There wewre TWO GOVERNORS named Quirinius, goddammit! ONE FUCKING DURING THE TIME of Herod BEFORE HIS MOTHERFUCKING DEATH, you ignorant fucking dumb-beel fucking cunt...
I OUGHTTA STICK MY FUCKING GUN THRU THIS COMPUTER SCREEN AND SHOVE IT UP YOUR ASS and pull the fathermotherfucking trigger, fuckface, bitch!
Having been raised a Catholic, the NYC billboard does not surprise me at all. These days, religion is a business, just like everything else. Also, it's impossible to say when Jesus was born because he never existed.
YOU NEED TO SERIOUSLY SEEK JESUS CHRIST,YOU NEED TO PRAY, YOU NEED TO READ YOUR BIBLE ITS YOUR LIFE AT STAKE HERE.DEVIL HAS DECEIVED YOU BIG TIME THROUGH PHILOSOPHY, ''KNOWLEDGE'' LEADING YOU STRAIGHT AWAY TO HELL.
@josephmainahi You are a sad brainwashed loud mouth, having posting six shouts of utter BS.Remove you fingers from your ears, go and really read your Bible with your mind open, though you may be too late to be saved, as it would appear its already overloaded with religious BS. Our time on earth is indeed short my friend.
@josephmainahi What if the Devil is deceiving you into believing that God doesn't want you to understand the universe he created? What if the devil is deceiving you into believing that the bible is the work of God, when it was actually his own? I wonder what you will do now.
MY FRIEND YOU NEED TO REPENT,BELIEVE IN JESUS CHRIST HAVE FAITH IN HIM AND BE BAPTISED.YOU ARE DEFINITELY AN AGENT OF DEVIL EITHER THROUGH ECUMINESM MOVEMENT OR SECRETE SOCITIES OR FRM CATHOLIC CHURCH.
SATAN MADE ADAM AND EVE DOUBT GOD.MY FRIEND YOU ARE SIMPLY USING THE SAME DEMONIC METHODOLOGY.WHEN A SEED OF DOUBT IS PLANTED IT CREATS DOUBTS,CONFUSION AND DISOBEDIENCE.BIBLE IS 100 PERCENT ACCURATE AM NOT TALKING OF THE FAKE BIBLES WHERE SOME VERSES OR WORDS HAVE BEEN DELIBERATELY ALTERED,CHANGED OR REMOVED.
@josephmainahi Sorry to have to tell you this but the bible contains many hundreds of contradictions and inaccuracies. Please do your own research. Don't simply accept the the opinions of apologists.
As for when Christ was born... it depends on which gospel you believe to be true because they are contradictory.
YOU VERY KNOW KNOW THAT BIBLE IS TRUE AND DOES NOT CONTRADICT ITSELF.YOU ARE SIMPLY TRYING TO DECEIVE THOSE WHO HAVENT READ THE BIBLE PROPERLY COS YOU ARE ALSO DECEIVED BIG TIME.YOU NEED TO WAKE UP AND REPENT YOUR SINS.MY FRIEND TIME ON THIS EARTH IS TOO SHORT
@josephmainahi So then how do you read properly to sell slaves and beat them? Or to sell your daughters as slaves? Or to kill people that work on Sundays? Just what is the proper way to read chop off your own hand to stop unproductive behavior? Cause I can only think of one way to read and understand those rules. It always comes out the same. God is a fuck up and a moron. Or god was made up bye incredibly stupid imbibes that did not have a clue. But you tell me what is the other take.
In some debates I've had with believers before (via comments in different videos and personal e-mails, not face to face or with a moderator), I've noticed that they quote the bible assuming it's real, and sometimes literal!! As soon as I challenge their assumption they start the chicken and the egg game plus many word games that fall apart too. This is getting old. No evidence means not true! Historians' accounts are more accurate than the bible.
Well Catholics don't know much but fallacious tradition and do good at bringing Biblical Christianity's reputation into the muck with them. "Assuming he was born" I don't think a secular researcher can say Yehoshua M. never existed and feel in the right. lol You quote Catholic priests and money-wanting televangelists (mostly--to be fair) to try to be non-biased? You're arrogant voice and lack of knowing about the monk's miscalculation (more on that if I cared ;) ) shows what we both know..Peace
No, there is absolutely no evidence of this. It is nothing more than wishful thinking on the part of history- and reality-averse Christians.
"The Luke text does not call him the governor...."
I cover this in my 2-part series "Quirinius, where art thou?" Spare me the harmonizing bullshit. Matthew and Luke tell different stories placed at different times. Honest Christian scholars, several of whom I quoted in the video, concede this.
"It is clear to me that the writings of the Christians are a lie and that your fables are not well-enough constructed to conceal this monstrous fiction." -- Celsus (On The True Doctrine c.178 CE)
Christians are devoid of spiriuality. They think the fascist ideology of some Celestial Dictatorship is Spirituality. If they could spend but 3 hours in the tortures suffered by the Prisoners of Guantanamo Bay or, better yet, those Medieval Chambers of Horrors long before "crual and unusual punishments" were supposedly banned, they could never propose the dogma of Eternal Damnation, not even for their Worst Enemies!
Most christians i know just act like it's some sort of *mystery*. That we're not supposed to *KNOW* when jesus was born, basically. It's kind of funny.
ProfMTH you sound very smart but thats about it..ha.... apparently you dont understand that the monk who did the calender made a slight calculation which when corrected Jesus is born on 6 AD......booooyaaa
Sorry I didn't ignore your response, I am at work and I don't want to beat a dead horse. You don't believe what I have to say and I don't believe what you have to say. So be it. In the end we both will find out, one way or another! That's all.
Then you should respond to responses when you're at home so that you can offer substance and not nonresponsive nonsense.
"I don't want to beat a dead horse"
When did the horse die? You just tossed out some stuff that I thoroughly refuted. Did *that* kill the horse? If so, you'd do well simply to admit you were wrong.
Matthew and Luke delineate two DIFFERENT events separated by a significant span of time. Luke writes of Jesus' birth in the manger and Matthew records the wise men (Magi) visiting and offering gifts to Jesus years after his birth. The wise men were NOT present at Christ's birth as pictures of Christmas contend. So there is no translation errors you are just not reading and understanding it correctly. Have a good day.
@mustangpassurchevy "Matthew and Luke delineate two DIFFERENT events separated by a significant span of time. Luke writes of Jesus' birth in the manger and Matthew records the wise men (Magi) visiting and offering gifts to Jesus years after his birth."
You're really just illustrating the problem (although it's clear you believe you're solving it). If the author of Matthew is telling a story about what took place, as you say "years after [Jesus'] birth," then he's put the birth of Jesus...
(con't) @mustangpassurchevy ...even farther away from when the author of Luke portrays it taking place. Herod the Great died in 4 BCE--approximately a decade before Quirinius became governor of Syria and Judea was annexed and a census conducted for tax purposes. In the Matthean story, Herod is still alive and ruling. So, it must be prior to 4 BCE and if, as you say, its "years after" Jesus was born, it's creates a gap of more than a decade for when Jesus was born in the two stories.
@ProfMTH Well we can go back and forth all day on this because you and I surely differ. But if I wasn't 1000% sure of myself. It is a lot safer to believe than to deceive. Because if i'm correct I have a great after life. If I'm wrong no big deal. If your correct no big deal But, if your wrong, your screwed.. Have a great day.
@mustangpassurchevy It's quite telling that you have ignored my response to your claims in favor of simply offering the nonresponsive Pascal's Wager. I'll take this as a concession on your part. Thanks. And, again, you have a great day, too.
Mustangpassurchevy & others acknowledge that the KJV et al contain translational errors. These may be intentional or they may be due to difficulty in determining exact translations. But here's a thought: According to Genesis, the reason we have multiple languages is because god himself confused the tongues at Babel. And he would've known it would be necessary to translate his "Word" into other languages in the future. Where was god's intervention to insure this happened honestly and accurately?
I would hate to be these guys who try to convince people the Bible contradicts its self when most Christians who read the bible already know it was translated by man. Let me set the record straight, the KJV is like every other version of the Bible is simply a translation. It has errors as do all versions, both ancient and modern. Translations are just that, translations – none are the original. And people that are led away from Christ because of these lost soul‘s. ProfMTH will pay one day.
@mustangpassurchevy So, please identify the translation errors that have resulted in the authors of Matthew and Luke placing Jesus' birth birth ten years apart from one another. Thanks.
This is fact not a personal attack. None of the first four books were writen by a desciple or any contemporaneous writer about Jesus. Jesus & his desciples spoke & preached in Aramaic & none of those books were writen in Aramaic.The oldest of the gospels was writen about AD60 in Koine Greek, the last about AD150.All preachers today talk of the 'miracles of Jesus', Paul in all his works NEVER once mentions even one, he'd never heard of them.The Bible holds the ONLY record of Jesus,he didn't exist
The shepherds sleep out at night when an angel tells them to go and see the newly born Jesus. Even in the Middle East 2000 years ago when it was warmer than now a night outside in late December would have killed them on the spot. The cold and the rain, sometimes even snow, would have made sure they died. Can anyone who is a believer in any religion explain that?
@breakaleg10 The explanation for that is simple. Jesus wasn't born in december. Dec 25th was just a date attached to his birth. I'm not quite sure about the history behind this but i think it was something to do with the fact that pagans already had a festival on dec 25, so the Roman Empire decided to place Jesus' birth on that day. No one knows when Jesus was actually born.
there are loads of other discrepencies in these two stories. pretty much whenever there is an instance of two or more gospels giving details that can be cross-checked, contradictions abound.
I've heard a lot of ways people have tried to reconcile the accounts. I've yet to hear one that's any good.
Some try to fudge the Greek grammar, some try to fudge the date of Q.'s governorship, some try to use Luke's reputation as proof Luke "couldn't be wrong", some offer equally dubious and misguided options for reconciliation.
Another good video. So far I've enjoyed your work. That said, I hate when people tell me what I know. Whether I agree with them or not, I hate when people act like every agrees with them whether they admit it or not. It's a truly terrible argument that will make atheists appear overly arrogant, when there are so many reasonable science and logic based arguments that will not come off as a personal attack. It just seems to me like one of the worst possible arguments to make.
@Moussyed "in depth study", handy rhetorical tool you've crafted there. It allows you to dismiss allegations of controversy no matter how well researched and presented as not being truly "in depth" as defined by you. It also allows you to, less effectively attempt to imply that any contradictions, in quotes to really discredit them, and alleged, to further imply their lack of validity, are the result of a lack of conveniently ill defined "in depth study".
@3:28 Just wondering Prof, are you sure that the two books are necessarily talking about the same Herod?
I found an interesting skeptic's website that says there were several Herods at the time, so this Herod contradiction you've listed may not be an actual contradiction at all.
They were named. For instance, you know the Herod in Matthew during Jesus' birth is Herod the Great because in Matt 2 it mentions Archelaus, as the son of Herod who takes over on his father's death.
Luke 1 mentions King Herod. Luke 3 mentions Herod the tetrarch and his brother Philip in the 15th year of Tiberius.
You can tell Luke 1's Herod is "The Great" because of his title, and the Herod in ch 3. is named as a tetrarch, which doesn't happen until after The Great is dead.
@Moussyed@ProfMTH I looked into this a while back. Herod had two sons this is how apologists try to pass it off. However neither son was a king, yet in the bible it speaks of a King Herod if I am not mistaken. So if neither of his sons actually held the title of King I do not believe it could be talking about one of them.
@contactharvest999 OK. I'm not contending that he didn't exist. Rather, I'm asking when he was born. The New Tesament identifies two different time, a decade apart. But Christians can't seem to nail down which one is the correct one and, oddly, they often try to say the two periods were *not* really a decade apart.
The author of luke is also the author of the apostle story, which is even today considered to be correct. If luke is so blatantly false in his historical research, how can he be so much better in making the apostle stories? That confuses me much.
Luke is also the author of the acts of the apostles, which is often told to be accurate (important for christians because of the apostolic conference, where paul is said to have been abolished the laws for christians), and if he here is so unhistorical, we can estimate the historicity of the acts of the apostles to be worse than often expected, even meaning, that the abolishment was introduced by luke and not by paul or jesus. It was a rhethorical question, Prof.
@mardastheEitheist " the acts of the apostles, which is often told to be accurate"
According to whom? Have you ever compared, just for one example, what Acts says about Paul's conversion to Christianity and what Paul himself wrote about it? They're wildly different. Have you ever compared Paul's Areopagus speech in Acts to what Paul says about pagans in Romans 1? They're the complete opposite of one another. Accurate? By what measure?
This video homo is an absolute idiot. Jesus was historically PROVEN by even "anti"Christian evidence.....Josephus, a Jewish historian, Tacitus a Roman historian, and the anti-Christian Talmud proves Jesus was historic. So any professor he can quote is merely claiming 'his' INACCURATE UNDERSTANDING of the Gospels. Both Luke "and' Matthew are not contradictive at all. You are just taking and interpreting words incorrectly, moron. ;) And Luke and Matthew are part of historic records.
@ProfMTH During the reign of herod the great and the NON GOVERNING but active political role of Quirinius. If you think there is no evidence to that look it up. (I hate saying "look it up" it is a bit too internet-debat'y'. Sir, you aren't always right. (also, a heads up, should you choose to reply, if I don't answer I am away for Xmas. Ok bye) I do honestly say Merry Xmas outside our debate. ;) I respect your passion, I just wish it was on something other than spreading false findings ;D
@ElCangri137 Sorry Promth is right When was Jesus born,there 3 contradictions in Matt. and Luke please tell us according to scriptures which is true? and which is deceiving?
In a normal setting, arguing about when Jesus was born is like arguing about when The Joker was born. You would have to actually believe Jesus was a real historical person to take anything seriously.
But I love the way you fight fire with fire Prof. You use that book that Christians try to use against us and throw it right back at them like a champion.
@MasterAdam100 "But I love the way you fight fire with fire Prof. You use that book that Christians try to use against us and throw it right back at them like a champion."
Thank you *very* much. That's the idea: to fight fire with fire.
For the word "governing" Luke uses the word "hegemon" (ruling officer or procurator) not the word "legatus" (Title of Governor). We know Quirinius did an excellent job in the 7BC census. Caesar could have put him in charge of the 7AD census because the Governor Saturninus had a repution for incompetence. This is likely because Roman Records say Quirinius was in the province at that time to crush a rebellion. That means no contradiction
@jamesplease1980 "For the word "governing" Luke uses the word "hegemon" (ruling officer or procurator) not the word "legatus" (Title of Governor)."
Since the author of Luke wrote in Greek, it's no surprise he didn't use the Latin word 'legatus'. The author of Luke uses hēgemoneuō in Luke 2:2 in reference to Quirinius as governor of Syria *and* he uses hēgemoneuō (the exact same word) in Luke 3:1 in reference to Pontius Pilate as governor of Judea. If Pilate was governor, so was Quirinius.
Jeremiah 10: 3-5 3For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. 4They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not. 5They are upright as the palm tree, but speak not: they must needs be borne, because they cannot go. Be not afraid of them; for they cannot do evil, neither also is it in them to do good.
3 For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. 4 They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not. 5 They are upright as the palm tree, but speak not: they must needs be borne, because they cannot go. Be not afraid of them; for they cannot do evil, neither also is it in them to do good.
YOU CANT EVEN GET THE SCRIPTURES RIGHT ..LUKE STARTS WITH THE BIRTH OF JOHN , IT ISN'T TIL VERSE 26 WHEN the angel Gabriel APPEARED TO Mary , THE BIBLE DOES NOT SPECIFY DATES OUR CALENDAR IS EVEN DIFFERENT NO ONE KNOWS THE ACTUAL DATE OF THE BIRTH OF CHRIST OR OF ANYTHING ELSE IN THE BIBLE FOR THAT MATTER.... THIS VIDEO IS BEYOND DEBUNKED SORRY WRONG TRY AGAIN ......
@morris766126 "YOU CANT EVEN GET THE SCRIPTURES RIGHT ..LUKE STARTS WITH THE BIRTH OF JOHN , IT ISN'T TIL VERSE 26 WHEN the angel Gabriel APPEARED TO Mary...."
Yes, I know. And Lk 1:36 tells us that Gabriel appeared to Mary in the 6th month of Elizabeth's being pregnant with John. So, please, do tell me what I haven't gotten right.
"THE BIBLE DOES NOT SPECIFY DATES"
But it *does* link Jesus' birth to events in history, the dates of which we know. As explained in the video, Matthew...
(con't) @morris766126 ...says Jesus was born when Herod the Great was reigning, so Jesus' birth in Matthew could not have been later than 4 BCE (the year of Herod the Great's death). The Gospel of Luke has Jesus birth happening *both* during the reign of Herod the Great (which ended in 4 BCE) AND during the tenure of Quirinius as governor of Syria (which did not begin until 6 CE, a decade after the death of Herod the Great). Did this somehow get by you when you were watching the video?
People can't raise from the dead(if you didn't know that). That's why your question is retarded. And having 'faith' in such things is retarded as well. You'll rot in a grave as much as me.
On top of that, who wants to believe in heaven? If anything I'd want to go to a place where it takes a little bit of struggle to learn new things (which is the greatest joy) instead of a paradise where no creativity exists and everything is handed to you. Eternal pergatory is more to my liking.
@KayleLang "I have respect for Brown due him being a priest, but still able to critically look at the bible."
So do I. And during his life he took a great deal of heat from many of his fellow Catholics and other Christians for not placing piety ahead of honesty and solid scholarship.
"If even priests accept the contradictions, than why so many apologetics suggest there are none?"
I suspect they're afraid to come to terms with the truth.
Ah, that old "we have better evidence for Jesus than Julius Caesar" chestnut. So, oh apologist, what works do we have written by Jesus himself, as compared to Caesar's 2? (That was something I found difficult as I was starting to question my faith- such a claim is so obviously wrong and yet so many highly intelligent religious people repeat it)
Im confused, is the creator of this vid somehow suggesting that since nobody can say the exact day Jesus was born therefore Jesus as a historical figure is in doubt?
@jamesplease1980 The point of the video as to many of profmth vid's is the verasity of the bible and the celebration of christmas. Baring in mind that christmas was not allowed or celebrated till 300-400 years after jesus was sposed to have died. What you have to understand is, if the gospels do not add up (Condtridicts itself) then the bible can not be inspired by the word of GOD, Mistakes should not be in there right???
@loudman12 I think he is being intellectually dishonest by the unrealistic demands of specificity he places on isolated sentences, which leads to inaccurate interpretation.
@jamesplease1980 No not really if you are following your bible and the teachings of jesus, then god being all powerfull and that should be able to inspire the information to be put clearly with no room for condtridiction. if like shown in this video the naratives are different and luke condtridicts itself then you can not ignore it. If there are 2 different accounts of his birth, then one account is wrong.
@jamesplease1980 Furthermore if you are stating that PROFMTH is intellectuary dishonnest. Then you believers are the same as well, when there is a direct condtriciton in the bible you use the line " INTERUPT IT IN-CORRECTLY" I will ask you honnestly which account is right was jesus born in 4bc or 8Ad as two accounts state this. Interupting this has nothing to do with it, two different accounts they both cannot be right?
@loudman12 Im sorry i didnt make myself clear. 4BC/8AD are not written in the Bible. If you look at how he comes to the conclusion of those dates and how he uses the references and sources he quotes then he is being unrealistic, and if he placed that same high standard of specificity to any other document he would get the same results. Does that make sense?
Im not going to reply after this cause Im getting too many long comments from weirdos
@jamesplease1980 "Im not going to reply after this cause Im getting too many long comments from weirdos."
More correctly, you're not replying because you've got nothing to say that actually responds to the comments you've received. That's OK. Take the time to think it all through a bit more. Happy New Year.
@jamesplease1980 You still have not answred the question. I know those dates are not told in there, i studied the bible for many years my friend. However both accounts mention two different time periods in history where we have independant evidence. So I will ask you for the final time, which time period was jesus born???
@beholdtheageofold then that is a direct condtidiction to the other account, therefore the bible is not 100% accurate, and thats just one area, I can quote you many areas of the bible that are wrong.
@loudman12 The other account is about John the Baptist. John was the real messiah. Matthew 1;17 actually applies to John the Baptist' genealogy considering the date of the King of Judea in Luke 1;5. Jesus being the son of God's genealogy actually is the one being described in Luke 3. The Greek scribes were being deceitful knowing Jesus as Christ never existed. They got confused on what they were doing and attributed both genealogies to Jesus. Jesus is John the Baptist revised from Greeks.
@beholdtheageofold aspects to fit in, typical christian both accounts do not add up simple really, for you to quote those verses makes me laugh and you call profmth intellectuary wrong.
@loudman12 A messiah did exist. Its just not what Christians are teaching. Christians are teachings revisions and reinterpretations. They are not teaching the true messiah based on original accounts. Their belief is aligned with forethought tradition. For instance Mark 3;18 James the Just is called son of Alphaeus. Alphaeus is said to be the husband of (the other Mary). Catholics call them St Clopas and (the wife of Clopas). These two characters are obviously Zacharias an Elizabeth.
@beholdtheageofold Sorry that arguement falls flat on its face straight away. The bible is the word of god right??? thus you should nmot have to re-interupt it, the bible has been written with the supposed guidence of the lord, yet many accounts do not match up, I'm not even talking about this subject there are many more areas i can mention. To date there are many sects within christianity to date and recorded over 30,000 the message must not have been clear .
@beholdtheageofold His argument overly relies on the statement by Paul L. Mair that the census was "...a provincial census of noncitizens for purposes of taxation"
However we know that Caesar held census all thhe time, probably world ones every 14 years, and there were other major census' 8bc, 2 bc and 6 AD. his sources and quotes are not very comprehensive as he makes out
@jamesplease1980 "Im confused, is the creator of this vid somehow suggesting that since nobody can say the exact day Jesus was born therefore Jesus as a historical figure is in doubt?"
I said nothing about "the exact day Jesus was born." The Christian scriptures don't address that. Rather I talked about what they *do* address, i.e., the year Jesus was born. As I explained in detail, Matthew and Luke contradict one another on this and Luke contradicts itself by linking Jesus' birth to...
(con't) @jamesplease1980 ...events that were approximately a decade apart from one another (i.e., the reign of Herod the Great and Quirinius's time as governor of Syria). One person cannot have been born in both 1967 & 1977. If there can be such clear error despite the NT's claims that the way the events are described is actually how they happened, and the accounts are the result of careful investigation, and that all of it was written under an omnipotent & omniscient god's inspiration, how...
(con't) @jamesplease1980 ...can one trust *any* of the details that appear in the infancy narratives (or anywhere in the New Testament for that matter)?
@jamesplease1980 If Simon Greenleaf was able to prove the case of Jesus' resurrection by writ, then is it not a shame Friedrich Nietzsche who was born after him murdered god by the exact same method?
@DanceInYourRoom Simon Greenleaf was the English speaking worlds authority on court based evidence. After studying the evidence for Jesus' resurection, such has the 3 Jewish writers, 19 Roman writers, plus the 27 books of the new testament, and manuscript evidence of the eye witness community, this atheist concluded that in a modern day court of law the must be to prove that Jesus didnt rise from the dead, not the other way around.
@DanceInYourRoom i guess what Im saying is the vid asks the wrong questions. The question isnt exactly what day wasJesus born, but rather did Jesus rise from the dead.
@jamesplease1980 You do realize that ethereal starlight heals all cases of pneumonia because that's the question that really matters. Your question...is fucking stupid.
@Turandot29 Im using the ESV, but other translations say similarly. in the footnotes "This was the registration before" which comes right before, Quirinius was the Governer of Syria.
@ahmalala The problem, of course, is that translation is about convenience rather than accuracy, as I explain in my "Quirinius, where art thou?" series. Moreover, as I also explain that series, there was no census in Judea prior to Quirinius's being appointed governor of Syria and Judea being annexed to Syria in 6 C.E. So, no, your ESV footnote does *not* solve the problem.
@ProfMTH Its most translations that state the same in the Footnotes. It solves most of the percieved problem. As to the Census how can we even really sure? is anything really 100% certain?
And even if that was a mistake, what would not really mean? It may mean there is a slight error in luke with many explanations such as possible scribal error. I can think of many explanations. The Bible is 66 books, if one book where proven completely false, it would only be one book
@ahmalala "Its most translations that state the same in the Footnotes."
I just checked the NASB, the KJV and NKJV, the CEV, the NCV, Young's Literal, the NAB, and the NET. None of them has a footnote that offers "before Quirinius was governor of Syria" as an alternative translation. More importantly, as I explained in my "Quirinius, where art thou?" series and mentioned in my earlier comment to you, as a matter of historical fact there was no census in Judea prior to Quirinius's being...
(con't) @ahmalala ...appointed governor of Syria and Judea being annexed to Syria in 6 C.E. (when Rome deposed Herod Archelaus and began direct rule of Judea). So, again, you haven't solved the problem.
"As to the Census how can we even really sure?"
I'll refer you to the various historians and biblical scholars who have written extensively on this. You'd do well to start with Raymond Brown's "The Birth of the Messiah."
(con't) @ahmalala "And even if that was a mistake, what would not really mean?"
That the Bible is not inerrant, which calls into question its being divinely inspired, which calls into question the alleged "revelation" upon which the whole Christian religion is based. No small matter.
"scribal error"
Produce a basis for the claim that it's a scribal error and we'll have something to discuss. A mere assertion or "it may be" doesn't get the job done. Rather, it betrays that you know...
(con't) @ahmalala ...that Luke contradicts itself and the infancy narrative in Matthew but do not wish to come to terms with the consequences of that fact.
"I can think of many explanations."
No doubt. The question is whether they withstand scrutiny. Again, my series "Quirinius, where art thou?" deals with the attempts to solve the problem.
"The Bible is 66 books, if one book where proven completely false, it would only be one book."
@ProfMTH On Error with many possible explanations does not in some way mean the entirel bible is not inspired. The Main basis we have are the Accuracies we can confirm and Lets not forget all the abundant miraculous prophecies the Bible is legendary for.
@ahmalala "On[e] [e]rror with many possible explanations does not in some way mean the entire [B]ible is not inspired."
I didn't say otherwise. You should reread what I actually *did* write and watch the video again and listen closely to what I actually *did* say. You should watch the "Quirinius, where art thou?" series to see that the "many possible explanation" don't survive scrutiny.
"Lets not forget all the abundant miraculous prophecies the Bible is legendary for."
@ProfMTH Until recent times, we didn't even have evidence for the Existence of Pontius Pilote and many claimed that shows inaccuracies or errors, but when we did the Bible proved true, similarly the same may be true of the census. Maybe someone we will find there was a census at the time mention in the scripture
@ProfMTH I didnt say i had evidence for a scribal error but Its of course a good possibility, also the alternate meaning i mentioned leaves everything open for many such possibilities.
And no, it would only mean Luke is not entirely innerant
@ProfMTH Of course the KJV wont. It doesnt contain footnotes at all lol A few others like the little known translations may not, but most of the better known ones DO! like the NIV, ESV, etc
@ahmalala "similarly the same may be true of the census"
A lot of "may be" & "might be" & "could be." Oddly vague stuff for a religion purportedly established by the omnipotent sovereign of the universe. In any case, I'll take this as your concession--albeit a begrudging one--of the fact that there was no census in Judea prior to 6 CE.
"I didnt say i had evidence for a scribal error but Its of course a good possibility"
If you have no evidence, how is it a "good possibility"?
(con't) @ahmalala "most of the better known ones DO! like the NIV, ESV, etc"
Other than the NIV and ESV, which ones have this footnote? Name them, please. You said "most translations" have this footnote. I'd like to see the list of the ones that do. Thanks.
@ProfMTH "I didnt say i had evidence for a scribal error but Its of course a good possibility"
If you have no evidence, how is it a "good possibility"?
ProfMTH, you have MUCH more patience than I, I am appreciative but how can you go over this crap so many times with these fundies? So many of these comments are irritating to me, I have to stop reading them. Good job though. Here, I’ll say it for you, ahmalala, quit being a retard. :-)
@ProfMTH After watching your other series on Quirinius, i feel more assured that the greek word, "Protos" Luke 2:2 can or should be translated as "Before". As u admitted, it is translated as such twice, which more than enough to demonstrate that it can. This solves the discrepancy to my satisfaction.
@ahmalala "After watching your other series on Quirinius, i feel more assured that the greek word, "Protos" Luke 2:2 can or should be translated as "Before". As u admitted, it is translated as such twice, which more than enough to demonstrate that it can. This solves the discrepancy to my satisfaction."
You're ignoring much of what I said there in favor of tendentiously selecting only part of what I said in an obviously desperate effort to save your claim--a pathetic and frequently...
(con't) @ahmalala ...employed apologetic tactic. If one has to resort to chicanery and dishonesty to defend one's religious beliefs, that betrays a substantial problem with the beliefs being defended.
BTW, I'm *still* waiting for you to provide the list of "most translations" that have that footnote.
@ProfMTH It just isnt even a big issue, its more of a minor one. The Text itself seems to portray itself as a carefully investigated orderly account by a Man. Its possible he can make a Mistake, is it certain? No. nevertheless, he was inspired, as other authors where inspired to write in accordance to there understanding.
This among other reasons is why many believe the Bible is not the verbatim literal word for word of God, But Just inspired by God and written through man. This would seem...
@ProfMTH .....like a logical assessment. Not to say it can't be the verbatim word, but innerancy should not be not big of an issue nor is it for all. Whichever the case, I certainly believe at the least it is the Message of God and his inspired word written through holy men.
@ahmalala Actually I take that back. Come to think of it, Philo of Alexandria mentioned Pilate before Tacitus. Another extra-biblical source. The evidence for the existence of Pilate goes way past "recent times".
@ahmalala "It just isnt even a big issue, its more of a minor one."
If it weren't important, it's quite odd that the gospel writers included the information while working under divine inspiration. One should think the Christian god would have stopped them from including such "minor" information, especially since they were going to write things that contradicted one another (in one case, one of the authors even contradicting himself). But another common apologetic tactic is to try to blunt...
(con't) @ahmalala ...the blow to inerrancy and divine inspiration and Christianity generally inflicted by the many contradictions and errors in the Bible by dismissing them as "minor."
"The Text itself seems to portray itself as a carefully investigated orderly account by a Man."
So the author of Luke was *not* working under divine inspiration, is that correct?
"innerancy should not be not big of an issue"
So despite what the Bible says, *not* every word of God is flawless?
@ProfMTH Supposing it is a contradiction, it would be Minor in terms of theological relevance. It has none.
Even so, it all hinges upon One word and its intepretation lol As shown in your video it can and has been interpreted as "Before" So its really not even a problem, nor is there any certainty that it is such.
Concerning Prophecy, that can be more assuredly said to be the verbatim word of God since its foretelling the Future. Remember scripture and prophecy are not always the same thing. It this clears things up for u
@ProfMTH Ah the footnotes. The Holman Christian standard also contains the footnotes, not sure which other ones do, i dont have many translations on hand, but mainly the best ones like esv, niv. Now that I have more understanding about what the word "protos" can mean, how many translations contains that footnote no longer seems important too important.
So earlier when you said "most translations" have this footnote, you weren't telling the truth because, as you now admit, you "don't have many translations on hand." OK. Thanks. As I suspected.
Once again, nicely done. Thanks. And following up an an earlier comment I made noting that the Internet, meaning quality material like this, is better than TV, even NPR, it seems like there would be a show on a cable channel or something that showcased videos like this one. Of course, other views could be presented, and other topics, as long as the quality is there, but the point is, the really good stuff is here.
Hey, dumb-ass-fuck!
There wewre TWO GOVERNORS named Quirinius, goddammit! ONE FUCKING DURING THE TIME of Herod BEFORE HIS MOTHERFUCKING DEATH, you ignorant fucking dumb-beel fucking cunt...
I OUGHTTA STICK MY FUCKING GUN THRU THIS COMPUTER SCREEN AND SHOVE IT UP YOUR ASS and pull the fathermotherfucking trigger, fuckface, bitch!
200wildmanchris200 2 weeks ago in playlist More videos from ProfMTH
@200wildmanchris200 Oh, I wouldn't want you to take the guns out of your ass, where they no doubt spend most of their time. Thanks anyway.
ProfMTH 2 weeks ago
Having been raised a Catholic, the NYC billboard does not surprise me at all. These days, religion is a business, just like everything else. Also, it's impossible to say when Jesus was born because he never existed.
markedwardindc 1 month ago
YOU NEED TO SERIOUSLY SEEK JESUS CHRIST,YOU NEED TO PRAY, YOU NEED TO READ YOUR BIBLE ITS YOUR LIFE AT STAKE HERE.DEVIL HAS DECEIVED YOU BIG TIME THROUGH PHILOSOPHY, ''KNOWLEDGE'' LEADING YOU STRAIGHT AWAY TO HELL.
josephmainahi 1 month ago
@josephmainahi You are a sad brainwashed loud mouth, having posting six shouts of utter BS.Remove you fingers from your ears, go and really read your Bible with your mind open, though you may be too late to be saved, as it would appear its already overloaded with religious BS. Our time on earth is indeed short my friend.
ISTABGLOF39 1 month ago
@josephmainahi What if the Devil is deceiving you into believing that God doesn't want you to understand the universe he created? What if the devil is deceiving you into believing that the bible is the work of God, when it was actually his own? I wonder what you will do now.
iz2sicc 2 days ago in playlist The best of atheism
MY FRIEND YOU NEED TO REPENT,BELIEVE IN JESUS CHRIST HAVE FAITH IN HIM AND BE BAPTISED.YOU ARE DEFINITELY AN AGENT OF DEVIL EITHER THROUGH ECUMINESM MOVEMENT OR SECRETE SOCITIES OR FRM CATHOLIC CHURCH.
josephmainahi 1 month ago
SATAN MADE ADAM AND EVE DOUBT GOD.MY FRIEND YOU ARE SIMPLY USING THE SAME DEMONIC METHODOLOGY.WHEN A SEED OF DOUBT IS PLANTED IT CREATS DOUBTS,CONFUSION AND DISOBEDIENCE.BIBLE IS 100 PERCENT ACCURATE AM NOT TALKING OF THE FAKE BIBLES WHERE SOME VERSES OR WORDS HAVE BEEN DELIBERATELY ALTERED,CHANGED OR REMOVED.
josephmainahi 1 month ago
ONLY A FOOL WOULD TAKE YOU SERIOUSLY.BIBLE IS TRUE
josephmainahi 1 month ago
@josephmainahi Sorry to have to tell you this but the bible contains many hundreds of contradictions and inaccuracies. Please do your own research. Don't simply accept the the opinions of apologists.
As for when Christ was born... it depends on which gospel you believe to be true because they are contradictory.
MrToby9999 1 month ago
YOU VERY KNOW KNOW THAT BIBLE IS TRUE AND DOES NOT CONTRADICT ITSELF.YOU ARE SIMPLY TRYING TO DECEIVE THOSE WHO HAVENT READ THE BIBLE PROPERLY COS YOU ARE ALSO DECEIVED BIG TIME.YOU NEED TO WAKE UP AND REPENT YOUR SINS.MY FRIEND TIME ON THIS EARTH IS TOO SHORT
josephmainahi 1 month ago
@josephmainahi So then how do you read properly to sell slaves and beat them? Or to sell your daughters as slaves? Or to kill people that work on Sundays? Just what is the proper way to read chop off your own hand to stop unproductive behavior? Cause I can only think of one way to read and understand those rules. It always comes out the same. God is a fuck up and a moron. Or god was made up bye incredibly stupid imbibes that did not have a clue. But you tell me what is the other take.
chiefsforpres 1 month ago
YES WE CAN ALL KNOW WHEN JESUS CHRIST OF THE BIBLE WAS BORN BUT HE WAS NOT BORN IN 25 OF DEC.
josephmainahi 1 month ago
@josephmainahi "YES WE CAN ALL KNOW WHEN JESUS CHRIST OF THE BIBLE WAS BORN BUT HE WAS NOT BORN IN 25 OF DEC."
So, when was he born?
ProfMTH 1 month ago
MY FRIEND AM SRRY TO SAY THAT YOU ARE JUST ONE OF THE VERY MANY AGENTS OF THE ANTICHRIST
josephmainahi 1 month ago
I know this one. Never.
SpoonFeedThem 1 month ago 2
LETS STOP INSULTS AND TRY TO FIND OUT THE TRUTH.WHEN WA JESUS CHRIST BORN??.I GENUINELY WANT TO KNOW THE FULL FACTS.
josephmainahi 2 months ago
@josephmainahi Never seems like a good bet at the moment. Check out jesusneverexisteddotcom
palerider1775 1 month ago
This season celebrate the Pagan festival of Winter Solstice.
TBlenx1995 2 months ago
In some debates I've had with believers before (via comments in different videos and personal e-mails, not face to face or with a moderator), I've noticed that they quote the bible assuming it's real, and sometimes literal!! As soon as I challenge their assumption they start the chicken and the egg game plus many word games that fall apart too. This is getting old. No evidence means not true! Historians' accounts are more accurate than the bible.
happyraver1958 2 months ago
August
TheMrgoku1985 2 months ago
Well Catholics don't know much but fallacious tradition and do good at bringing Biblical Christianity's reputation into the muck with them. "Assuming he was born" I don't think a secular researcher can say Yehoshua M. never existed and feel in the right. lol You quote Catholic priests and money-wanting televangelists (mostly--to be fair) to try to be non-biased? You're arrogant voice and lack of knowing about the monk's miscalculation (more on that if I cared ;) ) shows what we both know..Peace
YeshuaBePraised 2 months ago
@DefenseOfTruth "he governed on two occasions"
No, there is absolutely no evidence of this. It is nothing more than wishful thinking on the part of history- and reality-averse Christians.
"The Luke text does not call him the governor...."
I cover this in my 2-part series "Quirinius, where art thou?" Spare me the harmonizing bullshit. Matthew and Luke tell different stories placed at different times. Honest Christian scholars, several of whom I quoted in the video, concede this.
ProfMTH 2 months ago 8
"It is clear to me that the writings of the Christians are a lie and that your fables are not well-enough constructed to conceal this monstrous fiction." -- Celsus (On The True Doctrine c.178 CE)
yeshuahfullofit 2 months ago 2
Christians are devoid of spiriuality. They think the fascist ideology of some Celestial Dictatorship is Spirituality. If they could spend but 3 hours in the tortures suffered by the Prisoners of Guantanamo Bay or, better yet, those Medieval Chambers of Horrors long before "crual and unusual punishments" were supposedly banned, they could never propose the dogma of Eternal Damnation, not even for their Worst Enemies!
MushroomedAnymore 2 months ago
Just like we're not supposed to know what Jesus was up to for 18 years of his life.
doobdoob2 3 months ago
Most christians i know just act like it's some sort of *mystery*. That we're not supposed to *KNOW* when jesus was born, basically. It's kind of funny.
doobdoob2 3 months ago
ProfMTH you sound very smart but thats about it..ha.... apparently you dont understand that the monk who did the calender made a slight calculation which when corrected Jesus is born on 6 AD......booooyaaa
MrBen4king 3 months ago
Even if I was home I wouldn't waste my time with your non sense. I have better things to do. Like I said, In the end we both will find out!!
mustangpassurchevy 4 months ago
@mustangpassurchevy "Even if I was home I wouldn't waste my time with your non sense."
And yet you not only watched the video but you have--at work, no less!--filled up several comment boxes. Seems you're quite into "wasting" your time.
"I have better things to do."
I hope you do them better than you defend your beliefs. You do a horrible job of that.
ProfMTH 4 months ago 12
@ProfMTH LOOOOOOOOL this was PURE PWNAGE
Samura1gamer 2 months ago in playlist More videos from ProfMTH
@Samura1gamer Glad you enjoyed it. :-)
ProfMTH 2 months ago
Sorry I didn't ignore your response, I am at work and I don't want to beat a dead horse. You don't believe what I have to say and I don't believe what you have to say. So be it. In the end we both will find out, one way or another! That's all.
mustangpassurchevy 4 months ago
@mustangpassurchevy "Sorry I didn't ignore your response...."
You certainly didn't respond to it.
"I am at work"
Then you should respond to responses when you're at home so that you can offer substance and not nonresponsive nonsense.
"I don't want to beat a dead horse"
When did the horse die? You just tossed out some stuff that I thoroughly refuted. Did *that* kill the horse? If so, you'd do well simply to admit you were wrong.
ProfMTH 4 months ago
(con't) @mustangpassurchevy "I don't belive what you have to say."
Actually, you don't believe what your Bible says because it doesn't comport with what you want to believe.
ProfMTH 4 months ago
Matthew and Luke delineate two DIFFERENT events separated by a significant span of time. Luke writes of Jesus' birth in the manger and Matthew records the wise men (Magi) visiting and offering gifts to Jesus years after his birth. The wise men were NOT present at Christ's birth as pictures of Christmas contend. So there is no translation errors you are just not reading and understanding it correctly. Have a good day.
mustangpassurchevy 4 months ago
@mustangpassurchevy "Matthew and Luke delineate two DIFFERENT events separated by a significant span of time. Luke writes of Jesus' birth in the manger and Matthew records the wise men (Magi) visiting and offering gifts to Jesus years after his birth."
You're really just illustrating the problem (although it's clear you believe you're solving it). If the author of Matthew is telling a story about what took place, as you say "years after [Jesus'] birth," then he's put the birth of Jesus...
ProfMTH 4 months ago
(con't) @mustangpassurchevy ...even farther away from when the author of Luke portrays it taking place. Herod the Great died in 4 BCE--approximately a decade before Quirinius became governor of Syria and Judea was annexed and a census conducted for tax purposes. In the Matthean story, Herod is still alive and ruling. So, it must be prior to 4 BCE and if, as you say, its "years after" Jesus was born, it's creates a gap of more than a decade for when Jesus was born in the two stories.
ProfMTH 4 months ago
(con't) @mustangpassurchevy "there is no translation errors"
And yet earlier you suggested there were. Amazing how things change when an apologist is pressed for specifics.
"you are just not reading and understanding it correctly"
Oh, I'm reading it correctly. You have made my point for me. You have a good day, too.
ProfMTH 4 months ago
@ProfMTH Well we can go back and forth all day on this because you and I surely differ. But if I wasn't 1000% sure of myself. It is a lot safer to believe than to deceive. Because if i'm correct I have a great after life. If I'm wrong no big deal. If your correct no big deal But, if your wrong, your screwed.. Have a great day.
mustangpassurchevy 4 months ago
@mustangpassurchevy It's quite telling that you have ignored my response to your claims in favor of simply offering the nonresponsive Pascal's Wager. I'll take this as a concession on your part. Thanks. And, again, you have a great day, too.
ProfMTH 4 months ago
Mustangpassurchevy & others acknowledge that the KJV et al contain translational errors. These may be intentional or they may be due to difficulty in determining exact translations. But here's a thought: According to Genesis, the reason we have multiple languages is because god himself confused the tongues at Babel. And he would've known it would be necessary to translate his "Word" into other languages in the future. Where was god's intervention to insure this happened honestly and accurately?
88rat88 4 months ago
I would hate to be these guys who try to convince people the Bible contradicts its self when most Christians who read the bible already know it was translated by man. Let me set the record straight, the KJV is like every other version of the Bible is simply a translation. It has errors as do all versions, both ancient and modern. Translations are just that, translations – none are the original. And people that are led away from Christ because of these lost soul‘s. ProfMTH will pay one day.
mustangpassurchevy 4 months ago
@mustangpassurchevy So, please identify the translation errors that have resulted in the authors of Matthew and Luke placing Jesus' birth birth ten years apart from one another. Thanks.
ProfMTH 4 months ago
This is fact not a personal attack. None of the first four books were writen by a desciple or any contemporaneous writer about Jesus. Jesus & his desciples spoke & preached in Aramaic & none of those books were writen in Aramaic.The oldest of the gospels was writen about AD60 in Koine Greek, the last about AD150.All preachers today talk of the 'miracles of Jesus', Paul in all his works NEVER once mentions even one, he'd never heard of them.The Bible holds the ONLY record of Jesus,he didn't exist
kanakaken 4 months ago
The shepherds sleep out at night when an angel tells them to go and see the newly born Jesus. Even in the Middle East 2000 years ago when it was warmer than now a night outside in late December would have killed them on the spot. The cold and the rain, sometimes even snow, would have made sure they died. Can anyone who is a believer in any religion explain that?
breakaleg10 5 months ago in playlist Fler videoklipp från ProfMTH
@breakaleg10 The explanation for that is simple. Jesus wasn't born in december. Dec 25th was just a date attached to his birth. I'm not quite sure about the history behind this but i think it was something to do with the fact that pagans already had a festival on dec 25, so the Roman Empire decided to place Jesus' birth on that day. No one knows when Jesus was actually born.
Moussyed 4 months ago
oooh I would say half past two thousand NEVERS ago.
MrCommonSense100 8 months ago
there are loads of other discrepencies in these two stories. pretty much whenever there is an instance of two or more gospels giving details that can be cross-checked, contradictions abound.
BozoTheBear 8 months ago
I've heard a lot of ways people have tried to reconcile the accounts. I've yet to hear one that's any good.
Some try to fudge the Greek grammar, some try to fudge the date of Q.'s governorship, some try to use Luke's reputation as proof Luke "couldn't be wrong", some offer equally dubious and misguided options for reconciliation.
imperator332 8 months ago
@imperator332 I cover most of them in my "Quirinius, where are thou?" series.
ProfMTH 8 months ago
Was Quirinius, where art thou? Removed
DavidNeff2011 9 months ago
@DavidNeff2011 "Was Quirinius, where art thou? Removed"
No. /watch?v=CmRd6OKwcR4
ProfMTH 9 months ago
Another good video. So far I've enjoyed your work. That said, I hate when people tell me what I know. Whether I agree with them or not, I hate when people act like every agrees with them whether they admit it or not. It's a truly terrible argument that will make atheists appear overly arrogant, when there are so many reasonable science and logic based arguments that will not come off as a personal attack. It just seems to me like one of the worst possible arguments to make.
soxfan849 1 year ago
Putting aside the Herod argument, it's interesting to find how many alleged "contradictions" turn out not to be so after in depth study.
Moussyed 1 year ago
@Moussyed "in depth study", handy rhetorical tool you've crafted there. It allows you to dismiss allegations of controversy no matter how well researched and presented as not being truly "in depth" as defined by you. It also allows you to, less effectively attempt to imply that any contradictions, in quotes to really discredit them, and alleged, to further imply their lack of validity, are the result of a lack of conveniently ill defined "in depth study".
I guess that's how you cope.
GraeHall 9 months ago
@3:28 Just wondering Prof, are you sure that the two books are necessarily talking about the same Herod?
I found an interesting skeptic's website that says there were several Herods at the time, so this Herod contradiction you've listed may not be an actual contradiction at all.
Moussyed 1 year ago
@Moussyed "Just wondering Prof, are you sure that the two books are necessarily talking about the same Herod?"
Yes. I'm not aware of any basis for concluding that they're not.
"I found an interesting skeptic's website that says there were several Herods at the time...."
*After* Herod the Great.
ProfMTH 1 year ago 2
@ProfMTH "*After* Herod the Great"
Sorry, that's what i meant to say. After Herod the Great there were other Herods not just the one who died before Jesus.
Moussyed 1 year ago
@Moussyed
They were named. For instance, you know the Herod in Matthew during Jesus' birth is Herod the Great because in Matt 2 it mentions Archelaus, as the son of Herod who takes over on his father's death.
Luke 1 mentions King Herod. Luke 3 mentions Herod the tetrarch and his brother Philip in the 15th year of Tiberius.
You can tell Luke 1's Herod is "The Great" because of his title, and the Herod in ch 3. is named as a tetrarch, which doesn't happen until after The Great is dead.
imperator332 8 months ago
@Moussyed @ProfMTH I looked into this a while back. Herod had two sons this is how apologists try to pass it off. However neither son was a king, yet in the bible it speaks of a King Herod if I am not mistaken. So if neither of his sons actually held the title of King I do not believe it could be talking about one of them.
CtheWolfe 4 months ago
may i say that as a Jewish person i beleive that Jesus was real, and did in fact exist, but was not our savior
contactharvest999 1 year ago
@contactharvest999 OK. I'm not contending that he didn't exist. Rather, I'm asking when he was born. The New Tesament identifies two different time, a decade apart. But Christians can't seem to nail down which one is the correct one and, oddly, they often try to say the two periods were *not* really a decade apart.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
The author of luke is also the author of the apostle story, which is even today considered to be correct. If luke is so blatantly false in his historical research, how can he be so much better in making the apostle stories? That confuses me much.
mardastheEitheist 1 year ago
@mardastheEitheist I don't understand your question.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH
Luke is also the author of the acts of the apostles, which is often told to be accurate (important for christians because of the apostolic conference, where paul is said to have been abolished the laws for christians), and if he here is so unhistorical, we can estimate the historicity of the acts of the apostles to be worse than often expected, even meaning, that the abolishment was introduced by luke and not by paul or jesus. It was a rhethorical question, Prof.
mardastheEitheist 1 year ago
@mardastheEitheist " the acts of the apostles, which is often told to be accurate"
According to whom? Have you ever compared, just for one example, what Acts says about Paul's conversion to Christianity and what Paul himself wrote about it? They're wildly different. Have you ever compared Paul's Areopagus speech in Acts to what Paul says about pagans in Romans 1? They're the complete opposite of one another. Accurate? By what measure?
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH
Yeah, right :D. Here you are much more forward than me. Is there a video about that made by you, that you could recommend?
mardastheEitheist 1 year ago
@mardastheEitheist Here's one to start with: /watch?v=qDSUTjxNuiU
ProfMTH 1 year ago
This video homo is an absolute idiot. Jesus was historically PROVEN by even "anti"Christian evidence.....Josephus, a Jewish historian, Tacitus a Roman historian, and the anti-Christian Talmud proves Jesus was historic. So any professor he can quote is merely claiming 'his' INACCURATE UNDERSTANDING of the Gospels. Both Luke "and' Matthew are not contradictive at all. You are just taking and interpreting words incorrectly, moron. ;) And Luke and Matthew are part of historic records.
ElCangri137 1 year ago
@ElCangri137 "You are just taking and interpreting words incorrectly, moron. ;)"
So, douche bag, when was Jesus born: 4 BCE or earlier (during the reign of Herod the Great) OR 6 CE or later (during the governorship of Quirinius)?
ProfMTH 1 year ago 14
@ProfMTH During the reign of herod the great and the NON GOVERNING but active political role of Quirinius. If you think there is no evidence to that look it up. (I hate saying "look it up" it is a bit too internet-debat'y'. Sir, you aren't always right. (also, a heads up, should you choose to reply, if I don't answer I am away for Xmas. Ok bye) I do honestly say Merry Xmas outside our debate. ;) I respect your passion, I just wish it was on something other than spreading false findings ;D
YeshuaBePraised 2 months ago
@ElCangri137 Sorry Promth is right When was Jesus born,there 3 contradictions in Matt. and Luke please tell us according to scriptures which is true? and which is deceiving?
233yvan 1 year ago
In a normal setting, arguing about when Jesus was born is like arguing about when The Joker was born. You would have to actually believe Jesus was a real historical person to take anything seriously.
But I love the way you fight fire with fire Prof. You use that book that Christians try to use against us and throw it right back at them like a champion.
MasterAdam100 1 year ago
@MasterAdam100 "But I love the way you fight fire with fire Prof. You use that book that Christians try to use against us and throw it right back at them like a champion."
Thank you *very* much. That's the idea: to fight fire with fire.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
For the word "governing" Luke uses the word "hegemon" (ruling officer or procurator) not the word "legatus" (Title of Governor). We know Quirinius did an excellent job in the 7BC census. Caesar could have put him in charge of the 7AD census because the Governor Saturninus had a repution for incompetence. This is likely because Roman Records say Quirinius was in the province at that time to crush a rebellion. That means no contradiction
jamesplease1980 1 year ago
@jamesplease1980 "For the word "governing" Luke uses the word "hegemon" (ruling officer or procurator) not the word "legatus" (Title of Governor)."
Since the author of Luke wrote in Greek, it's no surprise he didn't use the Latin word 'legatus'. The author of Luke uses hēgemoneuō in Luke 2:2 in reference to Quirinius as governor of Syria *and* he uses hēgemoneuō (the exact same word) in Luke 3:1 in reference to Pontius Pilate as governor of Judea. If Pilate was governor, so was Quirinius.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
(con't) @jamesplease1980 "We know Quirinius did an excellent job in the 7BC census."
What 7 BC census?
ProfMTH 1 year ago
Jeremiah 10: 3-5 3For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. 4They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not. 5They are upright as the palm tree, but speak not: they must needs be borne, because they cannot go. Be not afraid of them; for they cannot do evil, neither also is it in them to do good.
demorris766126 1 year ago
3 For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. 4 They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not. 5 They are upright as the palm tree, but speak not: they must needs be borne, because they cannot go. Be not afraid of them; for they cannot do evil, neither also is it in them to do good.
Jeremiah 10: 3-5
morris766126 1 year ago
FURTHERMORE CHRISTMAS IS NOT A CHRISTIAN DAY IT IS A PAGAN DAY THE BIRTHDAY OF MANY PAGAN GODS AND HERE IS A SCRIPT 4 YOU ....
READ Jeremiah 10: 3-5
morris766126 1 year ago
YOU CANT EVEN GET THE SCRIPTURES RIGHT ..LUKE STARTS WITH THE BIRTH OF JOHN , IT ISN'T TIL VERSE 26 WHEN the angel Gabriel APPEARED TO Mary , THE BIBLE DOES NOT SPECIFY DATES OUR CALENDAR IS EVEN DIFFERENT NO ONE KNOWS THE ACTUAL DATE OF THE BIRTH OF CHRIST OR OF ANYTHING ELSE IN THE BIBLE FOR THAT MATTER.... THIS VIDEO IS BEYOND DEBUNKED SORRY WRONG TRY AGAIN ......
morris766126 1 year ago
@morris766126 "YOU CANT EVEN GET THE SCRIPTURES RIGHT ..LUKE STARTS WITH THE BIRTH OF JOHN , IT ISN'T TIL VERSE 26 WHEN the angel Gabriel APPEARED TO Mary...."
Yes, I know. And Lk 1:36 tells us that Gabriel appeared to Mary in the 6th month of Elizabeth's being pregnant with John. So, please, do tell me what I haven't gotten right.
"THE BIBLE DOES NOT SPECIFY DATES"
But it *does* link Jesus' birth to events in history, the dates of which we know. As explained in the video, Matthew...
ProfMTH 1 year ago
(con't) @morris766126 ...says Jesus was born when Herod the Great was reigning, so Jesus' birth in Matthew could not have been later than 4 BCE (the year of Herod the Great's death). The Gospel of Luke has Jesus birth happening *both* during the reign of Herod the Great (which ended in 4 BCE) AND during the tenure of Quirinius as governor of Syria (which did not begin until 6 CE, a decade after the death of Herod the Great). Did this somehow get by you when you were watching the video?
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH You and your fancy book learnin.
Cayvmann 1 year ago
@Cayvmann "You and your fancy book learnin."
LOL.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
People can't raise from the dead(if you didn't know that). That's why your question is retarded. And having 'faith' in such things is retarded as well. You'll rot in a grave as much as me.
On top of that, who wants to believe in heaven? If anything I'd want to go to a place where it takes a little bit of struggle to learn new things (which is the greatest joy) instead of a paradise where no creativity exists and everything is handed to you. Eternal pergatory is more to my liking.
DanceInYourRoom 1 year ago
I have respect for Brown due him being a priest, but still able to critically look at the bible.
If even priests accepts the contradictions, than why so many apologetics suggest there are none?
KayleLang 1 year ago
@KayleLang "I have respect for Brown due him being a priest, but still able to critically look at the bible."
So do I. And during his life he took a great deal of heat from many of his fellow Catholics and other Christians for not placing piety ahead of honesty and solid scholarship.
"If even priests accept the contradictions, than why so many apologetics suggest there are none?"
I suspect they're afraid to come to terms with the truth.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
Ah, that old "we have better evidence for Jesus than Julius Caesar" chestnut. So, oh apologist, what works do we have written by Jesus himself, as compared to Caesar's 2? (That was something I found difficult as I was starting to question my faith- such a claim is so obviously wrong and yet so many highly intelligent religious people repeat it)
golddiggingants 1 year ago
Im confused, is the creator of this vid somehow suggesting that since nobody can say the exact day Jesus was born therefore Jesus as a historical figure is in doubt?
jamesplease1980 1 year ago
@jamesplease1980 yes.
DanceInYourRoom 1 year ago
@jamesplease1980 The point of the video as to many of profmth vid's is the verasity of the bible and the celebration of christmas. Baring in mind that christmas was not allowed or celebrated till 300-400 years after jesus was sposed to have died. What you have to understand is, if the gospels do not add up (Condtridicts itself) then the bible can not be inspired by the word of GOD, Mistakes should not be in there right???
loudman12 1 year ago
@loudman12 I think he is being intellectually dishonest by the unrealistic demands of specificity he places on isolated sentences, which leads to inaccurate interpretation.
jamesplease1980 1 year ago
@jamesplease1980 No not really if you are following your bible and the teachings of jesus, then god being all powerfull and that should be able to inspire the information to be put clearly with no room for condtridiction. if like shown in this video the naratives are different and luke condtridicts itself then you can not ignore it. If there are 2 different accounts of his birth, then one account is wrong.
loudman12 1 year ago
@jamesplease1980 Furthermore if you are stating that PROFMTH is intellectuary dishonnest. Then you believers are the same as well, when there is a direct condtriciton in the bible you use the line " INTERUPT IT IN-CORRECTLY" I will ask you honnestly which account is right was jesus born in 4bc or 8Ad as two accounts state this. Interupting this has nothing to do with it, two different accounts they both cannot be right?
loudman12 1 year ago
@loudman12 Im sorry i didnt make myself clear. 4BC/8AD are not written in the Bible. If you look at how he comes to the conclusion of those dates and how he uses the references and sources he quotes then he is being unrealistic, and if he placed that same high standard of specificity to any other document he would get the same results. Does that make sense?
Im not going to reply after this cause Im getting too many long comments from weirdos
jamesplease1980 1 year ago
@jamesplease1980 "Im not going to reply after this cause Im getting too many long comments from weirdos."
More correctly, you're not replying because you've got nothing to say that actually responds to the comments you've received. That's OK. Take the time to think it all through a bit more. Happy New Year.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@jamesplease1980 You still have not answred the question. I know those dates are not told in there, i studied the bible for many years my friend. However both accounts mention two different time periods in history where we have independant evidence. So I will ask you for the final time, which time period was jesus born???
loudman12 1 year ago
@loudman12 According to scholars Jesus was born in 4 AD.
beholdtheageofold 1 year ago
@beholdtheageofold then that is a direct condtidiction to the other account, therefore the bible is not 100% accurate, and thats just one area, I can quote you many areas of the bible that are wrong.
loudman12 1 year ago
@loudman12 The other account is about John the Baptist. John was the real messiah. Matthew 1;17 actually applies to John the Baptist' genealogy considering the date of the King of Judea in Luke 1;5. Jesus being the son of God's genealogy actually is the one being described in Luke 3. The Greek scribes were being deceitful knowing Jesus as Christ never existed. They got confused on what they were doing and attributed both genealogies to Jesus. Jesus is John the Baptist revised from Greeks.
beholdtheageofold 1 year ago
@beholdtheageofold aspects to fit in, typical christian both accounts do not add up simple really, for you to quote those verses makes me laugh and you call profmth intellectuary wrong.
loudman12 1 year ago
@loudman12 A messiah did exist. Its just not what Christians are teaching. Christians are teachings revisions and reinterpretations. They are not teaching the true messiah based on original accounts. Their belief is aligned with forethought tradition. For instance Mark 3;18 James the Just is called son of Alphaeus. Alphaeus is said to be the husband of (the other Mary). Catholics call them St Clopas and (the wife of Clopas). These two characters are obviously Zacharias an Elizabeth.
beholdtheageofold 1 year ago
@beholdtheageofold Sorry that arguement falls flat on its face straight away. The bible is the word of god right??? thus you should nmot have to re-interupt it, the bible has been written with the supposed guidence of the lord, yet many accounts do not match up, I'm not even talking about this subject there are many more areas i can mention. To date there are many sects within christianity to date and recorded over 30,000 the message must not have been clear .
loudman12 1 year ago
@beholdtheageofold His argument overly relies on the statement by Paul L. Mair that the census was "...a provincial census of noncitizens for purposes of taxation"
However we know that Caesar held census all thhe time, probably world ones every 14 years, and there were other major census' 8bc, 2 bc and 6 AD. his sources and quotes are not very comprehensive as he makes out
jamesplease1980 1 year ago
@jamesplease1980 The story of messiah begins in Luke 1 not Matthew 1 just to let you know.
beholdtheageofold 1 year ago
@jamesplease1980 "we know that Caesar held census all thhe time"
I deal with other Roman censuses in my "Quirinius, where art thou?" series (link in the description box).
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@loudman12 define what you mean by period?
jamesplease1980 1 year ago
@jamesplease1980 The text says Jesus was born "in the days" of herod, and "in those days" a decree went out from Caesar.
Now to take those two versus that use "In those days" and demand a level of specificity that the text doesnt apply is intellectually dishonest.
Also, his sources Raymond E Brown and Paul Mair are just two dudes opinions. Their opinions dont conclusively prove the exact year Jesus was born.
jamesplease1980 1 year ago
@jamesplease1980 "Im confused, is the creator of this vid somehow suggesting that since nobody can say the exact day Jesus was born therefore Jesus as a historical figure is in doubt?"
I said nothing about "the exact day Jesus was born." The Christian scriptures don't address that. Rather I talked about what they *do* address, i.e., the year Jesus was born. As I explained in detail, Matthew and Luke contradict one another on this and Luke contradicts itself by linking Jesus' birth to...
ProfMTH 1 year ago
(con't) @jamesplease1980 ...events that were approximately a decade apart from one another (i.e., the reign of Herod the Great and Quirinius's time as governor of Syria). One person cannot have been born in both 1967 & 1977. If there can be such clear error despite the NT's claims that the way the events are described is actually how they happened, and the accounts are the result of careful investigation, and that all of it was written under an omnipotent & omniscient god's inspiration, how...
ProfMTH 1 year ago
(con't) @jamesplease1980 ...can one trust *any* of the details that appear in the infancy narratives (or anywhere in the New Testament for that matter)?
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH
jamesplease1980 1 year ago
Is the creator of this vid should read Simon Greenleafs book about the evidence of Jesus' resurection.
jamesplease1980 1 year ago
@jamesplease1980 If Simon Greenleaf was able to prove the case of Jesus' resurrection by writ, then is it not a shame Friedrich Nietzsche who was born after him murdered god by the exact same method?
DanceInYourRoom 1 year ago
@DanceInYourRoom Simon Greenleaf was the English speaking worlds authority on court based evidence. After studying the evidence for Jesus' resurection, such has the 3 Jewish writers, 19 Roman writers, plus the 27 books of the new testament, and manuscript evidence of the eye witness community, this atheist concluded that in a modern day court of law the must be to prove that Jesus didnt rise from the dead, not the other way around.
jamesplease1980 1 year ago
@DanceInYourRoom i guess what Im saying is the vid asks the wrong questions. The question isnt exactly what day wasJesus born, but rather did Jesus rise from the dead.
jamesplease1980 1 year ago
@jamesplease1980 You do realize that ethereal starlight heals all cases of pneumonia because that's the question that really matters. Your question...is fucking stupid.
DanceInYourRoom 1 year ago
The whole argument in this video seems to be centered around One verse, Luke 2:2.
And to solve the percieved problem there one needs only to look at the Footnotes for that verse. Argument defeated.
ahmalala 1 year ago
@ahmalala, what does the footnote say about this particular verse? Thx in advance.
Turandot29 1 year ago
@Turandot29 Im using the ESV, but other translations say similarly. in the footnotes "This was the registration before" which comes right before, Quirinius was the Governer of Syria.
ahmalala 1 year ago
@ahmalala The problem, of course, is that translation is about convenience rather than accuracy, as I explain in my "Quirinius, where art thou?" series. Moreover, as I also explain that series, there was no census in Judea prior to Quirinius's being appointed governor of Syria and Judea being annexed to Syria in 6 C.E. So, no, your ESV footnote does *not* solve the problem.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH Its most translations that state the same in the Footnotes. It solves most of the percieved problem. As to the Census how can we even really sure? is anything really 100% certain?
And even if that was a mistake, what would not really mean? It may mean there is a slight error in luke with many explanations such as possible scribal error. I can think of many explanations. The Bible is 66 books, if one book where proven completely false, it would only be one book
ahmalala 1 year ago
@ahmalala "Its most translations that state the same in the Footnotes."
I just checked the NASB, the KJV and NKJV, the CEV, the NCV, Young's Literal, the NAB, and the NET. None of them has a footnote that offers "before Quirinius was governor of Syria" as an alternative translation. More importantly, as I explained in my "Quirinius, where art thou?" series and mentioned in my earlier comment to you, as a matter of historical fact there was no census in Judea prior to Quirinius's being...
ProfMTH 1 year ago
(con't) @ahmalala ...appointed governor of Syria and Judea being annexed to Syria in 6 C.E. (when Rome deposed Herod Archelaus and began direct rule of Judea). So, again, you haven't solved the problem.
"As to the Census how can we even really sure?"
I'll refer you to the various historians and biblical scholars who have written extensively on this. You'd do well to start with Raymond Brown's "The Birth of the Messiah."
ProfMTH 1 year ago
(con't) @ahmalala "And even if that was a mistake, what would not really mean?"
That the Bible is not inerrant, which calls into question its being divinely inspired, which calls into question the alleged "revelation" upon which the whole Christian religion is based. No small matter.
"scribal error"
Produce a basis for the claim that it's a scribal error and we'll have something to discuss. A mere assertion or "it may be" doesn't get the job done. Rather, it betrays that you know...
ProfMTH 1 year ago
(con't) @ahmalala ...that Luke contradicts itself and the infancy narrative in Matthew but do not wish to come to terms with the consequences of that fact.
"I can think of many explanations."
No doubt. The question is whether they withstand scrutiny. Again, my series "Quirinius, where art thou?" deals with the attempts to solve the problem.
"The Bible is 66 books, if one book where proven completely false, it would only be one book."
If one book is wrong, what reason do we...
ProfMTH 1 year ago
(con't) @ahmalala ...have to regard any of them as divinely inspired scripture?
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH On Error with many possible explanations does not in some way mean the entirel bible is not inspired. The Main basis we have are the Accuracies we can confirm and Lets not forget all the abundant miraculous prophecies the Bible is legendary for.
ahmalala 1 year ago
@ahmalala "On[e] [e]rror with many possible explanations does not in some way mean the entire [B]ible is not inspired."
I didn't say otherwise. You should reread what I actually *did* write and watch the video again and listen closely to what I actually *did* say. You should watch the "Quirinius, where art thou?" series to see that the "many possible explanation" don't survive scrutiny.
"Lets not forget all the abundant miraculous prophecies the Bible is legendary for."
Such as?
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH Sent vid about prophesy proving it divine
ahmalala 1 year ago
@ProfMTH Until recent times, we didn't even have evidence for the Existence of Pontius Pilote and many claimed that shows inaccuracies or errors, but when we did the Bible proved true, similarly the same may be true of the census. Maybe someone we will find there was a census at the time mention in the scripture
ahmalala 1 year ago
@ahmalala "Until recent times, we didn't even have evidence for the Existence of Pontius Pilote "
Really? The first extra-biblical source to mention Pilate was Tacitus in the 1st century ACE. I don't know what you mean by "until recent times".
EruditeScythian 1 year ago
@EruditeScythian From what i know there has been debate concerning him prior to discoveries made in modern times.
ahmalala 1 year ago
@ProfMTH I didnt say i had evidence for a scribal error but Its of course a good possibility, also the alternate meaning i mentioned leaves everything open for many such possibilities.
And no, it would only mean Luke is not entirely innerant
ahmalala 1 year ago
@ProfMTH Its still not for Sure, as u mentioned in your video, "unlikely" they say.
ahmalala 1 year ago
@ProfMTH Of course the KJV wont. It doesnt contain footnotes at all lol A few others like the little known translations may not, but most of the better known ones DO! like the NIV, ESV, etc
ahmalala 1 year ago
@ahmalala "similarly the same may be true of the census"
A lot of "may be" & "might be" & "could be." Oddly vague stuff for a religion purportedly established by the omnipotent sovereign of the universe. In any case, I'll take this as your concession--albeit a begrudging one--of the fact that there was no census in Judea prior to 6 CE.
"I didnt say i had evidence for a scribal error but Its of course a good possibility"
If you have no evidence, how is it a "good possibility"?
ProfMTH 1 year ago
(con't) @ahmalala "most of the better known ones DO! like the NIV, ESV, etc"
Other than the NIV and ESV, which ones have this footnote? Name them, please. You said "most translations" have this footnote. I'd like to see the list of the ones that do. Thanks.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH "I didnt say i had evidence for a scribal error but Its of course a good possibility"
If you have no evidence, how is it a "good possibility"?
ProfMTH, you have MUCH more patience than I, I am appreciative but how can you go over this crap so many times with these fundies? So many of these comments are irritating to me, I have to stop reading them. Good job though. Here, I’ll say it for you, ahmalala, quit being a retard. :-)
scalercphlyer 1 year ago
@scalercphlyer lol Education can be challenging business, Scalercphlyer. ;-)
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH After watching your other series on Quirinius, i feel more assured that the greek word, "Protos" Luke 2:2 can or should be translated as "Before". As u admitted, it is translated as such twice, which more than enough to demonstrate that it can. This solves the discrepancy to my satisfaction.
ahmalala 1 year ago
@ahmalala "After watching your other series on Quirinius, i feel more assured that the greek word, "Protos" Luke 2:2 can or should be translated as "Before". As u admitted, it is translated as such twice, which more than enough to demonstrate that it can. This solves the discrepancy to my satisfaction."
You're ignoring much of what I said there in favor of tendentiously selecting only part of what I said in an obviously desperate effort to save your claim--a pathetic and frequently...
ProfMTH 1 year ago
(con't) @ahmalala ...employed apologetic tactic. If one has to resort to chicanery and dishonesty to defend one's religious beliefs, that betrays a substantial problem with the beliefs being defended.
BTW, I'm *still* waiting for you to provide the list of "most translations" that have that footnote.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH It just isnt even a big issue, its more of a minor one. The Text itself seems to portray itself as a carefully investigated orderly account by a Man. Its possible he can make a Mistake, is it certain? No. nevertheless, he was inspired, as other authors where inspired to write in accordance to there understanding.
This among other reasons is why many believe the Bible is not the verbatim literal word for word of God, But Just inspired by God and written through man. This would seem...
ahmalala 1 year ago
@ProfMTH .....like a logical assessment. Not to say it can't be the verbatim word, but innerancy should not be not big of an issue nor is it for all. Whichever the case, I certainly believe at the least it is the Message of God and his inspired word written through holy men.
ahmalala 1 year ago
@ahmalala Actually I take that back. Come to think of it, Philo of Alexandria mentioned Pilate before Tacitus. Another extra-biblical source. The evidence for the existence of Pilate goes way past "recent times".
EruditeScythian 1 year ago
@ahmalala "It just isnt even a big issue, its more of a minor one."
If it weren't important, it's quite odd that the gospel writers included the information while working under divine inspiration. One should think the Christian god would have stopped them from including such "minor" information, especially since they were going to write things that contradicted one another (in one case, one of the authors even contradicting himself). But another common apologetic tactic is to try to blunt...
ProfMTH 1 year ago
(con't) @ahmalala ...the blow to inerrancy and divine inspiration and Christianity generally inflicted by the many contradictions and errors in the Bible by dismissing them as "minor."
"The Text itself seems to portray itself as a carefully investigated orderly account by a Man."
So the author of Luke was *not* working under divine inspiration, is that correct?
"innerancy should not be not big of an issue"
So despite what the Bible says, *not* every word of God is flawless?
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH Supposing it is a contradiction, it would be Minor in terms of theological relevance. It has none.
Even so, it all hinges upon One word and its intepretation lol As shown in your video it can and has been interpreted as "Before" So its really not even a problem, nor is there any certainty that it is such.
ahmalala 1 year ago
@ahmalala Finally, Judgning by 2 Peters 1,
Concerning Prophecy, that can be more assuredly said to be the verbatim word of God since its foretelling the Future. Remember scripture and prophecy are not always the same thing. It this clears things up for u
ahmalala 1 year ago
@ahmalala I'm *still* waiting for you to provide the list of "most translations" that have that footnote.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH "So despite what the Bible says, *not* every word of God is flawless?"
Thats an interesting question cause sometimes it is important to see what the Bible actually says.
"For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." 2 Peters 1:21
ahmalala 1 year ago
@ahmalala BTW, I'm *still* waiting for you to provide the list of "most translations" that have that footnote.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH Ah the footnotes. The Holman Christian standard also contains the footnotes, not sure which other ones do, i dont have many translations on hand, but mainly the best ones like esv, niv. Now that I have more understanding about what the word "protos" can mean, how many translations contains that footnote no longer seems important too important.
ahmalala 1 year ago
@ahmalala "i dont have many translations on hand"
So earlier when you said "most translations" have this footnote, you weren't telling the truth because, as you now admit, you "don't have many translations on hand." OK. Thanks. As I suspected.
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@ProfMTH I may have over spoken earlier since the most prominent translations did include the footnotes it lead me to assume so.
ahmalala 1 year ago
@ahmalala "I may have over spoken earlier...."
May? LOL!
ProfMTH 1 year ago
@scalercphlyer You know its Real, deal with it :D
ahmalala 1 year ago
Once again, nicely done. Thanks. And following up an an earlier comment I made noting that the Internet, meaning quality material like this, is better than TV, even NPR, it seems like there would be a show on a cable channel or something that showcased videos like this one. Of course, other views could be presented, and other topics, as long as the quality is there, but the point is, the really good stuff is here.
Prelude610 1 year ago
@Prelude610 Thanks very much.
ProfMTH 1 year ago