I could be mistaken, but I believe that his PhD came from a 'university' - that HE founded! rationalwiki.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind%27s_doctoral_dissertations rationalwiki.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind%27s_doctoral_dissertations#/media/File:PatriotU_Crop.jpg
@@chriswhitehouse9137 Followed by: A dissertation or thesis is a long piece of academic writing based on original research, submitted as part of an undergraduate or postgraduate degree. The structure of a dissertation depends on your field, but it is usually divided into at least four or five chapters (including an introduction and conclusion chapter). How many words is that so far
I take comfort in the fact that Hovind is so much older than me that probability dictates that I at some point will be living in a world without Kent Hovind.
Not only that. He constantly stumbles and changes words he is reading off his screen. He paraphrases and fully changes words as he is reading them from the Bible. And he can’t argue that in any way. He can deny it, but that’s nothing new for him. All he does is deny reality haha.
Hahha wait, so Adam chose the names for his animals then picked one of them to be his wife?! Is that the way Ken said it or am I playing his game of twisting words?! Well, I’m choosing to play his game and state it is fact then, he definitely said that and he can’t convince me otherwise. Adam chose one of the animals as his wife. 😂
And those are not the easy to prove ones. Start looking at answers that are numbers and find other places with the same questions. The numbered answers change (in some cases a lot).
My favourite is when he, and others, try to convince people that everything in the bible is true... by citing the bible. That kind of circular reasoning would never work for any subject, but for this particularly it's insane. Why would anyone use something that the other people don't believe is anything more than a collection of parables, to prove to those non-believers that it's *more* and is actually the word of an all-seeing, all-knowing, all-powerful deity that is responsible for creating our entire existence? The bible is true because the bible says it's true. Well I say I'm a 15-foot purple chicken Jedi master with lasers for eyes, and you have to believe me, because I'm a purple chicken Jedi master and I say so.
Every person I've ever spoke to that refutes God has always admitted the same thing to me.. When they faced an instant life or death situation they found themselves asking the thing they have refuted their entire life to help or save them some how ... Please God if your real help me !! You who don't believe will one day do the same.
It's totally and utterly true as well. I know this is a fact because I have been to some of the locations mentioned in that book and they exist therefore absolutely everything in that book is totally and utterly true. Also there are less contradictions than the bible stories.
@@Sizzlik Very true, the demonstrations of companionship despite adversity are strong morals to abide by. Also, despite never having seen an orc or elf, the entire book must be entirely true because there are multiple books that refer to each other, which means they are all true, and I have seen and even *held* a gold ring which is absolute proof of everything.
@@nickryan3417 And, those books are written in different languages, in different countries by totally unrelated authors. And, they agree with one another.
Hovind reminds me of Dick Dastardly from the old cartoons or the old used car salesman passing off rusted through metal as the patina of a classic car.
7:52 hey, Kent, quick question. Who let Satan into the garden in the first place? How was he able to talk to and trick one of the only two humans at the time into going against gods will? Was god asleep? He is all seeing and all knowing right?
@@braedenmclean5304 right! In places it reads like God is some Mafioso type. At Sodom and Gomorrah he walks around other villages going door to door asking questions, and he is accompanied by "the elders". Who the hell are they?
He must be in much pain right now because of the depletion of the world's supply of Copium... all the flerfs are overdosing on it right now, so there's none left for the Kent Hovinds of the world.😅
The best part of the genealogy of Joseph, is that it's all given to show how Jesus, being the son of Joseph, fulfils a prophecy. But that all becomes irrelevant when you then claim that Joseph ISN'T the father anyway!
No it doesn't, because Joseph willingly adopted and took Jesus as his own. He didn't have to share DNA with his adopted son for his heritage to apply, from the standpoint of Jewish (or any, really) law.
@@theradgegadgie6352 And all this so called history, wasnt written till many decades after its claimed to have happened. So explain that, can you point us to other places other than the bible, were all this evidence is also available. you cant as its only in the bible. Which you don't have a original. ONLY HUNDRESDS OF VERSIONS. And just for good measure explain this for us. you claim, that he made adam from dirt, then made eve from Adams rib. That means that they would have the same DNA,. SO COULD HAVE CHILDREN. End of the fairy tail
He didn’t convince anyone, all he did was insult Emma (very Christian), say some words then act like what he said proved her wrong… very condescending for a Christian as well
Kent's whole thing is being massively condescending (and lying about science, obviously). Because in his mind he is clearly the only person who really understands the reality. It's deeply aggravating.
I’d bet money KH haaaaates women. Particularly ones who like education, critical thinking, independence, etc. At best he would *tolerate* a woman who submits to him.
The argument that your criticisms have no legitimacy if u havent read The Bible is not an argument. I never read the bible and know its hog wash. Consider the context: the period of time, how ignorant the people were, and the oppressive nature of soceity. U need obedient little citizens. Then u have the obvious falsehoods. U have Noahs Ark, the talking snake, the false assertion that the earth is 5000 years old. People thought the earth is flat. (But no one does today, thankfully....). We didnt know what a germ was. Plus, who wants to read a book with great life lessons like if a man grapes your daughter, he owes u 10 shillings or some sh!t? Or how its anti abortion, but if a woman gets preggo and the father is in doubt, u give her bitter water and if the baby lives, she wasn't unfaithful. Or how it condones slavery. Yep. Such a guiding light. Let me read this 1000 year old book to get my prioritys straight. ISIC AND EZEKIEL DID THIS AND THIS....WHICH MEANS TRUMP SHOULD BE PRESIDENT OR SOMETHING.
@@tyemaddog 66 different books - Paul is recognised as writing multiple of the NT books though not all of the letters that bare his name; whilst eg Isaiah is thought to have several authors over the time span of the text. And then there are editors such as in Genesis weaving together different traditions (ie why 2 distinct creation accounts). So no idea how many authors, and revisors - but agree no need to presume literalism, the text is much richer than than.
I think that those contradictions presented were pretty clear and i dont think Kent knows what a contradiction is. There was a quote once "I have no problem with God, it's his fan club i cant stand".
@@gdutfulkbhh7537 Because at least in the United States the Southern Strategy has used religion to grab political power. Donald Trump was just elected president in large part thanks to regular Christian folks thinking he's a their guy. I don't know that any of this is helping because not only did Trump win he won the popular vote which is.... gross. Why are we here now? To laugh until I die because I can't change anything. Religious folks won again. Yay.
Mr Anderson delivered a wonderful blow to Kent in one of their debates. I think Anderson said; "I'm not saying the Bible is wrong, I'm saying you're wrong," and the look on Kent's face was priceless. After all, Kent won't admit that the Bible is wrong, but he also can't admit that he is wrong.
A man who bought a fake PhD asserts that Emma has not done adequate research, attacks her motivation, and has to invent Bible stories of his own to 'prove' her wrong.
5:45 - just being one of the countless descendants of Solomon doesn't make someone king Kent. Just look up how many Americans are descendants of European royalty. Spoilers, it's probably every single person living in North America. Probably every human in North America has European royalty somewhere in their genealogy.
Kent was also found guilty for domestic violence. I suppose, to Kent, that doesn't count because the judges verdict contradicted Kent's opinion... And we all now know that Kent doesn't believe in contradictions.
@@tyemaddogwell...can you name a credible independent source that confirms he even existed? If so...tell the vast number of religious scholars that would die and/or kill for having one.😏
That joke at literacy in England is funny from an American guy. 52% of Americans are functionally illiterate. They know how to read, but they're stuck at the level of a 6th grader and they don't really understand what they're reading.
@didymus3348 That is not correct. According to the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation world literacy levels, the UK is 99%, and the USA is 86%. It's hardly similar.
The levels of twisting he has to do.... either don't explain it, say it says something it doesn't, or just simply make something up and say it says something nobody has ever thought it did ... Emma has read the whole bible, many times, that's why she's an atheist
"The atheists don't want god telling them what to do." WE atheists don't even believe in a god, much less care if he's telling us ANYTHING. Such a misconception by all these bible thumpers.
Oh man, this was cringy. I'm a self-taught Christian Apologist for the better part of 20 years. I've done my own research on the topic and am confident in my faith. With that being said, the presentation of his rebuttal was painful to watch, and follow. There was too much time in setting up his response and very little time he spend on the actual response. Unfortunately, this kind of forum does easily not lend itself to these kinds of topics, especially when the presenter is all over the place. He did describe himself as a (Biblical) Literalist, which is probably the most difficult kind of person to have a debate with. I do appreciate folks like Emma and you SciMan, who can tackle complex topics and distill them down to digestible and understandable explanations. Seeing videos like this make me want to re-double my efforts in the classes I lead in Christian Apologetics to emphasize being clear and to the point in responses. Also, not being able to say "I do not know" when you are entering murky waters is an acceptable response. I'm not sure that he should have been trying to tackle Emma point by point when his answers were all over the place. When it comes to matters of (any) faith, there are some things that are accepted without understanding - hence the word "faith". However, that is not a mandate to not ask questions or to try to learn about it. Regardless of your stance, I always enjoy learning more about things that I do not understand.
Biblical literalists who don't read it in the original, Hebrew, Greek, or Aramaic are a joke. Of course acknowledging the fact that there are different versions of the bible already shoots themselves in the foot but hey
@kirixen why so much hate? What is it about God that scares you? I think you are the one who doesn't understand "things" so you lash out. I hope you find peace.
@@kirixen”the things you do not know could fill a library” and then goes on to make a definitive claim “there’s no such thing as god”. Yikes. Instant hypocrisy.
My definition is: god/devil are both the result of human interaction with reality. Therefore humans created god. God and the devil are part of the same Ying yang circle.
That’s what I always tell creationists, it’s not really the word of God, because God didn’t write it, men did. And men are sinful, so why would you believe them? What’s stopping them from lying? They can’t ever answer that, and instead just go “lalala I can’t hear you”, and would rather choose bias over logic and critical thinking, id est, the truth.
@@natsterjam And they don't have one single original bible, a book so important to them, that they lost the original.. so who knows what that actually said. the oldest copy is the Sinai bible, and the kjv has 14,800 differences. add to that 1n 1480 some books were removed from the current version of the bible, so every version after that it totally different.
Aside from translations, transcriptions, and certain denominations (eg Mormon), it wasn't centuries later. It was around 50-120 years, depending on which book you're looking at and whose research you believe.
I was brought up with a religious background and once I started going to high school (well it was a comprehensive when I was at school) I told my parents that it wasn't for me anymore. I can understand people's faith but I can't relate despite my upbringing. To me it was just a load of folk tales that just became so established it became cannon. All the best from here in Yorkshire Dan.
As a trained theologian, I personally don't give two handfuls of crap if you believe in some sort of higher being or not. Let's just get that out of the way. Honestly, I think the worst thing that happened to the world was Johannes Gutenberg. He allowed the masses to have access to a document that they had no training in and didn't understand. (It would like your garbage man reading the a textbook on how to perform a appendectomy and then deciding she/he could perform it. (nothing against garbage men. It is an honorable job.)) Creationists have completely misread the Jewish and Christian scriptures. The universe was not created in six days. The story is there for three main reasons: a) to remind people that what we see is good b) to remind people that we are the caretakers and we should treat it with the utmost respect and not abuse it and c) to remember to take at least one day off a week because otherwise we will literally work ourselves to death. I won't bother getting into anything else. I have talked long enough. Here is your TL:DR: Creationists are morons.
@ What are you talking about? Yes. I owned a coffee shop. Yes. I drove motor coach. Yes. I drove school bus. Yes. I worked for a non-profit. Yes. I earned a Bachelor of Arts in Social Work. Yes. I earned a Master of Divinity. Yes. I earned a Master of Art in Christian Education with a specialization in youth ministry. Yes. I earned a Doctorate of Ministry. Yes, I have been a Christian pastor for 30 years. Yes, I was a parish pastor for 15 of those years. Yes, I am now a bishop. Go ahead and look them up! I don’t care! I get hit from the right, the left, and the f*ck you up the butt. Guess what? I am on your side. Deal with it, and learn something. Guess how many F*s I have to give now?
@@SizzlikNo. The problem is with people who 1) don’t understand literary genres or literature in general 2) don’t understand the cultural context of when the different texts were written make assumptions of the texts and read it with a modern western worldview.
One that caused a spirited discussion between me and the chaplain onboard my last ship was that there is more than one version of the 10 Commandments. Not just the story, but of the Commandments themselves.
-The book never contredit itself - same book having 2 parts, the second half speaking about a loving and forgiving god while the first part is describing a god who obliterate towns because they didn't follow his rules. Yes, that's consistent, isn't it? 😂😂😂😂
_"god who obliterate towns because they didn't follow his rules"_ Then I'd rather choose satan. At least he doesn't destroy me and everyone around me if some bloke at the end of the street says "no" to him.
The longer these people talk, the amount of hypocrisy and knit picking becomes overwhelming. Far too much variations of the same oppressive nonsense. You're doing a good job man
And he couldn't even begin to try. He barely watched her video (at least in this cut from Dan, and I refuse to watch Hovind's entire video to find out if he ever hit play).
"It is actually more proof that god's word is inspired and without error" - This is literally the boldest-faced lie of all the bold-face lies anyone has ever said. He literally followed that sentence with an attempt to try to explain away the errors
Which of the 5000+ claimed gods,are you referring too. Ant tell us when exactly has the bible been proven true. Only you indoctrinated nutters claim its true. SO prove it. And while your scrabbling to prove it. explain this. you claim this for a god. That he made adam from dirt, then made eve from one Adams rib. That means that they would have the same DNA,. SO COULD HAVE CHILDREN. End of the fairy tail.
Hovind *hates* Emma with an absolute passion. I suspect the main reasons are: (1) Emma is female (2) Emma is female (3) Emma is smarter than Hovind [admittedly a low bar, but still very true] (4) Emma is female (5) Emma is female (6) Emma is not heterosexual (7) Emma is female (8) Emma is smarter than Hovind (9) Emma is able to argue better than Hovind without resorting to name calling (10) Emma is female (11) Emma is female (12) Emma is female *and* attractive too (13) Emma is smarter than Hovind (14) Emma is female (15) Emma is younger than Hovind (16) Emma is female. I think that about sums up Hovind's take on Emma.
It has been proven 1000 times and will be proven 1000 times more but those who are strong in their FE religion, ignore it even if it is proven infinite number of times.
It doesn't disprove a flat earth. It merely proves a 24 hr sun at one point on the earth. The fact that a globe earth can predict to the second what will happen is irrelevant. Other models may also do that. There you go. That's all of 2025 arguments back and forth summed up in one post.
5:20 You know that when they heap words upon words upon words they are blowing smoke to obfuscate what they cannot explain away. It's always the same.🤷♂
Ssshhhh... the criminal Kent Hovind doesn't like that reality. He will attack you and throw *devastating* rebuttals at you such as "nuh uh!" and "you're a devil worshipper" or even "but if we descended from monkeys why are there still monkeys?"
man definitely is made of flesh. this is the challenge, to reject the animal flesh impulses, and live spiritually for god's ways. we have the opportunity to live eternal life after death. that's a pretty good hope that animals don't share.
8:40 "I'm right, you're wrong. So there." Yes, the ultimate argument ender for grade school kids everywhere. Truly Kent is a master of arguing with children at their level.
Ken's explanation at the end was brilliant, making one more copy of everything so Adam could name it. Reminds me of every explanation of every comic book discrepancy I've ever heard of. One thing that is not addressed enough about Genesis is the naming is all about power over. If I can name you, I have power over, you.
I believe in God,but you can't force your opinions and beliefs on other people,it just pushes them away.at least from my experiences,I wanted to believe,but didn't fully until after my dad passed away,we all have to see it,the way we need to see it,and everyone is different and need their own way
Actually Kent is being extremely woke here and is claiming the Christianity was already moving on from binary definitions of gender during the time of Christ. This is sarcasm in case anyone didn't notice.
Except discussing game characters is much more practical as knowing which is more powerful may impact the performance in the game (depending on the context of the doscussion)
@@evelghostrider Just as with God, I cannot prove that leprechauns don’t exist, I can only point out how nonsensical it is to believe that either do exist.
And don't forget the english version (I assume Kent reads the english one) is a translation of a translation of a translation of the latin version, which itself is a translation of a translation of the texts in hebrew. And which each translation, minor errors seep in, because there are metaphores and expressions that have different meanings, or don't exist at all, in other cultures and languages.
@Yehan-xt7cw That's completely not true. Kent is reading the King James, which is a revision of the Bishop's Bible, which is a revision of Tyndale's bible. Which is a direct translation from the original languages (Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic). Though there is a small section of Revelation in which Tyndale's Greek text is actually a translation back to Greek from the Latin Vulgate (which was a direct translation from the Greek). But that's only there because Erasmus didn't have access to any complete Greek manuscripts of that book. The original claim that the Bible is the most revised and re-written book of stories in literary history is only true if you consider translation to necessarily be revision and re-writing. Pretty much every translation or revision of the Bible is done by referring back to the texts in their original languages. The only exception I can think of is Wycliff's translation into middle English in the 14th century, which was a translation of the Latin Vulgate because that's all he had available.
One of the recent popes (I think either Paul of John-Paul) said (I paraphrase) that the Bible is inerrant, but must be interpreted. If ones interpretation does not conform with reality, it is the interpretation that is in error.
Hey, are you gonna tell us about Russian Collusion and how Trump "attempted to take over the US government" now? And I thought Kenny was delusional! Both of you True Believers, though, right?
Ironic how he preaches the good word of the bible, while there is a sign for Dinosaur Adventure Land behind him. Dinosaur fossils probably being one of the earliest discoveries that lead us to theorise that hundreds of millions of years have passed...not 6000.
Ah, but Kent thinks that all the dinosaurs died out as a result of the Great Flood. You know, that other thing that there's no evidence for. Checkmate, atheist!
@@kostkostkos2514 wow! Thanks for the info as I was very clearly not informed. I thought it was odd to see that! So I assume he is not a fan of carbon dating then?
The age of the Earth really isn't a problem for the Bible. Christians back in the 4th century wrote that Genesis 1 was not intended to be interpreted literally. Modern scholarship generally thinks of that passage as being a rebuttal to the pagan creation myths (most of which took the form of the gods reshaping what was already there), rather than being intended to be read as a scientific textbook. It's worth noting that Christians almost universally abandoned the idea of a young earth back in the 19th century (the one exception of any note being the Seventh Day Adventists, who were at the time a heretical offshoot of Christianity), and the Young Earth Creationism of today was a new movement than only really dates back to the 1950s.
Why are heavily religious the ones who always spout blasphemy and have to take little digs at those who are Athiest. The fact he feels the need to defend it so just demonstrates the indoctrination
To be fair there's plenty of equally bad rhetoric from the atheist side. A lot of the atheist TH-cam channels contain more personal attacks on Christians than they contain actual arguments against Christianity.
Hello! I am not a young earth creationist, but I am a Christian. I will try my best to explain these: 1: “Jesus’ genealogies in Matthew and Luke differ, so this is a contradiction.” Anyone who studies the genealogies will immediately notice that the genealogies are stated to be of Joseph, not Jesus. Matthew 1:16 reads, “and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ,” while Luke 3:23 reads, “Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli.” Both genealogies clearly state Joseph as the last link of the genealogy, with some separation showing that Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus. Most conservative Bible scholars today take a different view, namely, that Luke is recording Mary’s genealogy and Matthew is recording Joseph’s. Matthew is following the line of Joseph (Jesus’ legal father), through David’s son Solomon, while Luke is following the line of Mary (Jesus’ blood relative), through David’s son Nathan. Since there was no specific Koine Greek word for “son-in-law,” Joseph was called the “son of Heli” by marriage to Mary, Heli’s daughter. Through either Mary’s or Joseph’s line, Jesus is a descendant of David and therefore eligible to be the Messiah. Tracing a genealogy through the mother’s side is unusual, but so was the virgin birth. Luke’s explanation is that Jesus was the son of Joseph, “so it was thought” (Luke 3:23). 2: “Jesus tells Mary Magdalene not to ‘touch’ Him in John 20:17, while later in the chapter (implied in John 20:24 and explicitly in John 20:27) He invites Thomas to touch Him.” The Greek word for ”touch” in John 20:17 is ἅπτομαι (haptomai). It can also mean: “to cling to,” “to hold fast,” ”to detain.” Jesus’ command to Mary is not about physical touch, but about not clinging to Him or trying to hold Him back. Jesus is not forbidding all touching, as if He were a ghost; rather, He is telling Mary that she must not cling to Him as though He were about to stay permanently. His ascension has not yet occurred, and His presence will soon change. Thus, Jesus is not denying Mary Magdalene any physical contact, but is teaching her that His relationship with His followers will soon change after His ascension. 3. “Genesis 1 and 2 are differing creations stories and contradict each other.” Genesis 1:1-2:3 provides us with a chronological account of what God did on each of the days during Creation Week. Genesis 2:4-25 zooms in on Day Six and shows some of the events of that day. We see no discrepancies here: • Adam is created (Genesis 2:7) • Garden of Eden created (Genesis 2:8-9) • Description of river system in Eden (Genesis 2:10-14) • Adam put in Garden and given instructions (Genesis 2:15-17) • Adam names some of the kinds of animals (Genesis 2:18-20) • God creates Eve (Genesis 2:21-22) • Description of Adam, Eve, and marriage (Genesis 2:23-25) The particular issue that people have with Genesis 2 is that the order of the creation of man, animals, and trees seems to be contrary to the order stated in Genesis 1. Genesis 2:7 describes the creation of man. “And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.” (Genesis 2:7) Following the creation of man, Genesis 2:9 mentions that God created trees, including the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. “And out of the ground the Lord God made every tree grow that is pleasant to the sight and good for food. The tree of life was also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.” (Genesis 2:9) Then Genesis 2:19 mentions the creation of certain land animals. “Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them.” (Genesis 2:19) At first glance this seems to be a contradiction because Genesis 1 has the animals and trees created prior to the creation of man; however, both issues can be resolved by an understanding of the original language and the translation process.2 The Hebrew word for formed in both passages is “yatsar”. The New King James Version (quoted above) translates the verb in its perfect form. However, this Hebrew word may also be translated in its pluperfect form. In this case, it would read that God “had formed” these creatures, as some other translations have it (e.g. ESV, NIV, etc.) For example, Genesis 2:19 in the NIV states: “Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them.” This rendering eliminates any problem with the chronology because it refers to what God had already done earlier in Creation Week. This would mean that the plants (Genesis 2:9) and the animals (Genesis 2:19) had already been formed by God earlier in Creation Week. William Tyndale was the first to translate an English Bible directly from the original languages, and he also translated the verb in its pluperfect form. “And after that the Lord God had made of the earth all manner beasts of the field, and all manner fowls of the air, he brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them. And as Adam called all manner living beasts: even so are their names.” (Tyndale, Genesis 2:19) Hope this answers some of the errors! I love you channels and videos ❤
Whilst I don't necessarily buy all of our explanations, I do want to say that your explanations are a million times better then Kent Hovind's. Had he been remotely capable of expressing the discrepancies in the way you did, he would probably have a lot more respect and credence. Thank you for taking the time to put such a well-written response.
OK. I can maybe buy your explanation. But if the translation from Greek or Hebrew or whatever was wrong, it gets translated to something that didn't mean what it mean, why don't Christians correct them? Just change "son" to "son-in-law", and "touch" to "cling to" in the next edition, why Christians don't do that? Most people don't have time to learn Greek/Latin/Hebrew or whatever to learn the original meaning. Also I'm pretty sure if they twist God's words that's a sin, so they should really do that ASAP?
@@haomingjin1617 You’re absolutely right: twisting God’s words is a grave sin (see Deuteronomy 4:2, Revelation 22:18-19). However, that’s precisely why Christians do not rush to “fix” or alter translations on a whim. To tamper with the divinely inspired word in an unfaithful or arbitrary way would be far worse than allowing small uncertainties or variations to remain under prayerful study. A translation must reflect what the text says, while interpretation involves explaining what it means. Language is complex, and words don’t always map perfectly across different tongues. Ancient Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic often carry meanings that no single English word can fully capture. Scholars carefully balance accuracy and readability in translations, but decisions sometimes require careful nuance. If Christians recklessly “corrected” every difficult word without scholarly consensus, they could distort the meaning of Scripture rather than preserve it. For example, in John 20:17, where Jesus says, “Touch me not” (KJV), newer translations often say “Do not cling to me” because Greek scholars recognize the nuance in the word haptomai. However, this isn’t about “fixing” a mistake; it’s about refining understanding as linguistic knowledge advances. Most Christians don’t have the time to learn Greek or Hebrew, and they don’t need to. God has provided the Church with faithful scholars and teachers who dedicate their lives to understanding the Scriptures and helping others interpret them. Christians are encouraged to study various translations, consult commentaries, and listen to trusted teachers to gain deeper understanding. Christians believe that divinely inspired word (2 Timothy 3:16) is alive and active (Hebrews 4:12), and its core message is clear and unchanging across all translations: God’s love, the call to repentance, and the truth of salvation through Christ Jesus. While refining translations over time is a careful and legitimate process, treating Scripture as though it needs to be “patched” like faulty software would undermine its authority and dishonour it. Thank you for the question!
@@haomingjin1617 You’re absolutely right: twisting God’s words is a grave sin (see Deuteronomy 4:2, Revelation 22:18-19). However, that’s precisely why Christians do not rush to “fix” or alter translations on a whim. To tamper with the divinely inspired word in an unfaithful or arbitrary way would be far worse than allowing small uncertainties or variations to remain under prayerful study. A translation must reflect what the text says, while interpretation involves explaining what it means. Language is complex, and words don’t always map perfectly across different tongues. Ancient Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic often carry meanings that no single English word can fully capture. Scholars carefully balance accuracy and readability in translations, but decisions sometimes require careful nuance. If Christians recklessly “corrected” every difficult word without scholarly consensus, they could distort the meaning of Scripture rather than preserve it. For example, in John 20:17, where Jesus says, “Touch me not” (KJV), newer translations often say “Do not cling to me” because Greek scholars recognize the nuance in the word haptomai. However, this isn’t about “fixing” a mistake; it’s about refining understanding as linguistic knowledge advances. Most Christians don’t have the time to learn Greek or Hebrew, and they don’t need to. God has provided the Church with faithful scholars and teachers who dedicate their lives to understanding the Scriptures and helping others interpret them. Christians are encouraged to study various translations, consult commentaries, and listen to trusted teachers to gain deeper understanding. Christians believe that divinely inspired word (2 Timothy 3:16) is alive and active (Hebrews 4:12), and its core message is clear and unchanging across all translations: God’s love, the call to repentance, and the truth of salvation through Christ Jesus. While refining translations over time is a careful and legitimate process, treating Scripture as though it needs to be “patched” like faulty software would undermine its authority and dishonour it. Thank you for the question!
All my schooling was done by Catholic nuns and priests. The priests were highly qualified in theology and they made it clear that the bible should not be taken literally , but rather as a guide for behavior and basically how to be a good person. They knew that the bible was written by different people at different times, based on stories passed down verbally by illiterate people and parts like the creation in 7 days was not correct, just a simple explanation for simple people. I know some people don't agree with what I just wrote, but I don't care what you think and you won't see me in a church on Sunday.
For all it's (many) flaws, the Catholic Church did at least modify their doctrines in the light of scientific discovery. Eventually, when they realised they couldn't just make science 'go away' anymore.
"The priests were highly qualified in theology and they made it clear that the bible should not be taken literally , but rather as a guide for behavior and basically how to be a good person" Which as a thing isn't really that bad at all. As long as the entire old testament is ignored because that teaches that murder, genocide, slavery, rape and incest are OK.
As an ex-Roman Catholic, I must admit we weren't raised reading the bible, because the church believes the bible is difficult to interpret, so we're raised on the catechism, a distillation of church dogmas for children. We're not discouraged from reading the bible, but taught that it needs to be read in just the right way! It's a massive book written by multiple authors, and heavy on metaphor and allegory. What would astonishing is if it didn't contain a horde of contradictions!
The same here. My favourite part of the Catechism that we were taught was "He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience". I think this line is what ultimately turned me away from the Church. I could never in good conscience follow many of the teachings of the Church
it is a narrative history, mostly written by people who lived before scientific instrumentation. it is also only relatively recently that people were so rebellious as to translate the bible into languages that common people could read for themselves. - because people being able to read it for themselves would undermine the authoritarianism the church relied on to control the masses.
Same. In RE classes (catholic schools) we were taught that the bible is a mish-mash of myth, legend, story-telling, and some rough history in the later OT books. Even the NT we were taught that a lot of it is illustrative and not to be read as literal truth/history. But the bible bash nut jobs regard catholics as pagans anyway! I'm thoroughly atheist now, just wish I'd done that sooner.
@@ronkelley5348 Well, we can't expect reason from fundie whackjobs who read the bible as literal history, Noah's ark and all. They are a totally lost cause who don't know how to think, and reject skepticism as the tool of Satan!
I used to watch and follow this guy as a HUGE fan as a teen. Looking at it now, at bare minimum, he strongly engages in an "us/them" mentality. I remember it being that way back then, and I remember it developing a belief in me that Athiests were all dark, deceived, "them"s. Made me want to avoid Athiests at all costs. If we take the Jesus for who He is...he did not push his followers to avoid others who disagree. He moved toward them. My beliefs as a Christian have evolved quite a bit since then, and maybe some of that is maturing as an adult, but I distain the concept of pushing away those who don't agree with me. I cherish engaging with people, hearing ideas that challenge me, etc.
Until someone actually shows me an actual contradiction, it’s pretty easy to say there are no contradictions. It’s usually just people parroting the internet or a very surface level reading of an English translation and then they scoff and say it contradicts itself.
@@znail4675You mean the differences in detail between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2? What are you claiming is a contradiction? There are no contradictions. The first chapter is a poetic narration of the creation of the universe. The second chapter is a close up look of man’s beginning. Do you know what a contradiction is?
@@elyjahstark A contradiction is when facts doesn't match up. But this is only a problem if you consider the Bible the direct word of God that can't be wrong.
The reason why "Creationism" is the wrong way to "interpret" the Bible is because it relies heavily on literalism while completely marginalizes even ignoring the ontological and allegorical components which is the way the Bible was intended to be read. "All ism's are bad" - Ferris Bueller.
I didn’t find kent’s “explanations” very persuasive, but I didn’t find them to be explanations either. Just a smug idiot reading clearly contradictory citations from scripture and then asserting that it _isn’t_ a contradiction because he doesn’t want it to be. Basically just “nuh-uh” to everything. He’s not even _trying_ to explain them, just berating the audience for thinking that contradictions are contradictions. Full blown gaslighting.
Yeah, they never explain how “God” as an explanation, is actually an explanation. They believe that the claim of having an explanation is the same as actually having an explanation.
As a Christian, I agree with my Pastor - The Bible isn't a good historical document. It's a good book to teach you how to love one another, live a full life, and with God's grace, have an everlasting life in Heaven.
Can I just say you've been lied to, I myself could not read nor understand the bible u till I encountered the livng God and was filled with the promised holy spirit the word is spirit and life then I could see and understand. We have the original septuagint which clears up translation issues with dates but when I pray and seek the answers unfold and line up. As we believe in the word and see the word of God. Can I advise you to ask God only to teach you and follow those who believe Gods word all these questions are answered as we delve deeper to understand. Much love.
This isn’t hard people. Matthew records Joseph’s biological father and Luke records his legal father. This is confirmed in the different words that Matthew and Luke use to describe Joseph’s relation to Jacob and Heli. Matthew uses the Greek word gennao when describing how Jacob “became the father of Joseph.” Matthew uses the word to be taken biologically, because it’s the same word that he uses to describe how Jesus was “born” of Mary.
Kent did a terrible job with that, but it's actually pretty straightforward. Including both is intentional and valuable in context of other stories throughout the bible.
There is a simple word for twisting and manipulating things to cover up wrongs: LYING. If you were to read your bible stories you should find that lying is frowned upon and those that lie and push others to lie are generally regarded as followers of The Deceiver. Therefore according to the stories in your bible YOU are a follower of The Deceiver.
@@tyemaddog But why do you say that when even the best theologians and apologists use nothing but God of the gaps arguments while trying to dress them up as something prettier. Kent is the pig, and theologians and apologists are just people trying to put lipstick on that pig.
Religion is based on contradiction. For example you can't have an all knowing god and still have freewill and sin. If god is all knowing and designed everything based on infinite knowledge, then everything is predetermined. Thus making freewill and sin impossible. If freewill exists, then god isn't all knowing.
That’s not entirely true. You can have an all knowing entity and still have free will. The entity will know all possible ends, but you are free to chose your personal way through all these possibilities. It’s like playing chess. You could learn all possible openings and moves, and by that, you could theoretically predict every outcome of the game, but that doesn’t mean that you‘re not allowed to play the game the way you want to …
@@SixStringSamur4i . Sorry but no. Knowing all possibilities does not remove the fact that an omniscient being would know which possibility would occur.
@@SixStringSamur4i But if he doesn't know what choice the human will make, he is not omniscient. If he already knows what choice you will make, then free will doesn't really make sense because the outcome was already predetermined.
@@SixStringSamur4i If you play chess against an other human, you could think you have a free will, but if god would be the commentator of the game and will say the next move of white is d2 - d4, you wouldn´t think that anymore. You live your life and think you have a free will, but God knows before you are born all of your sins and if you will go to hell or to heaven. You have no chance of influencing the outcome. So the free will is just an illusion. The best part, god created mankind and he knew that he has to drown them all in the great flood, because of their sins. He himself created them with all the sins, he knew the outcome and he could easily change his desgin, but he prefered to kill them all.
You are wrong about the word 'father', Dan. In the Bible, the Hebrew words translated as 'father' and 'son' ('ab' and 'bar') are occasionally used as synonyms for 'ancestor' and 'descendant' respectively. Biblical genealogies are most often lists of tribal lineage rather than family trees, so 'father of' and 'son of' don't necessarily imply a direct parental relationship.
Dan wasn't wrong, father means father in English, is it his fault the English words in the English version of Bible don't mean what the English word means, but means what the Hebrew word means? if you are right, then the Bible gets translated wrong, and should be corrected, just change "father" and "son" to "ancestor" and "descendant" in the next edition, simple.
Hea so condescending its unbelievable. Calling out rhe education of others when he got his PhD from a Kellogs box.
Probably wasn't even Kelloggs, more likely Asda own brand. ( in USA)Walmart.
I could be mistaken, but I believe that his PhD came from a 'university' - that HE founded!
rationalwiki.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind%27s_doctoral_dissertations
rationalwiki.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind%27s_doctoral_dissertations#/media/File:PatriotU_Crop.jpg
His dissertation at his ranch house diploma mill literally begins, "Hi. My name is Kent Hovind".
I doubt he can even spell PhD.
@@chriswhitehouse9137 Followed by:
A dissertation or thesis is a long piece of academic writing based on original research, submitted as part of an undergraduate or postgraduate degree. The structure of a dissertation depends on your field, but it is usually divided into at least four or five chapters (including an introduction and conclusion chapter).
How many words is that so far
I take comfort in the fact that Hovind is so much older than me that probability dictates that I at some point will be living in a world without Kent Hovind.
Well I have some bad news for you - and it's called Eric Hovind.
@drunkenhobo8020 Ahh, yes.
"The spawn of Satan". Lol.
Roll on that blessed day. Lol.
Well I have no idea how old you are but it can’t happen soon enough for me!
Lucky you...but then it does seem quite a few younger grifters will fill the ranks
9:00 Kent saying "You need to learn how to read" then stumbling over the first word. Comedy bronze😭
he stumbled the whole video lol
Bronze. 😂 😂
Not only that. He constantly stumbles and changes words he is reading off his screen. He paraphrases and fully changes words as he is reading them from the Bible. And he can’t argue that in any way. He can deny it, but that’s nothing new for him. All he does is deny reality haha.
Hahha wait, so Adam chose the names for his animals then picked one of them to be his wife?! Is that the way Ken said it or am I playing his game of twisting words?! Well, I’m choosing to play his game and state it is fact then, he definitely said that and he can’t convince me otherwise. Adam chose one of the animals as his wife. 😂
@@RufotrisRootedRockhoundthis is the first case of zoophylia...
Kent complains how Emma can't read/comprehend text then he proceeds to ramble and read incoherently. Priceless.
What more can we expect from another con man convicted felon grifter?
Skeptics: "Did the animals, trees and birds come before or after man?"
Kent: "Yes"
🤦♂
And those are not the easy to prove ones. Start looking at answers that are numbers and find other places with the same questions. The numbered answers change (in some cases a lot).
Kent is a dumba$$ grifter. I expect nothing more from him. EDIT: GRIFTER
Wait! Kent stole my kind of answers? I'll suit!
The level of mental gymnastics people will go to to twist logic to fit the Bible would give Escher nightmares.
Has this guy ever read a high school biology text book😂 I think not.
Nice.
When we gonna see a list of "scientific" contradictions that atheists can't answer?
@@kellykubik4514that’s why he works for a 5 grade textbook
Or Hans Giger!
Hovind: "Yes, exactly, that's what's written down." Two seconds later; "But that can't be a contradiction because it's the Bible".
His arguments for any they aren't contradictions are 9/10 just him saying "no, they aren't because they are not"
His arguments for any they aren't contradictions are 9/10 just him saying "no, they aren't because they are not"
My favourite is when he, and others, try to convince people that everything in the bible is true... by citing the bible.
That kind of circular reasoning would never work for any subject, but for this particularly it's insane. Why would anyone use something that the other people don't believe is anything more than a collection of parables, to prove to those non-believers that it's *more* and is actually the word of an all-seeing, all-knowing, all-powerful deity that is responsible for creating our entire existence? The bible is true because the bible says it's true. Well I say I'm a 15-foot purple chicken Jedi master with lasers for eyes, and you have to believe me, because I'm a purple chicken Jedi master and I say so.
Every person I've ever spoke to that refutes God has always admitted the same thing to me..
When they faced an instant life or death situation they found themselves asking the thing they have refuted their entire life to help or save them some how ...
Please God if your real help me !!
You who don't believe will one day do the same.
@@evelghostriderhow many people you know have actually had an "instant life or death situation"?
It's almost as if different people tell different versions of fairy tales.
Who would have thought... 😊
In truth, the same can be said of evolution and gravity, when you ask the majority of people.
Like the Brothers Grimm
Lol. Riiiiigbt. It's like...let me reconstruct this made up thing to give me extra comfort because I'm scared to die.
@@daftpunkking909woah there, at least Grimm’s fairy tales are almost believable
Kent thinks man and dinosaurs existed at the same time. All within the last 6000 years
YABBA DABBA DOO!!!
.
I prefer the book about a student with a cloak that makes him invisible, and his friend has a car that flies.
It's totally and utterly true as well. I know this is a fact because I have been to some of the locations mentioned in that book and they exist therefore absolutely everything in that book is totally and utterly true. Also there are less contradictions than the bible stories.
I prefer the book of friendship and jewlery. It has orks and elves..good moral story
@@Sizzlik Very true, the demonstrations of companionship despite adversity are strong morals to abide by. Also, despite never having seen an orc or elf, the entire book must be entirely true because there are multiple books that refer to each other, which means they are all true, and I have seen and even *held* a gold ring which is absolute proof of everything.
MUCH more credible.
@@nickryan3417 And, those books are written in different languages, in different countries by totally unrelated authors. And, they agree with one another.
Is he going for the record "Most pompous and insufferable person on the internet"?
He's really putting every rotten scrap of what's left of his heart into it.
Beating Nathan Oakley to that title seems to be mission impossible.
if he is he's up against some stiff competition
He surely gives woke cultists a run for their money.
@@andregon4366Well.......you tried.
I don't know what it is, but everything about Kent's face, voice and general demeanor just makes me extremely uncomfortable...
yeah, i cant quite place the feeling but it is definitely uncomfortable
@@lordvile1209 Does the word 'slimy' get close? (I mean Hovind, not you).
He's just a creep.
Someone you don't want around children (alone).
Hovind reminds me of Dick Dastardly from the old cartoons or the old used car salesman passing off rusted through metal as the patina of a classic car.
He's one creepy bloke
I can feel my brain cells dying while listening to Kent.
I can feel Kent's brain cells dying every time he opens his mouth.
Kent Hovind is an IQ lowering cannon of crap.
7:52 hey, Kent, quick question. Who let Satan into the garden in the first place? How was he able to talk to and trick one of the only two humans at the time into going against gods will? Was god asleep? He is all seeing and all knowing right?
God did. God gave Satan dominion over the Earth. Christians get a bit upset when you tell them spicy boi is in charge of things.
@ I mean god knows everything (not counting all the times he has to ask humans questions about what was going on)
@@braedenmclean5304 right! In places it reads like God is some Mafioso type. At Sodom and Gomorrah he walks around other villages going door to door asking questions, and he is accompanied by "the elders". Who the hell are they?
redundant rhetoric about people with ears but can't hear blathered by someone with eyes that can't comprehend
I really like your user pic.
Kent doing exactly what he complains about other people doing? I am SO shocked. That is one HELL of a twist.
The heaps of Copium he needs for this is painful.
Haven't ever heard "copium" before, but I love it.
He might as well have just said "the bible is always correct" and ended the video, for all the good this argument did him.
@@kentenit's cool you learned it
I just want to see what the idiots behind his camera look like. I always imagine them as apes slinging shit
He must be in much pain right now because of the depletion of the world's supply of Copium... all the flerfs are overdosing on it right now, so there's none left for the Kent Hovinds of the world.😅
The best part of the genealogy of Joseph, is that it's all given to show how Jesus, being the son of Joseph, fulfils a prophecy. But that all becomes irrelevant when you then claim that Joseph ISN'T the father anyway!
No it doesn't, because Joseph willingly adopted and took Jesus as his own. He didn't have to share DNA with his adopted son for his heritage to apply, from the standpoint of Jewish (or any, really) law.
@@theradgegadgie6352🤦🏻♂️
@@daveg-Vancouver_Island Seriously. There's nothing too odd in Bronze Age law about a prince being adopted.
@@theradgegadgie6352I don’t think you can seriously equate begetting with adopting when the subject is about continuity !
@@theradgegadgie6352 And all this so called history, wasnt written till many decades after its claimed to have happened. So explain that, can you point us to other places other than the bible, were all this evidence is also available. you cant as its only in the bible. Which you don't have a original. ONLY HUNDRESDS OF VERSIONS. And just for good measure explain this for us. you claim, that he made adam from dirt, then made eve from Adams rib. That means that they would have the same DNA,. SO COULD HAVE CHILDREN. End of the fairy tail
8:02 -- A common misconception. Emma works for _Santa,_ not Satan. You have the wrong Big Red, Dan.
Questioning Emma's reading skills ! Casting aspersions on English education !! I didn't think I could despise Kent Hovind more, but he's done it.
It's not even 9àm and after listening to Kent I need to reach for a strong alcoholic beverage
I am pretty sure Kent is a typo.
Humanity has too many of those typos unfortunately
Kent has that affect on people.
yea... at this rate though Im not going to have anything left for christmas.
Yeah, whenever I hear Kent's southern drawl, I'm inclined to think the American civil war never got completely finished.
He didn’t convince anyone, all he did was insult Emma (very Christian), say some words then act like what he said proved her wrong… very condescending for a Christian as well
Hardcore US evangelicals *love* being condescending towards unbelievers for some reason.
But what is a Christian? It can be anything, and can always be justified by one Bible passage or another.
Kent's whole thing is being massively condescending (and lying about science, obviously). Because in his mind he is clearly the only person who really understands the reality. It's deeply aggravating.
I’d bet money KH haaaaates women. Particularly ones who like education, critical thinking, independence, etc. At best he would *tolerate* a woman who submits to him.
@@buenacghe was convicted of domestic violence against his wife in 2021
The fact we have hours of contradictions we would like to discuss about the perfect book kind of says it all
The argument that your criticisms have no legitimacy if u havent read The Bible is not an argument. I never read the bible and know its hog wash. Consider the context: the period of time, how ignorant the people were, and the oppressive nature of soceity. U need obedient little citizens. Then u have the obvious falsehoods. U have Noahs Ark, the talking snake, the false assertion that the earth is 5000 years old. People thought the earth is flat. (But no one does today, thankfully....). We didnt know what a germ was.
Plus, who wants to read a book with great life lessons like if a man grapes your daughter, he owes u 10 shillings or some sh!t? Or how its anti abortion, but if a woman gets preggo and the father is in doubt, u give her bitter water and if the baby lives, she wasn't unfaithful. Or how it condones slavery. Yep. Such a guiding light. Let me read this 1000 year old book to get my prioritys straight. ISIC AND EZEKIEL DID THIS AND THIS....WHICH MEANS TRUMP SHOULD BE PRESIDENT OR SOMETHING.
66 different authors. Yet same core. Jesus taught using metaphors for a reason. We all have different beliefs and values. How boring if we didn't 😊
@@tyemaddog but then, the punishment, to misinterpret them, shouldn't exist ;)
@@tyemaddog in which case the Creator needs to go on a reading comprehension and marketing course.
@@tyemaddog 66 different books - Paul is recognised as writing multiple of the NT books though not all of the letters that bare his name; whilst eg Isaiah is thought to have several authors over the time span of the text. And then there are editors such as in Genesis weaving together different traditions (ie why 2 distinct creation accounts). So no idea how many authors, and revisors - but agree no need to presume literalism, the text is much richer than than.
I think that those contradictions presented were pretty clear and i dont think Kent knows what a contradiction is. There was a quote once "I have no problem with God, it's his fan club i cant stand".
Imagine an american questioning another country's education system
Isn´t that normal? Americans believeing they are living in god´s own country and thereby raised above everything else
Christian hardcores: "The Bible is literal."
Also Christian hardcores: "No, see, the Bible meant..."
Anyone who says Luke is literal can be dismissed without thought. The gospel of Luke is a *musical*
@@Olyfrunanyone who believes a single thing in the bible is invalid anyway
Why are we wasting any time on this old crap? You want to be religious, found a religion for the 21st century.
@@gdutfulkbhh7537 Because at least in the United States the Southern Strategy has used religion to grab political power. Donald Trump was just elected president in large part thanks to regular Christian folks thinking he's a their guy.
I don't know that any of this is helping because not only did Trump win he won the popular vote which is.... gross. Why are we here now? To laugh until I die because I can't change anything. Religious folks won again. Yay.
Mr Anderson delivered a wonderful blow to Kent in one of their debates. I think Anderson said; "I'm not saying the Bible is wrong, I'm saying you're wrong," and the look on Kent's face was priceless. After all, Kent won't admit that the Bible is wrong, but he also can't admit that he is wrong.
Y
A man who bought a fake PhD asserts that Emma has not done adequate research, attacks her motivation, and has to invent Bible stories of his own to 'prove' her wrong.
5:45 - just being one of the countless descendants of Solomon doesn't make someone king Kent. Just look up how many Americans are descendants of European royalty.
Spoilers, it's probably every single person living in North America. Probably every human in North America has European royalty somewhere in their genealogy.
I questioned my boss’s reading skills one time and he literally threw the book at me.
You're hereby sacked.
A convicted criminal, charged with fraud, defending a book of fairy tales.
You couldn't make this up. 😆
I imagine such a one might even swear truth by this book in court before telling a series of lies
Don't forget that he has also beaten his wives, and permitted a convicted SO to share a bed with a vulnerable teenager. A truly horrible beast.
Fairy tales? Haha. Kent aside, Okay , like
Jesus never really existed right? Probably too lazy to actually research any of it
Kent was also found guilty for domestic violence.
I suppose, to Kent, that doesn't count because the judges verdict contradicted Kent's opinion... And we all now know that Kent doesn't believe in contradictions.
@@tyemaddogwell...can you name a credible independent source that confirms he even existed?
If so...tell the vast number of religious scholars that would die and/or kill for having one.😏
That joke at literacy in England is funny from an American guy. 52% of Americans are functionally illiterate. They know how to read, but they're stuck at the level of a 6th grader and they don't really understand what they're reading.
And they elected one of those types twice as their president
And they still wonder why it is, that in the UK they also speak English.
British have a similar reading level so don't act superior.
52% is enough people to elect a president.
@didymus3348
That is not correct. According to the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation world literacy levels, the UK is 99%, and the USA is 86%. It's hardly similar.
The levels of twisting he has to do.... either don't explain it, say it says something it doesn't, or just simply make something up and say it says something nobody has ever thought it did ...
Emma has read the whole bible, many times, that's why she's an atheist
"The atheists don't want god telling them what to do." WE atheists don't even believe in a god, much less care if he's telling us ANYTHING. Such a misconception by all these bible thumpers.
Oh man, this was cringy.
I'm a self-taught Christian Apologist for the better part of 20 years. I've done my own research on the topic and am confident in my faith. With that being said, the presentation of his rebuttal was painful to watch, and follow. There was too much time in setting up his response and very little time he spend on the actual response. Unfortunately, this kind of forum does easily not lend itself to these kinds of topics, especially when the presenter is all over the place.
He did describe himself as a (Biblical) Literalist, which is probably the most difficult kind of person to have a debate with. I do appreciate folks like Emma and you SciMan, who can tackle complex topics and distill them down to digestible and understandable explanations. Seeing videos like this make me want to re-double my efforts in the classes I lead in Christian Apologetics to emphasize being clear and to the point in responses.
Also, not being able to say "I do not know" when you are entering murky waters is an acceptable response. I'm not sure that he should have been trying to tackle Emma point by point when his answers were all over the place. When it comes to matters of (any) faith, there are some things that are accepted without understanding - hence the word "faith". However, that is not a mandate to not ask questions or to try to learn about it. Regardless of your stance, I always enjoy learning more about things that I do not understand.
As a Christian I couldn't have said it better myself.
Biblical literalists who don't read it in the original, Hebrew, Greek, or Aramaic are a joke. Of course acknowledging the fact that there are different versions of the bible already shoots themselves in the foot but hey
The things you do not understand could fill a library. Stop being so confident in your ignorance. There's no such thing as god. It's time to grow up.
@kirixen why so much hate? What is it about God that scares you? I think you are the one who doesn't understand "things" so you lash out. I hope you find peace.
@@kirixen”the things you do not know could fill a library” and then goes on to make a definitive claim “there’s no such thing as god”. Yikes. Instant hypocrisy.
’Gods word’ ….all written by humans centuries after Jesus supposedly existed….
And re-written, and re-written, over and over.
But yeah, it's expected to be believed, every word. 🤦♂
My definition is: god/devil are both the result of human interaction with reality. Therefore humans created god. God and the devil are part of the same Ying yang circle.
That’s what I always tell creationists, it’s not really the word of God, because God didn’t write it, men did. And men are sinful, so why would you believe them? What’s stopping them from lying? They can’t ever answer that, and instead just go “lalala I can’t hear you”, and would rather choose bias over logic and critical thinking, id est, the truth.
@@natsterjam And they don't have one single original bible, a book so important to them, that they lost the original.. so who knows what that actually said. the oldest copy is the Sinai bible, and the kjv has 14,800 differences. add to that 1n 1480 some books were removed from the current version of the bible, so every version after that it totally different.
Aside from translations, transcriptions, and certain denominations (eg Mormon), it wasn't centuries later. It was around 50-120 years, depending on which book you're looking at and whose research you believe.
Does this Hovind guy still go by his doctorate ? Coz he did his phd in a parking lot.
@@anuragdas2741 you cant call a patch of dirt in a forest a parking lot
@@TycerKirk I really can't believe that people fall for this guy.
Sadly, they do. Dunning Kruger and arrogant ignorance is all they have.
Yes, he still calls himself doctor, the PhD he got from Disneyland university.😅😅. His fellow graduate was Daffy Duck😂😂
Hovind’s educational ‘qualifications’ were given by a non-accredited institution. These credentials are worthless.
I was brought up with a religious background and once I started going to high school (well it was a comprehensive when I was at school) I told my parents that it wasn't for me anymore. I can understand people's faith but I can't relate despite my upbringing. To me it was just a load of folk tales that just became so established it became cannon. All the best from here in Yorkshire Dan.
As a trained theologian, I personally don't give two handfuls of crap if you believe in some sort of higher being or not. Let's just get that out of the way. Honestly, I think the worst thing that happened to the world was Johannes Gutenberg. He allowed the masses to have access to a document that they had no training in and didn't understand. (It would like your garbage man reading the a textbook on how to perform a appendectomy and then deciding she/he could perform it. (nothing against garbage men. It is an honorable job.)) Creationists have completely misread the Jewish and Christian scriptures. The universe was not created in six days. The story is there for three main reasons: a) to remind people that what we see is good b) to remind people that we are the caretakers and we should treat it with the utmost respect and not abuse it and c) to remember to take at least one day off a week because otherwise we will literally work ourselves to death. I won't bother getting into anything else. I have talked long enough. Here is your TL:DR: Creationists are morons.
There are many theologians who are trained at institutions that do not teach the Bible correctly. You are one of them.
So..the guy who ran a copy shop is the evil, not the authors or distributors? Interessting but not surprizing view from a "trained" theologist 😂
@ What are you talking about? Yes. I owned a coffee shop. Yes. I drove motor coach. Yes. I drove school bus. Yes. I worked for a non-profit. Yes. I earned a Bachelor of Arts in Social Work. Yes. I earned a Master of Divinity. Yes. I earned a Master of Art in Christian Education with a specialization in youth ministry. Yes. I earned a Doctorate of Ministry. Yes, I have been a Christian pastor for 30 years. Yes, I was a parish pastor for 15 of those years. Yes, I am now a bishop. Go ahead and look them up! I don’t care! I get hit from the right, the left, and the f*ck you up the butt. Guess what? I am on your side. Deal with it, and learn something. Guess how many F*s I have to give now?
Hear, hear!
@@SizzlikNo. The problem is with people who 1) don’t understand literary genres or literature in general 2) don’t understand the cultural context of when the different texts were written make assumptions of the texts and read it with a modern western worldview.
One that caused a spirited discussion between me and the chaplain onboard my last ship was that there is more than one version of the 10 Commandments. Not just the story, but of the Commandments themselves.
"Luke, i am your father" : Darth skyDaddy probably...
-The book never contredit itself
- same book having 2 parts, the second half speaking about a loving and forgiving god while the first part is describing a god who obliterate towns because they didn't follow his rules.
Yes, that's consistent, isn't it? 😂😂😂😂
Towns? How about entire nations?
Move along, nothing to see here 😂
_"god who obliterate towns because they didn't follow his rules"_
Then I'd rather choose satan. At least he doesn't destroy me and everyone around me if some bloke at the end of the street says "no" to him.
You are talking about that most benevolent and loving God that allows children to die of cancer right.?
well they do say that people change after they have a kid /s
Love ET and her work.
I haven't really thought about it before but I find it hilarious that her initials spell ET and she often describes herself as "just a little guy" 😂
I was amazed to see them here!
Love he ST stuff as well.
@@Olyfrun Emma is one person tho...
Bro I'm dumb I thought you were talking about the fucking alien for a second lmao
Tbh thought this was a video from Emma Thorne with the thumbnail lol
The longer these people talk, the amount of hypocrisy and knit picking becomes overwhelming. Far too much variations of the same oppressive nonsense. You're doing a good job man
And then Joseph looked at Mary and said:
" And he better be the ONLY son of god"...
I miss sam😢
🤣
Emma Thorne is one of my favorite TH-camrs, and seeing Kent try and debunk her is so hilarious.
And he couldn't even begin to try. He barely watched her video (at least in this cut from Dan, and I refuse to watch Hovind's entire video to find out if he ever hit play).
She's such a silly little guy.
"It is actually more proof that god's word is inspired and without error" - This is literally the boldest-faced lie of all the bold-face lies anyone has ever said. He literally followed that sentence with an attempt to try to explain away the errors
Which of the 5000+ claimed gods,are you referring too. Ant tell us when exactly has the bible been proven true. Only you indoctrinated nutters claim its true. SO prove it. And while your scrabbling to prove it. explain this. you claim this for a god. That he made adam from dirt, then made eve from one Adams rib. That means that they would have the same DNA,. SO COULD HAVE CHILDREN. End of the fairy tail.
Kent claiming his PhD is worth the paper it is written on comes close to the boldest faced lie
bald*
@ can be either, original was bare faced meaning bold. But has morphed over the years
"without error" followed by a failed attempt to explain the errors.
I read spec sheets as part of my job.
How come they have way less contradictions than the perfect words of God? Weird
Theological mental gymnastics should be an Olympic event, they're that impressive. 😅
id bet $5 that the bible is the ONLY book kent has ever read
But not all the way through though
I doubt Kent can actually read.
@@BrickNewton and we know kent likes to leave floaters in the toilets back stage, shame on him
@@seanmckelvey6618 he had the picture version
Children's audiobook, narrated by Ken Ham.
Joseph had two dad. Problem solved. I feel like we could make it a children’s book (Joseph had two dads) that would be banned in half the states.
He not the only one as Salathiel father is Jechonias in Matthew but Neri in Luke.
And Joseph's 2 dads are distant cousins😊
@ I mean, they all were then. The flood and all.
why not moses had three step dads... they name three different men as his step father.
@@J_sLaXx actually, it IS possible to have had three stepfathers, but not at the same time. His mother must have been rather busy.
Had to watch as soon as I saw Emma in the thumb nail.
Hovind *hates* Emma with an absolute passion. I suspect the main reasons are: (1) Emma is female (2) Emma is female (3) Emma is smarter than Hovind [admittedly a low bar, but still very true] (4) Emma is female (5) Emma is female (6) Emma is not heterosexual (7) Emma is female (8) Emma is smarter than Hovind (9) Emma is able to argue better than Hovind without resorting to name calling (10) Emma is female (11) Emma is female (12) Emma is female *and* attractive too (13) Emma is smarter than Hovind (14) Emma is female (15) Emma is younger than Hovind (16) Emma is female.
I think that about sums up Hovind's take on Emma.
@@nickryan3417 Spot on :)
With Kent's level of honesty, one wonders how he ever got sent to prison... 🤔🤣🤣🤣🤣
"People with Ears to hear" is a synonym for "Gullible marks."
2:28 'some people don't have ears, well they got ears but they won't listen' how delightful 🤣
Dan what are your thoughts on the 24 hour Antarctica sun finally being proven??
Tune in Friday :)
@@SciManDan oh exciting
“Finally”
It has been proven 1000 times and will be proven 1000 times more but those who are strong in their FE religion, ignore it even if it is proven infinite number of times.
It doesn't disprove a flat earth. It merely proves a 24 hr sun at one point on the earth.
The fact that a globe earth can predict to the second what will happen is irrelevant. Other models may also do that.
There you go. That's all of 2025 arguments back and forth summed up in one post.
5:20 You know that when they heap words upon words upon words they are blowing smoke to obfuscate what they cannot explain away. It's always the same.🤷♂
That they have in common with politicians who don´t want to answer a yes or no question :)
For a Christian, he is very condescending and insulting towards Emma, not very Christian of him.
@@Waterratt4344 Neither is being a wife beater and protecting a pedophile, but he is and does.
It actually is VERY Christian of him...look up the history of Christianity & how it spread & u'll see what I mean
Thanks for this one Dan. @Emmathorne is a fabulous content creator. Hats off to the both of you
Animals before… Animals after, what does it matter when Man is an animal.
Ssshhhh... the criminal Kent Hovind doesn't like that reality. He will attack you and throw *devastating* rebuttals at you such as "nuh uh!" and "you're a devil worshipper" or even "but if we descended from monkeys why are there still monkeys?"
man definitely is made of flesh. this is the challenge, to reject the animal flesh impulses, and live spiritually for god's ways. we have the opportunity to live eternal life after death. that's a pretty good hope that animals don't share.
8:40 "I'm right, you're wrong. So there." Yes, the ultimate argument ender for grade school kids everywhere. Truly Kent is a master of arguing with children at their level.
...followed by the ever popular (on playgrounds everywhere); My Dad can beat up your Dad.
Ken's explanation at the end was brilliant, making one more copy of everything so Adam could name it. Reminds me of every explanation of every comic book discrepancy I've ever heard of. One thing that is not addressed enough about Genesis is the naming is all about power over. If I can name you, I have power over, you.
I believe in God,but you can't force your opinions and beliefs on other people,it just pushes them away.at least from my experiences,I wanted to believe,but didn't fully until after my dad passed away,we all have to see it,the way we need to see it,and everyone is different and need their own way
Actually Kent is being extremely woke here and is claiming the Christianity was already moving on from binary definitions of gender during the time of Christ.
This is sarcasm in case anyone didn't notice.
To me, this is like my kids arguing about which imaginary character in the game they are playing is the most powerful.
Scimandan, Kent or Emma??
Except discussing game characters is much more practical as knowing which is more powerful may impact the performance in the game (depending on the context of the doscussion)
So you have proof God does not exist... please do share buddy. Where can I find this knowledge?
@@evelghostrider Just as with God, I cannot prove that leprechauns don’t exist, I can only point out how nonsensical it is to believe that either do exist.
@dross4207 It is still taking something on faith.
Hell yeah, ive never been here so soon after you posted. Great work, all of it. Thank you
Strange how exponents of the Bible can be so obnoxious.
And so wrong!
That's a good start.
Do you mean proponents?
@@jimburton5592 exponent ..... a person who supports an idea or theory and tries to persuade people of its truth or benefits........ It'll do.
@@dongee1664 Hm, interesting, seems I learned a new definition today. It'll do indeed
10:28 Thanks for the helpful graphic, Kent. Really shows us that the Genesis creation story is nothing but mythology lol
The brothers Grimm also wrote slightly different versions of the same fairy tale.
The Bible is the most revised and re-written book of stories in literary history.
And all lies.
And don't forget the english version (I assume Kent reads the english one) is a translation of a translation of a translation of the latin version, which itself is a translation of a translation of the texts in hebrew.
And which each translation, minor errors seep in, because there are metaphores and expressions that have different meanings, or don't exist at all, in other cultures and languages.
@Yehan-xt7cw That's completely not true. Kent is reading the King James, which is a revision of the Bishop's Bible, which is a revision of Tyndale's bible. Which is a direct translation from the original languages (Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic). Though there is a small section of Revelation in which Tyndale's Greek text is actually a translation back to Greek from the Latin Vulgate (which was a direct translation from the Greek). But that's only there because Erasmus didn't have access to any complete Greek manuscripts of that book.
The original claim that the Bible is the most revised and re-written book of stories in literary history is only true if you consider translation to necessarily be revision and re-writing. Pretty much every translation or revision of the Bible is done by referring back to the texts in their original languages. The only exception I can think of is Wycliff's translation into middle English in the 14th century, which was a translation of the Latin Vulgate because that's all he had available.
@@stephengray1344so it’s a revision, of a revision, translated by hand countless thousands of times. How is that not what they said?
Copying is not revising. Translating is not revising. Nor are either of these rewriting
Does the Bible mean what it says or is what the bible says needs an interpretation in order to understand the writings?
One of the recent popes (I think either Paul of John-Paul) said (I paraphrase) that the Bible is inerrant, but must be interpreted. If ones interpretation does not conform with reality, it is the interpretation that is in error.
@@cruelcarp5516 Every book.. every communication between two people actually.. requires interpretation. That is why misunderstandings happen.
Carelessly Understanding Nonsense Theologically
As I texted Hovid the other day, "Cee u next Tuesday". He didn't turn up. What a c&*t.
I see what you did there! My favourite is; Intelligent Design Is Only Theistic Silliness.
@@mirandahotspring4019 Totally Working Alongside The Shits
@@mirandahotspring4019 I did reply, but the youtube gods blocked it, shame, it was funny.
@@davidobrien7235 That's TH-cam!
Emma is awesome. Kent is the king of the derps.
Kent gets upset when he sees smart women. Same with Donald Trump and his cronies.
smart women like kamala? what a low bar for intelligence you have on the left
Hey, are you gonna tell us about Russian Collusion and how Trump "attempted to take over the US government" now? And I thought Kenny was delusional! Both of you True Believers, though, right?
Odd that you would say this, being that Trump appointed women 10 times smarter than any in the Biden camp.
Ironic how he preaches the good word of the bible, while there is a sign for Dinosaur Adventure Land behind him. Dinosaur fossils probably being one of the earliest discoveries that lead us to theorise that hundreds of millions of years have passed...not 6000.
Ah, but Kent thinks that all the dinosaurs died out as a result of the Great Flood. You know, that other thing that there's no evidence for.
Checkmate, atheist!
Not ironic as the adventure land is his business where he teaches humans lived with dinosaurs
@@kostkostkos2514 wow! Thanks for the info as I was very clearly not informed. I thought it was odd to see that! So I assume he is not a fan of carbon dating then?
The age of the Earth really isn't a problem for the Bible. Christians back in the 4th century wrote that Genesis 1 was not intended to be interpreted literally. Modern scholarship generally thinks of that passage as being a rebuttal to the pagan creation myths (most of which took the form of the gods reshaping what was already there), rather than being intended to be read as a scientific textbook. It's worth noting that Christians almost universally abandoned the idea of a young earth back in the 19th century (the one exception of any note being the Seventh Day Adventists, who were at the time a heretical offshoot of Christianity), and the Young Earth Creationism of today was a new movement than only really dates back to the 1950s.
@@stephengray1344it's a cult, who cares
Why are heavily religious the ones who always spout blasphemy and have to take little digs at those who are Athiest. The fact he feels the need to defend it so just demonstrates the indoctrination
To be fair there's plenty of equally bad rhetoric from the atheist side. A lot of the atheist TH-cam channels contain more personal attacks on Christians than they contain actual arguments against Christianity.
Why do people tar everyone with the same brush??
Emma did a detailed analysis, Kent replies with a condescending "Nuh Uh!"
it looked to me like kent agreed that the bible has contradictions
So Jesus can have two dads, but we cannot have that anymore? That's ridiculous.
Hello! I am not a young earth creationist, but I am a Christian. I will try my best to explain these:
1: “Jesus’ genealogies in Matthew and Luke differ, so this is a contradiction.”
Anyone who studies the genealogies will immediately notice that the genealogies are stated to be of Joseph, not Jesus. Matthew 1:16 reads, “and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ,” while Luke 3:23 reads, “Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli.” Both genealogies clearly state Joseph as the last link of the genealogy, with some separation showing that Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus.
Most conservative Bible scholars today take a different view, namely, that Luke is recording Mary’s genealogy and Matthew is recording Joseph’s. Matthew is following the line of Joseph (Jesus’ legal father), through David’s son Solomon, while Luke is following the line of Mary (Jesus’ blood relative), through David’s son Nathan. Since there was no specific Koine Greek word for “son-in-law,” Joseph was called the “son of Heli” by marriage to Mary, Heli’s daughter. Through either Mary’s or Joseph’s line, Jesus is a descendant of David and therefore eligible to be the Messiah. Tracing a genealogy through the mother’s side is unusual, but so was the virgin birth. Luke’s explanation is that Jesus was the son of Joseph, “so it was thought” (Luke 3:23).
2: “Jesus tells Mary Magdalene not to ‘touch’ Him in John 20:17, while later in the chapter (implied in John 20:24 and explicitly in John 20:27) He invites Thomas to touch Him.”
The Greek word for ”touch” in John 20:17 is ἅπτομαι (haptomai). It can also mean:
“to cling to,”
“to hold fast,”
”to detain.”
Jesus’ command to Mary is not about physical touch, but about not clinging to Him or trying to hold Him back. Jesus is not forbidding all touching, as if He were a ghost; rather, He is telling Mary that she must not cling to Him as though He were about to stay permanently. His ascension has not yet occurred, and His presence will soon change. Thus, Jesus is not denying Mary Magdalene any physical contact, but is teaching her that His relationship with His followers will soon change after His ascension.
3. “Genesis 1 and 2 are differing creations stories and contradict each other.”
Genesis 1:1-2:3 provides us with a chronological account of what God did on each of the days during Creation Week. Genesis 2:4-25 zooms in on Day Six and shows some of the events of that day. We see no discrepancies here:
• Adam is created (Genesis 2:7)
• Garden of Eden created (Genesis 2:8-9)
• Description of river system in Eden (Genesis 2:10-14)
• Adam put in Garden and given instructions (Genesis 2:15-17)
• Adam names some of the kinds of animals (Genesis 2:18-20)
• God creates Eve (Genesis 2:21-22)
• Description of Adam, Eve, and marriage (Genesis 2:23-25)
The particular issue that people have with Genesis 2 is that the order of the creation of man, animals, and trees seems to be contrary to the order stated in Genesis 1.
Genesis 2:7 describes the creation of man.
“And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.” (Genesis 2:7)
Following the creation of man, Genesis 2:9 mentions that God created trees, including the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
“And out of the ground the Lord God made every tree grow that is pleasant to the sight and good for food. The tree of life was also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.” (Genesis 2:9)
Then Genesis 2:19 mentions the creation of certain land animals.
“Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them.” (Genesis 2:19)
At first glance this seems to be a contradiction because Genesis 1 has the animals and trees created prior to the creation of man; however, both issues can be resolved by an understanding of the original language and the translation process.2 The Hebrew word for formed in both passages is “yatsar”. The New King James Version (quoted above) translates the verb in its perfect form.
However, this Hebrew word may also be translated in its pluperfect form. In this case, it would read that God “had formed” these creatures, as some other translations have it (e.g. ESV, NIV, etc.) For example, Genesis 2:19 in the NIV states:
“Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them.”
This rendering eliminates any problem with the chronology because it refers to what God had already done earlier in Creation Week. This would mean that the plants (Genesis 2:9) and the animals (Genesis 2:19) had already been formed by God earlier in Creation Week. William Tyndale was the first to translate an English Bible directly from the original languages, and he also translated the verb in its pluperfect form.
“And after that the Lord God had made of the earth all manner beasts of the field, and all manner fowls of the air, he brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them. And as Adam called all manner living beasts: even so are their names.” (Tyndale, Genesis 2:19)
Hope this answers some of the errors! I love you channels and videos ❤
Whilst I don't necessarily buy all of our explanations, I do want to say that your explanations are a million times better then Kent Hovind's. Had he been remotely capable of expressing the discrepancies in the way you did, he would probably have a lot more respect and credence. Thank you for taking the time to put such a well-written response.
@@DD-qq8sn Thank you! :]
OK. I can maybe buy your explanation. But if the translation from Greek or Hebrew or whatever was wrong, it gets translated to something that didn't mean what it mean, why don't Christians correct them? Just change "son" to "son-in-law", and "touch" to "cling to" in the next edition, why Christians don't do that? Most people don't have time to learn Greek/Latin/Hebrew or whatever to learn the original meaning. Also I'm pretty sure if they twist God's words that's a sin, so they should really do that ASAP?
@@haomingjin1617 You’re absolutely right: twisting God’s words is a grave sin (see Deuteronomy 4:2, Revelation 22:18-19). However, that’s precisely why Christians do not rush to “fix” or alter translations on a whim. To tamper with the divinely inspired word in an unfaithful or arbitrary way would be far worse than allowing small uncertainties or variations to remain under prayerful study.
A translation must reflect what the text says, while interpretation involves explaining what it means. Language is complex, and words don’t always map perfectly across different tongues. Ancient Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic often carry meanings that no single English word can fully capture. Scholars carefully balance accuracy and readability in translations, but decisions sometimes require careful nuance. If Christians recklessly “corrected” every difficult word without scholarly consensus, they could distort the meaning of Scripture rather than preserve it.
For example, in John 20:17, where Jesus says, “Touch me not” (KJV), newer translations often say “Do not cling to me” because Greek scholars recognize the nuance in the word haptomai. However, this isn’t about “fixing” a mistake; it’s about refining understanding as linguistic knowledge advances.
Most Christians don’t have the time to learn Greek or Hebrew, and they don’t need to. God has provided the Church with faithful scholars and teachers who dedicate their lives to understanding the Scriptures and helping others interpret them. Christians are encouraged to study various translations, consult commentaries, and listen to trusted teachers to gain deeper understanding.
Christians believe that divinely inspired word (2 Timothy 3:16) is alive and active (Hebrews 4:12), and its core message is clear and unchanging across all translations: God’s love, the call to repentance, and the truth of salvation through Christ Jesus. While refining translations over time is a careful and legitimate process, treating Scripture as though it needs to be “patched” like faulty software would undermine its authority and dishonour it.
Thank you for the question!
@@haomingjin1617 You’re absolutely right: twisting God’s words is a grave sin (see Deuteronomy 4:2, Revelation 22:18-19). However, that’s precisely why Christians do not rush to “fix” or alter translations on a whim. To tamper with the divinely inspired word in an unfaithful or arbitrary way would be far worse than allowing small uncertainties or variations to remain under prayerful study.
A translation must reflect what the text says, while interpretation involves explaining what it means. Language is complex, and words don’t always map perfectly across different tongues. Ancient Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic often carry meanings that no single English word can fully capture. Scholars carefully balance accuracy and readability in translations, but decisions sometimes require careful nuance. If Christians recklessly “corrected” every difficult word without scholarly consensus, they could distort the meaning of Scripture rather than preserve it.
For example, in John 20:17, where Jesus says, “Touch me not” (KJV), newer translations often say “Do not cling to me” because Greek scholars recognize the nuance in the word haptomai. However, this isn’t about “fixing” a mistake; it’s about refining understanding as linguistic knowledge advances.
Most Christians don’t have the time to learn Greek or Hebrew, and they don’t need to. God has provided the Church with faithful scholars and teachers who dedicate their lives to understanding the Scriptures and helping others interpret them. Christians are encouraged to study various translations, consult commentaries, and listen to trusted teachers to gain deeper understanding.
Christians believe that divinely inspired word (2 Timothy 3:16) is alive and active (Hebrews 4:12), and its core message is clear and unchanging across all translations: God’s love, the call to repentance, and the truth of salvation through Christ Jesus. While refining translations over time is a careful and legitimate process, treating Scripture as though it needs to be “patched” like faulty software would undermine its authority and dishonour it.
Thank you for the question!
6:02 it doesn't specify that it's Mary's genealogy
All my schooling was done by Catholic nuns and priests. The priests were highly qualified in theology and they made it clear that the bible should not be taken literally , but rather as a guide for behavior and basically how to be a good person. They knew that the bible was written by different people at different times, based on stories passed down verbally by illiterate people and parts like the creation in 7 days was not correct, just a simple explanation for simple people. I know some people don't agree with what I just wrote, but I don't care what you think and you won't see me in a church on Sunday.
For all it's (many) flaws, the Catholic Church did at least modify their doctrines in the light of scientific discovery. Eventually, when they realised they couldn't just make science 'go away' anymore.
"The priests were highly qualified in theology and they made it clear that the bible should not be taken literally , but rather as a guide for behavior and basically how to be a good person" Which as a thing isn't really that bad at all. As long as the entire old testament is ignored because that teaches that murder, genocide, slavery, rape and incest are OK.
As an ex-Roman Catholic, I must admit we weren't raised reading the bible, because the church believes the bible is difficult to interpret, so we're raised on the catechism, a distillation of church dogmas for children. We're not discouraged from reading the bible, but taught that it needs to be read in just the right way! It's a massive book written by multiple authors, and heavy on metaphor and allegory. What would astonishing is if it didn't contain a horde of contradictions!
The same here. My favourite part of the Catechism that we were taught was "He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience". I think this line is what ultimately turned me away from the Church. I could never in good conscience follow many of the teachings of the Church
It´s more astonishing that people still reads, and BELIEVES, e v e r y single word of the bible as the t r u t h !! Rgr
it is a narrative history, mostly written by people who lived before scientific instrumentation. it is also only relatively recently that people were so rebellious as to translate the bible into languages that common people could read for themselves. - because people being able to read it for themselves would undermine the authoritarianism the church relied on to control the masses.
Same. In RE classes (catholic schools) we were taught that the bible is a mish-mash of myth, legend, story-telling, and some rough history in the later OT books. Even the NT we were taught that a lot of it is illustrative and not to be read as literal truth/history. But the bible bash nut jobs regard catholics as pagans anyway! I'm thoroughly atheist now, just wish I'd done that sooner.
@@ronkelley5348 Well, we can't expect reason from fundie whackjobs who read the bible as literal history, Noah's ark and all. They are a totally lost cause who don't know how to think, and reject skepticism as the tool of Satan!
I used to watch and follow this guy as a HUGE fan as a teen. Looking at it now, at bare minimum, he strongly engages in an "us/them" mentality. I remember it being that way back then, and I remember it developing a belief in me that Athiests were all dark, deceived, "them"s. Made me want to avoid Athiests at all costs. If we take the Jesus for who He is...he did not push his followers to avoid others who disagree. He moved toward them. My beliefs as a Christian have evolved quite a bit since then, and maybe some of that is maturing as an adult, but I distain the concept of pushing away those who don't agree with me. I cherish engaging with people, hearing ideas that challenge me, etc.
This is the only way I can tolerate, Kent. Thank you, Sci-man Dan.
Blows my mind that people say there are no contradictions whatsoever and then go on to try to explain exactly why the contradictions are there
Yes, his Genesis explanation effectively rewrote the chapter to mean something else then what it says originally.
Until someone actually shows me an actual contradiction, it’s pretty easy to say there are no contradictions. It’s usually just people parroting the internet or a very surface level reading of an English translation and then they scoff and say it contradicts itself.
@@elyjahstark So what is your explanation for the two Genesis versions?
@@znail4675You mean the differences in detail between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2? What are you claiming is a contradiction? There are no contradictions. The first chapter is a poetic narration of the creation of the universe. The second chapter is a close up look of man’s beginning. Do you know what a contradiction is?
@@elyjahstark A contradiction is when facts doesn't match up. But this is only a problem if you consider the Bible the direct word of God that can't be wrong.
What's Damon Hill doing on your xmas jumper?
Hands up for all who think Miss Thorne could easily make Kent cry in a face to face debate. Also I Love You Emma!!
The reason why "Creationism" is the wrong way to "interpret" the Bible is because it relies heavily on literalism while completely marginalizes even ignoring the ontological and allegorical components which is the way the Bible was intended to be read. "All ism's are bad" - Ferris Bueller.
Contradictions in a book written by numerous unconfirmed authors from oral stories ~2000 years ago. I'm shocked.
I didn’t find kent’s “explanations” very persuasive, but I didn’t find them to be explanations either. Just a smug idiot reading clearly contradictory citations from scripture and then asserting that it _isn’t_ a contradiction because he doesn’t want it to be. Basically just “nuh-uh” to everything. He’s not even _trying_ to explain them, just berating the audience for thinking that contradictions are contradictions. Full blown gaslighting.
Yeah, they never explain how “God” as an explanation, is actually an explanation. They believe that the claim of having an explanation is the same as actually having an explanation.
He’s a tadge
"I bet that same five bucks because thats all I've got...." A moment of raw truthfulness from Kent.
He normally pushes his $10 CDs. I wonder if he had a Cyber Monday sale?
@@davep5788 I just know money and him don't get along.. Guy did prison for tax evasion I think.
10:40 ...and God put Adam into a deep sleep, and he took a rib, and created Eve...So...
What's this business about selecting a wife? 🙄🐕🐕
They don't like to talk about Lilith.
10:51 never mind this part, where God asked Adam if he was interested in banging any of the animals. Imagine the world today if he'd said yes.
As a Christian, I agree with my Pastor - The Bible isn't a good historical document. It's a good book to teach you how to love one another, live a full life, and with God's grace, have an everlasting life in Heaven.
Can I just say you've been lied to, I myself could not read nor understand the bible u till I encountered the livng God and was filled with the promised holy spirit the word is spirit and life then I could see and understand. We have the original septuagint which clears up translation issues with dates but when I pray and seek the answers unfold and line up. As we believe in the word and see the word of God. Can I advise you to ask God only to teach you and follow those who believe Gods word all these questions are answered as we delve deeper to understand. Much love.
This isn’t hard people.
Matthew records Joseph’s biological father and Luke records his legal father.
This is confirmed in the different words that Matthew and Luke use to describe Joseph’s relation to Jacob and Heli. Matthew uses the Greek word gennao when describing how Jacob “became the father of Joseph.” Matthew uses the word to be taken biologically, because it’s the same word that he uses to describe how Jesus was “born” of Mary.
Kent did a terrible job with that, but it's actually pretty straightforward. Including both is intentional and valuable in context of other stories throughout the bible.
There is a simple word for twisting and manipulating things to cover up wrongs: LYING. If you were to read your bible stories you should find that lying is frowned upon and those that lie and push others to lie are generally regarded as followers of The Deceiver. Therefore according to the stories in your bible YOU are a follower of The Deceiver.
@@nickryan3417 That isn't relevant in any way to this comment. Better luck next time
This is the kind of person that believes everyone who is any other religion is going to hell.
This is so ridiculous already
Becasuse he is the easier target.
His small sec. Imagine if Dan did something with a theologian , or anyone with the best arguments
@@tyemaddogthis is the best arguments for your sky daddy tho, cultist
@@tyemaddog But why do you say that when even the best theologians and apologists use nothing but God of the gaps arguments while trying to dress them up as something prettier. Kent is the pig, and theologians and apologists are just people trying to put lipstick on that pig.
Dans job security is insane. Literally.
And he does not even need to write the scripts
Religion is based on contradiction. For example you can't have an all knowing god and still have freewill and sin. If god is all knowing and designed everything based on infinite knowledge, then everything is predetermined. Thus making freewill and sin impossible. If freewill exists, then god isn't all knowing.
That’s not entirely true. You can have an all knowing entity and still have free will. The entity will know all possible ends, but you are free to chose your personal way through all these possibilities. It’s like playing chess. You could learn all possible openings and moves, and by that, you could theoretically predict every outcome of the game, but that doesn’t mean that you‘re not allowed to play the game the way you want to …
@@SixStringSamur4i .
Sorry but no. Knowing all possibilities does not remove the fact that an omniscient being would know which possibility would occur.
@@SixStringSamur4i But if he doesn't know what choice the human will make, he is not omniscient. If he already knows what choice you will make, then free will doesn't really make sense because the outcome was already predetermined.
@@SixStringSamur4i If you play chess against an other human, you could think you have a free will, but if god would be the commentator of the game and will say the next move of white is d2 - d4, you wouldn´t think that anymore.
You live your life and think you have a free will, but God knows before you are born all of your sins and if you will go to hell or to heaven. You have no chance of influencing the outcome. So the free will is just an illusion.
The best part, god created mankind and he knew that he has to drown them all in the great flood, because of their sins. He himself created them with all the sins, he knew the outcome and he could easily change his desgin, but he prefered to kill them all.
@@grahvis It knows ALL possibilities, but not which one you will chose.
You are wrong about the word 'father', Dan. In the Bible, the Hebrew words translated as 'father' and 'son' ('ab' and 'bar') are occasionally used as synonyms for 'ancestor' and 'descendant' respectively. Biblical genealogies are most often lists of tribal lineage rather than family trees, so 'father of' and 'son of' don't necessarily imply a direct parental relationship.
Dan wasn't wrong, father means father in English, is it his fault the English words in the English version of Bible don't mean what the English word means, but means what the Hebrew word means? if you are right, then the Bible gets translated wrong, and should be corrected, just change "father" and "son" to "ancestor" and "descendant" in the next edition, simple.
"Ears to hear," lol.
That sure sounds better than saying "open to being mislead."