Is The Bible True Part 2
Loading...
Loading...
2:43
Is The Bible Accurate Part 2by JoshMcDowell3,859 views- 4:23
Is the Old Testament Accurate?by JoshMcDowell1,609 views
- 2:28
Can We Trust The Apostles Part 1by JoshMcDowell1,120 views
- 5:20
Resurrection Factor - Part 1by JoshMcDowell3,937 views
- 2:10
The Bible is proven true by Archeologyby HarvestTV17,913 views
- 1:48
10 reasons why the bible is trueby Hemelburger17,544 views
- 10:44
Josh McDowell Testimony Part 1by JoshMcDowell24,876 views
- 5:21
My Storyby JoshMcDowell1,249 views
- 5:12
Resurrection Factor - Part 2by JoshMcDowell1,278 views
- 9:46
Greg Bahnsen - Problems for Unbelieving Worldviews (part 8)by gregbahnsen4,835 views
- 9:51
Proofs that the Bible is trueby reynandvalenzuela26,339 views
- 2:52
Scientific discoveries prove the Bible is real historyby fellowservant3439,089 views
- 9:55
Why The Bible Is Trueby WillofGod7226,025 views
- 2:16
Noah's Ark Field Studies 07 pt 1by VortexDelta7,245 views
- 3:00
Is the Bible really True? (John MacArthur)by JohnMacArthurGTY16,356 views
- 1:54
Ravi on Why is there Evil in the World?by jhargreaves32180,301 views
- 0:57
Richard Dawkins talking about Mormonism and Joseph Smithby buckfushes14,356 views
- 3:57
Can We Trust The Apostles Part 2by JoshMcDowell681 views
- 5:30
evidence of the bible being trueby dontH8christianity7,190 views
- 28:31
Is the Bible True?by BeyondTodayTV12,094 views
I agree with Derren Brown on the point that it is fascinating to see people believe in superstitions, psychics, and Gods. We are the most intelligent organisms on this earth, yet we are venerable to those kinds of tales. I do like the creative stories in the bible, but as science advances, the less true the bible becomes although the zealots alter their perceptions to blind themselves from seeing it. so, for me, science or religion? the answer: science.
entaroduai 1 year ago
The Proconsul of Acacia?
HConstantine 1 year ago
The Sinai Bible contains the Shepherd of Hermas , Barnabas and the Odes of Solomon. Mark 1:1 lacks the phrase "the son of God" as well as 16:9-20. Luke lacks verses 6:45-8:26, 9:51-18:14 and the phrase "and was carried up into heaven" is missing in 24:51. It was the testimony of Papias that Mark did not leave out any of Peter's teachings. If this is so, Peter never taught a virgin birth, a resurrection or ascension of Jesus. Please also see my video on 1 John 2:22.
ForBibletruth 3 years ago
None of these "differences" change ANY historicity or doctrine. Please list some differences, such as the end of Mark, the "Trinitarian formula" found in 1 John, or the "discrepancy" in the Codex Bezae. None od these "differences" affect anything.
theman77777777232 3 years ago