I can hear it now...Christian apologist says, "You took those readings out of context. You didn't include the verses on either side of what you quoted. You didn't read the entire chapter. It was an error in translation that caused that. To understand the true message, you need to read the Bible in its native Hebrew and Greek languages. Come on atheists, is that all you've got?"
First of all the Gospel of Mark is an abomination and is not Scripture. secondly according to the early church and as supported in some of the early manuscripts, Gospel of John matches what Mark says. also you are misquoting mark, but it is irrelevant because it is not scripture and is abomination.
@carlsonap16 Wait, now the Gospels are not Scripture? Who the hell comes up with this shit? Why can't you just say, "yeah, my religion's a complete fraud" and get over this fantastical crap? Children.
@alphaenemy my religion is not Christianity.my religion is Essenism.furthermore, the Gospel of Mark is demonstrably a forgery created as a polemic against the Gospel of Peter.i have historical sources which prove it.the man who knew Mark and Peter described the Gospel Mark scribed for Peter, and it is nothing like what we have in the Bible. Clement of Alexandria testified to a secondary shorter Gospel replacing the original Gospel Mark scribed.the original scholars call "Secret Gospel of Mark."
@alphaenemy it all depends on how you define a deity. most traditional ideas about deities are indeed wrong because they are illogical. i would suggest ou consider the possibility of what a deity truly is and not be influenced by the major ideas on deity, because the majority ideas for deity are just plain wrong and frankly stupid.
@carlsonap16 Until someone can actually quantify what a deity truly is, I have no interest in exploring any of them. I've tried out several, and found that they're all the same lie with different dressings.
@alphaenemy well, for me, my definition of a deity is: a mind. my definition of a mind is: that which has emotions, knowledge, and will. will is having a control over an aspect of reality, and the dictionary says a god a being regarded as having control over a portion of reality. therefore, you and i are gods/minds, and so is every other being that is alive.
@carlsonap16 For me, that definition doesn't help much because we already have a word for "mind" and it's "mind". No need to inject an unnecessary abstraction for something that already works, especially since "mind" is enough of an abstraction as it is. And secondly, we know nothing of a mind without a physical brain. Brains are the only things we know that produce "minds".
@alphaenemy i actually think it simplifies the issue significantly. now all we need to discuss is whether we have will, or if our consciousness is an illusion. one can also that plants have minds, but plants technically have something similar to minds. the best argument from science would be to show that the atomic particles have minds because of how they act non-deterministically.
hmm. Mark professes to give the time accurately; John does not. He says "it was about the sixth hour," without affirming that this was exactly the time. That doesn't necessarily imply a contradiction. Mark affirms certainty, John gives an estimate. Additionally, is it wrong that one man would speak of the time when the process for an execution commenced; another, perhaps, of the very act of the execution and would both speak of it in general terms and say that a man was executed at such a time?
@EddTheBiker no not according to Bart. I don't base my conclusions on scholars, i base it on my own independent research. the evidence is overwhelming both by manuscript support as well as ancient historical verificaiton in the church father's writings of the two different manuscripts circulating. one says 6th hour another says the correct reading. the church father explicitly said that both versions circulated, and mentioned in passing that the ones that read 6t hour were inferior.
@carlsonap16 I don't believe your conclusions are accurate. Can you tell me what manuscripts and early church father's writings of which you consider evidence for the book of John being in error?
@psburningman You misunderstand. Basically, what the statement means is that the NT is verifiable as accurate/original in the percentage of 99.5. The other 0.5% is the text that is not currently verifiable as accurate and original. This conclusion is made through the use of a manuscript base of more that 24,000 with 5,686 in Greek.
I can't imagine why anyone would worship a God who condemns people to eternal torment with no chance for repentance or reform. Such a God seems only worthy of resistance, not worship.
@Devilot109 Because He is holy, righteous, and just breaking His law is a transgression and worthy of punishment, just as stealing or murder will result in punishment by a judge. Moreover, He is not only the Judge but also the one of whom we transgress against. Because He is infinite, the punishment must also be infinite. The punishment is a severe as the one of whom we offend. Yet, this same Judge also offers mercy and gives grace through Jesus Christ should you repent and believe.
there was some... thing, on discovery channel, about an experimenter trying to figure out what stresses crucifixion puts on the body. apparently, enough that it would be only a few hours before the person on the cross would have a heart attack, and probably die. when jesus(presuming his reality) died, you have to allow, using the much despised science, that it was likely mere hours after he was put on the cross.
Mark used Jewish time and John used Roman time. John mentioned that the preparation day was when Jesus was crucified. Preparation for the sabbath BTW. Next!
@j919or All the gospel writers use Roman time in their gospels.
"John mentioned that the preparation day was when Jesus was crucified. Preparation for the sabbath BTW."
You should pay attention to what your Bible says. John 19:14 (cited in the video), "Now it was the DAY OF PREPARATION FOR THE PASSOVER; it was about the sixth hour. And [Pilate] said to the Jews, 'Behold, your King!'" (emphasis mine).
@j919or That still seems like an issue to me. Reading the passages now doesn't seem to clear it up. thank you for trying though. It still seems that Jesus could only be crucified once and at one time. Why would John tell us what time it was to him when Jesus was crucified when we want to know what time Jesus himself was crucified. Further reading is needed.
Because John spoke to one audience and other gospels spoke to another audience. Different people understand things different. If you bear in mind who John was speaking to back then u have a better understanding of the meaning NOW.
Act smug and pompous now but those in the know realize you are a fool. I hope you are truly happy and "successful" in this life. How pathetic it would be to not be happy in this life and be condemned to boot. It would be hilarious if it wasn't so incredibly tragic. Have a happy eternity...oh, that's right. You won't.
@jblglw "You sir will die in your sins and be judged with justice and not mercy."
You've posted that about 10 times now, which officially makes you a one-trick pony. Since that's all you've got and you've posted it so many times and you can't seem to control yourself, I'll bid you good luck and so long. Have a nice life. It's the only one you've got.
I know it must bother you that I've exposed your inability to answer the question about what you said...
You exposed nothing except how illogical your thought process' are. What you do or think means absolutely nothing to me. I just want to tell you and the people who log onto this video that though you might think you are clever, the Bible says you are a fool and I could not agree more. You sir will die in your sins and be judged with justice and not mercy.
@jblglw You agree with the Bible on this note because the Bible convinced you to believe every word of it a long time ago. Of course you agree. You agree with everything it says. Even contradictory stuff, which is why you're so screwed up and angry.
ProfMTH is so smart and proud of himself, but he will be judged and die in his sins and receive justice not mercy. I'm glad I'm not in your shoes. If in God's judgment you have a valid saving faith in Jesus you are a success in life. If you don't you are a failure. You will be judged in your sins and receive justice not mercy. You, oh arrogant and proud ProfMTH. you ,sir, are a total failure and will be judged in your sins.
Your "aha. you can't answer my question!" act is juvenile.
If it wasn't so sad it would be amusing to see such an arrogant no-it-all fool mocking people who claim to have a saving faith in the messiah Jesus. You, sir, will die in your sins and be judged with God's justice, not his mercy. You, sir, will be judged especially harshly because you not only have heard, understand and reject the gospel message, but choose to mock those who do believe and try to convince the weak or younger christians not to believe.
@jblglw "Your 'aha. you can't answer my question!' act is juvenile."
I know it must bother you that I've exposed your inability to answer the question about what you said and, in the process, shown you don't know what you're talking about here, but there is need to waste your time and mine with irrelevant blathering about your fantasy about my being punished and "mocking" you. I haven't mocked you; rather, I've tried to engage you in discussion (one for which you're clearly not prepared).
@ProfMTH The irony how it takes non-Christians and x-Christians to school "real" dime-a-dozen Christians with the book they think they know the most about. There's so many like this, they must have you very busy. Luckily there are many non-Christians out there that also know the bible like the back of their hands - hence the reason why they are not Christian. Great stuff. As always, thanks for the laughs and keep them coming.
Perhaps the bible and other religious books are a test, and all the contradictions with themselves, science, common sense, each other, and historical record doesn't mean that they're fake, perhaps it's all a test by God to see who can use the powers of reasoning he gave us the best, and be skeptical of such obviously seemingly false and ridiculous claims!
Perhaps there really is a heaven, and only atheists can go!
That's at least a theistic claim that makes sense!
You, sir, are a baby. You will die in your sins and no matter how arrogant and pompous you act it wont change a thing. You will receive justice, not mercy,
@jblglw "You will receive justice, not mercy. Figure it out. Have a happy eternity........ or not."
As I suspected, you can't answer the question. Well, at least you got to that fairly quickly. But here's some free advice: next time you decide to mouth off, do a bit of thinking first lest you leave your interlocutor with the unfortunate impression that you haven't a clue what you're talking about and are just being a windbag. Good luck to you!
@jblglw "Is there some kind of point to your question?"
Ah, answering a question with a question. One of the primary indicators that a person lacks an answer to the question s/he has been asked. My point is to find out when you believe justice *is* consistent with mercy and when justice is *not* consistent with mercy. Are you able to answer? If not, please just cut to the chase by saying so rather than wasting your time and mine with loads of persiflage. OK? Thanks.
Is there some kind of point to your question? Are you looking for a "rule" about when they are consistent? Are we playing 10 questions? If you want to make a comment about my original post about you dying in your sins and receving justice not mercy then do it ,but I'm not looking for a "pen pal" or "online buddy" to chit chat with, and even if I were it wouldn't be with someone who mocks those who believe in Jesus. (continued)
@ProfMTH.... Duh?? A murderer before a judge begging for justice would be executed. That's justice. That same murderer receiving mercy would be forgiven and set free. Think about it.
You will die in your sins and receive justice, not mercy. Have a happy eternity.
@jblglw "Duh?? ... You will die in your sins and receive justice, not mercy."
So, is that a "yes" or a "no" in response to my question? I'll remind you what my question was. Are justice and mercy inconsistent with one another? Yes or no. Thanks.
@ProfMTH ...Question:Are justice and mercy inconsistent with one another? Answer: Justice and mercy are two, totally different concepts. Sometimes they are consistent, sometimes they are not. Most people would be able to understand the example I gave as being sufficient, but...
Put your faith in the bible! Who cares if there's mistakes, or contradictions. I mean if you ask two witnesses to a crime details about it, they'll probably get it wrong. And the bible was written so long ago, and even then, not by witnesses, but by people decades after the event.
You can't expect people that long after spread apart to get the bare facts straight. It's a story we're trying to tell here, you can't take is as the gospel biblical truth!
You have to believe in GOD by faith not by your merits or intelligence. You have defiantly opened my eyes to some discrepancies in the Bible but man wrote the Bible and through the years it has been distorted. However you should get the dvd The Exodus Revealed (search for the red sea crossing). There is a lot of physical evidence that cannot be disputed about the crossing of the Red Sea which is expressed in the book of Exodus. "Coral covered chariot wheel found on the floor of the red sea."
@tmoG3D So, I just want to be sure I'm understanding you. You're claiming that I "have to believe in GOD by faith not by merits or your intelligence" BUT you're pointing me to alleged "physical evidence [of] the crossing of the Red Sea" that you regard as beyond dispute. So, you're saying it must be faith alone BUT you're appealing to alleged physical evidence, is that correct?
@tmoG3D so the only way said chariot wheel could have gotten there is for the seas to have parted and someone actually drove the chariot accross? Sooooo, it must logically follow then that all those man made things I saw while scuba diving last year must have been put there by people when the ocean was dry at some point?????? OR maybe the damn thing is made of wood, and floated around until sinking where it was found. People don't even understand the MEANING of the word evidence or it's use!!
You should go look up the meaning of the fallacy. Your reponse has nothing to do with the merits of my or the other person's arguments, but rather all you talk about is me, borrowing ad hominems from your holy book to talk about my purportedly "hardened heart" and my purportedly being "blinded" by "the god of this age." If that's not "to the man," nothing is. As I said, if you ever have somthing not fallacious to say, let me know.
@LibertyLuvr1969 "...the fact is you are NOT dealing with an unbiased or reasonable person here. He has hardened his heart, and due to that, the god of this age has blinded his eyes so he is unable to see."
Thanks for the Christian ad hominem. If you ever have anything relevant to say that isn't fallacious, let me know.
I believe you have misinterpreted Mark 14. In Mark 14:12, the apostles begin to prepare the Last Supper, the day before crucifixion, on "...the first day of unleavened bread, when they killed the passover..." This will put the crucifixion on Nisan 16, or the second day of passover, not the first. I agree with your interpretation of John 19.
They're not supposed to correlate. Look at the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh). It works the same way.The way we percieve truth in the 21st century is different from the way truth was percieved in 0 C.E. Judea. Keep that in mind. Historical accuracy was not important back in the day, but it is now. So if your gonna take historical/geneological accuracy as a means to derive wheather or not the New Testament contains truth, then your clearly mislead. Take it from a Hebrew major.
@ProfMTH Very simple rebuttal: Read Matthew 27:62, Mark 15:42, Luke 23:54, and John 19:14 and you will see that each gospel clearly places the crucifixion on Friday the "day of preparation" the day before the Sabbath. All the synoptic gospels place him on the cross between noon and three. Mark's reference to 9am, "the third hour" is most likely referring to the beginning of the crucifixion process, you have to imagine it took some time to get through the process.
@mjc1024 True, both Mark and John place the crucifixion on the day before a Sabbath, as your references indicate. But, it is clear that Mark and John differ on what day of the month that Sabbath occurs. John 19 puts the crucifixion on the day before the feast of unleavened bread begins, and states that that Sabbath is also a high holy day. Mark puts the Last Supper on the "...first day of unleavened bread...," i.e. the first day of the passover, so two days difference: Nisan 14 vs. 16.
@mjc1024 "Mark's reference to 9am, "the third hour" is most likely referring to the beginning of the crucifixion process, you have to imagine it took some time to get through the process."
lol With all due respect, that is the lamest attempt at harmonization I've seen a believer offer. It has no basis in the text. If Mark were the only text we had, you wouldn't offer it precisely because it has no basis in the text. Just extremely silly. And you haven't even dealt with the whole thing.
@ProfMTH "And you haven't even dealt with the whole thing"
WHAT!! I gave you point blank references that show that each gospel records his crucifixion on Friday the "day of preparation" and point blank references that have Jesus crucified around noon. If you can't see that then you're being purposely obtuse.
@ProfMTH "Sigh" If you can't see the obvious, then i'll have to let you wallow in your ignorance. I am not a strict literalist so I have no problem with mistakes, but this is not one of them.
Not in the story of Jesus' execution as it is told in the fourth gospel. Jesus was brought to Pilate early in the morning, not in the middle of the night (John 18:28). You would do well to read the ENTIRE biblical story before you comment on it.
@PrinceWalter "In John 19:14-15 we do not read of a crucifixion, but of what Pilot "saith" and of what "they cried out". Therefore you have made a factual error."
In John 19:14, we're told it was about noon when Pilate had Jesus before him PRIOR to the crucifixion. In John 19:16, Jesus is sent off to be crucified. So, in John Jesus is crucified at some time after noon. By contrast, in Mark, Jesus is crucified at 9 AM. The only factual error is on the part of either author (perhaps both).
@PrinceWalter "LOGICALLY CONCLUDE that 'the sixth hour' was NOT midnight."
You need to learn to read the biblical story you're commenting on. John 18:28, "Then the Jewish leaders took Jesus from Caiaphas to the palace of the Roman governor. By now IT WAS EARLY MORNING" (emphasis mine). John 19:14-15 comes after the early morning. It couldn't have been midnight by the story's own terms. Got it now, genius?
@PrinceWalter So, despite being shown that the story in the fourth gospel has the Jewish religious authorities questioning Jesus through the night and then bringing Jesus to Pilate early in the morning, you wish to insist that Jesus could have been before Pilate for judgment at midnight. Well, I've learned that once a true believer renders him/herself impervious to facts, reason, & inconvenient statements in the Bible, there's very little chance of bringing him/her back to reality.
Sarah Jones, a pedestrian, was struck by a vehicle on 6/21/11 on a street-corner at 11:58pm. A good Samaritan, having witnessed the accident, took Sarah and put her in his car and speed off to the hospital. At 12:02am on 6/22/11, the car in which they were riding was struck by another vehicle and Sarah Jones died instantly.
You see, it is the same with the Gospel accounts. They all harmonize if you simply seek more information.
@egwpisteuw Please don't be moronic. What you're saying is that both statements are true, NOT that they're harmonious. Learn the difference. More importantly, this isn't what we're dealing with vis-a-vis discrepancies & contradictions between the synoptic gospels & the 4th gospel re when Jesus was crucified. He could not be killed both on the day before the 1st day of Passover AND on the 1st day of Passover; he could not be crucified at 9 a.m. AND standing before Pilate at noon. It's that simple
@ProfMTH I have noticed that you like to engage in casuistry, trying to make distinctions between words and terms when there are none. The Bible call this wrangling about words:
Remind them of these things, and solemnly charge them in the presence of God not to wrangle about words, which is useless and leads to the ruin of the hearers. 2 Tim 2:14
So, if you want to make progress, why not drop that nonsense?
@ProfMTH When you are dealing with four detailed independent eyewitness accounts, you are going to have differences that need to be harmonized. What I am saying to you is that you need to engage in scholarship, and consult the works of those who have undertaken the research. There are numerous Gospel Harmonies produced over the past two millenia, did you consult any of them?
@ProfMTH And the analogy I gave is perfect--this is what you have in the Gospels--accounts that tell the same event from differect time/space perspectives. If you take the time to think them through, and do the research and consult the works of those who have done the analysis already--you will find that all of the events in the the four Gospels harmonize, perfectly.
(con't) @egwpisteuw Jesus could not have been executed on the day before the 1st day of Passover and executed on the 1st day of Passover. These differences do not admit of harmonization. However, if you insist on closing your eyes to fact in favor of an article of faith (i.e., that the Bible is without discrepancies, errors, and contradictions) that, of course, is your right. Just don't expect to be taken seriously.
@egwpisteuw The attributions of authorship of the gospels are merely traditional. The earliest of the attributions was probably in the early 2nd century CE. So, please. The author of Mark says nothing about being either a "close friend" of a "convert of Peter's." He says nothing about having relied on Peter for information. BTW, was Peter an eyewitness of things that happened while he was asleep (see, e.g., Mark 14:35-37)? Was Peter an eyewitness of the trial of Jesus reported in Mark?
(con't) "Luke - Read carefully Luke 1:1-4 note the words "Eyewitnesses" "most surely" "perfect" and "certainty" (NASB)"
Among the many problems for the author of Luke is that he says Jesus was born both during the reign of Herod the Great who died in 4 BCE (1:5) and when Quirinius was governor of Syria (2:2), which didn't happen until 6 CE--approximately 10 years after Herod had died. So, whatever "eyewitnesses" the author of Luke consulted, perfection & certainty was not their hallmark.
The Gospels contain the eyewitness accounts, either by Apostles of Jesus Christ, hand picked by Him, or by those closely associated with the Apostles. This is why they come down to us---of all the accounts of the life of Christ--these are the ones universally accepted. They were all written in the 1st Century AD.
@egwpisteuw 'The Gospels contain the eyewitness accounts, either by Apostles of Jesus Christ, hand picked by Him, or by those closely associated with the Apostles."
Well, that's your belief. But the *fact* of the matter is we have no idea who wrote the gospels. Articles of faith often have little if anything to do with fact.
@ProfMTH ----->...the *fact* of the matter is we have no idea who wrote the gospels.
We certainly do. Authorship of the Gospels cannot LEGITIMATELY be disputed. It is only disputed by "unrighteous men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness" (Rom 1:18) because they want to do "what is right in their own eyes" (Judges 17:6; 21:25) rather than obey God.
You are "sitting in the seat of scoffers" Psalm 1:1. My friend, that is a dangerous place to be (read Psalm 1).
@egwpisteuw My, my the prof has a challenge. This is sooooooooooooooo cool. Let me know when you take him on in others videos. I don't think the Prof can speak in the original Greek as I have seen you do. This is so entertaining. Please continue to clean his clock. I am sure the prof loves this. If not I do enjoy it. BTW he is a nice guy but since he is a heretic it is okay to put him in his place.
@RepresentingTruth There is one thing in life of which I am certain. The Bible contains no errors. Any supposed difficulty or error can be resolved if one simply seeks additional information. What the Prof is doing is leading people astray, and no matter how nice a guy he is, this is very wrong--in fact, the Bible would categorize it as evil.
People have been trying to break the Bible for millenia--it is unbreakable just as our Lord Himself promised:
@ProfMTH Au contraire. I think you know that you are in way over your head with what you are doing. People have tried for millenia to break the scriptures and the scriptures ALWAYS end up breaking in them.
What then is this that is written:
‘THE STONE WHICH THE BUILDERS REJECTED, THIS BECAME THE CHIEF CORNER stone’?
“Everyone who falls on that stone will be broken to pieces; but on whomever it falls, it will scatter him like dust.”
Good for you. If only you were as interested in substance as you apparently are in what entertains you. Oh, well. Back to that third season of "Lost"--appropriately enough. :-)
@ProfMTH Well my son got me hooked. If you watch the first couple they are okay. However at about the sixth one is where one can get hooked. BTW the current exchanged is cool.
This video is silly. The three verses you cited do not conflict in any way. The events of the crucifixion have been 100% harmonized. Just type into Google "Harmony of the Crucifixion."
"You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God." Matt 22:29
@ProfMTH What about the numerous harmonies that exist? Centuries of scholarship. Aren't you a scholar? The first harmony of the Gospels was the Diatesseron by Tatian in the 2nd century. Did you fail to do your research?
@ProfMTH profmth you are a genius. i like the way you show the subject.. and this guy pentagrafafgani i think hes crazy.. dont mind about him ok.. keep posting more..
Then consider the Apocryphal books and the well-known fact that the Catholic Church has many 1st-4th century writings in their archives that they do not allow people to see. I'm not a linguist. I was a Jehovah's Witness many years ago and I suppose I still have some left over baggage. So I apologize for some of my unkind comments towards you. You've given me lots to think about, but I still like to debate, just for the sake of debating.
Also your saying Jesus was crucified at 9 am is also incorrect. The quoted scriptures say the "ninth hour", which is 3 PM, not 9 am. The Jews used a lunar calendar, your time reckoning is using a solar calendar with the assumption that the day began at sunrise. It didn't for the Jews, it began at sundown. Nice try though.
@drevildruid "So Jesus died on Wednesday afternoon...."
Even if that's what one believes--and there are plenty of Christians who believe that--the fundamental problem remains, i.e., whether Wednesday afternoon was the preparation day for the first day of Passover OR the daytime portion of the first day of Passover after the seder had been eaten the previous night.
"Also your saying Jesus was crucified at 9 am is also incorrect."
Mark has Jesus being crucified at the third hour...
(con't) @drevildruid ...(Mark 15:5), which is 9 AM. John 19:14 has Jesus still before Pilate at the 9th hour, which is 12 PM--3 hours *after* Mark had Jesus already nailed to a cross. You need to read your Bible.
@ProfMTH I made a slight error. Jesus was crucified (put on the cross) at the third hour ( 9 am), however (Wednesday) he didn't die until the ninth hour (3 PM-Wednesday) Six hours on the cross total. The difference is in the wording, when he was crucified (put on the cross) and when he died. A crucifixion is a slow painful death, not an instant one. So Mark is still correct, it's just our understanding of what a crucifixion is which is in error. My apologies for my mistake.
Well, it was a significant error for 2 reasons: 1st, it's one of the primary matters the video covers; 2nd, you accused me of being incorrect. In any case, you still don't seem to have grasped the problem. Mark has Jesus being crucified at 9:00 in the morning, while John doesn't have Jesus being crucified until some time after 12 noon (since Jesus is still before Pilate in John at noon, while in Mark he's already been on the cross for 3 hours by noon).
@ProfMTH servantsnews(dot)com/sn0211/john1914(dot)htm gives a valid explanation as to the discrepancy in the two times mentioned. It does seem likely that a scribal error occurred considering how many times the text has been translated. But I'm sure you'll dismiss this. You seem "hell-bent" on discrediting the Bible and ignoring evidence you don't like. So be it.
@drevildruid "It does seem likely that a scribal error occurred considering how many times the text has been translated."
Is there evidence of a scribal error? If so, what? If not, what, if anything, makes a scribal error "seem likely" other than your desire (and the desire of other inerrantists) to bolster your article of faith about the Bible being without error? Finally, is the allegedly omnipotent sovereign of the universe not able to preserve the translation of his word from error?
@ProfMTH I'm not an innerrantist. I'm not even a Christian. Just giving a plausible explanation as to why this might be. I don't believe the Bible is without error, just like any other collection of mythologies that was written by human hands it has the capacity to be full of errors. I just find it interesting and a good topic for debate. :)
@ProfMTH I did leave you a link two comments up from this one that gave a plausible explanation. i would consider also that there are so many different translations/versions of the Bible it can be very confusing as to what is correct (if such a word can even be used in connection with the Bible). The thing that bugs me greatly is that IF YHWH is the true god (or even a God at all) then why didn't he make sure intact copies of the Bible books survived the ages instead of copies of fragments?
This has boggled scholars for centuries, so don't feel bad if you made the same mistake. The Gospel writers were penning these events for the Jewish and Gentile Christians who would be familiar with the Jewish Holidays, not people 2,000 years removed and in another part of the world. Understanding the culture and times that people lived in is the key to unlocking any mystery. Funny video though. Thanks.
Actually this video is incorrect. The Feast of Unleavened Bread contains it's own sabbath day (the Great Passover) and then there was the one that occurred on the Saturday (the Sabbath is Saturday, not Sunday). So Jesus died on Wednesday afternoon (at 3PM) and was buried before the sun went down which brought about the next day (Thursday, The Great Passover, part of The Feast of Unleavened Bread) and then Friday was a regular workday. Then the regular sabbath on Saturday. Sunday resurrected.
I haven't found out why the dates are different, but I'll continue my research and let you know when I find out. I'm sure there is a perfectly logical reason, just as there is for the time.
a) the gospels were written some time after Jesus' death, and as you may be aware when you tell a story years later you may get the dates a little wrong. b) not sure they would have been able to get the right time anyways because the world was in darkness at the time. Hence they wouldn't know the exact time of his death.
@ProfMTH Actually no. At first glance it seems like there is, but I've done some research and there isn't any discrepancy. My guesses as to why they were different were wrong. Actually, the gospel of Mark was written using jewish time. By the time the gospel of John was written, the jewish method of time was no longer used, so he used the roman method of telling time. And therefore they have jesus dying at the same time.
@MySpaige "the gospel of Mark was written using jewish time"
Actually, the author of Mark used Roman time--see, e.g., Mk 6:48 (which refers to the 4th watch of the night; Romans divided night into "watches"). It's been fascinating to see some Christians claim that Mark used Jewish time & John used Roman time, while yet other Christians have claimed the opposite, i.e., Mark used Roman time & John used Jewish time. Odd how your god can't get you all on the same page about what happened here.
@ProfMTH Does it really matter who used what time? NO. The point is that both gospels have Jesus dying at the same time, thus not being a blunder. And of course people are going to have difference of opinion, we weren't there.
@MySpaige "Does it really matter who used what time?"
You seemed to believe it mattered a great deal. You even claimed to have researched it & discovered the Jewish-versus-Roman-time thing, which you offered as the way to eliminate the discrepancy between Mark & John. Now that you've been shown to be wrong, you say the whole time thing doesn't matter at all (despite your earlier saying it very much *did* matter) and that now "the point" is that both gospels say Jesus died. Quite odd.
@ProfMTH No that's not what I'm saying at all. So I'll try to explain myself a bit better. Firstly, your video was all about the time and death of Jeus, so of course that is what matters here. I did do some research about this and yes, Mark used jewish time/ John used roman time. I didn't say I was wrong, I said the point is the gospels have jesus dying at the same time, thus there is no time discrepency at all. Which as I've mentioned was what your video was about in the first place.
@MySpaige "your video was all about the time and death of Jeus, so of course that is what matters here"
So after you were shown to be wrong about the timekeeping in the gospels and you asked the rhetorical question "Does it really matter who used what time?" and that "the point" was that both accounts have Jesus dying, what you really meant to communicate was that "who used what time" really *does* matter, is that what you're saying now?
@ProfMTH No, that's not what I'm saying now or ever. I'll try to make it simple for you. Firstly, if you're going to quote me, whether directly or indirectly, you should use the WHOLE quote and not just part of it (otherwise it's not accurate) . What I've said twice already is the gospels "have Jesus dying at the SAME TIME". Note the key words are same and time (which you have not included in your indirect quoting of me). "But you were wrong". Well, saying that Christians aren't on the same page
@ProfMTH Regarding the time issue doesn't mean I was wrong. Who used what time is NOT the issue (and I'm not wrong there), the issue is the TIME JESUS DIED (notice the key words Jesus and died. And NOT who used what time). And as I've said, there is no discrepancy between the gosepls on the time of Jesus' death (which is the issue here).
@MySpaige It's not a matter of thinking what I want, but rather dealing with what the Bible actually says. That can be frustrating for believers--especially those who embrace biblical inerrantism or, at the very least, feel the need to defend the Bible's accuracy even in the face of obvious contradictions and discrepancies.
@ProfMTH Yes I agree, it is frustrating. I don't believe the Bible is inaccurate at all. At face value it may appear that there are contradictions and discrepancies in the Bible, but if you do a little research you find that it makes perfect sense (even if some things are harder to find out than others). Now this is the end of discussion!! Well, for now anyway! :)
"but if you do a little research you find that it makes perfect sense"
No. The more research you do, the more obvious it is that there are blatant contradictions. But I'll give you a chance to prove that 'it makes perfect sense' if you just research: how old does the Bible say Ahaziah was when he took the throne? Was he 42 (2 Chronicles 22:2) or was he 22 (2 Kings 8:26)? 'Research' that for me.
@taicleis Sure. Ahaziah's father Joram took the throne at the age of 32 (2 kings 8:17) and reigned for 8 years before he died. So Ahaziah was 22 when he took the throne. There are a few theores as to why 2 chronicles says he was 42, 1. it was translated from hebrew into english wrong (due to smudging etc), as the symbols for 22 and 42 are very similar. This wouldn't be a discrepancy as they would have been the same same originaly. Another theory is that 42 was not his literal age, but the sum
@taicleis the years that had passed from the founding of the dynasty of Omri, which would also make sense. Although most people believe the 1st theory, syriac and arabic versions both say 22. Some english translations (NASB, NIV, ESV) say 22 in both verses.
This has been flagged as spam show
I can hear it now...Christian apologist says, "You took those readings out of context. You didn't include the verses on either side of what you quoted. You didn't read the entire chapter. It was an error in translation that caused that. To understand the true message, you need to read the Bible in its native Hebrew and Greek languages. Come on atheists, is that all you've got?"
ChipArgyle 1 week ago
Comment removed
ChipArgyle 1 week ago
First of all the Gospel of Mark is an abomination and is not Scripture. secondly according to the early church and as supported in some of the early manuscripts, Gospel of John matches what Mark says. also you are misquoting mark, but it is irrelevant because it is not scripture and is abomination.
carlsonap16 2 months ago
@carlsonap16 Wait, now the Gospels are not Scripture? Who the hell comes up with this shit? Why can't you just say, "yeah, my religion's a complete fraud" and get over this fantastical crap? Children.
alphaenemy 1 month ago
@alphaenemy my religion is not Christianity.my religion is Essenism.furthermore, the Gospel of Mark is demonstrably a forgery created as a polemic against the Gospel of Peter.i have historical sources which prove it.the man who knew Mark and Peter described the Gospel Mark scribed for Peter, and it is nothing like what we have in the Bible. Clement of Alexandria testified to a secondary shorter Gospel replacing the original Gospel Mark scribed.the original scholars call "Secret Gospel of Mark."
carlsonap16 1 month ago
@carlsonap16 Essenism? Obscure and pointless to a fault. I couldn't manifest an argument worthy of your time, good sir. Keep fighting that fight.
alphaenemy 1 month ago
@alphaenemy just because somethign is a minority does not mean it is wrong. good job mr. fallacious.
carlsonap16 1 month ago
@carlsonap16 No, but it's a religion with a central belief in a deity, so that probably DOES mean it's wrong.
alphaenemy 1 month ago
@alphaenemy it all depends on how you define a deity. most traditional ideas about deities are indeed wrong because they are illogical. i would suggest ou consider the possibility of what a deity truly is and not be influenced by the major ideas on deity, because the majority ideas for deity are just plain wrong and frankly stupid.
carlsonap16 1 month ago
@carlsonap16 Until someone can actually quantify what a deity truly is, I have no interest in exploring any of them. I've tried out several, and found that they're all the same lie with different dressings.
alphaenemy 1 month ago
@alphaenemy well, for me, my definition of a deity is: a mind. my definition of a mind is: that which has emotions, knowledge, and will. will is having a control over an aspect of reality, and the dictionary says a god a being regarded as having control over a portion of reality. therefore, you and i are gods/minds, and so is every other being that is alive.
carlsonap16 1 month ago
@carlsonap16 For me, that definition doesn't help much because we already have a word for "mind" and it's "mind". No need to inject an unnecessary abstraction for something that already works, especially since "mind" is enough of an abstraction as it is. And secondly, we know nothing of a mind without a physical brain. Brains are the only things we know that produce "minds".
alphaenemy 1 month ago
@alphaenemy i actually think it simplifies the issue significantly. now all we need to discuss is whether we have will, or if our consciousness is an illusion. one can also that plants have minds, but plants technically have something similar to minds. the best argument from science would be to show that the atomic particles have minds because of how they act non-deterministically.
carlsonap16 1 month ago
hmm. Mark professes to give the time accurately; John does not. He says "it was about the sixth hour," without affirming that this was exactly the time. That doesn't necessarily imply a contradiction. Mark affirms certainty, John gives an estimate. Additionally, is it wrong that one man would speak of the time when the process for an execution commenced; another, perhaps, of the very act of the execution and would both speak of it in general terms and say that a man was executed at such a time?
EddTheBiker 2 months ago
@EddTheBiker John's is a manuscript error demonstrably so where some manuscripts have correct reading.
carlsonap16 1 month ago
@carlsonap16 What? According to who, Bart Ehrman? lol. The NT is 99.5% textually pure. I have no reason to doubt it's accuracy.
EddTheBiker 1 month ago
@EddTheBiker no not according to Bart. I don't base my conclusions on scholars, i base it on my own independent research. the evidence is overwhelming both by manuscript support as well as ancient historical verificaiton in the church father's writings of the two different manuscripts circulating. one says 6th hour another says the correct reading. the church father explicitly said that both versions circulated, and mentioned in passing that the ones that read 6t hour were inferior.
carlsonap16 1 month ago
@carlsonap16 I don't believe your conclusions are accurate. Can you tell me what manuscripts and early church father's writings of which you consider evidence for the book of John being in error?
EddTheBiker 1 month ago
@EddTheBiker wrote, "The NT is 99.5% textually pure. I have no reason to doubt it's accuracy. "
I thought God was 100% perfect and the bible is the inspired word of god.
how do you explain the imperfect .5% ?
psburningman 3 weeks ago
@psburningman You misunderstand. Basically, what the statement means is that the NT is verifiable as accurate/original in the percentage of 99.5. The other 0.5% is the text that is not currently verifiable as accurate and original. This conclusion is made through the use of a manuscript base of more that 24,000 with 5,686 in Greek.
EddTheBiker 3 weeks ago
I can't imagine why anyone would worship a God who condemns people to eternal torment with no chance for repentance or reform. Such a God seems only worthy of resistance, not worship.
Devilot109 2 months ago
@Devilot109 Because He is holy, righteous, and just breaking His law is a transgression and worthy of punishment, just as stealing or murder will result in punishment by a judge. Moreover, He is not only the Judge but also the one of whom we transgress against. Because He is infinite, the punishment must also be infinite. The punishment is a severe as the one of whom we offend. Yet, this same Judge also offers mercy and gives grace through Jesus Christ should you repent and believe.
EddTheBiker 1 month ago
@EddTheBiker wrote, "The punishment is a severe as the one of whom we offend. "
Sounds more like Saddam Hussien .
Hey! Maybe they're related? Both came from the same end of town...
i'm just sayin...
psburningman 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Devin82m, if you ever click the link that takes you here, choke on this:
"Jesus, like chuck norris, is magical, no logic applies. No science can match Jesus magic. That is the reason why I am an Atheist."
gr8vibes2 3 months ago
there was some... thing, on discovery channel, about an experimenter trying to figure out what stresses crucifixion puts on the body. apparently, enough that it would be only a few hours before the person on the cross would have a heart attack, and probably die. when jesus(presuming his reality) died, you have to allow, using the much despised science, that it was likely mere hours after he was put on the cross.
felderup 3 months ago
@felderup Jesus, like chuck norris, is magical, no logic applies. No science can match Jesus magic. That is the reason why I am an Atheist.
immunetocommonsense 3 months ago
Mark used Jewish time and John used Roman time. John mentioned that the preparation day was when Jesus was crucified. Preparation for the sabbath BTW. Next!
j919or 3 months ago
@j919or All the gospel writers use Roman time in their gospels.
"John mentioned that the preparation day was when Jesus was crucified. Preparation for the sabbath BTW."
You should pay attention to what your Bible says. John 19:14 (cited in the video), "Now it was the DAY OF PREPARATION FOR THE PASSOVER; it was about the sixth hour. And [Pilate] said to the Jews, 'Behold, your King!'" (emphasis mine).
ProfMTH 3 months ago
@j919or That still seems like an issue to me. Reading the passages now doesn't seem to clear it up. thank you for trying though. It still seems that Jesus could only be crucified once and at one time. Why would John tell us what time it was to him when Jesus was crucified when we want to know what time Jesus himself was crucified. Further reading is needed.
kingofthekit 1 month ago
@kingofthekit ""Why would John tell us ""
Because John spoke to one audience and other gospels spoke to another audience. Different people understand things different. If you bear in mind who John was speaking to back then u have a better understanding of the meaning NOW.
j919or 1 month ago
One of the best known bible quotes that I remember is, Judge not let ye be judged.
I always find it interesting how so many Christians selectively forget this verse in favor of judging people as sinful or evil.
greentiger332 3 months ago in playlist 'Brief Bible Blunders' Series
Act smug and pompous now but those in the know realize you are a fool. I hope you are truly happy and "successful" in this life. How pathetic it would be to not be happy in this life and be condemned to boot. It would be hilarious if it wasn't so incredibly tragic. Have a happy eternity...oh, that's right. You won't.
jblglw 4 months ago
@jblglw "You sir will die in your sins and be judged with justice and not mercy."
You've posted that about 10 times now, which officially makes you a one-trick pony. Since that's all you've got and you've posted it so many times and you can't seem to control yourself, I'll bid you good luck and so long. Have a nice life. It's the only one you've got.
ProfMTH 4 months ago
@jblglw "those in the know realize you are a fool."
You mean those who read their bible before passing judgment - that would be a contradiction.
"Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?"
- Matthew 7:3
gr8vibes2 3 months ago
@jblglw Jesus fucking Christ does the truth about your religion ever anger you!
alphaenemy 1 month ago
I know it must bother you that I've exposed your inability to answer the question about what you said...
You exposed nothing except how illogical your thought process' are. What you do or think means absolutely nothing to me. I just want to tell you and the people who log onto this video that though you might think you are clever, the Bible says you are a fool and I could not agree more. You sir will die in your sins and be judged with justice and not mercy.
jblglw 4 months ago
@jblglw You agree with the Bible on this note because the Bible convinced you to believe every word of it a long time ago. Of course you agree. You agree with everything it says. Even contradictory stuff, which is why you're so screwed up and angry.
alphaenemy 1 month ago
ProfMTH is so smart and proud of himself, but he will be judged and die in his sins and receive justice not mercy. I'm glad I'm not in your shoes. If in God's judgment you have a valid saving faith in Jesus you are a success in life. If you don't you are a failure. You will be judged in your sins and receive justice not mercy. You, oh arrogant and proud ProfMTH. you ,sir, are a total failure and will be judged in your sins.
Your "aha. you can't answer my question!" act is juvenile.
jblglw 4 months ago
If it wasn't so sad it would be amusing to see such an arrogant no-it-all fool mocking people who claim to have a saving faith in the messiah Jesus. You, sir, will die in your sins and be judged with God's justice, not his mercy. You, sir, will be judged especially harshly because you not only have heard, understand and reject the gospel message, but choose to mock those who do believe and try to convince the weak or younger christians not to believe.
jblglw 4 months ago
@jblglw "Your 'aha. you can't answer my question!' act is juvenile."
I know it must bother you that I've exposed your inability to answer the question about what you said and, in the process, shown you don't know what you're talking about here, but there is need to waste your time and mine with irrelevant blathering about your fantasy about my being punished and "mocking" you. I haven't mocked you; rather, I've tried to engage you in discussion (one for which you're clearly not prepared).
ProfMTH 4 months ago
@ProfMTH The irony how it takes non-Christians and x-Christians to school "real" dime-a-dozen Christians with the book they think they know the most about. There's so many like this, they must have you very busy. Luckily there are many non-Christians out there that also know the bible like the back of their hands - hence the reason why they are not Christian. Great stuff. As always, thanks for the laughs and keep them coming.
gr8vibes2 3 months ago
@jblglw
Perhaps the bible and other religious books are a test, and all the contradictions with themselves, science, common sense, each other, and historical record doesn't mean that they're fake, perhaps it's all a test by God to see who can use the powers of reasoning he gave us the best, and be skeptical of such obviously seemingly false and ridiculous claims!
Perhaps there really is a heaven, and only atheists can go!
That's at least a theistic claim that makes sense!
Ryakki 3 weeks ago
@jblglw I suppose that if your daughter one day was all pissy and told you to fuck off you'd kill her, right?
Yep, trying to convince EVERYONE that chrisianity is FULL OF SHIT. And people are listening !
psburningman 3 weeks ago
You, sir, are a baby. You will die in your sins and no matter how arrogant and pompous you act it wont change a thing. You will receive justice, not mercy,
jblglw 4 months ago
@jblglw You're funny, man. So full of anger.
alphaenemy 1 month ago
You will receive justice, not mercy. Figure it out. Have a happy eternity........ or not.
jblglw 4 months ago
@jblglw "You will receive justice, not mercy. Figure it out. Have a happy eternity........ or not."
As I suspected, you can't answer the question. Well, at least you got to that fairly quickly. But here's some free advice: next time you decide to mouth off, do a bit of thinking first lest you leave your interlocutor with the unfortunate impression that you haven't a clue what you're talking about and are just being a windbag. Good luck to you!
ProfMTH 4 months ago
@jblglw "Is there some kind of point to your question?"
Ah, answering a question with a question. One of the primary indicators that a person lacks an answer to the question s/he has been asked. My point is to find out when you believe justice *is* consistent with mercy and when justice is *not* consistent with mercy. Are you able to answer? If not, please just cut to the chase by saying so rather than wasting your time and mine with loads of persiflage. OK? Thanks.
ProfMTH 4 months ago
Is there some kind of point to your question? Are you looking for a "rule" about when they are consistent? Are we playing 10 questions? If you want to make a comment about my original post about you dying in your sins and receving justice not mercy then do it ,but I'm not looking for a "pen pal" or "online buddy" to chit chat with, and even if I were it wouldn't be with someone who mocks those who believe in Jesus. (continued)
jblglw 4 months ago
I believe you are right, ProfMTH. There are discrepancies in the Bible. I also believe you will die in your sins and receive "justice", not "mercy".
jblglw 4 months ago
@jblglw Justice and mercy are not consistent with one another?
ProfMTH 4 months ago
@ProfMTH.... Duh?? A murderer before a judge begging for justice would be executed. That's justice. That same murderer receiving mercy would be forgiven and set free. Think about it.
You will die in your sins and receive justice, not mercy. Have a happy eternity.
jblglw 4 months ago
@jblglw "Duh?? ... You will die in your sins and receive justice, not mercy."
So, is that a "yes" or a "no" in response to my question? I'll remind you what my question was. Are justice and mercy inconsistent with one another? Yes or no. Thanks.
ProfMTH 4 months ago
@ProfMTH ...Question:Are justice and mercy inconsistent with one another? Answer: Justice and mercy are two, totally different concepts. Sometimes they are consistent, sometimes they are not. Most people would be able to understand the example I gave as being sufficient, but...
jblglw 4 months ago
@jblglw " Sometimes they are consistent, sometimes they are not."
When are justice and mercy consistent with one another and when are they not?
ProfMTH 4 months ago
Put your faith in the bible! Who cares if there's mistakes, or contradictions. I mean if you ask two witnesses to a crime details about it, they'll probably get it wrong. And the bible was written so long ago, and even then, not by witnesses, but by people decades after the event.
You can't expect people that long after spread apart to get the bare facts straight. It's a story we're trying to tell here, you can't take is as the gospel biblical truth!
.... oh.... well shit
bersaba 4 months ago
You have to believe in GOD by faith not by your merits or intelligence. You have defiantly opened my eyes to some discrepancies in the Bible but man wrote the Bible and through the years it has been distorted. However you should get the dvd The Exodus Revealed (search for the red sea crossing). There is a lot of physical evidence that cannot be disputed about the crossing of the Red Sea which is expressed in the book of Exodus. "Coral covered chariot wheel found on the floor of the red sea."
tmoG3D 5 months ago
@tmoG3D So, I just want to be sure I'm understanding you. You're claiming that I "have to believe in GOD by faith not by merits or your intelligence" BUT you're pointing me to alleged "physical evidence [of] the crossing of the Red Sea" that you regard as beyond dispute. So, you're saying it must be faith alone BUT you're appealing to alleged physical evidence, is that correct?
ProfMTH 5 months ago
@ProfMTH LOL another great defense to another ridiculous attack from another confused BELIEVER of an imaginary friend.
HeavyDickSince93 4 months ago
@tmoG3D so the only way said chariot wheel could have gotten there is for the seas to have parted and someone actually drove the chariot accross? Sooooo, it must logically follow then that all those man made things I saw while scuba diving last year must have been put there by people when the ocean was dry at some point?????? OR maybe the damn thing is made of wood, and floated around until sinking where it was found. People don't even understand the MEANING of the word evidence or it's use!!
TonyZXT 4 months ago
@LibertyLuvr1969 "You've just reinforced my original point. Thank you!"
LOL! It's hard not to be amused by the cluelessness you've displayed. So, no, thank *you*.
ProfMTH 5 months ago
@LibertyLuvr1969 "Not ad hominem...."
You should go look up the meaning of the fallacy. Your reponse has nothing to do with the merits of my or the other person's arguments, but rather all you talk about is me, borrowing ad hominems from your holy book to talk about my purportedly "hardened heart" and my purportedly being "blinded" by "the god of this age." If that's not "to the man," nothing is. As I said, if you ever have somthing not fallacious to say, let me know.
ProfMTH 5 months ago
@LibertyLuvr1969 "...the fact is you are NOT dealing with an unbiased or reasonable person here. He has hardened his heart, and due to that, the god of this age has blinded his eyes so he is unable to see."
Thanks for the Christian ad hominem. If you ever have anything relevant to say that isn't fallacious, let me know.
ProfMTH 5 months ago
I believe you have misinterpreted Mark 14. In Mark 14:12, the apostles begin to prepare the Last Supper, the day before crucifixion, on "...the first day of unleavened bread, when they killed the passover..." This will put the crucifixion on Nisan 16, or the second day of passover, not the first. I agree with your interpretation of John 19.
alachabre 6 months ago
They're not supposed to correlate. Look at the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh). It works the same way.The way we percieve truth in the 21st century is different from the way truth was percieved in 0 C.E. Judea. Keep that in mind. Historical accuracy was not important back in the day, but it is now. So if your gonna take historical/geneological accuracy as a means to derive wheather or not the New Testament contains truth, then your clearly mislead. Take it from a Hebrew major.
aiv14 6 months ago
Comment removed
aiv14 6 months ago
Comment removed
aiv14 6 months ago
The fact that the gospels correlate takes my faith to new heights. Thanks for the video.
aiv14 6 months ago
@aiv14 What "fact that the gospels correlate"? They don't.
ProfMTH 6 months ago
@ProfMTH woops. I meant to put that they don't* correlate.
aiv14 6 months ago
@aiv14 Ah. And how does this take your faith "to new heights"?
ProfMTH 6 months ago
Comment removed
aiv14 6 months ago
@ProfMTH Very simple rebuttal: Read Matthew 27:62, Mark 15:42, Luke 23:54, and John 19:14 and you will see that each gospel clearly places the crucifixion on Friday the "day of preparation" the day before the Sabbath. All the synoptic gospels place him on the cross between noon and three. Mark's reference to 9am, "the third hour" is most likely referring to the beginning of the crucifixion process, you have to imagine it took some time to get through the process.
mjc1024 6 months ago
@mjc1024 True, both Mark and John place the crucifixion on the day before a Sabbath, as your references indicate. But, it is clear that Mark and John differ on what day of the month that Sabbath occurs. John 19 puts the crucifixion on the day before the feast of unleavened bread begins, and states that that Sabbath is also a high holy day. Mark puts the Last Supper on the "...first day of unleavened bread...," i.e. the first day of the passover, so two days difference: Nisan 14 vs. 16.
alachabre 6 months ago
@ProfMTH References for noon to 3 time frame : Matt 27:45, Mark 15:33, Luke 23;44. John 19:14
mjc1024 6 months ago
@mjc1024 "Mark's reference to 9am, "the third hour" is most likely referring to the beginning of the crucifixion process, you have to imagine it took some time to get through the process."
lol With all due respect, that is the lamest attempt at harmonization I've seen a believer offer. It has no basis in the text. If Mark were the only text we had, you wouldn't offer it precisely because it has no basis in the text. Just extremely silly. And you haven't even dealt with the whole thing.
ProfMTH 6 months ago
@ProfMTH "And you haven't even dealt with the whole thing"
WHAT!! I gave you point blank references that show that each gospel records his crucifixion on Friday the "day of preparation" and point blank references that have Jesus crucified around noon. If you can't see that then you're being purposely obtuse.
mjc1024 6 months ago
@mjc1024 "I gave you point blank references that show that each gospel records his crucifixion on Friday the "day of preparation""
Which are not "point blank" at all. Clearly, you haven't read your gospels very closely. Watch this: /watch?v=EQIx4wPrf7A
ProfMTH 6 months ago
@ProfMTH "Sigh" If you can't see the obvious, then i'll have to let you wallow in your ignorance. I am not a strict literalist so I have no problem with mistakes, but this is not one of them.
mjc1024 6 months ago
@mjc1024 "I am not a strict literalist so I have no problem with mistakes, but this is not one of them."
It *is* a contradiction and it's quite clear that you very much *do* have a problem with it.
ProfMTH 6 months ago
Example:
Acts 2:15 says it was the "third hour of the DAY".
Acts 23:23 says "third hour of the NIGHT".
Acts 10:3 says "about the ninth hour of the DAY".
We have a "third hour of the day" AND a "third hour of the night".
The "sixth hour" can be midnight.
PrinceWalter 7 months ago
@PrinceWalter "The "sixth hour" can be midnight."
Not in the story of Jesus' execution as it is told in the fourth gospel. Jesus was brought to Pilate early in the morning, not in the middle of the night (John 18:28). You would do well to read the ENTIRE biblical story before you comment on it.
ProfMTH 7 months ago
@ProfMTH
lol
PrinceWalter 7 months ago
@DRod3186
John didn't have to use the Roman measurement.
There were two 12-hour watches for the hebrews. The "sixth hour" could be noon or midnight.
PrinceWalter 7 months ago
@PrinceWalter (ie. by our reckoning. Sun up to sun down is more accurate, beginning a second 12-hour watch)
PrinceWalter 7 months ago
1. The trials: continued throughout the night. Matt 26:57-27:31 Mar 14:53-15:19 Luk 22:54-23:25 John 18:12-19:13
2. About the sixth hour Pilate said "Behold your King". John 19:14-15.
3. Led away to be crucified. Matt 27:31-34 Mar 15:20-23 Luk 23:26-31 Joh 19:16, 17
4. The dividing of the garments. Matt 27:35-37 Mark 15:24 Luk 23:34 Joh 19:23, 24
5. "It was the third hour, and they crucified Him" Mark 15:25, 26
CONCLUSION: Joh 19:14-15 precedes Mark 15:25, 26.
cont...
PrinceWalter 7 months ago
...cont.
LOGICALLY CONCLUDE that "the sixth hour" was NOT midnight.
PrinceWalter 7 months ago
@PrinceWalter Who said anything about the 6th hour being midnight?
ProfMTH 7 months ago
@ProfMTH
Nobody. Bit if John 19:14-15 occurs before Mark 15:25, 26, and if Mark 15:25, 26 is 9 AM, then it is possible that John 19:14-15 is midnight.
In John 19:14-15 we do not read of a crucifixion, but of what Pilot "saith" and of what "they cried out". Therefore you have made a factual error.
PrinceWalter 7 months ago
@PrinceWalter "In John 19:14-15 we do not read of a crucifixion, but of what Pilot "saith" and of what "they cried out". Therefore you have made a factual error."
In John 19:14, we're told it was about noon when Pilate had Jesus before him PRIOR to the crucifixion. In John 19:16, Jesus is sent off to be crucified. So, in John Jesus is crucified at some time after noon. By contrast, in Mark, Jesus is crucified at 9 AM. The only factual error is on the part of either author (perhaps both).
ProfMTH 7 months ago
@ProfMTH "Noon" does not appear in the text.
LOGICALLY CONCLUDE that "the sixth hour" was NOT midnight.
PrinceWalter 7 months ago
@PrinceWalter "LOGICALLY CONCLUDE that 'the sixth hour' was NOT midnight."
You need to learn to read the biblical story you're commenting on. John 18:28, "Then the Jewish leaders took Jesus from Caiaphas to the palace of the Roman governor. By now IT WAS EARLY MORNING" (emphasis mine). John 19:14-15 comes after the early morning. It couldn't have been midnight by the story's own terms. Got it now, genius?
ProfMTH 7 months ago
@ProfMTH
And so reads Mar 15:1 "And straightway in the MORNING..."
Compare:
Mar 1:35 And in the MORNING, rising up A GREAT WHILE BEFORE DAY...
Mar 16:2 And very EARLY IN THE MORNING the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre AT THE RISING OF THE SUN.
Joh 20:1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early (same as John 18:28), WHEN IT WAS YET DARK
Thus "morning" can be anytime before sunrise, while yet dark.
PrinceWalter 7 months ago
@PrinceWalter So, despite being shown that the story in the fourth gospel has the Jewish religious authorities questioning Jesus through the night and then bringing Jesus to Pilate early in the morning, you wish to insist that Jesus could have been before Pilate for judgment at midnight. Well, I've learned that once a true believer renders him/herself impervious to facts, reason, & inconvenient statements in the Bible, there's very little chance of bringing him/her back to reality.
ProfMTH 7 months ago
@ProfMTH
Non sequiturs.
PrinceWalter 7 months ago
from #2 how an omniscient god not know 1. one of his flunkies (satan) will disobey
a direct order? how an omniscient god not know what is going on, behind his back
that the "serpent" (the hebrew translates as Reptile not snake because it had legs)
conned eve to eat.....?
gyreenedoc 7 months ago
Answer this question. Are these two events in harmony?:
Sarah Jones, a pedestrian, was struck by a vehicle on 6/21/11 on a street-corner, and died.
Sarah Jones, died on 6/22/11 when the vehicle in which she was riding, struck another vehicle.
It is the same Sarah Jones.
egwpisteuw 7 months ago
@egwpisteuw As presented, no, they're not in harmony.
ProfMTH 7 months ago
@ProfMTH Ah, but they are in perfect harmony:
Sarah Jones, a pedestrian, was struck by a vehicle on 6/21/11 on a street-corner at 11:58pm. A good Samaritan, having witnessed the accident, took Sarah and put her in his car and speed off to the hospital. At 12:02am on 6/22/11, the car in which they were riding was struck by another vehicle and Sarah Jones died instantly.
You see, it is the same with the Gospel accounts. They all harmonize if you simply seek more information.
egwpisteuw 7 months ago
@egwpisteuw Please don't be moronic. What you're saying is that both statements are true, NOT that they're harmonious. Learn the difference. More importantly, this isn't what we're dealing with vis-a-vis discrepancies & contradictions between the synoptic gospels & the 4th gospel re when Jesus was crucified. He could not be killed both on the day before the 1st day of Passover AND on the 1st day of Passover; he could not be crucified at 9 a.m. AND standing before Pilate at noon. It's that simple
ProfMTH 7 months ago
@ProfMTH I have noticed that you like to engage in casuistry, trying to make distinctions between words and terms when there are none. The Bible call this wrangling about words:
Remind them of these things, and solemnly charge them in the presence of God not to wrangle about words, which is useless and leads to the ruin of the hearers. 2 Tim 2:14
So, if you want to make progress, why not drop that nonsense?
egwpisteuw 7 months ago
@ProfMTH When you are dealing with four detailed independent eyewitness accounts, you are going to have differences that need to be harmonized. What I am saying to you is that you need to engage in scholarship, and consult the works of those who have undertaken the research. There are numerous Gospel Harmonies produced over the past two millenia, did you consult any of them?
egwpisteuw 7 months ago
@ProfMTH And the analogy I gave is perfect--this is what you have in the Gospels--accounts that tell the same event from differect time/space perspectives. If you take the time to think them through, and do the research and consult the works of those who have done the analysis already--you will find that all of the events in the the four Gospels harmonize, perfectly.
egwpisteuw 7 months ago
@egwpisteuw "When you are dealing with four detailed independent eyewitness accounts...."
Which, of course, in the case of the gospels we are *not* dealing with.
" What I am saying to you is that you need to engage in scholarship, and consult the works of those who have undertaken the research."
I have.
"accounts that tell the same event from differect time/space perspectives"
Once again, Jesus could not have been nailed to a cross at 9 a.m. and standing before Pilate at noon.
ProfMTH 7 months ago
(con't) @egwpisteuw Jesus could not have been executed on the day before the 1st day of Passover and executed on the 1st day of Passover. These differences do not admit of harmonization. However, if you insist on closing your eyes to fact in favor of an article of faith (i.e., that the Bible is without discrepancies, errors, and contradictions) that, of course, is your right. Just don't expect to be taken seriously.
ProfMTH 7 months ago
@ProfMTH ----->When you are dealing with four detailed independent eyewitness accounts...."
------>Which, of course, in the case of the gospels we are *not* dealing with.
Where do you get your information? And PLEASE do not tell me Bart Error-man (Ehrman):
Matthew - Apostle of Jesus
Mark - Close friend and (probably) convert of Peter, Apostle of Jesus
John - Apostle of Jesus
Luke - Read carefully Luke 1:1-4 note the words "Eyewitnesses" "most surely" "perfect" and "certainty" (NASB)
egwpisteuw 7 months ago
@egwpisteuw The attributions of authorship of the gospels are merely traditional. The earliest of the attributions was probably in the early 2nd century CE. So, please. The author of Mark says nothing about being either a "close friend" of a "convert of Peter's." He says nothing about having relied on Peter for information. BTW, was Peter an eyewitness of things that happened while he was asleep (see, e.g., Mark 14:35-37)? Was Peter an eyewitness of the trial of Jesus reported in Mark?
ProfMTH 7 months ago
(con't) "Luke - Read carefully Luke 1:1-4 note the words "Eyewitnesses" "most surely" "perfect" and "certainty" (NASB)"
Among the many problems for the author of Luke is that he says Jesus was born both during the reign of Herod the Great who died in 4 BCE (1:5) and when Quirinius was governor of Syria (2:2), which didn't happen until 6 CE--approximately 10 years after Herod had died. So, whatever "eyewitnesses" the author of Luke consulted, perfection & certainty was not their hallmark.
ProfMTH 7 months ago
@ProfMTH ----->The attributions of authorship...
The Gospels contain the eyewitness accounts, either by Apostles of Jesus Christ, hand picked by Him, or by those closely associated with the Apostles. This is why they come down to us---of all the accounts of the life of Christ--these are the ones universally accepted. They were all written in the 1st Century AD.
egwpisteuw 7 months ago
@egwpisteuw 'The Gospels contain the eyewitness accounts, either by Apostles of Jesus Christ, hand picked by Him, or by those closely associated with the Apostles."
Well, that's your belief. But the *fact* of the matter is we have no idea who wrote the gospels. Articles of faith often have little if anything to do with fact.
ProfMTH 7 months ago
@ProfMTH ----->...the *fact* of the matter is we have no idea who wrote the gospels.
We certainly do. Authorship of the Gospels cannot LEGITIMATELY be disputed. It is only disputed by "unrighteous men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness" (Rom 1:18) because they want to do "what is right in their own eyes" (Judges 17:6; 21:25) rather than obey God.
You are "sitting in the seat of scoffers" Psalm 1:1. My friend, that is a dangerous place to be (read Psalm 1).
egwpisteuw 7 months ago
@egwpisteuw "Authorship of the Gospels cannot LEGITIMATELY be disputed."
Not only can it, but it has been. You're clinging to nothing more than traditional attributions.
ProfMTH 7 months ago
@egwpisteuw My, my the prof has a challenge. This is sooooooooooooooo cool. Let me know when you take him on in others videos. I don't think the Prof can speak in the original Greek as I have seen you do. This is so entertaining. Please continue to clean his clock. I am sure the prof loves this. If not I do enjoy it. BTW he is a nice guy but since he is a heretic it is okay to put him in his place.
RepresentingTruth 7 months ago in playlist 'Brief Bible Blunders' Series
@RepresentingTruth There is one thing in life of which I am certain. The Bible contains no errors. Any supposed difficulty or error can be resolved if one simply seeks additional information. What the Prof is doing is leading people astray, and no matter how nice a guy he is, this is very wrong--in fact, the Bible would categorize it as evil.
People have been trying to break the Bible for millenia--it is unbreakable just as our Lord Himself promised:
The scripture cannot be broken John 10:35
egwpisteuw 7 months ago
@egwpisteuw "The Bible contains no errors."
An article of faith that not only has no basis in reality but actually flies directly in the face of reality.
ProfMTH 7 months ago
@ProfMTH Au contraire. I think you know that you are in way over your head with what you are doing. People have tried for millenia to break the scriptures and the scriptures ALWAYS end up breaking in them.
What then is this that is written:
‘THE STONE WHICH THE BUILDERS REJECTED, THIS BECAME THE CHIEF CORNER stone’?
“Everyone who falls on that stone will be broken to pieces; but on whomever it falls, it will scatter him like dust.”
Luke 20:17-18
egwpisteuw 7 months ago
@RepresentingTruth "My, my the prof has a challenge."
From Egwpisteuw? 'Challenge' isn't the word that comes to mind, but perhaps you're being charitable, which is always nice.
ProfMTH 7 months ago
@ProfMTH I just think this is entertaining. However, I will now go back to the TV series LOST. I am in the third season. Cool stuff.
RepresentingTruth 7 months ago
@RepresentingTruth "I just think this is entertaining."
Good for you. If only you were as interested in substance as you apparently are in what entertains you. Oh, well. Back to that third season of "Lost"--appropriately enough. :-)
ProfMTH 7 months ago
@ProfMTH BTW did you see LOST. It does take up your time but I think well worth it.
RepresentingTruth 7 months ago
@RepresentingTruth No, the series never interested me.
ProfMTH 7 months ago
@ProfMTH Well my son got me hooked. If you watch the first couple they are okay. However at about the sixth one is where one can get hooked. BTW the current exchanged is cool.
RepresentingTruth 7 months ago
This video is silly. The three verses you cited do not conflict in any way. The events of the crucifixion have been 100% harmonized. Just type into Google "Harmony of the Crucifixion."
"You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God." Matt 22:29
egwpisteuw 7 months ago
@egwpisteuw "The events of the crucifixion have been 100% harmonized."
Nonsense.
ProfMTH 7 months ago
@ProfMTH What about the numerous harmonies that exist? Centuries of scholarship. Aren't you a scholar? The first harmony of the Gospels was the Diatesseron by Tatian in the 2nd century. Did you fail to do your research?
egwpisteuw 7 months ago
Great series, ProfMTH
hec231 7 months ago
@hec231 Thanks very much.
ProfMTH 7 months ago
u look the quran to answer u question
pentagrafafgani 7 months ago in playlist Religion Comedy
@pentagrafafgani Why would I look to the Quran to resolve a conflict between the Gospels of Mark and John?
ProfMTH 7 months ago
@ProfMTH profmth you are a genius. i like the way you show the subject.. and this guy pentagrafafgani i think hes crazy.. dont mind about him ok.. keep posting more..
princerexor 7 months ago
Then consider the Apocryphal books and the well-known fact that the Catholic Church has many 1st-4th century writings in their archives that they do not allow people to see. I'm not a linguist. I was a Jehovah's Witness many years ago and I suppose I still have some left over baggage. So I apologize for some of my unkind comments towards you. You've given me lots to think about, but I still like to debate, just for the sake of debating.
drevildruid 8 months ago
@drevildruid look into the "Exgileadmissionaries" channel he helped me throw away all my JW baggage..
buktomsin 7 months ago in playlist 'Brief Bible Blunders' Series
Also your saying Jesus was crucified at 9 am is also incorrect. The quoted scriptures say the "ninth hour", which is 3 PM, not 9 am. The Jews used a lunar calendar, your time reckoning is using a solar calendar with the assumption that the day began at sunrise. It didn't for the Jews, it began at sundown. Nice try though.
drevildruid 8 months ago
@drevildruid "So Jesus died on Wednesday afternoon...."
Even if that's what one believes--and there are plenty of Christians who believe that--the fundamental problem remains, i.e., whether Wednesday afternoon was the preparation day for the first day of Passover OR the daytime portion of the first day of Passover after the seder had been eaten the previous night.
"Also your saying Jesus was crucified at 9 am is also incorrect."
Mark has Jesus being crucified at the third hour...
ProfMTH 8 months ago
(con't) @drevildruid ...(Mark 15:5), which is 9 AM. John 19:14 has Jesus still before Pilate at the 9th hour, which is 12 PM--3 hours *after* Mark had Jesus already nailed to a cross. You need to read your Bible.
ProfMTH 8 months ago
@ProfMTH I made a slight error. Jesus was crucified (put on the cross) at the third hour ( 9 am), however (Wednesday) he didn't die until the ninth hour (3 PM-Wednesday) Six hours on the cross total. The difference is in the wording, when he was crucified (put on the cross) and when he died. A crucifixion is a slow painful death, not an instant one. So Mark is still correct, it's just our understanding of what a crucifixion is which is in error. My apologies for my mistake.
drevildruid 8 months ago
@drevildruid "I made a slight error."
Well, it was a significant error for 2 reasons: 1st, it's one of the primary matters the video covers; 2nd, you accused me of being incorrect. In any case, you still don't seem to have grasped the problem. Mark has Jesus being crucified at 9:00 in the morning, while John doesn't have Jesus being crucified until some time after 12 noon (since Jesus is still before Pilate in John at noon, while in Mark he's already been on the cross for 3 hours by noon).
ProfMTH 8 months ago
@ProfMTH servantsnews(dot)com/sn0211/john1914(dot)htm gives a valid explanation as to the discrepancy in the two times mentioned. It does seem likely that a scribal error occurred considering how many times the text has been translated. But I'm sure you'll dismiss this. You seem "hell-bent" on discrediting the Bible and ignoring evidence you don't like. So be it.
drevildruid 8 months ago
@drevildruid "It does seem likely that a scribal error occurred considering how many times the text has been translated."
Is there evidence of a scribal error? If so, what? If not, what, if anything, makes a scribal error "seem likely" other than your desire (and the desire of other inerrantists) to bolster your article of faith about the Bible being without error? Finally, is the allegedly omnipotent sovereign of the universe not able to preserve the translation of his word from error?
ProfMTH 8 months ago
(con't) @drevildruid One more thing. If it is a scribal error, which one is the correct one, Mark or John? And how can we know?
ProfMTH 8 months ago
@ProfMTH I'm not an innerrantist. I'm not even a Christian. Just giving a plausible explanation as to why this might be. I don't believe the Bible is without error, just like any other collection of mythologies that was written by human hands it has the capacity to be full of errors. I just find it interesting and a good topic for debate. :)
drevildruid 8 months ago
@drevildruid "I'm not an innerrantist. I'm not even a Christian. Just giving a plausible explanation as to why this might be."
Fine. I'll ask again. Are you aware of any evidence of a scribal error?
"I just find it interesting and a good topic for debate. :)"
Terrific. So do I. But when debating, one wants to be sure that one is not just tossing out claims that have no basis. :-)
ProfMTH 8 months ago
@ProfMTH I did leave you a link two comments up from this one that gave a plausible explanation. i would consider also that there are so many different translations/versions of the Bible it can be very confusing as to what is correct (if such a word can even be used in connection with the Bible). The thing that bugs me greatly is that IF YHWH is the true god (or even a God at all) then why didn't he make sure intact copies of the Bible books survived the ages instead of copies of fragments?
drevildruid 8 months ago
This has boggled scholars for centuries, so don't feel bad if you made the same mistake. The Gospel writers were penning these events for the Jewish and Gentile Christians who would be familiar with the Jewish Holidays, not people 2,000 years removed and in another part of the world. Understanding the culture and times that people lived in is the key to unlocking any mystery. Funny video though. Thanks.
drevildruid 8 months ago
Actually this video is incorrect. The Feast of Unleavened Bread contains it's own sabbath day (the Great Passover) and then there was the one that occurred on the Saturday (the Sabbath is Saturday, not Sunday). So Jesus died on Wednesday afternoon (at 3PM) and was buried before the sun went down which brought about the next day (Thursday, The Great Passover, part of The Feast of Unleavened Bread) and then Friday was a regular workday. Then the regular sabbath on Saturday. Sunday resurrected.
drevildruid 8 months ago
My my, "little" atheist: google "Last supper one day earlier" and you will find an answer for your feeble mind.
aggienostic 8 months ago
@aggienostic Don't refer me to Google. What's the "answer"?
ProfMTH 8 months ago
I haven't found out why the dates are different, but I'll continue my research and let you know when I find out. I'm sure there is a perfectly logical reason, just as there is for the time.
MySpaige 9 months ago
That guy holding up the bible in the beginning is really cute.
caramonspace 9 months ago
a) the gospels were written some time after Jesus' death, and as you may be aware when you tell a story years later you may get the dates a little wrong. b) not sure they would have been able to get the right time anyways because the world was in darkness at the time. Hence they wouldn't know the exact time of his death.
MySpaige 9 months ago
@MySpaige So you agree that there is a discrepancy here, correct?
ProfMTH 9 months ago
@ProfMTH Actually no. At first glance it seems like there is, but I've done some research and there isn't any discrepancy. My guesses as to why they were different were wrong. Actually, the gospel of Mark was written using jewish time. By the time the gospel of John was written, the jewish method of time was no longer used, so he used the roman method of telling time. And therefore they have jesus dying at the same time.
MySpaige 9 months ago
@MySpaige "the gospel of Mark was written using jewish time"
Actually, the author of Mark used Roman time--see, e.g., Mk 6:48 (which refers to the 4th watch of the night; Romans divided night into "watches"). It's been fascinating to see some Christians claim that Mark used Jewish time & John used Roman time, while yet other Christians have claimed the opposite, i.e., Mark used Roman time & John used Jewish time. Odd how your god can't get you all on the same page about what happened here.
ProfMTH 9 months ago
@ProfMTH Does it really matter who used what time? NO. The point is that both gospels have Jesus dying at the same time, thus not being a blunder. And of course people are going to have difference of opinion, we weren't there.
MySpaige 9 months ago
@MySpaige "Does it really matter who used what time?"
You seemed to believe it mattered a great deal. You even claimed to have researched it & discovered the Jewish-versus-Roman-time thing, which you offered as the way to eliminate the discrepancy between Mark & John. Now that you've been shown to be wrong, you say the whole time thing doesn't matter at all (despite your earlier saying it very much *did* matter) and that now "the point" is that both gospels say Jesus died. Quite odd.
ProfMTH 9 months ago
@ProfMTH No that's not what I'm saying at all. So I'll try to explain myself a bit better. Firstly, your video was all about the time and death of Jeus, so of course that is what matters here. I did do some research about this and yes, Mark used jewish time/ John used roman time. I didn't say I was wrong, I said the point is the gospels have jesus dying at the same time, thus there is no time discrepency at all. Which as I've mentioned was what your video was about in the first place.
MySpaige 9 months ago
@MySpaige "your video was all about the time and death of Jeus, so of course that is what matters here"
So after you were shown to be wrong about the timekeeping in the gospels and you asked the rhetorical question "Does it really matter who used what time?" and that "the point" was that both accounts have Jesus dying, what you really meant to communicate was that "who used what time" really *does* matter, is that what you're saying now?
"I didn't say I was wrong."
But you were wrong.
ProfMTH 9 months ago
@ProfMTH No, that's not what I'm saying now or ever. I'll try to make it simple for you. Firstly, if you're going to quote me, whether directly or indirectly, you should use the WHOLE quote and not just part of it (otherwise it's not accurate) . What I've said twice already is the gospels "have Jesus dying at the SAME TIME". Note the key words are same and time (which you have not included in your indirect quoting of me). "But you were wrong". Well, saying that Christians aren't on the same page
MySpaige 9 months ago
@ProfMTH Regarding the time issue doesn't mean I was wrong. Who used what time is NOT the issue (and I'm not wrong there), the issue is the TIME JESUS DIED (notice the key words Jesus and died. And NOT who used what time). And as I've said, there is no discrepancy between the gosepls on the time of Jesus' death (which is the issue here).
MySpaige 9 months ago
@MySpaige " What I've said twice already is the gospels "have Jesus dying at the SAME TIME.""
And you may say that a million times and you'll be as wrong as you were the first time you asserted it.
"Well, saying that Christians aren't on the same page regarding the time issue doesn't mean I was wrong."
That's not why you're wrong. Never said it was.
ProfMTH 9 months ago
@ProfMTH Ok, well, think what you want. End of discussion.
MySpaige 9 months ago
@MySpaige It's not a matter of thinking what I want, but rather dealing with what the Bible actually says. That can be frustrating for believers--especially those who embrace biblical inerrantism or, at the very least, feel the need to defend the Bible's accuracy even in the face of obvious contradictions and discrepancies.
ProfMTH 9 months ago
@ProfMTH Yes I agree, it is frustrating. I don't believe the Bible is inaccurate at all. At face value it may appear that there are contradictions and discrepancies in the Bible, but if you do a little research you find that it makes perfect sense (even if some things are harder to find out than others). Now this is the end of discussion!! Well, for now anyway! :)
MySpaige 9 months ago
@MySpaige
"but if you do a little research you find that it makes perfect sense"
No. The more research you do, the more obvious it is that there are blatant contradictions. But I'll give you a chance to prove that 'it makes perfect sense' if you just research: how old does the Bible say Ahaziah was when he took the throne? Was he 42 (2 Chronicles 22:2) or was he 22 (2 Kings 8:26)? 'Research' that for me.
taicleis 9 months ago
@taicleis Sure. Ahaziah's father Joram took the throne at the age of 32 (2 kings 8:17) and reigned for 8 years before he died. So Ahaziah was 22 when he took the throne. There are a few theores as to why 2 chronicles says he was 42, 1. it was translated from hebrew into english wrong (due to smudging etc), as the symbols for 22 and 42 are very similar. This wouldn't be a discrepancy as they would have been the same same originaly. Another theory is that 42 was not his literal age, but the sum
MySpaige 9 months ago
@taicleis the years that had passed from the founding of the dynasty of Omri, which would also make sense. Although most people believe the 1st theory, syriac and arabic versions both say 22. Some english translations (NASB, NIV, ESV) say 22 in both verses.
MySpaige 9 months ago
@taicleis Sorry I had meant to say the sum of the years. And I meant to take out the word although.
MySpaige 9 months ago