How are the Authors of the Gospels Like Middle School Girls?

[ILovetheVanguard]

Luke was a doctor, who was a hater before he was a fanboy

[Athexistentialist]

@ILovetheVanguard I'm not sure I understand your point?

[ILovetheVanguard]

@Athexistentialist He's credible to an extent, you don't give as much credit as you should

[Athexistentialist]

@ILovetheVanguard Ah I see. Can you provide me with a source of your information? That is, can you please prove to me that Luke was a doctor? And if you can, can you then proceed to explain to me how "doctor" = "credible"?

[Athexistentialist]

@Athexistentialist It's not like there haven't been corrupt doctors. For example: Consider all the women who go to Mexico to have cheap plastic surgeries and die, or end up with a number of other undesirable complications.

[ILovetheVanguard]

he said both, there is a reason why there is 4 gospels, as far as the forsaking part, those words are prophesied in i believe Isaiah... anyway, God the Father did forsake Jesus, he sent him to die ya know?

[Athexistentialist]

@lifeofanIBkid Oh and by the way, since these accounts are linked on YouTube, it doesn't even count visits EITHER account to be a view. Don't believe me? Google it.

If you're going to be condescending, and you're going to pick out little things instead of actually addressing my content, like this, and when you incorrectly thought I said "confidence" twice, at LEAST try and be right.

[Athexistentialist]

@lifeofanIBkid Haha, naw. I was just trying to get people talking. I don't think that will be necessary any more though. Furthermore, I've only gone to the videos from my other account ///once/// per video, to post ///one/// comment. But as I said, I don't plan to anymore. Do you think you can manage to actually address the content of my videos? You haven't manage that yet, to comment with rebuttals. Instead, you're attacking little things, because I'm making you uncomfortable. Yes?

[BrianDPederson]

Haha, 'tis funny, 'tis very funny indeed. Although I would like to point out that it was after Jesus said, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" that he said it is finished. If you read down through the next few verses in Matthew after his outburst, then after that comes the wine and his next saying, I think you missed that. The rest of your speech was great though.

[BrianDPederson]

So basically Jesus said both, he just said the forsaken one first, according to Matthew.

[Athexistentialist]

@BrianDPederson As I said, the other versions don't specify and specific words following the forsaken part. I believe this still supports my argument. That is, we don't know, no one knows. As I've said, I think the discrepancies are enough to prevent me from wanting to live my life by it. But of course, that's just me.

[BrianDPederson]

@Athexistentialist Meh, the specification as to what he says comes from John 19:30, the Bible makes that part very clear. You have brought up some good points, but I don't believe this one is a very valid argument at all. And as far as Mark and Luke go, they weren't apostles -like you said- but they hung around for Jesus' entire ministry. Paul even called Luke "The beloved physician." This probably won't damage the point you tried to make, just something to think about.

[Athexistentialist]

@BrianDPederson Part 1: "According to Irenaeus, Papias of Hierapolis, writing in the early 2nd century, reported that this gospel was by John Mark,[7] the companion of Saint Peter in Rome, who "had one purpose only – to leave out nothing that he had heard, and to make no misstatement about it."[13] Most modern scholars believe that the gospel was written in Syria by an unknown Christian around AD 70, using various sources" - Wikipedia

[Athexistentialist]

@BrianDPederson Part 2: There's two things I want to focus on in this excerpt.

1: The part by Papias of Hierapolis, who talked about Mark's intention: "to leave out nothing that he had heard." Just in that statement, I see flaws. If he was really trying to include everything, not that he knew, but that he /heard/, how can the text be credible? Sure, it may have some parts that are right, but how do we know which is true and which is false? We don't. Nor will we ever be able to know. (I think)

[Athexistentialist]

@BrianDPederson Part 3:

2: "most modern scholars believe that the gospel was written in Syria by an unknown Christian around 70 AD" - So seventy years after Jesus' adventures, and yes, his last words, someone finally goes about to write it down. In my opinion, a near century could have very easily (and probably) changed the oral traditions of Jesus-related stories, so I'm sure details were lost or changed.

Thus, I do not believe the Gospel of Mark is credible, nor is the rest of the Bible.

[Athexistentialist]

@BrianDPederson Part 4;

And I know, I changed topics a bit here, but I thought I'd use Mark as an example. In my research, I've found similar stories for the origins of many other stories in the Bible. Thus, I do not think it has sufficient credibility to control a person's life.

[BrianDPederson]

@Athexistentialist That's a very good argument, the only thing I'd like to point out is that Christians have a fix-everything patch as to the authors of the Bible, 2 Timothy 3:16-17. Because the Bible was inspired by God, it doesn't matter who the author was. Thus, when talking to a Christian, every attack on their authors goes in one ear and out the other, because all 40 of them have one greater (and perfect) author behind them, God.

[Athexistentialist]

@BrianDPederson I suppose if you make believe that assumption, you won't ever think you can lose, but, of course, I can't agree. Furthermore, I personally believe that ignoring any dissenting opinion and simply propping it up with the classic, "inspired by god" logic, is a discredit to oneself as an intellectual. It's excessive reassurance in my opinion. Like a super clingy girlfriend who can't handle it when their boyfriend doesn't talk to them constantly, Christians were careful to cover...

[Athexistentialist]

@BrianDPederson ...every base. They don't want to even acknowledge the existence of another possibility, and while this is an understandable phobia, it's very limiting I think

[BrianDPederson]

@Athexistentialist Well, that is the Christian argument anyway, and it works. To be honest, I have found the entire Christian religion to be very self-sufficient. If you believe what the Bible says, and if you're smart about it (which some -not a lot, but some- Christians are), then it is almost, if not completely, impossible to disprove. On the other hand, it seems ridiculous to those outside it. It's like an impervious bubble that separated itself from everything else.

[Athexistentialist]

@BrianDPederson What version of the Bible are you using? (Another argument against it, as it's inconsistent between versions), because I went back and checked mine. Jesus definitely does not say, "It is finished" after the part about being forsaken in my Bible.

For that matter, I also have a Bible app with some 30-odd versions.

I have NIV in text, and it's not in there.

I also checked the KJV, and I don't see it there either.

I also also checked the NASB, which /also/ did not have it.

[BrianDPederson]

@Athexistentialist Hmmm.... you sure? Matthew 27:45-50? Clearly states in verse 45 Jesus' cry as the being forsaken, and then in verse 48 he is given the wine vinegar, and then in verse 50 it says he cries again, which, according to the other passages in the Bible, was the cry, "It is finished." I checked, it's in all three of the versions you are using, plus the one I use, which by the way is NKJV, the most clear cut translation of the Bible in my opinion.

[Athexistentialist]

@BrianDPederson On an interesting side note, the NASB has all of Jesus' word in caps.

Two more things:

1: I appreciate your tone. You come across as quite civil in your comments.

2: Thank you! (regarding the end of your comment about the speech being great). I really appreciate it. Feedback means a lot to me.

Man.... I am /really/ curious now to see what Bible version you have! :)

Thanks for creating some discussion. You're comments are meaningful, and I like that.

[BrianDPederson]

@Athexistentialist Thank you, I try to be peaceful in argumentation, I find it a most effective strategy in getting people to really listen. I also have a hankering for arguing both sides of almost any debate, this one included. I already, for the most part, have come up with responses to everything you have said, and I can pretty much guarantee I know your responses to those also (I'm planning on debating for a living :D). Anywho, continue with the series, I've subscribed!

[Athexistentialist]

@BrianDPederson Yes indeed. I go back and forth. You remind me of myself good sir. Glad we got to meet. But anyway, I think a lot of these arguments are pretty obvious, and the responses are too, but I just want people to think. They don't have to change their minds.

[MegaZaurr]

Also the gospels weren't written until at least 40 some years after Jesus died. I don't know if you knew that, but I have always found it interesting, because of the amount of people who devote their lives to the bible, but I don't think it's very credible.

[Athexistentialist]

@MegaZaurr Actually yes, I did know that. Thanks for bringing that up. I was actually planning to include that in tomorrow's video.... ha. You beat me to it! Because then you can get into all the problems with the fact that most of the Apostles died before the Bible was written. It's amazing isn't it? The fact that people can just ignore this stuff?

[MegaZaurr]

"lollipops and candy canes" I love it

[Athexistentialist]

@MegaZaurr If you love it, you should subscribe and like. Subscribes and likes motivate me to continue being funny/thoughtful. :D