please continue with those videos, i really had a question with these “Bible contradictions” even tho it did not made my faith weaker, i knew that the Word of God wouldn´t contradict, rather i just dont had enough study for knowing the answers and this video helped me much. Thank you, brother in Christ.
And here's an example of a sad and deluded believer who admits that he/she could see the obvious contradictions but it didn't make his/her 'faith' any weaker... WHY THE HELL NOT? 'Faith' is NOT a justifiable reason to believe anything (well, apart from believing that your mother loves you, perhaps) and certainly not to believe things that will change your life, or want you to change other people's lives.
@@exiled_londoner I pray that the Holy Spirit opens the eyes of your heart, as we're all in desperate need of a savior, so you may see Christ Jesus exiled_londoner. It's lonely being without God, but we're not alone. God is waiting for you, patiently to run to Him.
@@ThePlagueDoctor1490 - Asking such a question either shows astonishing naivety or malign and devious duplicity... I'm not sure which. It should be obvious to all but the most ignorant and uninformed observer of modern life (or history) that beliefs inform actions, that strongly held religious beliefs impact on an entire society and not just those who hold them, and that organised religion has a habit of seeking to import the commandments of its particular deity, or their interpretations of those commandments, into public and political life. Look at the influence of religion in every single Muslim majority country in the world, look at the co-opting of Hinduism into an aggressive nationalist political creed (Hindutva) in India, and look at the current disastrous situation in the USA where large numbers of so-called 'Evangelical Christian Conservatives' movement have become part of a broader fascist political movement and adopted a White Christian Nationalist position which poses a great threat to US democracy and to the US Constitution. It's a stupid question.
I turn to Cliff Knectle (I have no idea how to actually spell his name) he said that if two people report a car crash, one person says that they heard someone scream that they saw the crash, and someone said they heard a screech of brakes that they saw a crash, these are not contradictions. It is two different accounts of the same story from two different perspectives
Ok, here's a Bible contradiction for you: Was the Last Supper a Passover Seder? Or was it the night before Passover? Or was it the night after Passover? Each of the Gospels says something different. Or what about Jesus' last words - One gospel (Matthew) records them as "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" Mark records the same. Luke records "Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit." And John records "It is finished." What about the actual cross? Who carried it? Matthew, Mark and Luke say that Simon of Cyrene carried the cross, but John says that ONLY Jesus carried it. What about the tomb? Had the sun risen when the women came to the tomb? Matthew says it was dawn of the first day of the week. Mark says that the sun had risen (ie- dawn had come and gone and it was now full morning). Luke also says that it was dawn when they reached the tomb. And John says that it was still dark when the women reached the tomb (ie- dawn had not yet dawned). Now I'm sure you can begin to see the problem here. It's NOT a case of different reports of the same event. The last supper can NOT have been held on 3 different nights. So 2 or possibly 3 of the Gospels contain false information about the beginning of the crucifixion narrative. Jesus couldn't have spoken his last words, died, then come back to life on the cross, spoken more last words, died again, then come back to life again... So when it comes to THIS part of the crucifixion narrative, again, at least 2, possibly 3 of the Gospels have recorded false information. When it comes to carrying the cross, Jesus could NOT have carried the cross on his own, with no help from anyone, if Simon of Cyrene did in fact help him carry it. Either 1 or 3 of the Gospels have recorded false information on this aspect of the resurrection narrative. And as for whether it was dawn/ day or still dark when the women reached the tomb, it could not possibly have been all 3. Either 2 or 3 of the Gospels have recorded false information on this aspect of the resurrection narrative. These aren't "different perspectives of the same story." No, these are outright contradictions! There is so much false information recorded in relation to the crucifixion and resurrection narrative, that I don't understand how anyone in their right mind could think that the story is a true and accurate accounting of real, historical events. Ps: That's not the only false story in the New Testament, either. There are a good many of them, but my go-to example is always the story of the Adulterous Woman. That was the first story my mum ever taught me about Jesus and I've never forgotten it. Some years ago, when researching the bible, I learned that the whole story was a fictional invention, added to the bible in around 500 AD. Additionally, you might consider re-reading the Old Testament and what it says about False Prophets. A False Prophet is ANYONE who draws worship away from God (as you would call him, God the Father). Hells, the First Commandment makes it clear - "I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. You shall not have other gods beside me." That's a CLEAR injunction against worship, adoration and veneration of Jesus (and others). The Old Testament even warns you of False Prophets and their false promises. Lastly, the Old Testament book of Ecclesiastes makes it clear that there is NO afterlife. When we die, it's all over. There's no work, no learning, no joy, no reward, no food, no remembrance, no anticipation... We come from dust and to dust we return. Let me quote it to you: Ecclesiastes 9:5 For the living know that they will die: But the dead know nothing. And they have no more reward, For the memory of them is forgotten. Also, their love, their hatred and their envy have perished; Nevermore will they have a share In anything done under the sun... If you believed the false promises of an afterlife and eternal reward, from a False Prophet, then more fool you. The bottom line here is - If you believe that the bible is the book of God/ was inspired by God, then you CAN'T be a Christian. Not unless you ignore most of the Old Testament, even though the New Testament records Jesus saying (Matthew 5:13) I have not come to abolish the Law of Moses, or the writings of the Prophets, but to Fulfil them! I came to accomplish their purpose. For I tell you truly, until heaven and earth pass away, not a single jot, not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. If you were able to make it through all that, then tell me: How does it make any sense at all for any person to be a christian?
Additional - There are a LOT more contradictions in the Gospels. I counted 25 instances in the Resurrection narrative alone. Instances where at least one person, possibly more, maybe even ALL the Gospels have recorded false information. Those were just 5 of the most salient ones, but there are still a LOT more.
@@Raz.CYou fool. Do you not realise that 6000 years and millions of other believers have completely broken your argument? Read The Case For Christ if you're that stubborn. And repent, since you cause others to sin.
to add to the "turn the other cheek" bit. The slap was coming from the the hand that was used to wipe the bottom. It was basically a grave insult to you personally as well, not entirely an act of violence. It was also saying that if someone is gonna start flinging poo at you (metaphorically) then be the bigger man
As per my understanding, in Matthew 5:39 the "turn the other cheek around" has another context, it being that a slap on a persons cheek was a forceful insult yet not considered a violent offense or attack. Giving the other cheek (left) incite the aggressor to repeat the offense, but with the palm of the hand this time; an action done not to a lesser, but to an equal. The act neglects both the violent of retaliating and the passiveness of letting other do whatever with you.
I love your explenations, really clear and straightforward. Honestly you're really underrated and I truly hope people see your videos(which are really awesome and with good explaining aswell), keep it up and God bless!!
I already knew these were not real contradictions but you explain so well that I got to learn something new. Simply said but completely explained, good job!
In fact, the judas one also makes less sense if it's a contradiction. Like what? Dude fell on the ground and suddenly, his body decided to explode like some enemy in a video game?
@@thelostcaptain5763 I know, I’m just saying that you’d need a massive loophole to say that Judas killed himself from falling instead of hanging, rotting, and falling after a while.
@@kingdave7996 Which is the more parsimonious explanation- Judas threw himself from a high place. Different accounts make more sense since Acts made no mention of hanging, and the reason why the place he died on got named "Field of blood" was different. He's also the one who betrayed Jesus so there is a motivation to give him a gruesome end in the story.
When Judas hung himself, his body was in the middle of a desert plain, so obviously, his body would start to cook and have gas forming inside. When the rope snapped, his body ruptured and leaked entrails everywhere. This is something that whales have happen to them when they get beached.
it can be other way that judas die by heart attack and then he burst out luke only talk postmoterm not about death Thats why there is contradiction plus confusion
@@notanyone2433 thats a ignorent mentality here i am not talking that judas die or not i am talking how judas died luke is not talking that judas how judas die Luke is talking that judas die That confusion plus contradiction
There is no comtradiction at all. The greek word used in Acts 1:18 is "pregen" which implies the idea of falling from height, which makes sense that Judas died from hanging himself and then fell from height. @aryankhan3619
The issue with the harmonization of Judas’s death is that no one would write about a death by hanging as the author of Acts does (which suggests he didn’t have death by hanging in his mind). Given your example of a car accident, no author would write “He walked across the street and his guts spilled open on the other side”, even though it’s technically possible that he was hit by a car walking across the street and his body wasn’t found until it had decayed and exploded. There’s also the issue of whether the Pharisees or Judas himself bought the field.
@@Alexandros74738 that's the NIV version. It's better to trust the ESV or NASB version as they are more literal and word for word. The ESV version says acquired. So it's no doubt that the Pharisees brought the field with Judas' Monday due to which He received the field
@@GreatnessStrikes The ESV and NASB both say he acquired the field with the money. Acquiring something with money is another way to say bought. It means the same thing.
I would like to see more responses too. I'm a nonbeliever but would like to see both sides of the story. I looked up some bible verses they give as references and it really does seem to be contradictions. I struggle to imagine what the context could be for some of them to be explained away.
@donovandownes5064 I do think that supposed contradictions in the bible are taken out if context. Y I should check out inspiringpjikosophys supposed bible contradictions, and there are good videos on the subject also
Support from a Catholic, keep up your great work, brother. Do not let these blasphemers and insulters deter you in your mission and your faith, may you stand strong forever.
This video is very well edited with very good information I am surprised it is such a small channel keep up the good work. Can your next video be on seemingly moral issues of the bible like genocide and slavery. God bless 🙏
Romans 13:1 vs Acts 4:18-19, Peter and John refuse to do as higher ups say in contradiction to Paul stating that we need to submit to authorities. Great vid btw!
In Romans 13:1, Paul emphasizes the importance of submitting to governing authorities as they are established by God for order and governance. This submission is generally expected unless the authorities command actions that directly contradict God's laws. In Acts 4:18-19, Peter and John are confronted by the religious authorities and are commanded not to speak or teach in the name of Jesus. Their response highlights a key principle: when human authorities issue commands that conflict with God's directives, believers are called to obey God rather than men. Peter states, "We must obey God rather than human beings," indicating that their allegiance to God takes precedence over human authority when the two are in conflict.
The entire Gospel is a deep dive into the mind of not only God's perceptive, but multiple people's perceptives. I really like the point of the red bandana and the black garment. The New Testament is the perfect example of that point, the same story told with varying degrees of depth, but not just depth, but understanding of God's word. Matthew wrote a more direct and factual account of Jesus' acts, miracles and sermons, while, for example, luke, displayed a deeper understanding from the writers perceptive of Jesus' teachings. Some even focus more on the chronological telling of the events leading up to the death and resurrection of Yeshua, while other's don't.
The problem of biblical inconsistencies, discontinuities, contradictions, etc. long predates atheism. The rabbies tried to deal with it already in the Mishna.
As an atheist the first one makes no sense to me. In Acts 1:16-19, it is said that Judas bought a field with the money he recieved for betraying Jesus and in his iniquity, died by falling while in Matthew 27:1-10, it says that Judas felt remorse for betraying Jesus and returned the money then hanged himself and the chief priests bought a field. If somebody could explain this to me, it would be nice.
I can explain: Judas first hanged himself then his body fell apart because it was rotting for some time. And in ancient times, giving someone money to buy something would be like buying it yourself. Like, if I will give my friend money to buy a Bible, it would be like I bought it myself
@@GreatTrollger Alright, but did Judas feel guilty or not? Did he return the silver to the chief priests or did he buy the field with the silver, hang himself, then the chief priests use the silver Judas refused and bought the field? I'm honestly confused.
@@ronaldmcdonald871He just told you why, but to clear confusion, it was seen as a curse if someone hanged themselves so they bought the land with the money Judas gave back. If you connect the passages in the gospels together, yes Judas felt guilty and did return the sliver. Just as this guy says in the video, these are different observations and perspective of a true event.
@@Mend-fy9zn Right, so did Judah buy the land with the silver, then sell the land, returned the silver and hanged himself afterwards or what? Because I don't see any other way the verses could make sense together.
In Jewish custom it was common to say that someone did something when they actually sent someone to. Like in Exodus, it says Satan killed them then later God killed them. But God allowed Satan to kill the Egyptians. Judas felt guilty, gave back the money, hung himself, and the priests used his money to buy a field.
I would recommend InspiringPhilosophy. I don't know if it's exactly what you're looking for but he has a playlist of videos debunking arguments/connections of the Bible relating to mythology.
@@SamwiseLovesJesus He was raised Lutheran at least. It shows through in some of his works. One could certainly argue he wasn't a very good Christian based on how his first marriage ended, but still, yes.
Brother I need help, earlier, I was debating Muslim, and I was talking about how Muslims have dreams of Jesus, and then I looked up videos about Christians having dreams and Muhammad and people say they had dreams of Muhammad and they converted to Islam so I need help so people have dreams of Christianity and they turn to Jesus but also on the other side people have dreams that Islam and they turn to Islam could you help me with this? Thank you.
Anti-Muslim apologetics is not my strong suit. But I would say that the argument as a whole is not meaningful. Yes people convert based on dreams, but that really doesn’t matter. People can dream about anything, and be deceived in their dreams. The truth of Christianity that Jesus died and rose from the dead is in my opinion the best way to deal with Muslims. But again not my wheelhouse. I would suggest watching Testify, he is very good with his anti Muslim apologetics
exodus 21;23-25 is out of context if you go to verse 22 it states about a law protecting a woman who is carrying a unborn child "If men should struggle with each other and they hurt a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but no fatality results, the offender must pay the damages imposed on him by the husband of the woman; and he must pay it through the judges." it shows how much god values life even of the unborns
I'm an Atheist and I do disagree with a lot of what was said here, but I appreciate the effort involved in putting it together and the earnest work to inject some nuance into the conversation. That being said, the fire thing felt a little disingenuous. Sure, the world is going to be cleansed, redeemer and made a new with fire, but in order for it to be made new, the old version needs to be laid low and purged... through fire. Or are you interpreting the fire as pure metaphor
My point was that there is more nuance than just saying the Earth will/ will not exist And by definition, to redeem something means that it is not being completely destroyed. There has to be something left to be preserved
I would agree with you that “cleansing fire” is not the strongest answer to that. I have a different perspective to you JonTheMaven, if you are open to a dialogue. Reading more of 2 Peter in chapter 3:5-7, you’ll find he compares the “destruction” of the world to the Flood. And he mentions the world facing destruction from the Flood. What does the world being destroyed in that case mean? In the flood account, The earth was not *literally* destroyed, but only those wicked residing in it. So, there is a textual basis for seeing the “earth” being symbolic of wicked people. Verse 7: ”But by the same word the heavens and the earth that now exist are reserved for fire and are being kept until the day of judgment and of destruction of the ungodly people.” -2 Peter 3:7. This or other passages in context with this understanding of “earth and heaven” does not contradict the phrase in Ecclesiastes 1:4: “The earth will last forever” because one is referring to the literal creation of earth, while the other (like the flood) is referring to its inhabitants.
Can you debunk the claims made that slavery is generally not condemned in the old testament but is in the new. I don’t have specific verses off the top of my head but they’re out there. I’ve had it explained but I think you would do a better job. Thanks!
Something I use to also go against the idea of "transubstantiation = cannibalism" is that Jesus doesn't have human flesh any more. He ascended, just like Elijah, Moses, and Enoch, and during the transfiguration, Elijah and Moses appeared without their human flesh.
the book of Genesis first says that God created animals, and then created humans afterwards. But then God makes man, and then decides he doesn't want man to be lonely, and makes animals for him. What is the explanation for this? It's obviously something small, but it seems like a contradiction at least
@@christopherf8912 those seven people are factually incorrect. I believe in the Big Bang, but how did it happen? God made it happen. He also created the organisms that evolved into the animals we know today.
The chief priests unable to deposit Judas blood money into the temple treasury bought a potter's field (Matthew 27 : 6 - 10) Judas' sale was incomplete due to Passover (Leviticus 23) and lacking proper land transaction procedures (Jeremiah 32 : 9 - 12) After his suicide, the priests finalized the purchase in Judas' name completing the transaction.
@@Blindten He was referring to the law done by the Jews. Because of a holiday (Passover), Judas could not finalize the transaction, and it also lacked said procedures. After his suicide, it was finally done.
Yeah, I saw the non stamp collector video and easily discredited a lot of his claims by just looking at the context. He does have decent reasoning, but his confidence in these claims comes from arguing w/ ignorant christians or facing people who blindly follow and avoid these questions out of fear
@coolcatcastle8 first of all faith and reason are not contradictory. You don’t need physical, measurable evidence to be able to reason. I Can come to the conclusion, using reasoning, that someone does or does not like me even without physical, measurable evidence. Google says “humans do not reason entirely from facts”. Also yes Christians do have faith, but the ones I consider to blindly follow are those who put their faith and change the way they act based entirely off of what others say. They don’t come to their own conclusions and hardly understand what they supposedly believe in. My faith is based off of the conclusions I have come to when confronting the things that Jesus, scripture, and tradition preach.
@@BIG-qn6ed lot of filler sentences in there. you obviously don't need physical evidence for yourself if you can see it yourself, but if you try to prove it to someone, you're gonna have to show them as well.
The presence or absence of contradictions in the Bible is irrelevant because, as an ancient text written by humans, it lacks the independent, external evidence needed to be considered reliable proof of any divine truth.
It’s a little weird that you’re trying to prove that these phrases work at face value. There’s nothing wrong with saying “the Bible was written by a lot of people, is old, and has been heavily translated” and attributing contradictions to that. Alternatively, you can point out that you aren’t really supposed to take and interpret the Bible 100% literally, and shouldn’t assume that every word is deliberate.
@coolguy-y9z Of course there is metaphor in the bible. My point is that apologists pick and choose which parts are literal and which are not based on their own beliefs and desires, and not based on the intent of the authors.
Comment for the algorithm. I genuinely hope I can get famous one day to be a good role model (let’s be real, the kids need one) and to spread Gods word while debunking stuff like this. W vid🙏🏾🙏🏾💯
I've got a "contradiction" I've been trying to debunk but I'm having trouble. Matthew 16:28 And Luke 21:32-33. I'm trying to look in context but It's difficult. So if you could do a video on that one, that'd be great.
so youre having trouble reconciling the contradiction, but you still put in scare quotes because youre not open to the possibility of it actually being a contradiction. This isn't earnest truth seeking friend.
The problem with a lot of these responses to bible contradictions is I honestly think you could use this sort of logic to explain anything. There are also contradictions in the Koran and I’m sure Christians would accept those if pointed out but Muslims would have similarly contrived explanations for them. Jesus could literally say ‘My father’s house has many rooms’ and then also say ‘My father’s house has few rooms’ and people would say that he was being literal in one and metaphorical in another or something. You can say Harry Potter is without error if you’re allowed to view anything in it from any angle that you want. I’m not saying none of these explanations of bible contradictions work, but just, if you’re having to constantly bend the face reading of the text to keep it without error maybe ask yourself what the bible would have to say for you to agree that it did have an error. What bar would it have to clear? What would a biblical error even look like? (And if you can’t even imagine that maybe think about what a Koran error would look like and imagine if the bible said the same thing and if you’d accept that as a contradiction). Sure Luke might be looking at it from a doctor’s perspective. It’s weird not to mention anything that might imply a hanging. A mortician still tends to say the way someone died (blunt force trauma in the car example). Luke just doesn’t mention the cause of his death (if he died of hanging he clearly didn’t die from his intestines falling out). It’s just a weird omission for a supposedly perfect book.
Except that the Quran claims to be the exact word of God. So therefore it could not at all have any contradictions to deal with any difference of perception. And also the Quran is blatantly wrong about many different things such as the holy trinity being the Father Son and Virgin Mary? Which obviously we do not hold. which means we are literally able to verify today by simply asking a Christian what the Trinity is. But the quarn says that it is the unfiltered unchanged word of God surah 115.
@@MasonWittenberg Well I agree that that’s a problem with saying that the Koran is without error. But if you claim the bible is without error you also run into similar problems because there are clearly errors in the bible. The Christian can avoid this by saying that the bible isn’t perfect but if, as this guy says, you say that the bible is without error you have the same issue. But you’ve identified an error in the Koran. If you don’t think there are any errors in the bible can you give me an example of something that could be put in the bible that would make it have an error?
@@qfox16789 if the Bible were to say that Jesus was sinless, and then another verse that Jesus was not sinless. or where it says that portrayed that Jesus rose from the dead and then another verse that said that portray that Jesus did not rise from the dead. There are very small errors in the Bible, but it does not change the main idea of the passages. There are can be tiny mistakes made by copying errors like the 500 or 50,000 I believe where the original Hebrew letters look very very very similar. however, it does not change the main idea of the passage. Thankfully, we have a church that was able to interpret these passages, so that it could minimalize error among believers.
@@MasonWittenberg Yeah I don't mind this reply (well I think there are larger errors). You seem to disagree with the guy who made the video who says that the bible is without errors. There are other things to be debated but I think it's a bad position to say that the bible is without errors because it doesn't even need to be for Christianity to be true. Just separately on your Koran point why are they wrong about the trinity? And if it's just because of the way the trinity is presented in the bible, that's not evidence right? That just shows that the bible and koran conflict. Why can't the bible be wrong about that and the koran correct?
I got some more that I could use some help on. What are some examples I could use to help with the whole "If God is so great, why are still suffering. Why didn't God just do all the work we needed to. If it's because we're so evil what did the starving kids in Africa do to deserve their suffering? God isn't real." And "If God is supposed to be unchanging and all that, why does he go from this psychotic civilization destroying intolerant beast and yet is 'all loving and eternal.'."
These are understandable but also mostly opinion and personal interpretation. If you could simply interpret the entire bible this way, with no ground or baseline for these interpretations within scripture itself, you could assign whatever meaning or interpretations you wanted to any part of the bible, which ultimately means there's no 'real' meaning to the words. This is also kinda evident in 5:15 of the video where you can see this happen across denominations where people can assign their own interpretations to correct these 'contradictions'. Ultimately, this view of personal interpretation is also why there are so many denominations. In any case, I do belive the bible holds truths, however as a believers of God we have a responsibility to investigate the historical credibility of the gospels and their authors, to find why these discrepancies exist in the first place, and to find the true message of Jesus.
also, in many cases, the english transaltions of the greek give vastly different meanings and loses a lot of nuance in language, but that's something that's unavoidable when it comes to translation. Not to mention, even greek wasn't the original language of Jesus nor the disciples so there's actually at least two layers of this loss.
@@magicaldoriito9829I havent read your whole comment nor have I watched this video because I dont have the time right now but The gospels weren't translated from aramaic to greek. They were written in greek because greek was the common trade language at the time. So it's really one layer. Also, as time goes on it isnt uncommon for there to be minor copyist errors, especially when talking about numbers. But the most important messages of the bible such as the gospels cant be corrupted considering the amount of manuscripts there are saying the same thing. If there were major contradictions , I would understand your point.
@@SatireRON It being written in greek doesnt change that fact that the original teachings were indeed in Aramaic. Even if it was written from the original Arameic source into greek, there is a translation. Also there are some doctrinal contradictions between the old and new testaments that I can think of off the top of my head like the idea of the original sin contradicting ezekial 18:20. The idea that sacrifice of Jesus was necessary to atone for our sins also kind of goes against this teahcing. And, to the point of many manuscripts saying the same thing, the existence of multiple biblical cannons, regardless of which one someone follows, diminishes the authority of the scripture as guidance from God. This existence of cannon shows that some religious authorities have the power to choose which gospels are cannon and which are not. there's also the fact that for whatever reason, the earlier gospels such as Mark don't have many of the very important verses that are in John. like for example, "The Father and I are one" that people use to justify Jesus' co-equivelence to god is not present in the earlier gospels, where as if Jesus did infact say something this momentous, you would expect it to be there. Ultimately my point isn't to show that the bible is wrong and shouldn't be followed, but that we as blessed as we are by God with intellect, reasoning, and will, have a responsibility to thoroughly investigate what we are taught to belive about Him. Because undoubtedly, The God exists, and the heavens and the earth testify of His work. Our test in this life is to find His true message and worship Him, alone, as He wants us to worship Him.
@@SatireRON All or nearly all spoken words by Jesus and others that were later written to comprise the Gospels in Greek would have originally been uttered in Aramaic; therefore, two layers of translation in English.
As a non-believer I would very much like to see more rebuttals like this. For example, Timothy 6:16 says no man has seen, or ever will see God, but Genesis 32:30 says that Jacob saw God face to face. The bible also says that Abraham and Moses saw God. What is the explanation for that? There are also many more such contradictions which I personally cannot wrap my head around. But I'm not willing to just take your word at face value that "everything has an explanation"
There's an easy rebuttal for this . John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. 18 No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father's side, he has made him known. According to the Bible God is Spirit. That's why he can't be seen. That is why the only way we'll know the Father is because the Son became flesh and now we know the Father through Jesus. That's why Jesus says no one can come through the Father except through me. Once you see there's no contradiction, the word of God is beautiful ❤️
@@cesarbst8170but doesn't the verse they provide mention that jacob saw God? Genesis 32:30 NIV [30] So Jacob called the place Peniel, saying, “It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared.” Idk at least according to my understanding it seems like jacob (at least claimed) to have seen some version of God
@@3leggedfish41 The Angel of God in the Old Testament is Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is in the old testament. That's why we hold the new testament to a high standard because it connects to the old. The Prophecies of the old testament are about Jesus Christ. That's how we can know that Jesus Christ is the Word of God John 1 and God in the Flesh. So although he's not the father, but the Son, he is the Physical (human flesh) revelation of The God that we know, who is Spirit..that's also why he is omnipotent and can be all places at the same time. That's also why when Jesus Died, God the Father was always Alive.. so God.. the Father never died but his flesh died which was Jesus Christ.
@@3leggedfish41 yes.. remember to them.. they only knew The Father as God. They didn't know Jesus the Son until he came to Earth.. that's why Jesus is the only way to the Father.. the God we cant see. Because the word of God became flesh. Jesus Christ.. In the Beginning was the WORD. And the WORD was with GOD. and the WORD was God.
Normally most of the Contradictions, I usually hear are stuff like this. The Fowl has four legs Leviticus 11:20-21 The Bat is a Bird Leviticus 11: 13 &19 Insects have Four legs Leviticus 11:22-23 Hares chew the Cud Leviticus 11:5& 6
The apostles are inspired by the Holy Spirit so we see it as God writing those parts of the Bible through them and they are reliable as for example someone like Paul went from persecuting Christians to becoming one overnight because of claiming to have see the dead Christ risen
Nice video, some decent explanations. However, even though some of these contradictions can be explained, it is difficult to account for the sheer number of contradictions that are in the bible. It took 10 minutes to explain 5 contradictions, the NonStampCollector video you displayed alone lists a good 50 or so (I don't know, I didn't count but it was definitely a lot), and I can probably list a bunch of moral contradictions and paradoxes myself. The point being, why is the word of God so convoluted and seemingly contradictory that these explanations need to be made in the first place? The concept of a bible is already a terrible method of divine communication, a record of an all powerful god's word specifically made for humans to follow and obey should be pretty straightforward, clear and concise, similar to some of our laws today, and not vague enough to be interpreted in a bunch of different ways to cause these discrepancies in the first place. Here are a few more common logical contradictions that you might want to explain: We have free will because God wants us to willingly choose him, because he loves us. Yet in the bible, God sometimes interferes with free will, such as when he hardened the pharaoh's heart in exodus, which undermines this whole concept of free will that God is built upon. We have free will, which provides the option to either follow God or sin. However in heaven, sin does not exist. This implies a lack of free will in heaven, since the option to sin is simply not there. (The argument that people just don't want to sin in heaven is fallacious, since we got into this whole mess from Adam and Eve who also supposedly had no incentive to sin.)
I am very curious about Christianity so can u answer a few questions? •Why was king David's son punished for his father's sin ( 2 Samuel 12:18) •Also why are there Soo many contradiction in the bible? E.g: Punished Children because of their parents ( Deuteronomy 5:9 Exodus 20:5 number 14:8 Hosea 9:11-14) Not punishing children because of their parents ( Deuteronomy 24:16 2 kings 14:6 2 chronicles 25:4 Ezekiel 18:19-20)
As far as "consubstantiation," it's something that by definition is undetectable, not a real change of substance, so there's no reason to argue much there. As far as Matthew 7:21 and Acts 2:21, the one speaks of calling "out" the name of the Lord, contrasted with the one who does what God commands (cf. Matthew 7:21, 24-27). On the other hand, Peter said that whoever calls "on" or "upon" the name of the Lord shall be saved. This is working by His authority. When people ask how to "call on the name of the Lord," Peter tells them, Acts 2:38 (cf. Acts 22:16).
@@cesarbst8170but if judas hung himself luke would have probably noticed a rope hanging from juadas neck. Maybe he could even tell judas neck was broken, assuming the rope didnt magically disappear from judas neck or the tree he was hanging from i think luke would have been able to put two and two together. Just mentioning people see things differently doesn't really address any of this
@@3leggedfish41 if we both see a homeless person dead on the street with an alcohol bottle close to him. One might say.. Dead on the street, possibly sick or died from starvation. The other might say might've died from alcohol poisoning or drug abuse.. we both saw it, but our stories differ.. doesn't mean one of us didn't see it..
@@coolcatcastle8 exactly my point .. their testimonies weren't assumptions.. they saw it 😂 this Dude is Requiring that all of them have the same specific details.. pathetic
But we know from scientific observation that the Earth is not gonna last forever... and one minute before you said that the Bible is completely true. Did I misinterpret that?
You definitely did. You need to know the books in context, one book is talking literally about the longevity of the Earth, stating that it’ll not last forever and will come to an end, and another book is more of a poetic approach. It obviously isn’t literal but more emotional. It says that everyone will die, but the Earth will continue to thrive, as in, one person’s death won’t stop the lives of others. For example, my friend died, I mourned for a few weeks or even months, but after that, I continue with my life, so his death didn’t stop others (or the Earth) to stop thriving. Hope you understood it.
@@d3vd4s But in the video one passage talks about how the earth lasts forever and the one where it talks about the fire is also (according to the guy in the video) about the earth lasting forever... and we know that´s not gonna be the case. Could it maybe be that the people who wrote the bible didn´t know about modern science and were wrong? or does this "context" not count? or even more likely, that you believe in the bible and will simply interpret it as you see fit to fit the reality of the world we live in?
Could you figure out the contradiction where i think it was samson or David wasn’t allowed to touch dead animals yet he killed people using the jawbone of a donkey?
I believe on that one sampson (assuming it was him) was prohibited as in "you should not" as opposed to "you are literally and physically unable to do so". Both sampson and david disobeyed god before so i guess thats how id explain it
@@3leggedfish41 manipulating the words to make the situation fit your beliefs isn't exactly logical. mind explaining why a god couldn't simply state this instead of leaving it for the readers to interpret?
@@multi-milliondollarmike5127 It's not mental gymnastics, Most High-Level atheists scholars don't even believe in bible contradictions Because they supposed contradictions are all so idiotic and read without context. I was debating a classical internet atheist who quoted a parable from Jesus talking about Dogs returning to their vomit and Dogs eating the leftover crumbs, in which they tried to use this to say he's calling people Dogs when he's just making an analogy between the actions of a dog and a human. It's stupid.
@@unrivaled.zzz11 How would you explain the world being made in 6 days, the sun standing still in the sky, the world being said to have pillars and a cornerstone, or the idea that the Biblical flood happened even though there's no evidence the world was ever flooded? As for contradictions, how do you explain Elijah being brought into heaven without being under the blood of Jesus?
Well what about the story of Jesus's resurrection in one gospel itsays that there was only one angel who stepped on the rock while on the other hand ...gospel.....it says that there were two angels and the rock went away explain this............
Important thing to note about the Gospel of Matthew is that he did not necessarily write everything in exact chronological order. The passage in Matthew 28 in reference to the presence of only one angel is when the stone was rolled away when there were still Roman soldiers posted at the tomb, then cuts back to the women being told by the angel that Jesus has risen. Also important to note that omission does not equate contradiction. Matthew only mentions the angel that speaks because he only makes mention of the angel's dialogue. The passage in Luke, then, is specifically at the time the women were told Jesus had risen, wherein there were two angels present and Luke chose to make direct mention of the number of angels present. Both are not mutually exclusive descriptions of what occurred.
4:27 exactly, this is part of the new convenient, not a specific law for the nation of Israel to carry out for its citizens, but jesus is stating a moral truth that people should live by now that God will carry out his justice on judgment day
Apart from the "turn the other cheek"-part, I have never heard anyone use any of the other contradictions here. There are contradictions you could not explain like this.
Hi. I'm a scientific Theist, and I think you've missed (Matt 7:21-23)'s real impact. It's not so much that it contradicts (Acts 2:21), (although it does), but rather that Matthew's version of Jesus says that not everyone using his name to preach and prophesy is doing so HONESTLY. Jesus gives all Christians the right to test their leaders for honesty, because he also said that "Satan is the father of all lies" (John 8:44). This right is verified by Paul, who said, "Test all things, hold fast that which is good" (1Thess 5:21). If your teachers are DISHONEST you have been deceived because at best you have been given half-truths. "Nihil utile quod non honestum". (Without honesty nothing is any good.). Cheers, P.R.
Hey Phillip Robinson, thank you for your comment my friend. I think your point is very valid. And I’m sorry that I didn’t clarify this point in the video, but I did address your point (through briefly) when I described that the person Jesus is referring to has twisted faith and the word of God, which in my opinion is the worst form of dishonesty. Though I 100% think that I could have said that better and I thank you for your lovely comment. God bless brother!
@@Missionarypenguin Hi M.P. No-one could do justice to five Bible contradictions in ten minutes, but thanks for lifting the lid. Some theologians have spent their lifetimes on these issues. It's beneficial raising them through the internet, it's the process of "testing all things", Bible included. Truth will withstand any honest enquiry. Incidentally, Jesus wasn't addressing just one person in (Matt7:21-23), but many. The early church used these "wolves among the flock' scriptures to justify the stamping out of so called heresies and heretics. Cheers, P. R.
Hi M.P. All these issues need to be addressed because "he who fails to learn the lessons of history is doomed to repeat them" (Attributed to philosopher George Santayana). I don't care if he was a Christian or not, truth needs no support except its own strength. Cheers, P.R.
How about the age of jehoiachin mentioned in 2 chronicles 36:9 vs 2 kings 24:8 . Note: If you use the "copyist error" as your basis please do come with concrete historical evidences that supports your theory. And for those who will use the "co- regency" theory as your basis you're wellcome to peovide concrete historical evidences that he was made one .
New fish if u don’t mind Mr. Penguin. Plus for the turn the cheek misconception is not only being a obeyed of the word but also a sign of leaving the rest to God for vengeance like leave vengeance for me and I will repay verse. Yeah, coldest 🥶❄️☃️ verse in the Bible ever. God bless u all now. And peace ✌️ 💜💟
The blood and body of Christ are eaten by your spirit, for us to remember his sacrifice and be save in his name. But there's not more blood or flesh in these than there were in the last supper
He IS god you know. It is HIS law. He followed Jewish law, but also showed them what HIS law truly is and what He stands for. There is a video explaining this better, but essentially he followed Jewish law, but never broke his own laws and standards, which they should've followed, yet they never did. They shunned him and disrespected His law.
@@reznit 1. A god has no reason to follow a mortals law. 2. Him following it and then saying drink blood is contradictory. Regardless if metaphorical, as a wise person would know that this can be misinterpreted. 3. Did he came to abrogate the laws as you claim? I saw no verses where Jesus himself when he was alive said such. 4. He is not god, as god is not stupid to be human understand or prove humans that guys laws are possible to follow
@d34th56 the whole point of Jesus was to be the perfect human as he is God two wills he has dignity but still has to grow like any other human and his teaching disobeyed the idea of legalism. The perfect example why do you think the Lord made it to be memorable
@@joshmcgill4639 God made other prophets memorable also, has he not? So Jesus wasnt god until he grew up. This would mean he didnt know he was god and violating that god is all knowing.
please continue with those videos, i really had a question with these “Bible contradictions” even tho it did not made my faith weaker, i knew that the Word of God wouldn´t contradict, rather i just dont had enough study for knowing the answers and this video helped me much. Thank you, brother in Christ.
Thanks for enjoying the content! God bless you brother!
And here's an example of a sad and deluded believer who admits that he/she could see the obvious contradictions but it didn't make his/her 'faith' any weaker... WHY THE HELL NOT? 'Faith' is NOT a justifiable reason to believe anything (well, apart from believing that your mother loves you, perhaps) and certainly not to believe things that will change your life, or want you to change other people's lives.
@@exiled_londoner I pray that the Holy Spirit opens the eyes of your heart, as we're all in desperate need of a savior, so you may see Christ Jesus exiled_londoner. It's lonely being without God, but we're not alone. God is waiting for you, patiently to run to Him.
@@exiled_londoner
Let them believe if they want
It's their choice not yours
How does it bother you?
@@ThePlagueDoctor1490 - Asking such a question either shows astonishing naivety or malign and devious duplicity... I'm not sure which. It should be obvious to all but the most ignorant and uninformed observer of modern life (or history) that beliefs inform actions, that strongly held religious beliefs impact on an entire society and not just those who hold them, and that organised religion has a habit of seeking to import the commandments of its particular deity, or their interpretations of those commandments, into public and political life. Look at the influence of religion in every single Muslim majority country in the world, look at the co-opting of Hinduism into an aggressive nationalist political creed (Hindutva) in India, and look at the current disastrous situation in the USA where large numbers of so-called 'Evangelical Christian Conservatives' movement have become part of a broader fascist political movement and adopted a White Christian Nationalist position which poses a great threat to US democracy and to the US Constitution.
It's a stupid question.
Oh here's a good one for the sake of debunking, the whole "Iron Chariots" debacle! It is a nigh on COMEDIC misunderstanding of the text.,
"he" referring to the Tribe of Judah, not God.
@@voltekthecyborg7898 *Judah
But yeah, it was so obvious when reading the text.
@@memeboi6017 The correlation between the Tribe of Judah and Judas Iscariot is why I mixed them up.
@@voltekthecyborg7898 yeah I get that
I turn to Cliff Knectle (I have no idea how to actually spell his name) he said that if two people report a car crash, one person says that they heard someone scream that they saw the crash, and someone said they heard a screech of brakes that they saw a crash, these are not contradictions. It is two different accounts of the same story from two different perspectives
Ok, here's a Bible contradiction for you:
Was the Last Supper a Passover Seder? Or was it the night before Passover? Or was it the night after Passover? Each of the Gospels says something different. Or what about Jesus' last words - One gospel (Matthew) records them as "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" Mark records the same. Luke records "Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit." And John records "It is finished." What about the actual cross? Who carried it? Matthew, Mark and Luke say that Simon of Cyrene carried the cross, but John says that ONLY Jesus carried it.
What about the tomb? Had the sun risen when the women came to the tomb? Matthew says it was dawn of the first day of the week. Mark says that the sun had risen (ie- dawn had come and gone and it was now full morning). Luke also says that it was dawn when they reached the tomb. And John says that it was still dark when the women reached the tomb (ie- dawn had not yet dawned).
Now I'm sure you can begin to see the problem here. It's NOT a case of different reports of the same event. The last supper can NOT have been held on 3 different nights. So 2 or possibly 3 of the Gospels contain false information about the beginning of the crucifixion narrative.
Jesus couldn't have spoken his last words, died, then come back to life on the cross, spoken more last words, died again, then come back to life again... So when it comes to THIS part of the crucifixion narrative, again, at least 2, possibly 3 of the Gospels have recorded false information.
When it comes to carrying the cross, Jesus could NOT have carried the cross on his own, with no help from anyone, if Simon of Cyrene did in fact help him carry it. Either 1 or 3 of the Gospels have recorded false information on this aspect of the resurrection narrative.
And as for whether it was dawn/ day or still dark when the women reached the tomb, it could not possibly have been all 3. Either 2 or 3 of the Gospels have recorded false information on this aspect of the resurrection narrative.
These aren't "different perspectives of the same story." No, these are outright contradictions! There is so much false information recorded in relation to the crucifixion and resurrection narrative, that I don't understand how anyone in their right mind could think that the story is a true and accurate accounting of real, historical events.
Ps: That's not the only false story in the New Testament, either. There are a good many of them, but my go-to example is always the story of the Adulterous Woman. That was the first story my mum ever taught me about Jesus and I've never forgotten it. Some years ago, when researching the bible, I learned that the whole story was a fictional invention, added to the bible in around 500 AD.
Additionally, you might consider re-reading the Old Testament and what it says about False Prophets. A False Prophet is ANYONE who draws worship away from God (as you would call him, God the Father). Hells, the First Commandment makes it clear - "I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. You shall not have other gods beside me." That's a CLEAR injunction against worship, adoration and veneration of Jesus (and others). The Old Testament even warns you of False Prophets and their false promises.
Lastly, the Old Testament book of Ecclesiastes makes it clear that there is NO afterlife. When we die, it's all over. There's no work, no learning, no joy, no reward, no food, no remembrance, no anticipation... We come from dust and to dust we return. Let me quote it to you:
Ecclesiastes 9:5 For the living know that they will die:
But the dead know nothing.
And they have no more reward,
For the memory of them is forgotten.
Also, their love, their hatred and their envy have perished;
Nevermore will they have a share
In anything done under the sun...
If you believed the false promises of an afterlife and eternal reward, from a False Prophet, then more fool you. The bottom line here is - If you believe that the bible is the book of God/ was inspired by God, then you CAN'T be a Christian. Not unless you ignore most of the Old Testament, even though the New Testament records Jesus saying (Matthew 5:13) I have not come to abolish the Law of Moses, or the writings of the Prophets, but to Fulfil them! I came to accomplish their purpose. For I tell you truly, until heaven and earth pass away, not a single jot, not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
If you were able to make it through all that, then tell me: How does it make any sense at all for any person to be a christian?
Additional - There are a LOT more contradictions in the Gospels. I counted 25 instances in the Resurrection narrative alone. Instances where at least one person, possibly more, maybe even ALL the Gospels have recorded false information. Those were just 5 of the most salient ones, but there are still a LOT more.
He teaches false doctrine
@@Raz.CYou fool. Do you not realise that 6000 years and millions of other believers have completely broken your argument? Read The Case For Christ if you're that stubborn. And repent, since you cause others to sin.
@@l-rh8fs like what?
to add to the "turn the other cheek" bit. The slap was coming from the the hand that was used to wipe the bottom. It was basically a grave insult to you personally as well, not entirely an act of violence. It was also saying that if someone is gonna start flinging poo at you (metaphorically) then be the bigger man
This is great Brad!!!
As per my understanding, in Matthew 5:39 the "turn the other cheek around" has another context, it being that a slap on a persons cheek was a forceful insult yet not considered a violent offense or attack. Giving the other cheek (left) incite the aggressor to repeat the offense, but with the palm of the hand this time; an action done not to a lesser, but to an equal. The act neglects both the violent of retaliating and the passiveness of letting other do whatever with you.
When someone smacks me on my bottom, I always turns the other cheek! 😁
working hard and glorifying God's name man 🙏🏾
I love your explenations, really clear and straightforward. Honestly you're really underrated and I truly hope people see your videos(which are really awesome and with good explaining aswell), keep it up and God bless!!
Thank you Brother! God bless
I already knew these were not real contradictions but you explain so well that I got to learn something new. Simply said but completely explained, good job!
Thanks bro!
You are going to get big soon, here for the ride, thanks for the great content.
I hope you’re right! Thanks for the support
@@Missionarypenguinhello please address John 5:31 and John 8:14
Also Matthew 5:14 vs John 8:12
he silenced the atheists with one video
he is a true missionary who knows the bible well
great quality video. super underrated man keep it going
In fact, the judas one also makes less sense if it's a contradiction. Like what? Dude fell on the ground and suddenly, his body decided to explode like some enemy in a video game?
It is to explain where the name "Field of Blood" came from, which also comes with a contradiction of its own.
Exactly. You would need to fall from REALLY high to have that happen to a living person who has no decay.
@@kingdave7996the context is the body was of decay and dead
@@thelostcaptain5763 I know, I’m just saying that you’d need a massive loophole to say that Judas killed himself from falling instead of hanging, rotting, and falling after a while.
@@kingdave7996 Which is the more parsimonious explanation- Judas threw himself from a high place.
Different accounts make more sense since Acts made no mention of hanging, and the reason why the place he died on got named "Field of blood" was different. He's also the one who betrayed Jesus so there is a motivation to give him a gruesome end in the story.
absolutely underrated
Brother your channel is going to blow up soon if you keep it up. Im here for it and beleive in you. Keep going
love the content! Keep up the good work man!
Appreciate it!
When Judas hung himself, his body was in the middle of a desert plain, so obviously, his body would start to cook and have gas forming inside. When the rope snapped, his body ruptured and leaked entrails everywhere. This is something that whales have happen to them when they get beached.
it can be other way that judas die by heart attack and then he burst out
luke only talk postmoterm not about death
Thats why there is contradiction plus confusion
@@aryankhan3619 It isn't a contradiction still, you just refuse to accept it.
@@notanyone2433 thats a ignorent mentality
here i am not talking that judas die or not i am talking how judas died
luke is not talking that judas how judas die
Luke is talking that judas die
That confusion plus contradiction
@@aryankhan3619 Do you not know how to speak english? Also, quote the verse instead of making a foolish claim.
There is no comtradiction at all.
The greek word used in Acts 1:18 is "pregen" which implies the idea of falling from height, which makes sense that Judas died from hanging himself and then fell from height. @aryankhan3619
wow this video is very well made and you're really good at explaining things. keep it up, brother!
Thank you Brother!
Yt just recommended this masterpiece
The issue with the harmonization of Judas’s death is that no one would write about a death by hanging as the author of Acts does (which suggests he didn’t have death by hanging in his mind). Given your example of a car accident, no author would write “He walked across the street and his guts spilled open on the other side”, even though it’s technically possible that he was hit by a car walking across the street and his body wasn’t found until it had decayed and exploded.
There’s also the issue of whether the Pharisees or Judas himself bought the field.
Its the Chief priests. Acts 1:18 emphasizes Judas obtaininf or acquiring the field. He did not directly buy it
@@GreatnessStrikes Acts 1:18 explicitly says Judas bought the field
@@Alexandros74738 that's the NIV version. It's better to trust the ESV or NASB version as they are more literal and word for word. The ESV version says acquired. So it's no doubt that the Pharisees brought the field with Judas' Monday due to which He received the field
@@GreatnessStrikes The ESV and NASB both say he acquired the field with the money. Acquiring something with money is another way to say bought. It means the same thing.
only 340 subscribers? keep up the good work man! God bless
Hopefully it will continue to grow
@@MissionarypenguinSUBBED
Thanks for mentioning the nonstampcollecter video, I can't find anyone who responses to this guy
I would like to see more responses too. I'm a nonbeliever but would like to see both sides of the story. I looked up some bible verses they give as references and it really does seem to be contradictions. I struggle to imagine what the context could be for some of them to be explained away.
@donovandownes5064 I do think that supposed contradictions in the bible are taken out if context. Y I should check out inspiringpjikosophys supposed bible contradictions, and there are good videos on the subject also
Support from a Catholic, keep up your great work, brother.
Do not let these blasphemers and insulters deter you in your mission and your faith, may you stand strong forever.
Thank you brother! God bless!
This video is very well edited with very good information I am surprised it is such a small channel keep up the good work. Can your next video be on seemingly moral issues of the bible like genocide and slavery. God bless 🙏
Romans 13:1 vs Acts 4:18-19, Peter and John refuse to do as higher ups say in contradiction to Paul stating that we need to submit to authorities. Great vid btw!
In Romans 13:1, Paul emphasizes the importance of submitting to governing authorities as they are established by God for order and governance. This submission is generally expected unless the authorities command actions that directly contradict God's laws.
In Acts 4:18-19, Peter and John are confronted by the religious authorities and are commanded not to speak or teach in the name of Jesus. Their response highlights a key principle: when human authorities issue commands that conflict with God's directives, believers are called to obey God rather than men. Peter states, "We must obey God rather than human beings," indicating that their allegiance to God takes precedence over human authority when the two are in conflict.
The entire Gospel is a deep dive into the mind of not only God's perceptive, but multiple people's perceptives. I really like the point of the red bandana and the black garment. The New Testament is the perfect example of that point, the same story told with varying degrees of depth, but not just depth, but understanding of God's word. Matthew wrote a more direct and factual account of Jesus' acts, miracles and sermons, while, for example, luke, displayed a deeper understanding from the writers perceptive of Jesus' teachings. Some even focus more on the chronological telling of the events leading up to the death and resurrection of Yeshua, while other's don't.
The problem of biblical inconsistencies, discontinuities, contradictions, etc. long predates atheism. The rabbies tried to deal with it already in the Mishna.
I love the style and pace of the video, besides of course the content
wdym?
i cant wait for you channel to get big it will be soon i can tell
Bro earned my sub! Keep it up dude!
Thank you bro!
Waiting for the second part. Keep it up 👌. U did it well.
You’re growing fast, careful. More people will be on you like white on rice now. God bless
Thanks for the warning lol. I try to just ignore the obvious rage bait. Though seeing all the nice comments really brightens my day. God Bless
As an atheist the first one makes no sense to me. In Acts 1:16-19, it is said that Judas bought a field with the money he recieved for betraying Jesus and in his iniquity, died by falling while in Matthew 27:1-10, it says that Judas felt remorse for betraying Jesus and returned the money then hanged himself and the chief priests bought a field.
If somebody could explain this to me, it would be nice.
I can explain: Judas first hanged himself then his body fell apart because it was rotting for some time. And in ancient times, giving someone money to buy something would be like buying it yourself. Like, if I will give my friend money to buy a Bible, it would be like I bought it myself
@@GreatTrollger Alright, but did Judas feel guilty or not? Did he return the silver to the chief priests or did he buy the field with the silver, hang himself, then the chief priests use the silver Judas refused and bought the field? I'm honestly confused.
@@ronaldmcdonald871He just told you why, but to clear confusion, it was seen as a curse if someone hanged themselves so they bought the land with the money Judas gave back. If you connect the passages in the gospels together, yes Judas felt guilty and did return the sliver. Just as this guy says in the video, these are different observations and perspective of a true event.
@@Mend-fy9zn Right, so did Judah buy the land with the silver, then sell the land, returned the silver and hanged himself afterwards or what? Because I don't see any other way the verses could make sense together.
In Jewish custom it was common to say that someone did something when they actually sent someone to. Like in Exodus, it says Satan killed them then later God killed them. But God allowed Satan to kill the Egyptians. Judas felt guilty, gave back the money, hung himself, and the priests used his money to buy a field.
Would you mind debunking all the other gods, thanks
I would recommend InspiringPhilosophy. I don't know if it's exactly what you're looking for but he has a playlist of videos debunking arguments/connections of the Bible relating to mythology.
1:18 The discussion of Judas's body happens about 43 days after he killed himself. That's plenty of time to decay.
I'm starting to fall in love with these types of TH-cam channels
Thanks for the support! ❤️
I love your content, brooo!!! You have a new suscriber. :3
Welcome brother! Glad you enjoy the videos
0:25 Don't disparage Dr. Seuss, that Lutheran requires context to understand too!
Dr Seuss was a Christian?? Lets go!!!!!
@@SamwiseLovesJesus He was raised Lutheran at least. It shows through in some of his works. One could certainly argue he wasn't a very good Christian based on how his first marriage ended, but still, yes.
8:40 bro started speaking directly to the atheist watching hi ladies and gentlemen 👋🏽 😂 Lord Jesus wants you too accept His free gift
Brother I need help, earlier, I was debating Muslim, and I was talking about how Muslims have dreams of Jesus, and then I looked up videos about Christians having dreams and Muhammad and people say they had dreams of Muhammad and they converted to Islam so I need help so people have dreams of Christianity and they turn to Jesus but also on the other side people have dreams that Islam and they turn to Islam could you help me with this? Thank you.
Anti-Muslim apologetics is not my strong suit. But I would say that the argument as a whole is not meaningful. Yes people convert based on dreams, but that really doesn’t matter. People can dream about anything, and be deceived in their dreams.
The truth of Christianity that Jesus died and rose from the dead is in my opinion the best way to deal with Muslims. But again not my wheelhouse. I would suggest watching Testify, he is very good with his anti Muslim apologetics
Hello. Can you address John 5:31 vs John 8:14
It seems confusing to me.
Also Matthew 5:14 vs John 8:12
I will do my best to make sure I address those in the next video! Thanks for the help
@@Missionarypenguin Welcome
exodus 21;23-25 is out of context if you go to verse 22 it states about a law protecting a woman who is carrying a unborn child "If men should struggle with each other and they hurt a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but no fatality results, the offender must pay the damages imposed on him by the husband of the woman; and he must pay it through the judges." it shows how much god values life even of the unborns
I'm an Atheist and I do disagree with a lot of what was said here, but I appreciate the effort involved in putting it together and the earnest work to inject some nuance into the conversation.
That being said, the fire thing felt a little disingenuous. Sure, the world is going to be cleansed, redeemer and made a new with fire, but in order for it to be made new, the old version needs to be laid low and purged... through fire. Or are you interpreting the fire as pure metaphor
My point was that there is more nuance than just saying the Earth will/ will not exist
And by definition, to redeem something means that it is not being completely destroyed. There has to be something left to be preserved
I would agree with you that “cleansing fire” is not the strongest answer to that. I have a different perspective to you JonTheMaven, if you are open to a dialogue.
Reading more of 2 Peter in chapter 3:5-7, you’ll find he compares the “destruction” of the world to the Flood. And he mentions the world facing destruction from the Flood. What does the world being destroyed in that case mean? In the flood account, The earth was not *literally* destroyed, but only those wicked residing in it. So, there is a textual basis for seeing the “earth” being symbolic of wicked people. Verse 7: ”But by the same word the heavens and the earth that now exist are reserved for fire and are being kept until the day of judgment and of destruction of the ungodly people.” -2 Peter 3:7.
This or other passages in context with this understanding of “earth and heaven” does not contradict the phrase in Ecclesiastes 1:4: “The earth will last forever” because one is referring to the literal creation of earth, while the other (like the flood) is referring to its inhabitants.
@@PeterParker-vi2nl I appreciate the additional context! Thank you for sharing
@@JonTheMaven Yeah you’re welcome! Thanks for reading
I started losing braincells when you explained the bread and wine
Sounds painful
You Problem ≠ His fault
From what you just commented, i can tell.
smartest gacha user:
Well, when you have a Gacha pfp, your IQ is of a potato chip
Can you debunk the claims made that slavery is generally not condemned in the old testament but is in the new. I don’t have specific verses off the top of my head but they’re out there. I’ve had it explained but I think you would do a better job. Thanks!
CONTEXT!!! GIMME THE CONTEXT!!
Something I use to also go against the idea of "transubstantiation = cannibalism" is that Jesus doesn't have human flesh any more. He ascended, just like Elijah, Moses, and Enoch, and during the transfiguration, Elijah and Moses appeared without their human flesh.
you deserve more subscribers
Thanks man!
the book of Genesis first says that God created animals, and then created humans afterwards. But then God makes man, and then decides he doesn't want man to be lonely, and makes animals for him. What is the explanation for this? It's obviously something small, but it seems like a contradiction at least
the genesis creation story is a myth. it’s meant to be metaphorical and not meant to be taken literally.
@@thereturnofglenhaven721 I know like seven people who disagree with you.
@@christopherf8912 those seven people are factually incorrect. I believe in the Big Bang, but how did it happen? God made it happen. He also created the organisms that evolved into the animals we know today.
Genesis 1 tells what happened in seven days. Genesis 2 gives more detail about the events of Day 6, the creation of man.
I think you should re-read that pal
Thanks for your work!
glaze
Im not a Lutheran and I take the Lutheran view of the Eucharist as you described as my view.
Who bought the land where Judas died?
The chief priests unable to deposit Judas blood money into the temple treasury bought a potter's field
(Matthew 27 : 6 - 10)
Judas' sale was incomplete due to Passover (Leviticus 23) and lacking proper land transaction procedures
(Jeremiah 32 : 9 - 12)
After his suicide, the priests finalized the purchase in Judas' name completing the transaction.
@@justedits8048 So the bible is wrong about the order of events?
@@Blindtenwhat
it isnt, tell me what u r confused about
@@Blindten He was referring to the law done by the Jews. Because of a holiday (Passover), Judas could not finalize the transaction, and it also lacked said procedures. After his suicide, it was finally done.
@@Blindten you read what I wrote
Let him cook!!!
Wait, people thought the first one was a problem???? No way 😭
Yeah, I saw the non stamp collector video and easily discredited a lot of his claims by just looking at the context. He does have decent reasoning, but his confidence in these claims comes from arguing w/ ignorant christians or facing people who blindly follow and avoid these questions out of fear
every christian blindly follows. they use faith instead of reasoning.
@coolcatcastle8 first of all faith and reason are not contradictory. You don’t need physical, measurable evidence to be able to reason. I Can come to the conclusion, using reasoning, that someone does or does not like me even without physical, measurable evidence. Google says “humans do not reason entirely from facts”. Also yes Christians do have faith, but the ones I consider to blindly follow are those who put their faith and change the way they act based entirely off of what others say. They don’t come to their own conclusions and hardly understand what they supposedly believe in. My faith is based off of the conclusions I have come to when confronting the things that Jesus, scripture, and tradition preach.
@@BIG-qn6ed lot of filler sentences in there. you obviously don't need physical evidence for yourself if you can see it yourself, but if you try to prove it to someone, you're gonna have to show them as well.
The presence or absence of contradictions in the Bible is irrelevant because, as an ancient text written by humans, it lacks the independent, external evidence needed to be considered reliable proof of any divine truth.
Good video. Im going to repent to Jesus soon, so this video helps me gain more knowledge about the bible. Could you debunk Genesis 1 & Genesis 2?
Love to hear it friend. Thank you for the support 🫶🏻
It’s a little weird that you’re trying to prove that these phrases work at face value. There’s nothing wrong with saying “the Bible was written by a lot of people, is old, and has been heavily translated” and attributing contradictions to that. Alternatively, you can point out that you aren’t really supposed to take and interpret the Bible 100% literally, and shouldn’t assume that every word is deliberate.
It’s a very important point you bring up that I neglected to mention. The Bible should not be interpreted as 100% literal. Thanks for the comment!
@@Missionarypenguin
You are selective about which parts are literal and which are not. You use it to paper over obvious contradictions.
@coolguy-y9z
Of course there is metaphor in the bible. My point is that apologists pick and choose which parts are literal and which are not based on their own beliefs and desires, and not based on the intent of the authors.
Comment for the algorithm. I genuinely hope I can get famous one day to be a good role model (let’s be real, the kids need one) and to spread Gods word while debunking stuff like this. W vid🙏🏾🙏🏾💯
Thank you bro❤️
I've got a "contradiction" I've been trying to debunk but I'm having trouble. Matthew 16:28 And Luke 21:32-33. I'm trying to look in context but It's difficult. So if you could do a video on that one, that'd be great.
I’ll make sure I address it! Thanks
so youre having trouble reconciling the contradiction, but you still put in scare quotes because youre not open to the possibility of it actually being a contradiction. This isn't earnest truth seeking friend.
very based video
Based? BASED ON WHAT!
@@AblereSinAblere On the Scriptures, duh.
@@AblereSinAblere Ok, nerd. Gosh.
@@AblereSinAblere That's right, bröther!
@@AblereSinAblere I've played you like a fiddle. It's satisfying.
The problem with a lot of these responses to bible contradictions is I honestly think you could use this sort of logic to explain anything. There are also contradictions in the Koran and I’m sure Christians would accept those if pointed out but Muslims would have similarly contrived explanations for them. Jesus could literally say ‘My father’s house has many rooms’ and then also say ‘My father’s house has few rooms’ and people would say that he was being literal in one and metaphorical in another or something. You can say Harry Potter is without error if you’re allowed to view anything in it from any angle that you want. I’m not saying none of these explanations of bible contradictions work, but just, if you’re having to constantly bend the face reading of the text to keep it without error maybe ask yourself what the bible would have to say for you to agree that it did have an error. What bar would it have to clear? What would a biblical error even look like? (And if you can’t even imagine that maybe think about what a Koran error would look like and imagine if the bible said the same thing and if you’d accept that as a contradiction).
Sure Luke might be looking at it from a doctor’s perspective. It’s weird not to mention anything that might imply a hanging. A mortician still tends to say the way someone died (blunt force trauma in the car example). Luke just doesn’t mention the cause of his death (if he died of hanging he clearly didn’t die from his intestines falling out). It’s just a weird omission for a supposedly perfect book.
Except that the Quran claims to be the exact word of God. So therefore it could not at all have any contradictions to deal with any difference of perception. And also the Quran is blatantly wrong about many different things such as the holy trinity being the Father Son and Virgin Mary? Which obviously we do not hold. which means we are literally able to verify today by simply asking a Christian what the Trinity is. But the quarn says that it is the unfiltered unchanged word of God surah 115.
So either God is stupid or the Quran is wrong
@@MasonWittenberg Well I agree that that’s a problem with saying that the Koran is without error. But if you claim the bible is without error you also run into similar problems because there are clearly errors in the bible. The Christian can avoid this by saying that the bible isn’t perfect but if, as this guy says, you say that the bible is without error you have the same issue.
But you’ve identified an error in the Koran. If you don’t think there are any errors in the bible can you give me an example of something that could be put in the bible that would make it have an error?
@@qfox16789 if the Bible were to say that Jesus was sinless, and then another verse that Jesus was not sinless. or where it says that portrayed that Jesus rose from the dead and then another verse that said that portray that Jesus did not rise from the dead. There are very small errors in the Bible, but it does not change the main idea of the passages. There are can be tiny mistakes made by copying errors like the 500 or 50,000 I believe where the original Hebrew letters look very very very similar. however, it does not change the main idea of the passage.
Thankfully, we have a church that was able to interpret these passages, so that it could minimalize error among believers.
@@MasonWittenberg Yeah I don't mind this reply (well I think there are larger errors). You seem to disagree with the guy who made the video who says that the bible is without errors. There are other things to be debated but I think it's a bad position to say that the bible is without errors because it doesn't even need to be for Christianity to be true.
Just separately on your Koran point why are they wrong about the trinity? And if it's just because of the way the trinity is presented in the bible, that's not evidence right? That just shows that the bible and koran conflict. Why can't the bible be wrong about that and the koran correct?
I got some more that I could use some help on.
What are some examples I could use to help with the whole "If God is so great, why are still suffering. Why didn't God just do all the work we needed to. If it's because we're so evil what did the starving kids in Africa do to deserve their suffering? God isn't real."
And
"If God is supposed to be unchanging and all that, why does he go from this psychotic civilization destroying intolerant beast and yet is 'all loving and eternal.'."
I will try to make respond to both those questions
@@Missionarypenguin thank you
It's because god's nature is contradictory and you've just noticed that the claims about him from the Bible don't align.
Sounds like the epicurean paradox
Well the towns he destroyed where so bad that it made las vages and Martygra look like PBS kids
These are understandable but also mostly opinion and personal interpretation. If you could simply interpret the entire bible this way, with no ground or baseline for these interpretations within scripture itself, you could assign whatever meaning or interpretations you wanted to any part of the bible, which ultimately means there's no 'real' meaning to the words. This is also kinda evident in 5:15 of the video where you can see this happen across denominations where people can assign their own interpretations to correct these 'contradictions'. Ultimately, this view of personal interpretation is also why there are so many denominations. In any case, I do belive the bible holds truths, however as a believers of God we have a responsibility to investigate the historical credibility of the gospels and their authors, to find why these discrepancies exist in the first place, and to find the true message of Jesus.
also, in many cases, the english transaltions of the greek give vastly different meanings and loses a lot of nuance in language, but that's something that's unavoidable when it comes to translation. Not to mention, even greek wasn't the original language of Jesus nor the disciples so there's actually at least two layers of this loss.
@@magicaldoriito9829I havent read your whole comment nor have I watched this video because I dont have the time right now but
The gospels weren't translated from aramaic to greek. They were written in greek because greek was the common trade language at the time. So it's really one layer.
Also, as time goes on it isnt uncommon for there to be minor copyist errors, especially when talking about numbers. But the most important messages of the bible such as the gospels cant be corrupted considering the amount of manuscripts there are saying the same thing. If there were major contradictions , I would understand your point.
And we would have made a note of it in the last 2 thousand years
@@SatireRON It being written in greek doesnt change that fact that the original teachings were indeed in Aramaic. Even if it was written from the original Arameic source into greek, there is a translation. Also there are some doctrinal contradictions between the old and new testaments that I can think of off the top of my head like the idea of the original sin contradicting ezekial 18:20. The idea that sacrifice of Jesus was necessary to atone for our sins also kind of goes against this teahcing. And, to the point of many manuscripts saying the same thing, the existence of multiple biblical cannons, regardless of which one someone follows, diminishes the authority of the scripture as guidance from God. This existence of cannon shows that some religious authorities have the power to choose which gospels are cannon and which are not. there's also the fact that for whatever reason, the earlier gospels such as Mark don't have many of the very important verses that are in John. like for example, "The Father and I are one" that people use to justify Jesus' co-equivelence to god is not present in the earlier gospels, where as if Jesus did infact say something this momentous, you would expect it to be there. Ultimately my point isn't to show that the bible is wrong and shouldn't be followed, but that we as blessed as we are by God with intellect, reasoning, and will, have a responsibility to thoroughly investigate what we are taught to belive about Him. Because undoubtedly, The God exists, and the heavens and the earth testify of His work. Our test in this life is to find His true message and worship Him, alone, as He wants us to worship Him.
@@SatireRON All or nearly all spoken words by Jesus and others that were later written to comprise the Gospels in Greek would have originally been uttered in Aramaic; therefore, two layers of translation in English.
As a non-believer I would very much like to see more rebuttals like this. For example, Timothy 6:16 says no man has seen, or ever will see God, but Genesis 32:30 says that Jacob saw God face to face. The bible also says that Abraham and Moses saw God. What is the explanation for that? There are also many more such contradictions which I personally cannot wrap my head around. But I'm not willing to just take your word at face value that "everything has an explanation"
There's an easy rebuttal for this . John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. 18 No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father's side, he has made him known.
According to the Bible God is Spirit. That's why he can't be seen. That is why the only way we'll know the Father is because the Son became flesh and now we know the Father through Jesus. That's why Jesus says no one can come through the Father except through me. Once you see there's no contradiction, the word of God is beautiful ❤️
@@cesarbst8170but doesn't the verse they provide mention that jacob saw God?
Genesis 32:30 NIV
[30] So Jacob called the place Peniel, saying, “It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared.”
Idk at least according to my understanding it seems like jacob (at least claimed) to have seen some version of God
@@3leggedfish41 The Angel of God in the Old Testament is Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is in the old testament. That's why we hold the new testament to a high standard because it connects to the old. The Prophecies of the old testament are about Jesus Christ. That's how we can know that Jesus Christ is the Word of God John 1 and God in the Flesh. So although he's not the father, but the Son, he is the Physical (human flesh) revelation of The God that we know, who is Spirit..that's also why he is omnipotent and can be all places at the same time. That's also why when Jesus Died, God the Father was always Alive.. so God.. the Father never died but his flesh died which was Jesus Christ.
@@cesarbst8170 so he saw jesus but not God the father? I guess that actually makes sense
@@3leggedfish41 yes.. remember to them.. they only knew The Father as God. They didn't know Jesus the Son until he came to Earth.. that's why Jesus is the only way to the Father.. the God we cant see. Because the word of God became flesh. Jesus Christ.. In the Beginning was the WORD. And the WORD was with GOD. and the WORD was God.
😭 The pictures u used are so funny
Normally most of the Contradictions, I usually hear are stuff like this.
The Fowl has four legs
Leviticus 11:20-21
The Bat is a Bird
Leviticus 11: 13 &19
Insects have Four legs
Leviticus 11:22-23
Hares chew the Cud
Leviticus 11:5& 6
Can you help me, I’m wondering what it means to have faith in God the definition confuses me
Good minus the communion but, the symbols were symbols not the person they represent
How is the Bible God's word if it was written by the apostles after the death of Christ?
The apostles are inspired by the Holy Spirit so we see it as God writing those parts of the Bible through them and they are reliable as for example someone like Paul went from persecuting Christians to becoming one overnight because of claiming to have see the dead Christ risen
part two please
Nice video bro respect!
Nice video, some decent explanations.
However, even though some of these contradictions can be explained, it is difficult to account for the sheer number of contradictions that are in the bible.
It took 10 minutes to explain 5 contradictions, the NonStampCollector video you displayed alone lists a good 50 or so (I don't know, I didn't count but it was definitely a lot), and I can probably list a bunch of moral contradictions and paradoxes myself. The point being, why is the word of God so convoluted and seemingly contradictory that these explanations need to be made in the first place? The concept of a bible is already a terrible method of divine communication, a record of an all powerful god's word specifically made for humans to follow and obey should be pretty straightforward, clear and concise, similar to some of our laws today, and not vague enough to be interpreted in a bunch of different ways to cause these discrepancies in the first place.
Here are a few more common logical contradictions that you might want to explain:
We have free will because God wants us to willingly choose him, because he loves us. Yet in the bible, God sometimes interferes with free will, such as when he hardened the pharaoh's heart in exodus, which undermines this whole concept of free will that God is built upon.
We have free will, which provides the option to either follow God or sin. However in heaven, sin does not exist. This implies a lack of free will in heaven, since the option to sin is simply not there. (The argument that people just don't want to sin in heaven is fallacious, since we got into this whole mess from Adam and Eve who also supposedly had no incentive to sin.)
I am very curious about Christianity so can u answer a few questions?
•Why was king David's son punished for his father's sin ( 2 Samuel 12:18)
•Also why are there Soo many contradiction in the bible?
E.g:
Punished Children because of their parents ( Deuteronomy 5:9
Exodus 20:5
number 14:8
Hosea 9:11-14)
Not punishing children because of their parents ( Deuteronomy 24:16
2 kings 14:6
2 chronicles 25:4
Ezekiel 18:19-20)
As far as "consubstantiation," it's something that by definition is undetectable, not a real change of substance, so there's no reason to argue much there. As far as Matthew 7:21 and Acts 2:21, the one speaks of calling "out" the name of the Lord, contrasted with the one who does what God commands (cf. Matthew 7:21, 24-27). On the other hand, Peter said that whoever calls "on" or "upon" the name of the Lord shall be saved. This is working by His authority. When people ask how to "call on the name of the Lord," Peter tells them, Acts 2:38 (cf. Acts 22:16).
Great vid! Subscribed
Did Luke not see the tree and rope? Why didn't he document that instead?
Dumb question.. me and you can see a car crash and our stories might be totally different
@@cesarbst8170but if judas hung himself luke would have probably noticed a rope hanging from juadas neck. Maybe he could even tell judas neck was broken, assuming the rope didnt magically disappear from judas neck or the tree he was hanging from i think luke would have been able to put two and two together. Just mentioning people see things differently doesn't really address any of this
@@3leggedfish41 if we both see a homeless person dead on the street with an alcohol bottle close to him. One might say.. Dead on the street, possibly sick or died from starvation. The other might say might've died from alcohol poisoning or drug abuse.. we both saw it, but our stories differ.. doesn't mean one of us didn't see it..
@@cesarbst8170 horrible comparison. this implies that god would allow assumptions to pass off as facts.
@@coolcatcastle8 exactly my point .. their testimonies weren't assumptions.. they saw it 😂 this Dude is Requiring that all of them have the same specific details.. pathetic
7:18 perfect. This isn’t a contradiction, but it’s great to find the mention of the work of the father and not jesus. 😊
But we know from scientific observation that the Earth is not gonna last forever... and one minute before you said that the Bible is completely true. Did I misinterpret that?
You definitely did. You need to know the books in context, one book is talking literally about the longevity of the Earth, stating that it’ll not last forever and will come to an end, and another book is more of a poetic approach. It obviously isn’t literal but more emotional. It says that everyone will die, but the Earth will continue to thrive, as in, one person’s death won’t stop the lives of others. For example, my friend died, I mourned for a few weeks or even months, but after that, I continue with my life, so his death didn’t stop others (or the Earth) to stop thriving. Hope you understood it.
@@d3vd4s But in the video one passage talks about how the earth lasts forever and the one where it talks about the fire is also (according to the guy in the video) about the earth lasting forever... and we know that´s not gonna be the case. Could it maybe be that the people who wrote the bible didn´t know about modern science and were wrong? or does this "context" not count? or even more likely, that you believe in the bible and will simply interpret it as you see fit to fit the reality of the world we live in?
@@artu262 who is saying God can't just make the earth last forever? I don't see your problem here
The current earth will not last forever and will pass away one day. The New Earth will last for eternity. Hope this clears things up
@onionsans the solar system has a finite life, cosmology tells us. Or are you the kind of Christian that doesn't believe in modern science?
Could you figure out the contradiction where i think it was samson or David wasn’t allowed to touch dead animals yet he killed people using the jawbone of a donkey?
I believe on that one sampson (assuming it was him) was prohibited as in "you should not" as opposed to "you are literally and physically unable to do so". Both sampson and david disobeyed god before so i guess thats how id explain it
@@3leggedfish41 thx
@@3leggedfish41 manipulating the words to make the situation fit your beliefs isn't exactly logical. mind explaining why a god couldn't simply state this instead of leaving it for the readers to interpret?
@@coolcatcastle8 what you mean
@@3leggedfish41 what part is confusing
Correct me if I'm wrong but Bread and wine is symbolic to his flesh and blood as Jesus says do this in Remembrance of me.
Atheists after they realize every single argument of theirs has been debunked:
If you do enough mental gymnastics, I suppose you could come to a conclusion like that...
@@multi-milliondollarmike5127 that speaks for both sides
Bruh@@multi-milliondollarmike5127
@@multi-milliondollarmike5127 It's not mental gymnastics, Most High-Level atheists scholars don't even believe in bible contradictions Because they supposed contradictions are all so idiotic and read without context. I was debating a classical internet atheist who quoted a parable from Jesus talking about Dogs returning to their vomit and Dogs eating the leftover crumbs, in which they tried to use this to say he's calling people Dogs when he's just making an analogy between the actions of a dog and a human. It's stupid.
@@unrivaled.zzz11 How would you explain the world being made in 6 days, the sun standing still in the sky, the world being said to have pillars and a cornerstone, or the idea that the Biblical flood happened even though there's no evidence the world was ever flooded? As for contradictions, how do you explain Elijah being brought into heaven without being under the blood of Jesus?
Well what about the story of Jesus's resurrection in one gospel itsays that there was only one angel who stepped on the rock while on the other hand ...gospel.....it says that there were two angels and the rock went away explain this............
Important thing to note about the Gospel of Matthew is that he did not necessarily write everything in exact chronological order. The passage in Matthew 28 in reference to the presence of only one angel is when the stone was rolled away when there were still Roman soldiers posted at the tomb, then cuts back to the women being told by the angel that Jesus has risen. Also important to note that omission does not equate contradiction. Matthew only mentions the angel that speaks because he only makes mention of the angel's dialogue. The passage in Luke, then, is specifically at the time the women were told Jesus had risen, wherein there were two angels present and Luke chose to make direct mention of the number of angels present. Both are not mutually exclusive descriptions of what occurred.
Bro I was here
Should have brought up Matthew 13:30. It refers to a failed prophecy of Jesus arguably.
4:27 exactly, this is part of the new convenient, not a specific law for the nation of Israel to carry out for its citizens, but jesus is stating a moral truth that people should live by now that God will carry out his justice on judgment day
Im a muslim and im enjoying ur content❤️
Thank you friend!:)
Apart from the "turn the other cheek"-part, I have never heard anyone use any of the other contradictions here. There are contradictions you could not explain like this.
Good vid!
Hi. I'm a scientific Theist, and I think you've missed (Matt 7:21-23)'s real impact. It's not so much that it contradicts (Acts 2:21), (although it does), but rather that Matthew's version of Jesus says that not everyone using his name to preach and prophesy is doing so HONESTLY. Jesus gives all Christians the right to test their leaders for honesty, because he also said that "Satan is the father of all lies" (John 8:44). This right is verified by Paul, who said, "Test all things, hold fast that which is good" (1Thess 5:21). If your teachers are DISHONEST you have been deceived because at best you have been given half-truths. "Nihil utile quod non honestum". (Without honesty nothing is any good.). Cheers, P.R.
Hey Phillip Robinson, thank you for your comment my friend. I think your point is very valid. And I’m sorry that I didn’t clarify this point in the video, but I did address your point (through briefly) when I described that the person Jesus is referring to has twisted faith and the word of God, which in my opinion is the worst form of dishonesty.
Though I 100% think that I could have said that better and I thank you for your lovely comment. God bless brother!
@@Missionarypenguin Hi M.P. No-one could do justice to five Bible contradictions in ten minutes, but thanks for lifting the lid. Some theologians have spent their lifetimes on these issues. It's beneficial raising them through the internet, it's the process of "testing all things", Bible included. Truth will withstand any honest enquiry.
Incidentally, Jesus wasn't addressing just one person in (Matt7:21-23), but many. The early church used these "wolves among the flock' scriptures to justify the stamping out of so called heresies and heretics. Cheers, P. R.
Hi M.P. All these issues need to be addressed because "he who fails to learn the lessons of history is doomed to repeat them" (Attributed to philosopher George Santayana). I don't care if he was a Christian or not, truth needs no support except its own strength. Cheers, P.R.
Double Jericos in the Gospel?
Did Jesus die before or after the Passover?
ONE SUB AWAY FROM 500!!
How about the age of jehoiachin mentioned in 2 chronicles 36:9 vs 2 kings 24:8 .
Note:
If you use the "copyist error" as your basis please do come with concrete historical evidences that supports your theory.
And for those who will use the "co- regency" theory as your basis you're wellcome to peovide concrete historical evidences that he was made one .
It’s not really a sacrifice if you eat it.. 🤔🐑
New fish if u don’t mind Mr. Penguin. Plus for the turn the cheek misconception is not only being a obeyed of the word but also a sign of leaving the rest to God for vengeance like leave vengeance for me and I will repay verse. Yeah, coldest 🥶❄️☃️ verse in the Bible ever. God bless u all now. And peace ✌️ 💜💟
i like how gen 1 and 2 are completly different storys of the same thing. fucking gen 1 and 2
You don't know how to read ancient news east writing then
@@Chance_Rice you clearly don’t know what making sense is.
The blood and body of Christ are eaten by your spirit, for us to remember his sacrifice and be save in his name. But there's not more blood or flesh in these than there were in the last supper
Based.
Tesify's lost brother...?
ExegesisGODS won 🙏
5:09 yea this is a contradiction as jesus said that he came to fulfill the laws and he followed the laws. So going against the laws are contradictory.
He IS god you know. It is HIS law. He followed Jewish law, but also showed them what HIS law truly is and what He stands for. There is a video explaining this better, but essentially he followed Jewish law, but never broke his own laws and standards, which they should've followed, yet they never did. They shunned him and disrespected His law.
@@reznit
1. A god has no reason to follow a mortals law.
2. Him following it and then saying drink blood is contradictory. Regardless if metaphorical, as a wise person would know that this can be misinterpreted.
3. Did he came to abrogate the laws as you claim? I saw no verses where Jesus himself when he was alive said such.
4. He is not god, as god is not stupid to be human understand or prove humans that guys laws are possible to follow
@d34th56 the whole point of Jesus was to be the perfect human as he is God two wills he has dignity but still has to grow like any other human and his teaching disobeyed the idea of legalism. The perfect example why do you think the Lord made it to be memorable
@@joshmcgill4639 God made other prophets memorable also, has he not?
So Jesus wasnt god until he grew up. This would mean he didnt know he was god and violating that god is all knowing.
You can't be trying to debunk Christianity without any understanding of it, like you are doing right now