I could be mistaken, but I believe that his PhD came from a 'university' - that HE founded! rationalwiki.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind%27s_doctoral_dissertations rationalwiki.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind%27s_doctoral_dissertations#/media/File:PatriotU_Crop.jpg
@@chriswhitehouse9137 Followed by: A dissertation or thesis is a long piece of academic writing based on original research, submitted as part of an undergraduate or postgraduate degree. The structure of a dissertation depends on your field, but it is usually divided into at least four or five chapters (including an introduction and conclusion chapter). How many words is that so far
Not only that. He constantly stumbles and changes words he is reading off his screen. He paraphrases and fully changes words as he is reading them from the Bible. And he can’t argue that in any way. He can deny it, but that’s nothing new for him. All he does is deny reality haha.
Hahha wait, so Adam chose the names for his animals then picked one of them to be his wife?! Is that the way Ken said it or am I playing his game of twisting words?! Well, I’m choosing to play his game and state it is fact then, he definitely said that and he can’t convince me otherwise. Adam chose one of the animals as his wife. 😂
I take comfort in the fact that Hovind is so much older than me that probability dictates that I at some point will be living in a world without Kent Hovind.
I ditched religion at 16 when I asked the preacher at the church about the contradictions I saw in the bible. His response was simply "The bible is the word of god and cannot be questioned, you have to faith to accept it without question". I remember discussing it with my grandmother and she said that you need faith to accept it but I had to decide for myself whether or not I believed it. Next sunday I had written down many of the obvious contradictions I saw, chapter and verse and again questioned him, he became agitated, snatched the paper from my hand and told me that I had satan working in me and I needed to get up in front of the entire congregation and proclaim my sin and beg god for forgiveness or forever leave his church. I never set foot into any church again for anything other than weddings and funerals. When I told my grandmother what happened she let that preacher know exactly what she thought of him, using some very unchristian language that I had never heard her use before or sense. She also left that church but joined another in the community. This hovind guy reminds me very much of that baptist preacher.
I was 15. Same thing … I’d read the book so many times, found the contradictions, decided that Paul was a misogynistic jerk, and hoped the heck out of there.
If the Bible is written by God and God is perfect, why so many contradictions? Shortage of good proofreaders maybe? Funny how Bible pushers have an answer for everyone except young kids willing to ask the questions adults are too afraid to ask. Glad you believed in yourself. And wonderful of your grandmother to stick up for you.
@@user-qo3jh9mn1t who said the Bible was written by God? God wrote the 10 commandments, the Bible was written by man inspired by God. Humans are imperfect and any small contradictions can be attributed to writing, remembering, or translation errors.
@@GlockFanBoy94045 Right, so it's not the word of God since it's full of human error. Too bad he didn't inspire them enough for them to do it correctly and make it reliable. Seems it wasn't very important to him.
Thankfully, my parents are not religious. That's why I was never taken to a church, mosque, temple or whatever the place is called where people are brainwashed to believe in god(s).
My favourite is when he, and others, try to convince people that everything in the bible is true... by citing the bible. That kind of circular reasoning would never work for any subject, but for this particularly it's insane. Why would anyone use something that the other people don't believe is anything more than a collection of parables, to prove to those non-believers that it's *more* and is actually the word of an all-seeing, all-knowing, all-powerful deity that is responsible for creating our entire existence? The bible is true because the bible says it's true. Well I say I'm a 15-foot purple chicken Jedi master with lasers for eyes, and you have to believe me, because I'm a purple chicken Jedi master and I say so.
Every person I've ever spoke to that refutes God has always admitted the same thing to me.. When they faced an instant life or death situation they found themselves asking the thing they have refuted their entire life to help or save them some how ... Please God if your real help me !! You who don't believe will one day do the same.
Can anyone look at Hovind and say "If that's a Christian, I want to be a Christian too!"? He's purely preaching to his choir of followers. It's about retaining market share, not about convincing anyone.
He must be in much pain right now because of the depletion of the world's supply of Copium... all the flerfs are overdosing on it right now, so there's none left for the Kent Hovinds of the world.😅
Hovind reminds me of Dick Dastardly from the old cartoons or the old used car salesman passing off rusted through metal as the patina of a classic car.
@@Ryvaken What research did he do? All I watched was someone do terrible mental gymnastics to try and make his point of view stick and not rebuttal the points put forward. As to the others to comment were not talking about his speaking skills but that of issue with the absolute bullshit he spews out time and time again to defend something, which you would of read and understood if you had decent comprehension.
I love how anytime Emma gets called out by Kent, she just smiles like a teacher hearing a student say something so completely wrong that it's sad, and then she proceeds to *demolish* him.
He didn’t convince anyone, all he did was insult Emma (very Christian), say some words then act like what he said proved her wrong… very condescending for a Christian as well
Kent's whole thing is being massively condescending (and lying about science, obviously). Because in his mind he is clearly the only person who really understands the reality. It's deeply aggravating.
I’d bet money KH haaaaates women. Particularly ones who like education, critical thinking, independence, etc. At best he would *tolerate* a woman who submits to him.
The argument that your criticisms have no legitimacy if u havent read The Bible is not an argument. I never read the bible and know its hog wash. Consider the context: the period of time, how ignorant the people were, and the oppressive nature of soceity. U need obedient little citizens. Then u have the obvious falsehoods. U have Noahs Ark, the talking snake, the false assertion that the earth is 5000 years old. People thought the earth is flat. (But no one does today, thankfully....). We didnt know what a germ was. Plus, who wants to read a book with great life lessons like if a man grapes your daughter, he owes u 10 shillings or some sh!t? Or how its anti abortion, but if a woman gets preggo and the father is in doubt, u give her bitter water and if the baby lives, she wasn't unfaithful. Or how it condones slavery. Yep. Such a guiding light. Let me read this 1000 year old book to get my prioritys straight. ISIC AND EZEKIEL DID THIS AND THIS....WHICH MEANS TRUMP SHOULD BE PRESIDENT OR SOMETHING.
@@tyemaddog 66 different books - Paul is recognised as writing multiple of the NT books though not all of the letters that bare his name; whilst eg Isaiah is thought to have several authors over the time span of the text. And then there are editors such as in Genesis weaving together different traditions (ie why 2 distinct creation accounts). So no idea how many authors, and revisors - but agree no need to presume literalism, the text is much richer than than.
A man who bought a fake PhD asserts that Emma has not done adequate research, attacks her motivation, and has to invent Bible stories of his own to 'prove' her wrong.
Kent was also found guilty for domestic violence. I suppose, to Kent, that doesn't count because the judges verdict contradicted Kent's opinion... And we all now know that Kent doesn't believe in contradictions.
@@tyemaddogwell...can you name a credible independent source that confirms he even existed? If so...tell the vast number of religious scholars that would die and/or kill for having one.😏
Mr Anderson delivered a wonderful blow to Kent in one of their debates. I think Anderson said; "I'm not saying the Bible is wrong, I'm saying you're wrong," and the look on Kent's face was priceless. After all, Kent won't admit that the Bible is wrong, but he also can't admit that he is wrong.
The best part of the genealogy of Joseph, is that it's all given to show how Jesus, being the son of Joseph, fulfils a prophecy. But that all becomes irrelevant when you then claim that Joseph ISN'T the father anyway!
No it doesn't, because Joseph willingly adopted and took Jesus as his own. He didn't have to share DNA with his adopted son for his heritage to apply, from the standpoint of Jewish (or any, really) law.
@@theradgegadgie6352 And all this so called history, wasnt written till many decades after its claimed to have happened. So explain that, can you point us to other places other than the bible, were all this evidence is also available. you cant as its only in the bible. Which you don't have a original. ONLY HUNDRESDS OF VERSIONS. And just for good measure explain this for us. you claim, that he made adam from dirt, then made eve from Adams rib. That means that they would have the same DNA,. SO COULD HAVE CHILDREN. End of the fairy tail
@@gdutfulkbhh7537 Because at least in the United States the Southern Strategy has used religion to grab political power. Donald Trump was just elected president in large part thanks to regular Christian folks thinking he's a their guy. I don't know that any of this is helping because not only did Trump win he won the popular vote which is.... gross. Why are we here now? To laugh until I die because I can't change anything. Religious folks won again. Yay.
7:52 hey, Kent, quick question. Who let Satan into the garden in the first place? How was he able to talk to and trick one of the only two humans at the time into going against gods will? Was god asleep? He is all seeing and all knowing right?
@@braedenmclean5304 right! In places it reads like God is some Mafioso type. At Sodom and Gomorrah he walks around other villages going door to door asking questions, and he is accompanied by "the elders". Who the hell are they?
@@braedenmclean5304 Yes, because when I ask my students how they decided that 63 is less than 60, I'm asking out of my own ignorance instead of hoping that by asking the question, they might revisit what they have written and realize that something is wrong. If they can do that without me having to explain it, the lesson is better remembered next time.
The levels of twisting he has to do.... either don't explain it, say it says something it doesn't, or just simply make something up and say it says something nobody has ever thought it did ... Emma has read the whole bible, many times, that's why she's an atheist
man.. you don't need to read a book to be atheist.. you just need a brain and logic. Also the point of God being all knowing, invalidate ANYTHING in the bible and free will.
And those are not the easy to prove ones. Start looking at answers that are numbers and find other places with the same questions. The numbered answers change (in some cases a lot).
That joke at literacy in England is funny from an American guy. 52% of Americans are functionally illiterate. They know how to read, but they're stuck at the level of a 6th grader and they don't really understand what they're reading.
@didymus3348 That is not correct. According to the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation world literacy levels, the UK is 99%, and the USA is 86%. It's hardly similar.
@@AllanMogensen As an American, I have to admit that it is true that most of us are raised in, if not outright taught, that America is exceptional in literally every way. We are the best, and if we're not, we just pretend like whatever it is does not matter at all. It's pretty ludicrous, tbh. I would bet, though, that we in America have the highest per capita rate of citizens exemplifying the Dunning Kruger Effect.
I was brought up with a religious background and once I started going to high school (well it was a comprehensive when I was at school) I told my parents that it wasn't for me anymore. I can understand people's faith but I can't relate despite my upbringing. To me it was just a load of folk tales that just became so established it became cannon. All the best from here in Yorkshire Dan.
My definition is: god/devil are both the result of human interaction with reality. Therefore humans created god. God and the devil are part of the same Ying yang circle.
That’s what I always tell creationists, it’s not really the word of God, because God didn’t write it, men did. And men are sinful, so why would you believe them? What’s stopping them from lying? They can’t ever answer that, and instead just go “lalala I can’t hear you”, and would rather choose bias over logic and critical thinking, id est, the truth.
@@natsterjam And they don't have one single original bible, a book so important to them, that they lost the original.. so who knows what that actually said. the oldest copy is the Sinai bible, and the kjv has 14,800 differences. add to that 1n 1480 some books were removed from the current version of the bible, so every version after that it totally different.
Aside from translations, transcriptions, and certain denominations (eg Mormon), it wasn't centuries later. It was around 50-120 years, depending on which book you're looking at and whose research you believe.
-The book never contredit itself - same book having 2 parts, the second half speaking about a loving and forgiving god while the first part is describing a god who obliterate towns because they didn't follow his rules. Yes, that's consistent, isn't it? 😂😂😂😂
_"god who obliterate towns because they didn't follow his rules"_ Then I'd rather choose satan. At least he doesn't destroy me and everyone around me if some bloke at the end of the street says "no" to him.
It's totally and utterly true as well. I know this is a fact because I have been to some of the locations mentioned in that book and they exist therefore absolutely everything in that book is totally and utterly true. Also there are less contradictions than the bible stories.
@@Sizzlik Very true, the demonstrations of companionship despite adversity are strong morals to abide by. Also, despite never having seen an orc or elf, the entire book must be entirely true because there are multiple books that refer to each other, which means they are all true, and I have seen and even *held* a gold ring which is absolute proof of everything.
@@nickryan3417 And, those books are written in different languages, in different countries by totally unrelated authors. And, they agree with one another.
When I hear diatribes from religionists getting "butt hurt" over having their "holy book" questioned like any other book, I am reminded of a quote from Shakespeare. "It is a tale told by an idiot full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." Brings me to another quote from physicist, Richard Feynman, "I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned."
"It is actually more proof that god's word is inspired and without error" - This is literally the boldest-faced lie of all the bold-face lies anyone has ever said. He literally followed that sentence with an attempt to try to explain away the errors
Which of the 5000+ claimed gods,are you referring too. Ant tell us when exactly has the bible been proven true. Only you indoctrinated nutters claim its true. SO prove it. And while your scrabbling to prove it. explain this. you claim this for a god. That he made adam from dirt, then made eve from one Adams rib. That means that they would have the same DNA,. SO COULD HAVE CHILDREN. End of the fairy tail.
And he couldn't even begin to try. He barely watched her video (at least in this cut from Dan, and I refuse to watch Hovind's entire video to find out if he ever hit play).
Kent is like one of those little ankle biters barking at a big dog who just ignores them ... and the little ankle biter feels like a superhero showing the big one "his place".
It's not normal NOT to change as we grow older. We learn things we didn't realize when growing up. We hear and witness things in life that shape our beliefs. Yet Ken never, AT ALL, ever seems to change. He's been spuing the same rhetoric for his entire life, NOT CHANGING EVEN ONE THING in all those years... This alone makes me question the character of this silly man.
8:40 "I'm right, you're wrong. So there." Yes, the ultimate argument ender for grade school kids everywhere. Truly Kent is a master of arguing with children at their level.
Fantastic video, Dan! Keep pressure on Hovind and keep calling out his nonsense. You're work has a measurable impact on a lot of people, so keep kickin ass! 🔥😎👍
Hovind *hates* Emma with an absolute passion. I suspect the main reasons are: (1) Emma is female (2) Emma is female (3) Emma is smarter than Hovind [admittedly a low bar, but still very true] (4) Emma is female (5) Emma is female (6) Emma is not heterosexual (7) Emma is female (8) Emma is smarter than Hovind (9) Emma is able to argue better than Hovind without resorting to name calling (10) Emma is female (11) Emma is female (12) Emma is female *and* attractive too (13) Emma is smarter than Hovind (14) Emma is female (15) Emma is younger than Hovind (16) Emma is female. I think that about sums up Hovind's take on Emma.
The convictions of Kent and his corkscrew rationale for each of the points is hilarious. Never try to debate a zealot. you're never going to change their minds.
"The atheists don't want god telling them what to do." WE atheists don't even believe in a god, much less care if he's telling us ANYTHING. Such a misconception by all these bible thumpers.
I spent my first 20 years in a religious cult as a minister son. Every time i questioned a verse (and there were many) id receive the same response that it was not meant to be taken literally. However, every chirch service, after a reading, the layperson or minister would say "this is the word of god". What a crock. Needless to say im 62 now and i didn't go to my dads recent funeral as we could not reconcile our religious abd politicsl differences.
And don't forget the english version (I assume Kent reads the english one) is a translation of a translation of a translation of the latin version, which itself is a translation of a translation of the texts in hebrew. And which each translation, minor errors seep in, because there are metaphores and expressions that have different meanings, or don't exist at all, in other cultures and languages.
@Yehan-xt7cw That's completely not true. Kent is reading the King James, which is a revision of the Bishop's Bible, which is a revision of Tyndale's bible. Which is a direct translation from the original languages (Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic). Though there is a small section of Revelation in which Tyndale's Greek text is actually a translation back to Greek from the Latin Vulgate (which was a direct translation from the Greek). But that's only there because Erasmus didn't have access to any complete Greek manuscripts of that book. The original claim that the Bible is the most revised and re-written book of stories in literary history is only true if you consider translation to necessarily be revision and re-writing. Pretty much every translation or revision of the Bible is done by referring back to the texts in their original languages. The only exception I can think of is Wycliff's translation into middle English in the 14th century, which was a translation of the Latin Vulgate because that's all he had available.
5:20 You know that when they heap words upon words upon words they are blowing smoke to obfuscate what they cannot explain away. It's always the same.🤷♂
Until someone actually shows me an actual contradiction, it’s pretty easy to say there are no contradictions. It’s usually just people parroting the internet or a very surface level reading of an English translation and then they scoff and say it contradicts itself.
@@znail4675You mean the differences in detail between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2? What are you claiming is a contradiction? There are no contradictions. The first chapter is a poetic narration of the creation of the universe. The second chapter is a close up look of man’s beginning. Do you know what a contradiction is?
@@elyjahstark A contradiction is when facts doesn't match up. But this is only a problem if you consider the Bible the direct word of God that can't be wrong.
I think that those contradictions presented were pretty clear and i dont think Kent knows what a contradiction is. There was a quote once "I have no problem with God, it's his fan club i cant stand".
A contradiction is a circumstance where a logical system contains two concepts that cannot coexist with each other. The simplest example being P AND NOT P; that is, an proposition that is simultaneously true and false. The Bible lacks contradictions. Certainly nothing in this video holds water. You start with two genealogies, one which ends with a man's biological father and one that ends with his father-in-law. Not a contradiction. Then you come to a question about touching, which is closer to a lost-in-translation detail that clears up the instant you look at the verses in other translations or go back to the original Greek manuscripts and the idioms and phrases of the time. And then you wrap it all up with seven events that were merely not written in sequential order. None of these are contradictions.
@@goldengrimlock Per Matthew 28:1, Mark 16:1, and John 20:1, Mary Magdalene. Luke mentions only women who had followed Jesus without giving names. Matthew and Mark mention other women who accompanied her. Now, as to who met them, that gets somewhat confused. We know it was an angel of the Lord, which is enough of an event that it's not surprising that the reports were confused. Matthew and Mark name a single man, while Luke and John name two. Matthew's account is more poetic, whereas John's is more detailed, so most likely John interviewed the women much more closely on this account. This is in keeping with the themes of their respective gospels; John was always more fastidious on the details of Christ's divinity, whereas Matthew focused much more on the human details.
As an ex-Roman Catholic, I must admit we weren't raised reading the bible, because the church believes the bible is difficult to interpret, so we're raised on the catechism, a distillation of church dogmas for children. We're not discouraged from reading the bible, but taught that it needs to be read in just the right way! It's a massive book written by multiple authors, and heavy on metaphor and allegory. What would astonishing is if it didn't contain a horde of contradictions!
The same here. My favourite part of the Catechism that we were taught was "He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience". I think this line is what ultimately turned me away from the Church. I could never in good conscience follow many of the teachings of the Church
it is a narrative history, mostly written by people who lived before scientific instrumentation. it is also only relatively recently that people were so rebellious as to translate the bible into languages that common people could read for themselves. - because people being able to read it for themselves would undermine the authoritarianism the church relied on to control the masses.
Same. In RE classes (catholic schools) we were taught that the bible is a mish-mash of myth, legend, story-telling, and some rough history in the later OT books. Even the NT we were taught that a lot of it is illustrative and not to be read as literal truth/history. But the bible bash nut jobs regard catholics as pagans anyway! I'm thoroughly atheist now, just wish I'd done that sooner.
@@KPRPhoto-1599 Well, we can't expect reason from fundie whackjobs who read the bible as literal history, Noah's ark and all. They are a totally lost cause who don't know how to think, and reject skepticism as the tool of Satan!
Ssshhhh... the criminal Kent Hovind doesn't like that reality. He will attack you and throw *devastating* rebuttals at you such as "nuh uh!" and "you're a devil worshipper" or even "but if we descended from monkeys why are there still monkeys?"
man definitely is made of flesh. this is the challenge, to reject the animal flesh impulses, and live spiritually for god's ways. we have the opportunity to live eternal life after death. that's a pretty good hope that animals don't share.
It's been a long time since I read the Bible, but I distinctly remember the Old Testament says "eye for an eye" while the New Testament says "turn the other cheek"... sure sounds contradictory to me!
Except discussing game characters is much more practical as knowing which is more powerful may impact the performance in the game (depending on the context of the doscussion)
@@evelghostrider Just as with God, I cannot prove that leprechauns don’t exist, I can only point out how nonsensical it is to believe that either do exist.
Why are heavily religious the ones who always spout blasphemy and have to take little digs at those who are Athiest. The fact he feels the need to defend it so just demonstrates the indoctrination
To be fair there's plenty of equally bad rhetoric from the atheist side. A lot of the atheist RUclips channels contain more personal attacks on Christians than they contain actual arguments against Christianity.
Ironic how he preaches the good word of the bible, while there is a sign for Dinosaur Adventure Land behind him. Dinosaur fossils probably being one of the earliest discoveries that lead us to theorise that hundreds of millions of years have passed...not 6000.
Ah, but Kent thinks that all the dinosaurs died out as a result of the Great Flood. You know, that other thing that there's no evidence for. Checkmate, atheist!
@@kostkostkos2514 wow! Thanks for the info as I was very clearly not informed. I thought it was odd to see that! So I assume he is not a fan of carbon dating then?
The age of the Earth really isn't a problem for the Bible. Christians back in the 4th century wrote that Genesis 1 was not intended to be interpreted literally. Modern scholarship generally thinks of that passage as being a rebuttal to the pagan creation myths (most of which took the form of the gods reshaping what was already there), rather than being intended to be read as a scientific textbook. It's worth noting that Christians almost universally abandoned the idea of a young earth back in the 19th century (the one exception of any note being the Seventh Day Adventists, who were at the time a heretical offshoot of Christianity), and the Young Earth Creationism of today was a new movement than only really dates back to the 1950s.
It has been proven 1000 times and will be proven 1000 times more but those who are strong in their FE religion, ignore it even if it is proven infinite number of times.
It doesn't disprove a flat earth. It merely proves a 24 hr sun at one point on the earth. The fact that a globe earth can predict to the second what will happen is irrelevant. Other models may also do that. There you go. That's all of 2025 arguments back and forth summed up in one post.
Ken's explanation at the end was brilliant, making one more copy of everything so Adam could name it. Reminds me of every explanation of every comic book discrepancy I've ever heard of. One thing that is not addressed enough about Genesis is the naming is all about power over. If I can name you, I have power over, you.
'Then the L ord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him.” And out of the ground the L ord God formed every animal of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name. The man gave names to all the livestock, and to the birds of the sky, and to every animal of the field, but for Adam there was not found a helper suitable for him. ' Genesis 2:18-20 God didn't make the universe for himself. He made it for us. Adam was involved. Granted, he was involved the way a child is involved helping make breakfast: by doing the simple things where he can't cut himself, burn himself, spill everything all over the floor, but he can watch and learn and participate a little, under supervision.
@@tyemaddog But why do you say that when even the best theologians and apologists use nothing but God of the gaps arguments while trying to dress them up as something prettier. Kent is the pig, and theologians and apologists are just people trying to put lipstick on that pig.
5:45 - just being one of the countless descendants of Solomon doesn't make someone king Kent. Just look up how many Americans are descendants of European royalty. Spoilers, it's probably every single person living in North America. Probably every human in North America has European royalty somewhere in their genealogy.
The Bible is an impressive book and has many great teachings... but to deny that there are no contradictions as well as some passages that are outright problems is just foolish. But most of the religious people I've seen who make the argument that it is the infallible Word of God certainly do like to cherry-pick the parts they want to agree with and ignore the more inconvenient passages.
Oh man, this was cringy. I'm a self-taught Christian Apologist for the better part of 20 years. I've done my own research on the topic and am confident in my faith. With that being said, the presentation of his rebuttal was painful to watch, and follow. There was too much time in setting up his response and very little time he spend on the actual response. Unfortunately, this kind of forum does easily not lend itself to these kinds of topics, especially when the presenter is all over the place. He did describe himself as a (Biblical) Literalist, which is probably the most difficult kind of person to have a debate with. I do appreciate folks like Emma and you SciMan, who can tackle complex topics and distill them down to digestible and understandable explanations. Seeing videos like this make me want to re-double my efforts in the classes I lead in Christian Apologetics to emphasize being clear and to the point in responses. Also, not being able to say "I do not know" when you are entering murky waters is an acceptable response. I'm not sure that he should have been trying to tackle Emma point by point when his answers were all over the place. When it comes to matters of (any) faith, there are some things that are accepted without understanding - hence the word "faith". However, that is not a mandate to not ask questions or to try to learn about it. Regardless of your stance, I always enjoy learning more about things that I do not understand.
Biblical literalists who don't read it in the original, Hebrew, Greek, or Aramaic are a joke. Of course acknowledging the fact that there are different versions of the bible already shoots themselves in the foot but hey
@kirixen why so much hate? What is it about God that scares you? I think you are the one who doesn't understand "things" so you lash out. I hope you find peace.
@@kirixen”the things you do not know could fill a library” and then goes on to make a definitive claim “there’s no such thing as god”. Yikes. Instant hypocrisy.
Fifty eight charges for financial related offenses including tax evasion in 2006 resulting in a 10 year sentence which he served 9 years and 30 days for domestic assault on his third wife in 2021. Evidently tax evasion is more serious of an offense than domestic abuse in U.S law.
@@UncommonSense-wm5fd Yeah, a sad display of priorities, there. The UK managed to do something similar, years ago now, sentencing a guy who'd been *very* bad in Malaysia and a woman who was behind on her taxes to time in prison and allowing us all to calculate just how much the justice system thinks a Malaysian child is really worth. Tony Blair things his after-dinner speeches are worth about two Malaysian children per minute.
As a trained theologian, I personally don't give two handfuls of crap if you believe in some sort of higher being or not. Let's just get that out of the way. Honestly, I think the worst thing that happened to the world was Johannes Gutenberg. He allowed the masses to have access to a document that they had no training in and didn't understand. (It would like your garbage man reading the a textbook on how to perform a appendectomy and then deciding she/he could perform it. (nothing against garbage men. It is an honorable job.)) Creationists have completely misread the Jewish and Christian scriptures. The universe was not created in six days. The story is there for three main reasons: a) to remind people that what we see is good b) to remind people that we are the caretakers and we should treat it with the utmost respect and not abuse it and c) to remember to take at least one day off a week because otherwise we will literally work ourselves to death. I won't bother getting into anything else. I have talked long enough. Here is your TL:DR: Creationists are morons.
@ What are you talking about? Yes. I owned a coffee shop. Yes. I drove motor coach. Yes. I drove school bus. Yes. I worked for a non-profit. Yes. I earned a Bachelor of Arts in Social Work. Yes. I earned a Master of Divinity. Yes. I earned a Master of Art in Christian Education with a specialization in youth ministry. Yes. I earned a Doctorate of Ministry. Yes, I have been a Christian pastor for 30 years. Yes, I was a parish pastor for 15 of those years. Yes, I am now a bishop. Go ahead and look them up! I don’t care! I get hit from the right, the left, and the f*ck you up the butt. Guess what? I am on your side. Deal with it, and learn something. Guess how many F*s I have to give now?
@@SizzlikNo. The problem is with people who 1) don’t understand literary genres or literature in general 2) don’t understand the cultural context of when the different texts were written make assumptions of the texts and read it with a modern western worldview.
🤯 the cognitive dissonance. "Emma, your correct, the genealogies are different, but you're wrong that they are contradictory. It's actually more proof that God's word is inspired."
I didn’t find kent’s “explanations” very persuasive, but I didn’t find them to be explanations either. Just a smug idiot reading clearly contradictory citations from scripture and then asserting that it _isn’t_ a contradiction because he doesn’t want it to be. Basically just “nuh-uh” to everything. He’s not even _trying_ to explain them, just berating the audience for thinking that contradictions are contradictions. Full blown gaslighting.
Yeah, they never explain how “God” as an explanation, is actually an explanation. They believe that the claim of having an explanation is the same as actually having an explanation.
it's hard but kent is right on the first point. In ancient cultures, the father-in-law was also your father. In addition, the books are written from only one perspective.
How do I verify that? I've looked for this idea that "father" and "father-in-law" are interchangeable in genealogies. The only places I can find people saying that are when people are arguing these two genealogies don't contradict each other. Plus, this only explains the apparent contradiction if that *is* what these two genealogies are actually doing. There is nothing in the text that says they are. It's perfectly possible for these two authors to have different thoughts on these family trees, in which case this is a contradiction. At best, this is a *possible* explanation. Proponents would have to show more than they have done that this definitely *is* the explanation.
Honestly, this is exactly what Kent Hovind wants: attention. It doesn't matter that you constantly refute him. Maybe better to ignore? I get it, he's a liar, which is funny since he considers himself supposedly "moral" because of his "faith".
Hello! I am not a young earth creationist, but I am a Christian. I will try my best to explain these: 1: “Jesus’ genealogies in Matthew and Luke differ, so this is a contradiction.” Anyone who studies the genealogies will immediately notice that the genealogies are stated to be of Joseph, not Jesus. Matthew 1:16 reads, “and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ,” while Luke 3:23 reads, “Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli.” Both genealogies clearly state Joseph as the last link of the genealogy, with some separation showing that Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus. Most conservative Bible scholars today take a different view, namely, that Luke is recording Mary’s genealogy and Matthew is recording Joseph’s. Matthew is following the line of Joseph (Jesus’ legal father), through David’s son Solomon, while Luke is following the line of Mary (Jesus’ blood relative), through David’s son Nathan. Since there was no specific Koine Greek word for “son-in-law,” Joseph was called the “son of Heli” by marriage to Mary, Heli’s daughter. Through either Mary’s or Joseph’s line, Jesus is a descendant of David and therefore eligible to be the Messiah. Tracing a genealogy through the mother’s side is unusual, but so was the virgin birth. Luke’s explanation is that Jesus was the son of Joseph, “so it was thought” (Luke 3:23). 2: “Jesus tells Mary Magdalene not to ‘touch’ Him in John 20:17, while later in the chapter (implied in John 20:24 and explicitly in John 20:27) He invites Thomas to touch Him.” The Greek word for ”touch” in John 20:17 is ἅπτομαι (haptomai). It can also mean: “to cling to,” “to hold fast,” ”to detain.” Jesus’ command to Mary is not about physical touch, but about not clinging to Him or trying to hold Him back. Jesus is not forbidding all touching, as if He were a ghost; rather, He is telling Mary that she must not cling to Him as though He were about to stay permanently. His ascension has not yet occurred, and His presence will soon change. Thus, Jesus is not denying Mary Magdalene any physical contact, but is teaching her that His relationship with His followers will soon change after His ascension. 3. “Genesis 1 and 2 are differing creations stories and contradict each other.” Genesis 1:1-2:3 provides us with a chronological account of what God did on each of the days during Creation Week. Genesis 2:4-25 zooms in on Day Six and shows some of the events of that day. We see no discrepancies here: • Adam is created (Genesis 2:7) • Garden of Eden created (Genesis 2:8-9) • Description of river system in Eden (Genesis 2:10-14) • Adam put in Garden and given instructions (Genesis 2:15-17) • Adam names some of the kinds of animals (Genesis 2:18-20) • God creates Eve (Genesis 2:21-22) • Description of Adam, Eve, and marriage (Genesis 2:23-25) The particular issue that people have with Genesis 2 is that the order of the creation of man, animals, and trees seems to be contrary to the order stated in Genesis 1. Genesis 2:7 describes the creation of man. “And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.” (Genesis 2:7) Following the creation of man, Genesis 2:9 mentions that God created trees, including the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. “And out of the ground the Lord God made every tree grow that is pleasant to the sight and good for food. The tree of life was also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.” (Genesis 2:9) Then Genesis 2:19 mentions the creation of certain land animals. “Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them.” (Genesis 2:19) At first glance this seems to be a contradiction because Genesis 1 has the animals and trees created prior to the creation of man; however, both issues can be resolved by an understanding of the original language and the translation process.2 The Hebrew word for formed in both passages is “yatsar”. The New King James Version (quoted above) translates the verb in its perfect form. However, this Hebrew word may also be translated in its pluperfect form. In this case, it would read that God “had formed” these creatures, as some other translations have it (e.g. ESV, NIV, etc.) For example, Genesis 2:19 in the NIV states: “Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them.” This rendering eliminates any problem with the chronology because it refers to what God had already done earlier in Creation Week. This would mean that the plants (Genesis 2:9) and the animals (Genesis 2:19) had already been formed by God earlier in Creation Week. William Tyndale was the first to translate an English Bible directly from the original languages, and he also translated the verb in its pluperfect form. “And after that the Lord God had made of the earth all manner beasts of the field, and all manner fowls of the air, he brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them. And as Adam called all manner living beasts: even so are their names.” (Tyndale, Genesis 2:19) Hope this answers some of the errors! I love you channels and videos ❤
Whilst I don't necessarily buy all of our explanations, I do want to say that your explanations are a million times better then Kent Hovind's. Had he been remotely capable of expressing the discrepancies in the way you did, he would probably have a lot more respect and credence. Thank you for taking the time to put such a well-written response.
OK. I can maybe buy your explanation. But if the translation from Greek or Hebrew or whatever was wrong, it gets translated to something that didn't mean what it mean, why don't Christians correct them? Just change "son" to "son-in-law", and "touch" to "cling to" in the next edition, why Christians don't do that? Most people don't have time to learn Greek/Latin/Hebrew or whatever to learn the original meaning. Also I'm pretty sure if they twist God's words that's a sin, so they should really do that ASAP?
@@haomingjin1617 You’re absolutely right: twisting God’s words is a grave sin (see Deuteronomy 4:2, Revelation 22:18-19). However, that’s precisely why Christians do not rush to “fix” or alter translations on a whim. To tamper with the divinely inspired word in an unfaithful or arbitrary way would be far worse than allowing small uncertainties or variations to remain under prayerful study. A translation must reflect what the text says, while interpretation involves explaining what it means. Language is complex, and words don’t always map perfectly across different tongues. Ancient Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic often carry meanings that no single English word can fully capture. Scholars carefully balance accuracy and readability in translations, but decisions sometimes require careful nuance. If Christians recklessly “corrected” every difficult word without scholarly consensus, they could distort the meaning of Scripture rather than preserve it. For example, in John 20:17, where Jesus says, “Touch me not” (KJV), newer translations often say “Do not cling to me” because Greek scholars recognize the nuance in the word haptomai. However, this isn’t about “fixing” a mistake; it’s about refining understanding as linguistic knowledge advances. Most Christians don’t have the time to learn Greek or Hebrew, and they don’t need to. God has provided the Church with faithful scholars and teachers who dedicate their lives to understanding the Scriptures and helping others interpret them. Christians are encouraged to study various translations, consult commentaries, and listen to trusted teachers to gain deeper understanding. Christians believe that divinely inspired word (2 Timothy 3:16) is alive and active (Hebrews 4:12), and its core message is clear and unchanging across all translations: God’s love, the call to repentance, and the truth of salvation through Christ Jesus. While refining translations over time is a careful and legitimate process, treating Scripture as though it needs to be “patched” like faulty software would undermine its authority and dishonour it. Thank you for the question!
@@haomingjin1617 You’re absolutely right: twisting God’s words is a grave sin (see Deuteronomy 4:2, Revelation 22:18-19). However, that’s precisely why Christians do not rush to “fix” or alter translations on a whim. To tamper with the divinely inspired word in an unfaithful or arbitrary way would be far worse than allowing small uncertainties or variations to remain under prayerful study. A translation must reflect what the text says, while interpretation involves explaining what it means. Language is complex, and words don’t always map perfectly across different tongues. Ancient Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic often carry meanings that no single English word can fully capture. Scholars carefully balance accuracy and readability in translations, but decisions sometimes require careful nuance. If Christians recklessly “corrected” every difficult word without scholarly consensus, they could distort the meaning of Scripture rather than preserve it. For example, in John 20:17, where Jesus says, “Touch me not” (KJV), newer translations often say “Do not cling to me” because Greek scholars recognize the nuance in the word haptomai. However, this isn’t about “fixing” a mistake; it’s about refining understanding as linguistic knowledge advances. Most Christians don’t have the time to learn Greek or Hebrew, and they don’t need to. God has provided the Church with faithful scholars and teachers who dedicate their lives to understanding the Scriptures and helping others interpret them. Christians are encouraged to study various translations, consult commentaries, and listen to trusted teachers to gain deeper understanding. Christians believe that divinely inspired word (2 Timothy 3:16) is alive and active (Hebrews 4:12), and its core message is clear and unchanging across all translations: God’s love, the call to repentance, and the truth of salvation through Christ Jesus. While refining translations over time is a careful and legitimate process, treating Scripture as though it needs to be “patched” like faulty software would undermine its authority and dishonour it. Thank you for the question!
Want the Bible to be wrong? You only have to read it. Bats are birds. Talking donkey. Two creation stories. Different accounts of the 'resurrection'...........................etc.
Hea so condescending its unbelievable. Calling out rhe education of others when he got his PhD from a Kellogs box.
Probably wasn't even Kelloggs, more likely Asda own brand. ( in USA)Walmart.
I could be mistaken, but I believe that his PhD came from a 'university' - that HE founded!
rationalwiki.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind%27s_doctoral_dissertations
rationalwiki.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind%27s_doctoral_dissertations#/media/File:PatriotU_Crop.jpg
His dissertation at his ranch house diploma mill literally begins, "Hi. My name is Kent Hovind".
I doubt he can even spell PhD.
@@chriswhitehouse9137 Followed by:
A dissertation or thesis is a long piece of academic writing based on original research, submitted as part of an undergraduate or postgraduate degree. The structure of a dissertation depends on your field, but it is usually divided into at least four or five chapters (including an introduction and conclusion chapter).
How many words is that so far
9:00 Kent saying "You need to learn how to read" then stumbling over the first word. Comedy bronze😭
he stumbled the whole video lol
Bronze. 😂 😂
Not only that. He constantly stumbles and changes words he is reading off his screen. He paraphrases and fully changes words as he is reading them from the Bible. And he can’t argue that in any way. He can deny it, but that’s nothing new for him. All he does is deny reality haha.
Hahha wait, so Adam chose the names for his animals then picked one of them to be his wife?! Is that the way Ken said it or am I playing his game of twisting words?! Well, I’m choosing to play his game and state it is fact then, he definitely said that and he can’t convince me otherwise. Adam chose one of the animals as his wife. 😂
@@RufotrisRootedRockhoundthis is the first case of zoophylia...
Kent complains how Emma can't read/comprehend text then he proceeds to ramble and read incoherently. Priceless.
What more can we expect from another con man convicted felon grifter?
All these people do is project their insecurities onto others
Total MasterCard Moment
Don't forget he implied that it was Emma's English school that has made it hard for her to understand the Bible.
Emma is 10 times smarter than Kent Hovind.
His condescending attitude is insufferable.
Same with his whiney voice
...and totally unjustified, considering how stupid his arguments are!
His inability to speak clearly, and without talking over himself is awful.
I take comfort in the fact that Hovind is so much older than me that probability dictates that I at some point will be living in a world without Kent Hovind.
Well I have some bad news for you - and it's called Eric Hovind.
@drunkenhobo8020 Ahh, yes.
"The spawn of Satan". Lol.
Roll on that blessed day. Lol.
Well I have no idea how old you are but it can’t happen soon enough for me!
Lucky you...but then it does seem quite a few younger grifters will fill the ranks
The level of mental gymnastics people will go to to twist logic to fit the Bible would give Escher nightmares.
Has this guy ever read a high school biology text book😂 I think not.
Nice.
When we gonna see a list of "scientific" contradictions that atheists can't answer?
@@kellykubik4514that’s why he works for a 5 grade textbook
Or Hans Giger!
It's almost as if different people tell different versions of fairy tales.
Who would have thought... 😊
In truth, the same can be said of evolution and gravity, when you ask the majority of people.
Like the Brothers Grimm
Lol. Riiiiigbt. It's like...let me reconstruct this made up thing to give me extra comfort because I'm scared to die.
@@daftpunkking909woah there, at least Grimm’s fairy tales are almost believable
I ditched religion at 16 when I asked the preacher at the church about the contradictions I saw in the bible. His response was simply "The bible is the word of god and cannot be questioned, you have to faith to accept it without question". I remember discussing it with my grandmother and she said that you need faith to accept it but I had to decide for myself whether or not I believed it. Next sunday I had written down many of the obvious contradictions I saw, chapter and verse and again questioned him, he became agitated, snatched the paper from my hand and told me that I had satan working in me and I needed to get up in front of the entire congregation and proclaim my sin and beg god for forgiveness or forever leave his church. I never set foot into any church again for anything other than weddings and funerals. When I told my grandmother what happened she let that preacher know exactly what she thought of him, using some very unchristian language that I had never heard her use before or sense. She also left that church but joined another in the community. This hovind guy reminds me very much of that baptist preacher.
I was 15. Same thing … I’d read the book so many times, found the contradictions, decided that Paul was a misogynistic jerk, and hoped the heck out of there.
If the Bible is written by God and God is perfect, why so many contradictions? Shortage of good proofreaders maybe? Funny how Bible pushers have an answer for everyone except young kids willing to ask the questions adults are too afraid to ask. Glad you believed in yourself. And wonderful of your grandmother to stick up for you.
@@user-qo3jh9mn1t who said the Bible was written by God? God wrote the 10 commandments, the Bible was written by man inspired by God. Humans are imperfect and any small contradictions can be attributed to writing, remembering, or translation errors.
@@GlockFanBoy94045 Right, so it's not the word of God since it's full of human error. Too bad he didn't inspire them enough for them to do it correctly and make it reliable. Seems it wasn't very important to him.
Thankfully, my parents are not religious. That's why I was never taken to a church, mosque, temple or whatever the place is called where people are brainwashed to believe in god(s).
Is he going for the record "Most pompous and insufferable person on the internet"?
He's really putting every rotten scrap of what's left of his heart into it.
Beating Nathan Oakley to that title seems to be mission impossible.
if he is he's up against some stiff competition
He surely gives woke cultists a run for their money.
@@andregon4366Well.......you tried.
Hovind: "Yes, exactly, that's what's written down." Two seconds later; "But that can't be a contradiction because it's the Bible".
His arguments for any they aren't contradictions are 9/10 just him saying "no, they aren't because they are not"
His arguments for any they aren't contradictions are 9/10 just him saying "no, they aren't because they are not"
My favourite is when he, and others, try to convince people that everything in the bible is true... by citing the bible.
That kind of circular reasoning would never work for any subject, but for this particularly it's insane. Why would anyone use something that the other people don't believe is anything more than a collection of parables, to prove to those non-believers that it's *more* and is actually the word of an all-seeing, all-knowing, all-powerful deity that is responsible for creating our entire existence? The bible is true because the bible says it's true. Well I say I'm a 15-foot purple chicken Jedi master with lasers for eyes, and you have to believe me, because I'm a purple chicken Jedi master and I say so.
Every person I've ever spoke to that refutes God has always admitted the same thing to me..
When they faced an instant life or death situation they found themselves asking the thing they have refuted their entire life to help or save them some how ...
Please God if your real help me !!
You who don't believe will one day do the same.
@@evelghostriderhow many people you know have actually had an "instant life or death situation"?
Kent doing exactly what he complains about other people doing? I am SO shocked. That is one HELL of a twist.
Can anyone look at Hovind and say "If that's a Christian, I want to be a Christian too!"? He's purely preaching to his choir of followers. It's about retaining market share, not about convincing anyone.
Underrated comment.
Exactly 👍
It’s painful as a Christian to be lumped in with him. There are actually many intelligent Christians in the scientific and philosophical fields.
@@ericbradley9740 I can imagine. Maybe you should call yourself "follower of Jesus Christ". The word Christian has lost its original meaning.
The heaps of Copium he needs for this is painful.
Haven't ever heard "copium" before, but I love it.
He might as well have just said "the bible is always correct" and ended the video, for all the good this argument did him.
@@kentenit's cool you learned it
I just want to see what the idiots behind his camera look like. I always imagine them as apes slinging shit
He must be in much pain right now because of the depletion of the world's supply of Copium... all the flerfs are overdosing on it right now, so there's none left for the Kent Hovinds of the world.😅
I don't know what it is, but everything about Kent's face, voice and general demeanor just makes me extremely uncomfortable...
yeah, i cant quite place the feeling but it is definitely uncomfortable
@@lordvile1209 Does the word 'slimy' get close? (I mean Hovind, not you).
He's just a creep.
Someone you don't want around children (alone).
Hovind reminds me of Dick Dastardly from the old cartoons or the old used car salesman passing off rusted through metal as the patina of a classic car.
He's one creepy bloke
I can feel my brain cells dying while listening to Kent.
I can feel Kent's brain cells dying every time he opens his mouth.
Kent Hovind is an IQ lowering cannon of crap.
Too bad. He did some decent research. Shame you judge by his speaking skills instead of the content of what he said.
@@Ryvaken What research did he do? All I watched was someone do terrible mental gymnastics to try and make his point of view stick and not rebuttal the points put forward. As to the others to comment were not talking about his speaking skills but that of issue with the absolute bullshit he spews out time and time again to defend something, which you would of read and understood if you had decent comprehension.
liberal, i'm guessing.
I love how anytime Emma gets called out by Kent, she just smiles like a teacher hearing a student say something so completely wrong that it's sad, and then she proceeds to *demolish* him.
He didn’t convince anyone, all he did was insult Emma (very Christian), say some words then act like what he said proved her wrong… very condescending for a Christian as well
Hardcore US evangelicals *love* being condescending towards unbelievers for some reason.
But what is a Christian? It can be anything, and can always be justified by one Bible passage or another.
Kent's whole thing is being massively condescending (and lying about science, obviously). Because in his mind he is clearly the only person who really understands the reality. It's deeply aggravating.
I’d bet money KH haaaaates women. Particularly ones who like education, critical thinking, independence, etc. At best he would *tolerate* a woman who submits to him.
@@buenacghe was convicted of domestic violence against his wife in 2021
The fact we have hours of contradictions we would like to discuss about the perfect book kind of says it all
The argument that your criticisms have no legitimacy if u havent read The Bible is not an argument. I never read the bible and know its hog wash. Consider the context: the period of time, how ignorant the people were, and the oppressive nature of soceity. U need obedient little citizens. Then u have the obvious falsehoods. U have Noahs Ark, the talking snake, the false assertion that the earth is 5000 years old. People thought the earth is flat. (But no one does today, thankfully....). We didnt know what a germ was.
Plus, who wants to read a book with great life lessons like if a man grapes your daughter, he owes u 10 shillings or some sh!t? Or how its anti abortion, but if a woman gets preggo and the father is in doubt, u give her bitter water and if the baby lives, she wasn't unfaithful. Or how it condones slavery. Yep. Such a guiding light. Let me read this 1000 year old book to get my prioritys straight. ISIC AND EZEKIEL DID THIS AND THIS....WHICH MEANS TRUMP SHOULD BE PRESIDENT OR SOMETHING.
66 different authors. Yet same core. Jesus taught using metaphors for a reason. We all have different beliefs and values. How boring if we didn't 😊
@@tyemaddog but then, the punishment, to misinterpret them, shouldn't exist ;)
@@tyemaddog in which case the Creator needs to go on a reading comprehension and marketing course.
@@tyemaddog 66 different books - Paul is recognised as writing multiple of the NT books though not all of the letters that bare his name; whilst eg Isaiah is thought to have several authors over the time span of the text. And then there are editors such as in Genesis weaving together different traditions (ie why 2 distinct creation accounts). So no idea how many authors, and revisors - but agree no need to presume literalism, the text is much richer than than.
A man who bought a fake PhD asserts that Emma has not done adequate research, attacks her motivation, and has to invent Bible stories of his own to 'prove' her wrong.
If You Could Reason With Religious People There Would Be No Religious People.
A convicted criminal, charged with fraud, defending a book of fairy tales.
You couldn't make this up. 😆
I imagine such a one might even swear truth by this book in court before telling a series of lies
Don't forget that he has also beaten his wives, and permitted a convicted SO to share a bed with a vulnerable teenager. A truly horrible beast.
Fairy tales? Haha. Kent aside, Okay , like
Jesus never really existed right? Probably too lazy to actually research any of it
Kent was also found guilty for domestic violence.
I suppose, to Kent, that doesn't count because the judges verdict contradicted Kent's opinion... And we all now know that Kent doesn't believe in contradictions.
@@tyemaddogwell...can you name a credible independent source that confirms he even existed?
If so...tell the vast number of religious scholars that would die and/or kill for having one.😏
Mr Anderson delivered a wonderful blow to Kent in one of their debates. I think Anderson said; "I'm not saying the Bible is wrong, I'm saying you're wrong," and the look on Kent's face was priceless. After all, Kent won't admit that the Bible is wrong, but he also can't admit that he is wrong.
Y
It's not even 9àm and after listening to Kent I need to reach for a strong alcoholic beverage
I am pretty sure Kent is a typo.
Humanity has too many of those typos unfortunately
Kent has that affect on people.
yea... at this rate though Im not going to have anything left for christmas.
Yeah, whenever I hear Kent's southern drawl, I'm inclined to think the American civil war never got completely finished.
A personal attack during a battle of wit is a sure sign you're losing.
The best part of the genealogy of Joseph, is that it's all given to show how Jesus, being the son of Joseph, fulfils a prophecy. But that all becomes irrelevant when you then claim that Joseph ISN'T the father anyway!
No it doesn't, because Joseph willingly adopted and took Jesus as his own. He didn't have to share DNA with his adopted son for his heritage to apply, from the standpoint of Jewish (or any, really) law.
@@theradgegadgie6352🤦🏻♂️
@@daveg-Vancouver_Island Seriously. There's nothing too odd in Bronze Age law about a prince being adopted.
@@theradgegadgie6352I don’t think you can seriously equate begetting with adopting when the subject is about continuity !
@@theradgegadgie6352 And all this so called history, wasnt written till many decades after its claimed to have happened. So explain that, can you point us to other places other than the bible, were all this evidence is also available. you cant as its only in the bible. Which you don't have a original. ONLY HUNDRESDS OF VERSIONS. And just for good measure explain this for us. you claim, that he made adam from dirt, then made eve from Adams rib. That means that they would have the same DNA,. SO COULD HAVE CHILDREN. End of the fairy tail
Christian hardcores: "The Bible is literal."
Also Christian hardcores: "No, see, the Bible meant..."
Anyone who says Luke is literal can be dismissed without thought. The gospel of Luke is a *musical*
@@Olyfrunanyone who believes a single thing in the bible is invalid anyway
Why are we wasting any time on this old crap? You want to be religious, found a religion for the 21st century.
@@gdutfulkbhh7537 Because at least in the United States the Southern Strategy has used religion to grab political power. Donald Trump was just elected president in large part thanks to regular Christian folks thinking he's a their guy.
I don't know that any of this is helping because not only did Trump win he won the popular vote which is.... gross. Why are we here now? To laugh until I die because I can't change anything. Religious folks won again. Yay.
@@gdutfulkbhh7537 Did. It has two thousand years of recommendations behind it, too.
7:52 hey, Kent, quick question. Who let Satan into the garden in the first place? How was he able to talk to and trick one of the only two humans at the time into going against gods will? Was god asleep? He is all seeing and all knowing right?
God did. God gave Satan dominion over the Earth. Christians get a bit upset when you tell them spicy boi is in charge of things.
@ I mean god knows everything (not counting all the times he has to ask humans questions about what was going on)
@@braedenmclean5304 right! In places it reads like God is some Mafioso type. At Sodom and Gomorrah he walks around other villages going door to door asking questions, and he is accompanied by "the elders". Who the hell are they?
@@braedenmclean5304 Yes, because when I ask my students how they decided that 63 is less than 60, I'm asking out of my own ignorance instead of hoping that by asking the question, they might revisit what they have written and realize that something is wrong. If they can do that without me having to explain it, the lesson is better remembered next time.
Since God is omnipotent en the source of everything, then He is also Satan.
Kent owes the planet for the Oxygen he consumes every day.
The levels of twisting he has to do.... either don't explain it, say it says something it doesn't, or just simply make something up and say it says something nobody has ever thought it did ...
Emma has read the whole bible, many times, that's why she's an atheist
man.. you don't need to read a book to be atheist.. you just need a brain and logic.
Also the point of God being all knowing, invalidate ANYTHING in the bible and free will.
8:02 -- A common misconception. Emma works for _Santa,_ not Satan. You have the wrong Big Red, Dan.
Ho ho ho!
Skeptics: "Did the animals, trees and birds come before or after man?"
Kent: "Yes"
🤦♂
And those are not the easy to prove ones. Start looking at answers that are numbers and find other places with the same questions. The numbered answers change (in some cases a lot).
Kent is a dumba$$ grifter. I expect nothing more from him. EDIT: GRIFTER
Wait! Kent stole my kind of answers? I'll suit!
@@thgar4850 Example?
@@thgar4850like what?
Thanks!
That joke at literacy in England is funny from an American guy. 52% of Americans are functionally illiterate. They know how to read, but they're stuck at the level of a 6th grader and they don't really understand what they're reading.
And they elected one of those types twice as their president
And they still wonder why it is, that in the UK they also speak English.
British have a similar reading level so don't act superior.
52% is enough people to elect a president.
@didymus3348
That is not correct. According to the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation world literacy levels, the UK is 99%, and the USA is 86%. It's hardly similar.
Questioning Emma's reading skills ! Casting aspersions on English education !! I didn't think I could despise Kent Hovind more, but he's done it.
Imagine an american questioning another country's education system
Isn´t that normal? Americans believeing they are living in god´s own country and thereby raised above everything else
@@AllanMogensen As an American, I have to admit that it is true that most of us are raised in, if not outright taught, that America is exceptional in literally every way. We are the best, and if we're not, we just pretend like whatever it is does not matter at all. It's pretty ludicrous, tbh. I would bet, though, that we in America have the highest per capita rate of citizens exemplifying the Dunning Kruger Effect.
@@OrdinaryMarvel The Dunning Kruger Effect is probably to be found in every country -
Especially when he is from one of the worst states for education.
My five year old son is like Ken when debating with me. “No, I know everything I am five”
I'm sad because I haven't been five for 39 years. I just get more and more delusional.
im ready to be my life, that your son is right most of the time compared to that guy in the video lol
I was brought up with a religious background and once I started going to high school (well it was a comprehensive when I was at school) I told my parents that it wasn't for me anymore. I can understand people's faith but I can't relate despite my upbringing. To me it was just a load of folk tales that just became so established it became cannon. All the best from here in Yorkshire Dan.
Does this Hovind guy still go by his doctorate ? Coz he did his phd in a parking lot.
@@anuragdas2741 you cant call a patch of dirt in a forest a parking lot
@@TycerKirk I really can't believe that people fall for this guy.
Sadly, they do. Dunning Kruger and arrogant ignorance is all they have.
Yes, he still calls himself doctor, the PhD he got from Disneyland university.😅😅. His fellow graduate was Daffy Duck😂😂
Hovind’s educational ‘qualifications’ were given by a non-accredited institution. These credentials are worthless.
’Gods word’ ….all written by humans centuries after Jesus supposedly existed….
And re-written, and re-written, over and over.
But yeah, it's expected to be believed, every word. 🤦♂
My definition is: god/devil are both the result of human interaction with reality. Therefore humans created god. God and the devil are part of the same Ying yang circle.
That’s what I always tell creationists, it’s not really the word of God, because God didn’t write it, men did. And men are sinful, so why would you believe them? What’s stopping them from lying? They can’t ever answer that, and instead just go “lalala I can’t hear you”, and would rather choose bias over logic and critical thinking, id est, the truth.
@@natsterjam And they don't have one single original bible, a book so important to them, that they lost the original.. so who knows what that actually said. the oldest copy is the Sinai bible, and the kjv has 14,800 differences. add to that 1n 1480 some books were removed from the current version of the bible, so every version after that it totally different.
Aside from translations, transcriptions, and certain denominations (eg Mormon), it wasn't centuries later. It was around 50-120 years, depending on which book you're looking at and whose research you believe.
These religeous types just try to bury you with words without answering the question.
Kent thinks man and dinosaurs existed at the same time. All within the last 6000 years
YABBA DABBA DOO!!!
.
He's also a convicted felon for tax fraud and domestic abuse. So you can pretty much ignore anything he has to say.
Kent believes that, I'm not sure if he's capable of thinking.
-The book never contredit itself
- same book having 2 parts, the second half speaking about a loving and forgiving god while the first part is describing a god who obliterate towns because they didn't follow his rules.
Yes, that's consistent, isn't it? 😂😂😂😂
Towns? How about entire nations?
Move along, nothing to see here 😂
_"god who obliterate towns because they didn't follow his rules"_
Then I'd rather choose satan. At least he doesn't destroy me and everyone around me if some bloke at the end of the street says "no" to him.
You are talking about that most benevolent and loving God that allows children to die of cancer right.?
well they do say that people change after they have a kid /s
I prefer the book about a student with a cloak that makes him invisible, and his friend has a car that flies.
It's totally and utterly true as well. I know this is a fact because I have been to some of the locations mentioned in that book and they exist therefore absolutely everything in that book is totally and utterly true. Also there are less contradictions than the bible stories.
I prefer the book of friendship and jewlery. It has orks and elves..good moral story
@@Sizzlik Very true, the demonstrations of companionship despite adversity are strong morals to abide by. Also, despite never having seen an orc or elf, the entire book must be entirely true because there are multiple books that refer to each other, which means they are all true, and I have seen and even *held* a gold ring which is absolute proof of everything.
MUCH more credible.
@@nickryan3417 And, those books are written in different languages, in different countries by totally unrelated authors. And, they agree with one another.
When I hear diatribes from religionists getting "butt hurt" over having their "holy book" questioned like any other book, I am reminded of a quote from Shakespeare. "It is a tale told by an idiot full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."
Brings me to another quote from physicist, Richard Feynman, "I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned."
Love ET and her work.
I haven't really thought about it before but I find it hilarious that her initials spell ET and she often describes herself as "just a little guy" 😂
I was amazed to see them here!
Love he ST stuff as well.
@@Olyfrun Emma is one person tho...
Bro I'm dumb I thought you were talking about the fucking alien for a second lmao
"It is actually more proof that god's word is inspired and without error" - This is literally the boldest-faced lie of all the bold-face lies anyone has ever said. He literally followed that sentence with an attempt to try to explain away the errors
Which of the 5000+ claimed gods,are you referring too. Ant tell us when exactly has the bible been proven true. Only you indoctrinated nutters claim its true. SO prove it. And while your scrabbling to prove it. explain this. you claim this for a god. That he made adam from dirt, then made eve from one Adams rib. That means that they would have the same DNA,. SO COULD HAVE CHILDREN. End of the fairy tail.
Kent claiming his PhD is worth the paper it is written on comes close to the boldest faced lie
bald*
@ can be either, original was bare faced meaning bold. But has morphed over the years
"without error" followed by a failed attempt to explain the errors.
Emma Thorne is one of my favorite RUclipsrs, and seeing Kent try and debunk her is so hilarious.
And he couldn't even begin to try. He barely watched her video (at least in this cut from Dan, and I refuse to watch Hovind's entire video to find out if he ever hit play).
She's such a silly little guy.
Kent is like one of those little ankle biters barking at a big dog who just ignores them ... and the little ankle biter feels like a superhero showing the big one "his place".
It's not normal NOT to change as we grow older. We learn things we didn't realize when growing up. We hear and witness things in life that shape our beliefs. Yet Ken never, AT ALL, ever seems to change. He's been spuing the same rhetoric for his entire life, NOT CHANGING EVEN ONE THING in all those years... This alone makes me question the character of this silly man.
8:40 "I'm right, you're wrong. So there." Yes, the ultimate argument ender for grade school kids everywhere. Truly Kent is a master of arguing with children at their level.
...followed by the ever popular (on playgrounds everywhere); My Dad can beat up your Dad.
Joseph had two dad. Problem solved. I feel like we could make it a children’s book (Joseph had two dads) that would be banned in half the states.
He not the only one as Salathiel father is Jechonias in Matthew but Neri in Luke.
And Joseph's 2 dads are distant cousins😊
@ I mean, they all were then. The flood and all.
why not moses had three step dads... they name three different men as his step father.
@@J_sLaXx actually, it IS possible to have had three stepfathers, but not at the same time. His mother must have been rather busy.
And then Joseph looked at Mary and said:
" And he better be the ONLY son of god"...
I miss sam😢
🤣
Fantastic video, Dan! Keep pressure on Hovind and keep calling out his nonsense. You're work has a measurable impact on a lot of people, so keep kickin ass! 🔥😎👍
id bet $5 that the bible is the ONLY book kent has ever read
But not all the way through though
I doubt Kent can actually read.
@@BrickNewton and we know kent likes to leave floaters in the toilets back stage, shame on him
@@seanmckelvey6618 he had the picture version
Children's audiobook, narrated by Ken Ham.
Had to watch as soon as I saw Emma in the thumb nail.
Hovind *hates* Emma with an absolute passion. I suspect the main reasons are: (1) Emma is female (2) Emma is female (3) Emma is smarter than Hovind [admittedly a low bar, but still very true] (4) Emma is female (5) Emma is female (6) Emma is not heterosexual (7) Emma is female (8) Emma is smarter than Hovind (9) Emma is able to argue better than Hovind without resorting to name calling (10) Emma is female (11) Emma is female (12) Emma is female *and* attractive too (13) Emma is smarter than Hovind (14) Emma is female (15) Emma is younger than Hovind (16) Emma is female.
I think that about sums up Hovind's take on Emma.
@@nickryan3417 Spot on :)
"Luke, i am your father" : Darth skyDaddy probably...
The convictions of Kent and his corkscrew rationale for each of the points is hilarious. Never try to debate a zealot. you're never going to change their minds.
Theological mental gymnastics should be an Olympic event, they're that impressive. 😅
more like for the paralympics ( and I don´t want to insult any of the participants of the paralympics ... so maybe the para-paralympics ^^ )
Hell yeah, ive never been here so soon after you posted. Great work, all of it. Thank you
"The atheists don't want god telling them what to do." WE atheists don't even believe in a god, much less care if he's telling us ANYTHING. Such a misconception by all these bible thumpers.
The question, "Do you believe in god" is loaded. It implies there is a god to believe in. The correct question is, "Do you think there is a god?"
@@dragoncubes1074Exactly.
I spent my first 20 years in a religious cult as a minister son. Every time i questioned a verse (and there were many) id receive the same response that it was not meant to be taken literally. However, every chirch service, after a reading, the layperson or minister would say "this is the word of god". What a crock. Needless to say im 62 now and i didn't go to my dads recent funeral as we could not reconcile our religious abd politicsl differences.
The Bible is the most revised and re-written book of stories in literary history.
And all lies.
And don't forget the english version (I assume Kent reads the english one) is a translation of a translation of a translation of the latin version, which itself is a translation of a translation of the texts in hebrew.
And which each translation, minor errors seep in, because there are metaphores and expressions that have different meanings, or don't exist at all, in other cultures and languages.
@Yehan-xt7cw That's completely not true. Kent is reading the King James, which is a revision of the Bishop's Bible, which is a revision of Tyndale's bible. Which is a direct translation from the original languages (Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic). Though there is a small section of Revelation in which Tyndale's Greek text is actually a translation back to Greek from the Latin Vulgate (which was a direct translation from the Greek). But that's only there because Erasmus didn't have access to any complete Greek manuscripts of that book.
The original claim that the Bible is the most revised and re-written book of stories in literary history is only true if you consider translation to necessarily be revision and re-writing. Pretty much every translation or revision of the Bible is done by referring back to the texts in their original languages. The only exception I can think of is Wycliff's translation into middle English in the 14th century, which was a translation of the Latin Vulgate because that's all he had available.
@@stephengray1344so it’s a revision, of a revision, translated by hand countless thousands of times. How is that not what they said?
Copying is not revising. Translating is not revising. Nor are either of these rewriting
redundant rhetoric about people with ears but can't hear blathered by someone with eyes that can't comprehend
I really like your user pic.
5:20 You know that when they heap words upon words upon words they are blowing smoke to obfuscate what they cannot explain away. It's always the same.🤷♂
That they have in common with politicians who don´t want to answer a yes or no question :)
Ken is a typical narcissist. Very insecure frequently condensing and never wrong.
2:28 'some people don't have ears, well they got ears but they won't listen' how delightful 🤣
Kent doesn't have a brain. Well Kent has a brain, but he won't think. 😮💨
Blows my mind that people say there are no contradictions whatsoever and then go on to try to explain exactly why the contradictions are there
Yes, his Genesis explanation effectively rewrote the chapter to mean something else then what it says originally.
Until someone actually shows me an actual contradiction, it’s pretty easy to say there are no contradictions. It’s usually just people parroting the internet or a very surface level reading of an English translation and then they scoff and say it contradicts itself.
@@elyjahstark So what is your explanation for the two Genesis versions?
@@znail4675You mean the differences in detail between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2? What are you claiming is a contradiction? There are no contradictions. The first chapter is a poetic narration of the creation of the universe. The second chapter is a close up look of man’s beginning. Do you know what a contradiction is?
@@elyjahstark A contradiction is when facts doesn't match up. But this is only a problem if you consider the Bible the direct word of God that can't be wrong.
I think that those contradictions presented were pretty clear and i dont think Kent knows what a contradiction is. There was a quote once "I have no problem with God, it's his fan club i cant stand".
A contradiction is a circumstance where a logical system contains two concepts that cannot coexist with each other. The simplest example being P AND NOT P; that is, an proposition that is simultaneously true and false.
The Bible lacks contradictions. Certainly nothing in this video holds water. You start with two genealogies, one which ends with a man's biological father and one that ends with his father-in-law. Not a contradiction. Then you come to a question about touching, which is closer to a lost-in-translation detail that clears up the instant you look at the verses in other translations or go back to the original Greek manuscripts and the idioms and phrases of the time. And then you wrap it all up with seven events that were merely not written in sequential order.
None of these are contradictions.
@ Who went Jesus' tomb, and who was waiting for them?
@@goldengrimlock Per Matthew 28:1, Mark 16:1, and John 20:1, Mary Magdalene. Luke mentions only women who had followed Jesus without giving names. Matthew and Mark mention other women who accompanied her.
Now, as to who met them, that gets somewhat confused. We know it was an angel of the Lord, which is enough of an event that it's not surprising that the reports were confused. Matthew and Mark name a single man, while Luke and John name two. Matthew's account is more poetic, whereas John's is more detailed, so most likely John interviewed the women much more closely on this account. This is in keeping with the themes of their respective gospels; John was always more fastidious on the details of Christ's divinity, whereas Matthew focused much more on the human details.
Pencil, paper , bible , gasoline , match.
As an ex-Roman Catholic, I must admit we weren't raised reading the bible, because the church believes the bible is difficult to interpret, so we're raised on the catechism, a distillation of church dogmas for children. We're not discouraged from reading the bible, but taught that it needs to be read in just the right way! It's a massive book written by multiple authors, and heavy on metaphor and allegory. What would astonishing is if it didn't contain a horde of contradictions!
The same here. My favourite part of the Catechism that we were taught was "He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience". I think this line is what ultimately turned me away from the Church. I could never in good conscience follow many of the teachings of the Church
It´s more astonishing that people still reads, and BELIEVES, e v e r y single word of the bible as the t r u t h !! Rgr
it is a narrative history, mostly written by people who lived before scientific instrumentation. it is also only relatively recently that people were so rebellious as to translate the bible into languages that common people could read for themselves. - because people being able to read it for themselves would undermine the authoritarianism the church relied on to control the masses.
Same. In RE classes (catholic schools) we were taught that the bible is a mish-mash of myth, legend, story-telling, and some rough history in the later OT books. Even the NT we were taught that a lot of it is illustrative and not to be read as literal truth/history. But the bible bash nut jobs regard catholics as pagans anyway! I'm thoroughly atheist now, just wish I'd done that sooner.
@@KPRPhoto-1599 Well, we can't expect reason from fundie whackjobs who read the bible as literal history, Noah's ark and all. They are a totally lost cause who don't know how to think, and reject skepticism as the tool of Satan!
Animals before… Animals after, what does it matter when Man is an animal.
Ssshhhh... the criminal Kent Hovind doesn't like that reality. He will attack you and throw *devastating* rebuttals at you such as "nuh uh!" and "you're a devil worshipper" or even "but if we descended from monkeys why are there still monkeys?"
man definitely is made of flesh. this is the challenge, to reject the animal flesh impulses, and live spiritually for god's ways. we have the opportunity to live eternal life after death. that's a pretty good hope that animals don't share.
Strange how exponents of the Bible can be so obnoxious.
And so wrong!
That's a good start.
Do you mean proponents?
@@jimburton5592 exponent ..... a person who supports an idea or theory and tries to persuade people of its truth or benefits........ It'll do.
@@dongee1664 Hm, interesting, seems I learned a new definition today. It'll do indeed
It's been a long time since I read the Bible, but I distinctly remember the Old Testament says "eye for an eye" while the New Testament says "turn the other cheek"... sure sounds contradictory to me!
Emma did a detailed analysis, Kent replies with a condescending "Nuh Uh!"
it looked to me like kent agreed that the bible has contradictions
To me, this is like my kids arguing about which imaginary character in the game they are playing is the most powerful.
Scimandan, Kent or Emma??
Except discussing game characters is much more practical as knowing which is more powerful may impact the performance in the game (depending on the context of the doscussion)
So you have proof God does not exist... please do share buddy. Where can I find this knowledge?
@@evelghostrider Just as with God, I cannot prove that leprechauns don’t exist, I can only point out how nonsensical it is to believe that either do exist.
@dross4207 It is still taking something on faith.
Carelessly Understanding Nonsense Theologically
As I texted Hovid the other day, "Cee u next Tuesday". He didn't turn up. What a c&*t.
I see what you did there! My favourite is; Intelligent Design Is Only Theistic Silliness.
@@mirandahotspring4019 Totally Working Alongside The Shits
@@mirandahotspring4019 I did reply, but the youtube gods blocked it, shame, it was funny.
@@davidobrien7235 That's RUclips!
He sounds like Yoda everytime he goes "Hrrggmmm" 😅
Why are heavily religious the ones who always spout blasphemy and have to take little digs at those who are Athiest. The fact he feels the need to defend it so just demonstrates the indoctrination
To be fair there's plenty of equally bad rhetoric from the atheist side. A lot of the atheist RUclips channels contain more personal attacks on Christians than they contain actual arguments against Christianity.
Why do people tar everyone with the same brush??
@@evelghostrider Not enough brushes and too much tar?
Protecting the grift.
Ironic how he preaches the good word of the bible, while there is a sign for Dinosaur Adventure Land behind him. Dinosaur fossils probably being one of the earliest discoveries that lead us to theorise that hundreds of millions of years have passed...not 6000.
Ah, but Kent thinks that all the dinosaurs died out as a result of the Great Flood. You know, that other thing that there's no evidence for.
Checkmate, atheist!
Not ironic as the adventure land is his business where he teaches humans lived with dinosaurs
@@kostkostkos2514 wow! Thanks for the info as I was very clearly not informed. I thought it was odd to see that! So I assume he is not a fan of carbon dating then?
The age of the Earth really isn't a problem for the Bible. Christians back in the 4th century wrote that Genesis 1 was not intended to be interpreted literally. Modern scholarship generally thinks of that passage as being a rebuttal to the pagan creation myths (most of which took the form of the gods reshaping what was already there), rather than being intended to be read as a scientific textbook. It's worth noting that Christians almost universally abandoned the idea of a young earth back in the 19th century (the one exception of any note being the Seventh Day Adventists, who were at the time a heretical offshoot of Christianity), and the Young Earth Creationism of today was a new movement than only really dates back to the 1950s.
@@stephengray1344it's a cult, who cares
Dan what are your thoughts on the 24 hour Antarctica sun finally being proven??
Tune in Friday :)
@@SciManDan oh exciting
“Finally”
It has been proven 1000 times and will be proven 1000 times more but those who are strong in their FE religion, ignore it even if it is proven infinite number of times.
It doesn't disprove a flat earth. It merely proves a 24 hr sun at one point on the earth.
The fact that a globe earth can predict to the second what will happen is irrelevant. Other models may also do that.
There you go. That's all of 2025 arguments back and forth summed up in one post.
A lecture on honesty from Kent Hovid.
Hands up for all who think Miss Thorne could easily make Kent cry in a face to face debate. Also I Love You Emma!!
Ken's explanation at the end was brilliant, making one more copy of everything so Adam could name it. Reminds me of every explanation of every comic book discrepancy I've ever heard of. One thing that is not addressed enough about Genesis is the naming is all about power over. If I can name you, I have power over, you.
'Then the L ord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him.” And out of the ground the L ord God formed every animal of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name. The man gave names to all the livestock, and to the birds of the sky, and to every animal of the field, but for Adam there was not found a helper suitable for him. '
Genesis 2:18-20
God didn't make the universe for himself. He made it for us. Adam was involved. Granted, he was involved the way a child is involved helping make breakfast: by doing the simple things where he can't cut himself, burn himself, spill everything all over the floor, but he can watch and learn and participate a little, under supervision.
@@Ryvaken That's adorable! Did you take pictures of all this "creation" fun that you obviously witnessed?
@@discontinuedmodel232 As much as you have pictures of a big bang.
This is the kind of person that believes everyone who is any other religion is going to hell.
This is so ridiculous already
Becasuse he is the easier target.
His small sec. Imagine if Dan did something with a theologian , or anyone with the best arguments
@@tyemaddogthis is the best arguments for your sky daddy tho, cultist
@@tyemaddog But why do you say that when even the best theologians and apologists use nothing but God of the gaps arguments while trying to dress them up as something prettier. Kent is the pig, and theologians and apologists are just people trying to put lipstick on that pig.
It's really quite simple Emma; "Babble, gibberish, blah blah gibberish bigger blahalblah babble"
So there you go!
Kent: It's not a contradiction if I'm not listening. Checkmate.
Dans job security is insane. Literally.
And he does not even need to write the scripts
5:45 - just being one of the countless descendants of Solomon doesn't make someone king Kent. Just look up how many Americans are descendants of European royalty.
Spoilers, it's probably every single person living in North America. Probably every human in North America has European royalty somewhere in their genealogy.
The Bible is an impressive book and has many great teachings... but to deny that there are no contradictions as well as some passages that are outright problems is just foolish.
But most of the religious people I've seen who make the argument that it is the infallible Word of God certainly do like to cherry-pick the parts they want to agree with and ignore the more inconvenient passages.
Oh man, this was cringy.
I'm a self-taught Christian Apologist for the better part of 20 years. I've done my own research on the topic and am confident in my faith. With that being said, the presentation of his rebuttal was painful to watch, and follow. There was too much time in setting up his response and very little time he spend on the actual response. Unfortunately, this kind of forum does easily not lend itself to these kinds of topics, especially when the presenter is all over the place.
He did describe himself as a (Biblical) Literalist, which is probably the most difficult kind of person to have a debate with. I do appreciate folks like Emma and you SciMan, who can tackle complex topics and distill them down to digestible and understandable explanations. Seeing videos like this make me want to re-double my efforts in the classes I lead in Christian Apologetics to emphasize being clear and to the point in responses.
Also, not being able to say "I do not know" when you are entering murky waters is an acceptable response. I'm not sure that he should have been trying to tackle Emma point by point when his answers were all over the place. When it comes to matters of (any) faith, there are some things that are accepted without understanding - hence the word "faith". However, that is not a mandate to not ask questions or to try to learn about it. Regardless of your stance, I always enjoy learning more about things that I do not understand.
As a Christian I couldn't have said it better myself.
Biblical literalists who don't read it in the original, Hebrew, Greek, or Aramaic are a joke. Of course acknowledging the fact that there are different versions of the bible already shoots themselves in the foot but hey
The things you do not understand could fill a library. Stop being so confident in your ignorance. There's no such thing as god. It's time to grow up.
@kirixen why so much hate? What is it about God that scares you? I think you are the one who doesn't understand "things" so you lash out. I hope you find peace.
@@kirixen”the things you do not know could fill a library” and then goes on to make a definitive claim “there’s no such thing as god”. Yikes. Instant hypocrisy.
"I bet that same five bucks because thats all I've got...." A moment of raw truthfulness from Kent.
He normally pushes his $10 CDs. I wonder if he had a Cyber Monday sale?
@@davep5788 I just know money and him don't get along.. Guy did prison for tax evasion I think.
Fifty eight charges for financial related offenses including tax evasion in 2006 resulting in a 10 year sentence which he served 9 years and 30 days for domestic assault on his third wife in 2021. Evidently tax evasion is more serious of an offense than domestic abuse in U.S law.
@@UncommonSense-wm5fd Yeah, a sad display of priorities, there.
The UK managed to do something similar, years ago now, sentencing a guy who'd been *very* bad in Malaysia and a woman who was behind on her taxes to time in prison and allowing us all to calculate just how much the justice system thinks a Malaysian child is really worth.
Tony Blair things his after-dinner speeches are worth about two Malaysian children per minute.
As a trained theologian, I personally don't give two handfuls of crap if you believe in some sort of higher being or not. Let's just get that out of the way. Honestly, I think the worst thing that happened to the world was Johannes Gutenberg. He allowed the masses to have access to a document that they had no training in and didn't understand. (It would like your garbage man reading the a textbook on how to perform a appendectomy and then deciding she/he could perform it. (nothing against garbage men. It is an honorable job.)) Creationists have completely misread the Jewish and Christian scriptures. The universe was not created in six days. The story is there for three main reasons: a) to remind people that what we see is good b) to remind people that we are the caretakers and we should treat it with the utmost respect and not abuse it and c) to remember to take at least one day off a week because otherwise we will literally work ourselves to death. I won't bother getting into anything else. I have talked long enough. Here is your TL:DR: Creationists are morons.
There are many theologians who are trained at institutions that do not teach the Bible correctly. You are one of them.
So..the guy who ran a copy shop is the evil, not the authors or distributors? Interessting but not surprizing view from a "trained" theologist 😂
@ What are you talking about? Yes. I owned a coffee shop. Yes. I drove motor coach. Yes. I drove school bus. Yes. I worked for a non-profit. Yes. I earned a Bachelor of Arts in Social Work. Yes. I earned a Master of Divinity. Yes. I earned a Master of Art in Christian Education with a specialization in youth ministry. Yes. I earned a Doctorate of Ministry. Yes, I have been a Christian pastor for 30 years. Yes, I was a parish pastor for 15 of those years. Yes, I am now a bishop. Go ahead and look them up! I don’t care! I get hit from the right, the left, and the f*ck you up the butt. Guess what? I am on your side. Deal with it, and learn something. Guess how many F*s I have to give now?
Hear, hear!
@@SizzlikNo. The problem is with people who 1) don’t understand literary genres or literature in general 2) don’t understand the cultural context of when the different texts were written make assumptions of the texts and read it with a modern western worldview.
🤯 the cognitive dissonance.
"Emma, your correct, the genealogies are different, but you're wrong that they are contradictory. It's actually more proof that God's word is inspired."
I didn’t find kent’s “explanations” very persuasive, but I didn’t find them to be explanations either. Just a smug idiot reading clearly contradictory citations from scripture and then asserting that it _isn’t_ a contradiction because he doesn’t want it to be. Basically just “nuh-uh” to everything. He’s not even _trying_ to explain them, just berating the audience for thinking that contradictions are contradictions. Full blown gaslighting.
Yeah, they never explain how “God” as an explanation, is actually an explanation. They believe that the claim of having an explanation is the same as actually having an explanation.
He’s a tadge
OMG… Reading the Bible from cover to cover is a sure fire way to become an atheist, or agnostic at a minimum. 😂
it's hard but kent is right on the first point. In ancient cultures, the father-in-law was also your father. In addition, the books are written from only one perspective.
How do I verify that? I've looked for this idea that "father" and "father-in-law" are interchangeable in genealogies. The only places I can find people saying that are when people are arguing these two genealogies don't contradict each other.
Plus, this only explains the apparent contradiction if that *is* what these two genealogies are actually doing. There is nothing in the text that says they are. It's perfectly possible for these two authors to have different thoughts on these family trees, in which case this is a contradiction. At best, this is a *possible* explanation. Proponents would have to show more than they have done that this definitely *is* the explanation.
Honestly, this is exactly what Kent Hovind wants: attention. It doesn't matter that you constantly refute him. Maybe better to ignore? I get it, he's a liar, which is funny since he considers himself supposedly "moral" because of his "faith".
Hello! I am not a young earth creationist, but I am a Christian. I will try my best to explain these:
1: “Jesus’ genealogies in Matthew and Luke differ, so this is a contradiction.”
Anyone who studies the genealogies will immediately notice that the genealogies are stated to be of Joseph, not Jesus. Matthew 1:16 reads, “and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ,” while Luke 3:23 reads, “Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli.” Both genealogies clearly state Joseph as the last link of the genealogy, with some separation showing that Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus.
Most conservative Bible scholars today take a different view, namely, that Luke is recording Mary’s genealogy and Matthew is recording Joseph’s. Matthew is following the line of Joseph (Jesus’ legal father), through David’s son Solomon, while Luke is following the line of Mary (Jesus’ blood relative), through David’s son Nathan. Since there was no specific Koine Greek word for “son-in-law,” Joseph was called the “son of Heli” by marriage to Mary, Heli’s daughter. Through either Mary’s or Joseph’s line, Jesus is a descendant of David and therefore eligible to be the Messiah. Tracing a genealogy through the mother’s side is unusual, but so was the virgin birth. Luke’s explanation is that Jesus was the son of Joseph, “so it was thought” (Luke 3:23).
2: “Jesus tells Mary Magdalene not to ‘touch’ Him in John 20:17, while later in the chapter (implied in John 20:24 and explicitly in John 20:27) He invites Thomas to touch Him.”
The Greek word for ”touch” in John 20:17 is ἅπτομαι (haptomai). It can also mean:
“to cling to,”
“to hold fast,”
”to detain.”
Jesus’ command to Mary is not about physical touch, but about not clinging to Him or trying to hold Him back. Jesus is not forbidding all touching, as if He were a ghost; rather, He is telling Mary that she must not cling to Him as though He were about to stay permanently. His ascension has not yet occurred, and His presence will soon change. Thus, Jesus is not denying Mary Magdalene any physical contact, but is teaching her that His relationship with His followers will soon change after His ascension.
3. “Genesis 1 and 2 are differing creations stories and contradict each other.”
Genesis 1:1-2:3 provides us with a chronological account of what God did on each of the days during Creation Week. Genesis 2:4-25 zooms in on Day Six and shows some of the events of that day. We see no discrepancies here:
• Adam is created (Genesis 2:7)
• Garden of Eden created (Genesis 2:8-9)
• Description of river system in Eden (Genesis 2:10-14)
• Adam put in Garden and given instructions (Genesis 2:15-17)
• Adam names some of the kinds of animals (Genesis 2:18-20)
• God creates Eve (Genesis 2:21-22)
• Description of Adam, Eve, and marriage (Genesis 2:23-25)
The particular issue that people have with Genesis 2 is that the order of the creation of man, animals, and trees seems to be contrary to the order stated in Genesis 1.
Genesis 2:7 describes the creation of man.
“And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.” (Genesis 2:7)
Following the creation of man, Genesis 2:9 mentions that God created trees, including the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
“And out of the ground the Lord God made every tree grow that is pleasant to the sight and good for food. The tree of life was also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.” (Genesis 2:9)
Then Genesis 2:19 mentions the creation of certain land animals.
“Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them.” (Genesis 2:19)
At first glance this seems to be a contradiction because Genesis 1 has the animals and trees created prior to the creation of man; however, both issues can be resolved by an understanding of the original language and the translation process.2 The Hebrew word for formed in both passages is “yatsar”. The New King James Version (quoted above) translates the verb in its perfect form.
However, this Hebrew word may also be translated in its pluperfect form. In this case, it would read that God “had formed” these creatures, as some other translations have it (e.g. ESV, NIV, etc.) For example, Genesis 2:19 in the NIV states:
“Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them.”
This rendering eliminates any problem with the chronology because it refers to what God had already done earlier in Creation Week. This would mean that the plants (Genesis 2:9) and the animals (Genesis 2:19) had already been formed by God earlier in Creation Week. William Tyndale was the first to translate an English Bible directly from the original languages, and he also translated the verb in its pluperfect form.
“And after that the Lord God had made of the earth all manner beasts of the field, and all manner fowls of the air, he brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them. And as Adam called all manner living beasts: even so are their names.” (Tyndale, Genesis 2:19)
Hope this answers some of the errors! I love you channels and videos ❤
Whilst I don't necessarily buy all of our explanations, I do want to say that your explanations are a million times better then Kent Hovind's. Had he been remotely capable of expressing the discrepancies in the way you did, he would probably have a lot more respect and credence. Thank you for taking the time to put such a well-written response.
@@DD-qq8sn Thank you! :]
OK. I can maybe buy your explanation. But if the translation from Greek or Hebrew or whatever was wrong, it gets translated to something that didn't mean what it mean, why don't Christians correct them? Just change "son" to "son-in-law", and "touch" to "cling to" in the next edition, why Christians don't do that? Most people don't have time to learn Greek/Latin/Hebrew or whatever to learn the original meaning. Also I'm pretty sure if they twist God's words that's a sin, so they should really do that ASAP?
@@haomingjin1617 You’re absolutely right: twisting God’s words is a grave sin (see Deuteronomy 4:2, Revelation 22:18-19). However, that’s precisely why Christians do not rush to “fix” or alter translations on a whim. To tamper with the divinely inspired word in an unfaithful or arbitrary way would be far worse than allowing small uncertainties or variations to remain under prayerful study.
A translation must reflect what the text says, while interpretation involves explaining what it means. Language is complex, and words don’t always map perfectly across different tongues. Ancient Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic often carry meanings that no single English word can fully capture. Scholars carefully balance accuracy and readability in translations, but decisions sometimes require careful nuance. If Christians recklessly “corrected” every difficult word without scholarly consensus, they could distort the meaning of Scripture rather than preserve it.
For example, in John 20:17, where Jesus says, “Touch me not” (KJV), newer translations often say “Do not cling to me” because Greek scholars recognize the nuance in the word haptomai. However, this isn’t about “fixing” a mistake; it’s about refining understanding as linguistic knowledge advances.
Most Christians don’t have the time to learn Greek or Hebrew, and they don’t need to. God has provided the Church with faithful scholars and teachers who dedicate their lives to understanding the Scriptures and helping others interpret them. Christians are encouraged to study various translations, consult commentaries, and listen to trusted teachers to gain deeper understanding.
Christians believe that divinely inspired word (2 Timothy 3:16) is alive and active (Hebrews 4:12), and its core message is clear and unchanging across all translations: God’s love, the call to repentance, and the truth of salvation through Christ Jesus. While refining translations over time is a careful and legitimate process, treating Scripture as though it needs to be “patched” like faulty software would undermine its authority and dishonour it.
Thank you for the question!
@@haomingjin1617 You’re absolutely right: twisting God’s words is a grave sin (see Deuteronomy 4:2, Revelation 22:18-19). However, that’s precisely why Christians do not rush to “fix” or alter translations on a whim. To tamper with the divinely inspired word in an unfaithful or arbitrary way would be far worse than allowing small uncertainties or variations to remain under prayerful study.
A translation must reflect what the text says, while interpretation involves explaining what it means. Language is complex, and words don’t always map perfectly across different tongues. Ancient Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic often carry meanings that no single English word can fully capture. Scholars carefully balance accuracy and readability in translations, but decisions sometimes require careful nuance. If Christians recklessly “corrected” every difficult word without scholarly consensus, they could distort the meaning of Scripture rather than preserve it.
For example, in John 20:17, where Jesus says, “Touch me not” (KJV), newer translations often say “Do not cling to me” because Greek scholars recognize the nuance in the word haptomai. However, this isn’t about “fixing” a mistake; it’s about refining understanding as linguistic knowledge advances.
Most Christians don’t have the time to learn Greek or Hebrew, and they don’t need to. God has provided the Church with faithful scholars and teachers who dedicate their lives to understanding the Scriptures and helping others interpret them. Christians are encouraged to study various translations, consult commentaries, and listen to trusted teachers to gain deeper understanding.
Christians believe that divinely inspired word (2 Timothy 3:16) is alive and active (Hebrews 4:12), and its core message is clear and unchanging across all translations: God’s love, the call to repentance, and the truth of salvation through Christ Jesus. While refining translations over time is a careful and legitimate process, treating Scripture as though it needs to be “patched” like faulty software would undermine its authority and dishonour it.
Thank you for the question!
Want the Bible to be wrong? You only have to read it. Bats are birds. Talking donkey. Two creation stories. Different accounts of the 'resurrection'...........................etc.
Talking about British people not being able to read, you've just done a shocking job of reading in this video
"I did" reconsider my posistion. "I was right you were wrong." Seems he did a whole backflip reconsidering his position.