Why is the Bible reliable? | Tim Keller at Columbia University
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 พ.ย. 2011
- Tim Keller responds to Martin Bashir's question - How do we know we can test the Old Testament? | Columbia University, 2008 | View full forum at • Reason for God? Belief... | Explore more at www.veritas.org.
Want Veritas updates in your inbox? Subscribe to our twice-monthly newsletter here:
www.veritas.org/newsletter-yt
INSTAGRAM: / veritasforum
FACEBOOK: / veritasforum
SUBSCRIBE: th-cam.com/users/subscription_...
Over the past two decades, The Veritas Forum has been hosting vibrant discussions on life's hardest questions and engaging the world's leading colleges and universities with Christian perspectives and the relevance of Jesus. Learn more at www.veritas.org, with upcoming events and over 600 pieces of media on topics including science, philosophy, music, business, medicine, and more! - บันเทิง
![Isn't the Christian Church the Best Proof Against God? Tim Keller at Veritas [5 of 11]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QnbauJtqKF8/mqdefault.jpg)
![Isn't the Christian Church the Best Proof Against God? Tim Keller at Veritas [5 of 11]](/img/tr.png)
The real title of this video should be...... "is this cameraman reliable?"
😂😂😂😂😂
Lmao
probably the bootlegged version lol
😂
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣👦🏿
"They haven't really learned to read it." - Keller, at the end. That statement is at the heart of all confusion about God and Christ.
Or Christians read it superficially and few actually read it cover to cover let alone study its origins...
The god of Christianity is a new god.
th-cam.com/video/MlnnWbkMlbg/w-d-xo.html
Before men conceived that god polytheism was the norm.
th-cam.com/play/PLh9mgdi4rNeyuvTEbD-Ei0JdMUujXfyWi.html
This is somewhat odd if the Abrahamic god is the so called creator of the universe.
Can you identify the evolutionary origins of your religion from this chart?
ultraculture.org/blog/2015/11/30/map-world-religions/
...and the subsequent religions that it gave birth to?
Most of the characters in the Hebrew bible are not historical they are the product of legendary writings similar to how we view King Arthur.
Adam and Eve, Noah, Abreham, Moses are not historical figures.
There is no evidence of any exodus. That is merely a Hebrew myth not grounded in any historical or archaeological facts.
th-cam.com/video/21NoQuKTB8Q/w-d-xo.html
Jesus most probably existed.
th-cam.com/video/q46tjUQatgI/w-d-xo.html
He was a Jewish apocalyptic preacher. He was not born in Bethlehem as that story was added by Mark and Luke to give Jesus a backstory and a genealogy to align with claimed messiah.
The gospels were written specifically to promote a belief proclaiming “good news” and their bias is discerned in their content. Think of it as early Christian propaganda designed to promote the belief that Jesus was the Jewish messiah.
We do not know who wrote the gospels but we do know that they were not eyewitnesses of the events that they claim to describe. They were not written by Matthew , Mark, Luke or John as these names were added in the second century.
The gospel labelled Mark is the earliest gospel.
It is unlikely that Jesus was buried in a tomb and much more likely that his body was discarded in a ditch or a mass grave.
th-cam.com/video/Gsv-xBzSaW0/w-d-xo.html
The claimed resurrection is a matter of #faith for those that want to believe and not a matter of #fact.
I’m typing this free hand so I’m not really referencing as I go but I’ll pad it out later if you wish.
The claims of life after death, the resurrection and that Jesus died for our sins are just claims. None of these claims have ever been substantiated.
The claims about the martyrdom of the apostles have been grossly exaggerated.
th-cam.com/play/PLpdBEstCHhmXtCb1Ihr4NgJkSmPVT8g3t.html
Most people come to believe the beliefs of their parents via a process of indoctrination.
Some develop existential angst in their teen and early 20 and reaffirm their need to believe or come to a given religion at this age. Many through guilt, shame or desperation. Many find a loving community who grow to love them as a consequence. There are many rights and rituals which keep people locked into their given faith. They act as test of faith reaffirming belief to the other members of the tribe.
@Sunbro so yet people used to believe in a pantheon of gods and the success of Judaism is down to its evolution into a monotheistic religion.
There’s no archaeological evidence for the myths and miracles in the bible although some of the stories are set in historical locations even if not actually historical.
th-cam.com/video/21NoQuKTB8Q/w-d-xo.html
@@myopenmind527 Considering we don’t have evidence of certain events 100-200 years ago, I wouldn’t expect much to be found about historical accuracy of the Bible. You assume that all of history is figured out? You overestimate humanity’s ability to remember our past. In just a year an entire country could be wiped off the planet with no trace, we have nuclear weapons. However before nuclear weapons we had fire and humans that loot things, you understand where I’m coming from? History is nuanced
@@outsidechambaz what I said is perfectly valid. There are no #GOOD reasons to believe in any god let alone the god of Christianity.
@@myopenmind527 why
It does help to know that men far smarter than me put their faith in something I often struggle with.
Jesus Christ is the truth and the truth will set you free...
I'm already free! :)
You think you're free, but we can see your enslaved by your anger, and foul mouth....Nothing in your reply shows us your a person at peace.
MirroringTruth what?
Geoffery Davies You obviously don’t have an understanding of it. Not surprised...
@@geofferydavies8901 Get some knowledge before throwing ignorant comments.
The bible is written for us not written to us. We need to also read it but interpret it in the original readers cultural context.
exactly
agreed. my favorite is Titus 2:9
If God inspired the Bible, then it makes sense for some parts to have different relevance to readers throughout time. Brilliance of an omniscient being obviously allows for the text to have more meaning than just what's unlocked by the early readers.
Right
The so called modern scholars, like to say Mark was written first. Because it is the least flattering. Under this assumption any degraded document would be called first/original. What they don't say is why don't mark mention a resurrection? He didn't believe it? or he didn't think it was important? or was it that it was written by a roman stooge to destroy the message of The Messiah?
Ooops! You made a huge mistake. In Matthew and Luke the genealogies are a contradiction. Matthew said the woman held Him by the feet and worshipped Him. Luke says that Jesus said, don't touch me for I have not ascended to My Father. Spaul contradicts all the other 40 Inspired Books including Matthew.
Old Testament so called "contradictions" are few and can be easily explained with proper translation. In the "New Testament", there are many irreconcilable differences. Because only Matthew was originally written in Hebrew. "Matthew" was written anomalously/untitled. It is The Testament of Messiah the last Inspired book. The roman/greek books that fallow are roman lies, propaganda and contradictions. Wake up brothers and sisters, God didn't start speaking greek after they killed His Son. Rome is the beast of Daniel 7 that was given power over the saints for a season. Wake up!!!
Rest in peace Tim Keller.
Jesus said, "For if you believed Moses (Old Testament writer), you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?”
No,Moses or whoever is a ficional character in this book called the bible,which is purely fiction like any other book
Jason Rasmussen we also have evidence that the exodus actually happened!
Kay Nine Seven Cross what is Jesus saying ?
Jason Rasmussen. Not 66 but more I should know it's our Hebrew books that the white man edit, stole, rewritten.
Heston Westmoreland. Funny Guy
I think Tim Keller is pretty solid Biblically...that is just my opinion.
He may be but the Bible is not that solid historically.
The god of Christianity is a new god.
th-cam.com/video/MlnnWbkMlbg/w-d-xo.html
Before men conceived that god polytheism was the norm.
th-cam.com/play/PLh9mgdi4rNeyuvTEbD-Ei0JdMUujXfyWi.html
This is somewhat odd if the Abrahamic god is the so called creator of the universe.
Can you identify the evolutionary origins of your religion from this chart?
ultraculture.org/blog/2015/11/30/map-world-religions/
...and the subsequent religions that it gave birth to?
Most of the characters in the Hebrew bible are not historical they are the product of legendary writings similar to how we view King Arthur.
Adam and Eve, Noah, Abreham, Moses are not historical figures.
There is no evidence of any exodus. That is merely a Hebrew myth not grounded in any historical or archaeological facts.
th-cam.com/video/21NoQuKTB8Q/w-d-xo.html
Jesus most probably existed.
th-cam.com/video/q46tjUQatgI/w-d-xo.html
He was a Jewish apocalyptic preacher. He was not born in Bethlehem as that story was added by Mark and Luke to give Jesus a backstory and a genealogy to align with claimed messiah.
The gospels were written specifically to promote a belief proclaiming “good news” and their bias is discerned in their content. Think of it as early Christian propaganda designed to promote the belief that Jesus was the Jewish messiah.
We do not know who wrote the gospels but we do know that they were not eyewitnesses of the events that they claim to describe. They were not written by Matthew , Mark, Luke or John as these names were added in the second century.
The gospel labelled Mark is the earliest gospel.
It is unlikely that Jesus was buried in a tomb and much more likely that his body was discarded in a ditch or a mass grave.
th-cam.com/video/Gsv-xBzSaW0/w-d-xo.html
The claimed resurrection is a matter of #faith for those that want to believe and not a matter of #fact.
I’m typing this free hand so I’m not really referencing as I go but I’ll pad it out later if you wish.
The claims of life after death, the resurrection and that Jesus died for our sins are just claims. None of these claims have ever been substantiated.
The claims about the martyrdom of the apostles have been grossly exaggerated.
th-cam.com/play/PLpdBEstCHhmXtCb1Ihr4NgJkSmPVT8g3t.html
Most people come to believe the beliefs of their parents via a process of indoctrination.
Some develop existential angst in their teen and early 20 and reaffirm their need to believe or come to a given religion at this age. Many through guilt, shame or desperation. Many find a loving community who grow to love them as a consequence. There are many rights and rituals which keep people locked into their given faith. They act as test of faith reaffirming belief to the other members of the tribe.
David Platt as well.
You’re correct in that assessment. I’d also add that TK is super well versed in philosophy. Good asset for any theologian.
The so called modern scholars, like to say Mark was written first. Because it is the least flattering. Under this assumption any degraded document would be called first/original. What they don't say is why don't mark mention a resurrection? He didn't believe it? or he didn't think it was important? or was it that it was written by a roman stooge to destroy the message of The Messiah?
Ooops! You made a huge mistake. In Matthew and Luke the genealogies are a contradiction. Matthew said the woman held Him by the feet and worshipped Him. Luke says that Jesus said, don't touch me for I have not ascended to My Father. Spaul contradicts all the other 40 Inspired Books including Matthew.
Old Testament so called "contradictions" are few and can be easily explained with proper translation. In the "New Testament", there are many irreconcilable differences. Because only Matthew was originally written in Hebrew. "Matthew" was written anomalously/untitled. It is The Testament of Messiah the last Inspired book. The roman/greek books that fallow are roman lies, propaganda and contradictions. Wake up brothers and sisters, God didn't start speaking greek after they killed His Son. Rome is the beast of Daniel 7 that was given power over the saints for a season. Wake up!!!
One of the greatest blessings in these videos is the civil and amicable discourse between two people who disagree with one another.
I didn't get the impression they were not in agreement. Rather the interrogator presented questions as a representative of the people who don't agree. A great evangelism technique. And you are right about civil discourse. It's so refreshing to see and hear it.
Why would the apostles WASTE their lives and ultimately give it up to die for Him, if it was just a mere fairytale? They saw Him live, preach, and resurrect with their OWN eyes.
You have a big misconception.
The apostles were no real people. They are mir the authors of the gospels and its likely, that they never lived.
They are part of the fairytale of this is the word you want to use.
This way the contradiction fades away since there never really was anyone who committed the entire life for this.
@@Smitywerban I'm sorry, but with all due respect, that's entirely false. The apostles are historically proven to have lived, just the same as Jesus. You go to some of the top historic scholars on the subject (both atheist and Christian) and pretty much all of them validate that they were all real people who walked this earth 2000 years ago. I'm sorry, but that's not a valid argument. I do pray that you would come to know the truth by seeking it out for yourself though! God bless man.
@@jordanduvall6660 Is that so? Then why is there not a single contemporary source that even mentions Jesus and his followers?
We have documents from that time about "how many soldiers died to diarrhea" from those years... but noone thought it was necessary to write about a guy with magic powers?
I'm sorry but the earlyest mentioning of Jesus name is more than 90 years after his supposed death.
Not a single contemporary source.
The first surface we have for Jesus is Flavios Josephus around 93 AD and he admits outright, that his sources are hearsay.
So not at all reliable.
The evidence against Jesus is pretty strong tho.
In that time every execution was recorded with name of the one to be executed and his crime.
And guess what? No Jesus to be found.
Also there never, in no year were there any crucifixions on high local holidays..like Passover.
@@Smitywerban Sorry for the late reply, but anyway 1) i think there may be a misunderstanding with what Josephus was talking about when he was talking about "hearsay". I believe he was meaning the message in which the apostles and Jesus taught were hearsay and not that his sources for the existence of Jesus was false. Heck, I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure he was relating more towards the message itself since he was in fact a Roman. 2) You should watch this quick video and ought to check some of these guys out that he mentions. (He is talking about sources for Jesus and not necessarily the apostles but can assume they were real if Jesus was) I'm not going to lie, I can't really quote any historical evidence myself, but have looked into it enough to know that there is enough proof that Jesus and his apostles existed historically.
Here's the link.
th-cam.com/video/xGQ_5rSBwIQ/w-d-xo.html
If you do end up checking any of that out and come to terms of the fact that they actually existed, I'd encourage you to explore more into what Jesus did on the cross for you. And be honestly open to the idea that you may be wrong about some of your beliefs. I think its ignorant to think we have everything figured out and everything we believe is 100% correct... but when you search things out for yourself, truth will come.
And if you still are adamant about this, then I guess that's what you'll live with, although I'm not sure an atheistic worldview is the most enjoyable way to live life. I think Christianity has a bad rep, but if you were to read what Jesus actually did and what he said, it would be quite eye opening. Even to many people who call themselves "Christians". So I hope you do check it out, and if you do, man, I'd love to hear what conclusion you came to! God bless.
@@jordanduvall6660 hi, no problem with the late reply.
I'll look into this tomorrow!
I've been there, been raised pretty Catholic, went to church every Sunday, prayed before every meal, before sleeping and whenever i felt like it.
I came to be an atheist after reading the whole bible for myself and looking to proof the existence of God...
his answer seems to be straight forward....He believes Jesus...and he believes that Jesus believed the Hebrew Scripture, therefore....ergo....he believes the scripture....via Jesus....
The so called modern scholars, like to say Mark was written first. Because it is the least flattering. Under this assumption any degraded document would be called first/original. What they don't say is why don't mark mention a resurrection? He didn't believe it? or he didn't think it was important? or was it that it was written by a roman stooge to destroy the message of The Messiah?
Ooops! You made a huge mistake. In Matthew and Luke the genealogies are a contradiction. Matthew said the woman held Him by the feet and worshipped Him. Luke says that Jesus said, don't touch me for I have not ascended to My Father. Spaul contradicts all the other 40 Inspired Books including Matthew.
Old Testament so called "contradictions" are few and can be easily explained with proper translation. In the "New Testament", there are many irreconcilable differences. Because only Matthew was originally written in Hebrew. "Matthew" was written anomalously/untitled. It is The Testament of Messiah the last Inspired book. The roman/greek books that fallow are roman lies, propaganda and contradictions. Wake up brothers and sisters, God didn't start speaking greek after they killed His Son. Rome is the beast of Daniel 7 that was given power over the saints for a season. Wake up!!!
Yes, most people who criticized the gospel never actually read it
The so called modern scholars, like to say Mark was written first. Because it is the least flattering. Under this assumption any degraded document would be called first/original. What they don't say is why don't mark mention a resurrection? He didn't believe it? or he didn't think it was important? or was it that it was written by a roman stooge to destroy the message of The Messiah?
Ooops! You made a huge mistake. In Matthew and Luke the genealogies are a contradiction. Matthew said the woman held Him by the feet and worshipped Him. Luke says that Jesus said, don't touch me for I have not ascended to My Father. Spaul contradicts all the other 40 Inspired Books including Matthew.
Old Testament so called "contradictions" are few and can be easily explained with proper translation. In the "New Testament", there are many irreconcilable differences. Because only Matthew was originally written in Hebrew. "Matthew" was written anomalously/untitled. It is The Testament of Messiah the last Inspired book. The roman/greek books that fallow are roman lies, propaganda and contradictions. Wake up brothers and sisters, God didn't start speaking greek after they killed His Son. Rome is the beast of Daniel 7 that was given power over the saints for a season. Wake up!!!
I never ceased to be amused at how many of these "morally superior" criticisms of the Bible as being either or both contradictory or antithetical to western civilization, seem to be completely unaware of where the morality upon which they are basing their criticisms, came from in the first place.
Sure, our secular morals are a product of the enlightenment.
Before that slavery was still justified by quoting the Bible and women were little more than property.
@@ramigilneas9274 The same enlightenment's "secular morals" which brought us the French Revolution? No thanks. I don't want any part of those "secular morals" because that disaster is a text book example of what happens when you strip God from the equation and is what lies at the root of every failed Communist revolution and mass genocide since then. But I'm glad you brought up this issue of slavery and women in the Bible. The scriptures most oft quoted by those seeking to justify their bigotry of that time period were grossly misunderstood. The slavery the Apostle Paul was dealing with during the Roman Empire was not the same as the racially based African slave trade the Europeans learned from the Muslims. Slavery in the Roman empire was financial (there was no "bankruptcy protection" then) as well as a result of military conquest, but it wasn't racial. In view of how three servile rebellions in Rome ended, especially the Spartacus revolt with over 3,000 crucified slaves on the Appian way to Rome, Paul very wisely saw that the greater good was not to incite a rebellion against Rome. Instead he admonished masters to treat their slaves well and for slaves not to run away but to be good servants and submit to their masters. Per women in the Bible, we see the Apostle Paul consistently treating women as equals even calling some of them "Apostle" but then we see some puzzling verses in 1 Timothy and in 1 Corinthians. If you fully exegete these particular scriptures what you discover is that Paul was dealing with a common problem in the Roman empire with pagan temple prostitutes who were in and amongst believers in the Churches. They were trying to subvert / usurp spiritual authority in the Church by claiming that men could communicate with what these cult prostitutes saw as the "Christian God" by having pagan ritual sex with them in exchange for money such as had gone on in ancient pagan practice for centuries. In Roman culture women didn't have the same rights as men except when it came to ritual prostitutes who were seen as an oracle of the gods - this is EXACTLY what Paul was addressing. The truth is that Christianity was the first civil rights movement because gender and birth status were RIGIDLY ENFORCED throughout the Roman empire. With the exception of the Circus Maximus, you didn't dare violate seating requirements at public events throughout the empire - people were seated by social / gender order and to violate such could incur severe punishment. At Christian gatherings, men women, Jews, non-Jews, slaves and their masters, Roman citizens and barbarians were ALL seated and treated as equals. To the Romans this was seen as bizarre and even dangerous and definitely had a lot to do with how the state came to see Christianity as "a new and mischievous superstition" (i.e. Suetonius). Fast forward to the abolition of the racially based slavery almost 2 millennia later and it was devout Christians who led the way in that regard (i.e. Wilberforce in England and the American Abolitionist movement).
@@GTX1123 Great response!
Hahahahaha, a god that spent half of his book killing and ordering the killing is an amazing example of morality.
Your last reply just serves to show how indoctrinated you are, that you ignore the big picture, trying to divert the attention to a particular case.
What a mediocrity.
The so called modern scholars, like to say Mark was written first. Because it is the least flattering. Under this assumption any degraded document would be called first/original. What they don't say is why don't mark mention a resurrection? He didn't believe it? or he didn't think it was important? or was it that it was written by a roman stooge to destroy the message of The Messiah?
Ooops! You made a huge mistake. In Matthew and Luke the genealogies are a contradiction. Matthew said the woman held Him by the feet and worshipped Him. Luke says that Jesus said, don't touch me for I have not ascended to My Father. Spaul contradicts all the other 40 Inspired Books including Matthew.
Old Testament so called "contradictions" are few and can be easily explained with proper translation. In the "New Testament", there are many irreconcilable differences. Because only Matthew was originally written in Hebrew. "Matthew" was written anomalously/untitled. It is The Testament of Messiah the last Inspired book. The roman/greek books that fallow are roman lies, propaganda and contradictions. Wake up brothers and sisters, God didn't start speaking greek after they killed His Son. Rome is the beast of Daniel 7 that was given power over the saints for a season. Wake up!!!
fantastic , thanks
It's funny how people denounce the veracity of 'old texts' mainly because in the modern era text is something you throw away. We live in an era where people hand out fliers that get thrown into the gutter. When in the ancient era that flyer would have taken weeks of painstaking work to make. Here's the point. These texts exist, and survived because people were emotionally invested in making them exist. It's one thing to write on a slip of paper "Jesus Christ, Son of God" mass produced paper, mass produced pen, and mass educated language. It's another thing for people who had to work hard to make the paper, work hard for the ink and pen, and who had to struggle to educate 'anyone'. The more effort it takes to make a book, the more careful you are going to be about what you put in it. You're not going to waste effort on silliness, and this is why to a great degree older texts are useful in asserting veracity. Contrarily, it's also a reason why some history gets lost. The guy who buys the paper and ink gets to decide what's written on it.
Indeed. With how few people in the ancient world would have been literate, and with the astronomical costs of production of even a single scroll of writing, you have to assume that anything put to writing at that time could only have been written because someone thought it was worth writing in the first place.
The so called modern scholars, like to say Mark was written first. Because it is the least flattering. Under this assumption any degraded document would be called first/original. What they don't say is why don't mark mention a resurrection? He didn't believe it? or he didn't think it was important? or was it that it was written by a roman stooge to destroy the message of The Messiah?
Ooops! You made a huge mistake. In Matthew and Luke the genealogies are a contradiction. Matthew said the woman held Him by the feet and worshipped Him. Luke says that Jesus said, don't touch me for I have not ascended to My Father. Spaul contradicts all the other 40 Inspired Books including Matthew.
Old Testament so called "contradictions" are few and can be easily explained with proper translation. In the "New Testament", there are many irreconcilable differences. Because only Matthew was originally written in Hebrew. "Matthew" was written anomalously/untitled. It is The Testament of Messiah the last Inspired book. The roman/greek books that fallow are roman lies, propaganda and contradictions. Wake up brothers and sisters, God didn't start speaking greek after they killed His Son. Rome is the beast of Daniel 7 that was given power over the saints for a season. Wake up!!!
Using your logic, every ancient religious text is true. This obviously isn’t possible, so your reasoning is frivolous.
Some ancient texts aren't worth the paper they are written on. The First 40 Hebrew Inspired Books of the Bible Including Hebrew Matthew (Shem Tov) are worth more than gold. The last 26 greek/roman books aren't worth squat...
He is a smart fellow, but Bishop Barron would have answered these questions much more effectively. For example, Keller would have done better had he mentioned that the 'Bible" is not a book, but a large collection of books. So asking the question, "is the Bible true," is like asking the question, "is your Public Library true?" Certainly some sections of the library are history, some literature, and other poetry, etc. The Bible is no different. They each contain truth, but not in the same way or for the same purpose.
Thank you. Ive looked into Barron, watched a video and makes a LOT of mistakes interpreting the bible. His video about 'why i hate religion, but love jesus' is full of out of context replies. Even on needing works to be saved . This is really dangerous.
@@smgibv4393 Doubt it.
I find Bashir to be respectful . You see him with Diana and it’s the same respect
I find it interesting how non-Christians are so uptight. If you don’t get it, you don’t have be rude about it. Tim Keller is a very prepared man. Don’t think that you can distract him. As a Christian, I don’t have to prove anything. If you don’t have enough to make your choice, that’s not on me. Do your own work. I’ve made my decision. Be comfortable about yours. Right?
The Bible is reliable because God is reliable
Tim Keller awesome teacher but you need a new cameraman. So hard to follow with all the jiggling and change of focus. In need of a tripod!!
Yay! Martin Bashir, he's the man. =D
It is true that Jesus comes to us .it is proved to many who have the experience.it is a matter of experience
Is he really saying that only people who never lied, cheated or done anything wrong in their lives can testify in court?
Best answer ever.
Very simple examples of the veracity of the Bible :
1)Jesus' birth, life & death was predicted in terrible, tremendous accuracy in 355 prophecies from different authors. 2)The Bible was written by over 40 different authors, in a period of 1500 years. No othe not book is so fluid, & holds itself like it does. Many prophets were citing other older prophecies, that came to pass. So it's not track record is outstandingly reliable. Example : how Jesus' birth was predicted to happen in Bethlehem by Isaïah, a very old prophet. It came to pass, as predicted. 3)The flood : almost every people on the planet has a "legend or myth" of a great flood, that wiped out the face of the earth!!! That was predicted by the prophet Noah for 120 years, before it came to pass. Most scientists know this fact, but they'll just never admit to be in accordance with the Holy Bible. 3) Sodom & Gomorrah were predicted to never come out of the ashes, & to never be rebuilt... Their site was found by archeologists. Apparently, the fire that burnt these 2 cities was so hot, it was ssid to be "other worldly"!!! Up to this day, they were never rebuilt!!! 4)The city of Damascus was prophesied to be in total ruins in the end time, which we have surely entered. This came to pass in recent years, thanks to ISIS. It's very sad, but also predicted by the Word of God. I could go on f for days. The Holy Bible has a perfect track record for ALL OF IT'S PROPHECIES. None that were predicted failed to come to pass, exvept for those of the end days, of which the time has not come yet. This total rebellion to God, & the hatred for Christianity & Christians was also predicted. There's no surprise there. We already know that many of us will be put to death for our testimony & faith, in the God of The Bible, but we also trust that, as Yeshua was raised from the dead, we'll also be raised up to reign with Him, on His throne. The chapter of the rebellion of mankind against its Maker is coming to an end. Please choose now to serve the right Master, if you want to protect your family and yourself. God has begun to pour His wrath on a rebellious world. The worse is yet to come. So please, pick up your Bible & get to know and be pleasing to your Creator b4 it's too late. We are running out of time... The clock is ticking!!! God bless you all, and your families. 😊
Descriptive is *NOT* prescriptive.
Amaing
Thank you! This was actually helpful. Usually, the BEST way to solve a question is to simplify it. Be careful not to oversimplify-just simplify. At this point, since Jesus of Nazareth endorses the Old Testament, we simply have to find out who Jesus was and decide if we believe his claims. That takes an ENORMOUS endeavor and puts it in a more manageable sized package. 👍🏻
I say this because the Christians claim that Jesus is central to the entire Bible and that the entire thing points to him.
If Jesus is wrong about the Hebrew Bible what are the implications for Christianity?
The god of Christianity is a new god.
th-cam.com/video/MlnnWbkMlbg/w-d-xo.html
Before men conceived that god polytheism was the norm.
th-cam.com/play/PLh9mgdi4rNeyuvTEbD-Ei0JdMUujXfyWi.html
This is somewhat odd if the Abrahamic god is the so called creator of the universe.
Can you identify the evolutionary origins of your religion from this chart?
ultraculture.org/blog/2015/11/30/map-world-religions/
...and the subsequent religions that it gave birth to?
Most of the characters in the Hebrew bible are not historical they are the product of legendary writings similar to how we view King Arthur.
Adam and Eve, Noah, Abreham, Moses are not historical figures.
There is no evidence of any exodus. That is merely a Hebrew myth not grounded in any historical or archaeological facts.
th-cam.com/video/21NoQuKTB8Q/w-d-xo.html
Jesus most probably existed.
th-cam.com/video/q46tjUQatgI/w-d-xo.html
He was a Jewish apocalyptic preacher. He was not born in Bethlehem as that story was added by Mark and Luke to give Jesus a backstory and a genealogy to align with claimed messiah.
The gospels were written specifically to promote a belief proclaiming “good news” and their bias is discerned in their content. Think of it as early Christian propaganda designed to promote the belief that Jesus was the Jewish messiah.
We do not know who wrote the gospels but we do know that they were not eyewitnesses of the events that they claim to describe. They were not written by Matthew , Mark, Luke or John as these names were added in the second century.
The gospel labelled Mark is the earliest gospel.
It is unlikely that Jesus was buried in a tomb and much more likely that his body was discarded in a ditch or a mass grave.
th-cam.com/video/Gsv-xBzSaW0/w-d-xo.html
The claimed resurrection is a matter of #faith for those that want to believe and not a matter of #fact.
I’m typing this free hand so I’m not really referencing as I go but I’ll pad it out later if you wish.
The claims of life after death, the resurrection and that Jesus died for our sins are just claims. None of these claims have ever been substantiated.
The claims about the martyrdom of the apostles have been grossly exaggerated.
th-cam.com/play/PLpdBEstCHhmXtCb1Ihr4NgJkSmPVT8g3t.html
Most people come to believe the beliefs of their parents via a process of indoctrination.
Some develop existential angst in their teen and early 20 and reaffirm their need to believe or come to a given religion at this age. Many through guilt, shame or desperation. Many find a loving community who grow to love them as a consequence. There are many rights and rituals which keep people locked into their given faith. They act as test of faith reaffirming belief to the other members of the tribe.
It is hard to understand why the difference between "descriptive" and "prescriptive" is such an apparently difficult concept for many people.
I don't know which specific passages you mean with outdated, but I think, a lot of teachings can be found in second or third layer behind the content, the first layer might just be historical accounts or some other story to convey the teachings.
Example: (just made up)
1. Layer: You, your servant, your slave, your ox shall not work on the sabbath.
2. Layer: Even the least important should rest on the sabbath
3. Layer: Do not exploit your envireonment (poeple, animals)
I've noticed this, too. Look at Solomon and David
When and what body of men or authority put the entire canon together?
I agree! people don't get the point of whats going on in the stories, just cuz people do something or a culture does something that's common at the time doesn't make it right! look at all the stuff we do in this generation that is so wrong.
The so called modern scholars, like to say Mark was written first. Because it is the least flattering. Under this assumption any degraded document would be called first/original. What they don't say is why don't mark mention a resurrection? He didn't believe it? or he didn't think it was important? or was it that it was written by a roman stooge to destroy the message of The Messiah?
Ooops! You made a huge mistake. In Matthew and Luke the genealogies are a contradiction. Matthew said the woman held Him by the feet and worshipped Him. Luke says that Jesus said, don't touch me for I have not ascended to My Father. Spaul contradicts all the other 40 Inspired Books including Matthew.
Old Testament so called "contradictions" are few and can be easily explained with proper translation. In the "New Testament", there are many irreconcilable differences. Because only Matthew was originally written in Hebrew. "Matthew" was written anomalously/untitled. It is The Testament of Messiah the last Inspired book. The roman/greek books that fallow are roman lies, propaganda and contradictions. Wake up brothers and sisters, God didn't start speaking greek after they killed His Son. Rome is the beast of Daniel 7 that was given power over the saints for a season. Wake up!!!
Now once you understand what he is saying, then you will understand the lessons of the old testament.
0
sweetshaman lol dangerous nonsense..Believing document factual historical evidence is dangerous nonsense? lmao ok
sweetshaman The odds of the universe to expand at the rate it does ,is so astronomical,that to go against it ,would be foolish,all gamblers no this. IT's called odds.Odds is the most important thing you can know when gambling,because knowing these odds will save you a lot of money, that's why I only play blackjack and count cards. The casino loves it when people play slots, because they know that it is a losing proposition.In fact all gambling is a losing proposition,and the casino knows this. Counting cards just helps even out the odds.. I tell people ,even if science was to prove all religion to be false , I'd still believe there is a God., because of the odds.If you love math , you yourself can appreciate this.You would be laughed out of the casino by all the gamblers I know,if you went against these odds
0
0
Good man!!!!! Yes ppl don’t read the bible properly just skim over it then think it’s contradictive. God blessed this man, have him the wisdom in his words. And well done for him for staying humble unlike the interviewer who was really rude and had an underlying angry state of mind. Proves it all I say. Pearly evil lay on the left and good on the right. Find jesus he is the way the truth and the life. God bless.
🙌
The testimony of the Holy Bible is clear. It states both, that Jesus is the eternal Son of God (one of the Persons of the eternal Triune God), and that this eternal Word of God, who was involved in all of creation, by whom everything was created, and who sustains all of creation to this day, himself entered creation by becoming a human being.
AMEN
great answers
The Life, death and resurrection are indeed the starting point which salvation comes by. All other understanding comes from an unquenchable and thirst for the ways of God! They are beyond our logic and our understanding. You are a god in the sense that you have life. We can reason and think. So think about your eternity and ask him to knock. If you truly seek he will answer
All people of the world will have a chance to accept or reject the gospel of Jesus before the end of the world.
AMEN!
That’s a promissory note that you’ll never collect.
Because it was given to us by the true church. Paul said the church is the pillar of truth. The church that still celebrates the Eucharist
Rest easy king. Say what’s up to the King of kings for me
He literally said there is no way to know about these ancient biblical figures.
Has the guy asking the questions even read the bible. Highly doubt it.
Why is the camera work so bad? Get a tripod!
in the original text Hebrew and Greek, each word and letter has a numeric value. When a scribe hand copies a passage, he will take the original and add up the numeric value, and also add up the numeric value of the copy and if the numbers don't match, they will throw it away and start over.
The so called modern scholars, like to say Mark was written first. Because it is the least flattering. Under this assumption any degraded document would be called first/original. What they don't say is why don't mark mention a resurrection? He didn't believe it? or he didn't think it was important? or was it that it was written by a roman stooge to destroy the message of The Messiah?
In Matthew and Luke the genealogies are a contradiction. Matthew said the woman held Him by the feet and worshipped Him. Luke says that Jesus said, don't touch me for I have not ascended to My Father. Spaul contradicts all the other 40 Inspired Books including Matthew.
Old Testament so called "contradictions" are few and can be easily explained with proper translation. In the "New Testament", there are many irreconcilable differences. Because only Matthew was originally written in Hebrew. "Matthew" was written anomalously/untitled. It is The Testament of Messiah the last Inspired book. The roman/greek books that fallow are roman lies, propaganda and contradictions. Wake up brothers and sisters, God didn't start speaking greek after they killed His Son. Rome is the beast of Daniel 7 that was given power over the saints for a season. Wake up!!!
One reason you can trust the Bible is because most of the prophecies have come true, so there's no reason not to trust the rest of them to come true, just because they haven't when men think they should have. Revelation is a book of a mix of figurative speech and literal. But, much of the Bible is that anyway. Look at Proverbs. The Bible is not contradictory if you understand what is figurative and what is literal, and don't mix paganism with what is Godly..
The Bible is not undermined at all. A loving God will fix evil in this world once and for all, but it has to come at the right time, or else the question will forever plague humans and angels
The loving God has a plan to do away with evil so that we will never have to cry again.
Polygamy was not God's plan for mankind from the beginning. Jesus said that. One mate for each man and woman. We will have satisfying work to do. Read Isaiah 65 and 25.
That’s simply not true. Most prophecy is vague and nonspecific. Is Nostradamus a prophet of god?
LOL What is the BEST example of a fulfilled prophecy?
@Jane Arko //Revelation is a book of a mix of figurative speech and literal. But, much of the Bible is that anyway. Look at Proverbs. The Bible is not contradictory if you understand what is figurative and what is literal, and don't mix paganism with what is Godly..//
How do you distinguish between what is figurative speech and literal?
Exactly Pastor. You have to read and Understand for it to make sense. It's just like some of you who have had abortions or asked your woman to have one...from the outside I could just condemn you but if I learn your story I may see how you made that decision and also suffered from that. There is always room for repentance and lessons to learn but if we look in from the outside we just see Bad. Btw I am not saying abortion is okay but I'm saying that bad decisions happen everyday for multiple reasons and the bible is no different.
SingPray Luv right.
What book is he referring to?
As some other books are reliable and We believed without questions .Like for example,World history ,American history,Philippine history and etc .The Bible also is reliable source about Gods reality .Only in the Bible people are questioning because it involves Gods direct concerned to our personal life that he is our creator and We must return to him .But still God gave us freedom of choice ,he want us to believed and accept him with Love.
Mute the sound and watch this guy's hand signals. For example, start at 2:47 onward.. And/or at 4:28 onward.
Jesus Christ didn't mention the word bible in his testimony...where do we get the list.
What about the people that have never even heard about your book like the chinese and so forth?
I see what about the rest of your book then?
As per new testament the church is us than why revelation tells for new church coming down from heaven to Jerusalem. can you explain please.
This doesn't have to be as complex as Martin and Tim are making it.
Tim's argument, " I have given you good evidence to trust Jesus' character and he trusts the Old Testament."
So by extension everyone should trust the Old Testament.
A different approach would be show the bibliographical evidence for the scripture as opposed to other books of that time period, followed by the historic and archeological evidence which demonstrates reliability, followed by internal evidence (consistency of 40 authors writing over 1500 years, followed by the absurdity of over 75 prophecies that are fulfilled.
Martin needs to give concrete examples not just say things like "murder" etc.
What does the heavy lifting in these epistemic discussions is usually one's presuppositions (I.e. Miracles can't happen so any writings referring to miracles must be false ( Hume turned out to have a poor understanding of how Bayesian inference works but he predates Bayes so he can be forgiven his ignorance).
OT prophecy. There is not a more sure and undeniable tangible evidence than OT prophecy. No other religion or book even offers such or even attempts it. If not for the OT Prophets, we would have no basis at all to believe Jesus is our Lord and Savior.
Most churches and denominations have totally buried the OT prophets and most American Christians are totally ignorant of those books. Imagine that, our strongest tangible evidence of all has been totally buried and ignored for multiple generations now in the chruch.
And we are not talking about end times and Revelation, we are talking about the countless prophecy that were fulfilled in the time of Christ, concerning Jesus, Israel, the church age, even modern Israel and their continued rejection of Christ as their Messiah.
The so called modern scholars, like to say Mark was written first. Because it is the least flattering. Under this assumption any degraded document would be called first/original. What they don't say is why don't mark mention a resurrection? He didn't believe it? or he didn't think it was important? or was it that it was written by a roman stooge to destroy the message of The Messiah?
Ooops! You made a huge mistake. In Matthew and Luke the genealogies are a contradiction. Matthew said the woman held Him by the feet and worshipped Him. Luke says that Jesus said, don't touch me for I have not ascended to My Father. Spaul contradicts all the other 40 Inspired Books including Matthew.
Old Testament so called "contradictions" are few and can be easily explained with proper translation. In the "New Testament", there are many irreconcilable differences. Because only Matthew was originally written in Hebrew. "Matthew" was written anomalously/untitled. It is The Testament of Messiah the last Inspired book. The roman/greek books that fallow are roman lies, propaganda and contradictions. Wake up brothers and sisters, God didn't start speaking greek after they killed His Son. Rome is the beast of Daniel 7 that was given power over the saints for a season. Wake up!!!
Christ ll make you set you free
Maybe it's woth noticing that the bible is not one single book, but a collection of 50+ books written by different authors at different times. So, even if there were errors in one or more books amounting to more than just details, it wouldn't necessarily compromise the credibility of other books.
Actually the Bible has one Author, Almighty God through Jesus Christ in Heaven through Eternity but 40 Scribes of Israel rewritten on Earth through time.
For me, the reliability of the whole Bible depend entirely on my acceptance of the reality and truth about Jesus Christ. If Jesus is not real, then the whole Bible is mere story book.
We know that the Gospels were written 40 years and more after death of Jesus.We all know that most people cant recall reliably incidences that happened to them personally even a few days later let alone 40 years. 10 people witnessing a crime will give 10 variations of what happened and describe anyone involved in the crime very differently.
Sure, but if 10 people saw someone raised from the dead, then 10 people would remember someone being raised from the dead.
@@KatieGimple people make up stories to justify beliefs
@@KatieGimple also not a single one of them even claimed, that he saw Jesus raise from the dead.
Actually, this is not true. The oldest manuscript we have dates back to 30 years after Christ, which indicates that the actual original gospels were written before this. Already by 100 A.D. the gospel of John had reaches Egypt, which is an extraordinary length in the antique. It took both papyrus and long travels.
By the way, the time the manuscripts dates back to does not, in the context of textual critisism, confirm it's reliability. If we take Homer's illiad as confirmed history today, let me give you a clear example. We have less than a thousand manuscripts today of the illiad, and the earliest one dates back to roughly 100 years after the happenings. The New testament we have over 5 800 greek manuscripts, the earliest one dating back to 30 years after the real happenings. The case for the bible is extraordinarly strong in the realm of textual critisism, and therefore also bears significant historical value.
@@andersekren8065
Nope, you have exactly zero manuscripts from the 1st century, only a few tiny pieces with a few words on them in the 2nd century and the first partial manuscripts appear in the 3rd century.
It isn’t even sure that any of the originals were written in the 1st century.😉
The rainbow angel has to prove God is real to everyone, in Revelation. The lamb with seven eyes opens the scrolls. We needed to internet.
By the nature of the topic, it is very easy to nit pick and throw darts. So I guess I will jump in also. Except my nit picking is geared toward one of the responders that says that the bible is a compilation of letters from around 120a.d. Where he came up with 120 a.d. is very suspect. There is not a scholar around, even the wrong ones, that would peg the date of writing at 120. Hence, when one is so grossly inaccurate with one subject it makes the whole defense a bit suspect.
I believe the old testament actually defines man not God. The New Testament defines God by showing humanity Christ. You have to connect the dots of scripture to complete a true picture of God and that picture is Christ on The Cross dying and reconciling mankind into righteousness with God. And that defines what love is and God is Love!!!!!
It seem like Bashir is sounding hostile. It not even his tone in his voice but it show with his body language. I cant watch people who can't contain their disdain and remain unbiased.
Bashir is a believer, just playing devil's advocate
If what Jesus taught was fairytales there are only two possible explanations:
1 he was lying. Now, given the high moral standards that can be found throughout the entire New Testament is it likely that the very person who taught such standards was a liar?
2 he was crazy. Well, it has been said that if we put together all the teachings of cutting edge psychology the net result would be an imperfect copy of the gospels. So, again, is it likely that the wisdom that is found in the Sermon on the Mount is the result of a sick mind?
Yes.
Jesus was wrong about the historicity of the Hebrew Bible.
The god of Christianity is a new god.
th-cam.com/video/MlnnWbkMlbg/w-d-xo.html
Before men conceived that god polytheism was the norm.
th-cam.com/play/PLh9mgdi4rNeyuvTEbD-Ei0JdMUujXfyWi.html
This is somewhat odd if the Abrahamic god is the so called creator of the universe.
Can you identify the evolutionary origins of your religion from this chart?
ultraculture.org/blog/2015/11/30/map-world-religions/
...and the subsequent religions that it gave birth to?
Most of the characters in the Hebrew bible are not historical they are the product of legendary writings similar to how we view King Arthur.
Adam and Eve, Noah, Abreham, Moses are not historical figures.
There is no evidence of any exodus. That is merely a Hebrew myth not grounded in any historical or archaeological facts.
th-cam.com/video/21NoQuKTB8Q/w-d-xo.html
Jesus most probably existed.
th-cam.com/video/q46tjUQatgI/w-d-xo.html
He was a Jewish apocalyptic preacher. He was not born in Bethlehem as that story was added by Mark and Luke to give Jesus a backstory and a genealogy to align with claimed messiah.
The gospels were written specifically to promote a belief proclaiming “good news” and their bias is discerned in their content. Think of it as early Christian propaganda designed to promote the belief that Jesus was the Jewish messiah.
We do not know who wrote the gospels but we do know that they were not eyewitnesses of the events that they claim to describe. They were not written by Matthew , Mark, Luke or John as these names were added in the second century.
The gospel labelled Mark is the earliest gospel.
It is unlikely that Jesus was buried in a tomb and much more likely that his body was discarded in a ditch or a mass grave.
th-cam.com/video/Gsv-xBzSaW0/w-d-xo.html
The claimed resurrection is a matter of #faith for those that want to believe and not a matter of #fact.
I’m typing this free hand so I’m not really referencing as I go but I’ll pad it out later if you wish.
The claims of life after death, the resurrection and that Jesus died for our sins are just claims. None of these claims have ever been substantiated.
The claims about the martyrdom of the apostles have been grossly exaggerated.
th-cam.com/play/PLpdBEstCHhmXtCb1Ihr4NgJkSmPVT8g3t.html
Most people come to believe the beliefs of their parents via a process of indoctrination.
Some develop existential angst in their teen and early 20 and reaffirm their need to believe or come to a given religion at this age. Many through guilt, shame or desperation. Many find a loving community who grow to love them as a consequence. There are many rights and rituals which keep people locked into their given faith. They act as test of faith reaffirming belief to the other members of the tribe.
Here is how unreliable the New Testament is. Pilate asks Jesus, "What is truth?"
But Jesus didn't speak Greek and Pilate did not speak Hebrew or Aramaic. So, there is a interpreter there that is not included in the story.
Keller ignores the fact that the there are many gospels are are not included into the Bible. The Bible itself was indeed never a book, it is a compilation, a series of letters and writings from around 120 AD
For those concerned with the salvation of people who will never hear the good news, the question is irrelevant. If Christianity is true, will the answer to this question affect your response to that truth? Will its truthfulness be diminished? If it is true, should we claim we know what is right, and God doesn't? If it is true, we can trust that the Judge of all the earth will do right.
If Christianity is not true, then it does not matter the slightest bit what Christianity says on the subject.
Knowing that doesn’t make it any easier when a loved one who is not a Christian dies. My heart sank when a non -Christian family member dies and I have this great urgency to tell them about Jesus but I don’t know how to do it.
Would this speaker accept the same rebuttal in defense of the Qur'an, Bhavagad Gita,or the Book of Mormon?
OT prophecy. There is not a more sure and undeniable tangible evidence than OT prophecy. No other religion or book even offers such or even attempts it. If not for the OT Prophets, we would have no basis at all to believe Jesus is our Lord and Savior. Most churches and denominations have totally buried the OT prophets and most American Christians are totally ignorant of those books. Imagine that, our strongest tangible evidence of all has been totally buried and ignored for multiple generations now in the chruch. And we are not talking about end times and Revelation, we are talking about the countless prophecy that were fulfilled in the time of Christ, concerning Jesus, Israel, the church age, even modern Israel and their continued rejection of Christ as their Messiah.
@@Orange6921
There is exactly zero evidence that Jesus fulfilled any prophecies... but there is evidence that he failed to fulfill the most important messianic prophecies.
And the prophecy about Israel is pretty pathetic if it took millions of people thousands of years to fulfill it.😂
You can not blame God for a lot of things that people do, because Lord Jesus clearly says in the New testament: "Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law?". If you read the book of judges into what kind of state people have come... God says: "...Who so ever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart." to show them that the problem is in our nature that we are born with and that we have to be born again. So with my mind through faith a serve God but I still live in body of sin on this earth. ( Romans 7:20,23,24). Our guilt is put on the Lord Jesus and it is judged on a cross. Who acepts that in faith will not go into the judgment.
Belevers of the Old testament do not have the Holly Spirit living inside of them because Christ was not yet crucified. (The difference between hebrews promises and crhistian promises is shown in a picture of Noah and Enoch).
Anyone who denies the bible shut be shut down!!!!
"If Jesus is who he says he is." Big if, no?
Nobody can prove anything.
Your either a believer on not.
Jesus talked and reated all the Prophets as though it was all history. As in he took the old testament literally. He spoke of "Daniel the prophet"
" Moses".
God can change anyone. God gave Paul the strength, wisdom, and endurance to carry out the mission Jesus entrusted Paul with. One of Paul's most famous statements is: "I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me," (Philippians 4:13), reminding us that our power to live the Christian life comes from God, not ourselves.
4:30 But God did say to King David He would bless David with more wives if he was not content with what he had.
It does not. I think I'm familiar with the passage, but you didn't cite it, so I'm not sure. From memory, it mentions Saul's wives, not their relationship to David.
@@Moqlnkn 2 Sam. 12:8
@@andrewtsai777 Yes, God gave Saul's past wives to David. It does not say that they became David's wives. Importantly, this is also not condoning our modern understanding of slavery.
"And I gave you your master’s house and your master’s wives into your arms and gave you the house of Israel and of Judah. And if this were too little, I would add to you as much more."
@@Moqlnkn It's standard practice at that time. Furthermore, If Saul's wives did not become David's wives, there was no need to mention them in the passage. The context is about adultery. If Saul's wives did not become David's wives, why are they mentioned as part of condemnation against him?
Slavery is condoned in the Old Testament. Just read Lev. 25:44-46. It explicitly legislates chattel slavery.
unbelievers have no way of correctly interpreting what the word of God says. they do not have the spirit of God in them to discern what the the text is saying. their eyes have been blinded. it is our job as believers to present the gospel. they either reject it, contemplate and question it. or just flat out deny it in its entirety.
Sure, that’s why there are over 30.000 Christian denominations who disagree about pretty much every sentence of scripture, each with their own interpretation.😂
You'd feel free to do what you wanted even if it gave every indication that it was suffering. Also you're not the right person to create a living thing in a lab.
hmmmm
JMtrueblue, how can you say that "this guy is totally wrong". He is just sharing an opinion, albeit a strong one. When you say "totally wrong", I guess that means you are "totally right". We know that is not true. Don't we? That would be like me saying JMTrueBlues comments are totally idiotic. That might be very well true, and probably is. But in reality we know it is not. Go easy on words like totally and always.unless you have the authority to say such a thing. We do know who does.
Can you provide a reference for this? Or any reference that Jesus may have learnt or conversed in Latin. Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic were the common languages of the regions.
The point here is that this scene is not as simple as it is currently written, or as Keller would have us imagine it. Luke is not a "news" reporter of the story, quoting witnesses. It's more like he is writing a screen play. The actual facts get lost in what it is we are suppose to believe about the story.
The authors of Matthew and Luke copied large sections of Mark, word for word.
Terrible cameraman!!
The alternative to God is the singularity that caused the big bang, what created this singularity? Hawking believed that there was a dimention before this singularity(last theory before he died), so as far as we can tell this singularity poped up out of nowhere, then the big bang happened and you know the rest, of course this is extremely simplified.
Know here is the God theory, an all powerful, unlimited being that can do anything without any limitation, including the laws of the universe as a limitation, created everything, told us humans what happened, rebirthed himself(And because he is omnipresent throughout space and time he co-exists with his reincarnation/rebirth) as a human to confirm everything in the book to be true and to show us humans first hand that he can do the impossible.
If science proves the singularity wasn't living and a logical reason as to why it came from nothing then athiests win.
Christians operate on faith, which is opinion so there is nothing to prove, no claim being made. It is personal belief, but the bible is the only thing people have a hard time swallowing, and it could have been corrupted by men after Christianity became mainstream and monks made biblical manuscript copies supervised by the pope as the church gained money. Muhammad did say to follow the bible, and Muslims say humans corrupted it.
That is a real possibility, however for there to be a God with no limitations that can make himself gain limitations he would need a reincarnation of himself with limitations. The phsyical world has limitations, so God in flesh is just that and that means there is a spiritual world without such limitations that God rules over.
This all hinges on 1 assumption:
That only living beings can be omnipresent. This is because whatever created the universe has to be omnipresent throughout time, that way it can exist before it ever existed because time doesn't apply to it due to it being omnipresent throughout time.
I believe only a living creature could be omnipresent throughout time, but I could be wrong and something likd a singularity might be able to be omnipresent throughout time, but that singularity could be alive for all we know.
Much of the Old Testament is DESCRIPTIVE, not necessarily PRESCRIPTIVE.
Just answering Revelation ... chapter 1 says the vision was SIGNIFIED to John. It is a symbolic vision.
Where we can check (and this is the key that the critics ALWAYS forget--even after I have told them that they will forget, they do it!), the Bible has ALWAYS been found to be correct. And the critics of the Bible have ALWAYS been found to be wrong. The thing to note is that the critics are ALWAYS wrong. They claim to be smarter than the ignorant goat-herders who wrote the Bible (none of the writers of the Bible were goat-herders so they are wrong on that claim) and we certainly have more knowledge today than they did way back then. But, it is ALWAYS the critics who are found to be wrong--now why is that? Shouldn't they have been right at least 50% of the time? If the critics of the Bible were so much smarter than the writers of the Bible, we should think that they'd be ALWAYS right. Instead we we find that they are ALWAYS wrong. If you knew that a weather forecaster was ALWAYS wrong, how much longer would he/she be on the air? We have the joke that you can tell when a politician is lying--their lips are moving. Given the cont'd failure of the Bible critics to get even ONE, just one(!), thing right, I would suggest that the joke applies to them as well.
Two concrete examples will suffice:
1) When Herodotus (c. 484 BC - c. 425 BC) wrote ab't the fall of Babylon, he could not tell you who was in charge of the city (all sort of other alleged details tho'! See www.livius.org/articles/person/darius-the-great/sources/capture-of-babylon-herodotus/). Likewise, Xenophon, (born c. 430 bce, Attica, Greece-died shortly before 350, Attica), (see www.cyropaedia.org/2013/12/09/xenophons-cyropaedia-and-persian-oral-history-part-two/). Yet Daniel, which is supposed to have been written 3 centuries later, could tell us!
2) [LOTS OF EXAMPLES IN THE BOOK!] faithsaves.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Ancient-Orient-and-Old-Testament-Kenneth-Kitchen.pdf, see PDF page 30, "the price of twenty shekels of silver paid for Joseph in Genesis 37:28 is the correct average price for a slave in about the [page 54] eighteenth century BC:94 earlier than this, slaves were cheaper (average, ten to fifteen shekels), and later they became steadily dearer.95" and then on PDF page 33 "The total evidence, therefore, accords very well with a date for the Patriarchs in the twentieth to eighteenth centuries BC, and shows a reasonable degree of consistency when properly interpreted.105"
All this means,
1) the books could NOT have been written as late as is claimed, because the correct knowledge would have been lost.
2) when the critics err so often on the simple stuff, why should anyone trust them on the more complex issues? The same lack of research and lousy hermeneutics that CREATED the simple errors are magnified on the more complex.
@Larry Cavalli: see my original post (hit the "Read more"); I can and have backed up what I say.
The prophecies about Christ from Genesis to Malachi..
The perfect prophecies and cohesion between the separate authors and separate Old Testament books..
It’s actually entirely ludicrous not believe and trust The Word which is not just a book but it is God-
John 1:1
People who don’t believe it or don’t look into the questions that they have about it are left without an excuse.
I disagree. But I do think the healings were mostly in the time of Christ. I don't believe there's prophets today. But you got to consider the time of Jesus, there have been Giants and Men wisdom of old. The Angels come down and talk women and men had a fight make weapons as metals of the Earth. Thanks for totally different back in them days people were smarter. We cannot claim that today.
I hope you don't make a feeling thinking machine.
"Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, they all have more than one wife--polygamy." Nope. Isaac only had one wife, Rebecca. Okay, I'm sure Kellar knows that, and it was just a slip up and the video is really very good. But it is kinda fun to catch that.
Read Genesis 27.37 when Issac tells Esau that Jacob is lord over him and ‘all your brothers’. Since Rebecca only had 2 sons (Jacob/Esau) that would mean Issac had other women- most likely concubines.
The so called modern scholars, like to say Mark was written first. Because it is the least flattering. Under this assumption any degraded document would be called first/original. What they don't say is why don't mark mention a resurrection? He didn't believe it? or he didn't think it was important? or was it that it was written by a roman stooge to destroy the message of The Messiah?
In Matthew and Luke the genealogies are a contradiction. Matthew said the woman held Him by the feet and worshipped Him. Luke says that Jesus said, don't touch me for I have not ascended to My Father. Spaul contradicts all the other 40 Inspired Books including Matthew.
Old Testament so called "contradictions" are few and can be easily explained with proper translation. In the "New Testament", there are many irreconcilable differences. Because only Matthew was originally written in Hebrew. "Matthew" was written anomalously/untitled. It is The Testament of Messiah the last Inspired book. The roman/greek books that fallow are roman lies, propaganda and contradictions. Wake up brothers and sisters, God didn't start speaking greek after they killed His Son. Rome is the beast of Daniel 7 that was given power over the saints for a season. Wake up Brothers and Sisters, He's coming Soon!!!
"Almost all the Old testament scripture is quoted by Jesus authoritatively" is that what Mr Keller believes. when he says it?
Perhaps Mt Keller should look again at the sayings of Jesus which relate to Old Testament scripture? For he will find that he is in error.
*Believers Comment*
Atheist: Well, YOU JUST CONTRIDICTED YOURSELF, Info, Quotes, Stuff
*Atheist Comment*
Believers: Well, I DISAGREE MY GUY YOU ARE INCORRECT, Info, Qoutes, Stuff
As Christ said ,”Have you not read.”
The so called modern scholars, like to say Mark was written first. Because it is the least flattering. Under this assumption any degraded document would be called first/original. What they don't say is why don't mark mention a resurrection? He didn't believe it? or he didn't think it was important? or was it that it was written by a roman stooge to destroy the message of The Messiah?
Ooops! You made a huge mistake. In Matthew and Luke the genealogies are a contradiction. Matthew said the woman held Him by the feet and worshipped Him. Luke says that Jesus said, don't touch me for I have not ascended to My Father. Spaul contradicts all the other 40 Inspired Books including Matthew.
Old Testament so called "contradictions" are few and can be easily explained with proper translation. In the "New Testament", there are many irreconcilable differences. Because only Matthew was originally written in Hebrew. "Matthew" was written anomalously/untitled. It is The Testament of Messiah the last Inspired book. The roman/greek books that fallow are roman lies, propaganda and contradictions. Wake up brothers and sisters, God didn't start speaking greek after they killed His Son. Rome is the beast of Daniel 7 that was given power over the saints for a season. Wake up!!!
@@YTRhyms Ah! The “shotgun approach”. The atheist will use all sorts of schemes to deny the words of God. BIblical scholars have refuted all your “claims”.When you find you are wrong in your presuppositions,all you will do is ask more questions,in your rebellion against your Creator.
@@chrismachin2166 I worship a Hebrew Messiah, you worship a greek. You obey spaul a murderer of the earliest believers and a wolf in sheep's clothing. Notice how spaul never asked for donations for the ophans of the Believers he Killed? But he was very intent on getting offerings in return for his "spiritual gifts". I accept The Inspired Word of God, The first 40 Books of the protestant Bible. You been had.. Wake up Brother. Messiah was a Jew...
The Gospels aren't even congruent with each other. The fact is as I've addressed in my own vids is that there is good consensus that Jesus existed and had a following. So did Joseph Smith. But as far as divine this is where I go after the misinformation of the apologists on "evidence that he was God." There is none, religious or secular. The secular mentions (Tacitus, Pliny the Younger, Josephus) mention him as having this following. None of them believed he was divine. As far as his following and "witnesses" to his miracles and resurrection? We have not one signature. Nothing. Nothing written during Yeshua's actual life that said "I was his friend, I knew Yeshua, I witnessed this resurrection." Signed: friend of Yeshua. That began about thirty years later which screams urban legend. Cheers, DCF
this is not really true even people with single wives are miserable..it is Roman doctrine being passed down. In many other parts of the middle east, it is still practise to this day.
Mike, you're reading out of context and unless you earnestly seek the Holy Spirit's guidance you will never uderstand. The Scriptures you mention were for a specific people in a specific time and for a specific purpose. I pray your eyes and heart will be opoened. God bless...
He believes in evolution, and sees Genesis as just a poem. He does not believe in Adam and Eve. Check him out.
carkim521 Tim Keller?
the book of Genesis is written very similarly to allegorical writings that were written in the same era and context. That belief is founded on very close examination of the Bible which im guessing you have not gone through.
Our Protestant brothers say no one is infallible, then contradict themselves and claim their humanly devised criteria can infallibly determine what books are God-breathed Canon. But this cannot be true because fallible human opinion has no way of ever infallibly knowing what books are God-breathed. Happily, we can know what books are God-breathed Canon because God gave infallibility in this matter to "The One True Church," the Roman Catholic Church. This must be true or we can never know the authentic Bible.
in what year was the Roman Catholic Church conceived? Considering that until 280AD Christianity was outlawed in Rome I would suggest that not only did Jesus say this to people who would never even know what the Roman Catholic Church was or would ever be but that also every theological statement contained in the bible was therefore written before the conception of the Roman Catholic Church, and thus come to the conclusion that there was a true church of which Jesus mentioned and Paul later wrote to that existed 200+ years BEFORE the Catholics. You believed the papal authority when they said "we are the one true church of which jesus spoke" despite a pope never being mentioned in the bible...and dont mention peter...cmon...you really think peter is meant to be a pope? read it again. Im not pretending to be without theological shortcomings, nor do i claim that the church or denomination i subscribe to is without some discrepancies but i definitely do not claim to be infallible like you. when jesus said "the one true church" he meant those who follow christ in mind, spirit and body alongside those who do the same. Fortunately, that is Catholic's and other followers of Christ alike, keep searching for the heart of Jesus.
Had Jesus lived, as a real Jewish Rabbi, with the title of Rabboni ... Great teacher of Judaism ... he would not have been enticed to preach any doctrine foreign to, or offensive to Judaism. That is common sense. He would have wanted those who strayed from Judaism, to come back to his pure, unadulterated doctrine of Judaism. Jews that stay faithful to Judaism, do not believe their souls will go to a Christian heaven. They have their own version of Utopia, which is Olam Haba.
If you read the gospels carefully you'll see that Jesus did in fact call the Pharisees, the scribes and the Sadducees back to a pure and unadulterated biblical teaching!!!!
It wasn't Jesus who was in the wrong, it was the aforementioned ones - teaching the traditions of men to nullify the word of God as written!!! That is what the modern Rabbis still do!
You have it completely wrong! Jesus followed the scriptures ( see the statements containing the words - "Have you not read?" or "You have heard it said" ) and the Pharisees mucked it up with their own invention of rules!!!
The so called modern scholars, like to say Mark was written first. Because it is the least flattering. Under this assumption any degraded document would be called first/original. They say Mark was written to a greek audience and Matthew to a Hebrew audience. How does the audience change what Jesus said? Did Jesus say, in Mark 16: 15 - “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. 17 And these signs will follow those who [d]believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues; 18 they[e] will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.” or Not? Why didn't Mattew mention it? Did he believe it? Was it unimportant? Was he afraid to offend Jews? No " "Marks" roman gospel was not written in greek by Mark. It was written by a roman to justify spauls crazy gospel to the greeks.
Ooops! You made a huge mistake. In Matthew and Luke the genealogies are a contradiction. Matthew said the woman held Him by the feet and worshipped Him. Luke says that Jesus said, don't touch me for I have not ascended to My Father. Spaul contradicts all the other 40 Inspired Books including Matthew.
Old Testament so called "contradictions" are few and can be easily explained with proper translation. In the "New Testament", there are many irreconcilable differences. Because only Matthew was originally written in Hebrew. "Matthew" was written anomalously/untitled. It is The Testament of Messiah the last Inspired book. The roman/greek books that fallow are roman lies, propaganda and contradictions. Wake up brothers and sisters, God didn't start speaking greek after they killed His Son. Rome is the beast of Daniel 7 that was given power over the saints for a season. Wake up!!!
The Pharisees were the lying witnesses and Jesus said of them "when I am lifted up on the cross then you shall know that I am he"ironic isn't it that they should come to know it's him who they crucified because of their sins?🤔
David James
On what occasion were the Pharisees lying witnesses? And why would Jesus say to them, "When I am lifted up on the cross, etc?" The Pharisees, had, quite naturally, asked , Jesus, who he was? It is also reported that Jesus did not use the word 'cross' but simply said 'when you have lifted up the son of man'. (KJV)
And the Pharisees, did not crucify Jesus. The Romans executed Jesus.
Martin Bashir seems to put a lot of stock in rejecting anyone or thing i.e. in the bible that Martin Bashir thinks is a lie or false. Using this logic I'm assuming Martin has never told a lie? If he has then why should anyone give this man the time of day, after all as he said if you lie, anything said after the lie would be highly subject yes?
It’s not that easy.
The authors of the Bible weren’t necessarily lying... but they were very superstitious, gullible and ignorant.
So when Jesus spoke about Adam, Eve or Noah as if they were real people he wasn’t lying... he was just mistaken and thought that those fictional characters existed and that the creation myth and the global flood myth were historical events.
@@ramigilneas9274 You really need to take that to the nearest comedy club, silly man.:)