" see I'm well aware of this... In fact that was the precise topic of the Master's thesis that I wrote at the University of Oxford, AND FOR WHICH I WON AN AWARD FOR BEST DISSERTATION" That was the most gangster thing I've heard this year. I subscribed immediately.
Seriously though. She's insisting that she understands it better than him because of "basic context" while he knows the subject backwards and forwards. Then at the end she retreats to, "Actually being educated on this makes you likely to understand it," ridiculously un-self aware
It is a great public service when people who confidently assert some "fact" are exposed as lacking even basic knowledge. Keep it up, Dan, this is great!
Her comment section is wild. Pretty much every single comment is begging her to stop and take the L with grace. But it seems she can't stop herself while crying "ad hominem"
@@eyebot101I can't find the video with such a comment section. It looks like she deleted it? She did make a short crying about how she "won't be silenced" lmao.
She continually talks about “translations” while Dan talks about the original Hebrew which he can read and she can’t. Imagine not knowing mandarin, going to China and start lecturing the locals on the correct way to interpret their literature which you only know through translations. Takes an incredible amount of conceit.
I value the direct argument without ad hominem or insults. It is so satisfying to see the strength of clear logic and focused argument without mud obscuring the view. Well done, Dan. Truth with civility.
I'll never understand someone who will look at a person presenting a detailed argument grounded in evidence and citing sources, and think that an appropriate response is "you haven't proven anything" as though they can just hand-wave away whatever was said.
Worse, they themselves make no good arguments ane then claim they have conclusively shown they are right and the one with the actual arguments and evidence is wrong.
It's just unreal to me how people can be so convinced that they are correct while being simultaneously ignorant about the argument and/or the best available evidence. Hopefully she takes her own advice and gets better educated.
@@scantili What has he been wrong about? I just stumbled upon his videos last night so I've only seen 2 but if you know of something he is definitely wrong about please advise. I am extremely impressed with the knowledge, wisdom and delivery thus far.
@@penelopepittstopP Well one thing, he's wrong about there being a consensus on Deuteronomy 22:28. There is no "scholarly consensus" regarding the reading of this passage. Some scholars interpret it as rape or seduction whereas others say it was consensual. I personally don't know what the reading is, nor do I care because many critics accuse this verse of forcing a rape victim to marry her rapist, and it doesn't. In Exodus 22: 16-17, if a man seduces a virgin, he is to marry her and pay her father the required amount *unless* her father rejected. In the Halakhah, the woman also had a say in if she was to marry him. And if they didn't get married, the man was still forced to pay the required amount for that marriage. So no, the Bible doesn't 'say' that she was forced to marry anyone.
It was arguing with them as a progressive Christian that made me an atheist, so yeah apologists do more harm for the religion, they point out how crazy it all is. Listening to the actual academic side is just really interesting and informative. Apologists hate facts, especially those that don't fit with their beliefs.
I don’t think she’s unintelligent. I suspect that she’s very intelligent. That doesn’t preclude her from being wrong and guilty of a hubris and homophobia. I commend her for exercising her mind and engaging in debate. I hope that she takes something from the absolutely blistering schooling she received.
The blindness of faith is astonishing. Having been in the church for 10 years I’ve witnessed this type of behavior repeatedly. No matter how logical or reasonable the argument, if one challenges the dogma the believer will simply not hear it. They will always find a verse or other source to support their dogma.
Faith self-deception. It is pretending to know what you don't know and is just simply assuming things without reason and defending them against all reason. - Aron Ra Doubt is more important than faith, for doubt leads to inquiry and inquiry is what leads to truth. This is the reason religion encourages faith and discourages doubt, because they don't want you to know the truth.outside of what the bible says, there is no incontrovertible evidence that proves the existence of a god. If you wish to strive for peace of soul and happiness, then believe; if you wish to be a disciple of truth, then inquire.” - Friedrich Nietzsche
The Word is firmly established Truth. Faith in Jesus and His work on the cross is crucial for life. We are created beings who desire to serve the living GOD and He made a way through His Son for us to be reconciled with Him. This world has muted our senses and wrecked our brains to the Truth. He is the potter and we are merely the clay. Our brains are miniscule in comparison to the Almighty GOD of Abraham, Isaac & Jacob. Dogma is the "religions" of this world that are all satanic. Even atheism is a religion of this world. There is only ONE WAY. JESUS is the WAY, the TRUTH and the LIFE. It's that simple. Ephesians 2:8 “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:”
People don’t realise that defending your phd thesis, a long and required part of the process, has you fighting off multiple academics telling you you are wrong. Her tactic may work on the internet but against a real academic it fails.
It seems to me that she has the confidence that I see in so many Christians that feel that Jesus has given them direct knowledge without actually understanding the context
Ouch. Her entire claim is the epitome of Hitchen's Razor "what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." She literally provided not a single piece of evidence. She made at least two claims. One about a word's meaning that proved to be false and second that three scholars either disagreed/contradicted Dan, without actually providing evidence of that claim, to which Dan investigated and could find NO reference from those scholars contradicting his claim. My guess? Her dogma disagrees with the data and instead of changing her dogma to be data congruent, she wants to argue against the data without actually providing any contradicting data herself. Just claims.
I'm actually shocked and kinda impressed at the confidence these people without education, understanding of the language, etc. have that they are totally right in their arguments haha 😂
@@geekynerd7346 I agree it may sound a bit harsh but if she doesn't speak Hebrew or Greek, doesn't have any degrees in biblical studies or comparative religions or hasn't taken the time to do honest scholarly research then compared to a guy like Dan, she is "dumb" about the bible. She can be brilliant in other matters but in regards to the Bible all she has is a particular interpretation that she likes. Her views are not supported by the facts or data.
"Dumb" people should ALWAYS question those with a PhD. The more letters are after someone's name the more indoctrinated with things of this world they must overcome to realize or even remember the simple TRUTH.
Phds can be wrong even in their own fields. Her problem is that her interp is obviously wrong for the reasons stated in dan's first video, and she decided to double down, and ignored his arguments.
She tried to say all that with her full chest 🤦🏻♀️ at least she’s confident…? But she’s literally not even following her recommendation of research… when he’s clearly cited his academic sources. I can’t imagine trying to go to a literal doctor of a specific subject & telling them they’re wrong when I haven’t had near the studies they completed 😬 embarrassed for her. I think we can all see that she’s won’t learn because she’s not willing to learn. But it was a valuable lesson for us, her ignorance allowed him to hit home the FACTS. Again 👏🏽
Just wild that someone would try to debate the context of words used in a language, yet not even know...how to speak the language. Its just so weird. Dan, love your content. I'm not a scholar by any means, but I'm slowly working my way through your book. Keep up the good work!
Thank you Dan. I have a MDiv from Emory, took Hebrew enough to know I don’t know enough. Thank you for your clear and respectful engagement with that creator.
I'm a Bible literalist. If it says "wine" it means "wine", not "non-alcoholic grape juice"! The people at the Baptist churches I attended always had a peculiar problem with this particular word!
@@scambammer6102I mean it’s not gibberish. It’s just not meaningful to you. But it’s silly to say any religious text is ‘gibberish’. Or really any text written for a specific purpose, it’s just kind of a thought terminating cliche
@@PasteurizedLettuce lol wut? Gibberish means nonsensical. There is tons of gibberish in the Bible. You saying there isn’t means nothing. And the bible as a whole doesn’t have a specific purpose. It has many purposes, some of which are inconsistent.
@@scambammer6102 are you being intentionally obtuse? Every single book in the Bible reflects the rhetorical goals of its respective author for its intended audience including all of their cultural and political suppositions
0:14 All due respect to the original creator of the rebuttal to Dan, she seems to be projecting her method of biblical interpretation on Dan. Sometimes, I feel like a lot of apologists don’t listen to what is said or only care about their view of a person’s counter argument. Also, the KJV is very outdated.
Yeah there’s a ton of projection. She’s still going over on TikTok. People like this are pretty infuriating for me. I don’t know if they’re conscious of what they’re doing or not.
"a lot of apologists don’t listen to what is said or only care about their view of a person’s counter argument." That's exactly it. A lot of apologists recite from a script (their own, or another that they've heard) and outright ignore any argument or evidence to the contrary, simply following their narrow monologue, not even _trying_ to actually interact or have a dialogue with someone else.
If she is "not against education in any way", then she would do well to get (more of) one. Her passion for the subject is admirable. If she honestly seeks out good faith scholarship rather than unsubstantiated apologetics, she could be a powerful voice for biblical literacy.
Dan bringing the hammer on someone who is too arrogant and ignorant to realize that she is the one who needs to sit down, get some more education, and then ask humbly for a discussion.
I'm most impressed by your balancing on the knife-edge of patience and exasperation. Meanwhile, I hope your LDS and non-LDS viewers alike will take heart from a line in one of our best-known hymns: "Truth is reason."
I can't imagine having a hobby & arguing with the professional consensus in said hobby. That level of confidence or whatever that would be considered is wild to me.
Dan is a scholar. This woman is an apologist. Huge difference. Many apologists will resort to Strong’s or Vine’s for their Greek and Hebrew interpretation rather than actually taking Greek and Hebrew as a language (philology). Sorry but this woman is gravely incorrect.
Apologists have no integrity . They are people who are paid or decide to defend a position regardless of the facts or any new information that comes to light. I can't think of anyone more intellectually dishonest and hypocritical than an apologist.
@@penelopepittstopP Thank you for your response! I believe all people deserve respect but ideas not so much. With all due respect, you are demonstrably wrong about the Bible. It was written by men for religious and political reasons. It was not written or inspired by any God. Do you think the Koran or Book of Mormon is the "word" of God? Of course you don't. You are applying different standards for your book compared to those " holy books." That's called special pleading. Christians are not encouraged to read the Bible so most have never read it and don't know anything about it. I am going to take a guess that you were raised to believe the Bible was the word of God by your family, teachers and the adults in your community. That is called indoctrination. You were taught not to question anything about the Bible or else that's a sin and to think Satan is using me to test your faith 😂 but an intelligent person like you knows that the " truth could never fear investigation." You were also taught that your " faith " is a good thing but it's not and I can prove it to you. Your parents and those who raised you may have loved you and been fine people but that doesn't make them right. They repeated what they were taught. We are in 2023 and have access to information our parents could never dream of so you have no excuses. The truth is If you were born in Saudi Arabia, Iran or the Middle East there is a 99.% chance that you would be just as devoted to the Koran and Mohammed as you are to Jesus and the Bible today. I understand these are very difficult conversations for religious people like you. Hypothetically, if I am correct the implications on your life would be humongous. That would mean you would have to discard parts of your very identity. Christianity is how you define yourself but I think your better than that religion. Despite what most people including you believe, it is very difficult to be a good person when you believe the Bible is the word of God.. I am not an atheist but It is very ironic that more Atheists live a " Jesus Christ type life" than the fundamentalist who believe that the Bible is the word of God. Those people behave just like the sagisees and Pharisees Jesus complained about. Fundamental Christianity is very dangerous. It is anti-education, It affects how you feel about your self worth , it encourages feelings of guilt and depression, it determines what you wear, eat, drink, where you go and most importantly how you treat and judge people around you. That is why I think teaching children that the Bible is the word of God is a form of child abuse. When a person realizes that the Bible is not the word of God they don't feel a sense of loss, ironically it's like a dark cloud 🌨️ has been lifted and you can get sunlight ☀️. It's like getting released from a prison. I can't describe Once again, it's almost impossible to be a good spouse , family member, friend or person if you honestly believe the Bible is the word. If you ever find the courage to discuss and investigate the Bible and your beliefs I can prove to you with science , facts and history that the Bible is not the word of any god.
@@moonshoes11 Not at all. It was easy for me to apply reason to religions that were not my own. But much harder to apply reason to my own! When I saw Christians so earnest and certain their religion was true, even though I found it so absurd, it made me think maybe I am like that about my own religion. So certain it is true and yet to the outsider so patently not true. This led me down the path to a truly critical examination of Islam.
@@HassanRadwan133 So, if someone were to leave Christianity because some Muslims they know were particularly confident in their beliefs, would that make sense? If you came across a group of very confident flat earthers, would that be good reason to accept a flat earth?
@@moonshoes11 I don't think you understood. Now I don't believe in ANY religion. I'm saying that as an outsider I could see the flaws in another man's religion, because I wasn't emotionally attached to that religion so it was easier for me to apply reason without starting from the premise that it's true. The way the emotional attachment of those of other religions distorted their ability to apply reason made me realise that my own emotional attachment to Islam was distorting my own application of reason to my religion. So when I started looking at Islam with a truly critical eye, I began to see things that contradicted reason
Dan can make his own translation. She can't. Her case rests entirely on her ability to go to biblegateway and just click through all the translations until she finds something she likes, mixing and matching for different arguments but never remaining consistent. "Just because I never went to college doesn't mean I can't google". Well, google yes, competently, no.
7:00 "The bible was written for men by men." Literally the only accurate thing she said in the entire video and I have to take it out of context to make her right.
@@scambammer6102 Yes, which is why I said I have to charitably take her quote out of context for her to be right, otherwise she's wrong on every point.
She is criticizing someone that has far more education than she does. If you go back to earlier videos of Dans, he goes through his educational credentials, which includes a PhD. He is fluent as a philologist in biblical Greek and Hebrew, and not a memorizer of Strong’s or Vine’s. What are her credentials other than a diploma from a “Bible college.”
Christians don't like education, only indoctrination. They want the flock compliant and not questioning what they're told, that is reinforced in the bible several times. I have heard several sermons that instruct their flock not think for themselves, just keep putting money on the collection plate, and the pastor will think for them.
Let me throw some gas into the fire. HEB. Ki yimsae Na'ar'k betulah 'aser lo 'orasah utepasah wesaepab immah winemsa'u we'natah ha'is hassokeb 'immah la'abi hanna'ark hamissi kasep welow tihyeh le'issah. If a man finds a girl/young woman virgin that is not betrothed, and he seizes/uses and lies [has sex] with her and they are found-out, then shall give the man that lay with her to the father of her fifty silvers. DSS. No text for versus after 22:17 SPT. Ean de tis heuree te paida teen parthenon hetis ou memnesteutai kai biasamenos koimethee met autus kai heuree ho neanidos pentekonta didrachma If anyone should find the female child/virgin whoever was not espoused, and using force on her he went to bed with her, Shall give the man going to bed with her to the father of the young woman fifty double drachmas. There is no conflict here. The septuagint is talking about a man forcing himself on an adolescent female and so is the Hebrew Bible. The word utepasah "Taphas" is used as follows Psalms 71:11 - capture alive. Genesis 39:12 - to clutch (a garment in order to detain) Deuteronomy 21:19 - to take dominance (as in bring a disobedient young man to a city gate and control that gate) Deuteronomy 9:17 - to arrest (stop or detain) Many versus - to lay siege or seize a city. (as in to dominate) Habbakuk - to sheathed (inclose or surround) Again this gets back to the root to use skillfully/to handle or grasp in order to control. So the key words here are : girl/young virgin (diminuitive size and strength), a man finding her, a man seizing her and skillfully using, man lying with her. The context is sex, the manner of sex is forced, he overpowers her and forces her to lie. Violation. So lets put this in context, if you were a city, say a trading city, and you were seized, you would in a sense be violated. If you managed to garner the forces and attack the seizere, your not going to give them rainbows and lollipops. Your going to kill them, and you might even seek out their supporters and take revenge on them. If you are arresting them, that means they have violated something and the seizing is due recourse. But in this case a young girl being found, discovered, is blameless, so the violator is the one doing the seizing. BTW, there is a benefit to the woman, he must support her even if she decides to live apart from him. In other words if she can find a more pleasant place to live, he still has to pay her. And this gives the whole thing away, his forced payment is a compensation for him using force on her. And we can argue that it might be consensual sex, but the problem is the text does not clearly identify if its a child or adolescent. If a man handles a child to have sex with her, its a violation. If its not a child but an unbetrothed woman, that is less than one year post-puberty and he coerces her, thats still a violation. That's why the violator can't divirce her, he has to compensate her all his life for his crime.
It is always interesting to see the obvious difference between those that do know their stuff, and thos that think they know their stuff.. It actually is fun to see how you know what you are talking about, it is very refreshing, thanks for that.
Since someone decided to ruin my thread in the last video, I will repost this here: I actually use the word δοῦλος (doulos) to make this point in my classes all the time about language and translations. There are very few exact one-to-one interpretations for even the simplest words and concepts from one language to another. Any time something gets translated, there are choices being made. Doulos does not mean servant. A servant in English is someone who may be of lowly status, but is often employed, i.e. paid for their labor. A doulos is explicitly someone who is not paid for their labor. So, as I tell my students, any time you read "servant" in a text translated from Ancient Greek, the word there should be "slave," but the translator decided to soften it for whatever reason, some of which are more legitimate than others.
@@Exor_. You don't even believe that. 😂 But I understand Christians like you can only attack people's character never the argument. Indoctrination is a hell of a drug. 😔
@@Exor_. Hopefully you'll get the courage to face reality one day. How does it feel to know you have to ignore logic, archeology, history, science and facts to maintain your beliefs? Who would've thought using your brain is a sin. 😂
Have to keep repeating what Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson said about casual learning overreach: "One of the great challenges in this world is knowing enough about a subject to think you're right, but not enough about the subject to know you're wrong." I like how she resorts to anti-intellectualism and not so subtle castigation of "religious scholars." That's some blatant defensiveness there. You can always tell when people are sincerely looking for the truth by their humility and openness to learn -- polar opposite of this insecure creator here.
Damn it I absolutely love how people think they know what they're talking about and then proven wrong damn it what a great way to start the week for me love it
Basically she's saying Dan is wrong because she wants to believe the opposite of what he has explained to be factually correct. That is a fair description of the whole of christianity. "You can't be correct because I don't want you to be!"
"That is a fair description of the whole of christianity." No, it's not. There are a lot of Christians who are really interested in what those texts actually say.
@@DoloresLehmann Christianity is based on a legend that all of humanity is sinful due to Adam and Eve eating fruit from the tree of good and evil in the garden of Eden between 10,000-6,000 years ago. Humans are in fact apes, they migrated from what is now the African continent to all continents of the planet. Modern humans, as we recognise Homo Sapiens Sapiens, evolved 300,000-250,000 years ago. There was no original sin, nothing to be forgiven for, no reason for a god to impregnate a human teenager, only created for himself to be born as a man to be a human sacrifice to himself for something that never happened. But christians desperately want to believe the legends that they have been indoctrinated with, that there is a father figure magic wizard of immense power looking after them, and that they're going to live forever. I do understand the power of that indoctrination, but for someone who was never indoctrinated into a religion, it all seems very odd.
@@rainbowkrampus Given that "what he has explained to be factually correct" refers to the text and only to the text, it can't in this specific context. Of course, it GENERALLY can apply to more than just the text, but then, I also have to tell you that there are a lot of Christians interested in the GENERALLY factually correct.
That's a fair description of religion in general. Also conspiracy nuts and libertarians amd anyone who thinks that trump is a good leader or voted brexit. There are a lot pf people out there who'd rather believe in what they want to be true than what thebfacts actually are.
I gotta admit, I admire this girl’s confidence! This is like one of the strangest rap battles I have ever seen. I’m imagining people behind each of them cheering after each response.
While watching this video I grabbed my JPS Hebrew-Tanakh. I bet she doesn't have the Hebrew text. I am a noob when it comes to Hebrew. I was however able to find חזק thanks to your transliteration. I have a Hebrew keyboard on my phone and was able to pop what seemed like the correct letters into Google translate. I was then able to find וַיַּחֲזֶק־בָּהּ in verse 11 like you said. Thanks for doing what you do. I am an atheist and observant Jew. I love learning about the reality of the Tanakh rather than just "It's the word of G*d".
Ibrahim Ibn Ezra, a Jewish scholar of the 10-11th centuries, commented on verse 28: זאת אנוסה לא מפותה For those who don't read Hebrew, that is translated as: _this is forced, not seduced._
I certainly don’t understand the biblical language or context - I’ll take Dan at his word - but I do know the distinction between rape and seduction in earlier times (or at least in literature from ancient times) is not nearly as clean cut as it is today. The example I’m most familiar with is Mozart’s Don Giovanni. Modern viewers want to differentiate between whether he is a rapist or seducer. But in Mozarts day, people weren’t concerned because quite simply, it didn’t matter.
There is a simular lack of distinction in older French literature as well. Frankly the idea that women have autonomy over their own bodies and choice is fairly modern and quite radical at that.
@@scambammer6102 I didn't realize she did that. 😂 if that's true she's worse than I thought. After 15 seconds I had to cut off the video cause I knew it would be nothing but circular reasoning, special pleading and intellectual dishonesty.
Another classic example of how apologists talk outta pure bias and navigate data to fit their conclusion. It inevitably causes them to skip over details, make assumptions that they think are gonna argee with them, but don't. Like all apologists, she's projecting that you're trying to make the Bible read like it's written by men; in reality she's already started with the presupposition that it's written by God, so everything must be read that way and that must be the correct assumption.
Having seen the 1st short, I was struck by listening to a Black woman attempt to reinterpret in a more favorable light biblical sanctions of both SLAVERY and RAPE. I'm also constantly amazed at just how far Christian apologists will go in their attempts to make objective evidence conform to their belief. That they can still refer to themselves as scholars, while purposely disregarding the rules of true scholarship and the scientific method, is amazing to say the least. These "scholars" are not searching for and acknowledging objective truth; they're merely seeking confirmation of their pre-conceived beliefs. Smh...
Love your videos! The quest for truth should override our desire for scriptures to match predetermined beliefs. When we talk about God or talk to God, we should be honest. Some of the best prayer times I've had start with "God, I don't know if you exist, but I hope so cause I really like talking to You" But even if someone could prove the Bible is against homosexuality, so what? The accuracy of the texts is dubious. We don't know if Jesus said and did what the later Gospels say. Moses might not have existed, the exodus story did not happen as described in the Torah... So why would we blindly hurt people based on words that probably were never actually spoken by God or Moses? Ezra said to put away the wives and children from exile. That would've been cruel, and it doesn't seem to have historically happened. And other scripture contradicts it. My right eye and hand sin often...they offend me, yet I have never cut off my hand or plucked out my eye, as Jesus said to do. If ANY scripture (not just Abrahamic scripture) tells us to do something obviously hurtful or wrong, we should pause...see if it's metaphorical, hyperbolic, or based on outdated cultural norms
“You’re own interpretation”….. no shit, that’s all any of this is, just someone’s interpretation of old stories that other people decided to believe. And how are you going to sit there with a straight face and try to explain Greek and Hebrew translations to a person that built a career off of them?
It would be very helpful if you could give a link the the video you are responding to, as well as past videos of your own that you refer to. That said, this is now my favorite channel on TH-cam.
On the last bit she stated about the religious leaders during Jesus’ time being the ones who didn’t understand: it’s frustrating to me that people choose the side of ignorance because of their dogma as a good thing. Like they’ve won a prize because they’ve rejected logic in favor of belief.
@@NataliePineas the basis of religion is faith, believing in something without evidence, an arguement can be made that religion as a whole is anti-intellectual, on the grounds that it is saying something is a fact without evidence.
I think the reasoning here is that the Pharisees were condemned by Jesus, so she was condemning Dan, or at least questioning his faith, by comparing him to the Pharisees.
Can you explain what exactly “piel of anah” is, in reference to Deuteronomy 22: 28-29 and why it is different to “in-nah” in Deuteronomy 22:24, specifically “he humbled the wife of his neighbour” ?
7:25 We have only the Bible that claims that the most learned men misunderstood Jesus the most. Since the Jesus story requires that Jesus be misunderstood, any learned men that agreed with him are simply omitted from the story.
The layman who doesn't understand the language vs the scholar who does. This is not a difficult decision. Also it wasn't learned vs unlearned in the time of Jesus. It was the powerful who misunderstood him the most vs those who lacked power. The fact that the powerful happened to be learned is irrelevant here. They were trying to hold onto their power according to the gospel.
we don't know what jesus said, if anything. Paul never quotes Jesus. the first quotes attributed to jesus are in Mark, and that was 40 years and a destroyed temple after jesus supposedly died, and was written in a different language at a distant location for a Roman audience. Mark never references the supposed Q source, and the Gospels largely disagree about what Jesus allegedly said. I am not a mythicist. These are just facts.
She is so confident in being right, yet that confidence doesn't stand on an academic foundation. It stands on a perceived superiority complex. She reminds me of a political figure. I do not like her at all.
Deut 22 28/28 is about ra...pe: Jerusalem Talmud Ketubot 4:1:3. "“Payments for suffering for the *victim of an attack.” The r a p e victim.""* Ketubot 39a:5 "On a similar note, Rava inquired of Abaye: If he *forcibly* had intercourse with a young woman.." Targum Jonathan: "If a man find a damsel who is not betrothed, and *seize* and lie with her, and they be found, then the man who lay with her shall give to her father, as a fine for her dishonour, fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he humbled her, nor shall he have power to put her away by divorcement all his days." I am German and if i am not wrong to seize someone= to force someone. Even if not, the Talmud confirms this and i can give many other sources too.
She has a very good presentation but no more facts than normal. One really clever thing she does is in closing bringing up the idea that the bible was written by men for men. A key difference is that Dan believes the bible was written by men for men as a conclusion based on evidence while she brings the opposing belief into her reading of the text as a presupposition. This is a subtle difference but when you start drilling down it's the key to understanding where these people are coming from.
@@ChrisRobison I don't know that I can point to a place where Dan says that verbatim but that's verbatim from her response summarizing Dan and I think it's accurate.
@@danhoff4401 Dan never said that. She is not distinguishing between men and women, but rather men and god. She believes her position is divinely inspired so she is right, whatever secular eggheads like Dan say. That's her argument.
@@scambammer6102 I agree with your summary of her position. I don't mean to be talking down to you if you already know this but that use of "men" to refer to humanity is very typical language from evangelicals. I used that phrasing because she used it in her response. I certainly believe that the bible was written by humans for humans and I think that Dan M would affirm that as well though we would both typically use more inclusive language than she did. What this gets at is she affirms an Orthodox view of inspiration and Dan M does not and that's what she is signalling to her audience. Don't listen to this guy because he doesn't believe the same doctrine you believe.
I had a look at some of her other stuff on tictoc, to find a subject I knew a little more about. She makes great use of conjecture and hypothetical scenarios to support her views. Did I hear a little tetchiness creeping into Dan's voice ?
" see I'm well aware of this... In fact that was the precise topic of the Master's thesis that I wrote at the University of Oxford, AND FOR WHICH I WON AN AWARD FOR BEST DISSERTATION" That was the most gangster thing I've heard this year. I subscribed immediately.
Seriously though. She's insisting that she understands it better than him because of "basic context" while he knows the subject backwards and forwards. Then at the end she retreats to, "Actually being educated on this makes you likely to understand it," ridiculously un-self aware
th-cam.com/video/d5nF3VPABYE/w-d-xo.html
or it's a strawman appeal to authority
@@emilyronning2208na because to have universal best award is hard
Hilarious
While I don't think that she will learn from this, I hope people who listen to her will learn from this interaction.
It is a great public service when people who confidently assert some "fact" are exposed as lacking even basic knowledge. Keep it up, Dan, this is great!
They'll never see Dan's takedown of her position.
Her comment section is wild. Pretty much every single comment is begging her to stop and take the L with grace. But it seems she can't stop herself while crying "ad hominem"
@@TheMesomovie Her position is obviously wrong since she blatantly ignores the immediately preceding passage as dan pointed out.
@@eyebot101I can't find the video with such a comment section. It looks like she deleted it? She did make a short crying about how she "won't be silenced" lmao.
Trying to pick a fight over bible translation with Dan McClellan is a choice
Just not a good one.
Choices were made.
Poorly. Choices were made... So so poorly.
Dan failed 🤡
a BAD one, at that!
She continually talks about “translations” while Dan talks about the original Hebrew which he can read and she can’t.
Imagine not knowing mandarin, going to China and start lecturing the locals on the correct way to interpret their literature which you only know through translations. Takes an incredible amount of conceit.
she just but hurt cause dan made her look dumb
Conceit and ignorance.
@@scambammer6102 Nope, Dan looks dumb and this video proves that even further. 😆
She did not seem to lack confidence. Confidently wrong is the American Way, she'll be fine.
@@RobertCharles-i1kit’s literally the personification of arrogance on display
I value the direct argument without ad hominem or insults. It is so satisfying to see the strength of clear logic and focused argument without mud obscuring the view. Well done, Dan. Truth with civility.
I'll never understand someone who will look at a person presenting a detailed argument grounded in evidence and citing sources, and think that an appropriate response is "you haven't proven anything" as though they can just hand-wave away whatever was said.
Obliviate! 🪄
Worse, they themselves make no good arguments ane then claim they have conclusively shown they are right and the one with the actual arguments and evidence is wrong.
her real response was "smart people don't know jebus"
"you haven't proven anything" as though they can just hand-wave away whatever was said.
You haven't argued against Flat Earthers, have you?
It's just unreal to me how people can be so convinced that they are correct while being simultaneously ignorant about the argument and/or the best available evidence. Hopefully she takes her own advice and gets better educated.
Dunning-Kruger effect.
Kruger, meet Dunning.
@@scantili What has he been wrong about? I just stumbled upon his videos last night so I've only seen 2 but if you know of something he is definitely wrong about please advise. I am extremely impressed with the knowledge, wisdom and delivery thus far.
@@penelopepittstopP Well one thing, he's wrong about there being a consensus on Deuteronomy 22:28. There is no "scholarly consensus" regarding the reading of this passage. Some scholars interpret it as rape or seduction whereas others say it was consensual. I personally don't know what the reading is, nor do I care because many critics accuse this verse of forcing a rape victim to marry her rapist, and it doesn't.
In Exodus 22: 16-17, if a man seduces a virgin, he is to marry her and pay her father the required amount *unless* her father rejected. In the Halakhah, the woman also had a say in if she was to marry him. And if they didn't get married, the man was still forced to pay the required amount for that marriage.
So no, the Bible doesn't 'say' that she was forced to marry anyone.
but but but the pharisees were educated and jebus believers were dumb as rocks
Apologists do more harm to the Bible than any biblical scholar ever could.
It was arguing with them as a progressive Christian that made me an atheist, so yeah apologists do more harm for the religion, they point out how crazy it all is.
Listening to the actual academic side is just really interesting and informative. Apologists hate facts, especially those that don't fit with their beliefs.
Ya just like this guy
You'd think they'd have learned in Sunday school that lies make Baby Jesus cry.
@@scantili Ok Sparky 😆😆😆
@@user-gk9lg5sp4y Drop off
This woman is proof positive that the Dunning-Kruger effect is 100% real.
... that Dunning and Kruger were optimists.
I agree. So many in here can fit into that category.
she isn't dumb tho' just opinionate4d and wrong
Nah ur proof of that and ur into confirmation bias 🤡
I don’t think she’s unintelligent. I suspect that she’s very intelligent. That doesn’t preclude her from being wrong and guilty of a hubris and homophobia. I commend her for exercising her mind and engaging in debate. I hope that she takes something from the absolutely blistering schooling she received.
Dunning Kruger personified. If education is “a good thing“, that is the path she should follow here.
The way she just oozes smug condescension while spewing ignorance is rather grating.
@@MrPoster42 she good talker tho'
The blindness of faith is astonishing. Having been in the church for 10 years I’ve witnessed this type of behavior repeatedly. No matter how logical or reasonable the argument, if one challenges the dogma the believer will simply not hear it. They will always find a verse or other source to support their dogma.
Faith self-deception. It is pretending to know what you don't know and is just simply assuming things without reason and defending them against all reason. - Aron Ra
Doubt is more important than faith, for doubt leads to inquiry and inquiry is what leads to truth. This is the reason religion encourages faith and discourages doubt, because they don't want you to know the truth.outside of what the bible says, there is no incontrovertible evidence that proves the existence of a god.
If you wish to strive for peace of soul and happiness, then believe; if you wish to be a disciple of truth, then inquire.” - Friedrich Nietzsche
The Word is firmly established Truth. Faith in Jesus and His work on the cross is crucial for life. We are created beings who desire to serve the living GOD and He made a way through His Son for us to be reconciled with Him.
This world has muted our senses and wrecked our brains to the Truth. He is the potter and we are merely the clay. Our brains are miniscule in comparison to the Almighty GOD of Abraham, Isaac & Jacob.
Dogma is the "religions" of this world that are all satanic. Even atheism is a religion of this world. There is only ONE WAY. JESUS is the WAY, the TRUTH and the LIFE. It's that simple.
Ephesians 2:8
“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:”
@@penelopepittstopP 😂 thanks, you just provided the proof!
@@penelopepittstopP *"Faith"* is the excuse people give as a reason for believing in a god when they don't have evidence.
People don’t realise that defending your phd thesis, a long and required part of the process, has you fighting off multiple academics telling you you are wrong. Her tactic may work on the internet but against a real academic it fails.
It seems to me that she has the confidence that I see in so many Christians that feel that Jesus has given them direct knowledge without actually understanding the context
that's every christian
@@scambammer6102no, only dumb ones
Ouch. Her entire claim is the epitome of Hitchen's Razor "what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." She literally provided not a single piece of evidence. She made at least two claims. One about a word's meaning that proved to be false and second that three scholars either disagreed/contradicted Dan, without actually providing evidence of that claim, to which Dan investigated and could find NO reference from those scholars contradicting his claim.
My guess? Her dogma disagrees with the data and instead of changing her dogma to be data congruent, she wants to argue against the data without actually providing any contradicting data herself. Just claims.
I'm actually shocked and kinda impressed at the confidence these people without education, understanding of the language, etc. have that they are totally right in their arguments haha 😂
The audacity of this people is astonishing. A dumb person questioning a PhD in his field. Amazing. That tells something about our society.
I agree 100%. It should be a crime to be so confident and wrong at the same time.
She is not dumb. That sort of insult is not needed
@@geekynerd7346
I agree it may sound a bit harsh but if she doesn't speak Hebrew or Greek, doesn't have any degrees in biblical studies or comparative religions or hasn't taken the time to do honest scholarly research then compared to a guy like Dan, she is "dumb" about the bible. She can be brilliant in other matters but in regards to the Bible all she has is a particular interpretation that she likes. Her views are not supported by the facts or data.
"Dumb" people should ALWAYS question those with a PhD. The more letters are after someone's name the more indoctrinated with things of this world they must overcome to realize or even remember the simple TRUTH.
Phds can be wrong even in their own fields. Her problem is that her interp is obviously wrong for the reasons stated in dan's first video, and she decided to double down, and ignored his arguments.
She tried to say all that with her full chest 🤦🏻♀️ at least she’s confident…? But she’s literally not even following her recommendation of research… when he’s clearly cited his academic sources. I can’t imagine trying to go to a literal doctor of a specific subject & telling them they’re wrong when I haven’t had near the studies they completed 😬 embarrassed for her.
I think we can all see that she’s won’t learn because she’s not willing to learn. But it was a valuable lesson for us, her ignorance allowed him to hit home the FACTS. Again 👏🏽
she thinks her version is inspired by gawd and dan is just an egghead
An award for best dissertation from the Univeristy of Oxford...
OOOOOF.
It's like watching someone who read a Wiki page debate someone with years of education.
It's not like that. It is that.
Nothing but net from half court.
Just wild that someone would try to debate the context of words used in a language, yet not even know...how to speak the language. Its just so weird. Dan, love your content. I'm not a scholar by any means, but I'm slowly working my way through your book. Keep up the good work!
Thank you Dan. I have a MDiv from Emory, took Hebrew enough to know I don’t know enough. Thank you for your clear and respectful engagement with that creator.
I'm a Bible literalist. If it says "wine" it means "wine", not "non-alcoholic grape juice"! The people at the Baptist churches I attended always had a peculiar problem with this particular word!
I agree to the extent the literal words are known. Most of the bible is ambiguous or gibberish.
So when Jesus says I am the Door.. I guess he’s a Door 😔😔 R.I.P Door Jesus.. 😂😂😂😂 you sound stupid
@@scambammer6102I mean it’s not gibberish. It’s just not meaningful to you. But it’s silly to say any religious text is ‘gibberish’. Or really any text written for a specific purpose, it’s just kind of a thought terminating cliche
@@PasteurizedLettuce lol wut? Gibberish means nonsensical. There is tons of gibberish in the Bible. You saying there isn’t means nothing. And the bible as a whole doesn’t have a specific purpose. It has many purposes, some of which are inconsistent.
@@scambammer6102 are you being intentionally obtuse? Every single book in the Bible reflects the rhetorical goals of its respective author for its intended audience including all of their cultural and political suppositions
0:14 All due respect to the original creator of the rebuttal to Dan, she seems to be projecting her method of biblical interpretation on Dan. Sometimes, I feel like a lot of apologists don’t listen to what is said or only care about their view of a person’s counter argument. Also, the KJV is very outdated.
Yeah there’s a ton of projection. She’s still going over on TikTok. People like this are pretty infuriating for me. I don’t know if they’re conscious of what they’re doing or not.
@@Jd-808They aren’t aware of their projection. That’s the worst part.
@@maskedsaiyan1738 they are. They defend their "all about love" faith, even if it means to be dishonest.
You are much too kind to this lady.
"a lot of apologists don’t listen to what is said or only care about their view of a person’s counter argument."
That's exactly it. A lot of apologists recite from a script (their own, or another that they've heard) and outright ignore any argument or evidence to the contrary, simply following their narrow monologue, not even _trying_ to actually interact or have a dialogue with someone else.
If she is "not against education in any way", then she would do well to get (more of) one. Her passion for the subject is admirable. If she honestly seeks out good faith scholarship rather than unsubstantiated apologetics, she could be a powerful voice for biblical literacy.
Dan's unbothered tone and responses CONTINUES to impress!!!
Dan bringing the hammer on someone who is too arrogant and ignorant to realize that she is the one who needs to sit down, get some more education, and then ask humbly for a discussion.
I cannot begin to tell you how glad I am to have stumbled upon this channel. Thank you, Dan, for this content.
Don't know Hebrew, Ancient Greek, nor am I a Biblical Scholar, so hold my beer while I argue with someone who is all those things. 😂😂
That sounds like Hebrew Israelites.
I'm most impressed by your balancing on the knife-edge of patience and exasperation.
Meanwhile, I hope your LDS and non-LDS viewers alike will take heart from a line in one of our best-known hymns: "Truth is reason."
I don't know what's more embarrassing, nevermind it's all embarrassing for her.
God that was brutal. I almost felt bad for her.
you misspelled hilarious.
I can't imagine having a hobby & arguing with the professional consensus in said hobby. That level of confidence or whatever that would be considered is wild to me.
Dan is a scholar. This woman is an apologist. Huge difference. Many apologists will resort to Strong’s or Vine’s for their Greek and Hebrew interpretation rather than actually taking Greek and Hebrew as a language (philology). Sorry but this woman is gravely incorrect.
Apologists have no integrity . They are people who are paid or decide to defend a position regardless of the facts or any new information that comes to light. I can't think of anyone more intellectually dishonest and hypocritical than an apologist.
"Apologists" have always rubbed me the wrong way. The very word rubs me the wrong way when it concerns the WORD.
@@penelopepittstopP
I agree. What do you mean by the "WORD"?
Are you implying the Bible is the word of God?
@@RobertCharles-i1k Absolutely, I believe the Bible is the Word of God.
@@penelopepittstopP
Thank you for your response! I believe all people deserve respect
but ideas not so much.
With all due respect, you are demonstrably wrong about the Bible. It was written by men for religious and political reasons. It was not written or inspired by any God.
Do you think the Koran or Book of Mormon is the "word" of God? Of course you don't. You are applying different standards for your book compared to those " holy books." That's called special pleading.
Christians are not encouraged to read the Bible so most have never read it and don't know anything about it.
I am going to take a guess that you were raised to believe the Bible was the word of God by your family, teachers and the adults in your community. That is called indoctrination. You were taught not to question anything about the Bible or else that's a sin and to think Satan is using me to test your faith 😂 but an intelligent person like you knows that the " truth could never fear investigation."
You were also taught that your " faith " is a good thing but it's not and I can prove it to you.
Your parents and those who raised you may have loved you and been fine people but that doesn't make them right. They repeated what they were taught. We are in 2023 and have access to information our parents could never dream of so you have no excuses.
The truth is If you were born in Saudi Arabia, Iran or the Middle East there is a 99.% chance that you would be just as devoted to the Koran and Mohammed as you are to Jesus and the Bible today.
I understand these are very difficult conversations for religious people like you.
Hypothetically, if I am correct the implications on your life would be humongous. That would mean you would have to discard parts of your very identity. Christianity is how you define yourself but I think your better than that religion.
Despite what most people including you believe, it is very difficult to be a good person when you believe the Bible is the word of God..
I am not an atheist but
It is very ironic that more Atheists live a " Jesus Christ type life" than the fundamentalist who believe that the Bible is the word of God. Those people behave just like the sagisees and Pharisees Jesus complained about.
Fundamental Christianity is very dangerous. It is anti-education, It affects how you feel about your self worth , it encourages feelings of guilt and depression, it determines what you wear, eat, drink, where you go and most importantly how you treat and judge people around you.
That is why I think teaching children that the Bible is the word of God is a form of child abuse.
When a person realizes that the Bible is not the word of God they don't feel a sense of loss, ironically it's like a dark cloud 🌨️ has been lifted and you can get sunlight ☀️. It's like getting released from a prison. I can't describe
Once again, it's almost impossible to be a good spouse , family member, friend or person if you honestly believe the Bible is the word.
If you ever find the courage to discuss and investigate the Bible and your beliefs I can prove to you with science , facts and history that the Bible is not the word of any god.
It was the absolute certainty of Christians that led me to doubt my own faith in Islam.
Is this sarcasm?
@@moonshoes11 Not at all. It was easy for me to apply reason to religions that were not my own. But much harder to apply reason to my own! When I saw Christians so earnest and certain their religion was true, even though I found it so absurd, it made me think maybe I am like that about my own religion. So certain it is true and yet to the outsider so patently not true. This led me down the path to a truly critical examination of Islam.
@@HassanRadwan133
So, if someone were to leave Christianity because some Muslims they know were particularly confident in their beliefs, would that make sense?
If you came across a group of very confident flat earthers, would that be good reason to accept a flat earth?
@@moonshoes11 I don't think you understood. Now I don't believe in ANY religion. I'm saying that as an outsider I could see the flaws in another man's religion, because I wasn't emotionally attached to that religion so it was easier for me to apply reason without starting from the premise that it's true. The way the emotional attachment of those of other religions distorted their ability to apply reason made me realise that my own emotional attachment to Islam was distorting my own application of reason to my religion. So when I started looking at Islam with a truly critical eye, I began to see things that contradicted reason
@@HassanRadwan133
Ah, I understand better now. Thanks. 👍
Dan can make his own translation. She can't. Her case rests entirely on her ability to go to biblegateway and just click through all the translations until she finds something she likes, mixing and matching for different arguments but never remaining consistent. "Just because I never went to college doesn't mean I can't google". Well, google yes, competently, no.
Well done Dan. This seems like the Dunning Kruger effect
I didn't need to know Hebrew to know she was raped. I love this guy. No mincing words, just truth.
Yes. The words and context make it obvious.
can someone get this gal some burn ointment.
All projection from her, accusing Dan of the very thing she is doing herself.
Yikes. Calling Dan a pharisaical hypocrite is a bold move.
7:00 "The bible was written for men by men." Literally the only accurate thing she said in the entire video and I have to take it out of context to make her right.
her point is that the bible was written by god and her version is divinely inspired. she disagrees with "the bible was written for men by men"
@@scambammer6102 Yes, which is why I said I have to charitably take her quote out of context for her to be right, otherwise she's wrong on every point.
@@jon4574 lol ok
This not only recalibrated me, but Dan exemplified precisely how you should handle disagreement. What a fantastic video.
I mean, I rarely cry... but if I got eviscerated like this in person... I'd for sure cry 🤣🤣😭😭🤣🤣
Dan, " [she] is not against education in any way because [she] thinks it's a great thing." So, there's that.
Ummm, A broken clock is right at least twice a day. She is kind of cute, at least until she gets all self-righteous an indignant.
She is criticizing someone that has far more education than she does. If you go back to earlier videos of Dans, he goes through his educational credentials, which includes a PhD. He is fluent as a philologist in biblical Greek and Hebrew, and not a memorizer of Strong’s or Vine’s. What are her credentials other than a diploma from a “Bible college.”
Christians don't like education, only indoctrination. They want the flock compliant and not questioning what they're told, that is reinforced in the bible several times.
I have heard several sermons that instruct their flock not think for themselves, just keep putting money on the collection plate, and the pastor will think for them.
Let me throw some gas into the fire.
HEB. Ki yimsae Na'ar'k betulah 'aser lo 'orasah utepasah wesaepab immah winemsa'u we'natah ha'is hassokeb 'immah la'abi hanna'ark hamissi kasep welow tihyeh le'issah.
If a man finds a girl/young woman virgin that is not betrothed, and he seizes/uses and lies [has sex] with her and they are found-out, then shall give the man that lay with her to the father of her fifty silvers.
DSS. No text for versus after 22:17
SPT. Ean de tis heuree te paida teen parthenon hetis ou memnesteutai kai biasamenos koimethee met autus kai heuree ho neanidos pentekonta didrachma
If anyone should find the female child/virgin whoever was not espoused, and using force on her he went to bed with her,
Shall give the man going to bed with her to the father of the young woman fifty double drachmas.
There is no conflict here. The septuagint is talking about a man forcing himself on an adolescent female and so is the Hebrew Bible.
The word utepasah "Taphas" is used as follows
Psalms 71:11 - capture alive.
Genesis 39:12 - to clutch (a garment in order to detain)
Deuteronomy 21:19 - to take dominance (as in bring a disobedient young man to a city gate and control that gate)
Deuteronomy 9:17 - to arrest (stop or detain)
Many versus - to lay siege or seize a city. (as in to dominate)
Habbakuk - to sheathed (inclose or surround)
Again this gets back to the root to use skillfully/to handle or grasp in order to control.
So the key words here are : girl/young virgin (diminuitive size and strength), a man finding her, a man seizing her and skillfully using, man lying with her. The context is sex, the manner of sex is forced, he overpowers her and forces her to lie. Violation.
So lets put this in context, if you were a city, say a trading city, and you were seized, you would in a sense be violated. If you managed to garner the forces and attack the seizere, your not going to give them rainbows and lollipops. Your going to kill them, and you might even seek out their supporters and take revenge on them. If you are arresting them, that means they have violated something and the seizing is due recourse. But in this case a young girl being found, discovered, is blameless, so the violator is the one doing the seizing.
BTW, there is a benefit to the woman, he must support her even if she decides to live apart from him. In other words if she can find a more pleasant place to live, he still has to pay her. And this gives the whole thing away, his forced payment is a compensation for him using force on her. And we can argue that it might be consensual sex, but the problem is the text does not clearly identify if its a child or adolescent. If a man handles a child to have sex with her, its a violation. If its not a child but an unbetrothed woman, that is less than one year post-puberty and he coerces her, thats still a violation. That's why the violator can't divirce her, he has to compensate her all his life for his crime.
@@newworldlubbock So she is, but haven't we all made foolish mistakes in our youth.
Ma'am! Do. Not. Come. For. Dan. Periodt.
It is always interesting to see the obvious difference between those that do know their stuff, and thos that think they know their stuff.. It actually is fun to see how you know what you are talking about, it is very refreshing, thanks for that.
Since someone decided to ruin my thread in the last video, I will repost this here:
I actually use the word δοῦλος (doulos) to make this point in my classes all the time about language and translations. There are very few exact one-to-one interpretations for even the simplest words and concepts from one language to another. Any time something gets translated, there are choices being made. Doulos does not mean servant. A servant in English is someone who may be of lowly status, but is often employed, i.e. paid for their labor. A doulos is explicitly someone who is not paid for their labor. So, as I tell my students, any time you read "servant" in a text translated from Ancient Greek, the word there should be "slave," but the translator decided to soften it for whatever reason, some of which are more legitimate than others.
Is this woman’s name “Hubris?” Keep it up Dan, you’re doing the Deity’s work!!!
Imagine lecturing a scholar who has extensively studied the language of the Bible about the language of the Bible.
Debate rebuttal results:
Dan 1 Apologist 0
More like:
Dan 100 Apologist 0
@@RobertCharles-i1k 👍
More like Dan: -1 Apologist: 1000 😁
@@Exor_.
You don't even believe that. 😂
But I understand Christians like you can only attack people's character never the argument.
Indoctrination is a hell of a drug. 😔
@@Exor_.
Hopefully you'll get the courage to face reality one day.
How does it feel to know you have to ignore logic, archeology, history, science and facts to maintain your beliefs?
Who would've thought using your brain is a sin. 😂
She have a haughty soul and according to proverb in the bible.. Pride goes before destruction and an haughty soul before a fall
Have to keep repeating what Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson said about casual learning overreach:
"One of the great challenges in this world is knowing enough about a subject to think you're right, but not enough about the subject to know you're wrong."
I like how she resorts to anti-intellectualism and not so subtle castigation of "religious scholars." That's some blatant defensiveness there.
You can always tell when people are sincerely looking for the truth by their humility and openness to learn -- polar opposite of this insecure creator here.
Damn it I absolutely love how people think they know what they're talking about and then proven wrong damn it what a great way to start the week for me love it
She should be feeling this sick burn for months.
If only. But this type never does feel pain. They're delusional, and they're addicts of abusing either people, or substances.
She's so firm and confident in her totally uninformed opinion.
Whenever you hear the cries of "context, context!" It's a red flag .
Dan: Data over Dogma.
That other content creator: Dogma over Data.
I continue to be amazed at why people are unwilling to be open to various ideas and readings of Scripture. I truly enjoy your content. Thanks
Basically she's saying Dan is wrong because she wants to believe the opposite of what he has explained to be factually correct. That is a fair description of the whole of christianity.
"You can't be correct because I don't want you to be!"
"That is a fair description of the whole of christianity." No, it's not. There are a lot of Christians who are really interested in what those texts actually say.
@@DoloresLehmann Christianity is based on a legend that all of humanity is sinful due to Adam and Eve eating fruit from the tree of good and evil in the garden of Eden between 10,000-6,000 years ago.
Humans are in fact apes, they migrated from what is now the African continent to all continents of the planet. Modern humans, as we recognise Homo Sapiens Sapiens, evolved 300,000-250,000 years ago. There was no original sin, nothing to be forgiven for, no reason for a god to impregnate a human teenager, only created for himself to be born as a man to be a human sacrifice to himself for something that never happened.
But christians desperately want to believe the legends that they have been indoctrinated with, that there is a father figure magic wizard of immense power looking after them, and that they're going to live forever.
I do understand the power of that indoctrination, but for someone who was never indoctrinated into a religion, it all seems very odd.
@@DoloresLehmann "she wants to believe the opposite of what he has explained to be factually correct" Can apply to more than just the text.
@@rainbowkrampus Given that "what he has explained to be factually correct" refers to the text and only to the text, it can't in this specific context. Of course, it GENERALLY can apply to more than just the text, but then, I also have to tell you that there are a lot of Christians interested in the GENERALLY factually correct.
That's a fair description of religion in general. Also conspiracy nuts and libertarians amd anyone who thinks that trump is a good leader or voted brexit. There are a lot pf people out there who'd rather believe in what they want to be true than what thebfacts actually are.
Dan never lets the abuse phase him. What a ninja. I hate the abuse.
I gotta admit, I admire this girl’s confidence! This is like one of the strangest rap battles I have ever seen. I’m imagining people behind each of them cheering after each response.
There's nothing to admire about being confident in your own ignorance.
I’ve noticed that the most confident people tend to be the most ignorant (willful or otherwise). Street preachers are an excellent example of this
Love the rap battle reference
I’d pay $5 to hear Dan yell 'Cause ain’t no such things as half-way crooks’
Why admire confidence when it’s wrong? That’s not confidence. It’s arrogance & ignorance - always a bad combination.
Imagine being this arrogant at such a young age, and against such an educated person.
SPANKING the apologist in scholar clothing...Awesome Dan...and a class act while doing it.
While watching this video I grabbed my JPS Hebrew-Tanakh. I bet she doesn't have the Hebrew text. I am a noob when it comes to Hebrew. I was however able to find חזק thanks to your transliteration. I have a Hebrew keyboard on my phone and was able to pop what seemed like the correct letters into Google translate. I was then able to find וַיַּחֲזֶק־בָּהּ in verse 11 like you said.
Thanks for doing what you do. I am an atheist and observant Jew. I love learning about the reality of the Tanakh rather than just "It's the word of G*d".
Ibrahim Ibn Ezra, a Jewish scholar of the 10-11th centuries, commented on verse 28: זאת אנוסה לא מפותה
For those who don't read Hebrew, that is translated as: _this is forced, not seduced._
What galls me is the smugness of these kinds of apologists.
Oh, she comes across as so arrogant; I'm pretty sure this back-and-forth isn't over.
I certainly don’t understand the biblical language or context - I’ll take Dan at his word - but I do know the distinction between rape and seduction in earlier times (or at least in literature from ancient times) is not nearly as clean cut as it is today. The example I’m most familiar with is Mozart’s Don Giovanni. Modern viewers want to differentiate between whether he is a rapist or seducer. But in Mozarts day, people weren’t concerned because quite simply, it didn’t matter.
There is a simular lack of distinction in older French literature as well. Frankly the idea that women have autonomy over their own bodies and choice is fairly modern and quite radical at that.
frankly rape wasn't all that big a deal back then, kinda like slavery. I'm talking biblcal times not the romantics.
She said a whole lot of nothing there.
That's usually what you get from these Apologists.
not true. she claimed divine inspiration for her position and called dan a heretic or worse.
@@scambammer6102
I didn't realize she did that. 😂 if that's true she's worse than I thought. After 15 seconds I had to cut off the video cause I knew it would be nothing but circular reasoning, special pleading and intellectual dishonesty.
@@RobertCharles-i1k that was her big finish lol
She might be the Christian Dolores Umbridge.
These unlearned people…Dan you are so patient!!!
Another classic example of how apologists talk outta pure bias and navigate data to fit their conclusion. It inevitably causes them to skip over details, make assumptions that they think are gonna argee with them, but don't. Like all apologists, she's projecting that you're trying to make the Bible read like it's written by men; in reality she's already started with the presupposition that it's written by God, so everything must be read that way and that must be the correct assumption.
Who is this girl? What is her education and background? Debating Dan with her level of knowledge seems futile and childish. 🤷🏼♂️
Having seen the 1st short, I was struck by listening to a Black woman attempt to reinterpret in a more favorable light biblical sanctions of both SLAVERY and RAPE.
I'm also constantly amazed at just how far Christian apologists will go in their attempts to make objective evidence conform to their belief. That they can still refer to themselves as scholars, while purposely disregarding the rules of true scholarship and the scientific method, is amazing to say the least.
These "scholars" are not searching for and acknowledging objective truth; they're merely seeking confirmation of their pre-conceived beliefs. Smh...
that's how religion subverts morality
Someone brought a butter knife to a pew pew fight! 🤦🏽♂️
Love your videos!
The quest for truth should override our desire for scriptures to match predetermined beliefs. When we talk about God or talk to God, we should be honest.
Some of the best prayer times I've had start with "God, I don't know if you exist, but I hope so cause I really like talking to You"
But even if someone could prove the Bible is against homosexuality, so what? The accuracy of the texts is dubious. We don't know if Jesus said and did what the later Gospels say. Moses might not have existed, the exodus story did not happen as described in the Torah...
So why would we blindly hurt people based on words that probably were never actually spoken by God or Moses?
Ezra said to put away the wives and children from exile.
That would've been cruel, and it doesn't seem to have historically happened. And other scripture contradicts it.
My right eye and hand sin often...they offend me, yet I have never cut off my hand or plucked out my eye, as Jesus said to do.
If ANY scripture (not just Abrahamic scripture) tells us to do something obviously hurtful or wrong, we should pause...see if it's metaphorical, hyperbolic, or based on outdated cultural norms
She is a good example that mansplaining has no gender.
I GOT MY WISH !!!! Good video! I hope she responds again and look crazy.....again lol. Keep going plz
“You’re own interpretation”….. no shit, that’s all any of this is, just someone’s interpretation of old stories that other people decided to believe. And how are you going to sit there with a straight face and try to explain Greek and Hebrew translations to a person that built a career off of them?
ouch wrong. the object here is to discern the original intent, and it is not just a matter of interpretation.
Her final statement was a legitimately slick way of calling you a pharisee without insulting you explicitly 🤫
oh no that was an explicit insult, and also her whole argument. gawd's chosen don't need no book learnin.
It would be very helpful if you could give a link the the video you are responding to, as well as past videos of your own that you refer to. That said, this is now my favorite channel on TH-cam.
When I see a new video from Dan I mute the TV and prepare to be enlightened. And in cases like this, also thoroughly entertained.
On the last bit she stated about the religious leaders during Jesus’ time being the ones who didn’t understand: it’s frustrating to me that people choose the side of ignorance because of their dogma as a good thing. Like they’ve won a prize because they’ve rejected logic in favor of belief.
Sounds like anti-intellectualism using religion to legitimise itself.
@@NataliePineas the basis of religion is faith, believing in something without evidence, an arguement can be made that religion as a whole is anti-intellectual, on the grounds that it is saying something is a fact without evidence.
I think the reasoning here is that the Pharisees were condemned by Jesus, so she was condemning Dan, or at least questioning his faith, by comparing him to the Pharisees.
@@melissaheaton2706 that’s certainly the comparison. It just doesn’t hold up well at all.
@@charlestownsend9280 I’d be one to make that argument. I’m also somehow endlessly fascinated by religious studies.
I was waiting for this one
Dan is here to teach us all the truth, and there are some who unfortunately don't want to accept it.
She brought a knife to a gun fight.
Can you explain what exactly “piel of anah” is, in reference to Deuteronomy 22: 28-29 and why it is different to “in-nah” in Deuteronomy 22:24, specifically “he humbled the wife of his neighbour” ?
"For men by men"
One can think a book written for men by men is without flaws. I guess they thought Dan "just wanted to sin".
7:25 We have only the Bible that claims that the most learned men misunderstood Jesus the most. Since the Jesus story requires that Jesus be misunderstood, any learned men that agreed with him are simply omitted from the story.
we have zero idea of what jesus said, if anything
Why do they think taking on an actual scholar is a good idea...? That's what I don't get.
I haven't been able to find her qualifications. Anyone know?
The layman who doesn't understand the language vs the scholar who does. This is not a difficult decision. Also it wasn't learned vs unlearned in the time of Jesus. It was the powerful who misunderstood him the most vs those who lacked power. The fact that the powerful happened to be learned is irrelevant here. They were trying to hold onto their power according to the gospel.
we don't know what jesus said, if anything. Paul never quotes Jesus. the first quotes attributed to jesus are in Mark, and that was 40 years and a destroyed temple after jesus supposedly died, and was written in a different language at a distant location for a Roman audience. Mark never references the supposed Q source, and the Gospels largely disagree about what Jesus allegedly said. I am not a mythicist. These are just facts.
lol Dan throwing so much shade at this woman 😂 😂
She is so confident in being right, yet that confidence doesn't stand on an academic foundation. It stands on a perceived superiority complex. She reminds me of a political figure. I do not like her at all.
I'm not sure if it's hilarious or sad that she is so confident and clueless at the same time.
If a woman has no agency anywhere in the Old Testament, what is the part about shouting out by the woman in Deut 22:24?
Deut 22 28/28 is about ra...pe:
Jerusalem Talmud Ketubot 4:1:3.
"“Payments for suffering for the *victim of an attack.” The r a p e victim.""*
Ketubot 39a:5 "On a similar note, Rava inquired of Abaye: If he *forcibly* had intercourse with a young woman.."
Targum Jonathan:
"If a man find a damsel who is not betrothed, and *seize* and lie with her, and they be found, then the man who lay with her shall give to her father, as a fine for her dishonour, fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he humbled her, nor shall he have power to put her away by divorcement all his days."
I am German and if i am not wrong to seize someone= to force someone. Even if not, the Talmud confirms this and i can give many other sources too.
IKR? The word SEIZE is a clue
She has a very good presentation but no more facts than normal. One really clever thing she does is in closing bringing up the idea that the bible was written by men for men.
A key difference is that Dan believes the bible was written by men for men as a conclusion based on evidence while she brings the opposing belief into her reading of the text as a presupposition. This is a subtle difference but when you start drilling down it's the key to understanding where these people are coming from.
"Dan believes the bible was written by men for men" -- where has he said that?
@@ChrisRobison I don't know that I can point to a place where Dan says that verbatim but that's verbatim from her response summarizing Dan and I think it's accurate.
@@danhoff4401 Dan never said that. She is not distinguishing between men and women, but rather men and god. She believes her position is divinely inspired so she is right, whatever secular eggheads like Dan say. That's her argument.
@@scambammer6102 I agree with your summary of her position.
I don't mean to be talking down to you if you already know this but that use of "men" to refer to humanity is very typical language from evangelicals. I used that phrasing because she used it in her response. I certainly believe that the bible was written by humans for humans and I think that Dan M would affirm that as well though we would both typically use more inclusive language than she did.
What this gets at is she affirms an Orthodox view of inspiration and Dan M does not and that's what she is signalling to her audience. Don't listen to this guy because he doesn't believe the same doctrine you believe.
@@danhoff4401 I agree.
That was a KO. Somebody call a medic
I had a look at some of her other stuff on tictoc, to find a subject I knew a little more about.
She makes great use of conjecture and hypothetical scenarios to support her views.
Did I hear a little tetchiness creeping into Dan's voice ?
Up the gas, down with conjecture!
@@FriendlyPalBud Up The Gas !!!!