Matt, there is something else that is said in Matthew 15 and in many places in the Bible that points to the obvious human authorship of the Bible. As a physician I became fascinated with the brain during my training. After becoming an atheist and leaving both Christianity and Islam behind, it dawned on me that the brain is never mentioned in any holy text. The various people who wrote scripture had no idea what the brain did. Obviously all organs of the body are important and have critical functions, but the brain is especially unique. As you know that is where we get our sense of a conscious self and it is the true seat of the emotions. The ancient scripture writers believed that it was the heart where emotions and the sense of self was located. So today we say things like..."I love you with all my heart". Very poetic. However when we read things "love the Lord with all your heart" it was not meant to be poetry. They really believed that emotions and our sense of self came from the organ that is effectively a mechanical pump in the chest cavity. The person who wrote that Jesus said those things in Matthew 15 as elsewhere didn't understand anything about the digestive system nor did he understand anything about neurobiology. We really don't know what Jesus said and did. We only have what people claimed he said and did and that if he really existed. But after falling in love with the brain, and leaving religion behind, it struck me that the brain is not mentioned in any holy text. Shouldn't god have known?
@@jwsanders1214 USE your BRAIN. Your brain is rotten because you don't make use of it. All you do is blame satan for the bad things and ask your god (imaginary friend) to help you. If your prayers were answered, by now you'd be the happiest person on earth but look at you? You just pretend that god listens to your prayers. According to research religious people are the most poorest in the whole world, which means their prayers go unanswered LOL! They WASTE time talking to themselves instead of working hard to get what they want. So read about EVOLUTION , that way you won't look like an idiot who doesn't understand evolution and keep asking primitive questions on TH-cam.
Well, you see- "no one" was the name of a one-eyed, peg-legged hobbit who was infested with 732 demons, so essentially it was an "independently corroborated report."
Of course The Good news didn't stop there, within 120 days, The news of The Messiah had spread to tens of thousands of people throughout the Roman world by the word of witnesses who were present in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost when The Holy Spirit was given. By the time that Saul and others began to persecute the people of The Way, there were already Believers throughout The Roman World. For the details, read The Book of Acts, Shalom, Jesus any day !!!!
I've heard people use the "what goes into your mouth" passage to justify Christianity no longer keeping kosher. But to me, that represents changing the law, which Jesus explicitly said he would not do in Matthew. Another contradiction!
One of the Greatest Miracles in the New Testament .. Is Finding 4 guys with Angelo Saxon Names in the Middle East in the early first Century .. That is quite a feat Jesus.
Idk, it seems to me that the passage about defilement is purely metaphorical and refers only to spiritual defilement. Kind of saying: is not lack of personal hygiene that makes one a bad person, it’s their bad actions. I don’t think Jesus meant to make a statement about hand washing at all. Ancient authors used narrative devices and styles which are unfamiliar to us. More often than not we go for the literal meaning and miss what the author wanted to convey.
I'm from Pikeville, KY. I was very young when I first heard about churches that practice snake handling. There was one in particular that I'll always remember. I have passed in numerous times when traveling to visit one of my sisters. It was beside the main road, but because of the road being higher on the mountain side than the church, you could see the roof of the building, which had "JESUS SAVES" painted in white and red across the side that faced the road. I'm not sure about how many churches are still around in my local area, but I have heard that it's still being practiced around here. There have been news articles and documentaries in recent years reporting about churches that still handle snakes in nearby counties, and the occasional deaths from bites. It seems to be dying off, used more as a punchline than something to be taken seriously. A buddy of mine asked a group of Jehovah's Witnesses if they were the ones that handled snakes. We they said, "No.", he told them that if they ever did to come back and he'd sign up with them immediately! I damn-near pissed myself lol.
That is conclusive proof!!! Finally and at last, we can all show that Jesus, without any shadow of any doubt whatsoever, never played PlagueInc... (when choosing the difficulty of the bacteria/ virus/ etc, in PlagueInc, part of the description for difficulty levels include how often people wash their hands.)
An apologetic for the snake handling bit would be that that part was an analogy that calls back to the serpent in the garden.. and handling snakes would be thought of as dealing with evil. If it doesn't make sense literally then the default is to take it as an analogy. Which makes arguing bible stuff so frustrating
Apologies if a dozen people have already pointed this out, but this scene in Matthew 15 is based on the scene in Mark 7, not on this pronouncement Jesus makes about snakes and poison in Mark 16:18. So we don't need to speculate on whether or not the Long Ending of Mark was present in manuscripts that would've been available to the author of Matthew; we can already tell that he's getting it from a passage that was definitely always found in Mark.
Have you ever thought about the fact that the bible says that God told Adam he could eat any and all vegetation, and made no stipulation otherwise, even after their ouster from the Garden. And again, after the flood of Noah's day, upon exiting the ark, God told him that he could eat ALL vegetation, as well as meat. Every time I read those verses, i'm reminded of the movie "into the wild".
When I was a christian, I always had interpreted Jesus's statement about defilement as a criticism of the Jewish dietary laws, because they thought that eating pork or shellfish would defile you forever. Though after watching this, I found it quite ironic that believers claim you're taking Mt. 15 & 16 out of context; In all actuality, you explained the context of the passage, and showed that it is actually the believers that take the verse out of context!
Well now we know! You’ve got a demon that makes you love snakes! Joking! Seriously though. So many people hate snakes just because of Genesis. So sad 😞
I think another plausible explanation is that years (or decades, or centuries) after Mark's Gospel was written, maybe a scribe sympathetic to Christians performing these things (through trickery/fraud?) and who are being accused of being of the devil was encouraged to add verses to Mark's book, in a manuscript he/she was preparing, to serve as "evidence" that theses actions are actually consistent with what Jesus had said after his alleged resurrection.
In Mark 16:8 'He is Risen!' is just as validly translated from the Greek as "He got up." (he survived). The translation is designed to support theology requiring a resurrection. It is a biased and deceitful translation. In the case of survival, the women were terrified because the Romans would find out a criminal escaped and would come after his followers to find Jesus. Common sense trumps magic IMHO.
I doubt that Jesus (if he existed, if his words were accurately represented, etc.) was talking about food poisoning or toxicity. He was talking about dietary laws. Yes, certain foods are described as unclean but Jews of the time would also see gentiles eating those unclean foods and not suffering any physical harm. Eating forbidden foods would be wrong purely because gawd had told the Jews not to eat them, not because they'd make you ill. Eating unclean food would be breaking a commandment but it wouldn't physically hurt you and eventually you'd shit it out. Under certain circumstances (such as war) the priesthood had already decided that dietary commandments and the commandment to keep the sabbath could be suspended. So Jesus said that eating unclean foods wasn't as bad as having a bad character. That's what I take from this big book of fairy tales. But I could be wrong about that.
Matt you say.... that you were once a Christian, but are much , much wiser now. Judas Iscariot was too. Judas disowned Jesus, so have you. It's too late for Judas, not for you.
I've always wondered why Jesus spoke in parables rather than say things as plainly and as clearly as humanly possible. And why don't we have a Gospel of Jesus, in which he writes in easy to understand text that is impossible to take out of context.
Oh yeah. Not a fan of this word but this is definitely one of the most "problematic" parts of the Bible and I've yet to see a Christian wiggle out of it well.
Matt has a snake? I'm somewhat jealous. We don't have snakes here in New Zealand and, for very sound ecological reasons, aren't allowed to import any - which (although I thoroughly understand it) is a pity as I'd love to keep snakes. Nothing venomous, mind, non-venomous grass snakes or constrictors would do. But I reckon they'd be awesome pets.
If a person drinks deadly poison in homeopathic form, no harm done. So I guess when James Randi downs a whole bottle of homeopathic sleeping pills, he's proving himself to be a true believer!
one of nietzsche deeper suspectings was, that "christians" got the bible wrong. if you want to know the possible historical person, you need to read "through" the gospels" and especially the texts written after his supposed death - meaning this: if somebody claims having seen the resurrected one or tells a christian community what a christian is supposed to do, see what the person does: claiming authority, by talking in the name of jesus. that means what is written is spoiled by the authors intentions and one must make out the primal-worth of what makes the additions even worth a-damn. like the miracles are quite-certainly a try of the author to spice things up and a quite cheap one id say, if--- well if it didn't show being embarassingly effective.
One of the recurring issues I have with any devotee attempting to convince me of their position, is that they have to demonstrate to me that the version of Christianity they follow is the correct one. As they promote the idea there are evil supernatural entities attempting to deceive humanity, they have to show they are not one of those. Given Mark is explicit about the kinds of behavior authentic devotees should be able to demonstrate, apparently I now have a test for any prospective theist must show before I can even consider what they are claiming to be accurate. If Mark was indeed doctored, and those verses do not originate from a deity, and the only reason we know this is because of the different versions of the writings, who can say which writings are entirely accurate, as any undiscovered or lost text, could over throw the meaning of any part of any gospel. In any event, this once again demonstrates the major problems this deity has when communicating it's most important messages.
Yo Matt, off topic but I'd love to hear your thoughts on Alex Jones, he was just on JRE after he was de-platformed I don't know if you give a shit lol, but he talked about some bat shit crazy things you might enjoy watching.
Alex Jones doesn't even believe the crap he spews. He created an audience playing up government fuck ups like Ruby Ridge and Waco, then ran out of actual stories so he just makes shit up and yells it. Go watch his videos, he routinely breaks down into hysterics laughing at his own bullshit and his stupid audience.
No, it not Tū quoque. Matt needs to reread the beginning of Matthew 15. The pharisees accuse Jesus of transgressing the "tradition of the elders" Jesus responds by accusing them of them of transgressing The law of god! Traditions of men vs. word of god. Big difference (to him, I cant tell).
If it’s tradition for the Pharisees, who are appointed by god and who also act as a mouth piece for god - would this not technically be god’s law too? Or has god washed his hands of the responsibility of his chosen... see what I did there. I think in any respect the point remains that yeshua pulled a “well you’re in the wrong too” card, which isn’t what you’d expect when he and his disciples were technically in the wrong.
When unbiased common sense is used to study the bible, it becomes clear what inconsistent, rediculous and unrealistic value theists give that book. For what little good it does have gets drowned out by the imoral inconsistencies they frequently apologize for and they can't even demonstrate why it even makes sound sense. It's pretty pathetic and I still haven't ever gotten a clear answer as to why a 8 year old girl getting raped is justified in their eyes throughout their bible. God allowed it when he neglected that child's prayers, (True story), and if this God is real and the claims made by theists are true, that little girl wouldn't have been raped. Sorry... went a little emotional there. I have no hatred in my mind over this but it's pathetic to hear people excuse it using the bible or claiming.that it's free will. Free will!!!??? Under the theist model of free will, it doesn't exist. God made every thing preplanned so explain "free will" when that child's rape was in his plan all along.
It's possible that the "signs which shall follow believers" in Mark 16 were supposed to be literal. In the book of Acts, Paul was bitten by a venomous snake and suffered no ill affects. The "barbarians" who witnessed it believed that he was divine - Acts 28:1-6 - "1 And when they were escaped, then they knew that the island was called Melita. 2 And the barbarous people shewed us no little kindness: for they kindled a fire, and received us every one, because of the present rain, and because of the cold. 3 And when Paul had gathered a bundle of sticks, and laid them on the fire, there came a viper out of the heat, and fastened on his hand. 4 And when the barbarians saw the venomous beast hang on his hand, they said among themselves, No doubt this man is a murderer, whom, though he hath escaped the sea, yet vengeance suffereth not to live. 5 And he shook off the beast into the fire, and felt no harm. 6 Howbeit they looked when he should have swollen, or fallen down dead suddenly: but after they had looked a great while, and saw no harm come to him, they changed their minds, and said that he was a god."
The point is that 'nontraditional' 'god' definitions are typically things that most people will only accept based on the fact that there are seemingly no consequences for doing so, not because they actually consider those things to be gods or godlike.
@@mavortius8388 go watch "The secret reason we eat meat" by Dr. Joy Meyer. It'll explain what carnism is. As to why carnism is intellectually dishonest, look for "Name the Trait" by AskYourself. You cannot answer this question without contradicting yourself.
What I hear from those words Matt, is "They will drive out demons (enemies)", they will handle (people who are) snakes" and, "they will drink (people's words of) poison". In its literal form it's a scary thought, but when translated into a format we can understand and make sense of then it (seems to be) speaking of self-esteem and self-confidence- albeit built upon the fallacies and delusions the reader has already been filled with! Nonetheless, the premise may be that the believer will gain the confidence to handle such negative things/situations. Of course, you don't have to be a believer in God or Christianity to hold such confidence, you just have to adopt an attitude of intolerance to bullshit. So I would consider those verses (and their lessons) are valid but merely poorly presented.
Regarding Mathew 15, my understanding is that there was a formal ritual performed before eating which involved washing the hands while chanting a particular prayer. This tradition was imposed by the Pharisees, but the early Christians were breaking away from the old Jewish traditions. The Pharisees were not concerned about public health so much as they were trying to preserve their traditions and to preserve their position of power. Obviously Jesus got the biology wrong, but that's not really the point of the story. The point is that the Christian sect was rejecting the traditions of the Pharisees. They seem to be emphasizing a virtuous life without evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, or blasphemies. They seem to be emphasizing adherence to the Mosaic law as opposed to performing rituals which they deemed to be hypocritical. And then of course the chapter goes on to show that Jesus is the ultimate authority because he can do all sorts of miracles. Finally it ends with the feeding of the masses. This, I believe, is to show that this fringe sect is becoming an actual movement reaching large crowds.
all written much later and entirely metaphorical. where this theory is in some trouble is that there was no big pharesee influence at the time of jesus, especially not in the area he was supposed to have walked around and done his miracles. the rise of the pharesees and their spread were a later phenomenon and testify to the late scripting of the gospels. also, what makes the whole pharesee smearing in the gospels so strange is that historically the christian sects largely derived from them as can be seen in the parables and teachings copied from earlier pharasee originals. the christian sects originally were jewish sects and only later started smearing the jews with more and more antisemitism accumulating in christian texts despite the fact that christianity clearly started out as one or rather several forms of judaism. the same applies to the pharesee movement. the early chrisitan sects started out as part of it, and only later chrisitan text started smearing pharesees and becoming increasingly antipharesee despite christianity having originatd precisely in there. same with islam, which is clearly a form of christianity and only much later invented a totally made up origin story of a prophet who never existed and conquests that never happened in centuries in which none of the congregations in those areas felt any other than christian. only later the difference was invented and retrospectively projected onto a time when no such difference was present or felt by the actual persons involved, see robert price and richard carrier for history of chrisitianity and norbert pressburg formhistory of islam.
Your entire first paragraph seems to me completely anecdotal and you have no evidence to back up your claim. The Pharisees were indeed concerned with public health as they had a somewhat public authority under Roman tutelage, the Old Testament is also rigorous about some specifics of hygiene and the Pharisees were keeping in that line. It seems to me Jesus completely missed the point and instead of acquiescing as Matt said throws a completely fallacious reasoning on his detractors. It’s just a very embarrassing verse if you look at it without bias imo. P.S the Pharisees also opposes all those sinful acts so that’s a non-starter imo.
Maby someone time traveled back and put after verse 8 in there so that all of them would be weeded out like the Darwin awards by the time the time traveler got back.
Don't bother learning the Bible. Argument from authority does it. Life is too short to learn all the details of fallacious garbage in any religious text.
So, Jesus didn’t understand the details of human anatomy and physiology. If he would have, he wouldn’t have been a man of that time in history. Everything you ingest is excreted in some way except for what is left when you die. There are plenty of other things to pick on other than this.
Pharisees: "Your disciples aren't washing their hands, even though it's our tradition." Jesus: "You aren't killing your children, even though God said to." Huh?🤔
He is referring to old testament law that disrespectful children are to be stoned ..and telling them that they aren't following that law. As an aside it is interesting that when the woman was supposedly caught in adultery they couldn't wait to stone her ..which is also in line with OT law.
thats not what he's saying. He refers to a custom of the pharisees which violates that commandment to honor ones parents. He never says that they aren't stoning disobedient children, or that they should.
Vegan Gains had a beautiful wolfdog shipped over ALL the way to Canada from Eastern Europe and tried to feed it a ...vegan diet!! He lied to the breeder that he lived on a farm... He kept the wolfdog in a small flat. The animal got sick on the vegan diet which he almost killed it. He can't say shit.
@@fullup91 your comment isn't really accurate. Go to the source or those close to him. He adopted the "already sick" dog. He tried vegan dog food (like it's mother does well on) and Lucy's health didn't improve. He's spent thousands of dollars on improving her health. I can't speak to "the farm" comment but the breeder had no need for a sick dog and it would most likely have been put down. I'd say he can say whatever he wants to Matt on animal cruelty because he's giving the dog a life it most likely would not have had.
@@SansDeity lol, I'm not getting into that with you. I enjoy your content. Veganism is just how I choose to live. I've tried other alternatives and have done my due diligence. Your content has helped me bridge any gaps in logic I've had in the past and has changed how I look at - not just religion - but all matters of living.
@@fullTimeVeganinOhio bhahaha what a spin on history! I love it, paints him as a savior! But that version of event's is demonstrably false, and has been debunked several times by "source's close" to the actual truths. Nice laugh
Agreed especially when the body (inner world) and outside of (the outer world) are tightly interconnected and interwoven if looked at it from evolution. The outside world evolved us to be who we are just as much as our inner DNA based body plan. And there is no spiritual or regular touch-y feel-y things either since atoms cannot touch each other. (FYI Jesus seriously needs to watch both the new and old Cosmos series).There is neither a beginning to us or an end. We are nothing more then a process a fluke of the force of entropy.
That is a pretty ambiguous statement. If you are talking about Biblical figurative phrases and allegories I'd say they fail to grasp that they are "obvious" because they are indistinguishable from the nonsense stories that are put forward as historical fact. Did Job really spend 3 days in a Leviathan? No of course not! That is OBVIOUS ALLEGORY! Did Jesus spend three days on a cross and then come back to life before flying up into heaven? OF COURSE HE DID! THAT IS LITERAL TRUTH! Even the part about him leading a parade of zombies down main street? What? That is not in the Bible!(it is)
@@Hashishin13 I was raised without religion and taught to look for the meaning and intent behind myths, poetry and prose. They are all quite obvious to me. Maybe I am just more intelligent than most people. Have you read All Quiet On The Western Front ? Do you known what Remarque was conveying in that tome ? Did you catch all the (sometimes) subtle messages ?
I know this isn't the topic of the video and that you probably won't read this, but Matt, I feel compelled to point out that your digression at around 17:50 about how you don't like preachers mistreating and being cruel to snakes is pure hypocrisy on your part after having seen your discussion on veganism with Vegan Gains on The Atheist Experience. Why is it wrong to be mean to a snake for some bogus demonstration of God but it's not wrong to pay money for other animals to be forcibly bred into existence and live out short and miserable lives that literally end in being tortured to death and cut up into pieces for your fleeting taste pleasure? Meat is not necessary for human health in any way and you have viable alternatives easily available and probably even in the same grocery stores you go to now. You needn't maintain this glaring inconsistency in your ethics. It's very easy to be vegan, especially in this day and age, and your health will even improve because of it (assuming you replace the animal products with real food like fruits and vegetables instead of junk, obviously). You can do it, man. *I may not believe in God, but I believe in you.* 💪🏼😤
I'm sorry Matt, this is an awful exposition of the Bible. These "questions" have been well and truly answered. You clearly have not read the early fathers of the Church.
Listened to over 5 minutes of this and made me reiterate what Matt is failing at. Looking at the writ from outside, but the spirit of the words not reaching understanding. The writers of the text, were not displaying some scenario for a performance. Nor was it about a tit for tat argument with the scribes and pharisees and chief priest, and Jesus as hero to the villain scribes and pharisees. What did Jesus further say that Matt conveniently left out. Verse 18 "...For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks." Jesus was around these people, and knew how they were, and why he rebuked them often when they questioned or tried trapping him. This video is more a shot at the writers of scripture, trying to lesson the spiritual meaning. " But the natural man knows not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are 'foolishness' to him: neither can he know them because they are 'spiritually discerned'." 1 Corithians 2:14 The Apostle Paul makes clear, the atheist problem. But here's one that Matt can't make appear as theatrics or a tit for tat with the religious Jews. "But I say unto you, that every idle word a men shall speak, they shall give account in the day of judgement. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned." Matthew 12:36,37 You can snark and sneer at those words from Jesus; but somewhere in the back of your mind you may consider, "What if that does become true, as Jesus spoke?"
I really like these Bible study style videos. I'd love to see more of them in the future.
Matt, there is something else that is said in Matthew 15 and in many places in the Bible that points to the obvious human authorship of the Bible. As a physician I became fascinated with the brain during my training. After becoming an atheist and leaving both Christianity and Islam behind, it dawned on me that the brain is never mentioned in any holy text. The various people who wrote scripture had no idea what the brain did. Obviously all organs of the body are important and have critical functions, but the brain is especially unique. As you know that is where we get our sense of a conscious self and it is the true seat of the emotions.
The ancient scripture writers believed that it was the heart where emotions and the sense of self was located. So today we say things like..."I love you with all my heart". Very poetic. However when we read things "love the Lord with all your heart" it was not meant to be poetry. They really believed that emotions and our sense of self came from the organ that is effectively a mechanical pump in the chest cavity. The person who wrote that Jesus said those things in Matthew 15 as elsewhere didn't understand anything about the digestive system nor did he understand anything about neurobiology. We really don't know what Jesus said and did. We only have what people claimed he said and did and that if he really existed. But after falling in love with the brain, and leaving religion behind, it struck me that the brain is not mentioned in any holy text. Shouldn't god have known?
Hm, most suspicious indeed🤔
@THE PEOPLE SING I do not know what you are talking about. Sorry.
THE PEOPLE SING, how does what you said relate to what Dr. Paul King said?
So smart guy, you think that an awesome and complex organ like The Human Brain evolved by mindless chance ? Ridiculous !
@@jwsanders1214 USE your BRAIN. Your brain is rotten because you don't make use of it. All you do is blame satan for the bad things and ask your god (imaginary friend) to help you. If your prayers were answered, by now you'd be the happiest person on earth but look at you? You just pretend that god listens to your prayers. According to research religious people are the most poorest in the whole world, which means their prayers go unanswered LOL! They WASTE time talking to themselves instead of working hard to get what they want. So read about EVOLUTION , that way you won't look like an idiot who doesn't understand evolution and keep asking primitive questions on TH-cam.
The preachers dying to their own snakes is a delicious bit of irony
Well, they're clearly not going to be cruel to the snakes any more.
If the women ran off and told no one, who told the author of Mark 50 years later?
Well, you see- "no one" was the name of a one-eyed, peg-legged hobbit who was infested with 732 demons, so essentially it was an "independently corroborated report."
@@yadabub Well, now that explains everything. LOL Good one.
Look at Chuck Missler The last 12 verses of Mark
Of course it's a fairytale
Of course The Good news didn't stop there, within 120 days, The news of The Messiah had spread to tens of thousands of people throughout the Roman world by the word of witnesses who were present in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost when The Holy Spirit was given. By the time that Saul and others began to persecute the people of The Way, there were already Believers throughout The Roman World. For the details, read The Book of Acts, Shalom, Jesus any day !!!!
I have a lot of respect for what you do. Always engaging and thought provoking. Thank you, Matt.
I love this style of presentation rather than arguing with peole who can't hear what yu are saying. Well done Matt. Edward
Jesus somehow managed to screw up "Everyone Poops"
Damn Matt you're just pumping out the videos today! Right on! Keep'em coming.
I've heard people use the "what goes into your mouth" passage to justify Christianity no longer keeping kosher. But to me, that represents changing the law, which Jesus explicitly said he would not do in Matthew. Another contradiction!
I think it just means that Jesus was a drunkard, but he was firmly against vomiting.
he said he would fulfill the law.
You're still out there fighting the good fight. The world is better because you are in it.
One of the Greatest Miracles in the New Testament .. Is Finding 4 guys with Angelo Saxon Names in the Middle East in the early first Century .. That is quite a feat Jesus.
there are no anglo-saxon names in the new testament.
Idk, it seems to me that the passage about defilement is purely metaphorical and refers only to spiritual defilement. Kind of saying: is not lack of personal hygiene that makes one a bad person, it’s their bad actions.
I don’t think Jesus meant to make a statement about hand washing at all. Ancient authors used narrative devices and styles which are unfamiliar to us. More often than not we go for the literal meaning and miss what the author wanted to convey.
I'm from Pikeville, KY. I was very young when I first heard about churches that practice snake handling. There was one in particular that I'll always remember. I have passed in numerous times when traveling to visit one of my sisters. It was beside the main road, but because of the road being higher on the mountain side than the church, you could see the roof of the building, which had "JESUS SAVES" painted in white and red across the side that faced the road.
I'm not sure about how many churches are still around in my local area, but I have heard that it's still being practiced around here. There have been news articles and documentaries in recent years reporting about churches that still handle snakes in nearby counties, and the occasional deaths from bites.
It seems to be dying off, used more as a punchline than something to be taken seriously. A buddy of mine asked a group of Jehovah's Witnesses if they were the ones that handled snakes. We they said, "No.", he told them that if they ever did to come back and he'd sign up with them immediately! I damn-near pissed myself lol.
That is conclusive proof!!!
Finally and at last, we can all show that Jesus, without any shadow of any doubt whatsoever, never played PlagueInc...
(when choosing the difficulty of the bacteria/ virus/ etc, in PlagueInc, part of the description for difficulty levels include how often people wash their hands.)
Just love me some defilement!
What you put into your mouth does not defile the spirit......hmmm? Try telling that to an alcoholic!
Vodka is a spirit. When I put it in my mouth it is still an undefiled spirit. It's only when I piss it out that it's defiled.
Great analysis, Jesus seems even more hypocritical than the pharisees tbh.
An apologetic for the snake handling bit would be that that part was an analogy that calls back to the serpent in the garden.. and handling snakes would be thought of as dealing with evil. If it doesn't make sense literally then the default is to take it as an analogy. Which makes arguing bible stuff so frustrating
Apologies if a dozen people have already pointed this out, but this scene in Matthew 15 is based on the scene in Mark 7, not on this pronouncement Jesus makes about snakes and poison in Mark 16:18. So we don't need to speculate on whether or not the Long Ending of Mark was present in manuscripts that would've been available to the author of Matthew; we can already tell that he's getting it from a passage that was definitely always found in Mark.
Have you ever thought about the fact that the bible says that God told Adam he could eat any and all vegetation, and made no stipulation otherwise, even after their ouster from the Garden. And again, after the flood of Noah's day, upon exiting the ark, God told him that he could eat ALL vegetation, as well as meat. Every time I read those verses, i'm reminded of the movie "into the wild".
When I was a christian, I always had interpreted Jesus's statement about defilement as a criticism of the Jewish dietary laws, because they thought that eating pork or shellfish would defile you forever. Though after watching this, I found it quite ironic that believers claim you're taking Mt. 15 & 16 out of context;
In all actuality, you explained the context of the passage, and showed that it is actually the believers that take the verse out of context!
if something that goes into your mouth cannot defile you, then none of the dietary laws are necessary
Well now we know! You’ve got a demon that makes you love snakes! Joking! Seriously though. So many people hate snakes just because of Genesis. So sad 😞
I think another plausible explanation is that years (or decades, or centuries) after Mark's Gospel was written, maybe a scribe sympathetic to Christians performing these things (through trickery/fraud?) and who are being accused of being of the devil was encouraged to add verses to Mark's book, in a manuscript he/she was preparing, to serve as "evidence" that theses actions are actually consistent with what Jesus had said after his alleged resurrection.
Drinking strychnine (I assume doses not typically lethal) was/is sometimes a thing in some of these Pentecostal Churches.
Ahahahahahah!!!
Tripping churchies? AHAHAHahahahah
If the dose isn't typically lethal, than I think thats just cheating! And what of the casting of mountains into the sea? Does skipping stones count?
@@David16180 umm.... Yes!
In Mark 16:8 'He is Risen!' is just as validly translated from the Greek as "He got up." (he survived). The translation is designed to support theology requiring a resurrection. It is a biased and deceitful translation. In the case of survival, the women were terrified because the Romans would find out a criminal escaped and would come after his followers to find Jesus. Common sense trumps magic IMHO.
I doubt that Jesus (if he existed, if his words were accurately represented, etc.) was talking about food poisoning or toxicity. He was talking about dietary laws. Yes, certain foods are described as unclean but Jews of the time would also see gentiles eating those unclean foods and not suffering any physical harm. Eating forbidden foods would be wrong purely because gawd had told the Jews not to eat them, not because they'd make you ill.
Eating unclean food would be breaking a commandment but it wouldn't physically hurt you and eventually you'd shit it out. Under certain circumstances (such as war) the priesthood had already decided that dietary commandments and the commandment to keep the sabbath could be suspended. So Jesus said that eating unclean foods wasn't as bad as having a bad character.
That's what I take from this big book of fairy tales. But I could be wrong about that.
There you go bashing Jesus and claiming he don't. exist.
Fun Fact: Jesus made the defilement quip when Judas caught him eating dog food.
lol
Matt you say.... that you were once a Christian, but are much , much wiser now. Judas Iscariot was too. Judas disowned Jesus, so have you. It's too late for Judas, not for you.
Can the NIFB PLEASE have battery acid smoothies? Pretty please? #PumpkinKing :)
I've always wondered why Jesus spoke in parables rather than say things as plainly and as clearly as humanly possible. And why don't we have a Gospel of Jesus, in which he writes in easy to understand text that is impossible to take out of context.
We are better at learning things when they're presented as stories. Especially when it comes to morals and behaviour. "Boy who cried wolf" etc.
Oh yeah. Not a fan of this word but this is definitely one of the most "problematic" parts of the Bible and I've yet to see a Christian wiggle out of it well.
Matt has a snake? I'm somewhat jealous. We don't have snakes here in New Zealand and, for very sound ecological reasons, aren't allowed to import any - which (although I thoroughly understand it) is a pity as I'd love to keep snakes. Nothing venomous, mind, non-venomous grass snakes or constrictors would do. But I reckon they'd be awesome pets.
i love all the pedantic hullabaloo over people not washing their hands
If a person drinks deadly poison in homeopathic form, no harm done. So I guess when James Randi downs a whole bottle of homeopathic sleeping pills, he's proving himself to be a true believer!
So basically steve Irwin was messiah come again.
one of nietzsche deeper suspectings was, that "christians" got the bible wrong. if you want to know the possible historical person, you need to read "through" the gospels" and especially the texts written after his supposed death - meaning this: if somebody claims having seen the resurrected one or tells a christian community what a christian is supposed to do, see what the person does: claiming authority, by talking in the name of jesus. that means what is written is spoiled by the authors intentions and one must make out the primal-worth of what makes the additions even worth a-damn. like the miracles are quite-certainly a try of the author to spice things up and a quite cheap one id say, if--- well if it didn't show being embarassingly effective.
So Jesus is not opposed to blow jobs
Tell Mike Pence that. Watch him blow a fuse.
Or butt sex (He DID run around the desert with a bunch of men) lol
What kind of ball python do you have? "normal / classic", or a morph?
Do you have any debates coming up, in the near future?
Hey Matt, have you considered doing a podcast?
One of the recurring issues I have with any devotee attempting to convince me of their position, is that they have to demonstrate to me that the version of Christianity they follow is the correct one. As they promote the idea there are evil supernatural entities attempting to deceive humanity, they have to show they are not one of those.
Given Mark is explicit about the kinds of behavior authentic devotees should be able to demonstrate, apparently I now have a test for any prospective theist must show before I can even consider what they are claiming to be accurate.
If Mark was indeed doctored, and those verses do not originate from a deity, and the only reason we know this is because of the different versions of the writings, who can say which writings are entirely accurate, as any undiscovered or lost text, could over throw the meaning of any part of any gospel.
In any event, this once again demonstrates the major problems this deity has when communicating it's most important messages.
a lot of very good questions..
I came across a picture of matt today of him wearing a shirt with ball pythons, and wondered if he kept any....and then I heard this 😅
Yo Matt, off topic but I'd love to hear your thoughts on Alex Jones, he was just on JRE after he was de-platformed I don't know if you give a shit lol, but he talked about some bat shit crazy things you might enjoy watching.
Alex Jones doesn't even believe the crap he spews. He created an audience playing up government fuck ups like Ruby Ridge and Waco, then ran out of actual stories so he just makes shit up and yells it. Go watch his videos, he routinely breaks down into hysterics laughing at his own bullshit and his stupid audience.
@@Hashishin13 that's like me saying deep down inside you know there's a god. Don't tell people what they do and don't believe.
@Peter Scott thx for the clarity
No, it not Tū quoque. Matt needs to reread the beginning of Matthew 15. The pharisees accuse Jesus of transgressing the "tradition of the elders" Jesus responds by accusing them of them of transgressing The law of god! Traditions of men vs. word of god. Big difference (to him, I cant tell).
If it’s tradition for the Pharisees, who are appointed by god and who also act as a mouth piece for god - would this not technically be god’s law too? Or has god washed his hands of the responsibility of his chosen... see what I did there.
I think in any respect the point remains that yeshua pulled a “well you’re in the wrong too” card, which isn’t what you’d expect when he and his disciples were technically in the wrong.
When unbiased common sense is used to study the bible, it becomes clear what inconsistent, rediculous and unrealistic value theists give that book. For what little good it does have gets drowned out by the imoral inconsistencies they frequently apologize for and they can't even demonstrate why it even makes sound sense. It's pretty pathetic and I still haven't ever gotten a clear answer as to why a 8 year old girl getting raped is justified in their eyes throughout their bible. God allowed it when he neglected that child's prayers, (True story), and if this God is real and the claims made by theists are true, that little girl wouldn't have been raped.
Sorry... went a little emotional there. I have no hatred in my mind over this but it's pathetic to hear people excuse it using the bible or claiming.that it's free will. Free will!!!??? Under the theist model of free will, it doesn't exist.
God made every thing preplanned so explain "free will" when that child's rape was in his plan all along.
Oh I get the ‘I’m not religious’ bs response all the time.
It's possible that the "signs which shall follow believers" in Mark 16 were supposed to be literal. In the book of Acts, Paul was bitten by a venomous snake and suffered no ill affects. The "barbarians" who witnessed it believed that he was divine -
Acts 28:1-6 -
"1 And when they were escaped, then they knew that the island was called Melita.
2 And the barbarous people shewed us no little kindness: for they kindled a fire, and received us every one, because of the present rain, and because of the cold. 3 And when Paul had gathered a bundle of sticks, and laid them on the fire, there came a viper out of the heat, and fastened on his hand. 4 And when the barbarians saw the venomous beast hang on his hand, they said among themselves, No doubt this man is a murderer, whom, though he hath escaped the sea, yet vengeance suffereth not to live. 5 And he shook off the beast into the fire, and felt no harm. 6 Howbeit they looked when he should have swollen, or fallen down dead suddenly: but after they had looked a great while, and saw no harm come to him, they changed their minds, and said that he was a god."
Look at Chuck Missler :" The last 12 verses of Mark" and be amazed
In the case of our current president, what goes in and out of his mouth is down right a defilement and totally gross.
Is Matt Non theist and agnostic on if “god” exists or simply does not see god as existing in any sense?
Do you mean in the sense of existing as a coffee mug?
yadabub hmm not sure I fallow?
Like Sam Harris term for god which could be consciousness
The point is that 'nontraditional' 'god' definitions are typically things that most people will only accept based on the fact that there are seemingly no consequences for doing so, not because they actually consider those things to be gods or godlike.
@@yadabub you mean creating unfalsifiable definitions?
18:09 - 18:15 Matt... you being a carnist is intellectual dishonesty at its finest.
What the heck is a carnist and how is it intellectually dishonest?
@@mavortius8388 go watch "The secret reason we eat meat" by Dr. Joy Meyer. It'll explain what carnism is. As to why carnism is intellectually dishonest, look for "Name the Trait" by AskYourself. You cannot answer this question without contradicting yourself.
What I hear from those words Matt, is "They will drive out demons (enemies)", they will handle (people who are) snakes" and, "they will drink (people's words of) poison".
In its literal form it's a scary thought, but when translated into a format we can understand and make sense of then it (seems to be) speaking of self-esteem and self-confidence- albeit built upon the fallacies and delusions the reader has already been filled with! Nonetheless, the premise may be that the believer will gain the confidence to handle such negative things/situations. Of course, you don't have to be a believer in God or Christianity to hold such confidence, you just have to adopt an attitude of intolerance to bullshit.
So I would consider those verses (and their lessons) are valid but merely poorly presented.
Regarding Mathew 15, my understanding is that there was a formal ritual performed before eating which involved washing the hands while chanting a particular prayer. This tradition was imposed by the Pharisees, but the early Christians were breaking away from the old Jewish traditions. The Pharisees were not concerned about public health so much as they were trying to preserve their traditions and to preserve their position of power.
Obviously Jesus got the biology wrong, but that's not really the point of the story. The point is that the Christian sect was rejecting the traditions of the Pharisees. They seem to be emphasizing a virtuous life without evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, or blasphemies. They seem to be emphasizing adherence to the Mosaic law as opposed to performing rituals which they deemed to be hypocritical.
And then of course the chapter goes on to show that Jesus is the ultimate authority because he can do all sorts of miracles.
Finally it ends with the feeding of the masses. This, I believe, is to show that this fringe sect is becoming an actual movement reaching large crowds.
all written much later and entirely metaphorical. where this theory is in some trouble is that there was no big pharesee influence at the time of jesus, especially not in the area he was supposed to have walked around and done his miracles. the rise of the pharesees and their spread were a later phenomenon and testify to the late scripting of the gospels. also, what makes the whole pharesee smearing in the gospels so strange is that historically the christian sects largely derived from them as can be seen in the parables and teachings copied from earlier pharasee originals. the christian sects originally were jewish sects and only later started smearing the jews with more and more antisemitism accumulating in christian texts despite the fact that christianity clearly started out as one or rather several forms of judaism. the same applies to the pharesee movement. the early chrisitan sects started out as part of it, and only later chrisitan text started smearing pharesees and becoming increasingly antipharesee despite christianity having originatd precisely in there. same with islam, which is clearly a form of christianity and only much later invented a totally made up origin story of a prophet who never existed and conquests that never happened in centuries in which none of the congregations in those areas felt any other than christian. only later the difference was invented and retrospectively projected onto a time when no such difference was present or felt by the actual persons involved, see robert price and richard carrier for history of chrisitianity and norbert pressburg formhistory of islam.
Your entire first paragraph seems to me completely anecdotal and you have no evidence to back up your claim. The Pharisees were indeed concerned with public health as they had a somewhat public authority under Roman tutelage, the Old Testament is also rigorous about some specifics of hygiene and the Pharisees were keeping in that line. It seems to me Jesus completely missed the point and instead of acquiescing as Matt said throws a completely fallacious reasoning on his detractors. It’s just a very embarrassing verse if you look at it without bias imo. P.S the Pharisees also opposes all those sinful acts so that’s a non-starter imo.
Maby someone time traveled back and put after verse 8 in there so that all of them would be weeded out like the Darwin awards by the time the time traveler got back.
A person who heard the same story told it 50 years later.
I took eight Vicodin at one time, proving Mark 16:18 and it was a heavenly experience.
Dr. House, is that you? Stop wasting time on TH-cam and go back to the clinic.
@@SidheKnight LOL
Of course Jesus is not a skeptic, the dude is omniscient. Even if Jesus was just a man his belief in God would preclude him from being a skeptic.
Jesus Christ spoke about hell where there is not a drop of water so why go there?
Hi.
Don't bother learning the Bible. Argument from authority does it. Life is too short to learn all the details of fallacious garbage in any religious text.
So, Jesus didn’t understand the details of human anatomy and physiology. If he would have, he wouldn’t have been a man of that time in history. Everything you ingest is excreted in some way except for what is left when you die. There are plenty of other things to pick on other than this.
Pharisees: "Your disciples aren't washing their hands, even though it's our tradition."
Jesus: "You aren't killing your children, even though God said to."
Huh?🤔
He is referring to old testament law that disrespectful children are to be stoned ..and telling them that they aren't following that law. As an aside it is interesting that when the woman was supposedly caught in adultery they couldn't wait to stone her ..which is also in line with OT law.
thats not what he's saying. He refers to a custom of the pharisees which violates that commandment to honor ones parents. He never says that they aren't stoning disobedient children, or that they should.
Lol, watch out Matt. Richard (vegan gains) may here you say you're against harming animals and call back 😁
He and his fans have commented on every unrelated video so I fully expect them whether I mention animals or not.
Vegan Gains had a beautiful wolfdog shipped over ALL the way to Canada from Eastern Europe and tried to feed it a ...vegan diet!!
He lied to the breeder that he lived on a farm... He kept the wolfdog in a small flat.
The animal got sick on the vegan diet which he almost killed it.
He can't say shit.
@@fullup91 your comment isn't really accurate. Go to the source or those close to him.
He adopted the "already sick" dog. He tried vegan dog food (like it's mother does well on) and Lucy's health didn't improve. He's spent thousands of dollars on improving her health.
I can't speak to "the farm" comment but the breeder had no need for a sick dog and it would most likely have been put down. I'd say he can say whatever he wants to Matt on animal cruelty because he's giving the dog a life it most likely would not have had.
@@SansDeity lol, I'm not getting into that with you. I enjoy your content. Veganism is just how I choose to live. I've tried other alternatives and have done my due diligence. Your content has helped me bridge any gaps in logic I've had in the past and has changed how I look at - not just religion - but all matters of living.
@@fullTimeVeganinOhio bhahaha what a spin on history! I love it, paints him as a savior!
But that version of event's is demonstrably false, and has been debunked several times by "source's close" to the actual truths.
Nice laugh
Both the literal and allegorical meanings of these are rather vile. It is 'wrong' in every way.
Agreed especially when the body (inner world) and outside of (the outer world) are tightly interconnected and interwoven if looked at it from evolution. The outside world evolved us to be who we are just as much as our inner DNA based body plan. And there is no spiritual or regular touch-y feel-y things either since atoms cannot touch each other. (FYI Jesus seriously needs to watch both the new and old Cosmos series).There is neither a beginning to us or an end. We are nothing more then a process a fluke of the force of entropy.
Jehovah's Witnesses just covered these passages at their weekly meetings. How weird💀
Why do both theists and atheists fail to grasp obvious figurative phrases and allegories? Thanks, Matt.
That is a pretty ambiguous statement. If you are talking about Biblical figurative phrases and allegories I'd say they fail to grasp that they are "obvious" because they are indistinguishable from the nonsense stories that are put forward as historical fact.
Did Job really spend 3 days in a Leviathan? No of course not! That is OBVIOUS ALLEGORY!
Did Jesus spend three days on a cross and then come back to life before flying up into heaven? OF COURSE HE DID! THAT IS LITERAL TRUTH!
Even the part about him leading a parade of zombies down main street? What? That is not in the Bible!(it is)
@@Hashishin13 I was raised without religion and taught to look for the meaning and intent behind myths, poetry and prose. They are all quite obvious to me. Maybe I am just more intelligent than most people. Have you read All Quiet On The Western Front ? Do you known what Remarque was conveying in that tome ? Did you catch all the (sometimes) subtle messages ?
@@DBCisco how can you verify that your interpretations are correct?
Both the literal and allegorical meanings of these are rather vile. It is 'wrong' in every way.
@@masonmccandless540 You really don't understand literature, do you ?
I know this isn't the topic of the video and that you probably won't read this, but Matt, I feel compelled to point out that your digression at around 17:50 about how you don't like preachers mistreating and being cruel to snakes is pure hypocrisy on your part after having seen your discussion on veganism with Vegan Gains on The Atheist Experience.
Why is it wrong to be mean to a snake for some bogus demonstration of God but it's not wrong to pay money for other animals to be forcibly bred into existence and live out short and miserable lives that literally end in being tortured to death and cut up into pieces for your fleeting taste pleasure? Meat is not necessary for human health in any way and you have viable alternatives easily available and probably even in the same grocery stores you go to now. You needn't maintain this glaring inconsistency in your ethics.
It's very easy to be vegan, especially in this day and age, and your health will even improve because of it (assuming you replace the animal products with real food like fruits and vegetables instead of junk, obviously). You can do it, man. *I may not believe in God, but I believe in you.* 💪🏼😤
I'm sorry Matt, this is an awful exposition of the Bible. These "questions" have been well and truly answered. You clearly have not read the early fathers of the Church.
Listened to over 5 minutes of this and made me reiterate what Matt is failing at.
Looking at the writ from outside, but the spirit of the words not reaching understanding.
The writers of the text, were not displaying some scenario for a performance. Nor was it about a tit for tat argument with the scribes and pharisees and chief priest, and Jesus as hero to the villain scribes and pharisees.
What did Jesus further say that Matt conveniently left out. Verse 18 "...For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks."
Jesus was around these people, and knew how they were, and why he rebuked them often when they questioned or tried trapping him.
This video is more a shot at the writers of scripture, trying to lesson the spiritual meaning.
" But the natural man knows not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are 'foolishness' to him: neither can he know them because they are 'spiritually discerned'." 1 Corithians 2:14
The Apostle Paul makes clear, the atheist problem.
But here's one that Matt can't make appear as theatrics or a tit for tat with the religious Jews.
"But I say unto you, that every idle word a men shall speak, they shall give account in the day of judgement.
For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned." Matthew 12:36,37
You can snark and sneer at those words from Jesus; but somewhere in the back of your mind you may consider, "What if that does become true, as Jesus spoke?"