@@azurephoenix9546 looking thru his wiki page the guy is a whole mess, constantly starting beef with other celebs for no reason and making r@cist remarks about Asian folks
Lutheran Satire said it best: "I guess we shouldn't be surprised that people who claim they won't believe anything without evidence, will believe anything without evidence, as long as it mocks the gospel"
The comedian is right. The difference between the NT and Herodotus is that nobody is claiming that Herodotus is the word of god. BTW there is plenty of scholarly debate over what Herodotus allegedly wrote, so there's another epic fail by the apologist.
@@scambammer6102 threat? wow, you walk in some kind of creative fear. Creative fiction you claim as "facts" and suddenly someone laughs at you and it's "threat!!" Thanks for the entertainment 🤣
Ask Holy Spirit to teach you and to guide you. I would recommend the TH-cam Cleveland street preachers and follow Jesus no man no religion. Be holy and obey Jesus. Hebrews 5:9 "salvation is for those who obey. Jesus says if you love me keep my commandments (John 14:15). Jesus even says if you keep my commandments then you shall abide in my love (John 15:10).
Gervais is pretty injurious about religion but lacks David Cross's nastiness about it. Cross was great in a few albums in the early 2000s. He's probably sweating that he will soon be canceled.
Ah, that's where I know him from. I recognised the face but couldn't place him. I watched Arrested Development about 3 or 4 times too. He should definitely keep his day job and give theology, history (and comedy) a miss
Also, copies of the book of Isaiah was found with the Dead Sea scrolls, and it was found to be virtually identical to the one we have in our bibles today. 🙏🙏🙏
The only thing different hat comes to Kyle mind was that our copies say Holy thrice whereas the dead sea ones says it twice. I don't think that's a concern enough to doubt the authenticity of the scriptures
Ask Holy Spirit to teach you and to guide you. I would recommend the TH-cam Cleveland street preachers and follow Jesus no man no religion. Be holy and obey Jesus. Hebrews 5:9 "salvation is for those who obey. Jesus says if you love me keep my commandments (John 14:15). Jesus even says if you keep my commandments then you shall abide in my love (John 15:10).
The false assumption is that there was one copy per manuscript. In truth, several copies were made from the autograph, and several copies of those copies. Its inconceivable to think they were all massively corrupted without a trace of evidence…
@Notim Bart has lots of fantasies in his mind What is the evidence that the gospels originally contained docetism and adoptionism but later christians corrupted the original gospels?
Do they ever have a different bit ? The problem isn’t even that it’s historically inaccurate. It’s just boring at this point lol, it’s been played out since the 90’s.
It's super funny that one of those tweets at beginning says that it's nothing but biases being passed down, and yet the reason why some people might take this joke seriously is probably because of biases lol.
Quran is perfectly preserved unlike the Bible corrupted on so many levels. First compete compiled text was preserved since the life of the prophet. Keep the edgy stuff to yourself. You simply can’t cover the sun with your thumb. Islam is coming. And to add to your fun facts most sincere Christinas are reverting to Islam as a result of the biggest sin the church doesn’t want you to commit, that’s reading and educating yourself. Preaching is rotten logic is where it’s at.
I detest this argument. If it was so untrustworthy, then archeologists wouldn't be able to use the biblical texts to find and explore ancient archeological sites that seem to be discovered with such regularity that finding a new potential or confirmed biblical site isn't even a big deal anymore.
@@FlyingSpaghettiJesus It could be argued that Biblical text has influenced people to look for these sites and artifacts (Like Noah's Ark). There have been discoveries. But I understand if you've already made your mind up on this matter.
@@twitherspoon8954 Clement of Rome documented the death of Simon Peter by being crucified upside down by the Romans for his claim that Jesus came back from the dead. What benefit served Peter to lie? If it were a lie.
@@caleblott399 it isn’t harmful to look up the facts yourself before believing someone else. Yes comedians give good points all the time. But a comedians job is to make you laugh, plus most of their jokes that are meant to be taken lightly, not literally
One of the more extreme examples is Jon Stewart, who despite being openly biased and primarily concerned with being funny, was considered a very reputable news source by a whole generation.
Problem is that in today's world we do not understand that comedy is just a bunch of jokes. That's why we attack comedians on stage for "hate speech" and take comedic criticism of religion as scholarship.
He's married to a confessed witch and is a Freemason, making him one too. I would take everything he says with a ton of salt and a necklace of garlic. 👍😊
First, he’s a comedian, so you probably shouldn’t even take directions to a gas station from him seriously. Second, Freemasonry is a fraternity that has nothing to do with religion other than to strongly encourage people to seek enlightenment by reading the Bible.
2 Peter 3:3 Above all you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. Lord Jesus Christ is coming soon 🙏🏼❤️🕊REPENT, believe in the Gospel, Be Born Again
Who in their right mind would take advice from someone that lies for a living? Someone that regurgitates what they think to be true instead of what is true. There is no reality in a world without morality.
When people listen to comedians to learn history we have an problem with society. David Cross is not the issue; the people who believe him are the issue.
I don't understand the argument regarding "the Bible has been translated and retranslated so many times we no longer know what the original text was"..... What does the person making this argument think, that after the first translation was done, the original text was destroyed so each subsequent translation is produced by putting the previous English translation into Google translate to produce a Greek and Hebrew text, which is then put back into Google Translate to produce a new English version?
To add to the New Testament reliability argument, we have letters from the early church fathers spanning from the second half of the 1st century through the 2nd century where they quote an impressive amount of passages from the NT, not only validating their accuracy but also validating their status as what the church fathers believed to be inspired scripture. We are talking about men who were disciples of, or at least regularly corresponded with, the apostles themselves or were only one generation removed. Sources like Clement, Polycarp, Papias, and Ignatius.
Gee, I wonder why they did that. Of course, once you have declared virgin birth or water walking, it's too late to go back. Once you invent a god, you can't get rid of them.
@@rf7477 I fail to see what this has to do with the comedian’s claims. This video is about whether or not the Bible is accurate from its original form, not about whether or not its claims are true.
@@JabberW00kie All you really did was regurgitate "christian" dogma. Your words: "the church fathers believed to be inspired scripture". Belief is immaterial. I would say that the scriptures were clearly written by men for purposes of myth building, and who then falsely claimed divine inspiration. The fact that several languages, several translations and many more edits, additions and exclusions that the bible went through before it was printed in English make it highly dubious.
@@rf7477 Well, you missed the point. The point wasn’t that the Scriptures are true because they believed them to be true. Although, in the face of persecution and martyrdom, belief can be legitimate accumulative evidence. But putting aside belief, the point was rather “when“ those books were considered inspired, at a time when the church was heavily persecuted and had nothing to gain politically or monetarily. As for the tired argument of “several“ languages, edits, translations, additions, and exclusions, that is exactly the kind of rhetoric that is repeated ad nauseam to make an extraneous claim where there is none. Countless scholars, secular and non-secular, who are smarter than you and I I have put thousands of hours of research into this topic and have overwhelmingly found that the Bible we have is so close to the original writings as to make no difference. I don’t know why people keep making these claims. We are way beyond that. Contrary to popular skeptic belief, repeating the same objection over and over again does not make it true.
@@JabberW00kie If you keep telling the story of Moses and the lost tribes, then somehow it never becomes true because Moses has never been found nor any archeological evidence. The Romans were brutal people. The killed at least a third of the entire population of Gaul and sold many others into slavery. The persecuted Gauls never produced a divine messiah. The fact that there are some many contradictions, omissions, edits and outright lies in the bible, such as the so called census at jesus birth, make the books highly dubious. The only thing that accumulated was more myth to fit the OT.
David Cross describes the writting process of all FOUR of the inhuman Alvin and the Chipmunks movies he KNOWINGLY and WILLINGLY decide to be a part of and thinks it applies to Holy Scripture . Seriously , he was in all 4 of those .If we had more Catechism in school , he would have been taught enough self-respect to not do that and actually taught how the books of the Bible were first written , compiled and later translated .
Ask Holy Spirit to teach you and to guide you. I would recommend the TH-cam Cleveland street preachers and follow Jesus no man no religion. Be holy and obey Jesus. Hebrews 5:9 "salvation is for those who obey. Jesus says if you love me keep my commandments (John 14:15). Jesus even says if you keep my commandments then you shall abide in my love (John 15:10).
@Eddard Tyrsson I know. Those freaks are on every church in every country saying the same. Did you believe that some days ago, i showed to one of those the churches of Meggido and Dura Europo (200 AD) and he said me that was Constantine (born 280 AD) who build them? LOL
@@juan_martinez524 which ones and how am I specifically cherry picking? Because if you expect me to put the entire Bible in a comment, I think you need a brain more than Jesus.
@@AwesomeWrench I certainly do. And I can tell you that it is A FACT that there IS a God, and that Jesus Christ is Lord. And a little fun fact: you don't have to believe in it all to get sent to Hell and burn for all eternity.
If you go and read early church fathers like Saint Igantius of Antioch you find many verses from the New testament that are basically identical to modern bibles. Bart Ehrman even admits that you could reconstruct the gospels with the writings of the early church fathers, i.e. first and second century.
I'm currently taking a college course covering the subjects of the transmission, Textual Criticism, and reliability of the New Testament Manuscripts. Even though I'm just a beginner on the subject, from what I'm learning it sounds as if the New Testament is one of the best preserved set of documents from antiquity. The earliest Manuscripts we have are fairly close to the original autographs, and there are a plethora of them. On top of that, aside from the expected spelling errors that scribes would sometimes make, they all have an almost perfect agreement between copies of the same books/epistles. The bottom line? We can be 100% certain of what the Apostles actually wrote.
What? I can easily give you hundreds of contradictions, errors, omissions and outright lies in the NT alone. The virgin birth is a fatal contradiction. It breaks the necessary direct male lineage from David to jesus. It is a clear and dishonest fabrication intended to compete with Roman emperor virgin birth. Please do not be so credulous.
@@rf7477 Actually, since Mary was of the same lineage of David, and the Virgin Birth utilized her womb nonetheless, this presents no issues. Plus, the numerous "errors" are easily explained by either context, cultural differences between our modern understanding and the past, or simple bad translation by some modern versions. But the original transmission itself has no issues. I've heard 'em all.
@@GhostBearCommander Bad luck. Biblical lineage only comes through the male line. Read Matthew 1.2 and Luke 3.23 , both of which are male, and contradictory. If jesus was a man then he would have had an X chromosome which cannot come from the mother. Yep, I've heard every dishonest "christinan" explanation and they keep coming. A pack of lies. Shame on all of you. BTW, the errors started almost from the beginning.
@@rf7477 Technically, still good luck, since both both adoption and prophetic appointment were considered, by Jewish culture, to hold the same weight as biological sonship at the time. They were also considered, in those cases, to carry on the same bloodline. As for an X Chromosome, couldn't the same Lord who made the Universe in six days have easily imparted that ingredient via immaculate conception? Of course. All of that is neither here nor there, though, when compared with the main point. Namely, one can pick even the most well-proven facts to pieces with enough Google-search criticisms. Doubtless, you can find thousands of "errors" and "contradictions" on the web for the Bible. We could go over them all day, and I'd find it easy fodder to disprove as always. But let's face it. That's all camouflage. You doesn't reject the Bible due to "errors." You reject it because the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing. It becons you to die to your sins and live in freedom from bondage. Do not love your chains so dearly that you call them wisdom, my friend.
@@rf7477 dude, you need to go back to bio class. The X chromosome is passed down from the mother. A man has an X and Y chromosome where the X is passed from the mother and the Y from the father. A woman has two X chromosomes, one from the father and mother. Now the point you are trying to make with bringing chromosomes into this is beyond me?
Scholarship : Bible was written in Hebrew and Greek. We have different translations of the Bible and different manuscript. This guy :Hebrew and Greek are dead languages History : thr Kjv Bible and Latin Vulgate was translated at the time Greek was dominant in the east.
*Pro-tip:* anytime someone with no expertise in a subject with centuries of scholarship behind it says they debunked said subject, they probably didn't.
It takes a lot of arrogance to get up on stage and talk about something you know nothing about as though you know everything about it. ““Scoffer” is the name of the arrogant, haughty man who acts with arrogant pride.” Proverbs 21:24
"Comedians" can be a synonym for a "I can't be held responsible for anything I say because I will just claim it was a joke." The bad thing is that atheists will claim this guy as "evidence" in their next response on a thread.
The NT manuscripts are the earliest, most widely transmitted and has the most manuscript evidence of any ancient document. Nothing comes even remotely close. If you included every textual variant with every Greek manuscrpt, you would find only one textual variant every third page, and 90% of those variants cannot even be translated into the English language.
I believe most of the textual variants are of the definition ite article and the wrong use. So bad grammar here and there, doesn't xhange the meaning at all
@@twitherspoon8954 /* All four Gospels were written anonymously and all were written after 70 AD */ That would be 100 AD. However, P45 is dated to between 90 AD to 125 AD for the Gospel of John. Usually the original autograph is written before the you can have a manuscript. It is true that all four gospels were written anonymously, without having the title they have today. That does not follow that they weren't written by an eye witness and all four gospels possess unique sources. The only Gospel of the four that were certainly written by an eye witness, is the Gospel of John. In John 21:24, the author writes... "This is the disciple who is bearing witness about these things, and who has written these things, and we know that his testimony is true". I don't believe that the disciple is one of the 12 as this Gospel writer gives us hints on his identity, which I believe was Lazarus who rose from the dead. Lazarus is called "beloved" in John 11:3, 5, 35-16 and is the "beloved disciple" in John 19:25 and 21:20. The disciple John is never said to be love in this gospel or any other. Lazarus is the disciple who ran to the tomb early Sunday morning as he was raised to life by Jesus and was the one that the disciples questioned where he would die since he was raised from the dead (John 21:21-23). /* More than 80% of New Testament manuscripts date to the 5th century or later. */ I don't think you have grasped what you said. Of course 80% of the New Testament was written after the 5th century. The further on in time the more manuscript evidence you have as they are copied by hand and given to more people and churches. But that's the same as every single manuscript ever written. That's like me saying that after the 20th century, 90% of all things ever written were produced. Did you know that 100% of Julius Caesars Gallic Wars was written after the 5th century. In fact, I'll go further, 100% of all manuscripts for the Gallic Wars was written after the 8th century. The earliest manuscript for Julius Caesar comes from the 9th century, which is early for most Greek or Roman manuscript. Do you trust any ancient manuscript for Roman histories, Greek, Persian? Because none of them compare to the mountain of manuscript evidence we have for the NT. It dwarfs all by comparison. /* In the entire first century Jesus is not mentioned by a single historian, religion scholar, politician, philosopher, or poet */ Except for Tacitus, Josephus, Celcus etc. Not to mention Luke who wrote The Gospel of Luke and Acts. He is a first rate historian. As is Paul who met Jesus on the road to Damascus, and also met Peter and Jesus brother James in Jerusalem. We know that the Gospel of Luke was written before 70 AD as Paul is still alive when he wrote Acts of the Apostles. Luke was a companion of Paul on his travels, yet in Acts it doesn't contain the death of Paul. If Luke was still alive he would have added Paul's death in Rome to Acts. The only book of the NT that was written 60 years after Jesus death ,is the final book of Revelations. /* Jesus himself left no archaeological evidence of any kind, such as artifacts, tombs, dwellings, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. */ You can say that about almost anyone who has ever lived. Where are any archaological evidence for Alexander the Great? Julius Caesar? They were all great Kings yet they didn't leave anything that survives today. There is a good argument that the Shroud of Turin is the actually burial cloth for Jesus of Nazarus and the testimony of early history and the library we call the NT. Jesus is one of the best attested historical figures in history and wasn't even a political figure.
@@twitherspoon8954 But how do we know that "none of the Gospel authors witnessed Jesus"? I believe that some of the authors, especially John and Matthew, were followers of Jesus. And traditionally no other names were debated as the authors of the Gospels. Peace to you
There are also around 150 papyrus fragments which support the accuracy of the oldest copies of the New Testament. For the Old Testament there are the Dead Sea Scrolls, and Ketef Hinnom Scrolls which support the prophies including Israel, Babylon and of course Jesus. That comedian is very brave indeed to take sides against God.
Brave? He is ignorant and foolish. Brave are those prideful wretches who will oppose God at Armageddon, even knowing without a shadow of a doubt exactly who He is.
Ill-informed take on how stories are passed down aside, that's more an argument against sola scriptura than the religion itself. Tradition by its nature is about maintaining the divinely revealed truths passed down throughout the ages, not keeping every last thee and thou preserved. Said Tradition was almost as much oral as it was written.
That's a really good observation. I'm comparing Christianity to European polytheism, and since the sagas and much of the old testament were largely passed down through oral tradition, both are regularly used and explored by historians and archeologists to learn more about the history and culture of both sets of cultures, which indicates a high level of trust among academics that these texts are majority reliable, if not absolutely accurate about dates and locations.
@@fdsajfldaskjf It was probably to exaggerate that Solomon was a lecherous king. Not a lot of characters in the Old Testament are portrayed as flattering. The exact number isn't relevant. What matters is that the reader understands that Solomon sleeps with a lot of women.
The "it was edited/added to by" argument fails because all one has to do is look at the reputation of the ones using it. It is sad to say that, but their own standards destroy their "credibility".
Can you tackle cosmic skeptics argument about the “hiddeness of God”. It’s an interesting argument I hadn’t heard before. At first glance it seems very subjective, but at the same time there’s something there and I can’t pin point it out 🤔
I'm not a Christian because I disagree on metaphysics and morality (based on the best of my understanding, limited as it may be), but I do appreciate your historical defense. It's not like a major subset of people throughout 2000 years of history were just stupid, as many anti-religious comedians and popular rhetoricians want to make it seem.
Along with that, the idea that kings somehow had exclusive access to the texts and changed them at will always gets me. People weren't so dumb about that either and copies were everywhere pretty much from the start.
people don't have to be dumb to be religious. they just have to believe, have faith and not question too deeply. greeks and muslims and native americans and romans and christians all did some great things while still believing in their religions. off this by no means proves that zeus or any other god ever was more than a story, which people collectively agreed on believing to be true.
@@johnbrzykcy3076 Briefly, on metaphysics I disagree because I am a pantheist (I could be persuaded into pan/en/theism); I think it likely that nature itself is or is part of the Divine, and I find creation out of nothing unintelligible. I also don't think the material universe was ever corrupted by a satanic force, but it is simply part of the natural laws of everything. On morality, I have several disagreements about things like abortion and homosexuality; but my fundamental disagreement is the idea of sin. I do not think sin is a thing. We are imperfect in the sense that we are too limited and in flux to ever achieve complete virtue and happiness in this life; but there was no fall from grace or original state of goodness that we need to repent for or feel guilty for losing. Being limited is just our nature, as is the capacity for growth. In short, Christianity seems to me to be too judgmental and repressive of nature, based on abstract (if well-meaning) ideals that can never be applied. Since they can't be applied, Christians conclude that nature and humans are to blame, rather than correcting their own excessive expectations.
Pretty sure the Bible's contradictory elements are more than enough for it to debunk itself many times over. Especially as it claims to be inspired/written by the creator of the universe.
@@autisticphaglosophy7128 "The Bible has contradictions." "Really? Secular liberal biblical scholarship has contradictions?" This conversation is already reddit tier.
The problem is that these comedians reinforce many of the worldviews that people hold. I understand that the comedian's act is an exaggeration of truth but people are susceptible to such behavior.
Yes, I just watched the other day about archeologist finding more evidence that supports biblical text. This comedian is obviously an atheist and is pushing that agenda. I don't think he's funny either.
I'm tempted to feel sorry for those who reject God as their a priori assumption. It's such a stupid choice. Once my brain switched on around my early twenties I realized we exist in a stupendous miracle. That we ourselves are an unfathomable miracle. So I started searching for answers. My a priori assumption was that there must be a mind, an intelligence behind this fantastic design we live in. I further reasoned that this mind probably interacted with humanity very early in our history. So I looked into the two oldest major religions. The two that all the other major religions owe their existence to. Hebrew and Hindu. I don't credit the efforts of aborigine faith systems with much because they have little substance and less connected history over spans of time. It didn't take long to reject Hinduism. It's just silly and has been reworked over and over repeatedly. But Judaism hangs together well and is tremendously well documented. Jesus of Nazareth was a Jew and he taught Judaism. The Four Gospels are fully Jewish. Then along came Paul who claimed to have received a new revelation in which God was doing a new thing. Allowing any human being to receive salvation due to the substitutionary death burial and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth who was in fact The God-man. ( see 13th chapter of Acts ) I can't prove to you that my faith is in fact true. But it's the best system all history has to offer. It turned me into a reasonably decent human being from a callow youth soaked in hedonism. What possible gain does the atheist receive from believing in nothing?
I would agree Judaism/Christianity is more likely to be true than other religions, but I don't know yet. The topic I want to look more into is people's prophecies and see if they are fulfilled specific prophecies that well predate the event so you can predate the message and figure they could not tell where history would roll by their own power. I will then see if fulfilled prophecies would seem to validate contradictory claims, then if I find prophecy to be a reliable proof of divine revelation, I will compare the prophecies of the Bible and other Holy texts to find a potential winner. I would set aside prophecies like "The Israelites will rise again!" because that is vague. But prophets can still sin so even if they speak revelation, they could still teach false revelations also. Do you know of any books on the subject?
@@josephpostma1787 Detailed fulfilled prophecy is the great proof of Biblical revelation. I would point you to Isaiah 53. Get a Thomson Chain Reference Bible in King James Translation and in the back it will give you all the many prophecies of a coming Messiah. You won't get much on prophecy from any of the main line denominations. They have largely stopped thinking about it. Jesus of Nazareth pointed to the prophecies of the Messiah several times in the Four Gospels. He chided the religious leaders of His day for not knowing the prophecies. He told his disciples exactly what was going to happen to Him in Jerusalem near the end of his ministry. They didn't want to hear it nor were they current with how the details had been foretold in the Hebrew Scriptures.
@@andrevisser7542 Well it 'was' as Paul makes quite clear. Peter and the other Apostles directed their ministry 99% to Jews and continued to adhere to the Law. Then Paul ( first noted in Acts 13 ) claimed a new revelation was given to him by Christ. That salvation had been extended to 'all that would believe'. Prior to that the Jews did accept conversion to Judaism but there's not a lot of reverence to this. The story of Ruth being a prominent exception.
he probably watched the documentary on The History Channel, which, just like Tim Mackie pointed out, was made without consulting any real Bible and Hebrew/Greek scholars
We do not know who wrote the gospels. No one knows. So, even if we had originals, we wouldn't know whether they were even reliable accounts to begin with (beyond much doubt, we can discern they weren't written by eye witnesses). Furthermore, the gospels contradict eachother dramatically in places AND they were written AFTER Paul's authentic letters---and....even weirder, Paul never even mentions a single parable of Jesus. So, a comedian being overly dramatic about the gospels is the least of the worries regarding the validity of the gospels, etc.
if they were only written after paul wrote his letters than how does he quote them? 1 Timothy 5:17-18 quotes Luke 10:7 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 quotes Luke 22:19-20 1 Timothy 6:13-14 quotes John 18:33-38 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 literally says "He was raised on the third day *in accordance with the Scriptures"*
Criticisms of the authenticity and veracity of Scripture have made me research and read more widely and deeper and has led to a much stronger and calmer faith. I have been blown away by how verifiable, authentic and most importantly how profound Scripture is. It truly is the most remarkable written artefact, even from a secular perspective. But it’s not surprising that so many layers of subterfuge, misinformation, lies and derision exist across academia, entertainment and even everyday discussions given the presence of Satan and his handwork since the Garden.
You didn't mention that the church fathers (including early ones) quote from the new Testament so much that some portions could be reconstructed if we only had them.
There's blatant evidence that the gospels were re-written, but Christianity has just sort of defined that away. Matthew (and Luke) contain many of the exact Greek words of Mark. In what sense is one not a re-written version of the other?
Gosh, I'm glad for the last statement "I've only scratched the surface" because of things like "P75 being the most accurate" P75 is missing John 8s scene with the adulteress.
@@corporeallogos It doesnt matter. Its in the Old Latin translation, its in the comentaries by Augustin, Ambrose, Jerome, Pacian of Barcelona. I made a video response to Paulogia when he used this as a landslide twice.
Actually we believe in the Old Testament which was made in 1200-1300 BC and in the New Testament which is from 70-100 AD and the New Testament was written in Greek language of the gospel writers through oral tradition which orally transmitted the Gospels
WLC addressed this to when someone asked him about George Carlin (who I loved) but his jokes are Sky Daddy style caricatures and satire. To me these rascals aren't very different from a Court Jester entertaining the King.
I saw that one of the comments stated that what David Cross said was the truth. These days the word "truth" means "whatever a person believes to be true, usually without a shred of evidence." (i. e. humans being aardvarks because they said "I'm an aardvark").
Thanks for this video. Michael, would you please do a video for the text of the Old Testament? I know its own variant history is more complicated Thanks
" This word is spirit " & as an independent student of the bible [and other text ], I see that thru all the spirit remains the same. God has used physical circumstance and realities to demonstrate SPIRITUAL truths to us. What you understand is determined by how deep into Him you want to dig. Seek and ye shall find is His promise ! In the meantime, don't choke over the gnats.
I don't think I'll take a history lesson from a guy who blackmailed Alvin and the Chipmunks.
I THOUGHT THE EXACT SAME THING 🤣🤣🤣
🤣🤣👍👍
He also did coke in the white house while having a WH dinner with Obama, so I think I would also pass on taking advice from a cocaine addict.
@@azurephoenix9546 looking thru his wiki page the guy is a whole mess, constantly starting beef with other celebs for no reason and making r@cist remarks about Asian folks
Or a never-nude. There are only dozens of them. Dozens!
Lutheran Satire said it best: "I guess we shouldn't be surprised that people who claim they won't believe anything without evidence, will believe anything without evidence, as long as it mocks the gospel"
Well-put, I'm might use that one 😎.
Well said and so true.
@King of Sadness Do it, it’s worth it!
@King of Sadness
If you do, you'll have to change your handle to "King of Gladness."
try this then: anything that can be claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
"if you're getting your scholarship from a comedian, don't be surprised if it's a joke" Golden insight
The comedian is right. The difference between the NT and Herodotus is that nobody is claiming that Herodotus is the word of god. BTW there is plenty of scholarly debate over what Herodotus allegedly wrote, so there's another epic fail by the apologist.
@@scambammer6102 "the comedian is right" .... don't be surprised, LOL
@@tripperdan Is that a threat? how very xtian of you lol
@@scambammer6102 threat? wow, you walk in some kind of creative fear. Creative fiction you claim as "facts" and suddenly someone laughs at you and it's "threat!!" Thanks for the entertainment 🤣
@@tripperdan "don't be surprised" sounds like the typical christian threat: you will go to hell. If that's not what you meant, then what DID you mean?
There are too many “Christianity debunked” videos on the internet that barely touch the facts with a ten foot pole.
The dead sea Scrolls are fake I bet those ancient Bible copies are fake
@@gustavmahler1466 if you say so.
And this video is one of those
@@elgatofelix8917 amazes me how they deny the Bible has changed edited
@@gustavmahler1466
Prove it
I liked him better as Tobias Funke than when he tries to be Ricky Gervais 2.0
Alot of Comedians are hacks now
His best work was Mary Poppins!
Ask Holy Spirit to teach you and to guide
you. I would recommend the TH-cam Cleveland street preachers and follow Jesus no man no religion. Be holy and obey Jesus. Hebrews 5:9 "salvation is for those who obey. Jesus says if you love me keep my commandments (John 14:15). Jesus even says if you keep my commandments then you shall abide in my love (John 15:10).
Gervais is pretty injurious about religion but lacks David Cross's nastiness about it. Cross was great in a few albums in the early 2000s. He's probably sweating that he will soon be canceled.
Ah, that's where I know him from. I recognised the face but couldn't place him. I watched Arrested Development about 3 or 4 times too. He should definitely keep his day job and give theology, history (and comedy) a miss
Most comedians get this strange idea that they’re expert theologians and master philosophers during their careers.
its from all the white dudes saying stuff like, "comedians really are the modern day philosophers"
@Eddard Tyrsson lol.
@They Live We Sleep:
Wouldn't even call him a "comedian" to be honest.
...and now its crossed over to TH-cam dorks
Most theist get this strange idea that they’re expert scientists and know everything because a book says so.
Ironic isn’t it
Also, copies of the book of Isaiah was found with the Dead Sea scrolls, and it was found to be virtually identical to the one we have in our bibles today. 🙏🙏🙏
Nice!!!
The only thing different hat comes to Kyle mind was that our copies say Holy thrice whereas the dead sea ones says it twice.
I don't think that's a concern enough to doubt the authenticity of the scriptures
@@CMSLamarckAbsolutely. 🙏🙏🙏
Ask Holy Spirit to teach you and to guide
you. I would recommend the TH-cam Cleveland street preachers and follow Jesus no man no religion. Be holy and obey Jesus. Hebrews 5:9 "salvation is for those who obey. Jesus says if you love me keep my commandments (John 14:15). Jesus even says if you keep my commandments then you shall abide in my love (John 15:10).
@@connorlancaster7541 Haha cleveland street preachers are a joke. They pick on laymen and play the mic game.
We used to get theology from biologists such as Richard Dawkins, and now we're getting it from comedians. What next?
@Dewaldt twitter users
@@youtubeuser5761 Worse, discord mods and Redditors.
Karens
@@patrickmcdonnell2067 Or Sleepy Joe.
Gender studies professors I bet
"I've made a huge mistake." - Tobias Funke
The false assumption is that there was one copy per manuscript. In truth, several copies were made from the autograph, and several copies of those copies. Its inconceivable to think they were all massively corrupted without a trace of evidence…
@Notim ancient manuscripts do not survive the manuscripts we have are fake
@Passing Through the gospels are parables about Jesus
@Notim
Bart appeals to thin air
@Passing Through ancient manuscripts do not survive thousands of years
@Notim
Bart has lots of fantasies in his mind
What is the evidence that the gospels originally contained docetism and adoptionism but later christians corrupted the original gospels?
I love these short sharp videos debunking the pseudo intellectual nonsense attacks on Christianity.
😂😂😂😂😂
Yes , capsules
Ditto. Short and Sweet and packed with Info. 😀
Let me know when you find one 😂
@@FlyingSpaghettiJesus yeah ikr, athiests are always right🤣
Do they ever have a different bit ? The problem isn’t even that it’s historically inaccurate.
It’s just boring at this point lol, it’s been played out since the 90’s.
Exactly. It's just bad comedy
And Christianity is a joke played out since the 1st century.
It's super funny that one of those tweets at beginning says that it's nothing but biases being passed down, and yet the reason why some people might take this joke seriously is probably because of biases lol.
The devil is using his FUNNY GUYS to attack Christianity a lot lately
The small hat men
“Funny” guys
Lol
Comedians have a knack for saying the dumbest things possible regarding biblical history and theology, and then being praised for it.
@@reality1958 Wasn't Carlin also an atheist?
Sure, some of his worldly jokes were nice, but overall he was also part of the modernist corruption.
@@reality1958 especially George Carlin
These comedians are so edgy.
Now do "the holes in the Quran" ...
Quran is perfectly preserved unlike the Bible corrupted on so many levels.
First compete compiled text was preserved since the life of the prophet.
Keep the edgy stuff to yourself.
You simply can’t cover the sun with your thumb.
Islam is coming.
And to add to your fun facts most sincere Christinas are reverting to Islam as a result of the biggest sin the church doesn’t want you to commit, that’s reading and educating yourself.
Preaching is rotten logic is where it’s at.
I would love too see that hahahahah
Exactly. I know an apologist who actually drilled holes in the Quran.
They don’t have the guts.
There are holes in the narrative, that was all he was saying…
The guy was literally in a movie called big fat liar.
And as a lying politician in the modern family.
And a wannabe blue man in arrested development.
What does pointing out roles he has played as an actor have to do with this?
@@knutolavbjrgaas1069
Actors lie for a living.
The Romans did not consider them lower and more detestable than prostitutes without reason.
I detest this argument. If it was so untrustworthy, then archeologists wouldn't be able to use the biblical texts to find and explore ancient archeological sites that seem to be discovered with such regularity that finding a new potential or confirmed biblical site isn't even a big deal anymore.
Really? The very best Israeli archeologists have found no evidence of Moses or the so called wandering tribes. A complete myth.
Name one Archeologist who used the bible to find an ancient archeological site.
You won’t
@@FlyingSpaghettiJesus It could be argued that Biblical text has influenced people to look for these sites and artifacts (Like Noah's Ark). There have been discoveries. But I understand if you've already made your mind up on this matter.
Derick Gilbert just interviewed an archeologist the other day. It was very interesting.
@@FlyingSpaghettiJesus bro, Christians just ignore people like you, don’t even comment
The Dead Sea Scrolls demolished skeptics' claims.
The dead sea Scrolls are fake
Not the uninformed ones such as this comedian.
The evidence of the New Testament destroyed my ignorance.
@@twitherspoon8954 Clement of Rome documented the death of Simon Peter by being crucified upside down by the Romans for his claim that Jesus came back from the dead.
What benefit served Peter to lie? If it were a lie.
This is when people take a comedian’s words too literal. Like Michael just said, they’re not expert’s. They’re comedians.
Can you blame them though? Some comedians are practically 21st century prophets! Weep for our society.
@@caleblott399 it isn’t harmful to look up the facts yourself before believing someone else. Yes comedians give good points all the time. But a comedians job is to make you laugh, plus most of their jokes that are meant to be taken lightly, not literally
One of the more extreme examples is Jon Stewart, who despite being openly biased and primarily concerned with being funny, was considered a very reputable news source by a whole generation.
Unfortunately people are every bit, exactly that dumb
Problem is that in today's world we do not understand that comedy is just a bunch of jokes. That's why we attack comedians on stage for "hate speech" and take comedic criticism of religion as scholarship.
He's married to a confessed witch and is a Freemason, making him one too. I would take everything he says with a ton of salt and a necklace of garlic. 👍😊
Yes its easy just ask them about satan, lucifer see how positive they will talk about him
Well, Salt and garlic are very healthy. I wouldn't take anything from this guy. Masons and witches are Satanists.
well my brother is a freemason and he more than a little hates Satan and is a regular church attendee.
@@vedinthorn not a high enough degree it seems
First, he’s a comedian, so you probably shouldn’t even take directions to a gas station from him seriously. Second, Freemasonry is a fraternity that has nothing to do with religion other than to strongly encourage people to seek enlightenment by reading the Bible.
2 Peter 3:3 Above all you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. Lord Jesus Christ is coming soon 🙏🏼❤️🕊REPENT, believe in the Gospel, Be Born Again
Who in their right mind would take advice from someone that lies for a living? Someone that regurgitates what they think to be true instead of what is true. There is no reality in a world without morality.
Yet, the great majority of people completely believe what is said by reporters who lie for a living.
@@juan_martinez524 Fake ones like you.
When people listen to comedians to learn history we have an problem with society. David Cross is not the issue; the people who believe him are the issue.
I'd say the same thing about Jesus 🤣😂. But hey, the man is coming back, right?
@@lionzion1879
Very soon.
@@lionzion1879 yeah atheists need brain
Your opening line says it all - it is a (sad) joke that anyone would get any kind of information from a comedian. Well done.
I don't understand the argument regarding "the Bible has been translated and retranslated so many times we no longer know what the original text was".....
What does the person making this argument think, that after the first translation was done, the original text was destroyed so each subsequent translation is produced by putting the previous English translation into Google translate to produce a Greek and Hebrew text, which is then put back into Google Translate to produce a new English version?
To add to the New Testament reliability argument, we have letters from the early church fathers spanning from the second half of the 1st century through the 2nd century where they quote an impressive amount of passages from the NT, not only validating their accuracy but also validating their status as what the church fathers believed to be inspired scripture. We are talking about men who were disciples of, or at least regularly corresponded with, the apostles themselves or were only one generation removed. Sources like Clement, Polycarp, Papias, and Ignatius.
Gee, I wonder why they did that. Of course, once you have declared virgin birth or water walking, it's too late to go back. Once you invent a god, you can't get rid of them.
@@rf7477 I fail to see what this has to do with the comedian’s claims. This video is about whether or not the Bible is accurate from its original form, not about whether or not its claims are true.
@@JabberW00kie All you really did was regurgitate "christian" dogma. Your words: "the church fathers believed to be inspired scripture". Belief is immaterial. I would say that the scriptures were clearly written by men for purposes of myth building, and who then falsely claimed divine inspiration. The fact that several languages, several translations and many more edits, additions and exclusions that the bible went through before it was printed in English make it highly dubious.
@@rf7477 Well, you missed the point. The point wasn’t that the Scriptures are true because they believed them to be true. Although, in the face of persecution and martyrdom, belief can be legitimate accumulative evidence. But putting aside belief, the point was rather “when“ those books were considered inspired, at a time when the church was heavily persecuted and had nothing to gain politically or monetarily.
As for the tired argument of “several“ languages, edits, translations, additions, and exclusions, that is exactly the kind of rhetoric that is repeated ad nauseam to make an extraneous claim where there is none. Countless scholars, secular and non-secular, who are smarter than you and I I have put thousands of hours of research into this topic and have overwhelmingly found that the Bible we have is so close to the original writings as to make no difference. I don’t know why people keep making these claims. We are way beyond that. Contrary to popular skeptic belief, repeating the same objection over and over again does not make it true.
@@JabberW00kie If you keep telling the story of Moses and the lost tribes, then somehow it never becomes true because Moses has never been found nor any archeological evidence.
The Romans were brutal people. The killed at least a third of the entire population of Gaul and sold many others into slavery. The persecuted Gauls never produced a divine messiah.
The fact that there are some many contradictions, omissions, edits and outright lies in the bible, such as the so called census at jesus birth, make the books highly dubious. The only thing that accumulated was more myth to fit the OT.
David Cross describes the writting process of all FOUR of the inhuman Alvin and the Chipmunks movies he KNOWINGLY and WILLINGLY decide to be a part of and thinks it applies to Holy Scripture .
Seriously , he was in all 4 of those .If we had more Catechism in school , he would have been taught enough self-respect to not do that and actually taught how the books of the Bible were first written , compiled and later translated .
Ask Holy Spirit to teach you and to guide
you. I would recommend the TH-cam Cleveland street preachers and follow Jesus no man no religion. Be holy and obey Jesus. Hebrews 5:9 "salvation is for those who obey. Jesus says if you love me keep my commandments (John 14:15). Jesus even says if you keep my commandments then you shall abide in my love (John 15:10).
He was actually in 3 of them. Tony Hale was in the fourth one.
@@connorlancaster7541 Jesus ordered ministers and institucionalized the christian religion. Shut up.
@Eddard Tyrsson I know. Those freaks are on every church in every country saying the same.
Did you believe that some days ago, i showed to one of those the churches of Meggido and Dura Europo (200 AD) and he said me that was Constantine (born 280 AD) who build them? LOL
@@kalilsiqueira8980 Did Jesus ever call it a religion? Jesus is a person not a religion.
Every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. They won't have to believe to partake in this event. :)
*Every
@@Lone-Lee whoops. Thanks. Just goes to shoes how human I really am. :)
@@juan_martinez524 which ones and how am I specifically cherry picking? Because if you expect me to put the entire Bible in a comment, I think you need a brain more than Jesus.
@@AwesomeWrench I certainly do. And I can tell you that it is A FACT that there IS a God, and that Jesus Christ is Lord. And a little fun fact: you don't have to believe in it all to get sent to Hell and burn for all eternity.
@@juan_martinez524, should the OP post the entire Bible, according to you?
This is what happens when you’re a court jester your whole life
Great to have someone to counter the skeptics' fallacies!
Thanks again! I love what you are doing here.
Thank you
If you go and read early church fathers like Saint Igantius of Antioch you find many verses from the New testament that are basically identical to modern bibles. Bart Ehrman even admits that you could reconstruct the gospels with the writings of the early church fathers, i.e. first and second century.
I'm currently taking a college course covering the subjects of the transmission, Textual Criticism, and reliability of the New Testament Manuscripts.
Even though I'm just a beginner on the subject, from what I'm learning it sounds as if the New Testament is one of the best preserved set of documents from antiquity. The earliest Manuscripts we have are fairly close to the original autographs, and there are a plethora of them. On top of that, aside from the expected spelling errors that scribes would sometimes make, they all have an almost perfect agreement between copies of the same books/epistles. The bottom line? We can be 100% certain of what the Apostles actually wrote.
What? I can easily give you hundreds of contradictions, errors, omissions and outright lies in the NT alone. The virgin birth is a fatal contradiction. It breaks the necessary direct male lineage from David to jesus. It is a clear and dishonest fabrication intended to compete with Roman emperor virgin birth. Please do not be so credulous.
@@rf7477 Actually, since Mary was of the same lineage of David, and the Virgin Birth utilized her womb nonetheless, this presents no issues.
Plus, the numerous "errors" are easily explained by either context, cultural differences between our modern understanding and the past, or simple bad translation by some modern versions. But the original transmission itself has no issues.
I've heard 'em all.
@@GhostBearCommander Bad luck. Biblical lineage only comes through the male line. Read Matthew 1.2 and Luke 3.23 , both of which are male, and contradictory. If jesus was a man then he would have had an X chromosome which cannot come from the mother. Yep, I've heard every dishonest "christinan" explanation and they keep coming. A pack of lies. Shame on all of you. BTW, the errors started almost from the beginning.
@@rf7477 Technically, still good luck, since both both adoption and prophetic appointment were considered, by Jewish culture, to hold the same weight as biological sonship at the time. They were also considered, in those cases, to carry on the same bloodline. As for an X Chromosome, couldn't the same Lord who made the Universe in six days have easily imparted that ingredient via immaculate conception? Of course.
All of that is neither here nor there, though, when compared with the main point.
Namely, one can pick even the most well-proven facts to pieces with enough Google-search criticisms. Doubtless, you can find thousands of "errors" and "contradictions" on the web for the Bible. We could go over them all day, and I'd find it easy fodder to disprove as always. But let's face it. That's all camouflage. You doesn't reject the Bible due to "errors." You reject it because the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing. It becons you to die to your sins and live in freedom from bondage.
Do not love your chains so dearly that you call them wisdom, my friend.
@@rf7477 dude, you need to go back to bio class. The X chromosome is passed down from the mother. A man has an X and Y chromosome where the X is passed from the mother and the Y from the father. A woman has two X chromosomes, one from the father and mother. Now the point you are trying to make with bringing chromosomes into this is beyond me?
Well done. GOD Bless
I'm not taking a history lesson from the guy of alvin and the chipmunks
Nothing makes me cringe more than when I hear this old trope and people always say it with such confidence
Not hard to tell he's a comedian
0:32 Don't forget the Pauline Epistles from 50 AD!!
He's not that funny either.
Scholarship : Bible was written in Hebrew and Greek. We have different translations of the Bible and different manuscript.
This guy :Hebrew and Greek are dead languages
History : thr Kjv Bible and Latin Vulgate was translated at the time Greek was dominant in the east.
"Hebrew is a dead language"
*Cries in Israeli*
*Pro-tip:* anytime someone with no expertise in a subject with centuries of scholarship behind it says they debunked said subject, they probably didn't.
Ahh nah this actually the dude from Alvin and the chipmunks 💀
It takes a lot of arrogance to get up on stage and talk about something you know nothing about as though you know everything about it.
““Scoffer” is the name of the arrogant, haughty man who acts with arrogant pride.”
Proverbs 21:24
"Comedians" can be a synonym for a "I can't be held responsible for anything I say because I will just claim it was a joke." The bad thing is that atheists will claim this guy as "evidence" in their next response on a thread.
The NT manuscripts are the earliest, most widely transmitted and has the most manuscript evidence of any ancient document. Nothing comes even remotely close. If you included every textual variant with every Greek manuscrpt, you would find only one textual variant every third page, and 90% of those variants cannot even be translated into the English language.
I believe most of the textual variants are of the definition ite article and the wrong use. So bad grammar here and there, doesn't xhange the meaning at all
@@twitherspoon8954 /* All four Gospels were written anonymously and all were written after 70 AD */
That would be 100 AD. However, P45 is dated to between 90 AD to 125 AD for the Gospel of John. Usually the original autograph is written before the you can have a manuscript. It is true that all four gospels were written anonymously, without having the title they have today. That does not follow that they weren't written by an eye witness and all four gospels possess unique sources.
The only Gospel of the four that were certainly written by an eye witness, is the Gospel of John. In John 21:24, the author writes... "This is the disciple who is bearing witness about these things, and who has written these things, and we know that his testimony is true".
I don't believe that the disciple is one of the 12 as this Gospel writer gives us hints on his identity, which I believe was Lazarus who rose from the dead. Lazarus is called "beloved" in John 11:3, 5, 35-16 and is the "beloved disciple" in John 19:25 and 21:20. The disciple John is never said to be love in this gospel or any other. Lazarus is the disciple who ran to the tomb early Sunday morning as he was raised to life by Jesus and was the one that the disciples questioned where he would die since he was raised from the dead (John 21:21-23).
/* More than 80% of New Testament manuscripts date to the 5th century or later. */
I don't think you have grasped what you said. Of course 80% of the New Testament was written after the 5th century. The further on in time the more manuscript evidence you have as they are copied by hand and given to more people and churches. But that's the same as every single manuscript ever written. That's like me saying that after the 20th century, 90% of all things ever written were produced.
Did you know that 100% of Julius Caesars Gallic Wars was written after the 5th century. In fact, I'll go further, 100% of all manuscripts for the Gallic Wars was written after the 8th century. The earliest manuscript for Julius Caesar comes from the 9th century, which is early for most Greek or Roman manuscript. Do you trust any ancient manuscript for Roman histories, Greek, Persian? Because none of them compare to the mountain of manuscript evidence we have for the NT. It dwarfs all by comparison.
/* In the entire first century Jesus is not mentioned by a single historian, religion scholar, politician, philosopher, or poet */
Except for Tacitus, Josephus, Celcus etc. Not to mention Luke who wrote The Gospel of Luke and Acts. He is a first rate historian. As is Paul who met Jesus on the road to Damascus, and also met Peter and Jesus brother James in Jerusalem. We know that the Gospel of Luke was written before 70 AD as Paul is still alive when he wrote Acts of the Apostles. Luke was a companion of Paul on his travels, yet in Acts it doesn't contain the death of Paul. If Luke was still alive he would have added Paul's death in Rome to Acts. The only book of the NT that was written 60 years after Jesus death ,is the final book of Revelations.
/* Jesus himself left no archaeological evidence of any kind, such as artifacts, tombs, dwellings, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. */
You can say that about almost anyone who has ever lived. Where are any archaological evidence for Alexander the Great? Julius Caesar? They were all great Kings yet they didn't leave anything that survives today. There is a good argument that the Shroud of Turin is the actually burial cloth for Jesus of Nazarus and the testimony of early history and the library we call the NT. Jesus is one of the best attested historical figures in history and wasn't even a political figure.
@@josephsaab7208 That's true. The definite article doesn't have any say on words when translated into English.
@@twitherspoon8954 But how do we know that "none of the Gospel authors witnessed Jesus"? I believe that some of the authors, especially John and Matthew, were followers of Jesus. And traditionally no other names were debated as the authors of the Gospels. Peace to you
@@alimaclean5777 I appreciate your time and effort as shown by your comments. Thanks
I think the real point was the the editorial decisions on what books to include and what books to exclude
Comics like that are universal SpongeBobs.
DONT insult spongebob like that, hahahah
@@commenter178 yessir
1:28 my man just grew his forehead in a second
I’m gonna play devils advocate here and say he (comedian) mentioned the Bible whereas IP mentions just the NT. What about the OT ?
The Old Testament is arguably more reliable then the New Testament due to the lengths the Jews went to on preserving it
Dead Sea scrolls, Samaritan Pentateuch, Septuigant.
There are also around 150 papyrus fragments which support the accuracy of the oldest copies of the New Testament.
For the Old Testament there are the Dead Sea Scrolls, and Ketef Hinnom Scrolls which support the prophies including Israel, Babylon and of course Jesus.
That comedian is very brave indeed to take sides against God.
Brave? He is ignorant and foolish. Brave are those prideful wretches who will oppose God at Armageddon, even knowing without a shadow of a doubt exactly who He is.
First, he tries to take the chipmunk trinity, now he tries to take the Holy Trinity. This is the natural progression of atheism, people!
Actually, that is a regression. The chipmunks were a cartoon, the trinity is a joke.
The Romans had the right idea about comedians and actors.
You're first statement was pure gold . Lol
May GOD bless you brother .
Ill-informed take on how stories are passed down aside, that's more an argument against sola scriptura than the religion itself. Tradition by its nature is about maintaining the divinely revealed truths passed down throughout the ages, not keeping every last thee and thou preserved. Said Tradition was almost as much oral as it was written.
That's a really good observation. I'm comparing Christianity to European polytheism, and since the sagas and much of the old testament were largely passed down through oral tradition, both are regularly used and explored by historians and archeologists to learn more about the history and culture of both sets of cultures, which indicates a high level of trust among academics that these texts are majority reliable, if not absolutely accurate about dates and locations.
"Comedian" mocks the Bible and Christianity.
"Hey Siri, what does David Cross' early life section say?"
Every. Time.
Hi IP, please, make a video about if Solomon really had 1000 wives.
He didn't. 1000 is Bible-speak for "a lot." He probably had a few dozen.
@@fluffysheap Why wouldn’t they say a dozen then?
@@fdsajfldaskjf It was probably to exaggerate that Solomon was a lecherous king. Not a lot of characters in the Old Testament are portrayed as flattering. The exact number isn't relevant. What matters is that the reader understands that Solomon sleeps with a lot of women.
@@fdsajfldaskjf why do people say "cool", when they aren't talking about temperature?
Why do people "lame" when they aren't talking about paralysis?
He had 700 wives, who were princesses, and 300 concubines. And his wives turned away his heart
1 kings 11:3
The "it was edited/added to by" argument fails because all one has to do is look at the reputation of the ones using it. It is sad to say that, but their own standards destroy their "credibility".
Can you tackle cosmic skeptics argument about the “hiddeness of God”. It’s an interesting argument I hadn’t heard before. At first glance it seems very subjective, but at the same time there’s something there and I can’t pin point it out 🤔
1. Divine Hiddenness: A Christian Response
th-cam.com/video/3YvXeLtdVBE/w-d-xo.html
i think he already did a response and the guy made another video to debunk ip
@@mstrazz9302 1. Divine Hiddenness with Inspiring Philosophy and Paulogia
th-cam.com/video/GR-_l7MgLpg/w-d-xo.html
@@mstrazz9302 Paulogia?
The characters that he played in the past (Dwight easily defeated by Hanson and Ian from the Alvin and the Chipmunks franchise) have really paid off.
I'm not a Christian because I disagree on metaphysics and morality (based on the best of my understanding, limited as it may be), but I do appreciate your historical defense.
It's not like a major subset of people throughout 2000 years of history were just stupid, as many anti-religious comedians and popular rhetoricians want to make it seem.
Along with that, the idea that kings somehow had exclusive access to the texts and changed them at will always gets me. People weren't so dumb about that either and copies were everywhere pretty much from the start.
people don't have to be dumb to be religious. they just have to believe, have faith and not question too deeply. greeks and muslims and native americans and romans and christians all did some great things while still believing in their religions.
off this by no means proves that zeus or any other god ever was more than a story, which people collectively agreed on believing to be true.
Hello Andrea.... if I may ask.... what do you "disagree on metaphysics and morality"? I'm just curious. Thanks
@@johnbrzykcy3076 Briefly, on metaphysics I disagree because I am a pantheist (I could be persuaded into pan/en/theism); I think it likely that nature itself is or is part of the Divine, and I find creation out of nothing unintelligible. I also don't think the material universe was ever corrupted by a satanic force, but it is simply part of the natural laws of everything.
On morality, I have several disagreements about things like abortion and homosexuality; but my fundamental disagreement is the idea of sin. I do not think sin is a thing. We are imperfect in the sense that we are too limited and in flux to ever achieve complete virtue and happiness in this life; but there was no fall from grace or original state of goodness that we need to repent for or feel guilty for losing. Being limited is just our nature, as is the capacity for growth.
In short, Christianity seems to me to be too judgmental and repressive of nature, based on abstract (if well-meaning) ideals that can never be applied. Since they can't be applied, Christians conclude that nature and humans are to blame, rather than correcting their own excessive expectations.
Thanks for posting this, very helpful.
Pretty sure the Bible's contradictory elements are more than enough for it to debunk itself many times over. Especially as it claims to be inspired/written by the creator of the universe.
Can you point to some particularly using the past 150 years of secular liberal biblical scholarship so that it's not some reddit tier objection.
@@autisticphaglosophy7128 th-cam.com/video/Bw1ln7rJRXU/w-d-xo.html
@@autisticphaglosophy7128 "The Bible has contradictions."
"Really? Secular liberal biblical scholarship has contradictions?"
This conversation is already reddit tier.
The problem is that these comedians reinforce many of the worldviews that people hold. I understand that the comedian's act is an exaggeration of truth but people are susceptible to such behavior.
Yes, I just watched the other day about archeologist finding more evidence that supports biblical text. This comedian is obviously an atheist and is pushing that agenda. I don't think he's funny either.
and yet the very best Israeli archeologist have never found any evidence of Moses or the lost/wandering tribes. A complete myth.
Funny no archeologist has found anything to support the Exodus and Moses‘ existence
Well said! Thank you for sharing.
Clear, great response!! Thanks 😊
The Bible is a closed book to the fool. They will not understand it, thus they will mock it.
It's like consulting a florist for a faulty transmission. "The fool in his heart ..."
It's rare to find christian jews, it's almost impossible to find a Hollywood christian jew
✝️❤️🔥🙏🏽
He said in Run Ronnie Run that he sold his soul to the devil so he just doesn't want it to be real and true.
I'm tempted to feel sorry for those who reject God as their a priori assumption. It's such a stupid choice. Once my brain switched on around my early twenties I realized we exist in a stupendous miracle. That we ourselves are an unfathomable miracle. So I started searching for answers. My a priori assumption was that there must be a mind, an intelligence behind this fantastic design we live in. I further reasoned that this mind probably interacted with humanity very early in our history. So I looked into the two oldest major religions. The two that all the other major religions owe their existence to. Hebrew and Hindu. I don't credit the efforts of aborigine faith systems with much because they have little substance and less connected history over spans of time. It didn't take long to reject Hinduism. It's just silly and has been reworked over and over repeatedly. But Judaism hangs together well and is tremendously well documented. Jesus of Nazareth was a Jew and he taught Judaism. The Four Gospels are fully Jewish. Then along came Paul who claimed to have received a new revelation in which God was doing a new thing. Allowing any human being to receive salvation due to the substitutionary death burial and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth who was in fact The God-man. ( see 13th chapter of Acts ) I can't prove to you that my faith is in fact true. But it's the best system all history has to offer. It turned me into a reasonably decent human being from a callow youth soaked in hedonism. What possible gain does the atheist receive from believing in nothing?
I would agree Judaism/Christianity is more likely to be true than other religions, but I don't know yet. The topic I want to look more into is people's prophecies and see if they are fulfilled specific prophecies that well predate the event so you can predate the message and figure they could not tell where history would roll by their own power. I will then see if fulfilled prophecies would seem to validate contradictory claims, then if I find prophecy to be a reliable proof of divine revelation, I will compare the prophecies of the Bible and other Holy texts to find a potential winner. I would set aside prophecies like "The Israelites will rise again!" because that is vague.
But prophets can still sin so even if they speak revelation, they could still teach false revelations also.
Do you know of any books on the subject?
So are you suggesting salvation is only for the Jews?
@@josephpostma1787 Detailed fulfilled prophecy is the great proof of Biblical revelation. I would point you to Isaiah 53. Get a Thomson Chain Reference Bible in King James Translation and in the back it will give you all the many prophecies of a coming Messiah. You won't get much on prophecy from any of the main line denominations. They have largely stopped thinking about it. Jesus of Nazareth pointed to the prophecies of the Messiah several times in the Four Gospels. He chided the religious leaders of His day for not knowing the prophecies. He told his disciples exactly what was going to happen to Him in Jerusalem near the end of his ministry. They didn't want to hear it nor were they current with how the details had been foretold in the Hebrew Scriptures.
@@andrevisser7542 Well it 'was' as Paul makes quite clear. Peter and the other Apostles directed their ministry 99% to Jews and continued to adhere to the Law. Then Paul ( first noted in Acts 13 ) claimed a new revelation was given to him by Christ. That salvation had been extended to 'all that would believe'. Prior to that the Jews did accept conversion to Judaism but there's not a lot of reverence to this. The story of Ruth being a prominent exception.
@@nohandle257, read the parable Jesus told in Matthew 22 then tell me again salvation is for the Jews only.
he probably watched the documentary on The History Channel, which, just like Tim Mackie pointed out, was made without consulting any real Bible and Hebrew/Greek scholars
We do not know who wrote the gospels. No one knows. So, even if we had originals, we wouldn't know whether they were even reliable accounts to begin with (beyond much doubt, we can discern they weren't written by eye witnesses). Furthermore, the gospels contradict eachother dramatically in places AND they were written AFTER Paul's authentic letters---and....even weirder, Paul never even mentions a single parable of Jesus. So, a comedian being overly dramatic about the gospels is the least of the worries regarding the validity of the gospels, etc.
if they were only written after paul wrote his letters than how does he quote them?
1 Timothy 5:17-18 quotes Luke 10:7
1 Corinthians 11:23-26 quotes Luke 22:19-20
1 Timothy 6:13-14 quotes John 18:33-38
1 Corinthians 15:3-4 literally says
"He was raised on the third day *in accordance with the Scriptures"*
It takes the Holy Spirit to discern the Word of God. It takes a love of the TRUTH to even care
It doesn’t take a comedian to debunk a book of fairy tales full of inaccuracies, contradictions and outlandish claims 😂
If your getting your scholarships from a comedian don't be surprised if it a joke 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
baldspot
There's also P52 of the gospel of John from around 125 AD. Thats only a gap of only a few decades at most.
I agree with the comedian
I agree with Scholars
@@INFINITUMSPIRITI agree with people who are versed in more than one book.
Ask yourself why celebrities/comedians always bash and pick on the Bible but never touch other religions?
Cool story. Still BS.
how so ?
Not even a cool story
I pray God grants you revelational knowledge
This guy tried to steal the chipmunks. He can not be trusted.
Criticisms of the authenticity and veracity of Scripture have made me research and read more widely and deeper and has led to a much stronger and calmer faith. I have been blown away by how verifiable, authentic and most importantly how profound Scripture is. It truly is the most remarkable written artefact, even from a secular perspective.
But it’s not surprising that so many layers of subterfuge, misinformation, lies and derision exist across academia, entertainment and even everyday discussions given the presence of Satan and his handwork since the Garden.
Um what? Subterfuge, misinformation, lies? and then you conjure up satan? Profound? Nope.
@@rf7477 what on earth are you talking about?
@@eddiej9733 Don't worry about him brother, just another resident schizoid.
You are right.
You didn't mention that the church fathers (including early ones) quote from the new Testament so much that some portions could be reconstructed if we only had them.
As always well research, keep up the good work IP
There's blatant evidence that the gospels were re-written, but Christianity has just sort of defined that away.
Matthew (and Luke) contain many of the exact Greek words of Mark. In what sense is one not a re-written version of the other?
People believe what THEY WANT to believe
Gosh, I'm glad for the last statement "I've only scratched the surface" because of things like "P75 being the most accurate" P75 is missing John 8s scene with the adulteress.
@@corporeallogos It doesnt matter. Its in the Old Latin translation, its in the comentaries by Augustin, Ambrose, Jerome, Pacian of Barcelona. I made a video response to Paulogia when he used this as a landslide twice.
Not to mention archeology has uncovered early documents from the 1st and 2nd centuries that show the Bible has not been rewritten.
Very infornative and concise - good job!
in others words, you believe in a book that is not in the language of Jesus, about 200-400 years after Jesus, got it!
They believe in and worship a book 😂
Actually we believe in the Old Testament which was made in 1200-1300 BC and in the New Testament which is from 70-100 AD and the New Testament was written in Greek language of the gospel writers through oral tradition which orally transmitted the Gospels
@@INFINITUMSPIRIT Who transmitted the Gospels to the Gospels writers?
Look....old writings that we let survive, and/or approved. Doesn't change that they are still only collections of historical narratives.
WLC addressed this to when someone asked him about George Carlin (who I loved) but his jokes are Sky Daddy style caricatures and satire. To me these rascals aren't very different from a Court Jester entertaining the King.
good old rascals. Hey, how about that 2000 year Ponzi scheme? Still going! The sky frightener must be having a good old laugh.
Their king is Satan.
the church, guided by the holy spirit, preserved the word of God throughout the age.
I saw that one of the comments stated that what David Cross said was the truth. These days the word "truth" means "whatever a person believes to be true, usually without a shred of evidence." (i. e. humans being aardvarks because they said "I'm an aardvark").
Thanks for this video. Michael, would you please do a video for the text of the Old Testament? I know its own variant history is more complicated
Thanks
The irony here is...this comedian KNOWS he, himself is a joke. His fans are the ones oblivious. Imagine...that. They are fooled "twice".
" This word is spirit " & as an independent student of the bible [and other text ], I see that thru all the spirit remains the same. God has used physical circumstance and realities to demonstrate SPIRITUAL truths to us. What you understand is determined by how deep into Him you want to dig. Seek and ye shall find is His promise ! In the meantime, don't choke over the gnats.
Great video.