability to retranslate the bible to the point that we don't even know what it means anymore. Thanks Big G!
genext7 9 months ago
The main part of Matthew 5:21-22 that you left out was the words "WITHOUT CAUSE". Now, re-insert what was deleted, and it changes everything!
chapmaned 9 months ago
@chapmaned I didn't leave it out. Pay attention.
ProfMTH 9 months ago
@ProfMTH You just said "angry with your brother" You didn't say without cause after angry with your brother! I did pay attention. I played it five times to find it. It isn't there!
chapmaned 9 months ago
@chapmaned What I meant is that everything that appears in the text of Matthew 5:21-22 was included. Only some manuscripts of the Gospel of Matthew include "without cause" and, therefore, it is often left out in modern translations.
ProfMTH 9 months ago
@ProfMTH Oh, the NIV version you are using. No wonder the blunders. There are several blunders in the NIV. Leave it to the modern translations! Might as well use the Jehovah's Witness Bible, and really see the blunders!
chapmaned 9 months ago
@chapmaned I used the NIV here. But it's not the only modern version that doesn't have "without cause." Are you a KVJ-only type?
ProfMTH 9 months ago
@chapmaned The NIV version was translated directly from Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek texts so there aren't any blunders. But yes, the Jehovah's Witness Bible is full of blunders as it added and deleted bits and pieces to suit themselves. I wouldn't even bother calling it a Bible!
MySpaige 9 months ago
@MySpaige Actually, in many places the New World Translation ("the Jehovah's Witnesses' Bible") is a far better translation than the New International Version, which often manipulates the text to make it conform to Evangelical doctrine. See, e.g., Jason David BeDuhn's book "Truth in Translation: Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament" for a detailed discussion of this (as well as analysis of other English-language translations of the New Testament).
ProfMTH 9 months ago
@ProfMTH No that is not correct. The NIV version was translated directly (without manipulation) from the formentioned texts, whereas the Jehovah's Witnesses have translated the Bible to suit themselves.
MySpaige 9 months ago
@MySpaige You don't know what you're talking about. I've recommended a book that can begin to help you to get the facts about all of this. You may either avail yourself of that and other sources OR you may persist in ignorance. If you opt for the latter, please do not waste your time and my mine repeatedly posting your mere ignorant claims about Bible translations here. I know better and I'm not interested in my channel being cluttered with such nonsense. Thanks.
ProfMTH 9 months ago
@ProfMTH Just because I have a different opinion to you doesn't automatically make me ignorant. You don't know me from a bar of soap, so you can't say I don't know what I'm talking about, just as I can't say you don't know what you're talking about. I don't know what you do and don't know and vice versa.
MySpaige 9 months ago
@MySpaige "Just because I have a different opinion to you doesn't automatically make me ignorant."
I didn't say it did. This isn't about opinions; it's about facts. You're wrong on the facts. You may remedy your ignorance by learning the facts, of course. But I have a feeling you're not disposed to doing so.
"You don't know me from a bar of soap, so you can't say I don't know what I'm talking about...."
Oh, your statement about the NWT vs. the NIV made it clear that you don't.
ProfMTH 9 months ago
@ProfMTH Whatever
MySpaige 9 months ago
@MySpaige
Argument fail.
taicleis 9 months ago
@taicleis No I didn't want to have a debate. But fyi, the NWT was edited and revised for the purpose of agreeing with the jw's doctrine. For example, the greek word "stauros" meaning cross, was translated by the jws as "torture stake" because they don't believe Jesus was crucified on the cross. The greek words "sheol", "hades", "gehenna", and "tartarus" don't translate those words as heell, coz they don't believe in hell. And they've added the word "others" to col 1:16 (it wasn't in the original
MySpaige 9 months ago
@MySpaige
Hell is one of the mistakes, actually. It was never mentioned by the Jews, was never a part of the original scripture, and was only added when the Greeks began assimilating into the religion. They first called it Hades. Ever wonder why?
They liked having the Hades of Greek mythology so much, they just had to keep it when they converted.
Then they mistranslated Gehenna (an actual historical place) and Sheol (the grave) over and over again to fit.
taicleis 9 months ago
@taicleis Sorry, heell should have said hell. This is a very small amount of inaccurate translation and I could go on with more but I can't be bothered. So next time you think I don't know what I'm talking about, think again. I just can't be bothered.
MySpaige 9 months ago
This Bible Blunder always makes me giggle. Choice song at the end as well.
Vexille1983 10 months ago
@Vexille1983 Thanks. Glad you enjoyed it.
ProfMTH 10 months ago
"It is right to be angered by abuse and injustice"
lets see... 2 samuel 12:11 Thus saith the LORD, Behold, I will raise up evil against thee out of thine own house, and I will take thy wives before thine eyes, and give them unto thy neighbour, and he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun.
god arranging for the rape of the innocent - yer right, that does piss me off.
untestableClaims 10 months ago
Once again, it's all about context. Jesus is not saying that merely calling someone a fool will result in Hell. He is attempting to illustrate that a heart filled with judgment, hostility and unforgiveness is antithetical to the Gospel which teaches love for all - even your enemies. Jesus rebuked the pharisees with righteous judgment for their hypocrisy. It's all about motive. The first is from an evil heart, the second is from concern for those who are being harmed by manipulative priests.
TheThumper49 10 months ago
@TheThumper49 "Jesus is not saying that merely calling someone a fool will result in Hell."
Though that is what he says in the relevant passage.
"Jesus rebuked the pharisees with righteous judgment for their hypocrisy."
So it *was* "do as I say, not as I do"?
ProfMTH 10 months ago
@ProfMTH What part of righteous judgment don't you understand?
TheThumper49 10 months ago
@TheThumper49 thank you for explaining that becasue i was about to go in on somthing crazy after looking @ this crap. thank you again christ bless
MrWillDock 9 months ago
Thanks for the post.
Thearl 10 months ago
I don't quite get whats wrong with Lucifer / the devil. He killed one family by the request of god and was reported to be the snake but it wasn't quite confirmed. God's track record in support of incest and genocide is far worse. Ever think that lucifur knew how evil god was and tried to warn everyone else? Hell is looking far better then heaven these days. Gods propaganda machine is working in overdrive these days.
Biogenman 10 months ago
Love the song at the end. lol
PrudesCanBiteMe 10 months ago
@PrudesCanBiteMe ;-) Thanks.
ProfMTH 10 months ago
Question would you have a two year old on the US supreme court? No!!! They could not pass a proper judgement . Mr. ProMTH you and I are like the 2 year old compared to the wisdom of God. Until God steps off his throne what Jesus said made perfect sense.
RepresentingTruth 10 months ago
I love it when Christians try to dispute Mark 16:18 about drinking poison...haha
MercuryRis 10 months ago
A figure of speech in which a word or phrase that ordinarily designates one thing is used to designate another, thus making an implicit comparison
calling someone a fool is making a judgement that they are wrong
you are in danger of hell fire if it is you who is wrong because the penalty for being wrong then falls on you instead of them. How many people especially christians believe the wrong doer is going to hell.... jesus in many places says such christians will be the ones who go there
jagg1951 10 months ago
"will be in danger of the fire of hell" because they may be making a false accusation or judgement , Jesus of course KNEW they were fools, he did not make judgements he stated facts because his truth and knowledhe is objective ours is subjective, "judge and ye shall be judged in like manner"
jagg1951 11 months ago
@jagg1951 So wouldn't the instruction have been about making accusations or judgments rather than calling people something specific, i.e., fools?
ProfMTH 11 months ago
@ProfMTH
exactly!
jesus used meraphor so that is exactly what he was saying do not say anything bad about others because you are just as guilty and will be judged by God he same way you are judging others.
jagg1951 10 months ago
@jagg1951 What was the metaphor?
ProfMTH 10 months ago
@ProfMTH
the meraphor was calling someone a fool or wrong , making a judgement when you do not know that you may be the one who is wrong. so many peiople think they are right in what they believe which makes sense else why would they belieiive it. too few recognize that from the other persons point of view they also believe they are right and usually they are both right bit both also ignorant of the entirety of the issue and thus both also wrong so they fight instead of seeking understanding
jagg1951 10 months ago
@jagg1951 "the meraphor was calling someone a fool or wrong"
Do you know what 'metaphor' means?
ProfMTH 10 months ago
Every heard the phrase "Jesus Fucking Christ"? That's Jesus cloning himself, then fucking his clone in the ass! (Or vice versa.)
By the way, to all you Jews for Jesus nutjobs, it's not YAHUSHUA. You are adding an extra syllable for no reason. It's Yahsua. Or, Y'shua. Unless of course, you are worshiping some other holy clown I've never heard of.
politicoochie09 1 year ago
@politicoochie09 thats the real name of FSM!! Har har me matey!!
MasterMike44 11 months ago
Rofl jesus contradicting his dumb self yet again
esiosan 1 year ago
Worship GOD not Jesus. GOD bless.
jojonobo 1 year ago
Raca?
Mswordx23 1 year ago
@Mswordx23 "Raca" is an Aramaic term of contempt.
Largo64 11 months ago
Worship GOD not Jesus
jojonobo 1 year ago
@jojonobo , *ahem*.......JESUS IS God. He's the Son of GOD. One of the Three Persons of the GOD-Head. "YAHUSHUA".
gdg1963 1 year ago
@gdg1963 The key phrase being Son of GOD. Not GOD. We are all children of GOD, born with the ability to become enlightend. Jesus was born with this gift. I hope this helps.
jojonobo 1 year ago
@jojonobo , YAHUSHUA is the only begotten Son of GOD. (JOHN 3:16). The rest of us who are sons and daughters of GOD, through YAHUSHUA, are ADOPTED Children. YAHUSHUA is One of the Three Persons of the Triune GOD. Do not allow yourself to be confused on this fact any longer. It is vitally important that you know, that YOU KNOW that YAHUSHUA is God. Please read JOHN 1:1-5 and JOHN 1:14-15. YAHUSHUA (JESUS) is the Word made Flesh to be our Lamb's Blood Atoning Sacrifice for "whosoever will".
gdg1963 1 year ago
@gdg1963 I will pray you. Follow the good works and teachings of Jesus and worship GOD.
jojonobo 1 year ago
@gdg1963 I will pray for you. Follow the good works and teachings of Jesus and worship GOD.
jojonobo 1 year ago
@jojonobo , Thanks for your thoughtfulness. I will worship the Lord YAHUSHUA (JESUS) for He is my Saviour and Shepherd. He is the Living Word. He is God of very GOD. Peace! :-)
gdg1963 1 year ago
@gdg1963 He is the saviour of our species souls and deserves much credit. Keep good will in your heart and GOD bless.
jojonobo 1 year ago
@jojonobo , Thank you, again. And, you're so right...YAHUSHUA does deserve much credit. And, that is why I will continue to worship Him. Shalom!
gdg1963 1 year ago
@ProfMTH, The scribes took John the Baptist's, words and actions and applied them to Jesus' life after John (allegedly) Baptized him. Think of Jesus in terms of this, He is John the Baptist in action. I realized this years ago after noticing Mark 3;18 James is called son of Alphaeus. Catholics claim that Mary (mother of Jesus) had a second husband. This isn't the case. Alphaeus is Zacharias, James was brother of John. Scribes alerted the Gospels to hide Holy Grail.
beholdtheageofold 1 year ago
Great share.
Clownfreaks 1 year ago
Good thing these books editors sucked, without all the inconsistencies even open bright people might be brain washed after a life time of bologna
argo984 1 year ago
@argo984 True.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
I loved the look of utter shock on their faces when Jesus said that "terrible" word "raka".
Obviously - though - calling someone a fool is much, much worse than calling someone "empty-headed" (which is what raka means) and surely the only way to aptly punish it is eternally by means of hellfire.
Hahaha, I can't believe anyone would take this piece of pseudo-wisdom or any of the other preachings in the NT seriously to begin with.
Ordysz 1 year ago
clearly, the bible is full of schizophrenics.
ohdoshutit 1 year ago
Jeremiah 17:11 God calls the unjust fools. Luke 12:20 But God said to him "You fool! this very night your life will be demanded from you". Keep in mind that when God calls someone a fool he does it with complete accurate knowledge. Jesus being divine has every right to proclaim a fool to whoever he wants, Proof? since in your previous video you quoted John 9:39 to prove that Jesus judges the world, this interpretation doesn't seem so far fetched now does it? hahaha owned !
ors712 1 year ago
@ors712 "Jesus being divine has every right to proclaim a fool to whoever he wants."
So it *is* "do as I say, not as I do." Thanks.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH When one has supreme perfect knowledge, he can address you in any way he sees fit. do you know the depths of ones mind, of one's soul? no you dont, so you have no reason to criticize. I'm glad i could solve your problem.
ors712 1 year ago
@ors712 "When one has supreme perfect knowledge, he can address you in any way he sees fit"
So might makes right, is that correct?
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH More like it makes YOU WRONG
ors712 1 year ago
@ProfMTH , No. YAHUSHUA (aka "JESUS") was Perfect in every way. He was the Son of GOD and He never sinned. So, when He called someone a "fool", He spoke the Truth. But, we, mankind, who are born in sin, who are no better than the next guy, have no right to call someone else a "fool" when we, ourselves, are just as foolish, but, for different reasons (or even similar ones). We, as sinful human beings, are in no position to slam other people, when we're just as guilty.
gdg1963 1 year ago
@gdg1963 So might makes right?
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH , You know, when you're the Creator, as GOD is, you get to make all the Rules.
gdg1963 1 year ago
u can´t say fool to ur BROTHER. it has to be only love between u. not division.
Yeshua said that the pharisee were of "their father, the devil"
no brothers here, they were the serpent´s offspring u see?
yaitsmesuperboomboon 1 year ago
@yaitsmesuperboomboon "Yeshua said that the pharisee were of "their father, the devil""
Actually, according to the anti-Jewish screed that is called the Gospel of John, Jesus said that "[t]o the Jews who had believed him" (John 8:31). Moreover, the word the 4th gospel has Jesus use for 'brother' is the same word Paul uses in Romans to describe his relationship to the Jews. Learn your Bible before you come here to start posting bullshit.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH , Actually, YAHUSHUA called the sect of Pharisees "snakes", "brood of vipers" and "white-washed tombs" which were pretty and glamorous on the outside ,but, full of sin and rot on the inside. So, it's the same thing as calling them children of the Devil, just using different terminology.
gdg1963