I once got into a rather heated discussion with an acquaintance who insisted that Jesus spoke Elizabethan English. Never mind the fact that English didn’t even exist then.
It's very difficult (for me at least) that there are American Congressmen who believe that the first Bible was written in English. That's extreme ignorance...
One truth I learnt from life is that people whom we believe to be the most learned people, including scholars, can be wildly, blatantly ignorant when asked anything not sitting in their field. My PhD mentor, a very famous guy, was with me during a trip to Rome. When visiting the Castle San Angelo, he looked at metal poles that were used to hold marble blocks, which were original and still intact, and said: "That's not historical. Romans didn't know metallurgy." No, I am not kidding. He actually said that. I was so flabbergasted that for long minutes, I tried to figure out how someone so highly considered could believe such insane things. Part of my apprenticeship.
@@raminagrobis6112 Indeed, we are only knowledge on a handful of things, there are little to few people in this world who are good at everything they do or say, most of us only do good on certain things
i grew up in the Australian Presbyterian church. We were encouraged to learn the bible, and question translations. We were also ecouraged to know the difference between a story used to teach and actual one used to relate history...
but still you're told that the Bible is the word of god, huh? so they do realise the book is plain wrong when talking about history, dates, years, it's wrong about biology and space, but still it's the best book from all existing ones, right?..
@@kwakagreg The bible itself says to study and show your proof for faith. Who ever said to just believe and not seek truth and study all things is wrong. If someone makes a truth statement or something illogical see what the bible says instead.
@@joeshabe What exactly is the bible wrong about? You’re saying something is wrong without giving an example of whats wrong, it holds no grounds and is a baseless accusation.
Yes so did I and was told at about 13 to stop asking so many questions and asking for proof to just believe it.....I must have faith, it was not for us to know all.....I was disruptive ...
@@darthzaida1881: "More legacy then I'll ever manage to leave, I'm sure!" -- The vast majority of man will never, ever be known after their death. And according to one historian of ancient times, that means you didn't exist!
*This video is full of errors* and his own opinions, it's not near the truth and not scientific at all. *Inspiring Philosophy* has a video on that subject, make sure to read it and *stop the misinformation.* *"4. The Reliability of the New Testament (Authorship & Dating)"* by Inspiring Philosophy Edit : Since there is popular demand : This is how to know who wrote the gospels. 1- John John is a direct eyewitness. And he faithfully gives a detailed account. An easy way to identify John as the author of the Gospel of John is through contemporary witnesses. One of thoses witnesses is Polycarp, John's disciple, who identifies John as the author of the book of John. John also speaks in the first person and identifies himself multiples times in the book. --- "The Word became flesh and made his dwelling *AMONG US.* *WE have seen* his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. (John 1:14) At the end of the Gospel of John, John identifies himself in the first person : --- "Peter turned and saw that *the disciple whom Jesus loved* (John) was following them. (This was the one who had leaned back against Jesus at the supper and had said, “Lord, who is going to betray you?”)... *This is the DISCIPLE who testifies to these things and WHO WROTE THEM DOWN.* *WE KNOW* that his testimony is true." John 21:24 John's words 'WE know that HIS testimony is true" while putting himself in the "WE", is a clear proof of what I was saying up there, that he was purposely avoiding the first person, to show that it's not about him, and that it's about and authoriative, true and attested account of what happened. John had a closer relationship with Jesus than any of the other disciples. Jesus and John were essentially “best friends.” Jesus entrusted John with the care of His mother, gave John the vision of the transfiguration, allowed John to witness His most amazing miracles, and later gave John the Book of Revelation John 21;24 claims authorship of the gospel by the "Beloved Disciple". If the "Beloved Disciple". A study of the New Testament, the other Gospels, the letters of John and the book of Revalations, clearly points to John the disciple as the one who is called the Beloved Disciple. It's no brainer. www.gotquestions.org/disciple-whom-Jesus-loved.html John always identifies himself that way in the Gospel of John, because he knows he is writing a book about the story of Jesus, the Son of God, and he is the closest to Jesus, so he must be humble and objective, in order to write an authoritative book. "Instead, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus’ side with a spear, bringing *a sudden flow of blood and water.* The man who saw it has given testimony, and his testimony is true. He knows that he tells the truth, and he testifies so that you also may believe." John 19:34-35 "After the spear was thrust into Jesus' side out came what appeared to be blood and water [19:34]. Today we know that a crucified person might have a watery fluid gather in the sac around the heart called the *pericardium.* John would not have known of this medical condition, and could not have recorded this phenomenon unless he was an eyewitness or had access to eyewitness testimony." - Craig Blomberg, Historical Reliability Of John's Gospel" I bet you never heard of these passages before. 2- Luke Luke is not a direct eyewitness as he said it himself. Luke, while not an eyewitness, claims to have constructed his book from eye witnesses sources. Luke is not a Disciple of Jesus. Luke is a companion of Paul. So it's normal if Luke doesn't say "WE" as John said. But he does speak in the first person and from the book of Acts and the letters of Paul, we easily identify Luke as the author of the Gospel. Luke said : --- "Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. With this in mind, since *I myself* _have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught._ Luke 1:1-4 Luke excludes himself from those who were eyewitnesses of Christ’s ministry. He indicates participation in the Pauline mission by the use of the first person in the “we” sections of Acts. They suggest that Luke shared in instructing persons in the Christian message and possibly in performing miraculous healings. References of Luke in the Pauline Letters has regarded him as a very educated physician and a Gentile, and Paul indicates also he was with him on several missionary journeys, matching the "WE" passages of Luke in the books of Acts. Don't forget the book of Acts is an extension/continuation of the Gospel of Luke. And this is also direct proof* that the Gospels were already written even before Paul wrote this letter to the Galatians, because before Luke mentioned the meeting of Paul and the disciples in Jerusalem in the books of Acts, he already wrote before that the "Gospel of Luke" very well before 70 AD. And Luke did not tell us how Paul died in the book of Acts, that means Paul was still alive when Luke wrote the his his adventures with Paul and the Acts of the disciples. I the beginning of "Acts", Luke writes : " *In my former book* , Theophilus, I wrote about all that Jesus began to do and to teach until the day he was taken up to heaven, after giving instructions through the Holy Spirit to the apostles he had chosen." - Luke in the book of Acts. 3- Mark The bookendjng of mentions of Peter in Mark's gospel is called an inclusio. This is a literary device that denote an eyewitness source. (The Apostle is the first disciple mentioned in Mark and the last one mentioned after the Resurrection in Mk 16:7). Biblical ethics in both Testaments called for multiple witnesses to be retained for testing truth claims (Deut 19:15) Also, the principle of giving a testimony orconfession was a virtue of the early church. It wound be difficult to persuade Jews if Sinai teaching was ignored or if they were shown to be men of poor character. ' According to the 2nd-century theologian Irenaeus, Papias had known the Apostle John. Pappias, quoted by Eusebius, explained that "Mark became Peter's intetpretet and wrote accurately all he remembered". This is Papias quoting presumably the Apostle John ! So your Trey got nothing on Pappias who knew John himself. So if Pappias tell you that Mark and Peter wrote the Gospel of Mark, then Trey is a liar. So Mark, writing as Peter's interpreter writes his account matter-of-factly with details that seem like on-the-scene recollections. Examples: Mark 8;23-27 or 5;2-5. Scholar and historian Colin Hemer identified 84 facts in the last 16chapters of the Book of Acts. Items included deal with correctlynamed ports, correct languages used, landmarks, political titles, etc. Things that would be known by those who were there. Those in the know without access to Google or maps. John also mentions numerous historical details that would only be known by a personnal witness living at that time, details possibly irrelevant to a later audience. John correctly described the Pool of Bethesda as having five porticoes. The pool unearthed, critics discovered that they were indeed five. 4- Matthew - Patristic tradition is unanimous that the author is the Apostle Matthew. - The earliest manuscripts that we have of Matthew are titled "The Gospel according to Matthew" where it is appropriateto have one. There are no untitled manuscripts where a title is appropriate. - As a book universally ascribed to Matthew, to name anyone else as author is to affnm that the true author o'f'tAe gospel was forgotten in a comparatively short amount of time (50 years). - The Apostle Matthew, as a tax collector, needed to be fluent in Aramaic and Greek. - The Gospel of Matthew contains more mentions of financial transactions than either of the other Synoptic Gospels. A solid reason to consider a tax collector as the author. - The Apostle Matthew was not a member of Jesus' inner circle and a relatively unknown entity in scripture. If one desired to make up a title for one otjne gospels, Matthew, instead of Peter or James (brother ot John), would be an unlikely choice.
@@Yt_watcher12 It's really not him trying to lie on my religion. I'm a scientist and I wouldn't be defending my religion if I didn't notice how this video is full of inacuracies and his own biased opinion.
It is worth noting, there is a big difference between "the earliest copy" and "the earliest surviving copy of which we're aware". It is hard to infer too much from what has survived today.
It's like some vids: "This is the earliest [insert ancient item] in the world!" No, it's just the earliest one that e know about at the moment. As science progresses, the "earliest" will get pushed further and further back.
@@angrydragonslayer TH-cam blocks my comment when I paste links. So search on TH-cam : "4. The Reliability of the New Testament (Authorship & Dating)" by Inspired Philosophy.
Sidenote: The story of David and Goliath leaves out that David did the prehistoric equivalent of bring a gun to a knife fight. When even a moderately skilled person uses a sling you can hear it break the sound barrier. The rocks move at over 200 km/h, there's an account of the Romans in 123 BC being repelled by slingers at a port landing, having to retreat due to hull damage, armor their ships and go back. That scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark where Indiana Jones just pulls out his gun and shoots the guy? David is Indiana Jones in that scene.
Baeleric slingers were snipers. Thank you for making this point. The average speed of a solid rock moving at 100+ mph was deadly. They started using slings as soon as they could walk. That was the tool of the trade for herdsmen and was given as much importance as horse handling was. Not the range and accuracy of a bow, but when you are dead from a rock or dead from an arrow it doesn't really matter at that point.
Martin Luther, probably: "The catholic church is CANCELLED and that's on periodt, I mean, look at the pope sitting up on his white horse draped in finery while jesus wore a sack and rode a donkey smh i am diSGOSTED"
The Greek text is the LXX. The Masoretic text is an edited Hebrew text done with certain goals: addition of vowel points to the consonants; choice from among Hebrew variant readings to help in debates with Christian apologists; standardization of the Hebrew text. I’m sure this comment at approx. 6:21 of the lecture is just an oversight. I find your work well done and clearly presented. Thank you for doing this.
I was tracking with him till the Gospel authorship. No manuscripts, biblical or otherwise had titles at that time. They were not written anonymously. The early Church (2cnd and 3rd century) ascribed the authors and Mark as the testimony of Peter.
3:37 if that makes you feel better, here in brazil there is a city with the same name of bethlehem (belém) and when i was a kid, i thought jesus was born in the middle of the amazon rain forest. 😂😂😂
As a Muslima, i am told we should believe in Torah and Injeel (gospel). I am a bookworm growing up till i entered workforce when i was 23. I loved reading religious books, and read the Indonesian translation of The Bible/alkitab. Old Testament was ok but at times it was too gory and in many places too x-rated for me as teenager, while reading new testament i cant help feeling the Book of John was different from older 3 in regards to divinity of Jesus pbuh. It felt as if writer of John was trying to establish his own view of Jesus pbuh. After I found out that the 4 canonical gospels were NOT WRITTEN BY THE DISCIPLES THEMSELVES, but by ANONYMOUS PEOPLE, i felt despair in trying to learn what Jesus pbuh actually did teach. Who can verify whether these anonymous people can be even trusted? (And we havent even touched the problem of Aramaic vs Greek vs translations of translations of translations of translations available to public as of now) Gospels are like hadith in Islamic tradition. Bukhari/muslim/ahmad establish strict confirmation rule (who narrated, who retold the narration, whether the narrator actually met the prophet pbuh, whether the narrators in the chain of retelling all the way up to the source narrator that met the prophet were trustworthy). One link is deemed not reliable, the Hadith is no longer sahih (highest category). I cant find similar thing in gospel (where the writers of canonical gospels were even anonymous. No one knews who they were) Edit to add pbuh after Jesus pbuh name and clarifying chain of narrator and sahih Hadith
It is impossible to believe today’s Gospels and the Torah, because the reliability of these books is even worse than the reliability of the fictional Shiite hadiths. Today they can only be used to take into account attention to historical value. For example, in the Quran there is a verse about some story with the Israelis, for interpretation you first use other verses of the Quran, then you use the authentic hadiths of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, after that the Interpretation from the disciples of the prophet, peace be upon him and blessing, who certified these stories with Jews and Christians who lived in their age, after that you can turn to Hasan hadiths, and only after that we can choose whom to trust the interpretation, historians-archaeologists or people of Scripture.
the four Gospels are “anonymous”, in that the author’s name is not explicitly listed in the text, but that does not mean that they were initially presented as texts without authors! It does not mean that we can’t be confident who wrote them. In ancient times the omission of an author’s name in a text was not an unusual practice. We have literature written by Plato, Plutarch, Lucian, and Porphyry that do not contain their name in the text itself and are every bit as ‘anonymous’ as the Gospels, in that sense. But this by no means suggests that we have no idea who the authors were. The respected New Testament scholar Martin Hengel, pointed out that it is “… unlikely and unrealistic to think that such [early Christian] writings could have left their original communities without titles since such works needed both a generic identification as well as some personal authorization.”2 After all, what is the first thing a person would ask when presented with a brand-new writing? “What’s it about and who wrote it?” Does it really make sense that the scrolls would have arrived without the identity of the author being known and communicated to those receiving it? Additionally, people distrusted anonymous works without any identification of some kind. Forgeries existed in the ancient world, including among Christians, but they were rejected as deceptive when discovered.
Even Ehrman, who is known for his skepticism agrees, “Ancient sources took forgery seriously. They almost universally condemn it, often in strong terms.”3 Among early Christians this was especially the case. They held to the clear teachings in the Hebrew Scriptures that God does not lie and he hates deception. Lying was never tolerated (see Proverbs 12:22; Leviticus 19:11). New Testament specialist Eckhard Schnabel explicitly states, “The early church rejected writings … [whose] authorship was pseudonymous” (that is, had a false name attached to it).4 Because anonymous texts were distrusted, texts were never really completely anonymous! The recipients of a new text would make sure they knew who the author of the text was before they would use it.
I grew up in Mexico and I went to a Catholic elementary school. When I was in middle school they made several changes to the Catholic bible in Spanish, which bothered me because I was raised to believe every element in the bible was there for a reason. One of the changes was in John's gospel, they changed from "In the beginning there was the verb" to "In the beginning there was the word". I remember the priest at church saying that the change was correct because Greek, unlike Spanish, was more precise and one word has only one meaning, so the word "logos" had one, and only one meaning. At the same time in school I was learning that the word logos had many meanings and it was the source of "logic" as it use of "reasoning" or "thinking", and the source of the word "biology" where "logos" meant "science of", "knowledge of", "study of", "about of". I was expecting some of the adults raising their voice to correct the priest, but they either didn't bothered, or worse, they believed him. Most of the changes weren't major, but I didn't see anyone else mentioning in public any argument for or against any of the changes, just an attitude of "this is what we believe now"
The WORD in John 1 is a verb. It doesnt become a noun until its formed or begotten in you as a son of God. James 1:18, I Peter 1:3, Romans 1:3-4 give important evidence. Tyndalls' translation actually got it right when the WORD was translated as "IT" and not "him". There are many pivotal errors like this that led the church congregations into apostasy of worshipping a man as God Almighty. The abomination and strong delusion we were warned about. The 1st commandment never changed to include anyone but the Father Alone. Deut 13 is a very good chapter to read. as is Jer 16:19-21 which clearly states that at the end of the age during our affliction, we will discover we were lied to by our fathers. That prophecy is happening now just like it says.
@The Jazeera Channel ..... it feel like you said something and nothing at all. Give more info and contex, if not people will never understand what your are saying
The fact that adult americans exist who believe that the Bible was written in one piece, in English is the most shocking thing I’ve ever heard. That really put me in a thought spiral.
@@patana256 yalll make up shit, I can’t believe Christianity fooled everyone. Some people made it up long ago now it keeps getting scripted too. U have to be stupid to believe those are the true words of god.
@@EOMMunaware the bible is real and holy spirit guided the people who were writing the books of the bible. Just because the bible could have had some changes. If there was some changes, they don't take away events that happened. Like the beginning of the bible in genesis. Whatever changes were made never takes out jesus preforming miracles or jesus being crucified. I don't think I need to add anything more because you get what my point is. If you are not then you just keep your comments to yourself or other people. Doesn't matter because God created the heavens and earth and gave his only begotten son to die for me on the cross. Hell and satan are real.
I've always been under the impression that if you just dismiss any holy book by denying its realism, it's just as idiotic as dismissing a fable by denying its moral. No one goes around telling people that the Tortoise and the Hare is foolish because sometimes you need to act fast. Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and say I don't think forest animals came together to have a footrace, but neither did a man face a wall of flaming swords trying to return to Eden.
@Kevin Belgrove j is in geez alfabet spoken by adam.preserved in ethiopia amharic language.Janhoy Haile Selase defends melkesedek order.many names many languages of god.jews denied him but we believe on him by His Power of the cross.heart word breath.trinity of God father son holy spirit.jews allow greeks to big up Jesus.the word remain the same.is not symantics.not polytricks.is believe.faith.is ethiopia.she stretch forth her hands unto eyesus kiristos
I come back and re-watch this video and part 2 all the time. This is the kind of information I've craved since a child. Thank you for such amazing work. I can't even imagine the sheer research you did for this video. It's incredibly admirable.
What these people don't teach just like today we have different denominations who write their own version of the Bible they had them existing 1800 plus years ago hence why you find different texts. The Torah and the old testament are basically the same. The new testament be what version it be all testify about Jesus Christ and who He say He is. I am a king James version believer God will not corrupt His finally word. I learn this after I died in 1990 came back to life believing in something different than what I was thought knowing the truth for it set me free the day I came back to life after dying. I had stage 4 osteosarcoma cancer. That day I was totally heal never took medication since. Jesus Christ is Lord. Hope the same way the Holy Spirit lead me to know the truth He will lead you as well. Have a glorious and bless day.
@@angelgoindoo4518no at the beginning I’m pretty sure he explicitly stated that there are multiple different versions of the bible from different communities and time periods and that it’s not one linear path. Like he very explicitly stated this, repeats it throughout the bible, and shows a graph that’s a web of how all the different versions are connected. Granted this graph is just for the old testament but he says the new testament is in the same situation
Monk 1: *crosses out and corrects word* Monk 2:"You are a fool and a knave, do not change the text" The first social media fight due to a grammar Nazi happened 2000 years ago.
Wait til they meet Trump and what he's gotta say about it... Trump: Fake News Scribe: Sorry Mr Trump but it's actually Gospel meaning Good quality news so there 😇
In my discussions about the Bible with other believers, i am sometimes attacked for even suggesting the Bible has errors, and that at one time it was correct as it came originally.
I also believe in Jesus but not the doctrine of inerrancy, I came to that conclusion from spoting self contradictions in the text. I was following a cycle of finding a contradiction, leaving the faith, finding a way to reconcile it and rejoining. I was on the unbelieving part of the cycle when an event happened in my life that made me realize I still deep down believed in the gospel. There are actually a couple Christian authors I respect that don't/didn't believe in inerrancy.
@@jimmetcalf6408That's true, but I think he's critiquing the Pharisees for following the law too closely in a manner of speaking while also avoiding "the heart" of the law. For instance, "You have heard it said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart." [Matthew 5:27-28] He's not necessarily negating the scriptures, but instead unveiling its truer intent that the Jewish teachers either avoided or didn't fully understand. But I'm also in the camp that full biblical inerrancy seems problematic, especially considering some of the things Paul said in his letters that were more informal, like writing to a friend in a casual manner.
Your father wrote a letter about his love for you, and how you can find him if you get lost. the Bible=the Books is about a Message=the Gospel=the Good News---th-cam.com/video/nMPtcEH6t0g/w-d-xo.html
Help I can’t stop watching these two videos. Idk why. It’s just so hard to find actually good videos on the Bible that are neither trying to prove or debunk it. Why aren’t there more good channels on this site that look at the Bible from an objective, academic pov?
@@ussinussinongawd516 yep but atleast this one doesnt shit on everything man and thats a good thing it causes less conflict against the creator of the video
Hey as someone who was born and raised in a Christian church, even went to Christian school, I appreciate the research you've done. The truth is so much more interesting than anything we were taught in Sunday school! Keep up the good work and awesome videos.
@@therougechipmunk8058 Fuck. No. That was my point. The truth is much more fascinating than "what we were taught in Sunday school". In fact, as an adult, churches still make me uneasy and I have nightmares about some of the things I was taught. Like Carl Sagan said, we are all made of star stuff. Much more interesting to me.
First and foremost, it's important to contextualize the sociocultural landscape of the Middle East in the first century, marked by a profound linguistic and cultural heterogeneity. Aramaic was the lingua franca in Judea, being the mother tongue of the apostles, which facilitated direct communication with the local populations. However, the Roman Empire, with Greek as the official language of the East, promoted extensive Hellenization of the regions under its dominion, making Greek a common language for trade, education, and public administration. The New Testament, originally written in Koine Greek, serves as one of the main indications that the apostles were knowledgeable in Greek. This version of Greek, known for its simplicity and broad usage, was accessible to a vast range of the empire's population, including those regions far from the Greek cultural center. The choice of Greek as the language for the Christian sacred texts was not accidental but a strategic decision to reach a wider audience, transcending linguistic and cultural barriers. Moreover, archaeological evidence, such as inscriptions and manuscripts found in regions of Palestine, indicates the presence of Greek in Jewish contexts, suggesting linguistic coexistence. These artifacts, alongside references to Greek schools and the use of Greek in Jewish funerary inscriptions, reinforce the idea that Greek was known and used by Jewish communities of the time. The apostles' ability to communicate in Greek not only expanded the reach of their preachings but also facilitated intercultural dialogue and the dissemination of Christian teachings beyond Jewish borders, reaching Gentiles and converting them to Christianity. This is evidenced by the rapid expansion of Christianity in Hellenistic regions, and later, throughout the Roman Empire. 16:20
You know it's sad how it's the actual religious people who seem to be unwilling to analyze the history of their holy texts for changes, because you would think they would be the ones who would most want to go back, re-analyze everything, and create a new version of the Bible that is closest to God's word and original intent.
Exactly. Unfortunately what is taught in churches is to believe without question. Not only do we grow as people by challenging our beliefs, not challenging them and blindly following is a recipe for being manipulated.
Well, no. The really religious people are more than willing to analyze the Bible truthfully. The more religious they started, the deeper they went. Then they realize it's all crap and fall out of religion. Bart Ehrman is the perfect example of this.
@@hirisquvidson7625 I don't understand this self-righteous and insulting attitude, from someone who I assume wants to follow in Jesus' footsteps. I used to think comments like this were just from trolls who wanted to rile people up. Problem is, I see it in the real world just as often. And it always leaves me scratching my head, because it's the exact opposite of Jesus' message of compassion towards each other. I'm serious when I ask this question - Why? Why is this your approach?
This makes me appreciate one aspect of Islam I always liked anyway: you're not supposed to translate the Quran. The original Arabic text is believed to be the literal word of God as given to mohammed, not for any special reason other than that's what the prophet spoke. Translating it makes it NOT the word of God anymore, and while helpful for non speakers of Arabic, a quran in English for example is technically not a quran. Doesnt make their book any more or less factual or convincing, it's just cool in a historical context to still have the absolute original text of such a massively important religion.
The worst thing you can do is change something. This has been the down fall of the Catholics. Christianity originally had no priest. Bishops were several bishops over one congregation not one bishop over many congregation and that's just the start.
The Bible verse that has changed my life is John 3:16. Tha is the whole meaning of the Bible for me. Minor details does not change the overall theme of this Holy Scriptures.
Lu Marquesb True, i am a horror fan and it is very fascinating to see some of the almost Lovecraftian creatures that were dreamt up in the ancient days.
@Wade Haden - Master Jedi Engineer Goth Atheism is a claim that I can't particularly sympathize with for being such an arrogant claim. I particularly respect agnostics however because they simply do not know, atheists on the other hand completely deny anything outside the material world including the idea of a god which is completely unsupported by things like quantum physics. It's interesting that you speak of metaphysics... because I wrote an essay breaking down the evidence for god with quantum physics and neuroscience called the quantum god. You might find it interesting, you also might have to challenge some presuppositions you may have about reality being entirely material, the consensus of physicists agree to the idea that the material world is a fiction of conscious observers so you might have difficulty with that aspect but it is quite fascinating.
Keegan • to me, god may or may not exist, and no it is not because I “do not know,” it is because there is nothing that can prove or disprove the existence of a god. I don’t think I’ll ever believe in a god(s) until I see them with my own eyes.
@@juno7424 I'd agree with the first half of your statement, and by definition, may or may not exist is a netrual ground, you are fundamentally claiming that you are not convinced of either sides and reject both, you are not sure. The idea that you cannot prove or disprove god is simply a false dichotomy of evidences since not all evidence can be found on a purely scientific basis, god by definition cannot be "proven" with the scientific method because god exists outside the material world, so nothing can be used as a control, there are many other forms of evidence that can apply to god however like logical or empirical reasoning in ways of explaining the universe, assuming the only evidence that is useful is scientific evidence is faulty by all measures.
As a person who grew up in the church but has since fallen away from it, I find Biblical history to be absolutely fascinating. It's like everything I was taught when I was young is either misfounded or outright historical revisionism.
I find that there's a defining reason a lot of people leave the Church, It's so they can justify pulling little "pranks" on their friends that are more like assault. Trust me, I used to think that harassing people was "freedom". Jesus for life.
The funny thing is, my bible teacher from the Christian school I went to in 8th grade was strongly against historical revisionism. We had multiple lessons talking specifically about how society has revised historical events, and how that relates to Christianity. Yet he never once mentioned the historical revisionism of the bible, but instead claimed that it’s all God’s original word and said we should follow everything in the bible literally
My mother raised me to be vaguely aware of the revisionism (admittedly I’m Jewish so this applies to the Old Testament for me). Not aware of the exact revisions but with a vague idea that it wasn’t the original text. She is an archeology nerd. My synagogue usually didn’t take the words literally but instead as metaphors for how we should be nice to others and stuff. I know of people who step away from churches and synagogues but still have faith (just not in the texts). It’s always surprised me how few people knew about the translation errors since I figured people understood that people (who like anyone else) make mistakes while translating. It is genuinely shocking how some people try to force people new to the faith to believe that the text is literal (because metaphors didn’t exist in ancient times or something 😒). I understand why it works when someone is introduced to the literal interpretation while they are young but it just seems really shady that some people seem to be trying to keep people from knowing about the revisions. It’s not common knowledge despite it being important information in enlightening people to your faith. Sorry for rambling but it really bugs me when people try to misinform people on purpose.
8:288:5511:15 19:11 The Book of Esther? Mary, mother of Jesus. Mary Magdalene, Abigail, wife of Nabal Etc, etc. 20:00 (Video creator twists the word of God) "foremost" is not what the scripture on the screen says.
Look up Dr.James white for accurate information th-cam.com/video/pL0P6sH0cJM/w-d-xo.html The Gospel th-cam.com/video/Gyr2_cU-iew/w-d-xo.html The esv was translated from earlier greek manuscripts not from other english translations
11:01 lol It’s like Wikipedia before the internet. I have to add that it might seem very unprofessional to some to have that extra text in the margins from the scribes, but I absolutely love that they did this. It reminds us that these were painstakingly copied by hand by actual human beings and we get to see a side of them and their sense of humor that we otherwise never would know about. I think it’s wonderful.
False equivalency fallacy! Be careful your argument is anecdotal. The Bible was translated directly from the scrolls with teams of scholars and translators that cost millions of dollars. Don’t be fooled from smooth talking words.
Yes, and these are the "words of god"? More like the words of men, who despite being allegedly guided by the holy spirit, changed, omitted, amended the words of God. Errors errors everywhere
5:28 this is misleading. These are not strictly translations of translations. While some bibles will maintain a lineage such as this, the manuscripts that are used for the original translations are still consulted abd used to translate directly from when needed. It isn't a translation of a translation of a translation, they are still using the starting manuscripts to ensure accuracy.
The problem being is that all we have are translations. We have no originals. The translations we do have only go back to a couple of hundred years before the original. A lot can get mistranslated in a couple of hundred years .
Do you know that part about a camel going through an eye of a needle? It’s not a camel dude it’s a cord on a boat for fishing. Which makes more sense, considering there a bunch of fisherman in his posse.
During my confirmation in a conservative Christian church, we were also taught the doctrine of biblical inerrancy. Having seen National Geographic specials on the history of the Bible, I often brought up the fact that the bible we know is a translation of a translation. The minister eventually started asking us "Why can't there be any mistranslations in the bible?" when he was testing our understanding of what we'd learned. The correct answer was something to the effect of, "because they always used the best translation." I thought that was pretty weak.
@@alexnelson7258 There is no doubt that there are so many changes throughout translations and copies, some explained here. However, the statement the Scripture makes that it itself is inerrant because it is the Word of God does hold up, as we can see even though the linguistic words have been changed, the underlying words and messages have not. All *teachings* have remained true to itself and agreed with all references across all books within and outside the Bible. And yes, I agree, your minister's answer was pretty weak lol.
The books we call the Old Testament, and the Jews call the Tanakh, are mostly survivor stories, of real-time catastrophic events that repeatedly overwhelmed the ancient world between Noah and II Isaiah. They books are disordered, now, first by Jewish leaders of the 7th Century, when they assembled the Tanakh, as a formal document, already nearly a thousand years after the events of Exodus, so important five books, Exodus: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, or, "This is what we remember", "Holy God! What was that?", "These are the things you will and will not do", "This is what happened in the aftermath", and "These are the rules of our order". The five books associated with Moses (probably not a Jew, but possibly multi-racial Egyptian, somehow connected to the royal house) are sequential, but the rest of the Old Testament is jumbled, mostly because the scribes of the 7th Century BC didn't believe the stories as told to them, certainly not in the way their grandfathers' grandfathers would have. They were already safely separated by a century, from the last of the events that had terrorized their ancestors, over more than seventeen hundred years. The stories passed down from survivors told of unimaginable horrors and nightmare conditions, with unbelievable casualty figures. Jews had only been monotheistic for less than 500 years, adopting the practice about the time of Zoroaster, and perhaps, Akhenaten. The chronology of the ancient past is a confused mess, not merely because humans are lazy about record-keeping. The books of Exodus, Joshua, II Samuel, II Kings/Chronicles/I Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Jeremiah/Lamentations, and II Isaiah, tell of calamities later ascribed to "God", but events undoubtedly earthbound, by a BDR. Religion, as we know it today, is a blockbuster business around the world, and the biggest source of chicanery everywhere, and the source of more human misery than anything else. Today, some 3,200 years after the idea began to take root, men are still arguing about God. Few are content to allow others to come to their own conclusions, as "the faithful" are told repeatedly to do in Scripture, regardless of religion. In fact, few follow the basic guidelines, more interested in nitpicking detail, than in ordinary obedience. Jews revised the Torah again, in the 3rd Century BC, then Christians took over, and haven't stopped, since the 3rd Century AD Matthew 6 says, "Do not stand on the streetcorners boasting of your piety, as the hypocrites do", and what do proselytizing "Christians" do? Beside altering the verses to suit their twisted worldviews, poisonous impiety still fueling wars, death, famine, and pestilence. Then, Revelations, written long after the other books of the New Testament, mentions those four horsemen of the apocalypse, but the concept flies right past those who think of themselves as "the faithful". If we are indeed Children of God, then Our Father has to be totally disgusted with us, because we've become idolators, worshipping the symbols, while exhibiting little of the spirit. Jesus said, in John 13:34, "A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another." Christians of the "nationalist" persuasion fail this, meaning they are also not Christians. One cannot ignore the primary rule of the leader, and be considered a follower. I have serious issues with the whole idea of God, but I'm bringing the popcorn to Judgement Day, if indeed, He is real. I can't wait to hear all the racists try to explain why they should be allowed in, despite breaking Rule #1. It should be entertaining. Any way you slice and dice it, religion is the biggest con in history, benefiting any fool with a quick Persian rug about conversations with God, and a talent for laying guilt on with a mega-trowel. Misery and trouble are the touchstones of the skilled religionist, no heart too tender to milk. What God expects, it seems to me, is a whole lot more actin' right, and a whole lot less talking about how right you are. About as opposite to human nature as it's possible to get.
What even is "condescending"? I think most of us are bringing popcorn to judgment day---"right up to the time Noah entered the ark" Appreciated your rant
@@ryanunruh2683 I understand fully (as well as someone can who was not there) the causes of religion. Events that would revise the world around the survivors, changing rivers, seas, mountains, and continents, happened with frightening regularity, done before the change could be comprehended. It made sense to blame it all on "God". Who else could pull it off? The ancients did not understand the physical world they inhabited, attributing rain, wind, and good crops to some deity or another. We are all born with fears, racial determinants, and physical limitations we have no control over. The fears drive us to be stupid, the racial qualities color our perceptions of the world, and the physical limits keep us somewhat grounded. We are all related, distantly, from the swankiest nabob, to the crudest Displaced Person, like it or don't. That would be the "Godly" element, that we are here, to enjoy these times, with the life we were given. Nothing to do with our birth was due to our actions, inputs, or efforts.
When they tried to explain who shot Johnny Joestar, it was too complicated. They cut it out because most of the medieval peasants didn't take any napkins.
Man hates to Gospel bc it is the truth and bc they love living in sin and evil they change Goda words and turn away from him, Sadly many die and dont even know the truth, Get right with God before its too late🙏💙
@@tiana9720 you do know anime is against the word you’re preaching right, Sakura? Might wanna stop living in sin as thou shall not entertain that which permeates violence and sexual promiscuity, at least she chose sasuke in the end💀
@@abezebethou I definitely have, which is why I’m Atheist. The Bible and the Christian God himself are highly hypocritical, from killing infants to sacrificing women, to destroying a mans entire life for a bet. It took six commandments before “oh yea also don’t murder” while the first 5 are all about worshipping him and not worshipping others
I mean they translated Latin Bible which itself is translated version of Greek translation of original Hebrew Bible. So... The mistranslations in the book were almost inevitable
God: write down what I say. Humanity: okay, but we have to translate into many different languages for all of us to read. God: Wait what, that going cause mistranslation. Humanity: oh, then who the one that made us have different languages/togues God:.....fair point.
As non- english speaker reading the english bible is like reading a document straight from the middle ages. Like... other languages at least update the bible's grammar & spelling every century or so. For example, the modern german standard language even got created through the necessity of a coherent bible translation.
Translator 1: Yes but actually no Translator 2: Yes actually but no Translator 3: No actually but yes Translator 4: Maybe Translator 5: No actually but yes (Translator 4 is stupid!)
@@jadenk1409 yeah, translations often lose things because of the nature of the speakers and the languages makes perfect translations a far-fetched ideal. Things like pacing, structure, metaphors, sayings, poetry, rhyme, and alliteration doesn't typically translate all that well outside of closely related languages, and that's without even considering human error and people intent on changing it...
I grew up in Christian fundamentalist. The Bible is the unquestionable literal word of God. Written by men but inspired and given them to write down by God. It's infallible and unquestionable. I have read the Bible front to back hundreds of times. I then went to Bible college and studied it in depth even more to the point where I translated books of the Bible from koine Greek to English myself. The more I learned about the Bible and the history behind the council of nicea the less I believed in it's inerrancy. Especially translating it myself and seeing how portions where altered in order to fit thier agenda or to censor really sexual things or stuff that didn't align with their beliefs.
I really appreciate your approach to this, not patronizing or belittling Christians. I loved to learn about all of this, and will certainly look for more. I believe Christians shouldn't be afraid to learn this, as at least so far none of these changes jeopardize the fundamental concept of the Gospel.
I really, really don't want to give you any reason to stop investigating your beliefs, but how do you get to any fundamental concept in the Gospel. I haven't read the 60 something library that is the bible but from what I've read I do not see any concept they share unless the words GOD and GOOD count even when they are described as polar opposites. And just to clarify it's okay if you don't have an answer, it doesn't mean I "win" by default or anything childlish like that, I get that you're investigating for a reason.
@@Zancibar Why not read the whole bible so its easier to explain to other people why they should or shouldnt believe in it? To many people on the internet have who have a strong opinion about the bible but have never read the whole bible. They believe something because a youtuber, friend or family member said something.
@@MrTahref I read the motel version, I don't like it, I am not going through the whole 60 books if I have no reason to. And I don't have a strong opinion on the bible, it's a book I did not like and if I try to talk to people who do believe it's true (or metaphorically true) it's because I truly do not understand how do you reach that conclusion without taking it as an axiom.
@@Zancibar Its a guess, but atleast 50% of christians or people that call themselves christians have not read the whole bible. i cant force you to read the bible but to get better answers i think its better to read it yourself. If you dont wanna read, th-cam.com/users/jointhebibleproject is a channel with some cartoons about the bible but doesnt cover everything/enough.
@@Zancibar But remember the bible does not exist in isolation. While it contains the word of god, it has been compiled, edited, and studied by Christian scholars and the church for 2000 years . To understand it, it should be viewed from the lens of the teachings and doctrine of the church as well, not the texts alone. If you want to understand its message better, I would recommend watching people like Bishop Barron or other priests who's job it is to explain it.
Honestly, as a Christian, thank you for this video. We all have plenty of bias, but I saw little, if any, opinions for or against the Bible, just facts. I wish there were more channels like this, because I think this is great!
@@revan552 I have a hunch you're nit so kind to videos explaining the facts of way the Bible is the inspired word of God (not telling you that's a fact, but you get my point).
@@arunmoses2197 No one gets your point, half of your answer is copied from the question and the rest is airy-fairy nonsense. It‘s unsettling. Just like your god.
@@revan552 I'll put it simply.... Even if the Bible were true or not true, it doesn't matter. I'd rather choose to live the way Jesus taught me too because the world would be a better place if we just loved God and loved each other the way we're commanded to. Period. The problem is man is inherently evil, we are savage, animalistic, that's the flesh. We should live in the spirit and by that I mean controlling our bodies, our flesh. Mind over matter if you will. Again, whether Christianity is true or not, is besides the point. Strictly looking at it from a well being aspect it's great for the mind, body, and soul. Like let's look at it from a fasting and meditation aspect. Those things are good for the spirit regardless of religion or theological beliefs. I, however, just choose to meditate on God and the word of God. Meditation to me is nothing but prayer, thinking on the things of God and the mysteries of the universe. Fasting on the other hand allows me to overcome my flesh and curb that lustful appetite for evil. If Jesus were walking around today would people not confuse him for a yogi or guru or something of that nature?
A workplace argument on how the text had been altered in the "unchanging text of god". This is obvious proof that the texts are not "Unchanged through the ages" as some people argue. Besides it was in a text later used to put the bible together. In those days there was nothing that can be called a bible yet, just collection off different text collected by the church. No one knows how many of those texts were left out of what became the bible, but we know it was a LOT of them.
Just another Christian popping in to say that this is an awesome video. It's still a wonderful thing to dig into Western history by tracing this text back to as far as possible, mistranslations and political modification/sacrilege notwithstanding. Agreeing to disagree regarding the religious debate, I am always grateful to hear more about humanity's history, whether it fits our world view or not. Between you and channels like the Bible Project, it's been an interesting ride to try and decipher meaning from text and culture far removed from our own. Thanks Trey. Have a great Easter.
When reading the old testament I read the Tanakh. It is loaded with footnotes that give the different translations to passages. You get to see all of the different translations from different sources and it clarifies things a lot. It also give the meanings of Hebrew words and names and other footnotes. Always read the footnotes.
The man you called Jesus wasn't Greek the book says he came from the line of David and David sollom Issac and the rest were Hebrews l don't know why you all keep saying that all the people in that part of the world knew that but if you keep living you'll find out truth always show it's self. And no one knew any thing because most of you all wasn't even a thought celebrate the religion that were yours and that is the one you call christanty witch came out of Rome claim your own religion that's the only thing that you know why do you think Christ is to return to show people all the lies killing stilling that has been done and to whom it was done to you need to get some more understanding the most high God will judge everyone according to the deeds and their history and believe me you will be shocked don't play games with the most high God you can not hide your history you learn about the people and as always you claim to be who you are not and that too is a sin the most high God is not mock and he knows all things so do what you do best the whole world is in for the shock of the hour and it's coming and you will have to take it as it is
OK, the Tanakh is the entire Bible including the 5 books of Moses, the Psalms, the Prophets and the writings. We read from the Torah every Saturday and on specific weekdays. It's broken down into 52 readings. However we also include parts of all the other books in our studies and liturgy. There are many good study books by Stone, Schottenstein excellent study of the Talmud, Siddur Tehillat and many others with compelling commentaries. ut the Rashi commentary and the Hebrew is identical. The words never change, our interpretation does. What's important is how they help you to be a better person, to understand who you are and how you fit into the world.
@@winterwoods7219 There is no such thing. The land has had many different people and lies between the two great ancient civilisations of Egypt and Mesopotamia. There have been many religious changes too. The claims of the Zionists, people of the modern Jewish religion to have the right to drive out the people of the land are spurious.
You should, but the Wiki isn't a good source. It is often half right, half sourced, & can be altered one day, corrected the next. So, you might site it as a work, then when I check it to verify that, you are wrong, as it now states something different. And I don't mean a few words off, I mean complete changing of meaning. The wiki isn't a legitimate source for this reason alone. Second, I wonder if he got some of those other quotes from the wiki also, not the original source. In that case, his cited source is incorrect, but should be the wiki citing the source so you know where he got it vs where it originates. That is an issue. Example (not saying it is real). His Quoting Bart. This would be legitimate if he got it from that book, but what if he got that quote from the wiki? Then it is an improper citation & you would have to check the quote against the book to know that. As presented, it would have be directly from the book or incorrect. So let's say I did check the book & it's fine? Good. I can go forth happy that the information is legitimate. What if I didn't have the book or access to it, but know his quote is on the wiki, then what? Since he used the wiki, it is reasonable to assume he didn't have the book, but I couldn't conclude that, since the wiki can be changed. So I end up saying I don't know, but I trust this guy because of his other citations & presentation. This is given it isn't just a synonym change, because that isn't of interest unless you are professionally doing the work. There is the problem. Just the introduction of the wiki as a source causes issues. Maybe he is honest, but doesn't know. Maybe it came from the wiki & is wrong. Maybe he had the book & Bart is the source. I just have to end like Bart there. If it fails to jive I have to deny & if it jives maybe it is true. This isn't properly sourced even if properly cited. The Bible is markedly different in that though. I felt that needed saying. Edit: Just talking about his cite in the video, as a place to find things, not his list in the description.
I was never told to believe that the Bible is the Perfectly preserved Word of God. I was told that the people translating and revising the Bible are Divinely inspired by God so they cannot corrupt the meanings of the texts.
Dang it, how many times I've told Moses to make digital backups of the scriptures! But no, it HAD to be copied by hand in one sitting, without a single mistake, lest you have to start over.
You'd think someone like God would have been able to better preserve his words than some mere humans in the 20th century were able to come up with. But no. We had to wait 3500 years for digital to come along.
I've been finding myself sharing this video a lot differently. There are some out there who believe that thought the Bible has been translated, the meanings have never, ever changed. There is so much wisdom in the Bible, but it can not be "perfect", no matter how much anyone wants it to be. Thank you so much for this series of videos!
Perhaps knowing that the Bible is only reliable through understanding the narrative and ideas it offers would actually discourage Christian fundamentalists, and at last we would have some rest.
this is wrong teachings we have the original bible 350AD preserved until today and King James version Bible is the first translation to English and this translation is still available until today to ( everybody ).
@@aymanseder5887 we dont have the original bible, as the bible itself is just a compilation of various semi related books. you can have the original books sure, but the bible as we know it today has had many books either removed or added depending on your denomination. im also pretty sure that the oldest gospel wasnt written in 350ad as some of the new testament were supposed direct eyewitness accounts of christ himself, and the old testament were of stories that were shared long before christ. source: i study at a catholic institution in a very catholic country
@@aymanseder5887you’re right that we have the Bible from 350 AD pretty much similar all the way to today, but the problem is that was 200 years after Jesus died, so we don’t know what happened before that.
I really enjoy this series about the history of religious beliefs and how they've been changed and edited over time to fit the narratives of the society to which they belong.
@El-ahrairah holy spirit mate, I did not know about that one. Now that I have so much free time on my hands, I'm probably going to start reading up on this.
@El-ahrairah This error is much older than the King James Bible. It comes from an translation to Greek, where a Hebrew word that mostly means young woman (and sometimes virgin) was translated to a Greek word that mostly means virgin (and sometimes young girl). Maybe to match prophesies in the Old testament. Digital Hammurabi has a lot of videos on that topic.
The irony of that statement is that Christians are perhaps one of, if not the most reviled groups known to man. Just look at all the parodies of Christian literature around you, it's obvious that Christians are outcasts. Not only that, it's even a prophesy in Mathew 5:11
@@obsrvdsplash115 Lol, are you seriously telling me that there's too many Christians to be called oppressed? Please, women make up almost half of the world human population, and you wouldn't tell me they've never been oppressed throughout their existence.
Jesus Ramirez Romo yup, I’m pretty sure there was a Texas congresswoman who said “If English was good enough for Jesus, it’s good enough to the Texas board of education”
the very oldest surviving copies (and they are ALL copies) of the original writings of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, must necessarily be the most accurate and true versions of these fairy tales .
Look up Dr.James white for accurate information th-cam.com/video/pL0P6sH0cJM/w-d-xo.html The Gospel th-cam.com/video/Gyr2_cU-iew/w-d-xo.html The esv was translated from earlier greek manuscripts not from other english translations
You're right and I am a Christian and always has been. I have several translations of the English Bible which even includes the Catholic English Bible which we call the New American Bible. Plus I have the New King James Version, King James Version, New International Version, and the Gideon Bible. All of them kind of shares a bit of the same message in my own opinion but the wording of each one is drastically 100% different in every since of the term. I grew up in a very devout Roman Catholic family who is basically 100% of French Canadian descent. I even have the Gideon Bible translated from English into French which is just the New Testament part and the books of Pslams, and Proverbs from the Old Testament and that to is different reading from the other English translated Bibles that I've read during my own lifetime.
If you look at the Dead Sea scrolls, the entire book of Isaiah was found on a massive scroll, and was almost word for word identical (I believe it was 99.17% identical, with a few grammatically different phrasings) to a modern Hebrew copy.
@@tabsinabox Seeing as most of the texts in the cave were written well before Jesus, and stored well before the New Treatment was canonized, and likely by Jews who didn't believe in Jesus being important anyways... Makes sense. Which texts from the Dead Sea Scrolls are heretical though? And which group/groups consider them to be heretical?
(If you're Christian don't take this offensively, its just a joke I made on the spot) Jesus once said: Make Yogurt, it is good. 1st translation: Yogurt is good. 2nd translation: Godurt is good. 3rd translation: God is good.
From Monty Python Spectator I: I think it was "Blessed are the cheesemakers". Mrs. Gregory: Aha, what's so special about the cheesemakers? Gregory: Well, obviously it's not meant to be taken literally; it refers to any manufacturers of dairy products.
that would be true if we just let people of power change them ... Those who were against Christians would want to destroy the text not change .. And rulers who were Christians would want to preserve the text completely and emphasise the parts that support their reign
This is nothing new it is quiet clear man has always changed the Bible to suit the church. At the moment many of our churches are pushing to allow homosexuality into the church which directly goes againist what the Bible teaches.
@@secretwatcher9922 EXACTLY 💯 correct, another Deception Is the Names they changed, JESUS is YESHUA and GOD is YHWH, and that's very Important , there's been over 2.500 God's that man has Worshipped over the Centuries, Know what GOD you are Worshipping, Don't be Deceived 🤔🙌🏽💜😇
@@memeuninstall4983 That is not possible. You are either completely good or completely evil. Either you love the bible or you detest it to the point where you cannot use or control it. There is no gray area in the world. Only black and white.
About Jesus being angry at a person in need, according to what I have read, it's more probable that Jesus was not angry if we look back, only one codex had that and there are more things to support this too.
It’s mine blowing that the guy who made this video can be so wrong as he is. He is talking half truths. You really need to read a proper scholar, like FF Bruce on the new Testament text
For Catholics a lot of the early debate surrounding Biblical canon is why we oppose *sola scriptura* as proclaimed by Protestants. The Church did not come from the Bible, the Bible came from the Church
Yes the catholic church there weren't any other churches. That makes the new testament a catholic book. Any alterations e.g. Martin Luther means that his version is not genuine.
@@revnpb Not true; there were churches other than the Latin church. The Latin (Roman) church eventually went into schism and became the modern Catholic church, the rest remained Orthodox (more or less)
No. Most of the other churches were in communion with the Roman Church. There was a minor schism in the fourth century. The major schism was in 1054, when the Catholic Church split into Roman and Greek. There were and are many rites within both of these major churches. The Church Fathers were using the term “Catholic” at the end of the first century. If one reads the early Christian writings outside of the Bible, these writings confirm that there was the hierarchy of bishop, priest, and deacon. Most of the teachings of the Roman Catholic and the Greek Orthodox can be found in the letters of the Church Fathers. As well as the Bible. The Church created the Bible. The books were chosen by the Church. There is NO book in the New Testament that stipulates which books were inspired. There is no biblical table of contents that deals with any of that. Christians accept the Bible on the say so of the the Church. This was a unified Catholic Church. The books of the Bible were finally canonized in the late fourth century. They were read and used way before that, but the canon was closed in the late fourth century.
We Muslims don’t look at the Bible as words of god as the intro say. The Quran explains that the Torah and enjeel have been changed so we don’t actually study it or need to read it as we feel the Quran is complete and Allah never asks us to read the Bible. I myself read it cuz I’m curious but as Muslims we generally don’t
I was raised catholic and my parents and priests told me the bible is full of stories that teach how to live a good life. Some stories are true but others are not. Looking back it surprises me that my priest said this.
@@andreakoeries7230 Catholics know virtually nothing about the Bible--the hierarchy has interpreted it wrongly for 1500 years just to serve themselves. The last thing your priests, cardinals and pope want is for you and others to actually study God's Word because it points to the pope as the anti-Christ and more. The Bible teaches the free grace of Jesus Christ--the RCC teaches a system of works that can save no one. Eph 2:8 For by grace are you saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Eph 2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast. I would urge you to study the Bible and just ask God if it's true or not--He will reveal to you the truth. www.bibleuniverse.com/bible-school
@@stevebilliter the bible has been changed so many times to fit political agendas. It is a book to control. Jesus (if he truly existed) would condemn the Catholic Church just like he did to the Hebrews.
It comes as no surprise that the “Committee” didn’t want the world to see the changes made by the Masorites: the Greek Septuagint follows the Dead Sea Scrolls far more accurately than the modern-day Hebrew.
@@May3yad3 The word "God" was NEVER used to represent YHWH; In Aramaic the word "god" is "hhla" ("El" in Hebrew ? ) and means deity - used also for any other diety. - "El-lawh" in Aramaic means "GOD"(as we understand it today), while "Eloi" in Aramaic means "My GOD" hence: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachthani?" (My GOD My GOD why have you forsaken me?) - Christians did not use the word "God" up an until about 14th century when the English Language was formed. When the word "God"(Deus in Latin) became used in English and it meant the Biblical YHWH only ! - up until then, Christians referred to what we call now God : Latin : Lord God: Dominus Deus , or simply Lord/Deus, or Father/Pater Greeks used: Kyrios (Lord) , Patēr(πατήρ) meaning Father, etc Christian-Jews used their already dedicated names of YHWH: Elohim, El Shaddai, (...) all names being influenced by local dialects, adiacent cultures , etc. - Only !!! Arabic-speakers of all Abrahamic faiths, including Christians and Jews (in Middle-East), use the word "Allah" to mean "God" ( implicitly Aalah ) No Christians and Jews will use that word outside of Islamic/Arab influence. Aalah ( later Allah) is purely an Arabic word, limited to that region and people. It is the name of one of their many polytheistic gods before Islam. Islam as an Arab Religion, is vaguely inspired on Judaism and Christianity and came more than 600 years After Christ; as such has zero authority on both Judaic and Christian Doctrines. - The entire Classical Middle-East used (and still use) variations of Semitic languages.
The problem I have with the church is that most churches, teach from Paul’s epistles rather than the gospels or acts, so much to the point I feel that Jesus teachings are ignored. Therefore, this causes the church to focus and teach Paul’s epistles.
@@Ali7rrr If they made this same video about the Quran, we would be here for 10 years. You literally burned all the older versions of your Quran. Yet there is still variants today
@@nasiryahaya4184 😂😂 this was discussed and explained many times Yet your people still think we had other Qurans than only one? Those qurans were different dialects I speak Arabic and I read most of the things that people say about those books and literally the same but in things like di’b which means in Arabic wolf but some people got a different accent from us so they say it “deeb” so it’s just differences like that but you won’t find anything more than things like that Anyways you have access to free knowledge on TH-cam you can watch what Islamic scholars said about it to understand or maybe you trust me more and want me to explain everything?
@@Ali7rrr Nah Bro, my point is, if it only a dialect issue, why did you burn it then? There is no need to burn anything to try and standardize it. Did Allah ask for this? He said he would preserve it himself yet you took action yourselves to try and preserve it and when you are called out on it, you are justifying it. When you burn somethin, you lose the right to try and convince people that it wasn't different. Shoulda just left it alone
@@nasiryahaya4184because there's no censorship on those who wrote the Quran in there homes maybe they are hypocrites so what caliphate umar did is capitalized the copying of the Quran
Interesting. I remember our ancient Greek teacher pointing out bad style and grammar in the texts (the bible was one of the first texts we read, as it is really simply written) saying that the authour was likely not a native speaker...
The books which were supposed to bring guidance to humanity have been instead the source of unfathomable horrors, death and misery for thousands of years.
Thank God, it's not nearly as bad as the hundreds of millions of deaths caused by atheism in just the 20th century alone. Those of you who have studied history will know what I mean, while others will reply with ignorance.
I just google translated 2 sentances through 3 languages, English to Latin, then Latin to Greek, then Greek to Albanian...then Albanian to Greek , to Latin and back to English. Shit was unrecognisable. Just food for thought.
You’ve clearly never learned a foreign language. If I used Google translate for my Latin assignments I would have failed miserably. It might be useful to translate a single word, or close to the right word, but beyond that it’s only going to hurt you.
This food for thought is absolutely ridiculous. Sorry, but i can perfectly translate a sentence from English to German and vice versa, and so can someone who speaks more than one language. Google translate doesn't actually know if the translations are correct, it doesn't have a brain
Thankfully, I've seen a more scholarly approach to the Bible being disseminated down to the popular level over the years. Most pastors I've had regularly talk about the original Greek/Hebrew rather than letting parishioners get away with thinking that the Bible is originally English. Pastors and modern Bible footnotes are more commonly citing the subtle variations in manuscripts, offering food for thought and deeper study. I'm a follower of Jesus, but I'm no stranger to the idea of people tweaking texts and doctrines to suit their needs or gain power (heck, that's what Jesus spent much of his time dismantling in Israel). Christians need to be especially aware that even the best intentioned teachers can and have twisted God's words. Thankfully we don't just have the written Word, but we have the living Word, Jesus. He never changes, and he continues to transform the lives of people from many language groups, nations, generations, and levels of literacy. The true, timeless Word isn't merely written on a page, but on hearts and minds. Thanks for your video and for getting this information into the hands of more people. Regardless of our spiritual backgrounds, we can all benefit from studying things more carefully.
A A Exactly. If the bible has been corrupted God would’ve sent another book. That book is the Quran. Before you dismiss this comment just search Surah Ali Imran M Asif on TH-cam, and give the Quran an ear or two.
Well said. Jesus is the ever unchanging Word. The Old Testament scriptures is entirely in line with letters written in stone. The New Testament, however, is not. But which is written in the heart by the Spirit, a testament not written in stone or paper or wood by the hands of men. Just as his church is not a building built by the hands of men but being the sum of those who have faith.
n my 60 plus years. I have seen so many changes in the Bible. I've had/have many. This is every Bible. There are many more changes. Added and subtracted from the Bible. “What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it. Deuteronomy 4:2 KJv 2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you. * * Revelation 22:18-19 KJv 18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: 19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.” (Deut. 12:32.)
"I once got into a rather heated discussion with an acquaintance who insisted that Jesus spoke Elizabethan English. Never mind the fact that English didn’t even exist then" LOL! I can't stop laughing!!! wow! just wow!!
How do you know? Many claim now that Bible stats that Jesus was white, he may have been darkish because of the sun only! White people used to be slaves, not black africans.
Funny you should say that, someone commented recently on YT with a supposed "word" from the Lord which he was relaying for the supposed receiver. It was a mishmash of KJV language scriptures (including "yea"!) which immediately told me it wasn't a genuine word. It was almost laughable.
English is a made up language that came into existence approximately 500 years ago therefore it is very such impossible that the messenger spoke English which proves to a critical thinker that it was also impossible that ANYONE was named Jesus when the actual messenger walked the planet smh its 2020 we should have gotten pass that as a whole by now smh
Dam yall erasing my 2nd message saying certain Caucasians were slaves and the rest is the children of the so called African Americans who under oppression by them till this very day? Which is the cause of so much lies because y'all need PEOPLE to believe lies that colonialists call history like the transatlantic slavetrade were actually them leaving Spain after defeating Rome for 800 years under general Taariq the Moor? Then after the 800 they lost and were told to convert or leave Spain and millions leaving caused the trail of the fake slave trade?(rather then saying they were snatching up royal moors in America mixing them up with Africans?Are we here to teach or we here to keep lies going claiming to be noble?
What's the point in remembering the Sabbath commandment if u can't remember what the Sabbath actually is if people remember what the Sabbath is remembering the commandment becomes common sense u said alot so u know a little keep seeking you'll be shocked then amazed a clue is why did christ work on the Sabbath?
Anthropomorphic facsimile Before Josephus scrolls and books confiscated and burned. Those that were held onto were guarded after jews fled the persecution of Roman emperors Constantine rewrote history, made a statue of himself as a god Josephus was a sycophant doing his business
The early church (i.e., the Catholic Church) held several councils and synods in the first few centuries after Jesus’ death to TRY and sort stuff out. The Synod of Hippo was held in 393 AD and was the first time that a council of bishops listed and approved a Christian Biblical canon that corresponded closely to the modern Catholic canon but falling short of the Orthodox canon. The canon list approved at Hippo included six books later classed by Catholics as deuterocanonical books (and by Protestants as Apocrypha); but also included, as 'two books of Ezra', the Old Latin books First Ezra and Second Ezra, of which only the latter would subsequently be found in the Catholic canon. The canon list was later approved at the Council of Carthage (397) pending ratification by the "Church across the sea", the See of Rome (what we call the Catholic Church)...
The reasons people are reluctant to engage, debate or participate in conversations involving politics or religions: A lie is still a lie, even if the majority believes it to be the truth; and the truth is still the truth when the majority believes it to be a lie.’ “Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it." -Leo Tolstoy.
@@lindawitowski-u2d Or it's pointless to argue about something that no one has any proof of either side, and people have been arguing over this for thousands of years with no progress. Pointless. And what positivity does it bring to you to engage in such arguments?
@@shaynabobayna1723 that is a an interesting question worth of an answer. the best example in American history being changed via discussion occurred while we were still 13 colonies Caesar Rodney, was a man who believed that their was no subject so dangerous it could or should be debated. He was the third Delaware delegate and had not voted on July 1.1776 He traveled from Delaware to cast his deciding vote within the Delaware delegation. Rodney's action added Delaware to the colonies support of declaring America independent of Great Britain. That one vote is significant because without it. We would still be calling ourselves Englishman instead of Americans. South Carolina has won the split vote that the decision on American independence should be unanimous not a majority vote, With New York abstaining ( it was not a may vote 132 yea votes seemed impossible and without it the question of American Independence would be forever dead. C Rodney requested the Delegation from Delaware be polled, which was a valid request and it only required a majority vote the split Delaware delegation with his yea vote became a yea(yes) vote for the Independence resolution. But that wasn’t the end of it. South Carolina said without the prohibition of slavery clause being stricken it would vote Nay. There goes American Independence. Thomas Jefferson who had written all of it and had requested on the other charges( minus two word he refused to concede) did so again surprising everyone. He understood that the compromise was a necessary evil. First American independence then tackle the elimination of slavery Without it Slavery would remain in the control of England who didn’t abolish slave trading until after 1840 when America finically gained control off its sea borders. Revolution are expensive followed by the war of 1812) and building a Navy was costly as well It is easier to be judgements in hindsight but predictable during extraordinary circumstance requiring extraordinary compromises. When we restrict our thinking to one side or the other. advancement of knowledge is lost Rodney , who was a slave owner and hated the manpower restriction imposed on him by England He like Jefferson and many other s had to compromise their morality because they didn’t have the legal ability to ever make changes in England’s financial chokehold, including the manpower acts for her colonies.l Those included indentured servants as well as slavery to mention just two. As long as they remained 13 independent colonies the had no control over their destiny. Rodney got it right, there should be no subject so damaged that changing your opinion can not lead to a better results. The deaf’s voice is through sign language The blind is through touch. The stupid remain stupid if they fail to learn and choose to remain ignorant. Most stalemates continue to be unchanged but nothing is changed by a refusal to explore alternatives. Being pigheaded for the sake of it, makes you more your own enemy than the enemy itself. You don’t have to always concede but the willingness to try understanding makes you a better person for having made the effort.
Well, given that it was the Catholic Church that first assembled the Bible in the fourth century and the Catholic Church that decided which books and which versions were to be in the Bible that is still used today, then, yes, the Catholics get to say "No, those were wrong".
@@bobbrockway453 You are apparently unaware that we have 150 thousand letters from the early chruch fathers BEFORE the Roman councils and those letters quote virtually the entire NT. SO we know exactly which book the chruch fathers considered to be inspired canon and we know we have the same words they had in the first 2 centuries, some 200 years before Rome ever got involved with the councils. So I know its fun to say the catholic church created the Bible, but all they did was agree with the early church fathers of the first 2 centuries on which books were inspired canon and which were not.
@@bobbrockway453 Well, no. In the fourth century (when the canonization of the Bible really got underway) there was no such thing as the Catholic church. Although there were many schisms within the church, it considered itself to be one organization. The bishops who were part of these church councils came from all over the Christian world. There was never a complete consensus as to which books were canon, which of course is obvious since the Bibles of the Greek Orthodox church, the Roman Catholic church and the Coptic church (all of which were part of the early church) are different from one another.
@TheLance3185 Protestant propaganda. Protestants have killed far more Catholics than vice versa. American Protestants have killed more Catholic Christians.
It’s always great to see videos like these trying to educate people on the history of ancient texts and how textual transmission works. Unfortunately, there seem to be a number of factual errors or misconceptions in this video. I feel compelled to bring attention to a few: 5:12 Translation does not work like a game of telephone. The English Standard Version is not a translation of the Revised Standard Version. All modern translations use the oldest, most ancient, most reliable texts to translate directly from the original languages. These texts, with all of their variants, are collected and organized in the form of massive scholarly volumes called the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (old testament) and Novum Testamentum Graece (new testament). All modern translations use these compilations of original-language texts when making their versions. While the King James Version remains popular in many circles, it does not serve as any kind of base text for any modern translation or scholarship. This assumption of “telephone translation” unfortunately permeates this video. 12:00 When accidental mistakes are made, such as dropping words or lines, these mistakes don’t propagate into our modern translations. They are easily identified based on examining older manuscripts, and are trivially corrected (usually removed). These things really aren’t that controversial in biblical scholarship, and they happen all the time. For example, the Great Isaiah Scroll (of the Dead Sea Scrolls) is full of little tweaks and changes that are simply fixes made by scribes intending to preserve the original copy, which they are physically referencing in front of them while they write or proof-edit. It’s just how copying text by hand works. 17:50 The “disciple whom Jesus loved” in the Gospel of John is the author of the text. The whole point of the author telling the reader this is to contrast his personal calling with that of Peter. The video’s omission of the middle text (several sentences) obscures this. The voice of “we” in verse 24 is the author speaking on behalf of all of the disciples. One cannot understand subtle things like this by simply picking out and comparing pronouns in the text. Their literary design is much more sophisticated. You have to read the words and try to understand the meaning of the whole text in its larger context. The example given in the video is a feature, not a bug, of John's gospel. 18:13 I'm not sure how it follows that the author could not have met Jesus if he was also the compiler of the text. Both of these could be true. Later groups trying to associate names to the gospel texts are irrelevant in trying to understand the texts and their meanings. 18:45 The texts themselves claim to contain direct eyewitness testimony of events. For example, the introduction in Luke. This video seems to conflate the idea of the written accounts being collections of eyewitness testimony versus necessitating that the authors be the eyewitnesses themselves. I’m not sure why it’s so important that the authors be the eyewitnesses themselves (although I think it is likely the case with at least some). Whether or not you believe their reporting and collecting of stories is up to you, but it seems like a big leap to claim that earlier Christians just fabricated these ideas in order to gain credibility. The claims of eyewitness testimony were always there. 19:44 The name ‘Junia’ or ‘Junias’ (Gk. Ιουνια) is ambiguous to its gender. This is why one can find both readings in modern translations. There was never any conspiracy to change the female name to the male name, precisely because there was never a consensus that the name was female. It is not clear at all that Paul was referring to a woman, and the gender of the individual in this instance is still debated today. This example in the video seems particularly ignorant or deliberately misleading, as one can simply google “junia or junias” to get the full story. 25:06 Again, the KJV would not know to remove the Johannine comma as non-original, as modern scholarship had yet to uncover the (substantial) textual evidence that it is a later addition. This is just modern scholarship in action. The trinity or divinity of Jesus is not derived from this one verse that was added somewhere in the late 4th century, as these ideas obviously predate the addition significantly. Rather, it was the already existing idea that led to the erroneous scribal addition, not some conspiracy to attribute divinity to Jesus. For a more comprehensive, scholarly summary of some of these ideas, check out "Making of the Bible" on bibleproject.com/podcasts/exploring-my-strange-bible/ (it's given by Tim Mackie, a Ph.D. scholar in ancient Hebrew).
Thanks, John! As with any piece of history, it seems the "true answer" ends up being extremely complex or in some cases vague, so I always appreciate the further explanation of WHY some things remain unclear or uncertain in modern times. Just as I would with archaeological household items, language differences or understanding of customs. it seems "It's complicated" is very often the true answer to these questions. Edit: if there are errors in part 2 as well I would like to know of them :)
Whether you think it is BS or not, the fact remains that a man lived 2000 years ago that made an extraordinary change to life ever since and who claimed to be God, who did something no-one else can lay claim to, to rise from the dead never to die again. This Jesus, has been believed in the world and said he is the One who will come again to judge the world. It seems far removed from our world, from anything we know, and it is! But that does not mean it is not true. His claims still demands an answer, a verdict, from each one.
@@jimmymeyer7980 So you consider the tales as fact. Please produce your evidence. I've been dead three times so ... I don't believe in unicorns either, does that somehow matter?
There's a theory that Goliath may have had a similar condition that Andre the giant had. The texts suggest he was lead to the battle as his eyesight was not good. Killing a big dude who couldn't see well with the equivalent of a standard military firearm (slings were routinely used in war) isn't as much of an achievement as the tale of a giant and a kid with some stones. Propaganda for military achievements is a standard feature in ancient texts, you only have to read roman or Greek texts to find examples.
Marshall Kinnaird commie measurements? You mean the system that practically the rest of the world and science uses? America lost a $100 million satellite because they used your imperial system. You know where that system came from? It's an English system that originated from the lengths of rulers body parts. So much for the revolution. It's amazing how propaganda is able to distract people from common sense and facts.
I once got into a rather heated discussion with an acquaintance who insisted that Jesus spoke Elizabethan English. Never mind the fact that English didn’t even exist then.
So Jesus basically invented English. :0
Didnt he invent english in the tower of babel?
Ratbat 1986 You mean he invented a language before it existed, wut?
@@beepboopbeepp you didnt get the joke..
@@beepboopbeepp Yes, like how Tolkien invented Sindarin before it existed.
"I am a peaceful man" google translated from english to latin to greek to hebrew to greek to latin to english is "I have an airplane ticket"
I tried this and I got “For peace”
So the part where Jesus goes on an airplane to the Bahama’s is fake??? 😳
I tried the same, I got this: "I am a man of peace."
I got "go in peace"
I got i am a man of peace
It's very difficult (for me at least) that there are American Congressmen who believe that the first Bible was written in English. That's extreme ignorance...
maybe the kingjamesbible XD
One truth I learnt from life is that people whom we believe to be the most learned people, including scholars, can be wildly, blatantly ignorant when asked anything not sitting in their field. My PhD mentor, a very famous guy, was with me during a trip to Rome. When visiting the Castle San Angelo, he looked at metal poles that were used to hold marble blocks, which were original and still intact, and said: "That's not historical. Romans didn't know metallurgy." No, I am not kidding. He actually said that. I was so flabbergasted that for long minutes, I tried to figure out how someone so highly considered could believe such insane things. Part of my apprenticeship.
I just thought it was weird to for Trey to call Ted Cruz a congressman. It's a weird thing to call a senator
christian nationalists literally think jesus was the same nationality as them
@@raminagrobis6112 Indeed, we are only knowledge on a handful of things, there are little to few people in this world who are good at everything they do or say, most of us only do good on certain things
i grew up in the Australian Presbyterian church. We were encouraged to learn the bible, and question translations. We were also ecouraged to know the difference between a story used to teach and actual one used to relate history...
I was taught you must believe, proof is unnecessary....
but still you're told that the Bible is the word of god, huh? so they do realise the book is plain wrong when talking about history, dates, years, it's wrong about biology and space, but still it's the best book from all existing ones, right?..
@@kwakagreg The bible itself says to study and show your proof for faith. Who ever said to just believe and not seek truth and study all things is wrong. If someone makes a truth statement or something illogical see what the bible says instead.
@@joeshabe What exactly is the bible wrong about? You’re saying something is wrong without giving an example of whats wrong, it holds no grounds and is a baseless accusation.
Yes so did I and was told at about 13 to stop asking so many questions and asking for proof to just believe it.....I must have faith, it was not for us to know all.....I was disruptive
...
Imagine being the guy who is only remembered because he made a grammar mistake in the bible.
More legacy then I'll ever manage to leave, I'm sure!
today people are for less faults in tv culture!
✌😁
Could be worse, could be because you sold bad quality copper
@@lordmagot And kept all of the customer complaints in your house...
@@darthzaida1881: "More legacy then I'll ever manage to leave, I'm sure!" -- The vast majority of man will never, ever be known after their death. And according to one historian of ancient times, that means you didn't exist!
0:07 - Introduction
0:44 - A Few Basics about the Bible
4:37 - Example of a Bible's lineage (crude example)
7:35 - Archaeological Findings & Old Manuscripts
9:07 - How do we know the Bible has been changed? & Textual Variants
-----------------------------------------------
13:04 - #10 - Goliath's Height (1Samuel 17:4)
14:58 - #9 - Gospel Titles & Authors
19:11 - #8 - Women Omitted (Romans 16:7, Acts 17:4)
21:59 - #7 - Forgiveness on the Cross (Luke 23:34)
24:18 - #6 - The Johannine Comma (1John 5:7-8)
-----------------------------------------------
27:08 - Closing comments
Goat
The Dead Sea scrolls that have been verified dated and looked over for years shows there are no changes made to any part of the Bible
*This video is full of errors* and his own opinions, it's not near the truth and not scientific at all. *Inspiring Philosophy* has a video on that subject, make sure to read it and *stop the misinformation.*
*"4. The Reliability of the New Testament (Authorship & Dating)"* by Inspiring Philosophy
Edit : Since there is popular demand : This is how to know who wrote the gospels.
1- John
John is a direct eyewitness. And he faithfully gives a detailed account.
An easy way to identify John as the author of the Gospel of John is through contemporary witnesses. One of thoses witnesses is Polycarp, John's disciple, who identifies John as the author of the book of John.
John also speaks in the first person and identifies himself multiples times in the book.
--- "The Word became flesh and made his dwelling *AMONG US.* *WE have seen* his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
(John 1:14)
At the end of the Gospel of John, John identifies himself in the first person :
--- "Peter turned and saw that *the disciple whom Jesus loved* (John) was following them. (This was the one who had leaned back against Jesus at the supper and had said, “Lord, who is going to betray you?”)... *This is the DISCIPLE who testifies to these things and WHO WROTE THEM DOWN.* *WE KNOW* that his testimony is true."
John 21:24
John's words 'WE know that HIS testimony is true" while putting himself in the "WE", is a clear proof of what I was saying up there, that he was purposely avoiding the first person, to show that it's not about him, and that it's about and authoriative, true and attested account of what happened.
John had a closer relationship with Jesus than any of the other disciples. Jesus and John were essentially “best friends.” Jesus entrusted John with the care of His mother, gave John the vision of the transfiguration, allowed John to witness His most amazing miracles, and later gave John the Book of Revelation
John 21;24 claims authorship of the gospel by the "Beloved Disciple". If the "Beloved Disciple". A study of the New Testament, the other Gospels, the letters of John and the book of Revalations, clearly points to John the disciple as the one who is called the Beloved Disciple. It's no brainer.
www.gotquestions.org/disciple-whom-Jesus-loved.html
John always identifies himself that way in the Gospel of John, because he knows he is writing a book about the story of Jesus, the Son of God, and he is the closest to Jesus, so he must be humble and objective, in order to write an authoritative book.
"Instead, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus’ side with a spear, bringing *a sudden flow of blood and water.* The man who saw it has given testimony, and his testimony is true. He knows that he tells the truth, and he testifies so that you also may believe."
John 19:34-35
"After the spear was thrust into Jesus' side out came what appeared to be blood and water [19:34]. Today we know that a crucified person might have a watery fluid gather in the sac around the heart called the *pericardium.* John would not have known of this medical condition, and could not have recorded this phenomenon unless he was an eyewitness or had access to eyewitness testimony."
- Craig Blomberg, Historical Reliability Of John's Gospel"
I bet you never heard of these passages before.
2- Luke
Luke is not a direct eyewitness as he said it himself. Luke, while not an eyewitness, claims to have constructed his book from eye witnesses sources. Luke is not a Disciple of Jesus. Luke is a companion of Paul.
So it's normal if Luke doesn't say "WE" as John said. But he does speak in the first person and from the book of Acts and the letters of Paul, we easily identify Luke as the author of the Gospel.
Luke said :
--- "Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. With this in mind, since *I myself* _have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught._
Luke 1:1-4
Luke excludes himself from those who were eyewitnesses of Christ’s ministry. He indicates participation in the Pauline mission by the use of the first person in the “we” sections of Acts. They suggest that Luke shared in instructing persons in the Christian message and possibly in performing miraculous healings.
References of Luke in the Pauline Letters has regarded him as a very educated physician and a Gentile, and Paul indicates also he was with him on several missionary journeys, matching the "WE" passages of Luke in the books of Acts. Don't forget the book of Acts is an extension/continuation of the Gospel of Luke.
And this is also direct proof* that the Gospels were already written even before Paul wrote this letter to the Galatians, because before Luke mentioned the meeting of Paul and the disciples in Jerusalem in the books of Acts, he already wrote before that the "Gospel of Luke" very well before 70 AD. And Luke did not tell us how Paul died in the book of Acts, that means Paul was still alive when Luke wrote the his his adventures with Paul and the Acts of the disciples.
I the beginning of "Acts", Luke writes :
" *In my former book* , Theophilus, I wrote about all that Jesus began to do and to teach until the day he was taken up to heaven, after giving instructions through the Holy Spirit to the apostles he had chosen." - Luke in the book of Acts.
3- Mark
The bookendjng of mentions of Peter in Mark's gospel is
called an inclusio. This is a literary device that denote an eyewitness source. (The Apostle is the first disciple mentioned in Mark and the last one mentioned after the Resurrection in Mk 16:7).
Biblical ethics in both Testaments called for multiple witnesses to be retained for testing truth claims (Deut 19:15) Also, the principle of giving a testimony orconfession was a virtue of the early church. It wound be difficult to persuade Jews if Sinai teaching was ignored or if they were shown to be men of poor character. '
According to the 2nd-century theologian Irenaeus, Papias had known the Apostle John. Pappias, quoted by Eusebius, explained that "Mark became Peter's intetpretet and wrote accurately all he remembered". This is Papias quoting presumably the Apostle John ! So your Trey got nothing on Pappias who knew John himself. So if Pappias tell you that Mark and Peter wrote the Gospel of Mark, then Trey is a liar.
So Mark, writing as Peter's interpreter writes his account matter-of-factly with details that seem like on-the-scene recollections. Examples: Mark 8;23-27 or 5;2-5.
Scholar and historian Colin Hemer identified 84 facts in the last 16chapters of the Book of Acts. Items included deal with correctlynamed ports, correct languages used, landmarks, political titles, etc. Things that would be known by those who were there. Those in the know without access to Google or maps.
John also mentions numerous historical details that would only be known by a personnal witness living at that time, details possibly irrelevant to a later audience. John correctly described the Pool of Bethesda as having five porticoes. The pool unearthed, critics discovered that they were indeed five.
4- Matthew
- Patristic tradition is unanimous that the author is the Apostle Matthew.
- The earliest manuscripts that we have of Matthew are titled "The Gospel according to Matthew" where it is appropriateto have one. There are no untitled manuscripts where a title is appropriate.
- As a book universally ascribed to Matthew, to name anyone else as author is to affnm that the true author o'f'tAe gospel was forgotten in a comparatively short amount of time (50 years).
- The Apostle Matthew, as a tax collector, needed to be fluent in Aramaic and Greek.
- The Gospel of Matthew contains more mentions of financial transactions than either of the other Synoptic Gospels. A solid reason to consider a tax collector as the author.
- The Apostle Matthew was not a member of Jesus' inner circle and a relatively unknown entity in scripture. If one desired to make up a title for one otjne gospels, Matthew, instead of Peter or James (brother ot John), would be an unlikely choice.
@@christaime9812 it’s rlly not ur just trying to defend ur religion
@@Yt_watcher12 It's really not him trying to lie on my religion. I'm a scientist and I wouldn't be defending my religion if I didn't notice how this video is full of inacuracies and his own biased opinion.
It is worth noting, there is a big difference between "the earliest copy" and "the earliest surviving copy of which we're aware". It is hard to infer too much from what has survived today.
I think he talked about that
It's like some vids: "This is the earliest [insert ancient item] in the world!" No, it's just the earliest one that e know about at the moment. As science progresses, the "earliest" will get pushed further and further back.
@@christaime9812 link please?
@@angrydragonslayer TH-cam blocks my comment when I paste links. So search on TH-cam :
"4. The Reliability of the New Testament (Authorship & Dating)" by Inspired Philosophy.
@@christaime9812 oh shit waddup
Sidenote: The story of David and Goliath leaves out that David did the prehistoric equivalent of bring a gun to a knife fight. When even a moderately skilled person uses a sling you can hear it break the sound barrier. The rocks move at over 200 km/h, there's an account of the Romans in 123 BC being repelled by slingers at a port landing, having to retreat due to hull damage, armor their ships and go back.
That scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark where Indiana Jones just pulls out his gun and shoots the guy? David is Indiana Jones in that scene.
Didn't really leave it out as most people in ancient times would have known that. It's more about a poor boy defeating a wealthy warrior elite.
@@christophersnedeker yeah they would have, but you and I both know that's not the modern take on the tale.
200 kph sound barrier...hmmmm
@@jamesfriesen5576 read it again, the sling does the snap, same as a tip of the whip, the rocks go 200kph(citation needed?)
Baeleric slingers were snipers. Thank you for making this point. The average speed of a solid rock moving at 100+ mph was deadly. They started using slings as soon as they could walk. That was the tool of the trade for herdsmen and was given as much importance as horse handling was. Not the range and accuracy of a bow, but when you are dead from a rock or dead from an arrow it doesn't really matter at that point.
Yes, I know I screwed up saying “Vanaticus” instead of “Vaticanus”
I have dyslexia and I forgive you
hehe
Still waiting for that Mokele Mbembe Cryptid Profile.
@@justdamon25 that titanus from Godzilla?
Venerate the Immortal Emperor.
“This fandom is so toxic” - Martin Luther
IS THAT A JESUS REFERENCE?!
"The Pope is pretty cringe and deserves to be cancelled my dudes." Martin Luther 2016
"U wot m8" - Judas
@@diegodankquixote-wry3242 - 🤣😂
Martin Luther, probably: "The catholic church is CANCELLED and that's on periodt, I mean, look at the pope sitting up on his white horse draped in finery while jesus wore a sack and rode a donkey smh i am diSGOSTED"
People have no idea how painstaking it is to put something like this together. It's a lot of serious work.
@Stephen Valus The word actually is Vaticanus
👏 For sure!! A project with this much research would take me months to years 😂🤣 .
This guy is a hero!
@Stephen Valus so what?
@Stephen Valus bruh you wrong
The video or the Bible?
The Greek text is the LXX. The Masoretic text is an edited Hebrew text done with certain goals: addition of vowel points to the consonants; choice from among Hebrew variant readings to help in debates with Christian apologists; standardization of the Hebrew text. I’m sure this comment at approx. 6:21 of the lecture is just an oversight. I find your work well done and clearly presented. Thank you for doing this.
Hell does not exist. It isn't real. You are under mind control.@@Soyebakhtar0105
Ancient Hebrew is not easy to interpret. It lacks capital letters and punctuations. Making it hard to actually really read it.
Imagine being a "Christian", never reading the Bible, and get upset at a video like this that is based on the factual work of Bibical scholars.
@charlie rivera you know who wrote the bible?
Oh look, the devil has TH-cam!
I logged in just to tell you.."You are the smartest person" THAT'S CHRISTIANS IN SUMMARY. Yep dunce, even to whats written in the bible.
I was tracking with him till the Gospel authorship. No manuscripts, biblical or otherwise had titles at that time. They were not written anonymously. The early Church (2cnd and 3rd century) ascribed the authors and Mark as the testimony of Peter.
@@savebyj Bull.
3:37 if that makes you feel better, here in brazil there is a city with the same name of bethlehem (belém) and when i was a kid, i thought jesus was born in the middle of the amazon rain forest. 😂😂😂
imagining the entire nativity story taking place in the amazon gave me quite the laugh, thank you
That is a great story.
Thank you for the laugh and yes may our Lord produce spiritual babies in the Amazon.
Be Blessed
+t+
Kkkkkkk mano
jesus was brazilian
Jesus being Brazilian would make the same amount of sense as him being white
Dude wtf, why no spoiler warning? I didn't know Jesus died??????
WTF MAN. I read this comment and you spoiled that shit for me.
Wait what? Im still on the beginning of the new testament!! Spoilers dude!
Jesus! Dont spoil genesia please! Im up to the 4th day....
Its okay. He ends up resurrected. Ugh, this is sooo anime.
Hayden Walls Darth Vader was his father all along.
As a Muslima, i am told we should believe in Torah and Injeel (gospel). I am a bookworm growing up till i entered workforce when i was 23. I loved reading religious books, and read the Indonesian translation of The Bible/alkitab.
Old Testament was ok but at times it was too gory and in many places too x-rated for me as teenager, while reading new testament i cant help feeling the Book of John was different from older 3 in regards to divinity of Jesus pbuh. It felt as if writer of John was trying to establish his own view of Jesus pbuh.
After I found out that the 4 canonical gospels were NOT WRITTEN BY THE DISCIPLES THEMSELVES, but by ANONYMOUS PEOPLE, i felt despair in trying to learn what Jesus pbuh actually did teach. Who can verify whether these anonymous people can be even trusted? (And we havent even touched the problem of Aramaic vs Greek vs translations of translations of translations of translations available to public as of now)
Gospels are like hadith in Islamic tradition. Bukhari/muslim/ahmad establish strict confirmation rule (who narrated, who retold the narration, whether the narrator actually met the prophet pbuh, whether the narrators in the chain of retelling all the way up to the source narrator that met the prophet were trustworthy). One link is deemed not reliable, the Hadith is no longer sahih (highest category). I cant find similar thing in gospel (where the writers of canonical gospels were even anonymous. No one knews who they were)
Edit to add pbuh after Jesus pbuh name and clarifying chain of narrator and sahih Hadith
Great explanation!
Well said sister
It is impossible to believe today’s Gospels and the Torah, because the reliability of these books is even worse than the reliability of the fictional Shiite hadiths. Today they can only be used to take into account attention to historical value. For example, in the Quran there is a verse about some story with the Israelis, for interpretation you first use other verses of the Quran, then you use the authentic hadiths of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, after that the Interpretation from the disciples of the prophet, peace be upon him and blessing, who certified these stories with Jews and Christians who lived in their age, after that you can turn to Hasan hadiths, and only after that we can choose whom to trust the interpretation, historians-archaeologists or people of Scripture.
the four Gospels are “anonymous”, in that the author’s name is not explicitly listed in the text, but that does not mean that they were initially presented as texts without authors! It does not mean that we can’t be confident who wrote them.
In ancient times the omission of an author’s name in a text was not an unusual practice. We have literature written by Plato, Plutarch, Lucian, and Porphyry that do not contain their name in the text itself and are every bit as ‘anonymous’ as the Gospels, in that sense. But this by no means suggests that we have no idea who the authors were.
The respected New Testament scholar Martin Hengel, pointed out that it is “… unlikely and unrealistic to think that such [early Christian] writings could have left their original communities without titles since such works needed both a generic identification as well as some personal authorization.”2
After all, what is the first thing a person would ask when presented with a brand-new writing? “What’s it about and who wrote it?”
Does it really make sense that the scrolls would have arrived without the identity of the author being known and communicated to those receiving it?
Additionally, people distrusted anonymous works without any identification of some kind. Forgeries existed in the ancient world, including among Christians, but they were rejected as deceptive when discovered.
Even Ehrman, who is known for his skepticism agrees, “Ancient sources took forgery seriously. They almost universally condemn it, often in strong terms.”3
Among early Christians this was especially the case. They held to the clear teachings in the Hebrew Scriptures that God does not lie and he hates deception. Lying was never tolerated (see Proverbs 12:22; Leviticus 19:11).
New Testament specialist Eckhard Schnabel explicitly states, “The early church rejected writings … [whose] authorship was pseudonymous” (that is, had a false name attached to it).4
Because anonymous texts were distrusted, texts were never really completely anonymous! The recipients of a new text would make sure they knew who the author of the text was before they would use it.
I grew up in Mexico and I went to a Catholic elementary school. When I was in middle school they made several changes to the Catholic bible in Spanish, which bothered me because I was raised to believe every element in the bible was there for a reason.
One of the changes was in John's gospel, they changed from "In the beginning there was the verb" to "In the beginning there was the word". I remember the priest at church saying that the change was correct because Greek, unlike Spanish, was more precise and one word has only one meaning, so the word "logos" had one, and only one meaning. At the same time in school I was learning that the word logos had many meanings and it was the source of "logic" as it use of "reasoning" or "thinking", and the source of the word "biology" where "logos" meant "science of", "knowledge of", "study of", "about of". I was expecting some of the adults raising their voice to correct the priest, but they either didn't bothered, or worse, they believed him.
Most of the changes weren't major, but I didn't see anyone else mentioning in public any argument for or against any of the changes, just an attitude of "this is what we believe now"
And Jesus spoke Aramaic now imagine how many changes took place in the Greek language itself
The WORD in John 1 is a verb. It doesnt become a noun until its formed or begotten in you as a son of God. James 1:18, I Peter 1:3, Romans 1:3-4 give important evidence. Tyndalls' translation actually got it right when the WORD was translated as "IT" and not "him". There are many pivotal errors like this that led the church congregations into apostasy of worshipping a man as God Almighty. The abomination and strong delusion we were warned about.
The 1st commandment never changed to include anyone but the Father Alone.
Deut 13 is a very good chapter to read. as is Jer 16:19-21 which clearly states that at the end of the age during our affliction, we will discover we were lied to by our fathers. That prophecy is happening now just like it says.
TruthShockTv on TH-cam tells more changes
Son ovejas de dios
“In principio erat verbum” is the Latin. In English it is translated as “In the Beginning was the Word.”
I like how he gave us facts and didn't say anything bad about the bible but people still got mad.
Edit: watch out for the war in the replies
@The Jazeera Channel huh.
@The Jazeera Channel What do you mean?
@The Jazeera Channel aint no one reading all that
@The Jazeera Channel ..... it feel like you said something and nothing at all.
Give more info and contex, if not people will never understand what your are saying
@The Jazeera Channel so in short it's not up to the people to think about religion, but we should just believe?
Man this Evangelion analysis is taking too long...
@TRAV AVIS tbh I've sat through an 8 hour analysis of pokemon omega ruby/alpha sapphire without ever touching the games, so I can relate on some level
Rawov Un Lupin I know exactly what video you are talking about
@TRAV AVIS I too am a man of culture.
@TRAV AVIS Bruh same. And before that I watched a three or four hour-long video about Darksiders.
@@rawovunlapin8201 Damn, that sounds great.
The fact that adult americans exist who believe that the Bible was written in one piece, in English is the most shocking thing I’ve ever heard. That really put me in a thought spiral.
And then the Son of God spoke to him, and said," Use thy Spin Jonathan." - the Book of Araki 3:46
God never had or has a son. How tf can god have a kid. He ain’t human, we don’t know🤦🏾♂️🤦🏾♂️
@@EOMMunaware then why is God called the Father? Words have special meanings outside of their ordinary use.
@@patana256 father maybe cuz he is the creator of everything. But still I don’t call him father, he’s the lord.
@@patana256 yalll make up shit, I can’t believe Christianity fooled everyone. Some people made it up long ago now it keeps getting scripted too. U have to be stupid to believe those are the true words of god.
@@EOMMunaware the bible is real and holy spirit guided the people who were writing the books of the bible. Just because the bible could have had some changes. If there was some changes, they don't take away events that happened. Like the beginning of the bible in genesis. Whatever changes were made never takes out jesus preforming miracles or jesus being crucified. I don't think I need to add anything more because you get what my point is. If you are not then you just keep your comments to yourself or other people. Doesn't matter because God created the heavens and earth and gave his only begotten son to die for me on the cross. Hell and satan are real.
As a Atheist, i love your more scholar and historic approach to the religion than outright bashing them like most atheists do.
@Timbo Dewabem
That's free will after all
Oops I wanted to say that in more of a joking manner, but accidentally sent it
To be fair, silly things are easily mocked
I've always been under the impression that if you just dismiss any holy book by denying its realism, it's just as idiotic as dismissing a fable by denying its moral. No one goes around telling people that the Tortoise and the Hare is foolish because sometimes you need to act fast. Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and say I don't think forest animals came together to have a footrace, but neither did a man face a wall of flaming swords trying to return to Eden.
Exactly. Let the inconsistencies in “god’s word” speak for themselves.
"lets go finish my biology homework"
nah lets watch a guy talk about the history of the bible for 27 mins
XDD hell yeah
Fr I have a essay 😅
@Apuss - The Adopted Son Bah, only a half reader instead of reading the full story. Keep quiet
Lol😂😂😂
@Kevin Belgrove j is in geez alfabet spoken by adam.preserved in ethiopia amharic language.Janhoy Haile Selase defends melkesedek order.many names many languages of god.jews denied him but we believe on him by His Power of the cross.heart word breath.trinity of God father son holy spirit.jews allow greeks to big up Jesus.the word remain the same.is not symantics.not polytricks.is believe.faith.is ethiopia.she stretch forth her hands unto eyesus kiristos
I come back and re-watch this video and part 2 all the time. This is the kind of information I've craved since a child. Thank you for such amazing work. I can't even imagine the sheer research you did for this video. It's incredibly admirable.
What these people don't teach just like today we have different denominations who write their own version of the Bible they had them existing 1800 plus years ago hence why you find different texts. The Torah and the old testament are basically the same. The new testament be what version it be all testify about Jesus Christ and who He say He is. I am a king James version believer God will not corrupt His finally word. I learn this after I died in 1990 came back to life believing in something different than what I was thought knowing the truth for it set me free the day I came back to life after dying. I had stage 4 osteosarcoma cancer. That day I was totally heal never took medication since. Jesus Christ is Lord. Hope the same way the Holy Spirit lead me to know the truth He will lead you as well. Have a glorious and bless day.
@@angelgoindoo4518no at the beginning I’m pretty sure he explicitly stated that there are multiple different versions of the bible from different communities and time periods and that it’s not one linear path. Like he very explicitly stated this, repeats it throughout the bible, and shows a graph that’s a web of how all the different versions are connected. Granted this graph is just for the old testament but he says the new testament is in the same situation
Monk 1: *crosses out and corrects word*
Monk 2:"You are a fool and a knave, do not change the text"
The first social media fight due to a grammar Nazi happened 2000 years ago.
Might be an urban legend, but I've been told that the oldest text ever recovered is a customer complaint. So there...
Wait til they meet Trump and what he's gotta say about it...
Trump: Fake News
Scribe: Sorry Mr Trump but it's actually Gospel meaning Good quality news so there 😇
Honestly guys, the movies are better than the books. I mean have you seen Life of Brian
Mudly I kinda disagree.
He’s not the messiah, he’s a very naughty boy
Fun fact, that entire arc was just filler. Yeah it never actually happened in the manga
Oh please Jorge Joestar is the best book that was ever written
🤣
It's funny, how some people forget that Jesus was middle eastern.
it” 😂😂😂
Yeah not many people state this
Oh nah , not Jeebus y’all
U gotta be sped if u don’t know this
Jesus’ current “image” is Caesar Borgia
In my discussions about the Bible with other believers, i am sometimes attacked for even suggesting the Bible has errors, and that at one time it was correct as it came originally.
I also believe in Jesus but not the doctrine of inerrancy, I came to that conclusion from spoting self contradictions in the text. I was following a cycle of finding a contradiction, leaving the faith, finding a way to reconcile it and rejoining. I was on the unbelieving part of the cycle when an event happened in my life that made me realize I still deep down believed in the gospel. There are actually a couple Christian authors I respect that don't/didn't believe in inerrancy.
@@christophersnedeker Jesus often quotes favorably, but also disagrees frequently with the Bible: “You have heard it said … but I say to you…”
@@jimmetcalf6408That's true, but I think he's critiquing the Pharisees for following the law too closely in a manner of speaking while also avoiding "the heart" of the law. For instance, "You have heard it said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart." [Matthew 5:27-28]
He's not necessarily negating the scriptures, but instead unveiling its truer intent that the Jewish teachers either avoided or didn't fully understand.
But I'm also in the camp that full biblical inerrancy seems problematic, especially considering some of the things Paul said in his letters that were more informal, like writing to a friend in a casual manner.
@@bobkins10 Well said. Thanks for posting this.
Good to know you survived those attacks
10:53 "Fool and knave, leave the old reading and do not change it!"
...and Wikipedia was born.
Ancient greek "talk" pages lmao
Your father wrote a letter about his love for you, and how you can find him if you get lost. the Bible=the Books is about a Message=the Gospel=the Good News---th-cam.com/video/nMPtcEH6t0g/w-d-xo.html
Ancient shit-talking!
And it was good.
@@Biggy6Legs [citation needed]
Help I can’t stop watching these two videos. Idk why. It’s just so hard to find actually good videos on the Bible that are neither trying to prove or debunk it. Why aren’t there more good channels on this site that look at the Bible from an objective, academic pov?
Because the people who can generally make those videos are being paid in a university or seminary.
religionforbreakfast is a wonderful channel that talks about religion academically. his videos are really interesting
Cause bias friend unbiased shit is hard to find now sadly cause i like these vids to
@@ballmunch6714 nothing is truly unbiased
@@ussinussinongawd516 yep but atleast this one doesnt shit on everything man and thats a good thing it causes less conflict against the creator of the video
Hey as someone who was born and raised in a Christian church, even went to Christian school, I appreciate the research you've done. The truth is so much more interesting than anything we were taught in Sunday school! Keep up the good work and awesome videos.
That being said are you still a Christian?
@@therougechipmunk8058 Fuck. No. That was my point. The truth is much more fascinating than "what we were taught in Sunday school". In fact, as an adult, churches still make me uneasy and I have nightmares about some of the things I was taught.
Like Carl Sagan said, we are all made of star stuff. Much more interesting to me.
CatFaceFaces I tried to find evidence for god’s existence and all that exists is the fact that people believe in god
He leaves out half of the evidence he doesn't like so he can reach his predetermined conclusion, don't trust these videos.
@@jb0433628 then why do you watch?
First and foremost, it's important to contextualize the sociocultural landscape of the Middle East in the first century, marked by a profound linguistic and cultural heterogeneity. Aramaic was the lingua franca in Judea, being the mother tongue of the apostles, which facilitated direct communication with the local populations. However, the Roman Empire, with Greek as the official language of the East, promoted extensive Hellenization of the regions under its dominion, making Greek a common language for trade, education, and public administration.
The New Testament, originally written in Koine Greek, serves as one of the main indications that the apostles were knowledgeable in Greek. This version of Greek, known for its simplicity and broad usage, was accessible to a vast range of the empire's population, including those regions far from the Greek cultural center. The choice of Greek as the language for the Christian sacred texts was not accidental but a strategic decision to reach a wider audience, transcending linguistic and cultural barriers.
Moreover, archaeological evidence, such as inscriptions and manuscripts found in regions of Palestine, indicates the presence of Greek in Jewish contexts, suggesting linguistic coexistence. These artifacts, alongside references to Greek schools and the use of Greek in Jewish funerary inscriptions, reinforce the idea that Greek was known and used by Jewish communities of the time.
The apostles' ability to communicate in Greek not only expanded the reach of their preachings but also facilitated intercultural dialogue and the dissemination of Christian teachings beyond Jewish borders, reaching Gentiles and converting them to Christianity. This is evidenced by the rapid expansion of Christianity in Hellenistic regions, and later, throughout the Roman Empire. 16:20
Trey: (sees that one meme of Jesus holding a dinosaur)
Trey: "This. This shall be the basis of my entire channel."
Ass: The Legend of Ass you quite possibly might have the best username I’ve ever seen.
Barking Mad and jojo icon
oh my god im the 420th like i feel so special
Mista is into paleontology?
Just curious who would you guess are the wolves in sheeps clothing are
You know it's sad how it's the actual religious people who seem to be unwilling to analyze the history of their holy texts for changes, because you would think they would be the ones who would most want to go back, re-analyze everything, and create a new version of the Bible that is closest to God's word and original intent.
Exactly. Unfortunately what is taught in churches is to believe without question. Not only do we grow as people by challenging our beliefs, not challenging them and blindly following is a recipe for being manipulated.
Well, no. The really religious people are more than willing to analyze the Bible truthfully. The more religious they started, the deeper they went. Then they realize it's all crap and fall out of religion. Bart Ehrman is the perfect example of this.
@@hirisquvidson7625 I don't understand this self-righteous and insulting attitude, from someone who I assume wants to follow in Jesus' footsteps.
I used to think comments like this were just from trolls who wanted to rile people up. Problem is, I see it in the real world just as often. And it always leaves me scratching my head, because it's the exact opposite of Jesus' message of compassion towards each other.
I'm serious when I ask this question - Why? Why is this your approach?
@@hirisquvidson7625 dude...chill.
This makes me appreciate one aspect of Islam I always liked anyway: you're not supposed to translate the Quran. The original Arabic text is believed to be the literal word of God as given to mohammed, not for any special reason other than that's what the prophet spoke. Translating it makes it NOT the word of God anymore, and while helpful for non speakers of Arabic, a quran in English for example is technically not a quran. Doesnt make their book any more or less factual or convincing, it's just cool in a historical context to still have the absolute original text of such a massively important religion.
Wow, monks were the original fathers of 'comment section' arguments..
"...Fool and knave leave the old reading and do not change it.."
Hahah it say a lot about it
Well, I guess for Abrahamic, that's Rav Ashi and Ravina II, and the eldest, from those who's was recovered, Adi Shankara for Vedanta.
favorite line - bravo
The worst thing you can do is change something. This has been the down fall of the Catholics. Christianity originally had no priest. Bishops were several bishops over one congregation not one bishop over many congregation and that's just the start.
@@bobgordon1754
But, there were priests in the Bible right?
The Bible verse that has changed my life is John 3:16. Tha is the whole meaning of the Bible for me. Minor details does not change the overall theme of this Holy Scriptures.
You're very easily convinced, if it only took so little scholarship 😂
As an atheist who recently started growing an interest into Christianity and it's history, this is nice
Me too!
Lu Marquesb True, i am a horror fan and it is very fascinating to see some of the almost Lovecraftian creatures that were dreamt up in the ancient days.
@Wade Haden - Master Jedi Engineer Goth Atheism is a claim that I can't particularly sympathize with for being such an arrogant claim. I particularly respect agnostics however because they simply do not know, atheists on the other hand completely deny anything outside the material world including the idea of a god which is completely unsupported by things like quantum physics. It's interesting that you speak of metaphysics... because I wrote an essay breaking down the evidence for god with quantum physics and neuroscience called the quantum god. You might find it interesting, you also might have to challenge some presuppositions you may have about reality being entirely material, the consensus of physicists agree to the idea that the material world is a fiction of conscious observers so you might have difficulty with that aspect but it is quite fascinating.
Keegan • to me, god may or may not exist, and no it is not because I “do not know,” it is because there is nothing that can prove or disprove the existence of a god. I don’t think I’ll ever believe in a god(s) until I see them with my own eyes.
@@juno7424 I'd agree with the first half of your statement, and by definition, may or may not exist is a netrual ground, you are fundamentally claiming that you are not convinced of either sides and reject both, you are not sure. The idea that you cannot prove or disprove god is simply a false dichotomy of evidences since not all evidence can be found on a purely scientific basis, god by definition cannot be "proven" with the scientific method because god exists outside the material world, so nothing can be used as a control, there are many other forms of evidence that can apply to god however like logical or empirical reasoning in ways of explaining the universe, assuming the only evidence that is useful is scientific evidence is faulty by all measures.
Okay, but all the Monty Python pictures are hilarious
Minecraft Jesus cracked me up
As a person who grew up in the church but has since fallen away from it, I find Biblical history to be absolutely fascinating. It's like everything I was taught when I was young is either misfounded or outright historical revisionism.
I find that there's a defining reason a lot of people leave the Church, It's so they can justify pulling little "pranks" on their friends that are more like assault.
Trust me, I used to think that harassing people was "freedom".
Jesus for life.
Bee your experience is not universal
The funny thing is, my bible teacher from the Christian school I went to in 8th grade was strongly against historical revisionism. We had multiple lessons talking specifically about how society has revised historical events, and how that relates to Christianity. Yet he never once mentioned the historical revisionism of the bible, but instead claimed that it’s all God’s original word and said we should follow everything in the bible literally
@@SweetTodd what
My mother raised me to be vaguely aware of the revisionism (admittedly I’m Jewish so this applies to the Old Testament for me). Not aware of the exact revisions but with a vague idea that it wasn’t the original text. She is an archeology nerd. My synagogue usually didn’t take the words literally but instead as metaphors for how we should be nice to others and stuff. I know of people who step away from churches and synagogues but still have faith (just not in the texts). It’s always surprised me how few people knew about the translation errors since I figured people understood that people (who like anyone else) make mistakes while translating. It is genuinely shocking how some people try to force people new to the faith to believe that the text is literal (because metaphors didn’t exist in ancient times or something 😒). I understand why it works when someone is introduced to the literal interpretation while they are young but it just seems really shady that some people seem to be trying to keep people from knowing about the revisions. It’s not common knowledge despite it being important information in enlightening people to your faith. Sorry for rambling but it really bugs me when people try to misinform people on purpose.
8:28 8:55 11:15
19:11 The Book of Esther?
Mary, mother of Jesus.
Mary Magdalene,
Abigail, wife of Nabal
Etc, etc.
20:00 (Video creator twists the word of God) "foremost" is not what the scripture on the screen says.
Those Greek scribes were having an OG Wikipedia edit war.
Look up Dr.James white for accurate information th-cam.com/video/pL0P6sH0cJM/w-d-xo.html
The Gospel th-cam.com/video/Gyr2_cU-iew/w-d-xo.html
The esv was translated from earlier greek manuscripts not from other english translations
This is the first example of trolling.
11:01 lol It’s like Wikipedia before the internet.
I have to add that it might seem very unprofessional to some to have that extra text in the margins from the scribes, but I absolutely love that they did this. It reminds us that these were painstakingly copied by hand by actual human beings and we get to see a side of them and their sense of humor that we otherwise never would know about. I think it’s wonderful.
Ya that genuinely made me laugh🤣 it’s not often that you get to see people from ancient times in a natural light you know?
Yes! It’s a reminder that history isn’t just stories, but people. They got annoyed just like us, which (to me) is weird to think about for some reason
A greeting video..!
False equivalency fallacy! Be careful your argument is anecdotal. The Bible was translated directly from the scrolls with teams of scholars and translators that cost millions of dollars. Don’t be fooled from smooth talking words.
Yes, and these are the "words of god"? More like the words of men, who despite being allegedly guided by the holy spirit, changed, omitted, amended the words of God. Errors errors everywhere
There's a difference between wholly inaccurate, and holy inaccurate.
Underrated comment
@Ivan Walker Matthew 5.22
I always think of that book of lies, fantasies and mythology as the Wholly Babble.
@@mehrcat1 you should read your girls diary...
Holy n' accurate?
5:28 this is misleading. These are not strictly translations of translations. While some bibles will maintain a lineage such as this, the manuscripts that are used for the original translations are still consulted abd used to translate directly from when needed. It isn't a translation of a translation of a translation, they are still using the starting manuscripts to ensure accuracy.
I dong get it..
@@stevebehindlightshe's basically saying the Bible is a translation of a translation when it's not true
Most disagree - think the "original manuscripts" are unavailable, lost to time? do you have other evidence?
The problem being is that all we have are translations. We have no originals. The translations we do have only go back to a couple of hundred years before the original. A lot can get mistranslated in a couple of hundred years .
Do you know that part about a camel going through an eye of a needle? It’s not a camel dude it’s a cord on a boat for fishing. Which makes more sense, considering there a bunch of fisherman in his posse.
Here's the bible.
We're gonna do a dinosaur vid next.
Lmao, love the range as always.
During my confirmation in a conservative Christian church, we were also taught the doctrine of biblical inerrancy. Having seen National Geographic specials on the history of the Bible, I often brought up the fact that the bible we know is a translation of a translation. The minister eventually started asking us "Why can't there be any mistranslations in the bible?" when he was testing our understanding of what we'd learned. The correct answer was something to the effect of, "because they always used the best translation."
I thought that was pretty weak.
so do you believe in biblical inerrancy?
@@Dr.AutismGod big nope
I do, after reading the bible in its original languages. If someone is too lazy to do that, he puts all his effort in "disproving" biblical innerancy
@@stamatissavvanis5862 I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not
@@alexnelson7258 There is no doubt that there are so many changes throughout translations and copies, some explained here. However, the statement the Scripture makes that it itself is inerrant because it is the Word of God does hold up, as we can see even though the linguistic words have been changed, the underlying words and messages have not. All *teachings* have remained true to itself and agreed with all references across all books within and outside the Bible.
And yes, I agree, your minister's answer was pretty weak lol.
20:29
Two bros
Chilling in the Roman thermae
Four cubits and a span apart
Cuz they not gay.
Amazing.
😂
Social distancing...🤣🤣🤣
Awesome!!
Yooooooooo! LMAO.
The books we call the Old Testament, and the Jews call the Tanakh, are mostly survivor stories, of real-time catastrophic events that repeatedly overwhelmed the ancient world between Noah and II Isaiah. They books are disordered, now, first by Jewish leaders of the 7th Century, when they assembled the Tanakh, as a formal document, already nearly a thousand years after the events of Exodus, so important five books, Exodus: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, or, "This is what we remember", "Holy God! What was that?", "These are the things you will and will not do", "This is what happened in the aftermath", and "These are the rules of our order".
The five books associated with Moses (probably not a Jew, but possibly multi-racial Egyptian, somehow connected to the royal house) are sequential, but the rest of the Old Testament is jumbled, mostly because the scribes of the 7th Century BC didn't believe the stories as told to them, certainly not in the way their grandfathers' grandfathers would have. They were already safely separated by a century, from the last of the events that had terrorized their ancestors, over more than seventeen hundred years.
The stories passed down from survivors told of unimaginable horrors and nightmare conditions, with unbelievable casualty figures. Jews had only been monotheistic for less than 500 years, adopting the practice about the time of Zoroaster, and perhaps, Akhenaten. The chronology of the ancient past is a confused mess, not merely because humans are lazy about record-keeping. The books of Exodus, Joshua, II Samuel, II Kings/Chronicles/I Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Jeremiah/Lamentations, and II Isaiah, tell of calamities later ascribed to "God", but events undoubtedly earthbound, by a BDR.
Religion, as we know it today, is a blockbuster business around the world, and the biggest source of chicanery everywhere, and the source of more human misery than anything else. Today, some 3,200 years after the idea began to take root, men are still arguing about God. Few are content to allow others to come to their own conclusions, as "the faithful" are told repeatedly to do in Scripture, regardless of religion. In fact, few follow the basic guidelines, more interested in nitpicking detail, than in ordinary obedience. Jews revised the Torah again, in the 3rd Century BC, then Christians took over, and haven't stopped, since the 3rd Century AD
Matthew 6 says, "Do not stand on the streetcorners boasting of your piety, as the hypocrites do", and what do proselytizing "Christians" do? Beside altering the verses to suit their twisted worldviews, poisonous impiety still fueling wars, death, famine, and pestilence. Then, Revelations, written long after the other books of the New Testament, mentions those four horsemen of the apocalypse, but the concept flies right past those who think of themselves as "the faithful". If we are indeed Children of God, then Our Father has to be totally disgusted with us, because we've become idolators, worshipping the symbols, while exhibiting little of the spirit.
Jesus said, in John 13:34, "A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another." Christians of the "nationalist" persuasion fail this, meaning they are also not Christians. One cannot ignore the primary rule of the leader, and be considered a follower. I have serious issues with the whole idea of God, but I'm bringing the popcorn to Judgement Day, if indeed, He is real. I can't wait to hear all the racists try to explain why they should be allowed in, despite breaking Rule #1. It should be entertaining.
Any way you slice and dice it, religion is the biggest con in history, benefiting any fool with a quick Persian rug about conversations with God, and a talent for laying guilt on with a mega-trowel. Misery and trouble are the touchstones of the skilled religionist, no heart too tender to milk. What God expects, it seems to me, is a whole lot more actin' right, and a whole lot less talking about how right you are. About as opposite to human nature as it's possible to get.
What even is "condescending"?
I think most of us are bringing popcorn to judgment day---"right up to the time Noah entered the ark"
Appreciated your rant
@@ryanunruh2683 I understand fully (as well as someone can who was not there) the causes of religion. Events that would revise the world around the survivors, changing rivers, seas, mountains, and continents, happened with frightening regularity, done before the change could be comprehended. It made sense to blame it all on "God". Who else could pull it off? The ancients did not understand the physical world they inhabited, attributing rain, wind, and good crops to some deity or another.
We are all born with fears, racial determinants, and physical limitations we have no control over. The fears drive us to be stupid, the racial qualities color our perceptions of the world, and the physical limits keep us somewhat grounded. We are all related, distantly, from the swankiest nabob, to the crudest Displaced Person, like it or don't. That would be the "Godly" element, that we are here, to enjoy these times, with the life we were given. Nothing to do with our birth was due to our actions, inputs, or efforts.
Bruh why the Bible didn't say that Jesus was a part of the Steel Ball Run
Cuz that happened after the bible
They didn't mention it cuz it would've been spoilers.
When they tried to explain who shot Johnny Joestar, it was too complicated. They cut it out because most of the medieval peasants didn't take any napkins.
So the bible 2 is steel ball run
It's a spin-off
Human clever enough to change the words of God where ever and when ever necessary
Man hates to Gospel bc it is the truth and bc they love living in sin and evil they change Goda words and turn away from him, Sadly many die and dont even know the truth, Get right with God before its too late🙏💙
@@tiana9720 you do know anime is against the word you’re preaching right, Sakura? Might wanna stop living in sin as thou shall not entertain that which permeates violence and sexual promiscuity, at least she chose sasuke in the end💀
@@buythegamesagain guess you haven’t read the Bible
@@abezebethou I definitely have, which is why I’m Atheist. The Bible and the Christian God himself are highly hypocritical, from killing infants to sacrificing women, to destroying a mans entire life for a bet. It took six commandments before “oh yea also don’t murder” while the first 5 are all about worshipping him and not worshipping others
@@buythegamesagain Stop hating on Sakura, There is nothing wrong with her and since im preaching the Gospel i already repented so im not living in sin
Me: is the English bible really the same as the original bible?
English translator: yes but actually no
I mean they translated Latin Bible which itself is translated version of Greek translation of original Hebrew Bible. So... The mistranslations in the book were almost inevitable
God: write down what I say.
Humanity: okay, but we have to translate into many different languages for all of us to read.
God: Wait what, that going cause mistranslation.
Humanity: oh, then who the one that made us have different languages/togues
God:.....fair point.
As non- english speaker reading the english bible is like reading a document straight from the middle ages. Like... other languages at least update the bible's grammar & spelling every century or so. For example, the modern german standard language even got created through the necessity of a coherent bible translation.
Translator 1: Yes but actually no
Translator 2: Yes actually but no
Translator 3: No actually but yes
Translator 4: Maybe
Translator 5: No actually but yes (Translator 4 is stupid!)
@@jadenk1409 yeah, translations often lose things because of the nature of the speakers and the languages makes perfect translations a far-fetched ideal. Things like pacing, structure, metaphors, sayings, poetry, rhyme, and alliteration doesn't typically translate all that well outside of closely related languages, and that's without even considering human error and people intent on changing it...
I grew up in Christian fundamentalist. The Bible is the unquestionable literal word of God. Written by men but inspired and given them to write down by God. It's infallible and unquestionable. I have read the Bible front to back hundreds of times.
I then went to Bible college and studied it in depth even more to the point where I translated books of the Bible from koine Greek to English myself.
The more I learned about the Bible and the history behind the council of nicea the less I believed in it's inerrancy. Especially translating it myself and seeing how portions where altered in order to fit thier agenda or to censor really sexual things or stuff that didn't align with their beliefs.
My family also believes the king James is the only accurate Bible and all other bibles are false scriptures.
Your comment confused me. So you do or don’t believe the Bible is inspired by GOD completely
sexual things? can you elaborate more on that?
I really appreciate your approach to this, not patronizing or belittling Christians. I loved to learn about all of this, and will certainly look for more. I believe Christians shouldn't be afraid to learn this, as at least so far none of these changes jeopardize the fundamental concept of the Gospel.
I really, really don't want to give you any reason to stop investigating your beliefs, but how do you get to any fundamental concept in the Gospel. I haven't read the 60 something library that is the bible but from what I've read I do not see any concept they share unless the words GOD and GOOD count even when they are described as polar opposites. And just to clarify it's okay if you don't have an answer, it doesn't mean I "win" by default or anything childlish like that, I get that you're investigating for a reason.
@@Zancibar Why not read the whole bible so its easier to explain to other people why they should or shouldnt believe in it? To many people on the internet have who have a strong opinion about the bible but have never read the whole bible. They believe something because a youtuber, friend or family member said something.
@@MrTahref I read the motel version, I don't like it, I am not going through the whole 60 books if I have no reason to. And I don't have a strong opinion on the bible, it's a book I did not like and if I try to talk to people who do believe it's true (or metaphorically true) it's because I truly do not understand how do you reach that conclusion without taking it as an axiom.
@@Zancibar Its a guess, but atleast 50% of christians or people that call themselves christians have not read the whole bible. i cant force you to read the bible but to get better answers i think its better to read it yourself. If you dont wanna read, th-cam.com/users/jointhebibleproject is a channel with some cartoons about the bible but doesnt cover everything/enough.
@@Zancibar But remember the bible does not exist in isolation. While it contains the word of god, it has been compiled, edited, and studied by Christian scholars and the church for 2000 years . To understand it, it should be viewed from the lens of the teachings and doctrine of the church as well, not the texts alone. If you want to understand its message better, I would recommend watching people like Bishop Barron or other priests who's job it is to explain it.
Honestly, as a Christian, thank you for this video. We all have plenty of bias, but I saw little, if any, opinions for or against the Bible, just facts. I wish there were more channels like this, because I think this is great!
@@revan552 I have a hunch you're nit so kind to videos explaining the facts of way the Bible is the inspired word of God (not telling you that's a fact, but you get my point).
@@arunmoses2197 No one gets your point, half of your answer is copied from the question and the rest is airy-fairy nonsense. It‘s unsettling. Just like your god.
@@revan552 I'll put it simply.... Even if the Bible were true or not true, it doesn't matter. I'd rather choose to live the way Jesus taught me too because the world would be a better place if we just loved God and loved each other the way we're commanded to. Period. The problem is man is inherently evil, we are savage, animalistic, that's the flesh. We should live in the spirit and by that I mean controlling our bodies, our flesh. Mind over matter if you will. Again, whether Christianity is true or not, is besides the point. Strictly looking at it from a well being aspect it's great for the mind, body, and soul. Like let's look at it from a fasting and meditation aspect. Those things are good for the spirit regardless of religion or theological beliefs. I, however, just choose to meditate on God and the word of God. Meditation to me is nothing but prayer, thinking on the things of God and the mysteries of the universe. Fasting on the other hand allows me to overcome my flesh and curb that lustful appetite for evil. If Jesus were walking around today would people not confuse him for a yogi or guru or something of that nature?
@@revan552 _scratches neckbeard smugly_
@@revan552 _sips mountain dew_
So a workplace arguement was left in one of the oldest bibles
ur pfp is cute
A workplace argument on how the text had been altered in the "unchanging text of god". This is obvious proof that the texts are not "Unchanged through the ages" as some people argue. Besides it was in a text later used to put the bible together. In those days there was nothing that can be called a bible yet, just collection off different text collected by the church. No one knows how many of those texts were left out of what became the bible, but we know it was a LOT of them.
Just another Christian popping in to say that this is an awesome video. It's still a wonderful thing to dig into Western history by tracing this text back to as far as possible, mistranslations and political modification/sacrilege notwithstanding. Agreeing to disagree regarding the religious debate, I am always grateful to hear more about humanity's history, whether it fits our world view or not.
Between you and channels like the Bible Project, it's been an interesting ride to try and decipher meaning from text and culture far removed from our own. Thanks Trey. Have a great Easter.
Hey bible project is my favourite Christian Channel
Have you ever heard of tob skiba or zen garcia.Great read
I can not understand how one can alter original text to fit his view point. Even I would be afraid to do that.
you are right, the more we know the more we can find a closer relationship with Christ
@@andrzejadamowicz3753 It has happened already, so now we know that people are capable of doing that.
When reading the old testament I read the Tanakh. It is loaded with footnotes that give the different translations to passages. You get to see all of the different translations from different sources and it clarifies things a lot. It also give the meanings of Hebrew words and names and other footnotes. Always read the footnotes.
The man you called Jesus wasn't Greek the book says he came from the line of David and David sollom Issac and the rest were Hebrews l don't know why you all keep saying that all the people in that part of the world knew that but if you keep living you'll find out truth always show it's self. And no one knew any thing because most of you all wasn't even a thought celebrate the religion that were yours and that is the one you call christanty witch came out of Rome claim your own religion that's the only thing that you know why do you think Christ is to return to show people all the lies killing stilling that has been done and to whom it was done to you need to get some more understanding the most high God will judge everyone according to the deeds and their history and believe me you will be shocked don't play games with the most high God you can not hide your history you learn about the people and as always you claim to be who you are not and that too is a sin the most high God is not mock and he knows all things so do what you do best the whole world is in for the shock of the hour and it's coming and you will have to take it as it is
OK, the Tanakh is the entire Bible including the 5 books of Moses, the Psalms, the Prophets and the writings. We read from the Torah every Saturday and on specific weekdays. It's broken down into 52 readings. However we also include parts of all the other books in our studies and liturgy. There are many good study books by Stone, Schottenstein excellent study of the Talmud, Siddur Tehillat and many others with compelling commentaries. ut the Rashi commentary and the Hebrew is identical. The words never change, our interpretation does. What's important is how they help you to be a better person, to understand who you are and how you fit into the world.
@@philkipnis7403 Who are the true israelites?
i look for the Hebrew bible
@@winterwoods7219 There is no such thing. The land has had many different people and lies between the two great ancient civilisations of Egypt and Mesopotamia. There have been many religious changes too. The claims of the Zionists, people of the modern Jewish religion to have the right to drive out the people of the land are spurious.
Thank you for including citations. Everyone should be required to do this.
You should, but the Wiki isn't a good source. It is often half right, half sourced, & can be altered one day, corrected the next. So, you might site it as a work, then when I check it to verify that, you are wrong, as it now states something different. And I don't mean a few words off, I mean complete changing of meaning. The wiki isn't a legitimate source for this reason alone.
Second, I wonder if he got some of those other quotes from the wiki also, not the original source. In that case, his cited source is incorrect, but should be the wiki citing the source so you know where he got it vs where it originates. That is an issue.
Example (not saying it is real). His Quoting Bart. This would be legitimate if he got it from that book, but what if he got that quote from the wiki? Then it is an improper citation & you would have to check the quote against the book to know that. As presented, it would have be directly from the book or incorrect.
So let's say I did check the book & it's fine? Good. I can go forth happy that the information is legitimate.
What if I didn't have the book or access to it, but know his quote is on the wiki, then what? Since he used the wiki, it is reasonable to assume he didn't have the book, but I couldn't conclude that, since the wiki can be changed. So I end up saying I don't know, but I trust this guy because of his other citations & presentation. This is given it isn't just a synonym change, because that isn't of interest unless you are professionally doing the work.
There is the problem. Just the introduction of the wiki as a source causes issues. Maybe he is honest, but doesn't know. Maybe it came from the wiki & is wrong. Maybe he had the book & Bart is the source. I just have to end like Bart there. If it fails to jive I have to deny & if it jives maybe it is true.
This isn't properly sourced even if properly cited. The Bible is markedly different in that though. I felt that needed saying.
Edit: Just talking about his cite in the video, as a place to find things, not his list in the description.
@Mike Z scientific scripture 😂 now that's an oxymoron... Do you drink dry water too?
@Mike Z you notice the it too huh? 🤔
@Nadime Rivero I am a Muslim already bro haha Thank you though.
@@mackdmara thats why you go to the bottom to the works cited and use that
Not only has there been changes, much has been left out.
I was never told to believe that the Bible is the Perfectly preserved Word of God.
I was told that the people translating and revising the Bible are Divinely inspired by God so they cannot corrupt the meanings of the texts.
That's equally bad
Me too
anyone can say that though, so that's why you cannot trust the bible, at least in my opinion
What a the difference if they cant get it wrong?
LMAO 😂
Dang it, how many times I've told Moses to make digital backups of the scriptures! But no, it HAD to be copied by hand in one sitting, without a single mistake, lest you have to start over.
and then drops them on his way down the mountain, how clumsy.
You'd think someone like God would have been able to better preserve his words than some mere humans in the 20th century were able to come up with. But no. We had to wait 3500 years for digital to come along.
I found it, the thread of the true idiots lol
@@thewizzard3150 Hahahaha!!!
@@armandoc.3150 Hahahaha!!!
I've been finding myself sharing this video a lot differently. There are some out there who believe that thought the Bible has been translated, the meanings have never, ever changed. There is so much wisdom in the Bible, but it can not be "perfect", no matter how much anyone wants it to be. Thank you so much for this series of videos!
Perhaps knowing that the Bible is only reliable through understanding the narrative and ideas it offers would actually discourage Christian fundamentalists, and at last we would have some rest.
Agreed
Very informative. Thank you to the person who snuck in the frame from Life of Brian.
this is wrong teachings
we have the original bible 350AD preserved until today
and King James version Bible is the first translation to English
and this translation is still available until today to ( everybody ).
@@aymanseder5887 we dont have the original bible, as the bible itself is just a compilation of various semi related books. you can have the original books sure, but the bible as we know it today has had many books either removed or added depending on your denomination.
im also pretty sure that the oldest gospel wasnt written in 350ad as some of the new testament were supposed direct eyewitness accounts of christ himself, and the old testament were of stories that were shared long before christ.
source: i study at a catholic institution in a very catholic country
@@aymanseder5887you’re right that we have the Bible from 350 AD pretty much similar all the way to today, but the problem is that was 200 years after Jesus died, so we don’t know what happened before that.
Trey is literally the only guy on earth that can make me watch a video about the bible willingly.
Yeah for real
Same
Same
Came for the dinosaurs and cryptids, stayed for the Bible study.
@@H4rppy same to you. I'm not even Christian myself but trey made me interested in bible history
I really enjoy this series about the history of religious beliefs and how they've been changed and edited over time to fit the narratives of the society to which they belong.
@El-ahrairah holy spirit mate, I did not know about that one. Now that I have so much free time on my hands, I'm probably going to start reading up on this.
@El-ahrairah This error is much older than the King James Bible. It comes from an translation to Greek, where a Hebrew word that mostly means young woman (and sometimes virgin) was translated to a Greek word that mostly means virgin (and sometimes young girl). Maybe to match prophesies in the Old testament. Digital Hammurabi has a lot of videos on that topic.
The irony of that statement is that Christians are perhaps one of, if not the most reviled groups known to man. Just look at all the parodies of Christian literature around you, it's obvious that Christians are outcasts.
Not only that, it's even a prophesy in Mathew 5:11
@@SweetTodd Christians are the largest religious group on Earth, how are they then so reviled?
@@obsrvdsplash115 Lol, are you seriously telling me that there's too many Christians to be called oppressed? Please, women make up almost half of the world human population, and you wouldn't tell me they've never been oppressed throughout their existence.
Wait, US senators tougth the bibble was written in english?...
Jesus Ramirez Romo well given how stupid US senators can be , it not that surprising.
Jesus Ramirez Romo yup, I’m pretty sure there was a Texas congresswoman who said “If English was good enough for Jesus, it’s good enough to the Texas board of education”
Well it's uszal for them.
@@TREYtheExplainer God.... i'm scared of how pepole like that get to power
@@TREYtheExplainer Sometimes I wonder about the people we vote for in Texas, and what that says about us as a whole.
the very oldest surviving copies (and they are ALL copies) of the original writings of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, must necessarily be the most accurate and true versions of these fairy tales .
Goofy comment right here.
That Minecraft Jesus on the timeline graphic 😂
Look up Dr.James white for accurate information th-cam.com/video/pL0P6sH0cJM/w-d-xo.html
The Gospel th-cam.com/video/Gyr2_cU-iew/w-d-xo.html
The esv was translated from earlier greek manuscripts not from other english translations
@@greatanswers410 So you're saying there is no such thing as Minecraft Jesus? 🤔
@@greatanswers410 Hey, quit spamming with that link already. Why are so many christians so insecure to feel the need to do stuff like this?
@@girlkisser69420 You know, fanatical evangelists are like that.
@@paul6925
Yes there is a minecraft Jesus
But
He can only be accessed
Through the world of warcraft
Blood of the lamb
God: here y’all go
Humans: nah I don’t like that
Humans: *changes it to suit them*
God: wtf
What in the heaven*
God doesn't sin
Huh*
@@vvjjjio5549 bro it’s a joke if god exists it wouldn’t actually say that
@Uncle KFC okay Uncle KFC
So is this going to be a multi-part series you finish? 😂
Ben Weston hopefully
Damn, brutal
Savage.
Vicious
The biographies of Alexander the Great are further apart than accounts of Jesus to his life, but people openly accept Jesus’ role for humanity.
But they all use the same source, a historian who traveled with Alexander.
Somehow I ended up with 9 bibles, I'm not even Christian, but every single one of them is a little different from the others.
You're right and I am a Christian and always has been. I have several translations of the English Bible which even includes the Catholic English Bible which we call the New American Bible. Plus I have the New King James Version, King James Version, New International Version, and the Gideon Bible. All of them kind of shares a bit of the same message in my own opinion but the wording of each one is drastically 100% different in every since of the term. I grew up in a very devout Roman Catholic family who is basically 100% of French Canadian descent. I even have the Gideon Bible translated from English into French which is just the New Testament part and the books of Pslams, and Proverbs from the Old Testament and that to is different reading from the other English translated Bibles that I've read during my own lifetime.
Yet still basically the same.
Biblical inerrancy it's not time to Bible or by the church historically it says some fundamentals comes from the Protestant Reformation
Every translation of every book is like that
Dude, those are translation from the greek, there are thousands of those
Best thing I learnt from this video:
I'm canonically as tall as Goliath 14:04
Go back in time and scare some short ass Farmers.
Calm down modern Goliath.
"Reeeeeeee"
You be a tall man then
@@Ravishrex1 YO EDWARD TEACH?! IM WRITING A MUSICAL ABOUT YOU
If you look at the Dead Sea scrolls, the entire book of Isaiah was found on a massive scroll, and was almost word for word identical (I believe it was 99.17% identical, with a few grammatically different phrasings) to a modern Hebrew copy.
you also find texts considered heretical, and no acknowledgement of jesus
@@tabsinabox Seeing as most of the texts in the cave were written well before Jesus, and stored well before the New Treatment was canonized, and likely by Jews who didn't believe in Jesus being important anyways... Makes sense.
Which texts from the Dead Sea Scrolls are heretical though? And which group/groups consider them to be heretical?
They did a better study and found out they were fake put there by England during the crusades to give the New Testament more authenticity
@@Yacht27 Source? That's the first time I've heard of that and I've extensively studied them.
@@huntclanhunt9697 source th-cam.com/video/h_CJtPcQa-I/w-d-xo.html
(If you're Christian don't take this offensively, its just a joke I made on the spot)
Jesus once said: Make Yogurt, it is good.
1st translation: Yogurt is good.
2nd translation: Godurt is good.
3rd translation: God is good.
From Monty Python
Spectator I: I think it was "Blessed are the cheesemakers".
Mrs. Gregory: Aha, what's so special about the cheesemakers?
Gregory: Well, obviously it's not meant to be taken literally; it refers to any manufacturers of dairy products.
just common sense says people in power would alter it to suit their own views time and time again good luck making sense of it ..
that would be true if we just let people of power change them ... Those who were against Christians would want to destroy the text not change .. And rulers who were Christians would want to preserve the text completely and emphasise the parts that support their reign
This is nothing new it is quiet clear man has always changed the Bible to suit the church. At the moment many of our churches are pushing to allow homosexuality into the church which directly goes againist what the Bible teaches.
@@secretwatcher9922 EXACTLY 💯 correct, another Deception Is the Names they changed, JESUS is YESHUA and GOD is YHWH, and that's very Important , there's been over 2.500 God's that man has Worshipped over the Centuries, Know what GOD you are Worshipping, Don't be Deceived 🤔🙌🏽💜😇
@@1234poppycat why destroy when you can control?
@@memeuninstall4983 That is not possible. You are either completely good or completely evil. Either you love the bible or you detest it to the point where you cannot use or control it. There is no gray area in the world. Only black and white.
This stuff is MIND BLOWING. It’s just crazy to think about a book that is so old it has only survived the years as a spirit of the original book.
I guess you could say that the current bible is only a Holy Ghost of its former self.
That's what you got from watching this video? Perhaps you need to study textual criticism.
About Jesus being angry at a person in need, according to what I have read, it's more probable that Jesus was not angry if we look back, only one codex had that and there are more things to support this too.
It's exactly the same as the original, to the point that Trey made this 30 minute video and could only find 5 minor variations even after translation
It’s mine blowing that the guy who made this video can be so wrong as he is. He is talking half truths. You really need to read a proper scholar, like FF Bruce on the new Testament text
For Catholics a lot of the early debate surrounding Biblical canon is why we oppose *sola scriptura* as proclaimed by Protestants. The Church did not come from the Bible, the Bible came from the Church
Yes the catholic church there weren't any other churches. That makes the new testament a catholic book. Any alterations e.g. Martin Luther means that his version is not genuine.
@@revnpb Not true; there were churches other than the Latin church. The Latin (Roman) church eventually went into schism and became the modern Catholic church, the rest remained Orthodox (more or less)
Where you get that from probably a person that hates religion
Man the new cannon is so garbage I liked when we just had Luke blowing up the death star
No. Most of the other churches were in communion with the Roman Church. There was a minor schism in the fourth century. The major schism was in 1054, when the Catholic Church split into Roman and Greek. There were and are many rites within both of these major churches. The Church Fathers were using the term “Catholic” at the end of the first century. If one reads the early Christian writings outside of the Bible, these writings confirm that there was the hierarchy of bishop, priest, and deacon. Most of the teachings of the Roman Catholic and the Greek Orthodox can be found in the letters of the Church Fathers. As well as the Bible. The Church created the Bible. The books were chosen by the Church. There is NO book in the New Testament that stipulates which books were inspired. There is no biblical table of contents that deals with any of that. Christians accept the Bible on the say so of the the Church. This was a unified Catholic Church. The books of the Bible were finally canonized in the late fourth century. They were read and used way before that, but the canon was closed in the late fourth century.
We Muslims don’t look at the Bible as words of god as the intro say. The Quran explains that the Torah and enjeel have been changed so we don’t actually study it or need to read it as we feel the Quran is complete and Allah never asks us to read the Bible. I myself read it cuz I’m curious but as Muslims we generally don’t
I was raised catholic and my parents and priests told me the bible is full of stories that teach how to live a good life. Some stories are true but others are not. Looking back it surprises me that my priest said this.
Thomas Kelly yea that seems pretty radical coming from religious leaders
They lied to you--the Bible is 100% true--no one can prove otherwise.
I was raised catholic too and was told some parts might not be exactly accurate
@@andreakoeries7230 Catholics know virtually nothing about the Bible--the hierarchy has interpreted it wrongly for 1500 years just to serve themselves. The last thing your priests, cardinals and pope want is for you and others to actually study God's Word because it points to the pope as the anti-Christ and more. The Bible teaches the free grace of Jesus Christ--the RCC teaches a system of works that can save no one.
Eph 2:8 For by grace are you saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Eph 2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
I would urge you to study the Bible and just ask God if it's true or not--He will reveal to you the truth.
www.bibleuniverse.com/bible-school
@@stevebilliter the bible has been changed so many times to fit political agendas. It is a book to control. Jesus (if he truly existed) would condemn the Catholic Church just like he did to the Hebrews.
7:46 I loved it when the Dead Sea Scrolls were put out on the internet to the exasperation of the "committee" who were hoarding it for decades!
Stephen Cornell If you Google Aramaic laxeton website and search what God is in Aramaic the result is Aalah
It comes as no surprise that the “Committee” didn’t want the world to see the changes made by the Masorites: the Greek Septuagint follows the Dead Sea Scrolls far more accurately than the modern-day Hebrew.
@@May3yad3
The word "God" was NEVER used to represent YHWH;
In Aramaic the word "god" is "hhla" ("El" in Hebrew ? ) and means deity - used also for any other diety.
-
"El-lawh" in Aramaic means "GOD"(as we understand it today), while "Eloi" in Aramaic means "My GOD" hence:
"Eloi Eloi lama sabachthani?"
(My GOD My GOD why have you forsaken me?)
-
Christians did not use the word "God" up an until about 14th century when the English Language was formed. When the word "God"(Deus in Latin) became used in English and it meant the Biblical YHWH only !
- up until then, Christians referred to what we call now God :
Latin : Lord God: Dominus Deus , or simply Lord/Deus, or Father/Pater
Greeks used: Kyrios (Lord)
, Patēr(πατήρ) meaning Father, etc
Christian-Jews used their already dedicated names of YHWH: Elohim, El Shaddai, (...) all names being influenced by local dialects, adiacent cultures , etc.
-
Only !!! Arabic-speakers of all Abrahamic faiths, including Christians and Jews (in Middle-East), use the word "Allah" to mean "God" ( implicitly Aalah )
No Christians and Jews will use that word outside of Islamic/Arab influence.
Aalah ( later Allah) is purely an Arabic word, limited to that region and people.
It is the name of one of their many polytheistic gods before Islam.
Islam as an Arab Religion, is vaguely inspired on Judaism and Christianity and came more than 600 years After Christ; as such has zero authority on both Judaic and Christian Doctrines.
-
The entire Classical Middle-East used (and still use) variations of Semitic languages.
krix pop what's the personal name of God the Father in the new testament ?
Wet Mustard I can explain here in this video th-cam.com/video/y-WI8cPkyEg/w-d-xo.html
Modern bible is the netflix adaption of anicent texts
that explains white jesus
Limey Lassen shouldn’t it be the opposite ?
That explains the poor quality and horrible nonsensical plot lol.
*beats Judas in the back of his head*
"LORD JESUS"
No, netflix adaptations are more accurate, the modern bible is the weird bootleg version
The problem I have with the church is that most churches, teach from Paul’s epistles rather than the gospels or acts, so much to the point I feel that Jesus teachings are ignored. Therefore, this causes the church to focus and teach Paul’s epistles.
Convert to Islam 👍🏼
@@Ali7rrr If they made this same video about the Quran, we would be here for 10 years. You literally burned all the older versions of your Quran. Yet there is still variants today
@@nasiryahaya4184 😂😂 this was discussed and explained many times
Yet your people still think we had other Qurans than only one? Those qurans were different dialects I speak Arabic and I read most of the things that people say about those books and literally the same but in things like di’b which means in Arabic wolf but some people got a different accent from us so they say it “deeb” so it’s just differences like that but you won’t find anything more than things like that
Anyways you have access to free knowledge on TH-cam you can watch what Islamic scholars said about it to understand or maybe you trust me more and want me to explain everything?
@@Ali7rrr Nah Bro, my point is, if it only a dialect issue, why did you burn it then? There is no need to burn anything to try and standardize it. Did Allah ask for this? He said he would preserve it himself yet you took action yourselves to try and preserve it and when you are called out on it, you are justifying it. When you burn somethin, you lose the right to try and convince people that it wasn't different. Shoulda just left it alone
@@nasiryahaya4184because there's no censorship on those who wrote the Quran in there homes maybe they are hypocrites so what caliphate umar did is capitalized the copying of the Quran
I got a hard cover, signed by the author edition.
*how*
I just imagine how you stand in bookshop and guy who work there just in front of your eyes wrote "With love by God" into it.
Mista Lahey Magic
Which author?
I will gi e u about tree fiddy for it
3:55 Actually, Koine Greek was a lingua franca through the Middle East at the time of the Bible, so it's difficult to say whether it's a translation.
Interesting. I remember our ancient Greek teacher pointing out bad style and grammar in the texts (the bible was one of the first texts we read, as it is really simply written) saying that the authour was likely not a native speaker...
I love the use of frames from the movie Life of Brian as illustrations. You don’t get much more historically accurate than that.
Life Of Brian is honestly just about as accurate as modern versions of the Bible.
There is also a frame from the Holy Grail at 16:42.
My parents thought that movie was sacrilegious lol
There is very little history in the bible just fairy tail.
The books which were supposed to bring guidance to humanity have been instead the source of unfathomable horrors, death and misery for thousands of years.
Thank God, it's not nearly as bad as the hundreds of millions of deaths caused by atheism in just the 20th century alone.
Those of you who have studied history will know what I mean, while others will reply with ignorance.
I just google translated 2 sentances through 3 languages, English to Latin, then Latin to Greek, then Greek to Albanian...then Albanian to Greek , to Latin and back to English. Shit was unrecognisable.
Just food for thought.
You’ve clearly never learned a foreign language. If I used Google translate for my Latin assignments I would have failed miserably. It might be useful to translate a single word, or close to the right word, but beyond that it’s only going to hurt you.
Now, to debate whether or not Google translate is more accurate than nameless scribes in the first 600 years of A.D.
www.wikihow.com/Play-the-Telephone-Game
th-cam.com/video/Gyr2_cU-iew/w-d-xo.html
This food for thought is absolutely ridiculous. Sorry, but i can perfectly translate a sentence from English to German and vice versa, and so can someone who speaks more than one language.
Google translate doesn't actually know if the translations are correct, it doesn't have a brain
Thankfully, I've seen a more scholarly approach to the Bible being disseminated down to the popular level over the years. Most pastors I've had regularly talk about the original Greek/Hebrew rather than letting parishioners get away with thinking that the Bible is originally English. Pastors and modern Bible footnotes are more commonly citing the subtle variations in manuscripts, offering food for thought and deeper study.
I'm a follower of Jesus, but I'm no stranger to the idea of people tweaking texts and doctrines to suit their needs or gain power (heck, that's what Jesus spent much of his time dismantling in Israel). Christians need to be especially aware that even the best intentioned teachers can and have twisted God's words. Thankfully we don't just have the written Word, but we have the living Word, Jesus. He never changes, and he continues to transform the lives of people from many language groups, nations, generations, and levels of literacy. The true, timeless Word isn't merely written on a page, but on hearts and minds.
Thanks for your video and for getting this information into the hands of more people. Regardless of our spiritual backgrounds, we can all benefit from studying things more carefully.
A A Exactly. If the bible has been corrupted God would’ve sent another book. That book is the Quran. Before you dismiss this comment just search Surah Ali Imran M Asif on TH-cam, and give the Quran an ear or two.
Amen
@A A whatever works.
Well said. Jesus is the ever unchanging Word. The Old Testament scriptures is entirely in line with letters written in stone. The New Testament, however, is not. But which is written in the heart by the Spirit, a testament not written in stone or paper or wood by the hands of men. Just as his church is not a building built by the hands of men but being the sum of those who have faith.
I agree with your sentiment
10:56, There is something comforting that people made fun of other people due to their grammatical/spelling mistake so far back in time
Grammar police lol
And the irony is that he was wrong about it.
@@muhamadsayyidabidin3906 oi indonesian
n my 60 plus years. I have seen so many changes in the Bible. I've had/have many. This is every Bible. There are many more changes. Added and subtracted from the Bible.
“What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.
Deuteronomy 4:2 KJv
2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you. * * Revelation 22:18-19 KJv
18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.” (Deut. 12:32.)
"I once got into a rather heated discussion with an acquaintance who insisted that Jesus spoke Elizabethan English. Never mind the fact that English didn’t even exist then" LOL! I can't stop laughing!!! wow! just wow!!
How do you know? Many claim now that Bible stats that Jesus was white, he may have been darkish because of the sun only! White people used to be slaves, not black africans.
Funny you should say that, someone commented recently on YT with a supposed "word" from the Lord which he was relaying for the supposed receiver. It was a mishmash of KJV language scriptures (including "yea"!) which immediately told me it wasn't a genuine word. It was almost laughable.
English is a made up language that came into existence approximately 500 years ago therefore it is very such impossible that the messenger spoke English which proves to a critical thinker that it was also impossible that ANYONE was named Jesus when the actual messenger walked the planet smh its 2020 we should have gotten pass that as a whole by now smh
Dam yall erasing my 2nd message saying certain Caucasians were slaves and the rest is the children of the so called African Americans who under oppression by them till this very day? Which is the cause of so much lies because y'all need PEOPLE to believe lies that colonialists call history like the transatlantic slavetrade were actually them leaving Spain after defeating Rome for 800 years under general Taariq the Moor? Then after the 800 they lost and were told to convert or leave Spain and millions leaving caused the trail of the fake slave trade?(rather then saying they were snatching up royal moors in America mixing them up with Africans?Are we here to teach or we here to keep lies going claiming to be noble?
Someone commented this 2 months ago on this same video
I totally have a t-shirt that says “I AM NOT ARGUING WITH YOU. I AM EXPLAINING TO YOU WHY I AM RIGHT.”
Google products,
mate.....
just...
wow 😯
Christ Follower
“...Did Jesus didn’t rose from the grave...”. 🎵 Is you is or is you ain’t my baby 🎵 Loving your “evidence”
What's the point in remembering the Sabbath commandment if u can't remember what the Sabbath actually is if people remember what the Sabbath is remembering the commandment becomes common sense u said alot so u know a little keep seeking you'll be shocked then amazed a clue is why did christ work on the Sabbath?
You made me LOL dear sister.
Arent you original and funny?
I’m more interested in how the books of the Bible were chosen.
Anthropomorphic facsimile
Before Josephus scrolls and books confiscated and burned. Those that were held onto were guarded after jews fled the persecution of Roman emperors Constantine rewrote history, made a statue of himself as a god Josephus was a sycophant doing his business
@@christinapotter6166 sources??
@Ernest Doucette Nice "history" there, where did you get that, The Da Vinci Code? That's not correct at all...
@Ernest Doucette I'm finding multiple sources say the 313 Edict of Milan allowed free worship, not made Christianity the state religion.
The early church (i.e., the Catholic Church) held several councils and synods in the first few centuries after Jesus’ death to TRY and sort stuff out. The Synod of Hippo was held in 393 AD and was the first time that a council of bishops listed and approved a Christian Biblical canon that corresponded closely to the modern Catholic canon but falling short of the Orthodox canon. The canon list approved at Hippo included six books later classed by Catholics as deuterocanonical books (and by Protestants as Apocrypha); but also included, as 'two books of Ezra', the Old Latin books First Ezra and Second Ezra, of which only the latter would subsequently be found in the Catholic canon. The canon list was later approved at the Council of Carthage (397) pending ratification by the "Church across the sea", the See of Rome (what we call the Catholic Church)...
The reasons people are reluctant to engage, debate or participate in conversations involving politics or religions: A lie is still a lie, even if the majority believes it to be the truth; and the truth is still the truth when the majority believes it to be a lie.’ “Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it." -Leo Tolstoy.
"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" - Mark Twain
@@lindawitowski-u2d Or it's pointless to argue about something that no one has any proof of either side, and people have been arguing over this for thousands of years with no progress. Pointless. And what positivity does it bring to you to engage in such arguments?
@@shaynabobayna1723 that is a an interesting question worth of an answer. the best example in American history being changed via discussion occurred while we were still 13 colonies Caesar Rodney, was a man who believed that their was no subject so dangerous it could or should be debated. He was the third Delaware delegate and had not voted on July 1.1776 He traveled from Delaware to cast his deciding vote within the Delaware delegation. Rodney's action added Delaware to the colonies support of declaring America independent of Great Britain. That one vote is significant because without it. We would still be calling ourselves Englishman instead of Americans. South Carolina has won the split vote that the decision on American independence should be unanimous not a majority vote, With New York abstaining ( it was not a may vote 132 yea votes seemed impossible and without it the question of American Independence would be forever dead. C Rodney requested the Delegation from Delaware be polled, which was a valid request and it only required a majority vote the split Delaware delegation with his yea vote became a yea(yes) vote for the Independence resolution. But that wasn’t the end of it. South Carolina said without the prohibition of slavery clause being stricken it would vote Nay. There goes American Independence. Thomas Jefferson who had written all of it and had requested on the other charges( minus two word he refused to concede) did so again surprising everyone. He understood that the compromise was a necessary evil. First American independence then tackle the elimination of slavery Without it Slavery would remain in the control of England who didn’t abolish slave trading until after 1840 when America finically gained control off its sea borders. Revolution are expensive followed by the war of 1812) and building a Navy was costly as well It is easier to be judgements in hindsight but predictable during extraordinary circumstance requiring extraordinary compromises. When we restrict our thinking to one side or the other. advancement of knowledge is lost Rodney , who was a slave owner and hated the manpower restriction imposed on him by England He like Jefferson and many other s had to compromise their morality because they didn’t have the legal ability to ever make changes in England’s financial chokehold, including the manpower acts for her colonies.l Those included indentured servants as well as slavery to mention just two. As long as they remained 13 independent colonies the had no control over their destiny. Rodney got it right, there should be no subject so damaged that changing your opinion can not lead to a better results. The deaf’s voice is through sign language The blind is through touch. The stupid remain stupid if they fail to learn and choose to remain ignorant. Most stalemates continue to be unchanged but nothing is changed by a refusal to explore alternatives. Being pigheaded for the sake of it, makes you more your own enemy than the enemy itself. You don’t have to always concede but the willingness to try understanding makes you a better person for having made the effort.
Me: "Wasn't there multiple versions?"
Catholics: "No, those were wrong."
Well, given that it was the Catholic Church that first assembled the Bible in the fourth century and the Catholic Church that decided which books and which versions were to be in the Bible that is still used today, then, yes, the Catholics get to say "No, those were wrong".
@TheLance3185 Uh...no. Not Catholic doctrine. Made up protestant BS, yes, but Catholic doctrine? No.
@@bobbrockway453 You are apparently unaware that we have 150 thousand letters from the early chruch fathers BEFORE the Roman councils and those letters quote virtually the entire NT. SO we know exactly which book the chruch fathers considered to be inspired canon and we know we have the same words they had in the first 2 centuries, some 200 years before Rome ever got involved with the councils. So I know its fun to say the catholic church created the Bible, but all they did was agree with the early church fathers of the first 2 centuries on which books were inspired canon and which were not.
@@bobbrockway453 Well, no. In the fourth century (when the canonization of the Bible really got underway) there was no such thing as the Catholic church. Although there were many schisms within the church, it considered itself to be one organization. The bishops who were part of these church councils came from all over the Christian world. There was never a complete consensus as to which books were canon, which of course is obvious since the Bibles of the Greek Orthodox church, the Roman Catholic church and the Coptic church (all of which were part of the early church) are different from one another.
@TheLance3185 Protestant propaganda. Protestants have killed far more Catholics than vice versa. American Protestants have killed more Catholic Christians.
It’s always great to see videos like these trying to educate people on the history of ancient texts and how textual transmission works. Unfortunately, there seem to be a number of factual errors or misconceptions in this video. I feel compelled to bring attention to a few:
5:12 Translation does not work like a game of telephone. The English Standard Version is not a translation of the Revised Standard Version. All modern translations use the oldest, most ancient, most reliable texts to translate directly from the original languages. These texts, with all of their variants, are collected and organized in the form of massive scholarly volumes called the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (old testament) and Novum Testamentum Graece (new testament). All modern translations use these compilations of original-language texts when making their versions. While the King James Version remains popular in many circles, it does not serve as any kind of base text for any modern translation or scholarship. This assumption of “telephone translation” unfortunately permeates this video.
12:00 When accidental mistakes are made, such as dropping words or lines, these mistakes don’t propagate into our modern translations. They are easily identified based on examining older manuscripts, and are trivially corrected (usually removed). These things really aren’t that controversial in biblical scholarship, and they happen all the time. For example, the Great Isaiah Scroll (of the Dead Sea Scrolls) is full of little tweaks and changes that are simply fixes made by scribes intending to preserve the original copy, which they are physically referencing in front of them while they write or proof-edit. It’s just how copying text by hand works.
17:50 The “disciple whom Jesus loved” in the Gospel of John is the author of the text. The whole point of the author telling the reader this is to contrast his personal calling with that of Peter. The video’s omission of the middle text (several sentences) obscures this. The voice of “we” in verse 24 is the author speaking on behalf of all of the disciples. One cannot understand subtle things like this by simply picking out and comparing pronouns in the text. Their literary design is much more sophisticated. You have to read the words and try to understand the meaning of the whole text in its larger context. The example given in the video is a feature, not a bug, of John's gospel.
18:13 I'm not sure how it follows that the author could not have met Jesus if he was also the compiler of the text. Both of these could be true. Later groups trying to associate names to the gospel texts are irrelevant in trying to understand the texts and their meanings.
18:45 The texts themselves claim to contain direct eyewitness testimony of events. For example, the introduction in Luke. This video seems to conflate the idea of the written accounts being collections of eyewitness testimony versus necessitating that the authors be the eyewitnesses themselves. I’m not sure why it’s so important that the authors be the eyewitnesses themselves (although I think it is likely the case with at least some). Whether or not you believe their reporting and collecting of stories is up to you, but it seems like a big leap to claim that earlier Christians just fabricated these ideas in order to gain credibility. The claims of eyewitness testimony were always there.
19:44 The name ‘Junia’ or ‘Junias’ (Gk. Ιουνια) is ambiguous to its gender. This is why one can find both readings in modern translations. There was never any conspiracy to change the female name to the male name, precisely because there was never a consensus that the name was female. It is not clear at all that Paul was referring to a woman, and the gender of the individual in this instance is still debated today. This example in the video seems particularly ignorant or deliberately misleading, as one can simply google “junia or junias” to get the full story.
25:06 Again, the KJV would not know to remove the Johannine comma as non-original, as modern scholarship had yet to uncover the (substantial) textual evidence that it is a later addition. This is just modern scholarship in action. The trinity or divinity of Jesus is not derived from this one verse that was added somewhere in the late 4th century, as these ideas obviously predate the addition significantly. Rather, it was the already existing idea that led to the erroneous scribal addition, not some conspiracy to attribute divinity to Jesus.
For a more comprehensive, scholarly summary of some of these ideas, check out "Making of the Bible" on bibleproject.com/podcasts/exploring-my-strange-bible/ (it's given by Tim Mackie, a Ph.D. scholar in ancient Hebrew).
Thanks Jon White for a comprehensive, and factual correction.
You have done much work. Thank you. But as it is all BS what does it matter? ;)
Thanks, John! As with any piece of history, it seems the "true answer" ends up being extremely complex or in some cases vague, so I always appreciate the further explanation of WHY some things remain unclear or uncertain in modern times. Just as I would with archaeological household items, language differences or understanding of customs. it seems "It's complicated" is very often the true answer to these questions.
Edit: if there are errors in part 2 as well I would like to know of them :)
Whether you think it is BS or not, the fact remains that a man lived 2000 years ago that made an extraordinary change to life ever since and who claimed to be God, who did something no-one else can lay claim to, to rise from the dead never to die again. This Jesus, has been believed in the world and said he is the One who will come again to judge the world. It seems far removed from our world, from anything we know, and it is! But that does not mean it is not true. His claims still demands an answer, a verdict, from each one.
@@jimmymeyer7980 So you consider the tales as fact. Please produce your evidence. I've been dead three times so ... I don't believe in unicorns either, does that somehow matter?
Goliath being 6’9” was still huge for the time tho
What is it in meters?
wilvred djodo about 2.0574 meters
6'9"
Nice.
There's a theory that Goliath may have had a similar condition that Andre the giant had.
The texts suggest he was lead to the battle as his eyesight was not good.
Killing a big dude who couldn't see well with the equivalent of a standard military firearm (slings were routinely used in war) isn't as much of an achievement as the tale of a giant and a kid with some stones.
Propaganda for military achievements is a standard feature in ancient texts, you only have to read roman or Greek texts to find examples.
Marshall Kinnaird commie measurements? You mean the system that practically the rest of the world and science uses?
America lost a $100 million satellite because they used your imperial system.
You know where that system came from? It's an English system that originated from the lengths of rulers body parts. So much for the revolution.
It's amazing how propaganda is able to distract people from common sense and facts.
Thank you. I've wondered about these changes for years after first hearing that there were changes from a reliable source.
Even though Goliath was most likely closer to seven feet, that’s still pretty tall for back then
@Elizabeth Frantes I guess so, I just have a really tall family. My brother isn’t even 17 and he’s 6’7”. He’s also horrible at basketball lmao
@Elizabeth Frantes The same team as Porky the Pig and Bugs Bunny. They're all imaginary.
Goliath was 9 feet 9 inches.
He was 9ft 9inches. Some say he was a nephilim.
@Douglas Watkins @James Veerdog did y’all watch the video